http://www.environmentalleader.com/2008/08/21/raw-sourcing-glass-plastic-or-aluminum/ The Executive's Daily Green Briefing Sun, 22 Nov 2009 18:36:47 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 http://www.environmentalleader.com/2008/08/21/raw-sourcing-glass-plastic-or-aluminum/comment-page-1/#comment-67948 Jeff Yorzyk Mon, 25 Aug 2008 23:08:46 +0000 http://www.environmentalleader.com/2008/08/22/raw-sourcing-glass-plastic-or-aluminum/#comment-67948 In addition to Mr. Garn's comment on LCA - the concept of Functional Unit, a critical concept in determining the environmental burden of any product or delivery system (or packaging in the ase of beverages), is completely missing here... the information presented here is only relvant when we understand how MUCH of the material is required to produce the desired function (such as safely holding 12 ounces of my favorite beverage until I am ready to consume it). A "pound for pound" assessment of various material choices is a classic blunder of LCA neophytes that should be avoided at all costs because it usually takes us in the wrong direction. In addition to Mr. Garn’s comment on LCA – the concept of Functional Unit, a critical concept in determining the environmental burden of any product or delivery system (or packaging in the ase of beverages), is completely missing here… the information presented here is only relvant when we understand how MUCH of the material is required to produce the desired function (such as safely holding 12 ounces of my favorite beverage until I am ready to consume it). A “pound for pound” assessment of various material choices is a classic blunder of LCA neophytes that should be avoided at all costs because it usually takes us in the wrong direction.

]]> http://www.environmentalleader.com/2008/08/21/raw-sourcing-glass-plastic-or-aluminum/comment-page-1/#comment-67909 John Garn Mon, 25 Aug 2008 17:39:54 +0000 http://www.environmentalleader.com/2008/08/22/raw-sourcing-glass-plastic-or-aluminum/#comment-67909 In any discussion about life cycle assessment it is all about the boundaries and Mr. Sanel's boundaries seem to be very constricted. When the boundaries are expanded to include refilling the container for reuse, glass is the obvious winner. Just because we have moved away from refill and reuse doesn't mean that glass is a loser. It may be time to reconsider this tried and true method. In any discussion about life cycle assessment it is all about the boundaries and Mr. Sanel’s boundaries seem to be very constricted. When the boundaries are expanded to include refilling the container for reuse, glass is the obvious winner. Just because we have moved away from refill and reuse doesn’t mean that glass is a loser. It may be time to reconsider this tried and true method.

]]> http://www.environmentalleader.com/2008/08/21/raw-sourcing-glass-plastic-or-aluminum/comment-page-1/#comment-67879 Peter Hubbard Mon, 25 Aug 2008 13:02:21 +0000 http://www.environmentalleader.com/2008/08/22/raw-sourcing-glass-plastic-or-aluminum/#comment-67879 Mr. Sanel's conclusion prompts a reaction because his examination is so incomplete! Where are the numbers. More importantly, where is recycling? Glass is readily recyclable, but this is not routinely done. (Likewise PET). Aluminum apparently must have a lot of value, as it is widely recycled, both industrially and all the way down to retirees picking up aluminum cans by the road. Consequently, relatively little aluminum ends up as waste. Add to the equation the high transportation costs of glass and you can see that we can rule it out. PET can match aluminum in low transportation cost, but there remains the environmental (disposal) cost of both the PET itself and the labelling applied to it. I have no axe to grind here, but pragmatically, I'd have to say aluminum seems to win easily. Mr. Sanel’s conclusion prompts a reaction because his examination is so incomplete! Where are the numbers. More importantly, where is recycling? Glass is readily recyclable, but this is not routinely done. (Likewise PET). Aluminum apparently must have a lot of value, as it is widely recycled, both industrially and all the way down to retirees picking up aluminum cans by the road. Consequently, relatively little aluminum ends up as waste. Add to the equation the high transportation costs of glass and you can see that we can rule it out. PET can match aluminum in low transportation cost, but there remains the environmental (disposal) cost of both the PET itself and the labelling applied to it. I have no axe to grind here, but pragmatically, I’d have to say aluminum seems to win easily.

]]>