We have a new coffee packaging. We conducted extensive research and developed the bag ourselves. Our current solution keeps coffee fresh even longer and produces fewer emissions. Packaging is a continuous optimization process, which is why we keep improving in this area too. We describe everything we've learned here, which packaging is sustainable, and what you should pay attention to when buying coffee.
In an ideal world, we wouldn't need packaging. However, in our coffee universe, we ship more coffee than we physically sell in our two cafés in Basel. For our purposes, packaging is a must to be able to ship coffee at all, to maintain quality, and to guarantee food safety.
At the same time, packaging serves as a carrier of information: a brand design becomes etched in memory, and through labels we can describe the coffees, tell their stories, and create desire for enjoyment.
Our "New" ones - 250g and 1000g made from monomaterial: 60% renewable raw materials according to mass balance, 30% recycled plastic according to mass balance, and 10% new plastic.
When we look at packaging in the coffee world today, we see very different approaches in the specialty coffee industry about what coffee packaging can and should do.
We see pragmatic approaches to packaging that simply do exactly what they're supposed to do - make coffee transportable. We see approaches where it's more about pure design: especially when a lot of material is used. And then we see increasingly more ideas about how packaging can be made at least recyclable, but even better circular.
In the best of all worlds, there would be packaging that addresses all the mentioned criteria:
tight, pleasant to hold, circular, and stylish.
With this idea, we embarked on a long learning journey. It's not yet complete, but we've been able to develop a clear picture and clear position on what properties good coffee packaging must have, and what doesn't make sense for us.
We have a focus on continuous improvement in everything we do. With packaging too, sustainability is our priority.
How high are the environmental emissions from coffee packaging?
In the overall calculation of our emissions from 1kg roasted coffee until the moment a coffee bag leaves our roastery, the packaging itself accounts for only about three percent of total emissions.
In our case: packaging accounts for "only" 3% of coffee emissions
In the first chart, we look at the emissions we produce at our Basel roastery. In 2023, all packaging used accounted for 16.7% of all roastery emissions.
Emissions from Kaffeemacher roastery in Basel, 2023
The figures refer to harvest 22/23 on Santa Rita, Nicaragua.
We know exactly where we have the greatest leverage to reduce emissions in a coffee chain: in cultivation, not in coffee packaging. But: where we are, we can drive rapid change with what we know. And that's why we must continually improve packaging too.
One aspect we don't want to overlook when developing sustainable packaging is the look and feel. The emotions we experience when we see, hold, and feel a certain packaging influence our purchasing decisions.
And that's sometimes rather absurd:
- Paper-like packaging can suggest to us that roasted coffee is sustainable, even when there's no connection. The coffee could have been produced completely unsustainably.
- The opposite is also possible: highly sustainably produced coffees are sold in aluminum packaging, which by far is the most environmentally damaging (see chart below).
So we sought packaging whose appearance matches its contents. Sustainable coffee must go into sustainable packaging.
Aluminum performs worst in terms of emissions but has the best fresh-keeping capacity. Design: Tobias Milz, dataset from ecoinvent
New packaging - a process, not a state
In November 2022, we wrote a blog about our new packaging, saying it was now more sustainable. At that time, we switched from widely used paper-plastic composites to mono-plastic, with the idea that bags made from mono-plastic can be recycled and we'd have a better climate balance.
Our packaging upgrade from November 2022
Around the same time, we came across an article by DIW and disillusionment set in. Thermal recovery of plastics produces approximately 2.7 kg CO2e, which roughly doubles the emissions when viewed over the entire lifetime. Tobi put it bluntly:
"Well, that was a real miss."
And exactly why?
Because we consumed a lot of new material, so-called virgin material, based on fossil resources. The old and new packaging weighed the same, just under 13 grams. But the new packaging, which was recyclable because it was made from mono-plastic, consumed twice as much virgin material as the old packaging.
Learning 1:
The amount of material used is decisive for whether emissions are low. We see increasingly more recyclable coffee packaging. This is actually progress - designing packaging so it can theoretically be recycled for another purpose. But: if only a small percentage globally (9%) is recycled and the rest is burned or ends up in the environment, is this approach useful?
Anecdote:
We had lunch with an innovation manager from an energy producer.
"Don't make more plastic"
was his input. His company burns household waste to produce district heating, steam, and electricity. However, household waste today is "too clean" because people separate their plastic and packaging waste.
Household waste now has too little combustible mass, so exactly the plastic and packaging waste must be added back for combustion to work at all. As an alternative to plastic waste, the waste pile is also sprayed with an oil derivative.
"But no recycling isn't a solution either"
we heard from various quarters that otherwise contradicted each other vehemently. There is thus something like a consensus in science and industry that recycling must happen, but the entire system is still far too immature, and plastic consumption continues to rise.
Learning 2:
Recycling is not yet a functioning system. And yet we must do it. Legal requirements are becoming stricter, recycling more widespread, and pressure for change is growing.
And yet we asked ourselves whether recycling is right for us if we consume even more plastic in the process? Or should we work with packaging that doesn't need to be recycled at all?
We set out to search and conducted more than three dozen conversations with researchers, developers, manufacturers, recyclers, certifiers, other roasteries, and innovators. Our project was internally called: "the best of all packaging."
But we learned: the best packaging doesn't exist. It's always a snapshot and must always be reviewed.
Early on, we had an exchange with a startup that can produce films from byproducts of tofu production. That all sounded very good, but scaling development from the lab to larger quantities takes years. We're confident that in a few years new materials for films will be in use and available for the broader industry.
Learning 3:
We decide on a bag form and its properties, but remain flexible regarding material use. Enormous progress is happening right now.
Over more than a year and a half, we contacted and exchanged with various material suppliers.
While we looked for revolutionary materials, we also questioned our requirements and processes.
- Why do all bags have the same shape today?
- What sizes do we have? Do we need them?
- What are the processes for packing, sealing, and shipping?
- Are the current dimensions the right ones for us?
- What does each area want?
Through a community survey on Instagram, we discovered that our coffees are typically consumed after eight weeks. Every coffee package legally requires a best-before date. We provide one too, but simultaneously recommend orienting yourself by the roast date and consuming the coffee after a few weeks and at most two months.
Since we don't stretch the best-before date the way large-scale production for supermarkets often does, where coffee can sit on shelves for up to 18 months, we can rethink the barrier concept. We don't need an exceptionally long shelf-life. Our bags' barrier should keep coffee top-fresh for about three months - that would be enough. This saves on material used - as much as needed, as little as possible.
The following additional research questions came up:
How quickly does coffee age in a bag?
We checked three different coffees from the same date over eight weeks for oxygen content.
How tight is our current packaging?
When checking oxygen content, it turned out that not all packages were equally tight, and we sometimes found up to 17% oxygen (of possible 21%) in the package.
How do other packages on the market perform?
We analyzed coffee packaging from more than a dozen coffee roasteries and more than two-thirds had the same problem: the package wasn't tight.
How does coffee age in a "tight" package?
Much more slowly: the coffee showed more character, more aromas, and generally seemed rounder
We learned through observations, tests, and many tastings. With learnings from our preliminary tests, we sought conversations with manufacturers. With each conversation we learned more and quickly realized that almost all manufacturers need to rethink.
Those already working with new materials, however, still face capacity bottlenecks or lack food-use approvals that hinder scaling.
Data and facts about our new bag
Our new bag is made from a monomaterial and thus recyclable. The old bag was not. In composition, our new bag consists of
- 60% ISCC certified renewable raw materials under the mass balance approach: tall oil, a byproduct of paper processing
- 30% ISCC certified Post Consumer Recycled Plastic under the mass balance approach: recycled plastic
- 10% virgin material, meaning new plastic
Under the mass balance approach, we pay for more sustainable materials. These are mathematically present in the bag, physically if at all only marginally. So our packaging could consist of 100% new plastic.
Green electricity and biogas work on the same principle: you pay for alternative materials, which the manufacturer then purchases. You buy materials that are renewably balanced, but what comes from the outlet or tap is a mixed product.
In the following charts, we therefore assume a calculated best-case scenario and a real-case scenario.
Best Case Scenario:
shows what emissions our bag would theoretically have if the 60/30/10 mix were exactly present in the bag. It shows the purely calculated ideal value.
Real Case Scenario:
shows what emissions it would have in the real case if 0% of the more sustainable materials were present in a bag.
The real-case scenario still performs better than the old bag because we use roughly four grams less material.
The ecological footprint of our new packaging
New bag, theoretical best-case scenario: material, manufacturing, disposal without recycling
If our bag is not recovered, we have total emissions of 92g CO2e per 250g bag.
New bag, theoretical best-case scenario: material, manufacturing, disposal with 35% recycling
Plastics (PE and PP) from which coffee packaging is typically made involve downcycling. The global rate is 9%, in Germany approximately 35% becomes usable granulate.
Old bag: material, disposal
Our previous bag, which rolling switches to the new bag in April and May 2025, emits more. We're improving by roughly 25%.
New bag: detailed calculation in best-case scenario
Reality check - what really hurts and where there's joy
The longer we dealt with this topic, the more questions arose. At times we felt like researchers or investigative journalists - but really we were just looking for packaging for our coffee beans.
The packaging topic is complex and too often too intertwined with technological backwardness and lax legal trade regulations.
Minimal improvements were presented to us as "world innovations" and what some called a "smart approach," we probably would have categorized under common sense. The packaging topic is both emotional and pragmatic simultaneously.
You can quickly be bothered by bio-cucumbers wrapped in plastic, but you can't transport individual coffee beans. We need to sharpen our focus on where packaging makes sense and what properties it really does or doesn't need.
In these learnings, there were some things that hurt, but also ones that gave us confidence.
What hurts
Recyclable only means it can be recycled. Depending on the material, this works better or worse. Approximately 35% of waste collected in the yellow bag becomes usable raw material again.
The rest is burned, exported, or ends up in the environment.
Why is recycled material more expensive than virgin material?
- The processes aren't as optimized as those for virgin material.
- Demand determines price. Demand is high and there isn't enough available.
- If there's too little plastic in waste, oil or plastic waste is purchased for burning
- Material composites can't be recycled. This means they're burned. Which doubles CO2e emissions.
What raises questions
- All packaging materials from the yellow bag don't receive food approval
- Similarly (for now) "ocean plastic" → "wild plastic" for other areas
- Valves don't consist 100% of PP or PE but have a small PET film integrated and thus aren't 100% recyclable
- Worse than packaging waste is food waste or coffee waste
What gives us confidence
- New materials, young companies approaching the big industry players - things are happening
- The EU Directive 94/62/EG on Packaging and Packaging Waste "PPWR" is coming and requires the following points, which are especially relevant for coffee packaging:
- Components of recycled packaging must be separable and individually recyclable
- Material reduction: the weight and volume of packaging should be limited to the necessary minimum.
- Critical for shipping: empty space in packaging, filled with materials like bubble wrap or foam, may make up a maximum of 50% of total volume.
Checklist for good packaging:
- How long does my product need to stay fresh?
- How little packaging can I use?
- Package size vs. package contents
- How do I inform consumers that they're disposing of the packaging correctly?
- What do we stand for and how does the packaging align with that?
What brings joy: our new packaging partner
Our new partner for coffee packaging is the company O.Kleiner, based in Wohlen, Switzerland. We sought a partner who could handle both development and production. Through various conversations, we worked toward our target specifications and together developed new coffee packaging.
Andreas Platz from O. Kleiner (left) and Philipp Schallberger, Kaffeemacher GmbH (right)
