RESUMEN
Packaging can play a substantial role in moving towards more sustainable food systems by affecting the amount of food loss and waste. However, the use of plastic packaging gives rise to environmental concerns, such as high energy and fossil resource use, and waste management issues such as marine litter. Alternative biobased biodegradable materials, such as poly(3-hydroxybutyrate-co-3-hydroxyvalerate) (PHBV) could address some of these issues. For a careful comparison in terms of environmental sustainability between fossil-based, non-biodegradable and alternative plastic food packaging, not only production but also food preservation and end-of-life (EoL) fate must be considered. Life cycle assessment (LCA) can be used to evaluate the environmental performance, but the environmental burden of plastics released into the natural environment is not yet embedded in classical LCA. Therefore, a new indicator is being developed that accounts for the effect of plastic litter on marine ecosystems, one of the main burdens of plastic's EoL fate: lifetime costs on marine ecosystem services. This indicator enables a quantitative assessment and thus addresses a major criticism of plastic packaging LCA. The comprehensive analysis is performed on the case of falafel packaged in PHBV and conventional polypropylene (PP) packaging. Considering the impact per kilogram of packaged falafel consumed, food ingredients make the largest contribution. The LCA results indicate a clear preference for the use of PP trays, both in terms of (1) impact of packaging production and dedicated EoL treatment and (2) packaging-related impacts. This is mainly due to the higher mass and volume of the alternative tray. Nevertheless, since PHBV has limited persistence in the environment compared to PP packaging, the lifetime costs for marine ES are about seven times lower, and this despite its higher mass. Although further refinements are needed, the additional indicator allows for a more balanced evaluation of plastic packaging.