Recently, I attended a sustainability event where a representative from one of Denmark's largest food producers discussed the sustainability of their packaging. The spokesperson celebrated the company's achievement in 'solving the recycling problem of their packaging' by integrating cardboard-based food containers (commonly known as Tetra Pak) into the Danish recycling system.
A friend who attended the event with me, who is relatively new to sustainability, was very impressed by this 'solution'. Our subsequent conversation made me realize how many people don't fully understand what 'recyclable' actually means, how different the reality is from the perception, and how much big packaging producers rely on and exploit this gap, contributing to the smoke and mirrors surrounding recycling.
Here are some facts about the recycling of cardboard-based food packaging:
📦Cardboard cartons, such as Tetra Paks, consist of complex composites including plastic, aluminum, and cardboard. This complexity makes them problematic for recycling.
📊Tetra Paks are composed of 14% plastic, 5% aluminum, 6% bioplastic (cap), and 75% cardboard.
🏭🚛🚛Although labeled as 100% recyclable, Tetra Paks require specialized machinery for recycling due to their mixed material composition, which limits the actual rate of recycling. For example, there are no processing plants in Denmark; the waste is first transported to Germany and then to Sweden for what is termed recycling.
💸The recycling process for such packaging involves grinding the material into a very fine powder and then separating the fragments, which is highly energy-intensive, wasteful, and contributes further to microplastic pollution.
🗑️ Recycled Tetra Pak materials are often "downcycled" into lower-quality products that may ultimately end up in landfills, with less than 30% of the material volume actually being reused.
💸🚽The materials from this 'recycling' process rarely return to their original form; instead, they are turned into less valuable products, diminishing their overall recyclability and economic value.
Given all these challenges, I am somewhat taken aback by the celebratory nature of the announcement that the problem of cardboard food packaging has been 'solved' in Denmark. It seems to me that we are creating a whole inefficient system to handle an inherently unsustainable packaging solution, just so we can continue justifying its use in the service of big producers, rather than in the service of our social, economic, and environmental needs.
Only when we focus on designing systems that are fit for purpose, instead of applying ill-suited patches to unsustainable products, will we start making real progress on our sustainability journey. So lets hold off the celebrations until than, shall we?