Carbon Footprint Assessment and GHG Mitigation Potential of Canned Tuna Spread Products in Thailand
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study evaluated the carbon footprint (CFP) of tuna spread product produced by canned tuna factory in Thailand according to ISO 14067:2018 standards and Product Category Rules (PCRs) for processed and ready-to-eat food products. The assessment scope is cradle to gate, excluding secondary packaging of raw materials and products. The functional unit (FU) is defined as one can (net weight 85 grams) of tuna spread product. The carbon footprint of the tuna spread product is 408.08 gCO2eq per FU. The proportion of greenhouse gas emissions comes from non-tuna ingredient, steam and hot water, tuna meat, and primary packaging, with values of 65.12, 11.40, 9.02, and 7.00 % respectively. GHGs reduction potentials are installing solar panels with power storage, increasing renewable energy consumption, changing to electric-powered ships and trucks, changing packaging to retort cup, implementing zero waste to landfill, and switching boiler fuel to biomass. Implementing all measures can reduce greenhouse gas emissions by up to 30.09% of the CFP of the classic style canned tuna spread product.
Article Details
References
Mungkung, R., Gheewala, S. H., Kanyarushoki, C., Hospido, A., van der Werf, H., Poovarodom, N., Bonnet, S., Aubin, J., Moreira, M. T. and Feijoo, G. 2012. Product carbon footprinting in Thailand: A step towards sustainable consumption and production? Environmental Development. 3: 100-108.
Hospido, A., Vazquez, M., Cuevas, A., Feijoo, G. and Moreira, M. 2006. Environmental assessment of canned tuna manufacture with a life-cycle perspective. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 47(1): 56-72.
Poovarodom, N., Ponnak, C. and Manatphrom, N. 2012. Comparative carbon footprint of packaging systems for tuna products. Packaging Technology and Science. 25(5): 249-257.
Avadí, A., Bolaños, C., Sandoval, I. and Ycaza, C. 2015. Life cycle assessment of Ecuadorian processed tuna. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment. 20: 1415-1428.
Cortés, A., Esteve-Llorens, X., González-García, S., Moreira, M. T. and Feijoo, G. 2021. Multi-product strategy to enhance the environmental profile of the canning industry towards circular economy. Science of The Total Environment. 791: 148249.
De Vlieghere, A., Van Veghel, A. S. and Geeraerd, A. 2023. Life cycle assessment of importing canned tuna into Aruba through different supply chains, in varying can sizes and in oils, brine or tomato sauce. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment. 28(11): 1577-1589.
ISO (International Organization for Standardization). (2018). ISO 14067: 2018 Greenhouse gases: Carbon footprint of products. Requirements and guidelines for quantification and communication.
Thailand Greenhouse Gas Management Organization (TGO). 2024. Product Category Rules for Prepared and Ready to Eat Products. https://thaicarbonlabel.tgo.or.th/index.php?lang=TH&mod=Y0hKdlpIVmpkSE5mY25Wc1pYTT0.
Schmidt, J. H. 2015. Life cycle assessment of five vegetable oils. Journal of Cleaner Production. 87: 130-138.
Parker, R. W., Vázquez-Rowe, I. and Tyedmers, P. H. 2015. Fuel performance and carbon footprint of the global purse seine tuna fleet. Journal of Cleaner Production. 103: 517-524.
SeaRates. 2025. Distance & Time. https://www.searates.com/distance-time/.
Thailand Greenhouse Gas Management Organization (TGO). 2022. Emission Factor (CFP). https://thaicarbonlabel.tgo.or.th/index.php?lang=EN&mod=Y0hKdlpIVmpkSE5mWlcxcGMzTnBiMjQ9.
Saget, S., Costa, M., Styles, D. and Williams, M. 2021. Does circular reuse of chickpea cooking water to produce vegan mayonnaise reduce environmental impact compared with egg mayonnaise? Sustainability. 13(9): 4726.
Jirajitmeechai, J., Soralump, C. and Kanokkantapong, V. Carbon Footprint of Peeled Chinese Water Chestnut. 24th National Environmental Conference at Bangsaen Heritage Hotel, Saen Suk, Chon Buri, Thailand on May 20-21, 2025.
Khan, A. A., Reichel, C., Molina, P., Friedrich, L., Subasi, D. M., Neuhaus, H. and Nold, S. 2024. Global warming potential of photovoltaics with state-of-the art silicon solar cells: Influence of electricity mix, installation location and lifetime. Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells. 269: 112724.
Liamsanguan, C. and Gheewala, S. H. 2008. LCA: A decision support tool for environmental assessment of MSW management systems. Journal of environmental management. 87(1): 132-138.
Almeida, C., Vaz, S., Cabral, H. and Ziegler, F. 2014. Environmental assessment of sardine (Sardina pilchardus) purse seine fishery in Portugal with LCA methodology including biological impact categories. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment. 19(2): 297-306.
Almeida, C., Vaz, S. and Ziegler, F. 2015. Environmental life cycle assessment of a canned sardine product from Portugal. Journal of Industrial Ecology. 19(4): 607-617.
Laso, J., Margallo, M., Fullana, P., Bala, A., Gazulla, C., Irabien, A. and Aldaco, R. 2017. Introducing life cycle thinking to define best available techniques for products: application to the anchovy canning industry. Journal of Cleaner Production. 155: 139-150.
Moultak, M., Lutsey, N. and Hall, D. 2017. Transitioning to zero-emission heavy-duty freight vehicles. Washington, DC, USA: ICCT.
Jirajitmeechai, J. 2025. Greenhouse gas emission management guidelines for the canned tuna industry [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Kasetsart University.
