The Lifecycle of Paper Products is Already Circular (twosidesna.org)

In so many fundamental ways, environmental sustainability is baked into the nature of the paper and paper-based packaging industry – from the ability and financial incentive to regrow its primary raw material to the biodegradability of its products. As the call for the circularity of product lifecycles is growing louder, paper has always had a head start. And the industry’s strong support and investment in recycling has transformed the circularity of paper products from vision to reality. At a time when there is growing alarm about the low recycled rates of other materials, paper recycling is a stark exception.

While the recycling rate of other materials is as low as the single digits – for example, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency reports the recycling rate for plastics is just 8.7% – 66% of all paper products in the United States and 70% in Canada are being recycled. This is near the theoretical maximum recycling rate when items like hygiene products and long-held items such as archived records and books are excluded. For those grades that can be almost entirely recovered and reused, such as corrugated cardboard boxes, the recycling rates are higher than 90%.

This level of success is only possible because the paper industry and consumers interact in the free market that drives the paper lifecycle. Since the early 90s, manufacturers have voluntarily responded to the market’s need for greater supplies of recovered fiber with massive voluntary investment in capital-intensive machinery and transport. And according to the American Forest and Paper Association (AF&PA), U.S. pulp and packaging producers are committed to investing an additional $4.1 billion in manufacturing infrastructure between 2019 and 2023. Now, approximately 80% of all U.S. paper mills use some recovered fiber to make everything from paper-based packaging and printing papers to newspaper and tissue. The continuing investment in recycling technology is allowing paper manufacturers to reach further into the wastepaper stream to use fiber that was previously unrecoverable.

In fact, the AF&PA’s just-released Design Guidance for Recyclability tackles one of the remaining challenges to even higher recycling rates for paper-based packaging. The Guide provides a clear understanding of how packaging gets recycled in paper mills and how various non-fiber elements (inks, coatings, adhesives, polymer windows, et. al) affect the recyclability of paper-based packaging. It’s intended to help consumer products companies and their manufacturing supply chain partners more effectively design and produce packaging that meets growing customer demand for recyclability.

At the other end of the lifecycle, millions of households and tens of thousands of North America’s businesses and municipalities willingly participate in what amounts to a continent-wide partnership with industry, driven by paper’s ease of recovery and decades of local investment in the collection infrastructure. A 2014 survey found that 96% of Americans have access to community curbside or drop-off paper recycling programs, or both. Access numbers for Canadians are in the 94% to 96% range.

However, in a blind rush to address other materials that have never come close to the recycling rates of paper, especially those like plastics that don’t readily degrade in the environment and that often contain toxic substances, some state governments are considering actions that make no environmental or economic sense. Their latest prescription is a legislative mandate for all materials, including paper, called extended producer responsibility (EPR).

EPR shifts financial responsibility for recycling from the existing network of producers and communities to the manufacturers alone, with no evidence that it can or would improve recycling rates, lower costs, or extend the life of materials any longer than it is already. In fact, recent experience – for example, the EPR program in British Columbia – suggests EPR leads to higher systemwide costs that get passed on to consumers with less net tonnage diverted from the waste stream.

EPR would take a wrecking ball to the market forces that drive the success of the U.S. paper recycling enterprise, and for no purpose. Unlike the other materials that EPR is supposed to address, paper is not toxic, it does not contribute to ocean and other surface water waste, and it doesn’t take long to degrade in the environment. Yet EPR would target paper products with the same mandates and fees as those other materials, disrupting the economics and overwhelming success of paper recycling.

Compared to the efficiency of established markets, repeated experience teaches us that artificial government mandates are, at best, a testament to confused objectives, unintended consequences, and wasted money and effort. EPR does nothing to make paper recycling more circular than it already is. It is the well-established paper recycling network that is already getting the job done, delivering proven environmental benefits, and making itself ever more circular from year to year.
https://twosidesna.org/US/if-it-aint-broke-dont-break-it/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=TSNA%20-%20If%20It%20Aint%20Broke%20Dont%20Break%20It&utm_content=TSNA%20-%20If%20It%20Aint%20Broke%20Dont%20Break%20It+CID_ea50a11454f409e6c70b50b205af7a5a&utm_source=Email%20marketing%20software&utm_term=READ%20MORE

Related Posts

One step closer to 2025 targets: UPM Raflatac announces progress towards Ellen MacArthur Foundation and UNEP’s New Plastics Economy Global Commitment

Global pressure sensitive label material supplier UPM Raflatac is pleased to announce it has made great progress toward a more circular economy for plastics and a future beyond fossils. This progress is detailed in the New Plastics Economy Global Commitment 2020 Progress Report by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation and the UN Environment Programme. UPM Raflatac is the only pressure sensitive labeling company to have announced targets for reducing unnecessary plastic packaging as a signatory of the Global Commitment. As highlighted in the report, UPM Raflatac has continued to develop new sustainable label solutions that focus on more resource-efficient materials, including certified papers, recycled content, solvent-free adhesives, and wash-off and fossil-free solutions. One major step in this direction was the debut of UPM Raflatac Forest Film™ in 2019, the industry's first commercially available polypropylene and polyethylene plastic labeling material derived from wood-based sources.

Huhtamaki welcomes new scientific evidence on the real environmental impact of single-use packaging vs. reusable tableware in a recently published Life Cycle Assessment

According to the recently published comprehensive Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) study, paper-based single-use products provide significant key environmental advantages when compared to reusable tableware for in-store dining in Quick Service Restaurants (QSR). These advantages are primarily driven by the carbon emissions related to the amount of energy required to wash the tableware as well as the amount of freshwater used in the washing process in a multi-use system. A recent study conducted by Ramboll, a leading global engineering, design and consultancy company and certified by TÜV, one of the world’s leading testing service providers, compares the environmental impact of paper-based single-use packaging to that of reusable tableware in an in-store dining setting in Quick Service Restaurants in Europe. The full environmental impact was scientifically measured for both applications across multiple criteria and scenarios. Importantly, the results showed that: • For climate change, the single-use system shows very significant benefits. In fact, in the baseline scenario, the polypropylene-based multi-use system was responsible for generating 2.7 times more CO2-e emissions than the paper-based single-use system. The single main contributor to climate change impact in the multi-use baseline scenario is the electricity demand of the washing process. Overall, the use phase accounts for 83% of the total aggregated impact. • For Freshwater Consumption, there are also very significant environmental benefits to the single-use system. The multi-use system used 3.6 times the amount of freshwater in the baseline scenario.

Leonard Cronin Named Forester of the Year

Leonard Cronin, Regional Manager of Finch Forest Management, was presented the 2017 Forester of the Year award by the New York Society of American Foresters (NYSAF). This honor recognizes Len’s outstanding contributions to the profession of forestry, the stewardship of forest resources in New York, and the objectives of the Society of American Foresters. Bruce Breitmeyer, NYSAF awards committee chair, notes “Len has had an outstanding career with over 30 years of ‘feet in the forest’ in the Adirondacks and Upstate New York. His leadership at Finch in his forestry profession has been outstanding and his efforts directly contributed to the excellent condition of some of the most prestigious lands in the Adirondacks.” Click Read More below for additional information.
Back To Top
×Close search
Search