The Industry’s Parallel Universes of Sustainability and Cost

End-of-life impact, recyclability, or carbon footprint. Often not even considered. Yet packaging and intralogistics account for a significant share of a company’s emissions—often more than 50% of the overall emissions. 

There’s a disconnect. And it’s time we talk about it. 

Real-world procurement criteria 

For decades, static protection in electronics has relied on short-use or multi-material ESD packaging that’s hard to recycle and nearly impossible to recover at end of life. Even today, ESD materials are rarely selected based on their sustainability profile—even though viable alternatives exist. 

The result? Missed opportunities to reduce waste, extend material lifespans, and cut carbon emissions where it actually counts. 

If CO₂ data isn’t requested, it won’t be measured. And if it isn’t measured, it certainly won’t be managed. 

On paper, companies are committed to climate targets. In practice, reusability, material recyclability, and lifecycle CO₂ impact are rarely part of the actual packaging spec sheet. 

It’s time to evolve packaging specifications. End-of-life scenarios, recyclability, and CO₂ footprint should be considered alongside strength, conductivity, and dimensional stability. 
 
The good news? Sustainability doesn’t have to increase costs. Reusable packaging systems, circular material choices, and redesigning ESD compounds can offer better lifecycle value and lower environmental impact without sacrificing performance. 

Understanding Scope 1, 2 & 3 Emissions in Packaging 

• Scope 1 – Direct emissions from owned or controlled sources (e.g., in-house manufacturing)
• Scope 2 – Indirect emissions from purchased electricity or energy use
• Scope 3 – All other indirect emissions in a company’s value chain—including raw materials, transport, packaging, and end-of-life treatment 
  

 
For many companies, Scope 3 accounts for the majority of total emissions—often more than 70%, especially in logistics and packaging-intensive industries. This is where circular ESD packaging can make a measurable impact. 
 
If Scope 3 isn’t addressed, sustainability efforts remain incomplete. 

The Case for Change: What Needs to Happen 

• Procurement criteria need to evolve—adding recyclability and CO₂ footprint alongside traditional technical specs
• Lifecycle thinking must move from slides to specs
• Suppliers must be ready to provide CO₂ data and support circular packaging design
• Reusability and recyclability should be core design principles, not afterthoughts
• Customer expectations must shift from lowest unit price to best total lifecycle value 

What We’re Doing at Premix 

At Premix, we specialize in conductive plastic compounds that enable durable, reusable, and recyclable ESD packaging. Our materials are used in trays, containers, handling tools, and modular systems designed to be circulated and reused over and over again—not discarded after a single use. 
 
We support customers with: 

• Recyclable thermoplastic compounds (e.g., PP-based) for circular ESD packaging 
• Reliable conductivity and mechanical durability over many reuse cycles 
• Material data and design guidance to support ESG and regulatory reporting 
• CO2e calculations 
• Tailored compounds that meet technical and sustainability needs 

Let’s Start Now 

We don’t need to wait for a perfect system. We just need to start—by putting CO₂ and end-of-life impact alongside traditional performance requirements in packaging decisions. 
 
Sustainability won’t become real until it’s part of the specs, the process, the daily routine. Let’s make it business as usual. 

Understanding industrial Scope 3 emissions: what, why, how - Cambridge Industrial Innovation Policy