I highly doubt that 3D printing of all things is making any meaningful contribution to the microplastics problem. Plastics are absolutely everywhere, so it feels weird to pin blame on a small group of enthusiasts just making silly shit at very low volumes.
How often do you break things that can only be repaired with 3D-printed parts? I once printed a fridge handle that was a very specific shape. Other than that it’s zip-ties or glue.
Its more often that I get my hands on something in need of minor repair, perhaps a part. Newer devices arent always easy either - I’ve had trouble finding parts for a robo vac thats 5 yrs old, for example.
Smaller electronics that rely on special plastic clasps or hinges, think ITX computer cases or something like a game console or laptop. 3D printers are nice because then you don’t have to play Ebay part roulette or hope someone manufactures the particular part that snapped in half.
Not only that but most 3D printing is done with PLA which doesn’t generate meaningful microplastics. I mean, it does but they only last a short time out in the wild. A study funded by the state of California found that PLA will last up to three years of left out in the environment (e.g. not in a trash dump).
Three years is nothing. Also consider that many animals can eat and digest PLA. Furthermore, if it ends up in your body it will eventually be broken down.
The real microplastics problem comes from tires and plastics like ABS that are used in f’ing everything. ABS microplastics last like 400 years or something like that.
Other plastics last even longer but the studies I’ve looked at all suggest the same thing: Tires and ABS.
Even PET water bottles aren’t as bad because they only last 80-100 years (until *fully" broken down). That sounds like a long time but also consider that PET fibers are mostly inert and don’t seem to absorb and re-release nasty things like ABS.
Don’t get me wrong: PET microplastics (which mostly consist of tiny fibers from textiles—not from bottles) are 100% a problem. They’re just a fraction of the problem of everything else.
For reference, the biggest problem with PET fibers is that they float and can be carried by the wind. That means they tend to settle on top of soil which causes it to absorb more heat and retain less moisture… Requiring more watering. Whereas the butawhateverthefucktoxicshit that tires break down into can result in soil that’s harmful to life (in general). Enough of it and nothing will grow at all.
That’s why you rarely see weeds sprouting up from kids playgrounds that were filled with chopped up car tires. Well, that and the fact that they can get really hot.
It’s the individual responsibility argument of environmentalism all over again. It’s mostly large corporations dictating law to do very intentional things at often incomprehensible scales that is responsible for the vast majority of pollution, and it’s those same large corporations which promulgated the notion that environmentalism is everyone’s equal responsibility and if you don’t recycle your plastic bottles or drink through a paper straw you’re the problem.
This isn’t to say that individuals should not be environmentally conscientious, but it shifts the blame to be woefully incongruous with reality and leads to individualist virtue contests like this post.
I agree with this sentiment, but at the same time the only reason these companies exist is because people pay them to do what they do; therefore, individual responsibility is simply to not buy dumb shit you don’t need. Thrift stores are a great place for environmentalism, as one item purchased there is one item that isn’t made new. More people doing so will turn the economy more and more into a circular economy where goods simply change hands locally rather than created on the other side of the planet and moved to the other side of the planet.
Behind every company (or group of companies) destroying the environment, there’s a clueless consumer paying them to do it.
get outta here with your “individual responsibility” bullshit. Free market capitalism prevents such individual considerations from making a difference. So long as you’re allowed to act unethically with no cost, unethical behavior will be a common strategy. The only real way to change things is for unethical behavior to be the least profitable option for individuals, otherwise the mechanics of markets necessitate it will happen on mass.
We aren’t dealing with individual choices, but evolutionary selection pressures. If you think in terms of “individuals” or “responsibility” you’ll never come close to addressing the problem.
Honestly, I think “voting with your dollars” is equally as bullshit a propagandized myth as “environmentalism is everyones equal responsibility”. And just like the latter, I don’t mean that you shouldn’t always be trying to do the right thing for ecology when you can as an individual. I mean more that these ideas are designed to route us away from actions that can be truly effective, which strike at the root of the institutional problem, such as abolishing economic policies that create situations where corporations can externalize their waste onto the world in the first place. You simply cannot get to such a state by “dollar voting” or selective consumer boycotts. Definitely do promote living in a way that limits your individual impact, within reason, just don’t delude yourself into thinking that is any sort of solution to the issue itself. You are forced to be a liberal consumer, and so long as the institution remains, that is what you will remain. I think we have much more to gain by rallying around the common enemy of capitalism and corporatism than we do in shaming or otherwise pressuring our peers to restrict their own personal economic choices even further than they have already been. Because we really aren’t just “clueless consumers”, none of us are. We are individuals with needs, wants, fears, stresses, worries… And if we are presented with actions to take they really need to be actions that lead to meaningful change rather than ones that just cultivate self-resentment.
I highly doubt that 3D printing of all things is making any meaningful contribution to the microplastics problem. Plastics are absolutely everywhere, so it feels weird to pin blame on a small group of enthusiasts just making silly shit at very low volumes.
I fucken repair shit with 3D printed parts so that I don’t need to buy new shit.
How often do you break things that can only be repaired with 3D-printed parts? I once printed a fridge handle that was a very specific shape. Other than that it’s zip-ties or glue.
Its more often that I get my hands on something in need of minor repair, perhaps a part. Newer devices arent always easy either - I’ve had trouble finding parts for a robo vac thats 5 yrs old, for example.
Smaller electronics that rely on special plastic clasps or hinges, think ITX computer cases or something like a game console or laptop. 3D printers are nice because then you don’t have to play Ebay part roulette or hope someone manufactures the particular part that snapped in half.
Not only that but most 3D printing is done with PLA which doesn’t generate meaningful microplastics. I mean, it does but they only last a short time out in the wild. A study funded by the state of California found that PLA will last up to three years of left out in the environment (e.g. not in a trash dump).
Three years is nothing. Also consider that many animals can eat and digest PLA. Furthermore, if it ends up in your body it will eventually be broken down.
The real microplastics problem comes from tires and plastics like ABS that are used in f’ing everything. ABS microplastics last like 400 years or something like that.
Other plastics last even longer but the studies I’ve looked at all suggest the same thing: Tires and ABS.
Even PET water bottles aren’t as bad because they only last 80-100 years (until *fully" broken down). That sounds like a long time but also consider that PET fibers are mostly inert and don’t seem to absorb and re-release nasty things like ABS.
Don’t get me wrong: PET microplastics (which mostly consist of tiny fibers from textiles—not from bottles) are 100% a problem. They’re just a fraction of the problem of everything else.
For reference, the biggest problem with PET fibers is that they float and can be carried by the wind. That means they tend to settle on top of soil which causes it to absorb more heat and retain less moisture… Requiring more watering. Whereas the butawhateverthefucktoxicshit that tires break down into can result in soil that’s harmful to life (in general). Enough of it and nothing will grow at all.
That’s why you rarely see weeds sprouting up from kids playgrounds that were filled with chopped up car tires. Well, that and the fact that they can get really hot.
It’s the individual responsibility argument of environmentalism all over again. It’s mostly large corporations dictating law to do very intentional things at often incomprehensible scales that is responsible for the vast majority of pollution, and it’s those same large corporations which promulgated the notion that environmentalism is everyone’s equal responsibility and if you don’t recycle your plastic bottles or drink through a paper straw you’re the problem.
This isn’t to say that individuals should not be environmentally conscientious, but it shifts the blame to be woefully incongruous with reality and leads to individualist virtue contests like this post.
It’s not that deep I just wanted to satyrize 3d printer enthusiasts cause it’s funny
Oh yeah no shade on you, it made good ground for thought/discussion.
I agree with this sentiment, but at the same time the only reason these companies exist is because people pay them to do what they do; therefore, individual responsibility is simply to not buy dumb shit you don’t need. Thrift stores are a great place for environmentalism, as one item purchased there is one item that isn’t made new. More people doing so will turn the economy more and more into a circular economy where goods simply change hands locally rather than created on the other side of the planet and moved to the other side of the planet.
Behind every company (or group of companies) destroying the environment, there’s a clueless consumer paying them to do it.
get outta here with your “individual responsibility” bullshit. Free market capitalism prevents such individual considerations from making a difference. So long as you’re allowed to act unethically with no cost, unethical behavior will be a common strategy. The only real way to change things is for unethical behavior to be the least profitable option for individuals, otherwise the mechanics of markets necessitate it will happen on mass.
We aren’t dealing with individual choices, but evolutionary selection pressures. If you think in terms of “individuals” or “responsibility” you’ll never come close to addressing the problem.
Honestly, I think “voting with your dollars” is equally as bullshit a propagandized myth as “environmentalism is everyones equal responsibility”. And just like the latter, I don’t mean that you shouldn’t always be trying to do the right thing for ecology when you can as an individual. I mean more that these ideas are designed to route us away from actions that can be truly effective, which strike at the root of the institutional problem, such as abolishing economic policies that create situations where corporations can externalize their waste onto the world in the first place. You simply cannot get to such a state by “dollar voting” or selective consumer boycotts. Definitely do promote living in a way that limits your individual impact, within reason, just don’t delude yourself into thinking that is any sort of solution to the issue itself. You are forced to be a liberal consumer, and so long as the institution remains, that is what you will remain. I think we have much more to gain by rallying around the common enemy of capitalism and corporatism than we do in shaming or otherwise pressuring our peers to restrict their own personal economic choices even further than they have already been. Because we really aren’t just “clueless consumers”, none of us are. We are individuals with needs, wants, fears, stresses, worries… And if we are presented with actions to take they really need to be actions that lead to meaningful change rather than ones that just cultivate self-resentment.