Pitt researchers find faults in bio-polymers

Researchers in Pitt’s Civil and Environmental Engineering department published a study last… Researchers in Pitt’s Civil and Environmental Engineering department published a study last month suggesting that bio-polymer-based plastics might not be as “green” as their name would suggest.

The discovery, however, is not a setback for green industry and recycling methods, researchers said, and should be viewed as another step forward in the march toward developing a sustainable and environmentally friendly economy.

Kristen Ostermann — a graduate student in the Enviromental Engineering department who is familiar with the project — said the reason bio-plastics can be harmful involves the “un-green” practices employed in growing the various plants products used to produce them.

“These products are made with plants grown with pesticides and harmful fertilizers which are frequently used in farming today,” Ostermann said. “Unfortunately, the majority of bio-polymer products are produced under these circumstances.”

In the study, researchers claimed that although the biodegradability of bio-polymer based plastics makes them more eco-friendly than traditional plastics, the production of the bio-polymer can be even more detrimental to the environment than traditional slow-to-degrade plastics.

Bio-polymer products can be produced by biological systems or micro-organisms, plants and animals or chemically synthesized from biological starting materials like sugars, starch, natural fats or oils, according to Biopolymer.net.

To establish these claims, the research team examined 12 plastics. Seven were petroleum-based, five were bio-polymer-based and one was a hybrid.

Michaelangelo Tabone, a lead researcher of the experiments, said the research focused on comparing the environmental impact of producing bio-polymers against petroleum-based plastics.

The research did not cover the impact of the plastic products once they reach consumers’ hands or the impact of the products as post-consumer wastes, Tabone said.

During their research, the team looked at the plastics’ impact in 10 different potential areas — acidification, carcinogens, ecotoxicity, eutrophication, global warming, non-carcinogens, ozone depletion, respiratory effects, smog and fossil fuel depletion.

In order for a plastic product to be considered green, according to Biopolymer.net, it must be one or more of the following — biodegradable, made from renewable ingredients or have environmentally friendly processing.

According to the Pitt study, bio-polymer plastics lack environmentally friendly processing.

The products are currently used in disposable dining utensils, water bottles, plastic bags and numerous other products typically made from plastic.

Dr. John Stolz — the director for the Center for Environmental Research and Education at Duquesne — commented on the fact that researchers at Pitt were the first to publish such findings.

“For any given product, the life cycle is always considered, so this is certainly not the first time that the impacts of processing bio-polymers has been taken into account,” Stolz said, ”I wish they would do these comparisons for everything. And Shale drilling while they are at it.”

Despite the evidence against the environmental-friendliness of the bio-polymer processing methods, all researchers interviewed agreed that this should not be viewed as a setback to the green movement.

Stolz said these findings should not be received negatively by the public.

“So often do we, in the scientific community, find that our prepossessed beliefs have been false. These discoveries are good! We need to find a sustainable, biodegradable product, but we need a better way of processing,” he said.

The news of these findings, however, encouraged negative sentiments among Pitt students.

Rebecca Schroeder — a member of the Pittsburgh Student Environmental Coalition — found the discoveries to be disappointing.

“It makes me sad, of course. It shows that we, as an environmentally conscious community, need to find completely different alternatives — maybe we need to stop using plastic all together,” she said.