Efrat Gommeh Instructor: Michal Eitan June 2008

The Design Management Program, M.Des,

Bezalel Academy Of Art and Design

Durapack Packaging Waste Reduction Scheme

Durapack

Recommendation

Conclusions

Technical Assessment

Logistic Assessment

Financial Assessment

Ecological Assessment

Design

Durapack Scheme

Synthetic Paper

Cradle to Cradle

Existing Initiatives

Background

Working Scheme

Suggested Alternatives

working scheme

Semester A Semester B

Theoretical research about municipal solid waste reduction.

Focusing on waste reduction scheme of primary and secondary packages.

Different ideas for waste reduction initiatives;

Focusing on one of them.

Developing the idea into a scheme;

Analyzing the different aspects of the suggested scheme.

Meeting

Meeting

Meeting

Background

• Municipal Solid Waste - one of the major problems of Israel, as a modern society.

• Cardboard packages – a significant part of the problem.

MSW in Israel – 4.5 million tone / year (2002)

Other 4%

Metal 4%Trimmings 4%

Glass 2%

Plastic 34%

Organic material, trimmings, diapers 22%

Cardboard and paper 29%(1.3 million tone / year)

Existing Initiatives

Suggested Alternatives21

3

Cradle to Cradle

Synthetic Paper

Durapack packaging

14.5.2008

Durapack SchemeManufacturing

“Durapack”Transporting to the

product producing plant

Manufacturing product; printing

dynamic data

Packaging product; exposing

dynamic data

Transporting to the retailer

Purchasing the product without

the package

Sorting the packages

Collecting empty packages

Transporting empty packages to the product producing plant

Transporting frayed packages to the recycling plant

Transporting raw material to the

“Durapack” manufacturer

370 thousand tone / year

35 thousand tone / year

15 thousand tone / year

Design

Keeping the purposes of the original package

Suitable for an automatic process

“Cradle to Cradle” certificated

Weight and volume compared to the original package

Exposing dynamic data

The consumer will be encouraged to leave the package in the place of purchase

Transporting as a flat unit

Ecological Assessment

1 tone of “Durapack” package

Air pollution; Enhancing roads overflow; Increasing

car accidents risk

Air pollution, sewage and waste from the

manufacturing stage

+ +Air pollution, sewage and waste from the

recycling stage

1 tone of cardboard package

+ +Air pollution, land and underground water degradationfrom the land filling

stage

Air pollution; Enhancing roads overflow; Increasing

car accidents risk

Air pollution, sewage and waste from the

manufacturing stage

? 1 tone of “Durapack” package1 tone of cardboard package

<=

>

Durapack sceme

Financial Assessment

+

Teaching the consumers the

“Durapack” concept

Transporting the empty and the

recycled packages

Cost’s difference of raw material; sorting and

collecting empty packages; Recycling

Marketing

Transporting

Packaging

Product

Manufacturing of new

cardboard packages

-Product cost

Existing product Durapack

Perception of the products as eco-friendly Regulations

Governmental incentives

Product

Packaging

Transporting

Marketing

5

Logistic Assessment

14.5.2008

Collecting empty packages

1 2

Sorting the packages 3

4

Technical Assessment

Is the process of recycling “Durapack” suitable for Israel??

Sorting “Durapack” packages and re-packaging new products –an automatic process?

?

Collecting the waste during production should be done strictly, because of the high costs of the raw material.!

The rate of the frayed packages could be higher than expected.!

Is glue may be used??

Is 240 g/m² synthetic paper rigid enough for carrying the products??

Recommendation

• Filling the necessary data.• Additional meetings.

VSDurapack scheme No secondary packaging

Conclusions

• The final conclusions might determine “Durapack” as an unfeasible scheme for waste reduction of secondary cardboard packaging.

• Nevertheless –

“It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow.”

- Robert H. Goddard

Thank you for listening.

Thanks to Michal Eitan and Dr. Roni Levfor consulting and helping.