UBC WasteNauts

Textile Waste Recycling Project:

Design Cycle 2020-2021

Project Leads:
Danielle Clark
Kim Yao
Rynn Zhang
Justine Dumandan

Team Members:
Vito Abednego
Joy Du
Alice Hu
Dua Naqvi
Emily Remmers
Humleen Samra

1 |UBC WasteNauts
Abstract

The current model for the lifecycle of textiles is linear and promotes wasteful practices. In an effort
to reduce the environmental footprint of the fashion industry, UBC WasteNauts Textile Waste
Recycling Sub-Team researches a more circular approach that integrates the recycling process into
the life cycle of garments. This paper delves into potential recycling and pre-recycling processes,
particularly cotton and wool recycling.

A Weighted Decision Matrix (WDM) was created to rank several different mechanical and
chemical recycling processes. This resulted in a focus on the mechanical recycling processes of
turning cotton to paper and closed-loop wool recycling. A pre-recycling process minimizing the
amount of chlorine bleach used to whiten cotton prior to processing was also investigated.

The results of the experiments revealed that closed-loop wool recycling minimizing virgin wool
was not feasible; cotton-paper making was a reasonable recycling method; and pre-recycling was
unable to be researched further due to a lack of access to laboratory spaces during the COVID-19
pandemic.

2 |UBC WasteNauts
Contents

1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 4

1.1 Problem Statement ................................................................................................................ 4
1.2 Objective Statement .............................................................................................................. 4
1.3 Identification of Constraints .................................................................................................. 4
2.0 Evaluation of Alternatives ........................................................................................................ 5
2.1 Description of Parameters and Weights ................................................................................ 5
2.2 Weighed Decision Matrix (WDM) ....................................................................................... 6
2.3 Chosen Experiments .............................................................................................................. 6
3.0 Experiment 1: Closed Loop Recycling of Wool ....................................................................... 6
3.0.1 Experimental Procedure ..................................................................................................... 7
3.0.2 Results ................................................................................................................................ 8
3.1 Experiment 2: Cotton Paper Making ........................................................................................ 9
3.1.1 Experimental Procedure ................................................................................................... 10
3.1.2 Results .............................................................................................................................. 11
3.2 Pre-recycling Method 1: Bleaching ........................................................................................ 13
3.2.1 Experimental Procedure ................................................................................................... 13
3.2.2 Results .............................................................................................................................. 14
4.0 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 14
References ..................................................................................................................................... 16
Appendix ....................................................................................................................................... 17
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... 19
Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................... 23

3 |UBC WasteNauts
1.0 Introduction
The life cycle of a clothing garment is extremely resource-intensive and detrimental to
the environment. It begins with fiber production which releases insecticides and other chemicals
that are harmful to the environment. Most dyeing agents used in clothing production are shipped
from Asian countries to different parts of the world; this leads to greenhouse gas emissions from
transportation. Consumers wash their clothes regularly which sends microplastics into waterways.
Finally, when the consumer is done with the garment, it is often sent to a landfill.

Mass production has enabled the current trend of fast fashion. Fast fashion accelerates the life
cycle of clothing by enabling consumers to replace out-of-date yet wearable or usable garments.
Around 10 to 20% of all textile products worldwide are wasted. In China, the United Kingdom,
and the United States, textile waste is estimated to be 26.0, 1.0 and 12.4 million tons, respectively
[1]. Natural fibers in textile take hundreds of years to decompose releasing greenhouse gases in
the process. Recycling textile garments is essential in minimizing textile waste and pollution.
Although the importance of recycling textile is increasingly being recognized, just 12% of the
material used in producing clothing is recycled globally [2].

1.1 Problem Statement

Reevaluating the current linear fashion business model must be considered to lower the resources
used. This is where the circular economy concept applies. In a circular economy, resources are in
use for as long as possible, extracting their maximum value. At the end of its life cycle, they are
recovered and regenerated into new products and materials. Recovering textiles that end up in the
landfill is a key factor in creating a recovery stream for textile-to-textile recycling. By optimizing
the recycling process and transitioning into a circular system, the carbon footprint of the textile
industry can be minimized.
1.2 Objective Statement

To address this problem, the UBC WasteNauts Textile Waste Recycling Sub-Team aims to find
one or more feasible ways to recycle one material or blend with very little to no waste or
negative impact on the environment.

1.3 Identification of Constraints

There were many constraints with this project. Namely, with the COVID-19 global pandemic, the
team has been meeting virtually for the entire design cycle, from September 2020 to April 2021.
Therefore, one limitation was access to the team’s lab space for in-person activities and
experiments. Further, largescale and higher-risk adaptations of experiments were also limited.

4 |UBC WasteNauts
2.0 Evaluation of Alternatives

A Weighted Decision Matrix (WDM) was made with the following parameters and to determine
the most appropriate form of recycling for the team’s scope.

2.1 Description of Parameters and Weights

1. Feasibility: This parameter evaluates the simplicity and the time span for each process.
Preference would be given to recycling processes requiring the lowest cost and shortest
period. The parameter solely focuses on the process, regardless of how the materials are
gathered. Feasibility has a weight of 25% in the WDM due to the importance of
pragmatic solution.

2. Accessibility: This parameter evaluates the availability of the fabric, equipment, and
other resources for the process. A small-scale lab setting with minimal specialized
equipment must be sufficient to emulate the process. The parameter focuses on how
easily the materials can be gathered. Accessibility has a weight of 25% in the WDM as
the primary goal is creating an alternative product with easily acquirable materials.

3. Environmental Impact of Process: This parameter evaluates how well the process aligns
with WasteNauts’ goal of radically minimizing waste as well as the ability of the process
to encompass the 3 pillars of sustainability-how the environment, people, and economy
are affected. The higher the score a material has for this parameter, the less negative
impact it has. Environmental Impact of Process has a weight of 25% as another primary
goal is to reduce the environmental impact of current processes.

4. Environmental Impact of Material: This parameter evaluates how the material’s usage,
production and post-production affect the 3 pillars of sustainability. The higher the score
a material has for this parameter, the less negative impact it has. As this is impact is
already predetermined, it is given a lesser weight of 15%.

5. Variety of Final Product: This parameter evaluates the variety of final products post-
recycling. The application of the final product would be beneficial if it can be used in
several ways. This parameter is also given a lesser weight of 10% as being able to recycle
the material should be given more importance early in this project.

5 |UBC WasteNauts
2.2 Weighed Decision Matrix (WDM)

The scoring of each of the proposed project ideas were done collaboratively and anonymously
through a Google Form. Each member was asked to rank each proposed project idea on a scale of
one to ten for each of the previously discussed parameters. Each score had to have a written
justification alongside it to ensure that the ratings were well thought out and reasonable. The
weighted ratings given by each member were then added together as a final score. Please refer to
Appendix A for the ideas that were not selected.

2.3 Chosen Experiments

The results of the WDM contained small margins across the four proposed experiments. Cotton
paper making was rated the highest with a score of 56.2/80. It was recognized as a very feasible
experiment, which had a very basic and already commercially available product. Wool closed loop
recycling came in second with a score of 56.1/80, another natural material. Polyester, PET
recycling was lower at 54.9/80 and cellulose acetate scored lowest at 52.1/80 due to its difficulty.

3.0 Experiment 1: Closed Loop Recycling of Wool

Wool is a biodegradable fiber made of keratin that is commonly obtained from sheep and other
animals. It is also one of the most re-used fibers, accounting for up to 5% by weight of total clothing
donated by consumers for recycling and re-use. Wool has also been recycled for hundreds of years
as the process also uses significantly less energy than is necessary to produce new fabrics.
Currently, there are two processes for recycling wool. The first is the closed loop system, which is
a mechanical process that returns garments to the raw fiber state and makes it into yarn again, to
produce new products. Garments are sorted by color, composition or structure, mechanically
pulled into their raw fiber state (e.g. carding), and reused as raw material in the re-spinning back
to yarn by conventional processes. The second process is an open loop system where the recycled
wool is mechanically pulled into its fibrous form and used as raw materials for new industrial
products. After this process, recycled wool becomes the basis for industrial products such as
insulation or mattress padding.

The Textile Waste Recycling Sub-Team would like to tackle this problem by focusing on the
closed loop recycling process and making improvements to the process to extend the life of the
recycled wool. This solution will benefit society as it will reduce the need for virgin wool (i.e. new
wool) by extending the life of the recycled wool. This in turn will reduce the environmental
footprint that the process of producing virgin wool creates, lowering its contribution to destruction
of nature and climate change. Ultimately, it will help society move towards a more sustainable

6 |UBC WasteNauts
system for wool clothing while also meeting the demand for wool. The Sub-Team will meet this
goal by researching the closed loop process and its problems. From here, they will research
possible solutions to these problems to improve the closed loop process for maximum wool life
extension. The team will then carry out an experiment based on a possible improvement that can
be made in the closed loop process and report their findings.

Alice Hu and Dua Naqvi worked on an experiment to determine if lubricating a sample of recycled
wool prior to carding it retains fiber length. Quality of wool is dependent on fiber length. The
longer the fibers, the higher quality the wool fabric is said to be. During the carding stage of the
recycling process, the fiber strands from the wool fabric get cut into smaller pieces. Therefore, the
recycled fibers need to be combined with 5 to 50% virgin fiber when the wool is re-spun after
recycling to re-produce high quality wool.

The goal is to minimize the need for virgin fiber while maintaining high quality. A promising study
that lubricating wool fibers with polyethylene glycol prior to carding them helps retain fiber length
[3]. This experiment is being performed to determine if this hypothesis is indeed true.

3.0.1 Experimental Procedure

For the experiment, the independent variable is the amount of lubricant used per sample. The
dependent variable is the final fiber length of carded samples. The controlled variables in the
experiment are the original fabric of all the samples, the carder used for each sample, the mass of
each sample, and the experimental procedure for each fiber.

The materials necessary for this experiment are 300 mL of polyethylene glycol (PEG), ~1200 g of
recycled wool (woven), ~500 mL of laundry detergent, 1 iron,1 pair of scissors, 1 Strauch teasing
tool, 300 mL of deionized water, 1 drum carder, 1 spray bottle, 1 piece of green paper, 1 volumetric
flask, and 1 pipette.

The procedure begins with preparing the uncarded recycled wool and turning it into samples ready
for the experiment. First, wash the wool using standard laundry detergent and then iron the wool.
Shred and tease all samples using scissors and analyze the fibers, then calculate mean length, etc.
Measure out 5 samples of ~40 g of wool fibers using a balance.

Next is the lubrication of the samples. First, prepare 20mL of polyethylene glycol (PEG) solutions
with concentrations of 0%, 25%, 50%, 75% and 100% PEG by mixing known amount of PEG in
deionized water at 60°C, warmed using a heating plate. Spray each of the above-mentioned PEG
solutions onto a wool fiber sample using the same spray bottle for each sample. Leave the samples
to dry for 2 hours at room temperature.

For the carding and analyzing process, card each of the samples twice using the drum carder. Take
approx. 0.02g of fibers from each carded sample and lay then out flat on a piece of green paper.
Use image analysis to determine the fiber length distribution for each sample. Repeat all these
steps twice to obtain three trials of non-pre-carded samples.

7 |UBC WasteNauts
For the pre-carded samples, repeat the first paragraph of the procedure. However, before the
lubrication process, card each wool fiber sample once and then finish the procedure before
repeating this specific procedure twice to obtain three trials of pre-carded samples.

3.0.2 Results

Samples 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 of the non-pre-carded trial were treated with PEG concentrations of 0%,
25%, 50%, 75% and 100% respectively prior to carding. Figures 1-5 show photographs of the
samples before and after treatment. Lubricating the wool samples with PEG prior to carding helped
to retain fiber length which presented a major obstacle in the experiment. The PEG left a wet, oily
residue on the wool samples even after being left to dry for three days. Since this would leave the
wool fibers unable to be re-spun back into yarn, the rest of the trials for the non-pre-carded samples
and all the pre-carded trials were not performed.

Figure 1: Before (left) and after (right) of wool sample #1 treated with 0% PEG.

Figure 2: Before (left) and after (right) of wool sample #2 treated with 25% PEG.

8 |UBC WasteNauts
Figure 3: Before (left) and after (right) of wool sample #3 treated with 50% PEG.

Figure 4: Before (left) and after (right) of wool sample #3 treated with 75% PEG.

Figure 5: Before (left) and after (right) of wool sample #5 treated with 100% PEG.

Moving forward, it is recommended to repeat this experiment using a dry lubricant such as WD-
40 instead of PEG to investigate whether that would achieve the desired results with leaving the
wet, oily residue on the wool.

A source of error is that it was nearly impossible to measure out 5 samples of wool with equal
mass. Despite best efforts at measuring equal mass, the mass of each sample varies an insignificant
amount.

3.1 Experiment 2: Cotton Paper Making

Cotton is one of the most widely used textiles in the world; over 26 million tons of cotton are
produced annually [4]. Although cotton is a biodegradable material, most cotton clothing
terminates in the landfill at the end of its lifecycle [5]. Therefore, the Sub-Team was interested in
creating a sustainable and useful way of utilizing the abundant cotton textile waste. After
9 |UBC WasteNauts
researching different recycling processes, a mechanical recycling process to transform the textile
waste into a paper product was decided upon. Cotton paper is a popular product amongst artists,
valued for its durability and strength [6]. This type of process was deemed to be feasible and
sustainable at the team’s smaller lab scale.

Joy Du and Humleen Samra designed an experiment aimed to create a high-quality paper for these
artists from 100% cotton t-shirts. The Sub-Team utilized flax fibers as the filler and binding agent
and aimed to find the best ratio of flax to pure cotton to best suit the target demographic
of watercolor artists.

3.1.1 Experimental Procedure

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, this experiment had to be feasible and safe enough to conduct at
home.

The basic equipment and materials needed are: one set of papermaking screens with frame(17.8
cm x 14.8 cm; inner size: 14 cm x 10.9 cm), recycled cotton fibers, one pound of flax fibers, felt,
one blender, and one mixing container of 2.5 L.

This experiment was conducted with 4 different ratios of cotton to flax; 1:1, 7:3, 9:1, 1:0.

Each of the groups uses a total of 50g of material and follows the same experimental procedure.
First, the cotton fiber is cut into small pieces equal or less than 1 cm x 1 cm which can be blended
easily. Then, both the cotton fibers and flax fibers are processed separately in an alkaline solution
by simmering for an hour. The alkaline solution is prepared by using 3 teaspoons of baking soda
ash and 1 liter of water each time. A half-cup of baking soda ash is pre-prepared by baking the
baking soda at 220 Fahrenheit in the oven for an hour for the whole experiment. After cooling the
fibers, the fibers are broken down into pulp via a blender. Additional water is added into the
blender for better mixing effects, and this also prevents the blender from overheating. After
beating, the flax-cotton pulp is transferred to the 2.5L container. A papermaking screen is then
dipped into and out of the large container until a solid layer forms, a full sheet, and this step would
allow any excess water to drain off the screen. After draining the water, the screen is flipped onto
a piece of felt and then another piece of felt is placed on top and the process is repeated. Lastly,
sheets are pressed to remove water from them, and eventually get dried using a box fan or
sunshine. After the sheets are dried, the quality of each ratio was tested.

Upon conducting the experiment, size variations were observed among the 4 experiment groups.
The 100% cotton paper underwent the least shrinkage, it was the thickest of the 4 ratios. Both the
50% and 70% cotton groups had a trial that was more than 0.5cm smaller in length than the
expected 14cm.

10 |UBC WasteNauts
3.1.2 Results

Figure 6: The lengths of each piece of cotton paper at different cotton vs. flax percentage. Flax percentage was not shown on the
graph, but 50% cotton matches with 50% flax; 70% cotton matches with 30% flax; 90% cotton matches with 10% falx; and 100%
cotton matches with 0% flax. At both 50% and 90% cotton ratio, there were two overlapped data points at 14 cm.

Figure 7: The widths of each piece of cotton paper at different cotton vs. flax percentage. Flax percentage was not shown on the
graph, but 50% cotton matches with 50% flax; 70% cotton matches with 30% flax; 90% cotton matches with 10% falx; and 100%
cotton matches with 0% flax. At 100% cotton ratio, there were two overlapped data points at 10.5 cm .

11 |UBC WasteNauts
Figure 8: The thicknesses of each piece of cotton paper at different cotton vs. flax percentage. Flax percentage was not shown on
the graph, but 50% cotton matches with 50% flax; 70% cotton matches with 30% flax; 90% cotton matches with 10% flax; and
100% cotton matches with 0% flax. At both 70% and 90% cotton ratio, there were two overlapped data points at 0.2 cm.

Despite measuring the comparing the size of cotton paper pieces from each cotton vs. flax
ratio group, watercolour painting was applied and tested on each piece of cotton group from all
groups. After applying four common colours: blue, green, yellow, and red to all 4 treatment
groups, the results were shown in figure 4. A4 paper in figure 4.c was used as a reference for the
colour here. All four colours were the brightest and clearest in the 100% cotton vs. 0% flax
treatment group. The colour of blue, green, and red were all relatively clear in all treatment groups.
However, the colour of yellow became more difficult to display on the cotton paper as the flax
ratio started to increase in the treatment group. In the treatment group of 50% cotton vs. 50% flax,
the yellow watercolour almost fainted to into the colour of the paper. Besides the clarity of the
colour itself, the 100% cotton and 90% cotton treatment groups showed more watercolour blending
effects than the other two treatment groups.
a) b) c)

12 |UBC WasteNauts
Figure 9. a) Watercolour paint presenting on cotton paper with 100% and 90% cotton ratio. The top row was the 100% cotton vs.
0% flax group and the bottom row was the 90% cotton vs. 10% flax group. b) Watercolour paint presenting on cotton paper
with 70% and 50% cotton ratio. The top row was the 70% cotton vs. 30% flax group and the bottom row was the 50% cotton
vs. 50% flax group. c)Watercolour paint showing on a regular piece of A4 paper.

Due to the popularity of cotton paper with watercolor artists, the paper was tested for its ability to
display watercolor paints. 4 colors (blue, green, yellow, and red) were applied to the cotton paper
as well as a sheet of commercially available A4 printer paper. The colors appeared most clearly
and vibrantly on the 100% cotton experiment group. The 100% and 90% cotton experiment groups
most prominently displayed the blending effects that are desirable with watercolor paintings. The
other experiment groups did relatively well in displaying the blue, green, and red colors; however,
yellow was more difficult to see and the colors were not as vibrant or clear.

3.2 Pre-recycling Method 1: Bleaching

Emily Remmers and Vito Abednego researched the pre-recycling bleaching process for the
blended cotton pulp. Emily focused on the use of UV light to whiten the pulp, while Vito focused
more on the use of bleach and baking soda. The next sections detail further into their experimental
process.

Recycled cotton pulp produces a darker shade of color, unlike the newly produced paper.
Unfortunately, the difference of shade decreases the potential of recycled cotton pulp to be an
alternative to paper as it is more difficult to alter into other colors. To tackle this issue, a pre-
recycling bleaching process was further researched.

Bleach is a common way of whitening the shade of clothing. However, the use of large amounts
of bleach can have negative environmental impacts. Therefore, further research was done to
provide an alternative to using a pure bleach solution, where it was found that the use of baking
soda enhances the effects of the bleach, such that less of it is required to yield a lighter shade of
paper.

The purpose of this experiment is to investigate the ideal ratio of bleachtobakingsoda in a solution
to whiten the shade of the cotton pulp. It is hypothesized that the higher the concentration of the
bleach in the whitening solution, the lighter the shade of the final pulp.

3.2.1 Experimental Procedure

The independent variable for this experiment is the amount of baking soda added to the bleach
solution. The dependent variable is the shade of the final pulp, which will be compared to a blank
white paper as a referenced standard. The controlled variables include the amount of water added
with the bleach solution, amount of bleach used in the solution, amount of pulp used per bleaching
stage, temperature used to dry the pulp for post-bleaching, and amount of time that the pulp is
allowed to sit in the whitening solution.

The materials required include Clorox bleach, as the main whitening agent for this experiment. It
is commonly used in households as a whitening agent for clothing as well as a sanitizer for toilets,
kitchenware, and other household items. Baking soda is used as an additive towards the bleach

13 |UBC WasteNauts
solution that will increase efficiency at lower volumes. Therefore, less bleach will be produced as
waste. The 500 g of pulp used is cotton clothing that has been mulched and blended into a pulp to
be recycled into paper. Water is used to wash the bleach off the pulp after it has gone through a
whitening step.
A blender was used to emulsify the pulp with water after undergoing whitening. This is
done for the water to bind better with the unreacted bleach molecules in the solid pulp solution. A
mesh strainer is used to drain the pulp of the used bleach and to drain the water after it has been
emulsified with the pulp. A beaker is used to contain the measured amount of bleach and baking
soda prior to being mixed with the pulp. A small bucket is used for the waste produced in this
experiment. This bucket of waste can be submitted to a local waste disposal center for further
processing. A bowl is used for the pulp and bleach-baking soda solution to sit in while it goes
through its whitening process.

The procedure begins by measuring 120mL of bleach and add into beaker. Next, measure 25g of
baking soda and stir into the bleach solution until mixed well. Add the solution to 500g of pulp in
a bowl and let sit for 15 minutes. Strain the pulp solution and add the pulp to the blender to be
emulsified with water again. Have a separate beaker or small bucket to collect the used
solution. Strain the water and place the pulp in the bowl again. Lastly, dry out the pulp at room
temperature and evaluate results relative to a white sheet of paper. Repeat steps 1-6 three more
times to remove data ambiguity. Repeat steps 1-7 for a larger amount of baking soda added (45
g, 60g, 90g).

Note: The used bleach that is collected, can be dropped off at a local recycling center.

3.2.2 Results

No results were reported as the team was unable to conduct the experiments due to COVID-19
related limitations.

4.0 Conclusion
Redirecting clothing and textiles into recycling streams allows the Textile Waste Recycling Sub-
Team to utilize the circular economy concept. Rather than sending clothes to the landfill or
undergoing incineration, two mechanical recycling processes were proposed: closed loop recycling
of wool, and cotton paper making. A pre-recycling process of environmentally friendly bleaching
processes was also researched.

The goal of the research of wool closed loop recycling was to improve the process and minimize
the need for new virgin wool by extending the life of the original material. Lubricating the wool
fibers with polyethylene glycol prior to carding in the recycling process maintained the length and
therefore quality of the fibers; however, the lubricant soiled the fibers, leaving an oily residue that
was unable to be removed making the wool impossible to be re-spun into yarn.

14 |UBC WasteNauts
With cotton paper making, the goal was to reutilize cotton clothing by pulping it and creating
paper. The paper was made using cotton with flax to aid in binding. The result was a usable paper
for artists, typically those using watercolor paints.

A pre-recycling process to bleach cotton textiles was researched. The goal was to minimize the
amount of chlorine bleach used to whiten the textiles while still achieving white paper. Bleach
would be mixed with sodium bicarbonate, commonly referred to as baking soda, to determine the
ideal ratio in which the end-product is sufficiently light, and the bleach used is a minimum. In the
future this concept could be explored further with appropriate access to a laboratory.

The Textile Waste Recycling Sub-Team will be continuing to optimize the experiments and
conducing the pre-recycling process experiments in the laboratory during the 2021-2022 Design
Cycle.

15 |UBC WasteNauts
References

[1] N. Pensupa, S.Y. Leu, Y. Hu, C. Du, H. Liu, H. Jing, H. Wang and C.S.K. Lin, “Recent
Trends In Sustainable Textile Waste Recycling Methods: Current Situation And Future
Prospects,” Top Curr Chem (Z), vol.76, pp. 275, 2017. doi:10.1007/s41061-017-0165-0
[Accessed 2 August 2020]

[2] A. Beall, “Why Clothes Are So Hard To Recycle,” BBC.com, [Online], July 2020.
Available: https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200710-why-clothes-are-so-hard-to-recycle.
[Accessed 2 August 2020].

[3] K. Lindström, T. Sjöblom, A. Persson, N.Kadi, (2020). Improving Mechanical Textile

Recycling by Lubricant Pre-Treatment to Mitigate Length Loss of Fibers. Sustainability. 12.
10.3390/su12208706. [Accessed 2 August 2020]

[4] WorldAtlas. Top Cotton Producing Countries in the World.

https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/top-cotton-producing-countries-in-the-world.html

[5] United States Environmental Protection Agency (2018). Facts and Figures about Materials,
Waste and Recycling. Textiles: Material-Specific Data
https://www.epa.gov/facts-and-figures-about-materials-waste-and-recycling/textiles-material-
specific-data

[6] Inkstruck (2020). How to Choose Watercolor Paper.

https://www.inkstruck.com/how-to-choose-watercolor-paper-all-about-100-cotton-paper/

16 |UBC WasteNauts
Appendix
Appendix A

Option 1: Chemical recycling of PET- depolymerize PET into DMT (Dimethyl terephthalate):

This is a great example of depolymerizing PET into its monomer. However, due to the limitation
of the size of the Sub-Team, the process to recombine monomers into PET and potentially yarns
are difficult to perform. The procedure below is only applicable to the depolymerization
process.
1. Finding the source for polyester. People used plastics bottles during their research, but
other polyester products (such as garment) could also be potential candidates.
2. Polyester is treated in the DMSO solution at its boiling point for 10 minutes. The catalyst
hydrotalcite is used. By the end of this step, oligomer (tetramer) will be obtained.
3. Tetramer is treated with NaOH at the room temperature in methanol to get dimethyl
terephthalate (DMT)
4. The final product will be dimethyl terephthalate (DMT) and ethylene glycol (EG)

Equipment: (for per 5g of PET chips)

 DMSO solution (20 mL)
 Hydrotalcite catalyst (2.33g Mg (OH)2 and 0.52g Al2O3)
 Sodium bicarbonate (0.1N)
 NaOH (0.6g)
 Methanol (20mL)

Cost:
 DMSO: $82 per 100 mL
 Mg(OH)2: 4.68 USD/kg
 Al2O3: $52/250g
 Sodium bicarbonate: $51.40/ L
 NaOH: $52.1/100g
 Methanol: $67.9/L

Option 2: Physical recycling - Melting

1. Shredding polyesters into small chips or have them in the pellets form
2. Making any desired molds with metals. Two identical pieces of the mold with one
slightly larger than the other one, so two pieces of molds can be stack with some space in
between.
3. Inserting polyester chips into the interspace of the mold.
4. Putting the mold into the industrialized oven and heat up for 30 minutes at 220 Celsius.
5. Checking the mold is ready when the timer is near. Turn off the heat when fluid starts to
flow out.
6. Cool down the mold. After cooling, the polyester product should be easily taken out.

Equipment:
 Metals (various depends on what’s available)
17 |UBC WasteNauts
  Scissors/shredder $30-50
 Specific equipment for iron work (various depends on what’s available)
 Industrial oven (cheapest around $300 for a simple small-scale one, with a vacuum
drying oven at around $2000)

Option 3: Physical recycling – Injection Molder

1. Shredding polyesters into small chips or have them in the pellets form
2. Setting up and heating up the injection machine
3. Setting up the mold for the injection machine. If there isn’t any mold available,
use metals to make one or buy molds online
4. Inserting polyester chips/pellets into the injection molder
5. Achieve final product

Equipment:
 Scissor/ shredder $30- 50, but professional garment shredder can cause up to thousands
 Molder (if not available by hand, cheapest to build it with metals)
 Injection machine (Morgan Press G-100 TE is the one the team has) -USD $21,580

18 |UBC WasteNauts
List of Figures

Figure 1: Before (left) and after (right) of wool sample #1 treated with 0% PEG.

Figure 2: Before (left) and after (right) of wool sample #2 treated with 25% PEG.

Figure 3: Before (left) and after (right) of wool sample #3 treated with 50% PEG.

Figure 4: Before (left) and after (right) of wool sample #3 treated with 75% PEG.

19 |UBC WasteNauts
Figure 5: Before (left) and after (right) of wool sample #5 treated with 100% PEG.

Figure 6. The lengths of each piece of cotton paper at different cotton vs. flax percentage. Flax
percentage was not shown on the graph, but 50% cotton matches with 50% flax; 70% cotton
matches with 30% flax; 90% cotton matches with 10% falx; and 100% cotton matches with 0%
flax. At both 50% and 90% cotton ratio, there were two overlapped data points at 14 cm.

20 |UBC WasteNauts
Figure 7. The widths of each piece of cotton paper at different cotton vs. flax percentage. Flax
percentage was not shown on the graph, but 50% cotton matches with 50% flax; 70% cotton
matches with 30% flax; 90% cotton matches with 10% falx; and 100% cotton matches with 0%
flax. At 100% cotton ratio, there were two overlapped data points at 10.5 cm.

Figure 8. The thicknesses of each piece of cotton paper at different cotton vs. flax percentage.
Flax percentage was not shown on the graph, but 50% cotton matches with 50% flax; 70% cotton
matches with 30% flax; 90% cotton matches with 10% flax; and 100% cotton matches with 0%
flax. At both 70% and 90% cotton ratio, there were two overlapped data points at 0.2 cm.

21 |UBC WasteNauts
Figure 9a: Watercolour paint presenting on cotton paper with 100% and 90% cotton ratio. The
top row was the 100% cotton vs. 0% flax group and the bottom row was the 90% cotton vs. 10%
flax group.

Figure 9b: Watercolour paint presenting on cotton paper with 70% and 50% cotton ratio. The top
row was the 70% cotton vs. 30% flax group and the bottom row was the 50% cotton vs. 50% flax
group.

Figure 9c: Watercolour paint showing on a regular piece of A4 paper.

22 |UBC WasteNauts
Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge that all the experiments were conducted on the traditional,
ancestral, and unceded territory of the xʷməθkʷəy̓əm (Musqueam), Sḵwx̱wú7mesh (Squamish),
and Sel̓íl̓witulh (Tsleil-Waututh) Nations.

23 |UBC WasteNauts