0
Systematic Review ? AI-assigned paper type based on the abstract. Classification may not be perfect — flag errors using the feedback button. Tier 1 ? Systematic review or meta-analysis. Synthesizes findings across many studies. Strongest evidence. Environmental Sources Sign in to save

Evaluation of the Viability of 3D Printing in Recycling Polymers

Polymers 2024 24 citations ? Citation count from OpenAlex, updated daily. May differ slightly from the publisher's own count. Score: 65 ? 0–100 AI score estimating relevance to the microplastics field. Papers below 30 are filtered from public browse.
Chrysanthos Maraveas, Ioannis-Vasileios Kyrtopoulos, Konstantinos G. Arvanitis

Summary

This systematic review explores whether 3D printing technology can help recycle plastic waste, particularly from agriculture. Finding better ways to reuse plastics matters because unrecycled plastic breaks down into microplastics that contaminate soil, water, and eventually the food chain.

Study Type Review

The increased use of plastics in industrial and agricultural applications has led to high levels of pollution worldwide and is a significant challenge. To address this plastic pollution, conventional methods such as landfills and incineration are used, leading to further challenges such as the generation of greenhouse gas emissions. Therefore, increasing interest has been directed to identifying alternative methods to dispose of plastic waste from agriculture. The novelty of the current research arose from the lack of critical reviews on how 3-Dimensional (3D) printing was adopted for recycling plastics, its application in the production of agricultural plastics, and its specific benefits, disadvantages, and limitations in recycling plastics. The review paper offers novel insights regarding the application of 3D printing methods including Fused Particle Fabrication (FPF), Hot Melt Extrusion (HME), and Fused Deposition Modelling (FDM) to make filaments from plastics. However, the methods were adopted in local recycling setups where only small quantities of the raw materials were considered. Data was collected using a systematic review involving 39 studies. Findings showed that the application of the 3D printing methods led to the generation of agricultural plastics such as Polylactic Acid (PLA), Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS), Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET), and High-Density Polyethylene (HDPE), which were found to have properties comparable to those of virgin plastic, suggesting the viability of 3D printing in managing plastic pollution. However, limitations were also associated with the 3D printing methods; 3D-printed plastics deteriorated rapidly under Ultraviolet (UV) light and are non-biodegradable, posing further risks of plastic pollution. However, UV stabilization helps reduce plastic deterioration, thus increasing longevity and reducing disposal. Future directions emphasize identifying methods to reduce the deterioration of 3D-printed agricultural plastics and increasing their longevity in addition to UV stability.

Share this paper

Discussion

Log in to join the discussion

No comments yet. Be the first to share your thoughts.