Paper straws have long been promoted as an environmentally friendly alternative to conventional plastic straws. However, a new South Korean government-commissioned study has challenged that assumption, finding that paper straws recorded a 6.33 times higher human carcinogenic impact indicator than conventional plastic straws across their entire life cycle.
The research, titled Comprehensive Study on Single-Use Straws, compared conventional plastic, paper, biodegradable plastic and bio-based polyethylene (bio-PE) straws. It assessed their environmental impacts across 16 categories, covering raw material production, manufacturing, use and disposal. The findings suggest that switching from plastic to alternative materials does not automatically reduce environmental damage.
Key Takeaways
- 6.33 times higher impact: Paper straws recorded a human carcinogenic impact indicator 6.33 times higher than conventional plastic straws.
- Bio-based plastic performed worse: Bio-PE straws recorded 16.18 times the carcinogenic impact indicator of conventional plastic.
- 16 environmental categories: Researchers evaluated four straw materials across 16 environmental impact categories.
- Plastic performed better in 10 categories: Conventional plastic straws recorded the lowest impact in 10 of the 16 categories examined.
- Recycling challenges: Small sizes, coatings and adhesives make disposable straws difficult to recycle.
- Waste management matters: South Korean waste statistics indicated that 73.6% of used straws were incinerated and 26.4% sent to landfills.
- Researchers recommend reducing consumption: The study suggests that businesses should stop automatically distributing disposable straws and provide them only when customers request them.
What Did the South Korean Study Discover?
The study was commissioned by South Korea’s Ministry of Climate, Energy and Environment. Its findings were disclosed on October 21, 2026, by Kim Wi-sang, a lawmaker from the People Power Party.
Researchers compared four types of disposable drinking straws:
- Conventional plastic straws
- Paper straws
- Biodegradable plastic straws
- Bio-based polyethylene (bio-PE) straws
Instead of examining only the materials used to manufacture the straws, researchers considered their complete life cycles.
This included the environmental effects of obtaining raw materials, manufacturing products, using them and disposing of them after use.
The assessment covered 16 environmental impact categories, including climate change, acidification, particulate matter, human toxicity and carcinogenic impact.
One of the most notable findings was that conventional plastic straws recorded the lowest impact in 10 of the 16 categories.
The results challenge the assumption that replacing plastic with paper or plant-based materials automatically produces a more environmentally friendly product.
Paper Straws Recorded 6.33 Times Higher Carcinogenic Impact
The most widely reported finding concerns the human carcinogenic impact indicator.
According to the study, paper straws recorded an impact 6.33 times higher than conventional plastic straws.
They also recorded approximately 2.04 times the environmental acidification impact.
However, an important distinction is necessary: the carcinogenic impact figure is a modelled life-cycle environmental indicator based on potential effects associated with emissions from production and disposal.
It does not mean that drinking through a paper straw makes someone 6.33 times more likely to develop cancer.
The study evaluates potential impacts associated with the materials and their life cycles, not the direct cancer risk to individual consumers.
This distinction is important because the headline figure could otherwise be misunderstood as evidence that paper straws directly cause cancer.
How Different Types of Straws Compared
The research also found that alternatives marketed as environmentally friendly did not necessarily perform better than conventional plastic.
| Straw material | Carcinogenic impact compared with conventional plastic | Acidification impact |
|---|---|---|
| Conventional plastic | 1.00x | 1.00x |
| Paper | 6.33x | 2.04x |
| Biodegradable plastic | 3.34x | 1.98x |
| Bio-based polyethylene | 16.18x | 5.90x |
<text color=”secondary” size=”xs”>Source: South Korean government-commissioned study, as reported by The Korea Herald and NDTV. Figures are relative impact indicators, not direct measures of personal cancer risk.
Bio-based polyethylene recorded the highest impact among the four materials in the carcinogenic indicator comparison.
Importantly, bio-PE and biodegradable plastic are not the same thing.
Bio-PE can be manufactured using renewable plant-based sources such as sugarcane. However, its chemical structure is equivalent to conventional polyethylene, meaning it does not automatically biodegrade.
Biodegradable plastics are designed to break down under specified conditions, although actual performance depends on the material and waste-management environment.
Why Are Paper Straws Difficult to Recycle?
Paper is generally associated with recycling, but disposable paper straws present practical challenges.
Their small size makes them difficult for recycling facilities to separate from other waste materials.
Manufacturers may also use coatings, adhesives and water-resistant treatments to prevent paper straws from becoming soggy during use.
These additional materials can complicate the recycling process.
The study also examined how discarded straws are handled in South Korea.
Based on national waste statistics, researchers assumed:
| Waste treatment method | Share of discarded straws |
|---|---|
| Incineration | 73.6% |
| Landfill | 26.4% |
| Total | 100% |
These disposal assumptions matter because the environmental impact of a product depends not only on how it is manufactured but also on what happens after it is discarded.
The findings suggest that simply replacing plastic with paper may not solve the underlying waste-management problem.
South Korea’s Plastic Straw Policy Faces Renewed Questions
The findings have also brought renewed attention to South Korea’s policies aimed at reducing single-use plastic consumption.
The country introduced restrictions on plastic straws at cafes and restaurants in November 2022.
However, enforcement was postponed indefinitely in November 2023 following public complaints and questions about the effectiveness of the policy.
The government subsequently adopted an approach under which businesses provide straws when customers request them.
Kim Wi-sang criticised the government’s focus on replacing one disposable material with another, arguing that environmental policies should concentrate on reducing overall consumption.
The study also included a survey of 1,001 people.
According to the reported findings, 87.5% of respondents preferred plastic straws, while 54.4% supported providing straws only when customers requested them.
These results illustrate the practical challenges of introducing alternatives that consumers may find less convenient
Why Reusable Straws Could Be Part of the Solution
The findings raise an important question: if both paper and plastic disposable straws have environmental disadvantages, what should businesses and consumers use instead?
Researchers recommended reducing the distribution of disposable straws rather than automatically replacing one material with another.
Reusable alternatives, including stainless steel and other durable materials, can reduce the need for repeatedly manufacturing and disposing of single-use products.
However, reusable products also have environmental costs associated with manufacturing, transportation, cleaning and eventual disposal.
Their overall environmental benefits depend on how frequently they are reused and how they are maintained.
For businesses, one practical approach is to avoid automatically placing straws in every drink and provide them only when customers request them.
For consumers, drinking directly from a glass or using a reusable straw when necessary can reduce disposable waste.
The Bigger Picture
The South Korean study highlights a broader problem in environmental policy: changing the material of a product does not necessarily eliminate its environmental footprint.
Paper, biodegradable plastics and plant-based materials can offer advantages in particular circumstances, but their environmental performance depends on manufacturing methods, energy consumption, transportation and disposal infrastructure.
The findings should not be interpreted as proof that conventional plastic is environmentally harmless. Plastic pollution remains a significant concern, particularly because conventional plastics can persist in the environment.
Instead, the research reinforces the importance of evaluating products across their entire life cycles rather than judging their sustainability based only on whether they are made from paper or plants.
Looking Ahead
The findings could influence how governments evaluate alternatives to single-use plastics. Instead of focusing exclusively on banning particular materials, policymakers may increasingly consider the full environmental costs of manufacturing, using and disposing of everyday products. Businesses may also face greater pressure to reduce unnecessary packaging and disposable items.
Ultimately, the most important lesson is that replacing one disposable product with another is not always enough. Reducing unnecessary consumption, improving waste-management systems and encouraging reusable alternatives could play a more meaningful role in reducing the environmental impact of everyday products.
Frequently Asked Questions
1. Are paper straws worse than plastic straws?
A South Korean government-commissioned study found that paper straws had higher impacts than conventional plastic in several environmental indicators, including a 6.33 times higher human carcinogenic impact indicator. However, the results varied across 16 categories and do not establish that plastic is better in every environmental situation.
2. Do paper straws increase cancer risk?
The reported 6.33 times figure is a modelled life-cycle environmental impact indicator. It does not mean that people using paper straws have 6.33 times the cancer risk.
3. Why are paper straws difficult to recycle?
Their small size makes sorting difficult, while coatings and adhesives can complicate recycling.
4. What is bio-based polyethylene?
Bio-based polyethylene is a plastic made using renewable biological sources, such as sugarcane. Despite its plant-based origin, it is chemically equivalent to conventional polyethylene and is not automatically biodegradable.
5. What is the best way to reduce straw-related waste?
Reducing unnecessary single-use straw consumption is one practical approach. Businesses can provide straws only when customers request them, while consumers can avoid disposable straws or use reusable alternatives.
Get the day’s top stories in your inbox
One concise email. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.
