Life cycle assessment of different sea cucumber (Apostichopus japonicus Selenka) farming systems

• Published in: Journal of Ocean University of China Vol. 14; no. 6; pp. 1068 - 1074
• Main Authors: Wang, Guodong, Dong, Shuanglin, Tian, Xiangli, Gao, Qinfeng, Wang, Fang, Xu, Kefeng
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Heidelberg Science Press 01.12.2015; Springer Nature B.V; Key Laboratory of Mariculture of Ministry of Education, Fisheries College, Ocean University of China, Qingdao 266003, P.R.China%National Oceanographic Center of Qingdao, Qingdao 266071, P.R.China
• Subjects: Acidification; Apostichopus japonicus; Aquaculture; Climate change; Earth and Environmental Science; Earth Sciences; Environmental impact; Environmental indicators; Eutrophication; Extensive farming; Farming systems; Global warming; Holothurioidea; Intensive farming; Life cycle analysis; Life cycles; Marine; Meteorology; Oceanography; Oxidizing agents; Photochemicals; Sustainability; INW, China, People's Rep., Shandong Prov., Qingdao; environmental impact; sustainability evaluation; life cycle assessment; Apostichopus japonicas
• DOI: 10.1007/s11802-015-2640-y
• ISSN: 1672-5182

The life cycle assessment was employed to evaluate the environmental impacts of three farming systems (indoor intensive, semi-intensive and extensive systems) of sea cucumber living near Qingdao, China, which can effectively overcome the interference of inaccurate background parameters caused by the diversity of economic level and environment in different regions. Six indicators entailing global warming potential (1.86E + 04, 3.45E + 03, 2.36E + 02), eutrophication potential (6.65E + 01, −1.24E + 02, −1.65E + 02), acidification potential (1.93E + 02, 4.33E + 01, 1.30E + 00), photochemical oxidant formation potential (2.35E-01, 5.46E −02, 2.53E-03), human toxicity potential (2.47E + 00, 6.08E-01, 4.91E + 00) and energy use (3.36E + 05, 1.27E + 04, 1.48E + 03) were introduced in the current study. It was found that all environmental indicators in the indoor intensive farming system were much higher than those in semi-intensive and extensive farming systems because of the dominant role of energy input, while energy input also contributed as the leading cause factor for most of the indicators in the semi-intensive farming system. Yet in the extensive farming system, infrastructure materials played a major role. Through a comprehensive comparison of the three farming systems, it was concluded that income per unit area of indoor intensive farming system was much higher than those of semi-intensive and extensive farming systems. However, the extensive farming system was the most sustainable one. Moreover, adequate measures were proposed, respectively, to improve the environmental sustainability of each farming system in the present study.