Stretch film, made from various formulations of linear low density polyethylene film, is used just about everywhere to hold loads together on pallets. Since most of us do not see the palletized loads that move inside trucks and rail cars, it may surprise you to learn how much of this plastic film is being pumped into the waste stream.
Reliable industry figures are hard to come by, but a conservative estimate of U.S. stretch film capacity is something in excess of 1 billion pounds, which works out to approximately 8,333 rail cars of stretch film material. If those rail cars were passing you on the tracks at a clip of one car every three seconds, you'd have to wait seven hours for the entire train to pass.
Although U.S. annual consumption is not at full capacity, we are nevertheless dealing with a massive amount of plastic waste. What happens to it? Some of it is recycled, but most of it winds up in the garbage.
Why is stretch film so widely used? To paraphrase Sir Winston Churchill, stretch film is the worst form of pallet unitization except all the others that have been tried.
Strapping, either plastic or steel, is difficult to apply,
expensive, awkward or even dangerous to remove, and inconvenient to
dispose of. Strapping provides no moisture protection for palletized
loads, either.
Gaylord shipping containers, or large,
lidded boxes stapled to a pallet, are widely used in the printing
industry and in specialized applications such as automotive parts
shipping. However, they are expensive, use an enormous amount of
corrugated material, and are not practical for mainstream pallet
unitization applications.
Stretchable tapes and rubber bands
can be effective for lightweight, uniform loads and/or intraplant
transport, and are very appealing from a sustainability perspective.
However, these materials again provide no moisture protection, are not
practical for irregularly shaped loads, and are not strong enough for
heavy loads and long distance shipping.
Palletizing adhesives are applied to boxes in liquid or aerosol form as they are stacked on pallets. They are the ultimate in packaging source reduction, but are not always easy to apply and may present problems downstream when loads are broken down. And again, adhesives offer no moisture protection and have limited strength.
In contrast, stretch film can be applied to palletized loads of virtually any size, weight, and configuration. Stretch film is relatively inexpensive and is strong enough to maintain load integrity under even the most rigorous shipping conditions. Stretch film can be integrated into high speed and low speed palletization operations, in centralized or decentralized palletization environments, and wherever space is limited. Stretch film is easy to remove (other than being dusty), and can be easily recycled if a company takes the trouble to do so.
Realistically, stretch film is not likely to leave the U.S. secondary packaging scene. That being the case, it is critically important for packers to reduce the amount of film they use. In my next article, I will talk about the many ways it can be accomplished.
Brad Shorr is a sales and marketing consultant
with an extensive background in the packaging industry. He was inspired
to write on sustainable packaging topics by one of his major clients,
Salazar Packaging Inc., who has great expertise in that area. Brad's
company, Word Sell, Inc., offers sales training and coaching, business
blog development services, and a variety of marketing and copywriting
services. To learn more visit his Web site and blog at www.wordsellinc.com.
Subscribe by email
Comments