EPI News
November 29th, 2011
by EPI Media / EPI News
Vancouver, Canada – (November 29, 2011) – EPI Environmental Technologies Inc. (“EPI”), the global leader of Oxo-biodegradable plastic technology continues expansion into the Middle East with the signing of an exclusive distribution agreement with REDA Chemicals for the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries.
“Environmental Concern has been growing in the Middle East and some countries have started legislations banning the use of regular plastics” says Sam Garwani, EPI Business Development Manager responsible for the Middle East and Africa. “Our partnership with REDA, a leading distribution company in the region, is a strategic move that will enhance our reach to provide high quality Oxo Biodegradable additives to the thriving GCC markets. We are very pleased to start work with REDA’s outstanding team” concludes Sam.
Daniel Saikali, REDA’s Marketing and Development Director added: “REDA’s partnership with EPI will allow plastic manufacturers in the GCC region to benefit from EPI’s Oxo-Biodegradable technology; this is a recognized solution to the plastic waste problem. With this technology, plastic is degraded and absorbed back into the ground, protecting the environment for a sustainable future.”
REDA’s Core business is focused on supplying manufacturing industries with their need of specialty and industrial chemicals. REDA Chemicals is part of the REDA Group, which is a member of a large privately owned investment group that provides financial support and governance to REDA’s growth, continuity and commitment to best practices in the chemical industry.
About EPI
Established in 1991 in Vancouver, Canada, EPI Environmental Technologies Inc. (“EPI”) has become a world leader in the fight against plastic waste. EPI licenses proprietary technology that causes plastic to degrade. Plastic bags, plastic film, plastic packaging and other single-use plastics can remain in the environment for decades. When these products are manufactured using EPI’s additives, they will degrade and subsequently biodegrade when discarded in soil, in the presence of microorganisms, moisture and oxygen.
October 5th, 2011
by EPI Media / EPI News, Industry
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Industry Response to DEFRA Report
Vancouver, Canada (October 5th, 2011) - In March 2010 the UK Department of the Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) published a report, EV0422, ‘Assessing the environmental impacts of oxo-degradable plastics across their life cycle’ written by researchers at Loughborough University with no expertise in oxo-biodegradable (“OBD”) plastic technology. Its publication raised a number of concerns for those who specialize in the technology. In particular:
- The industry was not given appropriate opportunities to comment and to supply supporting data during the development of the report.
- The report gives inaccurate descriptions of OBD technology and mechanisms.
- The conclusions drawn for OBD plastics in relation to recycling, biodegradation and other issues are not supported by the evidence.
The report places considerable weight on European standard EN13432 and ASTM standard D6400 as standards for specifying biodegradability of plastics. This is a fundamental error, as these standards are for biodegradation in the special conditions found in industrial composting, according to a timescale required by industrial composters.
A Ministerial statement was also made on 11th March 2010 by the then Government, which was not supported by the evidence and has not yet been retracted. A scientific dossier was therefore compiled by the industry, and submitted to DEFRA through the British Plastics Federation in April 2011, comprising evidence from peer-reviewed academic literature and from studies in independent laboratories, which prove the degradability, biodegradability, recyclability, and non-toxicity of OBD plastics.
The most recent published work [Jakubowicz et al “Kinetics of abiotic and biotic degradability of low-density polyethylene containing prodegradant additives and its effect on the growth of microbial communities” Journal of Polymer Degradation & Stability Vol. 96 (2011) 919-928], shows 91% conversion to carbon dioxide (EN13432 requires 90% and ASTM D6400 and D6954 require 60%). It is significant that higher levels of biodegradability were obtained in a soil environment at 23 ºC than in a compost environment at 58º C.
The purpose of oxo-biodegradable technology is not for composting, but to deal with the problem of plastic waste which escapes into the open environment, by automatically converting the plastic at the end of its short useful life into a material which is inherently biodegradable and which will be bio-assimilated in the open environment in the same way as a leaf.
This is a highly successful technology now widely used around the world, where it confers significant environmental benefits. It is much less expensive and more versatile than the bio-based alternatives, and in the Middle East governments have already legislated to make its use compulsory. The British Standards Institute has now published a Standard for Oxo-biodegradable Plastics (BS8472).
We have decided to publish the scientific dossier on our website in the interests of informed debate and to deal with the confusion in the marketplace which the report has caused.
For the Industry Response to DEFRA Report, click Industry Response to DEFRA Report EV0422 Sept 2011.
September 1st, 2011
by EPI Media / EPI News
Vancouver, Canada (September 1, 2011) – The group that refers to itself as Californians Against Waste (CAW) recently reported on the Tesco (a UK retailer) decision to discontinue the usage of oxo-biodegradable plastics (OBP). The CAW newsletter article, with the headline “Retailer Ditches Oxo-Degradable Bags Because They Don’t Break Down”, placed particular emphasis on the flawed UK government DEFRA report on OBP. In doing so, CAW is perpetuating the misinformation and misconceptions about OBP. In the article, CAW also associated green washing with OBP and stated that OBP do not meet the existing standards and may even cause harm to marine life. EPI is particularly offended by the CAW comments, which are made without the full understanding of OBP technology.
With regards to the DEFRA report, a critical review of the report conducted by EPI’s International Scientific Advisory Board (ISAB) revealed severe deficiencies, both in the authors’ review of available information and in the reasoning behind the conclusions drawn. The conclusions of the report were based on an inadequate review of the available scientific literature and the erroneous assumptions used by the authors. It was also quite apparent that Bioplastics proponents had guided the authors and the report suffered by being influenced by the opinions of the Bioplastics industry.
The use of composting standards as biodegradation specifications is a tactic that is commonly used by the Bioplastics industry to attack OBP technology. That this approach was selected by the DEFRA report authors for assessing OBP biodegradation spoke to the fact that the authors had no background or experience in polymer degradation or biodegradation and likely relied on guidance from outside sources. The authors were ill-equipped to take on such a project and were certainly not qualified to render any conclusions regarding degradation and biodegradation, based on the limited scientific literature review that they conducted.
EPI Environmental Products quickly voiced its condemnation of the report conclusions. With the British Plastics Federation (BPF) acting as an intermediary, DEFRA agreed to listen to the OBP industry response to the DEFRA report findings. EPI led the preparation of the rebuttal document, which included a complete review of current OBP technology. The BPF recently submitted the document to DEFRA for review, on behalf of the OBP industry.
CAW has mistakenly interpreted composting standards such as ASTM D6400 as being a measuring stick for biodegradability, when in fact, such standards are only applicable to industrial composting facilities. EPI has tested its OBP in accordance with ASTM D6954 in order to assess degradability, biodegradability, and non-ecotoxicity. EPI does not claim compostability and categorically denies engaging in green washing, as all of its OBP claims are validated by testing and the vast body of research reported in scientific literature that has been presented in peer-reviewed journals.
Furthermore, there is absolutely no evidence that there are any toxic effects on the environment posed by degrading OBP, as CAW claims. EPI recommends that CAW review the science before making ill-informed conclusions.
About EPI Environmental Products Inc.:
Established in 1991 in Canada, EPI Environmental Products Inc. (EPI) with its UK subsidiary EPI (Europe) Ltd. has become a world leader in the fight against plastic waste. EPI licenses proprietary technology that causes plastic to degrade. Plastic bags, plastic film, plastic packaging and other single-use plastics can remain in the environment for decades. When these products are manufactured using EPI’s additives, they will degrade and subsequently biodegrade when discarded in soil, in the presence of microorganisms, moisture, and oxygen.
August 30th, 2011
by EPI Marketing / EPI News
Vancouver, Canada (Aug 30, 2011) – The DEFRA report on oxo-biodegradable (OBD) plastics, published in 2010, presented an unflattering portrait of OBD technology and attacked many of the core benefits associated with OBD plastics. This was of particular concern to EPI Environmental Products Inc. (EPI) because the report was commissioned by a UK government body, whose opinion is normally respected. EPI considered this to be a matter of high importance and undertook to examine the report and how it came to be.
A critical review of the report conducted by EPI’s International Scientific Advisory Board (ISAB) suggested severe deficiencies, both in the authors’ review of available information and in the reasoning behind their conclusions. These conclusions were based on an inadequate review of the scientific literature and on erroneous assumptions. It was also apparent that Bioplastics proponents had guided the authors and the report suffered by being excessively influenced by the opinions of the Bioplastics industry.
The use of composting standards as biodegradation specifications is a tactic that is commonly used by the Bioplastics industry to attack OBD technology. That this approach was selected by the DEFRA report’s authors for assessing biodegradation of OBD plastics reflected the fact that the authors have no background or experience in polymer degradation or biodegradation and relied too heavily on guidance from outside sources. The authors were ill-equipped to take on such a project and were certainly not well qualified to draw conclusions regarding degradation and biodegradation, based on the limited scientific literature review that they conducted.
Another issue was that the DEFRA authors only briefly consulted with OBD stakeholders during the very early stages of their review, and there was no follow-up consultation to clarify misconceptions or to request additional information. This is in stark contrast to other similar reports that have been prepared on DEFRA’s behalf, where there has been extensive consultation with stakeholders.
EPI quickly voiced its condemnation of the report’s conclusions, which was echoed by other companies in the OBD industry. With the British Plastics Federation acting as an intermediary, DEFRA agreed to listen to the OBD industry response to the DEFRA report findings. Chaired by the BPF, a group of industry representatives prepared a rebuttal document, which includes a complete review of current OBD technology. This document was presented to DEFRA for review on behalf of the OBD industry in May 2011 and will be made public once DEFRA has responded to it. EPI’s representative on this group was Prof. Norman Billingham, a long standing and esteemed member of EPI’s International Scientific Advisory Board.
The amount of information collected for this document clearly shows that there is a vast body of scientific evidence substantiating the performance of OBD technology which the DEFRA authors did not access or take into account. This information refutes the conclusions of the DEFRA report and validates the claims of the OBD stakeholders with regards to the benefits of OBD plastics.
About EPI Environmental Products Inc.:
Established in 1991 in Canada, EPI Environmental Products Inc. (EPI) with its UK subsidiary EPI (Europe) Ltd. has become a world leader in the fight against plastic waste. EPI licenses proprietary technology that causes plastic to degrade. Plastic bags, plastic film, plastic packaging and other single-use plastics can remain in the environment for decades. When these products are manufactured using EPI’s additives, they will degrade and subsequently biodegrade when discarded in soil, in the presence of microorganisms, moisture, and oxygen.
August 30th, 2011
by EPI Marketing / EPI News
Vancouver, Canada (Aug 30, 2011) – With recent media headlines showing the impact of the 2010 UK Government DEFRA report on oxo-biodegradable plastics (OBP), the responsibility falls on EPI Environmental Products Inc., as the industry pioneer and leader, to bring to light the deficiencies of the report and to highlight the OBP industry response. DEFRA commissioned the review of OBP technology, but unfortunately the resulting report was neither thorough nor accurate in its findings, and this has perpetuated misconceptions about OBP technology that have tainted perceptions of the associated environmental benefits.
The DEFRA report, prepared by a group at Loughborough University, UK was intended to be a complete review of OBP technology. Unfortunately, the expertise of the authors with regards to plastics degradation and biodegradation was certainly questionable, and the conclusions drawn were based on gross misconceptions. For example, the authors mistakenly used compostability as the key criterion for determining biodegradability, and failed to acknowledge the vast amount of scientific literature supporting OBP biodegradation. This may have resulted from the fact that key reviewers of the report were proponents of the Bioplastic industry, who view OBP as their chief competition.
The level of stakeholder input in preparation of the report was unusually low, and the OBP industry was not allowed the time to rebut the findings or provide additional information. This was in stark contrast to other similar DEFRA projects, where there has been extensive stakeholder involvement.
The OBP industry led by one of EPI’s eminent scientists, prepared an extensive report which contained a complete review of the peer-reviewed academic literature relating to OBP, along with industry data that together provided a thorough substantiation of OBP performance. All aspects of OBP technology were discussed and validated, including degradation, biodegradation, and non-ecotoxicity. In May 2011, the British Plastics Federation presented the OBP industry response to DEFRA for review and is patiently waiting for their comments.
The OBP industry response refutes all the misconceptions and misinformation contained in the DEFRA report. Those that have any questions about OBP technology are encouraged to review the industry response, which will be made public as soon as DEFRA has responded to it.
About EPI Environmental Products Inc.:
Established in 1991 in Canada, EPI Environmental Products Inc. (EPI) with its UK subsidiary EPI (Europe) Ltd. has become a world leader in the fight against plastic waste. EPI licenses proprietary technology that causes plastic to degrade. Plastic bags, plastic film, plastic packaging and other single-use plastics can remain in the environment for decades. When these products are manufactured using EPI’s additives, they will degrade and subsequently biodegrade when discarded in soil, in the presence of microorganisms, moisture, and oxygen.
