Journal of Polymers and the Environment

, Volume 25, Issue 2, pp 126–135 | Cite as

Developing Biocomposites Panels from Food Packaging and Textiles Wastes: Physical and Biological Performance

  • Ahmed S. O. Mohareb
  • Ahmed H. Hassanin
  • K. Candelier
  • Marie France Thévenon
  • Zeki Candan
Original Paper
  • 568 Downloads

Abstract

The urban solid waste problem has been one of the biggest environmental challenges these days. In this context, developing biocomposites with improved performance by using various sources and wastes has been intensified in the last decades for economic and environmental points of view. In this study, physical behavior, fungal decay and termite attack tests were conducted in laboratory conditions to investigate the performance of composites developed from TetraPak and textile wastes. All the results were compared to standard wood products. The water swelling properties strongly decreased in the manufactured TetraPak composites when compared with the conventional particleboard panels. The fungal decay resistance tests revealed that the stand alone TetraPak based composites were not completely resistant to wood-decaying fungi. A significant amelioration in the decay durability was observed for the manufactured TetraPak composites compared to the standard wood samples. Durability classes were determined according to the criteria given in the European standard (CEN/TS15083-1). Interestingly, the data indicated that the increment of the wool waste proportion in the produced boards lead to a significant enhancement counter the test fungi. The results of termite screening test showed further considerable resistance for whole TetraPak based composites against termites when compared to traditional wood samples. Such panels could be an available alternative without any additives for wood based composite structures and it can be used in a wide range of applications.

Keywords

Food packaging Textiles waste Biocomposites Fungi Termite 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work has been partially funded by Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) under Grant Nos. 21514107-216.01-237755. The authors thank EKOPAN Company and Yunsa wool Company of Turkey for providing raw materials.

References

  1. 1.
    Ashori A (2008) Bioresour Technol 99:4661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Terzi E, Köse C, Büyüksarı Ü, Avcı E, Ayrılmış N, Kartal SN (2009) Int Biodeterior Biodegrad 63:806CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Shah UD (2013) J Mater Sci 48:6083CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Khanjanzadeh H, Bahmani AA, Rafighi A, Tabarsa T (2012) Afr J Biotechnol 11:8045Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Reux F (2012) Overview and dynamism of the worldwide composite market. In: 5th innovative composites summit, JEC ASIA, Suntec, Singapore, 26–28 June 2012Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lykidisi C, Grigoriou A, Barboutis I (2014) Wood Mater Sci Eng 9:202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sassoni E, Manzi S, Mantecchi A, Canti M (2014) Energy Build 77:219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tetrapak globle site. TetraPak. [Online] Tetra Pak International S.A. [Cited: 4 24, 2015]. http://www.tetrapak.com/about-tetra-pak/the-company/facts-and-figures
  9. 9.
    TetraPak. Tetra Pak 2014 Sustainability update. [Online] Tetra Pak International S.A. [Cited: 4 24, 2015]. http://www.tetrapak.com/environment/sustainability-report
  10. 10.
    Yılgör N, Kose C, Terzi E, Figen AK, Ibach R, Kartal NS, Piskin S (2014) Bioresour 9:4784Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lopes CMA, Felisberti MI (2006) J Appl Polym Sci 101:3183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kartal NS, Green E III (2003) Int Biodeterior Biodegrad 51:29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Segerholm K (2012) Characteristics of wood plastic composites based on modified wood—moisture properties, biological resistance and micromorphology. Doctoral Thesis, ISSN 0349-5752, KTH Building Materials Technology, Stockholm, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yilgor N, Kartal NS, Houtman C, Terzi E, Kanturk A, Kose C, Piskin S (2012) Composites boards produced from wast TetraPak packaging materials: chemical properties and biological performance. In: International conference on recycling and reuse, Istanbul, Turkey, 4–6 June 2012Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gu DJ (2007) Int Biodeterior Biodegrad 59:170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Li X, Tabil LG, Panigrahi S (2007) J Polym Environ 15:25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mohanty KA, Misra M, Drzal TL (2002) J Polym Environ 10:19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sen S, Ayrilmis N, Candan Z (2010) Afr J Agric Res 5:159Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ebadi M, Farsi M, Narchin P, Madhoushi M (2015) J Thermoplast Compos Mater. doi: 10.1177/0892705715618745 Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ayrilmis N, Kaymakci A, Akbulut T, Elmas G (2013) Compos B Eng 47:150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    European Committee for Standardization (1999) Particleboards and fiberboards, determination of swelling in thickness after immersion, NF EN 317, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    European Committee for Standardization (1999) Wood-based panels—determination of moisture content, NF EN 322, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    European Committee for Standardization (1999) Wood-based panels—determination of density, NF EN 323, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mohareb A, Thévenon M, Wozniak E, Gérardin P (2010) Int Biodeterior Biodegrad 64:35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mohareb A, Hassanin A, Badr A, Hassan K, Farag R (2015) J Appl Polym Sci. doi: 10.1002/APP.42253 Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    CEN/TS 15083-1, 2006. Durability of wood and wood-based products. Determination of the natural durability of solid wood against wood-destroying fungi, Test Methods. Part 1: BasidiomycetesGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    European committee for standardization (1990) Wood preservatives—determination of toxic values against Reticulitermes santonensis de Feytaud (laboratory method), NF EN 117, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Gu DJ (2003) Int Biodeterior Biodegrad 52:69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Pekhtasheva E, Neverov A, Kubica S, Zaikov G (2012) Chem Chem Technol 6:263Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    De Vetter L, Stevens M, Van Acker J (2009) Int Biodeterior Biodegrad 63:130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Klyosov A (2007) Wood–plastic composites. Wiley online library. ISBN: 9780470165935Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ahmed S. O. Mohareb
    • 1
  • Ahmed H. Hassanin
    • 2
  • K. Candelier
    • 3
  • Marie France Thévenon
    • 3
  • Zeki Candan
    • 4
  1. 1.Forestry and Wood Technology Department, Faculty of AgricultureAlexandria UniversityAlexandriaEgypt
  2. 2.Textile Engineering Department, Faculty of EngineeringAlexandria UniversityAlexandriaEgypt
  3. 3.Wood Preservation Laboratory, Research Unit BIOWOOEBCIRADMontpellier Cedex 5France
  4. 4.Department of Forest Products Engineering, Faculty of ForestryIstanbul UniversityIstanbulTurkey

Personalised recommendations