Where is the time when the director of the World Health Organization, the World Health Organization, suggested we not wear a face mask if we weren’t sick? And that the National Center for Public Health (NNK) thought similarly, to the point that, along with the Ministry of Human Resources, they even advertised professional instructions on a joint poster?
However, after the coronavirus infection was declared a pandemic (March 2020), it soon became mandatory and humanity started to wear face masks en masse. The debate continues over whether a washable fabric mask or a disposable medical mask provides better protection. Dozens of arguments Pros and cons of burs.
We are at 130 billion and there is no stopping
But one thing is for sure: We’re using a disposable mask in such an amount that the off-white and green piece of synthetic fiber is shared as one of the most polluting of synthetic materials.
Already in the first year of the epidemic, 52 billion were produced from it, an estimated number 1.6 billion pieces Carried out in the oceans (and who knows how many in rivers, lakes and landfills). That’s as much as if we had sprayed several thousand tons of plastic into the world’s seas in 2020 alone. In the last two years of the pandemic, we used an almost unimaginable amount of medical masks, totaling 130 billion, and then threw them away somewhere.
Aluminum beverage cans, cigarette butts, plastic bags, PET bottles, baby diapers – and now medical mouth masks. The biggest problem is that with PET bottles and
Like diapers, it takes 450 years for them to disintegrate.
(By comparison, aluminum cans last two hundred years, plastic bags last twenty years, and cigarette filters ten years.) Until then, the disintegration of billions of microplastics will harm us and wildlife.
We blocked him, but not like that
It’s also more accurate than the fact that last year, the European Union and us banned single-use plastics forever. Plastic cups, forks, spoons, and of course, popular straws, were banned. On the other hand, the hygienic medical mask remained.
If it ends up in a landfill, it will likely end up in an incinerator with the rest of the waste. But since its material is polyester and polypropylene, few toxic gases are released in this case. So recycling it is literally a burning issue. For example, they try to disinfect with ultraviolet light to make it reusable. But let’s face it, it’s germ free,
It is very difficult to instill confidence in a wrinkled piece of material.
However, the most promising trials seem surprising: neglected medical trials mask batteries are manufactured. They are energy sources that approximate the energy density of common lithium-ion batteries. Nothing else is needed for manufacture other than the masking material and some graphene (an atomic thick layer of graphite with almost lossless electrical conductivity). No high temperature needed, just squeeze and dip in graphene ink and heat the mask to 140°C, and after a few steps you can make a cheap and eco-friendly battery.
Shall we shoot them?
It looks so good. The next leap in the technological revolution is likely to be the development of a high-capacity, low-cost and environmentally friendly technology to replace lithium-ion batteries. Disposable medical masks may be the runner-up.
However, the question remains: what will happen to the batteries if they are used up? It is unlikely that these plastics will be collected and recycled indefinitely. This is when the idea usually comes up: Why not get rid of harmful waste once and for all and launch it into space?
(Cover Photo: Sean Gallup/Getty Images)
