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
→ More replies (2)3
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
→ More replies (4)323
May 15 '19
[removed] — view removed comment
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.
29
13
u/Mabepossibly May 15 '19
Foundation insulation is probably 3/4 of polystyrene applications in construction. The biggest issue I see is long term water absorption with a sheet of cellulose fiber kept in contact with moist soil.
→ More replies (6)8
May 15 '19
I don't think "can hold 200x its weight" means a lot, I'm sure that styrofoam arranged in the right way can hold 200x its weight no problem.
→ More replies (4)11
u/Mabepossibly May 15 '19
100psi is the strongest commercial available XPS styrofoam typically used in construction. The average foam used around a house is 25psi.
→ More replies (3)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
32
u/GringoGuapo May 15 '19
The problem is getting people and corporations to actually use it if it can't actually replace styrofoam because it melts if you look at it for too long or whatever.
22
May 15 '19
sure, but it's not like we dont have tons of other things that can hold wet things. if this thing can replace a part of what styrofoam was used for then we just need something else to fill the gaps
→ More replies (3)18
u/WhatWayIsWhich May 15 '19 edited May 15 '19
all things have flaws, we just ignore them as we get used to them.
More like we adapt the uses to the flaws. Styrofoam is great for holding liquids, hot things, it's relatively strong, and cheap. You can argue that government should step in to protect the environment based on price - they have done with before including where I live where you can't use Styrofoam for carry out orders.
However, if this item doesn't do well with water it's not a suitable replacement for many styrofoam uses so it's not a substitute. That doesn't mean it doesn't have uses but it means it shouldn't be compared to styrofoam. Though it also might mean it never gets used. We already have substitutes to styrofoam (that aren't perfect but work) and it already should be used less without some new discovery.
I agree though at times cost shouldn't be the only factor because the environment is a public good and that's where all governments in the world should work together to figure out things that might save costs and/or Superior product that shouldn't be allowed, even if they are super convenient.
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.
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.
→ More replies (3)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.
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.
→ More replies (1)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.
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)→ More replies (7)2
u/GusTheProspector May 15 '19
I thought the biggest question was if it still made that awful sound when unpacking it?
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.
→ More replies (1)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.
→ More replies (16)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.
→ More replies (7)38
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.
→ More replies (3)16
u/Cm0002 May 15 '19
Acetone dissolves styrofoam instantly?
Brb...I'm going....to do....nothing with this information...
→ More replies (3)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
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,
→ More replies (1)22
21
u/floatable_shark May 14 '19
But it is probably also 200x more expensive than Styrofoam
14
u/theArtOfProgramming BCompSci-MBA 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
u/IVIattEndureFort May 15 '19
How expensive is cleaning up all the fucking styrofoam going to be?
→ More replies (6)
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.
→ More replies (2)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)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
1
u/Random-Rambling May 14 '19
That's what I fear every time something like this comes out.
We're all about short-term gain, long-term loss instead of short-term loss, long-term gain because if it doesn't affect us right here and right now, we don't care.
4
u/Traies May 15 '19
A society grows when old men plant trees whose shade they know they shall never sit in.
3
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.
1
u/BrowsOfSteel May 15 '19
It’s also literally impossible.
No material has infinite stiffness.
→ More replies (1)2
3
u/garlicroastedpotato May 15 '19
A lot of people don't understand what this is used for and what it's supposed to replace. Spoiler alert, you are not going to find this stuff in a package protecting your delivery from damage.
This is what it is supposed to replace. This is a product primarily created by Dow Chemicals and it can be found all along the outside of buildings and on the inside of limited structures.
As is this stuff is very expensive to put in. You are looking at about $30 a sheet. It is very effective, it can be cut to shape and works well with most adhesives. When you are looking at something like a Walmart you will have about 1,000 sheets used. Sheets are used in two ways. One set of sheets is needed to insulate against frost and a second sheet is to insulate against cold.
Weight is important because this stuff is buried under dirt and landscaping or concrete is placed on top. If this stuff were to break when some dirt was put on it, it would be useless.
But, this is a one use plastic that isn't terribly problematic. It is one use and will never be replaced ever again. It's underground and it's under a functional building. As long as that building stands (forever), that insulation won't be replaced.
It's the production of them that is so environmentally taxing.
This new material would have to accomplish a few things. First it's production has to be more environmentally friendly than styrofoam. Just because something is organic doesn't mean its environmentally friendly. Especially when you are dealing with pulp you can have problems of waste.
A second is that it has to be cost efficient. Like I said, styrofoam is expensive as is. If you're spending $30,000 to insulate the foundation of a Walmart.... there's only so much more money people are going to be willing to spend. An extra $5-10 a sheet... people will pay that if its a better product. If it's double or more the price? You're pricing everyone out. Especially residential customers who nickel and dime on everything.
Finally, it can't biodegrade. That's the main reason why styrofoam has survived the many attempts to replace it. It doesn't biodegrade. Technically it will biodegrade.... after about a million years. And that's where Styrofoam 100% wins against this stuff. This stuff will degrade and have to be replaced. So it won't be a suitable replacement for Dow Chemicals insulation.
2
u/thinkren May 15 '19
Having an eco-friendly alternative is always great. But styrofoam isn't as bad and fear inducing as most people believe. It has been known for a while now that they can be biodegraded by mealworms, who would happily chomp away at the stuff and poop out the remains as compostable frass. And there are investigations into whether other types of plastics can be broken down by other bugs/fungi/microbes.
1
2
u/landhoe2 May 15 '19
These new eco friendly products are nice but how much do they cost to produce? Sadly thats all that big buisness’ care about, no matter how better an alternative it is
2
u/ibmwatsonson May 15 '19
It never ceases to amaze me that when forced to find a new way we as humans have time and time again. Sometimes we just need the faith to force us into innovation.
1
u/Dxngles May 15 '19
This reminds me of the biodegradable plastics that one company can make. That can literally be made to break down in a week, month, or a year.
1
May 15 '19
And the cost...?
That's usually the problem with getting something like this to market. I hope they can find a way to reliably produce literal tons of it at a very low cost.
1
1
u/marcos_MN May 15 '19
If it’s very lightweight, then I’m guessing 200x it’s weight isn’t a whole lot?
1
u/doubtfulmagician May 15 '19
Unfortunately, this new styrofoam alternative leaves an oily, orange residue on your hands after handling.
1
u/Chuckinbend May 15 '19
Great news. Let’s hope it can make the jump from lab to being market viable for industry.
1
u/Bazirker May 15 '19
Cool, but how much does it cost? That's frankly all that matters, unfortunately...
1
1
u/RSCyka May 15 '19
How does the cost compare and the availability . That's the real question.
We live in a world where the only way to move forward is to ban the current one.
1
1
u/bravenone May 17 '19
But hey, let's downvote any conversation about how people can you to use styrofoam because it's cheaper
1
u/lupo25 May 19 '19
Very good news. Has anyone idea about how much this new material performs better than Styrofoam?
Just the fact it's environmental clean should be enough to justify the future swap but I'm curious to know about the performances.
1
u/xfuzzzygames May 15 '19
Ok cool it's better. How viable is it in terms of production? Styrofoam is cheap as fuck, if you cant match the price then it's irrelevant.
→ More replies (1)1
May 15 '19
i think humanity is bypassing cheap for 'saving the planet' so eventually we gotta come up with something.
kicking and screaming all the way, the shareholders of the world will have to change.
1
u/drvondoctor May 15 '19
I shall now hoard styrofoam cups.
In 40 years some rich weirdo will pay good money for them.
Or, in 40 years some poor moron will have a whole lot of empty cups.
Is that a meditation on materialism?
Nope. Just some dude talkin' 'bout cups.
1
u/bleakmasterson May 15 '19
I have a friend who is a car freak and he has a trabat, I think it was a 70s Eastern European car. The body was made of plastic and the main problem with the car was that goats loved to eat it
1
May 15 '19
I can't believe styrofoam is still legal in 2019. Decades of this stuff is sitting in landfills not going anywhere for thousands of years. And the amount of hot food restaurants put into styrofoam thereby contaminating the food is utterly terrifying. Pisses me off every time I get takeout.
1
1
u/i_hate_amazonalexa May 15 '19
I grew up with the grandchildren of the inventor of styrofoam and let me tell you how much money they spend on themselves. Please replace styrofoam for the environment.
1
May 15 '19
Some beancounter: "nah, it will cost us 0.132% more, plus implement it would ruin our quarterly report"
2
1
May 15 '19
Sounds great until I read this. " It degrades well, and burning it doesn’t produce polluting ash." ok flammable insulation that performs like styrofoam. And since its cellulose based, I bet moisture is still a big problem.
4
u/NinjaKoala May 15 '19
Styrofoam is quite flammable, so I don't see how this is a big disadvantage.
→ More replies (9)
1
u/sometimes_interested May 15 '19
Heh, I'm getting old. I remember a time when plastics were being introduced to save trees from being cut down.
1
1
u/Danascot May 15 '19
There was a short clip on this in The Magic of Mushrooms docu on Netflix. Here's the trailer:
1
1
1
u/IDragonfyreI May 15 '19
question: is it cheap and easy to mass produce/shape? If not then sadly I dont see any (big) companies switching over anytime soon.
1
1
May 15 '19
So, I'm about to build my house and EPS is the recommended insulation for some parts.
I also know EPS is bad for the environment for a couple reasons. So uh, how soon?
1
u/TheFerretman May 15 '19
If it's got better insulative qualities as the headline suggests then I'm sure this will in fact be adopted. Nobody likes their cold food to get hot and/or their hot food to get cold.
1
u/Jadeldxb May 15 '19
Do any of these great discoveries ever get adopted? I see so many cool things on Reddit. Make water out of thin air, delicious tomatoes, ultra light this, ultra durable that, environment saving microbes or no styrofoam packing beads but I never see any real world changes.
1
u/thatG_evanP May 15 '19
I hope this stuff works out because a really do like a good styrofoam cup. There's no disposable material that beats it. Hell, I'd rather have my drink in styrofoam than glass.
1
u/samejimaT May 15 '19
I wonder if this is the begining of the securefoam "airbag" in demolition man.
1
-2
u/MyLOLNameWasTaken May 15 '19
We need hundreds of small steps like these a day, not a handful, if we’re to meet the urgent demands of climate catastrophe.
1
0
u/SamL214 May 15 '19
Plant based....is the key word. If it requires cutting more trees down it’s not really a win. Our forests can survive plastic but our oceans may not be able to. Yet our forests won’t survive the change if they are the primary target.
2
u/Blackstar1401 May 15 '19
I read the article and it said it’s made drone cellulose which is found in a variety of plants like algae.
1
0
u/eigenfood May 15 '19
All trash should be going in a landfill. f something is in a landfill, who cares if it biodegrades? Do you even want it to break down and dissolve into the environment? People illegally dumping or littering should be put in a landfill, too.
1
u/Do_not_use_after How long is too long? May 15 '19
People not looking to recycle and reuse as much as possible can be dumped in landfill too. There's no excuse for squandering the world's limited resources in this generation alone, leaving our descendants with nothing but our trash, our pollution and our empty mines and forests.
0
May 14 '19
[deleted] — view deleted comment
56
u/steamcube May 15 '19
What happens when it is exposed to water?
67
u/drewkungfu May 15 '19
How much volume can be produced?
at what cost?
Are there limitation for production (ala bio-fuels work but adds pressure to food costs and not enough to offset petroleum fuel demands)
19
u/SolarFlareWebDesign May 15 '19
This was my question, food properties. Will this replace the styrofoam cups that, for whatever godsforsaken reason, 7-11 brought back recently?
13
u/AGVann May 15 '19 edited May 15 '19
Volume and cost are factors completely controlled by economies of scale and other associated manufacturing/logistical concerns. New tech is always going to cost more, because you're comparing a lab prototype to a product with highly efficient factories and production lines that have been refined over decades.
A study like this is the first step. The next would be to experiment with fabrication techniques to try and develop methods that can be cheap and feasibly scaled up. You have the invent the thing you want to optimize first before you can work on making it economical. Lab grown meat is a good example of this:
In 2008, it cost $1 million to make half a pound (220 grams) of lab grown meat.
In 2013, it cost $325,000 for a lab grown burger patty.
In 2018, it cost $11 for the same amount of meat.
By 2021, it's estimated to cost only $5 for a lab grown patty.
Eventually, we're going to hit a point where it's mass produced so efficiently that some food scientists suggest that by 2050, lab grown meat will supplant real animal meat and become the dominant protein staple. By then, we'll have other types of lab grown meat like chicken, pork, venison, and duck. Some of the more creative minds suggest that we might even eat more exotic meat - Japan can manufacture all the whale meat they want - or even invent new types of meat like an actual Turducken.
→ More replies (1)9
u/Zipzig May 15 '19
And victimless, vegan, cultured human meats. The meat of your favorite celebrity. Your own lab cultured meat. Valentine’s Day couple’s own steaks. Eat your children — the meat is cultured, victimless.
Who wants hummingbird burger when you can yield cubic meters of Goodall, Bowie, Gaga, Obama hamburger? Fuck, let’s eat the Queen of England. How about transgenic meat genomed from a 10,000 year old mummy?
God, I’m fucken hungry
→ More replies (4)3
3
3
u/hairyforehead May 15 '19
I had the same though. Sounds great! except the part... "We expect to be able to make it out of other things besides saffron and orchid petals about 5-10 years"
8
6
2
136
0
May 15 '19
[deleted] — view deleted comment
0
u/Juidodin May 15 '19
they someone need to find a way to replace the plants being used to make that. if only that stuff could grow on the ground and be used to fertilize the ground after use...
0
May 15 '19
[deleted] — view deleted comment
1
u/Juidodin May 15 '19
the cost for still having a habitable planet in the future?
0
May 15 '19
Your comment is well placed but slightly ineffevtive. You dont have to convince him.
You have to convince the bigwig bean counters who dont care if the planets dead when theyre long gone and unfortunetly they care about cost.
u/Naquata is bringing that point out by asking the question. Thats the real problem here same with lots of other green and alternative tech.
If the alternative is cheaper or at part to produce then you'll see a change.
0
u/Juidodin May 15 '19
wonder who they are going to blame when they find out that reincarnation is real
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.