How EcoEnclose Evaluates Novel Materials
Posted By on Mar 7th 2025
At EcoEnclose, our mission is to create truly sustainable packaging solutions to support the forward-thinking brands we work with. To achieve our ultimate vision, we are committed to two main concepts: boosting material circularity and catalyzing the use of regenerative raw materials as inputs into the system.
This second part - catalyzing these net-positive, regenerative materials - means our team constantly evaluates new materials that can potentially reduce environmental impact.
Making careful, transparent decisions about material adoption is crucial. We aim to evaluate novel materials to determine if they are truly regenerative and a step forward in environmental impact- mainly because many materials used in packaging today are considered “renewable” yet contribute to environmental degradation.
Vetting new inputs for their use is standard practice for product development across industries - but how we do that vetting is extra substantial and relevant when considering materials that are genuinely new, untested, and haven’t yet reached scale.
We want to balance making progress with due diligence, making calculated assessments and bets on materials that we think can benefit the greater industry ecosystem.
In this piece, we’ll explain our evaluation criteria.
Background: Why Novel Materials Matter
The current state of raw input materials used to make packaging (think trees, petroleum byproducts, bauxite, silica, industrial corn, etc.) presents significant environmental challenges, from land use to deforestation to soil health. Most of these inputs require a linear, extractive system rather than a circular one.
While we aim to use as much recycled content as humanly possible in products (boosting its circularity), it is also true that - even with a well-functioning circular economy - there will still need to be raw materials to enter and maintain the system.
This is where innovative, novel materials come in. Raw materials are critical for bridging this gap. Instead of using inputs characteristic of the Industrial Revolution, we see a clear opportunity to test and scale inputs whose very existence and commercialization improve the environment. We evaluate them rigorously to ensure they deliver meaningful, long-term benefits rather than just short-term gains.
EcoEnclose’s Approach to Evaluating Novel Materials
Our team has developed a comprehensive framework for assessing novel packaging materials. This evaluation is based on the same principles of our Sustainable Packaging Framework.
The main focus of our evaluation is to answer four questions:
-
What is the comprehensive environmental impact of the material?
-
At scale, is the material a better alternative than its replacement?
-
Does it perform and function as needed?
-
Is there potential for it to restore, regenerate, or remediate key environmental aspects, particularly biodiversity, habitat restoration, soil health, atmospheric carbon, or other planetary boundaries?
1. Comprehensive Environmental Impact
Source: Unsplash
In the world of packaging, brands and consumers often focus on the end of life as their starting point. When the entire life cycle is considered, it is often viewed solely through the lens of carbon emissions or whether or not a material is renewable versus fossil fuel-derived.
Since many of the most common input materials- trees, corn, petroleum- are quite degenerative when considered holistically, it’s essential to consider many more environmental impact aspect categories than may have been used in the past.
For instance, we believe it’s critical to evaluate the big-picture impact of crops on soil health and biodiversity. Is corn a renewable alternative to petroleum? Yes. But does corn also require a significantly more significant amount of land, water, and energy to grow at scale? Also, yes. The comparison is muddier, more nuanced, and less clear-cut but also much more complete.
We take a more holistic approach, considering all steps of the materials life cycle (from production to manufacturing to end of life) and as many environmental impact categories as possible. Here’s an example of how we would structure our evaluation of a novel material to fill out each cell with data, insights, and a red/yellow/green evaluation based on whether the data suggests the material is superior or inferior to the traditional materials it is replacing.
Completing this table is - by necessity - not an ideally quantitative and objective exercise. Novel materials do not have in-depth, agreed-upon data on their exact emissions, freshwater consumption requirements, chemical requirements, etc.
If you wanted to compare a standard petroleum plastic to a seaweed or algae-derived polymer, you could not simply plug it into a standard LCA software to understand the impact difference between the two. LCAs require data to power their calculations. When this data and studies don’t exist, materials are simply not calculated for impact.
In contrast, the most studied materials and inputs are typically those that have already been commercialized for many decades or have received the most funding to scale: think petroleum, trees, corn, and sugarcane.
Rather than disadvantaging novel materials because they do not yet have detailed LCA data, we look to the best research we can find to make our assessment. Then, we push for LCA-level analysis over time and adjust our decision-making as new information becomes available.
Notes:
-
Some cells will be filled out based on qualitative assessments, and some based on quantitative data. Some impact categories do not have a straightforward method of measurement: deforestation risk requires a more complex representation than kg of carbon dioxide equivalent. This is typical and helpful for framing your research at the outset to avoid getting frustrated and stuck on how to measure these more abstract environmental impact categories best.
-
Instead of expecting clear-cut numbers and results for qualitative impact categories, aim to do well-rounded, wide-ranging research on the impact of the input material/crop on the listed environmental aspects. When in doubt, more information is usually better.
-
Where data is unavailable, we use research from leading environmental NGOs and nonprofits that clearly commit to the environment and scientific integrity and whose work and sources are made public. Then, we consider articles from scientific journals and studies.
-
We share the sources for our research - so that our community can vet our work, just like we do.
-
It can be especially helpful to also research a control input material to compare to for context. For example, when we did our bio inputs assessment, we also researched the impact of petroleum alongside the novel materials to put into context the “alternative” we were comparing against.
Case Study: Algae Ink™ – A Success Story
Algae Ink™ represents one of EcoEnclose’s biggest material evaluation successes. This innovative ink serves as an alternative to carbon black pigment, which is derived from fossil fuels.
Initially, little direct research existed on Algae Ink™, but broader studies on land-based algae cultivation showed promise. Recognizing its potential, EcoEnclose partnered with Living Ink to commercialize the ink, even though the early data was imperfect. As adoption grew, investments in university-led LCAs validated its sustainability, reinforcing our commitment to this innovation.
Framework in Action: Bioinputs Matrix
The above table is an exact replica of the comprehensive matrix we used to assess bio-based inputs. We used it in 2023 during our internal process of assessing seaweed as a potential input to invest in—see it in action here: Bioinputs Matrix: EcoEnclose Public Resource 2. At scale, is the material a better alternative than its replacement?
Source: Unsplash
Comprehensive assessments: Making sure we don’t rob Peter to pay Paul.
The last thing we want to do is commercialize, grow, and promote a material that - once at scale - proves to be equally degenerative as the “bad” inputs it’s replacing, or in some cases - worse.
While we don’t often know precisely what “scale” will look like for novel materials, this shouldn’t stop us from using our best guesses and judgment to estimate. Some key questions we can ask include:
-
If this material were to replace the incumbent tomorrow:
-
What could we reasonably expect from production's impacts on the environment?
-
What could we reasonably expect disposal's impacts on the environment?
-
Are the current systems (for production and disposal) set up to correctly manage and treat the new material?
-
Would it create consumer confusion and/or adoption? How might users interact with it differently?
Several examples of this lack of long-term assessment and resulting impact are already playing out in the world of innovative packaging.
One helpful thought experiment for considering whether a material would be a net positive replacement for the current material is the example of PLA vs. LDPE—aka corn versus petroleum inputs.
Corn and its resulting ethanol was seen as a plant-based better alternative to gasoline and petroleum-based polymers for plastic. However, at scale, the most common corn-based polymer used in packaging (PLA) has a far higher carbon footprint than the virgin petroleum-based plastic it replaced. It also requires the petroleum-based additive PBAT to break down in industrial compost systems correctly.
In this case, our attempt to steer clear of petroleum materials, ostensibly because of their carbon footprint and nonrenewable nature, created a polymer with a much higher carbon footprint that still required petroleum polymers. Not to mention, industrially grown corn has many additional impacts on the environment when grown for mass output: excessive fertilizers, nitrogen and phosphorus runoff, freshwater use and contamination, and soil degradation, among others.
Framework in Action: PVOH/PVA
Dissolvable Plastics: a net-positive at scale?
Another example of this step comes from a material we considered utilizing in 2022: PVOH/PVA (polyvinyl alcohol), the polymer most commonly known as the clear, dissolvable plastic used to package dishwasher and laundry detergents.
At the time, there was a growing interest in using this polymer as a replacement for other common flexible films, like LDPE, which are used to make thin-film plastics like Ziploc bags, polybags, poly mailers, cling wrap, etc. Where thin-film plastics like LDPE presented challenge at end-of-life—not being easily recyclable curbside—PVOH claimed to be a possible alternative solution—one that could be simply dissolved down the sink.
While this was an interesting idea, it started to fall apart when we considered the concept of scale. We asked: What would happen if PVOH replaced all LDPE tomorrow, and instead of recycling thin-film plastics, we relied on the water treatment and sewage systems to manage and treat an inundation of PVOH in the wastewater system?
The answer? Realistically speaking, wastewater systems across the country are not equipped with the filtration systems or funding required to effectively remove an excess of PVOH suddenly introduced to its effluent. We passed on this material.
3. Does it perform and function as needed?
Source: Unsplash
Is it a pipe dream, a cool idea, or a valid alternative? More simply, does it actually work?
Beyond the broad environmental impact and lifecycle assessment, we need to consider the reality of packaging materials and why we use them in the first place: to protect products, in some cases, keep them sterile, and transport them safely from point A to point B.
Therefore, we must consider how the alternative material functions relative to the material it replaces. Does it reduce shelf life? Does it reduce protection or barrier?
Long-term and at scale, does it have the potential to meet critical functional requirements, like:
- Cost per unit
- Film barrier/protection requirements
- Storage space required
- Ability to scale/availability
- Lead time
- Performance in transit
- Shelf-life
- Waterproof packaging
- Alignment with preexisting machinery/automation
- Branding/print aesthetic
- End of life:
- Is it recyclable in existing systems?
- If not, has it been vetted for other forms of disposal, i.e., certified for compostability in industrial or at-home systems?
These are critical questions to ask even if the material is not novel. For instance, if a brand wants to reduce plastic, but its product is highly sensitive to water and cannot become damp before reaching the final customer and destination, it may not be feasible to replace its clear polybags with paper glassine or its poly mailers with paper mailers.
Framework In Action: Mushroom Foam
Using as blocking and bracing solutions is a no-go.
Mycelium-based mushroom foam was a potential alternative to molded pulp and expanded polystyrene packaging. However, despite its theoretical environmental benefits, it presented several challenges:
-
-
A relatively small amount of input material is available compared to other more common and available alternatives, like paper and pulp fiber, agricultural waste fibers, etc.
-
Inefficiencies in transportation and storage due to its inability to nest, leading to a 5-10x increase in space required
-
Uncertainty around whether it indeed outperformed molded pulp, which is already a sustainable alternative
-
Given these issues, EcoEnclose decided against adopting mushroom foam, instead prioritizing molded pulp from agricultural wastes and recycled paper as a better alternative.
4. Is there potential for it to restore, regenerate, or remediate key environmental aspects?
Source: Sway
When raw input materials are harvested from regenerative sources, they are sourced in a way that sustains and actively improves ecosystems.
Specific crops and inputs, like seaweed, algae, and agricultural waste byproducts, offer significant environmental co-benefits at scale.
Seaweed and algae, for example, sequester carbon, improve water quality, and reduce ocean acidification while requiring no freshwater or fertilizers. Agricultural waste byproducts repurpose otherwise discarded materials, reducing landfill waste and methane emissions.
These inputs contribute to soil restoration, biodiversity enhancement, and ecosystem resilience, creating a supply chain supporting environmental health and resource abundance.
Case Study: Sway Seaweed Film
A Work in Progress
Sway’s seaweed-based packaging film is an exciting innovation with significant promise:
-
Requires no freshwater or chemical inputs
-
It has the potential for ecosystem restoration and carbon sequestration
-
It avoids the land-use environmental issues associated with traditional bioplastics
However, challenges remain:
-
Manufacturing processes are still in early-stage development
-
Designed for compostability but requires investment to support recyclability at scale
-
Responsible sourcing must be ensured to prevent unintended environmental harm
Despite these hurdles, EcoEnclose sees the potential in Sway’s technology and has become a go-to-market partner, supporting its commercialization while investing in third-party research to validate its long-term sustainability.
The Future of Novel Materials at EcoEnclose
Looking ahead, EcoEnclose sees several material innovations with strong potential based on our evaluation framework:
-
Sway Seaweed Film: As commercialization efforts progress, continued research and development could make this a game-changing packaging solution that regenerates coastal environments and cleans water while growing.
-
Sugarcane-Based Packaging: When grown and harvested responsibly, sugarcane drop-in biopolymers (bioPE) present a promising alternative to petroleum-based polymers. They still function the same and are thin-film recyclable in existing systems.
-
Wheat-Straw Waste: With demand for paper continuing to grow (a trend that will continue with the adoption of EPR legislation), we must diversify our fiber basket to rely on multiple inputs into the paper stream. Our research has shown that wheat straw - a waste input often burned worldwide, releasing carbon and causing air pollution - is a promising alternative.
We are also exploring other agricultural and food waste inputs, additional ways to incorporate algae into our material stream, and a variety of on-purpose crops for paper fiber (such as hemp and miscanthus) that are nitrogen-fixing and soil-enhancing.
Leading with Sustainability
Seaweed as a Packaging Input
Choosing the Right Poly Mailers
Why Recycled Content Matters
About EcoEnclose
EcoEnclose is the leading sustainable packaging company that provides eco-packaging solutions to the world’s most forward-thinking brands.
We develop diverse, sustainable packaging solutions that meet our rigorous research-based standards and customers’ goals. We drive innovative packaging materials to market and consistently improve the circularity of existing solutions.