Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Life cycle assessment of preserved plum production in Southern China

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The fruit preservation industry in developing countries is growing rapidly and presents unique opportunities for promoting environmental sustainability. However, very few life cycle assessment studies have evaluated the environmental performances of current production technologies in developing countries. This study represents the first life cycle assessment to compare two common production lines of the preserved plum industry in Southern China and suggested strategies for improving their environmental performances. The first line, commonly adopted by medium-sized plants, included washing, osmotic treatment, blanching, superheated steam coupled with far-infrared radiation for drying, packaging and wastewater treatment stages. The second line, commonly utilized by small-sized plants, consisted of washing, osmotic treatment, drying by natural ventilation, packaging and wastewater treatment stages. The comparison suggested that the first production line resulted in higher fossil fuel depletion, ozone depletion, human health noncancer, respiratory and ecotoxicity impacts than the second production line. In contrast, the second production line resulted in higher photochemical formation, global warming, acidification, human health cancer and eutrophication impacts. Electricity and wastewater treatment, together, were the dominating contributors to most of the life cycle environmental impact categories. The sensitivity analyses suggested that the life cycle global warming impacts were most sensitive to electricity use, while the wastewater amount ranked as the most influential factor for the life cycle eutrophication impacts. In addition, the scenario analyses indicated that upgrading the activated sludge process to a membrane bioreactor process, for in-plant wastewater treatment, alone would increase life cycle fossil fuel depletion, photochemical formation, acidification and respiratory impacts. However, the combinational adoption of a membrane bioreactor process and electricity derived from wind or lignocellulosic biomass can significantly reduce life cycle environmental impacts of the plum preservation plants.

Graphic abstract

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Amit SK, Uddin MM, Rahman R, Islam SMR, Khan MS (2017) A review on mechanisms and commercial aspects of food preservation and processing Agriculture & Food. Security 6:51

    Google Scholar 

  • Anna Lucia Mourad LC, Oliveira PAPLV, Kletecke RM, Baddini JPOA (2007) A simple methodology for elaborating the life cycle inventory of agricultural products. Int J Life Cycle Assess 12:408–413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bare JC (2011) TRACI 2.0: the tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental impacts 2.0. Clean Technol Environ Policy 13:687–696

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bare JC, Norris GA, Pennington DW, McKone T (2003) TRACI—the tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental impacts. J Ind Ecol 6:49–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beccali M, Cellura M, Iudicello M, Mistretta M (2010) Life cycle assessment of Italian citrus-based products: sensitivity analysis and improvement scenarios. J Environ Manag 91:1415–1428

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • 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 42:106–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Camargo GGT, Ryan MR, Richard T (2013) Energy use and greenhouse gas emissions from crop production using the farm energy analysis. Bioscience 63:263–273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cashman S, Ma X, Mosley J, Garland J, Crone B, Xiaobo X (2018) Energy and greenhouse gas life cycle assessment and cost analysis of aerobic and anaerobic membrane bioreactor systems: Influence of scale, population density, climate, and methane recovery. Bioresou Technol 254:56–66

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Coley D, Howard M, Winter M (2009) Local food, food miles and carbon emissions: A comparison of farm shop and mass distribution approaches. Food Policy 34:150–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2008.11.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costello C, Griffin WM, Matthews HS, Weber CL (2011) Inventory development and input-output model of US land use: relating land in production to consumption. Environ Sci Technol 45:4937–4943

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Curran MA (2013) Life cycle assessment: a review of the methodology and its application to sustainability. Curr Opin Chem Eng 2:273–277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Marco Iolanda, Iannone R (2017) Production, packaging and preservation of semi-finished apricots: a comparative life cycle assessment study. J Food Eng 206:106–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Vries M, de Boer IJM (2010) Comparing environmental impacts for livestock products: a review of life cycle assessments. Livest Sci 128:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2009.11.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 78:121–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deng L, Zhang F, Wang H, Pan M, Liu J (2017) Development status and market prospect of instant food in China storge and process 17:112–121

  • Department of Ecology and Environment of GuangDong Province (2018) Industrial wastewater discharge standard in GuangDong Province. http://www.gdep.gov.cn/hbbz/df/

  • Energy Information Administration (2011) Country Analysis Briefs. http://www.eia.gov/cabs/china/Full.html

  • Green Delta The openLCA software (2018). http://www.openlca.org/openlca/new/

  • Hai J, Zhao M, Lin L, Dong Y (2015) isolation and identification of bioactive compounds with antioxidant activities from Sanhua Plum (Prunus salicina Lindl.). Mod Food Sci Technol 31:106–110

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Heller MC, Keoleian GA, Willett WC (2013) Toward a life cycle-based, diet-level framework for food environmental impact and nutritional quality assessment: a critical review. Environ Sci Technol 47:12632–12647. https://doi.org/10.1021/es4025113

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Howarth RW, Boyer EW, Pabich WJ, Galloway JN (2002) Nitrogen use in the United States from 1961 to 2000 and potential future trends. Ambio 31:88–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huijbregts MAJ et al (2016) ReCiPe2016: a harmonised life cycle impact assessment method at midpoint and endpoint level. Int J Life Cycle Assess 22:138–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Humbert S, Rossi V, Margni M, Jolliet O, Loerincik Y (2009) Life cycle assessment of two baby food packaging alternatives: glass jars vs. plastic pots. Int J Life Cycle Assess 14:95–106

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • ISO 14040:2006 Environmental management—Life cycle assessment—Principles and framework. https://www.iso.org/standard/37456.html

  • Karakaya A, Özilgen M (2011) Energy utilization and carbon dioxide emission in the fresh, paste, whole-peeled, diced, and juiced tomato production processes. Energy 36:5101–5110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khatri P, Jain S (2017) Environmental life cycle assessment of edible oils: a review of current knowledge and future research challenges. J Clean Prod 152:63–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lazarides H (2011) Food processing technology in a sustainable food supply chain. Procedia Food Sci 1:1918–1923

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li C, Jia W, Ye X, Yu Q (2012) Development and prospects of new energy in China electric power science and engineering:04

  • Liu Y (2015) China’s Guangdong Province Speeds Up Development of the Province’s Clean Energy Industry. https://www.renewableenergyworld.com/articles/2015/09/china-s-guangdong-province-speeds-up-development-of-the-province-s-clean-energy-industry.html

  • Lundie S (2005) Life cycle assessment of food waste management options. J Clean Prod 13:275–286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pelletier N, Leip A (2013) Quantifying anthropogenic mobilization, flows (in product systems) and emissions of fixed nitrogen in process-based environmental life cycle assessment: rational, methods and application to a life cycle inventory. Int J Life Cycle Assess 19:116–123

    Google Scholar 

  • Prosapio Valentina, Norton Ian, Marco ID (2017) Optimization of freeze-drying using a life cycle assessment approach: strawberries’ case study. J Clean Prod 16:1171–1179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rotz CA, Montes F, Chianese DS (2010) The carbon footprint of dairy production systems through partial life cycle assessment. J Dairy Sci 93:1266–1282. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2009-2162

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Roy P, Nei D, Orikasa T, Xu Q, Okadome H, Nakamura N, Shiina T (2009) A review of life cycle assessment (LCA) on some food products. J Food Eng 90:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2008.06.016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanjuán Neus, Stoessel Franziska, Hellweg S (2014) Closing data gaps for LCA of food products: estimating the energy demand of food processing. Environ Sci Technol 48:1132–1140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The ecoinvent Organisation (2019) The ecoinvent Database. https://www.ecoinvent.org/database/database.html

  • Tilman D, Clark M (2014) Global diets link environmental sustainability and human health. Nature 515:518–522. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13959

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Turconi R, Boldrin A, Astrup T (2013) Life cycle assessment (LCA) of electricity generation technologies: overview, comparability and limitations. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 28:555–565

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • US Energy Information Adminstration (2017) Chinese coal-fired electricity generation expected to flatten as mix shifts to renewables. https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=33092

  • Vignali G, Manfredi M (2014) Life cycle assessment of a packaged tomato puree: a comparison of environmental impacts produced by different life cycle phases. J Clean Prod 73:275–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang S, Zhou A, Yang X, Yang J, Huang K, Chen H (2017) Study on the heat pump technology of Shuanghua-Plum Preserved Science and Technology of Food Industry 38:227–232

  • Weber CL, Matthews HS (2008) Food-miles and the relative climate impacts of food choices in the United States. Environ Sci Technol 42:3508–3513

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Xue X (2011) Evaluating eutrophication potential of bioproducts using life cycle assessment methods University of Pittsburgh

  • Xue X, Landis AE (2009) Effect of agricultural practices on biofuels’ environmental footprints. In: 2009 ISSST’09 IEEE international symposium on sustainable systems and technology pp 1–4

  • Xue X, Landis AE (2010) Eutrophication potential of food consumption patterns. Environ Sci Technol 44:6450–6456

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Xue X, Landis AE (2014) Evaluating agricultural management practices to improve the environmental footprints of corn-derived bioproducts. Renew Energy 66:454–460

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xue X et al. (2018) Holistic analysis of urban water systems in the greater Cincinnati Region: (1) Life Cycle Assessment and Cost Implications Water Research Submitted

  • Xue X, Collinge WO, Shrake SO, Bilec MM, Landis AE (2012) Regional life cycle assessment of soybean derived biodiesel for transportation fleets. Energy Policy 48:295–303

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Environmental Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University at Albany, State University of New York, Rensselaer, NY, 12144, USA

    Xiaobo Xue Romeiko & Shao Lin

  2. School of Food Science, Guangdong Food and Drug Vocational College, Guangzhou City, 510520, Guangdong Province, China

    Guoping Huang

Authors
  1. Xiaobo Xue Romeiko
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shao Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Guoping Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xiaobo Xue Romeiko.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 28 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Romeiko, X.X., Lin, S. & Huang, G. Life cycle assessment of preserved plum production in Southern China. Clean Techn Environ Policy 22, 197–209 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-019-01777-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-019-01777-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation