Do foods imported into the UK have a greater environmental impact than the same foods produced within the UK?
Do foods imported into the UK have a greater environmental impact than the same foods produced within the UK?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s11367-013-0576-2
复制
发表时间：
2013-04
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
J. Webb;A. Williams;E. Hope;David Evans;E. Moorhouse
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. Webb;A. Williams;E. Hope;David Evans;E. Moorhouse
本研究评估了七种食品的生产模式或地点是否需要显著较少的投入，因此造成的污染较少。例如，考虑到额外的运输排放，增加从地中海进口田间种植的西红柿是否会减少英国加热温室的生产需求，从而减少温室气体（GHG）排放？英国的肉类生产比从南半球进口的红肉污染更少吗？MethodsWe进行了一个生命周期清单为每一种商品，量化流量有关的生命周期评估（LCA）的影响类别：一次能源的使用，酸化，富营养化，非生物资源的使用，农药的使用，土地占用和臭氧消耗。系统边界包括所有的生产投入，直到到达零售配送中心（RDC）。肉制品生产负担的分配是以经济价值为依据的。我们评估了指标食品，从中可以得出生产遵循类似链的食品的相似之处：西红柿（温室作物），草莓（田间生长的软果），苹果（储存全年供应或在春季和夏季进口），土豆（早季进口或长期储存的英国农产品），家禽和牛肉（从巴西等国进口）和羊肉（进口以平衡国内春秋供应）。结果和讨论总农场前门全球变暖潜势（GWP）英国生产的土豆和牛肉的产量低于替代国的产量。在交付给RDC之前，英国土豆、牛肉和苹果的全球升温潜能值低于其他地方的生产。尽管在运输过程中发生了排放，但西班牙的西红柿和草莓、巴西的家禽和新西兰的羊肉的生产产生的GWP低于英国。对于全球升温潜能值负担很小的食品，如苹果和草莓，运输负担可能占总负担的很大比例。对于食品本身具有较大的全球升温潜能值每吨，如肉类产品，从运输产生的负担可能只是一个很小的比例total.ConclusionsWhen考虑粮食生产的全球升温潜能值，从国家的生产力更大和/或冷藏要求是少的进口将导致更少的总全球升温潜能值比不言自明的偏好为本地产品。然而，优先考虑全球升温潜能值可能会导致其他环境负担的增加，特别是导致对水资源的需求增加和水资源质量下降。
PurposeThis study of seven foods assessed whether there are modes or locations of production that require significantly fewer inputs, and hence cause less pollution, than others. For example, would increasing imports of field-grown tomatoes from the Mediterranean reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by reducing the need for production in heated greenhouses in the UK, taking account of the additional transport emissions? Is meat production in the UK less polluting than the import of red meat from the southern hemisphere?MethodsWe carried out a life-cycle inventory for each commodity, which quantified flows relating to life-cycle assessment (LCA) impact categories: primary energy use, acidification, eutrophication, abiotic resource use, pesticide use, land occupation and ozone depletion. The system boundary included all production inputs up to arrival at the retail distribution centre (RDC). The allocation of production burdens for meat products was on the basis of economic value. We evaluated indicator foods from which it is possible to draw parallels for foods whose production follows a similar chain: tomatoes (greenhouse crops), strawberries (field-grown soft fruit), apples (stored for year-round supply or imported during spring and summer), potatoes (early season imports or long-stored UK produce), poultry and beef (imported from countries such as Brazil) and lamb (imported to balance domestic spring–autumn supply).Results and discussionTotal pre-farm gate global warming potential (GWP) of potatoes and beef were less for UK production than for production in the alternative country. Up to delivery to the RDC, total GWP were less for UK potatoes, beef and apples than for production elsewhere. Production of tomatoes and strawberries in Spain, poultry in Brazil and lamb in New Zealand produced less GWP than in the UK despite emissions that took place during transport. For foods produced with only small burdens of GWP, such as apples and strawberries, the burden from transport may be a large proportion of the total. For foods with inherently large GWP per tonne, such as meat products, burdens arising from transport may only be a small proportion of the total.ConclusionsWhen considering the GWP of food production, imports from countries where productivity is greater and/or where refrigerated storage requirement is less will lead to less total GWP than axiomatic preference for local produce. However, prioritising GWP may lead to increases in other environmental burdens, in particular leading to both greater demands on and decreasing quality of water resources.