Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Institut für Aufbereitung und Recycling fester Abfallstoffe Prof. Dr.-Ing. Th. Pretz Wüllnerstraße 2 52062 Aachen
Final report Beverage carton recycling
Customer: Kenniscentrum Nascheiding Dr. Ulphard Thoden van Velzen - senior packaging scientist Wageningen UR Agrotechnology and Food Innovations B.V. B.U. Fresh, Food and Chains Postbox 17 6700 AA Wageningen The Netherlands
Editor: Univ.-Prof. Dr.-Ing. Th. Pretz Dipl.-Ing. O. Pikhard
Aachen, May 2010
2
Content Figures ....................................................................................................................... 3
Tables ......................................................................................................................... 4
Management Summary .............................................................................................. 5
1. Introduction .......................................................................................................... 7
2. Beverage carton composition and masses .......................................................... 8
3. Description of beverage carton recycling processes ......................................... 10
3.1 Collection and separation ................................................................................ 11
3.2. Recycling concepts ........................................................................................ 13
3.2.1 Reject treatment concepts ........................................................................ 17
3.3 Quality criteria which have to be fulfilled by beverage cartons ........................ 19
3.4 Masses ............................................................................................................ 19
4. Comparison of qualities ..................................................................................... 21
4.1 Laboratory scale washing process .................................................................. 25
4.2 Technical scale processes .............................................................................. 28
4.2.1 Sorting ...................................................................................................... 28
4.2.2 Comminution and washing ....................................................................... 30
5. Results .............................................................................................................. 37
6. Conclusions ....................................................................................................... 38
3
Figures Figure 1: Components of a beverage carton .............................................................. 9
Figure 2: Beverage carton treatment ........................................................................ 11
Figure 3:Working principle NIR Sorter ...................................................................... 12
Figure 4: Working principle eddy current separator .................................................. 13
Figure 5: Schematic diagram „Niederauer Mühle“ plant [FKN2010] ......................... 14
Figure 6: Sorting drum .............................................................................................. 15
Figure 7: Schematic diagram recycling plant ............................................................ 16
Figure 8: Beverage carton recycling plants .............................................................. 17
Figure 9: Tectan boards ........................................................................................... 18
Figure 10: Amount of beverage cartons recycled in Germany .................................. 20
Figure 11: Flow sheet sample treatment .................................................................. 23
Figure 12: Rotor shear and comminution product ..................................................... 24
Figure 13: Material losses during comminution ........................................................ 25
Figure 14: Fiber loss versus time .............................................................................. 26
Figure 15: Impurity loss juice packaging ................................................................... 27
Figure 16: Vla losses ................................................................................................ 28
Figure 17: Comparison Vla carton before and after washing .................................... 28
Figure 18: Composition by weight ............................................................................ 29
Figure 19: Comminution losses ................................................................................ 31
Figure 20: Washing machine .................................................................................... 32
Figure 21: Organic loss washing .............................................................................. 33
Figure 22: Fiber from Vla washing ............................................................................ 34
Figure 23: Fiber quality Bron- and Nascheiding ........................................................ 34
Figure 24: Beverage cartons from Bronscheiding ..................................................... 35
Figure 25: Beverage cartons from Nascheiding ........................................................ 35
Figure 26: Fiber loss washing ................................................................................... 36
Figure 27: Organic losses based on dry weight ........................................................ 37
4
Tables Table 1: Packaging types and market shares ........................................................... 10
Table 2: Sorting catalogue ........................................................................................ 21
Table 3: Sampling masses ....................................................................................... 22
Table 4: Fiber loss size distribution .......................................................................... 26
Table 5: Wet weight of Vla / Yoghurt packagings ..................................................... 30
Table 6: Vla content .................................................................................................. 38
Table 7: Residues based on wet weight ................................................................... 38
Table 8: Average contamination based on dry organic mass ................................... 38
Table 9: Sorting results Dual System sample ........................................................... 41
Table 10: Sorting results Grootegast sample ............................................................ 41
Table 11: Sorting results Attero sample .................................................................... 42
Table 12: Sorting results Terschelling sample .......................................................... 42
Table 13: Sorting results Eureco Den Helder sample ............................................... 43
5
Management Summary
Beverage Carton Recycling in the Netherlands is a challenge following the legal
demands. The total amount of beverage carton in NL is only 3.9 – 4.2 kg/c*y.
Access to this waste is possible by source collection as well as by sorting MSW. In
order to characterise the Dutch beverage carton quality samples from different
sources have been analysed and compared with samples from the German
Packaging Waste Recycling system (2.7 kg/c*y).
Beverage cartons are produced both in a septic and an aseptic quality. Aseptic
packaging is build with an additional aluminium layer, while septic beverage
cartons contain mainly fibre and Polyethylene. The typical use in the Netherlands
is shown in figure 1. Due to the packaging of vla and yoghurt products in beverage
cartons the mixture is different from the composition in Germany (figure 2).
Figure 1: Product distribution in beverage cartons by wet weight (Netherlands)
Figure 2: Product distribution in beverage cartons by wet weight (Germany)
Vla Joghurt; 30,1%
Juice; 20,9%Milk; 20,6%
Others; 22,7%
Residues; 5,6%
Vla Joghurt; 0,0%
Juice; 20,3%
Milk; 59,4%
Others; 12,4%
Residues; 8,0%
6
Sorting technology for beverage cartons on a BAT level is available as Near
Infrared (NIR) Sorting. Due to the different qualities aseptic beverage cartons can
be separated from mixed waste streams both with NIR and with eddy current
separation technology due to the aluminium layer. The share of recyclable aseptic
beverage cartons varies between 30 and 50%.
The recycling process is divided into two separate steps, a mechanical sorting
process to generate a concentrate of beverage cartons and a specialized wet
separation process to separate fibres. While sorting can be organized regionally
the fibre enrichment process is very specialized. Only three facilities in Germany
and Spain are able to offer this important recycling service.
For the assessment of beverage cartons qualities analysis using lab scaled
processes were done. The main results of this research are:
1. Quality differences between the products from “Bronscheiding” and
“Nascheiding” sorting processes are detectable, whereas the source collection
always is responsible for a slightly higher quality.
2. The fibre yield depends on the purity. A slightly higher recovery rate can be
achieved with beverage cartons from the Bronscheiding system.
3. German and Dutch beverage cartons have a similar contamination share. The
main difference is that the main contamination factor in Dutch beverage
cartons is caused by organic residues whereas in German beverage cartons
the main contamination consists of other materials, e.g. plastic foils, other
packagings, etc. The specific Dutch product mix packed in beverage cartons
with a high percentage of vla and yoghurt cartons could thus cause problems
in a fibre recycling process due to the unknown influence of the high organic
share on the recycling process
4. Due to a strong dependency on few fibre processing plants only a limited
treatment capacity in Europe exists. Thus it is very likely that there is no
market for lower qualities.
5. For the design of a Dutch beverage carton recycling system a part stream
recycling focussing on the aseptic fraction (which is free of Vla packagings)
should be considered.
7
1. Introduction At this moment a change of the Dutch municipal solid waste collection and treatment
system takes place due to legislational exigencies formulated by the European
Union. These changes which especially affect packaging waste generated in
households lead to numerous uncertainties in terms of ecological, economical and
social questions. One way to overcome these uncertainties is to characterize the
problems in combination with a comparison to solutions found in other countries. One
special fraction of the packaging waste generated in households is beverage carton.
In order to be able to estimate the recyclability of Dutch beverage cartons it was
necessary to characterize their properties and to compare them to the properties of
other beverage cartons which can be recycled. As a reference sample beverage
cartons from a German Dual system were examined which were designated to be
mechanically recycled.
The main questions which had to be solved were:
- How do different consumption behaviors influence the recyclability?
- Which influence does a separate collection system (Bronscheiding) have on
the quality of beverage cartons?
- Which influence does a non separate collection system (Nascheiding) have on
the quality of beverage cartons?
- Are the qualities of dutch beverage cartons sufficient for a material reuse?
In order to solve these questions numerous boundary conditions have to be taken
into account. The main important conditions from the recycling point of view are:
- Quality criteria which have to be fulfilled for recycling of beverage cartons
- Existing technology for beverage carton collection and recycling
- Plant capacities of beverage carton treatment plants
- Quality characterization of Dutch beverage cartons
The first three boundary conditions will be described shortly. The last question is
more challenging because no studies on this topic are available. There is neither a
normative method for measuring the amount of residues on beverage cartons nor a
method for removing residues from beverage cartons without affecting the carton.
Therefore numerous tests were conducted in order to find out how organic and
mineral residues can be removed from beverage cartons in large amounts and with
representative methods.
8
2. Beverage carton composition and masses Beverage cartons are multilayer packagings. The surfaces of the different layers are
interconnected. In the beverage carton production process molten Polyethylene (PE)
is pressed through a slit nozzle at 250°C to form a foil which is adhered to the carton.
The foil is attached to the carton from both sides. If the beverage carton contains an
aluminum layer no further adhesives are needed because the glue force of the
polyethylene foil is sufficient to fix the aluminum foil with the carton.
Once the material compound is finished it is cut into pieces of the right size and
sealed together. After this step the beverage carton can be filled with a product.
[FKN, 2010; SIG, 2010]
Basically there exist two variations in the layout of a beverage carton. It is septic and
antiseptic beverage cartons.
Septic beverage cartons consist of carton and PE. These beverage cartons are used
for storing food that has to be cooled, e.g. fresh milk.
Antiseptic beverage cartons consist of carton, PE and aluminum. Due to the thin
aluminum layer the products are protected against light and air thus inhibiting the
formation of germs in the product. With this packaging type products can be stored
for a longer time even without cooling.
Figure 1 shows the main differences between septic and antiseptic beverage cartons.
9
Figure 1: Components of a beverage carton
The numbers given in Figure 1 refer to a normal beverage carton with a lid and 1 l of
volume. If the beverage carton has no lid the carton plastic relation will change. An
average septic beverage carton without lid consists of 88 % carton and 12 % plastic.
The average weight of a beverage carton of 1l is 27 g. If the beverage carton has a
lid the average weight rises to 30 g.
The thickness of the carton layer is about 0, 4mm, the thickness of the plastic layer is
about 0.045 mm and the aluminum foil used in antiseptic cartons has a thickness of
0.0065 mm[ACE 2010], [FKN 2010], [Tetra Pak 2010].
The carton layer provides the stability which is needed to keep the beverage carton
in shape. The fibers used for the production of the carton are made of Norway
Spruce because the fibers of Norway Spruce are longer than those of the usual
western European spruce. The average length of a Norway Spruce fiber is 5 mm
compared to the western European spruce with an average fiber length of 3 mm.
[FKN 2010]
10
At this moment beverage cartons are mainly produced by three companies:
− Tetra Pak GmbH,
− SIG Combibloc GmbH
− Elopak GmbH.
These companies have founded the industrial union for beverage cartons
(Fachverband Getränkekartons, FKN). Table 1 shows the development of the main
packaging types for drinking packaging in Germany. It can be seen that the share of
beverage cartons by weight is low.
Table 1: Packaging types and market shares
In 2007 219.500 Mg (ton) of beverage cartons were used in Germany. In the
Netherlands the amount of beverage cartons is estimated to be between 64.000 -
70.000 Mg in the year 2009.
3. Description of beverage carton recycling processes Beverage cartons can be recycled in an energetical or material way. Mechanical
recycling implies the re-use of the raw materials e.g. fibers, plastic, and aluminum.
In this report the focus is put on material recycling because one of the main aims is to
investigate which influence impurities of Dutch beverage cartons might have on
mechanical recycling. Furthermore, energetic recycling of beverage cartons is always
performed together with other waste streams. Usually beverage cartons do only
Packaging 2004 2005 2006 2007Reusable glass bottle 48,40% 43,60% 39,00% 35,80%
Reusable plastic bottle 17,80% 17,70% 16,60% 15,40%
Beverage carton 4,60% 4,00% 3,90% 3,10%Non-returnable plastic bottle 25,50% 31,60% 37,60% 42,60%
Non- returnable glass bottle 0,90% 0,70% 0,70% 0,60%
Beverage can 2,40% 1,90% 1,70% 2,00%
11
represent a very small amount of these waste streams so that the influence of
impurities on the incineration behavior of beverage cartons can be neglected.
3.1 Collection and separation
The usual way to recycle beverage carton is shown in Figure 2:
Figure 2: Beverage carton treatment
The economic and ecologic boundary conditions for waste collection depending on
the collection system were already described by Bergsma [Bergsma 2010]. After the
collection of the beverage cartons either as packaging waste from Bronscheiding or
together with MSW from Nascheiding the beverage cartons have to be separated
from the waste. The state of the art technique for separation of beverage cartons is
near infrared technology.
Bronscheiding
Packaging waste
separation plant
Beverage cartons
Recycling company
„Rejects“ Fibre pulp
Paper industry
Cement industry
Nascheiding
MSW separation plant
12
Figure 3:Working principle NIR Sorter
NIR Sorters analyze the reflection of light in the near infrared wavelength spectrum.
Due to specific absorption spectras of plastics and beverage cartons, beverage
cartons can be separated from the waste stream. In order to work with a high
efficiency it has to be assured that the particles which have to be sorted are singled
before they pass the sensor of the near infrared camera. Furthermore, they have to
remain on the same position on the conveyor belt after being scanned because
otherwise it is not possible to supply sufficient precise air impulses. If these main
conditions are fulfilled the separation of the beverage cartons no matter if septic – or
aseptic works very precise and with a high throughput.
Another option to remove at least most of the aseptic beverage cartons is to use
eddy current separators. The working principle is demonstrated in figure 4.
Sensor
Conveyor belt
Nozzle bar
Pressurized air
Waste
Beverage carton
13
Figure 4: Working principle eddy current separator
The repulsive forces induced into the thin aluminum foil by eddy currents generated
from the magnetic wheel are sufficient to separate aseptic beverage cartons. Modern
recycling plants do not use this machine for the separation of beverage cartons
because all septic beverage cartons will be lost this way.
3.2. Recycling concepts
Once the beverage carton is separated from the waste stream, be it from Na- or
Bronscheiding waste, it is baled and brought to a recycling plant. Recycling plants for
beverage cartons are different to those for paper recycling because of the amount of
impurities and compound materials.
There are different concepts for the setup of a beverage carton recycling plant and
there is no accurate description of the plants working at the moment. The concept of
“Niederauer Mühle” plant, which is one of the biggest beverage carton recycling
plants in Europe, is presented in Figure 5.
Input
Vibratory feeder
Magnet wheel
Aseptic beverage cartons
Septic beverage cartons
14
Figure 5: Schematic diagram „Niederauer Mühle“ plant [FKN2010]
After shredding the particles are mixed with water up to a solid material concentration
of 18% [Müller 2010]. In the drum pulper the comminuted material is washed
intensively so that the fibers soak the water and dissolve from the compound. The
drum pulper can treat up to 200 Mg of beverage cartons per day. After disintegration
of the fibers the separation of fibers aluminum and PE takes place in a sorting drum.
The surface of the sorting drum is perforated with small holes which allow the fibers
to pass but retain the plastic and aluminum particles. After sorting the fiber pulp is
concentrated and used for the production of cartons. The PE share of the rejects is
used as fuel in a cement kiln and the aluminum share of the rejects is used as a
bauxite substitute in the cement. Further possibilities for the treatment of rejects are
given in chapter “3.2.1 Reject treatment concepts”.
An insight of a sorting drum is given in Figure 6.
Cement industry
Shredder
Drum pulper
Fibre pulp
PE/Alu Baling press
Corrugated carton
Cement
Beverage cartons
Paper industry
Sorting Drum
15
Figure 6: Sorting drum
Another concept which gives a more detailed overview about the treatment steps is
described in the patents: DE 000004042227A11, DE000004042222A1
The beverage cartons are cut into small pieces of approximately 5 cm. Then they are
washed for the first time in order to remove impurities. After this first washing step the
dirty water is removed and a further comminution step reduces the particle size of the
clean beverage cartons down to about 8 millimeters. These fine grounded particles
are now disintegrated into their fiber, aluminum and plastic compounds. The
disintegration takes place in a so called drum pulper.
A very simplified schematic drawing of this process is presented in Figure 7.
16
Figure 7: Schematic diagram recycling plant
This concept might be of special interest for the Dutch beverage carton recycling due
to the fact that the organic impurities are higher than in Germany. Contamination of
German beverage cartons consist to a lot higher content of non beverage carton
material, e.g. plastic foils, other packaging material, etc.
At this moment there are 3 plants in Europe which do recycle beverage cartons.
These are:
- Niederauer Mühle, Germany
- Mondi Packaging, Germany
- Alier S.A., Spanien,
Furthermore there are three plants which do recycle rejects from the beverage carton
process, excluding cement kilns. These are:
- APK AG Merseburg,Germany
- EVD mbH Germany
- Alcoa Aluminio, Brasil
- Corenso United, Finland
There is no public data available concerning the capacity of the beverage carton
recycling plants. Another problem for the estimation of the capacity is that some
Cement industry
Rotor shear
Drum pulper
Fibre pulp
Rejects- PE energetical- Alumnim as
Bauxit substitute
Corrugated carton
Cement
Beverage cartons
Dirty water
Pre washing
Paper industry
17
plants do not only treat beverage cartons but also other paper materials. In total
125.000 Mg of beverage cartons were collected in Germany and treated in European
plants.
APK AG Merseburg
Corenso United
Alcoa Aluminio
Stora Enso + Alier S.A Barcelona
Niederauer Mühle Kreuzau
Quelle: www.mygeo.infoQuelle: www.expatriat-service.net
EVD mbH
Figure 8: Beverage carton recycling plants
3.2.1 Reject treatment concepts
According to the “Fachverband Kartonverpackungen” a share of 25% of the treated
beverage cartons will be recovered as rejects. As a rough estimation about 30.000
Mg of rejects per year are generated in Germany.
These rejects may be used in cement kilns. Other recycling possibilities are offered
by the APK plant and the EVD plant in Germany and the Alcoa plant in Brasil.
APK solves the plastic with a solvent and generates new plastic and aluminum. The
plant capacity for this process is estimated to 50.000Mg/year.
18
EVD uses complete beverage carrtons to press them to boards. The beverage
cartons are comminuted to particles of less than 5mm in size. Then the material is
heated up and compressed in order to melt the polyethylene. After this procedure the
boards are ready for usage. The compound material generated from the rejects is
called Tectan. No data concerning the capacity of this plant is given.
Figure 9: Tectan boards
Alcoa Aluminio recovers the rejects by exposing them to very high electrical energy
currents. By doing so a plasma is formed which ionizes the plastic and aluminum.
The aluminum can be casted to an ingot. Plastic components are transformed into
paraffin. The capacity for the treatment of rejects is about 8.000 Mg/a [Ped. 2007],
[PG 2010]
Corenso United uses a gas phase reactor to recover plastic and aluminum from the
rejects. In the so called “Ecogas plant” the rejects are heated up to 400°C. By doing
so the plastic evaporates into the gas phase meanwhile aluminum stay in it’s solid
state. The gas phase is incinerated in order to produce heat for a steam boiler which
delivers steam to a turbine. About 3000 Mg of aluminum and 250 GWh of electric
energy per year are produced by this plant [Getr- 2002], [Sek. 2004].
Stora Enso uses a pyrolysis process to recover plastic and aluminum. Since 2008 the
rejects are transformed into paraffin and aluminum with a low temperature pyrolysis.
When temperatures between 150 – 900°C are applied to the rejects the plastic will
evaporate and long hydrocarbon molecules will be cracked into smaller ones. Due to
19
the fact that is an endothermal process energy has to be supplied. No public
information about capacity or operating results is available.
3.3 Quality criteria which have to be fulfilled by beverage cartons
The first reference is the product specification list for beverage cartons published by
Duales System Deutschland GmbH (DSD). This specification list gives an overview
about the quality of beverage cartons which have to be fulfilled when the beverage
cartons from a separation plant are brought to a beverage carton recycling plant.
This specification claims that only used and empty beverage cartons which have
been filled with fluid products e.g. milk, juice and sauces will be accepted. The
beverage cartons may be made of carton and PE or carton, aluminum and PE.
The purity of the beverage cartons have to exceed at least 90 % by mass.
The amount of non beverage carton material thus has to be lower than 10 % by dry
mass. Materials that should not be in the beverage cartons are:
- Glass
- Metal
- Other paper, carton
- Other plastic material
- Compostable material e.g. food waste
Further details concerning impurities are given in the annex.
Another reference which can be applied to classify the quality of Dutch beverage
cartons is delivered by the comparison made in chapter 4.2.1.
3.4 Masses
In 2008 about 350.000 Mg of beverage cartons were recycled in Europe. This is
equal to a recycling rate of 33%. [ACE 2010]
Countries with a developed beverage carton recycling system can exceed this
number by far.
Germany
Figure 10 demonstrates the amount of beverage cartons which were sold and
recycled in Germany.
20
Figure 10: Amount of beverage cartons recycled in Germany
The recycling rate in 2007 was 66.7 % which corresponds to 146.500 Mg of recycled
beverage cartons. The amount of beverage cartons used in Germany is slightly
decreasing over the past few years. Nevertheless the amount of recycled material
shows only slight variations.
Per inhabitant 2.7 kg of beverage cartons are consumed in Germany. Compared to
the total amount of separately collected packaging waste (including separately
collected glass, paper and light weight packaging waste) in Germany of 12.000.000
Mg or 141 kg/c*y in 2007 this corresponds to 1.9 %.[Destatis 2010]
Netherlands
According to a state of the „Federatie Nederlands Levensmiddelindustrie” (FNLI) and
the “Centraal Bureau Levensmiddel” (CBL) in 2009 an amount of beverage cartons
between 64.000 – 70.000 Mg were used [CBL 2009]. This correlates to 3.9 – 4.2 kg
per inhabitant and year. Thus the relative amount of beverage cartons per persons is
higher than in Germany which can partially be explained by other consumption
behavior. The total amount of packaging waste is estimated to 3.469.000 Mg or
210kg/c*y in 2007. Therefore the total share of beverage cartons of packaging waste
is between 1.8 – 2 %. This comparison includes the fault that in Germany only the
21
separate collected packaging waste was taken as a reference. Considering this fact
the share of beverage cartons in packaging waste is also higher than in Germany.
The main difference between Germany and Netherlands is the usage of beverage
cartons to store high viscous dairy products, such as custard dessert (Vla) or
yoghurt. The other products packed in beverage cartons are quite comparable, e.g.
milk, juice, sauces etc.
4. Comparison of qualities In order to be able to quantify the differences between German and Dutch beverage
cartons investigations were made. Quality differences were documented according to
the usage behavior, the collection system and the impurities.
The usage behavior was estimated by separating the samples into product groups
and size. Table 2 gives a short overview about all beverage cartons which were
sorted.
Table 2: Sorting catalogue
Pasteurized milk with lid 1,00 L Milkdrink with lid 0,20 LPasteurized milk with lid 1,50 L Milkdrink with lid 1,00 LPasteurized milk without lid 1,00 L Milkdrink without lid 0,20 LFresh milk with lid 0,50 L Milkdrink without lid 0,33 LFresh milk with lid 1,00 L Milkdrink without lid 750 gFresh milk with lid 1,50 L Milkdrink without lid 0,50 LFresh milk without lid 0,50 L Cream without lid 1,00 kgFresh milk without lid 1,00 L Cream with lid 200 gFresh milk without lid 1,50 L Cream without lid 200 gVla/Joghurt with lid 1,00 L Condensed milk without lid 340 gVla/Joghurt without lid 1,00 L Condensed milk with lid 1,00 LJuice with lid 0,50 L Condensed milk without lid 0,18 LButtermilk with lid 1,00 L Pudding without lid 1,00 LButtermilk without lid 0,50 L Pouches 0,20 LButtermilk with lid 1,00 L Apple puree without lid 710 gJuice with lid 1,00 L Wine with lid 1,50 LJuice with lid 1,50 L Tomatoes without lid 500 gJuice with lid 2,00 L RestSauce without lid 0,25 LSauce without lid 0,45 LSauce without lid 1,00 L
22
The influence of the collection system on the quality of beverage cartons was proven
by taking samples from Bron- and Nascheidingsregions and measuring their amount
of impurities. From the Netherlands 4 samples were available. The comparison was
drawn to two samples from a german Dual System.
Table 3 shows the masses and numbers treated.
Table 3: Sampling masses
The measuring of impurities was challenging because there is no standardized
washing method for beverage cartons. The chosen procedure had to fulfill certain
criteria.
- It had to be applicable for large amounts of beverage cartons
- It should have almost no influence on the beverage carton itself
- It should remove all impurities
- It should be easily reproducible
Furthermore, the influence of subjective human behavior should be as small as
possible. The concept which fits all the criteria in the best way is presented in Figure
11.
Sample Collection systemPlace of collection Mass
Number of beverage cartons
„Grootegast“Bronscheiding Netherlands Grootegast 41.216 g 961+residue material
„Attero“Nascheiding Netherlands Unknown 9.310 g 248+residue material
„Fühler“Nascheiding Netherlands Terschelling 26.964 g 519+residue material
„Eureco“Nascheiding Netherlands Den Helder 11.320 g 234+residue material
"Dual System"Bronscheiding
Germany Unknown 53.100 g 1575+residue materialBronscheiding Netherlands 41.216 g 961+residue materialNascheiding Netherlands 47.594 g 1001+residue material
Total Netherlands
23
Figure 11: Flow sheet sample treatment
After sorting the beverage cartons into the different groups presented in Table 2 they
were put in a drying cabinet with an average temperature of 75°C. Thus they were
dried until all the water was evaporated. Depending on the beverage carton type the
drying process endured between 2 - 6 days. Especially beverage cartons filled with
Vla took a long time to dry. The next step was to comminute the beverage cartons.
The main aim of the comminution is to improve the accessibility of the water to the
inside of the beverage carton. The cutting edges allow the water to enter the fiber
and to dissolve them. Therefore the amount of cutting edges should be as small as
possible. On the other hand the material is easier to wash when particles are very
fine. Therefore a rotary shear was used for the comminution as it represents the best
ratio of particle size to open edges. Furthermore, the cut of a rotary shear is very
sharp which inhibits frayed cutting edges and thus reduce the surface exposed to
direct water contact.
Sorting
Drying Water loss
Comminution lossComminution
Impurity loss
Fibre lossWashing
Impurity loss
Drying
24
Figure 12: Rotor shear and comminution product
Figure 12 shows the rotary shear used for the comminution and the product gained.
It is important to divide the losses occurring during comminution into beverage carton
material losses and losses of impurities. Two mechanisms have to be considered:
1. It is a system immanent problem that part of the material stucks in the
dead storage of the comminution machine. Once these dead storage
spaces are filled no further losses of beverage carton material will
occur. The influence of this mechanism can be calculated as shown in
figure 13.
2. After drying the beverage cartons the solid organic matter which is still
in the carton forms a layer which is partially removed by comminution.
This is especially important for Vla beverage cartons because the
amount of remaining material in the packaging is high compared to
other beverage cartons.
25
Figure 13: Material losses during comminution
After comminution the beverage cartons were washed with water to remove the rest
of the impurities. The washing process was first tested in small scale to find out if it is
applicable.
4.1 Laboratory scale washing process
Similar to the comminution process two possibilities for material losses do exist.
1. The first material loss can be ascribed to the loss of impurities.
2. The second material loss can be ascribed to fiber losses which occur
during the washing process.
To examine the influence of fiber losses in comparison to the losses of impurities
after each washing step the fibers were sieved out of the residual water. Sieving was
performed with sieves of 1.6mm, 0.5mm, 0.08mm and 0.02mm. The amount of fibers
below 0.5 mm is negligible. As shown in Table 4 about half of the fibers were
captured with a 1.6 mm sieve and a 0.5 mm sieve.
The washing process was performed using a 10 l bucket filled with 4 l of water and 4
comminuted beverage cartons of 1 l for each experiment. To intensify the washing
f(x) = 0,0683e-0,022x
0,00%
1,00%
2,00%
3,00%
4,00%
5,00%
6,00%
7,00%
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Beverage cartons [pieces]
Comminution loss [Ma.-%]
26
process a stirrer was used with a 6 blade angular blade stirrer of about 5 cm
diameter and 250 round per minutes.
Table 4: Fiber loss size distribution
The time dependency of fiber losses versus time is shown in Figure 14.
Figure 14: Fiber loss versus time
It is obvious that the fiber losses are getting less the longer the material is washed.
This can be explained by the fact that a small part of the fibers which is close to the
cutting edge can easily be dissolved. After these first losses an almost linear
increase of fiber losses can be measured. Further fiber losses are smaller because it
is getting harder to dissolve fibers which do not have a direct contact with water in
motion.
After sieving the fibers the comminuted beverage cartons and the fibers were dried.
The fiber losses presented are calculated by dividing the dry mass of fibers by the
dry mass of fibers in the beverage cartons. The dry mass of fibers in a beverage
carton could be calculated because the fiber content of a standard 1 l aseptic and
septic beverage cartons is known.
Time [min] > 1,6 mm 0,5 ‐ 1,6 mm 0,08 ‐ 0,5 mm 0,02 ‐0,08 mm5 40% 60% 0% 0%
10 50% 50% 0% 0%15 57% 43% 0% 0%20 49% 51% 0% 0%25 57% 43% 0% 0%30 62% 38% 0% 0%
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
Time [min]
Fibe
r los
s [M
a.-%
]
27
The second material loss, the loss of impurities, was also measured. The assumption
is that most of the impurities are of organic matter originating from products residues
in the beverage cartons. Further impurities which might result from cross
contamination with other residues can be of organic or mineral matter. According to
the assumption the organic matter can be dissolved and thus will pass the sieve. The
amount of impurities can thus be measured by comparing the total loss of weight
after washing with the original weight before washing. Tests were conducted with
juice, milk and Vla beverage cartons to estimate the influence of the organic
contamination on the wash period necessary to dissolve the organic matter. Figure
15 shows the amount of impurity losses depending on the washing time for 1l juice
packagings. It can be seen, that after approximately 15 minutes no more losses
occur.
Figure 15: Impurity loss juice packaging
Another test with Vla beverage cartons was made in order to see how long it takes to
remove the Vla layer. The Vla packagings used for the investigations were not
collected via Bron- or Nascheiding in order to avoid influences other than Vla
impurities would cause.
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
Time [min]
Impu
rity
loss
[Ma.
-%]
28
Figure 16: Vla losses
Figure 17 shows the difference of comminuted Vla packagings before and after
washing.
Figure 17: Comparison Vla carton before and after washing
4.2 Technical scale processes
4.2.1 Sorting
As a first step the beverage cartons were separated into their main elements. Figure
18 shows a simplified summary of the sorting. All elements with a lower share than 5
% by wet weight are aggregated in the fraction “others”. Nevertheless this simplified
0 5 10 15 20 25 300
1
2
3
4
5
6
Time [min]
Mas
s pe
rcen
t
Impurity loss
Fiber loss
29
diagram shows the main differences between German and Dutch beverage cartons.
In Germany the highest share of beverage cartons by weight are milk packagings
whereas in the Netherlands Vla packagings represent the highest share by weight.
Another very important fraction are the juice beverage cartons. The composition by
weight is quite comparable between the Netherlands and Germany. The amount of
rest material shows significant differences between the Dutch Bron- and
Nascheidingsystem. Material collected via Bronscheiding had an amount of rest
material of 0.33 % by weight. The samples from the Nascheiding system had an
amount of rest material of about 5.0 % by weight. Comparing the share of rest
material it has to be considered that it is based on the original (wet) weight. As the
content of water in Dutch beverage cartons is higher than in German beverage
cartons the amount of rest material in German beverage cartons appears to be
higher, too. Comparing the share of non organic impurities it can be stated that
Bronscheiding leads to a better product quality.
Regarding the potential for a further treatment the fraction “others” is of low
importance. Most of the beverage cartons which belong to this fraction are milk
products, such as buttermilk or condensed milk. The amount of cream, tomato sauce
or rice pudding which might have a higher organic share is in average lower than 1 %
by weight. The complete data sets of the sorting results are given in the annex.
Figure 18: Composition by weight
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Composition by weight
Grootegast
Attero
Terschelling
Eureco Den Helder
Dual System
30
Concerning the recyclability “Vla and yoghurt” is of special importance because of
the unknown influence of the amount of food waste which is still in the beverage
carton on the recycling process. After sorting the beverage cartons into fractions of
size, content and opening (lid or no lid) they were weighed in order to estimate the
average weight of a dirty beverage carton. Table 5 shows the average weight for a
Vla/yoghurt beverage carton of 1 l volume and without a lid. These packagings do
have a netto weight of 26 g. Thus the relation between packaging weight and food
waste of these beverage cartons is about 2,3:1. After drying the beverage cartons the
weight of Vla and yoghurt packagings was between 29 – 33 g per packaging. Thus
the remaining dry matter of Vla and yoghurt can be reduced to 3 - 7 g of dry mass by
drying. The drying process of Vla takes about 4 – 7 days in a 75°C oven.
*n.m. =not measured
Table 5: Wet weight of Vla / Yoghurt packagings
The slightly higher brutto weights of the Vla packagings from the Nascheiding
samples (Attero, Fühler Terschelling and Eureco DenHelder) might be a result of
cross contamination from other household waste.
4.2.2 Comminution and washing
Another way to estimate the organic content is the preparation as described in
chapter 4. The main losses can be described in the following way:
Beverage carton dry
- Comminution losses organic
- Cominution losses material
- Washing losses organic
- Washing losses fibers
= Beverage carton after preparation
Vla/Yoghurt 1 l without lid, septic Brutto weight carton [g] Netto weight carton [g]Grootegast 52,38 29,66Attero 53,52 33,68Terschelling 61,45 29,75Eureco Den Helder 72,59 n.m.Average 59,98
31
Relative organic loss = (Comminution losses organic + Washing losses organic)
(Beverage carton after preparation + Washing loss fiber +
Comminution loss material)
After the sorting and drying process the beverage cartons were comminuted as
described in chapter 4. By drying the Vla packagings on the inside of the beverage
cartons brittle layers of solid organic matter is formed. During the comminution
process this layer is partly spalled of. Organic losses which occurred during
comminution are shown for the most important beverage carton fractions in Figure
19. The loss of beverage carton during comminution is very small (<1%) due to the
large amount of beverage cartons (see also Figure 13).
Figure 19: Comminution losses
The most important beverage carton fractions were then washed in a technical scale
washing machine. This machine is depicted in Figure 20.
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
8%
9%
10%
Org
anic
loss
com
min
utio
n[%
]
Dual System Bronscheiding Netherlands Nascheiding Netherlands
32
Figure 20: Washing machine
The beverage cartons were washed for 15 minutes. After washing the beverage
carton pieces were removed from the water. The water could pass through the
outflow in the bottom of the reactor. The washing water was sieved with a 1.6 mm
and a 0.5 mm sieve in order to remove the fibers of the water. During the trials with
the vla beverage cartons another 6 mm sieve was used to remove the rather large
organic layers which had the form of small plates.
The results concerning fiber loss and washing efficiency were comparable to the
results which were measured in the laboratory scale trials.
After the washing process the fibers and the beverage cartons were dried. The
organic loss of the beverage cartons can be calculated according to the following
formula:
Organic loss washing = Weight of beverage carton before washing – fiber loss
33
Figure 21: Organic loss washing
This formula can be applied without problems for beverage cartons with low
contamination and low viscous content, e.g. juice and milk cartons. For Vla beverage
cartons this formula is only partially applicable because the dried Vla layers do not
dissolve completely when washed for 15 minutes. To optimize the detection of
organics another 6.3 mm sieve was used to clean the washing water. In the left
picture of Figure 22 the fibers on a 1.6 mm sieve without a former sieving at 6 mm is
shown. On the right side of figure 22 the amount of organic material which could be
hold back is shown.
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
20%O
rgan
ic lo
ss w
ashi
ng [
%]
Dual System Bronscheiding Netherlands Nascheiding Netherlands
34
Figure 22: Fiber from Vla washing
One further difference which could be observed is that the fibers from beverage
cartons from Nascheiding waste are dirtier than those from Bronscheiding waste.
This is shown in Figure 23.
Figure 23: Fiber quality Bron- and Nascheiding
This result can be expected because beverage cartons from Nascheiding are visibly
dirtier than those from Bronscheiding. This is also shown in the Figure 24 and Figure
25.
35
Figure 24: Beverage cartons from Bronscheiding
Figure 25: Beverage cartons from Nascheiding
A further problem of beverage cartons from Nascheiding might be that they are
partially disrupted, which might lead to a worse fiber quality because fluids in the
waste material can be soaked.
36
During the investigations the larger open surface of fibers to water and the high
residual fraction which was collected in the sieve of Nascheiding material influenced
the results.
The amount of fibers which were dissolved from Nascheiding material is significantly
higher than for Bronscheiding material.
Figure 26: Fiber loss washing
As a result of the washing process the share of impurities can be calculated (see
Figure 27)
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
8%
9%
10%
Fibe
r los
s [%
]
Dual System Bronscheiding Netherlands Nascheiding Netherlands
37
Figure 27: Organic losses based on dry weight
Different conclusions can be drawn from these results:
- It is obvious that Vla and yoghurt beverage cartons are a lot dirtier than other
beverage cartons.
- A cross contamination of Vla or yoghurt with other beverage cartons cannot be
observed because the organic contaminations of other beverage cartons e.g.
from the Dual System are similar.
- The influence of cross contamination from other waste on beverage cartons
collected in the Nascheiding system can be detected. The contamination is
significantly higher.
5. Results The product specification list of the DSD system states that the maximum amount of
contamination shall not exceed 10 % by mass of the wet weight. Furthermore, the
organic rest which remains in the beverage carton after usage is not considered as
contamination according to the DSD specification. Thus the high amount of
remaining Vla and Joghurt in the beverage cartons would not be considered as
contamination according to the DSD specification. The amount of Vla in relation to
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
Dual System Bronscheiding Netherlands Nascheiding Netherlands
38
the dry weight of the beverage carton varies. The measured amounts are presented
in Table 6.
Table 6: Vla content
Comparing the results with the specifications of the DSD System it can be stated that
the non food residual fraction in all samples were below 10%. It has to be
considered that the amount of water in Dutch beverage cartons is significantly higher
due to the high amount of Vla and Joghurt than in German beverage cartons.
Table 7: Residues based on wet weight It is obvious that the Bronscheiding beverage cartons from Grootegast are of
outstanding quality even though the Vla and yoghurt packagings do have a high
impact on the organic contamination. The beverage cartons collected in the
Nascheiding systems do also fulfill the requirements.
To estimate how Dutch Vla and joghurt beverage cartons influence the fiber recovery
process their organic contamination has to be measured. A simplified calculation
based on mean contaminations of dry organic matter in relation to the netto weight of
a beverage carton is given in Table 8. Based on these values the average organic
share which is going to enter the recycling process can be estimated.
Table 8: Average contamination based on dry organic mass
6. Conclusions For future investigations it would be of interest to find out if the quality from
Bronscheiding material is constant. Furthermore it would be interesting to find out if
Vla content [%]Vla/Joghurt 1L without lid "Grootegast" 158%Vla/Joghurt 1L with lid "Grootegast" 67%Vla/Joghurt 1L with lid "Terschelling" 204%Vla/Joghurt 1L without lid "Terschelling" 145%Vla/Joghurt 1L without lid "Attero" 110%Vla/Joghurt 1L with lid "Attero" 122%
Residue share Grootegast
Residue share Attero
Residue share Terschelling
Residue share Eureco
Residue share DSD
Residues [Ma.-%] 0,33% 5,07% 6,14% 2,20% 7,97%
Vla Joghurt 14%Juice 3%Milk 5%Others 5%
39
the quality from Nascheiding material can be improved. It is very likely that Dutch
beverage cartons have a similar or even better quality as German beverage cartons
if the Vla packaging problem could be solved.
To solve the problem with the Vla contamination two possibilities exist. The first one
is to remove the Vla packagings from the other beverage cartons. This might work by
using their relative high weight, e.g. by wind sifting. Another possibility would be to
separate the septic from the aseptic beverage cartons with an eddy current separator
using the fact that almost all vla cartons are septic (without Aluminum foil).
The other possibility is to reduce the overall organic matter in the beverage cartons
by shredding and washing them the way it was performed in this research. Both
treatment possibilities will generate costs that cannot be specified at this moment.
The costs will depend on many factors e.g. plant capacity, technique applied, building
costs, personal costs, loss of fibers etc. Compared to the washing process an eddy
current separation or a wind sifting process are relatively cheap and easy to
implement. A comminution and washing process has to be realized in direct
neighborhood to the treatment plant, preferably in line with the pulper process.
If Vla and yoghurt beverage cartons cannot be removed or cleaned before the
washing process than it would be interesting to find out how the organic impurities do
influence existing treatment plants. Due to the relative low number of beverage
carton recycling companies in Europe it is likely that only beverage cartons of a high
quality will be accepted. Especially the unknown influence of organic impurities in Vla
and yoghurt packagings on the fiber recycling process might be a reason for the
rejection of theses packagings. Residues from German packagings will mainly be
collected in the reject fraction which is designated to incineration. The influence of
these impurities on the fiber pulp quality is probably much lower.
40
ANNEX [ACE 2010] The Alliance for Beverage Cartons and the Environment;
http://www.ace.be; Access 19.02.2010 [CBL 2009] Federatie Nederlandse Levensmiddelindustrie (FNLI); Centraal
Bureau Levensmiddelen : Drankenkartons; Informatiedocument over de milieuaspecten (in CO2 uitstoot), kosten, hygiene-aspecten en afzetmogelijkheden van de thermische verwerking, bronscheiden en nascheiden van drankenkartons in Nederland; 2009
[Destatis 2010] Deutsches Bundesamt für Statistik, Pressemitteilung Nr. 434
http://www.destatis.de/jetspeed/portal/cms/Sites/destatis/Internet/DE/Presse/pm/2008/11/PD08__434__321,templateId=renderPrint.psml; Access 07.05.10
[UBA 2009] Gesellschaft für Verpackungsmarktforschung mbH; Verbrauch
von Getränken in Einweg- und Mehrweg-Verpackungen; Berichtsjahr 2007; Umweltbundesamt; Texte 17/2009; Wiesbaden; 2009
[Bergsma 2010] Inzameling van Drankenkartons; Milieu- en kostenanalyse van
recyclingopties; Rapport; Delft; 2010 [Getr. 2002] Ökologischer Musterknabe - Getränkekartons können zu 100
Prozent verwertet werden; Getränkeindustrie; Edition 05/2002; 2002
[Müller 2010] W. Müller: Neue Auflösetrommel - kontinuierlich, kompakt,
flexibel, effektiv, innovativ; http://www.voithpaper.com/media/vp_de_twogether9_07_aufloesetrommel.pdf ; Access 06.05.2010
[Ped. 2007] Recycling of Aseptic Carton Packages in Brazil: a Case Study of Sustainable Supply Chain; online publication, http://www.klabin.com.br/upload/file/2389A.pdf, 2007; Access 06.05.10
[PG 2010] Alcoa Aluminio Carton Packaging Recycling Plant Piracicaba,
Brazil; http://www.packaging-gateway.com; Access 18.04.2010 [Sek. 2004] Energie aus Getränkekartons; Sekundärrohstoffe; Edition
06/2004; 2004
41
Table 9: Sorting results Dual System sample
Table 10: Sorting results Grootegast sample
Beverage carton DSD Volume Property Number [pcs.]
Share [pcs.-%]
Gross weight [g]
Share gross weight [Ma.-% wet]
Ø Gross weight [g/pcs.]
Pasteurized milk with lid 1,0 l Aseptisch 509 32,69% 16.888 31,78% 33,18Fresh melk with lid 1,0 l Septisch 455 29,22% 14.658 27,58% 32,22Juice with lid 1,0 l Aseptisch 206 13,23% 7.303 13,74% 35,45Condensed melk without lid 340,0 l Aseptisch 82 5,27% 1.175 2,21% 14,33Juice with lid 1,5 l Aseptisch 73 4,69% 3.477 6,54% 47,63Cream without lid 200 g Aseptisch 55 3,53% 542 1,02% 9,85Tomato sauce 500,0 l Aseptisch 34 2,18% 678 1,28% 19,94Pouches 0,2 l Aseptisch 16 1,03% 150 0,28% 9,38Milkdrink without lid 0,5 l Septisch 14 0,90% 260 0,49% 18,57Juice with lid 2,0 l Aseptisch 14 0,90% 876 1,65% 62,57Juice with lid 0,5 l Aseptisch 13 0,83% 288 0,54% 22,15Milkdrink with lid 1,0 l Septisch 9 0,58% 360 0,68% 40,00Fresh melk with lid 1,5 l Septisch 6 0,39% 301 0,57% 50,17Cream without lid 1000 g Aseptisch 6 0,39% 253 0,48% 42,17Sauce without lid 0,3 l Aseptisch 6 0,39% 109 0,21% 18,17Vla with lid 1,0 l Septisch 6 0,39% 191 0,36% 31,83Wine with lid 1,5 l Aseptisch 4 0,26% 186 0,35% 46,50Sauce without lid 370 g Aseptisch 3 0,19% 49 0,09% 16,33Juice with lid 0,8 l Aseptisch 2 0,13% 61 0,11% 30,50Water with lid 1,0 l Aseptisch 2 0,13% 68 0,13% 34,00Milkdrink with lid 0,2 l Septisch 1 0,06% 17 0,03% 17,00Milkdrink without lid 0,2 l Septisch 1 0,06% 10 0,02% 10,00Milkdrink without lid 0,3 l Septisch 1 0,06% 13 0,02% 13,00Milkdrink without lid 750,0 l Septisch 1 0,06% 27 0,05% 27,00Cream with lid 200 g Aseptisch 1 0,06% 16 0,03% 16,00Sauce without lid 0,5 l Aseptisch 1 0,06% 18 0,03% 18,00Sauce without lid 1,0 l Aseptisch 1 0,06% 26 0,05% 26,00Others 35 2,25% 911 1,71% 26,03Rest 4.234 7,97%Total 1557 100,00% 53145 100,00%
Beverage carton Grootegast Volume [l] Property Number
[pcs.]Share
[pcs.-%]Gross weight
[g]Share gross weight
[Ma.-% wet]Ø Gross weight
[g/pcs.]Pasteurized milk with lid 1,00 Aseptisch 181 18,83% 6.790 16,47% 37,51Juice with lid 1,50 Aseptisch 145 15,09% 7.699 18,68% 53,10Vla/Joghurt with lid 1,00 Septisch 136 14,15% 6.649 16,13% 48,89Vla/Joghurt without lid 1,00 Septisch 131 13,63% 6.862 16,65% 52,38Juice with lid 1,00 Aseptisch 50 5,20% 1.904 4,62% 38,08Pouches 0,20 Aseptisch 50 5,20% 561 1,36% 11,22Milkdrink with lid 1,00 Septisch 39 4,06% 1.834 4,45% 47,03Condensed milk with lid 0,47 Aseptisch 36 3,75% 862 2,09% 23,94Buttermilk with lid 1,00 Septisch 30 3,12% 1.501 3,64% 50,03Pasteurized milk without lid 1,00 Aseptisch 30 3,12% 934 2,27% 31,13Pasteurized milk with lid 1,50 Aseptisch 27 2,81% 1.737 4,21% 64,33Fresh milk with lid 1,00 Septisch 26 2,71% 954 2,31% 36,69Condensed milk without lid 0,47 Aseptisch 25 2,60% 536 1,30% 21,44Vla/Joghurt without lid 0,50 Septisch 10 1,04% 387 0,94% 38,70Fresh milk without lid 1,00 Septisch 9 0,94% 305 0,74% 33,89Juice with lid 2,00 Aseptisch 9 0,94% 527 1,28% 58,56Buttermilk without lid 1,00 Septisch 6 0,62% 198 0,48% 33,00Fresh milk without lid 1,50 Septisch 5 0,52% 210 0,51% 42,00Rice pudding 1,00 Septisch 5 0,52% 259 0,63% 51,80Goat milk without lid 0,75 Septisch 3 0,31% 94 0,23% 31,33Condensed milk without lid 1,00 Aseptisch 2 0,21% 58 0,14% 29,00Juice without lid 1,00 Aseptisch 2 0,21% 82 0,20% 41,00Vla/Joghurt with lid 0,50 Septisch 2 0,21% 55 0,13% 27,50Milkdrink with lid 0,50 Septisch 1 0,10% 25 0,06% 25,00Wine with lid 1,50 Aseptisch 1 0,10% 56 0,14% 56,00Rest 137 0,33%Total 961 100,00% 41.216 100,00%
42
Table 11: Sorting results Attero sample
Table 12: Sorting results Terschelling sample
Beverage carton Attero Volume [l] Property Number [pcs.]
Share [pcs.-%]
Gross weight [g]
Share gross weight [Ma.-% wet]
Ø Gross weight [g/pcs.]
Vla/Joghurt without lid 1,00 Septisch 31 12,50% 1.659 17,82% 53,52Juice with lid 1,50 Aseptisch 21 8,47% 1.211 13,01% 57,67Vla/Joghurt with lid 1,00 Septisch 19 7,66% 1.182 12,70% 62,21Pasteurized milk with lid 1,00 Aseptisch 21 8,47% 878 9,43% 41,81Pouches 0,20 Aseptisch 72 29,03% 873 9,38% 12,13Juice with lid 1,00 Aseptisch 16 6,45% 716 7,69% 44,75Milkdrink with lid 1,00 Septisch 13 5,24% 579 6,22% 44,54Condensed milk with lid 0,47 Aseptisch 9 3,63% 203 2,18% 22,56Condensed milk without lid 0,47 Aseptisch 9 3,63% 202 2,17% 22,44Fresh milk with lid 1,00 Septisch 5 2,02% 180 1,93% 36,00Buttermilk with lid 1,00 Septisch 4 1,61% 176 1,89% 44,00Fresh milk with lid 1,50 Septisch 3 1,21% 158 1,70% 52,67Fresh milk without lid 1,00 Septisch 4 1,61% 153 1,64% 38,25Buttermilk without lid 1,00 Septisch 3 1,21% 145 1,56% 48,33Fresh milk without lid 1,50 Septisch 3 1,21% 133 1,43% 44,33Vla/Joghurt without lid 0,50 Septisch 4 1,61% 107 1,15% 26,75Rice pudding without lid 1,00 Septisch 2 0,81% 94 1,01% 47,00Condensed milk without lid 1,00 Aseptisch 2 0,81% 82 0,88% 41,00Pasteurized milk without lid 1,00 Aseptisch 2 0,81% 65 0,70% 32,50Tomato sauce without lid 500 g Aseptisch 2 0,81% 50 0,54% 25,00Fresh milk without lid 0,50 Septisch 2 0,81% 42 0,45% 21,00Buttermilk without lid 0,50 Septisch 1 0,40% 22 0,24% 22,00Rest 472 5,07%Total 248 9.310 100,00%
Beverage carton Terschelling Volume [l] Property Number [pcs.]
Share [pcs.-%]
Gross weight [g]
Share gross weight [Ma.-% wet]
Ø Gross weight [g/pcs.]
Vla/Joghurt without lid 1,00 Septisch 84 16,18% 5.162 19,14% 61,45Vla/Joghurt with lid 1,00 Septisch 34 6,55% 3.012 11,17% 88,59Juice with lid 1,00 Aseptisch 52 10,02% 2.903 10,77% 55,83Fresh milk with lid 1,00 Septisch 51 9,83% 2.837 10,52% 55,63Buttermilk with lid 1,00 Septisch 63 12,14% 2.738 10,15% 43,46Juice with lid 1,50 Aseptisch 27 5,20% 2.085 7,73% 77,22Pasteurized milk with lid 1,00 Aseptisch 60 11,56% 2.031 7,53% 33,85Milk drink with lid 1,00 Septisch 33 6,36% 1.417 5,26% 42,94Fresh milk without lid 1,50 Septisch 15 2,89% 650 2,41% 43,33Milk drink with lid 0,50 Septisch 10 1,93% 381 1,41% 38,10Pouches 0,20 Aseptisch 35 6,74% 375 1,39% 10,71Pasteurized milk with lid 1,50 Aseptisch 7 1,35% 341 1,26% 48,71Condensed milk with lid 0,47 Aseptisch 9 1,73% 244 0,90% 27,11Fresh milk with lid 1,50 Septisch 4 0,77% 177 0,66% 44,25Fresh milk without lid 1,00 Septisch 6 1,16% 164 0,61% 27,33Condensed milk with lid 1,00 Aseptisch 4 0,77% 147 0,55% 36,75Pasteurized milk without lid 1,00 Aseptisch 4 0,77% 125 0,46% 31,25Buttermilk without lid 1,00 Septisch 3 0,58% 113 0,42% 37,67Buttermilk without lid 0,50 Septisch 4 0,77% 67 0,25% 16,75Fresh milk with lid 0,50 Septisch 3 0,58% 63 0,23% 21,00Wine with lid 1,50 Aseptisch 1 0,19% 51 0,19% 51,00Rice pudding without lid 1,00 Septisch 1 0,19% 46 0,17% 46,00Wine without lid 1,00 Aseptisch 1 0,19% 38 0,14% 38,00Fresh milk without lid 0,50 Septisch 2 0,39% 34 0,13% 17,00Condensed milk without lid 0,47 Aseptisch 2 0,39% 33 0,12% 16,50Milk drink without lid 1,00 Aseptisch 1 0,19% 32 0,12% 32,00Condensed milk without lid 0,18 Aseptisch 2 0,39% 24 0,09% 12,00Tomato sauce 390 g Aseptisch 1 0,19% 19 0,07% 19,00Rest 1.655 6,14%Total 519 26.964
43
Table 13: Sorting results Eureco Den Helder sample
Beverage carton Eureco Den Helder Volume [l] Property Number
[pcs.]Share
[pcs.-%]Gross
weight [g]Share gross weight
[Ma.-% wet]Ø Gross weight
[g/pcs.]Juice with lid 1,50 Aseptisch 43,00 18,38% 2.926 25,85% 68,05Vla/Joghurt without lid 1,00 Septisch 29,00 12,39% 2.105 18,60% 72,59Fresh milk with lid 1,00 Septisch 35,00 14,96% 1.922 16,98% 54,91Vla/Joghurt with lid 1,00 Septisch 18,00 7,69% 939 8,30% 52,17Fresh milk with lid 1,00 Aseptisch 13,00 5,56% 496 4,38% 38,15Milkdrink with lid 1,00 Septisch 10,00 4,27% 407 3,60% 40,70Buttermilk with lid 1,00 Septisch 8,00 3,42% 360 3,18% 45,00Juice with lid 1,00 Aseptisch 8,00 3,42% 328 2,90% 41,00Fresh milk with lid 1,50 Septisch 5,00 2,14% 266 2,35% 53,20Pouches 0,20 Aseptisch 25,00 10,68% 264 2,33% 10,56Condensed Milk with lid 0,47 Aseptisch 7,00 2,99% 213 1,88% 30,43Condensed Milk without lid 0,47 Aseptisch 10,00 4,27% 187 1,65% 18,70Vla/Joghurt without lid 0,50 Septisch 4,00 1,71% 176 1,55% 44,00Vla/Joghurt with lid 0,50 Septisch 5,00 2,14% 120 1,06% 24,00Pasteuized milk without lid 1,00 Aseptisch 4,00 1,71% 115 1,02% 28,75Tomato sauce 500 g Aseptisch 3,00 1,28% 75 0,66% 25,00Fresh milk with lid 0,50 Septisch 2,00 0,85% 43 0,38% 21,50Milkdrink with lid 0,50 Septisch 1,00 0,43% 31 0,27% 31,00Wine without lid 1,00 Aseptisch 1,00 0,43% 31 0,27% 31,00Fresh milk without lid 1,00 Septisch 1,00 0,43% 28 0,25% 28,00Condensed melk without lid 1,00 Aseptisch 1,00 0,43% 28 0,25% 28,00Cream 200 g Aseptisch 1,00 0,43% 11 0,10% 11,00Rest 249 2,20%Total 23400% 100% 11.320 100%
44
