Systematically Finding Opportunities for Product Reuse

Systematically Finding Opportunities for Product Reuse The Case of PET Bottles Murilo F. Frazão, Marco A. de Carvalho

Júlio C. de Carvalho

Mechanics Dept. – SOMA Systematic Innovation Lab. Federal University of Technology – Paraná (UTFPR) Curitiba, Brazil [email protected]; [email protected]

Bioprocesses Eng. and Biotechnology Dept. Paraná Federal University (UFPR) Curitiba, Brazil [email protected]

Abstract—Waste management is encouraged in modern industrial practice, given the potential environmental benefits and the possibility of adding value (the upcycling concept). However, reuse has been depending only on the individual designer’s creativity. A systematic tool that could support the identification of reuse opportunities could be quite useful. A method originally devised for identifying reuse opportunities of supporting goods was found in our literature research. We tested it for another application – not a supporting good, but a common waste product – plastic bottles. We were able to find many nonobvious ideas for reuse. Thus, the method is effective for the new application. We also report some opportunities to improve the method used. Keywords— new product ideation; product reuse; systematic innovation; waste management.

I.

INTRODUCTION

Industrial waste as as a resource is not a new notion. Several companies around the world already treat waste as a commodity or an energy source [1]. This shift in attitudes has led to the discovery of new innovative and valuable applications for product reuse. Examples can be found in the production of paving blocks from tires, tables from discarded lumber, chairs from oil barrels, sandals from tires, jewelry from aluminum cans, and so on [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]. Since every day, more industries seek to implement sustainable practices into their production, there is a large and ever growing academic literature database on product reuse. An industry’s shift to sustainability is usually motivated by legislative pressure, environmental conscience, or economic gain [7]. As these motivators have grown stronger, businesses can no longer disregard environmental thinking in their production planning [8]. Thus, the need for sustainable solutions provides the motivation for innovations and new concepts, such as industrial ecology and closed loop reuse [9]. Research on the reuse of specific materials is readily accessable. However, there is no popular, systematic method of identifying new reuse opportunities. It is assumed that most reuse examples were developed through serendipity or intuitive

techniques such as brainstorming. Some may argue that the closed structure of a systematic approach may hinder the creative process; however, a good systematic method aims to organize creativity rather than substituting for it. Other evident benefits of a systematic approach are reproducibility, and an easier structure to communicate new ideas [10]. A systematic tool for finding waste reuse opportunities would be welcome, since step by step processes tend to be less dependent on the user’s experience, easier to understand and teach and more conducive to documentation. In this paper, we discuss the Systematic Method for Identifying Reuse Opportunities of Supporting Goods (SMIROSG) [11]. The method was validated in a study on jute bags. Jute is a natural fiber. Such bags are used to transport coffee beans from farms to torrefaction. Thus, jute bags are supporting goods – after being used in the process for transportation, they become a waste product. In their article, Verhaegen et al. [11] show that it is indeed possible to discover new reuse applications with a systematic approach. The research described in this article has two main incentives: an evident need to reduce the environmental burden of production, and the aspiration of adding value to a product. We use SMIROSG as a base for discovering new applications to PET bottles (commonly recycled plastic bottles made from polyethylene terephthalate). Thus, in this paper, SMIROSG is not used on a supporting good such as jute bags which were used inside a production process, but on a “final” domestic waste available in most homes and offices. The intention is testing the method for the new application and finding ways of improving it.

II.

PREVIOUS STUDIES

A. Reuse Reuse is one of the many approaches of adding value to waste; other examples include recycling and remanufacturing. Reuse can be defined as the salvage of a product, after it has been discarded, without it being reduced to its material level [12]. Verhaegen et al. [11] used the same definition in their method. A simple way to compare the ecological viability of

distinct approaches to waste management can be found in Lansink’s ladder [1]. According to Lansink’s classification, it is preferable to reuse the whole product, or its components, than to recycle its material. Waste reuse can be evaluated at three levels: multi-machine systems, factory level, or multi-company level [13]. In multimachine systems, a promising way to discover reuse opportunities is through Input-Output Analysis [14]. At the factory level, a tool that can help introduce an industry to green practice is the Value Map Stream (VMS). Although not aimed at reuse, the use of VMS provides a precise charting of material flow in the system that could be useful to anyone studying the implementation of internal reuse practices [13]. Reuse at the multi-company level is often referred to as Industrial Symbiosis; this concept will be better explained in section II.D. B. Remanufacturing Although there are several definitions in the literature, a remanufactured product can be described as one that went through ‘‘the process of disassembling, cleaning, inspecting, repairing, replacing, and reassembling the components of a part or product to like-new condition” [15]. On the subject of systematic remanufacturing, there are more than 40 examples in the literature of tools intended to assess the feasibility of remanufacturing [16]. Although remanufacturing is a promising approach for a company that wishes to reduce production costs and raw material consumption, it must be carefully assessed before implementation. The high degree of uncertainty associated with remanufacturing is the main limitation of its applicability. Companies can make use of those tools as they may aid in making decisions regarding product design and suitability, business scenarios, quality inspection of returned goods, etc... [16]. Remanufacture is better suited to products that consist of several components such as home appliances and electronics. In other words, as the name implies, remanufacturing is appropriate for a manufactured product. When the targeted waste is a simpler product such as packaging or scraps, reuse may prove to be a more suitable practice. C. Life Cycle Assessment In order to determine whether a reuse practice has an impact on reducing environmental burden it is important to have a method capable of making such an analysis. One of these methods is Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). One of LCA’s most important functions is to calculate the environmental impact of a product, from the moment of its creation until its disposal [17]. LCA is a multi-phase methodological framework, with different approaches to its implementation [18]. There are numerous LCA related websites and computer programs containing collected data useful to many industries [17]. LCA is occasionally criticized as containing arbitrary and subjective decisions in some of its methods [17]. With LCA, it is possible to study the environmental impact of each waste component that is generated at each stage of production and use. Although LCA is not designed to discover reuse opportunities, it is an important methodology to any company considering the introduction of waste reuse. This

paper can assist as a basis for selecting the waste that requires alternative treatment most urgently. D. Industrial Symbiosis Industrial Symbiosis (IS) refers to the exchange of resources among industries, including not only waste, but also materials, water and energy [19]. By definition, IS requires three industries to be sharing two or more resources [7]. It is widely recognized that industrial associations not only contribute to improving the environment but also have proven to be cost effective, by cutting on waste disposal costs and replacing more expensive virgin products with inexpensive waste [14]. There are already systematic methods designed to stimulate the growth of IS [10], [20], [21]. Although these methods have some key differences in focus, they share some similarities. Identification of reuse opportunities is done through collection of input and output data of regional industries, and therefore require collaboration among industries. In addition, they do not consider innovation; and due to the large number of factors considered in its implementation, these methods can require the extensive effort of a substantial work force [10], [20], [21]. SMIROSG does not aim to stimulate IS. However, a successful application of the method described here would be of great use to anyone trying to apply the principles of IS. The reuse opportunities provided by SMIROSG would be exclusively of product reuse (not energy or water) and could be applied internally, by the industry, or externally, among industries. In other words, it could inadvertently stimulate the creation of IS, by suggesting new flows of material among industries. E. Systematic Innovation and Reuse Technological innovation plays a vital role in the reuse of waste. Most innovations on waste reuse are developed by the businesses that use the waste instead of the ones that create it [22]. Waste can be classified as “any substance that is not being used to its full potential”, in an attempt to redefine waste and emphasize its value as a resource [23]. Innovation is important in this definition, since reuse options are provided by the accumulated knowledge on potential reuse practices of a given waste [24]. Innovation studies often ignore reuse technologies, and the existing studies lack focus on technological innovation. The main drivers for innovation in waste reuse are the price of new material that the waste aims to substitute, and institutional support, such as academic research and governmental incentives [22]. F. Reuse Potential Park and collegues [24] established a metric for quantifying a substance’s potential for reuse. They considered both reuse and recycling by studying the feasibility of reusing a waste considering current technologies, projected revenues, and the market’s capability to absorb a given waste. Previous attempts mainly considered thermodynamics when evaluating the quality of waste [24]. The reuse potential is expressed by a real value between 0 and 1; 1 meaning the waste can be considered a resource, and 0

meaning disposable waste. A ratio is obtained by dividing the annual amount of a given waste that could be absorbed through existing technology (giving that the technology is economically viable) by the annual amount of waste produced. Although the ratio is simple, in order to be meaningful, the method requires extensive research and accurate, available data. This method does not provide new reuse opportunities, but instead exploits the reuse methods already considered in its calculations. G. Product DNA Product DNA consists of a systematic innovation method. Using Product DNA, designers are able to categorize their product through its properties and functions. The focus of this method is to connect previously unrelated domains, as they may provide innovative solutions [25]. For example, someone working with sugar cubes may innovate by learning from the detergent tablet industry. Although it may be hard to make a connection between those industries, an analysis of their product's properties reveals that both businesses work with self-dissolving, porous, rigid, white, unitary products [25]. Product DNA is very similar to SMIROSG. Although it is not its main objective, it can be argued that Product DNA could be used to identify waste reuse opportunities. The main difference between the two methods is that Product DNA uses patent databases in order to generate ideas, while SMIROSG uses web image searches [11]. One of Product DNA contributions is to deliver a simple way to describe a product. A property is defined by “what a product is or has”, and is usually expressed through adjectives, while functions are usually expressed through verbs [25]. H. Systematic Method for Identifying Reuse Opportunities of Supporting Goods (SMIROSG) SMIROSG consists of describing a given product in a set of attributes and searching these attributes pairwise in an image search engine [11]. It will be detailed in the next session.

III. SMIROSG SMIROSG targets supporting products. Supporting products are those that contribute in the manufacturing of other products, such as packaging material. To start using SMIROSG, the designers must choose the waste they intend to reuse. There is currently no way to estimate which waste product would produce the best results. Applicants should choose based on their own goals, such as treating the waste with the least costly disposal or trying to substitute recycling for reuse. In this section, a method for identifying possible reuse applications is described. Every step of the process (Fig. 1), along with the reasoning for choosing PET bottles as our target residue will be explained.

Targeted product

List of atributes

Search Queries

Data Analysis

Result evaluation

•The designer must choose the targeted product based on avaliability, disposal cost, environmental impact, etc. •A set of qualitative attributes are assigned to to the targeted product. It is recommended to use a list of 10 - 12 attributes. •Attributes are searched pairwise on an image search engine. All products that appear as a result must be considered. •The designer proceeds to rank the products on how many times they appeared as a search result. •With the list in hand, the designer must decide which of the results found are feasible reuse opportunities.

Fig 1. SMIROSG Flowchart

A. Assigning a Set of Attributes To discover new applications for a given product, it is first necessary to turn the specific product into an abstract formulation. This is done by describing the product through its attributes. It can be expected that both the current and future applications of the product will make use of these attributes in order to provide its new functionality [11]. For example, the fact that a PET bottle is rigid and lightweight allows it to be used in the production of a new chair. The attributes of the product can be derived from a simple web search on the product’s material. The Wikipedia page on the material, for example, can be a source of property related terms. To be able to provide the best possible results it is recommended that the applicant verify the attributes on more reliable sources, such as engineering literature. Attributes should be expressed in qualitative terms. Examples include lightweight and rigid, or heavy and brittle. Some simple and trivial terms may not come up as a result of a web search or literature review. The applicant is encouraged to include these trivial terms in their set of attributes. B. Search Queries In the next step, the given terms on the set of attributes must be searched pairwise on an image search engine. Since the search of only one of the terms does not provide appropriate results, attributes must be queried pairwise – e.g. lightweight and rigid. "Google Images" was chosen, as it is a commonly accessible and practical way to retrieve and interpret images. C. Image Encoding Each product category that appears as a result in the search queries is registered. Every registered product must be related back to the two attributes in its respective search query. For example, a search consisting of “lightweight rigid” has products such as wheelchair, bicycle and phone case among the results (Fig 2). Those products will be considered in the next step; hence, it is important to keep them organized in an easily quantifiable way, such as an Excel table.

It was decided “plastic” should be added as a key aspect, even though not mentioned in the websites, perhaps for being too trivial. The bottle cap was not considered in this case study and therefore, the method does allow for discovering new applications for both the bottle and the caps. The whole process, according to Verhaegen et al. [11], should be done separately for each individual part.

Fig. 2. Results of "lightweight rigid" search query

D. Results Evaluation The last step consists of tabulating how many search queries a registered product appeared as a result. It can be expected that the products that appeared as a result most frequently are the best paths for innovation. However, this may not always be the case. It is possible that the most frequent results are in fact products that have already been developed through reuse of that waste. It is up to the designer or team to determine the most feasible reuse alternatives.

IV.

CASE STUDY – PET BOTTLES

PET bottles seemed a plausible choice due to their abundance. They are a common domestic and commercial residue with several established reuses. Therefore, at the end of the study, it would be possible to compare the results given by the method with applications already known. A. PET Bottle Attributes A set of attributes was assigned to the PET bottle using two methods: literature review and the property-function correlation. Since it is a simple product, consisting of only one material, most of its properties could be extracted from a research on its sole material, PET. Those aspects were found in the Wikipedia article on PET [266], and a description on the website AZO Materials [27]. Although the original method uses only a web search to describe the material, it was decided to confirm the attributes obtained in more credible sources, in this case, books on polymer’s properties, such as [28], [29], and [30].

To obtain a sufficient number of attributes a correlation of property-function was established. A bottle’s main function is to hold liquids, and one of its attributes allows that function, the fact that it is hollow. A PET bottle also allows for inspection of its content, and is thus, transparent. The other ten attributes on Table 1 were found via web search and confirmed via more credible sources [28], [29], [30]. B. Image Results The twelve products were searched in all pairwise combinations. An image search for “plastic hollow”, for example, provided the results: phone case, hose, chair, etc. This case study on PET bottles had 500 products categories as a result. A table was created of which the first 10 products that appeared most frequently can be seen on Table 2. The attributes column represents the number of times each product category appeared as a result in a search that contained the given attribute, e.g. phone case appeared in six searches containing the attribute “lightweight”. Table 1. PET bottle attributes

Lightweight

Gas barrier

Chemical resistant

Strong

Moisture barrier

Wear resistant

Rigid

Transparent

Smooth

Plastic

Impact resistant Hollow

V.

1

60

2

56

3

46

4

43

5 6 7

42 40 38

8

36

9 10

36 34

Products phone case hose safety gloves food packaging chair shoes wristwatch food container roof tile piping

Display stand Fan blade Gas mask Kayak Piping Tripod Sprinklers

Cutlery Feeder Hanger Keychain Plant pot Wall Panel Safety Glasses

Hollow

Plastic

Smooth

Wear resistant

Transparent

5

0

0

8

2

6

7

8

5

6

2

4

9

2

2

5

8

3

7

4

4

2

3

8

2

8

0

4

6

5

5

1

2

1

3

2

3

9

7

5

2

0

3

7

1

4 3 3

7 2 3

2 5 6

3 3 1

3 3 1

0 1 0

5 2 4

2 0 2

1 6 7

5 5 5

7 4 4

3 6 2

1

5

4

3

4

2

2

4

1

2

6

2

5 4

3 4

6 1

2 4

1 0

0 0

3 0

5 6

2 5

0 3

6 5

3 2

Table 3. Most common known reuses of PET bottles

Chair

Gas barrier

9

A. Missing product categories As a basis for comparison, several websites were consulted in order to discover how people were already reusing plastic bottles. Most uses could be found in “Do-ItYourself” websites and social networks such as Pinterest. Table 3 represents the most common results found on the internet.

Candle holder

Moisture barrier

4

The results are useful and in accordance with initial expectations. On Table 2, some of the product categories are underlined. These underlined applications represent those that have already been developed. These can be easily found via a simple web search or be developed through intuitive techniques. The results that are not underlined can be regarded as the potentially most promising, as they may serve as inspiration for discovering new reuse applications. However, this potential should be ascertained by specialists and/or further research.

Basket Broom

Rigid

Impact resistant

6

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Awning Boat hull

Chemical resistant

Total

Strong

Lightweight

Table 2. Ten most frequent results of SMIROSG applied to PET bottle

Beads Bucket Charging cell phone holder Door Fence Hat Light diffuser Purse Water Heater Shoes

B. Abstraction Phase Some improvements that might have benefited the research were tested. The missing results served as a parameter, as they might represent flaws in the method application, or the method itself. One possible explanation for the missing results may be accredited to the abstraction phase. If the attributes assigned to the PET bottle were not appropriate, then the results may be missing some important reuse applications, or even showing invalid results. SMIROSG does not provide a systematic way to describe a product and Product DNA could be used in the abstraction phase to help produce a list of the target product’s attributes. Since two of these missing results are related to thermal properties, i.e. air conditioner and water heater, it was theorized that the addition of a PET bottle attribute related to heat might be enough to provide those two missing results. A new set of pairwise search queries was made, this time utilizing the term “thermal insulation” along with the other aspects already mentioned. In these last queries, some new applications could be found, along with some that had already been registered. Those product categories were not considered in the results, as the purpose of the last queries was only to study whether the missing categories could have been found. A water heater was indeed suggested in the images; however, an air conditioner was not. C. List of Properties It may help to adopt a list of properties to facilitate the abstraction phase. This list of material and product properties, would help to provide a basis for the description of materials that cannot be found easily on the web. Another benefit of this list would be to make the process more systematic. For such a list to be useful, it would have to be thorough enough to describe most of a product’s properties

in a faster and simpler way than a web search. Several lists can be found through handbooks and on websites. However, most of these lists are related to a specific area of study, e.g. list of mechanical properties, list of thermal properties. A wide list of materials properties can be found on Wikipedia. This list includes properties of several different areas of study; however, it is not completely suited for describing a product. Several of the properties included in this list are specific, complex and cannot be translated in an appropriate term for an image search, e.g. boiling point or atomic weight. Another problem with this list is that it cannot provide attributes that exclusively relate to the product instead of the material. The properties related to the product can be extrapolated from other literature on product innovation. For example, Product DNA [25] and Evolutionary Trends [10] could be used as a basis for coming up with product specific attributes.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors thank UTFPR, FUNTEF-PR, Fundação Araucária and CNPq for providing the infrastructure and financial support for this research.

REFERENCES [1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

VI.

CONCLUSION

Literature involving systematic reuse was reviewed. The motivation for strengthening reuse practices seems clear. It is both economically and ecologically preferable to reuse a product than to recycle it. Remanufacture is a viable option, but should be carefully studied by the company who has interest in implementing it. In addition, remanufacture is not suitable for all types of residues.

[5]

Most of the current research focuses on identifying the input and output of regional industries in order to develop synergistic relationships. These methods are efficient and capable of yielding good results. However, the identification of possible symbiotic links can require extensive effort, collaboration and data collection. In addition, the development of industrial symbiosis is most likely to happen spontaneously or to come from academic research, government agencies or waste management companies. Although industries may be willing to share their resources, it is questionable whether a single company will have the initiative or incentive to coordinate the exchange of materials among local companies. Industries are perhaps more willing to deal with their own waste production specifically, targeting one residue at a time.

[7]

In contrast to the other more complex methods presented, we present a simple alternative to finding new and novel uses for waste products. The method does have a narrow scope but is easy to implement. It does not require extensive data collection. This method was tested with a common domestic waste, i.e. PET bottles, and provided original opportunities and most of the expected results. Further research is recommended on the use of a list of attributes that could facilitate the method’s application. Overall, the advantage of pursuing waste reuse is evident. Reuse studies are abundant, and it is noticeable that these studies utilize known forms of reuse almost exclusively. The wide implementation of a systematic reuse method could shed light on new opportunities, strengthening waste reuse.

[6]

[8]

[9]

[10] [11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

Saeed P., Loorbach D., Lansink A., Kemp R., Transitions and institutional change: The case of the Dutch waste subsystem. In: Saeed P., Hebert-Copley B., editors. Industrial innovation and environmental regulation, New York: United Nations University Press; 2007, pp.233-57 Ordoñez, I., Rahe, U., 2012. How design relates to Waste: a categorization of Concrete examples. In: 7th International Conference Sustainable Innovation 2012, 29-30 October, Alanus University, Bonn. Rana, A., Kalla, P., Csetenyi, L.J., 2015. Sustainable use of marble slurry in concrete. Journal of Cleaner Production 94, 304–311. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.01.053 Manzini, E., Vezzoli, C., Carvalho, A., 2008. O desenvolvimento de produtos sustentáveis os requisitos ambientais dos produtos industriais. EDUSP, São Paulo. Raut, S.P., Ralegaonkar, R.V., Mandavgane, S.A., 2011. Development of sustainable construction material using industrial and agricultural solid waste: A review of waste-create bricks. Construction and Building Materials 25, 4037–4042. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.04.038 Singh, J., Ordoñez, I., 2015. Resource recovery from post-consumer waste: Important lessons for the upcoming circular economy. Journal of Cleaner Production. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.12.020 Chertow, M.R., 2007. “Uncovering” Industrial Symbiosis. Journal of Industrial Ecology 0, 070301071346001. doi:10.1162/jiec.0.1110 Esty, D., Winston, A., 2006. Green to Gold: How Smart Companies Use Environmental Strategy to Innovate, Create Value, and Build Competitive Advantage. Yale University Press, New Haven and London. Ruiz Puente, M.C., Arozamena, E.R., Evans, S., 2015. Industrial symbiosis opportunities for small and medium sized enterprises: Preliminary study in the Besaya region (Cantabria, northern Spain). Journal of Cleaner Production 87, 357–374. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.10.046 Mann, D., 2002. Hands on: Systematic innovation. IFR, Belgium. Verhaegen, P-A., Vandevenne D., Duflou, J. R., 2012. Systematically identifying reuse applications for supporting goods. TRIZ future conference 2012: Lisbon, Portugal, 24-26 October 2012. Faculdade de ciências e tecnologia, Lisbonne. Parker, D., 2010. Briefing: Remanufacturing and reuse – trends and prospects. Proceedings of the ICE - Waste and Resource Management 163, 141–147. doi:10.1680/warm.2010.163.4.141 Duflou, J.R., Sutherland, J.W., Dornfeld, D., Herrmann, C., Jeswiet, J., Kara, S., Hauschild, M., Kellens, K., 2012. Towards energy and resource efficient manufacturing: A processes and systems approach. CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology 61, 587–609. doi:10.1016/j.cirp.2012.05.002 WIEDMANN, Thomas et al. Allocating ecological footprints to final consumption categories with input–output analysis. Ecological economics, v. 56, n. 1, p. 28-48, 2006. Hazen, B.T., Overstreet, R.E., Jones-Farmer, L.A., Field, H.S., 2012. The role of ambiguity tolerance in consumer perception of remanufactured products. International Journal of Production Economics 135, 781–790. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2011.10.011 Goodall, P., Rosamond, E., Harding, J., 2014. A review of the state of the art in tools and techniques used to evaluate remanufacturing feasibility. Journal of Cleaner Production 81, 1–15. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.06.014

[17] Heijungs, R., Huppes, G., Guinée, J.B., 2010. Life cycle assessment and sustainability analysis of products, materials and technologies. Toward a scientific framework for sustainability life cycle analysis. Polymer Degradation and Stability 95, 422–428. doi:10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2009.11.010 [18] Pennington, D.W., Potting, J., Finnveden, G., Lindeijer, E., Jolliet, O., Rydberg, T., Rebitzer, G., 2004. Life cycle assessment part 1: Framework, goal and scope definition, inventory analysis, and applications. Environment International 30, 701–720. doi:10.1016/j.envint.2003.11.005 [19] Chertow, M.R., 2000. INDUSTRIAL SYMBIOSIS: Literature and Taxonomy. Annual Review of Energy and the Environment 25, 313– 337. doi:10.1146/annurev.energy.25.1.313 [20] Liu, C., Côté, R.P., Zhang, K., 2015. Implementing a three-level approach in industrial symbiosis. Journal of Cleaner Production 87, 318–327. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.09.067 [21] Dong, L., Fujita, T., Dai, M., Geng, Y., Ren, J., Fujii, M., Wang, Y., Ohnishi, S., 2016. Towards preventative eco-industrial development: An industrial and urban symbiosis case in one typical industrial city in china. Journal of Cleaner Production 114, 387–400. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.05.015 [22] Park, J.Y., 2014. The evolution of waste into a resource: Examining innovation in technologies reusing coal combustion by-products using patent data. Research Policy 43, 1816–1826. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2014.06.002 [23] Dijkema, G.P.., Reuter, M.., Verhoef, E.., 2000. A new paradigm for waste management. Waste Management 20, 633–638. doi:10.1016/s0956-053x(00)00052-0 [24] Park, J.Y., Chertow, M.R., 2014. Establishing and testing the ‘reuse potential’ indicator for managing wastes as resources. Journal of Environmental Management 137, 45–53. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.11.053 [25] Dewulf, S., 2011. Directed variation of properties for new or improved function product DNA – A base for connect and develop. Procedia Engineering 9, 646–652. doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2011.03.150 [26] Polyethylene terephthalate [WWW Document], 2015. . Wikipedia. URL https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyethylene_terephthalate (accessed 11.20.15). [27] Polyethylene Terephthalate polyester ( PET, PETP ) - properties and applications - supplier data by Goodfellow [WWW Document], 2015. . AZO Materials. URL http://www.azom.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=2047 (accessed 11.20.15). [28] BUDINSKI, Kenneth G.; BUDINSKI, Michael K. Engineering materials. Nature, v. 25, p. 28, 2009. [29] Wiebeck, H., Harada, J., 2005. Plásticos de engenharia. Artliber, São Paulo, SP. [30] Mano, E.B., 2000. Polímeros como materiais de engenharia. Edgard Blücher, [2000], São Paulo, SP.