1932
0
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Annual Review of Food Science and Technology
  4. Volume 13, 2022
  5. Article

Annual Review of Food Science and Technology

Volume 13, 2022

Life Cycle Assessment on Environmental Sustainability of Food Processing

Abstract

Food processing represents a critical part of the food supply chain that converts raw materials into safe and nutritious food products with high quality. However, the fast-growing food processing industry has imposed enormous burdens on the environment. Life cycle assessment (LCA) is widely used for evaluating the sustainability of food systems; nonetheless, current attention mainly concentrates on the agricultural production stage. This article reviews recent LCA studies on dairy, fruits and vegetables, and beverage products, with a particular emphasis on their processing stage. The environmental impacts of various foods are summarized, and the hotspots in their processing lines as well as potential remediation strategies are highlighted. Moreover, an outlook on the environmental performance of nonthermal processing, modified atmosphere packaging, and active packaging is provided, and future research directions are recommended. This review enables quantitative assessments and comparisons to be made by food manufacturers that are devoted to implementing sustainable processing technologies.

Keyword(s): emerging technologies, environmental impact, food supply chain, global warming potential, life cycle analysis, sustainable food processing
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-food-062420-014630
2022-03-25
2024-05-11
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/food/13/1/annurev-food-062420-014630.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-food-062420-014630&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Aganovic K, Smetana S, Grauwet T, Toepfl S, Mathys A et al. 2017. Pilot scale thermal and alternative pasteurization of tomato and watermelon juice: an energy comparison and life cycle assessment. J. Clean. Prod. 141:514–25
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Amienyo D, Gujba H, Stichnothe H, Azapagic A. 2013. Life cycle environmental impacts of carbonated soft drinks. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 18:177–92
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Bare JC, Hofstetter P, Pennington DW, Udo De Haes HA 2000. Midpoints versus endpoints: the sacrifices and benefits. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 5:6319–26
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Bârjoveanu G, Teodosiu C, Gîlcă AF, Roman I, Fiore S 2019. Environmental performance evaluation of a drinking water treatment plant: a life cycle assessment perspective. Environ. Eng. Manag. J. 18:2513–22
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Beddington JR, Asaduzzaman M, Clark ME, Bremauntz AF, Guillou MD et al. 2012. The role for scientists in tackling food insecurity and climate change. Agric. Food Secur. 1:10
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Bohnes FA, Hauschild MZ, Schlundt J, Laurent A. 2019. Life cycle assessments of aquaculture systems: a critical review of reported findings with recommendations for policy and system development. Rev. Aquac. 11:41061–79
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Bosco S, di Bene C, Galli M, Remorini D, Massai R, Bonari E 2011. Greenhouse gas emissions in the agricultural phase of wine production in the Maremma rural district in Tuscany, Italy. Ital. J. Agron. 6:293–100
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Bosworth MED, Hummelmose B, Christiansen K. 2000. Cleaner production assessment in dairy processing Rep., U.N. Environ. Progr. & Dan. Environ. Prot. Agency, Kongens Lyngby, Den. https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/9562/-Cleaner%20Production%20Assessment%20in%20Dairy%20Processing-2000319.pdf?sequence=3&isAllowed=y
  9. Brew. Assoc 2017. 2017 sustainability benchmarking report Rep., Brew. Assoc. Boulder, CO: https://cdn.brewersassociation.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/2017-Sustainability-Benchmarking-Report.pdf
  10. Brodt S, Kramer KJ, Kendall A, Feenstra G 2013. Comparing environmental impacts of regional and national-scale food supply chains: a case study of processed tomatoes. Food Policy 42:106–14
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Bus. Wire 2019. Global beverage market nears $1.86 trillion by 2024—analysis by type of beverage, packaging type, distribution channel, region, and market player. Business Wire. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20190917005879/en/Global-Beverage-Market-Nears-1.86-Trillion-2024
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Buzby JC, Farah-Wells H, Hyman J. 2014. The estimated amount, value, and calories of postharvest food losses at the retail and consumer levels in the United States Econ. Inf. Bull. EIB-121 US Dep. Agric. Washington, DC:
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Bylund G. 1995. Dairy Processing Handbook Lund, Swed: Tetra Pak
  14. Canals LMI, Muñoz I, Hospido A, Plassmann K, McLaren S. 2008. Life cycle assessment (LCA) of domestic versus imported vegetables. Case studies on broccoli, salad crops and green beans CES Work. Pap. 01/08
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Chapa J, Salazar Tijerino MB, Kipp S, Cai H, Huang JY 2019. A comparative life cycle assessment of fresh imported and frozen domestic organic blueberries consumed in Indiana. J. Clean. Prod. 217:716–23
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Cimini A, Moresi M. 2018a. Are the present standard methods effectively useful to mitigate the environmental impact of the 99% EU food and drink enterprises?. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 77:42–53
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Cimini A, Moresi M. 2018b. Effect of brewery size on the main process parameters and cradle-to-grave carbon footprint of lager beer. J. Ind. Ecol. 22:51139–55
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Dalla Riva A, Burek J, Kim D, Thoma G, Cassandro M, De Marchi M 2017. Environmental life cycle assessment of Italian mozzarella cheese: hotspots and improvement opportunities. J. Dairy Sci. 100:107933–52
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Dalla Riva A, Burek J, Kim D, Thoma G, Cassandro M, De Marchi M 2018. The environmental analysis of asiago PDO cheese: a case study from farm gate-to-plant gate. Ital. J. Anim. Sci. 17:1250–62
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Davis J, Moates GK, Waldron KW. 2009. High-pressure processing : a step toward sustainability. ? Food Safety Magazine Oct. 1. https://www.food-safety.com/articles/3878-high-pressure-processing-a-step-toward-sustainability-
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Davis J, Moates G, Waldron K 2010. The environmental impact of pulsed electric field treatment and high pressure processing: the example of carrot juice. Case Studies in Novel Food Processing Technologies C Doona, K Kustin, F Feehery 103–15 Cambridge, UK: Woodhead Publ.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. De Ancos B, Sanchez-Moreno C, De Pascual-Teresa S, Cano MP 2006. Fruit freezing principles. Handbook of Fruits and Fruits Processing YH Hui 59–79 Hoboken, NJ: Blackwell
     [Google Scholar]
  23. De Marco I, Iannone R. 2017. Production, packaging and preservation of semi-finished apricots: a comparative life cycle assessment study. J. Food Eng. 206:106–17
     [Google Scholar]
  24. De Marco I, Miranda S, Riemma S, Iannone R 2015. Environmental assessment of drying methods for the production of apple powders. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 20:121659–72
     [Google Scholar]
  25. De Marco I, Riemma S, Iannone R 2017. Environmental analysis of a mashed tomato production: an Italian case study. Chem. Eng. Trans. 57:1825–30
     [Google Scholar]
  26. De Marco I, Riemma S, Iannone R 2018. Uncertainty of input parameters and sensitivity analysis in life cycle assessment: an Italian processed tomato product. J. Clean. Prod. 177:315–25
     [Google Scholar]
  27. De Silva RT, Mantilaka MMMGPG, Ratnayake SP, Amaratunga GAJ, de Silva KMN. 2017. Nano-MgO reinforced chitosan nanocomposites for high performance packaging applications with improved mechanical, thermal and barrier properties. Carbohydr. Polym. 157:739–47
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Del Borghi A, Gallo M, Strazza C, Del Borghi M. 2014. An evaluation of environmental sustainability in the food industry through life cycle assessment: the case study of tomato products supply chain. J. Clean. Prod. 78:121–30
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Djekic I, Miocinovic J, Tomasevic I, Smigic N, Tomic N. 2014. Environmental life cycle assessment of various dairy products. J. Clean. Prod. 68:64–72
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Djekic I, Petrovic J, Božičković A, Djordjevic V, Tomasevic I. 2019. Main environmental impacts associated with production and consumption of milk and yogurt in Serbia: Monte Carlo approach. Sci. Total Environ. 695:133917
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Doublet G, Jungbluth N, Schori M, Salome S. 2013. Life cycle assessment of orange juice SENSE Proj. 288974, 7th Framework Progr Eur. Comm. Brussels, Belg:.
  32. Duncan TV. 2011. Applications of nanotechnology in food packaging and food safety: barrier materials, antimicrobials and sensors. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 363:1–24
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Dwivedi P, Spreen T, Goodrich-Schneider R. 2012. Global warming impact of Florida's not-from-concentrate (NFC) orange juice. Agric. Syst. 108:104–11
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Eide MH, Homleid JP, Mattsson B. 2003. Life cycle assessment (LCA) of cleaning-in-place processes in dairies. LWT Food Sci. Technol. 36:3303–14
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Eriksson O, Jonsson D, Hillman K 2016. Life cycle assessment of Swedish single malt whisky. J. Clean. Prod. 112:229–37
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Expert Mark. Res 2019. Tomato processing market size, trends & industry report 2020–2025. Expert Market Research. https://www.expertmarketresearch.com/reports/tomato-processing-market
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Fantin V, Buttol P, Pergreffi R, Masoni P. 2012. Life cycle assessment of Italian high quality milk production. A comparison with an EPD study. J. Clean. Prod. 28:150–59
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Fanzo J, Davis C, McLaren R, Choufani J. 2018. The effect of climate change across food systems: implications for nutrition outcomes. Glob. Food Secur. 18:12–19
     [Google Scholar]
  39. FAO 2016. The global dairy sector: facts Rep., FAO Rome: https://www.fao.org/3/cb2992en/cb2992en.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  40. FAO 2019. Food Outlook—Biannual Report of Global Food Markets Rome: FAO
  41. Feitz AJ, Lundie S, Dennien G, Morain M, Jones M 2007. Generation of an industry-specific physico-chemical allocation matrix: application in the dairy industry and implications for systems analysis. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 12:2109–17
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Finnegan W, Goggins J, Clifford E, Zhan X 2017a. Environmental impacts of milk powder and butter manufactured in the Republic of Ireland. Sci. Total Environ. 579:159–68
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Finnegan W, Goggins J, Clifford E, Zhan X 2017b. Global warming potential associated with dairy products in the Republic of Ireland. J. Clean. Prod. 163:262–73
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Garofalo P, D'Andrea L, Tomaiuolo M, Venezia A, Castrignanò A 2017. Environmental sustainability of agri-food supply chains in Italy: the case of the whole-peeled tomato production under life cycle assessment methodology. J. Food Eng. 200:11–12
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Gerber PJ, Steinfeld H, Henderson B, Mottet A, Opio C et al. 2013. Tackling Climate Change through Livestock: A Global Assessment of Emissions and Mitigation Opportunities, Vol. 14 Rome: FAO
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Giagnorio M, Steffenino S, Meucci L, Zanetti MC, Tiraferri A. 2018. Design and performance of a nanofiltration plant for the removal of chromium aimed at the production of safe potable water. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 6:44467–75
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Gilbert N. 2012. One-third of our greenhouse gas emissions come from agriculture. Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature.2012.11708
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  48. González-García S, Castanheira ÉG, Dias AC, Arroja L. 2013a. Environmental life cycle assessment of a dairy product: the yoghurt. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 18:4796–811
     [Google Scholar]
  49. González-García S, Castanheira ÉG, Dias AC, Arroja L. 2013b. Environmental performance of a Portuguese mature cheese-making dairy mill. J. Clean. Prod. 41:65–73
     [Google Scholar]
  50. González-García S, Castanheira ÉG, Dias AC, Arroja L. 2013c. Using life cycle assessment methodology to assess UHT milk production in Portugal. Sci. Total Environ. 442:225–34
     [Google Scholar]
  51. González-García S, Hospido A, Moreira MT, Feijoo G, Arroja L 2013d. Environmental life cycle assessment of a Galician cheese: San Simon da Costa. J. Clean. Prod. 52:253–62
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Gutierrez MM, Meleddu M, Piga A. 2017. Food losses, shelf life extension and environmental impact of a packaged cheesecake: a life cycle assessment. Food Res. Int. J. 91:124–32
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Han JW, Ruiz-Garcia L, Qian JP, Yang XT. 2018. Food packaging: a comprehensive review and future trends. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 17:4860–77
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Ilari A, Duca D, Toscano G, Pedretti EF. 2019. Evaluation of cradle to gate environmental impact of frozen green bean production by means of life cycle assessment. J. Clean. Prod. 236:117638
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Int. Energy Agency 2021. Countries and regions. International Energy Agency https://www.iea.org/countries
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Int. Organ. Stand 2006. Environmental management—life cycle assessment—requirements and guidelines. ISO 14044:2006 Geneva:
  57. Jain A, De S. 2019. Processing of beverages by membranes. Processing and Sustainability of Beverages A Grumezescu, AM Holban 517–60 Cambridge, UK: Woodhead Publ.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Jourdaine M, Loubet P, Trebucq S, Sonnemann G 2020. A detailed quantitative comparison of the life cycle assessment of bottled wines using an original harmonization procedure. J. Clean. Prod. 250:119472
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Jungbluth N, Keller R, Meili C. 2018. Life cycle assessment of a detailed dairy processing model and recommendations for the allocation to single products. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 23:91806–13
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Karakaya A, Özilgen M. 2011. Energy utilization and carbon dioxide emission in the fresh, paste, whole-peeled, diced, and juiced tomato production processes. Energy 36:85101–10
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Khalaj M-J, Ahmadi H, Lesankhosh R, Khalaj G 2016. Study of physical and mechanical properties of polypropylene nanocomposites for food packaging application: nano-clay modified with iron nanoparticles. Trends Food Sci. Technol. J. 51:41–48
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Khanali M, Kokei D, Aghbashlo M, Nasab FK, Hosseinzadeh-Bandbafha H, Tabatabaei M. 2020. Energy flow modeling and life cycle assessment of apple juice production: recommendations for renewable energies implementation and climate change mitigation. J. Clean. Prod. 246:118997
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Kim D, Thoma G, Nutter D, Milani F, Ulrich R, Norris G 2013. Life cycle assessment of cheese and whey production in the USA. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 18:51019–35
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Kumar C, Karim MA, Joardder MUH 2014. Intermittent drying of food products: a critical review. J. Food Eng. 121:148–57
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Kyriakopoulou K, Papadaki S, Krokida M 2015. Life cycle analysis of β-carotene extraction techniques. J. Food Eng. 167:51–58
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Laso J, Margallo M, Celaya J, Fullana P, Bala A et al. 2016. Waste management under a life cycle approach as a tool for a circular economy in the canned anchovy industry. Waste Manag. Res. 34:8724–33
     [Google Scholar]
  67. Lorite GS, Rocha JM, Miilumäki N, Saavalainen P, Selkälä T et al. 2017. Evaluation of physicochemical/microbial properties and life cycle assessment (LCA) of PLA-based nanocomposite active packaging. LWT Food Sci. Technol. 75:305–15
     [Google Scholar]
  68. Lu T, Halog A 2020. Towards better life cycle assessment and circular economy: on recent studies on interrelationships among environmental sustainability, food systems and diet. Int. J. Sustain. Dev. World Ecol. 27:6515–23
     [Google Scholar]
  69. MacDonald R, Reitmeier C. 2017. Food processing. Understanding Food Systems: Agriculture, Food Science, and Nutrition in the United States179–225 Cambridge, MA: Acad. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  70. Manfredi M, Fantin V, Vignali G, Gavara R. 2015. Environmental assessment of antimicrobial coatings for packaged fresh milk. J. Clean. Prod. 95:291–300
     [Google Scholar]
  71. Manfredi M, Vignali G. 2014. Life cycle assessment of a packaged tomato puree: a comparison of environmental impacts produced by different life cycle phases. J. Clean. Prod. 73:275–84
     [Google Scholar]
  72. Mikhaylin S, Patouillard L, Margni M, Bazinet L 2018. Milk protein production by a more environmentally sustainable process: bipolar membrane electrodialysis coupled with ultrafiltration. Green Chem 20:2449–56
     [Google Scholar]
  73. Mondor M, Ippersiel D, Lamarche F 2012. Electrodialysis in food processing. Green Technologies in Food Production and Processing JI Boye, Y Arcand 295–326 Berlin: Springer Sci.
     [Google Scholar]
  74. Nasrollahi Z, Hashemi M-S, Bameri S, Mohamad Taghvaee V. 2020. Environmental pollution, economic growth, population, industrialization, and technology in weak and strong sustainability: using STIRPAT model. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 22:21105–22
     [Google Scholar]
  75. Neto B, Dias AC, Machado M. 2013. Life cycle assessment of the supply chain of a Portuguese wine: from viticulture to distribution. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 18:3590–602
     [Google Scholar]
  76. Ngadi MO, Bin Latheef M, Kassama L 2012. Emerging technologies for microbial control in food processing. Green Technologies in Food Production and Processing, eds. JI Boye, Y Arcand 363–411 Berlin: Springer Sci.
     [Google Scholar]
  77. Nutter DW, Kim DS, Ulrich R, Thoma G 2013. Greenhouse gas emission analysis for USA fluid milk processing plants: processing, packaging, and distribution. Int. Dairy J. 31:1S57–64
     [Google Scholar]
  78. Ölmez H, Kretzschmar U. 2009. Potential alternative disinfection methods for organic fresh-cut industry for minimizing water consumption and environmental impact. LWT Food Sci. Technol. 42:3686–93
     [Google Scholar]
  79. Pardo G, Zufía J. 2012. Life cycle assessment of food-preservation technologies. J. Clean. Prod. 28:198–207
     [Google Scholar]
  80. Point E, Tyedmers P, Naugler C. 2012. Life cycle environmental impacts of wine production and consumption in Nova Scotia, Canada. J. Clean. Prod. 27:11–20
     [Google Scholar]
  81. Prosapio V, Norton I, De Marco I 2017. Optimization of freeze-drying using a life cycle assessment approach: strawberries’ case study. J. Clean. Prod. 168:1171–79
     [Google Scholar]
  82. Rafiee S, Khoshnevisan B, Mohammadi I, Aghbashlo M, Mousazadeh H, Clark S. 2016. Sustainability evaluation of pasteurized milk production with a life cycle assessment approach: an Iranian case study. Sci. Total Environ. 562:614–27
     [Google Scholar]
  83. Ramaswamy R, Jin ZT, Balasubramanim VM, Zhang HQ. 2012. Pulsed electric field processing: factsheet for food processors Ohio State Univ. Ext. Bull. FSE-2-05, US Dep. Agric. Washington, DC:
     [Google Scholar]
  84. Ramírez CA, Patel M, Blok K 2006. From fluid milk to milk powder: energy use and energy efficiency in the European dairy industry. Energy 31:121984–2004
     [Google Scholar]
  85. Rhim JW, Park HM, Ha CS. 2013. Bio-nanocomposites for food packaging applications. Prog. Polym. Sci. 38:1629–52
     [Google Scholar]
  86. Salazar Tijerino MB, San Martín-González MF, Cai H, Huang JY 2021. Integrated techno-economic analysis and life cycle assessment on instantaneous water heating system for craft beer production. Food Bioprod. Process. 127:472–81
     [Google Scholar]
  87. Santos HCM, Maranduba HL, de Almeida Neto JA, Rodrigues LB. 2017. Life cycle assessment of cheese production process in a small-sized dairy industry in Brazil. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 24:43470–82
     [Google Scholar]
  88. Saxe H. 2010. LCA-based comparison of the climate footprint of beer versus wine & spirits Rep. 207 Københavns Univ. Copenhagen, Den: https://curis.ku.dk/portal/files/44663043/FOI_report_207.pdf
  89. Silva VL, Sanjuán N. 2019. Opening up the black box: a systematic literature review of life cycle assessment in alternative food processing technologies. J. Food Eng. 250:33–45
     [Google Scholar]
  90. Smyth M, Nesbitt A. 2014. Energy and English wine production: a review of energy use and benchmarking. Energy Sustain. Dev. 23:185–91
     [Google Scholar]
  91. Strathmann H 1986. Electrodialysis. Synthetic Membranes: Science, Engineering and Applications PM Bungay, HK Lonsdale, MN de Pinho 197–223 Dordrecht, Neth: D. Reidel
     [Google Scholar]
  92. Sturm B, Hugenschmidt S, Joyce S, Hofacker W, Roskilly AP 2013. Opportunities and barriers for efficient energy use in a medium-sized brewery. Appl. Therm. Eng. 53:2397–404
     [Google Scholar]
  93. Takamoto Y, Mitani Y, Takashio M, Itoi K, Muroyama K. 2004. Life cycle inventory analysis of a beer production process. MBAA Tech. Q. 41:4363–65
     [Google Scholar]
  94. Thoma GJ, Ellsworth SW, Yan MJ 2018. Principles of green food processing (including lifecycle assessment and carbon footprint). Alternatives for Conventional Food Processing A Proctor 1–52 Cambridge, UK: R. Soc. Chem.
     [Google Scholar]
  95. Toepfl S, Mathys A, Heinz V, Knorr D 2006. Review: potential of high hydrostatic pressure and pulsed electric fields for energy efficient and environmentally friendly food processing. Food Rev. Int. 22:4405–23
     [Google Scholar]
  96. Üçtuğ FG. 2019. The environmental life cycle assessment of dairy products. Food Eng. Rev. 11:2104–21
     [Google Scholar]
  97. United Nations 2015. Sustainable development goals. United Nations Development Programme. https://www.undp.org/sustainable-development-goals
    [Google Scholar]
  98. United Nations 2017. World population projected to reach 9.8 billion in 2050, and 11.2 billion in 2100 Rep., United Nations New York: https://www.un.org/development/desa/en/news/population/world-population-prospects-2017.html
    [Google Scholar]
  99. USDA-ERS 2019. Irrigation & water use Rep., US Dep. Agric. Econ. Res. Serv. Washington, DC: https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/farm-practices-management/irrigation-water-use/
  100. US Energy Inf. Adm 2016. Carbon dioxide emissions coefficients Rep., US Energy Inf. Adm., Washington, DC: https://www.eia.gov/environment/emissions/co2_vol_mass.php
  101. US Energy Inf. Adm 2019. Use of energy explained: energy use in industry Rep., US Energy Inf. Adm. Washington, DC: https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/use-of-energy/industry.php
  102. Valsasina L, Pizzol M, Smetana S, Georget E, Mathys A, Heinz V 2017. Life cycle assessment of emerging technologies: the case of milk ultra-high pressure homogenisation. J. Clean. Prod. 142:2209–17
     [Google Scholar]
  103. van Middelaar CE, Berentsen PBM, Dolman MA, de Boer IJM. 2011. Eco-efficiency in the production chain of Dutch semi-hard cheese. Livest. Sci. 139:191–99
     [Google Scholar]
  104. Vasilaki V, Katsou E, Ponsá S, Colón J 2016. Water and carbon footprint of selected dairy products: a case study in Catalonia. J. Clean. Prod. 139:504–16
     [Google Scholar]
  105. Vauchel P, Colli C, Pradal D, Philippot M, Decossin S et al. 2018. Comparative LCA of ultrasound-assisted extraction of polyphenols from chicory grounds under different operational conditions. J. Clean. Prod. 196:1116–23
     [Google Scholar]
  106. Vázquez-Rowe I, Cáceres AL, Torres-García JR, Quispe I, Kahhat R 2017. Life cycle assessment of the production of pisco in Peru. J. Clean. Prod. 142:Pt. 44369–83
     [Google Scholar]
  107. Vázquez-Rowe I, Villanueva-Rey P, Moreira MT, Feijoo G. 2012. Environmental analysis of Ribeiro wine from a timeline perspective: harvest year matters when reporting environmental impacts. J. Environ. Manag. 98:173–83
     [Google Scholar]
  108. Venkat K. 2011. The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States. Int. J. Food Syst. Dyn. 2:4431–46
     [Google Scholar]
  109. Walser T, Demou E, Lang DJ, Hellweg S 2011. Prospective environmental life cycle assessment of nanosilver t-shirts. Environ. Sci. Technol. 45:4570–78
     [Google Scholar]
  110. Willaert R 2005. Biochemistry and fermentation of beer. Handbook of Food Science, Technology, and Engineering YH Hui, F Sherkat 2993–3012 Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press
     [Google Scholar]
  111. WRAP 2013. The milk model: simulating food waste in the home Rep., WRAP Banbury, UK:
     [Google Scholar]
  112. Yan M, Holden NM 2018. Life cycle assessment of multi-product dairy processing using Irish butter and milk powders as an example. J. Clean. Prod. 198:215–30
     [Google Scholar]
  113. Yih PT, Oria M, Nesheim MC, Natl. Res. Counc., Inst. Med., Board Agric. Nat. Resourc. 2015. A Framework for Assessing Effects of the Food System Washington, DC: Natl. Acad. Press
  114. Yonar T, Sivrioğlu Ö, Özengin N 2018. Physico-chemical treatment of dairy industry wastewaters: a review. Technological Approaches for Novel Applications in Dairy Processing N Koca London: InTechOpen
     [Google Scholar]
  115. Zhang BY, Tong Y, Singh S, Cai H, Huang JY. 2019. Assessment of carbon footprint of nano-packaging considering potential food waste reduction due to shelf life extension. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 149:322–31
     [Google Scholar]
  116. Zhang H, Hortal M, Dobon A, Bermudez J, Lara-Llledo M. 2015. The effect of active packaging on minimizing food losses: life cycle assessment (LCA) of essential oil component-enabled packaging for fresh beef. Packag. Technol. Sci. 28:761–74
     [Google Scholar]
  117. Zhang H, Hortal M, Dobon A, Jorda-Beneyto M, Bermudez J. 2017. Selection of nanomaterial-based active agents for packaging application: using life cycle assessment (LCA) as a tool. Packag. Technol. Sci. 30:575–86
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-food-062420-014630
Loading
Life Cycle Assessment on Environmental Sustainability of Food Processing
Annual Review of Food Science and Technology 13, 217 (2022); https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-food-062420-014630
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-food-062420-014630
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-food-062420-014630
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error