Assessing Alternative Materials for Packaging

Making the switch away from plastic requires careful assessment of the goals and requirements of each packaging application. © Juan-stock.adobe.com

Key considerations when switching away from plastic.

By Gabriella Giers, Sustainability Analyst with Atlantic Packaging

Atlantic Packaging’s stretch film recycling program equipment in Charlotte, NC
Image Courtesy of Atlantic Packaging

Emerging Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) for packaging laws and bold sustainability commitments from major consumer packaged goods (CPGs) manufacturers have led brands to increasingly consider alternative materials for packaging, particularly to replace single-use plastics. Although some alternatives aren’t quite at the point of serving as drop-in replacements, many brands are in the process of determining the right packaging applications for switching to alternative materials as well as how to weigh the options available to them.

Alternative materials refer to material substitutes designed to reduce our reliance on traditional, petroleum-based plastics. These packaging materials are typically compostable, recyclable, or derived from renewable resources like fiber or plant-based polymers. Some alternative options offer promising sustainable beginning-of-life benefits. For example, compostable packaging made from upcycled agriculture waste, or regenerative feedstocks like seaweed or mycelium from mushrooms, can help to repurpose waste, promote a circular economy, and provide additional benefits such as reduced virgin plastic usage.

Although alternative options, like fiber-based or compostable packaging, do offer exciting beginning-of-life benefits, making the switch away from plastic requires careful assessment of the goals and requirements of each application. While some applications lend themselves to changes in materials, such as switching from plastic to paper for dry goods, other applications may be harder to replace with an alternative material.

Evaluating Goals, Use Cases, and Product End-of-Life

Before considering a new material, it’s important to evaluate goals around presentation, production, protection, and barrier property requirements. Will the package be exposed to an environment with high moisture levels or temperatures? Are there specific needs around printability, clarity, or other presentation requirements? Once the necessary and unique material characteristics are identified, brands can discover alternative options that mimic the properties, use case, and function of their petroleum-based counterpart.

When deciding between recyclable or compostable materials, preference should be given to recyclable alternatives in most cases. About 91% of U.S. residents have access to recycling, whereas only about 11% of U.S. residents have access to composting programs that accept compostable packaging according to the Sustainable Packaging Coalition.¹ If certain barrier properties or other requirements do not lend themselves to a recyclable option, compostable materials may then be best.

However, it’s important to consider that the leading certifying body for compostable packaging in the U.S., the Biodegradable Products Institute (BPI), limits certification eligibility to items that aid in diverting organic waste due to contamination from non-compostable packaging. Because of BPI’s requirements, compostable packaging is best used for applications with food-contact packaging that is not readily recyclable.²

It’s also important to consider that the primary purpose of packaging is to protect, preserve, and present products effectively. Functionality and product safety are critical, so if a brand wishes to switch to an alternative material, that material must perform as well or better than the current option. When it comes to packaging that requires specific barrier properties, especially direct food-contact packaging, the most sustainable option is to preserve shelf life and avoid increasing waste rates from perishable items, even if that means using a traditional plastic package.

Embracing Challenges

Even after a brand identifies acceptable use cases, they may face challenges with fully adopting that material. The largest barriers are generally costs, supply chain availability, and shelf-life stability. Today, higher production or sourcing costs are typically associated with alternative materials compared to conventional materials like plastic. Many innovative technologies are just emerging and not yet widely scaled, limiting availability and making it difficult to find reliable sourcing, especially if the material does not have the ability to retrofit to existing machinery.

The requirements for alternative packaging to hold up under variable conditions during transport and storage may present further challenges, particularly when dealing with food-contact packaging. With the great opportunity for compostable packaging to divert more food waste to composters, it’s critical that the industry continues to develop the barrier properties of these materials. On top of shelf-life concerns, composters are generally hesitant to accept compostable packaging and composting programs are not widely accessible for U.S. residents. These factors pose challenges for the end-of-life of compostable materials.

A Path Forward

Perfection should not impede progress. Amidst challenges, there is great opportunity for a path forward with alternative materials. Emerging EPR laws for packaging can help lower cost barriers in several ways. According to a recent report by the Recycling Partnership, these laws are expected to provide funding for recycling and composting infrastructure, impose lower fees on eco-friendly packaging such as recyclable materials, and enforce higher fees on less sustainable options like single-use plastics.³ Through an approach known as eco-modulation, brands are incentivized to make sustainable packaging choices which creates a more even playing field for alternative materials.

While challenges may also exist with retrofitting alternative materials to existing machinery, automated alternatives are available. Fiber packaging formats have become increasingly automated, particularly in e-commerce with replacements like paper mailers, paper air pillows, and fiber alternatives for bubble wrap. Compared to food-contact packaging, e-commerce applications require lower barrier properties, presenting an ideal opportunity for alternative materials to replace plastics in these areas.

To bring alternative materials to market, scale them, and make them more cost-effective, the industry needs forward-thinking brands that are willing to take the risk and embrace the trial and error associated with testing these solutions on a smaller scale. With more brands engaging in smaller-scale pilot programs, the industry can effectively address barriers to adoption and develop solutions that can be widely scaled.

Organizations like Closed Loop Partners (CLP) and the US Composting Council (USCC) are working with composters and other stakeholders to address end-of-life concerns and increase acceptance of compostable packaging. Furthermore, recent insights show a growing number of composters are accepting food scraps and compostable packaging, while viewing these materials as additive to their business.⁴

With strategic investments and advancements in alternative material technologies, the market can better support alternatives that are petroleum-free, bio-based, and recyclable or compostable, while also being cost effective, functional and readily available. Increased collaboration between governments, companies, recyclers and composters will help ensure alternative materials are collected and disposed of properly. As these technologies develop, brands will need to engage and assess their current packaging to identify opportunities for trialing replacements. Together, we can build a more circular economy with alternative materials for packaging.

About the Author

Gabriella Giers is a sustainability professional focused on advancing circular packaging solutions. Giers joined Atlantic Packaging as a Sustainability Analyst in 2024 with a background in corporate sustainability and environmental justice. She holds a bachelor’s degree from Furman University in Sustainability Science. Visit: www.atlanticpkg.com

References:

1. https://sustainablepackaging.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/UPDATED-2020-21-Centralized-Study-on-Availability-of-Recycling-SPC-3-2022.pdf
2. https://bpiworld.org/faq
3. https://recyclingpartnership.org/eprreport/
4. https://www.closedlooppartners.com/why-more-composters-are-recovering-food-scraps-and-certified-compostable-packaging/