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

PARALLEL SESSION 4B: DIET 8 th Int. Conference on LCA in the
Agri-Food Sector, 1-4 Oct 2012
Figure 2. NRD9.3 scores of daily diets. Figure 2 has the same format as Fig. 1. A: Gerbens-Leenes and Nonhebel,
(2002); B: Risku-Norja et al., (2009); C: Collins and Fairchild, (2007); D:Risku-Norja et al., (2008);
E: Peters et al., (2007); F: Pathak et al., (2010); G: Saxe et al., (2012)
3.3. Global warming potential of diets
Four studies evaluated the GWP of daily diets (Pathak et al., 2010; Risku-Norja et al., 2008; Risku-Norja
et al., 2009; Saxe et al., 2012). Within Risku-Norja et al., 2009 and 2008 we distinguish between diets containing
food products from conventional (A) and organic (B) agriculture. In Figure 3 we show the indexed
GWP per FU. In the original studies, the GWP per day was lower for diets that had lower contributions of
animal protein. The same is true for the indexed GWP per 100 g of ‘protein capped’ and per unit of
‘NRD9.3’. The GWP per 100 grams of ‘protein uncapped’ was generally higher for diets that had lower contributions
of animal protein. This is due to the higher (excessive) amount of protein within diets that contain
more animal protein (Fig.1). Overall, the regression coefficient for the FU ‘day’ was significantly higher
compared to the regression coefficient for the FU ‘protein uncapped’ (p