Attachment D
Food Service Ware Price Comparison
This document contains data and graphics gathered and created by staff at the City of Mountain View in Fall 2021. Follow-up research by City of Cupertino staff showed current pricing largely unchanged. We thank the City of Mountain View for sharing this research work.
This document compares the typical per-item price range of commonly used disposable food service ware items. While this is not an exhaustive price survey, it provides preliminary insight into financial implications of the proposed food service ware regulations on food providers. While traditional plastic cups and containers are currently accepted for recycling in Cupertino, recycling markets for most of these common foodware markets are weak and they may end up contaminating the recycling if they are not empty and wiped clean. Transitioning these items to compostable, fiber-based materials or recyclable aluminum will reduce recycling contamination and landfilled waste. Proposed Single-Use Plastics Ordinance non-compliant items are shown in red and compliant in green.
Box-and-whisker plots divide the data into quartiles. The typical per-item price range is the middle two quartiles, 25th through 75th percentile values of all prices surveyed. The line inside the box is the median. The lines or “whiskers” above and below the bar show the maximum and minimum prices found. The data sets exclude statistical outliers.
1. Rectangular Tray with Lid (approximately 9”x6”)
Black plastic trays with clear lids are a commonly used type of takeout food packaging. As shown, aluminum trays are a cost-effective compliant alternative for this type of container, with significant per-item savings over black plastic.
Aluminum trayw/lidAluminum trayw/lidBlack plasticw/clear lidBlack plasticw/clear lidCertified PFAS-free fiber tray w/lidCertified PFAS-free fiber tray w/lid Aluminum tray
w/lid
Aluminum tray
w/lid
Black plastic
w/clear lid
Black plastic
w/clear lid
Certified PFAS-free fiber tray w/lid
Certified PFAS-free fiber tray w/lid
2. Large 9”x9” Hinged Container (“Clamshell”)
The median price for certified PFAS-free fiber clamshells is the same as that of plastic, though the typical price ranges differ. Compostable plastic is the most expensive option, so food providers currently using these items will save money by switching to compliant fiber-based alternatives.
Non-compliant paper/fiberNon-compliant paper/fiberPlasticPlastic“Compostable” plastic“Compostable” plasticCertified PFAS-free fiberCertified PFAS-free fiber Non-compliant paper/fiber
Non-compliant paper/fiber
Plastic
Plastic
“Compostable” plastic
“Compostable” plastic
Certified PFAS-free fiber
Certified PFAS-free fiber
3. Food Containers/Soup Cups (16 oz)
These products are often used to hold soups and other hot, liquid-based items for takeout orders. In this category, plastic containers were significantly cheaper than compliant alternatives, meaning food vendors will likely experience increased costs to comply with the proposed Single-Use Plastics Ordinance regulations.
Certified PFAS-free fiberCertified PFAS-free fiberNon-compliant paper/fiberNon-compliant paper/fiber Certified PFAS-free fiber
Certified PFAS-free fiber
Non-compliant paper/fiber
Non-compliant paper/fiber
PlasticPlastic
Plastic
Plastic
4. Hot Beverage Cups (16 oz)
There are only two primary material types for hot beverage cups: paper that is not certified as PFAS-free, and certified PFAS-free paper or fiber. While certified options are slightly more expensive, many of the cheaper non-compliant products may no longer be allowed when California’s PFAS ban takes effect in 2023.
Non-compliant paper/fiberNon-compliant paper/fiberCertified PFAS-free paper/fiberCertified PFAS-free paper/fiber Non-compliant paper/fiber
Non-compliant paper/fiber
Certified PFAS-free paper/fiber
Certified PFAS-free paper/fiber
5. Cold Beverage Cups (16 oz)
Cold cups are available in both plastic and fiber options. Under the proposed Single-Use Plastics Ordinance, clear plastic cups will no longer be allowed. Food providers are likely to encounter increased costs in transitioning cold cups to compliant fiber-based options unless they currently use compostable plastic.
PlasticPlastic“Compostable” plastic“Compostable” plasticCertified PFAS-free paper/fiberCertified PFAS-free paper/fiber Plastic
Plastic
“Compostable” plastic
“Compostable” plastic
Certified PFAS-free paper/fiber
Certified PFAS-free paper/fiber
Overall trends:
The impacts of switching to compostable, certified PFAS-free or recyclable aluminum disposable food service ware is likely to be a mix of cost increases and cost savings, depending on the specific foodware item and compliant alternatives.
Compostable plastic is the most expensive option for many products. Businesses using compostable plastic can save money switching to compliant fiber items.
This research revealed large variation in price for the same products across different distributors, so food providers should obtain quotes from multiple distributors when searching for compliant food service ware items.
Confusing labelling and “greenwashing” of non-compliant plastic and fiber products makes it more complicated for food vendors to identify compliant products. For example, some petroleum-based plastic items are labelled “eco-friendly” since they use less plastics than similar products or contain recycled material, but they are not compliant with the proposed ordinance.