Close
today i learned (til)

Are sustainability trends legit?

September 28, 2019

A lot of us may have seen the VSCO girl memes, telling us to “save the turtles” with their Hydroflasks and metal straws. I find it fascinating that metal straws have become a trend, restaurants have stopped providing plastic straws, and plastic bag bans are being implemented across the country. These sustainability trends sound great, but are they actually helping the environment and making a positive impact? It has been estimated that 8.3 billion plastic straws line the world’s coastlines, but they only make up 4% of total plastic waste, and according to The Atlantic, reusable tote bags use more energy to manufacture than a typical plastic grocery bag, and people tend to accumulate these tote bags, defeating the purpose of reusing them. 

Sustainability is a big buzz word in the field of materials science. I talked to Nasreen Khan, a PhD candidate in Materials Science and Engineering at the Georgia Institute of Technology, to find out more about sustainable materials. Nasreen and other graduate students in her lab have recently created a podcast called “Talk Green to Me,” with episodes covering different classes of materials and their impact on the environment.

The first thing I wanted to know was the definition of sustainability. Nasreen describes it as “taking positive action toward the protection and betterment of the environment.” So how are materials a part of the conversation around saving the environment? I asked for Nasreen’s opinion on what materials most affect our environment today. She replied with “microplastics, simply because of the sheer quantity of them that are in our environment, and we don’t quite know how they affect organisms.” Microplastics come from plastic waste naturally breaking down into smaller particles, as well as microbeads present in many consumer products, such as cosmetics. These microplastics pollute water systems, which are ingested by marine life and cause internal damage, and are even present in drinking water, though the extent of these effects are still being researched.

How do plastics degrade and why do they degrade slower than other materials? Metals and ceramics break down through corrosion, and they eventually become part of the environment. Corrosion of these materials typically happen through interactions with water that strips away ions. Plastics have varying degradation times depending on the polymer, but are typically much longer than metals or ceramics due to functional groups that aren’t easily cleaved by water. These stronger covalent bonds cause plastics to stay in the environment for many years before breaking down.

I asked Nasreen’s opinion about the effectiveness of reusable bags and straws. She argues that these trends are impactful because they have created awareness of how people’s choices affect the environment. This motivates people to think more about their consumption habits.

So what else can we be doing? As a recycling connoisseur, Nasreen has many resources to suggest. Some general things included consuming less, reusing and repurposing items, especially textile waste. Nasreen also suggests “[buying] from companies that use recycled content because that will expand the market for recycled products.” Target is an example of a company that is making large efforts to create sustainable products such as packaging, paper, and clothing.

In addition to choosing companies with sustainability efforts, municipalities typically provide information online that indicates how to recycle and what recycling efforts are happening. A recycling info card is available through atlantaga.gov to help people understand what can and cannot be recycled:

Other recycling resources in Atlanta include MandM Waste, which recycles scrap metal, UseAgain, which does textile recycling, and the Center for Hard to Recycle Materials (CHaRM). Outside of Atlanta, TerraCycle is an international waste recycling program that can recycle products from used makeup to brita filters. Links to all of these resources are at the end of the article.

Recycling correctly may take effort, but creating a regular habit can contribute to saving the environment. Looking back to the podcast created by Nasreen and her colleagues, I asked why they decided to create it in the first place. Nasreen said the goal was “to teach people about materials science and help them see the relevance and importance of sustainability.” Materials are such a big part of our daily lives, it’s crucial to be educated on how we are using and consuming them. If you want to learn more about the details of different classes of materials and their impact on the environment, check out “Talk Green to Me”, available on Spotify and iTunes.

 

City of Atlanta Recycling Information: https://www.atlantaga.gov/government/departments/public-works/recycling-program

MandM Waste: https://www.mandmwaste.com/scrap-metal-recycling-in-atlanta-ga-p-60.html

CHaRM: https://livethrive.org/charm/

TerraCycle: https://www.terracycle.com/en-US

Sources:

  1. Borenstein, Seth. “Science Says: Amount of straws, plastic pollution is huge,” Boston News. April 20, 2018. Available: https://www.boston.com/news/politics/2018/04/20/science-says-amount-of-straws-plastic-pollution-is-huge
  2. Dillon, Noah. “Are Tote Bags Really Good for the Environment?” The Atlantic. Sep 2, 2016. Available: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/09/to-tote-or-note-to-tote/498557/
  3. Jordan, Rob. “Do plastic straws really make a difference?” Stanford Earth. Sep 18, 2018. Available: https://earth.stanford.edu/news/do-plastic-straws-really-make-difference#gs.67cow8
  4. Target’s Sustainability Policies and Partnerships: https://corporate.target.com/corporate-responsibility/planet/sustainable-products
0Likes
About Author

You May Also Like

today i learned (til)
Nature’s Puppeteers: When Fungi Take Control
Story Time, today i learned (til)
A Tiny Frog with a Mighty Voice – The Puerto Rican Coqui
today i learned (til)
The Science Behind Pickled Vegetables and Their Longevity
today i learned (til)
Astronomy of the Ancient Skies

Your journey starts here! Let’s talk!

ThemeRex © 2026. All rights reserved.
  Timothy Durham was convicted of rape when a test showed his DNA genotype matched the DNA recovered from the crime scene. Eye witnesses testified that Durham was in a different state at the time of the incident, but he wasn’t exonerated from his 3000 year sentence until follow up DNA analysis showed that the preliminary forensic analysis used in the trial was misinterpreted (Thomas et al.). DNA testing serves an invaluable part in our criminal justice system, but it comes with complications and bias that can lead to wrongful convictions and misinformed juries.  

Background:

Forensic genetics aims to identify the origin of a biological sample. It can be traced back to Karl Landsteiner who discovered human ABO blood groups. With blood groups, suspects could be eliminated based on their blood type. For example, if a suspect had type A blood and there was type B blood left at the scene by the perpetrator, the investigators could rule out the suspect. Unfortunately, the reverse didn’t work. If the suspect and perpetrator both had the same blood type, it can’t be concluded that the suspect was guilty. Blood identifiers evolved into 8 distinct categories which improved the ability to eliminate suspects, but could only conclude that (if the system matched) it might be the perpetrator or this person might be related to the perpetrator (Jobling and Gill). The field evolved in the 1980s with the discovery of Minisatellites, lines of repetitive DNA that don’t encode proteins. Minisatellite patterns in DNA create what we know today as the DNA fingerprint, and it has a much higher accuracy rate than previous methods (Augustyn et al.). Around the same time, a breakthrough for victims of sexual assault was discovered. In the case of assault, bodily fluids of both the victim and the assaulter can get mixed. A process called differential lysis was created which could selectively increase the concentration of sperm in a fluid sample thereby allowing for accurate DNA testing (Jobling and Gill). Forensics evolved to use single-locus probe testing after several years because of its ease of interpretation. It looked at specific minisatellites that had high variability between subjects. This was the first DNA-based method to be used in a criminal investigation. Two murder homicides from several years apart were connected using DNA evidence. The evidence was then used to exonerate an innocent man, and the guilty party was found when he tried to evade mandatory DNA testing for all men in the small town. His guilt was then reinforced when the DNA profiles matched, and he gave a confession (Jobling and Gill). Finding DNA at a crime scene doesn’t guarantee that you’ll find a murderer. There are issues with non-pure samples and limited samples that make DNA work difficult, and accreditation of facilities and new techniques and take time (Jobling and Gill).  

Subjectivity of DNA Interpretation:

In a 2009 publication, the National Academy of Science discusses the possibility for subjective influence in lab based forensics. The interpretation bias happens in complex cases where, for example, there could be a mixture of DNA. A study published in 2011 looked specifically at this issue. A gang rape happened in Georgia, and the mixture in DNA from the case was used to prosecute one suspect after another suspect took a plea bargain to testify against him. With DNA mixtures, there are three possible conclusions: suspect excluded, suspect cannot be excluded, and inconclusive. If the suspect is excluded, it means that there’s little to no possibility that his DNA is part of the sample. If the suspect cannot be excluded, it means that there’s a possibility that his DNA is part of the sample. In the trial, the DNA examiners who knew the context of the case concluded that the suspect being prosecuted could not be excluded. The 2011 study gave the DNA evidence from this case and the DNA profiles of the suspects to 17 forensic examiners. These examiners had no context of the case, and they all worked independently. Of the 17, only 1 came to the same conclusion (suspect cannot be excluded) as the examiners who knew the context of the case. Twelve of the 17 concluded that the suspect who was prosecuted and convicted had no relation to the DNA found in the sample. Not only does this show that subjectivity occurs due to the context of the case, but the 17 examiners came up with different findings based on their past experiences meaning that not all DNA analysis is objective. Some organizations like the Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods say that quantitative statistical evidence should be presented with every categorical conclusion, but the US doesn’t require this (Dror and Hampikian).

False Positives:

There are two categories that cause wrongful identification in a DNA report: coincidental matches and false positives. Coincidental matches are DNA matches between two unrelated people. The probability of these matches is about 1 to 500,000 for white individuals and about 1 to 350,000 for black individuals. This small probability of coincidental matches makes people feel confident in DNA evidence. False positives, on the other hand, are matches between DNA and test DNA that result from issues in the forensics lab. There have been multiple cases of forensics labs accidentally switching victim and suspected rapist DNA which lead to convictions that were later overturned when the lab realized the error. There are also cases of misreading or misunderstanding a sample. In a case from 1993, a man was convicted of rape because someone interpreted a mixed sample of victim and perpetrator DNA as an individual sample. The conviction was again overturned. To prevent false convictions, retesting DNA is allowed, but it’s not an efficient solution. Many people are pushing for statistical information on the probability of false positives, so that the jurors can make accurate judgements based on DNA evidence (Thomas et al.).  

Conclusion:

DNA analysis is a useful tool for the criminal justice system, but subjectivity can be an issue in forensic testing. To combat wrongful convictions, there are organizations like The Innocence Project who use DNA testing to free the innocent, but reformed forensic testing standards should be put in place to prevent subjectivity and to ensure juries are correctly informed during trials. https://www.innocenceproject.org/    

Citation:

Augustyn , Adam, et al. “DNA Finerprinting.” Encyclopedia Britannica , 26 Apr. 2018, www.britannica.com/science/DNA-fingerprinting#ref153186. Dror, Itiel E., and Greg Hampikian. “Subjectivity and Bias in Forensic DNA Mixture Interpretation.” Science & Justice, vol. 51, no. 4, 2011, pp. 204–208., doi:10.1016/j.scijus.2011.08.004. Jobling, Mark A., and Peter Gill. “Encoded Evidence: DNA in Forensic Analysis.” Nature Reviews: Genetics, vol. 5, no. 10, Oct. 2004, pp. 739–751., doi:10.1038/nrg1455. Thompson, William C, et al. “How the Probability of a False Positive Affects the Value of DNA Evidence.” Journal of Forensic Sciences, vol. 48, no. 1, Jan. 2003, pp. 1–8., doi:10.1520/jfs2001171.