Journal of Cleaner Production 27 (2012) 11e20

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Life cycle environmental impacts of wine production and consumption in

Nova Scotia, Canada
E. Point a, *, P. Tyedmers a, C. Naugler b,1
a
School for Resource and Environmental Studies, Dalhousie University, Suite 5010, 6100 University Avenue, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada B3H 3J5
b
Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Dalhousie University, 5788 University Avenue, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada B3H IV8

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Life cycle assessment (LCA) was used to quantify environmental impacts and improvement options for
Received 18 June 2009 the full life cycle of one 750 ml bottle of wine produced and consumed in Nova Scotia, Canada. Results
Received in revised form indicate that viticulture and consumer transport contribute the greatest portion of wine’s total impacts.
28 November 2011
Within the vineyard, nutrient management offers the greatest potential for improvement. Modeled
Accepted 30 December 2011
Available online 3 January 2012
scenarios indicate that high-yielding organic viticulture could marginally improve most measured
impacts, but the provision of lighter bottles could yield even greater benefits. Scenarios in which
transport modes and distances to market were varied provide strong evidence that the mode by which
Keywords:
Life cycle assessment
wine is transported is equally important to the distance that it travels.
Wine Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Grapes
Organic
Bottle
Consumer transport
Food miles

1. Introduction
Material and energy use associated with the production and
consumption of food makes important contributions to a range of
environmental impacts (Dutilh and Kramer, 2000; Carlsson-
Kanyama et al., 2003; Foster et al., 2006). Wine is no exception
since grape growing, wine making, glass bottle manufacture,
product transport, refrigeration, and bottle disposal activities
require the provision of materials and energy that contribute to
resource depletion and a variety of environmental emissions
(Nicoletti et al., 2001; Notarnicola et al., 2003; Aranda et al., 2005;
Ardente et al., 2006; Pizzigallo et al., 2006).
A number of drivers have stimulated interest in the develop-
ment of improved environmental practices among producers and
consumers of wine. These include environmental regulations
(Marshall et al., 2005), personal values (Gabzdylova et al., 2009),
perceived improved product quality (Gabzdylova et al., 2009;
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ1 (250) 973 6895; fax: þ1 (902) 494 3728.
E-mail address: emmapoint@dal.ca (E. Point).
1
Present Address: Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University
of Calgary and Calgary Laboratory Services, 9-3535 Research Road NW, Calgary,
Alberta, Canada T2L 2K8.
Barber et al., 2009; Forbes et al., 2009), and increased demand
for wines produced with environmentally-friendly practices
(Gabzdylova et al., 2009; Forbes et al., 2009).
To date, attempts to improve the environmental performance of
wine have largely focused on energy and water efficiency in the
vineyard and winery, and localized issues such as agro-ecosystem
management, pesticide reduction, soil conservation, and solid
waste management (Marshall et al., 2005; Insight Environmental
Consulting, 2008). Broader, macro-scale issues and impacts, such
as greenhouse gas emissions, ozone layer depletion, and total
energy use, have generally not been considered. Additionally,
a narrow focus on the vineyard and winery phases of wine’s life
cycle may omit much of what actually contributes to wine’s total
environmental impact, since previous work in the field of food and
wine sustainability suggest that the provision of packaging, product
transport, and consumer shopping trips contribute a substantial
portion of total environmental impact (Dutilh and Kramer, 2000;
Carlsson-Kanyama et al., 2003; Foster et al., 2006; Notarnicola
et al., 2003; Aranda et al., 2005; Ardente et al., 2006; Pizzigallo
et al., 2006; Koroneos et al., 2005; Hospido et al., 2005; Talve, 2001;
Sonesson et al., 2005).
Here, life cycle assessment (LCA) was used to quantify the
various material and energy inputs and associated environmental
emissions of the full life cycle of one 750 ml bottle of wine made in

0959-6526/$ e see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.12.035
12 E. Point et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 27 (2012) 11e20
Nova Scotia, Canada from 100% locally grown grapes. This research
should be of interest to members and regulators of the grape and
wine industry e locally and globally e who wish to improve the
eco-profile of wine. Results also provide wine consumers with
information to make more informed decisions about the impact of
their choices and behaviors.
2. Nova Scotia wine industry
Despite its location at the northern climatic limit for viticulture
(Lewis et al.), a small yet growing wine industry has developed in
Nova Scotia in recent decades. At the time of study, annual
production of the province’s 350 acres of vineyard and twelve
commercial wineries was 750,000 l of wine. Production is pro-
jected to triple by 2020 (Josza Management & Economics, 2006).
Almost all Nova Scotia-produced wine is sold within the province
(Josza Management & Economics, 2006). Given Nova Scotia’s
climatic conditions, most of the vineyard acreage is planted with
hearty French hybrid varieties but growers are having recent
success with more delicate vinifera like Chardonnay and Pinot Noir.
3. Methods
Standardized under International Organization for Standardi-
zation (ISO) guidelines (International Organization for
Standardization, 2006a,b), LCA provides an accepted methodology
for quantifying the material and energy inputs and subsequent
emissions created throughout the entire life cycle of a product
Fig. 1. System flow diagram of Nova Scotia wine’s life cycle.
(Consoli et al., 1993; Guinée et al., 2001). All efforts were made to
follow the methodological framework provided by the ISO guide-
lines (International Organization for Standardization, 2006a,b).
3.1. Goal and scope
The goal of this research was to quantify life cycle emissions of
one 750 ml bottle of Nova Scotia wine made from 100% locally
grown grapes in 2006, and to determine the relative contribution of
each stage of wine’s life cycle to those environmental impacts.
Winery co-products were not distinguished (e.g. wines made from
different grape varieties, of various styles or qualities, or of different
alcohol contents), as the analysis aimed to characterize environ-
mental impacts based on annualized production inputs and outputs
of vineyards and wineries. In addition, the analysis sought to
determine how various potential changes to wine’s life cycle
(organic viticulture, lighter bottles, increased commercial trans-
port) might influence wine’s associated environmental impacts.
The boundaries of the system included all major material and
energy flows associated with grape growing, wine making, glass
bottle production, transport of wine to retail, consumer transport,
refrigeration and bottle recycling (Fig. 1). Provision of farm and
winery buildings and wine making equipment was excluded from
this analysis due to the assumed low attribution of these elements
to a single bottle of wine (Mattsson, 1999), and the exclusion of
these capital goods from previous wine and beer LCAs (Nicoletti
et al., 2001; Notarnicola et al., 2003; Aranda et al., 2005; Ardente
et al., 2006; Koroneos et al., 2005; Hospido et al., 2005; Talve,
 E. Point et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 27 (2012) 11e20
2001). Provision of vineyard machinery was included however,
since this input can contribute substantially to total energy
consumption of agricultural products (Frischknecht et al., 2007;
Audsley, 1997) and specifically fruit production (Milà i Canals
et al., 2006). Production-related emissions for pesticides were
included in the analysis, but field-level emissions were not due to
lack of available data concerning the climatic conditions at the time
of application (Hauschild, 2000; Schmidt, 2007), and the absence of
site-specific dispersion models to estimate the fate of those emis-
sions through the air, water and soil (Milà i Canals and Polo, 2003).
Also omitted was any consideration of fertilizer application timing,
soil characteristics, and climatic conditions at the time of applica-
tion, all of which could be important factors for a more detailed
analysis of a vineyard’s nutrient flow dynamics (Brentrup et al.,
2000; Erisman, 2000; Powers, 2007).
Following the system boundaries employed previously by
Notarnicola et al. (2003) and Ardente et al. (2006), the provision of
sugar, corks, paper labels and heat shrink capsules was included.
However, only transport-related emissions for yeasts, filtering and
clarifying agents, bacteria, enzymes and antioxidants were quan-
tified. Biogenic carbon sinks and emissions have been excluded
consistently throughout the analysis, such as carbon sequestration
by grape vines, and the subsequent release of CO2 during fermen-
tation. Alternately, emissions of ethanol e the primary volatile
organic compound (VOC) emitted during wine’s fermentation
process (USEPA, 1995) e were included in this analysis as they are
known to contribute to photochemical oxidation (Notarnicola et al.,
2003). Consistent with previous authors, cleaning products used in
the winery (Notarnicola et al., 2003; Aranda et al., 2005; Ardente
et al., 2006; Pizzigallo et al., 2006), wooden pallets on which
wine is transported (Aranda et al., 2005; Pizzigallo et al., 2006;
Talve, 2001), and activities related to the sale of wine in stores
(Aranda et al., 2005; Ardente et al., 2006; Koroneos et al., 2005)
were not quantified. Data regarding water consumption in wineries
were not available and were thus excluded from this analysis.
Abundant rainfall in Nova Scotia precludes the need for vineyard
irrigation.
3.2. Life cycle inventory
3.2.1. Vineyard life cycle inventory
Primary vineyard data were collected through the use of
a detailed questionnaire mailed to members of the provincial grape
growers association. The questionnaire was designed to obtain
information on the nature and quantities of one-time and annual
inputs, vineyard size, yield, and relevant transport activities.
Additional data were obtained from relevant personnel and liter-
ature sources as necessary. Vineyard-specific inventory data were
compiled and weighted using 2006 vineyard grape production
volumes to provide a representative vineyard model for Nova
Scotia. In instances where variability regarding the nature of
a material input did not permit averaging, the most common
response was used.
Methods used to calculate field-level greenhouse gas and
nutrient emissions from fertilizers were derived from Brentrup
et al. (2000), the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC, 2006) Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories
(Tier 1), and Dalgaard et al. (USEPA, 2004). Manure used as
a fertilizer on vineyards is essentially a co-product of meat or milk
production, but it was beyond the scope of this work to perform
a relevant system expansion to account for production-related
emissions from manure. Instead, a conservative estimate was
derived from a calculation of the production-related emissions of
an equivalent quantity of nutrients in synthetic fertilizers,
following Audsley (1997). CO2 emissions from propane cannons
13
(used to scare pests from vineyards), were derived from data re-
ported by the United States Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA, 2004). Emissions from the application of lime were
calculated using the IPCC (2006) liming emission factor. Due to
variability of machinery used in Nova Scotia vineyards, the model
was based on average machinery used in fruit production (Milà i
Canals and Polo, 2003).
Inputs to background processes (e.g. the provision of steel,
plastic, glass, synthetic fertilizers and pesticides) were obtained
from peer-reviewed LCA databases (See Point, 2008 for details).
Background process data representing current, average technolo-
gies were used and electricity production mixes for locale-specific
processes were substituted to reflect actual conditions whenever
possible. One-way transport distances were modeled for the
delivery of vineyard inputs to agricultural suppliers, and round-trip
distances for movement of inputs from retail to the farm gate.
3.2.2. Winery and bottle life cycle inventory
Questionnaires were administered to winemakers processing
solely Nova Scotia grown grapes, and solicited data regarding the
winery’s source and transport mode for grapes and bottles, energy
inputs, wine making ingredients, and total output of Nova Scotia
wine in 2006. For wineries that outsourced bottling, related
electricity consumption was estimated from the literature
(Notarnicola et al., 2003; Aranda et al., 2005). VOC emissions from
fermentation were calculated from a USEPA (1995) emission
factor.
Resulting winery inventory data were compiled and a weighted
average was calculated (based on volumes of 100% Nova Scotia
wine produced) to generate a representative model for Nova Scotia
wineries. Background processes (e.g. manufacture of bottles, labels,
corks) were obtained from peer-reviewed LCA databases with
electricity production mixes substituted to reflect locale-specific
conditions when possible (See Point, 2008 for details). One-way
transport distances were modeled for the delivery of bottles and
wine making ingredients, whereas the delivery of grapes was
modeled as a round-trip distance.
3.2.3. Post winery life cycle inventory and assumptions
Finished wine was assumed to be transported to, and purchased
in Halifax e Nova Scotia’s most populous city. Information
regarding mode of transport for wine to retail was obtained from
wineries. A consumer’s shopping trip was modeled as a 5 km
round-trip distance in a small gasoline powered vehicle for the sole
purpose of purchasing a bottle of wine. Consumer storage of wine
was conservatively modeled as chilling for 48 h in a small, energy
efficient household refrigerator. Finally, to account for the energy
and material requirements of wine’s end-of-life activities, requisite
vehicle inputs were modeled for collection and transportation of
the empty glass bottle to a recycling plant, as well as the energy and
material requirements for sorting glass cullets.
3.3. Life cycle impact assessment methodology
The following impact categories were selected for analysis:
abiotic resource depletion potential (ARDP), fresh-water acidifica-
tion potential (AP), eutrophication potential (EP), global warming
potential (GWP), stratospheric ozone depletion potential (ODP),
aquatic eco-toxicity potential (AETP), terrestrial eco-toxicity
potential (TETP), photo-oxidant formation potential (POP), and
cumulative energy demand (CED).
SimaPro (version 7.1.6) was used to facilitate the impact
assessment modeling. Impact assessment methodology was CML 2
baseline 2000, developed by the Center for Environmental Science
at Leiden University, which characterizes Life Cycle Inventory data
14 E. Point et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 27 (2012) 11e20
into contributions to “problem-oriented” (mid-point) impact
categories (Guinée et al., 2001).
3.4. Scenario modeling
The effects of various potential changes to wine’s life cycle were
explored through the application of scenario modeling (Consoli
et al., 1993). Three groups of scenarios were modeled, each repre-
senting a change to the base case model of wine’s life cycle that is
perceived, or has been demonstrated elsewhere, to have a non-
trivial effect on wine’s overall environmental impact.
3.4.1. Organic viticulture scenario
To explore potential benefits of organic viticulture, a hypothet-
ical model of Nova Scotia grape growing practices was constructed
by substituting conventional inputs (e.g. fertilizers, pesticides) with
ones that appear on the Canadian Organic Production Systems
Permitted Substances List (Canadian General Standards Board,
2006). Specifically, copper sulfate and sulfur replaced conven-
tional fungicides used in Nova Scotia vineyards, and wood pressure
treatment substances on vineyard posts were excluded. Cow
manure was modeled as the sole source of fertilizer, with quantities
of elemental nitrogen, phosphorous, and potassium equivalent to
the conventional system on a per-hectare basis, following Pelletier
et al. (2008). Nutrient content of cow manure was obtained from
the Atlantic Canada Nutrient Management Planning Guide (Nova
Scotia Department of Agriculture and Marketing, 1991). The same
methods to calculate field-level emissions from fertilizers and to
account for production-related manure emissions were used as
described in the base case model. Application rates of organic
fungicides were obtained from the Nova Scotia Grape Disease
Management Schedule (AgraPoint International Ltd, 2007). All
other model inputs and related assumptions remained the same. To
account for the impact of yield on environmental impacts, two
hypothetical organic grape yields were modeled. First, organic
vineyards were assumed to produce 20% fewer grapes (by weight)
per hectare relative to existing conventional yields reflecting
differences documented elsewhere (Nicoletti et al., 2001; Pizzigallo
et al., 2006; Niccolucci et al., 2008). In the second organic scenario,
organic yields were assumed to be equivalent to conventional
yields in Nova Scotia vineyards in 2006, enabling the comparison of
an arguably “best-case-scenario” for organic grape yields.
3.4.2. Lighter bottle scenario
The use of lighter glass bottles can reduce wine’s overall impact
(Waste Resource Action Programme) and trials of light-weight glass
bottles indicate they can be made strong enough to safely store and
transport wine (Hartley, 2008). To explore this potential, a 380 g
glass bottle was modeled, which is approximately 30% lighter than
the average weight of Nova Scotia wine bottles used presently.
3.4.3. Increased transport distance and new transport mode
scenario
Given recent interest in the concept of “food miles” (Schlich and
Fleissner, 2005; Smith et al., 2005), the final scenarios explored the
implications of shipping wine to two Canadian (Toronto and Van-
couver), and one overseas market (Perth, Australia). Mode of
transport for Canadian destinations was a transport truck. Ship-
ments to Perth were in a fully-loaded container ship, with an
additional 200 km of truck transportation on either end of the
ocean journey. Return trips were excluded from each scenario. As
a final scenario, the transport of Nova Scotia wine to retail in Halifax
was modeled with a transport truck in place of the smaller vehicle
currently employed. In this scenario, distance was unchanged from
the base case model.
4. Results
Returned surveys containing complete, useable data for vine-
yards represented operations for 60% of all grapes grown in the
province in 2006. Table 1 describes a typical Nova Scotia vineyard
based on weighted survey results, while Table 2 reports average
vineyard inventory data on a per-hectare basis.
Winery, bottle, and transport-related data were obtained from
Nova Scotia wineries that together processed 15% of all Nova Scotia
grown grapes in 2006 (Table 3). Weighted according to wine
volumes produced, an average Nova Scotia winery in 2006 had an
annual processing volume of 58 metric tonnes of grapes, yielding
just over 39,000 l of wine.
4.1. Life cycle impact assessment results
Table 4 presents a detailed account of contributions from all life
cycle stages to each impact category. Across all impact categories,
vineyard activities and consumer shopping make the largest relative
contributions. Bottle manufacture, winery activities, and transport
of wine to retail contribute the bulk of remaining impacts. Recycling
of the glass bottle and refrigeration of wine in the consumer’s home
contribute a very minor portion of total life cycle impacts.
4.1.1. Vineyard life cycle impact assessment results
Most vineyard-level impacts are generated from nutrient
management activities and fuel use. For the impact categories of
ODP, GWP, AP, and EP, nutrient management contributes respec-
tively 49%, 65%, 79%, and 92% of the total. Fuel use is responsible for
15%, 18%, 23%, 28%, and 33% of AP, GWP, POP, CED, and ARDP,
respectively. The trellis system contributes approximately half of
vineyard-level toxicity-related impacts due to the manufacture of
steel posts and the use of chromiumecopper arsenate as a wood
preservative. Vineyard machinery contributes between 8% and 13%
to the vineyard-level impact categories of ARDP, ODP, AETP, and
CED. Although pest management inputs contribute relatively little
to total vineyard impacts (less than 9%), recall that field-level
emissions from most of these substances were not modeled and
their measured contributions thus provide a conservative estimate.
Due to fertilizer emissions of nitrous oxide, nutrient management
activities yield a negative POP (Derwent et al., 1996).
Given the relative importance of nutrient management in the
vineyard e and the numerous associated substances and activities
e a finer scale assessment is warranted. Fig. 2 illustrates the relative
contributions of all nutrient management inputs. Nitrogen fertilizer
dominates all impact categories, and CO2 emissions from liming
make important contributions to wine’s GWP. Phosphate and
potassium fertilizers make non-trivial contributions to several
impact categories but the transport of nutrient inputs is a relatively
unimportant production aspect.
Finally, Fig. 3 illustrates the relative contributions associated with
the manufacture and application of nitrogen fertilizers. Most impact
Table 1
Average Nova Scotia vineyard characteristics in 2006.
Vineyard characteristic Unit
Total Farm Size ha 14.07
Vineyard Size ha 13.38
Annual Yield (total) tonnes 85.55
Yield/ha tonnes/ha 6.37
Red Grapes (produced) % 47a
White Grapes (produced) % 53a
Vineyard Age years 11.8a
Vine Density vines/ha 2844.12
a
Calculated based on 43% of all grapes produced in Nova Scotia in 2006.
 E. Point et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 27 (2012) 11e20 15

Table 3
Life cycle inventory results for post-vineyard production and activities in 2006.
Table 2 Material and energy inputs Unit Per Per bottle
Life cycle inventory results for Nova Scotia viticulture in 2006. hectoliter of wine
Material and energy inputs Unit Per haa,b Winery
Electricity kWh 50.67 0.38
Land Preparation
Heating oil l 2.67 0.02
Tile drain kg 38.41
Fraction of grapes purchased % 45.00
Lime (dolomitic) kg 162.37
N-fertilizer (synthetic and manure)c kg 3.12 from contract growers
P-fertilizer (synthetic and manure)d kg 2.29 in Nova Scotia
Average distance of contract km 20.00
K-fertilizer (synthetic)e kg 5.12
growers (round-trip distance)
Glyphosate kg 0.13
Mode of transport Pick-up truck
Diesel l 3.06
Bottle Manufacture and
Delivery truck operation km 5.21
Bottle Transport
Emissions from Land Preparation
Weight of average bottle kg 0.54
CO2 (from lime application) kg 178.36
Trellising System Origin of bottles
Steel wire kg 40.07 Halifax, Nova Scotia % 50.00
France % 50.00
Steel rod kg 11.59
Recycled content of glass % 50.00
Wooden posts kg 254.80
Mode of transport for delivery Transport truck
Wood preservative kg 6.94
of bottles to wineries
Delivery truck operation km 3.29
Number of bottles delivered 30,000
Nutrient Management
in one shipment
Lime kg 1154.75
N-fertilizer (synthetic)c kg 16.82 Transport of Wine to
N-fertilizer (manure) kg 76.06 Bottling Facility
Fraction of wine transported % 40.00
P-fertilizer (synthetic)d kg 45.67
(in bulk) to bottling facility
P-fertilizer (manure) kg 25.16
Average round-trip distance km 300.00
K-fertilizer (synthetic)e kg 79.69
of bulk wine to bottling facility
K-fertilizer (manure) kg 82.17
Mode of transport Small delivery truck
Delivery truck operation km 22.87
Transport of Wine to Retail
Freight ship operation tkmf 206.07
Emissions from Nutrient Management Average distance to km 400.00
CO2 (from lime application) kg 550.43 retail (round-trip)
Mode of transport to Small delivery truck
N2O (from synthetic) kg 0.62
deliver wine to retail
N2O (from manure) kg 2.81
Cardboard box kg 0.04
NO (from synthetic) kg 0.66
Consumer Transport
NO (from manure) kg 2.96
Distance traveled (round-trip) km 5.00
NH3 (from synthetic) kg 4.37
NH3 (from manure) kg 19.80 Mode of transport Passenger car
NO3 (from synthetic) kg 16.40 Consumer Storage
Small, energy efficient l*day 0.75
NO3 (from manure) kg 74.30
refrigerator
P205 (from synthetic) kg 1.27
Recycling
P2O5 (from manure) kg 0.76
Mass of bottles collected and kg 0.54
Pest Management
transported to recycling facility
Glyphosateg kg 3.06
Mass of glass sorted (as cullets) kg 0.54
Gluphosinateg kg 0.25
Paraquatg kg 0.03 at recycling facility
Captang kg 9.17
Folpetg kg 4.40
Sulfur kg 27.20
Propane l 3.89 categories are influenced by manufacturing emissions only. The
Delivery truck operation km 0.64 exceptions are AP, EP, and POP which are caused almost entirely by
Freight ship operation tkmf 288.15 the volatilization and leaching of nitrogenous compounds from the
Emissions from Pest Management
vineyard. Manufacturing and application emissions contribute
CO2 (from propane combustion) kg 13.06
Fuel
almost equally to GWP.
Diesel l 236.51
Gasoline l 3.57 4.1.2. Other life cycle impact assessment results
Lubricating oil l 4.40 Consumer shopping contributed between 8% and 58% of total
Delivery truck operation km 0.25
impacts, generated exclusively from the use of a car (Table 4). Glass
Vineyard Machinery
Tractor kg 20.32 bottles contributed between 3% and 24% of total impacts, resulting
a
primarily from the generation of electricity used in the bottle
One hectare of Nova Scotia vineyards in 2006, on average, produced 6.37 t of
grapes.
production process. The bulk of winery-related impacts (1e14% of
b
One tonne of grapes, on average, produces 800 bottles of wine in Nova Scotia totals) are derived from electricity generation e largely coal-fired in
(Naugler and Wright, 2006). Nova Scotia e and from ethanol emissions during fermentation.
c
Most common source of nitrogen used in Nova Scotia synthetic fertilizers is
ammonium nitrate.
d
Most common source of phosphorous used in Nova Scotia synthetic fertilizers is 4.2. Scenario modeling results
di-ammonium phosphate.
e
Most common source of potassium used in Nova Scotia synthetic fertilizers is
4.2.1. Organic viticulture scenario results
potassium chloride.
f
Tonne-kilometer. Life cycle inventories and impact assessment results for the two
g
Weight is active ingredient only. hypothetical organic vineyard scenarios appear in Point (2008), and
Table 5, respectively. In the reduced yield scenario, organic viti-
culture offered marginal improvements (between 0.14% and 3%) to
16 E. Point et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 27 (2012) 11e20

Table 4
Detailed contributions of life cycle stages to wine’s environmental impacts.a,b

ARDP AP EP GWP ODP AETP TETP POP CED

(kg Sb eq) (kg SO2 eq) (kg PO4 eq) (kg CO2 eq) (kg CFC-11 eq) (kg 1,4-DCB eq) (kg 1,4-DCB eq) (kg C2H4) (MJ)
Vineyard
Land Preparation 3.34E-04 1.63E-04 4.36E-05 6.19E-02 6.70E-09 6.40E-04 4.84E-05 4.81E-06 6.82E-01
Trellis 2.15E-04 1.48E-04 2.19E-05 2.73E-02 1.59E-09 1.65E-02 1.75E-03 1.39E-05 1.24
Nutrient management 9.16E-04 9.34E-03 4.98E-03 5.23E-01 1.35E-08 1.34E-02 9.39E-04 2.61E-04 2.07
Pest management 2.02E-04 3.05E-04 8.23E-06 2.00E-02 2.58E-09 1.58E-03 2.42E-04 1.26E-05 4.90E-01
Fuel 9.42E-04 1.72E-03 3.47E-04 1.46E-01 1.37E-10 3.49E-04 4.39E-05 6.11E-05 1.98
Vineyard machinery 2.36E-04 1.02E-04 1.17E-05 2.44E-02 3.18E-09 5.00E-03 1.47E-04 8.12E-06 5.94E-01
Sub-total 2.84E-03 1.18E-02 5.41E-03 8.03E-01 2.77E-08 3.74E-02 3.17E-03 L1.60E-04 7.05
Percent of system total 15.19% 45.74% 77.07% 24.94% 9.62% 40.61% 57.74% L18.50% 16.00%

Winery
Transport of grapes 1.16E-04 1.62E-04 2.88E-05 1.79E-02 1.58E-11 2.92E-06 8.44E-07 7.80E-06 2.42E-01
to winery
Wine ingredients 2.49E-05 4.36E-05 2.06E-05 5.26E-03 4.40E-10 1.05E-04 1.52E-04 8.80E-07 2.34E-01
Electricity 1.79E-03 1.60E-03 7.70E-05 2.86E-01 1.84E-09 1.59E-02 2.26E-04 6.20E-05 3.26
Heating oil 2.98E-04 5.48E-04 1.11E-04 4.62E-02 4.06E-11 1.11E-04 1.39E-05 1.66E-05 6.24E-01
Ethanol emissions 0.00Eþ00 0.00Eþ00 0.00Eþ00 0.00Eþ00 0.00Eþ00 0.00Eþ00 0.00Eþ00 1.09E-04 0.00
Transport of wine 1.18E-04 1.65E-04 2.94E-05 1.82E-02 1.60E-11 2.97E-06 8.59E-07 7.93E-06 2.47E-01
to bottling
Sub-total 2.35E-03 2.52E-03 2.67E-04 3.73E-01 2.36E-09 1.59E-02 8.91E-05 2.04E-04 4.62
Percent of system total 12.57% 9.77% 3.80% 11.58% 0.82% 17.26% 1.62% 23.50% 10.49%

Glass Bottle
Glass bottle production 2.54E-03 5.33E-03 3.40E-04 3.69E-01 3.24E-09 4.11E-03 2.45E-04 1.85E-04 5.89
Cork, label and 4.40E-04 1.80E-04 2.80E-05 4.60E-02 2.30E-09 2.55E-03 2.08E-04 1.23E-05 2.22
cap production
Glass bottle transport 1.73E-04 3.24E-04 3.76E-05 2.45E-02 3.66E-09 7.98E-04 4.88E-05 1.05E-05 0.399
Sub-total 3.15E-03 5.84E-03 4.06E-04 4.40E-01 9.20E-09 7.46E-03 5.02E-04 2.07E-04 8.51
Percent of system total 16.84% 22.64% 5.78% 13.66% 3.19% 8.10% 9.14% 24.00% 19.33%

Transport to Retail
Cardboard box 1.87E-04 5.18E-04 1.37E-05 2.94E-02 2.43E-08 5.94E-04 8.94E-05 1.96E-05 4.09E-01
Wine transport 2.33E-03 1.57E-03 3.26E-04 3.39E-01 5.16E-08 1.17E-02 6.55E-04 5.31E-05 5.58
Sub-total 2.52E-03 2.09E-03 3.40E-04 3.69E-01 7.59E-08 1.23E-02 7.44E-04 7.27E-05 5.99
Percent of system total 13.48% 8.10% 4.84% 11.46% 26.35% 13.36% 13.55% 8.40% 13.60%

Consumer Shopping Trip

Passenger car, 5km 7.54E-03 3.41E-03 5.62E-04 1.20 1.68E-07 1.32E-02 8.95E-04 3.75E-04 17.21
Percent of system total 40.32% 13.22% 8.01% 37.27% 58.33% 14.33% 16.30% 43.40% 39.07%

Consumer Storage
Fridge (energy efficient) 1.85E-05 1.91E-06 4.64E-07 2.65E-03 5.38E-11 5.18E-05 3.83E-07 1.07E-07 3.46E-02
Percent of system total 0.10% 0.01% 0.01% 0.08% 0.02% 0.06% 0.01% 0.02% 0.08%

Recycling
Public collection of glass 1.06E-04 7.91E-05 1.58E-05 1.45E-02 2.10E-09 8.43E-04 3.86E-05 2.70E-06 2.55E-01
Glass cullets, sorted 1.36E-04 1.01E-04 2.12E-05 2.36E-02 2.59E-09 4.84E-03 5.57E-05 3.51E-06 3.29E-01
Sub-total 2.41E-04 1.80E-04 3.70E-05 3.81E-02 4.69E-09 5.69E-03 9.43E-05 6.22E-06 5.84E-01
Percent of system total 1.29% 0.70% 0.53% 1.18% 1.63% 6.18% 1.72% 0.72% 1.33%

System Total 1.87E-02 2.58E-02 7.02E-03 3.22 2.88E-07 9.21E-02 5.49E-03 7.05E-04 44.04
a
Functional unit ¼ 1 (750 ml) bottle of wine produced and consumed in Nova Scotia in 2006.
b
System totals may not add up to 100% due to rounding.

three of nine impact categories, yet actually increased wine’s AP, EP,
and GWP. Wine’s ARDP and ODP did not change. Substantial
reductions (26%) to wine’s TETP are attributable to the exclusion of
wood preservatives on vineyard posts. Wine’s environmental
impacts were further reduced in the second organic scenario due to
the assumption of higher grape yields, although AP, EP and GWP
were still either higher than, or identical to, the base case model.
4.2.2. Lighter bottle scenario results
The adoption of glass bottles 30% lighter than those currently
used by Nova Scotia wineries could result in reductions between 2%
and 10% to all measured impacts associated with the life cycle of
a bottle of Nova Scotia wine (Table 5). Most of these improvements
resulted from lower impacts associated with bottle manufacture,
but to some extent from reduced impacts associated with bottle
transport to winery and the transport of packaged wine to retail.
4.2.3. Increased transport distance and new transport mode
scenario results
Alternate transport modes and increased transport distances had
varying effects on wine’s overall environmental impacts (Table 5).
When transported to Toronto in a transport truck, contributions to
impact categories changed only slightly from the base case scenario,
in some cases actually decreasing wine’s environmental impact.
When transported to Vancouver in a transport truck, contributions
to all impact categories increased, between 12% and 43%. Although
shipping wine 18,000 km by sea to Australia resulted in increases to
AP, EP, and POP (between 3% and 18%) the remaining impact cate-
gories experienced decreases (between 2% and 6%) relative to the
base case model. Interestingly, many of the greatest potential
reductions across all scenarios resulted from modeling a transport
truck for commercial transport of wine to market in Halifax. In this
scenario, decreases to impacts ranged from 4% to 14%.
 E. Point et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 27 (2012) 11e20
Fig. 2. Relative contributions of nutrient management sub-processes to environmental impact categories.
5. Discussion
5.1. Improvement analysis for Nova Scotia wine
Grape growing and consumer shopping trips offer the greatest
potential for cleaner production and consumption practices for
Nova Scotia wine. To a lesser extent, electricity consumption in the
winery, ethanol emissions from fermentation, bottle manufacture
and transport of wine to retail are sources of potentially non-trivial
emission reductions.
5.1.1. Vineyard improvement analysis
In the vineyard, nitrogenous fertilizers (provision and application),
were the most relevant input. Attempts to minimize the use and
subsequent emissions of fertilizers (e.g. application according to crop
demand (Brentrup et al., 2004), staggered applications (Spectrum
Analytic Inc) application in bands beneath the vines (as opposed to
broadcasting) (Naugler and Wright, 2006), use of nitrogen-fixing
cover crops (Pelletier et al., 2008), use of fertilizers with low leach-
ing and volatilization rates (for EP and AP), use of fertilizers with low
production-related global warming emissions (Brentrup et al., 2001,
2004), incorporation of organic fertilizers (Brentrup et al., 2000),
and the cultivation of grapes with high nutrient-uptake efficiencies
(Northwest Berry & Grape Information Network)) could result in
measurable emission reductions, barring any substantial reductions
in grape yield. Furthermore, the relative importance of fertilizers to
GWP (16% of total) highlights the need to consider non-energy related
greenhouse gas emissions from wine production.
17
The organic viticulture scenario models indicate that marginal
improvements are possible in several impact categories. However,
the exclusion of wood preservative chemicals on vineyard posts
resulted in substantial reductions to terrestrial eco-toxicity poten-
tial in both organic scenarios. This relatively simple option provides
one of the greatest potential improvements to wine’s toxicity-
related impacts. In contrast, substitution of synthetic fertilizer
with manure did not offer automatic emission reductions since
manure is associated with higher emissions of nitrous oxide,
ammonia, and nitric oxide than an equivalent amount of synthetic
fertilizer (Brentrup et al., 2000; IPCC, 2006), and since nitrogen in
manure is absorbed less readily by crops (Notarnicola et al., 2003;
Bussink and Oenema, 1998).
5.1.2. Consumer shopping improvement analysis
As modeled, consumer shopping contributed substantially to
wine’s total environmental impacts. For the impact categories of
ARD, GWP, POP and CED, driving 5 km to purchase a bottle of wine
has a greater impact than that arising from grape growing and wine
making combined (Table 4). Moreover, a 5 km drive contributes
more to ODP than all other life cycle stages combined.
The relative importance of car-based shopping for Nova Scotia wine
is consistent with findings from other wine (Cholette and Venkat,
2009), beer (Cordella et al., 2008) and food production systems in
general (Foster et al., 2006; Coley et al., 2009). Coley et al. (2009)
illustrated that the environmental benefits of eating locally
produced foods are quickly lost if consumers drive even short
distances to local markets, let alone to a wine tasting room in the
18 E. Point et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 27 (2012) 11e20

Fig. 3. Relative contributions of nitrogen fertilizer manufacture and field-level emissions to environmental impact categories.

countryside. Avoiding unnecessary car-based shopping trips is a highly
sensible option for achieving sustainable consumption practices for
wine. The direct shipment of wine to consumers and round-trip multi-
passenger transport services to winery tasting events may also offer
meaningful improvements (Cholette and Venkat, 2009).
5.1.3. Wine bottle improvement analysis
Emission reductions associated with a reduced bottle weight is
consistent with results of previous studies (Aranda et al., 2005;
Waste Resource Action Programme). As modeled in this analysis,
life cycle environmental benefits from the provision of lighter
bottles exceed those offered by the adoption of organic viticultural
techniques in all non-toxicological impact categories. The adoption
of bottle re-use systems (Van Doorsselaer and Lox, 1999; Mata and
Costa, 2001) and alternative packaging materials (Best Foot
Forward Ltd, 2008) could yield further improvements with
respect to certain bottle-related impacts.
5.1.4. Commercial transport improvement analysis
The danger of relying on “food miles” as a sole indicator of
a food’s environmental impact is well documented (Schlich and
Fleissner, 2005; Smith et al., 2005; Coley et al., 2009; Coleman

Table 5
Impact assessment results from scenario models. A percent change that is positive reflects a potential increase in contributions to an impact category. A negative percent
change indicates reduced contributions to an impact category, and thus reflects the potential for an improved environmental profile of wine.

ARDP AP EP GWP ODP AETP TETP POP CED

(kg Sb eq) (kg SO2 eq) (kg PO4 eq) (kg CO2 eq) (kg CFC-11 eq) (1,4-DB eq) (1,4-DB eq) (C2H4 eq) (MJ)
Total life cycle emissionsa (base case) 1.87E-02 2.58E-02 7.02E-03 3.22 2.88E-07 9.21E-02 5.49E-03 7.05E-04 44.04
Organic viticulture (low yield) 1.87E-02 2.72E-02 7.51E-03 3.27 2.88E-07 9.06E-02 4.05E-03 6.83E-04 43.98
Change to life cycle emissions (%) 0.00% 5.43% 6.98% 1.55% 0.00% L1.63% L26.23% L3.12% L0.14%
Organic viticulture (same yield) 1.85E-02 2.64E-02 7.15E-03 3.22 2.85E-07 8.76E-02 3.84E-03 6.72E-04 43.55
Change to life cycle emissions (%) L1.07% 2.33% 1.85% 0.00% L1.04% L4.89% L30.05% L4.68% L1.11%
Lighter bottle (380 g) 1.75E-02 2.37E-02 6.86E-03 3.05 2.79E-07 8.90E-02 5.32E-03 6.34E-04 41.21
Change to life cycle emissions (%) L6.42% L8.14% L2.28% L5.28% L3.13% L3.37% L3.10% L10.07% L6.43%
Increased transport to retail 1.87E-02 2.59E-02 7.05E-03 3.20 2.89E-07 9.46E-02 5.54E-03 7.12E-04 43.91
(1800 km to Toronto, ON)b
Change to life cycle emissions (%) 0.00% 0.39% 0.43% L0.62% 0.35% 2.71% 0.91% 0.99% L0.30%
Increased transport to retail 2.42E-02 2.98E-02 7.88E-03 3.94 4.11E-07 1.28E-01 7.17E-03 8.53E-04 56.72
(6000 km to Vancouver, BC)b
Change to life cycle emissions (%) 29.41% 15.50% 12.25% 22.36% 42.71% 38.98% 30.60% 20.99% 28.79%
Increased transport to retail 1.82E-02 2.99E-02 7.23E-03 3.17 2.74E-07 8.65E-02 5.34E-03 8.31E-04 42.80
(18,000 km to Perth, Australia)c
Change to life cycle emissions (%) L2.67% 15.89% 2.99% L1.55% L4.86% L6.08% L2.73% 17.87% L2.82%
Larger truck to retail 1.69E-02 2.46E-02 6.77E-03 2.96 2.48E-07 8.35E-02 4.99E-03 6.65E-04 39.65
(400 km to Halifax, NS)b
Change to life cycle emissions (%) L9.63% L4.65% L3.56% L8.07% L13.89% L9.34% L9.11% L5.67% L9.97%
a
Mode of transport (to retail) is a small delivery truck (as indicated in Nova Scotia winery surveys).
b
Mode of transport (to retail) is a transport truck (28-t capacity).
c
Modes of transport (to retail) are a trans-oceanic freight ship and a transport truck (28-t capacity), in Nova Scotia and Australia.
 E. Point et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 27 (2012) 11e20
and Päster, 2007). Scenario modeling of increased transport
distances for Nova Scotia wine demonstrated the importance of
also considering transport mode (Table 5). Indeed, the transport of
wine to Toronto actually resulted in similar, and in some instances
lower, impacts on a per unit basis than transport of wine within
Nova Scotia due to efficiencies gained by using a larger truck.
Similarly, the international transport of wine from Nova Scotia to
Australia by ship and transport truck was environmentally prefer-
able, per bottle, to the domestic transport of wine by truck to
Vancouver with respect to nearly all impact categories due to the
efficiency of ship-based transport on a per-product basis. Even
trucking wine to Toronto has greater environmental implications
per bottle than shipment to Australia with respect to the impact
categories of ARDP, GWP, ODP, AETP, and TETP.
The scenario in which transport to retail in Halifax is undertaken
with a transport truck suggests this change could lead to substan-
tial decreases in life cycle impacts for a bottle of Nova Scotia wine.
Therefore, the full environmental benefits of drinking locally
produced wine in Nova Scotia are, at present, partially negated by
the use of an inefficient transport mode. By extension, a locally
produced wine will not necessarily be environmentally preferable
to an imported wine if local transport is energetically inefficient. If
production volumes of Nova Scotia wine increase as expected (Josza
Management & Economics, 2006), the feasibility of this improve-
ment option may similarly grow.
6. Conclusion
Pressures on earth’s natural systems are thought to be
approaching or have surpassed thresholds for a number of plane-
tary boundaries that define a safe operating space for humanity
(Rockström et al., 2009). Choices we make with respect to the
production and consumption of food can have important implica-
tions for the extent to which we utilize resources and impact other
species.
Despite its devoted following, humans have no physiological
requirement to drink wine and this industry e perhaps even more
than non-luxury food and beverage items e may need to defend its
existence in a world of increasingly scarce resources and over-
burdened natural systems. To align with the principles of cleaner
production and environmental sustainability, the production and
consumption of wine must use material and energy resources
efficiently, and avoid unnecessary environmental emissions that
may contribute to irreparable ecological damage.
Here, LCA methodology was employed to quantify the material
and energy inputs, and associated environmental emissions of one
bottle of wine produced and consumed in Nova Scotia, Canada.
Results indicated that nutrient management activities and
consumer shopping trips were the largest relative contributors to
wine’s life cycle impacts. Non-trivial impacts also arose from the
manufacture of glass bottles, winery activities, and transport of
wine to retail. Scenario model results indicated that the use of
lighter bottles could yield important environmental benefits, even
greater than those associated with the adoption of organic grape
growing practices with respect to most impact categories. At
present, the full environmental benefits of drinking locally
produced wine in Nova Scotia are partially negated by the use of an
inefficient transport mode.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank members of the Nova Scotia grape and wine
industry for their data and insight into their activities. Funding, in
the form of stipend and scholarship support to Ms. Point, is
gratefully acknowledged from the Faculty of Graduate Studies at
19
Dalhousie University, the Natural Sciences and Engineering
Research Council of Canada (through a Strategic Grant to Alan
Fredeen, Nova Scotia Agricultural College) and the Grape Growers
Association of Nova Scotia (proportionally, sources of financial
support contributed approximately 48%, 48% and 4%, respectively).
References
AgraPoint International Ltd, 2007. Grape Disease Management Schedule for Nova
Scotia, Revised ed. Nova Scotia Grape Growers Association. Available from:
http://www.nbgrape.ca/Grape_Guide_v2007.pdf (accessed September 2011).
Aranda, A., Zabalza, I., Scarpellini, S., 2005. Economic and environmental analysis of
the wine bottle production in Spain by means of life cycle assessment. Inter-
national Journal of Agricultural Resources, Governance and Ecology 4 (2),
178e191.
Ardente, F., Beccali, G., Cellura, M., Marvuglia, A., 2006. POEMS: a case study of an
Italian wine-producing firm. Environmental Management 38 (3), 350e364.
Audsley, E., 1997. Harmonization of Environmental Life Cycle Assessment for Agri-
culture. European Commission DG VI Agriculture.
Barber, N., Taylor, C., Strick, S., 2009. Wine consumer’s environmental knowledge
and attitudes: influence on willingness to purchase. International Journal of
Wine Research 1, 59e72.
Best Foot Forward Ltd, 2008. The Carbon Impact of Bottling Australian Wine in the UK:
PET and Glass Bottles. Project Code: RTL063-001. Available from: http://www.
wrap.org.uk/downloads/Carbon_Impact_of_Bottling_Australian_Wine_in_the_
UK-_PET_and_Glass_Bottles.a3359a9a.5143.pdf (accessed September 2011).
Brentrup, F., Küsters, J., Lammel, J., Kuhlmann, H., 2000. Methods to estimate on-
field nitrogen emissions from crop production as an input to LCA studies in
the agricultural sector. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 5,
349e357.
Brentrup, F., Kusters, J., Kuhlmann, H., Lammel, J., 2001. Application of the life cycle
assessment methodology to agricultural production: an example of sugar beet
production with different forms of nitrogen fertilizers. European Journal of
Agronomy 14, 221e233.
Brentrup, F., Kusters, J., Barraclough, P., Kuhlmann, H., 2004. Environmental impact
assessment of agricultural production systems using the life cycle assessment
(LCA) Methodology II. The application to N fertilizer use in winter wheat
production systems. European Journal of Agronomy 20, 265e279.
Bussink, D.W., Oenema, O., 1998. Ammonia volatilization from dairy farming
systems in temperate areas: a review. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 51,
19e33.
Canadian General Standards Board, 2006. Organic Production Systems Permitted
Substances List. ICS 67.040. Canadian General Standards Board. Available from:
http://www.cog.ca/documents/311.pdf (accessed September 2011).
Carlsson-Kanyama, A., Ekström, M.P., Shanahan, H., 2003. Food and life cycle energy
inputs: consequences of diet and ways to increase efficiency. Ecological
Economics 44 (2e3), 293e307.
Cholette, S., Venkat, K., 2009. The energy and carbon intensity of wine distribution:
a study of logistical options for delivering wine to consumers. Journal of Cleaner
Production 17 (6), 1401e1413.
Coleman, T., Päster, P., 2007. Red, White and “Green”: The Cost of Carbon in the
Global Wine Trade. American Association of Wine Economists. Working Paper
No. 9. Available from: http://www.wine-economics.org/workingpapers/
(accessed September 2011).
Coley, D., Howard, M., Winter, M., 2009. Local food, food miles and carbon emis-
sions: a comparison of farm shop and mass distribution approaches. Food
Policy 34, 150e155.
Consoli, F., Allen, D., Boustead, I., et al. (Eds.), 1992. Guidelines for Life-cycle
Assessment: A “Code of Practice”, 1st ed.From the Society for Environmental
Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) Workshop held at Sesimbra, Portugal 31
March e 3 April 1993 Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
(SETAC).
Cordella, M., Tugnoli, A., Spadoni, G., Santarelli, F., Zangrando, T., 2008. LCA of an
Italian lager beer. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 13 (2), 133e139.
Derwent, R.G., Jenkin, M.E., Saunders, S.M., 1996. Photochemical ozone creation
potentials for a large number of reactive hydrocarbons under European
conditions. Atmospheric Environment 30 (2), 181e199.
Dutilh, C.E., Kramer, K.J., 2000. Energy consumption in the food chain: comparing
alternative options in food production and consumption. Ambio 29 (2), 98e101.
Erisman, J., 2000. Key factors necessary to determine the impact on the nitrogen
cycle and the resulting environmental effects as part of LCA for agricultural
products. In: Weidema, B.P., Meeusen, M.J.G. (Eds.), Agricultural Data for Life
Cycle Assessments, vol. 1. Agricultural Economics Research Institute (LEI),
The Hague.
Forbes, S.L., Cohen, D.A., Cullen, R., Wratten, D., Fountain, J., 2009. Consumer atti-
tudes regarding environmentally sustainable wine: an exploratory study of the
New Zealand marketplace. Journal of Cleaner Production 17, 1195e1199.
Foster, C., Green, K., Belda, M., et al., 2006. Environmental Impacts of Food
Production and Consumption: A Report to the Department for Environment,
Food and Rural Affairs. Manchester Business School, Defra, London. Available
from: http://randd.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document¼EV02007_4601_
FRP.pdf (accessed September 2011).
20 E. Point et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 27 (2012) 11e20
Frischknecht, R., Althaus, H., Bauer, C., et al., 2007. The environmental relevance of
capital goods in life cycle assessments of products and services. International
Journal of Life Cycle Assessment. http://dx.doi.org/10.1065/lca2007.02.308.
Gabzdylova, B., Raffensperger, J.F., Castka, P., 2009. Sustainability in the New Zea-
land wine industry: drivers, stakeholders and practices. Journal of Cleaner
Production 17 (11), 992e998.
Guinée, J.B., Gorée, M., Heijungs, R., et al. (Eds.), 2001. An Operational Guide to the
ISO Standards, Final Report. Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the
Environment (VROM) and the Centre for Environmental Studies, Leiden
University, The Netherlands.
Hartley, A., 2008. Lightweight Wine Bottles: Strength as an Issue in the Manufacture
of Lightweight Wine Bottles Final Report: GlassRite: Wine. MSG009. Available
from: http://www.wrap.org.uk/downloads/Wine_bottle_strength_May_08.
b294276b.5393.pdf (accessed September 2011).
Hauschild, M., 2000. Estimating pesticide emissions for LCA of agricultural prod-
ucts. In: Weidema, B.P., Meeusen, M.J.G. (Eds.), Agricultural Data for Life Cycle
Assessments, vol. 1. Agricultural Economics Research Institute (LEI), The Hague.
Hospido, A., Moreira, M.T., Feijoo, G., 2005. Environmental analysis of beer
production. International Journal of Agricultural Resources, Governance and
Ecology 4 (2), 152e162.
Insight Environmental Consulting, Ltd. 2008 Overview of sustainable prac-
tices programs applicable to vineyards and wineries. Available from:
http://www.bcwgc.org/publication/overview-sustainable-practices.
(accessed November 2011).
International Organization for Standardization, 2006a. ISO 14040 Environmental
Management e Life Cycle Assessment e Principles and Framework. Interna-
tional Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland.
International Organization for Standardization, 2006b. ISO 14044 Environmental
Management e Life Cycle Assessment e Requirements and Guidelines. Inter-
national Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2006. IPCC Guidelines for
National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. In: Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land
Use, Chapter 11: N2O Emissions from Managed Soils, and CO2 Emissions from
Lime and Urea Application, vol. 4. IPCC.
Josza Management & Economics, 2006. Economic Impact of the Nova Scotia Wine
Industry. Prepared for the Nova Scotia Liquor Corporation, Winery Association
of Nova Scotia, and the Grape Growers Association of Nova Scotia.
Koroneos, C., Roumbas, G., Gabari, Z., Papagiannidou, E., Moussiopoulos, N., 2005.
Life cycle assessment of beer production in Greece. Journal of Cleaner
Production 13, 433e439.
Lewis, J.C., Jamieson, A., Gordon, R., Patterson, G.. Opportunities and challenges for
wine grape production in Nova Scotia. Available from: http://www.
investinnovascotiawine.ca/pdfs/AgraPoint/Opporty_WineGrapeProdn.pdf
(accessed September 2011).
Marshall, R.S., Cordano, M., Silverman, M., 2005. Exploring individual and institu-
tional drivers of proactive environmentalism in the US wine industry. Business
Strategy and the Environment 14, 1e18.
Mata, T.M., Costa, C.A.V., 2001. Life cycle assessment of different reuse percentages
for glass beer bottles. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 6 (5),
307e319.
Mattsson, B. Environmental life cycle assessment (LCA) of agricultural food
production. Doctoral Thesis. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences,
Agraria 187, 1999.
Milà i Canals, L., Polo, G.C., 2003. Life cycle assessment of fruit production. In:
Mattson, B., Sonesson, U. (Eds.), Environmentally-friendly Food Processing.
Woodhead Publishing Ltd., Cambridge, England, pp. 29e53.
Milà i Canals, L., Burnip, G.M., Cowell, S.J., 2006. Evaluation of the environmental
impacts of apple production using life cycle assessment (LCA): case study in
New Zealand. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 114, 226e238.
Naugler, C., Wright, B., 2006. Wamboldt’s Nova Scotia Winegrowers’ Guide 2006
Edition. Blue Frog Inc., Bridgewater, Nova Scotia.
Niccolucci, V., Galli, A., Kitzes, J., et al., 2008. The Ecological Footprint Analysis
Applied to Two Different Italian Wine Productions. Report No. A0001-95. The
ESRC Centre for Business Relationships, Accountability, Sustainability and
Society. Available from: http://www.brass.cf.ac.uk/uploads/Niccolucci_et_al_
A95.pdf (accessed September 2011).
Nicoletti, G.M., Notarnicola, B., Tassielli, G. Comparison of conventional and organic
wine. In: Proceedings: International Conference on LCA in Foods. Gothenburg,
Sweden, 26e27 April, 2001.
Northwest Berry Grape Information Network. Grape rootstocks and nutrient uptake
efficiency. Available from: http://berrygrape.org/grape-rootstocks-and-
nutrient-uptake-efficiency/ (accessed September 2011).
Notarnicola, B., Tassielli, G., Nicoletti, G.M., 2003. Life cycle assessment (LCA) of
wine production. In: Mattson, B., Sonesson, U. (Eds.), Environmentally-friendly
Food Processing. Woodhead Publishing Ltd., Cambridge, England,
pp. 306e326.
Nova Scotia Department of Agriculture and Marketing, 1991. Guidelines for the
Management and Use of Animal Manure in Nova Scotia. Nova Scotia Depart-
ment of Agriculture and Marketing. Publication No. R-91-2000.
Pelletier, N., Arsenault, N., Tyedmers, P., 2008. Scenario modeling potential eco-
efficiency gains from a transition to organic agriculture: life cycle perspec-
tives on Canadian canola, corn, soy and wheat production. Journal of Envi-
ronmental Management 42, 989e1001.
Pizzigallo, A.C.I., Granai, C., Borsa, S., 2006. The joint use of LCA and energy eval-
uation for the analysis of two Italian wine farms. Journal of Environmental
Management 86 (2), 396e406.
Point, E. Life Cycle Environmental Impacts of Wine Production and Consumption in
Nova Scotia, Canada. Unpublished Results. Master’s Thesis. Dalhousie Univer-
sity, Canada, 2008.
Powers, S., 2007. Nutrient loads to surface water from row crop production. Inter-
national Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 12 (6), 399e407.
Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., Persson, Å, et al., 2009. Planetary boundaries:
exploring the safe operating space for humanity. Ecology and Society 14 (2), 32.
Schlich, E.H., Fleissner, U., 2005. The ecology of scale: assessment of regional energy
turnover and comparison with global food. International Journal of Life Cycle
Assessment 10 (3), 219e223.
Schmidt, J.H. Life cycle assessment of rapeseed oil and palm oil, Part 3: Life cycle
inventory of rapeseed oil and palm oil. Doctoral Thesis. Department of Devel-
opment and Planning, Aalborg University, 2007.
Smith, A., Watkiss, P., Tweddle, G., et al., 2005. The Validity of Food Miles as an
Indicator of Sustainable Development. Final Report Produced for DEFRA.
Sonesson, U., Anteson, F., Davis, J., Sjödén, P., 2005. Home transport and wastage:
environmentally relevant household activities in the life cycle of food. Ambio 34
(4), 371e375.
Spectrum Analytic Inc. Fertilizing grapes. Available from: http://www.
spectrumanalytic.com/support/library/pdf/fertilizing_grapes.pdf (accessed
September 2011).
Talve, S., 2001. Life cycle assessment of a basic lager beer. International Journal of
Life Cycle Assessment 6 (5), 293e298.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), 1995. Emission Factor
Documentation for AP-42, Section 9.12.2, Wines and Brandy, Final Report.
USEPA. Available from: http://www.epa.gov/ttnchie1/ap42/ch09/bgdocs/b9s12-
2.pdf (accessed September 2011).
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), 2004. Unit Conversions,
Emission Factors, and Other Reference Data. USEPA. Available from: http://
www.epa.gov/cpd/pdf/brochure.pdf (accessed September 2011).
Van Doorsselaer, K., Lox, F., 1999. Estimation of the energy needs in the life cycle
analysis of one-way and returnable glass packaging. Packaging Technology and
Science 12 (5), 235e239.
Waste Resource Action Programme. Lightweight Bottles: Less is More. Available
from: http://www.wrap.org.uk/downloads/GlassRite_Wine_lightweighting_-_
web_version.d52d1615.5381.pdf. (accessed September 2011).