IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i13p5913-d1688626.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Carbon and Water Footprint Assessment of a Pea Snack

Author

Listed:
  • Josemi G. Penalver

    (Institute for Sustainability & Food Chain Innovation (IS-FOOD), Public University of Navarra (UPNA), Jerónimo de Ayanz Building, Arrosadia Campus, 31006 Pamplona, Spain
    Agronomy, Biotechnology and Food Department, Public University of Navarra (UPNA), Arrosadia Campus, 31006 Pamplona, Spain)

  • Maria Jose Beriain

    (Institute for Sustainability & Food Chain Innovation (IS-FOOD), Public University of Navarra (UPNA), Jerónimo de Ayanz Building, Arrosadia Campus, 31006 Pamplona, Spain
    Agronomy, Biotechnology and Food Department, Public University of Navarra (UPNA), Arrosadia Campus, 31006 Pamplona, Spain)

  • Paloma Vírseda

    (Institute for Sustainability & Food Chain Innovation (IS-FOOD), Public University of Navarra (UPNA), Jerónimo de Ayanz Building, Arrosadia Campus, 31006 Pamplona, Spain
    Agronomy, Biotechnology and Food Department, Public University of Navarra (UPNA), Arrosadia Campus, 31006 Pamplona, Spain)

  • Maite M. Aldaya

    (Institute for Sustainability & Food Chain Innovation (IS-FOOD), Public University of Navarra (UPNA), Jerónimo de Ayanz Building, Arrosadia Campus, 31006 Pamplona, Spain
    Science Department, Public University of Navarra (UPNA), Arrosadia Campus, 31006 Pamplona, Spain)

Abstract

The agri-food sector in Navarra, Spain, is exploring alternative protein sources like pea protein due to concerns regarding the environmental impacts and allergenic properties of traditional options like soy. This study aimed to evaluate a pea-based snack using carbon footprint and water footprint methodologies to assess the environmental performance of pea extrusion. The carbon footprint of the pea snacks was found to be 0.12 kg of CO 2 e per 100 g of packaged product. The water footprint was 174 L per 100 g of packaged product, with the blue water footprint accounting for the largest share (52%), followed by green (47%) and grey (1%) water footprints. Strategies such as minimizing ingredient loss and switching to renewable electricity could potentially reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 17% and green water consumption by 3%. Regarding alternative protein matrices, pea extrusion utilized 225 L of water per 150 g of extrudate, primarily as green water, demonstrating a lower dependence on blue and grey water compared to soy-based alternatives, suggesting its suitability for blue water-scarce regions. The carbon and water footprint assessments highlight the potential of pea protein as a regionally suitable, low-impact alternative to soy in terms of both carbon and water use.

Suggested Citation

  • Josemi G. Penalver & Maria Jose Beriain & Paloma Vírseda & Maite M. Aldaya, 2025. "Carbon and Water Footprint Assessment of a Pea Snack," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(13), pages 1-16, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:13:p:5913-:d:1688626
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/13/5913/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/13/5913/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Abhishek Chaudhary & Denis Tremorin, 2020. "Nutritional and Environmental Sustainability of Lentil Reformulated Beef Burger," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-18, August.
    2. Ujué Fresán & Maximino Alfredo Mejia & Winston J Craig & Karen Jaceldo-Siegl & Joan Sabaté, 2019. "Meat Analogs from Different Protein Sources: A Comparison of Their Sustainability and Nutritional Content," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-10, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Bry-Chevalier, Tom, 2024. "Comparing the potential of meat alternatives for a more sustainable food system," OSF Preprints ze5yt, Center for Open Science.
    2. Anne Charlotte Bunge & Rachel Mazac & Michael Clark & Amanda Wood & Line Gordon, 2024. "Sustainability benefits of transitioning from current diets to plant-based alternatives or whole-food diets in Sweden," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-10, December.
    3. Pingali, Prabhu & Boiteau, Jocelyn & Choudhry, Abhinav & Hall, Aaron, 2023. "Making meat and milk from plants: A review of plant-based food for human and planetary health," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    4. Diana Bogueva & David Julian McClements, 2023. "Safety and Nutritional Risks Associated with Plant-Based Meat Alternatives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-28, September.
    5. Denise Ott & Shashank Goyal & Rosmarie Reuss & Herwig O. Gutzeit & Jens Liebscher & Jens Dautz & Margo Degieter & Hans Steur & Emanuele Zannini, 2023. "LCA as decision support tool in the food and feed sector: evidence from R&D case studies," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 129-141, March.
    6. repec:osf:osfxxx:ze5yt_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Tiboldo, Giulia & Boehm, Rebecca & Shah, Farhed & Moro, Daniele & Castellari, Elena, 2022. "Taxing the heat out of the U.S. food system," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    8. Magdalena Wróbel-Jędrzejewska & Joanna Markowska & Agata Bieńczak & Paweł Woźniak & Łukasz Ignasiak & Elżbieta Polak & Katarzyna Kozłowicz & Renata Różyło, 2021. "Carbon Footprint in Vegeburger Production Technology Using a Prototype Forming and Breading Device," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-18, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:17:y:2025:i:13:p:5913-:d:1688626. 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.