Processing of plastic packaging waste from material ...eimpack.ist.utl.pt/docs/2.1 Jansen.pdf · Processing of plastic packaging waste ... • Article 11(2a) of Directive 2008/98/EC

Michael Jansen

Processing of plastic packaging waste

1st International EIMPack Congress

Lisbon, 29th – 30th November 2012

Processing of plastic packaging waste – from

material following the DKR specifications to

milled goods

Dipl.-Ing. Michael Jansen

Michael Jansen


• Introduction

• Methodology

• Results

• Conclusion

Table of content

TO

C

2

Michael Jansen


• Article 11(2a) of Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament

sets a recycling quota for plastic packaging waste (PPW) of 50 % by

2020

• Recent developments in several member states allow for alternative

collection schemes to source separation

– For example in Spain, France, Austria and the Netherlands

• The calculation of the quota is based on the input of certified

recyclers (Certification now on EU-level with EuCertPlast)

Legal basis

INT

RO

DU

CT

ION

3

Michael Jansen


The PPW recycling chain

INT

RO

DU

CT

ION

4

Consumer

Source separated PPW

Sorting plant

MBT plant

MSRW

Sorting plant

PPW preconcentrate

Reprocessing plant Reprocessing plant

Polymer concentrate(HDPE, PP, PET, film, mix)

Polymer concentrate(HDPE, PP, PO, PET, film, mix)

Polymer concentrate(PO, film)

Plastic granulate Plastic granulate

• Studies regarding the source

of the plastic packaging

waste, success of the source

separation and potential in the

MSW

• Studies regarding recovery in

MBT plant

• Efficiency of sorting plants

issue of past publications

• Reprocessing has not been

described so far

Michael Jansen


Development of recycling process

ME

TH

OD

OLO

GY

5

• Production of granulates often

includes addition of additives

to influence properties

• Process was split into two

parts

– Mechanical re-processing is

subject of studies of the

RWTH Aachen

– Polymer technological re-

processing is subject of

studies of the TU Eindhoven

• Due to certain requirements to

the milled good process

stages were set

Mechanical re-processing

Polymer technological re-

processing

Milled good

Plastic granulate

Polymer concentrate

Re-processing plant

Michael Jansen


• The milled good needs to be clean, i.e. no surface adhering

contaminants (mechanical properties, odour)

• Certain polymers have to be removed (e.g. PVC during PET

recycling; certain combinations are allowed e.g. HDPE + PP)

• The milled good needs to be dry (foaming during remelting due to

evaporation of water)

• Paper, metals, stones, etc. have to be removed to prevent high wear

rates, blocking or breakage of machines

• Energy consumption should be as low as possible

• Yield should be as high as possible

Comminution, Screening, Washing, Density media separation, Drying

(centrifugal, thermal)

Requirements to the mechanical process

ME

TH

OD

OLO

GY

6

Michael Jansen


• Obtain a mass balance

– Recovery of mass

– Yield of recyclable material

• Measure energy consumption

of each stage

• Measure water use and

estimate treatment costs

• Compare source separated

and recovered samples, i.e.

work with real waste samples

instead of artificially

generated ones

Goals of the experiments

ME

TH

OD

OLO

GY

7

Recovery: 20 % Yield: 93 %

Michael Jansen


• The potential in the input is

difficult to measure (multi-

material packaging, e.g. PET-

bottle with PE-lid and PP-

label)

• The losses in the process

stages are difficult to measure

due to particle size and colour

Issue

• Screening was believed to

have the largest impact on the

yield

• Other losses of recyclable

material were assumed to be

negligible

• The sink-float-split observed

during density media

separation was transferred to

screening

• Other methods were checked

but were found to be less

precise

Workaround

How to calculate the yield?

ME

TH

OD

OLO

GY

8

Michael Jansen


Origin of sample material and DKR-no.

ME

TH

OD

OLO

GY

9

Sample

number

Source PE 329 PP 324 PO 321 PET Film

310

Mixed

plastics

350 MSRW Source

separation

system

1 x x x x 328-3 x

2 x x x 325 x x

3.1 x x x 328-1 x x

3.2 x x x 328-1 x x

4.1 x x x

4.2 x x x

5 x x x 328-2 x x

n = 22

Screening vs. No screening

Hot washing vs. Cold washing

Michael Jansen


Mass balances HDPE samples

RE

SU

LT

S

10

0,0%

10,0%

20,0%

30,0%

40,0%

50,0%

60,0%

70,0%

80,0%

90,0%

100,0%

1 2 3.1 3.2 5

Sh

are

of

pro

du

cts

fro

m t

ota

l m

ass

Sample number

Soluble substances [%]

Water [%]

Filter residues [%]

Sink product [%]

Float product [%]

Screen loss [%]

Recovery of mass [%]

Yield of recyclable material [%]

Michael Jansen


Screening

RE

SU

LT

S

11

• Screening is able to reduce

the amount of dirt in the

intermediate product

• High losses of plastic with a 8

mm screen deck

Screening is suggested but

with finer screen deck

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

Screen loss [%]

Sh

are

of

inp

ut

< 8

mm

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Fine - Plastic Fine - Water Fine - Dirt Coarse -Plastic

Coarse -Water

Coarse - Dirt

Sh

are

of

pla

sti

c/w

ate

r/d

irt

fro

m

fin

e/c

oars

e m

ate

rial

Michael Jansen


Recovery and yield

RE

SU

LT

S

12

• Around 75 % of the input got

recovered

• Around 90 % of the recyclable

material yielded into the

product

• Recovered samples are dirtier

• Therefore lower recovery but

the same yield

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Water and dirt [%] (sourceseparated)

Water and dirt [%](recovered from MSRW)

Sh

are

of

wate

r an

d d

irt

fro

m t

he

inp

ut

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Recovery of mass [%] Yield of recyclable material[%]

Sh

are

of

mass r

eco

vere

d i

nto

th

e p

rod

uct

Sh

are

of

recycla

ble

mate

rial

yie

lded

in

to

the p

rod

uct

Michael Jansen


Energy use HDPE samples

RE

SU

LT

S

13

• Main consumers are the

shredder, the hot washing

stage and the thermal drying

stage

• Heat loss is strongly

influenced by the calculation

model for wash water

management

• 18 kWh/Mg were used to

remove 1 % of moisture from

the product

• Drying equipment in the lab

different to industrial

equipment

5

15

25

35

45

Drying efficiency[kWh/(t*%)]

En

erg

y u

se [

kW

h/t

]

-

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

En

erg

y u

se [

kW

h/t

]

Michael Jansen


Total energy use

RE

SU

LT

S

14

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

Energy per ton of input [kWh/t] Energy per ton of product[kWh/t]

En

erg

y u

se [

kW

h/t

]

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Fraction of heat from totalEnergy consumption [%]

• Around 500 kWh/Mg energy

investment for processing

• 90 % of the energy provided

has to be heat

• Huge variations between

different polymers (e.g. LDPE

>> HDPE)

• Potential for optimisation due

to process design and

equipment selection

Michael Jansen


• For the first time re-processing of PPW was studied under

consideration of recovery, yield, energy use, water use and waste

water quality

• It was proven that recovered and source separated PPW can be

treated (and in a similar manner)

• Recovery of around 75 % is possible (recovered PPW is app. 7 %

dirtier)

• Yield potentially as high as 90 % (no matter of the origin of material)

• Around 500 kWh/Mg have to be invested (mainly for shredding, hot

washing and drying)

Conclusions

CO

NC

LU

SIO

NS

15

Michael Jansen


Any Questions?

QU

ES

TIO

NS

16

Thank you for

your attention!

Dipl.-Ing. Michael Jansen

Department of Processing and Recycling (I.A.R.)

RWTH Aachen University

Wüllnerstraße 2

D-52062 Aachen

www.iar.rwth-aachen.de

http://www.iar.rwth-aachen.de/



Documents

Processing of plastic packaging waste from material ...eimpack.ist.utl.pt/docs/2.1 Jansen.pdf · Processing of plastic packaging waste ... • Article 11(2a) of Directive 2008/98/EC