Recyclable spools for Ultimaker printers

[psatyshur 0]

Hi,

 

This seems like a dumb question, but here goes: are the Ultimaker plastic filament spools recyclable? I don't mean the material on the spool, I am referring to the spool itself. I do not see the recyclable logo on them so I assume not, but I would love to hear otherwise. We have purchased a few Ultimakers for use at my work, and we will be throwing away a lot of spools if they are not recyclable.

 

If they are not recyclable, please treat this as a feature request to either make the filament spools recyclable, or take them back for reuse.

[geert_2 556]

On the older spools that I have, the material is indicated: PS (=polystyreen). Other spools might be ABS, PC,... But I don't know about the newest spools.

 

So yes, these old spools should be recyclable perfectly. (But I am not an Ultimaker representative, just a user, so this is not official.)

 

But even if the spool would not be recycled, but only recollected in the general "rest" fraction of garbage, and be burned, it is probably still way more environmentally friendly than glass or cardboard.

 

Cardboard requires killing lots of trees to produce it. And glass requires at least 100x more energy to melt than plastic. And you don't get any energy back from glass at the end of its lifecycle (which for glass bottles is only 6x re-use, plus a lot of dangerous chemical cleaning liquids in-between each cycle).

 

Modern burning-installations use the heat from burning garbage to produce electricity and warmth for heating buildings, or for industrial processes (for which otherwise other energy sources would have to be found). The exhaust gasses CO2 and H2O (carbondioxide and water vapour) are food for the plants and trees.

 

Today there is not enough CO2 in the air, only 0.03% to 0.04%, and most plants are on the edge of extinction. Below 0.02% CO2, all plant life dies. Ideally, there should be between 4x and 10x more CO2 for optimal plant growth, than now. Yes, way more CO2, not less. Which is scientifically proven in large scale research projects, and even in every greenhouse: they inject a lot of CO2 in their greenhouses to increase growth and production.

 

The rule is: 10x more CO2 gives 6x to 7x more green, without you needing to do anything. Plants grow by themself. Then all deserts world-wide would become green again, automatically. The problem is not "lack of water" in the deserts, no, the problem is lack of CO2 to enable plant growth. If there is 10x more CO2, then plants don't have to open their pores as much to breathe in enough CO2, so they don't evaporate and lose as much moisture. Then the current amount of water in the desert is sufficient. This has been proven over and over again in test-environments.

 

And if all deserts would be green again, covered in forest, earth temperature would go down a bit and then stabilise. Because the sunlight is absorbed by the trees and turned into wood and leafs, so it is used-up, and can no longer heat the surface. Wood is stored solar energy.

 

And if the whole earth would be green again, with 6...7x more plants than now, there is enough food for everyone, and for all animals. This would be very benificial too, obviously.

 

The chemical formula is: CO2 + H2O + lots of sunlight-energy ---> long C-H-O chains (=wood + leafs + juices) + O2.

 

In words: carbondioxide and water are turned into wood, leafs, and juices, if there is enough sunlight as energy source. And oxygen is released.

 

This O2 is the oxygen we need to breath. So we do exactly the opposite as plants: we eat green (vegetables, fruits, wheat, nuts,...; thus we eat stored solar energy) and we breathe oxygen in. Out of these we produce energy to move and to keep our body on temperature. And we exhaust CO2 and H2O. So, solar energy is first stored in plants, and then we eat these plants to release that solar energy in our body. We are running on "indirect solar energy".

 

Any process that consumes oil, or gass, and that produces CO2, greatly helps the growth of trees and plants. CO2 is the most important life-gas on earth, without which no life would be possible. So, don't feel bad when you need to burn oil, gas or plastic. As long as you burn it cleanly, without producing too much sooth and particles. You are greening the planet and improving life.

 

Long ago, the whole earth was covered in green. But bit by bit, the leafs felt on the ground, and all this carbon got entrapped underground, in the form of coal, brown coal, oil and gas. So it could no longer be part of the life cycle. Today there is not enough carbon in the life-cycle anymore, on the earth surface, so life is dying. We should dig up all this entrapped carbon (coal, oil, gas,...), and burn it so it can be part of the life-cycle again. And so that we can make the whole earth green again.

 

We need to produce way more CO2 than we do now, to save plant life.

 

Yes, I know that my vision is not "politically correct", but it is definitely and absolutely scientifically correct. Life is dying because of lack of CO2: there is only 0.03 to 0.04%. Below 0.02%, plant growth is no longer possible. We are at the lower edge: plants are in continuous CO2-hunger, and we need to dramatically increase CO2 output to survive. You can easily search for, and verify these things. This is basic high-school science. And you can verify it in every greenhouse.

 

So, clearly, plastic is a very good product, even if not perfect. As long as you don't throw it in the environment or in the sea. But you should or recycle it, or cleanly burn it to regain its energy.

 

Don't feel bad for using plastic, and for burning gas and oil. Don't feel bad for improving plant life and saving the earth.

 

Edited November 7, 2019 by geert_2