Tag Archives: PET

Pepsi follows Green washed Consumers

This is a great article. Companies should be going with the best environmental packaging out there, not just what consumers believe is the best environmental packaging because they have suffered from greenwashing or a lack of access to the facts.  How amazing would it be to have a bottle made from renewable resources & with the ENSO additive. A renewable, biodegradable & recyclable bottle, that would be amazing.

Consumer preferences driving PepsiCo sustainability efforts

By Mike Verespej | PLASTICS NEWS STAFF 

Posted August 11, 2011

PURCHASE, N.Y. (Aug. 11, 12:40 p.m. ET) — For a brand owner like PepsiCo, sustainable packaging doesn’t just mean making decisions on a complex set of resource, energy and environmental issues. It also means that you have to understand and determine whether consumers will view what you do as sustainable.

“Everything needs to be in sync with the brand identity, and you have to ask yourself what is the right message so the consumer understands that what you are doing is sustainable,” said Denise Lefebvre, vice president of global packaging for food and beverage giant PepsiCo. “There already is confusion among the public about sustainability, so all our messages have to be clear, consistent and in sync.”

Lefebvre, who was director of advanced research for beverage packaging for the Purchase, N.Y., soft-drink giant until a recent promotion, also said that when it comes to sustainable packaging, much of what brand owners focus on is driven by “consumer desires and consumer thinking.”

“Consumers are looking for technologies and innovations where it is readily evident to them what to do with that product and how it benefits them and the environment,” Lefebvre said in a recent interview. “The benefit has to be clear to them and right in their sweet spot. Our messages give us an opportunity to simplify things for consumers.”

With that in mind, the company has focused on producing increasingly lightweight PET bottles, developing technology to make PET bottles from plant-based resources and agricultural and food waste, and putting Dream Machine recycling bins and kiosks into place in cities to increase the number of bottles and cans that are recycled, she said.

“When consumers see a bottle that is fully recyclable and ultra-lightweight, it helps them in terms of making their purchase,” Lefebvre said. “The consumer understands source reduction and the use of less material. It is tangible and they can understand that. So if we can create technologies to push that faster, that would be ideal.”

Similarly, consumer perceptions are one of the driving reasons why PepsiCo is working, in partnership with others, to make a PET bottle completely from plant-based materials, including switch grass, pine bark and corn husks.

“If I tell [consumers], it’s 100 percent renewable PET, they understand it and they get it because they want things straightforward,” Lefebvre said.

Since the firm announced in March that it had developed a 100 percent renewable bottle, it has received positive consumer feedback, she said — although that bottle won’t eat go into pilot production until sometime in 2012, and even then, in limited quantities of 100,000-500,000 bottles.

“Consumers like it because you have eliminated fossil-based products [and] they believe that pulling oil out of the ground” is not the route to use anymore, Lefebvre said.

PepsiCo is also working to make its planned renewable PET bottle from organic waste from its food businesses, including orange and potato peels, oat hulls and other agricultural byproducts.

“Consumers have made it clear that they want us to use non-food resources, or food or agricultural waste [for bioresins] because it doesn’t detriment the environment and it doesn’t take away from food supplies,” she said.

Although many of PepsiCo’s sustainability package initiatives are driven by consumer perceptions, the firm realizes it can’t do things that are not sustainable just because consumers perceive them to be, she said. “Consumers would love an oxo-biodegradable bottle,” Lefebvre said “But right now, the technologies out there would do more harm than good.

“So to deliver something that would be more detrimental to the environment … It would be wrong and it would be greenwashing.”

Similarly, PepsiCo is not using polylactic bioresin for bottles because she said the material does not have the necessary barrier properties and is problematic in the PET recycling stream.

During a presentation at the Bioplastek conference in New York in late June, Lefebvre said PepsiCo’s objective is to create “performance with a purpose” in its packaging.

“Our objective is to make a 100 percent renewable, sustainable, non-fossil-fuel-based PET bottle in a closed-loop system using agriculture waste,” she said. “We want performance identical to what we have now: a product that is fully recyclable and a product that significantly reduces the carbon footprint.”

A number of companies now make non-petroleum-based ethylene glycol — which is 30 percent of the formulation of PET. And roughly a half-dozen firm say that they have demonstrated in a lab that they can make paraxylene, the building block for terephthalic acid, which constitutes the rest of PET, or plant-based terephthalic acid.

PepsiCo’s main competitor, Coca-Cola Co., has been making its PlantBottle from conventional terephthalic acid and renewable ethylene glycol since December 2009. H.J. Heinz Co. also began using the Coca-Cola PlantBottle for its 20-ounce ketchup containers in July.

Heinz expects to sell 120 million PlantBottle ketchup bottles in 2011; Coca-Cola expects this year to package 5 billion beverages globally in 15 countries in the PlantBottle compared to 2.5 billion last year.

PepsiCo has not discussed technology details for making the renewable terephthalic acid needed for a PET bottle manufactured 100 percent from renewable resources.

“We can buy and source the renewable ethylene glycol from any number of sources,” Lefebvre said. “That has been around for awhile. The key is the T piece [terephthalic acid]. That is critical in driving a renewable PET bottle to a mass scale.”

PepsiCo plans to model several different types of chemistry in its pilot -cale project to determine their efficiency to make renewable terephthalic acid. “There are a lot of emerging technologies that we will be evaluating, and they all have their pros and cons,” she said. “We’re very open to looking at them all and would be comfortable using several of them,” she said.

“We don’t make PET. We’re not going to. So we need the quality to be right.”

Lefebvre said she expects PepsiCo to announce soon on its sourcing strategies for renewable PET bottles. None of those strategies, she said, mean the firm will reduce its efforts to boost recycling of its plastic bottles or aluminum cans.

Since it embarked on its Dream Machine recycling initiative in April 2010, PepsiCo has placed 2,600 Dream Machines bins and reverse-vending kiosks in more than 30 states — at supermarkets, on city streets and other public venues.

The recycling bins are similar to trash cans, but they’re painted Pepsi blue with a recycling message on them. The computerized kiosks give reward points for each bottle or can recycled, which consumers can redeem online at greenopolis.com. — a partner in the program along with Waste Management subsidiary WM GreenOps LLC.

PepsiCo has also developed a recycling initiative for schools, called Dream Machine Recycle Rally, which rewards schools with points for each non-alcoholic plastic bottle or aluminum can students bring to school for recycling.

“It is a self-supportive strategy,” Lefebvre said of the initiatives. “As the program proliferates, it reaffirms to the consumer that recycling is important, and that recycling is just as good as renewables.” The Dream Machines also help the firm bring up recycling rates and get the material it needs to incorporate recycled content in its products, she said.

Just last week, PepsiCo announced that in August it will market the first plastic soft drink bottle to be made from 100 recycled PET in North America. The bottle, 7UP EcoGreen, will be used for diet and regular 7UP sold in Canada. It is expected to reduce the amount of virgin PET used for that product by 6 million pounds a year.

“We want to use more recycled PET” in all plastic bottles, Lefebvre said. “It is a matter of obtaining the right quality and getting the material — which is in short supply. “

To augment PepsiCo’s supply of recycled PET, the firm last year agreed to buy the majority of its bottle-grade PET pellet and flake from the new CarbonLITE plant in Riverside, Calif., which is scheduled to launch by Sept. 30 with nameplate annual capacity of 100 million pounds.

Industrial farming linked to massive Red Tides

 

I just finished watching the movie Dirt a film that (among other concepts) shows viewers the negative impacts of industrial farming practices and it really got me thinking….

Living on Florida’s gulf coast, from time to time the Tampa Bay Area is plagued by the infamous red tide. For those of you not familiar, red tide is created primarily by excess fertilizers used in farming that runoff into rivers and streams. These fertilizers eventually end up in coastal areas. The excess nutrients become a food source for phytoplankton to feed on, creating massive algae blooms in high concentration that leaves red colored trails in the water.

As the algae blooms die, microorganisms feed on the algae and deplete the dissolved oxygen levels in the water. Fish and other submarine life perish without vital oxygen. Also, one species of algae often associated with red tide produces neurotoxins that can be harmful to birds, humans, and other land animals. Red tide creates polluted beaches, full of dead fish and makes swimming and beach activities unsafe.

Christopher George- Aquatic Biologist
Tampa, FL

After thinking about all of this, my mind really started turning…With all of the concerns about the methane emissions of biodegradable plastics, what about the excess of fertilizers used when farming corn, is anyone concerned with how that will effect the earth/waters? Is there any fix that doesn’t have any faults? Does the spread of articles on the internet that misguide readers give us a sense of false concerns ? ( See my Is the methane released from biodegradable plastic harmful? Blog )

These are all things to definitely think about and talk about! Make sure to leave any of your thoughts in the comment box below, I look forward to this discussion!

-Megan Bentley

 

 

 

 

Thanks for the photos

http://www.thew2o.net/events/humanhealth/observer3.htm

What Is Industrial Farming Doing to Our World’s Oceans?

 

Christopher George- Aquatic Biologist
Tampa, FL

I just finished watching the movie Dirt a film that (among other concepts) shows viewers the negative impacts of industrial farming practices and it really got me thinking….

dirt the movie

Living on Florida’s gulf coast, from time to time the Tampa Bay Area is plagued by the infamous red tide. For those of you not familiar, red tide is created primarily by excess fertilizers used in farming that runoff into rivers and streams. These fertilizers eventually end up in coastal areas. The excess nutrients become a food source for phytoplankton to feed on, creating massive algae blooms in high concentration that leaves red colored trails in the water.

red tide in florida

As the algae blooms die, microorganisms feed on the algae and deplete the dissolved oxygen levels in the water. Fish and other submarine life perish without vital oxygen. Also, one species of algae often associated with red tide produces neurotoxins that can be harmful to birds, humans, and other land animals. Red tide creates polluted beaches, full of dead fish and makes swimming and beach activities unsafe.

fish dead from red tide

After thinking about all of this, my mind  really started turning…With all of the concerns about the methane emissions of biodegradable plastics, what about the excess of fertilizers used when farming corn, is anyone concerned with how that will effect the earth/waters? Is there any fix that doesn’t have any faults? Does the spread of  articles on the internet that misguide readers give us a sense of false concerns ?  ( See my Is the methane released from biodegradable plastic harmful? Blog )

These are all things to  definitely  think about and talk about!  Make sure to leave any of your thoughts in the comment box below, I look forward to this dicsussion!

-Megan Bentley

 

 

 

 

Thanks for the photo

http://lauraweitnauer.blogspot.com/2010/09/urls.html

USF Patel School of Global Sustainability visits ENSO!

Here at the ENSO corporate office, we currently have a special guest visiting with us for 2 weeks. Heidi Grace Paintner, a student at the University of South Florida and is currently working on a project for her MA in Global Sustainability. The Patel School of Global Sustainability at the University of South Florida was the nation’s first school of its kind and is seen as an educational leader in this growing field. This program aims to train students to be leaders in the area environmental stewardship and prepares them for work in “green collar” occupations.


The title of Heidi’s thesis/project is PET Plastics: Biodegradability & Sustainable Packaging in the Bottled Beverage Industry. She found ENSO when researching solutions to the current landfill crisis the bottled beverage industry is struggling to resolve. We are very excited to be working with her and helping her to further develop her research in the area of sustainable beverage packaging.

Heidi’s First Day

Today was Heidi’s first day at the office. After meeting everyone and showing her what we do here at ENSO, I helped her to develop a bottled beverage consumer survey. If you all could please take a moment to participate in this survey, Heidi and I would greatly appreciate it.

The survey pertains to PET plant based plastics and the perception consumers have on their biodegradability. She will be using the results of this survey in her research project. Tomorrow she will meet with Del, the VP over our Environmental and Technology group and begin learning about the legislative issues that surround biodegradable plastics. ENSO is very excited to have Heidi with us for the next few weeks!

Are methane emissions good or bad?

Research and articles about biodegradable plastics releasing methane too quickly in landfills have been taking over the internet this past June. An alarming title to draw readers in, splashed on a article/blog written with bits of information that have trickled down from a once reliable source, leaving readers with the question in mind….Is “biodegradable” plastic  really harmful?

The original research was performed using “compostable plastics” designed to break down in as fast as 180 days!  ENSO Plastics are not “compostable plastics”.

ENSO is a global company and recognizes that some people aren’t as far ahead in methane-friendly landfill technology as North America (Environmental Protection Agency’s Landfill Methane Program at http://www.epa.gov/lmop ).  The fact is that even banana peels and apple cores release methane in a landfill as a natural byproduct of biodegradation.

Common sense says that truly Earth Friendly Plastics” are not in a race to biodegrade as quickly as possible for many reasons.  ENSO Plastics are engineered to biodegrade in a controlled manner; between 5 and 15 years in real-world landfill conditions.  This strikes a wonderful balance between a manageable release of naturally occurring biogases and the timely breakdown of plastic waste in a landfill.  Just another example as to why ENSO is the answer to today’s plastic problem.

 

Pitt Researchers: Plant-Based Plastics Not Necessarily Greener Than Oil-Based Relatives

Biopolymers are the more eco-friendly material, but farming and energy-intense chemical processing means they are dirtier to produce than petroleum-derived plastics, according to study in Environmental Science & Technology

Contact: Morgan Kelly | mekelly@pitt.edu | 412-624-4356 | Cell: 412-897-1400

PITTSBURGH—An analysis of plant and petroleum-derived plastics by University of Pittsburgh researchers suggests that biopolymers are not necessarily better for the environment than their petroleum-based relatives, according to a report in Environmental Science & Technology. The Pitt team found that while biopolymers are the more eco-friendly material, traditional plastics can be less environmentally taxing to produce.

Biopolymers trumped the other plastics for biodegradability, low toxicity, and use of renewable resources. Nonetheless, the farming and chemical processing needed to produce them can devour energy and dump fertilizers and pesticides into the environment, wrote lead author Michaelangelo Tabone (ENG, A&S ’10), who conducted the analysis as an undergraduate student in the lab of Amy Landis, a professor of civil and environmental engineering in Pitt’s Swanson School of Engineering. Tabone and Landis worked with James Cregg, an undergraduate chemistry student in Pitt’s School of Arts and Sciences; and Eric Beckman, codirector of Pitt’s Mascaro Center for Sustainable Innovation and the George M. Bevier Professor of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering in Pitt’s Swanson School. The project was supported by the National Science Foundation.

The researchers examined 12 plastics—seven petroleum-based polymers, four biopolymers, and one hybrid. The team first performed a life-cycle assessment (LCA) on each polymer’s preproduction stage to gauge the environmental and health effects of the energy, raw materials, and chemicals used to create one ounce of plastic pellets. They then checked each plastic in its finished form against principles of green design, including biodegradability, energy efficiency, wastefulness, and toxicity.

Biopolymers were among the more prolific polluters on the path to production, the LCA revealed. The team attributed this to agricultural fertilizers and pesticides, extensive land use for farming, and the intense chemical processing needed to convert plants into plastic. All four biopolymers were the largest contributors to ozone depletion. The two tested forms of sugar-derived polymer—standard polylactic acid (PLA-G) and the type manufactured by Minnesota-based NatureWorks (PLA-NW), the most common sugar-based plastic in the United States—exhibited the maximum contribution to eutrophication, which occurs when overfertilized bodies of water can no longer support life. One type of the corn-based polyhydroyalkanoate, PHA-G, topped the acidification category. In addition, biopolymers exceeded most of the petroleum-based polymers for ecotoxicity and carcinogen emissions.


Once in use, however, biopolymers bested traditional polymers for ecofriendliness. For example, the sugar-based plastic from NatureWorks jumped from the sixth position under the LCA to become the material most in keeping with the standards of green design. On the other hand, the ubiquitous plastic polypropylene (PP)—widely used in packaging—was the cleanest polymer to produce, but sank to ninth place as a sustainable material.

Interestingly, the researchers found that the petroleum-plant hybrid biopolyethylene terephthalate, or B-PET, combines the ills of agriculture with the structural stubbornness of standard plastic to be harmful to produce (12th) and use (8th).

Landis is continuing the project by subjecting the polymers to a full LCA, which will also examine the materials’ environmental impact throughout their use and eventual disposal.

<table style="cursor: default; margin-top: 1em; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 0px; width: 600px; border: 0px dashed #bbbbbb;" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" align="center">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="width: 50px; text-align: center;"><strong>Polymer</strong></td>
<td style="width: 50px; text-align: center;"><strong>Material</strong></td>
<td style="width: 10px; text-align: center;">&nbsp;<strong>Green Design Rank</strong></td>
<td style="width: 10px; text-align: center;"><strong>LCA Rank</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="width: 50px;">Polylactic acid-NatureWorks (PLA-NW)</td>
<td style="width: 50px;">Sugar, cornstarch</td>
<td style="width: 10px; text-align: center;">1</td>
<td style="width: 10px; text-align: center;">6</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="width: 50px;">Polyhydroxyalkanoate-Stover (PHA-S)</td>
<td style="width: 50px;">Corn stalks</td>
<td style="width: 10px; text-align: center;">2</td>
<td style="width: 10px; text-align: center;">4</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="width: 50px;">Polyhydroxyalkanoate-General (PHA-G)</td>
<td style="width: 50px;">Corn kernels</td>
<td style="width: 10px; text-align: center;">2</td>
<td style="width: 10px; text-align: center;">8</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="width: 50px;">Polylactic acid-General (PLA-G)</td>
<td style="width: 50px;">Sugar, cornstarch</td>
<td style="width: 10px; text-align: center;">4</td>
<td style="width: 10px; text-align: center;">9</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="width: 50px;">High-density polyethylene (HDPE)</td>
<td style="width: 50px;">Petroleum</td>
<td style="width: 10px; text-align: center;">5</td>
<td style="width: 10px; text-align: center;">2</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="width: 50px;">Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET)</td>
<td style="width: 50px;">Petroleum</td>
<td style="width: 10px; text-align: center;">6</td>
<td style="width: 10px; text-align: center;">10</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="width: 50px;">Low-density polyethylene (LDPE)</td>
<td style="width: 50px;">Petroleum</td>
<td style="width: 10px; text-align: center;">7</td>
<td style="width: 10px; text-align: center;">3</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="width: 50px;">Biopolyethylene terephthalate (B-PET)</td>
<td style="width: 50px;">Petroleum, plants</td>
<td style="width: 10px; text-align: center;">8</td>
<td style="width: 10px; text-align: center;">12</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="width: 50px;">Polypropylene (PP)</td>
<td style="width: 50px;">Fossil fuels</td>
<td style="width: 10px; text-align: center;">9</td>
<td style="width: 10px; text-align: center;">1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="width: 50px;">General purpose polystyrene (GPPS)</td>
<td style="width: 50px;">Petroleum</td>
<td style="width: 10px; text-align: center;">10</td>
<td style="width: 10px; text-align: center;">5</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="width: 50px;">Polyvinyl chloride (PVC)</td>
<td style="width: 50px;">Chlorine, petroleum</td>
<td style="width: 10px; text-align: center;">11</td>
<td style="width: 10px; text-align: center;">7</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="width: 50px;">Polycarbonate (PC)</td>
<td style="width: 50px;">Petroleum</td>
<td style="width: 10px; text-align: center;">12</td>
<td style="width: 10px; text-align: center;">11<span style="color: #494949; font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: 12px;"><span style="color: #000000; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: 10px;"><br /></span></span></span></span></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

The Ocean’s Plastic Garbage – A Serious Environmental Hazard

Our world’s oceans are home to five growing plastic gyres – vortexes of swirling ocean currents filled with degrading plastic that pose a serious threat to marine life.

Captain Charles Moore, noted author and oceanographer, has spent years conducting ocean and coastal samplings documenting plastic fragments along the 40,000 miles of the North Pacific Ocean. Captain Moore was the first to discover the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, otherwise known as the Pacific Gyre, which lies in the northern Pacific near Hawaii. This is the largest of the known gyres – roughly 12,400 square miles in size and growing – and filled with swirling fragmented colorful plastic debris.

Plastic in the ocean takes roughly 600 years to degrade fully. Marine life like sharks, dolphins, whales and numerous species of fish mistake these colorful remnants of our castoff trash as food, often suffering starvation due to the trash being indigestible. Oddly, it’s only the colored plastic they go for, though the clear plastic is also hazardous. Plastic water bottles are regularly found tangled in ocean coral, littering the ocean floor.

Plastic garbage doesn’t just stay in the ocean. Storms periodically break gyres up, pushing waves of trash onto beaches around the globe. Hawaii’s Kamilo Beach is frequently known as Plastic Beach due to its continually being overrun with plastic trash brought in by the ocean’s waves.

This plastic comes in all sizes and forms – discarded toothbrushes, combs, cups and, of course, plastic water bottles. Plastic trash discarded in Asia and Europe makes its way to the ocean, gets caught in the Indian Ocean gyre, then gets pushed back again to litter the once pristine shoreline.

We use 2 million plastic beverage bottles every 5 minutes in the U.S.

“No one is (looking) at it as a global phenomena and at the root causes (to) try to make it stop,” said Cecilia Nord, Vice President – Floor Care Sustainability and Environmental Affairs of Swedish-based Electrolux.

“We need to make it stop,” she said.

“Only we humans make waste that Nature can’t digest,” says Moore.

ENSO Bottles realizes that what’s needed is a shift in thinking as well as action.  By creating their innovative biodegradable plastic bottle with the ENSO additive, these PET-based bottles break down, rather than contribute to the world’s plastic pollution. It’s part of ENSO’s commitment “to act as environmental stewards.”

With plastic trash increasing the world over, and the devastating effect this has on marine life, it’s crucial for consumers to become responsible stewards who take on recycling to a level not seen before is needed.

Individuals doing their part can make the difference.