CHEP Talks Up Green Benefits
By Chaille Brindley
Date Posted: 10/1/2007
In the debate over who has the best sustainable packaging solution, CHEP has released a report touting the benefits of its pooling system. The report addresses the environmental and sustainability benefits of pallet pooling compared to other models.
According to CHEP, the study reveals that compared to the other common shipping platforms – one-way pallets, exchange pallets and corrugated slip-sheets – CHEP pooled pallets produce much less solid waste, require less total energy and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The report was developed by Franklin Associates, a research firm specializing in life cycle analysis and solid waste management.
CHEP claims the following savings by using pooled pallets instead of one-way pallets to ship 100,000 product unit loads per year:
• Reduce solid waste by over 1 million pounds (equivalent to 46 dump trucks filled with waste)
• Save 3.3 billion BTUs of energy (equivalent to 86 homes powered by electricity for a year)
• Avoid release of more than 250 tons of greenhouse gas emissions (equivalent to 49 passenger cars taken off the road).
Dave Mezzanotte, COO of CHEP, said, “From the managed tree plantations where we source our wood to our pallet repair facilities, CHEP is committed to reducing environmental waste and increasing customer savings through the proper use and stewardship of all natural resources.”
Franklin Associates performed a life-cycle inventory analysis of common shipping platforms, including the CHEP pooled pallet program. The study covered the extraction and processing of raw materials; platform fabrication; transportation of the platform to the customer (shipper); the use of the platform by the customer (including transportation cycles); and the recovery, reuse, recycling, or disposal of each platform after its useful life. The study quantified the solid waste, energy and environmental emissions resulting from the entire useful life of each platform.
CHEP’s study concluded that a one-way system produces 20 times as much solid waste, requires 125% more total energy and produces 135% more greenhouse gas emissions than the CHEP block pallet for an equivalent number of pallet trips. Furthermore, the study estimated that the pallet exchange produces eight times as much solid waste, requires 30% more total energy, and produces 30% more greenhouse gas emissions than the CHEP block pallet for an equivalent number of pallet trips. Corrugated Slip-sheets produce three times as much solid waste and require 20% more total energy compared to the CHEP block pallet for an equivalent number of pallet trips.
Of course, CHEP is not the only one to tout its green credentials. The Reusable Pallet & Container Coalition did the same thing in a recent life cycle analysis report. The U.S. Forest Service is currently studying the impact of wood pallets in landfills, which is a major component to any sustainability equation. The research is expected to show a reduction in the number of wood pallets going into landfills thanks to increased recycling of one-way packaging.
Discovering what is the best solution from a sustainability concern is easier said than done. The big problem is that life cycle analysis can be easily manipulated to come up with whatever conclusion you want. It all depends on how you define terms, measure key issues and quantify your competition. For example, both plastic and wood pallet interests have claimed to offer superior benefits when it comes to total life cycle analysis considerations. While both sides can claim to be the best, there has to be a winner and a loser in reality.
Sustainability has become a bigger deal over the past year as companies look to reduce negative impacts on the environment and develop stronger public reputations for green practices. Notably, Wal-Mart has launched a number of green initiatives, including a sustainable packaging program aimed at consumer packaging issues. This will have some ripple effects into transport packaging, including pallets.
Dr. Mark White, the former director of the Sardo Pallet Lab at Virginia Tech. Dr. White is a leading voice on packaging and unit load issues who regularly consults with major companies. Dr. White said in that companies are looking at sustainability because they ultimately believe it will bring cost savings to their bottom lines. Environmental benefits are just the icing on the cake.
One interesting wrinkle is that the discussion is not just wood vs. plastic. It is also one-way packaging vs. systematic pooling or exchange pallets. One-way packaging is not necessarily bad for the environment. It all depends on the situation. For example, shingle pallets are a perfect example of an application where pallets are made for one-time use. In many cases, those pallets are sent to new housing developments. This is not a typical closed loop situation. Unlike retail, where there are repeat patterns and processes, this is a one-time shot. A pooled pallet would make no sense. Who would send a truck to get one or two pallets? Is it more environmentally friendly to retrieve every pallet? What about the gas involved to do so? Or is better to only retrieve the pallets that are in closed loops and are easy to get?
The green discussion is just beginning. You should be asking your suppliers how they stack up.
