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

GROUP 5, SESSION B: FOOD PRODUCTS 8 th Int. Conference on LCA in the
Agri-Food Sector, 1-4 Oct 2012
150. Comprehensive life cycle assessment of fluid milk delivery
systems
Greg Thoma 1,* , Darin Nutter 1 , Jasmina Burek 1 , Dae-Soo Kim 1 , Susan Selke 2 , Rafael Auras 2 , Bev Sauer 3 ,
Sarah Cashman 3
1 University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, USA, 2 Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA, 3
Franklin Associates, Kansas City, MO, USA, * Corresponding author. E-mail: gthoma@uark.edu
In 2009 U.S. Dairy Management Inc. has set up a target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions of fluid milk
supply chain of 25 percent by 2020, as a part of U.S. Dairy Sustainability Commitment. The focus of this
research is the LCA of fluid milk delivery systems emphasising assessment of environmental impacts of 18
fluid milk packaging and delivery options. The study provides results of the life cycle impact assessment for
various standard and emerging fluid milk packaging options.
The objective of this project was to conduct a cradle-to-grave LCA of fluid milk delivery systems focused on
quantifying use of non-renewable energy sources, emissions to air, water, and land, consumption of water
and other natural resources; and assessment of the impacts of these inventory flows on climate change, resource
depletion, human health, and ecosystems. The LCA provides data for the dairy industry enabling the
industry to identify and engage in more sustainable approaches and identify opportunities for improvements
leading to mitigation of environmental impacts across the dairy delivery life cycle.
The main goal of this work was to equip milk delivery industry stakeholders (milk processors, packaging
material manufacturers and retailers) with timely, science-based information in order to incorporate environmental
performance into decision-making and drive innovative new products, processes, and services.
Fluid milk delivery systems can be distinguished by their final consumption, delivery type, container material
composition and size. The life cycle impact assessment methods chosen include: ReCiPe Midpoint,
ReCiPe Endpoint, and USEtox. They were used to create results that include the relevant inventory indicators
and range of midpoint/impact and endpoint/damage categories. The selection includes two inventory
indicators: ReCiPe’s Water depletion [m 3 ] and Cumulative Energy Demand Non-renewable, fossil [MJ]. For
the purpose of result interpretation and clarification of the importance of certain impact category in the context
of dairy delivery systems, each system was analysed using normalisation step of the IMPACT 2002+
Method for U.S., and World ReCiPe normalisation.
A summary of the fluid milk delivery systems under study based on their final consumption function, delivery
option, container composition, size, and total weight is presented in Fig. 1. Fig. 2 presents the overall
results for gallon sized HDPE container based delivery, as this represents approximately 65% of fluid milk
consumption in the United States.
Fluid Milk Delivery Systems
In-Home-Consumption On-The-Go Consumption
Chilled Ambient
Chilled
Ambient
1 gal 1/2 gal 4 L 1 L 16 oz 1/2 gal 1 L 500 mL 8 oz 250 mL 8 oz 250 mL
HDPE, LLDPE, LDPE, Paperboard, HDPE, LDPE, LLDPE, PET, HDPE, LDPE, LLDPE,
CaCO3
Paperboard, CaCO3 Paperboard, CaCO3
Figure 1. Summary of fluid milk delivery systems under study.
HDPE, PET, Paperboard,
CaCO3
883