French school catering services must rethink their practices: the use of single-use plastic will soon be banned, and reusable alternatives are becoming a necessity. Beyond the choice of material, this transition affects logistics, costs and organisation. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) makes it possible to evaluate these options and support local authorities in making sustainable and effective decisions.

A regulatory and environmental context accelerating the transition 

---

French school catering is now at a turning point. The issue of packaging, long perceived as a simple logistical matter, has become a strategic challenge at the intersection of public health policies, waste reduction and the fight against climate change.

The EGALIM Law requires that, from 2025 onwards, plastic food containers be banned for cooking, reheating and serving in school establishments.

This development is reinforced by the AGEC Law, which sets a broader objective of phasing out single-use plastic packaging by 2040. These measures reflect a clear national commitment: to reduce exposure to potentially harmful substances, limit waste generation and place public services on a trajectory of impact reduction.

In practice, this regulatory shift directly affects local authorities operating with central kitchens and chilled distribution systems. Every day, thousands of meals are packaged, transported, reheated and served. The choice of container impacts not only waste generation, but also energy consumption, workforce organisation, transport logistics and the investment required in equipment. 

The transition therefore does not simply involve replacing one material with another. It requires rethinking an operational model that has been built over decades around single-use items. 

Single-use packaging and reusable stainless steel: two approaches, two models

---

Single-use plastic packaging follows a linear model: produce, use, dispose. Its main advantage lies in operational simplicity. Lightweight, stackable and inexpensive per unit, it reduces the need for washing infrastructure and simplifies daily logistics management. In complex organisations, it has long represented a reliable solution.

However, this apparent efficiency conceals significant environmental impacts. The production of plastic trays consumes fossil resources and generates greenhouse gas emissions. Even when the plastic is technically recyclable, actual recycling rates remain variable, and waste generation remains structurally high. Added to this are health concerns related to certain plastic compounds, which have strengthened the public’s determination to reduce their use.

In contrast, stainless steel containers follow a reuse model. Durable and hygienically stable, they can be used hundreds, if not thousands, of times. At the end of their life, they benefit from an efficient recycling stream. On paper, stainless steel therefore meets the objectives of reducing waste and limiting the use of fossil resources.

However, the reuse model is not without its constraints. It requires appropriate washing facilities, with careful management of water and energy consumption. Stainless steel containers are heavier, which can affect transport loads and working conditions for staff. They also demand additional storage space and signific 

The real challenge therefore lies in a comprehensive analysis of these two models, beyond preconceived notions. Neither plastic nor stainless steel can be assessed solely based on purchase price or perceived environmental image. The entire system must be taken into account. 

Life Cycle Assessment: a strategic lever for decision-making and financing

---

In this context, Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) emerges as a central tool. It allows the evaluation of a container’s environmental impacts across its entire life cycle: raw material extraction, manufacturing, transport, use, washing, maintenance and end of life.

For single-use plastic, LCA highlights the impacts associated with repeated production and waste management. For stainless steel, it allows the calculation of the “environmental payback time,” that is, the number of uses required to offset the initial manufacturing impact. The higher the number of cycles and the more optimised the organisation, the more effective reuse becomes.

LCA plays a decisive role in the decision-making of local authorities. It enables objective comparison of multiple scenarios, anticipation of potential impact reduction, and identification of critical points, particularly regarding water and energy consumption. It provides a scientific basis for budgetary and policy trade-offs.

It is also crucial for access to public funding. Support schemes for the ecological transition, particularly those administered by ADEME, increasingly require rigorous environmental justification for projects. A study incorporating an LCA lends credibility to funding applications, demonstrates the project’s alignment with national objectives, and strengthens the robustness of the submissions. 

LCA is therefore not merely an environmental assessment tool: it becomes a strategic instrument for financial security and for managing the transition. 

WeLOOP: comprehensive support for local authorities

---

The transition from single-use plastic to reusable stainless steel containers is a cross-cutting project affecting organisation, equipment, finances and working conditions. It requires a systemic vision and a structured methodology.

WeLOOP supports local authorities in this transformation by combining environmental expertise with guidance on eco-design. The approach involves evaluating different options, modelling various scenarios, conducting comparative life cycle analyses, and identifying the most relevant pathways.

Beyond the technical study, WeLOOP contributes to the development of realistic roadmaps. Preparing funding applications, particularly to ADEME, is also part of this support, helping to secure investments and optimise available financial aid. 

By turning a regulatory obligation into a strategic opportunity, local authorities can use the shift to reuse as a lever for environmental, economic and social performance. The challenge goes beyond the choice of container: it is about embedding school catering sustainably within a framework of exemplary practice and alignment with national climate commitments.