FAQ - Food & Beverage Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Biodiversity Calculator

Through our carbon emissions assessment work with hotels and restaurants internationally, TLC identified that food and beverage operations were one of the largest contributors to hospitality emissions (excluding guest travel). This was particularly evident in EU, UK and American venues where beef dishes such as burgers and steaks were on the menu.

While F&B typically contributes 30% of revenue for hotels, it was producing up to 50% of their on-site emissions.

Adjusting menu options and portion sizes for high-emission foods such as beef is one of the quickest and most significant ways to reduce carbon emissions in hospitality.

While reducing carbon is important, we also recognised that food production in high-biodiversity areas damages local freshwater resources and ecosystems. Our Environmental Impact Calculator raises awareness of these wider environmental impacts, encouraging venues to look beyond just carbon when addressing sustainability.

The Food Environmental Impact Calculator aligns with the European PEF (Product Environmental Footprint) Standard, which uses Life Cycle Assessment throughout a product's lifetime production, use, and disposal across multiple indicators including climate, water, marine, land, and health impacts. We focus on the most relevant indicators to avoid overwhelming users who may not need the full PEF data range.

The answer to that is a wholehearted yes! But let's consider what may be driving those choices. For example, based on a review of the science literature we know that beef is eaten more and in larger amounts in hospitality venues than in the guests own home, so dining out is seen as an opportunity to indulge.

However, there are indulgent choices that are less environmentally impactful that can be made, and at the same time provide the premium pricing that often drives hospitality venues to profile steaks or burgers.

A restaurant we worked with identified that a seafood burger containing mixed fish, prawn, crab and lobster, hit the luxury indulgence spot just right, while also delivering the premium price wanted by the venue. Emissions down, prices slightly up, and diners feeling they had come to a really classy venue. Over a short time there was substantial increase in the seafood burger menu choice by diners

An easy to understand environment impact label next to the dish also nudges guest towards less impactful options (this is clear in research and real world F&B operations) and provides the buzz of doing good while indulging. So no it doesn't and shouldn't have to be a form of hair-shirt sustainability abstinence, people enjoy eating out and small changes such as reducing the high impact foods portion size, mixing exciting additional ingredients, plate layout, or tasty alternatives can deliver great choices. As one of our clients reported to us:
"Chefs really care about the environment because good quality dining comes from excellent food sourcing with great taste, poor environments create bland food and dishes. A good chef rises to the challenges and enjoys the creativity needed to deliver a truly engaging dining experience that takes better care of nature."

Our calculator tracks four key environmental indicators:

1. Climate Impact
   • Measured in kg CO₂ equivalent
   • Low: < 1.76 kg CO₂-eq/kg
   • High: > 4.24 kg CO₂-eq/kg
2. Water Use
   • Measured in m³
   • Low: < 1 m³/kg
   • High: > 5 m³/kg
3. Land Impact
   • Measured in eco-points (Pt/kg) The damage caused by land use (e.g. habitat loss, biodiversity reduction)
   • Low intensity: <129.4 Pt/kg
   • High intensity: >460.3 Pt/kg
4. Water Ecotoxicity
   • Measured in Comparative Toxic Units (CTUe)
   • Low: < 0.01 CTUe/kg
   • High: > 1 CTUe/kg

Comparing Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) impact results from different sources is complex due to several factors that can lead to variations:

• Functional Unit: Different methodologies for measuring product impacts
• Data Scope: Variations in which life cycle stages are included
• Geographical Representation: Regional differences in production methods
• Production Methods: Variations in farming practices
• Co-product Allocation: Different methods of attributing impacts

Always refer to source documentation for a comprehensive understanding of LCA methodologies. This public app uses the Agribalyse Life Cycle Assessment database from France.

The 'Overall Dish Rating' provides an at-a-glance summary by combining the four environmental indicators into a single, easy-to-understand score. The calculation follows these steps:

1. The impact per serving for each of the four indicators (Climate, Land, Water, and Ecotoxicity) is normalized into a 0-100 "impact score," where a higher score indicates greater environmental impact. This normalization heavily penalizes values that exceed the "High Impact" threshold.
2. These four scores are weighted to reflect environmental priorities. Given the urgency of climate change, we use a weighted average where Climate Impact accounts for 50% of the score, Land Use for 25%, and Water Use and Ecotoxicity for 12.5% each.
3. This weighted impact score is then converted to a final "Environmental Performance Score", which determines the impact level displayed on the gauge, where A is Lowest Environmental Impact and E is the Highest Impact.

The weighting can be adapted according to regional conditions. For instance, in areas with scarce water resources or poor water treatment, water impacts might receive greater weighting. Similarly, in high-biodiversity regions where deforestation occurs for livestock, land impacts could be weighted more heavily. The current weighting is primarily based on European farming practices and impacts. We have adapted the program for our work in other regions such as the Gulf, India, and Mesoamerica to consider their specific water and land issues and agricultural practices.

Food production is responsible for approximately 26% of global greenhouse gas emissions. The way we grow, process, transport, and consume food has a significant impact on our planet's climate.

Our calculations align with international standards, including ISO 14067 for carbon footprints and ISO 14046 for water footprint assessments.

Highest Climate Impact Foods

• Beef (can exceed 35 kg CO₂-eq/kg for EU-sourced, higher for South American-sourced)
• Lamb
• Chocolate
• Cheese

Lowest Climate Impact Foods

• Lentils (often below 1.76 kg CO₂-eq/kg)
• Beans
• Tofu
• Most vegetables
• Fruits

Freshwater Ecotoxicity Impacts

• Livestock farming creates harmful impacts on water resources due to high concentrations of nitrogen and phosphates from animal waste running into streams and rivers during rainfall. This increases nutrient content in water, leading to algae blooms that kill aquatic life and harm animals that drink from these water sources.
• Plant-based agricultural practices using biological or mineral fertilizers and pesticides tend to create runoff that flows into streams and rivers, harming aquatic life.
• Our ecotoxicity indicator shows that most foods have significant environmental impact. The LCA database we use is based on conventionally (non-organically) farmed ingredients, which represent the majority of our food production and supplies. We are seeking alternative LCA databases for future iterations of the calculator.

1. Increase plant-based options
   • Use more plant-based proteins such as beans and lentils
   • Reduce meat portion sizes in recipes and servings
   • Switch to lower-impact meats like chicken
   • Introduce meat-free menu options
   • Consider expanding vegan offerings
2. Minimize food waste
   • Plan meals and recipes carefully
   • Use our calculator to understand total lifecycle food impacts
   • Implement proper food storage practices
   • Avoid waste of high-impact foods, particularly meats
   • Create menu items that use leftovers creatively
3. Choose local and seasonal produce
   • Support local agriculture where possible
   • Avoid foods that require air transport (such as out-of-season berries)