Journal
SCIENCE ADVANCES
Volume 7, Issue 15, Pages -Publisher
AMER ASSOC ADVANCEMENT SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.abf0187
Keywords
-
Categories
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Mechanical recycling of polymers downgrades their usability, while chemical recycling offers a more sustainable way to recover chemical feedstocks. The cost and carbon footprint of chemically recycled PDKs are significantly lower than producing virgin resin, providing a strong incentive for recovering and recycling future polymer waste.
Mechanical recycling of polymers downgrades them such that they are unusable after a few cycles. Alternatively, chemical recycling to monomer offers a means to recover the embodied chemical feedstocks for remanufacturing. However, only a limited number of commodity polymers may be chemically recycled, and the processes remain resource intensive. We use systems analysis to quantify the costs and life-cycle carbon footprints of virgin and chemically recycled polydiketoenamines (PDKs), next-generation polymers that depolymerize under ambient conditions in strong acid. The cost of producing virgin PDK resin using unoptimized processes is similar to 30-fold higher than recycling them, and the cost of recycled PDK resin ($1.5 kg(-1)) is on par with PET and HDPE, and below that of polyurethanes. Virgin resin production is carbon intensive (86 kg CO(2)e kg(-1)), while chemical recycling emits only 2 kg CO(2)e kg(-1). This cost and emissions disparity provides a strong incentive to recover and recycle future polymer waste.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available