Download - The Impacts of Packaging on the Environment
The Impacts of Packaging on the Environment
Birgitte Kjær, Ph.D.Household Waste Division
Packaging Waste in relation to the Total Waste Production
• Packaging waste 1 mill. tons in 1999• Total waste 12.2 mill. tons in 1999• 8% of total waste • 192 kg packaging waste per inhabitant
per year
High attention to packaging
• Visible• All consumers take care of packaging
waste each day • 30% of domestic waste by weight• > 50% of domestic waste by volume
The Impacts of Packaging on the Environment
• Packaging is short-lived• Consumes global resources• Especially: Raw material and energy
Environmental objective
• Aim: Consumption of packaging causes the least possible burden to environment.
• Methods:• Reduce the weight of packaging• Substitution to materials with less
environmental impact.• Promote reuse and refill systems
Life-cycle screening of 11 packaging materials
• Life-cycle screening: only the most important environmental impacts and phases in the packaging life cycle (from cradle to grave) are included
• Environmental impact of packaging materials http://www.mst.dk/homepage/default.asp?Sub=http://www.mst.dk/waste/Packagings.htm
Life-cycle screening of 11 packaging materials
• Not possible to add all impacts with respect to the environment, resources and waste, into a single figure.Thus, it is necessary to make some political choices
• Operational unit: 1 kg of packaging
The life-cycle of packaging
Included in the life-cycle screening:• Extraction of raw material• Production of material • Production of packaging• Distribution - (calculated later)• Waste disposal
Not included in the life-cycle screening:• Use of the packaging
Materials in the survey
Paper/cardboard Glass Tinplate/steel Aluminium
Plastic: HDPE LDPE PP PET PVC EPS PS
Assumptions
• Sales packaging• Waste disposal as the present situation
in Denmark today• Glass packaging 70 % recycling
(separate collection)• Steel packaging 64% recycling
(separated from incineration slag)• Paper, plastic,aluminium incineration
with energy recovery (no separate collection)
How are the results expressed?
• Basis: “a politically determined environmental space”.
• Environmental effects and waste: possible emission per person if the political objectives are to be met in the year 2000. Unit: mPEMWDK2000.
• Resource consumption: the share of known reserves per person in the world in 1990.
Unit: mPRW90.
Global warmingPrimary materials
-0,5
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
Paper
Glass
HPD
E
LDPE
PP EPS
PET
PVC
PS Steel
Al
mPE
MW
DK
200
AcidificationPrimary materials
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
2,0
2,5
Paper
Glass
HPD
E
LDPE
PP EPS
PET
PVC
PS Steel
Al
mPE
MW
DK
2000
Resources: Crude oilPrimary materials
0
0,01
0,02
0,03
0,04
0,05
0,06
Paper
Glass
HPD
E
LDPE
PP EPS
PET
PVC
PS Steel
Al
mPR
W90
WastePrimary materials
-0,4
0,0
0,4
0,8
1,2
Paper
Glass
HPD
E
LDPE
PP EPS
PET
PVC
PS Steel
Al
mPE
MW
DK
2000
Primary materials <> recyclingGlobal warming: LDPE and Aluminium
0
0,4
0,8
1,2
1,6
LDPE LDPE-recycling
Al Al-recycling
mP
EM
DK
W2
00
0
Presentation of the environmental impact from packaging
Overall assessment
Some general outlines per kg material:• Cardboard and glass: lowest environmental impact• Some plastic materials (LDPE, HDPE, PP, PET,
PS) prove to have higher environmental impacts than cardboard and glass. PS and PET have the highest impact in this group.
• Steel: some indicators ranking similar to plastics but with major negative impact on the environment due to waste.
• Major environmental impacts originate from PVC, EPS and aluminium.
Environmental index
Primarymaterial
Secondarymaterial
Cardboard/paper 0,5 0,3Wood 0,3Glass 1Tinplate/steel 5Plastic 7 4,2EPS and PVC 11Aluminium 18
No-one has opposed the overall ranking of the materials
• After the consultation process none of the parties had opposed to the overall assessment - the ranking of materials - of the LCA study.
• LCA experts have supported the ranking of the packaging materials - because it is in line with other studies.
Objection: “All results are given per kg packaging”
• One objective of the tax is to reduce the total amount of packaging waste.
• In a LCA it is the use value of one product that is being compared to the use value of another product.
• The use value of packaging is not one kg material - but the 34 grams of plastic used to produce a bottle. This plastic bottle can then be compared to another bottle of glass of 290 grams
Life cycle assessment of packaging systems
Life cycle assessment of packaging systems for beer and soft drinks
• Published May 1998• Main report and 7 technical reports
Packaging types
Packaging system Beer Soft drinksRefillable glass bottle 33 cl green glass 25 cl clear glass
Single-use glass bottle 33 cl green glass 33 cl clear glass
Aluminium cans 33 cl and 50 cl 33 cl and 50 cl
Steel cans 33 cl and 50 cl 33 cl and 50 cl
Refillable PET bottle 50 cl and 150 cl
Single-use PET bottle 50 cl and 150 cl
Main environmental impacts
final energy consumption
consumption of natural resources
global warming
photochemical ozone formation
acidification
nutrient enrichment
waste
33 cl packages for beer
Environmental impact Refillable glassbottle
Single-useglassbottle
Aluminium can
Steelcan
Global warming 1-2 2-4 1-3 3-4Photochemical ozoneformation
1-2 2-4 1-3 3-4
Acidification 1-2 3-4 1-2 3-4Nutrient enrichment 1-2 3-4 1-2 3-4
50 cl packages for soft drinks
Environmentalimpact
RefillablePETbottle
Single-usePETbottle
Aluminiumcan
Steelcan
Global warming 1 2-4 2-3 3-4Acidification 1-2 4 1-2 3Nutrient enrichment 1-2 2-4 1-3 3-4
Conclusion
Environmental effects from packaging• Mainly use of raw material and energy
resources
Impact on environment can be assessed• Complex • Used in making political decisions