Eliminating toxicity
Chemical test tubes in a laboratory – assessments of forever chemicals are becoming more sophisticated. Image: Sarka Na kopci
Can manufacturers are committed to removing ‘forever chemicals’ from packaging, say experts. Liz Newmark reports from Brussels
The international can manufacturing and filling industry is continuing to face increasing regulatory pressure regarding certain food contact chemicals, which, while protecting cans against corrosion, may also harm consumer health and the environment. Dubbed by environmental groups as ‘forever chemicals’ because they take so long to degrade, these substances include bisphenols, phthalates and PFAS (per and poly-fluorinated alkyl substances).
With an increasing number of studies highlighting these chemicals’ association with environmental and health hazards, including cancer and high blood pressure, regulations and restrictions are tightening in Europe and the United States (US).
In June 2024, European Union (EU) member states endorsed a European Commission proposal to ban Bisphenol A (BPA) and other bisphenols in food contact materials. This will come into force once formal final approval is secured from the EU Council of Ministers and European Parliament anticipated at the end of this year. After an 18-month phase-out period (with 36 months allowed for canned fish, fruit, and vegetables and the outside packaging of food cans), the chemical be banned in this packaging EU-wide.
The decision is based on a scientific assessment from the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), published in April 2023, which concluded that BPA had “potential harmful effects on the immune system.” This ban will apply mainly to the use of BPA in packaging, such as the coating used on metal cans, the Commission said.
The EU takes a tougher stance than the US, where the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) has authorised the use of BPA in food contact adhesives, coatings and polymers since the 1960s. However, several states have issued bans, notably Connecticut, Maine and Vermont, which ban BPA in reusable containers as well as in baby bottles.
Laws blocking the use of PFAS in food contact materials are already in place in 20 US states, from New York (December 2022) to Connecticut (June 2024).
“In the last four years several states have passed regulations on the sale of packaging or types of packaging containing PFAS,” Renee Leber, technical services manager at the Chicago-based Institute of Food Technologists, told CanTech International. “During that time, the US FDA worked with manufacturers to commit to removing grease-blocking PFAS from food packaging and on February 28 announced that they were no longer being sold by manufacturers for food contact use in the US market.”
Across the pond, the EU’s PFAS ‘restriction’ proposal made under the EU’s REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals) regulation is being considered at the Finland-based European Chemicals Agency (ECHA). Released in February 2023, and covering 10,000 PFAS, it was tabled by the national authorities of Germany, the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway and Sweden, an ECHA spokesperson told CanTech. This could potentially block the use of PFAS in all metal packaging, although food and drink packs are the key focus.
“By 25 September 2023, following the six-month consultation launched on 22 March 2023, ECHA had received 5,600 comments from the public,” he said. This shows the importance of the proposal aiming “to reduce PFAS emissions into the environment and make products and processes safer for people.” Current limits are 25 parts per billion (ppb/µg/kg) for individual PFAS and 250 ppb (µg/kg) for the sum of all PFAS in articles.
This proposal says some beverage can coatings are “known to consist of fluoropolymers or perfluoro-plastics, more specifically polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE). The PFAS restriction proposal further describes/proposes that PTFE should fall within the scope of PFAS compounds to be restricted,” explained the spokesperson.
European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) flag at its Helsinki headquarters. Image: European Commission – Atte Kajova
The impact of this restriction proposal for food contact materials and packaging will be discussed by ECHA’s committees for risk assessment (RAC) and socio-economic analysis (SEAC) at their September 16-20 and 17-20 meetings.
“Their opinions, once adopted, will be communicated to the public and support the European Commission and [EU] member states in deciding on a potential restriction,” under a committee-based decision-making system, said the spokesperson.
An EU ban on PFAS in food and drink cans may also come via the proposed EU packaging and packaging waste regulation (PPWR), which – as currently drafted – includes an amendment banning PFAS in food contact packaging. A provisional agreement on the November 2022 proposal has now been reached between the European Parliament and EU Council of Ministers (representing member states), although more detailed discussions are pending.
If approved, the law, coming into force 18 months after publication in the EU’s Official Journal, would ban PFAS use in food contact materials above certain thresholds, for example 25 ppb for “any PFAS measured with targeted PFAS analysis and 250 ppb for the sum of PFAS measured as the sum of targeted PFAS analysis.”
This move was hailed by the Parliament’s ‘rapporteur’ coordinating the EP’s position on the waste law, Belgian MEP Frédérique Ries, as ensuring “a more virtuous European packaging market” and “a big victory for the health of European consumers.”
Amidst this growing regulatory pressure, the can industry has been keen to show its products are safe. A spokesperson for Europe’s rigid metal packaging industry association, Metal Packaging Europe (MPE), told CanTech: “Each MPE member selects the coatings which meet the performance requirements needed for their specific applications and provide a high safety level for the consumer. The substances used in coatings for metal food or beverage packaging have been evaluated by EFSA or by national food safety authorities.”
She could not however say how much PFAS are or have been used: “The use of specific materials is proprietary to individual industry members and not shared with MPE. We are not aware of any intentional PFAS use,” she stressed.
Moreover, under current EU legislation and proposals, companies do not have to legally state if PFAS are “constituents of materials and articles,” European food and drink organisation, FoodDrinkEurope (FDE), makes clear. Its October 2023 PFAS position paper emphasises “only intentional use of PFAS in food contact materials is to be restricted;” and that in any case, “suitable alternatives to PFAS should be developed and made available before restrictions are applied.”
Some EU member states already implement PFAS restrictions, although not specifically for cans. Denmark has banned PFAS in cardboard and paper food contact materials from July 2020. France’s law (adopted April 2024, operational in January 2026) that banned the manufacture, import and sale of PFAS-containing products in France includes waterproofing sprays but not cookware or food packaging.
Such regulatory pressure is prompting packaging companies to act, noted Justin Boucher, operations director at Zurich, Switzerland-based scientific research group, the Food Packaging Forum. Those that do not “will be left behind” he said, with “many non-fluorinated alternatives already on the market for many food packaging applications.”
“Alternatives can be more expensive,” he admitted, “but with the extensive health costs estimated from exposure to these substances, we are likely saving significantly more money on public health costs compared to the initial investment needed to replace the substances.”
2023 meeting of the EU high level roundtable on chemicals, in Brussels. Image: European Commission – Jennifer Jacquemart
At Switzerland-based global food and drinks company, Nestlé, whose canned product brands include Starbucks, Nestea and Felix (cat food), a spokesperson told CanTech it followed FDE’s position, emphasising the need to evaluate PFAS alternatives and that any restrictions should “be complemented with actions to mitigate the occurrence of PFAS in the environment.”
A spokesperson from Illinois, US-based global snack business, Mondelēz International, whose can brands include Cadbury and Royal Baking Powder, could not disclose how or if PFAS was being used in cans. But “We are working with suppliers to eliminate PFAS-containing packaging from its portfolio,” he said: “There are alternatives on the market… and we are exploring all the relevant solutions.
“Replacing PFAS is a complex process, and it requires multiple research and tests to ensure the quality and packaging properties,” he continued. “Costs are related to development, testing and implementation.”
Can makers too highlight efforts to eliminate any potentially harmful chemicals. “Our coatings historically included trace amounts of BPA,” and so, “in response to stakeholder feedback, we collaborated with our suppliers to introduce a new generation of coatings that contain no intentionally added BPA – so-called BPA-NI [not-intentional] coatings,” said a Ball Packaging note.
“Fifty-eight per cent of Ball’s inside spray purchased [in 2023] was BPA-NI compliant. In line with regulatory requirements and customer expectations, we plan to expand conversion further in 2024. We also continued to shift to manufacturing products without intentionally added PFAS coatings (PFAS-NI),” it added.
As of November 2023, the BPNCA (Ball Packaging North and Central America) region had converted 100% of its coatings to PFAS-NI regulatory-compliant products, said Ball.
Similarly, Crown Holdings’ 2023 sustainability report notes that its goal for 2025 is “to have screened all food contact materials for presence of chemicals of concern and take action to eliminate them where deemed necessary.”
“The metal packaging sector continues to meet policymakers’ requirements regarding its use of coatings to protect the integrity of consumer products and is committed to continuous improvement and innovation,” the MPE spokesperson added.
“Companies continuously work with their suppliers to ensure coatings used in packaging are safe and reliable.”
She added that every technological change for each MPE company to meet these regulations comes with considerable cost: “Some coating companies have been working for more than ten years to develop alternatives to BPA coatings.”
Boucher is optimistic about the practicality of such changes in the can industry: “When more inert materials are used instead, such as stainless steel, ceramics or glass, then chemical treatments such as PFAS are simply not necessary.
“A systemic switch towards reusable packaging systems with these inherently more chemically safe materials can provide often simpler and already widely available non-chemical alternatives.”
This feature article is restricted to logged-in paid subscribers.
Login or subscribe now to view this exclusive content.
