Plastic

[Anonymous No.15466776]

Is plastic more of a benefit to society, or no? There is reasonable argumentation that it pollutes the environment, is unhealthy for humans, and that these costs outweigh the merits. Argumentation in favor of plastic usage supports plastic a cheap and versatile resource that is easy to produce. Plastic sees utilization in almost all areas of contemporary daily life and to abandon or limit it would mean to damage the economy, by drawing from more expensive and scarce resources which can in turn lead to significant quality of life changes.

What do /sci/ anons think on this matter?

Also, what is the plastic engineering field like?

[Anonymous No.15466867]

>>15466776
I'm a materials engineer and polymer chemist.
Petroleum based plastic and their consequences have been a disaster for the human race. I'm speaking from a biological and environmental perspective.
We could give them up tomorrow, switch to appropriate metals, glass, ceramics, and cellulose polymers and lose almost nothing.

[Anonymous No.15466903]

>>15466776
1. Plastics themselves are so inert that it's a problem. Is glass the same?
2. Most problems of "endocrine disruptor" are from additives not the plastic themselves. Those additive have far more uses besides plastics and can be removed if people accept again non-transparent/flexible and cheap plastics. Let's not even talk about direct contamination from sewage that contains a cocktail of drugs (including hormones), persistent organic contaminants, etc.

The microplastic hype is stupid and a filter for some groups, there's things far worse and harder to solve.

[Anonymous No.15467149]

[Anonymous No.15467211]

>>15466903
bits of plastic , glass, and rubber last forever. These are the three things I occasionally find in my yard. Majority of the time it is tiny plastic pieces, probably chopped up by a mower or blown in from somewhere else because it's light and floats. It settles in the grass and eventually joins the dirt on the surface layer. Rarely I will find one of each type when digging up to a foot in my yard. They sink but stay the same.

[Anonymous No.15467259]

>>15466867
Imagine being a traitor to the industry that provides your job and the economy for some hippie-hype.

>>15467211
That's because you're careless.

[Anonymous No.15467380]

>>15467149
Nice infographic

[Anonymous No.15468286]

Bump

[Anonymous No.15468353]

>>15466776
Without plastics you don't have photoresistors and without photoresistors you don't have modern electronics. So you tell me
>>15466867
You are simply a moron. All the materials that you mention rely on plastics to be functional
Aluminum
>BPA and polyester coatings and films
Glass
> Literally you can't make a sealed glass structure without plastics
Ceramics
>Same as glass, usually reinforced with polyurethanes to not get destroyed at low weight
cellulose polymers (fucking paper and pulp you pseudo)
>Contain the most cross-contamination out of any material and its recycling method is incredibly dirty and fails to filter things like toluene, inks, MOSH and MOAH. It is shit on its own and it is always combined with polyethylene extrusion coating or polymer coatings like polyester liners to be functional
And this just talking about packaging. Entire key components for advanced manufacturing like Teflon, battery separators, photoresist polymers (photolithography) or synthetic rubbers are based on synthetic polymers

[Anonymous No.15468922]

>>15468353
>Without plastics you don't have photoresistors and without photoresistors you don't have modern electronics. So you tell me
This is a good case. It is hard to argue against it without communist tier sentiments.

[Anonymous No.15469809]

>>15467149
This must be why everything is so God damned cheap

[Anonymous No.15470607]

Bump