PD_Packaging Digest

Packaging Digest, Fall 2015

Issue link: http://dc.cn.ubm-us.com/i/586152

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 22 of 39

sustainability 23 www.PackagingDigest.com FALL 2015 // TRENDS 16 Belgrade Street, Youngstown, OH 44505 330.759.9099 A picture is worth a thousand words... a 3D printed part is worth a thousand pictures. VISIT OUR WEBSITE: printing-3d-parts.com Call or visit our website to learn how this is done. printing-3d-parts.com t Rapid Container Prototypes t 'VMM$PMPS(SBQIJDT"OE5FYU t No5PPMJOH$PTUT A look at packaging recycling rates can be a bit disappointing. Rates have stayed f at for the past few years, and many types of packaging we think of as "100% recyclable" have recycling rates that are a far cry from 100%. Meanwhile, we are coming to rely more and more on a new metric for recyclability: the access-to-recycling rate, or "reach" rate, which tells us the percentage of consumers whose recycling program accepts a given type of packaging. A number of studies on reach rates have been conducted and made publicly for nearly every major type of packaging, and one conclusion always jumps of the page: reach rates tend to be high while recycling rates tend to be signif cantly lower. Why the disconnect? If the vast majority of consumers have access to recycling, are they simply not using it? Take PET bottles, for example. A 2012 study commissioned by the American Chemistry Council showed that 94% of U.S. consumers have access to a recycling program that accepts PET bottles—pretty astronomical. Compare that with the EPA's estimate that 31% of PET bottles were recycled in 2012, and it's easy to conclude that Americans could recycle PET bottles, but they choose not to. T ere are likely plenty of instances where consumers are ambivalent and won't take the seemingly miniscule amount of time and ef ort to discard their waste in a recycling bin instead of a trash can. But it's more likely that a larger portion of the blame actually lies with the access to recycling. Unfortunately, many consumers with access to recycling lack convenient access to recycling. T e most simplistic measure of quality access to recycling is its comparative convenience to garbage. If we want people with curbside garbage collection to recycle, then they need curbside recycling collection too. Furthermore, their recycling receptacle needs to be similar to their garbage can. Have you ever strolled your wheeled garbage can out to the curb and then lifted and hauled a bin full of glass containers out next to it? T e amount of ef ort exerted is hardly an incentive to use that access to recycling. If the rolling cart for recycling is identical to the rolling cart for garbage, it's easy to imagine a greater willingness to use it. Cost matters too. If consumers with curbside garbage collection are asked to pay more for recycling pick-up, they can't be expected to jump at the opportunity. Many will, but a large number won't. It's not that those people are apathetic and choose not to use their access to recycling, it's that they are unwilling to pony up the extra monthly fee. T is is not a seemingly miniscule amount of time and ef ort to recycle, but rather an appreciable amount of money needed to receive that access to recycling. Recycling is often treated as a commoditized service, not a right, and participation in a fee-for-service program will be leveraged accordingly. Finally, it's important to recognize that our studies on access to recycling focus on households and services provided to homes, yet so much packaging waste is generated away from home. Single-serve beverages, for example, are overwhelmingly consumed on the go, but there is a lack of studies on the prevalence of recycling collection away from home. Does your workplace of er access to recycling that is equally convenient to garbage? Your gas station? T ese might be better measures of the likelihood that a PET bottle will be recycled. At the end of the day, it's true that most consumers have access to recycling programs that accept most major types of packaging. T is is a good thing. But before we scratch our heads wondering why consumers aren't recycling more, let's question the type of access to recycling and the quality of that access to recycling. It could be that recycling rates closely match the percentage of consumers with convenient access to recycling, and though an unwillingness to recycle still exists, that apathy exists only when the garbage can is simply more accessible. Challenging the idea of consumer apathy to recycling Author Adam Gendell is a project manager with the Sustainable Packaging Coalition and is currently organizing a large multi- stakeholder study on access-to-recycling that will include data on the convenience of provided access. For more information about the Sustainable Packaging Coalition, visit www. sustainablepackaging.org. Changeover Problems? Learn to Puck. s3ALES !DVANTAGE0UCKCOMs!DVANTAGE0UCKCOM Advantage Puck is owned by Simplimatic Engineering Holdings, LLC., a business development equity firm. -ADEINTHE53! Production line efficiency starts with the ability to stabilize and standardize. Advantage Puck provides value-added options not available elsewhere, including: Minimal lead-time from concept to production Custom design and molding Rapid prototyping Learn more about increasing efficiency at AdvantagePuck.com

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of PD_Packaging Digest - Packaging Digest, Fall 2015