Packaging Regulations

[Alta4ever]

Right... Ok, well you got me with that one. Still, it could be less packaging.

Its not that I am against less packaging, but the packaging we have for food is a direct result of consumer demand and food safety.

[guyser]

ever buy just a bag of cereal it doesn't stand up as well and is more difficult to store. The boxes can be recycled. Same with Crackers. I'm not sure exactly what extra packaging there is on a bag of meat balls or in a dish of lasagna aside from the plastic wrapping you cook it in its packaging.

Yes I have, the bag of rolled oats or whatever they're called. Comes in a plastic bag. No more to it. All cereal could be sold that way, but producers sexy it up with excess packaging to generate sales, not ensure the product stands up.Besides, look at the rigid plastic packaing for chocolate ocvered almonds, the pkg stands up.

As for the meat balls, etc, you get plastic outer wrap, a box, a plastic inner wrap , then the foil w contents + a cardboard lid. Apart from the lid and foil container, the rest is excessive

Some companies over package, and it is done so the end user gets a better product, or because the government has not yet come out with packaging regulation on a specific product and the company is being a good corporate citizen.

I think you best re-read this post.

What packaging "improves " a products contents?

And how are they a "good corporate citizen" by using excess packaging, when in fact the opposite would be true?

[TimG]

What packaging "improves " a products contents?

Any packaging that preserves the quality of its contents until it is delivered to the consumer. Packages that are stackable contribute to this goal. Rolled oats can be compressed without damaging the product. This is not true for most cereals which turn into crumbs. C

[Alta4ever]

What packaging "improves " a products contents?

One that better retains product freshness.

[guyser]

Any packaging that preserves the quality of its contents until it is delivered to the consumer. Packages that are stackable contribute to this goal. Rolled oats can be compressed without damaging the product. This is not true for most cereals which turn into crumbs. C

So potato chips dont come in bags but rather boxes?

ETA, yes in the case of rolled oats they can be mildly compressed and suffer no ill. However other products not so much

Edited December 10, 2010 by guyser

[guyser]

One that better retains product freshness.

Improves or preserves? Because no package I know of improves any product inside it.

[Alta4ever]

So potato chips dont come in bags but rather boxes?

Old dutch does.

pringles come in a tube. much fewer crumbs in the bottom.

Edited December 10, 2010 by Alta4ever

[guyser]

Old dutch does.

A grasp no doubt,and quite true, however they come in both.

[Alta4ever]

Improves or preserves? Because no package I know of improves any product inside it.

When comparing to a competitor the better preservation would be a better product getting to the consumer. Hence an innovation, an improvement over what was previously available. A better end product because of the improvement in packaging.

[Alta4ever]

A grasp no doubt,and quite true, however they come in both.

I don't buy the crushable bags, I don't want crumbs I want chips.

Don't forget pringles or the lays that come in the plastic tubes. I buy those too because they aren't cumbs by the time they get opened.

Edited December 10, 2010 by Alta4ever

[TimG]

So potato chips dont come in bags but rather boxes?

Yes - because they are sold in small quantities. i.e. the mass of a bag of chips is typically much less than the mass of a box of cereal. This means they can sell chips in bags filled with air to protect them. The downside of the chip bag approach is the volume of boxes required to deliver the same mass of food to the store is much larger. This, in turn, means more trucks burning more gas are required to move chips around. This would effectively negate any environmental benefit of the reduced packaging.

These kinds of side effects which are invisible to consumers are common yet that does not stop misguided people from demanding that more resources be expended in order to give them the illusion that they are doing something good for the environment.

Edited December 10, 2010 by TimG

[guyser]

Yes - because they are sold in small quantities. i.e. the mass of a bag of chips is typically much less than the mass of a box of cereal. This means they can sell chips in bags filled with air to protect them. The downside of the chip bag approach is the volume of boxes required to deliver the same mass of food to the store is much larger. This, in turn, means more trucks burning more gas are required to move chips around. This would effectively negate any environmental benefit of the reduced packaging.

These kinds of side effects which are invisible to consumers are common yet that does not stop misguided people from demanding that more resources be expended in order to give them the illusion that they are doing something good for the environment.

Guys, lets not forget a couple of things.

One, chips are sold in large bags relative to the contents and the reason does not have to do with the gas injected (although it works) rather than the percieved large size of the bag gives one an idea they are getting lots. We arent, but it looks good.

As for cereal it is even worse. The boxes have become bigger even though the product gross weight has decreased.

With cereal buying patterns, lets also remember that kids are with moms and dads and decide, based on variables including the colourful packages, cartoon depictions ,large size,which ones they want.

Packages of chips goes up to (IIRC) the 300g size, cereals typically around 450g

We cannot explain excess packaging for many items as a safety measure or a product quality measure (when in fact packaging does nothing to enhance the product apart from crushing it)sine so many young consumers could care less what happens to their Captain Crunch....provided its there on the table when they get up.

Any packaging that preserves the quality of its contents until it is delivered to the consumer. Packages that are stackable contribute to this goal. Rolled oats can be compressed without damaging the product. This is not true for most cereals which turn into crumbs

How does a half filled box of cereal, complete with box and liner, to as you say makes it stackable contribute to this goal.

Chips are filled w a gas to prevent crushing, ergo some extra space is needed, however, cereal is not pumped w gas yet giant boxes abound?

Edited December 10, 2010 by guyser

[TimG]

How does a half filled box of cereal, complete with box and liner, to as you say makes it stackable contribute to this goal.

None of the boxes I buy are half filled. 80% filled is the minimum. 500-600grams is also typical.

Chips are filled w a gas to prevent crushing, ergo some extra space is needed, however, cereal is not pumped w gas yet giant boxes abound?

At some point in time one has to accept the right of people and companies to make the choices that they want. After all, why regulate 'excessive packaging'? Why not simply outlaw environmentally unfriendly prcessed foods and force everyone to each rolled oats like they did in the 30s? Edited December 10, 2010 by TimG

[guyser]

None of the boxes I buy are half filled. 80% filled is the minimum. 500-600grams is also typical.

I dont buy cereal but it is around, however settling indictes less than 80 points, but immaterial really since there is plenbty of room to downsize save for consumer hoodwinking.

You are correct, boxes are getting bigger, but again, to fool the customer. Think of super sizing at Mick D's. The cost to provide more and get more $$ back is the reason, not demand.

At some point in time one has to accept the right of people and companies to make the choices that they want. After all, why regulate 'excessive packaging'? Why not simply outlaw environmentally unfriendly prcessed foods and force everyone to each rolled oats like they did in the 30s?

I dont want nor need regulation for excess packaging , nor did I indicate I was on that bandwagon.People can choose any product they want, lrg packages or small, but at some point a choice to be conscientous about waste will occur.

[TimG]

dont buy cereal but it is around, however settling indictes less than 80 points, but immaterial really since there is plenbty of room to downsize save for consumer hoodwinking.

Do you really know what you are talking about then? I buy different cereals and including settling the boxes are at least 80% full (i.e. they would likely full when they left the factory). This plague of big empty boxes does not exist as far as I am concerned but I did assume you were speaking from experience rather than assumption.

but at some point a choice to be conscientous about waste will occur.

A person worried about the environment would be better off avoiding heavily processed foods in the first place. Rolled oats and bulk brown sugar - can't get more environmentally friendly than that when it comes to breakfast choices. Edited December 11, 2010 by TimG

[dre]

Do you really know what you are talking about then? I buy different cereals and including settling the boxes are at least 80% full (i.e. they would likely full when they left the factory). This plague of big empty boxes does not exist as far as I am concerned but I did assume you were speaking from experience rather than assumption.

A person worried about the environment would be better off avoiding heavily processed foods in the first place. Rolled oats and bulk brown sugar - can't get more environmentally friendly than that when it comes to breakfast choices.

Do you really know what you are talking about then? I buy different cereals and including settling the boxes are at least 80% full (i.e. they would likely full when they left the factory). This plague of big empty boxes does not exist as far as I am concerned but I did assume you were speaking from experience rather than assumption.

You must live on a different planet. I buy half full boxes and bags of food ALL THE TIME. Just about everything you buy it seems like.

The food industry calls it "slack fill" and its very much a marketing strategy. Not only does it look like a bigger portion, but its a bigger surface for them to stamp their logo, and therefore a better and more eye catching advertising surface.

"Bit Size" marketing is another strategy that uses excess packaging.

[guyser]

Do you really know what you are talking about then?

Why yes I do. That I dont buy them does not mean that the 6 open boxes under the counter at the cottage are not at some point used ny me. Alas I was a youngster at one point and recall my Capn Crunch and Alpha Bits seemed shorted by the relevant size of the packaging.

This plague of big empty boxes does not exist as far as I am concerned but I did assume you were speaking from experience rather than assumption.

You assumed correctly. The incorrect part was thinking that not buying = not knowing.

[Shwa]

How about gum ?

Those ridiculous plastic pill trays they come in are excessive to say the least. Why not a nice cloth bag hmmm ?

LOLF! I haven't seen those little gold or purple nuggets in years. Do they still make them?

[Shwa]

Only crap comes in blister packs, i don't buy them.

Oh, I see - you are specifically referring to foodstuffs and not including non-foodstuffs correct?

[Alta4ever]

Oh, I see - you are specifically referring to foodstuffs and not including non-foodstuffs correct?

That is how this started, food stuffs.

[August1991]

One, chips are sold in large bags relative to the contents and the reason does not have to do with the gas injected (although it works) rather than the percieved large size of the bag gives one an idea they are getting lots. We arent, but it looks good.

As for cereal it is even worse. The boxes have become bigger even though the product gross weight has decreased.

With cereal buying patterns, lets also remember that kids are with moms and dads and decide, based on variables including the colourful packages, cartoon depictions ,large size,which ones they want.

Guyser, since you have figured out this apparent scam, do you think other people have not?

[i am amazed how often people think that they are smarter than most of humanity.]

In any case, the OP seems to have moved down to packaging for potato chips and cereal. Does anyone seriously think that we face environmental problems because of chip bags?

I'm with Alta on this. Packaging is a cost and producers are constantly seeking ways to reduce costs. Heck, if this were 1962, I bet the author of the OP would have objected to the early plastics industry on the grounds that it used unnatural petroleum products. Yet, the use of plastics in packaging has probably been the single greatest environmental measure in the past 50 years.

Plastic packages are lighter and require less energy to transport. In addition, plastic ensures that the product is delivered intact to the customer. (Think of foam egg cartons.)

-----

In any case, my own personal environmental rant concerns batteries. From the small AAA through cellphone rechargeables up to car batteries, we have no organized way to dispose of them. This is despicable.

Pop bottles/cans have a deposit and so homeless people scrounge garbage bins looking for cans or bottles.

IMV, all batteries should have a deposit of a dollar or so. Return the battery, you get your deposit back. We would not only protect the environment but also provide a simple transfer scheme to poor people who want to live outside the system.

Used batteries tossed into a landfill have a greater effect on the environment than biodegradable plastic packaging.

Edited December 12, 2010 by August1991

[Bonam]

Excess packaging on food has actually really decreased in the last ~10 years. It used to be some foods would be stored inside 3-4 layers of plastic. Like for example sliced lunch meats. Now they usually come in single layer vacuum-sealed plastic containers.

As for chips, they are under-packaged if anything. So many times a chip bag has a bunch of broken remains of chips inside it rather than nice whole chips. Pringles has the right idea with chip packaging if you ask me.

However, there are some non-food items that often really do seem very overpackaged. Such packaging is probably necessary for shipping, but seems hugely excessive from the consumer standpoint. For example, computer components. The box that my last CPU came in was about 1000x the volume of the CPU, and had multiple layers of cardboard, styrofoam, high density foam, polyethylene plastic, and an inner hard shell of polycarbonate plastic lined with anti-static coating. Obviously these measures are to make sure the fragile component can survive rough shipping and handing, but one might wonder if the shipping methods could be modified to reduce the need for such packaging.

Edited December 12, 2010 by Bonam

[bloodyminded]

Some companies over package, and it is done so the end user gets a better product, or because the government has not yet come out with packaging regulation on a specific product and the company is being a good corporate citizen.

Yes I ignore inane questions. It isn't worth my time.

Read your two sentences in sequence, as they were written.

First, you argue that one of the reasons companies "over package" is because they are being "good corporate citizens."

(Since you're hostile to thought and reflection, you have now decided to actively oppose it, evidently.)

Next, you remark about inanity.

But I appreciate the satire.