The new European regulation marks a decisive new phase for the packaging industry. But as the industry prepares to reduce materials and packaging waste, RDM Group urges stakeholders not to lose sight of another key objective: keeping existing resources in circulation and prioritising recycled fibre whenever it can deliver the required performance. We discuss the issue with Krzysztof Krajewski, Chief Sustainability and Innovation Officer at RDM Group.
With the implementation of the PPWR, the European packaging industry is entering a new phase in which packaging design, production and end-of-life management will have to be reconsidered in light of the regulation’s objectives of reducing packaging waste and increasing circularity.
For converters, packaging manufacturers and material producers, this is far from being a theoretical challenge. The regulation will require companies to rethink structures, grammages, materials and processes, with one word set to become increasingly common in the packaging industry’s everyday vocabulary: lightweighting.
Reducing the weight of packaging means using less raw material, optimising transport and handling and, at least apparently, reducing its environmental impact. But the equation becomes more complex when the pursuit of the lowest possible weight leads to a preference for virgin raw materials over recycled ones.
This is precisely where RDM Group offers an interesting perspective. Because a lighter package is not necessarily the package with the lowest environmental impact.
The issue is particularly relevant to the cartonboard sector, where the availability of high-quality recycled fibre can represent one of the most important levers for reducing pressure on natural resources and keeping materials within a circular system.
© Vicki Couchman Photographer
07957226911
vickicouchman.com
Face to face with Krzysztof Krajewski, Chief Sustainability and Innovation Officer at RDM Group
We asked Krzysztof Krajewski, Chief Sustainability and Innovation Officer at RDM Group, to help us understand how to navigate this new phase of the market and, above all, how to avoid making packaging weight the sole parameter by which sustainability is assessed.
The PPWR represents a major turning point for the European packaging industry. How do you see this new phase?
“The regulation rightly focuses on two fundamental aspects: eliminating unnecessary packaging and improving recyclability. At the same time, however, we must avoid allowing packaging minimisation to automatically become the main sustainability indicator simply because it is one of the easiest aspects to measure. Lightweighting certainly has an important role to play, but the lightest packaging is not necessarily the packaging with the lowest environmental impact.”
So where is the risk in a strategy based exclusively on weight reduction?
“The risk is that we simply shift the problem rather than solve it. Virgin raw materials have inherent characteristics that can make it possible to achieve lighter structures, thanks to their initial strength and greater mechanical rigidity. But if achieving a lighter package means significantly increasing our reliance on virgin raw materials, we risk simply transferring the environmental burden to another stage of the lifecycle. This is why weight needs to be assessed within a broader framework. We cannot consider every gram saved to be an absolute indicator of sustainability.”
What questions should the industry be asking when designing new packaging?
“We should move beyond the question ‘how much does this package weigh?’ and ask at least two additional questions: how much recycled content does it contain? And how much virgin raw material can we avoid using? In the case of recycled cartonboard, for example, we may end up with a slightly heavier package, but one made from material that has already entered the system and is being kept in circulation.”
This brings us directly to the issue of recycled fibre. What role can it play in the new scenario created by the PPWR?
“Recycled fibre is a valuable resource precisely because it allows us to extend the life of materials and reduce the need to continuously use new virgin fibre. Fibres can be used multiple times and, depending on the conditions and the recycling system, can go through 25 or more cycles. As a result, a slightly heavier package containing a significant share of recycled material can represent a more resource-efficient choice than a lighter package made predominantly from virgin fibre.
Of course, this applies when recycled fibre is capable of delivering the performance required by the specific application. Quality and performance remain fundamental considerations.”
The PPWR introduces specific targets for recycled content, particularly for plastics. Would a similar approach be desirable for paper-based materials?
“We believe the principle is important. For plastics, the PPWR has introduced mandatory minimum thresholds for post-consumer recycled (PCR) content alongside weight-reduction objectives. This approach recognises that material reduction should go hand in hand with greater circularity. We expect similar measures could also be developed for other materials, including paper-based materials, in order to support the regulation’s broader circularity objectives. The goal should be to create a system in which reduction, reuse and recycling are considered together, rather than treated as separate objectives.”
So, according to RDM Group, what will be the real test of the PPWR?
“The ability of the industry to make smarter use of the resources we already have. As implementation of the PPWR begins and guidance and interpretations of the regulation continue to evolve, we want to see the regulation driving greater circularity. Where high-quality recycled fibre is able to deliver performance comparable to virgin fibre, it should be prioritised over primary raw material. This allows us to extend the life of existing fibres and reduce demand for new natural resources. Ultimately, the industry’s success in implementing the PPWR should not be measured solely by how many grams we have managed to remove from a package. Instead, we should ask how effectively we have built circular packaging systems capable of delivering the lowest overall environmental impact.”
