Australia’s National Science Agency (CSIRO) has published a new report on the state of bioplastics in Australia. It reveals that the majority of bioplastics in Australia ends up in landfill. The report highlights systemic issues, including inadequate infrastructure, fragmented regulations, and consumer confusion over bioplastic labelling and disposal.
“Bioplastics are often a more sustainable alternative,” said Dr Albert Ardevol, CSIRO’s plastic packaging research lead. “However, if disposed of incorrectly, bioplastics can contaminate recycling and waste streams. A large portion of bioplastics end up in landfill, where they can decompose and release methane emissions. This negatively contributes to waste and climate change, and does not achieve circularity.”
The CSIRO team conducted a material flow analysis from feedstocks to end-of-life for PLA, PHA, and bio-PE.
Polylactic acid (PLA), primarily made from corn sugar, dominates the Australian bioplastics market. It is commonly used in food service ware, such as cups, lids, and cutlery. Despite being industrially compostable, most PLA ends up in landfill due to a lack of suitable composting facilities, especially outside South Australia, the report found.
Food Organics and Garden Organics (FOGO) collection is limited to 30% of Australians, primarily in metropolitan areas. Amongst the councils that offer FOGO collection, most do not accept certified compostable plastics except for those in South Australia, where they are widely collected.
Bio-polyethylene (PE), derived from sugarcane, and polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHA), made from organic wastes, cane, and beet sugars, are also used in Australia but on a smaller scale. CSIRO said there are large data gaps for both materials, as they are yet to be used in large-scale applications. The study found that most bioplastics in Australia are imported, primarily from Thailand (PLA) and Brazil (bio-PE).
End-of-life
The material flow analysis revealed that most bioplastics in Australia end up in landfill.
“We reviewed the end-of-life of bioplastic products and discovered that the majority ends up in landfill,” the CSIRO team wrote. “This is primarily due to the mixed materials in food packaging, such as paper and bioplastics, which render them non-recyclable or compostable in most states, except for South Australia. Agriculture mulch films, on the other hand, are left to naturally degrade on fields.”
Whilst bio-PE can be recycled with conventional plastics, this application remains limited in Australia, the report found.
A fragmented regulatory environment and inadequate waste management infrastructure are amongst the largest barriers to bioplastics' effective end-of-life management. The report calls for greater investment and coordination to develop a circular economy for bioplastics, including establishing viable end markets for recovered materials.
“End-of-life management poses one of the most complex challenges for the use of bioplastics in Australia, and was the most frequently mentioned challenge by stakeholders during the workshops,” the report says. “Lack of infrastructure capable of supporting the bioplastics value chain was seen as the biggest barrier to widespread uptake, with a fragmented regulatory environment further exacerbating this challenge…Designing a product using compostable or recyclable bioplastics in the absence of markets for the recovered material can hinder recycling efforts and render these products economically unfeasible and destined for landfill. For a range of biopolymers used in Australia, volumes are so low that the economics of collecting and reprocessing them do not cover their market price.”
Consumer confusion
The lack of clear, standardised labelling for bioplastics has also led to widespread consumer confusion, resulting in contamination across recycling and composting streams.
“At the root of this challenge lies a lack of understanding of the different types of bioplastics, how they are used, and how they can be disposed of appropriately. Due to the differing regulations and policies in Australia, consumers can become confused as to where and how they should dispose of biodegradable or compostable products, and whether they should do so in or outside of the home,” the report says.
Discussions with stakeholders revealed that compostability and recyclability labels are particularly important.
Some said that there is potential to integrate the Australasian Recycling Label (ARL) into packaging with home and commercial composting icons that require products to be certified to a relevant Australasian standard. Industry participants expressed interest in scaling the use of biobased and recycled content labels and certification but were apprehensive about further confusion this may cause.
For bioplastics to truly contribute to a circular economy, Australia must prioritise education, investment, and collaboration across the sector, the report concluded.