Polyvia has published „Packaging in Transition“, an LCA study compiled by Quantis that compares the environmental impact and circularity of various packaging materials in 29 use cases across four sectors and derives levers for action up to 2040.
The study starts at a critical point in the debate on packaging: Against the backdrop of the upcoming EU packaging regulation (PPWR), reliable, cross-material data should correct misconceptions and inform decisions in business and politics. The analysis combines environmental impacts over the entire life cycle with circularity indicators in order to assess performance and recyclability in equal measure.
Method and scenarios up to 2040
Quantis models 130 packaging types according to the EU's PEF methodology and supplements this with the Ellen MacArthur Foundation's Material Circularity Indicator. Two future paths to 2040 - a technology-driven scenario (including chemical recycling, weight reduction, decarbonisation) and a proactive regulation/reuse scenario - show how innovation and policy paths could change the performance of material families, according to Polyvia, the main professional association of the French plastics and composites industry.
Material-specific results
The study concludes that no material is superior „per se“; suitability depends on the context of use. In many cases, plastics perform favourably in environmental terms due to their low weight and material efficiency, but have some catching up to do in terms of circularity. Paper/cardboard scores highly in terms of recyclability, but loses out in terms of environmental performance when high strength requires complex or heavy designs. Metals are very circular, but remain energy-intensive to produce. Glass benefits from recycling and potential reuse, but has a high environmental impact, especially in the case of disposable items.
Sector-specific findings
In the Food packaging product protection and barrier functions are central; here, lightweight plastic solutions - especially for large formats and flexible films - often prove to be advantageous from an environmental point of view, while cardboard requires more material depending on the performance requirements and glass only convinces with a high reuse rate.
In the Industrial sector robust, chemical-resistant large plastic containers remain competitive; it is crucial to strengthen circularity through reuse. Wood can be useful in reusable applications, provided the return logistics work. Metals gain as decarbonisation progresses.
In Cosmetics, pharmaceuticals and household (FMCG) plastics offer a good functional/environmental ratio due to their versatility and resistance to moisture/chemicals; metals are indispensable for pressurised gas applications, but are at a disadvantage due to their weight and energy consumption. Glass and alternatives are said to perform moderately in terms of reuse/refill.
In the Pharmaceutical sector regulatory requirements limit the scope: lightweight plastics are functionally suitable and environmentally favourable, but circularly weaker; complex blisters (aluminium/plastic) are difficult to recycle. For 2040, the technology scenario appears more realistic than a strongly reuse-driven proactive scenario.
Main bottleneck: Recording
France is currently falling well short of the EU targets: around 30 % of plastic packaging is recycled, the target is 50 % by 2025. The main bottleneck is collection; once packaging is in the system, sorting rates are around 90 % and recycling rates are 60-80 % (household) or almost 90 % (commercial), depending on the stream. Technically, around 80 % of the plastic packaging currently on the market can already be recycled; 65 % are industrially recyclable and a further 15 % have proven solutions that are yet to be rolled out, according to the report.
Source: Polyvia
