The purpose of this report is to explore and impartially report on the current flexible plastic film
packaging trends and some of the opportunities, costs, and challenges associated with the diversion of
all flexible films generated in the residential waste stream in Ontario. To this end, the Canadian Plastics
Industry Association (CPIA), Continuous Improvement Fund, and Stewardship Ontario jointly sponsored
this project. As well, this team had the volunteer support of the Pac Next organization that assisted
with the project by providing advice and liaison coordination from its industry membership. This report
was produced by a project team composed led by Reclay StewardEdge, with support from Resource
Recovery Systems and Moore Recycling Associates, Inc.
According to Stewardship Ontario data, residential flexible film packaging makes up 6.2 percent of the
mass of printed paper and packaging that is generated and subject to product stewardship in the
Province.1 Currently however, only six percent of residential film packaging is recycled.2 Film plastic is
not monolithic and comes in a number of varieties, including high and low density polyethylene film,
biodegradable film, film made from other resins, and multi‐laminate film that is composed of layers of
different types of films. This complexity of films used in packaging, incompatibility of different plastics
with each other, and differences in recyclability of and market demand for the different types of films all
present challenges to increased recycling of film plastics.
This study researched film types and generation quantities, recycling market demand, and sorting
technologies to help in identifying feasible approaches to increase the recycling and diversion of film
from disposal. Based on this research, system approaches were identified and recovery models
constructed to arrive at cost and recovery estimates for the different approaches. The approaches that
were modeled in this study include residential curbside recycling collection, consumer drop‐off at
municipal and commercial return centers with on‐site baling, and consumer drop‐off at commercial
return centers with the ability to take advantage of no‐cost back‐haul of loose film to a central baling
facility.3 The approaches also considered producing two general market types of film – polyethylene
(PE) film and all other non‐polyethylene film. The cost estimates in this report are based on cost models
that use certain key inputs including Ontario wage rates, and for curbside collection of film, the relative