Mealworms Eating Styrofoam?

Wei-Min Wu, a senior research engineer in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, discovered the larvae can live on polystyrene.  

Brandon, Wu and their colleagues looked at Styrofoam or polystyrene, a common plastic typically used for packaging and insulation, that is costly to recycle because of its low density and bulkiness. It contained a flame retardant called hexabromocyclododecane, or HBCD, that is commonly added to polystyrene. The additive is one of many used to improve plastics' manufacturing properties or decrease flammability. In 2015 alone, nearly 25 million metric tons of these chemicals were added to plastics, according to various studies. Some, such as HBCD, can have significant health and environmental impacts, ranging from endocrine disruption to neurotoxicity. Because of this, the European Union plans to ban HBCD, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is evaluating its risk.

Mealworms in the experiment excreted about half of the polystyrene they consumed as tiny, partially degraded fragments and the other half as carbon dioxide. With it, they excreted the HBCD—about 90 percent within 24 hours of consumption and essentially all of it after 48 hours. Mealworms fed a steady diet of HBCD-laden polystyrene were as healthy as those eating a normal diet. The same was true of shrimp fed a steady diet of the HBCD-ingesting mealworms and their counterparts on a normal diet. The plastic in the mealworms' guts likely played an important role in concentrating and removing the HBCD.

The researchers acknowledge that mealworm-excreted HBCD still poses a hazard

Ryan Skinner wrote:You bring up a good point.

The beauty of the mealworm thing lies in accessibility i think.... As well as scale. I don't think you would be taking care of a large storage container of styro with mealworms. But that styrofoam cup that you found that blew in to your yard or the random square of stuff that came in that thing that you ordered from amazon you can throw that to the mealworms and it probably takes them a month or longer to consume it.  

But to your point... Sounds like I would be better throwing this in to the trash for it to be a carbon storage medium in the landfill rather than releasing the carbon through the mealworm digestion. It is a good point. I will have to chew on that for a while. I don't want to do bad while trying to do more good.

Thekla McDaniels wrote:yeah, hard to know.  One thing I've noticed is a trend in packing peanuts/ aka ghost turds.  some are still styrofoam, but more and more are using the weird disintegrating stuff that ?is made of potato starch?  that stuff sort of melts in water so it is not hard to identify.

The packing peanuts that are biodegradable are made from cornstarch or wheat; found a link for a science experiment for kids: https://www.iowaagliteracy.org/Article/Biodegradable-Packing-Peanuts

Brody Ekberg wrote:

Ryan Skinner wrote:You bring up a good point.

The beauty of the mealworm thing lies in accessibility i think.... As well as scale. I don't think you would be taking care of a large storage container of styro with mealworms. But that styrofoam cup that you found that blew in to your yard or the random square of stuff that came in that thing that you ordered from amazon you can throw that to the mealworms and it probably takes them a month or longer to consume it.  

But to your point... Sounds like I would be better throwing this in to the trash for it to be a carbon storage medium in the landfill rather than releasing the carbon through the mealworm digestion. It is a good point. I will have to chew on that for a while. I don't want to do bad while trying to do more good.

I see this is an old post but I’m interested. You bring up a conundrum in my mind about not wanting to do bad while trying to do good.

Is burning “burnable” garbage really any better than stuffing it into a landfill? My wife and I were talking about this and agreed that burning anything isn’t good for the atmosphere, and by letting some of those carbon sources, and maybe even compostables, into a landfill, maybe the native fungi and bacteria would use it all as a food source and help break down the whole works more efficiently. Seems to me like a landfill full of inorganic materials with no food waste and no carbon sources would degrade way more slowly than a landfill with mixed food waste, plastic, papers and whatever else.

Just a thought... I really dont think there is a “right” answer.

Kim Huse wrote:

Brody Ekberg wrote:

Ryan Skinner wrote:

Brody, yes, it takes a log time for that  to degrade; in fact, there's a  huge mound? hill? here outside of Dallas that has all of these odd looking pipes  dotted around on it; its part of the landfill; the pipes are sunk in at intervals to release the gases that build up from  all of that degrading, buried underneath soil and a very  vigorous growth of grasses; some of those pipes have a small flame that  you can see at times, and some don't; and there are also  different meters that measure just what is in those gases as well.

The thing is, we can't keep doing that....because some of what is in that mound will not finish breaking down for hundreds of years....

I’ve read that greenhouse gasses escaping from landfills contributes more to climate change than traffic does.

And I agree that we can’t keep burying garbage in landfill. Reusing, recycling and most importantly, lifestyle changes (not partaking in these products) are the only way out. But until global systems change, there will still be plastic, glass, styrofoam and whatever other inanimate objects in that we use and abuse being tossed into a landfill. I’m just curious if it would be better to include some organic matter with all of that, as a sort of “starter” or if it wouldn’t make big enough a difference and we should just continue composting that stuff instead. Although, compost releases greenhouse gasses as well, so there’s no t truly “clean” way out.

I’m just curious if it would be better to include some organic matter with all of that, as a sort of “starter” or if it wouldn’t make big enough a difference and we should just continue composting that stuff instead. Although, compost releases greenhouse gasses as well, so there’s no t truly “clean” way out.

Jay Angler wrote:

Ultimately, the best short-term approach I've managed is to "use less". By growing and processing locally, and doing one's best to use short cycle energy sources (think wood heat from coppiced wood) and growing lots of trees anywhere we can and building healthy soil, we can try to be part of the solution.

Ken Linder wrote:I just joined the site in part because I found this discussion. I've been interested in a more responsible way to dispose of old foam.  I know this is an old thread but I have been researching the topic. You folks should know that I found a 2019 article that tells us about the health of the worms over time, and about where at least one nasty substance in the foam goes when they digest it.  The mealworms seem to be fine after living on the stuff and the researchers claim the worms are safe to use as feed.

I think they'd need a multi-generation genetic / genomic assay for about 20 generations to be able to state that firmly, but it is still early days.  Then again I know people who reliably react to tiny amounts of substances.

Here is a quote from the linked article :

What chemical did they track

Brandon, Wu and their colleagues looked at Styrofoam or polystyrene, a common plastic typically used for packaging and insulation, that is costly to recycle because of its low density and bulkiness. It contained a flame retardant called hexabromocyclododecane, or HBCD, that is commonly added to polystyrene. The additive is one of many used to improve plastics' manufacturing properties or decrease flammability. In 2015 alone, nearly 25 million metric tons of these chemicals were added to plastics, according to various studies. Some, such as HBCD, can have significant health and environmental impacts, ranging from endocrine disruption to neurotoxicity. Because of this, the European Union plans to ban HBCD, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is evaluating its risk.

And what did they find out

Mealworms in the experiment excreted about half of the polystyrene they consumed as tiny, partially degraded fragments and the other half as carbon dioxide. With it, they excreted the HBCD—about 90 percent within 24 hours of consumption and essentially all of it after 48 hours. Mealworms fed a steady diet of HBCD-laden polystyrene were as healthy as those eating a normal diet. The same was true of shrimp fed a steady diet of the HBCD-ingesting mealworms and their counterparts on a normal diet. The plastic in the mealworms' guts likely played an important role in concentrating and removing the HBCD.

The researchers acknowledge that mealworm-excreted HBCD still poses a hazard

I don't think any of us want to concentrate every questionable substance in the foam into the mealworm frass that we would like to use on our gardens.


https://phys.org/news/2019-12-mealworms-plastic-solution.html

In this study, HBCDs (α-, β- and γ-HBCD) degrading strain Pseudomonas aeruginosa HS9 was isolated, identified, and characterized. The strain HS9 could remove 69% (± 0.05%) of 1.7 mg/L HBCDs in 14 days. Based on identification of metabolites, this bacterium could oxidize HBCDs by two pathways. In the first, HBCDs are sequentially debromized to tetrabromocyclododecene, dibromocyclododecadiene, and then debromized once more to cis, trans, trans-1, 5, 9-cyclododecatriene (CDT). After that, CDT is then oxidized to 1,2-epoxy-5,9-cyclododecadiene. The second identified pathway is a simultaneous debrominating and hydroxylating process based on the detection of 2,5,6,9,10-pentabromocyclododecanols, which were newly identified. The strain’s effects on plant-maize growth were tested and bioremediation evaluation trials were performed. The addition of strain HS9 could decrease HBCDs of 4.08 mg/g (87.6% removed) and 0.1 mg/g (25% removed) in soil and plants, respectively.

Highlights

• Three Bacillus strains can degrade HBCD within a half-live of 0.91–1.34 day.
• Bacillus cereus and Bacillus subtilis species complex were identified.
• B. cereus efficiently degraded HBCD at 35 °C, pH 7.0, and 0.10 ppm HBCD.
• The fungi we examined can remove HBCD quickly by sorption.
• The debromination is the main mechanism for B. cereus to degrade HBCD.

Patrick Marchand wrote:

Ken Linder wrote:I just joined the site in part because I found this discussion. I've been interested in a more responsible way to dispose of old foam.  I know this is an old thread but I have been researching the topic. You folks should know that I found a 2019 article that tells us about the health of the worms over time, and about where at least one nasty substance in the foam goes when they digest it.  The mealworms seem to be fine after living on the stuff and the researchers claim the worms are safe to use as feed.

I think they'd need a multi-generation genetic / genomic assay for about 20 generations to be able to state that firmly, but it is still early days.  Then again I know people who reliably react to tiny amounts of substances.

Here is a quote from the linked article :

What chemical did they track

Brandon, Wu and their colleagues looked at Styrofoam or polystyrene, a common plastic typically used for packaging and insulation, that is costly to recycle because of its low density and bulkiness. It contained a flame retardant called hexabromocyclododecane, or HBCD, that is commonly added to polystyrene. The additive is one of many used to improve plastics' manufacturing properties or decrease flammability. In 2015 alone, nearly 25 million metric tons of these chemicals were added to plastics, according to various studies. Some, such as HBCD, can have significant health and environmental impacts, ranging from endocrine disruption to neurotoxicity. Because of this, the European Union plans to ban HBCD, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is evaluating its risk.

And what did they find out

Mealworms in the experiment excreted about half of the polystyrene they consumed as tiny, partially degraded fragments and the other half as carbon dioxide. With it, they excreted the HBCD—about 90 percent within 24 hours of consumption and essentially all of it after 48 hours. Mealworms fed a steady diet of HBCD-laden polystyrene were as healthy as those eating a normal diet. The same was true of shrimp fed a steady diet of the HBCD-ingesting mealworms and their counterparts on a normal diet. The plastic in the mealworms' guts likely played an important role in concentrating and removing the HBCD.

The researchers acknowledge that mealworm-excreted HBCD still poses a hazard

I don't think any of us want to concentrate every questionable substance in the foam into the mealworm frass that we would like to use on our gardens.


https://phys.org/news/2019-12-mealworms-plastic-solution.html

I was looking this up and apparently it is possible to bio-remediate HBCD:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0304389419307861

In this study, HBCDs (α-, β- and γ-HBCD) degrading strain Pseudomonas aeruginosa HS9 was isolated, identified, and characterized. The strain HS9 could remove 69% (± 0.05%) of 1.7 mg/L HBCDs in 14 days. Based on identification of metabolites, this bacterium could oxidize HBCDs by two pathways. In the first, HBCDs are sequentially debromized to tetrabromocyclododecene, dibromocyclododecadiene, and then debromized once more to cis, trans, trans-1, 5, 9-cyclododecatriene (CDT). After that, CDT is then oxidized to 1,2-epoxy-5,9-cyclododecadiene. The second identified pathway is a simultaneous debrominating and hydroxylating process based on the detection of 2,5,6,9,10-pentabromocyclododecanols, which were newly identified. The strain’s effects on plant-maize growth were tested and bioremediation evaluation trials were performed. The addition of strain HS9 could decrease HBCDs of 4.08 mg/g (87.6% removed) and 0.1 mg/g (25% removed) in soil and plants, respectively.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S004565352100014X

Highlights

• Three Bacillus strains can degrade HBCD within a half-live of 0.91–1.34 day.
• Bacillus cereus and Bacillus subtilis species complex were identified.
• B. cereus efficiently degraded HBCD at 35 °C, pH 7.0, and 0.10 ppm HBCD.
• The fungi we examined can remove HBCD quickly by sorption.
• The debromination is the main mechanism for B. cereus to degrade HBCD.

The solution to composting styrofoams would thus probably be a multi-step approach. It seems the mealworms themselves can be safely used as feed, but the frass would have to be cultured with various other bacteria and fungi before it could be applied to plants.



Interesting; but, what about the  output from the, what is basically a fermentation process, of the  mealworm frass?  What happens when those  chemicals used, need to be  disposed of/recycled?  

Interesting; but, what about the  output from the, what is basically a fermentation process, of the  mealworm frass?  What happens when those  chemicals used, need to be  disposed of/recycled?

Kim Huse wrote:There is never any 'truly clean' way out.

... expert says " You have to realize, no matter what  it is in our lives, Everything, and I mean EVERYTHING, starts with oil. Oil makes gas, which powers  vehicles. taken in that context, Oil is the main resource that we can not do without; it starts everything."  

People talk about doing so much to help; however, we need to  focus on  taking care of what we NOW have created before we can even THINK about alternatives, and if those alternatives are going to actually supersede what we are doing now.; and if those newer technologies are also going to be environment friendly.