DOCSLIB.ORG

Bio-Based Food Packaging in Sustainable Development

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Bio-based food packaging in Sustainable Development Challenges and opportunities to utilize biomass residues from agriculture and forestry as a feedstock for bio-based food packaging Author: Rubie van Crevel, intern Supervisor: Valeria Khristolyubova, Officer Forest Products Team Forestry Policy and Resources Division February 2016-June 2016 Table of contents Executive summary ......................................................................................................................... 4 1. Bio-based food packaging as a function of sustainable development ....................................... 7 2. Food packaging materials and environmental concerns .......................................................... 10 2.1 Methodology to assess environmental performances of a packaging material ................ 10 Life cycle thinking .................................................................................................................. 10 Life Cycle Assessment ........................................................................................................... 10 Limitations of Life Cycle Assessments .................................................................................. 12 2.2 Bio-based feedstock ............................................................................................................ 13 Defining bio-based products ................................................................................................. 13 Primary versus secondary biomass resources ...................................................................... 13 Bio-based products can be carbon neutral products ........................................................... 13 Environmental considerations for bio-based products ........................................................ 13 Regulations and standards for bio-based materials ............................................................. 14 2.2 End-of-life scenarios: compostable and biodegradable ..................................................... 15 Recycling ............................................................................................................................... 16 Organic recycling ................................................................................................................... 16 Incineration with or without energy recovery ...................................................................... 18 Littering ................................................................................................................................. 18 2.3 Concluding remarks ............................................................................................................ 18 3. Bio-based substitutes for fossil-based materials applied in food packaging ........................... 20 3.1 Bio-based plastics................................................................................................................ 20 3.2 Fibre-based materials ......................................................................................................... 25 3.3 Bio-based food packaging made from biomass residues ................................................... 27 Carton boxes made from tomato plant residues ................................................................. 27 Solanyl ................................................................................................................................... 27 5. A case-in-point: bans on polystyrene foam (EPS) food packaging ........................................... 28 5.1 Extruded Polystyrene (EPS) ................................................................................................. 28 Environmental concerns with EPS ........................................................................................ 29 EPS and high waste management costs ............................................................................... 30 1 EPS and public health concerns ............................................................................................ 31 5.2 Bans on polystyrene foam food packaging ......................................................................... 31 5.3 Bio-based materials for food packaging ............................................................................. 32 Examples of existing sustainable biobased alternative for EPS food packaging .................. 33 5.4 concluding remarks ............................................................................................................. 34 6. Key barriers for substituting fossil-based food packaging products with bio-based food packaging products ....................................................................................................................... 35 6.1 Production cost of bio-based materials for food packaging ............................................... 35 Cost of mobilization biomass residues ................................................................................. 35 Cost for technological innovations requires ......................................................................... 36 Lack of economies-of-scale ................................................................................................... 36 6.2 Poor policy support for bio-based food packaging ............................................................. 37 Inappropriate standards on bio-based materials and food contact..................................... 37 Confusing labels on bio-based food packaging .................................................................... 37 Limited information on sustainable biomass utilization ...................................................... 37 6.3 Lack of appropriate waste management facilities for bio-based packaging materials ...... 38 6.4 concluding remarks ............................................................................................................. 38 7. Enabling policy frameworks for biobased food packaging products ........................................ 39 7.1 Policies to stimulate market demand ................................................................................. 40 Ban fossil-based packaging materials ................................................................................... 40 Tax fossil-based packaging materials .................................................................................... 41 Public procurement policies and certification ...................................................................... 41 7.2 Improve and secure access to sustainable biomass resources .......................................... 42 Facilitate appropriate data collection on biomass residues ................................................. 42 Regulated labels and certification ........................................................................................ 43 Invest in local infrastructures to allow optimal and sustainable utilization of biomass resources ............................................................................................................................... 43 Establish adequate waste management infrastructures for bio-based food packaging ...... 44 7.3 Mobilizing resources for research and development (R&D) for bio-based food packaging materials ................................................................................................................................... 45 7.4 The International Coalition on bio-based and sustainable food packaging ....................... 46 Promote bio-based food packaging as a function of sustainable development .................. 46 2 Establish evidence on how better application of bio-based food packaging reduces food loss in an environmental friendly manner ............................................................................ 46 Design guidelines for sustainable utilization of biomass and biomass residues .................. 47 Provide recommendations on enabling and incentivizing policy frameworks for bio-based food packaging ...................................................................................................................... 47 Communication and awareness raising about benefits of bio-based packaging among wider public and decision makers ................................................................................................... 47 Suggested stakeholders for the international and multi-level coalition on bio-based food packaging .............................................................................................................................. 48 8. Way forward for FAO ................................................................................................................ 52 Appendix A: Bio-based plastics approved for food contact ......................................................... 53 Appendix B: Bans and ordinances for EPS food packages ............................................................ 55 Bans installed in cities in the United States (Adopted from Surf rider Foundation, N.D.) ....... 55 CALIFORNIA - 65 Ordinances that cover restaurants: .......................................................... 55 FLORIDA ................................................................................................................................ 58 MAINE ................................................................................................................................... 58 NEW JERSEY .........................................................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Walmart Sustainable Packaging Playbook 1 Optimize Design

    Walmart Sustainable Packaging Playbook 1 Optimize Design

    Deliver sales Prevent theft and tampering Satisfy consumers Improve Conserve natural resources Sustainability Index Score Protect the product Support human and environmental health Reduce Cost of Goods Facilitate handling Minimize greenhouse gas emissions Communicate Close resource loops Sustainable Packaging Playbook A guidebook for suppliers to improve packaging sustainability Priorities Source Sustainably Maximize recycled and sustainably sourced renewable content Enhance material health Optimize Design Support Recycling Protect the product Design for recycling Reduce materials Communicate recyclability Innovate Deliver Everyday Low Cost and Performance Meet business requirements Walmart aims to reduce environmental and social impacts of This playbook provides an overview of sustain- private brand and national brand packaging, while maintaining able packaging best practices for suppliers interested in improving and innovating our ability to deliver quality products to customers. packaging. While the focus is on consumer- facing packaging, practices may impact or also be applied across the entire packaging system. This playbook is not meant to replace business requirements. Rather, sustainable packaging best practices may be used to complement business needs. The Sustainable Packaging Coalition and the Association of Plastic Recyclers provided expert input for this guide and we greatly appreciate their support and assistance. Walmart Sustainable Packaging Playbook 1 Optimize Design Protect the Product Does the packaging protect the product? Best Practice Design packaging that meets product protection International Safe Transit Authority (ISTA) standards When eggs were moved to reusable while using the minimum amount of packaging. plastic containers (RPCs) from cardboard containers, damage rates decreased, Tip Review the damage history of your products with preventing 37 million eggs from being your buyer and address any issues.
  • Developing Bioprospecting Strategies for Bioplastics Through the Large-Scale Mining of Microbial Genomes

    Developing Bioprospecting Strategies for Bioplastics Through the Large-Scale Mining of Microbial Genomes

    fmicb-12-697309 July 6, 2021 Time: 18:39 # 1 ORIGINAL RESEARCH published: 12 July 2021 doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2021.697309 Developing Bioprospecting Strategies for Bioplastics Through the Large-Scale Mining of Microbial Genomes Paton Vuong1, Daniel J. Lim2, Daniel V. Murphy1, Michael J. Wise3,4, Andrew S. Whiteley5 and Parwinder Kaur1* 1 UWA School of Agriculture and Environment, The University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia, 2 Department of Physics and Astronomy, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia, 3 School of Physics, Mathematics and Computing, The University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia, 4 Marshall Centre for Infectious Disease Research and Training, University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia, 5 Centre for Environment and Life Sciences, CSIRO, Floreat, WA, Australia The accumulation of petroleum-based plastic waste has become a major issue for the environment. A sustainable and biodegradable solution can be found in Polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHAs), a microbially produced biopolymer. An analysis of the global phylogenetic and ecological distribution of potential PHA producing bacteria and Edited by: archaea was carried out by mining a global genome repository for PHA synthase (PhaC), Obulisamy Parthiba Karthikeyan, University of Houston, United States a key enzyme involved in PHA biosynthesis. Bacteria from the phylum Actinobacteria Reviewed by: were found to contain the PhaC Class II genotype which produces medium-chain Rajesh K. Sani, length PHAs, a physiology until now only found within a few Pseudomonas species. South Dakota School of Mines Further, several PhaC genotypes were discovered within Thaumarchaeota, an archaeal and Technology, United States Vijay Kumar, phylum with poly-extremophiles and the ability to efficiently use CO2 as a carbon Institute of Himalayan Bioresource source, a significant ecological group which have thus far been little studied for PHA Technology (CSIR), India production.
  • Extrusion Foaming of Bioplastics for Lightweight Structure in Food Packaging

    Extrusion Foaming of Bioplastics for Lightweight Structure in Food Packaging

    EXTRUSION FOAMING OF BIOPLASTICS FOR LIGHTWEIGHT STRUCTURE IN FOOD PACKAGING A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Sitthi Duangphet School of Engineering and Design Brunel University December 2012 i Abstract This thesis reports the systematic approaches to overcome the key drawbacks of the pure PHBV, namely low crystallisation rate, tensile strength, ductility, melt viscosity, thermal stability and high materials cost. The physical, mechanical, thermal, and rheological properties of the pure PHBV were studied systematically first to lay a solid foundation for formulation development. The influence of blending with other biopolymers, inclusion of filler, and chain extender additives in terms of mechanical properties, rheology, thermal decomposition and crystallization kinetics were then followed. Creating lightweight structures by foaming is considered to be one of the effective ways to reduce material consumption, hence the reduction of density and morphology of PHBV-based foams using extrusion foaming technique were studied comprehensively in terms of extrusion conditions (temperature profiles, screw speed and material feeding rate) and the blowing agent content. The material cost reduction was achieved by adding low-cost filler (e.g. CaCO3) and reduction of density by foaming. The thermal instability was enhanced by incorporation of chain extender (e.g. Joncryl) and blending with a high thermal stability biopolymer (e.g. PBAT). The polymer blend also improved the ductility. Adding nucleation agent enhanced the crystallization rate to reduce stickiness of extruded sheet. The final formulation (PHBV/PBAT/CaCO3 composite) was successfully extruded into high quality sheet and thermoformed to produce prototype trays in an industrial scale trial. The effect of the extrusion conditions (temperature profiles, screw speed and material feeding rate) and the blowing agent content are correlated to the density reduction of the foams.
  • Converting Your Product to Be Eco-Friendly? Tips from Sierra’S Experts the Growing Need for Sustainable Packaging

    Converting Your Product to Be Eco-Friendly? Tips from Sierra’S Experts the Growing Need for Sustainable Packaging

    Converting Your Product to be Eco-Friendly? Tips from Sierra’s Experts The Growing Need for Sustainable Packaging Throughout the world, manufacturers and retailers alike are facing a rising demand for sustainable, environmentally friendly products and, increasingly, sustainable packaging. A recent Nielsen study illustrated this shift in consumer demand; surveying 30,000 shoppers from across the globe, a notable trend emerged, illustrated by the following figures:55% of respondents were willing to pay more for environmentally friendly products, 52% have purchased one or more products from environmentally friendly companies, and 52% have purchased a product at least in part because it had eco-friendly packaging. 30,000 SHOPPERS 55%SHOPPERS 52%SHOPPERS 52%SHOPPERS illing to pay more Have purchased one Have purchased at for environmentally or more products least in part because friendly products. from environmentally it had eco-friendly friendly companies. packaging. 2 1820 Enterprise Drive De Pere, WI 54115 www.sierracoating.com Phone: 920-983-8000 Walmart’s Scorecard and its Impact gas emissions caused by packaging production to recyclability and recyclability value. on Packaging Design Last year, Walmart doubled down on the initiative, One of the earliest augmenting it with their Sustainable Packaging Playbook. adopters of sustainable The Packaging Playbook builds upon these same ideas, packaging initiatives, placing emphasis on new initiatives such as consumer Walmart introduced recycling. their Packaging Walmart’s Scorecard and Scorecard in 2006. photo courtesy of Walmart® Playbook have prompted The Packaging Scorecard provides packaging design other retailers, large and small, guidelines for the various brands hoping to be sold to follow their lead; Amazon, at Walmart; these brands must design their product for example, has launched packaging in accordance with these specifications in Frustration-Free Packaging order to meet eco-friendly regulations.
  • Impacts of a Ban Or Restrictions in Sale of Items in the EU's Single Use Plastics Directive

    Impacts of a Ban Or Restrictions in Sale of Items in the EU's Single Use Plastics Directive

    SOCIAL RESEARCH NUMBER: 32/2020 PUBLICATION DATE: 19/05/2020 Preliminary Research to Assess the Impacts of a Ban or Restrictions in Sale in Wales of Items in the EU's Single Use Plastics Directive Mae’r ddogfen yma hefyd ar gael yn Gymraeg. This document is also available in Welsh. © Crown Copyright Digital ISBN 978-1-80038-424-8 Title: Preliminary Research to Assess the Impacts of a Ban or Restrictions in Sale in Wales of Items in the EU's Single Use Plastics Directive Author(s): George Cole, Resource Futures Carla Worth, Resource Futures Katie Powell, Resource Futures Sam Reeve, Resource Futures Susie Stevenson, Miller Research (UK) Nick Morgan, Miller Research (UK) Howard Walker, Bridge Economics Full Research Report: Cole, G; Worth, C; Powell, K; Reeve, S; Stevenson, S; Morgan, N; Walker, H (2019). Preliminary Research to Assess the Impacts of a Ban or Restrictions in Sale in Wales of Items in the EU's Single Use Plastics Directive. Cardiff: Welsh Government, GSR report number 32/2020 Available at: https://gov.wales/impacts-ban-or-restrictions-sale-items-eus-single- use-plastics-directive Views expressed in this report are those of the researcher and not necessarily those of the Welsh Government For further information please contact: Isabella Malet-Lambert Knowledge and Analytical Services Welsh Government Cathays Park Cardiff CF10 3NQ 03000 628250 [email protected] Table of contents List of tables ..........................................................................................................................
  • 1610 8 Shashoua Icomcc 2017

    1610 8 Shashoua Icomcc 2017

    ICOM-CC 18th Triennial Conference Sustainable future alternatives 2017 Copenhagen to petroleum-based polymeric SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH conservation materials YVONNE SHASHOUA* INTRODUCTION National Museum of Denmark Kongens Lyngby, Denmark [email protected] Conservation treatments often employ petroleum-based plastic materials KATJA JANKOVA ATANASOVA as packaging, adhesives and coatings that are synthesised from non- Technical University of Denmark Kongens Lyngby, Denmark renewable crude oil, a resource at risk of exhaustion within the next [email protected] 100 years. The Going Green conference held at the British Museum in CLAIRE CURRAN ICA Art Conservation April 2009 concluded that conservators are under increasing pressure to Cleveland OH, USA [email protected] review their practices in light of international environmental targets and *Author for correspondence the rising costs of fossil fuels. Biopolymers are considered sustainable either because they are synthesised from renewable sources or because they biodegrade to CO2 and H2O in soil and water after use. The range and KEYWORDS: sustainable, biopolymer, bioplastic quality of bioplastics have increased dramatically since 2006 and, today, polyethylene, polyester, soya, humic acid polyethylenes, polyesters, polyurethanes and polyvinyl alcohols can be fully synthesised from biomass, although their commercial availability ABSTRACT is more limited in Europe than in the USA and South America. While The research described here is the first study extensive research has been conducted into the rates and mechanism of on the use of sustainable, plant-based biopoly- degradation of bioplastics on disposal (Rani et al. 2012), few projects have mers in conservation practice. Two applications of biopolymers to conservation were investi- focused on their chemical and physical properties during use and none gated – in commercial bioplastics as substi- have addressed the application of bioplastics to conservation practice.
  • Expanded Polystyrene Food Service Take-Out Container Study

    Expanded Polystyrene Food Service Take-Out Container Study

    Appendix 1.1. California Cities that have Pursued a Polystyrene Ban Please note that not all of these bans are in place: many have been challenged or overturned. Alameda (2008) Expanded polystyrene ban, requirement that all takeout food packaging be compostable or recyclable Albany (2008) Expanded polystyrene ban, requirement that all takeout food packaging be compostable or recyclable Aliso Viejo (2005) Government facility expanded polystyrene ban Ordinance #2004-060 Berkeley (adopted 1988) Expanded polystyrene ban, requirement that 50% of takeout food packaging be recyclable or compostable Title 11.58 and 11.60 of Municipal Code Calabasas (2008) Expanded polystyrene ban, requirement that all takeout food packaging be recyclable or compostable Capitola (2009) Expanded polystyrene ban, requirement that all disposable takeout food packaging be compostable Carmel (1989) Expanded polystyrene ban, requirement that 50% of takeout food packaging be recyclable, compostable or reusable Del Ray Oaks (effective July 1, 2010) Expanded polystyrene ban, requirement that all takeout food packaging More information available on be recyclable or compostable page 35 of Agenda Packet Emeryville (2008) Expanded polystyrene ban, requirement that all takeout food packaging be recyclable or compostable Fairfax (1993) Expanded polystyrene ban for all restaurants and food retail vendors Title 8.16 of Municipal Code Fremont (effective January 1, 2011) Expanded polystyrene ban for food vendors, requirement that all takeout food packaging be recyclable or compostable Appendix 1.1 | i Hayward (effective July 2011) Expanded polystyrene ban for restaurant vendors, requirement that takeout food packaging be recyclable or compostable Hercules (2008) Expanded polystyrene ban Sec. 5-3109, Title 5, Chapter 3 of Municipal Code Huntington Beach (2005) Government facility expanded polystyrene ban Laguna Beach (2008) Polystyrene ban, requirement that all plastic takeout food packaging be recyclable Title 7.
  • Characterization and Degradation of Polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHA), Polylactides (PLA) and PHA-PLA Blends

    Characterization and Degradation of Polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHA), Polylactides (PLA) and PHA-PLA Blends

    Characterization and Degradation of Polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHA), Polylactides (PLA) and PHA-PLA Blends Rafeya Sohail Microbiology and Molecular Genetics, University of the Punjab, Lahore Nazia Jamil ( [email protected] ) Microbiology and Molecular Genetics, University of the Punjab Lahore Research Keywords: Degradation, FT-IR, Mixed Culture, PHA-PLA blends, Polyhydroxyalkanoates, Polylactides, SEM, Soil Posted Date: December 1st, 2020 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-113670/v1 License: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Read Full License 1 Characterization and Degradation of Polyhydroxyalkanoates 2 (PHA), Polylactides (PLA) and PHA-PLA blends 3 Rafeya Sohail1, Nazia Jamil1 4 1Department of Microbiology and Molecular Genetics, University of the Punjab, Quaid-e-Azam 5 Campus, Lahore 54590, Punjab, Pakistan 6 Correspondence: 7 Nazia Jamil 8 [email protected] 9 1 10 Abstract 11 Biodegradable biopolymers such as polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHA) and polylactide (PLA) have 12 wide range of applications in almost all sectors. Degradation of these polymers, however 13 efficient, still creates a paradox with green chemistry principles. Blending of these polymers can 14 potentially decrease plastic pollution due to their increased biodegradability. During this study, 15 PHAwas produced using bacterial strains DL3; Bacillus subtilis (MT043898), PWA; Bacillus 16 subtilis (MH142143), PWC; Pseudomonas aeruginosa (MH142144), PWF; Bacillus tequilensis 17 (MH142145) and PWG; Bacillus safensis (MH142146). Corn-based PLA was produced 18 chemically and physically blendedwith PHA (PHA-PLA blends). During molecular studies, 19 PHA, PLA and PHA-PLA blendswere characterized via FT-IR analysis, SEM, and light 20 microscopy indicating successful blending of PHA-PLA samples.
  • Sustainability the 5R Approach Schur Flexibles’ Five Pillars

    Sustainability the 5R Approach Schur Flexibles’ Five Pillars

    SUSTAINABILITY WITH SCHUR FLEXIBLES CBC - 019 | Cover picture: Laura Pashkevich - stock.adobe.com Pashkevich Laura picture: CBC - 019 | Cover THE 5R APPROACH SCHUR FLEXIBLES’ FIVE PILLARS We are particulary proud that we are the OF SUSTAINABILITY sustainability winner 2018 of the GERMAN PACKAGING AWARD for FlexiClosere. Recycling Through recycling we can get the most out of PACKAGING NEEDS TO FULFIL A the raw materials invested into the production of WIDE RANGE OF REQUIREMENTS packaging films. We are contributing to this with Rproducts such as our ready for recycling PE-based Protect and preserve: It should protect the skin- and shrink films or PE & OPP flow wrap. product against damage, dirt, light and oxygen. Our PP-based rigid films and the matching, new It should allow products to be transported and range of innovative OPP lidding films feature stored in safety. Good protection reduces food all typical options such as good peel or reliable wastage. reclose. For mono A-PET trays we offer suitable mono PET lidding films, optional with Peel and Attract and sell: Packaging needs to be attractive AF. Additionally, we have invested in new devel- to consumers and provide important information opments such as recyclable high barrier PE shrink on product usage, ingredients, shelf life and dis- bags and PP flexible film. posal of packaging. Increasing research into and usage of flexible Innovate and safeguard: Technical innovation mono and polyolefin materials have led to im- with focus on sustainability means that packaging portant advances in the field of recycling and material can be reduced, recycled or replaced by support a circular economy.
  • ISO Packaging and Environment Standards…

    ISO Packaging and Environment Standards…

    “Light-Weighting” (or is it Optimization?...or is it Responsible Packaging Design?) Agenda: •The global perspective-Sustainability •Light weighting or source reduction myth •What is ‘Responsible Package Design”? •Standards for responsible packaging design •Understanding today’s distribution networks to optimize your package •Steps to Analyze your product/package for optimization. •Optimization Success Stories Global Perspective-Sustainability •Purpose of packaging profession. •Economics of packaging Global Perspective-Sustainability ASTM Definition of Package Sustainability . “Sustainability: in packaging, is a feature of a package resulting from an assessment of the short-term and long-term environmental, social and economic impacts of design considerations and of the entire life of the package, from manufacturing and production, storage, distribution, use, and through end-of-life action; it does not include the product itself.” - ASTM D10.19 Subcommittee SPC Definition of Package Sustainability Sustainable Packaging: . Is beneficial, safe & healthy for individuals and communities throughout its life cycle; . Meets market criteria for both performance and cost; . Is sourced, manufactured, transported, and recycled using renewable energy; . Optimizes the use of renewable or recycled source materials; . Is manufactured using clean production technologies and best practices . Is made from materials healthy in all probable end of life scenarios; . Is physically designed to optimize materials and energy; . Is effectively recovered and utilized in biological and/or industrial closed loop cycles How is Sustainability Described? . Regardless of your definition, working towards sustainability can be put in the context of two basic concepts: • Cradle-to-Cradle (coined by Walter R. Stahel) • Cradle to Cradle Design defines a framework for designing eco-effective products and industrial processes that turn materials into nutrients by enabling the formation of cyclical material flow metabolisms.
  • Blown Films for Chilled and Frozen Food Packaging Applications

    Blown Films for Chilled and Frozen Food Packaging Applications

    polymers Article Evaluation of the Suitability of Poly(Lactide)/Poly(Butylene-Adipate-co-Terephthalate) Blown Films for Chilled and Frozen Food Packaging Applications Arianna Pietrosanto, Paola Scarfato * , Luciano Di Maio , Maria Rossella Nobile and Loredana Incarnato Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Salerno, Via Giovanni Paolo II, 132, 84084 Fisciano (SA), Italy; [email protected] (A.P.); [email protected] (L.D.M.); [email protected] (M.R.N.); [email protected] (L.I.) * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 20 December 2019; Accepted: 12 March 2020; Published: 3 April 2020 Abstract: The use of biopolymers can reduce the environmental impact generated by plastic materials. Among biopolymers, blends made of poly(lactide) (PLA) and poly(butylene-adipate-co-terephthalate) (PBAT) prove to have adequate performances for food packaging applications. Therefore, the present work deals with the production and the characterization of blown films based on PLA and PBAT blends in a wide range of compositions, in order to evaluate their suitability as chilled and frozen food packaging materials, thus extending their range of applications. The blends were fully characterized: they showed the typical two-phase structure, with a morphology varying from fibrillar to globular in accordance with their viscosity ratio. The increase of PBAT content in the blends led to a decrease of the barrier properties to oxygen and water vapor, and to an increase of the toughness of the films. The mechanical properties of the most ductile blends were also evaluated at 4 C and 25 C. The ◦ − ◦ decrease in temperature caused an increase of the stiffness and a decrease of the ductility of the films to a different extent, depending upon the blend composition.
  • Biodegradable Packaging Materials from Animal Processing Co-Products and Wastes: an Overview

    Biodegradable Packaging Materials from Animal Processing Co-Products and Wastes: an Overview

    polymers Review Biodegradable Packaging Materials from Animal Processing Co-Products and Wastes: An Overview Diako Khodaei, Carlos Álvarez and Anne Maria Mullen * Department of Food Quality and Sensory Science, Teagasc Food Research Centre, Ashtown, Dublin, Ireland; [email protected] (D.K.); [email protected] (C.Á.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +353-(1)-8059521 Abstract: Biodegradable polymers are non-toxic, environmentally friendly biopolymers with con- siderable mechanical and barrier properties that can be degraded in industrial or home composting conditions. These biopolymers can be generated from sustainable natural sources or from the agri- cultural and animal processing co-products and wastes. Animals processing co-products are low value, underutilized, non-meat components that are generally generated from meat processing or slaughterhouse such as hide, blood, some offal etc. These are often converted into low-value products such as animal feed or in some cases disposed of as waste. Collagen, gelatin, keratin, myofibrillar proteins, and chitosan are the major value-added biopolymers obtained from the processing of animal’s products. While these have many applications in food and pharmaceutical industries, a sig- nificant amount is underutilized and therefore hold potential for use in the generation of bioplastics. This review summarizes the research progress on the utilization of meat processing co-products to fabricate biodegradable polymers with the main focus on food industry applications. In addition, the factors affecting the application of biodegradable polymers in the packaging sector, their current industrial status, and regulations are also discussed. Citation: Khodaei, D.; Álvarez, C.; Mullen, A.M. Biodegradable Keywords: biodegradable polymers; packaging materials; meat co-products; animal by-products; Packaging Materials from Animal protein films Processing Co-Products and Wastes: An Overview.