Bioplastic Container Cropping Systems
Landscape and Biodegradation Trials
Round-2 Results Summary
James Schrader - Iowa State University
Landscape Evaluations
• Container removed, crushed, and buried beneath roots
Landscape
- Plant Quality Index
Container removed and
Container ID #
Container Material
Discarded
Installed
Beneath
25
Petroleum plastic (polypropylene)
217
191
PLA composite with
1
Soy 50%
258
203
2
Soy 33%
174
227
8
DDGS 20%
192
182
3
Soy + DDGS 30/10
242
274
4
Soy + Lignin 30/10
149
264
9
Lignin 20%
206
220
20
Protein (AR)
262
217
PHA composite with
6
Soy 33%
162
150
10
DDGS 20%
206
176
13
Starch 10% (Met)
168
184
19
Cellulose (AR)
232
232
188
217
14
PolyAmide - DDGS 70/30
Paper fiber
29
Uncoated
139
231
27
One coat PUR
183
205
28
Two coats PUR
181
194
• No statistical differences
from control with
container discarded
• Only two container types
showed a difference
between container
discarded and container
buried beneath
• One container type was
better than control with
container buried beneath
Biodegradation
in Soil
Biodegradation in soil (6 months)
Container ID #
25
Container Material
Petroleum plastic (polypropylene)
Degradation %
0
k
PLA composite with
1
Soy 50%
45
c
2
Soy 33%
30
e
8
DDGS 20%
11
i
3
Soy + DDGS 30/10
34
d
4
Soy + Lignin 30/10
26
f
9
Lignin 20%
0
k
20
Protein (AR)
33
23 & 24
Recycled PLA
de
0
k
PHA composite with
6
Soy 33%
86
b
10
DDGS 20%
47
c
13
Starch 10% (Met)
15
h
19
Cellulose (AR)
100
a
PolyAmide with
14
DDGS 30%
20
g
15
Lignin 30%
1
k
17
PLA 30%
0
k
Paper fiber
29
Uncoated
14
hi
27
One coat PUR
19
g
28
Two coats PUR
12
hi
Percentage
weight loss
Biodegradation in soil (Round-1 materials)
Degradation weight loss %
Round-1
Container Material
Over
6 months
Over
1.5 years
Petroleum plastic (polypropylene)
0
0
PLA composite with
Soy 50%
DDGS 10%
Corn stover 10%
PLA polymer only
53
16
14
0
54
20
16
0
PHA composite with
DDGS 10%
Starch 10% (Met)
Polymer only (Met. P1004)
43
17
8
82
44
18
Paper fiber
Uncoated
Two coats PUR
45
30
60
51
Wood fiber (Fertilpot)
Uncoated
Two coats PUR
53
18
100
87
TerraShell® (Summit Plastics)
8
15
Coir fiber (ITML Kord)
31
81
Peat fiber (Jiffy)
23
80
6 months = 1 season
1.5 years = 2 seasons
Shaded = not different
from petroleum control
Cumulative scores
100 = Best
Material characteriastics
0 = Worst
Container ratings after 6 weeks
Plant
Additional function
6-month
Processability Processability Biodegradation
Grower
Dry
Transplant
Fertilizer
Root
Total
Health
Quality
weight
establishment
effect
improvement
average score
100
96
77
78
80
80
100
98
94
95
89
X
X
78
90
100
95
77
78
78
X
X
76
100
100
95
95
74
80
73
X
80
60
80
85
100
99
95
87
100
X
82
26
60
77
32
40
99
93
82
79
X
66
100
0
80
100
100
100
96
80
84
83
na
75
33
60
85
95
100
100
100
100
95
63
75
75
86
?
80
80
75
92
47
63
63
80
90
47
?
100
100
90
93
54
71
Starch 10% (Met)
46
na
93
15
?
95
100
90
93
58
76
68
Cellulose (AR)
72
na
65
100
?
33
5
40
100
92
84
91
20
70
80
20
?
70
55
70
96
69
80
Uncoated
100
na
95
14
?
85
100
85
91
42
One coat PUR
96
na
90
19
?
90
100
95
95
55
Two coats PUR
94
na
90
12
?
95
100
95
96
67
Cost score
Extrusion
Inj. Molding
in soil
Recyclable
Aesthetic
83
na
95
0
80
100
100
Soy 50%
78
40
60
45
50
77
Soy 33%
76
55
75
30
67
85
DDGS 20%
78
85
90
11
80
Soy + DDGS 30/10
79
70
70
34
Soy + Lignin 30/10
78
60
65
Lignin 20%
77
90
Protein (AR)
72
Soy 33%
DDGS 20%
Petroleum plastic (polypropylene)
Structural assessment
81
PLA composite with
83
X
X
86
61
X
72
73
X
78
PHA composite with
PolyAmide - DDGS 70/30
73
?
?
68
79
X
64
60
71
X
74
74
76
79
81
73
80
Paper fiber
Characteristics Scores
100 = Best
0 = Worst
Container ID #
Material
Material
Cost score Processability
Petroleum plastic (polypropylene)
83
95
PLA composite with
Soy 50%
Soy 33%
DDGS 20%
Soy + DDGS 30/10
Soy + Lignin 30/10
Lignin 20%
Protein (AR)
78
76
78
79
78
77
72
50
65
88
70
63
95
75
19
PHA composite with
Soy 33%
DDGS 20%
Starch 10% (Met)
Cellulose (AR)
63
63
46
71
75
85
93
65
14
PolyAmide - DDGS 70/30
20
75
Paper fiber
Uncoated
One coat PUR
Two coats PUR
100
96
94
95
90
90
25
1
2
8
3
4
9
20
6
10
13
29
27
28
Characteristics Scores
100 = Best
0 = Worst
Extrusion
Inj. Molding
Petroleum plastic (polypropylene)
na
95
PLA composite with
Soy 50%
Soy 33%
DDGS 20%
Soy + DDGS 30/10
Soy + Lignin 30/10
Lignin 20%
Protein (AR)
40
55
85
70
60
90
60
75
90
70
65
100
75
Container ID #
25
1
2
8
3
4
9
20
19
PHA composite with
Soy 33%
DDGS 20%
Starch 10% (Met)
Cellulose (AR)
14
PolyAmide - DDGS 70/30
6
10
13
29
27
28
Processability
Paper fiber
Uncoated
One coat PUR
Two coats PUR
na
75
80
na
75
90
93
65
70
80
na
Overall
processing
na
na
na
95
90
90
Characteristics Scores
6-month
Biodegradation
100 = Best
0 = Worst
Container ID #
in soil
Recyclable
25
Petroleum plastic (polypropylene)
0
80
1
PLA composite with
Soy 50%
Soy 33%
45
30
50
67
2
8
DDGS 20%
11
80
3
Soy + DDGS 30/10
34
60
4
Soy + Lignin 30/10
Lignin 20%
Protein (AR)
26
0
33
60
80
60
86
47
15
100
?
19
PHA composite with
Soy 33%
DDGS 20%
Starch 10% (Met)
Cellulose (AR)
14
PolyAmide - DDGS 70/30
20
?
Paper fiber
Uncoated
One coat PUR
Two coats PUR
14
19
12
?
9
20
6
10
13
29
27
28
?
?
?
?
?
Characteristics Scores
100 = Best
0 = Worst
Container ID #
Container
Container
Performance Performance
(6 weeks)
(16 weeks)
Petroleum plastic (polypropylene)
100
100
PLA composite with
Soy 50%
Soy 33%
DDGS 20%
Soy + DDGS 30/10
Soy + Lignin 30/10
Lignin 20%
Protein (AR)
86
92
98
88
50
100
93
61
96
95
78
78
97
95
26
Failed
100
100
19
PHA composite with
Soy 33%
DDGS 20%
Starch 10% (Met)
Cellulose (AR)
14
PolyAmide - DDGS 70/30
65
71
Paper fiber
Uncoated
One coat PUR
Two coats PUR
90
95
97
89
90
25
1
2
8
3
4
9
20
6
10
13
29
27
28
NA
100
67
NA
NA
Characteristics Scores
Additional function
100 = Best
0 = Worst
Container ID #
Plant or Crop
Quality
Fertilizer
effect
Root
improvement
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Petroleum plastic (polypropylene)
83
PLA composite with
Soy 50%
Soy 33%
DDGS 20%
Soy + DDGS 30/10
Soy + Lignin 30/10
Lignin 20%
Protein (AR)
92
82
81
95
88
86
98
19
PHA composite with
Soy 33%
DDGS 20%
Starch 10% (Met)
Cellulose (AR)
66
73
74
91
14
PolyAmide - DDGS 70/30
79
X
Paper fiber
Uncoated
One coat PUR
Two coats PUR
66
75
79
X
25
1
2
8
3
4
9
20
6
10
13
29
27
28
X
X
?
?
Overall Scores
100 = Best
0 = Worst
* = Additional function
Container ID #
Overall
average score
Petroleum plastic (polypropylene)
81
PLA composite with
Soy 50%
Soy 33%
DDGS 20%
Soy + DDGS 30/10
Soy + Lignin 30/10
Lignin 20%
Protein (AR)
77
76
80
82
66
83
85
19
PHA composite with
Soy 33%
DDGS 20%
Starch 10% (Met)
Cellulose (AR)
72 *
78 *
74
68
14
PolyAmide - DDGS 70/30
64 *
Paper fiber
Uncoated
One coat PUR
Two coats PUR
74 *
79
80
25
1
2
8
3
4
9
20
6
10
13
29
27
28
**
**
*
**
*
**
Material Cost $
Cost of materials per pound
New
Recycled
Material
$/lb
$/lb
Petrol-based PP
1.10
0.76
Petrol-based HDPE
1.00
0.65
SP.A
0.74
(ISU High-percentage Soy polymer)
Soy protein isolate
1.14
PLA
1.10
PHA
2.00
PolyAmide
3.90
DDGS
0.08
Corn stover
0.03
Lignin (NeroPlast, polymer filler)
0.30
Recycled paper fiber
0.36
Polyurethane (dip coat)
2.71
0.60
Material Cost $
New material Recycled material
cost per
cost per
container (¢)
container (¢)
Container ID #
Petroleum plastic (polypropylene)
11.0
7.6
PLA composite with
Soy 50%
Soy 33%
DDGS 20%
Soy + DDGS 30/10
Soy + Lignin 30/10
Lignin 20%
Protein (AR)
13.5
14.4
13.1
13.1
13.4
13.8
16.4
9.8
9.5
7.3
8.7
9.0
7.9
12.0
20.3
20.2
28.6
16.7
NA
19
PHA composite with
Soy 33%
DDGS 20%
Starch 10% (Met)
Cellulose (AR)
14
PolyAmide - DDGS 70/30
40.4
NA
25
1
2
8
3
4
9
20
6
10
13
NA
NA
NA
Our cost to purchase
29
27
28
Paper fiber
Uncoated
One coat PUR
Two coats PUR
and dip coat (¢)
3.0
5.0
6.0
14.0
16.0
17.0
Categories of Biocontainers
(Based on results of our trials and/or information from publications)
1. Containers biodegradable in soil (within a timeline of 1 to 2 years)
2. Containers not degradable in soil, but degradable by
composting
3. Exceptional or durable containers that can be recycled
- or will be carbon-negative if landfilled
- carbon neutral if incinerated
Category 1
Containers Biodegradable in Soil
(Based on results of our trials)
1. PHA + DDGS (80/20)
2. PLA + Soy (50/50)
?? some persistent residue
3. Paper fiber (uncoated or coated with polyurethane)
4. Wood fiber (uncoated or coated with polyurethane)
5. Coir fiber (uncoated only)
6. Peat fiber
Category 2
Containers not degradable in soil,
but degradable by composting
(Based on results of our trials and information from publications)
1. TerraShell® from Summit Plastics
2. PLA - Protein Compound (Aspen Research)
3. PLA + Soy (67/33 and other blend percentages)
4. PLA + Soy + DDGS (60/30/10)
5. PHA with Starch (90/10) (Mirel P1008, Metabolix)
6. PHA without biocomposite filler
Category 3
Exceptional or durable containers that can be recycled
- or will be carbon-negative if landfilled
(Based on results of our trials and information from publications)
1. PLA + Lignin (80/20)
2. Recycled PLA (rPLA, Natureworks)
3. PLA - Polyamide blends
4. PLA without biocomposite filler
Containers Biodegradable in Soil
Example: PHA + DDGS (80/20)
Containers with Additional Function
Example: PLA + Soy (50/50)
- Fertilizer effect
- Root improvement
Containers with no change in
cultural practices
Example: PLA + Lignin (80/20)
Tentative Containers for Round 3
1. PLA + Soy (50/50) or (60/40)
2. PLA - Protein Compound from Aspen Research
3. PLA + Lignin (80/20)
4. PLA + DDGS (80/20) - probably Bio-Res™ DDGS
5. PHA & DDGS (80/20)
6. Paper-fiber (Polyurethane dip coat)
Current Industry Collaborators
• Metabolix, Inc. :
PHA bioplastics technology and production : www.metabolix.com
• Arizona Chemical :
• R/D Leverage :
Biopolymer production : www.arizonachemical.com
Mold design and manufacturing : www.rdleverage.com
• Aspen Research, Inc. :
Materials technology, research, analysis, and compounding
: www.aspenresearch.com
• Mid-Continent Tool & Molding :
• Laurel BioComposite LLC :
• VistaTek :
Injection molding, mold making
: www.mctminc.com
Modified DDGS polymer additives
: www.laurelbiocomposite.com
Mold making, injection molding : www.vistatek.com
• NatureWorks LLC :
PLA bioplastics technology and production
: www.natureworksllc.com
Looking for additional collaborators
• Three container manufacturers to produce 4.5” and
gallon containers from our top five materials on
production-scale machines
= Round-3 container manufacturing collaborations
• Up to 20 greenhouse and 20 nursery growers for
production and marketing trials of these containers
= Round-3 stakeholder horticultural trials
Commercial Availability of Containers
Available Now
• TerraShell® from Summit Plastics (thermoformed)
• Uncoated fiber containers of paper, wood, coir, peat,
and a few others
Available Soon
• 4.5” PLA - based injection-molded containers from a
collaboration of VistaTek, Aspen Research, and NatureWorks
Questions ?