[ Log In | Register]
! Skip Navigation Links
Skip Navigation Links
Image of Journal of Applied Nonlinear Dynamics
ISSN:2325-6192 (print)
ISSN:2325-6206 (online)
Journal of Environmental Accounting and Management
António Mendes Lopes (editor), Jiazhong Zhang(editor)
António Mendes Lopes (editor)

University of Porto, Portugal

Email: aml@fe.up.pt

Jiazhong Zhang (editor)

School of Energy and Power Engineering, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, Shaanxi Province 710049, China

Fax: +86 29 82668723 Email: jzzhang@mail.xjtu.edu.cn

Sustainability Evaluation of Sheep and Goat Rearing in Southern Italy. A Life Cycle Cost/Benefit Assessment

Journal of Environmental Accounting and Management 8(3) (2020) 229--242 | DOI:10.5890/JEAM.2020.09.002

Nausicaa Pollaro$^{1}$, Remo Santagata$^{1}$, Sergio Ulgiati$^{1}$,$^{2}$

$^{1}$ Department of Science and Technology, Parthenope University of Napoli, Napoli, Italy

$^{2}$ School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China

Download Full Text PDF

 

Abstract

Sheep and goat farming represent a non-negligible share of the worldwide livestock productions. Ovine rearing, although knowing time periods of growth and descents, is today gaining more interest especially with regards of milk and dairy products. This is due to the rediscovery of the economic, social and environmental potential of this type of farming and its products. This work aims to analyze goat farming and its productions using the life cycle assessment (LCA) method. LCA makes it possible to evaluate and understand the environmental impacts of livestock farming and dairy processing throughout all the phases of their production. The purpose is to highlight and localize the opportunities for reducing the environmental impacts; compare similar products to each other; evaluate and compare the effects related to different environmental and resource management policies. Two zootechnical companies, located in the province of Salerno (Italy), are investigated. The production process analyzed is precisely that of goat cheese, specifically the “Cacioricotta Cilentana”, a very well-known kind of Italian cheese. The characteristics of goat breeding and the production of Cacioricotta Cilentana are examined in this study. The similarities and differences between the two companies have been highlighted, linked to the breeding, cheese making and sale phases of the finished product. Applying the LCA approach, the environmental impacts of the production process were analyzed and quantified, according to the ReCiPe Midpoint (H) method to derive impact indicators relating to the most significant impact categories (including climate change, human toxicity, acidification, depletion of fossil resources, depletion of water resources). The evaluation highlights the critical points of the process so as to be able to suggest improvement options.

Acknowledgments

The Authors gratefully acknowledge the support from the Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation (MAECI - No. PGR00767) within the framework of the High Relevance Sino-Italian bilateral project “Analysis of the metabolic process of urban agglomeration and the cooperative strategy of circular economy”.

References

  1. [1]  André, L., Pauss, A., and Ribeiro, T. (2018), Solid anaerobic digestion: state-of-art, scientific and technological hurdles, Bioresource Technology, 247, 1027-1037.
  2. [2]  Angelonidi, E. and Smith, S.R. (2015), A Comparison of wet and dry anaerobic digestion processes for the treatment of municipal solid waste and food waste, Water and Environment Journal, 29(4), 549-557.
  3. [3]  Balthazar, C.F., Pimentel, T.C., Ferr˜ão, L.L., Almada, C.N., Santillo, A., Albenzio, M., Mollakhalili, N., Mortazavian, A.M., Nascimento, J.S., Silva, M.C., Freitas, M.Q., Sant’Ana, A.S., Granato, D., and Cruz, A.G. (2017), Sheep milk: physicochemical characteristics and relevance for functional food development, Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, 16(2), 247-262.
  4. [4]  Benini, L., Mancini, L., Sala, S., Manfredi, S., Schau, E., and Pant, R. (2014), Normalisation method and data for Environmental Footprints, Publications Office of the European Union.
  5. [5]  Bösch, P., Modarresi, A., and Friedl, A. (2012), Comparison of combined ethanol and biogas polygeneration facilities using exergy analysis, Applied Thermal Engineering, 37, 19-29.
  6. [6]  Browne, J.D. and Murphy, J.D. (2013), Assessment of the resource associated with biomethane from food waste, Applied Energy, 104, 170-77.
  7. [7]  Buonocore, E., Mellino, S., De Angelis, G., Liu, G., and Ulgiati, S. (2018), Life Cycle Assessment Indicators of Urban Wastewater and Sewage Sludge Treatment, Ecological Indicators, 94, 13-23.
  8. [8]  Burg, V., Bowman, G., Haubensak, M., Baier, U., and Thees, O. (2018), Valorization of an untapped resource: energy and greenhouse gas emissions benefits of convertingmanure to biogas through anaerobic digestion, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 136, 53-62.
  9. [9]  Bušić A., Kundas, S., Morzak, G., Belskaya, H., Mardetko, N., Šantek, M.I., Komes, D., Novak, S., and Šantek, B. (2018), Recent trends in biodiesel and biogas production, Food Technology and Biotechnology 56(2), 152-173.
  10. [10]  Cestonaro, T., de Mendonça Costa, M.S.S., de Mendonça Costa, L.A., Rozatti, M.A.T., Pereira, D.C., Lorin, H.E.F., and Carneiro, L.J. (2015), The anaerobic co-digestion of sheep bedding and>50%cattlemanure increases biogas production and improves biofertilizer quality, Waste Management, 46, 612-618.
  11. [11]  Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2012), Towards the Circular Economy Vol. 1 - An Economic and Business Rationale for an Accelerated Transition. http://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/publications/Ellen-MacArthur-Foundation-Towards-the-Circular-Economy-vol.1.pdf.
  12. [12]  Erdogdu, A.E., Polat, R., and Ozbay, G. (2019), Pyrolysis of goat manure to produce bio-oil, Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal, 22(2), 452-457.
  13. [13]  European Commission (2015a), Circular Economy Package: Questions & Answers. http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-15-6204_en.htm.
  14. [14]  European Commission (2015b), Press Release - Closing the Loop: Commission Adopts Ambitious New Circular Economy Package to Boost Competitiveness, Create Jobs and Generate Sustainable Growth. http://europa.eu/rapid/pressrelease_IP-15-6203_en.htm.
  15. [15]  FAO, OECD (2015), OECD-FAO Agricultural Outlook 2015-2024. http://www.fao.org/3/a-i4738e.pdf.
  16. [16]  Florio, C., Fiorentino, G., Corcelli, F., Ulgiati, S., Dumontet, S., Güsewell, J., and Eltrop, L. (2019),A life cycle assessment of biomethane production from waste feedstock through different upgrading technologies, Energies, 12(4), 718.
  17. [17]  Gelegenis, J., Georgakakis, D., Angelidaki, I., and Mavris, V. (2007), Optimization of biogas production by co-digesting whey with diluted poultry manure, Renewable Energy, 32(13), 2147-2160.
  18. [18]  Ghisellini, P., Protano, G., Viglia, S., Gaworski, M., Setti, M., and Ulgiati, S. (2014), Integrated agricultural and dairy production within a circular economy framework. A comparison of Italian and Polish farming systems, Journal of Environmental Accounting and Management, 2(4), 367-384.
  19. [19]  Goedkoop, M., Heijungs, R., Huijbregts, M., DeSchryver, A., Struijs, J., and VanZelm, R. (2009), ReCiPe 2008 — a Life Cycle Impact Assessment MethodWhich Comprises Harmonised Category Indicators at theMidpoint and the Endpoint Level. Report I: Characterisation. http://www.leidenuniv.nl/cml/ssp/publications/recipe_characterisation.pdf.
  20. [20]  Hamelin, L., Naroznova, I., and Wenzel, H. (2014), Environmental consequences of different carbon alternatives for increased manure-based biogas, Applied Energy, 114, 774-782.
  21. [21]  Holm-Nielsen, J.B., Al Seadi, T., and Oleskowicz-Popiel, P. (2009), The Future of anaerobic digestion and biogas utilization, Bioresource Technology, 100 (22), 5478-5484.
  22. [22]  Huijbregts, M.A.J., Steinmann, Z.J.N., Elshout, P.M.F., Stam, G., Verones, F., Vieira, M.D.M., Hollander, A., Zijp, M., and van Zelm. R. (2017), ReCiPe 2016 v1.1 A Harmonized Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method at Midpoint and Endpoint Level Report I: Characterization, Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
  23. [23]  ISO 14040 (2006), EnvironmentalManagement— Life Cycle Assessment — Principles and Framework.
  24. [24]  ISO 14044 (2006), EnvironmentalManagement— Life Cycle Assessment — Requirements and Guidelines.
  25. [25]  JRC (2010), The International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) Handbook — General Guide for Life Cycle Assessment – Detailed Guidance. Edited by European Commission and Institute for Environment and Sustainability. Constraints. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2788/38479.
  26. [26]  JRC (2011), The International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) Handbook—Towards more sustainable production and consumption for a resource-efficient Europe, Edited by European Commission and Institute for Environment and Sustainability. Constraints. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. doi: 10.2788/85727.
  27. [27]  Koller, M., Maršálek, L., de Sousa Dias, M.M., and Braunegg, G. (2017), Producing microbial polyhydroxyalkanoate (PHA) biopolyesters in a sustainable manne, New Biotechnology, 37(Pt A), 24-38.
  28. [28]  Leip, A., Ledgard, S., Uwizeye, A., Palhares, J.C.P., Aller, M.F., Amon, B., Binder, M., Cordovil, C.M.d.S., Camillis, C.D., Dong, H., Fusi, A., Helin, J., Hortenhuber, S., Hristov, A.N., Koelsch, R., Liu, C., Masso, C., Nkongolo, N.V., Patra, A.K., Redding, M.R., Rufino, M.C., Sakrabani, R., Thoma, G., Vertes, F., and Wang, Y. (2019), The value of manure - manure as co-product in life cycle assessment, Journal of Environmental Management, 241, 293-304.
  29. [29]  Leipold, S. and Petit-Boix, A. (2018), The circular economy and the bio-based sector - perspectives of European and German stakeholders, Journal of Cleaner Production, 201, 1125-1137.
  30. [30]  Marino, R., Atzori, A.S., D’Andrea, M., Iovane, G., Trabalza-Marinucci, M., and Rinaldi, L. (2016), Climate change: production performance, health issues, greenhouse gas emissions and mitigation strategies in sheep and goat farming, Small Ruminant Research, 135, 50-59.
  31. [31]  Moral, R., Moreno-Caselles, J., Perez-Murcia, M.D., Perez-Espinosa, A., Rufete, B., and Paredes, C. (2005), Characterisation of the organic matter pool in manures, Bioresource Technology, 96(2), 153-158.
  32. [32]  Nicolás, P., Ferreira, M.L., and Lassalle, V. (2019), A review of magnetic separation of whey proteins and potential application to whey proteins recovery, isolation and utilization, Journal of Food Engineering, 246, 7-15.
  33. [33]  Pennington, D.W., Potting, J., Finnveden, G., Lindeijer, E., Jolliet, O., Rydberg, T., and Rebitzer, G., (2004), Life cycle assessment part 2: current impact assessment practice, Environment International, 30 (5), 721-739.
  34. [34]  Pulina, G., Milán,M.J., Lavín,M.P., Theodoridis, A., Morin, E., Capote, J., Thomas, D.L., Francesconi, A.H.D., and Caja, G. (2018), Invited review: current production trends, farm structures, and economics of the dairy sheep and goat sectors, Journal of Dairy Science, 101(8), 6715-6729.
  35. [35]  Rossi, R. (2017), The Sheep and Goat Sector in the EU. Main Features, Challenges and Prospects. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2017/608663/EPRS_BRI(2017)608663_EN.pdf.
  36. [36]  Rossi, R. (2018), The Future of the EU’s Sheep and Goat Sector. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank.
  37. [37]  Ryssen, J.B.J. and Ndlovu, H. (2018), Wood ash in livestock nutrition: 1. factors affecting the mineral composition of wood ash – SASAS, Applied Animal Husbandry & Rural Development, 1, (11), 53-61.
  38. [38]  Santagata, R., Ripa,M., and Ulgiati, S. (2017), An environmental assessment of electricity production from slaughterhouse residues. Linking urban, industrial and waste management systems, Applied Energy, 186, 175-188.
  39. [39]  Santagata, R., Viglia, S., Fiorentino, G., Liu, G., and Ripa, M. (2019), Power generation from slaughterhouse waste materials. An emergy accounting assessment, Journal of Cleaner Production, 223, 536-552.
  40. [40]  Scarlat, N., Fahl, F., Dallemand, J.F., Monforti, F., and Motola, V. (2018), A spatial analysis of biogas potential from manure in Europe, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 94, 915-930.
  41. [41]  Siddique, M.D., Islam, N., and Wahid, Z. (2018), Achievements and perspectives of anaerobic co-digestion: A review, Journal of Cleaner Production, 194, 359-371.
  42. [42]  Szargut, J. (1989), Chemical exergies of the elements, Applied Energy, 32 (4), 269-286.
  43. [43]  Uçkun Kiran, E., Trzcinski, A.P., and Liu, Y. (2015), Platform chemical production from food wastes using a biorefinery concept, Journal of Chemical Technology and Biotechnology, 90(8), 1364-1379.
  44. [44]  Vagnoni, E., Franca, A., Porqueddu, C., and Duce, P. (2017), Environmental profile of Sardinian sheep milk cheese supply chain: a comparison between two contrasting dairy systems, Journal of Cleaner Production, 165, 1078-1089.
  45. [45]  Wernet, G., Bauer, C., Steubing, B., Reinhard, J., Moreno-Ruiz, E., and Weidema, B. (2016), The Ecoinvent Database Version 3 (Part I): Overview and Methodology, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 21(9), 1218-1230.
  46. [46]  Zygoyiannis, D. (2006), Sheep production in the world and in Greece, Small Ruminant Research, 62(1–2), 143-147.

Copyright © 2011-2024 L & H Scientific Publishing. All rights reserved. Wildcard SSL Certificates