GCP Sect 20 Packaging and The Environment

1
GCP (All Containers): Section 20: Packaging and the Environment
Institute of Brewing and Distilling

General Certificate in Packaging (GCP)
Section 20
Packaging and the Environment
20.1 Sustainability and climate change
The brewing industry, in common with other industries, impacts on the
environment in many different ways. For example:
• As a user of energy.
• As a ‘consumer’ of water and other natural resources.
• As a source, both directly and indirectly, of atmospheric emissions,
trade effluent and packaging waste.
Sustainable development
The challenge of sustainable development is to achieve economic, social and

environmental objectives at the same time.
In the past economic activity and growth have often resulted in pollution and
wasted resources. A damaged environment impairs quality of life and at worst
may threaten long term economic growth, for example as a result of global
climate change.
Climate change
Climate change is being caused by an increase in greenhouse gases in the

atmosphere. These gases come from both natural and man-made sources,
but the increase is the result of human activity, mainly the release of carbon
dioxide from the use of fossil fuels such as coal, gas, oil, petrol and diesel.
All businesses and societies, to a greater or lesser extent, will feel the impact
of climate change and the policies of governments around the world to
address it. These may include:
• restrictions on emission levels
• restrictions on water use
• changes in agricultural growth patterns
• increases in energy prices
• changes in consumer habits
Sustainability guiding principles
Companies committing to minimising the total impact of their activities on the

environment, to using natural resources wisely, to pursuing social progress
and to playing leading roles in their economies adhere to certain guiding
principles typified by the following:
© The Institute of Brewing and Distilling (GCP Revision Notes Version 1 2008)
2
• To comply with all relevant national and local legislation and

regulations.
• To design, operate and maintain processes and plants to:
- optimise the use of all resources (materials, water,
energy etc) whilst ensuring that unavoidable wastes are
recovered, reused or disposed of in an economically
sustainable and environmentally responsible manner.
- minimise the potential impact on the environment from
site emissions to air, water and land.
• To regularly assess the environmental impacts of processes and plants
and, based on the assessments, set annual objectives and targets for
the continual improvement of environmental performance.
• To use and develop packaging distribution systems for which
packaging/product combination will make fewer demands on non-
renewable and renewable natural resources.
• To minimise the use of substances which may cause potential harm to
the environment and ensure they are used and disposed of safely.
• To encourage a culture of awareness on sustainability issues amongst
employees through management commitment, appropriate
communications, training and other initiatives.
• To establish and maintain appropriate procedures and management
systems to implement these principles through policy commitment.
• To work with suppliers and other business partners in the supply chain
to maintain high environmental standards.
The role of carbon dioxide – the carbon cycle
Carbon dioxide emission is seen as a key measure of environmental damage.

During fermentation the yeast acts on the sugars in the wort to produce a
combination of alcohol and carbon dioxide. The impression may erroneously
be given that the brewing industry is a net generator of carbon dioxide as a
result. In reality, carbon dioxide evolution through that route is simply part of
the natural carbon cycle:
• The amount of carbon dioxide released during fermentation is roughly

a quarter of the amount absorbed from the atmosphere through
photosynthesis by the growing grain.
• Photosynthesis by the growing grain releases oxygen back into the
atmosphere.
• Carbon dioxide is also released back into the atmosphere through
human metabolism.
3
CO2 PROCESS CYCLE
oxygen
carbon dioxide
malting fermentable
barley sugar
beer
mashing
yeast man
water
Carbon dioxide derived from the fermentation process is increasingly

recovered in the brewery for use in the process and product. The first carbon
dioxide from a fermentation is mixed with air and is therefore vented to
atmosphere. Carbon dioxide recovery becomes viable when the gas reaches
a predetermined purity level (e.g. 99.5%). Generally, the recovery process
involves the following stages:
• Collection
• Washing / scrubbing
• Compression
• Deodorising and drying
• Liquefaction and storage
In addition to reducing emissions to the environment, this saves the brewery

having to purchase all the gas it requires from outside manufacturers thereby
reducing demand on resources and indirect energy use.
Principal sources of carbon dioxide emissions
The real source of carbon dioxide emissions in the brewing industry is the
combustion of fossil fuels – either at the brewery itself or in the generation of
the electricity supplied. There is therefore a need for continuing improvement
in the efficiency with which fossil fuels are used, whether through the use of
electricity or through the combustion of fuel at the brewery:
4
• Electricity, as compared with natural gas, gives rise to three times the
quantity of carbon dioxide for the same amount of delivered energy.
• Whereas electricity provides only perhaps 25% of the energy
requirements of the brewing industry, the generation of electricity
creates almost 50% of carbon dioxide emissions.
• Where available, natural gas generally provides perhaps 66% of the
total energy requirement but creates only 40% of carbon dioxide
emissions.
20.2 Energy conservation

The energy use in brewing where it interfaces with the processes takes the
form of Heat (steam and hot water) and Power (electricity). The heat energy is
normally generated on site in boilers using primary fuels such as gas, oil or
coal. Electricity on the other hand is usually purchased from national grids,
even though some breweries generate a proportion in-house.
Principal energy consuming activities
Within the brewing industry the main energy usage will vary between
breweries (large, small, old, modern), with product (beer, lager), with package
type (keg, returnable bottle, non-returnable bottle, can) and with location
(ambient air temperature and water temperature). The following are some
illustrative examples:
Thermal Energy %
Brewhouse 20 to 50
Packaging 25 to 30
Utilities 15 to 20
Admin, space heating Up to 10
Electricity %
Refrigeration 30 to 40
Packaging 15 to 35
Compressed air 10
Brewhouse 5 to 10
Boilerhouse 5
Other 15 to 35
5
Typical energy reduction strategies
The approach to achieving savings in the use of energy can be categorised

under the following headings:
Process technologies
Horizontal technologies
Overall energy management
1. Process technologies
Process technologies relate to the use and treatment of the materials

themselves, principally malt, water and hops in a way peculiar to brewing.
Energy savings can be achieved by the adoption of Best Available
Techniques (BAT) which are widely disseminated within the brewing industry.
Examples of processes which require high energy inputs where much work
has been carried out might include:
Mashing
Wort boiling
Wort cooling
Hot water management
Fermentation
Pasteurisation
2. Horizontal technologies
Horizontal technologies (with demonstrable Best Available Techniques) can

invariably be applied across many industries. Examples include:
Steam raising
Refrigeration
Compressed air
Utility pipework distribution systems and insulation
Combined heat and power
Electric motors and drives
Biomass solutions as alternative energy sources
3. Overall energy management
A number of well tried techniques can be employed in the effort to reduce

energy use:
6
a) Analysis of energy use and implementation of a monitoring and

targeting (M & T) system
This is the fundamental energy management technique that must

always be implemented first. It ensures that all energy usage is
monitored on a regular basis.
The key is strategically positioned effective metering to provide reliable

data. Best practice is to develop the energy metering to allow the
transfer of measured energy costs into the user cost centres with a
comparison of usages against calculated standards, any variance
being reported.
The energy data provided by the monitoring and targeting system must
be disseminated inside the brewery. This is of prime importance, in
conjunction with awareness training, to motivate the staff to save
energy and allow them to participate and improve the efficiency of the
equipment.
b) Targeted investigation and action plan
Here an investigation is initiated to look at an area (or areas) of high

energy usage or known inefficiency. For a generalised approach the
highest users of energy would be targeted first (adopting the Pareto
principle). Examples for heat would therefore be mashing, wort boiling
and pasteurisation. Examples for electricity would be refrigeration,
compressed air, large pumps and conveyor systems.
The key stages in the investigation process are:
• Audit the process

• Produce findings
• Evaluate findings
• Produce action plan
• Make modification / investment
• Re-evaluate process performance
• Assess energy saving and financial implications
This technique can be developed into one of continuous improvement:
• Evaluate against standard / benchmark

• Assess options
• Make change
• Re-evaluate
• Monitor improvement
• etc
7
c) Pinch analysis and pinch technology
Introduced in the mid 1980s pinch analysis provides a systematic

approach to analyse energy networks and improve the energy
performance of industrial processes. Pinch technology uses graphical
representations of the energy flows in the process and utility streams to
determine the minimum energy consumption a process should use to
meet its specific production requirements.
Pinch technology proceeds in two steps:
• In the first step, composite curves are created considering all the
streams within the process that require cooling as “hot” lines and
all the streams that require heating as “cold” lines. The theory is
then compared with the actual amount of utility to pinpoint to
what extent there is room for improvement. The points on the
composite curves at which the “hot” and “cold” lines come
closest to each other are called the “pinch point”.
• In the second step of the pinch technology analysis, aspects that
can be improved are studied from the perspective of energy
conservation, operational costs and new plant capital cost.
Finally the heat exchange network is improved and optimised.
The concept is designed principally for new breweries or for retrofit

situations. In its widest application it can take account of all the energy
flows on a site and identify projects that look attractive on their own or
inappropriate when considered in a wider context.
d) Feasibility studies into alternative technologies
In addition to the energy saving techniques described above, it may be

appropriate from time to time to carry out feasibility studies into
alternative technologies which may lead to strategic capital investment.
Examples of such technologies might be:
Combined heat and power

Wind power
Generation of methane from biomass
8
20.3. Water conservation
Access to a sustainable water supply is critical to the brewery as one of the

key raw materials. Quality and availability are of major significance.
It could, perhaps a little cynically, be said that breweries “borrow” water from
the environment:
• treat it as needed
• use it once (mostly)
• treat it again
• throw it away
This can be represented as the “Water Supply Chain”
The Environment
The Environment
The Environment
Water Water Effluent

Supply Use Treatment
Surveys of breweries have shown that the ratio of volumes of water

consumption to production varies from 3:1 to 20:1. The adjudged minimum
ratio of consumption, allowing for unavoidable losses, is approximately 1.4:1.
In practice, however, the minimum consumption is regarded as being in the
range 2.5:1 to 5:1 depending on the operations carried out by the particular
brewery.
Principal water consuming activities (see Section 2.3 for more detail)
There are three distinct purposes:
• Product (brewing) water (liquor) - for the production of the beer itself
• Process water - for cleaning brewery plant, washing beer packages
before filling, cooling and heating
• Service water - for boilers, utility cooling towers, general cleaning water
9
Typical water conservation strategies
Strategies to conserve water are, unsurprisingly, very similar to those to

conserve energy (see Section 21.2). The adoption of Process and Horizontal
Technologies incorporating Best Available Techniques (BAT) is essential in
seeking step-wise reductions in water use.
As described in the section on energy reduction, similar approaches can be

adopted:
a) Analysis of water use and implementation of a monitoring and targeting

(M & T) system
b) Targeted investigation and action plan
c) Feasibility studies into alternative technologies
An example of a well proven staged approach to improve water management

is detailed below:
• Produce mass balance
- Start with survey of water use across brewery
- Include all water use – product, process, and service
- Aim to account for > 80% of water use
• Construct simple model
- Build simple network model based on information known (flows,
concentrations) to identify areas of inaccuracy
- Resample critical nodes to improve accountability to 90 to 95%
• Reduce Waste
- Focus on poor housekeeping to reduce wastage
o routine inspection for leaks
o prevention of losses from taps, triggers by fitting flow restrictors
o or shut-off valves
• Improve Management
- Examine CIP programmes to ensure the water is being used
effectively
- Examine operations of keg washers, bottle washers and all small
pack pasteurisers to prevent unnecessary wastage of water
- Examine utilities (cooling systems, water purification, boiler
operation) to check for inefficient water usage
• Identify Reuse or Recycling Options
- Using network model, identify opportunities for water reuse and
water recycling
- Identify minimum economic water consumption for site
• Generate Strategic Vision
- Incorporate new plant, expansions, discharge consent levels
(new plant will be designed for minimum economic water
use)
- Identify new minimum economic water consumption for site
• Improvement Plan
- Identify steps to implement water management strategy and
- Prepare economic cases
• Implement water reuse and recycle improvements
10
It is generally accepted that full savings cannot be achieved in one step.

There is often merit in starting with the cheapest and most cost effective.
Typical savings may then build up in the following way:
• Reduction in uncontrolled use (housekeeping) 20 to 30%

• Improved control (management) 20 to 30%
• Water reuse 10 to 20%
• Water recycling 10 to 20%
• Design improvements 10 to 20%
Diagramatically this staged approach might be represented as shown:
WATER
SAVING
100 %
REDESIGN
80 %
RECYCLE
60 %
REUSE
40 %
MANAGEMENT
20 %
HOUSEKEEPING
CAPITAL COST
0%
11
20.4. Packaging Waste

Focusing purely on packaging, the beverage industry is one of the most
environmentally efficient of industries. Few industries can claim such an
impressive record of lightweighting, minimisation, refilling and recycling. The
cost of most beverages tends to be relatively low and yet they are relatively
heavy and bulky; therefore, the cost of packaging as a proportion of sales
tends to be higher than is the case with many consumer goods. This creates
compelling financial and environmental arguments for minimising beverage
packaging and is entirely in line with society’s aims of sustainable
development.
The impact of packaging waste on household (consumer) recycling
Factors such as market expectations and cost will always be among the
foremost drivers of packaging minimisation but in the 1990s such factors
came to be rivalled in their impact by legislation. The purpose of the
legislation was to divert packaging waste from landfill by forcing the recycling
of packaging materials.
Much of the legislation was pioneered separately in Europe and the United
States. In 1989 Germany introduced a law mandating ambitious recycling and
refilling targets for beverage packaging. This legislation led to the creation of
the European ‘Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive 1994’ in order to
preserve a free market across Europe.
The Directive initially specified that by June 30th 2001:
1. Between 50 and 65% of packaging must be ‘recovered’ (collected for

some acceptable form of processing, which does not involve
landfilling). The term ‘recovered’ is specified as consisting of any of the
following;
• Recycling – whereby the material is recycled into usable
product(s), although not necessarily the same product.
• Energy recovery – incineration with recovery of the resultant
energy, whereby the energy gained from the combustion
process is utilised in some useful form, such as electricity
generation or combined heat and power (CHP).
• Composting and biodegradation – where biodegradable
packaging is turned into useful compost, or otherwise
biodegrades to the extent that most of the resultant material
ultimately decomposes into carbon dioxide and water.
2. Between 25 and 45% of packaging must be recycled as defined above,

with a minimum of 15% of any individual packaging material being
recycled. The remaining 5 to 40% of packaging which has been
recovered but not recycled, may be incinerated with energy recovery or
composted.
12
The initial targets were varied for individual EU countries and have since been
revised upwards a number of times with the latest being set for 2008. The
mechanics of achieving the recovery and recycling targets vary considerably
between countries. However a typical system would involve:
• The country in question legislating to make product suppliers liable to

achieve the required levels of recovery and recycling.
• The setting-up, with state encouragement, of an industry-controlled
recycling organisation.
• Product suppliers joining the recycling organisation and paying it
levies (based on their tonnage of packaging marketed) to undertake
the legally-mandated recycling burden on their behalf.
The existence of rather different legislation in the USA demonstrates another

way of proceeding. The view of the US legal system is that, once money has
changed hands, only the owner of a product can have any responsibility for it.
This fundamental conceptual difference has influenced US packaging
legislation, since producers of beverage packaging are less likely to be held
responsible for recycling packaging waste owned by consumers. Apart from
this underlying difference in thinking compared to Europe, however, there is a
wide variation in requirements of individual US states. For example states
variously:
• ban particular products from landfill

• ban all containers from landfill
• ban the disposal of recyclable packaging materials
• mandate deposits on beverage containers
• require the payment of an ‘advance disposal fee’
Local household recycling of packaging materials
Recycling of household packaging materials began on a voluntary basis over

30 years ago with bottle-banks (green, brown and clear glass) being
strategically positioned near supermarkets, car-parks etc. Many of these
schemes started in northern Europe and Scandinavia. In due course
receptacles were added for metal cans and cardboard (and later still, beyond
packaging materials, clothes, shoes etc).
In the 1980s and 1990s national waste regulations increasingly gave rise to
regional and local regulations, policed by local authorities, district and city
councils etc. These local regulations required compulsory schemes to be
introduced covering all households living in the catchment area. Households
are generally issued with coloured bins or plastic sacks to segregate waste
streams. The schemes vary considerably depending on the sophistication of
the waste reception and sorting centre run by or on behalf of the authority or
council. One scheme, which is typical of many, requires households to
segregate packaging waste streams as follows:
13
• glass (all colours)
All glass is collected in a blue rigid plastic bin the contents being
emptied into a special section of the refuse lorry when it calls on a
weekly basis. The glass is subsequently recycled by returning to glass
manufacturers for use in coloured bottles, jars etc.
• paper, cardboard, cans and non-rigid plastic containers
All the above are collected in pink plastic sacks which are taken away
in the weekly refuse collection. At the waste reception station the
packaging materials are sorted mainly by hand but with some
automation (eg powerful magnets to separate steel cans and tins). The
segregated wastes are then returned via intermediate waste transfer
stations to the appropriate manufacturers.
The scheme described here extends to garden waste (collected in large

“wheely-bins”) collected separately every two weeks. Another scheme has an
additional small closed bin for domestic food waste. These schemes are
evolving continually with ever higher recycling targets being imposed from
national governments.
Strategies to minimise packaging material and encourage recycling
Around the world governments’ objectives are broadly similar:
• to minimise packaging and packaging waste as far as possible

• to promote reuse of packaging materials
• to encourage the recovery and, in particular, the recycling of packaging
waste
There are four key drivers to minimise packaging material and encourage
recycling:
• legislation
• market mechanisms
• the consumer
• cost
1. Legislation
Much of the packaging waste legislation imposes considerable responsibility

on packaging ‘producers’ who generally include:
• manufacturers of raw materials for packaging

• businesses that convert raw materials into packaging
• fillers, who put goods into packaging, or use packaging to wrap goods
• sellers, who sell packaging to the final user or consumer of the
packaging
14
Producers are subject to the essential requirement that packaging must be

minimal. A typical interpretation of minimal is: ‘Packaging shall be so
manufactured that the packaging volume and weight be limited to the
minimum adequate amount to maintain the necessary level of safety, hygiene
and acceptance for the packed product and the consumer’.
The following is an example checklist which may help to determine if a

package is minimal:
• Have other ways of packaging this product been considered?

• Have ways of minimising this packaging been considered?
• Do other packaging suppliers offer lighter weight versions of this pack
which do the job just as well?
• Has this pack been benchmarked against competitors’ packs?
• How does this pack compare with similar products on the market?
• If this pack had to be defended in court, is there a compelling defence
as to why this pack has to be this way?
In terms of reuse, recycling or disposal, for most countries with packaging

and/or packaging waste regulations, packaging technologists have to be able
to answer the following question in the affirmative: ‘Is the packaging
biodegradable (made of paper or board) or able to be incinerated cleanly with
the release of calorific energy (paper or board, plastics and even aluminium
foil usually meet this criterion), or recyclable (meeting the requirements of the
recycling process in operation where the packaging is sold)?’
How are packaging materials affected by legislation? Clearly, glass is

encouraged. Plastics are discouraged, except for PET (Polyethylene
terephthalate), which is sometimes well received due to the high recycling
rates achieved and the existence of PET refill systems. PVC (Polyvinyl
chloride) is the least favoured plastic. Metals are discouraged in some regions
in order to encourage the use of refillables and treated favourably in others,
due to the high recycling rates achieved for metal cans. Laminates are
discouraged due to their poor recyclability despite the fact that they meet
minimisation requirements to a greater extent than any other packaging
material and offer good calorific value for incineration. (The attractiveness of
laminates is ensuring that much work is being done to improve their
recyclability and a wider use of laminates can be anticipated in the future).
2. Market mechanisms
Environmental issues have come to drive market mechanisms to a greater

extent than ever before. This is because what began as informal
environmental interest has evolved into more formalised market mechanisms.
PVC (Polyvinyl chloride) forms an illustrative example. There may be little in

the way of legislation banning PVC yet less formal market mechanisms have
15
a huge negative impact on the use of this plastic. For example Greenpeace
has called for a ban on PVC and indeed all chlorine chemistry.
PVC beverage packaging is generally accepted in the USA and most

countries outside Europe and within Europe is banned by legislation only in
Switzerland. However, in practice, PVC beverage packaging cannot be used
throughout much of Europe. This is due to a variety of negative mechanisms.
For example, in several countries, such as the Netherlands, retailers refuse to
stock beverages packed in PVC. In other countries, just one handling retailer
may refuse to stock PVC for selected product lines. In still other countries,
PVC is accepted by most retailers but discouraged by a few (the UK is such
an example).
In the face of these difficulties, many beverage manufacturers have chosen to

package their products in non-PVC containers throughout Europe. Most
switched to PET (Polyethylene terephthalate) to enable continued access to
key markets.
3. The consumer
The impact of consumer attitudes to environmental issues concerning

beverage packaging is a complex matter. Consumer surveys tend to show
that the majority of consumers take an interest in environmental issues and
yet only a small majority shop as if they do.
In the beverage market there can be little doubt that packaging is the major
perceived determinant of the environmental performance of a beverage.
Therefore, environmentally responsible packaging is likely to grow in
importance as a significant determinant of the market success of a beverage
brand, while packaging that is environmentally inferior to market norms will
increasingly represent a significant brand weakness.
Against this background brewing companies are acknowledging the concerns

of their various stakeholders, including consumers, in employing scientific
methods to assist packaging technologists design environmentally
responsible packaging systems. The leading method is known as Life Cycle
Assessment or Life Cycle Analysis (LCA). In Germany and Switzerland, the
term Eco-Balance is preferred but the method is substantially the same:
1. The entire life cycle of an item of packaging is investigated:

extraction of raw materials, shipping, processing, manufacture of
packaging, transport, filling, distribution, sale, use by the consumer and
waste management.
2. At each of these stages, environmental impacts are measured –
materials and energy consumed, emissions and wastes produced.
3. These impacts are summed-up and analysed to give an overall picture
of the environmental impact of the pack. Repeating this for several
pack types enables comparisons to be made.
16
4. Cost
Scientific studies provide the clearest message when it comes to the
consideration of minimal packaging. When the amount of material used in the
construction of a package is reduced, a certain amount of material is saved
and so never used. Material that is not used is not mined or harvested, nor is
it transported, processed, used or disposed of. In other words, the
environmental impact is reduced throughout the entire lifecycle. Identifying net
gain does not involve weighing-up costs and benefits, as it does with recycling
and refilling – the environmental benefit of minimisation is total.
Clearly it is in a company’s interest to drive down costs through the process of
minimisation whilst ensuring no reduction in the protection afforded to the
beer by the pack.
A number of methods are employed. Examples include:
• Value Engineering
Value engineering analyses packaging by function rather than by

content and looks to reduce the cost. Focussing on function allows the
analysers to concentrate on essential features and avoid any
preconceived notions.
Each study will comprise the following steps:

1. Information gathering
2. Definition of function
3. Speculation on alternatives
4. Evaluation of all alternative ways of meeting the
requirements
5. Verification
6. Presentation of proposals
7. Implementation and subsequent follow-up
• Lightweighting
Lightweighting of packaging features under many initiatives, not least

cost reduction.
Much progress has been made in the last ten years or so in all aspects
of packaging from primary containers to secondary packaging.
Examples include the lightweighting of glass bottles, PET bottles, cans,
cartonboard, corrugated board and plastic films.
• Technological developments
Manufactures and suppliers often work with companies or

representative industry bodies to improve the companies’ or industry’s
competitiveness through technological developments often leading to
cost reduction. Examples include the two-piece can and the
progressive reduction in can-end size.

GCP Sect 20 Packaging and The Environment

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

GCP Sect 20 Packaging and The Environment

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1

GCP (All Containers): Section 20: Packaging and the Environment

Institute of Brewing and Distilling

The challenge of sustainable development is to achieve economic, social and

Climate change is being caused by an increase in greenhouse gases in the

Sustainability guiding principles

Companies committing to minimising the total impact of their activities on the

• To comply with all relevant national and local legislation and

The role of carbon dioxide – the carbon cycle

Carbon dioxide emission is seen as a key measure of environmental damage.

• The amount of carbon dioxide released during fermentation is roughly

CO2 PROCESS CYCLE

Carbon dioxide derived from the fermentation process is increasingly

In addition to reducing emissions to the environment, this saves the brewery

Principal sources of carbon dioxide emissions

20.2 Energy conservation

Principal energy consuming activities

Typical energy reduction strategies

The approach to achieving savings in the use of energy can be categorised

Process technologies relate to the use and treatment of the materials

Horizontal technologies (with demonstrable Best Available Techniques) can

3. Overall energy management

A number of well tried techniques can be employed in the effort to reduce

a) Analysis of energy use and implementation of a monitoring and

This is the fundamental energy management technique that must

The key is strategically positioned effective metering to provide reliable

b) Targeted investigation and action plan

Here an investigation is initiated to look at an area (or areas) of high

The key stages in the investigation process are:

• Audit the process

This technique can be developed into one of continuous improvement:

• Evaluate against standard / benchmark

c) Pinch analysis and pinch technology

Introduced in the mid 1980s pinch analysis provides a systematic

Pinch technology proceeds in two steps:

The concept is designed principally for new breweries or for retrofit

d) Feasibility studies into alternative technologies

In addition to the energy saving techniques described above, it may be

Combined heat and power

20.3. Water conservation

Access to a sustainable water supply is critical to the brewery as one of the

This can be represented as the “Water Supply Chain”

Water Water Effluent

Surveys of breweries have shown that the ratio of volumes of water

There are three distinct purposes:

Typical water conservation strategies

Strategies to conserve water are, unsurprisingly, very similar to those to

As described in the section on energy reduction, similar approaches can be

a) Analysis of water use and implementation of a monitoring and targeting

An example of a well proven staged approach to improve water management

It is generally accepted that full savings cannot be achieved in one step.

• Reduction in uncontrolled use (housekeeping) 20 to 30%

20.4. Packaging Waste

The impact of packaging waste on household (consumer) recycling

The Directive initially specified that by June 30th 2001:

1. Between 50 and 65% of packaging must be ‘recovered’ (collected for

2. Between 25 and 45% of packaging must be recycled as defined above,

• The country in question legislating to make product suppliers liable to

The existence of rather different legislation in the USA demonstrates another

• ban particular products from landfill

Local household recycling of packaging materials

Recycling of household packaging materials began on a voluntary basis over

• glass (all colours)