Hello. CXP has finally received the Eco-Label Certification. To be precise, it is not the CXP material itself, but the product made from CXP that received the certification. Under the current regulatory system, raw materials themselves cannot receive eco-label certification.
The product that received the certification this time is the "Diamond Eco-Friendly Float."
While numerous eco-friendly floats have been introduced in the past through various national projects, the CXP float is actually the first and currently the only eco-friendly float to obtain official Eco-Label Certification.
 | ||
| Eco-Label Certificate for Bioplastic CXP Material Float |
Other floats were simply claiming to be "eco-friendly" without receiving official certification.
Korea's Eco-Label certification audit is stricter than expected. A prerequisite for the Eco-Label certification audit is the ability to acquire KS (Korean Industrial Standards) or equivalent performance and quality certification.
In other words, if a product fails to satisfy performance or quality requirements, it cannot receive Eco-Label certification. Our CXP eco-friendly float satisfied both performance and quality. As you can see, not only did it meet the performance standards, but all items in the toxicity test were rated "Not Detected." It was not a case of barely meeting the detection limits; toxicity was completely non-existent.
 |
| Performance Test Report for Bioplastic CXP Float |
The performance certification for marine floats is called a "Certified Float" rather than a general KS certification. This is due to the difference in certifying authorities. General KS certification is audited by the Korean Agency for Technology and Standards, whereas marine certified floats are audited by the Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries.
Many people misunderstand marine certified floats as eco-friendly certifications, but marine float certifications mainly evaluate structural and mechanical performance. This is why ABS floats have also received marine float certification. Nevertheless, marine certified floats have contributed significantly to reducing the use of styrofoam floats. Styrofoam floats are far worse for the environment than ABS.
Styrofoam floats crumble easily and generate microplastics, so no matter how well their performance is recognized, styrofoam floats cannot receive marine float certification. Therefore, given the prior level of material technology where bioplastic floats could not achieve performance certification, I believe marine certified floats played a sufficient role in environmental protection.
There are two main types of float performance certification: one for laver (nori) farming and another for hanging culture farming. Laver farming floats do not undergo internal pressure tests. Consequently, relatively weaker PP or PE floats frequently pass performance certification for laver farming.
On the other hand, floats for hanging culture farming undergo an internal pressure test at a water depth of 10 meters. While PP or PE occasionally pass the hanging culture float test, this is only possible for companies with exceptional technology and is difficult for average manufacturers. Thus, high-strength engineering plastics like ABS or PC are commonly used.
Development of the CXP eco-friendly float began in 2022. The company that attempted it back then failed even the laver farming test due to ring breakage issues. However, a new partner company has now succeeded in injection molding using a new manufacturing process. The company that attempted it in 2022 gave up after one failure, so it ended as a simple failure. Without our current partner, success would have been difficult. We underwent numerous mold modifications and never gave up on long-term R&D. In fact, I was so worried that I even suggested, "Float performance certification is extremely difficult, so it might be better not to pursue it." Yet, they ultimately achieved success.
As a provider selling CXP materials, it is great for me if they develop it, but since this company had to stake its survival on the development, I was very concerned. I express my deepest gratitude to the executives and employees of DongnamEco Co., Ltd., the float manufacturer.
DongnamEco's CXP Diamond Float passed both the 500kg tensile test and the 10kg drop-weight test. Naturally, it passed the 10m internal pressure test, and additionally succeeded in a 30m internal pressure test. This level of quality is top-tier, suitable even for military use.
[Video: Bioplastic CXP Eco-Friendly Float repeatedly raised and lowered with a 500kg flexible container bag attached]
The gentleman in this video is the CEO of DongnamEco Co., Ltd. The voice in the tensile test video is also his. His joyful expression reflects how many failures he endured along the way. I was also immensely happy. Once again, thank you so much for your hard work. Now, I hope the government recognizes its value and purchases it extensively. Legally, they ought to do so.
With performance so clearly proven, why is CXP genuinely eco-friendly?
Since wood or plant-based biomass naturally decomposes and emits greenhouse gases, general plant biomass is viewed from a carbon-neutral perspective. However, looking at wooden architecture, if wood maintains its structure without rotting or burning, it is considered "carbon storage." Under regulatory standards, it must remain undecomposed for more than 20 years. The foundations of Venice, the city of water facing issues today, rely on alder wood piles driven into the ground. They remained unrotted for 500 years. Recently, due to changes in sea levels, they have begun to rot, causing significant issues. Beyond the urban structural risk, as they rot, carbon is re-emitted as greenhouse gas.
The core objective of CXP is to prevent cellulose, a plant polymer, from decomposing. This is essential for proper carbon sequestration. Think about it. Long-lasting wooden artifacts that do not rot have existed for ages, such as the Tripitaka Koreana at Haeinsa Temple, Bongjeongsa Temple in Andong, and Sudeoksa Temple in Yesan. Can we consider something environmental pollution just because it does not rot—that is, because it temporarily paused the carbon cycle? What about the trees during the Carboniferous period that did not rot and remained as coal?
Is it not rather the fact that humans dug up and burned the coal stored underground that created the problem?
Modern plants inevitably decompose in their natural state. Therefore, we devised a method to ensure long-term durability without toxicity, while simultaneously replacing petroleum-based plastics. The culmination of this effort is the eco-friendly material CXP. Furthermore, the complete eco-friendly material line utilizing this technology to replace plastic with other natural substances is collectively called "Terrafin." Terrafin includes CXP (plant-based bioplastic technology), BXP (made from charcoal), OXP (made from seashells), and MXP (made from minerals).
 |
| Modern Carbon Cycle and Carbon Sequestration via Bioplastic Terrafin |
In the diagram above, 300 million years ago during the Carboniferous period, a line could be drawn from forests directly to fossil fuels.
At that time, trees did not rot for over 60 million years. As plants evolved from pteridophytes into trees, they began producing a chemical called "lignin" (which imparts scent and chemical characteristics to plants while acting as an antibacterial agent). Its antibacterial potency was so strong that microbes failed to decompose it for 60 million years. This fossilized into petrified wood, became coal when buried deep underground, and formed lignite when buried at shallower depths. Why is it called lignite? Precisely because of lignin. The reasons why wood is brown, recycled paper is brown, eco-friendly tissue is brown, coffee is brown, and burdock tea is brown are all the same.
Modern microorganisms have overcome lignin, so they now decompose it completely. Put simply, trees created a chemical substance on Earth 300 million years ahead of humanity, causing monumental changes to the planet. Contrary to current trends, oxygen concentration spiked to 30% while carbon dioxide plummeted, cooling the Earth and causing mass extinction. It was the exact opposite of today's scenario.
Humans are not the only ones who manufacture chemical substances. Ant pheromones, bee beeswax, cyanobacteria olefin wax, apple peels, pineapple wax, and trilobite wax were all natural chemical substances created hundreds of millions of years before humans appeared. Because they have passed hundreds of millions of years of clinical trials on Earth, they do not cause major issues for living species. Vaseline is also a type of olefin, and its inventor consumed a spoonful of it every day. During press interviews, he even ate it from a pint container and lived past the age of 90. Why was it non-toxic? Because living species on Earth had already adapted to it.
Therefore, while humans can manufacture olefin, I argue that its design was clearly developed first by other living organisms in nature. That is why Terrafin’s slogan is "Designed by Nature, Crafted by Human." Our logo features a hornet and a hornet's nest. Hornets chew wood and mix it with olefin (beeswax) to construct their nests, which are resistant to rot and long-lasting. CXP simply mimicked the hornet's nest. In other words, wood-olefin composite bioplastic was first developed by hornets, and I merely replicated it. If hornets make it, why shouldn't humans? Hornets didn't file for patents anyway. Thank you for sharing your technology, ancient hornets.
 |
| terrafin logo |
Indeed, the eco-friendly material CXP contains only natural substances and olefin. Refined petroleum-derived olefin is actually safer than natural beeswax. Natural beeswax sometimes tests positive for heavy metals.
This is similar to why oases in deserts can be dangerous. Although natural, they can suffer from biological or chemical contamination. Purified distilled water derived even from urine is much safer. Because petroleum-refined olefin is significantly safer than natural beeswax, I utilize safe, petroleum-refined olefin. We are currently developing bioplastic olefins made from sugarcane as well. If bees can consume sugar water to produce beeswax, why couldn't we produce it from sugarcane? Once completed, it will be 100% natural, making it easy to present clearly to those who prefer straightforward explanations.
Functionally, why do I use olefin? As mentioned earlier, my goal is to prevent wood from rotting. The answer is simple. Coating wood with olefin blocks moisture and prevents microbial penetration. It causes no harm if ingested.
Thus, CXP, an eco-friendly bioplastic material, provides long-term carbon storage, replaces conventional petroleum plastics (since the wood content offsets plastic usage despite containing some olefin), contains no toxicity, and generates an import-substitution effect. Therefore, it is a complete eco-friendly solution.
Now that we have received official certification, we can freely advertise it as eco-friendly. Promoting a product as eco-friendly without official Eco-Label certification is illegal. Strictly speaking, other existing products currently marketed as "eco-friendly floats" are operating illegally, as CXP is currently the only eco-friendly float with official Eco-Label certification. Therefore, those currently developing new "eco-friendly goal floats" cannot claim them to be "eco-friendly" without acquiring official certification.
Whenever biodegradable floats were presented in the media as if they were eco-friendly, I felt uncomfortable. Biodegradable floats have never passed performance tests like internal pressure resistance, nor have they received Eco-Label certification. Media personnel should verify whether official certificates exist before using the term "eco-friendly." "Eco-friendly" is not merely an academic or descriptive modifier; it is a legal term.
Furthermore, if floats decompose easily in the ocean, they must be continuously manufactured and replaced. Is that truly eco-friendly? Most are made from bioplastic raw materials like cornstarch—is there a need to waste food resources? Does large-scale agriculture not also destroy nature? Agricultural fertilizers are a major cause of water pollution, not to mention the destruction of biodiversity.
CXP eco-friendly floats fall under the Float Deposit Return System. When a float is recovered, a deposit of 3,000 KRW is refunded, and we crush the recovered floats to manufacture artificial reefs. Our goal is to fix carbon permanently. CXP can be continuously recycled by crushing and re-processing.
There is video evidence showing that both bees and ants favor CXP.
[Video: Defective molded product thrown on the ground during early CXP development; ants moved their eggs onto it. Why did they do that? It serves as evidence that CXP was at least safe and comfortable for ants.]
CXP Bioplastic Product Used by Ants as a Daycare Center
Ants went out of their way to move their eggs onto the CXP product to operate it as a daycare. Why did they do that? I would love to ask Dr. Choe Jae-chun if I get the chance. Is it because CXP allows good oxygen flow? Or are they accustomed to the olefin (pheromone) used in it? Or is it because of the rice husks? This specific CXP was made with rice husks.
[Video: Honeycomb foundation frame produced with CXP. Bees gathered quickly to build their hive—faster than on plastic or beeswax. On CXP coated with beeswax, they only began building after running out of other space. Just as someone else's saliva feels unpleasant to us, was beeswax more unpleasant to them than raw CXP?]
Bioplastic CXP Honeycomb Foundation Frame - Hive Frame Where Bees Gathered Rapidly
Bees built their hive on the CXP frame faster than on other foundation frames. On the frame coated with beeswax, they did not build quickly. It seems they prefer CXP over beeswax mixed with other bees' secretions. How unpleasant would it feel for us if a restaurant reused food? Nobody likes food mixed with someone else's bodily fluids, even if those fluids are natural. How wonderful would it be if we could communicate directly with bees and ask how they feel?
[Video: Bees visited frequently. They filled it with honey faster than other foundation frames.]
Bioplastic CXP Foundation Frame Rapidly Filled with Honey
Bees seem to have visited frequently, as they filled it with honey faster than other foundation frames. At that time, the CXP honeycomb frame had low structural strength and suffered from bending issues, so development was paused. However, like the buoy, I believe we can successfully complete it. Although development costs will be high, if a suitable partner does not appear, I will earn money and complete it myself later.
Small organisms are extremely sensitive and vulnerable to chemicals. Thus, there are no better bio-indicators than bees or ants. What do you think? Is this not sufficient proof that it is non-toxic to living organisms and safe for the ecosystem?
Therefore, I am confident that if we make artificial reefs out of CXP, fish in the sea will like them as well.
What about military floats? Conventional military floats used floats filled solid with rubber. I have photos, but I will not upload them as they might be military secrets. These rubber floats were expensive and had enormous volume to secure buoyancy. Since they were solid inside and large in volume, their mass was tremendous. Consequently, material costs were high, and because they had to be molded as a single whole, production efficiency was low, making them extremely expensive. The Navy used rubber floats because standard plastic floats lacked internal pressure resistance at deep water levels.
[Image: CXP Diamond Float Passed 30m Internal Pressure Performance Test]
The CXP float passed an additional 30m internal pressure test, beyond the standard float performance criteria of 10m.
Isn't it remarkable that the CXP eco-friendly float achieved that difficult pressure performance? Now, there is no longer a need to use expensive rubber floats. It saves national budget and protects the marine environment, killing two birds with one stone.
Furthermore, as it replaces imported materials, it resolves national security concerns requiring military supplies to rely on domestic supply chains. In terms of performance and common sense, the CXP eco-friendly float is far superior. Legally, since the CXP float qualifies as a Green Product, the Navy is obligated to purchase it. I intend to watch with great interest how this unfolds moving forward.
Readers, please give us your strong support. Will we be able to break through the rigid existing supply chains? I look forward to a more fair and just Republic of Korea.
Eco-friendly bioplastic CXP has now been successfully applied to both demanding automotive parts and eco-friendly marine floats. Now, it seems capable of replacing most other general plastic products. Although some specialized items cannot be replaced yet, we will continue R&D to replace plastics as much as possible.
Thank you.
#CXP #Bioplastic #Ecolabel #AquacultureFloat #Sustainalble #Material #Bio-CCUS
Comments
Post a Comment