See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/224133522

New alternative energy from solid waste plastics

Conference Paper · January 2010

DOI: 10.1109/ICDRET.2009.5454177 · Source: IEEE Xplore

CITATIONS READS

4 1,402

9 authors, including:

Moinuddin Sarker, PhD, MCIC, FICER, MInstP, MRSC. Mohammad Mamunor Rashid
Waste Technologies LLC World Waste to Energy, LLC
130 PUBLICATIONS   506 CITATIONS    102 PUBLICATIONS   238 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Waste Plastic to Fuel View project

ICSD 2017 : 5th International Conference on Sustainable Development, 6 - 7 September 2017 Rome, Italy View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Moinuddin Sarker, PhD, MCIC, FICER, MInstP, MRSC. on 08 March 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 New Alternative Energy from Solid Waste Plastics
Moinuddin Sarker, ASM Din Mohammed, Mohammad M. Rashid, Nicholas Schiralli, Ashiquz Zaman, Aminul
Kabir, Sadikur Rahman, Kamrul Islam, and Mohammad Molla
Natural State Research, Inc., 37 Brown House Road (2nd Floor), Stamford, CT-06902, USA
E-mail: msarker@naturalstateresearch.com
Abstract : Generation of electrical energy from imported
fossil fuels is subject to the price fluctuations of the global
marketplace and, thus, constitutes a major expense in its
distribution to the end users. Even with the current low
prices for fuel, residents and businesses in the United States
pay a significant price for their utilities, if not higher than
many other countries in the world. Emissions from the
evaporation and combustion of these traditional fossil fuels
contribute to a range of environmental and health problems,
causing poor air quality, and emitting greenhouse gases that
contribute to global warming. Alternative fuel created from
domestic sources has been proposed as a solution to these
problems, and many alternative fuels are being developed
based on solar, wind, biomass, hydropower, fuel cell,
geothermal, etc. Natural State Research, Inc. (NSR) has
developed a new alternative hydrocarbon fuel which is
produced from abundant waste plastic materials. The
existing NSR process efficiently converts waste plastics into
a reliable liquid fuel. NSR has demonstrated the feasibility
of producing this fuel at the laboratory scale and a pilot
plant is being built to scale-up this process. Preliminary
tests in the NSR laboratory show comparable electricity
generation from NSR fuel when compared to that from the
commercially available gasoline with octane number 87
(gasoline-87).
1. Introduction
Alternative fuels developed from a reliable domestic
source have the potential to overcome many economic
and environmental problems, by providing a steady, low
cost source of fuel, by providing local employment in
energy production, and by providing fuel types that are
cleaner. A great deal of research and development in
alternative fuels has focused on biomass, for example,
creating cellulosic ethanol from non-edible biomass
sources. However, biomass energy requires large amount
of arable land to be devoted to the cultivation of plant
sources. Similar limitations are applicable for the
initiatives in solar and wind energy.
Alternative fuels from domestic sources have emerged
as a solution to power generation, and many alternative
fuels are being developed based on solar, wind, biomass,
hydropower, fuel cell, geothermal, etc. About 7% of the
total energy consumed in the United States, which is
equivalent to 7 quadrillion BTU, comes from alternative/
renewable sources. The percentile contributions from
current major alternative/ renewable sources are as
follows: (a) biomass 53%, (b) hydropower 36%, (c)
geothermal 5%, (d) wind 5%, and (e) solar 1% [1]. Non-
biomass sectors of the alternative energy sources are
known not to emit any direct greenhouse gases. Natural
State Research, Inc. (NSR) has developed a new
alternative liquid hydrocarbon fuel which is produced
from abundant solid waste plastics. The NSR fuel
contains hydrocarbons in the range C4-C27 as compared
with commercial gasoline with an octane rating of 87
(gasoline-87) in the range C4-C11.
There are strong benefits in deriving fuels from waste
plastic materials. Waste plastics are abundant and their
disposal creates large problems for the environment.
Plastics do not biodegrade in landfills, are not easily
recycled, and degrade in quality during the recycling
process. Instead of biodegradation, plastics waste goes
through photo-degradation and turns into plastic dusts
which can enter in the food chain and can cause complex
health issues to earth habitants [2]. In contrast, chemical
processes such as pyrolysis and de-polymerization can be
used to safely convert thermoplastics into hydrocarbon
fuels that can be used for transportation [3-5]. The United
States produces 30 million tons of waste plastics per year,
and since one ton of plastic can be converted into 420
gallons of liquid fuel per the process described in this
manuscript, there is a potential to generate 12.6 billion
gallons of fuel nationwide annually from waste plastics.
This could replace up to 9% of fossil-fuel consumption in
the US. Additionally, effective recycling of one ton of
plastics waste can save estimated 7.4 cubic yards of
landfill space.
According to a recent study, Americans alone
generate more than 10 million tons of plastics waste
annually but only ~5% of solid plastics waste is recycled
[2]. Only ~70% of the US solid municipal waste ends up
in landfills and the rest are dumped into the earth’s oceans
causing additional environmental issues. NSR’s fuel
technology addresses two of the most difficult problems
of the 21st century: energy dependence on fossil fuels and
environmental pollution. NSR’s technology will lead to a
sustainable economic development model by creating an
entire alternative energy industry – creating jobs and
ensuring long term prosperity while keeping the natural
balance of the planet earth.
The NSR process of converting waste plastic
materials to liquid hydrocarbon fuel has been successfully
demonstrated in a laboratory scale [6-7]. The advantages
of NSR’s technique are its simplicity, which would allow
the municipalities, oil companies and/or the airlines to
construct remote and/or local fuel production plants with
appropriate fractionation from the general NSR fuel
produced from the abundant waste plastics; its ability to
handle many different plastic types; and its ability to
produce a variety of fuel types for different transportation
needs, e.g., gasoline, diesel, or aviation engines.
2. Process Description
The process developed by Natural State Research, Inc.
(NSR) involves heating the plastic to form liquid slurry
(thermal liquefaction in the range 370-420 °C), partial
cooling of the slurry, distilling the slurry in the presence
of a cracking catalyst, condensing the distillate to recover
the liquid hydrocarbon fuel, and routing the remaining
slurry residue back into fresh slurry to undergo another
catalyzed distillation and condensation process. No
additional chemicals are used in the thermal liquefaction
phase, and a commercially available cracking catalyst is
used in the distillation and condensation phases. The fuel
is filtered using a commercial fuel filter (RCI fuel
purifier) that operates using coalescence and centrifugal
force.
1. Ground Plastics
7
2. Boiling Flask
3. Heat Mantle
5 4. Variac (Temperature Controller )
2 5. Condenser Unit
6. Water Inlet
7. Water Outlet
was collected in the 2nd collection flask which is termed
as the ‘NSR double condensed fuel 2nd collection’ or
‘NSR-2’. Gas chromatography (GC) and differential
scanning calorimetry (DSC) were used to analyze these
samples in comparison with commercial gasoline-87,
aviation fuel, and diesel.
The total process time for the production of the NSR
double condensed fuels is cut by a factor of 2 by placing
an intermediate collection flask (for single condensed
NSR fuel) in series in the process setup. This new
process setup is defined as the NSR modified process (not
shown). The final collection flask is used to collect
double distilled 1st and 2nd collections by simple change
of collection flasks after a pre-determined period.
Additional process modifications are in progress for
further cost saving in NSR fuel production. These
modifications will allow fractional distillations by
molecular weight and carbon chain length.
Generation of electricity from NSR fuel and
commercial gasoline-87 was tested under similar
conditions. For this experiment, a Jiang Dong gasoline
generator was used with 1 liter of NSR Fuel and 1 liter of
commercial gasoline-87 separately. The electrical energy
output from the generator was monitored with an EML
2020 energy monitoring logger. Three electrical
appliances (225 watt fan, 65 watt laptop, and 1500 watt
heater) were connected in order to record the amount of
electricity that was consumed by the appliances.

1
8. Collection Flask

9. NSR Fuel
3. Fuel Characterization
10
6 10. Lighter Gas Escape Outlet
Tests have been performed to investigate the composition
8
of the produced fuel. Gas chromatograms (GC) of five
different fuels have provided the differences in carbon
9
3 chain length: (a) NSR double condensed fuel 1st
4 collection (NSR-1), (b) NSR double condensed fuel 2nd
collection (NSR-2), (c) gasoline-87, (d) aviation fuel, and
(e) diesel [4-5]. The NSR fuel contains additional
Fig. 1 Schematic diagram of the production of waste plastics hydrocarbon groups (C4-C27) when compared with
to liquid fuel using the NSR direct process
commercial gasoline with an octane rating of 87 (C4-C9).
GC tests have shown peak intensity distribution
Small-scale conversion tests have been performed
throughout the range of hydrocarbon groups C4-C27,
with the simplified direct process shown in Figure 1
with retention time ranging from 2 min to 27 min. The
using various types of waste plastics: polyethylene
major difference between NSR-1 and NSR-2 fuels is that
terephthalate (PET, code 1), high density polyethylene
NSR-2 fuel contains heavier hydrocarbon compounds
(HDPE, code 2), vinyl/polyvinyl chloride (PVC, code 3),
than those in NSR-1 fuel. Also a characteristic difference
low density polyethylene (LDPE, code 4), polypropylene
in densities between the two fractions is noticed; the
(PP, code 5), polystyrene (PS, code 6), and other types
recorded average densities are 0.74 g/ml and 0.80 g/ml for
(code 7). These plastic types were investigated singly and
NSR-1 and NSR-2 fuels, respectively, which supports the
in combination with other plastic types. In the laboratory
differences observed in GC tests. GC tests for
scale tests, the weight of a single batch of input plastic for
commercial fuels show narrow range of hydrocarbon
the fuel production process ranges from 300 gm to 3 kg.
groups: gasoline-87 contains C4-C11; aviation fuel
The plastics are collected, optionally sorted, cleaned of
contains C9-C19; diesel contains C9-C27. Table 1 shows
contaminants, and cut into small pieces prior to the
comparisons of physical properties of NSR double
thermal liquefaction. It should be noted here that NSR
condensed fuels and those of the listed commercial fuels.
process does not exclude the use of random mixtures of
The data for the NSR fuels were obtained from tests
different plastic types; however, conversion processes
performed by Intertek, New Jersey, an external service
with PET and PVC require further optimization.
provider. The data for the commercial fuels were
NSR filtered fuel (1st distillation) went through the
obtained from open literature [8-10].
second distillation. The early 40% of the of the distillate
(2nd distillation) was collected in the 1st collection flask
which is termed as the ‘NSR double condensed fuel 1st
collection’ or ‘NSR-1’ and the remaining and final 60%
Table 1. Comparison of physical properties between energy content of the NSR fuels especially NSR-2 fuel
NSR fuels and selected commercial fuels. (140.65 MJ/gal) is comparable to commercially available
Fuel Boiling Point* Freezing Cloud Density Color / fuels such as gasoline-87 (131.88 MJ/gal), jet fuel (142.43
(°C) Point (°C) point (°C) (g/ml) Appearance
MJ/gal), and diesel (146.33 MJ/gal). Based on these
NSR-1 41.5 - 222.1 -50 -24 0.74 Pass – clear and
bright
comparison data, both NSR fuels show overlap with jet
NSR-2 171.8 - 329.9 N/A -12 0.80 Pass – clear and fuel carbon content range. It should be noted here that the
bright sulfur content of NSR fuels is at a minimal level (4.7 –
Gasoline 68.7 - 204.0 -72.7 N/A 0.71 - 0.75 Pass – clear and
bright 6.2 mg/kg) when compared to commercial gasoline (150
Jet Fuel N/A -47 N/A 0.79 - 0.84 Clear straw and mg/kg) and commercial diesel (50 mg/kg). Preliminary
bright
Diesel 215.5 - 10.0 (Gel - 5.0 0.85 Clear greenish and
tests indicate that chemicals such as benzene, methanol,
Point) bright ethanol, oxygen are almost non-existent in NSR fuels
Keys:
NSR-1 : NSR double condensed 1st collection fuel
(below the detection limit; not shown in table). With
NSR-2 : NSR double condensed 2nd collection fuel further fractionation, tailor-made suitable fuels for
*Range shows initial and final boiling points different commercial applications can be generated.
N/A : Not available
Further tests are in progress to achieve this general target.
Commercial gasoline-87 chromatogram have shown
Table 2. Comparison of chemical properties between
an even peak intensity distribution up to the retention time
NSR fuels and selected commercial fuels.
of 9 min [6-7]. For longer retention times, the peak Fuel Cetane Octane Energy Content Sulfur Content Carbon
intensities are decreased. Thus, gasoline-87 has a higher Number Number (Megajoules/gal) (mg/kg) Number
intensity of hydrocarbon compounds (C4 to C11) at the NSR-1 42.3 76 120.16 6.2 C4 - C12
lower retention times, and fewer hydrocarbon compounds NSR-2 58.3 N/A 140.65 4.7 C9 - C27
with longer carbon chain (C12 to C20) or none in the Gasoline N/A 87 - 93 131.88 150 C4 - C11
Jet Fuel N/A N/A 142.43 N/A C7 - C19
retention time range of 9 to 27 min. It is also observed
Diesel 42.5 N/A 146.33 50 C6 - C27
that gasoline-87 has a lower intensity of straight chain Keys:
hydrocarbon compounds when compared with NSR fuel. NSR-1 : NSR double condensed 1st collection fuel
NSR-2 : NSR double condensed 2nd collection fuel
N/A : Not available
DSC Curves of Several Fuels
60
In addition to the differences in carbon numbers for
NSR-1 and NSR-2 fuels, as observed from the GC data,
Heat Flow (mW)

40

few other differences in physical properties are observed

20
0 dry vapor pressure for NSR-2 fuel (0.36 psi) is much
-20
0 100 200 300
Temperature (°C)
Gasoline-87 (Onset B.P. 68.1 °C)
NSR Double Condensed 1st Collection (Onset B.P. 94.5 °C)
NSR Double Condensed 2nd Collection (Onset B.P. 194.5 °C)
Aviation Fuel (Onset B.P. 194.7 °C)
Diesel (Onset 226.7 °C)
Fig. 2 Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) curves of
several fuels illustrating different onsets of the boiling
points.
A comparative analysis, using a differential scanning
calorimeter, shows that NSR crude fuels have higher
initial boiling points (>94 °C) than that of gasoline-87
(68.1 °C). These values indicate that NSR fuel contains
more long chain hydrocarbon compounds than those in
commercial gasoline-87, and these chains can be
shortened during the further fractionation. As shown in
Figure 2, NSR-1 and NSR-2 fuels indicate the onset of
the boiling points to 94.5 °C and 194.5 °C, respectively.
However, initial boiling points for both NSR-1 and NSR-
2 fuels derived from NSR’s internal DSC measurements
(Figure 2) show higher values than those obtained from
external analysis by Intertek (Table 1).
Some selected chemical properties and the carbon
content ranges for all five different fuels, including 2
NSR fuels and 3 commercial fuels, are listed in Table 2.
Carbon content ranges were derived from the gas
chromatograms [6-7]. It should be noted here that the
based on the analysis done by Intertek, New Jersey: (a)
lower than NSR-1 fuel (5.18 psi); (b) initial boiling point
400
for NSR-2 fuel (341.2 °F) is significantly higher than
NSR-1 fuel (106.7 °F); (c) cold filter plugging point for
NSR-2 fuel (10 °F) fuel is much higher than NSR-1 fuel
(< -59.8 °F); (d) cloud point for NSR-2 fuel (10.4 °F) is
much higher than NSR-1 fuel (< -11.2 °F); and (e)
electrical conductivity for NSR-2 fuel (< 1 pS/m) is 3x
lower than NSR-1 fuel (3 pS/m) which is related to the
water content (93ppm for NSR-2 vs. 126ppm for NSR-1)
and temperature (65 °F for NSR-2 vs. 76 °F for NSR-1).
For both NSR fuels, the metal content was found to
be at a minimum level for calcium, magnesium, copper,
and phosphorus in the range of < 1 ppm. A closer look of
this data sets as well as the gas chromatograms also
suggest that either collection of NSR fuels can be further
fractionated and used as appropriate commercial fuel.
These preliminary tests will be supplemented in the
future by rigorous ASTM testing of various fractions for
direct comparison to the specifications of conventional
fuels. The un-fractionated NSR-1 fuel has a research
octane rating of 79.2 and a motor octane rating of 72.6
(average octane number is shown in Table 2). These
octane ratings are consistent with the results described
above indicating longer chain alkanes, and we therefore
expect to obtain a high quality gasoline and/or aviation
replacement fuels when the NSR fuel is properly
fractionated and perhaps isomerized.

Electricity from NSR Fuel and Gasoline-87
2000
Power (watt)
1500
1000
500
0
0 500 1000 1500
Time (sec)
NSR Fuel (input) NSR Fuel (output)
Fig. 3 Generation of electric power from NSR-2 fuel and
gasoline-87 as consumed by electrical appliances (a Jiang
Dong gasoline generator was used with 1 liter of each fuel
separately).
Current performance in NSR electricity generation is
from one liter of NSR-2 fuel and its instantaneous
consumption as output power by 3 different electrical
appliances as shown in Figure 3. The temporal profile of
this output power (average power generated 1671 watt)
from NSR-2 fuel indicates a stable power generation over
a period of 42 minutes. The input power (average power
consumed 378 watt) in generating NSR fuel from solid
waste plastics is shown for comparison. On the other
hand, the commercial gasoline-87 shows an output power
of 1713 watt over a period of 38 minute. The results
show that power output from NSR fuel is very similar to
that from the commercial gasoline-87.
4. Conclusions
A simple catalytic process for de-polymerizing waste
plastic to synthetic crude oil has been developed and
further refined using a laboratory scale double
condensation process. Characterization studies by GC and
GC-MS indicate the de-polymerization product is
essentially all straight chain hydrocarbons when linear
thermoplastic polymers are used as the feed. Both GC and
DSC studies indicate that NSR fuels include
hydrocarbons ranging from C4 to C27, a range that
includes commercial gasoline-87, aviation, and diesel
fuel. Initial analyses of NSR fuel indicate a low research
octane rating of 79.2 and a motor octane rating of 72.6 for
the case of NSR double condensed 1st collection (NSR-1)
fuel, which is lower than commercial gasoline-87.
Change in octane rating is expected with appropriate
fractionation which will be confirmed in the future per the
ASTM specifications. Comparison of physical properties,
chemical properties, and gas chromatograms suggests that
either collection of NSR fuels can be further fractionated
and used as appropriate gasoline and/or aviation fuel.
External analyses of NSR fuels show comparable energy
content in NSR fuels when compared to commercially
available fuels. Internal testing with generator show
similar electric power output from NSR-2 fuel when
compared to that from commercial gasoline-87. These
preliminary tests will be supplemented in the future by
rigorous ASTM testing of various fractions for direct
View publication stats
comparison to the specifications of conventional fuels,
motor fuel or aviation fuel.
5. Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge the support of Dr. Karin
Kaufman, the founder and sole owner of Natural State
Research, Inc. Critical technical suggestions made by Dr.
Richard Parnas and Dr. Sabir Majumder during the
preparation of this manuscript are also gratefully
2000 2500 acknowledged.
References
Gasoline87 (output)
[1] Energy Information Administration, “Renewable energy
consumption and electricity preliminary 2007 statistics,
Table 1: U.S. energy consumption by energy sources,
2003-2007,” May 2008.
[2] C.J. Moore, “Synthetic polymers in the marine
environment: A rapidly increasing long-term threat,”
Environmental Research, 108, 2008.
[3] Y. Uemichi, “Development of a catalytic cracking process
for converting waste plastics to petrochemicals,” J. Mat.
Cycles Waste Manage., 5(2), 2003.
[4] A. Marcilla, A. Gómez-Siurana, and F. Valdés, “Catalytic
cracking of low-density polyethylene over H-Beta and
HZSM-5 zeolites: Influence of the external surface kinetic
model,” Polym. Degrad. and Stability, 92(2), 2007.
[5] G. Manos, “Catalytic Degradation of Plastic Waste to Fuel
Over Microporous Materials”, Chapter 7 in Recycling of
Waste Plastics: Pyrolysis and Related Feedstock Recycling
Techniques (Eds: J. Scheirs and W. Kaminsky), J. Wiley,
pp. 193-208, 2006.
[6] M. Sarker, “Generation of Transportation Fuel from Solid
Municipal Waste Plastics”, manuscript #09FFL-0135, 2009
Powertrains, Fuels & Lubricants Meeting, San Antonio,
Texas, May 2009; SAE International, 2009, submitted.
[7] M. Sarker, “Aviation Fuel Derived from Waste Plastics”,
manuscript #09ATC-0195, AeroTech Congress &
Exhibition, Seattle, Washington, November 2009; SAE
International, 2009, submitted.
[8] Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_fuel.
[9] J.E. Shepherd, C.D. Nuyt, J.J. Lee, and J.E. Woodrow,
“Flash point and chemical composition of aviation
kerosene (Jet A),” National Transportation Safety Board,
USA, 2000.
[10] J.E. Woodrow, “The laboratory characterization of ARCO
jet fuel vapor and liquid,” National Transportation Safety
Board, USA, 2000.