Reuse, Single-Use, or no Use at all?

Paper is considered ecologically clean – it comes from renewable raw materials, is easy to recycle and decomposes relatively quickly. But that is only half the truth: paper production is energy- and water-intensive, and fresh fibers are partly sourced from controversial forestry sources. The paper industry is the fifth largest industrial energy consumer worldwide.

In light of these facts, the urgency of responsible paper use becomes more clear – and recycling more important. Since paper fibers lose quality with each cycle and fresh fibers must be added, recycling is not a perpetual motion machine, but it works relatively well and saves a large amount of water and energy resources in production.

Plastics – especially fossil-based ones – have a reputation for polluting the environment. But they do have advantages: they are lightweight, stable, versatile – and very easy to recycle in pure material streams. But here lies the problem: not all plastic packaging is made of pure material. In addition, additives (auxiliary/additional substances) provide flexibility, UV protection, or sealability – but make recycling difficult. Composite packaging, i.e., material composites made of plastic, paper, and aluminum, also pose major problems for sorting plants.

At first glance, bio-based or biodegradable plastics appear to be the solution. However, many of these materials only degrade under very specific conditions – for example, in special composting plants. In practice, they often end up in the yellow bag. There they cause problems – just like in classic plastic recyclates.

Recycling only works if the system works. A yogurt cup with a paper sleeve, aluminum lid, and plastic cup sounds well thought out. However, an ideally recyclable cup is useless if everything ends up in the yellow bin or if the cup cannot be recycled because the sorting plant does not recognize the material. Black plastics, for example, are considered problematic because many infrared scanners cannot detect them. Paper sleeves that are not removed or incorrectly placed labels can also cause packaging to be sorted out as contaminants and end up in incineration despite the best of intentions. 

One thing is clear: waste disposal infrastructure is crucial. Germany has a relatively good recycling rate compared to other European countries. Nevertheless, large quantities are not recycled but used to generate energy. In other words, they are incinerated. In other countries, the situation is often even worse. Waste exports, inefficient collection systems, and a lack of technology all mean that a product considered exemplary in Germany becomes an environmental burden in southern Italy. Sustainability therefore depends not only on the product, but also on the location.

The debate is ideologically charged. Reusable is considered noble, disposable is considered trash. But the reality is more nuanced. Reusable packaging – such as sturdy plastic containers or glass bottles – causes significantly more CO2 emissions and resource consumption in production than disposable packaging. It only makes ecological sense if it is used often enough – the so-called breakeven point.

How many cycles are necessary depends heavily on the system in question. If the container is transported regionally and returned efficiently, for example, its ecological footprint can quickly be relativized in comparison to disposable packaging. However, if hundreds of kilometers have to be covered, the advantage is quickly lost. Even more serious is breakage or loss. If a reusable container is lost or broken after just a few cycles, the initialinvestment was a waste from  an ecological point of view. A practical example: Reusable fruit crates have become established in food wholesaling over many years – but only because they are systematically returned and cleaned centrally. If there is no return system or if there are high losses, disposable packaging is often more resource-efficient. This shows that reusability only works with logistics behind it.

One aspect that is often overlooked in the debate is the protection of the packaged product. Packaging is not an end in itself – it is intended to prevent goods from being damaged or destroyed. After all, the ecological damage caused by replacing or disposing of a damaged laptop, spoiled fruit, or a broken bottle is usually many times greater than the ecological footprint of the product‘s packaging. If the packaging is too light or unstable, the risk of damage during transport increases. Supposedly “sustainable” packaging can thus become a boomerang. Sustainability does not automatically mean reduction – it means weighing up the options.

Only life cycle assessment (LCA) provides truly reliable answers. It considers all phases of a product – from raw material extraction to production and use to disposal. Numerous parameters are taken into account, including CO2 emissions, water consumption, land use, and energy requirements. This is the only way to assess whether packaging is truly sustainable – or just appears to be.

LCAs show that simple answers are usually wrong. Single-use can be better than reusable. Paper can perform worse than plastic. A heavy glass bottle can cause more CO2 than a recycled PET bottle – if it is transported over long distances.

The new EU Packaging Regulation (PPWR) is intended to provide greater clarity – and more binding commitments. In future, packaging is to be standardized for recycling, reuse is to be promoted more strongly, and certain materials are to be phased out. The intention is good – but implementation carries risks.

Among other things, there is criticism of the planned fee modulation: those who recycle better should pay less. But what is “better” is often a matter of interpretation. The danger is that packaging that is recyclable on paper but not in reality – so-called green claiming – will become commonplace. Companies adorn themselves with supposed sustainability that is practically impossible to deliver.

A promising approach is the digital traceability of packaging – for example, by scanning QR codes or digital watermarks that provide information about origin, material mix, and recycling route. However, there is still a lack of uniform standards – and acceptance.

And then there are humans. Even the best system is useless if consumers don‘t play along. Anyone who doesn‘t separate the paper sleeve from the yogurt cup, uses the wrong bin, or throws compostable items in the yellow bag is unintentionally sabotaging the system. Communication, education, and “design for recycling” are therefore crucial. But even clear symbols are only of limited help if there is no willingness to implement them.

Sustainable packaging is not a question of “good” or “bad.” It is a systemic challenge that affects all levels: materials, logistics, infrastructure, user behavior, and life cycle. What makes ecological sense depends on the individual case – not on the image of the material. Anyone who wants to design truly sustainable packaging must be prepared to think in a differentiated way – and let go of simple truths. Because sustainable packaging is not a standard. It is custom work.

The institute’s services include:

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA): The researchers use detailed life cycle assessments to determine the environmental impact of packaging. This allows them to identify specific emission drivers and make informed decisions to increase the sustainability of packaging systems.

Packaging Assessment: The researchers analyze packaging and load carriers according to economic, technical, and ecological criteria in order to identify optimization potential and increase efficiency.

Customized packaging planning: The institute provides support in the customized planning and design of packaging systems with a view to the entire life cycle – from procurement to disposal. This also includes the selection of disposable and reusable systems to ensure resource-efficient packaging use.

Packaging testing: In the Fraunhofer IML’s specialized packaging testing laboratory, experts test the resilience and suitability of packaging made from various materials under realistic conditions. Using static, dynamic, and climatic tests, they ensure that the packaging meets all logistics requirements.