Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy (2022) 24:789–800

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-021-02028-9

ORIGINAL PAPER

Qualitative and energy recovery potential analysis: plastic‑derived

fuel oil versus conventional diesel oil
Ronald Kizza1 · Noble Banadda1 · Jeffrey Seay2

Received: 2 November 2020 / Accepted: 6 January 2021 / Published online: 21 January 2021
© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH, DE part of Springer Nature 2021

Abstract
Due to depleting fossil fuel sources, plastic-derived fuel oil (PDFO) has received much attention over the past decade as an
alternative to conventional diesel oil. Although several researchers have reported the properties of PDFO and recommended
its usage in diesel engines, no study has thoroughly compared it with conventional diesel oil. This study aims at comparing
PDFO produced from pyrolysis of waste plastic (LDPE, HDPE, PS, and PP) with conventional diesel oil based on a number
of quality parameters and energy recovery potential. The quality parameters of color and appearance, water content, density,
viscosity, volatility, copper strip corrosion, flash point, pour point, and energy content, as well as the cetane index of the fuels,
were assessed following ASTM standards. The obtained results indicated no significant difference between the water contents
and densities of the fuel oils. Pensky–Martens Closed Cup (PMCC) flash point for PDFO was significantly lower than that
of conventional diesel oil. Although the pour points and viscosities of PDFO were significantly different from conventional
diesel oil, the values were within the recommended range. All the PDFO types had higher volatilities than conventional diesel
oil in the lighter section of the distillation curve, whereas no significant difference was detected in the heavier section. On the
ASTM corrosion chart, conventional diesel oil belongs to class 1a, whereas all the PDFO types belong to class 2a. Energy
recovery calculations revealed that PDFO has the potential to produce energy equivalent to 203,000 barrels of oil. It can be
concluded that although PDFO has undesirable high volatility in the lighter section of the distillation curve and relatively
low flash point, it compares relatively well with conventional diesel oil and thus is a potential substitute.

Supplementary Information The online version contains

supplementary material available at. https​://doi.org/10.1007/
s1009​8-021-02028​-9.

* Jeffrey Seay
jeffrey.seay@uky.edu
1
Department of Agricultural and Bio‑Systems Engineering,
Makerere University, P. O. Box 7062, Kampala, Uganda
2
Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering,
University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 42002, USA

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
790
Graphic abstract
Keywords Waste plastic · Pyrolysis · Plastic-derived fuel oil · Conventional diesel oil · Qualitative analysis · Energy
recovery potential
Introduction
Plastics are synthetic materials made from a wide variety of
organic polymers that can be shaped while soft and then set
into a slightly elastic form. They are polymeric materials
including several straight or branched cross-links between
chains (Sogancioglu et al. 2017). The most common forms
of plastics are: polyethylene terephthalate (PET), low-
density polyethylene (LDPE), high-density polyethylene
(HDPE), polypropylene (PP), polystyrene (PS), and poly-
vinyl chloride (PVC). Over the past few decades, plastics
have proved superior over the traditionally preferred mate-
rials such as wood, stone, horn, leather, metal, glass, and
ceramic in many products (Scalenghe 2018). The continu-
ously growing usage of plastics has been attributed to their
low cost, ease of manufacture, versatility, imperviousness
to water, durability, light weight, and low cost (Al-Salem
et al. 2017). Besides, due to the light weight of plastics, their
usage rather than the heavier glass or metal may reduce the
energy consumption during the transportation process. For
example, Andrady and Neal (2009) estimated a reduction of
52% results in transportation energy if PET plastic is used
packaging beverages rather than metal or glass. The attrib-
utes and benefits of using plastics as materials have led to
their increased demand and production since their discovery
and inception around 70 years ago.
13
R. Kizza et al.
Global production of plastics is at an estimated rate of
more than 400 million tonnes per year (World Economic
Forum 2020). The continuing increase in the production and
consumption of plastic has led to the accumulation of waste
plastic in the ecosystem. In the world today, waste plastic is
a known indelible component of municipal solid waste mak-
ing up to 17.4% and that makes it the second largest waste
stream after organic waste (Miandad et al. 2017). It is esti-
mated that the planet will hold another 33 billion tonnes of
plastic by 2050 (Rochman et al. 2013). The problem of waste
plastic accumulation has persisted for years both in devel-
oped and developing countries despite efforts by municipal
governments. The accumulation is mainly because plastics
take a long time to degrade naturally as compared to biode-
gradable materials. According to the World Wide Fund for
Nature, WWF (2018), the life cycle of plastics such as plastic
bags, coffee cups, plastic straws, 6-pack plastic rings, plastic
water bottles, coffee pods, plastic cups, disposable diapers,
and plastic toothbrushes is 20, 30, 200, 400, 450, 500, 450,
500, and 500 years, respectively. They degrade gradually
because the molecular bonds containing hydrogen, carbon,
and a few other elements such as nitrogen, chlorine, and oth-
ers make plastic very durable. The negative environmental
impacts associated with waste plastic have led to several
efforts which span across the entire plastics value chain and
take a holistic approach based on the “three Rs”—reduce,
Qualitative and energy recovery potential analysis: plastic‑derived fuel oil versus…
reuse, and recycle over the past few years (World Economic
Forum 2020). Such efforts include: legislation on plastic
bags, bans on the use of specific products such as straws,
packaging materials such as polystyrene, and taxes or waste
disposal fees on single-use plastics, among others.
The most common approaches to the problem of waste
plastic management include reduction, re-use, plastic recov-
ery, and disposal in landfills (Ouda et al. 2016). It is almost
impossible to reduce the production of plastics because of
the high demand and consumption. Also, a major percentage
of plastic produced per annum is used to make throwaway
items of packaging and other short-lived products that are
thrown away within a year of manufacture, and therefore, re-
use is not a viable alternative as well (Hopewell et al. 2009).
Likewise, landfilling of plastic waste cannot be counted on
because of the environmental issues associated with landfills
if not properly managed. According to Zohoori and Ghani
(2017), there are very few landfills in developing countries
that meet environmental standards which are approved in the
requirements of developed countries hence posing environ-
mental and health risks such as leachate seepage to ground
water, odor, houseflies, and spread of communicable dis-
eases. This leaves waste plastic recovery as the only viable
and most appropriate option for handling the problem of
waste plastic accumulation. Plastic recovery can be divided
into feedstock recycling and energy recovery (Aguado et al.
2007; Sogancioglu et al. 2017). Recycling can be defined
as the process of converting waste materials into new mate-
rials and objects. Unfortunately, conventional mechanical
recycling techniques for plastics such as sorting, grinding,
washing, and extrusion can recycle only 15–20% of all plas-
tic waste types (Miandad et al. 2016). Beyond this level,
the plastic becomes contaminated with materials like soil,
dirt, aluminum foils, food wastes, and paper labels and that
renders it unrecyclable. Besides, reprocessing techniques
expose the waste plastic to additional heat cycles that may
result in molecular damage such as cross-linking or forma-
tion of double bonds thereby reducing the chemical integrity
of the final product (Philip et al. 2004). The only way to
permanently eradicate plastic waste is by destructive thermal
treatment, such as combustion, gasification, and pyrolysis.
Combustion is usually carried out in incinerators but if not
controlled, as the case for open burning, pollutes the envi-
ronment by the production of air and waterborne pollutants
such as furans, and poly-chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins, a
carcinogen (Levis and Barlaz 2011; Miandad et al. 2016,
2017). Gasification is a potential alternative, but pyrolysis,
which is a complex series of chemical and thermal reac-
tions to decompose or depolymerize organic material under
oxygen-free conditions, has gained renewed attention over
the past few years due to its numerous environmental and
operational advantages (Al-Salem et al. 2017; Sharuddin
et al. 2017). Pyrolysis is a promising pathway to convert
791
waste into fuel that can be used to cover the energy gap
given the fluctuating fuel prices and the increasing demand
due to the increasing population (Kizza et al. 2019).
Pyrolysis of plastics for conversion into fuels has been
studied extensively over the past few years. Miandad et al.
(2017) reported the effect of plastic waste types on the pyrol-
ysis liquid oil. Demirbas et al. (2016) studied the conversion
of waste tires to liquid products via sodium carbonate cata-
lytic pyrolysis. Owusu et al. (2018) explored the potential
of converting plastic waste into useful fuels in both batch
and continuous pyrolysis reactors using appropriate technol-
ogy. Although some researchers have studied the conversion
of waste plastic into liquid fuels by pyrolysis, only a few
studies have endeavored to report the comparison of plastic-
derived fuel oil to conventional petroleum fuels. Nileshku-
mar et al. (2015) investigated the effect of the blend ratio
of plastic pyrolysis oil and diesel fuel on the performance
of a single cylinder IC engine. The main focus of most of
these studies has been analyzing the characteristics of liquid
fuel produced from different types of plastics, increasing
the amount of liquid fuel produced during the process, as
well as the usage of catalysts to upgrade the plastic-derived
pyrolysis oils. Conversely, the comparison of the quality of
the plastic-derived fuel oils with conventional fossil diesel in
terms of their properties such as corrosion, volatility, viscos-
ity, heating value (HV), flash point (FP), density, pour point,
and water content is rarely reported, although several studies
have suggested a similarity (Lee et al. 2015; Sogancioglu
et al. 2017). Moreover, the studies on the energy recovery
potential of plastic-derived pyrolysis oils in comparison with
traditional diesel are rare (Sharuddin et al. 2017), which is
the main focus of this study.
Uganda is a developing country located in the eastern part
of sub-Saharan Africa, and like so many other countries, it
is badly affected by the accumulation of waste plastic. In the
capital alone, Kampala City, approximately 62 kilotons of
waste plastic is generated per year, but only 2% is recycled
into useful products (Tukahirwa et al. 2010). The recycling
mainly relies on an informal recycling sector via waste pick-
ers to sort through dumpsites and unmanaged landfills to
collect recyclable waste plastics (Medina 2007, 2008). The
problem of plastic waste management in Uganda requires
a distinctive set of sustainable solutions. It is imperative to
note that in Uganda, there exist no completely developed
waste-to-energy facilities to convert plastic waste into energy
despite the immense potential and the high quantities of
plastic waste. In 2016, the University of Kentucky in col-
laboration with Makerere University introduced the Trash
to Tank (3 T) approach in Uganda. Trash to Tank (3 T) is
an approach to plastic waste management that is based on
the concept of converting waste plastic trash into a liquid
fuel dubbed plastic-derived fuel oil (PDFO), suitable for
use in any diesel or kerosene fuel application (Joshi and
13
792
Seay 2019a, b; Joshi et al. 2019). However, the quality and
the energy recovery potential of PDFO in comparison with
conventional diesel are barely known and it is the gap this
study aims to address. Therefore, the main aim of this study
is to thoroughly compare PDFO with conventional diesel
based on a number of quality parameters and energy recov-
ery potential.
Materials and methods
Materials
Waste plastic samples for PP, PS, HDPE, and LDPE were
obtained from Kiteezi landfill site located 12 km east of the
Central Business District (CBD) of Kampala City, Uganda.
The samples were hand-picked from the landfill, sorted, and
shredded by a group of waste plastic salvagers called Kiteezi
Landfill Salvagers’ Community-Based Organization (CBO)
stationed at the landfill. No samples of PVC and PET were
considered in this study due to their undesirable proper-
ties. Pyrolysis of PVC mainly releases corrosive and toxic
hydrochloric acid when heated moderately that may damage
the process equipment (Al-Salem et al. 2017; Miranda et al.
1999; Sharuddin et al. 2016). Pyrolysis of PET produces
yellowish benzoic acid that may clog the piping from the
reactor to the condenser thereby causing problems in product
collection and sterilization (Çepelioğullar and Pütün 2013;
FakhrHoseini and Dastanian 2013; Hartulistiyoso et al.
2015; Sharuddin et al. 2017). The samples were cleaned to
remove all the impurities and shredded to reduce their size
before they were loaded into the pyrolysis processor for bet-
ter heat transfer. Figure 1 shows an illustration of the waste
plastic samples before they were loaded into the processor.
Pyrolysis of waste plastic samples
Pyrolysis experiments were conducted using a stainless
steel reactor named 3 T processor designed and fabricated
by University of Kentucky Appropriate Technology and Sus-
tainability (UKATS). The detailed description of the 3 T
processor and the details of the pyrolysis process used to
produce PDFO can be found in the previous technical lit-
erature (DeNeve et al. 2017; Joshi and Seay 2019a; Kizza
et al. 2019). After the pyrolysis process, the fuel samples
were collected and their volume and mass were measured.
The percentage yield of the fuels was calculated using Eq. 1.
Produced PDFO samples were centrifuged at 3000 RPM
for 25 min using a Jouan KR422 centrifuge to remove wax.
The samples were then taken to the laboratory for analysis
of physical properties. Conventional diesel was purchased
from a gas station in Kampala City and then taken to the lab
for analysis along with the PDFO samples.
13
R. Kizza et al.
Fig. 1  An illustration of cleaned and shredded sample of waste plastic
Yield of fuel (wt%) = Mass of fuel (g)∕Total feed (g) × 100%
(1)
Characterization of fuel samples
Determination of physical properties
Color and appearance were determined by visual observa-
tion. Water content for the fuels was determined according
to ASTM D95-13 using Dean and Stark apparatus manu-
factured by Normalab. The density was determined accord-
ing to ASTM 1298 standard using a glass hydrometer with
a range of 800–850 mm manufactured by Allafrance. The
test sample of the fuel was brought to 15 °C and transferred
to the hydrometer cylinder that had also been brought to
15 °C. The hydrometer also at 15 °C was lowered into the
test portion and allowed to settle. After the temperature equi-
librium had been reached, the density of the fuel was read
from the hydrometer scale. The flash point (FP) of the fuels
was determined using methods described by ASTM D93
with an automated Pensky–Martens Closed Cup (PMCC)
apparatus model NPM 231 manufactured by Normalab. Pour
point was determined according to ASTM D97 using a Seta
Cloud and pour point cryostat model 93531-8 manufactured
by Stanhope Seta. The viscosity of the fuels at 40 °C was
determined according to ASTM 445 using a Thermostatic
visibility bath model TV4000 manufactured by Tamson and
a Canon-Fenske Routine Viscometer model 350—49663
manufactured by PSL Rheotek. For the corrosion test, a
polished copper strip manufactured by Grant Thompson
was slid into a chemically clean 25 by 150 mm test tube
containing 30.0 mL of the sample of fuel. The test tube was
then immersed in a corrosion bath maintained at 50 °C for
3 h. At the end of this period, the copper strip was removed,
Qualitative and energy recovery potential analysis: plastic‑derived fuel oil versus…
washed, and compared with the ASTM D130 Copper Strip
Corrosion Standards. The volatility (distillation) tests were
carried out according to ASTM D86 standards using an
atmospheric distillation unit model HDA627-Manual manu-
factured by Herzog. An ASTM 4C thermometer with a range
−5 to 400 °C manufactured by Allafrance and a class A
100-ml hexagonal base measuring cylinder manufactured
by GlassCo were used during the experiments.
Calculation of cetane indices
Calculated Cetane Indices (CCI) were determined using two
methods, that is, ASTM D 4737-04 and ASTM D976-04,
and the results were compared. Both methods were used
because each of them has limitations (Bezaire et al. 2010).
Under ASTM D 4737-04, boiling curves generated from the
volatility test and the density measurements were utilized to
calculate the CCI as shown in Eq. 2. For ASTM D976-04,
the mid-boiling points and American Petroleum Institute
(API) gravities of the fuels were utilized as shown in Eq. 3.
API gravity was calculated using density at 15 °C and spe-
cific gravity of the fuels as shown in Eq. 3.
CCI4 = 45.2 + (0.0892)(T10N ) + [0.131 + (0.901)(B)(T50N )]
+ [0.0523 − (0.420)(B)][T90N ]
+ [0.00049][(T50N )2 − (T90N )2 ]
+ (107)(B) + (60)(B)2
where ­CCI4 = Calculated Cetane Index by the four vari-
able equation, D = Density of fuel at 15 °C in g/cm 3,
DN = D − 0.85, B = [e (−3.5) (DN)] − 1, T10 = recovery temper-
ature in °C, T10N = T10 − 215, T50 = 50% recovery tempera-
ture in °C, T50N = T50 − 260, T90 = 90% recovery temperature
in °C, T90 = T90 − 310.
CCI2 = −420.34 + 0.01G2 + 0.192G log M
+ 65.01(log M)2 − 0.0001809M 2
where ­CCI2 = Calculated Cetane Index by the two variable
equation, G = API gravity, M = mid-boiling temperature.
G = 141.5∕SG − 131.5
where G = API gravity
/ of the fuels, SG = specific gravity of
the fuels given by 𝓁 , where ℓ = density of the density of
𝓁
W 40
the fuels and 𝓁W = 0.999103 g/cm3, the density of water at
15 °C (Lee et al. 2015).
Energy recovery potential analysis
The energy recovery potential analysis of the waste plastic
was carried out based on the yield of PDFO from the pyroly-
sis process, the lower heating values (LHV) of the PDFO,
793
and the solid waste management data for Kampala City as
shown in Eq. 5. The LHV values used were obtained from
an earlier study on plastic-derived fuels produced using the
trash to tank approach conducted by Joshi and Seay (2019b).
The solid waste management data that were used to calculate
the percentage of recyclable and non-recyclable waste plas-
tic were obtained from the literature (Tukahirwa et al. 2010).
Er = LHVf × Amount of PDFO in kg (5)
where E r = the energy recovered from waste plastic,
­LHVf = the lower heating value of the fuel in kJ/kg.
The amount of PDFO produced from the pyrolysis pro-
cess was calculated based on the percentage yield PDFO
from the pyrolysis and the weight of waste plastic excluding
PET and PVC as shown in Eq. 6.
Amount of PDFO in kg = Yield of PDFO × Amount of Waste Plastic (6)
Results and discussions
Pyrolysis yield
Figure 2 shows the percentage yield of PDFO produced from
(2) different types of plastics. Figure 2 shows that pyrolysis of
PS produced the highest yield of PDFO which was 71.3%,
followed by LDPE with 63.7%, then HDPE with 58.7%, and
lastly PP with the lowest which is 54.1%. These results are in
agreement with those observed in existing technical litera-
ture such as Sharuddin et al. (2016), Sharuddin et al. (2017)
and Kiran et al. (2000) that reported that the sequence of
pyrolysis oil yield for the four types of plastics should be
PS, LDPE, HDPE, and PP in descending order. The low
PP pyrolysis oil yield indicates a high yield of other prod-
ucts of other products of pyrolysis such as gases. According
(3) to Jung et al. (2010), PP degrades more easily than other
forms of plastics during pyrolysis due to the intramolecular
80
(4) 70
Percentage yield of PDFO
60
50
30
20
10
0
HDPE PP PS LDPE
Type of plastic
Fig. 2  Yield of PDFO from different types of plastics
13
794
radical transfer and hence produces more gaseous products
than liquids. It is also imperative to note that PS has the
highest amount of volatile matter of all the types of plastics,
that is, 99.63% (Abnisa et al. 2014) as compared to LDPE
(99.60%) (Aboulkas and El Bouadili 2010), HDPE (98.57%)
(Heikkinen et al. 2004), and lastly PP (95.63%) (Jung et al.
2010). Numerous researchers have highlighted that a high
fraction of volatile matter favors a high yield of pyrolysis oil
(Abnisa and Daud 2014; Jahirul et al. 2012). Asadullah et al.
(2008) reported that volatile matter is usually converted into
liquid oil upon condensation hence increasing liquid yield,
and Omar et al. (2011) highlighted that a high volatile matter
content provides the advantages of high reactivity and vola-
tility, which favor the production of liquid fuel production.
The high yields exhibited by both PS and LDPE in this
study are very important for the production of PDFO. This is
because the percentage of PS and LDPE is always quite high
in the MSW, and that implies a higher quantity of PDFO can
be produced. This has been confirmed by other research-
ers such as Al-Salem et al. (2017) who reported that PS is
a main component in the plastic solid waste (PSW) load.
Also, Komakech et al. (2014) reported that MSW contained
a higher percentage of soft plastics than hard plastics and
the soft plastics were mainly LDPE and HDPE. Therefore,
the PSW from Kampala City is expected to yield relatively
high quantities of PDFO.
Qualitative analysis of PDFO and conventional
diesel
Color and appearance
Figure 3 shows the produced PDFO from different types of
plastics together with conventional diesel oil right before
they were taken for characterization. It can be seen from the
figure that PDFO produced from all the types of plastic is
clear and bright just like conventional diesel oil. Color and
appearance are very important as they determine customer
likability of the fuel. It can be concluded that PDFO has
a suitable appearance. As for the color, PP was found to
be light brown, whereas LDPE and PS were yellow, HDPE
brown, and conventional diesel oil was pale yellow. Thus,
it can be concluded that conventional diesel oil was lighter
in color than PDFO. The discrepancy in the color of the
fuels produced by pyrolysis of plastic is usually caused by
different color additives in the feedstock waste plastic. It
should be noted that a number of additives are also added to
conventional diesel oil to improve its appearance and quality
performance as long as it does not cause other parameters
out of the specified standard ranges.
13
R. Kizza et al.
Fig. 3  Plastic-derived fuel oil produced from different types of waste
plastic alongside conventional diesel
Physical properties
Table 1 shows the comparison between different physi-
cal properties of PDFO and conventional diesel oil. The
water content of the fuels was less than 0.01%. As shown in
Table 1, the standard water content for diesel fuel oil must be
less than 0.02%, and therefore, all the PDFO samples were
within the recommended range. It is important to determine
the water content of diesel fuel oil because the presence of
water in diesel fuel oil systems can cause a number of prob-
lems. Water is known to rust any steel and iron components
leading to formation of loose particles of iron oxide that
can quickly choke fuel filters. If the particles are micron
sized and small enough to pass through the filters, they may
reach the injectors scoring their surfaces and hence ruin the
fuel injection spray patterns. Additionally, quiescent water at
the bottom of the tank can provide a favorable environment
for soil bacteria, entering the tank through openings. These
bacteria can form a slime layer after feeding on fuel that may
break free to spread throughout the fuel system or even clog
the filters (He et al. 2007). Living bacteria are also known
to release acids as waste products that may further corrode
and damage the fuel system components. Therefore, the low
percentage of water in the PDFO makes it a good fuel and a
potential substitute for conventional diesel oil.
Densities of the fuels were also measured, and the val-
ues are shown in Table 1. Density is a key quality indicator
since it affects handling, storage, and combustion of auto-
motive fuels. As shown in the table, the density of PDFO
was lower than that of conventional diesel oil and the min-
imum standard value of 0.820 kg/L for Uganda and East
Africa. However, statistical analysis of the values of density
for all the fuels indicates that there is no significant differ-
ence (p > 0.05). Therefore, although the density of the fuels
does not fall in the standard range, it can be concluded that
they are similar statistically. The viscosity of the fuels at
Qualitative and energy recovery potential analysis: plastic‑derived fuel oil versus… 795

Table 1  Physical properties of PDFO and conventional diesel oil in comparison with the standard values
Type of fuel Water content (%) Density @ 15 °C (kg/l) PMCC Flash Pour Point Viscosity @ LHV (MJ/kg)a
Point (°C)* (°C)* 40 °C (cSt)*

PP <0.01 0.778 25 −23 1.93 40.03

LDPE <0.01 0.772 25 −21 1.71 44.94
PS <0.01 0.783 25 −30 1.93 39.14
HDPE <0.01 0.781 25 −30 1.91 40.98
Diesel Oil <0.01 0.837 67 −30 3.13 41.50
Standardb <0.02 0.820–0.870 >55 n.a 1.60–5.50 n.a

n.a.: not available

*
Significant difference
a
(Joshi and Seay 2019b), b(UNBS 2019)

40 °C was also determined, and the values are also shown in
Table 1. The viscosity of all PDFO samples was significantly
lower than that of conventional diesel (p < 0.05). Although
they were lower than that of diesel oil, they fell in the rec-
ommended standard range (1.60–5.50 cSt) and hence safe
for usage in the engine taking other factors constant. The
lower viscosity of PDFO than that for conventional diesel
oil signifies that it is less viscous, and hence easier to pump
and suitable for use in the fuel injection process (Sharuddin
et al. 2017).
The result of the PMCC flash point measurement for the
fuels is shown in Table 1. It can be seen that all the PDFO
samples had a flash point (25 °C) that was significantly lower
than that for conventional diesel oil (67 °C) and the recom-
mended standard value (>55 °C). It is important to note that
flash point is a safety measure for fuel storage and the tem-
perature beyond which the fuels are flammable (Arbab et al.
2013; Mofijur et al. 2017). Therefore, the low flash point of
PDFO signifies that it is not safe for storage as conventional
diesel oil. However, it is a lot higher than that of gasoline
(−40 °C), and hence, with some additives or modifications,
it can be taken a lot closer to that of diesel oil than gasoline.
A blend of the PDFO with conventional diesel oil is also a
potential solution for improvement in flash point.
Pour point is another important property that was deter-
mined, and the result is also displayed in Table 1. The pour
point of a fuel is a measure of the tendency of a fuel to
become more viscous and resist flowing when cold due to
formation of wax crystals that increase its viscosity. Usually,
a lower pour point for fuels is more preferable. As shown in
Table 1, the pour points of HDPE and PS fuels were equal
to that of conventional diesel oil (−30 °C) while slightly
higher for PP (−23 °C) and LDPE (−21 °C). This implies
that HDPE and PS have desirable pour points and have a
high potential to replace conventional diesel oil. Although
PP and LDPE fuels have slightly higher pour points, they
may also be considered as the difference is of just −7 °C
and −9 °C, respectively. According to Cookson et al. (1995),
the pour point of diesel fuels should be in the range between
-30 and 9 °C, and thus, all the PDFO types have acceptable
pour points.
The lower heating values of the fuels are also reported
from the technical literature (Joshi and Seay 2019b). Table 1
shows that all the PDFO had relatively high LHV values and
quite close to that of conventional diesel oil. LDPE fuel had
a higher LHV value, that is, 44.94 MJ/kg than conventional
diesel oil (41.50 MJ/kg), whereas PP, HDPE, and PS had
slightly lower values, that is, 40.03, 40.98, and 39.14 MJ/
kg, respectively. These energy values are very important for
the calculation of energy recovery potential of waste plastic
because once they are multiplied by the total yield of PDFO,
it gives the total energy recovery potential of waste plastic
by pyrolysis.
Volatility
The distillation test is one universally accepted measure of
volatility for fuels. The distillation test was carried out for
the fuels, and its result is shown in the distillation curves dis-
played in Fig. 4. The percentage of fuel which is recovered
as the temperature increases was measured and plotted on a
graph. Of all the properties used for establishing the quality
for a fuel, volatility stands out as one of the most critical
ones since it is a characteristic directly related to pollutant
emissions and engine performance (Flórez and Agramunt
2005).
The initial boiling point (IBP) of a fuel is the tempera-
ture at which a fraction just begins to evaporate during a
distillation or volatility test. From Fig. 4, it can be seen that
the IBP of conventional diesel oil (174 °C) is significantly
higher than that of PDFO (43–50 °C). The same trend is
observed for all the distillation temperatures below 280 °C,
and the temperatures at which the same volumes of fuel are
recovered are lower for PDFO than conventional diesel oil.
This implies that PDFO contains more volatile components
than conventional diesel oil. From the chemical composition

13
796 R. Kizza et al.

Fig. 4  Distillation curves for

the PDFO and conventional
diesel oil

point of view, it can be deduced that PDFO contains a sig- the end point of fractionation at 250, 350, and 365 °C for
nificant percentage of hydrocarbons that have carbon chain all PDFO samples and conventional diesel alongside the
length below C10. del Coro Fernández-Feal et al. (2017) standards. This parameter is established such that 65%
reported that a diesel should mainly contain hydrocarbons must not have vaporized before 250 °C; 85% V/V should
that have carbon chain length in the range between C10 and be distilled before 350 °C, and 95% V/V before 365 °C (del
C16. It should be noted that the hydrocarbons in the C4–C11 Coro Fernández-Feal et al. 2017). As shown in Table 2, the
range have boiling points in the range 45 to 210 °C (del Coro recovery level of PDFO at 250 °C is significantly lower than
Fernández-Feal et al. 2017). The presence of such volatile that for conventional diesel oil. However, all the PDFO the
hydrocarbons in a fuel makes it susceptible to causing vapor samples passed the standard at this temperature as well as
locks in fuel line, and therefore, ways should be devised to the conventional diesel oil used in the study. For the 350 °C,
reduce the percentage of such compounds if total removal there is a significant difference between the volume recov-
is not possible. Conversely, most regulations in most coun- ered for PDFO and conventional diesel oil. However, LDPE
tries have no limitations on the light section of the curve for and PS fuels had recovery levels that were slightly higher
diesel fuels, but only for the end zone where fractionation of than the standard (85%), and therefore, they passed. PP and
components happens (del Coro Fernández-Feal et al. 2017). HDPE fuels had volumes that were slightly lower than the
Final boiling point (FBP) is the temperature at which all standard by 2 and 3%, respectively. At 365 °C, the recovery
the components of a fuel are expected to have evaporated levels exhibited by LDPE and PS were not significantly dif-
during a distillation test or the temperature at which vapori- ferent from conventional diesel oil. All the fuels, apart from
zation ends. According to Cookson et al. (1995), the FBP of LDPE did not pass the 95% standard. It is, however, note-
diesel fuels should be in the range between 320 and 370 °C. worthy that PS fuel had the same recovery level at this end
If the FBP of a fuel is very high, combustion of the less vola- point with conventional diesel oil. Although the recovery
tile components will be incomplete, and hence, fuel droplets
may reach the cylinder walls and dilution of the lubricating
oil may take place. This may increase wear and production
of coke deposits in the combustion chamber and waste seg- Table 2  End points of Type of fuel Volume recov-
fractionation at 250, 350 and ered (% V/V) @
ments (del Coro Fernández-Feal et al. 2017). As shown in 365 °C
Fig. 4, the FBP of LDPE (368 °C), PS (359 °C), and HDPE 250 350 365
(370 °C) fuels falls in the recommended range, whereas
PP 55 83 87
HDPE is slightly out of range at 398 °C. This implies that
LDPE 57 86 95
apart from HDPE, PDFO contains hydrocarbons that are
PS 58 91 91
in the same range as conventional diesel oil in the heavier
HDPE 47 82 88
section of the curve.
Diesel 28 91 91
Another important parameter for volatility is the end
Standard 65 85 95
point of the fractionation of the components. Table 2 shows

13
Qualitative and energy recovery potential analysis: plastic‑derived fuel oil versus… 797

levels for HDPE and PP fuels were slightly different from Table 3  Classes of different Type of fuel Copper strip class
conventional diesel oil, they are still acceptable. types of fuel on the copper strip
standard chart PP 2a
Corrosion test LDPE 2a
PS 2a
The copper strip corrosion test is designed to assess the HDPE 2a
relative degree of corrosivity of a petroleum product. It is Diesel 1a
meant to determine whether the fuel will be corrosive to Standard 1a–1b
the cylinder walls of the engine or the components of the
fuel supply system. The corrosion test was carried out using
ASTM DI30 standard, and the classes of the fuels on the fuel oil. ASTM 4737 yielded values that are closer but
copper strip corrosion chart shown in Fig. 5 are determined. slightly lower than the standard cetane index for Uganda
The classes of fuels on the copper strip chart are shown and East Africa at large. It should be noted that the mini-
in Table 3. It can be seen that all the PDFO belonged to mum standard cetane index for a diesel fuel oil in Uganda
class 2a of the chart, whereas conventional diesel belonged is 48. Neither conventional diesel used in the study nor the
to class 1a. It is imperative to note that the standard class PDFO passed this minimum standard if ASTM 4737 is to
for a diesel fuel should be either 1a or 1b. Therefore, it can be considered. However, if ASTM D976 is considered, all
be concluded that PDFO has some degree of corrosivity and the fuels were observed to pass the minimum standard with
may be dangerous to the engine or the fuel system. However, HDPE fuel having the highest CCI of 77.11. It can also be
it is just one class away from the standard ASTM class and seen that all the PDFO had a higher cetane index than con-
may be acceptable with just a few improvements. ventional diesel oil (53.32).

Calculated Cetane Index (CCI) Energy recovery potential

The Calculated Cetane Index is used as an alternative to The energy recovery potential calculation for PDFO was
estimate the Cetane number which is a measure of the igni- based on the solid waste management data from Kampala
tion quality or the auto ignition tendency of a fuel during City. It was reported that 1500 tonnes of municipal waste
a compression ignition process (Xing-cai et al. 2004). The was generated in Kampala City per day (Tukahirwa et al.
Calculated Cetane Index (CCI) was calculated using two 2010). This 1500 tonnes contains about 170 tonnes of waste
methods for a comparison, the ASTM D976 and ASTM plastic of which, only 2% is collected for recycling while
4737, and Table 4 shows the distillation temperatures at dif- the balance is deposited into the landfill. This implies that
ferent recovery levels, API gravities, and Calculated Cetane about 167 tonnes of waste plastic gets deposited into the
Indices for PDFO and conventional diesel oil. These were landfill per day which translates to 62,050 tonnes of waste
the input values into Eqs. 2 and 3 for calculation of Cetane plastic per annum. Since only LDPE, HDPE, PP, and PS
Indices for the fuels. are the types of plastic that can be used to produce PDFO
The Calculated Cetane Indices for the PDFO and con-
ventional diesel using both the methods are also shown in
Table 4. It can be seen that there is a significant difference Table 4  Distillation (boiling) temperatures (°C) at different recovery
between the values obtained using two the methods. The levels, specific gravities (SG), API gravities, and Calculated Cetane
same discrepancy has been reported by other researchers Indices (CCIs) of PDFO and conventional diesel oil
(Bezaire et al. 2010). ASTM D976 yielded higher values Property PP LDPE PS HDPE Diesel Oil
than ASTM 4737 for all the PDFO and conventional diesel
T10 102 101 123 113 219
T10N −113 −114 −92 −102 −32
T50 230 226 220 253 277
T50N −30 −34 −40 −7 −46
T90 370 358 348 370 334
T90N 60 48 38 60 24
SG 0.779 0.773 0.784 0.782 0.838
API gravity/0API 50.21 51.63 49.05 49.52 37.40
CCI4* 44.22 42.29 42.33 26.28 45.35
CCI2* 65.83 67.50 59.93 71.11 53.32
*
Fig. 5  ASTM copper strip corrosion standard chart Significant difference

13
798
through pyrolysis, there is need to exclude other types of
plastic such as PET and PVC. PVC and PET make up about
4% of total waste plastic (Sharuddin et al. 2017). This leaves
about 58,765 tonnes of waste plastic per annum available
for pyrolysis to convert into PDFO. Figure 6 shows an illus-
tration of the calculation used to determine the potential
energy recovery from plastics. The LHV values used in the
analysis are shown in Table 1 as obtained from the techni-
cal literature (Joshi and Seay 2019b). LDPE had the highest
LHV of 44.94 MJ/kg, whereas PS had the lowest, 39.14 MJ/
kg as shown in Table 1. The LHV of LDPE was higher than
that for conventional diesel, whereas PP, PS, and HDPE had
slightly lower values. In the calculation shown in Fig. 6, the
lowest value of PDFO, that is, 39.14 MJ/kg for PS, was
used. The calculation shows that waste plastic can be used
to produce 1.244 million MJ per annum of energy through
pyrolysis technology which is equivalent to 203,000 barrels
of oil per year. According to Munu and Banadda (2016), the
energy consumption for Kampala City is currently estimated
at about 90,000 TJ of which petroleum contributes about
47% or 42,300 TJ. Considering the energy recovery potential
of PDFO, it can contribute about 3% of the energy consump-
tion from petroleum for the entire city. If the LHV value for
LDPE is used, the energy recovery potential becomes 1.429
million MJ per annum which is equivalent to 233,000 bar-
rels of oil.
Fig. 6  Energy recovery potential analysis of PDFO
13
R. Kizza et al.
Conclusions
The comparison between conventional diesel and plastic-
derived fuel oil (PDFO) based on qualitative analysis and
energy recovery potential is presented. Under qualitative
analysis, the properties that were considered included:
color and appearance, water content, density at 15 °C,
viscosity at 40 °C, PMCC flash point, pour point, corro-
sion, volatility, lower heating values (LHV), and Calcu-
lated Cetane Index. The energy recovery potential analysis
was carried out based on waste plastic data collected from
Kampala Capital City Authority. It can be concluded that
all the PDFO types were found to be clear and bright by
appearance. There was a slight difference in the color of
the PDFO and conventional diesel oil mainly due to the
color additives in the feedstock plastic. The water con-
tent and density at 15 °C of PDFO were not significantly
different from those for conventional diesel oil. Despite
the fact that viscosity of PDFO at 40 °C was significantly
lower than conventional diesel oil, it was found to be
within the recommended standard range for Uganda and
East Africa (1.60–5.50 cSt). The PMCC flash point for
all the PDFO (25 °C) was found to be significantly lower
than for conventional diesel oil (67 °C) and the standard
(55 °C), and hence relatively unsafe for storage. Therefore,
there is need to improve the PMCC flash point of PDFO
either through blending or by addition of recommended
additives. The pour point of all the PDFO was found to
be quite similar to that of conventional diesel oil and lies
Qualitative and energy recovery potential analysis: plastic‑derived fuel oil versus…
within the recommended range (−30 to 9 °C). PDFO was
found to be a class below conventional diesel on the cor-
rosion chart and therefore has a higher degree of corro-
sivity than conventional diesel oil. The CCI calculated
using ASTM D976 yielded values that were higher than
ASTM 4737 and the standard value of 48. Values calcu-
lated using ASTM 4737 were slightly below the standard.
All the PDFO samples were found to be more volatile than
conventional diesel in the lighter section of the distillation
curve, and no significant difference was observed in the
heavier section. PDFO has undesirable high volatility in
the lighter section of the distillation curve and low flash
point, and therefore, ways should be devised to reduce
the same. Otherwise, PDFO compares relatively well with
conventional diesel oil and therefore a potential substitute.
PDFO was found to have a potential of producing energy
that is equivalent to 203, 000 barrels of oil per annum and
that may contribute to 3% of the petroleum fuel consump-
tion for Kampala City.
Funding This study was funded by the University of Kentucky Appro-
priate Technology and Sustainability (UKATS) Research Group and
Makerere University Department of Agricultural and Bio-systems
Engineering.
Availability of data and material All the data used in this study are
available in the form of a spreadsheet (ESM).
Code availability Not applicable.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflicts of interest Not applicable.
References
Abnisa F, Daud WMAW (2014) A review on co-pyrolysis of biomass:
an optional technique to obtain a high-grade pyrolysis oil. Energy
Convers Manag 87:71–85
Abnisa F, Daud WW, Sahu J (2014) Pyrolysis of mixtures of palm shell
and polystyrene: an optional method to produce a high-grade of
pyrolysis oil. Environ Prog Sustain Energy 33:1026–1033
Aboulkas A, El Bouadili A (2010) Thermal degradation behaviors of
polyethylene and polypropylene. Part I: pyrolysis kinetics and
mechanisms. Energy Convers Manag 51:1363–1369
Aguado J, Serrano D, San Miguel G (2007) European trends in the
feedstock recycling of plastic wastes. Global Nest J 9:12–19
Al-Salem S, Antelava A, Constantinou A, Manos G, Dutta A (2017)
A review on thermal and catalytic pyrolysis of plastic solid waste
(PSW). J Environ Manag 197:177–198
Andrady AL, Neal MA (2009) Applications and societal benefits of
plastics. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 364:1977–1984
Arbab M, Masjuki H, Varman M, Kalam M, Imtenan S, Sajjad H
(2013) Fuel properties, engine performance and emission char-
acteristic of common biodiesels as a renewable and sustainable
source of fuel. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 22:133–147
799
Asadullah M, Rahman MA, Ali MM, Motin MA, Sultan MB, Alam
MR, Rahman MS (2008) Jute stick pyrolysis for bio-oil produc-
tion in fluidized bed reactor. Bioresour Technol 99:44–50
ASTM D1298-12 (2012b) Standard test method for density, relative
density (specific gravity), or API gravity of crude petroleum
and liquid petroleum products by hydrometer method. ASTM
International, West Conshohocken. doi:https​://doi.org/10.1520/
D1298​-12
ASTM D130-12 (2012a) Standard test method for corrosiveness to
copper from petroleum products by copper strip test. ASTM
International, West Conshohocken. doi:https​://doi.org/10.1520/
D0130​-12
ASTM D445-06 (2006) Standard test method for kinematic viscosity
of transparent and opaque liquids (and calculation of dynamic
viscosity). ASTM International, West Conshohocken. doi:https​
://doi.org/10.1520/D0445​-06
ASTM D4737-04 (2004a) Standard test method for calculated cetane
index by four variable equation. ASTM International, West Con-
shohocken. doi:https​://doi.org/10.1520/D4737​-04
ASTM D86-01 (2001) Standard test method for distillation of petro-
leum products at atmospheric pressure. ASTM International, West
Conshohocken. doi:https​://doi.org/10.1520/D0086​-01
ASTM D93-00 (2000) Standard test methods for flash-point by Pen-
sky–Martens closed cup tester. ASTM International, West Con-
shohocken. doi:https​://doi.org/10.1520/D0093​-00
ASTM D95-18 (2018) Standard test method for water in petroleum
products and bituminous materials by distillation. ASTM Inter-
national, West Conshohocken. doi:https​://doi.org/10.1520/D0095​
-13R18​
ASTM D97-15 (2015) Standard test method for pour point of petroleum
products. ASTM International, West Conshohocken. doi:https​://
doi.org/10.1520/D0097​-15
ASTM D976-04 (2004b) Standard test methods for calculated cetane
index of distillate fuels. ASTM International, West Consho-
hocken. doi:https​://doi.org/10.1520/D0976​-04
Bezaire N, Wadumesthrige K, Ng KS, Salley SO (2010) Limitations of
the use of cetane index for alternative compression ignition engine
fuels. Fuel 89:3807–3813
Çepelioğullar Ö, Pütün AE (2013) Utilization of two different types
of plastic wastes from daily and industrial life. J Selcuk Univ Nat
Appl Sci 2:694–706
Cookson DJ, Iliopoulos P, Smith BE (1995) Composition-property
relations for jet and diesel fuels of variable boiling range. Fuel
74:70–78. https​://doi.org/10.1016/0016-2361(94)P4333​-W
del Coro Fernández-Feal MM, Sánchez-Fernández LR, Sánchez-
Fernández B (2017) Distillation: basic test in quality control of
automotive fuels. In: Distillation Innovative Applications and
Modeling, p 77
Demirbas A, Al-Sasi BO, Nizami A-S (2016) Conversion of waste
tires to liquid products via sodium carbonate catalytic pyrolysis.
Energy Sour A Recovery Util Environ Effects 38:2487–2493
DeNeve D, Joshi C, Samdani A, Higgins J, Seay J (2017) Optimization
of an appropriate technology based process for converting waste
plastic in to liquid fuel via thermal decomposition. J Sustain Dev
10:116–124
FakhrHoseini SM, Dastanian M (2013) Predicting pyrolysis products of
PE, PP, and PET using NRTL activity coefficient model. J Chem
2013
Flórez JAÁ, Agramunt IC (2005) Motores alternativos de combustión
interna. Universitat Politecnica de Catalunya. Iniciativa Digital
Politecnica
Hartulistiyoso E, Sigiro FA, Yulianto M (2015) Temperature distribu-
tion of the plastics Pyrolysis process to produce fuel at 450°C.
Proced Environ Sci 28:234–241
He B, Thompson J, Routt D, Van Gerpen J (2007) Moisture absorption
in biodiesel and its petro-diesel blends. Appl Eng Agric 23:71–76
13
800
Heikkinen J, Hordijk JD, de Jong W, Spliethoff H (2004) Thermo-
gravimetry as a tool to classify waste components to be used for
energy generation. J Anal Appl Pyrolysis 71:883–900
Hopewell J, Dvorak R, Kosior E (2009) Plastics recycling: chal-
lenges and opportunities. Philos Trans Royal Soc B Biol Sci
364:2115–2126
Jahirul MI, Rasul MG, Chowdhury AA, Ashwath N (2012) Biofuels
production through biomass pyrolysis: a technological review.
Energies 5:4952–5001
Joshi C, Seay J (2019a) Building momentum for sustainable behav-
iors in developing regions using Locally Managed Decentralized
Circular Economy principles. Chin J Chem Eng 27:1566–1571
Joshi CA, Seay JR (2019b) Total generation and combustion emissions
of plastic derived fuels: a trash to tank approach. Environ Prog
Sustain Energy
Joshi C, Seay J, Banadda N (2019) A perspective on a locally managed
decentralized circular economy for waste plastic in developing
countries. Environ Prog Sustain Energy 38:3–11
Jung S-H, Cho M-H, Kang B-S, Kim J-S (2010) Pyrolysis of a frac-
tion of waste polypropylene and polyethylene for the recovery of
BTX aromatics using a fluidized bed reactor. Fuel Process Technol
91:277–284
Kiran N, Ekinci E, Snape CE (2000) Recyling of plastic wastes via
pyrolysis. Resour Conserv Recycl 29:273–283. https​: //doi.
org/10.1016/S0921​-3449(00)00052​-5
Kizza R, Banadda N, Kabenge I, Seay J, Willet S, Kiggundu N, Zziwa
A (2019) Pyrolysis of wood residues in a cylindrical batch reactor:
effect of operating parameters on the quality and yield of products.
J Sustain Dev 12:112–130
Komakech AJ, Banadda NE, Kinobe JR, Kasisira L, Sundberg C,
Gebresenbet G, Vinnerås B (2014) Characterization of municipal
waste in Kampala, Uganda. J Air Waste Manag Assoc 64:340–
348. https​://doi.org/10.1080/10962​247.2013.86137​3
Lee S, Chen L, Yoshida K, Yoshikawa K (2015) Application of waste
biomass pyrolysis oil in a direct injection diesel engine: for a
small scale non-grid electrification. J Energ Power Eng 9:929–943
Levis JW, Barlaz MA (2011) Is biodegradability a desirable attrib-
ute for discarded solid waste? Perspectives from a national
landfill greenhouse gas inventory model. Environ Sci Technol
45:5470–5476
Medina M (2007) Waste picker cooperatives in developing countries.
Membersh Based Org Poor 105:21
Medina M (2008) The informal recycling sector in developing coun-
tries: organizing waste pickers to enhance their impact
Miandad R, Rehan M, Nizami A-S, Barakat MAE-F, Ismail IM (2016)
The energy and value-added products from pyrolysis of waste
plastics. Recycling of solid waste for biofuels and bio-chemicals.
Springer, New York, pp 333–355
Miandad R, Barakat M, Aburiazaiza AS, Rehan M, Ismail I, Nizami
A (2017) Effect of plastic waste types on pyrolysis liquid oil. Int
Biodeterior Biodegrad 119:239–252
Miranda R, Yang J, Roy C, Vasile C (1999) Vacuum pyrolysis of PVC
I. Kinetic study Polym Degrad Stab 64:127–144
Mofijur M, Rasul MG, Hassan NMS, Masjuki HH, Kalam MA, Mah-
mudul HM (2017) Chapter fourteen: assessment of physical,
chemical, and tribological properties of different biodiesel fuels.
In: Rasul MG, Azad Ak, Sharma SC (eds) Clean energy for sus-
tainable development. Academic Press, Cambridge, pp 441–463.
doi: https​://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-80542​3-9.00014​-4
13
R. Kizza et al.
Munu N, Banadda N (2016) Can cities become self-reliant in energy?
A technological scenario analysis for Kampala, Uganda. Environ
Eng Res 21:219–225
Nileshkumar KD, Jani R, Patel TM, Rathod GP (2015) Effect of blend
ratio of plastic pyrolysis oil and diesel fuel on the performance
of single cylinder CI engine. Int J Sci Technol Eng 1:195–203
Omar R, Idris A, Yunus R, Khalid K, Isma MA (2011) Characteriza-
tion of empty fruit bunch for microwave-assisted pyrolysis. Fuel
90:1536–1544
Ouda OK, Raza S, Nizami A, Rehan M, Al-Waked R, Korres N (2016)
Waste to energy potential: a case study of Saudi Arabia. Renew
Sustain Energy Rev 61:328–340
Owusu PA, Banadda N, Zziwa A, Seay J, Kiggundu N (2018) Reverse
engineering of plastic waste into useful fuel products. J Anal Appl
Pyrolysis 130:285–293
Philip M, Attwood J, Hulme A, Williams G, Shipton P (2004) Evalua-
tion of weathering in mixed polyethylene and polypropylene prod-
ucts. Published by The Waste and Resources Action Program p
113
Rochman CM et al (2013) Policy: classify plastic waste as hazardous.
Nature 494:169
Scalenghe R (2018) Resource or waste? A perspective of plastics deg-
radation in soil with a focus on end-of-life options. Heliyon. https​
://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliy​on.2018.e0094​1
Sharuddin SDA, Abnisa F, Daud WMAW, Aroua MK (2016) A
review on pyrolysis of plastic wastes. Energy Convers Manag
115:308–326
Sharuddin SDA, Abnisa F, Daud WMAW, Aroua MK (2017) Energy
recovery from pyrolysis of plastic waste: Study on non-recycled
plastics (NRP) data as the real measure of plastic waste. Energy
Convers Manag 148:925–934
Sogancioglu M, Ahmetli G, Yel E (2017) A comparative study on waste
plastics pyrolysis liquid products quantity and energy recovery
potential. Energy Proced 118:221–226
Tukahirwa JT, Mol AP, Oosterveer P (2010) Civil society participation
in urban sanitation and solid waste management in Uganda. Local
Environment 15:1–14
Uganda National Bureau of Standards (UNBS) (2019) Draft Uganda
standard: automotive gas oil (automotive diesel): specification,
3rd edn. Uganda National Bureau of Standards (UNBS), Uganda
World Economic Forum (WEF) (2020) Plastics, the circular economy
and global trade. Geneva
WorldWide Fund for Nature (WWF) (2018) The lifecycle of plastics,
vol 2020. World Wide Fund for Nature WWF, Australia
Xing-cai L, Jian-Guang Y, Wu-Gao Z, Zhen H (2004) Effect of cetane
number improver on heat release rate and emissions of high
speed diesel engine fueled with ethanol–diesel blend fuel. Fuel
83:2013–2020
Zohoori M, Ghani A (2017) Municipal solid waste management chal-
lenges and problems for cities in low-income and developing
countries. Int J Sci Eng Appl 6:39–48
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.