|
The impact assessment on wine containers considered 7 different packaging alternatives
- 2 x 1.5 Litre Metallised Laminate Bag-in-Box
- 2 x 1.5 Litre EVOH based Bag-in-Box
- A 3 Litre Metallised Laminate Bag-in-Box
- 4 x 0.75 Litre Glass Bottle
- 3 x 1 Litre Liquid Packaging Board Container
- 2 x 1.5 Litre Aluminium Pouch
- A 3 Litre Aluminium Pouch
The following sections outline the results for this product category in terms of global warming potential and provide real world comparisons.
 |
 |
 |
 |
Stand Up Pouch |
Bottle |
Bag in Box |
Tetrapak |
Packaging Components Required to get TetraPak's to "Store"
 |
 |
 |
TetraPak Laminate |
Cap |
Transit Tray |
The results from the wine container comparison found that:
- The glass bottle was significantly worse than the other alternatives in 8 of the 10 categories including acidification and global warming despite containing 60% cullet glass.
- The liquid packaging board container was again worse than all other options in terms of ozone layer depletion, but it was the best option in 5 of the 10 impact categories including global warming.
- Overall, the BIB options were superior to pouches with the bigger packs giving greater benefits per litre packed.
|
