Lets go back to corks
science
A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.
rule #1: be kind
As someone in a cork industry, you really don't want that.
What is this teasing? Elaborate.
It takes a lot of effort to soak the corks.
Its really hard to soak my own cork, so I just get my girlfriend to soak my cork instead.
Care to expand on why? I've had corks dissolve and break if I didn't finish the drink quickly enough, just on liquor bottles that went unused for a year or so. Any other reason?
Why?
Man on the surface this reeks of inside payoffs. I guess the technicality is plastic caps on glass bottles?? Which seems weird and nothing I've ever seen. Unless they're referencing the seal on the inside of some metal caps on glass bottles? Either way, seems suspect. I'd assume that overall drinking from glass is safer, as with plastic on any timeline you're dealing with the plastic breaking down and leaching chemicals and micro plastics into the liquid, which wouldn't be an issue with glass.
Not plastic caps, plastic paint. The printing on bottlecaps is a polymer and it gets scuffed.
Odd. I would have thought that the paint, being on the exterior, wouldn't leak into the beverage contained inside the glass.
But apparently, they found that blowing air over the caps reduced the amount of detected contamination by 60 per cent. So it seems like an easy fix that manufacturers can implement inexpensively (literally just an electric fan)
Unfortunately, it's probably not going to be an electric fan, but compressed air. Even more unfortunately, compressed air turns out to be a major cost factor due to the cost of running compressors, which might prevent adoption.
The original paper mentions blowing the caps out with an "air bomb", which I'm pretty sure is a mistranslation stemming from the French term "Bombe d’Air Comprimé", i. e. an air duster, a can of compressed air. In an industrial setting, you'd use a compressor for this, naturally.
Or just not paint the caps, at least not with plastic.
There is a real reason that the caps are painted. Glass beverage bottles are usually stored in a crate and grabbed from the top, so the design on the lid is what restaurant or store employees used to distinguish what drink is contained within it. This allows employees to distinguish similar-coloured drinks (e.g. Coca-Cola vs Pepsi or two different brands of beer) just from looking down at the top of the bottle.
But there probably is a way to paint them without using plastics
Then stamp/engrave the caps paint isn’t needed
Which is easier? Squatting down to count how many caps say "Coca-Cola" or counting the number of bottles with red caps?
Wholly and entirely dependent on the designs. Even barely two-tone patterns (as in low contrast) can be easily distinguishable.
How exactly would that happen if the cap is ON the bottle?
You make a lot of them. They are flat. They get painted, they get punched out, (this is where the ‘magic’ happens) they get shuffled around to load into machines to put them on the bottles, they go through the machine and they get clamped to the bottles.
There! Instant plastics!
The paint itself on the outside of the bottle cap. The ultra thin layer of (apparently polymer a.k.a. plastic) paint that make the cap not just metal colored.
...do plastic bottles not have caps? I'm confused.
their caps are fully plastic, not painted metal. The non-screwtop metal caps need to be bent to release their grip on the bottle. That scrapes the paint off the metal cap.
it's more likely that paint is scratched off by other caps, idk about metal caps but plastic ones are usually handled in bags, thrown into a cap feeder that aligns them and loads them into the capper. I expect metal caps to go through a similar process, and all that movement is bound to scratch it and send particles everywhere.
Ok, great find, we can simply switch the caps & solve the problem.
(The corps will do that, right??)
But I wander with such tests ... could there be any significant detection issues?
Did they have the proper equipment and processes? A methodological limitation to particle size maybe?
Coz some researches find higher concentrations than 100.
But the plastic bottle can still create a lot more, surely.