Study Contradicts Conventional Wisdom: Replacing Plastic Packaging with Other Materials Would Have Adverse Environmental Impacts

The new study, Life Cycle Impacts of Plastic Packaging Compared to Substitutes In the United States and Canada: Theoretical Substitution Analysis, finds that replacing plastic with alternative materials in packaging applications would cause increases in energy use, water consumption and solid waste, as well as increase greenhouse gas emissions (GHG), acidification, eutrophication and ozone depletion. “This report builds upon established data on the energy and GHG benefits of plastics, compared to alternatives,” said Steve Russell, vice president of plastics, American Chemistry Council. “It expands our understanding of critical environmental benefits beyond energy and highlights key environmental indicators like water use and waste generation.” Prepared by Franklin Associates for the American Chemistry Council, the study expands upon a 2014 report that used life cycle assessment methodology to assess the energy consumption and GHG emission potential of six general categories of plastic packaging produced and sold in the U.S. and Canada relative to alternative packaging.