Packages and closures for packaging

Plastics have the smallest impact on the environment!

For a long time now we have been on a kind of crusade for plastic, emphasizing its advantages and appreciating its unrivaled physical and chemical properties compared to other materials. Sometimes we felt like the devil's advocate, but the more research was conducted, the more studies were published, the bigger sense we saw in our work.
Scientific analyses and common sense invariably indicate that very often plastic is the best choice.

The latest research shows that plastic has the smallest impact on the environment.
Last October, the American Society of the Plastics Industry (PLASTICS) published a report on analyses of the environmental impact of plastics.
The scientists took a closer look at the entire life cycle of plastic (Life Cycle Assessment LCA), which includes its manufacturing, processing, transportation, use and its final withdrawal from circulation.
When compared to other materials, and the study included e.g. steel, glass and aluminum, plastic performed the best.
In the case of plastic, all parameters, starting with the amount of energy and water required to manufacture it, the CO2 emissions during transportation, period of use and the final disposal,  looked much better than in the case of comparable materials.
Reading such test results, we always need to be aware of the data taken for the analysis. Therefore, if we compare disposable products, and that's what PLASTICS did, we can't compare them to, for example, a beer bottle, which can be returned, and has a completely different role to play.
Consequently, what was analyzed was e.g. 50 ml jars for cream, one made of glass and the other made of plastic. On the assumption that both of them will be recycled.
Similar comparisons were made with steel or aluminum objects.
In each of them, plastic performed much better.

Huge burden of environment protection

Plenty of factors need to be taken into account during a discussion about finding the golden means in the use of plastics in, particularly, disposable packaging.
Paradoxically, those factors may be perceived differently depending on the region of the world. The same factor may be in favor of plastic in Poland and against it in another country.
In Poland, big cities cope with smog generated by transport and heating. Consequently, if we are to choose heavy glass as the packaging for our product, have it transported multiple times, and thus contribute to air pollution, we should take a moment to reflect on whether this is the kind of environment protection we want.
However, if we had this choice in an ideal country, where trains are powered by hydrogen and are the main means of transport, the subsequent door-to-door transport is performed by electric vehicles powered by electricity from nuclear power plants, we might treat the product weight factor differently in our deliberations.

Durability above all

Irrespective of the part of the world, products launched on the market should be durable. Consumers are fed up with low-quality products, vast majority of them pays attention to the quality of the items they buy.
If we go deeper into the qualitative aspects of disposable products, we need to make a small digression - a disposable product isn’t a product which can be used only once.
The best example are disposable razors, which can be in use for about a month... The point is that once they get blunt, they aren’t good for anything else without processing.

The research into the life cycle of disposable products took into account whether products made of particular plastics fully play the role for which they have been created. If the manufacturer has assumed their durability for a given period, it was analyzed if any defects appear in them during that period.
The results indicated that in numerous industries plastic proves to be the most durable. Apart from the automotive, construction and packaging industries, plastics are used for environmentally friendly activities such as wind turbine blades and components of solar power plants.

Recycling is already passe
What can’t be disregarded is the last stage in the life of plastics, i.e. their final withdrawal from the market.
Until recently, the only solution proposed to us by scientists was recycling.
It turns out, however, that it’s inefficient in terms of economic and material aspects.
We have written on numerous occasions in our newsletters that the cycles of recycled plastics aren’t controlled. The lack of control over the origin of recycled materials and the cost of investment in recycling facilities are very sensitive topics that raise a lot of doubts.
These days, specialists begin to say that only chemical recycling, i.e. breaking down polymers into monomers and regenerating them, is the most environmentally friendly, safest and financially viable option.

Consequently, while considering the type of cosmetic packaging, we should go for the lightest and most durable product. Developing customer trust based on quality, but also a reliable enviromentally friendly approach can pay off in the form of positive brand building.
It’s also worth mentioning the results of the latest research and analyses, as well as taking them into account, rather than be guided by stereotypes.
Consumer research shows that clients appreciate reliable information based not only on scientific studies, but also on common sense.