The Differences Between PET, PP, and PS Plastic Packaging in Food

In today’s food packaging industry, the three most commonly used plastics are PET (Polyethylene Terephthalate), which is transparent and recyclable; PP (Polypropylene), which has high heat resistance; and PS (Polystyrene, including EPS – Expanded PS), which is cheap and lightweight but increasingly restricted in many markets.

The choice made by supermarkets and manufacturers depends not only on cost but also on regulatory requirements (FDA, EU), green consumer trends, and global environmental pressures.

This article provides an in-depth analysis of the differences among these three plastics to help businesses make informed packaging strategies for 2025.

Xem thêm: Sản Phẩm | CÔNG TY TNHH HƯNG DỤ

1. Tổng quan về ba loại nhựa phổ biến

1. Overview of the Three Common Plastics

1.1. PET – Transparent and Sustainable

PET is a thermoplastic with very high transparency, commonly used for beverage bottles, sushi trays, and fruit containers. Key features of PET include:

• Clear product display, visually appealing.

• High mechanical strength, durable during transport.

• Easy recycling: PET has the most developed recycling system globally.

According to FDA (2021), PET is classified as “safe for food contact” and widely approved for food packaging. Many corporations such as Coca-Cola and Nestlé plan to use at least 50% recycled PET (rPET) by 2025, showing PET’s leading position in the green packaging trend.

1.2. PP – Flexible and Cost-Effective

PP has excellent heat resistance (up to 120°C), making it suitable for microwave heating. PP also remains tough at freezing temperatures, making it ideal for meat, seafood, and frozen food trays. Its cost is lower than PET, suitable for large-scale production.

Although less transparent than PET, PP balances cost, performance, and safety, maintaining a significant share in the Asian food packaging market.

1.3. PS/EPS – Cheap but Risky

PS (Polystyrene) and EPS (Expanded Polystyrene) were once popular due to their low cost, light weight, and good insulation. However:

• Difficult to recycle due to limited infrastructure.

• Brittle, making long-term food storage difficult.

• Styrene monomer in PS/EPS is classified as IARC Group 2B – possibly carcinogenic (IARC Monographs).

As a result, many countries have restricted or banned single-use EPS food packaging, especially in the EU and the US.

Image Source: Distribute ESG and Sustainability News to a Global Audience | 3BL Media

2. Technical Comparison

When selecting packaging material for different food categories (fresh meat, sushi, fruits, heatable meals), it is essential to consider core technical criteria: transparency, mechanical strength, heat/cold resistance, microwave compatibility, recyclability, and legal compliance. The table below summarizes key differences:

Transparency & Display: PET excels in optical clarity, ideal for sushi and premium fruits. PP is slightly opaque, and PS is prone to scratches. For products requiring immediate visual appeal, PET is often the default choice.

Durability & Impact Resistance: PET has high stiffness and impact resistance, retaining tray form during stacking/transport. PP is flexible and durable, though tray edge strength can be lower. PS/EPS is cheap and light but brittle, increasing leakage and reducing perceived quality.

Heat, Microwave, and Freezing: PP is the most versatile, heat- and cold-resistant, and microwave-compatible under FDA-approved conditions. PET withstands refrigeration but is not suitable for heating. PS/EPS is heat-unstable and unsuitable for microwaving.

Food Safety: PET and PP are FDA-approved for food contact when used correctly. PS/EPS carries styrene monomer risks, classified as IARC 2B, and should not be used with hot or acidic foods.

Recyclability & Policy Trend: PET has the most mature recycling system, with ~29% recycling rate in the US (EPA, 2018) and higher in Europe. PP is recyclable but with limited infrastructure (~3% recycling in the US). EPS is environmentally unfriendly, facing bans in the EU and Canada.

Implementation Guidance:

• PET: Optimal for sushi, fruits, salads – high display, compatible with anti-fog/topseal, easy to upgrade to rPET.

• PP: Ideal for meat, seafood, frozen or heatable foods; compatible with topseal/skin pack; cost-effective.

• PS/EPS: Suitable only for low-cost domestic segments, with increasing legal/environmental barriers.

Image Source: Collected

3. Food Safety

Beyond technical properties, food contact safety is the most important criterion when choosing packaging. Any material used for meat, seafood, sushi, or fruit must not release harmful substances during storage, transport, or heating. The three plastics PET, PP, and PS/EPS differ clearly in terms of safety.

3.1. PET – Safe and Transparent

PET is considered one of the safest plastics for food. According to the FDA (USA), PET is classified as a Food Contact Substance (FCS) and is widely approved for direct food contact, including beverage bottles, salad boxes, sushi trays, and fruit containers (FDA – Food Contact Substances).

A major advantage of PET is its chemical inertness, with minimal risk of releasing harmful substances under cold or room temperature conditions. Studies also show that the migration of acetaldehyde or antimony from PET is extremely low, fully within safe limits set by the EFSA (European Food Safety Authority). This makes PET a preferred choice for supermarkets displaying premium products without compromising health safety.

3.2. PP – Safe for Heating and Freezing

PP (Polypropylene) is also recognized as a safe plastic by FDA and EFSA. Its key feature is heat resistance up to 120°C, allowing use in microwaves or thermal sterilization without deformation. The FDA has approved multiple Food Contact Notifications (FCN) for PP, including applications for heating and freezing food (FDA FCN Database).

Additionally, PP remains non-brittle at low temperatures, making it ideal for frozen food storage. Research indicates that chemical migration from PP is extremely low, generally below detection limits, making it a “food-friendly” material for meat, seafood, and ready-to-eat meals.

3.3. PS/EPS – Styrene Risk and Phase-Out

Unlike PET and PP, PS (Polystyrene) and EPS (Expanded Polystyrene) raise significant health concerns. The styrene monomer in PS can migrate into food, especially when exposed to heat or acidic products.

• IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer) classifies styrene as Group 2B – possibly carcinogenic to humans (IARC Monographs).

• The US National Toxicology Program (NTP) also warns that styrene exposure may affect the nervous system and increase long-term cancer risk (NTP Report on Styrene).

As a result, many countries and major retail chains have restricted or banned EPS for food, particularly for hot or long-term use. In Vietnam, supermarkets such as Winmart and AEON have switched from EPS to PET/PP trays in meat and seafood sections.

Image Source: Illustration

See more: Products | HUNG DU Co., Ltd
Note PDF: RoC Profile: Styrene; 15th RoC 2021

4. Environmental Impact

In the context of increasingly strict global regulations on single-use plastics, the choice between PET, PP, or PS is not only based on technical performance but also linked to recyclability, product life cycle, and carbon emissions.

4.1. PET – Leading in Recycling

PET is considered the plastic with the most mature recycling infrastructure worldwide. According to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA, 2020), the recycling rate of PET bottles reached ~29% in the US, significantly higher than PP or PS (EPA Plastics Recycling Report). In Europe, the figure is even higher thanks to advanced waste sorting systems.

Additionally, PET can be recycled into rPET, which can be reused for trays, bottles, and polyester fibers. Major corporations such as Coca-Cola and PepsiCo have committed to using 50% rPET by 2025, demonstrating the feasibility of PET’s circular lifecycle. This positions PET as the “greenest” material among the three plastics.

4.2. PP – Potential but Limited Infrastructure

PP is also recyclable, though actual recovery rates remain low. According to The Recycling Partnership (2022), only about 3% of PP in the US is recycled, due to insufficient sorting infrastructure and specialized processing technologies. Nevertheless, the FDA has increasingly approved post-consumer recycled PP (PCR-PP) processes that are safe for food contact (FDA NOL Database), opening development opportunities in the future.

Environmentally, PP has advantages over PS: when incinerated, PP emits lower greenhouse gases and produces fewer toxic byproducts than EPS.

4.3. PS/EPS – Environmental Burden

PS, especially EPS (foam), is nearly impossible to recycle in practice. Due to its lightweight, bulky structure and high risk of food contamination, the cost of collecting and recycling EPS often exceeds its recovered value.

According to the European Commission (2021), single-use plastic packaging (of which EPS constitutes a significant portion) accounts for up to 50% of plastic waste in Europe (EU Plastics Strategy). Therefore, the EU banned single-use EPS cups and containers from 2021, and Canada also prohibited EPS in food packaging from 2022.

4.4. Perspective for Vietnamese Businesses

• PET: Should be prioritized for fruit, sushi, and salad to leverage the rPET trend and export advantages.

• PP: Suitable for meat and seafood; companies should prepare for the adoption of PCR-PP as markets increasingly demand transparency in product life cycles.

• PS/EPS: Only suitable for low-cost domestic segments, but in the long term, will be phased out due to policy pressure and consumer expectations.

Image Source: Collected

Category: Products | HUNG DU Co., Ltd
Read more at: Plastics strategy – European Commission

5. Supermarket Packaging Trends in 2025

The differences between PET, PP, and PS are not only in technical properties or environmental impact but are also clearly reflected in global supermarket selection trends. As consumers increasingly focus on safety and transparency, retail chains have defined clear roadmaps for transitioning food packaging.

5.1. PET – Dominating High-Visibility Segments

In supermarkets in Europe, Japan, and the US, nearly 100% of premium sushi, salad, and fruit boxes are packaged in PET or rPET. The reason: PET offers superior transparency, allowing customers to immediately see the product while also meeting recycling lifecycle requirements.

According to Euromonitor (2024), the PET/rPET packaging market in the food sector is expected to grow 12% per year during 2020–2025 in Vietnam and Southeast Asia. This demonstrates that PET is not only a popular choice but also a long-term export trend.

5.2. PP – Rapid Growth in Meat and Seafood

PP is favored in fresh meat, seafood, and frozen food categories due to its heat and cold resistance. Retail chains in Asia, such as Aeon (Japan, Vietnam) and Lotte Mart (South Korea), have switched most meat trays to PP capable of topseal or skin pack applications.

Additionally, the increasing number of FDA-approved PCR-PP processes paves the way for using recycled PP in trays, helping companies reduce Plastic Tax costs and enhance their sustainability image (FDA FCN Database).

5.3. PS/EPS – Gradually Phased Out from Supermarkets

EPS was once the “king of low-cost” meat packaging but is now declining rapidly. Reasons include:

• Banned in the EU and Canada for single-use food packaging.

• Consumers are concerned about health risks from styrene.

• Supermarkets aiming for a green image are removing EPS from supply chains.

According to a McKinsey survey (2023), over 60% of consumers are willing to pay more for products with environmentally friendly packaging (McKinsey Report). This creates direct pressure on supermarkets, leaving little room for EPS in sustainable strategies.

5.4. Recommendations for Vietnamese Businesses

• Invest in PET/rPET for export fruits and high-visibility products.

• Develop PP for meat, fish, shrimp, and frozen foods – prioritize integration of topseal, skin pack, and anti-fog technologies.

• Reduce dependence on EPS, gradually removing it from strategic product categories.

Image Source: Collected

See more: Products | HUNG DU Co., Ltd 
Read more at: Sustainable Packaging Market – Size, Report, Industry Growth 

Conclusion

Today, choosing food packaging materials is no longer based solely on cost or convenience; it has become an integral part of the sustainable development strategy for supermarkets and businesses. Comparing PET, PP, and PS shows:

• PET stands out for its transparency, safety, and recyclability. It is the number one choice for fruits, sushi, and salads—products that require clear display and compliance with international rPET standards.

• PP offers flexibility, excellent heat and cold resistance, and competitive costs. It is the ideal solution for meat, seafood, and ready-to-eat products.

• PS/EPS, although cheap, poses significant health and environmental risks and is gradually being phased out from global supermarket shelves.

In the context of 2025, with Plastic Tax, EPR, and growing green consumer trends, PET and PP will become the main pillars of the food packaging industry. Vietnamese businesses need to proactively invest in PET/rPET and PP, while ensuring transparency of certifications (FDA, HACCP, ISO 22000) to maintain domestic markets and expand exports to the EU, US, and Japan.