Despite extensive sorting, packaging waste often contains a mixture of different materials that make high-quality recycling difficult, especially in the case of flexible packaging. This is partly due to the widespread use of multi-layer laminates and packaging consisting of different inseparably combined materials. To improve the post-consumer recyclate quality and develop optimised recycling processes, it is important to generate a comprehensive understanding of the composition of the sorted packaging waste streams. Therefore, in this study, polyolefin sorting fractions for flexible packaging waste from three European countries are analysed in detail. By selective extraction of the different plastics, their mass fractions in the waste streams are determined. This shows that the PE-rich sorting fractions for flexible packaging are made up of 85–90% of PE, but also contain a certain proportion of foreign materials. A detailed analysis of the layer structures of various types of packaging also provides information on the prevalence of multi-layer packaging and the polymer and non-polymer materials used therein. This shows that particularly in food packaging, with 63–84% of multi-layer and 50–70% of multi-material packaging, a high proportion of foreign materials is used and introduced into the sorting fractions. These insights provide a valuable contribution to the development of recyclable packaging, potential sorting streams and recycling processes, especially with regard to the challenges of the closed-loop recycling of food packaging.

Whether plastic packaging waste is disposed of in different bins (source separation, S) or in a single bin (post source separation, P) is generally assumed to impact the waste stream's quality. To elucidate this question, we evaluated the quality of LDPE, HDPE, and PP plastic waste from both separation systems (S and P) through a concise analytical strategy. The materials received similar treatment after collection (e.g., washing, NIR-sorting). A multivariate approach to ATR-FTIR spectroscopy was developed to assess their material composition and the effect of washing. Results were complemented by TGA, DSC, and py-GC/MS analysis. The material performance was investigated by a lab-scale extrusion and granulation, followed by an assessment of the mechanical properties and the melt volume rate. Our study reveals the HDPE materials to be of good quality, regardless of their source. For LDPE and PP, the P-materials are fractionally more contaminated after washing. Both PP-materials display poor material performance with highly fluctuating elongations-at-break (between 30% and 380%). S-LDPE was found to contain more polymeric impurities than P-LDPE. We conclude that the quality depends strongly on the material type and on the treatment after collection (washing, sorting). The multivariate approach to FTIR data evaluation we propose aims at simplifying the quality evaluation of polyolefin waste plastics and may serve as a basis for future work in this field.

Yogurt is a diverse dairy product category. It is available in different packaging designs made of different materials. To identify potential for improvement for these packagings, a better understanding about used materials and packaging efficiencies is necessary. For this study, 150 dairy products and some yogurt relevant desserts were bought from various supermarkets, street markets and discounters in the Munich region (Germany) in spring 2022. Commercial types of packaging are cups, buckets, pouches, bottles, glass packagings and bricks. The filling ratio of most packagings is above 70%, the rest of the volume is headspace. Poly(1-methylethylene) (PP) and poly(1-phenylethene) (PS) dominate as main materials for the different types of packaging. For bottle packagings, poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET) and polyethene high-density (PE-HD) are used. Interestingly, poly(lactic acid) (PLA) is not found. Closures (caps) are responsible for 5 to 30% of the total packaging weight. Typical filling efficiencies are 20 to 40 g food product packaged in one gram of packaging material. For glass packagings, the values are 1.5 to 2 g food product packaged in one gram of packaging material. Therefore, plastic packaging results in an at least ten-times lower packaging use per unit of food, at single use packagings. With increasing product weights, we observe a tendency towards higher packaging efficiencies. By using paper/carton wrapping at cups, plastic use is reduced for the whole packaging.

Plastic packaging represents a large proportion of the plastic consumption throughout the world. The negative environmental impact associated with plastic packaging waste can be in part abated by recycling plastics, and increasing numbers of regulatory frameworks are being adopted towards this goal. Despite recent advances in modern recycling technologies, the production of high-quality polyolefin recyclates remains a challenge. Among other functional requirements, odor plays a crucial role in the acceptance of recycled packaging. This presents a challenge, as odor contamination in plastic packaging waste can stem from diverse sources, such as spoilage processes, and strongly depends on the quality of the post-consumer input material. The present study addressed this issue by exploring potential odor abatement of malodors in packaging waste through the use of probiotic bacteria. Specifically, probiotics were added to a mixed post-consumer plastic packaging waste fraction, which was subsequently evaluated using human sensory and gas chromatography–olfactometric analyses. A comparison of treated with untreated plastic waste fractions revealed significant sensory differences. Further structural elucidation of the causative odorants confirmed a reduction in malodorous microbial metabolites, although complete odor removal was not achieved. However, this environmentally friendly approach may represent an essential step towards overcoming the odor burden in post-consumer plastic packaging recyclates.

Fill product residues in packagings are equivalent to product losses. They are washed out after sorting and before commencing recycling processes. Not much data have been published about how much fill product is still present in packagings dedicated for recycling. Results are often from laboratory trials. Therefore, several hundred packagings from a sorting plant of a dual system in Germany were analysed to determine the amount of fill product residues. Approximately 10 wt. % of highly viscous fill products in tubes were lost as residue. In the case of packagings that were easy to empty, such as cups, and in the case of low-viscosity fill products, such as water, less than 1 wt. % of the fill products remained in the packagings. The mean amount of residue in relation to clean packaging was 0.9 g residue in 1 g of packaging material (without residue) in tubes and 0.07 g in PET bottles. These values were significantly lower for low-viscosity fill products compared to high-viscosity fill products, as expected.