Journal of Cleaner Production 281 (2021) 125300

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Review

A review on cotton gin trash: Sustainable commodity for material

fabrication
Abu Naser Md Ahsanul Haque, Rechana Remadevi, Maryam Naebe*
Deakin University, Institute for Frontier Materials, Geelong, Victoria, 3216, Australia

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Cotton gin trash (CGT), the waste generated from cotton ginning is a low-cost and abundant source of
Received 22 July 2020 lignocellulosic material. Effective valorisation of CGT is beneficial from both economical and environ-
Received in revised form mental perspectives. Earlier investigations and reviews on CGT were mostly based on the ethanol and
5 November 2020
bioenergy production, and soil amendment properties of CGT. However, due to the low yield in ethanol
Accepted 25 November 2020
Available online 28 November 2020
preparation, the low heating value of CGT in energy production and reported critical issues in soil
amendment, CGT yet remains as an underutilised material. However, the increasing number of studies in
Handling editor: Prof. Jiri Jaromir Kleme
s material science domain showed encouraging prospects of CGT. This includes using CGT as a composite
filler, preparing transparent plastic by combining with polymer, adsorbing dye from wastewater, and
Keywords: extracting micro and nanocrystalline cellulose for a potential application. Nevertheless, currently, there is
Cotton gin waste no review available dedicated to the material fabrication viewpoint of CGT. Therefore, this review ad-
Composite fillers dresses the current studies of CGT on material production, along with CGT structure and composition.
Nanocrystalline cellulose This study also discusses the rationale of using CGT as a sustainable resource in the cleaner production of
Adsorbent material
materials and explores the opportunities for future research.
Polymers and plastics
© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Sustainability

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Composition of cotton gin trash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Material fabrication routes from CGT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Pre-treatment of CGT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. Application of CGT in material production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.1. Composite and plastic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.2. Adsorbents from CGT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.3. Extraction of micro and nanocrystalline cellulose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.4. Further applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
6. Economical aspects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
7. Environmental aspects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
8. Future opportunities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
9. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Declaration of competing interest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: maryam.naebe@deakin.edu.au (M. Naebe).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125300
0959-6526/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
A.N.M.A. Haque, R. Remadevi and M. Naebe
1. Introduction
Cotton, the most used natural fibre, was produced around 26.7
million metric tons and consumed around 22.9 million metric tons
worldwide in the last 2019-20 season (Cotton Incorporated, 2020).
It is considered as economically the most important natural fibre in
the world (Kim et al., 2017). It is a staple fibre of pure cellulose,
collected from the flower of the cotton plant (Gossypium sp.) (Kim
et al., 2017; Wendel and Grover, 2015). The cotton flower is also
referred to as cotton boll inside which the fibres are grown around
the seed of cotton. After harvesting the cotton bolls, fibres are
separated from the seeds through a process called ‘ginning’ and
then packed in bale form to be transferred and used in the next
stage industries (e.g., spinning) (Wanjura et al., 2019).
From cotton harvesting to ginning, three major by-products are
produced, i.e., cotton stalks, cotton gin trash (also frequently called
cotton gin waste) and cottonseeds (Fig. 1). Cotton stalks are the
remaining leftover plant parts in the cotton field, after harvesting
the cotton bolls. Cotton gin trash (CGT) is the leftover produced
during the cleaning stages of cotton inside the ginning plant. In
contrast, cotton seeds are collected after ginning when fibres are
separated (Zabaniotou and Andreou, 2010). Though cotton seeds
are used as the raw material for the cottonseed oil industries, as
well as for growing new cotton plants, cotton stalks and CGT remain
as complete waste and need to be disposed of by the ginners
(Hamawand et al., 2016). Between cotton stalks and CGT, CGT is a
more complex waste, considering its heterogeneous mixture of
cotton burrs, motes (cotton fibres with immature or broken seeds),
sticks, leaf parts, and fine particles (Agblevor et al., 2003). The fibres
remain in CGT, entangle the other parts, and often restrict frac-
tionation (Haque et al., 2020b).
The amount of generated CGT varies widely and depends on
several factors, such as harvesting method, ginning technique,
origin and variety of cotton (Agblevor et al., 2006). In 2001, the data
obtained from a gin located in the United States showed the field-
cleaned cotton generated 140e160 kg CGT per bale during ginning,
while the non-field-cleaned cotton produced around 320e360 kg
CGT per bale of cotton (Holt et al., 2004). The common practices for
disposal of CGT include dumping and landfilling, composting for
soil amendment, and spreading over uncropped land, which cost
substantially, and also need large area (McIntosh et al., 2014). The
production of CGT by a particular gin in the United States was
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of cotton processing from harvesting to ginning.
2
Journal of Cleaner Production 281 (2021) 125300
reported 14,437 tons, and cost around $110,000 for disposal, while
preparing 55,000 bales of cotton in a single year (2001) (Holt et al.,
2004). A similar scenario observed in Australia reported an esti-
mated disposal cost of around $3.4 million per year through 26 gins
in New South Wales state (calculated average $130,770/gin)
(Hassall and Associates, 2005). Moreover, around 50 ha of land was
required for the dispose of two years’ gin trash generated in a large
gin (Hassall and Associates, 2005). Given that, CGT is considered as
a significant liability for the ginning industries all over the world.
Numbers of studies have been conducted on the soil amend-
ment properties of CGT (i.e., composting) so that it can be benefi-
cially applied to the land (Dıaz et al., 2002; Ghosh et al., 2011;
Jackson et al., 2005; Papafotiou et al., 2007; 2001; Tejada and
Gonzalez, 2003). However, CGT composting is still challenging
since few complex issues are required to be dealt with, such as
understanding curing time and application rate of compost ac-
cording to specific crops (Hamawand et al., 2016). Cattle feeding,
another way of utilising CGT also has drawbacks, such as poor di-
gestibility and low protein content (Hamawand et al., 2016).
Moreover, the feeding value of CGT is deficient as it has high lignin
and ash content, and the total digestible nutrient (TDN) is also less
than that of grass hay (Myer, 2007). Besides, comprehensive studies
have been conducted for the production of ethanol and bioenergy
from CGT over the years (Agblevor et al, 2003, 2006; Aquino et al.,
2010; Macias-Corral et al., 2008; Placido et al., 2013). However, low
yield (around 12e31%, even though using a combination of
advanced methods) is one of the major problems of ethanol pro-
duction from CGT, while any sort of energy production from CGT
might be limited due to its low heating values (16.67 MJkg
1) as a
fuel (Maglinao et al., 2015; Placido et al., 2013).
Nevertheless, CGT is an excellent source of lignocellulose, which
has also gained the attention of researchers over the past decades
for production of new materials, including fabrication of polymer
composites, insulation packaging, particleboard, masonry blocks,
adsorbent materials, and nanocellulose extraction (Bajwa et al.,
2011; Haque et al., 2020a; Holt ́ et al., 2012a; Jordan et al., 2019;
Mun ~ oz et al., 2015; Sutivisedsak et al., 2012). Fig. 2 illustrates the
growing interest in CGT research in material science domain over
the past two decades.
Recent studies have shown the prospect of CGT in the applica-
tions mentioned above, i.e., production of new material. However,
there has been no review available on the potential of CGT based on
A.N.M.A. Haque, R. Remadevi and M. Naebe
Fig. 2. The number of reports in Scopus and Web of Science database in material science domain including “cotton gin trash” or “cotton gin waste” in the content.
its material fabrication perspective. Earlier CGT reviews were
mainly based on the soil amendment, bioenergy and ethanol pro-
duction from this resource (Hamawand et al., 2016; Sharma-
Shivappa and Chen, 2008; Thomasson, 1990). Therefore, this pa-
per focuses on the CGT compositions, structure and properties
followed by its recent applications in material fabrication and
research opportunity in future. Since CGT is often confused with
other cotton wastes, such as cotton stalks (residue in the field) and
cotton linters (having around 94% cellulose, collected during cot-
tonseed oil processing, and also from spinning, weaving and knit-
ting), it is worth to clarify that this review only focuses on the
evaluation of gin trash (the complex mixture of burrs, sticks, motes
and other particles), the in-house waste material produced during
the cotton ginning process as illustrated in Fig. 1.
2. Composition of cotton gin trash
Cotton gin trash is mainly composed of cotton burrs (also known
as cotton carpels or hulls), motes (cotton fibres attached with
immature or broken seeds), sticks, leaf parts, and fine woody
Fig. 3. Different fractions of cotton gin trash showed after manual separation.
3
Journal of Cleaner Production 281 (2021) 125300
particles (Fig. 3). Though the amount of CGT and its composition
depends on many factors, method of cotton harvesting has the key
influence (Faulkner et al., 2011; Wanjura et al, 2013, 2017). The
oldest harvesting method is by hand, which delivers the superior
quality of cotton (van der Sluijs and Roth, 2020). However, due to
the dramatic rise of cotton production and inefficiency of hand-
picking, mechanical harvesting method is adopted by many
cotton-growing countries. Now some major cultivators in the
worlds, such as the United States, Brazil, and Australia have adopted
100% mechanical harvesting method for cotton (van der Sluijs and
Roth, 2020).
There are mainly two types of mechanical harvesting method
available; spindle picker and stripper harvester (Faircloth et al.,
2004). Spindle picker uses rotating spindles (tapered and barbed)
and regarded as an efficient and expensive technique since it is
selective in the collection of cotton bolls from the plants. However,
the stripper harvester is a non-selective technique that uses bats
and brushes in harvesting, which collects a lot of immature bolls,
sticks and plant materials (van der Sluijs and Roth, 2020). Fig. 4
shows the portion of fresh cotton fibre (lint turnout), cotton
A.N.M.A. Haque, R. Remadevi and M. Naebe
Fig. 4. Fractional parts of total harvested weight of cotton (1) and cotton gin trash (2) generated by spindle picker (a) and stripper harvester (b) methods (adapted from Wanjura
et al., 2017).
seeds and gin trash when harvesting is done in two different
methods. Almost half-weight (47e54%) of the harvested amount is
collected as cotton seeds, which is transferred to the seed oil in-
dustry for oil extraction (Wanjura et al., 2017). The proportion of
CGT greatly increases when the stripper harvesting method is used,
compared to spindle picker. For example, for preparing 218 kg of
the cotton bale, spindle picker method generates around 70 kg of
CGT (11.1% of the total harvested weight) while stripper harvesting
method generates 173 kg of CGT (23.2% of the total harvested
weight) and sometimes even more when done using the non-field-
cleaning technique (35.8% of the total harvested weight) (Wanjura
et al., 2017).
Moreover, the amount of CGT can also vary depending on the
ginning process used, i.e., saw ginning or roller ginning (Armijo
et al., 2013). Typically roller ginning method produces a slightly
higher grade of fibres than the saw ginning method, indicating
higher cleaning efficiency, yet higher CGT leftover of roller ginning
(van der Sluijs, 2015). The roller ginning is used for processing of
the extra-long staple cotton fibre, whereas saw ginning is used for
short to medium staple fibres (also known as upland cotton) (Estur
and Gergely, 2010). Worldwide production of extra-long staple
cotton is very low (only around 3% of total) compared to upland
cotton, which has made saw ginning the most used technique for
cotton ginning (van der Sluijs, 2015). Besides, the number and
performance of cleaning equipment (lint cleaner) used in particular
ginning line can affect the CGT amount (Mangialardi, 1993). Apart
from these, origin and variety of cotton, method of cultivation and
cultivating season also affect the generated amount of CGT
(Agblevor et al., 2006; Kumari and Pramanik, 2012).
In terms of chemical composition, being a lignocellulosic ma-
terial, CGT is mainly composed of three organic compounds, cel-
lulose, hemicellulose, and lignin. Fig. 5 shows the individual
subunits of cellulose, hemicellulose, lignin and a schematic struc-
ture of lignocellulose (Haque et al., 2018). Cellulose is composed of
long-chain D-glucose subunits. The degree of polymerisation of
cellulose can be up to ten thousand. Hemicellulose is mainly
comprised of D-xylose, D-galactose, L-arabinose and D-mannose
subunits with a very low degree of polymerisation up to 200
(Bajpai, 2016). Lignin is a heterogeneous three dimensional,
amorphous nonlinear polymer. It holds the other two parts
together and influences the solubility of the material in different
solvents. Lignin is closely associated with cellulose micro-fibrils
4
Journal of Cleaner Production 281 (2021) 125300
that prohibit microbial or enzymatic hydrolysis of lignocellulosic
material (Bajpai, 2016). Overall, cellulose is more crystalline than
hemicellulose and lignin (Yang, 2008).
While CGT can be generated in variable amounts from gin to gin,
its major chemical characteristic (cellulose, hemicellulose, and
lignin) remains within the range of common agro-based wastes.
Table 1 shows the CGT chemical composition reported by different
authors from different country source, i.e., United States, Australia,
India, covering the time between 2006 and 2017. Data show that
chemical compositions containing 24e40% cellulose, 7e18%
hemicellulose, 18e26% lignin, lay within the typical range of com-
mon other lignocellulosic waste materials, such as wheat straw, rice
straw, oat straw, etc. (Agblevor et al., 2006; Carvalheiro et al., 2009;
McIntosh et al., 2014; Passoth and Sandgren, 2019; Pla cido et al.,
2013; Shitarashmi and Krishna, 2017).
However, one interesting difference of CGT with the tabulated
agro-wastes is the proportion of lignin. Commonly in lignocellulose
material, cellulose remains as the principle proportion, followed by
hemicellulose, and then lignin, whereas, in CGT, lignin amount is
reported higher than hemicellulose part. Since lignin is responsible
for holding cellulose and hemicellulose together and restricting the
chemical degradation of the overall structure, the cellulose-
hemicellulose-lignin bonding in CGT is likely to be stronger than
most of the agro-wastes. Besides, lignin in CGT is reported as acid-
insoluble (72% sulphuric acid), probably due to the presence of
guaiacyl lignin (g-type) units which are difficult to dissolve
(Agblevor et al., 2006; Ibrahim et al., 2010; Nishiwaki-Akine et al.,
2017). CGT also contains non-lignin acid-insoluble part sourced
from condensed protein and lipids come from cotton seeds and
small leaf fractions (Agblevor et al., 2006), which is not very com-
mon in other lignocellulosic wastes.
There is hardly any data available on the amount of pectin and
wax present in CGT. However, CGT contains cotton fibres that are
composed of around 0.9% pectin and 0.6% wax (Hauser, 2015).
Taking that into account, and considering around 16e24% motes
(major cotton proportion) in CGT (Agblevor et al., 2006), the
calculated pectin and wax could rest between 0.14e0.22% and
0.1e0.14%, respectively to the entire CGT amount.
Given the elemental components of CGT, the presence of Carbon
(C), Oxygen (O), Hydrogen (H) with fewer amounts of Nitrogen (N)
is observed as shown in Table 2, where values from two different
reports are quite similar (White et al., 1996; Zabaniotou and
A.N.M.A. Haque, R. Remadevi and M. Naebe Journal of Cleaner Production 281 (2021) 125300

Fig. 5. Chemical structure of (a) the subunits of cellulose, hemicellulose, and lignin and (b) schematic structure of a lignocellulose material.

Table 1
Chemical composition of cotton gin trash (CGT) reported by different authors in comparison with some common lignocellulosic wastes.

Cellulose (%) Hemicellulose (%) Lignin (%) Reference

CGT 24e37 14e18 18e23 McIntosh et al. (2014)

~25 ~10 ~26 Pl
acido et al. (2013)
25e33 7e16 20e25 Agblevor et al. (2006)
~40 ~15 ~20 Shitarashmi and Krishna (2017)
Wheat straw 28e39 23e24 16e25 Carvalheiro et al. (2009)
Rice straw 29e35 12e29 17e19 Passoth and Sandgren (2019)
Oat straw 31e35 20e26 10e15 Passoth and Sandgren (2019)
Sorghum straw 32e35 24e27 15e21 Passoth and Sandgren (2019)
Switch grass ~31 ~24 ~18 Rao et al. (2010)

Table 2 Andreou, 2010). Several inorganic materials are also reported in

Elemental composition of cotton gin trash (CGT) reported by different authors. CGT, particularly inside the ash residue, which comprises mainly
Component Amount, % (based on dry weight) Calcium (Ca), Potassium (K), Silicon (Si), Phosphorus (P),
White et al. (1996) Zabaniotou and Andreou (2010)
Aluminium (Al), Magnesium (Mg), Sulphur (S) and Chlorine (Cl).
(Haque et al., 2020c; Zabaniotou and Andreou, 2010).
Carbon (C) 39.59 38.8
Oxygen (O) 36.38 Not specified
Hydrogen (H) 5.26 4.7
3. Material fabrication routes from CGT
Nitrogen (N) 2.09 1.44
Ash residue 16.68 23.5
Though CGT is considered as a heterogeneous waste material,
5
A.N.M.A. Haque, R. Remadevi and M. Naebe
due to its abundance and lignocellulosic composition, it has gained
much attention in the material research community. To this regard,
research has been conducted in different pathways adopting the
properties of CGT to produce value-added products. Production of
composites and adsorbent materials from CGT started a decade ago
(Bourne et al., 2007; Hernandez et al., 2007), whereas recent
studies using other techniques showed the potential of CGT as a raw
material for producing plastic and extracting nanocrystalline cel-
lulose (NCC) (Bourne et al., 2007; Haque et al., 2020b; Jordan et al.,
2019). In a broad view, current research on CGT can be classified
based on the current fields of application, i.e., composite and
plastic, adsorbent material and NCC (Fig. 6). The ultimate products
are achieved through a combination of processes, including
thermo-mechanical, thermal, or chemical techniques. Fabrication
of composites and plastics from CGT has been reported through
different thermo-mechanical processes, (Cheng et al., 2013;
Mostafa et al., 2015), whereas adsorbent materials from CGT have
been reported through either thermal or chemical treatments.
Besides, the chemical processing of CGT led to the production of
film and extraction of micro and nanocrystalline cellulose
(Agblevor et al., 2007; Haque et al., 2020b; Jordan et al., 2019).
4. Pre-treatment of CGT
Due to the presence of particles of different sizes in raw CGT,
mechanical treatment, such as milling has been a fundamental step
in CGT pre-treatment. In some cases, mechanical pre-treatment
was used as the sole step before the final material fabrication
(Cheng et al., 2012; Haque et al., 2020b). Milling helps to convert
CGT into a powder form, providing the opportunity to get a
representative sample using a small amount that favours lab-scale
operation. Milling of particles also facilitates interactions with
chemicals, such as different solvents, polymer matrices, adhesives
and compatibilisers due to an enhanced surface area, which is
useful in industrial purposes as well (Driemeier et al., 2011).
Up to now, mechanical milling or grinding of CGT has been re-
ported adopting two common principles, cutting and attrition. In
cutting, sharp knives rotate at high speed in a closed chamber
(Fig. 7a). The chamber is attached to a sieve underneath which lets
the milled particles pass through and be collected in another
chamber. The mesh size of the sieve determines the maximum size
of the CGT particles, and thus particles of a pre-determined range
can be achieved choosing a correct mesh (Sutivisedsak et al., 2012).
Cutting has been the primary process in almost every CGT studies
regardless of the final product produced (e.g., polymer composites,
particleboard, bioadsorbents, activated carbon, extraction of
nanocrystalline cellulose). The use of mesh size is widely varied
(4e100) and thus reportedly produces CGT particles from around
144 mm to around 4.7 mm sizes. For particleboard production,
slightly higher CGT particle sizes were reported (around 400 mm to
4.76 mm) (Holt et al, 2012a, 2014), whereas, for polymer compos-
ites and adsorbent film production, lower range of particles were
used (around 144 mm to 2 mm) (Bajwa et al., 2011; Bourne et al.,
Fig. 6. Current application routes of cotton gin trash for material fabrication.
6
Journal of Cleaner Production 281 (2021) 125300
2007; Ge et al., 2020; Haque et al., 2020d).
In attrition (the second technique of mechanical pre-treatment),
the treatment is commonly done to the coarse powder, that already
has passed through the cutting operation. Though this is not a new
method, and widely is used for different other biomass (e.g., wood),
the first attrition of CGT has been reported very recently (Haque
et al., 2020c; Nishiwaki-Akine et al., 2017). Attrition is carried out
to obtain very fine powders, generally in micron level size. The
attrition chamber contains ceramic balls inside (hence also referred
to as ball milling) and is equipped with a rotating shaft attached
with impellers (Fig. 7b). The size reduction of CGT coarse powder
occurs by the friction with the balls when the shaft and impellers
rotate at a high speed. In the overall process, water acts as the liquid
media inside the tank and retains the fine powders as a slurry. After
the attrition of sufficient time, the slurry needs to be dried to obtain
the fine CGT powder. The method of drying can also affect the
morphology of the CGT powder. For example, spray drying of CGT
has reportedly produced more spherical particles compared to
oven drying technique, and also delivered lower size of particles
(when other parameters were constant) due to less agglomeration
(reported particle size around 6.2 mm and around 5.7 mm, respec-
tively for oven-dried and spray dried CGT powder after 4 h attri-
tion) (Chranioti et al., 2016; Haque et al., 2020c, 2020e). Fig. 8
represents the scanning electron microscopic (SEM) images of the
coarse powder after cutting raw CGT, and the fine powders (oven-
dried and spray dried) after attrition of the coarse powder. The SEM
images show that CGT retains the fibrous structure blended with
the other woody particles in the coarse powder. However, in fine
powder, the fibres cannot be distinguished with all other particles
due to the significant reduction in the particle size.
Following the mechanical pre-treatment, sometimes chemical
treatments are also conducted to modify the characteristics of CGT.
For instance, excluding the use of compatibilisers in an extruder, or
use of adhesives during particleboard preparation, chemical treat-
ments are used occasionally to the CGT itself as a pre-step before
the final process. These include treating CGT with acetic anhydride
(acetylation) to enhance hydrophobicity and treating CGT with
succinic anhydride (succinylation) to improve hydrophilicity. In a
study concerning reinforcing CGT inside poly(vinyl alcohol) (Biswas
et al., 2020), these chemical pretreatments (i.e., acetylation and
succinylation) of CGT powder was conducted before the rein-
forcement. While the final composite film showed the morpho-
logical changes as a result of increasing filler (CGT) amount, the
morphological change in the CGT particle itself by the chemical
treatments was not reported. Besides, the chemical changes were
not found effective in the final material’s mechanical properties. In
another study, washing CGT with toluene to remove wax from the
surface, and treating the washed CGT with maleic anhydride graf-
ted polypropylene (MAP), before combining with polypropylene
(PP) polymer was reported as chemical pretreatments (Ge et al.,
2020). Similar to the earlier study, the composite’s morphology
was reported in this study (morphological changes in CGT particles
were not reported), where a better mixing of CGT particles inside
the matrix was claimed as a result of the chemical treatment with
MAP. This was probably because the MAP helped to reduce the
interfacial tension between CGT particles and polypropylene and
thus resulted in better adhesion between two phases.
In cellulose extraction from CGT, alkali pretreatment (4% sodium
hydroxide, 70  C, 2 h) and bleaching (0.25% sodium hypochlorite, 1%
acetic acid, 75  C, 2 h) were reported before converting CGT into
nanocrystalline cellulose (Jordan et al., 2019). A steam explosion
(thermal treatment) followed by peroxide bleaching of CGT was
also reported as pre-treatment steps while extracting microcrys-
talline cellulose from CGT (Agblevor et al., 2007). In both cases,
though the morphologies of the finally extracted products were
A.N.M.A. Haque, R. Remadevi and M. Naebe
Fig. 7. Mechanism of mechanical pretreatment of cotton gin trash (CGT) using (a) cutting and (b) attrition principle.
Fig. 8. Scanning electron microscopic images of cotton gin trash (a) coarse powder and (b) oven-dried and (c) spray dried fine powders after attrition.
discussed, the morphological changes of CGT in the pre-treatment
stages were not reported.
Other than that, often thermal pre-treatments are carried put
towards CGT mainly to reduce or remove the moisture fraction, and
facilitate its performance while interacting with polymers. These
treatments were reported from low temperature (e.g., 50  C) to
high temperature (e.g., 160  C), where a reduced treatment time
was chosen for higher temperature and vice versa (Bourne et al.,
2007; Holt et al., 2012a; Sutivisedsak et al., 2012).
Overall, among all of the pre-treatment methods reported for
material production from CGT, mechanical pre-treatment remains
as the most practiced method thus far, while the chemical and
thermal pre-treatments of CGT have not been widely studied.
5. Application of CGT in material production
5.1. Composite and plastic
Composites are multicomponent materials having different
phase areas, where at least one phase is continuous (i.e., matrix),
whereas plastics are the materials having plasticity and the ca-
pacity for being shaped (Alema n et al., 2007; Merriam-Webster,
2020). Since composites can often have plastic properties, in this
section, both composites and plastics are simultaneously discussed.
Over the years, composites production from CGT has been per-
formed using different techniques, such as extrusion moulding,
agglomeration, filamentous fungi growth and solution casting,
which are listed in Table 3. Extrusion moulding is a widely used
technique of composite manufacturing where the reinforcing ma-
terial and polymer matrix are premixed (generally at a high
7
Journal of Cleaner Production 281 (2021) 125300
temperature) and then extrude out through a die to form a shape
(Fig. 9a) (Cheng et al., 2013). Another principle of composite
fabrication commonly used in making particleboard is the
agglomeration of the reinforcing particles by adhesives (act as the
matrix) and applying high temperature and pressure (Fig. 9b) (Holt
et al., 2014). There have also been reports on CGT based building
blocks, agglomerated using cement. Solution- casting technique
can also be used for making composites where reinforcing material
is mixed in polymer solution by stirring at a required temperature
and then cast to form a film (Fig. 9c) (Haque et al., 2020c). Besides,
composites can also be manufactured by mycelium fungi assistance
to be used in non-structural applications (Jones et al., 2018). In this
technique, the reinforcing material is held together by mycelium
hyphae (similar to a matrix, as shown in Fig. 9d) after a certain
period of incubation (Ziegler et al., 2016).
Up to now, extrusion moulding has been the most used tech-
nique for fabrication of composite from CGT (Cheng et al., 2013;
Sutivisedsak et al., 2012). The powder from entire CGT, or particular
fractions, e.g., burrs, motes, sticks have been used to prepare
composite in combination with different non-biodegradable and
biodegradable synthetic polymers. However, the compatibility be-
tween synthetic matrix with hydrophilic CGT is a key influencing
factor for the mechanical properties of composites. Therefore,
different pre-treatment of CGT and adding additives to the com-
posites were well considered to improve the adhesion properties of
CGT with the matrix. Table 4 lists the key studies of CGT composites
prepared by the extrusion technique and their mechanical prop-
erties compared to the control polymer samples.
In most cases, as observed in Table 4, the incorporation of higher
filler percentages in polymer decreased the tensile and elongation
A.N.M.A. Haque, R. Remadevi and M. Naebe Journal of Cleaner Production 281 (2021) 125300

Table 3
Different approaches for preparing composite materials from cotton gin trash (CGT).

Method Reinforcement Matrix* Reference

Extrusion CGT or its HDPE, LDPE, PLA, PP (Bajracharya et al., 2017; Bajwa et al, 2009, 2011; Bourne et al., 2007; Cheng et al, 2012, 2013; Ge et al., 2020;
moulding fraction Sutivisedsak et al., 2012)
Solution casting CGT PVA, dissolved part of (Biswas et al., 2020; Haque et al., 2020b, 2020c)
CGT
Agglomeration CGT or its MMUF, PF, Portland (Alma et al., 2005; Holt et al, 2012a, 2014; Mun~ oz et al., 2015)
fraction cement
Fungi CGT or its Mycelium hyphae (Holt et al., 2012b; Ziegler et al., 2016)
colonisation fraction

* HDPE (high-density Polyethylene), LDPE (low-density Polyethylene), PLA (poly(lactic acid), PP (polypropylene), PVA (poly(vinyl alcohol)), MMUF (melamine-modified urea-
formaldehyde), PF (phenol formaldehyde).

Fig. 9. Different techniques of composite fabrication from cotton gin trash (CGT) reported in the literature, (a) extrusion, (b) solution casting, (c) agglomeration (particleboard), and
(d) fungi colonisation.

Table 4
Tensile and elongation properties of synthetic polymer-based composites from cotton gin trash (CGT) reported in the literature (values inside bracket showing the same for the
control polymer).

Combination* Filler (%) Treatment or additives* Tensile strength (MPa) Elongation at break (%) Reference

Burr/LDPE 40 N/A 7 ± 0 (9 ± 1) 21 ± 6 (549 ± 128) Cheng et al. (2012)

20 N/A 7 ± 0 (9 ± 1) 38 ± 8 (549 ± 128) Cheng et al. (2012)
20 MA þ LP 7 ± 1 (9 ± 1) 52 ± 8 (549 ± 128) Cheng et al. (2012)
20 N/A 6 ± 0 (9 ± 1) 47 ± 12 (693 ± 203) Sutivisedsak et al. (2012)
40 N/A 5 ± 0 (9 ± 1) 21 ± 3 (693 ± 203) Sutivisedsak et al. (2012)
25 N/A 5.5 ± 0.2 (6.8 ± 0.1) 100 ± 15 (287 ± 45) Cheng et al. (2013)
25 PMA 6.2 ± 0.2 (6.8 ± 0.1) 105 ± 34 (287 ± 45) Cheng et al. (2013)
Burr/PLA 10 N/A 39 ± 1 (62 ± 2) 9 ± 1 (16 ± 1) Cheng et al. (2012)
20 N/A 15 ± 1 (62 ± 2) 7 ± 1 (16 ± 1) Cheng et al. (2012)
20 MA þ LP 16 ± 1 (62 ± 2) 7 ± 1 (16 ± 1) Cheng et al. (2012)
20 N/A 13 ± 1 (58 ± 2) 10 ± 1 (13 ± 1) Sutivisedsak et al. (2012)
40 N/A 9 ± 3 (58 ± 2) 6 ± 2 (13 ± 1) Sutivisedsak et al. (2012)
CGT/PP 10 TW 28.85 (28.62) 17 (108) Ge et al. (2020)
20 TW 24.24 (28.62) 18 (108) Ge et al. (2020)
20 TW þ MAP 30.38 (28.62) 14 (108) Ge et al. (2020)
CGT/PVA 40 N/A 34 ± 5 (53 ± 9) 11 ± 2 (536 ± 69) Biswas et al. (2020)
60 N/A 22 ± 4 (53 ± 9) 5 ± 2 (536 ± 69) Biswas et al. (2020)
60 Acetylation 20 ± 1 (53 ± 9) 6 ± 0 (536 ± 69) Biswas et al. (2020)
60 Succinylation 23 ± 1 (53 ± 9) 6 ± 1 (536 ± 69) Biswas et al. (2020)
50 N/A 50 ± 2.8 (42 ± 0.9) 1.44 ± 0.18 (93 ± 3.6) Haque et al. (2020e)

* LDPE (low-density polyethylene), PLA (poly(lactic acid), PP (polypropylene), PVA (poly(vinyl alcohol)), MA (maleic anhydride), PMA (polyethylene grafted maleic anhydride),
LP (Lupersol 101 peroxide), TW (toluene wash), MAP (maleic anhydride-grafted polypropylene).

8
A.N.M.A. Haque, R. Remadevi and M. Naebe
properties. Between low-density polyethylene (LDPE) and poly(-
lactic acid) (PLA), the decrease in tensile strength was much higher
in PLA, whereas the decrease in elongation was higher for LDPE. For
example, the tensile strength of PLA reduced around 77% for 20%
filler incorporation, while the value was around 33% for LDPE for
the same amount of filler. However, the decrease in elongation for
PLA and LDPE composites was 23% and 93%, respectively
(Sutivisedsak et al., 2012). This reduction was probably related to
the generic properties of LDPE (lower strength, higher elongation)
and PLA (higher strength, lower elongation), which was affected
differently by the same reinforcing material. The increase of filler
percentages also negatively affected the tensile properties of most
of the composites. For example, by increasing the filler from 10% to
20% strength of PLA composite reduced around 62% and increasing
filler from 40% to 60% resulted in strength loss of around 35% in
poly(vinyl alcohol) (PVA) composite (Biswas et al., 2020; Cheng
et al., 2012). Besides, the elongation at break reduced approxi-
mately 98% and 22%, respectively, for the mentioned PLA and PVA
composites.
It is understood that the elongation of a composite material
greatly depends on the percentage of the filler used, and often
reduced by the increment of biomass filling amount. This is
generally due to the lower elongation property of cellulosic mate-
rials compared to common synthetic polymers. However, the
change in tensile properties of such composites is not one-
directional, i.e., do not always reduce by reinforcement. The
change of strength property of composites depends on some key
factors, such as compatibility or adhesion property of the two
materials, particle size and generic properties of the filler (e.g.,
breaking strength and breaking elongation).
In the CGT/polymer composite studies, the strength of com-
posites reduced compared to the control polymer in most of the
cases. Since CGT is hydrophilic, the compatibility of CGT and its
fractions towards hydrophobic polymers (e.g., LDPE, PLA, PP) is
likely to become low. The lower compatibility or adhesion between
the particles and polymer makes them poorly bonded, and results
in discontinuity inside the matrix and insufficient stress transfer
between the two phases (Fu et al., 2008). Thus the composite be-
comes more prone to breakage when the load is applied.
The weak interaction between polymer and filler can be offset
by using additives, often known as compatibilisers, that generally
improves the adhesion in composites (Bajwa et al., 2011; Cheng
et al., 2013). Apart from using compatibilisers, attempts also have
been made by pre-treating CGT (e.g., toluene wash, acetylation), so
that the compatibility with the matrix could be enhanced. For
example, using 5% polyethylene grafted maleic anhydride
enhanced strength of cotton burr/LDPE composite (around 13%),
compared to the composite without any compatibiliser (Cheng
et al., 2013). Besides, pre-treatment of toluene washed CGT with
polypropylene grafted maleic anhydride was also effective to
improve the mixing filler inside polypropylene (PP) matrix. This
pre-treatment enhanced the tensile strength of the CGT composite
(6%) compared to the pure PP. However, some other pre-
treatments, such as acetylation, or succinylation of CGT were not
effective in increasing the strength of the composites.
In contrast to the interaction of CGT with hydrophobic polymers
described above, natural materials are commonly well-matched
with PVA polymer due to its hydrophilic nature and presence of
OH groups (Zhang et al., 2020a). Several studies revealed a higher
strength of PVA-based composites compared to pure PVA, by
incorporating cellulosic fillers. However, up to now the studies
concerning CGT/PVA composites reported some mixed results. For
example, Biswas et al. reported approximately 36% decrease in the
strength of a 60/40 PVA/CGT composite (CGT particle size ˂ 150 mm),
whereas Haque et al. reported around 19% increase in strength of
9
Journal of Cleaner Production 281 (2021) 125300
50/50 PVA/CGT composite (CGT micro-sized particle ~5.75 mm),
both compared to the control PVA. Though a conclusion cannot be
fully made unless further investigations are carried out, given the
different percentage of CGT, the particle size of the CGT filled in the
matrix could be an influential factor of the CGT composite’s
strength. This is because; reinforcing micro-sized particles (e.g.,
1e10 mm) in polymer matrix has shown improvement of tensile
properties in previous studies (Douce et al., 2004; Nakamura et al.,
1992; Radford, 1971). This is due to the significant enhancement of
the surface area, which acts favourably towards the stress transfer
mechanism (Fu et al., 2008).
Table 5 lists the effect of the CGT particle size or its fractions on
the tensile strength and elongation properties reported by different
authors when the matrix/filler ratio was constant, and fabrication
was carried out without chemical pre-treatment or adding any
compatibiliser. The difference of cotton burr particles used (be-
tween 1000 and 2000 mm) did not bring any significant changes in
the tensile strength of either LDPE or PLA composites ((Sutivisedsak
et al., 2012). However, when particles with a smaller size (between
150 and 400 mm) were used, the tensile strength was found to be
affected. The strength of composite made of smaller particle size (˂
149 mm) was approximately 8% lower than the composite made of
coarser particles (298e400 mm). It was suggested that the smaller
particles raised the number of contacts and surface areas between
the polymer (LDPE) and filler, thus increased number of weak
points in the composite (Cheng et al., 2013). Since LDPE is hydro-
phobic and less compatible with the hydrophilic cotton burr,
enhancement of the surface area of particles did not contribute
towards the efficient stress transfer in interfaces.
In contrast, Haque et al. reported a higher tensile strength of
CGT/PVA composite when used a very fine particle size (~5.75 mm)
compared to coarse particles (~144.22 mm) (Haque et al., 2020e). It
was suggested that this was probably due to the lower disturbance
angle produce in the matrix by incorporating fine particles
compared to coarse particles. In between micro-sized, and coarse
particles, micro-sized particles promoted a very good dispersion in
the mixture and produced a transparent composite film. Due to the
good adhesion property of PVA and CGT, probably a higher surface
area further contributed to the effective stress transfer and
increased the tensile strength compared to that prepared from
coarse particles. Besides, the CGT (powder) used by Haque et al. was
prepared from the entire gin trash, having more fraction of micro-
cellulose particles inside (due to the pure cotton available in CGT),
compared to the only burr fraction used by Cheng et al. Presence of
micro-cellulose particles is also likely to contribute towards the
strength of the composite. It has been reported that micro-cellulose
particles, such as microcrystalline cellulose (MCC) derived from
different other sources (e.g., jute, fabric waste), showed good
adhesion and strong interfacial interaction with PVA matrix,
improving the overall tensile strength (Tan et al., 2015). Therefore,
the strength of the final composite material from CGT can be
affected very differently depending on the selection of materials or
CGT proportion, and particle size, which should be considered in
future exploration. Besides, towards a cleaner world, bio-based or
biodegradable polymers should be chosen for the effective valor-
isation of CGT.
Regardless of the effect of CGT in improving composite’s
strength (compared to the control polymer), a different way of
assessing CGT is to compare the composite’s property with the
established composites made from other natural resources, such as
wood fibre plastic composite (WPC). Different species of wood have
been commercially used to produce WPC, which has a wide
application area. However, CGT is a complete waste, often can be
collected with a low price or free of charge. Therefore, the
replacement of wood with CGT in composite preparation is likely to
A.N.M.A. Haque, R. Remadevi and M. Naebe
Table 5
Effect of particle size of cotton gin trash (CGT) or its fraction on tensile strength and elongation properties of composites reported in the literature.
Combination* Particle size (mm) Tensile strength (MPa)
Burr/LDPE ˂ 1000 6±0
˂ 2000 6±0
˂ 149 3.4 ± 0.2
149e297 3.5 ± 0.1
298e400 3.7 ± 0.1
Burr/PLA ˂ 1000 13 ± 1
˂ 2000 13 ± 2
CGT/PVA ~144.22 45.92 ± 2.41
~5.75 49.95 ± 2.83
*LDPE (low-density Polyethylene), PLA (poly(lactic acid), and PVA (poly(vinyl alcohol).
be cost-effective, if similar properties achieved. That is also one step
towards cleaner production, given the use of waste biomass, saving
trees and conserving forest and reducing the overall cost involved.
Taking this into account, Bourne et al. studied the potential of CGT
as a replacement of wood flour in producing WPC. Powder of CGT
(at best 48%) was combined with high-density polyethylene (HDPE)
and compared with the similar composite made of southern yellow
pine wood. Though the CGT composite was found lighter (lower
specific gravity) than wood composite, the strength in compression,
bending, and transverse shear of CGT were better in comparison
with the wood in the composites (Bourne et al., 2007). It was
suggested that the higher strength might be due to the presence of
high crystalline fibre content in CGT compared to wood parts. All
over, the properties of CGT composite were within the range of
commercially available WPC. In a different study, individual frac-
tions of CGT, such as burrs, and the mixture of burr and 2% linters
were used for reinforcing into HDPE (Bajwa et al., 2009). Cotton
burrs were able to replace up to 25% wood, without altering me-
chanical and physical properties. However, when the higher
amount of burr reinforced, greater moisture absorption and
swelling were observed, and mechanical properties, such as
compressive strength, modulus of rupture, and modulus of elas-
ticity were reduced. A similar result (the prospect of replacing up to
25% wood as filler) was reported when this composite was evalu-
ated in commercial-scale manufacturing and analysis (Bajwa et al.,
2014). Higher moisture absorption and swelling property by the
incorporation of burrs and sticks fractions were also reported in a
separate study (Bajwa et al., 2011). It was concluded that the
presence of a higher amount of cellulose in cotton wastes tends to
absorb more moisture due to the inherent hydrophilic nature.
However, reinforcing a mixture of CGT fractions and guayule
bagasse biomass, overcame this drawback and made it comparable
to WPC (Bajwa et al., 2011).
In addition to the alteration of the mechanical property, CGT
significantly influences the thermal characteristics of composites.
The most common scenario is a delay in the thermal degradation of
the associated polymer (at a higher temperature than normal), by
the addition of CGT. For example, incorporation of 10% CGT in
polypropylene (PP) delayed the degradation of PP from around
416  C to 445  C (Ge et al., 2020), whereas including 50% of CGT in
poly(vinyl alcohol) (PVA) increased the degradation temperature of
PVA from 350  C to 400  C (Haque et al., 2020e). Besides, commonly
a higher residual weight remains after treating the composite at a
high temperature (e.g., near 500  C) due to the presence of lignin,
ash and other constituents in CGT (Biswas et al., 2020; Haque et al.,
2020e). The glass transition temperature (Tg) and melting tem-
perature (Tm) are also reported to be affected to some extent by the
reinforcement. As shown in Fig. 10 (a, b), incorporation of 60%
cotton burr in PLA resulted in lowering the Tg from around 57  C to
around 47  C, and Tm from 156  C to around 139  C (Sutivisedsak
et al., 2012). These changes were particularly higher with the
10
Journal of Cleaner Production 281 (2021) 125300
Elongation at break (%) Reference
47 ± 12 Sutivisedsak et al. (2012)
52 ± 6 Sutivisedsak et al. (2012)
27 ± 3 Cheng et al. (2013)
32 ± 3 Cheng et al. (2013)
31 ± 3 Cheng et al. (2013)
10 ± 1 Sutivisedsak et al. (2012)
9±1 Sutivisedsak et al. (2012)
1.55 ± 0.14 Haque et al. (2020e)
1.44 ± 0.18 Haque et al. (2020e)
larger particle size of cotton burr (<2 mm). However, a similar trend
was not observed when burr was filled inside LDPE, where an un-
changed Tm (around 112  C) was reported even after 40% rein-
forcement (Fig. 10c). Moreover, an increase of Tm in PVA (from
around 196  C to around 207  C) was also reported when CGT was
reinforced at 60% level (Fig. 10d) (Biswas et al., 2020). Nevertheless,
Tm was greatly reduced, particularly when succination (rather than
acetylation) of CGT was conducted prior to the reinforcement. This
was probably related to the larger size of succinic groups and
anionic charges induced due to the pretreatment. Therefore, the
alteration of Tg and Tm of CGT composites could be affected by more
than one factors (e.g., polymer types, filler amount, pretreatment of
CGT and the compatibility of matrix and filler) which needs further
exploration.
There are a few studies on the influence of CGT on the crystalline
property of the polymer. Crystallinity directly affects the thermal
behaviour of a composite, as Tg and Tm are dependants on the
crystalline property of a polymer. Therefore, crystallinity can pro-
vide valuable information. The crystallinity index of CGT is reported
around 18e30% in different studies (Haque et al., 2020c;
Shitarashmi and Krishna, 2017). When CGT or its fraction is incor-
porated inside a polymer matrix, the disruption of CGT particles
influences the crystalline nature of the overall material. For similar
incorporation of CGT amount (50e60%) and a similar size of CGT
particles used in two different studies (Biswas et al., 2020; Haque
et al., 2020e), the crystallinity of PVA reduced. For example, for
50% CGT incorporation (particle size ~144 mm) the crystallinity of
PVA reduced around 17% (Haque et al., 2020e), while for 60% CGT
incorporation (particle size ˂ 149 mm) crystallinity of PVA reduced
to near 33% (Biswas et al., 2020). However, an increase in the
crystallinity (around 33%) of PVA was also reported with a lower
amount of CGT (20%). This was probably related to the crystallinity
of CGT itself, that enhanced the overall crystallinity (Biswas et al.,
2020). However, when CGT is reinforced in a higher amount,
probably the disturbance in the matrix becomes higher leading to
greater disturbance angles, thus reducing the overall crystallinity.
In another study, a slight reduction of LDPE crystallinity by rein-
forcing cotton burr is also reported (Sutivisedsak et al., 2012). For
instance, the crystallinity of LDPE reduced from 42% to 41% and 37%
by 10% and 40% burr incorporation, respectively. However, in the
same study, in case of PLA/burr composite, the crystallinity
increased even with a higher reinforcement (increased from 2% to
around 7e9% by 10e40% filler). It was claimed that the filler par-
ticles were probably acted as nucleating sites with the polymer thus
increased the crystallisation, and the addition of compatibiliser
contributed further towards the better nucleating sites. Neverthe-
less, the number of studies regarding the influence of CGT or its
fraction on polymer crystallinity are very small to understand any
definite trend. Besides, the methods used for measuring the crys-
tallinity are often different from each other adopting several tech-
niques including Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC), X-ray
A.N.M.A. Haque, R. Remadevi and M. Naebe
Fig. 10. Effect of filler amount on (a) glass transition temperature of poly(lactic acid)/burr composite, (b) melting temperature of poly(lactic acid)/burr composite, (c) melting
temperature of low-density polyethylene/burr composite when particle size is (x) < 1 mm and (y) < 2 mm, and (d) effect of cotton gin trash (CGT) filler amount on poly(vinyl
alcohol)/CGT composite when CGT is (p) untreated (q) acetylated and (r) succinated (drawn from the data reported by Biswas et al., 2020 and Sutivisedsak et al., 2012).
diffraction (XRD) and Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy
(FTIR), which makes the comparision more difficult.
Another important thermal property reported for CGT com-
posites is the thermal expansion. Biomass reinforcement is often
useful to reduce the expansion behaviour of a plastic. A lower co-
efficient of linear thermal expansion (CLTE) value indicates a
greater resistance towards the expansion by a higher temperature
(Ziegler et al., 2016). The CLTE of cotton burr/HDPE (0.015 mm/m/
 C) was reported lower than the WPC prepared from oak/HDPE
(0.020 mm/m/ C) (Bajwa et al., 2011). This could have resulted from
two factors; the degree of coupling between cellulose and HDPE,
and shrinkage in fibre when the heat was applied. A further
reduction in CLTE by adding cotton linters (Bajwa et al, 2009, 2011),
is an indication of the positive influence of CGT parts in the overall
resistance to the thermal expansion in WPC application.
Besides using conventional thermoplastic polymers in CGT
composite, a few studies were carried out using adhesives in the
matrix to stick the CGT particles (agglomeration principle) and
produce composite board (particleboard). Alma et al. were the first
to report the potential of CGT fraction (cotton carpel, also called
burr) in making particleboard. In that study, the bending strength
of the board (9.4e13.1 N//mm2) was in the range of minimum re-
quirements of general grade of particleboard (11.5 N/mm2 accord-
ing to British Standard (BS)-European Norm (EN) 312-2 standard).
Though the perpendicular screw holding strength (2.29e6.20 N/
mm2) was lower than the requirement (7.2 N/mm2, BS-2684), the
lateral screw holding strength was reported similar to the general
grade (3.6 N/mm2, BS-2604 standard) (Alma et al., 2005). In a
different study, a composite board made of 50% cotton burr blended
11
Journal of Cleaner Production 281 (2021) 125300
with 50% pine wood showed equal mechanical properties and
water resistance compared to the same prepared from 100% pine,
suggesting a low-cost alternative of traditional pine used for this
purpose (Holt et al., 2014). In another study, sticks and burrs were
used to produce a termite resistant composite board. As the matrix,
10% melamine modified urea-formaldehyde resin was used to bind
the particles. However, no effect on termite resistance was
observed for using CGT fractions, and the board made from 100%
CGT fractions was the least resistant towards termite compared to
another resource used, i.e., guayule bagasse (Holt et al., 2012a).
Even though the use of CGT in particleboard preparation
showed promising results, the use of formaldehyde-based resins
cannot be overlooked. This is because formaldehyde is categorised
as a highly toxic and carcinogenic substance, reported median le-
thal dose (LD50)  42 mg/kg for mouse and 100 mg/kg for rat
(Amaral-Labat et al., 2008). Therefore, attention is necessary while
using CGT for particleboard-making in future, selecting non-toxic
adhesives and environmentally friendly techniques.
Cotton gin trash was also used in producing blocks and panels in
agglomeration with Portland cement (Mun ~ oz et al., 2015). The
reduction of thermal transmittance while using CGT in external
walls was around 74% compared to masonry ceramic bricks,
whereas as roof enclosure the thermal transmittance reduction was
around 80% compared to non-insulated common roof structure
(Mun~ oz et al., 2015; Piccioni et al., 2013), indicating the insulating
capability of cotton gin trash incorporated panels.
Apart from the composite making methods as stated above, a
few studies also conducted on the preparation of composite from
CGT using the biological pathway. Holt et al. reported a CGT
A.N.M.A. Haque, R. Remadevi and M. Naebe
composite as a substitute for polystyrene-based thermal insulation
packaging material using the mycelium-based fungal treatment
(Holt et al., 2012b). In this method, the biomass is let inoculated
with the fungus until the required colonisation of mycelium fungi is
developed. The mycelium grows a filament structure, penetrates
and weaves the particles together (Fig. 9d). At the end of the pro-
cess, the composite is heat-treated to deactivate mycelium and
make the product safely useable (Ziegler et al., 2016). Up to now,
two studies of mycelium based composites from CGT were re-
ported. In the former, cotton burrs and seed hulls were used as the
reinforcement, whereas in the following study fibre fraction from
CGT was used (Holt et al., 2012b; Ziegler et al., 2016).
The coefficient of linear thermal expansion (CLTE) of this com-
posite showed negative value (
17.42  10
5 mm/mm/ C) (Ziegler
et al., 2016), opposite to the values of polymer-based composites
from CGT discussed before. Since the mycelium-based composites
did not have synthetic polymers, similar to other non-polymer-
based natural composites, it showed contraction property (rather
than expansion) at an elevated temperature. However, the me-
chanical property of these composites (e.g., tensile strength
0.09e0.2 MPa) was not comparable to commercial polystyrene
(e.g., tensile strength 35e55 MPa) (Polymer Properties Database,
2020; Ziegler et al., 2016). Nevertheless, due to their biodegrad-
able nature, exploitation of these composites is possible in pack-
aging applications (Ziegler et al., 2016).
Recently, chemical processing of CGT is also proposed for the
production of biodegradable film maintaining around 100% of yield
by using the whole material (Haque et al., 2020a, b). Importantly,
the use of whole CGT was confirmed leaving no residue behind,
which is a positive move towards cleaner production. The entire
CGT was converted to powder and then mixed with formic acid to
fabricate a film. A proportion of CGT dissolved in formic acid
(39e91%, depending on the CGT and formic acid ratio), acted as a
matrix to hold the undissolved part similar to a composite struc-
ture. In that particular study, CGT and formic acid were mixed at
room temperature, stirred for five days. The tensile strength of the
fabricated film was reported at the lower range of commercial
LDPE. Moreover, the films were reported thermally stable up to
200  C without any glass transition stage (Haque et al., 2020b). In
the following study (Haque et al., 2020b), increasing temperature
from room temperature to 50  C was sufficient to reduce the stir-
ring time from 5 days to only 1 h (Haque et al., 2020a, 2020f). The
film prepared by this technique (particularly, when higher CGT
amount was used) showed good tensile and sorption properties, as
well as dye adsorption characteristics.
5.2. Adsorbents from CGT
Adsorbents are the functional materials that can adsorb another
substance. Adsorbent materials are having different forms, such as
powder, film or membrane and often used to separate contami-
nants from a medium (e.g., water, gas). Though different common
agro-based resources (e.g., rice straw, wheat straw, lemongrass or
even cotton stalks) are extensively used to fabricate adsorbents and
separate dyes or metal ions from the wastewater (Cai et al., 2019),
adsorbent preparation from CGT is not extensively studied (though
having a similar chemical composition, noted in the ‘Composition
of cotton gin trash’ section).
Among the adsorbents commonly prepared from biomass,
activated carbon (AC) probably remains as the most preferred op-
tion, due to its higher degree of porosity and a very high surface
area suitable for adsorption. The activated carbon is commonly
prepared through thermal processing (often known as pyrolysis)
using a very high temperature (commonly  500  C). Though
thermal treatment of CGT is extensively studied, concentrating
12
Journal of Cleaner Production 281 (2021) 125300
mainly on its energy production potential, there are very few re-
ports on the production of AC from CGT. Besides, studies conducted
on preparing adsorbent from CGT using chemical modification
pathway are scarce. Fig. 11 illustrates two different techniques of
fabricating adsorbents from CGT reported in the literature (Haque
et al., 2020a; Hernandez et al., 2007). Table 6 lists a short
description of the adsorbents and their adsorption ability to
particular adsorbate.
Though there are reports of producing AC from other cotton-
based waste (such as cotton stalks), studies of producing AC from
CGT are decades ago. In a study conducted by Hernandez et al., CGT
was first converted into activated carbon through the pyrolysis
followed by steam activation. Different pyrolysis temperatures
ranging from 600 to 800  C were used, and the effect of tempera-
ture on iodine adsorption was reported. It was observed that the
pyrolysis at 700  C resulted in more iodine adsorption per gram of
CGT AC compared to the lower or higher temperatures. A lower
temperature than 700  C did not produce complete carbonisation,
while a higher temperature than 700  C resulted in thermal
degradation of the CGT biomass. In the following study, CGT and
flax shive were transformed into AC (pyrolysis at 700  C), and
adsorption of trichloroethylene was reported while comparing
with commercial carbon products. Though AC from flax shive was
found better adsorbent than that made of CGT (reasoning not dis-
cussed), the CGT AC showed similar adsorption property compared
to commercial carbons (i.e., bituminous coal-based carbon and
phosphoric acid-activated carbon) (Klasson et al., 2009).
Recently, CGT has been proposed as an adsorbent in the form of
film, rather than activated carbon. Application of film has some key
advantages over using powders (e.g., activated carbon) for
adsorption, providing easy handling and separation of adsorbent
from solution (after adsorption). In contrast, using AC in separation
needs further process (such as centrifugation) to re-separate the AC
from the solution after the contaminant adsorption. CGT film was
formed using chemical treatment with formic acid (FA). Though the
surface area of the film was very low compared to the reported AC,
the chemical treatment introduced new hydroxyl groups on the
film surface, assisting the adsorption of cationic contaminant, e.g.,
Methylene Blue dye (MB). Moreover, the crystallinity of the CGT
film was lower when a higher CGT amount was used with FA,
influencing towards a greater sorption property (Haque et al.,
2020b). The maximum adsorption of MB by CGT film was re-
ported significantly higher than raw CGT powder (Table 6), which is
also favourably compared to MB adsorption of other biomass-
derived adsorbents reported in the literature. In a further study,
chitosan-modified CGT film was found suitable for removal of
anionic dye and suggested the use of modified and unmodified CGT
film together could be beneficial for the simultaneous removal of
both cationic and anionic dye from the wastewater (Haque et al.,
2020d). Moreover, in the last report, the formic acid used for film
preparation was recollected through vacuum filtration arrange-
ment and the CGT prepared film was reported as reusable at least
for two more cycles. The efficient use of biomass and chemicals
reported is an important development for the sustainable valor-
isation of CGT.
5.3. Extraction of micro and nanocrystalline cellulose
Being rich in cellulose, low-cost and abundant, lignocellulose
materials (such as CGT) are potential candidates for the extraction
of micro and nanocrystalline cellulose, which have potential use in
numerous purposes (Ren et al., 2019). However, attempts for
extracting such from CGT are very few. Though extraction of
microcrystalline cellulose (MCC) from CGT was reported a decade
ago, no further studies found, and extraction of micro and
A.N.M.A. Haque, R. Remadevi and M. Naebe Journal of Cleaner Production 281 (2021) 125300

Fig. 11. Two different techniques of fabricating adsorbents from cotton gin trash (CGT), (a) pyrolysis to produce activated carbon, and (b) chemical treatment to produce an
adsorbent film.

Table 6
Fabrication of adsorbents from cotton gin trash (CGT) and their capability reported in the literature.

Adsorbent form Method of production Surface area (m2/ Adsorbate Maximum adsorption (mg/ Reference
g) g)

Activated Pyrolysis (600e800  C) and steam activation (250 Not reported Iodine ~642 Hernandez et al. (2007)
carbon e600  C)
Pyrolysis (700  C) and steam activation (850  C) 923 Trichloro- ~40 Klasson et al. (2009)
ethylene
Phosphoric acid activation (450  C) 582 Trichloro- ~40 Klasson et al. (2009)
ethylene
Powder No treatment 1.69 Methylene Blue ~141 Haque et al. (2020a)
Film Formic acid treatment (50  C) 1.08 Methylene Blue ~209 Haque et al. (2020a)
Film Formic acid treatment (50  C) Acid Blue 25 ~151.5 Haque et al. (2020d)

nanocrystalline cellulose (NCC) from CGT was reported very
recently (Agblevor et al., 2007; Jordan et al., 2019).
Agblevor et al. first reported the extraction of MCC from CGT,
which was performed through the steam explosion followed by
alkali extraction and bleaching as the pre-treatments (Agblevor
et al., 2007). Later, the samples were enzyme-treated (by cellu-
lase), or acid hydrolysed (by sulphuric acid) for the extraction of
cellulose. The extracted MCC showed similar chemical structure,
crystallinity and thermal stability compared to the commercially
available MCC, i.e., Avicel PH101. In between two routes, enzyme
treatment was suggested as more suitable in controlling the
morphological characteristics of MCC compared to the acid treat-
ment process.
Recently, CGT and its fraction were used in the extraction of
nanocrystalline cellulose (NCC) (Jordan et al., 2019). The cotton
waste was milled and then treated by a combination of alkaline and
bleaching chemicals followed by acid hydrolysis resulted in the
production of NCC. Fig. 12 shows a flow diagram of obtaining NCC
from CGT. The yield of the process was around 50%, and the
diameter of the crystals was less than 10 nm. For the past several
decades, this was the first example of extracting NCC from CGT,
where the contact angle test suggested that the NCC could impart
hydrophilicity to other materials. Overall, the degradation tem-
perature of the NCC (250.1  C) reduced compared to that of the
parent CGT (268.2  C). However, a higher degradation temperature
(319.3  C) with negligible deviation, was observed when NCC were
extracted from cotton motes (part of CGT, degradation temperature
318.3  C). Since gin motes are composed of mostly cotton fibres and
the amount of pure cellulose is much higher compared to CGT, the
aspect ratio of NCC derived from motes was higher (18.7e33.6)
than that of CGT (12). Besides, NCC from CGT showed broader
crystals and smaller crystallite size (5.25 nm) compared to that
derived from the motes (near 6.20 nm) (Jordan et al., 2019).
5.4. Further applications
Cotton gin trash has also gained attention to the production of
energy feedstocks using different thermochemical techniques. The
most studied technique in this field is pyrolysis. This method can
produce bio-oil, biogas, and biochar (Boateng et al., 2006), while
the first two are fuel sources, and the latter is a source of carbon
(Hernandez et al., 2007). Production of these products from CGT
depends on the pyrolysis conditions, e.g., temperature and time
(Encinar et al., 1997; Williams and Nugranad, 2000). For example,
lower pyrolysis temperature with higher time duration produces
more solid chars, whereas a shorter time in higher temperature
generates more liquid feedstock. In contrast, a longer time duration
together with a higher temperature (more than 550e600  C)
commonly favours the production of the gaseous product (Aquino
et al., 2010; Zabaniotou et al., 2000).
The other methods reported for the conversion of CGT into
feedstocks include combustion and gasification for generating

Fig. 12. Schematic diagram of obtaining nanocrystalline cellulose from cotton gin trash (adapted from Jordan et al., 2019).

13
A.N.M.A. Haque, R. Remadevi and M. Naebe
several gaseous products, e.g., hydrogen, carbon dioxide, carbon
monoxide, methane, ethane, nitrogen, nitrogen oxide and nitrogen
dioxide (Holt et al., 2006; Maglinao et al., 2015).
Moreover, Since CGT comprises fermentable sugars coming from
burrs, sticks and cotton linters, it has also been used to extract
ethanol fuel using the biological method (Jeoh, 1998). The efficiency
of ethanol production largely depends on the pre-treatment pro-
cess which removes the hemicellulose and lignin parts. The pre-
treatment of CGT let the polysaccharide break into individual
monosaccharides, and thus the fermentative microorganisms
operate easily (Jeoh, 1998).
Nevertheless, it should be noted that the conversion of CGT into
energy feedstocks (e.g., ethanol, bio-oil, gas), has gained tremen-
dous attention previously. These aspects of CGT have already been
comprehensively reviewed (Hamawand et al., 2016; Sharma-
Shivappa and Chen, 2008) and therefore, are not the focus of the
current review.
6. Economical aspects
Being rich in lignocellulose and due to its abundance, utilisation
of CGT can be economically beneficial. The cost of handling and
storing 100,000 tonnes CGT by a gin (in Australia) could reach
around $60,000 per year (Hamawand et al., 2016). Moreover, as
discussed in the Introduction section, the cost related to the
disposal of CGT could be around $110,000e130,770 each year by a
single gin (Hassall and Associates, 2005; Holt et al., 2004). Over
time, this value is increasing, as an estimated disposal cost of CGT is
reported $35/ton in 2016 (Luce, 2016), that was around $2/ton near
a decade ago (Bourne et al., 2007). Fig. 13 shows a calculated range
of probable disposal cost of CGT over the last decade, considering
70e173 kg CGT per bale of cotton production (Wanjura et al., 2017)
and $35/ton disposal cost (Luce, 2016). If CGT could be used effec-
tively for materials production, the cost of raw material would be
reduced significantly, since CGT is often collected from the ginners
at a negligible cost (Jordan et al., 2019). This would also cut off the
handling and disposal costs of the ginners. Thus using CGT for
making value-added products could give economical benefits to-
wards both of the sides, ginners and manufacturers. Besides, mass
consumers would also find CGT-based products in the market at a
lower price.
However, due to its complex composition, CGT is often not
treated as an effective raw material. Nonetheless, some studies of
CGT composites showed encouraging results that are favourable
towards an economic production. One of the examples is using CGT
in the production of wood fibre plastic composite (WPC) that has a
worldwide established market. In 2016, the global WPC market was
Fig. 13. Estimated range of cost for cotton gin trash disposal over the last ten years
considering 70e173 kg CGT per cotton bale production and $35/ton disposal cost
(Cotton Incorporated, 2014, 2017, 2020; Luce, 2016; Wanjura et al., 2017).
14
Journal of Cleaner Production 281 (2021) 125300
$2551 million, and with a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of
12.6%, it is projected to reach around $6584 million by 2023 (Allied
Market Research, 2017). Studies showed the wood proportion of
WPC could partially or fully be replaced by CGT retaining similar
properties of commercial WPC (Bajwa et al, 2011, 2014; Bourne
et al., 2007). Besides, cotton fibres in CGT have a high aspect ratio
(165:1), which is higher than common wood species (softwood
100:1, hardwood 50:1) (Bourne et al., 2007), that could also be
taken under consideration for effective production. Moreover,
reinforcement of CGT is possible in making economic polymer-
based composites where stiffness is acceptable in the final product.
Application of CGT as adsorbent also has economical benefit,
since the treatment of wastewater remains expensive thus far. For
instance, electrocoagulation cost of textile wastewater is around
$5.8/m3, given 100e200 L typical water use to process only one kg
of textile product (Yin et al., 2019). Recent studies showed effective
removal of both cationic and anionic dyes with reusable adsorbent
made from CGT. This could be economically viable since CGT is
cheap and the adsorbent is reusable (Haque et al., 2020a, 2020d).
Besides, other common adsorbents, such as activated carbon (AC)
can be sourced from CGT at a very low-cost. For example, the cost of
AC derived from CGT was $200 per tonne, reported ten times lower
than the contemporary market price of commercial ACs (Jeoh,
1998).
Moreover, CGT is claimed as a potential resource for extracting
nanocrystalline cellulose (NCC). The global nanocellulose market is
predicted to rise from $297 million in 2020 to $783 million by 2025
(CAGR 21.3%) (MarketsandMarkets, 2020). The low price of CGT is
highly contrasted with different current refined resources of NCC
extraction including microcrystalline cellulose ($51/lb) (Jordan
et al., 2019), and wood pulp (bleached softwood kraft pulp price
ranges from $610 to $1150/tonnes in different regions of the world)
(IndustryEdge, 2020).
Hence, considering CGT as a cheap alternative raw material,
effective utilisation could bring economic benefits in many ways for
different sides.
7. Environmental aspects
The current global journey towards cleaner production de-
mands efficient production methods while also limiting the gen-
eration of the waste amount. Every year, CGT is generated in a huge
amount which requires suitable disposal. Fig. 14 shows some
common practices for CGT disposal by the ginners (Anthony et al.
n.d.). Incineration is already restricted in many countries to con-
trol the environmental hazard. In most cases, CGT returns to the
land without giving any direct benefit.
Fig. 14. Common disposal methods of cotton gin trash (drawn from data reported by
Anthony et al. n.d.).
A.N.M.A. Haque, R. Remadevi and M. Naebe
Utilising CGT in material production, first of all, would eliminate
CGT itself (as a waste), and thus could become an environmental
benefit for the community and surroundings. Gathering up CGT
around the gin raises environmental issues as incidents of fire and
smoulder are also recorded (Bourne et al., 2007). Considering the
massive amount of CGT produced each year, valorisation of this
waste is highly required for environmental protection. One of the
routes for CGT valorisation is reported as the reinforcement in
composite preparation. Though most of the CGT composites re-
ported are combining with non-biodegradable polymers, those still
have some environmental benefit, given the reduced use of the
petroleum-based synthetic polymers. Besides, replacing wood by
CGT in the fabrication of WPC can eventually lead to the reduction
of cutting down trees, contributing to a greener environment. A
similar impact is also likely if CGT would be used as an alternative
for wood pulp for extracting nanocellulose.
Nevertheless, most of the polymer composites produced from
CGT are achieved compensating with the biodegradable nature of
CGT, as the ultimate products are often not completely biode-
gradable. In the production of composites combining with PLA,
biodegradation of PLA requires temperature above 50  C (Auras
et al., 2004; Haider et al., 2019), which is higher than the usual
soil condition. Besides, in particleboard preparation from CGT, the
use of toxic formaldehyde-based adhesives is a matter of concern.
However, there are still few examples of truly biodegradable
CGT materials (composite plastic) combining with PVA using
environmentally friendly techniques, though most of which re-
ported very recently (i.e., 2020) (Biswas et al., 2020; Haque et al.,
2020e). Such plastic composites prepared in combining with PVA
can be used as mulch to replace non-biodegradable polymers,
where along with mulching the compostability of CGT benefits the
land. Besides, reusable bioadsorbents from CGT are reported
recently, which could be a step towards resolving significant
environmental pollution, i.e., dye wastewater (Haque et al., 2020a,
2020d).
Nevertheless, most of these affirmative studies are in the pre-
liminary stages and need further attention and improvements, to
be effectively used in practical circumstances and thus contribute
to a greener world.
8. Future opportunities
Cotton gin trash is an enormous natural resource of lignocellu-
losic biomass that has potential in several material applications.
This review highlights the current research with CGT for material
preparation, also discusses the current limitations for the estab-
lishment of CGT as a potential resource in future. Studies have been
conducted on CGT for material production mostly based on com-
posite fabrication, where CGT is combined with synthetic polymers,
e.g., LDPE, HDPE, PLA, PP and PVA. Though fabrication of polymer-
based composites from CGT was first reported in 2007, the ad-
vances over the years are not sufficient. In most cases, CGT was
transformed into a coarse particle by cutting operation before the
reinforcement (Biswas et al., 2020; Bourne et al., 2007). The fabri-
cation of fine particle by attrition of CGT is only reported recently
(Haque et al., 2020e). Since CGT is a complex mixture of fibres and
other particles, the morphology of coarse powder shows distinct
shapes (Ge et al., 2020). However, as observed from SEM images
this dissimilarity of particle shapes in the CGT fine powder is found
at a significantly reduced amount (Haque et al., 2020e). Therefore, a
good distribution of CGT particles is likely to be achieved inside the
polymer matrix while using finer powders, which could act
favourably towards the mechanical strength of the composites by
effective stress transfer (Fu et al., 2008). Nevertheless, the impact of
CGT morphology (due to the changes in particle size and milling
15
Journal of Cleaner Production 281 (2021) 125300
techniques) on the behaviour of the composite are barely under-
stood thus far. Besides, changes in surface characteristics by either
mechanical or chemical processes to facilitate material fabrication
is also very narrowly studied, which requires attention. Further-
more, investigations are required in future to understand the effect
of few important parameters during the CGT composite prepara-
tion, such as the right selection of polymer, CGT particles and its
volume fraction within the composite, the orientation of CGT inside
the matrix, the aspect ratio of CGT reinforcement and interfacial
properties of the CGT/matrix system.
One of the major drawbacks regarding CGT composites reported
is the decrease of physio-mechanical properties of the final mate-
rial while incorporating CGT. Though most of the polymer com-
posite studies showed deterioration of mechanical properties, one
study using CGT particle size at micro-level showed enhanced
tensile strength when combined with PVA (Haque et al., 2020e). A
hydrophilic polymer (e.g., PVA) commonly possesses greater
compatibility with cellulosic biomass, compared to the hydropho-
bic polymers. In a composite structure, the overall strength of the
material is a result of the complex synergistic influence of the
compatibility (also often termed as adhesion property), amount of
particle reinforced and the size of the particles. Therefore, a deep
understanding of the impact of CGT on the composite is still to be
explored. Moreover, towards a greener environment, composite
studies of CGT should be more focused on using biodegradable
polymers. Alongside studies with PLA and PVA, fermenting poly-
mer products, such as polyhydroxyalkanoate (PHA), poly-
hydroxybutyrate (PHB), and other chemically synthesised
biodegradable polymers such as poly(caprolactone) (PCL), poly-
esteramides (PEA) (Alizadeh-Osgouei et al., 2019; Kabir et al., 2020;
Mumtaz et al., 2010), and bio-based thermoplastic matrices, such as
bio-polyethylene (Bio-PE), Bio-polyamide 11 (Bio-PA11), bio-
polypropylene (Bio-PP), bio-polyethylene furanoate (Bio-PEF) can
also be taken into consideration (Benavides et al., 2020; Harmsen
et al., 2014; Oliver-Ortega et al., 2019). There have been few at-
tempts on manufacturing composite through different principles,
such as agglomeration and fungi colonisation. Though the initial
results are encouraging, there are not adequate reports available to
get into any conclusion. However, the use of toxic and carcinogenic
formaldehyde-based adhesives while agglomerating CGT for
particleboard preparation, should be replaced or reduced by using
environmentally friendly adhesives or considering alternative
methods following successful examples. The selection of adhesives
could be starch-based, e.g., esterified starch (Qiao et al., 2016),
oxidised-gelatinised starch (Yang et al., 2013), nanosilica reinforced
starch (Wang et al., 2011), or could be lignin-based (formaldehyde-
free) (Ferdosian et al., 2017), or plant protein-based, such as soy
protein (Lei et al., 2014; Zhang et al., 2020b), canola protein (Wang
et al., 2014), cottonseed protein (He et al., 2014), or natural latex
(Nakanishi et al., 2018). Besides, reinforcing nanocellulose (possible
to extract from CGT itself) inside bio-based adhesives could be
considered for the improvement of the adhesion property (Cheng
et al., 2019; Jordan et al., 2019). Moreover, enzymatic pre-
treatment (e.g., laccase, peroxidase enzymes) of CGT could also be
an alternate choice for preparing binderless particleboard (Widsten
and Kandelbauer, 2008).
Till now, the pre-treatment of CGT for material preparation
mostly relied on the mechanical milling process. Though the
chemical composition of CGT is close enough to common ligno-
cellulosic biomasses (described in the chemical composition sec-
tion), treatment of CGT for material fabrication or extraction using
the chemical technique is in the embryonic phase. Chemical pre-
treatment for nanocellulose extraction and formic acid treatment
to prepare adsorbent film is reported only recently. Therefore, the
chemical treatment route of CGT needs further exploration in
A.N.M.A. Haque, R. Remadevi and M. Naebe
material production near future.
Besides, since CGT is considered as a heterogeneous material
(due to varied amount of different physical particles, burrs, motes,
sticks, etc), studies need to be conducted to understand the influ-
ence of its variability on materials properties, when CGT is collected
from different sources.
Overall, a substantial scope of future research with CGT is
currently wide open to the researchers, especially to the materials
scientists’ community. Therefore, aligning with the cleaner pro-
duction concept, CGT research in future should be more focused on
adopting sustainable and sensible approaches so that the waste
biomass passes through efficient handling and processing stages,
thus limiting the generation of further waste from the new process.
9. Conclusions
While the massive generation of cotton gin trash (CGT), its
handling and disposal costs are continuously upsetting the cotton
ginners, the attention of scientists is growing to offset the problem
by adding value to this lignocellulosic waste. Judicious use of CGT in
material production is very probable to bring economical and
environmental prospects. Over the past decades, scientists have
proposed different methods of CGT utilisation, including soil
amendment, production of ethanol, and feedstocks for bioenergy.
However, being rich in lignocellulose, CGT is also a potential
candidate for new materials production. Studies on CGT has been
conducted for manufacturing polymer-based composites, particle-
board, masonry blocks, and insulation packaging. Besides, the
production of transparent biodegradable plastic and bioadsorbents,
extraction of nanocrystalline cellulose from CGT are also reported
very recently. However, there is no review available from the ma-
terial perspective of CGT. The purpose of this review is to overcome
this gap, encourage further materials production from CGT, and
pointing out the limitations in previous materials that need a
counterbalance. Studies on CGT for materials preparation are still
not adequate and needs further attention to improve the existing
properties of the reported materials. Though CGT has shown
prospects in wood fibre plastic composite manufacturing, produc-
tion of biodegradable materials from CGT is very few. Composites
made with poly(lactic acid) did not show sufficient results. Though
CGT/poly(vinyl alcohol) (PVA) composites showed positive results,
PVA has limited industrial application due to its water solubility.
However, this is worth mentioning that studies on CGT increased
greatly in recent years, recognising the importance of its valor-
isation. Current studies are founding the base, which would require
the communal effort from the material scientists in near future for
the successful establishment of CGT as an economical and envi-
ronmental benefit to the community.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing
financial interests or personal relationships that could have
appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgement
We acknowledge the Deakin University Postgraduate Research
Scholarship (DUPRS) support from Deakin University to the first
author of this paper.
References
Agblevor, F.A., Batz, S., Trumbo, J., 2003. Composition and ethanol production po-
tential of cotton gin residues, in: biotechnology for Fuels and Chemicals.
16
Journal of Cleaner Production 281 (2021) 125300
Springer 219e230.
Agblevor, F.A., Cundiff, J.S., Mingle, C., Li, W., 2006. Storage and characterization of
cotton gin waste for ethanol production. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 46, 198e216.
Agblevor, F.A., Ibrahim, M.M., El-Zawawy, W.K., 2007. Coupled acid and enzyme
mediated production of microcrystalline cellulose from corn cob and cotton gin
waste. Cellulose 14, 247e256.
Alema n, J.V., Chadwick, A.V., He, J., Hess, M., Horie, K., Jones, R.G., Kratochvíl, P.,
Meisel, I., Mita, I., Moad, G., 2007. Definitions of terms relating to the structure
and processing of sols, gels, networks, and inorganic-organic hybrid materials
(IUPAC Recommendations 2007). Pure Appl. Chem. 79, 1801e1829.
Alizadeh-Osgouei, M., Li, Y., Wen, C., 2019. A comprehensive review of biodegrad-
able synthetic polymer-ceramic composites and their manufacture for
biomedical applications. Bioact. Mater 4, 22e36.
Allied Market Research, 2017. Wood plastic composites market by type and appli-
cation- Global opportunity analysis and industry forecast, 2017-2023 (accessed
9.11.20). https://www.alliedmarketresearch.com/wood-plastic-composite-
market.
Alma, M.H., Kalaycıog lu, H., Bektaş, I., Tutus, A., 2005. Properties of cotton carpel-
based particleboards. Ind. Crop. Prod. 22, 141e149.
Amaral-Labat, G.A., Pizzi, A., Goncalves, A.R., Celzard, A., Rigolet, S., Rocha, G.J.M.,
2008. Environment-friendly soy flour-based resins without formaldehyde.
J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 108, 624e632.
Anthony, W.S., Thomasson, J.A., Mayfield, W.D., Huitink, G.. Gin waste utilization
alternatives. n.d. https://www.cotton.org/ncga/techpubs/upload/gin-waste.pdf
(accessed 11.6.20).
Aquino, F.L., Capareda, S.C., Parnell, C.B., 2010. Elucidating the solid, liquid, and
gaseous products from batch pyrolysis of cotton gin trash. Trans. ASABE (Am.
Soc. Agric. Biol. Eng.) 53, 651e658.
Armijo, C.B., Foulk, J.A., Whitelock, D.P., Hughs, S.E., Holt, G.A., Gillum, M.N., 2013.
Fiber and yarn properties from high-speed roller ginning of upland cotton.
Appl. Eng. Agric. 29, 461e471.
Auras, R., Harte, B., Selke, S., 2004. An overview of polylactides as packaging ma-
terials. Macromol. Biosci. 4, 835e864.
Bajpai, P., 2016. Pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass, 17-70. https://doi.org/10.
1007/978-981-10-0687-6_4.
Bajracharya, R.M., Bajwa, D.S., Bajwa, S.G., 2017. Mechanical properties of polylactic
acid composites reinforced with cotton gin waste and flax fibers. Procedia Eng
200, 370e376.
Bajwa, S.G., Bajwa, D.S., Holt, G., 2009. Optimal substitution of cotton burr and
linters in thermoplastic composites. For. Prod. J. 59, 40e46.
Bajwa, S.G., Bajwa, D.S., Holt, G.A., Wedegaertner, T.C., 2014. Commercial-scale
evaluation of two agricultural waste products, cotton burr/stem and module
wraps, in thermoplastic composites and its comparison with laboratory-scale
results. J. Thermoplast. Compos. Mater. 27, 741e757.
Bajwa, S.G., Bajwa, D.S., Holt, G., Coffelt, T., Nakayama, F., 2011. Properties of ther-
moplastic composites with cotton and guayule biomass residues as fiber fillers.
Ind. Crop. Prod. 33, 747e755.
Benavides, P.T., Lee, U., Zare, O., 2020. Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions and
energy use of polylactic Acid, bio-derived polyethylene, and fossil-derived
polyethylene. J. Clean Prod. 277, 124010..
Biswas, A., Cheng, H.N., Evangelista, R., Hojilla-Evangelista, M.P., Boddu, V., Kim, S.,
2020. Evaluation of composite films containing poly(vinyl alcohol) and cotton
gin trash. J. Polym. Environ. 28, 1998e2007.
Boateng, A.A., Jung, H.G., Adler, P.R., 2006. Pyrolysis of energy crops including alfalfa
stems, reed canarygrass, and eastern gamagrass. Fuel 85, 2450e2457.
Bourne, P.J., Bajwa, S.G., Bajwa, D.S., 2007. Evaluation of cotton gin waste as a
lignocellulosic substitute in woodfiber plastic composites. For. Prod. J. 57,
127e131.
Cai, Z., Remadevi, R., Al Faruque, M.A., Setty, M., Fan, L., Haque, A.N.M.A., Naebe, M.,
2019. Fabrication of cost-effective biodegradable lemongrass (Cymbopogon)
membrane with antibacterial activity for dye removal. RSC Adv. 9,
34076e34085.
Carvalheiro, F., Silva-Fernandes, T., Duarte, L.C., Gírio, F.M., 2009. Wheat straw
autohydrolysis: process optimization and products characterization. Appl.
Biochem. Biotechnol. 153, 84e93.
Cheng, H.N., Dowd, M.K., Biswas, A., 2012. Biobased polymeric materials prepared
from cotton byproducts. In: Smith, P.B., Gross, R.A. (Eds.), Biobased Monomers,
Polymers, and Materials. ACS Publications, pp. 47e62.
Cheng, H.N., Dowd, M.K., Finkenstadt, V.L., Selling, G.W., Evangelista, R.L., Biswas, A.,
2013. Use of cotton gin trash and compatibilizers in polyethylene composites.
In: Cheng, H.N., Gross, R.A., Smith, P.B. (Eds.), Green Polymer Chemistry: Bio-
catalysis and Materials II. ACS Publications, pp. 423e431.
Cheng, H.N., Kilgore, K., Ford, C., Fortier, C., Dowd, M.K., He, Z., 2019. Cottonseed
protein-based wood adhesive reinforced with nanocellulose. J. Adhes. Sci.
Technol. 33, 1357e1368.
Chranioti, C., Chanioti, S., Tzia, C., 2016. Comparison of spray, freeze and oven drying
as a means of reducing bitter aftertaste of steviol glycosides (derived from
Stevia rebaudiana Bertoni plant)eEvaluation of the final products. Food Chem.
190, 1151e1158.
Cotton Incorporated, 2020. Monthly Economic Letter: July 2020.
Cotton Incorporated, 2017. Monthly Economic Letter: June 2017.
Cotton Incorporated, 2014. Monthly Econmic Letter: January 2014.
Diaz, M.J., Madejon, E., Lo pez, F., Lopez, R., Cabrera, F., 2002. Composting of vinasse
and cotton gin waste by using two different systems. Resour. Conserv. Recycl.
34, 235e248.
A.N.M.A. Haque, R. Remadevi and M. Naebe
Douce, J., Boilot, J.P., Biteau, J., Scodellaro, L., Jimenez, A., 2004. Effect of filler size
and surface condition of nano-sized silica particles in polysiloxane coatings.
Thin Solid Films 466, 114e122.
Driemeier, C., Oliveira, M.M., Mendes, F.M., Go mez, E.O., 2011. Characterization of
sugarcane bagasse powders. Powder Technol. 214, 111e116.
Encinar, J.M., Beltran, F.J., Ramiro, A., Gonzalez, J.F., 1997. Catalyzed pyrolysis of
grape and olive bagasse. Influence of catalyst type and chemical treatment. Ind.
Eng. Chem. Res. 36, 4176e4183.
Estur, G., Gergely, N., 2010. The economics of roller ginning technology and impli-
cations for African cotton sector. In: African Region Working Paper Series.
World Bank, pp. 1e75.
Faircloth, J.C., Hutchinson, R., Barnett, J., Paxson, K., Coco, A., Price III, P., 2004.
Evaluation of alternative cotton harvesting methods in northeast Louisiana- A
comparison of the brush stripper and spindle harvester. J. Cotton Sci. 8, 55e61.
Faulkner, W.B., Wanjura, J.D., Boman, R.K., Shaw, B.W., Parnell, C.B., 2011. Evaluation
of modern cotton harvest systems on irrigated cotton: harvester performance.
Appl. Eng. Agric. 27, 497e506.
Ferdosian, F., Pan, Z., Gao, G., Zhao, B., 2017. Bio-based adhesives and evaluation for
wood composites application. Polymers 9 (70). https://doi.org/10.3390/
polym9020070.
Fu, S.-Y., Feng, X.-Q., Lauke, B., Mai, Y.-W., 2008. Effects of particle size, particle/
matrix interface adhesion and particle loading on mechanical properties of
particulateepolymer composites. Compos. B Eng. 39, 933e961.
Ge, C., Cheng, H.N., Miri, M.J., Hailstone, R.K., Francis, J.B., Demyttenaere, S.M.,
Alharbi, N.A., 2020. Preparation and evaluation of composites containing
polypropylene and cotton gin trash. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 137 (49151) https://
doi.org/10.1002/app.49151.
Ghosh, S., Hulugalle, N., Lockwood, P., Daniel, H., McCorkell, B.E., 2011. Applying
composted cotton gin trash to a vertisol in Southeastern Queensland, Australia.
Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 42, 1855e1861.
Haider, T.P., Vo€lker, C., Kramm, J., Landfester, K., Wurm, F.R., 2019. Plastics of the
future? The impact of biodegradable polymers on the environment and on
society. In: Int, Chemie (Ed.), Angew 58, 50e62.
Hamawand, I., Sandell, G., Pittaway, P., Chakrabarty, S., Yusaf, T., Chen, G.,
Seneweera, S., Al-Lwayzy, S., Bennett, J., Hopf, J., 2016. Bioenergy from cotton
industry wastes: a review and potential. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 66,
435e448.
Haque, A.N.M.A., Remadevi, R., Naebe, M., 2018. Lemongrass (Cymbopogon): a re-
view on its structure, properties, applications and recent developments. Cel-
lulose 25, 5455e5477.
Haque, A.N.M.A., Remadevi, R., Rojas, O.J., Wang, X., Naebe, M., 2020a. Kinetics and
equilibrium adsorption of methylene blue onto cotton gin trash bioadsorbents.
Cellulose 27, 6485e6504.
Haque, A.N.M.A., Remadevi, R., Wang, X., Naebe, M., 2020b. Physicochemical
properties of film fabricated from cotton gin trash. Mater. Chem. Phys. 239,
122009.
Haque, A.N.M.A., Remadevi, R., Wang, X., Naebe, M., 2020c. Mechanically milled
powder from cotton gin trash for diverse applications. Powder Technol. 361,
679e686.
Haque, A.N.M.A., Remadevi, R., Wang, X., Naebe, M., 2020d. Adsorption of anionic
Acid Blue 25 on chitosan-modified cotton gin trash film. Cellulose 27,
9437e9456. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-020-03409-x.
Haque, A.N.M.A., Remadevi, R., Wang, X., Naebe, M., 2020e. Biodegradable cotton
gin trash/poly(vinyl alcohol) composite plastic: effect of particle size on phys-
icochemical properties. Powder Technol. 375, 1e10.
Haque, A.N.M.A., Remadevi, R., Wang, X., Naebe, M., 2020f. Sorption properties of
fabricated film from cotton gin trash. Mater 31, S221eS226. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.matpr.2019.11.065. Today Proc.
Harmsen, P.F.H., Hackmann, M.M., Bos, H.L., 2014. Green building blocks for bio-
based plastics. Biofuels, Bioprod. Biorefining 8, 306e324.
Hassall, Associates, 2005. Value of research investment relating to the waste clas-
sification of cotton gin trash. NSW, Australia.
Hauser, P., 2015. Fabric Finishing: Pretreatment/textile Wet Processing. In:
Sinclair, R. (Ed.), Textiles and Fashion. Elsevier, pp. 459e473.
He, Z., Cheng, H.N., Chapital, D.C., Dowd, M.K., 2014. Sequential fractionation of
cottonseed meal to improve its wood adhesive properties. J. Am. Oil Chem. Soc.
91, 151e158.
Hernandez, J.R., Capareda, S.C., Aquino, F.L., 2007. Activated carbon production from
pyrolysis and steam activation of cotton gin trash. In: 2007 Beltwide Cotton
Conferences. Louisiana, New Orleans, pp. 1494e1499.
Holt, G.A., Blodgett, T.L., Nakayama, F.S., 2006. Physical and combustion character-
istics of pellet fuel from cotton gin by-products produced by select processing
treatments. Ind. Crop. Prod. 24, 204e213.
Holt, G.A., Chow, P., Wanjura, J.D., Pelletier, M.G., Coffelt, T.A., Nakayama, F.S., 2012a.
Termite resistance of biobased composition boards made from cotton byprod-
ucts and guayule bagasse. Ind. Crop. Prod. 36, 508e512.
Holt, G.A., Chow, P., Wanjura, J.D., Pelletier, M.G., Wedegaertner, T.C., 2014. Evalu-
ation of thermal treatments to improve physical and mechanical properties of
bio-composites made from cotton byproducts and other agricultural fibers. Ind.
Crop. Prod. 52, 627e632.
Holt, G.A., McIntyre, G., Flagg, D., Bayer, E., Wanjura, J.D., Pelletier, M.G., 2012b.
Fungal mycelium and cotton plant materials in the manufacture of biode-
gradable molded packaging material: evaluation study of select blends of cot-
ton byproducts. J. Biobased Mater. Bioenergy 6, 431e439.
Holt, G.A., Simonton, J.L., Beruvides, M.G., Canto, A., 2004. Utilization of cotton gin
17
Journal of Cleaner Production 281 (2021) 125300
by-products for the manufacturing of fuel pellets: an economic perspective.
Appl. Eng. Agric. 20, 423e430.
Ibrahim, M.M., Agblevor, F.A., El-Zawawy, W.K., 2010. Isolation and characterization
of cellulose and lignin from steam-exploded lignocellulosic biomass. Bio-
Resources 5, 397e418.
IndustryEdge, 2020. Pulp prices respond to vagaries of global demand (accessed
9.11.20). https://industryedge.com.au/pulp-prices-respond-to-vagaries-of-
global-demand/.
Jackson, B.E., Wright, A.N., Cole, D.M., Sibley, J.L., 2005. Cotton gin compost as a
substrate component in container production of nursery crops. J. Environ.
Hortic. 23, 118e122.
Jeoh, T., 1998. Steam Explosion Pretreatment of Cotton Gin Waste for Fuel Ethanol
Production. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Virginia:
Blacksburg.
Jones, M., Bhat, T., Kandare, E., Thomas, A., Joseph, P., Dekiwadia, C., Yuen, R.,
John, S., Ma, J., Wang, C.-H., 2018. Thermal degradation and fire properties of
fungal mycelium and mycelium-biomass composite materials. Sci. Rep. 8, 1e10.
Jordan, J.H., Easson, M.W., Dien, B., Thompson, S., Condon, B.D., 2019. Extraction and
characterization of nanocellulose crystals from cotton gin motes and cotton gin
waste. Cellulose 26, 5959e5979.
Kabir, E., Kaur, R., Lee, J., Kim, K.-H., Kwon, E.E., 2020. Prospects of biopolymer
technology as an alternative option for non-degradable plastics and sustainable
management of plastic wastes. J. Clean. Prod. 258, 120536.
Kim, H.J., Lee, C.M., Dazen, K., Delhom, C.D., Liu, Y., Rodgers, J.E., French, A.D.,
Kim, S.H., 2017. Comparative physical and chemical analyses of cotton fibers
from two near isogenic upland lines differing in fiber wall thickness. Cellulose
24, 2385e2401.
Klasson, K.T., Wartelle, L.H., Lima, I.M., Marshall, W.E., Akin, D.E., 2009. Activated
carbons from flax shive and cotton gin waste as environmental adsorbents for
the chlorinated hydrocarbon trichloroethylene. Bioresour. Technol. 100,
5045e5050.
Kumari, R., Pramanik, K., 2012. Improved bioethanol production using fusants of
Saccharomyces cerevisiae and xylose-fermenting yeasts. Appl. Biochem. Bio-
technol. 167, 873e884.
Lei, H., Du, G., Wu, Z., Xi, X., Dong, Z., 2014. Cross-linked soy-based wood adhesives
for plywood. Int. J. Adhesion Adhes. 50, 199e203.
Luce, L., 2016. The elephant in the room: sustainability and garment manufacturing
(accessed 9.14.20). https://medium.com/@leanne_luce/waste-in-garment-
manufacturing-explained-three-ways-fd5eb3bdd3d8.
Macias-Corral, M., Samani, Z., Hanson, A., Smith, G., Funk, P., Yu, H., Longworth, J.,
2008. Anaerobic digestion of municipal solid waste and agricultural waste and
the effect of co-digestion with dairy cow manure. Bioresour. Technol. 99,
8288e8293.
Maglinao Jr., A.L., Capareda, S.C., Nam, H., 2015. Fluidized bed gasification of high
tonnage sorghum, cotton gin trash and beef cattle manure: evaluation of syn-
thesis gas production. Energy Convers. OR Manag. 105, 578e587.
Mangialardi, G.J., 1993. Effect of lint cleaning at gins on market value and quality.
Appl. Eng. Agric. 9, 365e371.
MarketsandMarkets, 2020. Nanocellulose market by type, application, region -
global forecast to 2025 (accessed 9.11.20). https://www.marketsandmarkets.
com/Market-Reports/.
McIntosh, S., Vancov, T., Palmer, J., Morris, S., 2014. Ethanol production from cotton
gin trash using optimised dilute acid pretreatment and whole slurry fermen-
tation processes. Bioresour. Technol. 173, 42e51.
Merriam-Webster, 2020. Plasticity (accessed 5.27.20). https://www.merriam-
webster.com/dictionary/plasticity.
Mostafa, N.A., Farag, A.A., Abo-dief, H.M., Tayeb, A.M., 2015. Production of biode-
gradable plastic from agricultural wastes. Arab. J. Chem. 11, 546e553.
Mumtaz, T., Yahaya, N.A., Abd-Aziz, S., Yee, P.L., Shirai, Y., Hassan, M.A., 2010.
Turning waste to wealth-biodegradable plastics polyhydroxyalkanoates from
palm oil mill effluentea Malaysian perspective. J. Clean. Prod. 18, 1393e1402.
Mun ~ oz, H.J., Ferreyraa, J., Aguirrea, D.D., Andersona, A.M., Bruselarioa, A.,
Defagota, C.A., Carrascoa, M.F., 2015. Influence of CaCl2. 2H2O content on the
productive process of composites from cotton gin waste. Procedia Mater. Sci. 9,
123e128.
Myer, R., 2007. Cotton Gin Trash: Alternative Roughage Feed for Beef Cattle. Uni-
versity of Florida, IFAS extension.
Nakamura, Y., Yamaguchi, M., Okubo, M., Matsumoto, T., 1992. Effects of particle size
on mechanical and impact properties of epoxy resin filled with spherical silica.
J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 45, 1281e1289.
Nakanishi, E.Y., Cabral, M.R., de Souza Gonçalves, P., dos Santos, V., Junior, H.S., 2018.
Formaldehyde-free particleboards using natural latex as the polymeric binder.
J. Clean. Prod. 195, 1259e1269.
Nishiwaki-Akine, Y., Kanazawa, S., Uneyama, T., Nitta, K., Yamamoto-Ikemoto, R.,
Watanabe, T., 2017. Transparent woody film made by dissolution of finely
divided Japanese beech in formic acid at room temperature. ACS Sustain. Chem.
Eng. 5, 11536e11542.
Oliver-Ortega, H., Julian, F., Espinach, F.X., Tarres, Q., Ardanuy, M., Mutje, P., 2019.
Research on the use of lignocellulosic fibers reinforced bio-polyamide 11 with
composites for automotive parts: car door handle case study. J. Clean. Prod. 226,
64e73.
Papafotiou, M., Avajianneli, B., Michos, C., Chatzipavlidis, I., 2007. Coloration,
anthocyanin concentration, and growth of croton (Codiaeum variegatum L.) as
affected by cotton gin trash compost use in the potting medium. Hortscience
42, 83e87.
A.N.M.A. Haque, R. Remadevi and M. Naebe
Papafotiou, M., Chronopoulos, J., Kargas, G., Voreakou, M., Leodaritis, N.,
Lagogiani, O., Gazi, S., 2001. Cotton gin trash compost and rice hulls as growing
medium components for ornamentals. J. Hortic. Sci. Biotechnol. 76, 431e435.
Passoth, V., Sandgren, M., 2019. Biofuel production from straw hydrolysates: current
achievements and perspectives. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 103, 5105e5116.
Piccioni, J., Mun ~ oz, H.J., Sa
nchez, M.A., Gordo, J.P., Gonzalez, A.A., Carrasco, M.F.,
2013. Composites based on cotton gin waste and cement for housing con-
struction. In: International Conference on Non-conventional Materials and
Technologies (Brazil).
cido, J., Imam, T., Capareda, S., 2013. Evaluation of ligninolytic enzymes, ultra-
Pla
sonication and liquid hot water as pretreatments for bioethanol production
from cotton gin trash. Bioresour. Technol. 139, 203e208.
Polymer Properties Database, 2020. Polystyrenes (accessed 9.11.20). https://
polymerdatabase.com/.
Qiao, Z., Gu, J., Lv, S., Cao, J., Tan, H., Zhang, Y., 2016. Preparation and properties of
normal temperature cured starch-based wood adhesive. BioResources 11,
4839e4849.
Radford, K.C., 1971. The mechanical properties of an epoxy resin with a second
phase dispersion. J. Mater. Sci. 6, 1286e1291.
Rao, S.S., Seetharama, N., Ratnavathi, C.V., Umakanth, A.V., Dalal, M., 2010. Second
generation biofuel production from sorghum biomass. In: Proceeding of 40th
Annual Sorghum Group Meeting. Tamil Nadu Agricultural University.
Ren, H., Shen, J., Pei, J., Wang, Z., Peng, Z., Fu, S., Zheng, Y., 2019. Characteristic
microcrystalline cellulose extracted by combined acid and enzyme hydrolysis of
sweet sorghum. Cellulose 26, 8367e8381.
Sharma-Shivappa, R., Chen, Y., 2008. Conversion of cotton wastes to bioenergy and
value-added products. Trans. ASABE (Am. Soc. Agric. Biol. Eng.) 51, 2239e2246.
Shitarashmi, S., Krishna, P., 2017. Evaluating fungal mixed culture for pretreatment
of cotton gin waste to bioethanol by enzymatic hydrolysis and fermentation
using co-culture. Polish J. Environ. Stud. 26, 1215e1223.
Sutivisedsak, N., Cheng, H.N., Dowd, M.K., Selling, G.W., Biswas, A., 2012. Evaluation
of cotton byproducts as fillers for poly (lactic acid) and low density poly-
ethylene. Ind. Crop. Prod. 36, 127e134.
Tan, B., Ching, Y., Poh, S., Abdullah, L., Gan, S., 2015. A review of natural fiber
reinforced poly (vinyl alcohol) based composites: application and opportunity.
Polymers 7, 2205e2222.
Tejada, M., Gonzalez, J.L., 2003. Effects of the application of a compost originating
from crushed cotton gin residues on wheat yield under dryland conditions. Eur.
J. Agron. 19, 357e368.
Thomasson, J., 1990. A review of cotton gin trash disposal and utilization, in:
proceedings-Beltwide Cotton Conference (USA, pp. 689e705.
van der Sluijs, M.H.J., 2015. Impact of the ginning method on fiber quality and
textile processing performance of Long Staple Upland cotton. Textil. Res. J. 85,
1579e1589.
van der Sluijs, M.H.J., Roth, G.W., 2020. Comparing dryland cotton upland fibre
18
Journal of Cleaner Production 281 (2021) 125300
quality from on-board spindle and stripper harvesting systems. J. Text 1e8. Inst.
Wang, C., Wu, J., Bernard, G.M., 2014. Preparation and characterization of canola
protein isolateepoly (glycidyl methacrylate) conjugates: a bio-based adhesive.
Ind. Crop Prod. 57, 124e131.
Wang, Z., Gu, Z., Hong, Y., Cheng, L., Li, Z., 2011. Bonding strength and water
resistance of starch-based wood adhesive improved by silica nanoparticles.
Carbohydr. Polym. 86, 72e76.
Wanjura, J.D., Armijo, C.B., Delhom, C.D., Boman, R.K., Faulkner, W.B., Holt, G.A.,
Pelletier, M.G., 2019. Effects of harvesting and ginning practices on Southern
High Plains cotton: fiber quality. Textil. Res. J. 89, 4938e4958.
Wanjura, J.D., Baker, K., Barnes, E., 2017. Engineering and ginning: Harvesting. J.
Cotton Sci. 21, 70e80.
Wanjura, J.D., Boman, R.K., Kelley, M.S., Ashbrook, C.W., Faulkner, W.B., Holt, G.A.,
Pelletier, M.G., 2013. Evaluation of commercial cotton harvesting systems in the
southern high plains. Appl. Eng. Agric. 29, 321e332.
Wendel, J.F., Grover, C.E., 2015. Taxonomy and evolution of the cotton genus, Gos-
sypium. In: Fang, D.D., Percy, R.G. (Eds.), Cottonwood 1e20. https://doi.org/
10.2134/agronmonogr57.2013.0020.
White, D.H., Coates, W.E., Wolf, D., 1996. Conversion of cotton plant and cotton gin
residues to fuels by the extruder’feeder liquefaction process. Bioresour. Technol.
56, 117e123.
Widsten, P., Kandelbauer, A., 2008. Adhesion improvement of lignocellulosic
products by enzymatic pre-treatment. Biotechnol. Adv. 26, 379e386.
Williams, P.T., Nugranad, N., 2000. Comparison of products from the pyrolysis and
catalytic pyrolysis of rice husks. Energy 25, 493e513.
Yang, L., Liu, J., Du, C., Qiang, Y., 2013. Preparation and properties of cornstarch
adhesive. Adv. J. Food Sci. Technol. 5, 1068e1072.
Yang, S., 2008. Plant Fiber Chemistry. China Light Industry Press, Beijing.
Yin, H., Qiu, P., Qian, Y., Kong, Z., Zheng, X., Tang, Z., Guo, H., 2019. Textile waste-
water treatment for water reuse: a case study. Processes 7, 34.
Zabaniotou, A.A., Roussos, A.I., Koroneos, C.J., 2000. A laboratory study of cotton gin
waste pyrolysis. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 56, 47e59.
Zabaniotou, A., Andreou, K., 2010. Development of alternative energy sources for
GHG emissions reduction in the textile industry by energy recovery from cotton
ginning waste. J. Clean. Prod. 18, 784e790.
Zhang, Y., Remadevi, R., Hinestroza, J.P., Wang, X., Naebe, M., 2020a. Transparent
ultraviolet (UV)-shielding films made from waste hemp hurd and polyvinyl
alcohol (PVA). Polymers 12, 1190.
Zhang, Y., Shi, R., Xu, Y., Chen, M., Zhang, J., Gao, Q., Li, J., 2020b. Developing a stable
high-performance soybean meal-based adhesive using a simple high-pressure
homogenization technology. J. Clean. Prod. 256, 120336.
Ziegler, A.R., Bajwa, S.G., Holt, G.A., McIntyre, G., Bajwa, D.S., 2016. Evaluation of
physico-mechanical properties of mycelium reinforced green biocomposites
made from cellulosic fibers. Appl. Eng. Agric. 32, 931e938.