‘development of functional barriers for the use of recycled … · benefits flexible packaging....
TRANSCRIPT
‘Development of functional barriers for the use of recycled materials in flexible packaging’
Vicent [email protected]
Follow AIMPLAS
AIMCAL ConferenceMunich, March 23rd 2017
Overview • Circular economy vision
• Functional barrier concept
• BANUS Project
• Cases study
• Conclusions
MARKET ORIENTED
+570MEMBERS
+2,300CUSTOMERS
€ 8.4MREVENUES
> R&D INNOVATION PROJECTS> TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE> ANALYSIS & TESTING> COMPETITIVEINTELLIGENCE> TRAINING
Over 8,500 m2 facilities with state-of-the-art equipment
Valencia Parc Tecnologic (SPAIN)
Benefits flexible packaging
Multilayer laminates and specialty coatingfilms offer optimal barrier properties thatlead to extended shelf-life for perishablegoods contributing food waste reduction
Lightweight and compact packagingformats allow lower environmental impactsdue to weight reduction andtransport cost savings
Drawbacks: difficult recycling
Packaging waste features low bulk density,thin gauge fluffy films, combination ofdifferent materials (foil, paper, plastics…)
Usually this type of waste is diverted to:Energy recovery from plastic incineration
Plastic mechanical recycling for low valueproducts including bin bags, pipes, pots, etc.
Paperboard for recycled pulp poses someconcerns on mineral oils hydrocarbons (MOHs)
Circular economy
Strategy to develop a sustainable, low carbon, resource efficient andcompetitive economy
Key actions:
Innovative and more efficient production processesImprove waste management to increase use secondary materialsAvoid scarcity of resources and raw materials volatile prices
Closing the loop of product lifecycles through greater recycling and re-use
Use of recycled plastic for food packaging
1. Offcuts and scraps from production of food contact plastics
(Regulation EC 2023/2006)
2. Recycled plastics from processesauthorised by EFSA
(Regulation EC 282/2008)
3. Recycled plastics used behind a functional barrier
(Regulation EU 10/2011)
Functional barrier
Layer (or multi-layer of any type of material) which prevents the migration ofsubstances from behind that barrier into the food(including set-off during storage of stackable packaging)
NON-AUTHORISED MATERIALS
FUNCTIONAL BARRIER
FOODSTUFF
X
Functional barrier
Behind a functional barrier, non-authorised substances can be used, provided they fulfil certain criteria and their migration remains below a given detection limit: 0.01 mg/kg in foodstuff (10 ppb)
Substances not covered by the functional barrier definition:
• Nanoparticles
• Toxic to reproduction
• Mutagenic
• Carcinogenic
Functional barrier
The effectiveness of the functional barrier depends on:
• Concentration and diffusion coefficient of contaminants in the recycled layer
• Chemical nature and thickness of the barrier layer
• Conditions of use:
o Type of food
o Temperature and time of use
A functional barrier must also be efficient under processing conditions, to prevent diffusion of substances when the polymer layers are in contact at high temperatures
BANUS projectDefinition and development of functional barriers for the use of recycled materials in multi-layer food packaging
www.banus-project.eu
Funded byDuration: 24 months July 2014 - June 2016
Partners: 9 partners from 6 countries
12
Develop new multilayer structures for food packaging applications (using conventional polymers to achieve new functionalities)
Evaluate their properties as functional barriers
Open new potential markets for the traditional recycling companies in Europe
The ultimate objective is to increase the technical knowledgeabout materials and technologies used in functional barrier development
BANUS project - Goals
• Substitution of a percentage of virgin material by recycled material(paper or plastic) in the selected structures in order to develop moreenvironmental friendly food packaging structures
13
BANUS project - Objectives
• The main objective is to ensure highly efficient functional barriers toguarantee food safety when using recycled materials (plastic andpaper) even coming from non-authorized recycling processes infood packaging structures
• A key point is the evaluation of the functional barriers performancewhen positioned between recycled materials and foodstuffs
Methodology to asses the effectiveness as functional barrier
Intentional contamination of a packaging material with a known
concentration of surrogate substances (challenge test)
Incorporation of contaminated material within the packaging
structure behind the functional barrier
Migration testing with food-simulating solvents under worst foreseeable
conditions of use
BANUS project - Stages
15
Case Study 1:Semi-rigid multilayer
plastic packaging
Case Study 2Flexible multilayer
packaging
Case Study 3Coated paperboard
packaging
Current structure PP/EVOH/PP Paper/PET met/PE Paperboard/Coating
Current processing technology
Co-extrusion Lamination adhesives Coating
Recycled material
proposedRecycled PP Recycled paper Recycled paperboard
End users Applications
BANUS project – Case Studies
16
CTC(OTH)
End-user Cluster
AIMPLASPlastic materials and processes expert
Pilot plant processingTesting
DELTA (SME)Paper coating
BOBINÓ (SME)Plastic
co-extrusion
BUMAGA(SME)Paper recycling
expert
Value chain resources mobilisation and integration
RTD/DEMO resources
mobilisation
and integration
HELIO (SME)Lamination
+MTM(SME)Plastic recycler
INNVENTIAPaper and coatings materials and
processes expertPilot plant processing
Testing
AVEP (OTH)Plastic industry
association
+
BANUS project- Partners’ roles
Case Study 1 Thermoformed PP/EVOH/PP tray
17
CASE STUDY 1: Thermoformed PP/EVOH/PP trays
Requirements Barrier propertiesMechanical properties: compression, impact resistance
Final application
Type of food Fatty liver (foie gras)
t-T contactconditions
Sterilization (80ºC- 60 min or 90 ºC-115 min)+Long termstorage at room T or below
Structures to be evaluated Assymetric: PP+tie / Recycled PP+tie / EVOH / PP+tie
Symmetric: PP+tie/ EVOH / Recycled PP+tie / EVOH / PP+tie
SELECTION OF SURROGATES
Substance PropertiesChloroform Volatile Polar
Toluene Volatile Non-PolarBenzophenone Non-Volatile Polar
Phenylcyclohexane Non-Volatile Non-PolarCopper(II) 2-ethylhexanoate Heavy metal
FDA Guidance forRecycled Plastic
EFSA Opinion on submission a dossier for safety evaluation of
recycling processes
CASE STUDY 1: Thermoformed PP/EVOH/PP trays
CONTAMINATION OF PP
- Virgin PP + Surrogate contaminants cocktail- 40ºC under continuous stirring- Several times of contact (since 10 days) until
maximum concentration was achieved- Rinse twice with water for elimination of
surface contamination- Drying- Quantification of contamination level
(chromatography)
CASE STUDY 1: Thermoformed PP/EVOH/PP trays
PILOT PLANT CO-EXTRUSION+THERMOFORMING
Asymmetric structure:
PP+tie / EVOH // Contaminated PP+tie / PP+tie
Symmetric structure:
PP+tie / EVOH // Contaminated PP+tie / EVOH / PP+tie
CASE STUDY 1: Thermoformed PP/EVOH/PP trays
MIGRATION STUDIES
Exposure- Filling- Conditions: 2h/100ºC + 10d/60ºC- Simulants:
- Simulant B (Acetic acid 3%) for Copper(II) 2-ethylhexanoate
- Vegetable oil simulant and alternative simulants (Iso-octane and Ethanol 95%) for Chloroform, toluene, benzophenone and phenylcyclohexane
Quantification of specific migrants- Chromatography techniques- ICP-AES
CASE STUDY 1: Thermoformed PP/EVOH/PP trays
MIGRATION STUDIES
Migration results in all cases are above 0.01 ppb (except for Cu)
IT CANNOT BE PROVED THAT ANY OF THE TESTED STRUCTURES ACTS AS FUNCTIONAL BARRIER
CASE STUDY 1: Thermoformed PP/EVOH/PP trays
RESULTS
- Specific substances have been selected to cover a wide range ofcontaminants in a worst-case scenario for challenge test
- Migration tests methods have been optimized to performa correct evaluation
- High levels of contaminants in the simulants after the exposure stage donot permit to prove that any of the structures testedacts as functional barrier
- Further research proposed to study diffusion of contaminants betweenlayers during co-extrusion and thermoforming process
CASE STUDY 1: Thermoformed PP/EVOH/PP trays
Case Study 2 Flexible multilayer multimaterial packaging
25
CASE STUDY 2: Flexible multilayer packaging
Requirements Barrier propertiesMechanical properties: delamination strength, CoF, tear resistance
Final application
Type of food Preparation for soups in powder form
t-T contactconditions
Long term storage at room T
Structures to be evaluated Coating / Recycled Paper / Metallized PET / PE
CONTAMINATION OF PAPER
- Spike 1: Mixture of chemicals
Maximum concentration was achieved and verified in used contamination conditions
- Spike 2: Recycled ‘dirty’ paper
- Spike 3: Mineral oils
- Spike 4: Boric acid and metal salt
CASE STUDY 2: Flexible multilayer packaging
PILOT-PLANT LAMINATION PROCESS
Recycled Paper / Metallized PET / PE
CASE STUDY 2: Flexible multilayer packaging
MIGRATION STUDIES
- Within a range from t=0 at 20oC to 10 days at 60oC with simulant A and E
- B, C, D2 and substitute simulants at the worst case scenario of 10 days 60oC
SPIKE 1
- Worst-case scenario- Below 0.01 mg/kg foodstuffs
for 9 substances
SPIKE 2
- Met PET/PE behaves as a functional barrier for a non-food contact approved recycled paper
CASE STUDY 2: Flexible multilayer packaging
MIGRATION STUDIES
- Within a range from t=0 at 20oC to 10 days at 60oC with simulant A and E
- B, C, D2 and substitute simulants at the worst case scenario of 10 days 60oC
SPIKE 3
- Met PET/PE behaves as a functional barrier for mineral oils
SPIKE 4
- Water soluble compounds are normally not migrating through the gas phase and are therefore not a problem for migration to dry food
CASE STUDY 2: Flexible multilayer packaging
RESULTS
- Exaggerated worst case conditions have been applied by means of4 different spiking procedures performed
- Migration tests methods have been optimized to performa correct evaluation
- Further research proposed in order to prevent set-off diffusion duringroll laminate storage by means of a barrier coating
CASE STUDY 2: Flexible multilayer packaging
- Met PET/PE could be considered as a functional barrier when laminatedto real recycled paper
Case Study 3 Coated paperboard packaging
32
CASE STUDY 3: Coated paperboard packaging
Requirements Mechanical properties; flexibility, resistance to abrasion
Final application
Type of food 1. Fast food (high fat content)2. Cereals
t-T contactconditions
1. Short term storage of hot foodstuffs2. Long term storage at room T
Structures to be evaluated Coating / Recycled Paperboard / Coating
SELECTION OF COATINGS
Dry coat weight
TAPPI 454 test (penetration
resistance to fats and oils)
SCREENING CRITERIA
CASE STUDY 3: Coated paperboard packaging
- Up to 120 different coatings wereselected for trials at laboratory level
- After screening 9 coatings subjectedfor verification performing migration test
MIGRATION STUDIES RESULTS
- 2 hours at 70oC and 10 days at 60oC
- Simulants B and E
SPIKE 1 SPIKE 2
SPIKE 3 SPIKE 4
CASE STUDY 3: Coated paperboard packaging
- Only one coating show lower migration values and could beconsidered as a functional barrier for mineral oils
BANUS project – General conclusions
• Considerable advance in the knowledge on methodologies ofcontaminating materials with representative surrogates (challenge test)
• Optimization of methods for migration evaluation of substances inselected packaging structures for each case study
• Co-extrusion and thermoforming are critical processes thatcan promote diffusion of contaminants between layers,affecting functional barrier behavior
• Paperboard coatings evaluated have not been able to act as a functionalbarrier to all selected contaminants
• Further work is needed in order to optimize barrier effectivenesson a commercial product
Thank you
Contact us:[email protected] + 34 96 136 60 40
www.linkedin.com/company/aimplasTwitter: @aimplas