Degradation of Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) and Polyamide (PA)

Abstract

Microplastics have become an increasing concern to humans and ecosystems as plastic production continues to soar, due to their prevalence in the environment and lifespan. Plastic is cheap and durable making it an ideal industrial and commercial material. However, because of this popularity, it resides in most places on earth, including in human blood, and is difficult to remove due to its small size. These plastics can enter the environment through numerous methods, from landfills and dumps to washing machines and sinks. In recent years, there has been significant investigation in reducing plastic pollution. This a difficult task attributed to the varying size, shape, polymer type, chemical properties and location plastic can be found. It’s critical to understand the rate of degradation and the factors that influence it for two main reasons; it provides accurate timelines of degradation and techniques that may increase degradation need a starting point. In Chapter 2, I investigate the degradation rate of laboratory grade polyethylene terephthalate (PET) using a model enzyme (Huimcola insolens cutinase) to hydrolyze the plastic. This research aims to characterize the polymers used such that results can be compared and identify the analyses which capture degradation and characterize the polymer best. Environmental factors controlling enzymatic plastic degradation are not well studied and this experiment aimed to study the effect of incubation temperature, exposure to freeze-thaw cycles (FTCs) and extreme temperatures on the degradability of laboratory-grade PET. In addition, we also assessed the degradability of consumer-grade PET, sourced from plastic bottles, for comparison to the laboratory-grade PET. The first test was under variable temperatures, where plastic was incubated at 25 ˚C, 40 ˚C and 55 ˚C. The results show increased temperatures increase the rate of polymer degradation. The second set of tests were conducted under different pretreatments; treatments the plastic would undergo before incubation at 40 ˚C. Plastic was exposed to a series of freeze-thaw cycles (FTCs) or extreme temperatures (-70 ˚C or +55 ˚C). It was found any type of pretreatment increased the rate of degradation compared to plastics that did not undergo any pretreatment. The final condition tested was plastic type, where PET water bottles were obtained and incubated at 55 ˚C to determine the differences in degradability between laboratory-grade PET and consumer-grade PET. Consumer-grade PET was found to not have any significant degradation after 10 weeks of enzyme exposure, raising serious concerns regarding its degradability and lifespan. This result suggests that modifications to the consumer-grade PET during the fabrication process, such as heat treatments, are altering its chemistry and its degradation kinetics. Analyses for degradation and characterizing the polymers included: Fourier-transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy, differential scanning calorimetry (DSC), scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and tensile strength measurements. Analysis of the crystallinity, tensile strength, SEM images and FTIR spectra measured indicate that PET’s physical and chemical properties were modified when degraded. Overall, the PET’s tensile strength decreased and the crystallinity increased with increasing hydrolytic degradation. FTIR spectral changes were seen early on, with peaks of interest at 1237 cm-1, 1016 cm-1 and 1087 cm-1, and finally at 1716 cm-1, and the flattening of these peaks increased with increasing hydrolytic degradation. The results highlight that enzymatic degradation rates can be highly variable due to differences in environmental conditions. It also highlights the large difference in the degradability of consumer-grade versus laboratory-grade PET, which has significant implications for in situ environmental degradation rates. In Chapter 3, I investigated the rate of laboratory-grade PET and polyamide (PA) degradation in stormwater pond sediment over a 16 month period in a stormwater pond in Kitchener, Ontario. Microplastic accumulation in the environment, especially in bodies of water and sediment is a well-known problem. Stormwater ponds act as a microplastic sink and draw pollutants from urban and industrial wastewater before it enters oceans or lakes. This results in high levels of microplastics remaining in stormwater pond sediment. Stormwater ponds are an excellent site to determine realistic plastic degradation in the environment, in a contained area where high concentrations of plastic is known to be present. To date, no long-term polymer degradation studies have been conducted in a stormwater pond despite the rising popularity of these ponds. For this study, 8 pore water samplers (peepers) were packed with pond sediment and plastic pieces were inserted into each cell of the peeper. An additional 8 peepers filled with water, such that pore water chemistry could be collected. The peepers were inserted into the pond sediment and sacrificed periodically over the course of 16 months. For the first 8 months both PET and PA plastic increased in mass as they absorbed water. After 16 months of field incubation, PA had degraded by 0.42% and PET was still net positive (higher mass than before the incubation) however it was close to its original weight. The obtained results highlight the lack of degradation to plastics in stormwater pond sediment and suggest lifespans are longer than previously estimated. Based on previous degradation studies under sediment conditions, this study suggests that stormwater pond sediment is the least effective at degradation polymers, which may be attributed to the pond water chemistry and microbial communities present. Microplastics are known to accumulate in stormwater pond sediment but they are found to degrade at slower rates than other sediment profiles. The laboratory experiment results in Chapter 2 show under ideal conditions laboratory-grade PET degrades minimally at low temperatures. Additionally, the lack of degradation seen with the consumer-grade PET in Chapter 2 suggests that under environmental conditions, the polymer would take even longer than the laboratory-grade polymers to degrade. The combination of Chapter 2 and 3 demonstrate the difference between ideal and environmental conditions for polymer degradation. This research provides evidence to strongly advocate for the removal of microplastics before they enter the environment as I have proven they take considerable lengths of time to degrade under various conditions. I encourage this research to be used by any future researchers who hope to develop methods for plastic pollution reductions.