New laws coming into force in 2025 will see nations implement plastic taxes ·Packaging Gateway
Oumar Fofana
5 min read
The conversation around bioplastics versus conventional plastics has been gaining momentum in recent years, largely driven by concerns over sustainability and the environmental impact of packaging.
As industries search for alternatives to traditional plastics, it's essential to understand the nuances, benefits, and challenges associated with both materials.
This article delves into the differences, advantages, and drawbacks of bioplastics compared to conventional plastics, providing insights into the future of packaging.
Understanding the basics: bioplastics vs. conventional plastics
Conventional plastics, such as polyethylene and polypropylene, are derived from fossil fuels, primarily oil and natural gas. They have been the dominant materials in packaging due to their durability, versatility, and cost-effectiveness.
However, the reliance on non-renewable resources and the environmental issues associated with plastic waste have prompted calls for alternative solutions.
Bioplastics, on the other hand, are derived from renewable resources such as corn, sugarcane, or potato starch. They are designed to mimic the properties of traditional plastics while offering the potential for reduced environmental impact.
However, not all bioplastics are created equal, and they can be broadly categorised into two main types: biodegradable and non-biodegradable.
Biodegradable bioplastics are designed to break down naturally in specific conditions, reducing the long-term impact on landfills and oceans. Non-biodegradable bioplastics, while still made from renewable resources, do not decompose as easily and may require industrial composting facilities for proper disposal.
Environmental impact: are bioplastics truly green?
The primary selling point of bioplastics is their potential to be more environmentally friendly than conventional plastics. However, the reality is more nuanced, and it is essential to consider the entire lifecycle of both materials.
Carbon Footprint: Bioplastics are often touted as being carbon neutral because the plants used to produce them absorb carbon dioxide during their growth. However, the farming, transportation, and processing of these crops can generate significant carbon emissions. In some cases, the overall carbon footprint of bioplastics can be comparable to or even exceed that of conventional plastics, depending on factors such as the type of crop used, farming practices, and energy consumption during production.
Degradability: While biodegradable bioplastics have the advantage of breaking down more quickly than traditional plastics, this process often requires specific conditions, such as high temperatures and humidity found in industrial composting facilities. In natural environments, such as oceans or landfills, bioplastics may degrade at a much slower rate, resulting in similar environmental challenges as conventional plastics. Moreover, the term 'biodegradable' can be misleading, as not all bioplastics will fully break down into harmless substances.
Resource Use: The production of bioplastics requires large quantities of agricultural land, water, and fertilisers. This raises concerns about competition with food production, deforestation, and the overall sustainability of growing crops for plastic production. In contrast, conventional plastics, while dependent on finite fossil fuels, do not directly compete with food resources.
Economic factors: cost and scalability
One of the biggest barriers to the widespread adoption of bioplastics is cost. Conventional plastics have benefited from decades of refinement and large-scale production, making them relatively inexpensive. In contrast, bioplastics are still a developing industry and can be significantly more expensive to produce.
Production Costs: The production of bioplastics is currently more energy-intensive and costly than that of traditional plastics. Factors such as raw material prices, the cost of converting biomass into bioplastic, and the need for specialised processing facilities all contribute to higher production expenses. As a result, many companies find it challenging to justify the switch to bioplastics, especially in cost-sensitive markets.
Scalability: Conventional plastics can be produced in vast quantities, meeting the demands of various industries. Bioplastics, however, face challenges in scaling up production due to limited agricultural land, water availability, and the need for more advanced technology. This makes it difficult for bioplastics to compete with conventional plastics in terms of volume and consistency.
The future of packaging: finding a balance
The debate between bioplastics and conventional plastics is complex, with both materials having their merits and drawbacks. While bioplastics offer a promising alternative, they are not a one-size-fits-all solution.
It is essential to consider the broader context, including factors such as waste management, recycling infrastructure, and consumer behaviour, when evaluating their potential.
Recycling and circular economy: One of the most effective ways to reduce plastic waste is through recycling. Conventional plastics, when properly managed, can be recycled multiple times, reducing the demand for virgin materials. However, recycling rates remain low globally, and bioplastics can sometimes complicate the recycling process. Bioplastics often require separate recycling streams, as they can contaminate conventional plastic recycling facilities. Improving recycling infrastructure and consumer awareness is critical to making both bioplastics and conventional plastics part of a circular economy.
Innovation and research: As technology advances, there is potential for bioplastics to become more sustainable and cost-effective. Research into using waste products, such as agricultural residues or algae, as raw materials for bioplastic production could address concerns about land use and competition with food crops. Additionally, developing bioplastics that can be processed in existing recycling facilities would reduce contamination issues and make them more compatible with current waste management systems.
Policy and regulation: Governments play a crucial role in shaping the future of packaging materials. Policies that encourage the development and use of sustainable materials, such as bioplastics, can help drive innovation and investment in the industry. Likewise, regulations that mandate recycling, reduce single-use plastics, and promote biodegradable alternatives can influence consumer behaviour and industry practices.
The takeaway: a sustainable path forward
The debate between bioplastics and conventional plastics is far from settled. Each material has its advantages and challenges, and the most sustainable solution may lie in a combination of approaches.
For now, bioplastics represent a step in the right direction, but they are not a silver bullet. The packaging industry must continue to innovate, invest in recycling infrastructure, and develop policies that support sustainable practices.
Ultimately, achieving a sustainable future will require a holistic approach that considers not only the materials used but also how they are produced, managed, and disposed of.
By understanding the complexities of the bioplastics versus plastics debate, consumers, businesses, and policymakers can make informed choices that contribute to a more sustainable and environmentally friendly world.
"Bioplastics vs. Plastics: the debate" was originally created and published by Packaging Gateway, a GlobalData owned brand.
The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site.
