ATIEL & UEIL Joint Sustainability Committee
collection points, where they are cleaned and reused or dismantled for recycling, preventing them from being incinerated or landfilled.
7.3.5 Multi-use Solutions for Packaging
Implementing solutions where packaging can serve more than one use cycle extends its life and reduces overall waste.
End-of-Life Example: A lubricant manufacturer uses refillable metal drums that can be shipped back and forth between the company and customers. After multiple uses, when the drums can no longer be reused, they are recycled in metal processing facilities, reducing both the number of drums required and the waste generated from single-use packaging.
7.3.6 Rationalizing Smaller Packages and Shifting to Larger Formats
Reducing the use of small packaging formats in favour of larger, bulk packaging can significantly minimize waste and improve efficiency across the supply chain. Larger packages result in fewer units, reducing the amount of material needed per Liter of lubricant and lowering the overall environmental impact. However, this approach may be more suitable for B2B contexts, where large quantities are used. For B2C, a dedicated fill amount is important to avoid leftover lubricant in the package, which could end up trailing in a car or garage. Therefore, handling the quantities used by the customer is a critical consideration when determining package size for consumer products.
End-of-Life Example: Shifting from small, single-use lubricant bottles to larger 20-liter pails or IBCs reduces the number of packaging units that need to be processed at the end of life. This not only cuts down on plastic waste but also streamlines the recycling process, as fewer containers need to be handled. Companies that move to bulk packaging formats also benefit from lower transportation and material costs, and the reduction in the number of packaging units helps ease the burden on recycling systems.
7.3.6.1 Optimizing the Ratio of Lubricant Weight vs Packaging Weight
This table compares the weight of lubricant versus packaging to highlight the plastic savings when opting for larger container sizes.
Package Size
1L 2L 4L 5L
Packaging Weight (g)
80
140 200 230
Total Weight (g)
850
1700 3400 4250
Table 3: Plastic savings versus 1L and 2L packaging
The figures in this table are indicative, and individual packages may differ, but it provides a general direction. For example, when you replace 2L cans with 4L cans, you save 25% of the plastic packaging weight. This optimization helps reduce plastic use without sacrificing the quantity of lubricant, making it a more sustainable choice.
7.3.7 Data-Driven Decisions Using LCA and PCF Assessments
Sustainable packaging decisions should be based on factual evidence rather than assumptions. Utilizing Life Cycle Assessments (LCA) and Product Carbon Footprint (PCF) data is essential for identifying genuinely more sustainable solutions. These tools provide comprehensive insights
Version 11.06.2025 © ATIEL and UEIL Lubricants & Greases End of Life, Sustainable Best Practices Page 22 of 42
kg Packaging per L of Lubricant
0.094 0.082 0.059 0.054
Plastic Saving vs 1L Package
-
12.50% 37.50% 42.50%
Plastic Saving vs 2L Package
- -
25.00% 34.30%
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 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42
