Thanks for such a comprehensive, informative article on bioplastics, Ann, and for staying on top of this fascinating and important space. I never knew what the differences were and it seems like there is quite a range. That said, I really like the direction BASF is heading with this compostabe and biodegradeable version of Ecovio. To think that all the plastic being used for food packaging could one day be bioplastic like this that can be reused and composted in an agricultural venue is promising, especially in a world where synthetic plastic has ruled for so many years and done such damage to the environment.
You're welcome, Elizabeth. Since there had been a lot of comments recently that indicated some readers were confused about the nature of bioplastics, I took the opportunity to clarify a few points again. BASF is a pioneer and leader in bioplastics, especially Ecovio compostable versions, and I( think they deserve kudos for this leadership, the R&D, and the productization/commercialization.
I'll definitely have to keep an eye on news from BASF. I think it's really great when a company takes such initiative to do something not only good for industry, but also for the environment. Responsible business practices are the future.
When researching the company last year, I discovered its commitment to sustainability goes back several years. I was also surprised that even my husband (in a very different field from this one) had heard of the company and its leadership in this area. Here's a link that will help: http://www.basf.com/group/corporate/en/content/sustainability/index
Thanks for the link, Ann. I will definitely take a look. I guess I shouldn't be surprised, as companies purely devoted to sustainability and environmental friendliness are popping up all the time know. But sounds like BASF was at the forefront.
Elizabeth, DuPont is another company that's been in the forefront of sustainability efforts, not just making sustainable plastics. I suggest you check out their website, too. http://www2.dupont.com/inclusive-innovations/en-us/gss/sustainability.html
Thanks for the info, Ann. I didn't know that about DuPont. I think for some reason I had a bit of a negative view of that company in my head, growing up so close to Delaware (near Philadelphia) where the company had such an ominous industrial presence. i always thought they were just another socially irresponsible chemical company. Good to know I'm wrong!
Elizabeth, I was also surprised, and pleased, to discover that most chemical companies have been addressing sustainability issues for several years now. Pressure from consumers had a lot to do with this.
Another fact I didn't know, Ann, but it makes sense. As consumers become more environmentally aware, it is just a no brainer that they want the companies providing the materials for a lot of products to do the same. Let's hope this starts to have a real positive impact.
I agree. Fortunately, consumer opinion already has made a big difference, and that's a large part of why companies have sustainability programs and we have second-generation biofuels and bioplastics, as well as the CAFE fuel efficiency standards. These changes actually began about 20 years ago, but have become more visible recently. The US has not exactly been at the leading edge.
Well it's good to see U.S. companies respond to pressure but a shame that they didn't change their ways beforehand. It's maddening to me how the U.S. can be ahead of the game in so many ways and behind on this important issue. Why is that, do you think? I don't know enough about it to say which countries are at the leading edge. Do you know what they are?
Sustainability is a big subject, so we need to separate it into relevant chunks, for example, a country's companies having corporate sustainability programs versus a country having regulations and concerted industry efforts toward making alternative materials and energy sources. On the second count, Japan and the EU are way ahead of the US. Regarding corporate sustainability programs, I don't know, but would make a reasonable guess that those two regions would also be ahead of us.
I was with Motorola Research in 2006 and a close peer commented that he was very concerned our retirement pension funding would be rapidly depleted as funds could be diverted to cleaning Chinese land-fills jammed with our plastic, metal and other non-RoHS materials. That guy championed an internal initiative to improve materials at Motorola, globally. Too bad we were all eliminated the following year due to Corporate Down-sizing.
That's an interesting story about Motorola Research, Jim. The overabundance of unrecycled plastic in landfills is not exactly a new story--there were forward-looking people worried about this back in the 1980s, but no one was really listening yet and it wasn't on most copanies' radar.
Thanks for that bit of history, JimT. So it sounds like internally there have been people inside companies trying to act environmentally friendly change for years, but then politics or downsizing (in this case) or other factors got in the way. It's good that consumer awareness and demand is bringing this issue to light again and forcing change. I hope it's not too late because I still fear those landfills will need to be cleaned--they are already jam-packed!
I agree, the article was very informative on the differences between the two bioplastics and I foresee them being widely used in the near future. Not out of popularity among the 'green' crowds but out of necessity due to the demand for oil and other dwindling resources. Easy oil is gone, is it not?
The thing to remember about petro-based oil, plentiful and easy or not, is that it not only causes new CO2 emissions when burned, as do biofuels, but does not first sequester new CO2 in the environment, as plant-based biofuels do before they become biofuels. In fact, it re-releases old carbon that had already been sequestered for a really, really long time. Growing more plants to temporarily sequester new carbon before then releasing it as fuel may not decrease environmental CO2 by a lot, but it sure stops the increase, and that's why biofuels are called carbon neutral. Alternative energy like solar is also called carbon neutral since it doesn't produce any carbon to start with.
No, really--your comment about it in another recent article on bioplastics made me realize that, even though I'd covered it in a feature last year, that was awhile ago. Thanks for helping to make this a better article.
An MIT research team has invented what they see as a solution to the need for biodegradable 3D-printable materials made from something besides petroleum-based sources: a water-based robotic additive extrusion method that makes objects from biodegradable hydrogel composites.
Alcoa has unveiled a new manufacturing and materials technology for making aluminum sheet, aimed especially at automotive, industrial, and packaging applications. If all its claims are true, this is a major breakthrough, and may convince more automotive engineers to use aluminum.
NASA has just installed a giant robot to help in its research on composite aerospace materials, like those used for the Orion spacecraft. The agency wants to shave the time it takes to get composites through design, test, and manufacturing stages.
The European Space Agency (ESA) is working with architects Foster + Partners to test the possibility of using lunar regolith, or moon rocks, and 3D printing to make structures for use on the moon. A new video shows some cool animations of a hypothetical lunar mission that carries out this vision.
Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.