The exclusive focus on energy performance does not capture the full extent of resource uses and problematic emissions also generated by the building sector. Hence, a more complete set of indicators must be applied to ensure comprehensiveness of the assessment. Furthermore, as the energy consumed in the use stage of new building diminishes due to improved building envelopes, the embodied impacts of the buildings become apparent. Table 28.3 sums up a general picture of the assessed impacts categories found in building LCA studies. LCA of Buildings and the Built Environment


A study by Heinonen et al. (2016) also points to this relevant issue of lack of comprehensiveness in assessed impact categories. However, on a European scale at least, explanations can be found on this current state of the art of assessed impacts, namely in the fact that within the framework of the European standards for Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) of building materials (EN 15804), a predefined set of indicators is established. The set corresponds with the CML methodology plus additional resource use and waste generation categories. As building material EPDs form the basis of many building specific LCAs, this scope of impact categories from a material level is transferred to the building level. In this sense, the sectoral application and standards development affects the practice of conducted building LCAs, also at the scientific level

28 LCA of Buildings and the Built Environment

Hauschild et al., LCA: Theory and Practice


In this sense, the sectoral application and standards development affects the practice of conducted building LCAs, also at the scientific level. 28.2.3 Notable Studies Having outlined the general areas of application related and methodological attention points of the building scale LCA, this section and Table 28.4 briefly introduce a range of notable studies highlighting selected aspects of relevance in the practice and development of building LCA. Methodological issues of building LCA highlighted in the studies in Table 28.4 concern the use of dynamic modelling of the important use stage of the building (see Collinge et al. 2013) as well as the previously mentioned significance of simplifications at system level, input level and indicator level. The two different modelling approaches of input–output-based LCA (see Chap. 14) and process-based LCA modelling seem in general to be applied at the different levels of national building sector scale and single building scale, respectively


14) and process-based LCA modelling seem in general to be applied at the different levels of national building sector scale and single building scale, respectively. Nässén et al. (2007) discusses difference in results from applying the two different approaches to the production stage of buildings. Future application of building scale LCA may well continue its importance in the post-construction evaluation of certified buildings although the application to early stage design (see Basbagill et al. 2012) remains an important area of development in order to identify environmentally preferable design solutions before construction takes place. Furthermore, incorporation of the financial and social aspects of building construction alongside the environmental assessment (Ostermeyer et al


Furthermore, incorporation of the financial and social aspects of building construction alongside the environmental assessment (Ostermeyer et al. 2013) will have a profound relevance to the decision takers in the Table 28.3 Impact categories seen in building LCA studies Often included categories Less frequently included categories Rarely included categories Primary energy demand Global warming Acidification Eutrophication Photochemical ozone creation Ozone depletion Resource depletions Ionising radiation Toxicity (human/ecosystem) Land transformation Land occupations B. Goldstein and F.N. Rasmussen


construction process. This may hold true especially for the vast body of western post-war buildings ripe for refurbishment actions, because these existing buildings are already deeply defined within a site-specific social and economic context that needs to be taken into account when a change in design and functionality is regarded. Table 28.4 Selected building LCA studies highlighting different aspects of methodological and application issues Study Aspect Highlights Nässén et al


Table 28.4 Selected building LCA studies highlighting different aspects of methodological and application issues Study Aspect Highlights Nässén et al. (2007) IO-LCA of buildings versus process-based LCA Energy use (GJ/m2) of relevant sectoral processes such as transport, construction activities and service sectors may be grossly underestimated in process-based LCA of buildings Kellenberger and Althaus (2009) Relevance of simplifications in LCA building components How typical simplifications of LCI and life cycle stages may have significant relevance to LCA results depending on component type Blengini and Di Carlo (2010) Significance of impacts from life cycle stages in a low-energy building How embodied impacts from the pre-use and maintenance of the building supersedes the operating energy in majority of assessed mid-point impact categories in a current low-energy building Basbagill et al


(2012) Application of LCA to early building design Introduces a method enabling designers to understand the relative global warming potential implications of building component decisions Collinge et al. (2013) Dynamic modelling Use stage scenario testing by dynamic modelling of characterisation factors and electricity mixes Ostermeyer et al. (2013) LCA coupled with life cycle costing (LCC) and social LCA (SLCA) in a refurbishment project The study introduces a Pareto-optimisation approach to refurbishment activities of residential buildings and highlights the need for further development of SLCA to be included as evaluation of the sustainability of building activities Heinonen et al. (2016) Simplifications of LCIA categories included in assessment Based on a case study: how only eight of 17 mid-point categories of the ReCiPe methodology correlates to the GWP which is oftentimes used in studies as the single environmental indicator LCA of Buildings and the Built Environment


28.3 LCA of Built Environment The quest to understand the environmental impacts of cities was initially an inwardly focused effort to improve conditions for the working poor that had amassed in recently industrialised cities around the world in the nineteenth century. John Snow’s study of an 1854 cholera outbreak in London linked the infectious disease to contaminated drinking water, providing partial impetuous for the study of water and waste flows in the city and the development of the city’s modern sewage system and drinking water network (McLeod 2000). This type of urban self-assessment was championed by the reform-urbanism movement at the turn of the twentieth century, which fought the pernicious effects of poor air, water and waste management in cities, eventually formalising into the sanitisation standards and modern land-use planning enshrined in modern cities. It was not until the 1960s that the attention shifted from a public health focus to an environmental focus


It was not until the 1960s that the attention shifted from a public health focus to an environmental focus. In addition to the question, ‘how is the environment in the city affecting the inhabitants?’, researchers began to ask, ‘how is the city, as a whole, interfering with the functioning of the environment?’ Widely acknowledged as the first researcher to explicitly address this question was Abel Wolman’s study ‘The metabolism of cities’ (1965). Wolman’s study estimated the fluxes of materials and energy consumed by and the air pollution from an ‘average’ US city of one million inhabitants. This ‘urban metabolism’, measured as the material, energy and waste treatment demands of a city, is exactly synonymous with the LCI components considered as part of an LCA of the built environment that were introduced in Sect. 28.1.1


28.1.1. This part of the chapter will show how quantifying the primarily mass-based urban metabolism can be used as starting point of a full LCA of the built environment, contrast this with methodologies of LCAs of the built environment and highlight some of the recent developments in this field. 28.3.1 From Urban Metabolism to LCA of the Built Environment Kennedy et al. (2007) suggest a definition of urban metabolism as: ‘the sum total of the technical and socioeconomic processes that occur in cities, resulting in growth, productionofenergy,andeliminationofwaste’.SinceWolman’s(1965)paper,thenumber of studies of various cities’ urban metabolisms is in the dozens and could very well over 100 (Decker et al. 2000; Kennedy et al. 2007, 2010; Zhang 2013; Stewart et al. 2014). The majority of these studies have been undertaken in the past two decades and have been performed by researchers in the field of industrial ecology


2007, 2010; Zhang 2013; Stewart et al. 2014). The majority of these studies have been undertaken in the past two decades and have been performed by researchers in the field of industrial ecology. Industrial ecology is itself a diverse research field of the environmental implications of socio-technical systems in general, and this wide scope is mirrored in different methodologies that have been employed to assess urban metabolism: ecological footprint, eMergy (energy memory), carbon footprint, material flow analysis (MFA), etc. B. Goldstein and F.N. Rasmussen


It is the MFA of urban metabolism that is most relevant to our discussion, since it yields results in terms of mass flows through the study area, which can be interpreted as an LCI of the built environment and readily fed into the LCA framework for environmental profiling. MFA of an urban metabolism is akin to a material balance of an urban system, with the exception that non-mass flows such as electricity are often included as well, with accounting almost invariably performed over the period of a year. Kennedy (2012) provided a formalised mathematical description of how MFA would ideally be applied to a built environment, accounting for fluxes of materials through the study area, material additions to stock and waste generation


Though no consensus exists regarding what types of flows need to be included in an MFA of a built environment to adequately characterise a city’s environmental footprint, Table 28.5 outlines the material and energy flows to be accounted if one is to make a comprehensive assessment of the metabolic, as adopted from Kennedy and Hoornweg (2012). These material and energy flows seek parsimony between the need to be sensitive to current data limitations, whilst capturing important activities driving environmental impacts and resource consumption


Table 28.5 Comprehensive list of material and energy flows that a holistic LCA of a built environment would account for Inflows Outflows Biomass (t and J) Waste emissions (t) Food Gases Wood Solid Fossil fuel (t and J) Wastewater Transport Heat (J) Space conditioning/industrial Substances (t) Electricity (kWh) Produced goods (t) Natural energy (J) Water (t) Stocks (inflows that do not exit system within assessment period) Drinking (surface and groundwater) Infrastructure/buildings (t) Precipitation Construction aggregates Substances (t) Metals E.g. salts, degreasers, etc. Wood Produced goods (t) Other materials Other (machinery, durable) (t) Production (inflows to technosphere generated within urban territory) Metals Biomass (t and J) Plastics Minerals (t) Other materials Energy (J) Substances (t) Typical units of measure are indicated in square brackets. Adopted from (Kennedy and Hoornweg 2012) LCA of Buildings and the Built Environment


It is often the case that there is little information about the material flows in and out of a city, and it is thus rare to find a study that has this level of completeness in accounting a city’s urban metabolism. It is far more likely for studies to cobble together disparate data sources to build an MFA inventory. This is typically done in two ways; bottom-up (or ‘activity-based’) using basic data on economic activity and demographics to estimate flows (e.g. number of housing construction starts in a year times the average amount of concrete in a house to estimate concrete demands of a city’s construction sector) (Kennedy et al. 2007) or top-down using regional trade data to balance production, imports and exports to gauge a city’s demand (Rosado et al. 2014)


2007) or top-down using regional trade data to balance production, imports and exports to gauge a city’s demand (Rosado et al. 2014). Moreover, many of the flows of key materials in terms of embodied environmental impacts and future resource scarcity (plastics, rare earth metals) are embedded within electronics and other consumer goods, for which data is scarce. In assessing the sustainability of the built environment, MFA has proven to be invaluable in exposing the extent to which cities continue to rely on unsustainable, non-renewable resource regimes to fuel their daily metabolism and growth. MFA studies have also illuminated one of the most pernicious aspects of modern cities; their linear metabolism that uses the urban hinterland and beyond as a source for both essential imports and waste assimilation, whilst recycling only marginal amounts of total inputs (Kalmykova et al.’s 2012). Nonetheless, MFA is not without its shortcomings


Nonetheless, MFA is not without its shortcomings. Most salient is the limitation of using mass as a proxy for environmental impacts. An obvious example of this is the way that high ‘biomass’ flows in MFA studies are almost always considered sustainable, despite the fact that the food flows lumped into this biomass category are some of the largest drivers of land-use change, greenhouse gas emissions and threats to biodiversity at the global level. Next is that most MFA studies only estimate direct mass and energy demands of a city, eschewing the ‘ecological rucksack’ of indirect mass and embodied energy, which can account for more than 50% of a system’s burdens (Goldstein et al. 2013), as shown in Fig. 28.2 which highlights the embodied mass and energy aspects of five different cities


2013), as shown in Fig. 28.2 which highlights the embodied mass and energy aspects of five different cities. Lastly, when MFAs consider pollutant loading in terms of GHGs, they tend to include scope 1 (direct combustion within city limits) and scope 2 (imported electricity) impacts, ignoring the significant impacts embodied within imported goods. 28.3.2 Linking MFA to LCA Coupling MFA with LCA is a natural solution to the methodological shortcomings of MFA focused studies in order to provide a more holistic assessment of the environmental performance of built environments. LCA of the built environment only requires a change of perception, whereby the MFA is viewed as the LCI for the use stage of a city’s annual demands (see Chap. 9). In this line of thinking, the MFA morphs into a crucial part of the process. With the MFA viewed in this B. Goldstein and F.N. Rasmussen


complimentary manner, it is easy to imagine building the other life cycle stages upand downstream of the use stage characterised by the MFA (LCI) of the built environment, which can then be modelled using traditional LCA methods. Impacts from consumption occurring within the city, such as fuel combustion or electricity, can also be modelled using the same principle; where the assessor’s job is to identify the most representative processes and align them with the demands of the study region. Figure 28.3 illustrates this. Due to the durability of many of the goods consumed by cities, it is challenging to accurately model the end-of-life phase of these goods. Rosado et al


Figure 28.3 illustrates this. Due to the durability of many of the goods consumed by cities, it is challenging to accurately model the end-of-life phase of these goods. Rosado et al. (2014) developed a method to account for the lifetimes of goods imported into the Lisbon region, which could theoretically be employed in the framework described here, 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Mass Energy Mass Energy Mass Energy Mass Energy Mass Energy Embodied Direct Beijing Cape Town London Hong Kong Toronto Fig. 28.2 Relative importance of embodied mass and energy impacts in LCAs of five cities. The direct mass and energy represent what is traditionally captured in MFA studies. Note Beijing’s lower embodied mass, a result of the frenetic construction activity in the city and the resulting concrete and aggregate flows. Source Goldstein et al


Note Beijing’s lower embodied mass, a result of the frenetic construction activity in the city and the resulting concrete and aggregate flows. Source Goldstein et al. (2013) Resource ExtracƟon Processing and Manufacturing Typical UM Scope Use (annual UM) End-of-life Emission to environment Input to lifecycle stage Inter-stage transport Fig. 28.3 Fusing MFA with LCA: urban metabolism (UM) is taken as the use stage of the metabolic flows, with supporting upstream production and downstream waste management activities built around this. Source Goldstein et al. (2013) LCA of Buildings and the Built Environment


but the proposed method can obviate the uncertainties in future recycling rates and evolving waste treatment technologies. To sidestep this issue, one could ignore the disposal phase of the durable goods used in the built environment and only include the impacts from waste treatment performed in the study region over the assessment period, though this has the double issue of underestimating impacts due to waste treatment in the future, whilst simultaneously ignoring the fact that many goods with substantial embodied impacts may be recycled at end of life (structural steel, aluminium, glass and maybe someday, precious metals in electronics). There is no right or wrong method here, but transparency in communicating the method chosen and its shortcomings is paramount. Another methodological consideration is that the level of detail of the MFA is normally very coarse


Another methodological consideration is that the level of detail of the MFA is normally very coarse. The LCI for the use stage typically consists of bulk categories of goods such as ‘steel’, ‘aluminium’ and ‘wood’, which the assessor then has to turn into a life cycle. This means that generic material production processes in an LCA database usually employed in modeling ignoring more detailed processes related to manufacturing of specific goods (forming, assembly, etc.). Moreover, transport is also difficult to come by, meaning that one is either left excluding it from the assessment, or using international trade data to make informed judgements about plausible sources of materials imported into a city


Considering the uncertainties regarding specific types of goods consumed and sources of those goods, it might be defensible to omit these from assessments of the built environment, since assembly and transport are often not the dominant sources of environmental impacts in the life cycles of many products 28.3.2.1 The Functional Unit: What are We Actually Assessing? One essential aspect of the LCA is the functional unit (see Chap. 8 on scope definition for more information about the functional unit). In an LCA of the built environment, what are we assessing exactly? Because built environments do not perform any one function, and many of the functions performed are impossible to quantify (foster community, facilitate cultural exchange, build institutional capacity), developing a functional unit moves from a methodological necessity to an esoteric philosophical exercise in semantics, and has been largely avoided in urban scale LCAs


Notwithstanding, since LCA is ostensibly to be used either for benchmarking or to decision-support between urban design alternatives, a common basis of assessment should be used to facilitate appraisals. This typically takes the form of taking gross impact potentials for the built environment and normalising these to the per-capita level, since this will at least show the environmental intensity of providing for the metabolic activities of the average denizen B. Goldstein and F.N. Rasmussen


28.3.3 Process-Based and Input–Output LCA of the Built Environment Both process and input–output (IO) LCA have been applied to the built environment, with IO methods figuring most prominently in urban LCA literature. For a detailed description of IO-LCA, the reader can refer to Chap. 14 of this book. Section 28.3.1 largely outlined what could be considered a process-based approach to assessing the built environment with LCA: determine the direct material demands of the study region and include the embodied impacts up- and downstream, as well as relevant impacts during the use stage. The reason that the process-based method has seen less application is that the general tenor amongst urban sustainability researchers has been that in order for LCAs of the built environments to be as complete as possible, an IO-LCA or hybrid-LCA approach should be employed (Chester et al. 2012)


2012). This rationale is absolutely justified; if data for final demand is available, inputting this into the IO-LCA framework yields a more complete inventory and accounting of environmental impacts. Moreover, if multiregion-IO methodology is used, then trade interdependencies between the study region and other economies can be ascertained. Another advantage of the IO-LCA method is that it provides a true demand-side analysis of a built environment, accounting for the environmental burdens of the study area’s final demands. Process-based assessment has the shortcoming of not allocating fuels and electricity used in the production of goods manufactured in the study region but ultimately exported to the final consumer, meaning that some of the burdens for these exported goods are incorrectly ascribed to the producing city. IO-LCA of the built environment faces numerous methodological challenges


IO-LCA of the built environment faces numerous methodological challenges. Much like the process-based approach, data availability is a challenge, this time in terms of getting final consumption data (in terms of final expenditures) at the subnational level, which means that IO-LCAs of built environments are often built from scaled national-level data (consumer household expenditure surveys have been used in a US context to scale down to the sub-urban level). Moreover, the IO tables are also at the national level, ignoring the regional industry interdependencies, though advances in multi-scale IO models may be able to overcome this (Bachmann et al. 2014)


Moreover, the IO tables are also at the national level, ignoring the regional industry interdependencies, though advances in multi-scale IO models may be able to overcome this (Bachmann et al. 2014). Though comprehensive in terms of value-chain coverage, the number of substances (*100) covered by IO-LCA are meagre in comparison to the process approach (over 1000), meaning that until now IO-LCA on the built environment has primarily focused on accounting GHGs (arguably meaning that these were not full multi-criteria LCAs as per ISO standards). Moreover, the IO-LCA method is not compatible with existing LCIA methods, missing out on the indicator sets and communicative power of these tools. IO-LCA is caught in a permanent present tense, whereby it models the impacts of present final-demands, ignoring life cycle stages beyond production and use


IO-LCA is caught in a permanent present tense, whereby it models the impacts of present final-demands, ignoring life cycle stages beyond production and use. The story is that process-based and IO-LCAs of the built environment are not incompatible, but have different strengths that the assessor should leverage depending on available data and study aims. Process-based LCA is best applied LCA of Buildings and the Built Environment


when the benefits of the LCIA methodologies are wanted and/or detail beyond the level of the economic sector is wanted. IO is optimised for inventory completeness. 28.3.4 Opportunities and Challenges The application of LCA to the built environment is new and evolving, but there are already a number of exciting envisioned uses for this tool. Most obvious is the use of LCA as an environmental screening tool to identify weak-points in the environmental performance of a neighbourhood, city or conurbation, and as a benchmarking method to assess longitudinal environmental performance related to policy changes or growth in a study area. LCAs of the built environment have been able to identify important characteristics of relating the environmental impacts of a study region to the urban form, economic development, population dynamics and local climate


Table 28.6 shows the effects of various urban attributes on the environmental performance of the built environments, pinpointing where policy interventions might be best applied. LCA of the built environment can also be used for scenario analysis, testing out the environmental efficacy of urban design interventions (i.e. how would the environmental performance of a city change if large-scale food production were employed or if a certain type of built form was pursued?) or policies (how would GHG emissions change with implementation of a congestion charge?). LCA of the built environment also provides exciting opportunities to explore other aspects of their environmental performance. Nexus interactions are one such area, whereby single metabolic activities that drive environmental impacts on multiple fronts, and therefore, that driver acts at the nexus of the drivers


Nexus interactions are one such area, whereby single metabolic activities that drive environmental impacts on multiple fronts, and therefore, that driver acts at the nexus of the drivers. Increase in private motor vehicle usage is one such metabolic driver that sits at the nexus of Table 28.6 Findings of LCA applied to the built environment Study region attribute Typical effect on urban environmental performance Low population density Impact potentials from mobility take on increased importance (Heinonen et al. 2011) Climate variability (hot summers, cold winters) Impacts from space conditioning take on increased importance (Goldstein et al. 2013) High population growth rate or economic development Impacts from capital formation (building and infrastructure construction) take on increased importance (Goldstein et al. 2013) Low population growth rate Impacts from household consumption takes on increased importance (Goldstein et al


2013) Low population growth rate Impacts from household consumption takes on increased importance (Goldstein et al. 2013) High disposable income Impacts from household consumption takes on increased importance (Heinonen et al. 2011) Compromised waste management system Local impacts take on increased relevance (Goldstein et al. 2013) B. Goldstein and F.N. Rasmussen


non-renewable resource use (fossil fuels and metals), GHG emissions (combustion) and the embodied impacts of construction aggregate use (new road construction). LCA can play a role in quantifying the collinearity of these impacts through urban design. Another interesting prospective use of LCA at the scale of the built environment is to quantify boundary effects at the border of a city or region, such as impacts from waste expelled into neighbouring geographic regions and fluxes across the system boundary (e.g. through traffic). LCA could predict the severity of environmental disruption from these types of boundary effects and highlight both the benefits and burdens of adjacent human settlements. Challenges also abound in the application of LCA to the built environment. Data shortcomings cannot be overstressed


Challenges also abound in the application of LCA to the built environment. Data shortcomings cannot be overstressed. Often environmental assessments at the scale of the built environment rely on data from other sources that are used as a proxy for material and energy demands at the neighbourhood, city or regional level. The use of ‘big data’ to develop more representative consumption profiles could increase the robustness of LCAs of the built environment, and provide finer scaled assessments in terms, both spatially and demographically. Another area of improvement would be the current ‘black box’ nature of LCA-based assessments, which ignores the way that interactions between subsystems within the built environment generate the study system’s emergent metabolism. The ‘black-box’ perspective results in static models unable to capture non-linear behavior, reducing their predictive power


The ‘black-box’ perspective results in static models unable to capture non-linear behavior, reducing their predictive power. Combining the environmental auditing power of LCA with other dynamic modelling tools such as system dynamics (Tam et al. 2014) in the urban realm would enhance the applicability of LCA in the urban realm and justify its place at the table when considering urban design or policy interventions. An emerging approach to the LCA of the built environment is ‘territorial LCA’; the application of LCA framework to mixed rural–urban systems (Loiseau et al. 2014). The method is closely aligned with those of this chapter with the noteworthy divergence that the territorial LCA method focuses on land uses and programmes as a method for describing functional units, providing a new perspective to overcome the ambiguity or lack of functional unit in previous LCAs of the built environment. Loiseau et al


Loiseau et al. have already applied this method to regions along the coastline of Southern France (2013, 2014), highlighting the method’s potential applicability. 28.3.5 Notable Studies We will close the dedicated discussion of LCAs of the built environment with a concise list of studies that exemplify the methods we have discussed, explored ways to overcome current methodological challenges or pushed LCA of the built environment into new exciting directions. The list is not restricted strictly to LCAs, including MFA and carbon footprint studies as well since these can be readily incorporated within the LCA framework. Table 28.7 provides an overview of selected studies. In general, LCAs and MFAs of cities have shown strong links between urbanisation and increasing per-capita material flows (Kennedy et al. LCA of Buildings and the Built Environment


2007), and as mentioned above, assessments of the built environment have related the metabolic profiles of cities to levels of economic development, city morphology, local climate and population dynamics (Goldstein et al. 2013). In terms of important methodological developments, Lenzen and Peters (2010) showed how multiregional IO-LCA can be applied at the scale of the urban household. Using a simpler, single region IO-LCA of Helsinki, Finland, Heinonen et al. (2011) demonstrated that dense living may reduce transport emission within the city, but increase consumption in other areas by affluent residents erased these benefits, highlighting the tension between urban morphology and wealth. Goldstein et al.’s (2013) assessment of five cities was the first to apply a process-based approach and use the full suite of indicators available to LCA practitioners


Goldstein et al.’s (2013) assessment of five cities was the first to apply a process-based approach and use the full suite of indicators available to LCA practitioners. Figure 28.4 shows how local environmental improvement with economic development (particulate matter formation) can be juxtaposed with increasing environmental pressure in private consumption (agricultural land Table 28.7 Details of notable studies of urban environmental performance Study Method Highlights Lenzen and Peters (2010) Multiregion IO-LCA Applied a multiregion IO of GHGs to Sydney, Australia Hillman and Ramaswami (2010) Process-based LCA of GHGs of 8 US cities Identified 6 key cross urban boundary activities that can be used for expedited, yet complete, GHG accounting of cities and explore boundary effects (i.e. air travel) Heinonen et al


air travel) Heinonen et al. (2011) IO-LCA of GHGs of Helsinki, Finland neighbourhoods Dense urban living reduces per capita transport emissions, but increased wealth of inhabitants ultimately results in higher overall consumption and carbon footprint Chen and Chen (2012) GHG accounting of Vienna, Austria Combined network analysis with GHG accounting to show interconnections between urban subsystems Goldstein et al. (2013) Process-based LCA of five cities using multiple indicators Application of hitherto unexplored indicators at the urban level (eutrophication, ecotoxicity), linking economic development and local environmental performance Tam et al. (2014) System dynamics MFA model of Shenzhen, China construction sector System dynamics approach to predict future C&D waste (legal and illegal) generation for different policy scenarios Rosado et al


(2014) MFA of Lisbon, Portugal Comprehensive trade statistics used to account for over 10,000 goods used in the city and included embodied mass within goods Kennedy et al. (2015) MFA of global megacities Identified links between urban morphology and electricity demands, and showed the super-linear scaling of urban metabolism and population B. Goldstein and F.N. Rasmussen


formation). Highlighting the utility of MFA as a means of LCI development, Rosado et al.’s (2014) study of Lisbon, captured over 10,000 goods entering and exiting the urban system using trade statistic, while concurrently accounting for indirect mass flows embodied within those goods. Hillman and Ramaswami’s (2010) GHG accounting of eight US cities laid down a solid methodology to account for the majority of GHG impacts and showed and explored the boundary effects of transport across municipal borders. Chen and Chen’s (2012) paper illustrated how network analysis can be used to open up the urban ‘black box’, elucidating how material and energy fluxes between urban subsystems influence GHG emissions in Vienna. Tam et al. (2014) combined MFA with system dynamics to assess policy scenarios on C&D waste in Shenzhen, illustrating that focusing on a single aspect of a city’s metabolism can yield detailed and relevant results


Lastly, Kennedy et al.’s (2015) MFA of the worlds megacities (population > 107) showed how environmental impacts scale super linearly with urbanisation, serving as a prescient reminder of the need to improve the environmental performance of the built environment as urbanization continues globally. 28.4 Methodological Challenges and Best Practice Having outlined the application of LCA to buildings and the built environment, it is prudent to end with a discussion of current methodological challenges related to this type of assessment. Data, LCI components, LCA method and other noteworthy methodological aspects are discussed in sequence, and are summarised in Table 28.8. 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 PMF (kg PM10/capita/year) ALO (m2/capita/year) Per capita GRP (2000 USD PPP) ALO PMF Beijing Cape Town Hong Kong London Toronto mg PM10 eq/unit GDP Fig


28.4 Per-capita agricultural land occupation (ALO) as m2 year−1 and PMF as kg particulates <10 lm year−1 are shown on the left. Local air pollution issues in Beijing and Cape Town are disproportionately high relative to the amount of economic activity, particularly when the predicted impact per unit of economic activity is taken into account as shown on the right. Wealthier cities show a tendency to minimise air pollution while the exported environmental pressure of ALO increases with the wealth of the residents. Source Goldstein et al. (2013) LCA of Buildings and the Built Environment


28.4.1 General Challenges Sensitivity testing of the scenarios applied in building LCAs remains an important issue in order to evaluate the potential impacts of a building. It is especially important due to the long service life of the building for a great deal of societal and technological changes can happen within the time frame of 50–80 years. Thus, the scenarios for the use stage and the end-of-life stage should preferably be tested to ensure some sort of likelihood of the obtained results. Such a particularly long time frame also comes with a difficulty of correctly interpreting the impact scores obtained. Due to the aggregation of emissions and their characterisation with time-integrated characterisation factors, emissions and resource extractions occurring at different moments in time during 50–80 years or more are represented as if they would take place simultaneously, and affecting the same (human) generation


For most product LCA applications, which will typically have time frames in the range of 10–30 years, this is not of particular importance, but needs to be considered in this context. An additional challenge to the practice of building LCAs is for the practitioners to harmonise, if not the inclusion then at least the description of the life cycle stages accounted for. For now, it often presents a challenge to compare results of different studies because of the opacity in the explanations of included life cycle stages and processes. Other methodological notes for LCA of the built environment include the static nature of the assessment and the black box perspective on the study system. Integration of LCA within the system dynamics framework or network analysis should be able to help overcome this, though work in this direction remains cursory


Integration of LCA within the system dynamics framework or network analysis should be able to help overcome this, though work in this direction remains cursory. Lastly, built environments are socio-technical systems, and it should always be kept in mind that the predominantly environmental assessment provided by LCA, though linked to the system’s economic and social attributes, should always be balanced against the more detailed work of social scientists, economists and political scientists who look at equity, living conditions, crime, institutions, employment, artistic and cultural practices, psycho-geography, public health and a myriad of other important aspects of life in human settlements. This last sentiment is probably truer for LCA of the built environment than any other application of LCA. 28.4.2 Goal and Scope Like any LCA, looking at buildings and the built environment with this tool requires a decision between process and IO-LCA


28.4.2 Goal and Scope Like any LCA, looking at buildings and the built environment with this tool requires a decision between process and IO-LCA. Both process and IO have their strengths; detail and completeness, respectively. Neither is preferred, though the process-based approach does have the advantage of better compatibility with the various LCIA methodologies and related indicator suites. Relatedly, as a rule, LCAs of the built environment should use multi-indicator assessments to minimise the risk of burden shifting between environmental issues, a practice that is difficult for B. Goldstein and F.N. Rasmussen


Table 28.8 Overview of the challenges of applying LCA to buildings and built environments Building Built environment Shortcoming(s) Best practice Shortcoming(s) Best practice LCI data Lack of transparency in EPDs of building materials Applying generic data to assessments of early design and specific data for footprinting and accounting Local data typically absent for many metabolic activities Use local data or adjust proxy data to local conditions LCI components Simplifications are frequently performed in studies without estimations of the impacts they might be responsible of Including all inputs relevant to the purpose of the study Only selected metabolic activities covered Coarsely aggregated fluxes Embodied impacts in imported goods ignored Major environmental drivers (construction, mobility, building energy, food) represented Fluxes should also be as disaggregated as possible Imported goods should be included to avoid underestimations Goal and scope Energy use and global warming


building energy, food) represented Fluxes should also be as disaggregated as possible Imported goods should be included to avoid underestimations Goal and scope Energy use and global warming potential often the only evaluated categories Inclusion of a comprehensive set of impact categories to avoid burden shifting Single indicator assessment Defining functional unit Multi-indicator toolsets should be used to avoid burden shifting Transparency in functional unit definition General challenges Scenarios for use/EoL stage rarely evaluated as part of sensitivity testing Lack of transparency and lack of consistency in life cycle stages included in assessments Lack of transparency in EPDs of building materials When relevant according to the purpose, testing of the energy, maintenance/replacements and EoL scenarios Addressing all relevant life cycle stages in relation to the purpose


Applying estimates for the stages where there is a lack of data. Describing thoroughly the processes involved in the included life cycle stages Applying generic data to assessments of early design and specific data for footprinting and accounting Static and black box models Social issues largely eschewed Combine LCA with system dynamics and/or network analysis Compliment assessment with work from social scientists, public health specialists and economists Current best practices are highlighted to give the reader a guideline for performing LCAs and appraise the work of others LCA of Buildings and the Built Environment


IO-LCA practitioners due to database limitations. In the future, best practice in this application area might consist of hybrid-IO-LCA that marries the best features of process and IO-LCA, though this has yet to see application. Lastly, there have been a number of GHG studies on the built environment that have focused on scope 1 (direct) and scope 2 (imported electricity) emissions (see some of the background data for the carbon disclosure project; www.cdp.net). This practice ignores GHGs embodied in imported goods and should be avoided since it can vastly underestimate the true carbon footprint related to a built environment’s metabolism. 28.4.3 Inventory and Product System Modelling 28.4.3.1 Data Data used on building LCAs is seen at different levels of specificity, generic data describing average production impacts and product specific data relating to products from specific manufacturers (see Chap. 9 for more general information on Inventory and Product System Modelling in LCA)


9 for more general information on Inventory and Product System Modelling in LCA). Generic data on building materials is found in most general LCA databases, but are limited in the sense that they cover mainly industrial products; thus a range of, e.g. biomaterials and innovative materials cannot be found. A whole category of technical components is also underrepresented in current databases. The product specific data is widely promoted as generating the most correct results when assessing a specific building. However, as the product specific data is mainly marketed in the format of EPDs, there is often a lack of consistency and transparency across the different national EPD programmes and the product category rules they each use. This affects the system boundaries and allocation methods applied in the LCA calculations. For instance, different national EPD programmes will account differently the biogenic carbon storage possible in wood products


For instance, different national EPD programmes will account differently the biogenic carbon storage possible in wood products. An ongoing effort in harmonising EPD programmes and assessment methods (e.g. the European Product Environmental Footprint—PEF) will increase the possibilities of using the EPDs for studies, although the format of the EPDs continues to be ‘black box’ oriented, meaning that only LCIA data and not LCI data is presented in order to protect property rights of the manufacturers. At the built environment level, a succinct lack of consumptive data at the subregional scale is a recurring theme, since trade statistics of goods/materials, food balances and household consumption surveys are normally performed at the national or regional level. Waste statistics, though normally available at the local level, are notoriously coarse in terms of disaggregating constituent flows within waste streams


Waste statistics, though normally available at the local level, are notoriously coarse in terms of disaggregating constituent flows within waste streams. Activities, such as private automobile use are also normally procured through surveys that are at best generalisations of travel patterns. This does not mean that good data is not available at the level of the built environment, but many studies rely on data from larger regions as proxies for urban metabolic activities and use coarse local level data. Jones and Kammen (2014) have shown how publicly available consumer expenditure data can be used to map carbon footprints at the B. Goldstein and F.N. Rasmussen


neighborhood level, while commercial geo-demographic data has also been employed to move more granular assessments (Minx et al. 2013). Moreover, with the proliferation of so-called ‘big data’, rich data sets of real urban metabolic activities should become available to researchers in the future. Ideally, high quality, locally contextual data should be used (see Rosado et al. 2014), and this data should be disaggregated enough to capture important goods within metabolic activities (e.g. ‘biomass’ should be broken down into food and non-food, with the former preferably disaggregated further to meat, fruits, etc.). Where national or regional data are used as proxies, these should be made locally contextual using economic data to account for the disparity in purchasing power between the area to be assessed by LCA and the region covered by the data (this holds for process and IO-LCAs)


28.4.3.2 LCI Components There is great disparity in the way building LCAs delimit the input flows of the system under scope; the main reason for this disparity probably being the different purposes of studies. If the purpose of the study is to assess the building within a specific certification framework, the completeness of the LCI may not be warranted as long as it aligns with the guidelines of the certification scheme. In this sense, it is important to keep in mind that certification-related assessment may not strive for the absolute accuracy of LCA results, rather it aims to place the building performance within a relative benchmark system developed for the certification scheme in question. For studies detached from these or similar relative performances, the basic LCA principle of comprehensiveness naturally applies (see more about inventory analysis in Chap. 9)


For studies detached from these or similar relative performances, the basic LCA principle of comprehensiveness naturally applies (see more about inventory analysis in Chap. 9). Transparency and exact descriptions of the materials and components included are paramount in the reporting, because even materials seemingly irrelevant to the results, for instance the fittings and fixtures, can affect certain impact categories. Thus, as no harmonised approach exists in the reporting of the LCI components, it can be difficult to interpret whether fittings may be included in the respective elements where they are installed, e.g. a wall, or if the fittings are not included in the study at all. LCI of the built environment is usually driven by data availability. There are numerous studies that have had to reduce their scope due to lack of quality data. Best practice would be to include all of the urban metabolic activities listed in Sect. 28.3.1, but this is an optimistic assertion


Best practice would be to include all of the urban metabolic activities listed in Sect. 28.3.1, but this is an optimistic assertion. One aspect to be cautious about is to ensure that the LCA broadly covers the major environmental drivers; construction, building energy, mobility and household goods (and sometimes water) to a reasonable extent, unless the assessment is explicitly focused on a particular aspect of a city’s environmental performance (nutrients, mobility, etc.). As mentioned above, biomass should always be disaggregated. To simply lump all biomass together as a renewable resource since it is produced by the planets annual solar budget ignores the reality that the consumption of some food items, namely, meat and dairy, are some of the largest drivers of global environmental pressure. LCA of Buildings and the Built Environment


28.5 Conclusion To perform an LCA of a human settlement is a complex exercise. What is a clear is that parsimony between the reductionist perspective of the autonomous building and the generality of the territory should be struck in order to address the multi-scalar sustainability challenges of the buildings and their agglomerations into the built environment. At the building scale, the environmental impacts during the use stage, as a rule, dominate, though environmental burdens shift to other life cycle stages with increased building operational efficiency. For the built environment, it is typically the mobility, space conditioning and nutritional needs of the residents that drive the majority of environmental impacts, with antagonism existing between lowering building energy use in new construction and increased transport energy from dispersed nature of these developments


Recent advances in LCA at the built environment have seen the application of IO-LCA, often at a multiregional level, and models that include dynamics of the subsystems that constitute a city. Next steps in the assessment of built environments will include harnessing novel data sources provided by ubiquitous computing (‘internet of things’) to ameliorate data gaps and provide real time monitoring and feedback of urban environmental performance, and the use of network science and systems thinking to shed light on the inner workings of the urban ‘black box’. At building level, recent advances include the standardisation of LCA calculation procedures (Khasreen et al. 2009); although the harmonised studies following this have yet to be seen on a larger scale


2009); although the harmonised studies following this have yet to be seen on a larger scale. Further development of building LCA may be found within the area of early design stage interventions as well as more holistic approaches to evaluating the life cycle of not only new constructions but also existing constructions in relation to the social and economic preconditions. Bachmann, C., Roorda, M., Kennedy, C.: Developing a multi-scale multi-region input–output model. Econ. Syst. Res. 27, 172–193 (2014) Basbagill, J., Flager, F., Lepech, M., Fischer, M.: Application of life cycle assessment to early stage building design for reduced embodied environmental impacts. Build. Environ. 60, 81–92 (2012). doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2012.11.009 Blengini, G.A., Di Carlo, T.: The changing role of life cycle phases, subsystems and materials in the LCA of low energy buildings. Energy Build. 42, 869–880 (2010). doi:10.1016/j.enbuild


Energy Build. 42, 869–880 (2010). doi:10.1016/j.enbuild. 2009.12.009 Chen, S., Chen, B.: Network environ perspective for urban metabolism and carbon emissions: a case study of Vienna, Austria. Environ. Sci. Technol. 46, 4498–4506 (2012). doi:10.1021/ es204662k Chester, M., Pincetl, S., Allenby, B.: Avoiding unintended tradeoffs by integrating life-cycle impact assessment with urban metabolism. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 4, 451–457 (2012). doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2012.08.004 Cole, R.J., Kernan, P.C.: Life-cycle energy use in office buildings.pdf. Build. Environ. 31, 307– 317 (1996). doi:10.1016/0360-1323(96)00017-0 B. Goldstein and F.N. Rasmussen


Collinge, W.O., Landis, A.E., Jones, A.K., et al.: Dynamic life cycle assessment: framework and application to an institutional building. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 18, 538–552 (2013). doi:10. 1007/s11367-012-0528-2 Decker, E.H., Elliott, S., Smith, F.A., et al.: Energy and material flow through the urban ecosystem. Annu. Rev. Energy Environ. 25, 685–740 (2000). doi:10.1146/annurev.energy.25. 1.685 Fragkias, M., Lobo, J., Strumsky, D., Seto, K.C.: Does size matter? Scaling of CO2 emissions and U.S. Urban Areas. PLoS One 8, 1–8 (2013). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0064727 Frischknecht, R.: LCI modelling approaches applied on recycling of materials in view of environmental sustainability, risk perception and eco-efficiency. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 15, 666–671 (2010). doi:10.1007/s11367-010-0201-6 Goldstein, B., Birkved, M., Quitzau, M.-B., Hauschild, M.: Quantification of urban metabolism through coupling with the life cycle assessment framework: concept development and case study


Environ. Res. Lett. 8, 1–14 (2013). doi:10.1088/1748-9326/8/3/035024 Heinonen, J., Kyrö, R., Junnila, S.: Dense downtown living more carbon intense due to higher consumption: a case study of Helsinki. Environ. Res. Lett. 6, 034034 (2011). doi:10.1088/ 1748-9326/6/3/034034 Heinonen, J., Säynäjoki, A., Junnonen, J.-M., et al.: Pre-use phase LCA of a multi-story residential building: can greenhouse gas emissions be used as a more general environmental performance indicator? Build. Environ. 95, 116–125 (2016). doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2015.09.006 Hillman, T., Ramaswami, A.: Greenhouse gas emissions footprints and energy use benchmarks for eight U.S. cities. Environ. Sci. Technol. 44, 1902–1910 (2010). doi:10.1021/es9024194 Jones, C., Kammen, D.M.: Spatial distribution of U.S. household carbon footprints reveals suburbanization undermines greenhouse gas benefits of urban population density. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48, 895–902 (2014)


household carbon footprints reveals suburbanization undermines greenhouse gas benefits of urban population density. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48, 895–902 (2014). doi:10.1021/es4034364 Kalmykova, Y., Harder, R., Borgestedt, H., Svanäng, I.: Pathways and management of phosphorus in urban areas. J. Ind. Ecol. 16, 928–939 (2012). doi:10.1111/j.1530-9290.2012.00541.x Kellenberger, D., Althaus, H.-J.: Relevance of simplifications in LCA of building components. Build. Environ. 44, 818–825 (2009). doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2008.06.002 Kennedy, C.: A mathematical description of urban metabolism. In: Michael, P., Weinstein, R., Eugene, T. (eds.) Sustainability Science: The Emerging Paradigm and the Urban Environment, pp. 275–291. Springer, New York, Dordrecht, Heidelberg, London (2012) Kennedy, C., Hoornweg, D.: Mainstreaming urban metabolism. J Ind Ecol. 16, 780–782 (2012). doi:10.1111/j.1530-9290.2012.00548.x Kennedy, C., Cuddihy, J., Engel-yan, J.: The changing metabolism of cities. J. Ind. Ecol


J Ind Ecol. 16, 780–782 (2012). doi:10.1111/j.1530-9290.2012.00548.x Kennedy, C., Cuddihy, J., Engel-yan, J.: The changing metabolism of cities. J. Ind. Ecol. 11, 43– 59 (2007). doi:10.1162/jie.2007.1107 Kennedy, C., Pincetl, S., Bunje, P.: The study of urban metabolism and its applications to urban planning and design. Environ. Pollut. (2010). doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2010.10.022 Kennedy, C.A., Stewart, I., Facchini, A., et al.: Energy and material flows of megacities. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. (2015). doi:10.1073/pnas.1504315112 Khasreen, M.M., Banfill, P.F.G., Menzies, G.F.: Life-cycle assessment and the environmental impact of buildings: a review. Sustainability 1, 674–701 (2009). doi:10.3390/su1030674 Lenzen, M., Peters, G.M.: How city dwellers affect their resource Hinterland. J. Ind. Ecol. 14, 73– 90 (2010). doi:10.1111/j.1530-9290.2009.00190.x Loiseau, E., Roux, P., Junqua, G., et al.: Adapting the LCA framework to environmental assessment in land planning. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess


14, 73– 90 (2010). doi:10.1111/j.1530-9290.2009.00190.x Loiseau, E., Roux, P., Junqua, G., et al.: Adapting the LCA framework to environmental assessment in land planning. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 18, 1533–1548 (2013). doi:10.1007/ s11367-013-0588-y Loiseau, E., Roux, P., Junqua, G., et al.: Implementation of an adapted LCA framework to environmental assessment of a territory: important learning points from a French Mediterranean case study. J. Clean. Prod. 80, 17–29 (2014). doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.05. Minx, J., Baiocchi, G., Wiedmann, T., Barrett, J., Creutzig, F., Feng, K., Förster, M., Pichler, P.- P., Weisz, H., Hubacek, K.: Carbon footprints of cities and other human settlements in the UK. Environ. Res. Lett. 8, 35039 (2013) doi:10.1088/1748-9326/8/3/035039 LCA of Buildings and the Built Environment


McLeod, K.S.: Our sense of snow: the myth of John Snow in medical geography. Soc. Sci. Med. 50, 923–935 (2000). doi:10.1016/S0277-9536(99)00345-7 Morée, A.L., Beusen, A.H.W., Bouwman, A.F., Willems, W.J.: Exploring global nitrogen and phosphorus flows in urban wastes during the twentieth century. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 27, 836–846 (2013). doi:10.1002/gbc.20072 Nässén, J., Holmberg, J., Wadeskog, A., Nyman, M.: Direct and indirect energy use and carbon emissions in the production phase of buildings: an input–output analysis. Energy 32, 1593– 1602 (2007). doi:10.1016/j.energy.2007.01.002 Ostermeyer, Y., Wallbaum, H., Reuter, F.: Multidimensional Pareto optimization as an approach for site-specific building refurbishment solutions applicable for life cycle sustainability assessment. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 18, 1762–1779 (2013). doi:10.1007/s11367-013-0548-6 Ramesh, T., Prakash, R., Shukla, K.K.: Life cycle energy analysis of buildings: an overview. Energy Build. 42, 1592–1600 (2010)


Life Cycle Assess. 18, 1762–1779 (2013). doi:10.1007/s11367-013-0548-6 Ramesh, T., Prakash, R., Shukla, K.K.: Life cycle energy analysis of buildings: an overview. Energy Build. 42, 1592–1600 (2010). doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2010.05.007 Rosado, L., Niza, S., Ferrão, P.: A material flow accounting case study of the Lisbon metropolitan area using the urban metabolism analyst model. J. Ind. Ecol. (2014). doi:10.1111/jiec.12083 Scheuer, C., Keoleian, G.A., Reppe, P.: Life cycle energy and environmental performance of a new university building: modeling challenges and design implications. Energy Build. 35, 1049–1064 (2003). doi:10.1016/S0378-7788(03)00066-5 Stewart, I., Kennedy, C., Facchini, A.: Metabolism of megacities: a review and synthesis of the literature (2014) Tam, V.W., Li, J., Cai, H.: System dynamic modeling on construction waste management in Shenzhen, China. Waste Manag. Res. (2014)


Waste Manag. Res. (2014). doi:10.1177/0734242X14527636 Thormark, C.: A low energy building in a life cycle—its embodied energy, energy need for operation and recycling potential. Build. Environ. 37, 429–435 (2002). doi:10.1016/S03601323(01)00033-6 United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP): Building design and construction: Forging resource efficiency and sustainable development. Sustainable buildings and climate initiative (2012) Wolman, A.: The metabolism of cities. Sci. Am. 213(3), 179–190 (1965) Zhang, Y.: Urban metabolism: a review of research methodologies. Environ. Pollut. 178, 463–473 (2013). doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2013.03.052 Author Biographies Benjamin Goldstein urban systems researcher with a focus on the environmental assessment of built environments. Interests include industrial ecology, political ecology and urban metabolism. Freja Nygaard Rasmussen works within the field of LCA methodology applied to building design and building materials


Interests include industrial ecology, political ecology and urban metabolism. Freja Nygaard Rasmussen works within the field of LCA methodology applied to building design and building materials. Has contributed to national development of LCA tools and methodology for building certification systems. B. Goldstein and F.N. Rasmussen


Chapter 29 LCA of Food and Agriculture Teunis J. Dijkman, Claudine Basset-Mens, Assumpció Antón and Montserrat Núñez Abstract This chapter deals with the application of Life Cycle Assessment to evaluate the environmental sustainability of agriculture and food processing. The life cycle of a food product is split into six stages: production and transportation of inputs to the farm, cultivation, processing, distribution, consumption and waste management. A large number of LCA studies focus on the two first stages in cradle-to-farm gate studies, as they are the stages where most impacts typically occur, due to animal husbandry and manure handling, production and use of fertilisers and the consumption of fuel to operate farm machinery. In the processing step, the raw agricultural product leaving the farm gate is converted to a food item that can be consumed by the user. Distribution includes transportation of the food product before and after processing


Distribution includes transportation of the food product before and after processing. In the consumption stage, environmental impacts arise due to storage, preparation and waste of the food. In the waste management stage, food waste can be handled using a number of technologies, such as landfilling, incineration, composting or digestion. A number of case studies are looked at here where the life cycles of typical food products (meat, cheese, bread, tomatoes, etc.), and an entire diet are discussed. Other case studies deal with what LCA can conclude on the differences between conventional and organic farming, and the perceived advantages of local food items. Finally, methodological issues in agricultural LCA are discussed: the choice of functional unit, setting the boundary T.J. Dijkman (&) Division for Quantitative Sustainability Assessment, Department of Management Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Kongens Lyngby, Denmark e-mail: tedi@dtu.dk C


Dijkman (&) Division for Quantitative Sustainability Assessment, Department of Management Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Kongens Lyngby, Denmark e-mail: tedi@dtu.dk C. Basset-Mens CIRAD, UPR Hortsys, ELSA—Research Group, Campus International de Baillarguet, TA B-103/C, 34398 Montpellier Cedex 5, France A. Antón IRTA, Food and Agricultural Research Institute, Centre de Cabrils, Barcelona, Spain M. Núñez Irstea, UMR ITAP, ELSA-LCA Research Group, 361 Rue Jean François Breton, 34196 Montpellier, France © Springer International Publishing AG 2018 M.Z. Hauschild et al. (eds.), Life Cycle Assessment, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-56475-3_29


between technosphere and ecosphere, modelling flows of nutrients and pesticides, and the generally limited number of impact categories included in LCA studies. 29.1 Agricultural production systems have changed dramatically over the course of the past century. The introduction of the combustion engine around 1900 started the replacement of human labour with fossil energy. In 1910, the Haber–Bosch process to bind nitrogen from air was commercialised. Synthetic fertilisers could now be produced on an industrial scale. In the decades after the Second World War synthetic pesticides became widely used, which together with improved plant breeding led to the so-called Green Revolution: a spectacular increase in yields worldwide, but especially in Asia and Latin America. More recently, techniques to alter the genetic material of crops have been applied to develop new plant varieties, such as herbicide-resistant maize. Especially in Europe this development has led to controversy


Especially in Europe this development has led to controversy. These developments do not mean that there are no challenges remaining for agriculture: the world population keeps growing. The global population increased from 1.65 billion in 1900 to 6 billion in 2000. In 50 more years, an additional 2 to 4.5 billion people will be added to the population (FAO 2012). Part of this growing population is becoming increasingly affluent. More affluence results in a higher demand for food in general—a year-round supply of fruits and vegetables either imported off-season from distant countries or produced in artificialised production systems such as heated greenhouses—for meat in particular. Part of this population, especially in poor countries, is also increasingly living in cities (50% in 2007 at the world scale, Kulikowski 2007), implying the import of food from rural areas and the development of urban farming


Urban farming is showing a great potential for securing food supply, creating jobs and alleviating poverty in the Global South, but it can be accompanied by environmental and human health risks due to intensified and not always well-controlled practices. Today, food production is associated with major environmental problems. Rachel Carson’s famous 1962 book Silent Spring addressed an important environmental problem: the effects of pesticide use on non-target animals, including humans. Later, focus shifted to issues such as eutrophication due to nutrient runoff. Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions caused by agriculture are high on the agenda today. For example, the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) estimates that livestock alone contributes 18% to the global GHG emissions and that 50% of the methane emitted into the atmosphere by human activity is due to crop and livestock production (FAO 2013). Another environmental problem is the disruption of the nitrogen cycle


Another environmental problem is the disruption of the nitrogen cycle. Human extraction of nitrogen from air, mainly for fertiliser production, is larger than all natural processes extracting nitrogen from air. Subsequent application of the produced fertiliser results in extensive nitrogen emissions to surface water. Last, but not least, agriculture is the economic sector T.J. Dijkman et al.


with the largest requirements of water and land and the main driver of land use change, e.g. through the conversion of forests into agricultural land (FAO 2013). In order to gain insight into the environmental performance of agriculture and agricultural products, a considerable number of Life Cycle Assessments (LCA) of these products have been carried out in recent years. Also, several initiatives encourage the environmental life cycle-based assessment of food products, such as the Envi Food protocol (Food SCP RT 2013), the Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) pilots (European Commission 2016), and the well-established international LCA Food conference. This chapter focuses on the LCA of food products. Foods are here defined as products of plant or animal origin that provide macro and micro nutrients and energy to the human body. They can be either produced by a form of land-based agriculture and aquaculture or collected in the environment, such as seafood or fungi


They can be either produced by a form of land-based agriculture and aquaculture or collected in the environment, such as seafood or fungi. The structure of the chapter is as follows. First, the life cycle of food products is presented and discussed. After that, a selection of LCA studies is reviewed, illustrating typical LCAs of food products and describing some relevant cases. Finally, the main results and methodological issues found in the case studies are summarised. 29.2 The Life Cycle of Agricultural Food Products Six stages can be distinguished in the life cycle of agricultural products, which are somewhat different from the usual stages in LCA (see Chap. 6). A large part of the agricultural LCAs carried out are cradle-to-farm gate studies (see Fig. 29.1), because of the importance of agricultural production, and because the agricultural stage often bears the largest environmental impacts


29.1), because of the importance of agricultural production, and because the agricultural stage often bears the largest environmental impacts. 29.2.1 Production and Transportation of Inputs In most modern food systems, the first stage of the life cycle is the production and transportation of inputs, such as agrichemicals, machines, building elements, seeds and energy carriers such as fuel and electricity to the farm. The production of these inputs has a vast geographic scope and requires substantial transportation. Cradle-to-farm gate Farm inputs Agricultural stage Waste management Use DistribuƟon ProducƟon Fig. 29.1 The six stages in LCA of agricultural products LCA of Food and Agriculture


Agrichemicals include pesticides and fertilisers. Pesticide is a general term covering all chemicals (insecticides, fungicides, herbicides or others) used to protect the farm product from different pests, diseases or undesired plant growth. Both the production of pesticides and of fertilisers contribute to environmental impact potentials on the site of their production. The manufacturing of both nitrogenous and phosphorous fertilisers requires substantial energy inputs: according to a 2004 estimate (Swaminathan and Sukalac 2004 as cited in IPCC 2007), the fertiliser industry consumes 1.2% of the total annual energy use, and contributes similarly to GHGs emissions, mainly carbon dioxide and nitrous oxides. Moreover, phosphorus is derived from phosphate rock, which is a non-renewable, overexploited resource whose reserves may be depleted in 50–100 years (Cordell et al. 2009)


Moreover, phosphorus is derived from phosphate rock, which is a non-renewable, overexploited resource whose reserves may be depleted in 50–100 years (Cordell et al. 2009). In animal husbandry, the production and transport of animal feed is associated with emissions of N2O and CO2, mainly caused by fertiliser production and fuel use. The production of capital goods, such as machinery, buildings for animals, greenhouses or glasshouses can have contrasted contributions to overall food impacts. Usually, farm equipment is used for a longer period of time, whilst an LCA study typically considers the production of a given mass of product, or the production from 1 ha of land, so the impacts of the production and disposal of the farm equipment would have to be allocated over different product systems. Consequently, the impacts of the equipment are often relatively small


Consequently, the impacts of the equipment are often relatively small. In some cases though, for example growing tomatoes in tunnel greenhouses, the production of the greenhouse may be an important source of environmental impacts as reported by Torrellas et al. (2012a). Previous studies have shown the importance of including agricultural capital goods in environmental assessments. In particular, for protected crops, structural components of unheated greenhouses may account for nearly 30% of the total impacts in environmental impact categories such as resource depletion and global warming (Antón et al. 2014). In accordance with ISO standards (ISO 2006a, b), in order to be accurate when assessing the environmental impact of products, infrastructure must be taken into account as capital goods are explicitly part of the production system


Most guides recommend including capital goods in the assessment when they contribute more than 5% of the total impacts per impact category (EU-JRC 2010). 29.2.2 Agricultural Stage The second stage in the life cycle of food products is the agricultural stage. This stage starts at the origin of the food product, for example seeds, fertilisers, pesticides, water and energy in case of crops, and breeding of animals in case of meat or dairy products. In the agricultural stage, all these inputs are used to produce the food product. In this section, the most important processes are described. However, some LCA studies may include other processes than the ones listed here. T.J. Dijkman et al.


29.2.2.1 Application of Agrichemicals Aside from their beneficial effects on the crop growth and yield, application of agrichemicals results in emissions from the field and from the buildings in which animals are kept. Pesticides are mainly considered because of their toxic impacts on non-target species during or after application and bioaccumulation in harvested parts of the crops, potentially contributing to ecotoxicity and human toxicity impacts. Because pesticides are distributed over the agricultural field when used, the disposal stage is usually not included in LCAs. However, pesticide residues are present in packaging materials, in the sprayer and in the water used to clean the sprayer after application (van Zelm et al. 2014). Ideally, the disposal and subsequent fate of these residues should be included in LCA studies. Fertilisers are applied to supply nutrients to crops, mainly nitrogen (N), phosphorous (P) and potassium (K)


Fertilisers are applied to supply nutrients to crops, mainly nitrogen (N), phosphorous (P) and potassium (K). Fertiliser consumption typically contributes to potential impacts due to field emissions into all environmental compartments: air, water and soil. More specifically, on-farm use of fertilisers results in emissions of ammonia (NH3), nitrous oxide (N2O) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) to air, contributing to impact categories such as acidification, climate change and eutrophication. In addition, emissions of N in the form of nitrate (NO3 −), and of P in the form of phosphate (PO4 3−) and particulate P through erosion, result in eutrophication of nearby water bodies and ultimately of the ocean and the sea. In LCIA practice, N emissions are considered to result in marine eutrophication, and P emissions result in eutrophication of freshwater bodies (see Chap. 10). Farming practice influences the emissions of pesticides and fertilisers to the environment


10). Farming practice influences the emissions of pesticides and fertilisers to the environment. When performing an LCA study, the choice of agricultural data should reflect the goal and scope of the LCA study. The study might focus on either average practices, i.e. the agricultural practice that is most common among farmers, even if these are non-optimal practices, or innovative and alternative agricultural practices. Worst, best or alternative practices should only be modelled when primary data is present to document this behaviour, or when the LCA study aims to compare different practices (van Zelm et al 2014). 29.2.2.2 Animal Husbandry and Manure Management Apart from application of agrichemicals for forage production specified in the section above, enteric fermentation and manure handling are important contributors to impacts such as climate change, eutrophication and acidification. Enteric fermentation in the digestive tract of ruminants (cattle, sheep, goat) produces methane


Enteric fermentation in the digestive tract of ruminants (cattle, sheep, goat) produces methane. This process is one of the major contributors to GHG emissions in LCAs of products from these animals. In a typical cradle-to-farm gate study, it will contribute approximately one-third of total climate change impacts. Excretion and manure handling from both ruminants and monogastric animals (pigs, chickens and other birds) result in direct emissions of CH4 and N2O. Manure can be applied as fertiliser, thus replacing synthetic fertilisers. Prior to application on the field, LCA of Food and Agriculture


manure can be treated mechanically, biologically or chemically. Ten Hoeve (2015) showed that all manure treatment technologies have inherent environmental advantages and disadvantages, and hence, the choice of technology depends on local policy preferences, costs and practicality. 29.2.2.3 Farming Operations Fuel is consumed during a number of on-farm operations. Ploughing is an especially energy-intensive activity because of the large volume of soil that needs to be moved. Other fuel-consuming activities are the application of fertiliser and pesticides, roughage production, harvesting, heating of greenhouses, transport of the product, etc. Because the fuel used on farms is normally from a fossil origin, these actions induce non-renewable resource use and climate change impacts. The use of machinery in farm operations negatively affects soil quality through compaction and erosion


The use of machinery in farm operations negatively affects soil quality through compaction and erosion. Degraded soils are less productive and require extra inputs of fertilisers to maintain food production steady on the short term. In addition, soil ecological functions, such as buffering and filtering of toxic chemicals, water retention and soil-biota, are also affected. Hence, at the long term, unsustainable farming practices may lead to irreversible soil degradation. To maintain food production, land cover is transformed to accommodate new cropland areas, many times at the expense of natural vegetation. Today, croplands and pastures have become one of the largest biomes on the planet, occupying around 40% of the land surface (FAO 2011) and still expanding to feed the growing population


Today, croplands and pastures have become one of the largest biomes on the planet, occupying around 40% of the land surface (FAO 2011) and still expanding to feed the growing population. 29.2.2.4 Irrigation Irrigated crops sustain 40% of the global food production (Abdullah 2006) and are responsible for around 70% of global water withdrawal taken from surface and ground water bodies (FAO 2014). Especially in arid countries (e.g. Australia, India, Spain) and for water-intensive-crops (e.g. almonds, rice) impacts derived from water consumption might be one of the main contributors to overall food production environmental impacts. Water leaving the farm is a vector of salts, toxic and nutrient-rich pollutants, potentially affecting aquifers and surface water bodies downstream. In many situations, water withdrawal is also responsible for a large use of non-renewable energy resources, with important associated environmental impacts, in order to transport the water to the field


29.2.3 Processing Processing is any step to convert the raw farm product into a (packaged) food item that will be preceded and followed by logistic phases further described below. T.J. Dijkman et al.


There is a wide variety of processing steps that can be performed, some of which have been included in LCA studies. Both the types and importance of potential environmental impacts from food processing vary a lot in function of the food item considered, as showed in the selected case studies commented in Sect. 29.3. 29.2.4 Distribution All food life cycles include distribution stages dealing with (often refrigerated) transportation to the warehouse and to the retailer, sorting fruits, conditioning, packaging and cool storage for good maintenance of food properties. Together these processes can contribute a large share to the potential impacts of food products. These impacts are mostly related to the use of non-renewable energy, such as fuel use in transportation and electricity in cool storage. These distribution phases are particularly important in fresh products’ life cycles such as fruits and vegetables


These distribution phases are particularly important in fresh products’ life cycles such as fruits and vegetables. In animal products’ life cycle, where the contribution of the agricultural stage is large, the impacts from distribution will appear minor. In contrast, in fruit and vegetable products, the stage of refrigerated transport and storage can have a major contribution to the total impacts. This is particularly true for fruits and vegetables transported over long distances, especially when these are air-freighted (see Table 29.1). For instance, Sim et al. (2007) revealed that the transportation of French beans by airplane from Kenya to England constituted 95% of their overall impacts. The mode of transportation more than the distance itself will play a role. 29.2.5 Consumption The use stage of food mostly includes food transport from the retailer to the point of consumption as well as energy use for cooking and storing


29.2.5 Consumption The use stage of food mostly includes food transport from the retailer to the point of consumption as well as energy use for cooking and storing. This stage might include, depending on the LCA case study, private households or restaurants and institutional kitchens (Sonesson et al. 2003). Most studies that have included the use stage conclude that its environmental impacts are related to food storage or preparation. In the complete life cycle of a food product; however, these steps usually are minor contributors to overall impacts in most categories (Schau and Fet 2008). Table 29.1 CO2-eq emissions per tkm (1 tonne transported over 1 km) for different modes of transport (Cristea et al. 2013) Mode of transport Emissions per tkm (g CO2-eq) Road Rail Ship 5–12 Air 475–1000 LCA of Food and Agriculture


An increasing part of meals are consumed in restaurants, institutional kitchens, caterers, etc. According to some studies, the variations in energy use for cooking between restaurants and institutional kitchens are large as are the variations between different dishes. Dishwashing, which is a direct effect of home cooking and eating, uses large and varying amounts of either cold or hot water. Hot water is an important contributor to a household’s total energy use. An aspect that is currently finding its way into LCA practice is exposure of humans to pesticide residues in food during consumption, leading to human toxicity impacts. Even though most countries have regulations in place to limit human exposure to pesticides to levels considered safe, LCA practice aims to quantify any effects on humans, no matter how small these may be. With the release of the dynamiCROP model (Fantke et al. 2011) and USEtox 2.0 in 2015 (USEtox 2015), this pathway is covered in LCIA practice


With the release of the dynamiCROP model (Fantke et al. 2011) and USEtox 2.0 in 2015 (USEtox 2015), this pathway is covered in LCIA practice. 29.2.6 Waste Management The disposal stage of a food product consists of both handling of food waste generated along the entire life cycle, and the treatment of human excretion resulting from food intake. An alternative not considered here is to allocate the impacts of waste handling to the life cycle stage where the waste arises. The food sector is wasteful. About one-third of all food produced in Europe for human consumption is lost or wasted before people consume it. For fruits and vegetables, this number may reach *45%. In general, 20% of food produced is wasted along the supply chain, from agricultural production (9%) to post-harvest handling and storage (4%), processing and packaging (5%) and distribution (3%). The consumer discards between 15 and 33% (Williams and Wikström 2011)


The consumer discards between 15 and 33% (Williams and Wikström 2011). Reduction of food waste in the use stage has been shown to be an effective way to reduce food environmental impacts. Avoidance or at least reduction of waste must be the priority. Once waste is produced it is also a challenge to close loops of nutrients and other materials. The potential to extract valuable bio-chemicals or recover energy and nutrients from various waste streams is significant, namely the recovery of energy and nutrients through digestion and composting is one of the most common methods in the food sector (Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2015). A number of studies have dealt with food waste handling, considering options such as landfilling, incineration, centralised and decentralised composting, digestion to produce biogas and conversion to animal feed. The results of the studies do not uniformly point in one direction and there also appear to be trade-offs between different impact categories


The results of the studies do not uniformly point in one direction and there also appear to be trade-offs between different impact categories. For some impact categories, food waste and human excretion can result in substantial contributions to the impacts found. For example, various GHGs are emitted from wastewater treatment and subsequent sludge disposal. Depending on the wastewater treatment facility, emissions of N and P to surface water may T.J. Dijkman et al.


contribute to the eutrophication potential (see more on LCA of wastewater treatment in Chap. 34). 29.3 Selected LCA Studies on the Food Sector This section will start by describing a number of contrasted examples of LCAs of food products, followed by a number of case studies about various developments intended to lower the environmental cost of supplying food. This selection of LCA case studies does not aim at being exhaustive, but rather at illustrating the diversity of case studies. 29.3.1 Examples of Food Product LCAs Below, we describe a number of LCAs of different types of food products: meat, cheese, bread and tomato. The studies have been chosen based on representativeness of their outcomes among LCA studies for similar products, and inclusion of processes beyond the farm gate. This chapter closes with an LCA study of a full diet to give an overview of the relative magnitudes of impacts of different food items. 29.3.1.1 Meat Dalgaard et al


This chapter closes with an LCA study of a full diet to give an overview of the relative magnitudes of impacts of different food items. 29.3.1.1 Meat Dalgaard et al. (2007) conducted an LCA of Danish pork exported to the United Kingdom to determine the environmental hotspots. The functional unit of the study was 1 kg of Danish pork (carcass weight) delivered at the port of Harwich. The system boundaries in this study included the pig farm, the slaughterhouse and the use and maintenance of transport infrastructure required to transport the pork to the UK. Because of the chosen consequential-LCA approach (see Chaps. 8 and 9), the feed products considered were limited to grain and soybean meal, which is the most competitive feedstock. Grain is mixed with soybean meal to achieve the optimal protein content in the feed. Manure and other by-products are considered as co-products of pork meat


Grain is mixed with soybean meal to achieve the optimal protein content in the feed. Manure and other by-products are considered as co-products of pork meat. The manure is used as natural fertiliser or is anaerobically digested into biogas for district heating and electricity production. The animal by-products are used as feed or for energy purposes. For these by-products, a system expansion was done in which environmental impacts of synthetic fertiliser, fossil fuels, grain and soy for feed production were subtracted as avoided impacts. The study was limited to three environmental impact potentials: global warming, eutrophication and acidification. The impact assessment method used was EDIP97 with updated global warming characterisation factors for methane and nitrous LCA of Food and Agriculture


oxide. Normalisation and weighting steps, which are optional in LCA, were not done in this study. The results, summarised in Table 29.2, showed that the environmental hotspots were in the farm’s input stage (i.e. production of grain and soybean meal used as forage). Approximately two-thirds of the global warming impact, which was 3.6 kg CO2-eq over the entire life cycle, was attributed to the production of farm inputs out of which 2 kg CO2-eq came from the production of grain. The authors did not specify where in the production of grain these impacts arise. The agricultural stage (mainly pig housing) contributes a further 0.9 kg CO2-eq due to methane emissions from manure. Meat processing in the slaughterhouse contributed about 5% of the global warming impacts, while transport to the UK contributed less than that


Meat processing in the slaughterhouse contributed about 5% of the global warming impacts, while transport to the UK contributed less than that. The use of manure as natural fertiliser resulted in a negative impact: although methane was emitted from manure, the avoided impacts from not producing synthetic fertiliser were greater. More than 99% of the eutrophication impacts were associated with grain production, manure application and ammonia emissions from pig housing: about 122 and 47 g NO3 −-eq, respectively, out of 232 g NO3 −-eq in total. The acidification impacts are also highest in the agricultural stage: ammonia emissions from pig housing contributed 53% and grain production contributed 38% to the total impact of 45 g SO2-eq. Based on their findings, the authors proposed to further reduce the protein consumption in pig feed by shifting from soy meal to grain


Based on their findings, the authors proposed to further reduce the protein consumption in pig feed by shifting from soy meal to grain. Reducing the protein content in feed will reduce nitrogen excretion and emissions from pig manure in the pig housing or when spread out on the field as manure. Moreover, as soy meal has a Table 29.2 Contribution of the life cycle stages to the overall impacts of 1 kg of pork, at UK port Process Global warming potenƟal EutrophicaƟon potenƟal AcidificaƟon potenƟal Photochem. ozone formaƟon Ozone depleƟon potenƟal Soybean meal Grain Pig housing Energy use in pig housing Manure applicaƟon to field -6 Slaughterhouse -1 Transport aŌer slaughterhouse Total impact 3.6 kg CO2-eq 232 g NO3 -eq 45 g SO2-eq 1.3 g C2H4-eq 0.7 mg CFC11-eq − The contributions are expressed as percentages of total impact (%) (Dalgaard et al. 2007)


2007). The total percentage does not sum up to 100% because contributions between 0 and 1 or −1% are all referred to as, respectively, 1 or −1% T.J. Dijkman et al.


higher global warming impact per kg than barley, the global warming impact will decrease as well when shifting to grain. Now, one can ask whether pork production is a good representative of meat production. Or, how would the picture look like when looking at LCAs of poultry and beef? De Vries and De Boer (2010) reviewed 16 cradle-to-farm gate LCA studies on livestock production in nonorganic farming systems in OECD-countries. They recalculated the results found in the reviewed papers to fit three functional units: kg of meat, kg of protein and kg daily intake. Here we will focus on their findings for the first functional unit. All impacts found were fully allocated to the edible part of the products. The impact potentials considered were fossil energy use, global warming, acidification, eutrophication and land use. Among all meat products, beef showed the greatest fossil energy use. Energy use results for pork and chicken production were in the same range (see Table 29.3)


Among all meat products, beef showed the greatest fossil energy use. Energy use results for pork and chicken production were in the same range (see Table 29.3). For global warming, the reviewers found the highest impacts for beef, followed by pork, then chicken. Global warming, energy use and land use impacts from beef were considerably higher than impacts from pork and chicken. Ruminants (beef) emit high amounts of methane that contribute to global warming impacts. Energy consumption is also greater for beef production than for pork and chicken production. In terms of land use, beef has greater feed requirements (i.e. feed conversion ratio, kg feed per kg meat), which means that a larger extension of land is needed, both as direct land use (pasture), and as indirect land use for forage production. Moreover, cows live longer and because most cows only have one calf per year a larger breeding stock is needed


Moreover, cows live longer and because most cows only have one calf per year a larger breeding stock is needed. Regarding acidification and eutrophication, the variation within each type of meat was larger than the variation between the three types of meat. These variations were mainly attributed to differences in emissions of NH3 caused by different agricultural practices and climatic conditions. Concluding, chicken and pork meat at the farm gate show comparable impacts, while beef meat generally causes higher impacts. The internal variability of the impacts within each meat product was high, reflecting the variability of practices and environmental conditions


The internal variability of the impacts within each meat product was high, reflecting the variability of practices and environmental conditions. Table 29.3 Comparison of minimum and maximum environmental impact potentials per kg of chicken, pork and beef (De Vries and De Boer 2010) Livestock animal Energy use (MJ) Global warming (kg CO2-eq) Acidification (g SO2-eq) Eutrophication (g PO4 3−-eq) Land use (m2) Chicken 15–29 3.7–6.9 0.062–0.29 0.004–0.079 8.1–9.9 Pork 18–34 3.9–10 0.043–0.74 0.032–0.17 8.9–12.1 Beef 34–52 14–32 0.11–0.90 0.063–0.33 27–49 LCA of Food and Agriculture


29.3.1.2 Cheese A full LCA of a Swedish cheese was carried out by Berlin (2002). Though now relatively old, this study yielded conclusions that were confirmed by later studies. As a functional unit “1 kg of Ängsgården semi-hard cheese wrapped in plastic” was chosen. The product system included milk production at farm level, cheese production at dairy factory, retailing, household consumption and waste management. Data from 1 farm and 1 dairy, both in Southwest Sweden were used. In order to produce cheese, apart from milk, several other ingredients were used: rennet (enzymes from calves’ stomach), calcium chloride, saltpetre, salt and water. Packaging material was made of plastic and cardboard. A number of cleaning agents in the dairy was also included. Capital goods such as buildings and equipment were excluded from the study. The impacts from the farm were allocated over the milk and meat produced


Capital goods such as buildings and equipment were excluded from the study. The impacts from the farm were allocated over the milk and meat produced. The dairy factory produced four different kinds of cheese as well as a range of other products. An economic criterion was used to allocate impact over the different co-products of the factory. The following impact potentials and flow indicators were considered: global warming potential, acidification, eutrophication, photochemical ozone formation, material and energy use. Ozone depletion and ecotoxicity were dealt with in a qualitative way. For this reason, these 2 impact categories will not be extensively discussed here. Impact assessment was stopped at the characterisation step. Hence no normalisation or weighting was done. Characterisation factors from different methods and guidelines were used to calculate impacts. The results are summarised in Table 29.4


Hence no normalisation or weighting was done. Characterisation factors from different methods and guidelines were used to calculate impacts. The results are summarised in Table 29.4. Almost 95% of global warming impacts were attributed to farming, with methane emissions from fermentation in the cow rumen being the most important impact source. N2O emissions from soil processes and fertiliser production also played a key role. The remaining 5% of the impacts were attributed to cheese Table 29.4 Results of the LCA of 1000 kg of Swedish semi-hard cheese (Berlin 2002) Life cycle stage Global warming (kg CO2-eq) Acidification (kg SO2-eq) Eutrophication (kg O2-eq) Photochemical ozone formation (kg C2H4-eq) Farm inputs and agricultural stage 2.4 Other inputs <1 3.3 <0.1 Processing <1 <0.1 Retail <0.1 <1 <0.1 Use <0.1 <1 <0.1 Waste management −2 <−0.1 <−1 <−0.1 Total 2.5 T.J. Dijkman et al.


production and retailing. Here, CO2 emissions from natural gas and fuel use caused the largest share of the global warming impact. Impacts from electricity use were low, because the Swedish electricity grid mix was used for modelling the product system. Since Sweden’s electricity mix is largely made up of hydropower and nuclear power, GHG emissions from electricity production are low. Of the photochemical ozone formation impacts, in which only volatile organic compounds (VOC) were taken into account, 93% of the impact was attributed to farm emissions. As was the case for global warming impacts, the cow-produced methane was the main source of VOCs. The farming step in the life cycle of cheese was the source of more than 99% of the eutrophication and acidification impacts. These impacts were attributed to ammonia volatilisation from manure for both impact categories. Nitrate leaching from the soil was another important contributor to eutrophication


These impacts were attributed to ammonia volatilisation from manure for both impact categories. Nitrate leaching from the soil was another important contributor to eutrophication. We have seen that, in this study, the major contribution to the impact categories considered arose from the farm inputs and agricultural stage (i.e. the process of milk production). The cheese making process accounted for most of the remaining impacts. The study was published in 2002, but most of the data are from the mid to late 1990s. Despite the age of the study, the conclusion that most impacts of dairy products arise at the farm input stage and agricultural stage was also found in more recent LCAs. However, compared with newer studies, the share of these stages (93 to >99%) as found by Berlin (2002) is at the high end. For example, in their LCA study of the production of cheddar and mozzarella in the USA, Kim et al


For example, in their LCA study of the production of cheddar and mozzarella in the USA, Kim et al. (2013) found that the farm inputs and agricultural stages (feed production and on-farm emissions) contributed to more than 60% in seven out of nine impact categories. For cumulative energy demand, marine and freshwater eutrophication and human toxicity, other steps such as manufacturing, retail and consumption were identified as hotspots. In other studies dealing with cheese production in the Netherlands (Van Middelaar et al. 2011), New Zealand (Basset-Mens et al. 2007), Spain (González-García et al. 2013) and Serbia (Djekic et al. 2014), the agricultural stage was confirmed to be the most important environmental hotspot. In the distributive step the mode of transport more than the distance itself plays a role. In their study of New Zealand cheese exported to England, Basset-Mens et al


In the distributive step the mode of transport more than the distance itself plays a role. In their study of New Zealand cheese exported to England, Basset-Mens et al. (2007) found that the contribution of ship transport over more than 20,000 km from New Zealand port to England was lower than the contribution of truck and consumers’ car transport together in all impact categories except acidification (Basset-Mens et al. 2007). These authors also found that the average sewage treatment in England for human excretion was the second main contributor for eutrophication (31%) after farm production. Comparing the Berlin (2002) study with newer studies raises two relevant points. Firstly, the limited number of impact potentials that were quantified shows that the field of LCA has seen a considerable methodological development in the last 15 years