By Cara Bommarito, sustainability manager, RadTech
Historically, sustainability and its benefits have been challenging to quantify. This is because ‘sustainability’ is a subjective term, with the definition changing depending on the person who defines it.
In the early 2000s, the world – and, particularly the US – experienced an environmental boom due to the overwhelming evidence that climate change was, in fact, affecting the planet. From this, a set of standards was developed by the World Resources Institute (WRI) and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD). These standards now are known more commonly as scope emissions. Previously, scope emissions were really the only key performance indicators (KPIs) most companies used, measuring carbon output as a means to reduce a rise in global temperature.
The global ecosystem is intricate, and the health of the planet involves not just understanding carbon emissions and greenhouse gas emissions. While emissions are extremely important, there is more to KPIs that can help measure a product’s impact. The entire picture includes the life cycle of a product. Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) is unique because it can look at multiple KPIs, not only carbon footprint.
Life Cycle Assessment of Packaging Inks
The sustainability committee at RadTech felt that exploring a holistic approach to support the claims made around ultraviolet (UV), electron beam (EB) and light-emitting diode (LED) technology was an important step in promoting the multiple sustainable benefits within the industry. To do this, RadTech commissioned a study by Dr. Calvin Lahkan of York University in Ontario. The committee outlined the KPIs it believed would paint the best picture of the benefits of UV/EB/LED curing, with the goal of highlighting how different ink/varnish types and packaging materials influence the environmental profile of packaging products.
The KPIs looked at in the RadTech LCA are as follows: energy usage, carbon emissions and VOCs. It is important to note that this study is specific to the printing process only. It did not look at other factors, such as shipping and raw material procurement because the committee wanted to isolate the process benefits. The committee selected multiple packaging scenarios and looked at three process technologies side by side: waterborne, UV and EB.
The findings showed that EB inks consistently have the lowest carbon footprint, VOC emissions and energy usage. In comparison, UV inks offer lower VOC emissions and moderate savings in energy usage and carbon emissions. Waterborne technology has fewer energy-intensive applications but results in higher carbon and VOC outputs due to the drying process. Results from one testing scenario are shown in Figure 1.
The LCA substantiated the claims the UV/EB/LED industry has been making about the multiple benefits of the technology. It reduces energy consumption, saves carbon emissions and significantly reduces VOC emissions when compared to conventional technologies. The LCA was an excellent way to quantify sustainability by looking at the outputs and comparing the alternatives. It is encouraging to see the claims supported and validated by data.
To see the full LCA and the specific scenarios selected by the sustainability committee, visit the ‘Members Only’ sections of RadTech’s website at www.radtech.org. Contact cara@radtech.org with questions.
