A comparison analysis of the paperboard properties: bagasse versus recycled paperboards
-
Reza Beiranvand
,
Hossein Gharebeiglou
Abstract
In this study, we examined the physical, chemical, and microbial properties of two types of industrial paperboards, with the same initial basis weight (Grammage = 180 g/m2). One type was made from bagasse (Sugarcane stalk residue), while the other was recycled. Following the guidelines set by the International Organization for Standardization, we employed various apparatuses to analyze the similarities and differences between the two paperboards, with the results undergoing statistical analysis. The findings showed that both types of paperboards met the quality indicators established by the standards of the International Organization for Standardization. Notably, the bagasse-based paperboard exhibited superior microbial properties, hydrophilicity, water absorption, flexibility, folding endurance, tear resistance, and stiffness compared to recycled paperboard. Conversely, the recycled paperboard demonstrated higher tensile strength than the bagasse paperboard. Overall, the results indicate that both types of paperboards provide viable solutions to various challenges in sustainable packaging and could help address issues within the food packaging industry.
Acknowledgments
The authors are thankful to the Pishro Kaghaz Pars Company (www.pars-pack.com) for providing laboratory services to conduct this research.
-
Research ethics: Not applicable.
-
Informed consent: Informed consent was obtained from all individuals included in this study, or their legal guardians or wards.
-
Author contributions: Elaheh Gharehkhani: Project administration, Supervision, Funding acquisition, Conceptualization, Data Curation, Validation. Reza Beiranvand: Validation, Resources, Data Curation, Laboratory conducting, Writing-Review & Editing, Discussion. Hossein Gharebeiglou: Material preparation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Writing-Original Draft, Methodology.
-
Use of Large Language Models, AI and Machine Learning Tools: None declared.
-
Conflict of interest: The authors state no conflict of interest.
-
Research funding: None declared.
-
Data availability: The raw data can be obtained on request from the corresponding author.
References
Aguilar‐Rivera, N. (2016). Sustainable sugarcane bagasse cellulose for papermaking. Adv. Eng. Mater.: 121–163, https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119242567.ch4.Search in Google Scholar
Armengot-Carbó, B., Oliver-Villanueva, J.V., Lorenzo-Saéz, E., and Lerma-Arce, V. (2025). Sustainable environmental analysis of wooden boxes for fruit and vegetable packaging and transport in comparison with corrugated paperboard boxes. Sustainability 17: 557, https://doi.org/10.3390/su17020557.Search in Google Scholar
El-Sakhawy, M., Abd El-Sayed, E.S., and El-Sakhawy, M.A.M. (2020). Non-wood fibers as raw material for pulp and paper industry. Nord. Pulp Pap Res. J. 35: 215–230, https://doi.org/10.1515/npprj-2019-0064.Search in Google Scholar
Engin, M., Yılgör, N., and Atik, C. (2021). Ageing mechanisms of the papers with zeolite and PCC fillers. Nord. Pulp Pap Res. J. 36: 284–296, https://doi.org/10.1515/npprj-2020-0090.Search in Google Scholar
Garbowski, T. (2024). ʻRevolutionizing corrugated board production and optimization with artificial intelligenceʼ. BioResources 19: 2003–2006, https://doi.org/10.15376/biores.19.2.2003-2006.Search in Google Scholar
Garbowski, T., Cornaggia, A., Gajewski, T., and Knitter-Piątkowska, A. (2023). ʻInfluence of humidity and temperature on mechanical properties of corrugated board–numerical investigationʼ. BioResources 18: 7490–7509, https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202307.1073.v1.Search in Google Scholar
Hao, F., Zhang, Z., Hu, D., Liu, W., and Chen, X. (2024). ʻNatural plant fiber‐based materials for packaging Applications–A review of recent innovations and developmentsʼ. Adv. Mater. Technol. 10: 2401020, https://doi.org/10.1002/admt.202401020.Search in Google Scholar
Indunil, G., M. and Bandara, R. (2022). ʻFood packaging from recycled papers: Chemical, physical, optical properties and heavy metal migrationʼ. Heliyon 8: e10959, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10959.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
Kohli, D., Loushigam, G., Richa, R., and Bajad, R. (2024). ʻRecent advances in food packaging for shelf life of foodʼ, food production, diversity, and safety under climate change. Springer Cham: 273–284, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51647-4_23.Search in Google Scholar
Lv, S., Mu, Y., Liu, J., Tong, J., Liu, L., Wang, J., and Wei, D. (2025). Recent advances in research on biomass‐based food packaging film materials. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 24: e70093, https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4337.70093.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
Marc, R.A., Stroescu, M., and Mureşan, C.C. (2024). A comprehensive review on sugarcane bagasse in food packaging: properties, applications, and future prospects. Hop Med. Plants 32: 169–184, https://doi.org/10.15835/hpm.v32i1-2.15024.Search in Google Scholar
Mikhailidi, A., Tikhomirova, E., Aleksandrov, D., and Tofanica, B.M. (2024). Evaluation of recycled paperboard properties and characteristics. Appl. Sci. 14: 1661, https://doi.org/10.3390/app14041661.Search in Google Scholar
Pirsa, S. (2024). Cellulose-based cartons: production methods, modification, and smart/active packaging. Cellulose 31: 3421–3445, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-024-05826-8.Search in Google Scholar
Sarlak, N. and Beiranvand, R. (2023a). Electrospun nanofiber mat of graphene/mesoporous silica composite for wastewater treatment. Mater. Chem. Phys. 309: 128311, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchemphys.2023.128311.Search in Google Scholar
Sarlak, N. and Beiranvand, R. (2023b). Application of PVDF/rPG/Silica-g-PS nanocomposite to reinforce LDPE films. Mater. Today Commun. 34: 105200, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mtcomm.2022.105200.Search in Google Scholar
Supplementary Material
This article contains supplementary material (https://doi.org/10.1515/npprj-2025-0012).
© 2025 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
