Browsing by Subject "LCA"

The environmental impacts of food production and consumption are substantial, and therefore, it’s important that their impacts are investigated and communicated. Life cycle assessment (LCA) is one promising method to assess the environmental impacts of products, like food products. It’s a process to assess products' environmental impacts through their life-cycle, and it’s used, for example, in policy making, companies’ strategic decision making and when communicating products’ environmental impacts. LCA is used actively nowadays, for example, over the past year few Finnish food companies have decided to calculate and communicate their products’ carbon footprints using LCA. LCA methodology has clearly developed during the past decades. However, there isn’t a shared view on all of the methodological issues. In fact, one essential methodological challenge is allocation situation. In allocation situation all inputs and outputs, such as, green house gas emissions produced in the product system are to be distributed between the studied product and its co-products. For instance, when the studied product is milk it should be determined how the inputs and outputs produced in the dairy cattle farm are to be divided between the farm’s products: beef and raw milk. Furthermore, in the dairy factory it needs to be decided how the inputs and outputs are to be divided between the further processed milk and other dairy products produced in the factory. The aim of the thesis is to investigate the allocation situations in the LCAs of food, as well as, to present, compare and find weaknesses and strengths of different ways of handling allocation situations and ways of guiding them. This is done in a literature study and in a LCA case-study made for Finnish farmed rainbow trout. It was calculated that the choice of how to handle the allocation situation has a major impact on the environmental impacts directed to the product under investigation. For example, climate change impacts and eutrophication of water bodies caused by production of a trout fillet can halve or double depending on the choice of the allocation method. Several different allocation methods were indentified, including ways to avoid allocation and ways to allocate the inputs and outputs, for instance, on the basis of the products' prices. To improve the harmonization of food LCAs and to reduce subjectivity it is important that there is guidance when choosing the allocation method. However, the existing LCA guides investigated don’t give enough support for the allocation situations. They provide divergent instructions and recommendations; they aren’t very specific in the allocation instructions and they allow choosing almost any allocation method, and therefore there is clear need for more specific instructions. Thus, it is evident that there is need to discuss and agree on the suitability of allocation methods to be used in LCAs of different food products. Also, because of the existing uncertainty one should be really careful when communicating exact environmental impacts, instead, one should consider presenting environmental impacts in a more coarse scale, for example, by presenting the scale of the results when using different allocation methods.

Current climate change is based on growth of greenhouse gas emissions, which are mainly due to human activities. Activities related to the global food system are responsible for about fourth of the global greenhouse gas emissions. Thereby, the emissions of the food system, which are related to the products that it provides, should be decreased. Greenhouse gas emissions of products can be estimated and communicated by the indicator of carbon footprint, whereas reduced greenhouse gas emissions of the products’ users, resulting from the emission improvements related to the products, can be presented by the carbon handprint. The aim of this master thesis was to calculate the carbon footprint of a Finnish food business’ meat containing food product. In addition, the food product’s meat component was replaced with different meat alternatives in order to assess the carbon handprints, and to compare the carbon footprint and carbon handprint as information providers of climate impacts. The main method used in this thesis was life cycle assessment, while methodology of carbon handprint was used as an additional method. Life cycle assessment was used to assess the carbon footprint, and it was applied according to the ISO standards of 14040 and 14044. Primary data for the study was collected from the Finnish food business through interviews by phone and e-mail, while secondary data was gathered from different sources. The actual calculation process of the carbon footprint and carbon handprints were executed by using Excel. The carbon footprint of the studied food product was found to be 1,20 kgCO2eq/one packaged food product, while the handprints based on the meat alternatives were found to be 0,27-0,39 kgCO2eq/one packaged product. Carbon footprint and handprint were found to be different as communication tools of climate impacts. In addition, they were discovered to have their advantages and limitations depending on the chosen point of view.

Agriculture is emitting ~6.2 Gt CO2-Eq. annually, which accounts for ~12 % of the total annual net anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions globally. Agriculture emits N2O and CH4, and it is responsible globally for ~79% of N2O emissions and ~40% CH4 emissions. These emissions are vital since N2O and CH4 are 273- and 27-times greater GHG than CO2, respectively. There are many different food production systems developed to reduce these emissions. One of the most promising systems is agroforestry. Agroforestry is a complex system where trees and/or shrubs are interacting with crops and/or animals. Agroforestry is an old practice which can provide plenty of advantages, e.g., increased yields, increased biodiversity, and increased carbon sequestration. Therefore, the interest towards it has been increasing in the last decades. In this master’s thesis the different maize production systems in Zambia were studied. The comparison was conducted between low-input maize monoculture where only external input was maize seed for sowing; high-input maize monoculture where mineral fertilizers and seeds for sowing were used; and maize-Faidherbia albida agroforestry system where only external input was maize seed for sowing. The goal of this master’s thesis was to find out, which production system is having the lowest climate change potential in the Central Province of Zambia. To conduct this study, Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) -method was used. Two cases were used in LCA, i.e., Case 1 with functional unit (FU) of 1000 kg d.m. maize grain, and Case 2 with FU of 3 ha maize field. Also, four sensitivity analyses were conducted. The result from this study indicates that agroforestry system had the lowest climate change potential in both cases, and in most of the sensitivity analyses. Only exception was found in the sensitivity analysis where above-ground biomass of F. albida was substituting hydropower. In this sensitivity analysis the monoculture without external inputs had the lowest climate change potential. Since the food production in Zambia must increase in the future to reduce the hunger, the high-input system or agroforestry system are more favourable options as they produce higher crop yields. When taking the climate change potential into account, according to the results of this thesis, the agroforestry system provides more benefits. The results of this thesis can provide new knowledge which could be used in the future decision-making processes. Yet, in the future studies, more complex agroforestry systems with more sustainability pillars should be considered to provide improved information for decision-making.

Hirvenmetsästys on Suomessa suurelle osalle metsästäjistä tärkeä harrastus, ja yhteiskunnallisestikin sillä on suurta merkitystä. Se on metsästyspäivissä ja lihan arvossa mitattuna Suomen merkittävin metsästysmuoto. Hirvenmetsästys tapahtuu usein seuruemetsästyksenä. Seuruemetsästys tapahtuu suurella joukolla laajoilla alueilla, jolloin syntyy päällekkäisyyttä ja mahdollisia ristiriitoja muun virkistyskäytön kanssa. Mikäli samalla metsästysalueella on useita hirviseurueita (esim. useita Metsähallituksen aluelupaa hakeneita seurueita metsästää samalla alueella), saattaa niiden välille syntyä kitkaa. Tällaisten seikkojen vuoksi harrastuksen sosiaalinen kestävyys saattaa kärsiä. Miten sosiaalista kestävyyttä voitaisiin parantaa? Mitä paremmin metsästysjärjestelyistä vastaavat viranomaiset tuntevat alueellaan metsästävät hirviseurueet, sitä paremmin ristiriitoihin ajautumista kyetään ennaltaehkäisemään. Yksi keino tutustua hirviseurueisiin on niiden profilointi. Profiloinnilla tarkoitetaan tässä työssä homogeenisten osajoukkojen tunnistamista heterogeenisesta vastaajajoukosta. Työssä tarkastellaan Pohjois-Suomessa metsästäviä hirviseurueita heidän taustojensa, toimintansa ja häiriöitä koskevien näkemystensä suhteen. Vastaajajoukko koostuu metsästyslain 8§ tarkoittaman vapaan metsästysoikeuden alueella metsästävistä hirviseurueista. Näistä seurueista Metsähallitus on kerännyt aineiston vuonna 2013. Alueella metsästää noin 1 400–1 600 hirviseuruetta, joista kysely lähetettiin kaikille, joiden yhteystiedot olivat saatavilla (n = 1 388). Näistä vastasi 825 (59,44 %). Vastauksia kertyi koko tutkimusalueelta melko tasaisesti, muutamaa poikkeusta lukuun ottamatta. Profiloinnissa käytettiin nominaaliasteikollisten muuttujien LCA:ta (Latent Class Analysis). Aineiston herkkyyttä menetelmävalinnalle tarkasteltiin järjestysasteikollisten muuttujien faktorianalyysillä ja korrelaatioanalyysillä. Jaoin seurueet LCA:lla 2–6 profiiliin. Eri profiilimääriin jaotteluja arvioin informaatiokriteereillä ja pyrin löytämään tulkinnallisesti mielekkään, aineistoon sopivan jaottelun profiileihin. Tällainen oli etenkin neljän profiilin ratkaisu. Nimesin eri profiilien seurueet ja analysoin eri profiilien esiintymisen riippuvuutta suhteessa seurueiden sijoittumiseen tutkimusalueella etelä–pohjois-suunnassa. Tämän tarkastelun mukaan ns. vapaan metsästysoikeuden alueella on 1) yksilömetsästystä suosivia pienseurueita (Ylä-Lappi), 2) monimuotoisia suurseurueita (Keski-Lappi), 3) seisontahaukkua suosivia seurueita (Etelä-Lappi), sekä 4) seisovaa ja siirtyvää haukkua suosivia seurueita (tutkimusalueen eteläosa). Tarkastelin myös tunnistamieni profiilien yhteyttä siihen, millaisia häiriöitä tai ristiriitoja niissä oli koettu. Häiriönä erityisesti nousi esille suden merkitys hirven metsästystä haittaavana tekijänä profiilissa 4). Kun tarkastelin pelkästään muiden seurueiden kanssa ristiriitoja kokeneita seurueita (40 % kaikista seurueista) tunnistin yhden profiilin, jossa oli ongelmia koettu muita enemmän. Tämä profiili muodostui seurueista, jotka olivat osallistujamäärältään suurimmat ja käyttivät myös paljon koiria, samoin he kuuluivat aluelupapäätökseen monen muun seurueen kanssa. Näihin seikkoihin vaikuttamalla ja niistä tiedottamalla, voisi olla mahdollista parantaa alueen hirvenmetsästyksen sosiaalista kestävyyttä.

Global growing demand to produce more food with less inputs and energy without causing greenhouse gas emissions challenges the current practice of using mineral fertilizers which are produced from new and partly non-renewable raw materials with considerable amount of energy. On the other hand recycled fertilizers made of different side streams and biomasses also need to be processed before usage or the amount needed per area is so great that the environmental advantages might be lost. The aim of this study was to discover and compare the energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions of recycled fertilizers (ammonium sulfate, biogas digestate and meat bone meal) and mineral fertilizer in production of oat by using Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). All recycled fertilizers were found to cause less greenhouse gas emissions and consume less energy than mineral fertilizer. The least emissions caused the usage of ammonium sulfate and the best energy efficiency was achieved with biogas digestate fertilization. Considered relative to global increase in food and energy consumption and control of climate change and recycling of raw materials recycled fertilizers proved to be effective compared to mineral fertilizer. Also on the grounds of land use and yield recycled fertilizers turned out to be potential substitute for mineral fertilizers. Further studies are still needed due to large number of raw materials and constantly increasing amount of processing techniques of recycled fertilizers.

Current diets with high meat consumption have several adverse effects on the environment and human health. Different alternative foods such as whole plant foods (WPFs), plant-based meat substitutes, and novel/future foods (NFFs) are potential options to reduce the environmental pressure caused by meat. The aim of this thesis was to study the effect of replacing meat with alternative foods on the climate impact, energy use, and nutrient intakes in Finnish diets. The study was carried out by formulating scenarios for the current diet using the National FinDiet2017 survey, in which all meat or half of meat was substituted with WPFs, PBMSs, and NFFs. The daily climate impact and energy use were the highest for the current diet while substituting meat with alternative foods reduced the climate impact by 13%−37% and energy use by 15%−40% from the current diet. The largest decrease in the environmental impacts was found when all meat was replaced, especially with WPFs. Moreover, a similar reduction of the climate impact and energy use was found for all alternative scenarios when the environmental impacts were integrated with nutritional properties by using the NRD index. Regarding nutrient intakes in Finnish diets, substituting meat resulted in several beneficial changes such as increased levels of folate and fiber or decreased levels of saturated fatty acid. On the other hand, full replacement of meat with plant-based alternatives led to decreased intake of some nutrients, such as vitamin B12. Even though some NFFs are still under development, this thesis showed that they may provide nutritious options in future diets. To conclude, replacing even half of the meat may be beneficial for improving nutrient intakes and reducing the environmental pressure in terms of lower climate impact and energy use.