JRC publishes case studies on single-use versus reusable packaging

On February 20, 2024, the EU Joint Research Centre published its final report on the environmental performance of alternative food packaging products in the European Union. The study encompasses six case studies across four scenarios, examining the environmental footprint of single-use and multiple-use packaging solutions within the hotel, restaurant, and catering sectors. 

JRC researchers used a life cycle assessment-based (LCA) approach to evaluate the environmental impacts from food contact article production to end-of-life. The assessments were grounded in a broad array of data collection and analyses, including factors like the number of reuses, transport distances, energy mix, and end-of-life waste management. For each factor, JRC ran a sensitivity analysis to check assumptions and the importance each played in the final, summary impact score. The LCA’s scoring incorporated more than greenhouse gas emissions and water use but also ozone depletion potential, cancer and non-cancer related human toxicity, acidification, and ten other impacts.   

JRC investigated five scenarios:  

1. Takeaway beverage cup – Single-use paper cup with a low-density polyethylene (LDPE) lining and polystyrene (PS) lid vs. multiple-use polypropylene (PP) cup. 

• • Summary score: multiple-use had lower or tied score with single-use in 70% of simulations 
  • Differentiating factors: single-use had lower impact scores in the three resource-use related categories, but multiple-use scored better in the other impacts 

2. Take-away packaging – 2a) Single-use cardboard tray with LDPE lining vs. multiple-use PP clamshell tray. 2b) Single-use aluminum tray with LDPE lined carton cover vs. multiple-use PP clamshell tray.

• • Summary scores: multi-use and single-use were comparable in both 2a and 2b in the main analysis. 
  • Differentiating factors: when JRC removed passenger cars from the model, for people making trips to return reusable items, the impacts of the multiple-use item were significantly lower. Removing passenger cars is closer to what might be feasible in a dense urban area. 

3. Beverages, bottled (0.5 L) – 3a) Single-use aluminum can vs. multiple-use PET bottle with PP cap. 3b) single-use glass bottle vs. multiple-use glass bottle (thicker). 

• • Summary scores: 3a) multi-use plastic bottle had lower or tied impact score with single-use aluminum in 80% of simulations. 3b) multiple-use glass had a lower impact score in 95% of simulations compared to single-use glass. 

4. Beverages, wine (0.75 L) – Single-use glass wine bottle vs. multiple-use glass wine bottle (thicker). 

• • Summary score: reusable glass had lower impact scores for all categories except land use.

5. Dine-in restaurant – Single-use hamburger meal with LDPE-lined carton cup and unlined carton trays for burger and fries multiple-use hamburger meal with PP plate for hamburger & fries and a PP cup. 

• • Summary score: multiple-use packaging had a lower impact score in nearly every metric in 90% of simulations  
  • Differentiating factors: significantly lower impacts of reusables since there is no need for the consumer or organization to transport the container. Despite the water needs for washing in the reuse process, water use impacts were lower for reusables due to high levels of water use when making paper. 
    

The results of JRC’s analysis were first presented in September 2023 (FPF reported) with final publication planned for November 2023. However, after the organization received more input from the industry it delayed the publication to incorporate this information.   

As part of HORIZON EUROPE, the EU recently funded STOPP, Strategies to prevent and reduce plastic packaging pollution from the food system. The research project will run through 2026 with the goal to “create circular strategies for plastic usage and processing” while also generating “awareness campaigns within a multi-actor network that involves profiles from every stage of the food packaging value chain.” 

To make LCA comparisons between even more materials, the Understanding Packaging (UP) Scorecard is a free, web-based tool to assess human and environmental health impacts of foodware and food packaging products. The UP Scorecard is being developed by Single-Use Materials Decelerator (SUM’D), a non-profit coalition made up of leading food service companies, non-profit and civil society organizations including FPF, and technical experts. As the only packaging tool that is freely available, the UP Scorecard includes an impact assessment for chemicals of concern present in and migrating from food packaging. 

References 

Sinkko, T., et al. (February 20, 2024). “Exploring the environmental performance of alternative food packaging products in the European Union.” European Commission. DOI:10.2760/971274 

Horizon Europe (January 1, 2024). “Strategies to prevent and reduce plastic packaging pollution from the food system.” European Commission 

STOPP (February 7, 2024). “STOPP: strategies for food plastic packaging circularity.” Recycling Magazine