SHEET MASKS ECO REPORT


masks, as reported by Market Data Forecasts, stands at US$195m in 2021 and is predicted to reach $392.1m by 2026, representing a CAGR growth of 8.6% annually.


Just a few of the brands that have introduced sheet face masks to their brand portfolio this year include Huda Beauty’s Wishful with its Chin Lift masks and Eye Lift & Snatch Instant Sculpting Masks; Spotlight Oral Care with its new Lip Sheet Masks; and cult brand Farmacy Beauty, which introduced its Brightening Coconut Sheet Mask earlier this year.


‘IT’S VALUELESS’ To cut consumption, beauty and health care retailer Holland & Barrett banned the sale of sheet masks from its stores and online site – and has implored its competitors to do the same. “It’s estimated that one million single- use beauty sheet masks are being thrown away across the world every day, and as a business that cares about the wellness of people and our planet, we decided to act now to reduce unnecessary waste,” Jo Cooke, Beauty Trading Director at Holland & Barrett, tells Cosmetics Business. “We’ll continue to find further ways to reduce waste and make other sustainable business decisions that will positively help the impact we have on our planet, hopefully encouraging other businesses to start to do the same. “We can only lead by example and show other retailers what can be done in terms of reducing single-use waste.” But that’s not to say that brands are not making some effort to reduce the impact of their products. While, traditionally, many sheet masks were made of plastic-containing nonwoven fabrics, Jean-Christophe Appriou, Sales Manager at French beauty manufacturer Technature, notes that “brands are more and more challenged on the sustainability of their products, meaning the substrates have to be of natural origin”.


Here he highlights naturally-derived solutions including Softcell (made from natural cellulosic fibres), Lyocell (from wood), cotton, biocellulose (from fermentation) and hydrogel (from carrageenans). However, when it comes to end-of-life get-out-of-jail-free claims like ‘biodegradable’ and ‘compostable’ issues persist – especially since consumers are likely to dispose of their masks via landfill, an environment in


cosmeticsbusiness.com


which even biodegradable materials are unlikely to break down fully. “Compostability in the beauty business: everybody thinks this is the answer. And it’s because brands and designers are not trained in when is the right or the wrong time to use a compostable material,” adds Sutherland. “Part of our responsibility is how can we educate this very powerful organisation, the beauty business, to just ask themselves one very simple question, and that is: if you’re thinking of using a compostable, does it help get food waste into the food waste system? If it does, it’s probably a good use of ‘compostable’; if it doesn’t, it probably isn’t.”


In addition, the biodegradability issue does not take away from the other problem giving sheet masking a bad name in the eyes of scrutinous activists, as Sutherlands explains.


“The sheet mask probably comes in a plastic sachet that is unrecyclable. Nobody will ever recycle that plastic sachet. It’s valueless. It will contaminate the environment, or it will be incinerated, or it will be exported to some developing countries for them to deal with. And there is no way that plastic sachet will be collected, let alone recycled. The system doesn’t exist. So,


first you’ve got the plastic sachet, then you’ve got the sheet mask itself, which is majorly made of plastic. It’s a plastic nightmare.”


WHAT SOLUTIONS? Technature’s Appriou echoes Sutherland’s concerns over non- recyclable packaging for sheet masks. “Regarding the [sheet] packaging, the packaging has to be a barrier. So it used to be PET aluminium PE sachets, which are definitely not recyclable. Packaging suppliers, in my opinion, don’t have reliable solutions, so far, because although you can have a triple or quadruple OPP [oriented polypropylene] complex for the sachets, you have water loss,” he says – far from ideal for a serum-soaked product. Moreover, infrastructure issues mean OPP “is recyclable, but it will never be recycled”.


Alternatives, the company notes, are powder ‘shaker’ masks. Activated by water, the product develops into “what could be a mousse, could be a gel, could be a cream”, which can then be applied to the face.


‘


One million single-use beauty sheet masks are being thrown away across the world every day


WE ASK THE EXPERT


Helen Cox, Global Environmental Reporting Lead, Lush What has Lush done to ensure its masks are not detrimental to the planet? As is the way of most greener options, going back to the original way of


thinking is the way forward. Our potted masks offer zero to landfill, wonderful fresh ingredients and multiple uses. For over 25 years, we at Lush have been filling our recycled black pots full of lovely fresh ingredients to make a face mask for every skin care need. Whichever mask you choose from us, whether it’s our minty powerhouse Mask of Magnaminty, our soothing lavender Beauty Sleep or our blueberry filled Catastrophe Cosmetic, there won’t be a single piece of waste left at the end – you’ll get multiple uses from the product inside and you can return the black pot to us using our Bring It Back packaging return scheme where we’ll grind up the pot, make it into a new one and fill again. Under our scheme you can either trade in five pots for a fresh face mask or use the pot as a 50p deposit to the next one – your choice.


December 2021 27


And this kind of anhydrous product can come packaged in a jar, or in a ‘paper-PE’ sachet, which features a melting layer for heat sealing, but which can be recycled by soaking in water to separate the paper and the PE inner for their different recycling streams. And it’s this type of development that will be imperative for beauty brands. “If you don’t move fast as a beauty brand right now and embrace new formulations today, you will be a future dinosaur,” says Sutherland. “There will be a bonfire of beauty brands if they don’t change fast”


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68