Abstract
Single-used packaging materials had become a key issue to address for the sustainability of e-commerce. The rapid growth of the express delivery industry has brought a surge in the consumption of cardboard boxes, as it is the main packaging material for shipping parcels. This study aims to define the carbon footprint of a small size cardboard box used for parcel packaging in Singapore with an approach of Life Cycle Thinking. The research is divided in two different sections. The first section assesses the carbon footprint for one single box divided by the different life cycle stages. The second section is a comparative analysis of single use and reuse practices in Singapore of cardboard boxes. Both sections address all the life cycle stages, from cradle-to-gate, distribution to consumer, and the end-of-life. The objective of this research is to provide useful data about the carbon footprint of cardboard boxes in Singapore for e-commerce sellers and consumers. The analysis of the carbon footprint of one single box demonstrates that the cradle-to-grate stage has very similar levels of carbon emissions for boxes made of both primary and secondary (recycled) materials. With a slight difference, secondary materials generate 3% more emissions. This can be attributed to the sorting process of the boxes, the distribution to the paper recyclate, as well as the pulping and stock preparation of the recovered fibres. On the other hand, the process of distribution to consumer can generate the highest or the lowest carbon emissions of the whole life cycle of the box depending on the mode of transportation. If the distribution is done by public transport, this stage becomes the least pollutant. Although, this is only feasible when transporting one or few cardboard boxes. When using private motorized vehicles like taxi and light good vehicles (LGVs) the carbon emissions become the highest of all life cycle stages. For section I, these private transportation modes are underutilized as the assessment is focused on understanding the impact of one box. Nonetheless, when the number of boxes distributed per trip increases, the impact becomes lower for these transportation modes. For section II, the behaviour is the same between public and private vehicles. However, reusing still produces less emissions even when using a taxi for short distances (less than 5 km) compared to buying single use boxes by public transport. The end-of-life of a cardboard box through the combustion-landfilling process has the highest levels of carbon emissions of all the solid waste treatments. For this study, the benefits of recycled or secondary materials cannot be fully visualized. The emissions factors do not consider the avoided emissions for not using primary materials. Nonetheless, recycling and reusing remain as the best methods to process cardboard waste. Recycling generates 98% less emissions compared to throwing the box to the general waste. Besides, reusing a cardboard box one time can save approximately 46% of carbon emissions compared with using a brand-new box. The carbon footprint can be minimized substantially if we opt for recycling or reusing practices for disposal. Promoting more sustainable consumption habits of cardboard boxes can reduce the environmental impact of parcel packaging waste.