Puzzle Persists for 'Degradeable' Plastics

Eco-friendly plastics disintegrate, but might just linger in the environment.

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

By Daniel Cressey of Naturemagazine

The environmentally friendly version of polythene might not be so friendly after all.

Polyethylene is one of the most widely used materials in the world, and the discarded plastic bag has become one of the most potent symbols of human impact on the environment. As worries over the vast scale of waste from this plastic has grown, so has the use of purportedly 'degradable' forms of it.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Adding transition metals such as iron and cobalt can promote the oxidation of the ethylene polymers and claims for the degradability or biodegradability of these materials are widespread on food packaging and plastic bags. But a review published last week in Environmental Science & Technology, notes that there is no evidence that 'degradable polyethylenes' are actually all they suggest.

Although it is clear that 'degradable' plastic bags, for example, will fall apart in the environment, the resulting fragments can persist for a long time, and there are no long-term studies on these pieces. A key issue is that products can be described as biodegradable without reference to the timescale it takes them to fully biodegrade.

"There are a tremendous number of papers about degradable polyethylene but no one has really shown a high degradation," says Ann-Christine Albertsson, a polymer researcher at the Swedish Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) in Stockholm and lead author on the critical review. "Of course they degrade in one way - they are losing part of their properties. But if you mean it as a positive for nature, that has not been proved."

Developing-world countries such as China are also starting to use 'degradable' polyethylene, says Albertsson. Indian authorities have taken an interest in the subject, and recently sent a postdoc to work with her. Although some countries are already trying to move to genuinely degradable products based on starch-based polylactide, this is still expensive. And paper-based products may not be a suitable replacement because of the requirement to cut down trees.

Burn it up

Noreen Thomas, a materials researcher at Loughborough University, UK, was one of the authors of a 2010 report for the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) on oxo-degradable plastics. These are mainly polyethylene but also include some types of polypropylene.

How quickly the plastic will break down into fragments is heavily dependent on heat and light exposure - and hence on the environment the plastic ends up in. The Defra report suggests that oxo-degradable fragments left outside in the United Kingdom would become small fragments over two to five years. The biodegradation of these small fragments then proceeds "very slowly", it notes.

"Our conclusion was there is no benefit to the environment of oxo-degradable plastics," Thomas told Nature.

These plastics should not be composted, as their breakdown fragments will ruin the resulting compost. But neither can such materials be incorporated into traditional plastics recycling as the same additives that encourage the break-up of the original material will degrade the recycled material produced.

The report recommended that these plastics should be kept out of conventional plastics recycling in favor of incineration or landfill.

The Defra-authored summary of the report points out, "Both of these options make the 'degradable' property of oxo-degradable plastics irrelevant."

This article is reproduced with permission from the magazine Nature. The article was first published on April 21, 2011.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe