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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

PARALLEL SESSION 2A: LAND USE 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 />

mated us<strong>in</strong>g the Australian <strong>in</strong>dicator s<strong>et</strong>. The <strong>in</strong>dicators of <strong>in</strong>terest <strong>in</strong>clude GWP, eutrophication, land use,<br />

water use and energy demand. However, only a subs<strong>et</strong> will be presented with<strong>in</strong> this paper, that be<strong>in</strong>g GWP.<br />

2.3 Horticultural systems<br />

With<strong>in</strong> the framework of this project, modell<strong>in</strong>g at farm level was required <strong>in</strong> order to m<strong>in</strong>imise use of<br />

average data to represent farms of differ<strong>in</strong>g sizes and <strong>in</strong> different regions. This is consistent with the purpose<br />

to compare and contrast impacts from farms <strong>in</strong> different geographical locations, with differ<strong>in</strong>g levels of <strong>in</strong>puts<br />

and outputs. A case study approach was taken, with l<strong>et</strong>tuce supplied to the Sydney mark<strong>et</strong> selected as<br />

the commodity of choice. L<strong>et</strong>tuce was selected for the follow<strong>in</strong>g reasons: it is a perishable crop and is ideally<br />

situated close to mark<strong>et</strong>; its relative economic importance with<strong>in</strong> Sydney’s horticultural production; a reasonable<br />

field plant<strong>in</strong>g area is occupied by l<strong>et</strong>tuce <strong>in</strong> Sydney; and l<strong>et</strong>tuce is a di<strong>et</strong>ary staple <strong>in</strong> the Australian<br />

di<strong>et</strong>, unlikely to be displaced from the supply cha<strong>in</strong>. The l<strong>et</strong>tuce mark<strong>et</strong>, be<strong>in</strong>g highly comp<strong>et</strong>itive, price<br />

driven and with an absence of mark<strong>et</strong> policies, is likely to expand us<strong>in</strong>g growers that can <strong>in</strong>crease their production<br />

with the least expense. Regional geographical locations identified based on ability to expand at<br />

m<strong>in</strong>imal cost, recent production growth and seasonality considerations <strong>in</strong>cluded specific regions <strong>in</strong> the states<br />

of Victoria and Queensland. Grow<strong>in</strong>g areas for l<strong>et</strong>tuce <strong>in</strong> Victoria and Queensland are approximately 900km<br />

from the Sydney mark<strong>et</strong> by road.<br />

Data was collected from two field farms <strong>in</strong> Sydney (LF1 and LF2), a hydroponic farm <strong>in</strong> Sydney (LF3)<br />

and a larger field farm <strong>in</strong> Victoria (LF4). Hydroponic grow<strong>in</strong>g (LF3) represented a low technology grow<strong>in</strong>g<br />

system, with no climate control and simple plastic shadecloth structures. Additional data will be collected<br />

from Queensland <strong>in</strong> the near future. Data was collected for iceberg, cos and/or baby cos l<strong>et</strong>tuce. Process <strong>in</strong>puts<br />

captured with<strong>in</strong> the system boundary for each farm, and calculated emissions to the compartments of<br />

air, soil and water <strong>in</strong>cluded those identified <strong>in</strong> Figure 2.<br />

INPUTS:<br />

Seeds/transplants<br />

Fertilisers<br />

Composts<br />

Manures<br />

Pesticides<br />

Herbicides<br />

Fungicides<br />

W<strong>et</strong>t<strong>in</strong>g agents<br />

Irrigation water<br />

Fuel<br />

Electricity<br />

Capital equipment<br />

L<strong>et</strong>tuce at farm<br />

INPUTS:<br />

Packag<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Wash<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Capital equipment<br />

Electricity<br />

Transport<br />

L<strong>et</strong>tuce at Sydney<br />

mark<strong>et</strong><br />

EMISSIONS to AIR:<br />

N2O<br />

CO2<br />

VOC<br />

EMISSIONS TO<br />

SOIL/WATER:<br />

Nitrate<br />

Phosphate<br />

Sulfate<br />

Pesticide<br />

Figure 2. Process <strong>in</strong>puts captured with<strong>in</strong> the system boundary for farms.<br />

2.4 Urban systems<br />

IMPACTS:<br />

Global Warm<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Eutrophication<br />

Land use<br />

Water use<br />

Cumulative energy<br />

demand<br />

Accord<strong>in</strong>g to Sydney’s M<strong>et</strong>ropolitan Plan (NSW Department of Plann<strong>in</strong>g 2010) there are two dom<strong>in</strong>ant<br />

forms of urban hous<strong>in</strong>g: greenfield and <strong>in</strong>fill. Greenfield requires large tracts of peri-urban land to be converted<br />

en masse <strong>in</strong>to d<strong>et</strong>ached low density hous<strong>in</strong>g. Infill development requires the purchase and demolition<br />

of exist<strong>in</strong>g, dated, structures, and the construction of new, mid to high-rise apartment complexes <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>ner<br />

suburban areas. From scenario 1 the model requires the impacts from 1 ha of greenfield development to be<br />

estimated, while scenario 2 requires impacts from 1 ha (equivalent) of <strong>in</strong>fill development (equivalency based<br />

on hous<strong>in</strong>g a certa<strong>in</strong> population). An <strong>in</strong>itial challenge was how to model <strong>in</strong>fill development given that <strong>in</strong>fill<br />

does not directly replace peri-urban horticultural land as greenfield hous<strong>in</strong>g systems do, on a per hectare<br />

basis. By calculat<strong>in</strong>g the number of houses per hectare <strong>in</strong> a greenfield development, and the associated persons<br />

per hectare based on population statistics, the correspond<strong>in</strong>g number of <strong>in</strong>fill style apartments to house<br />

the same population could be d<strong>et</strong>erm<strong>in</strong>ed. For the purposes of this study, the typical greenfield house is a<br />

250m 2 d<strong>et</strong>ached s<strong>in</strong>gle level brick veneer house, with concr<strong>et</strong>e slab and tiled roof on a 550m 2 block of land.<br />

An average of 2.5 persons lives <strong>in</strong> a typical greenfield house <strong>in</strong> Australia (ABS <strong>in</strong> Crawford and Fuller<br />

2011). Us<strong>in</strong>g this <strong>in</strong>formation, and d<strong>et</strong>erm<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g the number of houses (18.18 houses per ha) and population<br />

per hectare (45.45 persons per ha) for a typical greenfield development, the equivalent number of <strong>in</strong>fill<br />

apartments was ascerta<strong>in</strong>ed. The average population of a mid-rise apartment <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>ner suburban Australia is<br />

estimated at 1.6 per apartment (Crawford, 2011). Therefore 28.4 apartments would be needed to house the<br />

same population as 1 ha of greenfield hous<strong>in</strong>g, for those scenarios requir<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>fill development. It was assumed<br />

that these apartments were housed <strong>in</strong> one mid-rise (four or five storeys) high-density apartment block.<br />

151

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!