207
Scientists use bacteria to turn plastic waste into paracetamol (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/science@lemmy.world
25 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 1 year ago (6 children)

If you're at a point where you can feed it to bacteria, you've already separated it from the environment and the waste stream, right? How else are you going to feed it to bacteria?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (5 children)

    You know that bacteria exist in the wild normally, right? That is where they've been for 5 billion years.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Wait, are you suggesting releasing bio-engineered bacteria that destroys plastic randomly in the wild? You don't see any practical problems that would cause?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    Why would it be random? We are already releasing huge amounts of artificial chemicals into the wild.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Why would it be random?

    Perhaps I should have used the word "uncontrolled" instead of random. If you're expecting this bacteria to work against, say, a field with plastic litter in it, its going to be in contact with lots of other things made of plastic that aren't waste. If the bacteria is able to self replicate, and you've released it into the wild, you've effectively killed the use for nearly all plastics as things that are still in use will be decomposed.

    We are already releasing huge amounts of artificial chemicals into the wild.

    Thats a bizarre argument. That would be like saying: "We have lots of murders in the world, so why not intentionally murder more people?"

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (1 child)

    That is a terrible analogy. There are already bacteria and fungi out there that show signs of breaking down plastics but at a very slow rate btw. It could function only under very specific conditions, like UV light exposure or sea water. I'd like to know how else you would remove plastics from the wild.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    There are already bacteria and fungi out there that show signs of breaking down plastics but at a very slow rate btw. It could function only under very specific conditions, like UV light exposure or sea water.

    I wouldn't consider UV light to be specific. Sunlight has huge amounts of UV and sunlight is, well nearly everywhere. Sea water would also be a bad catalyst to choose. Lots of parts of boats and ships that come in contact with sea water (through the bilge or as sea spray) intentionally use plastic as it doesn't rust or corrode in the presence of marine environments. What you're suggesting would remove that protection.

    There are already bacteria and fungi out there that show signs of breaking down plastics but at a very slow rate btw.

    Sure, but we're not talking about those. You're suggesting releasing a bacteria that is being designed for industrial scale and use of rapid plastic decomposition. You don't see a difference there?

    I’d like to know how else you would remove plastics from the wild.

    I'm not required to provide a solution just to point out the catastrophic shortcomings of a proposed one.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent