Post on 29-Dec-2015
The shipping costs associated with shipping in bulk versus shipping
wine bottled at source
Volume comparison
Bulk wine shipping
According to Oxford dictionary the word ‘bulk’ mean the mass or size of something large.
Bulk wine as the name implied is the wine that is shipped through a tank from the origin, with
the intent of being bottled at the destination before distribution. Bulk wine shipping could be
done in two different way using Flexi-tank or ISO tank. The focus of this research would be
solely on Flexi-tank.
Flexi-tanks are disposable/reusable flexible bags that could be fitted into a standard 20ft
(6.25m) container (GlassRite, 2008). Depending on the transported product, the material used
in making this bags differs. On bulk wine shipments, substantial research and development
work has been done to ensure that appropriate materials are used in making this bags without
impairing its quality, taste and colours. While the bag comprises of different range of sizes, the
maximum capacity of the largest flexi-tank is 24,000 litres filling a 20ft (6.25m) container.
Usually most bottled wind has approximately 0.75cl of wine content. The number of bottles
that could be derived from 24000 litres of bulk shipment is as follows:
24000
0.75= 32000 𝑏𝑜𝑡𝑡𝑙𝑒𝑠
Bottled Wine in container
Containerised bottled wine is the shipping of wine in a box on a palletised container, listed
below are the specifications for a standard container and pallets allowance.
Workings:
1) (𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟𝑠. 𝑜𝑓 𝑏𝑜𝑡𝑡𝑙𝑒𝑠 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑏𝑜𝑥 ∗ 𝑛𝑜 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑠) = 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑏𝑜𝑡𝑡𝑙𝑒𝑠 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑝𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑡𝑠
6 * 140 = 840 bottles per pallets
𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑏𝑜𝑡𝑡𝑙𝑒𝑠 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑝𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑡𝑠 ∗ 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑡𝑠 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑟
= 𝐻𝑜𝑙𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑐𝑎𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑟
840*10=8400 bottles per container
A standard 75cl bottle of wine weighs 1.25kg. Thus, six bottles, without a case, would weigh
7.5 kg.
2) (𝑏𝑜𝑡𝑡𝑙𝑒 𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ 𝑖𝑛 𝑘𝑔. ∗ 𝑛𝑜. 𝑜𝑓 𝑏𝑜𝑡𝑡𝑙𝑒𝑠 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑟) =
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑒 𝑖𝑛 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑟
1.25kg*8400=10,500kg of bottled wine in a container
10,500kg of bottled wine are carried on a container, in reality, the liquid wine is just a fraction
of the load on transit as shown in the working below:
3) Bottles weight = 0.5kg
Actual product (Wine) = 750 ml (0.75 litres)
0.75*8400 bottes per container = 6300 litres per container
Container Pallets Bottles per box Cases per pallets Holding
Capacity 20 feet
container
Standard
pallets: 10
6 bottles per box 140 cases
8400 bottles
per Teu
container
40 feet
container
Standard
pallets: 20
6 bottles per box 140 cases
16800 bottles
per Feu
Container
Distinctively, wine case weights differ from 2kg to 6kg. Each variation put the total weight of
6 wine bottles and cases between 9.5kg and 13.5kg respectively.
Note: the below calculation is based on the assumption that the wine case weights is 6kg and
total weight of 13.5kg per cases.
4) (𝑊𝑖𝑛𝑒&𝐶𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑠 𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑖𝑛 𝑘𝑔. ∗ 𝑛𝑜. 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑎𝑠𝑒 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑝𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑡 ∗ 𝑛𝑜 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑡𝑠) =
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑𝑠 𝑠ℎ𝑖𝑝 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑟
13.5kg*140*10=18,900kg of wine in a container
Total full load weight: 18900+2330 = 21230kg
40ft. Container
No. of pallets: 20
Number of bottled wine per container: 16800 12,600 litres of wine excluding the bottles
Like to like comparison dictated that bulk wine will be compared to 20 ft. container not FEU,
due to the fact bulk shipping can only be done on TEU because of weight restrictions.
Shipment Cost Bottled Wine 20 TEU Bulk wine TEU
Origin Destination Cost ($) Origin Destination Cost
Maipo Valley port of
Valparaiso
178 Maipo Valley port of
Valparaiso
178
port of Valparaiso Felixstowe 2000** port of
Valparaiso
Liverpool
2500**
Felixstowe Daventry 340** Liverpool Manchester 250**
Daventry Manchester 337
Labour costs 3 peoples working
(loading and unloading) on each mode
@ 1 hours
240
Labour costs 1 person working
(loading and unloading) on each
mode @ 1 hours
80
Total costs 3095 3008
Workings based on assumption:
Maipo valley to Port of Valparaiso (Bottled & Bulk)
Mode: Truck
Claim: Rented $120 (𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒
𝑚𝑝𝑔) ∗ 𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠 𝑖𝑛 𝑔𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑛 ∗ 𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙 𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑒
Fuel price per litres: $1.37
Distance: 56.8 miles (56
6) ∗ 4.5 ∗ 1.37 = 57.54 ≈ $58
MPG = 6 58 + 120 = $178
Litres in gallon = 4.5
Felixstowe to Daventry
Estimation source: Network rail
Daventry to Manchester
Mode: Truck
Claim: Rented $163 (𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒
𝑚𝑝𝑔) ∗ 𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠 𝑖𝑛 𝑔𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑛 ∗ 𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙 𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑒
Fuel price per litres: $2.23
Distance: 128 miles (128
6) ∗ 4.5 ∗ 2.23 = 57.54 ≈ $58
MPG = 6 214 + 163 = $337
Litres in gallon = 4.5
Labour cost (bottled wine)
Number of loading and unloading = 4
Labour required on each = 3 4∗ 3 ∗ 20 = $240 Bottled
Hour required to load and unload = 1hour
Hourly rate = $20
Bulk wine
$20 hourly rate * 4 workforce (@ 1 per destinations) = $80
Note:
On average, it would take approximately an hour to load a 24000 litres flexitank with a single
person, the paying rate for the labour is usually around $20 per hour, furthermore, what
determined the loading and unloading time is the pump used and verbosity of the product,
however, a 24,000 liter Flexitank can be loaded in 45 minutes (Trans Ocean, 2010). Compared
to bottled wine which required about 3 to 4 man power to load a container. While it will cost
just $20 to load a flexitank, the loading labour costs on bottled wine container on average could
be around $60 to $80 depending on the man power.
Other Cost (Direct Material)
Under the current EU directive 2004/12/EC, UK has a set target of green glass that must be
recycled every year, according to WSTA (2013), the target for glass was 60%; this necessitate
the need for bulk shipping of wine, as the recycled glass could be used in bottling the imported
wine in the UK. Using recycled materials in wine packaging has some advantages such as
reducing the raw material imported into the UK and energy usage in producing new glasses on
every shipments, which can lead to cost savings and environmental improvements (WRAP,
2013). Looking at it in cost perspective, Rabobank (2013) report concluded that shipping in
bottles can add about 25cent (£0.15) per bottled wine ship. This price is usually pass-on to the
consumer of wine. Perhaps, is partly why bottled wine is more expensive than bulk wine.
Final remark (Bulk v Bottled wine)
Base on the calculation figures the shipping cost including labours associated with bulk is
$3008 while that of bottled wine will costs $3095. Shipping in bulk is not only cheaper based
on volume comparison, it work out cheaper on labour, due to the fact that it is less labour
intensive when compared to bottled wine (i.e. a single person could load and unload a flexitank
while it takes 3 or more to load and unload bottled container in an hour).
However, when the UK import duties is included with the shipping cost using the below
calculation bulk shipping incurred a higher cost of £36163.2 in tax compared to bottled wine
who tariff is relatively smaller registering £7119.63.
UK import duties are calculated in hectolitre thus the bulk and bottled wine need to be
converted into litres as follows:
Bulk 𝑁𝑜 𝑜𝑓𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑟𝑒
𝑙𝑖𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑑 𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑏𝑜𝑡𝑡𝑙𝑒
24000
0.75= 32000 Bottled wine can be obtained from a single bulk shipment
An hectolitres = 100 thus 32000
100= 320ℎ𝑙 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑠
Current wine duty
Wine and made-wine:
Exceeding 4% - not exceeding 5.5% abv
£113.01
(hmrc, 2013)
Therefore 320hl * £113.01 = £36163.2
Bottled wine 𝑁𝑜 𝑜𝑓 𝑏𝑜𝑡𝑡𝑙𝑒𝑠 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑟∗0.75(𝑙𝑖𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑑 𝑖𝑛 𝑏𝑜𝑡𝑡𝑙𝑒𝑠)∗𝑈𝐾 𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑒
ℎ𝑙 (100)
8400 ∗ 0.75 ∗ 113.01
100= £7119.63 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑏𝑜𝑡𝑡𝑙𝑒𝑑 𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑒
Lastly, the above calculation was not included on the table due to the flexibility of importer
of wine been able to pay the import tariffs on a later date instead of payment at the point of
clearance. Therefore, this calculation will not be used in the bulk or bottled import decision
later in the research.
The environmental costs associated with shipping in bulk versus
shipping wine bottled at source
To work out the environment cost/impact associated with both form of shipping, we need to
consider the mode of transport involve in shipping bulk and bottled. Below are the summary
of the intermodal transport that will be used in the shipment, the distance covered in mileage
and the C02 emission per mode.
Intermodal Transport of Bottled container
Origin Destination Mode Distance per
mile.
C02 Emission
(tonne)
a Maipo Valley port of Valparaiso Truck 56.8 0.055
b port of Valparaiso Felixstowe Ship 11060.5 1.4206
c Felixstowe Daventry Train 137 1.03
d Daventry Manchester Truck 128 0.123
Total emissions 2.629 tonnes
Working:
a) Maipo Valley to Valparaiso
Full Truck load
Fuel Consumption: 6 miles per gallon
1 gallon = 4.55 litres
1 litre of diesel produces 2.63 kg of greenhouse gases
(𝑀𝑖𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟
𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑢𝑚𝑝𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 ) ∗ 𝑛𝑜. 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑛 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠 ∗ 𝑔𝑟𝑒𝑒𝑛ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑠𝑒 𝑔𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑠 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑘𝑔
(56.8 /6) *4.55 * 2.63 = 113.3 kg is the carbon footprint of a truck shipment based on
44000kg (Full load)
In the UK, with some exceptions, the maximum vehicle weight is 44 tonnes gross (truck, fuel
and load) and has up to six sets of axles.
Note: as shown from earlier working the total weight for the bottled container is 21230kg,
which means the shipment is less than a full load capacity of a tuck. Therefore we need to
calculate the actual emission for LTL (Less than truck load)
Truckload = 44,000 kg
Shipment = 21,230 kg
𝐶𝑎𝑟𝑏𝑜𝑛 𝑓𝑜𝑜𝑡𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑡
𝑓𝑢𝑙𝑙 𝑇𝑟𝑢𝑐𝑘𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 113.3/44000 = 0.00256818181
0.00257 * 21230 (Shipment load) = 54.56kg 0.055 tonnes
b) port of Valparaiso to Felixstowe
Jfhillibrand (2010)
The above emission calculation was extracted from jfhillebrand.com CO2 calculator. The total
emission from grams to metric tonnes is converted as follows:
1420583.58
1000000= 1.42058358 ≈ 1.4206 tonnes
Note: the 1.4206 tonnes CO2 emission is for just a single container, a container ship could
carried around 11000 container per shipment journey example Emma Mærsk is able to carry
around 11,000 twenty-foot equivalent units (TEU) or 14,770 TEU depending on arrangement
and products type.
c) Felixstowe to Daventry
McKinnon et al. (2010)
Activity-based method formula for emission
𝑇𝑜𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝐶02 𝑒𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠 = (𝑇𝑜𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑠 ∗ 𝑘𝑚 ∗ 𝑔 𝐶02 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑡𝑜𝑛𝑛𝑒_𝑘𝑚
1000000)
Distances covered = 137 miles 220.480128 ≈ 220.5 km
Shipment weight = 21,230 kg 21.23 metric tonnes
CO2 emission factors for train = 22g CO2/tonne-km
Thus Tonnes of CO2 emission =
(21.23 ∗ 220.5 ∗ 22
1000000)
= 1.02987 tonnes
d) Daventry to Manchester
Full Truck load
Fuel Consumption: 6 miles per gallon
1 gallon = 4.55 litres
1 litre of diesel produces 2.63 kg of greenhouse gases
(𝑀𝑖𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟
𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑢𝑚𝑝𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 ) ∗ 𝑛𝑜. 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑛 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠 ∗ 𝑔𝑟𝑒𝑒𝑛ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑠𝑒 𝑔𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑠 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑘𝑔
(128 /6) *4.55 * 2.63 = 255.3 kg is the carbon footprint of a truck shipment based on
44000kg (Full load)
Shipment weight: 21230kg LTL (Less than truck load)
Truckload = 44,000 kg
𝐶𝑎𝑟𝑏𝑜𝑛 𝑓𝑜𝑜𝑡𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑡
𝑓𝑢𝑙𝑙 𝑇𝑟𝑢𝑐𝑘𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 255.3/44000 = 0.0058
0.0058 * 21230 (Shipment load) = 123.134kg 0.123134 tonnes
Bulk shipments
Origin Destination Mode Distance per
mile.
C02 Emission
1 Maipo Valley port of
Valparaiso
Truck 56.8 0.062
2
port of Valparaiso San Antonio Ship 95.5
1.4206 San Antonio Liverpool Ship 10973.8
3 Liverpool Manchester Ship
Canal
Barge 50 0.0598
4 Manchester Ship
Canal
Manchester Truck 5 ** Based on
assumption
0.00544
Total emissions 1.548 CO2 tonnes
Workings
1. Maipo Valley to Valparaiso
Full Truck load
Fuel Consumption: 6 miles per gallon
1 gallon = 4.55 litres
1 litre of diesel produces 2.63 kg of greenhouse gases
(𝑀𝑖𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟
𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑢𝑚𝑝𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 ) ∗ 𝑛𝑜. 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑛 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠 ∗ 𝑔𝑟𝑒𝑒𝑛ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑠𝑒 𝑔𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑠 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑘𝑔
(56.8 /6) *4.55 * 2.63 = 113.3 kg is the carbon footprint of a truck shipment based on
44000kg (Full load)
In the UK, with some exceptions, the maximum vehicle weight is 44 tonnes gross (truck, fuel
and load) and has up to six sets of axles.
Note: as shown from earlier working the total weight for the bottled container is 21230kg,
which means the shipment is less than a full load capacity of a tuck. Therefore we need to
calculate the actual emission for LTL (Less than truck load)
Truckload = 44,000 kg
Shipment = 24,000 kg
𝐶𝑎𝑟𝑏𝑜𝑛 𝑓𝑜𝑜𝑡𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑡
𝑓𝑢𝑙𝑙 𝑇𝑟𝑢𝑐𝑘𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 113.3/44000 = 0.00256818181
0.00257 * 24000 (Shipment load) = 61.68kg 0.062 tonnes
2. Port of Valparaiso to Felixstowe via San Antonio
Jfhillibrand (2010)
1420583.58
1000000= 1.42058358 ≈ 1.4206 tonnes
3. Liverpool port to Manchester ship canal
Activity-based method formula for emission
𝑇𝑜𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝐶02 𝑒𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠 = (𝑇𝑜𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑠 ∗ 𝑘𝑚 ∗ 𝑔 𝐶02 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑡𝑜𝑛𝑛𝑒_𝑘𝑚
1000000)
Distances covered = 50 miles 80.4672 ≈ 80.5 km
Shipment weight = 24,000 kg 24 metric tonnes
CO2 emission factors for train = 31g CO2/tonne-km
Thus Tonnes of CO2 emission =
(24 ∗ 80.5 ∗ 31
1000000)
= 0.0598 tonnes
4. Manchester ship canal to warehouse
Note: the final destination of the bulk wine was not included on the case study. Thus the below
calculation is based on the assumption that the bulk wine will be transported to a designated
warehouse in Manchester and be stored or bottled there, hence the need for more transportation
mode. It is assumed the mileage covered to reach the final destination is 5 miles and Truck as
the preferred mode of transport.
Full Truck load
Fuel Consumption: 6 miles per gallon
1 gallon = 4.55 litres
1 litre of diesel produces 2.63 kg of greenhouse gases
(𝑀𝑖𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟
𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑢𝑚𝑝𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 ) ∗ 𝑛𝑜. 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑛 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠 ∗ 𝑔𝑟𝑒𝑒𝑛ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑠𝑒 𝑔𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑠 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑘𝑔
(5 /6) *4.55 * 2.63 = 9.97 kg is the carbon footprint of a truck shipment based on 44000kg
(Full load)
Shipment weight: 24000kg LTL (Less than truck load)
Truckload = 44,000 kg
𝐶𝑎𝑟𝑏𝑜𝑛 𝑓𝑜𝑜𝑡𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑡
𝑓𝑢𝑙𝑙 𝑇𝑟𝑢𝑐𝑘𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 9.97/44000 = 0.0002265909
0.0002265909 * 24000 (Shipment load) = 5.44kg 0.00544 tonnes
CO2 emission Bulk v Bottled Container
Shipping wine in Bulk covered 11181.1 miles generating 1.548 tonnes of CO2 in the process
while bottled wine shipment will generate 2.629 tonnes of C02 emission with slightly more
distance covering 11382.3 mileage in the process.
Generic environment impact of shipping
Emission
Which form of transport is cheaper per bottle of wine? Wine bottled
in Chile or the same wine bottled in UK?
Bottled wine Bulk shipment
Shipping Cost $3095 $3008
No of bottles 8400 32000
𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑠ℎ𝑖𝑝𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑠 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡
𝑛𝑜 𝑜𝑓 𝑏𝑜𝑡𝑡𝑙𝑒𝑠
𝑁𝑜 𝑜𝑓 𝑏𝑜𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑙𝑒𝑠
𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑠ℎ𝑖𝑝𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑠 𝑎𝑚𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡
3095
8400= $0.4 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑏𝑜𝑡𝑡𝑙𝑒
3008
32000= $0.1 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑏𝑜𝑡𝑡𝑙𝑒
From the calculation above, it is apparent that bulk shipping is cheaper based on volume per shipping
cost ratio, bulk registered $0.1 cost per bottled wine imported while palletised bottled wine registered
$0.4 per bottle. The dissimilarity in cost is a result of the volumes of wine a bulk shipping can carry
compare to palletise bottled that carried just 6300 litres of wine, logically, bottled wine carries more of
other loads with relatively small amount of wine.
Which form of transport is more environmentally friendly? Wine
bottled in Chile or the same wine bottled in the UK?
Bulk v Bottled shipping
Bulk Bottled wine
Economy of scales 8400 bottles per shipment 32000 bottles per shipment
C02 emission 2629 tonnes 1548 tonnes
Bulk to bottled ratio
32000
8400= 4𝑥 Journeys of bottled wine to attain 32000 bottles of wine derived from a single journey of
bulk shipping.
Environment impact scales based on bulk to bottled ratios of travel time required.
Environment impact Bulk Bottled
wine
Emissions
Air Emissions
NOx, SOx & PM
Carbon Emissions
1
4x
4x
4x
Vessel Discharges
Ballast Water
1
4x
Invasive Species 1 4x
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-02-07/most-australian-wine-exports-ship-in-
giant-plastic-bladders
http://www.transoceanbulk.com/en/faqs.aspx?faqid=55#faq55
http://www.wsta.co.uk/Glass-recycling.html
http://www.wrap.org.uk/content/recycled-content-wine-packaging
http://www.networkrail.co.uk/Freight/The-cost-of-using-rail-freight/