Comparative Environmental Assessment of the Iron Fertilisers’ Production: Fe-Biochelate versus Fe-EDDHA

Sara Rajabi Hamedani, Mariateresa Cardarelli, Youssef Rouphael, Paolo Bonini, Andrea Colantoni and Giuseppe Colla ()
Additional contact information
Sara Rajabi Hamedani: Department of Agriculture and Forest Sciences, University of Tuscia, 01100 Viterbo, Italy
Mariateresa Cardarelli: Department of Agriculture and Forest Sciences, University of Tuscia, 01100 Viterbo, Italy
Youssef Rouphael: Department of Agricultural Sciences, University of Naples Federico II, 80055 Portici, Italy
Paolo Bonini: oloBion-OMICS LIFE LAB, 08028 Barcelona, Spain
Andrea Colantoni: Department of Agriculture and Forest Sciences, University of Tuscia, 01100 Viterbo, Italy
Giuseppe Colla: Department of Agriculture and Forest Sciences, University of Tuscia, 01100 Viterbo, Italy

Sustainability, 2023, vol. 15, issue 9, 1-14

Abstract: In response to tackling the environmental consequences of fertiliser production, biofertilisers from organic sources are strongly promoted in line with circular economy and maximising resource use. Despite the outstanding potential of bio-based fertilisers for the sustainable development of the agricultural sector, an environmental investigation of these fertilisers is required to replace synthesised fertilisers. Considering the importance of iron as a plant micronutrient and the scientific gap in the environmental assessment of relevant fertilisers, iron-based fertilisers produced in EU and US geographical zones are selected as a case study in this paper. Therefore, this study examines the environmental performance of two iron-based fertilisers (Fe-biochelate and Fe-EDDHA) by the life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology. The LCA model has been implemented in Simapro software by the ecoinvent database and ReCipe 2016 method considering 1 kg iron content as a functional unit. The results revealed that the Fe-biochelate reduced impacts (69–82%) on all relevant categories, including global warming (69%), terrestrial ecotoxicity (82%), and fossil resource scarcity (77%) in comparison with Fe-EDDHA. Soymeal and acetic acid were the main stressors identified in Fe-biochelate production, while phenol, ethylenediamine and glyoxal were the most significant contributors to the impact categories related to Fe-EDDHA. As a result, Fe-biochelate can be considered a more eco-friendly alternative to Fe-EDDHA.

Keywords: life cycle assessment; Fe-biochelate; Fe-EDDHA; protein hydrolysate; sustainable fertilization (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2023
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/9/7488/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/9/7488/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:9:p:7488-:d:1138372

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().