Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers

Food’s environmental impacts are created by millions of diverse producers. To identify solutions that are effective under this heterogeneity, we consolidated data covering five environmental indicators; 38,700 farms; and 1600 processors, packaging types, and retailers. Impact can vary 50-fold among producers of the same product, creating substantial mitigation opportunities. However, mitigation is complicated by trade-offs, multiple ways for producers to achieve low impacts, and interactions throughout the supply chain. Producers have limits on how far they can reduce impacts. Most strikingly, impacts of the lowest-impact animal products typically exceed those of vegetable substitutes, providing new evidence for the importance of dietary change. Cumulatively, our findings support an approach where producers monitor their own impacts, flexibly meet environmental targets by choosing from multiple practices, and communicate their impacts to consumers.

Organic and conservation agriculture promote ecosystem multifunctionality

Ecosystems provide multiple services to humans. However, agricultural systems are usually evaluated on their productivity and economic performance, and a systematic and quantitative assessment of the multifunctionality of agroecosystems including environmental services is missing. Using a long-term farming system experiment, we evaluated and compared the agronomic, economic, and ecological performance of the most widespread arable cropping systems in Europe: organic, conservation, and conventional agriculture. We analyzed 43 agroecosystem properties and determined overall agroecosystem multifunctionality. We show that organic and conservation agriculture promoted ecosystem multifunctionality, especially by enhancing regulating and supporting services, including biodiversity preservation, soil and water quality, and climate mitigation. In contrast, conventional cropping showed reduced multifunctionality but delivered highest yield. Organic production resulted in higher economic performance, thanks to higher product prices and additional support payments. Our results demonstrate that different cropping systems provide opposing services, enforcing the productivity-environmental protection dilemma for agroecosystem functioning.

The Environmental Impact of the Athlete's Plate Nutrition Education Tool

Periodized nutrition is necessary to optimize training and enhance performance through the season. The Athlete's Plate (AP) is a nutrition education tool developed to teach athletes how to design their plates depending on training load (e.g., volume × intensity), from easy (E), moderate (M) to hard (H). The AP was validated, confirming its recommendations according to international sports nutrition guidelines. However, the AP had significantly higher protein content than recommended (up to 2.9 ± 0.5 g·kg-1·d-1; p < 0.001 for H male). The aim of this study was to quantify the environmental impact (EnvI) of the AP and to evaluate the influence of meal type, training load, sex and registered dietitian (RD). The nutritional contents of 216 APs created by 12 sport RDs were evaluated using Computrition Software (Hospitality Suite, v. 18.1, Chatsworth, CA, USA). The EnvI of the AP was analyzed by life cycle assessment (LCA) expressed by the total amount of food on the AP, kg, and kcal, according to the Swiss Agricultural Life Cycle Assessment (SALCA) methodology. Higher EnvI is directly associated with higher training load when the total amount of food on the plate is considered for E (5.7 ± 2.9 kg CO2 eq/day); M (6.4 ± 1.5 kg CO2 eq/day); and H (8.0 ± 2.1 kg CO2 eq/day). Global warming potential, exergy and eutrophication are driven by animal protein and mainly beef, while ecotoxicity is influenced by vegetable content on the AP. The EnvI is influenced by the amount of food, training load and sex. This study is the first to report the degree of EnvI in sports nutrition. These results not only raise the need for sustainability education in sports nutrition in general, but also the urgency to modify the AP nutrition education tool to ensure sports nutrition recommendations are met, while not compromising the environment.

Environmental life cycle assessment of grain maize production: An analysis of factors causing variability

To meet the growing demand, high yielding, but environmentally sustainable agricultural plant production systems are desired. Today, life cycle assessment (LCA) is increasingly used to assess the environmental impact of these agricultural systems. However, the impact results are very diverse due to management decisions or local natural conditions. The impact of grain maize is often generalized and an average is taken. Therefore, we studied variation in production systems. Four types of drivers for variability are distinguished: policy, farm management, year-to-year weather variation and innovation. For each driver, scenarios are elaborated using ReCiPe and CEENE (Cumulative Exergy Extraction from the Natural Environment) to assess the environmental footprint. Policy limits fertilisation levels in a soil-specific way. The resource consumption is lower for non-sandy soils than for sandy soils, but entails however more eutrophication. Farm management seems to have less influence on the environmental impact when considering the CEENE only. But farm management choices such as fertiliser type have a large effect on emission-related problems (e.g. eutrophication and acidification). In contrast, year-to-year weather variation results in large differences in the environmental footprint. The difference in impact results between favourable and poor environmental conditions amounts to 19% and 17% in terms of resources and emissions respectively, and irrigation clearly is an unfavourable environmental process. The best environmental performance is obtained by innovation as plant breeding results in a steadily increasing yield over 25 years. Finally, a comparison is made between grain maize production in Flanders and a generically applied dataset, based on Swiss practices. These very different results endorse the importance of using local data to conduct LCA of plant production systems. The results of this study show decision makers and farmers how they can improve the environmental performance of agricultural systems, and LCA practitioners are alerted to challenges due to variation.

Refractometric detection of liquids using tapered optical fiber and suspended core microstructured fiber: a comparison of methods

Detecting explosive, flammable, or toxic industrial liquids reliably and accurately is a matter of civic responsibility that cannot be treated lightly. Tapered optical fibers (TOFs) and suspended core microstructured optical fibers (SC MOFs) were separately used as sensors of liquids without being compared to each other. We present a highly sensitive time-stable TOF sensor incorporated in the pipeline system for the in-line regime of measurement. This paper is furthermore focused on the comparison of this TOF and SC MOF of similar parameters for the detection of selected liquids. A validated method that incorporates TOF and SC MOF of small core (waist) diameter for refractometric detection is presented. The principle of detection is based on the overlap of an enhanced evanescent wave with a liquid analyte that either fills the cladding holes of the SC MOF or surrounds the waist area of the TOF. Optical power within the evanescent wave for both sensing structures and selected liquid analytes is analyzed. Measurement results concerning TOF and SC MOF are compared. Calculations to ascertain the limit of detection (LOD) for each sensor and the sensitivity (S) to refractive indices of liquid analytes in the range of 1.4269 to 1.4361 were performed at a wavelength of 1550 nm with the lowest refractive index step of 0.0007. Results affirming that S=600.96  dB/RIU and LOD=0.0733  RIU for the SC MOF and S=1143.2  dB/RIU and LOD of 0.0026 RIU for the TOF sensor were achieved, clearly illustrating that TOF-based sensors can reach close to two times greater sensitivity and 30 times higher limit of detection. This paper extends the comparison of the fiber sensors by discussing the potential applications.

Feed-food and land use competition of lowland and mountain dairy cow farms

Dairy cows and other ruminants contribute to human nutrition as they are able to convert feed components containing human inedible fibre concentrations (e.g. roughage and by-products from the food processing industry) into valuable animal-sourced food. A number of crops often fed to dairy cows (e.g. soy or cereals) are however potentially edible by humans too. Additionally, land used to grow dairy cattle feed may compete with crop production for human consumption. Two different methods to assess the competition between feed consumption of dairy cows and human food supply were thus refined and tested on 25 Swiss dairy farms. With respect to the potential human edibility of the feeds used in dairy production, the human-edible feed conversion ratio (eFCR) was applied. The land use ratio (LUR) was used to relate the food production potential, per area of land utilised, with the dairy production output. Low to medium eFCR, with values ranging from 0.02 to 0.68 were found, as an average proportion of 0.74 of total DM intake consisted of roughage. In contrast, we found relatively high LUR (0.69-5.93) for most farms. If the land area used to produce feed for cows was used for crop production (applying a crop rotation), 23 of the 25 farms could have produced more edible protein and all farms more human-edible energy. Indicator values strongly depend on the underlying scenarios, such as the human-edible proportion of feeds or the suitability of land and climate for crop production. Reducing the amount of human-edible feeds in dairy farming by feeding by-products from the food processing industry and improving forage quality may be suitable strategies to reduce eFCR, but relying on low-opportunity cost feeds may restrict milk performance level per cow. On farm level, improving overall efficiency and therefore using less land (especially area suitable for crop production) per kg product decreases LUR. However, the most promising strategy to mitigate land use competition may be to localise dairy production to land areas not suitable for crop production. Both methods (eFCR and LUR) should be used in parallel. They offer an opportunity to holistically evaluate the net contribution of dairy production to the human food supply under different environmental conditions and stress the importance of production systems well suited to specific farm site characteristics.

Review of Diet Quality Indices that can be Applied to the Environmental Assessment of Foods and Diets

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim was to identify indices of diet quality and health that could be applied to the environmental assessment of foods in order to provide metrics that collectively assess nutritional, health and environmental dimensions.

RECENT FINDINGS

The review identified five major groups of indices: nutrient-food quantity-based; guideline-based; diversity-based; nutrient quality-based; health-based. Nutrient-food quantity-based and guideline type indices were the most frequently used to evaluate diet quality. Scaled assessment using a nutritional functional unit is the most common integration of diet quality with the environmental analysis of foods. There are fewer indices that measure the heath impacts of foods, but epidemiological dietary risk factors seem a promising approach to integrate diet and health impacts into the environmental assessment of foods. Five groups of nutritional and health indices were identified that can be applied when performing an environmental assessment of foods. This review proposes different methodological insights when doing such assessments to ensure transparency and comparability of the results.

Environmental assessment of diets: overview and guidance on indicator choice

Comprehensive but interpretable assessment of the environmental performance of diets involves choosing a set of appropriate indicators. Current knowledge and data gaps on the origin of dietary foodstuffs restrict use of indicators relying on site-specific information. This Personal View summarises commonly used indicators for assessing the environmental performance of diets, briefly outlines their benefits and drawbacks, and provides recommendations on indicator choices for actors across multiple fields involved in activities that include the environmental assessment of diets. We then provide recommendations on indicator choices for actors across multiple fields involved in activities that use environmental assessments, such as health and nutrition experts, policy makers, decision makers, and private-sector and public-sector sustainability officers. We recommend that environmental assessment of diets should include indicators for at least the five following areas: climate change, biosphere integrity, blue water consumption, novel entities, and impacts on natural resources (especially wild fish stocks), to capture important environmental trade-offs. If more indicators can be handled in the assessment, indicators to capture impacts related to land use quantity and quality and green water consumption should be used. For ambitious assessments, indicators related to biogeochemical flows, stratospheric ozone depletion, and energy use can be added.