Recycling is not a true solution to the plastic problem: globally, just 28% of plastics are collected, of which only 7% are recycled. This, along with total plastic waste being predicted to double by 2034, makes recycling a “non-solution”.

Where mechanical recycling is limited to certain types of widely used plastics, the complexity of recycling single use plastics and films is the main cause for their low processing rate. Chemical recycling is a hot topic but the process requires nefarious chemicals and the by-products of the reaction are toxic substances such as bisphenol-A, cadmium, benzene, brominated compounds, phthalates, lead, tin, antimony, and volatile organic compounds from pyrolysis and solvolysis.

The reason for the recycling rate being so low is that most of the plastic reaching recycling facilities is either too dirty to be recycled or too thin – or maybe not even plastic at all!

Even if the recycling rate improved, it still would be a downward spiral, pushing back the problem to a later date rather than eliminating it, as recycled plastics are actually downgraded. This means, for example, that in most cases plastic used for food packaging cannot be recycled and re-used in food packaging. Recycling being far from 100% efficiency also means to continue supporting the petrochemical industry to complete the missing % with raw feedstock (petroleum) hence is just an end of pipe solution.

FlexSea improves the plastic lifecycle by removing the need to take care of post-consumption, as FlexSea will simply biodegrade harmlessly. This way, you can enjoy the value added of using a truly sustainable plastic alternative, knowing that you need not to worry about what happens to it once it’s been disposed of!

Bio-based PE and PP are basically taking the worst of both worlds… Imagine a petroleum plastic that cannot degrade but that also requires arable land, fresh water, pesticides and fertilizers.

Starch bioplastics are most commonly made of corn, potatoes, beetroot or sugarcane. These compete with food crops and are food crops themselves. This is unsustainable due to ever-increasing demand for food and land. Faced with limited arable land, farmers are turning to deforestation in order to meet demand for the crops needed for these bioplastics. Growing more of these crops also increases pressure on our limited freshwater supplies.

PLA and starch bioplastics also require very specific conditions to degrade, meaning that they can remain as pollution in the environment for decades if not longer.

PHAs requires very specific microbial conditions to biodegrade. As these are not found in many environments, PHA waste can remain intact for decades if not longer, causing as much damage as petroleum-based plastics.

These are made up of up to 98% traditional plastic and 2% of an oxidizing agent which will partially breakdown the plastic over time. Being made of petroleum, they do not decompose but instead degrade into microplastics, bioaccumulating across the food chain, harming both animals and humans.

The most commonly known product based on cellulose is Cellophane and it is not compostable. Companies who have tried out cellulose based solutions are rapidly moving away from it due to the long time needed to re-grow trees and the lack of land to cultiv… I mean, do we really need to explain why we shouldn’t cut down trees?