PETpla.net Insider 05 / 2010

MATERIAL / RECYCLING 18 PET planet insider Vol. 11 No. 05/10 www.petpla.net LCA: the advantages of PET A newly released life-cycle inventory of single-serving soda containers concludes that PET plastic bottles offer a better environmental footprint than aluminium cans or glass bottles. For further information please contact: info@gabriel-chemie.com www.gabriel-chemie.com Innovation Don’t compromise on quality. PremiumMasterbatches for Superb Products. $ (( / 0 * Kielce May 25–28, 2010 2 %/%0 1/ 0 , ( /0,+( The complete lifecycle study was conducted by Franklin Associates* for the PET Resin Association (PETRA)**. It compared total energy, solid waste and greenhouse gas emissions per 100,000 ounces of soft drinks packaged in typical 20-oz PET bottles, 8-oz glass bottles, or 12-oz aluminium cans. The PET bottles showed appreciably lower numbers across the board. Greenhouse gas emissions for the PET bottles reg- istered 59% less than aluminium and 77% less than glass. Franklin calcu- lated the greenhouse gas emissions for the PET bottles at 1,125lbs (approxi- mately 510kg) of CO2 equivalents, compared to 2,766lbs (c. 1,258kg) for aluminium and 4,949 lbs (c. 2,250kg) for glass. Total energy use for the PET bot- tles amounted to 11 million BTU per 100,000 oz of soft drink, compared to 16 million BTU for aluminium and 26.6 million BTU for glass. Solid wastes amounted to 302lbs (137 kg) for PET bottles, 767lbs (348kg) for aluminium, and 4,457lbs (2,025kg) for glass. Solid waste volume was 0.67yd² (0.6m²) for PET, 0.95yd²(0.855m²) for aluminium, 2.14yd² (1.9m²) for glass. “Since 2005, PET containers have been the subject of several independ- ent lifecycle analyses and PET has consistently shown itself to be a sound environmental choice whether com- pared to glass, metal or other plastics,” said PETRA Executive Director Ralph Vasami. After PETRA received the preliminary LCI report on the soft drink containers, it asked Franklin to recalcu- late its findings on the basis of 10,000 equally sized 12-oz. containers. The PET bottles still showed advantages over aluminium and glass in terms of lower greenhouse gas emissions and solid wastes, while total energy use was deemed comparable for all three materials. The lifecycle inventory for both analy- ses covered extraction of raw materials through container fabrication as well as post-consumer disposal and recy- cling. The post-consumer disposal and recycling calculations included transport to a landfill or incinerator, equipment operations at a landfill and energy recov- ered by an incinerator, but excluded incinerator and landfill emissions. Post- fabrication transport to the filling site, filling, distribution, storage, retail use and consumer use were excluded. www.petresin.org/news.asp *Franklin Associates, Ltd., founded in 1974, provides consulting serv- ices in lifecycle assessment and solid waste management to clients in the public and private sectors. www.fal.com **PETRA (the PET Resin Associa- tion) is the industry association for North America’s producers of PET. www.petresin.org Please note: all metric conversions are approximate values. Conversion rates lbs/kg: 1:2.2; cubic yards/cubic metres: 1:0.9.