Packaging
Beer packaging study challenges preconceptions
Wednesday 19. November 2008 - Environmental impact of cans, glass and PET bottles revealed
Against all expectations the environmental performance challenge for PET bottles (3% penetration in beer packaging today) is not vs. glass bottles, but in fact vs. steel and aluminum cans. This is one of the findings of an independently reviewed study based on specific customer data and commissioned by the Sidel Group. Using data from Belgian Martens Breweries, the study assesses the environmental impact of beer production and packaging, from ingredients hop to the package at its end of use. The so-called Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) looks at the impact of the production of 100 liters of beer in 0.5 l packages in terms of energy consumption, global warming, air acidification, eutrophication and water consumption.
“Environmental impact is an increasingly important factor when our customers decide which packaging to use for what product. Our packaging solutions must be backed by undisputable data,” says Luc Desoutter, Sustainability Officer at Sidel, describing the motivation for a “Life Cycle Assessment” the company commissioned on the different beer packaging options. Life Cycle Assess¬ment is a well-defined methodology, and ISO standards on LCA are available. Its goal is to compare the full range of environmental impact assignable to products and services in order to choose the least burdensome one.
The study compares the production of 100 litres of beer in four different types of packaging: PET bottles with Actis coating, glass long-neck bottles, aluminium cans and steel cans. It considers which option is least environmentally damaging in terms of resources and pollution over the full life cycle of beer. This includes the use of resources from the time grains are grown, harvested and used to make beer, to production of its primary packaging, delivery to supermarkets and customers, and finally to the packages end of life, be it sent to the landfill, incineration or recycling
plant. Data for the study came from Belgium (production and packaging) and the UK (distribution, consumption and disposal).
Primary packaging has the greatest environmental impact along with beer production
The results of the case study show steel cans and PET bottles contribute least to global warming and air acidification. The production of steel cans uses least primary energy and water, while glass is the highest consumer. The study draws several conclusions from these results. In terms of environ¬mental impact, primary packaging is the greatest along with beer production, while transport and secondary packaging are relatively small. Recycling rates are an important factor, especiallly for aluminum cans. Where aluminum can recycling rates are high, aluminium may be a good choice for packaging beer. The electric mix used for the production of packaging is an important parameter for the indicators “acidification”, “energy consumption” and “climate change”. The study also finds that if the weight of a 0.5l PET bottle can be at or below 20 grams, PET is the preferred overall choice in terms of climate change.
Key factors: recycling rates and packaging weight
Luc Desoutter: “The study identified the key factors which most influence environmental assessment. They were found to include recycling rates and the weight of the packaging. These insights enable us to determine which actions to implement to minimize the environmental impact of beer packaging. We can do this, for example, by improving recycling rates and by package lightweighting. The results of the study of course reflect the situation in the countries studied (Belgium for production, UK for consumption and end-of-life), at a given moment – recycling rates, transport distance and electricity mix vary across countries and over time.”
As a result of the study, a new “LCA User” tool has been developed to enable beer producers from everywhere in the world to make an informed decision regarding the most environment-friendly packaging solution for their products based on different scenarios.
The LCA assessment, which took its data from Martens Breweries industrial activities, was performed by RDC-Environment. Its conclusions and this press release were independently reviewed by Rene van Gijlswijk, an LCA expert from TNO in the Netherlands and Yvan Liziard, an LCA expert specializing in packaging. The LCA tool is available through Sidel.