Prospects of carbon labelling – a life cycle point of view

The total carbon footprint (CF) of the following life cycle food imports was compared for the prospects of carbon labelling; one study on beef from Canada, three from the U.S.A., and one each from Japan and Brazil; three studies on pork from Australia and Canada; three case studies on chicken from Brazil and Finland; rice from Thailand; and finally, two investigations of potatoes from the UK and Australia. The CF results on average were: beef (32.0 kg CO2-eq/kg or 100 kg CO2-eq/kg protein), pork (4.5 kg CO2/kg or about 18 kg CO2-eq/kg protein), chicken (2.9 kg CO2-eq/kg or about 10 kg CO2-eq/kg protein); and for rice and potatoes, 3.0 and 0.43 kg CO2-eq/kg respectively. Per 1000 kcal they are 2.31 and 0.56 kg CO2-eq respectively. While land use is widely acknowledged as a source/sink for carbon emissions, the allocation of CO2 amounts associated with deforestation was complex and difficult to quantify; and hence omitted from the life cycle CF analysis. It was highlighted that the results are not strictly comparable in absolute terms, but serve the purpose of shedding light on the environmental issues in a food production chain. A standardized approach would definitely be a useful GHG accounting tool to provide an indicator for carbon labelling schemes. Factors influencing carbon labelling schemes in Singapore were raised and discussed. From a survey conducted, 76% responded positively on having carbon labels.