The carbon footprint of different medication packaging items at an Australian tertiary hospital

Abstract Background Medication packaging contributes significantly to the overall carbon footprint of pharmaceuticals. Packaging design and material choices greatly influence environmental impact. Aim To assess the carbon footprint of packaging for a range of medications on an Australian tertiary hospital formulary and identify opportunities to reduce environmental impact. Method A life cycle assessment was undertaken to calculate the carbon footprint (as CO 2 equivalent, CO 2 e) of medication packaging across six common product categories: blisters, tablets in bottles, oral liquids in bottles, vials, glass ampoules, and plastic ampoules. Ethical approval was granted by the Alfred Health Ethics Committee (Reference no: 465/23) and the study conforms with the National Health and Medical Research Council Ethical considerations in quality assistance and evaluation activities . Results Twenty‐six products were assessed across the six categories. Within each category, the CO 2 e of the lowest footprint products was between 19% (for glass ampoules) and 76% (for blisters) lower than the highest footprint products. Differences in carbon footprint were mostly due to the use of alternative materials or from smaller packaging (e.g. from less empty space). Recycling aluminium from blisters, or the glass or plastic comprising tablet bottles, also improved the environmental performance of those products, with CO 2 e reductions of up to 81% and 56%, respectively. Some safety features (e.g. printing information over every blister‐packed tablet) may conflict with sustainability principles (avoiding empty space). Conclusion The environmental impact of packaging can be reduced by using materials with a lower footprint, decreasing packaging size and weight, and/or promoting greater recycling of waste materials. Some safety features promote larger packaging and increased use of raw materials, but this is not universally the case.