Foodservice Packaging Recovery: The Journey Continues

Transcription

1 Foodservice Packaging Recovery: The Journey Continues FPI & Pack2Go Europe Joint Meeting June 5, DRAFT - PRG MEMBER PRESENTATION 12/12/12

2 Recovery Background

3 The Challenges 3 The Challenges: Acknowledged that most foodservice packaging was not being recovered after use for a variety of reasons Limited infrastructure and end markets Real and perceived barriers Cost of recovery versus value of recovered material Consumer perceptions of, engagement with and access to foodservice packaging recovery Recognized that no one company had enough volume or influence to effect broad change alone

4 The Opportunities 4 The Opportunities: Work collaboratively to create solutions for the recovery and processing of used foodservice packaging Show that voluntary, industry-based recovery initiatives work and that new government-mandated solutions are not needed

5 The PRA & PRG 5 Paper Recovery Alliance (PRA) Formed in 2011 Plastics Recovery Group (PRG) Formed in 2012 Both are self-funded special interest groups within FPI Bring together a broad group of stakeholders across the entire value chain to work on the recovery of foodservice packaging Includes work on all recovery recycling, composting, energy recovery, with the desire to achieve the highest and best use possible for recovered materials.

6 6 Current PRA and/or PRG Members

7 Foam Recycling Coalition 7 Foam Recycling Coalition Formed in 2014 Goal: To support the recycling of post-consumer expanded polystyrene (EPS) foodservice and protective packaging.

8 Foam Recycling Coalition 8 Project Work General education about foam recycling Understanding end markets End market study Grant program FRC offers grants to public and private businesses in the U.S. and/or Canada to recycle foam FSP and protective packaging Recipients will receive funding for equipment, technical assistance First grant announced May 2015: Alpine Waste & Recycling in Denver, Colorado

9 Foam Recycling Coalition 9 Current members include: Americas Styrenics Cascades Canada ULC Chick-fil-A CKF Inc. Commodore Convermex D&W Fine Pack Dart Container Corporation Dolco Packaging, A Tekni-Plex Company Dyne-A-Pak Genpak Hawaii Foam Products NOVA Chemicals, Inc. Pactiv Foodservice/Food Packaging Shell Chemical Styrolution America TOTAL Petrochemicals with additional funding provided by the EPS Industry Alliance

10 Where have we been and where are we headed? 10 Intended to be a market-based approach with practical, scalable initiatives that allow circumstances to determine solutions Research, explore different approaches Solidify MRF-to- Market approach Launch MRF-to- Market approach, Identify barriers, firm up PRA/PRG identity Promote & publicize PRA/PRG work to MRFs, communities.

11 11 What are the barriers to FSP recovery we were hearing about? Oh, that s too dirty. It won t flow through a MRF properly. There are no end markets. Not interested in adding new materials. What is FSP? And how much is there? Recover More FSP It s not recyclable.

12 12 How are we addressing the barriers? Barrier: Understanding FSP Generation Data Barrier: Food Contamination Food Residue Studies Boston 2013 Delaware 2014 Barrier: Behavior & Fate in a MRF MRF Study Barrier: End Markets Paper Plastics Barrier: It s not recyclable Benchmarking Study

13 FSP Generation U.S. (by weight) 13 Clay Coated Paper Poly Coated Paper Other Coated Paper Napkins Paper Bags OCC Molded Pulp PS/PP/PET/PLA EPS Plastic Bags Total: ~5.5 million tons in U.S.

14 Barrier: Food Contamination 14 Does foodservice packaging (cups, containers, boxes & paper bags) collected at curbside have higher, lower, or the same amount of food residue to other food contact packaging (spaghetti jar, yogurt containers, etc.)? Food residue studies: Boston fall 2013 Delaware summer 2014

15 Barrier: Food Contamination 15 Boston 2013 Good study results, but samples were exceptionally clean Found no appreciable difference in the amount of residue on FSP and non-foodservice food contact packaging Delaware 2014 Same rating system and methodology as Boston All of the materials were dirtier FSP had only marginally more residue than other food contact packaging

16 Barrier: Behavior/Fate in a MRF 16 Co-sponsored MRF flow analysis study Conducted at 5 MRFs with range of sizes, geography, input and sorting technologies Added materials where needed Allowed materials to flow naturally for 3 hours Took samples from bales

17 Barrier: Behavior/Fate in a MRF 17 Preliminary results of the study include: Level of mechanization has significant effects Optical sorter can detect resin type whereas manual sorters have more difficulty Manual sorters can better detect form/shape Single stream facilities Size/shape highly dictates where the material ends up Plastic items that can break apart or be flattened have a higher likelihood of moving with paper Dual stream systems Separate paper and container streams can be confusing for consumers with poly coated cups, containers and other packaging

18 Barrier: End Markets 18 Working on end market development for all FSP materials Each have different characteristics in terms of processing and markets No FSP only bales working with existing bales Interactive map in the toolkit at to view end markets that may be interested in bales containing FSP.

19 Barrier: End Markets 19 Adding FSP to Mixed Paper Bale* Adding FSP to Mixed Plastics Bale* Beverage Cups - PS (Rigid) Beverage Cups - PP Food Containers - PP Food Containers - PET Food Containers - PS (Rigid) Beverage Cups - PET Current Other Coated Claycoated Molded Pulp OCC Polycoated Total Current *at a 10 percent recovery rate

20 Barrier: It s not recyclable 20 Fall 2013: Conducted study of nearly 70 MRFs in U.S. and Canada to Determine current prevalence of FSP acceptance Identify trends/factors impacting FSP acceptance Provide basis for measuring progress Identify FSP packaging types that are approaching key acceptance thresholds and may warrant a largescale survey to substantiate claims of recyclability

21 Barrier: It s not recyclable 21 Contrary to popular belief, FSP is recycled and/or composted in numerous communities across North America Many cities collect some FSP materials, even if they do not promote this to their residents On average, the MRFs included in the study accepted 7 out of the 19 types of FSP, and a majority accepted at least 9 of the 19 types Cup sleeves, pizza boxes and paper carryout bags were most widely accepted FSP items, followed by rigid plastic FSP items

22 In-Store Recovery

23 In-Store Recovery of FSP 23 Most FSP leaves the store, but it s a critical part of a brand s sustainability story First step: expand recovery infrastructure Second step: develop a recycling and composting tool kit for foodservice operators Use and build on company-specific learnings Partner with National Restaurant Association

24 In-Store Recovery of FSP 24 Toolkit to include: Definitions Business Case Waste Audit Guidance In House Logistics Help Hauler/Service Provider Language Staff and Customer Education Tips Suggested Local Resources Best Practices Case Studies Frequently Asked Questions

25 Communications

26 Stakeholder Communications 26 Establish relationships with wide variety of stakeholders in the packaging and recovery industries Seek input Educate Gain support Identify possible joint projects

27 Targeted Communications 27 Outreach to MRFs, end markets and communities Understand concerns Share results of studies and key learnings Encourage future acceptance of FSP Connect the dots / Play matchmaker

28 General Communications 28 Educate internal and external audiences through Online FSP Recovery Toolkit geared to municipalities, MRFs and end markets Data, reports, map, case studies Press releases Blog posts Webinars Speaking engagements

29 Recovery In Action

30 2015 Recovery Projects 30 Assist a municipality in adding FSP to their recycling program Assist a municipality in adding FSP to their composting program Document before and after assessments Publicize the results to encourage additional cities to recycle/compost FSP

31 Tracking FSP Recovery 31 Gather national data related to access to recycling of FSP Develop a database to track acceptance of FSP for recycling/composting by municipalities

32 More information: Natha Dempsey - DRAFT - PRG MEMBER PRESENTATION 12/12/12

33 More information: Natha Dempsey - DRAFT - PRG MEMBER PRESENTATION 12/12/12

34 More information: Natha Dempsey - DRAFT - PRG MEMBER PRESENTATION 12/12/12