Categories
Sustainable Packaging Coalition

Sustainable Packaging Coalition to Host SPC Engage: London On 23-24, October

New sustainable packaging-focused event will help brands and retailers achieve their sustainable packaging goals


The Sustainable Packaging Coalition, a membership organisation of over 320 brands, retailers, packaging manufacturers, suppliers and others, will bring together participants from across Europe for SPC Engage: London, an event focused on helping brands achieve their sustainable packaging goals.
SPC Engage: London’s theme is Activating Packaging Sustainability Through Goals Implementation.  This event will help brands, retailers, and their supply chain partners  understand how to align their goals with larger global sustainability frameworks and commitments like the Sustainable Development Goals, The EU Circular Economy Package, and The New Plastics Economy.

 Images from SPC Engage: Minneapolis 2019, a precursor to SPC Engage: London



The salon-style event will include interactive presentations and panels that provide a balanced overview on key topics and tradeoffs in sustainability goals. There will also be workshops that will help brands, their suppliers, and others in the sustainable packaging community to develop actionable strategies to implement their goals  while providing them with a platform to learn, share ideas, and collaborate with industry peers.
“SPC Engage London will take a deep dive on all the different elements at play when it comes to executing sustainable packaging goals, from the role that legislation, policy and voluntary commitments play, how retailers and labeling schemes can influence consumers and supply chain partners to the key decisions companies need to make to fulfill their sourcing and recovery goals,” said Barbara Fowler, Director of Stakeholder Engagement, GreenBlue. “The SPC is looking forward to bringing new perspectives to these very relevant topics at a global level.”

Sessions include:

See full programme

Making Sense of the The Evolving UK and EU Legislation Around Recyclable and Compostable Packaging, EPR and Single-Use Plastics

  • Speakers from Mars Inc, EUROPEN, DEFRA, INCPEN, Welsh Government

Voluntary Commitments and The Role of Packaging Innovation: What Does Progressive Look Like in the UK and Europe?

  • Speakers from  WRAP, SYSTEMIQ, Coca-Cola European Partners – Great Britain, Veolia UK & Ireland, Plastics Europe, and Carlsberg UK

Pioneering Responsible Sourcing in Packaging Materials

  • Speakers from Nestlé UK & Ireland, RB, NatureWorks, Asia Pulp & Paper

Designing Packaging Holistically to Fulfill Recovery Goals

  • Speakers from Procter & Gamble, Coca-Cola Great Britain, Method Ecover, Mondelēz UK

The Driving Force of Retailers and Their Role in Implementing Goals, Commitments, and Leading Sustainable Innovation, A Panel Conversation

  • Speakers from H&M Group, DECATHLON, Co-Op, Rapid Action Packaging, Anthesis

The Role of Labeling Schemes in Goals Execution: What Have We Learned About Behaviour Change?
 Speakers from OPRL, How2Recycle, Packaging Recovery Organisation Europe, Fashion Institute of Technology
The event will be held at The Design Museum in London, which will serve as the perfect backdrop to this creative-focused event.

The event is open to SPC members & non-members. For more information about this event visit www.spcengage.com/london.
This event is sponsored by Avery Dennison, Asean Stalk Market, Klöckner Pentaplast, KotkaMills , UPM Raflatac, and NatureWorks.
About the Sustainable Packaging Coalition®
The Sustainable Packaging Coalition® is a membership-based collaborative led by an independent non-profit that believes in the power of industry to make packaging more sustainable. Using an objective life-cycle-based approach, we work in a constructive atmosphere to provide thought leadership and bring our members together to strengthen and advance the business case for more sustainable packaging. Over 320 brands, retailers, manufacturers, suppliers, academic and government organizations make up the SPC. To learn more visit www.sustainablepackaging.org.

Categories
Eliminate Toxicity

HCPA’s Consumer Product Ingredients Dictionary and CleanGredients Partner to Increase Offerings to Product Formulators


CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA, July 11, 2019 – The Household and Commercial Products Association (HCPA) and CleanGredients, the database of market-ready chemical ingredients pre-approved to meet U.S. EPA’s Safer Choice standard, have announced a partnership to increase information about safer ingredients in HCPA’s Consumer Product Ingredients Dictionary.
The Consumer Product Ingredients Dictionary is used by formulators of household and automotive care products as a resource for ingredient nomenclature, regulatory status, and functions, among other features. Now, users will be able to find CleanGredients-listed trade name ingredients and mixtures that contain a particular chemical in the database, then click directly to access the relevant CleanGredients profiles for more information.
A listing in CleanGredients indicates that an ingredient has been pre-screened by independent, third-party reviewers and meets the U.S. EPA Safer Choice program’s criteria. Using CleanGredients-listed ingredients simplifies the Safer Choice certification process and ensures that the ingredients are safer options for both human health and the environment.
“We are excited to partner with HCPA, both to help product formulators more easily access information about safer ingredients, and to enable chemical suppliers who have invested in developing and screening safer ingredients to gain greater recognition for their efforts,” said Elizabeth Ritch, Project Manager at GreenBlue who leads the CleanGredients program.
“Together, CleanGredients and the HCPA Consumer Product Ingredients Dictionary are helping advance the use of safer ingredients,” said Dr. Steve Bennett, Senior Vice President of Scientific Affairs at HCPA. “The Dictionary is a unified source for ingredient names required by the state of California and accepted by Walmart, Target, and the EPA Safer Choice program. Making it easy to find CleanGredients-listed ingredients in the Dictionary helps companies cut through the clutter and standardize ingredients names both on the label and online.”

Ingredient suppliers that are existing HCPA Dictionary subscribers should visit https://www.productingredients.com to get their trade names listed in Product Ingredients Dictionary. Any trade names in the Consumer Product Ingredients Dictionary that are also listed in CleanGredients will be indicated as such in the Product Ingredients Dictionary ingredient profile.
ABOUT HCPA’S CONSUMER PRODUCT INGREDIENTS DICTIONARY
The Consumer Product Ingredients Dictionary is the only source for definitions of the chemicals used specifically in household and automotive care consumer products. Companies engaged in ingredient communication can use the database to assure maximum transparency for consumers who want to know what ingredients are in the products they buy and use. To learn more about the HCPA Consumer Product Ingredients Dictionary, please visit https://www.productingredients.com or email info@productingredients.com.
ABOUT CLEANGREDIENTS
CleanGredients is a database of chemical ingredients used primarily to formulate residential, institutional, industrial, and janitorial cleaning products that have been pre-approved to meet the U.S. EPA’s Safer Choice Standard. CleanGredients is an indispensable purchasing resource for formulators who are seeking suppliers of chemical ingredients that will help them to obtain the Safer Choice label. Using CleanGredients helps formulators reduce risk to their business, save money, and get their products to market faster. CleanGredients is a project of GreenBlue. To learn more about CleanGredients, please visit www.cleangredients.org or email info@cleangredients.org.

Categories
Sustainable Packaging Coalition

Sustainable Packaging Coalition Launches New Resource & Event Focused on Sustainable Packaging Goals

The SPC’s Goals Database & SPC Engage Are Focused on Helping Companies Evaluate, Set and Achieve a Wide Range of Sustainability Goals

CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA, FEBRUARY 5TH, 2019 — Today the Sustainable Packaging Coalition launched The Goals Database, a database of industry commitments aimed at improving packaging sustainability. The SPC member-exclusive resource will reflect the public commitments and goals that top brand owners and retailers from across industry sectors have created to improve sustainability in the following categories:
Packaging Sustainability Goal Categories:

  • Bio-based/renewable materials
  • Eliminate unfavorable materials
  • Improving recovery infrastructure
  • Increasing recycling
  • Material efficiency
  • Recyclability
  • Recycled content
  • Responsible fiber sourcing
  • Volumetric efficiency

Corporate Sustainability Goals:

  • Energy consumption
  • Greenhouse gas emissions
  • Manufacturing/operational waste
  • Renewable/alternative energy
  • Water consumption

“We’re seeing unprecedented ambition and breadth in industry goals around sustainable packaging, and the Goals Database allows us bring the sum of the parts into focus.”
Said Adam Gendell, Associate Director of the SPC. “Whether it’s this birds eye view of the industry’s commitments as a whole, an exploration around a specific type of goal, or a look at the commitments of a specific company, there is so much utility in The Goals Database and we’re excited for our members to dive in.”
Close to 100 Fortune 500 and SPC member companies are profiled in the database and hundreds of individual goals are available in this wide-ranging database. This is the first resource that specifically pulls companies’ sustainable packaging goals into one platform.

www.sustainablepackaging.org/goals

SPC Engage 2019


As many brands plan their strategy for the next decade and think about their own sustainable packaging goals, many companies have questions about how they can set goals that fit their company, and then how to create and action plan to achieve them. Fitting with this trend of goal setting, the SPC has also announced a new event, SPC Engage. This new salon-style event will be focused on helping companies set and achieve their sustainability goals, and will be open to SPC members & non-members.
We want to provide a new engagement platform where brands and their supply chain partners can come together to learn more and actively discuss how to execute their packaging sustainability goals,” said Barbara Fowler, Director of Stakeholder Engagement. “SPC Engage will be about how to accomplish those goals.”
Some key themes of this event include: thinking through sustainability goals, the pitfalls, and the right questions to ask; measuring impacts; identifying best-in-class goals and their nuances; and exploring successful strategies that other companies have implemented in their own organizations. The program will be a mix of sessions, panels, and round table discussions that will spark inspiration for new goals and chart the path for new ways of achieving existing goals.
This one-day event will host speakers from General Mills, NatureWorks, PepsiCo, Amcor, Starbucks and more to be announced.
Early bird pricing ends April 12th. This event is co-located with GreenBiz’s Circularity ‘19 in Minneapolis on Monday June 17th.

www.SPCengage.com

Categories
Uncategorized

Green Cleaning for Healthy Classrooms

As kids head back to school, we all hope that they will be entering a safe and healthy learning environment.  But some products used to clean and maintain school facilities may have negative effects on kids’ health. Fortunately, it’s possible to choose safer options, not only for general cleaning products, but also for antimicrobial products and other products used to maintain school facilities.
Considering that kids spend hours a day in the classroom, the chemicals in products used for school cleaning and maintenance can have a significant effect on their health.  For example, poor indoor air quality, which can be worsened by VOCs in some products, can actually reduce cognitive ability – potentially making it harder for kids to learn.  Also, asthma, which is associated with exposure to some cleaning chemicals, is a leading cause of school absenteeism.  
Using safer products in schools is especially important because kids can actually be more sensitive to the effects of chemicals than adults.  Why? Kids have a greater intake of food, air, and water per body weight than adults do, so their exposure to environmental chemicals (such as those present in indoor air) can be greater than that of adults in the same environment. Plus, kids’ metabolic pathways are different from adults’, so they can’t always metabolize and eliminate toxic chemicals from their body as easily as adults can.  Finally, during key developmental periods, such as in the womb, early childhood, and adolescence, their systems may be more susceptible to the effects of chemicals.
Of course, adults are also vulnerable to chemical hazards, and janitorial staff who use cleaning products daily are susceptible to skin conditions and respiratory problems due in part to cleaning product exposure.

So how can schools make sure the cleaning and maintenance products they’re using are safer for students and staff?  Many school districts have policies that mandate the use of environmentally-preferable or safer cleaning products in school facilities, and more are working to add them.  Some states also require or encourage schools to use safer products. For example, a bill currently under consideration by the California legislature, the Clean and Healthy Schools Act, would standardize green cleaning requirements for most schools in the state.
If your local school district doesn’t already have a policy in place, send them this: https://www.epa.gov/schools-healthy-buildings/cleaning-effectively-healthy-school-environment#what

One key recommendation is to source products with reputable third-party certifications – for example, EPA’s Safer Choice. This is an easy way to identify cleaning products that use only ingredients that have been reviewed for safety and confirmed to be a safer option for people and the environment.  For example, products with the Safer Choice label can’t contain ingredients that are carcinogens, and overall, products must fall within a specified pH range to avoid hazards associated with very acidic or basic products.  In addition to reviewing all intentionally added ingredients, third party toxicologists also consider residuals and contaminants that could present a hazard. Plus, Safer Choice-certified products must meet performance standards, avoiding concerns that green cleaning products won’t work and will result in staff frustration.
Safer Choice-certified products aren’t limited to general cleaning applications.  Other important school maintenance products can also be certified, including athletic field paints, graffiti removers, deicers, and whiteboard cleaners.  Even for applications where an antimicrobial product is necessary, EPA can help identify safer alternatives.  Although EPA-registered antimicrobial products, which are regulated as pesticides, aren’t able to use the Safer Choice label, the Design for the Environment program works with product manufacturers to recognize antimicrobial products made with safer ingredients.  These products are made with certain active ingredients, such as citric acid, hydrogen peroxide, and ethanol, that are both effective at killing disease-causing microbes in appropriate formulations, and safer for both people and the environment.  Inert ingredients in the product must meet the Safer Choice standard. Visit the Design for the Environment website for a list of antimicrobial products that have been reviewed through the Design for the Environment antimicrobial project.
If you’re a parent, concerned community member, or school employee looking to implement green cleaning practices, the Healthy Schools Campaign has a guide to help advocates for children’s health work towards a green cleaning policy.  Some tips include getting buy-in from other stakeholders (like parents, teachers, administrators, facilities staff, school nurses, and contract service providers) and getting started with a pilot program to test ideas and gain acceptance.  Fortunately, given the number of effective (and cost-effective) safer cleaning options available today, there’s no reason kids and workers need to continue to be exposed to hazardous products.
 

Categories
Sustainable Packaging Coalition

Is This The Sipping Point?

Single use plastics have become the focal point for our frustration with plastic waste. Doug Woodring from the Ocean Recovery Alliance wrote in a recent article, “Switching to alternatives might not save the world but the use of single-use plastics sends a distinct message to customers that the brand and its management is not on top of an issue of growing global importance.” Straws are emblematic of our single-use addiction because they are rarely necessary and tossed in a matter of minutes. Recent moves by Starbucks, McDonald’s and others to eliminate straws provides momentum to address the single use challenge. I believe we should embrace this momentum and leverage it to tackle the larger problem of developing system-based solutions for design and recovery of all packaging material types. It’s important that we not get distracted by single substrate solutions.All too often I hear packaging material manufacturers arguing that their specific material is the solution to our infrastructure problems. It’s not that simple.
All packaging materials have environmental impacts. Some have greater impacts at the beginning of life and others at the end of life. We often don’t think about the next life when we are developing packaging. Most materials have an environmental benefit from being recycled. The biggest issue for us to tackle today is creating a value for recycled materials. Materials end up in the ocean because they have no value.
We have two competing trends from different parts of the value chain that we must bring together. On one hand we have corporations increasing their commitments to make packaging from materials that can be recycled. On the other, we have a waste management infrastructure retreating to very basic commodities in response to China’s recent restrictions. A package cannot be considered recyclable if no one wants to use it to make new packaging or products. Many companies are setting challenging targets to make their packaging recyclable or compostable,   are committing to use recycled content, and/or helping with collection. This is a great start but they can’t do it alone. They need support from the rest of the value chain including municipalities who are involved in material recovery and consumers. The recent moves by China to restrict the materials it accepts for recycling has exposed weakness in our recycling system. We have become dependent on China to process our materials and let our own infrastructure decline. Municipalities are struggling to find buyers for their recovered recyclables. Our system is out of balance. We have to recognize that it will take investment to build better infrastructure for recovery here in the U.S.. In the past we have relied on the contribution from the collected materials to help fund the system. It is not enough. We have to tackle the issue of how we will pay to recover materials so that they can be reused and recycled.
There is no one size fits all. Packaging has been evolving rapidly in the last decade and our recycling systems have felt the impact of this change. The good old days of a very simplistic material mix are gone. We have not kept pace with the packaging changes and municipalities are struggling to figure out how to finance collection and recovery of packaging.
It’s time that we start to work together and recognize we need a new approach. Brands, manufacturers, recyclers, localities and NGOs need to put more effort into creating more robust American recycling facilities that are designed for today’s packaging. Let’s not make this a single material issue. Let’s leverage the momentum of the backlash against single use plastics and work to create a system where many materials can be recovered and have value.

Categories
How2Recycle

Top 18 Things You Should NOT Recycle Curbside

Originally posted on the How2Recycle blog.
It may be tempting when you aren’t sure whether something is recyclable, to just put it in the recycling bin anyways, in a hope (or even an assumption) that “they’ll find a way to recycle it.” This is called “wishcycling.”  In order to keep our recycling system healthy, it’s just as important to leave stuff out of the recycling as it is important to but the good recyclable stuff in the recycling.
Whenever you try to recycle items that you shouldn’t, it harms recycling. Sometimes those items can put recycling facility workers at risk or danger; sometimes those items cause the recycler to lose money if they tried to sort or process them (for a variety of reasons), so the recycler has to then pay to landfill the material anyway; and sometimes those items really slow down the recycling facility operations so that fewer overall materials can be processed by the facility each day, which hurts the health of the recycling business.
You should think of recycling more as a system designed to process a select suite of valuable materials to turn into something new again — not so much a Santa’s workshop where elves can magically transform everything that passes through its doors into objects of glory. The recycling system was built especially to sort and process these select materials, but not everything else. All the materials that end up as waste from our households that aren’t recyclable are either not valuable enough to create a recycling stream for, or not recyclable at a big enough scale yet.
But, you can do your part to help keep the recycling system strong, by keeping it clean and free of contaminants. Think of yourself, as a responsible recycler, as being the white blood cells of recycling… you attack the invaders and keep them out.
Here are the top things that recyclers do NOT want to see come into their facility:

1. Plastic bags and wraps

Plastic bags and some plastic wraps are recyclable — just not in your curbside bin! There are a small handful of communities in the US that can recycle bags and plastic wraps through curbside recycling. But the vast, vast majority of people need to recycle these items through Store Drop Off. Meaning, recycle those items at your local grocery store along with plastic shopping bags.
When you place these items in the curbside bin, they get wrapped on the equipment at the recycling facility, and workers have to stop the machines to climb on them to cut out the bags. And then they get landfilled. Not fun! Please look for the Store Drop Off label, take your bags and wraps with that label to the store. Click here to learn more.

2. Bagged recyclables

We could also count on one hand how many communities ask you to put your recyclables in plastic bags before setting out for recycling. One of them happens to be my hometown of Franklin, Tennessee, and another is New York City. But again — the vast, vast majority of communities cannot recycle stuff that you put inside a plastic bag. They’ll landfill it. You’re basically wasting your recycling effort by doing this. It’s OK though if you put your recyclables in an open paper bag. The recyclables will tumble out of the bag by the time they get to the recycling facility in order to be sorted correctly, and in most communities, the paper bag will also get recycled.

3. Anything that can ‘tangle’ around stuff

If it’s durable and stringy and you can get it in a knot, then don’t recycle it. These in the recycling industry are called “tanglers” and are looked upon with a special sort of disdain. Examples include electric cords, headphones, garden hoses, chains, wires, Christmas lights. Please do not put these in your recycling bin. They snag the equipment so the workers have to shut down operations and go cut them out of the machines.
Fortunately, Best Buy and Staples have recycling programs that accept electronics cables and connectors.

4. Hazardous materials

You should not recycle packaging that contains dangerous products — or in other words, products that are ignitable, corrosive, or toxic. Examples include oil paint, motor oil, fuel, poisons, or medical waste.
If these items are empty, and all you have left is the packaging, then throw the packaging in the trash. If you still have some leftover product inside the packaging, for example if it’s half empty , then check to see if your community has a way for you to recycle household hazardous waste (google the name of your town + “Household hazardous waste recycling”). It is important to take extra care when disposing of these hazardous items, and to do so in the proper way in your community. If not handled correctly they can harm water quality, wildlife, and human health.

5. Batteries, including lithium ion

Batteries are not curbside recyclable; if you try to recycle them this way, they will get landfilled, but also potentially put others in danger. The corrosive nature of their ingredients makes batteries a hazardous item for recycling facilities. Rechargeable, or lithium ion batteries are of particular concern, causing very dangerous fires in some instances — keep them out of your recycling bin, and your trash bin where they also present fire risks. You have to find a special drop off location in order to recycle batteries. Check out Call2Recycle to find a place near you that can help you recycle your batteries. Or, dispose of the batteries at a local household hazardous waste collection point.

6. Diapers

More people put their dirty baby diapers in the recycling than you’d believe. This is a terrible, terrible idea and wreaks havoc at recycling facilities. If you worked at a recycling facility, would you want those coming into your building, smooshing up against your precious cardboard boxes? Put those diapers in the trash! Clean baby diapers are not recyclable either — they’re made of multiple woven materials.

7. Electronics

If you have a TV, computer, phone, keyboard, smoke detector, hair dryers, vaccuum cleaners, anything electronic–never place that item in your curbside recycling. Instead, you should donate it if it still works (for example, you can donate old phones and electronics to the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence).
If you want to recycle it, click here to find a special drop off location for recycling with Consumer Technology Association’s Green Gadgets directory. Electronics are a separate recycling stream because they contain highly specialized materials and elements.

8. Food & food soiled recyclables

The best way to dispose of food waste is by composting it — either in your backyard, or through a community composting program that may be available to you. But you should never put food into the recycling bin. What I don’t mean by this is, never put any food residue in there — not all the packaging you recycle is going to be, or should be, perfectly clean all the time (because we need to save water, too). But please do not put any big food hunks, or gross, greasy, or otherwise dirty stuff into your recycling bin. The cleaner the recycling stream is, the less contamination there is for the recyclers to deal with. That means better health for the recycling stream. A good rule of thumb: ”no yuck!”
A little bit of food residue is sometimes fine — click here to read when you should be rinsing your recyclables. Quick rule of thumb: it should be relatively clean & dry, but no need to make everything spotless (you can read more in depth about it here). As for the pizza box debate: to recycle, or not to recycle? We are on Team Recycle It. “So long as there aren’t pizza slices still in there, or empty ranch cups,” says one of our paper recycling experts. “Paper recyclers are accustomed to smaller amounts of grease, but not food.”
What this means is that if you have a foam takeout container that’s filled with leftover Thai food — do not put the food in the recycling bin. Compost or discard the food waste and see if your community accepts clean foam for recycling (fewer than 20% of communities in US can recycle foam).

9. Propane cylinders

Nope. These cause big headaches for recyclers. See if you can return empty propane cylinders to where you purchased them. If not, check to see if your community has a household hazardous waste recycling program — propane tanks should be included in most of those programs. In some areas, there are twice a year events to drop off household hazardous waste for recycling.

10. Multi-layer bags, pouches and wrappers, like potato chip bags

It does come by surprise to many people that most packaging that’s flexible — meaning, you can ball it up — is not recyclable. There ARE some wraps and bags that you can recycle via Store Drop Off. But, the vast majority of pouches, crinkly bags, and other flexible packaging like candy or granola bar wrappers, or baby food pouches, should go into the trash because they are made of many layers of different materials. Look for our Not Yet Recycled label to tell you when you should place these items in the trash instead of trying to recycle them. If you put them in your curbside bin, they will be landfilled.

Some companies like TerraCycle have special takeback programs for non-recyclable packaging.

11. Bulky plastic items like plastic furniture, laundry baskets, and plastic playground sets (sometimes! Check Locally!)

Some communities recycle these, and some do not. Most bulky plastics are a high volume and high value recyclable plastic, but communities do differ on how they accept it for recycling. According to the Association of Plastic Recyclers, “New York City accepts bulky rigid plastics in their curbside collection program, smaller communities like Northampton, Mass. have special collection days, while others choose to have a drop off program.” You should always check with your municipality or recycling coordinator first before placing these items in your curbside bin. If a recycling facility is not set up to accept these items, it can cause problems.

12. Textiles & clothing

Clothes just aren’t recyclable through curbside recycling, but there are  special take back programs like H&M’s. Or, if the clothes are still in good shape, you should donate them. Keep textiles out of your recycling bin.

13. Hangers

Hangers get tangled up on equipment at recycling facilities. Some of them may technically be made of a recyclable plastic or metal, but their shape makes it likely that they’ll cause problems — they will not get recycled. Leave these out of your recycling.

14. Ceramics

Any pottery, dishes or other household items made of ceramics aren’t recyclable. Either donate usable items to a place like Goodwill, or otherwise put them in the trash.

15. Wood

Sometimes you will encounter wood in things like ice pop sticks, or much bigger pieces for protective packaging for furniture or appliances. Wood is not recyclable. However, you could check to see if you have a composting program in your community. If you do, they may or may not accept wood items, depending on size and type of wood.

16. Light bulbs

Similar to batteries and electronics, light bulbs have special recycling streams. You need to take them to a special drop off location that accepts them. This article explains the different ways to find where to recycle light bulbs near you, depending on light bulb type. There are also stores like Batteries Plus Bulbs that collect certain light bulbs for recycling.

17. Window panes & drinking glasses

Not all types of glass are recyclable. The glass that windows are made of is actually a different type of glass than the kind used in making packaging — it’s meant to be a lot more durable. Similarly, the types of glass that made our glassware to drink out of at home (or things like vases) are different than glass packaging (but mason jars are OK to recycle). The reason is they need to withstand different temperatures, and thus have a different melting point than glass packaging. There is not a system set up at glass recyclers to handle these, so put these in the trash.

18. Bowling balls

According to our many contacts in the recycling community, in every city, nearly every week or month, someone’s trying to recycle a bowling ball. It’s kind of funny… except it’s not funny to recyclers! Keep these things out of the recycling bin and we’ll all be happy. Maybe your local bowling alley would accept your old ball as a donation…
When in doubt, leave it out!
Always look for the How2Recycle label to tell you exactly what to do with packaging. The How2Recycle program issues over 70 new How2Recycle labels to our members each day, and is currently on tens of thousands of products. So keep an eye out for more labels to appear on your favorite products so you can know exactly how to help recycling.

Categories
Eliminate Toxicity

Four Reasons Your Company’s Products Should Be Safer Choice-Certified

You’ve probably heard of EPA’s Safer Choice program, which recognizes household and institutional cleaning and other products that are safer for human health and the environment.  If you’re on the fence about pursuing Safer Choice certification for your company’s products, here are four of the reasons why some other companies have found participation in the program to be worthwhile:

1. Retailers love it.  


More and more, major retailers are taking action to ensure that the products on their shelves don’t contain ingredients that are harmful to their customers.  Walmart, the largest retailer in the world, specifically urges its national and private brand suppliers to certify products using Safer Choice or comparable certification programs, and will start tracking the number of products and suppliers using credible certification programs next year. They’re not the only one taking chemical safety seriously – for example, Target rolled out a new chemical strategy last year, and recognizes products certified under the Safer Choice program in its Sustainable Product Index criteria. If you’re selling products to consumers, you know how important it is to maintain a good relationship with the retailers that carry your products. A Safer Choice certification will help retailers understand that you are aligned with their chemical safety goals and take them seriously.

2. It lets you brag about your product.  

You know your product is made with ingredients that are safer for people and better for the environment, but can you safely make these claims in your advertising? In the past, companies making environmental and safety claims have run afoul of the FTC’s Green Guides when they haven’t been able to back them up.  Some companies have even been sued for claiming their products are safer than the competition. So now that you’ve put all that work into formulating a greener, safer product, how can you make sure the world knows?  Because the Safer Choice program is based on specific, transparent criteria, it helps you get out the message that your product is safer for people and the environment, without landing you in legal hot water.

3. Nothing slips through the cracks.

You care a lot about the safety of the ingredients in your products, and you know your customers do too.  You do your best to work with suppliers to make sure that raw materials meet your company’s standards before they are used in your products.  But what if your supplier says the chemicals in their product are confidential, or they don’t think to let you know about a preservative they’ve added? In the Safer Choice review process, suppliers disclose all components of their ingredients, including confidential information, residuals, and additives, to an independent third party under a non-disclosure agreement. So, you can rest assured that even the chemicals you aren’t aware of in your product are still among the safest for your customers and the environment. (As a side note, suppliers who list their products in  CleanGredients have already done the work for you,  so you can avoid surprises when you’re having your product reviewed.)

4. It’s credible.

There are a lot of products out there, making a lot of environmental claims.  Some of the claims are legitimate, others less so. Safer Choice is a program run by the federal government, with a robust, transparent set of criteria.  A Safer Choice certification cuts through confusion and greenwashing, and lets customers know that your product has undergone a rigorous review against a broad set of toxicological endpoints, as well as performance criteria.  This is more than can be said for “green” products that haven’t been certified.  As consumers are increasingly looking for safer and more environmentally-friendly products, the Safer Choice label lets them know that your product is the real deal.

Categories
Uncategorized

Should Safer Choice Play a Role in TSCA Implementation?

It’s been almost two years since the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act was signed into law reforming the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). EPA is working to implement the law’s new requirements, including the requirement to assess the safety of existing chemicals — a daunting task, given the tens of thousands of chemicals used in commerce.  While the implementation process has been fraught with controversy, the hazard evaluations that have been ongoing for years under the Safer Choice program may have a role to play in identifying safer chemicals that may not need a comprehensive risk assessment.

The Need for Prioritization

The first step in assessing risks associated with existing chemicals is to determine which chemicals will be first to be assessed, so that EPA can focus its resources on assessing and mitigating the most significant risks.  By December 22, 2019, EPA is required to designate at least 20 chemicals as high priority substances and another 20 as low priority substances.  A high priority substance is defined as “a chemical substance that the Administrator concludes, without consideration of costs or other non-risk factors, may present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment because of a potential hazard and a potential route of exposure under the conditions of use, including an unreasonable risk to potentially exposed subpopulations identified as relevant by the Administrator.”  A low priority substance is one that the Administrator concludes, based on sufficient information, does not meet the criteria for a high priority substance. Those chemicals designated as high priority will be required to undergo additional risk evaluation, and if necessary, restrictions will be imposed to eliminate any unreasonable risk. Those designated as low priority will not need to undergo a risk evaluation. As risk assessments of the high priority substances are completed, additional high priority substances must be designated (so there will always be 20 risk assessments ongoing); however, there is no statutory requirement for designation of additional low priority substances.
The first 40 chemicals for prioritization must be selected by March 2019 in order to complete the prioritization process by December 2019.  So, how will EPA choose which chemicals will undergo the prioritization process? EPA held a public meetingin December 2017 to discuss possible approaches to identify candidates for prioritization.  For low priority substances, one possible approach discussed was to consider chemicals published on the Safer Chemical Ingredients List (SCIL) as candidates.

Existing Data and Data Needs

SCIL was originally developed to identify chemicals suitable for use in Safer Choice-certified products, not to support TSCA implementation.  However, because SCIL-listed chemicals have been determined to be among the safest in their functional classes, many would potentially meet the criteria to be designated as low priority substances.  In particular, chemicals designated on SCIL with a full green circle have robust data sets based on experimental or modeled data and have been determined to be low hazard, suggesting at first glance that they would be unlikely to “present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment”.
To meet the statutory requirements under TSCA, a hazard evaluation demonstrating a low hazard is not enough to determine whether a chemical meets the low priority chemical criteria.  Factors indicating the extent of likely exposure to the chemical, including storage near significant sources of drinking water, the conditions of use, consideration of potentially exposed susceptible subpopulations, and production volume must also be considered.  So, even in cases where a chemical listed on SCIL has very robust hazard data demonstrating minimal hazard, additional information would need to be collected to support the prioritization process.
There is a certain risk associated with initiating the prioritization process for a chemical: there is no “off-ramp” (meaning the chemical cannot be taken out of the prioritization process without being designated as either low-priority or high-priority), and there is a statutory deadline to complete the process once it begins.  If the available data does not support designation as a low priority substance, the chemical will be designated as a high priority substance and undergo a full risk assessment. It remains to be seen whether the market will place value on the certainty of having a low priority designation for a chemical, creating an incentive for manufacturers to work with EPA to have additional chemicals designated as low priority beyond the statutory requirements, despite the risk and the effort required to collect the necessary data.  During the 2018 Safer Choice Partner and Stakeholder Summit held last month, EPA reassured industry stakeholders that there is support during the data gathering process prior to formally submitting a chemical as a candidate low priority substance in order to mitigate the risk of an unanticipated outcome. Collection of this data may be a task that third party toxicologists – including third party profilers currently performing reviews for Safer Choice certification and listing ingredients in SCIL and CleanGredients – are equipped to assist with.
It is possible that some SCIL chemicals may not be good candidates for low-priority substance designation, in part due to insufficient data.  For example, some SCIL-listed chemicals do not have reported production volume. Some (designated with a yellow triangle) may have some hazard concerns, even if they are considered safer alternatives within their functional class, and others (designated with a half green circle) may have less robust toxicological data available.  It would seem that the chemicals designated with a full green circle (indicating a more robust data set and low hazard profile) that have well-understood characteristics and production volumes would be the best candidates for low priority designation.

The “Conditions of Use” Controversy

The framework rules promulgated for prioritization and risk assessment of existing chemicals under the amended TSCA have been not without controversy.  One concern expressed by NGOs has been that EPA is excessively narrowing the “conditions of use” considered during prioritization and risk assessment, to the point that risks associated with chemicals may be underestimated.  EPA has interpretedthe statutory requirements to mean that all conditions of use must be considered during the prioritization process; however, not every activity involving a chemical would necessarily be considered a condition of use.  Specific activities considered as conditions of use would be identified and presented for public comment early in the prioritization process for each chemical undergoing prioritization. The conditions of use considered during the prioritization process may potentially be different from those considered during the risk evaluation process – e.g., the risk evaluation process may exclude certain conditions of use that are deemed to be low risk.
Even though all conditions of use must be considered during the prioritization process, framework rules promulgated by EPA last year determined that some circumstances in which a person might be exposed to a chemical would NOT be considered conditions of use.  These circumstances include:

  • Intentional misuse, such as inhalant abuse;
  • Legacy uses with no ongoing manufacturing, processing, or distribution and associated disposal (e.g., disposal of materials in legacy use), such as use of asbestos insulation in older buildings and disposal of these materials when removed from a building; and
  • Legacy disposal – i.e., exposure to chemicals disposed of in the past, such as through contaminated groundwater.

The decisions not to include these situations as conditions of use and to potentially limit which conditions of use are included in risk assessments have been controversial, in large part because risk is determined in part by total exposure to a chemical, including exposure via legacy uses and disposal.  Therefore, failure to consider legacy uses may result in an underestimation of the overall potential risk associated with a chemical, both during the prioritization process and during the risk assessment phase.

Low Hazard = Low Risk

Controversy aside, the risk associated with a chemical substance is based on multiple factors, including the inherent hazard of that substance, as well as the dose-response relationship and the degree of exposure to the substance.  Regardless of whether exposure is underestimated, a low-hazard chemical will be associated with low risk. Even in the context of political questions about which potential exposures are taken into account, the low hazard chemicals listed on SCIL seem to be a good starting point for identifying low priority chemicals, which are unlikely to present an unreasonable risk to either human health or the environment.  While unknowns remain about stakeholder support for low priority designations beyond statutory requirements, and additional data will need to be collected to ensure that low priority prospects from SCIL do in fact meet the criteria for designation as low priority substances, there seems to be general support among Safer Choice stakeholders for the concept of using SCIL as a pre-screening tool to identify good low priority chemical candidates.

Categories
Sustainable Packaging Coalition

Solutions-oriented Collaboration sets the Sustainable Packaging Coalition Apart

At the Sustainable Packaging Coalition’s annual open conference, SPC Impact, the variety of attendees is striking, both in terms of industry and function. SPC is a collaborative organization that attracts organizations throughout the value chain – retailers, brand owners, packaging converters, material manufacturers, waste recovery organizations, consultants, and government agencies.

What separates SPC from other industry associations is collaboration to find solutions across the value chain

Derrick Lawrence, Director of Packaging Solutions for Seventh Generation, sits on the End Market Industry Leadership Committee. He says that SPC has been a wonderful resource for finding suppliers, discovering like-minded companies for partnerships, and sharing best practices about what’s going on in the packaging industry around sustainable packaging. It’s also a great forum to share technological advances that may be tricky to communicate with customers, but resonate with others in the industry. SPC has a great cross-section of the entire value chain of packaging — resin manufacturers, converters, brand owners, distribution companies, reclaimers — you don’t find that collection of people all in one place and at same time very often.
Assembling that group of people has sparked great partnerships for Seventh Generation. The company won the 2016 SPC Innovator Award (Formerly known as the “Trashies”) award for partnering with Accredo and Dow to develop a widely recyclable package for dishwasher detergent pods. Derrick said that those partnerships formed because of conversations started at SPC events. He also cited a great partnership with Braskem to enable their use of Green PE in combination post-consumer resin (PCR) HDPE.
This year’s winner of the SPC Innovator Award in the Outcome of a Partnership award also demonstrated the power of collaboration. PepsiCo, Natureworks, Danimer Scientific, Omya, Berry Plastics, and Johnson-Bryce commercialized a new bio-based compound for flexible packaging. PepsiCo worked with key resin manufacturer, NatureWorks, and leading bio-polymer compounder, Danimer Scientific, to produce the new bio-based compounds. Calcium carbonate additives, supplied by Omya, were modified to create the right interaction with the bio-polymers and to make the materials more cost effective. Berry Global adapted its film extrusion lines to handle the compounded resin and produce high-quality films. And converter Johnson Bryce optimized its process to print and laminate the new films. Brad Rodgers, R&D director of sustainable packaging and advanced materials research at PepsiCo, says “PepsiCo has the privilege of working with some great vendors within our supply chain and it is with their help that we were able to introduce the next generation of bio-based/compostable packaging.”
Dave McLain, Market Development Manager at Printpack, sits on the SPC Executive Committee, which is designed to have representatives from each supply chain segment. As a major converter of flexible and specialty rigid packaging for large CPGs, Printpack has seen a strong business value proposition in developing sustainable packaging, as consumers are increasingly asking for it. For Printpack, SPC has been a great one-stop forum for insights across the value chain. Dave sees his role a being the executive committee voice for members in his segment of the supply chain. As such, he works closely with the Multi-Material Flexible Packaging Recovery Industry Leadership Committee and the End Market Industry Leadership Committee. Printpack is a potential end market for PCR resin and works with both groups to figure how to get PCR right. Since consumers are accustomed to the performance, look and feel of packaging made with virgin materials, industry leaders are working together to solve the new challenges of using PCR materials.
Walt Peterson, Manager of Packaging Sustainability at Nestle USA, also sits on the SPC Executive Committee. Like Derrick and Dave, he says SPC is about bringing collaborative ideas to the industry. To him, sustainability is not optional, it’s something companies just have to do. Aligning everyone towards a common goal, like using the How2Recycle® label on packaging, allows the industry to move so much further than each acting alone. The label only works if it’s consistent across companies, and Walt describes SPC as a forum where he feels comfortable even talking to competitors about some of these issues. Nestle recently announced a new plastics strategy, with plastics recyclability and the How2Recycle® label at its core. Walt also sees SPC as a good source of information about what is going on in the industry, fresh ideas, and different points of view.
Weyerhaeuser is a newer member of SPC, having joined about a year ago. Ara Erickson, Sustainable Supply and Value Chain Sr. Manager, says that she started asking where the conversations were really happening around sustainable products and found that the SPC’s Forest Products Working Group (FPWG) is a place where the full supply chain is coming together to talk about how to use forest products in the most responsible way. Weyerhaeuser was the first land manager to join the group, completing the missing link of the supply chain – the original resource. She found that Weyerhaeuser could have a voice to participate, but also that it was an amazing way to understand what large brands, converters of paper products, and consumers on the other side were looking for. Since Weyerhaeuser sits at one end of the supply chain, even Weyerhaeuser’s customers are pretty far down. The FPWGallows a direct conversation with end users of the product in a forum that’s really trying to solve a problem. Ara has found that the conversations have enabled her to help people understand sustainable forest management and the carbon impacts and benefits of wood products, so that those further downstream in the value chain understand the upstream sustainability implications of their decisions. She says she has also learned an incredible amount from people downstream in the supply chain of what responsible forest management can do for them.
Reflecting on SPC as an organization, Ara says that SPC has a very inclusive approach about who participates and really brings people into the conversation, not just companies. SPC makes it clear that members are working together towards solutions and that all members need to bring some type of value and positive intention to the group – it’s not just a sales conference or group of sales teams. She also says that SPC does an excellent job of providing resources, tools, and information tailored to what members really want and need.

SPC Impact provides opportunities to learn and connect

For many attendees, SPC Impact is an opportunity to learn about industry developments and connect with potential partners. Sabrina Burkhardt, Director of Chemical Development at Sustainable Fiber Technologies, says that the conference was a good opportunity to keep up with new developments in sustainable packaging as well as meet with companies that they look forward to working with. Derek Atkinson, Senior Business Director Americas at Total Corbion, finds it valuable to connect with brand owners directly, since Total Corbion’s customers are typically intermediaries. It’s an opportunity to develop a deeper connection with the end customer that material manufacturers don’t always get.
SPC is also a forum for connecting with public sector players. Attendees heard from Teresa Bui of the California Department of Resources and Recycling (CalRecycle) about CalRecycle’s plans for packaging reform, and from Allen Langdon of Recycle BC about how Recycle BC has been successful in collecting materials across a large, sparsely populated area, increasing the potential quantity and quality of recovered materials. The Recycling Partnership, in concert with the Cascadia Consulting Group, also shared the results of their work to use better recycling metrics to improve recycling rates and develop cleaner materials streams in city recycling programs. The USDA Western Regional Research Center also opened its doors to attendees to show how USDA research supports private sector research into using agricultural byproducts in developing sustainable packaging materials. Alli Kingfisher, Materials Management and Sustainability Specialist from the Washington State’s Department of Ecology, says that she was attending the conference to find ways to better work with the private sector in the state’s Waste 2 Resources Program.  
Other attendees use the conference to learn about what’s going on in the industry. John Kraseski, Senior Product Development Specialist at Graphic Packaging International, works with moisture and oxygen barriers for dry food, and was particularly interested in panels on fluorinated chemicals in food packaging. Lili Huang, Product Development Manager at Sephora, saw the conference as an opportunity to learn more about advances in packaging to support her conversations with vendors about developing more sustainable packaging.
SPC has a spirit of collaboration and learning that is clear in all the conference sessions and conversations with attendees. The SPC Innovator award ceremony exemplifies that spirit. The community gathers to celebrate awards in categories such as Packaging Innovation, Breakthrough Process, Outcome of a Partnership, and Outstanding Person. Every award recipient acknowledged the collaboration with others that was integral to their success.
Elaine Hsu is a MBA Candidate 2019 at the Haas School of Business, University of California, Berkeley

Categories
Sustainable Packaging Coalition

When will an ocean debris solution float to the surface? Let's change the debate

Originally published in GreenBiz
 
Often, it’s hard to see the environmental damage we are doing. We can see some of the effects of too much carbon in the atmosphere but not the acidification of the ocean.
In many respects, plastics have become a poster child for environmental damage. Plastics are visible reminders of waste in the ocean. They float on the surface and wash up on beaches, sometimes a stark reminder of reality in the middle of a vacation.
I believe we can solve this problem and hope that visible progress can challenge us to identify and tackle some of the additional critical issues that we can’t see so clearly.
At the recent World Ocean’s Summit, hosted by The Economist, there were some unfortunate scuffles in which aluminum beverage cans and plastic were pitted against each other in terms of potential end-of-life benefit.
It’s easy to cherry-pick upstream or downstream benefits of specific materials. Both plastic and aluminum benefit from recycling. I believe we should strive to improve all materials to be as sustainable as each can be. Even if all beverages were in aluminum cans, we would still have plastic for a wide variety of other products. It’s really important to focus on how we can collect all materials, not just the ones with a high economic value.
In preparation for the summit, I asked myself these questions:

1. Will we ever achieve the Ellen MacArthur Foundation goal of one type of plastic?

In my opinion, there will never be one plastic to rule them all. Food packaging is a great example. In North America, food waste consumes 21 percent of all fresh water, 19 percent of all fertilizer, 18 percent of cropland and 21 percent of landfill space. About 85 percent of food waste occurs in homes and consumer-facing businesses, according to non-profit ReFED.
Packaging has been driven to protect food and increase shelf life, and that has resulted in a complex variety of engineered plastic multilayer films. These films are incredibly material-efficient at the start of life, consistent with the waste hierarchy that starts with source reduction. While these films have a low carbon footprint, they are not widely recovered or recoverable today.

Illustration of skeletons inside plastic bag

ele_nik
Most plastic waste appears to come from five developing nations in Asia.

We have established mechanical recycling for rigid polypropylene, polyethylene terephthalate and polyethylene. We have less capability for flexible materials. We need to recognize the value of investing in technologies for reprocessing and recovering more materials. We also need to look to some of these innovative technologies to meet the needs of developing countries and help them create value from waste. We may be able to optimize and narrow the types of materials we use and design packaging to be more recyclable, but we also will need to look at expanded recovery technologies to capture more plastic materials.

2. What is sustainable materials management and does it compete with circularity?

I strongly believe we need both. Sustainable materials management (SMM) is a great lens to use in combination with circularity to understand when we are increasing the environmental burden to attain circularity and when we can optimize to achieve both. If we do increase the environmental burden of packaging to gain greater circularity, we should only do it on purpose and not by accident. Unintended consequences should be mitigated by design.

 3. What does circularity mean for plastics today and where can it evolve in the future?

Recyclability is often used interchangeably with circularity, but it’s really a subset of circularity for plastics. I think we need to have a broad conversation about what circularity means for plastics. I propose that circularity may need to be defined differently for different types of materials (metals, paper, plastics).
It is difficult to have a small closed loop for many types of plastics. In some cases, there is a limit to the number of times a material can be mechanically recycled. For example, PET can be upgraded so long as it’s clean; its performance characteristics do not degrade as much as other resins. It’s really important to focus on how we can collect all materials, not just the ones with a high economic value.
Many define recyclability very narrowly. We need to think more broadly about recovery and include an expanded definition of new applications that can include chemical recycling. Chemical recycling offers a wide range of potential new products, from fuels to chemical intermediates and sometimes back to the original plastic monomer. I have heard much more talk about chemical recycling recently as a way to capture and reuse single use plastics.
We see many companies in the Sustainable Packaging Coalition making bold new goals for recyclability, but few are thinking about the idea that we need demand — stimulating end markets for recycled material either in terms of recycled content in packaging or use in other products for the system to work.

ocean plastic pollution

Rich Carey
Plastic pollution is an increasing problem in oceans around the world.

The demand for recycled aluminum always has been strong. Not true for plastics.
The virgin resin suppliers continue to announce new capacity without making a commitment to use recycled feedstocks. Brands are caught in the middle. They can use some mechanically recycled content, but to use more they need cleaner feedstock that might only come from chemical recycling. To have true recycling — so plastics are used at their highest value — we need to understand consumer access, sortation in a recycling facility, the ability for the material to actually be reprocessed by mechanical or chemical means, and if there is an end market.
The conversation is dominated by cost considerations that use traditional transactional economic models. The cost of natural capital is never considered.
At GreenBiz 2018, Joel Makower discussed TruCost’s findings that the world’s largest global companies had used twice as much natural capital in 2017 as their combined net income. The exposure previously had been falling. We need a new model that helps us see the true cost of not recovering materials.

4. What impact will China’s National Sword program have on circularity and plastic in the oceans?

In the wake of China’s initiative move to crack down on plastics imports, many U.S. states are advocating going backward and collecting less. The stream has changed so dramatically that many valuable historic materials no longer exist or do so at significantly reduced volumes.
I believe China’s National Sword initiative is a great driver to improve plastics recovery globally. It will be a shame and should be unacceptable if we just divert the material to other Asian countries that are even less equipped to manage the waste materials. We need to reprocess more of our materials where we generate them. We need to create drivers beyond economic value to create demand for reprocessed materials.
As long as there is too much plastic resin and no drivers for the resin producers to be part of the solution, the value of recycled plastics will remain low. As long as there is no demand, there will be no incentive to move toward circularity and waste will continue to be systemic issues.
In the United States, the situation is compounded by the lack of stable financing for collection. I often hear that the plastic waste in the ocean doesn’t come from Europe or America, but if we are shipping our low-value plastics, we are contributing significantly to the problem, not the solution.
America has a long tradition of innovation and creativity. Let’s rise to this challenge and create the change we want to see.