LESS IS MORE
FIGURE 1
A single case of Meals, Ready-to-Eat (MREs) is a great example of poor pack- aging. Not only does the cardboard case create
solid waste, but the individual
MRE package design leads to unused space within a case. Tis increases the cost of packaging and printing and cre- ates waste along the supply chain as these cases move on ships, vehicles and aircraft.
UNWRAP AND REUSE
The U.S. Army Natick Soldier Systems Center has developed ideas for smaller, lighter packaging for MREs, with the additional potential for dual use to create more value for Soldiers. (SOURCE: The MG James Wright MBA Fellowship Program at the College of William and Mary)
REDUCED PACKAGING Te Army can learn from initiatives in the private sector
to reduce packaging
waste. Wal-Mart Stores Inc., for exam- ple, decided that the punt, or dimple, at the bottom of a bottle of wine is waste- ful. Te chain worked closely with its supplier to redesign the Oak Leaf store- brand wine bottles and reduce the punt, resulting in a shorter and lighter bottle. Tis small change reaped big cost sav- ings in glass consumption, packaging materials and transportation and reduced Wal-Mart’s annual shipping requirement by 280 trucks.
Likewise, Freeport-McMoRan Inc., one of the top mining companies in the world, worked closely with a supplier to com- pletely redesign its packaging for cobalt hydroxide. Te new design resulted in a larger,
square-shaped product bag that
was more rigid. Te new design fits the exact dimensions of the company’s cargo trucks and has doubled the amount of material that can be shipped in one truck. Te rigid bag cost $2 more but doubled
64 Army AL&T Magazine April–June 2015
the transportation network’s efficiency. Te new design also made the packing process at the mine more efficient.
For the Army, an initiative to reduce or redesign packaging would have a sig- nificant effect on combat operations. Inefficient packaging
results in more
trucks than necessary on the road, poor use of air delivery assets and inefficient use of storage space. Improved packaging would decrease the exposure of vulner- able assets along the supply chain and improve air and ground asset utilization.
Most packaging materials used for food, water, ammunition and repair parts become a solid-waste burden during com- bat operations; waste must be disposed of for tactical, political and sanitary reasons. In remote areas, burning is the common method for disposal, but that can lead to health problems for Soldiers. Removing unnecessary packaging does not go far enough: Packaging should be designed to burn cleanly to generate power.
Smaller, lighter packaging offers sig- nificant benefits to Soldiers who receive resupply by containerized delivery sys- tems on air-only combat outposts. Te U.S. Army Natick Soldier Systems Cen- ter has developed improved packaging for the MRE, pending DOD approval. Natick has also considered designing dual-purpose packaging to create more value for Soldiers. For example, an MRE package could be used as a sandbag, a field-expedient
latrine or a camouflage net case. (See Figure 1.)
Te improved packaging initiative should extend to how the Army awards contracts to suppliers. For example, awarding con- tracts only to suppliers that could comply with efficient packaging standards, including packaging that is the minimum required, lighter, dual-purpose and clean- burning, would put American ingenuity to work in developing smart solutions to packaging challenges.
LOCAL AND RENEWABLE RESOURCES Freeport-McMoRan, which operates mines in remote areas of Central Africa, maximizes local and renewable resources to reduce its logistics resupply require- ment, increase its operational effect and maximize its profits. Methods employed include digging wells, partnering to refur- bish a hydroelectric plant and providing equipment and training to create local sourcing options. Each of these methods reduces the distribution resources required
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172