Plastic waste management and safety disinfection processes for reduced the COVID-19 Hazards

ABSTRACT

In response to the pandemic of COVID-19, various unexpected environmental impacts in many countries have been rising. Millions of gloves and masks are used and thrown away daily around the globe. Incorrect disposal of COVID-19 waste without disinfection preparation could expose people and healthcare personnel to the possibility of spreading the infection of coronaviruses. This article finds an appropriate way to disinfect the waste of coronavirus-infected items by involving various physical factors, chemical and biological or physiological factors. Policymakers must immediately adopt disinfection technology to achieve green recovery of covid-19 waste that encourages development and sustains climate change. Regarding previously published papers and research results, this article intends to investigate the plastic pollution research status before and during the COVID-19 pandemic and outline safely disinfecting COVID-19 plastic waste.

KEYWORDS:

• COVID-19
• climate change
• face masks
• sustainability
• environmental
• recycled

1. Introduction

In 2019 the (COVID-19) pandemic spread over the whole planet within months (Tang et al. 2020). As a result, social and economic life was badly disrupted globally. Furthermore, coronavirus diseases result in increased medical care costs. In addition, the environmental risk increases because of the excessive use of personal medical protective equipment (PPE), like Medical Face Safety Masks (MFSM). Plastic waste management aims to reduce the quantity of untreated waste in the environment by implementing a circular economy and other environmentally friendly disposal methods. That is why wearing medical face masks is advisable (Chu et al. 2020; Torres and De-la-Torre 2021). Both patients and healthcare personnel wear disposable masks to reduce the incidence of coronaviruses (Lipp and Peggy %J Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews Edwards 2012). The consistency in the use of surgical face masks is, therefore, important. It is defined by the common testing mechanism established by the European and American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) standards. With a durability of over 50 cycles, disposable surgical masks may be sterilised and washed for reuse (Chellamani, Veerasubramanian, and Vignesh Balaji 2013). However, reusing surgical masks not has the same efficiency as new ones (Chellamani, Veerasubramanian, and Vignesh Balaji 2013; Bora and Romy 2022; Hongbo and Rao Kommalapati 2021).

The repeated washing of used medical face masks will result in the use of more resources and the pollution of more water (Priya, Cuce, and Sudhakar 2021). For the production of MFSM, polypropylene is used as a raw material (Aragaw and Aragaw, Tade refa J Marine Pollution Bulletin 2020). It has several advantages; it acts as a water and moisture barrier and can be produced in fabric form to be breathable, flexible, lightweight, and non-toxic. Polypropylene is used in non-woven fabrics and fishing net manufacturing science. It can float on the surface of seawater (Shabaka et al. 2020). During the epidemic of COVID-19, several kinds of medical materials have been created, including contaminated face masks, hand gloves, other safety clothing, and a higher amount of infected products in the patients’ food baggage. Since the information about the human coronavirus outbreak hit the press, demand for goggles, gloves, hand sanitisers, and other vital things has increased. The international need for eye protectors is 1.6 million per month (Vanapalli et al. 2020). Produced monthly for the protection against COVID-19, 89 million surgical masks and 76 million hand gloves were calculated by WHO modelling. Since the pandemic’s beginning, this research has highlighted the problems the solid waste management industry encountered and the possibility of filling the current loopholes in the system (Jasneet et al. 2019; Rahman and Karim 2013).

According to several research papers, the standard substance used to make medical face masks is non-woven plastic fabrics (Aragaw and Aragaw, Tade refa J Marine Pollution Bulletin 2020). Polycarbonate, polystyrene, polypropylene, polyester, and polyethylene are all suitable for medical-grade face masks. Non-woven fabrics have better air permeability and bacteria filtration than woven fabrics. Therefore, surgical masks are made of nonwoven fabrics produced by the melt-blowing method. In the 1960s, surgical masks came into use and replaced cotton facemasks largely in developing countries. Most medical-style disposable masks are officially designed for single use, particularly in high-risk settings, while cloth masks are meant to be cleaned and reused. The objective here is to find a solution that governments must apply and make suggestions for tackling the COVID-19 Medical Waste issues (C-19MWI) by disinfection waste materials using gamma irradiation. The Gamma irradiation process is a clean method for preparing several materials used in environmental applications (Younis et al. 2020; Ghobashy et al. 2021; Ghobashy and Elhady 2017; Ghobashy and Abd El‐sattar 2020; Ghobashy et al. 2018). Compared to alternative sterilisation techniques, gamma irradiation offers a substantial logistical benefit because the soiled masks can be packaged and sealed in a container, transported to the gamma source, treated, and then withdrawn without being unsealed. This could simplify biosafety logistics compared to UV, ovens, and chemical sterilisation methods. There is probably a requirement for biosafety level 3 handling of dirty masks given the mounting evidence in recent days for the airborne transmission of SARSCoV2. Additionally, individual masks could be wrapped and labelled inside the container. Radiation therapy, food sterilisation, and basic science all frequently use 60-Co sources. Due to their widespread use in radiotherapy, 60Co sources are available in numerous hospitals worldwide (Cramer et al. 2020).

In addition, Gamma irradiation technique can be used to disinfect large quantities of infected material (Nagai, de Souza Santos, and Antonio Vasquez Salvador 2021; Silindir and Yekta Özer 2009). This process is cost-effective, according to Waite, T. D., et al. the accuracy for assuming annual cost is varied between four ($0.04) and eight ($0.08) cents per pound of disinfected waste, when based on the ionising irradiation techniques (Waite et al. 1998). Governments can potentially rebuild new industries that can develop innovative new reusable PPEs while also assisting businesses in weathering the epidemic (Benson, Bassey, and Palanisami 2021, 2021; Akpan, Omole, and Bassey 2020). The state-of-art for scientific community has now been made aware of the most recent findings on COVID-19 research in the area of bio-waste understanding owing to this paper. The use of gamma irradiation as a biowaste disinfection method is currently a popular topic, and it has made it possible to develop new knowledge bases for future work as a result of the work acquiring a component of sustenance to start new routes or paths. Gamma irradiation is an eco-friendly method for manufacturing biomaterials for different uses (Ghobashy, El-Sawy, and Kodous 2021, Ghobashy et al. 2021; Younis, Ghobashy, and Samy 2017; Ghobashy et al. 2018, 2020). The experimental section is outlined by measurements of the changing physiochemical properties of face mask materials prepared from polypropylene (PP) after being irradiated by 25 kGy. According to previous works, a dose of 25 kGy is enough to sterilise any biomaterials.

2. Related works of the current treatment of biological waste lack to agriculture sector

During the age of coronaviruses, bio-medical waste (BMW) becomes high biohazard materials that could cause environmental pollution and disease transmission risk (Datta et al. 2018). In recent decades, coronaviruses have caused large-scale pandemics, including the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-1 (SARS-Cov-1) and the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS). Coronavirus (Covid-19) has a new factor for its spread (Garcia et al. 2021). People’s exposure to disease increases if it is improperly disposed of after contemplation. Scientists believe that a user’s saliva can be stuck on the medical mask; therefore, coronavirus waste is among the means that help its spread (Nazir et al. 2021; Gigauri 2020).

In Table 1, you can see a comprehensive assessment of the current state of plastic pollution research and its prospects before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Research on plastic pollution associated with the COVID-19 pandemic has recently been collected in the Web of Science database, concluding that the findings have altered how plastic pollution research is conducted (Wang, Zhang, and Rongrong 2022) (i). Plastic pollution publication output has changed as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. There has been a significant increase in the attention regarding plastic pollution since the COVID-19 pandemic; the COVID-19 pandemic has redirected (ii) Pollution of plastic research. More and more countries are focusing their attention on the problem of plastic pollution since the outbreak of the pandemic. Developed countries were worldwide leaders in plastic pollution research before the epidemic; the COVID-19 pandemic has redefined (iii) Research on plastic pollution. Since the pandemic, research has taken on a different focus. Despite this, continuing research is vital since plastic pollution is a serious issue. Coronaviruses have recently deepened the worst downturn facing the world economy (Song and Zhou 2020). Some countries decided to reduce the subsidies provided to farmers, which will have short-term consequences (Menon and Schmidt-Vogt 2022).Reducing the subsidy leads to a rising price of food a good and services resulting from consumption, increasing demand for food and affecting consumer choices reduced in other economic sites such as electricity and household goods, shifting the demand curve of the economy to the negative.

Table 1. Research published in 2022 on plastic waste management based on COVID-19 pandemics.

Ref.	Title	Main research content
(Singh et al. 2022)	Solid waste management during COVID-19 pandemic: Recovery techniques and responses	Highlights the major issues faced by the solid waste management sector during the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as the underlying options for filling the gaps in the existing system, by focusing on specific areas that have been the most significant source of concern throughout the COVID-19 pandemic in the waste management process.
(Tamal et al., 2022)	Estimation of the healthcare waste generation during the COVID-19 pandemic in Bangladesh	Estimation of healthcare waste created in Bangladesh during the COVID-19 epidemic and COVID-related waste management
(Ranjbari et al. 2022)	Waste management beyond the COVID-19 pandemic: Bibliometric and text mining analyses	The visible and identified Bibliometric and text mining assessments of prominent waste management research issues in light of COVID-19 highlight a post-pandemic WM research plan.
(Harussani et al. 2022)	Pyrolysis of polypropylene plastic waste into carbonaceous char: Priority of plastic waste management amidst COVID-19 pandemic	outlines the pyrolysis method for processing plastic wastes, emphasising the importance of converting plastic waste into sustainable energy. According to studies, converting PP plastic to fuel-like liquid oil and solid char through the pyrolysis process reduces the amount of PP plastic waste.
(Amuah et al. 2022)	Are used face masks handled as infectious waste? Novel pollution driven by the COVID-19 pandemic	evaluating the use of face masks and their distribution during the COVID-19 pandemic
(Hasija et al. 2022)	The environmental impact of mass coronavirus vaccinations: A point of view on huge COVID-19 vaccine waste across the globe during ongoing vaccine campaigns	Gives a critical point of view on vaccine waste generation and the resulting impact on all elements of the environment. The dangers of releasing a large volume of plastic-based personal protection equipment into the maritime environment are discussed. The critical CO2 emission issue during the production and storage of several vaccinations led to global warming.
(Carlos Ivan et al., 2022)	Degradation of plastics associated with the COVID-19 pandemic	Integrates and evaluates current research on PPE contamination, PPE degradation, and PPEsubproducts such as microplastics, protective equipment, and chemical substances.
(Ilyas et al., 2020)	Disinfection technology and strategies for COVID-19 hospital and bio-medical waste management	Disinfection of bio-waste is necessary to control the mass spread of pandemic. Effective management of bio-waste is challenging to mitigate the health risks.

Furthermore, the complete shutdown leads to a lack of workers in the field or sufficient labour to collect crops and shrinkage of the agricultural area, and a shortage of food supply (Ababulgu, Abajobir, and Wana 2022). In addition, the American Veterinary Medicine Association (AVMA) has voiced concern about some major drug manufacturers’ low levels of animal pharmaceuticals (Nicola et al. 2020). When life returns to normal, the demand for agricultural products will increase. Concerning the environmental pollution due to the remnants of coronavirus, there is no indication of having a direct effect on agriculture (Gavin Gaynor et al. 2022; Haque et al. 2022).

3. Introductory material

3.1. Manufacturing approaches of face masks

Disposable MFSMs are produced using fabric formation technology, such as the Spunbond Melt blown Spunbond (SMS) technology. There are three types of fabric materials used for face mask manufacture. 1) The first type is woven fabrics, any cloth created by weaving. Woven fabrics consist of several threads woven on a weft and a warp and are often produced on a loom. Technically, a woven fabric is created by interlacing two or more lines at right angles. 2) The second type is non-woven fabrics. Non-woven fabrics are classified as sheets or web structures chemically, thermally, or mechanically bonded together by entangling fibres or filaments (and perforating sheets) (Adanur and Jayswal 2020; Chellamani, Veerasubramanian, and Vignesh Balaji 2013). They are smooth with porous surfaces as shown in Figure 1, made directly from individual fibres, melted plastics, or plastic films. Nonwovens are fabrics derived from synthetic plastic-like polyester, nylon, and polypropylene (Crangle 2017). Nonwovens are called because the fibres cannot be twisted together and must be physically forced on a conveyor system (Smith 2000). Non-woven fabrics are primarily used in producing PPE components (Molina et al. 2022; Smith 2000). Nonwovens are typically not regarded as wash-durable. Therefore, more than one-third of nonwovens have been used in durable applications that do not need washing because most nonwovens are considered disposable end-use (Gavin Gaynor et al. 2022).3)The third type is knitted fabrics, fibres from weaving, yarn inter-looping, or rope inter-meshing. Now, most medical face masks are nonwoven to be disposed of after use (Aral and Yigit). Face masks made from non-woven fibres are more desirable than woven face masks since they are easier, their manufacturing costs are low, and they have greater air permeability and better filtration. In addition, they are lightweight, durable, versatile, and resilient (Chellamani, Veerasubramanian, and Vignesh Balaji 2013). The main tri-laminate non-woven material used in the production of PPE is SMS. It consists of an inner layer of polypropylene (PP) melt-blown fabric thermally placed between two sheets of PPs pun-bond fabric (Morris and Murray 2021). The properties of these non-woven fabrics, when mixed, contribute to the final SMS result and provide properties such as water barrier functionality, breathability, and comfort ability (Shovon et al. 2020).

Figure 1. Schematic drawings of (a) woven, (b) nonwoven, and (c) knitted fabrics (above) and a medical mask made from non-woven PP fabrics (below).

Show how the manufacture of woven,nonwoven and knitted fabric.

3.2. Dangers of environmental pollution from coronaviruses waste to oceans

Even before the emergence of the coronavirus pandemic, considered one of the most dangerous global crises of our time, many countries viewed water pollution as a major health problem (Corlett et al. 2020; Mukarram 2020). Research has indicated that environmental pollution was the fifth largest death risk factor worldwide in 2017. It has been found that more people die from pollution-related diseases than from traffic accidents or malaria (de Moura et al. 2023).

Experts have raised the alarm about a new environmental crisis represented by the excessive use of masks during the emergence of the coronavirus pandemic (Chand et al. 2021). Environmental activists noted that coronavirus waste flooded the Mediterranean Sea with a torrent of masks and gloves floating in the water. This is because masks are made from polypropylene, characteristic of floating in the water (Shabaka et al. 2020; Ghani et al. 2022). Experts also warned of the increase in the spread of masks and gloves in the Mediterranean Sea with the widespread use of tools to prevent coronavirus in light of the gradual return to normal life in most countries around the world, the lifting of quarantine, and the uneven opening of borders (Nabi and Suliman %J Environmental Research Khan 2020; Novillo et al. 2020; Haward 2018). According to a previous study, plastic particles infiltrate the Earth’s oceans and pollute the terrestrial ecosystem (Shabaka et al. 2019, 2020). Our previous studies (Shabaka et al. 2019, 2020) warned that ‘microplastic has entered the marine food chain, which is one of the farthest in the world’. It constitutes ‘a potential new pressure factor on ecosystems facing climate change and increasing human activities’. The consequences of micro-plastic particle ingestion by marine and terrestrial animals are still unknown (Shabaka, Ghobashy, and Saad Marey 2019). Teams of scientists around the globe are seeking to assess the effect of chemicals on plastic or the diseases they can cause.

3.3. Governance strategies in the control of COVID-19 medical waste

Figure 2 proposes strategies for dealing with COVID-19 medical waste in six points.

Figure 2. Applying management science methods to solve COVID-19 waste issues and highlighting the important methods for optimizing decision-making.

It is highlighting the important methods for optimising the decision-making to solve COVID-19 waste issues.

First, based on previous literature (Loch and Terwiesch 1998; Yang et al. 2018; Lambert, García‐dastugue, and Croxton 2005; Bhalla et al. 2013) the use of mobile App programs to report the locations or quantities of medical waste is referred to as hot spots on the map. Through this program, we can predict the places contaminated with the medical waste of COVID-19 and the extent of the danger of its content and effectively limit its spread.

Second, since hospitals and medical centres are willing to participate in sharing information on COVID-19 concerns before they are discharged from the hospital, the government must immediately release them under its supervision and prevent the rest of the people from dealing directly or indirectly with those wastes.

Third, conducting media and educational activities to expand citizens’ awareness of how to dispose of medical waste safely. The government and the media should seize this opportunity to carry out various propaganda jointly and educational activities for citizens of all groups and to attract more people to join voluntary groups to spread sound environmental culture among their peers and improve the scientific knowledge of the public to reduce the negative impact of COVID-19 waste.

Fourth, use bags to collect COVID-19 waste with a distinctive colour and a warning sign of their dangers. The departments and ministries related to alert health must alert hospitals and medical centres by using these bags, fully acknowledging the essence of their content, and using the principle of transparency to enhance the governance of these wastes to reduce the spread of COVID-19 epidemics effectively.

Fifthly, based on the hazardous COVID-19 medical waste, we must dispose of the waste in places far from the animal, humans and plants that are due to be recycled and used again, as we mentioned.

Sixth, government departments, epidemic control teams, environmental protection platforms, and health organisations must fully use the information, solve any emergency that appears quickly and avoid recurring it to build an integrated mechanism to refute the remnants of COVID-19. Government departments and epidemiological control teams are responsible for submitting reports on what has been accomplished and hoped for promptly, issuing reliable information with pictures of how COVID-19 waste was handled and disposed of, and openness and transparency in the waste control process.

3.4. Disinfection Technology, Methods, and Control of COVID-19 Medical Waste

The classification of medical care waste is the first step towards treating coronavirus waste. Fig3 (3) refers to the best practice for classifying waste at its source used in the past. This method is not time-efficient and inaccurate since it classified the patient’s food bottles and baggage (the black colour) as non-infected waste. However, it is not true as all coronavirus waste is dangerous and infected and must be eliminated carefully to prevent the possibility of COVID being transferred to waste handlers. The COVID-19 waste items should be in bins/bags with special labels. At the point of waste classification, a waste-containing bag must always be disinfected and enclosed in two plastic bags before being transferred from its origin. The COVID-19 waste is always put under dangerous BMW. Separation becomes a straightforward task then. Separating storage before it is identified from which waste can be obtained at high priority and under a deadline. Therefore, appropriate disinfection of the holding areas and the bio-waste transportation trucks as a common bio-medical waste treatment and disposal facility (CBMWTF) is expected. Below is an outline of each disinfection and disposal of bio-waste technology.

Figure 3. Medical waste management of disinfection and disposal practices.

Procedures for disposing of and disinfecting medical waste.

3.4.1. Using Incineration to Disinfect

Incineration is based on burning waste with temperatures between 850°C and 1250°C. It can burn the pathogen and up to 90% of the organic compounds (Wang et al. 2020). The disadvantage of the incineration method is that various in-situ toxins, such as furan, and dioxins, have a high propensity to concentrate in fatty tissues, cause endocrine, and damage the immune system released (Mudhoo et al. 2013; Ilyas, Ranjan Srivastava, and Kim 2020). With the incineration facility, a flue-gas treatment facility, which costs the operator an extra expense, is also needed (Bjorge et al. 2009; Liuzzo, Verdone, and Bravi 2007). Consequently, operating the facility with a limited quantity is somehow not feasible. Alternative technologies are introduced.

3.4.2. Using High-Temperature Pyrolysis Procedure to Disinfect

The high-temperature pyrolysis procedure usually operates at a temperature ranging between 540°C and 830°C (Mohamad, Taha, and Ghobashy 2016). It involves plasma pyrolysis, pyrolysis-oxidation, pyrolysis based on induction, and laser pyrolysis. In pyrolysis-oxidation, a defined primary combustion chamber level is supplied with air estimated below the theoretical chemical reaction, where liquid waste and organic solids are vaporised under air turbulence at~600°C, leaving residual debris, scrap metal, and glass. In the second combustion stage, the flammable vapours are combusted at a temperature ranging between 980°C and 1090°C in a chamber to fully destroy the harmful substances, such as dioxins, releasing sterile exhaust vapour.

3.4.3. Using Microwave Low-Temperature Procedure to Disinfect

Microwave for COVID-19 waste disinfection shows several advances over conventional disinfection methods (Bjorge et al. 2009; Ilyas, Ranjan Srivastava, and Kim 2020; Kollu, Kumar, and Gautam 2022; Mahdi et al. 2022; Wang et al. 2020; Zhao et al. 2021). This process works at a temperature ranging from 177°C to 540°C and entails depolymerisation by using microwaves to break down the bonds between molecules in an inert environment. Furthermore, this process works at a temperature ranging from 170°C to 500°C.It involves depolymerisation by external high-energy microwaves to break down the organic matter in an inert environment (Timmy and Smith 2020). The microwaves’ absorption increases the materials’ internal energy, causing resultant vibration and bond cleavage. When these molecules are exposed to the electric field of microwave radiation, they rotate due to the action of the applied electric field. By choosing an appropriate frequency in the range of 2.45 GHz, which corresponds with the periodic time, the water molecules take to rotate 180 degrees (Nour and Yunus 2010). Materials containing dipoles (i.e. RNA or DNA) are characterised by their ability to absorb microwave radiation directly. Thus, the resonance effect between the radiation and the RNA or DNA molecules should occur. As a result of the RNA or DNA molecules’ rotation, they transfer part of their energy to other surrounding molecules, thus heating all the particles of coronaviruses. These coronaviruses are completely heated inside and outside by absorbing microwave radiation. Unlike the autoclave, the temperature is graded from the surface of the materials to the next layer, the next layer, and so on. (See Fig4 (4b)). However, the limitation of the microwave method is that it is so expensive.

Figure 4. Represents the mechanism of microwaves in which coronaviruses are disinfected by their irradiation and the difference between the microwave and the traditional technique of disinfecting coronavirus waste, such as an autoclave.

represents the way in which microwaves work to disinfect coronaviruses through their irradiation and how that differs from the more conventional methods of doing so, including using an autoclave.

3.4.3. Using Chemical Substances to Disinfect

The chemical disinfection procedure is commonly used with the previous mechanical shredder to pre-treat the COVID-19 waste. The drained gas is circulated through the absolute high-performance particulate device to prevent aerosol production while shredding. The amount of crushed waste is combined with chemical disinfectants and held in a closed facility for a certain period under extra pressure. In this process, the organic compounds are decomposed and the infectious bacteria and viruses are inactivated or destroyed. The key benefits of using chemical disinfectants are low concentration efficiency, consistent efficiency, fast action, and a large range of sterilisation with no residual dangers, as they do not just effectively destroy bacteria and viruses. The chemical management of COVID-19 waste can be subdivided into schemes dependent on non-chlorine and chlorine-based treatment. In the non-chlorine treatment system, H₂O₂ is widely used as a disinfectant agent. It is an oxidiser and denatures lipids and proteins, inducing membrane disorganisation by saturated OH-ions.SARS-CoV-2 can also be inactivated by using an alternative example of non-chlorine-based disinfectant agents, such as ethyl alcohol (>75%), povidone-iodine (>0.23%), isopropanol (>70%), and formaldehyde (>0.7%) (Duarte, Tallita, and %J Global Biosecurity Santana 2020). On the other hand, NaOClorClO₂wasusedasadisinfectant medium in a chlorine-based treatment method, where chloride electro negativity assists in oxidising peptide bonds and denaturing lipids and proteins at which even neutral pH obeys the invasion of cell layers. NaOCl is one of the first inorganic disinfectants to emit dioxins, acetic acid, and chlorinated aromatic compounds. Eventually, ClO₂ is used, which is a potent biocide that is increased. However, it is used on-site due to its unstable nature. For example, (H₂O₂/NaOCl) is widely suggested to be used as a disinfectant agent which inactivates the virus and the bacteria in the waste (Gallandat, Wolfe, and Lantagne 2017). Figure 5 shows the eight advanced and unadvanced common categories of medical waste management.

Figure 5. The Eight Advanced and unadvanced categories of medical waste management.

3.4.4. Using Ionizing Irradiation Technique to Disinfect Waste

Ionising irradiation disinfects waste by exposing them to gamma rays, electron beams, and X-rays that are fatal to all microbes. It is understood that gamma radiation inactivates all types of viruses. Commercial radiation that disinfects waste has been recommended lately after the coronavirus pandemic. Due to the numerous advantages of gamma irradiation overheat or chemical-based disinfectant techniques, these methods are particularly attractive in medical waste management since they disinfect the waste of healthcare items and medical devices. By causing chemical modifications and genetic disruption in the main biological macromolecules, radiation can be fatal to coronaviruses. The infected materials are swamped with high-energy electromagnetic rays, creating highly reactive free radicals, reactive ions, and charged particles. These radiation products react with the infected materials to fracture and alter the chemical bonds. DNA and RNA are particularly susceptible to the radiation’s adverse effects and can split, depolymerise, mutate, and change shape when exposed to ionising radiation. Ultimately, the inadequate damage repair of DNA and RNA contributes to genetic material loss and cell death. Radiation can also destroy dangerous coronaviruses and be safely used to disinfect waste. Co-60 and Cs-137 act as radioactive sources and undergo decomposition to emit high-energy gamma rays. Electromagnetic waves have high penetration power to synthesise different materials, destroy coronaviruses, and sterilise contaminated medical items. Both radioisotopes of Co-60 and Cs-137 are viable radiation sources because they have increased stability. The neutron irradiation of the available, non-radioactive isotope Co-59 within the nuclear reactor produces radioactive Co-60. Co-60 atoms decay by time (half-life time = 5.7 y), compared with non-radioactive atoms of Ni-60, by emitting one electron with two energetic gamma rays at 1.17 MeV and 1.33 MeV. Generally, it is recommended to build up a gamma cell facility of Co-60 in all hospital sites and on a large scale as a commercial manufacturer.

Various governments and public health organisations, like the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the US Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the United Nations (UN), and the World Health Organization (WHO), have considered the gamma-based radiation that disinfects waste safe and effective. In comparison, electron beam irradiation can clean and disinfect waste. Electron beam accelerators produce high-energy electrons that can cause biological damage. In popular conditions, electron energies of ~10 MeV are used for the e-beam facility to maximise the depth of electron penetration and restrict the degradation of the subject materials.

Irradiation of gamma and e-beam techniques vary in the depth of sample penetration and operate more safely without any involved toxic gas. Therefore, they are used in different applications (Ghobashy et al. 2020, 2020; Elhady, Ghobashy, and Mahmoud 2020; Alshangiti et al. 2019; Ghobashy, Alkhursani, and Madani 2018). Since electrons’ penetration potential is less than gamma radiation’s, applying an e-beam that disinfects waste to high densities or big items is restricted. However, higher dosages of e-beam can be used in a shorter time for disinfecting waste related to gamma radiation that disinfects waste. In economic policy terms of cost, e-beam disinfecting waste is more cost-effective than gamma disinfecting waste. Electron beam accelerators can also generate X-rays that could be used for disinfecting waste. X-rays are generated when the accelerator’s high-energy electrons interact with nuclei of high atomic numbers, such as tantalum or tungsten atoms. After passing through the nucleus, the electron emits X-rays in a mechanism called Bremsstrahlung. Then, 5–7 MeV electron energies are commercially used. The energies of the resulting X-rays lie around a spectrum that ranges the e-beams energy irradiation that disinfects the waste of items infected with coronavirus by exposing them to gamma rays that are very efficient in destroying viruses and bacteria. This technique is the same as radiation sterilisation. The effective dose to sterilise medical items is usually 25 kGy (Benson Roberto and %J Nuclear, Instruments, Methods in Physics Research Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials, and Atoms 2002; Alariqi et al. 2006). Figure 5 outlines the gamma irradiation that disinfects coronavirus waste and how biohazard materials become more safe and recyclable after exposure.

4. Experimental and design

4.1. Materials

The sample of nonwoven face masks made from PP was collected from marked and used without further modification

4.2. Gamma irradiation facility

The samples of face masks made from PP were irradiated with the ⁶⁰Co-cell of gamma rays, an industrial low dose rate source located at the Gamma Irradiation Facility (GIF), Biomedical Physics Department, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

4.3. Irradiated nonwoven face mask (PP) sample

The nonwoven face mask sample was cut into two pieces and put into two sealed polyethylene bag parts (a and b). Part (a) was dealt with as a blank sample (un-irradiated) 0 kGy and part (b) were irradiated at a dose of 25 kGy of dose rate (5.7 kGy/h).

4.4. Characterisation

The influence of gamma irradiation on the thermal properties of face mask materials was performed using DSC from the Shimadzu instrument, Japan, established in Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, Jubail, Saudi Arabia. The gamma irradiation influence on the chemical structure of face mask materials was performed by the Fourier transform infrared spectrophotometer FTIR, Shimadzu IR Affinity-1 with a single-reflection ATR attachment series microscope (shimadzu, Japan), established in Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, Jubail, Saudi Arabia. The inverted microscope is Am Scope 200× Lab metallurgy and clinic Trinocular Microscope with 15MP USB Camera, established in Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, Jubail, Saudi Arabia.

5. Results and discussions

5.1. Evaluation of the safe disinfection of plastic waste by gamma irradiation process

This experimental section aims to provide how can gamma irradiation process is a safe method to disinfect plastic waste during COVID-19 by measuring the influence of gamma irradiation on the physicochemical properties of face mask materials (polypropylene).

5.1.1. Inverted microscope

Figures 6 a and b show the microscope image of the face mask after and before irradiation, respectively. No remarkable change was observed for both samples; the nonwoven fabrics are identical in shape and fibre sizes.

Figure 6. The inverted microscope images of (a) un-irradiated and (b) irradiated face mask samples at dose of 25 kGy.

The inverted microscope images of samples of a 25 kGy dose of radiation on a face mask that were irradiated and unirradiated.

5.1.2. Dsc

Figures 7 a and b provide valuable DSC information on the influence of gamma irradiation processing on the structure of face masks. The DSC is useful for assessing the effective gamma irradiation technique to which the face mask was exposed during the disinfection process. The irradiated and un-irradiated samples exhibit the main melting transition (T_m) at 273 °C and 271 °C with the heat of melting (ΔH) of 251 J/g and 92 J/g, respectively. These crystallites caused an increase in the melting point and heat of melting (ΔH) significantly more than the unirradiated sample. The crystallite structure increases when a face mask sample is exposed to gamma irradiation.

Figure 7. The DSC thermogram of (a) un-irradiated and (b) irradiated face mask samples at dose of 25 kGy.

The DSC thermograms of samples irradiated at dose of 25 kGy.

5.1.3. Ftir

As seen from FTIR charts in Figure 8 the chemical structure of both un-irradiated and irradiated samples are typically the same. According to previous kinds of literature, the test face mask is a composite from non-woven fabrics of polyester , nylon, polypropylene and polyethylene terephthalate (Song et al. 2019; Yang and Martin 1994; Jinde, Naik, and Rakshit 2019).

Figure 8. The FTIR charts of (a) un-irradiated and (b) irradiated face mask samples at dose of 25 kGy.

The FTIR charts of irradiated samples of a face mask.

5.2. Economic feasibility

The goal of an economic feasibility study (EFS) is to show that a proposed project for recycled bio-hazardous plastic waste will be economically beneficial, taking into account the cost of transportation and gamma irradiation treatment in US dollar, as well as costs to the agency, other state agencies, and the general public. It was founded that, the price of bio-hazardous plastic waste depends on both supply and demand of the recycling market (Milios et al. 2018). Generally, the plastics that have good quality and the sufficient amount and easy processing will cost about 451$ to 36 $/1 Tons (Gazzotti et al. 2022) and the gamma irradiation and electron beam disinfection of box (50 × 60 × 17) cm is cost 3.44 $ (Dziedzic-Goclawska et al. 2008). At this point the bio-hazardous plastic waste is treated with 10 kGy to 25 kGy is enough to kill all microorganisms and the bio-hazardous plastic waste becomes safe to recycle.

6. Conclusion

In light of the significant increase in medical waste resulting from the Coronavirus pandemic, the importance of properly disposing of this waste increases. The incorrect disposal of COVID-19 waste without disinfection preparation could expose people and personnel in the healthcare industry to the possibility of spreading the infection of coronaviruses. Furthermore, the waste must be disposed of with appropriate techniques because it poses serious risks to transmitting secondary diseases to waste workers, health workers, patients, and society. After all, they will be exposed to infectious agents. Waste management includes elements such as segregating hazardous waste from non-hazardous waste. Waste should be classified, colour-coded, stored, handled, and disposed of. The results from FTIR, DSC and inverted microscope found that the gamma irradiation doesn’t change the physicochemical properties of face mask materials before and after the irradiation process at a dose of 25 kGy enough to disinfect and sterilise the plastic waste to recycle. Un-advanced chemical disinfection cannot be spread over all contaminated items because it is necessary to sterilise and disinfect all medical care items. The unadvanced pyrolysis process requires a lot of energy, and high operational costs, and causes air pollution. Gamma irradiation technology has presented solutions to disinfecting waste, which is responsible for the emission of greenhouse gases to reduce the risk these gases face. In addition, the incoming value can be raised by recycling these treated waste items after they become safe to be reused. Finally, the accepted method of treating coronavirus waste in the world is ionising irradiation technology as an integrated method, taking into account the less effect it has on the environment, the cost-effective economic analysis it has, and the inactive products it has on coronaviruses. Integrated waste management and COVID-19 can minimise the amount of coronaviruses-contaminated waste items, such as gamma irradiation treatment, recycling the treated items, and using them as raw materials to make consumer items.

7. Recommendations

Figure 9 outlines the gamma irradiation that disinfects coronaviruses waste and how the biohazard materials become safer and recyclable after exposure to gamma irradiation. The recommendations of plastic waste management and safety disinfection processes reduce COVID-19 hazards.

1. The incorrect disposal of COVID-19 waste without disinfection preparation could expose people and healthcare personnel to the possibility of spreading the infection of coronaviruses (Dindarloo et al. 2020).

2. The non-infected medical waste, such as water bottles and food boxes with discarded drug vials, used by coronavirus patients, becomes dangerous and should be categorised as infected medical waste (Kondepudi et al. 2022).

3. Using only one colour of waste-collected bags for coronaviruses is recommended (Capoor and Parida 2021).

4. Fishermen should be incentivised to collect plastic waste with incentive benefits and rewards (Gong et al. 2022).

5. The use of ionising radiation to disinfect waste is recommended due to:

   1. Items contaminated with coronaviruses should be stored in their tightly enclosed final packaging, regardless of the penetration depth of the ionising radiation. The possibility of being exposed to coronaviruses is reduced.

   2. The minor increases in temperature during the disinfection of waste are consistent with the materials susceptible to temperature.

   3. There is no residue or toxicity left on the radiation that disinfects products.

   4. Finally, the radiation that disinfects waste is considered a non-destructive technique. Therefore, it is easy to recycle plastic and disposable waste items safely. The cost of the radiation technique that disinfects waste could decrease

Figure 9. Outlines the gamma irradiation that disinfects coronaviruses waste and how the biohazard materials become more safe and recyclable after exposure to gamma irradiation.

Explains how biohazard materials become more safe and recyclable after being exposed to gamma irradiation, which disinfects coronavirus waste.

Acknowledgments

All the experimental studies in this article are conducted in the Faculty of Science and Humanities - Jubail, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, Jubail, Saudi Arabia and Polymeric Materials Research Department, the City of Scientific Research and Technological Applications (SRTA-city), Alexandria 21934, Egypt.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Sheikha A. Alkhursani

Sheikha A. Alkhursani Specialization is chemistry- General specialty Organic Chemistry- Areas of Scientific Interest Nucleosides and Nucleotides Glycosides and nucleic acids and their field in the treatment of tumors

Mohamed Mohamady Ghobashy

Mohamed Mohamady Ghobashy Ph.D. in smart polymer and nanocomposite. Specialization in radiation processing of biomaterials and he has several publications in water treatment and environmental issues.

Dalal Mohamed Alshangiti

Dalal Mohamed Alshangiti Specialization in solid-state physics, Areas of scientific interest - Semiconductors and superconductors.

Samera Ali Al-Gahtany

Samera Ali Al-Gahtany Specialization in solid-state physics, Areas of Green Processing and Synthesis.

Abeer S. Meganid

Abeer S. Meganid MsC in the taxonomy of flowering plants, PhD in Biology – Botany. Participated in the second symposium on environmental pollutants and ways to reduce them in Jeddah. Specialization in the principles of botany - the concept of life science - characteristics of living organisms - plant cell structure - plant division – germination- plant physiology (photosynthesis - respiration).

Norhan Nady

Norhan Nady Associate Professor in Chemical Engineering- Specialization in Polymeric Materials Research.

Gamal Abdel Nasser Atia

Gamal Abdel Nasser Atia is a Clinical dentist in the Department of Periodontal Treatment and Infection Control.

Mohamed Madani

Mohamed Madani Specialization in Sustainable Energy Engineering. Currently, he is a professor of physics. He has several publications in renewable energy and environmental issues.