Food-grade BPA-free plastics for gastronomy

Which common plastic is best for drinkware in the hospitality industry:
Tritan vs. SAN vs. PC

​

As the operator of a hospitality business, you may not have given much thought to the plastic your drinkware is made from. Given the slim profit margins in this industry, you’ve likely focused more on costs than other factors. But what if we told you that the choice of material for your plastic drinkware could have a significant impact on your overall results, beyond just the price?

That is indeed the case. Depending on your operational needs and brand positioning, you might spend more on your drinkware than is truly necessary. Or, you may not invest much, but need to replace your drinkware frequently because it chips, cracks, or breaks, which can prove to be more costly in the long run.

We present an overview of three different plastic types for drink containers – Tritan™, SAN, and PC – to analyze how they perform in terms of durability, replacement frequency, and specific applications.

​

About Tritan™, SAN, and PC in commercial plastic drinkware

Each of these plastics is an excellent choice and has its place in the hospitality industry. Polycarbonate (PC) and Styrene Acrylonitrile (SAN) are likely some of the most commonly used plastics in the production of commercial drinkware. Tritan™ plastic was designed as an effective alternative to glass.

Of these three options, SAN is generally the most cost-effective, while PC comes at a slightly higher price. Tritan™, like all premium products, is the most expensive of the three, costing about 30–45% more than PC and SAN.

Both SAN and Tritan™ are BPA-free, while PC cannot be produced without BPA, as it is part of the chemical structure. If BPA is a concern for you or your guests, PC could be excluded as an option for plastic containers.

​

Similarities between Tritan™, SAN, and PC plastics for the hospitality industry

On the surface, these three materials share a lot in common. All three have:

• Good clarity and durability

• Excellent performance in mimicking glass drinkware

• The ability to be customized with logos, graphics, and color tones

• The ability to be designed into almost any popular style of drinkware, from glasses to specialty bar tools

• Available in various sizes, designs, and surface textures

Looking at the situation from this perspective, one might argue that all these options serve the same purpose – holding drinks. So why not choose the cheapest option? This is a valid point. But if you analyze more closely, you'll realize that each of these materials has different performance characteristics that may be crucial in determining which material best fits your brand.

​

Durability differences between Tritan™, SAN, and PC plastics for the hospitality industry

All three materials are known for their durability, but in different ways. Eastman Kodak conducted an extensive study that evaluated various performance characteristics of these materials. We'll look at two common situations in the commercial hospitality industry that could have a significant impact on durability: dishwashing and dropping or bumping drinkware.

Commercial dishwasher performance of Tritan™ vs. SAN vs. PC
In the dishwashing section of the Eastman Kodak study, all three plastics were cleaned 1,000 times in a professional dishwasher. Each material was examined for clarity and structural integrity (chipping, cracking, etc.) after 1, 100, 250, 500, 750, and 1,000 wash cycles.

Both Tritan™ and SAN withstood washing in a commercial dishwasher through all 1,000 cycles. It’s likely that each plastic would continue to perform well after 1,000 washes, but the test wasn’t carried further. PC, however, passed the first wash cycle but failed after just 100 cycles, showing signs of cracks.

The key takeaway: In a commercial kitchen where dishwashing occurs frequently, you may need to replace PC drinkware up to ten times more often than SAN or Tritan™. Even when considering the price of PC drinkware.

​

Comparison of impact resistance of Tritan™, SAN, and PC

Here, SAN and PC show a shift. The Eastman Kodak study added an extra component to their dishwashing test by dropping the drinkware up to five times between wash cycles (using the same intervals as before).

Tritan™ emerged as the clear winner, passing every test inspection without any defects. It showed no chipping, cracking, or breaking, and likely would have continued to perform well if the test hadn't been cut short.

SAN, however, failed the drop test, as it chipped on the first fall. This doesn’t necessarily mean that SAN will chip or break with every fall; it simply means that it’s possible it could.