PET bottles are the cheapest packaging solution for carbonated soft drinks and beer. A cost chain comparison by Schönwald Consulting (Erlangen / Germany; www.schoenwald-consulting.com) shows that aluminium or steel cans are priced about 25% higher than PET bottles for carbonated soft drinks, whereas glass bottles cost up to 68% more. Beer filled into aluminium or steel cans is priced 16% higher than PET-bottled beer, whereas glass-bottled beer costs some 36% more than the PET alternative. These insights can be gleaned from Schönwald’s new study, which examines the cost effectiveness of steel cans, aluminium cans, PET bottles and glass bottles.

The study examines the cost ranges in euro per 1,000 units for 0.5 l containers with annual volumes of 150-200m units. The costs were divided into container, lid or cap, label, product, filling, secondary packaging, transport by truck and retailcosts. This cost chain is completed by listing the total chain cost per liter, Schönwald says, explaining its methodology.

In the soft drink category, the consultants took standard PET bottles as the basis. When looking at beer, by contrast, four different kinds of containers were examined: multilayer PET bottles, high barrier PET bottles, plasma based coated PET bottles and solvent based coated PET bottles. The study lists all the different types of containers and their costs.

e-Service:
Summary of the Schönwald study: "The Economics of 0,5 Litre Beverage Containers in 2009 – A Cost Comparison of Steel and Aluminium Cans as well as PET and Glass Bottles for Carbonated Soft Drinks and Beer in Europe” as a PDF document (28 KB)