EXPERIMENTAL STUDY OF DEGRADATION OF BIO-BASED PACKAGING, PAPER AND CONVENTIONAL PLASTIC BAGS IN SOIL

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32782/pcsd-2025-2-13

Keywords:

toxicity, conventional disposal plastic bags, biodegradable plastics, paper bags, soil medium, destruction, linear regression

Abstract

The increased use of plastic products and the shift to single-use plastics have led to an excessive accumulation of plastic waste in the environment. The durability of plastic is estimated at hundreds to thousands of years. Over the past two decades, bioplastics have been proposed as an alternative to traditional synthetic polymers, but issues related to their degradation remain poorly studied. The purpose of this study is to compare the degradation rates of paper and conventional disposable plastic bags, as well as bags labeled “biodegradable”, in soil. Research methodology. The research was done in the city of Bohodukhiv (Kharkiv Oblast) from early July till late November 2024. The site for soil sampling was selected in a garden with spontaneous herbaceous vegetation on the territory of a private household. The soil was transferred to 15 transparent plastic containers of the same size and shape. Five of the containers were filled with fragments of a regular disposable plastic bag, five with biodegradable plastic bags, three with fragments of a paper bag, and the remaining two containers were left with bare soil (control). All containers were kept in the same conditions. The analysis was carried out according to the characteristics of the loss of physical integrity of the bags on the 36th, 85th, and 141st day after the start of the experiment. The surface area of patches that underwent destruction was measured using the ImagJ software. Novelty. A linear regression model of the process of bio-based packaging degradation was built. Conclusions. Biodegradable bags begin to decompose faster than conventional disposable plastic bags, with the difference statistically proven. This difference is evident at least after a month from the start of the experiment. In almost three months of the experiment, the level of bio-based packaging degradation reached 10 %, and they did not undergo complete degradation during this time as expected prior to the experiment. After almost six months of experimentation (i.e., twice as long as the manufacturer claimed), the bio-based packaging reached only 18 % degradation. According to the modeling results, it is estimated that it will take about 2 years for the fragments of biodegradable bags to completely break down, provided the environmental conditions are stable.

References

Бараннік В. О. Методичні вказівки до виконання курсової роботи «Розробка лінійної регресійної моделі впливу скиду стічних вод підприємства на якість річкової води в контрольному створі» з дисципліни «Моделювання і прогнозування стану довкілля». Харків : Харківська національна академія міського господарства, 2007. 20 с.

Гадаєва Ю. С., Самойленко Н. М. Дослідження біорозкладання одноразового пакування. Екологічні науки. 2024. № 3(54). С. 139–143.

Івах Н. А., Рибалка І. О., Мельнікова О. Г., Вергелес Ю. І., Леневич О. І. Біорозкладані матеріали для пакетів як альтернатива звичайним пластиковим пакетам. Science in the modern world: innovations and challenges: III міжнар. науково-практ. конф., м. Торонто, 21 лист. 2024 р. 2024. С. 270–275.

Atiwesh G., Mikhael A., Parrish C.C., Banoub J., Le T-A.T. (2021). Environmental impact of bioplastic use: A review. Heliyon. 2021. Vol. 7. № 9. e07918.

Barnes D. K. A., Galgani F., Thompson R. C., Barlaz M. Accumulation and fragmentation of plastic debris in global environments. Philosophical Transactions of The Royal Society B. Biological Sciences. 2008. Vol. 364, P. 1985–1998.

Bergami E., Rota E., Caruso T., Birarda G., Vaccari L., Corsi I. Plastics everywhere: first evidence of polystyrene fragments inside the common Antarctic collembolan Cryptopygus antarcticus. Biology Letters. 2020. Vol. 16. № 6. 0093.

Bilo F., Pandini S., Sartore L., Depero L.E., Garguilo G., Bonassi A., Federici S., Bontempi E. A sustainable bioplastic obtained from rice straw. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2018. Vol. 200. P. 357–368.

Gilbert M. Chapter 1 – Plastics Materials: Introduction and Historical Development. Brydson’s Plastic Materials. 8th ed. / Gilbert M., ed. 2017. P. 1–18.

Lackner M. Bioplastics. Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology. 2015.

Mac Berthouex P., Brown L.C. Statistics for Environmental Engineers. 2nd ed. Boca Raton, 2002. 456 p.

Nielsen T. D., Hasselbalch J., Holmberg K., Stripple J. Politics and the plastic crisis: A review throughout the plastic life cycle. WIREs Energy and Environment. 2019. Vol. 9. № 1. e360.

Pilapitiya P. G. C. N. T., Ratnayake A. S. The world of plastic waste: A review. Cleaner Materials. 2024. Vol. 11. 100220.

Porta R. Anthropocene, the plastic age and future perspectives. FEBS OpenBio. 2021. Vol. 11. № 4. Р. 948–953.

Sarasa J., Gracia J.M., Javierre C. Study of the biodisintegration of a bioplastic material waste. Bioresource Technology. 2009. Vol. 100. № 15. Р. 3764–3768.

Thakur S., Chaudhary J., Sharma B., Verma A., Tamulevicius S., Thakur V. K. Sustainability of bioplastics: Opportunities and challenges. Current Opinion in Green and Sustainable Chemistry. 2018. Vol. 13. P. 68–75.

Thompson R. C., Moore C. J., vom Saal F. S., Swan S. H. Plastics, the environment and human health: current consensus and future trends. Philosophical Transactions of The Royal Society B. Biological Sciences. 2009. Vol. 364. P. 2153–2166.

Thushari G. G. N., Senevirathna J. D. M. Plastic pollution in the marine environment. Heliyon. 2020. Vol. 6. № 8. e04709.

Yan H., Cordier M., Uehara T. Future Projections of Global Plastic Pollution: Scenario Analyses and Policy Implications. Sustainability. 2024. Vol. 16. № 2. 643.

Published

2025-06-26

How to Cite

RYBALKA І., IVAKH Н., MELNIKOVA О., LENEVYCH О., & VERGELES Ю. (2025). EXPERIMENTAL STUDY OF DEGRADATION OF BIO-BASED PACKAGING, PAPER AND CONVENTIONAL PLASTIC BAGS IN SOIL. Problems of Chemistry and Sustainable Development, (2), 102–111. https://doi.org/10.32782/pcsd-2025-2-13