Green composites and their contribution toward sustainability: A review

Abstract

The current world environment scenario demands new and more eco-friendly solutions to global problems that cover the demands for materials. This sector has included green polymer-based composites and natural reinforcers from origins of renewable sources, these Green Composites (GC), natural-fiber-reinforced bio-composites in which the matrix is a bio-based polymer, have shown attractive characteristics. Biodegradability is one of the most important attributes for these new “green” materials, in that this characteristic allows for their introduction into the world market as an environmental solution. The manufacturing processes for obtaining these materials have observed important improvements because each raw material exhibits different properties and characteristics and their eco-friendly character has facilitated its incorporation into diverse sectors, such as construction, automotive, packaging, and medicine, among others. At present, this segment represents an important income for some economies, especially those where these resources are available, enhancing the creation of green economies, strengthening the world’s efforts toward sustainability.

Keywords

Biocomposites biomaterials degradability natural fibers sustainability

Introduction

Growing environmental awareness and increasing interest in sustainability have led to the development of biocomposites for structural applications, such as electronics, medicine, construction, sports, and automotive sectors.¹ At that time, the high economic cost of oil-based polymers was the main factor with which to search for new sources, based on more affordable biological origins, such as biomass and animal fibers. However, these fibers represented a minor percentage of the total mass of the composites, in that they were blended with Organic and Inorganic Matrices (OIM) that could confer on them physical, chemical, and structural properties for optimal performance in their applications, reducing the total cost of the final product.²

The persistence in the environment of these biocomposites is significantly shorter compared to those that are entirely composed of oil-based materials.³ The majority of natural fibers are easily degradable under environmental conditions,⁴ also, these fibers show important advantages, for example, are renewable, abundant, inexpensive, light in weight, strong and non-abrasive, so they can be used as an excellent reinforcement material to reduce the utilization of synthetic fibers.

However, before the substitution of oil-based material by natural fibers, there are some crucial issues that have been addressed, for instance, moisture adsorption, low impact strength, and durability; diverse studies have resulted in the improvement of mechanical performance of the bio-based composites, nevertheless, more investigation is still required.

Defining the sustainability of GC has been challenging; in the majority of these studies, at least one component, i.e. the economic, social, and environmental aspect is not considered in its entirety.^5,6 Some contradictions have been observed, specifically those related to the stage of the extraction of the raw materials, when lack of regulation can place the resource under pressure and, as a consequence, the whole system⁷ or, when the manufacturing process uses similar amounts of energy⁸ and toxic residues than in conventional processes of oil-based materials. The incorporation of concepts such as recyclability, renewability, and biodegradability⁹ has made the conceptualization of green materials easy.

In this review, we describe aspects related to green composites, i.e. type of raw materials, manufacturing methods, the physical and chemical properties of the green composites, their applications, regulatory frame, and the participation of these materials in the global markets. We also analyze the contribution of GC toward sustainability.

Availability of biological resources for the synthesis of green composites

Biological resources, i.e. biomass, have emerged as a feasible source of new materials to improve the properties of polymers, for instance, mechanical performance, antimicrobial activity, and degradability, among others.¹⁰ Two categories must be considered in the green composites field: the resources for synthesizing a bio-based polymer matrix, and the resources for blending with this polymer matrix, both of which are described here.

Bio-based polymers

Depending on the type of feedstock, biological strategies for developing biopolymers had been classified into the following three generations¹¹: the first generation focused on the use of crops to obtain natural carbohydrate biomass (e.g., starch and cellulose) and proteins; second-generation strategies were developed around the use of non-edible waste materials, mainly agroindustrial residues, which offers the advantage of simple processing since the raw materials had already been preprocessed, and finally, the third generation was developed referring to algal biomass as feedstock.

Polysaccharide polymers

Polysaccharides are a wide group of polymers composed of tens or thousands of monosaccharides joined by glycosidic linkages (covalent bonds that join a carbohydrate molecule with another group, which may or may not be another carbohydrate).¹² In Figure 1, the chemical structure is presented of the most common polysaccharide polymers, i.e. cellulose, chitosan, starch, alginate, and pectin. Their characteristics and applications are mentioned in the figure.

Figure 1.

Main characteristics and applications of polysaccharide polymers.

Natural fibers

Plant fibers can be classified according to their origin, considering six categories as follows: bast/stem; leaf: fruit/seed; stalk; grass, and wood.¹³ Bast, stalk, and leaf fibers are naturally organized into bundles, whereas fibers from seeds occur in single form. Fibers comprising these categories, along with their chemical composition and mechanical performance, are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1.

Chemical composition and mechanical performance of natural fibers.

	Lignin (% dw*)	Cellulose (% dw)	Hemicellulose (% dw)	Density (g/cm³)	Elongation (%)	Tensile strength (MPa)	Young modulus (Gpa)	Reference
Bast/Stem fibers
Banana	5–17.4	50–83	1–50	0.71–1.35	2.0–35	54–914	7.6–32	^14,15
Flax	1–5	60–85	14–20.6	1.4–1.5	1.2–3.6	345–2000	15–90	^13,15,16
Hemp	2–10	55–90	12–22.4	1.4–1.6	0.8–4	285–920	14.4–80
Jute	9–26	45–72	13.6–24	1.3–1.5	1.16–2	114–860	10–60
Kenaf	8–22	31–72	18.5–29.7	1.4–1.5	1.3–5.5	157–983	19–66
Ramie	0.4–9.1	61.8–91	5.3–16.7	1.4–1.5	1.2–3.8	400–938	24.5–128
Leaf fibers
Abaca	5–15.1	53–68	17.5–25	1.5	3–10	400–813	12–33.6	^13,15,16
Curaua	7.5–11.1	70.7–73.6	5–9.9	1.4	3.7–4.3	500–1404	11.8–36	^15,17,18
Date palm	27.7	33.9	26.1	0.7–1.2	2–19		60–80	¹³
Henequen	8–13.1	60–77.6	8–25	1.2	3.7–5.9	430–620	10.1–19.2	^15,19
Pineapple	5–12	70–82	17.5	0.8–1.6	1.6–14.5	126.6–1627	34.5–82.5	^13,15
Sisal	8–14	52.8–78	10–19.3	1.3–1.5	2–7.0	347–790	9–41	^13,15,16
Agave	15	80	3–6		1.64		1.1	^20-22
Fruit/seed fibers
Coir	40–45.8	32–43.8	0.15–20	1.15–1.3	3.7–47	131–343	3.4–17.3	^13,15,16
Cotton	0.75	82.7–98	3–5.7	1.5–1.6	3–12	287–800	5.5–13	^13,15,16
Oil palm empty fruit bunch	4–20	30–65	15–38.7	0.7–1.55	3.2–30	50–400	0.5–25	^15,23
Sponge gourd	11.2–16.4	59.4–66.6	16.5–29.5	0.72–0.92	3–10.4	26.4–40.7	600.9–1039.6	^24,25
Rice husk	15.4–31	25–48	11.96–33	1				^13,15,26
Stalk/Straw
Wheat Straw	13–21	28.8–48.8	15–39.1	1.49				^15,27
Oat Straw	10–19	31–53	20–38					^20,25
Rice Straw	7.2–18	32.1–38.3	24–28					^25,26
Barley Straw	6.3–19	31–45	24–38					^15,27
Corn Straw	8.2	42.6	21.3					²⁵
Grass
Bamboo	2.1–32.2	26–65	11.4–30	0.6–1.41	1.4–5.8	140–800	11–46	^15,16
Barley hull	19	34	36					²⁵
Elephant Grass	20.6	45.7	33.7					²⁰
Wood fibers
Softwood	25–35	40–50	25–35	0.3–1.5		45.5–1000	18–40	^13,20,25
Hardwood	18–35	40–55	24–40	0.3–1.2		51–121	5.2–37.9	^13,20,25
Pine	23–29	42–49	13–25					²⁵
Bagasse	22–25.3	37–55.2	16.52–21	0.9–1.25	5.5	290–350	17–22	^13,15,27
Residues
Corn cobs	7–21	38–45	28–35					²⁷
Sugar cane Bagasse	19–25	32–55	25–32
Corn stover	19	38	26
Coffee pulp	15.6–19.1	33.7–36.9	44.2–47.5
Oilseed rape	14.2	27.3	20.5					²⁷
Douglas fir	15–21	35–48	20–22					²⁷
Eucalyptus	25.4–29	41.7–51	11–32.5					^15,25
Olive tree biomass	19.1	25.2	15.8					²⁵
Sweet sorghum	21	45	27
Sugar beet	NA	5	5.5
Tamarind kernel	NA	10–15	55–65
Winter rye	16.1	29–30	22–26
Wheat bran	8.3–12.5	10.5–14.8	35.5–39.2
Alfa	38.5	45.4	38.5					^15,16
Hibiscus	22.7	28	25					¹⁵
Sorghum	11	27	25
Areca	13–24.6	—	35–64.8
Carnauba	18–20	53.5–62.5	13.3–14.7					²⁸

* dw: dry weight.

Fibers from bast or stems, separated from the extreme outer part of plant stems, are typically long fibers with high mechanical strength: thus, these are traditionally used in bags, curtains, yarn, textiles, and rope, among others.²⁹ The leaves, on the other hand, yield coarse and hard fibers with relatively low strength.³⁰ They can be obtained by hand-scraping or by mechanical extraction and utilized in woven ropes, fabrics, carpets, and mats.

Fruit and seed fibers are extracted from the outer husk of the respective fruit or seed. Because they are lightweight and strong, they have been used for the fabrication of ropes, mats, brushes, and textiles. Tall grasses are employed for the extraction of grass fibers and are mainly utilized as reinforcements for cement-based composites.

Plant fibers are produced worldwide, in that they can be obtained from many resources; however, a wider variety of plant fibers is found in tropical countries. Asia is considered the leader in terms of production, with India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh supplying coir and jute in high quantities, and China is one of the main global producers of wool and cotton, the latter along with India, Pakistan, and Thailand.¹⁶

The Americas also account for an important production of plant fibers. The United States, Brazil, and Canada are among the top five producers of wood in the world, while sisal, abaca, and cotton attain high yields in Brazil, Ecuador, and the U.S., respectively. Mexico, on the other hand, might play a leading world role as a producer of lignocellulosic materials,^31,32 which could be used as raw material for manufacturing composites. The cultivation of flax and hemp, however, is more favored in some countries in Europe because of their temperate climate.¹⁶

The cultivation of vegetable fiber has also proven to be one of the few viable economic activities for generating income in the least developed countries, especially as an alternative to agricultural production, while revalorizing food-production by-products.^33,34

Polymer matrix

An essential component of GC is the bio-based polymeric matrix, defined as organic macromolecules (human-made or human-processed) derived from biological resources for plastic and fiber applications.³⁵

To date, several bio-based polymeric matrices have been developed, exhibiting attractive performances in different sectors. In Figure 2, we find representations of the chemical structures of PolyButylene Adipate Terephthalate (PBAT), PolyButylene Succinate (PBS), PolyCaproLactone (PCL), PolyLactic Acid (PLA), and PolyHydroxyAlkaonates (PHA) and their methods of synthesis, properties, and relevant applications in diverse sectors.

Figure 2.

Bio-based polymeric materials and their applications.

Methods for the industrial manufacturing of green composites

Interest in natural fiber composites is growing due to their advantages against synthetic materials, for example, high specific strength and stiffness, renewability, lower production cost, low hazard manufacturing process, and low emission of toxic compounds during incineration at end of life. On the other hand, they possess lower durability and strength, high moisture absorption, and more significantly, their variability represented to date, all of the above remarkable aspects to consider in terms of their acceptability and the incorporation of these materials into new sectors.^36,37

The mechanical performance of green composites depends on the following factors: type of fiber (method of extraction, pretreatment, ratio, harvest time): selected matrix; fiber dispersion, and porosity, among others.³⁸

The technology for the manufacture of green composites is led by molding (injection and compression)^39,40 and pultrusion.^41,42

Table 2 shows some examples of green composites manufactured by applying the previously mentioned methods to the treatments and under the manufacturing conditions.

Table 2.

Manufacturing conditions, treatment and composition of green composites.

Composite material	Process	Treatment and composite composition	Reference
PLA/Sisal fiber	Injection molding	30% fiber sisal treated with NaHCO₃	⁴³
PLA/bamboo fibers	Compression molding	30, 40 and 50 wt % tarted with 4 wt % NaOH	⁴⁴
montmorillonite/Soy protein isolate/glicerol	Injection Moulding	Protein/glycerol ratio of 50/50 0 wt % (0%), 3 wt % (3%), 6 wt % (6%) and 9 wt % (9%) montmorillonite nano clay	⁴⁵
Coir fiber/PCL	Hand lay-up/casting process	2 wt %, 2.5 wt % and 5 wt % of fiber	⁴⁶
Sugar palm fiber/PVDF	Compression molding	30 wt % of short sugar palm fiber	⁴⁷
Kenaf yarns/vinyl ester	Pultrusion	50 Kenaf yarns was dipped into a polymer resin and evaluated different times in pulling plates.	⁴⁸
Agave fiber/PHA	Compression molding	PHB and PHBV 12wt % with 10, 20 and 30 wt % of agave fiber	⁴⁹
PHBV and nanocellulose, walnut shell flour, eggshell flour	Injection molding	15 % of each fibberPHBV + 15 wt % of nanocellulosePHBV +15 wt % walnut shell flourPHBV + eggshell flour,	⁵⁰
Jute fiber/starch	Pultrusion	Jute fiber was impregnated with thermo-plastic starch on pultrusion process	⁵¹
Eucalyptus nano and microfibers/PLA	Hand layup/casting process	90 wt %, 95 wt %, 99 wt % Eucalyptus fibbers	⁵²
Eucommia ulmoides gum/PCL	Hand layup/casting process	1.3–0.8 wt % of gum	⁵³
Properties of Kenaf/Jute Fiber Hybrid Composites	Hand lay-up	30 wt % of fibber	⁵⁴
PHBV/potato pulp powder	Mini injection molder	PHBV and 20 wt % of potato pulp powder	⁵⁵
Coir fiber/Pineapple Leaf Fiber/PLA	Compression molding	Since 30 wt % to 9 wt % of each fiber	⁵⁶

* wt: weight percent.

Injection and compression molding

The major advantage of the injection molding technique lies in its high processability, although the fiber could be degraded during the procedure.⁵⁷

The factors-to-analyze before deciding on the use of this method include the following: a) machine properties, i.e. barrel temperature, coolant temperature, packing pressure, back pressure, and injection pressure, and b) process parameters, i.e. molding and melting temperature, cooling temperature, melt pressure, cooling time, material flow rate and injection rate, and quality indices, i.e. the dimension of the parts, sink marks, appearance and strength, surface texture, and aesthetic defects.^58,59

Compression molding is used to produce complex parts⁶⁰; part-quality requirements are an important consideration for the selection of this method. The process is characterized by being usually discontinuous, being applied to produce a low volume of materials, and the raw materials can be supplied as sheets, composite granules, and prepregs.⁶¹

Pultrusion

This technology involves a process of pulling reinforcing fibers through a bath where they are impregnated with some formulated resins, and then through a heated die, creating a continuous composite profile. This method is utilized to produce traditional composites, i.e. natural flax fibers, hemp, and wool fibers,⁶² jute fibers,⁶³ jute, wood, and starch.⁵¹

Many advantages of this method are reported, for instance, the increase of composite strength, improving overall properties through better impregnation, distribution, and alignment of the reinforcing fibers. This technology is also a highly automated process, one that permits high volumes of production with homogenized quality. Pultrusion has demonstrated an excellent performance for the production of composites with a high percentage of natural fibers.⁶⁴

Hand lay-up

This method for manufacturing composites has been employed for forming composite structures since ancient times as it can be performed as long as the mold, skills, and materials are available.⁶⁵ However, the final characteristics and properties differ from one composite to the other, even though they are made with the same materials and composition. This is because the composites are made purely using of human skills; the presence of bubbles or non-uniform surfaces are, among others, recurrent characteristics.

Solvent/solution casting method

This method involves the dissolution of the polymer in an organic solvent, mixing it, and casting the solution into a mold. The solvent is subsequently allowed to evaporate, citing its main advantage as ease-of-preparation and -operation without the need for specialized equipment.⁶⁶ However, the polymer must be soluble in a volatile solvent or water and, because of the mostly insoluble character of fibers, the variability of the produced composites is high. The use of a solvent in the process could affect the green character of these composites; however, solvents in the process can be collected and recycled.

Summarizing, in Figure 3 are schematized the three most common methods that can be used for manufacturing green composites, a) Solution casting, b) compression molding, and c) injection molding.

During the solution casting method, the polymer is dissolved in an organic solvent and then mixed with fibers. The solution is then cast into a mold, and subsequently, the solvent is allowed to evaporate. b) During compression molding, the polymer and fibers are mixed and placed into the mold cavity. The polymer is melted by applying heat and pressure. Then, the composite is allowed to cool and solidify previous to its removal. c) Injection molding has been paramount for decades in the mass-production of bio-plastic products. Fibers are mixed with the polymer in solid-state. The mixture is then added into a heated barrel and injected in different molds, allowing the formation of different shapes.

Figure 3.

Methods used to manufacture green composites.

Physical and chemical characteristics of renewable, recyclable, and biodegradable composites

Green composites exhibit comparable properties to those reinforced with synthetic fibers, explicitly mechanical, thermal, and tribological, and acoustic and electrical insulating properties; while offering clear advantages regarding the environmental impact due to their renewability and natural biodegradability.⁶⁷

Despite these benefits, green composites are not capable of replacing their synthetic counterparts in all applications entirely due to some significant limitations, i.e. high flammability, high moisture absorption, and a wide variation in properties, a consequence of their natural origin.³⁷

Diverse studies have shown that the composite properties of green composites depend primarily on fiber size, shape, orientation, the crystallinity index, chemical composition, and dispersion. The volume and weight fraction of the fiber in the composite play a crucial role in determining the composite’s properties.²²

It is well known that applying pretreatments i.e. mechanical, physical, chemical and biological to raw materials used to manufacture green composites may improve the mechanical and physical characteristics of GC.⁶⁸ In Figure 4 are mentioned the main effects on the raw materials after the pretreatment and their particular characteristics; these effects might impact some physical and chemical properties of composites and are explained in detail in further sections.

Figure 4.

Pretreatments applied to natural fibers to manufacture green composites.

Mechanical properties of green composites

Mechanical performance is one of the most relevant parameters in composite materials since it is fundamental to assess their suitability for the targeted application.

Incorporating two or more fibers into a polymeric matrix is also a popular technique to obtain better properties of mechanical and moisture absorption. These types of materials have been designated as hybrid composites, and these materials have proven to be a cost-effective way to develop a better performance of composites. The compatibility between the fibers and the fiber-matrix is of utmost importance, in that this selection will determine the final properties of the composite.⁶⁹

Natural fibers have shown to have comparable specific stiffness and specific strength to glass fibers⁷⁰; however, when comparing the mechanical performance of composites made with each of the fibers, the trend does not always reveal the same patterns. Natural-fiber composites exhibit comparable tensile strength, impact strength, and interlaminar shear strength to synthetic fiber composites, and higher resistance to fracture.⁷¹

The natural fiber controls the mechanical properties of composites. Its performance can be affected by the location of the plant, crop variety, seed density, soil quality, field location, climate, and harvesting,⁷² which determine the chemical composition of the fiber, thus explaining the variability in properties.

The physical properties of fibers can also alter their mechanical performance; for instance, fibers with a small fibrillar angle, small fiber diameter, and high aspect ratio achieve higher mechanical properties.⁷³

Regarding the matrix-fiber system, fiber dispersion, size, orientation and volume fraction, and interfacial adhesion⁷⁴ might exert an influence of the mechanical behavior of the composites, particularly the interfacial adhesion, which is established as the most crucial key to determining the mechanical properties of the composite. This is due to that a strong adhesion will attain an effective transfer and distribution of stress on their interfaces, successfully achieving fiber reinforcement.⁷⁵

Fiber orientation has been demonstrated to improve fiber strength, while fiber length and volume fraction has been reported to entertain a relationship with flexural and tensile strength.⁷⁶ For example, small lengths confer a reduction on the composite’s tensile strength by decreasing the possibility of critical flaws.⁷⁷ However, it is important to emphasize that for structural applications, because short fibers lead to increased variability, fiber length should be maximized and aligned with the applied load to prevent failure.⁷⁸

Yussuff et al.⁷⁹ evaluated the tensile and flexural properties of PLA-based hybrid green composites reinforced by kenaf, bamboo, and coir fibers, observing that the combination of the high strength and stiffness of the bamboo and kenaf fibers and the high ductility of the coir fiber improved tensile and flexural strengths compared to those of single-fiber GC.

Table 3 summarizes the chemical and physical properties conferred on composites reinforced with natural fibers. Some parameters are included, such as the Young modulus, flexibility, tensile strength, elongation, etc.

Table 3.

Modification of physical and chemical properties of composites reinforced with natural fibers.

Polymer	Origin of the matrix	Fiber	Origin of the fiber	Physical and chemical properties	References
PLA	Plant based	Flax	Flax fabric	Increase in Young’s modulus (58%), tensile strength had no visible change	⁸⁰
PLA	Plant based	Flax modified with iron phosphonate	Flax fabric	Increase in Young’s modulus (35%) and decrease in tensile strength (6.2%)	⁸⁰
PLA	Plant based	Agave	Leaves	Increase in tensile modulus (14%) (30 wt %) and impact strength (71% with 40 wt %)Decrease in tensile strength (53%) (40 wt %), elongation at break (1.4%) (30 wt %), flexural strength (61%) (40 wt %)	⁸¹
PLA	Plant based	Kenaf + Coir	Kenaf bastBamboo culmCoconut fruit	Increase in tensile strength (4.2 times) and Young’s modulus (4.3 times)	⁶⁹
		Bamboo + Coir		Increase in tensile strength (6.2 times) and Young’s modulus (3.6 times)
		Kenaf + Bamboo + Coir		Increase in tensile strength (7.5 times) and Young’s modulus (4.5 times)
PLA	Plant based	Areca		Increase in tensile strength, tensile modulus, elongation at break, toughness, flexural strength, flexural modulus and flexural toughness with increasing fiber content up to 22 wt %, where a significant decrease is shown.	⁸²
PLA	Plant based	Kenaf	Bast	Flexural strength decreased 14% (30 wt %)Flexural modulus increased 84% (40 wt %)	⁸³
PLA/PHBHH (75:25)	Plant based/bacterial			Increase in flexural strength (7%) (30 wt %)Flexural modulus increased 89% (40 wt %)
PHBHH	Bacterial			Flexural strength increased 17% (30 wt %)Flexural modulus increased 258% (40 wt %)
PHB	Bacterial	Carnauba untreated, mercerized, acetylated, treated with permanganate or treated with peroxide		No composite exhibited improvements compared to neat matrix. Compared to untreated fiber, all treatments increased tensile strength and flexural modulus, with peroxide achieving the highest gain (46% and 14%, respectively).	²⁸
PHB	Bacterial	Hemp	Bast	Increase in flexural modulus (3.5 and 6.9 times), slight decrease in tensile strength and significant decrease in impact strength (almost inversely proportional to tensile strength	⁸⁴
PHB	Bacterial	Jute	Bast		⁸⁴
PHB (glycerol plasticizer)	Bacterial	Sisal	Leaves	Increase in flexural modulus (8%), decrease in elastic modulus (5%), tensile (18%) and flexural strength (8%).	⁸⁵
PHB (glycerol plasticizer)	Bacterial	Coconut	Fruit	Decrease in tensile (46%) and flexural (11%) strength, and flexural (24%) and elastic (18 %) modulus.	⁸⁵
PHB (TEC plasticizer)	Bacterial	Curaua		Increase in impact strength (139%), decrease in stress at break (36%), no significant difference in Young’s modulus and strain at break.	⁸⁶
PHB (TEC plasticizer)	Bacterial	Curaua mercerized or acetone treated		Best results obtained with mercerized fibers: increase in impact strength (150%), decrease in Young’s modulus (23%) and tensile strength (24%), no significant difference in elongation at break.	⁸⁶
PHB	Bacterial	Flax	Non woven fabric	All composites achieved increases in Young’s modulus (approx. 100%) and tensile strength (approx. 25%), with the exception of argon plasma treatment, which exhibited 34% increment in tensile strength, yielding the best results.	⁸⁷
		Flax treated with wet/dry cycling and argon plasma
		Flax treated with wet/dry cycling and ethylene plasma
PHB	Bacterial	Agave	Bagasse	Increase in Young’s modulus (80%), flexural modulus (36%), impact strength (40%). Tensile strength did not show significant improvement.	⁴⁹
PHB	Bacterial	Almond mercerized and treated with peroxide	Shell	Increase in tensile modulus with increasing fiber content, except for seagrass.Substantial decrease in tensile strength and elongation at break with increasing fiber content.	⁸⁸
		Rice mercerized and treated with peroxide	Husk
		Seagrass mercerized and treated with peroxide
P34HB	Bacterial	Rice + MAP modified lignin	Husk	Increase in Young’s modulus (30%), elongation at break from 9.7% to 2.3%A y MAP-lignin enhanced tensile stress and elongation at break	⁸⁹
PHBV	Bacterial	Agave	Leaves	Increase in Young’s modulus (50%), flexural modulus (41%), impact strength (66%). Tensile strength was not significantly improved.	⁴⁹
PHBV	Bacterial	Hemp on and off axis direction	Linen and Burlap	The highest tensile strength (114% increase) and Young’s modulus (110% increase) was achieved with on-axis hemp linen, however off-axis hemp linen exhibited the highest strain at break increase (300%)	⁹⁰
PHBV	Bacterial	Jute on and off axis direction	Burlap	On-axis direction showed the best mechanical performance of the two, with an increase in tensile strength of 51%, 112% in Young’s modulus and 4% in strain at break	⁹⁰
PHBV	Bacterial	Kenaf	Bast	Increase in flexural modulus (214%) and impact strength (112%), decrease in flexural strength (48%)	⁹¹
		Kenaf mercerized		Increase in impact strength (200% and 112%, respectively). Treatments did not produce improvements in flexural strength and flexural modulus, compared to untreated fibers.
		Kenaf silanized
PBAT	Petroleum based or bacterial	Kenaf	Bast	Increase in flexural modulus (14 times), decrease in impact strength and flexural strength.	⁹¹
		Kenaf mercerized		Treatments decreased flexural and impact strength compared to neat matrix and did not produce improvements in flexural modulus compared to untreated fibers.
		Kenaf silanized
PBAT	Petroleum based or bacterial	Hemp (20 wt %)	Bast	Increase in tensile strength (16%) and tensile modulus (277%)Tensile elongation and tensile toughness decreased with increase in fiber content.	⁹²
PBAT	Petroleum based or bacterial	Hemp mercerized and silanized (20 wt%)	Bast	Increase in tensile strength (45%) and tensile modulus (334%)Tensile elongation and tensile toughness decreased with increase in fiber content.	⁹²
PBAT (Resyflex® plasticizer)	Petroleum based or bacterial	Munguba (20 wt %)	Stem	Increase in Young’s modulus (82%), decrease in stress at break (72%) and elongation at break (80%)	⁹³
PBAT (Resyflex® plasticizer)	Petroleum based or bacterial	Munguba mercerized and acetylated (20 wt %)	Stem	Increase in Young’s modulus (90%), decrease in stress at break (72%) and elongation at break (87%)	⁹³
PBAT	Petroleum based or bacterial	Flax	Woven fabric	Increase in tensile strength, Young’s modulus and flexural modulus; decrease in impact and flexural strength.	⁹⁴
		Flax	Nonwoven fabric	Increase in Young’s modulus and flexural modulus (minor increase than woven); decrease in tensile, impact and flexural strength.
		Curaua mercerized and silanized		Increase in Young’s modulus (54%), decrease in tension at break (39%) and elongation at break (37%)
		Curaua mercerized and acetylated		Increase in Young’s modulus (47%), decrease in tension at break (8%) and elongation at break (13%)
PBAT/PBS (40:60)	Petroleum based or bacterial	Miscanthus + MAH compatibilizer		Compared to non-compatibilized composites, the addition of compatibilizer achieved a significant improvement in tensile (69%) and flexural (192%) strength; but tensile and flexural modulus did not show any increase.	⁹⁵
TPS (corn starch + glycerol)	Plant based	Coir treated with either oxygen plasma or air plasma	Coconut fruit	Best mechanical result obtained with oxygen plasma treatment, tensile strength increased 4 times and Young´s modulus increased more than 20 times
TPS (corn starch + glycerol)	Plant based	Potato	Pulp residue	Increase in Young´s modulus and reduction in elongation at break. Fiber content of 5% (highest content tested) led to a reduction in tensile strength.	⁹⁶

* wt: weight percent.

Moisture absorption

When dealing with natural-fiber composites, moisture absorption is a critical element to consider, because it can strongly influence the mechanical properties of the composite. Its importance increases if the matrix is a bio-based polymer, as these materials absorb more moisture than their oil-based counterparts.

Green composites have proven to perform poorly when immersed in water⁹⁷; therefore, it is essential to consider this major limitation when designing a green composite for a tailored application.

Moisture absorption in green composites is mainly driven by the natural hydrophilicity of plant fibers.⁹⁸ The volume fraction of fibers and the environmental temperature has also been reported to significantly influence water absorption, exhibiting an increasing effect with higher fiber content and temperature.⁹⁹

Incompatibility between the hydrophobic polymer matrix and the hydrophilic fibers can create micro-voids, which might increase water retention.¹⁰⁰ Micro-gaps between polymer molecular chains also contribute to water absorption by allowing the inward diffusion of water molecules.¹⁵

The absorbed water molecules severely affect the fiber–matrix interface. The capillary effect transports water through the interface, which leads to a decrease in the adhesion between fiber and matrix, creating regions of poor transfer efficiency, weakening of the composite mechanical properties, deformation, and even degradation.^101,102

Thermal

Determining the thermal properties of composites is relevant since they can limit the range of suitable applications and processing methods, especially when dealing with natural fibers and synthetic polymer–matrix combinations, given that the processing temperature of the matrixes can surpass the degradation temperatures of fibers. This, however, is not a great concern for bio-based polymers, since these materials have relatively lower processing temperatures¹⁰³; in the case of fibers, it is reported that decomposition occurs at 200°C when hemicelluloses degrade. The temperature range between 300 and 400°C corresponds to cellulose degradation, while lignin decomposition takes place between 400 and 500°C.¹⁰⁴ Selection of the polymer matrix must consider these temperature ranges to achieve the successful manufacturing of the composite.

Flammability

The flammability of natural-fiber composites depends on the type and content of the fiber in the material.¹⁰⁵ However, the majority of fibers are considered poor flame-retardant materials; therefore, they have not exhibited improvements concerning fire resistance in green composites.¹⁰⁶ When dealing with a particular interest in flame retardancy, it is common to find added flame-retardant agents and treated fibers for achieving the desired property for green composites.

Biodegradability and recyclability

The American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) defines a biodegradable plastic as a material in which all of the organic carbon can be converted into biomass, water, carbon dioxide, and/or methane via the action of naturally occurring microorganisms such as bacteria and fungi, in time-frames consistent with the ambient conditions of the disposal method.¹⁰⁷ The biodegradation of composites is determined by the degradation of its constituents¹⁰⁴ and, while plant fibers exhibit inherent biodegradability, not all bio-based plastics can be defined as biodegradable. Such is the case of PLA, which falls into the compostable category.

The degradation rate is mainly controlled by the chemical backbone of both the matrix and the fiber⁷²; thus, this can be predicted based on their chemical composition with respect to the natural fibers, cellulose, and hemicellulose, and the –OH. The remaining polar groups in cellulose and hemicellulose induce biological degradation through the creation of a moist environment that favors the growth of microorganisms. Fibers are also susceptible to different types of degradation, such as ultraviolet (UV) and fire degradation due to lignin, as well as thermal degradation due to hemicellulose.¹⁰⁸

The degradation of green composites is also affected overall by the environmental conditions to which the material is exposed. Moisture, UV radiation, temperature, and microorganism activity can negatively impact the interfacial adhesion, causing micro- and macro-cracks in the material, accelerating the biodegradation of the composite.¹⁰⁹

A time of degradation is not always desirable. It is also a positive aspect of the slow degradation of composites used in long-term applications, i.e. in the packaging and transportation of goods¹¹⁰; in this manner, the material can be used for longer times, thus reducing costs.

Microorganism growth on green composites can lead to a reduction in mechanical properties such as bending strength, hardness, and color fading, which will impact the aspect of the material.¹¹¹ When long durability is required, some pretreatments and new processes are included, for example, copolymerization, fiber treatment, and the addition of compatibilizers, to name a few.¹¹²

The measurement of biodegradability has been addressed via the emission of specific guidelines stipulating parameters that must be accomplished to determine whether the material fulfills the requirements.¹¹³

In terms of recyclability, there is little information available on green composites. The recyclability of bio-based plastics is not possible, since the infrastructure required is not widely available and the addition of fibers may prevent recycling of the composite, as occurs with synthetic composites reinforced with glass fibers.¹¹⁴

Regarding tools for the measurement of sustainability. Life Cycle Assessments (LCA) may also be a suitable technique, in that it can explain information concerning the material beyond its biodegradability. These analyses consider many factors, such as freshwater eutrophication, marine eutrophication, terrestrial ecotoxicity, freshwater ecotoxicity, marine ecotoxicity, agricultural-land occupation, natural-land transformation, metal depletion, and water depletion. Overall, green composites have proven to be non-toxic, with no or heavily reduced environmental damage throughout their life cycle.⁷² In some cases, their capacity for CO₂ sequestration brings them closer to their consideration as carbon-neutral materials. However, this is not the case for all plant-fiber composites. Korol et al.¹¹⁵ compared the LCA of polypropylene composites blended with glass, cotton, jute, and kenaf fibers. The cotton-fiber composites exhibited the highest total environmental impact, even more than that of glass fiber, which is caused mainly by agricultural-land occupation. Studies such as this shed light on considering many other aspects, aside from end-of-life options.

Industrial applications of green composites

Construction

The majority of materials utilized in construction exert a high negative environmental impact¹¹⁶; only in the U.S., around 40% of landfill volume belongs to demolition wastes, finding wood, drywall, and plastic.¹¹⁷

The use of composites has been addressed in terms of their incorporation into structural and non-structural applications,¹¹⁸ concernig their physical and chemical characteristics. For example, Christian and Billington¹¹⁹ tested the mechanical performance of eco-friendly materials based on cellulose and polyhydroxybutyrate mixed with hemp fibers, in that these composites possessed mechanical properties similar to those of structural wood, opening the possibility for use in formwork, flooring, scaffolding, walls, and temporary construction.

Natural fibers such as coconut, sisal, banana, hemp, sugarcane, and cotton are commonly reinforced in the polymer system to complement certain specific properties in the final product. Cellulosic fibers as reinforcement for various matrices comprise an important option for the construction industry.⁸⁹

Automotive sector

The automotive industry has included green composites as internal and external components.¹²⁰ This shift to more sustainable components is not only an initiative toward a better environment, but it is also a demand of European regulations.¹²¹ According to European Guideline 2000/53/EG issued by the European Commission, around 85% of the automobile would have to have been recycled by 2015.¹²² Composites composed of green renewable materials are employed for either interior or exterior car-body components, i.e. dashboards, door panels, parcel shelves, seat cushions, and car linings.¹

Many experts on materials from different automakers highlight that an all-advanced-composite auto-body could be 50–70% lighter than a current, similarly-sized steel auto-body compared with a 40–55% mass reduction for an optimized steel auto-body.¹²³ Also, the new trend toward the production of electric cars is predominant, and the inclusion of lighter materials for chassis is critical for maximizing the performance of the battery.¹²⁴

Several automotive manufacturers have included car components using natural-fiber composites, for instance, Audi, BMW, Fiat, SEAT, and Volkswagen, among others. These companies have applied these composites in door panels, parcel shelves, seat cushions, backrests, cabin linings, etc.¹²⁵

Biomedical applications

Tissue engineering is one of the most active areas concerning the incorporation of new materials, mainly because of their biodegradability and compatibility, such as those of PLA and poly-d-lactic acid, which demonstrated excellent performance in biodegradability and mechanical properties.² These polymers have been successfully mixed with other biopolymers, i.e. PolyLactic-co-Glycolic Acid (PLGA), PolyEthylene Glycol (PEG), and chitosan, improving their mechanical properties to an even greater degree.

The materials that have been utilized for orthopedic implants or medical applications include metals, such as stainless steel, cobalt-chrome, and titanium alloys,¹²⁶ polymers (ultrahigh-molecular-weight polyethylene, poly (ether-ether-ketone),^127,128 and ceramics (hydroxyapatite).¹²⁹ However, during recent decades, there has been a shift from the use of biostable biocompatible materials to bioabsorbable or biodegradable biomaterials for medical devices used to repair and regenerate tissue damage.¹³⁰

Packaging

Different blended materials have been developed to satisfy the growing demand in packaging. For instance, the fibers of Sterculia urens were employed as reinforcement for PLA composites,¹³¹ revealing good mechanical properties and excellent performance in degradability processes. It was established that PLA resins are suitable for the manufacture of S. urens uniaxial fabric-reinforced biocomposites with superior engineering properties, useful for food packaging.

Nurul Fazita et al.¹³² described the potential of utilizing green composites in packaging applications as compared to conventional thermoplastics. The study of these authors aimed to compare the functional properties related to the packaging applications of bamboo-polypropylene and bamboo-poly(lactic) acid composites, the results showing that Charpy impact strength was increased for bamboo-PP compared to pure polymers. Supplementary analyses, i.e. thermogravimetric, differential scanning calorimetry, and heat deflection temperature, demonstrated that the addition of bamboo improved the thermal resistance of these composites. The study concluded that bamboo fibers comprise a potential reinforcement material for PLA composites and their use in packaging applications, with the sole restriction of their mechanical performance in high-humidity environments.

A new window of applications of agroresidues and their use as reinforcements materials has arisen. This proposal has become attractive, not only in economic terms due to the low cost of the raw materials,¹³³ but also due to the mechanical properties¹³⁴ conferred on the biomaterials. The surplus of agricultural residues has driven the utilization of straw as fillers in composites, whether in polyesters or in protein-based matrices.¹³⁵ For instance Berthet et al.¹³⁶ investigated the impact of some characteristics of wheat straw fibers, such as size, morphology, and content, on their processability and functional properties, such as mechanical properties and water-vapor permeability in PolyHydroxyButyrate Valerate (PHBV) composites. It was demonstrated that the highest filler level was higher when there was a decrease in fiber size (over 50 wt % in the case of micrometric fibers), due to reduced film heterogeneity and improved fiber wetting by the polymer. Similarly, when increasing fiber size and/or content in composites, a decrease was observed in tensile properties, while the Young modulus was not significantly affected.

Srivastava et al.¹³⁷ analyzed the effect of the pretreatment of banana pseudostem fibers on the preparation methods of films with PolyVinyl Alcohol (PVA) for packaging uses. The results showed that composite films were permeable to water but able to maintain consistency and composition upon drying. Chemical cross-linking by citric acid and glutaraldehyde, between banana pseudostem fibers and PVA, all of which are hydroxyl functionalized, improved water resistance in films. Composite films with alkali-treated banana pseudostem fibers had a maximal tensile strength of 34.2 MPa and a water uptake of only 60%.

New studies analyzed the incorporation of natural ingredients into green composites, for instance, antimicrobial compounds such as oregano essential oil.¹³⁸ Ketkaew et al.¹³⁸ evaluated the antimicrobial activity of sugarcane bagasse fiber-reinforced starch foam composites with added essential oregano oil incorporated from 2–8 wt % to improve the microbial effectiveness of bioactive packaging. It was found that combining 8% wt % of oil achieves the maximal inhibitory effect against Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus.

In Figure 5 are exemplified some of the most common applications of GC in the mentioned sectors i.e. construction, automobile, biomedical and packaging.

Figure 5.

Representative applications of green composite in diverse sectors.

World institutions regulating the green composites sector

Diverse initiatives have emerged in European countries, in the United States, Canada, and Japan, to foster the use of green non-oil-based composites instead of oil-based materials, promoting the use of renewable conventional and non-conventional sources.

The ASTM has released documents regulating the evaluation of some physical and chemical characteristics of materials, including green composites,¹³⁹ in the following types of materials: test methods; specification; classification; practice; guide; and terminology. These standards are classified into five categories These include applications, materials, processes, properties, and measurements, in addition to test methods, in which methodologies and procedures can be found for analyzing and characterizing the physical, chemical, and biological properties of materials or composites of plant origin.¹⁴⁰

In the European Union, the organisms in charge of the standardization and regulation of green composites include the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI), the Commission of European Standards (CEN), and the European Committee for Electrochemical Standardization (CENELEC). The latter has released standards defining the technical specifications for products, production processes, services, or test methods, facilitating integration among companies, and increasing the value chain and trade.^141-144

Asian manufactured products, processes, and materials follow local standards. For instance, the Japanese Industrial Standards Committee (JISC) takes part as a Japanese contributor in setting international standards through its work with the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). In the Chinese market, the China National Institute of Standardization (CNIS), subordinated to the State Administration of Market Regulation, is the responsible entity for strategic standardization in the national economy and industrial development of China. The CNIS is committed to taking part in international standardization activities and world homologation of standards.^144,145

Finally, the ISO has published 22,482 international standards and related documents, covering nearly every industry, i.e. products, services, and systems, to ensure quality, safety, and efficiency, and facilitate international trade.^144,146,147

International trading of green composites

According to estimations, the world fiber market will reach USD 10.89 billion by 2024.^148,149 Wood-fiber materials dominated the global market in 2015¹⁵⁰ and it is considered that this trend will continue over the next 10 years. Raw materials including hemp, flax, and kenaf are increasingly employed in the production of lightweight and fuel-efficient cars.

The U.S. dominates the world’s green materials market,¹⁵¹ meanwhile, in Europe, the government has supported new regulations and incentivized the latest strategies to facilitate the incorporation of new eco-friendly materials.^152,153

The global natural-fiber composite market size was valued at USD 4,46 billion in 2016. According to some predictions, this means an incremental Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 11.8% from 2016 to 2024. Wood dominated the market and represented around 60% of the overall income, followed by flax with 13% of the world market; kenaf, cotton, and hemp complete the list.¹⁵⁴

Among the most important natural polymers are starch, rubber, PHB, and PLA. In 2015, this segment accounted for around 25% of the global market matrix.^147,155 As the trend of consuming matrixes continues, synthetic polymers will take second place in market consumption.

The current segmentation in natural-fiber composites by sector application include construction (60%), automotive (20%), electronics (10%), sporting goods (7%), and others (3%).^156,157

Regarding green-food packaging, the European Union, Canada, the United States, and Japan, among others, have focused their efforts on regulating the use of green composites in packaging operations, such as regulations on biodegradability, mechanical properties, and performance and iniquity according to the final specific use.^147,158

Developing economic, societal, and environmental development by manufacturing green composites for sustainability

The global tendency toward sustainable development has been focused on “greening” the world economies as a new strategy for social transformation, reducing environmental pressures, promoting economic growth, and enhancing social well-being.^159,160

Green growth is defined as the process of transition toward a low-carbon and resource-efficient society with economic development that safeguards the functioning of ecosystems and enhances human well-being and social equality.¹⁶¹ This definition includes elements of eco-efficiency,¹⁶² resource efficiency,¹⁶³ and circular economy.¹⁶⁴

Several studies have analyzed the environmental impact of the whole process to obtain green composites. For instance, Yuan and Guo¹⁶⁵ evaluated the environmental impact of the use of bamboo fiber as reinforcement in composites; the study was executed by using Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) of the manufacturing process. The authors found that pretreatment and energy consumption are the main contributors to the global environmental impact. In a similar study, Koronis et al.¹⁶⁶ concluded that in terms of the reduced amount of energy associated with the manufacturing of green composites positively affects the environment when the green-based process is compared with oil-based composite processes. Moreover, the authors concluded that the addition of plant-based content and natural fibers acts absolutely as a complementary effect and increases their environmental performance, given that both derive from annually renewable resources.

In addition to the reduction of CO₂ emissions, it is also important to consider that the replacement of plastics and oil-based materials by biopolymers or bioplastics reinforced with natural fibers has become an important global issue, not only from the environmental perspective, but also in terms of the improvement of living conditions in rural areas and, as a result, economic growth.¹⁶⁷

Along with this review, the main concepts regarding green composites that the technology has developed for their production, and interesting examples of green composites for each sector and world markets and trades for these materials have been mentioned. The environmental impacts and economic benefits continue to stimulate new research, especially due to that, each day, novel natural sources appear and seem to be ideal for blending with biopolymers, offering desirable mechanical and biodegradative performances. This is similarly due to the origin of the materials: concerns are addressed to the possible depletion and dwindling of wood resources from forests or non-conventional sources.¹⁶⁸

The growth of the world market entertains a rampant increase in the short term and represents a multimillionaire sector. Therefore, taking the economic aspect as the only important part of development could imply a new imbalance among economic pillars and generates a new, unfavorable world scenario.

Conclusions

Green materials represent a consolidated alternative as substitutes for oil-based polymers. Diverse laboratory and field studies have demonstrated that these materials exhibit adequate mechanical properties for use in strict sectors, such as the construction and automotive sectors, and may represent a significant reduction of their cost production and also for having a better environmental performance.

To achieve better physical, chemical, and mechanical properties, new raw materials have been evaluated, including the development of new manufacturing processes, and the inclusion of new regulations to avoid the incorrect management of natural and biological resources is now required.

Finally, it is essential to note that, although these raw materials entertain several challenges, such as the lack of proper technical and governmental policies, world market changes, price fluctuations, and technological challenges for processing them. Their role as a social driver toward improvement in economically deprived areas might be fundamental, in that it brings new alternatives to poor rural areas around the world where they are available.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

AMAR thanks to CONACYT for the economic support with the scholarship number 2018-000012-01-NACF-03334, EVN acknowledges to DIQEB—Universidad de Guanajuato and CA IQMAyM for all the technical support, thanks to SICES (Project PNPC/SICES/CONV/190/2019UG) for financial funding and B V-F for her patience help. M. del R. C thanks to Universidad Autónoma del Estado de Hidalgo for the support and B V-P thanks to ITESM Campus Edo. Mex and Massachusetts Institute of Technology for all the support received.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was financially supported by the CONACYT (scholarship no. 2018-000012-01-NACF-03334) and the SICES (project PNPC/SICES/CONV/190/2019UG).

ORCID iD

Edgar Vázquez-Núñez

References

Peças

Carvalho

Salman

, et al. Natural fibre composites and their applications: a review. J Compos Sci 2018; 2(4): 66.

Farah

Anderson

Langer

. Physical and mechanical properties of PLA, and their functions in widespread applications—a comprehensive review. Adv Drug Deliver Rev 2016; 107(1): 367–392.

Hahladakis

Velis

Weber

, et al. An overview of chemical additives present in plastics: migration, release, fate and environmental impact during their use, disposal and recycling. J Hazard Mater 2018; 344(1): 179–199.

Thakur

Singha

Thakur

Green composites from natural fibers: mechanical and chemical aging properties. Int J Polym Anal Charact 2012; 17: 401–407.

Tan

Heo

Foo

, et al. An insight into nanocellulose as soft condensed matter: challenge and future prospective toward environmental sustainability. Sci Total Environ 2019; 650: 1309–1326.

Zanchi

Delogu

Zamagni

, et al. Analysis of the main elements affecting social LCA applications: challenges for the automotive sector. Int J Life Cycle Ass 2018; 23(3): 519–535.

Fargette

Loireau

Libourel

The relationship between man and his environment: a systemic approach of the viability of “system earth.” In: Barrière

Behnassi

David

Douzal

Fargette

Libourel

Loireau

Pascal

Prost

Ravena-Cañete

Seyler

Morand

(eds) Coviability of social and ecological systems: reconnecting mankind to the biosphere in an era of global change. 1st ed. Switzerland: Springer, 2019, pp. 105–149.

Arnold

De Palmenaer

Brück

, et al. Energy-efficient carbon fiber production with concentrated solar power: process design and techno-economic analysis. Ind Eng Chem Res 2018; 57(23): 7934–7945.

Mohanty

Misra

Drzal

. Sustainable bio-composites from renewable resources: opportunities and challenges in the green materials world. J Polym Environ 2002; 10(1–2): 19–26.

10.

Spiridon

Darie-Nita

Hitruc

, et al. New opportunities to valorize biomass wastes into green materials. J Clean Prod 2016; 133: 235–242.

11.

Lambert

Wagner

Environmental performance of bio-based and biodegradable plastics: the road ahead. Chem Soc Rev 2017; 46(22): 6855–6871.

12.

Gray

Schindler

Migas

, et al. Bottom-up elucidation of glycosidic bond stereochemistry. Anal Chem 2017; 89: 4540–4549.

13.

Mochane

Mokhena

Mokhothu

, et al. Recent progress on natural fiber hybrid composites for advanced applications: a review. Express Polymer Letters 2019; 13: 159–198.

14.

Guimarães

Frollini

da Silva

, et al. Characterization of banana, sugarcane bagasse and sponge gourd fibers of Brazil. Ind Crops Prod 2009; 30(3): 407–415.

15.

Ramesh

Palanikumar

Reddy

. Plant fibre based bio-composites: sustainable and renewable green materials. Renew Sust Energ Rev 2017; 79: 558–584.

16.

Bourmaud

Beaugrand

Shah

, et al. Towards the design of high-performance plant fibre composites. Prog Mater Sci 2018; 97: 347–408.

17.

Spinacé

MAS

Lambert

Fermoselli

KKG

, et al. Characterization of lignocellulosic curaua fibres. Carbohydr Polym 2009; 77(1): 47–53.

18.

Katalyne Bilcati

Matoski

Trianoski

, et al. Potential use of curaua fiber (Ananas erectifolius) for cementitious production composite. Rev Ing de Construccion 2018; 33(2): 155–160.

19.

Luo

Netravali

. Characterization of henequen fibers and the henequen fiber/poly(hydroxybutyrate-co-hydroxyvalerate) interface. J Adhes Sci Technol 2001; 15(4): 423–437.

20.

Mohit

Arul Mozhi Selvan

. A comprehensive review on surface modification, structure interface and bonding mechanism of plant cellulose fiber reinforced polymer based composites. Compos Interface 2018; 25(5–7): 629–667.

21.

Pérez-Fonseca

Robledo-Ortíz

Ramirez-Arreola

, et al. Effect of hybridization on the physical and mechanical properties of high density polyethylene-(pine/agave) composites. Mater Des 2014; 64: 35–43.

22.

Sanjay

Madhu

Jawaid

, et al. Characterization and properties of natural fiber polymer composites: a comprehensive review. J Clean Prod 2018; 172: 566–581.

23.

Okahisa

Furukawa

Ishimoto

, et al. Comparison of cellulose nanofiber properties produced from different parts of the oil palm tree. Carbohydr Polym 2018; 198: 313–319.

24.

Chen

Song

Zhu

, et al. Scalable and sustainable approach toward highly compressible, anisotropic, lamellar carbon sponge. Chem 2018; 4(3): 544–554.

25.

Bilal

Lin

RJT

Jayaraman

Rice husk and its composites: effects of rice husk loading, size, coupling agents, and surface treatment on composites’ mechanical, physical, and functional properties. In: Thakur

Thakur

Kessler

(eds) Handbook of composites from renewable materials. 1st ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2017, pp. 1–16.

26.

Bassyouni

Waheed Ul Hasan

. The use of rice straw and husk fibers as reinforcements in composites. In: Faruk

Sain

(eds) Biofiber reinforcements in composite materials. 1st ed. Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing, 2015, pp. 385–422.

27.

Rafique

Sadaf

Rafique

, et al. A review on green synthesis of silver nanoparticles and their applications. Artif Cell Nanomed B 2017; 45(7): 1272–1291.

28.

Melo

JDD

Carvalho

LFM

Medeiros

, et al. A biodegradable composite material based on polyhydroxybutyrate (PHB) and carnauba fibers. Compos Part B Eng 2012; 43(7): 2827–2835.

29.

Nurul Fazita

Abdul Khalil

HPS

Wai

, et al. Hybrid bast fiber reinforced thermoset composites. In: Thakur

Thakur

Pappu

(eds) Hybrid polymer composite materials: properties and characterisation. 1st ed. Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing, 2017, pp. 203–234.

30.

Wright

Zhu

, et al. Leaf mechanical strength and photosynthetic capacity vary independently across 57 subtropical forest species with contrasting light requirements. New Phytol 2019; 223(2): 607–618.

31.

Ruane

Sonnino

Agostini

. Bioenergy and the potential contribution of agricultural biotechnologies in developing countries. Biomass Bioenerg 2010; 34(10): 1427–1439.

32.

Carrillo-Nieves

Rostro Alanís

de la Cruz Quiroz

, et al. Current status and future trends of bioethanol production from agro-industrial wastes in Mexico. Renew Sust Energ Rev 2019; 102: 63–74.

33.

van Eijck

Batidzirai

Faaij

. Current and future economic performance of first and second generation biofuels in developing countries. Appl Energy 2014; 135: 115–141.

34.

Dimou

Karantonis

Skalkos

, et al. Valorization of fruits by-products to unconventional sources of additives, oil, biomolecules and innovative functional foods. Curr Pharm Biotechnol 2019; 20(10): 776–786.

35.

Siracusa

Blanco

Bio-polyethylene (Bio-PE), bio-polypropylene (Bio-PP) and bio-poly(ethylene terephthalate) (Bio-PET): recent developments in bio-based polymers analogous to petroleum-derived ones for packaging and engineering applications. Polymers 2020; 12: 1641.

36.

Al-Oqla

Sapuan

. Natural fiber reinforced polymer composites in industrial applications: feasibility of date palm fibers for sustainable automotive industry. J Clean Prod 2014; 66: 347–354.

37.

Safri

SNA

Sultan

MTH

Jawaid

, et al. Impact behaviour of hybrid composites for structural applications: a review. Compos Part B—Eng 2018; 133: 112–121.

38.

Ramesh

Deepa

. Processing of green composites. In: Muthu

(ed) Green composites: processing, characterisation and applications for textiles. 2nd ed. Singapore: Springer, 2019, pp. 47–72.

39.

Pappu

Patil

Jain

, et al. Advances in industrial prospective of cellulosic macromolecules enriched banana biofibre resources: a review. Int J Biol Macromol 2015; 79: 449–458.

40.

Zubair

Ullah

. Recent advances in protein derived bionanocomposites for food packaging applications. Crit Rev Food Sci 2019; 60(3): 406–434.

41.

De Santis

Guarino

Ambrosio

. Composite biomaterials for bone repair. In: Pawelec

Planell

(eds) Bone repair biomaterials. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing, 2019, pp. 273–299.

42.

Carey

Ayranci

. Green braided composites. In: Carey

(ed) Handbook of advances in braided composite materials: theory, production, testing and applications. 1st ed. Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing, 2017, pp. 451–466.

43.

Chaitanya

Singh

. Kenaf fiber reinforced polypropylene composites fabricated by injection molding. Innov Corros Mater Sci (Formerly Recent Pat Corros Sci) 2017; 6(1): 4–9.

44.

Wang

Zhou

Yang

, et al. Thermo-mechanical performance of polylactide composites reinforced with alkali-treated bamboo fibers. Polymers 2018; 10(4): 401.

45.

Perez-Puyana

Felix

Romero

, et al. Development of eco-friendly biodegradable superabsorbent materials obtained by injection moulding. J Clean Prod 2018; 198: 312–319.

46.

Obasi

Chaudhry

Ijaz

, et al. Development of biocomposites from coir fibre and poly(caprolactone) by solvent casting technique. Polym Bull 2018; 75(5): 1775–1787.

47.

Alaaeddin

Sapuan

Zuhri

MYM

, et al. Physical and mechanical properties of polyvinylidene fluoride—short sugar palm fiber nanocomposites. J Clean Prod 2019; 235: 473–482.

48.

Fairuz

Sapuan

Zainudin

, et al. The effect of pulling speed on mechanical properties of pultruded kenaf fiber reinforced vinyl ester composites. J Vinyl Addit Technol 2018; 24: E13–E20.

49.

Torres-Tello

Robledo-Ortíz

González-García

, et al. Effect of agave fiber content in the thermal and mechanical properties of green composites based on polyhydroxybutyrate or poly(hydroxybutyrate-co-hydroxyvalerate). Ind Crops Prod 2017; 99: 117–125.

50.

Kuciel

Mazur

Jakubowska

. Novel biorenewable composites based on poly(3-hydroxybutyrate-co-3-hydroxyvalerate) with natural fillers. J Polym Environ 2019; 27(4): 803–815.

51.

Hedayati Velis

Golzar

Yousefzade

Composites based on HDPE, jute fiber, wood, and thermoplastic starch in tubular pultrusion die: the correlation between mechanical performance and microstructure. Adv Polym Technol 2018; 37(8): 3483–3491.

52.

Silva

Campini

PAL

Rocha

, et al. The influence of treated eucalyptus microfibers on the properties of PLA biocomposites. Compos Sci Technol 2019; 179: 54–62.

53.

Yue

Leng

Bian

, et al. Fast and simple construction of composite films with renewable Eucommia ulmoides gum and poly(ε-caprolactone). Compos Sci Technol 2019; 179: 145–151.

54.

Khan

Sultan

MTH

Shah

AUM

, et al. The effects of stacking sequence on the tensile and flexural properties of kenaf/jute fibre hybrid composites. J Nat Fibers 2019; 1: 1–12.

55.

Righetti

Cinelli

Mallegni

, et al. Thermal and mechanical properties of biocomposites made of poly(3-hydroxybutyrate-co-3-hydroxyvalerate) and potato pulp powder. Polymers 2019; 11(2): 308.

56.

Siakeng

Jawaid

Ariffin

, et al. Mechanical, dynamic, and thermomechanical properties of coir/pineapple leaf fiber reinforced polylactic acid hybrid biocomposites. Polym Compos 2019; 40(5): 2000–2011.

57.

Arao

Fujiura

Itani

, et al. Strength improvement in injection-molded jute-fiber-reinforced polylactide green-composites. Compos Part B Eng 2015; 68: 200–206.

58.

Peng

Kellens

Tang

, et al. Sustainability of additive manufacturing: an overview on its energy demand and environmental impact. Addit Manuf 2018; 21: 694–704.

59.

Khosravani

Nasiri

. Injection molding manufacturing process: review of case-based reasoning applications. J Intell Manuf 2019; 31(4): 847–864.

60.

Xia

Cai

, et al. Development of natural fiber-reinforced composite with comparable mechanical properties and reduced energy consumption and environmental impacts for replacing automotive glass-fiber sheet molding compound. J Clean Prod 2018; 184: 92–100.

61.

Trauth

Bondy

Weidenmann

, et al. Mechanical properties and damage evolution of a structural sheet molding compound based on a novel two step curing resin system. Mater Des 2018; 143: 224–237.

62.

Peng

Fan

Hartley

, et al. Properties of natural fiber composites made by pultrusion process. J Compos Mater 2012; 46(2): 237–246.

63.

Zamri

Akil

Bakar

, et al. Effect of water absorption on pultruded jute/glass fiber-reinforced unsaturated polyester hybrid composites. J Compos Mater 2012; 46(1): 51–61.

64.

Balasubramanian

Sultan

MTH

Rajeswari

. Manufacturing techniques of composites for aerospace applications. In: Jawaid

Thariq

(eds) Sustainable composites for aerospace applications. 1st ed. Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing, 2018, pp. 55–67.

65.

Elkington

Bloom

Ward

, et al. Hand layup: understanding the manual process. Adv Manuf Polym Compos Sci 2015; 1: 138–151.

66.

Sun

Zhou

Lee

. Various preparation methods of highly porous hydroxyapatite/polymer nanoscale biocomposites for bone regeneration. Acta Biomater 2011; 7(11): 3813–3828.

67.

Faruk

Bledzki

Fink

, et al. Biocomposites reinforced with natural fibers: 2000–2010. Prog Polym Sci 2012; 37(11): 1552–1596.

68.

Vinayagamoorthy

. Influence of fibre pretreatments on characteristics of green fabric materials. Polym Polym Compos 2020; 0967391120943461.

69.

Yusoff

Takagi

Nakagaito

. Tensile and flexural properties of polylactic acid-based hybrid green composites reinforced by kenaf, bamboo and coir fibers. Ind Crops Prod 2016; 94: 562–573.

70.

Maciel N de

Ferreira

da Silva Vieira

, et al. Comparative tensile strength analysis between epoxy composites reinforced with curaua fiber and glass fiber. J Mater Res Technol 2018; 7: 561–565.

71.

Fragassa

de Camargo

Pavlovic

, et al. Experimental evaluation of static and dynamic properties of low styrene emission vinylester laminates reinforced by natural fibres. Polym Test 2018; 69: 437–449.

72.

Dicker

MPM

Duckworth

Baker

, et al. Green composites: a review of material attributes and complementary applications. Composites Part A—Appl S 2014; 56: 280–289.

73.

Lau

Hung

Zhu

, et al. Properties of natural fibre composites for structural engineering applications. Compos Part B Eng 2018; 136: 222–233.

74.

Abdellaoui

Bouhfid

Qaiss

AEK

. Lignocellulosic fibres reinforced thermoset composites: preparation, characterization, mechanical and rheological properties. In: Kalia

(ed) Lignocellulosic composite materials. 1st ed. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2018, pp. 215–270.

75.

Panthapulakkal

Raghunanan

Sain

, et al. Natural fiber and hybrid fiber thermoplastic composites: advancements in lightweighting applications. In: Baillie

Jayasinghe

(eds) Green composites: waste and nature-based materials for a sustainable future. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing, 2017, pp. 39–72.

76.

Yoo

Kim

Park

, et al. Effects of fiber shape, aspect ratio, and volume fraction on flexural behavior of ultra-high-performance fiber-reinforced cement composites. Compos Struct 2017; 174: 375–388.

77.

Wang

Pattarachaiyakoop

, et al. A review on the tensile properties of natural fiber reinforced polymer composites. Compos Part B Eng 2011; 42(4): 856–873.

78.

Bourmaud

Mérotte

Siniscalco

, et al. Main criteria of sustainable natural fibre for efficient unidirectional biocomposites. Compos Part A—Appl S 2019; 124: 105504.

79.

Yussuf

Massoumi

Hassan

. Comparison of polylactic acid/kenaf and polylactic acid/rise husk composites: the influence of the natural fibers on the mechanical, thermal and biodegradability properties. J Polym Environ 2010; 18: 422–429.

80.

Zhang

Pan

, et al. Polydopamine induced natural fiber surface functionalization: a way towards flame retardancy of flax/poly(lactic acid) biocomposites. Compos Part B Eng 2018; 154: 56–63.

81.

Cisneros-López

Pérez-Fonseca

González-García

, et al. Polylactic acid–agave fiber biocomposites produced by rotational molding: A comparative study with compression molding. Adv Polym Technol 2018; 37(7): 2528–2540.

82.

Kousaalya

Biddappa

Krumm

, et al. Poly(lactic acid)/areca fiber laminate composites processed via film stacking technique. J Appl Polym Sci 2018; 135(5): 45795.

83.

Ismail

Sultan

MTH

Hamdan

, et al. A study on the low velocity impact response of hybrid kenaf-kevlar composite laminates through drop test rig technique. BioResources 2018; 13(2): 3045–3060.

84.

Gunning

Geever

Killion

, et al. Mechanical and biodegradation performance of short natural fibre polyhydroxybutyrate composites. Polym Test 2013; 32(8): 1603–1611.

85.

Hosokawa

Darros

Moris

VADS

, et al. Polyhydroxybutyrate composites with random mats of sisal and coconut fibers. Mater Res 2017; 20(1): 279–290.

86.

Scalioni

Gutiérrez

Felisberti

. Green composites of poly(3-hydroxybutyrate) and curaua fibers: morphology and physical, thermal, and mechanical properties. J Appl Polym Sci 2017; 134(14): 44676.

87.

Ventura

Claramunt

Rodríguez-Pérez

, et al. Effects of hydrothermal aging on the water uptake and tensile properties of PHB/flax fabric biocomposites. Polym Degrad Stab 2017; 142: 129–138.

88.

Sánchez-Safont

Aldureid

Lagarón

, et al. Biocomposites of different lignocellulosic wastes for sustainable food packaging applications. Compos Part B Eng 2018; 145: 215–225.

89.

Liu

, et al. Synergetic enhancement on flame retardancy by melamine phosphate modified lignin in rice husk ash filled P34HB biocomposites. Compos Sci Technol 2018; 168: 246–254.

90.

Miller

SA.

Natural fiber textile reinforced bio-based composites: mechanical properties, creep, and environmental impacts. J Clean Prod 2018; 198: 612–623.

91.

Russo

Carfagna

Cimino

, et al. Biodegradable composites reinforced with kenaf fibers: thermal, mechanical, and morphological issues. Adv Polym Technol 2013; 32(S1): E313–E322.

92.

Pulikkalparambil

Parameswaranpillai

George

, et al. Physical and thermo-mechanical properties of bionano reinforced poly(butylene adipate-co-terephthalate), hemp/CNF/Ag-NPs composites. AIMS Mater Sci 2017; 4(3): 814–831.

93.

Pinheiro

Morales

Mei

. Polymeric biocomposites of poly(butylene adipate-co-terephthalate) reinforced with natural Munguba fibers. Cellulose 2014; 21(6): 4381–4391.

94.

Phongam

Dangtungee

Siengchin

. Comparative studies on the mechanical properties of nonwoven- and woven-flax-fiber-reinforced poly(butylene adipate-co-terephthalate)-based composite laminates. Mech Compos Mater 2015; 51(1): 17–24.

95.

Muthuraj

Misra

Mohanty

. Biodegradable biocomposites from poly(butylene adipate-co-terephthalate) and miscanthus: preparation, compatibilization, and performance evaluation. J Appl Polym Sci 2017; 134(43): 45448.

96.

Fahrngruber

Eichelter

Erhäusl

, et al. Potato-fiber modified thermoplastic starch: effects of fiber content on material properties and compound characteristics. Eur Polym J 2019; 111: 170–177.

97.

Mohammed

Ansari

MNM

Pua

, et al. A review on natural fiber reinforced polymer composite and its applications. Int J Poly Sci 2015; 2015.

98.

Perremans

Hendrickx

Verpoest

, et al. Effect of chemical treatments on the mechanical properties of technical flax fibres with emphasis on stiffness improvement. Compos Sci Technol 2018; 160: 216–223.

99.

Pickering

Efendy

MGA

. A review of recent developments in natural fibre composites and their mechanical performance. Compos Part A—Appl S 2016; 83: 98–112.

100.

Avecilla-Ramírez

del Rocío López-Cuellar

Vergara-Porras

, et al. Characterization of poly-hydroxybutyrate/luffa fibers composite material. BioResources 2020; 15: 7159–7177.

101.

Sin

Tee

, et al. Extraction of cellulose nanocrystals from plant sources for application as reinforcing agent in polymers. Compos Part B Eng 2015; 75: 176–200.

102.

Väisänen

Das

Tomppo

. A review on new bio-based constituents for natural fiber-polymer composites. J Clean Prod 2017; 149: 582–596.

103.

Luzi

Puglia

Torre

Natural fiber biodegradable composites and nanocomposites: a biomedical application. In: Verma

Fortunati

Jain

Zhang

(eds) Biomass, biopolymer-based materials, and bioenergy. 1st ed. Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing, 2019, pp. 179–201.

104.

Azwa

Yousif

Manalo

, et al. A review on the degradability of polymeric composites based on natural fibres. Mater Des 2013; 47: 424–442.

105.

Rajini

Winowlin Jappes

Siva

, et al. Fire and thermal resistance properties of chemically treated ligno-cellulosic coconut fabric–reinforced polymer eco-nanocomposites. J Ind Text 2017; 47(1): 104–124.

106.

Marosi

Szolnoki

Bocz

, et al. Fire-retardant recyclable and biobased polymer composites. In: Wag

D-Y

(ed) Novel fire retardant polymers and composite materials. 1st ed. Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing, 2017, pp. 117–146.

107.

Kubowicz

Booth

. Biodegradability of plastics: challenges and misconceptions. Environ Sci Technol 2017; 51(21): 12058–12060.

108.

Rangel

Cedeño

Espino

, et al. Comparing the efficiency of N-doped TiO₂ and N-doped Bi₂MoO₆ photo catalysts for MB and lignin photodegradation. Catalysts 2018; 8(12): 668.

109.

Chee

Jawaid

Sultan

MTH

, et al. Accelerated weathering and soil burial effects on colour, biodegradability and thermal properties of bamboo/kenaf/epoxy hybrid composites. Polym Test 2019; 79: 106054.

110.

CS.

Renewable resource-based green composites of surface-treated spent coffee grounds and polylactide: characterisation and biodegradability. Polym Degrad Stab 2015; 121: 51–59.

111.

Zhang

, et al. Physicochemical evolutions of starch/poly(lactic acid) composite biodegraded in real soil. J Environ Manage 2018; 228: 223–231.

112.

Balla

Kate

Satyavolu

, et al. Additive manufacturing of natural fiber reinforced polymer composites: processing and prospects. Compos Part B—Eng 2019; 174: 106956.

113.

Cinelli

Mallegni

Gigante

, et al. Biocomposites based on polyhydroxyalkanoates and natural fibres from renewable byproducts. Appl Food Biotechnol 2019; 6(1): 35–43.

114.

Chidambarampadmavathy

Karthikeyan

Heimann

. Sustainable bio-plastic production through landfill methane recycling. Renew Sustain Energ Rev 2017; 71: 555–562.

115.

Korol

Burchart-Korol

Pichlak

. Expansion of environmental impact assessment for eco-efficiency evaluation of biocomposites for industrial application. J Clean Prod 2016; 113: 144–152.

116.

Liu

, et al. Comparing greenhouse gas emissions of precast in-situ and conventional construction methods. J Clean Prod 2018; 173: 124–134.

117.

Tiwary

AR.

Landfill volume gain from the diversion of construction and demolition waste. PhD Thesis, University of Texas, USA, 2015.

118.

Sharma

Thakur

Bhattacharya

, et al. Commercial application of cellulose nano-composites—a review. Biotechnol Rep 2019; 21: e00316.

119.

Christian

Billington

. Mechanical response of PHB- and cellulose acetate natural fiber-reinforced composites for construction applications. Compos Part B—Eng 2011; 42(7): 1920–1928.

120.

Yildiz Çankaya

Sezen

. Effects of green supply chain management practices on sustainability performance. J Manuf Technol Manag 2019; 30(1): 98–125.

121.

Shao

Ünal

. What do consumers value more in green purchasing? Assessing the sustainability practices from demand side of business. J Clean Prod 2019; 209: 1473–1483.

122.

Dey

Ray

. An overview of the recent trends in manufacturing of green composites—considerations and challenges. Mater Today: Proc 2018; 5(9): 19783–19789.

123.

Hassan

Zulkifli

Ghazali

, et al. Kenaf fiber composite in automotive industry: an overview. Int J Adv Sci Eng Inf Technol 2017; 7(1): 315–321.

124.

Velandia Vargas

Falco

da Silva Walter

, et al. Life cycle assessment of electric vehicles and buses in Brazil: effects of local manufacturing, mass reduction, and energy consumption evolution. Int J Life Cycle Assess 2019; 24(10): 1878–1897.

125.

Koronis

Silva

Fontul

Erratum: green composites: a review of adequate materials for automotive applications. Compos Part B—Eng 2013; 44(1): 120–127.

126.

Milošev

. From in vitro to retrieval studies of orthopedic implants. Corrosion 2017; 73(12): 1496–1509.

127.

Smith

Mele

Rimington

, et al. Polydimethylsiloxane and poly(ether)ether ketone functionally graded composites for biomedical applications. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2019; 93: 130–142.

128.

Ishihara

. Revolutionary advances in 2-methacryloyloxyethyl phosphorylcholine polymers as biomaterials. J Biomed Mater Res A 2019; 107(5): 933–943.

129.

Peñarrieta-Juanito

Costa

Cruz

, et al. Bioactivity of novel functionally structured titanium-ceramic composites in contact with human osteoblasts. J Biomed Mater Res A 2018; 106(7): 1923–1931.

130.

Bicho

Ajami

Liu

, et al. Peptide-biofunctionalization of biomaterials for osteochondral tissue regeneration in early stage osteoarthritis: challenges and opportunities. J Mater Chem B 2019; 7(7): 1027–1044.

131.

Postulkova

Chamradova

Pavlinak

, et al. Study of effects and conditions on the solubility of natural polysaccharide gum karaya. Food Hydrocolloids 2017; 67: 148–156.

132.

Nurul Fazita

Jayaraman

Bhattacharyya

, et al. Green composites made of bamboo fabric and poly(lactic) acid for packaging applications—a review. Materials 2016; 9(6): 435.

133.

Fortunati

Mazzaglia

Balestra

. Sustainable control strategies for plant protection and food packaging sectors by natural substances and novel nanotechnological approaches. J Sci Food Agr 2019; 99(3): 986–1000.

134.

Kontturi

Laaksonen

Linder

, et al. Advanced materials through assembly of nanocelluloses. Adv Mater 2018; 30(24): 1703779.

135.

Calva-Estrada

Jiménez-Fernández

Lugo-Cervantes

Protein-based films: advances in the development of biomaterials applicable to food packaging. Food Eng Rev 2019; 11(2): 78–92.

136.

Berthet

Angellier-Coussy

Chea

, et al. Sustainable food packaging: valorising wheat straw fibres for tuning PHBV-based composites properties. Compos Part A—Appl S 2015; 72: 139–147.

137.

Srivastava

Singh

Mishra

, et al. Pretreatment of banana pseudostem fibre for green composite packaging film preparation with polyvinyl alcohol. J Polym Res 2019; 26(4): 95.

138.

Ketkaew

Kasemsiri

Hiziroglu

, et al. Effect of oregano essential oil content on properties of green biocomposites based on cassava starch and sugarcane bagasse for bioactive packaging. J Polym Environ 2018; 26(1): 311–318.

139.

Saba

Jawaid

Alothman

, et al. A review on dynamic mechanical properties of natural fibre reinforced polymer composites. Constr Build Mater 2016; 106: 149–159.

140.

Barile

Casavola

De Cillis

. Mechanical comparison of new composite materials for aerospace applications. Compos Part B—Eng 2019; 162: 122–128.

141.

Naujoks

Wiedemann

Schömig

, et al. Towards guidelines and verification methods for automated vehicle HMIs. Transport Res F—Traf 2019; 60: 121–136.

142.

Harrison

Barbu

Campling

, et al. Governing labour standards through free trade agreements: limits of the European Union’s trade and sustainable development chapters. J Common Mark Stud 2019; 57(2): 260–277.

143.

Bennett

. The European General Data Protection Regulation: An instrument for the globalization of privacy standards? Inf Polity 2018; 23(2): 239–246.

144.

Saba

Jawaid

Sultan

MTH

. An overview of mechanical and physical testing of composite materials. In: Jawaid

Thariq

Saba

(eds) Mechanical and physical testing of biocomposites, fibre-reinforced composites and hybrid composites. 1st ed. Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing, 2019, pp. 1–12.

145.

Jenkins

. Standards and codes for advanced materials. In: Wessel

(ed) Handbook of advanced materials. 1st ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2004, p. 543.

146.

Williams

Alaimo

Bailey

, et al. Official USP Reference Standards: metrology concepts, overview, and scientific issues and opportunities. J Pharmaceut Biomed 2006; 40(1): 3–15.

147.

Karan

Funk

Grabert

, et al. Green bioplastics as part of a circular bioeconomy. Trends Plant Sci 2019; 24(3): 237–249.

148.

Debnath

. Flax fibre extraction to fashion products leading towards sustainable goals. In: Gardetti

Muthu

(eds) The UN sustainable development goals for the textile and fashion industry. 1st ed. Singapore: Springer, 2020, pp. 47–57.

149.

Jadhav

Pandit

Gayatri

, et al. Production of green composites from various sustainable raw materials. In: Muthu

(ed) Green composites. 1st ed. Singapore: Springer, 2018, pp. 1–24.

150.

Soares

PRC

Oliveira

da Silva

, et al. Competitiveness of wood pulp in the international market. Aust J Crop Sci 2018; 12: 1499.

151.

Marques

Moreno

Ballesteros

, et al. Starch biomass for biofuels, biomaterials, and chemicals. In: Vas

Jr (ed) Biomass and green chemistry: building a renewable pathway. 1st ed. Cham: Springer, 2017, pp. 69–94.

152.

Landi

Marconi

Meo

, et al. Reuse scenarios of tires textile fibers: an environmental evaluation. Procedia Manuf 2018; 21: 329–336.

153.

Magueta

Madaleno

Ferreira Dias

, et al. New cars and emissions: effects of policies, macroeconomic impacts and cities characteristics in Portugal. J Clean Prod 2018; 181: 178–191.

154.

Partanen

Carus

. Wood and natural fiber composites current trend in consumer goods and automotive parts. Reinf Plast 2016; 60(3): 170–173.

155.

Matos

BDM

Rocha

da Silva

, et al. Evaluation of commercially available polylactic acid (PLA) filaments for 3D printing applications. J Therm Anal Calorim 2019; 137(2): 555–562.

156.

İşmal

ÖE

Paul

. Composite textiles in high-performance apparel. In: McLoughlin

Sabir

(eds) High-performance apparel. 1st ed. Duxford: Elsevier and Woodhead Publishing, 2018, pp. 377–420.

157.

Potluri

. Mechanical properties of pineapple leaf fiber reinforced epoxy infused with silicon carbide micro particles. J Nat Fibers 2019; 16(1): 137–151.

158.

Mohanty

Swain

. Bionanocomposites for food packaging applications. In: Grumezescu

Oprea

(eds) Nanotechnology applications in food: flavor, stability, nutrition and safety. 1st ed. London: Academic Press, 2017, pp. 363–379.

159.

Geissdoerfer

Morioka

de Carvalho

, et al. Business models and supply chains for the circular economy. J Clean Prod 2018; 190: 712–721.

160.

Melkonyan

Krumme

Gruchmann

, et al. Scenario and strategy planning for transformative supply chains within a sustainable economy. J Clean Prod 2019; 231: 144–160.

161.

Lyytimäki

Antikainen

Hokkanen

, et al. Developing key indicators of green growth. Sustain Dev 2018; 26(1): 51–64.

162.

Korhonen

Honkasalo

Seppälä

Circular economy: the concept and its limitations. Ecol Econ 2018; 26(7): 625–634.

163.

Rauter

Globocnik

Perl-Vorbach

, et al. Open innovation and its effects on economic and sustainability innovation performance. J Innov Knowl 2018; 4(4): 226–233.

164.

Cecchi

Cavinato

. Smart approaches to food waste final disposal. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2019; 16(16): 2860.

165.

Yuan

Guo

. Do green wooden composites using lignin-based binder have environmentally benign alternatives? A preliminary LCA case study in China. Int J Life Cycle Ass 2017; 22: 1318–1326.

166.

Koronis

Silva

Green composites reinforced with plant-based fabrics: cost and eco-impact assessment. J Compos Sci 2018; 2: 8.

167.

Muniyasamy

Mohanrasu

, et al. Biobased biodegradable polymers for ecological applications: a move towards manufacturing sustainable biodegradable plastic products. In: Ul-Islam

(ed) Integrating green chemistry and sustainable engineering. 1st ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2019, pp. 215–253.

168.

Mangaraj

Yadav

Bal

, et al. Application of biodegradable polymers in food packaging industry: a comprehensive review. J Packag Technol Res 2019; 3(1): 77–96.