28.12.2012 Views

LCA Food 2012 in Saint Malo, France! - Manifestations et colloques ...

LCA Food 2012 in Saint Malo, France! - Manifestations et colloques ...

LCA Food 2012 in Saint Malo, France! - Manifestations et colloques ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

PARALLEL SESSION 1C: ECODESIGN AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 8 th Int. Conference on <strong>LCA</strong> <strong>in</strong> the<br />

Agri-<strong>Food</strong> Sector, 1-4 Oct <strong>2012</strong><br />

Table 1. Questionnaire summary of <strong>in</strong>put data she<strong>et</strong>, for reference and case study scenarios.<br />

Tomato crop, multi- Tomato crop, Venlo Rose crop, Venlo<br />

tunnel greenhouse glasshouse<br />

glasshouse<br />

Issue Input Units Case study Refer- Case study Refer- Case Referenceence<br />

study ence<br />

Crop Crop name Tomato Tomato Tomato Tomato Roses Roses<br />

100<br />

Yield produce·m<br />

-2<br />

20.0 kg·m -2* 16.5<br />

kg·m -2<br />

56.5 kg·m -2 56.5<br />

kg·m -2<br />

289<br />

stem·m -2*<br />

Density p·m -2 1.23 1.23 1.25 1.25 8.5 8.5<br />

Stems per plant num- 2 2 2 2<br />

ber·p -1<br />

275<br />

stem·m -<br />

2<br />

Growth period weeks 52 52 52 52 52 52<br />

Substrate Type of substrate name Perlite Perlite Rockwool RockRockRockwoolwoolwool Substrate life span years 3 3 1 1 1 1<br />

Bag volume l 30 30 14 14 6.42 6.42<br />

Plants per bag number 3 3 3 3 3 3<br />

Structure Number of spans number 10<br />

data<br />

*<br />

18 25 25 21 21<br />

Span width m 6 *<br />

8 8 8 9.6 9.6<br />

Span length m 60 * 135 200 200 200 200<br />

Roof vents: total greenhouse<br />

number<br />

number 10 * 36<br />

Gutter height m 4.0 * 4.5 6 6 6 6<br />

Ridge height m 4.5 * 5.8 6.8 6.8 6.76 6.76<br />

Greenhouse walls material LDPE * PC Clear glass Clear Diffuse<br />

glass glass *<br />

Clear<br />

glass<br />

Greenhouse frame life span years 15 15 15 15 15 15<br />

Greenhouse roof cover<strong>in</strong>g life<br />

span<br />

years 3 3 15 15 15 15<br />

Greenhouse walls life span years 3 * 15 15 15 15 15<br />

Energy Total greenhouse electricity kWh·m<br />

consumption<br />

consumption<br />

-2 0.641 0.641 10 10 633 633<br />

Water<strong>in</strong>g Water consumption L·m -2 475 475 795 795 902.5 902.5<br />

Irrigation system open/closed type Open Open Closed Closed Closed Closed<br />

Fertilisers N kg·m -2 0.050 * 0.060 0.1688 0.1688 0.1163 0.1163<br />

P2O5 kg·m -2 0.035 * 0.038 0.04058 0.04058 0.0276 0.0276<br />

K2O kg·m -2 0.135 * 0.117 0.18548 0.18548 0.128 0.128<br />

Pesticides Fungicides kg·m -2 0.00285 0.00285 0.0007 0.0007 0.0036 0.0036<br />

Insecticides kg·m -2 0.00038 0.00038 0.0003 0.0003 0.0006 0.0006<br />

Heat<strong>in</strong>g Heat<strong>in</strong>g type No heat<strong>in</strong>g No heat<strong>in</strong>g<br />

CHP CHP CHP CHP<br />

Fuel none NO NO Natural gas Natural Natural Natural<br />

gas gas gas<br />

Fuel consumption m 3 ·m -2 0.00 0.00 42.1 * 64.7 101.7 101.7<br />

*<br />

Data <strong>in</strong> case study differ<strong>in</strong>g from reference situation<br />

The <strong>in</strong>dicators and impact categories selected for the environmental assessment were: the five midpo<strong>in</strong>t<br />

impact categories def<strong>in</strong>ed by the CML2001 m<strong>et</strong>hod v.2.04 (Gu<strong>in</strong>ée <strong>et</strong> al., 2002), namely, abiotic depl<strong>et</strong>ion<br />

(kg Sb eq), acidification (kg SO2 eq), eutrophication (kg PO4 -3 eq), global warm<strong>in</strong>g (kg CO2 eq) and photochemical<br />

oxidation (kg C2H4 eq); one energy flow <strong>in</strong>dicator (cumulative energy demand, MJ); and one <strong>in</strong>ventory<br />

flow <strong>in</strong>dicator (water use, m 3 ).<br />

In this study, the environmental calculator was used to analyse three case studies. Each case was a type of<br />

production system that was compared with the correspond<strong>in</strong>g reference production system. The ma<strong>in</strong> data for<br />

each situation were <strong>in</strong>cluded <strong>in</strong> Table 1. The first case study was for tomato crop <strong>in</strong> a smaller multi-tunnel<br />

greenhouse with LDPE walls, a higher yield and lower doses of fertilisers. The second case was an energysav<strong>in</strong>g<br />

cultivation m<strong>et</strong>hod for tomato crop <strong>in</strong> a Venlo glass greenhouse with 35% reduced heat demand and<br />

the same yield. F<strong>in</strong>ally, the third case study was rose crop <strong>in</strong> a greenhouse with diffuse glass, an antireflective<br />

coat<strong>in</strong>g and a 5% higher yield.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!