Packaging Report: The Greener Side of Plastics

The other big “R” is renewable and plastics have a good story to tell in this area as well. The plastic “residues” remaining after being reduced, reused and recycled are essentially “frozen natural gas” so they have a very high energy value that can be recovered in energy-from-waste (EFW) facilities. According to Statistics Canada, Canadians recycled 2.6 million tonnes of residential waste in 2002 and disposed of 9.5 million tonnes. Even if Canadians doubled the recycling rate, that would still leave almost seven million tonnes of residential waste.

The energy value from seven million tonnes of residential waste would be equivalent to 96 million gigajoules – enough energy to provide electricity to more than two million homes or the equivalent of 16.7 million barrels of oil. If municipalities were to add Industrial, Commercial and Institutional (IC&I) sources into the mix, the energy value would more than double.

Reducing Greenhouse Gases
In addition to contributing positively to the 4Rs, plastics also offer advantages in other ways, namely in reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. A 2004 study conducted by Germany’s Gesellschaft fur umfassende Analysen (GUA) found that plastic packaging saves 582.6 million gigajoules (GJ) of energy per year in Western Europe compared to the use of alternative materials. This amount is equivalent to 101.3 million barrels of oil. The same study also found that if alternative materials were substituted for all of the plastic packaging used in Western Europe, there would be a marked increase in energy use and GHG emissions. These increases would amount to 582 million gigajoules of energy per year (equivalent to about 101 million barrels of oil) and the equivalent of about 43 million tonnes of CO2 per year (the equivalent of taking 12 million cars off of the road).

Case Study Comparisons
The environmental benefits of plastic packaging can be seen prominently in various case studies conducted by the ULS Report, February 2007. Comparisons of a traditional cereal box consisting of paperboard and a high-density polyethylene liner verses a plastic stand-up pouch show that the plastic pouch produces 68 per cent less landfill discards, 69 per cent fewer GHG emissions and 23 per cent less energy. And, the pouch contained 12 ounces of content versus the 11 ounces contained in the traditional cereal box.

Similarly, the ULS Report reviewed a glass bottle versus a plastic squeeze bottle versus a plastic pouch. The glass bottle and pouch each contained 16 ounces of product, while the squeeze bottle contained 20 ounces. In comparison to the glass bottle, the squeeze bottle produced 83 per cent less in landfill discards, generated 73 per cent fewer GHG emissions and used 40 per cent less energy. In comparison to the glass bottle, the plastic pouch produced 96 per cent less in landfill discards, generated 87 per cent fewer GHG emissions and used 81 per cent less energy.