Potential for an environmentally friendly Soylent bottle? Glass, Aluminium, Plastic Substitute


[quote=“Cec, post:5, topic:25486”]
The toxic persistence of plastics is what turns me off more than anything. There isn’t a swirling vortex of glass in the ocean the size of the United States.
[/quote]You can recycle the bottles. If you do, they are the clear winner environmentally.

Less energy to produce, less to transport, and effectively non-toxic.


I’m not really a fan of tetrapacks, as it always leaves some inside & they aren’t recyclable (not here, anyway).

An aluminum bottle in the same shape as the current one would be pretty cool, but perhaps even less environmentally friendly. One can find an argument against pretty much every material being harmful in some way. I think the solution is to somehow make it rain Soylent.


Personally I would prefer a drinking bag design for a more compact nature… specially after you are done with a “bottle”.
Kinda like these


Because glass sinks.


:stuck_out_tongue: well, I wasn’t talking about the size, just a the format of a “pouch” would be awesome for many reasons. (takes up less space as trash/recycling)


Arent tetrapaks made with recycled materials to begin with?


I get wanting to produce less waste, but also do consider that a Soylent diet will produce far less waste than a typical diet.

I think you may enjoy the discussion in these threads (I mean this sincerely, not trying to be snarky or anything):

How Soylent Ships A Trillion Calories Per Month
Since it’s not obvious from the title, this discusses the bags.

The bottles in soylent 2.0… Sustainable?

Is the plastic wrap on 2.0 bottles recyclable?

What to do with leftover 2.0 bottles: Build a raft? What’s your idea?

Is recycling worth it?


If you switch to 1.5 you will only be using one pouch for every 5 bottles you are using now. So that would be a significant reduction in the amount of plastic used. I’m not sure what is on the inside of the pouch, it seems like some kind of foil material. But whatever the pouch is made of it seems to me that the material used to make it is less than the material needed to make one 2.0 bottle.

On the subject of Reuse as opposed to Recycle I found that the tops from Soylent 2.0 fit on a conventional growler bottle that you can refill with beer at your local brewery. (I haven’t tested to see if it will seal well enough to prevent leaking of liquid or CO2 yet).


Seems like the best way to eliminate plastic bottle waste would be to switch to the powder, and then re-use your own bottle. Is that an option?


D’oh. 2.0 isn’t available in powder form yet. Disregard. :slight_smile:


If you want to be truly environmentally friendly, live in the woods in a simple shelter and grow / kill your food with your bare hands. Anything short of that = waste!


Definitely. That’s why I eat people. (soylent is people) Keeps the population down. But I manage on my 350 acres.


1.5 bags are mylar, same as fancy birthday balloons, but heavy duty. Unfortunately they aren’t recyclable, but if you’re doing 100% Soylent 1.5 for all food intake, considering the volume of a flattened empty bag, it would take months, maybe years, to fill up a standard kitchen trash bag provided you squished it down now and again. Waste is the least of anyone’s concerns with 1.5, so maybe that’s the way to go.

That said, 2.0’s bottles are recyclable top to bottom except for the seal. Glass would have this advantage also, but it’s far heavier, which increases shipping loads, which contributes directly to atmospheric CO2. Aluminum is light, but extraction is more resource intensive than plastic production. As it is, I can’t say there’s anything else I eat that provides a balanced meal and has near-total recyclable packaging. It might be inefficient to ship water, but it’s way more efficient than most food out there.

Ideal solution: municipal soylent supply. @rob has written about this somewhere if I remember right. Get on it, folks! :grin:


It won’t ever be an option. 2.0 IS liquid. That is THE difference between 2.0 and 1.5. There are formula differences, but that is to support the different mediums.


@bgat is referring to the point that RL has stated that v1.6 will bring the powder up to the v2.0 liquid macros. Their plan is to bring the nutritional profile of the powder to be similar to the liquid.


For the record, I wasn’t referring to any point: I was just being a stupid noob. :slight_smile:


Well. I did not know @Ric 's point. So that is interesting as well…


I am going to try the powdered form, but I love the municipal soylent idea.
I appreciate all of the input.


Bertrand use Tritan for its shaker. They might have a disposable bottle version.

And we can recycle plastic in an impressive manner.


We always look at new packaging options. Some of the biodegradable stuff is not functional for our purposes / the costs can be much higher.