Biyolojik ve Kimyasal Oksijen İhtiyacı Düşük, Çevre Dostu Sıfır Atık Kozmetikler

Abstract

Kozmetikler; vücuda girdikten sonra metabolize olarak ter, idrar veya gaita ile yeniden doğaya karışabilir; bu nedenle bu atıkların klasik yöntemlerle bertarafı her zaman mümkün değildir. Ürünlerin ulaştığı arıtma tesislerinde biyolojik arıtılabilirlik kapasitesini yorumlamak ve arıtımın ne ölçüde etkin olduğunu değerlendirmek için bir biyoanaliz yöntemi olan biyokimyasal oksijen ihtiyacı (BOİ) kullanılmaktadır. BOİ, biyolojik olarak kolayca parçalanabilen organik bileşiklerin miktarını yansıtan ve su kalitesinin değerlendirilmesinde yaygın kullanılan bir göstergedir; pratikte genellikle mg O2/L olarak ifade edilir. Atıksu arıtımı sırasında metabolize olmayan bileşiklerin giderilememesi ve kirleticilerin özellikle hava, su ve toprak üzerindeki etkileri, uzun vadede canlı yaşamını ve doğal kaynakları ciddi biçimde tehdit edebilir. Bu çalışmanın amacı; kozmetik ürünlerdeki kimyasal maddelerin olası zararlarını azaltmak, ambalaj ve içerik kaynaklı çevre kirliliğini önlemek ve çevresel döngüler yoluyla tekrar canlılara geri dönüşten doğan sorunları en aza indirmektir. Bu çalışmada söz konusu riskler, kozmetik ürün kullanımından sonra değil; doğal içerikli ve sıfır atık yaklaşımına uygun ürünlerin geliştirilmesi sürecinde, kullanım öncesi in silico modellemeler ve in vitro doğrulamalarla önleyici biçimde ele alınacaktır. Sıfır atık yaklaşımının esas alınmasıyla verimlilik ve performans artarken, israfın önlenmesi sayesinde maliyetler azalmakta ve çevresel riskler düşmektedir. Elde edilecek sonuçların, kimyasal risklerle ilişkili farklı formülasyonların çevresel sürdürülebilirlik üzerindeki etkilerini (ör. karbon ayak izi üzerindeki olası değişimler) aydınlatması ve sıfır atık kozmetik çalışmalarında yeni yöntemlerin geliştirilmesine katkı sağlaması beklenmektedir.

Keywords

• Sıfır Atık
• Biyolojik Oksijen İhtiyacı
• Kimyasal Oksijen İhtiyacı
• Kozmetikler
• İn-vitro/in-silico test
• Sürdürülebilirlik

Supporting Institution

Bu araştırma, Türkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştırma Kurumu (TÜBİTAK) tarafından BİDEB 2209-A programı kapsamında, proje numarası 1919B012214919 ile desteklenmiştir.

Project Number

1919B012214919

Ethical Statement

Bu çalışma insan veya hayvan denekleri içermemektedir; bu nedenle etik onay gerekmemektedir.

Thanks

Yazarlar, TÜBİTAK'a mali destekleri için teşekkür ederler.

Environmentally Friendly Zero Waste Cosmetics with Low Biological and Chemical Oxygen Demand

Abstract

Cosmetics; once they enter the body, they can be metabolised and re-enter the environment through sweat, urine or faeces; therefore, disposal of these waste products using conventional methods is not always possible. Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), a bioanalytical method, is used to interpret the biodegradability capacity of products at treatment plants and to assess the effectiveness of treatment. BOD is an indicator that reflects the amount of organically easily degradable compounds and is widely used in assessing water quality; in practice, it is usually expressed in mg O2/L. The inability to remove non-metabolised compounds during wastewater treatment and the effects of pollutants, particularly on air, water, and soil, can seriously threaten living organisms and natural resources in the long term. The aim of this study is to reduce the potential harm of chemicals in cosmetic products, prevent environmental pollution from packaging and contents, and minimise problems arising from their return to living organisms through environmental cycles. In this study, the aforementioned risks will be addressed preventively through in silico modelling and in vitro validation prior to use, during the development process of natural-based and zero-waste products, rather than after the use of cosmetic products. By adopting a zero-waste approach, efficiency and performance increase, while costs decrease and environmental risks are reduced through the prevention of waste. The results obtained are expected to shed light on the effects of different formulations associated with chemical risks on environmental sustainability (e.g., possible changes in carbon footprint) and contribute to the development of new methods in zero-waste cosmetics research.

Keywords

• Zero waste
• Biological Oxygen Demand
• Chemical Oxygen demand
• Cosmetics
• In-vitro/in-silico testing
• Sustainability

Supporting Institution

This research was supported by the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Türkiye (TÜBİTAK) under the BİDEB 2209-A program, Grant number 1919B012214919.

Project Number

1919B012214919

Ethical Statement

This study does not involve any human or animal subjects; therefore, ethical approval was not required.

Thanks

The authors gratefully acknowledge TÜBİTAK for their financial support.

References

1. Aslan I. Plants and cosmetics. Fitomed. 2007;3:49-51.
2. Draelos Z. Cosmetics and skin care products: a historical perspective. Dermatol Clin. 2000;18:557-559.
3. Çomoğlu T. Kozmetikler. Marmara Pharm J. 2012;16:1-8.
4. Blanco-Davila F. Beauty and the body: the origins of cosmetics. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2000;105(3):1196-1204.
5. Johnson D. Appearance and the elderly. In: Graham JA, Kligman AM, editors. The Psychology of Cosmetic Treatment. New York (NY): Praeger; 1985. p. 152-158.
6. Kligman AM, Graham JA. Cosmetic make-over in elderly women. In: Morganti P, Montagna W, editors. A New Look at Old Skin: A Challenge to Cosmetology. Rome: International Ediemme; 1986. p. 197-201.
7. Dion D, Berscheild E, Walster E. What is beautiful is good. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1972;24:285-290.
8. Kurt AA, Aslan I, Duman G. Next-generation natural baby barrier cream formulations: physicochemical analysis and safety assessment. J Cosmet Sci. 2021;72(2).

9. Aslan İ, Çelebi LT, Bursalıoğlu EO, Çakıcı B, Aydin MA, Ibrahim B, et al. Novel microbiome friendly purifying oil cleanser formulation with oil-soluble postbiotics. J Immunol Clin Microbiol. 2024;10(1):1-2.
10. Morganti P, Morganti G, Gagliardini A, Lohani A. From cosmetics to innovative cosmeceuticals—non-woven tissues as new biodegradable carriers. Cosmetics. 2021;8(3):65. https://doi.org/10.3390/cosmetics8030065
11. Aslan I, Çelebi L. Postbiotics cosmetic formulation: in vitro efficacy studies on a microbiome friendly antiperspirant. J Res Pharm. 2023;27:2095-2105. https://doi.org/10.29228/jrp.488
12. Martins AM, Marto JM. A sustainable life cycle for cosmetics: from design and development to post-use phase. Sustain Chem Pharm. 2023;35:101178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scp.2023.101178
13. Ebele AJ, Abdallah MA-E, Harrad S. Pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs) in the freshwater aquatic environment. Emerg Contam. 2017;3(1):1-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emcon.2016.12.004
14. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Dissolved oxygen. CADDIS [Internet]. 2025 Oct 3.
15. Bardak S, Altinisik Y, Bursalioglu EO. Investigation of the effect of social distance on frequency and voltage fluctuations on identical Ocimum basilicum L. plants indoors and outdoors for 24 hours using a mixed model. Pak J Bot. 2023;55(6):2253-2262.
16. Panico A, Serio F, Bagordo F, Grassi T, Idolo A, De Giorgi M. Skin safety and health prevention: an overview of chemicals in cosmetic routs. J Prev Med Yong. 2019;60:57-59.
17. Steinsann A, Nematollah N, Rimachi B, Goodman N, Konev SD. Pandemic products and volatile emissions. Air Qual Atmos Health. 2021;14:47-53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11869-020-00912-9
18. Bashir SM, Kimiko S, Mak CW, Fang JKH, Goncalves D. Personal care and cosmetic products as a potential source of environmental contamination by microplastics in a densely populated Asian city. Front Mar Sci. 2021;8:604. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.173893
19. Meaza I, Toyoda SH, Wise JP. Microplastics in sea, turtles, marine mammals and humans: a one environmental health perspective. Front Environ Sci. 2021;8:575614. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2020.575614
20. Hermabessiere L, Dehaut A, Pauz-Pont I, Lacroix C, Jezequel J, Soudant P, et al. Occurrence and effects of plastic additives on marine environment and organisms. Chemosphere. 2017;182:781-793.
21. Morganti P. Chitin nanofibrils and their derivatives as cosmeceuticals. In: Kim S-K, editor. Chitin, Chitosan, Oligosaccharides and Their Derivatives. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press; 2011. p. 531-541.
22. Morganti P, Tischenko G. Circular economy for a healthy environment. In: Morganti P, Coltelli MB, editors. An Introduction to the Circular Economy. Economic Issues, Problems and Perspectives. New York (NY): Nova Science Publishers; 2021. p. 97-112.
23. Morganti P, Morganti G, Fusco A, Baroni A. Waste recycling for wound care and cosmetics smart bioeconomics: chitin and lignin. In: Morganti P, Coltelli MB, editors. Introduction to the Circular Economy. Economic Issues, Problems and Perspectives. New York (NY): Nova Science Publishers; 2021. p. 341-364.
24. Morganti P, Danti S, Coltelli MB. Chitin and lignin to produce biocompatible tissues. Res Clin Dermatol. 2018;1:5-11.
25. Mellou F, Varvaresou A, Papageorgiou S. Renewable sources: applications in personal care formulations. Int J Cos Sci. 2019;6:517-525. https://doi.org/10.1111/ics.12564
26. Fermentino G, Asaduzzan M, Scampicchio MM. Current technologies and new insights for the recovery of high valuable compounds from fruit by-products. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2016;58:386-404.
27. Vågsholm I, Arzoomand NS, Boqvist S. Food security, safety and sustainability-getting the trade-offs right. Front Sustain Food Syst. 2020;4:16.
28. Panesar PS, Marwaha SS, Panesar R. Value addition of agro-industrial wastes and residues. In: Panesar PS, Marwaha SS, editors. Biotechnology in Agriculture and Food Processing. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press; 2014. p. 557-605.
29. Gupta J, Kumari M, Mishra A, Swati A, Akram M, Thakur IS. Agro-forestry waste management-a review. Chemosphere. 2022;287:132321.
30. Murugan K, Ramasamy K. Environmental concerns and sustainable development. In: Chandrasekaran M, editor. Valorization of Food Processing By-Products. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press; 2016. p. 739-756.
31. Laufenberg G, Kunz B, Nystroem M. Transforming of vegetable waste into value added products: (A) the upgrading concept; (B) practical implementations. Bioresour Technol. 2003;87:167-198.
32. Santos PV, Marques NSS, Maia PCSV, Barbosa de Lima MA, De Oliveira Franci L, Campos-Takaki GM. Seafood waste as attractive source of chitin and chitosan production and their applications. Int J Mol Sci. 2020;21:4290.
33. Monsalvo VM, Lopez J, Mohedano AF, Rodriguez JJ. Treatment of cosmetic wastewater by a full-scale membrane bioreactor (MBR). Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2014;21(22):12662-12670. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-014-3208-x
34. Eaton AD, Clesceri LS, Greenberg AE. Standard methods: for the examination of water and wastewater. 2014.
35. Sawyer CN, McCarty PL, Parkin GF, Toröz İ. Biyokimyasal oksijen ihtiyacı. In: Toröz İ, editor. Chemistry for Environmental Engineering and Science. Ankara: Nobel; 2013. p. 604-624.
36. Friha I, Karray F, Feki F, Jlaiel L, Sayadi S. Treatment of cosmetic industry wastewater by submerged membrane bioreactor with consideration of microbial community dynamics. Int Biodeterior Biodegradation. 2014;88:125-133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibiod.2013.12.015
37. Petrovic M, Barcelo D. Fate and removal of surfactants and related compounds in wastewater and sludges. In: Barcelo D, editor. The Handbook of Environmental Chemistry. Vol. 5. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag; 2004. p. 1-28.
38. Stackelberg PE, Furlong ET, Meyer MT, Zaugg SD, Henderson AK, Reissman DB. Persistence of pharmaceutical compounds and other organic wastewater contaminants in a conventional drinking-water-treatment plant. Sci Total Environ. 2004;329:99-113.
39. Aboulhassan MA, Souabi S, Yaacoubi A, Baudu M. Removal of surfactant from industrial wastewaters by coagulation flocculation process. Int J Environ Sci Technol. 2006;3(4):327-332.
40. Bautista P, Mohedano AF, Gilarranz MA, Casas JA, Rodriguez JJ. Application of Fenton oxidation to cosmetic wastewaters treatment. J Hazard Mater. 2007;143(1-2):128-134.
41. Morganti P, Gao X, Vukovic N, Gagliardini A, Lohani A, Morganti G. Food loss and food waste for green cosmetics and medical devices for a cleaner planet. Cosmetics. 2022;9(1):19. https://doi.org/10.3390/cosmetics9010019
42. Meng X, Wu J, Kang J, Gao J, Liu R, Gao Y, et al. Comparison of the reduction of chemical oxygen demand in wastewater from mineral processing using the coagulation–flocculation, adsorption and Fenton processes. Miner Eng. 2018;128:275-283.
43. Amigun AT, Basheeru AK, Amigun BO, Ayinla SO. Physico-chemical properties and heavy metals assessment of wastewater discharged from selected cosmetic industries in Nigeria. CaJoST. 2021;3(1):55-61.
44. Guerranti C, Martellini T, Perra G, Scopetani C, Cincinelli A. Microplastics in cosmetics: environmental issues and needs for global bans. Environ Toxicol Pharmacol. 2019;68:75-79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.etap.2019.03.007
45. Giustra M, Sinesi G, Spena F, De Santes B, Morelli L, Barbieri L, et al. Microplastics in cosmetics: open questions and sustainable opportunities. ChemSusChem. 2024;17(22):e202401065. https://doi.org/10.1002/cssc.202401065
46. You X, Zhou Y, Sun R, Pei X, Zhou H, Deng D, et al. Biodegradable microbeads for personal care products and cosmetics. Green Chem. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1039/D4GC05852F
47. Vdovchenko A, Resmini M. Mapping microplastics in humans: analysis of polymer types, and shapes in food and drinking water—a systematic review. Int J Mol Sci. 2024;25(13):7074. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms25137074
48. Devi SS, Jayan S, Kumar AB. Microplastic assessment in aquaculture feeds: analyzing polymer variability across commercial fishfeeds from three continents. J Hazard Mater. 2024;479:135621.
49. Thakur S, Chandra A, Kumar V, Bharti S. Environmental pollutants: endocrine disruptors/pesticides/reactive dyes and inorganic toxic compounds metals, radionuclides, and metalloids and their impact on the ecosystem. In: Biotechnology for Environmental Sustainability. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore; 2025. p. 55-100.
50. Ayyadurai P, Ragavendran C. Green nanotechnologies for removing cosmetic pollutants: approach towards preserving and protecting aquatic health. Nanotechnol Environ Eng. 2025;10(2):21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41204-025-00416-w
51. Gong W, Bai L, Liang H. Membrane-based technologies for removing emerging contaminants in urban water systems: limitations, successes, and future improvements. Desalination. 2024;590:117974. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2024.117974
52. Sawyer CN, McCarty PL, Parkin GF, Toröz İ. Kimyasal oksijen ihtiyacı. In: Toröz İ, editor. Chemistry for Environmental Engineering and Science. Ankara: Nobel; 2013. p. 625-6330.
53. Vrabič-Brodnjak U, Jestratijević I. The future of baby cosmetics packaging and sustainable development: a look at sustainable materials and packaging innovations–a systematic review. Sustain Dev. 2024;32(3):2208-2222. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2775
54. Thomassen G, Peeters E, Van Hee N, Noëth E, Du Bois E, Boone L, et al. The environmental impacts of reusable rice packaging: an extended comparative life cycle assessment. Sustain Prod Consum. 2024;45:333-347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2024.01.014
55. Park YW, Hong P. Beauty reimagined: navigating the cosmetic industry's digital transformation. In: Cosmetics Marketing Strategy in the Era of the Digital Ecosystem: Revolutionizing Beauty in the New Market Frontier. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore; 2024. p. 47-74.
56. Parveen N, Naik SCS, Vanapalli KR, Sharma HB. Bioplastic packaging in circular economy: a systems-based policy approach for multi-sectoral challenges. Sci Total Environ. 2024;945:173893. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.173893
57. Karaduman A. Kozmetikler ve kadın. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Dermatoloji Anabilim Dalı. 2003.
58. Juliano C, Magrini GA. Cosmetic ingredients as emerging pollutants of environmental and health concern. A mini-review. Cosmetics. 2017;4(2):11. https://doi.org/10.3390/cosmetics4020011
59. Alabi OA, Ologbonjaye KI, Awosolu O, Alalade OE. Public and environmental health effects of plastic wastes disposal: a review. J Toxicol Risk Assess. 2019;5(021):1-13.
60. Priyadarshanee M, Mahto U, Das S. Mechanism of toxicity and adverse health effects of environmental pollutants. In: Microbial Biodegradation and Bioremediation. Elsevier; 2022. p. 33-53.
61. Bursalıoğlu EO. The effects of fertilization on the green tea elements. Environ Res Technol. 2019;2(2):98-102.
62. Daughton, C.G.; Ternes, T.A. Pharmaceuticals and personal care products in the environment: agents of subtle change? Environmental Health Perspectives, 1999.
63. Vargas, C. et al. Characteristics and treatment alternatives for cosmetic industry wastewater. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 2022.
64. Ying, G.G. Fate, behavior and effects of surfactants and their degradation products in the environment. Environment International, 2006.
65. Juliano, C.; Magrini, G. Cosmetic ingredients as emerging pollutants in aquatic environments. Environmental Sciences Europe, 2017.
66. Banat, I.M. et al. Microbial biosurfactants: production, applications and environmental impact. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 2014.