Talk:Plastic/Archive 1

Archive 1

Text from 2001

Why the name change to 'plastics'? It is usually easier to link to singulars, eg: Bakelite is a plastic. --sodium

Older comments

The films link takes you to cinema 'film'. Dbroadwell 08:27, 24 Dec 2003 (UTC)

You're right -- "Film" points to an unrelated definition

Also, "British" is spelled with a capital 'B', when it should be lower, I believe.

I don't think so - it's a nationality and all nationalities are initial caps - plenty of usage examples in Wikipedia and elsewhere. AncientBrit 17:45, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Could somebody salvage the "sentence" in the top section that reads: "In the 19th century the discovered plastics based on chemically modified natural polymers: Charles Goodyear discovered vulcanization of rubber (1839) and Alexander Parkes discovered cellulose-based plastics in 1860ies."? Lomacar 04:35, 3 November 2005 (UTC) date/time

Polyvinyl butyral

There is a new article on Polyvinyl butyral (PVB). I would like to link it from here. Should it be under a "Common plastics" or "Special purpose plastics"? Thanks. --Edcolins 22:19, Aug 21, 2004 (UTC)

It is my understanding that anything other than the commodity plastics such as PS, PP, PVC, PE, PC and ABS would be a specialty plastic. PVB is used only in a small niche market and I think its therefor safe to call it a specialty plastic. CoolMike 03:39, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Bakelite

"Thermoplastics are tough and temperature resistant." - should that be "thermoset plastics" instead? Mr2001 12:06, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Righto, Done. Duk 16:09, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Plastics Engineering

I added a link to the plastics engineering article I wrote in the 'see also' section. I'm enrolled in plastics engineering at UMass Lowell right now, but I'm still only in my 4th semester. Anybody care to help me be more specific on the definition of plastics engineering? I sorta just brainstormed up my own definition. Let me know what you think of the article please, its my first new article and I don't know if I've completed all the necesary steps to making a new article. CoolMike 20:41, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Lead section needs to be more accessible to the general reader

Quick comment: this seems to be quite a thorough article, but I struggled to understand a lot of the lead section, particularly the third paragraph. It is, of course, appropriate to get technical in articles, but I would suggest that the lead section needs to be accessible to a general reader. Here's hoping someone can fix it ;-) — Matt Crypto 22:54, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Structural formula

I think the polymers shown are not graphically accurate. Eg:

   H        H            H    H    H    H
    \      /             |    |    |    |
     C == C      ->   -- C -- C -- C -- C -- 
    /      \             |    |    |    |
   H      <bzr>          H  <bzr>  H  <bzr>
                         
  styrene monomer       polystyrene polymer ("<bzr>" is a benzene ring)

The "polymer" shown is actually a repeating unit. To draw a structural formula of a polymer, you should include a -( )n- on the ends to show that it is a polymer. So it should look like :

                     /H    H    H    H  \
                    | |    |    |    |   |
                ----|- C -- C -- C -- C -|--- 
                    | |    |    |    |   |
                     \H  <bzr>  H  <bzr>/  n
                         
     polystyrene polymer ("<bzr>" is a benzene ring)

Natural Gas vs. Petroleum

Although plastics are a by product of petroleum it is also very common, especially in the US, to use natural gas.

Structures

Instead of having "text images" of the chemical structures, I will try to draw up some in ChemSketch and put the images in instead. Give me a bit. --Shell 15:25, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Tiny update: first one done:

second:

third:

fourth:

and lastly: File:Monomerreaction4.jpg

I assumed the bonds without atoms were radicals.

Unchopped

I reverted a few steps back because one of the edits chopped off a good deal of the article. Would someone care to incorporate the lost changes after that? I'm on a bit of a time crunch. blahpers 12:27, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Memory Plastic?

I've tried searching for info about memory plastic, but I've yet to come up with anything useful. Prehaps someone who knows about this could add this type of plastic under "special purpose plastics"?--137.186.211.84 04:18, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

inventor?

Who can be said to have "invented" plastic? Or is this article saying that rubber is a plastic, so it existed in mother nature before anybody tampered with the recipe and made human-made plastics? If so, who was the first to do the latter? I think we should give him or her credit.--Sonjaaa 19:38, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I belive that the very first plastic was shown at the 1862 great international exabtion in london, by Alexander Parkes. Also Leo Baekalite invented, baekalite. --Robin63 18:47, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Hyatt & Spill developed Celluloid/Xylonite in parallel. I have corrected this omission in the celluloid section Ephebi 16:50, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Price and the future

The last para in this article contains much BS about nanocarbons that is of dubious relevance to the article. To tout them as cheaper than conventional plastics is just wrong. Diamond is not a plastic, and not an "alternative" Wikipedia is not a place to speculate about the future either. Graphene is no threat to plastics. There are no bowling balls made of nanocarbons. I am removing all this erroneous and speculative stuff from the article.DonSiano 15:09, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Plastics vs Elastomers

The first two posts are from a discussion in the talk pages of User:Rifleman_82 and User:Hispalois. I've copied our discussion to here so that other contributors may participate in this discussion. Hopefully we can come up with more ideas and reach a consensus on how to classify polymers. --Rifleman 82 22:59, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi. I noted your comment in your edit to Polybutadiene. Polybutadiene is definitely an elastomer or a rubber. It certainly does not resemble many of the other plastics listed. However, "plastic" is not well defined in the first place. A better term would be "polymer" but that wikipedia article does not focus on hydrocarbon based synthetic polymers. That said, how does polybutadiene not fit the definition of Plastic?

Plastic covers a range of synthetic or semisynthetic polymerization products. They are composed of organic condensation or addition polymers and may contain other substances to improve performance or economics. There are few natural polymers generally considered to be "plastics". Plastics can be formed into objects or films or fibers. Their name is derived from the fact that many are malleable, having the property of plasticity. Plastics are designed with immense variation in properties such as heat tolerance, hardness, resiliency and many others. Combined with this adaptability, the general uniformity of composition and light weight of plastics ensures their use in almost all industrial segments.

--Rifleman 82 14:48, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Rifleman. You raise a good point: what is the exact definition of plastic and why do elastomers not fit into it?

For me, the concept with physical reality is not "plastic" but "material with plastic behavior": a material that changes its shape under stress and retains the new shape; whereas a "material with elastic behavior" is one that changes its shape under stress and goes back to the original shape once the stress stops, dissipating energy in the process.

No material is purely plastic or purely elastic. Steel, for instance, behaves quite elastically for small deformations but is definitely plastic for big ones.

When people try to classify polymers, there are many possible ways to do it. One possibility is to look at the stress-deformation behavior of the material. This lets us differentiate between "plastic polymers" (i.e. plastics) and "elastic polymers" (i.e. elastomers). People also distinguish polymers that become liquid when heated and can be reshaped again ("thermoplastics") and those which simply decompose when heated ("thermosets").

In my opinion, these definitions are far from clear-cut and many ambiguities exist so we often have to refer to "usual practice". Polybutadiene, for instance, is an elastomer if it is properly vulcanized but if vulcanization goes too far it becomes hard and rigid, thus a plastic. In both cases it is a thermoset, i.e. it will decompose when heated. To complicate things even more, when it is not vulcanized at all we should rather look at polybutadiene as a liquid! So, how should we classify polybutadiene? The usual practice is to look at its behavior in its most widespread applications. For polybutadiene the main property of use is actually its elasticity and so it should be considered above all as an elastomer, a thermoset elastomer to be precise (there are thermoplastic elastomers, like SBS).

As you can see, there is a lot of work to do to properly define all these concepts in Wikipedia and then to set up categories so as to classify the different polymers in the most suitable ones. I have started that work in es: and if we ever find a consensus there I will propose the category structure for use in en:

--Hispalois 22:45, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments, which do help me understand your point of view. I do agree that the usual form of polybutadiene does not qualify as a "plastic" per se. It is hard to differentiate polymers as either "plastic" or "elastomer" and nothing in between. There certainly is a continuum and there really is no big difference in terms of synthesis, and modification of properties. Because of the great number of similarities other than the application, I fear we are introducing a false dichotomy. Should we expand the category further? "Polymer" will be the best category but it might be overly broad. --Rifleman 82 22:59, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

whats the difference

beetween thermosetting plastic and thermo plastics147.10.211.222 09:01, 15 August 2006 (UTC)tom

See thermosetting plastic & thermoplastic. Femto 12:42, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Why so many quote marks?

It seems like every tenth word is in "quotes". It's kind of irritating to "read". 207.189.230.42 19:54, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

History of this page

The history of this page seems highly suspect, the majority of the content appeared in this revision: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Plastics&oldid=43615 dated 3 April 2002.

The content is word for word identical to a series of pages from the packaging today website, one of which is http://www.packagingtoday.com/introplasticexplosion.htm. The wayback machine http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.packagingtoday.com/introplasticexplosion.htm has the first entry for this page as being 12 October 2002.

The packaging today website doesn't have any attribution to wikipedia and it's unclear where the content originated from, it does seem suspicious to have so much content appear at once and other edit's by the IP on that day specify that content was copied from a book http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Diving&oldid=83016. The history of the packaging today front page indicates that the content was added there between 5 April 2001 and 28 September 2002 http://web.archive.org/web/*sa_/http://www.packagingtoday.com/.

Can anyone shed any further light on who copied from who?

Lod 23:55, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

A plastics wikiproject

I am interested in making a place where people who desire to improve, update, or add information regarding plastics can communicate and collaborate. The reason I think this is necessary is becuase of a handful of flaws I see in the current organization of wikipedia plastics related articles. These flaws include:

• Trade name/common polymer material name/iupac name conflicts - see the articles on Nylon and Polyamide for a great example.
• Lack of detailed information on polymer processing techniques and related theory
• The over-emphasis of the resin identification code, which labels a huge number of common materials as "other"...Many products today simply have the polymer abreviation below the identification code, since it provides much more information. (ie. >SAN<...)
• The prevailence of misconseptions about the recycling of plastics, and/or their envirnmental impact. Some people (wikipedians included) seem to think of plastics as, "filling up our landfills". This is of course a rediculous assertion. These same editors fail to mention the weight reduction and related environmental benefits (lower transportation costs, etc.) that plastics products have over alternative materials. I have seen countless assertions that a certain plastic is "unrecycleable", a statement that can never be true of any material. Life cycle analysis type thinking needs to be employed, or at least mentioned in nearly every article which lists environmental concerns as a drawback of a material (plastic or otherwise). The list of these environmental/recycling misconseptions and misinformation is neverending.
• Polymers in medicine is a topic which can be greatly expanded.

I tried to see if there already was a plastics wikiproject, but I was unable to find one. Does anyone know how to start such a project or collaboration? Thanks for any and all comments, suggestions, or advice. I see all these problems and yet I can not fix them all as only one man, and I feel like we need a subject wide re-organization of our plastics related reference material. For now I guess I must be content with picking one article and concentrating on improving it... CoolMike 06:22, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Can you tell us what happens to plastic in landfills, if it doesn't fill them up? Brian Pearson 17:05, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Length

I do not feel strongly about this, however, I think that a lot of the sections in this article are a little too long. If someone knowledgeable was willing to devote some time and effort into slimming down some of the sections in this article, it would be gratefully appreciated. --Robin63 02:34, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

PVC

I didn't know PVC is used in salad dressing. No wonder I feel funny after eating that stuff. 03:36, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Peak Oil

The last few paragraphs about price are very speculative. For one, they imply that reliance on alternatives to conventional crude oil would raise the market price; however, it is currently high demand that sets the market price for crude oil, not the production costs, which can be as much as 10 times lower for cheap Saudi oil and generally less than $20/barrel even for marginal plants. Consequently, I'm going to edit this to focus more on environmental concerns. 24.23.138.158 09:43, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Adjective vs. noun

Is the word plastic not actually an adjective used to describe the properties of a polymer, vs. an actual noun? Granted, the word is misused widely in society, but when you have a "plastic polymer" the word plastic describes the polymer... there is no such thing as a "plastic". Perhaps it should be mentioned somewhere in the article that plastic is an adjective to describe a polymer displaying properties of plasticity, and not a substance of its own. 206.47.186.244 14:17, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

See Wiktionary and http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/plastic. Looks like if it was considered a misuse at one point, it has entered accepted use now. -SCEhardT 16:35, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Failed V0.7 nomination

I've failed the article due to lack of references. I'm not talking about the inline type, but rather because it relies on only one source, which may or may not meet WP:RS. The tag at the top doesn't help much either... Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 17:17, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Add some pics ?

I think it could be helpful if there would be a thumb picture closeup of the surface for each one in 'plastic types'. 89.139.45.171 22:12, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

does anyone have any idea how the cost of recycling is compared to landfill accounts?--Miniwheats1 14:02, 11 June 2007 (UTC)miniwheats1

Plastic from feathers

Blacksburg, VA., March 29, 2007 – Biodegradable polymers created from poultry feathers may add value to the poultry industry and help solve the growing environmental problem of plastic waste. [1] Brian Pearson 17:02, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Plastic In Art - still under discussion?

Wasn't this still being discussed a couple of weeks ago? I notice someone has added a heading into the article, with nothing under it. When I last looked it seemed opposed by the majority of people. I am a lemon 04:10, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

The Graduate

Please add The Graduate to the See Also section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.69.137.8 (talk) 01:56, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Justification for continuation of Semi-protect?

What is the justification for the placement and continued existence of the Semi-protect tag? 207.69.137.8 02:04, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Someone fix this, please

At the end of the overview section:

" Freon was never used in the cups. Stoves said that we didn't know freon was bad for the ozone, but we knew it was not good for people so the cup never used freon to expand the beads.Template:Fact: I am not aware who wrote this article but it (e.g. never using freon) certainly is a factual quote from me, Edward J. Stove"

I can't login from where I'm at to do so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.42.26.190 (talk) 14:37, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

"Their name is derived from the fact that many are malleable"

I believe this shoud read" Their name is derived from the Greek "Plasticos" meaning, to mold, or to shape. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.96.7.15 (talk) 22:01, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Synthetic rubber section appears to be plagiarism

It seems like the section "Synthetic rubber" has sentences and paragraphs ripped word for word from http://www.packagingtoday.com/introsyntheticrubber.htm . There is a cite at the bottom, so I would assume the original content came from the other site. Someone please rewrite that segment and PARAPHRASE instead of ripping sentences. RabidDeity 03:28, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, it shocks me to see such obvious plagiarism in such an important article. --Yerpo 11:00, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

I think that they copied us. This section has been in the article pretty much from the beginning, since April of 2002! The first Wayback results appeared in October of 2002.--DO11.10 (talk) 02:44, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Archive 1

Polymer / Plastic

There is considerable overlap between the polymer and plastic pages. Its not clear from either page what the distinction, if any, between the two is. Actually my understanding is that 'plastic' is actually a colloquialism when used in this context, which seems to be what the article suggests. However, the article needs to make more clear how the two are related. A good example of conflation between these two articles is the inclusion of 'rubber' in this article. I don't believe that rubber is typically considered a 'plastic' in the colloquial sense, and even the section on rubber states that it is not a plastic. If it is not a plastic why is it in this article? My sense is that there needs to be some sort of merger or better division of subjects between these two articles, but I will do some additional research on whether there is a strict technical definition of the word 'plastic' as it is used in this article or whether it is mainly a colloquialism before I decide how to suggest doing that. Also, I'd like any thoughts by the rest of the community on this issue. Thanks. Locke9k (talk) 21:52, 16 December 2008 (UTC)Locke9k

I haven't look at the polymer article, however, with respect to the rubber (and elastomers) comment, I fully agree. I've never heard of plastic referring to rubbers or elastomers. That should definitely be removed. And I'm also very open to cleaning up the definition. This page is in pretty bad shape for how important an item plastic is. Wizard191 (talk) 00:08, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Koppers company and foam cups

Does anyone else feel like the section in the Overview on Koppers company and the foam cups sounds like marketing? It seems realllly subjective and, "hey, we're not so bad, this is not the foam cup you were looking for" It just doesn't sit well with me.

indeed it can be much shorter and objective, it would also sit better in the "Plastics explosion: acrylic, polyethylene, etc" section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.119.170.50 (talk) 20:01, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

That definitely doesn't belong in the overview - just the year that polystyrene foam was developed. As for the blurb about the cup, I don't think it even belongs in the section about polystyrene later on, but maybe in an article about foam cups, and even then it does smack of marketing. Miguel (talk) 15:31, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually, look at the following edit from March 14, by an anonymous user:

If burned without enough oxygen or at lower temperatures (as in a campfire or household fireplace) it can produce toxic vapors and other hazardous byproducts.

becomes sanitised to

If burned without enough oxygen or at lower temperatures (as in a campfire or household fireplace) it can produce carbon black and carbon dioxide.

Apart from the fact that insufficient oxygen will produce carbon monoxide the whole thing sacks of greenwashing. This same anonymous user has only ever contributed to this article. I have encapsulated the paragraphs about the foam cup in their own subsection in preparation for moving it out of the overview, possibly out of the article altogether into an article on the styrofoam cup, or for deletion as commercial propaganda. Miguel (talk) 15:43, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for pulling that stuff out of the overview. I feel as though it definitely doesn't belong in this article. Perhaps it should go in the Polystyrene#Solid foam section? --Wizard191 (talk) 13:54, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Moved section. --Wizard191 (talk) 13:28, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Toxicity

"Some plastics have been associated with negative health effects.

Polyvinyl chloride (PVC) contains numerous toxic chemicals called adipates and phthalates ("plasticizers"), which are used to soften brittle PVC into a more flexible form."

Is link 100% proved? I had heard that the harmful effects claimed of phthalates is not certain, and that alternative plasticisers may actually be more harmful overall. The current reference does not help clarify this. Can someone who knows more on this topic please expand on this section, thanks. Ephebi (talk) 10:26, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

http://www.prw.com/homePBP_NADetail_UP.aspx?ID_Site=818&ID_Article=24845&mode=1&curpage=2

Note above URL, watch this space for self-serving changes in future. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.195.113.153 (talk) 14:19, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Discussion of Plastic as Petroleum Derivative

I think more needs to be said about the process of making plastics from petroleum. Petroleum ranges from pentane to C12H26, whatever that's called. Are plastics just made from these molecules? Can they be made from heavier molecules like diesel fuels or even heavier? Can plastics be made from hydrocarbons not generally used for fuel, or are manufacturers of plastic and energy consumers always competing for supply? Is natural gas ever used to make plastics, and if not can it be? What do the chemical reactions look like? What does it take to make plastics from these molecules? Also, coal can be converted to petroleum, so perhaps it could also be converted to plastic. Do we ever make plastics out of coal? I think an article about plastic should address these questions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.174.37.51 (talk) 21:27, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Apart from petroplastic, there is bioplastic, from biomass. --Mac (talk) 07:06, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Color

Can someone add some information about the color of plastic when it is made?

• Is it transparent/opaque? If it is clear - is there some kind of transparency index?
• Does it vary depending on manufacturing conditions/processes?
• Is it treated or somehow chemically altered to make it clear?

Corrective lens#Lens materials has information on optical grade transparent plastics. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 09:27, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Flexible plastic

I suggest more infomation about flexible plastic types and materials. --Mac (talk) 07:05, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

First man-made plastic

According to the current form of this article, "The first man-made plastic was invented by Alexander Parkes in 1862; he called this plastic Parkesine." I'm not sure this is precisely correct. Bois-Durci was patented in Oct. 1855 by François Charles Lepage, and was supplanted by Bakelite after WWI. Perhaps Parkes should be credited with the first man-made thermoplastic or the first completely man-made plastic? Askari Mark (Talk) 23:26, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

What sources? I have tonnes of sources saying the opposite. Matador (talk) 21:28, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, in searching around, I’ve found these citations to something other than Parkesine being the first man-made plastic:

“Leonardo Da Vinci invented the first form of natural plastic during the Renaissance period. The plastic Da Vinci created was made from both animal and vegetable glues combined with organic fibers. This mixture was then used to coat the leaves of cabbage and papers. When this combination dried Da Vinci was left with a product that would be described today as a plastic-like substance.” (Source: American Plastics Council “The History of Plastic”)

“The first plastic was developed in 1851 when hard rubber, or ebonite, was synthesized.” (Source: EPA)

“One of the first plastics manufactured, discovered in 1856 and refined in 1877, was cellulose nitrate, also known as Celluloid. It was made from chemically treated cotton and was easily molded into a myriad of shapes, ....” (Mustalish, Rachel. “Modern Materials: Plastics”, Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History; Metropolitan Museum of Art)

“In 1862, Alexander Parkes was responsible for introducing the first man-made plastic at the Great International Exhibition in London. This man-made plastic was nicknamed Parkesine. Parkesine was an organic cellulose material that once heated could be strategically molded into certain shapes, and would keep shape when it was cooled.” (Source: American Plastics Council “The History of Plastic”)

“… since 1862 when Alexander Parkes synthesized the first man-made plastic (known as pyroxylin) ....” (Source: McGraw-Hill Higher Education, “Plastic-Producing Plants: The Cash Crop of the Future”)

“The plastics industry is recognized as having its beginnings in 1868 with the synthesis of cellulose nitrate. It all started with the shortage of ivory from which billiard balls were made. The manufacturer of these balls, seeking another production method, sponsored a competition. John Wesley Hyatt (in the U.S.) mixed pyroxin made from cotton (a natural polymer) and nitric acid with camphor. The result was cellulose nitrate, which he called celluloid. It is on record, however, that Alexander Parkes, seeking a better insulating material for the electrical industry, had in fact discovered that camphor was an efficient plasticizer for cellulose nitrate in 1862. Hyatt, whose independent discovery of celluloid came later, was the first to take out patents for this discovery.

“Cellulose nitrate is derived from cellulose, a natural polymer. The first truly man-made plastic came 41 years later (in 1909 [sic]) when Dr. Leo Hendrick Baekeland developed phenol-formaldehyde plastics (phenolics), ....” (Source: Ebewele, Robert O. Polymer Science and Technology)

“Leo Baekeland, a Belgian-born chemist-entrepreneur, ... developed a material that he named "Bakelite" ... the world’s first true plastic [i.e., the first completely synthetic man-made substance] [in 1907].... In 1909, Baekeland unveiled the world’s first fully synthetic plastic at a meeting of the New York chapter of the American Chemical Society.” (Source: Thinkquest.org, “History of Plastic”.)

So, for manmade natural plastics, we seem to have predecessors to Parkes in da Vinci (during the Renaissance), Charles Goodyear (ebonite, 1851), Alexander Parkes (cellulose nitrate, 1862 [or 1855?]) ... and, of course, Lepage (bois durci, 1855) if for Parkes one uses the 1862 date for Parkes (and both Lepage and Parkes displayed their inventions at the 1862 London Exhibition); on the first fully synthetic plastic, the sources all agree on Leo Hendrik Baekeland (Bakelite, developed in 1907 and revealed publicly in 1909). So what do you think? Askari Mark (Talk) 03:46, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

I think you're dead right. It's good to mention the invention of celluloid as the first thermoplastic, but it's not the earliest modern plastic in the sense of a fully synthetic polymer. The history section needs to begin with latex, Da Vinci etc, move on to C19 cellulose-based stuff (and Parkes) and then mention PVC, nylon & acrylics as a preamble to the Types section. --mikaul^talk 09:47, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Inventor of polypropylene

The section of the article on this subject is directly contradictory. The quote marks around "official" make me think there is some bias in this section. Raisedonadiet (talk) 13:50, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Bakelite Patent

The section states: "When the Bakelite patent expired in 1930, the Catalin Corporation acquired the patent..."

When a patent expires, does not the intellectual property enter into the public domain? Why then would anyone have to acquire the patent? I am not being flip here, I don't know, and I am asking. 17.225.12.26 (talk) 17:40, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

You are correct, after a patent expires it becomes public domain (at least in the US). I'm not sure that sentence is even correct though. According to [2] the patent expired in 1927 and the competition started producing it. I'm going out on a limb here, but I'm going to guess that Catalin became the major supplier of the plastic after the patent expired. Again, that's just an assumption here, and it should be researched more. Wizard191 (talk) 17:51, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

I believe it was not the (expired) patent that Catalin purchased, but rather the specific intellectual knowledge the Bakelite Co. had developed: their particular formula and processes used in its manufacturing process. A reliable source should be relatively easy to find that confirms my supposition. Askari Mark (Talk) 18:13, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

cleaning reg. numbers off my fiberglass boat

I have a fiberglass speed boat and I renewed my registration this week and they gave me new numbers to put on my boat, how do I clean the old numbers off? [email protected] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.53.134.208 (talk) 21:00, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

This is not a forum, please see the help desk. Wizard191 (talk) 02:10, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Polyester: thermoplastic or thermoset?

This article mentions polyester as an example of a thermoset, which does not change even when heat is applied, pointedly constrasting it to thermoplastics... but the wikipedia article on polyester itself claims that polyester is a thermoplastic, and changes shape with the application of heat. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.192.167.95 (talk) 11:59, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

It's both, depending if they are saturated or unsturated. I'm going to try and add some info to the polyester article. Wizard191 (talk) 16:35, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Plastic health issues and some components now outlawed

Looking through Google news [3] [4] I find a lot of news articles about the health problems of certain ingredients in plastic, and bans various ones have received. I added a health section to the article, showing it causes problems, so much so it was banned in some countries. Dream Focus 15:46, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Bis(2-ethylhexyl) adipate / DEHA mismatching information

On the Bis(2-ethylhexyl) adipate / DEHA page, the IARC puts DEHA into Group 3, which suggests to me that, if that article is correct, that "of concern" should be taken to something like "under study, with no conclusive evidence for its toxicity." Expert, please? Joshua McGee (talk) 01:48, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Uses of plastic

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

In the uses you din't mention electric kettles. From which kind of plastic are they made? --Ha-y Gavra (talk) 10:51, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

This article can't possibly name every use of plastic, nor the type used in each application. Wizard191 (talk) 23:18, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

I didn't mean to mention it in the article, but can somebody answer my question here in the discussion please?--Ha-y Gavra (talk) 11:03, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

This talk page is only for discussing the article. Please see the reference desk for general questions. Wizard191 (talk) 14:45, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

New lead paragraph proposed

The lead describes plastics as "organic amorphous solid", yet the "Chemical structure" section discusses and lists plastics that are semi-crystalline as opposed to amorphous. The lead needs to be changed to avoid this contradiction. Also, the first sentence refers to "plastic material", yet there is a separate article, Plasticity (physics) to which plastic material redirects.

I propose that the first paragraph be rewritten as:

A plastic is a high molecular weight organic polymer. Industrial plastics are usually made by polymerizing petrochemical monomers, but increasingly using monomers from renewable resources. Plastics may contain other substances to improve performance or reduce cost.

Silverchemist (talk) 18:58, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Fascinating

I believe I understand the problem with the lede mentioned in the previous thread and a very common one it is. "Plastics" then, really refers to the result of any technology shaping polymers for consumption. I came looking for the sense of pharmaceutical plastics such as would be in some enteric coatings. Cutting through and making the proper summary exposition of a concept often runs into stiff resistance, due to OR, sourcing, etc., even though it's essence of the encyclopædic project. 72.228.177.92 (talk) 11:31, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Noremac53, 21 November 2010

{{edit semi-protected}} The environmental issues part of this page is out dated. Some plastics, such as polystyrene, do degrade in the ocean. This is not good though for toxic chemicals are released as a result.

I would like "Plastics are durable and degrade very slowly; the molecular bonds that make plastic so durable make it equally resistant to natural processes of degradation." changed to "Most plastics are durable and degrade very slowly. However certain plastics, such as polystyrene will degrade completely resulting in the release of toxic chemicals such as bisphenol A into the ocean."

Here is the source that I used.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/08/090820-plastic-decomposes-oceans-seas.html

Noremac53 (talk) 11:02, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Why specifically ocean? Materialscientist (talk) 11:06, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Conflicting History

Did Alexander Parkes first invent plastic in 1855 or 1862? The first paragraph of in the history section states 1855. The second paragraph states 1862. Both are cited. I do not have access to either of the cited sources for verification. 69.68.125.6 (talk) 15:09, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Can't access them either, but the patent ref suggests it was indeed 1855. Cleaned up a bit. Materialscientist (talk) 01:01, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Alkane

Why not mention that plastics are generally Alkanes, which is why they tend to be unreactive (though they are combustive). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.94.18.42 (talk) 17:42, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Protection needed

Hello, all - I realize that this is not one of the pages I check with any great frequency, but I've noticed that in the last month or so (maybe longer) it has been plagued by unconstructive edits and vandalism. Would it be proper of me to suggest here that this page be given some sort of protected status? Regards. Sleddog116 (talk) 21:43, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Protected page status is really only for things that are virtually guaranteed to be slammed every few minutes or so due a current event bringing more eyes—and loonballs—to it. In this case it’s barely a flurry of the usual cranks/attention-whore changes that plague every page on WIkipedia so I don’t feel it needs protection because the vandalism isn’t so pervasive that the usual array of folks who monitor vandalism can’t handle it. --SpyMagician (talk) 02:56, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. I'm still fairly new to Wikipedia, so I'm still learning my way around. Sleddog116 (talk) 12:54, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Referencing needs help

I was looking for some general textbooks etc for references in this very general article. Instead there is this kind of well-intentioned but overspecialized material:

^ Heeger, A. J.; Schrieffer, J. R.; Su, W. -P.; Su, W. (1988). "Solitons in conducting polymers". Reviews of Modern Physics 60 (3): 781. Bibcode 1988RvMP...60..781H. doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.60.781.

^ Burroughes, J. H.; Bradley, D. D. C.; Brown, A. R.; Marks, R. N.; MacKay, K.; Friend, R. H.; Burns, P. L.; Holmes, A. B. (1990). "Light-emitting diodes based on conjugated polymers". Nature 347 (6293): 539. doi:10.1038/347539a0.

^ Sariciftci, N. S.; Smilowitz, L.; Heeger, A. J.; Wudl, F. (1992). "Photoinduced Electron Transfer from a Conducting Polymer to Buckminsterfullerene". Science 258 (5087): 1474–6. doi:10.1126/science.258.5087.1474. PMID 17755110.

^ Sirringhaus, H. (2005). "Device Physics of Solution-Processed Organic Field-Effect Transistors". Advanced Materials 17 (20): 2411. doi:10.1002/adma.200501152.

Then three one-sided references on the controversial BPA theme (none on polycarbonates and their benefits).

Etc. So I propose to replace a lot of these references with more general ones. Help and advice welcome! --Smokefoot (talk) 02:00, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on 8 February 2012

I am requesting several edits for the last sentence under the "Composition" subtitle. 1) It is missing a definite article before "twenty first century world." 2) "twenty first-century world" should be "twenty-first century world."

Original: This fine tuning of the properties of the polymer by repeating unit's molecular structure has allowed plastics to become an indispensable part of twenty first-century world.

Should be: This fine tuning of the properties of the polymer by repeating unit's molecular structure has allowed plastics to become an indispensable part of the twenty-first century world.

66.90.166.197 (talk) 05:30, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Done Thanks, Celestra (talk) 06:13, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Missing Reference

Reference 20 (linking to a National Geographic article) no longer exists (the link leads to a 404 page). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.231.42.128 (talk) 23:33, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Intended Meaning?

"Almost invariably, organic polymers mainly comprise plastics." I believe this literally says "most organic polymers are mainly plastics" when the intention might have been "most plastics are mainly organic polymers". The verb "comprise" is nowadays (1) almost always used passively, as "Almost invariably, plastics are comprised mainly of organic polymers". Morphing this to active voice, without deep analysis, can get you in trouble.

(1)except in patent applications, where the components are listed exhaustively and without probability modifiers.

Feedback welcome. Shannock9 (talk) 16:40, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

I went bold and changed to "Most organic polymers are plastics". Tweaks are welcome. The original phrasing was unencyclopedic anyway. Materialscientist (talk) 00:20, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you Materialscientist, now I clearly see what you are are saying. However it is not what I expected. Given that the article title is Plastics, I thought you would say "Most plastics contain organic polymers". Are there any/many Plastics that don't contain Organic Polymers? Are there any/many Organic Polymers that are not Plastics (as defined in the intro)? Shannock9 (talk) 16:04, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

I have changed my phrasing to yours, because polymers are a more general group than plastics (according to the Ullmann's handbook they might need to be processed to become plastics). Inorganic plastics are rare. Some books say that (inorganic) glasses are amorphous plastics, but wikipedia puts them into ceramics. However, I don't know how to treat silicon-based polymers. They are usually organic-inorganic polymers and are plastics. Materialscientist (talk) 10:35, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

I'll withdraw now because it's become self consistent and I'm not a subject matter expert. Thank you for curating a most interesting article.Shannock9 (talk) 15:13, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Results of FDA BPA study

The article mentions the LA Times article about the FDA BPA study in 2010. In 2012 the results of that study were released, with the following conclusion: "The Food and Drug Administration’s assessment is that the scientific evidence at this time does not suggest that the very low levels of human exposure to BPA through the diet are unsafe." (source: http://www.fda.gov/ForConsumers/ConsumerUpdates/ucm297954) I think this is relevant enough to be added into the article, given that it already mentions the study. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.252.201.10 (talk) 14:49, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

the raw material that plastic parts are made from

A handful of nurdles, spilled from a train in Pineville, Louisiana in the United States. (image and caption copied from plastic particle water pollution).

I've been told that practically all plastic parts are extruded or molded from a material variously known as resin, precursor, plastic granule, plastic pellet, nurdle, or microplastics. Alas, none of those articles (or this plastic article) say much about the small hard pieces of plastic that are used to produce larger plastic parts.

Are only thermoplastics distributed as plastic pellet(s), or can molds and extruders somehow process thermosetting polymers in this form? Is there one or more standard size or shape or both for these pellets, and if so, what is the name of the standard, and what size(s) or shape(s) or both does it specify? Are recycled plastic items usually converted back into such pellets, or are they usually converted directly into new parts? The wood-plastic composite article briefly mentions a "pelletizing extruder" -- is that the most common way of making pellets, or is there some other common way? How is underground oil converted into these pellets?

Is there some other article with the answers to these questions? --DavidCary (talk) 19:26, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Biodegradability and reversions

There seems to be something of an upheaval about the mention of proprietary names in this article (BASF, Biopol etc). I don't have any fish to fry, and do not intend to get involved (I only reverted the biopol edit to get the discussion into the talk page, so feel welcome to decide among yourselves how it all should end) but I think that the policing has overshot the mark. The mention of some names seemed to me to augment the article favourably, in being helpful to the reader. It is not necessarily in every context promotion to mention a suitably notable widely known (household?) trade name in suitable context. If someone put a bold "Hurrah" after every mention of Bayer or Dupont, repeatedly saying how wonderful their products are, then sure! But in this case it is helpful to mention names for purposes of reference. I reckon that linking to a product or name that appears as the title or within an accredited article in a proper context (as in this article) is not merely permissible, but appropriate. JonRichfield (talk) 07:33, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Very strongly AGREE with you Jon. Happy to expand but seems to me you've covered all the bases (including the excessive policing of some well meaning editors here on wiki) LookingGlass (talk) 08:06, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

yes — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.100.93.237 (talk) 15:50, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Edible plastics

There's no mention of edible plastics here (see: e.g Google - edible plastic). Is there a reason for that or is it a (large) gap in the article? It is hard to find decent information on this area (as you will see if you open some of the entries in the search). LookingGlass (talk) 08:11, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Error report. On the page detailing PLASTICS there are two subheadings :-Natural Rubber / Synthetic Rubber. These seem to be interpolations. Both these articles (Natural Rubber & Synthetic Rubber) have their own correct pages as Rubber is NOT a plastic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skyfacer9 (talk • contribs) 11:27, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

And/Or

Reverting removal of "and/or". In English (as opposed to say COBOL) "or" is not inclusive. Short reference. Long reference. Shannock9 (talk) 00:50, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Made from plastic fairies — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.162.93.254 (talk) 18:47, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Nat Geo Source?

Reference 24 (McRandle, P.W. (March/April 2004). "Plastic Water Bottles". National Geographic. Retrieved 2007-11-13) doesn't link to a national geographic article - it links to a website called the Green Guide. I couldn't find any mention of a similar nat geo article written by McRandle with a quick google search, though I may be wrong. Jr8825 • Talk 11:27, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 April 2014

Reference 65 [1][dead link] has been located here: http://exteriordesignsllc.com/TheVinyLoopEco-FootprintStudy.pdf Please update and remove dead link status. - Jeremy Scholz

OptimalWebmaster (talk) 19:43, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Done. Seems benign enough. Thanks for catching this. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 23:16, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

It isn't. This request is pure spam -- the username is a big hint. See WikiProject Spam report. MER-C 02:33, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Order of sections

Being WP:Bold I reordered some of the sections. Seeking a WP:Consensus, I explain here. More general, less technical discussions should come first with more detailed and technical information following, not unlike a good newspaper article with starts with the lede and then continues from general to specific, figuring that those who are interested will read on but the more casual reader will stop after the general info. I also think of this article as more of a summary page with links to other articles with more detailed information about the various plastics. Plastics are after all very diverse and more suitable to separate articles than a single one. Therefore I moved the common plastics section up so that people who are interested in a particular plastic can go to its page. Also by putting the list at the top it gives people a general overview of what plastic is and its uses. For instance, maybe people do not realize that polyester is a plastic.--Iloilo Wanderer (talk) 02:05, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 January 2016

Please change the link for "List of over 600 plastics" from http://www.ides.com/plastics/default.htm to http://plastics.ulprospector.com/materials. IDES is now UL Prospector, and this is the proper page for updating. If you follow the current link, you'll see it redirects to the link that I'm suggesting it be replaced with. Thanks! Mwiggins27 (talk) 16:11, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Done --allthefoxes ^(Talk) 19:29, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Plastic. 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:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120524001701/http://www.solvayplastics.com/sites/solvayplastics/SiteCollectionDocuments/VinyLoop/The VinyLoop Eco-Footprint Study.pdf to http://www.solvayplastics.com/sites/solvayplastics/SiteCollectionDocuments/VinyLoop/The VinyLoop Eco-Footprint Study.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:13, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Theme issue on Plastics, the environment, and human health

The Royal Society publishing did this theme issue in 2009: Theme Issue 'Plastics, the environment and human health' compiled by R. C. Thompson, C. J. Moore, F. S. vom Saal and S. H. Swan. Likely good fodder for material. II | (t - c) 07:29, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Malfunctional Links

The link of reference #2 does not takes the user to a working webpage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jacob.Charles.Stephens (talk • contribs) 17:46, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Plastic

Plastic is one of the most used materials in the world, but since there is so much of it going around it is beginning to cause a big problem. Chemicals in plastic are known to cause cancer, birth defects, and many other human health problems. Plastic also can not biodegrade, which means throughout time it breaks down into smaller and smaller pieces. These tiny pieces get eaten by zooplankton in the ocean and the chemicals then enter their bloodstream. Fish who eat these plankton, become contaminated themselves, and then, whatever or whoever eats that fish is exposed to those chemicals as well. This means that plastic is now entering the food chain and the chemicals can now reach people. This makes you wonder, is the convenience of plastic really worth it?174.29.43.79 (talk) 00:42, 13 October 2016 (UTC) Chantelle Stevens 10/12/2016

Polycarbonate lenses for glasses

The article states that lenses in glasses are made from Polycarbonate. This is kind of true, because *some* lenses are made of polycarbonate. Most, however, are made of one of the following materials: CR-39 (1.5 index), Trivex (1.53), MR-6 (1.6), MR-8 (1.6), MR-7 (1.67), MR-10 (1.67), and MR174 (1.74). There are many others, and also proprietary sub-types of the most common types, but these are the most common (Essilor uses "Orma" which is their own formulation of CR-39, while other examples are CR-607 and CR-630, which are types of CR-39 used for transitions).

Polycarbonate has terrible, terrible optical qualities compared to every other major type of lens material, and is rarely used except at budget retailers (it has: poor optics; extreme levels of chromatic aberration; scratches so easily that if you breathe on it the wrong way it will scratch; is injection molded (which is cheaper than traditional cast molding) causing severe asymmetric internal stresses which lead to noticeable optical distortions in the end product; and, finally, has a high impact resistance, but a low resistance to fracturing splintering (this makes it poor for drillmounts and semirimless frames, as it tends to "spider-web" crack slowly over time around stress points)).

Because of these horrible flaws, it does not make up a majority of lenses. — Gopher65_talk 15:03, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

John Cena founded rubber which isused to make plastic that makes plastic but the real creator of plastic is Steven Curry — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.67.87.194 (talk) 17:00, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

proposal

i propose to change the phrase "Plastic eating microbes" into "Plastic-eating microbes" because it is more correct grammatically. Absinthia Stacy 13 (talk) 11:12, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Plastic. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110720183608/http://www.nnfcc.co.uk/tools/biochemical-opportunities-in-the-uk-nnfcc-08-008 to http://www.nnfcc.co.uk/tools/biochemical-opportunities-in-the-uk-nnfcc-08-008
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080513223411/http://www.plasticsnews.com/subscriber/fyi.html?id=1132774806 to http://www.plasticsnews.com/subscriber/fyi.html?id=1132774806
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.vectorsite.net/ttplast.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:35, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Plastic. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071215124919/http://dwb.unl.edu/Teacher/NSF/C06/C06Links/qlink.queensu.ca/~6jrt/chem210/Page3.html to http://dwb.unl.edu/Teacher/NSF/C06/C06Links/qlink.queensu.ca/~6jrt/chem210/Page3.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110718081923/http://woohooreport.com/2009/09/wci-student-isolates-microbe-that-lunches-on-plastic-bags/ to http://woohooreport.com/2009/09/wci-student-isolates-microbe-that-lunches-on-plastic-bags/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:46, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

plastic

JOE WELLER — Preceding unsigned comment added by 51.7.217.73 (talk) 17:20, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 December 2017

Improvement to comparitive statistic under subheader: Bioplastic. (I already changed it on bioplastic main page as it was not locked)

Original:

Bioplastics Main article: Bioplastic

Whilst most plastics are produced from petrochemicals, bioplastics are made substantially from renewable plant materials such: as cellulose and starch.[17] Due both to the finite limits of the petrochemical reserves and to the threat of global warming, the development of bioplastics is a growing field.

However, bioplastic development begins from a very low base and, as yet, does not compare significantly with petrochemical production. Estimates of the global production capacity for bio-derived materials is put at 327,000 tonnes/year, out of a global consumption, of all flexible packaging, estimated at 12.3 million tonnes/year.[18][19]

Suggested edit:

Bioplastics Main article: Bioplastic

Whilst most plastics are produced from petrochemicals, bioplastics are made substantially from renewable plant materials such: as cellulose and starch.[17] Due both to the finite limits of the petrochemical reserves and to the threat of global warming, the development of bioplastics is a growing field.

However, bioplastic production does not yet compare significantly with petrochemical based production. Estimates of the global production capacity for bio-derived materials is put at 327,000 tonnes/year. In contrast, global production of polyethylene (PE) and polypropylene (PP), the world’s leading petrochemical derived polyolefins, was estimated at over 150 million tonnes in 2015.

---

Citation: https://www.icis.com/globalassets/documents/forms/ppf-pdf/global_trends_whitepaper_pp_pe.pdf 66.169.246.57 (talk) 04:05, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Done Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 21:10, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 January 2018

joe weller

That's not an edit request. !dave 20:30, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

waxworm

Please add a bullet point and link to Waxworm in the Environmental effects section: "*The Waxworm has been observed eating and digesting plastic." Also, please change 'However, microbial species' to 'However, species' since waxworm is not a microbial species.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.235.49.77 (talk) 02:26, June 1, 2018‎

1) cows eat grass but its digestion relies on microorganisms in the rumen, and a similar situation may apply here. 2) the work on waxworms is disputed per doi 10.1016/j.cub.2017.07.004. Since Wikipedia (at least in the chemistry area) avoids "news", the topic seems premature.--Smokefoot (talk) 15:12, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.I can only assume this request is in relation to some news report about the research of Paolo Bombelli, Christopher J. Howe and Federica Bertocchini This paper is a very preliminary report and, as Smokefoot notes, has already attracted methodological dispute. Until there is some confirmatory research, we should avoid adding this. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 21:59, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

References

the steam from when burning or melting plastic is harmful to health.

181.165.248.188 (talk) 20:41, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 20:53, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Production increase

The Plastic article should show the increase of production during last decades and especially since a moral ban upon oil extraction for transport, heating &c. Oil refiners continue to use more and more oil and push forth the use of plastics for single use containers.

P.-S. : The "Health issues of plastics" template appears twice in this page, in the Plastics template and by its own. --methodood (talk) 12:04, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Word origin missing

It would be great if somebody would add the word origin... This makes understand why they chose to use this word. https://www.etymonline.com/word/plastic — Preceding unsigned comment added by Einserschüler (talk • contribs) 12:51, 6 June 2019 (UTC) (from Greek πλαστικό (plastikó) meaning able to be molded or pertaining to molding) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Einserschüler (talk • contribs) 12:48, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 August 2019

Please remove the sentence involving the percentage of plastics used for packaging in India - it is misleading and unnecessary, especially out of context, and does not differ significantly from the percentage of plastics used for packaging in other developed countries. 2602:30A:C049:6830:9471:3709:CFF3:490F (talk) 07:12, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. The entire section is suitably cited. I'm reluctant to remove a reliably cited claim that is used in a context considered appropriate by a reliable source. --Trialpears (talk) 19:57, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

"Age of Plastics" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Age of Plastics. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 16:17, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

"Biodegradeble Polymers" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Biodegradeble Polymers. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 16:30, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

PVC and vinyl records

The applications for PVC should include vinyl records. Even if they’re not the main medium, it’s still an example of how PVC was used that just about everyone is familiar with (and probably doesn’t know is PVC!) Part2343 (talk) 04:09, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

Plastic

I don’t like what plastic is made of. Do you? Please make sure you Bold textthink think about this Lalaoppsie (talk) 08:31, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Historical Value of Plastic in Post-WWII America

At the time, the use of petroleum to make a material as an alternative to wood or metal was very valuable. Plastics experienced an increase in popularity during the 1950’s, after World War II. During WWII, plastics like Nylon, Plexiglas, Polyethylene, and Cellulosics were used to improve military resources. Nylon was used in uniforms and parachutes, and Plexiglas or Perspex was used in airplane windows. After the war, there was a surplus of plastic that needed to be used, and it entered mainstream market, especially lab-synthesized plastics. It was common for women to work in factories that made plastics as the industry grew.

Sources: 1.https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/tupperware-plastics/ 2.https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-brief-history-of-plastic-world-conquest/ Camrodriguez23 (talk) 23:50, 17 May 2020 (UTC)5/17/2020

Microplastics Controversy

Microplastics, which are tiny fragments of plastics smaller than 5mm, have been the topic of controversy among environmental advocates. These pieces are a challenge to filter because they can be too small to see by the human eye. Plastic litter in soil and water are degraded by sun, water, or wind and break down into microplastics. Microplastics are difficult to remove by filtration processes near inland regions, and drift out to sea. When ingested by sea or land animals, toxic chemicals are releases and can kill the animals, or humans who consume these animals. These chemicals can disrupt the immune & digestive systems. Chemicals like Bisphenol A can even cause cancer. There are two reasons microplastics can be harmful; the first is chemicals already present in the plastic, and the other is the pollutants that the plastics may soak up during their time in dirty water or polluted soil.

Camrodriguez23 (talk) 00:02, 18 May 2020 (UTC)5/17/2020

Methods of Recycling

The number stamped on plastic materials indicate the type of plastics it's made from. Some plastics are easier to recycle than others, and some rarely or never get recycled and simply become litter. For example, polyethylene terephthalate, which soda bottles are made from, is the easiest to reuse and are often recycled into other bottles. Other plastics, like Polystyrene, which Styrofoam boxes and packing peanuts are made from, are hard to recycle due to their density. Most plastics are actually "downcycled" into a lower-value type of plastic. Plastics degrade with very usage, and cannot be reused many times. One issue is that the United States has an inefficient recycling system and only 60% of Americans have access to curb pickup. Also, 76% of plastic waste end sup in landfills while 16% is recycled. Camrodriguez23 (talk) 00:50, 18 May 2020 (UTC)5/17/2020

Update to Resin Identification Code

The ASTM Resin Identification standard ASTM D7611 has changed. The number is no longer enclosed by chasing arrows but should be a solid triangle.

Please Change:

In 1988, to assist recycling of disposable items, the Plastic Bottle Institute of the U.S. Society of the Plastics Industry devised a now-familiar scheme to mark plastic bottles by plastic type. Under this scheme, a plastic container is marked with a triangle of three "chasing arrows", which encloses a number denoting the plastic type:

TO

In 1988, to assist recycling of disposable items, the Plastic Bottle Institute of the U.S. Society of the Plastics Industry devised a now-familiar scheme to mark plastic bottles by plastic type. Under this scheme, a plastic container is marked with a triangle which encloses a number denoting the plastic type. This scheme was added to the ASTM Standard ASTM D7611.

 Done ~ Amkgp 💬 18:34, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Definition of Term Plastic

The definition in the first sentence differs greatly from the official definition given by the standard ISO 472 (international standard on plastics vocabulary). ISO 472 defines the term plastic as: "material which contains as an essential ingredient a high polymer and which, at some stage in its processing into finished products, can be shaped by flow"

This means plastic is not characterized by its organic content or (semi-)synthetic nature, as the polymer could be anorganic or natural.

Suggestion for the definition: Plastics are a wide range of materials that have a polymer as their main ingredient and can be plastically deformed by flow into final products during production. Knorky2nd (talk) 08:53, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

@Knorky2nd: I did a rewrite of the lead -- that is closer to what you are talking about, but the definition you are using is not what most folks are "searching for" when they search plastic -- which is the synthetic organic chemical used in every day life. I suggest adding the ISO definition to the definitions section of the article, Sadads (talk) 12:03, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello Sadads, Thank you for replying to my comment! I'm new to editing on Wikipedia and don't know how to answer to your comment.

I think Wikipedia should display the correct definition of a term, not what people expect. The definition of "synthetic or semi-synthetic organic polymers" does not include e.g. silicones and bioplastics. I think this is problematic, as the very popular #plasticfree is wrongly used to declare bioplastics and silicones as non-plastics.

Additionally, plastics and polymers are not the same. Plastics contain polymers as a main component. Appart from the polymer there can be additives, which don't have to be polymers. A popular comparison for plastic is a pasta dish, where the spaghetti represent the polymers and the sauce the fillers/additives.

New suggestion: "Plastics are a wide range of synthetic or semisynthetic materials that have a usualy organic polymer as their main ingredient and can be plastically deformed by flow into final products during production." Knorky2nd (talk) 12:00, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Try this revision -- I don't think I understand your "plastically deformed" concept -- its too technical, and implies a bunch of things, I am sure, in chemistry or manufacturing that I don't understand as a lay reader. Sadads (talk) 12:11, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Forgot to @Knorky2nd: Sadads (talk) 12:11, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

I understand the problem with the too technical part. I added some links and changed same words/word order to make it clearer. New suggestion: "Plastics are a wide range of synthetic or semi-synthetic materials, that use polymers as a main ingredient. Most commonly used are organic polymers. The plasticity during production makes it possible for plastic to be moulded, extruded or pressed into solid objects of various shapes, making them an adaptable material for many different uses."Knorky2nd (talk) 17:54, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

 Done Yep, that works for me @Knorky2nd: -- thanks for contributing -- I hope you stick around and keep editing, plenty of spaces to keep improving (so much missing information about plastics pollution :P), Sadads (talk) 12:16, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

one last change: "that usually use a polymers" to "that use polymers". They always use polymers. Also the link is misleading, as it should point to the polymer page, not the organic compound page. As for editing, I might look into it :). I noticed that quite a bit of information is missing on the English version, the German version seams to be more detailed. Knorky2nd (talk) 12:29, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 March 2021

Dildos are made of plastic. 184.174.141.28 (talk) 00:39, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Thank you very much for your input! P.I. Ellsworth  ed. ^put'r there 01:42, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Suggestions on several sections

Having spent considerable time improving the language on this article, my familiarity with the subject had been improved to the point where I feel there might be some deeper issues beyond the comprehensibility of the copy. The article is a little less unwieldy than when I began, but I would like to see it reflect the best qualities of outstanding examples in the project. Plastic is not there yet:

Representative polymers

This is redundant in some way (and somewhat misleading by the word polymers. It seems an arbitrary exposition, when in fact we have a great list of specialty, engineering, and common plastics before that section that will satisfy most readers who want to get a concrete idea of how varied plastic is and the sort of applications that can be understood easily. I suggest removal, because:

Types

Perhaps these two lists can be expanded and updated a bit; some pictures added; and maybe even combine specialist, engineering and common plastics (and Representative polymers) into one alphabetical list under a section called "Representative plastics." Each plastic will link to a Wiki article; have an abbreviation if available; a short list of applications; and a few pictures sprinkled throughout

Toxicity

Move this to Environmental effects, which I'd like to rename Environmental impacts. And Bisphenol A (BPA) does not need a separate head.

Additives

Other classes is unjustified as separate. I suggest folding in with the list above it. Other additives in the future can simply be added alphabetically.

Excerpts

I don't like excerpts for the reason that control over the overall tone of the target article can be affected by the tone adopted in the anchor article, not to mention the citation weirdness. Editing the Plastic page means editing three or four other pages. Vandalization of another article can creep into this one. There are two solutions whose propriety I am unsure of:

1. Disable the excerpt; rewrite the target with new citations
2. Disable the excerpt; rewrite the target based on language in the anchor and support with citations already indicated in the anchor

Citations

There is old material here and some links don't work. Many portions of this article are uncited.

Final thoughts: I will do all of these things with permission, suggestions or consensus of some kind, but I don't want to move forward with these radical changes lest it seem like I'm messing around too much. Brightkingdom (talk) 17:11, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

I have been meaning to edit here for a while but I decided to start on other pages first and make my way in here later - partly because I just didn't know where to start. To my eyes the page needs a lot of work, one problem being a failure of due emphasis. For instance, polypropylene and polyethylene alone account for nearly half of global plastic production, with 8 polymer types accounting for about 90% of production (doi:10.1126/sciadv.1700782) - See 'supplementary info' section). So when we talk about plastic that's mostly what we mean. Representative polymers seems to be quite arbitrary and I don't see how it can be truly representative without it becoming unwieldy - I think it needs to be deleted and the types section improved instead. I'll try to help where I can.--Project Osprey (talk) 22:52, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

For the excerpts: its much better to improve the target article leads, and modify them to include sections or parts -- especially for a top level article like this one where repeating content means that it rapidly goes out of data (i.e. the plastic recycling section). Your concern about vandalism just means that you should watch multiple pages. It would only make sense to remove the citations if the goal was to improve the article to something like a featured article and indefinitely maintained by someone -- otherwise, the vast field of connected issues are rapidly evolving, so its better to support that, Sadads (talk) 05:25, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Bioplastics

This section needs more content on the potential issues of bioplastics. Please include: Bioplastics do present many of their own challenges. The production of bioplastics still produces pollution through the chemical process of turning organic material into plastic as well as the pesticides and fertilizes used for crop growth. Bioplastics also require specialized disposal and there is very limited infrastructure in place for such disposal. If a lot of recycled plastic is contaminated with bioplastic, the entire lot could be rejected and sent to a landfill where the bioplastic will release methane, a potent greenhouse gas. TKiewe1419 (talk) 06:00, 14 May 2021 (UTC)TamarKiewe

References

Introduction

This section needs more explanation as to why plastic persists in the ecosystem. Add a sentence so it reads: The success and dominance of plastics starting in the early 20th century has caused widespread environmental problems, due to their slow decomposition rate in natural ecosystems. This is because the manufacturing process transforms the raw, organic materials into something unknown to the organisms that typically break down organic material. Toward the end of the 20th century, the plastics industry promoted recycling in order to assuage environmental concerns while continuing to produce virgin plastic.TKiewe1419 (talk) 06:07, 14 May 2021 (UTC)TamarKiewe

References

Microplastics

This section needs added explanation as to the dangers of microplastics. Edit to include a sentence so it reads: Because plastics degrade slowly (often over hundreds to thousands of years),microplastics have a high probability of ingestion, incorporation into, and accumulation in the bodies and tissues of many organisms. While the effects on human health are not well known, it is thought that microplastics can lead to inflammation of the gastrointestinal tract and cause asthma-like symptoms. The toxic chemicals that come from both the ocean and runoff can also biomagnify up the food chain.TKiewe1419 (talk) 06:14, 14 May 2021 (UTC)TamarKiewe

References

Recycling

This section needs further explanation on why so little plastic is recycled or recyclable. Edit to add a sentence so it reads: However, the industry has lobbied for the expansion of recycling while these companies have continued to increase the amount of virgin plastic being produced. Marketing plastics as recyclable improved their image and prevented a ban on plastics in the 1980s.TKiewe1419 (talk) 06:19, 14 May 2021 (UTC)TamarKiewe

References

Introduction

The article says that all of the world’s oceans have garbage patches. However, it does not say that some oceans have multiple patches or give any specific information regarding the garbage patches. Proposed change: Plastic pollution can be found in all the world's major water bodies, for example, creating garbage patches throughout the world's oceans; two in the Atlantic Ocean, two in the Pacific Ocean, one in the Indian Ocean and multiple smaller patches elsewhere. These garbage patches have negative consequences on both marine and terrestrial ecosystems such as vessel damage, human health impacts, entanglement/ghost fishing and many other destructive effects. Gmooney1 (talk) 18:34, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

References

Incineration of Plastics

The article repeatedly says “toxins” and “pollutants”, but only specifically lists one toxin/pollutant. This is somewhat misleading. Proposed change: This is needed because uncontrolled incineration of plastic produces polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins, a carcinogen (cancer causing chemical), as well as hydrochloric acid, sulfur dioxide, other dioxins, furans, heavy metals and particulates. Gmooney1 (talk) 18:50, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

References

Incineration of Plastics

The article touches on what comes from the incineration of plastic, but does not introduce why it is bad or what are the specific toxins/pollutants. I believe this is necessary knowledge for someone learning about plastic and its impacts. Proposed addition: When these toxins are inhaled, human health is at risk. Instances of impotence, asthma, other respiratory ailments and various other stressors to the human immune system have occurred upon inhalation. Additional pollutants released by incineration of plastics are harmful greenhouses gases such as CO2, methane and ethylene. These pollutants directly exacerbate the effects of climate change. The toxins leading to these effects can travel thousands of miles, in certain conditions, from the incineration cite, spreading human and environmental health consequences. Gmooney1 (talk) 18:50, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

References

Decomposition of Plastics

The article introduces bioengineered plastic elsewhere, so it seems fitting to included genetically modified bacteria into the decomposition section. Proposed change: Microbial species, both natural and genetically modified (GMO), capable of degrading plastics, are known to science; some of which are potentially useful for disposal of certain classes of plastic waste. These microorganisms and enzymes are catalyzing the development of biological plastic-degradation technologies. Gmooney1 (talk) 19:00, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

References

What is the life cycle of plastic ?

Ans In some ways, the life of plastic is never-ending. It is a material that takes up to 100s of years to degrade and we can recycle certain plastics. We can melt and reform thermoplastic almost indefinitely in some instances. NIKESH789 (talk) 09:15, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 July 2021

These five sentences are all on separate lines.

Extended content

Plastics are usually classified by the chemical structure of the polymer's backbone and side chains. Important groups classified in this way include the acrylics, polyesters, silicones, polyurethanes, and halogenated plastics. Plastics can be classified by the chemical process used in their synthesis, such as condensation, polyaddition, and cross-linking.[9] They can also be classified by their physical properties, including hardness, density, tensile strength, thermal resistance, and glass transition temperature. Plastics can additionally be classified by their resistance and reactions to various substances and processes, such as exposure to organic solvents, oxidation, and ionizing radiation.[10] Other classifications of plastics are based on qualities relevant to manufacturing or product design for a particular purpose. Examples include thermoplastics, thermosets, conductive polymers, biodegradable plastics, engineering plastics and elastomers.

Could you remove the line breaks and make them one paragraph? 64.203.186.119 (talk) 12:56, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

 Done (CC) Tbhotch^™ 18:48, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Number of additives

The number of additives from the publication doi:10.1021/acs.est.1c00976 might be added to Plastic#Additives. --62.202.181.170 (talk) 22:36, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 July 2021

Remove link to PVC page in Polystyrene section Eosmon (talk) 07:49, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

To editor Eosmon:  done, and thank you very much! P.I. Ellsworth  ed. ^put'r there 15:38, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 August 2021

plastic is actually supposed to save earth not to pollute earth 180.254.65.192 (talk) 04:41, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. -ink&fables «talk» 09:08, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Planned changes

I'm planning to try and overhaul this page over the next few weeks. Changes will be gradual but probably significant. --Project Osprey (talk) 22:41, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 20 August 2018 and 5 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): PugSpam.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 06:45, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 August 2021 and 20 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Odunn23.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:25, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 January 2022

Section: Production

Original: "Since the birth of the plastic industry in the 1950s global production has increases enormously" Typo Fixed: Since the birth of the plastic industry in the 1950s, global production has increased enormously 172.112.210.32 (talk) 15:28, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

 Done --Project Osprey (talk) 15:33, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Thomas A. Edison may have inadvertently coined the term " Plastic" (A NOUN) in 11/1/1879.

Review of his US Patent 223,898 for an Electric Lamp filed 11/1/1879, approved 1/27/1880 reveals that Thomas A. Edison mentions the word "plastic" trice. Edison uses the word "plastic" to denote a new compound made by the heating under pressure of a mixture of lamp black (a para-crystalline carbon from the incomplete combustion of petroleum) and coal tar (a mixture of hydrocarbons, phenol and heterocylic compounds). Edison here is describing a "Thermoplastic Process" where 2 substances are combined to form a "plastic" material that is molded into a hard heat-resistant material that joined a carbonized cotton thread to a platinum wire used in his incandescent lamp. Celluloid, the first man-made "plastic" (A Noun) was invented in 1869 by John W. Hyatt, but no mention of the word "plastic" was made.32.213.246.45 (talk) 18:47, 30 December 2021 (UTC). 32.213.246.45 (talk) 18:44, 30 December 2021 (UTC) 32.213.246.45 (talk) 00:17, 25 December 2021 (UTC).

According to Oxford: "mid 17th century (in the sense ‘characteristic of molding’): from French plastique or Latin plasticus, from Greek plastikos, from plassein ‘to mold". (CC) Tbhotch^™ 20:16, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

You use the word Plastic as a verb. In his most important patent of 1879 for his incandescent light, Edison is describing a novel compound used to join a carbonized filament to a platinum wire in the glass globe of the light. He combines 2 different substances using a thermoplastic process to form this compound. He calls it a "plastic" long before Leo Baekeland in1907. 32.213.247.99 (talk) 22:33, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

We don't really do original research here, we're supposed to reference established facts. It's a very English-centric argument in any case. The French term 'matière plastique' had been used to describe various sorts of materials since before the 1800s and science was much more polylingual in those days. I'm not sure you can claim invention of a loanword. --Project Osprey (talk) 09:56, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Agree. Thanks for explanation. 32.213.247.99 (talk) 23:40, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Decomposition

Mushrooms: Carbios, Biohm[5], Pestalotiopsis microspora [6]

Bacteria: Pseudomonas morganensis, Ideonella sakaiensis

Enzymes: [7],[8], [9], [10] , [11],[12],[13],[14], [15],[16],[17],[18],[19],[20],[21],[22],[23], [24],[25],[26],[27],[28],[29],[30],[31]

Insects: Zophobas morio [32], Mealworms [33], Galleria mellonella [34], Plodia Interpunctella [35]

Algae: [36], [37], Phaeodactylum tricornutum [38] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.246.144.13 (talk) 17:14, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 November 2022

Please change the image of the Egg-tray from "/media/File:Eierdoosmet10eierengevuld2010.jpg" to "media/File:Plastic_egg_carton.jpg". The current image is not related to the Plastic Nitths (talk) 10:31, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

 Done ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ (talk) 12:30, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

How plastics harm Animals

Plastic waste is littering our oceans and threatening the lives of millions of marine animals every year. nearly 80 percent of animals contain microplastics. animals eat plastics because when the food is inside plastic bags or box the animals smell it and they attempt to eat it. 182.48.196.240 (talk) 16:02, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Plastic waste is littering our oceans and threatening the lives of millions of marine animals every year. nearly 80 percent of animals contain microplastics. animals eat plastics because when the food is inside plastic bags or box the animals smell it and they attempt to eat it. 182.48.196.240 (talk) 16:02, 19 February 2023 (UTC) 93.185.2.82 (talk) 08:55, 12 April 2023 (UTC)