Horizontal Form-Fill-Seal Packaging With Ingeo New Structures Opportunities Presented By: Roman Forowycz Innovation Takes Root Conference February 17 19, 2014
Company Profile Clear Lam Packaging is a multi-faceted manufacturer of Flexible Films, Rigid Rollstock, and Customized Compounded Polymer Additives Founded in 1969 Three (3) Manufacturing Facilities Totaling Over 660,000 Square Feet 2 US Facilities and 1 Chinese Facility Over 500 Employees Five (5) Operating Divisions Flexible Films, Forming Films, CL Polymers, LLC, PrimaPak Systems and Clear Lam Flexible Films (Nanjing) Co., Ltd Page 1
Clear Lam Product Lines Page 2
Various Manufacturing Disciplines Film Extrusion Laminating & Coating Sheet Extrusion Slitting Compounding Printing Page 3
What Is Horizontal Form-Fill-Seal Technology? An automated process that can produce a finished, semi rigid or flexible, plastic package primarily for perishable goods Process Includes: Unwinding roll of plastic Heating Forming Filling formed containers with product Sealing with or without vacuum or gas flush Scoring and cutting discharging Page 4
Manufacturing Process For Yogurt Cups Horizontal Form - Fill - Seal (HFFS) Forming Station Contact Heating Page 5
Benefits of HFFS Technology Lower material costs compared to preformed cups and trays Simpler product loading (on web) High output Significantly reduces warehousing space Removes trucks from the supply chain no need to ship preforms to processors Saves fuel consumption and reduces greenhouse gas emissions Page 6
Common HFFS Equipment In Market 1. Reiser Repack 2. Multivac 3. Ossid 4. Harpak Ulma 5. GEA Tiromat 6. Iapra 7. Rollstock, Inc. 8. Hassia 9. Arcil Page 7
Video Courtesy of Ossid Insert mov converted file here Page 8
HFFS Packaging Examples In Market Cheese Sliced Meats (Club Store) Cut Veggies / Fruit Page 9
HFFS Packaging Examples In Market Sliced Meats (Retail) Yogurt Razors Page 10
HFFS Packaging Examples In Market Burritos Pasta Veggie Patties Page 11
HFFS Packaging Examples In Market Page 12
Market Data - Sustainability Source: Priority Metrics Group and Packaging Strategies, 2013 Sustainable Packaging Survey, November 2013, Page 13
Market Data Consumers & Sustainability Source: Priority Metrics Group and Packaging Strategies, 2013 Sustainable Packaging Survey, November 2013, Page 14
Benefits Of Renewable PLA Lower cost per area (inch / cm) Lighter gauge vs. HIPS/PET/PP/RPET Equal or better barrier Comes from non petroleum based raw material Lower carbon footprint More stable pricing vs. traditional petroleum based plastics that fluctuate monthly Page 15
Examples of Current Market Structures Vs. Ingeo Based Alternatives Refrigerated Pasta Packaging PET/EVOH/PE PLA/EVOH/PE Gauge: 20mil OTR: 0.06cc/ 100sq.in./24 hrs. MVTR: 0.12g/ 100sqin./24hrs. Gauge: 18mil OTR: 0.07cc/ 100sq.in./24hrs. MVTR: 0.23g/ 100sq.in./24hrs Page 16
Examples of Current Market Structures Vs. Ingeo Based Alternatives Refrigerated Cut Vegetable Packs PETG/PE PLA/PE Gauge: 14mil OTR: 2.05cc/ 100sq.in./24hrs MVTR: 0.31g/ 100sq.in./24hrs. Gauge: 12mil OTR: 2.07cc/ 100sq.in./24hrs. MVTR: 0.35g/ 100sq.in./24hrs. Page 17
Examples of Current Market Structures Vs. Ingeo Based Alternatives Refrigerated Snap-Apart 4 Pack Yogurt HIPS PLA Gauge: 36mil OTR: 11.7cc/ 100sq.in./24hrs MVTR: 0.28g/ 100sq.in./24hrs Gauge: 27mil OTR: 0.78cc/ 100sq.in./24hrs. MVTR: 0.29g/ 100sq.in./24hrs. Page 18
Environmental Benefits Calculator 1950 Pratt Boulevard Elk Grove Village, IL 60007 Phone 847 378 1200 Fax 847 378 1325 www.clearlam.com ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS CALCULATION WORKSHEET 36 mil HIPS 27mil PLA Enter data in yellow sections Results displayed in green sections 9/13/2012 MATERIAL LB CO2 MJ LB CO2 MJ (assuming the same annual material weight) Usage net difference equates to: Usage net difference equates to: CONTROL STRUCTURE ALTERNATE STRUCTURE GAGE Renewable GHG ENERGY GAGE Renewable GHG ENERGY (mils) (%) eq /LB material / Kgm material (mils) (%) eq /LB material / Kgm material EVA 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0 0.000 0.0 NYLON 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0 0.000 0.0 PP 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0 0.000 0.0 PET 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0 0.000 0.0 LDPE 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0 0.000 0.0 HDPE 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0 0.000 0.0 LLDPE 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0 0.000 0.0 PLA 0.0 0.000 0.0 27.00 100.0 1.300 42.2 PVC 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0 0.000 0.0 HIPS 0.0 2.757 85.6 0.0 0.000 0.0 36.00 GPPS 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0 0.000 0.0 CELLOPHANE 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0 0.000 0.0 EVOH 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0 0.000 0.0 Foil 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0 0.000 0.0 Glass 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0 0.000 0.0 TOTAL 36.00 0.0 2.757 85.6 27.00 100.0 1.300 42.2 Control versus Alternate net Alternate Structure Weight change Difference 1,000,000LBs each material 894,231LBs net wt change = 105,769 GHG ENERGY TOTAL GHG ENERGY TOTAL Percentage % 52.8 50.7 57.8 55.9 Railcars of coal / year 3.5 9.1 12.5 3.8 10.0 13.8 Therms of Natural gas used 132,334 186,753 319,088 144,823 205,960 350,783 Comparable Savings: 1,998,360 crude oil gallons annually 3,190,880 therms of natural gas Emissions equivalent to 3,710 passenger cars passenger cars / year 121 250 371 133 275 408 automobile driving distance 1,436,165 2,960,269 4,396,434 1,571,699 3,264,717 4,836,416 Barrels of crude oil / year 1,538 3,220 4,758 1,683 3,551.2 5,234.5 52.8% reduction in GHG emissions by utilizing Renu PLA over HIPS Automobile driving distance passenger cars / year * 11,856 miles / car Barrels of crude oil / year structure GHG total * Yearly usage / (0.430 mton CO2 / barrel * 2203 lbs/mton) Energy calculations structure Energy total * Yearly usage * 0.454 Kgm / lb / (22.68 mmbtu / mton * 90.89 mton Railcars of coal / yearcoal / railcar * 1055 Mj / mmbtu) 50.7% additional energy savings Therms of Natural gas used structure Energy total * Yearly usage * 0.454 Kgm / lb * 1 Therms / 105.506 Mj Passenger cars / year driving distance / 11,856 miles / year Automobile driving distance Energy total * Yearly usage * 0.454 Kgm / lb * 1 barrel / 5.22 mmbtu * 42 gallons / barrel * 1 mmbtu / 1055 Mj * 19.7 miles / gallon Barrels of crude oil / year structure Energy total * Yearly usage / (5.80 mmbtu / Barrel * 1055 Mj / mmbtu * 1 lb / 0.454 Kgm) DENSITY Renewable GHG ENERGY Specific Gravity 1.00 = 100% LB CO2 eq (100 yrs) / LB material MJ / Kgm material MATERIAL Reference / source & date EVA 0.90 0.00 2.300 91.0 Wal Mart scorecard / DuPont company 7/2009 NYLON 1.15 0.00 7.200 120.0 Wal Mart scorecard / DuPont company 7/2009 PP 0.89 0.00 1.343 63.4 US LCI Database DOE / NREL / Alliance 2009 PET 1.36 0.00 2.538 69.1 US LCI Database DOE / NREL / Alliance 2009 LDPE 0.90 0.00 1.477 74.0 US LCI Database DOE / NREL / Alliance 2009 HDPE 0.94 0.00 1.478 68.9 US LCI Database DOE / NREL / Alliance 2009 LLDPE 0.92 0.00 1.479 68.5 US LCI Database DOE / NREL / Alliance 2009 PLA 1.24 1.00 1.300 42.2 NatureWorks 10/2009 Data PVC 1.29 0.00 2.029 52.4 American Chemistry Council 7/2009 HIPS 1.04 0.00 2.757 85.6 American Chemistry Council 7/2009 GPPS 1.04 0.00 2.763 84.6 American Chemistry Council 7/2009 CELLOPHANE 1.45 0.98 0.479 20.9 Use cardboard values Wal Mart scorecard 7/2009 EVOH 1.20 0.00 2.300 91.0 Use EVA values Wal Mart Scorecard / DuPont 7/2009 Foil 2.70 0.00 1.332 0.0 European Aluminum Association 7/2009 Glass 2.60 1.00 NO renewable energy credits nor carbon offset purchases included in values. Latest published data of real values used. Based on 10,000,000lbs. of material Page 19
Future Considerations Cost of real estate throughout the supply chain will continue to increase enhanced cube will be critical E commerce will grow substantially and packaging will need to be lighter and take up less space Consumers will demand lighter, easy to use, and easy to dispose packaging Freedonia, a research leader, projects U.S. demand for bioplastics in the packaging market will increase 19% per year to reach 277 million pounds in 2016 Page 20
Conclusions HFFS applications for refrigerated products are well suited for Ingeo based structures (multi layer and mono layer) Ingeo s characteristics allow for the opportunity to create lighter packaging with the appropriate strength In many cases, consumable costs can be lowered as compared to traditional petroleum based plastics CPG s and retailers can reach cost savings and sustainability goals by incorporating Ingeo PLA in form fill seal applications Page 21