Advertisement

Energy Footprints of Food Products

  • P. Senthil KumarEmail author
  • A. Saravanan
Chapter
Part of the Environmental Footprints and Eco-design of Products and Processes book series (EFEPP)

Abstract

In numerous regions, ecological issues that are both local (for instance, high rates of urbanization, mechanical exercises, arrive utilize changes, or rural practices,) and worldwide (for instance, desertification, or deforestation) have significantly lessened the capacity of land to ingest CO2. A few endeavors have been made to orchestrate rules for natural footprints of food. The energy footprint, similar to the environmental footprint, is a marker of advance that can be utilized as methods for activating activity at the neighborhood level. It is an effectively comprehended idea as it scales the message down to the level of a person. It additionally legitimizes associations and cooperation among various partners to discover new, economical and less harming arrangements. The data exhibit that the impressions are critical, both locally, national and comprehensive and have comes about for overall sustenance security and condition prosperity and effectiveness. The writing about concurs that worldwide sustenance creation framework produces impressive natural impressions and the circumstance would likely get troubling.

Keywords

Food waste Green house emission Sustainability Natural footprints 

References

  1. Aide TM, Clark ML, Grau HR et al (2013) Deforestation and reforestation of Latin America and the Caribbean (2001–2010). Biotropica 46:262–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Borucke M, Moore D, Cranston G et al (2013) Accounting for demand and supply of the biosphere’s regenerative capacity: the national footprint accounts’ underlying methodology and framework. Ecol Indic 24:518–533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Browne D, O’Regan B, Moles R (2009) Use of ecological footprinting to explorealternative domestic energy and electricity policy scenarios in an Irish city-region. Energ Policy 37:2205–2213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cederberg C, Henriksson M, Berglund et al (2013) An LCA researcher’s wish list—data and emission models needed to improve LCA studies of animal production. Animal 7:212–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chen CZ, Lin ZS (2008) Multiple timescale analysis and factor analysis of energyecological footprint growth in China 1953–2006. Energ Policy 36:1666–1678CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chow J, Kopp RJ, Portney PR (2003) Energy resources and global development. Science 302:1528–1531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dalgaard R, Schmidt J, Halberg N, Christensen P, Thrane M, Pengue A (2008) LCA of Soybean Meal. Int J LCA 13:240–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dufosse K, Gabrielle B, Drouet JL et al (2013) Using agroecosystem modelling to improve the estimates of N2O emissions in the life cycle assessment of biofuels. Waste Biomass Valor 4:593–606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ferng JJ (2002) Toward a scenario analysis framework for energy footprints. Ecol Econ 40:53–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fitzherbert EB, Struebig MJ, Morel A et al (2008) How will oil palm expansion affect biodiversity? Trends Ecol Evolut 23(10):538–545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Flysjo A, Cederberg C, Henriksson M et al (2011) How does co-product handling affect the carbon footprint of milk? Case study of milk production in New Zealand and Sweden. J Life Cycle Assess 16:420–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hernandez C, Witter SG, Hall CA et al (2000) The Costa Rican banana industry: can it be sustainable. Quantifying Sustain Dev: The Future of Trop Econ 563–593Google Scholar
  13. Hortenhuber S, Piringer G, Zollitsch W et al (2014) Land use and land use change in agricultural life cycle assessments and carbon footprints-the case for regionally specific land use change versus other methods. J Clean Prod 73:31–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hylander K, Nemomissa S, Delrue J et al (2013) Effects of coffee management on deforestation rates and forest integrity. Conserv Biol 27(5):1031–1040CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jacobson MZ (2008) Review of solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security. Energy Environ Sci 2:148–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kerr RA (2010) Natural gas from shale bursts onto the scene. Science 328:1624–1626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Khan S, Hanjra MA (2009) Footprints of water and energy inputs in food production—global perspectives. Food Policy 34:130–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kros H, Lesschen JP, Bannink A et al (2012) Review on calculation methodologies and improvement of mechanistic modelling of GHG emissions. DLO, Wageningen, NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  19. McDaniel CN, Borton DN (2002) Increased human energy use causes biological diversity loss and undermines prospects for sustainability. Bioscience 52:929–936CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. McDonald RI, Fargione J, Kiesecker J et al (2009) Energy sprawl or energy efficiency: climate policy on natural habitat for the United States of America. PLoS ONE 4:6802.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0006802CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Pimentel D, Herz M, Glickstein M et al (2002) Renewable energy: current and potential issues. Bioscience 52:1111–1120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ponsioen TC, Blonk TJ (2012) Calculating land use change in carbon footprints of agricultural products as an impact of current land use. J Clean Prod 28:120–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Reap J, Roman F, Duncan S et al (2008) A survey of unresolved problems in life cycle assessment. Int J LCA 13:290–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Robinson S (2008) Conceptual modeling for simulation Part I: definition and requirements. J Oper Res Soc 59(3):278–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ruf F, Schroth G (2004) Chocolate forests and monocultures: a historical review of cocoa growing and its conflicting role in tropical deforestation and forest conservation. In: Agro forestry and biodiversity conservation in tropical landscapes. Island Press, Washington, pp 107–134Google Scholar
  26. Santek B, Gwehenberger G, Santek MI et al (2010) Evaluation of energy demand and the sustainability of different bioethanol production processes from sugar beet. Resour Conserv Recycl 54:872–877CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Steinfeld H, Gerber P, Wassenaar T et al (2006) Livestock’s long shadow. FAO, Rome, p 229Google Scholar
  28. Stewart WM, Dibb DW, Johnston AE et al (2005) The contribution of commercial fertilizer nutrients to food production. Agron J 97(1):1–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Stoglehner G (2003) Ecological footprint—a tool for assessing sustainable energysupplies. J Clean Prod 11:267–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Van den Bergh JCJM, Verbruggen H (1999) Spatial sustainability, tradeand indicators: an evaluation of the ‘ecological footprint’. Ecol Econ 29:61–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Vlek P, Rodraguez-Kuhl G, Sommer R (2004) Energy use and CO2 production in tropical agriculture and means and strategies for reduction or mitigation. Environ Dev Sustain 6(1):213–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wackernagel M, Lewan L, Hansson CB (1999) Evaluating the use of natural capital with the ecological footprint. Ambio 28:604–612Google Scholar
  33. Wackernagel M, Rees WE (1996) Our ecological footprint: reducing human impact on the earth. New Society, Gabriola Island, British ColumbiaGoogle Scholar
  34. Wiedmann T (2009) A first empirical comparison of energy footprints embodiedin trade—MRIO versus PLUM. Ecol Econ 68:1975–1990CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Yergin D (2006) Ensuring energy security. Foreign Aff 85:69–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Chemical EngineeringSSN College of EngineeringChennaiIndia
  2. 2.Department of BiotechnologyRajalakshmi Engineering CollegeChennaiIndia

Personalised recommendations