IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i15p9484-d878484.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Explaining the Differences between the Environmental Impacts of 44 French Artisanal Cheeses

Author

Listed:
  • Adeline Cortesi

    (Université Paris-Saclay, INRAE, AgroParisTech, UMR SayFood, 91120 Palaiseau, France)

  • Laure Dijoux

    (Université Paris-Saclay, INRAE, AgroParisTech, UMR SayFood, 91120 Palaiseau, France)

  • Gwenola Yannou-Le Bris

    (Université Paris-Saclay, INRAE, AgroParisTech, UMR SayFood, 91120 Palaiseau, France)

  • Caroline Pénicaud

    (Université Paris-Saclay, INRAE, AgroParisTech, UMR SayFood, 91120 Palaiseau, France)

Abstract

Cheese production causes significant environmental impacts, which have to be reduced. In France, a lot of different cheeses are available, made from different milks but also from different cheese technologies. The goal of this study was to understand the origin of the environmental impact variation between cheeses made from different technologies and milks and produced using different ripening practices. To do so, the environmental impacts of 44 different types of French artisanal cheese, all produced under protected designation of origin (PDO) labels, were assessed using the life cycle assessment. Cheese technologies were fully described and two ripening scenarios were investigated. Results show that the differences of environmental impacts between cheeses mainly come from: the milk type (cow, goat, or sheep), the milk amount needed to produce one kilogram of cheese, the energetic performance of the ripening room, and the ripening time. Such results could be useful to cheesemakers to identify the origin of the environmental impacts of their products and to implement effective actions to reduce them. According to the results, innovations leading to the reduction in electrical consumption during ripening are interesting to explore in order to increase the environmental performance of a cheese.

Suggested Citation

  • Adeline Cortesi & Laure Dijoux & Gwenola Yannou-Le Bris & Caroline Pénicaud, 2022. "Explaining the Differences between the Environmental Impacts of 44 French Artisanal Cheeses," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-19, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:15:p:9484-:d:878484
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/15/9484/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/15/9484/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Poinssot, Ch. & Bourg, S. & Ouvrier, N. & Combernoux, N. & Rostaing, C. & Vargas-Gonzalez, M. & Bruno, J., 2014. "Assessment of the environmental footprint of nuclear energy systems. Comparison between closed and open fuel cycles," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 199-211.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Juliette Huguet & Christophe Chassard & René Lavigne & Françoise Irlinger & Isabelle Souchon & Stephan Marette & Anne Saint-Eve & Caroline Pénicaud, 2023. "Environmental performance of mixed animal and plant protein sources for designing new fermented foods," Post-Print hal-04132788, HAL.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Akhil Kadiyala & Raghava Kommalapati & Ziaul Huque, 2016. "Quantification of the Lifecycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Nuclear Power Generation Systems," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-13, October.
    2. Zhongwen Pan & Zhigang Wang & Xiaoxiang Li & Jingrong Li & Yujiao Zhou, 2022. "Space-Time Pattern of Coupling Coordination between Environmental Regulation and Green Water Resource Efficiency in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-16, August.
    3. Rigby, Aidan & Lindley, Ben & Cullen, Jonathan, 2023. "An exergy based assessment of the efficiency of nuclear fuel cycles," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 264(C).
    4. Lee, Young Duk & Ahn, Kook Young & Morosuk, Tatiana & Tsatsaronis, George, 2015. "Environmental impact assessment of a solid-oxide fuel-cell-based combined-heat-and-power-generation system," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 455-466.
    5. Miller, Lindsay & Carriveau, Rupp, 2017. "Balancing the carbon and water footprints of the Ontario energy mix," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 562-568.
    6. Bohdanowicz, Zbigniew & Łopaciuk-Gonczaryk, Beata & Gajda, Paweł & Rajewski, Adam, 2023. "Support for nuclear power and proenvironmental attitudes: The cases of Germany and Poland," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    7. Juliette Huguet & Christophe Chassard & René Lavigne & Françoise Irlinger & Isabelle Souchon & Stephan Marette & Anne Saint-Eve & Caroline Pénicaud, 2023. "Environmental performance of mixed animal and plant protein sources for designing new fermented foods," Post-Print hal-04132788, HAL.
    8. Jérôme Serp & Christophe Poinssot & Stéphane Bourg, 2017. "Assessment of the Anticipated Environmental Footprint of Future Nuclear Energy Systems. Evidence of the Beneficial Effect of Extensive Recycling," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-19, September.
    9. Bruno Merk & Dzianis Litskevich & Anna Detkina & Omid Noori-kalkhoran & Lakshay Jain & Elfriede Derrer-Merk & Daliya Aflyatunova & Greg Cartland-Glover, 2023. "iMAGINE—Visions, Missions, and Steps for Successfully Delivering the Nuclear System of the 21st Century," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-16, March.
    10. Jin, Yi & Behrens, Paul & Tukker, Arnold & Scherer, Laura, 2019. "Water use of electricity technologies: A global meta-analysis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    11. Mohan, Aniruddh, 2017. "Whose land is it anyway? Energy futures & land use in India," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 257-262.
    12. Federica Cucchiella & Alessia Condemi & Marianna Rotilio & Valeria Annibaldi, 2021. "Energy Transitions in Western European Countries: Regulation Comparative Analysis," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-23, July.
    13. Bruno Merk & Dzianis Litskevich & Karl R. Whittle & Mark Bankhead & Richard J. Taylor & Dan Mathers, 2017. "On a Long Term Strategy for the Success of Nuclear Power," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-21, June.
    14. Frederik Reitsma & Peter Woods & Martin Fairclough & Yongjin Kim & Harikrishnan Tulsidas & Luis Lopez & Yanhua Zheng & Ahmed Hussein & Gerd Brinkmann & Nils Haneklaus & Anand Rao Kacham & Tumuluri Sre, 2018. "On the Sustainability and Progress of Energy Neutral Mineral Processing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-18, January.
    15. Robin Taylor & William Bodel & Gregg Butler, 2022. "A Review of Environmental and Economic Implications of Closing the Nuclear Fuel Cycle—Part Two: Economic Impacts," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-31, March.
    16. Karaveli, Abdullah Bugrahan & Soytas, Ugur & Akinoglu, Bulent G., 2015. "Comparison of large scale solar PV (photovoltaic) and nuclear power plant investments in an emerging market," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 656-665.
    17. Aleksandra Schwenk-Ferrero & Andrei Andrianov, 2017. "Comparison and Screening of Nuclear Fuel Cycle Options in View of Sustainable Performance and Waste Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-31, September.
    18. Bruno Merk & Anna Detkina & Dzianis Litskevich & Maulik Patel & Omid Noori-kalkhoran & Gregory Cartland-Glover & Olga Efremova & Mark Bankhead & Claude Degueldre, 2022. "A First Step towards Zero Nuclear Waste—Advanced Strategic Thinking in Light of iMAGINE," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-21, September.
    19. Dungan, K. & Gregg, R.W.H. & Morris, K. & Livens, F.R. & Butler, G., 2021. "Assessment of the disposability of radioactive waste inventories for a range of nuclear fuel cycles: Inventory and evolution over time," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 221(C).
    20. Hassan, Syed Tauseef & Khan, Danish & Zhu, Bangzhu & Batool, Bushra, 2022. "Is public service transportation increase environmental contamination in China? The role of nuclear energy consumption and technological change," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 238(PC).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:15:p:9484-:d:878484. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.