Environmental assessment of diets: overview and guidance on indicator choice.

Comprehensive but interpretable assessment of the environmental performance of diets involves choosing a set of appropriate indicators. Current knowledge and data gaps on the origin of dietary foodstuffs restrict use of indicators relying on site-specific information. This Personal View summarises commonly used indicators for assessing the environmental performance of diets, briefly outlines their benefits and drawbacks, and provides recommendations on indicator choices for actors across multiple fields involved in activities that include the environmental assessment of diets. We then provide recommendations on indicator choices for actors across multiple fields involved in activities that use environmental assessments, such as health and nutrition experts, policy makers, decision makers, and private-sector and public-sector sustainability officers. We recommend that environmental assessment of diets should include indicators for at least the five following areas: climate change, biosphere integrity, blue water consumption, novel entities, and impacts on natural resources (especially wild fish stocks), to capture important environmental trade-offs. If more indicators can be handled in the assessment, indicators to capture impacts related to land use quantity and quality and green water consumption should be used. For ambitious assessments, indicators related to biogeochemical flows, stratospheric ozone depletion, and energy use can be added.

Life Cycle Assessment of a large commercial kelp farm in Shandong, China.

The environmental benefits of seaweed cultivation have gained a lot of attention, both in policy strategies and by private companies. Sustainability evaluations of seaweed farming have however focused on a very small part of global production of seaweed - on European cultivations at research and pilot-scales although Asia stands for 99 % of global production with China alone producing 60 %. In this study, we use Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) to evaluate the environmental performance of a 400-hectare Chinese kelp farm with a yearly harvest of 60,000 tons. Primary data from the farm was used to assess impacts up until harvest for the functional unit of 1 ton of fresh-weight kelp. Included in the LCA were impact on climate change, acidification terrestrial and marine eutrophication, and use of land water and energy. In addition, we calculated nutrient uptake. Further, we extracted inventory data of four published LCA studies of farmed kelp and recalculated environmental impacts, applying the same background data and method choices with the aim to compare the effects of scale and cultivation system. The results of the hotspot analysis showed that the plastic ropes and buoys dominated impacts on climate change, freshwater and marine eutrophication, and energy consumption. Consequently, the most effective improvement action was recycling after use. The yearly harvest of the Chinese farm was 1000-4000 times larger than previously evaluated farms compared. Results suggest that streamlined and mature production in the large-scale Chinese kelp farm led to lower electricity and fuel consumption compared to small-scale production, thus placing the Chinese farm with a climate impact of 57.5 kg CO2 eq. per ton fresh-weight kelp on the lower end when comparing the carbon footprint. There was a large variation in carbon footprints, which implies that the kelp cultivation sector has considerable room for optimization.

Environmental performance of blue foods.

Fish and other aquatic foods (blue foods) present an opportunity for more sustainable diets1,2. Yet comprehensive comparison has been limited due to sparse inclusion of blue foods in environmental impact studies3,4 relative to the vast diversity of production5. Here we provide standardized estimates of greenhouse gas, nitrogen, phosphorus, freshwater and land stressors for species groups covering nearly three quarters of global production. We find that across all blue foods, farmed bivalves and seaweeds generate the lowest stressors. Capture fisheries predominantly generate greenhouse gas emissions, with small pelagic fishes generating lower emissions than all fed aquaculture, but flatfish and crustaceans generating the highest. Among farmed finfish and crustaceans, silver and bighead carps have the lowest greenhouse gas, nitrogen and phosphorus emissions, but highest water use, while farmed salmon and trout use the least land and water. Finally, we model intervention scenarios and find improving feed conversion ratios reduces stressors across all fed groups, increasing fish yield reduces land and water use by up to half, and optimizing gears reduces capture fishery emissions by more than half for some groups. Collectively, our analysis identifies high-performing blue foods, highlights opportunities to improve environmental performance, advances data-poor environmental assessments, and informs sustainable diets.

Recirculating Aquaculture Is Possible without Major Energy Tradeoff: Life Cycle Assessment of Warmwater Fish Farming in Sweden.

Seafood is seen as promising for more sustainable diets. The increasing production in land-based closed Recirculating Aquaculture Systems (RASs) has overcome many local environmental challenges with traditional open net-pen systems such as eutrophication. The energy needed to maintain suitable water quality, with associated emissions, has however been seen as challenging from a global perspective. This study uses Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) to investigate the environmental performance and improvement potentials of a commercial RAS farm of tilapia and Clarias in Sweden. The environmental impact categories and indicators considered were freshwater eutrophication, climate change, energy demand, land use, and dependency on animal-source feed inputs per kg of fillet. We found that feed production contributed most to all environmental impacts (between 67 and 98%) except for energy demand for tilapia, contradicting previous findings that farm-level energy use is a driver of environmental pressures. The main improvement potentials include improved by-product utilization and use of a larger proportion of plant-based feed ingredients. Together with further smaller improvement potential identified, this suggests that RASs may play a more important role in a future, environmentally sustainable food system.