Finding Sustainability in a Brave New World
http://www.greenerpackage.com/sites/default/files/M&Ms tote bag.jpg
Have you eaten a candy bar today? Look at the wrapper. If you're in North America, there's a high likelihood that it was made by Mars . And before you toss it out, with or without the knowledge that it's not recyclable, stop.
Stop, because we just made a deal with them. What kind of deal? The largest diversion of post industrial waste ever. That's right, the bit of flexible film in your hand now holds the possibility of becoming something other than a resident in the landfill for eons.
While our previous agreements have been focused on the collection of both general categories of and branded post consumer waste this time we're placing strong focus on those poor unwanted end runs, printing errors, and other imperfect or otherwise commercially unusable packaging, which is perfectly functional when upcycled. Upcycling into something else of use long after a single food carrying use.
How many brands will this encompass?
• 19 candy lines, including Milky Way, Starburst, M&Ms, Wrigley's Spearmint.
• Dog and cat foods Pedigree, Nutro and The Goodlife Recipe
• Uncle Ben's, Seeds of Change and Flavia
I don't know about you, but I had no idea Mars covered such a breadth, until making this deal with them. You can bet that one or more of these brands are in the pocket or pantry of most people in North America. This excites me, how much will get to be made into cell phone holders, laptop sleeves and more.
What would have happened to the post industrial waste had it not been directed to us? You guessed it, used as "waste to energy," meaning it would be burnt for its energy. Yes there are increasingly sophisticated technologies to remediate the resulting emissions, but it's still at the end of the day a needless exercise, given options such as the one we'll be providing.
What does this translate into, in terms of quantity? 3000 tons in the first year. That's just to start.
And while this is huge, it should be noted that Mars sustainability efforts go far beyond the packaging. Their recent agreement with UTZ Certified has a stated goal of procuring 100 million tons of cocoa beans, source certified for sustainability, encompassing environmental and social practices, coupled with active education of the local community of the benefits and economic viability of these practices.
This is by 2020, backed by $10 million annually to help be a part of the movement towards such a large supply of sustainable cocoa beans. This will cover all the chocolate Mars makes. Not just a niche "green" line, but all of it. This to me expresses the depth of their commitment. Can you say that for your food company?
Now I'd like your opinion on a few things: Which do you think is more important, economically feasible, and environmentally sensible: Reducing packaging or reusing it? Would you rather spend time and money on making skinnier yet still food safe packaging, or finding new uses for what you've currently got? You probably know where I lean, but please, if you have a new angle on this, an alternate path you or your company are exploring, or otherwise think I'm full of it, please say so. With reasons. Looking forward to your responses.
* 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.
Dear Tom,
Your work is truely commendable. I hope TerraCycle comes to the UK and Europe, in some shape or form, bringing your values and entrepreneurial drive. The potential for 'Upcycling' in other waste streams are enormous. The corporate CSR partnership model you have adopted so successfully is an efficient way to scale and create the maiximum economic and environmental returns.
In answer to your question: Which do you think is more important, economically feasible, and environmentally sensible: Reducing packaging or reusing it?
I think BOTH. It is surely possible and desirable to reduce packaging and increase the reuse of it, from both an economic and environmental perspective. In fact economic, environmental and social factors are fundamentally interlinked and interdependent. Businesses that balance all three (in my opinion) position themselves for long term sustainable growth and 'legitimacy' from consumers and stakeholders, in a world where companies will have to justify their operations to society at large.
In the UK, we have a growing sector of businesses that share much in common with TerraCycle. We call them 'social businesses' and have built an online market place for them to trade, find workers and attract capital from investors. The site is ClearlySo.com. We're not Upcyclers but we are here to help businesses that do!
Simon Evill
Why frame the options as reduce versus reuse or recycling? We need to do all of these. I believe we need to do all we can to reduce waste/surplus in manufacturing (where 90% of waste occurs) AND help the consumer close the loop in their home - through reuse, composting and home recycling.
Mailing back to a 3rd party is an extra step most consumers won't take.
What % of total post-consumer waste packaging is TerraCycle collecting, versus the total waste out there?
As a courtesy, lets start by saying that Tom deserves his limelight. Rather than forcing the question of how large of an impact TerraCycle is having on the US Municipal Waste Stream, lets first recognize the value TerraCcyle brings to the global sustainability discussion. Tom's company is first and foremost, a startup... and one that leverages a business model that has already inspired many other companies (RecyleBank, GreenOps, Old Soap New Bottle, and others) to innovate into new business models that not only recover waste materials, but often incentivize consumers to engage in resource conservation. This new way of thinking of recapturing waste materials doesn't need to be a call to action to throw out the Three R's... but it does cause us to rethink the value we as packaging professionals instill in our packaging and the end of life options currently available.
Now stepping back for a moment; I do have to say that I think Tom's voice is often much bigger and more impactful than the company he represents (no offense intended Tom), but you have to admire how he has forced us to all tune-in and think for a moment about the end of life of our products. TerraCycle may ultimately not be remembered as the company that changed everything, but it will certainly be known as the company that got the ball rolling.
PS - Tom, congratulations on your success with Mars. This is a big win for both Mars and TerraCycle and will serve as a great vehicle for spreading the gospel of up-cycling.
Post new comment