IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jresou/v8y2019i2p110-d240159.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Life Cycle Assessment of Reusable Plastic Crates (RPCs)

Author

Listed:
  • Camilla Tua

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Environmental Section, Politecnico di Milano, 20133 Milano, Italy)

  • Laura Biganzoli

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Environmental Section, Politecnico di Milano, 20133 Milano, Italy)

  • Mario Grosso

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Environmental Section, Politecnico di Milano, 20133 Milano, Italy)

  • Lucia Rigamonti

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Environmental Section, Politecnico di Milano, 20133 Milano, Italy)

Abstract

The European packaging market is forecast to grow 1.9% annually in the next years, with an increasing use of returnable packages. In this context, it is important to assess the real environmental effectiveness of the packaging re-use practice in terms of environmental impacts. This life cycle assessment aims to evaluate the environmental performances of reusable plastic crates (RPCs), which are used for the distribution of 36% of fruit and vegetables in Italy. RPCs can be re-used several times after a reconditioning process, i.e., inspection, washing, and sanitization with hot water and chemicals. The analysis was performed considering 12 impact categories, as well as the cumulative energy demand indicator and a tailor-made water consumption indicator. The results show that when the RPCs are used for less than 20 deliveries, the impacts of the life cycle are dominated by the manufacturing stage. By increasing the number of deliveries, the contribution of the reconditioning process increases, reaching 30–70% of the overall impacts for 125 uses. A minimum of three deliveries of the RPCs is required in order to perform better than an alternative system where crates of the same capacity (but 60% lighter) are single-use. The same modeling approach can be used to evaluate the environmental sustainability of other types of returnable packages, in order to have a complete overview for the Italian context and other European countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Camilla Tua & Laura Biganzoli & Mario Grosso & Lucia Rigamonti, 2019. "Life Cycle Assessment of Reusable Plastic Crates (RPCs)," Resources, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-15, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jresou:v:8:y:2019:i:2:p:110-:d:240159
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/8/2/110/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/8/2/110/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Accorsi, Riccardo & Cascini, Alessandro & Cholette, Susan & Manzini, Riccardo & Mora, Cristina, 2014. "Economic and environmental assessment of reusable plastic containers: A food catering supply chain case study," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 88-101.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Irmeline Sadeleer & Kari-Anne Lyng, 2022. "A Life Cycle Assessment on Single-Use and Reuse Beer Cups at Festivals," Circular Economy and Sustainability, Springer, vol. 2(4), pages 1517-1539, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sarah Verdonk & Keri Chiveralls & Drew Dawson, 2017. "Getting Wasted at WOMADelaide: The Effect of Signage on Waste Disposal," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-17, February.
    2. Żaneta Muranko & Catriona Tassell & Anouk Zeeuw van der Laan & Marco Aurisicchio, 2021. "Characterisation and Environmental Value Proposition of Reuse Models for Fast-Moving Consumer Goods: Reusable Packaging and Products," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-35, March.
    3. Graham, Stephanie & Graham, Byron & Holt, Diane, 2018. "The relationship between downstream environmental logistics practices and performance," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 196(C), pages 356-365.
    4. Sebastjan Škerlič & Robert Muha, 2020. "A Model for Managing Packaging in the Product Life Cycle in the Automotive Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-19, November.
    5. Luo, Na & Olsen, Tava & Liu, Yanping & Zhang, Abraham, 2022. "Reducing food loss and waste in supply chain operations," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    6. Tanksale, Ajinkya N. & Das, Debabrata & Verma, Priyanka & Tiwari, Manoj Kumar, 2021. "Unpacking the role of primary packaging material in designing green supply chains: An integrated approach," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 236(C).
    7. Riccardo Accorsi & Lorenzo Versari & Riccardo Manzini, 2015. "Glass vs. Plastic: Life Cycle Assessment of Extra-Virgin Olive Oil Bottles across Global Supply Chains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-23, March.
    8. Accorsi, Riccardo & Manzini, Riccardo & Pini, Chiara & Penazzi, Stefano, 2015. "On the design of closed-loop networks for product life cycle management: Economic, environmental and geography considerations," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 121-134.
    9. Izabella Almirante Porto Tiburcio Rodrigues & Roberta Vianna Alves & Maria José de Oliveira Cavalcanti Guimarães & Thiago Santiago Gomes & Elen Beatriz Acordi Vasques Pacheco, 2022. "Assessment of plastic lumber production in Brazil as a substitute for natural wood," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(8), pages 9705-9730, August.
    10. Calzavara, Martina & Finco, Serena & Persona, Alessandro & Zennaro, Ilenia, 2023. "A cost-based tool for the comparison of different e-grocery supply chain strategies," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 262(C).
    11. Zhang, Qinhong & Segerstedt, Anders & Tsao, Yu-Chung & Liu, Biyu, 2015. "Returnable packaging management in automotive parts logistics: Dedicated mode and shared mode," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 234-244.
    12. Graham, Stephanie, 2018. "Antecedents to environmental supply chain strategies: The role of internal integration and environmental learning," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 197(C), pages 283-296.
    13. Jesús García-Arca & A. Trinidad González-Portela Garrido & J. Carlos Prado-Prado, 2017. "“Sustainable Packaging Logistics”. The link between Sustainability and Competitiveness in Supply Chains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-17, June.
    14. Zerbino, Pierluigi & Stefanini, Alessandro & Aloini, Davide & Dulmin, Riccardo & Mininno, Valeria, 2021. "Curling linearity into circularity: The benefits of formal scavenging in closed-loop settings," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).
    15. Diana Reinales & David Zambrana-Vasquez & Aitana Saez-De-Guinoa, 2020. "Social Life Cycle Assessment of Product Value Chains Under a Circular Economy Approach: A Case Study in the Plastic Packaging Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-17, August.
    16. Mayanti, Bening & Helo, Petri, 2022. "Closed-loop supply chain potential of agricultural plastic waste: Economic and environmental assessment of bale wrap waste recycling in Finland," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 244(C).
    17. Dominguez, Roberto & Cannella, Salvatore & Framinan, Jose M., 2021. "Remanufacturing configuration in complex supply chains," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    18. Beatrice Salieri & Natasha Stoudmann & Roland Hischier & Claudia Som & Bernd Nowack, 2021. "How Relevant Are Direct Emissions of Microplastics into Freshwater from an LCA Perspective?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-16, September.
    19. Anuj Mittal & Caroline C. Krejci & Teri J. Craven, 2018. "Logistics Best Practices for Regional Food Systems: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-44, January.
    20. Berill Takacs & Aiduan Borrion, 2020. "The Use of Life Cycle-Based Approaches in the Food Service Sector to Improve Sustainability: A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-31, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jresou:v:8:y:2019:i:2:p:110-:d:240159. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.