More packaging, not less: MPMA director to expose climate change truths at environmental summit

12 Jun 2023 --- Packaging’s carbon footprint at a time of growing climate change fears will take center stage at this week’s Environmental Packaging Summit in Birmingham, UK. But Robert Fell, director and chief executive at the Metal Packaging Manufacturers Association (MPMA), tells us that food waste is a bigger environmental issue than packaging, and a problem that packaging can help alleviate.

Although the premise of the session in which Fell will participate is the decarbonization of packaging, he argues that effective packaging avoids more carbon than it requires to manufacture by prolonging the shelf life of food and protecting items from damage. 

“Ironically, to reduce the carbon generated within the supply chain significantly, there is a good argument for the use of more, not less packaging,” he says.

“Moreover, if the packaging fails or is not used and the product is damaged, there is a significant carbon penalty related to additional transport and either repair or replacement.”

Packaging reduces the risk of food spoiling before it is consumed, which in turn avoids the generation of methane, a by-product of decomposition with a more potent global warming impact than carbon dioxide.

Counting the carbon 
One of the key ways of avoiding food waste is to significantly increase shelf life, which is where well-designed packaging can play a crucial role.

In 2021, the Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP) published a study on the UK food supply chain’s total GHG emissions. The study showed the proportion of GHG emissions associated with food production was around 68% of the total, which according to Fell, is “hardly surprising.” Extract from the WRAP 2021 report on GHGs in the UK’s food supply chain in 2018.

“What was less obvious was that the total contribution from all the packaging used to protect the food was only 3.3%,” he highlights.

“But, of course, the packaging is protecting far more than just the carbon of production because if the food spoils it will generate.” 

WRAP also revealed that consumers driving to and from the shops to buy their food contributed 6% of the total GHG emissions, almost twice that of packaging.

Fell asserts that carbon savings would be even higher if more food was canned.

“We have good third-party data showing the GHG contribution of packaging to the food supply chain is, in reality, negligible, so reductions in the carbon impact of packaging will only have a very limited impact on the total,” continues Fell.

“It’s been estimated that the packaging for food and drink in the UK accounts for around two-thirds of the total packaging used. This data, therefore, also covers two-thirds of all UK packaging for 2018.”

Cans to the rescue
In addition to this 2018 analysis, WRAP also looked at total food waste in the UK in 2018. According to the UK charity, the country wasted 6.4 million metric tons of food that could have been eaten in 2018, equivalent to around 17 million metric tons of CO2.

“A key reason for food waste is food spoiling or becoming out of date before it could be used. We also know that a good way to reduce food waste is to increase its shelf life, which is where the right sort of packaging comes in.”

A University of Delaware, US, report commissioned by Crown Holdings (now Eviosys) shows that the current use of metal food cans in the US and Canada, at the consumer stage alone, avoids the loss of 342 million liters a year, which can be extrapolated to over a billion liters if all the food cans sold globally are taken into account. 

Earlier this year, PackagingInsights discussed the profitability of canned foods and how they can help reduce food waste and associated carbon emissions with Fell.

“If we don’t stop wasting food, we’re in real trouble, not just from the waste of the carbon of its production, or the methane generated when it spoils, but also from the fact that with a growing world population, this wastage puts the natural world at even more risk from the plough,” he concludes. 

By Natalie Schwertheim