printing, labels & labelling
compared to plastic alternatives. The report was commissioned as
more emphasis is continually being put on whether packaging can deliver when it comes to its environmental credentials. It can be an essential way for brand owners to show that it is taking the environment seriously by reducing its carbon footprint and using labels that come from a sustainable background. Another aim of the report was also
to conduct a streamlined comparison looking at the production, transportation, disposal and recycling of both types of labels. Its study showed a ‘cradle to grave’ assessment of paper and plastic and includes the production and delivery of materials, polymerisation, extrusion and thermoforming, transportation, disposal and recycling of both types of labels. Also contained within the report is a
study from the research institute CE Delft (Holland), which came to the conclusion that the carbon footprint of synthetic plastics is about five times higher than that of paper. The results also show, according to
Intertech Pira, that even if it was possible to make a plastic label from 100 per cent recycled polypropylene, gram for gram it would still have a larger carbon footprint than paper. Using the Niklasdorf production data
instead of WRAP’s production data (which is based on typical mills rather than ‘best in class’ mills), the carbon footprint of paper is reduced by more than 20 per cent to 0.873 grams CO2 eq. per gram of paper – that is nearly 70 per cent lower than a plastic label of the same weight. When looking at the recyclability of paper labels compared to labels manufactured from synthetic materials the difference is stark, as far more paper than plastic is recycled. Additionally the low degradability of polypropylene not only affects the
“A shift in consumer attitude, backed by legislation and the drive towards a change in the branding, could signal a big push towards a more sustainable alterative to plastic”
world’s oceans but its half-life period in rubbish dumps can be over 500 years. According to the Intertek/Pira study, even in landfill paper labels degrade within a month or two and the natural resource depletion when producing paper is 84 per cent lower than with plastic.
A BIG PUSH? A shift in consumer attitude, backed by legislation and the drive towards a
change in the branding, could signal a big push towards a more sustainable alterative to plastic. Over the next couple of years major soft drinks brands may opt for environmentally alternatives to plastic bottles and this, in turn, could be a driving force towards the increasing use of paper labels along with landfill and recycling objectives. It is excellent that paper labels have achieved recognition for being a
sustainable way for brand owners to effectively market a product. There is no drop in speed or efficiency when moving from reel-fed plastic to paper but a huge gain in terms of environmental sustainability.
Packaging Gazette 19
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36