If you've no account register here first time
User Name :
User Email :
Password :

Login Now
Unilever

Unilever Sends Zero Waste to Landfill, Saves $226M

UnileverUnilever says it has achieved its target of sending zero non-hazardous waste to landfill from its global factory network, avoiding €200 million ($226 million) of costs and creating hundreds of jobs.

Unilever in 2013 pledged by the end of 2015, its factories worldwide would not sent any non-hazardous waste to landfill.

The company says hazardous waste represents a very small percentage of total factory waste — the types of materials that make up hazardous waste vary due to differing local waste regulations around the world.

Unilever says it believes this to be a global first for delivering zero waste on this scale, with more than 240 factories in 67 countries making products for brands such as Magnum, Knorr, Dove and Domestos that have now eliminated landfill waste.

In addition to reducing waste at source — which Unilever says remains the no. 1 priority — Unilever and its project partners are reusing remaining materials that would otherwise end up in landfills. For example, in Cote D’Ivoire, waste has been turned into low cost building materials; in India, organic waste is being composted and shared with the local community to grow vegetables and in China, waste from Hefei, Unilever’s largest factory in Asia, is being used in the manufacture of bricks and paving.

 

Operationalizing EHS Management: Bridge the Gap from Strategy to Execution
Sponsored By: LNS Research

  
Planning for a Sustainable Future
Sponsored By: Dakota Software

  
The EHS Guidebook: Selecting, Implementing, and Using EHS Software Solutions
Sponsored By: EtQ

  
6 Things to Consider When Deciding Whether to Build or Buy Software
Sponsored By: Progressly

  

2 thoughts on “Unilever Sends Zero Waste to Landfill, Saves $226M

  1. While undoubtedly an important milestone for Unilever, the incremental effect of toxic wastes/emissions, especially for a global operation, should not be ignored. Are non-toxic substitutions being considered? Or is Unilever’s supply chain in fact dependent upon the use of toxic chemicals? If so, celebrating this milestone should go hand-in-hand with honest disclosure of aspects of Unilever’s products/processes that represent real impediments to ecological sustainability.

    I would hope that Unilever’s reporting captures comprehensive data on toxics, respective eco-toxicities, and includes honest discussion of strategies to address this issue from a sustainability perspective. In addition, overly rosy statements about reuse and recycling, due to varying rates of efficiency/effectiveness, leave important questions about Unilever’s overall impact and progress toward sustainability.

Leave a Comment