Horizontal Form-Fill-Seal Packaging With IngeoNew Structures ‐ Opportunities

Presented By: Roman Forowycz

Innovation Takes Root ConferenceFebruary 17 – 19, 2014

Company ProfileClear Lam Packaging is a multi-faceted manufacturer of Flexible Films, Rigid Rollstock, and Customized Compounded Polymer Additives

• Founded in 1969

• Three (3) Manufacturing Facilities Totaling

Over 660,000 Square Feet

• 2 US Facilities and 1 Chinese Facility

• Over 500 Employees

• Five (5) Operating DivisionsFlexible Films, Forming Films, CL Polymers, LLC, PrimaPak™ Systems and Clear Lam Flexible Films (Nanjing) Co., Ltd

Page 1

Clear Lam Product Lines

Page 2

Various Manufacturing Disciplines

Film Extrusion

SlittingCompounding

Sheet Extrusion

Printing

Laminating & Coating

Page 3

What Is Horizontal Form-Fill-Seal Technology?

• An automated process that can produce a finished, semi‐rigid or flexible, plastic package primarily for perishable goods

• Process Includes:– Unwinding roll of plastic– Heating– Forming– Filling formed containers with product– Sealing with or without vacuum or gas flush– Scoring and cutting– discharging

Page 4

Manufacturing Process For Yogurt Cups Horizontal Form - Fill - Seal (HFFS)

Page 5

Contact Heating

Forming Station

Benefits of HFFS Technology• Lower material costs compared to preformed cups and trays

• Simpler product loading (on web)

• High output

• Significantly reduces warehousing space

• Removes trucks from the supply chain – no need to ship preforms to processors

• Saves fuel consumption and reduces greenhouse gas emissions

Page 6

Common HFFS Equipment In Market

1. Reiser Repack

2. Multivac

3. Ossid

4. Harpak Ulma

5. GEA Tiromat

6. Iapra

7. Rollstock, Inc.

8. Hassia

9. Arcil

Page 7

Video Courtesy of Ossid

Page 8

Insert mov converted file here

HFFS Packaging Examples In Market

Page 9

Cheese Sliced Meats (Club Store)

Cut Veggies / Fruit

HFFS Packaging Examples In Market

Page 10

Sliced Meats (Retail) Yogurt

Razors

HFFS Packaging Examples In Market

Page 11

Burritos Pasta

Veggie Patties

HFFS Packaging Examples In Market

Page 12

Market Data - Sustainability

Source: Priority Metrics Group and Packaging Strategies, 2013 Sustainable Packaging Survey, November 2013,

Page 13

Market Data – Consumers & Sustainability

Source: Priority Metrics Group and Packaging Strategies, 2013 Sustainable Packaging Survey, November 2013,

Page 14

Benefits Of Renewable PLA

• Lower cost per area (inch / cm)

• Lighter gauge vs. HIPS/PET/PP/RPET

• Equal or better barrier

• Comes from non‐petroleum based raw material

• Lower carbon footprint

• More stable pricing vs. traditional petroleum based plastics that fluctuate monthly 

Page 15

Examples of Current Market Structures Vs. Ingeo™ Based Alternatives

Refrigerated Pasta Packaging

PET/EVOH/PE PLA/EVOH/PE

Gauge: 20mil

OTR: 0.06cc/ 100sq.in./24 hrs.

MVTR: 0.12g/ 100sqin./24hrs.

Gauge: 18mil

OTR: 0.07cc/ 100sq.in./24hrs.

MVTR: 0.23g/ 100sq.in./24hrs

Page 16

Examples of Current Market Structures Vs. Ingeo™ Based Alternatives

Refrigerated Cut Vegetable Packs

PETG/PE PLA/PE

Gauge: 14mil

OTR: 2.05cc/ 100sq.in./24hrs

MVTR: 0.31g/ 100sq.in./24hrs.

Gauge: 12mil

OTR: 2.07cc/ 100sq.in./24hrs.

MVTR: 0.35g/ 100sq.in./24hrs.

Page 17

Examples of Current Market Structures Vs. Ingeo™ Based Alternatives

Refrigerated Snap-Apart 4 Pack Yogurt

HIPS PLA

Gauge: 36mil

OTR: 11.7cc/ 100sq.in./24hrs

MVTR: 0.28g/ 100sq.in./24hrs

Gauge: 27mil

OTR: 0.78cc/100sq.in./24hrs.

MVTR: 0.29g/ 100sq.in./24hrs.

Page 18

Environmental Benefits Calculator

• 1,998,360 crude oil gallons annually

• 3,190,880 therms of natural gas

• Emissions equivalent to 3,710 passenger cars

• 52.8% reduction in GHG emissions by utilizing Renu PLA over HIPS

• 50.7% additional energy savings 

Page 19

1950 Pratt Boulevard ▪ Elk Grove Village,  IL 60007 ▪ Phone 847‐378‐1200 ▪ Fax 847‐378‐1325 ▪ www.clearlam.com    ENVIRONMENTAL  BENEFITS  CALCULATION  WORKSHEET

9/13/2012

Enter data in yellow sections  Results displayed in green sections

CONTROL STRUCTURE ALTERNATE STRUCTUREGAGE Renewable GHG ENERGY GAGE Renewable GHG ENERGY

MATERIAL (mils) (%) LB CO2 eq /LB material MJ / Kgm material (mils) (%) LB CO2 eq /LB material MJ / Kgm material

EVA 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0 0.000 0.0NYLON 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0 0.000 0.0PP 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0 0.000 0.0PET 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0 0.000 0.0LDPE 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0 0.000 0.0HDPE 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0 0.000 0.0LLDPE 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0 0.000 0.0PLA 0.0 0.000 0.0 27.00 100.0 1.300 42.2

PVC 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0 0.000 0.0HIPS 36.00 0.0 2.757 85.6 0.0 0.000 0.0GPPS 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0 0.000 0.0

CELLOPHANE 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0 0.000 0.0EVOH 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0 0.000 0.0Foil 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0 0.000 0.0Glass 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0 0.000 0.0

TOTAL 36.00 0.0 2.757 85.6 27.00 100.0 1.300 42.2

Control versus Alternate ‐ net change

Alternate Structure Weight Difference 

(assuming the same annual material weight)1,000,000LBs     each material 894,231LBs     net wt change =     ‐105,769

Usage net difference equates to: Usage net difference equates to:

GHG ENERGY TOTAL GHG ENERGY TOTAL

Percentage ‐% 52.8 50.7 ‐‐‐‐‐ 57.8 55.9 ‐‐‐‐‐

Railcars of coal / year  3.5 9.1 12.5 3.8 10.0 13.8

Therms of Natural gas used  132,334 186,753 319,088 144,823 205,960 350,783

passenger cars / year  121 250 371 133 275 408

automobile driving distance  1,436,165 2,960,269 4,396,434 1,571,699 3,264,717 4,836,416

Barrels of crude oil / year  1,538 3,220 4,758 1,683 3,551.2 5,234.5

GHG calculations

Railcars of coal / yearstructure GHG total * Yearly usage / (191.5 mTon CO2 / railcar * 2203 lbs/mTon)

Therms of Natural gas used structure GHG total * Yearly usage / (0.005 mTon CO2 / therm * 2203 lbs/mTon)

Passenger cars / year structure GHG total * Yearly usage / (5.46 mTon CO2 / vehicle * 2203 lbs/mTon)

Automobile driving distance passenger cars / year * 11,856 miles / car

Barrels of crude oil / year structure GHG total * Yearly usage / (0.430 mTon CO2 / barrel * 2203 lbs/mTon)

Energy calculations

Railcars of coal / year

structure Energy total * Yearly usage * 0.454 Kgm / lb / (22.68 mmBTU / mTon * 90.89 mTon coal / railcar * 1055 Mj / mmBTU)

Therms of Natural gas used structure Energy total * Yearly usage * 0.454 Kgm / lb * 1 Therms / 105.506 Mj

Passenger cars / year driving distance / 11,856 miles / year

Automobile driving distance Energy total * Yearly usage * 0.454 Kgm / lb * 1 barrel / 5.22 mmBTU * 42 gallons / barrel * 1 mmBTU / 1055 Mj * 19.7 miles / gallon

Barrels of crude oil / year structure Energy total * Yearly usage / (5.80 mmBTU  / Barrel * 1055 Mj / mmBTU * 1 lb / 0.454 Kgm)

DENSITY Renewable GHG ENERGY

MATERIALSpecific                  Gravity 1.00 = 100% LB CO2 eq (100 yrs)                        / LB material MJ / Kgm               material

Reference  / source & date

EVA 0.90 0.00 2.300 91.0 Wal‐Mart  scorecard / DuPont company 7/2009

NYLON 1.15 0.00 7.200 120.0 Wal‐Mart  scorecard / DuPont company 7/2009

PP 0.89 0.00 1.343 63.4 US LCI Database DOE / NREL / Alliance 2009

PET 1.36 0.00 2.538 69.1 US LCI Database DOE / NREL / Alliance 2009

LDPE 0.90 0.00 1.477 74.0 US LCI Database DOE / NREL / Alliance 2009

HDPE 0.94 0.00 1.478 68.9 US LCI Database DOE / NREL / Alliance 2009

LLDPE 0.92 0.00 1.479 68.5 US LCI Database DOE / NREL / Alliance 2009

PLA 1.24 1.00 1.300 42.2 NatureWorks 10/2009 Data

PVC 1.29 0.00 2.029 52.4 American Chemistry Council   7/2009

HIPS 1.04 0.00 2.757 85.6 American Chemistry Council   7/2009

GPPS 1.04 0.00 2.763 84.6 American Chemistry Council   7/2009

CELLOPHANE 1.45 0.98 0.479 20.9 Use cardboard values ‐ Wal‐Mart scorecard 7/2009

EVOH 1.20 0.00 2.300 91.0 Use EVA values ‐Wal‐Mart Scorecard / DuPont 7/2009

Foil 2.70 0.00 1.332 0.0 European Aluminum Association 7/2009

Glass 2.60 1.00

NO renewable energy credits nor carbon offset purchases included in values.

Latest published data of real values used.

36 mil HIPS 27mil PLA

Based on 10,000,000lbs. of material

Comparable Savings:

Future Considerations

• Cost of real estate throughout the supply chain will continue to increase…enhanced cube will be critical

• E‐commerce will grow substantially and packaging will need to be lighter and take up less space

• Consumers will demand lighter, easy to use, and easy to dispose packaging

• Freedonia, a research leader, projects “U.S. demand for bioplastics in the packaging market will increase 19% per year to reach 277 million pounds in 2016”   

Page 20

Conclusions

• HFFS applications for refrigerated products are well suited for Ingeo based structures (multi‐layer and mono‐layer)

• Ingeo’s characteristics allow for the opportunity to create lighter packaging with the appropriate strength

• In many cases, consumable costs can be lowered as compared to traditional petroleum based plastics

• CPG’s and retailers can reach cost savings and sustainability goals by incorporating Ingeo PLA in form‐fill‐seal applications

Page 21