J. Pack. Set. TechnoL Vol.4 No.3 (1995)

Environment and Packaging
環境と包装

Robert Koichi Kawaratani*

1. Introduction
My colleague, Dr. Gordon Robertson of
Tetra Pak Asia/Pacific, summarizes society's
overall approach to the environment as fol-the packaging material, all front end aspects.
I wou ld li ke to sta rt this pre se n tation byr e v i e w i n g t h e e n v i r o n me n t a l , r e s o u r c e , a n denergy framework that Japan, packaging, andliquid food packaging in particular exist with-lows:

in. Without understanding this context, it is・ Environmental Issues are Emotionaldifficult to evaluate the relationship of the envi-

・ Environmental Solutions are Technicalronmental issues to the overall environmental
issues facing Japan.

・ Environmental Decisions are Political
・ Environmental Advantages are Competitive
I would add another two points:
・ Environmental Problems are Complex
・ Environmental Information is Always InadeQuate
Environmental issues related to packaging
are no exception and the debate over packaging tends to be driven by emotion, misconceptions, and local infrastructure related issues.
The public debate on environ mental issues
related to packaging mainly focuses on backend issues which is probably inevitable given
the visible nature of packaging in domestic
solid waste even though the bulk of environmental impacts related to packaging systems
are related to extraction of raw materials, processing of the raw materials, and production of

2. Japan and the Environment

Japan has an interesting image in othercountries regarding the environment Environme n t a l p r o f e s s i o n a l s i n ma n y c o u n t r i e s a r eaware of Japan's unparalleled achievements1 inimprovement of air quality including leadingd e v e l o p me n t o f l o w e mi s s i o n a u t o mo b i l e s ,clean fossil fuel fired power plants, and creation of a superb infrastructure for managing
municipal solid waste. This is contrasted by
the sharp attacks on Japan for its scientificwhaling program and attempts to end the banon commercial whaling, its role as the world's
larg est imp o rter of tropical hardwoods, andreactive rather than proactive, approach to*Nihon Tetra Pak K.K., Address Bldg., 2-19, Akasaka 2-chome Minato-ku, Tokyo, 107- 1 7 5 -

Environment

andPackagingenvironmental issues in general. One majore x a mp l e i s t h e i n i t i a l s t r o n g r e s i s t a n c e d u r i n g
the negotiation of the Montreal Protocol to thephaseout of CFCs.
So, wha t i s Japan 's real status in relation tot h e e n v i r o n me n t ? H o w d o e s J a p a n c o mp a r e t oother advanced industrial countries?
Japanese think of Japan as being a small
country. In terms of land area, while Japanm a y b e s m a l l c o mp a r e d t o t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s ,Russia, or China, its land area is larger thanmost of the countries hi Europe including
Italy, Germany, and the United Kingdom.

of municipal and industrial solid waste 1 ) , 2 ) .
Environmental data contained in the latest
OECD Environment Compendium was usedby the UK newspaper, The Independent, and athink tank to rank the G7 nations in “TheGreen League Table” as shown above. Japanranked first with 71.5 out of 100 with the United States at the bottom of heap with a score of
34.5. While not a perfect evaluation, the results

Japan has the second largest population ofshow that the investments in environmental

the OECD member countries and if it were a

protection made over the past two decades byJapan have had some impact especially inmember of the European Union, Japanese
would be languag e spok en b y the larg est numb e r o f E U c it iz en s, a hea d o f Eng li sh , F ren ch ,a n d
G e r m a n .
Of the OECD member nations, Japan ranks

Table 1

2nd for total CO2 emissions, is the second
largest consumer of fossil fuel, largest producer of steel, second largest producer and cons u me r o f p a p e r , a n d s e c o n d l a r g e s t p r o d u c e r

regard to air quality. Also, the score of 71.5
indicates that there are some areas with room
for improvement.

OECD/G7 Green League Tables 6 )CO2tons/capita

SOx
kg/capita

Nox
kg/capita

SewageTreatment%
CoveredMunicipal
Solid
Waste
kg/capita

Energy Use
TOE/
$1000
GDP

Best

2.31 tons

7.0 kg

3.0 kg98 %257 kg

0.21

Worst

19.8 tons

122 kg74 kg

1%776 kg

0.5

Japan
Italy

63.3

100

89.5

42.4

70.3

91.7

71.5

71.9

76.3

55.8

61.6

82.5

100

67.2

UK

53.4

52.5

37.3

88.7

82.5

71.8

63.6

France

72.8

86.2

67.2

69.4

86.3

76.6

62.5

Germany
Canada

43.6

44.2

47.4

87.1

82.1

78. 5

59.6

19.8

0.0

4.3

71.2

33.7

0.0

37.2

USA

0.0

35.0

0.3

75.3

10.6

26.2

34.5

- 1 7 6 -OverallScore

J. Pack. Set. Technol. Vol.4 No.3 (1995)

3. Japan and Resources

Table 3 Material Consumption for Packaging
19927),1),9)Paper/Paperboard
Plastic
Steel
Aluminum
Glass%
Total Usea Packaging
Use
Packaging(000 tons)(000 tons)
Use
27,987
12,01742.9%
12,796
3,570
27.9%
b
98,132
2,150
2.2%
2,431
376
15.5%
2 ,370Wood

69,120c

Most papers discussing Japan and its econo-

Malerial

my will include an obligatory comment about
Japan being very resource poor. On the other
hand, environmental commentators use adjectives like "voracious" and "predatory" inregards to Japan's drive to obtain resources.
The following table illustrates Japan's consumption of selected materials and the large

2.3%

a. 1991 unless Otherwise Noted
b. 1992
c. Does not include pulp raw materials.

share of these resources used relative toJapan's population.

share of the consumption of various materials

Table 2 Consumption of Materials 19917)
GlobalConsumption
Material ConsumptionJapan(tons)(tons)
Aluminum 17, 194,000 2,43 1,600
Steel
732 ,002,000 99, 1 49,000
Cadmium
20,2006,400
Copper
1 0,71 4,000 1 ,61 3,200
Lead
5,342,200
422500
Nickel
882,000
180,100
Tin
218,200
34 ,900
Zinc
6 ,992,800
845,500
3,068,300,00
Petroleum
249, 700,000
0

1 ,560as the following table shows.
Although a detailed analysis of the resource

Rank (%)

impacts of these packaging materials is beyond the scope of this presentation, it should
be noted that the reserves of the primary raw
materials for aluminum, steel, and glass while
not renewable are available in quantities thatcan be considered to be nearly inexhaustible.

2 (14.1%)
1 (13.5%)
1 (31.7%)
2 (15.1%)
2 (7.9%)1 (20.4%)
2 (16.0%)
2 (12.1%)

Some materials used for alloying and coating
metal products (e.g. tin) have relatively limited
reserves. Although petroleu m reserves arelimited, use of petroleum and other fossil

3( 8.1%)As this table shows, Japan is either thelargest or second largest consumer of most ofthese materials (Japan's rank was raised in a
few cases since the former Soviet Union no

organic materials for feedstocks for producing
plastics are only a few percent of the total consumption of petroleum. In addition, alternative

longer exists). Japan is also the largest or sec-

feedstocks for producing plastics are available

ond largest importer of these materials andother materials such as tropical hardwoods.

including biomass based feedstocks. Forest
resources, although threatened in many developing countries, with proper management can
provide a sustainable yield of fiber and otherproducts as in the case of the managed forestsof the industrialized countries of North America and No rthern Eu rope.
Rather than availability of resources, the

4. Packaging and Resources
As the Japanese economy as a whole consumes a substantial share of the world's resources, packaging accounts for a significant

-

1

7

7

-

Environment

andenvironmental impacts associated with extraction and processing of the various materials
used for packaging will probably be a major
constraint on the availability of these materials. Worldwide 24 billion tons of non-fuel minerals are extracted and a total of 28 billion tonsof material including overburden are moved to
extract the minerals. One copper mine in
Papua New Guinea dumped 130,000 tons ofwaste daily, roughly the same amount as thedaily municipal solid waste in Japan, until it
was closed by a civil war. It should be notedthat copper mining produces more mining
waste per ton than iron or aluminum due to its
low average grade (0.91%) compared to 40%
for iron and 23% for aluminum. It has been
estimated that 500,000 hectares (mo re thanthe combined area of Tokyo and Kanagawa)are directly impacted by mining activities. In
the United States, a number of Superfund Hazardous Waste sites are disposal sites for mining waste including the large Superfund Site
located in Montana along 220 km of the Clark
River. It has been estimated by a local environmental group that the cleanup of the minesite and disposal sites will cost in excess of $1
billion.
Large amounts of energy are consumed in
the extraction and processing of metal ores.
Taking aluminum as an example, on a global
scale, the aluminum industry is estimated touse 290 billion kwh of electricity for smelting
aluminum, more electricity than is consumedon the African continent Taking the energy
required for mining and other processing into
account, the aluminum industry is estimatedto consume about 1% of the world's energy 8 ) .

- 1 7 8 -Packaging

Although economic shifts including the rising value of the yen may reduce incentives,
the environmental impacts of extracting andprocessing metals even with a high level ofenvironmental control are such that this provides a major incentive for recycling of metals.
The same incentives exist to lesser degrees
for glass, paper, and plastics. In the case of
paper and plastic, a combination of material
recycling and energy recovery is appropriate.

5. Packaging, Solid Waste Management,
and Recycling
The solid waste management problems of
local governments in Japan are real and pressing and used packaging is certainly a visible
part of the problem. The share of packaging
material in municipal solid waste has been
estimated to be about 30% which seems to be
typical for major developed nations. Although
it is a major cost factor, management of municipal solid waste is not an environmental problem but an infrastructure problem. Although
Japan is currently a world leader in municipal
infrastructure investments, including municipal solid waste management facilities, it is also
obvious that no reasonable investment program could have kept pace with the explosive
growth in solid waste during the era of the
bubble economy during the late 1980's.
Given these circumstances, it's not surprising that local governments are emphasizing
recycling as a major part of their solid waste
management programs. In particular, collection programs being conducted by local governments emphasize the collection of beverage containers (glass bottles, steel, andJ. Pack. Set. Technol Vol.4 No.3 (1995)

aluminum cans) and paper. Municipal governments account for over 95% of the steel canscollected and a high proportion of the aluminum cans collected. The total consumptionof beverage containers in Japan is equivalent

waste from municipal waste management).
DSD was less successful at controlling costs
and collecting the fees for use of the GreenDot and accumulated debts of about one billion DM. It required major refunding including conversion of debts into loans from waste
haulers and other vendors. DSD was actually
too successful at collecting many materials
and succeeded in overwhelming recycling

to less than 10% of the municipal solid waste
stream and less than 5% if glass bottles are notconsidered. Given that the recycling rates forglass bottles and metal cans are greater than
50%, further increases in collection will nothave a major impact on the success or failureof solid waste minimization programs. Paper

capacity in Germany and other countries.
Exports of materials for recycling included 1.3
million tons of paper and 170,000 tons of plastic (60% of the amount collected) to Eastern

has an overall recycling rate over 50% and theprospects for major increases in use of waste

Europe and Asia. Some of this plastic alongpaper as a feedstock are limited as many types

with shipments from other countries were theof paper are approaching current technical limits for recycled fiber content
Japan has a long history of recycling andeven prior to the current re-emphasis on recycling has had relatively high rates of recycling
for many materials. The recycling system until
recently was driven primarily by the raw material needs of various production processes,
what can be called demand pulled recycling.
Recycling programs like DSD in Germany,municipal collection programs in North America, and the current efforts by local govern-

subject of a request for return to the countryof origin by Indonesia due to contamination,lack of proper sorting, and other factors that
rendered the material difficult to recycle.
Table 4 DSD Collection by Material
in 19932)
Material

ments can be called supply pushed recycling.
Supply pushed recycling efforts often
encounter major difficulties in regards to finding outlets for the materials collected particularly during the early years of such programs.
Taking DSD as an example, 1993 was a successful year for collection and DSD collected
4.6 million tons of packaging material andarranged.for recycling of 85% or 3.9 million
tons (equivalent to a 13% diversion of solid

-

tons

Glass

2 ,460,000

Paper/ Paperboard

1,160,000

Paper Beverage Cartons

52,000Tinplate

250,000

Aluminum

9,000

Plastics

280,000

The projected cost operating DSD in 1994 is
3.2 billion DM or 40 DM (¥2,400) per capita.
Along with the cost of the system, it remains
to be seen whether Germany will resolveo t h e r p ro b le ms r e l a t ed to t h e p r o g r a m a l though a rapid expansion in recycling capacity
for plastic is being implemented by major
petrochemical companies. A number of revisions to the packaging ordinance are being

1

7

9

-

Environment and Packaging

c o n s id e re d in cl u d in g p e r mi t t i n g th e u s e o fincineration with energy recovery for materials collected in excess of targets and changes
in deadlines for achieving targets. The German experiment will continue to be of greatinterest and it will be important to receive theright lessons from this experience.

6. Life Cycle Analysis and Packaging
Conceptually life cycle analysis is a straightforward exercise, adding up the various inputs
and outputs for a given system. The actual
execution is relatively difficult, time consuming, and the accuracy of the results limited by
the quality of the input data. The Coca-Cola
company sponsored one of the first life cycle
analysis studies of beverage containers in
1969. Since then Life Cycle Analysis has
become wide used, especially in the last five
years and a number of life cycle analysis studies of packaging are being conducted in Japanby packaging makers such as Toyo Seikan andNihon Tetra Pak, industry groups such Chemical Economy Research Institute and Plastic
Waste Management Institute, and packaging
users like the Japanese Consumers* Cooperative Union.
Most of the studies conducted thus far inJapan have focused on the life cycle inventory
or compilation of the various inputs and outputs of a given system. This stage, while time
consuming and costly, is straightforward
although th ere a number of approach es fo r
compiling and expressing an inventory. Also,
inventory compilation is also hampered by thedifficulty of access to necessary data.

- 1 8 0 -The next stage, life cycle assessment, is anarea where much mo re work is required andthere seem to be about as many ways to conduct life cycle assessments as there are workers in the field. Much of the problem stems
from the fact that for many environmental
problems such as acid rain or toxic substances, the dose response relationship iseither not well understood or varies markedly
with the location, season, and other environmental factors. The assessment stage is essential taking the environmental outputs fromsystems and converting them into impact functions. These impact functions are then used asa basis for assessing the overall environmental
impact of a given product or system. A variety
of approaches have been used to compile ther e s u l t s o f l i f e c yc l e i n v en to r i e s a nd a s s e ss ments including assignment and adding up
Ecopoints, conversion of health effect impacts
into monetary value, and development of arange of da mage functions based on variou s
criteria including local environmental standards.
The best use of a life cycle inventory ora s se ssme n t i s fo r i d ent i f ying and evalu ating
measures for improving the environmental
performance of a product Life cycle analysis isless useful for deciding between differentt y p e s o f p a c k ag in g b e c a u se s y s t e ms a r e n o t
always fu nctiona lly eq uiv alent. Also, factors
other than the types of parameters that can behandled by life cycle analysis such as healthand safety regulations, suitability for a given
distribution route, and consumer convenience
weigh heavily in the selection of packaging.
Some basic points th at can be made based

J. Pack. Sci. Technol Vol.4 No.3 (1995)

on LCA inventories are as follows:
・E The bulk of energy consumption and environmental impact for most one way packag-with energy recovery and with production of
toilet paper from virgin materials included toprovide the same endpoint Energy consump-ing systems occurs during the production of
the raw materials with transportation beingtion and water consumption were less for theincineration case while other environmental

the next largest item.

parameters evaluated were better for the recy-

・E Energy consumption is proportional to thea mo u n t o f ma t e r i a l u s e d .
・E Emissions of sulfur oxides and other fossil
related air pollutants are closely linked toenergy consumption.
These points illustrate the importance ofsource reduction in reducing the environmental burden of packaging.
To illustrate one practical application for
LCA, I would like to briefly discuss the resultsof a study which will be presented in moredetail by the project team during the last session of this Meeting. Last year Nihon Tetra
Pak sponsored an analysis of the recycling of
milk cartons versus handling by municipal
solid waste management
One of the key points of the milk carton
recycling system in Japan is the requirementthat cartons be clean and dry. This is primari-cling case. If the production of toilet paper
from virgin material is not included in theincineration case, most of the environmental
parameters evaluated would be better for theincineration case3).
Although the results did not point out a clear"winner" from an environmental standpoint,
o n e c l e a r r e c o m me n d a t i o n d i d e me r g e f o r
reducing the environmental burden of recycling. Care needs to be take when rinsing cartons to reduce the water used. The water used
for rinsing cartons even in the worst case is atrivial proportion of household water consumption but use of 2 to 3 liters of water torinse a carton is significant in the life cycle ofa package made from about 30 grams of material.

7. Closing Comments

ly due to the collection route which involves
handling by waste paper dealers who are not

In discussing packaging and the environ-equipped to handle wet and dirty materials.
Based on a survey of individuals involved in
carton recycling, it was esti mate d that theamount of water used to wash a carton was
greater than the amount of water used to produce the raw materials in a carton.
Two major cases were examined. The recycling case with production of toilet paper fromcollected,consumer waste cartons. The incineration case with cartons being incinerated

ment, it is difficult to discuss these issues
without considering Japan's overall policies
and situation regarding environment, resources, energy and solid waste management As
noted earlier in the presentation, for most of
the major packaging materials used in Japan,
the use of those materials for packaging are
not dominant factors in the use of thoseresource bases. Japan and other industrializedcountries are in the process of groping- 1 8 1 -

Environment

andPackagingtowards new policies that will reduce the overall impact of the developed world on global

packaging, recycling, use of renewable resources and energy, and a solid waste man-

resources and the environment Packaging

agement system that maximizes energy recovery will all play important roles in reducing thewill definitely have a contribution to make inthe implementation of these new policies.
A l t ho ugh jo u rn a li s t s, p o li ti c ia n s , en v i r o n mentalists, and public relations specialists
focus on key catch phrases such as “Building
the Recycling Society”, the real world is complicated and approaches akin to the free size
concept for women's clothing which results ingarments that don't fit many women will not
help us to meet real world environmental
ob jectives. Unfortunately recycling to man ypeople has become an objective rather than ame a n s to a e n d a n d th i s is r e sp o n si b le f o r
many of the distortions that we see hi public
perception and policy today.
Although not as pleasing to the ear as“Building the Recycling Society”, our real goal
as a society and industry is “Achieving a Sustainable Resource and Energy Conserving
Society with Low Environmental Impact”. For
the packaging industry, our contribution must
be to provide packaging that meets packaging
performance needs while minimizing resourceand energy consumption. We have a variety ofmeans to achieve these objectives and the mix
of approaches that is best for Japan is likely to
be different from the mix used in the UnitedStates or Europe. Source reduction, reusable

net environmental burden of packaging andthe econ omy as a wh ole.

References
1) Y. Arai, JPI Journal 32 (5), 5 (1974)
2) Green Packaging 2000, 4 (4), 12 (1994)
3) M. Ishikawa et al., "Proceedings of the 10th
Conference of Energy System and Economy",p. 273 (1993)
4) OECD Environmental Compendium 1993,
OECD, p. 324 (1993)
5) OECD Environmental Performance Reviews
Japan, OECD, p. 210 (1994)
6) N. Schoon, "Britain's green record is not all
black", The Independent/Daily Yo miuri,
December 17, 1993.
7) World Resources Institute, World Resources
1994-1995, Oxford University Press, p. 400( 1 9 9 4 )8) J. Young, Mining the Earth, World Watch
Paper 109, World Watch Institute, p. 53 (1992)
9) T. Oki, personal communication
Acknowledgments
I would like to express my appreciation to S.
Takada and R. Endo for their assistance inreviewing the drafts of this paper and to Dr. Y.
Oki for providing data on packaging utilization.
(Received 15 December 1994)- 1 8 2 -