Sustainability: U.S. needs consistent labeling to explain package recovery

This spring, the U.K.'s Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP) introduced its new consumer label after pilot testing, and partnered with the British Retail Consortium (BRC) to administer the recycling label system through a subsidiary company. The goal the first year is to have 60 companies commit to use the label and pay a nominal fee for upkeep of the data.

The Sustainable Packaging Coalition continues to explore how a similar labeling system can work in the U.S. through a number of partnerships. Though the drivers for participation aren't the same in the U.S., the goal is similar: To establish a harmonized and transparent messaging approach for all materials and packaging formats to encourage greater participation and to incentivize development of better recycling infrastructure.

Despite this desire for consistency, confusion on recycling in the U.S. continues, particularly since local governments responsible for recycling have turned to material-specific labels in lieu of a viable harmonized alternative. A prevailing example are the Society of the Plastics Industry (SPI) codes, which combine a material identification number and initials with the classic chasing arrows symbol, which many recognize as a recycling-related symbol. These codes complicate the messaging landscape by reducing the myriad of polymer densities, compositions, shapes, additives, etc., into seven numbers that inadequately address a growing number of polymer types and applications; they also have the unintended consequence of stifling innovation for comprehensive plastics collection.

The SPI codes are a default standard because 39 states require their use in packaging. Most consumers have the impression that the material can be recycled and is recycled—anywhere. The SPI is explicit in saying the codes aren't meant to be recycling guides: their guidance states, “do not make recycling claims in close proximity to the code, even if such claims are properly qualified.” In reality, they're commonly used that way in municipal collection. Using the SPI codes as recycling labels, we're asking consumers to ignore what they universally understand about the chasing arrows, and replace it with a highly variable understanding of the nuances of recycling. The American Society of Testing & Materials (ASTM) Intl. is working with SPI, the states with code laws to revamp the codes and GreenBlue in that process. Some committee members agree that the chasing arrows aren't appropriate as a part of the resin code; others have stated that costs associated with the retooling of molds and machines makes changing the code nearly impossible, or at least astronomically expensive. Eliminating the recycling symbol from the SPI codes is just the first step. However, we must also adopt a clear packaging labeling system that can adapt over time to reflect improvements in and implementation of better polymer recovery collection and sorting technology.