The future of foodservice packaging: Industry calls for harmonized chemical legislation amid fiber-based frenzy

19 Oct 2022 --- Quick Service Restaurant (QSR) packaging has been expanding into reusable and fiber-based options as the industry strives to become more circular. Consumers and professional environmentalists have been urging companies in the foodservice industry to reduce their waste while eliminating toxic chemicals such as PFAS. 

Governmental actions have been taken against the use of PFAS and other chemicals that have been reported in QSR packaging. The EU and US governments have enacted bans on the chemicals. 

Answering a public call to action, some fast-food service companies have been integrating reusable tupperware-style packaging instead of PFAS-containing single-use containers.

However, even as a reusable option, some industry players are not convinced it is the solution. Some claim tupperware-like packaging uses more greenhouse emissions than a superior alternative, fiber packages. 

“Legislation is important to drive change and create incentives to invest in new solutions and technology. Packaging, including barriers for fiber-Yoann Bouvet, sales director of foodservice at Graphic Packaging International calls for universal packaging regulations. based alternatives, must make sense. We cannot replace single-use plastics with another over-engineered and environmentally hazardous alternative,” Ann Dynehall, Chief Communications Officer from PulPac tells PackagingInsights. 

Yoann Bouvet, sales director of foodservice at Graphic Packaging International, echoes the same point, saying, “circularity should always be the goal for the foodservice sector, but we need to have a global consensus on what circularity truly means to develop solutions that contribute to it. We firmly believe in recyclability – an area where fiber-based materials lead the way.”

PFAS dangers and regulation
PFAS chemicals are widely used in QSR packaging because they are stain-resistant, water-repellent and grease-proof. They also aid in maintaining the shape of bags and bowls that contain hot or greasy foods.

Commonly called “forever chemicals,” PFAS do not break down in the environment and, therefore, can leak into water and soil, affecting crops and fish.

The EU plans to ban all PFAS, bisphenol and PVC by 2030. A “Restrictions Roadmap” from The European Commission details evidence that chemicals commonly used in packaging raise common disease rates. 

Using “bioplastic coating helps overcome the challenges stemming from the use of more traditional plastic coatings and lamination for moisture and grease resistance in foodservice packaging applications, which affect the product’s recyclability,” says Bouvet regarding a replacement for the industry shift away from PFAS.

According to Environmental Health Perspectives, there is evidence that PFAS transfers directly to food through its packaging, finding that people who frequently eat fast food have higher levels of PFAS in their bloodstream than people who eat meals from their homes.

A US national survey found that 92% of bipartisan voters agree that the government should require products to be proven safe before being put on the market and 88% agree that companies should work toward removing plastics from packaging.Fiber-based and reusable QSR packages face off as what is the more scale and environmentally sustainable solution. 

“The environmental effects of single-use plastics and the hazardous risks with PFAS have created a sound consumer skepticism,” emphasizes Dynehall. 

Increasing legislation 
In November 2021, The Keep Food Containers Safe from PFAS Act. in the US. The bill was passed as an amendment to the Food and Drug Administration’s Safety and Landmark Advancements Act of 2022, prohibiting food packaging that contains intentionally added PFAS. 

Bouvet calls for universal legislation regarding packaging so better produce environmentally sustainable options. “We would argue for a holistic view of packaging and its role in sustainability goals, and for more collaboration between lawmakers around the world. Varying requirements could be better harmonized between countries and markets.”

According to Consumer Reports, tests done in the US found more than 100 food packaging products – such as paper bags for french fries and wrappers for hamburgers – from restaurants and supermarkets contained dangerous PFAS chemicals. 

Nearly one in five products contained fluorine levels that exceeded 100 parts per million (ppm). McDonald’s fries, McNugget bags, and Burger King’s cookie bags exceeded the 100 ppm threshold. 

Yet, Mcdonald’s plans to ban the use of all PFAS in its packaging by 2025 and BurgerKing has recently implemented reusable food containers for its to-go items. 

Critics claim reusable packaging emits more greenhouse gasses than fiber-based options. Reuse or recycle 
Innova Market Insights pegged “Reusable Revolution” as a top trend for 2021, noting the shift from single-use consumption to reuse as a critical strategy for material savings. 

Since 2021, Burger King has offered customers reusable packaging systems instead of single-use fast food packaging in selected cities. 

Recently, the company announced it would be the first fast-food restaurant in the UK to pilot reusable clamshell containers for burgers. 

However, Risto Auero, sales director food service board at Metsä Board, has told PackagingInsights that reusable models for QSR are not necessarily the answer, saying, “instead, single-use fiber-based packaging used in QSR for in-store use results in very significant environmental benefits over its life cycle – from climate change to freshwater consumption.”

Similarly, an independent life cycle assessment reveals that transitioning QSR dining to reusable tableware would be equivalent to adding one million petrol cars to Europe’s roads. The reusable system generates almost three times more CO2-equivalent emissions and consumes about three and a half times more freshwater than the paper-based single-use system.

Fiber-based frenzy 
What Innova Market Insights dubbed the “Fiber-based Frenzy” refers to the recent surge of companies investing in fiber-based packaging as an alternative to plastic to reduce their reliance on fossil fuel-based resources and advertise their carbon emissions reductions. 

“I expect to see progress in sustainable barrier sol GPI calls for better universal packaging regulations for optimized global circularity.utions for fiber. Given the ‘fiber frenzy,’ there is a lot of research and development effort going into barrier development for fiber-based packaging. The packaging industry needs to move away from forever chemicals,” says Dynehall. 

“When shifting away from single-use plastics, fiber-based food packaging will have the upper hand. UPM and Smithers recently presented a market study that predicts a US$20 billion shift from plastic to fiber-based food packaging by 2040. The same study concludes that fiber-based packaging will be perceived as the most sustainable packaging solution.”

However, according to the Environmental Paper Network (EPN), the average sheet of A4 paper swallows at least 20 liters of water. Over half of the world’s paper supply is used in packaging due to transport and disposal issues. In 2013 the EPN suggested that paper could produce more greenhouse gas emissions than the aviation industry.

Major paper packaging groups have been freezing their operations in Russia in a show of protest against the invasion of Ukraine. Russia was a significant fiber export for many companies, and from that supply being cut off, those same countries will have to get their needed fiber from other forests. 

With more requests from consumers and governments to produce fiber-based QSR packages, manufacturers could potentially exhaust their natural resources – having access to less supply with more demand. 

By Sabine Waldeck