Compulsive EU regulation for sustainable packaging not far away

The European Packaging Directive is set to finally achieve Europe-wide harmonisation of rules on packaging and packaging waste. Thus, so the goal, the growing quantities of packaging waste within the community of member states could be reduced while at the same time, corporations would be motivated to switch to more sustainable solutions. Packaging that can be recycled, increased utilisation of recyclates, the introduction of a deposit return system for reusable containers, all is supposed to drive a genuine circular economy forwards. Following the trilogue negotiations in March, and approval of the most recently suggested compromise by the representatives of the member states, in April the EU Parliament has approved the Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR). The only thing missing now is the final approval by the EU Council.

At the three-party meeting of the legislative institutions of the EU, the so-called trilogue, the European Commission, Council and Parliament have agreed upon a written compromise regarding the new packaging regulation. This includes mandatory goals for reduction, prohibition of certain types of packaging, limitation of empty volume in packaging, support for reusable packaging as well as stricter and for the first time concrete, EU-wide requirements for the recyclability of packaging and the utilisation of recyclates. Following early announcements that the adoption of the Packaging & Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR) could be possible before the European Election at the beginning of June, this is now probably planned for autumn.  Its provisions are supposed to become effective 18 months after the directive enters into force.

The Umweltbundesamt (German Federal Environment Agency) views the results of the trilogue as significant progress for eco-friendly packaging design and the circular economy of packaging in the entire EU – even if some of the intended provisions lag behind the German regulation level. The compromise that was agreed upon is said to be an effective instrument in the fight against the rising flood of packaging in total, and to give packaging manufacturers tangible requirements for a more environmentally friendly packaging design. The important thing now is said to be leading the negotiations to a successful conclusion and to refrain from subsequent questioning of the compromise which was achieved. Clarity concerning the legal framework of packaging and the disposal of packaging is said to be important throughout the next ten years, so that corporations can adjust their activities accordingly. Consequently, many ⁠stakeholders⁠ are waiting for the final decision.

The compromise sets goals to reduce packaging (5 percent until 2030, 10 percent until 2035 and 15 percent until 2040) and obliges the EU countries to decrease the amount of plastic packaging waste above all. According to the agreement, certain types of plastic packaging will become illegal as of 01 January, 2030. Parliament has also decided to prohibit the use of so-called “forever chemicals” (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances or PFAS) in packaging with food contact. The leaders of the negotiations have agreed to determine a specific goal for reusable packaging for alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverages (except for e.g., milk, wine, aromatised wine, spirits) until 2030 (at least 10 percent). Member states can, under certain conditions, grant a five-year-exception to these requirements. In the future, all packaging is to be reusable and must conform to strict criteria. A decision was made regarding the minimum requirement goals for the ratio of reused material within all plastic parts of packaging. Further, 90 percent of single-use plastic and metal packaging for beverages (up to 3 litres) are to be separated and collected through deposit return systems until 2029. With the measures that have been decided, until 2040 the EU wants to step-by-step reduce packaging waste within the community of member states by at least 15 percent compared to 2018.

Following the consent of member states to the suggested compromise, manufacturers and associations both voice approval and criticism. The BDE Bundesverband der Deutschen Entsorgungs-, Wasser- und Kreislaufwirtschaft (German Federal association of waste and water management and circular economy) all-in-all approved of the agreement and voiced relief over the member states vote in favour of the political agreement reached during the trilogue with the Parliament, which was also achieved through German support. The suggested compromise especially targets regulations involving the recyclates countable for their minimum quota of utilisation, which had caused disagreement within the European Commission. Following the so-called mirror clause, the recyclates used for plastic packaging in the future may both be sourced from within the EU or have been recycled outside the EU, if it meets European requirements for the quality and sustainability of recyclates. The necessary plastic waste could also be both collected within the EU and in third-party states. However, collection and recycling in these third party states must conform to environmental standards corresponding to those within the EU. This assuaged legal concerns from a commercial point of view. “The mandatory quotas concerning the utilisation of recyclates have been set correctly, and are exactly the instrument we need to achieve a functioning circular economy for plastics and to meet the EU climate goals,” said BDE managing director Andreas Bruckschen.

The German Association for Plastics, Packaging and Films (IK) however views especially the “mirror clause” in a critical light, as it fears the recently added clause would lead the EU to face massive trade conflicts. “We are shocked that the PPWR is to be changed into an anti-plastics regulation,” so the criticism by IK managing director Dr Martin Engelmann. “We ask the Commission to lay down their concerns especially regarding the barriers to trade. It should also clarify, that the massive raise of the reusability quota to 100 percent for industrial packaging is often technically not feasible and nonsense from an ecological point of view and is tantamount to prohibition for many different types of packaging.”

Criticism by the manufacturers targets the existence, in their opinion, of numerous methods for circumvention: The unjustified privileges of, for example, paper and cardboard packaging according to the IK lead to more packaging waste, increased carbon emissions and less recycling – in contradiction to the goals of the regulation. The association therefore demands exactly the same rules for all packaging materials in order to avoid false motivations in an ecological sense.

The association also does not understand that packaging with plastic coating with less than five percent plastic content is to be exempt from the quotas of utilisation recyclates, and that it does not have to meet requirements for large-scale recycling. Further, it would still be possible to eat out of plastic coated single use packaging in fast food restaurants, while pure plastic packaging would be forbidden.

The European association Plastics Europe even speaks of a missed chance to created important incentives for large-scale investments, which are necessary to make plastic packaging fit for circular use. In order to make the change to a circular economy including plastics easier and to drive both mechanical and chemical recycling forward, what is said to be necessary are incentives for the market and a strong regulative framework. The association also voiced disappointment that there was no further effort made to clarify that biobased plastics and recycled materials are separate solutions which however add to each other and which can contribute to making the plastics industry more sustainable.

From the ranks of mechanical engineering and plant construction, the reactions are generally positive. “The EU packaging regulation creates a certain amount of security for planning, both for mechanical engineers and their customers. However, the sector is suffering from a lack of craft skills and requirements within the regulation that defy reality,” says Richard Clemens, managing director of the VDMA Food Processing and Packaging Machinery Association. The reason is that unlike the original draft suggested by the Commission, the now approved packaging regulation aims to significantly increase the quota for reusable packaging within industrial packaging, including pallet wraps and straps to secure the load on a pallet. “A quota of 100 percent reuse of packaging used for industrial transport between company sites and for transport within a member state is devoid of reason, and there is no proof of ecological benefits. Renewed use is not technically feasible. This means the requirement is tantamount to prohibition, which is in contrast to all requirements for securing loads.” Clemens explains.

The, Association of European Producers of steel for packaging, APEAL, together with the Permanent Materials Alliance, continues to support all regulations which support high-quality recycling and further more circular economy in Europe, but sees more room to strengthen the criteria for design for better recycling within the suggested compromise. The definition of these criteria is viewed as critical. The associations united in the Alliance (apart from APEAL, these are European Aluminium, FEVE and Metal Packaging Europe) therefore continue to demand an ambitious classification system with strict quantitative criteria, to ensure that packaging materials are not only designed to be recycled, but are also effectively collected, sorted and recycled on a large scale.

In an interview with “Handelsblatt” several large producers of consumer goods also warned that the regulation would fail. Without the regulation, important impulses for innovation would be prevented. These however would make packaging more sustainable, so Reinhard Schneider from Werner & Mertz informs the Handelsblatt. In spite of all criticism of the new EU directive, many manufacturers however in general are hopeful that a lot of administrative work will no longer be necessary due to unified European regulations.