SINCE 1950, global plastic production has reached more than 8.3 billion metric tons. Nearly half of this amount was manufactured in the last two decades due to our increasing reliance on petrochemical-heavy single-use plastic [1][2]. According to the United Nations, despite such heavy use of plastic, only 9% of all plastic ever manufactured had been recycled, with 12% being incinerated, and the remaining 79% discarded in nature, thus contributing to environmental pollution. This worsened with the COVID-19 pandemic, as single-use plastics from medical waste, online shopping, and food delivery increased [3]. With such a growing threat to our environment, the task of reimagining plastics has now become inevitable. Countries are starting to enforce regulations regarding the use of petrochemical-heavy plastic, and many companies are shifting to bioplastics. 

Stepping away from plastics

   Countries such as the European Union, the United Kingdom, and Russia have already implemented regulations and bans regarding the use of plastic straws, bags, and cotton buds [4]. Additionally, China has recently banned the utilization of single-use plastics in some of its major cities and is instead implementing eco-friendly packaging across various businesses [5]. Being the world’s leading plastic manufacturer, many countries—including South Korea—are dependent on China for their supply of plastics. With China’s plastic ban arranged to be implemented nationwide by 2026, South Korean companies—LG Chem Ltd., CJ Cheiljedang Corp., Lotte Chemical Corp., Hanwha Solutions, etc—are having to join the world in this long-term eco-friendly switch from plastics to bioplastics [5]. 

   Oil-based plastic, also known as polyethylene terephthalate (PET), has been, and still is, a highly favored material among manufacturers due to its lightness, transparency, flexibility, and affordability [6]. However, PET’s two most favorable features—strength and durability—are also the very reasons why they are considered to be so harmful to our environment. PETs cumulate in landfills and degrade after approximately 450 years or even longer if anti-oxidants were added to prevent them from breaking down easily [7][8]. PET plastic is also fossil-based, leading to significant carbon emission levels during its production and incineration. By drilling oil and gas from the Earth and burning used plastic, harmful chemicals such as benzene, carbon monoxide, and sulfur dioxide are released into the air, heavily contributing to air pollution and global warming [9]. Furthermore, when plastic wastes reach the sea, they break down into smaller particles called microplastics. These tiny pieces have been found all over the world, ending up inside the guts and tissues of marine animals and eventually humans. Consuming microplastics could block your intestinal tract, increase the likelihood of malnutrition, and cause poisoning [10]. 

Bioplastics today

   Then how are bioplastics—also known as plant-based plastics—different from the original PET plastics? There are two main types of bioplastics: polylactic acid (PLA) and polyhydroxyalkanoate (PHA). PLA is created by extracting sugars from either sugarcane or corn by immersing corn kernels in hot water and sulfur dioxide. The separated starch then produces lactic acid, the building block of the PLA polymer. Once polymerized, PLA can behave similarly to plastic and is mainly used in food packaging. On the other hand, PHA is made with sugars collected from microorganisms such as algae or bacteria. These microbes release carbon-heavy PHA that holds diverse kinds of sugar monomers. Companies can polymerize them to use for various purposes, including medical applications [6][11][12]. Derived from plant sources, both PHA and PLA emit lower carbon levels during their production. Both materials are also biodegraded by microorganisms, such as algae, fungi, and bacteria, or water in a much shorter time compared to the traditional plastic [13][14]. This process significantly reduces the pollution caused by plastic production and consumption. 

   However, while switching to bioplastics is theoretically more eco-friendly, it is not a perfect alternative to plastic. Bioplastics are not as strong and efficient as oil-based plastics are, yet they are more difficult and costly to prepare and manufacture. In addition, bioplastics are biodegradable only if they are collected in carefully controlled facilities; if they are left in landfills, they end up leaving a similar environmental impact as traditional plastics. Bioplastics, in fact, can emit greenhouse gases and pollute our environment for centuries [6]. While being plant-based is a big upside for bioplastics, the unfortunate truth is that it could pose yet another environmental problem. The sugars we use when producing bioplastics are normally extracted from transgenic, or genetically modified, crops; in order to mass-produce bioplastics, a significant portion of our land would have to be dedicated to growing them. Doing so would significantly reduce the amount of land available to grow crops for human consumption [6]. Keeping in mind that bioplastics cannot serve as a definitive solution for plastics, experts express the importance of recycling. “There isn’t a silver bullet. Recyclability should be first and foremost,” explains Simon Reddy, the director of Pew’s ocean plastic program [6]. 

Bioplastics tomorrow

   The topic of bioplastics will continue to be discussed by many environmentally conscious individuals. To address the concern on recyclability, Full Cycle, an environmental startup striving towards building a sustainable world, has been establishing a “circular economy”—a regenerative, environmentally-friendly approach for economic development that steers away from the traditional linear “take-make-waste” model [15]. By implementing a full cycle, they aim to turn organic waste into PHA that can be used for commercial products. Then, they would upcycle the waste into PHA resins, or degrade it into biomass through an environmentally sustainable process. This cycle would continue, allowing bioplastics to be recycled in future productions. 

   Recognizing the strengths and weaknesses of the current PHA and PLA, companies and organizations are setting goals to recycle the plastics currently in circulation and develop superior alternatives to plastics. Evian has recently created a bottle made of 100% recycled PET plastic and has set the goal to have its production process be fully “circular” by 2025 [6]. Coca-Cola has promised to recycle a plastic bottle for every bottle of Coke that is purchased, starting from 2030 [6]. Carlsberg, a popular Danish beer company, has spent more than five years creating a paper-based bottle with bioplastic linings [6]. The list continues beyond consumer brands; LG Chem has recently announced its development of a biodegradable material made from corn glucose and waste glycerol that can potentially replace plastic; they plan to work with other interested companies to start their mass production in 2025, commercializing their new biodegradable plastic for cups, bubble wraps, and bags [16].

   Countries, companies, and teams all over the world are finding ways to save Earth from drowning in a sea of plastic, by creating new biodegradable alternatives or improving and recycling the existing plastic. We have yet to know where society’s journey with bioplastics is headed, but one thing we all know for certain is that it is no longer an option to continue mass-producing virgin PET plastic.

[1] Plastics Europe Market Research Group

[2] University of California, Santa Barbara 

[3] Yonhap News Agency

[4] Herbert Smith Freehills

[5] The Korea Economic Daily Global Edition

[6] Yale School of the Environment

[7] Pela Case

[8] Ecology Center

[9] Repurpose

[10] Forbes

[11] National Geographic 

[12] Columbia University

[13] Britannica 

[14] Hanwha 

[15] Ellen Macarthur Foundation

[16] The Korea Economic Daily Global Edition