agricultural products

Transcription

1 Development of regional LCAs for agricultural products Feasibility & challenges of using representative Commercial Enterprise Budgets C. Pineo, P.F. Janse van Vuuren, L. Basson & J. Petrie 1st Southern African LCA Colloquium, 7 November 2016

2 Disclaimer The results presented have not been peer-reviewed (i.e. externally verified). They were used to demonstrate feasibility of the approach.

3 Overview Summary of contents Who is GreenCape and why are we here? Framing the LCA work within the Regional Resource Flow Model Project The importance of the food value chain The importance of life cycle thinking in terms of carbon intensity & competitiveness An example from the wine value chain Regional LCIs for agricultural products Wheat LCAs developed using Combuds Goal, method, results & key conclusions Sensitivity analysis Conclusions Recommendations & changes to support LCA development

4 Overview of GreenCape Who we are and what we do 4

5 GreenCape Overview A not-for-profit organisation established in 2010 by the Western Cape Government A sector development agency that supports businesses operating within the green economy in the Western Cape GreenCape aims to help unlock the investment & employment potential of green technologies & services Contributes to improving the resource efficiency, carbon intensity & resilience of the regional economy

6 ENERGY RESOURCES WASTE SECTOR DESKS Energy Efficiency Renewable Energy Water Agriculture Waste PROJECTS Smart Electricity Resources projects e.g. Regional Resource Flow Model Waste Economy Water as a Constraint to Development WISP NISP SKILLS SARETEC REGULATION & POLICY GREENTECH MANUFACTURING ATLANTIS SEZ & CITY INCENTIVES GREEN FINANCE TECHNICAL & KNOWLEDGE 6

7 Regional Resource Flow Model Key insights from the project

8 Regional Resource Flow Model Project goal & outputs To provide a strategic analysis of the provincial economy & identify possible resource constraints that may limit the competitiveness & resource productivity of key sectors Outputs are a macroeconomic analysis of the Western Cape & detailed reports on key agricultural sectors Economic Analysis (SAM Report) Wine Sector Report Fruit Sector Report Livestock & Game Sector Report Grain Sector Report 8

9 Macroeconomic analysis The importance of the food value chain in the Western Cape

10 Output Value (Rands) Output multipliers Secondary 10

11 ENERGY TOTAL EMISSIONS SAM analysis EMISSIONS GHG emission multipliers GHG emissions assumed proportional to their financial contribution for scaling The electricity sector clearly dominates: primarily coal-based Considering Scope 1 & 2 GHG emissions: Heavy industry (in particular metal) is the most carbon-intense Transport, commercial & household largest sector in absolute terms Agriculture may have significant nonenergy GHG emissions 11

12 Labour Multipliers Top 20 Labour Multipliers Western Cape 2014 Other Food Products Clothing Insurance Other Beverages and Tobacco Business Activities Other Manufacturing and Recycling Accommodation Buildings and Other Construction Wine Livestock Farming Ostrich and Game Farming Dairy Farming Vegetable Farming Trade Table Grape Farming Community, Social and Personal Fishing Other Agriculture Other Fruit Farming and Citrus Wine Grape Farming Skilled Semi-Skilled Unskilled Output Multipliers Top 20 GDP multipliers Western Cape Vegetable Farming2014 Direct Furniture Indirect Induced Non-Metallic Mineral Products Other Food Products Accommodation Wine Real Estate Publishing and Printing Other Fruit Farming and Citrus Wine Grape Farming Table Grape Farming Transport Services Community, Social and Personal Water Communication Mining Electricity Other Manufacturing and Recycling Trade Insurance Business Activities - 0,20 0,40 0,60 0,80 1,00 1,20 1,40

13 Key insights Prioritise the food value chain GHG emissions Agriculture is a significant source of non-energy GHG emissions Food and beverages sector has a significant footprint - the largest manufacturing sector in the Western Cape Labour Agriculture is the most labour intensive sector, especially for unskilled labour Output / GDP contribution Agri-processing sectors have some of highest multiplier effects Agriculture is a significant foreign exchange earner (Western Cape providing 45% of South Africa s agriculture exports)

14 The wine value chain The importance of life cycle thinking in terms of carbon intensity & competitiveness

15 Wine Sector Report Carbon footprint analysis Wine Sector Report Economic Analysis (SAM Report) Fruit Sector Report Livestock & Game Sector Report Grain Sector Report

16 Carbon intensity Legend max 75%th 25%th min

17 Developing life cycle inventories Importance of regional LCIs for agricultural products

18 Regional LCIs for agricultural products Status quo & feasibility SA largely relies on overseas LCI data when undertaking LCAs Results which may not be representative of local conditions, particularly within primary sectors Differences in management systems, climate, soils & vegetation can significantly affect LCA results Region-specific agricultural LCIs have been developed by other countries. E.g. Australia: Regional LCIs for cotton, grains, horticulture, livestock feeds & sugar Developed through the Australian Agricultural LCI (AusAgLCI) project Uses representative gross margin budgets for farms LCIs are publically available, locally relevant & standardised

19 Regional LCIs for agricultural products Strategic benefits Supporting agri-businesses and industries: LCAs can identify & drive improvements in production by providing a better understanding of the inefficiencies & impacts related to farming systems Enabling local producers to gain access to international markets: Inventories provide the environmental impact data required to access markets with strong environmental directives governing their operation (e.g. EU and Japan)

20 Regional LCIs for agricultural products Strategic benefits Ensuring that primary producers can easily & objectively demonstrate that their products are being produced in a responsible manner: Businesses can provide reliable carbon footprints & make sound environmental claims (e.g. carbon neutral) based on credible data that is region-specific, relevant & representative of local farming systems A centralised source of data can assist research organisations & industry bodies in terms of the time & money required to collect data & conduct LCAs Provides intensity & impact benchmarks for key commodities & sectors: Robust & scientific benchmarks can be used to implement mitigation drivers (e.g. carbon taxes) & evaluate the long-term effectiveness of mitigation strategies.

21 Wheat LCAs A case study for the use of Combud data to support regional LCI development

22 Wheat production Assessing resource intensity Why wheat? Significant in the WC 17% agricultural land use & feeds into important supply chains (e.g. bread, pasta) Variation in inputs & production yields Highlighted in DoA Combuds: 34 wheat budgets covering four districts & several production areas Wheat used as a case study: To explore the value of Combuds as a data source for LCIs To demonstrate use of LCAs specifically to: Examine the carbon intensity of a product Examine the potential environmental impacts associated with production Highlight areas for intervention to improve resource productivity & decrease adverse impacts

23

24 Wheat LCAs Goal To examine the resource intensity & potential impacts of wheat production in the Western Cape Examine differences in the type of production & farming practices Irrigated vs dry land production Conventional vs minimum tillage practices To examine the feasibility of using an LCA approach for analysing key commodities: Four representative wheat farms from the West Coast were selected: Middle Swartland & North-West region Coverage: 27-35% of total area of planted wheat ( ) and 34% of wheat production (2007)

25 Methodology Scope: cradle-to-farm gate Indirect (i.e. pre-farm) potential impacts e.g. fertilizer and chemical production, transport of inputs to farm, etc. Direct (i.e. on-farm) potential impacts e.g. GHG emissions from the application of fertilizer Functional unit (how potential impacts are expressed): Per tonne wheat production (resource intensity) Per hectare of planted wheat (land utilisation)

26 Methodology Inventory Detailed list of the flows in and out of the system Including raw resources or materials, energy and water, as well as emissions to air, water and land. Use Combuds to build a representative inventory primary source of information Supplemented with additional water information from water footprinting Use various ecoinvent emission models to look at output flows

27

28

29

30 Pre-farm stage (indirect impacts) Mining Extracting Processing Production Transport (to farm) Inputs Seeds Fertiliser Herbicides Pesticides Buildings Machinery Diesel Electricity Water On-farm stage (direct impacts) Field production Field processes Plough (if necessary) Tillage Fertilisation Sowing Application of plant protection Harvesting Irrigation (if necessary) Emissions Field emissions Fuel combustion Pesticides / herbicides System Boundary 1 tonne wheat 1 hectare wheat production

31 Summary of the wheat commercial enterprise budgets used for the LCA analysis Wheat LCA Dry_Conventional_1 Dry_Conventional_2 Dry_Min_Till Irrigated Combud no. ADMIN873 1/1/1/1/373 ADMIN875 1/1/1/1/372 ADMIN876 1/1/1/1/416 ADMIN909 1/1/1/1/1374 Area Middle Swartland (Moorreesburg) Middle Swartland (Moorreesburg) Middle Swartland (Moorreesburg) North West (Clanwilliam) Production Dry land Dry land Dry land Irrigated Tillage Conventional Conventional Minimum tillage Conventional Rotation Wheat after medic Wheat after fallow Yield (t/ha) Wheat after canola Unknown

32 Results Indication of carbon and water intensity Land utilisation: Impacts per hectare of wheat Climate change (kg CO 2 eq / ha) Water depletion (m 3 / ha) Dry_Conventional_ Dry_Conventional_ Dry_Min_Till Irrigated Irrigated vs dryland >9X >3000X Production intensity: Impacts per tonne of wheat Climate change (kg CO 2 eq / t) Water depletion (m 3 / t) Dry_Conventional_ Dry_Conventional_ Dry_Min_Till Irrigated Irrigated vs dryland >4X >2000X

33 Climate change (i.e. carbon intensity) Proportional contributions from different inputs / activities Dry_Conventional_1 Dry_Conventional_2 Dry_Min_Till Irrigated Fertiliser production (N) Fertiliser production (P) Fertiliser production (K) Lime production Chemical production Diesel production Transport to farm Infrastructure Field emissions Fuel combustion Irrigation 0% 50% 100% INDIRECT IMPACTS DIRECT IMPACTS

34 Global benchmarks Carbon intensity of wheat production Wheat production Dry land (rain-fed) Irrigated Practice Area Source Climate change Yields (t/ha) (kg CO 2 e) Per hectare Per tonne WC, SA This study Chile Huerta et al., Conventional Denmark Nielsen et al., 2003 (LCA food database) France Laratte et al., <500 USA Meisterling et al., Minimum tillage WC, SA This study Western Australia Biswas et al., Conservational Victoria, Australia Biswas et al., * 270* Mixed Ontario, Canada Ho, New Zealand Barber et al., WC, SA This study Conventional Khoshnevisan et al., Esfahan, Iran** *** *Excluding methane emissions from sheep. **Range encompasses results for small, medium and large wheat farms (Khoshnevisan, 2013). ***Not stated in the LCA study (Khoshnevisan, 2013). Assume 3.6 t/ha irrigated wheat based on reported yields for the Esfahan province (Ghadiryanfar, 2009).

35 Sensitivity analysis Effect of data quality & assumptions Identify the important underlying data & assessing whether the quality of the data available in the Combuds was sufficient Sensitivity analysis was used to: Test the assumptions made in the absence of detailed or transparent data available in the Combuds To provide evidence of the accuracy required for key parameters Targeted the largest contributors to climate change & the other impacts Production of fertiliser Fertiliser use, fuel combustion & electricity for irrigation Test impact of assumptions regarding fertiliser sources & irrigation efficiency

36 Sensitivity analysis Carbon intensity of wheat production Wheat LCA Input Description* Climate change (carbon intensity) Dry land Conventional Phosphate fertiliser Baseline: TSP Scenario: SSP - 6% Baseline: TSP + AN Dry land Minimum tillage Phosphate and nitrogen fertiliser Scenario: TSP + UAN Scenario: ANP + AN Scenario: MAP + AN UAN: - 9% Other: - 6 to -8% Scenario: DAP + AN Irrigated Conventional Irrigation motor efficiency Baseline: 65% Scenario: 95% - 20% *TSP: Triple super phosphate, SSP: Single super phosphate, AN: Ammonium nitrate, UAN: Urea ammonium nitrate, ANP: Ammonium nitrogen phosphate, MAP: Monoammonium phosphate, DAP: Diammonium phosphate

37 Key insights & implications from the LCA Feasibility of using LCAs for a representative analysis Feasible to develop representative inventories and inform LCA-based regional analyses Combuds: lack detail and transparency, thus require several assumptions which impact accuracy Potential impacts of wheat production Differences between production systems and farming practices: Irrigated >>>> Dry land: conventional > Dry land: minimum tillage Major contributing processes: fertiliser, fuel and electricity Improve Combud structure Dry land production (where possible) Improved productivity Fertiliser efficiency & alternative sources Fuel efficiency Energy & water efficiency for irrigation Alternative energy supply (low cost, low carbon, reliable)

38 Conclusion Insights & recommendations for LCI development 38

39 Developing LCIs from Combuds Advantages & gaps Advantages: Provide budgets for representative regions & farming practices for a specific rotation system Contain a mass balance per hectare for inputs such as lime, fertilisers, pesticides, herbicides & seeds as well as yield outputs Fuel consumption estimates could be made based on the economic balance provided for pre-harvest & harvest fuel per hectare Gaps Lack detail & transparency for chemical inputs (specifically fertiliser source & active ingredients in pesticides/herbicides) assumptions required Lack machinery use data additional budgets supplied from internal DOA studies Lack water consumption data & calendar of operations assumptions required

40 Conclusion Recommendations & developments The Combuds have important gaps that have a significant impact on the LCIA They lack the structure & detail provided in e.g. Australian farming budgets

41 Key differences: 1. Yield over multiple years, with a variety of crop rotations 2. Indication of machinery use 3. Fertiliser and other chemical inputs are expressed in basic components (e.g. urea, ammonium nitrate) and active ingredients (e.g. glyphosate rather than Roundup)

42 Conclusion Recommendations & developments The Combuds have important gaps that have a significant impact on the LCIA They lack the structure & detail provided in e.g. Australian farming budgets The DoA is addressing some of these gaps: Increased detail & transparency for fertilisers & other chemical inputs Active ingredients Machinery use budgets will be available on request & be linked to specific Combuds Operation time & fuel use Activities (e.g. tillage, spraying) Water & electricity models are being developed Work in collaboration with the research community to get the maximum use from Combuds

43 Thank You Cathy Pineo

44 Background slides Additional details

45 Inform & focus Aim: Macro-Economic Overview Methodology: Environmentally Extended Input Output (EEIO) Benefits Broad Sectoral Overview Challenges High level of analysis and data constraints limit interpretation Aim: Identify Enablers & Opportunities for Value Add Methodology: Life Cycle Analyses Benefits Multiple impact categories and in depth understanding Challenges Time consuming and data often does not exist (yet) Validate & update