Methodological Brief: 2003 Market Data Analysis (MDA)
A) Basic MDA: These sources were used in generating CRI’s 2003 Market Data Analysis:
1)Gallons sold[1] at the national and regional levels: from Beverage World’s (BW)June 2003 “Beverage Market Index” (exceptions noted below). MDA uses BW’s 7 U.S. sales regions.
2)Units sold by material type[2] at the national level: from the Beverage Marketing Corporation’s (BMC) “Beverage Packaging in the U.S.” (Dec. 2003). Exceptions noted.
3)Personal communication with BMC staff was used to augment data on total sales, average unit size, and market share for sports drinks, imported bottled water, and wine.
4)Personal communication with NAPCOR staff was used to augment data on average PET unit size, and market share for various beverage types.
5)Beer Institute (BI) data were used to assess packaged beer market shares (glass vs. aluminum cans) in all 50 states. BI does not report beer sold in PET bottles, so we omitted it from the regional and state data. It is included, however, at the national level (1% of the U.S. market).
National and regional BW gallonage data were divided by national, regional, and state population figures to get total and per capita volume sales. We used the the U.S. average unit size as the standard for all regions. This assumption was necessary because BMC does not provide regional unit data, and because BW does not provide any unit data. These figures are identical in all seven regions for all individual beverage categories (by definition), but they differ regionally in the packaging subtotals. For the seven regions, fluid ounces per capita (differs by region) was divided by average unit size (same for all regions) to get total units per capita for each beverage.
Because BMC does not define “plastic bottles” or “cans,” CRI estimated market share of PET vs. HDPE for all beverage categories, based on communication with Mike Schedler/NAPCOR. We assumed that PP, PC, LDPE, and PVC were less than 1% of total market share and excluded them. CRI assumed market share of aluminum vs. steel for the relevant can categories. Detailed assumptions for plastic and can market shares can be obtained with purchase of MDA data.
Without access to regional packaging data, we had to assume that market share by package type within each beverage category was the same at the national level and in each region. The exception is beer, where data (excluding PET) was available for all 50 states. Clearly, packaging choices do vary by state and region. If the client wishes, CRI can provide further analysis using the report “2003 PET Beverage Packaging in the U.S” (BMC, Nov. 2003, $6,995) or other purchased data.
B) Recycling MDA: Includes all Basic MDA data. Additional recycling data is drawn from state agencies in deposit states, where available. The Recycling MDA allows the user to input known or hypothetical recycling rates as desired to generate data in units, lbs, tons, and potential unclaimed deposit revenues.
C) Deluxe MDA: Includes Basic MDA and Recycling MDA, with additional tables on energy savings and greenhouse gas avoidance at varying recycling rates. Conversion factors are derived from “Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases: A Life-Cycle Assessment of Emissions and Sinks.” 2nd Ed. U.S. EPA, May 2002.
[1]Beverages included: soft drinks, beer, sparkling and non-sparking water, RTD tea, sports drinks, chilled and shelf-stable fruit juice and drinks, table wine, and spirits. Beverages excluded: milk, ground coffee, packaged [dry] tea, frozen concentrates, draft beer, fountain drinks, wine coolers, sparkling wine, champagne, mixed drinks.
[2]Packages included: aluminum and steel cans, PET and HDPE plastic bottles, one-way and refillable glass bottles; gable-top cartons, foil pouches, aspetic boxes. Packages excluded: cardboard/steel cans, cardboard [wine] boxes, kegs,PP, PC, LDPE, and PVC.