Journal of Polymers and the Environment

, Volume 20, Issue 4, pp 1019–1026 | Cite as

Methodology to Assess Silicone (Bio)Degradation and its Effects on Microbial Diversity

  • Baptiste Laubie
  • Aurélie Ohannessian
  • Valérie Desjardin
  • Patrick Germain
Original Paper

Abstract

The behavior of silicone elastomers in landfills has not been well studied. Their impact on the environment is not known and, consequently, it has not been possible to establish robust Life Cycle Assessments of these materials. In the first part of this study, a methodology for assessing silicone degradation pathways is described. The chemical and biological parameters were considered separately. Firstly, parameters such as pH, redox potential and cation concentration were monitored and then degradation in aerobic and anaerobic conditions was investigated. Any impacts on microbial diversity were also taken into account, using bio-molecular tools. In the second part, a case study on the degradation of Room Temperature Vulcanizable silicone elastomers was performed to validate this methodology. The results indicate that condensation catalysts play a key role at their end-of-life, in both chemical and biological degradation. Moreover, these compounds have a significant effect on microbial communities (similarities with blank samples <5 %). As a consequence, the choice of catalyst should be carefully considered to assess any environmental impacts.

Keywords

Polymer end-of-life Polymer degradation Silicone elastomers Silicone waste 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the analytical department of the LGCIE for contributions to this study. The authors would also like to thank the Bluestar Silicones® Company, which supplied the elastomers and Dr. Valerie James for proofreading this article.

References

  1. 1.
    Allen RB, Kochs P, Chandra G (1997) The handbook of environmental chemistry, part H: organosilicon materials. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mata-Alvarez J, Macé S, Llabrés P (2000) Bioresour Technol 74:3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Iglesias Jimenez E, Perez Garcia V (1991) Resour Conserv Recycl 6:45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    OECD Guidelines. OECD Guidelines for testing of chemicals, Paris, 1993. OECD 301 A: DOC die-away-test; OECD 301 B: CO2 evolution test; OECD 301 C: modified MITI test (I); OECD 301 D: closed bottle test; OECD 301 E: modified OECD screening test; OECD 301 F: manometric respirometry test; OECD 302 B: Zahn-Wellens/EMPA testGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    US Environmental Protection Agency (1996) Prevention, pesticides and toxic substances guidelines, “public drafts” for guidelines OPPTS 835.3110, 835.3120, 835.3170, 835.3180, 835.3200, 835.3210, 835.5045, 835.5154 and 835.3400Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pace NR (1997) Science 276:734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Steffen A, Kogej T, Tyrchan C, Engkvist O (2009) J Chem Inf Model 49:338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Muyzer G (1999) Curr Opin Microbiol 2:317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Acmite Market Intelligence (2009) World silicones market, markets, products, applications, innovations, chances & risks, competition, prospects to 2015. 1Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dewil R, Appels L, Baeyens J (2005) Energy Convers Manag 47:1711CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ohannessian A, Desjardin V, Chatain V, Germain P (2008) Water Sci Tech 58:1775CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Baker GC, Smith JJ, Cowan DA (2003) J Microbiol Methods 55:541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Watts RJ, Kong S, Haling CS, Gearhart L, Frye CL, Vigon BW (1995) Water Res 29:2405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Smith DM, Lehmann RG, Narayan R, Kozerski GE, Miller JR (1998) Compost Sci Util 6:6Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Baptiste Laubie
    • 1
    • 2
  • Aurélie Ohannessian
    • 1
  • Valérie Desjardin
    • 1
  • Patrick Germain
    • 1
  1. 1.INSA of Lyon Laboratoire de Génie Civil et d’Ingénierie Environnementale, Lab. (LGCIE)University of LyonVilleurbanne cedexFrance
  2. 2.INSA Lyon, LGCIEVilleurbanneFrance

Personalised recommendations