CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

As of 2012, the total paper and board demand in the Philippines is projected to

surpass 2 million tons within five years with the total annual demand growing at 2.5% per

year according to Department of Trade and Industry. As the demand for paper products

increases, researchers at the Department of Science and Technology are looking for

alternative raw materials to produce paper pulp (Rappler June 2012).

Eucalyptus deglupta is the only species of Eucalyptus in Mindanao, hence it is

internationally referred to as the Mindanao gum. The wood pulp derived from the tree is

the primary ingredient in white paper (D. Xu, June 2010). However, it is considered as a

threatened species in its native habitat (Good Shepherd Sisters, 2013). Shorea

negrosensis, also known as Red Lauan, can be found in Luzon, Samar, Negros, Cebu,

Leyte, and Mindanao. Its trunk is used for furniture and cabinet-making, veneer and

plywood, pulp and paper-making (FEED, Inc., 2016). This tree is classified as critically

endangered (CR) on the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red

List 2007 (Wildscreen Arkive, 2007).

Coconuts (Cocos nucifera) are produced in 92 countries worldwide on about more

than 10 million hectares. Indonesia, Philippines and India account for almost 75% of

world coconut production. The coconut fruit yields 40% coconut husks containing 30%

fiber, with dust making up the rest. The chemical composition of coconut husks consists

of cellulose, lignin, pyroligneous acid, gas, charcoal, tar, tannin, and potassium. (Salman

1
Zafar, December 2015). The cellulose content in old coconuts is 41.7% (Fatmawati et al.,

2013). However, a study about the cellulose and lignin content of young coconuts has not

yet been conducted. Furthermore, mature coir fibres contain more lignin, a complex

woody chemical, and less cellulose than fibres such as flax or cotton (FAO, 2018). Since

young coconuts have less lignin content than old ones, the study used young coconuts,

specifically, seven-month old coconuts, also known as “poppers” as one of the

components of CoCoPel.

Corn (Zea mays) is the second-largest agricultural crop in the world. According to

the Department of Agriculture, corn production in Philippines was at 2.5 million metric

tons as of May 2018, gaining some 4.2% year-on-year. Corn husk fibres have a high

content of cellulose about 80-87% and low content of lignin of about 6-8% (Chaudhary et

al. 2017).

The product is an alternative paper from young coconut and corn husks which is

called CoCoPel. The components of the said product is coconut husk of young coconuts

and corn husks.

Statement of the Problem

This InnoVention Project is trying to solve the following set of questions:

1. What ratio of the concentrations will be effective in making paper?

a. 35g coconut husk, 35g corn husk

b. 40g coconut husk, 30g corn husk

2
 c. 50g coconut husk, 20g corn husk

2. Is there a significant relationship between the different ratios of coconut husk and

corn husk to the quality of CoCoPel?

3. Is there a significant difference between the CoCopel and commercial paper in

terms of :

a. surface texture

b. visibility of writings

Objectives

General

To determine the feasibility of coconut (Cocos nucifera) husk and corn (Zea

mays) husk as alternative paper

Specific

1. To determine the quantity of components that will yield the best paper

2. To determine if there is a significant relationship between the Cocopel and

commercial paper in terms of surface texture and visibility of writings

3. To determine if there is a significant difference between CoCoPel and

commercial paper in terms of surface texture and visibility of writings

Hypothesis

There is no significant difference between the quality of commercial paper and

the CoCoPel in terms of surface texture and visibility of writings.

3
Significance of the Study

The findings of this study will redound to the benefit of the following:

Researchers of Department of Science and Technology. This study will be

favorable to the researchers of Department of Science and Technology since it will make

use alternative raw materials like coconut husk and corn husk in producing paper pulp.

Department of Environment and Natural Resources. This study will be of help

to this department since it lessens the cutting of trees for paper production by making use

of coconut husk and corn husk.

Students. This study will be beneficial to the students since it will use coconut husk

and corn husk as an alternative to paper which is not costly and will help them save huge

amount of money.

Professionals. The study will be advantageous to the professionals, especially those

who work in offices. For one department alone, 2.5 million sheets of paper are being used

(Manila times, 2016). With this study, the professional will be able to save money for the

usage of paper.

Researchers. The study will help them find another way to solve and prevent the

extinction of trees due to deforestation that many researchers were not able to explore.

Even though it is made out of coconut husk and corn husk, this alternative way of paper

production can still make positive changes in the environment. Hence, a new substitute

for trees as a main component in making paper may be used.

4
Scope and Limitations

The study will mainly focus on the feasibility of coconut husk and corn husk as an

alternative to paper.

The study will first limit to the components of the product. It is only limited to the

use of coconut and corn husk in making the product. Many variables are needed in

considering a quality paper; however, only the variables, surface texture and visibility of

writings are tested in the study. Also, the writing tools used in testing the product are only

black-inked marker and ballpen. The main source of gathering the data in the visibility of

writings and surface texture is only through the use of survey questionnaire which is

prepared by the researchers based on the Likert Scale and the results will be obtained

through the different statistical tools. The respondents of the survey will only be limited

to the selected students and some teachers.

5
Definition of Terms

Cellulose. According to Merriam-Webster Dictionary (2017) it is a substance

that is the main part of the cell walls of plants and that is used in making various products

(such as paper).

Coconut husk. The fibrous husk from the coconut seed which is found between

the outer and inner shells of the coconut. (Urban Organic Yield, 2018)

Coconut husk is one of the components in the product.

Corn husk. The outer covering of an ear of corn. (Specialty Produce, 2018)

Corn husk is one of the ingredients in making the product.

Feasibility. The possibility that can be made, done, or achieved, or is reasonable.

(Cambridge Dictionary, 2017)

In the study, it is to identify whether the product can be used as an alternative to

paper.

Lignin. An amorphous polymer related to cellulose that provides rigidity and

together with cellulose forms the woody cell walls of plants and the cementing material

between them. (Merriam-Webster Dictionary, 2017)

Water. According to Merriam-Webster Dictionary (2017), it is the clear liquid

that has no color, taste, or smell, that falls from clouds as rain, that forms streams, lakes,

and seas, and that is used for rinking, washing, etc.

Water is used in boiling the the fibers of the coconut and corn husks.

6
 Likert Scale. According to Statistics How To (2019), it is a type of rating scale

used to measure attitude and or opinions.

Likert Scale is where the researchers based their survey questionnaire for data

gathering.

7
 CHAPTER II

MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY

Materials

Quantity Unit Materials

1 piece basin

1 piece beaker

1 piece blender

1 piece bread knife

1 piece caserole

1 piece chopping board

1 yard cloth

1 piece flat iron

1 piece mixing bowl

3 8 x 10 inches mould and deckle

3 pieces plastic containers

1 piece ruler

1 piece Santoku knife

1 piece scissors

1 piece weighing scale

8
 Quantity Unit Ingredients

960 grams coconut husk

720 grams corn husk

1.44 liters glue

2 cups soda ash

10 gallons water

Procedure

I. Making the Product

1. Separating the coconut husk into cubes.

a. Using the knife, cut the coconut husks into cubes.

b. Make sure that the fibers are not sticking with each other.

c. Put in a basin and set aside.

2. Cut the corn husk into thin strips.

3. Boiling the corn husk.

a. Put the thin strips of corn husk in the caserole.

b. Fill the caserole with water until it is full and add the soda ash. Boil the strips

of corn husk for two to three hours.

4. Making the mixture.

Set-up 1

a. Measure 35 grams of coconut husk.

b. Blend the coconut husk in 240 ml of water. Set aside.

c. Measure 35 grams of corn husk.

9
 d. Blend the corn husk in 240 ml of water. Set aside.

e. Measure 40 ml of glue and add 320 ml of water. Mix thouroughly

f. Combine the blended coconut and corn husk and glue mixture in a

mixing bowl.

Set-up 2

a. Measure 40 grams of coconut husk.

b. Blend the coconut husk in 240 ml of water. Set aside.

c. Measure 30 grams of corn husk.

d. Blend the corn husk in 240 ml of water. Set aside.

e. Measure 40 ml of glue and add 320 ml of water.

f. Combine the blended coconut and corn husk and glue mixture in a

mixing bowl.

Set-up 3

a. Measure 50 grams of coconut husk.

b. Blend the coconut husk in 240 ml of water. Set aside.

c. Measure 20 grams of corn husk.

d. Blend the corn husk in 240 ml of water. Set aside.

e. Measure 40 ml of glue and add 320 ml of water.

f. Combine the blended coconut and corn husk and glue mixture in a mixing

bowl.

5. Making the paper.

a. Fill the basin with water.

10
 b. Place the mould and deckle in the water.

c. Pour the mixture into the mould and deckle.

d. Lift the mould and deckle to remove the excess water.

e. Remove the cover of the mould and deckle and flip it in a cloth.

f. Using the sponge, pat the back of the mould and deckle to remove the excess

water.

6. Drying the paper

a. Remove the mould and deckle from the paper.

b. place a thick cloth on the paper and iron to flatten.

c. Let the paper dry under the heat of the sun.

II. Data Gathering

Procedure A: Determining the surface texture and the readability of writings of the

CoCoPel.

1. Using Likert Scale, conduct a survey regarding the CoCoPel and commercial

paper.

2. Gather the responses and compute for the average of each trial.

3. Using QI Macros , find out if there’s a significant difference between CoCoPel

and commercial paper.

4. Analyze and interpret.

11
 CHAPTER III

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Table 1.1

Surface Texture of Setup A

(35 grams of coconut husk and 35 grams of corn husk)

Respondent Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Average

1 4 3 2 3

2 4 4 4 4

3 4 3 3 3

4 3 3 2 3

5 2 2 3 2

6 3 3 3 3

7 2 3 4 3

Table 1.1 shows the surface texture of Setup A, which is composed of 35 grams

of coconut husk and 35 grams of corn husk based on the responses of 7 respondents. It

also shows the average responses of each respondent in setup A.

12
 Table 1.2

Surface Texture of Setup B

(40 grams of coconut husk and 30 grams of corn husk)

Respondent Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Average

1 4 4 5 4

2 3 4 3 3

3 5 5 5 5

4 5 4 4 4

5 5 5 4 5

6 4 4 5 4

7 4 5 5 5

Table 1.2 shows the surface texture of Setup A, which is composed of 40 grams

of coconut husk and 30 grams of corn husk based on the responses of 7 respondents. It

also shows the average responses of each respondent in setup B.

13
 Table 1.3

Surface Texture of Setup C

(50 grams of coconut husk and 20 grams of corn husk)

Respondent Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Average

1 4 3 2 3

2 4 4 4 4

3 4 3 3 3

4 3 3 2 3

5 2 2 3 2

6 3 3 3 3

7 2 3 4 3

Table 1.3 shows the surface texture of Setup A, which is composed of 50 grams

of coconut husk and 20 grams of corn husk based on the responses of 7 respondents. It

also shows the average responses of each respondent in setup C.

14
 Table 1.4

Surface Texture of Commercial Paper

Respondent Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Average

1 4 4 5 4

2 5 5 5 5

3 5 5 5 5

4 5 5 5 5

5 5 5 5 5

6 5 5 5 5

7 5 5 5 5

Table 1.4 shows the surface texture of commercial paper based on the responses

of 7 respondents. It also shows the average responses of each respondent in the

commercial paper.

15
 Table 1.5

Average Rating of the Papers in terms of its Surface Texture

Respondent Setup A Setup B Setup C Commercial

Paper

1 3 4 3 4

2 4 3 4 5

3 3 5 3 5

4 3 4 3 5

5 2 5 2 5

6 3 4 3 5

7 3 5 3 5

Average 3 4 3 5

Table 1.5 depicts the average rating of the 3 Setups of each respondent and is

compared to the average ratings of the commercially available paper. As shown in the

table, Setup B was ranked higher compared to the other 2 Setups and the closest rating to

the commercially available one. Therefore, given the data, Setup B, which is composed

of 40g of coconut husk and 30g of corn husk, is the most effective in making paper in

terms of its surface texture.

16
 Table 1.6

Visibility of Writings of Setup A

(35 grams of coconut husk and 35 grams of corn husk)

Respondent Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Average

1 3 3 2 3

2 4 4 3 4

3 4 4 5 4

4 3 2 4 3

5 4 3 4 4

6 3 3 2 3

7 4 5 5 5

Table 1.6 shows the visibility of writings in Setup A, which is composed of 35

grams of coconut husk and 35 grams of corn husk based on the responses of 7

respondents. It also shows the average responses of each respondent in setup A in terms

of the visibility of writings.

17
 Table 1.7

Visibility of Writings of Setup B

(40 grams of coconut husk and 30 grams of corn husk)

Respondent Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Average

1 4 4 5 4

2 5 4 5 5

3 3 2 4 3

4 4 3 4 4

5 4 2 5 4

6 4 3 5 4

7 4 2 5 4

Table 1.7 shows the visibility of writings in Setup B, which is composed of 40

grams of coconut husk and 30 grams of corn husk based on the responses of 7

respondents. It also shows the average responses of each respondent in setup B in terms

of the visibility of writings.

18
 Table 1.8

Visibility of Writings of Setup C

(50 grams of coconut husk and 20 grams of corn husk)

Respondent Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Average

1 3 3 4 3

2 3 4 3 3

3 2 3 2 2

4 3 3 4 3

5 3 3 4 3

6 3 4 4 4

7 3 3 3 3

Table 1.8 shows the visibility of writings in Setup C, which is composed of 50

grams of coconut husk and 20 grams of corn husk based on the responses of 7

respondents. It also shows the average responses of each respondent in setup C in terms

of the visibility of writings.

19
 Table 1.9

Visibility of Writings of Commercial Paper

Respondent Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Average

1 5 5 5 5

2 5 5 5 5

3 5 5 5 5

4 5 5 5 5

5 5 5 5 5

6 5 5 5 5

7 5 5 5 5

Table 1.9 shows the visibility of writings in the commercial paper based on the

responses of 7 respondents. It also shows the average responses of each respondent in the

commercial paper in terms of the visibility of writings.

20
 Table 1.10

Average Rating of the Papers in terms of Visibility of Writings

Respondent Setup A Setup B Setup C Commercial

Paper

1 3 4 3 5

2 4 5 3 5

3 4 3 2 5

4 3 4 3 5

5 4 4 3 5

6 3 4 4 5

7 5 4 3 5

Average 4 4 3 5

SD 0.76 0.58

Table 1.10 depicts the average rating of the 3 Setups of each respondent and was

compared to the average rating of the commercially available paper in terms of the

visibility of writings.

As shown in the table, Setup A has the same average rank with setup B. To

determine which one ranked higher, the researchers solved for the standard deviation of

the 2 Setups and found out that the ratings of Setup B are closer to the average.

Therefore, given the data, Setup B, which is composed of 40g of coconut husk and 30g of

corn husk, is the most effective in making paper in terms of the visibility of writings.

21
 In conclusion, 40g of coconut husk and 30g of corn husk is the ratio of the

concentrations that will result to the most effective paper.

Table 2.1

Significant Relationship between the Amount of Coconut Husk and Ratings of CoCoPel

in Terms of Surface Texture

Setup Coconut Husk Rating

A 35g 3

B 40g 4

C 50g 3

rxy -0.19

The correlation coefficient is -0.19 which indicates a negative negligible

relationship between the amount of coconut husk and the ratings of CoCoPel in terms of

surface texture. The result further implies that the increase of the amount of the coconut

husk will somehow lead to the increase of the rating of the CoCoPel in terms of surface

texture.

22
 Table 2.2

Significant Relationship between the Amount of Corn Husk and Ratings of CoCoPel in

Terms of Surface Texture

Setup Corn Husk Rating

A 35g 3

B 30g 4

C 20g 3

rxy 0.19

The correlation coefficient is 0.19 which indicates a positive negligible

relationship between the amount corn husk and the ratings CoCoPel in terms of surface

texture. The result further implies that the increase of the amount of the corn husk will

somehow lead to the increase of the rating of the CoCoPel in terms of surface texture.

23
 Table 2.3

Significant Relationship between the Amount of Coconut Husk and Ratings of CoCoPel

in Terms of Visibility of Writings

Setup Coconut Husk Rating

A 35g 4

B 40g 4

C 50g 3

rxy -0.94

The correlation coefficient is -0.94 which indicates a negative high relationship

between the amount coconut husk and the CoCoPel rating in terms of visibility of

writings. The result further implies that the increase of the amount of the coconut husk

will somehow lead to the decrease of the rating of the CoCoPel in terms of writings.

24
 Table 2.4

Significant Relationship between the Amount of Corn Husk and Ratings of CoCoPel in

Terms of Visibility of Writings

Setup Corn husk Rating

A 35g 4

B 30g 4

C 20g 3

rxy 0.94

The correlation coefficient is 0.94 which indicates a positive high relationship

between the amount of corn husk and the CoCoPel rating in terms of visibility of

writings. The result further implies that the increase of the amount of the corn husk will

somehow lead to the increase of the rating of the CoCoPel in terms of visibility of

writings.

25
 Table 3.1

Significant Difference between the CoCoPel and the Commercially Available Paper in

terms of Surface Texture

CoCoPel Commercial Paper

Mean 4.29 4.86

Sd 0.76 0.34

Variance 0.57 0.14

n 7

df 12

P value 0.05

Table 3.1 shows the mean, standard deviation, variance, number of respondents,

degrees of freedom and p value of the data. P value is equal to 0.05, given the

significance level of 5%. Therefore, there is no significant difference between the

CoCoPel and the commercially available paper in terms of surface texture.

26
 Table 3.2

Significant Difference between the CoCoPel and the Commercially Available Paper in

terms of Visibility of Writings

CoCoPel Commercial Paper

Mean 4 5

Sd 0.58 0

Variance 0.33 0

n 7

Df 12

P value 0.000315

Table 3.2 shows the mean, standard deviation, variance, number of respondents,

degrees of freedom, and p value of the data. P value is less than 0.05, given the

significance level of 5%. Therefore, there is a significant difference between the CoCoPel

and the commercially available paper in terms of visibility of writings.

27
 CHAPTER IV

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Summary

Southeast Asia has the highest deforestation rates in the world, with 14.5% of

regional forest cover lost in the last 15 years. Philippines has already removed 93% of its

original forest cover caused by cutting trees for paper production, infrastructure

expansion, and timber export.

Due to this, the researchers of the study have come up with the idea to use an

alternative material in making paper such as corn husk and coconut husk. To know the

feasibility of the CoCoPel, the researchers conducted experiments consisting of three

different set-ups. Each set-up consists of three trials. Setup A consists of 35 g of coconut

husk and 35 g of corn husk.

Based on the results of the survey conducted, Setup A has an average rating of 3

in surface texture and 4 in visibility of writings. Setup B is made up of 40 g of coconut

husk and 30 grams of corn husk. It has an average of 4 in surface texture and visibility of

writings. Consisting of 50 g of coconut husk and 20 g of corn husk, Setup C has an

average rating of 3 in surface texture and visibility of writings. The results show that

Setup B is the closest to the commercial paper in terms of surface texture and visibility of

writings.

28
Conclusion

Based on the results of the surveys conducted, the researchers found out that setup

B with 40g of coconut husk and 30g of corn husk got the highest rating among 3 setups.

Thus, setup B is the best ratio of the components that will be effective in making paper

and was used in the third test.

The relationship between the ratio of components and the quality of paper was also

determined. In terms of surface texture, it was found out that there is a negligible

relationship between the ratio of components and the quality of paper. In terms of

visibility of writings, there is a high relationship between 2 variables.

Through t-test, the researchers were able to determine if there is a significant

difference between the cocopel and the commercially available paper. Using QI Macros,

it was identified that there is no significant difference between the cocopel and

commercial paper in terms of surface texture therefore accepting the first hypothesis.

However, there is a significant difference between the cocopel and commercial paper in

terms of visibility of writings. The second hypothesis is therefore rejected.

29
Recommendation

Knowing that the CoCoPel has not able to achieve the quality of a commercial

paper, it is recommended for the future researchers to make some improvements to the

CoCoPel. The future researchers should find a more efficient method to powderize the

corn husk and coconut husk. Also, the researchers propose to use hydraulic press in

flattening the CoCoPel. Moreover, bleaching the paper to obtain a whiter outcome is also

highly recommended. With this, the writings will be more visible. As for the experiment,

the future researchers can use other paper qualities and use appropriate equipment in

testing the paper. It is also recommended to test the product using different writing tools

like ballpens and pencils. Lastly, the CoCoPel can also be compared with other types of

paper.

30