Benefits of producing and using biodegradable polymers over conventional polymers: A literature review

Soleni dos Santos Kuhn Sette ,Luciano Luiz Silva ,Márcio Antônio Fiori ,Francieli Dalcanton ,Josiane Maria Muneron de Mello ,Natieli Bauerman

doi:10.24294/jpse11816

Home - JPSE - Volume 8 - Issue 1

Submit to JPSE

Journal Browser

Volume | Year

Issue

• Current lssue

View All

News and Announcements

View All

Benefits of producing and using biodegradable polymers over conventional polymers: A literature review

Soleni dos Santos Kuhn Sette

Luciano Luiz Silva

Márcio Antônio Fiori

Francieli Dalcanton

Josiane Maria Muneron de Mello

Natieli Bauerman

Journal of Polymer Science and Engineering 2025, 8(1); https://doi.org/10.24294/jpse11816

Submitted：25 Jun 2025

Accepted：30 Jun 2025

Published：08 May 2025

Download PDF(416.48KB)

XML

Abstract

With modern society and the ever-increasing consumption of polymeric materials, the way we look at products has changed, and one of the main questions we have is about the negative impacts caused to the environment in the most diverse stages of the life cycle of these materials, whether in the acquisition of raw materials, in manufacturing, distribution, use or even in their final disposal. The main methodology currently used to assess the environmental impacts of products from their origin to their final disposal is known as Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). Thus, the objective of this work is to evaluate how much the biodegradable polymer contributes to the environment in relation to the conventional polymer considering the application of LCA in the production mode. This analysis is configured through the Systematic Literature Review (SLR) method. In this review, 28 studies were selected for evaluation, whose approaches encompass knowledge on LCA, green biopolymer (from a renewable but non-biodegradable source), conventional polymer (from a non-renewable source) and, mainly, the benefits of using biodegradable polymers produced from renewable sources, such as: corn, sugarcane, cellulose, chitin and others. Based on the surveys, a comparative analysis of LCA applications was made, whose studies considered evaluating quantitative results in the application of LCA, in biodegradable and conventional polymers. The results, based on comparisons between extraction and production of biodegradable polymers in relation to conventional polymers, indicate greater environmental benefits related to the use of biodegradable polymers.

Keywords

References

1. Brazilian Association of Technical Standards (ABNT). NBR ISO 14062: Environmental Management—Integrating Environmental Aspects into Product Design and Development. ABNT; 2004.

2. Brazilian Association of Technical Standards (ABNT). NBR ISO 14001: Environmental Management Systems—Requirements with Guidance for Use. ABNT; 2004.

3. Brazilian Association of Technical Standards (ABNT) NBR ISO 14040: Environmental Management—Life Cycle Assessment—Principles and Framework. ABNT; 2009.

4. Brazilian Association of Technical Standards (ABNT). NBR ISO 14042: Environmental Management—Life Cycle Assessment—Life Cycle Impact Assessment. ABNT; 2000.

5. Arduin RH. Life Cycle Assessment of Textile Products: Implications from Allocation [Master’s thesis]. University of São Paulo; 2013. doi: 10.11606/D.18.2013.tde-07032014-130543

6. ABIPLAST. Plastic profile—Brazilian plastic material processing industry 2015. Available online: http://www.abiplast.org.br [accessed on 2 May 2025].

7. Carvalho JS, Oliveira SA, Rosa DS. Development of biodegradable polymeric films for disposable bags and their eco-efficiency analysis. In: Proceedings of the 5th Brazilian Congress on Life Cycle Management; 19–12 September 2016; Fortaleza, Brazil. pp. 763-770.

8. Amaral MC, Zonatti WF, Silva KL, et al. Industrial textile recycling and reuse in Brazil: case study and considerations concerning the circular economy. Gestão e Produção. 2018; 25(3): 431-443. doi: 10.1590/0104-530x3305

9. Silva DAL. Product life cycle management through environmental assessment and monitoring of manufacturing processes: Procedures and case studies [Master’s thesis]. University of São Paulo; 2016.

10. Loureiro CFB. Sustainability and Education: A Perspective from Political Ecology. Cortez; 2012.

11. Cavalcanti C. Sustainability: mantra or moral choice? An ecological-economic approach. Estudos Avançados. 2012; 26(74): 35-50. doi: 10.1590/s0103-40142012000100004

12. Ferreira VF, da Rocha DR, da Silva FC. Green chemistry, sustainable economy and quality of life. Revista Virtual de Química. 2014; 6(1): 85. doi: 10.5935/1984-6835.20140008

13. Dempsey N, Bramley G, Power S, et al. The social dimension of sustainable development: defining urban social sustainability. Sustainable Development. 2011; 19(5): 289-300. doi: 10.1002/sd.417

14. Malhotra NK. Marketing Research: An Applied Orientation, 3rd ed. Bookman; 2001.

15. Lakatos EM, Marconi MA. Methodology of Scientific Work, 6th ed. Atlas; 2001.

16. Vergara SC. Research Methods in Administration. Atlas; 2005.

17. Silva GA, Kulay LA. Life cycle assessment. In: Junior AV, Demajorovic, J (editors). Models and Tools of Environmental Management: Challenges and Perspectives for Organizations. SENAC; 2010.

18. ACV BRASIL. Available online: https://acvbrasil.com.br/empresa [accessed on 2 May 2025].

19. Technical Committee ISO/TC. Environmental Management—Life Cycle Assessment—Life Cycle Impact Assessment. Technical Committee ISO/TC 207; 2004.

20. Brazilian Association of Technical Standards (ABNT). Environmental Management—Specifications and Guidelines for Use. ABNT; 2004.

21. International Organization for Standardization. ISO 14040: Environmental Management—Life cycle assessment—principles and framework. ISO; 2006.

22. Kalakul S, Malakul P, Siemanond K, et al. Integration of life cycle assessment software with tools for economic and sustainability analyses and process simulation for sustainable process design. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2014; 71: 98-109. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.01.022

23. Brito GF, Agrawal P, Araújo EM, et al. Biopolymers, biodegradable polymers and green polymers. Revista Eletrônica de Materiais e Processos. 2011; 6(2): 127-139.

24. Muthukumar A, Eswaran A, Nakkeeran S, et al. Efficacy of plant extracts and biocontrol agents against Pythium aphanidermatum inciting chilli damping-off. Crop Protection. 2010; 29(12): 1483-1488. doi: 10.1016/j.cropro.2010.08.009

25. Pires RR. Evaluation of the Recycling Potential and Life Cycle of Blends Containing Polyethylene and Thermoplastic Starch [PhD thesis]. Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais; 2015.

26. Franchetti SMM, Marconato JC. Biodegradable polymers—A partial way for decreasing the amount of plastic waste. Quím. Nova. 2006; 29(4): 811-816. doi: 10.1590/S0100-40422006000400031

27. Belloli R. Green Polyethylene from Brazilian Sugarcane Ethanol: World-class biopolymer [Master’s thesis]. Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul; 2010.

28. Matheus JP, Munhoz PM. Life cycle evaluation of polyethylene (PE) films: a case study on the green PE alternative. I LCA Workshop: Social, Environmental and Economic Vision III LCA-Social Workshop. Universidade Federal do ABC (UFABC); 2017.

29. Edwards C, Parker G. A life cycle assessment of oxo-biodegradable, compostable and conventional bags. Intertek Expert Services; 2012.

Previous
article in this issue

Next
article in this issue