Only two percent of the total production volume of polymers is bio-based. In your view, what are the biggest hurdles for the production of an alternative raw material set for packaging?
There are several points that currently limit further spreading: There are many approaches to converting bio-residues into barriers, materials and substances, most of which already work very well in the laboratory. Unfortunately, however, there is then a lack of large refineries that can provide the corresponding quantities so that these can then be reliably ordered and processed.
In addition, we are usually talking about many small quantities, which quickly lack the critical mass to really keep up cost-effectively. However, the organic sector argues that price is often not the most important aspect for users, but rather the sustainable appearance of the company.
What arguments are typically used against the use of bioplastics?
Bioplastics are often accused of first having to prove their advantages. This is, of course, only a pretextual argument - because sustainability can be proven for very few conventional, fossil-based plastics. After all, the industry is working on comprehensive CO2 calculations or life cycle assessments.
There is also the tragic counter-argument of "no food for packaging", which is unfortunately not thought through to its logical conclusion from two points of view: the proportion of agricultural land used for bio-plastics is not even one hundredth of the area used for bio-energy. However, the "no food for energy" argument is surprisingly absent (not in the current energy crisis times anyway). Second, the amount of agricultural land used for discarded food in Germany alone is as large as the global demand for agricultural land for bioplastics. And then there is the fact that we are seeing a shift from the extraction of cultivated plants to plant residues from agricultural production or production residues.
So what would really speak for the use of bioplastics?
Quite a few things. For example, bioplastics have the advantage that they can be collected again as packaging in the usual sorting systems and can then be used again to generate energy via incineration - that doesn't distinguish them from non-recyclable multilayer packaging for the time being. This is called cascade usage and would then be a multiple utilization of the energy used.
Some bioplastics, by the way, are just as recyclable as fossil plastics, e.g., bio-PE, bio-PP, bio-PET, which account for the majority of bioplastic packaging volumes produced. So these 'drop-in' solutions behave 1:1 like fossil plastics and could also contribute to recycling. The only problem is that the infrastructure for sorting and recycling is not in place in many countries.
Where 'drop-in' solutions cannot be sorted, biodegradable plastics could at least ensure that the packaging does not remain in nature, or remains in nature with as little residue as possible if it is not disposed of properly. This affects a large number of countries worldwide, even in Europe.
Do you think bio-plastics will catch on despite the slight start-up turbulence?
Bio-plastics just like other bio-based materials will grow strongly because in the meantime resources are more diverse, we see a trend away from fossil resources (defossilization) and we also see many applications in reusable packaging where recycling, sorting and lower barrier functions play a minor role.
There are still no real standards to actually be able to make a binding assessment of the sustainability of bioplastics. What factors must not be missing under any circumstances?
Of course, the first thing bioplastics must do is meet the basic requirements for product safety. This is already achievable with many materials today. But the basic question arises again: are we talking about drop-in solutions such as bio-PE or bio-PET - which are identical to their fossil relatives - or PLA, starch, cellophane?
Then we also have to look at where the resources come from, how they are grown or harvested, what impact they have on agriculture in the region, what the transport routes are to processing, how they are processed.
Take sugar cane, for example. In the past, it was claimed that sugar cane would destroy the rainforest. However, this is not entirely correct, at least not directly. Sugar cane does not grow in the climatic conditions of the rainforest at all, but rather in the marginal zones. The problem is that sugar cane then sometimes displaces soybean cultivation, which in turn grows in tropical climatic regions. If a government - as in Brazil, for example - then gives this expansion its 'blessing', sugar cane indirectly contributes to the deforestation of the rainforest.
The situation is similar with palm oil, which is also produced on large plantations in monocultures, therefore degrading biodiversity in the regions and contributing to the destruction of natural vegetation and fauna. For this reason, palm oils are also increasingly being removed from recipes or a certified origin with controlled options is preferred.
So a lot would already change if attention was paid to the sustainable extraction of raw materials?
Yes, actually the companies would at least have to place more emphasis on sustainable extraction instead of just changing their minds, because the next interested party is certainly already lining up.
The whole construct is rather intricate. Let's take the example of bioplastics in the organic waste garbage can. Only a few, thin, rapidly degrading packages, such as films, are now accepted here by some local authority waste disposers. Absurdly: bioplastics that do not degrade quickly enough are sorted out and incinerated as best as possible. There is even a CO2 bonus for incineration because of the energy generated.
There are many applications for packaging - from shipping to food packaging. Where do you see the greatest application potential for bioplastics?
Bio-plastics have a clear long-term advantage if we are to succeed in divesting ourselves of fossil, non-renewable resources. "Defossilization" is the keyword currently doing the rounds here. This can be packaging such as films or rigids (trays, bottles, tubes or similar), as well as barriers on papers (alginates, for example), which are also increasingly bio-based. These resources can even be obtained from the sea, for example seaweed or algae. But there are also already the first cultivation facilities on land that specifically grow these algae in order to then process them further. That's an exciting concept, because we could then build the cultivation facility where we process it further and therefore have the process under better control and save on transport.
You mentioned that the organic industry argues that price is not at all the most important aspect with users. Do you agree with this statement?
Organic plastics are of course significantly more expensive than their fossil relatives. This is partly due to the cheap raw material oil, but also to the still manageable production volumes. Nevertheless, we also often hear that those interested in bioplastics or those who market them do not see price as the most important criterion. There is also a lot of emotion involved.
We already see a lot of potential in reusable packaging today and will continue to do so in the future, and here the material value does not play the most important role. In this case, the costs for return and cleaning are added to each cycle. I usually only pay for the material the first time and the more cycles there are, the more the material costs become relative.
In addition, Reuse packaging will have the option of digital tracking and recognition in the future. This means that I can collect identical packages of uniform bio-plastics and recycle them in a targeted manner. Some manufacturers even offer this today to avoid the disadvantage of single-use bioplastics packaging, as these are not relevant in sorting and are not sorted and recycled separately.
Now, if a company decides to switch to such materials: What consideration should be at the beginning of such a decision process?
Again, many factors are playing a role here - let's take the example of disposable packaging: In which country is the product distributed, is there a collection and sorting stream for plastics or (bio)coated papers there? If yes, we recommend focusing on existing infrastructures to recover and recycle the resources. If there is no infrastructure, biodegradable or compostable packaging in the usual sense can be a good alternative, e.g. if packaging is often thrown away carelessly. Unfortunately, this is still the case in many countries. The aim here should then be to ensure that the packaging remains in nature as little as possible. It should be noted that packaging does not degrade in the same way everywhere - in salt water, fresh water, on dry land or in cold, wet landscapes; the process and duration is different everywhere.
I assume there are also regulatory frameworks that need to be considered if you want to use bioplastics?
That's right! In more and more countries, there are now framework conditions that have to be observed. In Europe, for example, certain service packaging in the to-go sector has to include information about microplastics on the packaging - even in the case of chemically modified bioplastics. So there is a lot to consider and that is why we at PACOON look at the legislation and licensing conditions in Europe, USA, Canada and some other countries and also offer this information to interested parties.
Assuming I now want to gradually switch to the use of bioplastics in my company, how can you help us?
Often we experience that the desire for certain materials is greater than their availability. Start-ups in particular have their wishes, which we have to disappoint here and there. With standard sizes and packaging, it's easier to come up with the necessary quantities. Therefore, companies should try to bundle package sizes and quantities.
As with other packaging, there is no 100% solution in terms of sustainable packaging. At some point, a decision is always required where the company has to decide on a compromise that it feels more comfortable with. Optimally, there are already the overarching corporate goals that can be used as a guide. This is what we recommend and work out with companies so that the common thread for all further decisions is established. For this purpose, we have developed our own workshop format as a support.