{"id":522202,"date":"2026-03-14T00:54:12","date_gmt":"2026-03-14T00:54:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/522202\/"},"modified":"2026-03-14T00:54:12","modified_gmt":"2026-03-14T00:54:12","slug":"plastic-produce-packaging-is-greener-than-alternatives","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/522202\/","title":{"rendered":"Plastic produce packaging is greener than alternatives"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>By Kevin Kelly, Special for CalMatters<\/p>\n<p>This commentary was originally published by <a href=\"&quot;https:\/\/calmatters.org\/&quot;\">CalMatters<\/a>. <a href=\"&quot;https:\/\/calmatters.org\/subscribe-to-calmatters\/&quot;\">Sign up<\/a> for their newsletters.<\/p>\n<p>Guest Commentary written by<\/p>\n<p>Californians care about reducing plastic waste. Growers, packers and food companies do too.\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>That\u2019s why many in the fresh produce industry and even their packaging suppliers supported California\u2019s landmark packaging law \u2014 The Plastic Pollution Prevention and Packaging Producer Responsibility Act (<a href=\"&quot;https:\/\/leginfo.legislature.ca.gov\/faces\/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB54&quot;\">Senate Bill 54<\/a>) \u2014 when it was introduced and signed in 2022.<\/p>\n<p>The original goal of the law was simple: reduce waste and improve recycling without compromising food safety and affordability.<\/p>\n<p>However, the latest version of the regulation, released in January by the state\u2019s CalRecycle agency, puts those goals at risk by ignoring how food moves from farm to families. The revisions call for, essentially, a sweeping ban on plastics via the food supply chain by 2027.<\/p>\n<p>As a packaging industry executive, I would like nothing more than to discover the magic bullet that gives us a realistic way to eliminate plastic in the food supply chain. I\u2019ve been trying to do that for almost 25 years.<\/p>\n<p>But the facts of the current supply chain can\u2019t be wished away. And neglecting this reality will risk the health of Californians, while increasing food prices, limiting food selection and putting small businesses and family farmers out of operation.<\/p>\n<p>Here\u2019s why CalRecycle\u2019s proposed ban is short-sighted: Most people only notice packaging when they open it at home. But what people don\u2019t usually consider is that by then, it has already done nearly all its work.<\/p>\n<p>Packaging protects fresh produce from bacteria, dirt and damage as it is harvested, cooled, shipped and stocked. It prevents cross-contamination, extends shelf life and thereby reduces food waste.<\/p>\n<p>Fresh produce is alive and reactive to its environment even after it is picked. The science embedded in the package extends its life by letting oxygen in and carbon dioxide out, so packaging must comply with federal food safety laws, FDA food-contact standards and California regulations.<\/p>\n<p>Absent packaging, study after study shows, food is thrown away \u2014 along with the water, fuel, labor and money used to produce it.\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>More <a href=\"&quot;https:\/\/calmatters.org\/commentary\/2026\/02\/organic-waste-california-emissions-landfills\/&quot;\">greenhouse gases are emitted from food waste<\/a> than from the production of plastics, according to <a href=\"&quot;https:\/\/www.ecos.org\/smm-projects\/preventing-the-wasting-of-food\/?utm_source=chatgpt.com&quot;\">a 2017 study by the state of Oregon Department of Environmental Quality.<\/a> The authors\u2019 recommendation? Use plastic.<\/p>\n<p>The produce industry constantly evaluates new materials, but most alternatives do not provide the same protection against contamination and spoilage as current packaging.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem ironic, but plastics are still our most sustainable option. We are still decades away from finding other packaging that performs as well as plastic does when it comes to food safety and waste.<\/p>\n<p>Compostable materials, for instance, can\u2019t match the shelf-life function of plastics, and producing them at scale will also take a decade or more. Moreover, according to a <a href=\"&quot;https:\/\/vcm-international.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/Quantifying-functionality-importance-of-plastic-packaging-in-fresh-produce-from-needs-benefit-perspective.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com&quot;\">recently released Canadian government study<\/a>, compostables cost so much they\u2019d increase grocery produce prices by 5-10%.<\/p>\n<p>CalRecycle\u2019s revisions to SB 54 ignore these facts in favor of a foolhardy and dangerous ethos that is a de facto ban on plastics: \u201cIf we mandate it, industry will follow.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>This attitude passes the buck away from CalRecycle\u2019s own limitations onto the <a href=\"&quot;https:\/\/calmatters.org\/environment\/2025\/10\/resynergi-plastic-waste-recycling-pollution\/&quot;\">backs of small businesses and family farmers<\/a>. The problem is not that fresh produce packaging can\u2019t be recycled. It\u2019s that the recycling systems needed to handle these materials need major investment to get there.<\/p>\n<p>The produce industry isn\u2019t asking to junk the law. Instead, we\u2019re asking that produce packages governed by federal rules or guidelines on safety and shelf-life extension be excluded from the recycling rates proposed by CalRecycle. Such exclusions have been part of other versions of the proposed regulations but were left out in the latest.\u00a0<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"&quot;https:\/\/calmatters.org\/commentary\/2022\/11\/plastic-advanced-recycling-california-turf\/&quot;\">We need time<\/a>. Alternative technologies don\u2019t exist yet.<\/p>\n<p>Ironically, CalRecycle may end up taking a law designed to protect the environment and allow it instead to increase food waste and greenhouse emissions and reduce affordability. It\u2019s time to create reality-based regulations instead of ones that put Californians at risk.<\/p>\n<p>This article was <a href=\"&quot;https:\/\/calmatters.org\/commentary\/2026\/03\/plastic-food-packaging-california-environment\/&quot;\">originally published on CalMatters<\/a> and was republished under the <a href=\"&quot;https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by-nc-nd\/4.0\/&quot;\">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives<\/a> license.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"By Kevin Kelly, Special for CalMatters This commentary was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.&hellip;\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":522203,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[47],"tags":[3200,192,31937,6562,79],"class_list":["post-522202","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-environment","tag-commentary","tag-environment","tag-greenhouse-gas-emissions","tag-recycling","tag-science"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/522202","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=522202"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/522202\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/522203"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=522202"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=522202"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=522202"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}