Scoping Main Page / IERE Homepage
Minutes of the Packaging LCA Scoping Group - 19 March 2008
We met by phone. On the call were: Joe Cattaneo (Glass); Ron Cotterman (Flexible Packaging); Bill Franklin (Franklin Associates); Andrei Kotchetov (Glass); Dennis Sabourin (Recycled PET); Bev Saur (Franklin Associates); Rita Schenck (Institute for Environmental Research and Education); Ram Singhal (Flexible Packaging); Bob Streiter (Aluminum Association); Amy Zettlemoyer (Wal-Mart).
The group reviewed the tentative list of decisions, and had no corrections. The flexible packaging group is having some difficulty with the process because their membership is so variable, and they could find no secondary data on many of their processes, e.g. laminating.
Amy explained that she wanted to post this document on Retail Link and on the Packaging Scorecard websites. She stated that Wal-Mart is interested in this process to support the second and improved phase of the packaging scorecard. She noted that the selection of impact models was a key to identifying preferred materials, and that she is also working with the Chemical Intensive Materials group.
There was some discussion of the US LCI database. Some of the data there needs updating. The aluminum association members (amongst other industries) are working on their data collection right now.
We discussed the packaging summit planned for the 17th of April. Amy wants a 30-minute update on the purpose, history and progress of this group. Rita requested that some member of industry co-present, and the group felt that Mike Levy would be the best person in the group to do so. Rita will talk with him.
We started to review the LCIA methods in the PowerPoint Rita prepared. The group agreed that endpoint models were not appropriate because they are based on value judgments, but it became clear that there were too many technical questions to be answered via a phone conversation. The group agreed to plan an in-person meeting, possibly with a consultant to describe the different options for impact assessment, and their pros and cons. There also was a request to evaluate the cost of doing an LCA in accordance with this scoping effort.
There was some discussion of the difficulty of performing human health impact assessment, and of heavy metals impact assessment.
We reiterated that the primary reason to do this scoping effort was to create a more science-based and equitable way to improve the Wal-Mart packaging scorecard.
Several of the members expressed the desire to talk off-line with Rita, especially with respect to impact assessment methodologies. Some ecotox links for the committee’s consideration:
http://se.setac.org/files/setac-eu-0314-2007.pdf
http://www.iere.org/lca-tox/We discussed the addition of label makers to our group. Avery-Dennison has not responded to Rita’s email, and she could not find a labeling manufacturer’s association on the internet. The group thought that such a group did not exist, but perhaps a printer’s group might be helpful.
Our next meeting will be on the 10th of April at 8:00 Pacific, 10:00 Central and 11:00 Eastern. The agenda will largely be to review the presentation to be given on the 17th.
In summary, the group decided that:
1) Mike Levy should be asked to co-present with Rita on the 17th
2) Impact assessment models should not be end-point models
3) We should plan a face-to-face meeting to discuss LCIA methods