The Promising Potential of Bio-based Plastics (part 2)

As promised in my previous article I continue my review of the study “Product overviews and market projection of emerging bio-based plastics”, carried out by scientists of the Copernicus Institute for Sustainable Development and Innovation at the University of Utrecht/the Netherlands.

One of the main drivers to develop bio-based plastics is the goal to provide the market with biodegradable plastics, in order to solve the problem of rapidly increasing amounts of waste and limited landfill capacities. Although in some densely populated industrialized countries with limited landfill capacity, waste is nowadays primarily disposed off in municipal solid waste incineration (MSWI) plants, plastic waste management remains an issue in rural areas and in developing or emerging countries. Plastics are also increasingly polluting nature and particularly the sea, with the most prominent example being the so-called Great Pacific Garbage Patch in the central North Pacific Ocean, covering 700 000 km2, and some even say 15 million km2 of large-scale marine pollution.

Bio-degradable plastics can be manufactured not only from bio-based feedstock but also from petrochemical raw materials. But bio-based plastics, defined here as plastics that are fully or partially produced from renewable raw materials, are playing a more important role in the domain of bio-degradable plastics. Therefore bio-based plastics will be able to substantially reduce the chemical industry’s environmental footprint, but only if bio-based plastics manage to conquer a meaningful share of standard plastics.

Despite the many company press releases and the hype in the blogosphere, it should be clear that bio-based plastics still are in their infancy. There are success stories and very promising
developments, accompanied by failures and serious problems to be solved.

If ultimately successful, the reconstruction of the chemical industry using bio-based feedstocks (that means including bio-fuels) will have a major impact and can be seen as the Third Industrial Revolution.

After the successful introduction by small innovative companies the sector has now entered the second phase of business start-ups in bio-based plastics. Larger petrochemical firms still have the opportunity to rapidly gain and convert know-how by smart acquisitions. If done successfully, frontrunners can gain a competitive advantage that can last for decades. This window of opportunity may not be open for long. Laggards may still prosper in the medium term and even in the long term if they can ensure direct access to cheap fossil resources, especially oil and gas, otherwise they are likely to loose out and to disappear in the second half of this century or even before. This could even happen to the oil and chemical multinationals unless they adapt to the altered circumstances.

There are three principal ways to produce bio-based plastics, i.e.
1. to make use of natural polymers which may be modified but remain intact to a large extent (e.g. starch plastics);
2. to produce bio-based monomers by fermentation or conventional chemistry (e.g. C1 chemistry) and to polymerize these monomers in a second step (e.g. polylactic acid);
3. to produce bio-based polymers directly in micro-organisms or in genetically modified crops.
The study shows that the first way is by far the most important, followed by the second; the writers of the study state that they are not aware of any meaningful quantities being produced according to the third pathway.

Based on recent company announcements the production capacity of bio-based plastics is projected to increase from 360,000 tons in 2007 to about 2.3 million tons by 2013 and to 3.45 Mt in 2020. This is equivalent to average annual growth rates of 37% between 2007 and 2013 and 6% between 2013 and 2020. In 2007, the most important products in terms of production volumes were starch plastics (0.15 Mt) and PLA (0.15 Mt). Based on the company announcements it is projected that the most important representatives by 2020 will be starch plastics (1.3 Mt), PLA (0.8 Mt), bio-based PE (0.6 Mt) and PHA (0.4 Mt).
For starch plastics and PLA, cost reductions and the demand related to the production of bulk applications ensure a steady and fast growth. For bio-based PE, the production cost will be the key factor for the future expansion. The growth of bio-based epoxy resin is mainly determined by the availability of bio-based glycerol and by the production costs.

All in all, these developments have converted bio-based plastics from a small niche into a broadly supported development. Being at the beginning, the very substantial growth of bio-based plastics does not yet translate into large quantities if compared to petrochemical plastics. Even by 2020, the European production of bio-based plastics is projected not to exceed 2 kg per capita, while petrochemical plastics may amount to 166 kg per capita (the current values are 0.27 and 103 kg per capita respectively).
This is disappointing in terms of avoided environmental impacts in the short to medium term but on the other hand it brings about two major advantages: First, the land use required for bio-based plastics will be limited, not exceeding 1,000,000 hectares (see note at the end of the article) of land in 2020 (this is less than 0.3% of the arable land in Europe). As a consequence no interference with the food supply needs to be feared for the short to medium term, as-far-as bio-based plastics are concerned. The arable land needed for bio-fuels is a completely different story. Read also my next post (coming up in a few days) regarding alternatives.

Bio-resources are used for food, animal feed, bio-fuels (bio-ethanol) and for wood and other construction materials next to plastics and chemicals. And here we come, there is not enough sustainably produced biomass available to cover all these needs of the increasingly wealthy world population. Wise decisions need to be made which consider the environment. Key decision criteria are first the net environmental gains per hectare of land use and second the existence of other promising means of satisfying a given need. The use of bio-resources for food production comes undoubtedly first and must not be compromised by any means. The study stipulates that bio-based plastics should be preferred over bio-fuels because in the first place bio-based plastics have a higher product value than bio-fuels (e.g. ethanol) and in the second place, promising mobility concepts based on renewable power (electricity) do exist and will become more and more viable and attractive in future, while the carbon embodied in bio-based plastics (and organic chemicals) cannot be replaced by anything else; here, biomass is the only long-term sustainable option. Bio-based plastics do not always score better than power and heat generated from biomass but, again, the issue of viable alternatives speaks for bio-based plastics.

Furthermore it will take more than two decades until meaningful benefits such as CO2 emission reduction will be achieved at a macro level. On the other hand, the advantages of the slow substitution of petrochemical plastics are that technological lock-in can be more easily avoided and that an optimized portfolio of processes can be implemented ensuring maximum environmental benefits at lowest possible costs and minimum social backlash.

To conclude, it has become increasingly clear that a very broad range of plastics can be produced fully or partially from biomass and that these plastics can be tailored to be fully or partially bio-degradable. There is hence no doubt anymore that new bio-based plastics can be successfully commercialized. As a consequence, the focus of attention has shifted and the types of concern have gradually changed over time. Since analogies are seen with bio-fuel production, which is clearly ahead of bio-based plastics in terms of the quantities produced, the main issues are the distortion of food markets, the land use requirements (for food versus feed versus materials, including bio-based plastics), impacts on biodiversity and other environmental impacts (including the question whether bio-based polymers have a favourable overall footprint or not).

Note: in the study it is erroneously said to be 1,000 hectares (page 195)), representing less than 0.0003% of the arable land in Europe or 0.00006% world-wide. These figures should be read as I stated in this article, being 1,000,000; 0.3 and 0.06 respectively.

If you want to read the full study download (pdf-file) it here.

91114

Cubis – Innovative ‘cubed’ Beverage Bottles

Notwithstanding the growing importance of cylindrical shaped aluminium cans, stand-up pouches with all types of fitments and rectangular Tetra Pak-like paperboard boxes, the most common packaging for beverages in the present world is the glass or plastic (mostly PET) bottle of various sizes and shapes, but always cylindrical and narrowing at the top to form an orifice from which the beverage can be drunk or poured.

All these types of beverage containers have certain positive and negative aspects. But all have the same problem with respect to the supply chain. Cylindrical containers prevent optimal use of the freight volume during transportation. This means that large volumes of space around the bottles and around the neck and shoulder go unused.

Design creativity never failed the beverage industry, but seldom led to an efficient and optimal use of transport and storage facilities in the supply chain or even an optimal use of the available space on the shelves in the supermarket aisles.

To optimize the mentioned facilities a beverage bottle (or packaging in general) should be a rectangular cuboid (six rectangular faces), also called a rectangular hexahedron, or rectangular parallelepiped. And that’s exactly what Cubis, a Cyprian company in cooperation with the Swedish design studio ‘Love for Art and Business’ came up with.

According to the website, Cubis Ltd is a team of engineers, designers and marketers committed to rethinking the beverage packaging industry through innovation and forward-thinking. Well, you can say, that they succeeded with the introduction of the Cubis plastic bottle.

The patented Cubis container is based on a square box shape and has a flip-top cap mounted in the upper corner. The result is a stackable and user-friendly container with a unique and exclusive look.
Albeit using environmentally friendly recycled material, and constantly evaluating new materials and recycling solutions, the biggest benefits for the environment probably comes from the fact that Cubis is more efficient in the supply chain, as three 25 cl Cubis containers stacked on top of each other occupy about the same space as a single conventional 50 cl PET bottle.

This translates in twice as many bottles on the shelf, so that retailers will benefit from a substantial increase in shelf value. For transportation it means one truckload instead of two and that reduces the o-so important CO2 emissions.

The Cubis beverage concept is protected by several international patents and design registrations, while, according to the company, licensing rights are offered to beverage producers and packaging manufacturers.

According to the company market studies show a strong acceptance in all age groups and exclusively positive response from ages 10 to 20.

The Cubis containers can run on the existing filling, capping, labelling and packaging machinery, although some adaptations are to be made. The Cyprian company also settled for a cooperation with Formteknik Verktygs AB for the development of manufacturing tools and with Minab Pac, both in Sweden, for new filling machinery or adaptations of existing filling lines.

Conclusion:  Cubis is an amazing packaging design concept. It is a stackable, flip-top plastic beverage container, usable with one hand, even by a toddler. Because of its cube shape, the Cubis increases shelf value by allowing far more product to be displayed in the same space.
The high volume efficiency of the cubed containers substantially reduces costs as well as carbon emissions by better space utilization during transportation and storage. Additional environmental benefits are gained from using readily recyclable plastic materials, like HDPE and PP, while the company states that development is ongoing for the use of renewable materials. And finally it can serve as a powerful marketing platform for the introduction of new brands and products.

91122

The Potential of Bio-based Plastics

Li Shen, Juliane Haufe and Martin K. Patel of the Copernicus Institute for Sustainable Development and Innovation at the University of Utrecht (the Netherlands) recently published a study, titled: “Product overview and market projection of emerging bio-based plastics.”

Who really is interested to work through the 243 pages of the highly-recommended study can download the study here. For the executives, the fast-living packaging professionals and all who want to know what’s in it, I made a compilation of extracts I took from the study.

First. In this study, the term “bio-plastics” is avoided due to its ambiguity: it is sometimes used for plastics that are bio-based and sometimes for plastics that are biodegradable (including those that are made from fossil instead of renewable resources). The term used is: bio-based plastics.

Second. In this study bio-based plastics are defined as man-made or man-processed organic macromolecules derived from biological resources and for plastic and fibre applications (without paper and board). The bio-based plastics investigated in this study include starch plastic, cellulose polymers and plastics, PLA (polylactic acid), PTT (polytrimethylene terephthalate), PA (polyamides), PHA (polyhydroxyalkanoates), PE (polyethylene), PVC (polyvinylchloride), and other polyesters (e.g. PBT [polybutylene terephthalate], PBS [polybutylene succiniate], PET [polyethylene terephthalate] and PEIT [polyehthylene-coisosorbite terephthalate]), PUR (polyurethane) and thermosets (e.g. epoxy resins). For each of these plastics, the study presents the bio-based production routes, material properties, technical substitution potentials, applications today and tomorrow, emerging producers and wherever possible, costs.

Let’s start with a bit of history.
Polymers abound in nature. Wood, leaves, fruits, seeds and animal furs all contain natural polymers. Bio-based polymers have been used for food, furniture and clothing for thousands of years. The first artificial thermoplastic polymer “celluloid” was invented in the 1860s. Since then, numerous new compounds derived from renewable resources have been developed. However, many of the inventions related to bio-based polymers made in the 1930s and 1940s remained at the laboratory stage and were never used for commercial production. The main reason was the discovery of crude oil and its large scale industrial use for synthetic polymers since the 1950s.
Today, public concern about the environment, climate change and limited fossil fuel resources are important drivers for governments, companies and scientists to find alternatives to crude oil. Bio-based plastics may offer important contributions by reducing the dependence on fossil fuels and the related environmental impacts.

Packages in NatureWorks PLA

In the past two decades bio-based plastics have experienced a renaissance. Many new polymers from renewable feed stocks were developed. For example, starch, i.e. a naturally occurring polymer, was re-discovered as plastic material. Other examples are PLA that can be produced via lactic acid from fermentable sugar and PHAs which can be produced from vegetable oil next to other bio-based feed stocks.
The developments in the past five years in emerging bio-based plastics are spectacular from a technological point of view. Many old processes have been revisited, such as the chemical dehydration of ethanol which leads to ethylene, an important intermediate chemical which can be subsequently converted into polyethylene (PE), polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and other plastics. Moreover, recent technology breakthroughs substantially improved the properties of novel bio-based plastics, such as heat-resistance of PLA, enabling a much wider range of applications. For numerous types of plastics, first-of-its kind industrial plants were recently set up and the optimization of these plants is ongoing.

Wood pulp based NatureFlex of Innovia Films

The historical use of bio-based products demonstrates that bio-based polymers are neither fictional nor totally new. Instead, for many decades, they have been an industrial reality on a million-tonne-scale. Today, the combined volume of these non-food and non-plastics applications of starch and man-made cellulose fibres is 55 times larger than the total of all new bio-based polymers (approx. 20 Mt (million metric tonnes) versus approx. 0.35 Mt in 2007). The new bio-based polymers may reach this level in 20-30 years from now. The use of starch for paper production only amounts to 2.6 Mt and is hence still six times larger than today’s worldwide production of bio-based plastics. This demonstrates that the production of bio-based products at very large scale is not unprecedented.

This study estimates the global capacity of emerging bio-based plastics at 0.36 Mt by the end of 2007. This is approximately 0.3% of the worldwide production of all plastics (dominated by petrochemical plastics). The current production capacity of bio-based plastics is even smaller compared to “conventional bio-products”: they represent only 2% of the global production of established bio-polymers (20 Mt; comprising cellulose polymers, alkyd resins and non-food starch without starch for fuel ethanol) and only 0.1% of the world paper and board production. However, the market of emerging bio-based plastics has been experiencing rapid growth. From 2003 to the end of 2007, the global average annual growth rate was 38%. In Europe, the annual growth rate was as high as 48% in the same period.

 

Frito-Lay's plant-based chips bags

The total maximum technical substitution potential of bio-based polymers replacing their petrochemical counterparts is estimated at 270 Mt, or 90% of the total polymers (including fibres) that were consumed in 2007 worldwide. It will not be possible to exploit this technical substitution potential in the short to medium term. The main reasons are economic barriers (especially production costs and capital availability), technical challenges in scale-up, the short-term availability of bio-based feed stocks and the need for the plastics conversion sector to adapt to the new plastics. Nevertheless, this exercise shows that, from a technical point of view, there are very large opportunities for the replacement of petrochemical by bio-based plastics.

Based on company announcements it is projected that the most important items by 2020 will be starch plastics (1.3 Mt), PLA (0.8 Mt), bio-based PE (0.6 Mt) and PHA (0.4 Mt). The BAU (business-as-usual) scenario assumes a steady growth of the four key plastics (i.e. starch plastics, PLA, bio-based PE and bio-based epoxy resin) and a modest growth for cellulose films, PHA and bio-based PUR. The BAU projection results in a global production capacity of approximately 3 Mt for 2020.

It will hence take more than two decades from now until meaningful benefits such as CO2 emission reduction will be achieved at the macro level. On the other hand, the advantages of the slow substitution of petrochemical plastics are that technological lock-in can be more easily avoided and that an optimized portfolio of processes can be implemented ensuring maximum environmental benefits at lowest possible costs and minimum social backlash.

To conclude, several factors clearly speak for bio-based plastics. These are the limited and therefore uncertain supply with fossil fuels (especially oil and gas), the related economic aspects, environmental considerations (especially savings of non-renewable energy and greenhouse gas abatement), innovation offering new opportunities (technical, employment etc.) and rejuvenation in all steps from chemical research to the final product and waste management. Challenges that need to be successfully addressed in the next years and decades are the lower material performance of some bio-based polymers, their relatively high cost for production and processing and the need to minimize agricultural land use and forests, thereby also avoiding competition with food production and adverse effects on biodiversity and other environmental impacts.

As the conclusions of the study are of utmost importance, I shall post here a second article (within a few days) with the conclusions of the study in more detail.

Note:
The study was commissioned by the European Polysaccharide Network of Excellence (EPNOE) and European Bioplastics.

In the meantime if you like to read it in full, here it is with its typical scientific title: “Product overview and market projection of emerging bio-based plastics”.

91114

Cultivated in Transit

Let’s have a look at one more futuristic vision in packaging. The vision departs from the supposition that convenience, and product difference – aspects that were the typical characteristics of food products in the last decade – are taking a backseat in a world now more focusing on making a positive impact on freshness, taste and health, as well as the sustainability of the planet.

Our obsession with fresh food irrespective of season and location fuels developments in extending their life after the moment of harvest until the point of consumption. Ripening is manipulated, and breathing is slowed down through refrigeration and modified atmospheric packaging. But these so-called post-harvest technologies are not only economically and ecologically expensive, they are essentially damage control measures that only slow down the eventual deterioration, which starts the instant a crop is removed from the ground or separated from its parent plant.

For the consumer produce must be fresh, full of texture, succulence and flavour – with the full complement of vitamins and minerals that can only come from natural food that is eaten at its best. Damage control management can’t avoid deterioration in freshness and texture, even worse it can’t avoid that a lot of waste in fresh produce goes around.

How do you solve that problem? Agata Jaworska, a masters graduate from the Design Academy Eindhoven (the Netherlands), designed a way to use the time and space associated with the supply chain to grow fresh produce. Her outspoken thesis (which by the way she wrote in 2007) demonstrates how design thinking can go beyond the operational level of packaging design.

But before we continue please note that the packaging-concept is futuristic, it is a model of how produce could be grown in the future. Nevertheless the concept is worth a serious consideration for further development, Here is the story:

If we enable growth along the way, then we automatically deliver absolute freshness and the consumer can harvest his own food. The result is systemised distribution with zero post-harvest preservation.

Her “Made In Transit” concept focuses on a new system of cultivating (oyster) mushrooms, where the growth is completely embedded in the distribution chain. With this idea one of the functions of the distribution chain, preventing degradation of the perishable product by means of refrigeration, is converted into an active role in the cultivation process with a consumer interaction by harvesting at the time of consumption. It not only creates a shift from “best before” to “harvest on”, but, more importantly, also bypasses harvest labour, which for mushrooms can account for 40% of the overall production cost.

In her thesis Jaworska points out that transportation is normally a dormant time for produce. The food becomes trapped inventory and a lot of energy must be spent keeping it fresh. This means that the distribution system must be fast and the environment must be cool. But freight trucks aren’t the least bit cool. In fact they generate a lot of warmth en route, and that warmth is just what a growing mushroom needs most aside from darkness. In the “Made in Transit” (personally I’d prefer to call it “Cultivated In Transit”) concept, the need to heat the cool environment of the traditional mushroom farm is eliminated and the warmth naturally produced by the transport vehicle is used to do the growing.

Of course the concept doesn’t apply equally to all commodities. Mushrooms, however, are highly perishable, relatively easy to grow and produce a fruit body that is fully edible. There are also varieties that currently cannot reach our supermarket shelves precisely because they are so perishable.
The rice straw mushroom is one such example, with cultivation limited to China, Taiwan and Thailand. The rice straw mushroom begins to liquefy as soon as it is refrigerated and is currently only available in canned form.

The “Made In Transit” idea is not entirely new. We know early harvest of fruit and vegetables and ripening during the time the product ‘sits’ in the supply chain, that does not mean that the design and the thoughts of Agata Jaworska don’t deserve the necessary attention and further exploration.

Burning question is, which products are suitable for on-the-go cultivation and is it feasible to develop this concept further by incorporating combinations (partly on land or in the greenhouse, partly during transportation or storage). It will take a lot more research and development, before packaging trades in its conservation status for an active cultivation one. However it’s worth a try.

71120

Fancy Packaging Ideas

After my last post, which highlighted a non-glamorous item, it is time to enliven this blog a bit. Worldwide industrial designers come up with new packaging ideas, a large part of these ideas is just self-employment, in other words there is no client involved. They are just the fruits of a creative spirit, no commercial or technical requirements and restrictions limiting the brainwave. Of course a great deal is useless, too far fetched or impossible to execute or manufacture. But sometimes you encounter a packaging design concept, of which you say: “Nice idea, maybe it is worth to give it a try.”

As this blog has as goal to promote ‘green’ creativity in packaging, both design ideas described here, are spouted from ‘green’ spirits. Be aware also, that concepts do need some detailing work for the real world, at the other hand the choice of material is free, while both ideas might offer a strong marketing incentive in regard to sustainabilty, a word which is on everybody’s lips.

In my article “EcoPak and Ecocentric – What’s in a Name?” I described the plantable Pangea body-care packages with its herb seeds moulded in the 100% post-consumer paperboard sides of the packages. Soak it in water, after use and plant it in soil.

The designer Yun Hwan Sung comes up with an interesting twist on recycling, as despite the fact that PET-bottles are relatively easy to recycle, all too many end up in landfills or even worse in nature. His bottle with the “Seeds in the Bottle” concept is actually a variant of the Pangea paperboard packages. In this case the seeds are stored in an indent in the side of the bottle and covered by a label. After drinking down or using the last drop from the bottle, simply tip the bottle upside down, remove the bottom, fill the bottle up with soil, remove the label and take out the seeds, drop the seeds in, spray with water and wait to harvest your own fresh herbs.

Imagine the bottles themselves made attractive with a nice looking picture, and no consumer would mind having these plants (and your iconic bottle) all over his house.

About the designer. The first information I received about Yun Hwan Sung was that he was Chinese or Taiwanese. However my friends in Taiwan have not been able to locate him and state that the way the idea is presented is the Japanese style, but, according to them, Yun Hwan Sung definitely must be a Korean. Whatever the nationality, the Seoul Design Foundation doesn’t know Yun, I haven’t been able to gather more specific information.

As always is the case with ideas and concepts few technical aspects are known. The second creation is no better.

The NNew Can stands out as it has a deliberate round spiral shape. Designed by Choi Kwenyoung and Park Jiwoon (both from the Kongju National University, Korea) for those who separate garbage to have a quick and easy time crushing cans into a size of one third of a normal can.

I know, I know, seeing this concept will make the hair of many a technician stand on end. Let’s have a closer look.
First, of course is the shape with spirals enabling easy crushing of the can. What is the can doing when stacked high in a warehouse? In principle there shouldn’t be a problem, as the cans have a concave indent in the bottom as well as the pressure inside. It is even said, and certainly imaginable, that such structures as these spirals have indirectly formed ribs around the can, strengthening the structure instead, due to the surface deformations created.
If this is the case there should be found a balance between the above and the enabling to crush the aluminium can more easily.

The second problem is the manufacturing. In my opinion this can with its spiral structure only can be blow-moulded, as a high-speed draw re-draw (DRD) process can’t be used. But who am I to deny creativity in re-designing the DRD-process. After all, if this can gets picked up by any of the big beverage companies, this could certainly change how cans are produced.

And furthermore there is new shaping technology in aluminium bottles (CCL Containers) that features dramatic curves and contours the full length of the container. So, in other words, I think, that the production problems can be overcome.

Ok, maybe not for the big boys, as Coca-Cola, Pepsi etc, but think in terms of a healthy energy drink. It just might be the extra incentive to underline the green credentials and differentiation in the aisle.

90933

Packaging Dictionary

The Packaging Dictionary has been updated extensively per Nov. 01, 2009. A large number of definitions has been added, as well as a large amount of printing definitions.

Looking for a packaging or printing related definition? Click here or choose one of the letters below.

0 – 9

A *  B *  C *  D *  E *  F *  G *  H *  I *  J *  K *  L *  M *  N *  O
P *  Q *  R *  S *  T *  U *  V *  W *  X *  Y *  Z

Short, Shorter, the Shortest (Part 2)

In the first part of my article (which you find here) I wrote about the consequences of the introduction of the new PCO 1881 standard neck-finish for beverage bottles.

Bericap PCO 1881 neck finish

As the beverage industry appears to be ready to adopt the new neck-finish standard, e.g. from PCO 1810 (5.1g / 21mm length) to PCO 1881 ISBT (3.8g / 17mm), lightweight solutions are literally in everyone’s mind and consequently a number of different so-called short-neck closures have hit the market. Let’s look at some of them.

Bericap’s SuperShorty is available with two different external designs: a crown look; and a soft-drink look. The crown design targets PET beer bottles and soft-drink bottles in smaller package sizes. Both closure variants can be equipped with an in-shell, moulded oxygen-scavenging liner for oxygen-sensitive products like beer or juices.
Bericap’s DoubleSeal SuperShorty closure for PCO 1881 is suitable for mineral water and carbonated soft drinks up to 8 g CO2/ltr. Bericap completed its product range for the PCO 1881 light weight neck-finish with the development of the LinerSeal SuperShorty. The LinerSeal SuperShorty is a 2-piece closure made from polypropylene with a free rotating EVA-liner.

CSI closure for Frankfurter Brauhaus

Another catalyst in the market of PCO 1881 closures is Xtra-Lok mini of CSI – Closures Systems International (previously Alcoa). The company’s new MB-Lok mini beer closure was selected by Frankfurter Brauhaus for their next generation PET beer packaging.
The new package is much lighter with over 20% material savings in the threaded bottle finish area of the package. Utilizing a shorter and lighter-weight bottle finish and CSI’s MB-Lok mini closure, the sleek new beer package represents a major step forward to reduce packaging materials and to improve sustainability. It has a classic profile, combined with an easy to grip “Sure Grip” knurl pattern, specifically designed for ease of opening and consumer satisfaction.

The third player in the PCO 1881 market is the Swiss company, Corvaglia Closures Eschlikon AG, claiming to be one of the first cap producers to react to the trend.

Numerous beverage bottlers, including some multinationals, have selected the PCO Corvaglia as their new global standard. Starting in Italy, where the percentage of mineral water that is lightly or even heavily carbonated is as high as in Germany, the short PCO Corvaglia cap very quickly established itself on a broad front. Major fillers in Brazil, Mexico and Poland soon followed.

Corvaglia SportCap PCO 1881

The success is very much due to the cap’s advantages over other short versions, which include its compatibility with existing neck-finishes and the low cost of blowing machine and filling line conversion.

And with this, the word ‘conversion’ dropped into our story.
The switch to PCO 1881 will lead to a major retooling of pre-form and closure moulds, but above all, a conversion also means that bottling plants must be converted to be able to handle the new thread length. Here, up to € 250,000 in conversion costs are quickly incurred – money that can be a problem to raise and invest in this financially uncertain times, particularly for the smaller bottlers.

Conversion PCO 1810 - PCO 1881

In my first article I already wrote about the ComPetCap CC 28/21-01 designed by the German company CCT (Creative Closure Technology GmbH) creating a lightweight alternative for owners of older bottling plants. Often the older bottling plants can only be converted to a shorter thread length at high cost, while the ComPetCap doesn’t require reconstruction costs on moulding, filling and capping.

Adoption of PCO 1881 will also have a dramatic and far-reaching effect on the tooling industry. Apart from demand for new moulds, it will advance developments in tool design and fabrication, component engineering and multilayer moulding. Mould makers that have continued to invest in technology and expand their capabilities despite recent downturns in business will see the biggest gains.

Is this the end of the evolution in shorter caps. I doubt it. I am sure, the development of bottle closures continues in the direction of more savings in raw material. Time will tell.

90969

Short, Shorter, the Shortest

Bericap PCO 1881 neck finish

The item I want to handle today, doesn’t belong to the glamorous part of packaging. However its existence and eventual evolution have tremendous impact on the beverage industry and as a consequence on the sustainability credentials of the beverage packaging: the bottle.

The market environment in the mineral water and soft drinks industry, as well as in the beer sector changes rapidly. Best price offers in one-way PET are the bench mark sparking off the urgent need of a dramatic adaptation of the cost structures.

When it comes to exploiting possible saving potentials the weight of bottle and closure play an important role. Using less raw materials and moving less weight in the complete supply chain can translate in mouth-watering savings.

The new short-height neck-finish standard PCO 1881, which has been recently agreed upon within the International Society of Beverage Technologists (ISBT), is making serious inroads in the market for plastic single and multi-serve soft drink bottles (250 ml – 2 litre), taking over from the (old standard 28 mm) PCO 1810 with enormous material savings as result.

PCO 1881 neck-finish

The new standard PCO 1881 seeks to reduce resin costs associated with making polyethylene terephthalate pre-forms and polyolefin closures. It will create thinner neck finishes and lighter-weight polyolefin closures, decreasing the amount of material used in pre-forms by 1.3 grams and in standard 28-mm closures by 0.5 grams.

Material reductions totalling 1.8 grams per bottle, multiplied by the hundreds of billions of pre-forms and caps moulded worldwide each year, could yield savings of hundreds of millions of dollars annually for major brand holders like Coca-Cola Co., PepsiCo, Cadbury Schweppes and others.
Even regional beverage companies would see resin costs reduced by hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars, depending on volume.
And last but not least, PCO 1881 has the added benefit of “green” engineering. Light-weighting a high-volume product like beverage bottles and consequently reducing the amount of post-consumer waste generated by the market, create savings on a global scale that not only equate to hundreds of thousands of tonnes of resin per year, but also have a tremendous impact on handling, transport and recycling.

CSI closure for Frankfurter Brauhaus

Although adoption of the standard is voluntary, everybody is in on it because there are so many advantages to be exploited. Take this example: With the PCO 1881 a 600 ml PET-bottle for the Brazilian Coca-Cola is 4 mm shorter in height and weighs 26 gr, against the 28 gr of the old bottle. With the new neck-finish, the part of the bottle which is responsible for the largest share in material consumption, is thinner and smaller. The new neck-finish only has two screw threads, against three in the past. This results in a material saving of approx 1.5 gr of the PET for the bottle and 0.2 gr PP for the closure.

As the beverage industry appears to be ready to adopt the new neck-finish standard, e.g. from PCO 1810 (5.1g / 21mm length) to PCO 1881 ISBT (3.8g / 17mm), lightweight solutions are literally in everyone’s mind and consequently a number of different so-called short-neck closures have hit the market. I describe several of them in my article: “Short, Shorter, the Shortest (Part 2)”.

But what with the conversion from PCO 1810 to the new PCO 1881. The switch to PCO 1881 will lead to a major retooling of pre-form and closure moulds, but above all, a conversion also means that bottling plants must be converted to be able to handle the new thread length. Here, up to € 250,000 in conversion costs are quickly incurred – money that can be a problem to raise and invest in this financially uncertain times, particularly for the smaller bottlers.

Conversion PCO 1810 - PCO 1881

The German company CCT (Creative Closure Technology GmbH) designed the ComPetCap CC 28/21-01 especially for carbonated beverage packaging. This is a neck and closure version, called “PCO 1881 med”, which ideally combines the material-saving neck and closure version PCO 1881 with the quality of consumer-friendly neck and closure version PCO 28 (1810) being used by the market for decades. The closure is 21 mm tall and only weighs 3.9 g, resulting in a saving of at least 1.5 g for pre-form and closure in comparison with the neck and closure version PCO 28 (1810). As the ComPetCap doesn’t require reconstruction costs on moulding, filling and capping, it makes it the lightweight alternative for owners of older bottling plants, as they can often only convert from PCO 1810 to PCO 1880 at high cost.

Is this the end of the evolution in shorter caps. I doubt it. I am sure, the development of bottle closures continues in the direction of more savings in raw material. Time will tell.

90969

CupCan and CreaTin – Creative Design in Steel Cans

When the Institute of Medicine (IOM) called in its 2009 report “School Meals” for increasing the amount and variety of fruits, vegetables and whole grains, along with reducing saturated fat and sodium, the Canned Food Alliance jumped on the bandwagon and waved vigorously with a study of the University of California at Davis, that concludes that all forms of fruits and vegetables – canned, fresh and frozen – are nutritionally similar and contribute important nutrients that comprise a healthy diet.

The goal of this action of the Canned Food Alliance is obvious. Although steel cans belong to the select group of oldest and most trusted pillars of the packaging industry it is beyond discussion that the steel can, like glass and wood, lost considerable market share to the new developed packaging formats which claim to be lightweight and consumer friendly with sophisticated designs and printing options.
And indeed it should be said that in general the tin is, except for the decorated tins promoted as collectables, a dull packaging format, with its cylindrical shape and paper-wrapped label. Except for some printing, neither vegetables, not fruit and other food products are showcased in this  packaging format worth the 21st century.

And still steel is a material that is particularly suitable for food packaging due to its many different properties. Just to refresh the memory, a steel can or tin can, or just a tin, is a single-walled container moulded mostly by impact extrusion of tinplate or black plate (including tin-free steel). Tin plate has been replaced by tin-free steel which is given a tin coating, usually as thin as a human hair, to prevent rusting. Protective (plastic) coatings applied to the inside of the cans ensure the integrity of the contents, allowing tins to hold a wide variety of products.

The canning process does not require the use of preservatives; precise heating in the canning process and vacuum sealing maintain the quality, safety and integrity of the product. And then there is the sustainability, the ‘greenness’ of the tin. Tins are 100% recyclable – which means that there are no waste and waste substances in the recycling process as with plastics or paper/cardboard. And furthermore the latest figures from APEAL (the Association of European Producers of Steel for Packaging) show that 69% of steel packaging is recycled in Europe. This represents over 2.5 million tons of food and drinks cans and other steel containers, saving 4.8 million tons of CO2. Top performers were Belgium and Germany where more than 90% of steel packaging was recycled. Switzerland, Austria and the Netherlands follow closely behind, recycling over 80% of their steel containers.
In other words recycling is second nature for steel as recycled materials are an essential part of the steelmaking process. Steel is one of that few materials that have an infinite recycling loop – it can be recycled over and over again without any loss of its inherent properties.

So, when it’s such a perfect packaging material, why are the results, the designs, so dull. Shape communicates instantly. Shape creates memorable and recognizable branding. It also offers upscale, sophisticated cues. Innovative, shapely designs support brand positioning. A complimentary high-resolution colour printing helps contemporize metal packaging and the products they contain. Where is the creativity in simple steel cans?

I have to be honest. There is some. In 2008, Silgan Containers Corp., the largest manufacturer of metal food cans in the United States, launched it’s shaped can manufacturing capability under the brand name “Sculptured Metal Technology”, in a move to provide increased value.

And fortunately there is more to come. In Europe the R&D department of the Danish can manufacturer Glud & Marstrand developed a range of shapely steel containers under the name CupCan and CreaTin with remarkable decorating results in off-set printing.

The CupCan range is launched in a 100 ml ø73×36 mm and a 150 ml ø83×40 mm size with easy-open lids and full panel opening. The CupCan has a conical shape which gives it a nice organic look. It fits well in the hand and will have great eye-catching effect on the shelves, enhancing its perceived product value. The can is therefore well suited for more exclusive or modern products.
The new conical can is stackable which means that it only takes up approximately one-quarter of the space required by the traditional straight walled can when being transported and stored.

CreaTin is a product range – with a lot of different opportunities – made in either ø73 mm or ø99 mm and are available in different heights and different shapes. For the CreaTin range G&M developed a technology which can expand cans into new and unconventional shapes, starting from two expanded cans in the standard selection, creating a unique can that results in an exceptional sales promoting package.

The Milk Can as shown in the picture above is made by making a ground design that supports the effect with a finishing combining different lacquering techniques. By combining glossy lacquers with matt surfaces Glud & Marstrand created a three-dimensional graphic effect that accentuates the milk streaming over the top of the can.

Printing on metal is approaching photographic quality. Sharp and beautiful colours make the product stand out from other products. Using various matt, glossy and texture lacquers create a special visual (e.g. crackle) and touch feel (e.g. velvet) effect.

And furthermore there is the proprietary”Can2Can” design – a plastic ring that makes it possible to combine various cans from the G&M assortment in one package – metal packaging expands to new application areas. A nice opportunity for co-promotion of products from various categories such as sweets and toys or various components for ready-meals.

With some creativity the steel can certainly has a bright future.
*
If you want to know more about the steel can, its history and evolution, read my post: The Revival of the Tin Can – The Collectible as Marketing Tool , as the tin’s history began in 1795 when Napoleon Bonaparte, who famously noted that an army “travels on its stomach”, offered a prize of 12,000 francs to anyone who could invent a method of preserving food. From a marketing point of view the tin container became a very popular collectible in the past and of which we see a revival lately.

Crossposted at Packaging Digest blog: Excellence in Packaging

90938

The Evolution of the Stand-Up Pouch (Part 2)

As I promised in my previous post “The Evolution of the Stand-Up Pouch” in this post we shall take a look at some stand-up pouches which feature in one way or another a speciality. There are innumerable ways to design original stand-up pouches using the ultimate in technology to accentuate the brand’s presence on the shelves. Keep in mind that more than two thirds of purchasing decisions are made in the aisle. The competition is decided then and there by what the consumer favours, and it is on the shelves that the brand must make the impact. The only problem is, as it often is in the packaging world, the application of revolutionary technologies and/or material compositions, isn’t always recognised or even recognisable by the consumer.

All pouches described here, have in common that they are special in one way or another. All used the ultimate developments in packaging technology, printing techniques, material composition and design. All are outstanding examples of how the DoyPack evolved to a mature  and very popular packaging format. All are claiming ‘green credentials’.

Young & Smylie
Young and Smylie, the creators of quality confectionary products since 1845, introduced Strawberry Licorice in an 8 oz. (227 gr), re-sealable, stand-up pouch. Although the technical details about the package are proprietary, and not made public, there is still some known.

In fact the Young and Smylie pouch is a standard stand-up. The speciality lies in the printing technique used. Using an 8 ga (0,08 mil) PET-film, Printpack, one of the largest flexible and specialty rigid packaging converters in the US, printed the pouches in 9 colours on a Cerutti press using Sun Chemical inks.
The soft, natural look of the Young and Smylie Licorice pouch is created using a matte lacquer, a simple design, and small, well executed fonts. All the fonts are kept exceptionally clean with the help of Extreme-E engraving. Extreme-E is a high resolution engraving method which utilizes a machine that can engrave as low as a 2 point font without compromising the copy integrity. Compared to conventional engraving, Extreme-E technology produces engraved cells via a series of cuts. The advantage of this technology is that the smooth edges of this kind of etching can keep the small copy very legible and clean, versus the normal hounds-tooth edge of conventional engravings.

Grape Ranch Frozen Rose
Grape Ranch Frozen Rose is an all mixed and ready to throw in the freezer alcoholic beverage. Freeze till hard to the touch, tear off the top and mix in a blender, top with a favourite red wine or liqueur.
To withstand freezing and below-freezing storage conditions, the Grape Ranch Frozen Rose stand-up pouch, made by PPi Technologies, is using a multi-layer laminate film from Amcor Flexibles, uniquely designed to contain alcoholic beverages. In the frozen beverage category it is a stand-alone since it is offered in a re-closeable, stand-up pouch. The Grape Ranch Frozen Rose packaging format and design brings differentiation and opens with its significant convenience for the consumer a whole new market in frozen alcoholic beverages..

Bertolli Premium Pasta Sauces
The 21st DuPont Awards for Packaging Innovation honoured sustainability in packaging design and construction and the Bertolli Premium-brand stand-up pouch for pasta sauces, was one of the winners.

When launched the new 13.5-oz (400 ml) stand-up pouch for Bertolli Premium boasted a sophisticated appearance on the shelves. But the pouch had more to offer beyond its striking and mouth-watering appeal. While not a replacement for the glass jars used by Unilever for its Bertolli sauces, the stand-up pouch offers consumers microwaveability that allows them to heat the product in the pouch in just 90 seconds.

Amcor Flexibles produced the non-foil pouch-stock of a 104-micron (4.09-mil), seven-colour reverse-printed barrier lamination comprising PET as outer layer, nylon as barrier and PP as sealant, which provide a nine-month shelf life for the oxygen-sensitive product. Unilever settled on the material that gave the best combination of low cost, high barrier, heat stability, microwaveability, optical clarity (the consumer can see the product through the clear, bottom panel), and machine-ability at the converter and the filling operation.
The sauces are contract-packaged on an intermittent motion Toyo Jidoki system.

ShakerPAK
ShakerPAK, manufactured by Ampac Flexibles, a Division of Ampac Packaging LLC is unique in that the bottom of the pouch, the so called bottom gusset, has been replaced with an inside perforated layer for dispensing dry solids like seed, fertilizers, and ice melt. Below the perforation is a press-to-close zipper for recloseability.

The stand-up pouch includes a laser score tear strip for tamper evidence and product protection. The consumer needs only to open the package via the easy tear strip on the bottom of the package, pull open the zipper, position the package over the desired area with the easy-carry handle, and then shake the package to dispense the product. This allows the consumer to control where and how much product is dispensed without actually coming into contact with the product. The reclose feature protects the product from moisture for future use.

The ShakerPAK stand-up pouch is only 2% by weight of the replaced bulky rigid HDPE container, providing a considerable improvement through light-weighting.

Honest Kids
Honest Kids, an organic fruit juice product of Honest Tea, has a very special and modern stand-up pouch design. Although the modern design camouflages the original construction of a stand-up pouch, all elements are there including the gusset bottom and the traditional Doyen sealing of the edges of all 4 sides of the hourglass-shaped pouch, clearly connecting front and back panel.

Honest Kids hourglass-shaped 6,75 oz (200 ml) pouches, designed by Flow Design have a modern shape, a built-in straw, and white backgrounds picturing fruit splashing into pastel shades of water. The modern design has the objective to appeal to children and the hourglass-shape helps them to grip the package. The back of the pouches have a saying or quote at the top, such as “Don’t worry if your tasks are small and rewards are few, remember that the mighty oak was once a nut like you!”

The ‘green credentials’ of this pouch look impressive: The empty pouch weighs 5,63 gr, which is only 2,7% of the gross weight, in other words 97,3% is pure fruit juice. A good ratio, if there wasn’t a small problem.
With the Honest Kids stand-up pouches Honest Tea faced ‘green’ problems since the aluminium used by its contract packer on the bottom of the juice pouch made the pouch not-recyclable. Instead of replacing it by a recyclable material, Honest Tea honed in on re-use, paying schools 2 dollar cents for every juice pouch sent back to the company.
One of Honest Tea’s partners stitches the returned pouches together to make school-supply pouches.

Is this thought to be the new circle in a ‘green’ economy? Not really, as there still is one ‘little’ problem after the life as school-supply pouches, they still can’t be recycled and will end up at landfill.
Is the Honest Kids pouch not quite honest? Does it look like ‘green-washing’?

Oscar Mayer Mini Hot Dogs
Oscar Mayer Mini Hot Dogs, in a compact, stand-up pouch, embodies the essential characteristics of a packaging for a grab-and-go snack. The 10-oz (283 gr) pouch contains approximately 20 precooked Oscar Mayer Mini Hot Dogs, which are smaller than their full-size counterparts, but a bit larger than cocktail wieners.

The bottom-gusset pouch stands approximately 7” (19 cm) tall and 7” (19 cm) wide, providing a bright and visible billboard for the product in the refrigerated section. The pouch’s bottom gusset is made of clear film allowing the consumer a view at the miniature hot dogs inside. The front and back panel of the pouch appear to be a foil lamination. Consequently the hot dogs can’t be heated in the microwave when still sitting in the pouch.

The resealability of the pouch is enabled with a Zip-Pak Slider zipper, which employs a “clip” that slides back and forth, allowing the consumer to open and close the pouch. Before it is opened the first time, the FreshSlide zipper, as it is baptized by Oscar Mayer, is covered with a hood of film to be removed by gripping the side of the bag and tearing across the top. Once opened, the pouch provides the mini hot dogs with a seven-day refrigerated shelf life.

This short overview gave the most interesting stand-up pouches based on the standard DoyPack construction in recent time. I will close this cycle of posts about stand-up pouches with an article devoted to special designs. A special development in the stand-up pouches is the section where the in a stand-up pouch packaged food product is sterilized or pasteurised via an autoclave or retort process. The characteristics of retort sterilization require special materials. The retort pouch gained popularity in part from developments of ready-to-eat meals for the armed forces. In fact these packages for the military, officially known as tri-laminate retort pouches, aka “flexible cans”, got essentially the retort-pouches started.

Another item I shall describe in my next post are the designs that found their base in the original DoyPack but underwent such modifications that you barely can call them stand-up pouches anymore. The first will be the PushPop of Amcor and the second,  one of the most amazing evolutions in the stand-up pouch, the S-Pouch, a double gusset stand-up pouch, which not only offers benefits in comparison to the standard stand-up pouch but also offers amazing options for fitments.