San Francisco is often the poster child of compostable packaging. Polystyrene is banned, and restaurants are required to use compostable or recyclable containers and utensils. With supportive regulations, savvy consumers and access to composting infrastructure, compostable packaging should be a slam dunk, right?<\/p>\n
Yet a recent interview with the San Francisco Examiner, a representative from Recology, the city\u2019s recycling and composting service provider, confirmed that many compostable plastics were being pulled out by sorters and landfilled. Why? The problem is how these products are labeled.<\/p>\n
Most compostable items, especially compostable plastics, look exactly like their non-compostable counterparts. Clamshell containers, lids and utensils are simply embossed, often on the bottom of the item, to identify them as compostable while claims on the products themselves vary widely, from \u201cCompostable\u201d to \u201cBiodegradable\u201d to statements about sourcing like \u201cMade from corn.\u201d Green or brown stripes may be added to larger items, but non-compostable items can also be marked with green or brown symbols.<\/p>\n
Currently, compostable bags are the only category with best practices starting to take hold, like the use of green tinting, the words \u201cCertified Compostable\u201d in prominent text (1-inch or larger), and certification logos like BPI and OK Home Compost. For other product categories, especially clamshells and utensils, whether it\u2019s actually compostable is anybody\u2019s guess.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
New laws push labeling of more products<\/p>\n
New bills aim to address this confusion head-on. Washington\u2019s HB 1569 (effective July 2020) and California\u2019s proposed (but recently tabled) SB 54 outline labeling requirements for all compostable products, including product packaging, food serviceware and bags. Washington\u2019s bill requires that all compostable products be labeled in a way that is \u201ceasily and readily identifiable\u201d and include a certification logo or the word \u201cCompostable.\u201d<\/p>\n
These two new bills build on earlier versions of compostable labeling laws, which only address compostable bags. For instance, Maryland\u2019s HB 1349, effective since October 2017, sets strict requirements for the use of certification logos, wording and green tinting on bags but not on other compostable plastics or compostable products. Ultimately, both types of laws aim to eliminate greenwashing, reduce consumer confusion and aid composters in identifying which products coming into their facility are actually compostable.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
In the absence of clear labels, composters err on the side of caution<\/p>\n
At Recology\u2019s composting facility and at facilities across the country, sorters pull out unmarked, plastic-looking items to avoid contamination. Even compostable paper coffee cups are likely to be removed for fear they\u2019re conventional paper cups lined with plastic. A compostable plastic may be embossed with a certification logo or the words \u201cCertified Compostable,\u201d but no sorter is going to be able to spot this subtle labeling.<\/p>\n
Washington\u2019s bill adds \u201cprocessing facilities\u201d to the list of stakeholders who need to be able to identify compostable products. This further limits what is considered \u201ceasily identifiable\u201d\u2014a consumer disposing of a cup may spot the green stripe, but composters and sorters trying to identify materials in a truck or within a pile will require the largest and most obvious labeling, far beyond what most products have today.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Consumers are increasingly frustrated with compostability claims<\/p>\n
Consumers (as well as non-profits and media) are starting to put compostability in quotations\u2014as in, \u201cThese bowls are \u2018compostable\u2019 but are actually landfilled.\u201d More than a punctuation preference, this indicates that for many people, the claim (even when supported by third-party certification) doesn\u2019t mean much unless the item actually gets composted.<\/p>\n
The first and largest barrier to composting is the lack of widespread industrial facilities and curbside collection programs. But even in regions with composting infrastructure, like the Bay Area, consumers are frustrated that compostable packaging isn\u2019t getting composted. If composters can\u2019t identify what\u2019s compostable and are pulling these items out of their trucks and composting piles, then it\u2019s not truly compostable in the eyes of many consumers. Larger, more standardized product labeling is essential for identification, and by extension, consumer buy-in.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Compostable products need standardized labeling<\/p>\n
Labeling laws will continue to evolve in the direction of requiring clear labeling for all products. Washington\u2019s law is the first evidence of this. And if California passes a similar bill, manufacturers will need to tackle labeling in a key geographic market.<\/p>\n
It\u2019s not just food serviceware\u2014CPG brands venturing into compostability for categories like compostable wrappers should pay close attention, learning from the pitfalls of compostable plastics and designing packaging a composter can quickly and easily spot.<\/p>\n
Proposed and passed labeling bills refer to \u201cindustry standards\u201d for labeling, which don\u2019t yet exist\u2014there\u2019s no standard color to represent compostability, for instance. Manufacturers should collaborate pre-competitively to develop these standards, since better labeling benefits everyone. It eliminates bad actors making unverified compostability claims, and it allows consumers and composters alike to spot and sort compostable products more quickly and easily, increasing the chance these products will actually be composted.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
San Francisco is often the poster child of compostable packaging. Polystyrene is banned, and restaurants are required to use compostable or recyclable containers and utensils. With supportive regulations, savvy consumers and access to composting infrastructure, compostable packaging should be a slam dunk, right? Yet a recent interview with the San Francisco Examiner, a representative from […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_seopress_robots_primary_cat":"","nova_meta_subtitle":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[5572],"tags":[14198],"supplier":[],"class_list":["post-68187","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bio-based","tag-recyclable"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/renewable-carbon.eu\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68187","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/renewable-carbon.eu\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/renewable-carbon.eu\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/renewable-carbon.eu\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/renewable-carbon.eu\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=68187"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/renewable-carbon.eu\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68187\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/renewable-carbon.eu\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=68187"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/renewable-carbon.eu\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=68187"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/renewable-carbon.eu\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=68187"},{"taxonomy":"supplier","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/renewable-carbon.eu\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/supplier?post=68187"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}