LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT OF 1l OF MILK

1
LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT OF 1l OF MILK F. Falconi ,
G. Olivieri, R. Pergreffi, E. Aradeo, P.
Neri, R. Bombardieri SPINNER c/o ENEA-
C.R."E.Clementel" (Bologna, Italy),
francesca.falconi_at_bologna.enea.it - graduated
of University of Bologna (Italy) - ENEA
C.R."E.Clementel" (Bologna, Italy) -
Granarolo S.p.A. (Bologna, Italy)
Abstract The objective of this study is to
examine the total life cycle of production and
processing of milk, in order to quantify the
potential environmental impact, and to compare
two types of packaging HDPE bottle and Tetra
Brick Aseptic. The functional unit selected is 1
l of packaged liquid milk, the systems boundaries
consider the breeding of cows, the thermic
treatments of milk (homogenizing, centrifugation,
pasteurizing and sterilization), and its
packaging until the final disposal of the pack.
To assess the milk LCA we have considered data
from Simapro database, from an Italian company
(Granarolo S.p.a.) and from an Italian farm, the
inventory is calculated on the basis of its
annual production. In the study the analysis
refers principally to the method Eco-Indicator
99, but two others methods has been used to
compare the results and to demonstrate the
analogies EPS 2000 and EDIP 96. We consider also
the Function of the milk production because of
its importance in human alimentation.
In recent years the concept of sustainability and
the idea to evaluate the effects of human
activity or product manufacture on the
Environment has increased. In this sense Life
Cycle Assessment (LCA) is a method
internationally accepted to examine the whole
impact associated to activities or products. LCA
has been defined as a process to estimate the
environmental effects associated with a product,
process, or activity by identifying and
quantifying energy and materials used and wastes
released into the environment, and to identify
and evaluate opportunities to reduce
environmental damages. The dairy industry is an
example of a factory characterised by the
association of different production systems
agriculture, livestock, dairy farming, dairy
packaging and product distribution. This study
concerns the valuation of environmental impact of
the production of 1l of Italian milk UHT, and the
comparison between two types of packaging HDPE
bottle and Tetra Brick Aseptic. The system
analysed in this study is shown in Fig.1 where
the main stages of the process are represented in
blocks.
Introduction
Fig.1.- Schematic flow chart of the life cycle of
milk.
MATERIALS METHODS The standardization of LCA
methodologies has been done by SETAC (Society
for Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry) and
ISO (International Standard Organisation) who
has developed a series of standard the ISO 14040
based on life cycle assessment. The LCA
methodology includes four stages goal and scope
definition, inventory analysis (LCI), impact
assessment (LCIA) and interpretation of
results. Goal and scope definition this stage
explains the reasons because it has been done
LCA. It describes the system analysed and the
principal parameters functional unit (defined as
the quantified performance of a product system
used as a reference unit in LCA study) system
boundaries, allocation rules and quality
data. Inventory analysis the LCI consists of the
collection of data and concerns the resource
use, energy consumption, emissions and products
resulting from each activity in the production
system. Impact assessment the purpose of this
phase is to consider the LCI results to
understand their environmental importance. LCIA
classifies the inputs and outputs of the
inventory into specific categories, and it models
the inputs and outputs for each category into an
aggregate indicator. Interpretation of results
the life cycle interpretation is a procedure to
identify, qualify, check and evaluate the
information from the results of the LCI and/or
LCIA of a product system.
Results Discussions In the analyse of the total
life cycle of 1l of milk (production, processing
and packaging), the crucial element has been
identified in the milk production, especially in
the agricultural phase for the animal food. In
fact the greatest environmental impact is taken
by the breeding of cows, in particular for the
fertilizing used in the cultivation of lucern and
maize for the fodder. In the Damage Assessment
(Fig.2) are shown the principally results.These
results are specified in the Characterization of
LCA (Fig. 3) in Human Health the impact category
mainly damaged is Respiratory Inorganics
principally because of dust emissions, in
Ecosystem Quality the impact category mainly
damaged is Land Use principally because of the
soil occupation in agricultural and in Resources
the impact category mainly damaged is Fossil
Fuels principally because of crude oil
consumption.
HUMAN HEALTH the total impact is 1,45E-5 DALY,
given for the 70,88 by milk production, in
particular because of pesticides emission in the
soil (phenmedipham, metamitron, ecc.) ECOSYSTEM
QUALITY the total impact is 5,4 PDFm2y, given
for the 72,21 by milk production, in particular
because of land use in agriculture RESOURCES
the total impact is 1,23 MJsurplus, especially
because of the consumption of crude oil in the
operation of milk production and processing, and
because of the transports ENERGY the total
impact is 14,5 MJ, especially because of the
consumption of crude oil in the operation of milk
production and processing, and because of the
transports.
Fig.2. -Damage Assessment of 1l milk.
Fig.2. -Damage Assessment of 1l milk.
To render comparable the results of each category
it has been done a normalisation of the damages.
To give a numerical quantification to the
normalisation it has been attributed a weight to
these damage categories (Fig.4).
TOTAL DAMAGE 0,734 Pt ECOSYSTEM QUALITY 0,313 Pt
(42,69) RESOURCES 0,351 Pt (47,89)
RESOURCES 0,0691 Pt (9,425)
Fig.5.-Emissions in all compartments.
Fig.6 .- Weighting of 1l milk, EPS 2000 and EDIP
96.
To verify the connection between the weighting
and the emissions we analyse the scores
attributable to each compartment Airborne
emission (dust, NOx, CO2, etc.), Waterborne
emission (Ni, Cd, metamitron, etc.), Emission to
soil (metamitron, As, etc), Raw material (crude
oil, natural gas, coal, etc), and Non material
emission (occupation as organic meadow,
conversion to arable land, C14 to air, etc). this
connection is shown in Fig.5. The life cycle
assessment has been valued with others two
methods (EDIP 96 and EPS 2000) to show the
differences in weighting are not excessive for
example the difference between Eco-Indicator 99
and EDIP 96 (Fig.6) isnt elevated 0,734 Pt in
Eco-Indicator 99 and 1,1 Pt in EDIP 96. In all
the three methods the greatest damage is given by
milk production. .
Fig.4.- Weighting of 1l milk.
An important phase of this study is the
comparison between two types of packaging HDPE
bottle (a new type of packaging) and Tetra Brick
Aseptic. The HDPE bottle is composed by a
particular triple stratum an external stratum of
virgin HDPE (40) a middle stratum of carbon
black and ground (45), and an internal stratum
of virgin HDPE (15). To study these two
packaging we have compared the operations of
their preparation, filling of milk and transport
to sale, to find the less polluting packaging. By
this comparison (analysed with Eco-Indicator 99)
the impact of Tetra Brick Aseptic packaging is
smaller than HDPE, in fact the total weight of
HDPE is 0,0315 Pt and the total weight of TBA is
0,0237 Pt, with a reduction of 0,0078 Pt, equal
to a reduction of 24 of the damage. The lower
impact of TBA is caused principally to the less
amount of emission (especially dust, NOx or SOx),
these emissions in HDPE are greater because of
plastic production
Conclusions In this work LCA methodology has been
applied to analyse milk production, its
processing and its packaging. Milk production,
specifically agricultural phase in the
formulation of animal food at farm, has been
identified as the crucial element. It is
necessary to set up improvement actions. In the
phase of packaging, the second crucial element is
packaging, the comparison of two different
packages, has demonstrated that the Tetra Brick
Aseptic is a better package because of the
reduction of environmental impacts. This study
has been an important example of the possibility
to estimate environmental impacts of a system of
production and to characterize actions to reduce
these.
unit HDPE TBA
Total Pt 0.0315 0,0237
Human Health Pt 0,0129 0,0069
Ecosystem Quality Pt 0,00234 0,002
Resources Pt 0,0162 0,00935
SENSITIVE ANALYSIS
- Environmental management, Life cycle
assessment Goal and scope definition and
inventory analysis UNI EN ISO14041, ottobre
1998 - Environmental management, Life cycle
assessment Life cycle impact assessment UNI EN
ISO 14042, marzo 2000 - Environmental management,
Life cycle assessment Life cycle
interpretation UNI EN ISO 14043, marzo 2000 -
Prè Consultans B.V.Plotterweg 12, 3821 BB
Amersfoort - The Eco-indicator 99, Methodology
Report, PRé Consultants B.V., 17 April 2000,
Second edition - Bengt Steen CMP Report 19995,
A systematic approach to environmental priority
strategies in product development (EPS). Version
2000. Models and data of the default method.,
Chalmers University of Technology -
Environmental Assesment of Products. Volume 1
Methodology, tools and case studies in products
development.Methodology and results from the
EDIP programme (Environmental Design of
Industrial Products), Henrik Wenzel, Michael
Hauschild and Leo Alting Chapman Hall 1997. -
The European impact of dairy production in the
EUPractical options for the improvement of the
environmental impact.Brussels, European
Commission, 2002.
r e f e r e n c e s
Fig.7- Weighting of packages.