Question 1
Delegate packs at events often have bags that are printed with the conference name.
Many events use these and although they are re-usable, few people re-use them because despite being fit for purpose, they are often not needed. Nor are they nice enough to be reused in everyday life. Therefore it's a waste, but seen as necessary in order for delegates to carry all the other information provided on the day.
Answer:
The provision of something that at first view seems a good environmental thing such as a bag for life has become an environmental problem.
There are two potential solutions to this:
- The first is simply to not give one away at all but allow delegates to carry their packs and proceedings in whichever way they see fit.
- The second is to design a better bag (aesthetically and functionally) so that the recipient actually wants to re-use the bag.
Question 2
With regards to the live design exercise of the hair dryer.
There are many elements of the hair dryer which makes this not very 'green':
- Material Toxicity: PVC used in cables means outgassing of polybrominated biphenyl ethers.
- Copper alloy is scarce and relatively expensive but there is harm from copper mining.
- Plastic granules from oil is a finite resource, also harm from oil extraction.
- Other materials however have a relatively minor impact.
Production: Some components probably bought in such as the motor, switch, maybe the plug and flex; how far can you force 'green design' upstream into the supply chain? Quality problems are an enviro disaster too.
Distribution Packaging: protevtive vs. minimalistic vs. eye-catching, thish is the common problem. Product bulk and weight affect shipping, but what is the optimum mass for a shipping container? The different moulded-on plugs for different markets has stock consequences, which again is not lean.
Product Life Expectancy: A failure mode should the product become clogged with strands of human hair should be if nothing else. There should also be accelerated life testing to make sure motor is not over-specified.
The disposal plastic is not biodegradable; it is possibly recyclable (thermoplastic) but with material degradation.
The use of electical energy can't really be helped unless we want a gas-powered hairdryer.
Answer:
The dryer did indeed have a PVC cable. There are alternatives now and these are to be welcomed. In addition to the issues you mention in relation to PVC we are also observing the presence of lead and sometime cadmium in the PVC sheathing of cables. This is often in contravention to the RoHS regulations.
You raise a good point in relation to production errors. We often ignore hidden waste such as re-work, off-spec products and seconds.
Question 3
Our packaging is a very sophisticated method of incorporating our established brand, but it is restricted by our rapid food processing system.
The machines are unable to cope with varieties in packaging, this gives us a problem if we want to make drastic changes to our consumer packaging. We would need to invest in new machinery which could be capable of handling different packaging; it's just not feasible in the current economic climate.
The costs are huge and it is acknowledged that also the savings would be too, in the long term. Do the panel have any comments on this?
Answer:
Gaining approval for capital expenditure at the moment is probably more challenging than it ever has been.
It is not realistic to expect businesses to undertake significant capital investment if the payback falls under two years. Therefore, some capital improvements will only occur when another element of the investment mix needs attention.
However, it is important to factor in the full environmental benefits and give these a turnover equivalent figure. As credit markets loosen up there will be a window of low interest rates and available credit that may allow the acceptable pay-back period within some businesses lengthen.
Also consider the secondary potential benefits of investment in environmental improvements. For example, when installing new equipment and new packaging solutions it may also be possible to reduce the amount of packages that leak through improved seal, lessen any seconds/rework issues, and improve energy efficiency.
Question 4
When will the IPR legislation will be coming into force?
Answer:
Individual Producer Responsibility in relation to producer responsibility regulations (such as the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive) means that producers will be responsible for the recovery and recycling of their products specifically rather than have recovery and recycling targets set based on market share and achievable by the recovery and recycling on any electrical waste in the same category.
The benefits of IPR are that the producer knows what's in their product and may be able to use or recycle specific components, casing or other sub-assemblies. Furthermore, it would mean that the product would be more likely to be designed for a long-life as the producer would only have an obligation when its products came back to them. Consequently there is a significant benefit in ensuring that the product is designed for durability and modularity so that life can be extended. However, the strategy of longevity is not always appropriate. Design for short-life may be more appropriate for those products that are subject to rapid technological development. This strategy would be twinned with light-weighting, design for recycling, and design for material recovery.
Clearly, the product tracking, asset management and logistics systems required to enable full IPR are extremely complex. Therefore, it is likely that IPR will only be introduced for larger products that are collected and recovered under the hazardous waste regulations (fridges, freezers, TVs and LCD panels) in the first instance. This is currently being considered at EU and UK levels but I wouldn't hold your breath.
Question 5
How do you find out the carbon footprint on any packaging?
Answer:
There is a range of data available that allow you to equate a carbon equivalent to packaging.
These generally give impact per kg. However, different sources provide different figures.
The Envirowise Pack-In tool has pulled together a range of data and will give a carbon impact for a set package after you have entered the range of materials and material weights. However, you need to take the CO2 figure from the results table rather than the spider-diagram as the latter doesn't take into account weight it is a measure of the carbon embodied in a unit (kg) of packaging material.
Question 6
Regarding the vote on biodegradability, I do not believe as much in biodegradability but rather in the renewable resource basis.
Answer:
The role of biodegradable/degradable/compostable packaging in reducing environmental impact is unclear and dependent upon the development of effective infrastructure within the waste sector, and the effective training of waste operatives and a heightened awareness of how to treat this waste stream within the home.
There are clearly a number of other strategies that can be employed when developing packaging and investing in renewable materials is one option. This tends to rely on renewable materials such a card and paper but can also embrace bioplastics such as poly-lactic acid (PLA) based materials. Whilst bioplastics are degradable, the key element is that they come from renewable resources. However, this area is fraught with conflict as there is already concern that the world cannot grow enough food to feed itself and therefore the idea of diverting productive land to grow plastic feedstock (or indeed fuel) is not supported by everyone.
Question 7
LCA techniques and results matters to packaging and its design.
Is it a good evaluation tool or process in identifying "green packaging"?
Answer:
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) can be an incredibly effective tool that identifies the environmental impact (in millipoints, carbon equivalent, or even landtake) at each stage of the product's life.
There are a number of commercially available software packages that allow you to undertake this kind of analysis yourself, or you can use a specialist consultancy. However, there are a number of points that you need to consider.
The first relates to the level of detail that you need. A full LCA would provide very detailed data that may not be required during the design process. A simple cut-down analysis taking a quarter of the time and cost may well give you the level of detail that you need.
Second, there are a number of assumptions built into every LCA tool and it is essential that you understand the assumptions made and their implications.
It sounds as if a cut-down assessment would be enough to give you a strong steer on packaging design. It is also worth looking at the Envirowise Pack-In tool (www.envirowise.gov.uk/pack-in
) that will give you a number of measures of environmental impact and allows you to compare up to three different designs.
Question 8
I would like to share with you one of many examples of improving recyclability of a package.
Before: A classical blister package for medicaments (pills) made of aluminium and PVC. This is not recyclable as it contaminates the aluminium recycling as well as the plasctics recycling.
After: A monomaterial-blister (PP) which is a complete blister that is perfectly recyclable and indeed recycled (for example in Germany)
Answer:
Thank you for the example you provided.
Simple changes can make a considerable difference to the impact of your packaging. Furthermore, it is also possible to significantly reduce costs through better design.
Question 9
What is the best replacement possible for thermocole as a packaging material to transport plastic bodies weighing 10 - 25 kg?
Can corrugated sheet boxes be designed suitably to provide the same impact resistance and form stability?
Answer:
By Thermocole or thermacol, we assume you mean expanded polystyrene (EPS)?
Whilst EPS is very effective in one-off drop tests it is not widely recycled and performs less well on subsequent drop-tests. It is also so large per unit of weight that the logistics costs of recycling and waste management are high.
There are a number of alternatives that you may want to consider. Many producers of electrical equipment use simple die-cut folded cardboard to hold fragile and heavy products (such as flat panel TVs) in place.
If this won't work for your product other alternatives such as expanded polyethylene foam may be applicable. This tends to be slightly heavier and denser than EPS and consequently you may be able to use smaller blocks. It is also widely recyclable and the set up costs are significantly cheaper (moulds for an end cap can be as little as £200 compared with thousands for EPS), and tends to perform better on repeated drop-tests.
The other option would be 'air packaging' which is available in a number of different formats. It uses a thin polymers film filled with air to provide cushioning and protection though very little material usage.
Question 10
Is a "Green Packaging Label" certification system viable for further packaging management?
Answer:
We are not quite sure what you mean by a green packaging label.
If you mean the green dot label (two intertwined arrows in the shape of a circle) this does not apply in the UK, but if you use it here you will need to pay a license fee to VALPAK.
Maybe you could call the free Envirowise Helpline – 0800 585794 – and provide further detail. We can then answer your query more fully.
Question 11
Do you foresee that current legislation (WEEE, RoHS, EuP and REACH) may be amended then added to the CE marking directive by introducing auditable auditable proof of compliancy?
Answer:
Environmental legislation has traditionally sat outside of the CE marking process.
However, as it has become more product-focused many observers have queried why it doesn't sit under the CE umbrella. Indeed, the Eco-design of Energy Using Products (EuP) Directive does form part of the CE marking regulations. Furthermore, the recent review of WEEE and RoHS by the European Union has recommended that RoHS be regulated under the CE marking process.
So yes, it is likely that as and when elements of these regulations are reviewed some may fall under CE marking. It is likely that the recovery and recycling elements of this legislation will continue to be regulated by the relevant authority in each member state of the EU such as the Environment Agency in England and Wales and SEPA in Scotland.
Question 12
What design considerations should we undertake to address 'End of Life' recyclability?
Answer:
In terms of packaging design the key issues that you could consider include:
- Choice of materials – are you using a material that is widely recyclable.
- Construction – are materials glued or heat-sealed to one another in such a way as to make them inseparable and therefore unrecyclable.
- Windows – avoid the use of windows backed with plastic film in cardboard packaging as this needs separating before recycling.
- Staples and eyelets – avoid the use of these as they also hinder recycling as they need removing.
- Coatings – using a plastic coating on paper or card can hinder recycling. The same is true of plastic shrink-wrap applied to some glass and PET bottles.
- Caps – if designing bottles try and make the bottle and cap compatible.
RECOUP have recently published a comprehensive guide to design for recycling for plastic packaging. This can be found at: http://www.recoup.org/business/default.asp
For products design the key issues include:
- Choice of materials – are you using a material that is widely recyclable.
- Construction – are materials glued or heat-sealed to one another in such a way as to make them inseparable and therefore unrecyclable. Have you used composite materials that can not be recycled?
- Ease of disassembly – is your product easy to disassemble? Ask a recycler how they would recycle your product. You may find that it is simply shredded and therefore does not need to be designed for disassembly at all. Other products may be disassembled to remove valuable components. Could you have made this process easier?
Question 13
What is the impact on using recycled ABS? How badly would it affect the aesthetics and the UV stabilisation?
Answer:
It depends upon the end use of the ABS and the performance requirements. Recycled materials do have different technical characteristics but we are not aware of any issues relating to UV stabilisation and surface finish. However, we would recommend that you contact a supplier of recycled ABS to assess the impact in your particular case.
Question 14
Have you some suggestions on making water purifiers more eco friendly, by design?
I understand it is a big question; maybe you could suggest the 5 best practices that are practical to do?
Answer:
This is a big question, we would recommend that you contact the Envirowise Helpline – 0800 585794 – and gain 2 hours free telephone support to look at this in the detail it requires.
Furthermore, the Envirowise website has a number of product design guides that may be of use.
Question 15
Our company design and manufacture wireless communication equipment for various industry sectors including security markets. The enclosures are predominately machined aluminium.
What are the most environmentally friendly finish coatings?
Answer:
It depends how you define "environmentally friendly".
Each method will have environmental impacts and it is a case of understanding how these impacts compare with each other and balancing them against the added durability that they provide.
For example using a chemical coating can cause problems during manufacture, use and disposal. Anodising uses an acidic electrolytic solution to add a layer of aluminium oxide. This provides a tough corrosion resistant finish. This will extend life but has impacts in terms of chemical use, waste disposal and energy. Electro-less nickel is the application of a chemical coating that is applied without electrical charge but the renewal rates of the solution in the tank are high, hence process waste can be a problem. Using chrome plating involves a number of hazardous materials (not least hexavalent chrome) that have impacts in manufacture, use and disposal.
There were moves to reformulate some types of coating to embrace trivalent chromium rather than hexavalent chromium. It may be appropriate to powder-coat the product. This also extends life but sometimes requires the application of a 'key' such as hexavalent chromium based coating prior to painting. Finally, it may be possible to wet paint the product and the key issue here is the choice between water and solvent based paints.
There is no environmentally benign solution; you would need to weigh up the impacts of the different alternatives and the life extension benefits. For example, if one method provides 20 year life extension and another a 10 year life extension but the product life expectancy is 10 years then design the process and product around this.
Question 16
There's a lot of emphasis placed on waste management plans in the construction industry.
Do you think that more emphasis should be placed upon suppliers' who provide materials in unnecessary packaging e.g. bags of cement supplied on a pallet and wrapped in plastic shrink wrapping, reusable sand bags that are not collected and as seen of video shrink wrapping WC's Pans and non perishable materials? Or is the use of plastic wrapping a sustainable practice?
Answer:
You rightly point out that reducing waste is of a higher priority than managing waste. It's all very well to have procedures in place to deal with the waste that arises but designing out that waste through intelligent packaging and logistics is a much better option. Due to the way in which we construct buildings the sector is very inefficient when it comes to material use. There are numerous solutions which go beyond the use of site waste management plans such as the construction of 'pre-fabricated' units for building which are made in factories (where it is much easier to control resource use and waste) and then transported to site for integration into the building.
There are lots of opportunities to re-think the packaging used to deliver items to construction sites. Where applicable the use of returnable packaging should be considered. However, it should always be remembered that for some products the use of packaging will prevent damage to the product itself which would be a much more wasteful scenario. The use of shrink wrap on WCs may not reduce damage but it is a way of keeping a very complex-shaped item on a pallet. Other packaging alternatives may use more materials but re-useable packaging may be an option here.
There is a wide range of publications on the Envirowise website relating to construction and waste reduction (including packaging). Please visit the site and look at some of these such as:
- CS863 Resource efficiency at a construction site
- GG606 Managing packaging waste on your construction site
- GG493 Saving money and raw materials by reducing waste in construction: case studies
- GG500 - Saving money and raw materials by reducing waste in construction: case studies from Scotland
Question 17
How can small companies (those without in house designers or funds for external designers) find out about and trial new materials and packaging styles?
Answer:
The costs of implementing eco-design can sometimes be restrictive for smaller companies but there is help available.
The Envirowise website contains numerous guises and case studies which can help companies to realise how that can apply the same principles. Advice can be sought through the Envirowise Helpline 0800 585794 in the form of up to 2 hours free telephone support to look at these issues in more detail.
It may also be relevant to talk to your local Manufacturing Advisory Service (MAS) and Business Link. There could well be grants and subsidised support available. The Waste Resource Action Programme (WRAP) has undertaken a number of packaging research projects including the trailing of new materials. www.wrap.org.uk.
One thing to keep in mind is that sometimes the payback on investment in eco-design can be very quick.
Question 18
The term "recyclable" mentioned in the packaging presentation. Lots of material is recyclable, but is it actually recycled? What does that reclaimed material appear in?
Answer:
'Recyclable' is a term which is used to mean that something can be recycled (technically) however it may not actually be recycled as the economics, market and logistics may not allow this.
For example some plastic packaging materials can be recycled technically but it is not feasible economically to do so. Polystyrene would be a good example. Other complex plastics (marked with a number seven in a mobius loop) can not be recycled at all.
For more information on what can be recycled please see the Recycle Now website at http://www.recyclenow.com/what_can_i_do_today/can_it_be_recycled/.
Recycled materials can end up in a number of different products depending upon the material in question. Recycled PET can be used in packaging or it can be used to make a fleece material that is used in clothing or as a filling in sleeping bags etc. Recycled PVC can be used in construction materials and PE can be used in many products including recycled stretch-wraps.
Back