Category: Sustainability Tools

Categories
Recover More Sustainability Tools

Circular Economy Technology and Innovation at SPC Advance

Representatives from Kimberly-Clark, MHG, Recycling Partnership, Braskem, and Printpack gathered on stage the last day of SPC Advance to discuss advancement of the circular economy through technologies and innovations. Braskem presented in conjunction with Printpack about their collaborations on bioplastic. Mikel Knight and Joe Jankowski presented the environmental benefits of bioplastics, including the lower carbon footprint than typical plastics and the recyclability. Ben Jarrett discussed Kimberly Clark’s use of wheat-straw (a wheat by-product) and bamboo as a feedstock for some of their paper products such as a line of toilet paper. Jarrett encouraged attendees to explore the LCAs comparing the associated impacts of the different feed stocks. For example the use of virgin and recycled fibers versus the use of bamboo fiber, or wheat-straw fiber
The last speaker on the panel was Keefe Harrison, Executive Director of the Recycling Partnership. Recycling might not a new technology or innovation, however, recycled material as a feedstock is a key element in advancing the circular economy. As Keefe Harrison stated:

“recycling is about developing feed stocks.”

Keefe places committed communities at the top of a list for “6 aspects of a healthy recycling system approach.”
“Local governments are the means by which recycled materials is captured within American communities,” said Harrison. “Local governments provide access to recycling to their residents. Whether that access is a drop-off location or curbside pick-up. When a government is capturing recyclables then they have a consistent feedstock supply.”
The important role of local governments was echoed throughout the conference. As expressed by several SPC Advance speakers, the variance in recyclable materials across regions, states and counties plays a major recycling challenge. Neighboring counties could accept different materials depending on where they are sending the material. Amy Duquette with HAVI Global Solutions spoke on how in her current position she will sometimes call up governments to discuss whether or not certain materials are accepted in their recycling systems. As a company that produces consumer packaging there is a sense of responsibility to create packaging that is recoverable. However, the recoverability can drastically change depending on the infrastructure, regulations, and access in an area. Cities such as Seattle are leading the way in recycling and composting efforts. Other municipalities can join by providing adequate access to recycling for their residents. The Recycling Partnership works to help municipalities scale up recycling efforts in communities.
Increased recycling rates as well as the use of alternative materials will help lead the U.S. toward a circular economy.

Categories
Eliminate Toxicity GreenBlue Recover More Sustainability Tools Sustainable Packaging Coalition

Pharmaceutical and Biopolymers ILCs launch at SPC Advance

As one of the first working sessions to kick-off SPC Advance, the combined pharmaceutical and biopolymers brainstorming sessions generated a number of innovative ideas and set-up the process for members to engage in the two projects moving forward. There was interesting overlap in these two initiatives as both the pharmaceutical and biopolymer industries are utilizing cutting-edge technologies and present significant opportunities for innovation. We are very excited to now have both of these new ILCs off the ground and running!
Members shared a number of innovative ideas during pharmaceutical packaging brainstorming session with everyone agreeing that there are real sustainability gains to be made in both material sourcing and recovery areas of the value chain. Cold chain packaging was described by members as an example  where there is a need for solid thinking and supply chain collaboration around how to recover and/or reuse materials. The group also  discussed the need for dialogue across the supply chain, new initiatives drugstore companies are exploring, medical/hospital waste needs, and over-the-counter bottle and label recovery. It was an excellent brainstorming session that helped define the focus area (or areas) of the ILC as we move forward.
In the fascinating and emerging world of biopolymers, attendees  heard a number of valuable insights from members, most of all concerning the need for better education in the marketplace. For example, the prevailing (and incorrect) thinking that feedstocks for biopolymers necessarily disrupt what would otherwise be a food supply. Not the case. Biopolymer feedstocks are often residual material that normally gets sent to the landfill. But more than anything else, the discussion was very much focused on the potential that biopolymers present and the exciting opportunity that the SPC member companies have in exploring ways to bring these materials to the mainstream and leverage environmental benefits.
Thank you to Rob Fitzgerald, Director of Sustainable Packaging, The Estee Lauder Companies Inc.; and Owen Schultz, Vice President of Business Development, Earth Renewable for volunteering as co-chairs of the Biopolymers Working Group. Also thank you to Jason Sawicki, Senior Manager Operational Excellence and Packaging, Genentech; and Guy Gagnon of Ecolopharm for volunteering as co-chairs of the the Pharma Packaging Working Group.
Companies signed up to the Pharmaceutical Packaging and Biopolymers Working Group should look for invitations to the first conference calls to be held for each group in early November.
Through strong member support, an informed and science-based approach, supply chain collaborations and continuous outreach, the goal of the Pharmaceutical Packaging and Biopolymers Working Group is to understand the benefits, identify roadblocks and challenges, and develop solutions to bring innovations to market in a meaningful way.
 

Categories
GreenBlue Recover More Sustainability Tools Sustainable Packaging Coalition

Re-Thinking Acronyms: A Look At EPR In Canada

In October 2009, the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) approved a Canada-wide Action Plan for Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR). EPR is an environmental policy approach in which a producer’s responsibility for a product is extended to the post-consumer stage of that product’s lifecycle. EPR had visibility on Day 2 of SPC Advance in Charlotte, where an invigorating panel of experts on Canadian EPR discussed the latest developments across Canada and the efforts in one Province to evolve resource recovery under EPR.
Canada is a global leader in EPR, with many of Canada’s 10 provinces and territories already on-board with an established EPR program or working to transition municipally-led programs into full EPR programs. Participating provinces distribute responsibility between industry or municipality in various ways. For example, Manitoba has had an 80/20 shared responsibility between industry and municipality, respectively, since 2010. In 2014, industry producers took on 100% responsibility for packaging and printed paper waste diversion across British Columbia.
At the conference, one of the key quotes from the panel came from Al Metauro, President & CEO of Cascades Recovery, Inc. “Doing the same things and expecting the same outcomes is insanity”, referring to waste management approaches that underperform in meeting the recovery needs of the changing waste stream. Packaging formats have drastically changed in the past 10 years, and often the new packaging formats are difficult to capture with machinery and systems designed for waste streams of the past. In British Columbia, the aim has become re-engineering the recovery system with EPR as a catalyst for progress benefiting industries, municipalities, and consumers.
Successful EPR in British Columbia involves a key partnership between Multi-Material BC (MMBC), the non-profit organization managing the Province’s residential recycling program, and Green by Nature (GBN), the group contracted to manage the entire post-collection system for the Province. Funded entirely by industry, MMBC services 1.24 million homes and multi-family dwellings, operates over 200 recycling depots and drop-off locations, and introduces curbside recycling programs to more and more communities across British Columbia. While MMBC still faces the tough realities confronting material recoverers and recyclers across the world — such as volatile commodity markets and pressure to keep stewardship fees stable -— the transition to industry-led packaging and paper product recovery has proven successful and worthwhile in other ways. People are often uneasy of change, but MMBC has seen nearly 75% of residents stating that the new system either meets or exceeds their expectations, with many believing that it’s improved. High approval ratings and resident satisfaction are reflected in their diversion figures, with about 116,000 tonnes collected within the first 7.5 months of operation in 2014. Notably, this includes expanded polystyrene, which is widely unrecyclable in the United States.
Partnering with MMBC who collects the materials from curbside or drop-off locations, GBN re-engineers the systems and optimizes data to better inform industry partners. By tracking data on recovered materials, GBN is positioned to work with supply chain partners (such as brand owners) to understand if their products are recovered, to identify areas for improvements, and to facilitate productive conversations.
By seizing the opportunity to re-engineer and redesign recovery systems on a Province-wide scale, the collaboration between MMBC and GNB demonstrates the success and potential of EPR to not only recover more, but to transform the way we approach brand owners and packaging companies as invaluable partners rather than wrongdoers at fault. Thus far, the partnership in British Columbia is successful with an 80% diversion rate that exceeded the required Provincial recovery rate by 5% in its first year of operation.
Perhaps what we at the Sustainable Packaging Coalition need to do is expand our alphabet soup acronyms and consider EPR to mean Every Package Recycled.

Categories
GreenBlue Recover More Sustainability Tools

Scaling Up Composting in the Charlotte region

By Ryan Cooper, LEED GA, Project Associate of the SPC. 138x138xRyan-Cooper-headshot-e1436541175621.jpg.pagespeed.ic.Uv-2bWd7Xv
With funding from U.S. EPA Region 4, Mecklenburg County, the University of North Carolina, Charlotte (UNCC) IDEAS Center, and in-kind contributions from Sustainable Packaging Coalition (SPC) member dues, nonprofits GreenBlue and Elemental Impact, in cooperation with UNCC and composter Earth Farms Organics, are Scaling Up Composting in the Charlotte Region. The SPC is providing the initial funding for food waste generators to separate kitchen scraps and other organic materials from their trash. GreenBlue’s SPC recently recruited the Carolina Panthers franchise as a participant in this exciting program!test 01 (1)
The project aims to identify best practices for diversion of food waste from the landfill. The SPC will also provide local governments and businesses with a deeper understanding of the challenges and solutions associated with organics recycling. Data will be collected and analyzed for the weight and composition of the organic material, as well as the financial implications of participating in food waste collection.
Earth Farms Organics provides technical assistance, hauling services, and composting capacity for interested parties to recycle their organic residuals. Earth Farms’ proven success had already attracted many key stakeholders in the region, with names like Dole, Nestle, and Lance. Mecklenburg County also started a food waste collection pilot in the Charlotte-Mecklenburg School system, which has 164 schools and 144,000 students. In addition to the Panthers, the SPC has made it possible for the YMCA, Carolina Place Mall, and the Central Piedmont Community College (CPCC) to start composting. The SPC also successfully recruited the Food Lion grocery store chain, with 100 locations in Mecklenburg County alone.
With help from Rick Lombardo at Natur-Tec and Sarah Martell at Innovia Films, the SPC gathered current curricula related to sustainable materials management and composting, as well as completed a composting lesson plan, for Nicolette Torres’ 6th Grade Environmental Science Class at Metrolina Regional Scholars Academy. The SPC is also working on coordinating waste diversion at Metrolina as a three-bin package (compost, recycling, and landfill trash).
At Central Piedmont Community College (CPCC), the SPC provided funding to start food waste diversion at the Harris campus and purchase compostable liners. The SPC also coordinated donation by Rubbermaid for “slim jim” bins.
Working with Earth Farms Organics, the SPC provided compost bins for attendees and food vendors at the South End Hops Festival. GreenBlue is working with Mecklenburg County to enhance their support for recycling and composting at larger, and especially smaller, events around the city. The SPC is also collaborating with Mecklenburg County and CMS to gain an understanding of their innovative program and where improvements can be made.
Tyler Gilkerson, a geology student at UNCC, was welcomed to this project in April of 2015. Tyler immediately perceived this project as an opportunity to make a positive impact on his hometown’s environment and community. As the son of a geologist and grandson of a farmer, Tyler grew up learning the importance of responsible waste management and fostering healthy soils. Prior to UNCC, Tyler attended Guilford College, where he became an integral part of his institution’s on-campus, organic production farm and food waste diversion program. Upon graduating in 2012, Agromatters, LLC, formed by Tyler and his father, was awarded a contract to co-manage the Guilford Farm and a small Type III composting operation. With hopes of applying this sustainable, “closed-loop” concept to a municipal scale, they began operating a large Type I composting facility in Cabarrus County. Tyler has since decided to postpone his business pursuits and focus on his formal education. Tyler ultimately aims to apply the lessons he has learned during this project to a career involving pollution prevention and remediation of essential natural resources.
Tyler has been using the Re-TRAC Connect program to analyze the weight data of participants’ food waste. Waste characterizations by Gilkerson had begun at participating CMS schools before the school year ended, examining the volume, density, and rate of contamination in the food scraps. The most exciting waste characterization so far might have been at the Bank of America Stadium after the CONCACAF Gold Cup soccer match.
Information about the grant program was featured in the May issue of BioCycle magazine, the industry journal for composting. The SPC is currently working with the YMCA on bringing in additional campuses as well as adding front-of-house composting collection.
Anne Bedarf, Program Manager at the SPC, is the principal investigator of the grant. However, with Anne out on maternity leave, Ryan Cooper, LEED GA, Project Associate with the SPC, has taken the helm. Ryan has extensive experience in using compost for organic farming and horticulture, started a small Type III compost facility at the Penland School of Crafts in western North Carolina, and worked with the City of Asheville, NC, to develop a feasibility study for curbside residential food waste collection. His thesis reviewed organics recycling programs in municipalities throughout Europe and North America. He writes regularly for BioCycle magazine.
Challenges for food waste generators include space, labor, cost, and logistics such as ramps on loading docks that facilitate the removal of rolling food waste carts. New management can also step in and put an end to existing waste diversion programs. Difficulty with implementing front-of-house compostable packaging solutions include concerns about the difficulty of replacing currently used food service ware, contamination, and cost. Many times, it seems that an unseen bureaucracy can stop a potential participant from joining the program.
However, the recent site visit and operations tour of IKEA, a program participant, was an impressive example of the success that businesses and institutions can achieve by diverting their food waste. Outreach via calls and email to address problems, providing resources to disprove perceived issues, trials with compostable materials, and persistence in communications and value proposition can overcome the common challenges.
GreenBlue strategic ally Elemental Impact,5LM07VQt a national non-profit based in Atlanta, recently visited Charlotte for a series of follow-up meetings with shopping malls, stadiums, a conference facility, and other key stakeholders. SPC Project Associate, Ryan Cooper attended these meetings, organized by Ei Founder Holly Elmore, on recycling refinement, including food waste collection for compost. “The recent Elemental Impact trip to Charlotte was incredibly successful” said Cooper.
The EPA Region 4 grant team is now planning for the SPC Advance session detailing the results of this project in Charlotte on October 8, 2015. In addition to adding more participants to this successful program, Ryan Cooper will be busy compiling the final report for the EPA, his presentation for SPC Advance, and a BioCycle article detailing the results of the project.
Ryan has extensive experience in using compost for organic farming and horticulture, has started a small Type III compost facility at the Penland School of Crafts in western North Carolina, and has worked with the City of Asheville, NC, to develop a feasibility study for curbside residential food waste collection. His thesis reviewed organics recycling programs in municipalities throughout Europe and North America. He also writes regularly for BioCycle magazine.
 

Categories
GreenBlue Sustainability Tools Sustainable Packaging Coalition

Why Aren’t More Forests Certified?

Protecting and managing forests, and all the essential services forests provide, is critical to the well-being of our planet and its inhabitants. Forests provide clean air and water, wildlife habitat, and a home to an enormous and vast array of biodiveristy. Forest also provide recreational value, resources we depend on every day, and support economies all over the world. Forests are so much a part of our everyday lives they are often taken for granted. How can we protect forests when we depend on them for so much?
Active forest management, and particularly sustainable forest management (SFM), are strategies to help strike a balance in the relationship between society’s needs and maintaining forest health. Forest certification programs, first introduced in the 1990s, are one tool that have been established to assure stakeholders SFM practices are being followed. The Programme of the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC) gives a good definition: “Sustainable Forest Management certification provides forest owners and managers with independent recognition of their responsible management practices … certification provides forest owners and managers — families, communities, and companies — with access to the global marketplace for certified products.”
Today only about 12% of the world’s forests are certified to third-party systems such as the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI). This is despite the fact that many companies request certified wood for their products. Demand in many industry sectors — solid wood, paper, and packaging — is much greater than the supply of certified wood. It begs the question: Why aren’t more forests certified?
This was the fundamental question that SPC’s Forest Products Working Group (FPWG), a collaboration of 20+ companies across the supply chain, spent the last year and half trying to answer. Working across the forest products value chain, from landowners to brand owners, the the FPWG companies found that there are a number of reasons why forest certification has not been more widely adopted, with a specific focus on the United States.
Through a series of interviews, workshops, and research, the group has found that the underlying issue is that forest certification needs to offer a more compelling value proposition to small private landowners in the United States. Likewise, forest certification also needs to offer a more compelling value proposition to brand owners. Over the course of the next few months, the FPWG will be sharing their findings from this project, including the process the group used during the project called the Value Innovation Process, or VIP. An approach that was integral to developing our findings because we asked, first: “What is the job that forest certification is hired to do?” Or in other words, getting a better understanding of “what is the value of forest certification” before looking at ways to fix certification as is.

Using the VIP, the FPWG sought to understand why many landowners and forest managers have opted not to seek certification. At the other end of the value chain, we also explored the dynamics driving leading brands and other corporations to focus on buying certified products. We also reached consensus that there are many uncertified forests that are currently practicing sound, sustainable forest management. Against this backdrop, the group is seeking to find additional strategies to enhance the value of certification.
The FPWG interviewed numerous members of the value chain including landowners, foresters, loggers, merchants, printers, manufacturers, brand owners, associations, consultants, and more. The FPWG hosted two in-person Summits where we brought value chain members and representatives from FSC, SFI, and ATFS to discuss strategies to better drive the value of forest certification. The findings were numerous. Often complex. And in the spirit of innovation, not surprisingly, findings varied enormously. In the next few months the FPWG will be discussing sharing in more detail what we heard across the value chain.
In the context of the VIP, we continue to seek answers to complex questions such as:

  • How might we gain assurance of Sustainable Forest Management when certification is not an option?
  • How might we focus on value chain members who can have the most impact on driving the value of forest certification?
  • How might  we address feedback that certification is overly complex, expensive, and does not deliver optimal desired value?
  • How might we stimulate better dialogue across value chain from landowners to brand owners?
  • How might we overcome perceptions that landowners are not practicing sustainable forest management?
  • How might we educate multiple stakeholders about forestry and forest ownership?
  • How might we create a better value proposition for small private landowners and brand owners?
  • How might we create market incentives, policies or other mechanisms that will fundamentally help keep forests as forests?
  • How might we explore innovative strategies to go beyond certification?
  • How might we gain a better understanding of supply and demand?

In the spirit of innovation, we welcome input from multiple stakeholders as we continue to tackle these complex issues.  Stay tuned for more findings and notices of upcoming events.

Categories
Recover More Sustainability Tools Sustainable Packaging Coalition Uncategorized

Target & How2Recycle

Target’s Kim Carswell explains why the retail giant decided to join the How2Recycle program

Kim Carswell, Senior Manager of Packaging for Target

At Target, our guests are the center of everything we do.  We have a strong connection to our guests, and we continue to seek ways to be relevant to them.  Adding the How2Recycle label to our owned brand packaging is a way to heighten this relevancy.
Why did you decide to use the label?
Two reasons: our guests and our company strategies.
We know that how our guests manage their packaging when they are done with it is a key way for them to live sustainably. Adding the H2R label to our packaging will help them dispose of it the right way.  Using the label also increases the transparency between Target and our guests, which is important to us.
The label aligns with our three sustainability strategies:

  1.  Provide our guests with ways to live more sustainably
  2.  Offer a great assortment of sustainable products
  3.  Reduce waste

How did you go about it?
We were very intent to attach this work to other brand redesigns already in the works.. We are looking at a long term schedule that will allow the work to grow organically. We are keen not to create packaging waste when we change our packaging designs. We plan to flow through the changes so that old inventories can be depleted. Another key goal is to embed the addition of the label into current processes as much as we can to set ourselves up for a robust and sustainable approach.
What Target products currently use the label?

We have the How2Recycle label on our food brands including Market Pantry, Archer Farms, and Simply Balanced.  It is also on a wide array of our up&up products and select Spritz party supplies items.
And finally…
Here are 10 things we learned along the way and want to share with you. Success for Target, the Sustainable Packaging Coalition and all the other How2Recycle label users is for more and more companies to sign on, so we are delighted to share what we learned.

  1.  Tie H2R to company strategies
  2.  Take internal partners and engage them
  3.  Find and tap into internal leaders
  4.  Share the story
  5.  Attach this work to planned brand designs
  6.  Go to where people are
  7.  Keep a close connection with the SPC
  8.  Be flexible
  9.  Keep sharing the story
  10.  Recognize and celebrate the people and work

 

Categories
Sustainability Tools Uncategorized

SUSTPACK 2015 — Adaptation and Resiliency

The keynote speakers for day one of SustPack 2015 provided a kick-start to this conference dedicated to issues relevant to sustainable packaging. All three speakers presented evidence suggesting that industry as a whole (not just the packaging value chain) is struggling to adapt to a diversity of “stimuli” — a shrinking resource base with increasing costs for raw materials, changing expectations of customers, investors and society’s notion of what is required to be a good corporate citizen, and hopefully, a sense of personal responsibility to be effective agents of change, helping their companies to adapt and thrive in what several of the speakers referred to as a “highly dynamic marketplace.”
SUSTPACKheader2.132535David Kiron, a professor from MIT and co-author of a series of publications has conducted extensive research to understand the differences between “walkers,” companies that demonstrate a clear commitment, backed up by evidence that they are on a path to becoming more sustainable enterprises and the “talkers,” companies that acknowledge the importance of sustainability but are struggling to understand how to use sustainability as a compass to guide their strategies for survival if not future growth. In short, how to adapt their business models to a shifting landscape with new realities.
I was struck by a couple of thoughts while listening to David’s research. As someone who works for a non-profit organization attempting to inform and build the capacity of businesses to implement more sustainable practices, I welcome any insights into how we might help companies “walk the talk.” It’s almost a reflexive response of American business culture to want to be seen as “decisive,” “proactive,” “leading” and “visionary.” We need more companies to lead by example, to demonstrate what is possible so that others may follow – quickly. As sustainability professionals, we get frustrated by the seemingly inexhaustible energy to want to talk, gather more data, dispute the data, gather different data in order to debate whether one can truly make a “business case for sustainability.” But this is all a part of the process of learning how to evolve, to adapt.  “Talkers” play a critical role in the process of evolution. Their role is to build awareness in their companies and industry sectors, to amplify the signal, creating positive reinforcement for companies when they decide to take the leap of leadership.
Tamara Bekefi from Daedalus Strategic Advising provided a compelling rationale for why companies should continue talking if not walking. Apparently, it’s not only the Socially Responsible Investment (SRIs) firms that have their ear to the ground. The number of investors looking for evidence of corporations that are using sustainability as a means of forecasting and mitigating risk to their business is increasing. Investors clearly see the correlation between the metrics that are used to define sustainable business practices and the more traditional ones that companies currently hold as important and attempt to measure their performance against: risk management, innovation, reputation (license to operate + ability to attract talent), stakeholder demand, competition, staying ahead of regulations, etc.
In response, companies are beginning to integrate sustainability reporting into their annual reports as opposed to treating them as supplemental to their business operations. It will be interesting to see if the investment community also steps up to the plate and realizes it will be difficult for companies to make the necessary long-term investments that more sustainable solutions require and still meet Wall Street’s expectations for short-term revenue growth. Similar to the “slow food movement,” the “slow money” movement needs Wall Street to adjust its financial metrics to recognize and reward companies who are building wealth more slowly (i.e., sustainably) by planning for future, long-term growth. Maybe Wall Street can judge such investments by utilizing a “sustainability ROI” as opposed to the typical ROI of 2-3 years.
The final speaker of the session was Bill Frerking from Georgia Pacific. Bill reminded the audience that much of sustainability is relative and depends on a variety of things: the type of business your company is in, where the company sits in the value chain, who your customers are, who your influential stakeholders are, as well as the culture of the company. One of the basic challenges of operating a business, let alone one aspiring to be more sustainable is the ability to manage different interests of stakeholders when they often have conflicting demands. Bill noted that just as one cannot approach packaging as a monolithic problem or opportunity, sustainability is not a “one size fits all” solution. All companies should realize that the pursuit of sustainability is about resolving conflicting demands (“trade-offs”) in a manner that makes sense to the unique attributes of your business.
One assertion that Bill made in his presentation that I did not agree with was the idea that “market demand” (i.e., consumers) could send clear signals for their preferences to purchase more sustainable products. A common refrain that one hears from companies about why they are not doing more to address sustainable production is that their customers “are not asking for it.” The market can be an efficient mechanism for governing the supply and demand of resources used for production but not necessarily as a rationale for using those resources more sustainably. Thus far, the sustainability movement is still in the process of  educating the manufacturing community about why sustainable production and consumption is critical to the future security of their businesses. The idea that the average consumer has the education, information, and context necessary to make an informed purchasing decision to send a clear signal of demand or preference is either naive or disingenuous, and counterproductive to the work that must be done. Companies who have the foresight, talent, and ambition to lead by example will not be those whose approach is to “let the market decide.”

Categories
Recover More Sustainability Tools

Is Trash No Longer a “Weighty” Issue?

Traditionally, we have always used weight (in tons) to measure the amount of trash we generate and the amount of recycling and organic matter that’s collected for recovery. For example, both the U.S. EPA’s annual Municipal Solid Waste Facts and Figures report and Eurostat’s waste statistics for for European countries both report based on weight. Over time, this has allowed us to compare how we are doing on recycling from year to year in a meaningful way. However, the changing waste stream has made these types of comparisons over time less meaningful. At SUSTPACK 2015, one session focused on “Strategic Views of Recyclability and Recovery” and several of the speakers mentioned this changing waste stream issue.
There are actually two related issues: one is the lightweighting of traditional packaging such as bottles and cans made of glass, metal, and plastic. Second, even these light weight traditional packaging formats are being replaced by flexible films and pouches. While the weight of packaging has gone down, the quantity of collected packaging has actually increased, according to Susan Robinson of Waste Management, leading to higher costs for a company like Waste Management to process and sort the same ton of material. Gerald Rebitzer of Amcor Flexibles presented a provocative scenario that purposely questioned the sustainability of traditional recycling at all costs. His presentation put forth two extreme and hypothetical scenarios — one where all packaging is made of rigid materials (glass, metal, plastic) and is recycled at 100%, and one where all packaging is made of only flexible films and none of it is recycled. Which is more sustainable? In the end, Gerald commented that we need a hybrid of the scenarios, but the point of the comparison was to show that traditional material recycling is not always the most sustainable option. In fact, material reduction, the first “R” in the reduce/reuse/recycle mantra, remains the most effective sustainability action we can take.
Both Susan and Gerald suggested that weight, the traditional metric we use to measure waste generation and materials collected for recycling, is no longer relevant. This is because of the changing waste stream, but also because so many other life cycle assessment metrics could potentially provide a more relevant picture of sustainability for packaging recovery. They both suggested carbon footprint as a new metric, but Gerald also put forward additional life cycle metrics, such as water use.
I don’t like to abandon our tried and true weight metric completely for the sake of comparison over time, but I do think it’s time to start adding new metrics to our discussions about packaging recycling and recovery in the future. Should we start reporting our recycling, not in tons, but in carbon dioxide equivalents?

Categories
Sustainability Tools

The Key to Corporate Buy-In: Trickle-Up Employee Engagement?

When you ask any professional from a corporate sustainability leader about the keys for driving their sustainability efforts, you will likely hear a common refrain: Support from corporate leadership creates enthusiasm that trickles down through every corner of the company. This idea was illuminated at the SUSTPACK session, “How to Run a Thread of Sustainability Champions Throughout the Enterprise to Challenge the Status Quo.” Although the nature of the speaker’s companies shared little in common, every speaker attributed much of their success in leading sustainability initiatives to the willingness of their company’s leadership.
It’s something we hear about all the time, and it’s no mystery that corporate buy-in drives any effort through a company, but we rarely hear about how to obtain that support from leadership. The speakers in this session offered their advice. Michael Chung from Johnson & Johnson spoke about their focused and streamlined approach that cuts across all sectors of the business with a simplistic set of goals — making it easy for corporate leadership to understand and reinforce the efforts from the top. Ashley Hall from Walmart stressed the importance of setting sustainability targets that resonated with other corporate goals, never ignoring trade-offs and shooting for win-wins. Tetra Pak’s Carla Fantoni recommended developing internal sustainability champions from outside the sustainability team and creating the desired enthusiasm from within, which was supported by an insight from PepsiCo’s Daniel Brena that we rarely hear: It’s always nice to have support from the top ranks, and if you happen to have it, you’ll likely be in good shape, but it doesn’t need to start at the top. A groundswell of enthusiasm from the bottom of a corporate pyramid can be just as effective — and maybe more effective. Because when employees get excited about sustainability initiatives and spread that energy throughout the bottom ranks of a company, leadership listens.

Categories
Recover More Sustainability Tools

Experts weigh in on Marine Debris at SUSTPACK 2015

Credit: NOAA

Anne Bedarf shares what the experts had to say about marine debris,  a complex issue of importance to many at SUSTPACK 2015.
Dr. Kara Lavender Law of the Sea Education Association kicked off the session with the review of the current science of marine debris. She debunked the idea that marine debris is like a floating landfill; rather, while sometimes individual objects can be seen in the open ocean, most of the debris takes the form of microplastics or ends up on beaches, shorelines, and the seafloor. There may even be significant portions within marine animals and seabirds, but this has yet to be quantified. There are a variety of sources, including waste and litter that flow from land, natural disasters, microplastics in wastewater, and maritime activities, including lost cargo.
Ted Siegler of DSM Environmental Services made the point that marine debris is not just an ocean problem, but an “all waterways” problem that can be seen in lakes and rivers. Expanding recycling to the point where all trash bins are paired with recycling bins, particularly in public spaces like parks and beaches, is one part of the solution. Collaboration to implement financing systems for locally-based waste collection systems is another important solution.
Dr. Linda Zettler at Brown University introduced the fascinating concept of the “Plastisphere,” the colony of microorganisms that can live on marine debris. The debris is surprisingly easy for populations to develop, acting as “an oasis in the desert” and can serve to transport invasive species and displace native species such as the endemic populations of the Sargasso sea.
Well-known expert on biodegradation, Dr. Ramani Narayan of Michigan State University, made the important points that:

  • Biobased does not equal biodegradable or compostable.
  • Marine biodegradability is setting up the wrong pathway for industry and for all of us; it is not a disposal environment.
  • There is value if a product inadvertently enters the marine environment that it breaks down, if it isn’t toxic and is usable as “food.” However, the material can still persist for a long period of time and is not a solution — but reduces risk.

For more information.
The final speaker, Nicholas Mallos from The  Ocean Conservancy made the important point that marine litter is not just plastic. A concerted global approach needed, and their project, the Trash Free Seas Alliance, aims to do just that and apply solutions to developing countries where no infrastructure exists. For more information:
The final question to be answered is: What about the consumer’s role? The point was made that at least in the U.S., we need to have recycling bins everywhere to send the message that materials have value and that recycling is important. Also, teaching children ocean literacy and the value of marine ecology will instill important values that will help solve this conundrum.