Why We’re No Longer Collecting Mylar Bags

We began collecting mylar bags because I believed we could build a workable recovery option for packaging that has very few places to go.

I still believe in that goal. I also believe in the products that can be made from this material. But after pursuing processing options, comparing costs, and working through the realities of preparing and shipping the bags, we could not establish a system that our program could afford to continue.

P3 Distributing is no longer accepting mylar bags in our recycling boxes.

The bags we have already collected will be cleaned and shipped to TerraCycle for processing. We are following through on that material. Going forward, we are putting our resources into the packaging we have established systems to recover.

I want to explain what we tried, what we learned, and why we made this decision.

Why these bags are so difficult to recycle

In cannabis packaging, “mylar” is commonly used to describe flexible barrier bags. For this discussion, I’m talking about the multilayer bags commonly used for flower and other products, rather than every type of flexible plastic packaging.

These bags serve a purpose. They are lightweight, compact, easy to print, and relatively inexpensive. Their construction helps protect what is inside.

That same construction creates a problem after the bag is empty.

Different materials are bonded together to provide the properties the package needs. Conventional recycling systems generally work best with identified, compatible materials that can be sorted and processed together. A bag made from bonded layers does not fit easily into that system.

This also means a multilayer pouch should not be assumed to belong in a grocery store’s plastic bag collection bin. Those programs are generally intended for qualifying polyethylene films. A flexible bag looking similar to another flexible bag does not make the two interchangeable.

There are specialty companies that can handle certain multilayer materials. But finding a company capable of using the plastic is only one part of building a collection program.

You still need an agreement to receive it, preparation standards you can meet, transportation, and a way to pay for everything involved.

That is where our effort ran into trouble.

The system I hoped to build

My original plan involved HydroBlox, a company that makes drainage products from recovered plastic.

I believe HydroBlox has a great product. Turning difficult plastic waste into a useful drainage material was an outcome I wanted to support, and I hoped we could establish a route for the material we were collecting here in Oregon.

The owner initially told me he did not think the arrangement was economically viable. After we spoke by phone, he agreed to let us send our material for a processing fee of approximately $0.25 per pound.

Freight was going to add roughly another dollar per pound, give or take.

Even at that price, this was going to require additional funding. We would have been paying around $1.25 per pound just to transport the material and have it processed. That did not cover our pickups, sorting, handling, or storage.

But I believed there was something worth building there.

Unfortunately, I could not get the follow-up needed to move the arrangement forward. My calls and other attempts to make contact went unanswered, and eventually I had to accept that we did not have a working outlet.

That does not change my opinion of the product. It does change what I can offer through our collection program. I cannot operate an ongoing service around an arrangement that I have been unable to establish.

What the alternative actually costs

Without that outlet, I contacted TerraCycle.

We currently have approximately 1,500 pounds of bags to send. Shipping that material is expected to cost around $1,200. Processing will cost approximately $5,500.

That puts the combined freight and processing expense at about $6,700.

For this shipment, that works out to approximately $4.46 per pound before our own collection and preparation costs.

These are estimates based on the amount we expect to ship. The final weight and charges may vary, but the scale of the expense is clear.

We have already picked up the bags, brought them to our warehouse, and initially sorted them. Now we are taking additional steps to remove leftover material so the bags meet TerraCycle’s cleanliness requirements.

Preparing them has already taken several days of additional cleaning.

That labor is another expense. So are the collection routes, the initial sorting, the handling, and the warehouse space occupied while we work toward shipment.

The $6,675 figure does not represent the full cost of providing this service. It represents the freight and processing bill after we have done the work needed to get the material ready.

We will finish handling what we collected

The bags are being held while we prepare them, and they will be shipped to TerraCycle.

We collected this material because we believed we could establish a recovery system for it. People participated on that understanding, and we are going to complete the process for the bags already in our possession.

Ending new collection lets us address the material we have without continuing to add to a service whose costs we cannot sustainably cover.

There is a difference between testing a recovery option and maintaining it indefinitely. We made a real effort to get this option working. We found a potential use for the material, pursued an arrangement, and explored another processor when the first route did not come together.

The result was a much more expensive system than the one we originally hoped to build.

Why we cannot keep collecting

To continue, we would have to charge participating retailers enough to cover the service.

Even the original HydroBlox arrangement would have required additional fees over time. I had not settled on how to introduce those charges, and I expected that many businesses would be unwilling or unable to pay them.

At the TerraCycle rate, that problem becomes much larger.

Oregon retailers already face pressure on their margins. Based on the costs we are seeing, I do not believe we could charge what this service requires and retain enough participation to make it work.

Collecting more material would increase the amount we owe for processing. It would also add cleaning, handling, transportation, and storage work. Volume alone would not solve the funding problem.

Someone has to cover those expenses.

We cannot indefinitely absorb them, and I do not see a workable way to pass them on to our participating retailers. Continuing to accept bags while leaving that question unresolved would only create a larger problem.

That is why we are ending collection now.

What consumers can do instead

Consumers interested in recovering their multilayer packaging can investigate specialty services through TerraCycle or Ridwell.

These are paid services with their own acceptance rules. Customers should confirm that their specific packaging is accepted before purchasing a service or sending material.

At the time of writing, TerraCycle advertises its Plastic Packaging Zero Waste Box starting at $110, with pricing depending on the selected option. This consumer product is separate from the bulk processing quote we received for P3’s material.

Ridwell advertises doorstep pickup for $20 per month, where available, and lists multilayer plastic among its collection categories. Customers should enter their address and confirm the service and accepted materials offered in their area.

Ridwell also offers a $30 mail-in starter kit, which includes one prepaid plastic film bag and one prepaid multilayer plastic bag. Subsequent mail-in bags are advertised as low as $10 each.

Prices and service terms can change, so check directly with the provider before signing up.

Most importantly, bags must be completely empty, clean, and dry before being sent for specialty recycling. Remove all leftover cannabis and other residue, and follow the provider’s preparation instructions.

A bag that still contains product is not ready to send. Being accepted as a packaging material does not mean leftover contents are accepted with it.

Specialty services provide options worth exploring. Their existence also illustrates the central issue: recovering this material requires a separately funded system.

Where we are putting our effort

Our recycling program continues to recover materials for which we have established processes and outlets, particularly rigid polypropylene packaging.

In September, we collected a record 2,600 pounds of plastic. By weight, the plastic we recycled that month was equivalent to approximately 12.5% of the plastic packaging we sold. For perspective, the EPA reported that 8.7% of plastic waste generated nationally was recycled in 2018.

Returned packaging comes back on different timelines, so September’s material was not necessarily packaging sold that same month. Still, tracking recovery against sales gives us a practical way to measure our progress and shows why these established systems deserve our resources.

It also shows why we need to concentrate our resources.

Rigid polypropylene can move through our established sorting, cleaning, and grinding process and into a downstream use. Our jar reuse program provides another route for suitable packaging to return to service.

Those systems still require labor, funding, and participation. We know the work involved, and we have a process we can continue building.

Adding materials to an accepted list is easy. Establishing a dependable route through collection, preparation, transportation, and processing is the work that makes the list meaningful.

Our focus needs to remain on completing that work.

What belongs in the box now

Mylar bags are no longer accepted in P3 Distributing’s recycling boxes.

Please check the current accepted-materials list on our website before dropping off packaging. If you are collecting bags for a separate specialty service, keep them out of the P3 boxes and follow that provider’s requirements.

We will finish preparing and shipping the bags we already collected. We will also continue looking at opportunities to improve packaging recovery.

If a reliable outlet and workable funding become available, I am open to revisiting mylar collection. For now, the costs do not support an ongoing service.

I believed in what we were trying to build, and I still believe difficult materials deserve better recovery options. This effort showed us what was missing and what it would cost to bridge that gap.

We are following through on the material we brought in and directing our resources toward the recovery systems we can sustain.