Article

Effect of decabromodiphenyl ether and antimony trioxide on controlled pyrolysis of high-impact polystyrene mixed with polyolefins.

Department of Applied Chemistry, Okayama University, 700-8530 Okayama, Japan.
Chemosphere (Impact Factor: 3.14). 08/2008; 72(7):1073-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2008.04.011
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The controlled pyrolysis of polyethylene/polypropylene/polystyrene mixed with brominated high-impact polystyrene containing decabromodiphenyl ether as a brominated flame-retardant with antimony trioxide as a synergist was performed. The effect of decabromodiphenyl ether and antimony trioxide on the formation of its congeners and their effect on distribution of pyrolysis products were investigated. The controlled pyrolysis significantly affected the decomposition behavior and the formation of products. Analysis with gas chromatograph with electron capture detector confirmed that the bromine content was rich in step 1 (oil 1) liquid products leaving less bromine content in the step 2 (oil 2) liquid products. In the presence of antimony containing samples, the major portion of bromine was observed in the form of antimony bromide and no flame-retardant species were found in oil 1. In the presence of synergist, the step 1 and step 2 oils contain both light and heavy compounds. In the absence of synergist, the heavy compounds in step 1 oil and light compounds in step 2 oils were observed. The presence of antimony bromide was confirmed in the step 1 oils but not in step 2 oils.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
67 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Plastics from waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) have been an important environmental problem because these plastics commonly contain toxic halogenated flame retardants which may cause serious environmental pollution, especially the formation of carcinogenic substances polybrominated dibenzo dioxins/furans (PBDD/Fs), during treat process of these plastics. Pyrolysis has been proposed as a viable processing route for recycling the organic compounds in WEEE plastics into fuels and chemical feedstock. However, dehalogenation procedures are also necessary during treat process, because the oils collected in single pyrolysis process may contain numerous halogenated organic compounds, which would detrimentally impact the reuse of these pyrolysis oils. Currently, dehalogenation has become a significant topic in recycling of WEEE plastics by pyrolysis. In order to fulfill the better resource utilization of the WEEE plastics, the compositions, characteristics and dehalogenation methods during the pyrolysis recycling process of WEEE plastics were reviewed in this paper. Dehalogenation and the decomposition or pyrolysis of WEEE plastics can be carried out simultaneously or successively. It could be 'dehalogenating prior to pyrolysing plastics', 'performing dehalogenation and pyrolysis at the same time' or 'pyrolysing plastics first then upgrading pyrolysis oils'. The first strategy essentially is the two-stage pyrolysis with the release of halogen hydrides at low pyrolysis temperature region which is separate from the decomposition of polymer matrixes, thus obtaining halogenated free oil products. The second strategy is the most common method. Zeolite or other type of catalyst can be used in the pyrolysis process for removing organohalogens. The third strategy separate pyrolysis and dehalogenation of WEEE plastics, which can, to some degree, avoid the problem of oil value decline due to the use of catalyst, but obviously, this strategy may increase the cost of whole recycling process.
    Waste Management 08/2012; · 2.49 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Pyrolysis of kitchen based vegetable waste (KVW) was studied in a designed packed bed reactor. The effect of process parameters like temperature, time and catalyst on bio-gas yield and its composition was studied. The total bio-gas yield was found to be maximum with non-catalysed operation (260ml/g) at 1073K (180min). Higher hydrogen (H(2)) yield with non-catalysed operation (32.68%) was observed at 1073K (180min) while with catalysed operation the requisite temperature (873K) and time (120min) reduced with both silica gel (33.34%) and sand (41.82%) thus, saving energy input. Methane (CH(4)) yield was found to be highest (4.44times than non-catalysed and 1.42 with silica gel) in presence of sand (71.485ml/g) at medium temperature (873K) and time (60min). The catalyst operation reduced the carbondioxide (CO(2)) share from 47.29% to 41.30% (silica gel catalysed) and 21.91% (sand catalysed) at 873K.
    Bioresource Technology 11/2012; 130C:502-509. · 4.75 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The thermal degradation of flame retardant containing high-impact polystyrene (HIPS-Br), one of the most commonly employed plastics in electric and electronic appliances, was examined by thermogravimetry coupled with mass spectroscopy (TG-MS) in order to understand the threat that is posed by the release of hazardous brominated compounds. The HIPS samples contained decabromodiphenylether (DPE) and decabromodibenzyl (DDB) as the flame retardants as well as Sb2O3 as the synergist. The largest number of brominated compounds was obtained in the presence of DPE and Sb2O3 and DDB without Sb2O3. From the degradation of DPE, brominated benzenes, phenols, diphenylethers, and dibenzofurans were identified, and from the degradation of DDB, brominated benzenes, dibenzyls, and phenanthrenes were formed. The interaction between the flame retardant and the polymer matrix resulted in α-bromoethylbenzene. The formation of brominated dibenzodioxins was not observed, probably, due to the low phenol concentration in the polymer melt. No other report has, to our knowledge, ever reported on the formation of brominated phenanthrenes from flame retardants. Because they share similar steric features, it may well be that brominated phenanthrenes are similar in their carcinogen and mutagen potential to dibenzofurans and dibenzodioxins. A plausible mechanism for the formation of the observed compounds is presented, and the role of the synergist is considered.
    Chemosphere 07/2011; 85(3):368-73. · 3.14 Impact Factor