Glass is often championed as an alternative to plastics. A deeper dive reveals, however, that glass does not have the evironmental edge. Sand is an essential raw material in glass production, and there is a global sand shortage. Moreover, glass requires an energy-intensive manufacturing process, including in its recycling, and studies have shown that plastic bottles are less environmentally damaging overall than glass bottles.

A complete life cycle analysis (LCA) comparing plastic bottles with aluminum cans and glass bottles found that PET plastic bottles created less solid waste, used less water during production, and generated fewer emissions. Granted, the study was commissioned by the National Association for PET Container Resources, which has a dog in this fight, but it does contain some compelling science-based facts. Notably, comparing a 16.9-ounce plastic water bottle with a 12-ounce aluminum can, the LCA determined that the PET plastic bottle:

• Consumes 80% less energy during production;
• creates 80% less solid waste;
• uses 53% less water during production;
• has a 74% lower global warming potential;
• generates 68 to 83% fewer emissions that contribute to acid rain and smog formation.

Almost 50% of all food in the world reportedly goes to waste each year. Plastic packaging keeps food fresh and reduces food waste by nearly tripling the amount of time produce remains suitable for consumption, according to research from the Plastics Industry Association.

What you see is what you get in the supermarket. Transparent plastic packaging lets you fully see the cut of meat you are buying. You could get your meat from the butcher counter and have it wrapped in paper, but, honestly, how often do you choose that option?