A life cycle assessment of biosolarization as a valorization pathway for tomato pomace utilization in California

TY - JOUR

T1 - A life cycle assessment of biosolarization as a valorization pathway for tomato pomace utilization in California

AU - Oldfield, Thomas L.

AU - Achmon, Yigal

AU - Perano, Kristen M.

AU - Dahlquist-Willard, Ruth M.

AU - VanderGheynst, Jean S.

AU - Stapleton, James J.

AU - Simmons, Christopher W.

AU - Holden, Nicholas M.

N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2016 Elsevier Ltd

PY - 2017/1/10

Y1 - 2017/1/10

N2 - The California tomato processing industry produced circa 388,856 t of tomato pomace in 2014. While currently used for animal feed, tomato pomace could be utilized for biosolarization. Primary Energy Demand (PED) and Global Warming Potential (GWP) equivalent emissions were calculated for two valorization pathways: (i) feed for cattle; and (ii) biosolarization. In order to make these two valorization pathways comparable three management options were analyzed whereby each part of the system was satisfied, i.e. a pest management sub-system and a cattle feed sub-system. The management options were (1) tomato pomace used for cattle feed and soil pest control using fumigant Telone II and herbicide glyphosate; (2) tomato pomace used for cattle feed and soil pest control using solarization; (3) alternative cattle feed (cottonseed, canola pellets and wheat straw) and soil pest control using biosolarization with tomato pomace. Options 2 and 3 result in a reduction of GWP and PED. Among management options, the GWP ranged from 64–98 kg CO2-e and 1502–2250 MJ for PED per t of pomace. The majority of impacts were beyond the tomato processors’ immediate control, therefore encouraging the diversion of tomato pomace to biosolarization may be desirable. Total savings per annum for biosolarization could be as large as 7.7 M kg CO2-e and 203,000 GJ annually.

AB - The California tomato processing industry produced circa 388,856 t of tomato pomace in 2014. While currently used for animal feed, tomato pomace could be utilized for biosolarization. Primary Energy Demand (PED) and Global Warming Potential (GWP) equivalent emissions were calculated for two valorization pathways: (i) feed for cattle; and (ii) biosolarization. In order to make these two valorization pathways comparable three management options were analyzed whereby each part of the system was satisfied, i.e. a pest management sub-system and a cattle feed sub-system. The management options were (1) tomato pomace used for cattle feed and soil pest control using fumigant Telone II and herbicide glyphosate; (2) tomato pomace used for cattle feed and soil pest control using solarization; (3) alternative cattle feed (cottonseed, canola pellets and wheat straw) and soil pest control using biosolarization with tomato pomace. Options 2 and 3 result in a reduction of GWP and PED. Among management options, the GWP ranged from 64–98 kg CO2-e and 1502–2250 MJ for PED per t of pomace. The majority of impacts were beyond the tomato processors’ immediate control, therefore encouraging the diversion of tomato pomace to biosolarization may be desirable. Total savings per annum for biosolarization could be as large as 7.7 M kg CO2-e and 203,000 GJ annually.

KW - Bioeconomy

KW - Cattle feed

KW - Circular economy

KW - Pest control

KW - Solarization

KW - Tomato processor

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84994545624&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.09.051

DO - 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.09.051

M3 - 文章

AN - SCOPUS:84994545624

SN - 0959-6526

VL - 141

SP - 146

EP - 156

JO - Journal of Cleaner Production

JF - Journal of Cleaner Production

ER -