Is paper a packaging dream?

As many companies explore natural-fibre packaging, the ‘Paperisation in practice’ panel at Packaging Innovations asked if there were any industry implications and whether we should universally embrace paper?

'I think we have to be careful,' warned Martin Settle FIMMM, Senior Manager of Polymer Science at consumer goods company Reckitt. Their testing and material analysis has shown that “it’s got to be the right material for the right application, for the right product, for the right consumer”, rather than simply rushing to embrace the trend for fibre-based packaging.

Claire Hae-Min Gusko, Co-Founder at the AI packaging solutions provider one.five, agreed that it has to be the right solution for the right product.

Her organisation makes decisions based on sustainability, performance and affordability. 'Given customers are unwilling to accept anything outside the current status quo in terms of price and performance, it is incredibly difficult to hit that bullseye and to make sure that your solution really performs,' she muses.

'You can over-engineer paper to do a myriad of different things, but it may then be too expensive, or simply too augmented to even resemble paper anymore, and it ends up being some other kind of hybrid construction.'

She noted that the key challenge for paper is how affordable and high-performing plastic-based solutions are. While plastic cannot compete with the consumers’ perceptions of the sustainable qualities of natural materials. 

Dimitra Rappou, Executive Director for Sustainable Products at the Confederation of Paper Industries, noted that paper is renewable, degradable, recyclable and helps to reduce emissions. It is also manufactured with half the energy it was previously, she explained.

The competing credentials of plastic and paper mean for a massively transforming market. Gusko enthuses. '…You’re finally seeing equal players on either side of what previously probably was a very fragmented market, each with their own solutions and innovations…And competition is always great for innovation…'

Indeed, at the time of going to press, a new Alliance for fibre-based packaging was launched to represent members across the value chain from raw materials to retailers.

The key is data, asserted Gusko, in making the right choice for the product. Gusko said recent Life Cycle Assessments (LCA) have shown how paper has boosted its credentials, as many mills now use renewable energy sources. And so it is untrue to say paper always has a worse carbon footprint than plastic. Brands have to ask where the pulp is coming from and how is it being worked with.

A recent analysis of a specific paper-pulp mix showed 44% less emissions than a polypropylene tub, despite being 15% heavier, shared Gusko. 'You really shouldn’t fight the data, because it’s trying to tell you what works and what doesn’t,' Gusko insisted, noting it is case-specific.

Pragmatic approach

Graham Tilley, Managing Director of flexible packaging producer InterFlex Group, echoed the need for pragmatism in materials selection. 'As a convertor, you have a much more pragmatic approach to the solutions that your customer wants'. 

He believes plastic has a fundamental place in the packaging industry where it adds value. The shelf-life and transportation costs of products like a cucumber can be improved by plastic, while, 'an open bag that wraps a cabbage that really doesn’t need anything to it seems a fundamental waste of plastic'. Meanwhile, paper is “still the most easily recyclable product without question” and has reasonable levels of barrier, moisture and performance.

Tilley urged manufacturers and brands to make their materials selections carefully. Recycled polymer solutions are available, he noted.

'The limitations of paper stop us even going near [it for] some products,' commented Settle. He explained that while paper can be a packaging barrier for around 11-12 months, it struggles to meet two years, unless you are happy to use super-heavy paper. 'Paper loves moisture, it might be obvious, but it really loves moisture,' he said. To push paper to replace plastic, especially in laminates, engineering, science and new technologies are needed, he noted. 

Successful examples of use, Settle shared, are in confectionary. With the food shelf-life being 6-12 months maximum, paper-based laminate is a suitable switch. However, for products like laundry powders that are activated by moisture, these have to be thrown away if any moisture gets in. For example, he explained how dishwasher-tablet packaginsg might be 75% paper but needs other materials for the moisture-proof seal.

Reckitt has set some rules around use of paper, such as insisting that the source material meets regulations, like Forest Stewardship Council-certification, and for the end-of-life to be considered from the outset. This includes examining metrics like the product and its formula, and retailer storage and transport requirements. 

'Carbon is just one of the holistic counters in the KPI of the product. Cost comes into that, sourcing materials comes into that,' explained Settle. 

Paper has improved end-of-life performance, he said, but if they can reuse it, it becomes carbon neutral. Reckitt’s LCA procedure is driven by whether the consumer and retailers will buy into reuse? As well as the cost and benefit to the brand-owner. 

Monomaterials

Gusko thinks the market will consolidate towards monomaterial in a few years, plastic or paper solutions, 'because that is the most circular you can get. The more yield you get out of your packaging, the better it is for reuse and recyclability'. 

one.five has been looking specifically at natural-polymer-based technologies in response to the EU Single-Use Plastics Directive, which is due an update. Gusko highlighted the strict definition that anything synthetically modified is a polymer or plastic. Natural polymers allow direct extraction with little alteration, she said, and although it is an extremely difficult technical challenge, it is exciting.  She noted that many companies are attempting to combine a natural polymer with paper as it is the 'holy grail'. But again moisture is the menace. 

And transforming lab-scale solutions 'into industrially validated and feasible solutions is really the challenge', she reflected. The volumes required for even one product can be huge, and convertors have to consistently deliver the same quality. 

She also thought nanoparticle technologies will be needed for both paper and plastics for advanced performance.

But again nano-fibres added to paper as a water-vapour barrier can have astonishing numbers in the patents, said Gusko, but questions remain on scaling this up. For example, she explained how chitin nano-fibre coating needs a drying street that is 15-times longer, because of high moisture. 

'We understand the economics, we understand the infrastructure. The technologies we’re using aren’t really changing day-by-day, it’s probably decade-by-decade,' Gusko posited. 'I don’t think we can expect an unforeseeable shift where suddenly, tomorrow, we’re going to wake up and everything’s going to be possible.'

While marketing is extremely creative, Tilley said it is conservative with a small c. No-one wants to compromise the product.