• PatFusty
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I remember I spoke with the professor at UCSD working on this eTPU alternative to regular PUR this article is referencing a few years back. He was frothing at the mouth of selling this as a product as he was eager to talk with big companies to sell the research, it turned me off 100%. I asked if it decomposes just as well anaerobically and he said it’s not intended to be used outside of composting scenarios. It also has little shelf life and more hygroscopic which reduces use performance over time. So there we have it. Another green wash situation. Your composter is NOT going to accept this when they see it x10000000

    • abhibeckert@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      You’re making perfect the enemy of good.

      Yes, re-usable cups are better than a commercially compostable cup. Use re-usable cups if at all possible. But like it or not some people just aren’t going to do that, and commercially compostable cups are a hell of a lot better than plastic. Even if they don’t get composted, and you send them to regular landfill, they are still a million times better than plastic.

      • PatFusty
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        Sending plastic to the landfill that doesn’t decompose anaerobically is essentially the same as sending regular plastic. Also, using shitty material that has a shorter shelf life also means it allows for planned obsolescence for items you wouldn’t have thought was possible. For instance that can allow companies to put best use by dates on a refrigerator, home insulation, soles on shoes etc. For single use items it would make it so stock would be thrown out if not consumed more frequently. We would end up sending even more plastic to the landfills.