The Role of Plastic Packaging in the Sports Nutrition Industry - 4Ocean

The Role of Plastic Packaging in the Sports Nutrition Industry

The sports nutrition market is expanding quickly due to rising fitness and health consciousness. Sports nutrition products, such as protein powders, energy bars, supplements, and hydration drinks, are essential components of athletes' and fitness fanatics' daily regimens. However, there are serious environmental issues because of the industry's reliance on plastic packaging.

This article will discuss the function of plastic packaging in the sports nutrition sector, its effects on the environment, and ways that companies and customers can adopt more environmentally friendly methods without sacrificing the convenience or quality of their products.

Why Sports Nutrition Packaging Is Mostly Made of Plastic
Sports nutrition packaging frequently uses plastic for a number of reasons.

1. Durable and Lightweight
Because plastic containers are lightweight, they use less energy and money when being transported. For products like protein powders and supplements, their durability guarantees that they are shielded against spills, contamination, and damage.

2. Economical
Compared to alternatives like glass or metal, plastic is less expensive to create. In a sector where affordability is a key selling feature, this cost advantage enables manufacturers to maintain competitive pricing.

3. Consumer Convenience
Plastic packaging is perfect for customers who are constantly on the go because it is simple to use, reseal, and transport. Fitness aficionados' active lifestyles are catered to with pre-packaged doses of protein drinks, energy gels, and supplements in plastic containers.

4. Longer Shelf Life
Sports  Nutrition items are shielded from air, light, and moisture by the superior barrier qualities of plastic. This prolongs the items' shelf life and maintains their nutritious value.

Plastic is a sensible option because of these benefits, but its extensive use has negative environmental effects that cannot be ignored.

Plastic Packaging's Effect on the Environment in Sports Nutrition
Plastic packaging in sports nutrition has a substantial negative impact on ecosystems, wildlife, and human health.

1. Accumulation of Plastic Waste
Products related to sports nutrition, like protein powder tubs, energy bar wrappers, and hydration drink bottles, are frequently packaged in single-use plastic. These products commonly wind up as trash or in landfills, adding to the world's plastic waste problem.

2. Challenges with Recycling
Because of their nature, many of the plastics used in sports nutrition packaging are challenging to recycle. Although multilayer plastics, which blend several components, are frequently found in energy bar wrappers and supplement packs, most facilities do not recycle them.

3. Pollution in the Ocean
When plastic packaging is improperly disposed of, it frequently ends up in the ocean where it decomposes into microplastics that are harmful to ecosystems and marine life. The fact that energy gels and other portable goods are usually thrown out in the open during sporting events makes them more hazardous.

4. Emissions of Carbon
Fossil fuels are used in the creation of plastic, which raises greenhouse gas emissions. Every phase of the plastic lifecycle has an effect on the environment, from the extraction of raw materials to manufacture and shipping.

The Significance of Sustainability in Sports Nutrition
Sustainability is becoming more and more important to businesses and consumers alike. 73% of consumers worldwide think they would definitely or probably change their purchasing patterns to lessen their impact on the environment, according to a NielsenIQ poll. The sports nutrition sector is being impacted by this trend, as environmentally concerned consumers are requesting sustainable packaging options.

Sustainability's Advantages for Sports Nutrition

1. Brand Loyalty: Companies that put sustainability first can forge closer bonds with clients that care about the environment.
2. Regulatory Compliance: Sustainable practices are becoming essential as governments around the world impose more stringent laws on single-use plastics.
3. Opportunities for Innovation: Adopting sustainability encourages creativity in materials and packaging design, which helps firms stand out in a crowded market.

Eco-Friendly Packaging Options for the Sports Nutrition Sector
A change to more environmentally friendly packaging choices is necessary to address the plastic issue in sports nutrition. Here are a few good substitutes:

1. Plastics That Can Be Recycled
Waste can be greatly decreased by using easily recyclable single-material plastics. Packaging with clear labels can also assist customers in properly recycling.

2. Compostable and Biodegradable Materials
Conventional plastics can be replaced by materials like polylactic acid (PLA), which is made from renewable resources like corn starch. Under industrial composting settings, these materials break down, minimizing damage to the environment.

3.  Reusable Containers
Brands can provide reusable packaging options, such protein powder tubs that can be filled again. Refills can be bought by customers in place of fresh containers, reducing waste.

4. Packaging That Is Edible
Emerging cutting-edge technologies include edible packaging for vitamins or hydration gels. These methods are convenient and completely reduce waste.

5. Aluminum and Glass
Aluminum and glass are more costly and heavier, but they feel more high-end and are indefinitely recyclable. They work especially well with premium sports nutrition products.

6. Simple Packaging
Another successful tactic is to utilize less material when packaging. Energy bars, for instance, can be offered in large quantities with minimal packaging or wrapped in thinner, environmentally friendly materials.

Industry-Related Sustainability Initiatives
Already, a number of sports nutrition companies are moving closer to sustainability:

1. Vega
Plant-based nutrition company Vega has made a commitment to lessening its environmental impact by utilizing post-consumer recycled materials and recyclable packaging.

2. GU Power
A recycling mechanism for GU Energy's single-use gel packets has been implemented. TerraCycle, a business that specializes in difficult-to-recycle materials, accepts used packets from customers via mail.

3. Myprotein
In keeping with its environmental objectives, Myprotein has introduced a range of biodegradable packaging for its protein powders.

4. The Clif Bar
Through the use of energy-efficient production techniques and the investigation of compostable wrappers, Clif Bar is actively attempting to decrease packaging waste.

With the correct investments and technologies, sustainability is attainable, as these instances show.

Consumers' Contribution to the Reduction of Plastic Waste
Addressing the issue of plastic in sports nutrition is another crucial task for consumers. The following actions can be taken by individuals:

1. Encourage Eco-Friendly Brands
Select goods from businesses that place a high value on environmentally friendly packaging and open sustainability policies.

2. Recycle appropriately.
To guarantee that plastic packaging is disposed of properly, adhere to your local recycling regulations. Containers should be dry and clean before being put in recycling bins.

3. Purchase in Bulk
Buying protein powders or supplements in larger containers lowers the quantity of packaging waste produced overall.

4. Take Advantage of Reusable Solutions
Choose reusable containers, shakers, and water bottles over single-use plastic ones.

5. Encourage Change
Through or social media, customers may urge their preferred brands to use sustainable packaging.

Sports Nutrition Packaging's Future

There is a rare chance for the sports nutrition sector to set the standard for environmentally friendly packaging. Brands may lessen their environmental effect while preserving the convenience and quality of their products by making investments in cutting-edge materials, revamping packaging, and interacting with environmentally conscious customers.

To solve the plastic issue, governments, corporations, and consumers must collaborate. The industry may move toward a greener future with the help of policies that reward sustainable practices as well as greater awareness and education.

The need to reduce the environmental impact of sports nutrition products is growing along with the demand for them. The industry can strike a balance between sustainability and performance by redesigning packaging, guaranteeing that environmental aims are not sacrificed for fitness objectives.

Unquestionably, plastic plays a part in the sports nutrition sector, but there is also room for improvement. By working together, we can build a future where sustainability and wellness coexist.

Please visit our website for more information on this topic.

How much would it cost to switch to plastic alternatives? Richard Gray crunches the numbers.

Walking along a short section of stony beach, Claire Waluda stoops briefly to pick up something from between the rocks. It is a brightly coloured plastic bottle top – just one of hundreds of bits of plastic that she finds washed ashore on the remote, windswept island of South Georgia.

Located in the south Atlantic, on the fringes of the Antarctic, it is nearly 1,000 miles (1,500km) from the nearest major human settlement. Yet even here Waluda, an ecologist with the British Antarctic Survey, is finding worrying signs of our throw-away attitude towards plastic. Regularly she finds seals entangled in this debris or albatross chicks coughing up bits of plastic film.

These are just a few examples of the damage our throw-away relationship with plastics is inflicting on the environment. More than 78 million tonnes of plastic packaging is produced worldwide every year by an industry worth nearly $198 billion. Just a fraction of that is recycled while the vast majority is thrown away. Plastic litter now clutters every part of our planet, from remote parts of the Antarctic to the deepest ocean trenches.

You might also like:

- A mission to change Sweden overnight

- The cost of changing an entire country’s alphabet

- Why we’ll never replace the QWERTY keyboard

High profile campaigns and TV programmes such as the finale of the BBC’s Blue Planet II, where Sir David Attenborough highlighted the problems plastics are causing in the world’s oceans, have led to growing public alarm over the issue. In response to mounting pressure, governments, manufacturers and retailers are beginning to take steps to tackle the tide of plastic waste. But how much will this fundemantal change to the way we buy our goods actually cost?

Many of the companies attempting to tackle the amount of plastic waste generated by their products admit it will eat into their profits. Coca-Cola, for example, produces 38,250 tonnes of plastic packaging in the UK each year and estimates indicate it sells more than 110 billion single-use plastic bottles globally. The company has pledged to double the amount of recycled material in its plastic bottles in the UK and is trialling refillable bottles. Although it refuses to give details, Coca-Cola says these efforts will increase costs.

And even companies that have been dragging their heels will soon have to address the amount of plastic packaging they use. More than 60 countries are introducing legislation aimed at reducing the use of plastic bags and other single use plastic materials. This month, tiny Pacific island nation Vanuatu became the first in the world to ban single use plastic bags, straws and polystyrene food containers.

The cost of change

Several major supermarkets, including multinationals Tesco and Walmart, have already promised to reduce the amount of plastic packaging they sell their products in. Alongside Coca-Cola, drinks manufacturers Pepsi, food and cleaning multinational Unilever, food producer Nestle and cosmetics company L’Oreal have also pledged to ensure all their packaging is either reusable, recyclable or compostable by .

But despite these commitments, much of the food and drinks industry is still trying to work out how it will meet the targets it has helped to set for itself. Some experts fear that without the right approach, this rush to banish plastics from our shopping baskets will make the goods we buy more expensive.

“It is not as simple as ‘plastic is bad’ so let’s use something else,” warns Eliot Whittington, policy programme director at the University of Cambridge’s Institute for Sustainability Leadership, where he advises drinks manufacturers on reducing waste. “It will require a complete change in the way we use product packaging at the moment. Most packaging is now used just once and thrown away. We need to move away from that. It needs some form of leadership from government.”

Pinch and zoom on mobile to expand.

More than a third of the food sold in the EU now comes packaged in plastic and each of its 510 million residents produce about 31kg of plastic packaging waste a year. One reason plastic is so dominant is its ability to do more, for less: it takes less material to make a drinks bottle out of plastic, for example, than it does to make one out of glass.

“Plastics are cheap, lightweight and adaptable in ways many of the alternatives are not,” says Susan Selke, director of the school of packaging at Michigan State University.

Fifty years ago, before the plastics revolution had gathered pace, most drinks were sold in glass bottles. Today almost all soft drink bottles are made from a tough plastic material called polyethylene terephthalate, or PET.

While the cost of producing bottles can vary depending on the raw material and energy prices at the time, it is generally not that much more expensive to produce a glass bottle versus one made from PET – about $0.01 more, according to some analysis.

However, when manufacturers start transporting produce in glass bottles, costs start to rise. A 330ml plastic soft drink bottle contains around 18 grams of material while a glass bottle can weigh between 190g and 250g. Transporting drinks in the heavier containers requires 40% more energy, producing more polluting carbon dioxide as they do and increasing transport costs by up to five times per bottle.

“In many cases plastics are actually better for the environment than the alternatives,” explains Selke. “It is surprising until you look closely at it.”

A report by the American Chemistry Council and environmental accounting firm Trucost estimates that the environmental costs – which places a value on dealing with the pollution generated by a product – would be five times higher if the soft drinks industry used alternative packaging like glass, tin or aluminium instead of plastic. As governments seek to penalise polluting companies with carbon taxes and levies, these costs may be passed onto consumers.

“Food costs are going to increase – there can be no doubt about that,” says Dick Searle, chief executive of the British Packaging Federation, which represents the industry in the UK. Using glass milk bottles instead of plastic, for example, can lead to additional costs for producers.

But does this mean the costs will be passed back to shoppers?

Iceland, a British supermarket that pledged to remove plastics from its packaging by , is already switching its ready meals from black plastic trays to ones made from paper and plans to use other packaging materials like glass and cellulose, which is made from wood.

“Making this change is going to cost money,” warns Richard Walker, the chain’s managing director. “But we are determined that our customers will not have to foot the bill.”

There are some, however, who warn that abandoning plastic after nearly 70 years of using it to package our food could have other far more costly, unintended consequences.

What may at first appear to be a wasteful plastic bag wrapped around your cucumber, for example, is actually a sophisticated tool for increasing the shelf-life of your food. Years of research have allowed plastics to push the time food lasts for from days to weeks.

“I think people underestimate the benefits of plastics in reducing food waste,” says Anthony Ryan, professor of chemistry and director of The Grantham Centre for Sustainable Futures at the University of Sheffield.

The shrink wrap used on cucumbers for instance, can more than double the length of time the vegetable can last, allowing it to be kept for up to 15 days in the fridge and cutting food waste in half. An unwrapped cucumber would last just two days at room temperature and 9 days if refrigerated.

With competitive price and timely delivery, Flytoo sincerely hope to be your supplier and partner.

A meaty problem

Beef bought in polystyrene foam trays covered with plastic film will generally last between three and seven days. However if it is vacuum-packed in multilayer plastic, it can be kept for up to 45 days without spoiling. Environmental accounting firm Trucost estimate that vacuum-packing sirloin steak can cut food waste almost in half compared to conventional plastic.

Much of the food we now buy in supermarkets comes tightly wrapped in sealed plastic films and protective trays. This keeps fresh meat in an oxygen-free atmosphere, helping to prevent it from spoiling. Delicate fruit and vegetables are also kept safe from bumps that can degrade them, meaning they’re more likely to be sold. Putting grapes in their own individual plastic boxes has been found to cut food waste by 75%.

Pinch and zoom on mobile to expand.

Plastic wrapping can also keep fruit and vegetables in their own little microclimates – known in the industry as modified atmosphere packaging – which can help to prevent them from ripening too quicky. Putting sweet peppers into a bag with a modified atmosphere can extend their lifespan from four days to 20, according to the Flexible Packaging Association. Extending the shelf life of food can greatly reduce the cost of food waste to supermarkets. Extending the shelf life of produce by just one day would save shoppers in the UK up to £500 million ($661m), according to anti-waste charity Wrap.

The global cost of food waste is already estimated to be almost $1 trillion a year, which is largely borne by manufacturers and retailers. While some believe that single-use plastic packaging has actually led to an increase in the amount of food we throw away by encouraging a culture of disposability, many in the plastics industry argue that without plastic packaging, the cost of food waste could rise.

Pinch and zoom on mobile to expand.

Smart thinking

In this light, it might not make sense to ban plastics altogether but instead make plastics better.

“Rather than going back, it is perhaps more useful to look at innovation,” says Eliot Whittington. “There are more and more companies that are reinventing plastics with additives that help them break down or making plastics that are biodegradable.”

Whittington points to the growing bioplastics industry, which uses starch or protein from plants like sugarcane to generate the basic hydrocarbon materials needed to create plastics. Some of these bioplastics are not biodegradable at all, but others – like polylactic acid (PLA) – can break down over time and some are compostable, meaning they disintegrate entirely rather than merely crumbling into smaller “microplastics”.

One company that has already shifted to bioplastic is British skincare company Bulldog. It has swapped its traditional plastic tubes for polyethylene made from sugarcane.

The new tubes are more expensive but “we still think it is the right thing to do,” says Simon Duffy, the company’s founder.

Another bioplastics leader is Coca-Cola, which two years ago launched the PlantBottle, a PET partially made with Brazilian sugarcane. It too has found that producing bottles from plants comes at a premium, although it wouldn’t share with BBC Capital what this cost was.

Looking at a few examples, however, it becomes apparent just how much more expensive bioplastics can be.

A burger box made from sugarcane for instance, is almost twice as expensive as one made from polystyrene. A biodegradable takeaway fork made from plant starch costs 3.5 times more than a basic white plastic one.

Neither Bulldog or Coca-Cola are using bioplastics that can be considered biodegradable or compostable, instead encouraging consumers to recycle their bioplastics. And, in fact, there is some resistance to the widespread use of biodegradable materials.

“Bioplastics like PLA are huge contaminate for traditional recycling,” says Dick Searle.

Surprisingly, due to rising oil prices, recycled plastic is actually cheaper to use than fresh, virgin plastic made from oil. A tonne of virgin PET costs around £1,000 while clear recycled PET costs just £158 per tonne.

Contamination of PET plastic with PLA, however, can leave the resulting bottle weaker and unfit for use, meaning the whole batch will have to be discarded. As manufacturers try to reduce their plastic footprint by using greener, biodegradable plastics, the risk of mixing with conventional plastics will only increase, potentially driving up the cost of recycled materials.

“Introducing these innovative products in a system that is used to more traditional waste stream is difficult economically,” says Whittington.

“In modern meat or soft fruit packaging you might have several thin layers to give it strength, to stop gas permeability and to act as an adhesive,” he explains. “You could get all of these properties from a single thicker piece of polyethylene. Then you would have a reduced set of materials, which would make separating and recycling this stuff easier.”

He believes that making plastics more durable could help solve the current waste problem that is blighting our planet. Rather than abolishing plastics altogether, he proposes reusing the packaging we currently throw away.

Already deposit and reuse schemes like this – where plastic bottles are returned in exchange for a cash deposit and then are refilled – are in use in Finland, Germany, Denmark and parts of Australia.

According to research by the European Commission, however, reuse and refill schemes like this can work out to be up to five times more expensive than using packaging once and then throwing it away. But the World Economic Forum found innovative reuse and refill measures could actually reduce packaging costs by at least $8 billion a year,savings that could potentially be passed onto consumers.

And as many countries seek to introduce new laws that will put new levies on plastic bags and ban certain types of single use packaging, refillable and reusable options may become more attractive.

For Claire Waluda, whose team is monitoring the levels of plastic waste in South Georgia, the price of making these changes is one worth paying.

“We are seeing wandering albatross parents feeding plastic to their chicks,” she says. “Anything that can reduce the amount of plastic debris in the environment is a step in the right direction.”

--

Facebook page or message us on Twitter.

If you liked this story, sign up for the weekly bbc.com features newsletter called "If You Only Read 6 Things This Week". A handpicked selection of stories from BBC Future, Culture, Capital and Travel, delivered to your inbox every Friday.

For more Sport Plastic Productsinformation, please contact us. We will provide professional answers.