Contents:
Many companies are leading research initiatives to find viable alternatives to plastic products - and massive headway is being made. It certainly is not always practical to replace plastic with a biodegradable plastic - inevitably, biodegradables have short useable lifespans and typically fair poorly against liquid. However, for plastic products which are used for only minutes anyhow, biodegradable plastics offer a uniquely viable and environmentally friendly alternative.
To those who fret at the sight of a plastic bottle, biodegradable water bottles made from algae may provide a feasible alternative. The bottle safely houses water for short durations of up to a few days, which, if delivered to the consumer in time, would typically far exceed the needed lifespan a disposable water bottle requires to begin with. Long-term storage is still safe, however, the water may absorb some of the flavors from the algae material, which may be displeasing to many.
Nevertheless, having a biodegradable bottle with some added flavor still far outweighs the negatives a traditional plastic bottle imposes on the environment. There are many companies reducing the amount of plastic in packaging and products, as well as others who are employing more sustainable packages, although, a majority of consumer packing still includes plastic.
Changing the notion of how plastics are used and implemented is a team from Georgia Institute of Technology who want to add to the expanding list of sustainable alternatives with a new type of flexible plastic packaging made from crab shells and trees. The material offers a more sustainable and significantly easier to recycle alternative to traditional plastic packaging. And, according to the team, the new packaging may be more effective and safe at containing liquid and food. As with most plastic alternatives, this material also suffers drawbacks from the production of cost, as well as the difficulty in harvesting chitin a fibrous substance which forms part of an anthropoid's exoskeleton from crabs.
More research is still needed to investigate more economical and ethical production methods to create a more efficient plastic packaging alternative - and that solution may be found in fungus. The future of packaging may be rotten regardless of a viable plastic alternative is created or not - through the rot of the latter is not necessarily a negative. The visible portion of a fungus, or a mushroom, represents only a small fraction of the entire organism.
Scientists have nearly perfected fungus packaging and are already using it to create structures, like a foot tower constructed from living mushroom bricks.
The bricks are easily manufactured by simply filling molds with organic matter infused with spores. In a matter of five days, the mushrooms transform the organic matter into a brick like substance - a cheap and highly effective process. A team of scientists, nearly half a decade ago, once used the fungus bricks to construct a massive foot living mushroom tower.
However, its applications quite literally stem far deeper than just a building material. Companies are already investigating mycelium as a potential alternative to conventional packing material. The mushroom packaging is naturally fire resistant and it can be easily molded to any shape. With a curing time of only five days, the mushroom manufacturing process is proving to be a viable option for companies to incorporate into their packaging. Once it meets its intended purpose, the mushroom packaging can be tossed away where it too naturally decomposes.
Unfortunately, since it is still living, scientists are wary of disposing of the material in foreign environments where it may spread as an invasive species. Although, counteracting the possibility is the addition of specific bio-engineering which creates a very specific environment in which the packaging can grow. Outside of that environment, the fungus can no longer spread.
Though, cross-species contamination is still a threat in which must be investigated further. Evidently, there are many alternatives available right now to reuse and repurpose the plastic which already exists, and other technologies to entirely replace plastic leading on into the future. However, there are heaps of plastic waste already in the environment which still needs to be disposed of. Recycling is nearly out of the question - facilities are already struggling to keep up, and plastic can only be recycled so many times before it becomes too contaminated to the point of uselessness.
An inconceivable amount of plastic has been discarded into the environment, and once there, it can take upwards of a millennium for plastic to completely degrade, even then as previously mentioned, remnants of microplastics may continue to linger for far exist far longer. The fungus also uses mycelium, the same stuff used in the formation of mushroom bricks, to completely tear plastic apart, molecule by molecule. Rather than using it as a building block, the fungus uses its network of root-like threads to tear apart the polymer chains.
Currently, researchers are investigating the optimal conditions for the fungus to thrive in, then, the fungus can be introduced into waste treatment plants to begin the plastic eating process on a large scale. However, also like the fungus bricks, the plastic eating fungus may become an invasive species as well, especially if it decides to grow beyond the plastic where it is easier to extract nutrients rather than ripping the molecules of plastic appear.
Circumnavigating the problem of decomposing plastic requires ditching the idea of using a living organism altogether.
In a freak accident, researchers accidentally improved a naturally occurring enzyme and enhanced its ability to consume plastic. The newly modified enzyme is more effective at digesting plastic bottles and other plastic waste and could be used to fight back against plastic pollution. The enzyme was discovered only a few years ago while researchers in Japan were investigating a bacterium which produces the enzyme. Although scientists believe the enzyme is not native to the natural earth, rather, it was created out of a bizarre mutation which allowed to exclusively feed on PET plastic, a common substance used to fabricate bottles.
It is believed the bacterium which produces the enzyme evolved in a waste recycling center. If scientists can perfect the production of the enzyme, it may unlock the ability to easily break the polymer chains holding plastic together at a molecular level, finally turning the fight against in favor of the environment. In a world quickly suffocating beneath a blanket of plastic products, the time to act was today, but it needed to be acted on yesterday.
The fight against plastic still rages on, and the scale is tipped far in the direction of plastic. However, the fight is not lost. There are many technologies being developed to help eliminate plastic, and many are already ready to begin extracting and replacing the plastic which already exists. The alternatives are ambition, and will undoubtedly take a global effort to eradicate the plague of plastic. It is the consumer's responsibility to ensure companies are held accountable for the plastic waste included in nearly every product.
There are many new technologies to help, but the first step begins with preventing the production of senseless single-use plastic products. The first step is to reduce plastic, and that begins at the corporate level. Moving forward, companies should be accountable for including the packaging waste in nearly every product, and that begins with demanding returns on single-use plastics.
While it is important to reduce the amount of packaging you use, it is far more important to demand corporate returns on single-use plastic. Demanding returns on plastic is something we all can benefit from - companies can include small deposits on packaging to encourage plastic returns. It would also force companies to reconsider how products are packaged, perhaps by encouraging reusable packaging which can be returned and reused on another product.
Technologies can help assist remove the plastic which already exists, and replace plastics leading into the future. Right now, the ones producing the waste have no incentive to lead the change - but that can change. Consumers can help by consuming less, but companies can do more by eliminating senseless plastic at the source. Do not stand idle while the world suffocates, stand up against plastic, and demand change. We use cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website.
If you continue using our website, we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies on the Interesting Engineering website. They have the advantage that they can be used to sort different plastics that are black—a problem with traditional automatic systems. The application of laser-sorting systems is likely to increase separation of WEEE and automotive plastics.
These systems also have the capability to separate polymer by type or grade and can also separate polyolefinic materials such as PP from HDPE. However, this is still a very novel approach and currently is only used in a small number of European recycling facilities.
This article has been cited by other articles in PMC. PS A post-consumer recycled impact modified polystyrene for general use. Companies are finding ways to transform plastic waste into new products once more, significantly increasing the usable lifespan of plastic while simultaneously reducing the need for new plastics and removing some that already exists within the world. As a consequence, the production of plastics has increased markedly over the last 60 years. Recycling 15 , — doi: Right now, there are viable alternatives to entirely replace plastics while there are other recycling solutions to reduce the plastic which already exists.
Innovations in recycling technologies over the last decade include increasingly reliable detectors and sophisticated decision and recognition software that collectively increase the accuracy and productivity of automatic sorting—for example current FT-NIR detectors can operate for up to h between faults in the detectors.
Comparing some environmental impacts of commodity polymer production and current ability for recycling from post-consumer sources. All LCI data are specific to European industry and covers the production process of the raw materials, intermediates and final polymer, but not further processing and logistics PlasticsEurope a. A number of European countries including Germany, Austria, Norway, Italy and Spain are already collecting, in addition to their bottle streams, rigid packaging such as trays, tubs and pots as well as limited amounts of post-consumer flexible packaging such as films and wrappers.
Recycling of this non-bottle packaging has become possible because of improvements in sorting and washing technologies and emerging markets for the recyclates. The potential benefits of mixed plastics recycling in terms of resource efficiency, diversion from landfill and emission savings, are very high when one considers the fact that in the UK it is estimated that there is over one million tonne per annum of non-bottle plastic packaging WRAP a in comparison with tonnes of plastic bottle waste WRAP Life-cycle analysis can be a useful tool for assessing the potential benefits of recycling programmes.
If recycled plastics are used to produce goods that would otherwise have been made from new virgin polymer, this will directly reduce oil usage and emissions of greenhouse gases associated with the production of the virgin polymer less the emissions owing to the recycling activities themselves. There may be other environmental costs or benefits of any such alternative material usage, but these are a distraction to our discussion of the benefits of recycling and would need to be considered on a case-by-case basis.
Here, we will primarily consider recycling of plastics into products that would otherwise have been produced from virgin polymer. Feedstock chemical recycling technologies satisfy the general principle of material recovery, but are more costly than mechanical recycling, and less energetically favourable as the polymer has to be depolymerized and then re-polymerized.
Historically, this has required very significant subsidies because of the low price of petrochemicals in contrast to the high process and plant costs to chemically recycle polymers. Energy recovery from waste plastics by transformation to fuel or by direct combustion for electricity generation, use in cement kilns and blast furnaces, etc. There are also environmental and health concerns associated with their emissions. One of the key benefits of recycling plastics is to reduce the requirement for plastics production.
In terms of energy use, recycling has been shown to save more energy than that produced by energy recovery even when including the energy used to collect, transport and re-process the plastic Morris Life-cycle analyses has also been used for plastic-recycling systems to evaluate the net environmental impacts Arena et al.
It has been estimated that PET bottle recycling gives a net benefit in greenhouse gas emissions of 1. An average net reduction of 1. Mixed plastics, the least favourable source of recycled polymer could still provide a net benefit of the vicinity of 0. The higher eco-efficiency for bottle recycling is because of both the more efficient process for recycling bottles as opposed to mixed plastics and the particularly high emissions profile of virgin PET production. However, the mixed plastics recycling scenario still has a positive net benefit, which was considered superior to the other options studied, of both landfills and energy recovery as solid refuse fuel, so long as there is substitution of virgin polymer.
There is increasing public awareness on the need for sustainable production and consumption. This has encouraged local authorities to organize collection of recyclables, encouraged some manufacturers to develop products with recycled content, and other businesses to supply this public demand. Marketing studies of consumer preferences indicate that there is a significant, but not overwhelming proportion of people who value environmental values in their purchasing patterns.
For such customers, confirmation of recycled content and suitability for recycling of the packaging can be a positive attribute, while exaggerated claims for recyclability where the recyclability is potential, rather than actual can reduce consumer confidence. It has been noted that participating in recycling schemes is an environmental behaviour that has wide participation among the general population and was 57 per cent in the UK in a survey WRAP d , and 80 per cent in an Australian survey where kerbside collection had been in place for longer NEPC In the UK, producer responsibility was enacted through a scheme for generating and trading packaging recovery notes, plus more recently a landfill levy to fund a range of waste reduction activities.
As a consequence of all the above trends, the market value of recycled polymer and hence the viability of recycling have increased markedly over the last few years. Extended producer responsibility can also be enacted through deposit-refund schemes, covering for example, beverage containers, batteries and vehicle tyres. These schemes can be effective in boosting collection rates, for example one state of Australia has a container deposit scheme that includes PET soft-drink bottles , as well as kerbside collection schemes.
Here the collection rate of PET bottles was 74 per cent of sales, compared with 36 per cent of sales in other states with kerbside collection only. The proportion of bottles in litter was reduced as well compared to other states West Two key economic drivers influence the viability of thermoplastics recycling. These are the price of the recycled polymer compared with virgin polymer and the cost of recycling compared with alternative forms of acceptable disposal.
There are additional issues associated with variations in the quantity and quality of supply compared with virgin plastics. Lack of information about the availability of recycled plastics, its quality and suitability for specific applications, can also act as a disincentive to use recycled material. Historically, the primary methods of waste disposal have been by landfill or incineration. Costs of landfill vary considerably among regions according to the underlying geology and land-use patterns and can influence the viability of recycling as an alternative disposal route.
In Japan, for example, the excavation that is necessary for landfill is expensive because of the hard nature of the underlying volcanic bedrock; while in the Netherlands it is costly because of permeability from the sea. High disposal costs are an economic incentive towards either recycling or energy recovery. Collection of used plastics from households is more economical in suburbs where the population density is sufficiently high to achieve economies of scale. The most efficient collection scheme can vary with locality, type of dwellings houses or large multi-apartment buildings and the type of sorting facilities available.
These latter methods can be a good source of relatively pure recyclables, but are ineffective in providing high collection rates of post-consumer waste. The price of virgin plastic is influenced by the price of oil, which is the principle feedstock for plastic production.
As the quality of recovered plastic is typically lower than that of virgin plastics, the price of virgin plastic sets the ceiling for prices of recovered plastic. The price of oil has increased significantly in the last few years, from a range of around USD 25 per barrel to a price band between USD 50— since Hence, although higher oil prices also increase the cost of collection and reprocessing to some extent, recycling has become relatively more financially attractive.
Plastics Fabrication and Recycling - CRC Press Book. Series: Plastics Engineering. For Instructors Request Inspection Copy. For Librarians. International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 7, Issue 5, May- Keywords— Plastics recycling, Density of polymers, Shredder, Extruder of .
The latter point is particularly enhanced by technologies for turning recovered plastic into food grade polymer by removing contamination—supporting closed-loop recycling. So, while over a decade ago recycling of plastics without subsidies was mostly only viable from post-industrial waste, or in locations where the cost of alternative forms of disposal were high, it is increasingly now viable on a much broader geographic scale, and for post-consumer waste. In western Europe, plastic waste generation is growing at approximately 3 per cent per annum, roughly in line with long-term economic growth, whereas the amount of mechanical recycling increased strongly at a rate of approximately 7 per cent per annum.
In , however, this still amounted to only Together with feedstock recycling 1. This trend for both rates of mechanical recycling and energy recovery to increase is continuing, although so is the trend for increasing waste generation. Volumes of plastic waste disposed to landfill, and recovered by various methods in Western Europe, — APME Effective recycling of mixed plastics waste is the next major challenge for the plastics recycling sector.
The advantage is the ability to recycle a larger proportion of the plastic waste stream by expanding post-consumer collection of plastic packaging to cover a wider variety of materials and pack types. Product design for recycling has strong potential to assist in such recycling efforts.
Hence, wider implementation of policies to promote the use of environmental design principles by industry could have a large impact on recycling performance, increasing the proportion of packaging that can economically be collected and diverted from landfill see Shaxson et al. The same logic applies to durable consumer goods designing for disassembly, recycling and specifications for use of recycled resins are key actions to increase recycling.
Most post-consumer collection schemes are for rigid packaging as flexible packaging tends to be problematic during the collection and sorting stages. Most current material recovery facilities have difficulty handling flexible plastic packaging because of the different handling characteristics of rigid packaging. The low weight-to-volume ratio of films and plastic bags also makes it less economically viable to invest in the necessary collection and sorting facilities. However, plastic films are currently recycled from sources including secondary packaging such as shrink-wrap of pallets and boxes and some agricultural films, so this is feasible under the right conditions.
Approaches to increasing the recycling of films and flexible packaging could include separate collection, or investment in extra sorting and processing facilities at recovery facilities for handling mixed plastic wastes. In order to have successful recycling of mixed plastics, high-performance sorting of the input materials needs to be performed to ensure that plastic types are separated to high levels of purity; there is, however, a need for the further development of endmarkets for each polymer recyclate stream.
The effectiveness of post-consumer packaging recycling could be dramatically increased if the diversity of materials were to be rationalized to a subset of current usage. For example, if rigid plastic containers ranging from bottles, jars to trays were all PET, HDPE and PP, without clear PVC or PS, which are problematic to sort from co-mingled recyclables, then all rigid plastic packaging could be collected and sorted to make recycled resins with minimal cross-contamination.
The losses of rejected material and the value of the recycled resins would be enhanced.
In addition, labels and adhesive materials should be selected to maximize recycling performance. The goals should be to maximize both the volume and quality of recycled resins. In summary, recycling is one strategy for end-of-life waste management of plastic products.
It makes increasing sense economically as well as environmentally and recent trends demonstrate a substantial increase in the rate of recovery and recycling of plastic wastes. These trends are likely to continue, but some significant challenges still exist from both technological factors and from economic or social behaviour issues relating to the collection of recyclable wastes, and substitution for virgin material.
Recycling of a wider range of post-consumer plastic packaging, together with waste plastics from consumer goods and ELVs will further enable improvement in recovery rates of plastic waste and diversion from landfills. Coupled with efforts to increase the use and specification of recycled grades as replacement of virgin plastic, recycling of waste plastics is an effective way to improve the environmental performance of the polymer industry.
National Center for Biotechnology Information , U. Author information Copyright and License information Disclaimer. This article has been cited by other articles in PMC. Abstract Plastics are inexpensive, lightweight and durable materials, which can readily be moulded into a variety of products that find use in a wide range of applications.
Introduction The plastics industry has developed considerably since the invention of various routes for the production of polymers from petrochemical sources. Open in a separate window. Terminology used in different types of plastics recycling and recovery. ASTM D definitions equivalent ISO draft definitions other equivalent terms primary recycling mechanical recycling closed-loop recycling secondary recycling mechanical recycling downgrading tertiary recycling chemical recycling feedstock recycling quaternary recycling energy recovery valorization.
Systems for plastic recycling Plastic materials can be recycled in a variety of ways and the ease of recycling varies among polymer type, package design and product type. Most post-consumer flexible packaging not recovered PP Needs action on sorting and separation, plus development of further outlets for recycled PP PS Ecological case for recycling Life-cycle analysis can be a useful tool for assessing the potential benefits of recycling programmes.
Public support for recycling There is increasing public awareness on the need for sustainable production and consumption. Economic issues relating to recycling Two key economic drivers influence the viability of thermoplastics recycling. Current trends in plastic recycling In western Europe, plastic waste generation is growing at approximately 3 per cent per annum, roughly in line with long-term economic growth, whereas the amount of mechanical recycling increased strongly at a rate of approximately 7 per cent per annum.
Challenges and opportunities for improving plastic recycling Effective recycling of mixed plastics waste is the next major challenge for the plastics recycling sector. Conclusions In summary, recycling is one strategy for end-of-life waste management of plastic products. In Plastics and the environment ed.
Wiley Interscience Andrady A. B , — doi: European Environment Agency Fisher M. Wiley Interscience Fletcher B. Recycling 17 , — doi: In Dioxins and health eds Schecter A. Local Government Authority Marques G. Waste Management 20 , — doi: North Point Press Morris J. Recycling 29 , 65—90 doi: Recycling 15 , — doi: Biological Sciences are provided here courtesy of The Royal Society.
Support Center Support Center. Please review our privacy policy. Most post-consumer flexible packaging not recovered.