Introduction
Protective packaging is often discussed in terms of its material identity — recyclable, compostable, fossil-based, or bio-derived. Yet in distribution systems where the environmental cost of product loss is high, performance must be evaluated in terms of what the packaging achieves. The functional role of packaging, particularly its ability to prevent damage during transport, can significantly outweigh material characteristics in determining its environmental profile.
In 2025, the Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research (TNO) performed a comparative lifecycle assessment of protective packaging materials used in European logistics. The study assessed the climate impact of four packaging types — expanded polystyrene (EPS), expanded polypropylene (EPP), corrugated paperboard, and moulded pulp[1] — in two applications: televisions and washing machines. Each scenario measured greenhouse gas emissions per undamaged product delivered, including contributions from packaging production, transport energy use, and damage-related product loss.
In a sensitivity analysis, TNO explores the impact of damage rates and finds that even marginal increases in damage rates, “as minor as 0.06 or 0.07 in the damage rate,”[2] for TVs and for Washing Machines, “a change of just 0.34 in the damage rate” impacts the overall conclusion. These findings illustrate that the exclusion of damage rates from packaging LCA’s can be a critical flaw in the environmental impact because different materials typically have different protective properties.
[1] Moulded pulp was excluded from the Washing Machine scenarios, as the material was not able to provide the necessary protection.
[2] TNO. Environmental Comparison of Protective Packaging Materials. Delft: Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research (TNO), 2025.