Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
by each of these to be the same and depending on how the energy efficiency
versus the GWP is weighted, steel cans or plastic bottles appear to be good
choices. But the functionality of different materials is not comparable and
other environmental attributes need to be included in a comprehensive
assessment. More importantly, the impact of recycling (which is common
for several of the packaging) has not been taken into account in this
comparison.Evenwiththeselimitations,theresultsindicateplasticstobeat
the very least competitive with other packaging in terms of energy efficiency
or in avoided GWP.
Source: From Jackson and Bertényi (2005).
Glass
Aluminum Steel PET HDPE
Mass (g)
a
325/433 20/45
45/102 25/62 38/38
Energy (MJ/l) 8.2
9.0
2.4
5.4
3.2
0.05
0.18
0.34 0.06
a
Mass per package/approximate mass calculated for 1 Liter of contents.
b
Estimated from (Hammond and Jones, 2008).
A US study in 2009 (funded by a plastics trade organization) reported
a similar comparison of 12 oz aluminum (cans), glass bottles, and PET
bottles but also taking recycling into account in the LCA. Recycling rates of
different materials in the United States at the time of the study were used in
