Current practice, challenges and potential methodological improvements in environmental evaluations of food waste prevention – A discussion paper

A review was performed of eight previously performed investigations of environmental impacts from end-consumer food waste prevention. The overall aim of the study was to investigate the state of the art in these assessments, identify key factors which could explain seen variations in GWP-emission savings, and suggest methodological improvements leading to increased potentials for cross-study comparisons. Avoided emissions of greenhouse gases can according to reviewed studies reach from 0.8 to 4.4 kg CO2-eq./kg prevented food waste. The review shows that differences in calculated environmental benefits largely can be explained by emissions from avoided food production and related services, rather than avoided management of generated food waste. This, variations in previous studies are largely explained by differences in system boundary delimitations and assumptions related to the avoided food supply system. The review supports that food production is the overall determining factor for benefits related to food waste prevention in reviewed studies. In addition, consumer transports and end-consumer preparation can have a large impact on overall results, mainly due to the relatively small amount of food transported/prepared per unit energy consumed. The importance of a specific process in the food supply chain on overall results will however depend on several different parameters, such as environmental profile of energy used for cooking. The present study also discusses food categories of relevance to differentiate between when addressing the composition of preventable food waste, with the general recommendation to differentiate between vegetables/fruit, bread, cheese, other dairy products, fish, meat (beef) and meat (other than beef). As the many assumptions necessarily made in assessment of prevented food production have a large impact on the overall results, it is recommended for the LCA-practitioner to clearly present made assumptions. In addition, use of sensitivity analyses, varying the composition of prevented food waste is useful for robustness check. Due to the current diversity in methodological approaches when assessing environmental benefits from food waste prevention, authors would welcome establishment of more detailed guidelines within this field in order to increase both the general quality in assessments as well as the potential for cross-study comparisons. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. (Less)

[1]  Stefan Salhofer,et al.  Potentials for the prevention of municipal solid waste. , 2008, Waste management.

[2]  S Lebersorger,et al.  Discussion on the methodology for determining food waste in household waste composition studies. , 2011, Waste management.

[3]  K. Venkat The Climate Change and Economic Impacts of Food Waste in the United States , 2011 .

[4]  R. Betts,et al.  Changes in Atmospheric Constituents and in Radiative Forcing. Chapter 2 , 2007 .

[5]  Ki-in Choi,et al.  Evaluation of environmental burdens caused by changes of food waste management systems in Seoul, Korea. , 2007, The Science of the total environment.

[6]  Christine Göbel,et al.  Food waste in the Swiss food service industry - Magnitude and potential for reduction. , 2015, Waste management.

[7]  Peter Holm,et al.  Life cycle assessment of the waste hierarchy--a Danish case study on waste paper. , 2007, Waste management.

[8]  Junya Yano,et al.  Life-cycle greenhouse gas inventory analysis of household waste management and food waste reduction activities in Kyoto, Japan , 2012, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[9]  Anna Björklund,et al.  What life-cycle assessment does and does not do in assessments of waste management. , 2007, Waste management.

[10]  U. Sonesson,et al.  Global food losses and food waste: extent, causes and prevention , 2011 .

[11]  A Bernstad Saraiva Schott,et al.  Food waste minimization from a life-cycle perspective. , 2015, Journal of environmental management.

[12]  T. H. Christensen,et al.  Composting and compost utilization: accounting of greenhouse gases and global warming contributions , 2009, Waste management & research : the journal of the International Solid Wastes and Public Cleansing Association, ISWA.

[13]  Simone Manfredi,et al.  Environmental assessment of different management options for individual waste fractions by means of life-cycle assessment modelling , 2011 .

[14]  T Fruergaard,et al.  Optimal utilization of waste-to-energy in an LCA perspective. , 2011, Waste management.

[15]  Julian Cleary,et al.  The incorporation of waste prevention activities into life cycle assessments of municipal solid waste management systems: methodological issues , 2010 .

[16]  W. Deng,et al.  Environmental impacts of different food waste resource technologies and the effects of energy mix , 2014 .

[17]  Carol Diggelman,et al.  Household food waste to wastewater or to solid waste? That is the question , 2003, Waste management & research : the journal of the International Solid Wastes and Public Cleansing Association, ISWA.

[18]  Thomas H Christensen,et al.  Environmental evaluation of municipal waste prevention. , 2011, Waste management.

[19]  Tomas Ekvall,et al.  Key methodological issues for life cycle inventory analysis of paper recycling , 1999 .

[20]  Michael E. Webber,et al.  Wasted Food, Wasted Energy: The Embedded Energy in Food Waste in the United States , 2010, Environmental science & technology.

[21]  Thomas H Christensen,et al.  C balance, carbon dioxide emissions and global warming potentials in LCA-modelling of waste management systems , 2009, Waste management & research : the journal of the International Solid Wastes and Public Cleansing Association, ISWA.

[22]  Monia Niero,et al.  Review of LCA studies of solid waste management systems--part I: lessons learned and perspectives. , 2014, Waste management.

[23]  Helmut Rechberger,et al.  Quantitative evaluation of waste prevention on the level of small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs). , 2009, Waste management.

[24]  V. Oliveira,et al.  Estimating and Addressing America's Food Losses , 1997 .

[25]  J. Davis,et al.  Emissions of greenhouse gases from production of horticultural products : analysis of 17 products cultivated in Sweden , 2011 .

[26]  James W Levis,et al.  What is the most environmentally beneficial way to treat commercial food waste? , 2011, Environmental science & technology.

[27]  T. H. Christensen,et al.  Home composting as an alternative treatment option for organic household waste in Denmark: An environmental assessment using life cycle assessment-modelling. , 2012, Waste management.

[28]  Annika Carlsson-Kanyama,et al.  Food losses in food service institutions Examples from Sweden , 2004 .

[29]  T. H. Christensen,et al.  Anaerobic digestion and digestate use: accounting of greenhouse gases and global warming contribution , 2009, Waste management & research : the journal of the International Solid Wastes and Public Cleansing Association, ISWA.

[30]  Irene Bohn,et al.  Potentials for food waste minimization and effects on potential biogas production through anaerobic digestion , 2013, Waste management & research : the journal of the International Solid Wastes and Public Cleansing Association, ISWA.

[31]  H. Wenzel,et al.  Paper waste - recycling, incineration or landfilling? A review of existing life cycle assessments. , 2007, Waste management.

[32]  U. Bos,et al.  LCA study of unconsumed food and the influence of consumer behavior , 2016, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[33]  Michael D. Harrison,et al.  Working Group 1 Report , 1998, DSV-IS.

[34]  A. Washizu,et al.  An Analysis of Sustainable Consumption by the Waste Input‐Output Model , 2005 .

[35]  Janus T Kirkeby,et al.  Evaluation of environmental impacts from municipal solid waste management in the municipality of Aarhus, Denmark (EASEWASTE) , 2006, Waste management & research : the journal of the International Solid Wastes and Public Cleansing Association, ISWA.