in this report€¦ · 20/3/2012 · such as trays, boxes and outer wrapping. 4 tertiary...

In this report: Package Lightweighting

Issue 35 • March 20, 2012

• Latest Developments

• Policies and Standards

• Methods and Techniques

• Q&As with Procter & Gamble, Nestle Waters N.A., Diageo

EL Insights | © 2012 Environmental Leader LLC. Single license EL PRO subscription can be used by one person. For multiple users, purchase an enterprise license by emailing [email protected] for information.

EL Insights: Package Lightweighting

Package Lightweighting at a Glance

Lightweighting is the process by which companies reduce the weight (and sometimes, the volume) of their packaging. Reducing the amount of material is often the most effective and efficient way of reducing a package’s environmental impact – as long as the changes do not degrade the package’s protective role.1

Terms and Metrics

Generic: “Generic” or “standard” containers are off-the-shelf items produced by packaging manufacturers and bought by a number of product manufacturers, either directly or through container merchants. These containers are often used by large retailers for their own brands, and by small to medium-sized proprietary brands.

Proprietary: Alternatively, product manufacturers can produce their own brand-specific packaging for their items. This packaging is often associated with that brand, and is not available to the wider market.2

There are three major categories of packaging, and companies have applied lightweighting techniques to all three.

Primary packaging: This is the sales unit packaging, which the consumer picks up at the point of sale, and takes home.

1 INCPEN, Why Products are Packaged the Way They Are. http://www.incpen.org/docs/WPAPTWTR.pdf

2 WRAP, Final Project Report: GlassRite – Food, Ready to Drink and Soft Drinks. June 2009. www.wrap.org.uk/document.rm?id=7515

http://www.incpen.org/docs/WPAPTWTR.pdf

http://www.wrap.org.uk/document.rm?id=7515


Secondary packaging: Also called grouped packaging, this groups a number of sales units together to help retailers easily replenish stock on their shelves. It can also group sales units into a larger package which the customer can purchase.3 Secondary packaging includes retail-ready and display packaging, such as trays, boxes and outer wrapping. 4

Tertiary packaging: This refers to the outer transport packaging, such as pallets, outer cases, crates and stretch wrap, used in moving products to the depot or distribution center. This category does not include road, rail, ship or air containers.5

Technologies and Methods

There are a number of ways that companies can reduce the weight of their packaging.

Removing layers of material: Some intermediate layers, shrink wraps and adhesives can be eliminated.

Reducing packaging thickness: This is often made possible because of innovations in materials, and through improved manufacturing techniques. 6

3 Europen, Packaging in the Sustainability Agenda: A Guide for Corporate Decision Makers. http://www.europen.be/index.php?action=onderdeel&onderdeel=6&titel=Publications&categorie=0&item=36




http://www.europen.be/index.php?action=onderdeel&onderdeel=6&titel=Publications&categorie=0&item=36





Moving from one type of material to another: Companies should investigate whether another type of material would be lighter than the material currently used, while offering the same protection. Each material has its own environmental footprint. Metal extraction, for example, has a significant environmental impact – but metals can be recycled over and over again. They can withstand high and low temperatures and offer a long shelf-life. Paper and board require cutting down trees, at least at the outset of the packaging lifecycle, but they are also easily recyclable. Glass is another easily recycled material. Plastic is usually lightweight, and is suitable for a variety of complex designs.

Expanded polystyrene (EPS) provides good product packaging with less packaging weight and bulk, but is difficult to recovery and recycle. As an alternative for shipping sensitive materials such as electronics, companies might consider wrapping products in plastic bags, which uses less material and higher potential for recovery – but may also increase packaging volume. 7

Companies should note that single-material design can make packaging easier to recycle, but can also have drawbacks in terms of resource conservation, durability, safety and even legibility.8

Changing the product: In some cases, packaging can be drastically reduced by changing the product itself. For example, concentrated soap and laundry detergent come in much smaller bottle than their non-concentrated cousins.

Use refills: By setting up refill stations in stores, retailers can almost entirely eliminate the packaging associated with certain projects.

7 Europen, Green Paper – Packaging and Sustainability: An Open Dialogue Between Stakeholders. www.europen.be/download_protected_file.php?file=211

8 Retail Forum for Sustainability, Issue Paper No. 8: Packaging Optimisation. November 2011. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/industry/retail/pdf/packaging_%20issue_paper.pdf

http://www.europen.be/download_protected_file.php?file=211

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/industry/retail/pdf/packaging_%20issue_paper.pdf


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Th

ou

san

ds

of

ton

s

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2005 2007 2008 2009 2010 Total Containers & Pkg 27,370 43,560 52,670 64,530 75,840 76,330 78,370 75,700 71,320 75,640 Paper and Board 14,110 21,400 26,350 32,680 39,940 39,640 39,940 38,290 34,940 37,680 Glass 6,190 11,920 13,970 11,830 11,040 10,460 10,410 10,050 9,660 9,360 Steel 4,660 5,380 3,610 2,890 2,870 2,370 2,670 2,480 2,240 2,740 Wood 2,000 2,070 3,940 8,180 8,610 9,230 9,520 9,680 9,790 9,940 Plastics 120 2,090 3,400 6,900 11,190 12,420 13,630 13,010 12,530 13,680 Aluminum 170 570 1,270 1,900 1,950 1,930 1,880 1,880 1,880 1,900 Other Misc. Packaging 120 130 130 150 240 280 320 310 280 340

Total Containers & Pkg

Paper and Board

Glass

Steel

Wood

Plastics

Aluminum

Other Misc. Packaging

Source: Franklin Associates, via EPA

Major Categories of Containers and Packaging Generated in the Municipal Waste Stream, 1960 to 2010, in thousands of tons


Think three layers deep: Lightweighting often involves trade-offs between primary, secondary and tertiary packaging. If one level of packaging leaves the product more vulnerable to breaking or spoiling, than other levels must pick up the slack. Companies must be careful, not only that their packaging changes don’t harm the product (see Challenges), but that these changes don’t provoke a knock-on effect that actually increases the amount of packaging required, and therefore the resources and energy used. Some approaches companies may take towards this complex problem:

A pallet shipper can be replaced by a frame, if its only function is to hold together secondary boxes (the trade units delivered to retailers), and those secondary boxes adequately protect the product in transit.

Plastic slip-sheets can be used in place of pallets, especially for overseas and inter-company deliveries, saving both materials and space. 9

Some tertiary packaging can be re-used.10

Balancing lightweighting and other initiatives: Lightweighting is just one of a variety of methods that manufacturers can use to improve the environmental impact of their products. Others include use of sustainably managed raw material sources, use of recycled and recyclable materials, improving line efficiency and reducing production waste.11 A lifecycle analysis can help companies to weigh these considerations.








Manufacturers and suppliers

There is huge diversity in the packaging supply chain, which includes packaging manufacturers (each offering one or more types of packaging);; the manufacturers’ raw material suppliers;; makers of adhesives and labels; printers; marketing specialists; transportation service providers; and recyclers, among other companies. Firms from all these sectors are members of the Sustainable Packaging Coalition and the American Institute for Packaging and the Environment (Ameripen). A combined list of their members – leaving out consumer goods companies – is below.

538

397

245 230

186 90

69 57 55 49

12 7 5 4

120

67 50

43

58 43 40

450

325

176

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s 2010

Glass one-pint milk bottle 400g soup can 165g yogurt container Plastic one-liter dishwashing soap bottle Plastic 2-liter soda bottle Glass 275ml beer bottle

Source: INCPEN

Containers and Packaging "Lightweighting" Trends 1940 to 2010, in grams


AET Films, Inc. Alcoa Rigid Packaging Division Amcor American Packaging Corporation AMGRAPH Packaging, Inc Avery Dennison Ball Corporation BASF Corporation Be Green Packaging LLC Bemis Company, Inc. Berlin Packaging Berry Plastics C-P Flexible Packaging Caraustar Industries Inc. CardPak, Inc. cei (Coating Excellence International) CHEP Equipment Pooling Systems Clear Lam Packaging, Inc. Clearwater Paper Corporation Closure Systems International Coim USA, Inc. Competitive Innovation Constantia Flexibles Container Centralen, Inc Cork Industries Crown Holdings, Inc. Curtis Packaging D&W Fine Pack DaniMer Dart Container Corp. Design and Source Productions Domtar - Technical, Specialty and Premium Papers Dordan Manufacturing Company Inc. Dow Chemical Company DuPont E-pac (Far East) Co., Ltd Eastman Chemical Co. ecologic brands Ecospan

ExxonMobil Chemical Co. Fabri-Kal Corporation Flint Group Fluoro-Seal International LP Fort Dearborn Company Fres-Co System USA, Inc. Georgia-Pacific Packaging Graham Packaging Company L.P. Graphic Packaging International Hedwin Heritage Plastics Horizon Converting Huhtamaki IFCO Systems N.A., Inc. iGPS Innovia Films InterGroup International, Ltd. International Paper Interstate Resources, Inc. INTERTEK INX International Ink Co. ITW Klöckner Pentaplast LBP Manufacturing, Inc. Mannkraft/U.S. Corrugated McNairn Packaging Metabolix Micro-Pak USA Millwood Inc. ModusLink Global Solutions Multi-Color Corporation MWV Myriant Technologies NatureWorks Newark Group, The NewPage Corporation Specialty Papers NORDENIA U.S.A., Inc. NOVA Chemicals Inc. O-I OEC Graphics

Packaging Corp. of America Packaging Dynamics Packstar PaperWorks Industries PARC Corporation Phoenix Technologies pkg Plastic Packaging Technologies Plastic Suppliers, Inc. Pratt Industries precision color graphics Printpack, Inc. Product Ventures Resource Recycling Systems Ring Container Technologies Robinette Company, The RockTenn Company SAIC Energy, Environment, & Infrastructure, LLC Saint-Gobain Containers Inc. Schawk Inc Sealed Air Corporation Select Product Group, LP Seydel Companies, The Shanghai Luxin Packing Materials Science & Technology Co., Ltd. Shurtape Technologies, LLC Silgan Holdings, Inc. Solo Cup Company Sonoco Products Company Spartech Corporation Spectra-Kote StewardEdge Inc. Sustainable Packaging Limited Syngenta Tetra Pak thelamco, inc. Tomra North America

http://www.aetfilms.com/

http://www.alcoa.com/

http://www.amcor.com/

http://www.ampkcorp.com/

http://www.amgraph.com/

http://www.averydennison.com/

http://www.ball.com/

http://www.basf.com/

http://www.begreenpackaging.com/

http://www.bemis.com/

http://www.berlinpackaging.com/

http://www.berryplastics.com/

http://www.cpflexpack.com/

http://www.caraustar.com/

http://www.cardpak.com/

http://www.coatingexcellence.com/

http://www.chep.com/

http://www.clearlam.com/

http://www.clearwaterpaper.com/paperboard-products

http://www.csiclosures.com/

http://www.coimgroup.com/

http://www.competitiveinnovation.com/

http://www.cflex.com/

http://www.container-centralen.com/

http://www.corkind.com/

http://www.crowncork.com/

http://www.curtispackaging.com/

http://www.dwfinepack.com/

http://www.danimer.com/

http://www.dart.biz/

http://www.designandsource.com/

http://www.domtar.com/

http://www.domtar.com/

http://www.dordan.com/

http://www.dow.com/

http://www.packaging.dupont.com/

http://www.epac-china.com/

http://www.eastman.com/

http://www.ecologicbrands.com/

http://www.ecospan.com/

http://www.exxonmobil.com/

http://www.f-k.com/

http://www.flintgrp.com/

http://www.fluoroseal.com/

http://www.fortdearborn.com/

http://www.fresco.com/

http://www.gp.com/

http://www.grahampackaging.com/

http://www.graphicpkg.com/

http://www.hedwin.com/

http://www.heritage-plastics.com/

http://www.horizonconverting.com/

http://www.huhtamaki.com/

http://www.ifcosystems.com/

http://www.igps.net/

http://www.innoviafilms.com/

http://www.intergroupinternational.com/

http://www.ipaper.com/

http://www.interstateresources.com/

http://www.intertek.com/

http://www.inxintl.com/

http://www.itw.com/

http://www.kpfilms.com/

http://www.lbpmfg.com/

http://www.uscorr.com/

http://www.mcnairnpackaging.com/

http://www.mirelplastics.com/

http://www.micropakltd.com/

http://www.millwoodinc.com/

http://www.moduslink.com/

http://www.mcclabel.com/

http://www.meadwestvaco.com/

http://www.myriant.com/

http://www.natureworksllc.com/

http://newarkgroup.com/

http://www.newpagecorp.com/

http://www.nordenia.com/

http://www.novachem.com/

http://www.o-i.com/

http://www.oecgraphics.com/

http://www.packagingcorp.com/

http://www.pkdy.com/

http://www.packstargroup.com/

http://www.paperwrks.com/

http://www.parcusa.com/

http://www.phoenixtechnologies.net/

http://www.go-pkg.com/

http://www.plaspack.com/

http://www.plasticsuppliers.com/

http://www.prattindustries.com/

http://www.precisioncolor.com/

http://www.printpack.com/

http://www.productventures.com/

http://www.recycle.com/

http://www.ringcontainer.com/

http://therobinetteco.com/

http://www.rocktenn.com/

http://www.saic.com/EEandI/

http://www.saic.com/EEandI/

http://www.saint-gobain-northamerica.com/

http://www.schawk.com/

http://www.sealedair.com/

http://www.spglp.com/

http://www.seydelglobal.com/

http://www.luxinevotech.com/

http://www.luxinevotech.com/

http://www.shurtape.com/

http://www.silganholdings.com/

http://www.solocup.com/

http://www.sonoco.com/

http://www.spartech.com/

http://www.spectra-kote.com/

http://www.stewardedge.ca/

http://www.sustainablepackaging.asia/

http://www.syngenta.com/

http://www.tetrapak.com/

http://www.thelamco.com/

http://www.tomranorthamerica.com/


Emerald Packaging, Inc. Environmental Inks - A Member of the Siegwerk Group Environmental Packaging International EskoArtwork Evergreen Packaging Exopack Holding Corp.

OIA Global Logistics - Creative Packaging Solutions Omya Orbis Corporation PACCESS Packaging Packaging & Technology Integrated Solutions, LLC (PTIS)

Treofan Americas TricorBraun Unisource Worldwide Inc. Waste Management Wausau Paper

Benefits

Material use: The most obvious benefit of reducing packaging is the corresponding drop in the amount of material used, whether plastic, metal, glass or paper.

Energy/CO2: Lightweighting contributes to drops in energy consumption, and therefore in greenhouse gas outputs, in several ways. First, less energy may go into the extraction and manufacture of the raw material. Less energy may also be used to manufacture the packaging. Lighter packaging also means that less energy is needed to transport each item.

Financial savings: Lightweighting has been practiced and improved upon for decades – since long before companies were concerned with sustainability – because of the financial returns that such efforts often bring. This is demonstrated by the chart on page 7. However, there is also a potential for lightweighting to increase costs, especially in the short term – see Challenges, below.

Challenges

Costs: While most lightweighting efforts save money in the long term, there are often up-front costs associated with changing the shape or formulation of a product’s packaging. Glass manufacturers have

http://www.empack.com/

http://www.envinks.com/

http://www.envinks.com/

http://www.enviro-pac.com/

http://www.esko.com/

http://www.evergreenpackaging.com/

http://www.exopack.com/

http://www.oiaglobal.com/

http://www.oiaglobal.com/

http://www.omya.com/

http://www.orbiscorporation.com/

http://www.paccessglobal.com/

http://www.ptisglobal.com/

http://www.ptisglobal.com/

http://www.treofanamericas.com/

http://www.tricorbraun.com/

http://www.unisourceworldwide.com/

http://www.wm.com/

http://www.wausaupaper.com/


reported that the financial costs of routine lightweighting are insignificant, especially if they undertake the work to coincide with their regular mold renewal. But costs for new processes, such as the “solid blank” technique, a new glass-forming process which provides greater control over material distribution in the mold, are significant.

Even where manufacturers have the ability to make lighter-weight containers, packers may not have the flexibility to make the necessary changes to filling lines, and this can increase costs. 12 The Waste & Resources Action Programme (WRAP) found an example of a company spending £20,000 for each of five filling lines to run a lightweighted bottle.

And material reductions tend to lead retailers and brand owners to demand lower prices for the packaging they buy, though retailers told a WRAP survey they do not expect packaging development costs to be passed on to them – representing a further hurdle for the contract packagers.13

Loss of package strength: Packaging’s primary purpose is, of course, to protect the product inside. Packaging failures could cause not only end-consumers but also retail customers to take their business elsewhere, creating a serious financial risk.

What’s more, a number of studies have shown that products generally use far more resources than the packaging that protects them – so under-performing packages are likely to cause much more harm than good. INCPEN says that 10-15 times more energy and materials are locked up in household goods and food than in the packaging around them. 14



14 INCPEN Factsheet: Lightweighting. http://www.incpen.org/displayarticle.asp?a=10&c=2



http://www.incpen.org/displayarticle.asp?a=10&c=2


Stronger packaging systems can also withstand more pressure and may allow products to be stacked higher in warehouses, saving storage space costs. 15

Food freshness: Consumers and media have been quick to point out perceived instances of wasteful packaging in the fruit and vegetable markets. But packaging on fruit and vegetables can significantly extend product life, thus preventing food wastage. Goods that are not pre-packed are more likely to be damaged. The Industry Council for Packaging and the Environment (INCPEN) says that an unpackaged cucumber will keep for a few days, but one wrapped in just 1.5 grams of film will keep about a week. 16 Goods that are sold loose, on the other hand, still use packaging in the form of plastic bags that customers use to group items together, and the plastic bags used for carrying the items home.17

Under-performing and non-existent packaging are a serious issue in developing countries, causing 30 to 50 percent of all food to decay before it reaches the consumer, compared to two to three percent in Western Europe. If packaging in developing countries could be brought up to the European standard, energy use associated with food losses would be reduced by more than 50 percent, while also making more food available for consumption, according to the European Organization for Packaging and the Environment (EUROPEN).

Customer appeal: A study by Bangor University in Wales, carried out in conjunction with WRAP packaging trials, found that lightweighting by up to 15 percent does not affect customers’ perception of value, but a 30 percent weight reduction results in a three pence drop in estimated value. Container shape, rather than weight, seems to be the main driver of customer perception, and produces a difference



17 INCPEN Factsheet: Excessive Packaging. http://www.incpen.org/displayarticle.asp?a=12&c=2





of up to £0.20 ($0.32) in estimated value. Telling customers that packaging has been lightweighted will likely benefit product sales, the researchers found.18

Luxury items, especially, use packaging to convey opulence or refined tastes. But there are ways to communicate these qualities with less packaging. The right graphics, combined with high-quality print and packaging materials, can be used instead of the traditional combination of primary pack, exterior box and film, INCPEN suggests. Point-of-sale displays can also do much of the marketing needed, reducing the need for excessive packaging.19

Reduced shelf space: One risk with shrinking a product’s packaging weight is that the product may take up less shelf space than its competitors. This can be addressed through several packaging design tactics. The design could reduce weight while maintaining package volume. The product could be sold in larger portions, or more sales units could be placed in a retail box. Companies may also wish to address this issue by talking to their trade associations and seeking sector-wide agreement on packaging reductions.20

Retailer demands: Increasingly, retailers are demanding retail-ready packaging that reduces their labor and handling costs. Such packaging could be a significant extra cost for the supplier – unless the secondary packaging is strong enough to protect the product in transit, and can therefore be counter-balanced by reductions in tertiary packaging. 21

18 WRAP, Optimising Glass Containers in the Food Industry, Building Packaging Efficiencies into Your Business. www.wrap.org.uk/document.rm?id=7592









Shoplifting: Small, valuable items are conventionally packaged in a blisterpack with a backing card to prevent shoplifiting, but there are alternatives that can cut down on material use. These include mono-material trap-packs, security tags, or display behind a shop counter or locked cabinet. 22

Supply chain complexities: WRAP’s GlassRite project found that partners in various stages of the generic container supply chain identified very different barriers to package lightweighting – with some sectors even dismissing the concerns raised by other sectors. What’s more, brand owners’ lack of intellectual property ownership over generic container means they have little to no influence over the containers’ design. These containers are designed to be used for a range of content. The use of container merchants further disables communication between glass manufacturers and brand owners.23

Filling demands: Factories have continually raised filling speeds, to keep costs down. This puts greater strain on packaging integrity.24

Other qualities packaging requires: Packaging must be easy to open, but difficult to open accidentally. It must carry information about the product (or contain a leaflet with that information). The packaging must be easy for a consumer to transport. Depending on the product, the packaging may need to be resealable (which helps to prevent food waste), child-resistant, tamper-evident, have ovenable trays, and be able to pour liquids without spilling.25




25 INCPEN Factsheet: Excessive Packaging. http://www.incpen.org/displayarticle.asp?a=12&c=2






Policies and Programs

Europe

Packaging & Packaging Waste Directive 94/62/EC: This directive establishes common rules to reduce the environmental impact of packaging and help prevent obstacles to trade. The directive’s “essential requirements” aim to keep packaging weight and volume to the minimum required for hygiene, safety and consumer acceptance, while keeping the use of hazardous materials to a minimum and ensuring that packaging can be recovered and/or reused.26

Manufacturers seen to be “over-packing” may be reported to a watchdog body, such as the U.K.’s Trading Standards Institute by competitors or consumers. To comply with the regulations, manufacturers must identify their “critical area” - that is, the barriers preventing the company from reducing its packaging further. If the company finds that further reductions would cause an unacceptable increase in its packaging failure rate, then the firm has reached the “critical point.” This point will vary from product to product. The company can also claim compliance if packaging reductions would require the purchase of new machinery. Companies must document their assessment, prepare a statement of conformity and keep records for possible inspection.27

The Essential Requirements are supported by a set of European Committee for Standardization (CEN) standards, formally recognized by EC Communication 2005/C 44/13. While companies are free to choose how they demonstrate compliance with the Essential Requirements, packaging that conforms to the voluntary CEN standards is automatically assumed to comply with the Essential Requirements.28








Standards, Certifications and Industry Commitments

The ISO is developing standards on packaging and the environment in line with the CEN standards. This work started in December 2009 and ISO has said it aims to finalize the standards by mid-2012.29

Last September a group of retailers and consumer goods manufacturers launched the Global Protocol on Packaging Sustainability, a suggested set of common definitions and principles for packaging in the framework of sustainability.30 The GPPS should also help companies identify and assess packaging “hotspots,” Europen says.31

In 2006, retailers in the U.K. signed up to WRAP’s Courtauld Commitment, which aimed to design out packaging waste growth by 2008 and deliver absolute reductions by March 2010. The companies achieved the first goal, but missed the second one, with total packaging remaining at about 2.9 million tons between 2006 and 2009. The commitment’s second phase aims to reduce the carbon impact of grocery packaging by 10 percent, and to reduce traditional grocery product and packaging waste in the grocery supply chain by five percent, among other goals, between 2010 and 2012. WRAP has also set up an agreement with six leading DIY retailers and brands, targeting a 15 percent packaging reduction between 2007 and 2012. 32


30 http://globalpackaging.mycgforum.com/







Latest Developments in Package Lightweighting

Worldwide and U.S. market

While companies have reduced packaging on many individual products, consumers used on average about the same amount of packaging in 2008 as they did in 1998. This has been driven by shrinking households and rising demand for easy-to-prepare foods.33 Although technological breakthroughs such as new materials or manufacturing processes occasionally allow major changes in package weight, most lightweighting occurs as tiny reductions, repeatedly over time, as small improvements are made again and again.34

Different materials have experienced widely different trends. For example, generation in the waste stream of wood products, glass wine and liquor bottles, aluminum beer and soft drink cans, and “other” plastic packaging (which excludes all plastic containers, bags and sacks), rose from 2007 to 2010. But that for corrugated boxes, folding cartons, and PET bottles and jars fell. (These figures refer to total waste generation, including material landfilled, recycled and incinerated.)

Overall, the global packaging industry was worth $670 billion in 2010, a rise of over $120 billion since 2006. Asia was the biggest consumer of packaging, accounting for almost $200 billion in 2010, and the U.S. was the biggest single country with $137 billion, followed by China with $80 billion. The food industry was the biggest single end user, with 31 percent of demand, over $206 billion. By material, board products accounted for the biggest sector, with about $210 billion, followed by rigid plastic with $144






billion (over 21 percent), and flexible packaging made up another $130 billion. Metal made up over 15 percent of the market.35

A survey of 19 food, beverage and consumer products companies, carried out by McKinsey & Company for the Grocery Manufacturers Association, found that the companies had avoided more than 1.5 billion pounds of packaging from 2005 to 2010, including more than 800 million pounds of plastic and over 500 million pounds of paper.

The companies had engaged in more than 180 packaging improvement initiatives and had increased their number of packaging improvements each year, with improvements spanning most product categories. The 19 companies represented about $225 billion in annual U.S. sales, or roughly one-third of the U.S. market.36

In Europe, packaging consumption has grown at a much slower pace than GDP while packaging disposal to landfill has fallen significantly.37 Europen reports that some of the most noticeable changes have occurred in the beverage industry, where competition between material sectors has allowed manufacturers to use less packaging while keeping products protected. 38

35 PIRA International, The Future of Global Packaging to 2016. www.pira-international.com

36 Grocery Manufacturers Association, Reducing Our Footprint: The Food, Beverage and Consumer Products Industry’s Progress in Sustainable Packaging. http://www.gmaonline.org/file-manager/Sustainability/ReducingOurFootprint.pdf



http://www.pira-international.com/

http://www.gmaonline.org/file-manager/Sustainability/ReducingOurFootprint.pdf




Adoption by businesses

Procter & Gamble: See Q&A.

Nestle Waters N.A.: See Q&A.

Diageo: See Q&A.

Mars Food: As part of WRAP’s GlassRite trials, the company produced an Uncle Ben’s cooking sauce jar that was six percent lighter than its standard counterpart.39

ASDA: Also as part of WRAP’s GlassRite trials, the supermarket lightweighted three sizes of coffee jars by about 10 percent.40

IKEA: The company says its famous “flat packs” increase the efficiency of goods transport. All new products must be flat-packable and all product packaging must fit exactly onto the pallets. Product designers and developers are now including packaging considerations in their assignments.41

Tesco: Late last year, company said that its work with suppliers over the past three years was putting it on track to save over 100,000 tons of packaging by the end of 2011. It has a target to reduce all product








packaging, including that for food, electrical items and homeware, by a quarter. The target includes both supplied and own-brand products.42

Mercadona: Through the Spanish distribution company, stores use “reverse logistics” to return reusable packaging, as well as the cardboard, plastic and expanded polystyrene produced in their operations, to warehouses and logistics centers. They use the same trucks that carried the goods to store, ensuring that the trucks do not have to travel empty. The materials are all recycled.43

The Future of Package Lightweighting

Projections

In a survey of 21 food, beverage and consumer products companies with collective revenue of about $200 billion, carried out by Georgetown Economic Services on behalf of the Grocery Manufacturers Association, the firms said they expect to avoid about 2.5 billion pounds of packaging from 2011 to 2010 – or ten percent of total average packaging weight. Paired with the results from the GMA/McKinsey survey (see Latest Developments), this adds up to a total of four billion pounds of packaging eliminated from 2005 to 2020. All 21 companies said they plan to take steps to reduce their packaging weight.44



44 Grocery Manufacturers Association, Reducing Our Footprint: The Food, Beverage and Consumer Products Industry’s Progress in Sustainable Packaging. http://www.gmaonline.org/file-manager/Sustainability/ReducingOurFootprint.pdf



http://www.gmaonline.org/file-manager/Sustainability/ReducingOurFootprint.pdf


PIRA International projects that the global packaging industry will increase from $670 billion in 2010 to almost $820 billion in 2016. It predicts that Chinese consumption will surpass that of the U.S. in 2017. Healthcare packs will see the highest growth rate of any sub-sector, growing by about 4.5 percent a year to $34 billion, and cosmetics will follow just behind at 4.2 percent, reaching $24 billion by 2016. The food packaging sector is projected to grow to $245 billion, and drinks from $74 billion to $87 billion.

By packaging type, board will keep its lead position and be worth almost $250 billion by 2016, fueled in part by environmental demands. Rigid plastic will reach over $200 billion, pushed by the growing use of plastic in secondary and tertiary bundling applications, and flexible packaging will top $163 billion. The demand for glass will slow, rising from $45 billion in 2010 to about $53 billion in 2016.45

WRAP estimates that if the weight reduction approaches piloted in its ContainerLite project were applied across the food and beverage sector, 10 to 20 percent of material could be removed from the average glass container – savings of up to 100,000 tons per year.46

Some industry experts have suggested that plastic and glass lightweighting has gone as far as it can But most glass manufacturers questioned by WRAP said that this is not the case for their industry. They said the creation of new technological and forming processes, such as solid blank technology, would create more margin for improvement. One respondent forecast potential reductions of up to 20 percent over the next decade. Other survey results suggested that there are large potential savings in both the premium and every-day ranges of the market.47

45 PIRA International, The Future of Global Packaging to 2016. www.pira-international.com



http://www.pira-international.com/




PIRA projects that from 2010 to 2016, metal packaging will fall from 15 to 14 percent of the market. Although consumers are more likely to turn to canned foods during a recession, this factor will be partially offset by metal’s weight and the competition it faces from more logistically friendly materials.

1

5

2

6

3

6

1

1

1

6

19

12

15

18

15

1

35

25

22

20

18

13

4

6

6

29

29

24

21

18

16

15

19

14

29

18

35

32

32

33

62

53

53

1

3

4

7

12

18

17

21

26

Aging populations

Less disposable income because of economic downturn/increased taxes

More single-person/ smaller households

Rising consumer demands for convenience

Increased cost of transportation and travel

Increased raw materials/ energy costs

Increased exposure of consumers to environmental issues

Advances in processing/ converting technologies

Advances in materials technology

Impact of Mega-Trends on Sustainable Consumer Packaging % response

Major barrier to growth Barrier to growth Neither a barrier nor a driver Could be either a barrier or driver Growth driver Major growth driver

Source: Pira International Ltd. Source: Pira International Ltd.


Package Lightweighting: What does all this mean?

For years, package lightweighting has been driven as much – or more – by cost considerations as it has by sustainability.

Most packaging changes are taken incrementally, so companies should not expect a huge leap in their savings.

Any decision to lightweight a product’s packaging should be taken from a lifecycle perspective, considering the potential threats to product failure rates and other desired package qualities, such as recyclability and use of recycled or bio-based materials.

Q&A

Keith Fanta, Senior Engineer – Packaging Sustainability, Procter & Gamble

By how much did you reduce the packaging for the Fusion ProGlide?

The amount of plastic reduction for the Fusion ProGlide was ~75% by weight. This plastic reduction was shared between product and packaging. We were able to reduce the overall packaging material by 11%. This not only includes the plastic but all packaging material.

How did you achieve these reductions?

These reductions were achieved by moving away from the original PVC blister pack towards a more environmentally friendly tray. The new tray is made of renewable sugarcane, bamboo and bulrush. We also able to improve the pallet density by 16% which allowed us to reduce the overall packaging weight further.


What other initiatives have you undertaken to reduce the weight of your packaging?

There are a number of programs that we have executed in the last couple of years to reduce the weight of our packaging. Many of these initiatives are never seen by the consumer and involve reductions in packaging that is used to ship the products to our customers. A couple of reduction examples that affected consumer packaging would be the Tide Compactions (both liquid and powder) and our reduction in Prilosec packaging.

For what types of materials and what products?

Our packaging weight reduction spans all of our materials from fiber based packaging to plastic resin and touches almost all of our major products.

How successful have these initiatives been?

Typically packaging reduction initiatives have been very successful. They generally provide a win for the consumer (by requiring them to take home less packaging and in some cases making it easier to access the product), for the environment (by shipping less packaging), and for P&G (by continuing to help keep the costs of our products affordable for the consumer).

What obstacles did you encounter in trying to make these reductions?

We encounter many obstacles when making packaging reductions. One of the more difficult obstacles is to ensure that the reduced package still provides all the protection needed to get the product through the supply chain. A reduced packaging design that increases product damage typically has a negative effect on the overall environmental footprint.

What other kinds of benefits have there been?

In some cases a reduction in packaging allows us to simplify our manufacturing process and reduce the amount of waste that is produced during this process.


What are the trade-offs - what does one sacrifice in lightweighting a package, and how does a company reduce these trade-offs?

Generally, nothing is sacrificed when lightweighting packaging. We still have to ensure the product is protected, the package looks great on the shelf and it is easy for the consumer to use. Sacrificing any of these attributes would lead to either a negative environmental impact or negative business results.

How do you prioritize which products’ packaging to focus on when it comes to lightweighting?

Many times lightweighting now occurs during the initial design of the product/package. We use computer modeling and physical testing to make sure we get the package weight right the first time. We strive to make sure our packages have the right weight from the beginning so that “light weighting” can eventually become a thing of the past.

What standards, guidance and/or tools have you used to re-design your packaging?

Our packaging engineers have access to a large number of tools, standards (both internal to P&G and external to P&G), and experience to ensure that they produce packages that meet all of the commercial and technical specifications.

First, we begin with the individual business goal which reflects our company sustainability goals. We then develop the business packaging strategy for the business that defines how we are going to use packaging to deliver our goals. We then do in-depth consumer understanding so we know use and habits/needs and marry those with the technical requirements for the product.

We also use a Life Cycle Assessment for the product and the package. P&G helped pioneer this research tool, which looks at environmental factors such as carbon dioxide, energy and water consumption, and waste over the entire lifespan of a product from the creation of raw materials, to product manufacture and logistics, to consumer use, and to the final post-consumer disposal. This comprehensive approach helps us identify the biggest opportunities to improve the environmental impact of our products.


We have created a standard for certain products that have an improved environmental profile. We call these Sustainable Innovation Products or SIPs. These products must:

Reduce usage by more than 10% in either energy, water, transportation, packaging, or product material, while NOT being offset by a meaningful increase in other indicators;

Be supported by good science and substantiated by data, verified via our stringent claim approval systems.

What do you see as the future of lightweighting - have companies done all they can to reduce packaging weight or are there still some untapped areas for improvement?

As mentioned before, the future of lightweighting is that it eventually does not exist. As engineers start to use more sophisticated tools and simulations, the hope is to produce a package that has the lowest possible weight the very first time.

Do you think the market will see future lightweighting emphasize a certain type of material? For example, some commentators say that plastic and glass lightweighting have gone as far as they can, and any future lightweighting will have to occur with other materials.

The vast majority of our packaging materials are plastic and fiber-based packaging. Because of this, I believe that you will continue to see efforts on those two materials to identify technologies or even different materials that can meet the commercial and technical requirements at a lighter weight.


Nestlé Waters North America

What initiatives have you undertaken to reduce the weight of your packaging -- including, but not limited to, the initiatives that helped you cut packaging volume 19 percent between 2007 and 2009? For what types of materials and what products? How successful have these initiatives been?

Since the 1990s, Nestlé Waters North America has prided itself as a leader in the beverage industry in our efforts to reduce materials used in our packaging.

In 2009, we conducted a life-cycle assessment for our Eco-Shape® bottles to understand our biggest environmental impacts. The assessment revealed that plastic resin production accounted for our largest impact in terms of carbon emissions. We also learned that our consumers could reduce the carbon footprint of our bottles, just by recycling after use.

For our part, we reduced even further the plastic in our Eco-Shape bottles, first introduced in 2008 after two years of design research and, in late 2009, launched our next generation Eco-Shape half-liter bottle, which weighs 9.3 grams on average and contains 60% less plastic than our original, pre-Eco-Shape half-liter PET bottle. The next generation Eco-Shape bottle also features a cap weighing only one gram.

In spring 2011, we began converting our 1.5-liter Eco-Shape bottle to 24.1 grams (reducing plastic by 22.3%) and converting our one-liter Eco-Shape bottles to 17.6 grams (reducing plastic by 23.5%). These incremental reductions are expected to help us achieve a combined weight average reduction of 22.9%.

We have also taken steps to reduce the amount of corrugate we use – in 2010 we cut 8,666 tons of corrugated material from our secondary packaging. We have eliminated cardboard side walls from the majority of our 24-packs of half-liter bottled water – our number one seller. And, we have continuously reduced the size of our paper labels since 1998—to date saving nearly 20 million pounds of paper, or the equivalent of 25,000 trees.

In addition to a reduction in packaging materials, other benefits we’ve experienced through lightweighting our packaging have been better energy savings, lower transportation impact and overall reduction of

http://beveragelcafootprint.com/

http://www.press.nestle-watersna.com/press/Nestle-Waters-North-America-Continues-Plastic-Reduction-with-New-Lighter-Bottle.htm


environmental impact. In turn, we intend for lightweighting to demonstrate to our stakeholders and consumers Nestlé Waters’ commitment to reduce our environmental impact.

In addition to innovations we’ve achieved over the past several years in our products’ packaging, we believe that working to increase PET recycling rates in the U.S. is the single best way we can address the overall environmental impact of our products.

What are the trade-offs - what does one sacrifice in lightweighting a package, and how does a company reduce these trade-offs?

In terms of “trade-offs” when it comes to lightweighting, we took the opportunity to communicate widely with our consumers that the lighter, flimsier bottles are a good thing! Otherwise, our customers enjoy the same quality packaged beverages provided in bottles that have a lesser environmental impact.

What do you see as the future of lightweighting - have companies done all they can to reduce packaging weight or are there still some untapped areas for improvement?

Our priority is to meet and exceed our consumers’ needs. The next-generation Eco-Shape bottle is the lightest bottle Nestlé Waters can produce at this time, still protecting the quality of the water our consumers drink and without compromising the structural integrity of the bottle. While this second-generation Eco-Shape bottle is our gold standard for lightweighting, we also took efforts to make sure the bottle is still practical for consumers.

That said, as we have done since the 1990s, we’ll continue to look for ways to reduce the bottle’s environmental impact by taking advantage of future technological advances in packaging material and production.


Diageo

What initiatives have you undertaken to reduce the weight of your packaging?

Various initiatives to reduce, remove and reuse from lightweight glass bottle re-deigns, transferring from glass to PET, reducing carton / shipper weight or material, removing unnecessary secondary packaging.

For what types of materials and what products?

Focus has been on key components (glass, closures, cans, cartons, shippers) accounting for the greatest proportion of packaging weight across our portfolio of brands including Smirnoff Ice, rums, Cacique, and wines.

How successful have these initiatives been? How much have you reduced your packaging by and over what time period?

Pleased with progress to date but recognize that we need to continue to identify opportunities to embed sustainability. We reported a 3.3 % improvement in 2011 (2009 baseline).

How much money has this saved you, and over what time period?

Primary focus is not cost, packaging sustainability is the focus. There have been various cost savings associated with individual projects however we have not aggregated globally.

What other kinds of benefits have there been?

Clearly environmental but also employee engagement and engagement with suppliers.

What challenges have you encountered in trying to make these reductions?

Maintaining and protecting brand identity and supply chain issues.


Diageo has said that while lightweighting can lead to increased breakages and the company will even consider "heavyweighting" if it will give packaging a second life.48 Have you moved towards "heavyweighting" for any of your products yet?

Where appropriate we will ‘right-weight’ particularly for super premium brands.

How do you prioritize which products’ packaging to focus on when it comes to packaging improvements?

Prioritization is primarily determined by weight and/or the opportunity arises as part of a brand re-design – currently our high volume brands are key focus as improving their packaging sustainability will have most overall benefit to the environment.

48 http://www.environmentalleader.com/2011/12/09/diageo-sets-sustainable-packaging-guidelines/

http://www.environmentalleader.com/2011/12/09/diageo-sets-sustainable-packaging-guidelines/

in this report€¦ · 20/3/2012 · such as trays, boxes and outer wrapping. 4 tertiary...

Documents