[et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ fullwidth=”on” _builder_version=”4.25.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_module=”73″ saved_tabs=”all” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_fullwidth_post_title meta=”off” featured_image=”off” _builder_version=”4.25.0″ _module_preset=”default” title_font=”|||on|||||” title_text_align=”center” title_text_color=”#FFFFFF” title_font_size=”50px” background_image=”https:\/\/www.poplast.it\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/visual-generico.webp” custom_padding=”13%||7%||false|false” custom_padding_tablet=”140px||70px||false|false” custom_padding_phone=”130px||40px||false|false” custom_padding_last_edited=”on|desktop” title_font_size_tablet=”40px” title_font_size_phone=”30px” title_font_size_last_edited=”on|phone” global_colors_info=”{}”][\/et_pb_fullwidth_post_title][\/et_pb_section][et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ _builder_version=”4.27.4″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_row column_structure=”3_5,2_5″ _builder_version=”4.27.4″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_column type=”3_5″ _builder_version=”4.27.4″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_text admin_label=”Testo” _builder_version=”4.27.4″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” hover_enabled=”0″ global_colors_info=”{}” sticky_enabled=”0″]<\/p>\n
At Interpack 2025 (D\u00fcsseldorf, May 7-13) we will present the results of our LCA study published in Environmental Impact Assessment Review.
We conducted a Life Cycle Assessment (#LCA) on traditional vs mono-material flexible packaging structures for three applications: coffee (PET\/AL\/PE vs PP\/PPHB met\/PP cast), dried fruit (OPA\/PE vs MDOPE\/PE), cheese (PET\/PE\/EVOH\/PE vs PPHB\/PP cast).<\/p>\n
[\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”2_5″ _builder_version=”4.27.4″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_image src=”https:\/\/www.poplast.it\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/lca-monomateriale.jpg” title_text=”lca-monomateriale” _builder_version=”4.27.4″ _module_preset=”default” hover_enabled=”0″ global_colors_info=”{}” sticky_enabled=”0″][\/et_pb_image][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][et_pb_row _builder_version=”4.16″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″ _builder_version=”4.16″ custom_padding=”|||” global_colors_info=”{}” custom_padding__hover=”|||”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.27.4″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” hover_enabled=”0″ global_colors_info=”{}” sticky_enabled=”0″]<\/p>\n
The study, carried out by CIPACK research group (Interdepartmental Centre for Packaging) at University of Parma (Prof. Eng. Giuseppe Vignali, Eng. Roberta Stefanini) in collaboration with POPLAST R&D (Eng. @Gian Marco Ricci), applies ISO 14040\/14044 methodology and EF 3.1 method with cradle-to-grave approach.<\/p>\n
Recyclability and end-of-life scenarios Mono-material solutions achieve Recyclass Class B (recyclable, can feed closed-loop).<\/p>\n
Traditional multilayer structures result in Class E\/F (non-recyclable, destined for incineration with energy recovery) or non-assessable due to aluminum >5\u03bcm.<\/p>\n
This yields two scenarios based on COREPLA national data: With recyclable materials: 83% to recycling, 17% to landfill, 0% to incineration. With non-recyclable materials: 0% to recycling, 83% to incineration, 17% to landfill.<\/p>\n
Quantified results (Climate Change) CO2 emission reduction using Poplast mono-material packaging:<\/strong><\/p>\n Raw material production accounts for 40-80% of total life cycle impact. Poplast mono-material solutions reduce this impact by eliminating aluminum and complex barriers, enabling end-of-life recycling vs incineration of traditional multilayer structures.<\/p>\n A more conservative scenario where recyclable films might not all be actually sent to recycling but partially to incineration (41.5% recycling – 41.5% incineration – 17% landfill) has been published in the prestigious international journal Environmental Impact Assessment Review\u00a0<\/p>\n\n
Conclusions<\/h2>\n