首页> 外文期刊>Packaging Technology and Science >Life Cycle Environmental Performance and Improvement of a Yogurt Product Delivery System
【24h】

Life Cycle Environmental Performance and Improvement of a Yogurt Product Delivery System

机译:生命周期环境绩效和酸奶产品配送系统的改进

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

A life cycle assessment was conducted to evaluate the environmental performance of the yogurt product delivery system used by Stonyfield Farm. A life cycle model was developed which included material production, manufacturing and disposition for primary and secondary packaging, as well as the related transportation links between these stages and filling, retail and the point of consumption. Product delivery systems (PDS) that utilized 4, 6, 8 and 32 oz polypropylene (PP) cups and 2oz linear low-density polyethylene (LLDPE) tubes were analysed. Ten strategies for improving the environmental performance of these systems were proposed and their impacts on the total life cycle burden were analysed. The life cycle energy consumption for the 2, 4, 6, 8 and 32 oz containers was 4050, 4670, 5230, 4390 and 3620MJ/1000lb yogurt delivered to market, respectively. Material production of the primary packaging accounted for 58% of the life cycle energy, while Distribution 3 (yogurt delivery to distributors/retailers) alone accounted for one-third of the life cycle total energy. The life cycle solid waste profile showed that as the container size decreased, the solid waste burden increased, from 27.3kg (32 oz) to 42.8kg (6oz) per 1000 lb yogurt delivered to market. This relationship was even more pronounced for the 4oz (47.5kg) and 2oz (56.2kg) product delivery systems. The greatest potential improvements in the environmental performance of the PDS are achievable through redesigning the primary packaging and using alternative manufacturing techniques for the yogurt cups. Shifting from injection moulding to thermoforming of 32 oz container reduces the life cycle energy and solid waste by 18.6% and 19.5%, respectively, primarily due to light-weighting. Elimination of lids for 6oz and 8oz containers provided similar benefits. Consumers purchasing yogurt in 32 oz instead of 6 oz containers can save 14.5% of the life cycle energy and decrease solid waste by 27.2%.
机译:进行了生命周期评估,以评估Stonyfield Farm使用的酸奶产品输送系统的环境性能。建立了一个生命周期模型,其中包括初级和次级包装的材料生产,制造和处置,以及这些阶段与填充,零售和消费点之间的相关运输联系。分析了使用4、6、8和32盎司聚丙烯(PP)杯和2盎司线性低密度聚乙烯(LLDPE)管的产品交付系统(PDS)。提出了十种改善这些系统的环境性能的策略,并分析了它们对整个生命周期负担的影响。投放到市场的2、4、6、8和32盎司容器的生命周期能耗分别为4050、4670、5230、4390和3620MJ / 1000磅酸奶。主包装的材料生产占生命周期能量的58%,而仅配送3(酸奶向分销商/零售商的配送)仅占生命周期总能量的三分之一。生命周期固体废物概况显示,随着容器尺寸的减小,固体废物负担从投放市场的每1000磅酸奶27.3千克(32盎司)增加到42.8千克(6盎司)。对于4盎司(47.5千克)和2盎司(56.2千克)的产品输送系统,这种关系更加明显。通过重新设计主包装并使用酸奶杯的替代制造技术,可以最大程度地提高PDS的环保性能。 32盎司容器从注模转变为热成型的过程主要是由于重量轻,分别将其生命周期能量和固体废物减少了18.6%和19.5%。取消6盎司和8盎司容器的盖子也有类似的好处。消费者购买32盎司而不是6盎司容器的酸奶可以节省14.5%的生命周期能量,减少27.2%的固体废物。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号