1

EVALUATION OF THE EFFICIENCY OF PYROLYZED POLYETHYLENE

AS AN ADDITIVE TO COMMERCIAL FUEL

A Science Investigatory Project

Presented to the
Galileo's Community

In Partial Fulfillment of
the Requirements in
Practical Research II

by
BENELISO, Mariane Therese S.
CRUZ, Maria Nicettas G.
DAYAUON, John Mark B.

PALIPARAN III SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL

Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics
September 2019
 2

ABSTRACT
The Philippines is facing great dilemmas with regard to plastic pollution, depletion
of fossil fuels, and natural gas shortage. These inspired the researchers to conduct a
study entitled "Evaluation of the Efficiency of Pyrolyzed Polyethylene as an Additive to
Commercial Fuel", that aims to help improve the current state of our environment, and
contribute to the energy industry of our society. The researchers gathered three sacks
of plastic bottles which were later pyrolyzed to produce the light fuel additive. The
pyrolization was made possible by the prototype pyrolysis reactor chamber, provided by
the researchers themselves. The produced fuel was then evaluated using the BWT
(Boiling Water Test), and the data was computed using Two-way Anova statistical
treatment. The results showed the performance of pyrolyzed polyethylene as an
additive to commercial fuel by conducting water boiling test to measure the fuel
consumed, time to boil, burning rate and specific fuel consumption. In the simmering
phase, a lot of fuel is consumed but the fuel with more pyrolyzed polyethylene added is
consumed less, and it boils water fast. The results analyzed by the researchers proved
that the pyrolyzed polyethylene is efficient because it is eco-friendly, cheap and have
high quality.

ii
 3

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The researchers would like to acknowledge the help of their families: Beneliso
family; Cruz family; and Dayauon family, for giving the ideas so that they may come up
with this study, and also giving financial support to aid the materials needed in
conducting the experiments.
Also, the researchers would like to thank the help of the following teachers:
Mr. Limuel Gohil, Practical Research II teacher, whom always gives advice regarding
the study and help the researchers improve their write ups and for sharing his
knowledge to them as for this research.
Moreover, the researchers are wholeheartedly thankful to the presence of their
science teachers, Mr. Jan Reyzel Lambino and Ma'am Shela Lebasnon, for sharing
their knowledge and comments, and classmates, that shared their sleepless nights
together, to friends who always ask what is the feeling of conducting a Research, and to
social groups that gave their moral, intellectual, emotional and spiritual supports.
Last, but not the least, God. The researchers are grateful for His gift of
knowledge to them, and for using the people mentioned above to help them. They thank
God for His guidance and protection during the conducting of the study, and that's the
most important for these researchers.

iii
 4

Table of Contents

Page

Title Page i
Abstract ii
Acknowledgment iii
Table of Contents iv
Chapter I: Introduction 1
A. Background of Pyrolyzed Plastic 1
B. Research Problem 2
C. Significance of the Pyrolyzed Polyethylene 2
D. Scope and Limitation 2
E. Review of Related Literature 3
F. Hypotheses 4
G. Definition of Terms 4
H. Conceptual Framework 5
I. Theoretical Framework 6

Chapter II: Methods 7

A. Research Material Used 7
B. Materials and Equipment 7
C. Procedures 7

Chapter III: Results and Discussion 9

Chapter IV: Summary, Conclusion, and Recommendations 16

A. Summary 16
B. Conclusion 16
C. Recommendations 16
D. Appendices 17
E. References 20

iv
 1

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

A. Background of Pyrolyzed Plastic

Plastic pollution has always been a major problem in the Philippines. Different
regions of the country, including its capital Manila, have been suffering from plastic
pollution for years. Due to this upsetting event, various negative effects are continuously
causing discomfort and inconvenience to the environment and its inhabitants through its
different types of manifestations, some of these are flood because of blocked drainages,
destruction of natural habitats, death of aquatic animals, and diseases caused by eating
foods which are contaminated by small amounts of plastic wastes. An audit in the
Philippines has shown that the country uses a shocking amount of single-used plastics
including nearly 60 billion sachets a year, which is a very troubling fact (France-
Presse,2019).
Plastic pollution was never a problem on just one country. Instead, several
countries around the world are contributing to the production of million tons of plastic
wastes that are being disposed to oceans. In 2010, the world's primary production of
plastic was about 270 million tonnes, and the average weigh of the world's plastic
pollution was over 275 million tonnes, in which less than 8 million of it was thrown onto
the oceans. Twenty- two percent of these were incinerated (the incineration of plastic
wastes began on 1981). Sixteen percent of it was recycled by humans into some
convenient things to become useful. The remaining 62 percent were thrown somewhere
on landfills, oceans, etc. These records were only for the year 2010, whereas in 2015, it
grew so high. Global plastic production reached 381 million tonnes. However, global
disposal of these wastes goes as 22.50% was incinerated, 19.50% was recycled and
55% was discarded (Ritchie, H.,Roser, M., 2018), wherein through the following years,
these percentages are expected to definitely increase.
Aside from plastic pollution, little did people know that problems with natural
resources such as fossil fuel shortage: coal, petroleum, and natural gas; were also
worsening not only in the Philippines but also in the entire world. Natural gas shortage
has been growing at a rapid rate in recent years. Demand for natural gas has steadily
increased because of its clean burning properties, low-cost, and accessibility (Carlson
J., 1975). According to Ritchie and Roser (2019), global fossil fuel consumption has
been continually rising since the year 1950 with a record of 20, 138.91 terawatt-hours
(TWh). It rose to 133, 853.38 TWh by the year 2017. This indicates the extreme
demand for fossil fuels which results to its fast depletion. Fossil fuels are predicted to be
completely consumed in less than a couple of centuries: oil- 53 years; gas- 52 years;
and coal- 150 years (Ecotricity, 2011).
Considering all the factors above, the researchers were encouraged to conduct a
study wherein problems with regard to plastic pollution, and natural gas shortage, can
be simultaneously resolved the moment it becomes successful; entitled: Evaluation of
 2

Pyrolyzed Polyethylene as an Additive to Commercial Fuel. This study aims to convert

plastic wastes into useful commercial fuel additive through the process of pyrolysis.
Pyrolysis is a well-known process of setting plastics under high temperature to
obtain hydrocarbons. It is an innovative plastic waste management technique that
recently gained a lot of interest in research. Plastic wastes can be decomposed into
three fractions: gas, liquid and solid residue, wherein the liquid products are usually
composed of higher boiling point hydrocarbons (Demirbas, 2014). Pyrolysis of plastic
waste could have an important role in converting this waste into economically valuable
hydrocarbons, which can be used either as fuels or a feed stock in the petrochemical
industry. Through this, the researchers hope to contribute to the economy, society, and
help save the environment.
B. Statement of the Problem
Since recent times up to now, plastic pollution had always been a major problem
to the society. Billions of plastic are produced each year just to be disposed and
dumped to the environment. Aside from this, we are also facing a huge crisis with
regard to the consumption of natural gas resources, and fossil fuel shortage.
Research Questions:
1) To what extent is the efficiency of pyrolyzed polyethylene as an additive to the
commercial kerosene?

2) What are the advantages of adding pyrolyzed polyethylene to commercial fuel rather
than using pure commercial fuel?

3) How efficient is pyrolyzed polyethylene as an additive to the commercial kerosene

with regard of the following domain;
a) eco-friendly,
b) cheap,
c) high quality
C. Significance of the Pyrolyzed Polyethylene
Even though the process of pyrolyzation might seem dangerous, it did not
release other harmful gases aside from smoke, since the chamber was enclosed to
prevent the evaporated melted plastic, from escaping to the air. Moreover, the results of
the study could be of use to the following: citizens, energy industry, government, and
the future researchers.
D. Scope and Limitation
This study focuses on the evaluation of the efficiency of pyrolyzed polyethylene
as an additive to the commercial kerosene. Plastic bottles were exposed to extreme
heat through the use of the prototype pyrolysis reactor chamber prepared by the
researchers to produce the light fuel additive. The data will be collected by conducting
 3

the Water Boiling Test (WBT), and will be evaluated statistically according to the
standards provided by the protocol of the test used.
However, this study does not include the viability of its implementation to local
markets.
E. Review of Related Literature
Plastics
According to the UN Environment (2018), plastic pollution does not only threat
humans or animals, but also the plants and soil. Much of it ends up in landfills, where it
may take up to 1,000 years to decompose. A large number of marine species is known
to be harmed and/or killed by plastic debris, which could jeopardize their survival,
especially since many are already endangered by other forms of anthropogenic
activities. GrrlScientist (2018) claims that plastics from the time 1992 that fell on the
seas during an overseas trading, were still onto ashore up until today. This presents the
problems and risks the world got from plastics. Therefore the problem about plastic
pollution must be resolved as soon as possible.

Pyrolysis
The growth of plastic products and uses are increasing day by day. So it became
an important issue to control these problems. Plastic to oil conversion process has been
studying since 1990’s. Waste plastics first treated in a heater at a certain temperature
distance. Then melted plastic passed into a reactor where its carbon chain breaks down
into different level depending on different temperature level. Then from the distillation
chamber different kinds of gas and fuel can be collected. (Ahamed, M., 2013)
Pyrolyzed Polyethylene
Bustillo, S.J, et al, (2018, March) stated that transparent packaging like “plastic
labo” (Low Density Polyethylene) and plastic bottles and garbage bags (High Density
Polyethylene) are widely used in the Philippines for various commercial products such
as shampoo, condiments, etc. As these are under the categories of HDPE and LDPE, it
is made from petroleum and has longer hydrocarbon chains than gasoline and diesel
type of fuels. Other types of plastics such as polystyrene and polypropylene were
proven to be substitute fuels.
Jasmin Shah, ZahidHussain (2005) also proved that Polyethylene really does
have properties that make it possible to be converted into fuel oil, whether by simple
pyrolysis or even with the use of a catalyst which in their case was the lead sulfide, an
inorganic compound.
Yusaku Sakata (2011) also confirmed that the liquid products from catalytic
degradation have a carbon‐number distribution very similar to commercial motor
gasoline. This indicates a positive result in the characteristic of the liquid product
obtained from the processed polyethylene and polypropylene, it has traits that are very
similar to commercial gasoline, meaning it is perfect to be an alternative.
 4

Many research studies have successfully demonstrated that waste plastics such
as low density polyethylene (LDPE), high density polyethylene (HDPE), polypropylene
(PP) and polystyrene (PS) can be converted into valuable liquid hydrocarbon fuels such
as kerosene. Sooner or later, light fuels from plastic will be at trend in the whole world
because of fast emerging studies and projects about the issued idea. Besides that,
another fast change is bound to happen, which is the renewal of mother Earth, free from
plastic wastes and safe from depletion of fossil fuels. (M. Sarker, et al, 2012)
F. Hypotheses
Null Hypothesis
Pyrolyzed polyethylene cannot be a good light fuel additive to the commercial
kerosene.
Alternative Hypothesis
Pyrolyzed polyethylene can be a good light fuel additive to the commercial
kerosene.
G. Definition of Terms

 Polyethylene. A lightweight plastic that is commonly used for daily purposes

such as packaging, insulation, etc. Plastic bottles which are made of
polyethylene were the main raw material used in the making of liquid fuel
additive.
 Pyrolysis. The process of exposing materials under extreme heat to turn
resources to its desired state. On this study, the plastic bottles had undergone
the pyrolysis process to produce the liquid fuel additive.
 Kerosene. A popular light fuel often used in households for cooking and lighting
purposes. It is relevant considering it will be the end product of the study.
 5

H. Conceptual Framework

INDEPENDENT VARIABLE DEPENDENT VARIABLE

POLYETHYLENE EFFICIENCY

EVALUATION OF THE EFFICIENCY OF PYROLYZED

POLYETHYLENE AS AN ADDITIVE TO
COMMERCIAL KEROSENE

DATA COLLECTION

(WBT)

DOMAINS

ECO-FRIENDLY CHEAP

HIGH QUALITY
 6

I. Theoretical Framework
Technology, innovation, and discoveries, different ideas with the same goal
which is to provide comfort and convenience to people in various of ways. Many
changes have been successfully carried out up until now; some were concerned with
agriculture, education, and many more. One of the most common and useful innovation
that we don't really appreciate that much is the evolution of disposable packages. One
popular type of these are plastic bottles. However, aside from the comfort and benefits
that people have acquired from these changes, are the negative effects as well that little
do people know, it can be the cause of major problems in the society, environment, and
even to humans.
This is what inspired the researchers to conduct a study where in, the increasing
amount of wastes due to disposed plastics, especially plastic bottles, can be converted
into something, that can only not harm the environment, but also produce a product that
can benefit people, and contribute to areas such as transportation, economy, and many
more. In this study the pyrolyzed polyethylene will be thoroughly observed with regard
of its efficiency under different domains: eco-friendliness, cheapness, and quality. With
this, plastic bottles can be officially determined if it can be an efficient liquid fuel additive
to commercial kerosene.
 7

CHAPTER II
METHODS

A. Research Material Used

Experimental research is a method wherein the researcher controls the
independent variable and different factors that could affect the result of an
experiment. Basically, in this type of attempt, the researcher predicts a phenomenon by
manipulating everything that might obstruct, or modify, or have any other concern to the
possible outcome. The researcher has full control of the independent variables in order
to prove the hypothesis upon reaching the conclusion of the study. The variables can be
then tested by using the relevant statistical treatment.

B. Materials and Equipment

The main material used for this research was precisely three sacks of
commercial polyethylene (plastic bottles of differing sizes). The equipment used in the
process of pyrolization was a prototype pyrolysis reactor chamber made from a huge tin
garbage can, a metal tube, and a wooden lid; a glass container for the finished product,
and a homemade kerosene stove for the WBT (Water Boiling Test).

C. Procedures
First, plastic bottles of inconsistent sizes were collected and cleaned, having to
say that the researchers gathered three sacks of it. At the same time, the researchers
managed to provide the prototype pyrolysis reactor chamber. After this, the plastic
bottles were placed inside the prototype chamber. The reactor was then set into 180 oC
which is approximately 356 oF to ensure that the bottles would tend to melt. After two
and a half hours, all the plastic bottles inside the chamber have all melted, evaporated,
and then condensed through the metal tube. The produced oil was then collected and
set aside inside a container jar.
For the testing of the efficiency of the product, the researchers conducted the
WBT (Water Boiling Test). WBT was done to measure how efficient a stove can use fuel
to heat water; and the quantity of emissions produced while cooking. However, it could
also be relevant to measure the efficiency of the light fuel produced in pyrolyzing
polyethylene. WBT consists of three phases: the cold-start high-power phase; the hot-
start high-power phase; and the simmer phase; all of which was performed on the three
setups.
Every setup on all phases has used an equal amount of 150mL of water. Setup A
contains 60 mL of pure commercial kerosene; Setup B contains 5mL of pyrolyzed
polyethylene and 55 mL of commercial kerosene mixed; while Setup C contains 8.5 mL
 8

of pyrolyzed polyethylene and 51. 5 mL of commercial kerosene mixed. The fuel was
used to boil the water in a pot on each setup. With this, the researchers would manage
to test the fuels’ efficiency by recording important variables and computing it statistically.
 9

CHAPTER III
RESULT AND DISCUSSION

This chapter presents, analyses, and interprets the data collected from the procedures
that are guided by the specific questions.

Problem 1. To what extent is the efficiency of pyrolyzed polyethylene as an additive to

commercial fuel?
Table C: Results
Fuel Consumed Set A Set B Set C
Cold start 10 10 5
Hot start 7 10 8
Simmering phase 40 35 35

Time to boil Set A Set B Set C

Cold start 3 2.45 2.3
Hot start 2.5 2 2
Simmering phase 13 13 13

Burning Rate Set A Set B Set C

Cold start 3.3333 3.6364 4
Hot start 2.8 5 4
Simmering phase 3.0769 2.6923 2.6923

Specific fuel consumption Set A Set B Set C

Cold start 0.0667 0.0667 0.0333
Hot start 0.0467 0.0667 0.0553
Simmering phase 0.2667 0.2333 0.2333

Evaluation of the efficiency of pyrolyzed polyethylene through water boiling test

was measured by the following:
 fuel consumed, how much fuel is needed to boil a water
 time to boil, how fast the water boils
 burning rate, how much fuel is burned every minute
 and the specific fuel consumption, how much fuel is needed to boil a mL of
water.
 10

Problem 2. What are the advantages of using alternative light fuel rather than the
commercial fuel?
Table D: Two Factor ANOVA Testing for Fuel Consumed
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Rows 1605.556 2 802.7778 138.9423 0.000201 6.944272
Columns 14.88889 2 7.444444 1.288462 0.369892 6.944272
Error 23.11111 4 5.777778

Total 1643.556 8

At 5% level of significance with 2 degrees of freedom, the F value of 138.9423 is

greater than the F-critical value of 6.944272 and the P-value of 0.000201 is less than
the level of significance = 0.05. So the null hypothesis of rows is rejected, and the
alternative hypothesis of rows is accepted. Therefore, there is a significant difference
between the means of Cold Start, Hot Start and Simmering Phase.
At 5% level of significance with 2 degrees of freedom, the F value of 1.288462 is
greater than the F-critical value of 6.944272 and the P-value of 0.369892 is less than
the level of significance = 0.05. So the null hypothesis of columns is rejected, and the
alternative hypothesis of columns is accepted. Therefore, there is a significant
difference between the means of Setup A, Setup B and Setup C.

Table E: Two Factor ANOVA Testing for Time to boil

Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Rows 226.0417 2 113.0208 2948.37 4.60E-07 6.944272
Columns 0.285 2 0.1425 3.717391 0.122367 6.944272
Error 0.153333 4 0.038333

Total 226.48 8

At 5% level of significance with 2 degrees of freedom, the F value of 2948.37 is

greater than the F-critical value of 6.944272 and the P-value of 4.60E-07 is less than
the level of significance = 0.05. So the null hypothesis of rows is rejected, and the
alternative hypothesis of rows is accepted. Therefore, there is a significant difference
between the means of Cold Start, Hot Start and Simmering Phase.
At 5% level of significance with 2 degrees of freedom, the F value of 3.717391 is
less than the F-critical value of 6.944272 and the P-value of 0.122367 is greater than
the level of significance = 0.05. So the null hypothesis of columns is accepted, and the
alternative hypothesis of columns is rejected. Therefore, there is no significant
difference between the means of Setup A, Setup B and Setup C.
 11

Table F: Two Factor ANOVA Testing for Burning Rate

Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Rows 2.014005 2 1.007003 2.054697 0.243301 6.944272
Columns 0.787741 2 0.39387 0.803657 0.508874 6.944272
Error 1.960392 4 0.490098

Total 4.762138 8

At 5% level of significance with 2 degrees of freedom, the F value of 2.054697 is

less than the F-critical value of 6.944272 and the P-value of 0.243301 is greater than
the level of significance = 0.05. So the null hypothesis of rows is accepted, and the
alternative hypothesis of rows is rejected. Therefore, there is no significant difference
between the means of Cold Start, Hot Start and Simmering Phase.
At 5% level of significance with 2 degrees of freedom, the F value of 0.803657 is
less than the F-critical value of 6.944272 and the P-value of 0.508874 is greater than
the level of significance = 0.05. So the null hypothesis of columns is accepted, and the
alternative hypothesis of columns is rejected. Therefore, there is no significant
difference between the means of Setup A, Setup B and Setup C.
Table G: Two Factor ANOVA Testing for Specific Fuel Consumption
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Rows 0.07109 2 0.035545 132.9531 0.00022 6.944272
Columns 0.000619 2 0.00031 1.158244 0.401022 6.944272
Error 0.001069 4 0.000267

Total 0.072779 8

At 5% level of significance with 2 degrees of freedom, the F value of 132.9531 is

greater than the F-critical value of 6.944272 and the P-value of 0.00022 is less than the
level of significance = 0.05. So the null hypothesis of rows is rejected, and the
alternative hypothesis of rows is accepted. Therefore, there is a significant difference
between the means of Cold Start, Hot Start and Simmering Phase.
At 5% level of significance with 2 degrees of freedom, the F value of 1.158244 is
less than the F-critical value of 6.944272 and the P-value of 0.401022 is greater than
the level of significance = 0.05. So the null hypothesis of columns is accepted, and the
alternative hypothesis of columns is rejected. Therefore, there is no significant
difference between the means of Setup A, Setup B and Setup C.
Hence, the fuel consumed between the three phases and the three setups, the
time to boil between the three phases, and the specific fuel consumption between the
three phases all have significant difference. Their means are illustrated with graphs to
show their differences.
 12

Table H: Means for Fuel Consumed

Mean
Cold Start 8.333333
Hot Start 8.333333
Simmering Phase 36.66667

Graph A: Means for Fuel Consumed

Fuel Consumed
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Cold Start Hot Start Simmering Phase

Graph A shows that in the simmering phase, a lot of fuel is consumed.

Table I: Means for Fuel Consumed

Mean
Setup A 19
Setup B 18.33333
Setup C 16

Graph B: Means for Fuel Consumed

 13

Fuel Consumed
19.5
19
18.5
18
17.5
17
16.5
16
15.5
15
14.5
Setup A Setup B Setup C

Graph B shows that in the Setup C, the fuel is consumed lesser.

Table J: Means for Time to Boil

Mean
Cold Start 2.583333
Hot Start 2.166667
Simmering Phase 13

Graph C: Means for Time to Boil

Time to Boil
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Cold Start Hot Start Simmering Phase

Graph C shows that in the simmering phase, it takes a lot of time since it is
already boiling, it is just the end of the boiling test. The Hot start takes lesser time than
Cold Start since the stove is already hot, but notice that it only takes two minutes for the
water to boil, which is very fast.
 14

Table K: Means for Specific Fuel Consumption

Mean
Cold Start 0.055567
Hot Start 0.056233
Simmering Phase 0.244433

Graph D: Means for Specific Fuel Consumption

Specific Fuel Consumption

0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
Cold Start Hot Start Simmering Phase

Graph D shows that in the simmering phase, a lot of fuel is consumed per mL of
water since it boils for 13 mins.

Therefore, the Setup C, the one with more pyrolyzed polyethylene added to the
commercial fuel is more efficient than pure commercial fuel because it takes lesser fuel
in cooking or boiling and it boils water fast.

Problem 3. How efficient is pyrolyzed Polyethylene as an additive to commercial fuel

with regard of the following domain;
a. eco-friendly,
Plastics are one of the main pollutants, if these are turned into more
efficient product, then they will get lesser until they won't be a problem
anymore. The researchers proved the efficiency of the performance of
plastics as fuel; hence the plastics can now be regulated and controlled
rather than negatively affecting the environment.
b. cheap,

Graph B shows that it takes less fuel to boil the water, then, if it only needs
a little fuel to cook something, it means that there is no need to purchase
more making it more cheap.
 15

c. high quality
Table L: Comparison of Observational Characteristics of High Quality Kerosene
and Pyrolyzed Polyethylene
High Quality Kerosene Pyrolyzed Polyethylene
(Kerosene-wicks, 2019)
Clear just like water Clear as water
No bubbles if it let sit for atleast an hour No bubbles after an hour
No dirt No dirt

The pyrolyzed Polyethylene had the same characteristics as the high quality
kerosene, hence it is high quality.
 16

CHAPTER IV
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
A. Summary of Findings
 The fuel consumed between the three phases and the three setups, the time to
boil between the three phases, and the specific fuel consumption between the
three phases all have significant difference regarding with the results of two-way
ANOVA test.
 In the simmering phase, a lot of fuel is consumed but the fuel with more
pyrolyzed polyethylene added is consumed less, and it boils water fast.
 The pyrolyzed polyethylene is eco-friendly, cheap and has high quality.

B. Conclusion
The results of the study shows the performance of pyrolyzed polyethylene as an
additive to commercial fuel by conducting water boiling test to measure the fuel
consumed, time to boil, burning rate and specific fuel consumption. The results
analyzed by the researchers proved that the pyrolyzed polyethylene is efficient because
it is eco-friendly, cheap and have high quality.

C. Recommendation
The researchers suggest the following vital recommendations in the development
of the study:
1. Test in other use of light fuel (lighting, heater).
2. Add replications to make the results more valid.
 17

APPENDICES
Documentation

Plastics are placed inside the chamber

Prototype Pyrolysis Chamber. melting the plastics

 18

Applying ice on the tube of chamber

Collecting the output oil

 19

Setup for the water boiling test

Water boiling test

 20

REFERENCES

Jose GB Derraik (2002). The Pollution of the Marine Environment by Plastic Debris: A
Review

Ayhan Demirbas (2004). Pyrolysis of Municipal Plastic Wastes for Recovery of

Gasoline-range Hydrocarbons

F Pinto (2001). Pyrolysis of Plastic Wastes. 1. Effect of Plastic Waste Composition on

Product Yield

Shafferina Dayana Anuar Sharuddin, Faisal Abnisa, Wan Mohd Ashri Wan Daud,
Mohamed Kheireddine Aroua (2016). A Review of Pyrolysis of Plastic Wastes

DS Scott, SR Czernik, J Piskorz, D St AG Radlein (2000) Fast Pyrolysis of Plastic

Wastes

Yusaku Sakata (2011). Catalytic Degradation of Polyethylene and Polypropylene to

Fuel Oil

M. Sarker, M. M. Rashid, M. S. Rahman, M. Molla (2012). Fractional Distillation Process

Utilized to Produce Light Fractional Fuel from Low Density Polyethylene (LDPE) Waste
Plastic

Ozcanli, Mustafa (2013). Light and Heavy Phases Derived from Waste Polyethylene by
Thermal Cracking and their Usage as Fuel in DI Diesel Engine

Jasmin Shah, Zahid Hussain (2005). Catalytic Pyrolysis of Low-density Polyethylene

with Lead Sulfide into Fuel Oil

Moinuddin Sarker, Mohammad Mamunor Rashid, Md. Sadikur Rahman, and

Mohammed Molla (2012). Conversion of Low Density Polyethylene (LDPE) and
Polypropylene (PP) Waste Plastics into Liquid Fuel Using Thermal Cracking Process

Terell, M. {2016} Strategies for Recycling Polyethylene. Retrieved from

https://-www.thermofisher.com/-blog/materials/-strategies-for-recycl-ing-polyethylene/

Jassim, A. (2017). Recycling of Polyethylene Waste to Produce Plastic Cement.

Retrieved from
https://-www.sciencedirect.com-/science/article/-pii/S2351978917300872

Zeaiter, J. (2014). A process study on the pyrolysis of waste polyethylene. Retrieved

from https://-www.sciencedirect.com-/science/article/-pii/S001623611400475X
 21

Ahmad I., Khan M., Khan H., Ishaq M., Tariq R., Gul K. and Ahmad W. (2014). Pyrolysis
study of polypropylene and polyethylene into premium oil products. Retrieved from
https://-www.tandfonline.com/-doi/abs/10.1080/-15435075.2014.880146?-journalCode=l
jge20

Farah and Janajreh (2014). High density polyethylene pyrolysis: review and progress.
Retieved from https://-link.springer.com/-chapter/10.1007/-978-3-319-05708-8_47

United Nation Environment Programs (2018). "Plastic planet: how tiny plastic particles
are polluting our soil". Retrieved from https://-www.unenvironment.org-/news-and-
stories/-story/-plastic-planet-how-ti-ny-plastic-particles--are-polluting-our-s-oil

GrrlScientist (2018). "Five ways that plastics harm the environment (and one way they
may help)". Retrieved from https://-www.forbes.com/sites/-grrlscientist/2018/-04/23/-five-
ways-that-plasti-cs-harm-the-environm-ent-and-one-way-they--may-
help/-#74796b4767a0

Baker, M. (2018). How to Eliminate Plastic Waste and Plastic Pollution with Science and
Engineering. Retrieved from https://-interestingengineerin-g.com/-how-to-eliminate-
plas-tic-waste-and-plasti-c-pollution-with-sci-ence-and-engineering

Energypedia (2018). "Cooking with Kerosene". Retrieved from

https://-energypedia.info/-wiki/-Cooking_with_Kerosene

Muye. H. (2015). Energy conversion efficiency of pressurised kerosene and pyramid-

shaped clay-lined charcoal cooking stoves. Retrieved from
https://-www.tandfonline.com/-doi/abs/10.1080/-20421338.2015.1094240

The 21st Century Webster's International Encyclopedia Second Edition. Trident Press
International. 5th book pg. 619

The 21st Century Webster's International Encyclopedia Second Edition. Trident Press
International. 7th book pg. 882

The 21st Century Webster's International Encyclopedia Second Edition. Trident Press
International .7th book pg. 862

Ćwik,A.(2014). Fuel from Waste-Catalytic degradation of plastic waste to liquid fuels.

Gaurav, Madhukar, M., Arunkumar, K. N., &Lingegowda, N. S. (2014). CONVERSION

OF LDPE PLASTIC WASTE INTO LIQUID FUEL BY THERMAL DEGRADATION.
Bustillo, S.J., Casapao, C.E., Lizarondo, M.V.,& Lopez, B.J., (2018, March). Evaluation
and Comparison Of Light Fuel Produced From Pyrolyzed Low and High Density
Polyethylene.
 22

France-Presse, A. (2019,March). Philippine Survey Shows "Shocking" Plastic Waste.

Retrieved from https://amp.rappler.com/science-nature/environment/225272-philippine-
survey-shows-shocking-plastic-waste-march-2019

Chen, J. (2018). What is Petroleum?. Retrieved from

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/petroleum.asp

Energypedia (2018). Kerosene Stoves. Retrieved from

https://energypedia.info/wiki/Kerosene_Stoves

Ahamed, M., Ph. D. (2013). A Report on Plastic Industry of Bangladesh.