(GUF) rPET

There simply isn’t enough recycled plastic to match the sky-high marketing claims flooding supermarket shelves. For rPET to be more than a PR badge, it needs to be available, affordable, and allocated strategically- not just to tick ESG boxes, but to serve genuine operational needs.

That means facing an uncomfortable truth: rPET needs more help. The market can’t meet current demand without intervention. If we’re serious about circularity, we need national or international systems to guarantee supply, stabilise prices, and direct rPET where it has the most impact. That may require subsidies, incentives or greater procurement mandates that give recycling infrastructure a fighting chance and make this green promise less of a mirage.

Right now, we’re pretending there’s a river of recycled plastic when it’s closer to a slow trickle and everyone’s fighting to bottle it. Even the most “green” multinationals, from P&G to Unilever, still operate on a volume-driven, high-turnover model that inherently conflicts with sustainability. The maths doesn’t lie: if every brand wants 50% rPET in their packaging, but there’s only enough for 15%, someone is left holding the virgin plastic.

If that means rPET must be artificially cheapened to keep both green credentials and operating budgets intact, so be it. A truly circular economy will never materialise if recycled materials are treated as a boutique option for marketing campaigns rather than a baseline feedstock for global supply chains - more like this (rPET) - link