Your sample cart is empty
What are the benefits of pouches?

Here’s an overview of the key benefits of pouches (stand-up pouches / flexible packaging), especially relevant for both food and non-food applications:
1. Space & weight efficiency
- Pouches are lightweight and take up little space, both in transport and storage.
- Less weight = lower shipping costs and reduced CO₂ emissions.
2. Flexibility in design and size
- Available in many formats: stand-up, flat-bottom, gusseted, with or without zipper.
- Adapt the size and opening to your product (powders, coffee, snacks, non-food, etc.).
3. Consumer-friendly
- Reclosable options (zipper or resealable) improve convenience.
- Transparent windows show the product inside, building trust at the point of purchase.
4. Product protection
- Barrier properties protect against moisture, oxygen, light, or odors.
- Extended shelf life without the need for bulky extra packaging.
5. Marketing & branding
- Large printable surfaces for eye-catching designs.
- Make your brand stand out on store shelves, webshops, or trade fairs.
6. Sustainability
- Mono-material and recyclable options support circularity.
- Uses less material compared to traditional boxes, bottles, or jars.
7. Cost savings
- More cost-effective than rigid packaging.
- Efficient in transport: more pouches per pallet, less storage space needed.
How do they compare?
Below you’ll find a decision table that compares pouches with traditional packaging such as cans, jars, cartons, and rigid plastics. The focus is on B2B food and non-food applications, with clear advantages (+) and disadvantages (–).
| Feature / Property | Pouch (plastic film) | Can / Metal | Jar / Glass | Box / Cardboard | Rigid Plastic |
| Weight | + Very light | – Heavy | – Heavy | + Light | ± Medium |
| Transport & storage | + Compact, flexible | – Space-intensive | – Fragile, space-consuming | + Stackable, light | ± Stackable |
| Product protection | + Good against moisture, air | + Excellent for long shelf life | + Good for shelf life | – Limited barrier | + Good, not always airtight |
| Marketing & branding | + Large print area | – Limited print area | + Medium | + Large print area | + Medium to large |
| User-friendliness | + Reusable, light | – Difficult to open/close | + Reusable, heavy | + Easy to open | + Reusable, can be heavy |
| Sustainability / recycling | + Mono-materials possible | + Recyclable metal | + Recyclable glass | + Recyclable cardboard | – Often difficult to recycle |
| Production costs | + Low in larger volumes | – Expensive | – Expensive | + Very low | ± Medium |
| Flexibility in shape / size | + Very flexible | – Rigid shapes | – Rigid shapes | ± Limited | – Rigid shapes |
| Risk of breakage / leakage | ± Depends on material | + Unbreakable | – Breakable | – Can tear | + Unbreakable |
| Energy consumption production (raw material) | Low – 1–2 MJ/kg | High – 15–20 MJ/kg | High – 10–15 MJ/kg | Low – 0.5–1 MJ/kg | Medium – 3–5 MJ/kg |
| Energy consumption production (processing) | Low – 1–2 MJ/kg | High – 5 MJ/kg | High – 5 MJ/kg | Medium – 2–5 MJ/kg | Medium – 2–5 MJ/kg |
| CO₂ emissions (raw material) | Low – 0.1–0.25 kg CO₂/kg | High – 1.5–2.5 kg CO₂/kg | High – 1–2 kg CO₂/kg | Medium – 0.25–0.75 kg CO₂/kg | Medium – 0.25–0.75 kg CO₂/kg |
| CO₂ emissions (processing / manufacturing) | Low – 0.1–0.25 kg CO₂/kg | Medium – 0.5 kg CO₂/kg | Medium – 0.5 kg CO₂/kg | Low – 0.1–0.25 kg CO₂/kg | Medium – 0.25–0.75 kg CO₂/kg |
| Water consumption (raw material) | Low – 0.5–1.5 L/kg | High – 10–20 L/kg | High – 7–15 L/kg | High – 10–20 L/kg | Medium – 2–5 L/kg |
| Water consumption (processing / manufacturing) | Low – 0.5–1.5 L/kg | High – 5 L/kg | High – 3–5 L/kg | Low – 0.5–3 L/kg | Medium – 3–5 L/kg |
1. Raw material production – CO₂, energy, and water needed to produce the base material (PE, PP, PET, glass, metal, cardboard).
2. Manufacturing / processing – CO₂, energy, and water needed to convert the raw material into the final packaging product (pouch, jar, can, carton).
- For pouches: raw material = plastic film (PE/PP); processing = cutting, sealing, printing.
- For glass and cans: raw material = glass or aluminum; processing = forming jars/cans, possibly coating or printing.
- For cardboard: raw material = paper/board; processing = folding and printing boxes.
- For rigid plastic: raw material = PE/PET/PP; processing = injection molding or extrusion.
In short:
- Pouches score highest on weight, flexibility, transport, marketing, and reusability.
- Cans and jars offer strong protection and long shelf life, but are heavy and costly.
- Cartons/boxes are cheap and light, but provide limited protection.
- Rigid plastics sit somewhere in between, but can be difficult to recycle.
- Pouches clearly win when it comes to energy, CO₂, and water efficiency, mainly due to their low weight and reduced material use.
- Cans and glass consume a lot of energy and water due to melting, shaping, and processing.
- Cardboard is cheap and eco-friendly in production, but less protective.
- Rigid plastics are average in terms of energy and water use, and recycling is more challenging compared to mono-materials.
Average energy, CO₂, and water consumption during recycling
| Material | Explanation |
| Pouch (plastic film, mono-PE/PP) | Plastic film requires separation, washing, shredding and extrusion. Mono-materials are easier than multi-layer, but film is light and thin, which means a lot of energy per tonne is needed. |
| Can / Metal (aluminium, steel) | Metal recycling is energy-intensive, especially melting. Aluminium is highly energy-efficient in recycling compared to primary production, but steel also requires cleaning and sorting. |
| Jar / Glass | Glass is relatively easy to recycle (washing, melting). Low CO₂ emissions, but melting requires energy. Reuse of jars (deposit/return) strongly reduces impact. |
| Box / Cardboard | Cardboard recycling requires separation, washing and pulping. Energy use is low, but water use is high due to pulp water and cleaning of ink/contaminants. |
| Rigid Plastic (PE, PP, PET) | Rigid plastic can be mechanically recycled, but sorting and cleaning require extra energy and water. PET bottles are relatively efficient, PE/PP more difficult due to contamination or additives. |
Looking for a quick answer? Check out these FAQs!
Want to know more or have questions? Contact us - we'll be glad to help!
Curious to learn more about pouches?
Feel free to get in touch with us. We’ll be happy to help you find the best packaging solution for your product!







