Post G22-008: Plastic cloche surprise, not all plastics are created equal.

Posted on March 30, 2022

 

Background

In my last experiment, I showed how well a Ball (mason) jar worked as frost protection.  In the coldest part of the night, the inside of the jar stayed 10 degrees F warmer than the outside.  I thought that was exceptional performance for a lightweight uninsulated glass container.  My explanation is that the glass traps long-wave infrared.  And so, this works for the same reason that my radiant-barrier frost protection works.  It prevents the garden bed from radiating heat energy off into space.

Long-wave infrared absorption would explain why glass worked well but polyethylene sheet was a near-total failure.  A sheet of ordinary window glass will absorb about 86% of long-wave infrared, and reflect the rest.  Polyethylene, by contrast, was reported to be almost completely transparent to infrared.

Accordingly, where a glass jar works well as a garden cloche, I figured that a plastic jar would not.  And that’s what I tested last night.


Never let facts get in the way of a good argument.

There’s just one problem:  Different plastics have different infrared absorption spectra.  And it took me a while to track that down.

Using Wein’s Law, the spectrum of radiation emitted by my 50 F garden subsoil would peak somewhere around:

  • 10 microns (micrometers) wavelength
  • 10,000 nanometers wavelength
  • 1000 waves per centimeter.

Those are three ways of saying the exact same thing.

So I wanted to find out how different plastics behaved with respect to long-wave radiation somewhere in that vicinity.  That’s where most of the power from the upwelling long-wave radiation from the garden bed will be concentrated.

I never did find exactly the data that I wanted.  But I came close.  And, as it turns out, polyethylene’s absolute transparency in that region of the spectrum is the exception among plastics, not the rule.

The chart below show the absorbance spectra of various common plastics, with the long-wave infrared region highlighted.   Note that the line for polyethylene is almost completely flat in that region.  It absorbs almost no long-wave infrared.   But PETE plastic, just below that, in fact absorbs infrared strongly right at the frequency where infrared from the soil will have its peak — wave number of 1000.

Source:  Figure 9, “Identification of black microplastics using long-wavelength infrared hyperspectral imaging with imaging-type two-dimensional Fourier spectroscopy“, Kosuke Nogo, Kou Ikejima, Wei Qi, et al., DOI: 10.1039/D0AY01738H (Paper) Anal. Methods, 2021, 13, 647-659

The upshot is that when I condemned all plastic for this use, I was too hasty.  Avoid polyethylene, for sure.  But, assuming the glass choche works as I have described it, PETE plastic ought to work reasonably well.  Not as well as glass, but certainly not as poorly as polyethylene.

As an odd little footnote, Mylar plastic — the kind used to make space blankets — is the same stuff as PET/PETE plastic — polyethylene terephthalate.


Results

Below is a photo of a quart Ball jar (right) and the thick-walled PETE jar that I’m going to test.  That was as close as I could get to the same size and shape as the Ball jar.  FWIW, the PETE jar originally held salad dressing.  You can see that it’s much thicker than (e.g.) a typical disposable water bottle or soda bottle.

 

When I tested that last night — two temperature loggers on a raised garden bed, one covered with the PETE bottle, one un-covered — sure enough, PETE works pretty well.  But not as well as glass.

At the very coldest part of the night, the PETE jar provided between 4 and 6 degrees F of protection, or about half the maximum protection observed for the glass jar.

The lesson here is that when I condemned all plastics for use in frost protection, I was too hasty.  Polyethylene sheet is a terrible choice, from the standpoint of trapping long-wave infrared.  But PETE’s OK.  Not quite as good as glass, but pretty close.