“Green” Beauty Packaging Guide for Condé Nast

Reusable. Recyclable. Renewable. Compostable.  Degradable.  Sustainable. There are a lot of “green” buzzwords out there. Some have a bigger and better environmental impact than others. Use this guide next time a new “environmentally-friendly” beauty product comes your way to understand how good the claim is really.

Here’s what you should be looking for in this order of importance. We explain why and what follow-up questions to ask below:

1. REDUCE/ELIMINATE

2. REUSE

3. RECYCLABLE

4. MADE WITH RECYCLED CONTENT

5. BIOPLASTIC / PLANT or BIOBASED / RENEWABLE

6. DEGRADABLE

1. REDUCE/ELIMINATE is the first and best step to a more sustainable planet. Why? Eliminating a product altogether, or aspects of a product or package — in that order — cuts use of resources and the need to extract material from the earth.  

What exactly is being reduced — product, packaging, or both? If product, how much is needed to get the same effect as the original? Concentrating formulas to eliminate water or other ingredients is often a plus, as not only does the product shrink in volume, but a little will go a longer way.   Here’s a good test:  if two products (i.e. shampoo and conditioner) of which you’d use 1 oz each per wash are combined into a 2-in-1 product of which you’d use less than 2 oz per wash it’s a win for the planet.  If you’d use more than 2 oz of the 2-in-1 then the 2-in-1 is worse.

If packaging is being reduced, has the reduction compromised recyclability? Brands make packaging out of light, versatile materials all the time and often strive to update designs to use less material. One example is swapping glass for thin, flexible pouches. The idea is that less packaging = less resources and less waste, which holds only if the design doesn’t negatively impact how the package is recycled. So, reduction is great as long as recycling is not impacted (see recycling section).

If non-recyclable parts of a beauty package, like pump tops and snap caps, are eliminated so it can go in the recycling bin, that’s even better, as is eliminating packaging altogether (i.e. a bath fizz sold “naked”).

2. REUSE is the next best thing because the item can be used over and over.

How many times should the package realistically be reused in order to see the benefit?   Rule of thumb is you have a win if it’s less than 25 (best is less than 10), noting if the package needs to be reused an unreasonable number of times before a benefit is seen vs. single-use then the single-use option is better.   

What is the model for reuse or refill, and is it reasonable to ask a consumer to do it? It’s important that the brand makes it convenient to refill and reuse or not enough people will do it.   Ask yourself,  would you do the reuse function the brand is suggesting?   Is it reasonable for your readers to do it?   And can they easily access it?  

There are three ways (or “modalities”) a bottle is typically cleaned and reused (in order of benefit to the environment). The main driver is that at-home cleaning is never as environmentally friendly as large-scale professional cleaning.   On #2 vs. #3 – in #3 there are typically disposable components to enable the concentrate or bulk to get to the consumer (i.e. refill sachet):

1. Prefill (i.e. professional clean and refill by manufacturer).
2. Consumer Cleans and Refills in store (i.e. refill stations in stores)
3. Consumer Cleans and Refills at home (i.e. keep the durable bottle and home and gets concentrate or bulk refill)

Is there a non-reusable part of a reusable product or package? If so, what happens to it? Many products are reusable in part (i.e. the bottle is reusable) but the pump is not. Ask what happens to the non-reusable parts.

3. RECYCLABLE is a positive aspect because it keeps resources in use instead of being thrown away or incinerated. 

Is the item able to be collected and recycled through a local or curbside program, meaning more than 60% of US consumers have access to it? Curbside recyclability is what most consumers understand and is the common definition of recyclable. In fact, in the US, there are laws about it – 60% of people need to have access for an item to be called “recyclable.” 

Not all materials are equally recycled.  For the US below is the hierarchy (best to worst) according to the EPA and other sources (from 2018 data):

1. Aluminum (cans):  67%  (though other aluminum is 16%)
2. Paper (uncoated = no glossy surface or a texture that doesn’t feel like paper):  66%
3. Plastics #1 through #7:
   1. Plastic #2 (HDPE):  29.1%
   2. Plastic #1 (PET):  27.9%
   3. Plastic #4 (LDPE):  6% 
   4. Plastic #5 (PP): unknown / low
   5. Plastic #6 (PS):  unknown / low
   6. Plastic #7(unknown):  0%
   7. Plastic #3 (PVC):  Avoid this material
4. Glass (usually clear):  26% 
5. Cartons:  15%

When the package is a small (less than 2” by 2” by 2”), made from dark colors (i.e. black plastic or green glass), multiple materials together (i.e. metal and plastic laminated together):  when this happens the package, no matter what it’s made from, will likely not be recycled.

If not curbside recyclable, is there a private recycling program via the brand and/or retailer:   In order to encourage participation in private recycling programs, recycling must be easy to do and widely available.  Ask yourself – would you do it?   Also, ask for examples of what the recycled materials are made into.

Can the entire package be put in the recycling bin or private recycling program, or just parts? Of course the entire package is preferred because if it’s just parts, this takes down the consumer convenience and chance of the program being used.

Who says it’s recyclable? A credible organization, or just the brand or package manufacturer? The brand or package manufacturer has a vested interest in conveying recyclability. A third party authority provides credibility to a packaging claim.

4. MADE FROM RECYCLED CONTENT is typically better than something made of “virgin” material.

What percentage of the product or package is made of recycled material? 100% is better than 25%, and much better than 5% – recycled material is often more expensive and challenging to work with than new, so don’t assume a package is majority recycled material.

What type of recycled content is it? Municipally-sourced clear beverage containers, like water/soda bottles, are one of the easiest and most common items to make new packaging from. While using them is important, recycling more challenging materials requires a new process, costs more money, and makes a bigger environmental impact, and therefore deserves recognition.  For example, if a company is using recycled cosmetic packaging to make their package vs. beverage containers it is significantly better.

What is the company’s corporate average for use of recycled content? There is a huge difference between an entire product range or company using PCR material (post-consumer recycled) and just one product line or SKU. Ask how broad the example is within the company.

Can it be widely, easily recycled? Can the item that is made be recycled again?  (see recycling section above).

5. BIOPLASTIC / PLANT or BIOBASED / RENEWABLE (NOT BIODEGRADABLE)  packages are derived from plant (renewable) sources like sugarcane, plant starches, or corn that can be renewed — naturally or through other recurring processes. The idea is to move away from fossil fuels, hence the word “bio.”  This does not include biodegradable (see below).

Ask first if this is biodegradable (if so move to #6 below)?

This section is focused on durable bioplastics, not biodegradable plastics.

Can it be widely, easily recycled?   Some bioplastics are compatible for local curbside recycling (these are great).   However, some are not, and if so these should be avoided.

What percentage of the product or package is made of biomaterial?

A small percentage indicates a technical addition made for the sake of the claim. 

What type of material or bioplastic is it? In theory, an advantage of bioplastic is that what it’s made of is more sustainably sourced than conventional plastic, but two main sources used today are corn and sugarcane, which respectively compete with food crops and contribute to clearing forests in the Amazon.

The best are feedstocks that are already waste and if not used for bioplastics would be wasted (i.e. from a resource standpoint, straw left over from flax production, typically burned off, might be preferred to plants using up agricultural land, water, and resources that could have been put towards feeding people and animals or left as woodlands). 

6. DEGRADABLE simply means something will break down. Everything does, eventually, so what a package breaks down into, and in what time, is key here. 

Is the claim biodegradable, compostable, or oxo-degradable?    OXO-degradable is horrible as it simply means the package is designed to break down into smaller pieces. Basically, it’s on a fast track to turning into microplastic. For this reason, it’s banned in Europe.

Is it industrially compostable (i.e. “biodegradable”) or compostable (i.e. “home compostable”)?   

Industrial compostability is very limited in the US;  specifically only 4% of people in the US have access to industrial composting (of which 90% of industrial composters view compostable plastic as a contaminant to their feedstock, as a result separate it and dispose of it in landfills [where it doesn’t break down] or incinerators).  

Home compostable is preferred because that means the package will easily break down in a backyard pile with the right amount of air, water and sunlight. However, note that since most people don’t actually home compost, the claim is often meaningless.