Lab vs. Field: The Compostability Reality Check Your Team Needs

This is a follow-up Q&A session from an IOPP (Institute of Packaging Professionals) webinar featuring Daniel Peretz, Kelly Williams, and moderator Jessie Schwartz. 

The discussion addresses questions about sustainable packaging, focusing on bioplastics (particularly PLA), compostability challenges, recycling infrastructure, and the integration of recycled content. 

Key themes include the practical limitations of different composting methods, the challenges of replacing fossil-based plastics with sustainable alternatives, consumer education needs, and the importance of setting realistic recycling goals. 

The conversation emphasizes that while material science has advanced significantly, infrastructure and market adoption remain major barriers to widespread sustainable packaging solutions.

Questions Discussed
PLA Compostability: Does PLA break down in windrow compost facilities or home composting, and how do bench chemistry tests correlate with real-world compostability?

Fish Box Alternatives: What are alternative options for fish boxes to meet refrigeration requirements while using sustainable materials?

Recycling Infrastructure: Why don't more establishments (like fast-food restaurants) have recycling bins despite making sustainability claims?
Consumer Confusion: How can the packaging industry address the confusion consumers face with inconsistent recycling labeling and instructions?

Pilot Programs for Recycled Content: What pilot programs exist for integrating recycled content, and what approaches are proving successful?
Attainable Sustainability Goals: How should brands approach recycled content commitments to make them realistic and achievable?

Small vs. Large Scale Partnerships: Do brands need to partner with companies of similar scale, or can smaller companies effectively support sustainability initiatives?

About the Expert Panel:
Jessie Schwartz, Moderator is the CEO of Strategic Packaging Partners, a consulting firm that helps food and beverage manufacturers bridge the gaps between procurement, operations, and packaging engineering. With experience including packaging roles at Target and work with companies ranging from PepsiCo to mid-size food manufacturers, Jessie specializes in cutting through organizational silos and packaging industry complexity to help companies make practical decisions. She's currently helping numerous brands navigate EPR reporting requirements and has firsthand visibility into how sustainability mandates translate (or fail to translate) into actual operational changes. Her approach focuses on identifying costly blind spots and facilitating the cross-functional collaboration needed to implement packaging solutions that work in the real world—not just in press releases.

Daniel Peretz is a resin distributor at NextGen Polymers who works across both virgin and post-consumer recycled materials. His unique position provides unfiltered visibility into market dynamics, supply challenges, and the gap between corporate sustainability announcements and actual purchase orders. He's invested in recycling infrastructure and works with major brands on implementation pilots.

Kelly Williams is an independent compostable films consultant with over a decade in the industry, including work with Elevate and Earth First. He's partnered with converters on cutting-edge projects, experienced major market disruptions, and currently develops practical compostable structures designed for commercial scale.

If you love our content and want to learn more about the packaging industry, hit SUBSCRIBE!

Connect with us: www.StrategicPackagingPartners.com
Jessie Schwartz - jessie@stratpackpartners.com

Transcript

0:00

Hey everyone, we really appreciate you joining the IOPP webinar and we have a few questions that came out of the webinar that we wanted to address because we didn't get enough time at the end. And so here we are. I'm just going to run through the questions with Daniel and Kelly and get those answers you're looking for. So we're going to get right into it. Question number one regarding PLA compostability. It has been my experience that it doesn't break down in the window compost facilities have or in home composting. The bench chemistry compostability test does not correlate well within dirt compostability. Do you have any comments, Kelly? Yes. And what he meant to type and it probably auto corrected him is it's not window, it's windrow with an R. Okay. And that's there's. So there's three primary types of industrial compost. There's what, what's called windrow, which looks like a long, like a, just a domed mound that runs like a linear length. And there's a machine that turns it a couple of times during it. So that's a particular type. It's an older type. You generally find it in the central Midwestern states. So I understand. And then there's a static pile and then what's called a covered, heated, circulated pile called a GW process. So windrows are notoriously more challenging, not only for bioplastics, even for, for paper sometimes because they're so moisture. A lot of this breakdown process is moisture dependent. In fact, I had a composter tell me that industrial compost facilities are basically managed dehydrators. So in those more arid Midwestern states, they don't always get enough moisture in it. So the breakdown can be more problematic depending on the mix. So I understand what they're saying about windrow, but over 50% of the manufactured compost in the United States comes from the newer process called the Gore process or covered pile. It's a hotter, shorter process and it eats bioplastics like PLA really, really well. They're actually paper has the greater challenge. So I understand what he's saying and when he says in dirt, what he means is infield. So yes, the BPI certification schema, the ASTM test method, ASTM D6400 is a wonderful test for demonstrating that your material is in fact earth digestible, meaning it does convert to organic CO2. But that test was designed well before even the modern day. So there is a difference between that Test and the field testing, which is why we have field testing options out there now like the CMA Compost Manufacturers Organization does infield testing. So there's differences there. For BPI certification, is it that covered pile or what is the one they're using? BPI uses ASTMD 6400, which is basically, it uses mature compost for the process of biodegradation and disintegration. But when you go to cma, for example, for field testing, which I think is what he means or he or she means by in dirt, they do it in all three primary technologies, Gore, uncovered pile and windrow. Okay. So you'll know how your material behaves in each of those. In all. Okay, that sounds good. And then, Kelly, what are the alternative options for fish boxes to meet refrigeration requirements? So, you know, I love this one actually because it is a very demanding application. It's kind of like drum labels for, for chemical drums that are going to travel across oceans. They have to pass such severe testing. But look, what is a fossil plastic? It is cellulose that's gone through millions of years of hornification and hydrophobicity. So they reject water completely. So if you're trying to replace fossil plastics that reject water completely with a natural material that still has oxygen in the back backbone, the water part does become more challenging. But I think what, what's important to, to note here is the material science is, is not the limiting factor in packaging design. It's really what's holding large brands back from commercializing. So when I look at things like fish boxes, there's two or three ways to approach it, but there has to be some, some market pull to, to employ it. So I feel like any of these things are. Now, if you would ask me this seven years ago, I would have said, yeah, maybe not. Because moisture is always just such. Moisture is part of the compostability breakdown process. Yeah. But man, I'm seeing things now that you really can control the water holdout and moisture vapor and oxygen for that matter in these materials. So I think for the fish box there just needs to be a market pole to develop it. What would be the refrigeration question? Well, you're just holding stuff that's going to be frozen, it's going to condense, there's going to be a lot of temperature extremes, water direct contact extremes. And look, what keeps PLA from being generally considered home compostable is you have this long chain. It's like the difference between sugar, a carbohydrate, a hemicellulose and a tree is the molecular weight. So PLA is a larger molecular weight that has to break down. So if you want to use a plastic that's sensitive to moisture, which all of them are, you know what molecular weight is enough to hold that type of condition from frozen fish going, yeah. Well, isn't it kind of brittle too? Doesn't it get brittle when it's refrigerated or frozen? A lot of plastics do, but some, some don't. They have additives and stuff. So like what's, yeah, PLA is known for its stiffness and, and brittleness as well. I think, when I think here, this is where you're seeing the material science fusion between cellulosics and polymers. Meaning a polymer can be a polyethylene, a polypropylene, or it could be lactic acid polymerized into poly lactic acid. And then you have cellulosics like nanocellulose. So where, where I'm seeing this coming is, is bringing these types of material systems together, you can put pretty much engineer whatever you want. All right. Okay, so the third question is, Dannemer Scientific recently went bankrupt and was sold. Do you have any concerns on the future of the compostable and bio based plastic materials in the near future or even further out? I know we covered a little bit of this even with the PCR about how the demand has to lead to, of that market opening up and pricing being favorable and things like that. But maybe you want to say a. Little more so P. PHA if those that are listening don't know. It's poly hydroxy alkynoate. It's basically a polymer that's made in the fat cells of certain microorganisms when they consume specified foods like vegetable oils, et cetera. So PHA has all the distributed manufacturing benefits. It's everything digestible, it has all the right markings, zero carbon footPR. But it's a complex material to make. But even there the science has come along that I've seen like you know, 4,6 micron biaxially oriented PHA film. So I mean what we can do with it is not again, what's holding it up? What's holding it up is Dannermer. Like most companies, we, we are relying too heavily on these large brands to pull us over the finish line when in reality they have so much perceived risk, real or perceived, but it's risk nonetheless. Commercial risk. There's no such thing as in lieu of shelf life testing to know if your product's going to last a year in the wild, you kind of have to put it in the wild and watch it for a year. So these things are really holding big brands back and that's what killed Nannomer. They were expecting these large brands to commercialize and with California and, and epr. So just so much confusion that if the commercialization doesn't happen, it can put those early adopters and pioneers into some tough places. And that's what happened to Dannemur. Well, you need the large brands to involve to invest in large volumes to make the options feasible for small brands. But you need the small brands to get in and invest to do the proof of concept. So it's sort of a goofy loop it seems, and it seems like Daniel even exists a little bit in your field as well in PCR and kind of creating that demand for PCR and making it more economical for everybody. Do you agree? Sure. I mean, I think from my perspective, I think what a lot of these companies are looking for that are developing these new compostable technologies or degradable or really sustainable, whether it's pcr, mechanically recycled, chemical, recycled, it's just consistency from their customers. They want to know if a purchase order is a purchase order. It's a firm purchase order and they're manufacturing for this quarter and next quarter and two years from now and building and really working alongside your supply chain partner. And it's really a partnership long term being benchmarked every quarter to what virgin prices are versus post consumer mechanically recycled or chemically recycled or PLA or it's just not feasible. It's impossible to invest in the equipment to scale with the commitments these brands are openly committing to in the marketplace. And it's very challenging and I've been on that side. I was mechanically recycling plastic and where was our biggest downfall was the volatility benchmarked against non recycled material, which it's not really in. You know, my prerogative if you, if, if I can say because I'm not making non recyclable materials, I'm meeting the requirements and commitments for my customers to continuously give them high quality recycled content at a fair market price and grow with them as their demand grows to multiple locations, multiple products and multiple plants. And that just hasn't been the case in the last five years, unfortunately. So for me I think it's about consistency. Sustainability is not a quarter to quarter initiative, it's much longer than that and it has to be treated. So for these companies to survive, that makes sense. All right, another question. Do we See, the access to industrial compost facilities or potentially like curbside collection, I think is what I mean. Do we see it increasing in the US in the near future? If not, why, why should we develop industrial compostable packages instead of recyclable packages? For me, recycling requires overcoming the entropy. Because you've got system entropy, you've got human entropy. You've got packaging that's designed to not even stay in one piece. When it goes, goes through, it's useful. So if you think you can collect it all, flexibles, I. e. rigids obviously are heavier, more dense, easier to collect. But even there, not easy. But when it comes to flexibles, I'm just not sure how you can rely on, on that to, to not hammer into it. But it comes back to Rick Roll, the Rickroll Law, the Resource Conservation Recovery Act. Each state has its own problem. There's no federalization or harmonization. So everyone's got to figure out their, their own way. And to me, the only, the only option. And this is why PepsiCo is, is adamant about a home compostable chip bag is it' engineer a solution for escape, for litter, for entry. Right. Well, but now we're kind of like, you know, we're in two different topics, right? There's the industrial compostable, there's backyard compostable, and essentially the, the industrial. If you're going to claim industrial compostable, it has to break down in a certain amount of time. Right. We just talked about that. Backyard compostable is a little more loose, but certainly nobody wants packaging in their backyard for multiple years. And so like, let's say that we want to go at this more collectively as a, as a community versus just one person with a compost heap in their backyard. Industrial composting, like, do you see that becoming more accessible? Last I checked, it was like 3 to 5% of Americans have access to curbside collection of compostable packaging. Compostable in general. Right. Like compostable products, materials. Do you see those facilities expanding? I mean, when I look at epr, I see it very focused on like recycling. I, I think, I think there's a much simpler explanation. I mean, Seattle's been doing it. Minneapolis does a good job. California does a good job. Canada does a good job. It's being done, it works. But post Covid, these municipalities don't have the staffing they had before COVID Whether somebody there believes in it or not, it's a big task when it's on the state because of the Rickroll Law, it's their responsibility. So within the epr, there's money allocated to compost infrastructure. The biggest thing holding it back is in all of this is trust. What Daniel just said. We have a cascading layers of trust, problems between POS and commitment willing to do. Will you buy it if I build it? There's just a lot, a lot of trust that's eroded holistically everywhere. And this is no different. So until composters can accept packaging and sell it to organic farmers, which is part of USDA's responsibility with the NOP, it's going to continue to be somewhat in a stalemate. But to me, to me, 120 out of over 5,000 that are taking packaging as industrial composters isn't the problem. We're not talking about the sheer number of community compost programs that are popping up all over North America in the United States for sure, because there's no data on it. So I do see it happening. Entropy, I think demands it. But just because a package doesn't make it to an industrial composter doesn't mean it's not earth digestible. Which is why ASTM D6400 is so incredibly, incredibly important. Because it demonstrates that your material absolutely does become organic CO2, which means it became a food source for microorganisms. If you do that, that's all you can do today. Right. But okay, it's like if they're. If. It'S digestible by organisms. I'm going to go a tangent for a second. Will it break down in an anaerobic landfill? So anaerobic is different than aerobic. So that's not compost, that's anaerobic digestion. So I think most of the landfill. Right. Isn't, aren't landfills, don't they tend to be anaerobic? Like there's, there's some simulation of landfills. I. But it is generally, yes, an anaerobic environment. So you are creating methane regardless. So, yeah, I think anaerobic digestion is, is a different topic than composting. I think all materials have some profile to go through there. So I'm not, I'm not going to speak on the anaerobic side, but the aerobic or the composting side, these materials do what they need to do it just at some point that molecular weight has to get short enough to be consumed and that's why things aren't home compostable versus industrial, because that molecular weight has to shrink to the point that, that the microorganisms can't Consume it. So it's a, it's a rate effect. It's similar to paper. Look, our paper is made in a craft process. We hornify the bejesus out of cellulose to make something that could be reprocessed over and over and over again. When it gets to the compost. Microorganisms aren't exactly taking these products as fast as fresh, you know, alive cellulose, it takes longer because it's been so dehydrated it's calcified. So even the cellulosics are struggling to go through industrial compost as they're, as they're designed today. Yeah, so I think it's, I mean, I guess we're kind of in a, kind of in a quandary, right? Because it's like if you, you have compostable films and you need curbside collection because it should go to industrial composting. We're trying to get to maybe a backyard compost thing, but like that's even fewer people and we've got the municipalities responsible. It's not federal, it's more state based. We have no idea how EPR is going to roll out. And you know, there's just not a lot. There's not like a driving force behind any of this. And I think that's probably one of like an impetus for epr, right? It's like, okay, guys, if you aren't gonna figure it out, if you're not gonna invest in pcr, in compostable films, in, you know, doing something different. Cause packaging I think is like 40% of the waste in the world, then we're just gonna start mandating things, which kind of sucks because then you don't, you don't always get the best case scenario for what is best for the earth, what is, you know, and I guess that's, that's kind of part of the problem, right? There's no one true choice that is the absolute best. But, but anyway, you just get everything so regulated that pretty soon you don't have the freedoms to even invest in R D around new materials, right? Because if it's, if, if that new material, whatever it is, doesn't, doesn't decrease EPR fees, for example, then you're not gonna be able to get R and D into that space, right? And so you even look at compostable films, I don't know how the fees are going to be laid out. And if, if the fees are such that it's more geared towards recycling versus composting, then are we going to get money or are we going to get a focus on compostable materials? Because these fees are going to be a lot and it's going to be this balancing act. And you're like, gosh, I don't know, what do you think? I, I, it's, it's a, it's a quagmire that's gonna have to unfold. I feel like it's all in the spirit of doing the right thing, but I feel like that motion will un, will correct itself. So I don't think current. You know, I look at somebody like PepsiCo, they're doing everything right. They're trying to, to, to not only develop, but take a leadership role organizing supply chains to work together to develop more environmentally friendly solutions. And EPRs are going to hurt them worse than other brands. So what's the incentive as a brand to really drive innovation. And where's that innovation coming from? The less than 10 converters of flexible packaging that dominate over 60, maybe even as high as 70% of the market in North America, they're not incented to drive innovation. They don't even have assets to do innovation on. So everything's kind of stuck. And then when you've got things like AB 1201 and the stuff going on in California, everything is really come to, to a jam point when, when it comes down to it, it's like, how do you disperse 1.6 to 1.8 trillion units of flexible packaging globally every year and expect it to come back? It's like spraying glitter onto every concert as a musician and expecting the crowd to bring you the little pieces of glitter back. It just doesn't happen. It just drives you insane because you find glitter everywhere for the next six months. Daniel, do you see PLA and in general compostable products contaminating the streams for recyclable resins? Are you seeing that or is it separate? You know, how is that for you? Yeah, I mean, it's a question that comes up regularly, Jesse, and I don't know if I have the right answer because I get a lot of mixed feedback from different stakeholders in different places in the country. And what I mean by that is understanding how the waste management haulers are compensated through the state, through the county, through volume incentives. They're going to want to put every compostable piece of flexible packaging through their system because that's weight that goes against their pocket and they want to be able to move that volume. And they're going to state that of course it can be mixed with recyclables whether it can or it can't. I think that the proof is in the pudding depending on what extractions you're doing, what level of. I mean I've been to mrfs where oh we stored at such high efficiencies. Okay, can we walk the plant? Their opticals aren't running. Why? Because they don't feel that they have to put the opticals on because they're getting such a high return for selling. 45% yield losses in the marketplace that they couldn't care less. So does it really matter that there's PLA in there? Maybe yes, maybe no. You know, I find it very interesting in talking to the brands and I worked on different projects and sustainable supply chain solution from a solution based approach to try to find the perfect recipe for certain companies with their waste streams as we move and migrate towards epr. And it's amazing the level of cooperation I might have in one county or state versus the other for the same type of material that would meet the same desired or end result. So as Kelly suggested earlier, how do we implement a broader approach when there's so many different fragments throughout the system in different respective county, states, jurisdictions, among others. For me, my motivation is diversion from landfill and incineration. How can we get there? That's the million dollar question. And then whatever's left over, how do we make that material, you know, I don't want to say disappear, but reintegrate into its natural environment? You know, for me I think EPR conceptually is the right move forward. But again, I think I said this on our last call. We can't point the fingers in one direction. We really have to start circulating that finger around to everybody. So different pilots that I've worked on with some of the big box stores on bringing back some of their recyclables and having them take ownership at the site level, if you will, bailing on site, you know, some of these and I'll use, you know, a Walmart type company that has a little bit more parking space, that has a little more engagement with their customers, that have a point value based system is a perfect. And I'm not using Walmart, bless you as an example. I'm just suggesting that type of, you know, getting a mental picture of that space as you go to shop could derive significant amount of recyclables coming back to, let's call it, it's, it's source of origin and then working with their stakeholders to either push it through a proper recyclable partnership or Compostable partnership or industrial compost. Let them, and I'm not saying them as in the brand, but them collectively decide how to handle these larger volumes and set the press for certain jurisdictions and counties and communities and so forth. And there are NGOs out there that I work with and that I know well that try to implement this. But the problem is, is the pushback from the MRFs. Why? Because they're losing volume. And if they're losing volume, they're losing money. And if they're losing money, there's a big problem. Because sustainability isn't about sustainability. Sustainability is a path to making more money. Yes. Would you. Okay. The path to making more money, but also, like, in general, you have to be profitable to keep going, right? Absolutely. It's like both kind of. Right. You know, it's like sometimes it's. For me, it's like, okay, is this a. Is this a greed situation or is this like, I need to get to the point where I can, I can keep going? And I think that's where a lot of these industries are right now, like the PCR or compostable. Like, how do we get money to keep going? And that's kind of where it seems like where we're at right now. Sure. But I think, you know, the phenomenon of online shopping and Uber Eats and all this takeout, everything delivered to your door kind of shifts the numbers a little bit on how much product, what is being reported at the source of origin, how much is. How much waste is being sent to an individual McDonald's store versus how much is being sent outside of that McDonald's store. How are we accounting for. And I'm just using McDonald's as an example. Dunkin Donuts, Tim Hortons in Canada, whatever. How are we accounting for the waste streams? And how are we holding people accountable? So therefore, another kind of hole in the armor for EPR is accounting for all the variables. And again, yeah, EPR is wrong. I'm just saying, I never believe one, that the direction is in one direct, you know, the fingers pointed in one direction. We're all held accountable. It starts with education in your respective counties and communities. But be more creative on a pilot. And I think that leads to some other questions, Jesse, is how can we be more creative? How do we start slow? You know, we're going to be 25 PCR by 2025. Okay, sounds great. It's 2024 and you haven't bought 1% of PCR. What do you expect to do in three months? You might want to Start lining up your supply chain. Oh, now they're all bankrupt. Well, because they've been building the foundation to support these initiatives and nobody's cut a purchase order in the last three years. So I believe starting slow, I believe, you know, learning the supply chain, making it economical for everybody, finding pathways to be successful. Yeah, well, something that you said, you know, a different conversation we were having, like how about just like 5%? Yeah, I think so. People just had these really high expectations, you know, we're this lofty goal, whatever. And it's not coming from the people who understand polymer science. It's more. Maybe it's the business team or everyone wants to do the right thing. Like let's just assume that. But you know, 5% is even something that, that is something that is something that allows your operations to get a feel of. Like, okay, what kind of between lot variability are we getting? And does it matter? Like run with five, run for six months, run, you know, run through a whole season, run for a year with 5%, then see if you can get to 10. Right, like, or 7, I mean, whatever, but just start, start somewhere. And I think, yeah, and just to. Speak to that, Jesse, I worked with a pretty substantial company that tempered their goals. Realistically, it was more of a complicated product. They wanted to stick to a mechanically recycled product and grow with that and refine and you know, improve over time. But if their goal was 25% and they were integrating, let's call it 5% PCR, the differential between what it would cost them for Virgin versus pcr, they invested in their local communities for education, for collection. You know, whether it's curbside, whether it's drop offs. They would facilitate the differential between them continuously trying to implement PCR at a 25% threshold versus keeping it at 5%, showing the commitment to try to find a better way, highlighting some of the inefficiencies in the supply chain, but not stepping away from their financial commitment to get to a higher efficiency or a higher collection level and invest in the community. So their retail stores would accept a drop off bin and they work with a local company to develop a bin system. It would weigh the product, it would give them a rough number. Come and shop at our store. Here's 35 cents off. Thanks for dropping. Oh wow. I got 35 cents for my waist. I just throw that in my garbage. That's fantastic. 35 cents. What does that really do at the end of it? But nonetheless. Well, I did that three times in one week. Now I got a dollar. Okay, now I got a dollar. Let's go. I mean, it means something to people. To track sort of stuff, right? It's like more not hitting that 25% threshold, but investing in the community gave them that opportunity. So there are ways for brands and companies and stakeholders and municipalities and everybody involved to be involved. But coming up, I'm going to be 50% by 2030. Okay. Maybe you want to start buying something and start supporting your local recycler, because guess what? 2030 is literally around the corner and we know how quickly time goes, so better get moving. Well, yeah, I mean, to your point, like, everything, I think one of the issues is that this whole thing, all the things hinge on the consumer and what the consumer does with the packaging, right? And so because it hinges on where the consumer puts the packaging, it's like almost needs to be a grassroots effort of informing the consumer about like, what they can and should do with the packaging at the end. And we've created this like, infinitely confusing spot for people, right? Like, I went to buy M&M's the other day and they're, they're converting to in store drop off film. So like, literally on the shelf there was a bag of like M&M's that couldn't be recycled and M&M's that could be recycled. And so, I mean, obviously they're working through the volume, they're working through the product there, right? And they're doing a flow through instead of like throwing product away, which is great. But I'm just saying, like, to the consumer, they're like, they don't even know what's going, what's going on. And there's no like, homeostasis, right? Like, we're not gonna reach a point where we're like, hey, once we get to over here, then we can like inform the consumer that this is the way it is now. So anyway, it's, it's an interesting. But again, like, it's more of a grassroots thing of, hey, put, put signs, you know, at ST stores have collection points. Or even put like our recycling bin has a sticker on it. Like, these are the numbers we take. And you're like, yeah, that would be so helpful. Like, why are we messing around with H2R tiles that say check locally? Like, why don't we just put the number on there and then put a sticker on a garbage can. That way you know what you can and can't recycle. But no one asked me, obviously, I. Would say this, Jesse. Some of the most recognizable fast food Chain restaurants, some of them, if not most of them, don't even have recycling bins in their stores. But they were very quick to switch from plastic straws to paper straws to show their commitment to sustainability in the environment. Why not put a recycling bin in your store? Because every single cup is a pet thermoform. I mean, obviously we care about the animals, we care about the environment, care about everything. But how about putting some recycling bins in the store to start cycling? I mean, what am I missing here? Yeah, well, and like to your point though, and you know, everything gets contaminated and so it's like, how do you. Don'T put it then? Don't switch the straw. I don't know. There's last question for Daniel. Can you talk a little bit about any pilot programs and integration of recycled content and what you're seeing that's successful? I mean, we did talk about starting at lower rate, lower percentages if maybe that's. That feeds into that question a little bit. But if there's anything else you wanted to add. Yeah, I mean, from my experience, Jesse, it's working with the right stakeholders, staying committed to what we're trying to achieve. Again, not focusing quarter to quarter, but understanding this is a little bit of a longer Play. Forget the 25% by this specific date, at this specific time, based on this achievement, let's start small. Let's have some reasonable attainable goals. And some of the projects we work on are some of your most recyclable materials. And some of the projects we work on are complicated, but it's finding the right stakeholders. There are so many small to medium sized companies that have such tremendous capabilities that everything is based on scale. And the brands feel that we need to partner with somebody that has the same scale or capabilities that we do. That's not necessarily the case. It's amazing what some of the small to medium sized companies can do from a volume perspective. Again, you know, moving that needle, moving that threshold, starting somewhere, getting in the game and making a difference, I think is the most important thing for me. And those commitments long term are wonderful, but they have to be attainable and we have to be held accountable. Yep, I agree. All right, that wraps up the questions. You guys, anything else you wanted to add? I'll add one thing. Just remember, PLA is, is the most recyclable polymer on earth that we use today because you can make it take it back to lactic acid in an instant pot in your kitchen. So I do think it has ubiquity. But I don't see it ever hitting mainstream. There's too many forces against that, that mono materials usage. And to be quite honest, you just can't replace 3.5 million tons of dispatch between fossil and paper. You just can't fill it. So we have a decimal point problem in material science as well that we got to fill. And also, don't take pla. Back to lactic acid in an instant pot in your kitchen, please. I haven't done it, but I know others that have. All right, everybody, thanks for joining. Sounds good. All right, bye.