❙ APPLICATIONS AND IMPLEMENTATION Guidance for Improving Life-Cycle Design and Management of Milk Packaging Gregory A. Keoleian Center for Sustainable Systems University of Michigan Ann Arbor, MI, USA David V. Spitzley Battelle Memorial Institute Columbus, OH, USA ❙ Keywords life-cycle costs Summary life-cycle design Life-cycle inventory and cost-analysis tools applied to milk life-cycle energy packaging offer guidelines for achieving better environmen- milk packaging tal design and management of these systems. Life-cycle performance evaluation solid waste solid waste, energy, and costs were analyzed for seven sys- tems including single-use and refillable glass bottles, single- use and refillable high-density polyethylene (HDPE) bottles, paperboard gable-top cartons, linear low-density polyeth- ylene (LLDPE) flexible pouches, and polycarbonate refill- able bottles on a basis of 1,000 gal of milk delivered. In addition, performance requirements were also investigated that highlighted potential barriers and trade-offs for envi- ronmentally preferable alternatives. Sensitivity analyses, in- dicated that material production energy, postconsumer solid waste, and empty container costs were key param- eters for predicting life-cycle burdens and costs. Recent trends in recycling rates, tipping fees, and recycled materi- Address correspondence to: als market value had minimal effect on the results. Inven- Gregory A. Keoleian tory model results for life-cycle solid waste and energy Center for Sustainable Systems indicated the same rank order as results from previously University of Michigan Dana Building 430 E. University published life-cycle inventory studies of container systems. Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1115, USA Refillable HDPE and polycarbonate, and the flexible Phone: (734) 764-3194 Fax: (734) 647-5841 pouch were identified as the most environmentally prefer-
[email protected] able with respect to life-cycle energy and solid waste.