SUSTAINABILITY IN FOCUS
45
The CO 2 footprint is a good measure. In the packaging industry, CO 2 reduction has long been an overarching goal to optimize and establish sustainability in the existing process chain. Is this enough? CH: It’s true: many of the goals in the sustainability reports focus on reducing CO 2 . There are numerous commitments with which companies and brands go public. Plastics have great potential here, and CO 2 can be saved with packaging materials such as PET. Achieving the goals and accepting the metric “CO 2 footprint” will improve plastic packaging and its reputation. Companies must make their sustainable contribution along the entire packaging value chain so that the declared goals of CO 2 savings become a reality. In terms of CO 2 savings, plastics do not have to fear comparison with glass or metals. If this ultimately
catches on with consumers and finds acceptance, then the issues of resource conservation and waste prevention remain. What other options help to improve the tarnished image of plastics - or more precisely of plastic packaging? Alternative materials and new business models in the field of packaging offer further options. A lot will also happen in terms of technologies and processes. In addition to mechanical recycling, there is also chemical and biological recycling. Reusable systems will also play an increasing role. Why is mobility not so caught up in the crossfire with its impact on the environment? CO 2 emissions are already being discussed, but wear and tear from tires or brakes: you hardly hear any complaints about that. Is it about lobbying?
CH: It’s the things that you see and perceive. Unfortunately, plastic packaging has become a symbol of environmental pollution among consumers. That’s because of the pictures. Our problem persists, and it’s visible. Of course, there are other pollution sources: microplastics, tires, functional underwear - we know where it comes from. Our job is to solve the problems that plastic packaging causes. In this context, it is interesting that the EU tax is called a “plastic tax”, in reality, it is a “plastic packaging tax”. This creates facts that don’t necessarily lead to the best solutions, right? CH: A differentiation based on facts is necessary to identify the problems in detail and then discuss them. In our industry, we often experience a lot of misunderstanding. People, for instance, confuse environmental protection with
COPYRIGHT PETNOLOGY/TECPET GMBH
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online