Packaging
PP Bags vs FIBC Packaging
How to choose between 25 kg bags, 50 kg bags and bulk FIBCs: handling at discharge, cost per tonne, moisture protection and what each option demands of the receiver.
· 7 min read
The packing decision looks like a detail and behaves like a commercial term. It determines handling cost at both ends, how the cargo survives transit, whether the receiver can actually discharge it with the equipment they have, and in some markets whether the product can be sold in the form it arrives. It is also expensive to change after the fact, since re-bagging a container is slow and adds handling damage.
The three practical options
| Option | Net weight | Suits | Main constraint |
|---|---|---|---|
| 25 kg PP woven | 25 kg | Manual discharge, repackers, retail supply chains | Highest bag cost per tonne |
| 50 kg PP woven | 50 kg | Mills, bulk buyers with mechanical handling | Manual handling limits at some destinations |
| FIBC / jumbo bag | 1,000–1,250 kg | Processors with forklift and hopper discharge | Requires mechanical handling at both ends |
Cost per tonne runs the opposite way to handling cost
Smaller bags cost more per tonne to buy and more time to fill and stitch. Larger units cost less per tonne on both counts. Handling economics run in the opposite direction at the receiving end, where a 25 kg bag can be moved by one person and a 50 kg bag frequently cannot, and where an FIBC cannot be moved at all without a forklift.
The net result is that there is no universally cheapest packing — there is only the cheapest packing for a given receiver. Which is why the receiver's discharge capability should be established before the packing is contracted, not after.
Where FIBCs make sense and where they do not
FIBCs work well for a processor taking large volumes into a hopper: fewer handling movements, less labour, less bag waste, faster discharge. They work badly where the product needs to be broken into smaller units downstream, because that reintroduces all the handling that the FIBC was supposed to remove, plus a re-bagging operation.
- Confirm the receiver has forklift access and a discharge station before contracting FIBC.
- Agree loop type, fill weight, liner and discharge spout — these are not standardised.
- Check the container stuffing arrangement, since FIBC loading needs its own equipment and access.
- Confirm the exact fill weight, which varies with product density and with the receiver's equipment.
Liners, laminates and paper
A PE liner inside a woven bag adds a moisture barrier for long transits and humid discharge ports. A laminated or BOPP-printed bag gives better abrasion and moisture resistance than plain woven fabric and allows full-surface branding. Multiwall paper bags are preferred by some food processors and by buyers whose supply chains restrict woven plastic, but they tolerate rough handling and humidity less well.
Palletisation
Palletised delivery is common into Europe and into some retail supply chains. It speeds discharge and reduces handling damage, but it consumes container volume and reduces the net weight loaded, and heat-treated ISPM 15 wood is required for most destinations. Both effects belong in the landed-cost calculation rather than being added afterwards.
All packing options, marking requirements and container loading in one place. Packaging