The new target was set by the FMCG giant in its recently published 2011 sustainability report, called Commitment to everyday life.
It also wants to replace its petroleum-based materials with sustainably sourced renewable materials by 25% by 2020 compared with 2010 levels.
P&G chief executive Robert A. McDonald said: “We’re confident that with P&G’s size and scale, and with our capabilities and partnerships, we can make the difference in the world to which we’re committed.”
He also said that the firm was advancing in research in renewable materials to develop alternatives to petroleum, “which is the most important thing we can do to reach our long-term vision of making 100% of our products and packaging with renewable or recycled materials”.
P&G acknowledged that it would not “reach this vision overnight; in fact, it will take decades to achieve”.
The report tracks the progress of P&G’s global commitments to reduce its environmental footprint across products and operations, introduce sustainable product innovations into its markets and fulfil its social responsibility commitments.
Gillette Fusion ProGlide pack
In 2007, P&G set itself a number of goals to achieve by 2012.
It said that is has reduced packaging within the detergent category in the US and Canada by 33%, by creating different dosage sizes and minimising plastic, lessening its environmental impact.
P&G case studies its Gillette Fusion ProGlide pack and said that the pack’s new design delivered a 57% reduction in packaging.
The company has also introduced plant-based plastic within its Pantene Pro-V packaging for the “nature fusion collection” across Western Europe, which it intends to roll out across North America this autumn.
Elsewhere, global sustainability vice president Len Sauers said solid waste continued to be an important issue to address for “our industry”.
He added that P&G aimed to create less “solid waste by designing waste out of our packaging and products”.
If you enjoyed this story, you may also like this one:
Loading ...
Targets can be good, especially if goals are met and they drive innovation in high enviROI green.
Though there can be the danger they are just PR.
It is a pity to see little consumer end-benefit reuse mentioned.
Get the users motivated, and even sustainability targets can be exceeded
Report this comment
P&G’s announcement is further evidence of big brand owners committing to using recycled content in their packaging. However, as a UK plastic recycler, what we’d also like to see is a further commitment to using UK-sourced recyclate in UK produced packaging, as well as greater focus on design for recycling. These are key to ensuring we produce a true closed loop. We look forward to working with companies such as P&G to ensure they can acheive their sustainability goals.
Report this comment
What we need to understand is there are two sides to plastic. The supply side and the disposal side. Manufacturers are very keen to address the supply side as that is where they can lessen their costs and provide a more secure supply of raw material. But what they to not like to address is the disposal side. And this is the side that affects the consumers the most. Making a bottle with a thinner wall poses just the same disposal problem as the original one. Making a bottle out of plant material doesn’t mean it is biodegradable. If disposed to a landfill it will still last many 100′s of years like a regular plastic bottle.
So manufacturers need to look at the disposal side to before they can claim environmental sustainability. This can be in actively encouraging recycling schemes, deposit schemes, setting up recycling containers or partnering with local councils to help pay for the set up of recycling bins. Also they could put in a landfill biodegradable additive to the plastic in the event that their bottle (or any other item) does go to a landfill, then they know it will biodegrade away and not sit there for 100’s of years. If the bottle doesn’t go to a landfill but is recycled or incinerated for its energy the inclusion of these additives does not affect these operations at all. So it is a good back stop allowance that puts an end to plastic waste no matter how it is treated.
Report this comment