This report examines refillable polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles as one of the packaging systems used to distribute carbonated soft drinks in Denmark. The functional unit is 1,000 litres of beverage, including its distribution from the soft drink producer through retailers to consumers. The assessment covers PET resin, preforms and bottles, secondary packaging, filling, beverage transport and distribution, cooling in consumers’ refrigerators, waste management and recycling. It is one volume in a broader comparison of packaging systems for beer and soft drinks; its results should therefore be read alongside the assumptions in the main report and the other technical reports.
The study applies the EDIP impact assessment method. It reports that most of the used bottles—98.5% in the model—are collected for recycling. The authors interpret the results with dominance and sensitivity analyses, including alternative collection rates, bottle weights, allocation approaches for PET recycling, beverage distribution and electricity supply. Collection rate is an important assumption. A higher share of bottles discarded at the soft drink producer has a similar effect to a lower collection rate. The report also finds that a 20% increase in bottle weight appears less influential, particularly because the assumed increase is considered excessive.
The assessment identifies distribution of the beverage, washing and filling, and PET-resin production as important processes for the refillable-bottle system. Using a light truck for beverage distribution increases estimated impacts, especially nitrogen oxides and carbon dioxide. The electricity scenario also matters: the base case represents coal-marginal electricity, while sensitivity cases examine fragmented markets and a European base load.
The authors note data gaps, including missing information on material scrap in preform production and PET recycling, and on potential water emissions during washing and filling. Workplace impacts, littering, packaging migration, noise and visual effects are outside the study’s scope. These boundaries and assumptions limit how directly the results can be transferred to other countries, distribution systems or present-day packaging supply chains.
