Bio-based Revelation: Far from the Imagined Marvel

At present, bio-based PET (polyethylene terephthalate), bio-based PE (polyethylene), and bio-based NYLON (nylon) are becoming increasingly popular. Bio-fabrics originate from nature, and surprisingly, even common fruits can be a source of cutting-edge environmentally friendly materials. Many luxury brands have begun promoting research on them, hoping to lead the way in developing high-quality sustainable products. In the fashion world, some individuals are vigorously promoting a new theory: after drinking a glass of freshly squeezed apple juice, simply save the residue, and a series of futuristic biochemical reactions can eventually transform it into fibers or produce apple leather.

Some articles argue that the promotion of Plant Bottles by Coca-Cola and the use of terms like "plant-based," "bio-based," or "compostable" in their advertising imply the recyclable advantages of these materials over traditional plastics derived from petrochemicals.

We believe that bio-plastics cannot address the main issues with traditional plastics due to the following reasons:

1. The degradation of bio-plastics is not as easy as imagined; it requires strict control in high-temperature industrial facilities. However, developing countries that consume large amounts of plastic products lack recycling mechanisms and such facilities. This leads to the ultimate fate of bio-plastics being landfill, where their degradation in anaerobic conditions can produce methane, which lasts for centuries.
2. The sugars used to produce bio-plastics (e.g., corn starch and sugarcane) often come from genetically modified plants, causing ecological issues and competing with food crops for land.
3. If bio-plastics are mixed with traditional plastic recycling processes, they can contaminate the entire batch of traditional plastics, exacerbating the plastic waste problem.

The article suggests that the ultimate solution to the plastic problem is recycling and extending producer responsibility.

In fact, the situation is much more severe.

Currently, most studies are skeptical about the feasibility of replacing traditional plastics with bio-plastics. For instance:

The focus is still on the fact that bio-plastics do not have significant advantages over traditional plastics in natural degradation. Bio-plastics require high-temperature industrial facilities that ordinary people generally cannot access, especially in areas with inadequate recycling systems and where the public is not sensitive to plastic recycling and sorting. Consequently, these bio-plastic products often end up in landfills, generating methane, a greenhouse gas not produced by traditional plastics.

As bio-plastics come from plants like corn, cassava, and sugarcane, these raw materials are widely cultivated for plastic production, leading to debates on industrial products versus food crops. This is actually the same issue discussed in the context of biofuels and food security. The question is whether we are willing to sacrifice some food crops for industrial products. Globally, this may be difficult for everyone to accept.

Some studies show that bio-plastics produce more pollution throughout their life cycle compared to traditional plastics. This is because bio-plastics come from plants that consume a considerable amount of fertilizers and pesticides, leading to more ozone generation.

However, the most significant advantage of bio-plastics over traditional plastics is that under certain conditions, they can be completely biodegraded and enter the natural cycle, whereas traditional plastics can only be broken down into nanoparticles that cannot be naturally eliminated from animals' bodies (though technology is evolving, and there are now degradation solutions for traditional plastics, it still takes time).

Therefore, under the current development conditions, bio-plastics cannot solve the current plastic problem. However, if recycling mechanisms and facilities are improved, bio-plastics still have advantages. At the very least, bio-plastics can serve as raw materials for bio-methane production, and their plant origin significantly reduces carbon emissions.

Relying on a single product to solve a historical problem is clearly not feasible, as these issues have systemic causes and require systemic solutions. Solutions should include products, supporting infrastructure, and policies. This also applies to the plastic problem—first, we need to address how to recycle, and then consider how to utilize. Regardless of bio-plastics or traditional plastics, recycling and sorting are the first steps; then, we should think about how to deal with them.

The emergence of bio-plastics does not mean that we can casually discard plastic products. Instead, it emphasizes the need to clearly communicate the importance of sorting and disposing of even bio-plastics properly, to avoid companies using the "green" label for mere "Greenwashing." This is the main purpose of this article.

We need to stay vigilant and recognize that no matter how good the materials are, they should not be an excuse for waste. The most crucial point is to raise public awareness and reduce plastic waste at the source.