Content uploaded by Alessandra Nardina Trícia Rigo Monteiro
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Alessandra Nardina Trícia Rigo Monteiro on Nov 29, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
Content uploaded by Alessandra Nardina Trícia Rigo Monteiro
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Alessandra Nardina Trícia Rigo Monteiro on Nov 29, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
method looks at environmental impact at the end of this
cause-effect chain, i.e., the extinction of species due to the
emission of such a mineral (Figure 1).
Among midpoint and endpoint approaches, the environmen-
tal effect of system inputs can be expressed into different LCA
impact categories. Some of them have been widely addressed
since the first LCA studies, such as climate change or carbon
footprint. Over the years, other categories raised environmen-
tal concerns, such as acidification, eutrophication, and energy
use. Others were neglected for several years but are currently
being highlighted, such as toxicity-related issues. Whatever
the impact category considered, the knowledge of the envi-
ronmental impact of the process and/or products is important
to achieve a global sustainable development. That is why
Life cycle assessment
of feed ingredients
Improving sustainability of the livestock sector is
essential. Life cycle assessment (LCA) studies have
shown that feed production accounts for 70% of
the carbon footprint of animal products which
makes it an important element to account for when
considering mitigation options. Improved knowledge
of the environmental impact of feed ingredients is
fundamental to instigate a positive change.
PHOTO: BLONK CONSULTANTS
BY ALESSANDRA MONTEIRO, R&D, ANIMINE AND JEAN-YVES DOURMAD,
SENIOR RESEARCHER, INRA
The idea of a comprehensive environmental LCA was
conceived in the USA in the late 1960s/early 1970s.
In 1969, the Coca Cola Company commissioned the
first LCA study to examine the complete environ-
mental impact of a package, focusing on sustaining the use
of high value recyclable materials and reusable packages.
Around 1973, the interest turned to energy mainly due to the
oil crisis. In 1988, interest returned to solid waste, but this was
quickly replaced by a more balanced concern about the areas
of resource use and environmental emissions. In 1991, con-
cerns over the inappropriate use of LCAs to make marketing
claims by product manufacturers, led to the development of
the LCA standards in the International Standards Organization
(ISO) 14000 series. In 2002, the United Nations Environment
Programme (UNEP) joined forces with the Society of Environ-
mental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) to launch the Life
Cycle Initiative, an international partnership to improve the
supporting tools through better data and indicators.
Four phases of an LCA study
As required by ISO 14040, four phases are involved in an LCA
study and they include: (i) goal and scope definition, (ii) in-
ventory analysis, (iii) impact assessment, and (iv) interpreta-
tion. The results of an LCA study can be calculated using dif-
ferent impact assessment methods, which give different
detail levels of the cause-effect chain. Considering the
cause-effect chain for a trace mineral, a midpoint method
looks at a point in the cause-effect chain, i.e., the increased
concentration of trace minerals in soil, while an endpoint
Figure 1 - The cause-effect chain.
Inventory
Elementary
flows
Midpoints Endpoints
Human
health
Natural
environment
Natural
resources
Climate change
Ozone depletion
Human toxicity
Ionising radiation
Acidification
Eutrophication
Ecotoxicity
Land use
Resource depletion
Emissions of trace
minerals (TM) into soil
Increased concentration
of (TM) into soil
Extinction of
species
33
▶ SUSTAINABLE LIVESTOCK FARMING | OCTOBER 2018
environmental footprint (EF) initiatives have been developed
worldwide to move towards a sustainable economy.
Strategies to improve sustainability
In the past, traditional environmental themes, such as pro-
tecting species and improving the air/water quality were the
major environmental concerns facing the world. Nowadays,
more systematic approaches that consider the links between
various themes and their global dimension are required. A
multi-stakeholder initiative named LEAP (Livestock Environ-
mental Assessment and Performance Partnership) has been
created by FAO. It develops guidance and methodology for
understanding the environmental performance of livestock
supply chains, in order to shape evidence-based policy meas-
ures and business strategies. In 2016, LEAP published a guide-
line for the assessment of environmental performance of ani-
mal feeds supply chains, based on LCA. Feed additives, such as
minerals, are considered as feed ingredients in these guide-
lines; however, detailed guidance regarding their production
is outside its scope. Early this year in Europe, the product envi-
ronmental footprint category rules (PEFCR) was approved by
the EU commission. The EU feed industry was the first sector
to have its PEFCR, based on LEAP guidelines. It provides a
more detailed and comprehensive technical guidance on how
to conduct a PEF study, with the objective of delivering more
sustainable consumption and production, by ensuring more
environmental friendly products on the EU market.
Besides that, PEFCR presented the LCA results for one ton of
animal feed, representing the average composition of feed
ingredients consumed by the EU feed industry from 2009 to
2013. Among the impact categories covered by PEF results,
the toxicity-related ones (terrestrial, freshwater and marine)
were excluded from the LCA, due to the lower robustness
of ecotoxicity models. However, applicants who want to
calculate the PEF profile of their product in compliance with
PEFCR requirements are encouraged to include the character-
ised results for all impact categories (including toxicity). The
PEF initiative provided solid information on plant- and
animal-based feed ingredients. However, for feed additives
such as minerals, enzymes, vitamins or amino acids, the
models of their production process is still being improved.
It is expected that LEAP will develop in the near future
recommendations on how to model the production of these
particular feed ingredients, which may have a significant con-
tribution to some environmental impacts although they are
incorporated at a very low level in the diet.
Feed industry’s environmental footprint
The feed industry is committed to contributing to the genera-
tion of high quality data on feed additives. In line with this, an
LCA was developed for the potentiated zinc oxide source
named HiZox (Animine, France). To represent the contribution
of trace mineral sources on EF of complete feed, a diet based
on the composition of the virtual feed proposed by PEFCR was
created. The results show that cereals and oilseeds (48% and
28% of total feed composition, respectively) contribute the
most to EF on climate change, acidification and eutrophica-
tion, energy demand, and terrestrial ecotoxicity, due to the
use of fertilisers, pesticides, and transportation network for
their production (Figure 2).
Even if trace minerals represented only 0.78% of total feed
ingredients consumed in Europe, they showed the highest
contribution to freshwater and marine ecotoxicity, due to their
high toxicity potential when emitted into soils and waters, and
to metal depletion, due to the fact that they are non-renewa-
ble resources. This high contribution demonstrates the impor-
tance of the sustainable use of trace minerals in terms of
source and dose used in animal nutrition. Nevertheless, there
is still room for methodological improvement in the evalua-
tion of their impacts: (i) move the system boundaries from ‘at
feed factory gate’ to beyond animal production, accounting
the EF of disposing animal wastes. (ii) improve the robustness
of ecotoxicity models. (iii) account for the chemical form of
trace mineral sources in animal wastes on LCA. The SUMINAPP
Project funded by EU H2020 (www.suminapp.eu) expects to
fill these three gaps by providing a new ecotoxicity assess-
ment approach, from feed to excreta, using new LCA ecotoxici-
ty characterisation factors informed from experimental results.
Figure 2 - Contribution of feed ingredients to environmental footprint.
Climate change
Terrestrial acidification
Freshwater eutrophication
Cumulative energy demand
Terrestrial ecotoxicity
Freshwater ecotoxicity
Marine ecotoxicity
Metal depletion
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Trace minerals
Oilseed meals Vegetable oils
Cereals Amino acids Vitamins
34 ▶ SUSTAINABLE LIVESTOCK FARMING | OCTOBER 2018