System expansion and allocation in life cycle assessment of milk and beef production

Background, Goal and Scope  System expansion is a method used to avoid co-product allocation. Up to this point in time it has seldom been used in LCA studies of food products, although food production systems often are characterised by closely interlinked sub-systems. One of the most important allocation problems that occurs in LCAs of agricultural products is the question of how to handle the co-product beef from milk production since almost half of the beef production in the EU is derived from co-products from the dairy sector. The purpose of this paper is to compare different methods of handling co-products when dividing the environmental burden of the milk production system between milk and the co-products meat and surplus calves. Main Features  This article presents results from an LCA of organic milk production in which different methods of handling the co-products are examined. The comparison of different methods of co-product handling is based on a Swedish LCA case study of milk production where economic allocation between milk and meat was initially used. Allocation of the co-products meat and surplus calves was avoided by expanding the milk system. LCA data were collected from another case study where the alternative way of producing meat was analysed, i.e. using a beef cow that produces one calf per annum to be raised for one and a half year. The LCA of beef production was included in the milk system. A discussion is conducted focussing on the importance of modelling and analysing milk and beef production in an integrated way when foreseeing and planning the environmental consequences of manipulating milk and beef production systems. Results  This study shows that economic allocation between milk and beef favours the product beef. When system expansion is performed, the environmental benefits of milk production due to its co-products of surplus calves and meat become obvious. This is especially connected to the impact categories that describe the potential environmental burden of biogenic emissions such as methane and ammonia and nitrogen losses due to land use and its fertilising. The reason for this is that beef production in combination with milk can be carried out with fewer animals than in sole beef production systems. Conclusion, Recommendation and Perspective  Milk and beef production systems are closely connected. Changes in milk production systems will cause alterations in beef production systems. It is concluded that in prospective LCA studies, system expansion should be performed to obtain adequate information of the environmental consequences of manipulating production systems that are interlinked to each other.     

Attributional and consequential LCA of milk production

Background, aim and scope  Different ways of performing a life cycle assessment (LCA) are used to assess the environmental burden of milk production. A strong connection exists between the choice between attributional LCA (ALCA) and consequential LCA (CLCA) and the choice of how to handle co-products. Insight is needed in the effect of choice on results of environmental analyses of agricultural products, such as milk. The main goal of this study was to demonstrate and compare ALCA and CLCA of an average conventional milk production system in The Netherlands. Materials and methods  ALCA describes the pollution and resource flows within a chosen system attributed to the delivery of a specified amount of the functional unit. CLCA estimates how pollution and resource flows within a system change in response to a change in output of the functional unit. For an average Dutch conventional milk production system, an ALCA (mass and economic allocation) and a CLCA (system expansion) were performed. Impact categories included in the analyses were: land use, energy use, climate change, acidification and eutrophication. The comparison was based on four criteria: hotspot identification, comprehensibility, quality and availability of data. Results  Total environmental burdens were lower when using CLCA compared with ALCA. Major hotspots for the different impact categories when using CLCA and ALCA were similar, but other hotspots differed in contributions, order and type. As experienced by the authors, ALCA and use of co-product allocation are difficult to comprehend for a consequential practitioner, while CLCA and system expansion are difficult to comprehend for an attributional practitioner. Literature shows concentrates used within ALCA will be more understandable for a feeding expert than the feed used within CLCA. Outcomes of CLCA are more sensitive to uncertainties compared with ALCA, due to the inclusion of market prospects. The amount of data required within CLCA is similar compared with ALCA. Discussion  The main cause of these differences between ALCA and CLCA is the fact that different systems are modelled. The goal of the study or the research question to be answered defines the system under study. In general, the goal of CLCA is to assess environmental consequences of a change in demand, whereas the goal of ALCA is to assess the environmental burden of a product, assuming a status-quo situation. Nowadays, however, most LCA practitioners chose one methodology independent of their research question. Conclusions  This study showed it is possible to perform both ALCA (mass and economic allocation) and CLCA (system expansion) of milk. Choices of methodology, however, resulted in differences in: total quantitative outcomes, hotspots, degree of understanding and quality. Recommendations and perspectives  We recommend LCA practitioners to better distinguish between ALCA and CLCA in applied studies to reach a higher degree of transparency. Furthermore, we recommend LCA practitioners of different research areas to perform similar case studies to address differences between ALCA and CLCA of the specific products as the outcomes might differ from our study.     

Functional priorities in LCA and design for environment

Aim, Scope and Background  The interest in environmental questions has increased enormously during the last decade. Environmental protection has become an issue of strategic importance within the manufacturing industry and many companies are now working in the field of Design for Environment (DFE). The main purpose of DFE is to create products and services for achieving a sustainable society. Designers are widely believed to have a key role in adapting products to a sustainable society and one of the major instruments in the context of Design for Environment is Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). However, product development creates particular challenges for incorporating environmental issues that combine functional and environmental assessment. A natural and important part of product design is to define and analyse the functions of the product. Consequently, the functional unit in LCA is a core issue in DFE. Most recent research in DFE has focused on how to reduce the environmental impact of products throughout their life-cycle by addressing environmental aspects, while little attention has been given to the functionality of the product. Additionally, early product development phases, so called re-think phases, are considered to have the influence on major changes in products in general. These phases have thus the highest potential for changing products and product systems towards a sustainable development. Main Features  This paper discusses an extended functional representation in design for environment methods to evaluate sustainable design solutions, especially in early (re-think) phases of product design. Based on engineering-design science and several case studies, a concept has been developed describing how functional preferences can be visualised in design for environment and product development. In addition, the functional unit in LCA is discussed. The concept is called Functional Profile (FP) and is additionally exemplified in a case study on radio equipment. Discussion  The new functional characterisation concept helps identify functional priorities in design for environment. The Functional Profile is a structured, systematic and creative concept for identifying the necessary functions of a new product. The FP is envisioned to complement existing design for environment methods, not to replace them. Instead of being a product-development tool or method, the concept is an approach that increases understanding of inter-reactions between functional characteristics of products and their environmental characteristics, which furthermore facilitates trade-off decisions. One of the objectives behind the concept is to highlight the importance of balancing functional requirements and environmental impacts, presenting both the advantages and disadvantages of the product. Outlook  A second paper will be produced to complement the functional-environmental characterisation concept in early product development phase, presenting the environmental characterisation part and illustrating correlations between the functional and environmental sides.     

Integration of life cycle assessment in the environmental information system

Background, aim, and scope  As the sustainability improvement becomes an essential business task of industry, a number of companies are adopting IT-based environmental information systems (EIS). Life cycle assessment (LCA), a tool to improve environmental friendliness of a product, can also be systemized as a part of the EIS. This paper presents a case of an environmental information system which is integrated with online LCA tool to produce sets of hybrid life cycle inventory and examine its usefulness in the field application of the environmental management. Main features  Samsung SDI Ltd., the producer of display panels, has launched an EIS called Sustainability Management Initiative System (SMIS). The system comprised modules of functions such as environmental management system (EMS), green procurement (GP), customer relation (e-VOC), eco-design, and LCA. The LCA module adopted the hybrid LCA methodology in the sense that it combines process LCA for the site processes and input–output (IO) LCA for upstream processes to produce cradle-to-gate LCA results. LCA results from the module are compared with results of other LCA studies made by the application of different methodologies. The advantages and application of the LCA system are also discussed in light of the electronics industry. Results and discussion  LCA can play a vital role in sustainability management by finding environmental burden of products in their life cycle. It is especially true in the case of the electronics industry, since the electronic products have some critical public concerns in the use and end-of-life phase. SMIS shows a method for hybrid LCA through online data communication with EMS and GP module. The integration of IT-based hybrid LCA in environmental information system was set to begin in January 2006. The advantage of the comparing and regular monitoring of the LCA value is that it improves the system completeness and increases the reliability of LCA. By comparing the hybrid LCA and process LCA in the cradle-to-gate stage, the gap between both methods of the 42-in. standard definition plasma display panel (PDP) ranges from 1% (acidification impact category) to −282% (abiotic resource depletion impact category), with an average gap of 68.63%. The gaps of the impact categories of acidification (AP), eutrophication (EP), and global warming (GWP) are relatively low (less than 10%). In the result of the comparative analysis, the strength of correlation of three impact categories (AP, EP, GWP) shows that it is reliable to use the hybrid LCA when assessing the environmental impacts of the PDP module. Hybrid LCA has its own risk on data accuracy. However, the risk is affordable when it comes to the comparative LCA among different models of similar product line of a company. In the results of 2 years of monitoring of 42-in. Standard definition PDP, the hybrid LCA score has been decreased by 30%. The system also efficiently shortens man-days for LCA study per product. This fact can facilitate the eco-design of the products and can give quick response to the customer's inquiry on the product's eco-profile. Even though there is the necessity for improvement of process data currently available, the hybrid LCA provides insight into the assessments of the eco-efficiency of the manufacturing process and the environmental impacts of a product. Conclusions and recommendations  As the environmental concerns of the industries increase, the need for environmental data management also increases. LCA shall be a core part of the environmental information system by which the environmental performances of products can be controlled. Hybrid type of LCA is effective in controlling the usual eco-profile of the products in a company. For an industry, in particular electronics, which imports a broad band of raw material and parts, hybrid LCA is more practicable than the classic LCA. Continuous efforts are needed to align input data and keep conformity, which reduces data uncertainty of the system.     

LCA of soybean meal

Background, Aim and Scope  Soybean meal is an important protein input to the European livestock production, with Argentina being an important supplier. The area cultivated with soybeans is still increasing globally, and so are the number of LCAs where the production of soybean meal forms part of the product chain. In recent years there has been increasing focus on how soybean production affects the environment. The purpose of the study was to estimate the environmental consequences of soybean meal consumption using a consequential LCA approach. The functional unit is ‘one kg of soybean meal produced in Argentina and delivered to Rotterdam Harbor’. Materials and Methods  Soybean meal has the co-product soybean oil. In this study, the consequential LCA method was applied, and co-product allocation was thereby avoided through system expansion. In this context, system expansion implies that the inputs and outputs are entirely ascribed to soybean meal, and the product system is subsequently expanded to include the avoided production of palm oil. Presently, the marginal vegetable oil on the world market is palm oil but, to be prepared for fluctuations in market demands, an alternative product system with rapeseed oil as the marginal vegetable oil has been established. EDIP97 (updated version 2.3) was used for LCIA and the following impact categories were included: Global warming, eutrophication, acidification, ozone depletion and photochemical smog. Results  Two soybean loops were established to demonstrate how an increased demand for soybean meal affects the palm oil and rapeseed oil production, respectively. The characterized results from LCA on soybean meal (with palm oil as marginal oil) were 721 gCO₂ eq. for global warming potential, 0.3 mg CFC11 eq. for ozone depletion potential, 3.1 g SO₂ eq. for acidification potential, −2 g NO₃ eq. for eutrophication potential and 0.4 g ethene eq. for photochemical smog potential per kg soybean meal. The average area per kg soybean meal consumed was 3.6 m²year. Attributional results, calculated by economic and mass allocation, are also presented. Normalised results show that the most dominating impact categories were: global warming, eutrophication and acidification. The ‘hot spot’ in relation to global warming, was ‘soybean cultivation’, dominated by N₂O emissions from degradation of crop residues (e.g., straw) and during biological nitrogen fixation. In relation to eutrophication and acidification, the transport of soybeans by truck is important, and sensitivity analyses showed that the acidification potential is very sensitive to the increased transport distance by truck. Discussion  The potential environmental impacts (except photochemical smog) were lower when using rapeseed oil as the marginal vegetable oil, because the avoided production of rapeseed contributes more negatively compared with the avoided production of palm oil. Identification of the marginal vegetable oil (palm oil or rapeseed oil) turned out to be important for the result, and this shows how crucial it is in consequential LCA to identify the right marginal product system (e.g., marginal vegetable oil). Conclusions  Consequential LCAs were successfully performed on soybean meal and LCA data on soybean meal are now available for consequential (or attributional) LCAs on livestock products. The study clearly shows that consequential LCAs are quite easy to handle, even though it has been necessary to include production of palm oil, rapeseed and spring barley, as these production systems are affected by the soybean oil co-product. Recommendations and Perspectives  We would appreciate it if the International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment had articles on the developments on, for example, marginal protein, marginal vegetable oil, marginal electricity (related to relevant markets), marginal heat, marginal cereals and, likewise, on metals and other basic commodities. This will not only facilitate the work with consequential LCAs, but will also increase the quality of LCAs.     

The Application of the Environmental Product Declaration to Waste Disposal in a Sanitary Landfill - Four Case Studies (10 pp)

Goal, Scope and Background

The aim of the present study is to evaluate, through LCA, the potential environmental impact associated to urban waste dumping in a sanitary landfill for four case studies and to compare different technologies for waste treatment and leachate or biogas management in the framework of the EPD® system. Specific data were collected on the four Italian landfills during a five-year campaign from 2000 to 2004. This work also analyses the comparability of EPD results for different products in the same product category. For this purpose, a critical review of PSR 2003:3, for preparing an EPD on ‘Collection, transfer and disposal service for urban waste in sanitary landfills', is performed.

Methods

PSR 2003:3 defines the requirements, based on environmental parameters, that should be considered in an LCA study for collecting and disposal service of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) in a sanitary landfill. It defines functional unit, system boundaries towards nature, other technical systems and boundaries in time, cut-off rules, allocation rules and parameters to be declared in the EPD. This PSR is tested on four case studies representing the major landfills located from the farthest west to the farthest east side of the Ligurian Region. Those landfills are managed with different technologies as concerns waste pre-treatment and leachate or biogas treatment. For each landfill, a life cycle assessment study is performed.

Results and Discussion

The comparison of the LCA results is performed separately for the following phases: Transport, Landfill, Leachate and Biogas. The following parameters are considered: Resource use (Use of non-renewable resources with and without energy content, Use of renewable resources with and without energy content, Water consumption); Pollutant emissions expressed as potential environmental impact (Global Warming Potential from biological and fossil sources, Acidification, Ozone depletion, Photochemical oxidant formation, Eutrophication, Land use, Hazardous and other Waste production). The comparison of the LCA results obtained for alternative landfill and biogas management techniques in the case studies investigated shows that the best practicable option that benefits the environment as a whole must be identified and chosen in the LCA context. For example, a strong waste pre-treatment causes a high biological GWP in the Landfill phase, but a low GWP contribution in the Biogas phase, due to the consequent low biogas production, evaluated for 30 years since landfill closure.

Conclusion

The analysis of four case studies showed that, through the EPD tool, it is possible to make a comparison among different declarations for the same product category only with some modification and integration to existent PSR 2003:3. Results showed that different products have different performances for phases and impact categories. It is not possible to identify the \best product\ from an environmental point of view, but it is possible to identify the product (or service) with the lowest impact on the environment for each impact category and resource use.

Recommendation and Perspective

In consequences of the verification of the comprehensiveness of existent PSR 2003:3 for the comparability of EPD, some modifications and integration to existent rules are suggested.

     

农业生命周期评价研究进展

作为评价产品系统全链条环境影响的有效工具,生命周期评价（LCA）方法已广泛用于工业领域。农业领域也面临着高强度的资源和环境压力,LCA在农业领域的应用应运而生。旨在综述已有农业LCA研究的基础上,鉴别农业LCA应用存在的问题,并为农业LCA未来的发展提出建议。目前农业LCA存在系统边界和功能单位界定不明晰、缺少区域清单数据库、生命周期环境影响评价模型（LCIA）不能准确反映农业系统环境影响、结果解释存在误区等方面的问题。为了科学准确地衡量农业系统的环境影响,促进农业系统的可持续发展,文章认为农业LCA应该从以下几个方面加强研究,即科学界定评价的参照系、系统边界的扩大及功能单位的合理选取、区域异质性数据库构建与LCIA模型开发、基于组织农业LCA的开发以及对于利益相关者行为的研究。     

Economic allocation: Examples and derived decision tree

Goal, Scope and Background  In the recently published (Dutch) Handbook on LCA, economic allocation is advised as baseline method for most allocation situations in a detailed LCA. Although the Handbook on LCA aimed to provide a ‘cookbook’ with operational guidelines for conducting each step of an LCA, this was not completely achieved for the allocation step. The guidelines for allocation largely remained at the level of principles. This restricted elaboration of economic allocation may hamper application in practice. Therefore, this paper elaborates some examples applying economic allocation. Method  Two concepts are of particular importance when applying economic allocation: functional flow and multi-functional process. The definitions of these concepts are presented and discussed. The basic principle of economic allocation is that having determined the various functional flows of a multi-functional process, all other flows need to be allocated to these functional flows according to their shares in the total proceeds. Proceeds are based on prices and these are not always easy to determine for a process. A summary of possible solutions for different problems when determining prices is given. Results and Discussion  The examples presented focus on co-production and various recycling situations. All examples are hypothetical in order to avoid discussions on the data. The examples show that the prices of the functional flows determine the allocation results. It is of importance to have correct information on the relative prices of the functional flows at stake, especially whether they are negative or positive. Learning from these examples, we establish a decision tree for economic allocation. The decision tree is meant for identifying and handling multi-functionality situations starting from a defined (product) system. This decision tree is with minor adaptations also applicable to other allocation methods and has a more general value than for the economic allocation method only. Conclusions and perspective  The examples have helped us to establish a decision tree for handling the multi-functionality problem by economic allocation. The examples can be broadened to other materials and allocation situations. We would encourage others to provide other examples and experiences as we expect that these will help to further improve and refine the guidelines and decision tree for economic allocation in future.     

Life cycle assessment of forest biomass energy feedstock in the Northeast United States

Life cycle assessment (LCA) was combined with primary data from nine forest harvesting operations in New York, Maine, Massachusetts, and Vermont, from 2013 to 2019 where forest biomass (FB) for bioenergy was one of several products. The objective was to conduct a data‐driven study of greenhouse gas emissions associated with FB feedstock harvesting operations in the Northeast United States. Deterministic and stochastic LCA models were built to simulate the current FB bioenergy feedstock supply chain in the Northeast US with a cradle‐to‐gate scope (forest harvest through roadside loading) and a functional unit of 1.0 Mg of green FB feedstock at a 50% moisture content. Baseline LCA, sensitivity analysis, and uncertainty analyses were conducted for three different FB feedstock types—dirty chips, clean chips, and grindings—enabling an empirically driven investigation of differences between feedstock types, individual harvesting process contributions, and literature comparisons. The baseline LCA average impacts were lower for grindings (4.57 kg CO_2eq/Mg) and dirty chips (7.16 kg CO_2eq/Mg) than for clean chips (23.99 kg CO_2eq/Mg) under economic allocation, but impacts were of similar magnitude under mass allocation, ranging from 24.42 to 27.89 kg CO_2eq/Mg. Uncertainty analysis showed a wider range of probable results under mass allocation compared to economic allocation. Sensitivity analysis revealed the impact of variations in the production masses and total economic values of primary products of forest harvests on the LCA results due to allocation of supply chain emissions. The high variability in fuel use between logging contractors also had a distinct influence on LCA results. The results of this study can aid decision‐makers in energy policy and guide emissions reductions efforts while informing future LCAs that expand the system boundary to regional FB energy pathways, including electricity generation, transportation fuels, pellets for heat, and combined heat and power.     

The relative mass-energy-economic (RMEE) method for system boundary selection Part 1: A means to systematically and quantitatively select LCA boundaries

Life-cycle assessment (LCA) is being used more and more as a decision making tool to compare alternative systems of providing a given product or service. Each system is theoretically made up of a near infinite number of elements or unit processes to produce the product or service. In practice, time and resources to complete an LCA are limited, hence the need to draw practical boundaries on the systems being analyzed. However, how does the LCA practitioner draw fair boundaries on two or more different systems being compared? In other words, how does one decide which unit processes to include in each system? A consistent quantitative method of selecting boundaries is essential for comparative LCA studies. This paper first outlines the requirements for a system boundary selection methodology and then demonstrates the shortfalls of existing methods. The primary objective is to present the Relative Mass-Energy-Economic (RMEE) method for system boundary selection. This concise, repeatable and quantitative method for selecting system boundaries for LCA is demonstrated on a life-cycle system for ethanol fuel. Unlike many other methods of selecting system boundaries, the RMEE method is practical to use and quantitatively ensures different systems have similar system boundaries to ensure a fair comparison between options. The RMEE method has been designed specifically for LCA studies of energy systems     

Life Cycle assessment of frozen cod fillets including fishery-specific environmental impacts

Goal, Scope and Background  The purpose of the present study was to perform an environmental assessment for the entire life cycle of a seafood product and to include fishery-specific types of environmental impact in inventory and assessment. Environmental data for a frozen block of cod fillets was collected and used for a Life Cycle Assessment, including the fishery-specific environmental aspects seafloor use and biological extraction of target, by-catch and discard species. The fishery takes place in the Baltic Sea where cod is mainly fished by benthic trawls and gillnets. Methods  The functional unit was a consumer package of frozen cod fillets (400 g) reaching the household. Data was gathered from fishermen, fishery statistics, databases, companies and literature. Fishery-specific issues like the impact on stocks of the target and by-catch species, seafloor impact and discarding were quantified in relation to the functional unit and qualitative impact assessment of these aspects was included. Results  Findings include the fact that all environmental impact categories assessed (Global Warming Potential, Eutrophication Potential, Acidification Potential, Photochemical Ozone Creation Potential and Aquatic Ecotoxiciy) are dominated by the fishery. Around 700 m² of seafloor are swept by trawls and around 50 g of under-sized cod and other marine species are discarded per functional unit. The phases contributing most to total environmental impact following fishery were transports and preparation in the household. The process industry and municipal sewage treatment cause considerable amounts of eutrophying emissions. Conclusions  Conclusions are that there are considerable options for improvement of the environmental performance of the seafood production chain. In the fishery, the most important environmental measure is to fish sustainably managed stocks. Speed optimisation, increased use of less energy-intensive fishing gear and improved engine and fuel technology are technical measures that would considerably decrease resource use and environmental impact caused by fishery. Due to the importance of fishery for the overall results, the most important environmental improvement option after landing is to maintain high quality and minimise product losses. Recommendations and Outlook  The need for good baseline data concerning resource use and marine environmental impact of fisheries in order to perform environmental assessment of seafood products was demonstrated. LCA was shown to be a valuable tool for such assessments, which in the future could be used to improve the environmental performance of the seafood production chain or in the development of criteria of eco-label-ling of seafood products originating in capture fisheries.     

Life cycle assessment of two baby food packaging alternatives: glass jars vs. plastic pots

Background, aim, and scope  This paper compares the life cycle assessment (LCA) of two packaging alternatives used for baby food produced by Nestlé: plastic pot and glass jar. The study considers the environmental impacts associated with packaging systems used to provide one baby food meal in France, Spain, and Germany in 2007. In addition, alternate logistical scenarios are considered which are independent of the two packaging options. The 200-g packaging size is selected as the basis for this study. Two other packaging sizes are assessed in the sensitivity analysis. Because results are intended to be disclosed to the public, this study underwent a critical review by an external panel of LCA experts. Materials and methods  The LCA is performed in accordance to the international standards ISO 14040 and ISO 14044. The packaging systems include the packaging production, the product assembly, the preservation process, the distribution, and the packaging end-of-life. The production of the content (before preservation process), as well as the use phase are not taken into account as they are considered not to change when changing packaging. The inventory is based on data obtained from the baby food producer and the suppliers, data from the scientific literature, and data from the ecoinvent database. Special care is taken to implement a system expansion approach for end-of-life open and closed loop recycling and energy production (ISO 14044). A comprehensive impact assessment is performed using two life cycle impact assessment methodologies: IMPACT 2002+ and CML 2001. An extensive uncertainty analysis using Monte Carlo as well as an extensive sensitivity study are performed on the inventory and the reference flows, respectively. Results  When looking at the impacts due to preservation process and packaging (considering identical distribution distances), we observe a small but significant environmental benefit of the plastic pot system over the glass jar system. Depending on the country, the impact is reduced by 14% to 27% for primary energy, 28% to 31% for global warming, 31% to 34% for respiratory inorganics, and 28% to 31% for terrestrial acidification/nutrification. The environmental benefit associated with the change in packaging mainly results from (a) production of plastic pot (including its end-of-life; 43% to 51% of total benefit), (b) lighter weight of packaging positively impacting transportation (20% to 35% of total benefit), and (c) new preservation process permitted by the plastic system (23% to 34% of total benefit). The jar or pot (including cap or lid, cluster, stretch film, and label) represents approximately half of the life cycle impacts, the logistics approximately one fourth, and the rest (especially on-site energy, tray, and hood) one fourth. Discussion  The sensitivity analysis shows that assumptions made in the basic scenarios are rather conservative for plastic pots and that the conclusions for the 200-g packaging size also apply to other packaging sizes. The uncertainty analysis performed on the inventory for the German market situation shows that the plastic pot system has less impact than the glass jar system while considering similar distribution distances with a confidence level above 97% for most impact categories. There is opportunity for further improvement independent of the type of packaging used, such as by reducing distribution distances while still optimizing lot size. The validity of the main conclusions presented in this study is confirmed by results of both impact assessment methodologies IMPACT 2002+ and CML 2001. Conclusions  For identical transportation distances, the plastic pot system shows a small but significant reduction in environmental burden compared to the glass jar system. Recommendations and perspectives  As food distribution plays an important role in the overall life cycle burdens and may vary between scenarios, it is important to avoid additional transportation of the packaged food in order to maintain or even improve the advantage of the plastic pot system. The present study focuses on the comparison of packaging systems and directly related consequences. It is recommended that further environmental optimization of the product also includes food manufacturing (before preservation process) and the supply chain of raw materials.     

The Relative Mass-Energy-Economic (RMEE) Method for System Boundary Selection

Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA) is a decision analysis tool used to compare alternatives to providing a given product or service. To ensure a fair comparison, LCA must select system boundaries in a consistent manner. The Relative Mass-Energy-Economic (RMEE) (pronounced ‘army’) of system boundary selection is a practical and quantitative method of defining system boundaries. RMEE compares each input to a system with the system’s functional unit on a mass, energy and economic basis. If this ratio of input to functional unit is less than a selected “cut-off” (defined as ‘Z_RMEE’) then the input is excluded from the analysis and all unit processes upstream of that input are outside the system boundary. Ignoring unit processes outside the system boundary limits the size of the LCA analysis but adds a source of uncertainty for the overall results. The lower the value of the Z cut-off ratio the larger the system boundary is, resulting in a greater number of unit processes.     

Life cycle assessment of California unsweetened almond milk

Purpose

Plant-based alternatives to dairy milk have grown in popularity over the last decade. Almond milk comprises the largest share of plant-based milk in the US market and, as with so many food products, stakeholders in the supply chain are increasingly interested in understanding the environmental impacts of its production, particularly its carbon footprint and water consumption. This study undertakes a life cycle assessment (LCA) of a California unsweetened almond milk.

Methods

The scope of this LCA includes the production of almond milk in primary packaging at the factory gate. California produces all US almonds, which are grown under irrigated conditions. Spatially resolved modeling of almond cultivation and primary data collection from one almond milk supply chain were used to develop the LCA model. While the environmental indicators of greatest interest are global warming potential (GWP) and freshwater consumption (FWC), additional impact categories from US EPA’s TRACI assessment method are also calculated. Co-products are accounted for using economic allocation, but mass-based allocation and displacement are also tested to understand the effect of co-product allocation choices on results.

Results and discussion

The GWP and FWC of one 48 oz. (1.42 L) bottle of unsweetened almond milk are 0.71 kg CO₂e and 175 kg of water. A total of 0.39 kg CO₂e (or 55%) of the GWP is attributable to the almond milk, with the remainder attributable to packaging. Almond cultivation alone is responsible for 95% of the FWC (167 kg H₂O), because of irrigation water demand. Total primary energy consumption (TPE) is estimated at 14.8 MJ. The 48 oz. (1.42 L) PET bottle containing the almond milk is the single largest contributor to TPE (42%) and GWP (35%). Using recycled PET instead of virgin PET for the bottle considerably reduces all impact indicators except for eutrophication potential.

Conclusions

For the supply chain studied here, packaging choices provide the most immediate opportunities for reducing impacts related to GWP and TPE, but would not result in a significant reduction in FWC because irrigation water for almond cultivation is the dominant consumer. To provide context for interpretation, average US dairy milk appears to have about 4.5 times the GWP and 1.8 times the FWC of the studied almond milk on a volumetric basis.

     

A survey of unresolved problems in life cycle assessment

Background, aims, and scope  Life cycle assessment (LCA) stands as the pre-eminent tool for estimating environmental effects caused by products and processes from ‘cradle to grave’ or ‘cradle to cradle.’ It exists in multiple forms, claims a growing list of practitioners, and remains a focus of continuing research. Despite its popularity and codification by organizations such as the International Organization for Standards and the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, life cycle assessment is a tool in need of improvement. Multiple authors have written about its individual problems, but a unified treatment of the subject is lacking. The following literature survey gathers and explains issues, problems and problematic decisions currently limiting LCA’s goal and scope definition and life cycle inventory phases. Main features  The review identifies 15 major problem areas and organizes them by the LCA phases in which each appears. This part of the review focuses on the first 7 of these problems occurring during the goal and scope definition and life cycle inventory phases. It is meant as a concise summary for practitioners interested in methodological limitations which might degrade the accuracy of their assessments. For new researchers, it provides an overview of pertinent problem areas toward which they might wish to direct their research efforts. Results and discussion  Multiple problems occur in each of LCA’s four phases and reduce the accuracy of this tool. Considering problem severity and the adequacy of current solutions, six of the 15 discussed problems are of paramount importance. In LCA’s first two phases, functional unit definition, boundary selection, and allocation are critical problems requiring particular attention. Conclusions and recommendations  Problems encountered during goal and scope definition arise from decisions about inclusion and exclusion while those in inventory analysis involve flows and transformations. Foundational decisions about the basis of comparison (functional unit), bounds of the study, and physical relationships between included processes largely dictate the representativeness and, therefore, the value of an LCA. It is for this reason that problems in functional unit definition, boundary selection, and allocation are the most critical examined in the first part of this review.

Mapping the Influence of Food Waste in Food Packaging Environmental Performance Assessments

Scrutiny of food packaging environmental impacts has led to a variety of sustainability directives, but has largely focused on the direct impacts of materials. A growing awareness of the impacts of food waste warrants a recalibration of packaging environmental assessment to include the indirect effects due to influences on food waste. In this study, we model 13 food products and their typical packaging formats through a consistent life cycle assessment framework in order to demonstrate the effect of food waste on overall system greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and cumulative energy demand (CED). Starting with food waste rate estimates from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, we calculate the effect on GHG emissions and CED of a hypothetical 10% decrease in food waste rate. This defines a limit for increases in packaging impacts from innovative packaging solutions that will still lead to net system environmental benefits. The ratio of food production to packaging production environmental impact provides a guide to predicting food waste effects on system performance. Based on a survey of the food LCA literature, this ratio for GHG emissions ranges from 0.06 (wine example) to 780 (beef example). High ratios with foods such as cereals, dairy, seafood, and meats suggest greater opportunity for net impact reductions through packaging‐based food waste reduction innovations. While this study is not intended to provide definitive LCAs for the product/package systems modeled, it does illustrate both the importance of considering food waste when comparing packaging alternatives, and the potential for using packaging to reduce overall system impacts by reducing food waste.