| Bioplastics: Rumors, Facts and Future Potential |
| Monday, 22 February 2010 | Aaron Lada, Ph.D. | Article |
|
The study (pdf) released in June, 2009, was conducted by the European Bioplastics and the European Polysaccharide Network of Excellence (EPNOE). The 90% substitution figure represents what EPNOE calls the “technical potential” of bioplastics, meaning that of all the petroleum-based plastics currently in use, there are bioplastics available that could directly substitute for all but 10% of them. However, the study concludes that even in the next 10-20 years this level of substitution won’t be possible due to the higher production costs of bioplastics, as well as lack of infrastructure and production facilities. According to Melissa Hockstad, Director, SPI Bioplastics Council, “Less than 1% of the current global plastics market is comprised of bioplastics,” which agrees with the EPNOE figure of 0.3%. Both sources predict the bioplastics market will grow 8-30% per year through 2020, yet its share will still be less than 2% of total plastics produced. Thus, while the study is encouraging and the future uses for bioplastics appear many, there are still significant hurdles to overcome. Background Starch-derived polymers – Starch from plants is chemically modified to produce a biodegradable, combustible product. Due to its brittleness and tendency to attract or absorb water, it is not a good choice for beverage bottles, but can replace traditional plastics in packaging (foam products), and short-lived goods such as eating utensils, plates and shopping bags. Polylactic Acid (PLA) – This polymer is produced from lactic acid—a waste product that bacteria and certain fungi make during fermentation. PLA has similar physical qualities to polyethylene terephthalate (PET), used widely for bottles, and can directly substitute for it in some cases. While PLA’s use is limited by its lower melting point and higher gas permeability (which may cause problems with carbonated beverages), it is currently found in a variety of products including bottles, films, diapers, electronics and eating utensils. Bio-based Polyethylene (PE) – This bioplastic is identical to the petroleum-based PE used in packaging, automobiles, construction and electronics. The difference is that the ethylene used in bio-based PE comes from ethanol produced through fermentation of sugars instead of petroleum. Bio-based PE can fully substitute for petroleum-based PE and, while not biodegradable, it is recyclable. Polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHAs) – These are produced through bacterial fermentation of a variety of carbon sources including sugars, vegetable oils and fats. This biodegradable product could possibly substitute forPVC in some packaging, cutlery, household products, toys, textiles, building materials and medical uses. In addition, blends of petroleum and plant-based plastics have been developed. While not biodegradable, they are recyclable and reduce the use of petroleum-based plastics. For example, Coca-Cola’s PlantBottle™ contains up to 30% plant material, and Frito-Lay’s SunChips® bag contains 33% plant-based material. Pros and Cons Pros
Cons
A claim that a biodegradable, environmentally friendly product can replace almost all plastics definitely gets attention, but must be taken with a grain of salt. The bioplastics industry is advancing technologically and continues to increase its share of the plastics market, yet it still has an insignificant market share and substantial issues to resolve. Regardless, few would fault an industry with such capacity to benefit the environment for setting ambitious goals. Additional resources: Comments
(2)
Written by Beth Terry, aka Fake Plastic Fish , February 25, 2010
Hi. Could you please address the issue of additives in bioplastics? It is my understanding that just like petroleum-based plastics, bio plastics may contain chemical additives to affect their strength, flexibility, color, etc. And just as with petroleum-based plastics, these additives can leach from bio-plastics.
Report abuse
Since manufacturers are not required to disclose all the ingredients in their plastic products, for proprietary reasons, how can we consumers know for sure any plastics -- bio or petro -- are safe for us? The FDA and EPA are certainly not protecting us these days. Beth Terry http://fakeplasticfish.com Adviser to Plastic Pollution Coalition |
The excitement generated by a recent study stating that 90% of petroleum-based plastics can be replaced with plant-based bioplastics is understandable—since it would mean reduced demand for oil, lower CO2 emissions and biodegradable plastics. Unfortunately, the figure has been misinterpreted beyond the study’s intent. Due to several limitations, this lofty goal won’t be attainable any time soon, but that does not reduce the promise of bioplastics. 
Show/Hide comments
This means bio-plastics have the same devastating effect on marine life as petroleum based plastics and that is that often these products get mistaken for food, animals ingest them, and they die.
"It is estimated that each year over one million seabirds and one hundred thousand marine mammals die from ingestion or entanglement in plastics." - Surfrider Rise Above Plastics Campaign
The solution to this is not the same packaging made out of another material that will still result in the same devastating death toll. A solution is to rethink our consumer lifestyles, and while convenience is easy, the price the ocean and the marine life living there pays, is way too high.