A Future Without Plastic Packaging
How multinationals will rapidly abandon single-use plastics.
Humans have produced over 6.3 billion metric tons of plastic waste since plastic’s advent in 1950. Only 9% of the plastic ever produced has been recycled. The rest has gone to landfills, been incinerated, or drifted into our natural environment (source).
What is causing this build up of plastics? Are we doomed? How can we build a more sustainable future?
The use of plastics in consumer packaging has largely contributed to our global plastic waste crisis. 40% of all plastics produced globally serve as packaging — a portion of a product that is immediately discarded once arriving at the end user (source).
Why are plastics so popular in CPGs (Consumer Packaged Goods)?
Plastics only first gained traction during World War II, when the US needed to preserve natural resources (plastic provided a synthetic alternative to almost any naturally-produced material). In packaging, the incumbent naturally-produced materials were paper, glass, and metal. Plastic ultimately became the standard in the CPG industry due to its light weight and inexpensiveness. For food products specifically, plastic also increased shelf-life. But plastic’s reign has only lasted about 60 years. And over the course of that reign, scientists have raised growing concerns over plastic’s environmental impact. You can read more about the fascinating history of plastics here.
Today, plastics have nestled themselves into the supply chain of countless consumer products, from deodorant containers, to soap dispensers, to razor cartridges, to soda bottles. Now, CPG companies and their consumers grapple with the conflict between plastic’s cheap cost and high environmental impact. Biodegradable and compostable alternatives to plastics exist, but these alternatives come at a higher price, dissuading many businesses and consumers from switching.
With single-use plastics as such an industry staple, CPG manufacturers seemingly face a tradeoff between protecting the environment and protecting their bottom line. But what if CPG companies could actually save money and the environment at the same time?
Why should you care as a consumer?
- Toxic chemicals leach out of plastic and are now found in the blood and tissue of nearly all humans. Exposure to them has been linked to cancer, birth defects, impaired immunity, endocrine disruption and other ailments (source).
- Plastic cannot biodegrade; it breaks down into smaller and smaller pieces called microplastics (source).
- Today, the average person eats 70,000 microplastics each year (source).
- Plastic has been estimated to endure for 450 years — forever (source).
- 40 million pounds of plastic have accumulated and are currently floating in the north pacific ocean alone (source).
Plastic pollution puts our very existence as human beings into jeopardy.
Consumers directly influence the products that CPG companies produce. We all want convenience and low prices. If plastic continues to be the cheapest and most convenient form of packaging, we are going to keep purchasing products which use plastic packaging. It’s a tragedy of the commons.
But there’s a future in which we preserve convenience and low prices, while abandoning plastic packaging. It is our job as consumers to be conscious of that future. And it is our job to vote with our wallets in favor of that future.
Why should you care as a decision maker at a CPG company?
- Consumers have a growing preference for more sustainable products:
- 73% of consumers say they would definitely change their consumption habits to reduce their environment impact. (source)
- Looking at packaging specifically:
- 53% of consumers said it was important for packaging to be biodegradable when asked about the largest CPG segment — food and beverage (source)
Balancing sustainability with unit economics is a difficult feat. But what if there didn’t have to be a tradeoff? If your company could make its products more sustainable, while lowering costs at the same time, wouldn’t that be attractive? Consumers are more likely to buy from sustainable brands, but CPG manufacturers are the only ones who can change what CPGs are actually available to consumers. There’s a way forward where everyone can win. Let’s build that future.
Today’s Plastic Alternatives
Sustainable products are often touted as more virtuous by the consumers who use them. But as of now, living sustainably requires more than virtue; it requires large amounts of disposable income as well.
Companies like Seed Phytonutrients, Patch Strips, Boxed Water, and No Evil Foods have created products packaged in biodegradable alternatives to plastic. But these manufacturers are able to afford biodegradable packaging because they are targeting a more wealthy, environmentally-conscious demographic that is willing to spend more on more sustainable products. This is how Seed Phytonutrients, for example, can charge $24 for a single bottle of shampoo.
Compostable beverage cups offer restaurants that have proper composting infrastructure a more sustainable alternative to plastic cups. However, restaurants have to pay 2–3 times as much to switch from plastic to compostable cups (source). Plastic straw bans in cities like San Francisco and Seattle have caused restaurants to ditch plastic, but require that these restaurants spend 5–10 times as much on straws (source).
Current single-use alternatives to plastics in consumer packaging (like these biodegradable materials) offer more sustainable solutions, but there’s a reason why major CPG companies aren’t flocking towards biodegradable packaging: The environmental incentives do not align with the financial incentives.
My Theory for Change
I have a simple yet important theory: in order for a massive shift away from plastic in consumer packaging, CPG companies must identify eco-friendly plastic packaging alternatives that actually save themselves money at the same time. This shift will likely not occur by searching for alternatives to plastic as a material, but instead by reimagining how we define packaging in the first place.
Pillars for success in a plastic packaging alternative system:
1. All packaging components made of natural materials. This includes:
- Biodegradable materials (Ex: paper and compostable materials.)
- Natural, infinitely recyclable materials. (Important: plastic is NOT infinitely recyclable. Plastics are downcycled through each use into less and less useful materials until reaching a landfill.) (Metal and glass are natural and infinitely recyclable.
2. System emphasizes reusability over recyclability/disposal.
- Recycling has its own slew of problems. If the packaging or portions of it can be reused, disposal can be avoided after single-use.
3. System costs less than plastic.
- If the system involves biodegradable single-use packaging, that system must cost less than the current single-use plastic packaging.
- If the system involves packaging reuse, cost/use must cost less than the current single-use plastic packaging.
4. System preserves or increases convenience for the consumer.
5. The carbon footprint involved in producing, operating, and discarding the alternative system must be no greater than the carbon footprint involved in producing and discarding the current single-use plastic packaging.
You might be thinking… “yeah right” or “sounds like a tall order,” but there are already companies accomplishing these pillars.
Companies paving the way for tomorrow’s plastic alternatives
#1: Reducing packaging by reimagining the form factor of consumer products
A company called Blueland has discovered that surface cleaner and hand soap products do not require a new plastic bottle with every purchase. The company has reduced these products to concentrated Nickel-sized tablets, which mix with water in a reusable glass bottle in order to produce the desired product. These replacement tablets come in small, compostable paper packaging rather than wasting entire soap containers for each use.
Another company called “by Humankind” has redefined purchasing new deodorant to mean purchasing deodorant inside of plastic-reduced cartridges which insert into a reusable outer shell container. “by Humankind” has also reduced mouthwash into small concentrated tablets which dissolve in water, preventing the need to purchase large plastic mouthwash bottles every time.
#2: Reusable containers owned by the consumer
Simple reusable products are in demand as well. Most notably, reusable water bottles have built out an industry that is now worth over $8 billion. (Though it is interesting to note that US plastic water bottle sales have unfortunately grown alongside this industry development (source)).
Other reusable products are continuing to be introduced to provide alternatives to single-use plastic incumbents. Reusable snack bags made of silicone seek to replace disposable plastic snack bags like Ziploc. Beeswax-based food wraps, like Beeswrap, aim to replace disposable plastic wrap. Durable, stainless steel razors, like Rockwell, seek to upend an industry of razors with short-lived, disposable plastic cartridges.
#3: Return-for-deposit
And finally, return-for-deposit systems for packaging, popularized by TerraCylce’s venture called Loop, have redefined the purpose and ownership structure of consumer packaging altogether. Loop sells traditional consumer products from companies like Unilever and Nestle inside of uniquely designed reusable stainless steel containers. Once consumers finish using their products, the reusable packaging is sent back to Loop for cleaning and then back to the manufacturers to be refilled and used again.
In this model, the packaging is merely a borrowed vessel for transporting the product inside, rather than being a possession of the consumer that he/she will choose to eventually discard. In order to incentivize return of the packaging, customers put a deposit down for the containers which they get back once returning them, hence the term “return-for-deposit”.
Why these companies are onto something MASSIVE
The products I’ve highlighted have gained a lot of media attention for their more sustainable approach to packaging. But what has hardly been discussed is the potential for these products to actually save manufacturers and consumers money through these sustainable approaches. This savings potential signals to me that we are on the verge of a revolution.
This matrix shows the traditional slippery slope in CPGs toward cheap and unsustainable packaging. In the top right shows the outliers which break the trend.
#1: The entire sanitation industry could adopt Blueland’s model TODAY
Blueland is a company that excites me because it is able to completely eliminate plastic waste from their product’s life cycle and preserve the same convenience as traditional products in their industry, all the while delivering a price point for refills that is lower than some of the cheapest hand soap and surface cleaner competitors. Pledge surface cleaner from Walmart, for example, comes in at $3.93 per bottle for 16 oz while Blueland surface cleaner can go for as little as $1.56 per tablet for 20 oz. I have used Blueland’s Iris Agave hand soap myself and it’s fantastic.
Blueland estimates that the average home uses 30 single-use plastic bottles of cleaner every year. If you do the math…
1st year with Blueland: $12.00 + 30*($1.56) = $58.80
Every year after: 30*($1.56) = $46.80
vs.
Every year with Pledge: 30*($3.93) = $117.90
That’s $59.10 in savings in year 1 and $71.10 in savings every year after that. Plus 30 bottles of waste saved each year.
Blueland demonstrates a path forward for the entire sanitation industry. Imagine if a major brand, like Softsoap, adopted Blueland’s refillable tablets approach in place of single-use plastic containers for their hand soap. That alone would eliminate about 100 million plastic soap containers of waste per year (source).
And why shouldn’t Softsoap? Recreating Softsoap’s form factor into a concentrated tablet would require some R&D, but once completed could offer much lower packaging variable expenses. Why incur the cost of a plastic soap container each time you sell to a customer when each customer only needs one?
It’s important to note that Blueland uses compostable paper packaging for their refill tablets. This compostable paper is likely more expensive than if the company were to use plastic of the same size. But it is just that — the size of the packaging — that Blueland has innovated on which allows it to beat competitors on cost even while using a much more sustainable packaging material.
By reimagining the form factor of liquid hand soap, which has been stagnant since its 1964 creation (source, source), Blueland has set a benchmark for how CPG manufacturers might rethink their products in order to cut costs and reduce environmental impact at the same time. That should be quite an attractive proposal.
Using my theory’s framework, I give Blueland the following scores out of 10:
- Pillar 1 (packaging made of natural materials): 10
- Pillar 2 (emphasizes reusability over recyclability/disposal): 8
- Pillar 3 (cheaper than plastic): 10
- Pillar 4 (consumer convenience): 10
- Pillar 5 (carbon footprint management): Unknown
#2: How consumers can take more direct action — for the environment AND their wallets
While cost savings that come with models like Blueland’s may trickle down to consumers, simple reusable products allow consumers to save money directly. Purchasing a reusable water bottle, like “que,” can allow a consumer to save hundreds of dollars a year on plastic water bottles (source).
In jurisdictions that have instituted a tax on plastic grocery bags, using a reusable bag can save consumers money.
Coffee shops often provide financial incentives for bringing your own reusable coffee cup. Starbucks, for example, provides a $.10 discount each time you use a reusable cup. An average reusable travel mug costs around $10. If you get coffee 4 times a week, you’ll be profitable in 6 months ($.10*(4 times)*(26 weeks) = $10.40). 6 months later and you’ll have earned an extra $10.40.
There is a reason most of our possessions — from dishware to clothing — are reusable. If we were to use paper plates or wear disposable t-shirts every single day, not only would that be incredibly wasteful, but it would end up being incredibly expensive as well. Consumers who embrace reusability take care of the planet and their wallets at the same time.
Using my theory’s framework, I give simple reusable products the following scores out of 10:
- Pillar 1 (packaging made of natural materials): 9
- Pillar 2 (emphasizes reusability over recyclability/disposal): 10
- Pillar 3 (cheaper than plastic): 10
- Pillar 4 (consumer convenience): 5
- Pillar 5 (carbon footprint management): Unknown
#3: CPG Manufacturers should invest in Loop’s long-term vision
Loop is probably the most complex model, since there is a lot of transportation involved in collecting reusable packagings from the consumer and redistributing those to the respective manufacturers. There are also cleaning expenses. However, at its core, Loop allows manufacturers to utilize the same stainless steel packagings for indefinite product purchases. This replaces the necessity to purchase/produce new plastic packaging for every product unit.
In theory, with enough transportation and cleaning efficiency, Loop can save money for CPG manufacturers who adopt this model. Even if it’s a few cents per unit, that’s enough to spark a massive shift.
The barrier that will remain in the way is the decreased consumer convenience involved in returning packaging. Because of that required shift in consumer habits, there is a long road ahead for return-for-deposit packaging systems. But at the end of that road lies a future where CPG packaging never touches a landfill.
The potential cost savings to manufacturers is the most crucial component of all of this. If reusing packaging actually becomes cheaper than producing individual, disposable plastic packaging, large and stubborn CPG manufacturers are going to start listening.
Using my theory’s framework, I give Loop the following scores out of 10:
- Pillar 1 (packaging made of natural materials): 10
- Pillar 2 (emphasizes reusability over recyclability/disposal): 10
- Pillar 3 (cheaper than plastic): 7
- Pillar 4 (consumer convenience): 5
- Pillar 5 (carbon footprint management): Unknown
Concluding Thoughts
Counterintuitive as it may seem, CPG companies need to think of ways to invest less money into saving the environment in order to save the environment. What I mean is that manufacturers need to conceptualize sustainable packaging as a potential for cost savings rather than a financial burden.
Sustainably-packaged products which merely serve wealthy environmentalists can only have so big of an impact. Sustainable packaging systems that replace single-use plastics and actually save manufacturers/consumers money are those that will create an unstoppable force for good. Not only will they attract the environmentalists on a budget, but they will sway even the least environmentally-inclined individuals.
This is how our plastic waste crisis can be circumvented. Consumers and businesses acting in their own self-interest will, in turn, act in the best interest of the environment.
That is a future I want to live in.
The question is which product categories should be tackled first? Which categories generate the largest plastic waste volumes? Which categories will move the conversation forward the fastest?
Follow me on Medium to find out.
About Me:
My name is Julian Davis and I’m an entrepreneur, environmental sustainability activist, and undergraduate student at Georgetown University studying Management and Physics. As a passionate surfer from San Diego, I’ve seen plastic in our oceans first hand far too often. Through Physics, I’ve come to understand the scientific complexities and implications of our plastic waste build-up. As a Business student, I also understand the pragmatism and costs of adopting new products and systems. Having experience founding multiple entrepreneurial ventures in the past, I am now setting out to tackle the issue that matters most to me — the plastic waste crisis. Exciting new products, systems, and ideas are to come in the near future, so stay tuned.
📝 Save this story in Journal.
🌎 Wake up every Sunday morning to the week’s most noteworthy stories in Society waiting in your inbox. Read the Noteworthy in Society newsletter.
