this post was submitted on 07 Mar 2024
210 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

68244 readers
5099 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

the chemicals may interfere with the body's hormones, raise cholesterol levels, affect fertility and increase the risk of certain cancers, according to the EPA."

all 39 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] krigo666@lemmy.world 112 points 1 year ago (3 children)

And now instead of stopping producing them, we will continue with the excuse 'we have the cure for the disease!'

[–] doylio@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)
[–] DireAlchemist@lemmy.blahaj.zone 34 points 1 year ago (1 children)

These articles are always feel so silly for anyone in the field. There are literally dozens of papers coming out every week on the subject of PFAS destruction and probably about 10-20% of them are equally "simple".

The problem isn't destroying the C-F bonds, it is doing it efficiently and with enough scalability to process hundreds of tons of soil or lakes worth of water without making a bigger mess than we started with. Most of the common PFAS compounds are going to be tied into CERCLA and the RCRA hazardous substance lists hopefully this year which should mediate further environmental contamination, but we have to make chemical companies do more due diligence regarding chronic exposure risks before they make new compounds mainstream and ubiquitous.

[–] kalkulat@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

But I'm not in the field. My reasoning for posting this: I see news about PFAs a lot, this was fresh to me and I was glad to hear the news that chemists are at work on the problem (many communities in WA have contaminated water). And simply-enough for 'newbs' to learn from. I don't find a 'technology for experts' 'community' on Lemmy.

Livescience is far from the best source, but I checked that they had a link to the study (Science) in it.

It appears, going by the comments, that others who are not 'in the field' were happy to learn about. It'd be great if more people 'in the field' would post about such discoveries now and then.

[–] deafboy@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago (2 children)

the fastest way to take PFAS down was to heat the "forever chemical" to boiling along with DMSO and lye, or sodium hydroxide

Is it even feasible to basically pre-boil the drinking water on such a large scale?

[–] WagnasT@iusearchlinux.fyi 25 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think the idea is to filter it out (which is also not easy) but then this gives you a way to destroy the concentrated pfas left behind. Because otherwise what are you supposed to do with the material you have filtered out? It'd be cool if regulations required the cost of destroying pfas be added to the sale of pfas which might help manufacturers decide that they don't need to add pfas to disposable things like paper plates after all.

[–] girsaysdoom@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago

Agreed 100%. They should be forced to add the cost of handling and recycling the material. Honestly, this should've been done with all plastic from the get go too.

[–] TonyTonyChopper@mander.xyz 8 points 1 year ago

DMSO and NaOH are not what you want in drinking water

[–] NotAtWork@startrek.website 12 points 1 year ago

Not the guillotine news I was expecting in 2024, but I'll take it.

[–] YungOnions@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 year ago

Excellent news.

Off with their heads!

[–] ryannathans@aussie.zone 3 points 1 year ago

They make it sound trivial to filter away

[–] Wahots@pawb.social 3 points 1 year ago

Thank god, especially since everything is off the shelf, too.

[–] stoy@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 year ago
[–] Dremor@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Someone need the National Razor?