Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Frozen Food

Packaging Systems

Kevin Li, Adrienne Lewis, Lisa Keaton, Allison Weis, David Scoville,

Ted Espenschied

Overview

• The goal of this project was to quantify and compare the environmental impacts of two types of packaging used in the frozen entrée industry- Tray-and-Film and Traytite

• The client for this project was Kurt Naas of A-line Corporation

Life Cycle Assessment

• Tracing the environmental impacts of a product from “cradle to grave”

• Four steps of an LCA:

–Goal and scope definition (and redefinition)

– Inventory analysis

– Impact assessment

– Improvement analysis

Defining Impacts

• Raw Materials/Energy Use

– Water

– Wood

– Energy

• Global Warming

– CO2 and Methane

• Eutrophication

– NH3

• Acidification

– SOx and NOx

• Solid Waste

Identifying relevant processes

• Raw materials acquisition

• Materials manufacture

• Production

• Use/reuse/maintenance

• Waste management

Data Collection

• Sources of data and process information– Industry experts– Existing LCA reports– Machine manufacturers– EPA websites

• Limitations and assumptions– Data is unavailable or inaccessible– Process ambiguity– Shared or negligible processes

• “Cradle to Gate” assessment

Traytite®• Solid Bleached Sulfate (SBS) paperboard tray and lid• Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) coating

Tray-and-film• SBS outer carton• PET tray• PET film

PHASE 1Raw Materials Acquisition

Wood Harvest

Transport

Crude Oil Extraction

Transport

Tray –and-film CartonTray

Photo Sources: Dummit, 2008, http://sprinterusa.com/images/tray2.gif, http://www.baypack.com/cartoners/images/carton_side.gif, http://media.canada.com/cfe7ac49-e090-4323-a853-83766709cd57/shelloilsands_cw_073007.jpg, , http://www.germes-online.com/direct/dbimage/50282392/PET_Plain_Film_For_Thermal_Lamination.jpghttp://www.webstaurantstore.com/images/1262027_lg.jpg, http://wwwtest.enbridge-us.com/uploadedImages/Enbridge_Energy/About_Us/Our_Businesses/Natural_Gas_Segment/Trucking_Services/Dufour-truck.gif

Traytite

Tray and Film

Traytite Film

Traytite Coating

PHASE 2aMaterials Manufacture

Pulping

Papermaking

PET Extrusion

Transport

PET Resin Production

Traytite Carton Paperboard

Tray-and-film Carton Paperbaord

Transport

Paperboard plant(International Paper)

PET resin plant(DuPont)

Traytite PET coating

APET for PET tray

Transport

Precursor Amorphous PET (APET)

APET for PET film(in DuPont)

WoodPetroleum

Intermediates

To Paper Conversion Plant

To Paper PET Packaging Plant

Photo Sources: Dummit 2008

PET ExtrusionPrinting/Cutting

Transport

Thermoforming

Trim Press

Transport

Dryer

Transport

Pre-heating

Folder/gluing

PET Packaging Plant(Associated Packaging

Technologies)

Paper Conversion Plant(Graphic Packaging

International)

PET Extrusion

Dryer

PHASE 2bProduct Fabrication

PET Plant(DuPont)

PET Film

Traytite, Tray-and-film Carton APET APET

Tray-and-film Carton

Traytite

PET Tray

Form Traytite

Fill

Freeze

Denester

Cartoning

Transport

Seal

Seal

PHASE 2cFilling/Packaging Distribution (Michelina’s)

MP-HT

ES-S

Photo Sources: http://www.aline1.com/products/?productID=61

To Consumer

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Traytite Tray&film

gra

ms/

pa

ckag

eRaw Materials Consumption

methanol

acetic acid

Ethylene Oxide

starch

Paraxylene

latex binder

Wood

•The TrayTite required less raw materials than the Tray-and-Film

•The consumption of water was the largest component of the raw materials for both product.

•The second largest resource used was wood used for the paper board of the TrayTite, and the Tray-and-Film carton

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

Traytite Tray&film

Am

ou

nt U

sed

(m

l)

Water Use

Water

Results

Energy use (KJ)

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

Traytite Tray&film

Am

ou

nt

Use

d (

kJ)

Total energy (kJ)

14% 3%

3%

56%

20%

1%2%1%

Energy Consumption by Process (Traytite) Resin Production (per

coating)Coating Production

Tree Harvesting (SBS)

Pulping (SBS)

Papermaking (SBS)

Transportation

Traytite Forming

TrayTite Sealing

2%0%

51%

2%

30%

11%

3%0% 0%0% 1%

Energy Consumption by Process (Tray-and-Film)

Resin Production (per film)

Film Production

Resin Production (per tray)

Tree Harvesting (SBS)

Pulping (SBS)

Papermaking (SBS)

Tray Production

Denesting

Tray Sealing

Cartoning

Transportation

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Traytite Tray and Film

GH

G e

mis

sio

ns

(g/p

acka

ge)

Global Warming Potential (CO2 Equivalents)

•The Tray-and-Film emits almost twice as much CO2 Equivalents as the Traytite

•Even though the breakdown of contributions from product, one process from each stands out clearly as the most

Coating resin production

Coating process

Tree harvest and transport

Pulping

Papermaking

Transport

Frozen food plant

Traytite Global Warming Potential (CO2 Equivalents)

Film resin Film production

Tray resin

Tree harvest and transport

Pulping

Papermaking

Paper conversion Tray

production

Frozen food plant

Transport

Tray and Film Global Warming Potential (CO2 Equivalents)

•Pulping involved with SBS paperboard production is the largest contributor for both products

•The production of the plastic for the tray in the Tray-and-Film design is the main reason why this product has higher greenhouse emissions.

0

0.0000002

0.0000004

0.0000006

0.0000008

0.000001

0.0000012

Tray and Film Traytite

Am

ou

nt

of

NH

3 (

kg)

Euthrophication Potential

0

0.5

1

1.5

Traytite Tray & Film

Acidification (g/unit)

SOx

NOx

0

0.0000002

0.0000004

0.0000006

0.0000008

0.000001

0.0000012

Tray Production Film Production

Am

ou

nt

of

NH

3 (k

g)

Eutrophication Potential for Tray-and-Film

Conclusions and Recommendations

Traytite vs. Tray-and-Film

• Resource consumption: Traytite

• Emissions: Traytite

• Recyclability: Tray and Film

• A thorough investigation of the two products, including material and energy inputs and emissions suggests that the Traytite package has a smaller impact on the environment than Tray-and-Film.

Recommendations

Category Traytite Tray-and-Film Both

Paper Use Re-design carton, increase use of recycled fiber

Water Use Reduced quantity of PET

Increase process efficiency, paper use, gray water

Recyclability Alternative Coating Non-black PET

Solid waste generation

Reengineer resin production

Increase internal recycling

Water Emissions Paperboard

Air Emissions Reduced paper/fiber use

Combustion of waste at factory

Conclusion

• The major negative environmental consequences (global warming, eutrophication, and acidification), are more substantial for the tray-and-film product than for the traytite product

• However, there is less room for improvement in traytite manufacturing and consumption