Issue link: http://cp.revolio.com/i/399448
Plastic Packaging The Wise Environmental Choice 5 The benefits of plastic packaging are well established – it's lightweight, less costly to manufacture, fits a multitude of design needs and provides superior product protection. Plastic packaging also makes a significant contribution to sustainability because it uses fewer resources to produce and generates fewer greenhouse gas emissions than alternative materials (glass, paper/corrugated, steel and aluminum). That's the key finding from a life cycle analysis (LCA) study released by The American Chemistry Council and the Canadian Plastics Industry Association that looks at the carbon footprint of plastic packaging vs. alternative packaging materials The study, Impact of Plastics Packaging on Life Cycle Energy Consumption & Greenhouse Gas Emissions in the United States and Canada, assessed the energy requirements and greenhouse gas emissions of six general categories of plastic packaging produced and sold in the United States and Canada. These include caps and closures, beverage containers, other rigid containers, carrier (or shopping) bags, stretch/shrink wrap, and other flexible packaging. The report shows how using less material at the beginning of a package's life provides many advantages throughout its lifecycle. And due to plastics' high strength-to-weight ratio, these materials often make packaging lighter and more efficient than alternatives. The study found that for the baseline year 2010, replacing all plastic packaging with non-plastic alternatives for these six types of packaging in the United States has the following impacts: • Plastic packaging is lighter to manufacture and transport. • Today, the use of plastics in packaging across the U.S. market enables weight savings of 78% over alternatives. That's a savings of 110 billion pounds annually. • Other materials use 80 percent more energy – the equivalent of 91 oil supertankers. • The potential global warming impact of other materials is 130 percent higher than plastic packaging - equivalent to adding 15.7 million more cars to our roads. Similar calculations are available for the U.S. market. Common Plastics Packaging Helps Reduce Package Weight, Energy Use and GHG Emissions in U.S. Total Weight Mil. tons (109.8 Bil. lbs.) Substitutes = 348% higher than plastics 70.7 Mil. tons Substitute Packaging Cumulative Energy Use Global Warming Potential Source: "Impact of Plastics Packaging on Life Cycle Energy Consumption & Greenhouse Gas Emissions in the United States and Canada," Franklin Associates 2014. Study based on 2010 data. 54.9 2,466 Bil. MJ (Mega Joules) Substitute Packaging 134.4 Mil. Metric Tonnes CO 2 eq Substitute Packaging 15.8 Plastic Packaging Mil. tons 1,357 Plastic Packaging Bil. MJ 58.6 Plastic Packaging Mil. Metric Tonnes CO 2 eq SAVINGS for PLASTICS Bil. MJ Substitutes = 82% higher than plastics 1,110 SAVINGS for PLASTICS Mil. Metric Tonnes CO 2 eq Substitutes = 129% higher than plastics 75.8 SAVINGS for PLASTICS Common Plastics Packaging Helps Reduce Package Weight, Energy Use and GHG Emissions in U.S. Total Weight Mil. tons (109.8 Bil. lbs.) Substitutes = 348% higher than plastics 70.7 Mil. tons Substitute Packaging Cumulative Energy Use Global Warming Potential 54.9 2,466 Bil. MJ (Mega Joules) Substitute Packaging 134.4 Mil. Metric Tonnes CO 2 eq Substitute Packaging 15.8 Plastic Packaging Mil. tons 1,357 Plastic Packaging Bil. MJ 58.6 Plastic Packaging Mil. Metric Tonnes CO 2 eq SAVINGS for PLASTICS Bil. MJ Substitutes = 82% higher than plastics 1,110 SAVINGS for PLASTICS Mil. Metric Tonnes CO 2 eq Substitutes = 129% higher than plastics 75.8 SAVINGS for PLASTICS Common Plastics Packaging Helps Reduce Package Weight, Energy Use and GHG Emissions in U.S. Total Weight Mil. tons (109.8 Bil. lbs.) Substitutes = 348% higher than plastics 70.7 Mil. tons Substitute Packaging Cumulative Energy Use Global Warming Potential Source: "Impact of Plastics Packaging on Life Cycle Energy Consumption & Greenhouse Gas Emissions in the United States and Canada," Franklin Associates 2014. Study based on 2010 data. This study measures energy use and GHG emissions and is not an ISO 14044 life cycle assessment. 54.9 2,466 Bil. MJ (Mega Joules) Substitute Packaging 134.4 Mil. Metric Tonnes CO 2 eq Substitute Packaging 15.8 Plastic Packaging Mil. tons 1,357 Plastic Packaging Bil. MJ 58.6 Plastic Packaging Mil. Metric Tonnes CO 2 eq SAVINGS for PLASTICS Bil. MJ Substitutes = 82% higher than plastics 1,110 SAVINGS for PLASTICS Mil. Metric Tonnes CO 2 eq Substitutes = 129% higher than plastics 75.8 SAVINGS for PLASTICS