The environmental impacts of packaging and food service ware (FSW) are increasingly the subject of government policy, public discourse, and industry commitments. While some consideration is given to reducing the impacts of packaging across its entire life cycle, most of the focus is on packaging waste or feedstock substitution. Efforts typically focus on specific packaging characteristics, or material attributes, commonly perceived to be environmentally preferable. This article summarizes an extensive meta-review of existing published literature that was performed to determine whether the material attributes recyclability, recycled content, compostability, and biobased, commonly considered to be environmentally beneficial, correlate with lower net environmental impacts across the full life cycle of the packaging and FSW. Seventy-one unique life cycle assessment (LCA) studies that quantify the environmental impacts throughout the entire life cycle of packaging and FSW were analyzed. These studies included over 5000 comparisons for 13 impact categories commonly analyzed in LCA studies. The results from the meta-review identified a number of instances where material attributes do not correlate with environmental benefits for packaging and FSW. Rather, other characteristics such as material choice or mass of the packaging/FSW products can have higher influence in determining life cycle impacts.
Summary
Beverage producers in the United States choose packaging based on cost and consumer preference. Monolayer high‐density polyethylene (HDPE) and gable‐top carton containers have long dominated the U.S. fluid milk market, but pressure for more sustainable packaging is increasing. We present a broad discussion on environmental sustainability of 18 fluid milk containers through life cycle assessment. Because different container types require unique milk processing, distribution, and disposal and incur or avoid milk losses, fluid milk delivery systems (FMDSs) are evaluated, rather than containers in isolation. By assessing FMDSs, a complete measure of containers’ environmental sustainability was obtained. Despite conservative assumptions about milk losses, differences in container size, milk processing, distribution, and container recycling, pair‐wise cradle‐to‐grave comparisons of FMDSs show there are no superior FMDSs. But, 500‐ to 1,000‐milliliter FMDSs are potentially superior to ≥half gallon if they prevent milk losses. Thus, the future of FMDSs in the United States depends on the industry's ability to prevent distribution (12%) and consumption milk losses (20% to 35%). Farm‐gate‐to‐grave comparisons showed that chilled HDPE FMDSs are superior to other plastic and chilled paperboard FMDSs for climate‐change impact, but the result is inconclusive for chilled HDPE to ambient (unrefrigerated) paperboard or plastic pouch FMDS comparisons. Plastic pouch FMDSs show potential to reduce nonrenewable fossil energy, but need to be recyclable. Ambient FMDSs are superior to chilled FMDSs for water depletion. Eight‐ounce paperboard FMDSs are superior to 8‐ounce plastic FMDSs. Thus, alternative FMDSs may improve environmental sustainability of the U.S. postfarm fluid milk supply chain.
Life‐cycle assessment is increasingly being recognized as an important tool for determining the environmental impacts of products and packaging. A complete life‐cycle assessment consists of three components: life‐cycle inventory, impact assessment, and improvement assessment. The impact assessment methodology is still relatively undeveloped and controversial; however, the life‐cycle inventory methodology is well established. Life‐cycle inventory provides useful information on the quantities of energy and resources consumed and environmental releases associated with product and packaging systems. This article illustrates the types of useful information that are obtained from a life‐cycle inventory and shows how the information can be analyzed and used to target areas for improving products in terms of reducing energy usage, resource usage, and environmental releases.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.