Development of a packaging test method
Source abstract
Abstract
Innovation in packaging design will be facilitated by a simple test method to indicate whether a product is compatible with paper recycling. Three laboratories cooperated on the development of a method and used it on linerboard, coated paperboard, wet-strength paperboard, and white copy paper. This test method includes pulping and screening. The data presented here illustrate the factors affecting the results of a bench-scale test. Our observations show that a bench-scale test can give reproducible results for yield, < 5%. We also present an approach to contaminant assessment based on current published test methods. A specification with a lower limit on yield of 70% and a contaminant level of less than 5,000 particles/kg is proposed.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Material Properties and Processing · Advanced Cellulose Research Studies · Recycling and Waste Management Techniques
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
United States Department of Agriculture
WestRock (United States)
University of Maine
References (19)
Show source-provided references
1. 1. “REMA’s ISRI specifications,” Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries, Washington, DC. Available [Online] https://www.isrispecs.org/ <02Feb2026>.
2. 2. Kasimi, H., “Unravelling recovered paper price trends,” Recycling Product News, Baum Publication Ltd., Vancouver, BC, Canada, Available [Online] https://www.recyclingproductnews.com/arti-cle/43457/unravelling-recovered-paper-price-trends <02Feb2026>
3. 3. Cooper, T., Hist. Res. 80(214): 710(2008)https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2281.2007.00420.x.10.1111/j.1468-2281.2007.00420.x ↗
4. 4. Ince, P.J., “Recycling of wood and paper products in the United States,” General Technical Report FPL–GTR–89, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory, Madison, WI, USA,1996. https://doi.org/10.2737/FPL-GTR-89.10.2737/FPL-GTR-89 ↗
5. 5. “Advancing sustainable materials management: 2018 tables and figures,” U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, 2020.
6. 6. Hutten, I.M. and Banerjee, S, “Repulpablity of waxed corrugated board,” Report of Project 3900, Institute of Paper Science and Technology Atlanta, GA, 1994.
7. 7. “Voluntary standard for repulping and recycling corrugated fiber-board treated to improve its performance in the presence of water and water vapor,” Fibre Box Association, Elk Grove Village, IL, USA, 2013.
8. 8. “Voluntary standard for repulping and recycling coated or treated corrugated fiberboard and its equivalents in the old corrugated containers (OCC) recycling stream,” Fibre Box Association, Itasca, IL, USA, 9 September 2025. Available [Online] https://www. fibrebox.org/assets/2025/09/Volunatary_Standard_9.17.25.pdf <02Aug2026>.
9. 9. Seiter, D.F., Pikulin, M.A., Meese, R.G., et al., “Environmentally benign USPS stamps: Baseline pilot recycling results,” TAPPI Pulping Conf., TAPPI Press, Atlanta, GA, 1998, p. 193.
10. 10. Houtman, C.J., Seiter, D., Sutherland, N.R., et al., “Can laboratory and pilot recycling trials predict adhesive removal in commercial recycling systems? Results from the USPS Environmentally Benign Stamp Project,” TAPPI Fall Tech. Conf. Trade Fair, TAPPI Press, Atlanta, 2002.
11. 11. Houtman, C., Scallon, K., and Oldack, R., Prog. Pap. Recycl. (17)2: 26(2008).
12. 12. “Sustainability,” Tag and Label Manufacturers Institute, Nashville. Available [Online] https://tlmi.com/insight/sustainability/
13. <02Feb2026>.
14. 13. “Harmonised European laboratory test method to generate param-eters enabling the assessment of the recyclability of paper and board products in recycling mills with conventional process (Part I),” Confederation of European Paper Industries, Brussels. Available [Online] https://www.cepi.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Cepi-Test-Method-27.02_FINAL.pdf <02Feb2026>.
15. 14. Xu, K., Mo, W., Zhang, F., et al., Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 63(17):7950(2024). https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.4c00483.10.1021/acs.iecr.4c00483 ↗
16. 15. Doshi, M., Moore, W.J., Venditti, R.A., et al., Prog. Pap. Recycl. 12(3): 34(2003).
17. 16. Sithole, B. and Filion, D., “Assessment of methods for the mea-surement of macrostickies in recycled pulps,” Recycl. Res. Forum, 8th, TAPPI Press, Atlanta, 2007.
18. 17. Saville, F., Martinez, M., and Olson, J., Can. J. Chem. Eng. 94(3): 446 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1002/cjce.22421.10.1002/cjce.22421 ↗
19. 18. “Annex documents part I – recycling mill with conventional process,” Confederation of European Paper Industries, Brussels, January 2025. Available [Online] https://www.cepi.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/4evergreen-Annexes-PART-I-25.02.pdf <02Feb2026>.