Everytime i come across a 3d printing post
-
Dude this is a place for shitposting. Go somewhere else if you want to be pedantic.
You realize you're arguing with Satan's maggoty cum fart, yeah? Might be a hint of something...
Yes I'm very grateful for their name and enjoyed their presence immensely ty, don't feed the trolls, on either side of the fence, ty goodnight
-
Dude this is a place for shitposting. Go somewhere else if you want to be pedantic.
You realize you're arguing with Satan's maggoty cum fart, yeah? Might be a hint of something...
wrote last edited by [email protected]I'll have you know Sire Pipette SatansMaggotyCumFart Esq. (Formally known as the Artist cumfart) and I are on nominal grounds and I will assuredly still be acting in such a manner
-
I'll have you know Sire Pipette SatansMaggotyCumFart Esq. (Formally known as the Artist cumfart) and I are on nominal grounds and I will assuredly still be acting in such a manner
(as long as I say their full name of course)
-
I'll have you know Sire Pipette SatansMaggotyCumFart Esq. (Formally known as the Artist cumfart) and I are on nominal grounds and I will assuredly still be acting in such a manner
Carry on then.
-
What do you think the net pollution of Luigi's alleged Glock and suppressor print is, all things considered?
This paper estimates the CO2e emissions of roughly a 1kg spool (estimates are done by length of filament, not weight, but weight would end up being about 1kg) of PLA filament at 3.10kg of CO2e.
The model used to print the alleged ghost gun is the FMDA 19.2 by "the Gatalog," which when I load it into my slicer shows an estimated 55g of filament used to print when using 15% infill, and 94g with 100% solid infill, for an estimated 0.1705-0.2914 CO2e of emissions for the printed parts. (This doesn't include any support material, depending on print positioning)
There's no easy way to determine how much of that could theoretically end up as microplastics though.
As for the metal parts, I have no clue lmao, I don't care to estimate it that much. -
Carry on then.
Appreciate you
-
Tires are the 2nd largest contributor to microplastics in the ocean. Synthetic fabric like nylon, polyester, etc. are the main contribution.
Aw man there goes my all polyester 70's wardrobe!
-
Your mom.
-
Aw man there goes my all polyester 70's wardrobe!
That wardrobe will live on forever in our hearts and minds… in the form of microplastics.
-
Your mom.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Do you rather have me buying a complete new device than printiner a spare part with PLA (not derived from oil)?
-
The AI needs all your electricity now. Please only use the bare minimum electricity so the giant corporations can get their profits.
-
This paper estimates the CO2e emissions of roughly a 1kg spool (estimates are done by length of filament, not weight, but weight would end up being about 1kg) of PLA filament at 3.10kg of CO2e.
The model used to print the alleged ghost gun is the FMDA 19.2 by "the Gatalog," which when I load it into my slicer shows an estimated 55g of filament used to print when using 15% infill, and 94g with 100% solid infill, for an estimated 0.1705-0.2914 CO2e of emissions for the printed parts. (This doesn't include any support material, depending on print positioning)
There's no easy way to determine how much of that could theoretically end up as microplastics though.
As for the metal parts, I have no clue lmao, I don't care to estimate it that much.How much co2 emissions did he save if he capped a CEO tho?
-
This post did not contain any content.
Look, you see the world around you? You think it’s worth saving? We had a good run, time to burn it down
-
Do you....drive a car? Rubber rubbing off from your tires onto the road is one of the main contribution (2nd highest) to ocean micro plastics as your tires are filled with them suspended in the tire...
tbf what matters here more is microplastic production per capita rather than overall production
-
PLA is basically plant starch. most 3d printing is done with PLA
made from doesn't mean same properties (e.g. biodegradability)
-
From what I've seen, at the bare minimum, it will break down completely back into plant polymers faster than other plastics could hope to break down into anything non-dangerous to the environment, and even if it does break down into microplastics quicker, I'd rather have something like that, which can then later break down into plant polymers, rather than something that slowly leeches microplastics into the environment for the next few centuries, and doesn't really break down into anything much less dangerous past that point.
To cite some interesting points from the paper you referenced:
The biodegradation of polylactic acid occurs in two main steps: fragmentation and mineralization. [...] which can be biotic or abiotic. For instance, biotic hydrolysis involves microorganisms and/or enzymes, whereas abiotic hydrolysis involves mechanical weathering.
This means it can break down via multiple mechanisms, with or without the presence of any microbes, but only given specific environmental circumstances, which is why it doesn't work well in aquatic environments, as previously mentioned. However, some of it does still break down there, and if it later exits that aquatic environment, other processes can begin to break down what remains.
The authors concluded that polylactic acid and its blends are similar to non-biodegradable plastics in terms of biodegradation in aquatic environment.
[They] proposed that low temperatures along with low bacterial density make the sea water unsuitable for the biodegradation of polylactic acid.
However, on the microplastics point, while they do state it degrades quickly, in terms of overall quantity of microplastics produced, it's actually lower than other common plastics.
The authors reported that polylactic acid forms almost 18 times fewer microplastics as compared to the petroleum-based plastic, polypropylene.
They do still mention that it will still likely have many negative effects on marine life, though, even given that. Surely we'll stop dumping plastics in the ocean now, for the good of the planet! Or not, because profits matter more, am I right?
From another study, it seems that soil with certain combinations of bacteria, at regular temperatures found in nature, could mineralize about 24% of PLA in 150 days, which is pretty damn good compared to how long it would take non-bioplastics to do so.
And of course, when put into dedicated composting facilities that can reach high temperatures, PLA can be composted extremely effectively. And this is just regular PLA we're talking about, not things like cPLA, which can be 100% composted within regular composting facilities within 2-4 months. (coincidentally, most biodegradable utensils are now made of cPLA)
I wouldn't doubt we start seeing even more compostable variants of filament for 3D printers specifically popping up as actual distribution and manufacturing for the material becomes more cost effective and widespread. I was able to find cPLA filament at a reasonable price just from a simple search, and there's even a biodegradable flexible filament as an alternative to TPU, made of oyster powder, which is 100% compostable (though is about 4-8X the price of regular TPU per gram as of now)
None of this discounts any of the current environmental impacts of 3D printing materials, of course, but a lot of PLA now can already be almost entirely, if not actually entirely composted in local municipal composting facilities, and there's even more compostable alternatives that exist today.
I compost my failed or no-longer-needed PLA prints, and my city even explicitly states to put it in my compost bin, as it's supported by our composting system.
If you're only using natural (unpigmented) PLA that's one thing, but the pigments in colored PLA vary widely in terms of environmental effects and compostability. Composting old PLA prints may release all sorts of crud into the end product you really don't want to fertilize your garden with, always check your filament's MSDS first.
-
made from doesn't mean same properties (e.g. biodegradability)
wrote last edited by [email protected]PLA doesn't not hold up to the elements. sunlight breaks it down
it turns to floppy noodle in summer heat
do you even know anything about PLA?
-
Look, you see the world around you? You think it’s worth saving? We had a good run, time to burn it down
Think of the animals that preceded us. Humans are so self-absorbed.
