4.4 Article

Safety assessment of the process INCOM RESOURCES RECOVERY (TIANJIN), based on the Buhler technology, used to recycle post-consumer PET into food contact materials

期刊

EFSA JOURNAL
卷 21, 期 11, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2023.8403

关键词

Buhler; food contact materials; INCOM RESOURCES RECOVERY(TIANJIN) CO.,LTD; plastic; poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET); recycling process; safety assessment

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this translation, the EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes and Processing Aids (CEP) assessed the safety of the recycling process INCOM RESOURCES RECOVERY (TIANJIN) that uses the Buhler technology. The panel concluded that the information provided is insufficient to demonstrate that this recycling process can reduce potential unknown contamination to a level that does not pose a risk to human health.
The EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes and Processing Aids (CEP) assessed the safety of the recycling process INCOM RESOURCES RECOVERY (TIANJIN) (EU register number RECYC312), which uses the Buhler technology. The input material consists of hot washed and dried poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET) flakes originating from collected post-consumer PET containers, e.g. bottles, including no more than 5% PET from non-food consumer applications. Washed and dried flakes are extruded into pellets, which are dried and crystallised in a reactor and then preheated and further treated in a solid-state polymerisation (SSP) reactor. The recycled pellets are intended to be used at up to 100% for the manufacture of materials and articles for contact with all types of foodstuffs, including drinking water, for long-term storage at room temperature or below, with or without hotfill. The Panel concluded that the information submitted to EFSA is inadequate to demonstrate that this recycling process is able to reduce potential unknown contamination of the input PET flakes to a concentration that does not pose a risk to human health.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据