Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Assessment of Carbon Footprint in Different Industrial Sectors, Volume 1 pp 85–112Cite as

Carbon Footprint of Food Products

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: EcoProduction ((ECOPROD))

Abstract

The food system has been identified as one of the major contributors to climate change. The main sources of greenhouse gas emissions are nitrous oxide (N2O) from soils, methane (CH4) from enteric fermentation in animals, and carbon dioxide (CO2) from land use change, such as deforestation. Emissions also arise from manure management, mineral fertilizer production, rice cultivation, and energy use on farms and from post-farm activities such as processing, packaging, storage, distribution, and waste management. With increasing awareness of climate change, calculating the carbon footprint (CF) of food products has become increasingly popular among researchers and companies wanting to determine the impact of their products on global warming and/or to communicate the CF of their products to consumers. This chapter discusses issues that are especially relevant when calculating the CF of food products, such as the choice of functional unit, which is challenging owing to the multifunctionality of food. Other issues concern how to include emissions arising from indirect land use change and removal of CO2 from the atmosphere by carbon sequestration in soils into CF calculations. Causes of the large uncertainties associated with calculating the CF of food products and ways to handle this uncertainty are also discussed and examples of uses and results of CF of food products are presented. Despite the large uncertainties, it is clear that the differences in CF between different types of food products are very large. In general, the CF of livestock-based products are much larger than those of plant-based products. CF information on food products may be useful in business-to-business communication, for professionals in the retail sector and in public procurement.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Ahlgren S (2009) Crop production without fossil fuel. Production systems for tractor fuel and mineral nitrogen based on biomass. Dissertation, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences

    Google Scholar 

  • Audsley E, Brander M, Chatterton J et al (2009) How low can we go? An assessment of greenhouse gas emissions from the UK food system and the scope to reduce them by 2050. FCRN-WWF, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Beauchemin K, Kreuzer M, O’Mara C, McAllister T (2008) Nutritional management for enteric methane abatement: a review. Aust J Exp Agri 48:21–27

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Beddington J, Asaduzzaman M, Fernandez A et al (2011) Achieving food security in the face of climate change: summary for policy makers from the commission on sustainable agriculture and climate change. CGIAR research program on climate change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS), Copenhagen

    Google Scholar 

  • Bere E, Brug J (2009) Towards health-promoting and environmentally friendly regional diets: a Nordic example. Public Health Nutr 12(1):91–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berglund Ö, Berglund K (2010) Distribution and cultivation intensity of agricultural peat and gyttja soils in Sweden and estimation of greenhouse gas emissions from cultivated peat soils. Geoderma 154(3–4):173–180

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Björklund A (2002) Survey of approaches to improve reliability in LCA. Int J LCA 7:64–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boardman B (2008) Carbon Labelling: too complex or will it transform our buying? Significance 5(4): 168–171

    Google Scholar 

  • Broch A, Kent Hoekman S, Unnasch S (2013) A review of variability in indirect land use change assessment and modeling in biofuel policy. Environ Sci Pol 29:147–157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BSI (2011). PAS 2050:2011. Method for assessing the life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of goods and services. British Standard Institution, London

    Google Scholar 

  • BSI (2012) PAS 2050-1:2012. Assessment of life cycle greenhouse gas emissions from horticultural products. British Standard Institution, London

    Google Scholar 

  • CCAFS (2013) Big facts: where agriculture and climate change meet. Site from the CGIAR research program on climate change, Agriculture and Food Security’s (CCAFS). http://ccafs.cgiar.org/bigfacts/global-agriculture-emissions/. Accessed 16 May 2013

  • Cederberg C, Darelius K (2001) Livscykelanalys (LCA) av griskött (Life cycle assessment of pork meat). Naturresursforum, Landstingen Halland

    Google Scholar 

  • Cederberg C, Nilsson B (2004) Livscykelanalys (LCA) av ekologisk nötköttsproduktion i ranchdrift (Life cycle assessment of organic beef production using ranch production system). SIK report 718. Swedish Institute for Food and Biotechnology, Gothenburg

    Google Scholar 

  • Cederberg C, Sonesson U, Henriksson M et al (2009) Greenhouse gas emissions from production of meat, milk and eggs in Sweden 1990 and 2005. SIK-Report 793. Swedish Institute for Food and Biotechnology, Gothenburg

    Google Scholar 

  • Cederberg C, Persson U, Neovius K et al (2011) Including carbon emissions from deforestation in the carbon footprint of Brazilian beef. Environ Sci Techn 45:1773–1779

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • de Vries M, de Boer IJM (2010) Comparing environmental impacts for livestock products: a review of life cycle assessments. Livestock Sci 128:1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Di Lucia L, Ahlgren S, Ericsson K (2012) The dilemma of indirect land-use changes in EU biofuel policy—an empirical study of policy-making in the context of scientific uncertainty. Environ Sci Pol 16:9–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dutilh CE, Kramer KJ (2000) Energy consumption in the food chain: comparing alternative options in food production and consumption. Ambio 29(2):98–101

    Google Scholar 

  • EC (2006) Environmental impact of products (EIPRO): analysis of the life cycle environmental impacts related to the total final consumption of the EU 25. European commission technical report EUR 22284 EN

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis J, Kebreab E, Odondo N et al (2007) Prediction of methane production from dairy and beef cattle. J Dairy Sci 90:3456–3467

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ellis J, Bannink A, France J et al (2010) Evaluation of enteric methane prediction equations for dairy cows used in whole farm models. Glob Cha Biol 16:3246–3256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EPD (2013) The international EPD (Environmental product declaration) system—a communications tool for international markets. http://www.environdec.com/sv/. Accessed 15 May 2013

  • Eurostat (2011) Food; from farm to fork statistics. Eurostat Pocketbooks. European Commission, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • FAOSTAT (2011) FAOSTAT database, livestock primary, cow milk, whole, fresh. http://faostat.fao.org/. Accessed 15 May 2013

  • Flysjö A (2012) Greenhouse gas emissions in milk and dairy product chains—improving the carbon footprint of dairy products. Dissertation, Aarhus University

    Google Scholar 

  • Flysjö A, Cederberg C, Henriksson M, Ledgard S (2011) How does co-product handling affect the carbon footprint of milk? Case study of milk production in Sweden and New Zealand. Int J of LCA 16:420–430

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foley J, Ramankutty N, Brauman KA et al (2011) Solutions for a cultivated planet. Nature 478:337–342

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • FoodDrink Europe (2012) ENVIFOOD protocol. Environmental assessment of food and drink protocol. Draft version 0.1. European food sustainable consumption and production round table, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • Foresight (2011) The future of food and farming. Executive summary. The Government Office for Science, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Garnett T (2011) Where are the best opportunities for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the food system (including the food chain)? Food Pol 36:23–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerber P, Vellinga T, Opio C (2010) Greenhouse gas emissions from the dairy sector: a life cycle assessment. FAO, Rome

    Google Scholar 

  • Global Carbon Project (2013) Global carbon budget highlights. http://www.globalcarbonproject.org/carbonbudget/12/hl-full.htm. Accessed 18 Feb 2013

  • Guardian (2012) Tesco drops carbon-label pledge. http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/jan/30/tesco-drops-carbon-labelling. Accessed 11 May 2013

  • Guthman J (2003) Fast food/Organic food: reflexive tastes and the making of ‘yuppie chow’. Soc a Cult Geo 4(1):45–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henriksson M, Flysjö A, Cederberg C, Swensson C (2011) Variation in carbon footprint of milk due to management differences between Swedish dairy farms. Animal 5:1474–1484

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Houghton RA (2012) Carbon emission and the drivers of deforestation and forest degradation in the tropics. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 4:597–603

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • International Dairy Federation (IDF) (2010) A common carbon footprint for dairy: the IDF guide to standard lifecycle assessment methodology for the dairy industry. International Dairy Federation

    Google Scholar 

  • IPCC (2006a) IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories. Emissions from livestock and manure management, vol 4, chap 10. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • IPCC (2006b) IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories. N2O emissions from managed soils, and CO2 emissions from lime and urea application, vol 4, chap 11. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • IPCC (2007) Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Jansson P-E, Karlberg L (2004) Coupled heat and mass transfer model for soil-plant atmosphere systems TRITA-LWR report 3087. Royal Institute of Technology, Department of Land and Water Resources Engineering, Stockholm

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson K, Johnson D (1995) Methane emissions from cattle. J of Anim Sci 73(8):2483–2492

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kernebeek H, Oosting S, de Boer I (2012) Comparing the environmental impact of human diets varying in amount of animal-source food—the impact of accounting for nutritional quality. Proceedings from the 8th international conference on lifecycle assessment in the agri-food sector, St Malo, 1–4 Oct 2012

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirchgessner M, Windisch W, Müller H (1995) Nutritional factors for the quantification of methane production. In: von Engelhardt W, Leonhard-Marek S, Breves G, Giesecke D (eds) Ruminant physiology: digestion, metabolism, growth and reproduction, pp. 333–348

    Google Scholar 

  • Lantmännen (2013) Klimatdeklarationer. (Climate declarations). http://lantmannen.se/omlantmannen/press–media/publikationer/klimatdeklarationer/. Accessed 16 May 2013

  • Leip A, Weiss F, Wassenaar T et al (2010) Evaluation of the livestock sector’s contribution to the EU greenhouse gas emissions (GGELS)—final report. European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Rome

    Google Scholar 

  • Macdiamid JI, Kyle J, Horgan GH et al (2012) Sustainable diets for the future: can we contribute to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by eating a healthy diet? Am J Clin Nutr 96:632–639

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MAX (2013) Klimatdeklaration (Climate declaration). http://max.se/sv/Maten/Klimatdeklaration/. Accessed 22 May 2013

  • Meier T, Christen O (2013) Environmental impacts of dietary recommendations and dietary styles: Germany as an example. Environ Sci Techn 47(2):877–888

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Meul M, Ginneberge C, Van Middelaar C et al (2012) Carbon footprint of five pig diets using three land use change accounting methods. Livestock Sci 149:215–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA) (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: biodiversity synthesis. World Resources Institute, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Mills J, Kebreab E, Crompton L, France J (2003) The Mitscherlich equation: an alternative to linear models of methane emissions from cattle. In: Proceedings of the British society of animal science 2003

    Google Scholar 

  • Moe PW, Tyrrell HF (1979) Methane production in dairy cows. J Dairy Sci 62:1583–1586

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Munoz I, Milà i Canals L, Clift R (2008) Consider a spherical man—a simple model to include human excretion in life cycle assessment of food products. J Ind Ecol 12(4): 521–538

    Google Scholar 

  • Nemecek T, Gaillard G (2010) Challenges in assessing the environmental impacts of crop production and horticulture. In: Sonesson U, Berlin J, Ziegler F (eds) Environmental assessment and management in the food industry. Woodhead Publishing Limited, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Nijdam D, Rood T, Westhoek H (2012) The price of protein: review of land use and carbon footprints from life cycle assessments of animal food products and their substitutes. Food Pol 37:760–770

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NNR 5 (2012) Sustainable food consumption. What are the environmental issues concerning food consumption? How does food consumption connect to the environmental impact? Chapter in the draft proposal of the Nordic nutritional recommendations (NNR 5). http://www.slv.se/en-gb/Startpage-NNR/. Accessed 15 May 2013

  • Nylinder J, Stenberg M, Janson P-E, Kasimir Klemedtsson Å, Weslien P, Klemedtsson L (2011) Modelling uncertainty for nitrate leaching and nitrous oxide emissions based on a Swedish field experiment with organic crop rotation. Agric Ecos Environ 141:167–183

    Google Scholar 

  • Pelletier N, Pirog R, Rasmussen R (2010) Comparative life cycle environmental impacts of three beef production strategies in the Upper Midwestern United States. Agri Syst 103:380–389

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ponsioen T, Blonk T (2012) Calculating land use change in carbon footprints of agricultural products as an impact of current land use. J Clean Prod 28:120–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Powlson D, Whitmore A, Goulding K (2011) Soil carbon sequestration to mitigate climate change: a critical re-examination to identify the true and the false. Euro J Soil Sci 62:42–55

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rockström J, Steffen W, Noone K et al (2009) A safe operating space for humanity. Nature 461:472–475

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Röös E (2011) The trade-off between animal welfare and lowered emissions of greenhouse gases from pork production. Presentation at the NJF conference in Uppsala, 15–16 June 2011

    Google Scholar 

  • Röös E (2012) Mat-klimat-listan version 1.0 (The food-climate-list version 1.0) report 2012:040. Department of Energy and Technology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala

    Google Scholar 

  • Röös E, Karlsson H (2013) Swedish vegetal consumption—effect on the carbon footprint from eating seasonal. J Clean Prod 59:63–72

    Google Scholar 

  • Röös E, Nylinder J (2013) Carbon footprint of livestock products—variations and uncertainties. Report 2013:063. Department of Energy and Technology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala

    Google Scholar 

  • Röös E, Tjärnemo H (2011) Challenges of carbon labelling of food products: a consumer research perspective. Brit Food J 113(8):982–996

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Röös E, Sundberg C, Hansson P-A (2011) Uncertainties in the carbon footprint of refined wheat products: a case study on Swedish pasta. Int J of LCA 16:338–350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Röös E, Sundberg C, Tidåker P, Strid I, Hansson P-A (2013) Can carbon footprint serve as an indicator of the environmental impact of meat production? Ecol Ind 24:573–581

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roy P, Nei D, Orikasa T et al (2009) A review of life cycle assessment (LCA) on some food products. J Food Eng 90:1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubinstein R, Kroese D (2007) Simulation and the Monte Carlo method. Wiley-Interscience, ISBN 0470177942, 9780470177945

    Google Scholar 

  • Saarinen M (2012) Nutrition in LCA: are nutrition indexes worth using? In: Proceedings from the 8th international conference on lifecycle assessment in the agri-food sector, St Malo, 1–4 Oct 2012

    Google Scholar 

  • SBA (2012) Ett klimatvänligt jordbruk 2050 (Climate friendly agriculture 2050). Report 2050:35. Swedish Board of Agriculture, Jönköping

    Google Scholar 

  • Schau EM, Fet AM (2008) LCA studies of food products as background for environmental product declarations. Int J LCA 13(3):255–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt J, Reinhard J, Weidema B (2012) A model of indirect land use change. In: Proceedings from the 8th international conference on lifecycle assessment in the agri-food sector, St Malo, 1–4 Oct 2012

    Google Scholar 

  • SEPA (2008) Konsumtionens klimatpåverkan (The climate impact of consumption). Report no 5903. Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, Stockholm

    Google Scholar 

  • Shibata M, Terada F (2010) Factors affecting methane production and mitigation in ruminants. Anim Sci J 81:2–10

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sjaunja L, Baevre L, Junkkarinen L et al (1990) A Nordic proposal for an energy corrected milk (ECM) formula. In: 27th session of the International Commission for Breeding and Productivity of Milk Animals, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Smedman A, Månsson H, Drewnowska A, Edman A (2010) Nutrient density of beverages in relation to climate impact. Food Nutr Res 54:5170 doi: 10.3402/fnr.v54i0.5170

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith P (2012) Agricultural greenhouse gas mitigation potential globally, in Europe and the UK. Scientific review. Glob Cha Biol 18:35–43

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith P, Martino D, Cai Z et al (2007) Agriculture. In: Metz B, Davidson OR, Bosch PR, Dave R, Meyer LA (eds) Climate change 2007: mitigation. Contribution of working group III to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Soussana J, Allard V, Pilegaard K et al (2007) Full accounting of the greenhouse gas budget of nine European grassland sites. Agric Ecos Environ 121:121–134

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Soussana J, Tallec T, Blanfort V (2010) Mitigating the greenhouse gas balance of ruminant production systems through carbon sequestration in grasslands. Animal 4(3):334–350

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Strid Eriksson I, Elmquist H, Stern S, Nybrant T (2005) Environmental systems analysis of pig production. The impact of feed choice. Int J LCA 10:143–154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LRF, Svensk Mjölk, Swedish Meats et al (2002) Maten och miljön. Livscykelanalys av sju livsmedel (Food and environment. Life cycle assessment of seven food items). The Federation of Swedish farmers (LRF), Stockholm

    Google Scholar 

  • Tesco (2012) Product carbon footprint summary. http://www.tescoplc.com/assets/files/cms/Tesco_Product_Carbon_Footprints_Summary(1).pdf. Accessed 22 May 2013

  • Thomassen M, Dalgaard R, Heijungs R, de Boer I (2008) Attributional and consequential LCA of milk production. Int J of LCA 13:339–349

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tillman AM (2010) Methodology for life cycle assessment. In: Sonesson U, Berlin J, Ziegler F (eds) Environmental assessment and management in the food industry. Woodhead Publishing Limited, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • UCS (2011) The root of the problem—what is driving tropical deforestation today?. Union of Concerned Scientists, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • van Middelaar CE, Cederberg C, Vellinga ThV et al (2013) Exploring variability in methods and data sensitivity in carbon footprints of feed ingredients. Int J LCA 18(4):768–782

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Veysset P, Lherm M, Bébin D (2011) Productive, environmental and economic performances assessments of organic and conventional suckler cattle farming systems. Org Agr 1:1–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber CL, Matthews HS (2008) Food-miles and the relative climate impacts of food choices in the United States. Environ Sci Techn 42:3508–3513

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wilkerson VA, Casper DP (1995) The prediction of methane production from Holstein cows by several equations. J Dairy Sci 78:2402–2414

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • WRI & WBSCD (2011) Greenhouse gas protocol. Product life cycle accounting and reporting standard. http://www.ghgprotocol.org/standards/product-standard. Accessed 16 May 2013

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Energy and Technology, Box 7032, 750 07, Uppsala, Sweden

    Elin Röös, Cecilia Sundberg & Per-Anders Hansson

Authors
  1. Elin Röös
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Cecilia Sundberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Per-Anders Hansson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elin Röös .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Eco-design Consultant, Global Sustainability Services SGS Hong Kong Limited, Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR

    Subramanian Senthilkannan Muthu

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Röös, E., Sundberg, C., Hansson, PA. (2014). Carbon Footprint of Food Products. In: Muthu, S. (eds) Assessment of Carbon Footprint in Different Industrial Sectors, Volume 1. EcoProduction. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-4560-41-2_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation