Slides from Jonathan Rivin, Materials Evaluation Specialist, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality presented at the Sustainable Purchasing Leadership Council's 2018 Summit in Minneapolis, MN.

1. [Presenter’s Name] | Oregon Department of Environmental QualityJonathan M. Rivin| Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
EPP for Food Service Ware and
Packaging: A Review of LCA Studies
SPLC Summit
May 15, 2018

2. [Presenter’s Name] | Oregon Department of Environmental QualityJonathan M. Rivin| Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
…and what Packaging Attributes
Reveal about
Environmental Outcomes

3. [Presenter’s Name] | Oregon Department of Environmental QualityJonathan M. Rivin| Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
Why Packaging?
• Includes loose material & containers
• Protection
• Preservation
• 30% of MSW*
• ~ 50% of packaging recycled*
* Advancing Sustainable Materials Management: 2014 Fact Sheet (US EPA, 2016)

4. [Presenter’s Name] | Oregon Department of Environmental QualityJonathan M. Rivin| Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
at·trib·ute
A quality or feature regarded as a
characteristic of or inherent part
of something or someone
4

5. [Presenter’s Name] | Oregon Department of Environmental QualityJonathan M. Rivin| Oregon Department of Environmental Quality

6. [Presenter’s Name] | Oregon Department of Environmental QualityJonathan M. Rivin| Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
Sustainable Procurement
• Taking social and environmental/health factors into
consideration alongside financial factors in making
purchasing decisions
• minimize harmful environmental/health impacts
• maximize positive social impacts
• EPP focuses on environmental/health factors

7. [Presenter’s Name] | Oregon Department of Environmental QualityJonathan M. Rivin| Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
Sustainability Act (ORS 184.423)
(a) State purchases should be made so as to serve the broad, long term
financial interests of Oregonians, including ensuring that
environmental, economic and societal improvements are made so
as to enhance environmental, economic and societal well-being
(b) Investments in facilities, equipment and durable goods should reflect the
highest feasible efficiency and lowest life cycle costs
(c) Investments and expenditures should help promote improvements
in the efficient use of energy, water and resources
(j) State operations and purchases should reflect the efficient use and
reuse of resources and reduction of contaminants released into the
environment

8. [Presenter’s Name] | Oregon Department of Environmental QualityJonathan M. Rivin| Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
Oregon Procurement Preferences for EPP
“…promote the use of recyclable or biodegradable products for food service and packaging”
“…ensure the procurement of materials that are recycled or that may be recycled or reused...”

9. [Presenter’s Name] | Oregon Department of Environmental QualityJonathan M. Rivin| Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
+
global warming
eutrophication
smog
acidification
ozone depletionfresh water consumption
primary energy
demand

10. [Presenter’s Name] | Oregon Department of Environmental QualityJonathan M. Rivin| Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
Scientific Evidence ?

11. [Presenter’s Name] | Oregon Department of Environmental QualityJonathan M. Rivin| Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
Life Cycle of Packaging
11

12. [Presenter’s Name] | Oregon Department of Environmental QualityJonathan M. Rivin| Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
Material Attributes & Life Cycle Impacts
12
recycled content renewable content
recyclablecompostable reusable durable
cumulative energy demand
freshwater consumption
global warming potential
ozone depletion
human health
aquatic toxicity
eutrophication…
non-toxic

13. [Presenter’s Name] | Oregon Department of Environmental QualityJonathan M. Rivin| Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
Focused In-House Study
LCA Study
13

14. [Presenter’s Name] | Oregon Department of Environmental QualityJonathan M. Rivin| Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
Optimize for Attributes or Environmental Impacts?
14
Life Cycle Environmental Impacts?
recyclable? compostable?contains recycled content?bio-based materials? reusable?
**

15. [Presenter’s Name] | Oregon Department of Environmental QualityJonathan M. Rivin| Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
water consumption (liters)
water consumption
(liters)
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
GHG emissions (kg CO2 eq)
GHG emissions
(kg CO2 eq.)
Recycled Content and Recyclability as Design Criteria
15
•no recycled content
•not recyclable now
•5% recycled content
•recyclable, recycled
•40% recycled content
•recyclable, recycled
-3.4%
-15%
- 84%
-55%
comparisons based on 48 ounce product

16. [Presenter’s Name] | Oregon Department of Environmental QualityJonathan M. Rivin| Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
The Research
Attributes in LCA literature
16
PACKAGING
FOOD SERVICE WARE

17. [Presenter’s Name] | Oregon Department of Environmental QualityJonathan M. Rivin| Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
Materials Attributes & Life Cycle Impacts
17
recycled content renewable content
recyclablecompostable reusable durable
cumulative energy demand
freshwater consumption
global warming potential
ozone depletion
human health
aquatic toxicity
eutrophication…
non-toxic

18. [Presenter’s Name] | Oregon Department of Environmental QualityJonathan M. Rivin| Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
Four Material Attributes Reviewed
18
recycled content renewable/bio-based
recyclablecompostable

19. [Presenter’s Name] | Oregon Department of Environmental QualityJonathan M. Rivin| Oregon Department of Environmental Quality 19
PACKAGING
Recycled Content

20. [Presenter’s Name] | Oregon Department of Environmental QualityJonathan M. Rivin| Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
Recycled Content – Packaging Studies
20
20 studies
534 comparisons

21. [Presenter’s Name] | Oregon Department of Environmental QualityJonathan M. Rivin| Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
High-level finding #1:
recycled content in
packaging
Producing recycled material with
higher recycled content generally has
lower environmental impacts than
producing the same material from
virgin material
22
Trend held true for: acidification, ozone depletion,
smog formation, total energy demand, ecotoxicity,
and human health impacts.
Mixed results for eutrophication: 66% lower, 33%
higher
N=30
GWP – global warming potential
Higher recycled content:

22. [Presenter’s Name] | Oregon Department of Environmental QualityJonathan M. Rivin| Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
High-level finding #2:
recycled content in
packaging
Packaging design, material choice,
and weight are more important in
determining environmental
preference than recycled content
when comparing different materials
23
Trend held true across all impact categories.
However, in 66% of the instances with
“marginal differences”, the packaging systems
with higher recycled content showed higher
impacts.
N=229
GWP – global warming potential
PCR – postconsumer recycled content
HIgher recycled content:
Higher recycled content:

23. [Presenter’s Name] | Oregon Department of Environmental QualityJonathan M. Rivin| Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
water consumption (liters)
water consumption
(liters)
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
GHG emissions (kg CO2 eq)
GHG emissions
(kg CO2 eq.)
Recycled Content as a Decision Criteria
24
•no recycled content
•not recyclable now
•5% recycled content
•recyclable, recycled
•40% recycled content
•recyclable, recycled
-3.4%
-15%
- 84%
-55%
comparisons based on 48 ounce product

24. [Presenter’s Name] | Oregon Department of Environmental QualityJonathan M. Rivin| Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
Summary – Recycled Material
1. When comparing packaging of the same material, selecting the packaging
with more recycled content is usually environmentally preferable
2. The reductions in life cycle impacts associated with using recycled content can
vary considerably in magnitude:
a. 60-80% for aluminum packaging
b. 10-15% for PET used in inkjet cartridges for example
3. Literature suggest that it is not possible to infer environmental preference for
packaging of one material type over another solely based on recycled content
4. May be transferrable to other product categories
25

25. [Presenter’s Name] | Oregon Department of Environmental QualityJonathan M. Rivin| Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
Central Message:
Keep the System
in Mind
1. Using material attributes as a
proxy for environmental goodness
may have limited potential
2. The utility of attributes must be
seen in the context of the whole
system
FOR INTERNAL USE 26

26. [Presenter’s Name] | Oregon Department of Environmental QualityJonathan M. Rivin| Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
Questions?
Jonathan M. Rivin | rivin.jonathan@deq.state.or.us
27