Restaurants and Institutions

Michael Oshman

How Green is Green Packaging?
November 19, 2008

How can packaging be green? Isn't it better to not use packaging or disposables?


Yes, it is better to eliminate or greatly reduce the need for items that need to be discarded. Disposable items can take years of natural-resource production, but yet they only get used for a few minutes and then can spend years in a landfill.

But what if your restaurant still needs disposable items? A large part of your business is likely in take-out or guests bringing home leftovers. You need napkins, take-out containers, pizza boxes and more.

Well, in this new green economy, it is important to learn the language so you can be educated and empowered to ask the right questions of your manufacturers and distributors. And it is important to know what the best environmental claims are in various categories.

Here is a small glossary of terms/phrases you’ll likely come across when making purchasing decisions:

1. Recyclable
This is a very vague term that doesn't mean the manufacturer has done anything to the product to make it more environmentally sustainable. It just means that the manufacturer is putting the word “recyclable” on the container, implying that you should recycle it.  Keep in mind that in this day and age, almost all glass, aluminum, plastic and paper materials are recyclable. But just because you might see the word “recyclable” on a container doesn't mean it's recyclable in your community. So, in short, when you hear this claim, you should not only disregard it as a claim upon which to make a decision, but it should also alert you that if the manufacturer is making this claim, make sure their other claims do have real environmental impact.

2. Made from Recycled Materials
This is better. It means that some part of that product actually is made of something used already and processed make into this product via recycling. But this claim doesn't specify a percentage, which is important to know when making purchasing decisions.

3. Made from 100% Recycled Materials
Even better. None of this product is made from virgin trees or plastic or whatever materials were used. That means no natural resources needed to be harvested or mined for this product ... AND this product creates a demand for materials to be kept out of landfills. For paper alone, a ton of 100% recycled material saves 12 trees, 4100 kWh (kilowatt-hours) of energy and 7,000 gallons of water.

4. Made from 100% Post-Consumer-Waste Recycled Material
The best. But what is the difference between this item and No. 3 above? This is an important item to know and understand. When you see the term “recycled materials,” there are two possible components to it:
a. Pre-Consumer Waste
b. Post-Consumer Waste

Pre-consumer waste is the leftovers from a newspaper run, the trimmings of paper manufacturing or any waste created in the production of a product. Those scraps are then sold back into the market as pre-consumer waste. This is much better than virgin materials but not nearly as good as post-consumer waste.

Post-consumer waste is the waste produced after it has reached the consumer. It has already been fully used, discarded in a recycling bin and then made into a new product. Post-consumer waste, also called PCW, is the element that saves the most natural resources.

So next time you go to purchase a napkin, keep in mind that if you see two napkins that say 100% recycled materials, they are not necessarily the same. One could have 60% post-consumer waste and 40% pre-consumer waste, while the other one has 20% post-consumer waste and 80% pre-consumer waste. The first product has three times the environmental value in the additional post-consumer waste. If you know that, then you can make sure you are spending your precious dollars in a way that is truly going to have the largest impact.

There are lots of environmental claims being made these days with great brochures and nice green colors.  Keep in mind to ask, "Show me the numbers." The real story is in the percentages.

Posted by Michael Oshman on November 19, 2008 | Comments (2)