In this study, for the first time, acute and chronic toxicity caused by four different kinds of microplastics: polypropylene (PP), polyethylene (PE), polyvinylchloride (PVC), and a commercial mixture ...(PE + PVC) on Lepidium sativum were evaluated. Parameters considered were: i) biometric parameters (e.g. percentage inhibition of seed germination, plant height, leaf number and fresh biomass productions); and ii) oxidative stress (e.g. levels of hydrogen peroxide, glutathione, and ascorbic acid). On plants exposed to chronic stress chlorophylls, carotenoids, aminolaevulinic acid, and proline productions were, also, evaluated. PVC resulted the most toxic than other plastic materials tested. This study represents the first paper highlighting microplastics are able to produce oxidative burst in tested plants and could represent an important starting point for future researches on biochemical effects of microplastic in terrestrial environments such as agroecosystems.
Display omitted
•L. sativum was exposed to microplastics (PP, PE, PVC, PE + PVC).•Acute and chronic effects due to different microplastics exposure were recorded.•Biometric and biomarkers of oxidative stress parameters were measured.•The occurrence of oxidative burst was highlighted in exposed plants.•PVC resulted the most toxic than other microplastics tested.
Bisphenol A (BPA), a synthetic chemical which has raised concerns due to its potential toxicological effects on humans, has been widely detected in canned and non-canned meat and meat products. This ...study estimated BPA migration from packaging to non-canned and canned meat products by developing two probabilistic models. BPA concentration data in packaging materials were collated, including polyethylene terephthalate, polyvinyl chloride, epoxy-based coatings, and polyester-based coatings. Migration ratios were calculated from migration tests of BPA molecules moving from packaging to food simulants. The predictive model revealed that the BPA migration concentration from packaging ranges from 0.017 to 0.13 (5th–95th percentile) μg kg−1 with a simulated mean of 0.056 μg kg−1 in non-canned meat products. This is in stark contrast to the simulated mean of 134.57 (5th–95th percentile: 59.17–223.25) μg kg−1 for canned meat products. Nevertheless, plastic packaging was estimated to contribute only 3 % of BPA levels in non-canned meat products. The sensitivity analysis showed that the contact area of meat products with films is the most sensitive parameter of the plastic packaging migration model. It is concluded that plastic packaging may not be the only or dominant source of BPA in non-canned meat products.
Display omitted
•Probabilistic models were developed to estimate BPA migration from packaging.•BPA migration levels are higher from can packaging than from plastic packaging.•Plastic packaging contributes only 3 % of BPA levels in non-canned meat products.•The contact area of films with meat products is the most sensitive parameter.•Plastic packaging may not be the dominant source of BPA in non-canned meat products.
•Plastics recyclability is largely dependent on their quality.•Technicalities define the ability of plastic materials to be properly recovered.•Cascading of recycled plastics should be pursued as an ...alternative pathway.•Plastic packaging should be redesigned, improving sorting and reprocessing systems.•Transitioning towards a circular economy requires the exploitation of all available routes.
Display omitted
While attention on the importance of closing materials loops for achieving circular economy (CE) is raging, the technicalities of doing so are often neglected or difficult to overcome. These technicalities determine the ability of materials, components and products (MCPs) to be properly recovered and redistributed for reuse, recycling or recovery, given their remaining functionality, described here as the remaining properties and characteristics of MCPs. The different properties of MCPs make them useful for various functions and purposes. A transition, therefore, towards a CE would require the utmost exploitation of the remaining functionality of MCPs; ideally, enabling recirculation of them back in the economy. At present, this is difficult to succeed. This short communication article explains how the remaining functionality of MCPs, defined here as quality, is perceived at different stages of the supply chain, focusing specifically on plastic packaging, and how this affects their potential recycling. It then outlines the opportunities and constraints posed by some of the interventions that are currently introduced into the plastic packaging system, aimed at improving plastic materials circularity. Finally, the article underpins the need for research that integrates systemic thinking, with technological innovations and policy reforms at all stages of the supply chain, to promote sustainable practices become established.
Littered plastics are ubiquitous in the environment. This work presents an elaborate functional classification and material characterization of plastic packaging in land litter representatively ...sampled in Flanders, to support policy makers in taking effective reduction measures. In terms of mass, plastic bottles constituted the largest functional fraction (50.4 %) within plastic packaging found in land litter, followed by packaging films (food and non-food combined, 19.2 %) and rigid packaging (food and non-food combined, 18.2 %). In contrast, in number, plastic bottles were only the third largest fraction (10.1 %), after food (37.9 %) and non-food (26.2 %) packaging films. The difference between mass and number % for plastic packaging films can be explained by the fact that these films largely consisted of small and lightweight items, such as cookie wrappers and fragments of torn-open packaging. On a material level, the bottles fraction consisted almost entirely of PET, whereas non-food packaging films, bags and loose bottle caps consisted mainly of PE. ‘Cups and lids’, food and non-food rigid packaging and food packaging films consisted of a variety of polymer types, with PP, PET and PE being the most abundant in different ratios. Given the relative importance of plastic bottles, the introduction of a deposit return system could considerably reduce the plastic packaging mass littered into the environment. However, since the share of plastic packaging in the total collected land litter was only 14 %, the overall effect of such a measure on the litter mass will be limited. Given the high number share of food and non-food packaging films such as cookie wrappers, indicating their high ‘likeliness-to-get-littered’, effective policies to avoid littering of these types of packaging seem to be key.
•3 out of 9 chemical recycling technologies have the highest TRL of 9.•Plasma gasification of plastics could soon be fully commercialized.•Economic feasibility of chemical recycling is still ...challenging to asses.•Chemical recycling is only a part of solution for plastic recovery.
Chemical recycling is considered an attractive technological pathway for reducing waste and greenhouse gas emissions, as well as promoting circular economy. In the EU, readiness to develop a full commercial plant is becoming increasingly important given the ambitious goal to recycle all plastics by 2030. Household packaging streams tend to be of lower quality and lower recycling performance compared to industrial and commercial waste streams, thus requiring particular attention. This paper assesses chemical recycling technologies available and identifies the most suitable for recycling of household plastic waste. We identify eight different technologies and compare them in terms of process temperature, sensitivity to feedstock contamination and level of polymer breakdown, three critical factors affecting the cost and attractiveness of a chemical process. In addition, we carry out a Technology Readiness Level (TRL) assessment for eight technologies based on the stage of their present development. The review is based on peer-reviewed scientific papers and information collected from technology developers and providers, as well as interviews with experts. Our analysis outlines advantages and disadvantages of technologies available for chemical plastic recycling and their TRL. The chemical recycling technologies with the highest TRL are pyrolysis, catalytic cracking and conventional gasification. However, the economic feasibility of these technologies is difficult to assess due to the low number of projects in operation and scarcity of data available for comparison. The results of this analysis provide timely information as policy makers and developers set targets for recycling, and contemplate investments on research and chemical plastic recovering plants.
Increasing plastic recycling rates is crucial to tackle plastic pollution and reduce consumption of fossil resources. Recycling routes for post-consumer plastic fractions that are technologically and ...economically feasible remain a challenge. Profitable value chains for recycling mixed film and tray-like plastics have hardly been implemented today, in sharp contrast to recycling of relatively pure fractions such as polyethylene terephthalate and high-density polyethylene bottles.
This study examines the economic feasibility of implementing mechanical recycling for plastic waste such as polypropylene, polystyrene, polyethylene films and mixed polyolefins. In most European countries these plastic fractions are usually incinerated or landfilled whilst in fact technologies exist to mechanically recycle them into regranulates or regrinds.
Results show that the economic incentives for the recycling of plastic packaging depend predominantly on the product price and product yield. At current price levels, the most profitable plastic fraction to be recycled is PS rigids, with an internal rate of return of 14%, whereas the least profitable feed is a mixed polyolefin fraction with a negative internal rate of return in a scenario with steadily rising oil prices. Moreover, these values would be substantially reduced if oil prices, and therefore plastic product prices decrease. Considering a discount rate of 15% for a 15-year period, mechanical recycling is not profitable if no policy changes would be imposed by governments. Clearly low oil prices may jeopardize the mechanical recycling industry, inducing the need for policies that would increase the demand of recycled products such as imposing minimal recycled content targets.
Display omitted
•There is no mainstream solution for recycling multi-material multilayers plastic packaging in the next 5–10 years.•Chemical recycling (feedstock) is concentrating investments as a recycling ...solution, however with concerns about costs and genuine environmental benefits.•Harmonization of processes (multilayers, waste management, sorting) is critical for improving post-consumer rates.•Renewable materials can be key elements to reduce the carbon footprint of multilayers.
Multi-material multilayer plastic packaging (MMPP) is widely applied in fast moving consumer goods (FMCG) combining functionalities of distinct materials. These packaging structures can enhance properties, such as resource-use efficiency and barrier performance leading to consequential benefits like a prolonged shelf-life. Nevertheless, they represent a challenge for existing recycling systems, confronting circular economy principles. This study aim was to foresight the future of recycling technologies for MMPP in the next five to ten years. Future scenarios were identified, including (1) high-performance material recycling, (2) recycling into hydrocarbons, (3) business as usual, and (4) downcycling. In-depth interviews and a feedback survey were methods used to validate the scenario matrix while defining experts' expectations towards the future. The analysis showed that distinct technologies will develop unevenly in different parts of the world. A mix of all scenarios is probable in the upcoming years, depending, essentially, on regulations and technology availability. Advanced high-performance material recycling encounters systemic bottlenecks, such as insufficient sorting technology for post-consumer waste. In contrast, chemical recycling (feedstock) is concentrating investments as a solution, requiring low input-characterization. Additionally, design for recycling trends might reduce multilayers’ complexity. A gap between recycling targets and recycling technologies was identified, representing short-term opportunities for more sustainable materials, such as bio-based.
•Flexible plastic packaging waste is a common environmental pollutant.•Pyrolysis ̶ catalytic oil upgrading ̶ MWCNTs synthesis was investigated.•Catalytic oil upgrading over Fe-ZSM removes oxygenated ...compounds released from PET.•Non-condensable pyrolysis gas is converted into MWCNTs.•Electrodes from MWCNTs showed superior activity during oxygen reduction reaction.
Flexible plastic packaging waste causes serious environmental issues due to challenges in recycling. This study investigated the conversion of flexible plastic packaging waste with 11.8 and 27.5 wt.% polyethylene terephthalate (PET) (denoted as PET-12 and PET-28, respectively) into oil and multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs). The mixtures were initially pyrolyzed and the produced volatiles were processed over 9.0 wt.% Fe2O3 supported on ZSM-5 (400 °C) to remove oxygenated hydrocarbons (catalytic cracking of terephthalic and benzoic acids) that deteriorate oil quality. The contents of oxygenated hydrocarbons were decreased in oil from 4.6 and 9.4 wt.% per mass of PET-12 and PET-28, respectively, to undetectable levels. After catalytic cracking, the oil samples had similar contents of gasoline, diesel and heavy oil/wax fractions. The non-condensable gas was converted into MWCNTs over 0.9 wt.% Ni supported on CaCO3 (700 °C). The type of plastic packaging influenced the yields (2.4 and 1.5 wt.% per mass of PET-12 and PET-28, respectively) and the properties of MWCNTs due to the differences in gas composition. Regarding the electrocatalytic application, both MWCNTs from PET-12 and PET-28 outperformed commercial MWCNTs and Pt-based electrodes during oxygen evolution reaction, suggesting that MWCNTs from flexible plastic packaging can potentially replace conventional electrode materials.
Plastic pollution is considered to be among the greatest challenges the world faces. The consumption and often uncontrolled disposal of single-use plastic packaging is regarded as one of the main ...environmental hazards. Whereas the role of companies and politics in addressing this problem has been discussed intensively, little focus has been placed on the role of consumers. This paper investigates consumers’ awareness of plastic packaging by following an inductive and more differentiated approach. Results show that consumers associate plastic packaging with far more than environmental problems. Five different types of consumers’ awareness can be identified. Results help to gain a broader understanding of consumers and thus help to develop more effective strategies that empower consumers to use plastic in a more sustainable way.
•About 3 million ton of plastic packaging waste was generated from households in 2017.•Material footprint of single-use plastics consumption was estimated to be 638 units per capita a year.•A large ...fraction of the waste was incinerated by emitting greenhouse gasses.•The recycling of plastic packaging waste could reduce about 6.6 million ton of CO2eq per year.
Environmentally sound management of plastic packaging waste is an issue of concern around the world because it causes potential threats to oceans and the environment upon disposal and mismanagement. This study examines the current efforts on recycling of the waste by extended producer responsibility (EPR) in South Korea as well as other countries. Material flow analysis (MFA) was performed on plastic packaging by life cycle. Based on the results in this study, material footprint of common single use plastics (i.e., PET water bottles, plastic cups, plastic bags, and plastic containers and cutlery by food delivery) by consumption was estimated to be on average 11.8 kg or 638 disposable plastics per capita a year, resulting in 32.6 billion disposable plastics and 603,000 ton of waste for disposal in South Korea. Approximately, 3 million ton of plastic packaging waste from household waste streams in 2017 in South Korea was generated and treated by energy recovery with solid refuse fuels and heat recovery, incineration without energy recovery, material recycling, and landfilling. Material recycling and recovery rates of plastic packaging waste from households were relatively low at 13.5% and 50.5%, respectively. It was estimated that as much as 3.6 million ton of CO2eq was generated from 2.7 million ton of plastic waste by incineration in 2017. Approximately 6.6 million ton CO2eq could be avoided by material recycling. Challenges and efforts have been discussed to improve current recycling system of plastic packaging waste towards a circular economy.
Display omitted
PDF
