click to learn more

Applying this framework clarifies that there is a hierarchy to landfill diversion for packaging.

• Reuse is optimal. Minimal resources are required to reuse packaging, and reuse means much of its initial value is left intact.

• Recycling is the next most optimal: recycle an item back into itself or an equally high-value item wherever possible. This is because recycling most efficiently turns existing raw materials back into something valuable, extending the useful life of the raw materials and resources that went into their production and reducing the need for natural resources to be otherwise extracted for new items.

If neither is possible for an item or package, the next best choice is to convert packaging into compost or energy (waste-to-energy). Unfortunately, most compostable packaging degrades the value of the compost it helps to produce. Because of this, in many situations, waste-to-energy would be considered more circular than composting packaging.

As people have tried to leverage this critical composting waste stream to become an outlet to “get rid of packaging,” we’re inadvertently creating many obstacles for composters. These challenges are making it more and more difficult for composting to do its primary job of turning organic waste into nutrient-rich humus.

Most Americans don’t have a nearby industrial composting facility. Because of this, many people point to access as the main challenge regarding compostable packaging.

This logic misses the most critical point - even fairly small volumes of compostable packaging lead to lower-quality compost, which is contaminated and very difficult to sell.

This creates two challenges. First, industrial composters that accept packaging have difficulty selling their output. When they lose this vital revenue stream, they can’t operate anymore. Second, the compost they do sell pollutes, rather than enriches, the soil it is amended to. This is because compostable packaging - certified or not - has a net negative impact on compost. Certified compostable packaging must prove its negative impact is under “accepted” limits in lab environments.

Let’s dive into certified compostability requirements to understand why.

ASTM D6400 is the standard specification for solid material biodegradation (by composting) required for the labeling of plastics designed to be aerobically composted in municipal or industrial facilities.

An item must demonstrate the following to pass ASTM D6400.

Specifically, 90% of an item must be smaller than 2mm (the remaining 10% can remain indefinitely), a portion of the organic carbon in an item must have been converted to CO2, plants can grow at least 90% as quickly when grown in soil with the resulting compost (the nutritional value of that plant is not tested at all), and toxic heavy metals can be present but not above a certain threshold. Unsurprisingly, the heavy metal thresholds in the US are much higher than in Europe.

Consider a compostable poly mailer in this context. It is likely made with PBAT and PLA and includes additives, inks, and adhesives. PBAT biodegrades very quickly. PLA biodegrades more slowly (which is why the PBAT is required to accelerate the overall biodegradation). Neither of these polymers adds any value to compost, and both make the output wetter and less nutrient dense. The additives, inks, and adhesives do not biodegrade and add some heavy metals to the output, but in low enough quantities to come in under the max thresholds set forth by ASTM 6400. As a result, the compost will likely no longer be considered organic and cannot be sold to organic farmers. And, if this type of compostable packaging is present in composting streams at even modest levels, the impact on the resulting compost is severely detrimental.

This type of chemical makeup is true of almost all compostable packaging because these additives, chemicals, inks, and adhesives are important to achieving the packaging’s functional requirements.

This is one reason why some of the earliest and most forward-thinking composters have since pulled the plug on compostable packaging - they care too much about their ability to accept food and yard waste, and produce an output that is carbon sequestering and soil-enriching.

In their explanation of why they have banned bioplastics, Oregon composters state that it often contains additives and chemicals that threaten human and environmental health. Specifically, “[compostable] consumer packaging may contain chemicals that can transfer into finished compost. From the compost, these chemicals may then transfer to ground and surface waters, be taken up by plants, and lead to negative health impacts…We want to keep our compost clean and safe for all.”

In explaining why they have banned packaging, Colorado’s A1 Organics states, “We can’t sell to organic farmers: Farmers often use compost in the production of certified organic foods. National standards prohibit the use of many different packaging materials when making compost used to grow crops certified as “USDA Organic.” Accepting packaging and service ware at our facilities hinders our ability to provide finished compost to organic farmers.”

The above section assumes that certified compostable packaging is composting successfully in a home or industrial environment.

This is not true.

Many studies have shown that the lab conditions in which plastic packaging compostability is tested are highly inadequate in recreating an actual home or industrial composting environment. As such, the results in those lab environments do little to replicate what happens in the real world.

When Oregon’s composters banned bioplastic, their first and most important reason for doing so was this: “They don’t always compost: Not all ‘certified’ compostable items will actually compost (break down) as fully or quickly as we need them to. This is because certification standards test compostability based on laboratory conditions. Those conditions are not always replicated in the real world (our facilities) which means that some “compostable” items don’t fully compost. The result is a finished compost that is contaminated with bits of partially degraded “compostable” material.”

Last year, a UK-based citizen science experiment - Big Compost Experiment - showed this same issue was also true in home composting. The study enrolled 1,648 citizens in performing home compost experiments to test the environmental performance of compostable plastics. The results show that of the compostable plastics tested under different home composting conditions, the majority did not fully disintegrate, including 60% of those certified “home compostable.” Read the complete study here.

We often talk about wishcycling - throwing random things in your recycling bin and hoping some get recycled. Wishcycling is highly problematic. It bogs down an already complex sorting process, can lead to the contamination of bales and slowdowns on remanufacturing equipment, and often (when caught in time) leads to rejections of entire bales of materials - all of which then get landfilled.

This same thing is happening in the home composting world. Unfortunately, composters and compost buyers are not as well equipped to deal with it all as recyclers and remanufacturers are.

A1 Organics, Colorado’s composting facility - which recently decided to stop allowing anything except for food and yard waste - found that over the past year, people have been throwing all sorts of things into the compost bin.

From produce stickers (which are not compostable) to single-use latex gloves to packaging peanuts - they saw so many items come through that either were not compostable (and likely tossed into the compost bin out of lack of knowledge or carelessness) or were compostable lookalikes, likely labeled as “biodegradable” or something similarly confusing.

Unfortunately, most composting facilities don’t have any infrastructure to effectively and efficiently sort the non-compostable waste out before it all gets pushed through to the composting pile.

Most of this inbound sorting is done by hand. And composters then struggle to sift contaminants out after the composting cycle is done. While some sorting and sifting are possible, small items will generally get through this screening. Additionally, sifting is expensive, slow going, and very difficult to warrant investments in if compost is sold at such low prices due to its overall quality issues.

According to A1 Organics, two reasons they are now only accepting food and yard waste include:

In the fall, I purchased a load of A1 Organics compost for a pollinator garden. Unfortunately, I found it full of litter - everything from bottle caps to partially biodegraded bioplastics to glass shards, nerf bullets, and tiny shreds of candy wrappers.

My family tried to pick out every piece of litter, but I’m sure some remained.

And, of course, most compost is laid on massive fields or in public spaces and forest lands, where no one can be expected to hand pick litter out before soil is spread.

Rightfully, many people and brands are horrified by the plastic pollution crisis taking over the planet. It is tragic to think about how much plastic is floating in our oceans, infiltrating previously pristine rivers and forests, and being ingested by birds and marine life.

No eco-conscious business leader wants their packaging to contribute to pollution in this way, and many have started to consider compostable packaging to decrease this risk.

Some even look to plastic packaging labeled as “biodegradable” or “degradable” to address these issues.

Unfortunately, none of these genuinely biodegrade in a marine environment and are not the pathway to solving plastic pollution.

ASTM D6991 is an emerging standard that aims to test (again, in lab environments) whether a bioplastic will biodegrade in seawater. This a true step in the direction of understanding how materials will act in our oceans, but at the time of this resource being written, it is still not a standard we should assume renders a package “safe” in marine environments.

We strongly recommend that brands looking for packaging that will not contribute to plastic pollution stick with paper.

Paper is unique because it is curbside recyclable, which is the preferred end-of-life outcome. It is also compostable in all environments and naturally biodegrades relatively quickly in any natural environment.

If paper or any other natural fibers is not feasible for your use case, and tackling marine plastic pollution is critical, consider glass, aluminum, or rigid plastic packaging. These materials are not biodegradable but less likely than plastic film to leak into the natural environment and become litter.

Finally, where feasible, brands committed to solving ocean plastic pollution might consider using packaging made with certified “ocean bound” plastic. This approach may enable them to be part of the solution to the plastic crisis. Investing in ocean-bound plastic helps fund waste management and recycling infrastructure in developing nations struggling most to deal with the world’s plastic waste.

Plastics labeled as compostable, biodegradable, or degradable do not solve issues like marine plastic pollution and have been found to contribute to these issues in different ways.

However, recognize that paper packaging for the food industry is often coated with PFAs. Avoid PFAs. The addition of PFAs and other forever chemicals generally renders packaging non-compostable. In situations where this packaging does get composted, it severely damages the health of the soil this compost is amended to.

Supercalendered paper (such as glassine paper) can often provide grease protection without coatings.

If you find yourself in a situation where paper won’t work, and you need compostable plastic, aim for the following.

If you are pursuing home compostability, don’t solely rely on lab schemes, given that most home compostable certified packaging has been found not to compost in real-life settings.

After your packaging receives home compostability certification, do your research. Have 20+ friends home compost your packaging with your intended labels and any other additions, and review the results before making your packaging widely available.

Don’t focus solely on “passing the compostability test” and instead, commit to creating packaging that has as minimal a negative impact on resulting compost as possible.

Remember that any compostable packaging you put out into the world will likely end up in our soil. So one personal test is - would you feel entirely comfortable composting your packaging and putting the resulting compost on your vegetable garden soil? Check your gut before producing tens of thousands of those packages for your consumers to dispose of.

And finally, in these situations, recognize that most of your packaging will likely be landfilled.

Most consumers nationwide don’t have access to industrial composting facilities willing to accept compostable bioplastic, and most don’t have home compost. Those that home compost certainly don’t have the space to put a lot of compostable packaging in their setup properly.

With that in mind, whether your packaging is compostable, recyclable, or neither, don’t lose sight of the entire lifecycle of your materials.

When brands design their packaging, most start with a focus on end-of-life, prioritizing packaging that won’t end up in the landfill.

This makes sense because end-of-life is the aspect of a packaging’s lifecycle that consumers must deal with. It is also the most visible packaging component, as we all see how much garbage our households and businesses create. We see litter on the side of the road or our shorelines. These images become a driving force in our decision-making.

Interestingly, however, end-of-life represents a fairly small amount of an item’s carbon footprint and environmental impact.

If you find yourself looking solely for “compostable packaging” or - if you’ve decided to skip compostable and instead seek “recyclable packaging” - don’t neglect the critical step of expanding your decision framework. Consider questions such as:

These questions are essential and can lead to much better and more nuanced choices than simply looking for packaging that meets your desired “end of life” criteria.

By keeping this perspective in mind - that composting and recycling are purely related to end-of-life and end-of-life represents a fairly small percentage of an item's environmental impact - you begin to bring a more precise and impactful approach to your packaging decision-making process.

We'd love to help you find the right shipping solution for your business.