Fundacion Tatiana Catedra etica ambiental UAH Universidad de Alcala
CO2Web Observatorio Online
FOOD
Alimentos
What do the calculations include?

We have carried out an exhaustive analysis of the references published in the scientific literature on GH of the life cycle of the different foods we consume. Since CF is closely related to the origin of the product (close or very distant cultivation), the type of manufacture (handling processes from cultivation to packaging), and transport and storage, the same food can give rise to varied values ​​of CF. Therefore, when we have found several calculations for the same group, we considered including the average values, which at least give an idea of ​​the differences between types of food, as well as the minimum and maximum, to indicate that there may be a variation -sometimes considerable- depending on the process they have followed. Obviously, a product grown locally and processed in a factory fed with renewable energy does not have the same CF compared to another that is imported and has been produced with high emission energies.

We divide the analysis in an initial table, by food groups, and in other more specific with each product.

Emissions by food group

(Value in kgCO2e / kg product)

FOOD GROUPS MEDIUM EMISSIONS MINIMUM EMISSIONS MAXIMUM EMISSIONS
VALUE PRODUCT VALUE PRODUCT
Oil and sauces 0,97 0,54 Sunflower oil
 1,44 Olive oil
Beverage 1,67 0,10 Bottled water
 7,04 Tea (kg)
Meat 17,19 3,09 Duck
 73,86 Buffalo
Cereals 0,85 0,29 Rape
 2,66 Rice
Sweets 2,28 0,96 Honey
 4,80 Almond chocolate
Fresh fruits 0,91 0,22 Lemon and lime
 7,47 Raspberry
Nuts 1,26 0,43 Hazelnut
 1,74 Almonds
Vegetables and legumes 0,75 0,18 Beet
Celery
Onion
 3,81 Cocoa
Dairy products 4,80 1,34 Cow milk
 11,52 Butter
Seafood 10,48 1,58 Mussels
 21,24 Lobster
Fish 6,23 1,10 Sardine
 20,86 Sole fish

Vegetables and legumes

(Value in kgCO2e / kg product)
(Click on emission values to check the origin of this value and the link to the document where it was published)

FOOD GROUP MEDIUM EMISSION MIN EMISSION MAX EMISSION
FOOD GROUP MEDIUM EMISSION MIN EMISSION MAX EMISSION
VALUE CALCULATION LOCATION VALUE CALCULATION LOCATION
Lettuce 0,81 0,13
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Sweden 4,73
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
UK
Asparagus 0,95 0,38
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Swiss 2,54
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Australia
Broccoli 0,70 0,37
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Sweden 1,73
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Australia
Zucchini 0,87 0,09
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Sweden 1,94
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Italy
Cucumber 0,72 0,08
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Sweden 1,74
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Swiss
Pickles 0,72 0,13
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Swiss 2,12
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Netherlands
Beans 0,60 0,22
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Greece 1,55
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
UK
Chickpea 0,67 0,45
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
USA 0,80
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
UK
Lentils 1,03 1,00
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Australia 1,06
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
UK
Green peas 0,36 0,20
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Sweden 0,51
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
UK
Carrots 0,21 0,04
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Sweden 0,50
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Sweden
Artichoke 0,48 0,48
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
EU 0,48
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
EU
Beet 0,18 0,11
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Sweden 0,24
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Australia
Cabbages 0,30 0,12
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Sweden 0,42
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Swiss
Pepper 1,08 0,23
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Australia 3,80
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Japan
Celery 0,18 0,18
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Australia 0,18
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Australia
Eggplant 1,30 1,30
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Swiss 1,30
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Swiss
Garlic 0,57 0,57
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
UK 0,57
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Netherland
Mushrooms 0,80 0,06
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Australia 1,86
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Netherland
Onion 0,18 0,06
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Sweden 0,37
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
UK
Potatoes 0,20 0,08
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Sweden 0,36
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
UK
Pumpkin 0,33 0,15
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Germany 0,73
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Germany
Spinach 0,54 0,18
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Swiss 0,91
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Japan
Tomatoes 1,25 0,17
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain 6,12
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
UK
Processed tomato 0,87 0,87
Theurl, M. C., Haberl, H., Erb, K.-H., & Lindenthal, T. (2014). Contrasted greenhouse gas emissions from local versus long-range tomato production Agronomy for Sustainable Development (Vol. 34(3), pp. 593602).
Italy 0,87
Theurl, M. C., Haberl, H., Erb, K.-H., & Lindenthal, T. (2014). Contrasted greenhouse gas emissions from local versus long-range tomato production Agronomy for Sustainable Development (Vol. 34(3), pp. 593602).
Italy
Green beans 0,63 0,24
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain 1,55
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
UK
Cocoa 3,81 3,81
ADEME (2018). Agribalyse program. French Environment & Energy Management Agency.
France 3,81
ADEME (2018). Agribalyse program. French Environment & Energy Management Agency.
France

Fresh fruits

(Values in kgCO2e/kg product)

FOOD GROUP MEDIUM EMISSION MIN EMISSION MAX EMISSION
FOOD GROUP MEDIUM EMISSION MIN EMISSION MAX EMISSION
VALUE CALCULATION LOCATION VALUE CALCULATION LOCATION
Apple 0,36 0,18
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
New Zeland 0,89
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
France
Apricot 0,43 0,43
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
EU 0,43
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
EU
Avocado 0,87 0,43
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
EU 1,30
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Switzerland
Banana 0,79 0,42
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Ecuador 1,37
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Costa Rica
Redcurrant 0,84 0,84
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
UK 0,84
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
UK
Cherry 0,34 0,26
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Sweden 0,45
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
USA
Grapes 0,41 0,15
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain 0,88
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Japan
Kiwi 0,47 0,28
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
New Zeland 0,83
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Greece
Lemon and lime 0,22 0,18
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Italy 0,26
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Italy
Melon 0,95 0,30
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Switzerland 1,43
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Italy
Olives 0,56 0,22
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Italy 0,85
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Italy
Oranges 0,33 0,18
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Italy 0,59
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain
Peach y nectarine 0,54 0,38
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain 0,81
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Japan
Pears 0,27 0,19
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
China 0,34
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
China
Pineapple 0,72 0,40
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Switzerland 1,78
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
UK
Raspberry 7,47 7,30
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain 7,70
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
UK
Strawberry 0,89 0,20
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Austria 5,20
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Japan
Watermelon 0,38 0,38
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Australia 0,38
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Australia
Mandarin oranges 0,51 0,51
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
EU 0,51
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
EU

Nuts

(Values in kgCO2e/kg product)

FOOD GROUP MEDIUM EMISSION MIN EMISSION MAX EMISSION
FOOD GROUP MEDIUM EMISSION MIN EMISSION MAX EMISSION
VALUE CALCULATION LOCATION VALUE CALCULATION LOCATION
Blueberries 0,92 0,86
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
USA 0,97
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
USA
Almonds 1,74 0,51
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
USA 3,77
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
USA
Cashew nuts 1,72 1,37
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Brazil 2,27
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Netherland
Hazelnut 0,43 0,43
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
EU 0,43
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
EU
Peanuts 0,94 0,80
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
USA 1,33
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Netherland
Pistachios 1,53 0,88
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
UK 2,17
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
USA
Quinoa 1,15 1,10
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
USA 1,20
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
USA
Walnuts 1,62 0,50
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
USA 2,94
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
USA

Cereals

(Values in kgCO2e/kg product)

FOOD GROUP MEDIUM EMISSION MIN EMISSION MAX EMISSION
FOOD GROUP MEDIUM EMISSION MIN EMISSION MAX EMISSION
VALUE CALCULATION LOCATION VALUE CALCULATION LOCATION
Barley 0,54 0,30
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Sweden 0,98
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Norway
Corn 0,48 0,41
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain 0,66
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
USA
Millet 0,47 0,47
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
UK 0,47
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
UK
Oats 0,60 0,38
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
UK 0,87
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Sweden
Rape 0,29 0,29
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Australia 0,29
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Australia
Rice 2,66 0,66
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
USA 5,69
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Thailand
Rye 0,37 0,36
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Sweden 0,38
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
UK
Sesame 0,88 0,88
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
UK 0,88
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
UK
Sorghum 0,88 0,88
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
UK 0,88
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
UK
Soy 0,58 0,38
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Brazil 0,96
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Brazil
Wheat 0,50 0,18
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Australia 0,80
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
UK
Bread crumps (wheat) 1,25 1,25
Chuvieco, E.; Burgui, M.; Carrero, I.; Daz, E.; Labajo, V.; Valor, C. y Jimnez, R. (2018). Clculo y etiquetado de la huella de carbono en productos alimentarios (pp. 36): Ctedra de tica Ambiental FTPGB-UAH.
Spain 1,25
Chuvieco, E.; Burgui, M.; Carrero, I.; Daz, E.; Labajo, V.; Valor, C. y Jimnez, R. (2018). Clculo y etiquetado de la huella de carbono en productos alimentarios (pp. 36): Ctedra de tica Ambiental FTPGB-UAH.
Spain
Slice bread 1,11 1,11
Espinoza-Orias, N., Stichnothe, H., & Azapagic, A. (2011). The carbon footprint of bread The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment (Vol. 16(4), pp. 351365).
UK 1,11
Espinoza-Orias, N., Stichnothe, H., & Azapagic, A. (2011). The carbon footprint of bread The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment (Vol. 16(4), pp. 351365).
UK
Rye bread 0,80 0,80
MFVM (2009)
Denmark 0,80
MFVM (2009)
Denmark
Wheat flour 1,10 1,10
MFVM (2009)
Denmark 1,10
MFVM (2009)
Denmark
Rye flour 1,10 1,10
MFVM (2009)
Denmark 1,10
MFVM (2009)
Denmark

Dairy products

(Values in kgCO2e/kg product)

FOOD GROUP MEDIUM EMISSION MIN EMISSION MAX EMISSION
FOOD GROUP MEDIUM EMISSION MIN EMISSION MAX EMISSION
VALUE CALCULATION LOCATION VALUE CALCULATION LOCATION
Butter 11,52 3,70
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
UK 25,00
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Austria
Cheese 8,86 5,33
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Netherland 16,35
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
USA
Cream 5,32 2,10
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Canada 7,92
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Austria
Buffalo milk 3,75 2,87
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Italy 5,20
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Italy
Cow milk 1,34 0,54
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Norway 3,26
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Bangladesh
Goat milk 1,41 1,41
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
France 1,41
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
France
Yogurt 1,37 1,17
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Austria 1,78
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Portugal

Fish

(Values in kgCO2e/kg product)

FOOD GROUP MEDIUM EMISSION MIN EMISSION MAX EMISSION
FOOD GROUP MEDIUM EMISSION MIN EMISSION MAX EMISSION
VALUE CALCULATION LOCATION VALUE CALCULATION LOCATION
Alfonsino 3,49 3,49
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain 3,49
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain
Angler 12,29 10,43
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain 14,15
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain
Codfish 3,58 1,58
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Iceland 5,38
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Sweden
Eel 3,88 3,88
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain 3,88
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain
Hake 8,89 2,14
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain 14,15
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain
Roosterfish 6,41 1,20
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Denmark 11,61
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain
Sardine 1,10 0,78
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain 1,41
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain
Pout 2,77 1,20
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Sweden 3,84
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Norway
Swordfish 12,84 11,44
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain 14,24
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain
Common carp 1,80 1,73
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Indonesia 1,93
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Indonesia
Herring 1,17 0,98
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Norway 1,39
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Norway
Mackerel 2,00 0,94
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain 4,50
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain
Salmon 3,76 2,04
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Canada 8,33
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
UK
Bass 3,55 1,91
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Tunisia 5,76
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
France
Shark 11,50 11,44
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain 11,56
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain
Sole fish 20,86 20,86
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Denmark 20,86
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Denmark
Trout 3,73 1,37
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Germany 5,95
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
China
Tuna 3,78 2,56
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain 6,32
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain
Turbot / Brill 14,51 9,63
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
France 19,40
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain
Whiting fish 2,66 1,54
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain 3,79
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain

Seafood

(Values in kgCO2e/kg product)

FOOD GROUP MEDIUM EMISSION MIN EMISSION MAX EMISSION
FOOD GROUP MEDIUM EMISSION MIN EMISSION MAX EMISSION
VALUE CALCULATION LOCATION VALUE CALCULATION LOCATION
Lobster 21,24 7,62
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Sweden 28,30
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain
Mussels 1,58 0,28
Chuvieco, E.; Burgui, M.; Carrero, I.; Daz, E.; Labajo, V.; Valor, C. y Jimnez, R. (2018). Clculo y etiquetado de la huella de carbono en productos alimentarios (pp. 36): Ctedra de tica Ambiental FTPGB-UAH.
Spain 2,54
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Norway
Octopus 7,35 7,35
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain 7,35
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain
Prawns 15,56 5,25
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Thailand 38,00
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Senegal
Squid 6,65 6,39
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain 6,91
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain

Meat

(Values in kgCO2e/kg product)

FOOD GROUP MEDIUM EMISSION MIN EMISSION MAX EMISSION
FOOD GROUP MEDIUM EMISSION MIN EMISSION MAX EMISSION
VALUE CALCULATION LOCATION VALUE CALCULATION LOCATION
Beef / Veel 27,11 10,74
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Netherland 64,00
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Brazil
Buffalo 73,86 48,92
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
South America 100,72
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Southeast Asia
Chicken 3,91 1,06
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Latvia 9,98
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Australia
Duck 3,09 2,07
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Australia 4,10
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
UK
Kangaroo meat 4,10 4,10
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Australia 4,10
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Australia
Lamb 26,17 10,05
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Australia 56,70
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Spain
Pork 5,73 2,11
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Latvia 10,25
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
France
Rabbit 4,70 3,82
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
France 5,58
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Australia
Turkey 6,04 3,34
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Canada 8,49
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
UK

Oil and sauces

(Values in kgCO2e/kg product)

FOOD GROUP MEDIUM EMISSION MIN EMISSION MAX EMISSION
FOOD GROUP MEDIUM EMISSION MIN EMISSION MAX EMISSION
VALUE CALCULATION LOCATION VALUE CALCULATION LOCATION
Olive oil 1,44 1,22
Chuvieco, E.; Burgui, M.; Carrero, I.; Daz, E.; Labajo, V.; Valor, C. y Jimnez, R. (2018). Clculo y etiquetado de la huella de carbono en productos alimentarios (pp. 36): Ctedra de tica Ambiental FTPGB-UAH.
Spain 1,67
Chuvieco, E.; Burgui, M.; Carrero, I.; Daz, E.; Labajo, V.; Valor, C. y Jimnez, R. (2018). Clculo y etiquetado de la huella de carbono en productos alimentarios (pp. 36): Ctedra de tica Ambiental FTPGB-UAH.
Spain
Colza oil 0,94 0,94
ADEME (2018). Agribalyse program. French Environment & Energy Management Agency.
France 0,94
ADEME (2018). Agribalyse program. French Environment & Energy Management Agency.
France
Sunflower oil 0,54 0,54
ADEME (2018). Agribalyse program. French Environment & Energy Management Agency.
France 0,54
ADEME (2018). Agribalyse program. French Environment & Energy Management Agency.
France

Beverages

(Values in kgCO2e/kg product)

FOOD GROUP MEDIUM EMISSION MIN EMISSION MAX EMISSION
FOOD GROUP MEDIUM EMISSION MIN EMISSION MAX EMISSION
VALUE CALCULATION LOCATION VALUE CALCULATION LOCATION
Almond drink 0,42 0,39
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
USA 0,44
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
USA
Coconut milk 0,42 0,39
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
USA 0,44
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
USA
Soy milk / soya milk 0,88 0,66
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
USA 1,40
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
UK
Red wine 1,49 1,13
Navarro, A., Puig, R., K?l?, E., Penavayre, S., & Fullana-i-Palmer, P. (2017). Eco-innovation and benchmarking of carbon footprint data for vineyards and wineries in Spain and France Journal of Cleaner Production (Vol. 142(4), pp. 1661-1671).
Spain 1,92
Rinaldi, S., Bonamente, E., Scrucca, F., Merico, M. C., Asdrubali, F., & Cotana, F. (2016). Water and Carbon Footprint of Wine: Methodology Review and Application to a Case Study Sustainability (Vol. 8(7), pp. 621).
Italy
White wine 1,84 1,84
Rinaldi, S., Bonamente, E., Scrucca, F., Merico, M. C., Asdrubali, F., & Cotana, F. (2016). Water and Carbon Footprint of Wine: Methodology Review and Application to a Case Study Sustainability (Vol. 8(7), pp. 621).
Italy 1,84
Rinaldi, S., Bonamente, E., Scrucca, F., Merico, M. C., Asdrubali, F., & Cotana, F. (2016). Water and Carbon Footprint of Wine: Methodology Review and Application to a Case Study Sustainability (Vol. 8(7), pp. 621).
Italy
Beer 1,41 1,29
Cimini, A., & Moresi, M. (2018). Mitigation measures to minimize the cradle-to-grave beer carbon footprint as related to the brewery size and primary packaging materials Journal of Food Engineering (Vol. 236, pp. 1-8).
Italy 1,53
Cimini, A., & Moresi, M. (2018). Mitigation measures to minimize the cradle-to-grave beer carbon footprint as related to the brewery size and primary packaging materials Journal of Food Engineering (Vol. 236, pp. 1-8).
Italy
Bottled water 0,10 0,10
MFVM (2009)
Denmark 0,10
MFVM (2009)
Denmark
Carbonated soft drink 0,33 0,15
Amienyo, D., Gujba, H., Stichnothe, H., & Azapagic, A. (2013). Life cycle environmental impacts of carbonated soft drink The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment (Vol. 18(1), pp. 7792).
UK 0,56
Amienyo, D., Gujba, H., Stichnothe, H., & Azapagic, A. (2013). Life cycle environmental impacts of carbonated soft drink The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment (Vol. 18(1), pp. 7792).
UK
High alcohol liquor 2,97 2,07
Hallstrm, E., Hkansson, N., kesson, A., Wolk, A., & Sonesson, U. (2018). Climate impact of alcohol consumption in Sweden Journal of Cleaner Production (Vol. 201(10) pp. 287-294).
Sweden 3,88
Amienyo, D. (2012). Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment in the UK Beverage Sector. PhD Thesis. School of Chemical Engineering and Analytical Science. University of Manchester. Manchester (UK).
UK
Coffee (kg) 1,45 1,45
ADEME (2018). Agribalyse program. French Environment & Energy Management Agency.
France 1,45
ADEME (2018). Agribalyse program. French Environment & Energy Management Agency.
France
Tea (kg) 7,04 7,04
Hu, A. H., Chen, C.-H., Huang, L. H., Chung, M.-H., Lan, Y.-C., & Chen, Z. (2019). Environmental Impact and Carbon Footprint Assessment of Taiwanese Agricultural Products: A Case Study on Taiwanese Dongshan Tea Energies. Vol. 12 (138), pp. 1-13.
Taiwan 7,04
Hu, A. H., Chen, C.-H., Huang, L. H., Chung, M.-H., Lan, Y.-C., & Chen, Z. (2019). Environmental Impact and Carbon Footprint Assessment of Taiwanese Agricultural Products: A Case Study on Taiwanese Dongshan Tea Energies. Vol. 12 (138), pp. 1-13.
Taiwan

Sweets and others

(Values in kgCO2e/kg product)

FOOD GROUP MEDIUM EMISSION MIN EMISSION MAX EMISSION
FOOD GROUP MEDIUM EMISSION MIN EMISSION MAX EMISSION
VALUE CALCULATION LOCATION VALUE CALCULATION LOCATION
Almond chocolate 4,80 4,80
Volpe, R., Messineo, S., Volpe, M., & Messineo, A. (2015). Carbon Footprint of Tree Nuts Based Consumer Products Sustainability (Vol. 7(11), pp. 14917-14934).
Italy 4,80
Volpe, R., Messineo, S., Volpe, M., & Messineo, A. (2015). Carbon Footprint of Tree Nuts Based Consumer Products Sustainability (Vol. 7(11), pp. 14917-14934).
Italy
Chocolate-hazelnut 3,43 3,43
Volpe, R., Messineo, S., Volpe, M., & Messineo, A. (2015). Carbon Footprint of Tree Nuts Based Consumer Products Sustainability (Vol. 7(11), pp. 14917-14934).
Italy 3,43
Volpe, R., Messineo, S., Volpe, M., & Messineo, A. (2015). Carbon Footprint of Tree Nuts Based Consumer Products Sustainability (Vol. 7(11), pp. 14917-14934).
Italy
Peanut butter 1,93 1,93
Volpe, R., Messineo, S., Volpe, M., & Messineo, A. (2015). Carbon Footprint of Tree Nuts Based Consumer Products Sustainability (Vol. 7(11), pp. 14917-14934).
Italy 1,93
Volpe, R., Messineo, S., Volpe, M., & Messineo, A. (2015). Carbon Footprint of Tree Nuts Based Consumer Products Sustainability (Vol. 7(11), pp. 14917-14934).
Italy
Hazelnut cream chocolate 2,81 2,81
Volpe, R., Messineo, S., Volpe, M., & Messineo, A. (2015). Carbon Footprint of Tree Nuts Based Consumer Products Sustainability (Vol. 7(11), pp. 14917-14934).
Italy 2,81
Volpe, R., Messineo, S., Volpe, M., & Messineo, A. (2015). Carbon Footprint of Tree Nuts Based Consumer Products Sustainability (Vol. 7(11), pp. 14917-14934).
Italy
Ice cream 1,00 1,00
MFVM (2009)
Australia 1,00
MFVM (2009)
Australia
Sugar 1,00 1,00
MFVM (2009)
Denmark 1,00
MFVM (2009)
Denmark
Honey 0,96 0,40
Kendall, A.; Yuan, Juhong; Brodt, S.; Kramer, K. J. (2011). Carbon Footprint of U.S. Honey Production and Packing. Report to the National Honey Board. University of California-Davis (USA)/ KJKramer Consulting.
USA 2,50
Mujica, M.; Blanco, G.; Santalla, E. (2016). Carbon footprint of honey produced in Argentina. Journal of Cleaner Production, 116, 50-60 (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.12.086).
Argentina
Eggs (dozen) 1,50 1,30
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
Australia 5,80
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 140(2), pp. 766-783.
UK
Tobacco (gCO2e/cigarette) 14,00 14,00
Zafeiridou, M., Hopkins, N. S., & Voulvoulis, N. (2018). Cigarette Smoking: An Assessment of Tobaccos Global Environmental Footprint Across Its Entire Supply Chain Environmental Science & Technology (Vol. 52(15), pp. 8087-8094).
Global 14,00
Zafeiridou, M., Hopkins, N. S., & Voulvoulis, N. (2018). Cigarette Smoking: An Assessment of Tobaccos Global Environmental Footprint Across Its Entire Supply Chain Environmental Science & Technology (Vol. 52(15), pp. 8087-8094).
Global

Calculate emissions for different menus

CHOOSE A DISH

kgCO2e

STARTER

SECOND COURSE

DESSERT

DRINK

TOTAL: