Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. —Robert J. Hanlon

Close the Loop on Food Packaging [Justin]

Posted by Justin under Economics View recent posts with the tag Economics on Technorati Environment View recent posts with the tag Environment on Technorati 

I wrote a paper in college about how wasteful food packing is, and will post it if I can find it. The vast majority of food packaging is now single-use, which is incredibly wasteful. Consider the following hierarchy:

Single-use, non-recyclable < Single-use, recyclable < Washable & reusable < No-wash reusable < No container at all

On the left end of the spectrum would be things like Capri Sun juice containers and pizza boxes, which aren’t recyclable in most places. On the right end would be multi-gallon water jugs, which can be refilled without requiring a washing, and water fountains, which don’t require a container at all (and thus count as Manvironmentally Friendly). In the middle are containers that don’t completely go to waste, but still take some energy to use more than once (e.g. in the form of melting and remolding or simply washing out).

Very few food packages could be reused without washing, but we could save a ton of energy by washing and reusing containers rather than recycling them. In other words, there’s huge leverage for reducing our ecological footprint by moving from recycling to reuse.

In the 1990s, great strides were made in getting people to recycle instead of sending their containers to landfills. Recycling is great in terms of landfill and resource savings, but still consumes a ton of energy. Consider recycling a plastic food container, such as a dairy tub, which requires:

  • Energy to rinse the container out (which often involves hot water)
  • Energy to transport the container to a recycling facility, which may be hundreds of miles away
  • Energy to further clean and melt the item, to produce pellets of recycled plastic
  • Energy to transport the plastic pellets to another facility, such as a bottling plant
  • Energy to melt the plastic pellets and mold the plastic into something new
  • Energy to transport the new container back to the store

Remember bulk foods, those big bins of oats and granola and other stuff you could dispense for yourself in whatever quantity you wanted?

Bulk Foods Picture, from Flickr user bcmom

I hardly ever see this setup any more except at high-end stores like PCC and Whole Foods, which are out of reach for most people. I think the concept failed for several reasons, which explain why you don’t see bulk food sections in stores:

  • They were gross - any kid could flick a booger in the dried apples or drop the scoop on the floor
  • They were hard to use - you had to write a long ID number on each bag
  • The bags were flimsy and easy to rip, and largely canceled out the benefit of buying bulk, since you still used a disposable container

We need bulk foods to come back and save all that energy we pour into recycling. There are of course easy solutions to the problems with bulk foods listed above, but they need some incentives to get into the mainstream:

  • Use push-drop bins, like they have for coffee, instead of open bins with scoops.
  • Provide barcoded little stickers at first, so people can make sure they’re paying for the right food (though this would introduce some waste - it could be phased out once people were used to buying bulk)
  • Require people to bring their own containers, and only provide reusable containers for sale - no bags

The last point, of course, is the kicker. Who wants to bring a dozen or more empty plastic containers with them to the store? If there’s no financial incentive, very few people, which in turn drives down the incentive for stores to even have a bulk food section.

The solution is to tax all single-use food packaging, even if it’s recyclable. Perhaps a gradually increasing tax would be the best way to implement this, so people have time to acquire reusable containers and stores and food companies have time to adjust their systems. The tax would have to apply to the packaging used to transport goods to the store as well (such as large cardboard boxes), so there would be an incentive to create a completely closed loop - no single-use packaging anywhere along the supply chain.

It would take some ingenuity to create machines that would dispense food into customer-owned containers in a sanitary manner, since you couldn’t ensure that people would bring in perfectly clean containers. I’m confident that it could be done, though, for most food. Liquids are easy, since we already have the technology to dispense liquids into people’s containers. Oats, coffee, and other bulk-ish foods are also easy, since they can be poured. Crackers, meats, and the like would be the hardest, since you can’t dump crackers out of a chute without breaking them, and meats are just plain messy. Meats could be distributed in store-owned containers with a substantial deposit, and the store could wash and sanitize them upon return.

What do you think of this proposal to close the loop? How could the tax on food packaging be levied fairly, considering the vast array of foods and packages currently on the market?

5 Responses to “Close the Loop on Food Packaging”


When we pick up our veggies from our CSA everything comes in a box which we bring back. And its local.

How about making for packaging reusable as other stuff? All of our glasses are reused jars and many people reuse things like butter tubs for food storage. If the packaging was made attractive for reuse then people could do this. Flour sacks used to be made out of printed cloth and people made dresses for the kids out of them.

If people were taught how to cook from scratch and all of the adults in the family didn’t have to work full time to make ends meet, we would cut down on packaging because prepared stuff is the most over packaged. That’s a big societal change to ask for.

1

That’s the way our Pioneer Organics deliveries come, too - in a plastic crate that they pick up next time they deliver.

I think repurposing food packaging at least makes us feel better about buying things that come in a single-use container, but we ultimately still buy more of that product and can’t possibly use all the containers. You can only have so many sour cream tubs before they don’t fit in the cabinet any more, so you ultimately have to get rid of some of them.

However, this is the approach I take with plastic grocery bags, which inevitably rip or get nasty when you use them for something else, e.g. to protect your backpack from potentially leaky leftover containers on the way to work. It’s better than just throwing them out, but ultimately they do end up in the bin.

What we really need is a closed loop from which nothing escapes - every product is designed to be reused indefinitely, then recycled when it’s no longer usable.

In Cradle to Cradle, which Aaron and Daniel should definitely have blogged about now, the authors argue that we shouldn’t “downcycle” things in the way that soda bottles are recycled into lower-grade plastic that can’t be used to make more soda bottles, but can be used to make plastic boards and the like. They say we should instead design things to be remade infinitely into equal-quality products. Sounds good to me, but I don’t know if it’s even possible for most products.

2

Leave a Reply

You can track future comments on this post via this RSS feed. You can trackback this post by pinging this URL. Allowed HTML: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Shrink comment box | Expand comment box



Get RC Via Email



Buy the Emersons a Truck

Because theirs was destroyed in an accident and they need one

    Tagegories

    Browse by category:

    Explore by tag:

    Recent Posts

  • Blogroll

  • Archives


    Use the calendar below to find posts by day (mouseover a day on the calendar to see all posts from that day). If you're looking for a specific post, it's much faster to use the search box above.

    May 2007
    S M T W T F S
    « Apr   Jun »
     12345
    6789101112
    13141516171819
    20212223242526
    2728293031  

      Recent Comments


      Creative Commons License
      We aren't very into all that copyright stuff. Creative Commons licenses are better, so RC is licensed under this one.
      Quote Radical Congruency at will. Inbound links are appreciated, and required for direct quotations.