Why I Don't Recommend Large-Scale Adoption of Biodegradable Packaging

In recent years, with the rise of environmental awareness, plastics have been somewhat "demonized" by certain media narratives, while biodegradable packaging (such as PLA, PBAT, PHA, etc.) has been widely promoted as an ideal Sustainable alternative—even regarded as the "ultimate solution" to plastic pollution. However, despite its commendable environmental intentions, the large-scale application of biodegradable packaging still faces numerous practical challenges.

(1) Stringent Degradation Requirements For Biodegradable Packaging

The environmental benefits of biodegradable packaging are highly dependent on specific degradation conditions. For example:

1.PLA (Polylactic Acid): Requires industrial composting conditions (55–65°C, high humidity, specific microorganisms). In natural environments, its degradation rate is extremely slow, making it no different from conventional plastics.

2.PBAT/PBS: Although degradable in soil, the process can take months or even years, with potential microplastic residues.

3.PHA (Marine-Degradable Material): Research and development is not yet mature, with actual degradation efficiency heavily influenced by salinity and temperature.

Without professional industrial composting facilities, these packaging materials will ultimately end up in landfills or the natural environment, failing to deliver the expected environmental benefits.

（2）Existing Recycling Systems Struggle to Accommodate Biodegradable Materials

Current global plastic recycling systems are primarily designed for conventional plastics like PET and HDPE. Biodegradable packaging faces several recycling challenges:

1.Lack of Dedicated Recycling Channels: Most regions lack specialized classification, collection, and composting facilities for biodegradable packaging, leading to incineration or landfilling.

2.Contamination of Recycling Streams When Mixed with Traditional Plastics: PLA resembles PET in appearance; if it enters traditional plastic recycling lines, it reduces the quality of recycled materials.

3.Misleading Marketing: Claims about biodegradable packaging may lead consumers to mistakenly believe it will "disappear on its own" without proper disposal, exacerbating waste management difficulties.

(3) Performance and Cost Issues Limit Practical Applications

Biodegradable packaging has significant shortcomings in strength, durability, and transparency:

1.Poor Mechanical Properties: PLA is brittle and has low heat resistance (softening at around 50°C), making it unsuitable for high-temperature or high-load packaging (e.g., beverage bottles, frozen foods).

2.Short Shelf Life: Some biodegradable materials are prone to hydrolysis in humid environments, affecting food preservation.

3.High Production Costs: Biodegradable packaging is more expensive to produce than traditional plastic packaging, limiting its widespread adoption.

(4) Mono Material Packaging Offers Greater Environmental Advantages

Compared to the complex challenges of biodegradable packaging, mono material packaging (e.g., 100% PE, PP, or PET) is more advantageous in terms of sustainability and practicality:

1.Better Recycling Compatibility: Conventional recycling systems are more efficient at sorting and reprocessing mono material packaging, avoiding the difficulties caused by mixed-material multilayer packaging.

2.Superior Performance Stability: Mono material packaging (e.g., all-PE flexible packaging) offers better strength, heat resistance, and sealing properties, making it suitable for food, household chemicals, and other applications.

3.Relatively Lower Overall Costs: Mono material packaging benefits from mature production technology and economies of scale, making it cheaper than biodegradable alternatives. Recycled plastics can be directly reused in new packaging, creating a circular economy.

4.Policy and Industry Trends Support Adoption: The EU’s Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR) encourages mono material design to improve recyclability. Major brands like Nestlé and Unilever have already adopted recyclable mono material packaging to reduce their environmental footprint.

Mono Material Pef Shrink Film

When addressing the global challenge of plastic pollution, we must move beyond an "either-or" mindset. While traditional plastics do contribute to persistent pollution, outright bans are not the solution. Similarly, biodegradable packaging is not a perfect alternative. In reality, a more practical and sustainable approach lies in innovating and optimizing traditional plastics, particularly by developing recyclable mono material plastic packaging.

For example, Mingca Packing’s PEF Shrink Film—made from a mono PE structure—retains the performance advantages of traditional plastic packaging while achieving TÜV Rheinland certification due to its recyclability. If you have any questions, feel free to discuss further.