You have successfully logged out.

Hello !
Logout

Life-cycle assessment study

Rigid sterile containers deliver clear sustainability benefits

Choosing between rigid sterile containers and blue wrap for the sterile processing of operating theatre equipment.

Eco-costs of blue wrap vs. rigid sterile containers (RSCs)

Over 5,000 sterilisation cycles

Table eco-costs of blue wrap vs. rigid sterile containers (RSCs)

CO2e generation from blue wrap vs. rigid sterile containers (RSCs)

Over 5,000 sterilisation cycles

Table CO2e generation from blue wrap vs. rigid sterile containers (RSCs)

CO2e footprint

The study finds that for the carbon footprint of the two systems, a breakeven point is reached after 98 sterilisation cycles. From this point onwards, the RSC system is delivering lower CO2e results, which becomes more and more significant with each subsequent sterilisation cycle:

 

Environmental breakeven point (CO2e)

After just 98 sterilisation cycles, RSCs already start to produce less CO2e than blue wrap, with the differential continuing to grow proportionally over the whole RSC product life-cycle.

Chart environmental breakeven point (CO2e)

Eco-costs

The study finds that for the eco-costs of the two systems, a breakeven point is reached after 68 sterilisation cycles. From this point onwards, the RSC system is generating a lower level of eco-costs, which becomes more and more significant with each subsequent sterilisation cycle:

 

Environmental breakeven point (eco-costs)

After just 68 sterilisation cycles, RSCs already start to achieve better eco-cost results than blue wrap, with the differential continuing to grow proportionally over the whole RSC product life cycle.

Chart environmental breakeven point (eco-costs)

More interesting facts about sterile packaging systems