FOOD CHAIN SUSTAINABILITY-from LCA to sustainable food production

systems

Thomas OhlssonSIK – The Swedish Institute for Food and

Biotechnology

SUSTAINABLE FOOD PRODUCTION

• The Brundtland “Mantra”: ”Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (Brundtland Commission,1987)

• "Sustainability is an economic state where the demands placed upon the environment by people and commerce can be met without reducing the capacity of the environment to provide for future generations. (Paul Hawkin, 1993)

THE 3 PILLARS OF SUSTAINABILITY

• Environmental performance

• Social responsibility

• Economical viability and governance

Env

ironm

ent

Soc

iety

Eco

nom

y

Sustainability of food chains

SUSTAINABLITY INDICATORS –Many available general systems

• UN - Global Compact• Social Accountability 8000 Sai• Dow Jones Sustainability Indicator• International Institute For Sustainable

Development • UNEP Life Cycle Initiative• www.fairtradefederation.com

SOCIAL CONCERNS RE SUSTAINABLE FOOD PRODUCTION AND SUPPLY

• Labour practices– No child labour– No discrimination– Freedom of association– Access to health care

• Rural development– Stabilisation of rural population

• Human capital development• Citizenship

ECONOMICAL CONCERNS RE SUSTAINABLE FOOD PRODUCTION

• Efficiency of resource use– Value added– Lean production

• Risk and crisis management– Adequacy of plans

• Prevention of corruption and bribery• Fair distribution of revenues

– Responsible purchasing– Customer relations

ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS RE SUSTAINABLE FOOD PRODUCTION

• Eutrophication (75 % of total)– High nitrogen leakage– High phosphorus leakage

• Persistent toxicity– Cadmium and heavy metals– Dioxin

• Energy (17% of total)– Extensive dependence on fossil fuels

• Biological risks– Resistant pathogens,..

SWEDISH FOOD PRODUCTION CHAIN

• 75 % of eutrophication

• 25 % of green house gases

• 17 % of energy use

Life cycle analysis – LCA in the food chain

Resources:

Energy, raw material,Land

• Emissions-to air

• -to water• -to land

• Waste

LCA-Food database• Milk• Cheese• Beef• Pork• Poultry• Bread • Potatoes• Lettuce• Cod• Oils• …….

Major project byThe Federation of Swedish Farmers

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Agriculture Transport toabbatoir

Abbatoir Packagings Distribution Retail, householdand cooking

[MJ/kg meat]

Other energy sourcesElectricityFossil fuels

LCA OF PORK PRODUCTIONEnergy

Source: ”Maten och Miljön”, LRF

0

50

100

150

200

250

Agriculture Transport to dairy Dairy Packagings Distribution Retail andhouseholds

[g O2-equiv./litre milk]

NH3NOxNitrogen (water)Phosphorus (water)Other

LCA OF MILK Eutrophication

Source: ”Maten och Miljön”, LRF

LCA OF COD Energy use

(Ziegler et al, 2002)

-1.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

Wheat growing Growing otheringredients

Bakery Packagings Distribution Retail,household and

cooking

[MJ/kg hamburger bread]

Fossil raw material in packagingsDistrict heatingElectricityFossil fuels

LCA OF HAMBURGER BREADEnergy

Source: ”Maten och Miljön”, LRF

-4.0

-2.0

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

Home made Semi-finished Ready-to-eat

MJ/

mea

l

Packaging production

Waste Managament

Households

Home transport

Residues, use of

Industry

Truck transports

Potato farming

Wheat farming

Carrot farming

Cattle farming

Pig farming

Dairy farming

LCA IN THE CONSUMER PHASEEnergy per portion of a meatball meal

(Sonesson et al, 2005)

LCA-plus, towards a Sustainability Index • LCA combined with other

environmental factors and/or socio-economical aspects– Land use– Fishing method– Sea floor effects– Nutritional value– Working conditions– Salary level– Health care– Return of Investment

SUSTAINABLE FOOD PRODUCTION Using LCA for minimisation of resource

use and emissions

• Water use minimisation– Closed loop food factory

• Energy use minimisation– Process integration for the food industry;

energy analysis with pinch technology • Waste minimisation

– Plant material waste reduction and reprocessing

– Production planning and product sequencing- Future scenario

REDUCTION OF ENERGY AND WATER CONSUMPTION IN FOOD INDUSTRY BY

APPLICATION OF MEMBRANE SEPARATION TECHNOLOGY

Objectives are to investigate the potential of membrane technology for reducing the energy- and water consumption in food industry with focus on membrane applications at high temperatures by nano-filtration (NF)

Applied research Applied research aimed at developing industrial membrane applications where environmental (LCA), microbiological and control aspects (sensors) will be highlighted.

0

1 000

2 000

3 000

4 000

5 000

6 000

7 000

8 000

Today's system Technical development Fewer deliveries

kg C

O2 -

equi

v./w

eek

Soy meal

Extra milk

Cleaning

CLOSED LOOP DAIRYGlobal Warming Potential

(Sonesson & Östergrenn, 2002)

Contribution to GWP per profit (kg CO2 eq./SEK)

0,0

0,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

2,5

System oftoday

Combination 2 Combination 3 Combination 4

kg C

O2

/ SEK

Drying/sifting of CAP

NF

UF

Sterilisation of porc bone meal

Sterilisation of beef bone meal

Sifting of porc grax

Separation of porc grax

Evaporation of protein solution

Evaporation of stickwater

Spray drying of P100

Drying of porc grax

Drying of beef grax

(Davies et al, 2005)

MINIMISATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT BY OPTIMISED PRODUCT SEQUENCING IN YOGHURT PRODUCTION

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AS OF TODAYS

PRODUCTION

Optimised product sequence

Future product sequence

Dairy A with modified line

74 % 50 %

Dairy B with new line

76 % 58 %

(Berlin, 2005)

HIGH LOSSES CAUSE UNNECESSARY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

Grower

Transport

Packer

Transport

Retail

Transport

Consumer1,5 kg

1,55 kg

1,70 kg

2,0 kg 15% loss

10% loss

2% loss

7% loss(+27% peel)

1,0 kg Meal