Rethinking Plastic Bans: Life Cycle Research Reveals Recycling PET Bottles as the True Environmental Solution
Based on the misguided idea that alternatives to plastic are always more sustainable, there is a growing trend towards plastic bans. These types of measures, such as bans on plastic bottles in large venues like airports and stadiums, come with damaging environmental consequences that NAPCOR is dedicated to addressing through increased information and data sharing. Contrary to popular belief, a recent Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) comparing beverage packaging indicates that recyclable polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles are a more sustainable choice for beverage packaging—across multiple environmental impact categories—than common alternatives.
Beverage Delivery Systems and Recycling
The LCA reveals that PET beverage bottles outperform aluminum and glass packaging systems in the U.S. PET bottles—which are 100 percent recyclable and can be made with 100 percent recycled content—offer lower environmental impacts in terms of greenhouse gas emissions, energy consumption, water usage, and emissions contributing to acid rain and smog formation versus these alternatives.
The LCA found that compared to a 12 oz. aluminum can, a 16.9 oz. PET plastic water bottle:
- Consumes 80% less energy during production
- Creates 80% less solid waste
- Uses 53% less water during production
- Has a 74% lower global warming potential
- Generates 68%-83% fewer emissions contributing to acid rain and smog formation
Given that PET bottles are the best choice for the environment, NAPCOR urges large venues like the San Francisco Airport, which banned the sale of plastic water bottles in 2019, to invest in and advocate for the proper recycling of PET bottles. The focus should be on leveraging existing recycling infrastructure to maximize positive environmental impact.
The San Francisco Airport (SFO) Case Study
The San Francisco Airport (SFO) implemented a complete ban of plastic water bottles in August 2019. In what might be a surprising finding to some, replacing the daily sale of 9,000 water bottles with aluminum cans would mean an estimated 1,100 metric tons of additional CO2 equivalent emissions over the time that has elapsed since the ban was implemented. The greenhouse gas impact of these extra emissions is equivalent to driving 2.8 million miles in a gas-powered vehicle.* This staggering environmental impact exemplifies the unintended negative consequences of plastic bottle bans.
Regarding plastic bans, NAPCOR emphasizes the underlying misconception surrounding the environmental impact of plastics compared to other packaging materials. Research unequivocally supports the idea that PET is the more sustainable option for U.S. beverage packaging. Total bans on plastic containers are counterproductive, ultimately causing more harm than good.
Additional Examples
Other large venues joining this trend include the University of Michigan Health, which announced the replacement of 113,000 plastic water bottles with aluminum and/or boxed water. While U-M Health states that “nearly 6,000 pounds of plastic waste will not be created,” the total solid waste impacts over the packaging life cycle of an equivalent number of aluminum cans is 6,100 pounds greater compared to PET bottles. Likewise, Natural Products Expo West touted that their partnership with the canned water brand Liquid Death “prevented the use of 19,492 plastic water bottles” in 2023. NAPCOR research indicates that replacing that number of plastic bottles with 16-ounce aluminum cans would result in extra CO2 emissions equivalent to burning 1,700 pounds of coal.*
Plastic bag bans have also had unintentional consequences for the environment in the name of sustainability. A recent study found that banning plastic bags in the state of New Jersey tripled the amount of plastic used in the state, a move The Wall Street Journal called “a major inconvenience for state residents” and “an environmental dud.”
Don’t Ban It – Recycle It
NAPCOR, along with its members, aims to educate the public about the environmental benefits of PET and advocates for legislative measures that encourage recycling. The key message is clear: understanding the benefits of PET packaging is crucial for making informed choices and comprehending the environmental trade-offs associated with alternative materials.
For those interested in delving deeper into the Life Cycle Analysis and learning more about the sustainability of PET, the full report as well as summary materials are available for download at https://napcor.com/pet-life-cycle-assessment-report-2023/. As consumers, making environmentally conscious decisions at the store and actively participating in recycling initiatives are vital steps toward a more sustainable future.
*Calculated using the EPA Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator.