Support our Kickstarter

Plastic Eaters

Morgan Maher
plastic bags_large.jpg

The problem and plague of plastic bags was eating away at Daniel Burd. So, for his science fair project he decided to find out what eats away at plastic bags.

After testing various methods and reaching the formidable goal of isolating two strains of plastic-eating microorganisms (Sphingomonas and Pseudomonas), Burd found that plastic bags could be significantly decomposed in about six weeks, with total decomposition taking around three months.

Scaling this to industrial applications should be easy, Burd says: "all that's needed is a fermenter, a growth medium and plastic, and the bacteria themselves provide most of the energy by producing heat as they eat."

While many places around the world have already banned the use of plastic bags, existing bags still threaten waters, wildlife and the planet, and can take up to 1,000 years to decompose. Approximately 500 billion plastic bags are produced each year and the UN Environment Program estimates that there are 46,000 pieces of plastic litter in every square mile of ocean.

Burd's discovery provides significant steps forward and he has recieved $30,000 in awards and scholarships for his work.

Photo by Zainub used via Creative Commons.

 

Tags:

Comments

reuse, recycle, decompose?

Submitted by vivifidal on Mon, 06/16/2008 - 15:45.
Is decomposition the best course? Does the decomposed material have any economic use? Eventually all landfills will be mined for resources, how does this effect that process? Benign substrate for fill that decompoises slowly is often useful, if these organisms escape from their introduced locations how will it effect the structural integrity of architecture? This is NOT bioneering. Just like there are many possible negative effects of bioengineered (not to be confused with bioneered) crops going feral, this could pose more risks than benefits and should be approached with great caution.

Suffocating

Submitted by Morgan Maher on Mon, 06/16/2008 - 17:28.

Allow me to repeat: "...the UN Environment Program estimates that there are 46,000 pieces of plastic litter in every square mile of ocean."

There is no benefit to that.

These organisms are not part of some science fiction fantasy attack upon humanity. They are present and alive on the planet, and Daniel Burd has found a way to enlist their help.

Some info on these microorganisms:

The sphingomonads are widely distributed in nature, having been isolated from many different land and water habitats, as well as from plant root systems, clinical specimens, and other sources.

An article published in the journal Science in 2008 showed that Pseudomonas may be the most common nucleator of ice crystals in clouds, thereby being of utmost importance to the formation of snow and rain around the world.

If you want a risk-benefit analysis, try putting a plastic bag over your head for 1000 years and see what happens. No malice intended with that comment, but I think you get the picture.

its still not bioneering

Submitted by vivifidal on Tue, 06/17/2008 - 01:01.
proper collection methods and recycling of organic compounds would create jobs and reduce energy cost. Anthrax is not part of some science fiction fantasy either and is alive and well on the planet.. It is not a whole system approach. If a computer program was written without more care to how it affected the overall system it would have what is known as memory leaks and cause the entire system to stop functioning in a very short time. You are ignoring the fact that the majority of houses and many other things things society depends on are composed of plastics and rely on NOT being exposed to the specific strain of bacteria mentioned in order to function properly. Your argument is illogical and not a whole system approach and could very well result in many unnecessary deaths or injuries even among those intelligent enough not to intentionally asphyxiate themselves. Daniel Burd is a bright young man, but unfortunately we live in a society that falls in love with clever ideas like the internal combustion engine before we think through the overall ramifications or fully develop the technology and the support system for it in a manner that takes into consideration the TOTAL environmental and social effect. My argument stands and yours falls apart it seems due to lack of overall structural integrity. I'm not saying that it's a dead end, I am saying that it should be pursued with EXTREME caution.Youth is very adept at producing novelty, but not very good at considering the overall effect and ramifications of any given action. That is why there isa the term "the folly of youth," and why those at the heart of the world refer to the rest of us as younger brother.

The new frontier pioneers

Submitted by gaiadruid on Mon, 06/16/2008 - 22:59.
Daniel Burd shows us how a little effort and caring can address a problem that "adults" seem to be prepared to ignore. The new generation is faced with the most daunting challenges of any generation, saving the planet and our future. All applause for his efforts and successes.I personally believe in "bio-plastics" as a solution. Avoid the problem to begin with.

bio-plastics and metaphorical mushrooms

Submitted by vivifidal on Tue, 06/17/2008 - 02:43.
Hemp based bio-plastics are wonderful. Effective agriculture that enriches the soil in a rotation system for food crops: good bioneering! Yet we still have all this petro based stuff around and it is useful stuff that should be used wisely and not just simply made to disappear in a possibly toxic manner. Remember, organic does not mean safe, strychnine is organic, almost all bacteria produce toxins, some we know about, others we don't. Whenever you try something new you have to be careful, you don't want to eat the whole mushroom at once just because its very similar to one you know well!

Just recycle them

Submitted by BentFranklin on Fri, 06/20/2008 - 00:21.
If you can get all those plastic bags in one place to decompose them, just recycle them instead. That's much better.

or reuse!

Submitted by vivifidal on Fri, 06/20/2008 - 03:57.
I had a friend that would make rugs out of shopping bags and they were durable, functional, and often beautiful!

The real enemy

Submitted by RogerscottQ on Thu, 07/31/2008 - 18:53.

Plastic from oil is not our friend. Not anyone's friend.

"Plastics". That was the advice to "The Graduate", played by Dustin Hoffman.

It presaged the dire situation that we were racing into at that time . . . to where we are today.

It was the 60s, and a new ascendancy of revolt to received ideas, and to some extent an over-reaching urge for dis-continuation of the same-old same-old was beginning to burgeon into an all out revolt against everything: Turn on, tune in, drop out.

One form of this was a rapid over-reaction towards all conservatism which, curiously, didn't work for preserving much of the good things, but for preserving some pretty stupid things. I'm still trying to figure this pussle out, and can't say I've gotten very far, but the over-arching urge to stop war was the good thing that came out of that. Only, part of the "war" which wasn't fully appreciated was the war against middle-class industry that was burgeoning, but soon to be attacked by accession to the aims of big oil interests and the pushing of plastic and other by-products of the oil industry. They wanted to see every possible road paved with asphalt versus time-proven concrete for example. Portland cement competed against this sludge-as-product. Big oil also waged war on "trolley-cars" for the sake of buses. And, guess what? We now see that that was big mistake. Now we are rebuiling trolley-systems all across the nation. I guess city-planners might call than "Oops!" moment of realization.

The impulse towards profit marched on unimpeded, for the most part, despite the popular trend that saw big-oil as an industry aimed at war. The "more" demand trumped the "righteousness" demand, and the 'more, cheaper, more!' helped to put us today in this situation where plastic can be found in all the skat of all the animals and fish that live in or on or near the ocean.

The generation of extremes has left some fine pickles for us to figure out.

Bard's research and experiment shows practical and efficient thinking that touches on periphery of the big problem of the world-wide culture of OIL and the internal combustion engine.

It will help ameliorate the problem, but will hardly solve it. The sheer volume of plastics being generated is far too great. Part of the solution indeed, but a greater part is to just demand they stop making the damned stuff. Our economy was much more robust when we used metals and even bakelite and cellulosic plastics. The prior approaches were more labor-intensive, and kept more people at work.

I seriously doubt the future "antique" collectors will value much of the injection plastic crap that is proliferating at ever greater levels just to make a quick buck. What amazes me is that "all cotton" products are labeled with synthetic tags or held together by plastic thread! It is a cancer.

On the PBS series JOURNEY TO PLANET EARTH

http://www.pbs.org/journeytoplanetearth/

, a segment talked about this pervasiveness of plastic particulates in the Pacific. In looking at a sample of sea-water to about 3 meters, a fine-mesh cone that was dragged for a few miles came up with an astounding finding: the mass of particles was greater than that of plankton! This is a profound problem. When the plankton concentrations begin to suffer, the entire chain of life will alter in highly unfavorable ways. Not just in respect to animal and sea-life, but the entire globe: most of the oxygen of the earth is produced from the sea. We have spread a giant sun-filter in the top layer of the oceans. Think of that.

There is also a floating "island" of plastic in the Pacific that some have estimated is as large as Texass! See:

http://www.greenpeace.org/international/campaigns/oceans/pollution/trash...

Also, see these reports, about the plastic problem, in general:

http://www.mindfully.org/Plastic/Ocean/Origins-Small-Plastic-Particles.h...

Other interesting sites for research:

www.damninteresting.com

www.weirdscience.com

http://www.usc.edu/org/cosee-west/October06Resources/Activities/Elementa...

Bottom line: just boycott big-oil. Boycott oil-plastics. We did fine without for uncounted millenia. It hasn't helped life at all. How could it? It is leading us to extinction. We will rue the day it was invented someday. We can make plastics from peanuts and scores of other sources that will not be nearly as harmful to earth than the crap we take from the oil industry. We can invent many things. It doesn't mean we should keep them all. Time to throw this entire industry into the trash-heap.

======================
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance -- that principle is contempt prior to investigation." HERBERT<