Tracing the Carbon Footprint of Ravenswood Wine's ...

1 downloads 0 Views 149KB Size Report
Ravenswood is now owned by Constellation and is sold in many German markets. ... although it should be noted that many other brands' bottles are even more.
Tracing the Carbon Footprint of Ravenswood Wine’s Supply Chain to Germany Susan Cholette and Elmar Schlich Extended Abstract Submitted for the 10th Annual AAWE Meeting at Bordeaux, June 2016 Summary: Measuring and reducing greenhouse gas emissions is now a topical concern within industry, academia, and even popular media. Logistics for the food and beverage sector are inherently energy and emissions intensive, and wine is no exception given that about only about half the weight and volume of a case of wine is allocated to the product itself. We consider each link of the supply chain needed to convey wine from a California bottling facility to a German distributor and the resultant transportationrelated emissions. We show how variations in this supply chain may impact emissions. In addition we consider the contribution of the ultimate consumer to the carbon emissions, comparing the Consumer Carbon Footprint (CCF) with the Product Carbon Footprint (PCF). We conclude by discussing how such analyses may be used to better understand the climate impact of all actors within the supply chain and potentially inform decision makers’ emissions reduction strategies. Background and Motivation: The measurement of product carbon footprints is a relatively recent exercise. In their seminal AAWE working paper, Colman and Päster (2009) show that distance is not always the dominant factor in emissions associated with transportation; French wines arriving to the New York market by container ship will likely have a lower carbon footprint than California wines trucked or air freighted from their state of origin. Cholette and Venkat (2009) perform a step-by-step analysis of various scenarios for shipping wine to consumers, illustrating how differing configurations and other factors such as utilization and backhaul rates influence carbon intensity. Schlich (2007, 2009, 2010) demonstrates that the wine industry is also subject to an ecology of scale (Schlich and Fleissner, 2005), proving that transportation distance as such is not a reliable indicator of a supply chain’s overall level of efficiency. It should be noted that transportation is but one component of a product carbon footprint, and indeed greenhouse gas emissions are but one dimension of sustainability. Some researchers such as Rugani et al (2013) bemoan the lack of comprehensive analyses that consider all aspects of sustainability and encompass a cradle-to-cradle frame. However, we propose that there is still value to be obtained from these more specialized analyses for the following reasons. Colman and Päster (2009) and Point et al (2012) show that outbound logistics typically has one of the largest emissions impacts of all processes within the life cycle of wine. Short of total systematic re-envisioning, logistical decisions about how to package and ship wines can and will be made independently of cultivation and vinification practices. Finally, reducing the carbon footprint associated with transportation is also likely to reduce costs and may serve as an entry-level way for firms focused solely on the single bottom line to join the sustainability community and later expand their scope and efforts. Methodology: We build on the findings of these and other prior studies by studying a real world supply chain using life cycle assessment techniques subject to ISO 14040 (2006). We define the functional unit as one 750 ml bottle of California zinfandel which is bottled at the place of origin. Our PCF investigation starts at the delivery door of the bottling facility in California and ends at the supply door of the German wine distributor as the Point of Sale (PoS). We consider importing zinfandel to Germany, as this fullbodied varietal would not currently be a candidate to grow in Germany’s vineyards. In particular, we select the Vintners Blend Zinfandel from Ravenswood. One of the well-known zinfandel producers,

Ravenswood is now owned by Constellation and is sold in many German markets. Using data collected from interviews and secondary sources we model the supply chain, calculating the emissions at each transportation link that can be assigned to the product. We consider the type of transportation, single distance, load factor, backhaul factor, fuel type, and mileage/fuel consumption for each link. Using these data the PCF of each link is calculated by allocating the carbon emissions to the functional unit: one bottle. Finally the PCF of the entire supply chain is found by tallying the PCFs for each link, shown in Table 1. Table 1: Distance and PCF of each link of the Ravenswood Vintners Blend supply chain to Germany, based on primary data from Anderson (2014), Dubielzik (2015), Fuchs (2015), and Planco (2007). Link Description 1 Midsize Diesel Truck from Acampo Bottling to Lodi WHS 2 Heavy Duty Diesel Truck from Lodi WHS to Port of Oakland 3 PANAMAX container cargo vessel from Port of Oakland to Europoort Rotterdam 4 Rhine container barge from Europoort Rotterdam to Container Terminal Mainz (CTM) 5 Heavy Duty Diesel Truck from CTM to Brogsitter, Grafschaft as PoS

Distance (km) 6

PCF (g CO2/bottle) 2.6

140

22.63

17,283

121.3

487

8.4

152

23.8

In total we find a PCF of approximately 180 g CO2 per bottle for the international supply chain of Ravenswood Vintners Blend Zinfandel delivered to Germany, which covers a distance of more than 18,000 km. Carbon calculators do not always yield the same results, so we make use of two further calculation tools to benchmark our results and note where differences occur. CarbonCalc (2015) is a spreadsheet tool based on WRI (2004) and EPA (2007) reporting standards, as further detailed elsewhere (Cholette and Venkat, 2009). EcoTransIt World (2015) is a scientific software tool that calculates the energy consumption and resultant emissions of different environmental pollutants such as CO2, SO2, NOx, HC, and particulate matter for all kinds of global transportation, in accordance with DIN EN 16258 (2013). Table 2 presents the results of these publicly available carbon calculators in comparison to the PCF result of our own investigation. Table 2: Comparison of different PCF calculators for the same supply chain (CarbonCalc 2015, EcoTransIt World 2015) PCF calculation method Result of our investigation Carbon Calc EcoTransIt World

PCF (g CO2 per bottle) 180 216 193

Overall, both tools yield similar results to within about 20%. In view of the given inaccuracies of each link - such as traffic jams on the roads or heavy weather conditions at the seas - we can assume that the PCF of the investigated supply chain falls within the relatively narrow range of 180 - 216 g CO2 per bottle.

Due to its lower bottle weight and relative closeness of the bottling plant to the distribution center, Ravenswood Vintners Blend results in lower emissions than other zinfandel wines from Ravenswood, such as their Lodi County Series Zinfandel, which has a transportation footprint at least a fourth larger. This more expensive wine travels a greater distance to Constellation’s central distribution center and is packaged in heavier glass, although it should be noted that many other brands’ bottles are even more substantial. While consumers may eventually accept lighter bottles without assuming that quality declines, Mueller and Remaud (2013) show that this transition currently remains an uphill battle for marketers. Given that these more expensive wines comprise only a small portion of Ravenswood’s total sales, reducing their associated carbon footprints should not be the highest priority project of decision makers, however sustainability minded they may be. We additionally consider a hypothetical scenario where the wine is shipped in bulk and bottled in Germany at a nearby facility that services much of the German private label market, finding such a localized bottling can at most cut transportation emissions by a third. This would be equivalent to reducing the packaging of a 750ml bottle of wine to no more than 100 grams, akin to bottling in Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) instead of glass. However, marketers are unlikely to cheer either suggestion, as German consumers prefer their higher end wines in glass and bottled at the place of origin. Thus, it would seem Constellation currently has little room for decreasing the carbon footprint of their most popular Ravenswood product, unless they can surreptitiously lightweight their glass bottles without consumers noticing the change. Lastly, we consider the impact of the final step in the supply chain, the journey from the retail outlet to the consumer’s home: the Consumer Carbon Footprint (CCF). Prior studies (Sima et al. 2012, Mohr 2013) show that carbon emissions associated with German consumers shopping at stores by purchasing is rather high, with macro statistical data supporting a CCF-value of approximately 300 g per kg of purchased foods. Using the functional unit of one bottle (m = 1.3 kg) results in a CCF of 390 g CO2 per bottle, about twice the PCF of the international supply chain which covers more than 18,000 km. Conclusion: While efficiency gurus may wonder why consumers buy wines from around the world especially if they live near vineyards, most oenophiles appreciate the differences in flavor and style provided by the terroirs and traditions of wine producers worldwide. Furthermore, the high level of German consumption necessitates importing, which covers about two-thirds of national wine consumption (Deutscher Wein Statistik 2015). Wine exports to Germany and other thirsty nations will likely to continue to grow, but supply chain actors can take steps to reduce the carbon footprint associated with transporting these wines. This paper provides options that decision makers might ponder, at least as a first step to becoming more sustainable. In scenarios where bulk transport is infeasible from either a technical or marketing perspective, wine producers should take steps to maximize efficiencies of scale to transport their products, minimize unneeded transport links, and make efforts to lightweight their packaging to the extent that technology and branding allows. While carbon footprints are unlikely to be highly accurate, provided these calculations are done consistently and are benchmarked they can provide useful guidelines for showing where opportunities for improvement may lie. Communicating reliable information to the ultimate consumer regarding the PCF and CCF of items may serve to better inform the discussion about the climate-relevance of global and local trade.

Reference List Anderson (2014) Facility tour and e-mail message, Nov-05-2014, Constellation Brands, Inc., Lodi California (mail to: [email protected]). CarbonCalc (2015) Spreadsheet Tool for Calculating GHG Emissions Associated with Transportation. Available from http://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/ited.1120.0087 . Cholette S and K Venkat (2009) The energy and carbon intensity of wine distribution: a study of logistical options for delivering wine to consumers. Journal of Cleaner Production 17(16):1401-1413. Colman T and P Päster (2009) Red, white and green- the cost of carbon in the global wine trade, American Association of Wine Economists. Available from: www.wine economics.org/workingpapers/AAWE_WP09.pdf . Deutscher Wein Statistik (2015) Weinmarkt 2013. Available from: http://www.germanwines.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Website/Service/Downloads/statistik_2014_N EU_web.pdf (interrogation of data Nov-02-2015). DIN EN 16258 (2013) Methodology for calculation and declaration of energy consumption and GHG emissions of transport services (freight and passengers). Beuth Verlag, Berlin (2013). Available from: www.beuth.de/de/norm/din-en-16258/152888035 . Dubielzik F (2015) Interview and e-mail-message, Oct-01-2015, Fa. Hamburg Sued, Hamburg, Germany (mail to: [email protected]). EcoTransIT World (2015) Energy consumption and greenhouse gases (GHG) in accordance with EN 16258: Ecological Transport Information Tool for Worldwide Transports. Available from: http://ecotransit.org (interrogation of data Oct-21-2015). Environmental Protection Agency (2007). Emissions & generations resource integrated database, v2.1. Available from: www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energyresources/egrde/index.html. Fuchs S (2015) Interview and e-mail message, Aug-11-2015, Fa. Brogsitter, Grafschaft, Germany (mail to: [email protected]). ISO 14040 (2006) Environmental management - Life Cycle Assessment - Principles and framework (last reviewed in 2010). International Standard Organization. Available from: http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail?csnumber=37456 (download Oct-20-2015). Mohr M, Schlich E (2013) Consumer Carbon Footprint beim Einkauf von Bioprodukten. Shaker:Aachen, OND-00000-0000165. Mueller S and H Remaud (2013) Impact of corporate social responsibility claims on consumer food choice: A cross‐cultural comparison. British Food Journal 115(1): 142 – 166. Planco (2007) Verkehrswirtschaftlicher und ökologischer Vergleich der Verkehrsträger Straße, Bahn und Wasserstraße. Planco Consulting GmbH, Essen, Germany, November 2007. Point E, Tyedmers P, and Naugler C (2013) Life cycle environmental impacts of wine production and consumption in Nova Scotia, Canada. Journal of Cleaner Production 27 (2012): 11-20.

Rugani B et al. A comprehensive review of carbon footprint analysis as an extended environmental indicator in the wine sector. Journal of Cleaner Production 54 (2013): 61-77. Schlich E (2009) Zur Energieeffizienz regionaler und globaler Prozessketten: Das Beispiel Wein aus Erzeugerabfüllung. J.Verbr.Lebensm. 4 (2009): 68-74. Schlich E (2010) From Vineyard to Point of Scale: Allocation of Energy Use and CO2-Emission to entire Supply Chains of Wine. 4th Annual Meeting of American Association of Wine Economists (AAWE). Davis, California (USA), June 25-28, 2010. Schlich E and 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):219-223. Schlich E et al. (2007) La consommation d`énergie finale de différents produits alimentaires: un essai de comparaison. Le Courrier de l´environnement de l`INRA, n° 53 (2006), S. 111-120 und n° 54 S. 106 (erratum). Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique INRA (printed 4/2007). Sima A, Möhrmann I, Thomae D, Schlich E (2012) Einkaufswege als Teil des Consumer Carbon Footprints (CCF) - Zum Anteil des Endverbrauchers an der Klimarelevanz von Prozessketten im Lebensmittelbereich. ErnährungsUmschau 59 (2012) 9, 524-530. DOI: 10.4455/eu.2012.960. WRI (2004) World Research Institute. Greenhouse gas protocol, a corporate accounting and reporting standard. Available from: www.ghgprotocol.org/files/ghgprotocol-revised.pdf .