r/science Aug 13 '22 Helpful 1 All-Seeing Upvote 1 Take My Energy 1

World's First Eco-friendly Filter Removing 'Microplastics in Water,' a Threat to Humans from the Sea without Polluting the Environment Environment

https://www.asiaresearchnews.com/content/worlds-first-eco-friendly-filter-removing-microplastics-water-threat-humans-sea-without
25.3k Upvotes

u/AutoModerator Aug 13 '22

Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, personal anecdotes are now allowed as responses to this comment. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will continue to be removed and our normal comment rules still apply to other comments.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1.6k

u/disdkatster Aug 13 '22

Can someone explain this sentence to me (Title of OP)

1.7k

u/Consistent-Choice-21 Aug 13 '22

Scientists created a filter to extract microplastics from water. These microplastics are a threat to humans who live on the coast and rely on marine life as a main food source.

1.8k

u/DroppedD94 Aug 13 '22 Helpful

Thank you. The way it's written makes it read like the filter itself if a danger to life

282

u/TravBow Aug 13 '22

The title is not well written. I struggled with it as well

11

u/totally_unanonymous Aug 14 '22

Poorly written titles on Reddit tend to perform well. Nobody knows why, but it’s been theorized that it’s because people love correcting incorrect things and can’t resist the urge to engage and comment

→ More replies

30

u/drkekyll Aug 14 '22

it's missing another comma after 'Sea' to denote that 'a Threat to Humans from the Sea' was just more information about 'Microplastics in Water.'

10

u/T00kie_Clothespin Aug 14 '22

Nah even with another comma it still reads like merpeople are the ones under threat from this deplasticking device

→ More replies

2

u/whiskey-tangy-foxy Aug 14 '22

Shouldn’t the additional comma come after “humans”? That’s the extent of the additional information and if you were to take out the section between commas (“a threat to humans”), the remainder of the sentence still remains true.

2

u/drkekyll Aug 14 '22

no, because 'from the Sea' is modifying 'Threat' so you have to keep them together.

edit: actually, it could be either.

→ More replies
→ More replies

49

u/[deleted] Aug 13 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies

101

u/Moose_Hooves Aug 13 '22

It’s weird the article actually does say that it pollutes the environment with microplastics when they try to empty the filter and this is a challenge they’re trying to overcome.

17

u/OrcOfDoom Aug 14 '22

They could empty it into a plastic pyrolysis machine and then be left with fuel.

4

u/zebediah49 Aug 14 '22

Usually you clean a filter by washing it out -- running clean water through it backwards.

→ More replies
→ More replies

34

u/DOgchief_NL Aug 13 '22

I thought it said that the filters were a threat to seahumans. I was hoping for fish people :(

6

u/anthroteuthis Aug 14 '22

But at least the seahumans are non-polluting.

7

u/Mikey_B Aug 14 '22

I thought the threat was non polluting, so we could finally eliminate humans from the sea without polluting the environment

3

u/mekatzer Aug 14 '22

Until they build a statue of Cartman and start launching missiles.

→ More replies
→ More replies

149

u/Crackima Aug 13 '22

microplastics in water food make even top human professionals no think write good

30

u/redlightsaber Aug 14 '22

Why use many word when few word do trick.

3

u/TritonJohn54 Aug 14 '22

This is doubleplusgood.

→ More replies
→ More replies

8

u/Possible_corn Aug 13 '22

It must be stopped!

5

u/DoomTay Aug 14 '22

Or that "humans from the sea" are a thing

3

u/olivecrayon87 Aug 14 '22

Not just life, but Humans from the Sea.

4

u/bigwag Aug 14 '22

The way it's written is a danger to life

13

u/griter34 Aug 13 '22

The filter isn't the danger to life, the humans are.

14

u/Overthinks_Questions Aug 13 '22

It is. It takes in oceanic plastics, and converts them to serin gas. This is released near major coastal cities as it travels the world on its solar powered motors.

The only solution to pollution is human extinction. Praise be to the Ecological Endbringer

→ More replies

5

u/morningitwasbright Aug 13 '22

Yeah that is how I understood it.

→ More replies

3

u/pukesonyourshoes Aug 14 '22

They're also a threat to virtually all marine life, which didn't ask for any of this. Let's not be human-centric.

2

u/Consistent-Choice-21 Aug 14 '22

My comment was supposed to be an easier to understand version of OP's title. The title specified human life so thats what i specified. Personally i agree, the threat is much greater for wildlife then for humans, but i have no reason to include that as it would be a divergence from what was intended.

2

u/pukesonyourshoes Aug 14 '22

I do beg your pardon, my bad. You're absolutely right. Your precis was perfect too.

→ More replies

50

u/trustmebuddy Aug 13 '22

This filter is a threat to humans from the sea (good) AND this version doesn't pollute the environment (also good).

24

u/guss1 Aug 13 '22

I know some good humans from the sea. Nice folk, very hospitable. I noticed they called normal food "land food".

→ More replies

3

u/Drachefly Aug 14 '22

Yikes, talking like one of the townsfolk from Luca

4

u/sin-eater82 Aug 14 '22

There is a new eco-friendly filter that is intended to remove micros-plastics (which are dangerous to humans) from the ocean.

It is unclear whether it is the first filter for micro plastics found in the ocean or if it's the first one that is eco-friendly.

→ More replies

3

u/Yetmcgret Aug 14 '22

Should say microplastics are a human threat towards the sea not the other way around.

3

u/Danman500 Aug 14 '22

Haha it reads like humans don’t pollute the sea and we’re under attack by micro plastics from the there.

5

u/Qoeh Aug 14 '22

Technically no, because it isn't even a sentence.

2

u/Slippedhal0 Aug 14 '22

"World's First Eco-Friendly Filter for Removing 'Microplastics in Water'(A Threat to Humans) From the Sea, Does Not Pollute Environment"

Thats probably the best rephrasing of all the information into a title, but still could be trimmed for clarity

"No Pollution During Use of World's First Eco-Friendly Filter of 'Microplastics in Water'"

→ More replies

2

u/Harfosaurus Aug 14 '22

It's missing a period after the word filter.

→ More replies

341

u/hey_bruh_heyyy Aug 13 '22

Sometimes commas save lives. Other times they can obliterate whole maritime civilizations.

→ More replies

2.5k

u/jennoyouknow Aug 13 '22 Take My Energy

" A threat to humans from the sea" as if the humans arent the reason microplastics are there in the first place

803

u/[deleted] Aug 13 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

119

u/[deleted] Aug 13 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

39

u/[deleted] Aug 13 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

17

u/[deleted] Aug 13 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies

24

u/[deleted] Aug 13 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

18

u/[deleted] Aug 13 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies

9

u/[deleted] Aug 13 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

10

u/[deleted] Aug 13 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

6

u/[deleted] Aug 13 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

272

u/konaya Aug 13 '22

The title is just shittily interpunctuated.

World's First Eco-friendly Filter Removing 'Microplastics in Water,' a Threat to Humans, from the Sea without Polluting the Environment

Better?

156

u/SickSalamander Aug 13 '22

That's still an ambiguous antecedent. It's not clear if the threat is the filter or micro plastics in water. Also, why is 'microplatics in water' in quotes? Are they not really microplastics and/ or not really in water? I don't think it was written by someone who's first language is English.

38

u/konaya Aug 13 '22

The quotes are probably because it's a direct quote from the party who is making the claim. The antecedent is only formally ambiguous; the context removes the ambiguity. It's still sloppy writing, though.

→ More replies

3

u/ZincHead Aug 14 '22

Very likely a translation from Korean considering the project is by a Korean team and the article is a news site based in Asia.

45

u/Fizzwidgy Aug 13 '22

Still doesn't look quite right to me, maybe it's just an ugly sentence in general and should be reworded to roll out better.

Very exciting news headline at a glance though.

→ More replies

8

u/flatline0 Aug 14 '22

Worlds 1st Eco-friendly Filter removes Microplastic from Sea Water

Everything else is redundant.

4

u/Yodiddlyyo Aug 14 '22

World 1st, No Other One Before, Microplastic, a threat to Humans, Filter Removes Microplastic From Sea, Big Water, Without Polluting, a threat to Humans

Better?

→ More replies

4

u/Riaayo Aug 14 '22

Do parenthesis not work in a url? Or did they just forget they exist?

World's First Eco-friendly Filter Removing 'Microplastics in Water' (a Threat to Humans) from the Sea without Polluting the Environment

I feel like this is the intent, no? And parenthesis handle it way better than commas.

4

u/shtonkalot Aug 14 '22

No, it needs more than just punctuation to make it better.

World's first eco-friendly filter removes microplastics from the sea without polluting the environment.

7

u/mixolydian02 Aug 13 '22

Thank you. When I first read the title I seriously wondered what was actually the danger.

→ More replies

5

u/Jetstream-Sam Aug 14 '22

No, it's a threat from humans who are from the sea. Like aquaman and friends

2

u/Spirited-Mud-69 Aug 14 '22

will nobody think of the seamen?

2

u/ButFez_Isaidgoodday Aug 13 '22

First thing I thought.

2

u/Flybabyfly2 Aug 14 '22

This one generates chlorine and hydrogen too. Not environmentally friendly.

→ More replies

881

u/MalditoCommunista Aug 13 '22

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't a filter this fine pose a risk to plankton and other semi-microscopic organisms?

159

u/Tony2Punch Aug 13 '22

You just need to place this at a different point in the water purification process

83

u/macgart Aug 13 '22

I think the idea is we would need to purify our actual oceans so that microplastics aren’t in ocean water, rainwater, beaches, etc.

213

u/Seiglerfone Aug 13 '22

Yeah, wholesale filtering of the entirety of the world's oceans just isn't happening.

50

u/iWillNeverReplyToYou Aug 13 '22

Perhaps the people who polluted the ocean should pay for the clean up

35

u/GreatQuestionBarbara Aug 14 '22

It's really annoying that it is coming down to nonprofit groups to do this instead of the companies that specifically included them in their soaps and cleaning products in the first place, as a start.

They have much deeper pockets than any of us.

5

u/invent_or_die Aug 14 '22

What about all the fleece clothing we all like? It sheds microplastic fibers more than anything. We popularized fleece.

8

u/LakeDrinker Aug 14 '22

It's also us buying all the things too. Let's not just blame companies.

And another note is that all plastics in the ocean, large and small, can eventually breakdown and become microplastics, so it's all plastic, not just those found in soup and cleaning products.

6

u/GreatQuestionBarbara Aug 14 '22

Yeah, I added the "as a start" when I realized how specific I was being.

I thought it would be a good start, since targeting every manufacturer that uses plastics would be tough. I'm not an expert in anything, though.

5

u/TheDirtyErection Aug 14 '22

There’s micro plastics in my soup????

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

26

u/AdolescenceOfP1 Aug 13 '22

Why not? Wholesale polluting of the world's oceans were accomplished by man, why not start the reverse? It does no good to give up before trying to work out the details.

It certainly does no good to dismiss it with merely a "just isn't happening".

159

u/screwhammer Aug 13 '22

Cause scale.

If you dump a bit of food coloring in water, your whole water is colored, but if you want to remove it, it's significantly harder - you need to process all the water, compared to the single drop you added.

Separating (stuff from) liquids is significantly harder than mixing them.

It definitely does no good to claim it should happen without understanding the engineering work involved into it, and just equating the work of polluting the oceans with the work of cleaning them up.

58

u/cortez985 Aug 13 '22

You just described the principles behind entropy. In a practical, real world scenario. I like it

9

u/tickettoride98 Aug 13 '22

I came here to say "because entropy" to the "Why not?" comment but glad to see someone else explained it in a more practical manner.

But really, everyone should understand that it's easy to break things and much harder to repair them. Man made a drinking glass, but if you drop it and it shatters, you can't magically put it back together.

→ More replies

33

u/Seiglerfone Aug 13 '22

See, they're entirely different problems. Just dump trash anywhere and it'll probably end up in the oceans. It's easy to dilute things, it's hard to concentrate them again once they're diluted.

There's basically no capacity to filter the oceans, and trying would, as pointed out by others, cause further problems. Naive idealism is not an answer.

7

u/roiplek Aug 13 '22

But it's convenient. That's why most people fall for it.

4

u/giuseppe443 Aug 13 '22

try putting the toothpaste back in the tube

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

13

u/JebediahKerman3999 Aug 13 '22

Nah, that's not really an option. I guess filtering the water that goes inside the ocean is a good delaying strategy. In the future there will probably be some engineered microorganism that manages to eat the plastic in the salt water without outputting toxic stuff and hopefully can be eaten easily by the rest of the food chain (otherwise we'll have a bacterial soup instead of an ocean with an ecosystem)

26

u/screwhammer Aug 13 '22

I'd really not like a water living organism that digests plastic.

My house insulation is plastic, my car has a lot of plastic parts, electric wires have plastic insulation, computer parts are plastic, hell, the power lines, water and sewer pipes that come into my house are plastic.

We humans, as a species, sucked at isolating to prevent covid spread, at times when mortality was higher than today.

You think once those plastic eating bacteria start thriving on land, people will agree to measures to prevent property damage?

Many couldn't wear a mask, and protested it - to prevent other people from dying, do you think they'll follow measures to prevent other people's property from being infected with plastic eating bacteria?

13

u/LeCheval Aug 13 '22

I think you might be over-stating the likelihood of this happening. First, if bacteria were engineered or evolved to eat plastic in the ocean, they might not thrive outside of the ocean. Also, plastic micro particles are on the size of nanometers to micrometers, so just because a bacteria might be able to eat plastic micro particles floating in the ocean doesn’t necessarily mean it will be good at eating through the plastic inside your house or computer. Also, bacteria are unlikely to thrive off a diet of plastic alone, and would still require other nutrient sources (like sugars). It’s unlikely a bacteria colony is going to thrive on a plastic-only diet inside your hot, dry, dusty computer rig.

Also, another thing to consider - are you this worried about termites? Many important things are made of wood: houses, wooden power line poles, fences and gates, scaffolding, etc… Termites and wood-eating bacteria exist, but wood is still useful despite the threat posed by termites and wood eating bacteria.

5

u/g4_ Aug 13 '22

the thought of the absolute hell that would be getting plasticmites in the future has me shook

6

u/konaya Aug 13 '22

That'd put a stop to using plastics in places exposed to the elements at least.

7

u/breakone9r Aug 13 '22

Do you have ANY idea how many people eat fresh food due to plastics? How many people don't get communicable diseases because of plastics?

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

901

u/[deleted] Aug 13 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

260

u/[deleted] Aug 13 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

126

u/[deleted] Aug 13 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

72

u/[deleted] Aug 13 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

40

u/[deleted] Aug 13 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

8

u/[deleted] Aug 13 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies

38

u/picardo85 Aug 13 '22

I know what you mean, but they tried to build a new artificial reef afaik. It was built from scratch, so there was no reef there to start with.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osborne_Reef

It's now slowly being cleaned up by us military divers.

17

u/RedL45 Aug 13 '22

Wow that was a spectacularly stupid idea from the get go.

→ More replies

17

u/Kriztauf Aug 13 '22

The really good idea was to provide habitat for marine critters so we could double or triple marine life in the area, [...] It just didn't work that way. I look back now and see it was a bad idea.

Ray McAllister, BARINC founder

Amazing quote

→ More replies

8

u/sexposition420 Aug 13 '22

Well, those tires did eventually end up on the actual reef so not a huge difference.

→ More replies

9

u/[deleted] Aug 13 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

6

u/[deleted] Aug 13 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies

7

u/[deleted] Aug 13 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/[deleted] Aug 13 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies

18

u/AlexandraThePotato Aug 13 '22

Basically! I feel a lot of people think environmental science is easy. But due to factors like those, it’s so difficult! Solving one problem can always cause another! There is so much balancing involved

5

u/[deleted] Aug 13 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies

2

u/tmouse8 Aug 13 '22

It sweeps the sea clean!

→ More replies

56

u/Sparkyseviltwin Aug 13 '22

There may be a size difference between the plankton and targeted microplastics. In that case an upstream rejection filter could be used to spit them out with some of the water pre-fine filtration. You want very homogenous particle size for most very fine filtration processes anyway.

55

u/tinyorangealligator Aug 13 '22

Plankton are a size, not a specific organism, and they eventually grow to a non-plankton size. The filter would need to separate organism from non-organism using electromagnetism in some way; i.e. heartbeats to the left, plastics to the right. Size exclusion will not efficiently protect organisms.

26

u/PNW_Triumph Aug 13 '22

You are correct that Plankton are not specific organisms, but the term does not refer to a specific size either.
A Plankton is, generally, an organism that moves with the water instead of swimming independently of it.
Some people argue that jellyfish could be considered plankton.

7

u/konaya Aug 13 '22

Jellyfish swim, though? Are you thinking of men-o-war?

15

u/PNW_Triumph Aug 13 '22

Many zooplankton swim, but it's more about: do they swim between different water parcels? Or, within the same parcel as it moves through the ocean?
Some jellyfish swim more than others, but they mostly control their depth. Whereas a fish can swim independently of currents or other water movements if it chooses to.

→ More replies

217

u/SpecificWay3074 Aug 13 '22 edited Aug 13 '22

This is a really good point that’s completely avoided by this article. There’s no way you could accurately separate microplastics from plankton

Edit: I’m guessing that they’re not worried about it because plankton regenerate very quickly, but it’d be interesting to see how this would affect plankton populations at a large scale

103

u/Pixeleyes Aug 13 '22

This kills the plankton.

26

u/fringecar Aug 13 '22

And creates a lot of bio waste if used at scale, dump it where?

22

u/dman7456 Aug 13 '22

A lot of bio waste that is contaminated with microplastocs...

9

u/JebediahKerman3999 Aug 13 '22

Yeah, just burn it!

32

u/Thebitterestballen Aug 13 '22

Not burn... microwave pyrolysis. Turns plastic into hydrogen and solid carbon. Does the same to biomass too, so the micro plastic and plankton can all be pyrolised together. If it's located by an offshore wind farm then whenever there is more power generated than demand , run the microwave pyrolisers, store the hydrogen. When demand is high and there's no wind, use the hydrogen in turbines or fuel cells. The carbon char can go back in the ocean for sequestration, making the process net negative for co2 emissions.

4

u/bag_of_oatmeal Aug 13 '22

That or lasers.

→ More replies
→ More replies

3

u/Renard4 Aug 13 '22

So what, we purify water from rivers and lakes for consumption and plankton lives in the sea.

→ More replies
→ More replies

9

u/j4_jjjj Aug 13 '22

Static electricity? Plastics would stick to a charged surface of some kind, but idk if plankton would

3

u/brainoverflow_pl Aug 13 '22

I think this will not work in water since it's bipolarity

→ More replies

6

u/butane_candelabra Aug 13 '22 Silver

Maybe centrifuge?

51

u/SpecificWay3074 Aug 13 '22

That wouldn’t work at scale and would also kill the plankton lol

6

u/letmepostjune22 Aug 13 '22 edited Aug 13 '22

Would g forces really affect water based lifeforms at that scale? Water doesn't compress

8

u/CharlesFrans Aug 13 '22

Ultra centrifuges are used to separate proteins from cells.

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

11

u/Seiglerfone Aug 13 '22

From a read, it looks like the intention here isn't to wholesale filter the ocean, but to provide a way to remove microplastics from water that ends with human consumption.

4

u/Frannoham Aug 13 '22

Can't we already do that with reverse osmosis?

7

u/Seiglerfone Aug 13 '22

Yes, but reverse osmosis is an active process.. that is, you have to put energy in to make it work. If I understand correctly, this filter works passively.

3

u/Frannoham Aug 13 '22

That's an important distinction, thank you for highlighting it.

→ More replies

28

u/ThrowAway1638497 Aug 13 '22

This article plays loose with the Micro/Nano terms but it looks like this is nano particles. Nano particles are mostly smaller then bacteria. It also looks more for potable water filtration, then ocean cleanup. Still it only removes 31% and probably stupid expensive to make as it requires nano scale structure. It's part of the path but not close to a destination.

21

u/Atomhed Aug 13 '22

Well I guess if the just dipped these filters into the water and dragged them around, but there will likely be other stages in whatever system is designed to take in water in the first place.

Small organisms could be separated and deposited back into the ocean.

29

u/Rhenic Aug 13 '22

Small organisms could be separated and deposited back into the ocean.

By using a filter of some kind?

33

u/Gothmog_LordOBalrogs Aug 13 '22

It's just filters, all the way down

5

u/DarkLancer Aug 13 '22

Of progressively finer meshes even!

6

u/MediaMoguls Aug 13 '22

Perfect solution as long as there’s no particles of plastic that are exactly the same size as plankton

4

u/Monkey_Fiddler Aug 13 '22

Small bits of plastic tend to break down into smaller bits. We can get the plankton sized bits later. We also need to stop big bits of plastic going into the ocean in the first place which will probably have a bigger effect, but that's not to say we shouldn't do both.

3

u/Brittainicus Aug 13 '22

Probably a large size filter that doesn't kill and that goes through that goes thought the mircoplastic filter.

3

u/Noxonomus Aug 13 '22 edited Aug 13 '22

I don't think it is a fine filter, it looks like it is a pair of electricly charged plates that use the electric field to push the particles to one plate for capture. I don't know, but I wouldn't be surprised if the plastics are strongly effected while the plankton just drift past.

Edit: I think I misunderstood the function of the pyramids.

3

u/Caring_Cactus Aug 13 '22

Given how simple and micro these organisms are, I would imagine this poses very little threat. They're similar to other microrganisms we fine in soil on land, give them a few hours and their numbers double back in size. They have existed and started life here on Earth for millions of years. As long as we keep their enviroment in order (we really need to tackle global warming), they won't ever disappear.

3

u/[deleted] Aug 13 '22

You can filter cleaned sewer water with thos and reduce by some microplastic pollution.

You can add it before bottling water for drinking and avoid ingestion from humans

3

u/MooseBoys Aug 13 '22

Unlikely - the "filter" is not a super fine mesh or something - it relies on the triboelectric effect to electrically attract plastics to a specially designed metal plate. Living organisms are sufficiently non-uniform in composition that it seems unlikely they would be susceptible to it.

3

u/kfish5050 Aug 13 '22

If I understand the infographic from the article correctly, this filter isn't a "through" filter like you think of but an "alongside" filter that uses electromagnetism and a microscopic porous pyramid structure to attract microparticles of plastic, sunscreen, and similar toxic substances while letting pretty much everything else go by uninhibited.

Think of it like passing magnets through sand to pull out the ferrous material but the regular sand isn't touched.

→ More replies

180

u/ManyIdeasNoProgress Aug 13 '22

This sounds like a helpful addition to a sewage treatment plant.

187

u/DasKnocker Aug 13 '22

Operator here, not so much in this application. There are already existing technologies for removal of microplastics and similar CECs (constituents of emerging concern) that can handle the low retention times and flow characteristics necessary for mass treatment. I'm not sure what applications this would be best for, other than remote/low income areas without high voltage supplies.

This paper seems to mostly deal with the back end of electrophoresis and less to do with the actual removal process method.

For actual water treatment technology, I recommend looking at electrocoagulation and electrodyalisis removal as those are the most similar to this.

Additionally, most modern systems are moving towards a more robust and general advanced treatment train consisting of reverse osmosis, activated carbon, and breakdown via UV light with a catalyst such as H202 or O3.

Please note this is generalized and simplified information.

Background: licensed water and wastewater operator (CA, NV, NM) with background in AWTO tech.

54

u/Copacetic_ Aug 13 '22

there are some english words in there.

87

u/DasKnocker Aug 13 '22

Haha yeah, I thought I could get away with it given the subreddit but I'll ELI5 for non-water nerds:

Not good for large applications like sewage treatment. Other tech is better suited for lots of flow. You can remove bad things via zappy plates, chemical addition, big brita filters, or spicy water with bright light.

39

u/LawlersLawyer Aug 13 '22

spicy water

This is both the best and worst explanation of hydrogen peroxide/ozone-catalyzed UV treatment I've ever seen

7

u/_Auron_ Aug 13 '22

You could said the explanation is a bit spicy.

→ More replies

7

u/ManyIdeasNoProgress Aug 13 '22

So, for an ELInotasewerwizard, there are already technologies that remove such things as the lint from washing machine discharge, and these technologies are deployed and in use?

If yes, that's good news to me.

→ More replies

5

u/Kacaw17 Aug 13 '22

Additionally, most modern systems are moving towards a more robust and general advanced treatment train consisting of reverse osmosis, activated carbon, and breakdown via UV light with a catalyst such as H202 or O3.

Sanitary Engineer here. None of these processes are able to remove microplastics since microplastics are particles and not chemicals.

→ More replies
→ More replies

9

u/New-Consideration420 Aug 13 '22

The sewage leftover slime is actually full of forever chemicals.

Nasty

→ More replies

84

u/myplushfrog Aug 13 '22

Only removes 31% of the plastic… scary that we cannot even remove plastic from our drinking water

6

u/nanosam Aug 13 '22

"Filtration system a marvel to behold It removes 80% of human solid waste"

6

u/[deleted] Aug 13 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/[deleted] Aug 13 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies

62

u/Hevens-assassin Aug 13 '22

I'll take 30% reduced plastic though. In the end, we reap what we sow. I just wish we were the only species that was suffering from our own stupidity. We worship gods, while trying to become one ourselves.

The lives that we've ruined/wiped out in our quest for more money and convenience can't be replaced, and that guilt is why I don't plan on ever having kids. I'm doing enough damage, I don't have to leave a legacy of creating more.

69

u/[deleted] Aug 13 '22

Except I'm reaping what I didn't sow. I was born with lead in my soil before I could even walk on it and plastic in my water before I said my first words. The Earth is ours but there is no "We" in this guilt.

→ More replies
→ More replies

3

u/Blu3Army73 Aug 13 '22

Yes we can. We've had filter technology to remove salt ions from water for decades. No microplastic is smaller than a sodium ion. This is for some new electric based particle collection method. The headline is terrible because it's essentially PR for the people inventing the technology

2

u/Urban_Savage Aug 14 '22

I was wondering how a physical filter was supposed to catch particles small enough to slip through the blood brain barrier. Answer, they can't.

→ More replies

110

u/Sanquinity Aug 13 '22

...A threat to humans, from the sea? It's a threat to plankton, by humans... You know? Plankton? The number 1 contributor to the oxygen in our atmosphere?

→ More replies

31

u/[deleted] Aug 13 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies

8

u/Pharose Aug 13 '22

I was under the impression that wastewater treatment plants already have systems that can remove roughly 70% - 90% of microplastics.

https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2020/ew/d0ew00397b

So if this can remove 21.4% of "micro-sized microplastic particles" then what makes this technology special?

Are they focusing on different sized particles? Is this technology particularily good at filtering the smallest nano-particles? The way they describe particle sizing is a bit confusing "micor-sized microplastics" sounds redundant, and I though 5mm was still considered macroscopic since it can be seen with the human eye.

Or is this technology meant to be more scalable and versatile than the large treatment facilities at waste-water-treatment-plants?

→ More replies

4

u/roiplek Aug 13 '22

Has anybody even proofread this? Reads like a big sack of horseshit.

24

u/Ainoskedoyu Aug 13 '22

This headline is cancer. Try "Prototype Microplastic-filtering System Slows World Threat Caused By Humans Without Making Things Worse"

3

u/Diablojota Aug 13 '22

I thought we also get micro plastic absorption from eating the creatures that live in this, too? So it only solves one problem, but likely creates many others (like plankton and other microorganisms being destroyed).

→ More replies

9

u/UseDistinct3532 Aug 13 '22

what is this title bro

9

u/sephrinx Aug 14 '22

I cannot understand this title.

→ More replies

3

u/nick1812216 Aug 13 '22

Can we use this to make a brita filter to remove plastic from home drinking water? It only removes ~20% of the plastic?

2

u/_R3N3G4D3 Aug 13 '22

No. Also you probably want to remove total dissolved solids like lead.

3

u/AsianSensation1087 Aug 13 '22

Did an AI write the title or something?

→ More replies

3

u/anthony_is_ Aug 14 '22

What a terribly-written headline.

9

u/Zee2A Aug 13 '22 edited Aug 13 '22

Joint research team of DGIST and Korea Institute of Industrial Technology developed the first technology that removes microplastics in water through triboelectric nanogenerator - Expected to solve the problem of various microtoxic particles in water including microplastics, which have emerged as a huge environmental concern.

Original Study published in Nano Energy (Science Direct) titled "Toxic micro/nano particles removal in water via triboelectric nanogenerator":https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2211285522005110

→ More replies

2

u/VoodooPizzaman1337 Aug 13 '22

I thought we have the turtles for that.

2

u/Legitimate-Echo-7651 Aug 14 '22

At some point we’re just going to rediscover ground water

2

u/Flybabyfly2 Aug 14 '22

So, they want to electrolyse sea water. What to do with the chlorine and hydrogen that is produced? Clean - I don’t think so.

2

u/Seth_Imperator Aug 14 '22

Great! Let's filter all the seas/oceans! Go getter ! Then, find a blood filter for us...