Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Bioplastics from Winemaking By-products in the Buildings Sector: A Feasibility Study on the Main Opportunities, Barriers and Challenges

  • Short Communication
  • Published:
Circular Economy and Sustainability Aims and scope Submit manuscript

    We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

    Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Abstract

Plastics from fossil source are third after steel and cement among the most widespread materials used in the buildings sector. Bioplastics are biopolymers that offer a sustainable alternative due to their biodegradability and compostability. The edible first-generation sugary-based feedstocks, having high costs that drive the market price even in presence of a large-scale production of bioplastics, should be partly replaced by 2030 with non-edible second-generation feedstocks based on recyclable organic solid agro-wastes according to “Green Deal” of the European Union. The winemaking wastes used as feedstock for the synthesis of biopolymer building blocks and reinforcing fillers could represent a suitable option to reduce biopolymer costs and increase their competitiveness in plastic market. Although bioplastic can solve more environmental issues, nonetheless the production cycle does not always respect the principles of sustainability overall during biopolymer recovery. The present feasibility study is aimed at taking the state of the art of bioplastics in the buildings industry for promoting winemaking co-products into a circular system. The literature data have been collected, consulted and empirically elaborated to find real and potential opportunities, barriers and challenges of developing wine wastes (e.g. wine shoots, grape pomace and wine lees) in the strategic market segment of bioclimatic architecture.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Data availability

Not applicable

Code availability

Not applicable

References

  1. Rivero CP, Hu Y, Kwan TH, Webb C, Theodoropoulos C, Daoud W, Lin CSK (2017) Bioplastics from solid waste. Curr Dev Biotechnol Bioeng. In: Solid Waste Manag. Wong JWC, Tyagi RD, Pandey A, (Eds), Elsevier, pp 1-26, ISBN 9780444636645. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-63664-5.00001-0

  2. Geyer R, Jambeck JR, Lavender Law K (2017) Production, use and fate of all plastics ever made. Sci Adv 3(7):e1700782. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1700782

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Schmidt C, Krauth T, Wagner S (2017) Export of plastic debris by river into the sea. Environ Sci Technol 51(21):12246–12253. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.7b02368

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Shah AA, Hasan F, Hameed A, Ahmed S (2008) Biological degradation of plastics: a comprehensive review. Biotechnol Adv 26(3):246–265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2007.12.005

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Kaur G, Uisan K, Ong KL, Lin CSK (2018) Recent trends in green and sustainable chemistry & waste valorisation: rethinking plastics in a circular economy. Curr Opin Green Sustain Chem 9:30–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogsc.2017.11.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Eriksen M, Lebreton LC, Carson HS, Thiel M, Moore CJ, Borerro JC, Galgani F, Ryan PG, Reisser J (2014) Plastic pollution in the world’s oceans: more than 5 trillion plastic pieces weighing over 250,000 tons afloat at sea. PLoS ONE 9:e111913. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0111913

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Ritchie H, Roser M. (2018) Plastic pollution, 2018 Our World in Data. Available online: https://ourworldindata.org/plastic-pollution (accessed on 30 December 2020)

  8. Galloway TS (2015) Micro- and nano-plastics and human health. In Marine Anthropogenic Litter. Springer: Cham, Switzerland 2015:343–366

    Google Scholar 

  9. Güven O, Gökdaĝ K, Jovanović B, Kıdeyş AE (2017) Microplastic litter composition of the Turkish territorial waters of the Mediterranean Sea, and its occurrence in the gastrointestinal tract of fish. Environ Pollut 223:286–294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2017.01.025

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Jabeen K, Su L, Li J, Yang D, Tong C, Mu J, Shi H (2017) Microplastics and mesoplastics in fish from coastal and fresh waters of China. Environ Pollut 221:141–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2016.11.055

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Revel M, Châtel A, Mouneyrac C (2018) Micro(nano) plastics: a threat to human health? Curr. Opin. Environ Sci Health 1:17–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coesh.2017.10.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Boden TA, Marland G, Andres RJ (2009) Global, regional, and national fossil-fuel CO2 emissions. Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory; US Department of Energy: Oak Ridge, TN, USA, 2009, Report No. 10

  13. Teigiserova DA, Hamelin L, Thomsen M (2019) Review of high-value food waste and food residues biorefineries with focus on unavoidable wastes from processing. Resour Conserv Recycl 149:413–426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.05.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. De Corato U, De Bari I, Viola E, Pugliese M (2018) Assessing the main opportunities of integrated biorefining from agro-bioenergy co/by-products and agroindustrial residues into high-value added products associated to some emerging markets: a review. Renew Sust Energ Rev 88:326–346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.02.041

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Esparza I, Jiménez-Moreno N, Bimbela F, Ancín-Azpilicueta C, Gandía LM (2020) Fruit and vegetable waste management: conventional and emerging approaches. J Environ Manag 265:110510. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110510

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Keswani C (2019) Bioeconomy for sustainable development. Springer-Nature, Singapore 2019:392 ISBN 978-981-13-9430-0

    Google Scholar 

  17. Keswani C (2021) Agri-based bioeconomy: reintegrating trans-disciplinary research and sustainable development goals. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, USA, 2021, 384 pages, ISBN 9780367471002

  18. European Bioplastics (2020) 15th European Bioplastics Conference, 1-2 December 2020, Vienna. Web-site: https://www.european-bioplastics.org

    Google Scholar 

  19. Roland-Holst D, Triolo R, Heft-Neal S, Bayrami B, Director CM (2013) Bioplastics in California: economic assessment of market conditions for PHA/PHB bioplastics produced from waste methane. Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, Berkeley. Web-site https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov

    Google Scholar 

  20. Shen L, Haufe J, Patel MK (2009) Product overview and market projection of emerging bio-based plastics PRO-BIP 2009. Technical Report, European Polysaccharide Network of Excellence and European Bioplastics: Berlin, Germany, June 2009

  21. Anonymous (2018) Bioplastics market data 2018-global production of bioplastics 2018–2023. Technical Report, European Bioplastics: Berlin, Germany, December 2018

  22. De Corato U (2020) Improving the shelf-life and quality of fresh and minimally-processed fruits and vegetables for a modern food industry: a comprehensive critical review from the traditional technologies into the most promising advancements. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 60(6):940–975. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2018.1553025

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Murariu M, Dubois P (2016) PLA composites: from production to properties. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 107:17–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addr.2016.04.003

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Galanakis CM (2017) Handbook of grape processing by-products: sustainable solutions. Galanakis CM (Ed), Academic Press, San Diego, CA, USA, 2017, 326 pages, ISBN 978-0128098707

  25. Arvanitoyannis IS, Ladas D, Mavromatis A (2006) Potential uses and applications of treated wine waste: a review. Int J Food Sci Technol 41:475–487. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.2005.01111.x

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Devesa-Rey R, Vecino X, Varela-Alende J, Barral M, Cruz J, Moldes A (2011) Valorization of winery waste vs. the costs of not recycling. Waste Manag 31(11):2327–2335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2011.06.001

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Zacharof M-P (2017) Grape winery waste as feedstock for bioconversions: applying the biorefinery concept. Waste Biom Valor 8:1011–1025. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12649-016-9674-2

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Bordiga M, Travaglia F, Locatelli M (2019) Valorisation of grape pomace: an approach that is increasingly reaching its maturity—a review. Int J Food Sci Technol 54:933–942. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijfs.14118

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Ahmad B, Yadav V, Yadav A, Rahman MU, Yuan WZ, Li Z, Wang X (2020) Integrated biorefinery approach to valorize winery waste: a review from waste to energy perspectives. Sci Total Environ 719:137315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137315

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Nanni A, Parisi M, Colonna M (2021) Wine by-products as raw materials for the production of biopolymers and of natural reinforcing fillers: a critical review. Polymers 13:381. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym13030381

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Lemos PC, Serafim LS, Reis MA (2006) Synthesis of polyhydroxyalkanoates from different short-chain fatty acids by mixed cultures submitted to aerobic dynamic feeding. J Biotechnol 122(2):226–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiotec.2005.09.006

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. DiGregorio BE (2009) Biobased performance bioplastic: Mirel. Chem Biol 16:1–2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chembiol.2009.01.001

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Van den Oever M, Molenveld K, van der Zee M, Bos H (2017) Bio-based and biodegradable plastics: facts and figures. Focus on Food Packaging in the Netherlands. Technical Report, Wageningen Food & Biobased Research: Wageningen, The Netherlands, April 2017

  34. Eurostat (2018) Annual report of European Institute for Statistics. Web-site: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat

  35. RAEE (2015) Rapporto Annuale Efficienza Energetica. Web-site: http://www.enea.it/ efficienzaenergetica (in Italian)

  36. De Corato U, Cancellara FA (2019) Measures, technologies, and incentives for cleaning the minimally processed fruits and vegetables supply chain in the Italian food industry. J Clean Prod 237:117735. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.117735

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Aramvash A, Gholami-Banadkuki N, Moazzeni-Zavareh F, Hajizadeh-Turchi S (2015) An environmental friendly and efficient method of extraction of PHB biopolymer with non-halogenated solvents. J Microbiol Biotechnol 25(11):1936–1943. https://doi.org/10.4014/jmb.1505.05053

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Aramvash A, Mozzaeni-Zavareh F, Gholami-Banadkuki N (2018) Comparison of different solvents for extraction of polyhydroxybutyrate from Cupriavidus necator. Eng Life Sci 18:20–28. https://doi.org/10.1002/elsc.201700102

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. IUPAC (1971) Basic definitions of terms relating to polymers. Inf Bull Append 13

  40. Dimou C, Kopsahelis N, Papadaki A, Papanikolaou S, Kookos IK, Mandala I, Koutinas AA (2015) Wine lees valorization: biorefinery development including production of a generic fermentation feedstock employed for poly(3-hydroxybutyrate) synthesis. Food Res Int 73:81–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2015.02.020

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Spaccini R, Todisco D, Drosos M, Nebbioso A, Piccolo A (2016) Decomposition of biodegradable plastic polymer in a real on-farm composting process. Chem Biol Technol Agric 3:4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40538-016-0053-9

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Petersen K, Nielsen PV, Bertelsen G, Lawther M, Olsen MB, Nilsson NH, Mortensen G (1999) Potential of biobased materials for food packaging. Trends Food Sci Technol 10:52-68. PII: S0924-2244(99)00019-00019

  43. Koller M, Salerno A, Miranda de Sousa Dias M, Reiterer A, Braunegg G (2010) Modern biological polymer synthesis: a review. Food Technol Biotechnol 48(3):255–269

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Choi J, Lee SY (1999) Factors affecting the economics of polyhydroxyakanoate production by bacterial fermentation. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 51:13–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002530051357

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Tesfaye T, Sithole B, Ramjugernath D (2017) Valorisation of chicken feathers: a review on recycling and recovery route—current status and future prospects. Clean Techn Environ Policy 19:2363–2378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-017-1443-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. OIV (2018) The International Organisation of Vine and Wine. Available online: http://www.oiv.int/public/medias/6371/oiv-statisticalreport-on-world-vitiviniculture-2018.pdf (accessed on 26 December 2018).

  47. OIV (2019) Statistical Report on World Vitiviniculture. Available online: http://oiv.int/public/medias/6782/oiv-2019-statisticalreport-on-world-vitiviniculture.pdf (accessed on 6 December 2019).

  48. Charrondière UR, Rittenschober D, Nowak V, Wijesinha-Bettoni R, Stadlmayr B, Haytowitz D (2012) Persijn D (2012) FAO/INFOODS guidelines for converting units, denominators and expressions, Version 1.0. FAO, Rome, Italy

    Google Scholar 

  49. Taixeira A, Baenas N, Dominguez-Perles R, Barros A, Rosa E, Moreno DA, Garcia-Viguera C (2014) Natural bioactive compounds from winery by-products as health promoters: a review. Int J Mol Sci 15(9):15638–15678. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms150915638

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Kammerer DR, Kammerer J, Valet R, Carle R (2014) Recovery of polyphenols from by-products of plant food processing and application as valuable food ingredients. Food Res Int 65 (Part A):2-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2014.06.012

  51. ISTAT (2018) Annual report of Italian Institute for Statistics. Web-site: http://www.istat.it

  52. Bustamante M, Moral R, Paredes C, Pérez-Espinosa A, Moreno-Caselles J, Pérez-Murcia M (2008) Agrochemical characterisation of the solid by-products and residues from the winery and distillery industry. Waste Manag 28(2):372–380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2007.01.013

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Spigno G, De Faveri DM (2007) Antioxidants from grape stalks and marc: influence of extraction procedure on yield, purity and antioxidant power of the extracts. J Food Eng 78(3):793–801. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2005.11.020

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Maugenet J (1973) Evaluation of the by-products of wine distilleries. II. Possibility of recovery of proteins in the vinasse of wine distilleries. CR Seances Acad Agric Fr 59:481–487

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Martinez GA, Domingos J, Rebecchi S, Bertin L, Fava F (2014) An agro-industrial waste valorization: biopolymer production from dephenolized and fermentated grape pomace. In: Ecomondo Conference Paper, Rimini (Italy)

  56. European Bioplastic (2017) Bioplastic market data 2016: global production capacities of bioplastics 2016-2021. Web-site: www.european-bioplastic.org/market (accessed on 5 February 2019).

  57. Dahy H (2014) Natural fibres as flame-retardants? Bioplastics Magazine 2:18–20

    Google Scholar 

  58. Dahy H, Knippers J (2016) Flexible high density fireboard and method of manufacturing the same. International Patent Pending No. WO2016005026A1, WIPO/PCT, Released by 14 January 2016

  59. Koller M, Salerno A, Reiterer A, Malli H, Malli K, Kettl K-H, et al (2012) Sugarcane as feedstock for bio-mediated polymer production. In: Goncalves J, Correia KD (Eds), Sugarcane: production, cultivation and uses. Nova Publishers, New York (USA), ISBN 978-1-61942-213-1, pp 105–136

  60. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations) 2011. Energy-Smart food for people and climate, issue paper 78. Web-site: http://www.fao.org/bioenergy

  61. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations) 2011. Save and grow: a policy maker’s guide to the sustainable intensification of small holder crops production, 63 pages. Web-site: http://www.fao.org/bioenergy

  62. Dahy H, Knippers J (2017) Biopolymers and biocomposites based on agricultural residues: industrialized natural resources for architecture and construction. In: Hebel DE, Heisel F. (Eds.). Cultivated Buildings Material. Birkäuser Publishers, Basel (Swiss)

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Bioenergy, Biorefinery and Green Chemistry (TERIN-BBC-BIC), Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development (ENEA), Territorial Office of Bari, Via Giulio Petroni, 15/F, 70124, Bari, Italy

    Ugo De Corato

Authors
  1. Ugo De Corato
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ugo De Corato.

Ethics declarations

Additional declarations

Not applicable

Ethics approval

Not applicable

Consent to participate

Not applicable

Consent for publication

Not applicable

Competing interests

The author declares no competing interests.

Supplementary Information

ESM 1

(DOCX 107 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

De Corato, U. Bioplastics from Winemaking By-products in the Buildings Sector: A Feasibility Study on the Main Opportunities, Barriers and Challenges. Circ.Econ.Sust. 1, 1313–1333 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43615-021-00048-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43615-021-00048-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation