Tabletop conveyor systems cut packaging line downtime by moving products across a flat, low-friction surface that reduces tipping and jamming, and by using modular sections that are quick to reconfigure or repair.

That answer covers the mechanics, but it does not explain why some tabletop systems solve the problem, and others just move it further down the line. The difference usually shows up in scrap counts and unscheduled stops, not on a spec sheet, which is worth understanding before specifying the next system.

Why Product Handling Matters More Than Conveyor Speed

It is tempting to shop for a tabletop conveyor on belt speed alone, but speed is not what causes most packaging line stoppages. Unstable, delicate, or oddly shaped products, think glass bottles, filled pouches, cartons, or lightweight plastics, are more likely to tip or jam than to simply run too slowly.

A tabletop conveyor with a flat, sanitary top plate and a low-friction surface keeps products upright and moving as a single, controlled flow instead of colliding or backing up. That single change removes a large share of the manual clearing and restart cycles that eat into uptime on food, beverage, and pharmaceutical lines.

The cost of getting this wrong is not limited to the stopped line. A tipped bottle or a crushed carton often means scrapped product, a mislabeled unit that has to be pulled downstream, or, in a regulated environment, a quality hold while the team documents what happened. Those secondary costs add up faster than the minutes on the stoppage report suggest, which is why handling stability tends to matter more than raw throughput numbers when a line keeps underperforming.

Where Tabletop Conveyors Fit Into a Packaging Line

Tabletop conveyors rarely operate alone. They sit between filling, capping, labeling, casing, and bundling or banding equipment, and they are often the piece that has to accommodate a 90-degree or 180-degree transfer, merge two lines into one, or briefly buffer product without disturbing it.

Modular tabletop sections make that kind of layout change practical. Instead of redesigning an entire line to add a station or reroute product flow, a manufacturer can add, swap, or reposition sections to match the new configuration. That flexibility matters most during a product launch, a line speed increase, or a shift to a new package format, when the line cannot afford weeks of downtime for a rebuild.

It also matters when a line has to run more than one product. A facility switching between bottle sizes, carton formats, or pouch weights on the same shift needs a conveyor that adjusts with minimal changeover time. A rigid, purpose-built conveyor forces a choice between a slow manual changeover and a permanent compromise that runs every product a little worse than it should. A modular tabletop system avoids that trade-off by letting guide rails, transfer points, and section lengths adjust to the product actually running that day.

That bundling or banding step deserves the same attention as the conveyor feeding it, since a bottleneck there erases whatever time was gained upstream. For manufacturers weighing that piece of equipment, a look at how Felins banding machines handle high-volume banding is a useful reference point, since conveying and banding tend to work best when they are planned together rather than sourced as an afterthought.

What to Look For in a Tabletop Conveyor System

Not every tabletop conveyor is built for the same environment, and the features that matter most rarely show up until the line has been running for a few months. A few features separate a system that holds up on a demanding line from one that turns into the next maintenance headache:

• Sanitary, stainless steel construction that meets FDA and USDA expectations for food, beverage, and pharmaceutical environments
• Tool-free access for cleaning and maintenance, so a changeover or wash-down does not turn into an extended stop
• Zero-pressure or low-backpressure transport that protects delicate or labeled products from scuffing and damage
• Modular design that supports quick reconfiguration as products, speeds, or layouts change

Well-built tabletop conveyor systems are designed around exactly these requirements, pairing sanitary construction with configurations built for fast layout changes rather than one fixed setup. The point is not to collect every feature on the list, but to weigh which ones actually apply to the product, the plant’s sanitation standard, and how often the line is expected to change.

How a Line Analysis Prevents Costly Guesswork

Specifying a tabletop conveyor from a catalog is a gamble if nobody has tested how the actual product behaves on that surface. Product weight, center of gravity, container material, and even how full a container is at transfer speed all affect whether a given conveyor design will run clean or cause problems at speed.

This is why established conveyor and accumulation manufacturers offer free line analysis and in-house product testing before a system ships. That step catches handling issues on a test line instead of on the production floor, where a bad fit turns into scrapped product and an emergency service call. It also gives an engineering team a chance to catch a transfer point or guide rail setting that looks fine on paper but causes a product to tip at full speed, long before that mistake shows up as a line stoppage.

Skipping that step to save a few weeks of lead time is one of the more common ways a new conveyor ends up under-performing from day one. A short validation run against real product is a small investment compared to the cost of retrofitting a line that is already installed and running behind target.

Where to Start if Downtime Keeps Coming Back

If a packaging line is losing time to jams, tipped product, or awkward transfers, the tabletop conveyor is one of the first places to look, not the last. Before specifying a replacement, pull the stoppage data for the last few months and see how much of it traces back to product handling rather than upstream or downstream equipment. Then request a line analysis so the recommendation is based on how your actual product behaves rather than a generic spec sheet.

The post How Do Tabletop Conveyor Systems Reduce Downtime on Packaging Lines? first appeared on Packaging World Insights.

The joint initiative unites Amcor’s specialized packaging development and manufacturing infrastructure with Dow’s polyethylene product portfolio, materials science research, and carbon footprint tracking capabilities. Together, the organizations intend to facilitate the rollout and scaling of alternative packaging formats that satisfy essential performance, quality, and operational criteria while aiding corporate progress toward Scope 3 emissions targets.

Commercial Practicality and Value Chain Collaboration

Under the framework of the agreement, the participating companies will evaluate potential packaging applications to verify both technical viability and commercial scalability. The operational strategy emphasizes engaging additional segments of the value chain during early development stages, alongside delivering comprehensive greenhouse gas metrics to inform customer procurement and operational choices.

Keith Cleason, president of Dow’s packaging and specialty plastics business, commented on the operational focus of the initiative:

“Together with Amcor, we are testing a new commercial model through market-based mechanisms to reduce adoption risk, create clearer demand signals and help accelerate commercialisation of low-carbon packaging solutions across the value chain. We are making it easier for brands and retailers to evaluate and integrate low-carbon packaging options that support both business growth and sustainability objectives.”

Implementation of the Carbon Footprint Ledger System

The core operating mechanism driving the collaboration is the carbon footprint ledger (CFL) methodology. Developed on established industry conventions for mass balance within greenhouse gas accounting systems, the framework is structured to verify emissions reductions accurately.

Data Assurance and Independent Standards

The carbon footprint ledger delivers independently assured product-level emissions data benchmarked against globally recognized reporting protocols, including ISO 14067 and the Greenhouse Gas Protocol Product Standard. By applying these standards in combination with physical manufacturing expertise, the partners aim to provide commercial clients with transparent environmental impact metrics, enabling brands to assess and contrast lower-carbon packaging against conventional formats.

David Clark, chief sustainability officer at Amcor, highlighted the operational implementation for consumer brands:

“Bringing low-carbon polyethylene to market in packaging that meets the same technical and design standards is one of the simplest ways to help shrink a product’s carbon footprint. Because it’s truly a drop-in solution for brands, we see this collaboration as an exciting opportunity for them to translate climate commitments into action.”

The post Amcor and Dow Form Strategic Alliance to Advance Lower-Carbon Packaging first appeared on Packaging World Insights.

Data from a 2025 Innova Market Insights survey indicates that 42% of global consumers selected brands with refillable options last year, while 25% specifically chose product alternatives packaged in refillable formats. Amcor’s portfolio now includes refillable containers in multiple sizes that can be paired with various dispensers and closures, such as the customizable Mocha bottle. For the refill portion of the cycle, the company offers AmPrima recycle-ready spouted stand-up pouches, ranging in size from 30ml to two liters. These refillable packaging solutions can also integrate post-consumer recycled (PCR) material to further support sustainability objectives.

Lara Alemany, product line director at Amcor Global Rigid Packaging Solutions, emphasized that the development focus remains on combining aesthetics with functionality to uphold brand image. According to Alemany, high-quality refill solutions also assist companies in complying with the requirements of the European Union’s Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR). Furthermore, the availability of these formats helps reinforce consumer perceptions regarding value for money when purchasing refillable systems.

The post Amcor Expands Portfolio of Refillable and Refill Packaging Solutions first appeared on Packaging World Insights.

This regulatory detail is particularly relevant for packaging formats where consumers peel back only a portion of the foil while the remainder stays connected to the container. Packaging designers have sought such certainty to avoid unnecessary redesigns of systems that already retain the sealing component during use. The functional interpretation provided by the EU focuses on the practical behavior of the packaging rather than the mere existence of a closure. Consequently, converters and brand owners can determine whether a specific foil seal necessitates a redesign or if it can continue to be utilized without modification under existing tethered lid requirements.

While the exclusion provides relief from specific tethered closure provisions, aluminium foil packaging remains subject to broader European Union obligations. Manufacturers must continue to adhere to requirements regarding recyclability, material composition, minimization, and labeling under the Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR) and related technical standards. Recent European sortability standards also continue to distinguish between sealed foil that remains attached and aluminium layers integrated into complex structures. As implementation of these rules progresses, technical distinctions regarding how a pack is opened and whether components remain attached will play a critical role in packaging design and compliance documentation.

The post EU Clarifies Tethered Lid Requirements for Sealed Aluminium Foil Packaging first appeared on Packaging World Insights.

The new 0.33-litre container is made from transparent PET and does not require any additional internal coatings. Designed to integrate seamlessly into existing infrastructure, it can be run on standard PET filling lines, making the transition straightforward for beverage producers already operating within established bottling setups.

A Resealable, Recyclable Format Built for the Existing Supply Chain

One of the most notable features of this recyclable PET can is its tethered cap closure — a design element that ALPLA describes as new to the can category. The closure is engineered to help protect contents from dirt and insects, which may also ease sorting and washing requirements during the recycling process.

The container is fully recyclable and is designed to remain within the existing bottle-to-bottle recycling stream. It can also be produced using recycled PET, commonly referred to as rPET, further supporting circular economy objectives in sustainable beverage packaging.

Recycling performance is additionally supported by CCL Label’s EcoFloat sleeve, which is manufactured from low-density polyolefin (PO). This label material is specifically designed to separate from PET flakes during recycling processing, ensuring the integrity of the recycled output is not compromised.

Full-Body Shrink Sleeve with 360° Print Area

The outer shrink sleeve covers the entire surface of the pack, offering a full 360-degree print area. Available in silver and mirror-style finishes, the sleeve provides strong visual differentiation on shelf. ALPLA noted that the sleeve is applied after filling, giving producers greater flexibility in adapting design and branding at a later stage of production without disrupting the filling process.

Timing Aligned with EU Packaging Regulations

The launch comes in the wake of the European Union’s ban on bisphenol-containing food packaging, particularly in disposable formats, which came into effect in July. This regulatory context makes the introduction of the recyclable PET can timely for manufacturers seeking compliant and future-ready sustainable beverage packaging options.

ALPLA’s food and beverage global sales director, Daniel Lehner, commented: “A beverage can may just as well be made of plastic. Our PET can relies on the well-known material properties of transparent PET, which have proven themselves on the market, strengthens the supply chain and can highlight special products as a novelty.”

He added: “We stand for safe and modern packaging solutions worldwide. The PET can combines these features and enables our customers to have a seamless and long-term supply.”

ALPLA Expands Global Manufacturing Footprint

Separately, in March, ALPLA commenced operations at a new manufacturing facility in Calamba City in the Philippines, establishing its first base plant in the country — reflecting the company’s continued focus on expanding its global production presence.

With the introduction of the recyclable PET can, ALPLA and CCL Label are offering the beverage industry a packaging solution that combines material familiarity, design flexibility, supply chain compatibility, and recyclability within a single format.

The post ALPLA and CCL Label Launch Stackable PET Can as a Sustainable Alternative to Aluminium first appeared on Packaging World Insights.

The demonstration test centred on an alkaline depolymerization technology that rapidly breaks down PET materials. JSW’s Twin Screw Extruder TEX αⅢ series — a co-rotating processing system designed for advanced polymer compounding, reactive extrusion, and recycling — was central to the test, with Kirin having developed the underlying alkaline depolymerization technology that the extruder facilitated.

Conventional PET chemical recycling approaches have long been held back by the need for high temperatures and extended reaction times, both of which drive up energy consumption and operational costs. The solution developed by Kirin and JSW directly addresses these challenges.

Rather than relying solely on heat to accelerate the chemical reaction, the technology also applies mechanical forces — including strong mixing and friction generated by the machinery itself. This combined approach allows the depolymerization reaction to proceed in a shorter time with less energy, which the companies say helps reduce environmental impact.

The partners established operating conditions that allow stable PET depolymerization at a throughput of 250 kg/h or greater. According to Kirin and JSW, the results of the demonstration test provided “valuable knowledge” on equipment specifications and operating conditions for the design of commercial-scale processes, while establishing a foundation for commercialization.

As a major beverage producer, Kirin acknowledges that the use of PET bottles continues to increase globally, making resource circularity ever more vital. The company notes that mechanical recycling currently remains the dominant method for PET bottle recycling, but argues it has limitations.

“Chemical recycling depolymerizes and purifies PET feedstocks, creating the potential to recycle a broader range of PET materials into high-quality PET, not limited to beverage bottles,” Kirin states. “However, conventional technologies have faced challenges related to energy efficiency and cost due to the need for high-temperature and long-duration reaction conditions.”

The company adds that the solution it developed alongside JSW is also low-energy and highly efficient, presenting it as a more viable pathway toward scalable PET chemical recycling.

Kirin and JSW have confirmed plans to continue developing their technology by working toward an integrated recycling process that covers the entire value chain — from PET collection and depolymerization through to resource recovery. The companies will also evaluate whether their solution is suitable for a wide range of PET packaging feedstocks, including non-food contact material grade PET materials.

Through collaborations with other corporations, local governments, research institutions, and other partners, Kirin and JSW intend to promote the development, practical implementation, and eventual commercialization of the technology.

Kirin and JSW plan to present more detailed results of the demonstration test at the 57th Autumn Meeting of the Society of Chemical Engineers in Japan later this month. The presentation is expected to provide further insight into the technical parameters and operating conditions established during testing.

The post Kirin and JSW Achieve 95% PET Depolymerization in Chemical Recycling Breakthrough first appeared on Packaging World Insights.

At the heart of the project is SleeveFlex Ultra Stretch, Coveris’ elastic stretch sleeve engineered from mono-material LDPE film. This mono-material sleeve is compatible with both PET bottles and HDPE containers, offering versatility across packaging formats. On PET, the sleeve’s floatable design supports bottle-to-bottle recycling, while on HDPE, it creates a fully mono-material PE packaging solution — a notable advancement in sustainable packaging design.

Significant Material and Energy Savings Over Conventional Shrink Sleeves

Compared with conventional shrink sleeves, Coveris states that SleeveFlex Ultra Stretch uses approximately 30% less material. The solution also eliminates the need for a steam tunnel during application, saving around 150 kilograms of steam per hour. Beyond energy efficiency, the flexible sleeve removes the requirement for temperature-controlled transport and special storage conditions, further streamlining the supply chain for Dr. Beckmann.

To support Dr. Beckmann’s expansion into the liquid fabric softener category, Coveris acted as a full-service packaging partner throughout the entire project. The collaboration covered technology selection, new machinery integration, and production line commissioning. The end-to-end support enabled Dr. Beckmann to bring the packaging solution from initial concept to commercial launch within six months — a timeline that reflects the efficiency of both the technology and the partnership.

The newly designed bottle required a packaging format that met Dr. Beckmann’s dual requirements of premium visual presentation and meaningful sustainability credentials, both of which were addressed through the SleeveFlex Ultra Stretch mono-material sleeve.

The post Coveris Develops Mono-Material Sleeve for Liquid Fabric Softener Launch in France first appeared on Packaging World Insights.

The mass balance system is essentially a structured accounting method. It tracks the amount of qualifying recycled material entering a production process, even when that material is blended with virgin, or newly made, plastic during manufacturing. Because chemical recycling fundamentally alters the chemical structure of plastic waste — unlike mechanical recycling, which physically processes waste plastic without changing its chemical makeup — the recycled and virgin materials can become physically indistinguishable once mixed. Mass balance addresses this by recording inputs and allowing an equivalent amount of recycled content to be attributed to products leaving the system, under defined rules.

From 1 April 2027, this attributed content will be eligible to count towards the 30% recycled-content threshold under the Plastic Packaging Tax. Businesses choosing to use chemically recycled plastic will only be able to claim its recycled status for PPT purposes if they operate within this mass balance framework. Without it, HMRC will treat the material as non-recycled for tax purposes.

The rules apply to packaging components manufactured in the UK using chemically recycled plastic, as well as finished packaging components imported into the UK that were produced using such material. Businesses using only mechanically recycled plastic will continue under the existing accounting system.

HMRC published its preparation guidance and minimum certification requirements on 28 August 2026, with more detailed guidance expected in early 2027.

Certification Requirements for the Supply Chain

A central requirement of the mass balance system is independent, third-party certification. Businesses across the relevant supply chain — from the chemical recycling stage through to the completion of the plastic packaging component — must be certified under a scheme that meets HMRC’s minimum requirements. Depending on the supply chain structure, this could include chemical recyclers, petrochemical operations, polymer producers, and packaging manufacturers or converters.

Businesses in the same supply chain are not required to use the same certification scheme, provided each scheme meets HMRC’s minimum standards. One notable exception applies to importers: a business that only imports finished plastic packaging produced using mass balance does not itself need to hold certification. However, it must ensure the relevant supply chain is certified and must retain supporting evidence from its supplier.

HMRC will not directly regulate certification schemes or the organisations that carry them out. Instead, certification schemes must meet HMRC’s published minimum requirements for their certificates to be accepted as PPT evidence. From 1 April 2027, certification schemes will also be required to operate electronic registers, enabling businesses to verify certification details and validity dates.

Supply-Chain Records and Attribution Declarations

Certification alone is not sufficient. Businesses must also maintain documentary evidence showing how attributed chemically recycled material moves through the supply chain. When material changes hands between businesses, the supplier must provide both a valid certificate and an attribution declaration — a formal document recording how much chemically recycled content has been assigned to a specific delivery or batch.

Each new delivery or batch containing attributed chemically recycled content requires a new attribution declaration. The declaration must include the quantity of recycled material covered, a unique batch number, the dispatch date, and the identities of both the supplier and the recipient.

Receiving businesses are responsible for verifying that their suppliers are properly certified and that all declarations are complete and valid. If a declaration is incomplete, the receiving business will not be able to use the attributed content to claim a PPT exemption. For packaging manufacturers and converters, this places significant weight on the quality of supplier records throughout the supply chain, not just on internal calculations made at the point of final production.

All certificates, attribution declarations, and relevant mass balance records must be retained for six years. HMRC has stated that businesses unable to produce the required evidence during a compliance check may be liable to pay PPT on packaging previously reported as exempt. Penalties may also apply where chemically recycled material has been accounted for without satisfying the minimum requirements.

Site-Level Accounting and Operational Demands

The mass balance system requires detailed, site-specific record-keeping. Businesses must operate on three-month accounting periods and cannot assign more recycled content to products than their records confirm is available. The recycled-material account cannot fall below zero at any point — meaning a business cannot attribute 100 tonnes of recycled content if only 80 tonnes are recorded as available.

These accounting periods run continuously from the date of certification and do not need to align with a business’s quarterly PPT accounting periods. Production losses must also be factored in. If 100 tonnes of qualifying material enters a process but 10 tonnes are lost during manufacturing, only 90 tonnes can be treated as available for attribution to products. Businesses must therefore apply site-specific conversion factors based on their own operational data.

More complex rules govern refineries and petrochemical plants that produce multiple outputs from the same process, particularly where some outputs are directed to fuel use rather than plastic production. For packaging businesses, meeting these requirements will mean internal systems must reconcile recycled and virgin materials entering a site, outgoing products, stock levels, production data, and the volume of recycled content assigned to different outputs.

Current PPT Framework and the April 2027 Changes

The Plastic Packaging Tax applies to finished plastic packaging components that contain less than 30% recycled plastic. The tax rate stands at £228.82 per tonne from 1 April 2026. Businesses are generally required to register for PPT if they manufacture or import 10 tonnes or more of finished plastic packaging components within the relevant 12-month period.

The April 2027 change creates a defined route for qualifying chemically recycled material to count towards the 30% recycled-content threshold. For packaging producers and importers, this means commercial decisions will extend beyond sourcing chemically recycled plastic. They will also need to confirm that the material has passed through a properly certified supply chain and that the necessary documentation is in place to support its recycled status for PPT.

Pre-Consumer Plastic Waste: A Parallel Change

A further change to PPT takes effect on the same date. From 1 April 2027, pre-consumer plastic waste will no longer qualify as recycled plastic for PPT purposes. Pre-consumer waste is plastic generated during manufacturing before a product reaches consumers, whereas post-consumer waste originates from plastic products after consumer use. Reprocessed post-consumer plastic waste will continue to qualify as recycled content for PPT.

The government announced this change alongside the mass balance reform as part of a broader package of PPT adjustments. For packaging businesses, the combination of these two changes means that existing recycled-content calculations and supplier evidence should be reviewed ahead of April 2027.

The mass balance framework gives chemically recycled plastic a structured and auditable route to contribute towards PPT recycled-content calculations, even in cases where recycled and virgin materials become physically indistinguishable during production. Chemical recycling can work alongside mechanical recycling by processing plastic waste that may be technically difficult or economically unviable to recycle mechanically.

The government’s approach does not replace mechanical recycling but instead establishes a separate accounting route for qualifying chemically recycled material, supported by certification requirements and supply-chain documentation. For the packaging sector, the rules define the conditions under which chemically recycled material can count towards the PPT threshold, which may influence decisions about material sourcing and supplier selection as businesses assess their routes to meeting the 30% requirement.

The 1 April 2027 implementation date provides packaging businesses with time to put the necessary systems in place. Companies considering using mass balance should begin by mapping their chemically recycled material supply chains and identifying which businesses within those chains will need to hold certification.

Businesses should establish whether their suppliers intend to use certification schemes that meet HMRC’s requirements and put in place processes for receiving, checking, and storing certificates and attribution declarations. Internal systems may also need to be updated to record material movements, supplier certification status, attribution declarations, production data, and the running balance of recycled material available for assignment to products. These records must be maintained in a retrievable format for the required six-year period.

Importers of finished packaging should establish procedures for verifying supplier certification and reviewing attribution declarations, even where they are not themselves required to hold certification. HMRC has confirmed that more detailed operational guidance will be published in early 2027. The August 2026 documents provide a preparatory framework, with further specifics on system operation still to follow.

For packaging manufacturers, converters, and importers, the changes connect recognition of chemically recycled plastic under the Plastic Packaging Tax to a documented chain of evidence running from raw recycled material through processing, manufacturing, and on to the finished packaging component. From April 2027, participation in this system remains a choice — but businesses that choose it will need to demonstrate, through certification, accounting records, and supply-chain documentation, how much chemically recycled material they are entitled to count.

The post UK Plastic Packaging Tax: New Mass Balance Rules for Chemically Recycled Plastic from April 2027 first appeared on Packaging World Insights.

Addressing the Plastic Problem in Paper Packaging

Sneh Bangar, Assistant Professor of Packaging Science in RIT’s College of Engineering Technology (CET), is leading the effort to develop a new application for modified starch-based biopolymers that can act as a protective barrier for paper-based packaging. Paper-based packaging is among the most widely used materials for food products — milk cartons being a common example — where synthetic laminates are typically applied to the surface to strengthen the base material and extend product shelf life.

The critical challenge with these conventional laminates, as Bangar explained, is that the synthetic coatings make the packaging difficult to recycle or compost, creating a significant sustainability gap in the food packaging supply chain.

“We were able to achieve the same barriers that the plastic lamination or plastic coatings give,” said Bangar, who leads the Food Packaging and Shelf-Life Testing Laboratory in CET. “The goal is not to eliminate plastics but reduce the use of the plastics.”

The Science Behind Modified Starch

The research team applied crosslinking techniques to modify and strengthen pearl millet, a native starch, altering its molecular structure to improve its stability and viscosity. Crosslinking is a chemical process that bonds polymer materials at the molecular level to strengthen the resulting substance. This process is widely used in materials science to develop alternatives to petroleum-based plastics.

While starch is a renewable, abundant, and relatively inexpensive material, it requires processing before it can function effectively as a bio-plastic barrier that is fully water-resistant, strong, and stable. The crosslinking approach adopted by Bangar’s team addresses precisely these limitations, enabling starch biopolymers to perform comparably to their synthetic counterparts in packaging applications.

The findings from recent testing were published in the August 14, 2026 edition of the International Journal of Food Properties.

Food Packaging as the Highest-Need Category

“When it comes to packaging, the food category contributes the most in the need for packaging options. We can add value to alternative packaging options with this new work,” said Bangar, who was recently recognized with the 2026 American Polymers Association Young Scientist Award — an honor given to researchers working on alternative materials for packaging.

The project is a collaboration with Clemson University and was supported by a grant through the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s program Assisting Specialty Crop Exports — Sustainable Packaging Innovation Lab.

RIT’s Interdisciplinary Approach to Sustainable Packaging

Kyle Dunno, Professor and Department Chair of CET’s Department of Packaging and Graphic Media Science, who worked closely with Bangar and her research group on the biopolymers project, noted the broader context driving this research direction.

As brands and consumers continue to seek more sustainable packaging solutions, there is growing interest in renewable materials that can reduce reliance on traditional plastics and synthetic coatings without sacrificing performance, Dunno observed.

“RIT is uniquely positioned to address these challenges through the integration of packaging science, materials research, manufacturing technologies, and product testing,” said Dunno. “Research like Dr. Bangar’s exemplifies how our interdisciplinary approach can transform promising bio-based materials into practical packaging solutions that support a more sustainable future.”

RIT integrated its packaging science and print media programs in 2022 to reflect strategic growth in the evolving packaging and print industries, with an emphasis on sustainable practices, plastic alternatives, and improvements to manufacturing and distribution processes. Students, faculty, and industry partners have access to extensive laboratory facilities within the college to develop new materials and test products. The work on starch biopolymers stands as a direct product of that integrated, collaborative environment.

The post RIT Researcher Develops Plant-Based Starch Biopolymers as Sustainable Alternatives to Plastic Laminates in Paper Packaging first appeared on Packaging World Insights.

The study, led by scientists at the Food Packaging Forum, arrives at a time of growing scrutiny of more than 15,000 chemicals present in food contact articles — ranging from packaging materials to kitchenware — of which 87% lack sufficient safety data to meaningfully evaluate their potential health impacts.

A Regulatory System Under Strain

The researchers make a compelling case that today’s one-chemical-at-a-time approach, practiced across both Europe and North America, was never built to manage a chemical universe of this scale. Of the more than 15,000 substances currently in circulation within food contact materials, 1,222 have already been identified as priority chemicals that are hazardous to human health. The remaining 13,000-plus have little to no publicly available data, leaving regulators and industry effectively working in the dark when it comes to food packaging safety.

To address this data gap, the research team developed a method that groups chemicals by their structural similarities, operating on the well-established scientific principle that structurally similar compounds tend to share similar hazard properties. Through this approach, the study identifies 38 priority chemical groups that contain a disproportionately high concentration of known hazardous substances. Among the groups flagged are ortho-phthalates, PFASs, organophosphates, isocyanates, and primary aromatic amines — all significant categories within the broader food contact chemicals landscape.

The Scope of the Problem

In total, 4,222 food contact chemicals fall within these 38 flagged groups, meaning a substantial portion of substances currently on the market are structurally proximate to known hazards. This finding carries direct implications for manufacturers making substitution decisions, as it highlights the very real risk of introducing what researchers describe as “regrettable substitutes” — chemicals swapped in to replace a restricted substance, only to carry the same or similar hazard profile.

Lead author Helene Wiesinger addressed the substitution risk directly, stating, “Replacing known hazardous chemicals with very similar but insufficiently tested alternatives is not solving the problem.” She noted that the chemical grouping fix allows for rapid identification of chemicals of concern, giving both policymakers and industry a faster route to informed action on food packaging safety.

Co-author Jane Muncke was equally direct in her assessment of the current regulatory framework. “Today’s regulatory approaches in Europe and North America look at each chemical individually, but this is inefficient and does not sufficiently protect consumers,” she said. “We are proposing an evidence-based grouping approach decision makers can already use now until the proper testing methods and testing data become available.”

The combined weight of both statements points to a structural deficiency in how regulatory frameworks currently handle the complexity of food contact chemicals — and positions the proposed method as a bridge solution rather than a distant reform goal.

Free Tools Released Alongside the Study

Rather than leaving the chemical grouping fix as a theoretical framework, the research team released two practical tools in tandem with the study’s publication.

The first is an updated FCCprio List, which ranks known hazardous food contact chemicals and serves as a reference baseline for hazard prioritization. The second is FCCgroup, an interactive application that enables users to screen their own chemical inventories against the 38 identified priority groups.

Co-author Albert Anguera Sempere outlined the practical commercial value of these tools, emphasizing that FCCgroup is designed to be accessible and efficient. He noted it is built to make it easy and quick for anyone to screen a set of chemicals and identify which might be hazardous — a capability he said could help companies get ahead of future legal restrictions, avoid litigation, and better protect their customers.

Industry and Regulatory Relevance

With regulators in both the European Union and the United States signalling growing interest in reforming food contact material rules, the availability of a free, structure-based screening tool meaningfully shifts the risk calculus around substitution decisions. Companies replacing a restricted chemical with a structurally similar alternative — without first checking where it falls among the 38 priority groups — may be exchanging one liability for another. The tools now provide a direct mechanism to make that check before any commitment is made.

The study represents a concrete and research-backed step toward addressing one of the most persistent challenges in food packaging safety: the vast gap between the number of chemicals in commercial use and the depth of safety data available to evaluate them. By combining structural chemistry logic with freely accessible screening tools, the Food Packaging Forum research team has provided both regulators and industry with an actionable framework at a moment when reform conversations are actively under way.

The post Scientists Propose Chemical Grouping Fix for Food Packaging Safety Gaps first appeared on Packaging World Insights.