Production of Bioplastics Using Potato S

University of Mauritius
Faculty of Engineering
Department of Chemical Engineering
Chemical and Environmental Engineering
Level 4 Year 2015/2016
Name: Soomaree Keshav
ID: 1114132
Title of dissertation: Production of bioplastics
Code: AKR 5
Supervisor: Mr A K Ragen
i
Table of Contents
Table of Contents .................................................................................................ii
List of Tables …………………………………………………………………....vi
List of Figures …………………………………………………………………...viii
Acknowledgment ………………………………………………………………..xi
Declaration form ………………………………………………………………...xii
Abstract ………………………………………………………………………….xiii
List of Abbreviations ……………………………………………………………xvi
List of Tables ........................................................................................................... vi
List of Figures ......................................................................................................... vii
List of Abbreviations .............................................................................................. xii
Chapter 1: Introduction ........................................................................................14
1.1 Background..................................................................................................14
1.2 An overview on plastics ..............................................................................14
1.3 Plastics in Mauritius ....................................................................................15
1.4 Production of plastics ..................................................................................16
1.5 Plastic Carry Bags .......................................................................................16
1.6 Objectives of the project..............................................................................17
1.7 Structure of the report..................................................................................17
Chapter 2: Literature Review...............................................................................19
2.1 Types of plastics ..........................................................................................19
2.2 Degradable plastics......................................................................................20
2.2.1 Plastics Codes ....................................................................................20
2.2.2 Production of degradable plastics ......................................................23
2.2.3 Biodegradable plastic additives .........................................................24
2.3 Biodegradable plastics .................................................................................24
2.3.1 Classification of biodegradable plastics ............................................25
ii
2.4 Starch based plastic .....................................................................................26
2.4.1 Starch .................................................................................................27
2.4.2 Characteristics of starch .....................................................................27
2.4.3 Different types of starch sources .......................................................27
2.4.4 Properties exhibited by starch during polymer synthesis ..................28
2.5 Comparison study ........................................................................................29
2.5.1 Advantages of degradable plastics and starch-based plastics............29
2.5.2 Disadvantages of degradable plastics and starch-based plastics .......30
2.6 Starch based polymer and plastic plant design ...........................................31
2.6.1 Extraction of starch from potato ........................................................31
2.6.2 The biodegradable polymer production from the starch ...................32
2.6.3 The processing of starch-based polymer for plastic film production 33
2.6.4 Mechanical properties ........................................................................33
2.7 Researches on Bioplastics ...........................................................................34
2.7.1 Polyhydroxybutyrate and Hydroxyvalerate Production by Bacillus
megaterium Strain A1 Isolated from Hydrocarbon-Contaminated Soil. .........34
2.7.2 Production and characterization of PHB from a novel isolate
Comamonas sp. from a dairy effluent sample and its application in cell culture
35
2.7.3 Production of PHB by a Bacillus megaterium strain using sugarcane
molasses and corn steep liquor as sole carbon and nitrogen sources. .............35
2.7.4 Sustainable Embedding of the Bioplastic Poly-(3-Hydroxybutyrate)
into the Sugarcane ............................................................................................36
2.7.5 Polyhydroxybutyrate synthesis on biodiesel wastewater using mixed
microbial consortia...........................................................................................36
Chapter 3: Methodology ......................................................................................37
3.1 Overall process ............................................................................................37
3.2 Extraction of starch form Potato tubers ......................................................37
3.2.1 Extraction process............................................................................37
3.2.2 Selection of the potato......................................................................38
iii
3.3 Preparation of the potato .............................................................................38
3.3.1 Weighing ............................................................................................38
3.3.2 Washing .............................................................................................38
3.3.3 Weighing ............................................................................................38
3.3.4 Peeling................................................................................................39
3.3.5 Dicing .................................................................................................39
3.3.6 Blending and slurring.........................................................................39
3.3.7 Water Slurring ....................................................................................40
3.3.8 Filtration .............................................................................................40
3.3.9 Final starch .........................................................................................42
3.4 Production of starch based bioplastic ..........................................................43
3.5 Biodegradable starch plastic process plant design ......................................45
3.5.1 Process consideration .........................................................................45
3.5.2 Extraction unit ....................................................................................45
3.5.3 Starch-based polymer production ......................................................51
3.5.4 Starch-based biodegradable plastic film production .........................52
3.6 Preliminary economic analysis over the starch-based plastic film process
plant design ..........................................................................................................54
3.6.1 Purchase Equipment Cost (PEC) .......................................................54
3.6.2 Total Direct Cost (TDC) and Total Indirect Cost (TIC) ....................55
3.6.3 Fixed Capital Investment (FCI) .........................................................56
3.6.4 Total Capital Investment (TCI)..........................................................56
3.6.5 Total Product Cost (TPC) ..................................................................56
3.6.6 Profit or Loss......................................................................................56
3.6.7 Payback ..............................................................................................57
3.6.8 Internal Return of Rate (IRR) ............................................................57
Chapter 4: Results and Discussion ......................................................................57
4.1 Chemistry behind the formation of starch based bioplastic ........................57
4.2 Starch content of raw potato........................................................................58
iv
4.3 Number of starch-based biodegradable plastic carry bags..........................59
4.4 Economic analysis of the process plant.......................................................59
4.5 Mechanical testing of the bioplastic samples. .............................................60
Chapter 5: Conclusion .........................................................................................63
5.1 Recommendations and Future works ..........................................................64
Chapter 6: References ..........................................................................................65
Appendix: Economic analysis..................................................................................71
ANNEX 1 …………………………………………………………………………85
ANNEX 2…..……………………………………………………………………..87
v
List of Tables
Table No. Title Page No.
Starch-based polymer
Table 2.1 28
comparison table
Advantages of degradable
Table 2.2 plastics and starch-based 29
plastics
Disadvantages of
Table 2.3 degradable plastic and 30
starch-based plastics
Parameters of starch-
Table 2.4 based plastic film 33
production
List of standard tests for
Table 2.5 34
plastic carry bags
Economic analysis
Table 4.1 60
summation table
Equipment cost and the
Table A1 72
industrial source
Conversion table for
Table A2 74
purchased equipment
Capacity and cost of
Table A.3 76
equipment
Total Direct Cost
Table A.4 77
calculations
Total Indirect Cost
Table A.5 78
calculations
Total Product Cost (TPC)
Table A.6 79
calculations
vi
List of Figures
Figure No. Title Page No.
Figure 2.1 Polyethylene Terephthalate
20
Figure 2.2 High-Density Polyethylene 21
Figure 2.3 PVC 21
Figure 2.4 Low-Density Polyethylene 22
Figure 2.5 Polypropylene 22
Figure 2.6 Polystyrene 22
Polycarbonate and
Figure 2.7 23
Polylactide
Figure 2.8 Plastic pellets 23
Oxo-Biodegradable Plastic
Figure 2.9 24
Master Batch / Additive
Process of the bioplastic
Figure 3.1 38
production
Figure 3.2 Diced Potato 39
Figure 3.3 Blending and Slurring 40
Double layered cheesecloth
Figure 3.4 41
for filtration
Figure 3.5 Residue pulp of potato 41
Figure 3.6 Starch after water extraction 42
Figure 3.7 Dried starch 42
Steps for producing
Figure 3.8 44
bioplastic.
Mass balance diagram over
Figure 3.9 45
weighing unit
Figure 3.10 sampling and dry washing 46
unit
Figure 3.11 46
reception area
Figure 3.12 47
rotating bar screen
vii
Figure 3.13 47
rotary washer unit
Figure 3.14 48
stone catcher unit
Figure 3.15 rotary screen peeler and 49
buffer bin unit
Figure 3.16 49
rasper and mixer unit
Continuous rotating vacuum
Figure 3.17 50
filter
Mass balance over the
Figure 3.18 52
refining unit
Figure 3.19 52
hydrolysis tank
Figure 3.20 the polymer dryer and 52
pelletizer unit
Figure 3.21 53
extrusion unit
Figure 3.22 the film and surface 53
treatment unit
Figure 3.23 54
distribution unit
Graph of force against
Figure 4.1 61
Elongation for sample 1
Graph of stress against strain
Figure 4.2 61
for sample 2
Graph of Stress against
Figure 4.3 62
strain for sample 3
viii
Acknowledgement
First and foremost, I praise and thank God for the blessings, good health and
wellbeing that were necessary to complete this project and thesis successfully.
I would like to express my deep appreciation and sincere gratitude to the following
people:
- My supervisor, Mr. A K Ragen for providing me the opportunity to work on

this project and for his patience, encouragement, guidance and support over
the last four years.
- My friends and colleagues of the chemical engineering department who
helped me in norms of difficult time.
- My parents, Viraj Soomaree and Usha Khanna Luchmun, for raising me up in
a good and healthy environment, which gave me a great starting point. I know
I cannot thank them enough and there are no words that can truly express the
level of gratitude and appreciation I have for them. I am very grateful from
the bottom of my heart for everything they have done and sacrificed for me.
"My Lord, have mercy upon them as they brought me up [when I was] small."
- Everyone in the chemical engineering department of the University of
Mauritius for funding, supporting and easing everything during my studies.
Special thanks to Mr. D. Reedoye, Mr. Bheekun, Miss Pritima and Miss
Parvati, the chemical laboratory technicians, for their valuable assistance,
guidance and willingness to exchange information and ideas during the course
of the experimental practical carried out in the laboratory.
Finally a graceful thanks to Dr. D Surroop, the head of the chemical department
(year 2015/2016) for this assistance and helpful collaboration in the satisfaction of
my needful requirements.
ix
UNIVERSITY OF MAURITIUS
PROJECT/DISSERTATION DECLARATION FORM

Name: Soomaree Keshav
Student ID: 1114132
Programme of Studies: Chemical and Environmental Engineering
Module Code/Name: CHE 4000Y (5)
Title of Project/Dissertation: Production of Bioplastic
Name of Supervisor(s): Mr. A.K. Ragen
Declaration:
In accordance with the appropriate regulations, I hereby submit the above dissertation for examination and I
declare that:
(i) I have read and understood the sections on Plagiarism and Fabrication and Falsification of Results found
in the University’s “General Information to Students” Handbook (20…./20….) and certify that the dissertation
embodies the results of my own work.
(ii) I have adhered to the ‘Harvard system of referencing’ or a system acceptable as per “The University of
Mauritius Referencing Guide” for referencing, quotations and citations in my dissertation. Each contribution to, and
quotation in my dissertation from the work of other people has been attributed, and has been cited and referenced.
(iii) I have not allowed and will not allow, anyone to copy my work with the intention of passing it off as his or
her own work.
(iv) I am aware that I may have to forfeit the certificate/diploma/degree in the event that plagiarism has been
detected after the award.
(v) Notwithstanding the supervision provided to me by the University of Mauritius, I warrant that any alleged
act(s) of plagiarism during my stay as registered student of the University of Mauritius is entirely my own
responsibility and the University of Mauritius and/or its employees shall under no circumstances whatsoever
be under any liability of any kind in respect of the aforesaid act(s) of plagiarism.
Signature: Date:
x
Abstract
The aim of the project was to study the potential of producing starch-based
bioplastics using potato as feedstock in Mauritius. The methodology of the project
started with the preparation of the potato which included weighing, washing,
peeling, dicing. It was followed by blending, slurring and filtration so as to extract
maximum starch. The second step was the production of the bioplastic where acid
and chemicals was added to the starch with the presence of heat. Some mechanical
and physical tests were done on some bioplastic samples and it was found that the
bioplastic could withstand a load of 1 Kg with an elongation of 105 mm at break and
62 mm at peak, strain of 76% at break and 46% at peak, a stress of 0.063 N/mm2 at
break and 0.207 N/mm2 and finally a young’s modulus of 3.467 N/mm2. From the
investigation, 25% of starch was extracted from local potatoes with a bulk density
of 1450 kg/m3. The processing capacity of 10 tons per day of potato is promising
and would supply a starch-based plastic process plant with 3.17 tons per day of starch
which would subsequently be used to produce approximately 10.686 tons of starch-
based plastic film. However, it was observed that the supply of potato should
increase so that the starch-based plastic plant can be supplied with approximately
3330 tons of tuber per year. Besides, the feasibility of the proposed process plant for
the production of the starch-based plastic carry bags was viable with a payback
period of 4.20 years for a total production of approximately 117 million of starch-
based plastic carry bags per year being sold at the proposed price of Rs 1.55. It was
thus concluded that bioplastics from potato starch was a feasible solution as a
substitute for petroleum based plastics.
xi
List of Abbreviations
Abbreviations Meaning
μ Microns
ASTM American Society for the Testing of

Materials
O
C Celsius
CO2 Carbon Dioxide

CTCRI Central Tuber Crops Research Institute
EPI Environmental Crops Inc

FAO Food and Agriculture Institute
FCI Fixed Capital Investment

g Grams
GDP Gross Domestic Product

HDI Human Development Index
HDPE High Density Polyethylene

HMF Hydroxymethylfurfural
IRR Internal Rate of return

Kg Kilogram
LDPE Low Density Polyethylene

m Mass flow rate
m3 Cubic metre
ml millilitres
MSW Municipal Solid Waste

NA2S2O5 Sodium Metabisulphite
PBS Polybutylene Succinate

PCL Polycaprolactone
xii
PE Polyethylene
PEC Purchase Equipment Cost
PET Polyethylene Terephthalate

PFD Process Flow Diagram
PHAS Polyhydroxyalkanoates
PHB Poly-3-Hydroxybutyrate
PHH Polyhydroxyhexanoate
PHV Polyhydroxyvalerate
PLA Polylactic Acid

PP Polypropylene
PS Polystyrene
PSM Plastarch Materials
PVC Polyvinyl Chloride

rpm Revolutions per minute
SPI Society of the Plastic Industry

TCI Total Capital Investment
TDC Total Direct Cost

TIC Total Indirect Cost
TPC Total Product Cost

UN United Nations
v Volumetric Flow Rate
xiii
Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1 Background
Mauritius, a volcanic island nation in the Indian Ocean, is situated near Reunion Island
to the East of Madagascar. The island has an assessed population of about 1.3 million
which covers an area of about 2,000 square kilometres with a population density of 635
people per each square kilometre (World Bank, 2014). According to the Statistic
Mauritius (2015), the GDP per capita of the island was recorded to 6679.21 US dollars
in 2013 while the inflation rate was 0.2 % reported for the month of December 2014.
Due to an increase in the population, the amount of waste generation is constantly on the
increase year by year. This eventually affects the waste handling and management locally
since, the island possesses only one dumping ground which is itself undersized. Indeed,
the landfill was initially designed for 400 tons per day where now more than 1,200 tons
per day of waste is being inputted to the present day (Indian Ocean Times, 2015).
1.2 An overview on plastics

Basically, plastics can be classified as a group of man-made or natural organic materials
that can be molded and then hardened, including many types of resins, resinoids,
polymers, cellulose derivatives, casein materials, and proteins
Plastics, made from non-renewable resources such as petroleum products, are now very
common and are being used almost everywhere as such; in packing materials, in bottles,
cell phones, plastic bags and more. They are being so extensively used because of their
durability, strength, malleability, low reactivity and cost efficiency.
However, together with all its benefits is the fact that it is highly pollutant and plastics
nowadays have become a big environmental issue.
Nowadays, people are more aware about the harmful effects of petrochemical derived
plastic materials in the environment. Researchers have conducted many researches for
14
managing plastic waste on earth by finding eco-friendly alternative to plastics. This
ecofriendly alternative is bioplastics, which are disposed in environment and can easily
degrade through the enzymatic actions of microorganisms. The degradation of
biodegradable plastics give rise to carbon dioxide, methane, water, biomass, humic
matter and various other natural substances which can be readily eliminated (Azios,
2007).
Plastic bags has be banned in Mauritius from the 1st January 2016 as Environment
Protection (Banning of Plastic Bags) Regulations 2015 have been amended to avoid all
confusion around the definitions of plastic and plastic bags. The regulations prohibit
import, manufacture, sale, or supply of a plastic bag as from 1st January 2016. The
regulations concern only the vest-type plastic bags, roll-on bags and Non-Woven
Polypropylene bags, which are designed to carry goods purchased at points of sale such
as wholesale and retail outlets, markets, fairs and hawkers. The import, manufacture, sale
or supply of biodegradable and compostable plastic bags is allowed subject to strict
conformity to appropriate standards specified in the regulations.
There is thus a need for a more sustainable alternative such as bioplastics and this study
accounted for the production of bioplastic from potato starch so as to assess its feasibility.
1.3 Plastics in Mauritius

Plastic carry bags are the most widely used form of plastic in Mauritius and the disposal
of the bags are alarmingly increasing each year. It is estimated that over 360 million
plastic bags are brought in the local market and around 1 million are disposed of at the
only landfill. (MOE; L’Express, 2006).
For the time being, Mauritius is facing a real problem concerning the disposal of solid
waste. Indeed, Mare Chicose, the only landfill of the island has a daily generation of
about 1,200 tons of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) while it was designed for 400 tons
per day (SWM Division, 2012). It is clearly noted that the dumping ground is undersized.
15
Also, MSW constitutes the highest proportion of wastes in the order of 70% that are
disposed of at the landfill (CODWAP, 2009). It can be classified into yard wastes, food
wastes, plastics, paper, textile, metals, glass and others. About 80% of the wastes are
organic (paper, food and yard wastes). The amount of yard waste composition is about
43% and that of food waste around 25%. The inorganic wastes that make up about 20 %
of the waste stream consist of plastics, glass, metal, textile and others. The main
component of the non- organic waste is plastics, making up on average about 13 % by
volume, representing around 37,000 tons of the MSW generated annually (NRFE, 2011).
With its slow degradation rate, plastics represent one of the major potential threat to the
environment.
1.4 Production of plastics

The production of plastic around the world represents over 90 million tonnes and the
growth is assessed to be around 3% per year. The worldwide production of plastic has
grown by more than five hundred percent during the last 30 years (Plastinum Polymer
Technologies Corp, 2009).
Around 6% of the world oil supply is used in the production of plastics and it is mainly
used for the plastic packaging and vehicle assembly and in construction (Zawya, 2011).
For example in the north of America and the western European countries, the amount of
plastic consumed is about 100kg per capita and is estimated to reach 140kg per capita by
2015.
1.5 Plastic Carry Bags

As per the Environmental Protection Act 2004 governing ‘Plastic Carry Bags’ the plastic
carry bag is defined as ‘the vest-type carrier bag made of plastic designed for the general
purpose of carrying goods purchased by consumers’ (Ministry of Environment and
Sustainable Development, 2004). Most of today’s plastics come from petrochemicals and
are not biodegradable. In addition to that, there are depleting reserves of those petroleum
resources. Also, incineration of plastics as such is not an appropriate method as there are
high toxin emissions such as dioxins and furan, adding to environmental issues. Though
16
plastic recycling has some advantages, it is considered to have a negative impact on our
ecosystem as an important amount of energy is required during the recycling phase. Since
then, there have been major interests to replace conventional plastics by degradable ones.
Results indicated that plastics from renewable sources would degrade in a time frame of
60 days, while those with biodegradable additives would require more time (Mohee et
al., 2006). Hence, for the different reasons mentioned, it is clear that biodegradable
polymers would add ample to sustainable development.
1.6 Objectives of the project

Biodegradable plastics present a potential alternative to petroleum-based plastics.
Reducing oil consumption and promoting a greener environment remain an important
goal for the sustainably-minded today. This study aim is to investigate the potential of
producing bioplastics from potato starch in Mauritius.
The main objectives of this study are:
 To carry out a literature review on plastics and bioplastics in Mauritius and abroad.
 To investigate the feasibility of local potato as main feedstock.
 To perform tensile stress, strain, elasticity and young’s modulus test on some
bioplastic samples produced.
 To perform an economic analysis of a designed plant of potato starch based
bioplastic and to check for its economic feasibility.
1.7 Structure of the report

The report has the following structure:
 Chapter 1 introduces the plastics waste issues in Mauritius and an overview of

plastics production worldwide.
 Chapter 2 covers a profound review on plastics taking into consideration the
biodegradability concept. A review of relevant studies on biodegradable plastics
is discussed.
17
 Chapter 3 describes the way used to extract the starch from the potato and the
different materials and methods adopted produce the biodegradable starch
polymer from the potato starch extracted.
 Chapter 4 encloses the results and discussions part. A summary of the results is
tabulated.
 Chapter 5 gives an overall conclusion of the results obtained from the study. The
possible recommendations and future works are also illustrated.
 The appendices contains an economic analysis and other appropriate sheet and
relevant information are also annexed.
18
Chapter 2: Literature Review
The literature review contains the basic information about plastics and the importance
behind the production of the biodegradable plastics as an alternative to degradable
plastic. The different aspects behind the process undergone for production of the raw
material are studied in this chapter.
2.1 Types of plastics

Different types of plastics exist, depending on the raw material used. They are as follows:
1. Petroleum plastic
Petroleum plastics are plastic that originate from petroleum monomers that are
chemically processed to produce polymers. They do not degrade as easily as bioplastic.
2. Degradable plastic
Degradable plastics are plastic that have been manufactured along with a particular blend
of biodegradable additives in order to alter the chemical characteristics of the product
when exposed to specific environmental conditions (Doty, 2005).
3. Biodegradable plastic
From the ASTM D6400 definition, a biodegradable plastic is a plastic that can be
degraded by the action of naturally occurring microorganisms such as bacteria, fungi and
algae or by the action of sunlight and water (Doty, 2005).
4. Bioplastic
Bioplastic is a type of plastic that is derived from natural raw materials such as biomass
and corn starch. This type of plastic will degrade when exposed to environmental
conditions such as moisture, naturally occurring microorganisms such as bacteria, fungi
and algae or in a composting condition.
5. Oxo-biodegradable plastic
Oxo-biodegradable plastic is a type of plastic made with a small amount of metal salt
added to the polymer. When disposed of, the plastic comes into contact with oxygen and
starts to degrade. The resulting by-product of the Oxo-biodegradable plastic is carbon
19
dioxide, water and biomass. The Oxo-biodegradable plastic additives usually used
include the EPI additive, used in Tesco plastic bags and Clariant. (Tan,2011)
6. Compostable plastic
Compostable plastic, as defined by the ASTM D6400, is a plastic which will undergo
biological degradation to yield carbon dioxide, water, biomass and inorganic material
when subjected to a biological environment such as in a compost bin. There will be no
harmful material left at the end of its product life (Tan,2011).
7. Photodegradable plastic
Photodegradable plastic is a type of plastic that decomposes on exposure to sunlight.
This is because they become brittle and break down into small pieces thus reducing the
amount and volume of waste and environmental deterioration.
2.2 Degradable plastics
Degradable plastic is the most common type of plastic used and is produced from the
raw materials including crude oil and natural gas.
2.2.1 Plastics Codes

There exists different type of plastic used for various material production. They have
diverse characteristics and each of them have their respective properties.
Below is the different types of codes used for the degradable plastics that are
manufactured according to the Society of the Plastics Industry (SPI).
I. The first one includes Polyethylene Terephthalate also known as PET. Items made
from this plastic are commonly recycled.
Figure 2.1: Polyethylene Terephthalate
(Plastic recycling, 2014)

20
II. High-Density Polyethylene (HDPE). HDPE products are very safe and they are
not known to transmit any chemicals into foods or drinks. HDPE products are
commonly recycled.
Figure 2.2: High-Density Polyethylene
III. Made with Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC). PVC is not often recycled and it can be
harmful if ingested.
Figure 2.3: PVC
21
IV. Plastic marked with an SPI code of 4 is made with Low-Density Polyethylene, or
LDPE. LDPE is not commonly recycled but it is recyclable in certain areas.
Figure 2.4: Low-Density Polyethylene
V. Plastic marked with an SPI code of 5 is made with Polypropylene, or PP. PP is

not commonly recycled, but it is accepted in many areas. This type of plastic is
strong and can usually withstand higher temperatures.
Figure 2.5: Polypropylene
VI. Plastic marked with an SPI code of 6 is made with Polystyrene (PS) and
commonly known as Styrofoam. It is commonly recycled.
Figure 2.6: Polystyrene
22
VII. Designates miscellaneous types of plastic not defined by the other six codes.
Polycarbonate and Polylactide are included in this category. These types of
plastics are difficult to recycle.
Figure 2.7: Polycarbonate and Polylactide
2.2.2 Production of degradable plastics

The preliminary process for producing degradable plastic consist of the cracking process.
This involves converting the oil obtained from petroleum resources into monomers of
hydrocarbons such as ethylene and propylene. The monomers are then formed into
polymers, followed by plastic pellets production. Plastic pellets, as shown by the Figure
2.1, are required for plastic production.
Figure 2.8: Plastic pellets
The principle behind the production of degradable plastic includes melting the plastic
pellets along with the biodegradable plastic pellets at a temperature between 200oc to
23
275oc depending on the polymer. The melted polymer is then forced through either a die
or into a mould to produce the desired plastic product before being cooled.
There are four types of process used for production of the different types of plastic are:
1. Extrusion of plastic
2. Injection molding or blow molding
3. Plastic blow extrusion
4. Rotational molding
2.2.3 Biodegradable plastic additives

Figure 2.2 shows additives, which are basically chemicals added to degradable plastics
during their production to render them degradable when exposed to different
environmental conditions or sunlight. These additives though referred to as
biodegradable plastic additives only cause the plastic product to be degraded and as a
result still cause the problem of plastic disposal. Some other types of additives are added
to enhance the properties of the plastic product such as protection against UV light or for
coloring.
Figure 2.9: Oxo-Biodegradable Plastic Master Batch / Additive
(Plastic particle water pollution, 2016)
2.3 Biodegradable plastics

Biodegradable plastics are plastics produced from natural materials that are mostly
organic materials such as corn, pea starch, cellulose based materials and potato.
24
Biodegradable are considered as substitutes to degradable plastics since they have many
characteristics that favors them concerning their environmental benefits. Figure 2.10
shows the life cycle of a biodegradable plastic.
Figure 2.10: life cycle of a biodegradable plastic
(Instructable, 2010)
2.3.1 Classification of biodegradable plastics

Biodegradable plastics can be classified as follows:
1. Cellulose based plastics
Cellulose based plastic are plastics produced from cellulose resources such as wood
and other plant materials. The mechanism behind producing cellulose based
bioplastic involved the conversion of the glucose found in the cellulose from the plant
or biomass into hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF). However this technology is quite
expensive and still requires a lot of research before commercial applications.
2. Aliphatic polyesters
This type of polymer has similar characteristics as Polyethylene (PE) and
Polypropylene (PP). They are used for the production of beverage bottles or trash
bags. This type of polymer can be manufactured by conventional plastic process and
25
are resistant to high temperatures up to 260oC. However this type of polymer is also
resistant to microbial degradation. (Lenau, 2003).
3. Polylactic acid (PLA) plastic
PLA is derived from natural resources such as corn or sugar cane (glucose). It can be
processed easily on conventional petroleum plastic machinery and has many similar
characteristics. PLA usually comes in granular forms and can be used along
processing lines to manufacture foils, cups and bottles.
4. Poly-3-hydroxybutyrate (PHB)
Poly-3-hydroxybutyrate (PHB), a biopolymer, is a polyester produced by some

microorganisms that feed on starch or a source of glucose. PHB shows interesting
characteristics as an alternative to degradable plastics because it is a transparent film
at a melting point higher than 130oC and is completely biodegradable.
5. Polyethylene derived from biomaterials
Polyethylene can be derived from biomaterials such as the fermentation of corn or

sugarcane. It is a polymer of ethylene which can be produced from ethanol. The
polyethylene obtained from the organic raw materials is similar to the petroleum
derived polyethylene. However the polyethylene does not biodegrade but can be
recycled.
6. Starch based plastics
Starch based plastics are plastic produced from starch which possesses the ability to
observe plastic properties similar to thermoplastic polymers. Around 50% of the
market of bioplastic is starch-based plastic or bioplastic. It is currently the most
important and extensively used bioplastic used.
2.4 Starch based plastic
In this project, the production of a starch-based polymer for the production of starch
based plastic films was investigated. Starch-based plastic is an interesting alternative to
degradable plastics since they present multiple advantages. They are produced from
natural resources and do not affect the environment after degradation. In Europe, most
26
of the plastic used nowadays are starch-based. It can either be recycled or reused as well
as composted thus offering environmental benefits over degradable plastics. When the
starch based plastic is composted, the compost is returned back to the raw material and
when it is reused or recycled, the manufacturer recycles the bioplastic for future use.
2.4.1 Starch
Starch is a naturally occurring soluble carbohydrate that can be obtained from various
raw materials such as corn, potato, cassava, rice and sweet potato. Starch is produced by
plants mainly as an energy reserve.
2.4.2 Characteristics of starch

Starch exhibits some similar properties as polymers when subjected to hydrolysis. There
exists two type of molecules in starch namely unbranched molecules which consist of
glucose and branched molecules which consist of amylose and amylopectin. The shapes
as well as the size of the granules of the starch are important factors to be considered
during processing concerning their properties (Mweta, 2009).
2.4.3 Different types of starch sources

Starch can be obtained from different plant sources. Sweet potato, potato, cassava and
maize are some sources of starch locally available in Mauritius. Starch sources from
potato, sweet potato, cassava and maize were investigated and the different aspects of
the polymers were examined. A comparison table was drawn for the different sources of
starch to identify the best raw material for the study. Table 2.1 shows the results obtained
as comparison.
27
Table 2.1: Starch-based polymer comparison table
Properties Potato Sweet potato Cassava Maize

Type of source Tuber Tuber Tuber Grain
Availability in Mauritius High Average Average Low
Harvest time1 (months) 3 6 8-9 3
Harvest quantity2 (tons/ 10.5 – 14.5 6 - 8 8.5 - 10.5 56250
acre) units
Production in 20133 (in 882 435 435 53
tons)
Polymer specifications
Starch extracted Good Good Good Good
Ease of working Good Good Average Good
Texture Good Good Sticky Too liquid
Drying feature Good Good Low Very low
Strength High High Low Low
1
AREU, 2004, 2AREU, 2004, 3Central statistical Office, 2013
From Table 2.1, the most advantageous raw materials were potato and sweet potato. The
other sources of starch did not show possible industrial exploitation to produce starch
based polymer and consequently starch-based biodegradable plastic films in Mauritius.
The island has almost reached an auto-sufficient supply in potato whereas sweet potato
harvest represents a greater supply than the demand thus resulting in an excess of the
tuber on the market. However, when using potato as the raw material source of starch in
the process consideration, a situation of food crisis may arise in the island.
2.4.4 Properties exhibited by starch during polymer synthesis

Starch can be processed to produce natural polymers. Starch polymer has the ability to
sustain water and thus water can be used in the production of the starch-based polymer.
However the final properties of starch polymer depend mostly on the type of raw
material. For example tubers such as potato and cassava starch have low protein content
28
but high phosphate content as compared to wheat starch and according to a recent study
(Mweta, 2009). This gives tuber a better biodegradability as compared to wheat starch.
2.5 Comparison study

Degradable plastic and biodegradable plastic derived from starch are two types of
plastics that can be used for the production of plastic carry bags. However they both have
their qualities and weaknesses as illustrated in Tables 2.2 and 2.3.
2.5.1 Advantages of degradable plastics and starch-based plastics

TABLE 2.2: ADVANTAGES OF DEGRADABLE PLASTICS AND STARCH-BASED PLASTICS
Degradable plastics Starch-based plastics

They are light weighed and malleable They do not cause the death of marine
and can be used for the production of animals such as the tortoise in the sea.
plastic carry bags.
They have strong mechanical and They do not affect the environment in
physical properties in contrast to starch the form of water pollution or
based plastics. environmental pollution.
They are light weighed and show strong As opposed to degradable plastics,
mechanical properties. biodegradable plastics require less
energy to be produced.
They are resistant to chemicals and can They are light weighed and malleable
be used for production of storage and can be used for the production of
containers for chemical products. plastic carry bags.
They can be used as insulators in many They reduce the dependency on fossil
appliances. fuels for the production.
They are malleable and can be molded They are made from renewable raw
into a variety of complex forms. materials such as corn starch and
biomass.
29
2.5.2 Disadvantages of degradable plastics and starch-based plastics
TABLE 2.3: DISADVANTAGES OF DEGRADABLE PLASTIC AND STARCH-BASED PLASTICS
Degradable plastics Starch-based plastics

They are made from nonrenewable raw They show weaker mechanical and
materials such as crude oil thus making chemical properties as compared to
this type of plastic not environmentally degradable plastics.
sustainable.
They generate a lot of solid waste They do not have a long life time since
though some degradable plastics can be they degrade in the presence of
recycled. environmental conditions such as
microorganisms and moisture.
Degradable plastics are sometimes not Has a considerable cost thus affecting
biodegraded thus contributing to the its economic sustainability.
increasing amount of solid waste in
landfills where they remain unchanged
and unaffected by environmental
conditions.
They cause the death of marine animals
such as the tortoise in the sea.
According to Liam Bartlett (2008),
more than 100,000 marine animals are
killed each year due to plastic pollution
in the sea (Bartlett et al., 2008).
When degradable plastic are burnt, they
release harmful emissions such as
dioxins that causes health problems.
30
Degradable plastic production is very
energy intensive processes requiring a
large amount of energy.
Not environmentally sustainable.
Some types of plastic, such as
polycarbonate (Bisphenol A, BPA), are
believed to cause health problems such
as on the nervous system especially
regarding infants.
The qualities of biodegradable plastic made from starch raw material outweigh the
qualities of degradable plastics and thus biodegradable starch plastic can become a strong
alternative to degradable plastic.
2.6 Starch based polymer and plastic plant design

The design of the starch based biodegradable plastic plant includes three main steps
namely:
1. The extraction of starch from sweet potato
2. The starch-based polymer production
3. The processing of the polymer for starch-based biodegradable plastic film production
2.6.1 Extraction of starch from potato

For the extraction of starch from potato, there are three main procedures that exist that
is; alkali extraction medium, water extraction medium and enzymatic extraction medium.
1. Alkali extraction medium
Alkali medium extraction of starch from tuber consists of using an ammonia solution
(0.03M) by normal settling method. This type of extraction was done with three
31
different types of tuber crops namely from Colocasia, Dioscorea esculenta starches
and potato (Moorthy, 1990).
2. Water extraction medium

Water extraction is the most popular extraction means of extracting starch from
tubers. In this procedure of isolation, the potato is washed, peeled and diced to
increase the surface area exposed to the following blending and slurring purposes.
The diced potato is then blended and scurried directly in a solution of water and
crushed ice in the ratio of 1: >10 (w/w) to expose the starch granules from the potato.
Tubers are rich in sugar and protein and when exposed to air, they form colored
components. A Sulphur component is usually added to the mixture to prevent any
oxidation. The milk starch is then refined and dried to obtain the required starch
(Vasanthan, 2001).
3. Enzymatic extraction medium
Enzymatic extraction is also another process that can be used for the extraction of
starch from raw materials such as potato and cassava. Starch extraction by water and
acid extraction can cause loss of starch up to 20%. Enzyme extraction of starch
includes treating the ground starch-rich raw material with Pectinolytic and Cellulase
enzymes (J.Kallabinski et al., 1991). The process involves incubation of the cultured
starch material at a temperature of 45oC.
2.6.2 The biodegradable polymer production from the starch
Starch can be processed to produce a starch-based polymer. The starch is first hydrated
with water and then hydrolyzed with a weak acid such as acetic acid or 0.1M HCL.
Evaporation of water from the starch solution causes the amylose chain alignment and
increases attraction between the polymeric chains through hydrogen bonding (Rechial et
al., 2010). However the polymer does not exhibit plastic properties at this stage
(Instructable, 2010). Sorbitol and glycerin are two types of plasticizer added to the starch
to enhance its plasticity. Heat (between 90oC to 180oC) (Vilpoux et al., 2003) is provided
to promote the swelling and hydrolysis process of the starch.
32
2.6.3 The processing of starch-based polymer for plastic film production
The starch-based plastic polymer can be further processed along with other
biodegradable components such as the Polylactic acids (PLA) or Polycaprolactone
(PCL) (Michigan Technological University, 2005) in a conventional plastic extruder
machine to produce the desired plastic product. The extrusion technology is used since a
long time mainly for the corn starch processing such as for packaging materials
production (Peng et al., 2003). According to a study (Bhatnagar et al., 1996)
biodegradable plastic does not show good storage characteristics when exposed to
moisture. The addition of additives such as magnesium silicate or polycarbonate can
reinforce the properties of the starch products (Bhatnagar et al., 1996). There are some
parameters such as the temperature or blending ratio that need to be respected during the
processing of the biodegradable plastic. According to a study, (Bhatnagar et al., 1996)
the ratio of starch polymer to the additive can be 70:30 on a dry basis. Also this study
shows that the properties of the final product will depend on the type of starch used for
the production of the plastic product. Some parameters for the production of starch-based
polymers or ‘thermoplastic starch’ (TPS) from pea starch by using a twin screw extruder
are illustrated in Table 2.4.
TABLE 2.4: PARAMETERS OF STARCH-BASED PLASTIC FILM PRODUCTION
Feature Parameters
Starch rate of flow (kg/hr) 12
Plasticising rate of flow (L/h) 3.6 - 4.8
Screw rotation speed (rpm) 110 -160
Temperature of plasticization zone (oC) 110 – 120
Product temperature when leaving the 55 - 60
extruder (oC)
Die pressure when product leaves the 50 – 60
extruder (bar)
Specific Mechanical Energy (kJ/kg) 1050 - 1400
(Source: Vilpoux et al., 2003)
2.6.4 Mechanical properties

The mechanical properties of degradable plastic can be tested according to the
Environmental Protection Act 2004 governing ‘Plastic Carry Bags’, made by the
33
Minister under section 96 of the environment Protection Act 2004 (Ministry of
Environment and Sustainable Development, 2004), plastic carry bags are tested
according to different standards of the American Society for Testing and Materials
(ASTM). The different standards are listed in Table 2.8.
TABLE 2.5: LIST OF STANDARD TESTS FOR PLASTIC CARRY BAGS
Feature ASTM test

Degradation tests ASTM D3826 – 98: standard practice
for determining endpoint in degradable
polyethylene and polypropylene using a
tensile test
ASTM D 5208-01 - Standard practice
for operating fluorescent ultraviolet
(UV) and condensation apparatus for
exposure of photodegradable plastics
ASTM D 5510-94 - Standard practice
for heat ageing of oxidatively
degradable plastics
Thickness test TM D 374 - Standard Test Method for
Thickness of Solid Electrical Insulation
(Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development, 2004)
2.7 Researches on Bioplastics

2.7.1 Polyhydroxybutyrate and Hydroxyvalerate Production by Bacillus megaterium
Strain A1 Isolated from Hydrocarbon-Contaminated Soil.
As per, Demirbilek et al., an alternative microbial resource as a bioplastic producer were
found. From all the isolates, the Al strain produced 44% poly (b- hydroxybutyrate)
(PHB) with reference to its dry cell weight. The molecular identification of the 16S RNA
gene showed that this bacterium was a strain of Bacillus megaterium. The optimization
studies led to the conclusion that the highest poly (b-hydroxybutyrate-co-
hydroxyvalerate) (PHBV) production was 78% when 5% molasses was used as the
carbon source at pH 6 and 35_C after 60 h of incubation. Differential scanning
calorimetry was used to determine the thermal properties of the PHB and PHBV that
34
were synthesized with sucrose and molasses as carbon sources, respectively. The
molecular weights of PHB and PHBV synthesized with sucrose and molasses were
calculated as 428 and 498 kDa, respectively, according to the viscometric method. The
study indicated that the B. megaterium strain A1 is an alternative microbial resource as
a bioplastic producer. (Demirbilek et al., 2014)
2.7.2 Production and characterization of PHB from a novel isolate Comamonas sp. from
a dairy effluent sample and its application in cell culture
From the research carried out by Raveendran et al., optimizing various process
parameters affecting fermentation for PHB production by Comamonas sp. Were carried
out. The optimum conditions for PHB production were yeast extract concentration of
1%, pH 6.0 and inoculum concentration of 5.5%. Under optimized conditions the PHB
yield was 0.523 g/g. The extracted polymer was characterized by FTIR and 1H NMR.
Nanomatrices and solid walled matrices were prepared using the extracted PHB.
Cytotoxic studies revealed that both solid walled and nanomatrices prepared from the
extracted PHB showed almost 100% survivals of H9c2 cells. (Raveendran et al., 2015).
2.7.3 Production of PHB by a Bacillus megaterium strain using sugarcane molasses and
corn steep liquor as sole carbon and nitrogen sources.
K. Gouda et al., worked on the production of PHB by Bacillus Megaterium using
molasses and corn steep as nutrient sources. It was found that Poly (hydroxybutyric acid)
(PHB) and other biodegradable polyesters are promising candidates for the development
of environment-friendly, totally biodegradable plastics. The use of cane molasses and
corn steep liquor were found to reduce the cost of producing such biopolyesters. Result
shown that maximum production of PHB was obtained with cane molasses and glucose
as sole carbon sources (40.8, 39.9 per mg cell dry matter, respectively). The best growth
was obtained with 3% molasses, while maximum yield of PHB (46.2% per mg cell dry
matter) was obtained with 2% molasses. Corn steep liquor was the best nitrogen source
for PHB synthesis (32.7 mg per cell dry matter), on the other hand, best growth was
observed when ammonium chloride, ammonium sulphate, ammonium oxalate or
ammonium phosphate were used as nitrogen sources. (K. Gouda et al., 2001).
35
2.7.4 Sustainable Embedding of the Bioplastic Poly-(3-Hydroxybutyrate) into the
Sugarcane
From the research of Martin Koller et al., biodegradable polymer poly-(3-
hydroxybutyrate) (PHB) were made economically competitive with common end-of-
pipe plastic materials from petrochemistry, the production costs have to be reduced
considerably. The embedding of the industrial PHB production into a sugar and ethanol
factory starting from the raw material sugarcane made it possible to achieve a production
price per kilogram PHB that is 4–5 times lower than known for prior PHB production
processes. The availability of the substrate sucrose in high quantities leads to the gained
price advantage. Together with the application of ethanol as an alternative fuel, CO2
emissions from the production plant return to the sugarcane fields via photosynthetic
fixation, resulting in a carbon balance of nearly zero. The utilization of medium chain
length alcohols, by-products of the ethanol production integrated in this plant, substitutes
the classic PHB extraction method using chlorinated agents. (Martin Koller et al., 2009).
2.7.5 Polyhydroxybutyrate synthesis on biodiesel wastewater using mixed microbial

consortia
R. Coats et al., worked on the synthesis of PHB using mixed microbial consortia and
biodiesel wastewater as main source of nutrient. In the study they investigated PHA
production on CG using mixed microbial consortia (MMC) and determined that the
enriched MMC produced exclusively polyhydroxybutyrate (PHB) utilizing the methanol
fraction. PHB synthesis appeared to be stimulated by a macronutrient deficiency.
Intracellular concentrations remained relatively constant over an operational cycle, with
microbial growth occurring concurrent with polymer synthesis. PHB average molecular
weights ranged from 200–380 kDa, while thermal properties compared well with
commercial PHB. The resulting PHB material properties and characteristics would be
suitable for many commercial uses. (R. Coats et al., 2010).
36
Chapter 3: Methodology
3.1 Overall process
The figure 3.1 shows the process of the bioplastic production.
Figure 3.1: Process of the bioplastic production
3.2 Extraction of starch form Potato tubers

3.2.1 Extraction process
Water medium was chosen for the extraction because it was observed that the extraction
rate was enhanced as compared to alkali extraction. With alkali medium, the extraction
of starch from potato is decreased as compared to other tubers such as the family of
Colocasia which includes the cocoyam (Moorthy, 1990).
37
3.2.2 Selection of the potato
The potato selected for the extraction was bought at the local vegetable market of
‘Mahebourg’ in the island. The potato is grown in Mauritius thus showing all the
characteristics required for the project.
3.3 Preparation of the potato

There were a few procedures followed before the extraction of the starch from the sweet
potato. These included the:
1. Weighing
2. Washing
3. Peeling
4. Dicing
3.3.1 Weighing
The selected sweet potato was first weighed. This was done to obtain an initial mass of
the tuber. Potato tubers with a total weight of approximately one kilogram were used in
the extraction. The ratio of the impurities to the potato was then determined by the
difference in the weighing before and after washing.
3.3.2 Washing
The selected potato was then washed with water to remove the contaminants such as dirt,
soil, small roots and other unwanted plant materials which could otherwise affect the
final output of the tuber. The rubbing in the washing step is an important quality factor
since this step will determine the purity factor of the potato. There are many impurities
that are similar to the final starch. To avoid any contamination in the final product, proper
washing was done (International Starch Institute, 2006).
3.3.3 Weighing
The washed potato was again weighed to obtain the difference in the weighing before
and after washing.
38
3.3.4 Peeling
The washed potato was then hand peeled using a knife. Care was taken to avoid
unnecessary peeling of the potato cells. This would otherwise cause loss of the pulp and
starch granule from the potato resulting in starch loss. A large amount of damaged starch
granule could lead to alteration in the physiochemical properties of the starch to be
extracted according to the procedure chosen. The peels obtained from the potato can be
sent to an organic compost company for further processing that can be consequently used
as an organic fertilizer in the potato agricultural lands instead of chemical fertilizers. This
would reduce the plantation cost of the farmers.
3.3.5 Dicing
The peeled potato was then carefully hand diced to small regular cubes of similar size
(as far as possible the dimensions of all the cubes were respected). Care was taken to
avoid damage of the starch granule in the sweet potato. Figure 3.1 shows the dices potato
tubers.
Figure 3.2: Diced Potato
3.3.6 Blending and slurring

The blending and slurring procedure of the potato sample was done in water by using a
blender. This type of slurring is done for the potato because the tissues of the tuber are
39
soft and require no grinding as compared to hard plant tissues such as for cereal or
legume grains according to the protocol adopted (Thava Vasanthan, 2001).
Figure 3.3: Blending and Slurring
3.3.7 Water Slurring

For water slurring of the sample of diced potato, the ratio of the tuber to water added was
1 : >10 (w/w). For the sample of 890g of diced sweet potato, a total mass of 9790g
(0.00979m3) of water was added, that is eleven times more water by weight. During the
water slurring, crushed ice was added to the mixture to avoid heat-induced damage to
the starch granule (Thava Vasanthan, 2001). However the total weight of water added
was carefully controlled.
3.3.8 Filtration
The filtration procedure was done by passing the slurry obtained through double-layered
cheesecloth. The filtration procedure was done to separate the starch granules extract
from the residue of the potato as shown in Figure 3.3 (left). The starch was washed into
the filtrate by spraying water from a wash bottle onto the residue. The lack of opacity of
the filtrate, Figure 3.3 (right), indicates appropriate washing. Squeezing of the
cheesecloth was avoided. The residue of the potato, Figure 3.4, was blended two more
times and filtered again to maximize recovery of the starch from the potato.
40
Figure 3.4: Double layered cheesecloth for filtration
Figure 3.5: Residue pulp of potato
41
3.3.9 Final starch
The figure 3.6 shows the final starch obtained after extraction while figure 3.6 shows the
starch after drying.
Figure 3.6: Starch after water extraction
Figure 3.7: Dried starch
42
3.4 Production of starch based bioplastic
The methodology of producing the bioplastics is as follows:
 15g of dried potato starch was diluted with 150ml distilled water in a 500ml
beaker.
 The beaker was brought on a heater plate including a magnetic stirrer.
 A magnet stick was added in the beaker and let stirring at 2 r.p.m.
 18ml of 0.1M HCl was pipetted in the mixture and the same amount of 0.1M
NaOH was added for neutralization.
 12ml of 1% glycerol was added.
 The heater was switched to 100oC.
 The mixture was allowed to heat for about 15 mins and the stirrer was brought to
3 r.p.m as the mixture was hardening.
 The mixture took about 1 hour to form an opaque gel.
 The gel was spread on a mold of 2 mm thickness.
 The sample was allowed to dry.
The figures below show the steps used for the preparation of the bioplastics
43
Figure 3.8: steps of producing bioplastic.
44
3.5 Biodegradable starch plastic process plant design
3.5.1 Process consideration
The process flow chosen for the extraction of the starch was the Potato Starch
Production from the International Starch Institute, 2006. The process consideration of
the starch-based plastic film process plant was considered in this unit. The process plant
for a total capacity of 10 tons per day of potato was considered.
3.5.2 Extraction unit

The first unit of the process plant consisted of the extraction unit. The extraction unit is
the unit where the starch will be extracted from the potato. The different sub units of the
first unit are discussed in this design chapter.
 Weighing platform
The weighing platform is the area where the raw material used for the starch extraction
is unloaded and weighed. After the weighing platform, the potato is unloaded to the
sampling and washing section. Figure 3.9 shows the mass balance over the weighing
unit.
Figure 3.9: Mass balance diagram over weighing unit
 Sampling and dry washing
The potato is conveyed to the sampling section with a total volume of 10.4 m 3 where
they are sorted and sent to the dry washing unit for cleaning before storage. This will
avoid any problem of contamination inside the storage area which might consequently
cause possible loss of raw materials. Figure 3.10 shows the mass balance over the
sampling and dry washing unit.
45
Figure 3.10: Mass balance diagram over sampling and dry washing unit
 Storage area
The storage area is the area where the selected potato for the process plant will be stored
for the minimum period. The turnover of the storage area should be fast and the oldest
potato should be processed first (International Starch Institute, 2006). The reception area
has an overall volume of 1060 m3. An additional 25% volume was considered as an
assumption for the safety so that any excess of potato can be stored during period of
maintenance within the plant. A cold storage area should be available to avoid early
sprouting of the tuber in any condition of plant shut down. The storage area is a well
ventilated rectangular area and made of either concrete or steel. Figure 3.11 shows the
mass balance over the storage area.
Figure 3.11: Mass balance diagram over reception area
 Rotary bar screen
The rotary bar screen removes the stones and unwanted materials that might still be
attached to the tuber prior to the washing section. Figure 3.12 shows the mass balance
over the rotary bar screen unit.
46
Figure 3.12: Mass balance diagram over rotating bar screen
 Rotary washer
The rotary washer is the unit where the potato tubers are washed intensely to remove all
the unwanted dirt and stones. The rotary washer is fed with fresh process water to be
cleaned. The wash water (containing the dirt and unwanted components) is then filtered
and recycled through a rotary screen and passed through a settling basin of sand to
remove the unwanted components of dirt. Any loss of process water along the unit line
is compensated by the recycled water. The water in the rotary washer is added by
pressure nozzles in the final step and a counter current flow is adopted for the washing.
The pressure ensures that the maximum amounts of unwanted materials are removed
from the process flow. The mass balance over the rotary washer is shown in Figure 3.13.
Figure 3.13: Mass balance diagram over rotary washer unit
 Stone catcher
The potato passes through a stone catcher along the washing line so that the stones and
soil collected are removed. The difference in weight is used for the removal of stones
47
(International Starch Institute, 2006). Water level in the stone catcher is kept low so that
the potato tubers do not float. Figure 3.14 shows the mass balance over stone catcher
unit.
Figure 3.14: Mass balance diagram over stone catcher unit
 Rotary screen peeler
The rotary screen peeler is the unit where the tuber is peeled prior to rasping. The peeled
tubers are then fed to the rasper through a buffer bin, allowing a constant mass flow rate
of tuber along the process line. The peeler that can be used for the unit is similar to the
Rootveg peeler and polisher from the Haith Tickhill Group of companies. Figure 3.15
illustrates the mass balance over the rotary screen peeler. The peeled potato is then fed
to the next unit, the rasper and mixing unit, through a buffer bin to ensure that the mass
flow rate is uniform. The peels obtained from the potato will be sent to an organic
compost company for further processing. It can then be used as an organic fertilizer in
the potato agricultural lands instead of chemical fertilizers (International Starch Institute,
2006).
48
Figure 3.15: Mass balance diagram over rotary screen peeler and buffer bin unit
 Rasping unit
Rasping is the action of opening the tuber to release the starch granules inside the cells.
The rasper unit, with a volume of 272.5 m3, is the direct rasping equipment and the potato
is only passed through this unit once. Cold water, from a feeding tank with a total volume
of 118 m3, is added to the rasping unit at a temperature of 4oC (Thava Vasanthan, 2001).
Figure 3.16 shows the mass balance over the rasping unit.
Figure 3.16: Mass balance diagram over rasper and mixer unit
 Sulphur addition
A Sulphur component, in the ratio of 0.01% (w/v) to the water, is added to the rasped
sweet potato to avoid oxidation of the tuber upon rasping. The Sulphur component added
is the Sodium Metabisulphite and is added from its dissolution tank, with a 4.5 tons
storage capacity, by a feeding pump.
 Refining unit
I. Rotating conical sieves
There are two rotating conical sieves used in the first unit for the preliminary sieving of
the rasped potato for separating the milk starch from the pulp and fibres of the tuber. The
49
residue left after separation is used in an auxiliary processing plant where cattle feed can
be produced (International Starch Institute, 2006).
II. Hydrocyclone
Hydrocyclone is used for the extraction of only the starch from the milk starch obtained
after removal of fiber and pulp. The starch granules are collected at the underflow
because they are heavier than water while the fruit juice of the potato is removed in the
overflow.
III. Continuous rotating vacuum filter
The moist starch from the previous section is then dried by a continuous rotating vacuum
filter. Figure 3.17 shows the principle of the continuous rotating vacuum filter and the
equipment.
Figure 3.17: Continuous rotating vacuum filter
IV. Flash dryer
The flash dryer is used in the process plant to dry the starch extracted. A warm air of
35oC to 40oC is forced at the bottom of the flash dryer while the starch is dropped from
the top of the machine. The warm air cause the water in the starch to be dispersed and
the dried moist starch is accumulated at the bottom. The mass balance diagram over the
refining unit is shown in Figure 3.18.
50
Figure 3.18: Mass balance over the refining unit
3.5.3 Starch-based polymer production

 Hydrolysis of starch
The hydrolysis of the starch extracted from the sweet potato is subjected to water and
acid hydrolysis. A heat source between 90oC to 180oC (Vilpouxet al., 2003) is used in
the hydrolysis process. A plasticizer, in the form of glycerol, is also added for the process.
The hydrolysis reaction is carried out in a closed tank of 94m3 under atmospheric
pressure. The tank is made of steel to resist the mild acid corrosion that might occur. The
tank consists of rotating blades to ensure proper mixing of the ingredients for the polymer
production. The mass balance over the hydrolysis unit is illustrated in Figure 3.19.
51
Figure 3.19: Mass balance diagram over hydrolysis tank
 Dryer and pelletizer
This unit ensures that the wet polymer produced in the previous section is properly dried
in an oven or incubator at a temperature of 40oC and transformed to smaller pellets of
polymer. The mass balance over the unit is shown in Figure 3.20.
Figure 3.20: Mass balance diagram over the polymer dryer and pelletizer unit
3.5.4 Starch-based biodegradable plastic film production

This unit consists of the extrusion unit, the film and surface treatment unit and the final
distribution unit.
1. Extrusion unit
The pellets of the starch polymer, with a possible blend, in the ratio of starch to
Polylactic acid (PLA) additive of 70:30 (Qi Fang and Milford A. Hanna, 2000), are
first melted and then extruded through a conventional plastic extruder to produce the
starch based plastic film to consequently manufacture the plastic carry bags. The
melted polymer is forced through a die (depending on the size of the final plastic
52
product). Compressed air is used for the extrusion with a die of range φ120φ300
(Wenzhou Zhudian Machinery Makes Co., Ltd, 2011). The thickness of starch-based
plastic film produced is 20microns. The mass balance over the extrusion unit is as
shown in Figure 3.21.
Figure 3.21: Mass balance diagram over extrusion unit
2. Film and surface treatment unit
The starch-based plastic film produced is then treated in the film and surface treatment
unit to ensure that the final product can be printed for use as carry bags. The mass balance
over the unit is as illustrated in Figure 3.22.
Figure 3.22: Mass balance diagram over the film and surface treatment unit
3. Distribution unit
The distribution unit is the unit where the starch biodegradable plastic film produced
from the extrusion unit is cut and manufactured into the carry bags for commercial use.
The mass balance over the unit is as follows:
53
Figure 3.23: Mass balance diagram over distribution unit
3.6 Preliminary economic analysis over the starch-based plastic film process
plant design
The economic analysis of the biodegradable plastic process plant was estimated by
calculating the following:
1. Purchase Equipment Cost (PEC)
2. Total Direct Cost (TDC) and Total Indirect Cost (TIC)
3. Fixed Capital Investment (FCI)
4. Total Capital Investment (TCI)
5. Total Product Cost (TPC)
6. Profit or Loss
7. Pay Back period
8. Internal Rate of Return (IRR)
The method used, such as the equations and relationships, for the economic estimation
was from the book Plant Design and Economics for Chemical Engineers, 4th Edition,
Max S. Peters, Klaus D. Timmerhaus, Professors of Chemical Engineering, University
of Colorado, , 1991, McGraw-Hill International Editions (Refer to appendix).
3.6.1 Purchase Equipment Cost (PEC)

The price of the different equipment for the plant were acquired from various industries
specified in the field of biodegradable plastic production. The cost were converted to
Mauritian rupees (Rs) from Dollars (USD) using the following assumption:
54
 The currency conversion factor of 29.10 Rupees (Rs) for one dollar (USD) was
used. (Currency convertor, 9th December 2015)
Equation 1:
Conversion = Price in Dollar (USD) x Currency Conversion factor
= USD x Rs 36.20
Some of the equipment costs were estimated by using the equation from Estimating
Equipment Costs by Scaling (S. Peters et al., 1991). The equation could be used where
only a range of ten times the initial capacity was possible.
Equation 2:
𝐶𝑎𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑜𝑓 𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑝𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝐴 0.6

Cost of equipment A = Cost of equipment B x( )
𝐶𝑎𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑜𝑓 𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑝𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝐵
3.6.2 Total Direct Cost (TDC) and Total Indirect Cost (TIC)
The TDC and the TIC were then calculated by using the typical percentages of Fixed
Capital Investment values for TDC and TIC segments for multipurpose plants additions
to existing facilities from Ratio factors for estimating capital-investment items based on
delivered equipment cost (S. Peters et al., 1991).
a) Direct costs
The equation 3 was used to find the direct cost.
Equation 3:
Direct Cost = Percentage used x Purchased Equipment Cost
b) Indirect costs
The equation 4 was used to find the indirect cost.
Equation 4:
Indirect Cost = Percentage used x Total Direct Cost
55
3.6.3 Fixed Capital Investment (FCI)
The FCI was calculated by using the following equation:
Equation 5:
Fixed Capital Investment = Total Direct Cost + Total Indirect Cost
FCI = TDC + TIC
3.6.4 Total Capital Investment (TCI)

The TCI was calculated from Ratio factors for estimating capital-investment items
based on delivered equipment cost (S. Peters et al., 1991, Page 183) by using equation
6.
Equation 6:
Total Capital Investment = Fixed Capital Investment + Working Capital
TCI = FCI + WC
Assumption:
The percentage of the WC assumed was 10% of the TCI.
When the WC represents a percentage of 10%,
TCI = FCI + 0.01 TCI
3.6.5 Total Product Cost (TPC)

The TPC was derived from the Ratio factors for estimating capital-investment items
based on delivered equipment cost (S. Peters et al., 1991, Page 183).
3.6.6 Profit or Loss

The profit or loss met by the process plant was found by deducting the annual TPC from
the sales as calculated by using equation 7.
Equation 7:
56
Profit/Loss = Revenue – TPC
3.6.7 Payback
The payback period of the process plant was determined by using the equation 8.
Equation 8:
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝐶𝑎𝑝𝑖𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝐼𝑛𝑣𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡

Payback period =
𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑓𝑖𝑡 𝑜𝑟 𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟
3.6.8 Internal Return of Rate (IRR)

The IRR measures the prosperity of an investment and was calculated by using the
equation 9.
Equation 9:
𝑛
𝐶𝐹𝑡
∑ − 𝐶𝐹0 = 0
(1 + 𝐾)𝑡
𝑡=1
Where:
k: is the internal rate of return (IRR)
t: is the time period, years
CFo: is the initial cash investment, Rs
CFt: is the net cash flow at period t, Rs
Chapter 4: Results and Discussion

4.1 Chemistry behind the formation of starch based bioplastic
Starch is made of long chains of glucose molecules. There are two shapes or molecules:
amylose which is a straight molecule and amylopectin which has a branched shape. The
57
amylose and amylopectin molecules aggregate into small particles called granules. When
making the plastic film, the chains of molecules in starch line up and bond in an ordered
fashion (due to hydrogen bonding) to make a strong material. Straight chained amylose
molecules form a more ordered, and stronger, plastic film, than the branched amylopectin
molecules that are difficult to align. In this experiment, dilute hydrochloric acid is added
to an aqueous solution of starch to break down the branched amylopectin molecules into
straight chained amylose molecules. Once the starch solution is acidified, it is heated to
boiling. As the solution is heated, the starch becomes soluble in the water and loses its
semi-crystalline structure as the starch granules swell with water. This creates a paste
that is highly viscous and the process is known as gelatinization. As the paste cools, the
water is expelled and the amylose molecules hydrogen bond to form a semi-crystalline
structure again resulting in a brittle plastic film. To improve the flexibility of the samples,
other chemicals can be added to the solution before heating. Glycerol is a small molecule
that is hygroscopic (water attracting). When glycerol is added to the starch mixture, it
traps water in the starch chains making it less crystalline, and consequently less brittle.
Sugar can delay gelatinization by competing with starch to absorb water. Glue will
increase the flexibility of the sample, while keeping a high tensile strength.
4.2 Starch content of raw potato

The average density of potato was found to be about 960 kg/m3 while the average mass
of starch based polymer from 15 grams of starch was around 44.8 grams. This
characterizes an overall percentage of 31.7% of the total initial potato used. The value
for the mass of starch obtained is in accordance with the value from the literature review.
If from literature review, starch represents 32% of potato, then there is a loss of around
58
0.3% from the potato. Extraction of starch can be carried out by either one of the
following mediums: water, alkali or enzymatic. Water is the commonly used medium for
the extraction of starch from soft tissues such as from tubers. This was the method chosen
for the starch extraction in this study. However, according to a study on enzymatic
extraction of starch from potato (J. Kallabinski, 1991), the rate of starch extraction can
be increased by 90% to 93%. This medium of extraction was not chosen because of the
high energy requirement and requires significant control of the process parameters such
as for the temperature and pH.
4.3 Number of starch-based biodegradable plastic carry bags.

The number of starch-based plastic carry bags produced from the 10 tons of potato per
day being processed is 356, 204 per day or around 117 million starch-based plastic carry
bags with the proposed dimension of 30cm by 45cm. From a recent article (Article Base,
2007) the amount of plastic carry bags consumed for the year 2006 was 113 million. The
type of plastic being produced and consumed in Mauritius since the law was enforced is
the degradable plastic. However according to a recent study (R. Mohee et al., 2006) this
type of degradable plastic, even though a biodegradable additive was added during the
production process, remained unaffected after 55 days of composting. Also, the study
concludes that starch-based plastic would completely degrade in a period of 60 days
when exposed in controlled and natural composting environments. The positive aspects
of the starch-based plastic film underlined shows that it can be used to slowly substitute
the degradable plastic in order to avoid environmental problems. Moreover with the
processing of 10 tons per day of sweet potato in the process plant, additional agricultural
lands would be required in the island to account for the yearly requirement of the plant.
4.4 Economic analysis of the process plant

Table 4.1 shows the results of the economic analysis of the starch-based carry bags
process plant.
59
TABLE 4.1: ECONOMIC ANALYSIS SUMMATION TABLE
Economic feature calculated Value

Purchase Equipment Cost (PEC) Rs 21,749,997
Total Direct Cost (TDC) and Total TDC: Rs 41,977,494
Indirect Cost (TIC) TIC: Rs 26,099,996
Fixed Capital Investment (FCI) Rs 68,077,491
Total Capital Investment (TCI) Rs 75,641,656
Total Product Cost (TPC) Rs 164,170,639
Sales/ year Rs 182,198,346
Profit or Loss Rs 18,027,707
Pay Back period 4.20 years
Internal Rate of Return (IRR) 23%
From the economic analysis, a final payback period of 4.20 years was obtained for a total
profit of Rs 18,027,707 per year and a Total Capital Investment (TCI) of Rs 75,641,656.
The production of approximately 113 million of starch-based biodegradable plastic carry
bags was possible per year at a selling price of Rs 1.55 thus bringing revenue of Rs
182,198,346 to the process plant per year. In addition to the revenue already obtained
from the starch-based carry bags, the production of cattle feed from the potato fiber
residue and compost from the potato peels can bring supplementary revenue to the plant.
4.5 Mechanical testing of the bioplastic samples.

The mechanical testing was carried out at the metrology lab from the mechanical
department at the University of Mauritius. The Universal texting machine was used to
perform several physical tests and hence obtaining values for the elongation at break and
at peak, force at break and at peak, strain at break and peak, stress at break and at peak,
young’s modulus, time to failure and finally the time to peak.
The standard ISO 18872 was adopted for the several tests where a pull-off speed up to
20 mm/min were achieved. In addition, the use of direct extension measurement on the
specimen were possible, allowing informative stress-strain diagrams to be generated.
The following positive results were obtained on three samples:
60
Fig 4.1: Graph of force against Elongation for sample 1
61
Fig 4.2: Graph of stress against strain for sample 2
Fig 4.3: Graph of Stress against strain for sample 3

It was observed that this typical bioplastic could resist a force up to 1 Kg and hence it
has a good strength.
62
Chapter 5: Conclusion
This study was carried out with the aim to investigate the potential of producing starch-
based plastic films and consequently plastic carry bags from potato starch in Mauritius.
The tensile properties of the starch-based polymer were observed to be higher when the
thickness of the polymer was increased. However, according to the law promulgated on
plastic carry bags in Mauritius, the thickness should be at 20microns. The tensile
properties can therefore be improved with the addition of additives such as Polylactic
acids (PLA) or fiber additives. Besides, the feasibility of the proposed process plant for
the production of the starch-based was also evaluated.
This study showed that the product realization was viable with a payback period of 4.20
years. This was achieved with a TCI of Rs 75,641,656, TPC of Rs 164,170,639 and
revenue of Rs 18,027,707 on the production per year. The production of approximately
117millions of starch-based plastic carry bags was possible per year at a selling price of
Rs 1.55.
The legislative norms governing the starch-based plastic carry bags were assumed to be
similar to those of degradable plastic bags under the Environmental Protection Act 2004
governing ‘Plastic Carry Bags’, made by the Minister under section 96 of the
environment Protection Act 2004. Moreover, with a process plant, for a total capacity of
10 tons per day of potato, additional agricultural lands would be required in the island
since the production of the tuber is 435 tons at the present time for the year. This would
consequently encourage the agricultural sector and create job opportunities.
To conclude, the production of starch-based plastic film is a viable industry even though
for the time being it will still be dependent on petroleum products such as energy
resources for the machine operation. However, with the increasing influence for the
environment concern, the use of renewable resources such as starch-based plastic
products will be an obligation across the world.
63
5.1 Recommendations and Future works
The recommendations identified for the project are as follows:
 It is recommended to use fresh potato starch for better quality of the bio plastics.
 The waste extracted from the potato remaining and fibers could be used as
compost or cattle feed.
 Cheaper and less risky form of acid could be used instead of hydrochloric acid
such as acetic acid.
 Sorbitol is a plasticizer that could be used as a substitute to glycerol in the process
of production.
 The starch from the potato could be extracted by the two other means namely alkali
or enzymatic extraction to determine the percentage extraction as compared to
water extraction.
 The detailed design of the process plant could be worked out to provide a more
precise production illustration of the plant.
The future works that can be carried out in the same line of study as this project can be
as follows:
 A Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) study between the starch-based biodegradable

plastic carry bags and degradable plastic carry bags can be carried out to determine
the potential impacts related with the inputs and outputs of both process plants.
 A sustainability study of the starch-based plastic product can be performed to
determine if it is economically, environmentally and socially acceptable.
 Other sources can be used to produce different types of bioplastics, for example,
the production of PHB or PHA from the digestion of microorganisms can be
investigated.
64
Chapter 6: References
1. CO2G Limited. (2014). Plastic recycling. Available:

http://www.co2g.co.uk/?page_id=149. Last accessed 16th Jan 2016.
2. Davies Emmanuel Mweta, May 2009, Title: Physiochemical, Functional and
Structural Properties of Native Malawian Cocoyam and Sweetpotato Starches,
Thesis: Philosophiae Doctorate Degree (Chemistry/Plant Sciences), University of
the free State Bloemfontein South Africa [online]. Available at:
http://www.etd.uovs.ac.za/ETD-db//theses/available/etd-
03112010.../MwetaDE.pdf. Last accessed 20th December 2015.
3. Erik R. Coats,Zachary T. Dobroth, Shengjun Hu, Armando G. McDonald . (2010).
Polyhydroxybutyrate synthesis on biodiesel wastewater using mixed microbial
consortia. Available: www.elsevier.com/locate/biortech. Last accessed 5th Aug
2015.
4. Indian Ocean Times. (2015). Mauritius: Prohibition of plastic bags on the island
in January 1, 2016. Available: http://en.indian-ocean-times.com/Mauritius-
Prohibition-of-plastic-bags-on-the-island-in-January-1-2016_a5391.html. Last
accessed 5th Aug 2015.
5. Indian Ocean Times. (2015). Mauritius: Prohibition of plastic bags on the island
in January 1, 2016. Available: http://en.indian-ocean-times.com/Mauritius-
Prohibition-of-plastic-bags-on-the-island-in-January-1-2016_a5391.html. Last
6. Instructable, 2010, Making potato plastic [online]. Available from:
http://www.instructables.com/id/Make-Potato-Plastic!/. Last accessed 4th
September 2015.
65
7. International Starch Institute, 2010, Technical Memorandum on Potato Starch
[online]. Available at: http://www.starch.dk/isi/starch/tm5www-potato.asp. Last
accessed 24th Oct 2015.
8. J. Kallabinski, C. Balagopalan, 1991, Enzymatic Starch Extraction From Tropical
Root and Tuber Crops [online]. Available at:
http://www.actahort.org/members/showpdf?booknrarnr=380_13. Last accessed
5th November 2015
9. L. F (Lee) Doty, 2005, Definition of Compostable [online]. Available at:
http://mailman.cloudnet.com/pipermail/compost/2005- March/013129.html. Last
accessed 25th November 2015.
10.L.Shivarasan, Akshay Gowda, Arjun Kittur. (2013). Bioplastics. Available:
http://www.slideshare.net/shivarasan/bio-plastics-presentation?qid=db751005-
6c98-4439-8980-1fc7a02404f4&v=qf1&b=&from_search=2. Last accessed 8th
Aug 2015.
11.L.Shivarasan, Akshay Gowda, Arjun Kittur. (2013). Bioplastics. Available:
http://www.slideshare.net/shivarasan/bio-plastics-presentation?qid=db751005-
6c98-4439-8980-1fc7a02404f4&v=qf1&b=&from_search=2. Last accessed 8th
Aug 2015.
12.Letícia Mello Rechia1, Juliana Bergman de Jesus Morona1, Karine Modolon
Zepon1, Valdir Soldi2, Luiz Alberto Kanis, 2010, Mechanical properties and total
hydroxycinnamic derivative release of starch/glycerol/Melissa officinalis extract
films [online]. Available at: http://www.scielo.br/pdf/bjps/v46n3/v46n3a12.pdf.
Last accessed 25th November 2015.
13.Liam Bartlett, Nick Greenaway, Julia Timms, 2008, Seas of shame [online].
Available at:
http://sixtyminutes.ninemsn.com.au/stories/liambartlett/598914/seasof-shame.
14. Martin Koller, Paula Hesse, Christoph Kutschera, Rodolfo Bona, Jefter
Nascimento, Silvio Ortega, Jose´ Augusto Agnelli, Gerhart Braunegg. (2009).
66
Sustainable Embedding of the Bioplastic Poly-(3-Hydroxybutyrate) into the
Sugarcane Industry. Available: link.springer.com/.../698_2009_11.pdf. Last
15.Michigan Technological University, 2005, Biodegradable PLA/ starch foam
[online]. Available at: http://djbreile.webs.com/background.htm. Last accessed
26th November 2015.
16.Ministry of Environment and National Development unit, 2003, Fact Sheet on
Solid Waste Management [online]. Available at:
http://www.gov.mu/portal/goc/menv/files/waste.pdf. Last accessed 23rd October
2015.
17. Mona K. Gouda, Azza E. Swellam, Sanaa H. Omar. (2001). Production of PHB
by a Bacillus megaterium strain using sugarcane molasses and corn steep liquor
as sole carbon and nitrogen sources. Available:
http://www.urbanfischer.de/journals/microbiolres. Last accessed 8th Aug 2015.
18. Murat Demirbilek, Mehmet burçin Mutlu, Emir Baki Denkbas, Ahmet Çabuk.
(2014). Polyhydroxybutyrate and Hydroxyvalerate Production by Bacillus
megaterium Strain A1 Isolated from Hydrocarbon-Contaminated Soil. Available:
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/261712961. Last accessed 14th Nov
2015.
19.NOR SYAKIRA BINTI MAT, NOR ASMIRA BINTI MUSA, AZIFAH BINTI
MOHD SUHAIMI. (2014). mini project for packaging subject - making own
bioplastic from potato starch. Available:
http://www.slideshare.net/sya92/bioplastic-from-potato-starch-
2014?from_action=save. Last accessed 8th Aug 2015.
20.NOR SYAKIRA BINTI MAT, NOR ASMIRA BINTI MUSA, AZIFAH BINTI
MOHD SUHAIMI. (2014). mini project for packaging subject - making own
bioplastic from potato starch. Available:
http://www.slideshare.net/sya92/bioplastic-from-potato-starch-
2014?from_action=save. Last accessed 8th Aug 2015.
67
21.Olivier Vilpoux, Luc Averous, 2003, Starch-based plastics, Technology, use and
potentialities of Latin American starchy tubers [online]. Available at:
http://www.biodeg.net/fichiers/Starch-based_Plastics.pdf. Last accessed 15th
October 2015.
22.Plastinum Polymer Technologies Corp, 2009, The global plastics
industry:continued growth [online]. Available at:
http://www.plastinum.com/plastinum/Plastic-Industry-Recycling/Theglobal-
plastics-industry-continued-growth. Last accessed 15th October 2015.
23.Plastinum Polymer Technologies Corp, 2009, The global plastics industry:
continued growth [online] Available at:
http://www.plastinum.com/plastinum/Plastic-Industry-Recycling/Theglobal-
plastics-industry-continued-growth. Last accessed 15th October 2015.
24.R. Mohee, G. Unmar, 2006, (Ministry of Environment, 2003), Determining the
biodegradability of plastic materials under controlled and natural composting
environments
25.R. Mohee, G. Unmar, 2008, Assessing the effect of biodegradable and degradable
plastics on composting of green wastes and compost quality
26.S. Bhatnagar and Milford. A. Hanna, 1996, Starch-Based Plastic Foams From
Various Starch Sources [online]. Available at:
http://www.aaccnet.org/cerealchemistry/backissues/1996/73_601.pdf. Last
accessed 20th November 2015.
27.S. N. Moorthy, Central Tuber Crops Research Innstitute (CTCRI), Sreekariyam,
Trivandrum 695 017, India, 1990, Extraction of Starches from Tuber Crops Using
Ammonia [online]. Available at: http://moorthy.co.in/extraction-of-starches-from-
tuber-crops-usingammonia.html. Last accessed 5th November 2015.
28. Sindhu Raveendran, Binod Parameswaran, Vandana Sankar, Raghu K G. (2015).
Production and characterization of PHB from a novel isolate Comamonas sp.from
a dairy effluent sample and its application in cell culture. Available:
68
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/276417163. Last accessed 14th Nov
2015.
29.T. Azios “A primer on biodegradable plastics”. Christian Science Monitor.
Retrieved from Academic One File database, 2007.
30.T. Azios “A primer on biodegradable plastics”. Christian Science Monitor.
Retrieved from Academic One File database, 2007.
31.Tan Cheng li, 2011, Bags that break down [online]. Available at:
http://thestar.com.my/lifestyle/story.asp?file=/2010/12/7/lifefocus/7548373&sec
=lifefocus. Last accessed the 18th November 2015.
32.Thava Vasanthan, John Wiley & Sons Inc, 2001, Overview of Laboratory
Isolationof Starch from Plant Materials, Current protocols in food analytical
chemistry [online]. Available at:
http://www.nshtvn.org/ebook/molbio/Current%20Protocols/CPFAC/fae0201.pdf
. Last accessed 13th October 2015.
33.The American Heritage, Science Dictionary, Houghton Mifflin Company, 2005,
Photodegradable plastic [Online]. Available at:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/photodegradable. Last accessed 18th November
2015.
34.Torben Lenau, 2003, Aliphatic polyesters [online]. Available at:
http://www.designinsite.dk/htmsider/m0952.htm. Last accessed 20th November
2015
35.Wai-Bun Lui, Jinchyau Peng, 2003, Effects of Operating Conditions on
Degradable Cushioning Extrudate’s Cellular Structure and The Thermal
Properties [online]. Available at: http://cel.sagepub.com/content/39/6/439.short.
36.Wenzhou Zhudian Machinery Makes Co., Ltd, 2011, Three Layer Film Extruder
(quotation referenced).
69
37.Wikipedia. (2016). Plastic particle water pollution. Available:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plastic_particle_water_pollution. Last accessed
16th Jan 2016.
38.World Bank, 2011, World Development Indicators, [online]. Available at:
http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=wbwdi&met=sp_pop_totl&idim=country
:MUS&dl=en&hl=en&q=population+of+mauritius. Last accessed 29th October
2015.
39.Zawya, 2010, Global plastic production grew over 500percent over the last 30
years [online]. Available at:
http://www.zawya.com/story.cfm/sidZAWYA20100505063554/Global%20plast
ic%20production%20grew%20over%20500%20per%20cent%20over%20the%2
0past%2030%20years. Last accessed 15th October 2015.
70
Appendix: Economic analysis
The economic feasibility of the biodegradable plastic plant was covered in this part of
the Appendix. The purpose of this part was to present a preliminary technical and
economic feasibility study for the process plant. Two main aspects were examined,
namely the total capital investment of the process plant and the payback period. The
economic analysis of the biodegradable plastic process plant was estimated by
calculating the following:
1. Purchase Equipment Cost (PEC)
2. Total Direct Cost (TDC) and Total Indirect Cost (TIC)
3. Fixed Capital Investment (FCI)
4. Total Capital Investment (TCI)
5. Total Product Cost (TPC)
6. Profit or Loss
7. Pay Back period
8. Internal Rate of Return (IRR)
The method used, such as the equations and relationships, for the economic estimation
was from the book of Max S. Peters, Klaus D. Timmerhaus, 1991, Plant Design and
Economics for Chemical Engineers.
A1. Purchase Equipment Cost
The first aspect of the economic analysis was the Purchase Equipment cost. The prices
of the equipment to be used in the process plant were first obtained from different
industries specialized in the field of starch extraction and biodegradable plastic
production. Table A.1 shows the different equipment used and their industrial sources.
71
Table A1: Equipment cost and the industrial source
Equipment Total Industrial Source Amount Price

(USD)
Conveyor Kaifeng Sida Agricultural 2 3400
Products Equipment Co., Ltd
Cleaning cage Kaifeng Sida Agricultural 1 1060
Products
Crusher (rasper) Kaifeng Sida Agricultural 1 3500
Round Sieve Kaifeng Sida Agricultural 4 9200

(Rotating sieve)
Slurry Pump Kaifeng Sida Agricultural 5 7500
Round Sieve Kaifeng Sida Agricultural 1 2300

(Dewatering)
Residue Pump Kaifeng Sida Agricultural 5 6500
Vortex Kaifeng Sida Agricultural 18 63000
Assembly
(Hydrocyclone)
Desander Kaifeng Sida Agricultural 2 800
Desander Pump Kaifeng Sida Agricultural 1 1600
Vacuum Kaifeng Sida Agricultural 1 9600
dehydrator
Airflow dryer Kaifeng Sida Agricultural 1 26000
72
Electricity Kaifeng Sida Agricultural 5 7000
chamber
Transfer pump Kaifeng Sida Agricultural 5 3000
Hydrolysis tank Hangzhou Haishun 1 191076
Pharmaceutical Machinery
Co., Ltd
Dryer KC Printing Machine 1 3850
(Group) Limited
Granulating and Jiangsu Lianguan Science & 1 152947
recycling unit Technology Development
Co., Ltd.
Plastic extruder Wenzhou Zhudian 1 250808
Machinery Makes Co., Ltd.
Film and surface Tianrun Machinery Co., Ltd. 1 4282
treatment
For the conversion of the dollar currency to the Mauritian rupee, the equation three was
used:
The currency conversion factor of 29.10 Rupees (Rs) for one dollar (USD) was used.
(Fx-rate, 7th March 2016)
Conversion = Price in Dollar (USD) x Conversion factor
= USD x Rs 29.10
The calculation for the conversion for the conveyor used in the process was as follows:
Conveyor
i. The total price of the conveyor = 3400 USD
ii. Currency conversion used is 29.10 Rupees (Rs) for one dollar (USD)
iii. Price of the conveyor = Rs(3400 x 29.10) = Rs 98, 940
The price conversions for all the equipment were done as for the conveyor. The table
73
A.2 shows the conversion for the equipment used.
Table A2: Conversion table for purchased equipment
Equipment List Conversion of USD to Rs Total Price of equipment

(Rs)
Conveyor 3400 x 29.10 98,940
Cleaning cage 1060 x 29.10 30,846
Crusher 3500 x 29.10 101,850
Round Sieve 9200 x 29.10 267,720
Slurry Pump 7500 x 29.10 218,250
Round Sieve 2300 x 29.10 66,930
Residue Pump 6500 x 29.10 189,150
Vortex Assembly 63000 x 29.10 1,833,300
(Hydrocyclone)
Desander 800 x 29.10 23,280
Desander Pump 1600 x 29.10 46,560
Vacuum dehydrator 9600 x 29.10 279,360
Airflow dryer 26000 x 29.10 756,600
Electricity chamber 7000 x 29.10 203,700
Transfer pump 3000 x 29.10 87,300
Hydrolysis tank 191076 x 29.10 5,560,306
Dryer 3850 x 29.10 112,035
Granulating and recycling 152947 x 29.10 4,450,758
unit
Extruder 250808 x 29.10 7,298,499
Film and surface 4282 x 29.10 124,613.61
treatment
74
The Purchased Equipment Cost (PEC) was calculated by adding the different price of
the equipment and the total purchased equipment cost was Rs 21,749,997.
A.2 Equipment cost estimation
Some of the equipment costs were estimated by using the equation from Estimating
Equipment Costs by Scaling (S. Peters et al., 1991, Page 169).
The equipment that were estimated by scaling are:
i. Hydrolysis tank
ii. Granulating and recycling unit
iii. Extruder unit
iv. Film surface treatment
The equation four was used for the estimation of the costs of the equipment.
1. Hydrolysis tank
i. Capacity of hydrolysis tank from quotation = 10kg/hr
ii. Capacity of hydrolysis tank required = 100kg/hr
iii. Cost of equipment obtained = 100 000 USD
iv. Estimation of hydrolysis tank required:
Table A.3 shows the different available capacity and cost of the equipment
75
Table A.3: Capacity and cost of equipment
Equipment Capacity Wanted Actual Final

capacity price Price
Hydrolysis 20000 94000 75500 191076

tank (L)
Granulating 300 2000 49000 152947
and recycling
unit (kg/hr)
Extruder 100 1000 63000 250808
(kg/hr)
Film surface 120 1000 1200 4282
treater (kg/hr)
A.3 Total Direct Cost (TDC) and Total Indirect Cost
The TDC and the TIC were then calculated by using the typical percentages of Fixed
Capital Investment values for TDC and TIC segments for multipurpose plants or large
additions to existing facilities from Cost factors in Capital Investment (Max S. Peters et
al., 1991, Page 183)
A.3.1 Direct costs
The equation was used to find the direct cost.
Direct Cost = Percentage used x Purchased Equipment Cost
Table A.4 shows the typical percentages and cost calculated for the direct cost.
76
Table A.4: Total Direct Cost calculations
Direct Costs % PEC (Rs) Calculations Costs (Rs)

taken
Purchased Equipment 0.39 21,749,997 39% x PEC 8,482,499
Installation
Instrumentation & Control 0.13 21,749,997 13 % × PEC 2,827,500
Piping 0.31 21,749,997 31 % × PEC 6,742,499
Electrical equipment & 0.10 21,749,997 10 % × PEC 2,175,000
Materials
Building & Services 0.29 21,749,997 29 % × PEC 6,307,499
Yard Improvement 0.10 21,749,997 10 % × PEC 2,175,000
Service facilities 0.55 21,749,997 55 % × PEC 11,962,498
Land 0.06 21,749,997 6 % × PEC 1,305,000
Total Direct Cost (TDC) 41,977,494
The TDC was obtained by adding all the direct cost and the value is Rs 41,977,494.
A.3.2 Indirect costs
The equation was used to find the indirect cost.
Indirect Cost = Percentage used x Total Direct Cost
Table A.5 shows the typical percentages and cost calculated for the indirect cost.
77
Table A.5: Total Indirect Cost calculations
Indirect Costs % PEC Calculations Costs (Rs)

taken
Engineering & Supervision 0.32 21,749,997 32 % × PEC 6,959,999
Construction expenses 0.34 21,749,997 34 % × PEC 7,394,999
Contractors fee 0.18 21,749,997 18 % × PEC 3,914,999
Contingency 0.36 21,749,997 36 % × PEC 7,829,999
Total Indirect Cost (TIC) 26,099,996
The TIC was obtained by adding all the indirect cost and the value is Rs 26,099,996.
A.4 Fixed Capital Investment (FCI)
The FCI was obtained by using the equation:
Fixed Capital Investment = Total Direct Cost + Total Indirect Cost
FCI = TDC + TIC
The FCI of the process plant is Rs 68,077,491.
A.5 Total Capital Investment (TCI)
The TCI has the following equation:
Total Capital Investment = Fixed Capital Investment + Working Capital
TCI = FCI + WC
Assumption:
 The percentage of the WC assumed was 10% of the TCI.
When the WC represents a percentage of 10%,
TCI = FCI + 0.01 TCI
When the FCI of the process plant is Rs 68,077,491

78
Then:
TCI = (FCI/ 0.9)
TCI = Rs (68,077,491/ 0.9) = Rs 75,641,656
Therefore WC = Rs (0.1 x 75,641,656) = Rs 7,564,166
A.6 Total Product Cost (TPC)
The TPC was calculated from the from Ratio factors for estimating capital-investment
items based on delivered equipment cost (S. Peters et al.,1991, Page 183) and the
calculations are shown in Table A.6.
Table A.6: Total Product Cost (TPC) calculations
Raw materials: Calculations (Rs) (Rs)

potato Rs 20 x 10000 kg x 66,000,000
330 days
Hydrochloric acid Rs 20137.20 x 1.621 10,770,344
metric ton x 330 days
Glycerol Rs 20.37 x 1.907 12,817
metric ton x 330days
Sodium Rs1000 x 9.70kg x 3,199,6
metabisulphite 330days
Total 79,982,764
Operating Labor 10 % TPC 0.1 TPC
(OL)
Direct Clerical 10 % OL 0.01 TPC
Labor
Utilities 10 % TPC 0.1 TPC
Maintenance & 5 % FCI 3,403,875
Repairs
79
Operating 0.5 % FCI 340,387
Supplies
Direct Production 83,727,026 +
0.21 TPC
Cost
Fixed Charges 10 % TPC 0.1 TPC
Plant Overhead 10 % TPC 0.1 TPC 0.2 TPC
Cost
Manufacturing 83,727,026 +
0.41 TPC
cost
Administrative 3 % TPC 0.03 TPC
Cost
Distribution & 5 % TPC 0.05 TPC
Selling
General expenses 0.08 TPC
Total Product Cost 83,727,026+ 0.49

TPC
(TPC)
TPC = Rs (83,727,026+ 0.49 TPC)
TPC = Rs 164,170,639
The value obtained for the TPC was Rs 164,170,639.
A.7 Sales
The sales of the plastic carry bags produced from the starch based polymer were sold at
Rs 1.55 and the total sales obtained from the sale of 356204 starch-based biodegradable
plastic carry bags per day was:
80
Total sales = (356204 x Rs 1.55 x 330 days)
= Rs 182,198,346
The revenue for the process plant is Rs 182,198,346.
A.8 Profit/Loss
The Profit/ Loss of the process plant was calculated by using equation:
Profit/Loss = Revenue – TPC
When the revenue of the process plant is Rs 182,198,346 and the TPC is Rs
164,170,639,
The Profit encountered by the process plant is = Rs (182,198,346 – 164,170,639)
= Rs 18,027,707
After calculating the revenue and total product cost, the process plant obtained a profit
of Rs 18,027,707.
A.9 Payback period
The payback period of the process plant was determined by using the equation:
When:
i. TCI of the plant is Rs 75,641,656,
ii. And the Profit obtained per year is Rs 18,027,707,
The payback of the process plant = Rs (75,641,656 / 18,027,707)
81
= 4.20 years
A.9 IRR
The IRR measures the prosperity of an investment and was found by using the equation:
Where:
 k: is the internal rate of return (IRR)
 t: is the time period, years
 CFo: is the initial cash investment, Rs
 CFt: is the net cash flow at period t, Rs
The IRR obtained for the starch-based biodegradable plastic carry bags process plant was
calculated as shown in Table H.7. The IRR obtained for the prosperity of the investment
is 23%.
82
ANNEX 1
FACULTY OF ENGINEERING
PROJECT/ PROPOSAL SYNOPSIS
Department: Chemical and Renewable Energy Engineering
Academic Year: 2015/2016
Soomaree Keshav
1114132
Production of Bioplastics
Aims and Objectives:
The aim of this project is to:
 Identify a suitable and sustainable feedstock which is locally available and to
investigate the means of producing bioplastics from it.
The primary objective is to:
 Find a sustainable alternative to conventional plastics made from non-
renewable resources and to be able to economically producing bioplastics from
natural sources obtained throughout the year.
 To achieve this, some physical, mechanical and chemical tests should be done
on different samples produced.
 Preparation of feed stocks

 : Extraction of potato starch from peel and flesh
 Production of bioplastics experiments
 Testing of produced material
 Physical and mechanical tests
: At least once every two weeks
: 10/08/15
: 07/04/16
GANTT CHART
83
Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar
Intro/Lit Rev
Preparation of feed stocks
Setup of equipment
Running of experiments
Data collection
Analysis of data
Writing of Project
Submission
Name of Supervisor: Mr A.K.Ragen
Student Signature:
Date:
Supervisor Signature:
Date:
84
ANNEX 2
FACULTY OF ENGINEERING
PROGRESS LOG
Student Name : Soomaree Keshav
Student ID : 1114132
Department : Chemical Engineering
Programme : Chemical and Environmental Engineering
Title of Dissertation : Production of Bioplastics
Supervisor : Mr. A.K. Ragen
Project Coordinator : Mr. A.K. Ragen
• Your Progress Log serves as a record of your transferable skills
and participation and attainment as a student for dissertation purposes.
• Its purpose is to help you to plan your own dissertation and to record
the outcomes.
• As well as gaining valuable skills, you will find that the information
accumulated in this Log will prove helpful during the write up of the
dissertation.
• The document belongs to you and it is your responsibility to keep it up
to date.
• It is your responsibility to ensure your supervisor is aware of the
dissertation activities you have undertaken.
You should sign the appropriate statement below when you submit your Progress
Log:
I confirm that the information I have given in this Log is a true and accurate record:
Signed: ……………………………………… Date: ………………
85
RECORD OF STRATEGIC MEETINGS WITH SUPERVISOR
Comments Supervisor’s Student’s

Meetings Date Topics/Themes Discussed
(If any) Initials Initials
1 08.09.15 Overall topic discussion
2 22.09.15 Classification of works and

chapters
Discussion on the ordering of
3 6.10.15
chemicals
Discussion and overview of

4 20.10.15 expected type of work for the
different chapters
Discussion on the problem

5 09.02.16
faced in practical
Correction and discussion on

6 23.02.16 abstract and the literature
review
Discussion on chances to be
7 15.03.16
made in content
8 29.03.16 Comments on the results

obtained
9 04.04.16 Relevant correction to be
made
10 08.04.16 Submission of final work
86 | P a g e

Production of Bioplastics Using Potato S

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Production of Bioplastics Using Potato S

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

University of Mauritius

Department of Chemical Engineering

Chemical and Environmental Engineering

Level 4 Year 2015/2016

Name: Soomaree Keshav

Title of dissertation: Production of bioplastics

- My supervisor, Mr. A K Ragen for providing me the opportunity to work on

PROJECT/DISSERTATION DECLARATION FORM

Name of Supervisor(s): Mr. A.K. Ragen

ASTM American Society for the Testing of

CO2 Carbon Dioxide

EPI Environmental Crops Inc

FCI Fixed Capital Investment

GDP Gross Domestic Product

HDPE High Density Polyethylene

IRR Internal Rate of return

LDPE Low Density Polyethylene

MSW Municipal Solid Waste

PBS Polybutylene Succinate

PET Polyethylene Terephthalate

PLA Polylactic Acid

PVC Polyvinyl Chloride

SPI Society of the Plastic Industry

TDC Total Direct Cost

TPC Total Product Cost

v Volumetric Flow Rate

1.2 An overview on plastics

1.3 Plastics in Mauritius

1.4 Production of plastics

1.5 Plastic Carry Bags

1.6 Objectives of the project

The main objectives of this study are:

1.7 Structure of the report

 Chapter 1 introduces the plastics waste issues in Mauritius and an overview of

2.1 Types of plastics

2.2.1 Plastics Codes

Figure 2.1: Polyethylene Terephthalate

(Plastic recycling, 2014)

Figure 2.2: High-Density Polyethylene

(Plastic recycling, 2014)

Figure 2.3: PVC

(Plastic recycling, 2014)

Figure 2.4: Low-Density Polyethylene

(Plastic recycling, 2014)

V. Plastic marked with an SPI code of 5 is made with Polypropylene, or PP. PP is

Figure 2.5: Polypropylene

(Plastic recycling, 2014)

Figure 2.6: Polystyrene

(Plastic recycling, 2014)

Figure 2.7: Polycarbonate and Polylactide

(Plastic recycling, 2014)

2.2.2 Production of degradable plastics

Figure 2.8: Plastic pellets

(Plastic recycling, 2014)

2. Injection molding or blow molding

3. Plastic blow extrusion

2.2.3 Biodegradable plastic additives

Figure 2.9: Oxo-Biodegradable Plastic Master Batch / Additive

(Plastic particle water pollution, 2016)

2.3 Biodegradable plastics

Figure 2.10: life cycle of a biodegradable plastic

2.3.1 Classification of biodegradable plastics