Packing A green punch

Like your average polypropylene (PP) tray, retailer thinking with regard to on-shelf meat and poultry packaging is not always as clear as it could be.

Why, for instance, is PP the most commonly-specified polymer for poultry trays? Some suppliers cite cost and historical reasons. And, self-evidently, consumers’ expectations are shaped by what they know. But apparently, there is more to those expectations than mere habit.

Director of innovation at Linpac Packaging Alan Davey says a conversation with one of the UK’s major retailers ran along the following lines. His contact identified clarity as being the overriding consideration, but then went on to criticise Linpac’s PP as being too transparent. Consumers wanted the clarity, but they did not like looking at blood, he contended.

If retailers are picking up a mixed message regarding consumer aesthetics, there are plenty of additional pressures to add further confusion to packaging choices. Davey reports: “The various retailers each tend to go off in their own direction in order to create a point of difference.” So, for instance, Linpac supplies Morrisons with barrier-foamed polystyrene (PS) trays, Marks & Spencer (M&S) with recycled polyethylene terephthalate (rPET) laminated with polyethylene (PE), Tesco and Asda the same, and Sainsbury’s with either rPET or PP for red meat. In all cases, though, the category language spells out the same semi-transparent PP for poultry.

Since the PS trays represent a point of difference for Linpac, as well as Morrisons, Davey is understandably eager to thrust them into the spotlight. Linpac had a history of producing foamed trays before rigid polymers came to dominate the market and he says they are enjoying something of a comeback.

In the 1990s, he recalls, Wal-Mart in the US led the move towards centralised packing, with its requirement for improved product appearance through a longer supply chain. The answer at the time was barrier PP, combined with gas flushing.

In fact, Davey argues, consumers liked the ‘fresh’ associations of the foam-tray-and-overwrap combination, and voted with their feet.

CARBON CALCULATIONS

Now, he says, other UK retailers are looking at foamed PS options, given that laminate structures can provide the same shelf-life as with other polymers. But the lightness of the pack means they are also factoring in the sustainability criteria of weight and carbon footprint – as well as more traditional cost considerations.

The reference to carbon calculation is not a throwaway one. According to the government-funded Waste & Resources Action Programme (WRAP), the Climate Change Act will ensure that greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions remain centre stage over the coming months. In recent years, WRAP has helped to co-ordinate retailers and brand-owners, which signed up to the Courtauld Commitment, with undertakings to maintain and then reduce the overall weight of packaging. Last month, WRAP special adviser Mark Barthel told a sustainability conference: “We are seeing a move from thinking about the tonnage of waste to GHG emissions and resource efficiency. But what should the balance of metrics be?”

Of course, the logical answer would be to calculate the net environmental impact of every product and pack. But even if this were possible, it would be economically prohibitive, Barthel argued. “Carbon may be a better proxy,” he concluded. Linpac’s Davey believes that complex life-cycle analyses are not always necessary in order to establish reliable and comparable carbon values for different packs. Linpac’s own studies show that there is a correlation between production cost and carbon footprint, he claims. “Foamed PS with overwrap is far and away the lowest value,” he says. “PET without recycled content would probably be the highest, though rPET content brings down the footprint.”

ON A CYCLE

As brands in the soft drinks sector are discovering, declared recycled content can also constitute a strong marketing message. According to Barthel, many consumers do not understand packaging weight reductions, and are often not told about them. Communicating carbon-based criteria will be even more challenging, he says. And in the meantime, interventions from the likes of the Local Government Association are fuelling consumer frustration that more packaging is not recycled.

Then again, the move to greater use of PET, and in particular rPET, has brought with it problems of its own. Production of food-grade post-consumer recyclate (PCR) has increased massively over the past year or two, but is barely keeping pace with demand in terms of both quality and quantity. Frank Coleman, site director at Sharp Interpack’s Bridgwater plant, says: “I’m struggling to get hold of the right quality of rPET, especially for MAP-packed red meat. Levels of contaminants are too high. A lot of what we’re using is imported.”

Presumably, the supply chain is bracing itself for the next Daily Mail exclusive, this time contrasting the amount of uncollected or contaminated domestic PET with the volumes imported from Europe. Lack of domestic availability would be even more acute, if converters were to attempt to move to post-consumer recycled PP (rPP). In fact, there is no PCR stream for this much-prized polymer, leaving it lagging behind PET and high-density polyethylene (HDPE) in the UK.

IT’S A WRAP

WRAP has acted as a catalyst in exploring potential collection and reprocessing systems, as well as demand, for mixed plastics, with food-grade rPP as a prime target. But it is still too early to tell whether this will ever materialise at a commercial level.

In the absence of food-grade rPP, Sharp Interpack has done what it calls “the next best thing” and combined virgin PP with manufacturing waste and recycled post-consumer HDPE in varying proportions. This would theoretically allow retailers to retain all the benefits of PP while having some sort of PCR content to talk about. Sharp Interpack makes the point that, at least, it is able to recycle mixed rPET and polyolefins to make a composite food-grade recyclate, used for less demanding applications such as biscuit trays. But some other converters are less than impressed, and suggest that it opens the industry up to charges of ‘greenwash’.

Harrison Europac MD Joe Iannidinardo draws a contrast with parent company Faerch Plast’s own brand of MAPET for modified atmosphere applications. Having secured what it says is 60% of the UK ready-meals market with its crystalline PET (CPET) trays, Harrison Europac is eager to make greater inroads into other markets and other materials. “MAPET is monomaterial, with no PE, and so can be recycled,” says Iannidinardo. Instead of using PE, the top layer is modified to allow heat-sealing. He contrasts this with other supposedly monomaterial trays from other suppliers, which are nothing of the sort, he says.

Then again, it is not always so easy to define exactly where environmental responsibility finishes and ‘greenwash’ starts. What exactly are the current sustainability benefits of monomaterial trays, for instance? “It is still difficult to identify the different polymer trays for recycling,” Iannidinardo admits. “But we have to start somewhere. With PET, the bottle technology is already there. All that’s missing is the collection and separation.” In fact, that is rather a large missing link, since consumers are not about to be invited to throw their PET trays in with their PET bottles for recycling.

MORE THAN MEETS THE EYE

On the general topic of monomaterial packs, he claims: “If you talk to Helene Roberts at M&S, for instance, she understands this design issue.” The problem is that this is more than a design issue. No polymer tray, monomaterial or otherwise, is likely to be recycled until mixed plastics recycling becomes a viable proposition. So rather than simplifying pack choices, the sustainability debate can actually make those criteria more complex. For example, there is far more than meets the eye – even to the apparently straightforward process of lightweighting packaging.

Back at Sharp Interpack’s Bridgwater plant, Bob Hayes is sales director with responsibility for meat packaging. “There hasn’t been any let-up in the pressure to reduce weights and minimise packaging,” he reports. But this pressure, whether driven by consumers or retailers, does not always take into account the processing and supply chain rigours that those packs have to go through. Considerable effort goes into ensuring that lighter trays are still fit-for-purpose, says Coleman. “A lot of design goes into the ribbing to strengthen the trays, and we will run trials on everything from de-nesting to top-sealing,” he explains.

Of course, the aesthetics and ‘silent salesman’ role of the packaging cannot be neglected. It is interesting that, while Sharp Interpack says that tray weights may have been cut by up to 25%,
most of this has come from micron reductions in tray thickness, rather than in the ‘frame’ or top area of the pack. Evidently, the concern seems to be that the size of the pack can help to create the impression of value-for-money.

Or do retailers overestimate consumer concerns over pack aesthetics? After all, many of those retailers have been busy replacing traditional tray-and-lidding-film combinations with flexibles, in spite of these supposed concerns. No doubt, the fact that flexibles represent the ultimate in lightweight options has helped packaging buyers to overcome their worries. Add to that the reduced costs and often significantly improved shelf-life, and those film packs probably start to seem quite good-looking, after all.

Chief among the champions of flexible packaging is Sealed Air Cryovac. Jon De Roeck, fresh protein market manager EMEA, Cryovac Packaging, says: “In most organised retailers today, there is a transition from tray-lidding applications into vacuum-shrink bags. This means moving from a modified atmosphere pack with headspace for the gas to a tightly shrunk barrier bag.”

In fact, while the Sealed Air Cryovac name is most commonly associated with high-barrier flexibles, such as Darfresh, the multinational’s options span everything from ‘fresh-for-freezing’ film packs to semi-rigids and the low-sided Mirabella tray-and-overwrap combination to a range of foamed CPET trays for ready meals.

Those applying the various Darfresh film systems for meat industry customers include machinery company Multivac. Marketing manager Andrew Stark puts these types of development into context: “WRAP has moved on from looking at pack reduction alone, with Courtauld signatories hitting their targets, and one of their newer concerns is food waste reduction.”

Clearly, there are a number of overlapping strands to food waste issues, not least consumer education. With a trend to smaller households and larger, less frequent shopping trips, better portion control and the intelligent use of the freezer are two obvious targets for WRAP. In both cases, flexibles can make a valuable contribution. Applications of Flexible Darfresh for poultry include individual skinpacks, loaded into bulk ‘mother’ bags for retailers such as M&S. As Stark explains, one of the attractions of skinpack systems, as opposed to more traditional vacuum-packing, is that the combination of film preheating and vacuum provides a wrinkle-free finish and overall a more attractive appearance. They also build in longer shelf-life for individual items, and facilitate home freezing. Equally importantly, many barrier films are able to provide longer shelf-life than MAP. This can offer greater flexibility both in the supply chain and in how consumers use the product post-purchase.

A further option using flexibles is Vacuum Darfresh, says Multivac. Used for more delicate products, and often applied to fish, it can be combined with either a tray or flat pack, such as board.

For larger cuts and joints, Multivac has partnered film supplier Krehalon in the Formshrink technology. “This offers up to 80% weight reductions compared with pre-made trays,” says Stark. Already used by all the major retailers, it can be combined with registered, pre-distorted printing and easy-open features.

Another equipment company which has teamed up with film suppliers – again Krehalon and Bemis – to produce imaginative flexible packs is Reiser. Here, too, the company has an option that involves creating a pack on one of the traditional Repak thermoforming lines that it supplies, before shrinking the film in a tank or tunnel, says director of packaging Rob Allen. Similarly, this system is suitable for whole birds and larger cuts. “Another trend has been in the use of skinfilm, especially as used with cold meats,” says Allen. “At M&S, all steaks are in skinpacks, which gives very good presentation and extended shelf-life in comparison with MAP.”

Specific machine innovations have included options for extending thermoforming lines, for improving and lightweighting the thermoformed pack and for loading trays, says Reiser. “One of the benefits of our thermoforming system is that the width of the line can be changed at a later date,” says Allen. “Traditionally, you’ve not been able to do this. So there’s a lot of flexibility here.” This would extend the typical thermoforming line speeds which, like speeds for preformed tray filling/sealing with MAP, stand at around 150 or 160ppm, he says.

While pre-made trays remain popular, says Reiser, there is a definite move in the sector to use more thermoforming. This is partly cost-driven, but at the same time, control in the thermoforming process has improved. “The Rapid Air Forming system on Repak machines offers a 15% reduction on packaging materials,” Allen claims. “The speed with which the plastic sheet is pulled into the tray shape means that material distribution is improved, especially at critical points such as the tray corners.”

He adds: “We’ve seen a lot of interest in automated loading systems, especially for pre-made trays. The Vemag automatic loading conveyor can mean there is no human intervention on the line running at up to 160ppm. There are hygiene and shelf-life – as well as obvious cost – benefits.”

Over and above the new environmental imperatives, says Allen, pressures to improve line efficiencies, automate, reduce labour and cut costs remain the principal concerns of meat and poultry packing operations.

One eye-catching materials trend over the past couple of years has been the development of smoothwall aluminium options, especially for ready-to-cook products. Suppliers such as Nicholl Food Packaging, I2r Packaging Solutions and D2 are competing for this premium market. Stark at Multivac highlights Skinfoil, a foil, barrier film and vacuum combination, which his company has been promoting in partnership with Nicholl and film supplier Bemis.

Novelty, along with clear product presentation could be seen as the main attraction here. And again, as with other vacuum/barrier film options, improved shelf-life should be a major plus. In this case, though, cost is not on its side. “We’ve had a lot of interest, but our timing hasn’t been fantastic,” Stark admits. “The market has switched to lowest-possible-cost packaging.” That said, there is a new application in the US, he reports, with a semi-prepared meat product, including sauce and spices.

One challenge when heat-sealing a lidding film to an aluminium tray is the clear tendency for heat to dissipate through the pack. Tray-sealing specialist Proseal has had its Hot Rod system for a couple of years now, and says it has specific benefits for metal packaging. Project sales engineer Rick Carless explains that dedicated tool sets (which take just two minutes to change) ensure localised heating. This is not the case with the traditional ceramic mat heating system.

One benefit of this technology is that it can reduce power consumption by 25%, says Proseal. And overall, issues about energy usage in the packing process are likely to loom ever larger, as scrutiny of both cost and carbon footprint increases.

While not giving away too many details, the company says it has also developed a new generation of tray-sealing machines, which offer an impressive 60% reduction in power consumption. This machine-based example underscores a point made by Stark at Multivac in the context of materials trends: “Environmental and cost considerations are not necessarily mutually exclusive, as demonstrated by the common shift towards the use of high-barrier flexibles rather than
pre-made trays.”

For some more sustainable options, the cost premium may prove to be a deterrent during the downturn. But as De Roeck at Cryovac puts it: “Environmental concerns are a strong trend. The current recession may slow down, but won’t totally offset, the underlying move in this direction.”A strong message regarding weight, carbon footprint and food waste could take barrier flexibles into even more meat and poultry applications. But in trays, retailers will be looking for some sort of balance between those polymers, notably PET, where PCR content is available (no doubt increasingly so) and those such as PS and PP where no such option is likely to exist in the foreseeable future. The consumer hunger for more visible recycling, and use of recycled content, is likely to persist alongside those more established requirements for value, convenience and product protection.

Printer friendly version

Email this article to a friend

Bookmark this

---