Environmental Implications of Consumer Convenience: Coffee as a Case Study

Abstract

Summary Products of convenience are playing an increasingly large role in today's society. These products provide a competitive advantage over their conventional counterparts by requiring less time and effort to produce a similar service or experience. At the same time, these products are often also more materials intensive to produce and create a greater amount of waste. A comparative midpoint life cycle assessment of different coffee brewing systems is presented in order to explore the comparative impact of three different systems: drip filter, french press, and pod style (a product of convenience). Utilizing a comparative functional unit, the drip filter system method was found to have the greatest environmental impact in all impact categories, whereas the pod style had the least in six of the impact categories (with the french press having the least in two of the impact categories, and a tie between pod style and french press in a single impact category). This suggests that contrary to popular belief, the pod style coffee may be the more environmentally friendly option. The two most significant contributors to environmental impact in all of the categories considered was the amount of dry coffee utilized and the energy needed to brew the coffee, although in some categories considered transportation was also significant. There is the potential for the environmental impact of coffee brewing to shift if coffee wastage occurs (likely in the case of the drip filter and french press system) or if substantial changes in materials or energy consumption were to occur (in the case of the pod‐style brewing system). From the perspective of industrial ecology, this analysis suggests that, in regard to products of consumer convenience, the convenient alternative may not have a significantly greater environmental impact than its conventional counterpart, and that it may be time to question that often‐held assumption.

Life Cycle Assessment of Ground Coffee and Comparison of Different Brewing Methods: A Case Study of Organic Arabica Coffee in Northern Thailand

“…That is consistent with previous findings. A high quantity of fertilizers used to grow coffee, whether organic or chemical, can lead to higher environmental impacts (Salomone, 2003;Coltro et al, 2006;Hick, 2017).…”

“…Coffee brewing was found to be an energy-intensive stage that consumes a large proportion of energy in the coffee life cycle and, subsequently, leads to energy-related environmental impacts (Chayer and Kicak, 2015). In some cases of coffee LCA, transport can contribute a more significant environmental score since coffee beans are typically imported from other countries (Hick, 2017;Tchibo, 2009).…”

“…The product system consisting of five main stages are displayed in Figure 1. In addition, since consumer behaviors are important parameters that can influence environmental impact results (Hick, 2017), three brewing method scenarios were established ( Figure 1) in order to provide information for consumers to aid decision makers. The intended audience of this study, therefore, includes coffee farmers, producers, and consumers who can use the results to improve their activities and lower environmental impacts.…”

“…These were energy consumption-Cumulative Energy Demand, climate change, eutrophication, and acidification (Büsser and Jungbluth, 2009) and endpoint impacts like human health, ecosystem quality, and resources that depend on brewing methods and types of coffee (Chayer and Kicak, 2015). A comparative LCA of different brewing systems (drip filter, French press, and podstyle) was executed in the United States and revealed that pod-style coffee was the most environmentally friendly (Hick, 2017). With regard to greenhouse gas emissions, a study on the carbon footprint of coffee production based on the LCA method indicated that the application of fertilizers was the principal contributor to greenhouse gas emissions in coffee cultivation (Noponen et al, 2012).…”

Carbon and water footprint of coffee consumed in Finland—life cycle assessment

“…The consumption and cultivation (primary production) stages are the most important contributors to the carbon footprint in the coffee chain (e.g. Büsser and Jungbluth 2009;Hicks 2017;Humbert et al 2009;Killian et al 2013;Salomone 2003). According to Humbert et al (2009), about half of the climate impacts of the coffee chain are under the control of the coffee producer or its suppliers including the primary production and processing stages, and the other half is controlled by the consumer.…”