MikkelThrane (Ph.D candidate) Aalborg university Dept

Mikkel Thrane (Ph.D candidate)Aalborg university

Dept. Development and Planning(Denmark)

LCA on Danish fish products

LCA on Danish fish products

1. Method2. Characterization results3. Weighted results (EDIP)4. LCA screenings of other fish products5. Conclusions6. Methodological discussion

Method & database

Approach: Change oriented LCAData presented today: EDIP-97 updateETH-ESU 96 for related processes (energy & materials)LCAfood: Food products, waste water treatment etc.

LCA on flatfish (process diagram)

Wholesale

Transport

Landing andauction

Materials

Chemical

Energy

Emissionsto air

Emissions to water

Emissionsto soil

Production ofmink fodder

Fish mince

Retail

Flatfishfishery

Processing

Soy protein

Porkfrom farm

Wastewater treatmentOther

Use

Seperate catchof non-target sp.

Waste treatment(incineration/landfill)

Non-targetfish species

Processes in Denmark

Processes in Central and southern Europe

Processes in Southern America

Avoided products

Article submitted to The int. Journal of industrial ecology

Characterization – flatfish filet (IQF)

-80%

-60%

-40%

-20%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100% Use (consumption)RetailTransportWholesaleProcessingAuctionFishery

GWP Ozone depletion

Acidif i-cation

Nutrient enrichment

Photochemical smog

System expansion: two types of by-products1) Offal used for mink fodder (substitute soy protein)2) Fish mince – human food (substitute minced pork)

…Improvement potential – fishing gear

-100-80-60-40-20

0

20406080

100 Danish seine

Beam traw l

GWP Acidif i-cation

Eutrophication

Photochemical smog

Ozone depletion

Percent

NB: Factor 4 improvement due to a factor 18 difference in fuel consumption at the fishery stage

Tickler chains

3. Weighted results (flatfish)

Weighted results (present)

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10Global warmingOzone depletionAcidificationNutrient enrichmentPhotochemical smog

Fishery Landing & auction Processing

Whole-sale

Transport Retail Use

mPE (weighted - EDIP 97 update - global/DK)

REGULATION

NO REGULATION

Weighted results (year 2010-15)

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10 Global warmingOzone depletionAcidificationEutrophicationPhotochemical smog


Whole-sale



Plain flatfish"av. Fishing method"

?

0100200300400500600700800900

Global warmingOzone depletionAcidificationNutrient enrichmentPhotochemical smogEcotoxHumtox

Fishery Landing & auction

Proces-sing

Whole-sale



….. toxicity included (present)

Water chronic – TBT and (copper)

….toxicity included (future 1)

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

120Global warmingOzone depletionAcidificationEutrophicationPhotochemical smogEcotoxHumtox


Whole-sale



Reduction with a factor 7 in eco-tox.

32 WmPE due to copper and 13 WmPE due to sea nine

….toxicity included (future 2)

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70Global warmingOzone depletionAcidificationEutrophicationPhotochemical smogEcotoxHumtox


Processing Whole-sale



7,5 WmPE from Copper released from anti fouling

4. Weighted results for other fish products

-113579

1113

Global warming Ozone depletionAcidificationEutrophicationPhotochemical smog


Proces-sing

Whole-sale



"Shrimp"

LCA screenings

-1

9

19

29

39Global warming Ozone depletionAcidificationEutrophicationPhotochemical smog


Proces-sing

Whole-sale



"Norway lobster - speciality"

Shrimp (IQF) – no shells

Norway lobster tail (IQF) Similar conclusions for other Shellfish, while the processingStage is relatively more important for Pickled herring in glass and Canned mackerel (aluminum)

Eco- and human toxicity (in general)

The fishery stage is the hot-spot for eco-toxicity and remains so in both future scenario - for all species analyzed (except canned mackerel and blue mussels).

The use stage is the hot spot for Human toxicity for all products.

5. Conclusion

Conclusions

The fishery is hot-spot, followed by use and retail (7 categories)Fishery also hot-spot for most of the non-flow related impact Energy consumption is a key process for all seven impact types (even more in the future)Authorities need to address energy consumption and sea floor impacts (Solve two problems by addressing one):

Adjustments of the fleet capacity (maintain small vessels)Cleaner technology (not only processing stage)Eco-labelling (not only focus on exploitation)Fuel tax

Comparing 1 kg material 'Trout (standard), from trout pond farm' w ith 1 kg material 'A) Fishery - average (2000) - ETH'; Method: EDIP DK 1999 prioritisation project,amn030805GTKon / EDIP updated by 2.-0 / cha

%

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Global w arming (GWP 100) Ozone depletion Acidification Eutrophication Photochemical smog

Trout (standard), from tro A) Fishery - average (200

57.8

100

11.5

100

21.6

100 100

21.818.6

100

Farmed trout versus flatfish

10/20/2003 Mikkel Thrane, Aalborg University 19

Fuel consumption in fishery

Demersal fish Shellfish Pelagic Indus. Allocation

method Atlantic

cod Eu.

PlaicePrawn Shrimp NL. Mus-

sels Herring Mack-

erel Sand-eel

etc. Total catch volume (1000 ton)

67.80 40.74 5.72 2.58 5.04 109.74 134.96 34.27 1,117.71Relative fuel consumption - per caught fish (liter per kg)

Mass 0,47 0,56 0,54 1,02 1,16 0,01 0,14 0,08 0,10Value 0,86 0,92 0,89 1,22 3,95 0,08 0,07 0,27 0,04Sys. Exp. 0,36 0,97 0,76 1,03 6,05 0,01 0,18 0,06 0,06

Absolute fuel consumption per caught fish (million liter) Mass 31.780 22.754 3.115 2.629 5.864 1.378 19.009 2.891 107.692Value 58.245 37.565 5.068 3.149 19.929 8.233 9.791 9.263 45.870Sys. Exp. 24.460 39.630 4.354 2.664 30.539 1.365 24.253 1.916 67.930

•Up till a factor 100 in difference (same fishing gear different species)•Up till a factor 18 in difference (same species, different fishing gear)

6. Sensitivity - methodological aspects?

Methodological aspects (2010-15)

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12Global warmingOzone depletionAcidificationEutrophicationPhotochemical smog


Processing Whole-sale



• Weighting factor 44!!• Substitution of HFC

• Emissions on the open Sea!!

• Avoided nutrient enrichment in South America, but nutrient enrichment may not even be a problem here

•NB: transport and particle pollution

LCA screenings (herring and mackerel)

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5Global warming Ozone depletionAcidificationNutrient enrichmentPhotochemical smog


Processing

Whole-sale



"Canned mackerel 100% rec."

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5Global warming Ozone depletionAcidificationNutrient enrichmentPhotochemical smog


Processing

Whole-sale



"Canned mackerel 0% rec."

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3Global warming Ozone depletionAcidificationNutrient enrichmentPhotochemical smog


Processing

Whole-sale



"Pickled herring - virgin glass"

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

Global warming Ozone depletionAcidificationNutrient enrichmentPhotochemical smog


Processing

Whole-sale



"Pickled herring - no glass"

Canned mackerel 0% rec. Canned mackerel 100% rec.

Pickled herring – no glassPickled herring, virgin glass

Documents

MikkelThrane (Ph.D candidate) Aalborg university Dept