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

PARALLEL SESSION 3B: PACKAGING 8 th Int. Conference on LCA in the
Agri-Food Sector, 1-4 Oct 2012
tubErreur ! Source du renvoi introuvable.Erreur ! Source du renvoi introuvable.Erreur ! Source du
renvoi introuvable.. The authors experience is that once opened the large yogurt needs be consumed in a
timeframe that is not always met, where as the individual packets are consumed in one serving.
Table 4. Two types of yogurt packaging compared
Packaging (p) = 6 x 7 g PS a tubs
= 42 x 3.97 g CO2-eq/g
= 35 g PP a tub & lid + 2 g aluminium a foil
= 35 x 2.90 g CO2-eq/g + 2 x 12.57 g CO2-eq/g
Food impact (f)
= 166.7 g CO2-eq
= 6 x 175 g yogurt
= 126.7 g CO2-eq
b
= 900 g yogurt
= 1 050 x 1.22 g CO2-eq/g
= 1 281 g CO2-eq
b
Waste (w)
= 900 x 1.22 g CO2-eq/g
= 1 098 g CO2-eq
c = 5% residual yogurt in pack = 30% yogurt (mouldy in fridge)
Impact/pack = p + fw
= p + fw
= 166.7 + (1 281 x 5%) = 126.7 + (1 098 x 30%)
= 230.8 g CO2-eq /6 pack = 456.1 g CO2-eq/900 g tub
Impact/kg d = 219.8 g CO2-eq/kg = 506.7 g CO2-eq/kg
a. impact factors from Ecoinvent database (2012) using the Australian impact method
b. . Lindenthal et al., (2010)
c. emissions from the biodegradation of the wasted food were not considered in this model, if included the emission factor for food
waste would be higher
d. functional unit of packaging is the ‘delivery of consumed food per kg’
The results indicate that once food waste is included the environmental impact differ substantially. In the
yogurt example, the bulk 900g packet has a 24% lower GWP than the 6 pack when viewed in isolation of
food waste, and a 230% higher GWP when included in the above scenario. Appropriate portion sizing that
reduce food waste has a dominant impact, even with a food type such as yogurt that has a relatively low
GWP in comparison to meat based products.
From a design perspective it is also possible to foresee that packaging design to reduce food waste should
not always result in an increase in the environmental impact of packaging in isolation. Traditional packaging
design solutions such as lightwieghting and material selection could apply to make the 6 pack less material
intense than the 900 g tub.
4. Discussion: Possible means to integrate food waste into LCA
The results of the rice and yogurt case studies indicate scenarios where increases in packaging may reduce
the overall environmental impact by avoiding food waste. The most critical data gap to successfully
completing replicable LCA’s is in estimating the amount of food wasted. A very small variation in the percentage
of food wasted that has a high GWP potential like red meat substantially differs the environmental
impact of packaging once food waste is included. It is also acknowledge that packaging is only one of many
ways that food waste could be reduced. In a recent stakeholder engagement forum in Australia brand owners
identified that they rarely complete user trials on how packaging is actually used in the home (Verghese et
al., 2012b). To test the success of alternate packaging scenarios requires ‘additional fieldwork and empirical
research outside the traditional boundaries of LCA’ (Verghese, et al., 2012a, p. 403). Understanding food
waste in the home is a fundamental first step to improving the resolution of waste estimates. Multiple sensitivities
can quickly be run by altering the percentage wasted and packaging type to see the impact of reduced
wastage and they can be used to develop hypothesis that require empirical testing.
The packaging attributes that influence food waste elaborated in section 2 provide a useful guide for
packaging designers to assist them in designing packaging to faciliate reduced food waste. By taking a service
perspective the focus can move from the product itself, to the process it is used for (Vargo and Lush,
2004; Edvardsson et al., 2005). The product can be described by attributes, each attribute providing prerequisites
for the service. Each packaging attribute assists to script individual behaviour and experiences, and
potentially the environmental outcome e.g. , the amount of food waste generated. The consumer interaction
with the product depends on the design of the product, the consumer preferences and experiences, and the
context of the consumer (Löfgren, 2006).
295