❓Frequently asked questions

Using the UP Scorecard

The food packaging material type I am interested in is not yet included in the UP Scorecard. Will it be added in the future?

There are hundreds of unique food packaging materials available on the global market. Due to data limitations, we have prioritized many of the most commonly used materials to include as generic products in the current version of the UP Scorecard. Multiple new and novel alternative materials are also now entering the market – many of which are complex plastics or multilayer packaging all containing different base polymers and additives, and relying on diverse manufacturing processes. The UP Scorecard is a work in progress. As more information on these novel materials are made publicly available, we hope to be able to incorporate more of them into the UP Scorecard in future versions of the tool.

Nevertheless, you do have the possibility to create new, customized products based on the materials that are available in the UP Scorecard. This allows you to assess and compare new products along with those already in the tool.

Also, we encourage purchasers to use the general principles captured by the UP Scorecard when discussing with suppliers about their products’ material sustainability and as a reflection of where the market demand is heading.

How can the UP Scorecard help me achieve my sustainable packaging goals?

The UP Scorecard measures commonly used foodware and food packaging products with a coherent method to provide companies with the information needed to make sustainable purchasing decisions.

• It addresses the need for a consistent and comprehensive way to assess the different sustainability impacts of foodware and food packaging products.

• It provides an easy way for food industry and service professionals to make informed decisions about the environmental and human health impacts of the foodware and packaging products they purchase.

• It enables users to determine which options offer the strongest protection for the environment and human health.

It looks like reusables win through almost every category. Is that a conclusion that can be drawn?

From an environmental and health perspective, reusables are shown to be generally preferable to single-use materials. Compared to the manufacturing of new products from virgin materials, reuse helps in most cases to reduce resource extraction, energy use, and waste generation. Even if recycling is available for single-use materials, the reduction in impacts achieved by using reusables is usually much higher. However, reusables only achieve their fullest potential if they do not include chemicals of concern, are reused as many times as possible, and contain recycled content where possible.

Why are the Chemicals of Concern scores for all packaging so low by default?

One of the design goals of the UP Scorecard is to advance transparency about the chemicals used in food packaging. As explained more thoroughly in the tool’s methodology, the chemicals on the Food Contact Chemicals Priority (FCCprio) List are harmful chemicals known to have been intentionally used or present in food contact materials.

In the current version of the tool, a generic approach is used and gives all materials for which there is no publicly available and detailed information the worst score. As every food packaging article can be produced differently using various chemicals along the supply chain, it is assumed that all products contain these harmful chemicals until proven otherwise. If a user has information that chemicals of concern on one or more of the four tiers of the FCCprio list are not present in a specific product, they can update this setting manually for each product to improve the scoring. This also takes into account the quality of this claim (e.g. self-declared, supported by a third-party certification, etc).

A goal for the tool is to encourage producers of specific products to provide chemical information directly to their business customers down the supply chain. They could then potentially leverage the information for product selection or to better inform their own customers about the safety of the packaging and foodware in use.

Does the impact of products within the UP Scorecard include the packaging they are shipped in (e.g. cardboard shipping boxes or LDPE wrap)?

No. The UP Scorecard only considers the food packaging article itself. It does not include the secondary (or tertiary) packaging used to transport these articles.

Are there ways that companies can use the UP Scorecard to publicly report on their performance?

Not yet, but this is an interesting feature we are thinking more about!

Purchasing decisions are often still made only after also considering the financial costs and comparing the price performance of available packaging options. Does the UP Scorecard consider or provide any information about the costs of the products being compared?

Currently, the UP Scorecard does not collect or provide information about the financial costs of the various products or provide links to products available on the market. In future updates, we are considering linking to available products and/or including information about average purchasing prices.

Do you see a potential to use the UP Scorecard to communicate on the consumer level?

The current version of the UP Scorecard is intended for food packaging procurement professionals working in the field. While it is still freely accessible to consumers and available to help them compare packaging options and understand their choices, consumers are not currently the primary target audience. In the future, additional simplifications to the user interface and communications aimed at educating the general public could also be developed to better engage with them.

---

Methodology and data within the UP Scorecard

The UP Scorecard calculates results using average infrastructure and impact data for the currently available regions (United States, Europe, Spain, Global Average). Can it also calculate impacts for specific cities or for other countries or regions?

Currently, the UP Scorecard only calculates impacts based on average data for the available regions (United States, Europe, Spain, Global Average). One of our top priorities is to expand the dataset within the UP Scorecard to calculate impacts also for other regions. Technically, the UP Scorecard is already setup to be expanded to include any new region. However, the main limitation is finding and processing the needed data for impact calculations to accurately reflect any new regions. We’re working on developing this further.

Which Chemicals of Concern does the UP Scorecard include? Are PFAS included?

The full Food Contact Chemicals Priority (FCCprio) List is available where you can see the names and CAS (Chemical Abstracts Service) numbers of all chemicals included. Avoiding the intentional use of all PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) is required to reach Level 1 compliance within the Chemicals of Concern metric. Read the full methodology for more information about how to use this list to increase a product’s score in the tool.

Does the Chemicals of Concern metric consider the presence of harmful chemicals during upstream manufacturing or downstream recycling and disposal processes?

No, the UP Scorecard only considers the presence of chemicals of concern within the product itself. Upstream and downstream impacts they may cause are not included.

Which LCA tool/software does the UP Scorecard use?

For the quantitative impact metrics (climate, water use, and plastic pollution), the UP Scorecard primarily makes use of life cycle inventory data from the highly respected ecoinvent database. Where necessary, custom inventories were defined (for a material or a process) and implemented using ecoinvent processes. In a few cases, the tool relies on US LCI, and in one case it uses GREET (developed by the Argonne National Laboratory). For the qualitative metrics (chemicals of concern, recoverability, and sustainable sourcing), custom methodologies were developed and reviewed by groups of experts and based on recent scientific literature. See the full methodology for more information about how each of the metrics are calculated.

Are reusable polypropylene (PP) products included? They make up a large share of reusables currently in use in the US.

Yes, PP (polypropylene)-based reusables are included for multiple container types. More may be added across additional container types in the future.

I created a product made from plastic (not PET) that has more than 50% recycled content. Why is this not reflected in the Sustainable Sourcing metric?

The Sustainable Sourcing metric only rewards post-consumer recycled content in metals (aluminum and steel), glass, and PET bottles due to concerns about chemical contamination from recovered materials.