Towards Environmentally Sustainable and Cost-Effective Food Distribution in the U.S.

Distribution centers (DCs) and supermarkets have an important role in food sustainability, but no previous research has accounted for their environmental impact. The purpose of this research was to assess environmental sustainability of grocery, perishables, and general merchandise DCs; to estimate food storing and retailing impact; and to provide cost-effective strategies to reduce DCs’ environmental impacts. The importance and relevance of the research is threefold: improving sustainability of DCs, food storing, and food retailing. The main method used in this research was the life cycle assessment (LCA) method. An initial study calculated environmental impacts of the Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. DCs, which combined a building energy consumption simulation, a process modeling tool for conveyors, regional water consumption and scarcity, and an LCA model of DCs’ material and construction environmental impacts. Further research provided an in-depth analysis of refrigerated zones within DCs and supermarkets in the United States. The study represents an initial attempt at assessing the environmental impact of food storage and retailing. We developed a model for calculating environmental impact of food storing and retailing in different states. Drawing on the data about DCs’ energy consumption and the impact of climate change, a multi-objective optimization model including cost, non-renewable fossil energy use, and climate change was developed. The optimization model used on-site solar panels and off-site wind technologies to find cost-effective energy mixes, which will reduce environmental impacts and shift DCs from energy consumers to energy producers and net zero DCs. We found solutions to the Pareto-optimal zero energy DCs, which were achieved by installing roof solar panels and/or erecting wind turbines at nearby locations. A pairwise Monte Carlo analysis showed when the switch to renewable energy became superior in terms of reducing fossil energy use and environmental impact. The research has shown variation of environmental impacts by building type, size, state, and climate zone; has identified which food has the highest and lowest storage and retailing impacts; and has found a feasible option to increase solar and wind energy use in DCs. Supporting datasets for chapters 2, 3, and 4 are included in Appendices 1, 2, and 3, respectively

A Life Cycle Analysis of Land Use in US Pork Production

The goal of this study was to analyze land use in the production of US pork using Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). LCA is a comprehensive methodology for quantitatively analyzing potential environmental impacts associated with complex systems. Identification of processes contributing to high environmental impacts often highlights opportunities for gains in efficiency, which can increase the profitability and sustainability of US pork. The environmental impact category analyzed in this assessment was land use. After reviewing existing information regarding land use in agriculture and livestock production, analysis for US pork production was performed at two scales: cradle-to-grave and cradle-to-farm gate. The cradle-to-grave analysis provided a scan-level overview of land use associated with the production and consumption of lean pork at an aggregated national level. The cradle-to-farm gate analysis provided a more granular assessment of the land use required for live swine production, and evaluated the use of alternate ration formulation as a tool for reducing environmental impacts. [Excerpt from report]

The environmental analysis of asiago PDO cheese: a case study from farm gate-to-plant gate

A farm gate-to-plant gate life cycle assessment was performed to estimate the environmental impact of Asiago Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) cheese, the fourth most produced Italian PDO cheese. One manufacturing plant were surveyed for primary data. Emphasis was given to manufacturing processes, wherein environmental hotspots were identified. However the farm phase was discussed in order to obtain a clear prospect of Asiago cheese production. Inputs and outputs at the plant, such as cheese ingredients, fuels, electricity, water, cleaning agents, packaging, waste, and associated transport were included. Asiago cheese was the main product and co-products were other cheeses and liquid whey. Raw milk, other materials and energy flows were allocated using economic allocation strategy, while salt was attributed using plant specific information. Scenario analysis was about allocation strategies and time of cheese aging. SimaPro© 8.1.1 was the modelling software. Ecoinvent® v3.1 database was used for upstream processes. Climate change and energy consumption per kg of Asiago cheese was 10.1 kg CO2-eq and 70.2 MJ, respectively. Uncertainty analysis gave 95% confidence interval of 6.2–17.5 kg CO2-eq and 41.8–115 MJ per kg of Asiago cheese. The main impact driver was raw milk production. At the plant, electricity and fuels usage, refrigerants, packaging and wastewater treatment had the highest contribution to the overall impacts, except for fresh water eutrophication where wastewater treatment had the largest impact. Energy and fuel consumption were the crucial "hot spots" to focus on for efficiency and mitigation procedures at plant

Research Brief: Can Passive House and Zero-energy Building Standards Promise a Low-carbon Future?

Passive house (PH) and zero-energy building (ZEB) standards aim to reduce the energy consumption and carbon footprints of buildings. The PH concept implies a low energy consumption achieved through passive technology such as insulation and energy-efficient HVAC systems. A ZEB is an energy-efficient building that gen­erates enough renewable energy to offset or even exceed the energy it consumes from the grid. Previous research has shown higher embodied energy and costs for PH and ZEB compared to conventional buildings. To date, very few projects have shown that a PH could be done within a budget comparable to similar standard homes, which calls into question the economic viability of PH. However, most analyses were done using comparisons of individual designs for specific scenarios, making it difficult to draw broad conclusions. We conducted an analysis comparing a wide range of conventional, PH, and ZEB designs in order to have a better understanding of the economic and environmental trade-offs of these strategies

A retrospective analysis of the United States poultry industry: 1965 compared with 2010

The U.S. poultry industry requires a comprehensive understanding of the driving forces behind the changes in the environmental performance of poultry meat production in order to implement an effective sustainability strategy. This life cycle assessment (LCA) evaluates those changes over the past 45 years so that the industry can prioritize improvements to aspects of production that will have the greatest effect on the environmental impacts associated with poultry production. The LCA included material and energy flows associated with crop production and live poultry operations, beginning with one day old baby chicks in the grandparent generation, continuing through the parent generation, and ending with live market-weight broilers and culled hens at the farm gate. The results indicated that improvements in background systems and bird performance were the primary drivers behind a reduction in environmental impacts and decreased resource requirements in U.S. poultry meat production in 2010, as compared to 1965. Climate change, acidification, and eutrophication impacts associated with poultry production decreased by 36%, 29%, and 25% per 1000 kg poultry meat produced, respectively, from 1965 to 2010. Furthermore, resource-related impacts decreased in the categories of fossil energy use (39%), water depletion (58%), and agricultural land occupation (72%) per 1000 kg of poultry meat produced. This study provides the first retrospective analysis of poultry meat production in the United States, and the only U.S. poultry LCA that incorporates spent hen meat destined for human consumption and successive breeding generations into an analysis of broiler production. These methodological considerations provide greater insight into the impacts associated with U.S. poultry supply chains than was previously available, which will allow the U.S. poultry industry to make more informed decisions regarding an effective sustainability strategy and will increase publicly-available LCI data with contributions to the National Agricultural Library\u27s LCA Commons

Sustainability Health Initiative for NetPositive Enterprise handprint methodological framework

Abstract Purpose The Sustainability and Health Initiative for NetPositive Enterprise (SHINE) project is dedicated to improving the scientific basis for transformative environmental, social, and economic positive changes called handprints. Organizations and individuals can create handprints relative to their business-as-usual (BAU) through voluntary reductions in their own footprint as well as in the footprints of others. The novel SHINE handprint framework expands thus the scope, retains accountability for the outcomes, and increases widespread pursuit of net-positive goals. Methods Handprints are quantified using the dynamic life cycle assessment (LCA)-based modeling and measured in footprint-related impact units. Like LCA, the SHINE handprint framework includes the goal and scope definition, inventory analysis, impact assessment, and interpretation. Existing life cycle inventory databases are adopted to promote widespread use of the method. However, in the SHINE handprint framework, the BAU footprint and the actor’s actions and positive changes (handprints) are defined. The scope of the handprint assessment includes changes caused by the action within the system boundary. The BAU footprint is then compared with actual footprint calculated with changes to assess the handprint. An additional element for making comparative claims about net positivity that are meant to be disclosed to the public is an attestation. Results and discussion The SHINE handprint framework is demonstrated through a case study collaboration with Interface, a global carpet tiles and flooring manufacturer. Historic handprints are estimated from Interface’s initiative to capture and flare nearby landfill gas and utilize a portion of the captured gas to produce heat in their facility and in a third actor’s facility. The handprints are calculated by dynamic LCA which included Interface’s BAU footprint during the years of landfill gas capture and the amount of natural gas displaced from landfill gas use in both facilities, and the amount flared at the landfill. Results are presented for the years of landfill gas capture and flaring (2003–2016). The results showed Interface could achieve net positive outcomes when all actions leading to positive changes are activated. Conclusions While actors’ efforts to reduce their own footprints are essential, this perspective alone may not be enough to encourage the scale of action necessary to face global challenges. The SHINE handprint framework quantifies positive actions and changes caused by an actor, both within and outside the scope of the actor’s footprint. This shift in accounting for change can promote innovation and collaboration by multiple actors, which ultimately creates widespread ripple effects of positive impacts

THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF COW MILK IN THE NORTHEAST OF ITALY

This study presents a “from cradle to farm gate” Life Cycle Assessment on cow milk produced in Northeast Italy. System boundaries consider milk and meat delivered at farm gate, including all upstream emissions. All farm activities were considered. Inputs and outputs required in one year are counted and information about 34 dairy farms are used to represent the production area. Different allocation approaches were used to share resources and emissions between milk and meat. Functional unit was one kg of raw milk. The Ecoinvent v3.1 and Agri-footprint v1.0 database were used for secondary data, and SimaPro© 8 was the main software in the analysis. The following impact categories were investigated: Climate Change (CC), Terrestrial Acidification (TA), Freshwater Eutrophication (FE), Land Occupation (LO), Water Depletion (WD) and Cumulative Fossil Energy Demand (CFED). Purchased feed production was the first emitter, followed by on-farm crop production, animals and manure management emissions. Considering the most debated impact categories, 1.80-2.19 kg CO2eq and 8.84-10.78 MJ represent, respectively, CC and CFED per kg of raw milk. This research could be applied in regional studies on environmental impact of Italian dairy production

Spatialized Life Cycle Assessment of Fluid Milk Production and Consumption in the United States

Purpose: Understanding the main factors affecting the environmental impacts of milk production and consumption along the value chain is key towards reducing these impacts. This paper aims to present detailed spatialized distributions of impacts associated with milk production and consumption across the United States (U.S.), accounting for locations of both feed and on-farm activities, as well as variations in impact intensity. Using a Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) approach, focus is given to impacts related to (a) water consumption, (b) eutrophication of marine and freshwater, (c) land use, (d) human toxicity and ecotoxicity, and (e) greenhouse gases. Methods: Drawing on data representing regional agricultural practices, feed production is modelled for 50 states and 18 main watersheds and linked to regions of milk production in a spatialized matrix-based approach to yield milk produced at farm gate. Milk processing, distribution, retail, and consumption are then modelled at a national level, accounting for retail and consumer losses. Custom characterization factors are developed for freshwater and marine eutrophication in the U.S. context. Results and discussion: In the overall life cycle, up to 30% of the impact per kg milk consumed is due to milk losses that occur during the retail and consumption phases (i.e., after production), emphasizing the importance of differentiating between farm gate and consumer estimates. Water scarcity is the impact category with the highest spatial variability. Watersheds in the western part of the U.S. are the dominant contributors to the total water consumed, with 80% of water scarcity impacts driven by only 40% of the total milk production. Freshwater eutrophication also has strong spatial variation, with high persistence of emitted phosphorus in Midwest and Great Lakes area, but high freshwater eutrophication impacts associated with extant phosphorus concentration above 100 µg/L in the California, Missouri, and Upper Mississippi water basins. Overall, normalized impacts of fluid milk consumption represent 0.25% to 0.8% of the annual average impact of a person living in the U.S. As milk at farm gate is used for fluid milk and other dairy products, the production of milk at farm gate represents 0.5% to 3% of this annual impact. Dominant contributions to human health impacts are from fine particulate matter and from climate change, whereas ecosystem impacts of milk are mostly due to land use and water consumption. Conclusion: This study provides a systematic, national perspective on the environmental impacts of milk production and consumption in the United States, showing high spatial variation in inputs, farm practices, and impacts

Spatialized Life Cycle Assessment of Fluid Milk Production and Consumption in the United States

Purpose: Understanding the main factors affecting the environmental impacts of milk production and consumption along the value chain is key towards reducing these impacts. This paper aims to present detailed spatialized distributions of impacts associated with milk production and consumption across the United States (U.S.), accounting for locations of both feed and on-farm activities, as well as variations in impact intensity. Using a Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) approach, focus is given to impacts related to (a) water consumption, (b) eutrophication of marine and freshwater, (c) land use, (d) human toxicity and ecotoxicity, and (e) greenhouse gases. Methods: Drawing on data representing regional agricultural practices, feed production is modelled for 50 states and 18 main watersheds and linked to regions of milk production in a spatialized matrix-based approach to yield milk produced at farm gate. Milk processing, distribution, retail, and consumption are then modelled at a national level, accounting for retail and consumer losses. Custom characterization factors are developed for freshwater and marine eutrophication in the U.S. context. Results and discussion: In the overall life cycle, up to 30% of the impact per kg milk consumed is due to milk losses that occur during the retail and consumption phases (i.e., after production), emphasizing the importance of differentiating between farm gate and consumer estimates. Water scarcity is the impact category with the highest spatial variability. Watersheds in the western part of the U.S. are the dominant contributors to the total water consumed, with 80% of water scarcity impacts driven by only 40% of the total milk production. Freshwater eutrophication also has strong spatial variation, with high persistence of emitted phosphorus in Midwest and Great Lakes area, but high freshwater eutrophication impacts associated with extant phosphorus concentration above 100 µg/L in the California, Missouri, and Upper Mississippi water basins. Overall, normalized impacts of fluid milk consumption represent 0.25% to 0.8% of the annual average impact of a person living in the U.S. As milk at farm gate is used for fluid milk and other dairy products, the production of milk at farm gate represents 0.5% to 3% of this annual impact. Dominant contributions to human health impacts are from fine particulate matter and from climate change, whereas ecosystem impacts of milk are mostly due to land use and water consumption. Conclusion: This study provides a systematic, national perspective on the environmental impacts of milk production and consumption in the United States, showing high spatial variation in inputs, farm practices, and impacts