Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Packaging Design For The Environment UK WRAP Ecowise
Packaging Design For The Environment UK WRAP Ecowise
GG360
GUIDE
SUMMARY
Good design has a vital role to play in producing packaging that is both
fit for purpose and less environmentally damaging. Many companies
have redesigned their packaging in recent years and have usually
achieved significant cost savings. In addition, they have found it easier
to comply with the packaging waste regulations. This Guide is intended
to help both management and designers/specifiers to take a fresh and
systematic look at packaging design with a view to reducing its cost
and its impact on the environment.
From a management perspective, there are numerous factors encouraging an
improvement in packaging. These range from Government legislation and consumer
pressure on the one hand, to the benefits associated with a more environmental
approach on the other. However, a reassessment of packaging can only be
successful if managers are prepared to commit both staff and resources to the
process.
The packaging designer can draw on a range of tools and techniques to assist the
packaging design process. The Guide examines these, highlighting their advantages
and any problems associated with their use. It also leads the reader through the
main approaches to packaging design, from resource minimisation and recycling/reuse, and reducing the use of hazardous substances, through to design for final
disposal.
The Guide also contains more detailed information about packaging legislation (see
Part 4) and the raw materials used in packaging - from paperboard and plastics to
adhesives and inks. This will help designers to identify the most appropriate
materials for any particular packaging purpose.
CONTENTS
Section
Page
Introduction
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
5
5
6
7
11
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
5.6
5.7
5.8
11
11
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
17
18
20
22
23
25
8.1
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
8.6
9
General principles
Paper and board
Plastic
Glass: using the right colour
25
26
26
27
29
29
32
32
32
33
33
10
11
36
10.1
10.2
10.3
10.4
36
37
37
37
Types of re-use
Durability and weight
Use and handling
Cleaning and refurbishment
39
11.1
11.2
11.3
11.4
39
41
41
42
12
44
13
45
13.1
13.2
13.3
13.4
45
46
47
48
14
49
50
Action plan
53
16
54
54
56
56
58
16.1
16.2
16.3
16.4
16.5
16.6
16.7
16.8
16.9
58
60
63
63
64
65
66
67
68
Paper
Plastics
Glass
Steel and aluminium
Renewable and biodegradable materials
Laminates and coatings
Composite materials
Adhesives and mechanical linkages
Inks
17
70
70
71
18
75
19
Glossary
76
20
Checklist
78
Packaging, however, has to protect and preserve1 goods, facilitate handling and
distribution, present information and act as a marketing tool for the product.
Inadequate packaging can result in product damage, customer returns and wastage
- not just of the product but also of the energy and materials used in its
manufacture2. Poor packaging design can even result in injury. In 2000, packagingrelated accidents (eg cuts to hands) accounted for more than 67,000 recorded
hospital casualties and cost the National Health Service more than 12 million.
It is clear from the above that packaging must be fit for purpose. Equally important,
today, is the environmental impact of packaging over its life-cycle. Current
legislation is seeking to minimise this impact by placing specific obligations on
packaging producers and users.
Good design has a vital role to play in producing packaging that is both effective
and environmentally appropriate. The significance of the design element is
highlighted in a 1998 Design Council statement that more than 80% of the costs
and environmental impacts of any product are determined at the design stage.
Many companies have reassessed their packaging in recent years, usually achieving
significant cost savings. They have also found it easier to comply with the recent
packaging regulations. This Guide contains information that will help your company,
and particularly its packaging designers, technologists and specifiers to take a fresh
and systematic look at packaging design. The resulting packaging systems should
be both cheaper and less damaging to the environment.
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
The main purpose of the Guide is to provide clear, concise and practical advice. It is
divided into four parts:
The remainder of Part One considers the importance of fitness for purpose and
examines the development and benefits of packaging design for the environment.
According to a recent INCPEN study, the energy used in the production of food and goods is about 15
times that used to make the packaging that protects them.
SECTION 1
Part Four provides more detailed information on the background legislation and
on the materials used for packaging. It also contains sources of further
information and a glossary.
Reducing the cost of packaging in the food and drink industry (GG157).
Other useful Case Studies on packaging and eco-design are available from the
Envirowise Advice Line on 0800 585794 or via the website (www.envirowise.gov.uk).
protect, contain and preserve the product while at the same time allowing
efficient manufacturing, handling and distribution methods;
SECTION 2
All packaging must be able to protect its contents from damage during manufacture
(ie on the packing line), and during transit and storage. This means that, in most
cases, it must have the rigidity and strength to resist:
various loads, eg compression loads when stacked (bursting loads in the case of
drums);
being dropped from various heights onto faces, edges and corners;
Product manufacture often involves automated packing lines, with product collation,
bagging, wrapping etc taking place at high speeds. In the case of breakfast cereal,
for example, a packing rate of 200 cartons per minute is common. The packaging,
therefore, has to be designed for quick and easy manipulation - folding, filling and
closure - and adhesives have to provide a rapid bond.
Handling and distribution considerations are also very important, and answers are
needed, at an early stage in the design process, to several questions. Examples
include:
How will the product or its primary packaging fit with or into the distribution
packaging? Will it add to the overall strength and rigidity of the load? Could it
damage the outer packaging?
Will the load be palletised? If so, what size of pallet will be used?
Will the customer break the pack into smaller units for onward distribution?
SECTION 2
The structures and materials used vary with each application. For example,
polyethylene (PE) provides a good barrier against moisture and bacteria: it also
allows the packaging to be heat-sealed (eg when used in cartons). Section 16
provides more information about materials.
The clear and concise presentation of information (bar codes, instructions,
ingredients, health and nutritional information etc) is critical, while the inclusion of
photographs and drawings may be an essential part of product presentation and
marketing. The quality of printing, finishes and the overall appearance of the pack
are therefore very important.
Packaging for food and pharmaceutical products must be tamper-evident, ie the
consumer must be able to detect any tampering. It may also need to be child-safe.
Packaging also has to be designed with consumer use/acceptance in mind. Typical
considerations include ease of opening and dispensing, resealing and storage. The
importance of these issues is reflected in the considerable effort that has recently
been put into new closures for milk and juice cartons.
Overall, while packaging aesthetics and differentiation are clearly important, it is the
functionality of the pack that is most critical from the consumer perspective.
Protection against photodegradation (affecting taste, odour, colour and nutritional value) is important for
certain foods, medicines, cosmetics etc, although some, including most wines and beers, have natural
and added antioxidants that help to limit such degradation.
SECTION 3
Emissions to water (eg hazardous substances, suspended solids, oxygenreducing materials with a high chemical or biochemical oxygen demand
(COD/BOD)).
the average weight of glass containers has been reduced by about 30% since 1980;
the thickness of supermarket carrier bags has been reduced by, on average,
about 45% during the last 15 years;
SECTION 3
during the 1990s, juice cartons were made about 15% lighter and the aluminium
foil layer 30% thinner; at the same time the rigidity of the overall package was
improved;
it now takes only 1.5 g of plastic film to contain, protect and preserve 150 g of
biscuits.
Despite these real improvements, some of the packaging used today in the UK is not
designed for economy, often wasting finite resources and very large sums of money.
Customers (particularly large retailers) and consumers, while demanding highquality packaging, are becoming increasingly interested in its environmental profile.
Retailers and product manufacturers are specifying packaging that meets certain
national or international standards.
The Food Safety Act 1990 and associated regulations govern the use of
packaging for food-contact applications.
Companies are becoming increasingly aware of the waste hierarchy concept with
its focus on eliminating or minimising waste. Many companies have benefited in
recent years from waste minimisation initiatives, some of them saving hundreds
of thousands of pounds per year. Now, others are being encouraged to adopt a
similar approach4.
Many of the companies that have benefited from waste minimisation initiatives belong to one of the many
waste minimisation clubs that have been set up across the country. Information on these clubs is available on
the Envirowise website (www.envirowise.gov.uk) or from the Envirowise Advice Line (0800 585794).
Many of the companies that have reassessed their packaging as a result of the
drivers listed above have saved money, enhanced their business profitability and
competitiveness, and improved their environmental performance. This is
demonstrated in many of the examples contained within this Guide.
SECTION 3
Material
Product
Eliminate
Avoid producing
waste in the
first place
Reduce
Minimise
the amount
of waste you
do produce
Re-use
Use items as
many times as
possible
WASTE
ONLY
Recycle
Recycle what
you can only
after you
have re-used it
Dispose
Dispose of
whats left in a
responsible way
SECTION 3
The specific benefits of eco-design, which far outweigh the costs, can include:
Studies have shown that eco-designs can occupy new niches while eco-redesigns
are generally more successful than the products they replace. However, it almost
goes without saying that all the products of the design/redesign process have first
to be competitive in terms of performance and cost.
Why reassessing packaging for the export markets makes financial sense
Packaging recovery schemes often make different charges for certain types
and materials. To those selling packaged products into the German market, the
financial implications can be significant. For instance, under the German DSD
system, different packaging materials attract specific basic fees5:
plain cardboard:
0.1/kg;
beverage cartons:
0.5/kg;
other composites:
0.7/kg;
plastics:
0.9/kg.
Re-usability, recyclability
Size/shape of container
Resource/transport efficiency
Grade/thickness of material(s)
Type/material of closures/
fixings/labels
Re-usability, recyclability
Type/material of adhesives/inks/
coatings/laminates
Emissions, recyclability
Re-usability
It is not easy to consider every aspect of a packages design while also taking
environmental impacts into account, and many decisions have to be made. Ideally,
packaging eco-design and development should be a step-by-step process that
takes place alongside, and interacts with, product design. Fig 1 overleaf summarises
the main steps in a typical product/packaging design process. It is important to note
that checks are made at several stages in the process to ensure that environmental
goals are being met.
SECTION 4
SECTION 4
Detailed design
Develop detailed specifications
Discuss specifications with customers/suppliers and refine
Check that environmental goals are still met
Carry out detailed design/engineering work
Production
Engineer and manufacture final design
10
Review
Monitor performance
(including
environmental
performance) in the
marketplace
and review design
estimated net cost savings - usually arising from reduced material use, greater
transport efficiency and improvements in productivity;
SECTION 5
Initial work should also consider market trends and the place for greener products.
Initial discussions with customers/suppliers will be needed in both cases.
Once the benefits are clear, and management commitment has been obtained, it will
be possible to identify and set strategic and operational objectives, including
environmental goals. This approach will ensure that environmental issues are
considered from the outset and integrated into the development process.
See also Waste minimisation pays: five business reasons for reducing waste
(GG125).
11
SECTION 5
trading/procurement;
manufacturing;
warehousing/distribution;
Ideally, this integrated team should be led by a champion or co-ordinator. The team
should have a very clear customer focus plus strong links with suppliers, and should
share relevant information and experience. This integrated approach is sometimes
referred to as concurrent engineering.
See also Saving money through waste minimisation: teams and champions
(GG27).
12
Available through the Envirowise Advice Line on 0800 585794 or via the website (www.envirowise.gov.uk).
wasting too much time on aspects that are beyond the companys sphere of
influence.
SECTION 5
For example, where mineral extraction is involved, the company may feel that the
associated green issues are outside its control. However, it can send strong signals
to the marketplace by requiring environmental data from suppliers and by switching
materials. Obtaining certain packaging data from suppliers is crucial, both to the
design process and to meeting obligations under the packaging waste regulations.
It is important to consider the practical effects of design changes on other parts of
the packaging chain. For example, a change to the ink or varnish specification could
significantly affect the converters production process, while a change in adhesive
could affect a packer/fillers production line. Where use is made of recycled
materials, it is particularly important to have good links with the reprocessor in
question to ensure that the materials are of a consistently high (ie suitable) quality.
It is also important to understand the packagings destination, as this can influence
the design. Questions that need to be answered include:
Will the packaging be recycled, composted, burnt or just put in a landfill site?
While sorting and reprocessing techniques vary across the world, realistically you
can only consider the target product market on the typical circumstances covered in
this Guide (for example section 11).
13
SECTION 5
14
SECTION 5
Manufacture
4
5
Reduce impacts
of distribution
Raw materials
Use
10
End-of-life
Use fewer
resources
Cause less
pollution
and waste
8
Optimise
functionality
and service life
15
SECTION 5
16
UK markets for clear and brown glass are good: they are far more limited for green glass and this, in some
cases, is exported.
Material
grade/structure
Shape/volume
Improved
design
Closure
Adhesives/
fixings
SECTION 6
Inks/coatings
17
SECTION 6
Ideas can be whittled down using agreed assessment criteria (based on design
objectives and constraints) and the combined expertise of the team. If necessary,
some form of voting system can be used. Value analysis, which aims to achieve
maximum functionality for least economic and environmental cost, is also a good
basis for selection. The best approach overall is to look for key priorities - the small
number of ideas that will generate a large overall benefit.
One well-known technique for screening ideas is controlled convergence. This
technique allows participants to consider the good and bad aspects of every idea,
using a scoring and weighting selection matrix. The process can briefly be
described as follows:
Step 1: Decide on the main selection criteria and weights (multipliers related to
importance).
Step 3: Score the ideas numerically on a scale of, say, 1-5, with positive values
where the idea is scored as better than the benchmark, negative values where the
idea is perceived to be worse, and a zero value where there is no perceived change.
A new benchmark can be chosen from the various concepts considered, and the
process can be repeated for new or hybrid ideas.
18
New concept,
eg refill system
8
New product
Existing product
Recyclability/
7
compostability
Renewable/
recycled materials
SECTION 6
10
8
6
4
Re-usability 6
2
2
5
Transport efficiency
(shape/volume)
Low-hazard
materials
3
Low material
weight
4
Low waste/emissions
in production
A similar approach can be made using a linear life-cycle abacus. The abacus criteria
can be chosen according to company stakeholder priorities.
Another simple approach involves using a Material, Energy, Toxicity (or MET) matrix as
shown in Table 2. This type of matrix allows the combined use of scoring and
weighting so that some sort of judgement can be made about the product. Each
option is given a score, out of 5, for each component of the matrix. This is based, in
each case, on a judgement of that components impact relative to the other options. A
weighting factor or multiplier, again between 1 and 5, is allocated to each component
in relation to its perceived importance. The two values are multiplied together (shown
in brackets), and a total score is achieved for each option. This is converted to a
percentage by comparing the total score achieved with the maximum possible.
Table 2 A simple MET matrix
Materials
Energy
Toxicity
Total
score
Score
(%)
Relative
score
Weighting
factor
3x
3x
5x
Option 1
3 (9)
3 (9)
5 (25)
43/55
78%
100%
Option 2
4 (12)
5 (15)
2 (10)
37/55
67%
86%
Option 3
2 (6)
4 (12)
4 (20)
38/55
69%
88%
19
SECTION 6
A full LCA uses detailed data that are relevant to the processes in question. As even
relatively simple packaging can involve several materials and numerous processes
during its full life-cycle, the analysis will involve dozens of parameters across,
typically, 5-10 categories. This presents problems for a full LCA:
a full LCA can only be used when specific details are known - usually later in the
project design process;
representative, accurate and comprehensive inventory and impact data are often
difficult and time-consuming to obtain;
the results can be difficult to interpret as many of the parameters are often not
directly comparable.
Fortunately, LCA software tools exist that can be used in an abridged or simplified
mode which considers a reduced range of impacts and makes use of generic data
rather than data derived from the specific process/packaging under consideration.
These tools also allow impacts to be aggregated and made more meaningful to
allow comparisons. For example, hazardous substance emissions may be converted
into premature human deaths or damage to the eco-system. The importance of
different issues may also be weighted.
Abridged LCA tools are useful at a number of different stages in the packaging
design process. However, careful consideration needs to be given to the assumptions
made, and it is usually best to do some sensitivity analysis, varying the assumptions
within reasonable limits, to check how robust any comparison is. In some cases,
LCAs can give conflicting results for the same item, often because the analysis is
incomplete (for example, it does not cover all the impacts) or the assumptions used
were inappropriate. LCA tools have to be applied carefully and used as an aid to
decision-making rather than as decision-makers in their own right8.
20
EcoIndicator 99.
SECTION 6
SimaPro5.
EcoScan.
Eco-IT.
Best Practice, Essential Requirements Guidelines (for Europe) and LCA are
available as tools for packaging developers.
The company always assesses the product and its packaging together. This is
important as the biggest impacts generally relate to the product. For example,
the move from washing powder to tablets, while having some negative
packaging implications, has proved beneficial overall because it has
significantly reduced product use per wash, ie it has eliminated wastage
through over-dosing.
21
SECTION 6
22
paper-bleaching chemicals.
SECTION 7
Polyvinyl chloride (PVC) can also be regarded with some concern when considered
from a life-cycle perspective (see section 16.2).
The main sources of heavy metals in packaging are colour pigments and recycled
materials. In general, European manufacturers of inks and coatings no longer use
heavy metals, however, you should check that they are not present in supplies from
other countries. They can be introduced in very small amounts through the recycling
of plastic (where heavy metal-based pigment has been used in the past), glass (lead
in particular) and paperboard. In these instances, they have been introduced through
the recycling route rather than as an intentional addition.
Key points to note when designing packaging to minimise the use of hazardous
substances are as follows:
Ensure that the packaging meets the 100 ppm Essential Requirements limit for
combined heavy metals, including those in inks and coatings (or the derogation
limit in the case of glass containers and recycled plastic containers).
Try to use inks that have the least overall environmental impact. Possible
alternatives to organic solvent-borne inks (which have related VOC issues) include
water-borne, ultraviolet (UV) curable and litho inks. However, do take into account
the environmental pros and cons of each alternative (eg the associated requirements
for higher energy use) and also the application limitations (see section 16.9).
As with other materials, think carefully about the benefits and disbenefits of PVC
before using/specifying it.
Use the information in material safety data sheets (MSDS) that suppliers are
obliged to provide (under the Chemicals (Hazard) Information and Packaging for
Supply) Regulations (CHIP3) for any dangerous substance or preparation. Carry
out risk assessments, as required under COSHH, and identify and implement
appropriate risk management measures. If in doubt about a material, ring the
Envirowise Advice Line on 0800 585794.
Use abridged LCA software tools. These should take into account the impacts of
hazardous substances typically used in generic processes.
23
SECTION 7
24
Implement
now
SECTION 8
As discussed in section 5.8, care must be taken to ensure continued fitness for
purpose, both on-site and downstream. Resource minimisation at one point can
have implications elsewhere in the system, so it is important to consider the impact
that a reduction in primary packaging will have on the secondary and tertiary (transit)
packaging. Will an increase be needed further down the line to ensure product
protection? If so, is there a net gain?
BS EN 13428:2000 is the Essential Requirements standard relating to packagingsource reduction.
Use larger pack sizes - where consumer demands permit - to reduce the amount
of packaging per unit of product.
For more information, see GG295 Cleaner product design: examples from industry, available through the
Envirowise Advice Line on 0800 585794 or via the website (www.envirowise.gov.uk).
25
SECTION 8
Packaging elimination
The household products company, SVM.PACT, has
adapted its packaging for a range of products. In the case
of the cheese slicer, a cardboard sleeve was replaced
with a small self-adhesive label. As a result, the cheese
slicer packaging is now 150 g lighter than before.
Furthermore, the company has reduced its overall
packaging weight by 97%.
26
Eliminate unnecessary layers, eg box plus bag/tube, collation trays plus shrink
wrap. Given appropriate laminates, cartonboard boxes can be used without an
inner bag and still give good product preservation.
Eliminate the use of adhesives and tapes by using only interlocking tabs. Good
examples include the multi-packs used for underwear and the board multi-packs
used for bottles and cans. A similar approach can be adopted for other food
products where tamper evidence is provided in some other way.
Eliminate the need for labels by using in-mould embossing or direct printing
wherever possible, eg on paper, polypropylene (PP), polystyrene (PS). Note,
however, that direct printing can be a disadvantage if the packaging is recycled,
as the associated colour cannot be excluded.
Avoid using fillers (eg EPS blocks) and padding (eg bubble-wrap) in containers by
creating a better designed, smaller container wherever possible.
Consider using air as the packing medium where the product is fragile. Crisp
packets are a good example of where air pressure protects the product.
SECTION 8
Eliminate one or more packaging layers to reduce the weight of packaging used.
Lightweighting at a major
supermarket
A major supermarket has now eliminated
one packaging layer from its own-brand
garlic bread by replacing the original
cardboard carton and inner plastic sleeve
with a polypropylene film pack. This
change has reduced the weight of the
packaging by 70% and improved transit
pack efficiency by 20%. Product
protection has been maintained.
27
SECTION 8
Replace large blister packs with smaller cardboard packs, using a photograph to
illustrate the product.
Do not use hollow, double-walled containers (eg plastic tubs) unless these are
specifically needed for strength/insulation.
Use double-walled rather than triple-walled corrugated board where the extra
strength given by the latter is not necessary.
Reduce the average thickness of the material used wherever possible, ie downgauge.
28
Use CAD/CAM and associated tools such as finite element analysis (FEA) (for
stress analysis) and mould flow analysis (MFA) to help reduce/optimise
packaging weight.
Consider reducing the main packaging material and using adhesive to glue it to
the product. One company manufacturing a yoghurt multi-pack uses printed
cartonboard to cover the top and part of the sides of the four-pot pack. The
cartonboard is glued to the sides of the pots to provide rigidity. The amount of
cartonboard used is about half that used in a full sleeve.
Reduce the use of adhesives and tapes by targeting their application. Use, for
example, spot weld blobs of adhesive rather than a continuous strip.
Minimise the size of labels. Dont let information requirements dictate an overlarge pack. Consider printing on the inside of the pack or using a fold-out
label/leaflet rather than a fixed label.
Use adhesives with a low melting point where possible. Less energy will then be
needed to maintain the adhesive in the liquid state within the applicator.
Consider the sealing temperature (and hence energy use) needed for films.
Ionomers, for example, can initiate sealing at temperatures as low as 75C, while
linear low-density polyethylene (LLDPE) requires a temperature of around 100C.
Lower sealing temperatures also mean there is less chance of damage to heatsensitive products and, in some cases, better machine operation.
SECTION 8
Choose packaging shapes that will maximise case and pallet utilisation and
transport efficiency, eg rectangular sections and flat tops. In some cases it is
worth considering stacking and nesting possibilities and shaping the pack
accordingly. For example, one manufacturer uses L-shaped corrugated
packaging for its child car seat products.
If the pallet dimensions are not exact multiples of the pack dimension it is
usually better to slightly underhang rather than overhang to avoid product
damage. However, excessive underhang can result in damage from too much
product movement.
29
SECTION 8
Checkl
Investigate
further
Implement
now
Lightwe
Would a
of a tripl
Could lo
reductio
Can the
reduced
Elimination of packaging
Can CA
help red
Can prod
seconda
For card
folds/tab
Can adh
main pa
Can separate labels be avoided by using direct printing
or embossing?
Can information be printed on the pack (eg inside carton)
rather than on a separate leaflet?
Can the
targeted
Has labe
Would a
Reducin
Can voidspace be reduced (eg between cartonboard and
plastic inner packaging)?
Can low
Could the use of fillers and padding be reduced in a smaller,
better-designed container?
Does the
any impa
Can a pl
Lightweighting and downsizing
Improvi
Can a blister pack be replaced by a smaller cardboard
container with a product picture or a cut-out window?
Could the use of a scaled product photo replace plastic film
'windows' in a package or a cut-out window?
Is a double or hollow-walled container specifically needed for
strength/insulation?
30
Can the
palletisa
Can the
hence, im
Can the
form, po
lement
now
Investigate
further
Lightweighting and downsizing (continued)
Implement
now
SECTION 8
31
SECTION 9
Glass, metal and most corrugated board packaging has contained a significant
proportion of post-consumer recycled material for decades.
One unsuccessful trial does not mean that recycled material is not for you. The
problem could have been with the supplier or the particular grade of material
used. Alternatively, perhaps your equipment just needs to be fine-tuned.
Try to ensure that recycled material includes some post-consumer waste as well
as post-industrial (off-cut) material. It is only the recycling of post-consumer
waste that counts towards packaging waste regulation recovery targets.
Do not automatically exclude the use of recycled materials from food product
applications, but do take steps to ensure protection against possible
contaminant migration (microbial or chemical), (see section 15).
Follow the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) Green
Claims Code and make it clear where recycled materials (as opposed to
recyclable materials) are being used. Research has shown that consumers are
often confused and misled in this respect.
32
Make sure that all the corrugated board and industrial packaging (tubes, cores
and drums) used contains a high percentage of recycled material. Some virgin
material may be required to meet performance specifications.
SECTION 9
9.3 PLASTIC
Consider using co-extruded plastic bags and containers, thereby allowing postconsumer plastic to be used in new packaging. If necessary, establish a closed
loop to ensure that only waste from your own or a similar product is
reintroduced. Coca-Cola does this with some of its PET bottles in the EU (see
section 16).
Remember that production wastes (sprues) can be, and are, used in prime
single-layer materials.
33
SECTION 9
If you are an importer of products in glass (eg wine or beer), specify clear glass
where possible and brown glass as a second option. UK glass container
manufacturers need these types of waste more than green glass waste.
Consider using plastic shrink sleeves or organic coatings to provide the required
product colour/image, thus allowing the use of bottles made from any colour of
recycled glass. Most sleeves can be easily removed during recycling while
organic coatings will burn off.
34
Investigate
further
General
Could the use of recycled material be considered/
reconsidered?
Implement
now
SECTION 9
35
SECTION 10
With conventional re-use systems, understand how the packaging will be re-used
and design accordingly.
36
Consider novel re-use systems. Re-usable air bags can be used, for example, in
electronics packaging.
Whatever the type of re-use, make sure the appropriate arrangements are in
place and available to make re-use possible in practice.
10
Note that re-use of this kind is not regarded as re-use under the terms of the packaging waste regulations.
Consider reinforcing existing designs. Material changes (eg the use of kraft fibres
in corrugated cases), ribs, internal separators, edge strengthening, lamination etc
can help to turn a one-trip box into a re-usable system.
Consider finish and other factors as well as strength. Will the packaging
maintain all aspects of its performance or will one aspect make it unusable after
a few trips?
SECTION 10
Design the package so that the product can be discharged/unloaded without any
significant damage to the packaging.
Ensure easy opening and secure closure to facilitate handling and use. For
example, overlapping/interlocking box lids are useful.
Make the packaging modular and repairable. If sections of a plastic box, for
example, can be replaced when damaged, the overall life of the packaging will
be significantly extended. Wooden pallets and crates are, of course, quite easy
to repair.
Make sure that any cleaning/reconditioning process has minimum impact on the
environment. Using excessive amounts of water and detergent after each use, for
example, will reduce the benefits of re-use.
37
SECTION 10
38
Implement
now
SECTION 11
Plastics, for example, will usually be sorted by colour and generally by polymer.
They are then chopped/flaked and washed to separate labels and adhesives.
Flotation tanks can be used to separate lighter polymers (such as PP, LDPE and
HDPE) from heavier polymers (such as PET and PVC) and heavy contaminants. A
counter-current airstream is used to separate labels and films from plastic flake. The
clean, separated polymers are then generally heated, extruded and chopped to
make new granulate.
Paper mills that take waste paper use various combinations of mechanical agitation,
screening, flotation and centrifuging in the pulp preparation process. By this means,
contamination, in the form of metal and plastic (films, closures) can be segregated,
and applied adhesives and print or coatings can be removed or dispersed. Attention
should be paid to the recyclability characteristics of all components in the design
and production of packaging. Mills vary and each has its own specification based
on the UK or EU waste paper grading system (see box on waste paper
contamination under section 11.2).
In practice, the recycling of used products is determined not only by the collection,
sorting and recycling process, but also by the expected use to which the recycled
material will be put.
BS EN 13430:2000 is the UK standard relating to the design for recycling of
packaging under the Essential Requirements. A CEN standard is also currently
under development for material recycling. This covers:
substances or materials that are likely to create problems in the recycling process;
substances or materials that are likely to have a negative influence on the quality
of the recycled material.
Where cardboard has previously been combined with EPS or plastic, consider
using corrugated board on its own.
39
SECTION 11
Pay particular attention to eliminating blister packs. In some instances, these can
readily be replaced with a cardboard box that uses a photograph to illustrate the
product. Alternatively, the packaging can be entirely redesigned using different
materials and with the product still visible.
Design plastic packaging for single polymer use wherever possible. Alternatively,
use compatible polymers that are easy to deal with during sorting and
reprocessing. For example, avoid using PVC labels on HDPE containers as the
automatic recognition or density separation systems used for HDPE/PET mixed
streams may not separate out the PVC. As a result, PVC would be incorporated
in the PET stream (see section 16.2).
Code
Description
Polyethylene
terephthalate
(PETE in the USA)
PET
High-density
polyethylene
(or PE-HD)
LDPE
40
Polypropylene (PP)
Polystyrene (PS)
PS
Polyvinyl chloride
(V in the USA)
PVC
Description
PP
HDPE
Code
7
OTR
HE
(7 19)
Low-density
polyethylene
(or PE-LD)
Other:
Use of this code indicates
that the package in
question is made with a
resin other than the six
listed above, or is made of
more than one resin used
in combination.
Avoid using colourants in plastic packaging wherever possible. Where they are
necessary, use them sparingly to minimise colour contamination. Avoid mixing
coloured and clear plastics in the same design, even when the polymer is the
same, as this can limit potential uses for the recycled material.
Minimise the use of inks, adhesives and other coatings as these will usually need
to be removed or dispersed during recycling.
Minimise the use of labels as these will usually need to be removed or dispersed
during recycling. If possible, mould/emboss (eg as often done for polymer ID
codes on plastic bottles) or print information directly onto the packaging.
Consider making greater use of interlocking tabs on paper packaging and integrally
moulded press-studs on plastic packaging, hence avoiding the need for adhesives.
Use easy-to-remove fasteners rather than tape. Staples can be used where it is
appropriate, although not in packaging for food and toys because of the safety
considerations.
Avoid plastic and foil laminates and UV varnishes on paper packaging (eg
cartons) unless these are absolutely necessary, as they can inhibit recycling in
certain paper mills.
SECTION 11
Use recycle-friendly adhesives on paper packaging, particularly tough and lowor high-density hot melts and polyurethane rubber (PUR) adhesives that are
easier to remove at the paper mill. Remember that water-based adhesives can
cause problems for paper mills: they are difficult to remove and can build up on
equipment.
41
SECTION 11
Use individual blobs of hot melt adhesive on paper packaging rather than thin
strips that can break up in the pulping process.
With plastic packaging, water-based adhesives (eg for labels and bottle bases)
are usually preferable to hot melts and solvent-based adhesives (see section 17).
42
Investigate
further
General
Has the segregation, collection and sorting regime for
recycling been considered?
Have the end markets for the materials been considered?
Implement
now
SECTION 11
43
SECTION 12
Increase the calorific value of packaging by reducing the inorganic fraction (eg
metal, glass). Packaging that is more than 50% organic (paper, wood, plastic) is
regarded as complying with the Essential Requirements in this respect, as is
aluminium foil that is less than 50 microns thick. BS EN 13431:2000 is the
relevant standard on design for energy recovery.
PVC and other sources of chlorine (including some bleached paper) will increase
the quantity of hydrogen chloride (an acid gas) produced during incineration. It
has also been suggested that the quantity of dioxins (including highly toxic
substances) will be increased by the combustion of PVC, although there is no
clear evidence for this. Modern UK incinerators are required to keep emissions
within set safety limits. They operate, therefore, at high temperatures (minimising
the risk of dioxin formation) and employ appropriate flue gas cleaning
technologies to capture problematic emissions.
44
Implement
now
SECTION 13
45
SECTION 13
consistency/repeatability of application.
The Managing Director summed up his thoughts on the workshop approach as follows:
Working with the Giraffe Innovation Consultants really helped us to consolidate
and explore new product opportunities - incorporating brand, technical and
environmental factors from the outset.
environmental issues;
costs.
Process technology issues were considered from the outset, and the design agency
quickly identified narrow-neck, press-blow glass technology as the most likely
manufacturing technique. It allows the more precise use of material during
production, removing the need to overcompensate during the manufacturing
process and reducing the quantity of material used. The new bottle finally weighed
only 218 g and held 330 ml of liquid (see Fig 9).
46
SECTION 13
The principles of finite element analysis (FEA) were factored in at the outset. By
using rough calculations only, the designer retained the flexibility needed while
generating ideas at the concept stage but, at the same time, ensured that the
eventual design was unlikely to fail. More robust FEA calculations were made
collaboratively during the industrialisation phase of the project, with the packaging
suppliers using more complex software tools to finalise product specifications.
47
SECTION 13
proved to be cheaper than contracting out container manufacture. There has since
been a switch to post-consumer plastic waste, supplied by Linpac Recycling. This
has reduced the overall cost of the containers, even though the blow-moulding is
now carried out by an external container supplier.
The company has experienced no performance problems with any of its recycled
packaging, eg in terms of strength or odour migration to the product. Success can
be attributed to:
compatibility with legal and cultural requirements in the EU and other markets;
Outer layer (20% of total): Virgin HDPE, allowing exact matching of the colour
required so that brand image is not adversely affected.
Centre core (70% of total): Recycled material, including a minimum of 25% postconsumer recyclate (PCR). This percentage can be
increased to up to 35%, depending on container
design and type.
The PCR used in the centre core is taken from the household domestic waste
stream. The balance of recycled material comes from in-house process HDPE scrap.
48
it reduces the use of virgin HDPE by up to 50% (as it can also include off-cuts);
SECTION 13
Using three layer co-extrusion technology will allow the manufacture of new HDPE
containers incorporating PCR, with no increase in weight against conventionally
manufactured containers. At the same time exactly the same technical performance is
achieved as containers manufactured entirely from virgin HDPE, and with no increase
in cost, an achievement which up until now had not been considered possible.
Recent improvements in the UKs infrastructure of collecting, sorting, washing,
shredding and granulating plastics materials taken from the domestic waste stream,
have resulted in PCR now being competitive in price to virgin HDPE. The PCR/HDPE
co-extrusion approach to manufacturing new HDPE containers offers an
environmentally sound solution to using waste materials, which would have
previously ended up in a landfill.
be easy to assemble;
be easy to handle;
CAD/CAM techniques and solid models were used to develop the design concept.
The new die-cut pack (see Fig 10) has been designed with:
three corner protectors and a central support strut to hold the product securely
in place;
49
SECTION 13
50
Part of the development of any new product includes research to assess packaging
options against various criteria. This research includes the environmental aspects of
material choice, minimising waste and materials, and compliance with international
regulations. Where a major pack-format change or a novel pack design is under
consideration, life-cycle assessment (LCA) techniques are employed.
Reviews are also carried out on existing ranges to improve performance.
SECTION 13
A packaging rationalisation project across the Nurofen product range has yielded
annual savings of around 25 tonnes of plastic and aluminium foil.
The Boots in-house bottle-blowing facility now uses granulated plastic bottle
waste as a sandwich layer in new co-extruded bottles for specific applications.
A project team was set up to develop a transit packaging portfolio for the range of
medicinal liquids produced by the company. The brief was to rationalise the
existing range of transit outers and trays and to investigate new packaging
concepts. After extensive analysis and testing, the range of corrugated packaging
was reduced by more than 50%, while two product ranges were converted to
trayless packaging using shrink film
Figure 11 The re-usable plastic pallet
only. The cost savings that accrued
system developed at Airdrie
from this exercise totalled 52,000,
and there was a reduction of
28 tonnes/year in the quantity of
packaging used. Opportunities in
other areas are being investigated.
51
SECTION 13
52
been introduced (see Fig 11). This replaces the existing system, comprising onetrip corrugated outers and trays, shrink film and wooden pallets. Annual cost
savings are expected in excess of 20,000, with materials savings of 13 tonnes of
corrugated board and 2.5 tonnes of polythene film.
The corrugated outers from one particular supplier are returned to the mill for
repulping into new packaging. This is a closed-loop system with the vehicles that
deliver new corrugated cases being used, on their return journey, to take
packaging back to the mill for recycling. The closed-loop system reduces the
transport impact of recycling.
The following points summarise the key actions that you should
consider first when improving the design of your packaging.
packaging elimination;
packaging reduction;
packaging re-use;
packaging recycling.
Use abridged LCA and other simple tools to give a clear and scientifically
informed basis for decision-making.
SECTION 14
ACTION PLAN
Remember - you can achieve a lot with common sense and teamwork.
53
SECTION 15
(Regulations shown in this section were correct when this Guide was
prepared. As details may change, companies should contact the
regulator for the most up-to-date position. See section 18 for contact
details.)
produce raw materials, convert materials into packaging, fill packaging, sell
packaging (indirectly as transit packaging or as a retailer of packaged goods) or
import packaging and/or packaging materials;
AND
AND
AND
AND
These companies are required to register with the Environment Agency in England
and Wales, or the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) in Scotland, or
the Environment and Heritage Service in Northern Ireland. Alternatively, they may
register with a compliance scheme and provide evidence that they are meeting their
obligations, generally by obtaining packaging waste recovery notes (PRNs).
54
11
the content of heavy metals (mercury, lead, cadmium and hexavalent chromium
combined) shall be limited to 100 parts per million from June 200113.
SECTION 15
The obligation to fulfil these requirements lies with the packer/filler brand owner or
the importer of the packaging, and the regulations are enforced by local authority
Trading Standards Officers. BSI/CEN standards have now been developed which
further explain the requirements.
Materials and Articles in Contact with Food Regulations 1987 (amended 1994);
Plastic Materials and Articles in Contact with Food Regulations 1998 (amended
2000).
The 1987 regulations apply to all materials and articles that (in their finished state)
are intended to come into contact with food. There is a general requirement that
such material shall be manufactured in such a way that in normal or
foreseeable conditions of use they do not transfer their constituents to foods
in quantities which could endanger human health or bring about an
unacceptable change in its nature, substance or quality.
The materials covered by these regulations include regenerated cellulose film.
Under the plastic materials regulations, a material does not meet the standards if:
For example, the SML for vinyl chloride (found in PVC) is 0.01 mg per kg of food.
There is no law in the UK that precludes the use of recycled material per se in food
contact applications. There are, in fact, several good examples of its use.
12
This does not include choices between materials and overall systems (eg one-trip versus return).
13
Certain derogations are allowed, for example, in terms of glass containers and recycled plastic crates and
pallets.
55
SECTION 15
56
customer expectations;
material standards;
production/handling methods;
economic conditions.
Particular problems are associated with the specification and use of recycled
(secondary) materials, particularly in paperboard and plastic packaging:
SECTION 15
Such problems have limited the use of recycled materials, even where fitness for
purpose can be clearly demonstrated.
57
SECTION 16
16.1 PAPER
Although paper is produced from renewable sources (eg wood), the harvesting,
transportation and preparation of the wood can use significant amounts of energy. In
the UK, a considerable proportion of paper packaging is manufactured from the
waste paper collected from all over the country. Waste paper is relatively easy to
repulp, although it does have to be cleaned and, for some applications, de-inked.
Some mills burn this process waste to generate electricity and raise steam, thereby
reducing process impact.
16.1.1 Cartonboard
Plain paperboard is used widely in packaging applications where it is often referred to
as cartonboard or folding boxboard. It usually consists or four or five layers of pulp
plus an outer coating to provide a smooth finish with a good printing surface (see
Fig 12). The surface finish may make use of clays, varnishes or polymeric materials.
Figure 12 Typical cartonboard structure
58
Bleached pulp tends to be used throughout in the case of luxury items and where
there is direct food contact. This type of cartonboard is called solid bleached board
(SBB) or folding box board (FBB). Unbleached pulp and waste-based pulp are used
in other applications, although generally with a bleached pulp top layer and a
SECTION 16
coating. White lined chipboard (WLC) is the term usually applied to waste-based
boards. These can contain very high proportions (70% or more) of recycled material.
Non-European mills may still use chlorine gas in the bleaching process: this
can produce small amounts of carcinogenic dioxins.
it is relatively simple to change the design, and the lead-time involved is much
shorter than that required to re-tool for plastic mouldings, for example;
59
SECTION 16
16.2 PLASTICS
Although plastics (polymers) are made from non-renewable oil resources, they are
extremely versatile and have many excellent performance characteristics - a high
strength-to-weight ratio, transparency, toughness/durability, good moisture and, in
some cases, gas-barrier properties, and smooth printing surfaces. Furthermore and contrary to popular belief - oil-based packaging accounts for only about 2% of
the oil used in the UK, compared with 29% for road transport and 50% for heating,
electricity and energy.
It is possible to combine plastic materials, by co-extrusion and lamination. This
allows packaging designers to optimise product-protection properties and minimise
packaging weight. Using this approach can reduce the need for food
stabilisers/preservatives and improve food freshness/shelf-life.
Polymers can be very resistant to chemicals and can act as both thermal and
electrical insulators. They can be moulded into virtually any shape of container
(trays, bottles etc). Furthermore, plastic corrugated sheet is also manufactured,
providing a more durable version of corrugated board.
Each of the main packaging polymers (high-density polyethylene (HDPE), lowdensity polyethylene (LDPE), polypropylene (PP), polyethylene terephthalate (PET),
polyvinyl chloride (PVC), polystyrene (PS)) has different strengths and weaknesses in
environmental and performance terms14. All can be recycled mechanically although,
ideally, the individual polymers should be separated out in the waste management
system, as the uses for recycled mixed polymer wastes are limited. It is possible to
make greater use of recycled plastic, even in food packaging applications, by using
it as the core layer when co-extruding rigid plastic and films.
60
14
A thin outer layer, visible to the consumer, made of virgin material and of
any required colour.
A middle layer that provides most of the container strength and is made
from recycled plastic.
A thin inner layer that is in contact with the product. This can generally be
made from recycled plastic if the product is dry and a non-food product.
However, virgin material is usually used if the product is liquid to eliminate
contamination concerns.
SECTION 16
Co-extrusion of plastic
Co-extrusion is commonly used for packaging in PE and PET. The latter has
good gas-barrier properties and this makes co-extrusion a possibility even in
food applications as it prevents the migration of contaminants to the product.
Companies such as Unilever, Boots and Coca-Cola use co-extrusion methods
for certain product ranges. In the case of Coca-Cola, a closed loop allows
control over the PET recyclate supply.
Around 5% of total UK plastic bottle production - including milk bottles, fabric
conditioner bottles etc - is manufactured by co-extrusion. Companies such as
Nampack (formerly Plysu) can show that co-extruded bottles meet all but the
most demanding specifications in terms of strength, barrier properties etc.
Furthermore, recycled plastic waste can be significantly cheaper than virgin
material: in some cases the level of saving is 20% or more. However, material
prices do fluctuate, so occasional checks with suppliers are needed.
Both EPS and PVC have been criticised on environmental grounds, and some of the
key issues are summarised below.
61
SECTION 16
Chlorine gas (toxic) and two process intermediates, vinyl chloride and ethylene
dichloride (both carcinogenic) are used in the manufacture of PVC. Concern
has been expressed about the use of phthalate plasticisers (DINP, DEHA and
DEHP) during manufacture and the risk of these and vinyl chloride migrating
into food, medicine etc. Phthalates have been implicated in asthma, endocrine
(hormone) disruption and cancer, and are known to accumulate in certain
organisms. Scientific evidence concerning the danger of phthalates, however,
is mixed, and the industry claims that concerns are unfounded. Lead stabilisers
are used in around 60% of PVC products - but not in food packaging.
There are also concerns about the release of carcinogenic dioxins, both during
manufacture and when PVC is burnt or incinerated. A US EPA study, sampling
data from various points in the vinyl production process, showed emissions of
only about 24g of dioxin to air, land and water, less than 1% of the total emitted
annually by sources throughout the country. The incineration of PVC does
produce more acid gases than, say, HDPE waste, but this is true for any
chlorine-containing item such as coal, wood or chlorine-bleached paper. It has
also been suggested that incinerating PVC may slightly increase the generation
of dioxins, although there is no firm evidence for this.
Although incinerator emissions are very tightly controlled in the UK, with flue
gases being cleaned, recycling is generally the best practicable environmental
option for PVC. Although the recyclate is being used for items such as water
pipes and road cones, the scale of PVC recycling in the UK is limited.
In some countries, PVC has a poor public image, and some manufacturers and
retailers (eg Marks and Spencer) claim to be phasing it out of their packaging
and products. It attracts high fees in certain EU countries that charge for
packaging recovery.
62
SECTION 16
Ionomers offer significant benefits over linear LDPE (LLDPE) and other film materials
(eg acid copolymers) in the production of plastic films. They can, for example, offer
lower-temperature sealing and better thermoform performance (eg in vacuum
packing) where higher infrared (IR) absorption rates result in higher packaging
speeds and energy savings. Ionomers also offer better hot-tack strength, higher
puncture and pinhole resistance, greater tensile strength and improved chemical
resistance. Gas permeability is similar to that of LLDPE, although moisture
permeability is generally slightly greater.
16.3 GLASS
Glass containers are made primarily from silica (sand), and almost all contain some
recycled glass (cullet). The proportion of cullet varies in the UK from around 90% in
green glass manufacture to 30% in the production of clear and brown (amber) glass.
The source of materials is, therefore, effectively unlimited.
Glass represents a strong and durable material for containers. It can withstand
significant loads and temperatures and is resistant to most chemicals. Glass
containers act as an excellent moisture and gas barrier. They can also be attractively
shaped and allow the product to be clearly seen by the consumer.
Brown and, to a lesser extent, green glass reduce light penetration levels, while
clear glass offers good natural protection from the high-energy UV light that occurs
in natural sunlight and in the light created by in-store fluorescent lamps. (Plastic
containers require the addition of chemical UV filters where photodegradation is an
issue.) Modern, printed shrink sleeves can offer colour and graphic design features
and provide an alternative to the use of coloured glass and labels.
A glass bottle and an equivalent plastic bottle consume similar amounts of energy
during their manufacture. However, despite very significant weight reductions in
recent years, the glass bottle is at least five times heavier than the plastic bottle.
This means that a truck-load of drinks in plastic bottles typically consists of around
90% drink and 10% packaging (by weight), whereas a truck-load of drinks in glass
bottles typically consists of around 60% drink and 40% packaging. As a result,
glass does not perform well environmentally when compared with single-trip plastic
containers and paperboard cartons.
However, glass packaging can achieve a good environmental performance where it
is re-used a significant number of times, particularly where the trips are local (as in
local milk deliveries). Glass containers are well suited to re-use, being robust and
easily cleaned and resealed. Furthermore, unlike certain plastic packaging and
composite packaging materials, there is a well-established infrastructure in the UK
for the post-consumer recycling of glass containers.
63
SECTION 16
However, steel cans and drums can be difficult to reseal once opened. Furthermore,
despite the considerable weight reductions that have been made, for example, by
introducing ribbed steel cans, steel is heavy when compared with packaging
materials such as plastic.
Aluminium, while more expensive per tonne, is far lighter per can and hence
competitive in cost when compared with steel. Life-cycle analyses comparing
aluminium cans with steel cans have been unable to reach any clear conclusions as
to which is better environmentally.
64
Some new materials may, when compared with regular polymers, require
increased energy inputs and/or more material to provide the same level of
performance.
The use of substitutes for plastic may, in the future, reduce the costs of
compliance under the packaging waste regulations. Securing PRNs for
plastic is more costly than for other materials.
SECTION 16
65
SECTION 16
they do not offer as good a light and gas barrier as aluminium foil and, hence, have
only been used for extended shelf-life applications rather than for long-life products.
The packaging recovery systems in place in EU (Green Dot) countries provide a
significant financial incentive for organisations exporting to those countries to use
readily recyclable materials. The latter attract only a fraction of the normal fee for
more difficult materials.
66
15
SECTION 16
Research has shown that thin beads of hot-melt can actually cause more problems
than thick beads as they fragment more readily. However, newer EVA-hot-melts and
fast-drying polyurethane rubber (PUR) adhesives (used, for example, for telephone
directories) are available. Because these are tougher and have a higher or lower density
(for example, a specific gravity of < 0.94), they are easier to remove from the pulp.
Water-based and water-soluble adhesives (such as PVA) are still widely used in the
UK and do not involve the release of VOCs to air. However, they generally require
more drying energy and/or compression time than hot-melts, although IR curing can
speed up the process. Such adhesives may also be difficult to use in some
applications, for example, where the surface is too smooth to obtain a key. Most
67
SECTION 16
UK paper mills prefer an adhesive that can be separated out rather than dissolved,
as soluble adhesives can build up on equipment and become difficult to remove.
An alternative to adhesives in the construction of cartonboard packaging is to use
mechanical fastenings such as interlocking tabs and metal staples. Interlocking
cardboard tabs are used widely, often in conjunction with an adhesive seal elsewhere
on the package (eg down the side seam of a box). However, interlocking tabs can
often be used without any adhesive, making the pack inherently more recyclable.
Adhesive-free packs are now used by many companies in various applications, from
shoe boxes to can and bottle multi-packs. Plastic packaging can also be designed
with interlocking tabs and integral press-together fittings (eg plastic press-studs).
While staples are not suitable for certain applications - food packaging, toys etc they can offer an alternative to adhesives in other product groups, eg DIY goods.
Ease of use. Mechanical locks are less messy than hot-melts and involve
less machine set-up, cleaning and maintenance.
The company has found that, in this particular range of applications, packing
lines that use mechanical lock packs continue to achieve production speeds of
more than 200 packs per minute.
Hot-melts are still used on larger and heavier packs.
16.9 INKS
Water-borne and UV-curable inks can offer an environmental benefit in terms of
reduced VOC emissions to air. In selecting materials, overall environmental impacts and
manufacturing issues should be considered. For example, water-borne inks may require
more drying energy and/or may slow down the flexographic and rotogravure printing
processes used in most packaging applications. UV-cured print is generally acceptable
for all types of primary food packaging, having low taint and odour and good basic
adhesion. Water-borne inks are not always suitable for high specification packaging
applications on non-absorbent plastic surfaces, as substances may shrink during the
drying stage after being printed with a water-borne (or water-borne UV-curable) ink.
68
SECTION 16
Water-borne inks can also be more difficult to remove during the repulping and deinking process at the paper mill. De-inking usually involves flotation techniques, and
the ease with which ink can be removed from the pulp relates to ink particle size and
hydrophobicity. Despite this, ink contamination is not usually a problem, given that
packaging waste is generally used for other packaging applications, eg for
corrugated board or cartonboard, with the latter being white-lined where necessary.
69
SECTION 17
Acronym
PP
0.9 to 0.91
Low-density polyethylene
LDPE
0.91 to 0.93
High-density polyethylene
HDPE
0.94 to 0.96
Polystyrene
PS
1.04 to 1.06
Nylon
PA
1.13 to 1.14
Acrylic
PMMA
1.17 to 1.20
Polycarbonate
PC
1.20
Polyethylene terephthalate
PET
1.35
Polyvinyl chloride
PVC
1.35 to 1.45
Polypropylene
70
Yes (suitable)
No (not suitable)
Cap
HDPE
PP
Thermoset
PVC, PS
Metal
Inner cap/seal
PE
EVA
PVC
Handle/collar
Clear PET
HDPE
PP
Coloured PET
PVC
Bottle
PET
Coloured
Coated
Multi-layer
Non-PET
Direct printing
Label
PE
PP/OPP
Paper
Water-soluble adhesive
Shrink
PVC
PET
OPS
Solvent adhesive
Hot-melt
Base
Weld
Coloured PET
SECTION 17
The raw material code should be located on the base of bottle. However, if there is the risk of cracking due to
the bottle design, the code may be relocated.
71
SECTION 17
Yes (suitable)
No (not suitable)
Cap
PVC
HDPE
PP
PET
PS
Metal
Thermoset
Inner cap/seal
PVC
PE
EVA
Bottle
PVC
Label
PET
PS
Solvent-based adhesive
Hot-melt adhesive
Yes (suitable)
No (not suitable)
Cap
PP
HDPE
PVC
PU
PS
Thermoset
Metal
Inner cap/seal
HDPE
Bottle
HDPE
Multi-layer HDPE
Label
HDPE
PP
OPP
Shrink
Paper/water-soluble adhesive
72
PVC
PET
PS
Hot-melt
Paper/solvent-based
adhesive
Component
Yes (suitable)
No (not suitable)
Cap
PP
HDPE
PET
PS
PVC
Thermoset
Metal
Inner cap/seal
LDPE
EVA
PVC
Bottle/jar
PP
Label
HDPE
PP/OPP
In-mould
Direct print
Light paper/water-soluble
adhesive
SECTION 17
PVC
PS
PET
Heavy paper
Hot-melt
Solvent-based adhesive
The raw material code should be located on the base of container. However, if there is the risk of cracking
due to the bottle design, the code can be relocated.
17.2.5 PP tray
Component
Yes (suitable)
No (not suitable)
Lid
Foil
PP
OPP
Metallised OPP
Foil/heavy paper
Tray
PP/multi-layer PP
Label
PE
PP/OPP
In-mould PP
Water-soluble adhesive
Direct print**
Heavy paper*
PVC
PET
Solvent-based adhesive
Hot-melt adhesive
Excessive paper content can be a problem if a large proportion of the recycled containers have paper
labels/lids or use heavy weights of paper.
** Although direct printing is acceptable, it may be necessary to consider ink types to avoid reducing the
quality of the recycled granulate.
73
SECTION 17
17.2.6 PS pot
Component
Yes (suitable)
No (not suitable)
Lid
Foil
PET/light paper
Metallised OPET
Metallised OPP
PBT/PS
OPS
PET/Heavy paper
Pot
PS
HIPS/PS
Multi-layer*
Label
Paper (reduced)
PE
PP/OPP
OPS
EPS
In-mould PS
Water-soluble adhesive
Direct print***
Heavy paper**
PVC
PET
Solvent-based adhesive
Hot-melt adhesive
The raw material code should be located on the base of the container. However, if there is the risk of cracking
due to the bottle design, the code can be relocated.
*
** Excessive paper content can be a problem if a large proportion of the recycled containers have paper
labels or use heavy weights of paper.
*** Although direct printing is acceptable, it may be necessary to consider ink types to avoid reducing the
quality of the recycled granulate.
74
Organisation
Web address
www.incpen.org
www.europen.be
www.wrap.org.uk
Valpak
www.valpak.co.uk
Remade (Scotland)
www.remade.org.uk
www.conseil-emballage.com
www.gruener-punkt.de
SECTION 18
www.packagingfedn.co.uk
www.pi2.org.uk
www.igd.org.uk
www.apme.org
www.bpf.co.uk
www.corrugated.org.uk
www.rapra.net
British Glass
www.britglass.co.uk
www.mpma.org.uk
www.alupro.org.uk
www.scrib.org
www.coatings.org.uk
Packaging design
The Design Council
www.design-council.org.uk/design
Pira International
www.piranet.com
Regulations
Office of Public Sector Information
www.opsi.gov.uk
www.defra.gov.uk
www.berr.gov.uk
Environment Agency
www.environment-agency.gov.uk
www.sepa.org.uk
www.ehsni.gov.uk
www.lacors.com
75
SECTION 19
76
GLOSSARY
APME
BSI
CAD
Computer-aided design
CAM
Computer-aided manufacture
CEN
CTPA
DEHA
DEHP
DINP
ECF
Elemental chlorine-free
EPS
Expanded polystyrene
EVA
A type of hot-melt
FBB
FEA
HDPE
High-density polyethylene
LCA
Life-cycle assessment
LDPE
Low-density polyethylene
LLDPE
MEK
MET matrix
MFA
NAMAS
PCR
Post-consumer recyclate
PE
Polyethylene
PET
Polyethylene terephthalate
Biopolymer
PLA
Maize-based polymer
PP
Polypropylene
PRNs
PROR
PS
Polystyrene
PSA
Pressure-sensitive adhesive
PUR
Polyurethane rubber
PVA
Water-soluble adhesive
PVC
Polyvinyl chloride
QM
Residual quantities
SBB
SEPA
SML
TCF
Totally chlorine-free
UV
Ultraviolet
VOC
WLC
SECTION 19
PHA/PHB
77
SECTION 20
CHECKLIST
Please photocopy these checklists for use in your company.
Investigate
further
Implement
now
Elimination of packaging
78
Implement
now
SECTION 20
Investigate
further
79
SECTION 20
Investigate
further
Implement
now
80
Implement
now
SECTION 20
Investigate
further
81
SECTION 20
Investigate
further
Implement
now
82
Implement
now
SECTION 20
Investigate
further
83
84
SECTION 20