A life cycle assessment of the environmental impacts of a beef system in the USA

Senorpe Asem-Hiablie, Thomas Battagliese, Kimberly R. Stackhouse-Lawson, C. Alan Rotz

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: The need to assess the sustainability attributes of the United States beef industry is underscored by its importance to food security locally and globally. A life cycle assessment (LCA) of the US beef value chain was conducted to develop baseline information on the environmental impacts of the industry includ`ing metrics of the cradle-to-farm gate (feed production, cow-calf, and feedlot operations) and post-farm gate (packing, case-ready, retail, restaurant, and consumer) segments. Methods: Cattle production (cradle-to-farm gate) data were obtained using the integrated farm system model (IFSM) supported with production data from the Roman L. Hruska US Meat Animal Research Center (USMARC). Primary data for the packing and case-ready phases were obtained from packers that jointly processed nearly 60% of US beef while retail and restaurant primary data represented 8 and 6%, respectively, of each sector. Consumer data were obtained from public databases and literature. The functional unit or consumer benefit (CB) was 1 kg of consumed, boneless, edible beef. The relative environmental impacts of processes along the full beef value chain were assessed using a third party validated BASF Corporation Eco-Efficiency Analysis methodology. Results and discussion: Value chain LCA results indicated that the feed and cattle production phases were the largest contributors to most environmental impact categories. Impact metrics included water emissions (7005 L diluted water eq/CB), cumulative energy demand (1110 MJ/CB), and land use (47.4 m 2 a eq/CB). Air emissions were acidification potential (726 g SO 2  eq/CB), photochemical ozone creation potential (146.5 g C 2 H 4  eq/CB), global warming potential (48.4 kg CO 2  eq/CB), and ozone depletion potential (1686 μg CFC 11  eq/CB). The remaining metrics calculated were abiotic depletion potential (10.3 mg Ag eq/CB), consumptive water use (2558 L eq/CB), and solid waste (369 g municipal waste eq/CB). Of the relative points adding up to 1 for each impact category, the feed phase contributed 0.93 to the human toxicity potential. Conclusions: This LCA is the first of its kind for beef and has been third party verified in accordance with ISO 14040:2006a and 14044:2006b and 14045:2012 standards. An expanded nationwide study of beef cattle production is now being performed with region-specific cattle production data aimed at identifying region-level benchmarks and opportunities for further improvement in US beef sustainability.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)441-455
Number of pages15
JournalInternational Journal of Life Cycle Assessment
Volume24
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 8 2019

Fingerprint

environmental impact
life cycle
farm
cattle
sustainability
CFC
industry
food security
meat
municipal solid waste
water use
acidification
global warming
ozone
toxicity
land use
methodology
animal
air
water

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Environmental Science(all)

Cite this

Asem-Hiablie, Senorpe ; Battagliese, Thomas ; Stackhouse-Lawson, Kimberly R. ; Alan Rotz, C. / A life cycle assessment of the environmental impacts of a beef system in the USA. In: International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment. 2019 ; Vol. 24, No. 3. pp. 441-455.
@article{4e09ec434b9d43688e7cfc98bf7e9f35,
title = "A life cycle assessment of the environmental impacts of a beef system in the USA",
abstract = "Purpose: The need to assess the sustainability attributes of the United States beef industry is underscored by its importance to food security locally and globally. A life cycle assessment (LCA) of the US beef value chain was conducted to develop baseline information on the environmental impacts of the industry includ`ing metrics of the cradle-to-farm gate (feed production, cow-calf, and feedlot operations) and post-farm gate (packing, case-ready, retail, restaurant, and consumer) segments. Methods: Cattle production (cradle-to-farm gate) data were obtained using the integrated farm system model (IFSM) supported with production data from the Roman L. Hruska US Meat Animal Research Center (USMARC). Primary data for the packing and case-ready phases were obtained from packers that jointly processed nearly 60{\%} of US beef while retail and restaurant primary data represented 8 and 6{\%}, respectively, of each sector. Consumer data were obtained from public databases and literature. The functional unit or consumer benefit (CB) was 1 kg of consumed, boneless, edible beef. The relative environmental impacts of processes along the full beef value chain were assessed using a third party validated BASF Corporation Eco-Efficiency Analysis methodology. Results and discussion: Value chain LCA results indicated that the feed and cattle production phases were the largest contributors to most environmental impact categories. Impact metrics included water emissions (7005 L diluted water eq/CB), cumulative energy demand (1110 MJ/CB), and land use (47.4 m 2 a eq/CB). Air emissions were acidification potential (726 g SO 2  eq/CB), photochemical ozone creation potential (146.5 g C 2 H 4  eq/CB), global warming potential (48.4 kg CO 2  eq/CB), and ozone depletion potential (1686 μg CFC 11  eq/CB). The remaining metrics calculated were abiotic depletion potential (10.3 mg Ag eq/CB), consumptive water use (2558 L eq/CB), and solid waste (369 g municipal waste eq/CB). Of the relative points adding up to 1 for each impact category, the feed phase contributed 0.93 to the human toxicity potential. Conclusions: This LCA is the first of its kind for beef and has been third party verified in accordance with ISO 14040:2006a and 14044:2006b and 14045:2012 standards. An expanded nationwide study of beef cattle production is now being performed with region-specific cattle production data aimed at identifying region-level benchmarks and opportunities for further improvement in US beef sustainability.",
author = "Senorpe Asem-Hiablie and Thomas Battagliese and Stackhouse-Lawson, {Kimberly R.} and {Alan Rotz}, C.",
year = "2019",
month = "3",
day = "8",
doi = "10.1007/s11367-018-1464-6",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "24",
pages = "441--455",
journal = "International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment",
issn = "0948-3349",
publisher = "Springer Science + Business Media",
number = "3",

}

A life cycle assessment of the environmental impacts of a beef system in the USA. / Asem-Hiablie, Senorpe; Battagliese, Thomas; Stackhouse-Lawson, Kimberly R.; Alan Rotz, C.

In: International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, Vol. 24, No. 3, 08.03.2019, p. 441-455.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - A life cycle assessment of the environmental impacts of a beef system in the USA

AU - Asem-Hiablie, Senorpe

AU - Battagliese, Thomas

AU - Stackhouse-Lawson, Kimberly R.

AU - Alan Rotz, C.

PY - 2019/3/8

Y1 - 2019/3/8

N2 - Purpose: The need to assess the sustainability attributes of the United States beef industry is underscored by its importance to food security locally and globally. A life cycle assessment (LCA) of the US beef value chain was conducted to develop baseline information on the environmental impacts of the industry includ`ing metrics of the cradle-to-farm gate (feed production, cow-calf, and feedlot operations) and post-farm gate (packing, case-ready, retail, restaurant, and consumer) segments. Methods: Cattle production (cradle-to-farm gate) data were obtained using the integrated farm system model (IFSM) supported with production data from the Roman L. Hruska US Meat Animal Research Center (USMARC). Primary data for the packing and case-ready phases were obtained from packers that jointly processed nearly 60% of US beef while retail and restaurant primary data represented 8 and 6%, respectively, of each sector. Consumer data were obtained from public databases and literature. The functional unit or consumer benefit (CB) was 1 kg of consumed, boneless, edible beef. The relative environmental impacts of processes along the full beef value chain were assessed using a third party validated BASF Corporation Eco-Efficiency Analysis methodology. Results and discussion: Value chain LCA results indicated that the feed and cattle production phases were the largest contributors to most environmental impact categories. Impact metrics included water emissions (7005 L diluted water eq/CB), cumulative energy demand (1110 MJ/CB), and land use (47.4 m 2 a eq/CB). Air emissions were acidification potential (726 g SO 2  eq/CB), photochemical ozone creation potential (146.5 g C 2 H 4  eq/CB), global warming potential (48.4 kg CO 2  eq/CB), and ozone depletion potential (1686 μg CFC 11  eq/CB). The remaining metrics calculated were abiotic depletion potential (10.3 mg Ag eq/CB), consumptive water use (2558 L eq/CB), and solid waste (369 g municipal waste eq/CB). Of the relative points adding up to 1 for each impact category, the feed phase contributed 0.93 to the human toxicity potential. Conclusions: This LCA is the first of its kind for beef and has been third party verified in accordance with ISO 14040:2006a and 14044:2006b and 14045:2012 standards. An expanded nationwide study of beef cattle production is now being performed with region-specific cattle production data aimed at identifying region-level benchmarks and opportunities for further improvement in US beef sustainability.

AB - Purpose: The need to assess the sustainability attributes of the United States beef industry is underscored by its importance to food security locally and globally. A life cycle assessment (LCA) of the US beef value chain was conducted to develop baseline information on the environmental impacts of the industry includ`ing metrics of the cradle-to-farm gate (feed production, cow-calf, and feedlot operations) and post-farm gate (packing, case-ready, retail, restaurant, and consumer) segments. Methods: Cattle production (cradle-to-farm gate) data were obtained using the integrated farm system model (IFSM) supported with production data from the Roman L. Hruska US Meat Animal Research Center (USMARC). Primary data for the packing and case-ready phases were obtained from packers that jointly processed nearly 60% of US beef while retail and restaurant primary data represented 8 and 6%, respectively, of each sector. Consumer data were obtained from public databases and literature. The functional unit or consumer benefit (CB) was 1 kg of consumed, boneless, edible beef. The relative environmental impacts of processes along the full beef value chain were assessed using a third party validated BASF Corporation Eco-Efficiency Analysis methodology. Results and discussion: Value chain LCA results indicated that the feed and cattle production phases were the largest contributors to most environmental impact categories. Impact metrics included water emissions (7005 L diluted water eq/CB), cumulative energy demand (1110 MJ/CB), and land use (47.4 m 2 a eq/CB). Air emissions were acidification potential (726 g SO 2  eq/CB), photochemical ozone creation potential (146.5 g C 2 H 4  eq/CB), global warming potential (48.4 kg CO 2  eq/CB), and ozone depletion potential (1686 μg CFC 11  eq/CB). The remaining metrics calculated were abiotic depletion potential (10.3 mg Ag eq/CB), consumptive water use (2558 L eq/CB), and solid waste (369 g municipal waste eq/CB). Of the relative points adding up to 1 for each impact category, the feed phase contributed 0.93 to the human toxicity potential. Conclusions: This LCA is the first of its kind for beef and has been third party verified in accordance with ISO 14040:2006a and 14044:2006b and 14045:2012 standards. An expanded nationwide study of beef cattle production is now being performed with region-specific cattle production data aimed at identifying region-level benchmarks and opportunities for further improvement in US beef sustainability.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85047795163&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85047795163&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s11367-018-1464-6

DO - 10.1007/s11367-018-1464-6

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85047795163

VL - 24

SP - 441

EP - 455

JO - International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment

JF - International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment

SN - 0948-3349

IS - 3

ER -