Life Cycle Assessment of Plant-Based vs. Beef Burgers: A Case Study in the UK

Abstract

As the world attempts to decarbonise the food industry and limit greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, plant-based meat analogues (PBMAs) have emerged as a sustainable alternative to traditional meat. The objective of this study is to assess the environmental impacts of PBMAs compared to traditional beef burgers, aiming to address the research gap in the life cycle assessments (LCAs) of publicly available PBMA recipes. Utilising a cradle-to-fork system boundary, this research conducted a rigorous LCA on a 100 g plant-based burger patty and its beef burger (BB) counterpart, each produced in the UK but sourced from different global locations. The results demonstrated that the plant-based burger had significantly lower environmental impacts across several categories, including a 65% reduction in global warming potential and a 45% reduction in water consumption. A simple extrapolation illustrated that if the UK population switched from beef to meat analogue patties, 3 million tonnes of CO2e could be saved annually, corresponding to 0.74% of the country’s yearly territorial GHG emissions. Scenario analyses displayed how the environmental impact of the MA patty remained stable regardless of changes in exportation, ingredient origin or soy protein sourcing. Moreover, a sensitivity analysis conducted with an alternative characterisation method corroborated the initial findings, whilst uncertainty analysis ensured that nearly all of the conclusions generated from the original comparison were robust. Future studies should conduct LCAs on PBMA patties with commercial recipes using varied plant-based sources, as well as fully understanding any potential health implications of long-term PBMA consumption.