Even our waste can speak now!

Which do you think consumes more water: the production of plastic or paper packaging? Independent experts have calculated this for the U.S. The result? The production of paper packaging requires almost six times more water than that of plastic packaging. To put this into context: If the amount of water that would be saved in the U.S. by using plastic were put into Olympic swimming pools, it would fill about 460,000 pools. The production and processing of plastics consume less water than that used in the production of substitute packaging made of paper and cardboard, for example: an average of 190 liters of water/kg of PET compared to 350 liters of water/kg of pure paper. If a closed cooling water system is also used in the plastic production, the ratio shifts even more in favor of plastic packaging. So, did you guess right about the water consumption?

Since its invention, plastic has turbocharged human progress. There are scarcely any areas that can function without plastics today. They are used in dental fillings, in car airbags, as a lightweight component in aircraft, in computer housings and as food packaging. And further innovations such as 3D printing are constantly being added. The secret behind plastic’s success is that it isn’t just one material, but a whole range of different materials. Customized solutions can be developed for any application, no matter how specific, by combining different properties such as hardness, elasticity, fracture strength, temperature and chemical resistance in a whole variety of ways. This seemingly inexhaustible potential shows how favorable the industry’s prospects are for meeting the challenges it is currently facing in the recycling of used plastic. Plastic plays such an important role in our everyday lives, that only solutions which include plastic will succeed, and not those which avoid it. The answers lie not in dogmatic and prejudiced debate, but in taking an unbiased view of practicable sustainable solutions. The PLAST:IQ REVOLUTION and circular economy represent a promising and realistic way forward.

The oceans are drowning in plastic waste. And the flood of waste will continue to rise if we fail to take countermeasures. The reason for this is that single-use plastic packaging is hardly ever recycled. Given the omnipresence of such catastrophic images in the media, it seems almost paradoxical that plastic, of all things, could represent a lifeline. But that is precisely the goal of the PLAST:IQ REVOLUTION. The solution lies in circular economy. Two things are crucial here. First, all plastic packaging must be collected to stop it from ending up in the environment. This is particularly important in Asia, where there are still very few functioning waste disposal systems. Secondly, all plastic packaging must be fully recycled. This will be made possible by the use of the Digimarc technology, which gives plastic packaging a digital identity. It allows precise identification and effective sorting of used packaging so that it can be recycled again and again and turned into new plastic products. This is how plastic waste becomes the intelligent raw material PLAST:IQ.

At the risk of turning the worldview of anti-plastic activists upside down: Plastic does not waste oil. Plastic products account for only 6% of non-renewable fossil-based raw material consumption. In fact, replacing them with alternative materials such as paper, cardboard, steel, aluminum and glass would have the opposite effect. Total consumption of non-renewable fossil resources would increase, as would greenhouse gases and other negative environmental factors. The reason for this is the poorer material efficiency of the packaging alternatives. On average, 4.1 metric tons of alternative materials are required to replace one metric ton of plastic. It is therefore clear that replacing plastic packaging with alternatives is a naive miscalculation which would ultimately place a greater burden on the environment and society. This is evident from recent scientific studies by Franklin Associates (2014) and (2019), Denkstatt (2011), and Trucost (2016), which modeled the replacement of plastics.

Without a future, what is there to live for? We have long been aware that the Earth's resources are finite. We also know that we can no longer afford to squander them and to destroy the environment in doing so. If our future is to offer any quality of life, it is high time we learned how to use the available raw materials responsibly. Sustainable solutions already exist for energy generation: these include solar, wind and hydro power. Various solutions aimed at managing plastic waste are being worked on at full speed. The PLAST:IQ REVOLUTION based on circular economy is one of the most promising. It uses technology that has already proven its effectiveness, is sustainable and offers genuine prospects for the future. It allows 100% of plastic packaging to be recycled, meaning that only a minimum of new plastic has to be produced and that no more plastic ends up being dumped in the environment. This conserves resources, saves energy, reduces emissions, stops the export of plastic waste and protects the environment. And, of course, our future.

Bacteria and viruses hate plastic. This is because plastic has proven to be extremely effective at reducing the risk of transmitting disease – and not only during the COVID-19 pandemic. This starts with products for everyday body care and hygiene and extends to applications that meet the highest medical hygiene standards. Protective masks, protective suits, rubber gloves, respirator components and rapid tests: during the coronavirus pandemic, products made of plastic have made an immense contribution to healthcare. But this increased demand has unfortunately led to increased consumption of plastic items. If we want to prevent the coronavirus crisis from turning protectors into polluters, it is high time to put the growing amount of plastic waste from the hygiene and medical sectors into the circular economy system – that is, to recycle it safely, hygienically and sustainably. Otherwise, the COVID-19 pandemic will claim yet another victim – nature itself.

Doesn’t it strike you as crazy that German waste gets shipped to Vietnam? We do this because Germany is the world champion in exporting stuff – including plastic waste. And that’s because we don’t have sufficient recycling capacities of our own. But how much sense does it make to export this problem? China has already banned plastic waste imports from Germany. And all too often our exported plastic waste ends up in the environment in many Third World countries with inadequate collection and recycling systems. The pictures of littered beaches speak volumes. The solution: talking plastic packaging. Thanks to digitalization, it can speak for itself at any point in the recycling process. This ensures that the packaging remains within the closed loop system and is fully recycled. As a recyclable material, it then forms the basis for the production of new plastic packaging. However, what’s important now is for local authorities and politicians to realize that investing in this functioning system pays off in the long term. Maybe you could help by drawing the attention of your local politicians to the PLAST:IQ REVOLUTION.

The only thing more durable than plastic itself is the prejudice that surrounds it. And so the misconception persists that paper is a better alternative to plastic as a packaging material. Apart from its superior product properties, plastic packaging has a significantly better environmental footprint than paper packaging, as independent international scientific studies have repeatedly demonstrated. Anyone looking to replace plastic packaging with paper-based packaging is sawing away at the branch they are sitting on. Because paper is harmful to the environment – especially the forests. The worldwide increase in paper consumption – especially for the production of packaging – is accelerating deforestation and raising the levels of CO2 in the atmosphere. The supposedly environmentally friendly paper bag is therefore proving to be an environmentally harmful driver of climate change. Those making repeated calls for plastic packaging to be replaced by paper packaging are barking up the wrong tree.

Die-hard plastic critics will now have to look away. A range of scientific studies have independently shown that replacing plastic packaging with paper and other alternatives would have dire consequences: energy demand would increase by a factor of 2.2 – meaning a rise of 1,240 million giga joules per year. That’s the equivalent of 27 metric megatons (million tons) of crude oil in 106 large tankers – enough to heat 20 million homes. Why? Because plastic packaging performs the same function as the alternatives, but requires significantly less material mass per functional unit. In other words, it gets the job done much more efficiently and therefore more sustainably. For example, an average of four metric tons of alternative materials are required to achieve the same function as one metric ton of plastic. Aluminum (39%), paper (23%), glass (17%) and steel and tinplate (12%) account for the majority of environmental costs because large amounts of water and energy are consumed in their production processes. Sorry!

When plastic packaging and supposed alternatives are weighed up against each other, one aspect that carries considerable weight is often neglected – namely the weight itself. The weight and volume of solid waste from substitute packaging (e.g., paper, metals, glass) tend to be significantly higher. This is because, in general, greater amounts of substitute packaging are required to perform the same function as plastic packaging. Scientists once calculated the weight advantages of plastic packaging compared to substitute packaging, based on the situation in the U.S. The total advantage added up to a factor of 4.9. This means substitute packaging would weigh nearly five times more than equivalent plastic packaging. If these weight savings are converted into the corresponding number of Boeing 747 aircraft, an extra 290,000 additional aircraft would end up – figuratively speaking – in the bin in the U.S. alone.

Yes, you read that correctly. The discussion about plastic waste has become highly dogmatic in many cases. It is all too easy to forget that plastics have become an indispensable part of our everyday lives. No other material is as versatile and meets such extremely diverse requirements as durability, low weight, robustness, elasticity, malleability, hygienic suitability and much more. It is used in many industries and sectors, but it is above all in the field of medicine in which plastics play a crucial role: from advanced surgical technologies, prostheses and implants to hygienic disposables and material for blood donation to bionic applications. Anyone who calls for a general ban on plastic must be aware that they are throwing stones while sitting in plastic houses.

Our mission: fewer emissions. And the most sustainable way to achieve this is the PLAST:IQ REVOLUTION with closed loop recycling. The ecological superiority of plastic packaging is apparent not only from the energy and raw material levels, but also from the CO2 footprint. The reason is that the amount of energy required to produce alternative materials such as paper, aluminum and glass is 2.2 times higher than that of plastics – the equivalent of 27 million metric tons of crude oil annually worldwide. And the higher energy consumption causes – you guessed it – higher CO2 emissions. In Europe alone, the greenhouse gas emissions caused by using alternatives to plastic would increase by a factor of 2.7, or 61 million metric tons of CO2 equivalents per year. This is equivalent to the CO2 emissions of 21 million cars on the road, or the total CO2 emissions of Finland (2018). What’s more, plastic is the only effective packaging material for keeping food fresh, also resulting in less waste. The amount of greenhouse gas saved by avoiding food losses is about five times higher than the amount emitted during packaging production on average. At last – some news to feel good about!

Would you pick up a cucumber at the supermarket that was shriveled or had turned brown? No? Then you’re only too happy to have it shrink-wrapped, we’re assuming. This ensures that the cucumber is still crisp and fresh when you slice it into your salad. Even if it has traveled all the way from Spain. This demonstrates that using plastic packaging in food production is not an end in itself, but fulfills an important function that we all expect as consumers: ensuring fresh, unspoiled and undamaged fruit and vegetables as well as dairy and meat products. A further argument in favor of plastic packaging is that the amount of greenhouse gas saved by avoiding food losses is about five times higher than that generated during the production of packaging. Replacing plastic packaging with paper would have severe consequences. Paper packaging has neither hygienic nor preservative qualities. This would make it necessary to destroy large quantities of food that are unsellable because they are impaired or no longer fresh. So, bon appétit!