What are the advantages of starch bioplastics?

Potato starch bioplastic pros and cons

If you are looking for more details, kindly visit HW.

Potato starch-based bioplastics have emerged as a promising alternative to traditional petroleum-based plastics. Not only are they biodegradable and compostable, but they can also be produced from renewable resources and may have lower carbon footprints than their fossil fuel-based counterparts. However, like any material, potato starch bioplastics come with their own set of pros and cons, and understanding these tradeoffs is crucial for making informed decisions about their use. In this article, we will delve into the top-secret potato starch bioplastic pros and cons, and explore some surprising insights of these innovative materials.

1. Bioplastic made from potato starch?

1.1. What is potato starch bioplastic?

Bioplastic made from potato starch is a type of biodegradable plastic that is derived from natural materials, such as potato starch, and other renewable resources. The process of making bioplastic from potato starch typically involves extracting the starch from the potatoes and then combining it with other natural ingredients, such as glycerol, to create a material that can be molded and shaped into various forms. 

The resulting bioplastic has several advantages over traditional plastic, as it is biodegradable, meaning it can be broken down naturally by microorganisms in the environment, and it does not release harmful chemicals or microplastics into the ecosystem. Additionally, bioplastics made from potato starch have a lower carbon footprint and require less energy to produce than traditional plastics.

1.2. Who invented potato starch bioplastic?

Pontus Törnqvist, a young Swedish student, studied potato starch among other kinds of starch. He has a product that is vying for the renowned James Dyson prize.
"I was interested in discovering solutions for the post-use life of throwaway plastic materials," the student himself explains. The disparity between the amount of time individuals spend using plastic things (20 minutes) and how long they survive in the environment (450 years!) served as the starting point.

Pontus Törnqvist used a "trial and error" approach because he adhered to the traditional scientific procedure. "At first, I believed that my research with biodegradable thermoplastic might somehow include algae. But when I heated the algae, all I got was something like an algal cookie. A tiny amount of the liquid that I used to combine the algae and potato starch dropped to the floor. It created a type of film as it dried. I thus devoted all of my energies to doing this.

Potato Plastic was created in this manner. From straws to cutlery, this biodegradable material may be utilized to create any item that is typically made of throwaway plastic. After being used for two months, it will then be composted.

1.3. Potato starch bioplastic applications

Potato starch-based bioplastics have a variety of applications in different industries. Some of the most common applications of bioplastics made from potato starch include:

• Packaging: One of the most common applications of bioplastics made from potato starch is in packaging. Bioplastics can be used to create a wide range of packaging materials, including films, wraps, bags, and containers. 
• Foodservice items: Another common application of potato starch-based bioplastics is in the production of food service items. These can include plates, cups, utensils, and other disposable items used in restaurants and catering businesses. Bioplastics made from potato starch are a suitable alternative to traditional plastics and paper products. 
• Agriculture: Bioplastics made from potato starch can also be used in agriculture, where they can be used to create mulch films. These films can be placed over the soil, where they help to reduce soil erosion and promote crop growth.
• Textiles: Bioplastics made from potato starch can be used in textile production. The starch is extracted from potatoes and converted into fibers, which can be woven into textile products. These fibers can be used to create clothing, upholstery, and other textile products.
• Medical devices: Bioplastics made from potato starch can also be used in medical device manufacturing. They are a suitable alternative to traditional plastics in the production of surgical instruments and implants. 
• 3D printing: Bioplastics made from potato starch can be used in 3D printing to create a variety of objects, from prototypes to consumer products.

Overall, the applications of potato starch-based bioplastics are still growing and expanding as new technologies and methods are developed for creating and using these materials. While they are not yet as widely used as traditional plastics, they offer a promising alternative for reducing the environmental impact of plastic production and disposal.

2. Potato starch bioplastic pros and cons

2.1. Pros

Potato starch bioplastics have several advantages over traditional petroleum-based plastics, including:

Biodegradability

Potato starch bioplastics are biodegradable, meaning they can be broken down by microorganisms in the environment, including bacteria, fungi, and algae. This is in contrast to traditional petroleum-based plastics that can persist in the environment for hundreds of years. The biodegradability of potato starch bioplastics means that they have the potential to reduce the amount of plastic waste in the environment and prevent harm to wildlife.

Renewable resource

Potatoes, the raw material used to create potato starch bioplastics, are a renewable resource that can be grown and harvested each year. This is in contrast to petroleum-based plastics, which are derived from non-renewable fossil fuels. The use of renewable resources reduces the dependence on finite resources and helps to promote a more sustainable economy.

Lower carbon footprint

Potato starch bioplastics have a lower carbon footprint compared to traditional plastics. The production of traditional plastics requires the extraction of fossil fuels, which releases greenhouse gasses and contributes to climate change. In contrast, the production of potato starch bioplastics requires less energy and emits fewer greenhouse gasses. This means that potato starch bioplastics have the potential to help mitigate climate change.

Versatility

Potato starch bioplastics can be used in a variety of applications, including packaging, food service items, agriculture, textiles, medical devices, and 3D printing. This versatility makes them a useful alternative to traditional plastics in many different industries. Additionally, the properties of potato starch bioplastics can be customized to meet the specific needs of each application.

Biocompatibility

Potato starch bioplastics are biocompatible, meaning they do not cause harm to live tissue. This makes them a suitable alternative to traditional plastics in medical device manufacturing, including surgical instruments and implants. Additionally, potato starch bioplastics can be used in other applications where contact with living tissue is required, such as wound dressings and bandages.

Consumer appeal

With an increasing awareness of environmental issues, consumers are becoming more interested in products that have a reduced environmental impact. Potato starch bioplastics offer an eco-friendly alternative to traditional plastics, making them an attractive option for environmentally-conscious consumers.

The use of potato starch bioplastics has the potential to reduce the environmental impact of plastic production and disposal. They are biodegradable, made from renewable resources, have a lower carbon footprint, are versatile, biocompatible, and have consumer appeal. As the demand for sustainable materials continues to increase, potato starch bioplastics are likely to become more widely used in a variety of applications.

2.2. Cons

While potato starch bioplastics have many advantages over traditional petroleum-based plastics, they also have some disadvantages that are worth considering, including:

Cost

The production of potato starch bioplastics can be more expensive than traditional petroleum-based plastics. This is because the raw materials used in bioplastics are more expensive, and the production process is often more complex. The cost of potato starch bioplastics can make them less competitive with traditional plastics in some applications, particularly in industries where costs are a major factor.

Limited durability

While potato starch bioplastics are biodegradable, they are not as durable as traditional plastics. This means that they may not be suitable for applications that require long-term use or exposure to extreme temperatures or other harsh conditions. For example, some food packaging materials may need to be able to withstand freezing temperatures or high heat, which could cause potato starch bioplastics to degrade or lose their shape.

Production challenges

The production of potato starch bioplastics can be challenging, particularly for small manufacturers who may not have access to specialized equipment and expertise. The production process can also be sensitive to fluctuations in temperature and humidity, which can impact the quality and consistency of the final product. Additionally, the process of creating potato starch bioplastics requires a significant amount of water, which can be a challenge in areas with limited water resources.

Competing uses for raw materials

The raw materials used to create potato starch bioplastics can also be used for food production. This can create competition for these resources, which can impact the availability and cost of the raw materials used in bioplastic production. Additionally, the production of potato starch bioplastics can potentially divert resources away from food production, which could create issues in areas where food security is a concern.

Limited recycling options

While potato starch bioplastics are biodegradable, they may not be suitable for recycling in the same way as traditional plastics. This is because the biodegradable additives used in potato starch bioplastics can contaminate the recycling stream, making it difficult to recycle these materials in the same way as traditional plastics. This can limit the options for disposing of potato starch bioplastics at the end of their life cycle.

Biodegradation time

While biodegradability is one of the advantages of potato starch bioplastics, it can also be a disadvantage. Depending on the environmental conditions, potato starch bioplastics can take several months or even years to biodegrade. During this time, they can still create litter and potentially cause harm to wildlife. Additionally, the process of biodegradation can release methane, a potent greenhouse gas, which can contribute to climate change.

While potato starch bioplastics have many advantages over traditional plastics, they also have some limitations that can make them less suitable for certain applications. As technology and manufacturing processes improve, some of these limitations may be overcome, making potato starch bioplastics a more viable alternative to traditional plastics.

3. How to make bioplastic from potato starch?

In this tutorial, we'll show you how to create plastic from potato starch and other household ingredients to turn it into a resin. You may just use cornstarch in place of potato starch if you don't want to the time making it. Below is the detailed potato starch bioplastic recipe:

Step 1: Prepare the materials

The first step is to gather all of the necessary materials. These typically include potato starch, water, glycerol, and vinegar. You should ensure that all materials are of high quality and free from contaminants, as impurities can impact the properties of the final bioplastic.

Step 2: Extract the Starch

After preparing the materials, the next step will be extracting the starch.

• 1) Obtain and wash a potato.
• 2) To completely remove the skin, use a peeler.
• 3) Cut the baked potato into size-appropriate pieces for your blender.
• 4) Fill the blender with the cubes and around 1 cup of water. Run the machine on high for one or two minutes.
• 5) To remove the hazy water, use a coffee filter.
• 6) Dry the mixture is not strictly essential if you want to make the plastic  immediately. But if you need to store it for a long time, spread it out on wax paper and place it in a bright location to dry (it could get moldy otherwise).

You may purchase pre-made, higher-quality starch online or at your neighborhood grocery shop if you don't want to manufacture the starch yourself.

Step 3: Mix the potato starch and water

In a saucepan, mix together the potato starch and water until the potato starch is fully dissolved. The ratio of potato starch to water can vary depending on the desired properties of the final bioplastic, but a typical ratio is around 1:10 (i.e. 1 part potato starch to 10 parts water).

• 1) Fill the beaker or other container with 60 ml (4 teaspoons) of cold water before heating the mixture.
• 2) Add 10 grams (or roughly 1 tablespoon) of potato or corn starch - either homemade or purchased - to the water.
• 3) Add the food coloring at this point if colorful plastic is required. Five drips should be plenty.

Step 4: Heat the mixture

Reduce the heat to low and whisk the mixture often. Increase the heat to medium-high and whisk even more as the mixture begins to thicken. Keep cooking it when it begins to boil for 5 minutes. You now should have a "gooey" product that you can pour into a mold or onto a piece of aluminum foil/silicone heat pad to dry. You want it to be extremely transparent and sticky (but not like toothpaste, think flubber). Heating the mixture helps to activate the potato starch and create a uniform, homogeneous solution.

Step 5: Add glycerol and vinegar

Once the mixture has thickened, remove it from the heat and stir in the glycerol and vinegar. Glycerol is a plasticizer that helps to give bioplastic flexibility and elasticity, while vinegar acts as a preservative and helps to prevent the growth of bacteria and fungi. The exact amount of glycerol and vinegar used can vary depending on the desired properties of the bioplastic, but a typical ratio is around 2-3 parts glycerol and 1 part vinegar per 100 parts of potato starch.

Step 6: Pour the mixture into a mold

Once the mixture is fully mixed, it is poured into a mold or onto a flat surface and allowed to cool and harden. The mold can be made of a variety of materials, such as silicone or plastic, and can be designed to create a specific shape or size of bioplastic. The temperature and humidity of the environment can impact the cooling and hardening process, and it may take several hours or even days for the bioplastic to be fully set.

Step 7: Remove the bioplastic from the mold

Once the bioplastic has hardened, it can be removed from the mold and used in a variety of applications. The bioplastic may need to be trimmed or cut to the desired size or shape, and any rough edges or imperfections can be sanded or smoothed out. The final properties of the bioplastic will depend on the specific recipe and manufacturing process used, as well as any additional additives or treatments that may be applied.

In short, making bioplastic from potato starch requires careful attention to detail and specialized equipment and expertise. The recipe and manufacturing process can be adjusted to achieve specific properties, such as flexibility, strength, or biodegradability, and the resulting bioplastic can be used in a variety of applications, such as packaging, food service products, and even medical devices. As demand for sustainable materials grows, more research and development will likely be devoted to improving the production and properties of bioplastics made from potato starch and other renewable resources.

BiONext 400 is a bioplastic compound made from bioplastic and modified starch powder, offering an eco-friendly alternative to traditional plastics. This bioplastic is made from starch, which makes it biodegradable within 12 months after use, eliminating any concerns over waste management and disposal.

For more Whoelsale Biodegradable Starch Resin Companyinformation, please contact us. We will provide professional answers.

BiONext 400 is a bio-compound based on bioplastic and modified starch powder

BiONext 400 is a versatile material that offers full functionality in one compound. It can be directly processed without the need for additional materials, making it a convenient option for manufacturers looking to produce sustainable products. It is an efficient and eco-friendly option for various applications, such as single-use cutlery, disposable food packaging, and more.

If you want to know more information about BiONext 400 or other kinds of bioplastic products, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Abstract

The accumulation of plastic wastes in different environments has become a topic of major concern over the past decades; therefore, technologies and strategies aimed at mitigating the environmental impacts of petroleum products have gained worldwide relevance. In this scenario, the production of bioplastics mainly from polysaccharides such as starch is a growing strategy and a field of intense research. The use of plasticizers, the preparation of blends, and the reinforcement of bioplastics with lignocellulosic components have shown promising and environmentally safe alternatives for overcoming the limitations of bioplastics, mainly due to the availability, biodegradability, and biocompatibility of such resources. This review addresses the production of bioplastics composed of polysaccharides from plant biomass and its advantages and disadvantages.

Keywords:

bioplastics, starch-based bioplastics, lignocellulosic fibers, extraction process

1. Introduction

Over the past two centuries, the significant growth of the world population and its consumption habits have led to several negative impacts on the environment. The development of a society with more sustainable production/consumption mechanisms should consider scenarios such as deforestation, water pollution, soil silting, and solid waste accumulation. Regarding plastic wastes, they represent approximately 12% of the composition of the world&#;s solid waste [1], and their annual production has been increasing since and exceeded 6 billion tons of waste generated between &#; [2].

Despite technologies and bioproducts (e.g., bioplastics) being an alternative for the mitigation of such environmental problems, a total replacement of synthetic plastics from petrochemical origin can hardly be considered in the short or even long term. On the other hand, certain applications of bioplastics may represent areas of large-scale potential replacement [3]; for example, biodegradable materials for packaging and other short-lived use sectors are viable, since they constitute a large part of the total plastics production [4,5,6,7].

Bioplastics can be classified into materials derived directly from natural polymers (agro-polymers), with or without modifications (e.g., starch-based bioplastics and/or cellulose), polymers produced by microbial fermentation (e.g., polyhydroxyalkanoates-PHAs), and biomaterials chemically synthesized from renewable raw materials (e.g., polylactic acid&#;PLA, bio-polyethylene-BPE, bio-nylons, and bio-polyurethanes). BPE is derived from the polymerization of ethylene from bio-ethanol, bio-nylons are produced via diacids from biomasses, and bio-polyurethanes are fabricated from the incorporation of polyols of plant origin [8]. However, even oils can represent a feedstock for the development of bioplastics.

Bioplastics from agro-polymers are derived from natural polymers such as polysaccharides (starch, cellulose, pectins, hemicellulose) and proteins (casein, zein, gluten, gelatin) that generally involve intra and intermolecular interactions and cross-links (crosslinking) between polymeric constituents, forming a semi-rigid three-dimensional polymeric network which retains the solvent [3,9].

However, large-scale production of bioplastics for different applications is limited by high costs, in comparison to synthetic plastics derived from fossil oil, and concerns over functionality [10]. Different biopolymers used have disadvantages such as high-water vapor permeability, oxygen permeability, fragility, low thermal resistance, low mechanical properties, vulnerability to degradation, and low processability [11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19].

The production and use of bioplastics instead of synthetic plastics (non-biodegradable and oil-based ones) reduce emissions of polluting gases and provide materials from renewable and/or biodegradable sources, availability of raw materials, and a promising alternative for the destination of solid biomass residues. Regarding environmental problems such as the greenhouse effect (the emission of greenhouse gases is a growing global concern, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)), a 50% reduction in GHG emissions by is required for avoiding a 2 °C increase in the global temperature. Biomaterials such as bioplastics and biofuels are considered one of the mitigating measures in relation to global warming [5,7,20,21,22].

This review focuses on the different possibilities of bioplastics production from starch and lignocellulosic fibers, their advantages and disadvantages, and the procedures for obtaining natural polymers from plant biomass. Therefore, considering the development of several studies on the production of bioplastics from lignocellulosic fibers (from fractionation of the components or in nature and modified), in addition to the different applications that these bioplastics present, a review study on the characteristics (properties) of bioplastics and the processes for obtaining these polymers are justified.

4. Extraction of Starch and Lignocellulosic Components (a Challenge)

Regarding the development of bioplastic materials with the addition of natural polymers such as lignocellulosic fibers, the steps that precede the formulation and modification stages of such materials must be considered, since the extraction and purification processes of the lignocellulosic fibers from the biomass are responsible for the economic viability of the fiber&#;s application, hence, the final material&#;s price. The processes will also define the quality and characteristics of the final materials because they influence the properties of the bioplastic films formed and their suitability for a particular application.

The choice of biomass must be considered for manufacturing processes and further transformations of starch, due to its different characteristics and compositions. Tubers, for example, contain a very small amount of proteins and fats, which facilitates the isolation of starch [197]. The most common sources of commercial starch are cereals such as corn, rice, and wheat, with more than 60% starch, as well as the roots or tuberous of cassava and potato, with approximately 16&#;24% of starch in weight [198,199,200].

The unit operations for the extraction of starch start with disintegration&#;the plant cell walls are opened, thus exposing their starch granules [201]. The next steps are extraction, in which starch is separated from the fibers, and purification, especially from proteins. Starch is then concentrated and finally dried [202].

The industrial process of starch isolation separates starch from protein, usually using an alkaline solution [203,204]. Different alkaline agents, such as detergents and sodium hydroxide or sodium hypochlorite, can be employed as extraction solvents [205]; however, concerns over the disposal of effluents arise due to their use [203]. Such methods have been proven effective for the production of starch films [206], and important considerations include avoidance of amylolytic or mechanical damage to the starch granules, effective deproteinization of starch, and minimization of the loss of small granules [207].

Hydrothermal processing with microwave-assisted extraction can optimize the process, since it is considered a green and safe technology for starch extraction, due to its ease of use, the possibility of using only water as extraction solvent, short extraction times, higher performance, and lower solvent consumption [208,209]. Therefore, it has been applied on an industrial scale for the obtaining of bioactive compounds [210].

In cost-effective and efficient isolation of cellulose from biomass, the cellulose source should ideally come from economically viable and easily accessible agro-wastes, as the amount of cellulose in various natural sources can vary, depending on the species and the lifetime of the plants. From a technological point of view, the evaluation of lignin content is crucial for the optimization of the pretreatment necessary for the extraction of pure cellulose pulp [211]. Indeed, lignin is considered the hardest chemical component to be removed from lignocellulosic materials [212].

Initially, the material is subjected to a water-washing process for the removal of dirt/impurities and water-soluble extractives. The biomass compounds closely linked to cellulose, such as hemicellulose and lignin, are then removed. The complexity of the composition of lignocellulosic materials hampers the penetration of chemical agents, thus requiring a pretreatment for the breakage of the structure and facilitation of chemical processes, hence, economy.

Kraft pulping uses a mixture of sodium hydroxide (NaOH) and sodium sulfide (Na2S) in a digester to dissolve lignin and hemicellulose [211]. The strong base disrupts OH bonding in the fiber network structure by ionizing the hydroxyl groups of various materials in fibers [213]. Such a process is addressed in research on cellulose extraction for film formation and is widely used on an industrial scale, with 96% market dominance [211,214,215].

The addition of sodium sulfide facilitates ether cleavage and controls undesirable condensation reactions, resulting in a high yield of strong fibres. However, it generates sulfite derivatives, which may link to cellulose and cause environmental problems within disposal [216,217]. Many treatments free from chlorine and/or sulfide have been developed towards reducing the environmental impacts of the pulping process [211,218]. Due to strict environmental regulations, organosolv has emerged as an alternative owing to its unique features [216,217].

After pulping, the resulting material can undergo a bleaching step, or delignification, which uses different bleaching agents such as chlorine dioxide (ClO2), hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), ozone (O3), or peracetic acid [211]. The use of chlorine dioxide has excelled that of elemental chlorine in controlling parameters such as chemical and biochemical demand for oxygen and total solids, as it more effectively minimizes the polluting load of bleaching effluents. Significant pollution reductions have been achieved; however, its use still causes environmental concerns [219].

Similar procedures can be adopted for hemicellulose extraction, especially regarding bioplastics formation [159]. Since hemicelluloses exhibit an amorphous structure, they are more vulnerable to degradation than cellulose, and some extreme methods can be responsible for their hydrolysis into monomers. Although the alkali treatment under moderate conditions cannot break glycosidic bonds between hemicellulose monomers, it is suitable for obtaining hemicellulose of high polymerization degree [220].

The most applied hemicellulose isolation method involves an alkaline reaction usually with NaOH or KOH [159], which dissolves hemicelluloses and lignin, cleaving the phenyl glycoside bonds, esters, and benzyl ethers linkages between such structures, hydrolyzing uronic and acetic esters, and swelling cellulose, decreasing its crystallinity [221,222].

Low-boiling-point organic solvents such as ethanol, methanol, butanol, and acetone can be used in alkaline reactions for biomass fractionation for avoiding extremely high temperatures and reducing environmental impacts and energy consumption [223,224]. Although the method also recovers solvent by distillation, high costs are associated with wastewater used for washing the resulting material, which limits its economic viability on a large scale [225].

From an environmental point of view, enzymatic extraction is more acceptable than chemical procedures [226]. It uses specific hemicellulose-degrading enzymes to obtain hemicellulose from biomass, and, although slower than other methods, the degree of polymerization obtained can be controlled by both reaction time and enzyme activity applied.

The complete use of the biomass compounds is required so that the process becomes a more profitable investment. Therefore, the isolation of lignin with few changes in its structure may be advantageous, since it can be used for specific applications, such as the production of resins, adhesives, carbon fiber, activated carbon, among others [227].

During biomass fragmentation by alkali treatment, lignin is degraded into soluble fragments and then separated either with the removal of the reaction solvent or by lignin precipitation [228,229]. However, overly severe extraction conditions may induce substantial changes in the original lignin structure [229,230]. Among such processes, organosolv pretreatment with ethanol or acetic acid has been widely used [231], and organic acids such as acetic acid and formic acid yield a high-quality product [232].

5. Environmental Impact of Polysaccharide-Based Bioplastics from Plant Biomass

The following information provides an overview of the bioplastics developing implications, in order to complete the pros and cons of using plant biomass. This is an attempt to allow a broader study of the impacts of plant biomass-based bioplastics, without any intention to overshadow the clear importance and benefits of the biomaterials development and use.

The carbon footprint refers to the measurement (CO2 equivalent) of emissions of CO2 and other gases in the GHG (greenhouse gases) category [233]. The human need for natural resources of the biosphere for different services and products can be measured by the ecological footprint, and the water footprint refers to direct and indirect consumption demand for freshwater in the development of a product or technology.

In the study by Korol et al. [233] the carbon, ecological, and water footprints of cotton fibers (CF), jute (FJ), and kenaf (FK) added to synthetic plastic polypropylene (PP) were analyzed. The results showed, in relation to the carbon footprint, the CF, FJ, and FK fibers had a lower impact (3%, 18%, and 18%, respectively) compared to PP. This measurement is related to the use of energy and petroleum processing in the manufacture of propylene and polymerization. Regarding the ecological footprint, the FJ and FK fibers showed less impact (8.2% and 9.4% reduction, respectively), however, due to the cultivation and harvest of CF fibers occurring in greater quantity and not being manual (use of machinery and energy expenditure), these had a high ecological footprint (an increase of 52%). However, the water footprint in the study by Korol et al. [233], proved to be alarmingly more worrisome from the point of view of natural plant-based resource use. The use of fibers added to the PP pellet is responsible for 286% (FK), 758% (FJ), and 891% (CF) of the increase in the water footprint. The increase in the water footprint of plant biomass in applications of blends with synthetic polymers is mostly related to water resources applied in irrigation. Korol et al. [234] also observed the increase in the water footprint, resulting from the use of plant biomass, in another study.

The application of native starch in bio-plastics resulted in reduced GHG emission (up to 80%) and nonrenewable energy use NREU (up to 60%) [235]. These natural polysaccharides can result in an increase in the potential for eutrophication (up to 400%) and land use (0.3&#;1.3 m2 yr/kg), compared to petrochemical plastics. Moreover, these negative impacts about the use of bioplastics or additives based on plant biomass are debatable, as the implications of the arable land use and water resources due to the cultivation and harvesting of these biomasses can be mitigated through the approach of reusing agro-industrial and urban wastes. In addition to reducing the environmental impacts mentioned above, the use of waste from the wood industry, crops, and urban is a management alternative to agro-industrial and urban organic solid waste.

The life cycle assessment approach (LCA), blends with starch residues (waste from fries potato processing) depicted a reduction in the eutrophication potential (up to 40%), land use (up to 60%), GHG and NREU (reduction < 10% for both), compared to virgin starch [235]. The reduction of the water footprint can also be reduced through the use of residues from vegetal biomass, to take advantage of residues from different crops.

6. Conclusions

This review has addressed the state-of-the-art of the production of bioplastics from polysaccharides from plant biomass, as well as the advantages and disadvantages of using starch and lignocellulosic components (as an additive and main component) for their development. Academic and industrial efforts have been devoted towards new and improved polymers, production methods, and sources for the obtaining of polysaccharides that can strategically reduce petroleum consumption in the production of plastic and replace partially the conventional synthetic and non-biodegradable plastic materials. Moreover, the production of bioplastics from plant biomass represents a model for the recycling and management of such waste with positive economic effects. However, the disadvantages (mechanical resistance, gas barrier properties, processability of natural polymers, and economic viability) related to the production of bioplastics from polysaccharides must be studied towards the expansion of the fields of application of such materials. This study showed that the application of lignocellulosic fibers has a high potential for application in bioplastics, since they result in the improvement of the properties of bioplastics, in addition to being an alternative to reuse biomass with great availability.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: M.M.A., M.B.; methodology: M.M.A., J.R.M., P.B.S., J.V.M.; resources: M.B., V.R.B., M.C.B., writing&#;original draft preparation: M.M.A., J.R.M., P.B.S., J.V.M., M.C.B., P.H., V.R.B., M.B.; writing&#;review and editing: M.M.A., J.R.M., P.B.S., J.V.M., M.C.B., P.H., V.R.B., M.B.; supervision: M.C.B., P.H., V.R.B., M.B.; funding acquisition: M.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP), grant number /-9; /-6; /-8.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Footnotes

Publisher&#;s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

If you want to learn more, please visit our website Custom Biobased Bags Supplier.