Home Locate A Sales Rep Contact Us Testimonials Blog

Posts Tagged ‘sustainable’

More bans?

Friday, May 21st, 2010

Well here we go again. More politicians have decided they are experts on food packaging. This time it’s New York state (Genpak’s home state by the way). State Senator Liz Krueger and Assembly member Brian Kavanagh have teamed with others in an attempt to ban the use of foamed polystyrene foodservice products in governmental offices and public schools.  They kicked off this witch hunt by holding a rally on Earth Day at a Manhattan school, standing next to a giant pile of polystyrene products. They have also begun recruiting elected officials to sign their SPARE (Stop Polystyrene And Revitalize the Environment) pledge. I guess this document forces governmental office buildings to find other, (more expensive) forms food service packaging. Ms. Kruger went on to say she was proud to be part of something that will ban products blah blah blah, toxic to the environment blah blah, etc etc. All the same rhetoric that is mostly all false or half true.

Here’s what I think. Election day is right around the corner and if you are an incumbent, you’re fighting for your political life. Especially in New York where once again we have no budget in place because of all the political bickering. Hey, let’s find an easy target we can pick on that will make us look like good guys in the voters eyes. Styrofoam!  Yes there we go, lets ban Styrofoam! 

Let’s face it, foamed polystyrene (Styrofoam is a trade name by another company) is an easy target due to huge consumer misconception…partially fueled by the misinformation piled on by folks like this. These politicians make up neat acronyms like SPARE and stand next to a giant piles of garbage talking about the ills of the material. Most of what they are saying are totally incorrect.

I’m not going to go into all the misinformation Krueger and Kavanagh are saying on this post, but if you are interested, I’ve posted before regarding all the misconceptions of foamed polystyrene. They don’t take long to read and it’s real information offered by someone not looking to be elected.

One thing that should be said here is if they are successful, taxpayers in NY should know that most of the alternative materials available are significantly more expensive than foam. Yes there are alternatives. I know because we sell a ton of it with our Harvest label products.  It’s compostable and made from annually renewable resources. But, unfortunately, it is more expensive. Given the economic crisis the politicians have put New York State in, I would think they should be looking for any savings they can get. Spending 15% to 20% more for alternative food service packaging is probably not the wisest choice at the moment.

Listen, I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again. We are not against alternative materials for food packaging.  Far from it. Genpak is leading the charge for alternative materials. We have products made from annually renewable resources, products that have been significantly source reduced, products that are #1 recyclable, products that are produced with up to 50% post consumer recycled content and products produced from hybrid materials that replace a significant portion of the petrochemical resin with natural, annually renewable materials. What I’m against is politicians finding a business sector to regulate and control without knowing the facts, to make them appear grand in voters eyes.

I propose instead of SPARE they initiate DUMB (Don’t Usurp My NYS Budget) or perhaps STUPID (Stop Tying Up taxPayers Invaluable Dollars) and get to work on passing a budget for this great state. Let the foodservice markets and industries make their own natural progression toward the materials and substrates that make the most sense environmentally and economically.

Sustainability

Monday, April 19th, 2010

Over the last couple of days I attended a conference put on by Nature Works, who is a domestic supplier of PLA. PLA (polylactic acid) is an alternative resin source made entirely from corn and is meant to be used in replacement of PET, OPS and other clear petrochemical based resins. This conference came off the heals of another meeting I attended called the Biopolymers Symposium, which had a very similar theme to the aforementioned NW conference.

Both events were fairly well attended, and not just by chemists and engineers (thankfully). One message I took away from both events was the goal of many companies to practice and become more sustainable. Sustainability by definition is not rocket science, but to me more of a common sense practice. However the extent to which some companies have embraced sustainable practices does teeter on the verge of mind blowing. Not just the big companies either. I saw most impressive presentations from all sized companies including smaller regional companies, national niche market companies right on up to multi-billion dollar multinational brand name companies.  

Clearly the largest companies have the most aggressive and far reaching game plans due to greater resources.  Once such plan that was talked about was a goal to make a manufacturing facility of one such large company, 100% self reliant.  To be taken totally off the grid for power, water and other utilities.  This wasn’t just some lofty goal on paper to say “look what we are thinking about”, but according to the presentation, well under way to becoming reality.  I can’t go into all the details of everything they were doing, but it was very impressive.  Especially the water reclamation part.  This is because the facility was located in an arid location and the company used a great deal of water in their particular process.  They not only figured out how to clean and purify the water, but to repipe it back into their process to be used again and again.

There was one common detail that each and every company who talked about sustainability initiatives stressed though.  That was a return on their investment.  Let’s face it, companies are in business to turn a profit.  No profit and the doors close.  These forward thinking companies each had a clear objective to turn their sustainability programs into a healthier bottom line.  They not only wanted to be better stewards of the environment but wanted a stronger company as a result of it.  Again, there were lots of examples provided showing where and how a payback and return was realized, but I think the most important aspect that each organization practiced was a top down approach to sustainability.  In each and every case that was presented, the company’s top management was completely committed to their program and, they got all their empoylees on board.  You can have an excellent plan on paper, but if the mother hen is not fully committed, the chicks will surely scatter.  These companies were not afraid to step back and take a critical look at themselves to ask “how can we do this better and what can we do differently that will not only  enrich the environment, but enrich our profits as well”.

I urge you to do the same.  Whether you have or work for a company as well as in your personal life.  Ask yourself the questions.  Do you really need to drive to the market for that gallon of milk, or could you walk or ride a bike?  Turn off the lights when you leave a room and power your computer down when you’ll be away from it.  These may seem like little things but just remember, one or two tiny snowflakes falling won’t add up to much, but millions falling can enact a blizzard of change.