The document discusses various types of bioplastics produced from biomass sources such as polysaccharides, proteins, and lipids. It provides information on the production processes and properties of starch-based, cellulose-based, chitin-based, gums-based, protein-based, and CNSL-based bioplastics. Global plastic production and waste statistics are presented. Reasons for developing bioplastics include sustainability and use of renewable resources. However, bioplastics still only account for 1% of total plastics production. Common applications of bioplastics include food packaging, food service items, and agricultural uses.

2. 370
million metric tons
Global Plastic Production
275
million metric tons
Commercial Plastic Waste
99.5
million metric tons
Residential Plastic Waste
8.1
million metric tons
Goes Into The Ocean
6,350- 245,000
metric tons
Estimated Mass of Plastic waste
Floating on the surface of the Ocean
Source: Science Advances, 2017; 3(7).

5. Starch-based
Cellulose-based
PLA-based

6. 1%
Bioplastics are still only
1% of the approximated 230 million tonnes
of plastic in use today.
Source: Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology, 2015, 3.

7. Reasons For Developing Bioplastic
REASONS
Sustainable Development

8. BioPlastics
Biomass Products From BiotechnologyFrom Microbial
Fermentation
Poly-
saccharides LipidsProteins
PLA
PHA
Starches
Cellulose
Chitin
Gums
Pectin
Zein
Gluten
Soy
Protein
Gelatin
Casein
Whey
Beeswax
Free Fatty
Acids
Source: International Journal of Research and Applied Natural Social Science, 2014; 2(8).

9. BIOMASS
PRODUCTS BASED

10. Plastics
From
Polysaccharide

11. Starch-based Plastic

12. The raw materials are mixed,
heated and converted into a
homogenous substance
A cooling water system ensures
stable temperature condition
At the end of the extruder, the
molten thermoplastic starch
discharges as a strand through nozzle
Production:

13. Properties
• Partially crystalline
• Higher density
• Low resistance to oil and
solvents
• Easy to process but
vulnerable to degradation
• Sensitive to moisture and
has high water vapour
permeability

14. Cellulose-based Plastics

15. Properties
• High transparency and
aesthetic appeal
• High impact and mechanical
strength
• Excellent machine-ability
• Good resistance to a variety
of chemicals
• Ability to be offered in an
unlimited range of colours

16. Chitin-based
Plastics

17. Properties
• Antibacterial and
antifungal activities
• Ability to absorb heavy
metal ions
• Water-retaining and
moisturizing properties
• High chemical reactivity
• Good film forming
properties

18. Alginate Or
Alginic Acid
Alginate Or
Alginic Acid
Enzyme
Action
Gums-based Plastics

19. Properties
• Decreased Brittleness
• Resistant to microwave
radiations
• Good barrier and
mechanical properties
• Resistant to mammalian
enzymes
• Can be used in Edible
Films

20. Plastics
From Polypeptide

21. CORN ZEIN
 Brittle
 Low water vapour permeability
 Excellent film-forming
property
WHEAT GLUTEN
 Homogeneous, transluscent,
mechanically strong
 Poor moisture barrier
 Excellent gas barrier

22. SOY PROTEIN
 Flexible, smooth, transparent
 Slight water resistance
 Excellent mechanical property
COLLAGEN/ GELATIN
 Flexible, transparent
 Moisture resistant
 Impermeable to Oxygen

23. CASEIN
 Excellent barrier property
 Neither fragile, nor tough
 Instantly dissolve in water
WHEY PROTEIN
 Flexible, slightly transparent,
colourless, odourless
 Moisture and gas resistant
 Prevent lipid, aroma and
flavour transfer

24. KERATIN
 Increased Flexibility
 High tensile strength
 High resistance to water
and tearing
 Unpleasant mouthfeel,
cannot be used as edible
coatings

26. CNSL-based
Plastics

27. Properties
• Heat resistance and good
thermoplasticity
• High durability
• Good barrier and
mechanical properties
• Reduces water vapour
permeability

29. 1. Corn Harvesting
3. Dehydration
2. Fermentation
4. Lactide
Polymerization
Sugarcane
Molasses
E. coli
Lactic Acid Lactide
Polylactic Acid
(PLA)

30. Properties
• Transparent, high
clarity and gloss
• High rigidity and
stiffness
• Softening point - 60 C
• Flavour and aroma
barrier
• Oil and grease resistance

32. Plant Crops Plant oil
Extraction
By-Product:
Triacylglycerol
Glycerol
TransesterificationFermentor
Intracellular
PHA
Inclusion
Extraction,
Purification
BioPlastic
PHA

33. Properties
• Transparent, high
clarity
• Wide temperature range
• Lower crystallinity
• Higher melt viscosity
• Tendency to creep and
shrink
• UV resistant

35. Packaging
Consumer Goods
Food
Service
Agriculture and
Horticulture
Electronics
Others
Global Use of Bioplastics
as in 2016
Source : Cogent Food & Agriculture, 2015; 1(1).
Total:
4.16 million
tonnes in %

36. FOOD PACKAGING
Edible Coatings
Bottles
Wrapping Films
Containers / Trays

37. FOOD SERVICE
Disposable Glasses
Plates and Bowls
Take-away Containers
Disposable Cutlery

38. AGRICULTURE AND HORTICULTURE

39. H
H
H
H
C
C
C
C
BIOMASS

40. 1
2
3
4
5
Reduced CO Emmission
Multiple End-of-life Options
Reduce Carbon Footprint
Reduced Waste Generation
Cheaper Alternative
2

41. Not Decomposable
With Other Plastics
Use Agricultural Land
Difficult to Recycle
Made from GM Foods

42. Global
Demand
900,000
Metric Tons
By 2020
Global
Production
1.5 Million
Tons
By 2020
Production
Capacity
2.3
Million
Tons
By 2020
Source: Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology, 2015, 3.

43. Bioplastic is a reality and
practical truth. Our
willingness and
improvement in
technology will
give it a wider
success

44. Aim: To produce bioplastic from banana peels as a substitute for the conventional plastic and to prove that
the starch in the banana peel could be used in the production of the bioplastic.
Methodology: Methodology consist of extraction of starch from banana peel, production of developing
the biodegradable plastic, biodegradation test of the bioplastic and elongation experiment of
biodegradable plastic.
Result: The plastic was formed after several experiment was made. The plastic sample produced may not
be achieving the ideal characteristic of a plastic but it is good in biodegradability as it can be composted in
just 6 days. As the second test that is tensile strength test proved that the bioplastic can be stretched upto
6.5cm with maximum strength as petroleum plastic. In the soil burial degradation test, the intensity of
degradation was tested for all three types of film and the biodegradable film degraded at a rapid rate
compared to control film while the synthetic plastic did not degrade at all.
Conclusion: Based on all the testing that was carried out, the biodegradable film from banana peel is the
best and ideal overall compared to the control and synthetic plastic. Hence, it can be used in the industry
for various application such as moulding and packaging, at the same time rescuing the environment from
potential harm by synthetic plastics.
Yaradoddi, J., et al., "Biodegradable plastic production from banana peel and its
sustainable use for green applications.", International Journal Of Pharmaceutical
Research And Allied Sciences, 2016; 5(4): 56-65.

45. Adhikari, D., et al. "Degradation of bioplastics in soil and their degradation effects on
environmental microorganisms.", Journal of Agricultural Chemistry and Environment,
2016; 5(1): 23-29.
Aim: To analyze the degradation of three kinds of bioplastics and their effects on microbial biomass and
microbial diversity in soil environment
Methodology: To investigate the effect of bacterial biomass in soil on biodegradability of bioplastics,
PBS-starch, PBS and PLA was buried in three kinds of soils differing in bacterial biomass (7.5 × 106, 7.5 ×
107, and 7.5 × 108 cells/g soil)
Result: The degradation rate of bioplastic in soil was closely related to the main components in the
bioplastics. Poly butylene succinate-starch (PBS-starch) and poly butylene succinate (PBS) were degraded
by 1% to 7% after 28 days in a soil with an initial bacterial biomass of 1.4 × 109 cells/g-soil, however poly
lactic acid (PLA) was not degraded in the soil after 28 days. When the powdered-bioplastics were
examined for the degradation in the soil, PBS-starch also showed the highest degradability (24.4%
degradation after 28 days).
Conclusion: The rate of bioplastic degradation was enhanced accompanied with an increase of the
bacterial biomass in soil. The analysis indicated that the bacterial diversity in the soil was not affected by
the degradation of bioplastics. Moreover, the degradation of bioplastic did not affect the nitrogen
circulation activity in the soil.

46. Aim: To determine the effect that processing and further thermal treatments exert on different
thermo-mechanical properties of the protein based bioplastics
Methodology: Methodology consist of Oscillatory shear, modulated differential scanning calorimetry,
dynamic mechanical thermal analysis, thermo-gravimetric analysis and water absorption tests were
carried out to study the effect of processing on the physical characteristics of the protein bioplastics.
Result: The protein-based bioplastics studied in this work present a high capacity for thermosetting
modification because of protein denaturation that may favour the development of a wide variety of
materials. The use of albumen or rice protein allows the reduction in both protein concentration and
thermosetting temperature, similar to those of synthetic polymers such as LDPE and HDPE. The
hygroscopic characteristics of protein-glycerol bioplastics may lead to a decrease in the values of the linear
viscoelasticity functions.
Conclusion: Both processing methods (casting and thermo-mechanical) have demonstrated to be
interesting potential procedures to obtain a bioplastic. Moreover, the casting method seems to provide
biomaterials with higher thermosetting potentials. However, the simple mechanical mixing of protein and
plasticizer makes easier and faster bioplastic manufacture.
Jerez, Abel, et al., "Protein-based bioplastics: effect of thermo-mechanical processing.",
Rheological Acta, 2007; 46(5): 711-720.

47. Aim: To investigate the characteristics of bioplastic that produce from a rice straw cellulose and to predict the
potential utilization based on their characteristics.
Methodology: Materials used in this study are rice straw, hydrochloride acid, sulphuric acid, sodium hydroxide ,
acetic acid, glycerol, sodium hypochlorite, and chitosan. All of the reagents is used without further purification.
The production of bioplastic has been performed using phase inversion methods with a ratio of chitosan and
cellulose pulp were 3:10, 4:10, and 5:10.
Result: The results showed that the bioplastics have different characteristics (water absorption, density, and the
mechanical properties include tensile strength, elongation at break, and modulus of elasticity) depend on the
ratio of chitosan and cellulose pulp. Higher chitosan will produce a denser bioplastic. Chitosan will interact with
cellulose by filling into the cavity between cellulose. The denser bioplastic has a smaller value of the percentage of
water absorption. So, in this case, bioplastic with ratio chitosan and pulp 5:10 was the densest bioplastic with the
smallest water absorption . Bioplastic 4:10 has the highest % elongation at break. Bioplastic 4:10 has the highest
modulus of elasticity compare to the others. The same reason with other mechanical properties, modulus of
elasticity is also affected by interaction between bioplastic material.
Conclusion: The utilization of this bioplastic can be customized according to their characteristics. This is a
special characteristic that can develop the application of bioplastic or combine with conventional plastic to make
a better biodegradable plastic.
Agustin, M. B., et al., "Bioplastic based on cellulose from rice straw.", Journal of Reinforced
Plastics and Composites, 2014; 33(24): 2205-2213.

48. Aim: To produce utilizing a cosmopolitan aquatic weed water hyacinth as a potential substrate for the production
of PHA using Pseudomonas aeruginosa as the fermenting organism.
Methodology: Acid hydrolysis using HCl (1%) was used for breaking down complex sugars in the water hyacinth
hydrolysate to easily fermentable reducing sugars. Sodium Hypochlorite digestion was employed for cell lyses and
subsequent release of the intracellular PHA content from Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Preliminary confirmation of
the recovered product was done using Thin Layer Chromatography and Crotonic Acid Assay.
Result: Extraction of PHA from the fermentation media using chloroform extraction method produced a net
yield of 65.51 % on 72 hours of incubation. Pseudomonas aeruginosa culture stained with lipophilic stain Sudan
black when viewed under microscope exhibited dark intracellular granules in pink coloured cells. The extracted
PHA granules were dissolved in minimum amount of Benzene: Ethyl acetate mixture and loaded on to silica gel
TLC plates. Upon exposure to iodine vapours yellowish brown precipitates were formed in TLC. This is similar to
the results observed by previous investigators. The crotonic acid assay for quantification of PHA recovered from
fermentation broth revealed a PHA composition of 97μg/mL and 113μg/mL for Modified nutrient broth and
Water hyacinth medium respectively.
Conclusion: The results obtained in the present investigation confirmed the product to be PHA and is in
complete agreement with the results obtained by previous investigators.
Radhika, D., and A. G. Murugesan, "Bioproduction, statistical optimization and characterization of
microbial plastic (poly 3-hydroxy butyrate) employing various hydrolysates of water hyacinth
(Eichhornia crassipes) as sole carbon source.", Bioresource technology, 2012; 121: 83-92.

49. Journal Reference:
1. Adhikari, D., et al. "Degradation of bioplastics in soil and their degradation effects on
environmental microorganisms.", Journal of Agricultural Chemistry and Environment, 2016;
5(1): 23-29.
2. Agustin, M. B., et al., "Bioplastic based on cellulose from rice straw.", Journal of Reinforced
Plastics and Composites, 2014; 33(24): 2205-2213.
3. Bioplastic from Chicken Feather Waste International Journal of Pharmaceutical Science, 2014;
27(2): 2014-2023.
4. Chen, Y. J., "Bioplastics and their role in achieving global sustainability.", Journal of Chemical
and Pharmaceutical Research, 2014; 6(1): 226-231.
5. Domenek, S., et al., "Biodegradability of wheat gluten based bioplastics.", Chemosphere, 2004;
54(4): 551-559.
6. Fathanah, U., M. R. Lubis, and R. Moulana, "Biopolymer From Starch And Chitosan As
Bioplastic Material For Food Packaging.", Journal of Chemical and Pharmaceutical Research,
2015; 5(1): 2015-2020.
7. Geyer, R., J. R. Jambeck, and K. L. Law, "Production, use, and fate of all plastics ever
made.", Science Advances, 2017; 3(7): 700-732.

50. 8. Gill, M.. "Bioplastic: A better alternative to plastics.", International Journal of Research and
Applied Natural Social Science, 2014; 2(8): 115-120.
9. Jabeen, N., I. Majid, and G. Ahmad Nayik. "Bioplastics and food packaging: A review.", Cogent
Food & Agriculture, 2015; 1(1): 111- 119.
10. Jerez, A., et al, "Rheology and processing of gluten based bioplastics.", Biochemical Engineering
Journal, 2005; 26(2): 131-138.
11. Jerez, Abel, et al., "Protein-based bioplastics: effect of thermo-mechanical processing.",
Rheological Acta, 2007; 46(5): 711-720.
12. Jeyasubramanian, K., and R. Balachander, "Starch bioplastic film as an alternative food-packaging
material.", Journal of Achievements in Materials and Manufacturing Engineering, 2016; 75(2): 78-
84.
13. Kale, G., et al., "Compostability of bioplastic packaging materials: an overview.", Macromolecular
Bioscience, 2007; 7(3): 255-277.
14. Karamanlioglu, M., R. Preziosi, and G. D. Robson. "Abiotic and biotic environmental degradation
of the bioplastic polymer poly (lactic acid): A review.", Polymer Degradation and Stability, 2017:
200-219.
15. Keshavarz, T., and I. Roy, "Polyhydroxyalkanoates: bioplastics with a green agenda.", Current
opinion in microbiology, 2010; 13(3): 321-326.

51. 15. Korawit C., "Bioplastic Industry from Agricultural Waste in Thailand,", Journal of Advanced
Agricultural Technologies, 2016; 3(4):310-313.
16. Kulkarni, S. J., "Food Waste Utilization: An Insight into Research and Studies.", International
Journal of Ethics in Engineering and Management Education, 2016; 3(8): 1-4.
17. Kumar, Y., et al., "Bio-Plastics: A Perfect Tool for Eco-Friendly Food Packaging: A Review.",
Journal of Food Product Development and Packaging, 2014; 1: 01-06.
18. Lackner, M., “Bioplastics.”, Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology, 2015, 3: 1–41.
19. Lagaron, J. M., and A. Lopez-Rubio., "Nanotechnology for bioplastics: opportunities, challenges
and strategies.", Trends in food science & technology, 2011, 22(11): 611-617.
20. Luengo, J. M., et al., "Bioplastics from microorganisms.", Current opinion in microbiology, 2003;
6(3): 251-260.
21. Patel, H., S. Seshadri, and J. R. Parvathi., "Edible Bioplastic with Natural pH Indicators.",
International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences, 2017; 6(7): 1569-1572.
22. Pezzella, C., et al., "Production Of Bioplastic From Waste Oils By Recombinant Escherichia coli:
A Pit-Stop In Waste Frying Oil To Bio-Diesel Conversion Race.", Environmental Engineering &
Management Journal, 2016; 15(9): 375-383.
23. Pohare, M. B., S. A. Bhor, and P. K. Patil., "Sugarcane for Economical Bioplastic Production.",
International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering, 2017: 124-130.

52. 24. Radhika, D., and A. G. Murugesan, "Bioproduction, statistical optimization and characterization
of microbial plastic (poly 3-hydroxy butyrate) employing various hydrolysates of water hyacinth
(Eichhornia crassipes) as sole carbon source.", Bioresource technology, 2012; 121: 83-92.
25. Rahmatiah A. F., M. Sujuthi, and K. C. Liew., "Properties of Bioplastic Sheets Made from
Different Types of Starch Incorporated With Recycled Newspaper Pulp.", Brazilian Journal of
Microbiology, 2016; 3(1): 451-461.
26. Rajendran, N., et al., "Seaweeds can be a new source for bioplastics.", Journal of Pharmacy
Research, 2012; 5(3): 1476-1479.
27. Razzaq, H. A., et al., "Barley β-glucan-protein based bioplastic film with enhanced
physicochemical properties for packaging.", Food Hydrocolloids, 2016; 58: 276-283.
28. Reddy, R. L., V. S. Reddy, and G. A. Gupta., "Study of bio-plastics as green & sustainable
alternative to plastics.", International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced
Engineering, 2013; 5: 294-305.
29. Ryder, K., et al., "The potential use of dairy by-products for the production of non-food
biomaterials.", Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology, 2017: 100-150.
30. Siracusa, V., et al., "Biodegradable polymers for food packaging: a review.", Trends in Food
Science & Technology, 2008; 19(12): 634-643.
31. Soroudi, A., and I. Jakubowicz., "Recycling of bioplastics, their blends and biocomposites: A
review.", European Polymer Journal, 2013; 49(10): 2839-2858.

53. 32. Ullah, A., et al., "Bioplastics from feather quill.", Biomacromolecules, 2011; 12(10): 3826-3832.
33. Xie, F., et al., “Thermoplastic Starch.”, Journal of Renewable Materials, 2014; 4(4): 95–106.
34. Yaradoddi, J., et al., "Biodegradable plastic production from banana peel and its sustainable use
for green applications.", International Journal Of Pharmaceutical Research And Allied Sciences,
2016; 5(4): 56-65.
35. Yeh, C. H., F. K. Lücke, and J. Janssen., "Bioplastics: Acceptable for the Packaging of Organic
Food? A Policy Analysis.", Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development,
2016; 6(1): 95-105.
36. Yu, P. H., et al, "Conversion of food industrial wastes into bioplastics.", Applied biochemistry
and biotechnology, 1998; 70(1): 603-614.
37. Yu, P. H., H. Chua, and P. A. Huang, "Conversion of food industrial wastes into bioplastics with
municipal activated sludge.", Macromolecular Symposia, 1999; 148(1): 200-218.
38. Zahari, M. A., et al., "Case study for a palm biomass biorefinery utilizing renewable non-food
sugars from oil palm frond for the production of poly (3-hydroxybutyrate) bioplastic.", Journal
of Cleaner Production, 2015; 87: 284-290.

54. Book Reference:
1. Ashter, S. A., “Types of Biodegradable Polymers.”, Introduction to Bioplastics Engineering,
Elsevier/Morgan Kaufmann, 2016, 81–133.
2. Kabasci, S., Bio-Based Plastics: Materials and Applications. Edited by Christian Stevens, Wiley,
Chichester, 2014.
3. NIIR Board, “Plastic From Potato Waste.”, Complete Book on Biodegradable Plastics and
Polymers: Recent Development, Properties, Analysis, Materials & Processes, Asia Pacific
Business, 2006, 263–300.
4. Pilla, S., “Biobased Materials In Food Packaging Application.”, Handbook of Bioplastics and
Biocomposites Engineering Applications, John Wiley & Sons, 2016, 121–157.
5. Stevens, E. S., “Reemergence of Bioplastics.”, Green Plastics: an Introduction to the New Science
of Biodegradable Plastics, Princeton University Press, 2002, 104–132.

55. Webliography:
1. http://docs.europeanbioplastics.org/2016/publications/fs/EUBP_fs_what_are_bioplastics.pdfht
tp://www.plastice.org /fileadmin/files/Future_of_Bioplastics.pdf
2. http://stanford.edu/~dsull/Making_Bioplastics.pdf
3. http://www.ensc-lille.fr/actu/GCI/paternostre.pdf
4. http://www.plasticsindustry.org/sites/plastics.dev/files/2016PMWBioplasticsIA.pdf
5. http://www.plasticsindustry.org/sites/plastics.dev/files/Bioplastics%20Simplified_0.pdf
6. https://mediathek.fnr.de/media/downloadable/files/samples/b/r/brosch.biokunststoffe-web-
v01_1.pdf
7. https://www.acs.org/content/dam/acsorg/education/resources/highschool/chemmatters/video
s/chemmatters-april2010-bioplastics.pdf

56. THANK
YOU

57. ANY
QUESTIONS