The Carbon Cost of Packaging: Beyond Plastic and Paper

Introducing sustainability in packaging goes way beyond the paper vs plastic debate. Be it raw materials sourcing, to the way they are transported, manufacturing and waste management, all levels come with its own hidden carbon cost. If your business is committed to achieving its Net-Zero goals, it becomes imperative to comprehend the full lifecycle emissions of packaging.

Here’s unpacking the carbon footprint of packaging, and understanding how businesses, especially SMEs, can deep dive into smarter more climate-conscious decisions.

Packaging’s Role in Scope 3 Emissions

When it comes to packaging emissions, they fall under Scope 3 as these are indirect emissions that occur across a company’s value chain. According to the Resources, Conservation and Recycling journal, Scope 3 emissions make up for 88% of a company’s total carbon footprint. Therefore, tracking and executing an effective mechanism to reduce these is paramount in your journey to Net Zero. These emissions can be from the raw materials that your business is using, the processes used by your suppliers, your logistics framework, waste management as well as recycling.

When it comes to packaging, there are many hidden emissions that need to be dealt with. Be it plastic wrapping, the use of a cardboard box, laminated packing, or emissions from energy usage, transportation, and processing, everything contributes in a big way. Additionally, you might feel that you are using traditional eco-friendly alternatives like paper or bio-based materials, but these can also turn out to be emission-intensive if sourced unsustainably or transported inefficiently.

Plastic vs. Paper: The evergreen debate

While many would place paper over plastic on the sustainability chart, it all boils down to how it’s procured and used. While plastic has been condemned for the pollution it causes as well as its longevity, it can, at times, be more carbon-efficient. This is possible in its weight-to-strength ratio, transport efficiency, as well as the usage of energy during production. On the other hand, paper packaging might be biodegradable, but also entails deforestation, water-intensive processing mechanisms, and higher transport emissions as it is bulkier.

Therefore, we see that neither of the two options are inherently sustainable. They need to be viewed through the lens of lifecycle carbon analysis.

Photo by RoseBox رز باکس on Unsplash

What Drives the Carbon Cost of Packaging?

1. Raw Material Extraction
   Be it mining metals, harvesting trees, or manufacturing petrochemicals, sourcing each raw material carries its own carbon emissions. While recycled materials often emit less but they still require energy to be processed.

2. Manufacturing Process
   When it comes to packaging, the process can be resource-intensive. Packaging plants can consume large amounts of electricity and water. For example, producing one tonne of virgin paper can emit up 951 kg CO₂, depending on energy sources, states this study, published in the journal Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews.

3. Logistics
   Your logistics depend on the kind of packaging you opt for. If you have heavier and bulkier packaging, it can lead to increased fuel consumption during transport. Whereas lighter and more space-saving options can help keep your emissions in check.

4. Waste Management
   When it comes of end-of-life management, landfilling, incineration, or recycling all come with their varies impacts. Bio-degradable and compostable options aren’t always effective if they enter landfills without proper segregation.

What Can Businesses Do Differently?

1. Conduct Carbon Audits of Packaging

While switching materials might be the way forward, it is imperative for companies to analyse the actual carbon impact of their current packaging mechanism. Tools Such as Fitsol’s Kyoto™ platform can help you to assess your emissions across the packaging value chain. This would also include production, transport, and disposal.

2. Prioritize Design for Efficiency

Not just the materials, but a system to use as little as possible is a huge step towards sustainability. Adopting eco- friendly designs, using less raw materials can help. By going in for smart packaging, businesses can come up with designs that reduce weight, eliminate air gaps, and lower transportation emissions.

3. Source Locally and Responsibly

An effective way to shorten your supply chain is by sourcing packaging materials closer to your manufacturing units. This can help you significantly reduce your emissions. Opt for vendors who can use renewable energy and also offer transparency in their emissions.

4. Educate and Innovate

Finding the right partners when it comes to innovative packaging can help you determine the way forward. Be it within your teams and your suppliers, it is important to explore biodegradable coatings, mono-materials, or refillable models. Fitsol also provides you with a platform where you can meet sustainable vendors, who are better-aligned with your ESG goals.

Towards Carbon-Smart Packaging

Therefore, sustainability in packaging is not restricted to just choosing paper over plastic anymore. It is essential to get an informed understanding of the carbon consequences of every choice you make as a business. Right from the packaging material that you use, to where you procure it from, what it’s made of and how you transport it, everything can impact your carbon emissions. As regulations like SEBI’s BRSR make emissions reporting mandatory for larger companies, and indirectly their vendors, SMEs must get proactive in reducing their emissions as much as they can.

Prioritizing carbon efficiency over optics can help companies come up with packaging solutions that are not only sustainable, but also cost-effective and scalable. Fitsol, a number one decarbonization partner, can help your business track real-time emissions as well as support in strategizing your path to becoming Net-Zero.

Citations

Resources, Conservation and Recycling: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921344920301750

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032122005950