| Literature DB >> 32834763 |
Sungyup Jung1, Sangyoon Lee1, Xiaomin Dou2, Eilhann E Kwon1.
Abstract
It becomes common to wear a disposable face mask to protect from coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) amid this pandemic. However, massive generations of contaminated face mask cause environmental concerns because current disposal processes (i.e., incineration and reclamation) for them release toxic chemicals. The disposable mask is made of different compounds, making it hard to be recycled. In this regard, this work suggests an environmentally benign disposal process, simultaneously achieving the production of valuable fuels from the face mask. To this end, CO2-assisted thermo-chemical process was conducted. The first part of this work determined the major chemical constituents of a disposable mask: polypropylene, polyethylene, nylon, and Fe. In the second part, pyrolysis study was employed to produce syngas and C1-2 hydrocarbons (HCs) from the disposable mask. To enhance syngas and C1-2 HCs formations, multi-stage pyrolysis was used for more C-C and C-H bonds scissions of the disposable mask. Catalytic pyrolysis over Ni/SiO2 further expedited H2 and CH4 formations due to its capability for dehydrogenation. In the presence of CO2, catalytic pyrolysis additionally produced CO, while pyrolysis in N2 did not produce it. Therefore, the thermo-chemical conversion of disposable face mask and CO2 could be an environmentally benign way to remove COVID-19 plastic waste, generating value-added products.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; Carbon dioxide; Disposable plastic waste; Face mask; Hydrogen; Pyrolysis
Year: 2020 PMID: 32834763 PMCID: PMC7426216 DOI: 10.1016/j.cej.2020.126658
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Chem Eng J ISSN: 1385-8947 Impact factor: 13.273
Fig. 1A photograph of disposal face mask disassembled into different parts.
Fig. 2FT-IR spectra of different plastic parts of a disposable face mask: (a) filter layers 1, 3, and 4, (b) filter layer 2, and (c) ear strap with relevant reference peaks (red bars) of (a) PP [39], (b) PE [40], and (c) nylon-6 [41].
Chemical compositions of disposable face mask identified by FT-IR and ICP-OES.
| Parts | Chemical compositions | Weight percentage (wt.%) |
|---|---|---|
| Filter layers 1, 3, 4 | PP | 73.33 |
| Filter layer 2 | PE | 13.77 |
| Ear strap | Nylon | 8.27 |
| Nose frame | Metals | 4.63 (Fe: 4.58, Zn: 0.02, Ti: 0.01, Ca: 0.01, and Mn: 0.01) |
Fig. 3(a) Mass loss and DTG curves of face mask, PP, and, low density PE between 200 and 600 ˚C under the N2 environment, and (b) mass loss and DTG curves of face mask under the N2 and CO2 environments.
Fig. 4Gas evolution profiles from mask pyrolysis with one-stage setup under the N2/CO2 atmospheres.
Fig. 5GC-TOF/MS results of condensable HCs obtained from mask pyrolysis under the N2/CO2 atmospheres.
Peaks areas of chemical constituents obtained from condensable HCs under N2 and CO2 atmospheres.
| Peak Notation | Component | Retention Time | Molecular Weight | Area (CO2)× 10-6 | Area (N2)× 10-6 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C8 | 4-methylheptane | 5.222 | 114 | 1.09 | 1.45 |
| C9 | 2,4-Dimethyl-1-heptene | 6.517 | 126 | 18.54 | 38.19 |
| C12 | 2,4,6-trimethyl-1-nonene (meso form) | 9.804 | 168 | 7.29 | 15.04 |
| 2,4,6-trimethyl-1-nonene (racemic form) | 9.853 | 168 | 5.38 | 11.50 | |
| C15 | 2,4,6,8-tetramethyl-1-undecene (isotactic) | 12.180 | 210 | 47.54 | 58.80 |
| 2,4,6,8-tetramethyl-1-undecene (heterotactic) | 12.266 | 210 | 17.81 | 21.28 | |
| 2,4,6,8-tetramethyl-1-undecene (syndiotactic) | 12.353 | 210 | 39.56 | 49.43 | |
| C16 | 2,4,6,8,10-pentamethyl-1,10-undecadiene (isotactic) | 12.909 | 222 | 8.66 | 84.17 |
| C18 | 2,4,6,8,10-pentamethyl-1-tridecene (isotactic) | 14.391 | 252 | 18.19 | 22.73 |
| C19 | 2,4,6,8,10,12-hexamethyl-1,12-tridecadiene (isotactic) | 15.139 | 264 | 14.44 | 20.57 |
| C21 | 2,4,6,8,10,12-hexamethyl-1-pentadecene (isotactic) | 16.588 | 294 | 26.38 | 24.75 |
| C22 | 2,4,6,8,10,12,14-heptamethyl-1,14-pentadecadiene (isotactic) | 17.335 | 306 | 22.86 | 19.36 |
| C24 | 2,4,6,8,10,12,14-heptamethyl-1-heptadecene (isotactic) | 18.713 | 336 | 15.71 | 17.52 |
| C25 | 2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16-octamethyl-1,16-heptadecadiene (isotactic) | 19.429 | 348 | 26.93 | 19.38 |
| C28 | 2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18-nonamethyl-1,18-nonadecadiene (isotactic) | 21.378 | 390 | 22.35 | 21.34 |
| C31 | 2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18,20-decamethyl-1,20-henicosadiene (isotactic) | 23.174 | 432 | 24.45 | 27.49 |
| C34 | 2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18,20,22-undecamethyl-1,22-tricosadiene(isotactic) | 24.831 | 474 | 33.27 | 30.14 |
| C37 | 2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18,20,22,24-dodecamethyl-1,24-pentacosadiene (isotactic) | 26.504 | 516 | 32.95 | 34.64 |
| C40 | 2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18,20,22,24,26-tridecamethyl-1,26-heptacosadiene (isotactic) | 28.608 | 558 | 26.77 | 33.42 |
| C43 | 2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18,20,22,24,26,28-tetradecamethyl-1,28-nonacosadiene (isotactic) | 31.884 | 600 | 21.23 | 25.84 |
| C46 | 2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18,20,22,24,26,28,30-pentadecamethyl-1,30-untriacontadiene (isotactic) | 35.802 | 642 | 15.95 | 22.12 |
Fig. 6Gas evolution profiles from mask pyrolysis with two-stage setup under the N2/CO2 atmospheres.
Fig. 7Gas evolution profiles from mask pyrolysis with 5 wt% Ni/SiO2 catalyst under the N2/CO2 atmospheres.
Fig. 8Comparison of overall gas production from one-stage pyrolysis, two-stage pyrolysis, and catalytic pyrolysis (5 wt% Ni/SiO2) of the disposal face mask under the CO2 environment.