Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Designer Creates a Water Bottle That You Can Eat

samzenpus posted about 5 months ago | from the eating-trash dept.

Earth 171

Diggester (2492316) writes "Rodrigo García González has been working on the Ooho water bottle for the past few years. The bottle is made out of edible materials, looks like a jellyfish, and has the potential to put an end to the bottled water industry. Inspired by the juice-filled pearls added to bubble tea and the mad-cuisine creations of chef Ferran Adriá, who uses a technique known as sheperification (encasing liquid into edible membranes), García is on his way to revolutionizing the bottled water industry."

cancel ×

171 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

huh (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46857839)

Why?

Re:huh (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46858109)

Less polution maybe?

Re:huh (-1, Flamebait)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 5 months ago | (#46858211)

That was my question with "sheperification", I was trying to figure out why a stooge was needed in the process.

Then I read the article and found out it was "sphereification", which makes a lot more sense.

Re:huh (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46858255)

what no designer has created: nigger pussy you WANT to eat!

Re:huh (2)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about 5 months ago | (#46859663)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T... [wikipedia.org]

I would have linked to their website, but it's a fucking Flash-only blob.

You say sheperification, I say spherification (2)

GrumpySteen (1250194) | about 5 months ago | (#46857841)

Let's call the whole thing off.

Huh? (4, Interesting)

p51d007 (656414) | about 5 months ago | (#46857845)

Ok, the "bottle" can be eaten...but is the "bottle" placed in a sealed box or other container? Or, before use, do you have to sterilize it before use? Plus, not that it is healthy to reuse a water bottle, I see a lot of them being refilled around colleges, businesses, parks etc...

Re:Huh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46857927)

> Plus, not that it is healthy to reuse a water bottle...

What total and utter rubbish you speak you brainwashed sheep..

Re:Huh? (1)

Barsteward (969998) | about 5 months ago | (#46858119)

refilling plastic bottles in public places spreads diseases. our work place had 4 water coolers on each floor and they had to be regularly sanitized because people were getting ill from refilling their bottles

Re:Huh? (1)

causality (777677) | about 5 months ago | (#46858323)

refilling plastic bottles in public places spreads diseases. our work place had 4 water coolers on each floor and they had to be regularly sanitized because people were getting ill from refilling their bottles

Not to mention the long-term effects of BPA exposure. If you don't know about this, I'd recommend researching it.

Besides, I think stainless steel just looks better and I know I'm not going to break it. When you have and regularly use an electric kettle anyway, you can quickly sanitize a steel container too.

Re:Huh? (1)

xclr8r (658786) | about 5 months ago | (#46859029)

BPA Free water bottles are common place now.

Re:Huh? (2)

nightsky30 (3348843) | about 5 months ago | (#46859385)

BPA Free water bottles are common place now.

Except that it appears the BPA alternatives they created as replacements can be just as bad, and sometimes worse. http://www.motherjones.com/env... [motherjones.com]

Re:Huh? (1)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | about 5 months ago | (#46859481)

BPA is harmless. It's toxic at levels far above normal intake and concentration in the blood. BPA-Free polycarbonate now uses BPS, which is exactly as toxic as BPA but leaches at a rate 20 times that of BPA. It breaks the toxicity barrier with gusto, so enjoy your new toxic world.

Water bottles are most often PET or LDPE. These plastics aren't made with BPA or any analog.

Re:people were getting ill (1)

DocSavage64109 (799754) | about 5 months ago | (#46859443)

How do you know they weren't getting ill by touching hand railings and doors or breathing contaminated air?

Re:people were getting ill (1)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | about 5 months ago | (#46859487)

Statistical comparison of many samples and normalization for confounding factors.

No problem. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46858633)

Just you have to rinse it before eating.

Pointless? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46857857)

How

can I refill it?
how do I drink half a unit?
how do I keep the outside clean enough to eat?

Re:Pointless? (5, Informative)

shadowrat (1069614) | about 5 months ago | (#46857923)

I think edible implies that it's rapidly biodegradable. You are not commanded to eat it. You can throw it away, and if some enterprising sea turtle eats it, it's not big deal.

Re:Pointless? (2, Informative)

kruach aum (1934852) | about 5 months ago | (#46858357)

Salt is edible but not bio-degradable.

Re:Pointless? (1)

Hillgiant (916436) | about 5 months ago | (#46858991)

False. Any salt is easily reduced to its component ions by exposing it to water.

Re:Pointless? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46859309)

So the salt just disappears? NO, you now have salt water. The salt is still there, it didn't break down it was absorbed and made the water undrinkable. ------Biodegradation is the chemical dissolution of materials by bacteria or other biological means not mixing salt with water.

Re:Pointless? (1)

quarterbuck (1268694) | about 5 months ago | (#46859463)

You can just funnel the salt water to a coconut palm.

Re:Pointless? (1)

guises (2423402) | about 5 months ago | (#46859711)

No, the salt isn't there any more. Salt water doesn't have salt in it - salt water has ions in it. It's the components of the salt, the sodium mostly, that your body uses.

Re:Pointless? (1)

schlachter (862210) | about 5 months ago | (#46859415)

it's a water condom.
wouldn't want to eat that.

Re:Pointless? (1)

14erCleaner (745600) | about 5 months ago | (#46858535)

Besides, the empty skin looks like a used condom. Eeew.

Re:Pointless? (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about 5 months ago | (#46858799)

How are you supposed to consume the water without eating the sphere?

Re:Pointless? (2)

shadowrat (1069614) | about 5 months ago | (#46859459)

Homo sapiens has overcome tougher challenges that that.

Re:Pointless? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46857931)

how do I keep the outside clean enough to eat?

Just rinse it with water.

Re:Pointless? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46858035)

Rinsing with water will not remove all the contaminants on the outside of a bottle.
Rinsing will only, maybe, get rid of chunks of stuff on the outside of the bottle but will not remove oils, fingerprints, chemicals in normal situations.
This is basic science, isn't it?
You wash your dishes with hot and soapy water before you rinse them for the next use, don't you?
You wash your hands with hot and soapy water after you use the restroom, don't you?

Re:Pointless? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46859231)

Fine then, wash it with hot and soapy water.

Re:Pointless? (1)

master_kaos (1027308) | about 5 months ago | (#46859269)

Nope, if I am just on my own, Ill use warm water no soap. If I have guests I will do a proper wash on them. And this answer is for both your questions.. exception is a #2 I will use soap.

You know why so many people get sick? Because people wash their hands too often, you don't build an immune system when you get no bacteria
I honestly don't remember the last time I was sick (besides the common cold), probably over 20 years ago. And I am probably this way because I grew up on a farm with a ton of flies and other bacteria spreading bugs, etc. 3 second rule? Forget it 3 minute rule, I don't care if my food falls in the dirt, wipe it off it's good.

I remember we had a sandbox which our cats loved shitting in, and I would grab the cat shit with bare hands and toss em out, and then go eat dinner without washing my hands (remember I was a kid, I probably wouldn't do that now). The people I find who are the sick most often, are the ones who use antibacterial soap, wash their hands after they do anything, and use hand sanitizer after touching a door knob. Honestly, it makes you wonder how civilization lasted this long, because you can be sure as fuck they weren't using hand sanitizer 300 years ago.

Re:Pointless? (1)

master_kaos (1027308) | about 5 months ago | (#46859317)

Oh, and I have a plastic cup sitting on my desk that I haven't washed in probably close to 2 years (used only for water). Sure there is basically an 1/8 inch layer of built up calcium at the bottom of the cup but I don't care.

Re:Pointless? (1)

alen (225700) | about 5 months ago | (#46858081)

you're not supposed to refill plastic water bottles
water breeds bacteria build up. i recycle mine. which in NYC means an old chinese lady takes it out of the garbage dump and takes it to the machine for $.05

Re:Pointless? (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 5 months ago | (#46858159)

you're not supposed to refill plastic water bottles
water breeds bacteria build up.

Daiso (online, Serramonte Plaza, Japan, etc) has "PET BOTTLE WASHER" brushes which are not for pet bottles, but for PET bottles — polyethylene. They have very soft bristles. They're probably just meant for making your trash spotless and clean before recycling, but you could use them for bottle reuse. But you can reuse a drinking vessel two or three times in rapid succession without any notable biofilm buildup, anyway.

Re:Pointless? (3, Insightful)

Kiwikwi (2734467) | about 5 months ago | (#46858303)

you're not supposed to refill plastic water bottles

Yes, there was a Danish study of this. A repeatedly refilled water bottle has a much higher level of bacteria etc. than tap water.

It's still cleaner than regular bottled water, though.

Turns out, all that bottled water sitting still at room temperature for months before purchase doesn't do anything for the water quality. Being a Danish study, all of the above assumes you have clean tap water, of course. YMMV.

Re:Pointless? (4, Insightful)

hodet (620484) | about 5 months ago | (#46858359)

Better yet, for most of the first world, just drink local water. It's idiotic to ship water that comes from a "public source" (aka "the tap") in a city hundreds of miles away.

Re:Pointless? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46858501)

I used to live in a "developing country" then I moved to what passes for a developed country ('Murica). I had always had a water filter at home that more or less worked, after the move people suggested the local tap water was ok to drink... for me, let's just say it wasn't. I've even taken to drinking bottled water that I run through a filter. Not taking any chances.

And in conclusion, don't change the isotopes and pollutants in your water. Your stomach might not take it well.

Needs edible cofee cups (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46857861)

what is "sheperification"?

Re:Needs edible cofee cups (0)

cyrano.mac (916276) | about 5 months ago | (#46858097)

what is "sheperification"?

It is the process of becoming a Microsoft customer...

Re:Needs edible cofee cups (2)

pjt33 (739471) | about 5 months ago | (#46858401)

It's supposed to say sherparification: it's based on the same principle as getting a Nepalese guide to carry your water.

Almost there (4, Funny)

lagomorpha2 (1376475) | about 5 months ago | (#46857871)

I'm still waiting for someone to invent a reusable water bottle. Then the bottled water industry will really be finished.

Re:Almost there (2)

CastrTroy (595695) | about 5 months ago | (#46858229)

I really don't understand how the bottled water industry has become so big. Obviously there is a need for stores to sell bottled water, as we can't always have water on us, but I think it's gotten a little out of hand. When I'm going out for the day, or doing some kind of exercise, I almost always bring a reusable water bottle with me. If I'm not exercising and only going out for a few hours, I can get by without drinking anything until I return home. My main reason for all this is simply the price difference. I can't believe that people would rather spend $1 on a bottle of water then fill it up from their own tap for less than a penny.

Re:Almost there (1)

Gamer_2k4 (1030634) | about 5 months ago | (#46858383)

You don't need to clean it, no one's going to steal it, and if you forget it or lose it, you're only out a dollar. People are paying for convenience, as they always do.

Re:Almost there (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 5 months ago | (#46858543)

I can't believe that people would rather spend $1 on a bottle of water then fill it up from their own tap for less than a penny.

Well first, most tap water is fucking horrible and most people aren't qualified to install a water filter, because they are useless lames whose only skill involves filing cabinets, or selling people shit they don't need, or one of many skills which have only been developed to support someone else's greed and are based on inefficiency and waste in our society. And second, you don't have access to your tap while you're not home, HTH HAND.

I personally have installed an RO filter (any monkey with a crescent wrench should be able to do the same) and we have a crapload of klean kanteen-style stainless bottles, so I agree with what you're saying, but most people would rather complain about the price of bottled water than figure out how to install a water filter. But is it their fault they're useless? Or is that a conscious decision based on cognitive dissonance? They convinced themselves that they're not useless based on the idea that only laborers know how to do that stuff anyway, and they're better than that. Amusingly, it would cost them more per hour to have the work done than they actually make, but that doesn't stop them from believing that actual work is below them.

Re:Almost there (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46858891)

most people aren't qualified to install a water filter, because they are useless lames

You know if you take the position that people who can't do what you can must therefore be useless and lame, then that means the only things that you can do just barely require mediocrity.

Re:Almost there (4, Funny)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 5 months ago | (#46859123)

You know if you take the position that people who can't do what you can must therefore be useless and lame, then that means the only things that you can do just barely require mediocrity.

The thing is, anyone who can read and follow instructions can install an under-sink water filter. It's not fucking rocket surgery. The only people who can't do it are people who have been convinced that they can't do it, or people with no arms. Even some of them could probably manage it, but I'll go ahead and accept that they are probably in the minority.

Re:Almost there (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46859013)

I personally have installed an RO filter (any monkey with a crescent wrench should be able to do the same)

The funny thing about water filters is that they make the water cleaner ... for a short while. Then the bacteria that lives in them makes the water worse than unfiltered tap water. Most people don't change the filters nearly often enough so they drink bad water while congratulating themselves how wise they were to install filters.

Re:Almost there (1)

pnutjam (523990) | about 5 months ago | (#46859265)

I would love to see something to backup this claim.

Re:Almost there (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 5 months ago | (#46859505)

I suspect it's true, but only for systems with a post-RO carbon filter. THAT particular filter will all too commonly go unchanged. The same is true of fridge filters.

The problem arises when you use a carbon filter with water which is not chlorinated. The chlorine coming into the filter kills the bacteria that love to live in the carbon filter. It's not the RO filter itself, which is made of very smooth plastic and which is constantly backflushed when operating correctly.

An intelligently-designed system, if it includes such a filter at all, will have it located as the last element before the tap. On the pressure tank outlet, you'll install a john guest connector with an integrated ball valve, they cost a couple of bucks. The filter itself, you'll either buy with 3/8 NPT and then install plastic john guest connectors on both ends, or you'll buy them with the connectors integrated which usually costs little more. Then 1/4" tubing runs between these connectors, and on to the tap. In this setup, as long as the lines are left long enough, you can bypass the filter if it tastes funky while waiting for a replacement which you should have had on hand :)

You used to have to run carbon before your RO, because chlorine would ruin the RO filter. I run a carbon filter before my RO in spite of not being on municipal water, because I assume that my water is under surface influence (you can tell the difference in flavor of the unfiltered water between the serious drought and non-drought times, so it seems a reasonable assumption) and I live in the middle of an agricultural area, so I'm concerned about things like organophosphate runoff. ROs are not known to handle VOCs well, either. They're good on particulates, including microorganisms. But by the system's nature, you typically need a carbon filter before the RO, so the carbon filter has ample opportunity to be colonized.

tl;dr: it's a real problem but easily avoidable

Re:Almost there (1)

Medievalist (16032) | about 5 months ago | (#46859249)

I personally have installed an RO filter (any monkey with a crescent wrench should be able to do the same) and we have a crapload of klean kanteen-style stainless bottles...

Stainless steel is a filthy metal [typinganimal.net] unless you're using the newer silver-coated stuff. [smartplanet.com]

Seems a shame to use water from an expensive reverse osmosis filter in an inherently disease-friendly container - why not use a nice glass bottle, or a silver or copper one if you're worried about breakage?

Re:Almost there (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 5 months ago | (#46859359)

Seems a shame to use water from an expensive reverse osmosis filter in an inherently disease-friendly container - why not use a nice glass bottle, or a silver or copper one if you're worried about breakage?

Besides being expensive, silver and copper are shitty materials for water bottles due to their malleability, as is glass when you're out of the house. I drink from glass at home. For $3 I bought two brushes from Daiso which have a spinning handle so that you just sort of twirl them around and they spin inside the bottle. I line a half-dozen bottles up on the counter and wash them all in series.

Glass builds up biofilm too, in practice only about twice as slow as stainless. The klean kanteen wasn't designed to automatically be clean, but to be eminently cleanable. Every possible material for a drinking vessel has its own problems, but in terms of being on the go, stainless has the least problems.

Also, a complete RO system is available under two hundred bucks these days. My personal RO system was originally over a grand, but I didn't pay it. It was a gift from someone who bought it and then never installed it, moving out instead. And it no longer has the expensive faucet, which was too much of a PITA to rebuild when it stopped functioning properly and which I replaced with a ten dollar POS which comes apart easily and has simple O-Ring seals.

Re:Almost there (1)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | about 5 months ago | (#46859535)

I am so glad I don't have a reverse-osmosis system. Besides the 95% water waste, it removes all the good stuff from the water. Horrible stuff.

Re:Almost there (1)

master_kaos (1027308) | about 5 months ago | (#46859609)

I don't get it either and really pissed me off as such a waste since you know most poeple are throwing it in the trash instead of putting in recycling. Now I don't use tap water for my regular drinking water as I don't particularly like the taste, so I instead have a water cooler which costs about 26 cents a litre however it is spring water so it tastes really good. So while it is still expensive I don't feel quite as bad since it doesn't cost near as much as bottled water and they reuse them. I just can't stand city water, used to live in the country and our well water was awesome...
But I don't get people who buy Dasani. Nestle, etc since most of htem just get it from municipal water anyways.. it is glorified tap water...

But why... (1)

MasseKid (1294554) | about 5 months ago | (#46857895)

But why would I ever want to eat the bottle?

Re:But why... (1)

Barsteward (969998) | about 5 months ago | (#46858127)

no waste if you eat the bottle.

Re:But why... (2)

Charliemopps (1157495) | about 5 months ago | (#46858169)

Yes there is, it just delays having to deal with that waste by a few hours.

Re:But why... (2)

ericloewe (2129490) | about 5 months ago | (#46858621)

Or a few minutes, depending on just how edible the thing is...

Re:But why... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46858133)

But why would I ever want to eat the bottle?

Because it's Pina Colada flavored!!

Contamination (5, Insightful)

Scutter (18425) | about 5 months ago | (#46857897)

So, for the bottle to be edible, it's going to have a removable, non-edible outer wrapping to protect it from contamination during the shipping, handling, and sales process. That means you've just moved the problem one layer out. You're still going to be generating waste.

Re:Contamination (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about 5 months ago | (#46857937)

If we decide to not eat it at all (and skip the extra wrapping), I guess it could make for a quickly-decomposing water bottle. Not sure how we prevent it from self-destructing itself while still on the shelf, though...

Re:Contamination (1)

number17 (952777) | about 5 months ago | (#46858083)

If we decide to not eat it at all (and skip the extra wrapping)

As mentioned, the extra packaging would be necessary for shipping as these things are as fragile, if not more, than an egg. Ive found that the shipping process isn't as bad as how people handle product in stores. I don't think the average person could handle putting a water balloon in their cart without crushing it.

Re:Contamination (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46857967)

Another MAJOR issue: people might accidentally drink their laundry detergent.

Re:Contamination (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46858121)

You mean like fruit skin? That dirt can be washed off of?

Re:Contamination (4, Informative)

KingOfBLASH (620432) | about 5 months ago | (#46858245)

From TFA the technique is already in use with some yogurt. You buy a box of yogurt "balls" that are edible, flavored, and filled with yogurt. When you pack your lunch for school or work you simply grab a ball of yogurt out of the box instead of a yogurt in an individual plastic container. Presumably the box is easier to recycle then the plastic containers.

This is interesting in the sense that it generates LESS waste and the waste it generates is biodegradable. The "container" is something from brown algae so I guess you could just compost the thing, much like an eggshell...

Re:Contamination (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 5 months ago | (#46858489)

This is interesting in the sense that it generates LESS waste and the waste it generates is biodegradable. The "container" is something from brown algae

...and nobody wants to drink from it except kids who don't care if they wind up wearing the contents. We already have compostable plastic bottles made from algae. This "solves" a problem which has already been solved in a superior fashion.

Re:Contamination (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46859467)

LESS waste and the waste it generates is biodegradable

So? http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2014/04/video-ars-talks-to-the-experts-on-ataris-dump-at-yesterdays-big-dig/

Trash in a dump is very stable unless exposed to air and sun. It lasts centuries.

Re:Contamination (1)

gurps_npc (621217) | about 5 months ago | (#46858753)

You made a bad assumption. Specifically that humans will eat the bottle. Merely having an edible bottle - and allowing dogs, birds, rats, cockroaches, etc. to eat the bottle - would solve a lot of the problem - the landspace and pollution that disposing of said bottle takes.

Re:Contamination (1)

Threni (635302) | about 5 months ago | (#46858791)

What, like fruit and vegetables?

Not worried about the water bottle companies (1)

will_die (586523) | about 5 months ago | (#46857905)

They will just go and convert their product to be disposible water spherification carriers.

Now... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46857913)

Now, let's cynically destroy the idea by finding all the ways how it does not work and how it is not completely perfect and thus is automatically completely useless.

Not merely 'not completely perfect'. (4, Informative)

Junta (36770) | about 5 months ago | (#46858113)

The current concept is extremely far from being even slightly practical..

-It's uselessly tiny
-They can't make a video where someone manages to drink from it without spilling it all over the place.
-It's so fragile that it can't reasonably be used on its own.
-It costs 33% the cost of a gigantic bottle to produce, but contains far less than 33% of the volume of water. Cost per unit of water is way high before ignoring how a plastic bottle can be re-used.

Basically the only thing it has going for it is that it will break down nearly instantly in trash. The problem is we already have materials from which we *can* make a water bottle from that in fact would probably work better than this concept that already can be friendly enough to the environment. The problem is they still aren't practical and can't be used because they lack the durability.

This concept is a warm fuzzy with zero value over the current possibilities. It doesn't merely have 'kinks' to work out before it can be used, it's just fundamentally flawed as a concept.

Bottled drinks are a problem, but this is not going to provide a solution.

Re:Not merely 'not completely perfect'. (1)

Jaime2 (824950) | about 5 months ago | (#46858387)

Also, the process only works if the water is frozen. That takes about 120 Watt-hours per liter of water. If the entire bottled water industry were converted to this process, that's about 3.6 billion kilowatt-hours used to produce bottles, or about 5% of the total world electricity usage.

I'd say this process needs some improvement before it will make the world a better place.

Re:Not merely 'not completely perfect'. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46858545)

I've read this far down and can't believe that nobody has mentioned recycling plastic bottles.

Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46857945)

Packaging traditionally serves as a barrier between what you're eating and all the dirt and grime found outside it.
The point is to not have to eat that dirt and grime.

Just make them biodegradable and leave it at that.

Re:Why? (1)

PPH (736903) | about 5 months ago | (#46858075)

They'll sell them in blister packs.

No free lunches though...... (1)

Squatting_Dog (96576) | about 5 months ago | (#46857961)

Now instead of using all of that oil to produce the plastic for the bottles they will now have to use even more oil to run the electrical infrastructure to freeze the water before applying the edible membrane......(sigh).

Still.....if it gets rid of all of those damn bottles......

Re:No free lunches though...... (1)

Barsteward (969998) | about 5 months ago | (#46858135)

maybe they are using solar or renewable energy to run their electrics

Deposits (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46857993)

If I eat it, how will I get the deposit on the bottle? They're hardly going to waste as it is, people turn them in for the deposits, and the plastic gets recycled.

I can tell if this is sad or hilarious (1)

Vyse of Arcadia (1220278) | about 5 months ago | (#46858009)

and has the potential to put an end to the bottled water industry.

Re:I can tell if this is sad or hilarious (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46858309)

Just trying to watch that 'advertisement' video on the articles was hilariously sad.

"Ok, we're trying to sell a tiny clear water balloon, what's the best way to show it off?"
"White room, white shirts, white table, white girls, and so much flood lighting that the only thing anyone will be able to see is the blue bottlecap on the plastic water bottle."
"Brilliant! Get started immediately!"

I can't tell WTF TFS is suggesting (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46859143)

García is on his way to revolutionizing the bottled water industry.

So wait, is he revolutionizing it, or is he putting an end to it?

Now to invent a brain that isn't disposable (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46858031)

Looks to me like it's brains that are disposable. When will people learn that the water they get from the water tap is the same that is bottled... Tons and tons of plastic waste would be prevented if people would simply think for a second. (and the economy would crash in a week, yes, as it's based on people stupidity to re-buy the same product every year, but maybe humanity would actually survive the century this way)

Re:Now to invent a brain that isn't disposable (1)

The Grim Reefer (1162755) | about 5 months ago | (#46858605)

When will people learn that the water they get from the water tap is the same that is bottled...

When will you learn to stop making stupid statements? Granted, any thing labeled as "spring water", probably is similar to tap, and in some cases is. But purified water certainly is not.

I installed a RO/DI water filter a couple of decades ago for my saltwater aquarium hobby. It keeps the total dissolved solids (TDS) levels of the output water between 0-5 ppm. After drinking water from that I realized just how nasty tasting tap water was.Since I can't take my water filter with me when I travel, I've tested the water from many bottled water brands. I'm not going to shill for any of them, but the ones I will buy (when necessary) have a maximum TDS of 25 ppm. I've tested my tap water as high as 600 and it has never been below 250 ppm. I've also tested for various metallic and other specific contaminants. But TDS is a quick easy test and gives a good indication as to how bad water will taste. Through talking with others in the saltwater hobby, I've found that most areas have similarly high levels in municipal water. Well water can be even worse.

Saying that tap water is the same as bottled water is akin to saying that you should put light sweet crude oil in your car instead of gasoline.

Yeah, right. (1)

briancox2 (2417470) | about 5 months ago | (#46858063)

Look out bottle industry. People have been wanting to eat those plastic things that slide down your dirty aluminum rollers and get touched by every customer.

skipping over why we need bottled water at all (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46858177)

dirty deeds http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=water+food+supply+manipulation+WMD

Similar Appearance (1)

me01chanl (553161) | about 5 months ago | (#46858187)

I don't think the fact that the "packaging" looks quite a lot like a used condom is going to help the appeal for a large portion of the potential customer base.

except all the flaws (1)

slashmydots (2189826) | about 5 months ago | (#46858227)

Impossible to transport, can't eat it if someone touched it on the shelf which means it needs plastic packaging (lol), and Willy Wonka has prior art and likely a patent.

Hitler and George Bush!!!! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46858273)

http://www.rt.com/news/155088-neo-nazi-march-disrupted/

" As a result, the ultra-right radicals held a short meeting where they were and after about three hours began to disperse.

The police set up two cordons to separate the two groups, although there was some violence. Bottles and stones rained down on the neo-Nazis, which were hurled from the left-wing camp and the police had to intervene with batons and tear gas. A few people were arrested and there were a few injuries, including among the police.

The local press has dubbed the neo-Nazis’ march, “the shortest march in history.”

---Of course the Nazis, that is the National Socialists are far far left, that is fascism, big government from border to border, regulations for thier regulations. Oh yes and death and violence all around. This is nothing to do with the right, as understood in the west, that is the Tea Party style right that stands for limited government and individual rights - for ALL men.

Silly media, lies are for Democrats!

Perpetual consumption machine. (1)

NMBob (772954) | about 5 months ago | (#46858509)

Once I drink all of the contents and eat the bottle I have to get another bottle to wash down the first one, then after I drink all of that one and eat the bottle I have to get another one to wash that bottle down with, then...

Not the first go at this (1)

davidwr (791652) | about 5 months ago | (#46858527)

Decades ago there was a "liquid candy" marketed to children that came in small (less than 2 oz. I think) mostly(?)-wax "bottles" that were technically edible.

I'm using "edible" as a euphemism for "non-toxic, but no real taste and other than to gross out your parents or show off to your friends there was no good reason to eat it rather than throwing it away."

Was this practical as a "water bottle"? Not really. Is it "prior art" on any related patents? Possibly, especially against any "broad" claims.

Wrong application of the technology (1)

McGruber (1417641) | about 5 months ago | (#46858539)

The bottle is made out of edible materials

They could make a lot more money if they used the edible materials to make bongs.

How much did they pay you, Slashdot? (2)

kheldan (1460303) | about 5 months ago | (#46858591)

Is Slashdot now a shilling-for-hire website?
This is not going to kill the bottled water industry, it's not going to do anything, it's some sort of joke at best and rediculous at worst. You'd have to package the damned thing in order to ship them to stores and the packaging would cancel out the lack of a plastic bottle. Instead of zero-calorie water you're drinking, now there's some weird substance containing it that you're supposed to eat? Who the hell would want that, people who buy bottled water want water, not some weird 'alginate' snack! What about this 'alignate'? Since it's edible, won't it also have a shelf life? Won't it go bad long before the water it's containing and have to be discarded? Isn't that also kind of stupid in and of itself? So far as 'solutions looking for a problem' this scores pretty high, even if I personally think that bottled water is a scam and people should just get their own refillable bottle instead.

Re:How much did they pay you, Slashdot? (1)

gurps_npc (621217) | about 5 months ago | (#46859235)

You have misunderstood the real advantage of the bottle. You don't package it, you let it collect bacteria and garbage.

People don't eat the bottle. Dogs, birds, bugs, rats, squirrels, etc. eat the bottle.

It's not about feeding people, it's about preventing a ton of non-degradable plastic from filling up our land fills.,

As for shelf life, you keep it in the refrigerator at a convenience store. There may be a small shelf life problem, but it greatly solves the garbage dump life problem.

Re:How much did they pay you, Slashdot? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46859611)

>rediculous

It is ridiculous how often this word is misspelt.

this is stupid (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46858627)

This is a great example of a "solution looking for a problem"

Separately, I like making lemonade and other drinks by adding the flavored powder to a water bottle. This idea is useless for my needs. (Because I don't want to buy nor clean a pitcher)

I imagine though you could send a truckload of these to impoverished people though.

I'm sure bottled water are quaking in their boots (1)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about 5 months ago | (#46858813)

as the potential to put an end to the bottled water industry

ORLY?

How strong is it? How easily gripped is it while running or cycling? Can you refill it? Can you reseal it? Can you drink it without dribbling all over the table?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

Sold!

not important at all (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46858837)

First line in article: "Let us all face it; carrying an empty bottle of water is nearly as uncomfortable as finding yourself shy of a water bottle."

So, not uncomfortable at all then. Thanks for not wasting any more of my time.

This not supposed to be eaten by humans (1)

gurps_npc (621217) | about 5 months ago | (#46859287)

A bunch of you foolishly think humans are supposed to eat this. So you foolishly think it needs an outer layer.

The point of making it edible is not so that humans can eat it, but instead so that after we finish drinking from it we can throw it on the ground and let birds, dogs, bus, etc eat it. No outer layer needed.

That said, this concept still needs a lot more work before it goes into production

It's a water balloon. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46859731)

I really want to stash water balloons in my backpack. What could possibly go wrong?

Want less environmental impact? Use a bota, canteen, or Camelbak.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>