Blog

Following our last post, we examine the land use cost of rapseed growing for the global warming. According to a study, forest in Germany has a carbon stock of 500 tonnes of CO₂ per hectare, and one hectare of rapeseed has 365 tonnes of CO₂ . However, we cannot directly conclude that the rapseed is more environmental friendly compared to the palm oil. Each hectare of palm oil farm yields 3585 kg of palm oil. To produce the same amount of colza oil we need 2.6 hectrares. Taking that to the account, the carbon cost of colza oil production is 757 tonnes of CO₂ for the equevalent of 1 hectare of palm oil production (compared to 563 tonnes of CO₂ per hectare for palm oil).

The data from FAO shows that the palm oil production is responsible for 5% of tropical deforestation. But the forest is replaced by a farm of trees which also absorb the carbon dioxide. Can a farm of palm trees set off the carbon impact of tropical forest? According to a study, each hectare of tropical forest stores 1063 tonnes of CO₂ where a large scale oil palm production stores 500 tonnes of CO₂ , the difference is 563 tonnes of CO₂ per hectare.

Tree are assumed to be our biggest chance to fight the global warming by absorbing the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and create solid material mainly cellulose or other types of carbohydrates that do not contribute to the global warming. But how much carbon dioxide does each tree absorb? One tree absorbs between 10 to 40 kg of CO₂ per year (on average 25 kg). The average is equal to riding a car 130 km.

Shipping is the heart of global trade. After introduction of studies reporting the carbon footprint of road transport, we want to look at the greenhouse gas emission of sea freight. According to a study at the University of California, Berkeley, the carbon footprint of ocean container vessels is 2.7 - 3.6 grams CO₂ per kilometer tonnes of transported goods and for ocean tanker vessels is 1.7 - 2.3 grams CO₂ per kilometer tonnes of transported goods. The numbers are slightly smaller if the fuel is diesel of LNG.

After introduction of data sources about the greenhouse gas emissions of different types of human transport, it is interesting to look at the cargo transport. According to a study from the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) transportation is the largest contributor to the US greenhouse gas emissions (29%), 58% of which coming from light duty vehicles and 24% from medium and heavy duty vehicles. A life cycle study reports the amount of emission from light duty vehicles to be 745 grams CO₂ per kilometer tonnes of transported goods and the emissions from medium duty vehicles to be 265 grams CO₂ per kilometer tonnes. The scope of the study includes the emissions from the production of the vehicles.

Human impact on the earth system in terms of greenhouse gas emission, biodiversity, and chemical pollution is overshooting several planatary boundries. These problems are being driven in large part by global resource use, through processes of material extraction, production, consumption, and waste. Global material use has been increase up to 90 billion tonnes per year in 2017. But how much are different nations with different level of national wealth responsible for the situation? According to a study, total consumption has been 2.5 trillion tonnes since 1974, 1.1 trillion of tonnes of that being beyond the sustainable corridor. The high-income nations (defined by the world bank) are responsible for the 74% of the total consumption since then, and are responsible for 25%. The USA is the largest consuming country by 27% of the consumption in this time span followd by the EU+UK by 25%. They study has also an interactive website where you can look up the results in the country level and download the data.

After intorduction of studies about the carbon footprint of electric cars and trains, we want to look at another electric option for transport: e-scooters. The e-scooters have been controversial since they became pervasive. Most of the discussion on e-scooter focus on their problems for cities, leading many cities put restrictions on e-scooters. But how much do they impact the environment? According to a study, the carbon footprint of e-scooters is 202 grams of CO₂ per PMT with 50% coming from manufacturing, 43% from collecting and distribution of the e-scooters, and 4.7% from the electricity used to charge the scooters.

After looking at the carbon footprint of flight, it is interesting to know the carbon footprint of other types of transport. Although one should not forget that trains are not an alternative for long distance flights. According to the data reported by the UK Department of Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy, the carbon footprint of national rail is 41 grams of CO₂ per PMT and only 6 grams of CO₂ per PMT for the Eurostar that is a high speed rail network connecting UK, France, Belgium, and the Netherlands.

The emission problem of aviation is a frequently discussed topic. Although compared to the total emission of other industries, the contribution of aviation is small, its high carbon intensity emission (meaning high amount of emission compared to the activity) is non-deniable. But how much is the carbon footprint of flight? With a simple search, one can find several emissions calculator online (for example from myclimate and the Internation Civil Aviation Organization ICAO that is an United Nations organization). However, when I tied to calculate the carbon footprint of my trip to Cape Town in South Africa, I got different results from those calculators (5.9 tones of CO₂ calculated by myclimate and 2.2 tones of CO₂ calculated by ICAO). In my search for validating the results, I found a study from the UC Berkeley that provides the methodology of the GHG emissions calculation as well. According to the study, the carbon footprint of Boeing 737 (as a representative of average commercial aircraft) is 172 grams of CO₂ per passenger mile travel (PMT) and 245 grams of CO₂ per PMT (as a representative of large aircrafts). Given these results, the calculation of the ICAO is more realistic.

Leather is a product that has synthetic resembling products. How much is the carbon footprint of synthetic leather? Is it more sustainable to use synthetic leather instead of cattle leather? According to a study published by the Industrial Development Organization of the United Nations (UNIDO) the carbon footprint of the synthetic leather is 15.8 Kg of CO₂ per 1 m² of faux leather.

The question about the carbon footprint of leather is not an easy one. Do you consider it a by-product of meat industry or a co-product of it? Here we assume the latter, as leather industry is a well profit-deriven industry. According to a study, the carbon footprint of bovine leather is 73 Kg of CO₂ per 1 m² of leather. As an example, approximately 0.3 m² of leather is required to make a pair of shoes, that is 24.3 Kg of CO₂ for the leather.

After studying the global warming impact of electric cars, we want to focus on an aspect of fossil fuels that is usually neglected in the discussions about combustion cars. How much greenhouse gas is released to bring the fuel to gas stations? An article studies the topic and summerizes different academic publications. On average, 63 Kg of CO₂ per barrel of crude oil is released to bring the oil to the refineries. Taking the refining process into account, the carbon footprint of gasoline is 0.72 Kg of CO₂ per liter and of diesel is 0.64 Kg of CO₂ per liter. That is 30 and 26 g of CO₂ per kilometer for gasoline and diesel, respectively.

In the last post of the series, we focus on the end-of-life stage of an electric car. A car battery contains valuable minerals like Lithium which is not abundant in the nature. With the current rate of producing large storage batteries, soon we will be forced to recycle them as well. But how much is the carbon footprint of recycling a storage battery compared to production from virgin material? According to a study, the carbon footprint of a recycled battery is 37.7%. Recycling is even more environmental friendly when we look at other areas such as acidifying (94.5%), eutrophication (76.5%), and photochemical ozone precursors (78.2%).

After looking at the global warming impact of storage battery production for cars, the next question is, whether the emission will be paid off by lower carbon footprint during the usage of the car. A study compares the carbon released by driving a combustion engine car and an electric car in Europe. Of course the emission for the electric car means the carbon emission for the production of the electricity to recharge its battery. The total carbon footprint of a combustion engine is 255 g of CO₂ per km of driving and 125 g of CO₂ per km for an average electric car. This means an electric car will be more environmental friendly if it is drived on average 50,000 km.

In 2015, transportation was responsible for 28% of energy-related CO₂ emissions. Electric vehicles are the main hope for the transport sector to cut its emission by 40% by 2040 and 80-95% by 2050 compared to 1990. But how much are the electric vehicles environmental friendly? In a few posts we are going to introduce data on this topic. First, we consider the emissions due to production of the batteries. According to a study, the carbon emission of production of the batteries is 150-200 kg of CO₂ per 1 kWh (since 2017 the lowest capacity of Tesla model S is 75 kWh). The main contributor to the emission is electricity required to produce the battery (40%), the Lithium-Nickel-Manganese-Cobalt-Oxide (LiNiMnCoO2) (22%), and Electrolytes (12.5%).

Online shopping have been growing since the first days of internet. However, we have seen a boom in online shopping after be pandemic and on and off restrictions. Online shopping ads at least one carton package to any item and its global warming impact. But how much does the packaging impact the environment? A study calculates the cradle-to-grave emission of cartons to be 0.326 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of carton.

Environmental impact of nappies and discussion about replacing disposable nappies with reusable is getting more and more attention. But how much do they impact the global warming? On one hand, disposable nappies are used only once and stay in the environment for a long time. On the other hand, washing the reusable nappies increases their global warming impact. In a study, the whole global warming of nappies used for each baby (assuming that a baby needs nappies until 2.5 years old) are calculated. For lighter disposable nappies it is 509 kg of CO₂ and for normal nappies it is 550 kg of CO₂ . The carbon emission for reusable nappies start from 520 kg of CO₂ for high efficiency laundering up to 815 kg of CO₂ for tumble drying the washed nappies.

Glass is one of our best hopes to reduce the plastics use. Glass can be recycled infinitely without losing any of its properties. Therefore it is one of the best material for container for a circular economy. A study that covers 72% of all glass packaging production in Europe, showes that the carbon footprint of virgin glass is 1.2 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of glass and each time it is recycled the carbon footprint decreases and it can be cut down to 0.62 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of glass.

Cheddar is a relatively hard cheese with off-white to orange color. Originated in southwest England, it is a popular cheese for making the cheese burger. But how much does it impact the global warming? According to a study, the carbon footprint is 3.17 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of cheese. The study is for the cheese produced and consumed in the united states and its scope is cradle-to-grave, that means it includes the emission from customer refrigeration and waste management.

Fresh cheese is another popular and highly produced type of cheese. The carbon footprint of fresh cheese is reported to be 3.24 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of packed product. The scope of the study is from cradle to packaging. Comparing with the italian hard cheese, one can see that replacing the hard cheese with fresh cheese can significantly cut the environmental impact of our diet.

Mango is a stone nutritious fruit. Main producers of Mango are India, Indonesia, and China and main exporters are Mexico, Peru, and Brazil. According to a study the carbon footprint of mango produced in Brazil is 0.14 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of packed fruit. However, the emissions from export is excluded. When we look at the water footprint of mango, it is a sustainable food as well. The water footprint of mango is 1800 liters of water per 1 kg of fruit.

Another widely transported tropical fruit is pineapple. According to this study the carbon footprint of pineapple produced in Costa Rica and exported to Germany is 0.69 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of the fruit. Only 10% of the emission is released in production and 62% is released in transportation.

Banana is one the most transported fruits in the world. This nutrition rich fruit has reached almost every corner of the world. But how much does it impact the global warming? According to a study the carbon footprint of banana is 0.84 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of the fruit. The scope of the study is banana produced in Ecuador and exported to Europe. Share of production and transportation are 24% and 55%, respectively.

Avocado is a popular fruit and its consumption increases every year. Therefore, it is important to know its global warming impact. According to a study the carbon footprint of avocado is 1.38 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of the fruit. The scope of the study is the avocado produced in Mexico and transported to Germany. There more ESG concerns about avocado as well. In Michoacan Mexico forests are destroyed to use the land for farming avocado. Moreover, farming avocado is considered dangerous. Farm workers might be subject to dehydration, heat stroke, unprotected exposure to harmful, toxic chemicals and pesticides, and unsafe machinery.

Whisky (or depending on the place of its production whiskey) is one the most favorite alcoholic beverages. But how much does the demand for whisky impacts the global warming? Carbon footprint of of whisky is 1.2 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg (including the packaging). That makes the global warming of 1 dram 30 grams of CO₂ . The main contributors to the greenhouse gas emissions are production (32%) and ingredients (29%).

Water is consumed in the majority of the human activities. It is important to know how the water consumption impacts the global warming. A report studies the carbon footprint of water in the US. The article divides the types of water sources, usage of water, and reports the energy required for each of them. By calculating the energy sources in the US and their carbon footprint, one can get an average 0.037 to 0.51 kg of CO₂ per 1 cubic meter of water.

The light emission is the amount of CO₂ released if a Incandescent (60 Watts) is used for 8 hours.

Parmesan is a genericised name for hard Italian-style grating cheese. In Europe, the name is exclusively used for the Italian hard cheese produced in Emilia-Romanga area in Italy. It is one of the most favorite cheese types and name 'King of the Cheese'. But how much this beloved food impact the global warming. A source reports the carbon footprint of Parmesan cheese to be 13.5 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of cheese. Moreover, it takes 5060 liters of water to produce 1 kg of the parmesan cheese.

Peanut butter is a key ingredient in many popular snacks ranging from a simple peanut butter jelly sandwich to chocolates and donuts. The peanut production of the US has increased 160% in ten years between 2002 to 2012. But how much does this snack impact the global warming? According to a study the carbon footprint of peanut butter is 2.88 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of product. The scope of the study is cradle-to-grave which includes the consumption and waste management of the packaging.

Ever wondered how much your favorite breakfast impacts the global warming? A study reports the carbon footprint of breakfast cereal to be as high as 0.98 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of cereal. The main contributors to the carbon footprint of cereal are cultivation and manufacturing stages.

How much is the carbon footprint of paper production? The aswer highly depends on the type of paper. According to a study that uses data from 252 mills in the US, the least sustainable types of paper are tissue, printing paper, and coated greenwood paper (used for high quality printing like magazines) with emission as high as 1.72, 1.56, and 1.51 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of paper respectively. The lowest emission belongs to uncoated greenwood (for example used for newspaper) with 0.61 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of paper.

Lamb meat is another widely consumed type of meat around the world. How much does the production of lamb impact the global warming? A study compares the carbon emission of lamb meat production in spain with three methods ranging from traditional free grazing method to fully industrialized method. The results are 56.7 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of meat for traditional method, 48.5 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of meat for mixed method, and 38.9 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of meat for fully industrialized method.

Tomato is consumed in many different forms around the world. But how much does it impact our environment? A study compares the global warming impact of tomato production in Austria, Spain, and Italy. For the transportation, it is assumed that the products are transported to Austria. In Austria, the results are reported for two methods of prodcution, venlo and organic. The venlo method requires heating that increases the carbon footprint significantly. The results for venlo method in Austria is 1.37 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg packed tomato. Carbon footprint of organic production in Austria is 0.18 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg packed tomato, and for conventional production in Spain is 0.68 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg packed tomato. For Italy, the study reports the results for canned tomato that is 0.87 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg packed tomato.

Sustainability of fabrics is one of the biggest but least discussed topics. In a few posts, we want to find out how much does the fashion industry impact the global warming. First step is looking at the emissions of different spun fiber. According to a study the carbon footprint of polyester produced is 9.5 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg, of conventional cotton is 5.9 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg, and of organic cotton is 2.35 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg. All of these numbers are for production in the USA.

Wine is an ancient drink, hence an ancient contributor to the global warming. But how much does wine production and consumption contribute to the global warming? According to a study 1.2 kg of CO₂ is released during the full life cycle of 1 bottle of wine (0.75 liter). The carbon footprint of red and white wine are the same, but red is much more sustainable if we take acidification and eutrophication into account.

Ever wondered about the carbon footprint of your shrimp salad? It can be a complicated issue. According to a study carbon footprint of shrimp production is 6.9 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of shrimp, where the main factors are electricity (2.0093 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg, 29.39%), feed (1.6395 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg, 23.98%), indirect raw materials (1.4782 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg, 21.62%), waste treatment (0.7783 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg, 11.40%) and transport and refrigerant (0.7524 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg, 11.01%).

However, in many parts of the world the shrimp farms are built by cutting mangrove trees. Not only this deforestation creates many ecological problems, but also it releases large amount of carbon in mangrove soil. These farms only last 5 years before the buildup of sludge in the ponds and the acid sulfate soil renders them unfit for shrimp. If we take this factor into acount, the carbon footprint of shrimp is as high as 1980 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of shrimp (link).

French fries is one of the most iconic and popular forms of consuming potatos. Although called a side dish, it is inseperable from some food like Hamburgers. But how much does it add to the carbon footprint of the food? A study calculates the cradle to grave carbon footprint of the french fries as high as 2.06 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of french fries. Almost half of it is from consumption stage. This result is consistent with results of another study that calculates the carbon footprint of french fries in Switzerland.

Every week millions of washing machines spin billions of textiles and garment. Although the main source of carbon emission from washing machine come from heating the water, we are going to look at the carbon footprint of the detergent used by the washing machines. A study by the european union calculates the carbon footprint of the liquid detergent to be 0.23 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of product for the life cycle excluding the usage and 0.29 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of product for usage stage that makes it 0.52 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg in total.

Pork is one the most widely consumed types of meat. It is consumed in various ways such as cured and cooked. But how does it impact the climate change? A study from University of Arkansas compares the enviromental impact of pork produced in the US and in Europe. The scope of the study includes the consumption, or as they call it pork to fork!! The results are reported to be 9.94 kg of CO₂ and 12.4 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of pork produced in US and Europe respectively.

Beyond Burger is considered functionally and nutritionally similar to beef. It has offered an alternative to beef burgers that can satisfy not only the vegetarians but also non-vegetarian burger fans. Since burger is one of the most common forms of consuming meat, it is hoped that it can take over a large part of meat consumtion. But how much is the carbon footprint of beyond burger? A cradle-to-distribution study from University of Michigan calculates the carbon footprint of beyond burger to be 3.4 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of beyond burger, that is around 10% of the beef burger. Therefore, one can claim that be beyond burger has been successful to offer a sustainable alternative to the beef burger.

Wide range of factors affect the parnets' choice to initiate substitution of breastfeeding with formula. But how does this choice impact the environment? According to a study supported by the World Health Organization (WHO), carbon footprint from the production of baby formula range from 7.1 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg in the United States to 11 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg in Brazil, 75% of which is from the raw milk production. Taking preparation into account adds around 2.5 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg to the carbon footprint, that means the carbon footprint for consumption is 11-14 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg.

It is time to pass the hang over after the party and ask ourselves how much our drinking impacted the climate change? According to a study carbon footprint of vodka is 1.6 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of glass bottled vodka (a 1 liter glass of smirnoff weighs around 1.6 kg). The ingredients produce 25% of the CO₂ , packaging 37%, and transport 12%. Carbon footprint can be reduced by 27% if PET packaging is used.

Ever wondered about the environmental impact of the salmon fish? An article studies the carbon footprint of two different production methods, land-based and open net pen. It is important to mention that open net pen (ONP) can harm biodiversity drastically as free exchange between farm and the surrounding environment is allowed.

Carbon footprint of ONP and land-based are comparable, 3.39 and 3.73 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg salmon live-weight respectively, when the land-based method uses hydropower. The carbon footprint of land-based is 7 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg salmon live-weight, if the land-based uses fossil fuels. If the transport is taken into account, the carbon footprint can be as high as 15 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg salmon live-weight, when the salmon is air transported. On the other hand, the sea freight transport does not change the carbon footprint considerably.

Soap is the first hygene product used by human beings. There is a clay tablet that documented how soap was produced 4500 year ago. But how much is the global warming impact of this ancient product? A study analyses the carbon footprint of soap produced using palm oil to be 1.65 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of soap. Most of the carbon dioxide is emitted during the soaponification process where palm oil is submitted to reaction with sodium hydroxide.

Are cashews good for environment? The article studies two types of cashew production, conventional farming and multi-cropping farming. The results for greenhouse gas emissions suggest that conventional farming is much better for climate change with 4.2 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of cashew compared to 8.9 for the multi-cropping system. On the other hand, multi-cropping farming has much lower terrestrial acidification and water eutrophication.

Another important aspect is that, there is anacardic acid in the fruit of cashew tree which is toxic and burns skin. The laborers are usually not provided with protection.

Does using vegan products decrease the global warming impact of our consumption? According to this study, not in the case of mayonnaise. The study reports the carbon footprint of egg mayonnaise 2 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of mayonnaise, and the vegan made by chickpea cooking water (aquafaba) 3.6 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of mayonnaise. The main reason for that is the electricity required for processing of aquafaba. On the other hand, aquafaba is a recent ingredient and hopefully we will find new and more efficient processes to produce it.

Coca Cola is with no doubt the biggest brand in the world. But what is the carbon footprint of their products? This report published by Coca Cola Europe, calculates the full life cycle climate impact of the coca cola products. For the 330 ml can, it is 150 g of CO₂ (0.42 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of product). A 500 ml plastic PET bottle has 240 g of CO₂ (0.44 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of product), and the 2 liters PET bottle has 500 g of CO₂ (0.25 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of product) emission. Of the total carbon footprint 43.1% is from packaging, 14% from the ingredient, and 24.5% from the retail (mostly refridgeration).

Is coconut oil sustainable? This study reports the carbon footprint of coconut oil to be 2.1 Kg of CO₂ per Kg of coconut oil. However, coconut oil industry is one of the most dangerous industry for the farmworkers. The farmworkers farmworkers may be subject to dehydration, heat stroke, unprotected exposure to harmful, toxic chemicals and pesticides. Moreover, the laborers are often exploited.

Which one is more sustainable? Eating your sandwich with ketchup or mustard? The carbon footprint of yellow mustard condiment is 1 Kg of CO₂ per Kg of yellow mustard, that means it is quite sustainable compared to other condiments.

Is it more sustainable to buy a natural tree or a plastic one? It is highly dependent on what happens to your tree after the christmas. An article reports the carbon footprint of a natural tree that is burnt as firewood to be 3.5 Kg of CO₂ for an average size tree. If the ends up decomposing, the number will be 16 Kg of CO₂ for an average size tree. The carbon footprint of a plastic tree is 40 Kg of CO₂ , which means a plastic tree should be at least used for 12 years to be more sustainable than a natural tree.

Is almond milk better for environment than the diary milk? The short answer is yes, at least if your main concern is the global warming. According to a study carbon footprint of almond milk is 0.71 Kg of CO₂ per 48 oz (1.42 L) of almond milk, 55% of which is attributed to the almond milk production and the rest attributed to the packaging. Therefore, using recycled packaging can reduce the carbon footprint dramatically. Another factor to consider is the fresh water consumption which is 175 L of water for production of 1.42 L of the almond milk.

Rice has one of largest yield among all food crops especially in east and south east asia with its high population. The article studies the carbon footprint of rice production in 5 districts of Hunan, Heilongjiang, Jiangsu, Sichuan, and Guangdong. The highest results is for Guangdong with 4.657 Kg of CO₂ per Kg of rice and the lowest is Jiangsu with 2.866 Kg of CO₂ Kg of rice. Another study in five regions in India reports 1.2 Kg of CO₂ Kg of rice.

Carbon footprint of beer is highly dependent on the method of production, quantity of production, packaging, and export distances. The guardian reports the emission to be 300 g of CO₂ per pint (~473 milliliter) for a locally produced beer, 500 g of CO₂ per pint for a foreign beer bottled locally and 900 g of CO₂ per pint for a bottle beer from shop and extensively transported.

How much is the impact of eating pasta on global warming? This study reports the carbon footprint of pasta made with egg and a pasta where egg is replaced by pea protein. The carbon footprint (up the retail distribution) is 1.79 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of pasta for egg pasta and 1.22 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of pasta enriched by pea protein instead of egg.

Ever wondered how much is the carbon footprint of your cup of tea? This study analyses the carbon footprint of tea including the energy used for boiling water in consumption. The final number is 7.035 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of tea. Main contributors are consumer use and raw material (fertilizer, pesticide, machinery use, etc.). That mean the carbon footprint of your cup of tea is about 21 g of CO₂ .

Carbon footprint of Gouda Cheese production and consumption can be between 6.9 to 11.8 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of Gouda Cheese. The study reports detailed numbers for feed raw material, diary farm processes, inventory, etc. Moreover, it includes the environmental impact of Gouda Cheese for other important factors such as terrestrial acidification and Freshwater eutrophication.

The carbon footprint of ketchup can be different based on parameters from the ingredients to the shape of its bottle. The study compares the carbon footprint of ketchup production up to the transport to the supermarket. The study also takes food loss and waste (FLW) of ketchup due to the shape of the bottles as well. The lowest carbon footprint, a ketchup produced in Czech republic in 550 g upside down bottle, is 5.6 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg and the highest is 9.1 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg in 380 g bottle.

Olive oil is believed to be good for the health, but how much is its impact on the global warming? A study calculates the carbon footprint of 1 Kg of olive oil in one large bottle is 2.36 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of olive oil. 55% percent of the carbon footprint is from insecticides and fertilizers.

California-grown almonds dominate the world. This article reports the carbon footprint of almond production in California. The methodology includes the hulling and shelling of almonds. Moreover, the co-products of almond can be used as biomass for electricity generation; the study deducts the amount of CO₂ that would have been produced by fossil fuels instead of the biomass of almond co-products. The result is 0.71 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg.

There are two thorough studies by Bianchi et. al. (2020) and Ntiamoah et. al. (2008) about the environmental impact of cocoa production such as Abiotic Depletion Potential (use of nonrenewable sources), Acidification Potential (emission of SO₂ , NO_x , etc.), Eutrophication Potential (over fertilization of soil and water), Human Toxicity, and Freshwater Aquatic Eco-toxicity Potential.

The global warming impact of cocoa production is reported to be 0.32 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg. However, this number is for the production in Ghana. The impact of Cocoa production in Indonesia using monoculture method (only Cocoa trees planted in the farm) can 4 times higher than this number.

Next food product is our environment friendliest so far as well. The carbon footprint of salt production in Riburg, Switzerland is reported to be 0.041 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of Salt. The most exciting data in the report is the carbon footprint for the production and transportation to different destinations. For example the carbon footprint of the salz produced Switzerland and transported to Italy by road transport is 0.75 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg. For the same product transported to the Netherlands by ship is 0.186 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg and to Spain by rail cargo and ship is 0.140 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg. The reported data on transportation has much more detail in the complete report.

Wagyu is highly marbled beef beloved by the chefs around the world. If it is of certain types of japanese cow and grown in the Kobe region of Japan it is called Kobe beef and the most expensive beef in the world. But how much is its carbon footprint? Carbon footprint of Wagyu beef is 32.3 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of beef. It is particularly high, compared to the US beef with carbon footprint of 16.3 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of beef, partly because it must be bred for 28 months , where US beef is bred for 13 months.

Ever wondered how your honey consumption impacts the global warming? That highly depends on the beehive management of the farm. A study compares the emissions of six different farms in Italy, where three of them use migratory system (meaning that beekeepers move their beehives) and other three use non-migratory (or stationary) system. As you could guess the migratory system has more impact due to the transportation. The carbon footprint of the migratory system is 2.2 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of honey and for the non-migratory system it was 0.42 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of honey. The main sources of emission were supplemental feeding of the bees and electricity for the extraction machines.

Sugar is a product whose production affects the environment in several different (and negative) ways such as soil erosion, soil degradation, overuse of water, intensive use of fertilizers, and water pollution due to Discharge of mill effluents.

One of the main sources of GHG emission is pre-harvest burning of the sugar cane farms. A study shows that the carbon footprint of sugar produced from sugar cane 86% harvested with pre-burn harvesting method and 14% green harvesting method in Brazil is 0.241 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of sugar.

Ever wondered how much your coffee drinking habit contribute to the global warming? That highly depends on where and how your coffee was produced. A study reports the life cycle assessment of the coffee growing, milling, and exportation. The results are reported for the coffee grown in Brazil and Vietnam with conventional and sustainable methods and exported by aeroplane. The emission for the coffee produced by conventional methods is 16.04 kg of CO₂ and 14.61 per 1 kg of coffee for Vietnam and Brazil respectively. The numbers for sustainable production are 3.64 kg of CO₂ and 3.37 kg of CO₂ for Brazil and Vietnam. The main reason for the difference between two countries is the emission due to exportation.

Another article from the University College London calculates the amount of carbon emission for espresso (0.06 kg of CO₂ if it is produced sutainably and 0.28 kg of CO₂ if it is produced conventionally), and cappuccinos (0.34 kg of CO₂ if it is produced sutainably and 0.41 kg of CO₂ if it is produced conventionally).

Talking about the carbon footprint of yoghurt is difficult because there are several different types of yoghurt based on its content of protein, fat, etc. In this post we focus on greek yoghurt which is a high protein and low fat yoghurt. The study is craddle-to-grave, which means the environmental impact of its production and consumption are included in the reported results. Carbon footprint of the yoghurt, produced by 3 different processes are reported and the numbers are 2.5 - 2.8 kg of CO₂ per 1 kg of greek joghurt.

Milk is our next food product. The article studies the carbon footprint of milk production for confinement dairies in UK and US as well as grass-based diary in Ireland. The GHG emission of grass-based production is 0.837 Kg of carbon dioxide per Kg of produced milk that is 5% lower than the UK confinement system (0.884 Kg of carbon dioxide per Kg of milk) and 7% lower than the US confinement system (0.898 Kg of carbon dioxide per Kg of milk).

#food_product #uk #us #ireland #life_cycle_assessment

Following up with our breakfast table list, next food products is egg. We found this assessment from the Australian Egg Corporation Ltd. that reports the carbon footprint of egg production to be 1.3 Kg carbon dioxide for production of 1 Kg of Egg for caged housing and 1.6 Kg of carbon dioxide for free-range eggs. The latter number is consistent with another study for the free range egg production in the UK. However, these studies do not take the downstreem emissions (consumption) into account.

Following the series on food product, butter comes after the cheese. In this article carbon footprint of butter is analyzed and calculated throughout its life cycle, and the points that can be improved are discussed. The carbon footprint of wrapped 250g butter is 10 Kg carbon dioxide per Kg, and (surprise! surprise!) wrap packaging has a lower carbon footprint compared to the tub.

It is important to consider that the numbers are calculated for milk and farm products produced in Denmark and the butter consumed in Denmark. If the butter the transported further, more emission must be taken into account.

#food_products #europe #butter #life_cycle_assessment

Ever wondered how much your mazzarella consumption impact the environment? The question is answered thoroughly in this article by researchers from University of Padova and University of Arkansas. The short answer is from cradle to grave (including all ingredients and the waste management of the plastic packaging) 6.6 Kg Carbon Dioxide per 1 Kg of high moisture mazzarella.

But the article has much more to offer. It calculates the environmental impact of mazzarella production and consumption across many more criteria such as ozone depletion, terrestrial acidification, and freshwater eutrophication. Moreover, the detailed transparent methodology and life cycle assessment, enables to break up the results and show the impact of each step in the life cycle such as manufacturing, transport, retail, etc.

#food_products #europe #mazzarella #life_cycle_assessment