Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Global warming potential associated with Irish milk powder production

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Climate change is an ever growing issue and a major concern worldwide. Both producers and processors need to address the issue now by reducing their carbon footprint. Additionally, if Ireland is to meet their climate and energy targets, as outlined in Food Harvest 2020, which outlines a range of objectives for the Irish agricultural sector, the efficient use of resources and fuels within the industry will need to be increased. In Ireland, agriculture accounts for 29.2% of the total greenhouse gas emissions (58.5 million tonnes CO2eq). Therefore, in this paper, a single agri-food product, milk powder, is examined in order to estimate the global warming potential (GWP) associated with its manufacture using life cycle assessment. A cradle-to-processing factory gate analysis, which includes raw milk production, raw milk transportation to the processing factory, its processing into each product and product packaging, is assessed in this study using data collected circa 2013. The factories surveyed processed approximately 24%of the total raw milk processed in the Republic of Ireland in 2013, which was 5.83 billion liters. The average total GWP associated with the manufacture of milk powder is 9.731 kg CO2eq∙kg–1 milk powder, which has a standard deviation of 2.26 kg CO2eq∙kg–1 milk powder, for the life cycle stages analyzed in this study. The most significant contributor to GWP is raw milk production (84%), followed by dairy processing (14%), with the remainder of the life cycle stages contributing approximately 2%.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. O’Shea R, Bougard M, Breen J, O’Donoghue C, Ryan M. Greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation and technology adoption theory: extended grazing as a case study. In: 89th Annual Conference of Agricultural Economics Society, April 13–15, 2015. Warwick University, Coventry, UK: Agricultural Economics Society, 2015

    Google Scholar 

  2. CSO. Statistical Product-Milk Production. 2016. Available online at http://www.cso.ie (accessed February 11, 2016)

  3. Casey J W, Holden N M. Analysis of greenhouse gas emissions from the average Irish milk production system. Agricultural Systems, 2005, 86(1): 97–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. O’Brien D, Brennan P, Humphreys J, Ruane E, Shalloo L. An appraisal of carbon footprint of milk from commercial grass-based dairy farms in Ireland according to a certified life cycle assessment methodology. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2014, 19(8): 1469–1481

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. O’Brien D, Hennessy T, Moran B, Shalloo L. Relating the carbon footprint of milk from Irish dairy farms to economic performance. Journal of Dairy Science, 2015, 98(10): 7394–7407

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. O’Brien D, Shalloo L, Patton J, Buckley F, Grainger C, Wallace M. A life cycle assessment of seasonal grass-based and confinement dairy farms. Agricultural Systems, 2012, 107(0): 33–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Irish Farm Centre. Dairy Fact Sheet I F A. 2012. Available online at http://www.ifa.ie/sectors/dairy/dairy-fact-sheet/ (accessed November 17, 2014)

  8. Finnegan W, Goggins J, Clifford E, Zhan X. Global warming potential associated with dairy products in the Republic of Ireland. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro. 2015.08.025

  9. Flysjö A. Greenhouse gas emissions in milk and dairy product chains. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree. AIJ Foulum: Aarhus University, 2012

  10. Flysjö A, Thrane M, Hermansen J E. Method to assess the carbon footprint at product level in the dairy industry. International Dairy Journal, 2014, 34(1): 86–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Vergé X P C, Maxime D, Dyer J A, Desjardins R L, Arcand Y, Vanderzaag A. Carbon footprint of Canadian dairy products: calculations and issues. Journal of Dairy Science, 2013, 96(9): 6091–6104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Eurostat. Milk and milk product statistics. 2017. Available online at http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Milk_- and_milk_product_statistics (accessed February 24, 2017)

  13. Board Bia. Factsheet on the Irish Agriculture and Food & Drink Sector. 2016. Available online at http://www.bordbia.ie/industry/ buyers/industryinfo/agri/pages/default.aspx (accessed October 27, 2016)

  14. Weiss F, Leip A. Greenhouse gas emissions from the EU livestock sector: a life cycle assessment carried out with the CAPRI model. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 2012, 149: 124–134

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. FIL-IDF. A Common Carbon Footprint Approach for Dairy, a Guide to Standard Life Cycle Assessment Methodology for the Dairy Sector. Brussels, Belgium: International Dairy Federation, 2010

    Google Scholar 

  16. Finnegan W, Goggins J, Clifford E, Zhan X. Environmental impacts of milk powder and butter manufactured in the Republic of Ireland. Science of the Total Environment, 2017, 579(579): 159–168

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. FIL-IDF. A Common Carbon Footprint Approach for the Dairy Sector. The IDF Guide to Standard Life Cycle Assessment Methodology. Brussels, Belgium: International Dairy Federation, 2015

  18. ISO. ISO 14040: Environmental Management- Life Cycle Assessment-Principles and Framework. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization, 2006

  19. ISO. ISO 14044: Environmental Management- Life Cycle Assessment-Requirements and Guidelines. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization, 2006

  20. BSI. PAS 2050: Specification for the Assessment of the Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Goods and Services. London, UK: British Standards Institute, 2011

    Google Scholar 

  21. Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt K B, Tignor M, Miller H L, eds. IPCC 2007: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press, 2007

    Google Scholar 

  22. Hagelaar G J L F, van der Vorst J G A J. Environmental supply chain management: using life cycle assessment to structure supply chains. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, 2001, 4 (4): 399–412

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Henriksson P J G, Guinée J B, Kleijn R, de Snoo G R. Life cycle assessment of aquaculture systems-a review of methodologies. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2012, 17(3): 304–313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Joshi S. Product environmental life-cycle assessment using inputoutput techniques. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 2000, 3(2&3): 95–120

    Google Scholar 

  25. EuropeanCommission. Environmental LIFE CYCLE Information for Products Used Every Day in Households. Brussels, Belgium: Retail Forum for Sustainability, 2010

    Google Scholar 

  26. Weidema B P, Bauer C, Hischier R, Mutel C, Nemecek T, Reinhard J, Vadenbo C O, Wernet G. The ecoinvent database: Overview and methodology, Data quality guideline for the ecoinvent database version 3. 2013. Available online at http://www.ecoinvent.org (accessed January 5, 2017)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Kim D, Thoma G, Nutter D, Milani F, Ulrich R, Norris G. Life cycle assessment of cheese and whey production in the USA. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2013, 18(5): 1019–1035

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Hanrahan K, Hennessy T, Kinsella A, Moran B. Teagasc National Farm Survey 2013. Athenry, Co. Galway, Ireland: Teagasc, Agricultural Economics & Farm Surveys Department,2014

    Google Scholar 

  29. Hynes S, Farrelly N, Murphy E, O’Donoghue C. Modelling habitat conservation and participation in agri-environmental schemes: A spatial microsimulation approach. Ecological Economics, 2008, 66 (2–3): 258–269

    Google Scholar 

  30. Chyzheuskaya A, O’Donoghue C, O’Neill S. Using a farm microsimulation model to evaluate the impact of the nitrogen reduction mitigation measures on farm income in Ireland. International Journal of Agricultural Management, 2014, 3(4): 232–242

    Google Scholar 

  31. Hennessy T, Kinsella A, Moran B, Quinlan G. Teagasc National Farm Survey 2011. Athenry, Co. Galway, Ireland: Teagasc, Agricultural Economics & Farm Surveys Department, 2012

    Google Scholar 

  32. Hennessy T, Moran B. Teagasc National Farm Survey 2015. Athenry, Co Galway, Ireland: Teagasc, Agricultural Economics & Farm Surveys Department, 2016

    Google Scholar 

  33. Lalor S, Coulter B, Quinlan G, Connolly L. Survey of Fertilizer Use in Ireland from 2004–2008 for Grassland and Arable Crops. Dublin, Ireland: Teagasc, Agricultural and Food Development Authority, 2010

    Google Scholar 

  34. Murphy E, Curran T, Humphreys J, Upton J. Direct water use of Irish dairy farms. In: Teagasc Agricultural Forum 2014. Dublin, Ireland: Teagasc, 2014

    Google Scholar 

  35. Melia P. Scientist backs tax on Ireland’s food processors. Dublin, Ireland: Irish Independant (12/12/2015), 2015

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge the funding provided by the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine for the DairyWater project (Ref.: 13-F-507); for additional details: www.dairywater. ie. The second author would like to acknowledge the support of Science Foundation Ireland through the Career Development Award program (No. 13/ CDA/2200).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Engineering and Informatics, National University of Ireland Galway, H91 HX31, Galway, Ireland

    William Finnegan, Jamie Goggins & Xinmin Zhan

  2. Ryan Institute for Environmental, Marine and Energy Research, National University of Ireland Galway, H91 DK59, Galway, Ireland

    William Finnegan, Jamie Goggins & Xinmin Zhan

  3. Centre for Marine and Renewable Energy (MaREI), H91 HX31, Galway, Ireland

    Jamie Goggins

  4. Socio-Economic Marine Research Unit (SEMRU), National University of Ireland Galway, H91 WN80, Galway, Ireland

    Aksana Chyzheuskaya

Authors
  1. William Finnegan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jamie Goggins
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Aksana Chyzheuskaya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Xinmin Zhan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to William Finnegan or Jamie Goggins.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Finnegan, W., Goggins, J., Chyzheuskaya, A. et al. Global warming potential associated with Irish milk powder production. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng. 11, 12 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-017-0949-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-017-0949-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation