Abstract
Introduction
The production of bioplastics is in a phase of transition, and also a phase of relative growth. The earliest bioplastics were the biodegradable plastics, developed to fulfill simple packaging roles that would address a growing waste management dilemma. Mastery of some of the biobased versions of the bulk thermoplastics has created both new applications and market opportunities. However, like their fossil-based equivalent counterparts, the biobased thermoplastics are non-biodegradable. In terms of end-of-life, the lack of biodegradability is offset to some degree by their ability to enter the established recycling infrastructure.
Biobased production is now at a stage at which new biorefineries are announced frequently. A lot of attention focuses on integrated biorefineries, in which the higher margins and lower production volumes of biobased chemicals are envisaged alongside bulk biobased fuels, with their lower margins. This economic model is one employed in petrochemical refineries, where petrochemicals make up a significant proportion of the profits for a much lower demand on crude oil than gasoline and diesel. Plastics represent a fascinating middle ground – higher production volume than fine, specialty, and commodity chemicals, but much lower volume than fuels. In the operation of integrated biorefineries, one can imagine that biobased plastics are a linchpin category.
The biggest obstacle to the proliferation of bioplastics has been their higher price in comparison to fossil-based plastics. The cost differential has been decreasing. This is quite logical, as the latter are very mature in their production technology and can be produced at massive economies of scale in fully amortized plants, whereas bioplastics are in their earliest technological development. Therefore, much opportunity exists to improve the production efficiency of bioplastics. One avenue for this is through the emerging discipline of synthetic biology, which offers great potential across all sectors of biobased production. 1
The complete OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers No. 10: “Policies for Bioplastics in the Context of a Bioeconomy” is available at
With these matters in mind, it was timely for the Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) to conduct an examination of the policy regimes being employed to support bioplastics production and to identify gaps where public policy may remove barriers, but in a cost-efficient manner for the taxpayer.
Market Trends
It would be hard to imagine a class of materials that is as successful as plastics. Twenty times more plastic is produced today than 50 years ago, and plastics production worldwide has surpassed that of steel. The recent history and the future of plastics is about growth. The transition from biodegradable plastics in niche applications to non-biodegradable, but biobased thermoplastics in bulk applications is currently changing the market dynamics (Fig. 1). These new bioplastics are biobased equivalents of the major thermoplastics that dominate the market—polyethylene (PE), polypropylene (PP), and polyethylene terephthalate (PET)—with biobased equivalents of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) expected soon.
Projected production of bioplastics, reflecting the transition from biodegradable plastics to biobased thermoplastics. (Source: European Bioplastics,
However, a recent update, from the industry organization European Bioplastics is significant. 2 The market of about 1.2 million tonnes in 2011 may see a 5-fold increase in production volumes by 2016, to almost 6 million tonnes. The product expected to contribute most to this growth is biobased PET (for plastic bottles), which already accounts for approximately 40% of the global bioplastics production capacity. The current production volume is expected to grow to more than 4.6 million tonnes by 2016 as a result of demand from large manufacturers of carbonated drinks. Early in 2013, nova-Institut predicted that by 2020 bioplastics production could rise to 12 million tonnes, principally due to drop-in polymers, particularly bio-PET. 3 With an expected total polymer production of about 400 million tonnes in 2020, the biobased share should increase from 1.5% in 2011 to 3% in 2020. So clearly, the predictions of growth are changing dramatically over relatively short time periods, which draws the attention of the OECD.
Drivers for Bioplastics Production
Recently elaborated bioeconomy strategies from various countries and regions (e.g., The White House, 2012; the European Commission, 2012) emphasize the increasing contributions to future economic growth through biobased production. 4,5 This is envisaged as a way to break the link between growth and environmental damage; a doubling of wealth has been associated with an 80% increase in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. 6 The large production volumes of plastics make them important in this process.
Energy Security and the Competition for Crude Oil Use
The issue of energy security and access to crude oil is not frequently discussed in terms of plastics. Plastics have shown an almost exponential growth during the past decades and currently over 200 million tonnes per annum are produced worldwide. One source has predicted that overall demand for plastics could increase 4- to 5-fold by the end of this century. 7 The feedstock for producing synthetic plastics is almost exclusively crude oil, and currently around 5% of oil production is used for making plastics. By the end of this century, 20–25% of current crude oil production would be required. Add to this the increasing demand for crude oil, for chemicals production, and the combined demand for chemicals and plastics alone in relation to total crude oil production may become unsustainable, given the current situation regarding new oil finds and the increasing demands that will be placed on unconventional sources.
Landfill Dilemma and Ocean Accumulation of Plastics
During the 1980s, solid waste disposal emerged as a potential crisis in many areas of the United States due to increasing amounts of municipal solid waste (MSW), shrinking landfill capacity, rising costs, and strong public opposition to new solid waste facility sites. 8 In 2010, plastics were 12.4% of US MSW, in comparison to less than 1% of US MSW in 1960, with only 8.2% of total plastics waste being recovered in 2010. 9
This problem of solid waste disposal has become a global issue. After food waste and paper waste, plastic waste is the third major constituent of municipal and industrial waste in cities. 10 In many countries, legislation has been developed with the aim of maximizing the efficiency of use of landfill sites, by diverting materials to other end-of-life options.
Also emerging has been a growing awareness of the accumulation of large quantities of plastic waste in certain ocean locations, e.g., the North Atlantic Gyre and the Northern Pacific Gyre's “eastern garbage patch.” 11,12 In a long-term study in the North Atlantic, the largest sample collected in a single 30-minute tow was 1,069 plastic pieces at 24.6°N, 74.0°W in May 1997. This is equivalent to 580,000 pieces per square kilometer. 11
Climate Change Mitigation
There is now almost universal acceptance of climate change by scientists. Among papers expressing a position on anthropogenic global warming (AGW), an overwhelming proportion endorses the scientific consensus on AGW, with a miniscule number rejecting it. 13 To date, 167 countries have signed up to the Copenhagen Accord, aimed at trying to limit the temperature rise, compared to pre-industrial levels, to 2°C. 14 However, the world is currently on a trajectory consistent with a long-term average temperature increase of 3.6°C. 15
A comparison of the cradle-to-grave GHG emissions associated with conventional and biobased chemicals, based on a total of 44 life cycle analysis (LCA) studies covering approximately 60 individual biobased materials and 350 different life cycle scenarios, suggests that the GHG emissions savings associated with biobased products (including biobased plastics such as polytrimethylene terephthalate, polylactic acid, and PHA) are superior to those for their conventional counterparts. 16 However, the error margins associated with these estimates are considerable, largely due to differences in background assumptions, system boundaries, and differences in methodology of LCA in different studies. Serious misgivings concerning the use of LCA as the sole tool in environmental impact assessment have been raised. 17 The subject merits further attention by policy makers.
Policy Aspects
Despite these potential benefits, there are also many actual and potential barriers to the growth of a bioplastics sector. These include:
• Debates over the relative merits of using land to produce crops for non-food use rather than food use;
• Restricted access to adequate sources of biomass in countries with limited land resources and consequent dependence on international trade in biomass;
• Competition for biomass from more established sectors such as the biofuels sector, which also benefits in many countries from preferential policy regimes that disadvantage rival sectors such as bioplastics;
• Production costs that are currently higher than those for petrochemicals, though the differentials are rapidly becoming smaller;
• The possibility of public resistance to the use of technologies such as synthetic biology in advanced bioprocessing facilities (e.g., consolidated bioprocessing (CBP) plants);
• Inadequate recycling and disposal infrastructures for both biodegradable and durable bioplastics leading, for example, to the accumulation of plastics and "microplastics" in the environment, particularly the marine environment;
• Lack of standardization and limited harmonization of standards internationally concerning terms and concepts such as sustainability, which could act as a barrier to international trade;
• Lack of consensus on the methodologies needed to perform LCAs, preventing adequate assessments of the potential of bioplastics to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Many policies and policy instruments have the potential to affect the development of the bioplastics sector. These include agricultural policies, research and development (R&D) support policies, and trade and industry policies, as well as mechanisms such as subsidies and tax incentives, quota systems, standardization schemes, and regulatory measures. Looking across countries, the following characteristics and trends are apparent:
• Few countries have policies specifically targeting the bioplastics sector, whereas a number of countries have policies that nurture the biofuels and bioenergy sectors, which places bioplastics at a disadvantage in the competition for biomass.
• The only bioplastics policies that are widespread relate to the use and disposal of plastic bags.
• Many countries have R&D and innovation-related policies from which the bioplastics sector can benefit.
• A number of countries are making significant efforts to build up bioplastics production capacity, though the costs of scale-up associated with leading-edge facilities are a constraint.
• Large blocs such as the US and the European Union have realized the potential of public procurement to stimulate market development.
• There is growing interest in the development of comprehensive bioeconomy strategies in many countries around the world; the scope of these would encompass targeted bioplastics initiatives.
Key messages for the policymaking community are as follows:
• Bioplastics have an important role to play in the development of the bioeconomy due to their potential to address environmental and economic challenges.
• Within the overarching context of the development of comprehensive bioeconomy strategies, the practice of according preferential treatment to sectors such as biofuels, which places bioplastics at a disadvantage, could be reconsidered.
• Again, within the context of holistic bioeconomy strategies, there is scope for the more considered use of intelligent policy mixes targeted at the development of bioplastics over their whole “cradle-to-grave” life cycle.
• Greater efforts are needed at an international level concerning the definition and harmonization of standards related to concepts such as sustainability in order to avoid creating barriers to the international trade of biobased products and bioplastics in particular.