Much more yes… That is why I would put jus as an option and only for customers.
The carbon cap would be to use them individually
You are right… I am trying to think a way to reduce caps or the plastic used but its complicated
1 Like
Because using food grade PET is by far the easiest proven solution available - the simplest choice s to start introducing rPET with a view to ramping up its use as the material becomes more common place.
That’s what @coup’s Geordie workmate calls him.
2 Likes
You seem like the Norm Macdonald of UK jajaja
2 Likes
It’s important to consider a few factors:
Logistically and commercially it is better for Huel to leverage existing technologies and materials with a focus on using less of them.
Experimental and exotic new developments = higher production costs and certification requirements.
It’s also important to remember not to demonise all plastics in a generalised way. Plastic carrier bags and bottles do not throw themselves into the ocean – humans dump them there.
Mature technology exists and is constantly improving to make plastic recycling more efficient but as most recycling ventures are privately owned they more often than not do not see the commercial sense in investing in these technologies thereby reducing the amount and types of materials they can process but increasing their bottom line profits.
Using recycled plastics is a perfectly good solution that also can be used for increasing good will and PR for the brand owner doing so.
2 Likes
PepsiCo is the latest big brand owner to make packaging changes with its water brands as it looks to reduce its use of virgin plastic. from next year, Lifewtr water will be packaged in 100% rPET and Bubly Sparkling Water will no longer be packaged in plastic.
Along with the Aquafina water brand – they will start to offer aluminium can packaging in foodservice outlets, while the brand tests the move in retail. The changes are expected to eliminate more than 8,000 metric tons of virgin plastic and approximately 11,000 metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions.
The changes support PepsiCo’s plan to make 100% of its packaging recyclable, compostable, or biodegradable and using 25% recycled plastic content in all its packaging by 2025. Last year, PepsiCo announced plans to triple the content of recycled plastic in its bottles across the European Union by 2030, aiming to achieve 50% recycled plastic (rPET) content in its bottles.
2 Likes
Phil, I was just at Glastonbury Festival where they did really well in cutting down the use of single use plastic water bottles. Apparently 1.3 million were used at the last Glastonbury in 2017. You could still take them in, but have them refilled at various water points around site but not buy them.
Interestingly there was 500ml canned water for sale, made by life-water.co.uk.
What is the environmental impact of aluminium vs. plastic? Any idea.
2 Likes
Haha…if only I had that talent.
Was wondering that too 
1 Like
A main benefit of a PET bottle over an aluminium can commercially would be its cost and flexibility. A PET bottle can be moulded in almost any shape or size you want as well as having branding and design built into that mould. You cannot cost effectively create a unique aluminium drink container like you can with plastic. As mentioned on a previous comment too – with viscous drinks like Huel, this would not be practical in a conventional ring pull can and really need a wider aperture and neck.
People always get really excited about using cans and while they are very recyclable – food grade cans also have plastic liners – in the same way you get in paper takeaway coffee cups which are allegedly extremely difficult to recycle. (translation: they are easy to recycle if you use the correct methods and machinery but that’s expensive to invest in so let’s not – let’s propose taxing consumers instead to stop using them and pocket the cash whilst saving money on not having to buy more coffee cups.)
The reason many big brands are struggling to introduce more rPET quicker is literally because there is a global shortage of it. That may sound crazy but the reason is simple. Plastics are not being recycled effectively or in any kind of volume currently.
Yes. In a nutshell. All of that plastic shipped out to Asia to be swept under the carpet wasn’t recycled – it just went into bigger landfills. Now those landfills are maxxed out the shop is shut.
rPET isn’t a perfect answer but it’s a start. Increased recycling and use of it has to be a help until something more viable is developed. Even when it’s no longer suitable for food grade materials it can still be repurposed into building materials for example.
3 Likes
Just as an add on – currently around 40% of the global use of aluminium is recycled annually compared to only 10% for plastic - clearly showing the huge gap in what we are told is going in the recycling business and what is actually happening.
That other 60% (that’s 105,000 metric tonnes – a day) of the needed aluminium comes predominantly from bauxite mining which is as bad – if not worse – than putting plastic in landfills.
So while it is lighter and stronger than PET it’s no environmental angel either 
3 Likes
A system like Loop is the future, I have that very clear
Micro-plastics are kind of a two pronged thing – normal micro plastics such as the raw materials used in plastic production can be mitigated somewhat with research and new materials however secondary microplastics released by degradation of manufactured plastic products is less easy to control and indeed the best solution to combat that is by far greater recycling efforts being made coupled with correct disposal.
Again – we gave to be careful not to use plastics as a scapegoat – aluminium cans take between 200 to 500 years to fully degrade if they are not recycled. Demonising one thing at the expense of others is not a good idea as you pointed out with your example earlier. We find it very easy it seems to follow the out of sight out of mind attitude to packaging materials.
We like the idea of aluminium cans because we think they are clean and we’d rather not think about the huge environmental damage that surrounds their production – mining, smelting etc. Similarly – we love the idea of electric cars but let’s not think about the damage they do to the environment mining the toxic raw materials for their batteries.
This points back to recycling being key – it’s an old anecdotal example but stands true as far as reducing somethings impact by reusing it – maintaining and driving around in a classic V8 Mustang for the remainder of your life would cause less damage to the environment than buying a new Prius. (at least until we get next generation energy storage using materials like Graphene)
To this end systems like Loop offer a great solution but require huge infrastructure to be implemented – it would be amazing to see many more of these kind of brand/retailer/recycling partnerships springing up to truly offer global coverage or at least as much as possible.
1 Like
Just to clarify before anyone jumps all over me the degradation times you hear for materials breaking down (millennia for plastics, half a century for aluminium etc) refer to the integrity of the material in a neutral condition. For example, if you put a clean empty plastic carrier bag and a soda can in a cool, dark cupboard and left them there unattended - they would still be there in pristine condition for generations.
Packaging materials breakdown because of chemical reactions and energy applied to them. If this were not the case then there would be no such thing as secondary micro-plastics. Applying external forces by energy or chemical reactivity greatly reduces this degradation time. While its very easy for Leonardo di Caprio to tweet to you from the comfort of one of his (many) private jets that a plastic bag in the ocean will be there for thousands of years – it simply isn’t the case. The worlds ocean’s transmit huge amounts of energy to everything they touch and this is multiplied by exposure to UV radiation and abrasion from other materials in the sea also. It is estimated that plastic waste in the ocean fully degrades (or at least to a state where it becomes unfortunately digestible micro plastic particles) in around 20 years.
Again, this is in no way me condoning the dumping of materials – just a clarification for the sake of transparency.
2 Likes
That is why I think the bricks are a great solution for frequent huel consumers that care about the environvment. More Huel in less space
Just to get back to the original topic as you say – I’m working on some revised concepts based on the discussions and suggestions here to incorporate further diminishing the pack volume and reducing the closure height/type. I’ll post them as soon as they’re done.
1 Like
Yeah hang on, I remember Tim saying that a lot of the space in the bags of powdered Huel is due to it “settling” in transit, but those paper bricks of flour seem to be packed alright don’t they? And the flour doesn’t really “go off”, would Huel?
1 Like
Hello Ryan - The settling wouldn’t occur with a compressed block and the removal of the air in the pack would also be beneficial in avoiding things ‘going off’
2 Likes
Ou yes! We are waiting!