Environmental Challenges 6 (2022) 100444

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Environmental Challenges
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/envc

Catalyst screening for heavy oil production from waste plastic

Hiroshi Yamada a,∗, Worapon Kiatkittipong b, Tomohiko Tagawa c
a
Department of Chemical Systems Engineering, Nagoya University, Furo-cho, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya-Shi, Aichi 464-8603, Japan
b
Department of Chemical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Industrial Technology, Silpakorn University, Nakhon Pathom 73000, Thailand
c
National Institute of Technology, Toyota College, Eisei-cho 2-1, Toyota-Shi, Aichi 471-8525, Japan

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Keywords: In fuel production from waste plastics, highly flammable hydrocarbon oils and by-product gasses are produced.
Waste plastic These products are not suitable for developing countries, because high-precision plants and experienced operators
Heavy oil are required for safe operation. Production of heavy oil rather than light oil is one solution to this problem. In the
Developing country
present study, catalytic pyrolysis of packing sheets commonly used in Vietnam was carried out in a batch reactor
Catalyst screening
in order to produce heavier oil. The liquid product components were quantified by flame ionization detector-gas
Ferric oxide
chromatography. Six kinds of catalysts were used for catalytic pyrolysis, including commercial SiO2 -Al2 O3 , Pd
on alumina, Cu, Ni, Fe2 O3 and Fe3 O4 . Pd on alumina, Cu, Ni and Fe3 O4 had no catalytic activity. The product
components were almost the same as those produced by thermal pyrolysis with no catalyst. Al2 O3 -SiO2 products
had a large amount of low-carbon-number components. Fe2 O3 produced a small amount of light components and
a large amount of heavy components. Fe2 O3 produced heavier oil than the other catalysts.

1. Introduction
Plastics are among the most abundant wastes in our daily life. Since
plastics are very stable, their degradation requires a very long time. Con-
sequently, they accumulate in the environment (Barnes et al., 2009).
The primary use of plastics is packaging. Packaging is a single-use ap-
plication and its product lifetime is very short (Geyer et al., 2017).
Most packaging materials are disposed of in landfills. Today, microplas-
tic pollution in the ocean has become a large environmental problem
(Andrady, 2011). Outflow from landfill sites and direct disposal in the
sea are major sources of microplastics (Jambeck et al., 2015). Thus, re-
ducing waste plastic is a required technology.
Liquefaction to produce fuel is a promising plastic recycling method
for producing energy resources. Plastics consist of long-chain hydrocar-
bons, and liquid fuel can be produced by splitting these long chains
into appropriate lengths. There has been much research on producing
fuel from waste plastic with the objective being the production of light
hydrocarbons such as gasoline (Miandad et al., 2016; Sharuddin et al.,
2016; Kunwar et al., 2016a; Al-Salem et al., 2017).
The amount of used plastics is increasing even in developing coun-
tries. In the production of fuel, highly flammable hydrocarbon oils and
by-product gasses are produced. Even a small amount of leakage is
dangerous for these products, so high-precision plants and experienced
operators are required for safe operation (Kodera and Memon, 2010).
These requirements are challenging to achieve in developing countries.
Simple plants and easy operation are required in these countries. If the
fuel product was heavier, the vapor pressure would be lower and the
flash point would be higher, and this would be an advantage in devel-
oping countries.
Thermal pyrolysis and catalytic thermal pyrolysis are the major ways
to produce oil from waste plastics. We previously studied thermal py-
rolysis of waste plastic (Yamada et al., 2018), and the major products
were compounds with carbon numbers of 18 and 19. In this study, cat-
alyst screening was carried out to increase the fraction of heavier com-
ponents. To date, SiO2 -Al2 O3 (silica-alumina) has been the major com-
mercial catalyst used for catalytic pyrolysis. There has also been con-
siderable research on other catalytic methods such as the use of zeolites
and fluid catalytic cracking. The effect of the different catalytic meth-
ods on the final products has been examined, but very few differences
were found (Lopez et al., 2011; Syamsiro et al., 2014; Miandad et al.,
2017; Elodri et al., 2012; Pinto et al., 1999). In some studies, the cata-
lysts showed no activity (Syamsiro et al., 2014; Pinto et al., 1999), with
catalytic pyrolysis and non-catalytic pyrolysis yielding almost the same
results. Temperature was found to have a greater effect on the product
composition (Lopez et al., 2011; Kunwar et al., 2016b).
Noble metal catalysts are highly active, and have been used for hy-
drogen (Gil et al., 2016) and chemical production (Lu et al., 2017) from
biomass; however, they have rarely been used for plastics. Some re-
searchers have studied dry reforming (Yamada et al., 2010) and steam
reforming (Nabgan et al., 2017) for producing gaseous products, but few

∗
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: yamada.hiroshi@material.nagoya-u.ac.jp (H. Yamada).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envc.2022.100444
Received 12 August 2021; Received in revised form 4 January 2022; Accepted 4 January 2022
2667-0100/© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
H. Yamada, W. Kiatkittipong and T. Tagawa
Fig 1. Reaction apparatus.
researchers have used noble metal catalysts for plastic catalytic pyroly-
sis.
Fe, Cu and Ni also exhibit catalytic activity for hydrogenation and
oxidation, but there have been few studies on the use of these metals
or their oxides for catalytic pyrolysis (Sarker and Rashid, 2013). These
catalysts are cheap and simple to produce, so they may be suitable for
use in developing countries.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Reaction method
Fig. 1 shows the reaction apparatus. A three-necked 1000-mL quartz
glass flask was used as the reactor. The catalyst and virgin low-density
polyethylene pellets or waste plastic samples were inserted into the re-
actor. The flask was placed in a mantle heater and heated under an
argon gas flow. A thermocouple was inserted into the liquefied reac-
tant to measure the reaction temperature, which reached 710 K within
30 min. Product gas was blown out from the reactor and condensed us-
ing a Liebig condenser. The experiment was terminated when no more
liquid condensed, which occurred around 2 h after reaching the reaction
temperature. The liquefied product was weighed and analyzed by flame
ionization detector-gas chromatography.
2.2. Analysis method
Gas chromatography (GC-353B GL-Science) with a non-polar Inert-
Cap1 column was used to analyze the products, with helium used as the
carrier gas. The column was initially kept at 323 K for 5 min, and the
temperature was then increased to 523 K at 10 K/min and held at that
temperature for 5 min. Calibration curves for linear alkanes with dif-
ferent carbon numbers were obtained using this column. These curves
were used to fit the data obtained for the different products based on
2
Environmental Challenges 6 (2022) 100444
the retention times. Since this study focused on liquid fuels, only liquid
products were measured. Fig. 2 shows an example of a liquid-product
chromatogram. The conversion rate was defined as the ratio of the liq-
uid product weight to the reactant weight. Selectivity was defined as the
ratio of each component weight to the total liquid weight.
The product was pale yellow liquid as shown in Figs. 3. Figs. 4 and
5 are photographs of the residue and reactor after the reaction, respec-
tively. A large amount of tar-like residue adhered to the reactor wall.
2.3. Materials
Low-density polyethylene and waste plastic were used as reactants.
The low-density polyethylene was in the form of virgin pellets. The
waste plastic was in the form of packing sheets that are commonly
used in Vietnam, and was supplied by a waste treatment company.
Fig. 6 shows a photograph of such waste plastic. The waste plastic was
analyzed by IR spectroscopy and found to also consist of low-density
polyethylene.
Six kinds of catalysts were used in this study. SiO2 -Al2 O3 is a catalyst
commercially used for garbage pyrolysis, and was supplied by a waste
treatment company. Details about this catalyst are not known. The Pd
catalyst was Aldrich 0.5 wt% on alumina, the Ni catalyst was Harshaw
Ni-0104, and the Cu catalyst was Harshaw Cu-0803. Fe2 O3 and Fe3 O4
were powders supplied by Wako Pure Chemical Industries, Ltd. These
catalysts were used without any pretreatment.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Low-density polyethylene
Low-density polyethylene was used as a model reactant for prelimi-
nary experiments. Fig. 7 shows the catalytic pyrolysis results with SiO2 -
Al2 O3 . The major products had carbon numbers of 7 and 8, and the
heaviest component had a carbon number of 16. This oil consisted of
lighter components than the oil produced by thermal pyrolysis in our
previous work (Yamada et al., 2018). Rehan et al. investigated the ef-
fect of SiO2 -Al2 O3 on plastic pyrolysis (Rehan et al., 2017). Increasing
the volume of micropores and the Brunauer-Emmett-Teller (BET) sur-
face area increased the amount of gas production. Since our catalyst
was a commercial catalyst, its characteristics were unknown. However,
if we used a catalyst with a lower micropore volume and BET surface
area, we would expect to obtain heaver oil.
Fig. 8 shows the experimental results with the Ni catalyst. The heav-
iest component had a carbon number of 19 and the fraction of light
components was reduced compared to the case of using the SiO2 -Al2 O3
catalyst. Thus, the Ni catalyst produced heavier oil than the Al2 O3 -SiO2
catalyst, but it was still lighter than that produced by thermal pyrolysis.
Ding et al. (1997) reported that the amount of Ni affected the product
yield. The conversion rate increased from less than 5% to more than
80% by using the catalyst. Increasing the amount of Ni increased the
amount of gas products and decreased the liquid products. This would
suggest that optimizing the amount of nickel could achieve our objec-
tive of producing heavy oil. However, the effect of using a Ni catalyst
on the conversion rate was different from our results.
The conversion rates with Ni and SiO2 -Al2 O3 catalysts were 76%
and 75%, respectively, and that using thermal pyrolysis was 77%
(Yamada et al., 2018). While the type of catalyst had no effect on the
conversion rate, the components depended on the catalyst.
3.2. Waste plastic
The use of zeolites causes a reduction in the amount of wax and
an increase in the amount of gas and oil (Shah et al., 2010). However,
with our preliminary experiments with-low density polyethylene, the
catalysts did not increase the conversion rate. Noble metal catalysts
H. Yamada, W. Kiatkittipong and T. Tagawa
Fig 2. Example of chromatogram.
have high activity for many reactions, and hence an increase in the
conversion rate was expected by using these catalysts. Pd/Al2 O3 was
selected as the first catalyst for waste plastic catalytic pyrolysis. Unfor-
tunately, the conversion rate did not increase and was only 69%. There
are two possible reasons for this lack of improvement. The first could
be that liquid products were converted to gas products due to the high
activity of the catalyst. In this case, the liquid product would become
lighter. The second is simply that the catalyst did not work. In this case,
the liquid product components would be the same as those for ther-
mal pyrolysis. Fig. 9 shows the product distribution, which indicates
the same results for both the catalyst experiment and thermal pyrolysis.
It is considered that Pd was too active for this reaction. As a result, car-
bon was deposited on the catalyst surface and deactivation occurred. To
avoid carbon decomposition, weaker catalysts were used in subsequent
experiments.
3
Environmental Challenges 6 (2022) 100444
Fig. 10 shows the experimental results for the SiO2 -Al2 O3 catalyst.
The product distribution was the same as when low-density polyethy-
lene was used as a reactant (Fig. 7). Waste plastic produced slightly
lighter oil than low-density polyethylene when no catalyst was used
(Yamada et al., 2018). The plastic sheet was heated in the molding step,
which cut the carbon bonds and shortened the carbon chains. Short car-
bon chains produced light oil in the thermal pyrolysis. On the other
hand, the SiO2 -Al2 O3 catalyst had a higher cutting ability than heat.
The difference in reactants had no effect on the selectivity during cat-
alytic pyrolysis.
The Ni catalyst produced heavier oil from low-density polyethylene
than the SiO2 -Al2 O3 catalyst. Thus, to produce heavier oil from the
waste plastic, the Ni catalyst was used. Fig. 11 shows the experimen-
tal results. The largest carbon number in the product oil was 19. This is
larger than that for the product obtained using the SiO2 -Al2 O3 catalyst
H. Yamada, W. Kiatkittipong and T. Tagawa Environmental Challenges 6 (2022) 100444

Fig 3. Product oil.

Fig 6. Reactant waste plastic.

Fig 4. Residue in the reactor.

Fig 5. Reactor after reaction.

(Fig. 10). Furthermore, the fraction of light components decreased when

using the Ni catalyst and the product oil became heavier.
Next, the use of other metals was investigated. Fig. 12 shows exper-
imental results for the Cu catalyst. The fraction of light components de- Fig 7. Catalytic pyrolysis of low density polyethylene with SiO2 -Al2 O3 catalyst.
creased and that of heavy components increased compared to the case
for the Ni catalyst. The highest selectivity was obtained for a carbon
number of 18, and the heaviest component had a carbon number of 20.

4
H. Yamada, W. Kiatkittipong and T. Tagawa
Fig 8. Catalytic pyrolysis of low density polyethylene with Ni catalyst.
Fig 9. Catalytic pyrolysis of low density polyethylene with Pd catalyst.
Since iron oxides are cheap catalysts, Fe3 O4 and Fe2 O3 were investi-
gated for catalytic pyrolysis. The experimental results are shown in Figs.
13 and 14, respectively. The product distributions were different, with
Fe3 O4 producing light oil and Fe2 O3 producing heavy oil.
The performance of all the catalysts is compared in Fig. 15. The ratios
of the oil weight to the reactant weight for SiO2 -Al2 O3 , Ni, Cu, Fe3 O4
and Fe2 O3 catalysts were 47%, 48%, 63%, 38% and 60%, respectively.
The amount of product oil is also important in plastic liquefaction. In this
figure, the yield of each component is used as the index instead of selec-
tivity. “No catalyst” indicates the result of thermal pyrolysis obtained in
5
Environmental Challenges 6 (2022) 100444
Fig 10. Catalytic pyrolysis of waste plastic with SiO2 -Al2 O3 catalyst.
Fig 11. Catalytic pyrolysis of waste plastic with Ni catalyst.
a previous study (Yamada et al., 2018). Many catalysts produced lighter
oil than that produced by thermal pyrolysis. Only Fe2 O3 produced heav-
ier oil, which contained only a small fraction of light components, and
a large fraction of heavy components.
Polyethylene thermal pyrolysis is a radical reaction, which cleaves
the main chain randomly (Tsuge et al., 2006). The acid point of SiO2 -
Al2 O3 accelerates the cleavage reaction. Heavy components are split
into light components, making the product oil lighter. Transition met-
als form metal-carbon bonds and activate the cleavage reaction, pro-
ducing small components. Only Fe2 O3 produced heavier oil, with a
smaller fraction of components with low carbon numbers of around
10, and a larger fraction of components with high carbon numbers of
around 20. The difference in reduction properties may cause the dif-
H. Yamada, W. Kiatkittipong and T. Tagawa Environmental Challenges 6 (2022) 100444

Fig 12. Catalytic pyrolysis of waste plastic with Cu catalyst. Fig 14. Catalytic pyrolysis of waste plastic with Fe2 O3 catalyst.

Fig 13. Catalytic pyrolysis of waste plastic with Fe3 O4 catalyst.

ference in product distribution, although the details are not yet clear.
Shiraga et al. (1999) used Fe3 O4 and Fe2 O3 for polyvinyl chloride pyrol-
ysis, and found that Fe2 O3 produced slightly heavier oil. They reported
that some Fe2 O3 was converted to Fe3 O4 after the reaction. This change
Fig 15. Effect of catalysts on waste plastic catalytic pyrolysis.
in crystal structure may be the cause of the product difference.
Catalysts had an effect on the product distribution shown in Fig. 15.
However, except for Fe2 O3 , the effect was not great. Many researchers
have reported this tendency (Lopez et al., 2011; Syamsiro et al., 2014; gradient. Thus, different reactions occurred in different places in the re-
Miandad et al., 2017; Elodri et al., 2012; Pinto et al., 1999). Melted plas- actor. Thermal pyrolysis is a device-dependent reaction (Murata et al.,
tics are highly viscous (Matsufuji, 2009), and therefore mass transfer 1981; Murata and Makino, 1973). The temperature profile in each reac-
from bulk melted plastic to the catalyst surface is small. The dominant tor is different because the heater location is different. A mixing device
reaction in the reactor was thermal pyrolysis. The thermal conductivity would make the temperature uniform and improve the contact between
of melted plastics is also low, and the reactor had a large temperature the catalyst and the reactant. Thus, the design of the device may im-

6
H. Yamada, W. Kiatkittipong and T. Tagawa
prove the catalyst effects. We predict that Fe2 O3 would show significant
catalytic pyrolysis in such a reactor.
4. Conclusion
Catalyst screening for plastic liquefaction in developing countries
was carried out, with the desired product being heavy oil. A commer-
cial catalyst, Ni, Cu and Fe were used as catalysts to liquefy real plas-
tic garbage. The commercial catalyst produced the lightest oil, whereas
Fe2 O3 produced the heaviest oil. Further reactor improvements should
be carried out to clarify the effect of the catalyst.
Acknowledgement
We thank SHINKO TECNOS CO., LTD. for supplying SiO2 -Al2 O3 and
waste plastic.
Funding
This research did not receive any specific grants from funding agen-
cies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
References
Al-Salem, S.M., Antelava, A., Constantinou, A., Manos, G., Dutta, A., 2017. A review on
thermal and catalytic pyrolysis of plastic solid waste (PSW). J. Environ. Manage. 197,
177–198. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.03.084.
Andrady, A.L., 2011. Microplastics in the marine environment. Mar. Poll. Bull. 62, 1596–
1605. doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2011.05.030.
Barnes, D.K.A., Galgani, F., Thompson, R.C., Barlaz, M., 2009. Accumulation and fragmen-
tation of plastic debris in global environments. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 364, 1985–1998.
doi:10.1098/rstb.2008.0205.
Ding, W., Liang, J., Anderson, L.L., 1997. Hydrocracking and Hydroisomerization of high-
density polyethylene and waste plastic over zeolite and silica-alumina supported Ni
and Ni-Mo sulfide. Energy Fuels 11, 1219–1224. doi:10.1021/ef970051q.
Elodri, G., Olazar, M., Artetxe, M., Castano, P., Bilbao, J., 2012. Effect of the acidity of
the zeolite catalyst on the cracking of high density polyethylene in a conical spouted
bed reactor. Appl. Catal. A Gen. 89–95. doi:10.1016/j.apcata.2011.12.011, 415-416.
Geyer, R., Jambeck, J.R., Law, K.L., 2017. Production, use, and fate of all plastics ever
made. Sci. Adv. 3, e1700782. doi:10.1126/sciadv.1700782.
Gil, M.V., Fermoso, J., Pevida, C., Chen, D., Rubiera, F., 2016. Production of fuel cell
grade H2 production by sorption enhanced steam reforming of acetic acid as a
model compound of biomass-derived bio-oil. Appl. Catal. B Environ. 184, 64–76.
doi:10.1016/j.apcatb.2015.11.028.
Jambeck, J.R., Geyer, R., Wilcox, C., Siegler, T.R., Perryman, R., Andrady, A., Narayan, R.,
Law, K.L., 2015. Plastic waste inputs from land into the ocean. Science 347, 768–771.
doi:10.1126/science.1260352.
Kodera, Y., Memon, M.A., 2010. Selection guidelines of fuel production technolo-
gies for waste plastics (in Japanese). Kagaku Kogaku Ronbunshu 36, 212–221.
doi:10.1252/kakoronbunshu.36.212.
Kunwar, B., Cheng, H.N., Chandrashekaran, S.R., Sharma, B.K., 2016a. Plastics to fuel: a
review. Renew. Energy Rev. 54, 421–428. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2015.10.015.
Environmental Challenges 6 (2022) 100444
Kunwar, B., Moser, B.R., Chandrasekaran, S.R., Rajagopalan, N., Sharama, B.K., 2016b.
Catalyatic and thermal depolymerization of low value post-consumer high density
polyethylene plastic. J. Energy 111, 884–892. doi:10.1016/j.energy/2016.06.024.
Lopez, A., de Marco, I., Caballero, B.M., Laresgoiti, M.F., Adrados, A., Aranza-
bal, A., 2011. Catalytic pyrolysis of plastic wastes with two different types of
catalysts: ZSM-5 zeolite and red mud. Appl. Catal. B Environ. 104, 211–219.
doi:10.1016/j.apcatb.2011.03.030.
Lu, Q., Zhang, Z., Ye, X., Li, W., Hu, B., Dong, C., 2017. Selective production of 4-ethyl
guaiacol from catalytic fast pyrolysis of softwood biomass using Pd/SBA-15 catalyst.
J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 123, 237–243. doi:10.1016/j.jaap.2016.11.021.
Matsufuji, T., 2009. Plastic Recycling (in Japanese). Gihodobooks, Tokyo.
Miandad, R., Barakat, M.A., Aburiazaiza, A.S., Rehan, M., Nizami, A.S., 2016. Cat-
alytic pyrolysis of plastic waste: a review. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 102, 822–838.
doi:10.1016/j.psep.2016.06.022.
Miandad, R., Barakat, M.A., Rehan, M., Aburiazaiza, A.S., Ismail, I.M.I., Nizami, A.S.,
2017. Plastic waste to liquid oil through catalytic pyrolysis using natural and synthetic
zeolite catalysts. Waste Mnage. 69, 66–78. doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2017.08.032.
Murata, K., Makino, T., 1973. Thermal degradation of high density polyethylene
(in Japanese). Nippon Kagaku Kaishi 2414–2420. doi:10.1246/nikkashi.1973.2414,
1973.
Murata, K., Sato, K., Teshima, H., 1981. Thermal degradation of high density polyethy-
lene by using a continuous flow stirred tank reactor (in Japanese). Kagaku Kogaku
Ronbunshu 7, 64–70. doi:10.1252/kakoronbunshu.7.64.
Nabgan, B., Tahir, M., Abdullah, T.A.T., Nabgan, W., Gambo, Y., Mat, R., Seah, I., 2017.
Ni/Pd-promoted Al2 O3 -La2 O3 catalyst for hydrogen production from polyethylene
terephthalate waste via steam reforming. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 42, 10708–10721.
doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.02.034.
Pinto, F., Costa, P., Gulyurtlu, I., Cabrita, I., 1999. Pyrolysis of plastic wastes
2. effect of catalyst on product yield. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 51, 57–71.
doi:10.1016/S0165-2370(99)00008-X.
Rehan, M., Miandad, R., Barakat, M.A., Ismail, I.M.I., Almeelbi, T., Gardy, J.,
Hassanpour, A., Khan, M.Z., Demirbas, A., Nizami, A.S., 2017. Effect of zeo-
lite catalysts on pyrolysis liquid oil. Int. Biodeterior. Biodegrad. 119, 162–175.
doi:10.1016/j.ibiod.2016.11.015.
Sarker, M., Rashid, M.M., 2013. Waste plastics mixture of polystyrene and polypropylene
into light grade fuel using Fe2 O3 catalyst. Int. J. Renew. Energy Technol. Res. 2,
17–28.
Shah, S.H., Khan, Z.M., Raja, I.A., Mahmood, Q., Bhatti, Z.A., Khan, J., Farooq, A.,
Rashid, N., Wu, D., 2010. Low temperature conversion of plastic waste into light
hydrocarbon. J. Hazard. Mater. 179, 15–20. doi:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2010.01.134.
Sharuddin, S.D.A., Abnisa, F., Daud, W.M.A.W., Aroua, M.K., 2016. A review
on pyrolysis of plastic waste. Energy Convers. Manage. 115, 308–326.
doi:10.1016/j.enconman.2016.02.037.
Shiraga, Y., Uddin, M.A., Muto, A., Narazaki, M., Sakata, Y., Murata, K., 1999. Boiling-
point distribution and dechlorination of organic chlorine compounds in oil ob-
tained from the degradation of PVC mixed plastic. Energy Fuels 13, 428–432.
doi:10.1021/ef9801266.
Syamsiro, M., Saptoadi, H., Norsujianto, T., Noviasri, P., Cheng, S., Alimuddin, Z.,
Yoshikawa, K., 2014. Fuel oil production from municipal plastic waste in se-
quential pyrolysis and catalytic reforming reactors. Energy Proced. 47, 180–188.
doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2014.01.212.
Tsuge, A., Otani, H., Watanabe, C., 2006. Pyrolysis-GC/MS of Highpolymers -fundamentals
and Pyrogram compilations- (in Japanease). Techno System, Tokyo.
Yamada, H., Mori, H., Tagawa, T., 2010. CO2 reforming of waste plastics. J. Ind. Eng.
Chem. 16, 7–9. doi:10.1016/j.jiec.2010.01.029.
Yamada, H., Kimura, M., Tagawa, T., 2018. Pyrolysis of waste plastics for heavy oil pro-
duction (in Japanese). Kagaku Kogaku Ronbunshu 44, 197–200. doi:10.1252/kako-
ronbunshu.44.197.