Nonrenewable Resources, Vol. 5, No.

4, 1996

Material Flow Analysis for an Industry--A Case Study in

Packaging*

Kevin Sandgren 1,2

Received March 15, 1996; accepted November 6, 1996

The basic materials used in packaging are glass, metals (primarily aluminum and steel), an
ever-growing range of plastics, paper and paperboard, wood, textiles for bags, and miscellaneous
other materials (such as glues, inks, and other supplies). They are fabricated into rigid, semi-
rigid, or flexible containers. The most common forms of these containers include cans, drums,
bottles, cartons, boxes, bags, pouches, and wraps. Packaging products are, for the most
part, low cost, bulky products that are manufactured close to their customers. There is
virtually no import or export of packaging products. A material flow analysis can be
developed that looks at all inputs to an industrial sector, inventories the losses in processing,
and tracks the fate of the material after its useful life. An example is presented that
identifies the material inputs to the packaging industry, and addresses the ultimate fate of
the materials used.
KEY WORDS: Materials; flow analysis;packaging; input/outputinventory.

INTRODUCTION Packaging simplifies product handling and ship-

Packaging can be traced to the dawn of history.
Any item that was stored or transported required pack-
aging. Leaves, gourds, skins, woven baskets, carved
wood, clay and earthenware vessels, and other avail-
able commodities were pressed into service.
Over the last century, packaging has become a
part of everyday living. Bottles, boxes, and cans are
part of an extensive list of familiar packages that testify
to the popularity of the package as a fixture in day-
to-day life. In 1930, the introduction of paper, cello-
phane, and aluminum foil provided the basis for a
whole new area known as flexible packaging. The
development of new materials has continued with the
introduction of polyethylene in the 1940"s, followed
by polyesters, ionomers, and a number of other coated
or laminated materials.
i Reno, Nevada 89502.
2 Formerlywith the U.S. Bureauof Mines, Washington,D.C.
* Correspondence shouldbe directed to Earle B. Amey,U.S, Geo-
logical Survey,National Center 983, Reston, Virginia20192.
ping, protects the product, and aids in inventory con-
trol, identification, and marketing. It is estimated that
as much as 50% of all current packaging applications
did not exist 10 years ago (Munts, 1990).
In more recent years, packaging products have
garnered a great deal of attention in the United States
due to the expanding solid waste problem. Approxi-
mately 160 million tons of municipal solid waste was
disposed of in 1990, 30% of which was packaging
materials. The fate of the majority of this material
is to end up in landfills. Approximately 67% of all
municipal waste in 1990 was deposited in landfills,
17% was recycled, and the remaining 16% was inciner-
ated (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992).
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) estimates of the constituents and quantities, by
weight, of municipal solid waste and, in particular,
packaging waste discarded in 1990 are shown in figure
1. Paper and paperboard is the largest single material
component of the municipal waste stream, accounting
for over one-third of the discarded waste. Nearly 40%
of all discarded paper and paperboard consists of pack-

235
0961-1444496/1200-0235509.50/I 9 1996 International A.~ociation for Mathematical Geology
236 Sandgren

Other wastes
Glass is a nearly impermeable material which

~
14.8
Pac4k3a.ging~~ Durablegoods Wood M;tal
,~ ~::~t~ 22.s 6.8 -:
11[1[1t
Nondurable goods
39.2
Solid Waste Packaging Waste
Figure1. Materialsin municipalsolidwasteand packaging
waste,1990.Mmt = million metrictons.Source:Elliot (1991).
aging products (nearly 19 million metric tons). Glass
containers are also a significant contributor to solid
waste. Glass containers account for approximately
90% of the total amount of glass found in municipal
landfills. Metal containers account for more than 25%
of the metals found in solid waste. Of this, it is esti-
mated that two-thirds are steel containers with the
remainder being predominantly aluminum (Rauch
Associates, 1990). On a weight basis, plastics packag-
ing accounts for less than 5% of the total solid waste
load and is not considered a problem.
GLASS CONTAINERS
Glass containers and packaging include beer and
soft-drink bottles, wine boules, liquor bottles, and bot-
tles and jars for food, cosmetics, and other commodi-
ties. Figure 2 shows how much glass was consumed
by these commodities in 1990.
prevents the migration of moisture and volatile compo-
~Jass nents to or from the product. It is also inert, preventing
any alteration of the contents by the glass itself. The
use of glass as a packaging material is limited by its
weight, brittleness, and susceptibility to breakage.
In the production of glass containers, three pri-
mary ingredients are used. Silica (SiOz) is the main
structural component, soda (NazO, as sodium carbon-
ate) is the fluxing agent, and lime (CaO) is the final
bulk component, which is used to provide stability and
durability. Small quantities of other materials are often
added to produce specific properties such as color or
hardness. Glass is manufactured by melting the raw
materials in a furnace. Frit (feedstock materials) is
added at the same rate glass is withdrawn from the
other end. Frit usually contains cullet (broken recycled
glass). The molten glass is usually sent directly to a
molding process where it achieves its final shape. The
finished containers are then shipped to the packagers
or bottlers.
Glass bottles and containers remain the second
largest fraction of packaging waste as can be seen in
figure 1. Glass packaging comprises nearly 7% of the
overall municipal waste stream. Table 1 shows that
the quantity of glass packaging generated has slowly
decreased since the early 1980's. This has been primar-
ily due to the displacement of glass by plastic and, to
a small extent, aluminum. Glass bottle and container
productions are projected to remain fiat, or slightly
decrease.
Source reduction of glass packaging is unlikely
to significantly reduce the amount of packaging waste,
since the amount of glass used for packaging is usually

non-packaging beer and

markets --~ soft drink bottles
15.2 Mmt
silica ~1 making
glass
lime wine and
soda ope]ation liquor bottles
1.9 Mmt

.~food and other t

jars and bottles
recycled 3.7 Mmt
2.4 Mmt landfilled
8.4 Mmt
Figure 2. Glass packaging flow, 1990. Mmt = million metric tons. Source: U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (1992).
Material Flow Analysis
Table 1. Glass PackagingGenerated, 1960-1990
(Million Metric Tons)a
Glass packaging 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990
Beer and soft
drink bottles !.3 2.4 5.1 5.7 6.1 5.2
Wine and liquor
bottles 1.0 1.3 1.7 1.8 2.3 2.0
Food and other
bottles and jars 3.4 3.7 4.0 4.0 4.4 3.8
Total glass
packaging 5.6 7.4 10.8 11.5 12.7 II.0 10.8
a Source: U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency, 1992.
set by the strength and durability requirements of the
package. Unless there are significant advances in glass
technology, the amount of glass required, for a specific
application, will not appreciably decrease.
Conversely, the reuse of glass packaging could
become an important technique in the reduction of
glass waste. Cleaning and reusing a bottle can require
less material and energy then making a new bottle
from virgin or recycled material. However, without
legislation mandating bottle deposits, it is unlikely that
the use of refillable bottles will increase. This is due
to the shift to centralized bottling facilities by the major
beverage companies. The increased cost of transporta-
tion to these facilities due to the high weight of glass
containers offsets the cost savings of refilling.
Glass recycling after use is a simple, accepted
process in glass container manufacturing. Glass manu-
facturers have found it desirable to use some recycled
material in their raw materials feed since the recycled
fraction melts more readily than the silica thereby
"wetting" the silica and increasing the rate of heat
transfer to the mix. It is possible to include more
than 70% of recycled glass in the input "frit" with no
deleterious effects (Munts, 1990). Figure 3 compares
the amount of glass that was recycled and reused to
the amount disposed of in landfills in 1990. Table 2
presents the amount of glass reused and recycled from
1960 to 1990. Much of the cost effectiveness of glass
recycling schemes depends on the degree of color sepa-
ration of the glass "cullet." The Solid Waste Handbook
reported the value of mixed-color glass cullet to be
$1.50 per short ton ($1.65/mt) in 1986, while the value
of sorted glass was $50.00 per short ton ($55.13/mt)
in 1986. Incineration has little applicability for glass
wastes since glass has no heating value.
237
M E T A L CONTAINERS AND P A C K A G I N G
Most metal packaging is constructed of either
steel or aluminum. Steel is used to make food cans,
5.2 beverage cans, drums, pails, and other items. Alumi-
num also is used to make beverage cans as well as
1.9
foil, tubes, and other packaging products.
3.7 The most common metal packaging product is
the can. It can be seen from figure 4 that nearly 90%
of all metal packaging consists of metal cans. The
primary feature of the metal can is its ability to contain
foods and beverages while preventing decomposition.
Food preservation is a critical function of packaging.
Within the food industry, metal packaging accounts
for 41% of all packaging products (Capstick, 1991).
It is estimated that in the United States less than 3%
of the processed food is lost to spoilage while less
developed countries with inadequate packaging may
lose more than 50% (Capstick, 1991).
Metal can shipments are projected to increase
through 1995 at an average overall annual growth rate
of 3 percent. Soft-drink consumption has slowed, but
the consumption of beer in metal cans has increased
as demand has shifted from "premium" brands pack-
aged in glass bottles to brands packaged in metal cans.
The sluggish economy is seen as the reason for the
expected increase in canned food usage as consumers
attempt to stretch their dollar (Bureau of Census,
1991).
Drums and pails are another type of metal con-
tainer. Drums and pails are heavy duty shipping con-
tainers most often used for liquids and hazardous
materials. Generally, they are exceptionally strong and
durable. Lightweight materials such as plastic and
fiberboard compete with metals in some drum and
pail applications.
Foil containers, which are constructed of alumi-
num, are semi-rigid and maintain their shape through-
out all the conditions and temperatures that are
encountered in common packaging and food-pro-
cessing applications. They are impermeable to vapor,
sterile, nontoxic, and odorless. Frozen and baked goods
are the largest use of foil containers since the food can
be frozen, transported, stored, heated, and served in
the same container.
Metal collapsible tubes are generally used for
packaging viscous consumer products, such as tooth-
paste. They are airtight and keep the product fresh
through extended periods of intermittent use. Essen-
tiaUy all of the collapsible tube market belongs to
238 Sandgren

Recycled
1.7 Recycled

@
Recycled

@
0.2

Disposed
Disposed 1.7
Disposed 3.3
3.4
Beer and soft-drink Food and other Wine and liquor
bottles bottles bottles
Figure 3. Glass packaging product recycled and disposed (1990) (million metric tons).
Source: Elliot (199i).

aluminum, although lead and tin are sometimes used
for unique applications.
The production of steel packaging can be seen
in figure 5. Steel packaging containers, for example,
involves essentially three steps. Initially, the raw iron
ore is reduced to "pig" iron. The impure iron is refined
and processed into various types of steel. Various other
metals or minerals can be added to the steel to meet
the requirements of the end user. The steel forms are
then worked in drawing and rolling mills to manufac-
ture containers and other goods. Often the interior of
the container is coated with a plastic material to prevent
contact between the metal and its contents. The con-
tainers are shipped with one end separate or unsealed.
The packager then fills the container with the product
and seals the can.
The amount of steel packaging generated, shown
in table 3, as well as the amount discarded have been
declining since the early 1970's. This decline is
expected to continue due to the penetration of plastics,
aluminum, and multilayer paper products into the
shelf-stable food industry. Steel beverage cans, food
containers, and other packaging represent less than
1.5% of the total discarded municipal waste. The
amount of steel packaging recycled has increased in
recent years, as can be seen in table 4.
The primary raw material for aluminum is baux-
ite. In the production of aluminum, bauxite undergoes
a caustic digestion followed by a clarification. The
resultant liquid is treated to precipitate the aluminum as
alumina (A1203). This is known as the Bayer Process.
[ ] Beverage cans [ ] Food and other cans
[ ] Other packaging
2.5

Table 2. Glass Packaging Reused/Recycled, 1960-1990 (Does

Not Include Fabrication Scrap) (Million Metric Tonsy~ 1.5

Glass packaging 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990

"
Beer and soft
drink bottles 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.7 0.9 1.7
Wine and liquor 0.5
bottles b b b b b 0.1 0.2
Food and other
bottles and jars b b b b b b 0.5
@
Total glass ~enerated Recycled Generated Recycled
packaging 0.1 O.1 0.2 0.4 0.7 1.0 2.4
Steel packaging Aluminumpackaging
"Source: U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency, 1992. Figure 4. Metals packaging products generated and recycled
b Negligible (less than 50,000 tons). (1990) (million metric tons). Source: Elliot (1991).
Material Flow Analysis 239

I non-packaging
markets [

ore 9 "nary l steel J ~ _ ' _ 12.6 I I 0.1 Mmt

refining eel ~ ,u,.::..,~j ~ .
l lille I - ' ....... I I f~176 I
i :i other cans
iron I I 2"3Mmt I
ore
I
9 ~ packaging -
recyc eo
0.5 Mint
| 0.2 Mint I
lan~illed
2.1 Mmt
Figure 5. Steel packaging flow (1990). Mmt million metric tons. Source: U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (1992).

Alumina is smelted to produce aluminum metal. Alu-

Table 3. Steel Packaging Generated, 1960-1990 minum metal is formed or drawn into the desired shape,
(Million Metric Tons)~ the majority of which are beverage cans. This process
from bauxite to finished aluminum packaging is illus-
Steeipackaging 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990
trated in figure 6.
Beer and soft The tonnage of aluminum packaging has
drink cans 0.5 0.8 1.5 1.2 0.5 0.1 0. I increased dramatically in the last 30 years as can be
Food and other seen in table 5. While the aluminum products being
cans 3.5 3.3 3.3 3.1 2.6 2.4 2.3
Other steel generated are expected to increase, the aluminum prod-
packaging 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 ucts being landfilled are expected to remain flat (U.S.
Total steel Environmental Protection Agency, 1992). This is due
packaging 4.2 4.4 4.9 4.5 3.3 2.6 2.6 to an expected increase in recycling. Table 6 shows
~ Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992. this trend of increased recycling from 1975 to 1990.
Aluminum beverage cans have a mature collection and
recycling infrastructure in place as well as increasing
legislation around the country mandating recycling.

PLASTIC CONTAINERS AND PACKAGING

Table 4. Steel Packaging Recovered/Recycled, 1960-1990 Plastic packaging products consist of a wide vari-
(Million Metric Tons)=
ety of goods. These goods include soft-&ink bottles,
Steel packaging 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 milk bottles, miscellaneous containers, bags and sacks,
plastic wrapping, and various other products. While
B e e r and soft there exist many different types of plastic resins, the
d r i n k cans b b b b 0.1 b b
ensuing discussion will include them all in the general
F o o d and other
cans b 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.5
category of plastics.
O t h e r steel Plastic soft-drink bottles are an economic package
packaging b b b b b b b with reasonable customer appeal. They are light, con-
Total steel venient, and nearly unbreakable. Plastic bottles are
packaging b 0.1 0. I 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.5 impermeable to many gases, but are susceptible to
= Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992. diffusion of oxygen and carbon dioxide. The perme-
b Negligible (less than 50,000 tons). ability to carbon dioxide is the primary reason that
240 Sandgren

beerand ]
non-packagi
marketsng ~ = ~ soft-drink
cans I
[ Bayer I. . t 1.~9 Mmt
1.5
/ process l alumlna I alun bina t
aluminum t aluminum
" refir ing ingots forming
mills
I caustic
bauxite foil and
miscellaneous
packaging
recvcled
0.9 Mmt
landfllled
0.8Mmt
Figure 6. Aluminum packaging flow (1990). Mmt million metric tons. Source:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1992).

plastic soft-drink bottles have been limited to the 2

Table5. Aluminum Packaging Generated, 1960-1990 liter and larger bottle size. As the bottle size is reduced
(Million Metric Tons)= below this level, the volume to surface area ratio lowers
to the point where the beverage is likely to lose carbon-
Aluminum
packaging 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 ation and become "flat" before consumption. There-
fore, unless an inexpensive resin that is impermeable
Beer and soft to carbon dioxide is produced, aluminum cans will
drink cans 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.8 1.2 1.5 dominate the single-serving size soft drinks.
Other cans b b 0.1 b b b b
Foil and other Two trends are affecting plastics use in the soft-
packaging 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 drink market. First, there has been a gradual increase
Total in consumption of soft drinks, primarily due to the
aluminum decrease in consumption of alcoholic beverages. Sec-
packaging 0.2 0.3 0.6 0.7 1.1 1.5 1.7
ond, there has been a demographic shift to smaller
=Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992. households which has the potential to decrease the
b Negligible (less than 50,000 tons). market for the large multiserving soft-drink bottles.
Overall, this market is expected to grow slightly over
the next 5 years, then reach a plateau (Elliot, 1991).
Other uses of plastic containers include milk jugs,
water, juice, and alcoholic beverage containers; frozen,
Table6. Aluminum Packaging Recovered/Recycled, dry, and refrigerated food containers; hot-filled, ambi-
1960-1990 (Million Metric Tons)= ent-filled, and aseptically-filled food containers; and
various nonfood containers for use with health prod-
Aluminum
ucts, bulk industrial products, cosmetic products, etc.
packaging 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990
Most of the above nonfood uses are expected to remain
Beer and soft flat for the next few years (Wirka, 1989). The use of
drink cans b b b 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.9 plastics in packaging food products that have tradition-
Other cans b b b b b b b
Foil and other ally used glass jars continues to expand. Micro-
packaging b b b b b b b waveability is one of the reasons for this. Overall,
Total aluminum miscellaneous plastic containers are the fastest grow-
packaging b b b 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.9 ing segment of the plastics packaging market. The use
~Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992. of plastic to package mayonnaise, peanut butter, salad
b Negligible (less than 50,000 tons). dressing, mustard, etc., is increasing due to such perfor-
Material Flow Analysis
mance characteristics as shatter resistance or squeez-
ability, or both.
Plastic bags and sacks are another fast growing
segment of the packaging industry. Many stores, partic-
ularly grocery stores and supermarkets, are switching
from the traditional paper sack to plastic bags. The
primary resistance to the use of plastic has been cus-
tomer preference. The consumer perceives paper sacks
to be more environmentally friendly than plastic and
has been slow to completely accept the plastic sack.
Nevertheless, the use of plastic bags and sacks is
increasing.
Another significant portion of plastic packaging
is plastic wraps. This is one of the largest constituents
of plastic packaging as shown in figure 7. Plastic wraps
primarily consist of heat-shrink wrapping and stretch
wrapping. These wraps are commonly used for the
bundling and protection of consumer goods. The use
of plastic wraps is increasing because plastic wraps
are convenient, cost effective, allow product viewing,
and are cost competitive with other methods.
Miscellaneous plastic packaging includes packing
foams, lids, caps, closures, and other plastic packaging
products. The trend for this category of plastic packag-
ing products mirrors that of the other packaging prod-
ucts. These miscellaneous products are usually used
to complete or close the other packaging products.
Because the other categories of packaging are pro-
jected to increase, particularly plastics, this category
is also expected to grow in the foreseeable future.
Milk bottles
0.4
retainers
.6
Wraps
1.4
Bags anc
0.~ ackaging
,.7
Soft-drink bottles
0.4
Figure 7. Plastic packaging products generated, (1990) (million
metric tons). Source: Elliot (1991).
241
The production of plastic packaging products
essentially consists of two steps: the manufacture of
plastic resins and the formation of the packaging mate-
rials from the resins. The production of plastic resins
depends on the formation of polymers, which are
organic chains or lattices of repeating molecular groups
called monomers. First, the raw hydrocarbon inputs
are refined into various organic chemicals. These
chemicals are then reacted to form monomers. One or
more types of monomers are then formed, or polymer-
ized, to form the characteristic chain or lattice of the
desired plastic. In some cases, further reactions are
undertaken to modify the properties of the plastic. The
plastic resin thus formed is usually produced in the
shape of a small pellet. This pellet is then sent to a
forming operation where the resin may be blow-
molded, drawn, machined, extruded, etc., into the
desired product. This process, resulting in various
packaging products, is illustrated in figure 8.
Plastic containers and packaging have experi-
enced rapid growth in the last 30 years as shown in
table 7. Plastic packaging has changed from an insig-
nificant 0.2 percent of the municipal waste stream in
1960 to a larger 3.7 percent of the overall municipal
waste stream in 1990.
Source reduction of plastics is being applied to
minimize the waste at the end of the useful life of
the product. One method of source reduction is the
elimination of packaging where possible. Another
source-reduction technique is material efficiency, min-
imizing the amount of packaging necessary to meet
the requirements of the product. This technique is often
technology driven. For example, the average thickness
of shrink wrap has been cut in half due to manufactur-
ing improvements that make shrink wrap stronger,
allowing thinner sheets to perform the same function
(Wirka, 1989).
The reuse of products has been identified by the
EPA as the second step in a waste management hierar-
chy. The reuse of plastic packaging products is only
slowly gaining wide-ranging acceptance. The use of
refillable plastic milk bottles is currently being tried
in several U.S. and Canadian dairies (Wirka, 1989).
The recycling of plastics has increased dramati-
cally in the last 5 years, but still only accounts for a
small portion of the plastics generated (see figure 9
and table 8). It is expected that the recycling of plastic
packaging materials will continue to increase, thus
lowering the strain placed on already overburdened
landfills. Government involvement in the form of
deposit laws and mandatory recycling is becoming
242 Sandgren

.•.• soft-drink bottles~..~.~

0.4 Mmt [
non-packaging milk bottles
crude markets 0.4 Mint
l~ 1 _ . _ _ ~ other containers
refining I _I plastic I R~. 1.6 Mmt J
and. plastic
resins forming . ~ _ . ~ l bags and sacks 1
process ng ] operations 0.8 Mmt j
I atural wraps
gas 1.4 Mmt j
other plastic [
J[ packaging
[ 1.7 imt J
recycle
0.3 Mmt
landfilled or incinerated I ,
6.1 Mmt
Figure 8. Plastics packaging flow, (1990). Mmt million metric tons. Source: U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (1992).

increasingly common driving forces for change
(Wirka, 1989).
Waste management by incineration provides for
the recovery of some of plastics' value as heat. The
Btu value of many polymers rivals that of traditional
fuels (Wirka, 1989). The emission of hazardous fumes
and disposal of the remaining ash are, however, linger-
ing concerns. But, arguably, the largest roadblock to
the use of incineration is the common "not in my back
yard" attitude that always seems to surface whenever
the construction of an incineration facUity is proposed.
Incineration programs in cities such as Akron, Ohio,
and Hempstead, New York, have been able to inciner-
ate waste at lower tipping fees than local landfills,
recover valuable energy, and have not exceeded pro-
posed or existing federal air quality standards
(Wirka, 1989).
The final option for disposal of plastic containers
and packaging is landfilling. Most plastic packaging
is still being discarded in landfills.
PAPER AND PAPERBOARD PACKAGING
Paper and paperboard containers and packaging
comprise, by weight, 50 percent of the packaging
industry's shipments (Rauch Associates Inc., 1990).
This is, by far, the largest element o f the packaging
industry. The packaging products in this category
include corrugated boxes, milk cartons, folding car-
Recycled
0,3
=================================

Table 7, Plastic Packaging Generated, 1960-1990 (Million

Metric Tonsy

Plastic packaging 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990

Soft drink bottles b # # # 0.3 0.4 0.4
Milk bottles
Other containers
Bags and sacks
Wraps
Other plastic
packaging
#
0.1
b
#

0.1
#
0.3
b
b

0.6
b
0.8
#
#

1.1
b
1.2
#
b

1.3
0.2
0.8
0.4
0.7

0.7
0.3
1.1
0.5
0.9

0.9
0.4
1.6
0.8
1.4

! .7
i!fijiii!!i!ifiiiilii!ii!i!i!i!iii!ii
Total plastic
packaging 0.2 0.9 1.9 2.5 3. ! 4.1 6.4 Landfill or combusted
6
=Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992. Figure 9. Recycled and disposed plastic packaging products
Not separately estimated prior to 1980. (1990) (million metric tons). Source: Elliot (1991),
Material Flow Analysis
Table 8. Plastic PackagingRecovered/Recycled,1960--1990
(Million Metric Tons)a
Plastic packaging 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990
Soft drink bottles b b b b
Milk bottles b b t, b c
Other containers e ~. c c
B a g s and sacks b b b b
Wraps b b b b
Other plastic
packaging . . . .
Total plastic
packaging . . . . . 0. l
Source: U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency, 1992.
b Not separatelyestimatedprior to 1980.
c Less than 50,000 tons.
tons, bags and sacks, wrapping paper, miscellaneous
paper, and paperboard packaging.
Corrugated and solid fiber boxes are the most
universal type of paperboard packaging and account
for 73 percent of all the paper and paperboard packag-
ing products by weight. Most corrugated boxes are
used as shipping containers where their light weight,
yet strong and rigid construction, is of great use. Corru-
gated boxes are the preferred shipping container for
many products since they are strong enough to protect
the merchandise against the hazards of shipping. Cor-
rugated boxes are used by virtually every industry. The
shipments of these containers is tied closely to the
national economy due to its wide variety of users. It
has been reported that about 90 percent of all goods
are shipped in corrugated boxes (Bureau of Census,
1991). The use of corrugated boxes is expected to
grow at a rate similar to that of the general economy.
Other trends include the use of larger bulk containers,
stronger adhesives for forming the boxes, and
increased use of coatings for water resistance.
Sanitary food containers are another common
type of paPerboard container. The most common type
of sanitary food container is the milk carton. Paper-
board food containers were developed after World War
II as convenient packages for one-way food transporta-
tion and merchandising in supermarkets. Milk cartons
are folding boxboard that has been hardsized and
coated with a wax or plastic to provide water and vapor
resistance as well as a surface for high-quality printing.
Paperboard controls the market for half-gallon and
smaller milk-type cartons, while plastic dominates the
larger sizes. The shift in consumer preference towards
the larger (plastic) sizes has been offset by penetration
243
of paperboard into the fresh juice market. Overall, the
use of paperboard milk-type cartons is expected to
remain fiat, or slightly decrease, over the next few
years.
c 0.1 0.1 A similar category of paperboard container is the
c c folding carton. Folding cartons are similar to milk-
c c e type cartons, but are not coated or laminated to be
~. c c
c c c liquid tight. Folding cartons are used to contain cereals,
processed foods, soaps, detergents, etc. The chief com-
c ~ petition for folding cartons are plastic wraps and plastic
containers. To prevent erosion of its market share,
0.3 manufacturers have made folding cartons lighter
weight, minimized material use, and increased use of
recycled paperboard to keep costs down. Despite those
improvements, folding canons are expected only to
retain the markets they now control with little or no
increase in shipments.
Miscellaneous paperboard products include
paperboard cans and drums as well as molded pulp
packaging. Paperboard cans and drums vary from
small frozen juice containers to large (55 gallon) con-
tainers of various chemicals. Paperboard cans and
drums are lighter, similar in strength and durability,
but more expensive than the metal cans with which
they compete. Paperboard cans are expected to lose
some of their market share to competition from plas-
tics. Paperboard drums are expected to retain their
market share due to increased moisture resistance and
improved graphics. Molded pulp packaging is rough
paper pulp deposited on a mold. The result is a soft,
low density product that is relatively rigid. The primary
market for molded pulp packaging is for egg cartons.
Molded pulp is recapturing its share of the market that
it had previously lost to plastic foam products. This is
due to improvements in strength and to the consumer's
perception of molded pulps biodegradability.
The most common use of paper in packaging is
for bags and sacks. Bags are used as transportation
and retail containers for a wide variety of products
such as flour, charcoal, dog food, and fertilizer. Bags
can be constructed with high strength and good resis-
tance to breakage. If laminated or lined, paper bags
demonstrate good moisture and vapor resistance. The
market for paper shipping bags is expected to remain
flat with little market penetration by plastic due to
consumer's generally negative perception of plastics.
The most common type of paper sack is the grocery
sack. This type of sack is open-topped and is a conve-
nient way for the consumer to transport miscellaneous
goods and containers. The market for paper grocery
sacks has been declining as plastic sacks made strong
244 Sandgren

initial inroads into the market. After the initial strong Table 9. Paper and Paperboard Packaging Generated,
penetration by plastics, the market for paper sacks 1960-1990 (Million Metric Tons)=
appears to be rebounding due to the consumers percep-
Paperboard and
tion of paper as an environmentally friendly material. paper packaging 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990
Even so, plastic sacks are continuing to replace paper.
Another use of paper in packaging is for wrapping Corrugated boxes 6.6 9.1 11.5 12.3 15.5 17.3 21.7
Milk cartons b b b b 0.5 0.5 0.5
paper. Wrapping paper is used to wrap industrial prod-
Folding cartons b b b b 3.4 3.6 3.9
ucts such as lumber as well as food products such Other paperboard
as meats. Other coated wrapping papers are used as packaging 3.5 4.1 4.4 4.0 0.3 0.4 0.3
pouches and wrappings for foods, such as candy bars Bags and sacks b b b b 3.1 2.8 2.2
and fast foods. Because wrapping paper is having some Wrapping papers b b b b 0.2 0.1 0. I
success in replacing foam containers in the fast food Other paper
packaging 2.6 3.0 3.5 3.0 0.7 1.2 0.9
industry, the market for paper wrappings is predicted Total paper and
to grow slightly. paperboard
The final category, miscellaneous paper packag- packaging 12.7 16.2 19.4 19.3 23.6 25.8 29.6
ing, covers such products as envelopes, gift wrapping,
= Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992.
and protective coverings. This category is expected to b Not separately estimated prior to 1980.
follow the trends of the other paper packaging catego-
ries and remain flat.
Figure 10 illustrates paper packaging flows. The including bleaches, dyes, or fillers, are then added.
production of paper and paperboard uses three sources The pulp is then formed into a continuous sheet of
of pulp. Wood waste from the production of other paper or paperboard on a paper machine (Fourdrinier
wood products is one source of the wood fibers. Paper machine). The continuous rolls of paper that are pro-
recovered for recycling is the second source of fiber. duced are cut, trimmed, and coated where necessary.
These two sources provide the majority of the fiber The paper is then sent to the end-user who then prints
required, 54% (Haynes, 1990). The other 46% is sup- any graphics or designs and forms it into the desired
plied by pulpwood grown specifically for the purpose product.
of paper production. These raw materials are reduced The generation of paper and paperboard packag-
to a fibrous pulp by either a mechanical method, chemi- ing has more than doubled in the last 30 years, as can
cal method, or combination of the two. Any additives, be seen in table 9. This increase is expected to continue,

corrugated boxes
21.7 Mmt
milk cartons
pulpwood non-packaging ~ 1 0.5 Mmt
I operations~ markets I folding cartons
T
paperboard, 2 ~ -~
3.9 Mint
other paperboard J LI
I I~ ~
paper, and
I cellophane packaging
operations I 1 mills 0,3 Mmt l
bags and sacks L.~
2.2 Mint !
wrapping paper
0.1 Mmt
other paper packaging I
0.9 Mint I q
recycle
10.9 Mmt
landfilled or incinerated
18.7Mmt
Figure 10. Paper packaging flow (1990). Mmt million metric tons. Source: U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (1992).
Material Flow Analysis 245

but at a much reduced rate. The increase comes almost Table 10. Paper and Paperboard Packaging Recycled,
completely from corrugated boxes. The generation of 1960-1990 (Million Metric Tons)~
the other types of paper and paperboard packaging has
Paperboard and
been relatively constant and is projected to remain paper packaging 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990
constant. This has been caused by the substitution of
paper packaging products by plastic packaging prod- Corrugated boxes 2.3 2.0 2.5 3.3 5.7 6.5 10.5
Milk cartons b b b b ~ ~ ,.
ucts. By percent o f waste generated, it is expected that
Folding cartons b b b b 0.5 0.2 0.3
the proportion of paper and paperboard packaging in Other paperboard
the waste stream will drop, as other materials out pace packaging 0,3 0.4 0.5 0.5 c c c
the growth of paper. Bags and sacks b b b b 0.3 0.1 0.2
Paper and paperboard packaging is, by far, the Wrapping papers b b b b c c c
largest component of all packaging waste. This is pri- Other paper
packaging 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.4 c ~
marily due to the corrugated box. Corrugated contain- Total paper and
ers account for more than one-half of all disposed paperboard
paper and paperboard packaging, as can be seen in packaging 2.7 2.6 3.3 4.1 6.5 6.8 10.9
figure I 1. Corrugated boxes have become the standard
~ Source: u.s. EnvironmentalProtection Agency, 1992.
in packaging of durable goods such as stoves and b Not separatelyestimated prior to 1980.
stereos, but are also used for some nondurable goods c Less than 50,000 tons.
such as in pizza boxes. Corrugated containers provide
strength in a lightweight, inexpensive package as well
as a convenient surface for labeling and advertising
the product. and some pulp fibers become too short to be useful,
The recycling of paper and paperboard has been thus requiring disposal. In 1990, more than 36%, by
practiced within the pulp industry for over 300 years. weight, or 11 million metric tons of paper packaging
Recycling has long been seen as, arguably, the most products were recycled, as shown by figure 11 and
important waste management method for paper and table 10.
paperboard packaging waste. Recycled paper is less Incineration is an additional, or alternate, method
expensive to make and produces less pollution than the o f paper packaging waste management, The incinera-
production of paper from virgin pulp. Unfortunately, tion of paper waste could reduce the demand for fossil
every time paper is recycled, approximately 15% o f fuels for power generation and lower or eliminate the
the fiber is lost due to the shortening of the fibers Iandfilling of paper products. Incineration o f the waste
(Bureau of Census, 1991). Because of this, most grades pulp products for energy recovery could also replace
of paper require at least 20% virgin pulp to produce some nonrenewable fossil fuels, thus contributing to
an acceptable product. This means that a closed-loop a sustainable economy. While rare, the presence of
system is impossible since virgin pulp is necessary contaminants in the waste, particularly heavy metals,
might preclude incineration or force the disposal of
the ash as a hazardous waste.
Recycled Despite the use of both recycling and incineration,
10.5
the disposal of paper waste in sanitary landfills is still
dominant. Paper and paperboard packaging occupies
an estimated 13% of the volume in landfills, according
to a 1992 EPA report (Elliot, 1991).

Landfill or combusted WOOD PACKAGING

7.4
Landfill or combusted
11.4 The primary use of wood for packaging is for
Corrugated All other paper pallets and skids. As shown in figure 12, 73% of wood
boxes packaging packaging is used for pallets and skids, 25% is used for
Figure 11. Recycledand disposedpaper and paperboardpackaging wood boxes, and the remainder is used for cooperage
(1990) (million metric tons). Source: Elliot (1991). (Rauch Associates, Inc., 1990).
246
non-packaging
markets
logging l ,.2 1ll.SMmt'
operations saw ~ cooperage
lumber mills , I
operations
rate,heel
0.4"Mmt
Figure 12. Woodpackaging flows, (1990). Mmt million metric tons. Source:
U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency(1992).
The use of wood packaging has increased since
the mid-1970's. This is due to the increasing use of
pallets and skids in packaging and construction of
facilities geared toward pallet use (U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1992). The growth in industrial
and agricultural production also led to increased
demand for pallets. Some of this increase is also due
to the increasing use of expendable, one-use pallets.
The use of pallets is expected to continue to increase,
but at a slower rate than in the immediate past.
The other significant types of wood packaging
are cooperage and boxes. Cooperage includes casks
and barrels which are often liquid-tight. Wood boxes
include nailed crates, wirebound boxes, and plywood
(or veneer) containers. The use of wood boxes and
cooperage is in decline due to the displacement of
wood by fiber and plastic containers. This substitution
is occurring due to the adaptability of fiber and plastic
containers to automated packaging operations as well
as lower shipping costs due to the lower weight (U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1992). Delicate
equipment as well as certain fruits and vegetables
which require special protection continue to use wood
boxes and cooperage.
Source reduction in the use of pallets has been
reflected in the decrease in wood required for an "aver-
age" pallet from 25 to 17 board ft. Unfortunately, some
of this decrease has also come about because of the
increasing proportion of one-use pallets, which have
lower strength requirements (U.S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency, 1992).
With the exception of expendable pallets, reuse
is a common occurrence with pallets. The number of
Sandgren
Jwoodeoboxes
Jr--"
t 0,2 Mmt ]
I J pallets and skids[
I Mint I
landfilledor incinerated
6.8 Mmt
times a pallet is used varies greatly depending on how
it is used and the care used. The reuse of pallets is
expected to increase as pallet construction methods
improve and pallet-repairing businesses become wide-
spread (Rauch Associates, Inc., 1990). The reuse of
boxes is relatively rare since they are commonly dam-
aged when the packaged product is removed.
In the past, there has been little recycling of wood
containers and packaging. In 1990, only 0.4 million
metric tons of wood packaging (almost entirely pallets)
was recycled as shown in figure 12 (Elliot, 1991). This
was used to make chips that were subsequently used
for mulch or pulp feed.
The amount of consumed wood packaging incin-
erated in licensed incineration facilities is low even
though many wood burning waste-to-energy plants
exist. Wood burning incineration facilities usually rely
on saw mills and construction sites for a readily collect-
ible supply of clean wood chips and scraps. On the
other hand, the amount of wood that is being diverted
from the municipal waste stream for household burning
is unknown, but possibly considerable. Anecdotal evi-
dence at construction sites and landfills have recog-
nized the common occurrence of wood scraps being
removed by members of the general public, particu-
larly during the winter months, presumably to burn in
home fireplaces.
In 1986, the volume of timber grown in the United
States exceeded that harvested by 37% (U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency, 1992). However, the aver-
age diameter of timber available for harvest has
declined, thereby reducing the number of trees suitable
for boardwood products.
Material How Analysis
MISCELLANEOUS PACKAGING
M A T E R I A L S (INKS, G L U E S , T E X T I L E S ,
ETC.)
Miscellaneous packaging materials include such
items as textile bags, printing inks, labels, glues, tapes,
and twine.
Textile bags are used primarily for the shipment
of bulk dry goods, such as rice or beans. In the last
10 years, polymer products, such as acrylic yam and
polypropylene film, have made significant inroads in
this market. The market for textile bags is expected
to remain stable despite the competition from plastics.
Labels and inks are used for product identifica-
tion, information, and the application of graphics to
the product. The use of labels has increased as the
cost of printing graphics has decreased. This trend
is expected to continue as recently passed legislation
increases the amount of required information on pack-
aged foods.
Glues, or bonding adhesives, are important mate-
rials that are used in every facet of the packaging
industry. Glues are used for laminating, bonding pack-
aging together, and sealing containers. Since glues are
so pervasive in the packaging industry, glue is expected
to be consumed in proportion with the growth of the
industry.
Miscellaneous packaging materials are a very
small part of the municipal waste stream. It has been
estimated that only 0.2 million metric tons of waste
was generated in this category in 1990 (Elliot, 1991).
This is only a small fraction of the 58.5 million metric
tons of packaging that was generated in 1990. Labels,
inks, glues, and tapes are usually integral parts of other
packaging and, as such, are recycled, incinerated, or
landfilled with the rest of the package. In many cases,
these materials are contaminants that affect the recycl-
ing or incineration of the package of which they are
a part.
247
CONCLUSIONS
Since the early 1970's, there has been a growing
recognition that the production and consumption of
manufactured products have significant effects on the
environment. Some of these environmental effects are
readily apparent. For example, the increasing demand
for disposable products and the increasing use of food
and product packaging have resulted in an increase
in trash generated by households, which ultimately
translates into stress on waste management facilities
and landfills. Other environmental effects, however,
are more indirect, such as process releases to the envi-
ronment or loss of energy as heat. The growing aware-
ness of the magnitude o f these releases necessitate
evaluation of material and energy use efficiency in the
major industry end-use sectors.
REFERENCES
Bureau of the Census, 1991, Cans and containers, 1991--U.S.
Industrial outlook: U.S. Department of Commerce, Washing-
ton, D. C., chaps. 10-11.
Capstick, D. O., 1991, Shelf-stable food packaging: A materials
use analysis: U.S. Bureauof Mines, unpublishedreport, 100 p.
Elliot, M. S., 1991,Plastics packaging report 1991: Market Search
Inc., Toledo,Ohio, unpublished report, p. 2-10.
Haynes, R. W., 1990, An analysis of the timber situation in the
United States 1989-2040: United States Departmentof Agri-
culture, Forest Service, Washington, D.C., p. 269.
Munts, S. R., 1990, Material Shift in the New Society:U.S. Bureau
of Mines, New Materials Society, v. 3, 148 p.
Ranch AssociatesInc., 1990,The Rauchguide to the U.S.packaging
industry: Industrial Marketing Guides, Bridgewater,New Jer-
sey, 267 p.
United States EnvironmentalProtection Agency, 1992, Character-
ization of municipal solid waste in the United States, 1992
update: United States Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, D.C., 103 p.
Wirka, J., 1989,What's happening in the UnitedStates?:Legislative
messages to the packaging industry in 1989: Environmental
Action Foundation Report, EnviroPak '89, Washington, D.C.,
unpublished report.