Packaging minimization
How much does the replaced unit weigh compared with a complete single-use pack of the same volume?
Guide · Updated 2026-11-03
How to choose a cosmetic refill system in the PPWR era
A comparison of the four common refill formats for skincare and beauty: pour-in refills, refill jars and inner cups, refillable airless bottles, and airless refill pouches. With a checklist for the EU Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR).
Short answer
Start with what gets replaced.
Every refill system keeps one part and replaces another. The part that is replaced, its weight, what it is made of and whether the formula stays protected while it is swapped decide most of the environmental and practical outcome.
For airless formulas such as serums, lotions, gels, creams and sunscreen, the main choice is between replacing a rigid inner container and replacing a flexible pouch while the airless pump stays in use. Pour-in refills and jars suit products that do not need airless dispensing.
Comparison
The four refill formats compared
General characteristics of each format. Individual products vary, so check the specification of the system you evaluate.
| Format | What is replaced | What stays | Airless during use | Consumer step | Typical fit |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pour-in refill | Refill pouch or bottle | The whole original container | Usually not; product is decanted | Open, pour, close | Rinse-off, body and hand care |
| Refill jar / inner cup | Rigid inner jar or cup | Outer jar and lid | Usually not; airless jar versions exist | Swap the inner cup | Creams, balms |
| Refillable airless bottle | Rigid inner cartridge, often with its piston | Outer bottle, often the pump | Yes | Swap the cartridge | Serums, foundations, fluids |
| Airless refill pouch | Flexible pouch with spout | Airless pump and dispenser | Yes; the pouch collapses as it empties | Move the pump to a new pouch | Serums, lotions, gels, creams, sunscreen |
Rigid vs flexible
Why the replaced part matters
A rigid inner cartridge has to hold its own shape, so it typically uses more material than a flexible pouch of the same volume. A pouch collapses as it empties, which supports airless dispensing and helps minimize the product left behind.
On the other hand, a flexible pouch needs a reliable interface with the pump: a spout, valve and connection that keep the system airless through filling, storage, dispensing and swapping. That interface, more than the pouch film alone, decides whether a pouch refill performs like a premium airless pack.
Material comparisons should use the same delivered product volume, count the reusable dispenser once, and state how many refills are assumed. A material comparison is not a carbon footprint.
PPWR checklist
What to check before you choose
The PPWR, Regulation (EU) 2025/40, has applied generally since 12 August 2026, with individual requirements on their own schedules. These questions help map a refill system to it.
Reuse and refill
Which component is designed for reuse, for how many cycles, and with what handling and hygiene instructions?
Recyclability
What is each component made of, including barrier layers, inks, adhesives, spouts and pumps, and which recycling route applies?
Recycled content
Can PCR material be used, in which components and at what verified percentage?
Product protection
Does the system keep the formula protected while it is used and swapped? Airless dispensing and material barrier are separate questions.
Information and labeling
Can batch, ingredient and disposal information stay clear for each component in each market?
This checklist is a planning aid, not legal advice. Compliance is assessed for each final configuration, market and intended use.
Where Airless Pak mono fits
An airless refill pouch with a reusable pump
Airless Pak mono by BOTTLESS is an airless refill pouch system: the airless pump and dispenser stay in use, and only a lightweight PE-based pouch is replaced.
- Formats from 30 ml to 300 ml
- Documented pouch laminate of approximately 93.15% PE by weight
- PCR options defined per project
- Up to 90% less packaging material for the replacement refill vs. a conventional rigid airless pack of the same volume*
*Results depend on format, configuration and comparison baseline.