sustainable packaging

You are currently browsing articles tagged sustainable packaging.

Greener Package Database – “an insurance policy against greenwashing”

April 30, 2010 in Industry News & Insights by admin | No comments

Claims of packaging that is sustainable, biodegradable, recyclable or compostable are floating around everywhere. Unfortunately, these claims are often unsubstantiated – they are not specific and not backed by third party proof. For example, for a package to qualify as “recyclable”, it needs to be accepted in more than 60% of US communities according to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). For compostability claims, it is essential that packaging suppliers are specific as to whether it is home compostable or only accepted in industrial composting facilities and this needs to be accompanied by proof from the Biodegradable Products Institute (BPI) for example.

To address the issue of “greenwashing” in the packaging industry, Greener Package has established a database for packaging suppliers to register their “sustainable” products. The idea is to finally have one set of guidelines for sustainability claims, one place to check these claims against these guidelines by a third party, and one place to look up packaging suppliers that have been accepted into the database and meet the guidelines.

While this database does not replace further in depth research and analysis of a product, it is a significant first step as a base filter – in particular since database users can dispute questionable claims, have entries reviewed further, or even withdrawn.

Now with the FTC Green Guide, the Sustainable Packaging Coalition criteria which I discussed in a previous post, and the Greener Package Guidelines, we are starting to see some solid improvements from basic definitions and guidelines, to a vision for improvement, to actual measurement and policing. Setting such universal standards is instrumental to give consumers the tools to properly assess their purchase decisions while rewarding those companies who invest in creating packaging that addresses as many of the principles of sustainable packaging as possible.

Additional resources:

8 Tips to Green Guideline Claims

Greener Package unveils industry-first ‘anti-greenwash’ guidelines

GreenerPackage.com Releases Sustainability Claims Guidelines and Announces Third-Party Review of Packaging Sustainability Data

» Leave a comment

Tags: , , ,

Acting and Communicating a Commitment to Sustainability

April 26, 2010 in Industry News & Insights by admin | No comments

These days, more than ever, selling on price point alone is not enough. Consumer demands for added value, environmental and societal considerations, economic pressures to decrease operating costs, and the need to increase productivity, are some of the many factors at play. According to research undertaken by The Produce Marketing Association (PMA) in 2008, 74 percent of leaders in the fresh produce industry recognize that making “sustainability” a priority in their company is urgent.

Sustainability is a broad concept so where do fresh produce retailers start? While the economic side of sustainability is critical for the business, the priority action items that consumers would like to see from a societal and environmental perspective are just as significant. What’s more, research shows that consumers are willing to pay a premium if they see certain social and environmental actions taking place.

The PMA survey showed that consumers place priority on the following top industry action items: pay workers fairly and establish worker safety programs; implement water and energy conservation programs; reduce pollution in transportation; reduce trash; and ensure products are packaged in recyclable packaging.

Let’s delve further into the packaging concern since this is the focus of the blog. A 2009 consumer survey conducted by the Hartman Group on behalf of the PMA verifies this concern. Most consumers (65%) want to see more emphasis on protective packaging of produce. In addition, a majority (60%) want to see more eco-friendly packaging.

While some may argue against using packaging in the first place, it is quite justifiable from a consumer health perspective as well as an economic bottom line. Packaging protects fresh produce from spoilage and dirty hands, and extends shelf life. In bulk displays, retailers are throwing away anywhere from 15 to 18 percent of produce due to it being picked over and damaged. With packaging, there is only five to eight percent waste at most.

But what type of packaging will create the right value in the mind of the consumer?

First off, we want to clearly reduce our dependency on petroleum based plastic packaging that goes straight to landfill, that litters and pollutes our oceans, that does not biodegrade nor compost, and that is not recyclable. The alternatives for fresh produce retailers range from PLA (corn plastic), to a variety of agricultural fiber based packaging made from renewable resources, such as palm, bamboo, bulrush, and bagasse. These fiber based products are 100 percent compostable in the backyard compost and once broken down, make a healthy contribution to the soil as humus.

We recommend that fresh produce retailers look to align themselves with packaging distributors that also offer an integrated merchandising program to assist with communicating sustainability efforts to the customers. For example, by creating a well integrated program that informs and educates the consumer, as well as tells the story of our eco-packaging, our company’s goal is to strengthen and substantiate the retailer’s commitment to sustainability and the reduction in petroleum based plastics. It shows the consumer that the retailer is part of the solution, not contributing more to the challenges.

» Leave a comment

Tags: , , , , , ,

What is Sustainable Packaging?

April 19, 2010 in ­In Perspective by admin | No comments

Sustainable, eco-friendly, eco-responsible, environmentally sound, green – the list goes on – are the terms we read and hear about on a daily basis in response to various new product innovations. The packaging industry is no exception to using this type of language. But what do all these words really mean? Let’s go with the word sustainable as it seems to be the most common yet most vague of the “green” terms. It is overused and means different things to different people. At the same time, it is hard to avoid, especially for me, being part of a packaging movement that aims to bring about the type of change that might be termed sustainable.

To start with a more fundamental, widely accepted definition of sustainable development, I like Dr. Gordon Robertson’s interpretation of the Brundtland Report definition. He explains that for sustainable development to take place, a balance between economic growth, social development and environmental protection is required – a triple bottom line view. According to his 2009 article, Sustainable Packaging: Does it Really Exist?, Robertson interprets that “sustainable development is the level of human consumption and activity which can continue into the foreseeable future, so that the systems which provide goods and services to humans persist indefinitely.”

So let’s relate this back to the packaging industry. Robertson goes on to criticise some efforts by the industry, namely the Sustainable Packaging Coalition (SPC), to find a common ground around the meaning of sustainable packaging – he says according to their definition, no packaging on the market is currently sustainable. But here I argue that we have to start somewhere – and we require a widely accepted guideline to work from. And this is exactly what the Sustainable Packaging Coalition is trying to do. If we want to improve our industry and bring about change to the way we make our packaging, we need a framework like this to direct our activities toward improvement.

According to the SPC then, a package is sustainable if it meets the following criteria:

  • Is beneficial, safe and healthy for individuals and communities throughout its life cycle;
  • Meets market criteria for performance and cost;
  • Is sourced, manufactured, transported, and recycled using renewable energy;
  • Maximizes the use of renewable or recycled source materials;
  • Is manufactured using clean production technologies and best practices;
  • Is made from materials healthy in all probable end of life scenarios;
  • Is physically designed to optimize materials and energy;
  • Is effectively recovered and utilized in biological and/or industrial cradle to cradle cycles.

As a designer and distributor of eco-responsible packaging, I can look at these criteria as a progressive challenge and see where we are at and what areas we need to analyze further to make improvements to become truly sustainable according to this definition. I know that we have to make some significant improvements in the area of renewable energy and clean production technologies. But I also know that we are meeting this definition in the other categories. This allows me to speak with more confidence and clarity to my clients as I can show them these criteria among our other standards, such as ASTM D6866, BPI compostable, and Greener Package Database, to explain how we measure our success and compare to our competition.

Additional Resources:

Sustainable Packaging: How do we Define and Measure It?
Greener Package Guidlines
Sustainable Packaging Alliance
Wikipedia: Sustainable Packaging
Wikipedia: Sustainability

» Leave a comment

Tags: , , ,

Why Use Packaging in the First Place?

March 26, 2010 in ­In Perspective by admin | No comments

When I’m at the grocery store check-out till, I often wonder about the courageous customers that place their unprotected lettuce, tomatoes, or apples on the conveyor belt where hundreds of other items, including meats, poultry and fish, and sticky bakery items or dusty cans have already been transferred that day. What’s more, the cashier needs to touch every item and handle the cash in-between. Of course, we have the option of bringing our own reusable produce bags. Either way, it does beg a discussion about the benefits of packaging.

In our business, we come across many individuals that ask us the question, “Why use packaging in the first place?” There is great concern about packaging adding significantly to the overflowing landfills. And it’s true. According to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 2008 report, “Containers and packaging made up the largest portion of municipal solid waste generated in 2007: 31 percent or 78 million tons.”

Fresh produce packaged in Earthcycle

But let’s face it, when it comes to food packaging in particular, our convenience-driven and health conscious society with a growing affinity for portion-sized pre-packaged food cannot and maybe should not do without it. In particular with the recent panic surrounding the H1N1 virus, you want to know your food is wrapped safely from any possible contaminants and from pathogens in the air when it’s displayed in grocery stores.

And let’s not forget, packaging will protect from germs that can transfer from shoppers picking over the produce. Then there’s the damage to consider. In bulk displays, retailers are throwing away anywhere from 15 to 18 percent of produce due to it being picked over and damaged. With packaging, there is only five to eight percent waste at most.

So packaging is not only helpful for our health, but it also assists the retailer with maintenance of product integrity at store shelves and decreases the amount of fresh produce waste that will otherwise end up in landfills. James McWilliams discusses these issues in more detail in his recent New York Times article, “How About Them (Wrapped) Apples?” It is a worthwhile read.

This still leaves us with the overflowing landfills and waterways contaminated by packaging. But there are many packaging alternatives now available, including PLA and agricultural fiber options which are cost competitive with traditional plastics such as PET. Earthcycle is one of them. When we first conceptualized Earthcycle Packaging in 2004, we took the various issues discussed above among many more into consideration and believe that the benefits of packaging in the produce industry far outweigh the negatives.

In this day and age, we do not necessarily have to do without. We have the knowledge and understanding to leverage the design brilliance of nature to come up with the type of products that we have come to depend on without creating more waste or environmental harm in the meantime.

Our Earthcycle packaging, for example, follows the cycle of nature. Our product life cycle starts with a natural renewable resource, palm fiber, from which we mould certified home compostable packaging. Once the packaging has done its job protecting our food, it can be thrown into any compost and will break down within 90 days, returning to the earth as humus and creating valuable nutrients for the soil.

» Leave a comment

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Waste Management at Vancouver 2010 Olympics

March 16, 2010 in ­In Perspective by admin | No comments

According to a recent article from PricewaterhouseCoopers, VANOC has been the first organizing committee in the history of the Olympic Games to integrate a sustainability management and reporting system into its business plan. It was based on international standards, such as AccountAbility’s AA1000 series, which are “principles-based standards for helping organizations become more accountable, responsible and sustainable.”

Given VANOC’s sustainability definition of “managing the social, economic and environmental impacts and opportunities of [the] Games to produce lasting benefits, locally and globally,” they built sustainability into the games in 12 key areas. You can read the details here.

I wanted to take a closer look at the waste management side of things, and in particular, see what I could find on packaging. The VANOC 2008 to 2009 Sustainability Report states that overall, VANOC managed to divert 67% of their waste by reusing, recycling or composting it – that’s 734.2 metric tonnes of their total solid waste that they were successful in diverting from landfills during this time period. Their target for the actual game period of January 1 to March 31, 2010 was to divert a minimum of 85 percent of their total waste generated from all game operations. It’ll be interesting to see the results once the 2010 Sustainability Report is released.

In adopting Vancouver’s Zero Waste Challenge Strategy, VANOC has had to strategically work with sponsors, product suppliers, contractors and staff in the areas of source reduction, reuse, recycling, waste energy, landfill disposal, and education and communication.

For example, VANOC worked with one of their sponsors, The Hudson’s Bay Company (HBC), on their packaging. HBC sponsored furniture and linens for the athletes’ village. VANOC says that the waste creation from polystyrene (Styrofoam) packaging  would have been high. In addition, there would have been the generation of more traffic, more costs for waste disposal and the creation of greenhouse gas emissions through removal of non-recyclables. So HBC turned around and worked with its suppliers to find alternatives that would be acceptable to VANOC’s waste management policy, such as easily compactable and recyclable cardboard packaging and plastic films. In addition, HBC provided worker uniforms in bulk packaging.

The Hudson’s Bay Company was not the only sponsor who took the challenge seriously. Coke, for example, showcased its commitment to the Zero Waste Challenge and sustainable packaging by presenting its new, fully recyclable “PlantBottle”, using only 100 percent compostable beverage cups and lids, and collecting all PET containers for a 95 percent diversion of waste from landfills. Apparently, the uniforms worn by the Coke reps were made out of recycled PET bottles.

More links of interest:

Vancouver 2010 Sustainability Overview

12 Ways VANOC Built Sustainability into the Games

VANCOV 2008-2009 Sustainability Report
See page 54 for Waste Reduction details

Snapshot of VANOC 2008-2009 Sustainability Report
See page 14 for Environmental Stewardship and Impact Reduction Scorecard

VANOC announces additional “Sustainability Star” winners

Coke’s Zero Waste Carbon Neutral Sponsorship

Green is the New Red for zero-waste, carbon neutral sponsor

The Olympic Gold Rush – it’s Only Just Begun

» Leave a comment

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Pros and Cons of PLA – “Corn Plastic”

March 4, 2010 in Consumers, Eco-Responsible Packaging by admin | 1 comment

Bioplastics  are a form of plastic that come from renewable sources, such as corn, vegetable oil or corn starch, for example. They differ from the standard plastics, made from petroleum, that we have come to depend on in society over the past several decades. For example, many clear plastic containers today are made from PLA or polylactic acid – a resin produced from corn. NatureWorks  in the USA is the world’s largest producer of PLA. Their containers are compostable in industrial composting facilities only. PLA is also used in cups and containers as an impermeable liner.

Scanning the Internet, there has been quite the debate over the past few years on whether or not corn plastic actually makes us better off than our conventional petroleum based PET. So here is a condensed list derived from the more prominent sources* that summarizes some of the key advantages and disadvantages of corn plastic:

Advantages of PLA

  1. Derived from corn which is a renewable resource
  2. PLA products are compostable in industrial composting facilities
  3. PLA is cost competitive with regular petroleum-based resins such as PET and most likely cost advantaged in the future given rising petroleum prices
  4. Producing PLA uses 65% less energy than producing conventional plastics
  5. Producing PLA creates 68% fewer greenhouse gases than producing conventional plastics
  6. PLA contains no toxins
  7. From a safety perspective it will not blow up like oil might

PLA pellets

Drawbacks/Criticism of PLA
  1. PLA is only compostable in industrial composting facilities – access is limited as only few sites in the USA exist (113+)
  2. PLA in large amounts may interfere with conventional composting because the resulting polymer will make the compost wetter and more acidic
  3. Consumers will dump PLA in with their regular PET recycling which can contaminate the PET recycling stream if it happens in large quantities
  4. Material Recovery Facilities (MRFs) have to pay to sort out PLA and pay again to dispose of it
  5. Because of the lack of infrastructure, the majority of PLA packaging is likely to still end up in landfills
  6. Most of the corn used to produce PLA is genetically modified
  7. Some individuals raise morality concerns in using food for packaging if so many people in the world are starving

In addition to PLA, there are a number of other renewable packaging alternatives hitting the markets, most notably, agricultural fiber products produced using natural fibers such as bagasse, bamboo, bulrush, and palm fiber. They differ mainly in that they can be composted at home, not requiring an industrial composting facility.  While they have many advantages, agricultural fiber based products are not necessarily direct substitutes to PLA. For example, they cannot be used for high moisture applications, such as cups, without partnering with PLA or other such product to offer a barrier coating.   

 *Sources
The Daily Green – TheDailyGreen.com: Is Corn Plastic Good for the Environment?
Smithsonian Magazine – Smithsonian.com: Corn Plastic to the Rescue
Nature Works LLC – NatureWorksLLC.com: Fact or Fiction
Oregon Environmental News – OregonLive.com: Corn plastic sounds great, but it’s tough to recycle and may foul systems
Plastic Redesign Project

» Leave a comment

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Annual DuPont Awards for Packaging Innovation

March 3, 2010 in Industry News & Insights by admin | No comments

The annual DuPont Packaging Awards recognize excellence in packaging developments. Encouraging your customers and their customers to enter the DuPont Awards for Packaging Innovation can open new marketing and communications channels throughout the value chain. Packaging designers, converters, consumer goods producers, retailers and equipment manufacturers around the world are eligible. The industry’s longest running, independently judged competition honors innovation, sustainability and cost or waste reduction. For entry details click here.

Earthcycle – Natureflex Organic Kiwi Package was the 2008 winning package.

Watch the Earthcycle Innovia package details here:

Watch what the DuPont Juror’s had to say (click on Winner: Earthcycle & Innovia on the right):

Watch jurors’ comments on 2008 winning package: Earthcycle – Natureflex Organic Kiwi Package

» Leave a comment

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Walmart pushes for “zero greenwash” tolerance at Sustainable Packaging Expo

February 17, 2010 in Industry News & Insights by admin | No comments

Everywhere we look, Walmart seems to be leading some kind of sustainability initiative. In April, Walmart will host the 5th Annual Sustainable Packaging Expo in Bentonville, AR, and just last week, we had the Walmart Green Business Summit here in Vancouver with David Suzuki as keynote speaker. Yes, you read right – THE David Suzuki. The corporate giants can no longer ignore the realities of our environment if they want to sustain their business – they are opening their boardroom doors to the individuals who used to make their lives difficult. At the same time, it looks like activists are realizing that they can no longer shun the big box corporate world. Collaboration and transparency may just become the favorable recipe.

So what does such collaboration and transparency look like for Walmart? More specifically, what does it look like at the sustainable packaging side of things? For starters, Walmart has been executing on their sustainable packaging objectives by implementing an online packaging scorecard, running a yearly Sustainable Packaging Expo, actively working with private brand suppliers on sustainable packaging solutions, and exploring alternatives for PVC used in private brand packaging. All of this is quite well documented on their website with a dedicated section for packaging. The process surrounding exhibitors at the Sustainable Packaging Expo is particularly of interest and demonstrates some of their efforts to use collaboration to bring about more transparency and clarity in messaging form their suppliers.

For the 2010 Sustainable Packaging Expo, Walmart is working with Environmental Packaging Intl. (EPI) and GreenerPackage.com. According to a recent post on GreenerPackage.com, exploring the details of this collaboration, GreenerPackage.com will host the virtual component of the Sustainable Packaging Expo in an effort to sustain the relationships between packaging suppliers, product suppliers, and buyers beyond the duration of the April Expo. According to the post, any supplier who would like to be considered as exhibitor has to upload their product specifications to the Greener Package Product Database first.

EPI is taking on the audit component. As per the GreenerPackage.com interview with Walmart’s Ron Sasine and Sam’s Club’s Robert Parvis:

 EPI is very well equipped to provide a level of review of environmental claims and substantiation that is helpful for us. We can then be assured that as our associates walk the floor, they are seeing claims and information that have been vetted and verified for accuracy.

Through Walmart’s efforts to collaborate with product and packaging suppliers, providing educational opportunities, working together to find solutions, and establishing third party audits and measurement tools, the sustainability messages from their packaging suppliers are becoming clearer and more focused, says Parvis.

So, what do we make of Walmart’s sustainability efforts and their work to bring about more collaboration and transparency? Do these efforts stem from a sincere concern for our natural environment or is it merely a competitive survival tactic? Or does it even matter if the direction is right and encourages others to follow suit?

Watch Walmart’s business case for Sustainable Packaging here:

Walmart: Sustainability 2.0 - Packaging - Clip

 

» Leave a comment

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Palm Fiber: The Source of Our Business

December 7, 2009 in Eco-Responsible Packaging by admin | No comments

At Earthcycle we source palm fiber from Malaysia, the largest exporter of palm oil in the world. According to the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank, Malaysia is also the world’s second largest palm oil producer, behind Indonesia.

Malaysia’s palm oil industry began in the early 1900s and grew rapidly in early 1960s as part of a government agricultural diversification program. According to the Malaysian Palm Oil Council (MPOC) , about five million hectares of land in Malaysia is under oil palm cultivation today, producing about 17 million tonnes of palm oil.

For years, after the harvest of palm fruit for oil, the leftover palm fiber was mostly incinerated or dumped in landfill, causing many negative environmental impacts. As part of the effort to move the Malaysian palm oil industry towards sustainability, a more productive use was discovered for this waste – packaging.

Earthcycle has developed an innovative way to turn this former waste into environmentally responsible packaging alternatives such as produce packaging, food trays and other applications.

The raw fiber used in the production of Earthcycle packaging is sourced from palm plantations in west Malaysia that have been reviewed against principles and criteria established by the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) – an organization which defines and certifies sustainability in the palm oil industry. Heap of palm fiber

We also provide earth-to-earth packaging solutions. That means our product comes from the earth, and after displaying and protecting products, returns to the earth through composting. Earthcycle packaging is also certified compostable. That means it has been officially recognized as a product that will break down in a backyard compost. It turns into humus which can then be added as a healthy contribution back into the earth. What’s more, the palm fiber we source is ethically sourced and is not genetically modified.

For more on the palm oil industry, check out these links:

Potential of Palm Oil for Developing Countries and Role in the Food and Fuel Debate

Malaysian Palm Oil Council

» Leave a comment

Tags: , , , ,