Manufacturers across Europe are aggressively promoting plastic packaging that they claim is sustainable, but experts warn these assertions are fundamentally misleading. These so-called eco-friendly products often contain only a tiny fraction of genuinely recycled waste material, with the vast majority still derived from petroleum-based sources.
The Fossil Fuel Foundation of 'Circular' Plastics
Supermarket shelves are increasingly filled with brands, from Kraft's Heinz Beanz to Mondelez's Philadelphia, that bill their plastic packaging as sustainable. However, this packaging frequently relies on materials produced by the petrochemical arm of the state-owned Saudi oil giant, Aramco. This company is the world's largest corporate emitter of greenhouse gases and has opposed production cuts under the UN plastic treaty.
Aramco's subsidiary, Sabic, alongside other major industry players, has successfully devised a strategy to rebrand their operations as environmentally beneficial. They label plastic as "circular" and climate-friendly, despite the reality that it remains almost entirely fossil-based, thereby worsening both global warming and the plastic pollution crisis.
Legalising Greenwashing Through Industry Pressure
Under significant pressure from the petrochemical industry, Europe is moving to legalise this controversial practice. Independent experts have categorised it as greenwashing. Lax European Union rules are scheduled to take effect in 2026, with similar regulations in the United Kingdom set for enforcement from 2027.
To advance this agenda, the industry is championing pyrolysis, the most common form of chemical recycling. This process is highly energy- and carbon-intensive, converting plastic waste into a recycled feedstock known as pyrolysis oil. Critically, this hazardous compound can constitute at most 5% of the total feedstock. It must be diluted with 95% virgin naphtha—a fossil fuel derivative—to prevent damage to the steam-cracking plants that manufacture new plastic.
"The whole process is labelled as plastic recycling, while fossil fuel use expands because virgin feedstock must be added," stated Helmut Maurer, a former senior expert in the European Commission's environment department.
Accounting Tricks Behind the 'Green' Claims
The industry relies on two lawful but highly contentious accounting methods to present appealing figures on recycling rates and emissions to brands eager to attract eco-conscious consumers.
The first is "mass-balance bookkeeping." This system attributes the recycled input to specific output batches. For instance, if 5% pyrolysis oil (mixed with 95% naphtha) is credited to 5% of a 100-tonne production run, those 5 tonnes can be certified as "100% recycled" packaging. This certification occurs even if the final product contains no physically recycled material and is composed entirely of fossil feedstock.
"This is unfair to consumers – recycled content should be physically part of the final product," argued Lauriane Veillard, a policy officer at the NGO Zero Waste.
The second method is the "avoided emissions" approach. This involves subtracting the carbon that would theoretically have been released if an equivalent volume of waste had been incinerated instead of recycled. This creates an illusion of carbon savings when compared to virgin plastic production.
Scrutiny of the Certification and Carbon Calculations
Recycling labels based on the mass-balance method are issued by the industry-led International Sustainability and Carbon Certification (ISCC) platform. These certifications are then passed from plastic producers to the brands that use the packaging.
Public records indicate that the recycled material used by Sabic—2,600 tonnes of pyrolysis oil in 2022—may represent even less than 5% of its total feedstock. This is given the enormous quantity of virgin naphtha, approximately 4 million tonnes, fed into the company's European cracking plants in the Netherlands.
The petrochemical group's own life cycle assessment (LCA) admits that the full process, from pyrolysis to cracking, emits 6% to 8% more greenhouse gases than producing plastic solely from fossil fuel. Only by counting the hypothetical "avoided" incineration emissions do the net benefits appear marginally positive, showing about 2kg less CO₂ per kilogram of recycled plastic.
"What matters is not hypothetical emissions from incineration that are 'avoided' on paper, but what is actually emitted in reality," emphasised Helmut Maurer.
Sabic's LCA claims a "rigorous critical review" by experts, including a co-founder of Plastic Energy, Sabic's main feedstock supplier. The close business ties between the reviewers and Sabic raise serious questions about the impartiality of this scrutiny. Both Sabic and Plastic Energy declined to disclose full LCAs or answer specific questions. The consumer brands named also did not respond to requests for comment.
Warnings from Academia and Environmental Groups
"LCA documents serve no purpose other than advertising, because companies control the parameters to achieve desired results," said Peter Quicker, professor of emission control in waste management at Aachen University in Germany.
Research into other LCAs has found they can be selectively framed to mask the true climate footprint. It warns that claimed carbon savings largely vanish when recycled feedstock replaces only a minuscule fraction of fossil-based plastic.
"The overestimated carbon savings follow the downstream value chain, amplified by mass-balance credit, to packaged products, potentially making consumer brands' statements unreliable and misleading," explained Margaux Le Gallou, a senior programme manager at the NGO Ecos.
Intensified Lobbying and the Future of Plastic
Over the past three years, petrochemical companies have dramatically intensified their lobbying of EU institutions. Their goal is to ensure upcoming legislation accommodates the mass-balance method, while they simultaneously rush to secure supply deals with pyrolysis-oil providers.
Despite public pledges from brands, mandatory recycled-content targets designed to curb waste and emissions may be technically met even as major oil companies expand virgin plastic production. With global demand for fossil fuels in decline due to the rise of renewables, plastic is poised to become a critical profit engine for oil majors in the coming decades, according to analysis by the International Energy Agency.
This investigation reveals a systemic issue where marketing claims of sustainability are disconnected from the material reality of the products, leaving consumers misled and environmental goals undermined.
