Screening of the data sets against the reporting template indicated that none of the identified data sets are currently reported in sufficient detail to warrant inclusion in the CALDC. Identification of available Canadian agri-food LCI data sets indicated a high degree of coverage in the field crop sector, and the need for significant further development with respect to data in the livestock, poultry, dairy, and agricultural support sectors. The identified data-reporting template contained 65 mandatory fields for LCI data, 58 of which related to metadata. This screening focused, in particular on metadata, and the identification of potential areas of improvement in metadata reporting. These data sets were classified by process type and geography, and then screened on the basis of their reported metadata against the identified reporting template to determine which data sets are currently reported in sufficient detail to warrant inclusion in the CALDC. Canadian agri-food-related practitioners at academic, government and industry organizations were then identified via web and literature searches, along with associated, publicly available resources containing Canadian agri-food LCI data tables. MethodsĪ data-reporting template was developed based on comparison of the ILCD and ecoSpold2 data-reporting formats, which contains all fields required for minimum compliance with both formats.
We address this issue through identification and evaluation of publicly available Canadian agri-food LCI data for possible inclusion in the forthcoming Canadian Agri-food Life-Cycle Data Centre (CALDC). Canadian agri-food LCA research has been limited by the unavailability of common life cycle inventory (LCI) data resources characterizing processes in Canadian-specific supply chains.
Their emission, energy and economic factors are available for viewing in units of metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2E), million BTU, labor hours, wage dollars and tax dollars.Food systems are key drivers of environmental impacts, which may be assessed using life cycle assessment (LCA). WARM now recognizes 60 material types, which are presented in the table below. WARM Background Documents - provide information on using WARM emission, energy and economic factors for materials and pathways that are not in the model. WARM can be used by individuals and organizations ranging from state and local governments, solid waste planners, students, small businesses, and other organizations interested in the GHG, energy and economic impacts frm materials management decisions. WARM helps solid waste planners and organizations track and voluntarily report greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions, energy savings and economic impacts from six different waste management practices including source reduction, recycling, composting, anaerobic digestion, combustion and landfilling. Users may refer to the model history to better understand the differences among various versions of WARM. WARM is periodically updated as new information becomes available and new material types are added.
ton) of aluminum cans instead of landfilling them would be calculated as follows: (1 short ton × -9.13 MTCO2E/short ton) - (1 short ton × 0.02 MTCO2E/short ton) = -9.15 MTCO2E
For example, the GHG savings of recycling one (1) short ton (standard U.S. GHG savings are calculated by comparing the emissions associated with managing materials under an alternative scenario with the emissions associated with the user’s baseline scenario (i.e., current practices), as opposed to simply multiplying the quantity of materials managed by an emission factor. WARM is also available as a downloadable Microsoft Excel spreadsheet.
WARM is currently available as a tool based on a database developed in open life cycle assessment (openLCA) software, with versions available for both Windows and Macintosh users.