LET'S GROW TOGETHER

Carbon footprint of our products

At Aller Aqua we are proud to be the first aquafeed company worldwide to be verified to label our products with a COequivalent.

Our labelling is based on the PEFCR guidelines created by the European Commission. The PEFCR guidelines are a ruleset describing how to calculate the environmental footprint of a specific product group. In our instance, we have used:  PEFCR Feed for Food-Producing Animals. 

Displaying our CO2 equivalent is a way for us to be transparent, whilst the verification validates our methods and results. Consumers increasingly request transparency about the food they buy. In the aquaculture value chain, we should be ready to meet these requests.

This will enable our customers to calculate and display the carbon footprint of their products. Additionally, the COequivalent on the label can help spark a much-needed debate about sustainability and the complexity of the subject matter.

The COequivalent can be found on our data sheets and product labels, and on request, we are also able to deliver a COreport to our customers including a calculation of the transportation emission.

Below we have listed some of the most frequent questions we have encountered since initiating this project.

Customers are welcome to contact us to find out more.

 

Read the Press Release

Read about aLLER AQUA VERIFIED IN CO2-LABELLING

Read about Aller Aqua Sustainability

go to our data sheets

read about aller Aqua commitment

HOW YOU GET CO2 VERIFIED AS A FISH FARMER

 


QUESTION:

Why do you display a CO2 number on your labels and data sheets? 

ANSWER:

We have chosen to label our feeds with COequivalents to create transparency about the impact of our products and to enable our customers to calculate the Carbon-footprint of their products. In many places, this is not yet requested in the market, but we believe that it will be and then we are ready. To ensure that our numbers are valid and that we do things right, we have been verified by Bureau Veritas.  



 
QUESTION:

What do the numbers on our data sheets and labels mean? 

ANSWER:

The Carbon footprint on the data sheets and labels quantifies the global warming potential of produced COequivalent (CO2-eq) as kg per kg feed. The COequivalent is the amount of CO2 that would create the same amount of global warming and provides a standardized value for the global warming potential of products. The COequivalent of a specific process or product summarizes CO2 emissions, but also emissions of other greenhouse gases (shortened GHG) and other effects, like deforestation, of this process. The lower the COequivalent value of a specific feed, the less this feed contributes to global warming. 

Two values of COequivalent are stated on our labels and data sheets:  

With Land Use Change (LUC) 
The number includes the Carbon footprint derived by transforming the natural landscape into cultivation in the last 20 years, for example, deforestation to cultivate soy. 

Without Land Use Change (LUC) 
The number is exclusive to the Carbon footprint created by transforming the natural landscape into cultivation, for example already cultivated areas for wheat. 

On the labels, the exact Carbon footprint given as COequivalents of the product will be shown. On the data sheets, a range will be presented to account for small adjustments in the production. 




QUESTION:

Which feeds have we labelled with a COequivalent? 

ANSWER:

All feeds from our factories in Denmark, Poland and Germany will display COequivalents on data sheets and labels, except organic feed. Feeds from other factories will follow at a later date. 

 


QUESTION:

Why is there no Carbon footprint for organic feeds? 

ANSWER:

Organic raw materials are not yet considered in the environmental footprint databases.




QUESTION:

Does the Carbon footprint reflect feed quality or final fish quality?

ANSWER:

The labelling for Carbon footprint does not reflect or affect feed quality or final fish quality. 




QUESTION:

Have the feed recipes been changed due to Carbon footprint?

ANSWER:

The recipes of the feeds have not been changed due to labelling for Carbon footprint.




QUESTION:

Are there extra or reduced costs associated with Carbon footprint? 

ANSWER:

There is no change in price connected to the labelling of feeds for Carbon footprint. 




QUESTION:

What is the difference in Carbon footprint of different feeds and different fish species? 

ANSWER:

There is no general difference in Carbon footprint between feeds for different species since a very different feed composition can lead to similar COequivalents. In addition, each fish species can be offered a range of feeds, from intensive to extensive farming, EX or non-EX and floating or sinking feeds, possibly, but not necessarily, creating a range of COequivalents for each species. 

The Carbon footprint is largely dependent on the raw materials in each feed. The final composition of a feed is however not the only determinator of the Carbon footprint of a fish farm. Therefore, more factors than purely the COequivalent should be considered when choosing a sustainable feed for the farm.   

It is important to note that the feed conversion ratio (FCR) for each combination of feed and fish species will determine the Carbon footprint at fish farm level. A high-performance feed with a low FCR will show a lower Carbon footprint per kg fish produced than a medium-performance feed with a possibly similar Carbon footprint. Given the progression in FCR during fish growth and higher Carbon footprint in grow-out feeds due to possible higher inclusion rate of raw materials with higher Carbon footprint, small fish will show a lower Carbon footprint than larger fish of the same species per kg fish. 




QUESTION:

 What is the contribution of different raw materials to the Carbon footprint? 

ANSWER:

Different raw materials contribute differently to the final Carbon footprint of a feed by showing deviating COequivalents, both with and without Land Use Change. Some raw materials show a large spread in COequivalents with or without Land Use Change, whereas in other raw materials these values are very close together. 




QUESTION:

What is the historical development of Carbon footprint in feeds from Aller Aqua?

ANSWER:

Several steps have reduced the Carbon footprint by: 

  • Changing the sourcing of raw materials from global to regional purchase, 
  • Changing the source of soy from South America to Europe* to reduce the Carbon footprint of soy with regard to transportation and cultivation (deforestation or Land Use Change), 
  • Using raw materials with little need of fertilizers (for example legumes/peas). 

*For our European factories. 




QUESTION:

How can your customers calculate their COequivalent? 

ANSWER:

To enable our customers to calculate their COequivalent, we have created a method to calculate the transportation emission. Customers can request a report from us, which contains the COequivalent of the feed they have ordered, as well as a calculation of the COequivalent of the transportation.  



From left: Odyssefs Papagiannidis, LCA & EPD Consultant - Bureau Veritas, Mette Rindom Nørrelykke, Group Quality Manager - Aller Aqua Group, Mikael Ridstrøm Lauridsen, Purchaser - Aller Aqua Group and Odysseas Negkas, Purchase Student Assistant - Aller Aqua Group.