 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Prime Resin vs. Reprocessed Resin [repro]
Few people know that bags made from reprocessed resin (repro) compared to those made from prime resin place a heavier burden on the environment. Recent testing and Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) data show that reprocessed resin used in the manufacturing of trash bags does more harm than good to the environment. Repro provides a positive environmental impact when used in thicker plastic products like park benches and plastic lumber that have long life spans. However, when repro is used in thin film plastic trash bags, up to 40% more plastic is sent to the landfills, more energy is used to produce the bag and greenhouse gas emissions increase, as documented on these next few slides.
Why Waste the Plastic?
Frank Ruiz has been a polymer chemist since 1976.
As an expert and pioneer in the use of mineral additives,
Frank helped develop polymer blend formulations
that now make possible the production of thinner plastic
bags with outstanding performance properties. Frank also developed
the Heritage Bag Company’s BioTuf™ compostable liner used to divert organic
waste from landfills into composting operations across the country.
“The fact is, most garbage bags go into landfills. Knowing that repro bags need 40% more plastic content to reach reasonable performance standards, why not put that 40% repro into something that will last, like a park bench or plastic lumber? Otherwise we are sending plastic to landfills when the plastic wasn’t needed to get the job done in the first place. A bag without repro content can get the job done using over a third less raw material. ” – Frank Ruiz
Weighing the Options
Lan Nguyen’s research in the plastics industry has been instrumental
in understanding the environmental impact of reprocessed resin used
in plastic bags. Lan is a polymer chemist and is the Technical Director
at Heritage Bag Company.
“After years of thorough research and testing the results were clear: trash bags containing repro are made thicker because the repro content does not meet the required performance standards to get the job done – they need more plastic content to function. We need to be smart recyclers and only use repro where it makes environmental sense to do so.”– Lan Nguyen
Typical Reprocessed Resin Bag
- More energy to produce bag
- More plastic sent to landfills
- More plastic for the same job
- More petrochemical materials
- More cost per bag
- Weaker puncture performance
- Weaker tear performance
Prime Resin Bag
- Reduces energy used to produce bag
- Reduces plastic needed for the same job
- Reduces Petroleum based raw materials
- Reduces cost per bag
- 40% less plastic into landfills
- 200% stronger puncture performance
- 50% stronger tear performance
Test Results
Real World Facts
* This analysis is based on a 38” X 58” bag size comparing 1.5 mil average repro bag vs. 0.9 mil prime bag. The calculations were based on the US Environmental Protection Agency’s Greenhouse Gas Equivalences Calculator. See last page for sources. PCR content =20%.
References for Real World Facts:
LCAs conducted following the National Risk Management Research Laboratories [NRMRL] Life Cycle Assesment: Principles and Practices in conjunction with the US Environmental Protection Agency [EPA].
Resin carbon emission numbers were derived from various suppliers' craddle-to-gate analyses as well as from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory [NREL] US Life Cycle Invetory Databases.
Common Reference comparisons used the EPA's Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator.
