Nov. 12, 2024 - A new cellulose diacetate is the fastest degrading bioplastic in seawater, researchers at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) have found. 

Side-by-side microscopic images of cellulose diacetate foam before and after 36 weeks of immersion in seawater. The team found that the cellulose diacetate foam lost 65-70% of its original mass. 

Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI), a comprehensive marine science research organization on the Atlantic coast of the United States, is the world's largest private, not-for-profit marine engineering education and research institution. 

WHOI scientists have been working for years to study which plastics have the shortest and longest lifespan in the oceans, and which plastic products, such as straws and food wrappers, most often contribute to plastic pollution. As more biodegradable materials are developed, such as cellulose diacetate cellulose diacetate (CDA)-a plastic-like polymer derived from wood pulp-researchers are working to ensure that they can replace traditional plastics without harming the marine environment. 

Now, after years of testing, the new version of CDA has been found to be the fastest degrading bioplastic material tested in seawater - and it is a promising alternative to other foam materials, such as polystyrene foam, which can stay in the environment for years. In a new paper published in 2007 ACS Sustainable Chemistry and Engineering, WHOI scientists Bryan James, Collin Ward, Chris Reddy, Yanchen Sun, and Kali Pate found that adding small holes to the CDA material - called foaming -- made it degrade 15 times faster than solid CDA and even faster than paper.

Ward, the study's senior author, said, “What excites me most about this study is its translational nature. This study is the culmination of years of research focused on understanding the fundamental controls on CDA biodegradation in the ocean.” He and the WHOI team collaborated with scientists from the bioplastics manufacturing company Eastman (Eastman), which funded the study, contributed as a co-author, and provided materials. 

Ward added, “We translated the basics into the design of a new material that meets consumer needs while degrading in the ocean faster than any other plastic material we know of, even faster than paper. In a field that often focuses on the negative effects of plastic pollution rather than trying to solve the problem, this is a huge success story.” 

The study consisted of monitoring cellulose diacetate foam and solid cellulose diacetate from a continuous flow seawater tank in Martha's Vineyard Island Sound in a specially designed laboratory at WHOI.After 36 weeks, the team found that the cellulose diacetate foam had lost 65-70% of its original mass.

The study was conducted in a specially designed laboratory at WHOI that monitors foam and solid CDA in tanks of continuously flowing seawater in Martha's Vineyard Sound.In this lab, researchers are able to control temperature, light, and other environmental variables to mimic the natural marine environment. 

“The use of continuously flowing seawater tanks allows us to bring the dynamics of a microbially active ocean into the lab. The ocean is constantly changing and it is important that we replicate this environment by replenishing it with microbes and nutrients for more environmentally friendly experiments,” explains lead author James. 

After 36 weeks, the team found that the CDA foam had lost 65-70% of its original mass.

In a previous study using dynamic seawater tanks, researchers tested straws made from standard plastic, paper, solid CDA, and foam CDA, and found that the solid CDA showed the fastest mass reduction versus the paper straws. The scientists then compared two types of straws made of CDA, one made of solid CDA and the other made of foam CDA. They found that the foam straws degraded 190% faster than the solid straws, resulting in a shorter projected environmental lifetime than the paper straws. 

James says: “As a materials scientist and engineer, it's exciting that foams can be materially efficient, meaning they can be functional using as little material as possible, reducing costs and minimizing many environmental impacts. In addition, when they are made from biodegradable plastics, they can be one of the least durable materials.”

According to the study authors, replacing polystyrene foam and single-use plastics, such as takeout containers that often leak into the ocean and are not biodegradable, is one of the most pressing uses for the material. Foamed CDA products are already on the market, with Eastman introducing a compostable, lightweight tray made from foamed CDA designed to replace existing plastic trays used in industrial food packaging. Jeff Carbeck, vice president of innovation at Eastman, said, “Partnerships between industry and academia are critical to accelerating solutions to the most pressing global challenges, where academia can provide unique insights that can be utilized by industrial partners to develop solutions at scale. That's how we've partnered with WHOI; they've significantly broadened our understanding of how materials degrade in commerce and development.”

Carbeck emphasized that the study demonstrates the potential of CDA foam to help solve the challenges of single-use plastic packaging. 

He said, “The properties of foams make them ideal for many packaging and insulation applications, and this study shows that foams made from biodegradable materials degrade rapidly in the marine environment if they accidentally end up there. The use of biodegradable materials in consumer products is a critical step in protecting our environment, reducing plastic pollution and fostering sustainability for future generations.” 

One of the advantages of working with an industry partner is that we can ensure the scalability of the new technology,” explains Ward. One of the criteria for designing a new material is that it must be a single-use, turnkey replacement for polystyrene foam products, which means that companies converting virgin CDA to biodegradable foam don't have to invest in new equipment. The push for new plastics that are not made from fossil fuels, are compostable, and do not persist in the environment due to pollution is a win for consumers and the environment.”

"Will I be the only one who cares about the excessive amount of plastic waste from take-out?" Lauren Sweeney once asked herself this before she planned to promote recycled tableware. 

"Would throwing them in the 'recyclables' bin be just a psychological relief? Is there a better solution?"

A survey by the American Ocean Conservancy shows that more than 70 percent of Americans order take-out once or three times a week. That means hundreds of billions of single-use plastic utensils are used and discarded each year.

In November 2019, Lauren Sweeney and two other co-founders, AdamFarbiarz and Byron Sorrells, joined forces to launch the DeliverZero website, a food ordering platform that uses recycled tableware. People can place take-out orders on the site, and unlike other sites, the take-out food is served in reusable boxes rather than disposable containers.

At first, the site was joined by only a handful of restaurants in the Brooklyn neighborhood, and the user interface was "very bad," but the app launched quickly anyway. 

As chief marketing officer, Lauren Sweeney spent three months with her partners expanding DeliverZero in Brooklyn and was just about to "enter" Manhattan when the New Crown virus hit. In the summer of 2020, they temporarily shut down the DeliverZero website to redesign and plan for a new launch. At the time, New Yorkers were hunkered down at home, eager to eat different flavors of meals via takeout.

More than 130 restaurants in the two boroughs now use DeliverZero to deliver food in sturdy, green polypropylene containers that can be recycled, washed and reused up to 1,000 times. 

DeliverZero is one of many startups trying to eliminate take-out packaging contamination, and Sweeney shared his experience that the key to success depends on the scale of the solution and consumer demand for sustainability. 

Sweeney said, "We want to create a network of easy-to-collect and reusable containers to replace the use of single-use plastic packaging." Counting their useful life, reusable containers produce lower greenhouse gas emissions and use less energy and water than disposable containers. 

Olga Kachook, senior manager of the U.S. Sustainable Packaging Coalition, said, "More and more innovative startups are proving that takeout can be an industry that doesn't generate a lot of disposable waste." 

 In Denver, Seattle, San Diego, Portland, Oregon, St. Paul, Minneapolis, Durham, North Carolina, and O'ahu, Hawaii, a growing number of restaurants are choosing to use recycled tableware instead of single-use plastic lunch boxes. Sustainable consumption is gaining traction in the United States. 

Even major international brands are gradually experimenting. By early 2022, Burger King will be piloting reusable soda cups and large containers in New York City and Portland, Oregon. In some locations in the U.K., McDonald's has begun offering reusable coffee cups. 

"We are on the cusp of a recycling revolution." said Bridget Croke, managing director of Closed Loop Partners, a circular economy investment firm, in a recent report. She predicts that the emerging model will "reconfigure recycling into our culture and behavioral norms. 

The operation of using recycled tableware in take-out orders is basically the same as using disposable tableware, except that there are one or two extra steps to check the box for use and return before and after using recycled tableware. 

The containers that startups provide to restaurants are often made of durable, reusable plastic that holds heat better than disposable plastic. Like books in a library, these recycled meal boxes have QR codes and electronic codes printed on them, so customers can scan the QR codes on the boxes with their cell phones to make an appointment to return the food as they get it. In terms of fees, some companies require customers to pay a monthly subscription fee of a few dollars, others require a small fee per box, and still others are free. Most companies charge restaurants a fee for the use of recycled cutlery that is comparable to the price of disposable plastic cutlery.

The return steps are similar: the customer returns the box to the designated restaurant or smart drop box. If the box is not returned within the specified time, the customer will be fined, or the deposit will be deducted. 

Recycled tableware delivery platforms like DeliverZero have the option to pick up directly at their doorstep. Customers can return the boxes at any of the restaurants DeliverZero partners with, or return previously used boxes to the delivery person when they bring their next meal to their doorstep. 

Instead of charging restaurants or customers for the boxes, DeliverZero charges restaurants 5%-20% of sales as a service fee. "The maximum will not exceed 22.5%." Sweeney emphasized. During the outbreak, some take-out platforms such as Seamless and GrubHub took the opportunity to raise their service fees to 30 percent of restaurant turnover, sparking outrage that eventually led to cities including New York and San Francisco introducing rules to tighten the cap on service fees on take-out platforms.

Today, DeliverZero is bringing reusable meal boxes to more major take-out platforms as a packaging option. Consumers can choose to use them for 25 cents per box, and Sweeney hopes that more consumers will choose to put their take-out food in reusable containers. 

Maia Tekle and Lindsey Hoell, founders of Dispatch Goods, another supplier of recycled tableware, believe that the logistics chain is the key to solving the problem of plastic pollution from packaging. They want to further optimize the company's recycling process and make reuse as routine as recycling. They intend to add a "fourth bin" to the "non-recyclable bin", "recyclable bin" and "next to the food waste bin". "for recycled food containers.

Dispatch Goods founders Maia Tekle and Lindsey Hoell hold stainless steel recycling utensils

Sarah Currie Halpern, co-founder of waste reduction consultancy Think Zero, argues that it will be difficult for the private sector alone to mainstream the reusable model, and that regulators and the public sector will play a key role in creating a stronger recycling system. "A small tax on disposable items could fund the operation of new recycling sites and washing facilities. Local governments should do more to support emerging companies." For example, the city of Boulder has partnered with RepEATer to provide funding for reusable take-out containers and help them attract new restaurants and diners. Some cities are also taking action to limit or ban the use of single-use plastic containers in restaurants. Starting in 2023, Germany will require restaurants to use reusable eating utensils when serving takeout.

Hoell believes her reuse model will work in densely populated, ecologically strong areas of Northern California, and may take a while in rural Arkansas. But she believes that her "fourth bin" system will gradually spread to all metropolitan areas with populations over 500,000.

Sweeney is also optimistic about the prospects for using recyclable take-out containers. In New York, she says, it's a feature that some residents never turn on their ovens (never cook and rely on takeout). "Many people around the world are eating take-out food every day, which means there is a market everywhere for developing sustainable, reusable take-out systems."

In recent years, with the global focus on green development, especially the Chinese government's major strategic decision to achieve carbon peaking by 2030 and carbon neutrality by 2060, major companies have responded by promoting and laying out a comprehensive green transformation through their own innovative R&D. In the packaging application, more and more companies are actively exploring the application of green packaging. Let's take a look at it together.

IKEA to phase out plastic packaging for goods 

For its part, IKEA says product packaging is a key component of the IKEA business model and an important enabler for achieving affordability, sustainability and safe handling. In response to plastic waste and pollution issues, IKEA has significantly reduced the plastic used in its packaging. Today, less than 10 percent of the packaging materials used by IKEA each year are plastic. To move closer to its sustainability goals, IKEA will further eliminate plastic from its merchandise packaging and use only recycled or recyclable materials. The plan is to achieve all new product lines without plastic packaging by 2025 and to phase out plastic packaging from existing product lines by 2028.

 Amazon France order packaging tends to be recyclable

Amazon France has announced that it will stop using single-use plastic bags for its products by the end of 2021, a change that applies to small items sold by private label and third-party sellers using Amazon's logistics service. Consumers are currently receiving orders in paper or cardboard packaging that is more easily recycled through waste collection and disposal services. These bags are now made from more recycled materials, reducing the volume of the package compared to a standard cardboard box.

Estee Lauder: Entering the paper bottle packaging

Estée Lauder Companies announced that it has joined the Pulpex Partnership Alliance in developing recyclable bottles made from wood pulp for its products. The new paper bottles are designed to be widely recycled in the standard waste stream, which will support Estée Lauder's efforts to reduce the environmental impact of packaging throughout its lifecycle. And the expansion of this technology will support Estée Lauder's efforts to drive progress on its global sustainable packaging goals, including the company's latest commitment to reduce the amount of virgin petroleum-based plastics in its packaging to 50 percent or less by the end of 2030. By 2025 all cartons are FSC certified and 75 to 100 percent of their packaging is "recyclable, refillable, reusable, recyclable.

The current situation and development prospects of green packaging 

As the government, enterprises and individuals continue to pay attention to environmental protection, green packaging, environmental protection packaging has gradually become an excellent opportunity for packaging and printing enterprises to achieve competitive differentiation and sustainable development. The most attention to environmental protection courier packaging, for example, in order to solve the problem of packaging pollution, major e-commerce and courier companies are currently testing the water green packaging.

Green Packaging Materials 

Green packaging research mainly lies in the following points: the reduction of packaging materials, that is, in the product packaging to meet the functions of the use, transportation, convenient, conducive to sales of the basic situation, as far as possible to save packaging materials ; The recycling of packaging materials is to improve the efficiency of the recycling of packaging materials, in the waste to achieve renewable resources use has been the maximum degree of environmental protection. The compatibility of packaging materials with the environment, can be naturally degraded in a short time, minimal or no pollution of the environment, maintaining the ecological balance; packaging materials to ensure that non-toxic and non-polluting, the choice of packaging materials is also a responsible for the safety of life.

The so-called green packaging material is in the production, use, end-of-life and recycling process, can save resources and energy, waste can be quickly natural degradation or reuse, will not damage the ecological balance. And a wide range of sources, low energy consumption, easy to recover and high recycling rate of materials or material products. The common green packaging materials include biodegradable plastics and natural biomolecular materials.

01 Reusable and recycled packaging materials 

reuse packaging such as beer, drinks, soy sauce, vinegar and other packaging using glass bottles for repeated use. Sweden and other countries to implement the polyester PET beverage bottles and PC milk bottles reuse up to 20 times or more. The Netherlands Wellman company and the United States Johnson company to PET containers for 100% recycling.

Recycling packaging, such as polyester bottles after recycling, can be recycled in two ways, the physical method refers to the direct and thorough purification and shredding, without any contaminant residue, after the treatment of plastic and then directly used in recycled packaging containers. Chemical method means that the recycled PET is shredded and washed, and the PET is fully depolymerized into monomers or partially depolymerized into oligomers by using depolymerizers such as methanol water, ethylene glycol or diethylene glycol under the action of alkaline catalysts, and then the monomers or oligomers are purified and repolymerized into recycled PET resin packaging materials.

Reuse and recycling of packaging materials. Honeycomb cardboard will surely lead the trend of the times and become the leader in the field of packaging materials with its following features 

02 Edible packaging materials 

Edible packaging films have been used for decades, and the familiar glutinous rice paper used in candy packaging and the corn baking cups used to package ice cream are typical of edible packaging. It is a tasteless, odorless, non-crystalline, amorphous white powder, a non-ionic, non-reducing stable polysaccharide, and because it is a polydextrose composed of α-glucoside, it dissolves easily in water and can be used as a viscous, neutral, non-dissociative non-gelatinized aqueous solution.

Its 5%-10% aqueous solution can be dried or hot pressed to make films of 0.01mm thickness, which are transparent, colorless, odorless, non-toxic, tough, highly resistant to oil, edible and can be used for instrument packaging. Its gloss, strength and folding resistance are better than the film made of high chain starch.

Edible cling film has been used in China as early as the 12th to 13th centuries to coat oranges and lemons with wax to retard their dehydration and weight loss. Extend the shelf life of fruits and vegetables. Nowadays, edible cling films have been developed into multi-component edible films made of various biomolecules (proteins and polysaccharides) and lipids with various functional properties.

This kind of composite film is mainly through the interaction between different molecules, the formation of a stable emulsion, and then dried so that the solvent volatilization and the formation of porous, transparent or translucent three-dimensional network structure of the film, this porous network structure makes the film with obvious water resistance and certain optional permeability, and therefore in the food industry, especially in the preservation of fruits and vegetables, has a broad application prospects.

03 Biodegradable materials 

A degradable material is a plastic whose chemical structure changes under specific circumstances that cause loss of performance over a specific period of time. Biodegradable plastic packaging materials not only have the functions and characteristics of traditional plastics, but also can be degraded and restored in the natural environment through the action of ultraviolet light in sunlight or the action of microorganisms in soil and water, and finally reenter the ecological environment in a non-toxic form and return to nature. 

Polystyrene foam food packaging, made from a rigid plastic called polystyrene, poses many environmental problems. In response, New York State will ban the use of single-use foam polystyrene plastic food containers and packaging starting January 1, 2022. Violators will face a $250 fine, and repeat offenders will face fines of $500, $1,000 and $2,000.

Democratic State Senator Todd Kaminsky (D-CA)

According to the New York Department of Environmental Conservation , the new rules apply to restaurants, caterers, food carts, food trucks, grocery stores, grocery stores, cafeterias, coffee shops, delis, universities, schools, etc. However, there are some exceptions to the ban, including raw meat and seafood sold with the intent of allowing customers to prepare it off site. Non-profit organizations and venues that provide food to those in need may also continue to provide food packaged in foam polystyrene if they qualify for certain exemptions.

There is no federal ban on foam polystyrene packaging, and all current bans are on the city or county level. In addition to New York, 11 other U.S. cities do not allow the use of foam polystyrene packaging to serve food or beverages, including major cities such as San Francisco (California), Portland (Oregon) and Seattle (Washington).

Without foam polystyrene, what's next for take-out food packaging? Companies producing and developing alternatives to traditional food packaging are focused on using sustainable and biodegradable materials that release little to no chemicals when processed. 

One of the most popular alternatives to foam polystyrene in recent years has been the use of plant fibers to create compostable food take-out containers. 

Many different fibers can be used for this application, including sugar cane, corn, potatoes and bamboo. Packaging made from paper, especially recycled paper, is another common choice. While these materials are compostable, some compostable packaging contains "permanent chemicals" that never decompose. A Hong Kong-based company called Ecoinno uses sugar cane and bamboo to make take-out containers without the use of any of these special chemicals or plastics.

This past summer, delivery service Delivery Hero launched a sustainable packaging program for the restaurants it serves in an attempt to reduce single-use and toxic packaging waste. 

QSRs such as Burger King and Taco Bell have begun experimenting with various alternatives to their original disposable packaging, such as reusable, recyclable and compostable packaging. 

This week, a London company called Notpla raised €11.7 million ($13.1 million) for its "disappearing" seaweed packaging. The replacement packaging completely degrades within 4-6 weeks without the use of any special treatment. Although NotPla's packaging is intended to be a direct replacement for plastic rather than foam polystyrene, this still has potential for use in restaurants and food spaces.

In recent years, scientific studies have continued to discover the existence of microbial flora in the natural environment capable of degrading conventional plastics, such as PET and PE degrading bacteria. This series of discoveries continues to expand the knowledge of "degradable plastics".

Cellulose acetate (CDA), a bio-based plastic widely used in consumer products, was once thought to be difficult to degrade, but a new study published in Environmental Science & Technology Letters suggests that cellulose acetate actually breaks down and degrades in the ocean much faster than previously assumed, capable of disappearing in a matter of months.

"These findings challenge the understanding of government agencies and advocacy groups that cellulose acetate materials will persist in the ocean for decades," disagrees the paper, "Rapid Degradation of Cellulose Acetate by Marine Microbes. 

Acetate is primarily derived from wood pulp, making it a "bio-based" plastic. It is used in a wide range of consumer products, including cigarette filters, textiles, coatings, films, food packaging and other products such as eyeglass frames and tool handles.

Cigarette filters made from acetate

Evolution of the degradation ability of natural microorganisms

In this study, the researchers set up nearly 350 acetate materials and control samples in a customized seawater mesocosm environment. They equipped the experimental system with a continuous stream of seawater from Vineyard Sound, Massachusetts, which flowed over the samples, and the researchers examined their degradation over time using a variety of techniques.

Time-lapse photographs and mass loss measurements documented the decomposition of these materials, indicating that acetate materials are capable of decomposing in seawater over a period of several months. 

The paper notes that the rapid breakdown of acetate material is marked by an increase in esterase and cellulase activity, suggesting that the composition of the natural microbial community "is evolving with the metabolic capacity to degrade acetate material. Using specialized equipment at the National Ocean Sciences Accelerator Mass Spectrometry (NOSAMS) facility, the researchers confirmed this finding by determining that the chemical signature of carbon dioxide breathed by native seawater microbes matched the chemical signature of acetate.

"Our collective findings suggest that acetate materials break down and biodegrade in the ocean several orders of magnitude (months) faster than previously reported (decades)," according to the study. 

Although scientists have previously found that acetate appears to be readily broken down by microorganisms in soil and wastewater environments, no studies had assessed the persistence of acetate materials in the marine environment prior to this study. 

Co-author Collin Ward, an assistant scientist in the Department of Marine Chemistry and Geochemistry at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI), said, "This is the first paper that tries to give a specific number on how long acetate materials will last in the ocean." .

"We use a variety of tools to approach the problem from many different angles, from pictures to multi-million dollar mass spectrometers.

Each line of evidence converges on the same answer: these materials decompose in a matter of months. This challenges the perception that industry has held on to for decades - that acetate is difficult to degrade in the ocean." 

Marine degradable does not mean that pollution will be tolerated

The paper states that the time to biodegradation of acetate can be affected by many factors, such as different particle shapes and sizes, time of year and location. "It's good news that some of the material doesn't seem to last as long as we thought it would," Ward said. The common goal of the research community should be to investigate the different types of plastics and to try to identify those that are "simultaneously useful, do not persist in the environment, and are composed of materials from sustainable sources.

Ward and lead author Michael Mazzotta said they hope the findings will encourage people, including lawmakers, to rely more on scientific data when discussing the fate of plastics. 

"The environmental persistence of organic pollutants is a key component of the risk assessment and regulatory framework, and some believe that high persistence alone is sufficient for regulation. However, applying the regulatory framework of whether or not plastics are degradable remains a challenge due to the incomplete understanding of plastics." The paper states.

While this research is a positive step in the right direction, it does not mean that pollution will be tolerated," said Mazzotta, a postdoctoral researcher in WHOI's Department of Marine Chemistry and Geochemistry. Just because cellulose acetate degrades faster than we expected, it is allowed to be thrown away willy-nilly."

The research was funded by Eastman Chemical Company and WHOI, and WHOI researchers say it is beneficial to society to bring industry and academia together to find solutions. 

Innovation & Sustainability 

Sustainable packaging has been a top priority for brand owners for more than a decade, and since 2021, we have seen relevant and effective solutions that can fuel consumer desire for environmental protection and brand sustainability.

Increased consumer awareness continues to drive the mission of sustainable packaging at the brand end. About 74% of consumers say they are willing to pay extra for products with sustainable packaging. Recyclable packaging seems to be most important to consumers because recycling is a contribution they can make. However, in many areas, the recycling business is struggling. This may force brands to adopt other sustainable packaging options.

We are now gradually seeing industrial and branded applications for reusable, refillable, recyclable packaging, bio-based alternatives to plastic packaging, etc. Here are 7 global sustainable packaging trends we will see in 2021. 

1.Refillable packaging 

The use of refillable containers supports zero waste programs. It works on a simple principle: stores offer bulk products, and customers bring in empty refillable containers and fill them with products (see above). Personal care and cosmetic products can often be packaged in refillable packaging for sustainable solutions. Sustainability is particularly important to the CPG industry as the FMCG (Consumer Packaged Goods) industry is one that relies heavily on disposable packaging. The use of refillable containers has reduced transportation and manufacturing costs, but the success of the system depends on a variety of factors. These may include public acceptance, additional costs incurred by the supply chain, and the availability of a large number of containers.

Hermès, for example, expects this trend to further affect large cosmetic manufacturers and start-ups, especially when the fashion luxury giant enters the sector. 

2.Recyclable/reusable packaging 

Recyclable/reusable packaging is not a new concept in the business-to-business market. Manufacturers have long reused crates, drums, pallets and bulk containers. 

This trend toward recyclability is back, with many organizations using recyclable containers and utensils to reduce their impact on the environment. 

CupClub (UK), Globelet (Australia), ReCup (Germany) and CupKita (Indonesia) are industry pioneers. But the trend is not limited to liquid beverages: Fresh Bowl (USA) uses glass containers for fresh salads.

Another example is industrial products, where Oshkosh Corp. is a large wholesaler that goes with the flow and uses recyclable packaging, and where recyclable packaging management software can also be used to manage assets through the supply chain. 

In 2021, the concept of reusable packaging will also be embraced by the business-to-consumer market. 

Major organizations such as Nestlé, P&G, PepsiCo and Unilever are adapting to this trend by supporting the Loop circular economy shopping platform launched by Tom Szaky, founder and CEO of TerraCycle. 

Loop is growing at a healthy rate, and it is initially available in three cities, offering 300 products. 

3.Antibacterial packaging

Antibacterial packaging is a new example of promoting sustainability by helping to reduce product waste. However, the development of such packages is usually expensive and may require significant design changes. And some domestic companies also do antimicrobial agent development and anti-mold and anti-bacterial packaging.

Hayriye Unal, an industry expert from Sabanci University in Turkey, has come up with the innovative idea of using clay to make an antibacterial film. This film for packaging will reduce microbial and ripening activity on food products, keeping them fresher for longer. 

4.edible film (edible packaging) 

Edible packaging is finally available for commercial use. Different natural products can be made into edible packaging, but the most effective ingredient is chitosan, a polysaccharide with natural antibacterial activity in sufficient amounts. 

The advantage of chitosan packaging is that it is edible and protects food from a variety of mechanisms. It acts as a physical barrier, preventing direct contact between microorganisms and food. It also inhibits the respiratory activity of bacteria by blocking the supply of oxygen in the package.

Edible film can be used for fruit and vegetable packaging. However, food scientists believe that by the end of 2021, restaurants will adopt this product for take-out packaging. 

5.Bioplastic packaging

Bioplastics are made from biodegradable, renewable resources such as starch, protein and polylactic acid (PLA). The number of available products and suppliers has exploded in recent years, and today bioplastics are being used in commercial markets around the world. 

Of all the plastics used in packaging, polyethylene terephthalate (PET) has the highest recycling rate. It is usually produced from raw materials, but it can replace certain petroleum-based components with bio-based alternatives. According to the European Bioplastics Association, bio-based PET is a relevant, economical and effective form of plastic packaging. It has an elastic texture and strong fibers, making it suitable for replacing other packaging materials for containers, rigid bottles and films. Klaus Hartwig, head of Nestlé's research center, has described in detail the company's 100% recycled plastic bottles for mineral water packaging.

Materials used for bioplastic packaging may not compete with food sources and their raw materials may be waste or industrial by-products, such as rice hulls and wood chips. 

6.Post-consumer recycled resin (recycled plastic) 

Post-consumer recycled (PCR) resin is a recycled plastic used to make packaging such as water bottles, sheets, films and other containers. 

PCR is now in high demand, as many companies have set targets for PCR content in their packaging. This includes electronics, retail, pharmaceutical and medical packaging are all beginning to look at this solution. 

Stephanie Baker, CEO of KW Plastics, the world's largest recycler, said, "We buy recyclable plastics from surrounding areas and manufacture recycled packaging materials. 90 percent of our raw materials come from bottles used in kitchens and bathrooms. In addition to bottles, we also produce caps, tubs, tubes and other disposable items." 

7.Bulk dispenser refill 

While similar to retailers' bulk purchases of consumers in refillable containers, bulk dispenser refills are another packaging trend in the wholesaler-to-retailer market. This trend is rapidly expanding in the United States, Canada, Europe, Indonesia, Brazil and South Africa. Wholesalers are asking retailers to bring their containers and fill them.

A limited number of wholesalers and a limited number of products are adopting this concept. However, retailers like Asda and Waitrose are offering consumers many products - mainly dry foods such as cereals, pasta and nuts - through bulk dispensers that need to be replenished on their own. This trend is rapidly expanding, with general stores and small grocery chains also adopting it to contribute to environmental sustainability.

Chilean consumer brand Algramo sells bulk products at an affordable cost in low-income areas to increase its usage in the region.

The consumer wipes market is booming. From hand washing to surface disinfection to bathroom hygiene, consumers are relying on wipes more than ever before, and manufacturers are taking notice. According to Smithers, the wipes market consumed 1.4 million tons of nonwovens in 2020, and its market value reached $19.6 billion. 

The annual growth rate from 2015-2020 is reported to be 7.9%. This spiked during the New Crown outbreak when market demand for wipes increased. Even after demand peaked in the second quarter of 2020, sales of certain categories of wipes were still more than 20% higher than before the outbreak.

More consumers than ever before are using wet wipes, driving growth in this market. According to recent surveys, there has been a 30% increase in the number of people using wipes regularly compared to 2008. In addition, the number of people using surface disinfecting wipes is up 44% from the start of the new crown epidemic, and this behavior is expected to continue. 

Most wipes manufacturers and their suppliers are looking to increase investments to meet this growing demand. Two of the industry's largest wipes processors, Nice-Pak and Rockline Industries, announced investments in the U.S., primarily in the production of surface disinfecting wipes, while disinfecting wipes leader Clorox added a new production line in Atlanta, Georgia, and expanded its network of contract manufacturers located in the U.S. and globally. 

Bio-based environmental transition for brand owners 

As the use of wipes continues to climb, the industry is facing the challenge of making products greener. This is being driven not only by regulations such as the European Single-Use Plastics Directive and similar measures being evaluated in several U.S. states, but also by consumer preference for more natural products. 

Pricie Hanna, managing partner of Price Hanna Consultants, is also seeing more direct-to-consumer brands competing for consumers who value sustainability. "Millennials and younger consumers are driving this trend at the same time that the public is increasingly concerned about sustainability," she explains. "In addition to direct-to-consumer brands, we are seeing major manufacturers and their brands adopt similar strategies in the baby and feminine care categories. " 

Kimberly Launches Natural Fiber Wipes

Earlier this year, Kimberly-Clark (Kimberly-Clark) launched a new line of Huggies Pure Biodegradable wipes in the UK that are biodegradable after 15 days in simulated landfill conditions. 

Huggies said the plastic-free wipes are made from 100 percent natural fibers. Independent tests have shown it to be biodegradable after 15 days in simulated landfill conditions, making it the brand's first biodegradable product. The brand has pledged to completely eliminate plastic from its line of baby wipes in the U.K. within five years or sooner. 

In addition to launching its first biodegradable products, Huggies has made significant progress toward other goals of its "footprint minimization" mission. Achievements to date include removing 359 tons of plastic from its baby wipes portfolio each year, removing 17 tons of plastic from the Huggies Extra Care portfolio each year, and removing the internal plastic bags from its larger boxes, saving 43 tons of plastic each year. 

"We know this will be welcome news for parents who rely on wipes as a daily parenting necessity but are also working to reduce their impact on the planet," said Ori Ben Shai, vice president and managing director of Kimberly-Clark UK and Ireland, "No parent should not have to compromise between caring for their children and protecting the environment, so we are proud to be able to offer an affordable and sustainable solution with baby's skin care at its core." 

Unicharm launches biodegradable wipes

"The launch of our first biodegradable product brings us one step closer to achieving our goal of a 'footprint minimization' mission. We know we have a long way to go to achieve this ambitious plan, but we are committed to developing the best products to meet the evolving needs of consumers." 

Similarly, Unicharm will launch Mamy Poko Premium baby wipes. The new product uses organic cotton composites that have received the world's highest safety standard "OEKO-TEX" STANDARD100 certification, as well as "FSC certification", which proves that it takes into account both safety and environmental aspects. 

The "OEKO-TEX" STANDARD100 is an international safety certification granted only to textiles that have been analysed and tested to a strict standard by the OEKO-TEX® International Community Certification Inspection Unit for more than 350 hazardous chemical substances. In order to obtain this certification label, all materials and chemicals used in the product must specify their experimental criteria. In other words, products bearing this label are "certified" as having high safety standards. 

Unicharm is working hard to protect a better future for babies, and their commitment to providing safe and reliable products is evidenced by the ORGABITS program, an earth-friendly and sustainable activity. 

In May, baby care brand Coterie launched a wipe made from 100% plant-based biodegradable and compostable materials. Designed in collaboration with Veocel Brands, Coterie wipes contain 99 percent water and are the most sustainable baby wipes on the U.S. market. 

Recent certification tests have shown that Coterie wipes are proven to be fully compostable after only a few weeks, decomposing even under the harshest conditions, compared to similar wipes that take hundreds of years. By comparison, acceptable standards for compostable products can take up to six months, while plastic-based products, can take hundreds of years. In addition, the new wipes are the first in the country to receive chemical safety certification from the Environmental Working Group (EWG), mildness certification from the National Eczema Association and sustainability certification from TÜV-OK Compost HOME. 

Bio-based transformation for nonwoven manufacturers

Suominen

In terms of substrates, the nonwovens producer serving the global wipes market continues to focus on developing alternative sustainable materials. Nonwovens supplier Suominen has set a goal to increase sales of sustainable materials by 50 percent and to launch more than a dozen sustainable products each year. 2020 saw the company launch nine sustainable products and grow sales by 22.5 percent. 

"Sustainability is increasingly important to our customers and other stakeholders," said Lynda Kelly, senior vice president of business development, "and we help our customers achieve their own by providing them with products made from renewable, recyclable, compostable and plastic-free raw materials. environmental goals by providing our customers with products made from renewable, recyclable, compostable and plastic-free raw materials. As a result, we're bringing more sustainable options to this market." 

In sync with this strategy, Suominen has launched products such as Biolace Pure, a 100% plant-based product with excellent cleaning power. The successful development of this innovative material with outstanding liquid management and cleaning properties is based on Suominen's long history and expertise. 

Another sustainable household product from the company is Biolace Bamboo, which also offers superior cleaning capabilities. As the name suggests, Biolace Bamboo's main ingredient is bamboo, a perennial grass that is one of the fastest growing plants in the world. Its high rate of regrowth makes it an important alternative. 

"Compared to traditional petrochemical-based nonwovens used in wipes, Biolace Pure and Biolace Bamboo offer significant advantages in terms of reduced CO2 footprint and lower environmental impact," Kelly added. 

Biolace Ultrasoft, meanwhile, is a nonwoven for personal care and baby products made from plant-based, biodegradable, plastic-free and compostable raw materials. The latest addition to Suominen's sustainable portfolio, it is also a continuation of its Biolace product line, which was launched more than a decade ago. 

Biolace Ultrasoft was developed to meet the needs and quality expectations of its customers and consumers for sustainable products. According to Suominen's tests, the structure and composition of Biolace Ultrasoft nonwovens offer a 25% improvement in cleaning efficiency compared to 100% viscose spunlace nonwovens of the same basis weight, and a 38% improvement compared to polyester wipes. 

"Biolace Ultrasoft is a sustainable product with outstanding cleaning efficiency and exceptional softness. It is the perfect solution for baby and personal care products, such as make-up wipes and baby wipes. The softness makes it suitable for gentle skin products as well," said Johanna Sirén, the company's category management manager. 

Jacob Holm

At the same time, Jacob Holm has introduced a new sustainable member to his Sontara EC family in EMEA.Sontara EC Green is a unique new high performance 100% cellulose based product made from proprietary Sontara technology. This ultra-pure manufacturing process produces a 100% bio-based product that contains no binders, chemicals or silicones. 

Sontara EC Green is patented and produced from renewable resources, making it an excellent alternative to non-biodegradable substrates. The wipes come in an easy-to-dispense box with sealed packaging to prevent any contamination. With this product, users can get the critical cleaning power they need while being environmentally responsible. 

In addition to new sustainable packaging made from recycled materials and a new folding format, Jacob Holm has added sustainable options to its Sontara EC product line. This takes Jacob Holm's commitment to sustainability and continuous innovation one step further.

The development of more sustainable materials is a key component of Jacob Holm's Project Boost, a multimillion-dollar global expansion program that will increase its global production capacity. 

"Project Boost will help us increase capacity to serve our global partners and provide them with more sustainable substrate options, as well as continue our position as a leader in nonwovens innovation." said Martin Mikkelsen, the company's chief executive officer. 

Glatfelter

As a manufacturer of air-webbed nonwovens, Glatfelter has 30 wipe substrates that contain a high percentage of recycled materials and wood pulp. 

For the disinfecting wipes market, Glatfelter now offers an environmentally friendly cellulose-based air-flow webbed nonwoven substrate for GlatClean disinfecting wipes. 

"Glatfelter is committed to providing our customers with wipe substrates that meet extremely high standards of hygiene, safety and sustainability," said Chris Astley, senior vice president and chief commercial officer of the company, "and we are proud to bring to the cleaning and disinfecting wipes market by bringing an environmentally friendly air-flow web formation solution with a cellulosic substrate." 

In October 2021, UNEP released the report "From Pollution to Solution: a global assessment of marinelitter and plastic pollution" to the world. However, some comments of the report about biodegradable plastics and bio-based plastics may be controversial due to the angle and lack of comprehensiveness of the comments.

UNEP PK FAO: Biodegradable plastics, who is lying?

On December 15, 2021, the European Bioplastics Association (EUBP) commented in an open letter to the public in response to the United Nations Environment Programme's globally released report, From Pollution to Solutions: A Global Assessment of Marine Litter and Plastic Pollution.

EUBP began by welcoming UNEP's long-term efforts in promoting a transition to a low-carbon, resource-efficient and environmentally risk-reducing economy.

But EUBP says that despite the many benefits of bioplastics in helping to reduce, reuse and recycle waste, misconceptions and prejudices about bio-based, biodegradable and compostable plastics persist. As the recent UNEP scientific assessment, "From Pollution to Solutions - A Global Assessment of Marine Litter and Plastic Pollution" and the complementary report "Drowning in Plastic - A Global Assessment of Marine Litter and Plastic Pollution," show, there is no doubt that biomass is a major source of pollution. -A Critical Map of Marine Litter and Plastic Waste," both of which were released earlier in 2021.

EUBP believes that both reports show a lack of understanding of the nature and properties of bioplastics and, as a result, draw erroneous and highly misleading conclusions about their impact. These reports lack an understanding of the innovative properties of bioplastics and ignore recent developments, the latest scientific evidence and standardization efforts. This is inconsistent with the UN's commitment to reduce dependence on fossil resources, greenhouse gas emissions and the environmental impact of plastics.

Therefore, EUBP wanted to address some of the most problematic areas identified in the report and provide a more balanced understanding of bioplastics. 

(1). Definition of bioplastics and proper use of terms

Throughout the report, various terms are used to refer to the origin of bioplastics, including "bio-based," "bio-sourced," and "plant-based," which only leads to more confusion about what bioplastics are, not less. This only leads to more confusion about the meaning of bioplastics, not less. To the casual reader, these terms mean exactly the same thing. Unlike "bio-sourced" plastics, "bio-based" plastics may be entirely fossil-based (and may be biodegradable), which is unreasonable.

Therefore, EUBP strongly recommends using the most common and widely accepted definition of bioplastics: "Bioplastics are either bio-based, biodegradable, or both." These terms are defined and clearly described in the European Standard EN 16575 developed by CEN/TC411 WG 1.

As correctly stated in the report, the term "bioplastics" should not be used to describe a specific material without reference to its source (based or non-biological) and its intended end-of-life options. Similarly, the terms "biodegradable" and "compostable" should not be used alone as general end-of-life statements, but should always be specified by the target environment (e.g., industrial compost, home compost, agricultural soils) in terms of the time frame in which biodegradation can occur and/or specific criteria for setting corresponding thresholds. or specific criteria for setting corresponding thresholds.

(2). Properties and advantages of bio-based plastics

The two reports released by UNEP completely ignore the main advantages of bio-based plastics, namely removing bio-carbon from the atmosphere, storing it in materials/products, and preventing carbon from contributing to climate change. This is significantly better than petrochemical-based plastics, where fossil carbon stored underground for millions of years is extracted and eventually emitted into the atmosphere, negatively impacting the climate. Bio-based products replace fossil carbon and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This fact must be taken into account when making a fair and balanced assessment of environmental impacts. However, it is not mentioned in the report.

Instead, the two reports state, "Overall, replacing one disposable product (e.g., made of plastic) with another made of a different material (e.g., paper, biodegradable plastic) will only shift the environmental burden and create other problems." (UNEP, From Pollution to Solutions, p. 101).

It is true that the priority to reduce pollution should be to reduce the number of disposable products to the absolute minimum necessary, but bioplastics still have an advantage over conventional plastics because they are either bio-based or biodegradable (compostable), or both. In this way, while it may not be possible to completely eliminate the environmental burden, they will certainly reduce it without shifting any of it.

(3). Biodegradation behavior under different environments

To assess the benefits or impacts of biodegradable plastics, the report references the following studies and conclusions: "In their review of the biodegradability of plastic bags, Harrison et al. conclude that current international standards and regional testing methods are insufficient to realistically predict the biodegradability of hand-held plastic bags in wastewater, inland waters (rivers, streams and lakes) due to the shortcomings of plastic bags and marine environments for biodegradability. 

Existing testing procedures, the lack of relevant standards for most unmanaged aquatic habitats, and the lack of broader research on the biodegradation of plastic materials under real-world conditions." (UNEP, From Pollution to Solutions, p. 79). 

However, this reference is very problematic because it completely ignores the clear recommendation that in order to declare the biodegradability of a product, environmental conditions must be specified and a time frame for biodegradation must be set in order to make the declaration measurable and comparable. This is provided for in the applicable standards. There are specific applications in which compostable and organic recycling properties represent ecological improvements: 1) applications that promote biological waste collection and composting; easily contaminated compost; 2) and/or those that cannot or are not easily recycled. because they are: a) contaminated with food waste; b) too small to be collected, sorted and cleaned prior to recycling; c) made of non-separable multi-layer films; or d) otherwise difficult to recycle. These applications should also be made of compostable plastics, as organic recycling provides a valuable end-of-life option. Closed-loop systems can work well by allowing compostable packaging to be collected along with food waste in situations where reuse is not appropriate. In order to be suitable for organic recycling, products and materials need to meet the strict criteria of the European standard EN 13432 on industrial compostability.

However, these reports ignore the need for these specifications and further note that "in recent field studies (Balestri (2017, 2019, 2020), the impact of conventional (HDPE) plastic bags and compostable plastic bags was tested. When they are left in the natural environment, the findings show that plastic bags labeled as meeting the criteria for biodegradability and compostability do not meet these criteria once they are discarded in the natural environment." (UNEP, From Pollution to Solutions, p. 31).

Coming to such a conclusion is not only extremely misleading, but it also unknowingly promotes the idea that such products may be littered. This is problematic because it leads to the opposite result. 

Since it is clearly not possible to scientifically standardize the "natural environment", biodegradability cannot be tested in such environments. This in no way affects the added value of certifying plastic bags as industrial or home compostable. 

If a plastic bag meets industrial compostability standards such as EN 13432, it is ideally suited for collecting biological waste and composting with its contents in an industrial composting facility. Neither the material nor the application is designed to degrade in a "natural" environment. 

The report further states, "While biodegradability may be an advantage of PLA and some other bio-based plastics in reducing the number of landfills, few cities and communities have the infrastructure needed to compost under the right conditions. Organizations that use compostable biopolymers may continue to send their waste to landfills (UNEP 2021b). For the more common bio-based and biodegradable plastics, this may be a major problem. (UNEP, From Pollution to Solutions, p. 101)

Given the commitment to waste reduction and increased recycling, does the above statement justify the need for an effective waste infrastructure to avoid bio-waste ending up in landfills and releasing methane there, a greenhouse gas more than 20 times more powerful than carbon dioxide, rather than rejecting altogether innovative solutions that offer many other benefits? 

(4). Biodegradation behavior in the marine environment

Biodegradability in the open environment (especially in the ocean) is only applicable to a very few, highly specific applications. These may be plastic wastes that are difficult to find and recover, such as fireworks shells, or plastic products used by professionals (e.g. farmers or fishermen/fishermen) in specific situations (e.g. fishing line nets). For other applications that fall primarily under the category of packaging, "biodegradability in an open environment" is neither promoted nor endorsed, and the industry fully agrees that this principle should not be changed.

However, if a comprehensive assessment of the persistence of items causing littering consequences is to be conducted, a risk assessment should be conducted for all materials found in the open environment. 

In this regard, the report refers to the following publication, "The persistence of bio-based and biodegradable plastics in aquatic habitats is uncertain, but experiments over time have found that even after three years, most biodegradable plastics and mixtures fail to demonstrate any degradation in the marine environment or meet International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and ASTM biodegradation standards." However, the criteria mentioned in the report kind are not explicitly passed-fail criteria for the test methods. Therefore, it is meaningless to say that they do not meet these criteria.

At the same time, some of the papers in the report failed to test certified materials or test industrial compostable materials, or worse, none of them tested oxidatively degradable materials.

Therefore, the results of these publications cannot be used to make such a generalized statement. On the other hand, the report does not mention that several biodegradable plastics and blends (e.g., TPS, PHB, PHB-PLC blends, etc.) showed good marine biodegradability as indicated in the article by Narancic et al. 

Currently, there are no international standards that adequately define the biodegradation of plastics in the marine environment. However, many standardization projects are underway at the ISO and ASTM levels. While biodegradable plastic is not and never will be the solution to marine litter according to established standards, it may be part of the solution.

EUBP fully supports additional research on the biodegradation behavior of existing material types and applications and calls for criteria to measure and confirm (or reject) biodegradation claims in the respective marine environments as already achieved with biodegradable materials. 

(5). Risk of microplastics

The advantage of biodegradable materials is that they do not erode into permanent secondary microplastics as they degrade because most natural environments are inhabited by microorganisms capable of metabolizing these polymers. As a result, biodegradable materials have a much shorter residence time in the environment compared to conventional plastic materials. In this way, biodegradable plastics help to minimize the environmental impact and reduce the accumulation of plastic particles in different environmental habitats. However, the report incorrectly claims that "biodegradable plastics do not degrade into microplastic particles like conventional plastics (Napper and Thompson 2019)." (UNEP, From Pollution to Solutions, p. 55) Not only is the statement misleading, but the study it refers to (Napper, IE and Thompson, RC (2019), Environmental Science and Technology 53(9), 4775-4783.) contains many flaws and is therefore disqualified. The main point of criticism from academics is that they deliberately draw general and erroneous conclusions about "biodegradable" bags from bags that claim to be biodegradable, but clearly are not.

EUBP strongly recommends that a careful distinction always be made between biodegradable and compostable. When testing compostable plastics for marine biodegradation, the conclusions of these tests lack any justification. Biodegradable and compostable plastics, when used in their designed applications, do help reduce the risk of microplastic contamination. They are metabolized to CO₂, H₂O and biomass and decomposed in less than 12 weeks. In this case, decomposition is a necessary part of the overall biodegradation process and the formation of smaller particles, which should not be confused with persistent microplastics that will remain in the final compost. Even in the case of sub-optimal composting treatment, the biodegradation process of the decomposed plastic small particles does not stop at this point, but continues in the soil.

EUBP supports all efforts to better understand the origin and production of microplastics and their release into and impact on the environment, minimizing the impact of plastics on the environment. Scientists are investigating the options of biodegradable materials as potential solutions for microplastic accumulation. Therefore, data on the residence time of the material in nature should also be included in the risk assessment of the LCA.

(6). Risk of littering (ecotoxicity)

Biodegradable and compostable plastics have never been designed to be discarded in the open environment. However, in order to address this issue, it is necessary to distinguish between waste that is intentionally released into the environment and waste that is discarded due to "accidental spills/littering". In the first category, there are only a limited number of applications, such as fishing gear and fireworks casings, to name a few. In addition, soil biodegradable mulches that improve agricultural productivity also fall into this category. These criteria were developed to ensure complete biodegradation and integrated ecotoxicity testing that takes into account all relevant exposure pathways. As described for composting, soil biodegradable mulch helps reduce microplastics in agricultural soils. Unlike conventional mulch made of PE, which can lead to a buildup of plastic in the soil - even after planting has stopped - soil biodegradable mulch does not lead to a buildup in the soil.

However, if littering means "accidental spills", a risk assessment should be conducted to examine not only biodegradable and compostable plastics, but also all plastics and other materials (glass, paper, metal, etc.), as there is no evidence that compostable products are more dispersed in the environment than any other material. In many cases, media reports portray compostable packaging as a popular innovation for every application and the primary solution to marine plastic pollution, which is incorrect. In other cases, compostable packaging is portrayed as not truly compostable, which is also incorrect. Policymakers, academia, and industry must continue to work to understand the intersection of food waste, composting infrastructure, and ocean pollution systems, and to communicate the facts clearly and accurately.

EUBP believes that sound, well-functioning, source-separated waste collection is one of the most important measures to combat littering. All types of waste should find their way into appropriate and controlled forms of waste management and recycling.

(7). The safety of bio-based plastics has been proven

This is particularly important when the safety of bioplastics and additives has long been established according to EU environmental and human health safety standards. For example, products that want to be certified as compostable according to the European standard EN 13432 need to pass a rigorous ecotoxicity test. It should also be noted that some biodegradable polymers are considered safe because they are also used in biomedical applications, indicating that their safety for human health has been thoroughly investigated.

(8). Land use and sustainable sources of raw materials

Many of the raw materials used to produce bio-based plastics have been used for industrial purposes for almost a century. For example, the EU starch production from corn, wheat or potato is 10.7 million tons (2019), of which the EU consumes 9.2 million tons of starch (excluding protein and fiber, totaling about 5 million tons), of which 56 % is used for food, 3 % for feed and 41 % for non-food applications, mainly paper (31 %). Bio-based plastics account for less than 5% of starch consumption in the EU and fall under the category of "other non-food applications" (source: Starch Europe). Therefore, with regard to sustainability criteria for bio-based plastics, the focus is not on the type of raw material used, but on the amount of land required to produce the main raw material. According to recent data, the bio-based plastics industry does not compete with food and feed production. The land used to grow renewable feedstocks for bioplastics production is estimated at 0.013% of the global agricultural area of 5 billion hectares (in 2020). Although the market is expected to grow over the next five years (2021-2026), the land use share of bioplastics will increase to only about 0.06% by the end of this period. (Source: European Bioplastics and Nova Institute, 2021)

(9). Clarification of labels

All plastic products (traditional petrochemical-based plastics and bioplastics) should be the subject of comprehensive education and awareness campaigns to ensure proper disposal and end-of-life treatment. Compostability complements other waste management processes, especially for materials that are otherwise difficult to recycle. Biodegradable/compostable plastics should not be judged or evaluated based on their behavior in a non-compostable environment, as it is already perfectly possible to separate and process these plastics mechanically or organically.

EUBP believes that both the bio-based content and compostability of plastics should be clearly and uniformly labeled. 

Overall, EUBP believes that the assessments and conclusions of the two UNEP reports on bioplastics represent an inadequate and very misleading portrayal of these innovative materials. They also jeopardize the potential for innovation in the field of plastic substitutes and bio-based products. By ignoring the important aspects and advantages of the bioplastics sector, they strongly support the status quo of traditional fossil plastics. This is a serious obstacle to the commitment and goal of replacing fossil carbon and reducing greenhouse gas emissions and environmental impact. EUBP therefore urges the UN to reconsider its position on bioplastics and update the report - while halting wider dissemination - to take into account the latest scientific research and set the same high bar for traditional fossil plastics as it does for mandated, innovative bio-based materials .

Comments on the United Nations Environment Programme report

In October 2021 UNEP released the report From Pollution to Solutions: A Global Assessment of Marine Litter and Plastic Pollution, citing some of the articles in its Box 4 section of the report (O'Brine and Thompson 2010; Alvarez-Zeferino et al. 2015; Narancic et al. 2018; UNEP 2018a; Napper and Thompson 2019; Zimmermann et al. 2020.) In an article published in Elsevier's journal Environment International, Zimmermann's group at the University of Frankfurt, Germany, conducted extraction and in vitro cellular toxicity studies on 43 everyday bio-based and/or biodegradable products and their precursors, mainly covering food contact materials made from nine material types. Toxicity studies concluded that "existing bio-based and biodegradable plastics are no different from conventional plastics in terms of toxicity testing against organisms."  This has led some to argue that "biodegradable plastics, like conventional plastics, do not contribute to the improvement of the marine and terrestrial environment and are equally harmful to humans.

A careful reading of the article revealed that.

The paper investigates the harmfulness of bio-based plastics/biodegradable plastics themselves to cells in an in vitro environment, not for testing the toxicity of their degradation products to cells. This paper does not study the corresponding chemical characterization markers and related toxicological tests (including but not limited to baseline toxicity tests, oxidative stress tests, endocrine activity tests) for degradation products such as PLA, PBAT, starch-based plastics, and bamboo fiber-based plastics

The plastic extraction method in this paper was performed by dissolving in methanol and extracting in an environment of sonication at room temperature, while the extract was later added directly to the medium containing the cells. This method is equivalent to injecting plastics directly into the human body. It is impossible to prove that bio-based plastics/biodegradable plastics have direct harmful effects on the marine environment or terrestrial environment, but only that bio-based plastics/biodegradable plastics products themselves contain biologically harmful chemical components, which can actually be completely avoided from the synthetic processing side.

The main idea of the paper is to emphasize to the public that bio-based plastics \ biodegradable plastics may also have the risk of containing chemicals that are harmful to humans, and therefore the chemical safety issues must be addressed when targeting the production and marketing of food-grade bio-based plastics/biodegradable plastics. In its conclusion section, the authors of this paper argue that in the development of new bio-based and biodegradable materials, the chemical safety of the materials can be further optimized using green chemistry to remove toxic components from the products by artificial means. This article is more about communicating to the public that we should produce "food-grade bio-based plastics and biodegradable plastics that are safer for humans" rather than denying bio-based plastics and biodegradable plastics.

As seen above.

The report released by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) does not completely reject bio-based plastics/biodegradable plastics, but some of its contents are easily misunderstood and quoted out of context by some people who do not conduct in-depth research and publish their views, causing the public to think that "bio-based plastics/biodegradable plastics do not improve the environment and reduce carbon emissions. This has led to the misunderstanding that "bio-based plastics/biodegradable plastics do not improve the environment and reduce carbon emissions.