医院餐饮服务中的食物废物管理做法及其相关的温室气体排放:提高环境可持续性的潜力。

IF 4 2区 农林科学 Q2 NUTRITION & DIETETICS
Frontiers in Nutrition Pub Date : 2025-05-13 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fnut.2025.1541657
Yee Man Janis Yip, Nathan Cook, Jorja Collins
{"title":"医院餐饮服务中的食物废物管理做法及其相关的温室气体排放:提高环境可持续性的潜力。","authors":"Yee Man Janis Yip, Nathan Cook, Jorja Collins","doi":"10.3389/fnut.2025.1541657","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Hospitals produce and waste large amounts of food. When disposed in landfill it creates greenhouse gases (GHGs) from the decomposition process. While various food waste management strategies exist that divert hospital food waste to an alternative end of life pathway to landfill, it is not clear which can decrease GHG emissions the most. This study aimed to (a) compare the differences in GHG emissions associated with hospital foodservice food waste before and after adopting a food waste management strategy, and (b) identify which waste management strategy can prevent the most GHGs in 1 year.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A secondary analysis of data from a systematic review reporting on food and food-related waste diversion strategies in hospital foodservice was conducted. The online \"ReFED Impact Calculator\" was used to calculate GHG emissions from food waste in the original scenario (e.g., landfill), and the alternative scenario after a food waste management strategy that reused, recycled or recovered resources was implemented. The net change of GHGs was calculated, and the GHGs emissions avoided in paired samples and between food waste management scenarios was analyzed statistically.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifty-five food waste management strategies (surplus food donation, feeding animals, anaerobic digestion or industrial uses, and composting) were eligible for analysis and were grouped into eight scenarios. The median GHGs generated decreased after adopting the alternative strategy in all scenarios. There was a statistically significant median reduction in GHGs when changing from landfill to donations (-11.54, <i>p</i> < 0.001), landfill to industrial uses (-25.92, <i>p</i> < 0.001), and landfill to composting (-15.24, <i>p</i> < 0.001). Percentage change in GHGs generated in these 3 scenarios demonstrated a significant difference (<i>p</i> < 0.001), with landfill to donations displaying the greatest reduction in GHGs (-92.02%), followed by composting (-8.69%) and industrial uses (-7.75%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Various food waste diversion strategies can handle types and volumes of hospital food waste, yet each strategy displays a reduction in GHG emissions compared to a lower prioritized strategy. Donating waste shows the greatest reduction in GHG emissions and if food waste cannot be avoided, it may be the preferred end of life pathway for food waste.</p>","PeriodicalId":12473,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Nutrition","volume":"12 ","pages":"1541657"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12106006/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Food waste management practices in hospital foodservices and their associated greenhouse gas emissions: potential for increased environmental sustainability.\",\"authors\":\"Yee Man Janis Yip, Nathan Cook, Jorja Collins\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fnut.2025.1541657\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Hospitals produce and waste large amounts of food. When disposed in landfill it creates greenhouse gases (GHGs) from the decomposition process. While various food waste management strategies exist that divert hospital food waste to an alternative end of life pathway to landfill, it is not clear which can decrease GHG emissions the most. This study aimed to (a) compare the differences in GHG emissions associated with hospital foodservice food waste before and after adopting a food waste management strategy, and (b) identify which waste management strategy can prevent the most GHGs in 1 year.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A secondary analysis of data from a systematic review reporting on food and food-related waste diversion strategies in hospital foodservice was conducted. The online \\\"ReFED Impact Calculator\\\" was used to calculate GHG emissions from food waste in the original scenario (e.g., landfill), and the alternative scenario after a food waste management strategy that reused, recycled or recovered resources was implemented. The net change of GHGs was calculated, and the GHGs emissions avoided in paired samples and between food waste management scenarios was analyzed statistically.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifty-five food waste management strategies (surplus food donation, feeding animals, anaerobic digestion or industrial uses, and composting) were eligible for analysis and were grouped into eight scenarios. The median GHGs generated decreased after adopting the alternative strategy in all scenarios. There was a statistically significant median reduction in GHGs when changing from landfill to donations (-11.54, <i>p</i> < 0.001), landfill to industrial uses (-25.92, <i>p</i> < 0.001), and landfill to composting (-15.24, <i>p</i> < 0.001). Percentage change in GHGs generated in these 3 scenarios demonstrated a significant difference (<i>p</i> < 0.001), with landfill to donations displaying the greatest reduction in GHGs (-92.02%), followed by composting (-8.69%) and industrial uses (-7.75%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Various food waste diversion strategies can handle types and volumes of hospital food waste, yet each strategy displays a reduction in GHG emissions compared to a lower prioritized strategy. Donating waste shows the greatest reduction in GHG emissions and if food waste cannot be avoided, it may be the preferred end of life pathway for food waste.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12473,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Nutrition\",\"volume\":\"12 \",\"pages\":\"1541657\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12106006/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Nutrition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2025.1541657\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"NUTRITION & DIETETICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Nutrition","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2025.1541657","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

医院生产和浪费大量的食物。在垃圾填埋场处理时,它在分解过程中产生温室气体(ghg)。虽然存在各种食物废物管理策略,将医院食物废物转移到另一种生命终结途径填埋,但尚不清楚哪一种可以最大程度地减少温室气体排放。本研究旨在(a)比较采用食物废物管理策略前后与医院餐饮服务食物废物相关的温室气体排放差异,以及(b)确定哪种废物管理策略在一年内可以防止最多的温室气体排放。材料和方法:对医院餐饮服务中食物和食物相关废物转移策略的系统回顾报告中的数据进行了二次分析。在线“ReFED影响计算器”用于计算原始情景(例如,填埋)下食物垃圾的温室气体排放量,以及实施了重复使用、回收或回收资源的食物垃圾管理战略后的替代情景。计算温室气体净变化,统计分析配对样本和餐厨垃圾管理方案之间避免的温室气体排放。结果:55种食物垃圾管理策略(剩余食物捐赠、饲养动物、厌氧消化或工业利用和堆肥)符合分析条件,并分为8种方案。在所有情景中,采用备选策略后产生的温室气体中位数均有所下降。从填埋到捐赠(-11.54,p < 0.001),从填埋到工业用途(-25.92,p < 0.001),从填埋到堆肥(-15.24,p < 0.001),温室气体减少的中位数具有统计学意义。三种方案产生的温室气体百分比变化差异显著(p < 0.001),其中填埋至捐赠的温室气体减少幅度最大(-92.02%),其次是堆肥(-8.69%)和工业用途(-7.75%)。结论:各种食物垃圾转移策略可以处理医院食物垃圾的类型和数量,但与优先级较低的策略相比,每种策略都显示出温室气体排放的减少。捐赠废物可以最大限度地减少温室气体排放,如果无法避免食物浪费,这可能是食物浪费的首选终结途径。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Food waste management practices in hospital foodservices and their associated greenhouse gas emissions: potential for increased environmental sustainability.

Introduction: Hospitals produce and waste large amounts of food. When disposed in landfill it creates greenhouse gases (GHGs) from the decomposition process. While various food waste management strategies exist that divert hospital food waste to an alternative end of life pathway to landfill, it is not clear which can decrease GHG emissions the most. This study aimed to (a) compare the differences in GHG emissions associated with hospital foodservice food waste before and after adopting a food waste management strategy, and (b) identify which waste management strategy can prevent the most GHGs in 1 year.

Materials and methods: A secondary analysis of data from a systematic review reporting on food and food-related waste diversion strategies in hospital foodservice was conducted. The online "ReFED Impact Calculator" was used to calculate GHG emissions from food waste in the original scenario (e.g., landfill), and the alternative scenario after a food waste management strategy that reused, recycled or recovered resources was implemented. The net change of GHGs was calculated, and the GHGs emissions avoided in paired samples and between food waste management scenarios was analyzed statistically.

Results: Fifty-five food waste management strategies (surplus food donation, feeding animals, anaerobic digestion or industrial uses, and composting) were eligible for analysis and were grouped into eight scenarios. The median GHGs generated decreased after adopting the alternative strategy in all scenarios. There was a statistically significant median reduction in GHGs when changing from landfill to donations (-11.54, p < 0.001), landfill to industrial uses (-25.92, p < 0.001), and landfill to composting (-15.24, p < 0.001). Percentage change in GHGs generated in these 3 scenarios demonstrated a significant difference (p < 0.001), with landfill to donations displaying the greatest reduction in GHGs (-92.02%), followed by composting (-8.69%) and industrial uses (-7.75%).

Conclusion: Various food waste diversion strategies can handle types and volumes of hospital food waste, yet each strategy displays a reduction in GHG emissions compared to a lower prioritized strategy. Donating waste shows the greatest reduction in GHG emissions and if food waste cannot be avoided, it may be the preferred end of life pathway for food waste.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Frontiers in Nutrition
Frontiers in Nutrition Agricultural and Biological Sciences-Food Science
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
8.00%
发文量
2891
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: No subject pertains more to human life than nutrition. The aim of Frontiers in Nutrition is to integrate major scientific disciplines in this vast field in order to address the most relevant and pertinent questions and developments. Our ambition is to create an integrated podium based on original research, clinical trials, and contemporary reviews to build a reputable knowledge forum in the domains of human health, dietary behaviors, agronomy & 21st century food science. Through the recognized open-access Frontiers platform we welcome manuscripts to our dedicated sections relating to different areas in the field of nutrition with a focus on human health. Specialty sections in Frontiers in Nutrition include, for example, Clinical Nutrition, Nutrition & Sustainable Diets, Nutrition and Food Science Technology, Nutrition Methodology, Sport & Exercise Nutrition, Food Chemistry, and Nutritional Immunology. Based on the publication of rigorous scientific research, we thrive to achieve a visible impact on the global nutrition agenda addressing the grand challenges of our time, including obesity, malnutrition, hunger, food waste, sustainability and consumer health.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信