- Home
- Packaging database
Packaging Microplastics Database
Every other product scanner reads the label. None of them read the container. Yuka's published food score is nutritional quality, additives and organic status. Bobby Approved scores the ingredient deck. Beat the Microbead screens plastic as an ingredient. Not one contains a term for packaging, which means none of them can tell you that the same yogurt in a plastic pot and a glass jar are different products.
This database covers that gap. 15 formats, ranked by what physically drives particle release into the contents, what makes each one worse, and the better option.
Why this matters, quantified. A May 2026 report by Earth Action with rePurpose Global estimated roughly 1,000 tonnes of microplastics migrate from packaging annually, about 130 mg per person per year, with PET bottles responsible for around a third of packaging-related exposure. It also found UV exposure can raise release up to 100×, and that food safety regulation largely does not account for packaging particle release at all.
PET plastic bottle
High releasePolyethylene terephthalate, PET (#1)
The single largest packaging source of microplastic exposure. Earth Action attributes roughly a third of all packaging-related exposure to PET bottles, and a 2024 PNAS study counted ~240,000 particles per litre in bottled water.
Better option: Glass bottle
Plastic film and cling wrap
High releaseLDPE, PVC or PVDC film
The highest surface-area-per-gram contact in a kitchen. Film is pressed directly against food, often fatty food, for the entire storage period, and PVC film brings plasticiser questions on top.
Better option: Beeswax wrap
Plastic squeeze bottle
High releaseLDPE or PET, flexible wall
The one format where you deliberately deform the container every single time you use it. Mechanical stress is an established driver of particle release, and squeeze bottles usually hold fatty or acidic contents for months.
Better option: Glass bottle with a pour spout
Polystyrene tray or cup
High releasePolystyrene / expanded polystyrene (#6)
Brittle, easily abraded and used mainly for raw meat trays and hot drinks. Research on packaged meat has specifically implicated polystyrene trays as a microplastic source, and it performs badly with heat.
Better option: Butcher paper from a counter
Flexible pouch or laminate sachet
High releaseMulti-layer plastic and foil laminate
Worse than the can it often replaces. Food sits directly against a polymer layer and the whole sealed assembly is then heat-sterilised, combining direct contact with the most migration-favourable moment in production.
Better option: Glass jar
Coated paper cup
High releasePaperboard with a polyethylene or PLA inner lining
A paper cup is a plastic cup with a paper exterior. Research measured particle release from the polymer lining into hot liquid within about fifteen minutes, which is roughly how long a takeaway coffee lasts.
Better option: Ceramic mug in-store
Plastic mesh tea bag
High releaseNylon or PET mesh
The highest single-item release measured in the food literature. A 2019 McGill study found one nylon or PET pyramid bag released roughly 11.6 billion microplastic and 3.1 billion nanoplastic particles into a single cup at 95C.
Better option: Loose leaf with a stainless steel infuser
Plastic coffee pod
High releasePolypropylene or multi-layer plastic capsule
Pressurised hot water forced through a plastic capsule, which is close to a worst-case combination of heat, pressure and direct contact. Aluminium capsules are meaningfully better because only a thin inner liner touches the water.
Better option: Stainless steel refillable pod
HDPE bottle or jug
Moderate releaseHigh-density polyethylene, HDPE (#2)
More chemically stable than PET and it does not carry PET’s antimony catalyst, but polyethylene is the exact polymer the EU microbead restriction names, and opaque jugs are usually large formats opened repeatedly over days.
Better option: Glass bottle
Tetra-style carton
Moderate releasePaperboard laminated with polyethylene and often aluminium foil
A genuine middle ground. Mostly paperboard by weight with a thin inner polyethylene layer that does contact the food, but no bottle wall to shed and full light protection.
Better option: Glass bottle
Polypropylene tub
Moderate releasePolypropylene, PP (#5)
One of the more thermally stable food plastics, which is why it is used for yogurt and microwave containers. Stability is relative though: PP is still a carbon-chain polymer, and it is usually the format people microwave.
Better option: Glass container
Plastic lid or cap
Moderate releasePolypropylene or LDPE closure
The most overlooked component, and the reason a stainless steel bottle is only as clean as its lid. Threads grind against each other at every open and close, generating particles directly above the contents.
Better option: All-stainless lid
Aluminium can
Low releaseAluminium with an epoxy or acrylic internal liner
Aluminium cannot shed microplastics, which removes the bottle problem entirely. The trade is a thin internal polymer liner, so a can swaps a particle question for a bisphenol question rather than eliminating both.
Better option: Glass jar
Metal tin
Low releaseTinplate or aluminium with a thin internal coating
One of the two best formats for anything fatty. Fully opaque so it blocks the light that degrades oils, and it has only a thin internal coating rather than a polymer wall.
Better option: Dark glass for daily use, decanting from the tin
Glass bottle or jar
NegligibleSoda-lime or borosilicate glass
The cleanest widely available format. No polymer touches the contents at all except the cap liner, which is a tiny sealing surface. If a product is sold in both glass and plastic, the glass version is the answer.
Better option: Already the best option — keep and reuse the jar
Scan the container, not just the label
MicroPlastics scores the packaging your product actually comes in, gives it a 0–100 exposure score, and names a lower-plastic version of the same thing.
Scan my packagingSources
- Earth Action with rePurpose Global (2026). Microplastic migration from food and beverage packaging (reported May 2026). Forbes.
- Qian N, Gao X, Lang X, et al. (2024). Rapid single-particle chemical imaging of nanoplastics by SRS microscopy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS).
- Winkler A, Santo N, Ortenzi MA, et al. (2022). Does mechanical stress cause microplastic release from plastic water bottles?. Water Research.
- Hernandez LM, Xu EG, Larsson HCE, et al. (2019). Plastic teabags release billions of microparticles and nanoparticles into tea. Environmental Science & Technology.
Related: microplastic ingredients database, cosmetics brand database, microplastics in water, and bottled water brand database.