Metsä Board’s recent comparative life cycle assessment* compared the carbon footprint of berry trays made from three different materials: MetsäBoard Prime FBB EB, PET and recycled R-PET. The study included both biogenic carbon sequestration and biogenic carbon emissions, and it was verified by two independent reviewers from RISE and SimaPro UK. The cradle-to-grave study covered multiple end-of-life scenarios, such as regional recycling and full incineration.
Under the European end-of-life scenario**, the carbon footprint of a berry tray made of MetsäBoard Prime FBB EB was shown to be negative for the studied life cycle – meaning that more carbon, expressed as CO₂ equivalents, was bound in the paperboard’s fibres than was released during the processes of the first life cycle. The carbon footprint of the PET tray was 0.071 kg CO2e, and for the R-PET tray 0.039 kg CO2e. When the end-of-life scenario was 100% incineration, the carbon footprint of a berry tray made of MetsäBoard Prime FBB EB was 87% lower than that of a tray made of R-PET.
“When comparing end-of-life impacts, both PET plastic and paperboard contain carbon, which forms carbon dioxide during incineration. The key difference is that paperboard’s emissions are balanced by the carbon dioxide absorbed from the atmosphere during tree growth, while fossil-based plastics add new carbon to the atmosphere,” says Lari Oksala, Sustainability Manager at Metsä Board.
Metsä Board’s latest verified carbon footprint case study* compared berry trays made of Metsä Board’s dispersion barrier board to trays made of PET plastics