Jump to content

Talk:Bioplastic

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Add Table of Contents with links.

Copy from bioplastics24.com

[edit]

Some of the material was copied from that website under an open license.diff II | (t - c) 06:57, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Biodegradable plastic

[edit]

Although the topics are related a merger may be confusing. Biodegradable plastics may or may not be produced from sustainable biological sources - BASF's Ecoflex and Arkema's Rilsan PA11 are both derived from petrochemicals yet are inherently biodegradable (without the use of any heavy metal additives) Bioplastics are polymers derived from biological - and generally sustainable sources. But Bioplastics need not be biodegradable. I suggest you keep the two topics separate but linked. -- 80.42.18.231

It's an artificial distinction that you're creating. I suppose we could make it stick. It'll depend upon what other people think. Certainly if we merged the articles we would make clear that there are different types of biodegradable plastics. Incidentally, like the poster down below, I'm skeptical that oil-derived plastic with an additive really biodegrades completely. ImperfectlyInformed | {talk - contribs} 06:15, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Reading over my comment again I think I was mistaken. The question is whether bioplastics are necessarily biodegradable. IP 80.42 says they are not. If he's right, they should be kept separate. The information in this article, although unreferenced, suggests he is right, and a merge should not occur. II | (t - c) 06:57, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As far as the definition goes here are some:

Either biobased or biodegradable:

Solely biobased:

I vote for the Britannica/M-W definition of biobased, and so think it should not be merged, unless we're infringing on the territory of the wiktionary.Zylstra (talk) 09:16, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What if they were merged as an article that lists bioplastic and biodegradable plastic as types of biology-related plastics? 914ian915 (talk) 01:04, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bioplastics deserve its own article because it represents a new paradigm in the creation of plastics — simply put, they're not made with fossil fuels. 2001:F40:90F:F8B:BCA4:ECD4:82CE:C692 (talk) 07:56, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the title should be changed to "biobased plastic" or "biobased polymer" to make the distinction clearer. It is an important distinction because, at least in theory, certain petrobased polymers can completely biodegrade[1], and biobased polymers could be made non-biodegradable with enough treatment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MadderChemist (talk • contribs) 23:28, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://ac.els-cdn.com/S0734975008000141/1-s2.0-S0734975008000141-main.pdf?_tid=70971570-7e68-11e4-bcca-00000aacb362&acdnat=1417994955_0e9bb163670fc6aa676119b239fabb96


Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 August 2019 and 6 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Dmontalvo98. Peer reviewers: Mfink1210, Alexissabatelle, Paco BRG.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 15:47, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification

[edit]

The article says : "After ~100,000 years all the carbon-14 present in the original organic material will have undergone radioactive decay". 100,000 is I think too much rounded of. 60,000 would be better:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiocarbon_dating 84.35.136.98 (talk) 08:16, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Moved some material for structure regarding environmental impacts into own section. It was cluttering the introduction and an ancillary point (at least as it was made). Also a bit lengthy, so I broke up long sentences into shorter ones and removed some unnecessary details. Halogenated 18:48, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

modification last paragraph of Bioplastics and biodegradation

[edit]

I've suppressed the first sentence which said tha tadditive bioplastics degraded very well, beacause it is controversial, and I personnaly think it's false (tatters of plastics stays in the ground). I couldn't found references to this so I didn't put it and I just suppressed the sentence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Letuffe (talk • contribs) 10:29, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Citations

[edit]

What kind of sources would be acceptable for citation on this page? 914ian915 (talk) 20:30, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Main Makers

[edit]

Vincotte is a certifying organisation, not a bioplastic "main maker". I removed it from the list. Biostarch (talk) 03:57, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

[edit]

Biopolymer is just repetition of this article. It is almost completely a discussion of bioplastics, with a few lines thrown in about non-plastic "biopolymers" (which are just natural chains, like protien/DNA). NJGW (talk) 15:43, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bioplastics and biopolymers are not the same, although the topics are a bit overlapping. Some biopolymers might be used as bioplastics. The biopolymer article needs more attention. --Langbein Rise (talk) 08:45, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
While they may not be the same thing, the articles are not differentiated. If you're going to remove the merge tag, please fix the biopolymer article first. Otherwise I just don't see enough for two articles. Would you be in favor of merging bioplatic into biopolymer? NJGW (talk) 14:09, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think they should be separate articles, as biopolymers like cellulose, lignin, dna, etc., are quite distinct from the efforts to create plastics from biological sources. Though I agree the biopolymer article is not of very high quality, I think it's good enough to stand on its own, and not so bad that it should be merged. Pro crast in a tor (talk) 21:08, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I improved the biopolymer page a little, adding in another image and info about cellulose, and removed the merge message. I don't think my improvement was significant, but hopefully others feel it was enough. Pro crast in a tor (talk) 21:23, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

history of bioplastics

[edit]

bioplastics were the original plastics, there is a lot of very interesting history of bioplastics in this book "Alcohol Can Be a Gas!" see page: http://www.permaculture.com/ cheers, Jamie

Ad for BPI

[edit]

Removed many of the Ad's for composting Callsign (talk) 20:27, 5 January 2011 (UTC) too much information that is not correct, corrected EN13432, which is a 90 day test not a 180 test, fixed numerous errors around testing and composting terminology. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Callsign (talk • contribs) 19:31, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

potential resource

[edit]

Plastic from Algae: The First Step Toward a Fish-Friendly Gyre? by Chris Ladd April 29, 2010 12:08 PM Popular Mechanics

97.87.29.188 (talk) 23:09, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

There are quite a few dead links in the article and it would be nice to see them resolved.Bradyjs bradyjs (talk) 16:54, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Shrilk

[edit]

I mentioned Shrilk[1] in the see also section , a page needs to be made on it — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.182.142.202 (talk) 11:32, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Shrilk

break out compostability and merge rest with biopolymer

[edit]

I want to revive the aborted discussions about cleaning up this article. Bioplastic in my view refers to to the origins of the material, and this content needs to be merged with biopolymer. Biodegradable plastic refers to product end of life options and all text about compostability needs to be moved from this page to that one. Keitsist (talk) 16:55, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to modify my goal: not merge with biopolymer but harmonize. biodegradability does have to moved out of this article though. Keitsist (talk) 17:03, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Biopolymers can be biodradable, but one might as well - see for example Coke's efforts with their PlantBottle - make any conventional plastic type out of biomass. In the introduction, this sentence: "Bioplastics are more sustainable because they can break down in the environment faster than fossil-fuel plastics, which can take more than 100 years." seriously does more harm than good. I will remove it after posting this comment. --SocSch (talk) 14:07, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rename article to "Biobased polymer"

[edit]

The IUPAC definition of "bioplastic" contains a note recommending that "biobased polymer" be used instead of bioplastic. Gred Sixteen (talk) 20:18, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree for renaming article to Biobased polymer. --Daniele Pugliesi (talk) 03:08, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Bioplastic. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:44, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Bioplastic. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:48, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cost

[edit]

I think the section on cost is too simplistic since it just directly compares the price between petroplastics and bioplastics, not taking into acount the price benefits it can bring.

For instance, when using bioplastics as the material for food packaging, the whole can be direclty sold as fertilizer. When using petroplastics for food packaging, this isn't possible and requires prior seperation, making the whole a financially unattractive option. So, for food manufacturers, using bioplastics rather than petroplastics would be, financially seen, the most sensible approach. KVDP (talk) 16:05, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

“biodegradable plastic bags and shoppers are compuslory”

[edit]

I feel it's always important to make sure that shoppers are biodegradable. KenSharp (talk) 11:21, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

History of Bioplastics

[edit]

The history section likely should be formatted as a timeline replacing the subsequent summary timeline section. The references between the two sections are unclear at first glance and the prose section is dense and somewhat hard to navigate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mjbraun (talk • contribs) 06:12, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Recent additions

[edit]

The recent additions by Wiksameera (talk · contribs) seem to be pasted in from an essay. There is probably some useful content, so I am disinclined to simply revert it. I have done some purely mechanical cleaning but it needs reducing and editing by somebody who knows the subject matter — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 15:38, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. @DoubleGrazing:. See recent Draft:Bioplastics for construction materials — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 17:00, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that my recent additions need some work. I am new to Wikipedia editing and I understand that the content added is relevant to the topic. I drafted the contents to submit as an article before, in which i was told the contents should be under existing topic which is "BIOPLASIC". I will try my best to improve on my editing. thanks Wiksameera (talk) 19:18, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bioplastic&oldid=1234323005"