How to measure green - A quest for the greenometer
Alexandros Astropekakis
The time may come, when protecting the environment and saving money will go hand in hand, thanks to widely available and cheap clean technologies, eco-aware consumer decisions, substantial taxing, penalizing and regulating irrational solutions.
But until that turning point comes, when financials will drive environmental protection, the greatest challenge we face is how to measure the ‘greenness’ of our actions. KPI’s, Scorecards or exhausting Life Cycle Analysis - what does it take for everyone to easily distinguish packaging greening from greenwashing?
* indicates an article that was submitted directly to this Web site by the supplier, and was not handled by the Greener Package editorial staff.
Greener Package may share your contact information with our sponsors, as detailed in our Privacy Policy. Greener Package will not share your information with a sponsor whose content you have not reviewed. The members of the Advisory Board and Expert Network do not review, approve or endorse advertisements on this Web site.
How to measure green - A quest for the greenometer
Thomas Oris
Alexandros, you hit on a key point. Their really is no means for anyone to "easily" distinguish green from greenwashing. With that said, I do believe the time is here when we do not have to choose between the environment and finances, we can have the best of both! All it really takes is an industry to truly "push" converters, blow molders and other makers of packaging. As evidence of the power of the industry, we only have to look at the Walmart scorecard and how far and quickly the industry has shifted. But that alone is not enough. Large users of consumer packaging can also push the industry.
How does one measure? This is complex. One measure is the use of post consumer materials, although their can be concerns related to the amount of water, energy and CO2 emissions. Another measure is the use of clean energy in the manufacturing of packaging. Even using virgin materials, if they are made within a manufacturing facility that uses clean energy to power their facility is a benefit. Many companies are going to energy efficient lighting and more use of natural light and these are also good, but not to the level of clean energy. So, as noted their are several means by which to measure.
GREENOMETER
GERALD...Dear Alexandros
I agree with your comments reg. green washing.
I was in Greece 2 weeks ago to give training on Sustainable Scores Cards with RADAR Methods and noticed that there was a lot of confusion for people between definitions and dimensions (metrics) of what is Green, Biological, Organic, Natural, Ecological, Sustainable ... and all think this will be expensive !.
Lot of them were thinking coming back to paper, cardboard, rigid boxes without taking into account how “heavy” the Packaging could become without polymers and how certain process for “natural products” are polluting water, air and soil as well as non-controlled biodegradability which give energy back …only to worms ! Bio-polymers are a the trend/way to replace Fossil-polymers, when petrol resources disappear but they must be as efficient and effective in their L.C.A than what they should replace otherwise this is waste of water, time and …energy!
A lot of confusion is due to the fact that LCA (Life Cycle Assessments) are only partially communicated without all the "Disclaimers" – which is not fair (and not allowed by laws in EU) and done only on certain chosen indicators, which suit the Company presenting a particular product.
Furthermore Assessment are made mainly only in regard of 1 main function of the Packaging System but as we know Packaging Systems fulfill more than 1 function!
Pack must be convenient, protect product from outside, preserve product inside, help for the efficiency of the pack line, must be effective to pack correctly the product up to the end of its shelf life otherwise the packed product will be wasted, which is the “worse sustainable” result
“Greennometer” metrics with the ISO14062 (ECO-CONCEPTION) and RADAR Methods are respecting smart assessments for Sustainability, Ecological and Economical aspects of the Packaging System.
The serial ISO14xxx for Product Systems takes into account all its functions and its values.
To conduct those assessments: Inventories are done, giving the level of T.E.M.P.S. in the System (Toxics for ECO Systems, Energy, Materials, Process and Scraps) then the effectiveness and efficiency of this inventory in the system reviewed for the application will be improved, which will reduce the negative impacts for the ECO-System in improving economical and ecological aspects of the Product System.
Hope this will help
Best Regards
Gerald
BRAND ESTEEM
Dean Bellefleur
Let me take a go at this Alex. Just yesterday I judged entries for a sustainable packaging competition now in its second year. You want to talk about green washing this is where the washing is hung out to dry, the acid test if you will. I’ve concluded that most attempts to green a product bar designers and revoke creative license. It appears to be teams of number crunchers & technicians auditing production lines & processes holding firm to Weber’s Law. Minimal intensity of input to produce a noticeable variation or change is how I would describe “Just Noticeable Differences” which is Weber’s Law.
Leading brand owners need to be purists at heart on green solutions. For who else can make such a significant impact in such a short time due to the volumes of product they supply to the market. There is a mindset that needs to emerge that compels industry to want “to go all the way” with their green initiatives. Let’s call it “Brand Commitment”.
Consumers face an impractical learning curve in order to distinguish green from green wash. It therefore falls on the marketers, designers, engineers, converters and regulatory bodies to propose full solutions rather than endorsing cost saving measures under the guise of going green. In turn this would become a broader facet of brand recognition fully measurable & transparent from sales figures.
Who takes the responsibility? I for one believe that it commences with each of us in our respective industries when asked to support a green initiative, design & propose the Rolls-Royce solution. To those that are judging and awarding honors for green developments ask yourself is this 100% effort and if not provide your input as to what was missing. At the end of the day brand esteem could be the motivating factor.
Greenometer
John Bernardo
Alexander,
I suggest relying on second and third party certifications of materials and energy sourced for packaging production. Additionally, strive for End-of-Life attributes that are realistic and verifiable. It does no good to say a package made from polypropylene is recyclable when polypropylene is not commonly collected and recycled curbside, which is where most consumers attempt to recycle packaging. Finally, testing and verification of composting and biodegrading attributes of packaging are essential to move the packaging chain towards a truly sustainable sector and not just with words (greenwashing).
Greenometer
John Bernardo
Alexander,
I suggest relying on second and third party certifications of materials and energy sourced for packaging production. Additionally, strive for End-of-Life attributes that are realistic and verifiable. It does no good to say a package made from polypropylene is recyclable when polypropylene is not commonly collected and recycled curbside, which is where most consumers attempt to recycle packaging. Finally, testing and verification of composting and biodegrading attributes of packaging are essential to move the packaging chain towards a truly sustainable sector and not just with words (greenwashing).
Focus on what you can do for improvement.
Brad Rodgers
I like the simple way the Sustainable Packaging Coalition has defined sustainable packaging:
Sustainable Packaging:
1) Is beneficial, safe & healthy for individuals and communities throughout its life cycle;
2) Meets market criteria for performance and cost;
3) Is sourced, manufactured, transported, and recycled using renewable energy;
4) Maximizes the use of renewable or recycled source materials;
5) Is manufactured using clean production technologies and best practices;
6) Is made from materials healthy in all probable end of life scenarios;
7) Is physically designed to optimize materials and energy;
8) Is effectively recovered and utilized in biological and/or industrial cradle to cradle cycles.
Well, maybe not so simple to achieve all of these goals at one time. But, if we focus on 2 or 3 areas to begin with then try to continually improve we can make progress towards the ultimate goal. Number 1 and 2 on the list are kind of "givens" for most packagers - it has to be safe and it has to meet cost and performance criteria or it's not even considered. So then it's just a matter of focusing on the other 6 areas (while not forgetting about the first 2). See - simple!
GREENOMETER TO MEASURE ANALYSE AND IMPROVE
GERALD...Definition of Sustainable Packaging is given in 8 "Dimensions" of WHAT to achieve.
1) 2) 6) and 7) are traditional functional tasks of a packaging system.
So the values and costs of its components (Inventories on Energy, Materials, and Process, Scraps and Toxics levels) must be analyzed to assess if they are "TOO MUCH" to fulfill the Functions they are aimed to and HOW we could improve them to Innovate or meet the results of Benchmark, of the Best Available Technics or of the Best In Class.
4)5)8) are difficult to dimension and the metrics chosen to measure the "Green" position on those dimension axes (Green Barometers) must be done in a SMART way (Specific Measurable Achievable Relevant Traceable).
Every project, action, concept which help, step by step to get the Barometer "greener" and "greener" will give improvements in the right direction.
The barometer could become Greener in acting in the Production (ISO14001 Serials) or acting the ECO-Conception of the Product (ISO14062 and related guidelines)
The most important is the ethic of the metrics chosen and the serious of the measurement: this must be done in a scientific way in order for others to measure them self again and to find and confirm on what has been assess ...
I guess it is the most difficult to achieve: transparency of how performances are measured and get international approval regarding accuracy of the results ...
Hope this will help
Gerald, ECOscore6
Measuring Sustainability-Standardization?
pjnolan52
I have had the opportunity to attend several conferences on packaging sustainability and observed the happenings within the packaging community (the Wal-Mart scorecard to name one). This ‘green movement’ seems to be here to stay, although I will contend that the ‘movement’ has been here for a long time, is not new (remember Earth Day?) , and has been driven primarily by economic and market forces. I believe it will continue to be driven predominantly by economic and market forces, independent of the ‘sustainability movement’. Over the long term, there are no incentives for businesses to use more packaging materials than is required to get the product to the consumer. It has always made good business and economic sense to discover the most economical and practical way to package and deliver products.
Environmental stewardship, in all business endeavors, is the right goal. For packaging professionals, designing the optimal package has always been the objective. Perhaps the rapid industrial growth of countries such as India and China has heightened the awareness of the environmental impact of industrialization. Environmental activism is a logical response to global industrialization and external pressure (the ‘green movement’) is being applied to businesses to make sustainability a significant parameter, in designing packaging. So we have the Wal-Mart scorecard and other programs by other retailers to force suppliers to use more ‘sustainable’ packaging. This is all well and good but how do you know when you are designing sustainable packaging; and how can this be evaluated equitably in the marketplace? Where are the standards against which packaging can be measured and examined to determine how well you are meeting a goal of “sustainable” packaging. Is sustainable packaging a continuum or a finite achievement? I think it is generally accepted that packaging sustainability is a process of continuous and incremental improvements, primarily driven by new technologies and new applications and of course, increasing global competition.
The pursuit of continuous improvement for package sustainability does not preclude the development of standards, goals and “scorecards” however; it presents a challenge to the development of global standardization. Can metrics, criteria and goals be developed in order to provide some equitable measure of packaging sustainability? It will not exactly be ‘sustainable packaging’ if each supplier has to comply with a different ‘scorecard’ for each retailer they want to sell to causing manufacturers to develop special packaging for each customer; Further, we can not call a package sustainable if by removing materials (source reduction) the shipment of the that package causes increased damage (potential hazard to the environment). So global standardization and specifications are essential. How do we do it?
The ASTM Committee D10 can play an integral role in providing a debate for discussion on the topic of sustainability. There is already some work going on to develop metrics. The Sustainable Packaging Coalition ( www.sustainablepackaging.org ) has an activity called the ‘Indicators and Metrics Project’ with the primary purpose to develop guidelines for measuring the sustainability of packaging and packaging systems. The guidelines will comprise a core set of performance indicators and metrics to help members of a packaging supply chain track and gauge their performance against key elements of the SPC “Definition of Sustainable Packaging”.
In addition the ASTM Committee D10 on Packaigng already has established standardized test methods and procedures for evaluating packaging materials and package systems. These include standards for evaluating the protective function of the package through distribution and shipping hazards such as shock, compression and vibration. So far, I have heard little discussed about the impact of source reduction on the logistic chain and the need to evaluate, and validate new sustainable package designs for their protective function. This step is essential to ensure that with the implementation of a sustainable new design there are not other non-sustainable consequences somewhere else in the manufacturing and logistics chain.
ASTM committee D10.19, ‘Recycling and Disposability’ is the perfect forum for the continuing effort to bring sustainable packaging to the marketplace by way of published standards, practices and guides. There is no better organization in the world for developing, disseminating and maintaining standardized documents for industries. Experts in all phases of packaging can have a direct hand in developing the future standards that will foster environmental stewardship as we continue to conduct the commerce essential to a prosperous global economy, and also provide the level playing field that is necessary for that prosperity.
Greenometer
Martin Hardwidge...Good debate. I recognise the need for a technical solution to the questions posed, because the popular debate is largely informed by reference to recyclability or other end-of-life issues, without reference to the benefits or otherwise of materials throughout the supply chain. I agree with the writer who suggested that the 8 criteria of sustainability are difficult to measure effectively, but I would go further - packaging is the least of our problems when considering sustainability. Food production, for example, is hugely dependent on oil, including growing the crops that may or may not be turned into biopolymers. Why is there not a huge debate about the sustainability of, say, wheat? Or maybe there is.
As an industry, it is important that we acknowledge the issues, but I honestly believe that packaging is one of the very few inherently 'green' industries in the world. The purpose of packaging is to reduce waste and protect products. I don't intend to trivialise the importance of a proper solution to waste, landfill etc, but actually, it isn't the key point. It has priority in the public eye because it is the only 'waste' that people encounter on a day to day basis. Packaging is around 3-4% of waste in the UK. Of course it is worth minimising, but the most important thing is that packaging continues doing what it needs to do, without an increase in product waste.
Greenometer with Sustainable Score Cards and ISO14XXX
Gerald Lefebvre
Dear Martin
I agree with comments.
There is no "easy way or paths" to change way People are measuring with their "own" metrics
and their "own" feelings.
If you keep it "too simple" as to reduce
your Greenometer to a Carbon Footprint,
or to REnewable Aspects: it is very dangereous and in most of case it transfers pollutions.
"Keep it simple" as I have read in a lot of "Greenwashing exercices": is not a scientific to go deeper and to understand the complexity of Life!
SSC Metrics, in well done in the spirit of ROQ&ROI-ISO10014- and with the RADAR Technics
are taken into account all the functionalities
of a packaging system because a packaging
does not exist for itself!.
The packaging system must be measured and analysed in regard of its Effectiveness and Efficency for the processed & packed product
and its entire life cycle (LCB,LCI,LCA,LCC...).
It means that the SSC of the "ECO or Green Way" in the spirit of ECO-Design (ISO14062)
must have a RADAR Tool to measure
the System Performances on 5 Perspectives:
User Perspectives (Function Convenience, Shelf ...)
Packer Perspectives (Function Filling, Processing ...)
Converter Perspectives (Economy, Ecology, Energy)
Ecological Perspectives (T.E.M.P.S)
T.E.M.P.S.: Toxics, Energy, Materials, Process Efficiency, Scraps & Wastes
Improvements Perspectives (Innovations)
Strategy and Actions Plan
To go to your actions plan and
Tasks Deployement Chart for your Teams:
apply the United Nation Strategy
for Sustainable Design & ISO14 Serials (For Processes, Production and Products:
- Rethink the Product and its Functions
- Reduce Energy and Material consumption
- Replace harmful substances
- Recycle
- Reuse
- Reduce the "Entropy" (Losses of Informations ...)
- Do the right think (Effectiveness)
and do it right (Efficiency)
All of those Items are Causes
of Environemental Effects on
Human Life, Future, Nature, Soil, Air, Water, Resources Depletion ....
And Causes and Effects Matrix can get a SMART (Specific Measurable Achievable Relevant, Traceable) Metrics and Scales for Evaluation
BUT One cannot be "calculated":
your perceived Values: your way of life,
your choice, your cultural evaluation of what
is right or what is wrong !
SO yes: you will have to choice for your Customers Perspectives and Your Business SSC a Solution WHICH WON'T BE IDEAL EVERYWHERE !
as the "ideal, Universal " Solution is an illusion.
To do your choice with respecting
Human, Nature & Future: it is not possible keep it too "simple": Life is complex! and the best way to meaure and analyse the complexity is to go step by step with scientific methods and approved "Standards"
Hope this will help
Kindest Regards
Gérald
I will update this forum as
Johny...I will update this forum as our work progresses. Thanks for your input on this.
Post new comment