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

GROUP 3, SESSION A: LABELLING, CONSUMERS, DIET 8 th Int. Conference on LCA in the
Agri-Food Sector, 1-4 Oct 2012
70. Fish or meat? Is this a relevant question from an environmental
point of view?
Benedikt Buchspies 1 , Niels Jungbluth 2,*
1 b.buchspies@gmx.de, 2 ESU-services Ltd., CH-8610 Uster, Switzerland, Corresponding author. E-mail:
jungbluth@esu-services.ch
Nutrition accounts for about 30% of environmental impacts caused due to the final consumption of Swiss
households (Jungbluth et al., 2011). It is thus the most important consumption sector from an environmental
point of view. Out of this meat is the most important product group accounting for about 26% of impacts of
food consumption (Jungbluth et al., 2012). Therefore, it is necessary to investigate and understand the environmental
impacts of food consumption and possibilities for the reduction of environmental impacts. One
option discussed for this is a reduction of meat consumption. Fish might be considered as a possible replacement
by consumers.
Within a recent study we assessed the environmental impacts of different fish products sold in Swiss supermarkets
(Buchspies et al., 2011). The life cycle inventory for different types of fish is based on published
work by different authors. These data have been harmonised and implemented in the EcoSpold format. The
defined functional unit is one kg of frozen cod, canned mackerel, canned herring or smoked salmon. The
former three are caught and processed in Denmark; the latter is farmed and processed in Norway. Data for
the production of different meat products were available from earlier studies (Jungbluth, 2000; Jungbluth et
al., 2011). To evaluate environmental impacts, the ecological scarcity method 2006 and global warming potential
2007 are used.
When comparing the results with the ecological scarcity method 2006, high sea fish is at the lower end of
range for all compared products. Fishing and packaging are main determinant in regard to environmental
impacts of high sea fishing. Salomon’s environmental impacts are nearly as high as those of veal. Feed production
and the nutrient emissions into the sea are quite important for the total environmental impacts. In
regard to the global warming potential, fish offers an alternative to meat. Depending on the type of fish,
emission per kg of filet range between 3.7 and 6.6 kg CO2-eq. For farmed salmon indirect N2O emissions
from nutrient emissions need to be considered. Fish cannot be regarded generally as a more environmentally
friendly food product than meat, because environmental impacts of different fish products might be quite
variable and be even higher than these of meat.
References
Buchspies B, Tölle SJ, Jungbluth N. Life Cycle Assessment of High-Sea Fish and Salmon Aquaculture
[Practical training report]. Uster, CH: ESU-services Ltd.; 2011.
Jungbluth N. Umweltfolgen des Nahrungsmittelkonsums: Beurteilung von Produktmerkmalen auf Grundlage
einer modularen Ökobilanz [Dissertation Nr. 13499]. Berlin, D: Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule
Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften, dissertation.de; 2000.
Jungbluth N, Flury K, Büsser S, Stucki M, Frischknecht R. Life cycle inventory database on demand: Eco-
Spold LCI database of ESU-services. Uster, CH: ESU-services Ltd.; 2011.
Jungbluth N, Itten R. Umweltbelastungen des Konsums in der Schweiz und in der Stadt Zürich: Grundlagendaten
und Reduktionspotentiale. Zürich: ESU-services GmbH im Auftrag der Stadt Zürich (unpublished);
2012.
Jungbluth N, Nathani C, Stucki M, Leuenberger M. Environmental impacts of Swiss consumption and production:
a combination of input-output analysis with life cycle assessment. Bern, CH: ESU-services Ltd. &
Rütter+Partner, commissioned by the Swiss Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN); 2011. p. 171.
759