How does plastic compare with alternative materials in the packaging sector? A systematic review of LCA studies

Waste Manag Res. 2024 Apr 5:734242X241241606. doi: 10.1177/0734242X241241606. Online ahead of print.

Abstract

In the recent years, packaging made of conventional plastics has been increasingly replaced by materials believed to be more sustainable. However, perceived sustainability must align with scientific assessments, such as life cycle assessments (LCAs). This review analysed 53 peer-reviewed studies published in the time range 2019-2023, aiming at understanding the state of the art in LCA about the environmental impacts of packaging by focusing on the comparison between plastics and alternative materials. The literature showed that consumer perceptions often differ from LCA findings and revealed that, frequently, conventional plastics are not the least environmentally friendly choice. Bioplastics typically show benefits only in the climate change and the fossil resource depletion impact categories. The heavy weight of glass turns out to affect its environmental performances with respect to the light plastics, with reuse being an essential strategy to lower the burdens. The comparison between plastics and metals is more balanced, leaning more towards plastics for food packaging. Similarly, paper resulted often preferable than plastics. Finally, for the other materials (i.e. wood and textiles), the picture is variable. To be competitive with plastics, the alternative materials require improvements like the optimisation of their production processes, their reuse and enhanced end-of-life options. At the same time, recycled polymers could boost the eco-performance of virgin plastics.

Keywords: Life cycle assessment; bioplastics; glass; metals; packaging; paper; plastics; systematic review.

Publication types

  • Review