Life cycle assessment reveals spent coffee ground valorization significantly lowers carbon emissions and fossil fuel use across coffee supply chains, highlighting key circular economy benefits.
Coffee production is a major economic activity in Latin America, Africa, and Asia but faces significant environmental challenges, including resource depletion, biodiversity loss, and climate change. This study applies a cradle-to-grave Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of the Italian coffee supply chain using a functional unit of 1 kg of roasted coffee beans consumed, the Ecoinvent database, and the Environmental Footprint 3.1 method to evaluate environmental impacts across cultivation of imported green coffee beans, roasting, distribution, consumption, and end-of-life management. Results were compared with published findings for major coffee-producing regions, including Brazil, Colombia, and Ethiopia. Wet and dry processing methods were also compared, and waste valorization strategies were evaluated. The results indicate that cultivation and consumption are the principal contributors to greenhouse gas emissions and water use. Although Italy is not a coffee-producing country, the environmental hotspots identified for the assessed supply chain are consistent with those reported for major producing regions. Waste valorization, particularly of spent coffee grounds (SCGs), was identified as a promising mitigation strategy because end-of-life management accounted for more than 30% of the overall environmental burden under the baseline disposal scenario. Proposed interventions, including biogas production and organic fertilizer use, reduced greenhouse gas emissions from 3.5 to 0.62 kg CO 2 -eq/kg of coffee, improved the Net Energy Ratio (NER) from 0.82 to 2.2, and reduced fossil resource use from 9.9 to 6.5 MJ/kg. Data variability and limited regional specificity highlight the need for region-specific datasets and sensitivity analyses to improve the robustness of future LCA studies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rehman et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: