Rawan Abdelmajid, Mohammed Abdalghafoor

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23730021

Compostable bioplastics are promoted as low-carbon substitutes for fossil food packaging, but their benefit depends on end-of-life infrastructure that many countries lack. This study compares the cradle-to-grave climate impact of rigid clamshells made from PET, PP, PLA and PHA for cold food in Lebanon. There, 57% of municipal waste goes to sanitary landfills and 43% to open dumps, where much of it is burned. A streamlined LCA combines published eco-profiles, Lebanese electricity and waste data, and IPCC end-of-life methods across five scenarios, two biogenic carbon conventions and a 10,000-run Monte Carlo analysis. Under current conditions, PP has the lowest impact (41.2 kg CO₂ eq per 1,000 containers), followed by PET (58.9) and PLA (60.4), while PHA is highest (105.6). PHA’s result is driven by methane from landfills and dumps, which accounts for 45% of its total. Bio-based options outperform fossil ones only under open burning, or when landfilled biogenic carbon is credited as storage, which lowers PLA to 31.6. Ideal composting does not let either bio-based material beat PP. The findings indicate that, in countries with weak waste systems, compostable packaging should follow, not precede, investment in organics collection, composting and landfill gas capture.

life cycle assessment; bioplastics; PLA; PHA; food packaging; end-of-life; open dumping; landfill methane; Lebanon

This study compared PET, PP, PLA and PHA clamshells for cold food in Lebanon, using the country’s actual mix of sanitary landfills, open dumps and open burning. Four conclusions follow. 1.PP is the lowest-carbon option today. At 41.2 kg CO₂ eq per 1,000 containers, PP was lower than every alternative in four of five scenarios, and lower than both bio-based options in all Monte Carlo runs under base-case accounting. 2.PLA offers no climate gain over PET in Lebanon. PLA (60.4) is on a par with PET (58.9) in the base case and higher in most uncertainty runs; it beat PET in only 9% of them, because PLA’s benefit depends on composting routes that do not exist. 3.PHA is the highest emitter where landfill gas is not captured. Methane from landfills and dumps accounts for 45% of PHA’s 105.6 kg CO₂ eq, and PHA stays above PET even with full gas capture. 4.Accounting choices can reverse the ranking. Crediting biogenic carbon stored in landfills lowers PLA to 31.6 kg CO₂ eq, below every other option. Studies and policy claims should therefore state their biogenic carbon convention. For Lebanon, the priority is not material substitution but waste-system reform: closing open dumps with gas capture, separating organics, and recycling PET and PP. Compostable containers should be promoted only after composting infrastructure exists. Until then, lightweight PP, low-carbon electricity for converters and reusable systems offer the most reliable savings. Future work should extend the model to a full multi-impact LCA with primary supplier data, include leakage and microplastic impacts, and model heat-resistant grades for hot food

1.Abd Razak, I.H., Phuang, Z.X., Woon, K.S., Sudesh, K. (2024). Life cycle assessment on global warming and fine particulate matter formation for biological extraction method in polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHA) production: a sustainable alternative. Chemical Engineering Transactions, 113, 397–402. https://doi.org/10.3303/CET24113067 2.Aggarwal, R. (2024). Comparative life cycle assessment of reusable and single use take-away lunch boxes used in student restaurants. Cleaner Environmental Systems, 14, 100223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cesys.2024.100223 3.Allison, A.L., Băitanu, A., Purkiss, D., Lorencatto, F., Michie, S., Miodownik, M. (2024). Enabling desired disposal of compostable plastic packaging: an evaluation of disposal instruction labels. Frontiers in Sustainability, 5, 1376519. https://doi.org/10.3389/frsus.2024.1376519 4.Almadhi, A., Abdelhadi, A., Alyamani, R. (2023). Moving from linear to circular economy in Saudi Arabia: life-cycle assessment on plastic waste management. Sustainability, 15(13), 10450. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310450 5.Borda, F., Conte, R., Ambrogio, G., et al., Gagliardi, F. (2026). Environmental performance of PET and biopolymers: a comparative LCA of end-of-life scenarios. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 142(5), 2599–2613. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-025-17057-7 6.Caspers, J., Süßbauer, E., Coroama, V.C., Finkbeiner, M. (2023). Life cycle assessments of takeaway food and beverage packaging: the role of consumer behavior. Sustainability, 15(5), 4315. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15054315 7.CDR (2024). Final Draft National Integrated Solid Waste Management Strategy of Lebanon, Executive Summary, Rev. 01. Council for Development and Reconstruction / World Bank. cdr.gov.lb 8.Chen, G., Li, J., Sun, Y., Wang, Z., Leeke, G.A., Moretti, C., Cheng, Z., Wang, Y., Li, N., Mu, L., Li, J., Tao, J., Yan, B., Hou, L. (2024). Replacing traditional plastics with biodegradable plastics: impact on carbon emissions. Engineering, 32, 152–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eng.2023.10.002 9.Cruz, R.M.S., Krauter, V., Krauter, S., et al., Varzakas, T. (2022). Bioplastics for food packaging: environmental impact, trends and regulatory aspects. Foods, 11(19), 3087. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11193087 10.de Jong, M., Corona, B., Junginger, M., et al., Shen, L. (2026). From static to dynamic: reviewing the application and potential of dynamic LCA to bio-based systems. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 31(4), 56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-026-02624-1 (complete the author list) 11.DESNZ/DEFRA (2024). Greenhouse gas reporting: conversion factors 2024. UK Government. 12.Ember (2024). Yearly electricity data: Lebanon. Ember, London. 13.Fonseca, A., Ramalho, E., Gouveia, A., Figueiredo, F., Nunes, J. (2023). Life cycle assessment of PLA products: a systematic literature review. Sustainability, 15(16), 12470. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151612470 14.IPCC (2006). 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, Vol. 5: Waste, Chapters 3 and 5. 15.IPCC (2019). 2019 Refinement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines, Vol. 5: Waste, Chapter 5. 16.IPCC (2021). Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis, Working Group I, Chapter 7, Table 7.15. 17.Islam, M.M., Chaudry, S., Thornton, A.W., Haque, N., Lau, D., Bhuiyan, M., Pramanik, B.K. (2025). Environmental footprint of polylactic acid production utilizing cane-sugar and microalgal biomass: an LCA case study. Journal of Cleaner Production, 496, 145132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2025.145132 18.ISO (2006). ISO 14040 and ISO 14044: Environmental management — Life cycle assessment. 19.Jabali, Y., Naghizade, A. (2026). Life cycle assessment of municipal solid waste management in Tripoli, Lebanon: from open dumping to integrated resource recovery. Environments, 13(10), 553. https://doi.org/10.3390/environments13100553 20.Kolstad, J.J., Vink, E.T.H., De Wilde, B., Debeer, L. (2012). Assessment of anaerobic degradation of Ingeo polylactides under accelerated landfill conditions. Polymer Degradation and Stability, 97, 1131–1141. 21.Lee, S., Lee, I., Seo, D., Kim, H., Joo, G., Lee, S., Park, K. (2024). Life cycle assessment of aPHA production. ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering, 12(1), 72–84. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.3c04788 22.Mahadi, Z., Yahya, E.A., Yaacob, M., Mustafa Din, W., Arham, A.F., Hasim, N.A. (2025). Toward national guidelines for biodegradable and compostable bioplastics: a case study in the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Polymers, 17(16), 2165. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym17162165 23.Maragkaki, A., Tsompanidis, C., Velonia, K., Manios, T. (2023a). Pilot-scale anaerobic co-digestion of food waste and polylactic acid. Sustainability, 15(14), 10944. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151410944 24.Maragkaki, A., Malliaros, N.G., Sampathianakis, I., Lolos, T., Tsompanidis, C., Manios, T. (2023b). Evaluation of biodegradability of polylactic acid and compostable bags from food waste under industrial composting. Sustainability, 15(22), 15963. https://doi.org/10.3390/su152215963 25.Montegiove, N., Puglia, D., Pellegrino, R.M., Dominici, F., Calzoni, E., Pezzolla, D. (2026). Anaerobic co-digestion of polylactic acid (PLA) films with organic fraction of municipal solid waste: biodegradation, biogas yields, and metabolomic analysis. Agronomy, 16(14), 1303. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy16141303 26.Morão, A., de Bie, F. (2019). Life cycle impact assessment of polylactic acid (PLA) produced from sugarcane in Thailand. Journal of Polymers and the Environment, 27, 2523–2539. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10924-019-01525-9 27.Pathak, G., Nichter, M., Hardon, A., Moyer, E. (2024). The open burning of plastic wastes is an urgent global health issue. Annals of Global Health, 90(1), 3. https://doi.org/10.5334/aogh.4232 28.Peantham, K., Varabuntoonvit, V. (2024). Sustainable solutions in single-use food containers: a comprehensive life cycle assessment comparing plastic (PP) and its green alternative (PLA coated kraft paper, PLA). Environmental Engineering Research, 29(5), 230729. https://doi.org/10.4491/eer.2023.729 29.Pelliconi, M., Righi, S. (2024). Life cycle assessment applied to polyhydroxyalkanoates production phases: a mini review. XVII Convegno della Rete Italiana LCA (conference proceedings). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11105211 30.Piao, Z., Agyei Boakye, A.A., Yao, Y. (2024). Environmental impacts of biodegradable microplastics. Nature Chemical Engineering, 1, 661–669. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44286-024-00127-0 31.Piao, Z., Yao, Y. (2026). The role of biodegradable plastics in the global plastic future. Nature Reviews Clean Technology, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44359-025-00142-1 32.PlasticsEurope (2014). Eco-profiles and EPDs of the European Plastics Manufacturers: Polypropylene (PP). 33.PlasticsEurope (2017). Eco-profile and EPD: Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET), Bottle Grade. 34.Pscherer, T., Krommes, S. (2025). LCA standards for environmental product assessments in the bioeconomy with a focus on biogenic carbon: a systematic review. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 30(2), 371–393. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-024-02387-7 35.Rebolledo Leiva, R., Ladakis, D., Ioannidou, S.-M., Koutinas, A., Moreira Vilar, M.T., González García, S. (2023). Attributional and consequential life cycle perspectives of second-generation polylactic acid: the benefits of integrating a recycling strategy. Journal of Cleaner Production, 420, 138354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.138354 36.Righi, S., Guerra, R., Vogli, L., Baioli, F. (2020). Polyhydroxybutyrate from sewage sludge: life cycle assessment methodological choices and inventory. Proceedings of the European Biomass Conference and Exhibition, 831–836. 37.Saavedra del Oso, M., Nair, R., Mauricio Iglesias, M., Hospido Quintana, A. (2023). Comparative life cycle analysis of PHA-based consumer items for daily use. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 199, 107242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2023.107242 38.Senila, L., Kovacs, E., Resz, M.-A., Senila, M., Becze, A., Roman, C. (2024). Life cycle assessment (LCA) of bioplastics production from lignocellulosic waste (study case: PLA and PHB). Polymers, 16(23), 3330. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym16233330 39.Sikander, A., Deegener, S., Körner, I. (2024). Decomposition of biodegradable plastic bags for kitchen waste collection in industrial composting. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 8, 1433460. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2024.1433460 40.Sun, S., Yang, S., Qiu, Y., Ding, J., Wang, W., Wu, F., Chen, G.-Q. (2025). Life cycle design of polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHA). National Science Review, 12(12), nwaf517. https://doi.org/10.1093/nsr/nwaf517 41.UNEP (2022). Single-use supermarket food packaging and its alternatives: recommendations from life cycle assessments. United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi. lifecycleinitiative.org 42.UNFCCC CDM (2022). Repository of default values: emission factors for diesel generator systems. 43.Wang, S., Lydon, K.A., White, E.M., Grubbs, J.B., Lipp, E.K., Locklin, J., Jambeck, J.R. (2018). Biodegradation of poly(3-hydroxybutyrate-co-3-hydroxyhexanoate) plastic under anaerobic sludge and aerobic seawater conditions: gas evolution and microbial diversity. Environmental Science & Technology, 52(10), 5700–5709. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.7b06688 44.Wang, X., Firouzkouhi, H., Chow, J.C., Watson, J.G., Ho, S.S.H., Carter, W., De Vos, A.S.M. (2023). Chemically speciated air pollutant emissions from open burning of household solid waste from South Africa. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 23, 15375–15393. https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-15375-2023 45.World Bank (2025). Lebanon Emergency Assistance Project (P509428): Environmental and Social Review Summary, Report ESRSA04037. worldbank.org 46.Yadav, K., Nikalje, G.C. (2024). Comprehensive analysis of bioplastics: life cycle assessment, waste management, biodiversity impact, and sustainable mitigation strategies. PeerJ, 12, e18013. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.18013

Rawan Abdelmajid, Mohammed Abdalghafoor (2026). Are compostable clamshells climate-better where composting does not exist? A streamlined comparative LCA of PET, PP, PLA and PHA food packaging under Lebanon’s end-of-life conditions. International Journal of Research in Engineering Technology, 11(5), 98–113. ISSN: 2455-1341. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23730021