Abstract

____________________________________________________________________________
The world is faced with the vast emergence of human activities with the natural world and
the impacts that are growing deeper and outwards are alarming. Consequently, if this pattern
of events persists over a long period undetected and unfazed, then it can impose significant
societal and economic chaos on mankind. Recognizing the danger of the steadily increasing
path we take, the advancement of renewable energy, along with the adoption of the recycling
approach, becomes our guiding light in the midst of the current environmental catastrophe.
Plastic, that is present everywhere, easily, and becomes essential in world activities.
Probably the thing that is the most serious problem is its durability because it does not
degrade unceasingly, thereby increasing the level of pollution and destabilizing ecological
equilibrium. Pyrolysis emerges as a promising method to address plastic waste, converting it
into fuel.
This study presents the design, fabrication, and performance evaluation of a novel plastic
pyrolysis reactor, aimed at sustainable plastic waste mitigation. The reactor design integrates
principles of thermal degradation through pyrolysis, converting plastic waste into valuable
products such as fuel oil and gas. Finite Element Analysis (FEA) techniques are employed to
optimize the structural integrity and thermal efficiency of the reactor under varying
operating conditions. Through meticulous design iterations and material selection, the
reactor achieves enhanced heat transfer capabilities, ensuring efficient conversion of plastic
waste while maintaining operational stability. The performance evaluation encompasses
thermal efficiency, product yield, and environmental impact assessments, validating the
reactor's efficacy in mitigating plastic waste and generating valuable resources. The
integration of FEA enables comprehensive analysis and optimization, facilitating the
development of robust and sustainable solutions for plastic waste management. This
research contributes to advancing the field of sustainable engineering by providing a
scalable and efficient approach towards mitigating plastic waste while promoting resource
recovery and environmental stewardship. The findings of this research underscore the urgency of
sustainable design for suitable plastic waste management, emphasizing pyrolysis as an
environmentally friendly solution to mitigate pollution and resource depletion associated with
traditional plastic disposal methods. By harnessing pyrolysis, commonly used plastics can be
repurposed, offering economic and environmental benefits while reducing their adverse impact on
ecosystems and human health.
 Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
Plastics are a product of human ingenuity and innovation—one of civilization’s great
solutions. It is unique material because of their toughness, light weight, resistance to water
and chemicals, resistant to heat and cold, low electrical and thermal conductivity, ease of
fabrication, remarkable color range, more design flexibility, durability and energy efficiency.
Due to above properties it is used in packaging materials, agriculture, construction,
insulation, automobile sector, electronic devices, textiles and sports equipment and toys.

Table 1: Uses of different types of plastics

Type of Plastics Uses
Polyester
Textile fiber

PET Carbonated drink bottles, plastics film

PE Supermarket bags, plastics bottle

HDPE Milk jugs, detergent bottles, thicker, Plastics film, pipes

LDPE
Floor tiles, shower curtains, cling film

PVC Agriculture (fountain) pipe, guttering Pipe, window frame, sheets for
building material

Foam use for insulation of roofs and walls, disposal cups, plates, food
PS
Container, CD and cassette box.
PP Bottle caps, drinking straws, Bumper, house ware, fiber carpeting and
rope.

Plastics constitutes in two main categories. It is thermoplastics and thermoset plastics.

Thermoplastics make up 80% of the plastics and thermoset plastics make up of remaining 20
% of plastics produced today. Thermo plastics can re-melt or remold and therefore it
recyclable easily but thermoset plastics cannot re-melt or reshape and therefore it is difficult
to recycling. Use of different type of some thermo plastics is given in table1 below. Plastics
are relatively cheap, easy available, easy to manufacture and their versatility replace to
conventional materials.
Plastic waste management is biggest problem now due to their non- biodegradability nature.
Now plastics manage by plastics recycling technologies.

Use and production of plastics are increasing exponentially. Annual production of plastics
exceeded approximately 400 million tonnes per year. Asia is the largest manufacturer of
plastics and production rate in Europe is almost constant. The global production of plastic has
reached about 299 million tons in 2013 and has increased by 4% over 2012 [1]. The scaring
news is that projected four-fold increase in production tonnage by 2050. It was reported that
33 million tons of plastic waste are generated in the US based on 2013 statistic [2]. But
projected 2050 levels of production are clearly too much of a good thing. Our growth-
addicted economic system has a knack for turning every solution into a problem—every
strength into a weakness.

In India generation of plastics are increased from about 2.6 MT in 2003 to about 3.6 MT in
2007 [3]. Also it is estimated that approximately 10 thousand tons per day (TPD) of plastics
waste is generated i.e. 9% of 1.20 lacks TPD of MSW in the India [4]. 32 million of plastics
were generated in 2011 in America, representing 12.7 percent of total MSW [5]. It is
estimated that 100 million tons of plastics are produced each year with PE, PS, PVC and PP
amounting to more than 65% of total produced. The average European throws away 36kg of
plastics each year. Discarded plastic products and packaging materials make up a growing
portion of municipal solid waste. Plastics packaging totals 42% of total consumption and very
little of this is recycled [6].

Plastics are forever—well, almost. Except for the tonnage we’ve incinerated, nearly all the
plastic ever produced still exists somewhere in the biosphere, although much of it is now
invisible to humans, reduced to tiny particles in ocean and land ecosystems. Plastic is great
because it lasts so long and resists decay. Plastic is a big problem for those same reasons.

Only 18 percent of plastic is recycled. This is the rate for plastics overall, including plastics
in cars and buildings. For plastic packaging (water bottles, chip bags, supermarket
packaging, etc.) the recycling rate is just 14 percent. But much of that plastic inflow is
excluded during the sorting and recycling process, such that only 5 percent of plastic
packaging material is actually returned to use through recycling. And one third of plastic
packaging escapes garbage collection systems entirely and is lost directly into the
environment: onto roadsides or into streams, lakes, and oceans.
Oceans are now receptacles for at least 8 billion kilograms of plastic annually—equivalent to
a garbage truck full of plastic unloading into the ocean every minute. The growth rates
projected above will mean that by 2050 the oceans will be receiving the equivalent of one
truckload of plastic every 15 second, night and day. And unless we severely curtail plastic
production and dumping, by 2050 the mass of plastic in our oceans will exceed the mass of
fish. Once in the ocean, plastics persist for centuries, in the form of smaller and smaller
particles. This massive contamination comes on top of other human impacts: overfishing,
acidification, and ocean temperature increases.

Plastic is a fossil fuel product. Plastic is made from oil and natural gas feedstocks—
molecules extracted from the oil and gas become the plastic. And oil, gas, and other energy
sources are used to power the plastic-making processes. By one estimate, 4 percent of global
oil production is consumed as raw materials for plastic and an additional 4 percent provides
energy to run plastics factories.
Plastics contain additives than harm humans and other species: fire retardants, stabilizers,
antibiotics, plasticizers, pigments, bisphenol A, phthalates, etc. Many such additives mimic
hormones or disrupt hormone systems. The 150 billion kilograms of plastics currently in the
oceans includes 23 billion kilograms of additives, all of which will eventually be released
into those ocean ecosystems.

Plastics may take up to billions of years to degrade naturally. They degrade gradually since
the molecular bonds containing hydrogen, carbon and few other elements such as nitrogen,
chlorine and others that make plastic very durable. The continuous disposal of plastic in the
landfill would definitely cause serious environmental problem. In order to reduce plastic
disposal to the landfill, recycling method is considered as another alternative to manage
plastic waste.

Recycling plastic has proven difficult and it can be costly because of the constraints on water
contamination and inadequate separation prior to recycle that is labor intensive [7].
Separation is needed since plastics are made of different resin compound, transparency and
color. Normally, pigmented or dyed plastics have lower market value. Clearly transparent
plastics are often desirable by the manufacturers since they can be dyed to transform into new
products, thus have greater flexibility [8].
 Figure 1: Projected global plastics production to 2050

Recycling of plastics should be carried in a manner to minimize pollution during the process and
enhance efficiency and conserve the energy. There is different type of technology include following
aspect:

1. Mechanical Recycling- Recycling of plastics waste into reusable product.

2. Chemical Recycling – Gasification, blast furnace
3. Incineration- Burning of waste plastics to obtain energy.
4. Pyrolysis – Conversion of waste plastics into liquid fuels.

It’s important to think about plastics, not just because doing so shows us that we’re doing
something wrong, but because the tragic story of plastics shows us why and how our
production and energy systems go wrong.

Hence, this project work was undertaken with the following objectives:
(i) To design and develop a plastic pyrolysis reactor with the application of
environmentally sound technologies (EST) to remove all plastic disposed in
 our institute and nearby locality to make the locality a plastic free and green
zone.
(ii) Utilization of Finite Element Analysis (FEA) techniques to enhance the
structural integrity and thermal efficiency of the reactor across diverse
operating conditions.
 Chapter 2

LITERATURE REVIEW
___________________________________________________________________________

2.1 PYROLYSIS & CATALYTIC PRYOLYSIS:

Pyro means heat and. lysis means break down. Plastic Pyrolysis is a chemical reaction by
which we can breakdown larger molecules into smaller molecules in presence of heat.
Pyrolysis is also known as thermal cracking, cracking, thermolysis, depolymerization, etc.

Pyrolysis of waste plastics in presence of catalyst lower the pyrolysis temp and reaction time,
increase conversion rate of waste plastics into fuel, increase the yield of fuel and satisfying
diesel, petrol quality of fuel by increase octane value of petrol and decrease pour point of
diesel. Catalyst use for this purpose is solid acids such as silica, alumina, zeoliteβ, zeoliteY,
mordenite, HZSM-5, MCM-41. Acidic catalysts (HZSM-5, Zeolitey, mordenite and so on)
have greater efficiency than less acidic ones, for example amorphous alumina silicate. The
pore size and structure of catalyst determine their performance on cracking reaction as well as
production.

Figure 2: General pyrolysis reaction

At any temperature above zero Kelvin the molecule will be in vibrating stage which is called
phonon. The molecular frequency is directly proportional to the temperature of molecules in
Kelvin scale. During pyrolysis the object’s molecules are subjected to very high temperatures
leading to very high molecular vibrations. At these high molecular vibrations, every molecule
in the object is stretched and shaken to such an extent that molecules starts breaking down
into smaller molecules. This is pyrolysis.

Given below are benefits of waste plastic pyrolysis.

 Recycles synergy of waste plastic into usable fuel.

 Offers renewable energy source.
 The in product can be used as fuel in existing industrial boilers and furnaces.
 End products can also be used for generating electricity.
 Eliminates hazard of land pollution by waste plastics.
 Converts waste into energy.
 Clears dumping yards and environment of non-bio degradable plastic waste.

2.1.1 Industrial pyrolysis of waste plastic:

Industry that converts waste plastic and tire into pyrolysis products like pyrolysis oil,
pyrolysis gas, and carbon black is called pyrolysis plant. Pyrolysis plant offers new business
opportunities like:

 Recycling
 Waste to energy
 Waste to electricity
 Energy recovery from waste
 Solid waste management
 Pollution control
 New and renewable energy
 Environment protection

Today’s world generates millions of tons of waste plastic and tires every month. Plastic
pyrolysis can convert this waste into energy worth billions of dollars. Pyrolysis plant is an
upcoming industry that will fuel tomorrow’s growth and protect environment by cleaning
dumping yard off waste plastic and tire.

2.2 PYROLYSIS OIL:

Pyrolysis oil is the end product of waste plastic pyrolysis. Pyrolysis oil is widely used as
industrial fuel to substitute furnace oil or industrial diesel. Pyrolyzed oil has calorific value
equivalent to diesel.

2.2.1 Typical industrial application of pyrolysis oil:

 Burners of Boilers
 Burners of Furnaces
 Burners of Hot Water
 Burners of Hot Air Generators
 Burners of Thermic Fluid Heater
 Burners of Hot Mix Plants
 Other Industrial Burners
 Electric Generators (mixed with 50% diesel)
 Diesel Pumps(mixed with 50% diesel)

2.3 PLASTIC PYROLYSIS:

The process requires intense heat with shorter duration and in absence of oxygen. The three
major products that are produced during pyrolysis are oil, gas and char which are valuable for
industries especially production and refineries. Pyrolysis was chosen by many researchers
since the process able to produce high amount of liquid oil up to 80 wt% at moderate
temperature around 500 C [9]. In addition, pyrolysis is also very flexible since the process
parameters can be manipulated to optimize the product yield based on preferences. The liquid
oil produced can be used in multiple applications such as furnaces, boilers, turbines and
diesel engines without the needs of upgrading or treatment [10]. Unlike recycling, pyrolysis
does not cause water contamination and is considered as green technology when even the
pyrolysis byproduct which is gaseous has substantial calorific value that it can be reused to
compensate the overall energy requirement of the pyrolysis plant [11]. The process handling
is also much easier and flexible than the common recycling method since it does not need an
intense sorting process, thus less labor intensive.

Fundamentally, different types of plastics have different compositions that normally reported
in terms of their proximate analysis. Proximate analysis can be defined as a technique to
measure the chemical properties of the plastic compound based on four particular elements
which are moisture content, fixed carbon, volatile matter and ash content [12]. Volatile matter
and ash content are the major factors that influence the liquid oil yield in pyrolysis process.
High volatile matter favored the liquid oil production while high ash content decreased the
amount of liquid oil, consequently increased the gaseous yield and char formation [11].

Figure 3: plastic recycling grades

Based on Table 2, it was observed that the volatile matter for all plastics is very high while
the ash content is considered low. These characteristics indicate that plastics have high
potential to produce large amount of liquid oil through pyrolysis process. Since the results of
plastics proximate analysis are very convincing, the following discussion would focus more
on the process parameters involved during the pyrolysis process that would have major
influence in the liquid production.

Table 2: Proximate analysis of plastics

 Plastic Fixed Carbon (wt %) Volatile (wt %) Reference

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) 7.77 91.75 [9]

High-density polyethylene 0.01 99.81 [10]

Polyvinyl chloride (PVC) 6.3 93.7 [10]

Low-density polyethylene 0.0 99.7 [13]

Polypropylene 1.22 95.08 [10]

Polystyrene 0.12 99.68 [13]

Polybutylene terephthalate (PBT) 2.88 97.12 [10]

Polyethylene (PE) 0.04 98.87 [15]

Polyamide (PA) 0.69 99.78 [17]

or Nylons

2.3.1: Polyethylene terephthalate (PET): PET has become the great choice for plastic
packaging for various food products, mainly beverages such as mineral water, soft drink
bottle and fruit juice containers. This is due to its intrinsic properties that are very suitable for
large-capacity, lightweight and pressure-resistant containers. Other applications of PET
include electrical insulation, printing sheets, magnetic tapes, Xray and other photographic
film [13]. The extensive applications of PET would cause an accumulation of PET waste in
the landfill. Recycling PET waste was the current practice of handling accumulated plastic
waste. However, the bulkiness of the containers causes high frequency of collections and
therefore, increases the transport costs. To ease the recycling process, the PET waste needs to
be sorted into different grades and colors that make its recovery inefficient and
uneconomical. Hence, other alternative for PET recovery such as pyrolysis process has been
explored and the product yield was analyzed by several researchers. Cepeliogullar and Putun
[14] have explored the potential of PET in pyrolysis process to produce liquid oil using fixed-
bed reactor at 5000C. The heating rate was 10 C/min and nitrogen gas was used as the
sweeping gas in this experiment. It was observed that the liquid oil yield was lesser than the
gaseous product. The liquid oil obtained was 23.1 wt% while the gaseous product was 76.9
wt % with no solid residue left. The low liquid yield could be explained through the
proximate analysis based on Table 1, showing the relatively low volatile content of PET
around 86.83% in comparison with other plastics in which the volatile contents were all
above 90%. Unfortunately, almost half of the oil composition contained benzoic acid which
was around 49.93% based on the gas chromatography–mass spectroscopy (GC–MS) analysis.
The acidic characteristic in pyrolysis oil was unfavorable due to its corrosiveness that
deteriorated the fuel quality [14]. Besides that, benzoic acid was a general sublime that could
clog piping and heat exchanger, thus need a serious attention if running in industrial scale
[15, 16]. On the other hand, Fakhrhoseini and Dastanian [9] found slightly higher liquid oil
yield at the same operating temperature and heating rate. The liquid yield obtained was 39.89
wt%, gaseous was 52.13 wt% and solid residue was 8.98 wt%. Therefore, it can be concluded
that the liquid oil production from the PET pyrolysis obtained in the ranges of 23–40 wt%
while gaseous yield in the ranges of 52–77 wt%. Based on these results, PET might be the
most suitable plastic to be used in pyrolysis if gaseous product became a preference, for
instance to provide energy supply to heat up the reactor at the desired temperature.

2.3.2 High-density polyethylene (HDPE): HDPE is characterized as a long linear polymer

chain with high degree of crystallinity and low branching which leads to high strength
properties. Due to its high strength properties, HDPE is widely used in manufacturing of milk
bottles, detergent bottles, oil containers, toys and more. The various applications contribute
about 17.6% in plastic waste category which is the third largest plastic type found in
municipal solid waste (MSW) [17]. HDPE wastes have a great potential to be used in
pyrolysis process since it can produce high liquid yield depends on the set up parameters.
Many studies have been conducted on HDPE pyrolysis at different operating parameters to
investigate the product yield obtained. Ahmad et al. [18] explored the pyrolysis study of
HDPE using micro steel reactor. The pyrolysis temperatures were within 300– 400 0C at
heating rate of 5–10 C/min. Nitrogen gas was used as the fluidizing medium. From the
experiment, they found that the highest total conversion happened to be at 350 0C with liquid
was the dominant product yield (80.88 wt%). The solid residue was very high at 300 0C
(33.05 wt%) but the amount was reducing to 0.54 wt% at the highest temperature of 400 0C.
On the other hand, Kumar and Singh [19] have done the thermal pyrolysis study of HDPE
using semi-batch reactor at higher temperature range of 400–550 0C. It was observed that the
highest liquid yield (79.08 wt%) and gaseous product (24.75 wt%) obtained at temperature of
5500C while wax started to dominate in product fraction at higher temperature of 500–550 0C.
The dark brownish oil obtained from the pyrolysis had no visible residue and the boiling
point was from 82 to 3520C. Besides, the sulfur content in the HDPE pyrolytic oil was very
low (0.019%) that made it cleaner to the environment. Besides that, Marcilla et al. [21] have
also studied the HDPE pyrolysis at 5500C using batch reactor. The liquid oil yield was 84.7
wt% and gaseous product around 16.3 wt%. This results proven that higher liquid oil could
be obtained at higher temperature but there was also a limitation that should be noted. Too
high temperature would reduce the liquid oil yield and increased the gaseous product since
the process had passed the maximum thermal degradation point. Mastral et al. [22] conducted
the HDPE pyrolysis in a fluidized bed reactor at 650 0C and they found that the liquid oil
production was around 68.5 wt% and 31.5 wt% gaseous product. This shows that the liquid
was cracked to gaseous when further heated up at a very high temperature above 550 0C.

2.3.3 Polyvinyl chloride (PVC): Unlike other thermoplastics such as polyethylene (PE),
polystyrene (PS) and polypropylene (PP) which can be softened by heating and solely
derived from oil, PVC is exceptional since it is manufactured from the mixture of 57%
chlorine (derived from industrial grade salt) and 43% carbon (derived from hydrocarbon
feedstock such as ethylene from oil or natural gas) [23]. The chlorine property makes PVC an
excellent fire resistance, thus very suitable for electrical insulation. The compatibility PVC to
be mixed with many additives makes it a versatile plastic. Regular applications of PVC
include wire and cable insulation, window frames, boots, food foil, medical devices, blood
bags, automotive interiors, packaging, credit cards, synthetic leather, etc. Even though it has
wide applications, the research done on the PVC pyrolysis found in the literature was very
less due to the dangerous substance that it tend to release when heated at high temperature.
Miranda et al. [24] conducted the pyrolysis of PVC in a batch reactor at temperature range of
225–520 C and heating rate of 10 C/min. The experiment was done under vacuum and total
pressure of 2 kPa was applied. Liquid oil obtained was not that high and varied from 0.45 wt
% to 12.79 wt% as the temperature increased. Tar accumulation was even higher than the
liquid oil obtained and the amount kept increasing up to 19.6 wt%. Hydrogen chloride (HCl)
was found to be the main product obtained from the experiment with the highest yield of 58.2
wt%. HCl tend to be corrosive and toxic when heated moderately that caused damage to the
process equipment. Therefore, it can be concluded that PVC was not preferable for pyrolysis
since the yield of liquid oil was very minimum. Furthermore, PVC waste accumulated in
MSW was very minimal, about less than 3% in plastic waste category which was very limited
[17]. Additionally, the release of harmful product such as HCl and the presence of chlorinated
compound such as chlorobenzene in the pyrolysis liquid could be toxic to the environment.
To overcome this, a dechlorination process of PVC was required to reduce the chlorine
content in liquid oil. This process could be achieved through several methods such as
stepwise pyrolysis, catalytic pyrolysis and pyrolysis with adsorbents added to the PVC
sample [25]. Hence, the pyrolysis of PVC required an additional cost when an extra
dechlorination step was needed which was one of the disadvantages to the industry.

2.3.4 Low-density polyethylene (LDPE): In contrast to HDPE, LDPE has more branching
that results in weaker intermolecular force, thus lower tensile strength and hardness.
However, LDPE has better ductility than HDPE since the side branching causes the structure
to be less crystalline and easy to be molded. It has an excellent resistance to water, thus
widely applied as plastic bags, wrapping foils for packaging, trash bags and much more. All
these items are commonly used in our daily lives and therefore, LDPE waste has been
accumulated day by day that it is known as the second largest plastic waste in MSW after PP
[17]. As one way to recover energy and reduce waste, pyrolysis of LDPE to oil product has
received much attention by researchers nowadays. Bagri and Williams [26] have investigated
the LDPE pyrolysis in fixed-bed reactor at 500 C with heating rate of 10 C/min. The
experiment was done for duration of 20 min and nitrogen was used as fluidizing gas. It was
observed that high liquid yield of 95 wt% was obtained with low gas yield and negligible
char. High liquid oil yield of 93.1 wt% has also been obtained by Marcilla et al. [21] when
the experiment was carried out in a batch reactor at 550 0C, but this time with lower heating
rate of 5 C/min. There are also some researchers who studied the LDPE pyrolysis at lower
operating temperature less than 500 0C. From the research conducted by Uddin et al. [27]
using batch reactor at 430 C, the liquid yield obtained was around 75.6 wt%. Aguado et al.
[28] have obtained a closer yield which was 74.7 wt% when using the same type of reactor at
450 0C. However, the liquid oil yield could be increased when pressure was applied in the
reactor during the process, even though at lower temperature. This was proven by Onwudili
et al. [29] who used pressurized batch reactor (0.8–4.3 MPa) in LDPE pyrolysis at 425 0C.
From the experiment, they have obtained 89.5% liquid oil, 10 wt% gaseous and 0.5 wt%
char. This indicates that pressure may have an influence on the composition of pyrolysis
product that would be discussed afterward in this paper.

2.3.5 Polypropylene (PP): PP is a saturated polymer with linear hydrocarbon chain that has a
good chemical and heat resistance. Unlike HDPE, PP does not melt at temperature below
than 160 0C. It has a lower density than HDPE but has higher hardness and rigidity that
makes it preferable in plastic industry. PP contributes about 24.3% in plastic wastes category
which are the largest amount of plastics found in MSW [17]. The diverse applications include
flowerpot, office folders, car bumpers, pails, carpets, furniture, storage boxes and more. The
high demand of PP in daily life causes the amount of PP wastes to increase each year and
therefore, pyrolysis of PP is one of the methods that can be used for energy recovery. Several
researchers have investigated the pyrolysis of PP at various parameters to measure the liquid
oil yield and properties. In a study conducted by Ahmad et al. [18] on PP pyrolysis within
250–4000C using micro steel reactor, they summarized that the highest liquid oil was
achieved at temperature of 300 0C around 69.82 wt% with total conversion of 98.66%. The
increase in temperature to 400 0C only reduced the total product conversion to 94.3% and
increased solid residue from 1.34 to 5.7 wt%. This indicates that coke formation started to
dominate at higher temperature. However, Sakata et al. [30] have explored the PP pyrolysis at
higher temperature of 380 C. They found higher liquid yield of 80.1 wt%, 6.6 wt% gaseous
and 13.3 wt% solid residue left. On the other hand, Fakhrhoseini and Dastanian [9] obtained
higher liquid yield about 82.12 wt% when performed PP pyrolysis at 500 0C. Nevertheless,
further increase in temperature more than 500 0C only reduced the liquid yield collected. This
was proven by Demirbas [31] who carried out the PP pyrolysis at extreme temperature of 740
0
C in a batch reactor which resulted in 48.8 wt% liquid yield, 49.6 wt% gaseous and 1.6 wt%
char.

2.3.6 Polystyrene (PS): PS is made of styrene monomers obtained from the liquid
petrochemical. The structure consists of a long hydrocarbon chain with phenyl group attached
to every other carbon atom. PS is naturally colorless but it can be colored by colorants. It is
heat resilience and it offers reasonable durability, strength and lightness that make this
polymer desirable to be used in variety of sectors such as in food packaging, electronics,
construction, medical, appliances and toys. The wide range of applications signifies the large
waste amount of PS in MSW accumulated each year. Unfortunately, PS is not included in the
roadside recycling program in which the recycling bins only included glasses, papers, cans,
and certain plastics. Even though there is a plastic category, normally people will not throw
the foam food packaging into plastics recycle bin and they often go to the general bin. Thus,
PS is generally not separated and not economically to collect for recycling due to its low
density polystyrene foam. Hence, the only way the PS waste can be fully utilized is through
pyrolysis process in which it can be turned into more valuable oil product rather than to end
up in the landfills forever. Onwudili et al. [29] have investigated the pyrolysis of PS in a
batch pressurized autoclave reactor at 300–500 0C for one hour duration. The heating rate
used was 10 C/min and the experimental pressure given was 0.31 MPa up to 1.6 MPa. From
the experiment, they found that the PS pyrolysis produced a very high liquid oil yield around
97.0 wt% at optimum temperature of 425 0C. The maximum amount of gas produced was
only 2.5 wt%. The high yield of liquid oil product was also supported by Liu et al. [32]. The
difference was during this time, the pyrolysis of PS was conducted using fluidized bed
reactor at temperature of 450–700 0C. The highest liquid oil obtained was 98.7 wt% at 600
0
C. Nevertheless, the amount of liquid oil produced was also considered high at lower
temperature of 450 0C which was around 97.6 wt% and it differed by only 1.1 wt%. In the
case when energy saving was the priority, lower temperature was preferable as it could
reduce the energy cost incurred. Based on the study done by Demirbas [31], the liquid oil
reduced to 89.5 wt% when the PS pyrolysis was running at 581 0C in a batch reactor.
Therefore, the PS pyrolysis was not recommended to run at temperature more than 500 0C to
optimize the liquid oil production.

2.3.7 Mixed plastics: As previously mentioned, pyrolysis process has an added advantage
over the recycling process since it does not need an intense sorting process. In recycling
process, most plastics are not compatible with each other to be processed together during
recycling. For instance, a slight amount of PVC contaminant present in PET recycle stream
will degrade the whole PET resin by becoming yellowish and brittle that requires
reprocessing [33]. This shows that recycling process is very sensitive to contaminants that it
requires all plastics to be sorted based on type of resins, colors and transparency. However,
pyrolysis process seems to be more sustainable since liquid oil still can be produced from the
mixed plastics in the feedstock. This has been encountered by several researchers who
conducted studies of mixed plastics pyrolysis. Kaminsky et al. [34] studied the pyrolysis of
mixed plastic wastes collected from German households which was composed approximately
75% of polyolefins (PE, PP) and 25% PS. There was indeed a small amount of PVC content
remained in the material after the separation step about less than 1 wt% and this was shown
by the presence of the chlorine content in the product yield. The experiment was conducted in
a fluidized bed reactor at 730 0C which finally produced 48.4 wt% liquid oil. The amount of
liquid oil obtained was very similar to the study conducted by Demirbas [31] in pyrolysis of
polyolefins (PP, PE) and PS mixture collected from landfill which was approximately 46.6 wt
%. The gaseous and solid yields were reported to be 35 wt% and 2.2 wt% respectively. In
terms of the oil composition, it contained 4 ppm chlorine resulted from the remaining PVC
left in the material. However, it did not deteriorate the oil quality since the minimum chlorine
limit in petrochemical processing was less than 10 ppm. Furthermore, the rest of the chlorine
content was found to be the largest in solid residue. Therefore, the author concluded that the
chlorine content in the feedstock could not be more than 1 wt% to ensure high quality oil was
produced. The potential of polyolefins mixed plastics in pyrolysis was also explored by
Donaj et al. [35]. The mixed plastics were composed of 75 wt% LDPE, 30 wt% HDPE and
24 wt% PP. The experiment was operated at high temperatures of 650 0C and 7300C in a
bubbling fluidized bed reactor. The results showed that the liquid obtained was higher at
lower temperature of 6500C which was around 48 wt%. However, this oil fraction consisted
of 52% heavy fraction such as heavy oil, wax and carbon black. In contrast, it was up to 70%
light fraction of liquid contained in the pyrolysis oil (44 wt%) running at 730 0C. This means
that the higher the temperature, the lighter the hydrocarbon liquid or gaseous produced.
Therefore, it should be noted that there was a tremendous change in the product distribution
when the temperature was further increased. In comparison to the single plastic pyrolysis, it
can be seen that the pyrolysis of mixed plastics produced lower liquid yield less than 50 wt%.
Nevertheless, the quality of oil produced was comparable to the single plastic pyrolysis in
terms of the oil composition that made it ideally suited for further processing in
petrochemical refineries.

Chapter 3
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The experiment is initially aimed at performing pyrolysis on a small scale, and the volume of
the reactor is designed to accommodate atleast 1 kg of waste plastic. The line diagram of mini
reactor for pyrolysis setup is shown in the Figure 2. Composition of SS 304 is listed in Table
3.Various specifications of pyrolysis reactor were listed in Table 4. Various properties of the
reactor material are listed in Table 5.

3.1 RESEARCH PROCEDURES:

The design and fabrication of waste plastic oil converter went through a series of stages. It
includes:

(i) Planning
(ii) Design and analysis
(iii) Fabrication
(iv) Preliminary testing
(v) Modification
(vi) Final testing and
(vii) Data gathering

Thorough planning was employed in the conduct of the study to arrive at the desired output.
This was done through extensive review of literature and studies on the existing practices and
technology on converting waste plastic into a resource, particularly pyrolysis process. It also
included the selection of materials, tools, equipment, parts and accessories for the
development of waste plastic oil converter. In finite element analysis for plastic pyrolysis
reactors, the thermal stress behavior is scientifically defined through numerical simulations.

The design of the equipment involves the high temperature generating gas burner that was
installed with temperature regulator to attain the desired temperature. It also includes the
reactor tank, reactor tank frame, smoke cleansing and condensing tank and its frame, bubbler
etc. Design also covers the proper placement and arrangement of every component of the
machine. Environmental aspect was also considered in the design of the machine. A smoke
cleansing tank which also served as oil condensing tank was made to clean the smoke, and
condense the remaining vapor before it goes to the atmosphere.
Fabrication was done when all the needed materials were ready. The materials used were
angle bar, steel pipe, copper tube, hose, hose clip, vacuum pump, stainless steel pot, gas
heater, thermocouple, temperature controller, contactor, condensing tank and waste water
collecting tank.
Testing was done for two stages: (i) preliminary testing and (ii) final testing, respectively.
Before the testing was made, feedstock was prepared and weighed accordingly. Five
thousand grams of plastics were feeded initially. Modification on some parts of the
equipment was done after the preliminary finite element analysis to improve its function
ability.
After modifications, final testing was conducted to test the performance of the designed and
fabricated waste plastic oil converter.
Only the liquid product and char was collected while the gas was submerged in water before
releasing it to the atmosphere.

3.2 FLOWCHART OF RESEARCH PROCEDURE:

 Collection and segregation of plastic waste

Storing of plastic waste

Shredding of plastic waste

Feeding into hopper

Flow of waste into heating vessel in absence of oxygen

Movement of liquid-vapor into condenser Vessel tarry waste

Tapping of liquid fuel

Fractionation of liquid fuel to obtain diesel, petrol, kerosene etc.

3. 3 PROCESS PARAMETERS:

Condition Parameters play major role in optimizing the product yield and
composition in any processes. In plastic pyrolysis, the key process parameters may influence
the production of final end products such as liquid oil, gaseous and char. Those important
parameters may be summarized as temperature, type of reactors, pressure, residence time,
catalysts, type of fluidizing gas and its rate. The desired product can be achieved by
controlling the parameters at different settings. In-depth discussions of the operating
parameters are reviewed in the following subsections.

3.3.1. Temperature: Temperature is one of the most significant operating parameters in

pyrolysis since it controls the cracking reaction of the polymer chain. Molecules are attracted
together by Van der Waals force and this prevents the molecules from collapsed. When
temperature in the system increases, the vibration of molecules inside the system will be
greater and molecules tend to evaporate away from the surface of the object. This happens
when the energy induced by Van der Waals force along the polymer chains is greater than the
enthalpy of the C–C bond in the chain, resulted in the broken of carbon chain [36]. The
thermal degradation behavior of the plastics can be measured using thermogravimetry
analyzer. The analyzer produces two types of graphs which are thermogravimetry analysis
(TG) curve and derivative thermogravimetry analysis (DTG) curve. The TG curve measures
the weight change of substance as function of temperature and time. On the other hand, the
DTG curve gives the information on the degradation step occurred during the process which
is indicated by the number of peaks. The main PET degradation started at 400 0C with a very
small weight change occurred when the temperature was in the range of 200–400 0C. The
maximum weight loss of the substance happened at temperature of 427.7 0C. No significant
changes were observed at temperature more than 470 0C. Therefore, the authors concluded
that the thermal degradation of PET happened at temperature range of 350–520 0C. As for the
HDPE, Chin et al. [37] reported the thermal degradation started at 378–404 0C and was almost
completed at 517– 5390C based on the thermogravimetry analysis (TG) at different heating
rates in the range of 10–50 C/min. Higher heating rates speeds up the weight loss, thus
increases the rate of reaction. In another thermal behavior study carried out by Marcilla et al.
[38], they found that the maximum degradation rate of HDPE occurred at 467 0C. This
important temperature needs to put into consideration when running the pyrolysis experiment
to ensure the most optimum liquid yield. On the other hand, PVC may have different thermal
behavior than others when the major weight loss occurred at two different temperature
ranges. The first temperature range was between 260 and 385 0C in which maximum weight
loss of 62.25% from the initial weight occurred. The second temperature range happened to
be between 385 and 5200C where about 21.74% weight loss from the original weight. As the
temperature was raised up till 800 0C, the weight loss of the substance became insignificant
(1.62%). Thus, it was concluded that the degradation temperature of PVC was in the range of
220– 5200C. In LDPE pyrolysis, Marcilla et al. [39] observed that small amount of liquid oil
formation started at temperature of 360– 385 C. The maximum liquid yield was collected at
469–4940C. A brown waxy material formed at temperature below than 410 0C indicated the
incomplete conversion of oil. They concluded that the most optimum temperature to obtain
the highest liquid was at 4250C for LDPE. Further increase in temperature to 600 0C only
reduced the liquid yield obtained [40]. Hence, it can be summarized that the LDPE thermal
degradation occurred at temperature range of 360–5500C.

PP had lower thermal degradation temperature if compared to HDPE. The main

decomposition of HDPE and PP happened within the range of 400–500 0C based on derivative
thermogravimetry analysis (DTG) curves. However, it was observed that the weight loss of
PP fraction started to occur at lower temperature below 400 0C in comparison to the HDPE
fraction. Marcilla et al. [39] discovered that the maximum degradation temperature for PP
was 4470C while HDPE was 4670C where the major weight loss happened. Theoretically, PP
degraded faster than HDPE since half of the carbon in PP chain is tertiary carbon,
consequently ease the formation of tertiary carbocation during the degradation. Among all
plastics, PS degraded at the lowest temperature during pyrolysis process. Onwudili et al. [29]
have investigated the PS pyrolysis in a batch reactor. From their studies, they found that no
reaction seems to take place at 300 0C. However, they found that PS degraded completely into
highly viscous dark-colored oil at lower temperature of 350 0C. The highest liquid oil was
achieved at 4250C. The increase of temperature to 581 0C only reduced the liquid oil
production and increased gaseous product [32]. Thus, it is worth noting that the thermal
degradation temperature of PS would be in the range of 350–500 0C approximately.
Therefore, it was proven that the temperature has the greatest impact on reaction rate that
may influence product composition of liquid, gaseous and char for all plastics from the
previous discussion. The operating temperature required relies strongly on the product
preference. If gaseous or char product was preferred, higher temperature more than 500 0C
was suggested. If liquid was preferred instead, lower temperature in the range of 300– 500 0C
was recommended and this condition is applicable for all plastics.

3.3.2 Pressure and residence time: The effect of pressure to the HDPE pyrolysis product
was studied by Murata et al. [41] in a continuous stirred tank reactor at elevated temperature
of 0.1–0.8 MPa. Based on the studies, they discovered that the gaseous product increased
tremendously from around 6 wt% to 13 wt% at 410 C but only a small increase from 4 wt%
to 6 wt% at 4400C as the pressure went up from 0.1 to 0.8 MPa. This shows that pressure had
high influence to the gaseous product at higher temperature. Pressure also affected the carbon
number distribution of the liquid product by shifting to the lower molecular weight side when
it was high. Besides, pressure also had a significant effect on the rate of double bond
formation. As reported by Murata et al. [41], the rate of double bond formation decreased
when pressure increased and this suggested that pressure directly affected the scission rate of
C–C links in polymer. They also discovered that pressure had greater impact on residence
time at lower temperature. However, as the temperature increased more than 430 0C, the effect
of pressure to the residence time became less apparent. Residence time can be defined as
average amount of time that the particle spends in the reactor and it may influence product
distribution. Longer residence time increases the conversion of primary product, thus more
thermal stable product is yielded such as light molecular weight hydrocarbons and non-
condensable gas [42]. Nevertheless, there is a temperature limitation in the process that may
influence the product distribution where until that instant, the residence time has not much
effect on the product distribution. Mastral et al. [43] studied the effect of residence time and
temperature on product distribution of HDPE thermal cracking in fluidized bed reactor. It was
found that higher liquid yield obtained at longer residence time (2.57 s) when the temperature
was not more than 6850C. However, the residence time had less influence on the liquid and
gaseous yield at higher temperature above 6850C. Therefore, it was concluded that pressure
and residence time are both temperature dependence factors that may have potential influence
on product distribution of the plastic pyrolysis at lower temperature. Higher pressure
increased the gaseous product yield and affected the molecular weight distribution for both
liquid and gaseous products but only apparent at high temperatures. Based on the literature
review, most researchers conducted their plastic pyrolysis studies at atmospheric pressure and
focused more on the temperature factor. The residence time was not brought up to attention
while carrying out the experiment since the effect would become less apparent at higher
temperatures. Moreover, in terms of economic viewpoint, additional units such as compressor
and pressure transmitter need to be added into the overall system, thus increase the operation
cost if the factor of pressure is considered. However, it should be noted that these two factors
should be put under consideration based on the product distribution preference especially
when running at temperature below 4500C.
 Figure 2: Schematic diagram of mini plastic pyrolysis plant
Stainless steel grade 304 i.e. SS 304 pipe was used to construct the reactor chamber. Standard
MS pipes were used for various connections and piping within the pyrolysis plant. Refractory
bricks were used to construct inner liner of the furnace which maintained high temperatures
and improved thermal efficiency.
Versatile heating elements like coal and wood can be used in this setup. An electric blower is
attached at the bottom side of the furnace to enhance the temperature. WIKA Model 213.53
pressure gauge is used to monitor pressure inside the reactor. KMQIN-062E-18 Model
(OMEGA) K type thermocouple is used to monitor temperature. High-temperature resistant
gaskets and seals are used to ensure tight seals at joints.

Table 3: Standard composition of SS304

Sl. No. Elements Weight %
1 Carbon (C) Maximum 0.08
2 1. Silicon (Si) Maximum 0.75
3 Manganese (Mn) 2. Maximum 2.00
4 Phosphorus (P) 3. Maximum 0.045
5 Sulfur (S) 4. Maximum 0.030
6 Chromium (Cr) 5. 18.0 - 20.0
7 Nickel (Ni) 6. 8.0- 10.5
8 Nitrogen (N) 7. Maximum 0.10
Additionally, stainless steel grade 304 may also contain trace amounts of other elements such
as molybdenum (typically less than 0.10%) and other alloying elements depending on the
specific manufacturing process and intended application.

Table 4: Specification of the mini reactor

Sl. No. Parameter Value

1 Size Shell diameter 300 mm
2 Thickness 3.96 mm
3 Drum Height 750 mm
4 Exhaust pipe diameter 10 mm
5 Max Allowable Pressure 3 bar
6 Drain pipe diameter 10 mm
7 Temperature Range for the Pyrolysis Process 400-600°C

Table 5: Properties of the reactor material (SS 304)

Sl. No. Parameter Value

1 Tensile Strength 540 – 750 MPa

2 Tensile Ultimate Strength MPa 586 MPa
3 Tensile Yield Strength 207 MPa
4 Density 7.75×10-6 kg/mm3
5 Youngs Modulus 1.93 x 105 MPa
6 Bulk Modulus 1.69 x 105 MPa
7 Ductility Coefficient 0.57
8 Cyclic Strength Coefficient 2224
9 Melting Point 1450 °C
10 Modulus of Elasticity 193 GPa
11 Electrical Resistivity 0.72 x 10-6 Ω.m
12 Thermal Conductivity 1.51 x 10-2 W/mm°C
13 Thermal Expansion 1.7 x 10-5/°C
14 Specific Heat 4.8 x 10-6 mJ/ kg°C

Chapter 4
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
During this project we have collected around five kilogram (5 kg) of waste plastics from our college
locality and we have cleaned it and shorted it out as per its grade. They were shredded before feeding
it inside the reaction cylinder. We have repeated the pyrolysis process at various temperatures and
obtained various % of recovery from the plastics. Table 6 shows the % of recovery from the plastics at
various temperatures during experiments.

Table 6: Recovery percentage at various temperatures

Temperature
Sr. No. % Recovery
(°C)(±5-10°C)
1 300 25
2 350 34
3 375 39
4 400 41
5 450 44

TESTING OF PYROLYTIC OIL:

Collected pyrolytic oil is tested in our laboratory and some outside labs. Various
results are tabulated in table no 6.

Table 7: properties of pyrolytic oil and apparatus used

Sr. No. Tests Results Apparatus Used

1. Density at 15°C 0.8038 g/cc Hydrometer /Measuring flask and Mettler
2. Flash point 39°C Penski Martin Flash Point Apparatus
3. Calorific Value 42.44 MJ/kg Bomb Calorimeter
4. Appearance Clear Brown Visual Inspection
Kinematic
5. °
1.31mm2/s Viscometer
viscosity at 40 C

The test results are more or less similar to standard value of commercial diesel so this oil can
be used with mixing it with diesel. Before mixing it with diesel, purification is very important
for better performance.

FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS:

 Figure 3: Meshing of Pyrolysis Reactor

The design of the plastic pyrolysis reactor constructed from SS 304 and its performance
evaluation using Finite Element Analysis (FEA) yielded significant insights. The FEA
simulations provided a comprehensive understanding of the reactor's thermal behavior, stress
distribution, and structural integrity under varying operational conditions. Results revealed
that the reactor having specific thickness (3.96 mm) exhibited favorable thermal stability and
mechanical strength, contributing to the reactor's robust performance. Moreover, the FEA
analysis highlighted areas for potential optimization, such as heat dissipation mechanisms and
stress concentrations, which could enhance the reactor's efficiency and longevity. Overall, the
integration of FEA techniques with SS 304 material in the design of the plastic pyrolysis
reactor presents a promising approach for achieving sustainable and efficient plastic waste
management.

Chapter 5
 CONCLUSION
The sustainability of the process is unquestionable since the amount of plastic wastes
available in every country is reaching millions of tons. With the pyrolysis method, the waste
management becomes more efficient, less capacity of landfill needed, less pollution and also
cost effective. Moreover, with the existence of pyrolysis method to decompose plastic into
valuable energy fuel, the dependence on fossil fuel as the non-renewable energy can be
reduced and this solves the rise in energy demand.

The project introduces a thorough method for assessing the performance of plastic pyrolysis
plants using finite element analysis (FEA). Its primary findings are as follows: Firstly, it
showcases how FEA is applied to evaluate the performance of these plants. Through
modeling temperature and stress dynamics within the reactor, FEA offers crucial insights into
thermal management, structural integrity, and reliability aspects, contributing significantly to
the understanding of plant operation.

The pyrolysis could be done in both thermal and catalytic process. However, due to lack of
time and financial constrains we couldn’t investigate the process but as per literature the
catalytic process provided lower operating temperature with greater yield of liquid oil for
most plastics with the right catalyst selection. So it is our future plan of work to apply the
process.

REFERENCES
__________________________________________________
[1] Association of Plastic Manufacturers Europe. An analysis of European plastics
production, demand and waste data. Belgium: European Association of Plastics
Recycling and Recovery Organisations; 2015. p. 1–32.

[2] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Common wastes and materials. US; 2014.

[3] Ministry Of Environment and Forest. News letter on solid waste management, New
Delhi, (2007)
[4] Central Pollution Control Board. Study on solid waste management CPCB Delhi.
(2003).

[5] Environment Protection Agency, U.S.A. Study on solid waste management (2011).

[6] Vogler, Jon, Small-scale recycling of plastics. Intermediate Technology Publications

1984. A book aimed at small-scale plastics recycling in developing countries)

[7] Kukreja R. Advantages and disadvantages of recycling. Conserve Energy Future;

2009.

[8] Masanet E, Auer R, Tsuda D, Barillot T, Baynes A. An assessment and prioritization

of ‘‘design for recycling” guidelines for plastic components. In: Electronics and the
environment, IEEE international symposium; 2002. p. 5– 10.

[9] Fakhrhoseini SM, Dastanian M. Predicting pyrolysis products of PE, PP, and PET
using NRTL activity coefficient model. Hindawi Publishing Corporation; 2013. p. 1–
5.

[10] Bridgwater AV. Review of fast pyrolysis of biomass and product upgrading. Biomass
Bioenergy 2012;38:68–94.

[11] Abnisa F, Wan Daud WMA. A review on co-pyrolysis of biomass: an optional

technique to obtain a high-grade pyrolysis oil. Energy Convers Manage 2014;87:71–
85.

[12] Kreith F. The CRC handbook of mechanical engineering. 2nd ed. CRC Press, Inc;
1998.

[13] Çepeliog˘ullar Ö, Pütün AE. Thermal and kinetic behaviors of biomass and plastic
wastes in co-pyrolysis. Energy Convers Manage 2013;75:263–70.

[14] Cepeliogullar O, Putun AE. Utilization of two different types of plastic wastes from
daily and industrial life. In: Ozdemir C, Sahinkaya S, Kalipci E, Oden MK, editors.
ICOEST Cappadocia 2013. Turkey: ICOEST Cappadocia; 2013. p. 1–13.

[15] Wan Ho M. Waste plastics into fuel oil? UK: Institute of Science in Society; 2015.

[16] Shioya M, Kawanishi T, Shiratori N, Wakao H, Sugiyama E, Ibe H, et al.

Development of waste plastics liquefaction technology, feedstock recycling in Japan.
 In: Muller-Hagedorn M, Bockhorn H, editors. Feedstock recycling of plastics,
Germany; 2005. p. 19–42.

[17] Michael PA. Plastic waste total in MSW. Society of the Plastic Industry; 2010.

[18] Ahmad I, Khan MI, Khan H, Ishaq M, Tariq R, Gul K, et al. Pyrolysis study of
polypropylene and polyethylene into premium oil products. Int J Green Energy
2014;12:663–71.

[19] Kumar S, Singh RK. Recovery of hydrocarbon liquid from waste high density
polyethylene by thermal pyrolysis. Braz J Chem Eng 2011;28:659–67.

[20] Boundy B, Diegel SW, Wright L, Davis SC. Biomass energy data book. 4th ed. US:
Oak Ridge National Laboratory; 2011.

[21] Marcilla A, Beltrán MI, Navarro R. Thermal and catalytic pyrolysis of polyethylene
over HZSM5 and HUSY zeolites in a batch reactor under dynamic conditions. Appl
Catal B Environ 2009;86:78–86.

[22] Mastral FJ, Esperanza E, Garcia P, Juste M. Pyrolysis of high-density polyethylene in

a fluidized bed reactor. Influence of the temperature and residence time. J Anal Appl
Pyrol 2001;63:1–15.

[23] British Plastics Federation. Polyvinyl chloride (PVC). London; 2015.

[24] Miranda R, Jin Y, Roy C, Vasile C. Vacuum pyrolysis of PVC kinetic study. Polym
Degrad Stab 1998;64:127–44.

[25] López A, de Marco I, Caballero BM, Laresgoiti MF, Adrados A. Dechlorination of

fuels in pyrolysis of PVC containing plastic wastes. Fuel Process Technol
2011;92:253–60.

[26] Bagri R, Williams PT. Catalytic pyrolysis of polyethylene. J Anal Appl Pyrol
2001;63:29–41.

[27] Uddin MA, Koizumi K, Murata K, Sakata Y. Thermal and catalytic degradation of
structurally different types of polyethylene into fuel oil. Polym Degrad Stab
1996;56:37–44.
[28] Aguado J, Serrano DP, San Miguel G, Castro MC, Madrid S. Feedstock recycling of
polyethylene in a two-step thermo-catalytic reaction system. J Anal Appl Pyrol
2007;79:415–23.

[29] Onwudili JA, Insura N, Williams PT. Composition of products from the pyrolysis of
polyethylene and polystyrene in a closed batch reactor: effects of temperature and
residence time. J Anal Appl Pyrol 2009;86:293–303.

[30] Sakata Y, Uddin MA, Muto A. Degradation of polyethylene and polypropylene into
fuel oil by using solid acid and non-solid acid catalysts. J Anal Appl Pyrol
1999;51:135–55.

[31] Demirbas A. Pyrolysis of municipal plastic wastes for recovery of gasolinerange

hydrocarbons. J Anal Appl Pyrol 2004;72:97–102.

[32] Liu Y, Qian J, Wang J. Pyrolysis of polystyrene waste in a fluidized-bed reactor to

obtain styrene monomer and gasoline fraction. Fuel Process Technol 1999;63:45–55.

[33] Hopewell J, Dvorak R, Kosior E. Plastics recycling: challenges and opportunities.

Philos Trans R Soc London B Biol Sci 2009:2115–26.

[34] Kaminsky W, Schlesselmann B, Simon CM. Thermal degradation of mixed plastic

waste to aromatics and gas. Polym Degrad Stab 1996;53:189–97.

[35] Donaj PJ, Kaminsky W, Buzeto F, Yang W. Pyrolysis of polyolefins for increasing
the yield of monomers’ recovery. Waste Manage 2012;32:840–6.

[36] Sobko AA. Generalized Van der Waals-Berthelot equation of state. Dokl Phys 2008;53:416–
9. [43] Marcilla A, García-Quesada JC, Sánchez S, Ruiz R. Study of the catalytic pyrolysis
behaviour of polyethylene–polypropylene mixtures. J Anal Appl Pyrol 2005;74:387–92

[37] Chin BLF, Yusup S, Al Shoaibi A, Kannan P, Srinivasakannan C, Sulaiman SA. Kinetic
studies of co-pyrolysis of rubber seed shell with high density polyethylene. Energy Convers
Manage 2014;87:746–53.

[38] Marcilla A, García-Quesada JC, Sánchez S, Ruiz R. Study of the catalytic pyrolysis behaviour
of polyethylene–polypropylene mixtures. J Anal Appl Pyrol 2005;74:387–92.

[39] Marcilla A, Beltrán MI, Navarro R. Evolution of products during the degradation of
polyethylene in a batch reactor. J Anal Appl Pyrol 2009;86:14–21.
[40] Williams PT, Williams EA. Fluidised bed pyrolysis of low density polyethylene to produce
petrochemical feedstock. J Anal Appl Pyrol 1998;51:107–26.

[41] Murata K, Sato K, Sakata Y. Effect of pressure on thermal degradation of polyethylene. J

Anal Appl Pyrol 2004;71:569–89.

[42] Ludlow-Palafox C, Chase HA. Microwave-induced pyrolysis of plastic waste. Ind Eng Chem
Res 2001;40:4749–56.

[43] Mastral FJ, Esperanza E, Berrueco C, Juste M, Ceamanos J. Fluidized bed thermal
degradation products of HDPE in an inert atmosphere and in air– nitrogen mixtures. J Anal
Appl Pyrol 2003;70:1–17.