Glenroy flexible packaging, including our store drop-off recyclable options, weighs less – resulting in less waste, has a better product-to-package ratio, consumes less energy in manufacturing and transport, and generates less greenhouse gas emissions.
To help our customers achieve their sustainability goals, our store drop-off recyclable packaging options meet the requirements of the How2Recycle® program.
With multiple layers, and components made from many different materials, flexible packaging can be complex. We have a dedicated team of professionals committed to looking for new ways to reduce the environmental impact of our packaging. Helping consumers understand how to properly recycle our packaging reduces confusion and frustration, which can lead to less waste in our environment.
According to a life-cycle assessment study (LCA) by the Natural Marketing Institute (NMI), inverted pouches greatly reduce environmental impact when compared to glass bottles. The results of this assessment show that STANDCAP inverted pouches:
- Reduce fossil fuel usage by 65%
- Reduce greenhouse emissions by 77.8%
- Reduce overall water usage by 80.6%
*Pouches also eliminate the need for a separate label or shrink sleeve.
- This convenient, lightweight 24-oz pouch weighs 20 g (sprayer not included) as opposed to 51 g for a typical 24-oz plastic bottle.
- One truckload of pouches holds 364,000 packages while the same quantity of like-sized rigid bottles would require nine truckloads.
- The additional eight truckloads traveling 1,000 miles will require an additional 2,000 gal of fuel and emit nine times the amount of greenhouse gases.
Unlike typical plastic bottles, which can waste about 14% of ultrasound gel left on the bottom, this lightweight flexible package design requires less energy to manufacture & transport and allows for up to 99.5% evacuation of the product, reducing the number of units consumed each year.
As a result, 1.5 million fewer containers and 800,000 less pounds of gel will end up in landfills. This reduced waste contributes to a yearly savings of $1.9 million for the industry.
Table 1: Rigid Packaging vs. Flexible Packaging for Liquids
|Beverage Packaging||Product Weight||Packaging Weight||Product-to-Packaging Ratio||Packaging Weight
per 100 g Product
Kg Co2 e /8 oz
|Glass Bottle & Metal Cap||8 ounces (236 g)||198.4 g||1:1||83.9 g||3.36||0.29|
|Plastic PET Bottle & Cap||8 ounces (236 g)||22.7 g||10:1||9.6 g||3.00||0.18|
|Aluminum Can||8 ounces (236 g)||11.3 g||21:1||4.7 g||0.99||0.08|
|Stand-up Flexible Pouch||6.75 ounces (199 g)||5.7 g||35:1||2.8 g||0.45||0.02|
Source: FPA/Battelle Memorial Institute, Sustainability Assessment of Flexible Packaging; and Flexible Packaging! Less Resources, Energy, Emissions, and Waste (brochure). Cradle-to-grave life cycle energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions data developed for FPA by Battelle Memorial Institute. Packaging weight, product weight, and product-to-packaging ratio calculated by PTIS. Beverage assumed to be water.
Table 2: Non-carbonated Beverage Packaging Grams to Landfill
|Beverage Packaging||Product Weight||Packaging Weight||Packaging Weight
per 100 g Product
|Recycle Rate||To MSW Landifll||To Landfill
per 100 g Product
|Glass Bottle & Metal Cap||8 ounces (236 g)||198.4 g||83.9 g||34%||66%||55.4|
|Plastic PET Bottle & Cap||8 ounces (236 g)||22.7 g||9.6 g||29%||71%||6.8|
|Aluminum Can||8 ounces (236 g)||11.3 g||4.7 g||58%||42%||2.0|
|Stand-up Flexible Pouch||6.75 ounces (199 g)||5.7 g||2.8 g||0%||100%||2.8|
Source: FPA Case Studies, 2009; EPA 2010 MSW Report