Beneath the ocean’s surface, bacteria have evolved specialized enzymes that can digest PET plastic, the material used in bottles and clothes. Researchers at KAUST discovered that a unique molecular signature distinguishes enzymes capable of efficiently breaking down plastic. Found in nearly 80% of ocean samples, these PETase variants show nature’s growing adaptation to human pollution.
  • bleistift2@sopuli.xyzEnglish
    37·
    3 days ago

    While this is awesome news (if true as stated), I’m afraid it will lead to a cessation of anti-pollution efforts and a return to the old thinking of “nature will handle it.”

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.worldEnglish
      14·
      3 days ago

      I’m afraid it will lead to a cessation of anti-pollution efforts

      The bacteria release carbon during the decomposition process. So this isn’t a “solution” in any meaningful respect. It’s an instance of evolution at work, as a surplus resource becomes a food source for innovative organisms.

      Also, we look at this as some kind of “clean-up”. In reality, this is a threat to one of our most useful durable materials. It’ll likely lead to the development of antiseptics to kill these bacteria colonies, as the last thing anyone with a hard plastic shell on their vehicle or appliance or equipment wants is a colony of plastic-eaters deteriorating it.

    • fizzle@quokk.auEnglish
      1·
      3 days ago

      I dont really follow.

      You think people are going to point to this as a reason not decarbon?

      Im sure that idiots will, but those people were never going to make any meaningful effort to decarbon anyway.

      • bleistift2@sopuli.xyzEnglish
        11·
        3 days ago

        I am continuously amazed how people keep confusing plastic pollution with carbon pollution. They are not even close!

        • fizzle@quokk.auEnglish
          2·
          3 days ago

          Settle down mate. Im well aware that plastic pollution is not carbon pollution.

          The comment i replied to suggested that solving plastic pollution might discourage people from addressing pollution all together. Plastic and carbon are the most problematic pollutants.

  • bitteroldcoot@piefed.socialEnglish
    26·
    3 days ago

    Has anyone considered the flip side of this. if we are unintentionally creating a bacteria that eats plastic, and our civilization is made of plastic, then this is a bad thing. Hospital equipment, airplanes, computers food storage, electrical wires…

    Don’t get me wrong, I think we should end all plastic use. but in a controlled way, not with a plastic eating plague.

    • Brummbaer@pawb.socialEnglish
      16·
      3 days ago

      There are plenty of wood eating bacteria and fungus all around you and yet wooden buildings still exists.

      These microorganisms need a favourable environment to start digesting wood, for example. That’s why you can stack firewood outside without it being decomposed, but leave a tree out in the mud and it gets eaten.

      There are exceptions, something like Serpula lacrymans, can bring down whole buildings, but even there the wood needs to be humid enough for it to be attacked by this fungus.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serpula_lacrymans

      • thedeadwalking4242@lemmy.worldEnglish
        4·
        3 days ago

        We don’t use wood for clinical medically settings though or long term food preservation or flying planes or cars etc etc etc. not being able to rot is one of the reasons they are used in these applications

        • Brummbaer@pawb.socialEnglish
          1·
          3 days ago

          We don’t use that anymore, but all of these things have been used in this applications, plastic has more advantages than not rotting in some cases.

          Wooden airplanes were still used successfully in the 2nd world war and in general aviation they still exist.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robin_DR400 - here is a widely used example.

    • porcoesphino@mander.xyzEnglish
      19·
      3 days ago

      Kind of, but there are plenty of paper and wood decomposers and we still use plenty of those. It will have consequences but you already have to service vehicles and you already need to sanitise hospital equipment

    • MNByChoice@midwest.socialEnglish
      7·
      3 days ago

      To be fair, this has happened before, and I understand it was far hard for the bacteria then.

      There was a time when cellulose could not be broken down. Trees fell and piled up for … miles? Anyway, then bacteria figured out how to break it down. (We also got coal from the trees that were burred.) Anyway, we still build out of cellulose. Sometimes we treat the cellulose, sometimes we don’t.

      Plastic may, or may not, end up the same way.

      • discocactus@lemmy.worldEnglish
        4·
        3 days ago

        It could always burn though. And in fact burned easier, with a higher O2 level in the atmosphere. And while bacteria did figure out how to break down some wood molecules, fungi evolved and are the more important wood digesters.

        • MNByChoice@midwest.socialEnglish
          1·
          8 hours ago

          Thank you. I always hear about the fungi and not the bacteria…

          Great reminder about the fires. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carboniferous in the section titled “Atmospheric oxygen levels”.

          For example: the increasing occurrence of charcoal produced by wildfires from the Late Devonian into the Carboniferous indicates increasing oxygen levels,…

    • Vex_Detrause@lemmy.caEnglish
      5·
      3 days ago

      I don’t think bacteria can stop Big Oil from pumping oil to make plastic and Big Plastic from making consumer things.

    • Limerance@piefed.socialEnglish
      2·
      3 days ago

      When the plastic eating bacteria starts endangering the existence of artificial consciousness in the machine, life on earth will be purposefully wiped out.