Innotex Group 
The Sustainable Packaging Coalition hosted a series of webinars and presentations the week of January 24th 2022. Multiple topics from multiple presenters were available all surrounding the sustainability of packaging. A summation of the sessions I attended is below.
EPR for Packaging: The Spectrum of Control
EPR means Extended Producer Responsibility. It’s a policy approach that assigns producers responsibility for end-of-life of products. It is intended to realign finance and governance of recycling systems. Producers either supply services (for collection, sortation etc) or money to cover the end-of-life costs of the product or package they put into the market.
While more popular in Europe, The United States has seen an increase in states setting laws around EPR for packaging. In 2021, Maine and Oregon became the first two states to enact EPR packaging laws. New York, Illinois, and others have bills up for debate this year.
EPR systems can take a wide variety of forms. Some put more decision making power with the manufacturers while others have more control with the municipality. Producer Responsibility Organizations (PRO’s) are created that producers (brand/retailer) pay into or the producers institute a platform to collect the packaging themselves. In the end, it takes both producers and municipalities to create a more inclusive closed loop system to collect, sort, and re-sell materials.
A simple example of a basic EPR system is a container take back program. A deposit on a container promotes getting the container back for reuse and/or recycling. Deposit/Refund systems aim to close the loop.
A second example relates to carpeting. California has a “carpet stewardship law” which aims to ensure that discarded carpets become a resource for new products in a manner that is sustainably funded. Carpet manufacturers (either themselves or through a separate organization) design their own stewardship program monitored by CalRecycle.
Ultimately, EPR systems are meant to increase circularty of materials. The systems improve recovery of packaging material at the end of life and seek to improve design of packaging longer term to allow ease in recovery. Better design means better collection. Better collection means more material to reuse. Reusing material curbs the demand for virgin materials, saves energy in production and cuts emissions.
Panel | The European Experience on Packaging Free and Refillable Packaging Programs Currently, 99% of packaging is single use with just 1% (or less) using refillable/reuse models. Reuse models are very limited today but the drive toward a more circular economy will be accelerated by more reuse models being developed.
Propane tanks for grills offer a good example. The tank is the package which delivers the propane to the grill. Once empty, the tank is brought back to any store who sells propane and is exchanged for a full one. The “package” is reused over and over again eliminating the need to make new tanks and the need to dispose of the used ones. The environmental impact of the tank lies solely in the original manufacturing of the tank itself.
For most products, a system re-design is needed to facilitate reuse models. For a reuse model to work, 3 key elements must be present.
- Accessibility: Widespread availability of the product in a reusable form.
- Convenience: The ability to return the package for reuse needs to be as widespread as possible.
- Customer choice: The ability for consumers to choose multiple brands and products under a reusable/refillable model.
Buy anywhere and return anywhere is the goal — this is the ideal driving systemic change.
How many times does a package need to be reused to make the environmental impact less than single use? It depends on the product and the package. Some products ands systems only need 3 or 4 turns while others require 20 plus. Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) — measuring impacts at each stage of the package —- helps guide each modeling decision.
LCA for single use broadly includes the environmental impact of how the package is made, where it is made, what it is made of, how the package travels and how it is handled at end of life (impacts of recycling, composting, landfill etc). LCA for reuse has the same factors at creation but has different ones at end of life. End-of-life for reuse models involves how to get the package back, washing (if needed) and getting it back into circulation.
Supportive legislation would help build infrastructure to support reuse models. Reusing shopping bags (bring your own) has replaced single use plastic bags in many grocery stores. The reuse model is supported by legislation to help dissuade the use of bags when a reusable alternative is viable. Can this same model be used for items that go into the shopping bag?
Reuse model for chicken, nuts, bread, ice, cereal. It is hard to imagine for items like these people bringing into the store a container for each item they buy and the store being able to offer the products in an unpackaged form to fill client containers. Factors such as food safety, convenience and consumer information often displayed on the package need to be considered. These types of items will likely remain as single use.
Circularity for reuse and single use models must be supported by consumer education, involvement, and infrastructure to support accessibility, convenience and customer choice.
Return is so important – return for reuse or return for recyclability. Imagine bringing back a shampoo bottle to MCDonalds or a plastic bag to a restaurant. The more locations that can gather materials be it for reuse or recycling, the better.
Reuse or single use? Both are needed. Both can support a circular flow of materials. The hierarchy of Reduce then Reuse and then Recycle is still the order. Reduce as much packaging as possible. If a package is needed, can the product fit into a reuse model that fits the three elements above? If a reuse model is not possible or not fully developed, recycling (or composting) the package at the end of life is the last option.
Panel – Biodegradable Additives Performing the Smell Test.
Dr Ramni Naraynan and Dr Rafeal Auras from Michigan State University along with Rob Flores from Berry Global were the three panelists. They presented the science behind plastic polymers and additives along with a perspective on how to navigate the current additive landscape.
For the sake of the webinar, additives were defined as something “added” that renders a material degradable—-breaks it down to smaller pieces.
Some science to start. …
- LDPE/LLDPE plastics have a “Carbon to Carbon” backbone in chemical structure.
- Carbon to Carbon bonds are the strongest bonds in organic chemistry. They can only be broken down to molecular level using very high amounts of heat (400 degrees F plus).
- Complete breakdown means the material is small enough to be transported into micro-organisms cells to allow use for their life processes. It must be able to pass through the cell wall.
- Complete breakdown fully removes the material from the environment
- Evidence of full removal is found in the amount of CO2 released by microorganism after metabolism
- Any material with carbon to carbon backbone cannot breakdown in ambient temperatures (soil, ocean, landfill) – temperature not nearly high enough.
What does this mean for additives?
- While additives may break down material, it does not get to the molecular level for microbes to use in their cells – temperature not nearly high enough.
- Any test must validate that carbon is completely used by microbes. Proof of this is found in the amount of CO2 emitted in the process. Most additive ASTM referenced tests do not supply this information.
- Compostable films do not have Carbon to Carbon bonds. Chemical structure is different allowing for complete breakdown in set conditions — set temperature and humidity.
- Polymer Structure plus Disposal conditions (temperature, humidity) = Biodegradability/Compost. Need both structure and conditions in place.
- ASTM D6400, EN13432, ASTM D6868 — these allow a claim to be made. A material is tested and either passes or fails the criteria. To pass these standards — a full breakdown in a set time frame under set disposal conditions is achieved.
- ASTM D5511, ASTM 5388, ASTM 5988, ASTM D6691 (plus others) — can test according to these but cannot make a pass/fail claim. They leave the consumer to “assume” it fully biodegrades without any pass/fail criteria (time frame, rate).
- When a claim of biodegradability is made, look to what ASTM standard is being referenced. Additives typically reference the ASTM standards without a “pass/fail” criteria.
- Testing results were shown from experiments of disposal in a landfill, compost environment and soil burial conditions. The tests revealed additives do not degrade to the microbial level in a set time frame.
Some information relayed…
- Biodegradable is the most used and misused word. Biodegradable by the truest sense of the word must validate that carbon in material is used for microorganism metabolism and emits CO2 in a certain time frame.
- Try to match contents to package material. Organic waste should be in compostable packaging which would allow the organic matter left in the package and the package itself to be composted together.
- Circularity in packaging is the target. Degradable additives do not encourage the 5 circular flows below.
- Recycled plastics
- Reduce carbon footprint
- Reuse/refillable models
- Renewable plastics
- Improved recyclability
- Aerobic breakdown (exposed to Oxygen) yields CO2
- Anaerobic breakdown (not exposed to Oxygen) yields CO2 and methane. Methane is a much more potent greenhouse gas than CO2. This is why landfill degradation is to be avoided.
- All packaging being Reusable, Recyclable or Compostable by 2025 – this is the goal.
For a deeper dive on additives, The Sustainable Packaging Coalition position on the topic can be found at the link below.