Enhanced extraction of brominated flame retardants from e-waste plastics

• Main Authors: Das, Pallab, Zeng, Qiang, Leybros, Antoine, Gabriel, Jean-Christophe P., Tay, Chor Yong, Lee, Jong-Min
• Other Authors: School of Materials Science and Engineering
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: 2023
• Subjects: Engineering::Chemical engineering; Brominated Flame Retardant; Microwave
• Online Access: https://hdl.handle.net/10356/171434
• Institution: Nanyang Technological University

Acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) is a high utility engineering thermoplastic, abundantly present in waste electronic and electrical goods. The demand for this plastic resin increases continuously with rapid industrial growth across the world. During the recycling of e-waste plastics, it is a common occurrence to find brominated flame retardants, such as Tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBPA) in the plastic. These flame retardants are intentionally added to the plastics as additives. Three processes were investigated to find the optimum solvent/antisolvent combinations, process parameters for the efficient recovery of TBBPA free plastics: microwave assisted extraction (MAE), ultrasound assisted extraction (UAE), and dissolution reprecipitation (DR). Rigorous solvent screening was carried out for both TBBPA and ABS using Hansen Solubility Parameters (HSP), and their interactions with the solvents were investigated with a molecular based Conductor like Screening Model for Realistic Solvents (COSMO-RS) software platform. A 4:1 (v/v) solvent mixture of 1-propanol and heptane was found to be ideal for the solid–liquid extraction process. The optimal extraction conditions (Temperature = 110 – 130 °C, time = 60 to 70 min solid/liquid ratio of 0.025) in MAE were predicted using machine learning based Support Vector Regression (SVR) technique. MAE was found to be superior to UAE and DR processes in terms of quantity and quality of recovered plastics. The maximum extraction efficiencies for TBBPA removal were achieved with MAE, UAE, and DR processes at 95.81%, 93.92%, and 98.15%, respectively. However, the DR process had a relatively lower plastic recovery.