Taking guess work out of nuking? A new approach!

Though microwave heating technology was patented in 1946, the popular counter top oven using this technology became a reality only in 1967. By 1976 this device became common and it became a necessity by 1980 for most American families. To day Microwave heating has become a standard practice in most kitchens in developed countries, becoming the twin partner of another equally convenient and useful food handling tool viz refrigerator for getting a food ready for eating in a jiffy. While refrigerator with freezer facilities can store prepared foods for long time, microwave oven can make it available for consumption in a matter few minutes. Microwave technology is no more confined to homes in Americas, Europe, Australia, New Zealand and affluent East Asian countries as its versatility is spreading far and wide. Even in developing countries with sizeable middle class population, affordable microwave ovens are becoming a standard fixture in modern kitchens. Look at India where more than 8 lakh units of microwave ovens are marketed annually though the 4 major metros in the count for 70% of this market. Of course India market is relatively insignificant if global penetration is taken into consideration with the world market expected to grow to a staggering 80 million ovens by 2020! One of the major constraints in using microwave heating is the non-uniform heat generation within the mass of the food heated and the difficulty most consumers have in determining the correct end point of the heating process. Recent report indicating development of a device that can be included in the design of a microwave oven that can provide accurate picture about the completion of heating process will be a great boon to the consumer. Here is a take on this exciting new development. 

"For all the time they save us in food preparation, burnt tongues and frozen centers are an all too common occurrence when dealing with microwaves. But former NASA engineer-turned-inventor Mark Rober reckons nuking our food shouldn't involve so much guesswork. His take on the everyday kitchen appliance offers  a thermal vision display of your food as it cooks,so you know exactly when it's time to chow down. Though it is only a prototype, in using cheap, widely available technologies Rober says there's no reason the Heat Map Microwave can't start saving your bacon right away. An infrared lens is planted on the ceiling of the microwave, streaming a thermal, birds eye view of your dish to a display where you would normally find the window. As your food moves from cold to hot, it goes from blue, to red and to white hot when it's time to pull it out. Alternatively the microwave could be programmed to switch off automatically when it reaches this point. And the really neat thing here is that the display could quite easily be streamed to a mobile device over Bluetooth or Wi-Fi, meaning you could monitor it remotely and wouldn't need to stand salivating around the microwave, peering through the window for any sign that your food is ready to go. Rober does plan on commercializing his modern take on the microwave. But rather than turning to crowdfunding sites to raise money, he's asking people to pledge support by signing a petition, which has gathered more than 20,000 signatures at the time of writing. Rober hopes to build enough momentum through the petition to show investors his product is worth mass-producing, while also enabling him to keep his supporters in the loop on his progress and its design."

Though convenient-wise microwave heating or more popularly referred to as "nuking" in the US, is the turning point in reducing kitchen drudgery, a country like India is not able to make it a common man's tool because of the power crisis in the country where quality and quantity of electricity available, especially in rural and many semi urban areas are highly uncertain and unpredictable because of "power of the power suppliers" to resort to unscheduled and unannounced cuts several times a day! Added to these woes most Indian traditional food preparations do not lend themselves to microwave heating due to lack of information about the optimal heating time and the power settings to be programmed. It is here that the new innovation will help the consumer in the country to be more confident about the usefulness of this gadget. Another handicap that is faced by the Indian consumer is the uncertainty regarding the wares regarding their suitability for microwave cooking. Unlike in the US or the UK, most inert wares like plastics, glass or china, do not display any signs on their wares whether they can be used for nuking. Still there is no stopping of these ovens gaining popularity in the coming years due to their versatility. The existing manufacturers in the country must try to absorb the new "visual" window technology and offer the new ovens sooner than later.    

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

Why is India promoting manufacture of plastics in the country? Is it a forward looking policy?

With the government's top priority bestowed on its "Make in India" policy, manufacturing sector is set to get all types of encouragement and proactive support from the government. A question that begs for an answer is whether the policy makers have selected the product basket for expanding production within the country or any one is welcome to manufacture any thing that will provide employment economic growth? This blogger is provoked to raise this issue because of a recent announcement by the plastic industry that special plastic "parks" are going to be established in the country for expanding production of fossil fuel based plastic materials in the next few years. This is a paradoxical situation when use of plastics is being curbed because of their indestructibility when disposed off in landfills, some times for almost 1000 years! If country had a plastic policy, at least there could have been a selection of types of products that are essential for sustaining the activities the products, mainly industrial items which will last for a long time, in stead of consumer items with short usage life. Definitely consumers must not be trusted to adopt recycling of plastic items at their end and proportion of consumer items must be progressively reduced as much as possible. Here is the report that boasts of quantum jump in plastics production through specialized parks across the country.

"All India Plastic Manufacturers Association (AIPMA) expects its under-construction plastic park in Dahej (Gujarat) to be operational in 2016. AIPMA is developing plastic parks across the country in a bid to promote plastic processing industry in the country. "AIPMA plans similar plastic parks in five states namely, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka and Gujarat," said Arvind Mehta, chairman, AIPMA governing council. The Dahej plastic park is coming up over 200 acres of land and is likely to house 150 companies, entailing an investment of around Rs 3,000 crore over the next few years. Together Gujarat and Daman-Silvassa region account for over 50 per cent of the country's polymer processing, and the park is expected to give a boost to this industry in the state. In addition, around 70 per cent of plastic raw material as well as 70 per cent of the plastic processing machinery is produced in Gujarat. According to AIPMA, the apex body and the largest industry association of the plastic industry in India, the plastic industry is poised to make significant contribution to various initiatives of the Union government and is focusing on developing skills and entrepreneurship. AIPMA said in a statement that most of the government initiatives such as Swachcha Bharat, 'More crop per drop of water', 'Housing for all', developing smart cities, cannot be implemented without using plastics and the industry has devised plans to promote its use to help Centre achieve its various goals. Rituraj Gupta, president, AIPMA, said, "The fact is plastic is a material that can be recycled for any number of times with varying end-uses and manufacturing of any product through it consumes less power. Thus, plastic is more environment-friendly." Gupta stated that the per capita consumption of plastic is only 9.7 kg per person in India while the global average is 27 kg. South Korea has the highest per capita plastic consumption of 100 kg per person".

Is it not a paradox that the world is moving towards a new plastics regime where bio-degradable plastics are replacing conventional plastics as most of us know, India is least concerned about the dangers posed by the latter in terms of health concerns and environmental degradation? There does not appear to be any concerted move to invest in developing new plastics from natural sources with high environmental credentials. There are hundreds of universities and research institutions in the country capable of working on plastic materials but they all lack a direction and a national mandate. It is time that government of India comes out with a National Plastics Policy and a dedicated "Mission" to transform the plastic landscape in the country into a more sustainable one, in stead of encouraging expansion of conventional plastics indiscriminately.. 

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

Paper from plastics! An environment friendly technology

A new technology called Cronology developed in Mexico seems to be headed for adoption by the paper industry which is being criticized by the environmentalist for massive deforestation in obtaining their input materials. An indirect beneficiary will be the plastic waste recycling industry which seeks to reduce the environment pollution through reprocessing the plastic waste into useful products. While recycling does help in getting a temporary reprieve in terms of pollution, ultimately plastics end up in landfills staying there for more than 800 years without getting degraded. The paper obtained by the new technology is claimed to be photodegradable decomposing within 6 months. Here is a take on this exciting technological development about which lot will be heard in the coming years.

"A group of young entrepreneurs from Mexico has developed a system that converts PET bottles into mineral paper and which they claim will save up to 20 trees and 56,000 liters of water per ton of paper produced. The photodegradable, waterproof paper can be used to print books, boxes and general stationery. "By not cutting trees, nor using water we reduce costs and help the planet," says Ever Adrian Nava, cofounder of the Cronology company, located in Ecatepec, a municipality in Mexico State, just north from Mexico City. The Cronology process is claimed to be 15 percent cheaper than traditional paper manufacture because it doesn't use chemicals, like chlorine, or water. Although countries like Spain and Taiwan already use similar processes to manufacture mineral paper (also known as peta paper or stone paper), its developers say the Cronology system is four times cheaper than conventional methods. The original idea for this type of paper is to reduce production costs and deforestation. Mexico currently produces 700,000 tons of paper each year, mostly for books and notebooks, but also for wrapping papers and toilet paper. Ever Nava says that producing one ton of traditional paper has an effect on the environment for 100 years, but that mineral paper eliminates that, with 235 kg (518 lb) of pellets, or PET beads, obtained using recycled plastic bottles, calcium carbonate and stone, capable of producing a ton of the mineral paper. "The mineral paper is stronger than the standard, you can not break it with your hands, it is waterproof, has the quality of being photodegradable and only absorbs the necessary amount of ink when printing," says Ever Nava. Recycled plastic bottles are first crushed with various pieces of calcium carbon to form pellets (plastic beads), which are then subjected to a casting process at over a 100° C (212° F), before being rolled to form large sheets of paper. The paper degrades in just six months, with the company saying the only downside is that ink gels can't be used on it because they contain alcohol, which the paper does not support."

What is more interesting is the water saved by this process in making high quality paper compared to traditional paper making from wood. Already forests are being denuded in South America massively for planting Palm plants for oil. Demand for palm oil, one of the cheapest oils in the world is literally exploding because of its dual utility as a food ingredient as well as a fossil fuel substitute. PET, also known as polyester, is chemically Polyethylene Terephthalate and world produces about 25 million tons annually out of which only 30% is used for bottle production remaining going into textile industry. Also known as Dacron or Terylene or Lavasa, fabrics made from PET are extraordinarily strong and crease resistant. The new technology to convert PET into paper can thus be a large industry capable of solving one of the most vexing issues facing mankind viz disposing of 25 million tons of PET into useful products with excellent environmental credentials. Another beauty is that the technology uses comparatively lower temperatures, about 100C while for recycling it has to be done at temperatures beyond 250C. Thus PET paper production technology can be a win-win situation for all the stake holders connected with PET industry.  

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

BOTTLED DRINKING WATER-THE SAFETY ISSUE

Is not this world really crazy? First, one creates a scare about some thing and then an entrepreneur comes out with a solution! Who is benefited? Of course the industry. For example, the fears about the health of children make all parents nervous, fearing that inappropriate foods may harm their children as they grow. In comes a bevy of products claiming that consuming them will make the child grow faster, taller, more intelligent and more athletic! Vow! parents fall over each other to be seen buying these products though there is hardly any scientific evidence to support the outlandish claims of these peddlers! This blogger is provoked by the sorry situation that exists in almost all countries of the world about the safety of drinking water leading to its exploitation by the bottled water industry for beefing up their bottom line. In India also this industry is flourishing under the very nose of a democratic government where right to affordable food, safe water and pure air is enshrined in the constitution. Yet no water supply in any parts of the country is safe and water borne diseases are common among population which cannot buy expensive water treatment gadgets or spend costly fuels to boil it. Can any one believe that in India cost of bottled water is almost same as that of soft drinks! Now that bottled water has established itself as a standard item of family purchase, its negative impact on the health of citizens is coming out. Here is a report on this issue which is considered mundane by many people though reality is some thing else.   

"Plastic water bottles are made from polyethylene terephthalate. When heated, the material releases the chemicals antimony and bisphenol A, commonly called BPA. While the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has said BPA is not a major concern at low levels found in beverage containers, it continues to study the chemical's impacts. Some health officials, including those at the Mayo Clinic, say the say the chemical can cause negative effects on children's health. And antimony is considered a carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, part of the World Health Organization. UF soil and water science professor Lena Ma led a research team that studied chemicals released in 16 brands of bottled water kept at 158 degrees Fahrenheit for four weeks, what researchers deemed a "worst-case scenario" for human consumption".

Packaging water in plastic bottles and sachet is so common that consumers take it for granted that nothing is wrong with it. It is well known that except for glass and stainless steel, all other packaging materials are not "content-neutral", ie the packaging materials do cause leaching of some of its constituents: many of them can be harmful beyond a limit. According to the above report plastic bottles being used by many bottlers can cause migration of Antimony, a heavy metal and bis-Phenol A, both of them with health damaging potential, especially to growing children and this leaching out becomes more extensive if the water is exposed to higher temperatures that prevail in many tropical countries. What is scary is the long term effect of consuming such water over a long period on the future generations if health authorities do not revisit this area immediately.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

PLASTIC FROM BACTERIA-TECHNICALLY FEASIBLE?

Fast depleting fossil fuel resources is raising alarms all around with private and public funded research efforts striving to evolve alternate sustainable energy sources. While tapping solar energy, wind energy, wave energy, geothermal energy, etc can help to fill the gap to some extent after the era of easy and cheap fossil fuels, still there is no clear solution to this vexing problem. One of the areas where fossil fuels have contributed enormously is in the manufacture of a variety of plastics for packaging consumer products including food and it is an irrefutable fact that both production and disposal of plastics pose technical, environmental and economic challenges. There are alternate technologies for production of plastics from basic chemicals produced by the plants and some microbiological sources though they have not yet gained universal acceptance. Recent break through in research studies to convert carbon dioxide, the very villain of peace to day in the global warming debate, are considered exciting and here is a critique on this development with some far reaching future potential to clean up the Globe.

Today, the world consumes 120 million tons of the chemical ethylene to make the world's most widely used plastics. Almost all of that ethylene is derived from fossil fuels. Between 1.5 to 3 tons of carbon dioxide is released for every ton of ethylene produced, which is why plastic has such an enormous carbon footprint. Now, researchers have inserted a gene into bacteria that turns it into one of the world's most efficient factories for ethylene by eating carbon dioxide, instead of releasing it into the air. On the opposite end of the plastic production line, a newly discovered fungus in the Amazon eats plastic, finally giving us a way to get rid of the stuff. The new cyanobacterium works in the opposite way of traditional plastic production: Its photosynthetic capabilities means it harnesses today's photons from sunlight (as opposed to old photons stored in the energy of chemical bonds in petroleum) to add carbon from the air to ethylene molecules. This saves six tons of carbon dioxide emissions for every ton of ethylene created: Three tons are absorbed by bacteria and three are avoided from the usual fossil fuels, says the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. "Our peak productivity is higher than a number of other technologies, including ethanol, butanol, and isoprene," said NREL principal investigator, Jianping Yu, in a release from the Lab. "We overcame problems encountered by past researchers. Our process doesn't produce toxins such as cyanide and it is more stable than past efforts. And it isn't going to be a food buffet for other organisms."

The new genetically modified bacteria offers exciting possibilities if harnessed properly. The fact that it can create the basic building blocks of plastics by absorbing atmospheric carbon dioxide has future repercussions for both the packaging industry as well as environmental managers since it will considerably reduce the green house effect due to carbon dioxide while providing an inexhaustible source for making plastics for consumer use. The commercial feasibility part of the research has to be established in no uncertain terms and if technical feasibility is confirmed all countries in this Universe must join hands to evolve this technology further to the point of global use. The technological developments for optimizing the production of ethylene by the bacteria and exploitation of the Amazon fungus must be a common property of the mankind and there should not be any reservation on the part of NREL to share this with the world community at large.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

THE TRASH THAT IS OVERWHELMING THE PLANET-AN OCEANIC PROBLEM!

Modern day ocean waters have some strange company joining them uninvited and sure they do not make  the waters happier compared to what they were 100 years ago before the industrial revolution. to day's ocean waters have become so polluted that these natural water bodies are no more friendly to thousands of creatures which had made them their home for millions of years. The major culprit is a group of man made materials every body knows by that ubiquitous name Plastics. If environmentalist are to be believed millions of pieces of plastic materials in different sizes, colors and shapes find their way into the seas and oceans and there is very little that is being done to prevent this blatant destruction of natural environment and resources. Half way measures like banning plastics, a variety of recycling programs, development of sustainable plastics and financial and policy incentives are not touching even the fringe of the problem, let alone solving it. Isolated groups of people interested in doing some thing to stem this undesirable and dangerous trend have their own way to contribute to lessen the burden on the sea. Here is a critique on the tragedy of plastics.

"The UN Environment Programme estimated in 2006 that over 46,000 pieces of plastic litter are floating on every square mile of ocean. Some researchers calculate that 4.7 million tons of plastic waste reaches the sea annually, swept from mundane terrestrial existence into swirling adventure via rivers and sewage drains, or dumped from ships.Toothbrushes, syringes, dentures, Lego blocks, lighters. These are just a few of the plastic players that frolic in the waves, catching a lift on oceanic currents to eventually find their way to the ever-growing plastic trash party known as theGreat Pacific Garbage Patch, the "plastic soup" of waste that now covers an area twice the size of the continental United States. But then there are the strays, the rebellious pens and bags and bottles that take a turn away from a future as marine detritus and instead find refuge on the sandy shore. Washed up like castaways, they bake in the sun and wait to return to the sea or some other unknown fate. Which is where Willis Elkins – artist, environmentalist, urban kayaker, documenter of debris, savior of trash – enters the picture. Like a Victorian collector of natural specimens, Elkins searches out and catalogues the flotsam and jetsam of everyday life. His trash-scouting adventures and the fruits of his labor are chronicled at outerspacecities.com, where his logs and archaeological surveys of mostly ocean debris are kept – like the New York City Lighter Log, which follows 1900 disposable plastic cigarette lighters, collected, mapped, and photographed, from 47 different waterfront locations throughout the five boroughs of New York City."

Trash in any form is not a material that can be strewn around because of many predictable consequences arising out of possible decay and decomposition due to the action of sun, rain and wind. Plastics pose much more danger because they are practically indestructible for ages, average life being 800 years and the decomposition products of plastics are generally toxic to all living creatures on this planet. Most plastics leach out chemicals which often act as endocrine disruptors causing hormonal imbalances and consequent health impairment in many people. There are also reports that plastic pieces are increasingly being found inside the fish posing further dangers to humanity besides affecting the fish reproductive cycle. Unless the world wakes up to these dangers and takes serious steps to address this problem, the consequences of ignoring it may be too heavy for future generations.    

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

GLASS BOTTLES-RETURN OF THE PRODIGAL?

Packaging of food materials in plastic film pouches and rigid containers is the industry standard to day because of the convenience that is inherent in using them. In the evolution of food packaging from metal cans to plastics, consumer had been enjoying many advantages plastics have, such as light weight, shatter-proof feature, low cost, ease of use etc. But during the last one decade the safety of plastics has received critical attention because of the contaminants leached into the contents during processing as well as storage. Fossil fuel based plastics contain many chemicals which are dangerous for humans and there are standards for upper limits of these leachable substances in food. While these standards differ in various countries, there are global limits set by WHO which form the basis for member countries to generate their own standards. Still more data are being generated on the dangers of food contaminants and the limits are continuously coming down as more and more sophisticated analysis techniques are developed. Environmental hazards, posed by the indiscriminate disposal of used plastics which are not biodegradable, is another challenge in continuing with them perpetually. Enormous volume of information on safety of plastics, often contradictory in nature, has raised more questions regarding the safety of plastics, especially during the last one decade. It is in this context that glass is returning to the fore as the safest alternative for food packaging, with minimum risks to the consumer, in spite of some of the logistical problems associated with its use. Here is a commentary on this shift in the food packaging scenario.   

"A shatter-resistant glass water bottle product developed by Walt Himelstein. But now, in back to the future fashion, glass is making a bit of a comeback. And it is being helped in a small way by an entrepreneur who is developing a reusable glass bottle that is hard to break and will not shatter if broken. The shift to reusable glass water bottles from plastic and metal, which began taking off a couple of years ago, is becoming big business, retailers said. "I'd say glass bottles account for 20 percent, 30 percent of water bottle sales on our site now," said Vincent Cobb, founder of reuseit.com, which sells a variety of reusable products. "More and more people are looking for glass." The interest does not stop at water bottles. Consumer concerns that chemicals used in packaging can leach into the products they eat and drink are driving more and more beverage makers and food producers to use glass containers, said Lynn Bragg, president of the Glass Packaging Institute, an industry association. "They're also looking for sustainable products to be ecologically responsible." Coca-Cola is expanding the distribution of products — Coca-Cola, Diet Coke, Coke Zero and Sprite — that it sells in eight-ounce glass bottles, and S. C. Johnson now sells a line of reusable Ziploc containers called VersaGlass that can be used in a microwave, a freezer and, without their lids, even in an oven up to 400 degrees. "It's part of our overall effort to increase packaging diversity so that people have more choices of packaging and portion size," said Susan Stribling, a Coca-Cola spokeswoman. No one expects glass to replace plastic anytime soon. After all, billions of plastic bottles are used every year. But in a survey of more than 4,000 consumers this year by EcoFocus Worldwide, a research and consulting group, 37 percent said they were extremely or very concerned about the health and safety of plastics used in food and water packaging, compared to 33 percent in 2010".

Use of glass alternative is currently limited to water bottling and packing of beverages including sodas. The two inherent disadvantages of glass are the relatively higher weight per unit volume and its vulnerability to easy breakage and shattering. Both these issues are being addressed and light weight, shatter-resistant and thermally stable glass containers are now being made by the glass industry for different uses. Food industry is increasingly turning to glass because of its many advantages which include excellent clarity, neutral to chemical reaction, unleachable nature, impervious to tainting of the contents, good heat conductivity etc. One of the problems that is still defying solution is how to make the glass absolutely safe by preventing breakage altogether since even if there is a crack in the container, the contents become inedible. Probably food industry may still live with this problem because such breakages and consequent rejection rate, can be factored while pricing glass packaged products.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

REUSABLE GROCERY BAGS-POTENTIAL DANGERS

Reusable bags for carrying groceries are increasingly being adopted by consumers world over because of better awareness about the damages plastics can cause to the environment. It is almost two decades since the harmful environmental effects of plastics , when they are discarded indiscriminately, became an issue and tireless campaigns and a few policy orchestration by the government authorities have created some sensitivity among the consumers regarding the undesirability of continued use of plastics. Two prime considerations that weigh against plastics are that it is mostly made from the unsustainable fossil fuels and plastics are not biodegradable for long periods, as long as 800 years. Besides the ultra voilet  degradation generates artifacts which are more dangerous to the environment. Pacific ocean is one of the most polluted water bodies containing millions of tons of plastic substances. The devastating Mumbai floods in India, a few years ago which caused severe damage to the city, was attributed to choking of storm drains with discarded plastics. Many governments have tried to put a ban on production of plastic films with thickness less than 20 microns but not with any degree of success. Now that reusable bags are gaining acceptance, the dangers inherent in not taking care of these bags have been highlighted in an advisory by the Canadian health agencies which is contained in the report below. 

"Health Canada is reminding Canadians to take steps to prevent cross-contamination of foods when shopping with reusable grocery bags and bins. As an environmental choice, many Canadians are now shopping with reusable bins, plastic bags and cloth bags to reduce the amount of plastic they are using. Health Canada supports the proper use of these products, but it is important to use them safely to prevent cross-contamination of food with bacteria that can cause food borne illness. Because these bags and bins are reused frequently, they can pick up bacteria from the foods they carry, or from their environment (the ground, the back of your car or the items stored in them between grocery trips). The following steps can help to prevent cross-contamination:
-- Wash cloth bags frequently, especially after carrying fresh produce, meat, poultry or fish. Reusable grocery bags may not all be machine washable. If yours are not, you should wash them by hand frequently with hot soapy water. Plastic bins should be washed using hot soapy water on a regular basis as well. It is also important to dry grocery bags and bins after washing.
-- Put fresh or frozen raw meat, poultry and fish in separate bins or bags from fresh produce and other ready-to-eat foods.

-- Putting your fresh or frozen raw meat, poultry or fish in plastic bags (the clear bags found in the produce and some meat sections work well) will help to prevent the juices from leaking and contaminating your reusable containers and other foods. Fresh produce should also be put in plastic bags to help protect it from contamination.

-- If you are using your grocery bags or bins to store or transport non-food items, they should be washed thoroughly before using them for groceries.
It is estimated that there are approximately 11 million cases of food-related illness in Canada every year. Many of these cases could be prevented by following proper food handling and preparation technique".

Before the advent of plastics in countries like India people have been using cloth bags for shopping and regular cleaning was a feature embedded in the daily lives of the people. It is true that the the extent of danger is enhanced when moist foods are carried and raw meat carries maximum risks. Cloth bags also pose danger during rainy season when humidity is high and an improperly dried bag can attract mold growth with some risks of microbial contamination in foods. Also in vogue was the practice of using old news papers for wrapping grocery items before the implementation of the packed commodities regulations making it illegal to indulge in loose vending by the retailers. Probably it is only in India that used news papers have a market for making paper bags for use by grocery shops. Many modern retail stores use reinforced paper bags with high strength in place of plastic bags though it could cost a few cents extra to the customers. Use of paper makes eminent sense because of its sustainable nature with recycling technology well developed. Ultimately cloth bags can only provide a lasting solution and if necessary care is taken, nothing else can come any where near to this age old traditional "carry bag" system.  

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

OMNIPOTENCE OF PLASTICS-NEW FINDINGS WITH UNCERTAIN RAMIFICATIONS!

It is no wonder that modern society is called a "plastic society" because of the omnipotence of plastics in all walks of life and practically every day the exposure is continuous and substantial. While use of these synthetic plastics in non-food applications may not pose very serious health challenges, the so called food grade plastic wrappers and other materials coming in contact with food are never considered absolutely safe. The protocols of testing plastics and standards and specifications in place in many countries give one a false sense of security while using plastics, though there is nothing in the world that can be considered absolutely safe. After all life is a fine balance between risks and benefits one must face to live comfortably. It is against this background that a new finding released recently in the US raises serious concerns about plastics continued use, indicating an urgent need to moderate the exposure through substantially reduced exposure.

"In a study published last year in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, researchers put five San Francisco families on a three-day diet of food that hadn't been in contact with plastic. When they compared urine samples before and after the diet, the scientists were stunned to see what a difference a few days could make: The participants' levels of bisphenol A (BPA), which is used to harden polycarbonate plastic, plunged — by two-thirds, on average — while those of the phthalate DEHP, which imparts flexibility to plastics, dropped by more than half. The findings seemed to confirm what many experts suspected: Plastic food packaging is a major source of these potentially harmful chemicals, which most Americans harbor in their bodies. Other studies have shown phthalates (pronounced THAL-ates) passing into food from processing equipment and food-prep gloves, gaskets and seals on nonplastic containers, inks used on labels — which can permeate packaging — and even the plastic film used in agriculture. The government has long known that tiny amounts of chemicals used to make plastics can sometimes migrate into food. The Food and Drug Administration regulates these migrants as "indirect food additives" and has approved more than 3,000 such chemicals for use in food-contact applications since 1958. It judges safety based on models that estimate how much of a given substance might end up on someone's dinner plate. If the concentration is low enough (and when these substances occur in food, it is almost always in trace amounts), further safety testing isn't required. Meanwhile, scientists are beginning to piece together data about the ubiquity of chemicals in the food supply and the cumulative impact of chemicals at minute doses. What they're finding has some health advocates worried. This is "a huge issue, and no [regulator] is paying attention," says Janet Nudelman, program and policy director at the Breast Cancer Fund, a nonprofit that focuses on the environmental causes of the disease. "It doesn't make sense to regulate the safety of food and then put the food in an unsafe package." How common are these chemicals? Researchers have found traces of styrene, a likely carcinogen, in instant noodles sold in polystyrene cups. They've detected nonylphenol — an estrogen-mimicking chemical produced by the breakdown of antioxidants used in plastics — in apple juice and baby formula. They've found traces of other hormone-disrupting chemicals in various foods: fire retardants in butter, Teflon components in microwave popcorn, and dibutyltin — a heat stabilizer for polyvinyl chloride — in beer, margarine, mayonnaise, processed cheese and wine. They've found unidentified estrogenic substances leaching from plastic water bottles. Finding out which chemicals might have seeped into your groceries is nearly impossible, given the limited information collected and disclosed by regulators, the scientific challenges of this research and the secrecy of the food and packaging industries, which view their components as proprietary information. Although scientists are learning more about the pathways of these substances — and their potential effect on health — there is an enormous debate among scientists, policymakers and industry experts about what levels are safe. The issue is complicated by questions about cumulative exposure, as Americans come into contact with multiple chemical-leaching products every day. Those questions are still unresolved, says Linda Birnbaum, director of the National Institute of Environmental Health Science, part of the National Institutes of Health. Still, she said, "we do know that if chemicals act by the same pathway that they will act in an additive manner" — meaning that a variety of chemicals ingested separately in very small doses may act on certain organ systems or tissues as if they were a single cumulative dose. The American Chemistry Council says there is no cause for concern. "All materials intended for contact with food must meet stringent FDA safety requirements before they are allowed on the market," spokeswoman Kathryn Murray St. John says. "Scientific experts review the full weight of all the evidence when making such safety determinations." When it comes to food packaging and processing, among the most frequently studied agents are phthalates, a family of chemicals used in lubricants and solvents and to make polyvinyl chloride pliable. (PVC is used throughout the food processing and packaging industries for such things as tubing, conveyor belts, food-prep gloves and packaging.) Because they are not chemically bonded to the plastic, phthalates can escape fairly easily. Some appear to do little harm, but animal studies and human epidemiological studies suggest that one phthalate, called DEHP, can interfere with testosterone during development. Studies have associated low-dose exposure to the chemical with male reproductive disorders, thyroid dysfunction and subtle behavioral changes. But measuring the amount of phthalates that end up in food is notoriously difficult. Because these chemicals are ubiquitous, they contaminate equipment in even purportedly sterile labs. In the first study of its kind in the United States, Kurunthachalam Kannan, a chemist at the New York State Department of Health, and Arnold Schecter, an environmental health specialist at the University of Texas Health Science Center, have devised a protocol to analyze 72 different grocery items for phthalates".

If the above report is rubbished as is the usual practice one can feel pity for the inhabitants of this planet! While individual chemicals that are found in foods leached out from the containers may be relatively safe as per prevalent assessment protocols, what about their cumulative intake and long term effect on human body? Honestly no body knows. It is true that having come to the present situation banning all plastics totally through government policy is not a feasible alternative but every step needed to be taken to reduce the exposure must be considered. Voluntary shunning of these materials may be desirable but number of votaries for such an approach may not be many. As for industry a world without plastics is unthinkable. Recent reports that in the UK families are spending more to buy gasoline than that spent on food must come as a rude shock and reveals the mindset of people about the relative priority between cozy transportation and healthy food! Probably these ominous trends must galvanize the world community regarding the urgent need for deploying safer alternatives to unsafe fossil fuel based synthetic plastics. There are many alternatives already developed but it needs tremendous courage, far vision, sagacity and missionary zeal to bring about a change in this field.    

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

SAFETY OF FOOD PACKAGING MATERIALS-NEW FINDINGS

Plastic materials, made mostly from petroleum based chemicals, are often indicted for their potential to harm human health when used for packing foods. When a food is packed in a plastic container, be it a film pouch or a rigid container, there is a tendency for the food to leach out some of the constituents used in the manufacture of the container into the contents and such migration is influenced by many factors including the type of container used, temperature, pH of the food, composition of the food, duration of contact, storage environment etc. To allay such fears, a scientific study in Australia and New Zealand was undertaken with government blessings and the findings provide interested reading.

"Following the analyses, the FSANZ team declared: "There were no detections of phthalates, PCFs, semicarbazide, acrylonitrile and vinyl chloride in any of the foods analysed in this survey." However, ESBO, produced by epoxidation of soybean oil and used in a range of plastics most often as a plasticiser, was the only one of the potential chemicals of concern detected in the exercise. It is also commonly used in PVC sealing closures (gaskets) of glass jars to form an airtight seal to prevent microbiological contamination of foods . PVC, in the form of films and gaskets, can contain up to 30 per cent of the substance. The chemical was found in three foods packaged in glass jars at concentrations ranging from 4.2 to 10 mg/kg. The highest levels were discovered in olive brine, followed by savoury pasta sauce and infant dinners".

How far the study really represents the whole spectrum of the food industry is not clear. Also the sample size and the varieties of packaging material studies do not appear to be adequate to come to any sweeping conclusion as done by the group involved in this study. There universally accepted methods to study migration behavior of plastics and food processors are expected to confirm when buying the packaging materials that the container suppliers vouch safe regarding the food grade specifications of the same. Another uncertainty pertains to the impact of cumulative ingestion of substances migrated into foods packed in various plastics on human health. One should not forget the recent food tainting episode in Taiwan caused by the plasticizer DEHP which is used in PVC up to 40%. Considering all these factors consumer may be justified in asking for safer and sustainable alternatives to fossil fuel based packing modes for foods.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

BANNING PLASTICS-WILL IT HELP?

Amidst the controversial debate centering around banning plastics for use as grocery shop bags and other type of carry bags, no country seems to have been able to take a firm decision though there are many regional bodies in some countries enforcing such a ban. In India states like Kerala have already made it illegal to use plastic bags with thickness 20 microns or less for shopping but finds it difficult to enforce the ban due to logistical reasons. Though the basis for such affirmative action is sound in that plastic bags do pose an environmental hazard as it takes more than 800 years for them to be degraded when discarded, "policing" of the law is fraught with many practical difficulties. Catching the defaulters may be easy but to prosecute them in the already cluttered judicial system is next to impossible. Probably only an incentive system may work as being attempted in many countries and it may take a long time to sufficiently sensitize the public regarding the dangers posed by plastic bags. The recent action in California in banning use of plastics is also a move unlikely to work as the government there is hardly in a position to force the citizens to abide by the new law.

"Paper or plastic? Soon the answer may be neither. California would become the first state to ban grocery, liquor and drug stores from providing free paper or plastic bags under legislation pushed by Democrats and supported by Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. The goal is to fight litter and lighten the load on landfills by getting shoppers to use reusable fabric bags. Those who don't could buy paper bags for a nickel or more. "I think the proliferation of plastic bags is unnecessary, and it's a pollutant, an urban tumbleweed," Assemblywoman Julia Brownley, D-Santa Monica, said of the lightweight bags that can litter yards and clog waterways. Californians use about 19 billion plastic bags per year, about 552 bags apiece, according to a legislative committee analysis of Brownley's proposal, Assembly Bill 1998. Tim Shestek of the American Chemistry Council said the plastic bag industry would rather pay to bolster recycling programs than ban plastic bags. He said that with California's economy struggling, it makes no sense to jeopardize about 500 plastic-bag manufacturing jobs and to promote paper bags that produce more greenhouse gas during their life cycle than plastic bags do. "We frankly think this is a dangerous precedent for the state to be setting," Shestek said. The crackdown on disposable bags would cost an estimated $1.5 million the first year and $1 million annually to launch, administer and enforce, payable from fees on makers of reusable bags".

California is estimated to be using annually 19 billion bags, about 552 bags per capita and a provision in the law also makes it mandatory for the shops to provide paper bags made from recycled paper to those not bringing along multi use bags. Also the law gives adequate time to implemet the measures as it will take effect only in January 2012 for retailers and 2015 for small shops, pharmacies and others. Similar laws are being enacted in many states in the country, more or less on similar lines.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

ARE PLASTICS REALLY SAFE FOR FOOD PACKING?

Use of plastics by the food industry is so extensive to day that all other packaging materials are playing secondary role in food preservation, storage and distribution. There are many types of plastics, most of them derived from petroleum hydrocarbons, being used both in rigid as well as flexible formats for packing and storing almost all category of foods, solid or liquid, oily or aqueous, powders or pastes and these materials are tested for food contact application before clearing from the safety angle. By far Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) is the most widely used plastic material and also most extensively studied for safety for use in food industry. According to The International Life Science Institute (ILSI), the Washington DC based organization, PET is absolutely safe for food contact application based on their comprehensive study.

"PET itself is biologically inert if ingested, is dermally safe during handling and is not a hazard if inhaled. No evidence of toxicity has been detected in feeding studies using animals. Negative results from Ames tests and studies into unscheduled DNA synthesis indicate that PET is not genotoxic. Similar studies conducted with monomers and typical PET intermediates also indicate that these materials are essentially nontoxic and pose no threats to human health. . . . It is important to stress that the chemistry of compounds that are used to manufacture PET shows no evidence of oestrogenic activity. There is a significant body of evidence that demonstrates that the use of PET is not a concern and is perfectly safe in this respect."

Though a clean chit is given to PET based on limited extraction studies using simulating food systems under standard conditions, there can still be lurking dangers due to varying characteristics of foods that are packed, especially in a country like India where there are hundreds of ethic foods with scant information about the inter action between their chemical constituents and the packaging material. In spite of availability of high tech instruments that can detect even traces of chemicals in a simple system, migration into complex food systems cannot be easily assessed. Many consumers do realize this limitation and shun plastics if avoidable.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

A PLASTIC"LAW" FOR STAVING OF FUTURE DISASTER?

To days world is dominated by plastics made from petrochemicals and it is difficult to imagine a future without plastics around. Use of plastics is directly proportional to the affluence levels of nations and as can be expected, the US is the biggest producer and user of plastics in practically every thing which include food and beverage packing materials, water packing, electronics, building products, water piping and taps, furniture and furnishings, vehicles, planes, toys and medical devices. It is now realized that the world has to pay for its indiscriminate use of plastics as billions of tons of used plastics are floating around or lying in garbage dumps because only an insignificant portion of used plastics is recycled. Since it takes more than 700 years to be destroyed completely, the quantity of used plastics that will accumulate, is bound to increase manifold in the coming years. There may be some substance in the argument that there must be legal control of plastic manufacture, recycling, disposal and development of new plastics.

"Given the proven health threat posed by some plastics, the scattershot and weak regulation of the plastics industry, and the enormous environmental costs of plastics — the plastics industry accounts for 5 percent of the nation's consumption of petroleum and natural gas, and more than 1 trillion pounds of plastic wastes now sit in U.S. garbage dumps — the time has come to pass a comprehensive national plastics control law".

It is shocking that an average US citizen uses about 100 kg of plastics every year and the dependence on plastics there is so strong that a population of 300 million consume more than 30 billion bottles of packed water during an year!. What is galling is every developing country is following the "plastic" path, without realizing the damage it can do in the long run to their people and the environment. If such a trend goes on without being checked now, a day is not far off to see the entire world getting choked with plastics with no way out.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com