Could ‘liquid wood’ replace plastic?
Germans engineer an organic alternative from a paper waste product.
By Brian Whitley | Contributor to The Christian Science Monitor/ February 11, 2009 edition
Almost 40 years ago, American scientists took their first steps in a quest to break the world’s dependence on plastics.
But in those four decades, plastic products have become so cheap and durable that not even the forces of nature seem able to stop them. A soupy expanse of plastic waste – too tough for bacteria to break down – now covers an estimated 1 million square miles of the Pacific Ocean.
Sensing a hazard, researchers started hunting for a substitute for plastic’s main ingredient, petroleum. They wanted something renewable, biodegradable, and abundant enough to be inexpensive.
Though they stumbled upon a great candidate early on, many US chemists had given up on it by the end of the 1990s. The failed wonder material: lignin, the natural compound that lends strength to trees. A waste product from paper production, much of the lignin supply is simply burned as fuel.
But while many scientists turned to other green options, a German company, Tecnaro, says it found the magic formula. Its “liquid wood” can be molded like plastic, yet biodegrades over time.
Now, Tecnaro’s success could revive interest in lignin and propel the search for better and cheaper bioplastics.
“The lignin itself was misunderstood completely by [leaders in the field] and the majority of people,” says Simo Sarkanen, an environmental science professor at the University of Minnesota.
The formula is everything
This past holiday season, nativity figurines made from Tecnaro’s “liquid wood” raised eyebrows among the bioplastic community. Sold as Arboform, the tough mixture is chock full of lignin – sometimes more than 50 percent, compared with the 30 percent threshold where many researchers would max out. The rest is fiber from wood, flax, or hemp, as well as a few additives.
Raw Arboform consists of dark brown pebble-sized pellets. It is processed using the same equipment used to make conventional plastic. The granules are dropped into a barrel and heated until they melt. Then the contents are highly pressurized and forced into a rigid mold – that of a figurine, perhaps.
As the liquid cools, Arboform actually conforms better than most plastics to the boundaries of complex molds, says Benjamin Porter, a researcher with Tecnaro. The 10-year-old, 10-person operation based in Ilsfeld, Germany, is very secretive about its liquid-wood formula – so proprietary that Dr. Sarkanen is a little skeptical. In 2001, his lab
patented a simpler lignin-based plastic, one that lacks the secret combination of additives in Arboform.
With several years of successful sales, the company takes on one or two new employees annually. And as the company grows, so does the catalog of Arboform products, according to Mr. Porter. The current lineup includes watches, keyboards, hairbrushes, and, recently, caskets. Future possibilities include car interiors and furniture. “We haven’t built a house though – yet,” Mr. Porter jokes.
Arboform’s nativity figurines showcase a new grade of the material. Its sulfur content is much lower than Tecnaro’s original recipe, says Emilia Regina-Inone of the Franhoefer Chemical Institute, which works with Tecnaro to test Arboform. And it can be broken down and reused eight or 10 times without wrecking the material’s mechanical properties, such as its relatively high fire-resistance and durability.
But there are tradeoffs. All versions of Arboform are heavier, more brittle, and more expensive than conventional plastics. Arboform costs about $1.60 per pound when purchased in bulk, compared with less than a dollar for a pound of polypropylene, a traditional plastic. Tecnaro produces about 6.6 million pounds of Arboform each year, a capacity that Porter says consistently increases 10 percent each year.
America has a taste for starch
Tecnaro’s products sell in Australia, Brazil, and Colombia, but mostly in Europe, where consumers are more willing to pay for environmentally conscious products – and producers must pay to recycle petroleum-based plastics.
The US mostly backs a different plastic substitute. After giving up on lignin, American scientists focused on starch – a cheap and renewable resource, though one also important to food production.
Cereplast, based in Hawthorne, Calif., harnesses starch from corn, tapioca, wheat, and potatoes to produce a resin capable of replacing at least 50 percent of the petroleum in conventional plastics. Dwarfing upstarts like Tecnaro, the company’s California facility can pump out 50 million pounds of starch-based plastic a year for compostable forks and biodegradeable containers.
But tapping the potential of long-neglected lignin could not only cut the amount of plastic thrown away each year, but could also slow current greenhouse gas emissions. In trees, lignin naturally stores carbon dioxide during photosynthesis, in which plants use sunlight to turn that CO2 into oxygen.
When papermakers discard unwanted lignin, the carbon is still trapped inside it – until they burn the lignin. At that point, much of the CO2 is released into the atmosphere.
“If you can make plastics, or any useful kinds of polymeric materials from lignins … this, of course, would help reduce the rate of global warming quite significantly,” Sarkanen says.
And the question of what to do with lignin instead of burning it is quickly becoming an urgent one. The US Department of Agriculture has mandated that 30 percent of transportation fuels must come from plant materials by 2030.
Producing those “green” fuels involves stripping the lignin from the cellulose in plant matter, an arduous task. Federal funding totaling $375 million over five years now backs three research centers dedicated to efficient biofuel production, one of which is affiliated with Sarkanen’s project to find the enzyme that naturally dissolves lignin without the assistance of a fungus.
“The question of what we’re going to do with lignin besides burning it is coming to the fore,” Sarkanen says. “It’s of enormous potential importance.”
( More stories )
Comments
3. Dr. Johnson | 02.13.09
A product which costs more and degrades over time… what a losing idea… give me styrofoam and real plastic… not the imitation kind… do you really.. actually… believe there’s a petroleum shortage… and do you really care about global warming… do you honestly believe syntho plastic would save the world… it’s just not going to happen… get a clue.
4. Marvin McConoughey | 02.13.09
A key question is whether the manufacturing process permits large economies of scale as production ramps up. If it does, liquid wood may have commercial potential.
5. The Chia Baker | 02.13.09
This stuff sounds great!
But, can you eat out of it? I’m in the food industry, and “plastic plastic plastic” is all you hear about the packaging. It’s thin, cheap, and keeps food fresh…but it’s also disposed of almost right away. It SEEMED safe (up until that BPA scare in baby bottles etc) but how safe is the wood based stuff? Has anyone made any food containers out of it and tested it out?
6. Dr. Chuckie | 02.14.09
It depends on the source of the lignin. Today there are a hand full of mechanical pulp mills where the lignin comes out as a fairly pure. Not lignin sulfide. As yes it will take something else to make it into a binder or foam. And the something else is likely a petrol chemical… so if niche applications are developed for the already present materials the economics are likely better than the roller coaster economics of oil. I say it is time to get our heads out of the sand.
7. Miles Bader | 02.14.09
Given that Arboform is currently produced in extremely small amounts compared to conventional plastics, it seems kind of amazing that it’s already so close in price.
Surely the price of Arboform would go down if it were produced in the insane massive quantities that plastic is… Even if there are limits to the current production methods, widespread adoption would be a strong incentive for more research.
8. jim sadler | 02.14.09
Use of wood fiber is one thing. The use of plants for fuel is a lousy idea. It is already raising the price of corn, rice, potatoes, soy and other bean oils. We need emergency legislation to halt the use of food or the land needed to grow foods for use as fuel crop land.
9. JF | 02.14.09
I don’t see why wood products would be less safe to eat off of than petroleum products.
10. Not a Doctor | 02.14.09
Hey Dr. Johnson,
Are you realy a DR or did you just put that in your name too make your drivel sound better. Or are you perhaps a proctologist. Global warming or not is not the question. Much of the green movement is about saving money long term. Also with the current economy there are a lot of recycling campaigns that are failing. They cant find markets to purchase thier recyclables anymore.
11. Donny Viszneki | 02.15.09
Dr. Johnson: That this product “degrades over time” is not, as you see it, a negative attribute. You seem to suggest that we someone wants to replace plastics in situations where plastics have the characteristics which are actually needed for the job. On the contrary: if we want to put food containers on a space station or in a fall-out shelter, we will all still be using plastics. Most plastic in the world is only meant to hold products for at most a few years. Say you move 10 million units of a product with packaging that lasts 20 years: that is 200 million package years of garbage occupying the world. The rest of your post suggests that you don’t know much about science, but I’ll leave that for someone else to remedy.
12. Frank MacGill | 02.15.09
Why do they burn the lignin from paper production anyway? Wouldn’t it be better to bury it?
13. Abbo | 02.15.09
First Law of Ecology - everything has to go somewhere. Second Law - everybody is downstream from somebody.
What makes the lignin-plastic go away at the end of its life besides burning? Can lignin digesting microbes from the gut of termites and rumin of cows convert it to energy? The drag on the environment from plastic is that there are no biologic processes (decay) mechanisms for it.
As regards BPA, that’s only the tip of the problem (and it is much more than a “scare” to the people (kids) affected by it). All plastics, because of their synthetic nature and indestructability, pose a danger - just some are more immediate than others (the human food chain accumulating more, the Pacific Plastic Sargasso Sea less pressing, for now….). The Europeans seem to have grasped the fundamentals of small planet-large population that we have not. For every product made in the market there has to be a lifecycle and it has to be managed (and paid for) through those stages. Otherwise, we will continue to be buried in indestructible crap that has no end-of-life use except as lung-destroying dirty fuels.
Faith in technology is misplaced without ethics and morality.
14. Michael | 02.15.09
I doubt this will eliminate plastics for everything. Since it’s biodegradable, it’s great for stuff that doesn’t have to be around a long time (food containers, retail packaging, anything that’s just going to be discarded) but I wouldn’t want to use it for something I intended to keep for a long time or that was deliberately exposed to the elements (building materials, gardening equipment)
Assuming it’s safe to use with food (good point Chia Baker), this stuff could make a great replacement for plastics in many places.
15. vince | 02.15.09
Try making a plastic made from plant matter that ISNT biodegradable. Free carbon sequestration.
17. Susan P | 02.15.09
The majority of lignin produced today comes from wood pulping processes, where it is used on-site as boiler fuel, to produce the steam that powers the production process. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kraft_process). A Kraft pulpmill is usually 100% energy self-sufficent because it burns the lignin that come from the trees that are the raw material imput. If you use the lignin for another purpose, then you need another energy source - Oil or coal anyone?
The pulp is then made into paper and paperboard products.
Maybe making things directly from paper might be environmentally better than plastics…
Like the paperboxes and paper wrappings for hamburgers rather than styrofoam boxes? Like paper egg cartons? Like wax paper candy wrappers rather than foil/plastic wrappers?
18. Gloria Fisher | 02.15.09
The Chia Baker should be aware of the fact that substances, whether natural
or synthetic get modified for particular usages, eventually. However,
my worry would be intense deforestation - there goes the Black Forest for starters !!!!! Dr. Johnson, yes, I DO care about global warming and have personally reduced my footprint to help in the little way that I can. How about you, Sir?
19. Wellington Wells | 02.15.09
In the 1930’s Henry Ford used soy beans to make “plastic” for the garnish mouldings and interior trim such as escutcheon plates for window winders and door handles. These products were temperature sensitive after many years and suffered some degrees of deformation. Ford liked to use resources at hand whether soybeans or ore from the iron ranges of Michigan.
20. Alex T | 02.15.09
Dr. Johnson: Well, consider that most consumer plastics only last a few years anyway? I wouldn’t want to make something like a toolbox or child’s outdoor playset from this stuff, but it’d do just fine for something like a cellphone or something with a high turnover rate?
And what’s wrong with paying more for something that’s better in the long run?
21. Elaine Holden | 02.15.09
I really like china plates, woven wooden baskets, and cloth tote bags for my groceries. I like to reject plastic every chance I get. The problem is not the plastic, the problem is the stupid people who don’t even THINK what the plastic is doing to the world. The problem is total lack of integrity, lack of honesty, and lack of desire to keep the environment safe for us and our future generations. Scientists, as usual, have done this to us in their “wisdom” and showing off their brilliance in how to dominate nature. I hope they all greet each other in hell.
22. Sapper | 02.16.09
Dr Johnson(3) has hit the issue on the head, but does not see that it is precisely that the material degrades over time that places it the fore of addressing the planets needs.Cost of production is inversely relative to volume so answering that criticism is only a matter of time.
23. Don | 02.16.09
Here in Oregon I’m a small tree farmer, just 37 acres. I’ll be in my 80’s when I get my once-in-a-lifetime harvest.
Since the 1940’s there has been promise of useful materials and chemicals from trees. The idea of using the lignin for something other than boiler fuel is hopeful. I’d love to see a material such as arboform come from our abundant, renewable resource: trees.
24. 1poordog | 02.16.09
To find the enzymes needed to break down the lignin, they should start by checking the digestive tracts of termites, locusts, paper wasps, marine borers, etc. These little guys have cornered the market on breaking down wood fibers long enough, dont you think?
25. Global Impact | 02.16.09
“Do you really care about Global Warming? Do you believe there is a petroleum shortage?”
I can say with certainty, the only doctorate that you would aquire is one out of the USofA.
You may have noticed a little heat increase over the last number of years? Or perhaps the constant weather fluctuations? Or just maybe, you’ve noticed an increase in diseases in 3rd world countries… Insects and the like carry these diseases, they also flourish in an environment that has 2 day years (ie. Raining/Storm one day, Scorching hot day the next)
If you haven’t, then:
A) Turn off your Aircon and take a step outside.
B) Open your eyes to the world around you.
C) Ask why.
D) Refer back to your original comment.
E) Enlightenment!
26. former plastics guy | 02.16.09
Just some prices for comparison. In dollars per pound for 10,000-100,000 pounds. I also took the liberty of averaging several subcategories.
Arboform(stuff from the article) 1.60
polypro 1.42
polystyrene .68
PVC flexible .77
PVC rigid .96
Polyethylene .80
Polycarbonate 2.27
Nylon (this comes in a wide range of grades and prices) 1.50-3.00
acetel 1.00
You should also consider that they mentioned that it is heavier. That means you get less volume per pound, so the same part that took .2lbs of material now takes .3lbs of a more expensive material.
27. Daniel | 02.16.09
I agree with Susan P, it’s better to use the paper directly, than have to replace the lignin with other sources of energy for the paper mill — unless those sources are renewable energy, possibly hydroelectric. I buy my eggs in a paper container of 30, and refill my little styrofoam container of 12 that I bought last time I didn’t pay attention to what material my eggs were packed in.
For those who don’t believe global warming exists, yes, pay attention! This is the second year in a row that the robins haven’t flown south for the winter from my parents’ house in eastern Oklahoma. And there were mosquitoes there in early February. I can’t ever remember insect problems before spring even starts. In south central Kansas, my aunt says she feels cheated because when she was young, there would be snow all winter long, and she never got to go outside and enjoy it. Now that she’s retired and can spend the days how she wants, there is very rarely any snow to enjoy.
One other thing. Don’t think that just because someone is a doctor, they know the truth about global warming. There are plenty of deniers with MD’s and PhD’s all around me here in Oklahoma. Even if they’ve been paying attention enough to notice the warming trend, they say human activities can’t have anything to do with it. If they have a doctorate in meteorology, there is no excuse, but if they’re another kind of doctor, they’ve often been paying too much attention to whatever they got their doctorate in, at the expense of everything else.
28. Money is illusion | 02.16.09
1) Plastics DO contain more carbon than wood; burning them creates the REAL POLLUTANTS, namely SO2 and NOx (CO2 is expelled by LIVING beings, not
2) Economics of this stuff is IRRELEVANT, as far as the HEALTH of human beings is concerned (and, more importantly, of world’s ecosystem)
3) What about the “secret ingredients” ? If they have LITTLE detrimental effects on health, let’s start massive TREE PLANTING, as the (real) production “cost”, disposal being through soil-burrying, is recycled through tree’s growth
4) Houses could be built out of this stuff, and pretty much anything (either using this, or wood molding through “sake”) …
5) And, please, let’s hurry : Malthusian thinking and population “reduction” looms in the next COMING years if we do not act SOON enough (google : gpso / georgia guidestones)
29. Richard K | 02.16.09
I understand that bio-degradation of organic materials releases just as much carbon as burning them. So the prevention-of-global-warming argument for biodegradeable plastics is weak, I think. Whether the lignin is burnt or degraded, the carbon released should be equal to that which was absorbed during the growth of the tree. For the purpose of minimizing carbon emissions, either option is superior to burning fossil fuels, whose carbon has been locked up for millions of years, rather than 10’s of years.
30. plastics designer | 02.17.09
Many of you have little background in polymers. I can add something here; 20 years in the field. The three issues I see with lignan based polymers are 1) the process for breaking the scrap material down presently takes several steps, and is also being compounded with conventional plastics, so it may not be really reusable, 2) the material properties of this substance are not that good - very brittle and low heat deflection point, and 3) need to look at the release of carbon from the the whole cradle to grave life of the material, including the making of it, recycling of it, and also including the replacement for burning the lignan - coal or gas, right? Bioplastics are coming along for sure, and if I can use them I will. But they are not the correct material for most uses.
31. mikey007 | 02.17.09
I think some of you are confused about the differences between pollution, and litter. Some believe incredibly that carbon dioxide is a pollutant. Forests breathe CO2. If CO2 is reduced, the forests could all die out. In truth, plastic is the best carbon sequestration on earth. Extremely long strings of carbon atoms in an indestructible matrix. I personally try to do my part for global warming, as i’m driving, i donate all my plastic drink bottles to the earth.
32. Gabe | 02.18.09
Massive deforestation is the obvious problem. The ecological impact of this product is low now because of it’s low prevalance. Oil, coal, and natural gas appear clean in small ammounts too.
It’s only a ‘free’ source of material until all of the byproduct production is used for plastic production, aften that plant materials would need to be harvested specifically for plastic production.
It’s probably just better to use less packaging and to burn off packaging that would otherwise go to a landfill. Carbon and other nasty chemicals created when plastics are burned aside (I guess you could sequester them), it probably makes the most sense.
If the power grid is “greened” then I imagine that the price of hydrocarbon plastics will fall even more making the economic viability of this even more unrealistic.
As for human health being more important than the economics. That’s nonesense. Human health almost always benifits from economic development. Primitive Anarcho arguments aside (yes, if there were far less people on Earth we could all live in Eden as care-free hunter-gathers), if something is not economically viable, then it probably does more harm than good to people, the environment and human health.
33. Gabe | 02.18.09
As for “noticing” global warming. That’s an invention of the media. Almost all climate scienctists say that noticing climate change from day to day or even year to year is impossible.
The scare mongering by the media and some evironmental groups only undermines legitimate arguments for climate change and actions to reduce its effects.
You cannot “see” the effects of global warming. For every story about hot summers and birds not migrating (which could actually be because of someone putting up a bird feeder, my grandmother has the same problem) there there is an equal number of stories about colder winters and birds moving further south. That’s weather. Global warming is something different.
34. Anonymous | 02.19.09
Check out the site for Greenware, food packaging made out of 100% renewable resources and fully biodegradable. It looks and feels like plastic.
35. matt | 03.12.09
I feel a bit confused by all this, Isn’t oil just another member in the organic chemistry family? Plastic indestructable? hasn’t anyone seen what happens to toys left outside for a few years. and if the shells of microbes can be modified enough to become oil naturally, then who is to say that modified wood products are any safer? really show me the data. I think this whole subject seems to suffer from a belief system that plastic from oil is unnatural and plastic from a plant is natural. they are both natural and unnatural depending on your view. I personally believe that if you provide a source of carbon and something will learn to eat it (eventually).
dont get me wrong, I do care. I just think the whole question of natural is clouded by human short sightedness.
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
Leave a Comment
We do not publish all comments, and we do not publish comments immediately. The comments feature is a forum to discuss the ideas in our stories. Constructive debate - even pointed disagreement - is welcome, but personal attacks on other commenters are not, and will not be published.
Tip: Do not write a novel. Keep it short. We will not publish lengthy comments. Come up with your own statements. This is not a place to cut and paste an email you received. If we recognize it as such, we won't post it.
Please do not post any comments that are commercial in nature or that violate copyrights.
Finally, we will not publish any comments that we regard as obscene, defamatory, or intended to incite violence.
1. zohan | 02.12.09
The 40% more that it appears, that is cost to produce this alternative product, is not really representative of the true economic situation, when taken into consideration the negative economic aspects of making and using plastic, this alternative product is much cheaper.
The only negatives appear to be the fortunes of the oil and chemical related interests.