News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Plastic to Oil – Produces 80% Oil by 8note on Thursday January 19, 2023 @01:04PM (#34443428)
Burning plastic however, has high temperature requirements to avoid giving off toxic fumes in the smoke, which I think you would reduce by doing a conversion to oil first.
Re:Plastic to Oil – Produces 80% Oil by killjoywashere on Thursday January 19, 2023 @01:42PM (#34443866)
Re:Plastic to Oil – Produces 80% Oil by Reason077 on Thursday January 19, 2023 @01:45PM (#34443908)
Waste-to-energy plants are designed to reach those high temperatures, amongst other measures, to minimise and prevent toxic emissions.

They still produce a lot of CO2, though: plastic is still a fossil fuel. From a climate perspective, we’d be better to bury the stuff in the ground than to burn it. And ideally, we’d just produce a lot less plastic in the first place!

Re:Plastic to Oil – Produces 80% Oil by yowlingcat on Thursday January 19, 2023 @02:44PM (#34444665)
Are you suggesting to bury it in the ground so it can leach into groundwater and soil rather than even trying to capture and reuse the CO2? Are you serious or are you joking?
Re:Plastic to Oil – Produces 80% Oil by csours on Thursday January 19, 2023 @03:29PM (#34445192)
Digging a hole and lining it with clay and polymer, filling it with household waste, and then covering it with a polymer liner is significantly cheaper than what you are describing.

It's not great, there's no great solution, the problem is hard on multiple levels. If a solution made sense, people would already be doing it.

Re:Plastic to Oil – Produces 80% Oil by worik on Friday January 20, 2023 @02:40AM (#34450186)
The solution is to not generate waste we cannot dispose of
Re:Plastic to Oil – Produces 80% Oil by yowlingcat on Friday January 20, 2023 @03:59AM (#34450586)
I think this is the correct approach. No need to recycle what we do not generate. My only question is, how much legacy plastic would remain in the supply chain and what do we do with it?
Re:Plastic to Oil – Produces 80% Oil by ars on Thursday January 19, 2023 @04:20PM (#34445757)
> From a climate perspective, we’d be better to bury the stuff in the ground than to burn it.

Actually from a climate perspective we'd be better off burning the plastic, and reducing how much fresh oil we pump.

I'd rather "bury" if you will, the oil, instead of the plastic.

Re:Plastic to Oil – Produces 80% Oil by trompetenaccoun on Thursday January 19, 2023 @08:06PM (#34447895)
At the point where the plastic is already produced it's the exact opposite. It makes more sense to burn it and reduce our fossil fuel consumption. There may be edge cases where it's debatable, like in Iceland which already runs on 100% renewables.

Btw all these processes aren't as simple. For example decomposing polyethylene produces methane which can leak into the atmosphere where it's one of the worst greenhouse gases of all. If you burn it you "only" produce CO2, which is much preferable. The oil and gas was (semi)-permanently trapped before humans started digging it up without knowing the consequences. Putting waste into a surface dump and covering it with a few meters of soil and maybe some plastic sheets is not the same thing at all. This is not permanent carbon sequestration.

Everyone should consider there are many things we do not understand. In the media we're often presented "experts" who purport to know it all, but it's not true. And many laypeople have strong opinions despite understanding even less.