Sustainable solutions require trade-offs
-- Packaging Digest, 8/1/2008 2:00:00 AM
|
One thing I learned while on vacation: if you want an incredible amount of press coverage, redesign a milk jug. The newly released square milk jug and the consumer response to tilt-and-pour versus lift-and-pour were remarkable. It's an eloquent example of the tension that can result when the economic and environmental benefits of a package redesign are invisible to the consuming audience whose main concern relates to pouring milk at a reasonable price. However, we have conquered Windows™, cell phones and ordering “skinny” venti lattes. I am confident we will conquer tilt-and-pour.
Interestingly, it was surprising to members of the press when it was mentioned that the milk jug redesign was not novel, but was simply a very public and iconic example of what some members of the packaging industry have been working on for several years—packaging redesign for more efficient use of materials, energy and recyclability.
No place is the potential for this tension greater than the world of retail. Participating in a retailer conference recently, I heard several examples of both successful and unsuccessful attempts to introduce more environmentally responsible packaging. What struck me was that retailers often don't have the in-house technical packaging or environmental expertise to evaluate possible environmental issues related to a package redesign. As a result, they often look to their supply chain partners to play a role in helping to provide this expertise—for better or for worse.
One thing is clear: Retailers react quickly when consumers take the time to complain. However, reacting without a clear understanding of the trade-offs implicit in a decision may end up creating a different set of unintended consequences. The paper-versus-plastic-bag debate comes to mind and is an issue where retailers and politicians are feeling the heat to take action. Is there a right or wrong answer? It depends on what you care about.
In trying to decide which material is preferable in an application from an environmental perspective, it's critical to have a clear understanding of the environmental issues one values and wants to address. Next, it's critical to understand the trade-offs associated with a material selection and to understand what issues you are choosing not to address. This includes thinking about any unforeseen consequences. It's rare that a material wins across all of the environmental considerations.
Oxodegradable and oxobiodegradable additives for plastics have further complicated the paper-versus-plastic issue. Differences between these additives are clouded by a lack of understanding on what “degradable” versus “biodegradable” means; as well as concerns about the chemistry of the additives or of the consequences of the accumulation of plastic shards in the environment related to oxodegradables and questions about the ultimate biodegradability of oxobiodegradables as they typically don't meet compostability standards.
From a sustainability perspective, you need to consider whether a material decision supports your strategic vision or is a tactical, near-term response that may not align with this vision.
No related content found.
VIEW ALL GALLERIES
