Opportunities to integrate Ecosystem Services into Life Cycle Assessment (LCA): a case study of milk production in Brazil

IF 6.1 2区环境科学与生态学 Q1 ECOLOGY

Ecosystem Services Pub Date : 2024-07-24 DOI:10.1016/j.ecoser.2024.101646

Daiane Vitória da Silva , Ana Laura Raymundo Pavan , Luiz Carlos de Faria , Cassiano Moro Piekarski , Yovana María Barrera Saavedra , Diogo A. Lopes Silva

{"title":"Opportunities to integrate Ecosystem Services into Life Cycle Assessment (LCA): a case study of milk production in Brazil","authors":"Daiane Vitória da Silva , Ana Laura Raymundo Pavan , Luiz Carlos de Faria , Cassiano Moro Piekarski , Yovana María Barrera Saavedra , Diogo A. Lopes Silva","doi":"10.1016/j.ecoser.2024.101646","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>World dairy production is growing rapidly having increased by 339 million tons over the last twenty years. However, it remains unclear how anthropic activities in the milk sector can impact the Ecosystem Services (ES) supply to society. The aim of this study was to propose and determine the Net Environmental Performance (NEP) of different milk production systems. For this purpose, a case study on a confined compost barn farm, located in southeastern Brazil was selected as reference scenario and compared with three other systems. The mapping of ES benefits was carried out using the Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services, while environmental impacts were calculated using Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). The LCA results and ecosystem benefits were combined and converted into monetary units to calculate the NEP per 1 kg of milk. The results indicated that semi-confined systems had the worst environmental performance (90 % more impacts) compared to the compost barn milk system. On the other hand, confined systems generate few ES benefits, but their environmental impacts were lower for most LCA impact categories (up to 87 % minimized impacts) compared to semi-confined systems. Finally, we concluded the confined systems in SP and PR showed the best NEP (1.07 and 1.48) aiming for both environmental impacts and ES benefits to fit the win–win situation.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51312,"journal":{"name":"Ecosystem Services","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecosystem Services","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041624000536","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

World dairy production is growing rapidly having increased by 339 million tons over the last twenty years. However, it remains unclear how anthropic activities in the milk sector can impact the Ecosystem Services (ES) supply to society. The aim of this study was to propose and determine the Net Environmental Performance (NEP) of different milk production systems. For this purpose, a case study on a confined compost barn farm, located in southeastern Brazil was selected as reference scenario and compared with three other systems. The mapping of ES benefits was carried out using the Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services, while environmental impacts were calculated using Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). The LCA results and ecosystem benefits were combined and converted into monetary units to calculate the NEP per 1 kg of milk. The results indicated that semi-confined systems had the worst environmental performance (90 % more impacts) compared to the compost barn milk system. On the other hand, confined systems generate few ES benefits, but their environmental impacts were lower for most LCA impact categories (up to 87 % minimized impacts) compared to semi-confined systems. Finally, we concluded the confined systems in SP and PR showed the best NEP (1.07 and 1.48) aiming for both environmental impacts and ES benefits to fit the win–win situation.

查看原文本刊更多论文

将生态系统服务纳入生命周期评估（LCA）的机会：巴西牛奶生产案例研究

世界乳制品产量增长迅速，在过去二十年中增加了 3.39 亿吨。然而，人类在牛奶行业的活动如何影响为社会提供的生态系统服务（ES），目前仍不清楚。本研究旨在提出并确定不同牛奶生产系统的净环境绩效 (NEP)。为此，我们选择了位于巴西东南部的一个封闭堆肥牛舍农场作为参考方案，并与其他三个系统进行了比较。利用国际通用生态系统服务分类法绘制了生态系统效益图，并利用生命周期评估（LCA）计算了环境影响。生命周期评估结果与生态系统效益相结合，并转换成货币单位，计算出每 1 千克牛奶的 NEP。结果表明，与堆肥牛舍牛奶系统相比，半封闭系统的环境绩效最差（影响增加 90%）。另一方面，密闭系统产生的环境效益很少，但与半密闭系统相比，其对大多数生命周期评估影响类别的环境影响较小（影响最小化达 87%）。最后，我们得出结论，在 SP 和 PR 的封闭系统中，NEP 值（1.07 和 1.48）最佳，既能满足环境影响，又能满足环境效益，实现双赢。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Ecosystem Services ECOLOGYENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES&-ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES

CiteScore

14.90

自引率

7.90%

发文量

109

期刊介绍： Ecosystem Services is an international, interdisciplinary journal that is associated with the Ecosystem Services Partnership (ESP). The journal is dedicated to exploring the science, policy, and practice related to ecosystem services, which are the various ways in which ecosystems contribute to human well-being, both directly and indirectly. Ecosystem Services contributes to the broader goal of ensuring that the benefits of ecosystems are recognized, valued, and sustainably managed for the well-being of current and future generations. The journal serves as a platform for scholars, practitioners, policymakers, and other stakeholders to share their findings and insights, fostering collaboration and innovation in the field of ecosystem services.