Life Cycle Assessment Guidelines Research Articles

A comparative analysis of recent life cycle assessment guidelines and frameworks: Methodological evidence from the packaging industry

In recent years, a number of new guidelines and frameworks for Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) have emerged, trying to support analysts in dealing with certain methodological issues and “gaps” of the ISO 14040-44, that are still the main LCA reference standards. This trend can be considered as positive, because the lack of shared, standardised and more detailed rules regarding LCA has affected for years the consistency of LCA analyses and their potential comparisons. However, the proliferation of guidelines and frameworks can also have negative consequences, first of all related to the potential resulting confusion and the lack of a clear reference for LCA analysts. These potential risks are particularly accentuated for multinational companies, which deal with many clients, in different markets, countries and sectors, and have to conform their analyses to different requirements each time.Focusing on the plastic packaging industry, this study compares six LCA guidelines and frameworks to highlight their similarities and differences. The documents selected to be analysed were: three documents applicable to products in general (ILCD, PAS 2050 and PEF), two packaging-specific guidelines (Pathfinder Framework and SPICE Methodological Guidelines) and a product specific standard for the packaging industry (PCR 2013:19). The methodological aspects analysed and compared, grouped according to the LCA stages, are: units of analysis; system boundaries; allocation methods; cut-off criteria; end-of-life; packaging; storage; biogenic CO2 emissions; carbon removals and carbon content; land use; offsets; impact categories and indicators; LCA methods and models; normalisation and weighting; data quality; sensitivity analysis. The aim is to understand to what extent potential differences may impact on companies and LCA analysts who conduct the assessments. Results highlight that the six guidelines and frameworks analysed are not always aligned and that, although some misalignments can be easily addressed, others could negatively affect the reliability of the analyses conducted.

Technological suitability and improvement for shaping environmental performance: A life cycle perspective on Fenton-based wastewater treatment processes

Water resource management and wastewater treatment are designed to ensure a safe and clean water resource in the pursuit of sustainable development goals. Chemical-based wastewater treatment processes typically involve significant consumption of resources, by means of chemical or material uses, which potentially lead to significant environmental impacts. This study intends to gain a comprehensive understanding of the environmental impacts associated with two Fenton-based wastewater treatment processes, namely, fluidized-bed reactor (FBR-Fenton) and conventional Fenton (C-Fenton) methods, for four industrial wastewater tests (organic wastewater from pulp mill, pharmaceutical, oil-containing, and polyethylene terephthalate (PET) rinsing), from a technical suitability perspective. The present study adopts ISO 14040 guidelines for life cycle assessment (LCA) and uses the IPCC and ReCiPe methods for environmental impact assessment. The results show that the FBR process has relatively lower environmental impacts than the C-Fenton process according to the IPCC and ReCiPe impact results, partly due to differences in chemical usage and electricity consumption. The results obtained from the IPCC method show that the C-Fenton process had a relatively higher impact on global warming potential than the FBR process, with impacts in the range of 20.5–141.9 kg CO2eq/1 kg COD and 12.0–41.9 kg CO2eq/1 kg COD, respectively, mainly due to variations in the amount of sodium hydroxide or sulfuric acid required to achieve the desired degree of water quality from different raw industrial wastewater sources. Furthermore, the reduction in the use of high-impact chemicals contributes to remarkable environmental benefits for the processes, while process adjustment may not guarantee environmental benefits. This result implies that the environmental performance of Fenton-based processes significantly varies depending on the treatment of raw wastewater characteristics; that is, the environmental advantage of a wastewater treatment technique strongly depends on the determination of a suitable process. This information can be used to support the determination and advancement of future wastewater treatment technologies aimed at improving environmental outcomes.

Carbon accounting of negative emissions technologies integrated in the life cycle of spirulina supplements

Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies are considered essential to accomplish the Paris Agreement targets. Given the important contribution of the food sector to climate change, this study aims to investigate the role of two carbon capture and utilization (CCU) technologies in decarbonizing the production of spirulina, an algae product commonly consumed for its nutritional characteristics. The proposed scenarios considered the replacement of synthetic food-grade CO2 in Arthrospira platensis cultivation (BAU scenario) with CO2 from beer fermentation (BRW) and CO2 from DACC (direct air carbon capture) (SDACC), representing two alternatives with great potential in the short and medium-long term, respectively. The methodology follows the Life Cycle Assessment guidelines, considering a cradle-to-gate scope and a functional unit equivalent to the annual production of spirulina in a Spanish artisanal plant. Results showed a better environmental performance of both CCU scenarios as compared to BAU, reaching a reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of 52 % in BRW and of 46 % in SDACC. Although the brewery CCU offers a deeper carbon mitigation of spirulina production, the process cannot reach net zero GHG emissions due to residual burdens across the supply chain. In comparison, the DACC unit could potentially supply both the CO2 needed in spirulina production and work as a CDR to compensate residual emissions, which opens the door for further research on its technical and economic feasibility in the food sector.

Role of Corn Silage in the Sustainability of Dairy Buffalo Systems and New Perspective of Allocation Criterion

This paper aims to compare the cradle-to-farm gate sustainability of two dairy buffalo systems, according to life cycle assessment guidelines (LCA). Primary data were obtained by five intensive farms with feeding plans based on non-corn silage (NCS) and five with corn silage (CS) based rations. Both systems were characterized by the presence of two farms with wheat grain yields, sold for human consumption. All the farms were in Southern Italy and seven were included in the Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) area of “Mozzarella di bufala campana”. The functional unit (FU) adopted was 1 kg of normalized buffalo milk (NBM); impact categories investigated were: global warming potential (GWP), acidification potential (AP), eutrophication potential (EP), agricultural land occupation (ALO), water depletion (WD). Two different economic allocation procedures were tested: a first step aimed to mitigate the environmental impacts sharing among wheat grain, where present, and milk. The second stage involved culled buffalo cows. Neither the allocation nor the combination of allocation and feeding system showed significant effects (p > 0.05). Corn silage-based system (CS) showed lower impacts than non-corn silage (NCS) one for AP and EP (p = 0.002 and p = 0.051 respectively). High average dry matter yield per hectare of corn silage probably had a positive effect on SO2 and PO43− equivalents.

Bioplastics for a circular economy.

Bioplastics — typically plastics manufactured from bio-based polymers — stand to contribute to more sustainable commercial plastic life cycles as part of a circular economy, in which virgin polymers are made from renewable or recycled raw materials. Carbon-neutral energy is used for production and products are reused or recycled at their end of life (EOL). In this Review, we assess the advantages and challenges of bioplastics in transitioning towards a circular economy. Compared with fossil-based plastics, bio-based plastics can have a lower carbon footprint and exhibit advantageous materials properties; moreover, they can be compatible with existing recycling streams and some offer biodegradation as an EOL scenario if performed in controlled or predictable environments. However, these benefits can have trade-offs, including negative agricultural impacts, competition with food production, unclear EOL management and higher costs. Emerging chemical and biological methods can enable the ‘upcycling’ of increasing volumes of heterogeneous plastic and bioplastic waste into higher-quality materials. To guide converters and consumers in their purchasing choices, existing (bio)plastic identification standards and life cycle assessment guidelines need revision and homogenization. Furthermore, clear regulation and financial incentives remain essential to scale from niche polymers to large-scale bioplastic market applications with truly sustainable impact.

Correction to: On the nordic guidelines for life cycle assessment

Correction to: On the nordic guidelines for life cycle assessment

Review and expert survey of allocation methods used in life cycle assessment of milk and beef

PurposeBeef and dairy production systems produce several by-products, such as fertilizers, bioenergy, hides, and pet foods, among which the environmental impacts arising from production should be allocated. The choice of allocation method therefore inevitably affects the results of life cycle assessment (LCA) for milk and beef. The aims of this study were to map out the different allocation methods used in dairy and beef LCA studies and to clarify the rationale for selecting a certain method.MethodsA literature review was conducted to identify the different allocation methods used in LCA studies of milk and beef production and the products using beef by-products as a raw material. The justifications for the use of different methods in the studies were also collected. To map out the perspectives of LCA practitioners and further clarify the reasoning behind the use of certain allocation methods, a mixed method survey with quantitative questions and qualitative explanatory fields was sent to the authors included in the literature review.Results and discussionThe literature review showed that the most commonly used allocation method between milk and meat was biophysical allocation, which is also the recommended method in LCA guidelines of milk production. Economic allocation was the second most common method, although the rationale for using economic allocation was weak. By-products, such as inedible body parts, were not considered in milk studies and were taken into account in only a small number of beef studies. This might be because most of the studies have cradle-to-farm gate system boundaries. According to the survey, a significantly higher share of LCA practitioners would allocate impacts also to these by-products.ConclusionsThe allocation is usually done between milk and meat, and other by-products are not taken into account. Since these materials are an unavoidable part of production and there are numerous uses for them, these outputs should be recognized as products and also taken into consideration in LCA studies.

A practice‐based framework for defining functional units in comparative life cycle assessments of materials

AbstractIn comparative life cycle assessment (LCA) studies of materials, there is a mismatch between the current practice and existing guidelines regarding functional unit definition. The purpose of this study is to develop a practice‐based framework for defining functional units in comparative LCAs of materials and provide guidance regarding in which situations different functional unit types are relevant. A literature review of comparative LCAs of materials identified three types of functional units: (i) the reference flow functional unit, (ii) the property functional unit, and (iii) the performance functional unit. These functional unit types, of which only the latter strictly complies with LCA guidelines, represent varying degrees of functional equivalence and technological maturity. The most relevant functional unit type depends on the goal of the study. We suggest that screening assessments of whether materials have comparable environmental impacts can apply reference flow functional units. Material comparisons for certain application areas with some important properties can apply property functional units. For comparisons of end products, performance functional units can be applied. However, even in such cases, complete functional equivalence can hardly be achieved due to more or less relevant product differences. The applicability of the framework is demonstrated for the case of comparing cemented carbide and polycrystalline diamond hard materials.

Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Five Greek Yogurt Production Systems: A Perspective beyond the Plant Boundaries

Greek yogurt (GY), a high-protein-low-fat dairy product, particularly prized for its sensory and nutritional benefits, revolutionized the North American yogurt market in less than a decade, bringing with it new sustainability challenges. Standard GY production generates large volumes of acid whey, a co-product that is a potential source of environmental pollution if not recovered. This study aims to assess the environmental performance of different technologies and identify the main factors to improve GY production. A complete life cycle assessment (LCA) was performed to compare the standard technology (centrifugation) with two new technologies (fortification and ultrafiltration) to reduce acid whey volumes. Three milk protein concentrate alternatives were also assessed. Results show that technology choice is not a clear discriminant factor. However, minimizing losses and wastage (accounting for 23 to 25% of the environmental impacts for all indicators) beyond the processing plant and selecting milk ingredients (accounting for 63 to 67% of the impacts) with low environmental impacts are key factors to improve the environmental performance of GY systems. From a methodological perspective, the results also highlight a shortcoming in the current LCA guidelines (2015) issued by the International Dairy Federation to treat the multifunctionality of GY systems.

Definition of LCA Guidelines in the Geothermal Sector to Enhance Result Comparability

Geothermal energy could play a crucial role in the European energy market and future scenarios focused on sustainable development. Thanks to its constant supply of concentrated energy, it can support the transition towards a low-carbon economy. In the energy sector, the decision-making process should always be supported by a holistic science-based approach to allow a comprehensive environmental assessment of the technological system, such as the life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology. In the geothermal sector, the decision-making is particularly difficult due to the large variability of reported results on environmental performance across studies. This calls for harmonized guidelines on how to conduct LCAs of geothermal systems to enhance transparency and results comparability, by ensuring consistent methodological choices and providing indications for harmonized results reporting. This work identifies the main critical aspects of performing an LCA of geothermal systems and provides solutions and technical guidance to harmonize its application. The proposed methodological approach is based on experts’ knowledge from both the geothermal and LCA sectors. The recommendations cover all the life cycle phases of geothermal energy production (i.e., construction, operation, maintenance and end of life) as well as a selection of LCA key elements thus providing a thorough base for concerted LCA guidelines for the geothermal sector. The application of such harmonized LCA framework can ensure comparability among LCA results from different geothermal systems and other renewable energy technologies.

A Guideline for Life Cycle Assessment of Carbon Capture and Utilization

Carbon Capture and Utilization (CCU) is an emerging field proposed for emissions mitigation and even negative emissions. These potential benefits need to be assessed by the holistic method of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) that accounts for multiple environmental impact categories over the entire life cycle of products or services. However, even though LCA is a standardized method, current LCA practice differs widely in methodological choices. The resulting LCA studies show large variability which limits their value for decision support. Applying LCA to CCU technologies leads to further specific methodological issues, e.g., due to the double role of CO2 as emission and feedstock. In this work, we therefore present a comprehensive guideline for LCA of CCU technologies. The guideline has been development in a collaborative process involving over 40 experts and builds upon existing LCA standards and guidelines. The presented guidelines should improve comparability of LCA studies through clear methodological guidance and predefined assumptions on feedstock and utilities. Transparency is increased through interpretation and reporting guidance. Improved comparability should help to strengthen knowledge-based decision-making. Consequently, research funds and time can be allocated more efficiently for the development of technologies for climate change mitigation and negative emissions.

Life cycle assessment of emerging technologies: A review

AbstractIn recent literature, prospective application of life cycle assessment (LCA) at low technology readiness levels (TRL) has gained immense interest for its potential to enable development of emerging technologies with improved environmental performances. However, limited data, uncertain functionality, scale up issues and uncertainties make it very challenging for the standard LCA guidelines to evaluate emerging technologies and requires methodological advances in the current LCA framework. In this paper, we review published literature to identify major methodological challenges and key research efforts to resolve these issues with a focus on recent developments in five major areas: cross‐study comparability, data availability and quality, scale‐up issues, uncertainty and uncertainty communication, and assessment time. We also provide a number of recommendations for future research to support the evaluation of emerging technologies at low technology readiness levels: (a) the development of a consistent framework and reporting methods for LCA of emerging technologies; (b) the integration of other tools with LCA, such as multicriteria decision analysis, risk analysis, technoeconomic analysis; and (c) the development of a data repository for emerging materials, processes, and technologies.

Review of Methodological Choices in LCA-Based Textile and Apparel Rating Tools: Key Issues and Recommendations Relating to Assessment of Fabrics Made From Natural Fibre Types

Life cycle assessment (LCA) is a key tool for determining environmental impacts for textiles and apparel and is the basis for the publicly available Higg Material Sustainability Index (MSI) developed by the Sustainable Apparel Coalition (SAC). This paper reviews and evaluates the Higg MSI with respect to rating of fabrics made from natural fibre types, with the aim of providing a constructive analysis of methodological issues identified by comparison with the International Standards and LCA guidelines. The major issues identified by the review were: (1) lack of sufficient guidance for comparative analysis and public disclosure; (2) incomplete system boundaries and the choice of functional unit; (3) the choice of attributional LCA methods and variable methods applied for handling multi-functionality; (4) use of generalised data and small datasets, without reported sensitivity or uncertainty; (5) exclusion of important impact categories, choice of LCIA methods and lack of coverage of non-LCA assessed issues; and (6) the choice of the weighting and normalisation approach. This review found that the provision of, and adherence to the appropriate standards and best practice in LCA would rectify most of these issues. To achieve the laudable aims of the Higg MSI, further development and refinement is needed to ensure robust information is provided to improve the sustainability of textiles.

Guidelines for evaluating the environmental performance of Product/Service-Systems through life cycle assessment

Product/Service-Systems (PSS) such as integrated solutions, performance-based contracts or sharing systems are often proposed as means to enable improved environmental sustainability. However, PSS are not necessarily environmentally benign compared to conventional systems. Quantitative environmental performance evaluations of PSS are hence needed. Life cycle assessment (LCA) is a commonly used method for environmental performance evaluation. However, applying LCA in the context of PSS requires specific considerations, which are not sufficiently addressed by current LCA guidelines. In this article, we propose a set of guidelines consisting of six steps, which elaborates the LCA process with respect to the specific consideration for PSS assessment. The guidelines were developed based on identified challenges for the application of LCA on PSS, a review of existing LCAs on PSS case studies, expert consultations, case study applications, and structured user feedback. The use of the guidelines is demonstrated on three exemplifying cases, covering three different scopes for PSS evaluation. By applying the guidelines, the risk of biased results, predictable rebound effects and significant cut-of errors should be reduced. Future work includes evaluating the guidelines through full-scale case applications and further development of dynamic and prospective modelling approaches for assessing systemic consequences and rebound effects.

Quantification of environmental impacts of domestic wastewater treatment using life cycle assessment: A review

Abstract Life cycle assessment (LCA) is an analytical tool used to quantify the overall environmental impacts associated with products, processes or human activities from cradle to grave. The LCA is important to determine the impact of wastewater treatment and the technologies used on human health and the environment. It performs well to find the best solutions to improve the sustainability. Therefore, it is important to review how previous studies on wastewater treatment have applied LCA. This paper presents a wide-ranging review of papers published from 1990 to 2016 that have used a range of LCA to cover the objectives, boundaries, functional units (FUs) and life cycle impact assessment(LCIA) of wastewater treatment. The analysis of the reviewed papers revealed that there are some differences in term of the FUs, system boundaries, and LCIA methods. These differences normally contribute to obtaining a few non-prosaic results. Moreover, the FUs adopted in some reviewed studies were not able to achieve the purpose of providing a reference to ensure compatibility of the results. Therefore, it is highly recommended that more attention is paid to choosing the FU in future studies. Thus, to ensure the quality and comparability of LCAs, it is very important to develop the LCA guidelines and standards and the LCIA impact categories.

Life cycle assessment of hydrogen energy systems: a review of methodological choices

As a first step towards a consistent framework for both individual and comparative life cycle assessment (LCA) of hydrogen energy systems, this work performs a thorough literature review on the methodological choices made in LCA studies of these energy systems. Choices affecting the LCA stages “goal and scope definition”, “life cycle inventory analysis” (LCI) and “life cycle impact assessment” (LCIA) are targeted. This review considers 97 scientific papers published until December 2015, in which 509 original case studies of hydrogen energy systems are found. Based on the hydrogen production process, these case studies are classified into three technological categories: thermochemical, electrochemical and biological. A subdivision based on the scope of the studies is also applied, thus distinguishing case studies addressing hydrogen production only, hydrogen production and use in mobility and hydrogen production and use for power generation. Most of the hydrogen energy systems apply cradle/gate-to-gate boundaries, while cradle/gate-to-grave boundaries are found mainly for hydrogen use in mobility. The functional unit is usually mass- or energy-based for cradle/gate-to-gate studies and travelled distance for cradle/gate-to-grave studies. Multifunctionality is addressed mainly through system expansion and, to a lesser extent, physical allocation. Regarding LCI, scientific literature and life cycle databases are the main data sources for both background and foreground processes. Regarding LCIA, the most common impact categories evaluated are global warming and energy consumption through the IPCC and VDI methods, respectively. The remaining indicators are often evaluated using the CML family methods. The level of agreement of these trends with the available FC-HyGuide guidelines for LCA of hydrogen energy systems depends on the specific methodological aspect considered. This review on LCA of hydrogen energy systems succeeded in finding relevant trends in methodological choices, especially regarding the frequent use of system expansion and secondary data under production-oriented attributional approaches. These trends are expected to facilitate methodological decision making in future LCA studies of hydrogen energy systems. Furthermore, this review may provide a basis for the definition of a methodological framework to harmonise the LCA results of hydrogen available so far in the literature.

A bibliometric overview of Brazilian LCA research

We bibliometrically evaluated the scientific literature outlined around Brazilian life cycle assessment (LCA). Our aim is twofold: (1) Analyze the Brazilian scientific literature on LCA, forming a current view of how the LCA methodology is applied in the country; (2) within this view, trace the evolution of themes, characterize institution collaboration, and indicate major influences in Brazilian LCA community. Data were outlined around academic production and publications, from 1993 to 2015, indexed by the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI- SCIE and SSCI) through a specific group of keywords. Initially, a temporal evolution and projection of papers, PhD and Master Theses, were performed. In sequence, indexed papers were analyzed through performance indicators (i.e., number of authors, impact factor, among others) and content evaluation (for instance, major addressed themes). Finally, a mapping of science was performed, with the aid of Cite Space software application, where coword (and evolution), cocollaboration (and evolution), and cocitation maps were created. The survey identified 429 documents divided among international and national papers, PhD and Master Theses. From those documents, 165 were indexed. In terms of production and performance, the results indicate an undeniable evolution of the Brazilian LCA research, as affirmed by relations solidified through time. The main research field is “LCA application” with 84 % of papers, whereas “LCA methodology” completes the framework. In LCA applications, 25 % of publications are related to Biofuels—divided into bioethanol and biodiesel—which makes it the current dominant LCA research area in Brazil. The collaboration network demonstrates three main institution groups, whereas evolution through the years indicates that this situation may further improve. Influential authors are linked to LCA of biofuels, general LCA guidelines, and methodological LCA developments. Brazilian LCA research has been growing and more complex relations between themes and institutions denote that further developments can be expected. Cocollaboration indicates three main clusters, led by USP, Unicamp, and UFRJ. “Biofuels” is the main research area where sugarcane ethanol and biodiesel from different sources are the domain product systems. Cocitation analysis solidifies this statement, pointing to Isaias Macedo (and other biofuel researchers) as the main author in Brazilian LCA after ISO and Mark Goedkoop.

Quantifying the potential contribution of soil carbon to orchard carbon footprints

Increasing soil carbon is promoted to growers as a means of increasing soil function and mitigating climate change. However, the importance of soil carbon is not yet fully acknowledged in life cycle assessment guidelines. Because of their perennial nature and deep rooting systems, orchards have the potential to increase subsoil carbon stocks below 0.3 m depth. Quantifying soil carbon stocks at the orchard scale, however, requires sampling protocols that incorporate the spatial variability of carbon in orchards. We have investigated soil carbon stocks to 1 m depth in apple orchards in Australia and New Zealand and found that total carbon stocks were maintained over four to 12 years. Orchard floor management practices can create a spatial distribution of shallow soil carbon stocks, and we observed a trend for decreasing surface-soil carbon stocks under the alley. Additionally, we determined soil carbon stocks to 9 m depth in a New Zealand kiwifruit orchard and calculated an increase of 190 t C ha-1 after 30 years compared with that in the nearby pasture soil that was the antecedent land-use. This increase in soil carbon equates to 42% of the carbon footprint of New Zealand kiwifruit on United Kingdom supermarket shelves. Therefore, accurately quantifying soil carbon stock changes under orchard systems presents a potential opportunity to reduce horticultural carbon footprints.

Challenges when evaluating Product/Service-Systems through Life Cycle Assessment

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is a state-of-the-art method for conducting environmental assessments of systems, whether these consist of goods or services, or a combination of the two. However, current LCA guidelines focus on assessing tangible products and lack specific attention to more complex systems, such as Product/Service-Systems (PSS), which also consist of intangible elements. PSS imply a shift in business paradigm from selling specific products to delivering a function, through a mix of products and services, thereby incentivising resource efficiency as well as user satisfaction. Despite their potential to reduce environmental impacts, PSS are not by default more environmentally benign compared to conventional systems, and quantifications of their environmental performance are called for. This paper contributes by showing that specific challenges need to be addressed when using LCA to evaluate the environmental performance of PSS. We identify a set of PSS characteristics that can challenge an LCA study. Three relevant scopes are distinguished, where LCA may be applied: (1) evaluating options within the PSS itself; (2) comparing a PSS with an alternative; and (3) modelling the actual contextual changes caused by the PSS. We derive three pronounced challenges when conducting LCA within the three scopes: (i) identifying and defining the reference system; (ii) defining the functional unit; and (iii) setting system boundaries. We elaborate on how these challenges are discussed in current literature. Recommended future work includes developing adapted guidelines and further empirical case studies that quantify the environmental changes and impacts caused by introducing PSS.

LCA study of unconsumed food and the influence of consumer behavior

In the light of anthropogenic resource depletion and the resulting influences on the greenhouse effect as well as globally occurring famine, food waste has garnered increased public interest in recent years. The aim of this study is to analyze the environmental impacts of food waste and to determine to what extent consumers’ behavior influences the environmental burden of food consumption in households. A life cycle assessment (LCA) study of three food products is conducted, following the ISO 14040/44 life cycle assessment guidelines. This study addresses the impact categories climate change (GWP100), eutrophication (EP), and acidification (AP). Primary energy demand (PED) is also calculated. For adequate representation of consumer behavior, scenarios based on various consumer types are generated in the customer stage. The customer stage includes the food-related activities: shopping, storage, preparation, and disposal of food products as well as the disposal of the sales packaging. If the consumer acts careless towards the environment, the customer stage appears as the main hotspot in the LCA of food products. The environmental impact of food products can be reduced in the customer stage by an environmentally conscious consumer. Shopping has the highest effect on the evaluated impact categories and the PED. Additionally, consumers can reduce the resulting emissions by decreasing the electric energy demand, particularly concerning food storage or preparation. Moreover, results show that the avoidance of wasting unconsumed food can reduce the environmental impact significantly. Results of this study show that the influence of consumer behavior on the LCA results is important. The customer stage of food products should not be overlooked in LCA studies. To enable comparison among results of other LCA studies, the LCA community needs to develop a common methodology for modeling consumer behavior.