There are a lot of claims made about bioplastic products. Some are true, some are partly true, many are misleading, and most are unsubstantiated. It’s a bit of a Wild West scenario in the world of bioplastics: producers are trailblazing into new terrain in search of petrochemical plastic alternatives; everything from corn to mushrooms to manure is seen as a polymer source. Manufacturers and retailers are hot to tout what they see as “environmentally safe” plastic. Meanwhile, policymakers and regulators are scrambling to attach real definitions to the producers’ eco-fantastic labels.

There’s plenty to get excited about in terms of finding a good alternative to petrochemical-produced plastics, but we shouldn’t ride off into the sunset with bioplastics just yet.

What are bioplastics?

Bioplastics are, in simple terms, plastics made from renewable feedstocks, which can include corn, sugar cane, potatoes, coconuts, mushrooms, wheat, wood, or soy beans to name a few. (Conventional plastics are made from crude oil.) Like conventional petrochemical-produced plastics, there are several types of bioplastics: Some of the most common include poly lactic acid (PLA) derived from corn, wheat, or sugar cane, and labeled with a #7 resin recycling code; bio-polyethylene made from sugar cane or corn, with a #4 recycling code; polyhydroxyalkanoate (PHA) primarily derived from corn, with a #7 recycling code.

Bioplastics are used to make products like food containers, cutlery, bags, bottles, foams, electronics casings, medical supplies, and beyond. Many are compostable, a few might be biodegradable, and some are also recyclable.

Sounds great, doesn’t it—a naturally derived plastic from a renewable source that just melts back into the Earth when we’re done with it? Unfortunately, not all of these biomass-produced polymers are environmentally innocent.  

"Renewable" Isn’t Always Green

Many of the renewable feedstocks used to make bioplastics are agricultural crops—corn, sugar cane, soy beans. Industry cowboys are quick to point that out, too. But what they aren’t so forthcoming about is that much of the corn used for bioplastics is a GM (genetically modified) crop, and that crop requires a lot of industrial fertilizers, pesticides, water, and land to produce. For example, NatureWorks, one of the largest manufacturers of PLA bioplastic in the U.S. (a subsidiary of Cargill, one of the largest suppliers of genetically modified corn in the world), uses GM corn.

Magnify this process to a global scale: GM crops expanding, huge swaths of land being converted to agriculture but not for food, more deforestation, more fertilizers and pesticides being used, food costs continuing to soar, and food shortages becoming even more of an issue.

But not all bioplastics use genetically modified corn and innovations using more sustainable biomass are already underway. Companies are commercializing bioplastics made from algae, a more sustainable source than GM crops.

That said, even if bioplastic companies start using abundant, low-impact materials for their products, we can’t neglect to consider the end-of-life cycle of many of the bioplastics—that is to say, their ability to biodegrade, compost, or recycle.

Beware of Biodegradability Claims

This is the category in which bioplastics theoretically have huge benefits; bioplastic that can biodegrade means less trash in landfills. However, many bioplastics that may biodegrade only do so in specific environments, often industrial biodegrading facilities. While "biodegradable" can technically be true, it is often problematic (and sometimes illegal) to use in sales and marketing language.

Third parties, like ASTM International, an organization that develops international standards across various industries, created pass/fail standards for biodegrading and composting that are generally accepted and trusted. Their certification for compostable products and packaging is BPI and is a widely recognized symbol for compost-ability. Keep in mind that these are voluntary standards.

In terms of specific legislation, California passed laws in 2011 that require products with compostable or biodegradable labels pass ASTM standards. Other countries, like the E.U. and China have bans on plastic and stricter legislation around bioplastics.

However, even biodegrading bioplastics that pass ASTM standards need to be looked at carefully. You have to ask what conditions are required for that biodegradation? By and large, the answer is an aerobic or oxygen-filled environment (a field, a forest, an ocean) with adequate microbes to start munching away at the stuff. Here’s the hitch: a lot of plastics (petrochemically produced or biomass produced) end up in landfills. Our country lacks a coherent infrastructure for recycling, including the actual recycling process and education around recycling for its residents.

Let’s be clear on this: landfills are designed to be as anaerobic (oxygen-void) as possible—the things are sealed to prevent as much decay as possible. This state does not allow bioplastics to properly degrade in a landfill.

In short, even bioplastics from the most sustainable feedstocks aren’t going to benefit the environment any more than conventional plastics if they end up in landfills. They must be disposed of in a way that allows them to biodegrade or compost.

Coordinating Composting

Composting bioplastics shows a lot more promise than biodegrading. “Compostable,” according to the FTC, means the product will degrade into “useable, compost-humus-like material that enriches the soil and returns nutrients to the Earth.” According to the FTC, they are supposed to degrade just like leaves and food waste in a backyard composter. But due to a lack of oversight with this label, the fact is that many will still need a municipal composter to fully break down.

Right now, consumers probably should assume that current “biodegradable” and “compostable” bioplastics can only be composted in a commercial composting facility with controlled heat and moisture (i.e., generally not the backyard heap). Sadly, these composters are few and far between, the majority do not accept material from individuals, and some may ban bioplastics anyway, since many bioplastics are indiscernible from conventional plastics.

Many large metropolitan areas like San Francisco, Seattle, and Denver have implemented curbside compost pick-up programs. Some of these programs accommodate bioplastics; to be sure, contact your city's waste management.

The Toxicity Question

Plastics are rarely just made out of oil—they’re mixed with a host of chemical additives to enhance their capabilities: more flexible or less flammable; prevent them from degrading, or to tint them pretty colors. The same holds true for bioplastics—they aren’t just made from plants.

Bioplastics go through a host of chemical processes to turn into the plastics we know and use today. In a 2020 study, researchers purchased bio-based plastic products and discovered thousands of unidentifiable chemicals. The majority of these chemicals have multiple toxic effects.

An Evolving Industry

Responsibly manufactured bioplastics make a lot of sense in many ways. At the most basic level, they aren’t derived from petroleum, and preventing fossil fuels from further polluting our environment is a good thing. Secondly, based on the information we know now about bioplastics, they don’t stick around for hundreds of years like their petroleum counterparts.

At this point, corn, sugar cane, or soy beans may not in sum be significantly better than petrochemicals as a source for plastics, but it’s a start. Given enough pressure from consumers, environmental groups, and federal agencies on bioplastics manufacturers, recyclers, and composters to coordinate their efforts, improve accessibility, and become greener, we could end up with a truly biodegradable, compostable, recyclable bioplastics.

Updated February 2026