Carbon footprint of dietary patterns in Ontario, Canada: A case study based on actual food consumption

被引:66
作者
Veeramani, Anastasia [1 ]
Dias, Goretty M. [1 ]
Kirkpatrick, Sharon I. [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Waterloo, Sch Environm Enterprise & Dev, 200 Univ Ave West, Waterloo, ON N2L 3G1, Canada
[2] Univ Waterloo, Sch Publ Hlth & Hlth Syst, 200 Univ Ave West, Waterloo, ON N2L 3G1, Canada
基金
加拿大创新基金会; 加拿大健康研究院;
关键词
Carbon footprint; Dietary pattern; Food basket; LCA; Beef; Food waste; GREENHOUSE-GAS EMISSIONS; LIFE-CYCLE ASSESSMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS; NUTRITIONAL QUALITY; BEEF-PRODUCTION; ENERGY; LCA; RECOMMENDATIONS; SUSTAINABILITY; SYSTEMS;
D O I
10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.06.025
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Recent studies have established the important contribution of food consumption to climate change, but the environmental implications of Canadians' dietary choices have not been studied in this regard. In this study, dietary intake data for 10,000 residents of Ontario, Canada were used to identify dietary patterns and estimate the Global Warming Potential (GWP) of food consumption and waste. Cluster analysis was used to identify seven dietary patterns (DP): vegan, vegetarian, pescatarian, omnivorous, and diets excluding red meat, beef and pork. Calorie-adjusted food baskets were formulated based on the most commonly consumed food items for each DP. Life cycle assessment was used to estimate GWP for each basket from farm operations, processing, distribution, to household processes (cooking, storage, food waste). The findings suggest that Ontario residents prefer DPs rich in animal products (particularly beef) that have very high GWP. Further, reducing food waste could reduce GWP by up to 8%. Though methods differ across studies and comparisons must be made carefully, available estimates of diet-related GWP from the US and UK are consistently higher than values in this study. Efforts are needed to standardize methods to facilitate a more cohesive body of evidence on the relevance of dietary choices and food waste to climate change. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1398 / 1406
页数:9
相关论文
共 82 条
[1]  
Alber S., 2003, AIR3CT942028
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2008, CLIM CHANG FOOD SEC
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2002, World agriculture: towards 2015/2030: Summary report
[4]   Assessing alternative aquaculture technologies: life cycle assessment of salmonid culture systems in Canada [J].
Ayer, Nathan W. ;
Tyedmers, Peter H. .
JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2009, 17 (03) :362-373
[5]   Evaluating the environmental impact of various dietary patterns combined with different food production systems [J].
Baroni, L. ;
Cenci, L. ;
Tettamanti, M. ;
Berati, M. .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NUTRITION, 2007, 61 (02) :279-286
[6]  
BCFN, 2014, DOUBL PYR 2014 DIET
[7]   Priority actions for the non-communicable disease crisis [J].
Beaglehole, Robert ;
Bonita, Ruth ;
Horton, Richard ;
Adams, Cary ;
Alleyne, George ;
Asaria, Perviz ;
Baugh, Vanessa ;
Bekedam, Henk ;
Billo, Nils ;
Casswell, Sally ;
Cecchini, Michele ;
Colagiuri, Ruth ;
Colagiuri, Stephen ;
Collins, Tea ;
Ebrahim, Shah ;
Engelgau, Michael ;
Galea, Gauden ;
Gaziano, Thomas ;
Geneau, Robert ;
Haines, Andy ;
Hospedales, James ;
Jha, Prabhat ;
Keeling, Ann ;
Leeder, Stephen ;
Lincoln, Paul ;
McKee, Martin ;
Mackay, Judith ;
Magnusson, Roger ;
Moodie, Rob ;
Mwatsama, Modi ;
Nishtar, Sonia ;
Norrving, Bo ;
Patterson, David ;
Piot, Peter ;
Ralston, Johanna ;
Rani, Manju ;
Reddy, K. Srinath ;
Sassi, Franco ;
Sheron, Nick ;
Stuckler, David ;
Suh, Il ;
Torode, Julie ;
Varghese, Cherian ;
Watt, Judith .
LANCET, 2011, 377 (9775) :1438-1447
[8]   Life cycle assessment of greenhouse gas emissions from beef production in western Canada: A case study [J].
Beauchemin, Karen A. ;
Janzen, H. Henry ;
Little, Shannan M. ;
McAllister, Tim A. ;
McGinn, Sean M. .
AGRICULTURAL SYSTEMS, 2010, 103 (06) :371-379
[9]  
Berlin J., 2010, ENV LIFE CYCLE ASSES
[10]   The relative greenhouse gas impacts of realistic dietary choices [J].
Berners-Lee, M. ;
Hoolohan, C. ;
Cammack, H. ;
Hewitt, C. N. .
ENERGY POLICY, 2012, 43 :184-190