Environmental impact potential of insect production chains for food and feed in Europe

Abstract

Insects can address sustainability issues associated with current food systems by providing an alternative protein source to address hunger and disease. Only the production systems that rely on side-stream heat and alternate energy sources may benefit from replacing compound feed production with insect value chains. Seventy-five percent to 93% of the effects of compound feed production on global warming potential, land use, and fossil resource shortages can be avoided. To fully assess the potential of insect production, it is critical to consider a wide range of sustainability indicators, including social, economic, and environmental aspects. The current food systems are facing several sustainability problems. One major issue is the environmental impact of food production, which contributes to climate change, deforestation, and biodiversity loss (Poore and Nemecek, 2018). Additionally, current food systems depend on finite resources, such as water and fossil fuels, which are becoming increasingly scarce. Moreover, the current food systems have a significantly negative impact on human health, particularly the increasing incidence of chronic diseases linked to the overconsumption of animal products (Willett, 2013). Furthermore, the current food systems are inequitable, as they often fail to provide adequate access to food for marginalized communities and contribute to social and economic inequality (UN, 2019). As a result, it is crucial to develop sustainable food systems that can provide nutritious food for a growing population while minimizing negative environmental and social impacts. Alternative proteins, such as plant-based, lab-grown meat and insects, can potentially address many of the sustainability issues associated with current food systems. For example, replacing animal-based products with plant-based alternatives has significantly reduced greenhouse gas emissions, land use, and water use associated with food production (Poore and Nemecek, 2018). Additionally, lab-grown meat has been proposed to reduce the environmental impact of meat production while still providing a high-quality source of protein (Post et al., 2020). Insects are also seen as a promising alternative protein source, they have a high nutritional value, are rich in protein, vitamins, and minerals, and have a lower environmental impact than traditional livestock (van Huis et al., 2013). Furthermore, alternative proteins can contribute to food security by reducing dependency on finite resources and increasing the resilience of food systems (Sexton, Garnett & Lorimer, 2019). Alternative proteins can also improve human health by providing nutritious food options and reducing the incidence of chronic diseases linked to the overconsumption of animal products (Willett, 2013) While life cycle assessment (LCA) studies and other specific information about insect production can provide valuable insights into the environmental and nutritional aspects of insect-based food systems, it is important to note that these studies do not provide a comprehensive understanding of the sustainability potential of insect production chains on a European level. Factors such as social acceptability, economic feasibility, and production scalability are also crucial to consider when evaluating the sustainability of insect production chains (Gjerris, Gamborg & Röcklinsberg, 2016; Veldkamp et al., 2022). Additionally, the results of LCA studies on insect production can be affected by several variables, such as insect species, the type of feed used, and the production method, which can lead to varying results (Smetana et al., 2021). Therefore, it is important to consider a wide range of sustainability indicators, including social, economic, and environmental aspects, to fully evaluate the potential of insect production as a sustainable food system on the European level. The aim of this study was to define the potential of insect production to improve the sustainability of the food system on the European level using a comprehensive assessment approach. This study relied on the FAO Sustainability Assessment of Food and Agriculture Systems (SAFA) guidelines to analyze published data on environmental indicators such as greenhouse gas emissions, land use, water use, biodiversity, energy, and animal welfare (FAO, 2014). SAFA is a comprehensive worldwide framework that evaluates sustainability across food and agriculture value chains. It serves as a universal benchmark for analyzing the interplay between various sustainability dimensions and identifying conflicts and opportunities for mutual benefits. By assessing these indicators, this study provides a holistic basis for the identification of the potential of insect production to tackle environmental hotspots of sustainable food systems on the European level. SAFA concentrates on supply chains and enterprise(s) as elements of those chains. The LCA approach focuses on the evaluation of the environmental impacts of a product through its lifecycle, and, therefore, is not always suitable for the sustainability analysis of regions and countries. Similarly to LCA, SAFA covers multiple components of inputs, outputs, and environmental impacts; however, its focus on a larger system scale (value chains) enables a more comprehensive consideration of the scope of good governance and social well-being of sustainability (SAFA). The current study concentrated only on the aspects of environmental integrity, including the quality of the atmosphere (greenhouse gas emissions), water, land, biodiversity, materials and energy, and animal welfare. The impact categories that have been selected are extensively used and established due to their rigorous research and inclusion in the most scientifically validated methodologies. By using these categories, the study can facilitate evidence-based decision-making towards sustainability and provide a more comprehensive assessment of environmental and social impacts. According to the SAFA guidelines, the food system should be analyzed from a few aspects of the environment. From the impacts on the condition of the atmosphere, we relied on the accounting of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. In some initial studies (van Huis et al. 2013), it is indicated that the GHG emissions per kilogram of insect protein were lower than those for beef and pork but higher than those for chicken and fish. Similarly, a study by van Loon et al. (2018) found that the GHG emissions per kilogram of mealworm protein were lower than those for beef and pork but higher than those for chicken and fish. Impacts associated with GHG emissions in insect production systems depend heavily on the use of diet. Thus, using a standard diet based on commercial or proprietary feed is associated with 2.3–3.1 kg CO2eq per kg of fresh insects produced (Oonincx and de Boer, 2012; Halloran et al., 2017). This aligns with the results found for 1 kg of dried larvae, which is 5.76 kg CO2eq (Bava et al., 2019), and for 1 kg of protein, which is 3.9–7 kg CO2eq (Halloran et al., 2017; Bosch et al., 2019). However, some studies have reported a higher carbon footprint of up to 21.1 kg CO2eq per kg of fresh larvae (Suckling et al., 2020) or 15–29 kg CO2eq per kg of protein (Ulmer et al., 2020) when the production systems are specific and so on not optimized for the production. These higher impacts can be attributed to the inclusion of frass application to the field as an emission factor (Suckling et al., 2020) or the analysis of a different production system with low technology readiness level (Ulmer et al., 2020). The impacts associated with GHG emissions of insect production based on food processing by-products (food waste) can vary widely, from positively impacting the environment at −6.42 to 5.3 kg CO2eq for all functional units (Thévenot et al., 2018; Bosch et al., 2019; Smetana et al., 2019; Ites et al., 2020). The application of manure as feed for insects has a great potential for environmental improvement, but reviewed studies have indicated considerable environmental impacts from 0.77–12 kg CO2 eq per 1 kg of dried insects (Roffeis et al., 2017) to 1–7 kg CO2eq per 1 kg of proteins (Bosch et al., 2019). In order to consider the potential improvement in GHG emissions of the European food system, we relied on the following considerations: insect can potentially substitute different, or all meat produced in Europe; insects can potentially substitute compound protein feed produced in Europe; insects can potentially substitute other products on one-to-one basis on a wet basis (fresh insects to fresh meat); data on the amount of meat produced were acquired from EUROSTAT for 2021 (“EUROSTAT, 2021”, 2021); data on the amount of compound feed produced in Europe were acquired for 2021 from FEFAC (Feed and Food, 2021); data on the environmental impacts of meat and feed was acquired from the Agri-footprint database (van Paassen et al., 2019) and economic allocation methods using IMPACT2002+ (Jolliet et al., 2003). For the estimation of GHG emission changes with insects replacing conventional products, we considered two options for their impact: minimal (0.3 kg CO2eq per 1 kg of insect biomass) and maximal (3 kg CO2eq per 1 kg of insect biomass). This range was defined as the most beneficial for different insect species, resulting from the analysis above. The beef impact was 35.0; pork: 6.95 and poultry 5.97 kg CO2eq per 1 kg of meat. 1 kg of compound feed was responsible for 1.34 kg CO2eq. Production of insects with a defined range of GHG emission impact has the potential to improve the food system if the insects are consumed as a substitute for meats. GHG associated with meat can be reduced in this case by 72% to 97% (350–466 Mton CO2eq) (Figure 1). The biggest potential for impact reduction is observed in bovine meat production systems, the lowest in poultry substitution. The use of insects for feed substitution might not result in straightforward benefits, as a higher impact range would result in a higher environmental impact than the compound feed. A lower value could result in a 77% of impact reduction (155.9 Mton CO2eq). Substitution of meat in this case would have higher benefits (around 300 Mton CO2eq). GHG emissions (in kg CO2 eq) associated with meat and feed produced in Europe and their changes due to potential substitution with insect biomass (A—meat production effects; B—compound feed production effects). Another key aspect of environmental influence is the water footprint. It is especially interesting as some studies indicate that the water use per kilogram of mealworm protein was lower than that for beef and pork, but higher than that for chicken and fish (van Loon et al. (2018); Huis et al. (2013)). It should be noted that water footprint is only indicated in a limited number of studies, with insects grown on a control diet resulting in 0.42–0.82 m3 of water depleted per 1 kg of fresh insects (Halloran et al., 2017; Suckling et al., 2020). The same impact is found for the protein-based unit at 0.71 m3 (Halloran et al., 2017). When calculated based on dry matter content, the impact increases to 1.26 m3 (Bava et al., 2019). The production of insects on by-products (food waste) results in varying levels of water depletion, from a low of 0.8–1.1 m3 per kg of dry matter content (Bava et al., 2019) to a high of 8.5–11 m3 per kg of fresh insects produced (Roffeis et al., 2017). The water footprint of insects produced on manure is also inconsistent, with ranges from a low of 8.5–11 m3 per 1 kg of insect on a dry matter basis (Roffeis et al., 2017) to a very high of 113.9–187.6 m3 (Roffeis et al., 2015). There is a lack of studies evaluating the water footprint of insects grown on food waste and manure. Therefore, we further considered a range of potential water footprints of 0.4–0.8 m3 per 1 kg of insect biomass, which corresponds to the lower range of impacts of different insect species. Average beef was responsible for 0.25; pork for 0.05 and poultry for 0.067 m3 of water footprint per 1 kg of meat. Production of 1 kg of compound feed caused 0.0179 m3 of water footprint per 1 kg of feed. Production of insects with a defined range of water footprint impacts is not expected to bring environmental benefits for Europe’s sustainable food systems (Figure 2). However, it should be noted that water footprint methods are often criticized for being under development and not reflecting the results with reliable certainty. Water footprint (in m3) associated with meat and feed produced in Europe and their changes due to potential substitution with insect biomass (A—meat production effects; B—compound feed production effects). Another aspect of sustainable food system assessment relates to the aspects of biodiversity change and changes in land use and soil quality. Despite the development of novel biodiversity assessment approaches, most LCA studies still rely on the land use category as a representation of the mentioned aspects. Land use of insect production indicated in studies in a wide range of impacts from 3.6 m2 per kg of fresh insects (Oonincx and de Boer, 2012) to as high as 94.7 m2 per 1 kg of insects on a dry matter basis (Bava et al., 2019) and 1.1–93 m2 per 1 kg of proteins (Bosch et al., 2019; Ulmer et al., 2020). Using by-products and wastes in the feed of the insects should lower the impacts to 1.6 m2 per 1 kg of fresh insects produced (Thévenot et al., 2018); -16.8 to 7.7 m2 per 1 kg of insect on a dry matter basis (Roffeis et al., 2015; Bava et al., 2019; Smetana et al., 2019; Ites et al., 2020) and 0–1 m2 per 1 kg proteins (Bosch et al., 2019). The current study considered the land use impact of sustainable insect production in Europe in the range of 0.36–3.6 m2 per 1 kg of insect biomass. Such a range reflects the 10-fold range of lowest land use impacts indicated for insect production in studies. Average beef was responsible for 23.1; pork for 6.28, and poultry for 4.64 m2 of land per 1 kg of meat. It was necessary to use 1.48 m2 of land to produce 1 kg of compound feed. Defined potential sustainable impacts associated with land use and biodiversity of insect mass production for food and feed in Europe allowed us to hypothesize about the potential to improve the food system if the insects are consumed as a substitute for meat and compound feed. Reduction of land use for meat production can be associated with substitution with insect biomass and reduction of land use in the scope of reduced in this case on 58% to 96% (209–350 Mm2). The biggest potential for impact reduction is observed in bovine meat production systems, the lowest in pork substitution (Figure 3). The use of insects for feed substitution might not result in straightforward benefits, as a higher impact range would result in higher environmental impacts than the compound feed. A lower value could result in a 75% impact reduction (167.5 Mm2). Substitution of meat can potentially result in higher environmental impact reduction (around 42 Mm2). Land use (in ha) associated with meat and feed produced in Europe and their changes due to potential substitution with insect biomass (A—meat production effects (log scale); B—compound feed production effects). Material and energy use is an important factor, influencing the sustainability of food systems. Similar to previously mentioned factors, the energy use of insect production chains depends on the types of diets used (Smetana et al., 2021). Insect production on conventional diets results in energy use of 33.7 MJ per 1 kg of fresh insects (Oonincx and de Boer, 2012) and 159–425 MJ for 1 kg of proteins (Bosch et al., 2019 and Ulmer et al., 2020). Energy use for insect production, when grown on by-products and waste, is highly varied and ranges in the scope of -108 to 62.8 MJ per 1 kg of insect biomass on a dry matter basis (Roffeis et al., 2017; Thévenot et al., 2018; Ites et al., 2020) or 18–77 MJ per 1 kg protein (Bosch et al., 2019). The current study relied on energy use impacts for insect production in Europe in the range of 0.36–21.2 MJ per 1 kg of insect biomass. The range is defined from the studies of the best insect production chains. Average beef was responsible for 104.0; pork 28.3 and poultry for 23.8 MJ of non renewable energy per 1 kg of meat. It was necessary 5.81 MJ of energy to produce 1 kg of compound feed. The mass production of insects for food and feed in Europe has led us to consider their potential to reduce the dependency on non renewable energy sources. Reduction of the use of non renewable energy sources can be associated with the substitution of meat with insect biomass and can be expected in the range of 45% to 99% (763.5–1,668 PJ) (Figure 4). The biggest potential for impact reduction is observed in bovine meat production systems, the lowest in chicken substitution. However, in the case of energy-efficient insect production systems—the impact is minimal in all the scenarios. However, it is important to note that using insects for feed substitution may not necessarily result in straightforward benefits, as the environmental impacts could be higher than that of traditional compound feed. More energy-efficient insect production scenarios could result in a 93% of impact reduction (821.9 PJ). Therefore, the insect may be an energy-efficient substitute for both meat products and compound feeds. Non renewable energy use (in MJ) associated with meat and feed produced in Europe and their changes due to potential substitution with insect biomass (A—meat production effects; B—compound feed production effects). One more important factor, with growing importance, relates to animal welfare. The animal welfare of insect production for food and feed in the European have not been extensively However, a study by van Huis et al. that to traditional livestock production, insect can provide a more environment for the insects, as they can be in with and access to The environment is not the only factor, and indicated for insects are environmental human and animal health, human and social acceptability, animal and animal issues et al., The issues to animal integrity, and have been extensively in livestock and for many (van Huis and should be in the of insects and insect the of and integrity, and the analysis of the of towards insects as a basis for including insects in the may at some that is of consideration in and of of the animal at the of the in the life cycle assessment some proposed et al., 2017) for the number of to the same amount of such an approach insect for food or feed. the number of it could potentially be considered that using insects for food and feed could be very and from this (van Huis However, in and van Huis consider that to produce for food of feed of insects have to be by or through current food responsible for animal welfare issues associated with in which are not being While SAFA for a comprehensive analysis and has the potential to the and between social, and economic aspects, it the of some key important for the food systems. indicators for assessing or are in the SAFA framework (SAFA). analysis of such are still in LCA should improve the in the current the same this study concentrated on the assessment environmental of SAFA and not the aspects of good economic and social The for the inclusion of environmental only relates to the on the of studies aspects or holistic as as or of insect production Such aspects are not The current however, the for development from to reduce the environmental might of between different aspects and but they would not change the defined potential of environmental improvement in a few impact categories due to the substitution of meat with insect-based products or lower potential for environmental impact improvement due to feed substitution. The study to define the potential of insect production for sustainable food systems on a European level a comprehensive assessment approach. The study that insects with a high nutritional value, are rich in protein, vitamins, and and potentially have a lower environmental impact than traditional and can be an alternative protein source to address sustainability issues associated with current food systems. The study relied on the change of crucial sustainability aspects defined in FAO Sustainability Assessment of Food and Agriculture Systems (SAFA) It allowed that beneficial insect value chains can reduce the impact of livestock production systems by to 97% in categories of global warming potential, land use, and fossil resources It is if insect biomass meat pork, and Substitution of compound feed production with insect value chains could be beneficial only in the of environmental insects grown on wastes or on side-stream heat and alternative energy production systems. In this the 75% to 93% of impacts of compound feed production in categories of global warming potential, land use, and fossil resources can be The study that the insect in Europe should two potential development which result in environmental The concentrates on the development of the production of high-quality biomass for food substitution the other is for the waste and further use of insect biomass for feed It is necessary to note that insect biomass not potential benefits in the water footprint and animal welfare impact This is to the lack of with the or with a lack of methods animal welfare for Additionally, the results of LCA studies on insect production can vary on the specific of type of feed used, and production Assessment of environmental to the SAFA framework not necessarily the impact categories of and These aspects are important for food system value and their assessment can provide valuable into between different of environmental Moreover, it is to consider various factors, such as social acceptability, economic feasibility, and production when evaluating the sustainability of insect production chains. Moreover, the SAFA framework indicators of good social and social which were not analyzed in this There is a for holistic research studies that would use the SAFA framework to tackle insect production chains. Therefore, it is crucial to consider a wide range of sustainability indicators, including social, economic, and environmental aspects, to fully evaluate the production potential as a sustainable food system on the European level. The insect can these development scenarios and towards insect production systems. research could be to insect and for various food and feed could also be to address and that the of the insect The for the insect promising as it a potential to the sustainability associated with current food systems. As the can contribute to a more and sustainable food system for the Smetana as a of Food at the of Food However, the in and was responsible for sustainability assessment of food and food that as a in of Systems of for a and as a in of and The focus of research is sustainability assessment of food processing alternative protein sources and data analysis of food systems. is a on the of global is based on system using the is a at the Food is an with a of in the and in and with a in from is an environmental with in sustainability and life cycle assessment (LCA) in the food and As an LCA has a understanding of LCA and its in sustainability and environmental in LCA to provide valuable insights and to on reducing their environmental footprint and more sustainable As a with a in at has a in environmental guidelines, and in and allowed to and develop to problems. is a at the for Food and the and of the research of and in from in at the Systems of and is a at the of in Agriculture and research of systems, and with to food and more than published in two and to led on and for food and several at the between and is of the of the and and for of This has from the European research and under This reflects only the and the is not responsible for use that may be of the information it

Topics & Concepts