EASAC report on packaging plastics in the Circular Economy is a ‘missed opportunity’ says EUBP

Earlier this month, scientists at the European Academies of Science (EASAC) produced a report warning that current efforts to resolve the plastics crisis are ineffective and misleading. Policymakers and industry must address conflicts in the whole system, from production to end-of-life.

“Reducing the leakage of millions of tons of plastic waste into the marine, terrestrial and freshwater environments is incompatible with banking on continued growth in the use of plastics”, says Easac’s Prof. Michael Norton. EASAC’s latest report “Packaging Plastics in a Circular Economy” shows that fundamental and systemic reforms are required along the whole value chain, in order to slow and reverse damage to the environment, biodiversity and ultimately risks to human health.

The warning of our report is not a dystopia of environmental activists. It’s science, according to Norton. “European legislators should adopt rules and incentives to speed up the move towards a Circular Plastic Waste Economy. We have to reuse plastic goods and packaging, drastically improve our recycling and above all see that no waste is leaked into the environment,” he said.

The Academies’ report makes clear that banking on growth is not an option, not least because switching to many so-called “bio”-materials cannot be justified on resource or environmental grounds either. Says Norton: “They can mislead consumers by creating a false image of sustainability and thereby risk prolonging today’s throw-away mentality.”

The scientists at Easac have formulated seven recommendations for reforming the system.
These include banning exports of plastics waste, adopting a target of zero plastics waste to landfill by minimising consumption and one-way use, extending producer responsibility, ending misleading information about bio-based alternatives, advancing recycling and reprocessing technology, limiting additives and types of resin to improve recyclability and, finally, introducing price regulations and quotas for recycled content.

In response to the report, European Bioplastics chairman François de Bie said: “If we wanted to condense the gist of the report, we could say that EASAC discourages all the innovations that appear in the industrial sector currently dominated by fossil-based plastics.”

The report doubts that bio-based plastics are better for the environment, although it has been proven by third party researchers and many peer reviewed Life Cycle Assessments that bioplastics made from sustainably grown biomass carry multiple environmental benefits over their fossil counterparts.
Raising mainly emotional and not science-based arguments, the report is also critical about biodegradable plastics. It’s posting the idea that biodegradability and durability are properties that cannot coexist, making biodegradable plastic an ‘elusive’ target. This claim is disavowed by many products that are present on the market today. The report also questions how ‘soon’ and ‘well’ biodegradable plastics degrade. “This does not reflect the reality, especially in the case of some applications which can potentially end up in the organic waste, as a recent independent study by Wageningen University & Research (WUR) clearly showed. The tested EN 13432 certified degradable and compostable plastic products, such as organic waste collection bags, plant pots, tea bags or coffee capsules, broke down in a full-scale industrial organic waste treatment facility within a maximum of 22 days,"  said de Bie.

Packaging that is prone to be highly contaminated with food waste will not be mechanically recycled. Instead, in most cases, it will be incinerated, or even worse, landfilled. “Compostable plastics, e.g. compostable shopping bags which can be reused to collect organic waste, help divert organic waste from landfills and thus increase the amount of extra organic waste collected. Biodegradable and compostable plastics play an important role in a circular economy by closing the organic cycle,” said de Bie.

The study also refers to possible confusion of consumers caused by the term ‘biodegradable’. “To the best of our knowledge, none of the expressed criticism that biodegradability will increase litter is backed up with any actual evidence. The much cited UNEP report is such a case in point”, François de Bie criticises. Thus, it seems to EUBP that any attempt to solve the gigantic environmental problems caused by fossil-based plastics is hastily dismissed by EASAC. On the other hand, EASAC seems to ignore twenty years of research, market applications and recycling practices of these materials, always developed in compliance with the current EU legal provisions. “The report constitutes a missed opportunity for a meaningful evaluation of the role of bio-based as well as biodegradable and compostable plastics in a sustainable circular economy. It is liable to dash any hopes that the European Commission will rely on more in depth scientific reports when drafting its policy framework for bio-based and biodegradable and compostable plastics. Against this background, we kindly invite all policy makers and other stakeholders to re-discuss the findings of this report with us”, de Bie concluded.