Rethinking sustainability: A research on starch based bioplastic

Abstract

Based on the need to rely on sustainable feedstock, depend less on fossil resources and decrease carbon emissions, biomaterials and bioplastics as substitutes of conventional petroleum based plastics have been the focus of many material scientists, architects and industrial product designers. Therefore, this article is an experimentation on the possibilities of starch based bioplastic production. The focus of the article is to understand the limits of this new material and figure out whether starch based bioplastic material can be used in architecture, both as a facade material and an interior space furnishing.

 

Based on Steven’s bioplastic formula, starch based bioplastic is produced handmade as a surface and cubic specimens with different developed variations in this article. Different starch types, such as potato, corn, wheat and tapioca are tested and mixed with pellets known as local agricultural waste, natural fibers and aggregates. Within the research bioplastic produced from potato starch is formed and molded firstly as a sheet and secondly as a three-dimensional material and tested for vulnerability and durability. The research expands to understanding how organic and inorganic interventions can be made in order to increase the life span of the material, make it durable and resistant to humid and weather conditions. It is observed that tapioca starch gives the finest, smoothest, flexible and strengthful biopolymer among all.

 

Issues on sustainability, designing and sensing the unpredictable and searching for “new” materials for a greener and sustainable future are the main core of bioplastic production. Regarding the negative carbon footprint and long-term environmental effects of fossil-based plastics through landfill and incineration, the search for such a material brings forth a deeper material experience along with a further collaboration of architects and engineering disciplines.  Through this production, we need to figure out deeply the nature of new starch based materials in architecture, which are eco-friendly, cheaper and more strengthful materials compared to conventional synthesized polymers.

Keywords

• Agricultural waste,biocomposite,construction material,material design,starch based bioplastic

References

1. European Bioplastics (a), 2016. http://en.european-bioplastics.org/bioplastics/ (Date of Consult: 10.01.2016).
2. Stevens, E. S. (2002). Green Plastics: An Introduction to the New Science of Biodegradable Plastics, Princeton University Press. Princeton and Oxford.
3. Frech, C. B. (2002). Green Plastics: An Introduction to the New Science of Biodegradable Plastics, Book & Media Reviews, Journal of Chemical Education, Volume: 79, Issue: 9.
4. Gupta, K. M. (2011). Starch Based Composites for Packaging Applications. Handbook of Bioplastics and Biocomposites Engineering Applications, S. Pilla, ed., Scrivener Pub., Hoboken, NJ, Wiley, Salem, Mass., 189-262.
5. Pilla, S. ed. (2011). Handbook of Bioplastics and Biocomposites Engineering Applications, Scrivener Pub., Hoboken, NJ, Wiley; Salem, Mass.
6. Arboskin, (2016). https://www.trendhunter.com/trends/bioplastic (Date of Consult: 12.12.2017).
7. Bioplastic Morphologies, (2016). http://www.merged-vertices.com/portfolio/bioplastic-morphologies-2/ (Date of Consult: 10.01.2016).
8. Arboskin pavillion, Stuttgart, (2016). http://designplaygrounds.com/deviants/arboskin-bioplastic-facade-research-itke/ (Date of Consult: 10.01.2016).

9. Özdamar, E. G., and Bal, A. (2016). A “Material Experience” in the Age of Consumption: Bioplarch. Future Architecture Platform. http://futurearchitectureplatform.org/news/21/a-material-experience-in-the-age-of-consumption- bioplarch/ (Date of Consult: 10.11.2017).
10. Özdamar, E. G., and Bal, A. (2017). Investigating Starch Based Bioplastic as A Construction Material. ICBEST, International Conference On Building Envelope Systems and Technologies, Interdisciplinary Perspectives for Future Building Envelopes (Tavil, A., Çelik, O.C. eds. Istanbul, Istanbul Technical University, 564-579.
11. Karana, E., et al. (2014). Materials Experience: fundamentals of materials and design, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford.
12. Muneer, F. (2014). Bioplastics from natural polymers. Introductory paper at the Faculty of Landscape Architecture, Horticulture and Crop Production Sciences 2014:4, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Alnarp. https://pub.epsilon.slu.se/11915/1/muneer_f_20150220.pdf (Date of Consult: 10.12.2017).
13. Green plastics, (2011). http://green-plastics.net/posts/69/qaa-why-water-and-vinegar/(Date of Consult: 20.10.2016).
14. http://www.neptutherm.com/phpwcms/index.php?home (Date of Consult: 10.11.2016).
15. https://materia.nl/material/neptutherm/ (Date of Consult: 10.11.2016).
16. Warren, F.J., et al. (2016). Infrared spectroscopy as a tool to characterize starch ordered structure-a joint FTIR-ATR, NMR, XRD and DSC study, Carbohydrate Polymers, Volume: 139, 35-42. doi: 10.1016/j.carbpol.2015.11.066.
17. Bootklad, M., et al. (2016). Novel biocomposites based on wheat gluten and rubber wood sawdust, J. Appl. Polym. Sci. Volume: 133, Issue:30, 43705, doi: 10.1002/app.43705.
18. van Soest, J.J.G., and Knooren, N. (1997). “Influence of glycerol and water content on the structure and properties of extruded starch plastic sheets during aging, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., Volume: 64, Issue: 7, 1411–1422. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4628(19970516)64:7<1411::AID-APP21>3.0.CO;2-Y.
19. Morán, J.I., et al. (2013). Bio-nanocomposites based on derivatized potato starch and cellulose, preparation, and characterization, J. Mater. Sci., Volume: 48, Issue:20, 7196-7203. doi: 10.1007/s10853-013-7536-x.
20. García, N.L., et al. (2009). Physico-mechanical properties of biodegradable starch nanocomposites, Macromol. Mater. Eng. Volume: 294, Isuue: 3, 169-177. doi: 10.1002/mame.200800271.
21. González-Gutiérrez, et al. (2011). Effect of processing on the viscoelastic, tensile and optical properties of albumen/starch-based bioplastics, Carbohydrate Polymers, Volume: 84, Issue: 1, 308-315. doi: 10.1016/j.carbpol.2010.11.040.
22. Gironi, F., and Piemonte, V. (2011). Bioplastics and Petroleum-based Plastics: Strengths and Weaknesses, Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization and Environmental Effects, Volume: 33, Issue: 21, 1949-1959. doi: 10.1080/15567030903436830.
23. Nawroth, J.C., et al. (2012). A tissue-engineered jellyfish with biomimetic propulsion, Nature Biotechnology, Volume: 30, Issue: 8, 792-797. doi:10.1038/nbt.2269.
24. Girotti, A., et al. (2011). Elastin-like recombinamers: Biosynthetic strategies and biotechnological applications, Biotechnology Journal, Volume: 6, Issue: 10, 1174-1186. doi: 10.1002/biot.201100116.
25. Barron, A. E., and Zuckermann, R.N. (1999). Bioinspired polymeric materials: in between proteins and plastics, Current Opinion in Chemical Biology Volume: 3, Issue: 6, 681-687, doi: 10.1016/S1367-5931(99)00026-5.
26. European Bioplastics (b), (2015). http://en.european-bioplastics.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/publications/EUBP_Considerations_Circular_Economy_Proposal_2015.pdf (Date of Consult: 10.01.2016).