Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

filosoful OP t1_iusrl1q wrote

Scientists developed iron oxide nanoparticles with water-resistant coatings. They showed that microplastics in water bind to the particles, which can then be removed with a magnet.

The paper is here.

22

slickhedstrong t1_iusun40 wrote

And then cleaning up the nano particles with radioactive snakes and then breeding gorillas that eat radioactive snakes, and then, this is the beauty part, winter simply kills the gorillas.

80

[deleted] t1_iusy87q wrote

This isn’t being reported anywhere but all of us are consuming about a credit card’s worth of plastic a week. We are allowing corporations to poison the entire human race for convenient packaging for their shitty brands.

2

Brice706 t1_iut291m wrote

Hmmm...Removing plastic pollution from water using nanoparticles... and then the nanoparticles evolve to eat all the fish in the sea...and then they're still reproducing, and hungry, and decide to move on to land animals....! Oh, what a good sci-fi story this would make!

8

not_bendy t1_iutaf1n wrote

I don't know whyyyyyy... she swallowed that flyyy. Perhaps we'll die

2

flourishingvoid t1_iutcayh wrote

Sounds a bit too "futuristic"

We had a discussion ( in my Biophysicist group of 3 ) about specialized bacteria bred to consume plastic with non-toxic metabolic residues, and in just 15 minutes we isolated dozen or so serious issues with the theory.

I will give you just one.

What may happen if lab-bred bacteria follow the trend of consumption-based mutations and became create variants targeting not only waste but also more "energy-dense matter", and now we created species that can consume everything.

0

Hitemup27 t1_iutzgxu wrote

To fight the microplastics we must become the microplastics.

7

BravestCrone t1_iuu23fl wrote

How about we stop using plastic for everything? Avoid pollution to begin with? Why clean it up if more is plastic is just gonna get poured into the ocean? This technology doesn’t address the root of the problem, it just throws money at the symptoms

6

FTRFNK t1_iuu9ara wrote

Not really futuristic, surprising to say from a physicist to think literally manipulating living organisms to do a specific task is easier than making an inorganic small thing from minerals and then taking them out with a magnet.

Seems pretty simple to me. People have these weird conceptions about anything with a "nano" in front of it, particularly anything "nanoparticle".

Nanoparticle is literally just very very small, well, particle. This is quite literally just a very small iron oxide particle with a charged coating. What's futuristic about thar? There are iron molecules and oxygen molecules all around us. What's futuristic about using a giant magnet? If people cared about microplastics back in the day, we could have done this like 30 years ago.

2

flourishingvoid t1_iuurttv wrote

Nanoparticles that 'accumulate' or stick to specific substances aren't the same as nanomachines ( I was referring to ), they are still nanoparticles but much more complex in design, and less volatile when it comes to degradation from different chemicals and other environmental factors.

1

razorxent t1_iuw3kn5 wrote

I used the nanoparticles to destroy the nanoparticles

1