In part one of our Trashtalk series , we talked with Karine van Doorsselaer, a lecturer in ecodesign at UA, about systems thinking and the priorities of the circular economy. But we're definitely not done busting all the myths around recycling. Indeed, in the second part we talk about the business model of the big players, thermal recycling & alternative packaging ways. Let's go!

Can you summarize again why reuse comes above recycling towards climate impact?

I do have to comment on reuse. If we are going to reuse our packaging. Does it make sense that when closing the loop det transport distance is realistic. We are not going to start a collection scenario for packaging if we have to drive hundreds of miles around. That's important to outline, it's not always the solution. We have to look at it situation by situation. It's also true that if we're going to collect that packaging back that's transportation, but if we're going to recycle it you also have transportation.

But the environmental impact is in the washing, cleaning and reconditioning of our reusable packaging. That's often the commentary that reusable packaging gets. However, it is true that companies that clean will recuperate their water as much as possible. Water is also a cost for those companies. They are going to reuse as much water as possible and if there is water, that it is treated.

"We're not going to start a collection scenario if you have to drive hundreds of miles around to do so."

If we make the comparison back to recycling. That is also collection, also transportation. When it comes to plastics, it is shredded, it is also washed. When it comes to paper, also water consumption. That is sometimes forgotten, but there is also a washing process in recycling the materials. We then get a reduction in our value. Because we get granules because with energy we have to convert that back to packaging. Which is an extra process step which again has its environmental impact.

And if you focus that on Dripl? If you are indeed looking at reusing a drinking bottle or glass versus the plastic bottles and aluminum cans, how would you draw up that comparison?

Dripl's big advantage is that consumers come to the unit with their own glass or bottle. That's even better than reusable glass bottles, the beer bottles. Those are collected. Everyone knows it. You go get a container of beer, you consume it and you bring it back to the store. And it follows its route to the cleaning plants. Whereas at Dripl, it's the consumer who comes up with their own reusable packaging. Whereas at Dripl, it's the consumer who comes up with their own reusable packaging.

With Dripl, we enter the market with a solution that would be sustainable. How come big players are not making that move yet?

Of course, it's all for the money. The beauty of Dripl is that you don't sell people water. Because in the end, Coca-cola or Sprite is flavoured water and sugar. And water here with us in the West, water comes from the tap. That's the big advantage, no water is transported. But of course that is the business of the Coca-Cola's of this world. That's their business model.

Prefer a video instead of reading on?

While we're recycling, maybe you could explain more about what happens to our bottle? And is it always the case that a PET bottle becomes a PET bottle?

Of course we have different types of packaging, but let's take the PMD bag for now. We as consumers, the caring conscious consumers are going to throw their empty packaging in the bag and not in nature. Then it is collected and taken to large sorting companies. Those bags are ripped open on big conveyor belts and then they are going to use magnets to first take out all the steel cans. Then they use eddy currents to remove the aluminum cans. Large drums are used to remove small packages and then sensors are used to sort them by type. The different fractions are sorted. These are tied together in large bales and then collected by the recycling companies. The PET bottles are shredded, washed and then new bottles are made. PET is the plastic that can be recycled from bottle to bottle. Polyethylene and polypropylene are more difficult to separate. We recycle them together to make garden furniture, for example. Aluminum and steel are perfectly recyclable. Also without loss of properties.

The beverage cartons are also shredded. The paper is pulped and recycled. But the layers of aluminum and plastic that is burned. Industry likes to say, "We're going to thermal recycle." But so it is bandages. A strategy that has no place in the circular economy.

So thermal recycling is incineration. Suppose we indeed put out our PMD bag. What is the proportion of the PMD bag that gets a new life?

Whew, I don't dare put a number on that. That also depends on material to material. I'm not going to venture into that. In any case, there is still a lot of work to be done when it comes to plastics and even more work when it comes to plasticized paper packaging. Because I hold my heart. We are seeing a transition because of the plastic soup. By the European Commission that has stated that they have a Plastic Strategy. Because of that we are seeing a switch from nice material, plastic that is perfectly recyclable to all kinds of applications of paper coated with plastic.

A great example recently. The Nesquik box has long been mono-material. Perfectly recyclable. Then in certain countries they decided to then make cardboard boxes out of it with a coating of plastic. That is creating perception, those are really not good things that are happening. It's creating awareness. There is no such thing as a bad material, but it is about the correct use of material. Circular packaging means applying the rules of thumb of ecodesign. First system thinking and then life cycle thinking.

Indeed, if we continue about the alternative packaging types that are popping up today, what are the alternatives that you think make sense?

Strategies first anyway. Avoid packaging. Optimal protection of the product and hence there is no single answer to that. It's about optimal protection of the product and depending on that, some packaging will be better than others. What is very important as far as I am concerned is leaching of harmful substances into the product. Which in this case we do deal with food or drink. So in plastics we have presence of small molecules that can leach to the food. Paper is printed so same story. Hence, recycled paper should not come in direct contact with food. Then we look at the materials that are inert. Then we come to glass and stainless steel. Cans, if we take aluminum and steel cans, those are coated with plastic. I have already read papers showing that there can be leaching of harmful substances there as well.

Now no horror, but when it comes to migration. Is it always a question of how many molecules come out of that? People are going to do tests and try to determine where the limit is. How many harmful substances are you allowed to ingest before you get weird diseases? That is fixed, but the problem is that we face numerous chemicals in our daily lives. Not only from packaging, but also from cosmetics, our clothing, the air. We have a lot of harmful chemicals in our environment so if we can avoid it, we better do so.