Scroll over image for caption

The need for ‘brand identity’, ‘joined-up thinking’ and ‘communication’ might sound like hollow slogans brandished in corporate meetings and literature, but putting them into action could set the tone for a more cohesive and better understood bioplastics packaging industry. Rupal Mehta reports on a conference in London, UK, that explored the challenges ahead.

As the Biopackaging – From Feedstock to Waste Stream conference in London, UK, got underway on 9 September, the need for collaboration and clarity to address the use, disposal and sustainability of bio-based, biodegradable and compostable plastics in packaging became a hot topic. So much so that traditional paper, corrugated and cartonboard biopackaging did not get much of a look in.

‘Bioplastics are sexy for politicians but they might raise expectations with the consumer that are difficult to fulfil,’ said Joachim Quoden, General Manager for Pro Europe, the organisation for European packaging waste recovery and recycling schemes, based in Brussels, Belgium.

Clearer messages about what these plastics are, and how to identify and dispose of them are therefore essential, not just for the consumer, but for the waste management companies as well. Stuart Reynolds, an independent consultant in waste management at CSR Associates, UK, made this point in his presentation to the packaging materials suppliers in the audience. He said, ‘When you consider the design of your products, think beyond the consumer to the poor bloke who has to pick them up and sort them’.

This approach becomes increasingly important as the market for these materials steadily grows. Many big brands and retailers are introducing bottles, flow wrap and thermoformed trays comprising conventional polymers such as PET made from the sugarcane and molasses (Coca-Cola) and new plastics such as a home compostable film made from wood-pulp (Nestlé).

‘Bio-based and biodegradable plastics are now entering a critical stage of their growth phase,’ noted Hariharan Ramasubramanian, an Industry Analyst from international consultancy firm Frost and Sullivan. ‘We are expecting the global demand to be more than 100,000t by 2011.’ A database developed at the University of Applied Sciences in Hanover, Germany, which enables materials specifiers to compare bioplastic properties, currently stores about 100 different manufacturers and 370 materials or grades, revealed researcher Andrea Sieber-Raths.

So whatever your stance on the environmental credentials of these plastics, they are here to stay. And as consumer and media scrutiny of packaging’s sustainability intensifies, with added pressure from European regulations, these materials are viewed as one element of the solution and will coexist alongside conventional packaging materials.

Moving the goal posts

Recyclability is becoming more of a focus for those involved in developing and using bioplastics, opening up the debate on how to dispose of these materials. It represents a shift from the previous narrow emphasis on the materials’ biodegradability and compostability credentials, which has invited ‘green’ interest, followed by confusion, concern and criticism. This is because not all bio-based plastics are biodegradable or compostable (and not all biodegradable plastics are bio-based), and those that are require strict environmental conditions for disposal, which many European countries lack the infrastructure for.

‘Associating bioplastics with biodegradation and, in turn, a throwaway mentality is probably the worst possible start for this new technology,’ suggested one delegate.

Speaker Françoise Gerardi, of the French Plastic and Flexible Packaging Association, responded, ‘It started with biodegradation but now we are talking about recycling them. The potential for recycling was not clear for these materials three years ago. [Also] recovering energy from waste is a good option if recycling is not technically, economically or environmentally viable’.

Polylactic acid (PLA), which is made from corn starch, has previously been promoted as suitable for industrial composting. Erwin Vink, of PLA supplier Natureworks, presented a new ‘end-of-life vision’ where composting is only desirable for food-contaminated PLA packaging. The ideal scenario, he says, is chemically recycling the material by hydrolysis back to lactic acid for further reprocessing into PLA resin.

This ‘Loopla’ system has been developed by Galactic, which opened a 1,500t lactic acid recovery plant in Escanaffles, Belgium, in September. There are three different pathways for reprocessing the waste to create PLA of different purities, suitable for end uses in industrial or food-grade products.

However, while PLA producers assert that the bio-based plastic can be sorted from PET in industrial or post-consumer waste using near-infrared technology, waste managers argue that the practicalities of introducing the instrumentation, and then sorting and transferring PLA for reprocessing are problematic, particularly during a recession.

Reynolds said, ‘With the current climate, it is difficult to get entrepreneurial investment in new technology. The waste industry needs certainty in the markets for a waste stream, then it will be quick to address that. Facilities do not have the time to handle and sort every quirk in packaging’.

This poses the catch-22 position of needing larger quantities of material in the market and a definite end use for its waste before the associated infrastructure can develop.

Andy Sweetman, Global Marketing Manager for Innovia Films, noted, ‘Sometimes you need the [packaging] solution to create demand for the infrastructure’. The company, headquartered in Wigton, UK, supplies the home compostable wood pulp-based film that Nestlé uses for its Quality Street chocolates. ‘It is also suitable for anaerobic digestion,’ said Sweetman. ‘We are undergoing a recycling revolution but the problem is that flexible packaging is contaminated with food, printed and laminated, and so is not easy to recycle.’

Deciding how and on which lines to build a modern waste management infrastructure requires holistic consideration of the options by all key stakeholders on an economic and environmental basis. Each route, be it recycling, recovering energy from waste, home or industrial composting, or biodegradation is at various stages of development in different European countries, and each method has pros and cons. But ultimately, ‘bioplastics have to meet the demands of the European Waste Directive’, insisted Gerardi.

Brand awareness

Creating materials with different end-of-life options poses logistical difficulties for not only waste management facilities, but also consumers. Many of the delegates concluded that clear branding using labels, colour codes and instructions are vital so that individuals can easily identify what the bioplastic is and which bin it needs to go in, or how exactly to home compost it. Educating consumers and local authorities will dispel preconceived ideas – industry compostable packs, for example, can go in the same bin as organic food waste, but non-compostable packs will contaminate this stream.

Bruno de Wilde of Organic Waste Systems, in Ghent, Belgium, described how in Switzerland ‘compostable packaging has a green line’. He said, ‘You need to continually communicate. Local authorities are not specialists in this, retailers are’.

Quoden added that claims about a material’s disposal route should only be made if it is the most sustainable option and there is existing infrastructure to reprocess the material, to avoid misleading the consumer. Saying a pack is made from 70% biodegradable material confuses customers about what they should do with it at end of life. Furthermore, telling a consumer that a pack is made from renewable resources is only useful if it genuinely has better environ-mental peformance over its lifecycle.

Taking control

Responsible use of bioplastics and branding is therefore vital to move forward, ensuring that the right materials are selected, presenting the most sustainable option over the pack’s lifecycle and without compromising the manufacturing process or packaging functionality (which would inadvertedly increase product waste).

Technical development of bioplastics is ongoing, and companies like Natureworks are also looking to use non-food plants and agricultural waste sources to address criticism that bioplastics increase food prices by creating heightened competition for the feedstock.

Gerardi concluded, ‘For us, it’s not an option [of choosing] between fossil fuel and bio-based plastics, it’s just about diversification. We don’t want to stop innovation but we need to work on getting it right, as otherwise we will lose credit very quickly’.

Joined-up thinking between materials suppliers, retailers, designers and waste managers is required. Sweetman said, ‘We are continually compared to the conventional plastics industry, which has big economies of scale. But you cannot compare [the two] as we do not have the efficiency as yet’. There is a long way to go, and the bioplastics industry appears to acknowledge that.

Further information: Intertechpira