How can I pack better?

As a brand sold (almost) exclusively online, we do ship packages. And even though shopping online is generally more eco-friendly than shopping in stores, we wanted to understand the issue and choose packaging that causes as little pollution as possible.

To assess their environmental impact, we compared the various packaging options based on two main criteria:

1. Greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to global warming
2. The generation of waste that pollutes the land and the oceans

There are, of course, other criteria, such as water consumption, acid rain, fine particulate matter emissions, and the generation of toxic particles… These are important criteria, but we did not include them in this initial study.

1- Kraft packaging (the one we chose 💙)

Greenhouse gas emissions

To make cardboard, you have to (breaking news) cut down trees. Then you have to transport them and turn them into wood pulp, which is then pressed, dried, and compressed between steel rollers. This process consumes energy and therefore inevitably emits greenhouse gases (approximately 964 kg per metric ton of CO2 equivalent).

But here's the good news: we can choose trees from sustainably managed forests (which is what we did for our FSC-certified packaging). In other words, for every tree that’s cut down, several more grow back. And trees are still the best solution we’ve found for capturing CO2 from the atmosphere. As a result, according to the Swedish Environmental Research Institute, sustainably managed forests sequester730 kg per metric ton of CO2 equivalent.

 

Finally, a kraft cardboard envelope doesn’t just vanish with a wave of a magic wand after being used once. To calculate its carbon footprint, we must therefore also take into account its end-of-life stage, when the CO2 stored in the cardboard is released into the atmosphere through incineration or decomposition in landfills. Second piece of good news: in France, 80% of cardboard is recycled, which significantly limits emissions. In short, to calculate the total carbon footprint of cardboard from cradle to grave, one need “only” add 163 kg/metric ton of CO2 equivalent.

All in all, when you add it all up, the carbon footprint of our kraft packaging is 15 grams of CO2 equivalent—four times less than, for example, conventional plastic packaging.

Waste Generation

In France, 13% of cardboard ends up in landfills. That’s relatively low, but it’s still too much. This is because there’s a risk that, in open landfills, lightweight pieces will blow away and end up in the oceans. Fortunately, unlike plastics, cardboard can biodegrade naturally within a few years.

2- Plastic packaging

Greenhouse gas emissions

Generally speaking, the packaging you receive when you order a piece of clothing is a plastic bag made of LDPE—low-density polyethylene. In other words, flexible plastic. As with cardboard, its production requires energy, which emits 1,870 kg/metric ton of CO2-equivalent greenhouse gases—much more than cardboard (even though the packaging is generally lighter).

But the real problem arises when we consider the end-of-life of plastic packaging. Because there are three options for your plastic bag:

1. Incineration (32% of plastics in France): When burned, all the CO2 that has been trapped for millions of years in the oil from which the plastic was made is released into the atmosphere. We’re talking about 3,384 kg per metric ton of CO2 equivalent. Let’s subtract 1,000 kg per metric ton associated with the energy generated by incineration. In the end, your 15-gram plastic bag will have emitted 65 grams of CO2—four times more than the kraft paper bag.
2. Landfilling (58% of plastics in France): As mentioned above, there is a risk that the plastic bag could blow away from an open landfill and end up in the oceans. In the best-case scenario, the degraded plastics end up underground… Unless they’re eventually incinerated… Back to scenario #1.
3. Recycling (10% of plastics in France): Unlike packaging that you can put in the yellow bin, LDPE plastic is difficult to recycle, particularly because the process is very expensive. Only certain types of LDPE—separated from other waste, for example, when collected at recycling plants—can be recycled. So this will never be a viable solution. On the contrary, talking about “recyclable plastic” can keep us in a dangerous illusion and lead us to believe that we can continue with these consumption patterns (here’s a great, in-depth article on this topic, by the way).

Waste Generation

As we mentioned in the previous paragraph, 58% of plastics in France end up in landfills—and sometimes in the oceans—where they will take millions of years to break down. In the meantime, there’s a risk of water contamination and ingestion by marine life…or even by you: 90% of table salt also contains microplastics.

 

Put yourself in the shoes of a turtle that's really craving some jellyfish...

3- Biodegradable plastic packaging

In recent years, plastic packaging labeled “oxo-biodegradable”—often referred to simply as “biodegradable”—has appeared on the market. It’s a rather misleading name...

Greenhouse gas emissions

So-called “biodegradable” plastics are actually conventional plastics made from petroleum, to which a few chemical additives have been added to make them break down more easily. Greenhouse gas emissions are therefore exactly the same as for conventional plastic.

Waste Generation

That’s the whole problem: these plastics are biodegradable only under certain conditions, specifically at temperatures above 50°C. This requires a dedicated recycling system that does not currently exist in France. On the contrary, it actually makes recycling more difficult, and the additives pose a danger to the environment.

4- Bio-based plastic packaging

There is also a growing number of so-called “bio-based” packaging materials—that is, those derived from plant-based, non-fossil sources: sugarcane for green polyethylene, for example, and corn for PLA, among others. These bio-based plastics are still in their infancy (there are particular challenges surrounding the use of pesticides, water consumption, the use of arable land, and eutrophication; see the study here).

Greenhouse gas emissions

If we calculate a “cradle-to-grave” carbon footprint, bio-based plastic packaging is very appealing, as it is nearly carbon neutral. In fact, as with cardboard, the raw material is plant-based and therefore sequesters CO2 as the plants grow.

Waste Generation

Bioplastics such as green polyethylene have exactly the same chemical composition as their fossil-based counterparts. So, technically, they can pose the same waste problems...

5- Reusable Plastic Packaging

Some companiesoffer reusable plastic bags to e-commerce retailers. Basically, you return your packaging by dropping it in any mailbox; they pick it up, clean it, and send it back to our warehouse. It’s a kind of deposit-return system applied to e-commerce—which sounds pretty appealing at first glance.

Greenhouse gas emissions

According to one of these companies, the average number of times a plastic bag is used is 20. The reusable bag is estimated to emit1,110 grams of CO2 equivalentover that period, largely due to the numerous round trips by truck to return the bag to the repackaging center. To calculate end-of-life emissions, we can estimate that there are none (for simplicity’s sake): damaged packaging is upcycled at repackaging centers, and packaging that remains with customers (because it was forgotten) can be reused for other purposes.

So, with 1,110 grams of CO2 equivalent over 20 uses, it’s better than a standard single-use LDPE bag (20 × 65 = 1,300 grams of CO2 equivalent), but significantly higher than our kraft pouch (20 × 15 = 300 grams of CO2 equivalent).

Waste Generation

That's the magic of the deposit system: no waste generated over 20 uses…

6- No packaging at all

That’s right—you can also go shopping for clothes in stores and decline the disposable bag they offer you… but here’s the thing: contrary to what you might think, shopping in stores increases greenhouse gas emissions by an average of three times. This is mainly due to the vehicle you use, so it’s no problem if you go by bike or subway :)

 

Summary