Life cycle assessment and life cycle cost of tofu production and its extended recycling scenario

Hartini, S.; Fatliana, A.N.; Handayani, N.U.; Wicaksono, P.A.; Ramadan, B.S.; Matsumoto, T.

doi:10.22034/gjesm.2024.02.05

Document Type : CASE STUDY

Authors

¹ Lean and Sustainable Supply Chain Laboratory, Department of Industrial Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Diponegoro, Jl. Prof. Sudarto S.H., Tembalang, Semarang City, Central Java 50275, Indonesia

² Department of Industrial Engineering, Garut Institute of Technology, Jl. Mayor Syamsu, Jayaraga, Taronggong Kidul, Garut, Jawa barat, 44151, Indonesia

³ Environmental Sustainability Research Group, Department of Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Diponegoro, Jl. Prof. Sudarto S.H., Tembalang, Semarang City, Central Java 50275, Indonesia

⁴ Graduate Programs in Environmental Systems, Graduate School of Environmental Engineering, The University of Kitakyushu, Hibikino, Wakamatsu-ku, Kitakyushu, Fukuoka, 808-0135 Japan

https://doi.org/10.22034/gjesm.2024.02.05

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The current literature on tofu production has predominantly focused on exploring the value-added potential of the waste generated during tofu production and conducting impact assessments related to this production. However, a noticeable gap remains in the research concerning the comprehensive examination of life cycle costs and eco-efficiency in tofu production and its associated waste. This study aims to assess the environmental and economic impacts of the implementation of recycling alternatives using a life cycle assessment and life cycle cost approach. The impact of waste recycling on the eco-efficiency of small and medium-sized enterprises in Sugihmanik Village, Grobogan Regency, Indonesia is also examined.
METHODS: To achieve this goal, this study employed life cycle assessment and life cycle cost methodologies to evaluate eco-efficiency. Data were collected through interviews and direct observations. Cradle-to-grave (tofu production) and cradle-to-cradle (tofu production and waste recycling) approaches were compared. Environmental impact was assessed by determining the 12 impact categories. Environmental cost was determined using the eco-cost 2023 method, and environmental and economic impacts were examined with SimaPro software version 9.4.
FINDINGS: Life cycle assessment analysis revealed eutrophication, carbon footprint, and freshwater ecotoxicity to be the categories with the most significant impact for each process. In particular, the eco-cost of the cradle-to-grave approach was 7.03 United States dollars, and that of the cradle-to-cradle approach was 7.90 United States dollars. Life cycle cost analysis yielded a net value of 1.33 United States dollars for the cradle-to-grave process and 38.16 United States dollars for the cradle-to-cradle process. According to the life cycle cost analysis, the recycling scheme increased the overall cost of production. Meanwhile, the eco-efficiency analysis demonstrated an increase in the eco-efficiency of tofu production (cradle-to-grave) and the recycling system (cradle-to-cradle). Waste recycling can increase the eco-efficiency index from 0.18 to 5.
CONCLUSION: Life cycle assessment identified eutrophication, carbon footprint, and ecotoxicity (freshwater) as the three major impact categories. Proper waste management in tofu production offers environmental benefits and significant profits, with the net value of the cradle-to-cradle process at 38.99 US dollars. The eco-efficiency values showed a substantial positive increase, and the waste processing scenarios were found to be sustainable and economically beneficial. These findings suggest new business opportunities through straightforward waste processing and affordable production costs. The scheme also reduces the environmental impact and increases the efficiency and profit of the overall tofu production system.

Graphical Abstract

Highlights

Tofu production processes are giving higher environmental impact on eutrophication, carbon footprint, and freshwater ecotoxicity;
Recycling scenario is giving the higher life cycle cost compared to the business as usual but smaller eco-cost value ratio;
Conversion of rice husk to briquettes becomes the most valuable waste recycling compared to wastewater and tofu dregs conversion;
All waste recycling scenario can elevate the eco-efficiency index, which highlight the economic and environmental advantages of tofu production.

Keywords

Main Subjects

Environmental impact assessment

OPEN ACCESS

©2024 The author(s). This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit:

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

PUBLISHER NOTE

GJESM Publisher remains neutral concerning jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

CITATION METRICS & CAPTURES

CURRENT PUBLISHER

GJESM Publisher

References

Ajijah, N.; Tjandra, B.C.; Hamidah, U.; Sintawardani, N., (2020). Utilization of tofu wastewater as a cultivation medium for Chlorella vulgaris and Arthrospira platensis. IOP Conference Series: Earth Environ. Sci., 483(1): 012027 (9 pages).

Al-Shami, S.; Rashid, N., (2022). A holistic model of dynamic capabilities and environmental management systems for eco-product innovation and sustainability in automobile firms. J. Bus. Ind. Mark., 37(2): 402-416 (15 pages).

Bahri, S.; Hadati, K.S.; Satrimafitrah, P., (2021). Production of protein hydrolysate from tofu dregs using the crude extract of bromelain from pineapple core (Ananas comosus l). Conference Series: J. Phys., 1763(1): 012008 (10 pages).

Blonk, H.; Kool, A., Luske, B., de Waart, S. (2008). Environmental effects of protein-rich food products in The Netherlands: consequences of animal protein substitutes.

Budihardjo, M.A.; Ardiansyah, S.Y.; Ramadan, B.S., (2022). Community-driven material recovery facility (CdMRF) for sustainable economic incentives of waste management: Evidence from Semarang City, Indonesia. Habitat Int., 119: 102488 (10 pages).

Budihardjo, M.A.; Priyambada, I.B.; Chegenizadeh, A.; Al Qadar, S.; Puspita, A.S., (2023). Environmental impact technology for life cycle assessment in municipal solid waste management. Global J. Environ. Sci. Manage., 9(SI): 145-172 (28 pages).

Colimoro, M.; Ripa, M.; Santagata, R.; Ulgiati, S., (2023). Environmental impacts and benefits of tofu production from organic and conventional soybean cropping: improvement potential from renewable energy use and circular economy patterns. Environments, 10(5): 73 (30 pages).

Dai, Y.; Wang, Z.; Li, J.; Xu, Z.; Qian, C.; Xia, X.; Liu, Y.; Feng, Y., (2023). Tofu by-product soy whey substitutes urea: Reduced ammonia volatilization, enhanced soil fertility and improved fruit quality in cherry tomato production. Environ. Res., 226: 115662 (11 pages).

Dewilda, Y.; Fauzi, M.; Aziz, R.; Utami, F.D., (2023). Analysis of food industry waste management based-on the food recovery hierarchy and 3R concept-A case study in Padang City, West Sumatra, Indonesia. J. Ecol. Eng., 24(7): 198–208 (11 pages).

Esteban, J.; Ladero, M., (2018). Food waste as a source of value‐added chemicals and materials: a biorefinery perspective. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol., 53(5): 1095-1108 (14 pages).

Gultom, E.; Hestina, H.; Florentina, N.; Aritonang, B., (2021). Paper making and characterization from waste coconut and tofu dregs. J. Pendidikan Kimia (JPKIM), 13(2): 159-171 (13 pages).

Hartini, S.; Azzahra, F.; Purwaningsih, R.; Ramadan, B.S.; Sari, D.P., (2021). Framework for Increasing Eco-efficiency in the Tofu Production Process: Circular Economy Approach. Prod. Eng. Arch., 29 (December 2023): 452–460 (9 pages).

Hartini, S.; Ramadan, B.S.; Purwaningsih, R.; Sumiyati, S.; Kesuma, M.A.A., (2021). Environmental impact assessment of tofu production process: case study in SME Sugihmanik, Grobogan. IOP Conference Series: Earth Environ. Sci., 894: 012004 (9 pages).

Hulu, A., (2023). Study of policy innovation strategy to accelerate achievement of Indonesian soybean self-sufficiency in 2035. Matra Pembaruan, 7(1): 13–23 (11 pages).

Jain, A.; Sarsaiya, S.; Awasthi, M.K.; Singh, R.: Rajput, R.; Mishra, U.C.; Chen, J.; Shi, J., (2022). Bioenergy and bio-products from bio-waste and its associated modern circular economy: Current research trends, challenges, and future outlooks. Fuel, 307: 121859 (13 pages).

Karlović, A.; Jurić, A.; Ćorić, N.; Habschied, K.; Krstanović, V.; Mastanjević, K., (2020). By-products in the malting and brewing industries—re-usage possibilities. Fermentation, 6(3): 82 (17 pages).

Kurniawan, T.A.; Meidiana, C.; Othman, M.H.D.; Goh, H.H.; Chew, K.W., (2023). Strengthening waste recycling industry in Malang (Indonesia): Lessons from waste management in the era of Industry 4.0. J. Cleaner Prod., 382: 135296 (14 pages).

Kurniawati, S.D.; Supartono, W.; Suyantohadi, A., (2019). Life cycle assessment on a small scale tofu industry in Baturetno village, Bantu district Yogyakarta. IOP Conference Series: Earth Environ. Sci., 365: 012066 (6 pages).

Masayu, R.; Masruri, A.; Putra, R.A.; Mayanita, Ananda, Cindy. (2020). Analysis of environmental impact with the life cycle assessment (LCA) method on tofu production. Int. J. Sci. Technol. Manage., 1(4): 428-435 (7 pages).

Mejia, A.; Harwatt, H.; Siegl, K.J.; Sranacharoenpong, K.; Soret, S.; Sabate, J., (2017). Greenhouse gas emissions generated by tofu production: A case study. J. Hunger Environ. Nutr., 13(45): 1-12 (12 pages).

Mendoza, J.M.F.; D’Aponte, F.; Gualtieri, D.; Azapagic, A., (2019) Disposable baby diapers: Life cycle costs, eco-efficiency and circular economy. J. Cleaner Prod., 211: 455-467 (13 pages).

Mihai, F.C.; Gündoğdu, S.; Markley, L.A.; Olivelli, A.; Khan, F.R.; Gwinnett, C.; Gutberlet, J.; Reyna-bensusan, N.; Llanquileo-Melgarejo, P.; Meidiana, C.; Elagroudy, S.; Ishchenko, V.; Penney, S.; Lenkiewicz, Z.; Molinos-Senante, M., (2021). Plastic pollution, waste management issues, and circular economy opportunities in rural communities. Sustainability, 14(1): 20 (48 pages).

Moghadam, H.; Samimi, M., (2022). Effect of condenser geometrical feature on evacuated tube collector basin solar still performance: Productivity optimization using a Box-Behnken design model. Desalination, 542: 116092 (8 pages).

Mulyasari; Subaryono; Yosmaniar, (2022). Utilization of tofu waste from Indonesian small scale industry as fish feed through a fermentation process. IOP Conference Series: Earth Environ. Sci., 978: 012042 (9 pages).

Nugroho, G.S.F.; Sulistyaningrum, R.; Melania, R.P.; Handayani, W., (2019). Environmental analysis of tofu production in the context of cleaner production: case study of tofu household industries in salatiga, Indonesia. J. Environ. Sci. Sustain. Dev., 2(2): 127-138 (12 pages).

Pérez-Marroquín, X.A.; Estrada-Fernández, A.G.; García-Ceja, A.; Aguirre-Álvarez, G.; León-López, A., (2023). Agro-food waste as an ingredient in functional beverage processing: Sources, functionality, market and regulation. Foods, 12(8): 1583 (18 pages).

Plamada, D.; Teleky, B.E.; Nemes, S.A.; Mitrea, L.; Szabo, K.; Călinoiu, L. F.; Pascuta, M.S.; Varvara, R.A.; Ciont, C.; Martău, G.A.; Simon, E.; Barta, G.; Dulf, F.V.; Vodnar, D.C.; Nitescu, M., (2023). Plant-based dairy alternatives—A future direction to the milky way. Foods, 12(9): 1883 (33 pages).

Pushparaj, K.; Liu, W.C.; Meyyazhagan, A.; Orlacchio, A.; Pappusamy, M.; Vadivalagan, C.; Robert, A.A.; Arumugam, V.A.; Kamyab, H.; Klemeš, J.J.; Khademi, T.; Mesbah, M.; Chelliapan, S.; Balasubramanian, B., (2022). Nano-from nature to nurture: A comprehensive review on facets, trends, perspectives and sustainability of nanotechnology in the food sector. Energy, 240: 122732 (17 pages).

Qiu, Y., Li, C., Dong, H., Yuan, H., Ye, S., Huang, X., Zhang, X.; Wang, Q., (2022). Analysis of key fungi and their effect on the edible quality of HongJun tofu, a Chinese fermented okara food. LWT, 172: 114151 (11 pages).

Ropiudin, R.; Syska, K., (2023). Green manufacturing for rural tofu SMEs to increase global competitiveness: Case study in tofu industry center, Banyumas Regency, Central Java. J. Agric. Biosyst. Eng., 2(1): 168-179 (12 pages).

Saba, B.; Bharathidasan, A.K.; Ezeji, T.C.; Cornish, K., (2023). Characterization and potential valorization of industrial food processing wastes. Sci. Tot. Environ., 868: 161550 (15 pages).

Samimi, M.; Nouri, J., (2023). Optimized Zinc Uptake from the Aquatic Environment Using Biomass Derived from Lantana Camara L. Stem, Pollution, 9(4): 1925-1934 (10 pages).

Sari, I.P.; Kurniawan, W.; Sia, F.L., (2021). Environmental impact of tofu production in West Jakarta using a life cycle assessment approach. IOP Conference Series: Earth Environ. Sci., 896: 012050 (6 pages).

Smith, M.; Lal, P., (2022) Environmental and economic assessment of hard apple cider using an integrated LCA-LCC approach. Sust. Prod. Consum., 32: 282–295 (14 pages).

Syarifuddin; Anshar, K.; Subhan; Mulyawan, R., (2021). Feasibility study of potential utilization of tofu industry waste into cat fish feed. J. Sainsmat., 10(2): 82-89 (8 pages).

Vogtlander, J.G.; Scheepens, A.E.; Bocken, N.M.; Peck, D., (2017). Combined analyses of costs, market value and eco-costs in circular business models: eco-efficient value creation in remanufacturing. J. Remanufacturing, 7: 1-17 (17 pages).

Xu, Q.; Wu, J.; Zou, L.; Ouyang, J.; Zheng, Z., (2022). Development of a process for the enhanced enzymatic digestibility of solid waste from tofu to yield fermentable biosugars. Biocatal. Biotransform., 40(1): 64-74 (11 pages).

Zhang, R.; Ma, X.; Shen, X.; Zhai, Y.; Zhang, T.; Ji, C.; Hong, J., (2020). PET bottles recycling in China: An LCA coupled with LCC case study of blanket production made of waste PET bottles. J. Environ. Manage., 260: 110062 (11 pages).

Zheng, L.; Regnstein, J.M.; Teng, F.; Li, Y., (2020). Tofu products: A review of their raw materials, processing conditions, and packaging. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf., 19(6): 3683-3714 (32 pages).

Zunidra, Z.; Sondang, S.; Supriatna, S., (2022). Treatment of tofu liquid waste using anaerobic-aerobic biofilm aeration system to reduce pollution. Environ. Health Eng. Manage. J., 9(4): 391-397 (7 pages).

Zuraida, S.; Armijaya, H.; Margono, R.B.; Harmaji, A.; Dewancker, B.J., (2021). A calculation approach of embodied energy, carbon emission and eco-costs on waste recycled composite materials. J. Appl. Sci. Eng., 25(1), 109-118 (10 pages).

Letters to Editor

GJESM Journal welcomes letters to the editor for the post-publication discussions and corrections which allows debate post publication on its site, through the Letters to Editor. Letters pertaining to manuscript published in GJESM should be sent to the editorial office of GJESM within three months of either online publication or before printed publication, except for critiques of original research. Following points are to be considering before sending the letters (comments) to the editor.

[1] Letters that include statements of statistics, facts, research, or theories should include appropriate references, although more than three are discouraged.
[2] Letters that are personal attacks on an author rather than thoughtful criticism of the author’s ideas will not be considered for publication.
[3] Letters can be no more than 300 words in length.
[4] Letter writers should include a statement at the beginning of the letter stating that it is being submitted either for publication or not.
[5] Anonymous letters will not be considered.
[6] Letter writers must include their city and state of residence or work.
[7] Letters will be edited for clarity and length.

Name *

Email Address *

Affiliation *

Comments *

Security Code *

Global Journal of Environmental Science and Management

Life cycle assessment and life cycle cost of tofu production and its extended recycling scenario

References

References

Letters to Editor

Send comment about this article

Volume 10, Issue 2 - Serial Number 38
April 2024
Pages 487-502

Life cycle assessment and life cycle cost of tofu production and its extended recycling scenario

References

References

Letters to Editor

Send comment about this article

Volume 10, Issue 2 - Serial Number 38April 2024Pages 487-502

Volume 10, Issue 2 - Serial Number 38
April 2024
Pages 487-502