Follow us

A detailed life cycle analysis (LCA) has compared the environmental impacts of small boxes made from cardboard and expanded polystyrene (EPS). The study shows that cardboard cooler boxes are not necessarily better for the environment than EPS cooler boxes. The findings indicate that while both types of boxes have an almost similar carbon footprint, EPS cooler boxes generally have a lower overall environmental impact, especially in areas like water emissions. Published in May 2024, this study was conducted by our member Stybenex, the Dutch EPS National Association, thus reinforcing the European EPS Industry’s commitment to advancing sustainable practices within the European Union.

 

The Environmental Performance of EPS Cooler Boxes

The study assessed the environmental performance of two cardboard cooler boxes, the “Papercooler” and the “EcoCooler, against their EPS equivalents. The “Papercooler” is a fully cardboard cooler box, while the “EcoCooler” features cardboard walls filled with cellulose insulation material. Both types of boxes were evaluated for various environmental impacts, including carbon emissions, water toxicity, and overall ecological footprint.

EPS cooler boxes are often perceived negatively due to their plastic composition. However, this study reveals that EPS, a lightweight and durable material, offers significant environmental advantages when its entire lifecycle is considered. The analysis spanned from the production phase to disposal, taking into account factors like raw material extraction, manufacturing processes, transportation, and end-of-life treatment.

 

Environmental Footprint: Methodology and Findings

Using the Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) method, which measures the environmental impact of products throughout their entire life cycle, the study found that the “Papercooler” and “EcoCooler” have environmental footprints that are 191% and 55% larger, respectively, than EPS cooler boxes. This difference becomes even more significant when looking at specific environmental impacts.

The PEF methodology provides a comprehensive assessment, considering multiple impact categories such as greenhouse gas emissions, resource depletion, water use, and biodiversity loss. By adopting this robust framework, the study ensures that all significant environmental aspects are covered, offering a holistic view of the products’ ecological impacts.

 

Specific Environmental Impacts: A Closer Look

The impact on freshwater organisms from toxic substances released into the environment is 201 times greater for the Papercooler and 96 times greater for the EcoCooler compared to EPS boxes. This finding is crucial as it highlights the ecological consequences of using materials that contribute heavily to water pollution. Additionally, the potential for global warming due to land use changes is 75 times greater for the Papercooler and 38 times greater for the EcoCooler than for their EPS equivalents.

The study also examined the contribution of both types of cooler boxes to climate change through different mechanisms. For instance, the impact of biobased greenhouse gas emissions from cardboard was found to be 43.2 times greater than that from the EPS equivalent. This is a significant finding, as it challenges the common assumption that biobased materials are inherently more sustainable.

Another critical aspect is the depletion of abiotic resources, such as fossil fuels. EPS cooler boxes were found to have a 1.33 times lower impact on fossil fuel depletion compared to cardboard boxes. This lower resource depletion rate further underscores the environmental efficiency of EPS as a packaging material.

 

Advocating for Sustainable EPS Solutions

The findings from this LCA study conducted by our member Stybenex provide essential insights into the excellent environmental performance of EPS. The study demonstrates that EPS cooler boxes perform environmentally well compared to other cooler boxes, including reduced contributions to freshwater toxicity and global warming potential.

These results challenge the common belief that cardboard is more sustainable. They align with other research showing that replacing plastic packaging with paper is not always the best sustainable solution. EPS cooler boxes have up to 191% lower environmental footprints in some categories, highlighting EPS as a sustainable choice.

These insights underscore the importance of considering the full lifecycle of packaging materials. They reinforce the environmental benefits of EPS, supporting its role in achieving the EU’s climate and environmental goals. EUMEPS and its members continue to advocate for the recognition of EPS as a key material in sustainable packaging practices.

 

EUMEPS actively participates in regulatory frameworks such as the Green Deal, the European Performance of Buildings Directive, the Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation, and the Construction Products Regulation. Our involvement in these frameworks ensures that the benefits of EPS are recognised in policy decisions, supporting its continued use and development in various applications.

Findings resulting from LCA are crucial for making informed decisions about packaging materials in a sustainability-focused context. EUMEPS, representing the entire EPS value chain, is dedicated to meeting EU environmental goals and promoting EPS as a smart choice for packaging and insulation, by demonstrating EPS as a sustainable, innovative material essential for achieving the EU’s environmental objectives.

  • If you have any questions regarding this comparative LCA study, please email your queries tor.goes@stybenex.nlr.goes@stybenex.nll.

Related content