MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3162575831 · doi:10.3390/ma14102586

Pyrolytic Conversion of Plastic Waste to Value-Added Products and Fuels: A Review

2021· review· en· W3162575831 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermochemical Biomass Conversion Processes
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPyrolysisWaste managementDiesel fuelPetrochemicalRaw materialMaterials scienceHeat of combustionFluid catalytic crackingEnvironmental scienceFlash pointMunicipal solid wastePyrolysis oilCrackingCombustionOrganic chemistryChemistryComposite materialEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plastic production has been rapidly growing across the world and, at the end of their use, many of the plastic products become waste disposed of in landfills or dispersed, causing serious environmental and health issues. From a sustainability point of view, the conversion of plastic waste to fuels or, better yet, to individual monomers, leads to a much greener waste management compared to landfill disposal. In this paper, we systematically review the potential of pyrolysis as an effective thermochemical conversion method for the valorization of plastic waste. Different pyrolysis types, along with the influence of operating conditions, e.g., catalyst types, temperature, vapor residence time, and plastic waste types, on yields, quality, and applications of the cracking plastic products are discussed. The quality of pyrolysis plastic oil, before and after upgrading, is compared to conventional diesel fuel. Plastic oil yields as high as 95 wt.% can be achieved through slow pyrolysis. Plastic oil has a heating value approximately equivalent to that of diesel fuel, i.e., 45 MJ/kg, no sulfur, a very low water and ash content, and an almost neutral pH, making it a promising alternative to conventional petroleum-based fuels. This oil, as-is or after minor modifications, can be readily used in conventional diesel engines. Fast pyrolysis mainly produces wax rather than oil. However, in the presence of a suitable catalyst, waxy products further crack into oil. Wax is an intermediate feedstock and can be used in fluid catalytic cracking (FCC) units to produce fuel or other valuable petrochemical products. Flash pyrolysis of plastic waste, performed at high temperatures, i.e., near 1000 °C, and with very short vapor residence times, i.e., less than 250 ms, can recover up to 50 wt.% ethylene monomers from polyethylene waste. Alternatively, pyrolytic conversion of plastic waste to olefins can be performed in two stages, with the conversion of plastic waste to plastic oil, followed by thermal cracking of oil to monomers in a second stage. The conversion of plastic waste to carbon nanotubes, representing a higher-value product than fuel, is also discussed in detail. The results indicate that up to 25 wt.% of waste plastic can be converted into carbon nanotubes.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.705
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it