r/Futurology • u/mvea MD-PhD-MBA • May 14 '19
Environment Researchers develop viable, environmentally-friendly alternative to Styrofoam. For the first time, the researchers report, the plant-based material surpassed the insulation capabilities of Styrofoam. It is also very lightweight and can support up to 200 times its weight without changing shape.
https://news.wsu.edu/2019/05/09/researchers-develop-viable-environmentally-friendly-alternative-styrofoam/88
u/DubsToastedBread May 15 '19
The real question is does it have the same terrorizing squeak as Styrofoam
11
3
0
539
u/cartmanbeer May 15 '19
Let me guess the catch: it costs 10x more than Styrofoam and they have no idea how to scale up production yet.
9
u/Hyaenidae73 May 15 '19
And I wonder about the true cost of styrofoam when externalities are accounted for, v. this product.
2
u/michelangelo88 May 15 '19
Emerging tech that can fundamentally change industries is almost always more expensive in the beginning
0
May 15 '19
3
u/ILikeCutePuppies May 15 '19
Corn peanuts are not that much more than Styrofoam. Their is at least a path to success.
→ More replies (4)323
May 15 '19
190
u/hyperbolicbootlicker May 15 '19
It's very lightweight, meaning 200x it's weight isn't really that much, so it's considerably weaker than styrofoam. That would be my guess anyway.
→ More replies (18)73
May 15 '19
all things have flaws, we just ignore them as we get used to them. it is way beyond time to seeing that pollution is a much more terrible cost than a lot of less effective options. and the new options can be optimized just like anything else.
it boggles my mind how everyone discounts new things due to the simplest reasons as if it somehow stops them from being worth the effort.
well sure i understand why society does it, no one likes change and if it's broke dont fix it. but society is going to implode if this continues to be the norm zzz
→ More replies (7)31
→ More replies (3)9
u/yuzirnayme May 15 '19
I think the real concern if it is worse is that Styrofoam will be gone and yet another third option will dominate that is worse than either of the first two.
Think plastic bag bans. People use paper or reusable bags instead. Paper bags have to be used at least 3 times to be even on environmental impacts. Reusable have to be used 100+ times. And in the end people buy plastic trash bags to replace the missing shopping bags they used to use anyway.
So I don't think these concerns are without merit. People regularly make the wrong decisions when trying to do the right thing.
→ More replies (2)
133
u/yvngcoorslight May 15 '19
The question everyone is clamoring for - how much does it cost to produce vs regular styrofoam?
119
u/jyok33 May 15 '19
Literally the biggest factor that all these new inventions seem to neglect mentioning
91
u/blazedd May 15 '19
If argue that it's often a difficult subject to have a 10,000 foot conversation about.
Styrofoam is cheap because of how prolific it is as a material. Any new invention will be dwarfed by the costs or even the projections of new material until it gets near that status.
The real question comes down to can we as a species afford not to care about a new material simply because of costs or at least initial costs.
22
u/CrazyApes May 15 '19
Another aspect of this is supply chain pricing. Is there enough raw material available to make it at scale. And once this new market is made for that raw material, how much does the price go up for it? These are the types of things that kill a project like this. I wish them luck though.
5
u/reddit_give_me_virus May 15 '19
It's said to have "super insulation" properties. If it achieves an insulation value much higher than what is now available, the heating/cooling savings could easy offset a high material cost.
There are also all types of tax credits and other incentives for buildings that meet high efficiency standards.
1
u/chiliedogg May 15 '19
But these decisions aren't made by a species. They're made by companies, and a company that chooses to use the more expensive product will not be able to compete without those who do not.
0
u/ohgodhelpplease May 15 '19
can we as a species afford not to care about a new material simply because of costs or at least initial costs.
would it surprise you to learn that the answer is yes
7
u/SirDukeOfEarl May 15 '19
It's still in research stage. It's unlikely that this version will even make it to market, but that's how r&d works.
3
u/-PM_Me_Reddit_Gold- May 15 '19
Partly because the cost to make isn't really known, because mass production costs are very different then lab costs. However, I don't know why the article can't at least give a ballpark number.
That being said, anytime an article can't give me a cost I automatically assume it costs more than the alternative. However, if it's a small enough difference in cost for them to make this, the company might write it off for PR.
1
4
u/Ryangonzo May 15 '19
Oh, I thought the question we all wanted the answer too was how it performed in the microwave.
My stomach is usually ahead of my wallet. Which is why I'm broke.
9
u/Zncon May 15 '19
Oh no.. Please don't microwave styrofoam unless it's marked as safe.
"It’s important to note that the vast majority of styrofoam containers like coffee cups, styrofoam plates, and take-out containers are probably not microwave-safe."
https://sciencetrends.com/can-you-microwave-styrofoam/The science isn't perfect on how harmful it might be, but there's some risk, and it's easy enough to avoid.
→ More replies (2)2
u/GusTheProspector May 15 '19
I thought the biggest question was if it still made that awful sound when unpacking it?
1
May 15 '19
It’s mostly hydrolysed cellulose and polyvinyl alcohol. I can’t imagine it’s particularly expensive.
1
u/Sabot15 May 15 '19
PVOH is at least double the price of PS, and NCC is pricey as hell as far as I know.
→ More replies (2)1
u/nullbull May 15 '19
Unfortunately, every time we compare a new invention to an incumbent, particularly an incumbent from the petroleum and chemical industries, we're not comparing the cost of production to the cost of production.
We're comparing the unsubsidized disruptor to the heavily subsidized incumbent, then making conclusions about which is "cheaper" based on this comparison.
Too bad it takes a legion of tax lawyers to tell you what the unsubsidized cost of styrofoam is. It's a subsidized product made from a subsidized byproduct of another subsidized product.
1
1
u/glaedn May 15 '19
Probably more important to project what production will cost when the product has matured as nothing's going to be cheaper than a product like Styrofoam that has had its manufacturing process hammered out over such a long period of time.
12
May 15 '19
i remember not long ago, the mycelium mushroom based packaging that was easily compostable, did that ever take off?
8
u/hebhobmushroom May 15 '19 edited May 15 '19
I know of one small company, Ecovative Design that does this and similar projects. IIRC they laid off some 25% of their employees last year, but I think the company itself does a fair amount of business?
38
u/thinkB4WeSpeak May 14 '19
We just need companies to get on board with buying these and implementing them in their business.
124
u/Aidanlv May 15 '19
Nope, what we need are governments to subsidize them or penalize regular styrofoam so it becomes the most cost effective option. Asking companies to go against their own short-term self interest has never been particularly effective.
1
u/Ryangonzo May 15 '19
I'd really like to get out of the business of the government subsidizing any business.
70
u/faux_glove May 15 '19
I'd really like businesses to get out of the business of turning the planet into a cinder for short-term profit, but that's not going to happen.
So.
38
9
u/ignost May 15 '19
Please this. Subsidies once given are hard to take away. We are still subsidizing oil and gas for some of the richest companies on the planet, because the companies got powerful enough to defend their subsidy. We subsidize sugar, wheat, and beef for reasons no one really remembers. Sugar, carbs, grassland destruction, methane emissions. All things we don't need more of. Good job team subsidy.
Also you would want to understand emissions, environmental impact vs lifetime, and other potential downsides. Rushing to throw money at it isn't a great idea for new tech.
Don't kid yourself: Monsanto and Dow chemical will probably end up benefiting, and we'll be subsidizing those bastards forever.
1
→ More replies (3)-6
u/xfuzzzygames May 15 '19
Or how about we put the onus on manufacturers to make their product financially viable? Instead of forcing everyone to pay for something you want.
19
u/Alpha_Zerg May 15 '19
That won't succeed because companies don't care about you or your feelings. They care about cash, and will only do what gets them more of it.
How the fuck do you think we got into this situation in the first place?
→ More replies (2)4
u/vanboiDallas May 15 '19
I don’t entirely disagree, as this is generally step two of any product rollout right? Scaling the product to meet demand? but how do you get manufacturers to lower their price (profit margin) if they don’t have buyers lined up? Manufacturers will want to recover the cost of development and production.
1
u/francesrainbow May 15 '19
I'm sure that Lush already uses this, or something very like it. Hopefully others will follow suit!
15
u/NotTooDeep May 15 '19
Styrofoam dissolves instantly in the presence of acetone. This limits what adhesives can be used with it and what applications it can serve.
What chemicals can cause catastrophic failure in this new foam? That will also be a key in its adoption.
As for burning, it's just celulose, so the same toxicity as stick built homes. That's manageable.
16
u/Cm0002 May 15 '19
Acetone dissolves styrofoam instantly?
Brb...I'm going....to do....nothing with this information...
3
May 15 '19
you can vanish incredible volumes of styrofoam in acetone.
i have a post somewhere with a video
torturing styrofoam or smth
1
1
u/NotTooDeep May 15 '19
Ditto for polyester resins. Have to use epoxies with Styrofoam.
SOURCE: home built aircraft, industrial model making, composites mold making. We used acetone to clean surfaces of molds and cleanup of tools used in the layup process. When we would built prototypes, we'd want to use cheap foam for sandwich cores. With polyester resins, we had to use urethane foam sheets from the home center and peel the metal foil off the surface. We did use Styrofoam with epoxy systems, but only for prototypes. In real parts going into the wild, any contact with acetone would destroy the integrity of the composite sandwich. On real parts, we'd use balsa wood cores for impact resistance or aerospace foam ($$$) for light weight.
Fun experiment: squirt some acetone into a styrofoam coffee cup. Don't do this on a nice surface or in your home.
1
May 15 '19
Its most likely brittle. They made a cellulose matrix that acts like a ceramic with void spaces so yes its brittle.
1
u/NotTooDeep May 15 '19
I'm thinking about mass produced SIP panels for home construction. Replacing the current white bead foam (styrene based, I believe) with a cellulose based foam would eliminate some toxic combustion products and maybe reduce costs. Brittleness might not be an issue in this application.
Also, it would be interesting to blend short glass fibers into this foam. It would make it stronger and stiffer. Might make it a standalone construction material.
→ More replies (1)
25
u/xyzloveyou May 15 '19
Redditors don’t be fooled by this misleading title “can hold 200 times it’s weight”. This means literally nothing because when things get smaller their surfers area grows exponentially bigger than the volume. Simple inverse cube law. You know how ants can lift 20x their weight? Well if humans were that size we could life two THOUSAND times. So while this new styrofoam is pretty cool, this title is deceptive. Always be aware,
22
1
u/localhostdotdev May 15 '19
sounds more logical to me than ant-sized humans would have a similar strength than ants: https://www.geek.com/news/geek-answers-why-can-ants-lift-so-many-times-their-own-weight-1583950/
21
u/floatable_shark May 14 '19
But it is probably also 200x more expensive than Styrofoam
14
u/theArtOfProgramming May 15 '19
You have to be careful to account for economies of scale. I don’t know the specifics of this one but new, more economical products often start more expensive than the existing competition.
3
9
u/lucasrr123 May 15 '19
Who cares if its lightly more expensive. Make styrofoam illegal and it will be between paper and this. People still will have a choice and future harm fro. Styrofoam will be mitigated
12
u/ImmutableInscrutable May 15 '19
Who cares if its lightly more expensive
Every single company who might buy this
5
u/isboris2 May 15 '19
Styrofoam is 100% recyclable.
5
u/drchaz May 15 '19
I looked it up so I could downvote you and prove you wrong...but it turned out you are right! The service was even available in my city all this time. Thanks for letting me know.
→ More replies (3)2
u/YNWA_Wassy May 15 '19
This. The process is just slightly more intensive so people (being lazy as we are) don’t wanna deal with it. Easier to just scream it’s so bad though
→ More replies (1)1
u/YNWA_Wassy May 15 '19
PSA paper doesn’t just magically degrade either and is pretty similar to plastic
1
u/Zncon May 15 '19
Who cares if its lightly more expensive.
Anyone already living paycheck to paycheck, who can't afford anything in their life to get more costly.
5
u/Restless_Fillmore May 14 '19
There's also some very promising research recently to allow better recycling of extruded polystyrene foam (Styrofoam), which would allow it to be collapsed and re-expanded into foam again. Currently, it's not practical to recycle foam into foam again.
2
u/lightknight7777 May 15 '19
Literally the only thing that matters is cost comparison with styrofoam. That will be the only comparison. Nobody really cares about performance differences since styrofoam does a perfectly reasonable job in cheap scenarios and there are better products for more expensive scenarios.
So unless they can give a comparative cost product then we'll never see anyone care except in VERY specific situations where the properties of styrofoam were specifically desireable and the increased functionality would be useful. Like if styrofoam ever gets sent to space, this would be a good replacement.
2
u/Drugsrhugs May 15 '19
Won’t be replaced commercially until it meets or falls below the cost of average styrofoam manufacturing.
5
May 14 '19
Oh yeah all about money, which insulation is the most effective oh definetly this one.. it the most cost effective although it seems to have obvious cues mother nature seems to be dying cause of it.. but what does it matter im still getting rich and my family wont be affective by it
→ More replies (2)
3
u/thefolkie May 15 '19
I totally see a return of the McDLT, just because of this new invention.
→ More replies (1)
3
u/Zpik3 May 15 '19
" It is also very lightweight and can support up to 200 times its weight without changing shape. "
This tells us nothing.
→ More replies (3)
0
2.2k
u/shillyshally May 14 '19
I remember when corn based packing peanuts came out at the turn of the century. I lobbied hard to add them to our packing standards at my uber rich corporation. The problem was they melted when wet which was great as far as limiting physical waste but no one wanted to take a chance on our orders possibly getting wet.
Hope this fares better.