Paper Straws vs. Plastic Straws: Which Is Actually Better?

When fast-food chains began swapping plastic for paper in 2018, paper became the obvious eco-friendly default. Then a 2023 study muddied the picture. Here's the fair, fact-checked comparison.

The short answer

For ocean impact, paper straws are unambiguously better than plastic. They break down in weeks in marine environments versus the 200+ years required for plastic. The 2023 Belgian study finding PFAS in some paper-straw brands is a real concern, but it applies to specific lined products — uncoated, FDA-compliant paper straws remain the safer marine option.

For everyday convenience, plastic still wins on durability, cost-per-unit, and consumer experience — which is exactly why the campaign to refuse plastic straws is a behavior-change campaign, not just a product-substitution one.

Material differences in three minutes

Why paper wins on the ocean issue

The whole reason plastic straws became a campaign target is what happens to them after disposal. As covered in our deep dive on how long plastic takes to decompose, plastic doesn't biodegrade in marine environments — it fragments into microplastics that persist for centuries. Paper, by contrast, is made from cellulose fiber that marine microbes evolved to digest. An uncoated paper straw entering the ocean breaks down in 2–8 weeks depending on water temperature.

Even if you assume the absolute worst about a paper straw — that it's lined, gets littered, and somehow takes a year to break down — that's still 200 times better than the plastic equivalent.

The 2023 PFAS study, fairly examined

In August 2023, researchers at the University of Antwerp tested 39 brands of single-use straws (paper, bamboo, glass, stainless steel, plastic) for the presence of PFAS — per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, the "forever chemicals" linked to cancer, reproductive harm, and immune-system disruption.

The findings made global headlines: PFAS were detected in 27 of 39 brands, and paper straws were the most-affected category, with detections in 18 of 20 paper brands tested. Plastic straws had the lowest detection rate.

The crucial detail underneath the headline: PFAS concentrations were tiny (median ~0.1 nanograms per straw) and the contamination almost certainly came from water-resistance coatings applied to specific paper-straw products by manufacturers seeking to extend in-drink durability.

The takeaway isn't "paper straws are dangerous" — exposure from a few straws a year is negligible. The takeaway is "ask whether your paper straws are uncoated or use food-safe coatings only." Major U.S. paper-straw manufacturers including Aardvark have always used uncoated, FDA-compliant designs.

Where plastic still wins (and why that matters less than it seems)

• Cost. Plastic is roughly 4× cheaper per unit at foodservice scale. For a chain serving millions of straws a year, that adds up — but at the per-customer level the difference is fractions of a penny.
• Durability. Plastic straws don't soften. Paper straws can soften in cold drinks within an hour and in hot drinks within minutes. For a long brunch, this is annoying.
• Texture. The "papery" mouthfeel of paper straws is the most-common consumer complaint and the source of substantial backlash from chains that switched.

Two of these three are mostly solvable: heavier-construction paper straws (like Aardvark's) hold up for hours, and bulk-purchase costs have dropped substantially since 2018. Texture is real but is a fixable consumer-expectation problem.

What about reusable alternatives?

For most people who can plan ahead, a reusable stainless-steel or silicone straw used hundreds of times will have a smaller lifetime footprint than even paper. Paper still has its place for foodservice scenarios where collection and washing aren't practical. See our full alternatives comparison for the head-to-head breakdown.