Increasing legume intake through dietary diversification confers nutritional and environmental benefits. This study used life cycle assessment to evaluate the environmental impacts of producing frozen green peas from conventional and organic farming. We explored two ways of treating farm data: modeling each farm (baseline) and using a uniform distribution of each farm parameter's average, maximum, and minimum values (alternative). We also assessed the indirect land-use change (iLUC) impacts by applying a deterministic model and used the EF 3.0 method to estimate the midpoint environmental impacts. The results of the two scenarios for pea cultivation (including iLUC) showed notable differences in absolute terms with minor discrepancies in the contribution analysis (e.g., climate change (CC) for the baseline and alternative were 0.98 and 2.09 kg CO2 eq./kg fresh peas, respectively). Generally, conventional peas had a higher environmental impact than organic peas, although this was not uniformly observed across all farms. When included, iLUC accounted for nearly half of the CC score. Pea cultivation was the most impactful phase due to emissions from fertilizers and field operations. The impacts of pea production can be reduced by anaerobic digestion of pea residues with energy and nutrient recycling. However, improvements in processing and nitrogen use efficiency could significantly enhance the overall environmental performance of frozen green peas. In summary, this study emphasizes the need for sustainable practices to minimize the environmental impact of frozen pea production.

Environmental Impact Assessment of Frozen Peas Production from Conventional and Organic Farming in Italy / Boakye-Yiadom, Ka; Ilari, A; Bisinella, V; Foppa Pedretti, E; Duca, D. - In: SUSTAINABILITY. - ISSN 2071-1050. - 15:18(2023). [10.3390/su151813373]

Environmental Impact Assessment of Frozen Peas Production from Conventional and Organic Farming in Italy

Boakye-Yiadom, KA;Ilari, A;Foppa Pedretti, E;Duca, D
2023-01-01

Abstract

Increasing legume intake through dietary diversification confers nutritional and environmental benefits. This study used life cycle assessment to evaluate the environmental impacts of producing frozen green peas from conventional and organic farming. We explored two ways of treating farm data: modeling each farm (baseline) and using a uniform distribution of each farm parameter's average, maximum, and minimum values (alternative). We also assessed the indirect land-use change (iLUC) impacts by applying a deterministic model and used the EF 3.0 method to estimate the midpoint environmental impacts. The results of the two scenarios for pea cultivation (including iLUC) showed notable differences in absolute terms with minor discrepancies in the contribution analysis (e.g., climate change (CC) for the baseline and alternative were 0.98 and 2.09 kg CO2 eq./kg fresh peas, respectively). Generally, conventional peas had a higher environmental impact than organic peas, although this was not uniformly observed across all farms. When included, iLUC accounted for nearly half of the CC score. Pea cultivation was the most impactful phase due to emissions from fertilizers and field operations. The impacts of pea production can be reduced by anaerobic digestion of pea residues with energy and nutrient recycling. However, improvements in processing and nitrogen use efficiency could significantly enhance the overall environmental performance of frozen green peas. In summary, this study emphasizes the need for sustainable practices to minimize the environmental impact of frozen pea production.
2023
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
sustainability-15-13373-v2.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Versione editoriale (versione pubblicata con il layout dell'editore)
Licenza d'uso: Creative commons
Dimensione 1.9 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.9 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11566/325869
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 1
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 1
social impact