Is Glass The Way To Go?
While discussing our project, the question, "Is glass really the most sustainable?" was posed. Currently in packaging wet products the main options are glass, aluminium cans and plastics.
The main point of our service is that the containers are reusable first and foremost and can eventually be recycled if need be. Eliminating the need to recycle the containers eliminates a chunk of energy consumption, but there's the potential that the weight of the glass will make the energy costs of transportation higher than the recycling of aluminium. Plastic is not ideal because it has to be transported overseas to be recycled and is a difficult material to recycle without degradation.
Some research has found that reusable glass bottles are in fact more sustainable than aluminium cans. There's also the ease of use of glass containers to consider. Aluminium cans can have sharp edges and food should not be stored in them after opening as it can taint the food. This means that food must be put into another container for storage after opening.
What impacts the environmental footprint?
Source, transport, energy in making, energy in recycling.
Aluminium is made from bauxite, the mining of which has substantial negative environmental impacts. Glass on the other hand is made from silica which is less environmentally taxing to obtain. This means the production of a vessel made of 100% virgin materials requires 2.07 kilowatt hours of electricity for a 350ml aluminium can vs. 1.09 kilowatt hours for a glass bottle of a similar size.
However the average aluminium can is made of 40% recycled material, which boasts an energy saving of 96%, with most of the energy consumption in the mining of materials. On the other hand the average glass bottle is comprised of about 25% recycled glass which has a much lower energy saving of 26.5% when recycled. With this in mind the production of the average aluminium can and glass bottle is 1.28 and 1.02 kilowatt hours of electricity, respectively. Once again the glass bottle comes out on top, however by a much slimmer margin.
Knowing this, we could push for businesses to use 100% recycled aluminium cans that would boast an energy consumption of just 0.0828 kilowatt hours of electricity per unit. This in itself would have a vast positive impact. A 100% recycled glass vessel would have an energy rate of 0.28885 kilowatt hours of electricity which, while still good, cannot complete with aluminium.
This is especially so when you consider the extra weight of glass and the costs of transportation. A trip across the USA results in the glass emitting 20% more greenhouses gasses than the can.
It's clear from this that aluminium is the premium option for single use packaging, however a container that is reused has a lesser environmental impact than single use packaging despite the transportation costs.
"if we assume that a refillable bottle were used 20 times, and that the glass bottles used over that period were recycled at a rate of 42 percent, then the refillable would win over disposable options as long as the distance between the brewery and the local distribution center was less than 2,608 miles."
There is a glass recycling facility in Auckland (O-I New Zealand), the pet food company we would propose partnering with (Ziwi) is based in Tauranga which is only 525 km from Wellington. This makes reusable glass containers the best option in terms of sustainability, unless we can find a lighter alternative or eliminate packaging entirely.
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/the_green_lantern/2008/03/wear_green_drink_greenly.html
http://www.philly.com/philly/columnists/sandy_bauers/20120723_Which_is_greener__Glass_bottles__plastic_bottles__or_aluminum_cans_.html
https://recycleglass.co.nz/o-i-new-zealand/
The main point of our service is that the containers are reusable first and foremost and can eventually be recycled if need be. Eliminating the need to recycle the containers eliminates a chunk of energy consumption, but there's the potential that the weight of the glass will make the energy costs of transportation higher than the recycling of aluminium. Plastic is not ideal because it has to be transported overseas to be recycled and is a difficult material to recycle without degradation.
Some research has found that reusable glass bottles are in fact more sustainable than aluminium cans. There's also the ease of use of glass containers to consider. Aluminium cans can have sharp edges and food should not be stored in them after opening as it can taint the food. This means that food must be put into another container for storage after opening.
What impacts the environmental footprint?
Source, transport, energy in making, energy in recycling.
Aluminium is made from bauxite, the mining of which has substantial negative environmental impacts. Glass on the other hand is made from silica which is less environmentally taxing to obtain. This means the production of a vessel made of 100% virgin materials requires 2.07 kilowatt hours of electricity for a 350ml aluminium can vs. 1.09 kilowatt hours for a glass bottle of a similar size.
However the average aluminium can is made of 40% recycled material, which boasts an energy saving of 96%, with most of the energy consumption in the mining of materials. On the other hand the average glass bottle is comprised of about 25% recycled glass which has a much lower energy saving of 26.5% when recycled. With this in mind the production of the average aluminium can and glass bottle is 1.28 and 1.02 kilowatt hours of electricity, respectively. Once again the glass bottle comes out on top, however by a much slimmer margin.
Knowing this, we could push for businesses to use 100% recycled aluminium cans that would boast an energy consumption of just 0.0828 kilowatt hours of electricity per unit. This in itself would have a vast positive impact. A 100% recycled glass vessel would have an energy rate of 0.28885 kilowatt hours of electricity which, while still good, cannot complete with aluminium.
This is especially so when you consider the extra weight of glass and the costs of transportation. A trip across the USA results in the glass emitting 20% more greenhouses gasses than the can.
It's clear from this that aluminium is the premium option for single use packaging, however a container that is reused has a lesser environmental impact than single use packaging despite the transportation costs.
"if we assume that a refillable bottle were used 20 times, and that the glass bottles used over that period were recycled at a rate of 42 percent, then the refillable would win over disposable options as long as the distance between the brewery and the local distribution center was less than 2,608 miles."
There is a glass recycling facility in Auckland (O-I New Zealand), the pet food company we would propose partnering with (Ziwi) is based in Tauranga which is only 525 km from Wellington. This makes reusable glass containers the best option in terms of sustainability, unless we can find a lighter alternative or eliminate packaging entirely.
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/the_green_lantern/2008/03/wear_green_drink_greenly.html
http://www.philly.com/philly/columnists/sandy_bauers/20120723_Which_is_greener__Glass_bottles__plastic_bottles__or_aluminum_cans_.html
https://recycleglass.co.nz/o-i-new-zealand/