The Climate Change Impact of Finnish Fish Products

The Climate Change Impact of Finnish Fish Products | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Article The Climate Change Impact of Finnish Fish Products Frans Silvenius, Kirsi Silvennoinen, Jari Setälä, Tapio Keskinen, and 4 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-6152746/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Published Journal Publication published 21 Oct, 2025 Read the published version in Scientific Reports → Version 1 posted 12 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract This study focuses on counting the climate impacts of the most common Finnish fish products. The selected fish species were rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), Baltic herring (Clupea harengus membras), pikeperch (Sander lucioperca), perch (Perca fluviatilis) and vendace (Coregonus albula). Rainbow trout was farmed, and all the other fish species were caught wild fish. On the product level this study was limited to cover only fresh fillets and gutted fish (vendace). The data was collected by surveys from typical enterprises from fisheries sector, like fishermen, aquaculture and fish processing companies. LCA methodology was used to count the impacts. The farmed rainbow trout had the highest climate impact with 3.7 kg CO2 eq/kg/functional unit and the lowest Baltic herring caught with fish trap with 0.7 kg CO2 eq/kg/functional unit. In average the farmed products (rainbow trout) had higher climate impact than studied captured species. Gillnet fishing had higher climate impact than the action of trawling, seine and fish traps. The main reason for higher impacts for farmed fish was a consequence of feed consumption. The differences between caught fish species were caused by different distance to fishing areas and volumes of catch. According to the results the carbon footprint of Finnish citizen can be lowered by using domestic caught fish. Earth and environmental sciences/Environmental sciences Physical sciences/Engineering fishing aquaculture carbon footprint Figures Figure 1 1. Introduction Human population is growing rapidly and there is an urgent need to change food production more sustainable. This transition should cover a variety of aspects including climate and other impacts to our environment. The data show there should be a shift from animal-based products to plant-based ones [ 1 ]. However, fish products and aquaculture could have potential to be part of the sustainable and healthy diet if the production is directed to products with lower impact to environment and climate [ 2 ]. All actions for changing diet and production will need reliable data for verifying the direction and target achievement. In this article we consider climate impact of Finnish fish products, how the resulted impacts have distributed in the product chain and what is the difference between farmed and captured fish products. Globally the amount of aquaculture products has grown from 20 million tonnes in 1990 to 120 million tonnes in 2022 [ 3 ] Fish farming is dominated by Asia, which has produced 89 percent of the global total in volume terms in the last 20 year [ 4 ]. Total global fish production including farmed and caught products is estimated to have reached about 200 million tonnes in 2020 [ 3 ]. Of the overall total, 156 million tonnes were used for human consumption, equivalent to an estimated annual supply of 20.5 kg per capita. The remaining 22 million tonnes were destined for non-food uses, mainly to produce fishmeal and fish oil. Aquaculture accounted for 46 percent of the total production volume of fish products and 52 percent of fish for human consumption [ 5 ]. In Finland in the year 2021 consumption of fish products was about 62 million kg, and about 80 percent of this was imported. The consumption of Finnish farmed salmon was about 6.7 million kg and caught wild fish about 5 million kg. [ 6 ] The highest catch is for Baltic herring (Table 1 ), but only 5% of the catch goes for the human consumption in Finland, the remaining part goes to fish meal production and fur animal feed and export. Altogether fish was consumed 14.5 kg/cap annually and about 4 kg of that is domestic. Further, over about 50% of the domestic consumption is from small-scaled fisheries. The human consumptions of studied fish species are shown in Table 1 . The consumption of meat products was 77.4 kg/cap [ 7 ]. Table 1 Production volumes and consumption per capita of the most important Finnish fish species. (Luke 2023b, Luke 2024) Million kg kg/ca. Rainbow trout, farmed 15.3 (2022) 1.5 Baltic herring, brackish water 68.2 (2022) 0.2 Perch, brackish water 1.0 (2022) 0.6 Pikeperch, freshwater 0.9 (2021) 0.4 Vendace, freshwater 2.0 (2021) 0.2 For Atlantic herring fishing, there have been publications: like [ 8 ], [ 9 ] and [ 10 ]. The climate impact of farmed Atlantic salmon and rainbow trout have been published recently e.g. in Norway [ 11 ], [ 9 ], [ 12 ]. Different kinds of caught fish have been investigated [ 15 ], [ 18 ]. The first fish production study in Finland investigated climate impact of average freshwater fish as pike (Esox lucius), pikeperch, perch and whitefish (Coregonus lavaretus) [ 19 ]. This study lacked representative data e.g. about fuel consumption and more investigations were needed. A Finnish LCA-investigation of Baltic Herring fillet has been published with the same system boundaries and functional units [ 19 ]. The data source was fuel consumption statistics and amounts of catch by trawling. In the previous Finnish study, where the climate impact of the Finnish rainbow trout was evaluated, feed production chain is the most relevant share of the life cycle [ 19 ]. In this study, all the relevant life cycle parts were included in the calculation. The aim of this study was to calculate climate impacts for the main domestic fish products used in Finland. The novelty value of this study is high, because there was lack for climate impact studies for small-scaled fishing. Especially for freshwater fishing there was not any kind of climate impact data. The study was carried out, because the results can be utilized in many ways by different actors, for instance decision makers concerning blue economy, consumers in their plans for climate-friendly diets as well as actors of fish industry in their marketing. 2. Materials and methods 2.1 Goal and scope In this study the climate change impact of the most important Finnish fish products was calculated. The background data was based on surveys made for the most relevant catching, processing and farming methods. The analysed fish species were rainbow trout, Baltic herring, pikeperch, perch and vendace. Rainbow trout was farmed, and all the other fish species were caught wild fish. Functional unit for the different fish species was chosen based on how the fresh fish products are mainly sold in the Finnish fish market (Table 2 ). The study covered gutted vendace and fresh fillets of other fish species. The fillet yield (the amount of fillet in relation to the amount of round fish) was lowest for perch and highest for rainbow trout (Table 2 ). Table 2 Fillet yield and functional units of the studied products [ 17 ]* Gutting yield Product Fillet yield % Functional unit Rainbow trout, farmed 60 Fillet with skin Baltic herring, brackish water 37 Fillet with skin Perch, brackish water 30 Fillet without skin Pikeperch, freshwater 42 Fillet without skin Vendace, freshwater 70* Gutted fish with skin 2.2 Methodological aspects All methods were carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations, in accordance with ISO 14067 and PAS 2050 for land use change [ 21 ], [ 22 ]. SimaPro software was used for calculations. LCA-methodology was used, because it provides tools to marketing and decision making containing all parts of the life-cycle of the product system. Only climate impact was assessed, despite that there are also other important sustainability aspects in fisheries and aquaculture. The most significant greenhouse gases emissions, carbon dioxide, methane and dinitrogen monoxide were converted to carbon dioxide equivalents by multiplying the emissions as gas-specific characterization factors. For characterization, EF 3.1 factors were used and the most important of them are shown in Table 3 . Table 3 Characterization factors in this study. Factor kg CO 2 eq/kg Carbon dioxide, fossil 1 Carbon dioxide, biogenic 0 Methane, fossil 29.8 Methane, biogenic 27 Dinitrogen monoxide 273 In this study economic allocation (based on value) was used for feed raw materials except fish meal and oil were allocated by mass allocation (based on quantity). Allocation for main and by-products of the fish was done by economic allocation. For target species and by-catches economic allocation was used. Economic allocation is used because the use and prices are so different between main and by-products of fish processing and slaughtering. Fish meal and fish oil are different, the prices vary, and it is not always clear, which one is the main product. 2.3 Data collection The data was collected from feed raw material production, feed production, fish farming and fisheries, hatchery, transports and packaging. The system boundaries were same as in many previous studies, e.g. [ 12 ], [ 19 ]. Trade, consumer and food waste in these phases were excluded. Data was collected from fishermen by surveys and interviews concerning fuel consumption of fisheries, logistics and package use. All the experimental protocols were approved by Luke. We confirm that informed consent was obtained from all subjects and their legal guardians. The fish farming data was mainly based on national statistics and previous studies. The fish processing data was collected from leading processing companies by surveys and interviews. Processing data of fish-based raw materials of feed was based on surveys to one Finnish processing plant and Ecoinvent The inventory data is presented in the Results Chap. 3.1 The data of fish recipes, feed production inputs and outputs and transports of feed and its ingredients was collected from two leading fish feed producing companies, which deliver almost all fish feed used by Finnish fish farmers. The feed recipes and data sources are presented in Table 4 . More detailed information was not allowed to publish because of confidential reasons. Economic allocation was used for all feed raw materials except fish meal and oil products because of variability of prices and because the prices are near to each other. For Finnish rainbow trout, the feed conversion factor was 1.15 according to statistics of Centre for Economic Development, Transport and the Environment in South-West Finland [ 23 ] The origin and transport equipment of the feed raw materials was obtained from the feed processing companies. Table 4 Finnish fish feed ingredients ¨Feed ingredient % Product Data source Animal based ingredients 19 By-products of slaughtering Ecoinvent 3.8 Fish-based ingredients 23 Fish meal and fish oil Ecoinvent 3.8, primary data Plant-based ingredients 54 e.g. Soya, wheat and corn products Ecoinvent 3.8, Proagria database Other ingredients 4 Vitamines, minerals Ecoinvent 3.8 The data of production volumes and nitrogen excretion were taken from statistics [ 23 ] The materials of fish farming process were based on [ 19 ]. The N 2 O-emissions of N-excretion of the metabolism of rainbow trout were assumed to be 0.005 kgN 2 O-N/kg N excreted based on IPCC (2006) estimate of the emission of treated wastewater [ 24 ]. Methane emissions of fish farming were not considered, because of lack of data. Net cage inputs and outputs like electricity and diesel consumption originated from the analysis of unpublished financial statements of farming companies. The data of hatcheries was based on interview of a major Finnish producer. The data of fuel consumption of Baltic herring trawling was based on interviews of the two biggest trawling companies (Table 5 ). The data included both the actual fishing and transports to landing place. The calculation of perch fishing fuel consumption was based on the interviews of fishermen and the analysis of nine perch fishers’ fishing and fish landings areas and the interviews concerning the fish collection routes of fish processing companies. The data of material quantities concerning boats and fishing traps were caught from the fish equipment producers. The data based on fishing of vendace was based on interview of five trawlers and seven seine fishers and the fishing of pikeperch interview of four fishers. The interviews were made during 2018–2019 and the participated groups of fishermen were selected so that they represent as typical fishermen in Finland as possible. Table 5 Number of fishermen groups in investigations Fish species, fishing equipment Number of fishermen groups (staff of the boats) interviewed Area Baltic herring, trawl 2 SW-Finland Baltic herring, fish-trap 8 SW-Finland Perch, net 9 SW-W-Finland Vendace, trawl 5 Central Finland Vendace, seine 10 North Savo, Lapland Pikeperch, net 5 Central Finland The data concerning logistics of fish raw materials from fish farms and harbors to processing and logistics final products to central warehouses were based on interviews to fishermen, fish processing and aquaculture companies concerning transport equipment, fuel consumption, distances and amounts of transported products. Residual low and medium voltage Finnish residual electricity emission factors were used for electricity (modified based on Ecoinvent 3). For fuels used for logistics and for heat energy, emission factors based on studies of [ 25 ], [ 26 ] and [ 27 ] were used. Packages are used both in the transport of fish from farm or catch area to processing plant and in the transport of the final product. The energy and water use data and use of packages for chosen products were inquired from the processing companies, one large processing company for each product and for production of packaging materials average data from different databases was used [ 25 ], [ 28 ], [ 29 ], [ 30 ]. The most common package type is polystyrene box, which is used for transport of fish, especially perch and pikeperch. Some larger transport units like skipping containers are reusable, but not so commonly used. Vacuum package and cardboard boxes were also used for transports of fillets to central stores. The quantity of packages was based on questionnaires to fishermen, fish processing companies and aquaculture companies. The climate impacts of packages were based on surveys to the biggest package producers of Finnish market and this data is confidential. For polystyrene-packages, only weights were caught from producers and climate impact data was based on [ 15 ]. 3. Results 3.1 Fuel consumption of fisheries The results for fuel consumption of the fisheries varied a lot, for trawled vendace the fuel consumption was as 0.32 l/kg (live weight), when for Baltic herring caught by fish-trap the value was 0.01 l/kg − (live weight) (Table 6 ). The variation between fuel consumption of vendace trawlers was large, (0.16–0.80 l/kg round fish). Deviation of pikeperch fishing was large to0, (0.11–0.57 l /kg round fish) and vendace caught by seine 0.02–0.11 l/kg round fish. The energy inputs for an average Finnish fish farm were 0.054 l diesel/kg and 0.16 kWh electricity/kg. Table 6 Fuel consumption of the main products in Finnish fisheries. Around Finland Baltic sea was considered as brackish water because of low salt content. Product l/kg fish Baltic herring, brackish water, trawl 0.11 Baltic herring, brackish water, fish-trap 0.01 Perch, brackish water, gillnet 0.15 Pikeperch, freshwater, gillnet 0.13 Vendace, freshwater, trawl 0.32 Vendace, freshwater, seine 0.08 3.2 Packaging and transports The amounts of used packaging materials are presented in Table 7 . The high use of package for perch fillets is due to very low filleting yield and small package size being transported. Table 7 Amount of the packaging used in the whole product chain. Fish species Catch method tai origin Use of polystyrene boxes, kg/kg − final product Use of cardboard boxes, kg/kg − final product Use of plastic packages kg/kg final product Rainbow trout Farmed 0.03 0.04 0.008 Baltic herring Fish-trap 0.02 0 0 Baltic herring Trawl 0.02 0 0 Perch Gillnet 0.10 0 0.001 Pikeperch Gillnet 0.03 0 0.003 Vendace Seine 0.02 0 0 Vendace Trawl 0.04 0 0 Fuel consumption during transport to processing site was lowest for Baltic herring fishery (Table 8 ). High volumes of Baltic herring are landed with trawlers to central fish harbors, and therefore also transport is cost effective and in spite of long fishing trips and high fuel consumption the fuel consumption per fish unit is still low. Volumes of Baltic herring fishing with trap net are also relatively high while transporting distances are from fishing sites to harbor is short leading altogether to low fuel consumption per unit. The volumes are much lower in small scale fisheries (perch and pikeperch fishing), and the transport distances normally are longer in dispersed inland fisheries. Thus, the fuel consumption per kilo fish were higher for small scale gillnet fishing and inland fishing. Table 8 Fuel consumptions from the catch area to processing. Fish species and origin Fuel consumption, l/kg fish Finnish rainbow trout, farmed in marine net cages 0.008 Baltic herring caught by trawl, marine fishing 0.003 Baltic herring caught by fish-trap, marine fishing 0.003 Perch caught by gillnet, marine fishing 0.016 Pikeperch caught by gillnet, inland fishing 0.073 Vendace caught by trawl, inland fishing 0.034 Vendace caught by seine, inland fishing 0.034 3.3 Climate change results The highest climate impact was analysed for farmed fish, 3.7 kg CO 2 eq/kg t. thereafter, came fish caught by gillnet (2.1–2.4 kg CO 2 eq/FU) and the lowest carbon footprint was products caught by seine, trawl and fish-trap (0.7–1.6 kg CO 2 eq/kg FU).. The exception was vendace caught by trawl, which had the same climate impact as gillnet fishing (2.4 kg CO 2 -eq/kg FU) The product chain of feed raw materials was the most important source of greenhouse gas emissions, 60% of the total emissions (Table 8 , Fig. 1 ). The part of dinitrogen monoxide in farming process was 0.17 g N 2 O-N/kg round fish. Climate impact for liveweight rainbow trout was 2.1 kg CO 2 eq/kg fish. Fishing was usually the most important source of greenhouse gas emissions for captured fish and feed raw material production for farmed fish. (Table 9 , Fig. 1 ) and the share of fishing varied between 16% and 70%. The share of processing, which include filleting and packaging, was 6–71%, the lowest for rainbow trout fillet and the highest for Baltic herring caught by fish-trap. The overall results for climate impact of fish products and contribution of product chain are presented in the Supplementary materials. Table 9 Climate change impact of studied products in relation to the functional unit Fish product LCA results, kg CO 2 eq/FU Rainbow trout fillet 3.7 Baltic herring fillet, fish trap 0.4 Baltic herring fillet, fish trawl 1.3 Perch fillet, net 2.5 Pikeperch fillet, net 2.0 Gutted vendace, seine 0.8 Gutted vendace, trawl 1.9 4. Discussion According to the results the climate change impact of farmed fish was higher than climate impact of caught fish. The largest part of the emissions of farmed fish coming from the product chain of feed raw materials. For caught fish the distance to mainland and catch volumes were essential: fish species, which can be caught in higher volumes the climate impact is usually lower than for fish species with lower catch volumes. The results of the study show that catch volumes by seine, fish-trap or trawl are higher than catch volumes of gillnet. That is why climate impact of Baltic herring and vendace was lower than that of perch and pikeperch. The fillet yield impacted also on the results: despite the fuel consumption for perch and pikeperch fishing were almost the same, the climate impact for perch fillet was higher due to the low fillet yield than that of pikeperch fillet. Higher transport volumes mean usually lower climate impact of transports. Therefore, the climate impact of Baltic herring fillet and rainbow trout fillet transports was especially low. The climate impact of Baltic herring fillet caught by trawl was higher than that for Baltic herring trap net. The main inland pikeperch fishing areas located rather long away from main market areas in Southern Finland cities. Therefore, transport distances of pikeperch were longer than for any other investigated products and the share of transports climate impacts high (24%). Gutted vendace caught by seine had an average climate impact of 1.2 kg CO 2 eq/kg and vendace seined during winter had climate impact 0.9 kg CO 2 eq/kg. The average value for vendace trawling was 2.4 kg CO 2 eq/kg functional unit and was between 1.6–4.6 kg CO 2 eq/kg. One thing to keep in mind is that the products are not fully comparable to each other because vendace was analysed as gutted fish and other fish products as fillets. The climate impact per kilogram of gutted fish is lower than that filleted fish of the same fish species. The vendace is the only fish that is typically cooked and served as gutted rather than fillet. The climate impact for rainbow trout has been decreased considerably 1.8 kg CO 2 eq/kg from 5.5 kg CO 2 eq/kg to 3.7 kg CO 2 eq/kg in the previous study in Finland [ 19 ]. The reasons for that are mainly methodological changes. The functional unit was then, however, different from this study, 1 kg of edible product. Further, the N 2 O-emissions of N-excretion of the metabolism of rainbow trout were assumed to be 10 times higher in previous study [ 19 ], [ 31 ] and the characterization factor of N 2 O has lowered from 298 to 273. The share of N 2 O was in previous study 1.2 kg CO 2 eq/kg fish fillet, so this had a remarkable effect on the results. On the other hand, in some similar studies the N 2 O-emissions were not mentioned at all, e.g. [ 12 ], [ 16 ], [ 32 ]. One remarkable change since previous investigation was the amount of soya in feed, which has declined to almost zero. The main replacing raw materials are animal-based by-products and some plant protein products. There has been published value 5.3 kg CO 2 eq/kg for farmed salmon in Norway with mass allocation [ 12 ], [ 32 ]. Reasons for differing results are combination of input-output model, different feed conversion factor, different modeling of N 2 O in farm level, different content of soya in the feed and species-based modeling of fish meal and fish oil. Higher amount of soy in feed causes remarkable climate impacts because of land use change, which were minimal in our study. The fish meal and fish oil were modeled in this study by average Ecoinvent-values [ 25 ], but separate data of each fish species raw materials has been published [ 12 ] and [ 32 ]. This species-specific data had higher climate change impact than global averages of Ecoinvent 3 [ 25 ] used Furthermore, in this study some share of climate impact was allocated to roe production, which is not essential for salmon cultivation. There were also differences in functional units: in a recent Norwegian study [ 12 ] the functional unit is edible part of the fish (fillet without skin) and in this study unit was fillet with skin. When compared this study to other studies some has higher and some lower results than this study. In Central Europe, Spain and France the size of the rainbow trout is smaller, which can cause differences in climate impact results. For smaller fish, in Central Europe there has been published value 1.18 kg CO 2 eq/kg for liveweight rainbow trout [ 33 ] and 1.78 kg CO 2 eq/kg for liveweight rainbow trout in Spain [ 14 ] and 1.76–1.85 in France [ 34 ], which are lower than value of this investigation (2.1 kg CO 2 eq/kg fish). On the other hand in Norway there has been calculated higher result than this study [ 32 ], 3.8 kg CO 2 eq/kg liveweight as well as in Germany: 2.24–3.56 kg CO 2 eq/kg for liveweight rainbow trout [ 17 ]. In that study was also recirculating aquaculture system in Denmark calculated and the value was 13.6 CO 2 eq/kg liveweight. In a review article [ 35 ] the climate change impact was 1.7–3.3 kg CO 2 eq/kg liveweight and in one Norwegian study [ 36 ] the result was 2.0 kg CO 2 eq/kg liveweight, which are on the same level as this study. The climate impact is highly dependent on the farming system studied [ 17 ] and the marketing size of fish [ 14 ]. In the Central and South Europe rainbow trout is normally farmed in inland ponds and the marketing size is then below 500 grammes (portion size fish). The Finnish marketing size is 2–3 kilos, and it is mostly farmed in net pens in brackish water. The marketing size of sea farmed rainbow trout is bigger in Norway (up to 5 kilos) and in Denmark (up to 4 kg). However, Denmark also produces a lot of portion size rainbow trout too. The difference of functional unit explained also the lower climate impact of this study compared to Finnish previous study [ 19 ]. Functional unit is not in general the same in seafood life cycle assessment (LCA) investigations, which make it difficult to do comparisons between different LCA-studies and it has been edible part of fish or liveweight in most of the studies. Harmonized methods for LCA investigations of seafood are needed to make the results comparable to each other. The LCA inventory results of this study were in general in line with previous climate studies of fish products In Norway there has been published fuel consumptions values for very many fishing methods [ 11 ]. In this study, the average value for gillnet fishing were 0.13 l/kg for pikeperch and 0.15 l/kg for perch, so they are slightly lower than that study. generic value in Norway 0.19 kg fuel/kg fish for gillnet fishing [ 11 ] and) in Denmark, 0.2–0.4 l/kg [ 18 ]. For seine, this study gives a number between 0.04 (winter) and 0.08 (summer) l/kg fish and the values are lower than generic value 0.09 kg l/kg fish in Norway [ 11 ] and in Denmark [ 18 ], which was 0.11–0.16 l/kg fish. In pelagic trawl, the fuel consumption value was 0.09 l/kg fish, when the value for this study was in freshwater trawl fishery was 0.32 l/kg fish, in the trawling case the fuel consumption is higher in freshwater fishing than in pelagic fishing However, it is essential to notice that fishing conditions in the deep Atlantic coast with various fish species are very different compared to shallow coastal and inland waters in Finland. The climate impact varies in this study a lot between fishers even for same species and fishing methods. For example, the variation or pikeperch fillet was between 1.6–3.6 kg CO 2 eq/kg FU and vendace caught by trawl 1.6–4.6 kg CO 2 eq/kg FU. The deviation of vendace caught by seine was 1.0-1.4 kg CO 2 eq/kg FU. This means that at highest the climate impact of caught fish can be as higher than farmed fish in some cases. This large variation should be taken in account when making LCA-assessment for specific fish products. This also reveals possibilities to fishers to lower their climate impact by intensifying fishing and choosing climate friendly fishing methods. According to results by selecting caught low carbon fish products to diet it is possible to reduce climate impact of diets. However, the amount of fishermen has been continuously declining, which has an impact on domestic fish consumption in Finland [ 36 ]. When compared to meat products in edible part, Finnish captured fish products have lower climate impact than Finnish chicken (3.4 kg), pork (5.0 kg) and beef (31.2 kg) according to [ 37 ], [ 38 ], [ 39 ] converted to edible part from carcass weight. Rainbow trout fillet has lower climate impact (3.7 kg) than pork and beef, but higher than chicken. Further, when comparing different protein sources in a review article [ 40 ] the climate impact of animal products like chicken was 3.1–5.2 kg CO 2 eq/kg edible part, pork 4.1–6.2 kg CO 2 eq/kg edible part and beef 28.0–31.0 kg CO 2 eq/kg edible part. It means that by selecting caught carbon fish products to diet it is possible to reduce climate impact of diets. There is, however, trend in Finland, where the amount of fishers is continuously declining, which has an impact on domestic fish consumption in Finland. The Nordic Nutrition Recommendations [ 41 ] advised for increasing intake from sustainably managed stocks supported both by effects on health outcomes and environmental footprint. It also recommended fish and seafood from sustainably managed farms and that wild stocks should be prioritized and consumption of species with high environmental impact should be limited. In Finland these advises could be fill by consuming herring, perch, pikeperch and some other freshwater species like roach. 5. Conclusion In general, climate impact for captured fish is lower than cultivated fish. Moreover, fish product caught by gillnet have higher climate impact than fish products caught by seine, trawl and fish traps, except vendace caught by trawl, which has the same climate impact as fish products caught by gillnet. According to the study, however, there is big variation between single fishermen in distances to fishing place, catch and transport volumes and transport distances. Captured fish, for example vendace, can have higher climate impact than farmed fish. On the contrary, the climate impact of captured fish is seldom high, when the catch amount is high. Therefore, the climate impact for different fishermen can vary significantly. This finding encourages fishermen to analyse their fishing to develop climate friendly fishing methods and practices. Declarations Author contributions Frans Silvenius: Data collection, Methodology, Investigation, Writing, Review, Editing Kirsi Silvennoinen: Review, Writing, Visualization Jari Setälä: Data collection, Writing, Review Tapio Keskinen: Data collection, Writing, Review, Editing Markus Kankainen: Data collection, Writing, Review K Kaija Saarni: Writing, Review Jari Niukko. Data collection, Modelling, Writing Ilkka Leinonen: Methodology Acknowledgements Thanks to the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, who funded the study. Thanks to interviewed fishermen, fish farming companies, fish processing companies and packaging manufacturers. Without them the project would not have to be possible to do. Conflict of interest The authors declare not conflict of interests. Data availability Yes. The datasets used and analysed during the current study available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. References Willet, W., Rockström, J., Loken, B., Springmann, M., Lang, T., Verneulen, S., Garnett, T., Tilman, D., DeClerck, F., Wood, A., Jonell, M., Clark, M., Gordon, L. J., Farzo, J., Hawkes, C., Zuryak, R., Rivera, J. A., De Vries, W., Sibanda, L. M., Afshin, A., Chaudhary, A., Herrero, M., Agustina, R., Branca, F., Lartey, A., Fan, S., Crona, B., Fox, E., Bignet, V., Troell, M., Lindahö, T., Singh, S., Cornell, S. E., Reddy, K. S., Narain, S., Nishtar, S., Murray, C. J. L. 2019. Food in the Anthropocene: the EAT-Lancet Commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems. Lancet. 2019 Feb 2;393(10170):447-492. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31788-4. Epub 2019 Jan 16. Erratum in: Lancet. 2019 Feb 9;393(10171):530. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)30212-0. Erratum in: Lancet. 2019 Jun 29;393(10191):2590. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31428-X. Erratum in: Lancet. 2020 Feb 1;395(10221):338. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30144-6. Erratum in: Lancet. 2020 Oct 3;396(10256):e56. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31828-6. PMID: 30660336. Koehn, J., Allison, E., Golden, C., Hilborn, R. 2022. The role of seafood in sustainable diets. Environ. Res. Lett. 17 (3). DOI:10.1088/1748-9326/ac3954 FAO 2022. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2022. Towards Blue Transformation. Rome, FAO. https://doi.org/10.4060/cc0461en (accessed 9.6.2023). FAO 2023. Consumption of Fish and Fishery Products. Fisheries and Aquaculture Division Rome. FAO 2020. https://www.fao.org/news/story/en/item/1279179/icode/ (accessed 14.9.2023). Luke 2023. Kalamarkkinakatsaus 2023. https://jukuri.luke.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/553302/Luke-luobio_43_2023.pdf?sequence=1 (accessed 14.9.2023) Luke 2023. Tilastotietokanta. https://statdb.luke.fi/PXWeb/pxweb/fi/LUKE/ (Accessed 14.9.2023) Luke 2024. Kalan kulutus 2023 [verkkojulkaisu]. Luonnonvarakeskuksen tilastotietokanta, Helsinki: Luonnonvarakeskus [viitattu: 18.11.2024]. Saantitapa: https://www.luke.fi/fi/tilastot/kalan-kulutus/kalan-kulutus-2023 Suomen virallinen tilasto (SVT): Kaupallinen kalastus sisävesillä. Helsinki: Luonnonvarakeskus http://www.stat.fi/til/aksis/index.html (accessed 19.7.2021). Suomen virallinen tilasto (SVT): Vesiviljely. Helsinki: Luonnonvarakeskus http://www.stat.fi/til/vvilj/index.html (accessed 19.7.2021). Schau, E. M., Ellingsen, H., Endal. A., Aanondsen, S. A. 2009. Energy consumption in the Norwegian fisheries. J. Clean. Prod. 17, 325-334. Ziegler, F., Jafarzadeh, S., Skontorp Hognes, E., Winther, U. 2021. Greenhouse gas emissions of Norwegian seafoods: From comprehensive to simplified assessment. J. Ind. Ecol. 26, 1908-1919. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.13150 Schmidt, J. & Thrane, M. 2006. LCA study of pickled herring. in Kørnøv, L., Thrane, M., Remmen, A., Lund, H. (Eds.), In Tools for Sustainable Development. Aalborg Universitetsforlag, pp. 241-266. Sanchez-Matos, J., Regueiro, L., González-García, S., Vázquez-Row, I. 2023.. Environmental performance of rainbow trout ( Oncorhynchus mykiss ) production in Galicia-Spain: A Life Cycle Assessment approach. Sci. Total Environ. 856, Part 2. Winther, U., Ziegler, F., Hognes, E., Emanuelsson, A., Sund, V., Ellingsen, H. 2009. Carbon footprint and energy use of Norwegian seafood products. SINTEF Fisheries and Aquaculture, Norway. http://www.sintef.no/upload/Fiskeri_og_havbruk/Internasjonalt_R%C3%A5dgivning/2009_Carbon%20footprint%20of%20seafood%20products.pdf Winther, U., Hognes, E., Jafarzadeh, S., Ziegler, F., 2020. Carbon footprint and energy use of Norwegian seafood products in 2017. SINTEF Fisheries and Aquaculture, Norway Samuel-Fitwi, B., Nagel, F., Meyer, S., Schroeder, J. P., Schultz, C. 2013. Comparative life cycle assessment (LCA) of raising rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in different production systems. Aquac. Eng. 54, 85–92. Bastardie, F., Hornborg, S., Ziegler, F., Gislason, H., Eigaard, O. R. 2022. Reducing the Fuel Use Intensity of Fisheries: Through Efficient Fishing Techniques and Recovered Fish Stocks. Front. Mar. Sci., Sec. Marine Fisheries, Aquaculture and Living Resources, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2022.817335 Silvenius, F., Grönroos, J., Kankainen, M., Kurppa, S., Mäkinen, T., Vielma, J. 2017. Impact of feed raw material to climate and eutrophication impacts of Finnish rainbow trout farming and comparisons on climate impact and eutrophication between farmed and wild fish. J. Clean. Prod. 164: 1467–1473. Commission of the European communities 1996. Comparative study of conversion coefficients used for estimating the live weight of the fish caught by Community fishing vessels. Directorate Gerneral for Fisheries, Project 95/02, Final report. https://www.fao.org/fishery/en/collection/global_fish_consump (accessed 10.3.2023). ISO 2018. ISO 14067:2018: Greenhouse gases – Carbon footprint of products – Requirements and guidelines for quantification. The International Standards Organisation, Geneva. PAS 2050(2008). Specification for the assessment of the greenhouse gas emissions of goods and services, Publicly available specification, BSL Kallioniemi, H., Local Employment and Economic Development Offices (TE Offices), Personal comment 17.5. 2021Luke 2022. https://www.luke.fi/fi/tilastot/ravintotase/ravintotase-2021-lopullinen-ja-ennakko-2022 (accessed 14.9.2023) IPCC Guideline for national Greenhouse Inventory, Volume 5, chapter 6 (Ecoinvent v3.10 2025) Ecoinvent database 3.10, https://ecoinvent.org/ecoinvent-v3-10/, assessed 3 March 2025. Alakangas, E., Hurskainen, M., Laatikainen-Luntama, J. & Korhonen, J. 2016. Properties of fuels used in Finland. (In Finnish, Suomessa käytettävien polttoaineiden ominaisuuksia. VTT technology 258. Sokka, L., Correia, S. & Koljonen, T. 2018. Lämmityspolttoaineiden elinkaariset kasvihuonekaasupäästöt. VT Technology 336. FEFCO 2021: Calculation of a “Carbon footprint” for corrugated packaging https://www.fefco.org/calculation-%E2%80%9Ccarbon-footprint%E2%80%9D-corrugated-packaging. Cited 1.3.2021 Plastics Europe 2016. High-density polyethylene (HDPE). Low-density polyethylene (LDPE) Linear Low-density polyethylene (LLDPE) Eco-Profiles and Environmental Product Declarations of the Europen Platics Manufacturer.Plastics Europe April 2014. Decemer 2016: update water balance. Plastics Europe 2016. Polypropylene (PP). Eco-Profiles and Environmental Product Declarations of the Europen Platics. Manufacturer.Plastics Europe April 2014. Decemer 2016: update water balance Hu, Z., Lee, J. W., Chandran, K., Khanal, S. K. 2012. Nitrous Oxide (N 2 O) Emission from Aquaculture: A Review. Environ. Sci. Technol. 46, 6470-80. Johansen, U., Nistad, A.A., Ziegler, F., Mehta, M., Langeland, M., Wocken, Y., Hognäs, E.W.S. 2022. Greenhouse gas emissions of Norwegian salmon products. SINTEF report 2022 01198. Wind, T., Schumann, M., Hofer, S., Schulz, C., Brinke, A. 2022. Life cycle assessment of rainbow trout farming in the temperate climate zone based on the typical farm concept. J. Clean. Prod. 380, Part 1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.134851. Papatryphon, E., Petit, J., Van der Werf, H., Kaushik, S . 2003. Life Cycle Assessment of trout farming in France: a farm level approach. Life Cycle Assessment in the Agrifood sector. Proceedings from the 4th International Conference Dias Report 61, 71–77. http://www.lcafood.dk/lca_conf/DJFrapport_paper_2_poster.pdf Pelletier, N., Tyedmers, P., Sonesson, U., Scholz, A., Ziegler, F., Flysjo, A., Kruse, S., Cancino, B., Silverman, H. 2009. Not All Salmon Are Created Equal: Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of Global Salmon Farming Systems. Environ. Sci. Technol. 43, 8730–8736. Luke 2023c. Tilastotietokanta https://statdb.luke.fi/PxWeb/pxweb/fi/LUKE/LUKE__06%20Kala%20ja%20riista__02%20Rakenne%20ja%20tuotanto__02%20Kaupallinen%20kalastus%20merella/1a_meri_saalis_toimijat.px/table/tableViewLayout2/ (Accessed 14.9.2023) Usva, K., Hietala, S., Nousiainen, J., Vorne, V., Vieraankivi, M-L., Marja Jallinoja, Leinonen, I., Environmental life cycle assessment of Finnish broiler chicken production – Focus on climate change and water scarcity impacts, J. ]Clean. Prod., Volume 410, 2023, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.137097 Hietala, S., Heusala, H., Katajajuuri, J-M., Järvenranta, K., Virkajärvi, P., Huuskonen, A., Nousiainen, J. 2021. Environmental life cycle assessment of Finnish beef – cradle-to-farm gate analysis of dairy and beef breed beef production, Agric. Syst., Volume 194, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2021.103250. Hietala, S., Usva, K., Vorne, V., Vieraankivi, M.-L., Nousiainen, J., Leinonen, I. 2022. Sian- ja broilerinlihan ympäristökilpailukyky. Luonnonvara- ja biotalouden tutkimus 67/2022. Luonnonvarakeskus. Helsinki. 78 s. Hartikainen H., Pulkkinen, H. 2016. Summary of the chosen methodologies and practices to produce GHGE-estimates for an average European diet. In: Natural Resources and Bioeconomy Studies. Helsinki: Natural Resources Institute Finland, 58, 5–38. Blomhoff, R., Andersen, R., Arnesen, E.K., Christensen, J.J., Eneroth, H., Erkkola, M., Gudanaviciene, I., Halldorsson, T.I., Høyer-Lund, A., Lemming, E.W., Meltzer, H.M., Pitsi, T., Schwab, U., Siksna, I., Thorsdottir, I., Trolle, E. 2023. Nordic Nutrition Recommendations 2023. Copenhagen: Nordic Council of Ministers. DOI: 10.6027/nord2023-003 (accessed 9.6.2023). Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files Supplementarymaterial.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Published Journal Publication published 21 Oct, 2025 Read the published version in Scientific Reports → Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 02 May, 2025 Reviews received at journal 25 Apr, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 24 Apr, 2025 Reviews received at journal 22 Apr, 2025 Reviews received at journal 28 Mar, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 24 Mar, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 24 Mar, 2025 Reviewers invited by journal 23 Mar, 2025 Editor assigned by journal 23 Mar, 2025 Editor invited by journal 19 Mar, 2025 Submission checks completed at journal 19 Mar, 2025 First submitted to journal 04 Mar, 2025 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-6152746","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":435296257,"identity":"724b04ac-d907-49f2-974a-f85b896521dc","order_by":0,"name":"Frans Silvenius","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"LUKE Natural Resources Institute Finland","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Frans","middleName":"","lastName":"Silvenius","suffix":""},{"id":435296258,"identity":"566a9fe2-113b-43d6-a76d-9ff3ac0bc42a","order_by":1,"name":"Kirsi Silvennoinen","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"LUKE Natural Resources Institute Finland","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Kirsi","middleName":"","lastName":"Silvennoinen","suffix":""},{"id":435296259,"identity":"99bf39ec-3fba-49f8-a81e-3d1e0ee8345b","order_by":2,"name":"Jari Setälä","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"LUKE Natural Resources Institute Finland","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Jari","middleName":"","lastName":"Setälä","suffix":""},{"id":435296261,"identity":"81cb6dc3-86f9-4142-b572-ed8a6b8fdc26","order_by":3,"name":"Tapio Keskinen","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"LUKE Natural Resources Institute Finland","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Tapio","middleName":"","lastName":"Keskinen","suffix":""},{"id":435296263,"identity":"ce1a2750-c33b-413d-a9c1-fe46f3018417","order_by":4,"name":"Markus Kankainen","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"LUKE Natural Resources Institute Finland","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Markus","middleName":"","lastName":"Kankainen","suffix":""},{"id":435296265,"identity":"01c16f08-c1f7-4b4e-befe-e793556f7ab9","order_by":5,"name":"Kaija Saarni","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"LUKE Natural Resources Institute Finland","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Kaija","middleName":"","lastName":"Saarni","suffix":""},{"id":435296267,"identity":"210defeb-a2e3-4c2c-9be4-bdaa163ba4b4","order_by":6,"name":"Jari Niukko","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"LUKE Natural Resources Institute Finland","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Jari","middleName":"","lastName":"Niukko","suffix":""},{"id":435296269,"identity":"00f75845-afa3-4e0d-9812-fe3344283e1f","order_by":7,"name":"Ilkka Leinonen","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"LUKE Natural Resources Institute Finland","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Ilkka","middleName":"","lastName":"Leinonen","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-03-04 09:08:10","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6152746/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6152746/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[{"content":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-20628-z","type":"published","date":"2025-10-21T16:16:38+00:00"}],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":79604731,"identity":"60aeecab-8b30-4f70-8e07-60516b70f8e6","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-03-31 16:01:49","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":33418,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eClimate impact of fish products and contribution of product chain, kg CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e eq/kg.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6152746/v1/4a56191bf61d255cbbee6bc5.png"},{"id":94490317,"identity":"b29a7807-83d5-4e25-800e-e0db358a1249","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-27 17:09:06","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":807242,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6152746/v1/3f200dec-1b20-403b-ac9d-8443ff835713.pdf"},{"id":79604403,"identity":"f5b9ba61-b9ff-4108-af99-0af687c1445d","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-03-31 15:53:49","extension":"docx","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":15466,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Supplementarymaterial.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6152746/v1/eb7acb44fae950ed9c73a16d.docx"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"The Climate Change Impact of Finnish Fish Products","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eHuman population is growing rapidly and there is an urgent need to change food production more sustainable. This transition should cover a variety of aspects including climate and other impacts to our environment. The data show there should be a shift from animal-based products to plant-based ones [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e]. However, fish products and aquaculture could have potential to be part of the sustainable and healthy diet if the production is directed to products with lower impact to environment and climate [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e]. All actions for changing diet and production will need reliable data for verifying the direction and target achievement. In this article we consider climate impact of Finnish fish products, how the resulted impacts have distributed in the product chain and what is the difference between farmed and captured fish products.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eGlobally the amount of aquaculture products has grown from 20\u0026nbsp;million tonnes in 1990 to 120\u0026nbsp;million tonnes in 2022 [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e] Fish farming is dominated by Asia, which has produced 89 percent of the global total in volume terms in the last 20 year [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e]. Total global fish production including farmed and caught products is estimated to have reached about 200\u0026nbsp;million tonnes in 2020 [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e]. Of the overall total, 156\u0026nbsp;million tonnes were used for human consumption, equivalent to an estimated annual supply of 20.5 kg per capita. The remaining 22\u0026nbsp;million tonnes were destined for non-food uses, mainly to produce fishmeal and fish oil. Aquaculture accounted for 46 percent of the total production volume of fish products and 52 percent of fish for human consumption [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn Finland in the year 2021 consumption of fish products was about 62\u0026nbsp;million kg, and about 80 percent of this was imported. The consumption of Finnish farmed salmon was about 6.7\u0026nbsp;million kg and caught wild fish about 5\u0026nbsp;million kg. [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e] The highest catch is for Baltic herring (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e), but only 5% of the catch goes for the human consumption in Finland, the remaining part goes to fish meal production and fur animal feed and export. Altogether fish was consumed 14.5 kg/cap annually and about 4 kg of that is domestic. Further, over about 50% of the domestic consumption is from small-scaled fisheries. The human consumptions of studied fish species are shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e. The consumption of meat products was 77.4 kg/cap [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eProduction volumes and consumption per capita of the most important Finnish fish species. (Luke 2023b, Luke 2024)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMillion kg\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ekg/ca.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRainbow trout, farmed\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e15.3 (2022)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBaltic herring, brackish water\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e68.2 (2022)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerch, brackish water\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.0 (2022)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePikeperch, freshwater\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.9 (2021)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVendace, freshwater\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.0 (2021)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor Atlantic herring fishing, there have been publications: like [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e], [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e] and [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e]. The climate impact of farmed Atlantic salmon and rainbow trout have been published recently e.g. in Norway [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e], [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e], [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e]. Different kinds of caught fish have been investigated [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e], [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe first fish production study in Finland investigated climate impact of average freshwater fish as pike (Esox lucius), pikeperch, perch and whitefish (Coregonus lavaretus) [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e]. This study lacked representative data e.g. about fuel consumption and more investigations were needed. A Finnish LCA-investigation of Baltic Herring fillet has been published with the same system boundaries and functional units [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e]. The data source was fuel consumption statistics and amounts of catch by trawling. In the previous Finnish study, where the climate impact of the Finnish rainbow trout was evaluated, feed production chain is the most relevant share of the life cycle [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e]. In this study, all the relevant life cycle parts were included in the calculation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe aim of this study was to calculate climate impacts for the main domestic fish products used in Finland. The novelty value of this study is high, because there was lack for climate impact studies for small-scaled fishing. Especially for freshwater fishing there was not any kind of climate impact data. The study was carried out, because the results can be utilized in many ways by different actors, for instance decision makers concerning blue economy, consumers in their plans for climate-friendly diets as well as actors of fish industry in their marketing.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. Materials and methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.1 Goal and scope\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn this study the climate change impact of the most important Finnish fish products was calculated. The background data was based on surveys made for the most relevant catching, processing and farming methods.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe analysed fish species were rainbow trout, Baltic herring, pikeperch, perch and vendace. Rainbow trout was farmed, and all the other fish species were caught wild fish. Functional unit for the different fish species was chosen based on how the fresh fish products are mainly sold in the Finnish fish market (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). The study covered gutted vendace and fresh fillets of other fish species. The fillet yield (the amount of fillet in relation to the amount of round fish) was lowest for perch and highest for rainbow trout (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFillet yield and functional units of the studied products [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e]* Gutting yield\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eProduct\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFillet yield %\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFunctional unit\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRainbow trout, farmed\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e60\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFillet with skin\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBaltic herring, brackish water\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e37\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFillet with skin\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerch, brackish water\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e30\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFillet without skin\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePikeperch, freshwater\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e42\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFillet without skin\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVendace, freshwater\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e70*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGutted fish with skin\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.2 Methodological aspects\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAll methods were carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations, in accordance with ISO 14067 and PAS 2050 for land use change [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e], [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e]. SimaPro software was used for calculations. LCA-methodology was used, because it provides tools to marketing and decision making containing all parts of the life-cycle of the product system. Only climate impact was assessed, despite that there are also other important sustainability aspects in fisheries and aquaculture.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe most significant greenhouse gases emissions, carbon dioxide, methane and dinitrogen monoxide were converted to carbon dioxide equivalents by multiplying the emissions as gas-specific characterization factors. For characterization, EF 3.1 factors were used and the most important of them are shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCharacterization factors in this study.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"2\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFactor\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ekg CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e eq/kg\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCarbon dioxide, fossil\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCarbon dioxide, biogenic\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMethane, fossil\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e29.8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMethane, biogenic\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e27\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDinitrogen monoxide\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e273\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn this study economic allocation (based on value) was used for feed raw materials except fish meal and oil were allocated by mass allocation (based on quantity). Allocation for main and by-products of the fish was done by economic allocation. For target species and by-catches economic allocation was used. Economic allocation is used because the use and prices are so different between main and by-products of fish processing and slaughtering. Fish meal and fish oil are different, the prices vary, and it is not always clear, which one is the main product.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.3 Data collection\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe data was collected from feed raw material production, feed production, fish farming and fisheries, hatchery, transports and packaging. The system boundaries were same as in many previous studies, e.g. [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e], [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e]. Trade, consumer and food waste in these phases were excluded. Data was collected from fishermen by surveys and interviews concerning fuel consumption of fisheries, logistics and package use. All the experimental protocols were approved by Luke. We confirm that informed consent was obtained from all subjects and their legal guardians. The fish farming data was mainly based on national statistics and previous studies. The fish processing data was collected from leading processing companies by surveys and interviews. Processing data of fish-based raw materials of feed was based on surveys to one Finnish processing plant and Ecoinvent The inventory data is presented in the Results Chap.\u0026nbsp;3.1\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe data of fish recipes, feed production inputs and outputs and transports of feed and its ingredients was collected from two leading fish feed producing companies, which deliver almost all fish feed used by Finnish fish farmers. The feed recipes and data sources are presented in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e. More detailed information was not allowed to publish because of confidential reasons. Economic allocation was used for all feed raw materials except fish meal and oil products because of variability of prices and because the prices are near to each other. For Finnish rainbow trout, the feed conversion factor was 1.15 according to statistics of Centre for Economic Development, Transport and the Environment in South-West Finland [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e] The origin and transport equipment of the feed raw materials was obtained from the feed processing companies.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFinnish fish feed ingredients\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026uml;Feed ingredient\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eProduct\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eData source\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAnimal based ingredients\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBy-products of slaughtering\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEcoinvent 3.8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFish-based ingredients\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e23\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFish meal and fish oil\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEcoinvent 3.8, primary data\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePlant-based ingredients\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e54\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ee.g. Soya, wheat and corn products\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEcoinvent 3.8, Proagria database\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOther ingredients\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVitamines, minerals\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEcoinvent 3.8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe data of production volumes and nitrogen excretion were taken from statistics [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e] The materials of fish farming process were based on [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e]. The N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO-emissions of N-excretion of the metabolism of rainbow trout were assumed to be 0.005 kgN\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO-N/kg N excreted based on IPCC (2006) estimate of the emission of treated wastewater [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e]. Methane emissions of fish farming were not considered, because of lack of data. Net cage inputs and outputs like electricity and diesel consumption originated from the analysis of unpublished financial statements of farming companies. The data of hatcheries was based on interview of a major Finnish producer.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe data of fuel consumption of Baltic herring trawling was based on interviews of the two biggest trawling companies (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e). The data included both the actual fishing and transports to landing place. The calculation of perch fishing fuel consumption was based on the interviews of fishermen and the analysis of nine perch fishers\u0026rsquo; fishing and fish landings areas and the interviews concerning the fish collection routes of fish processing companies. The data of material quantities concerning boats and fishing traps were caught from the fish equipment producers. The data based on fishing of vendace was based on interview of five trawlers and seven seine fishers and the fishing of pikeperch interview of four fishers. The interviews were made during 2018\u0026ndash;2019 and the participated groups of fishermen were selected so that they represent as typical fishermen in Finland as possible.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab5\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 5\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNumber of fishermen groups in investigations\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFish species, fishing equipment\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNumber of fishermen groups (staff of the boats) interviewed\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eArea\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBaltic herring, trawl\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSW-Finland\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBaltic herring, fish-trap\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSW-Finland\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerch, net\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSW-W-Finland\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVendace, trawl\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCentral Finland\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVendace, seine\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNorth Savo, Lapland\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePikeperch, net\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCentral Finland\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe data concerning logistics of fish raw materials from fish farms and harbors to processing and logistics final products to central warehouses were based on interviews to fishermen, fish processing and aquaculture companies concerning transport equipment, fuel consumption, distances and amounts of transported products.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eResidual low and medium voltage Finnish residual electricity emission factors were used for electricity (modified based on Ecoinvent 3). For fuels used for logistics and for heat energy, emission factors based on studies of [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e], [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e] and [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e] were used.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePackages are used both in the transport of fish from farm or catch area to processing plant and in the transport of the final product. The energy and water use data and use of packages for chosen products were inquired from the processing companies, one large processing company for each product and for production of packaging materials average data from different databases was used [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e], [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e], [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e], [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e30\u003c/span\u003e]. The most common package type is polystyrene box, which is used for transport of fish, especially perch and pikeperch. Some larger transport units like skipping containers are reusable, but not so commonly used. Vacuum package and cardboard boxes were also used for transports of fillets to central stores. The quantity of packages was based on questionnaires to fishermen, fish processing companies and aquaculture companies. The climate impacts of packages were based on surveys to the biggest package producers of Finnish market and this data is confidential. For polystyrene-packages, only weights were caught from producers and climate impact data was based on [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"3. Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1 Fuel consumption of fisheries\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe results for fuel consumption of the fisheries varied a lot, for trawled vendace the fuel consumption was as 0.32 l/kg (live weight), when for Baltic herring caught by fish-trap the value was 0.01 l/kg\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u003c/sup\u003e(live weight) (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e). The variation between fuel consumption of vendace trawlers was large, (0.16\u0026ndash;0.80 l/kg round fish). Deviation of pikeperch fishing was large to0, (0.11\u0026ndash;0.57 l /kg round fish) and vendace caught by seine 0.02\u0026ndash;0.11 l/kg round fish. The energy inputs for an average Finnish fish farm were 0.054 l diesel/kg and 0.16 kWh electricity/kg.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab6\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 6\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFuel consumption of the main products in Finnish fisheries. Around Finland Baltic sea was considered as brackish water because of low salt content.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"2\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eProduct\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003el/kg fish\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBaltic herring, brackish water, trawl\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBaltic herring, brackish water, fish-trap\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerch, brackish water, gillnet\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePikeperch, freshwater, gillnet\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVendace, freshwater, trawl\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.32\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVendace, freshwater, seine\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.2 Packaging and transports\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe amounts of used packaging materials are presented in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab7\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e. The high use of package for perch fillets is due to very low filleting yield and small package size being transported.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab7\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 7\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAmount of the packaging used in the whole product chain.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFish species\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCatch method tai origin\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUse of polystyrene boxes, kg/kg\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u003c/sup\u003efinal product\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUse of cardboard boxes, kg/kg\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u003c/sup\u003efinal product\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUse of plastic packages kg/kg final product\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRainbow trout\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFarmed\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.04\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.008\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBaltic herring\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFish-trap\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBaltic herring\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTrawl\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerch\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGillnet\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePikeperch\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGillnet\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.003\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVendace\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSeine\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVendace\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTrawl\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.04\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFuel consumption during transport to processing site was lowest for Baltic herring fishery (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab8\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e). High volumes of Baltic herring are landed with trawlers to central fish harbors, and therefore also transport is cost effective and in spite of long fishing trips and high fuel consumption the fuel consumption per fish unit is still low. Volumes of Baltic herring fishing with trap net are also relatively high while transporting distances are from fishing sites to harbor is short leading altogether to low fuel consumption per unit. The volumes are much lower in small scale fisheries (perch and pikeperch fishing), and the transport distances normally are longer in dispersed inland fisheries. Thus, the fuel consumption per kilo fish were higher for small scale gillnet fishing and inland fishing.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab8\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 8\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFuel consumptions from the catch area to processing.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"2\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFish species and origin\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFuel consumption, l/kg fish\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFinnish rainbow trout, farmed in marine net cages\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.008\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBaltic herring caught by trawl, marine fishing\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.003\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBaltic herring caught by fish-trap, marine fishing\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.003\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerch caught by gillnet, marine fishing\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.016\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePikeperch caught by gillnet, inland fishing\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.073\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVendace caught by trawl, inland fishing\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.034\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVendace caught by seine, inland fishing\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.034\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.3 Climate change results\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe highest climate impact was analysed for farmed fish, 3.7 kg CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e eq/kg t. thereafter, came fish caught by gillnet (2.1\u0026ndash;2.4 kg CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e eq/FU) and the lowest carbon footprint was products caught by seine, trawl and fish-trap (0.7\u0026ndash;1.6 kg CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e eq/kg FU).. The exception was vendace caught by trawl, which had the same climate impact as gillnet fishing (2.4 kg CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e -eq/kg FU)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe product chain of feed raw materials was the most important source of greenhouse gas emissions, 60% of the total emissions (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab8\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e, Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). The part of dinitrogen monoxide in farming process was 0.17 g N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO-N/kg round fish. Climate impact for liveweight rainbow trout was 2.1 kg CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e eq/kg fish. Fishing was usually the most important source of greenhouse gas emissions for captured fish and feed raw material production for farmed fish. (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab9\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e, Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e) and the share of fishing varied between 16% and 70%. The share of processing, which include filleting and packaging, was 6\u0026ndash;71%, the lowest for rainbow trout fillet and the highest for Baltic herring caught by fish-trap. The overall results for climate impact of fish products and contribution of product chain are presented in the Supplementary materials.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab9\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 9\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eClimate change impact of studied products in relation to the functional unit\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"2\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFish product\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLCA results, kg CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e eq/FU\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRainbow trout fillet\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBaltic herring fillet, fish trap\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBaltic herring fillet, fish trawl\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerch fillet, net\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePikeperch fillet, net\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGutted vendace, seine\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGutted vendace, trawl\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4. Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eAccording to the results the climate change impact of farmed fish was higher than climate impact of caught fish. The largest part of the emissions of farmed fish coming from the product chain of feed raw materials. For caught fish the distance to mainland and catch volumes were essential: fish species, which can be caught in higher volumes the climate impact is usually lower than for fish species with lower catch volumes. The results of the study show that catch volumes by seine, fish-trap or trawl are higher than catch volumes of gillnet. That is why climate impact of Baltic herring and vendace was lower than that of perch and pikeperch. The fillet yield impacted also on the results: despite the fuel consumption for perch and pikeperch fishing were almost the same, the climate impact for perch fillet was higher due to the low fillet yield than that of pikeperch fillet. Higher transport volumes mean usually lower climate impact of transports. Therefore, the climate impact of Baltic herring fillet and rainbow trout fillet transports was especially low. The climate impact of Baltic herring fillet caught by trawl was higher than that for Baltic herring trap net. The main inland pikeperch fishing areas located rather long away from main market areas in Southern Finland cities. Therefore, transport distances of pikeperch were longer than for any other investigated products and the share of transports climate impacts high (24%). Gutted vendace caught by seine had an average climate impact of 1.2 kg CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e eq/kg and vendace seined during winter had climate impact 0.9 kg CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e eq/kg. The average value for vendace trawling was 2.4 kg CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e eq/kg functional unit and was between 1.6\u0026ndash;4.6 kg CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e eq/kg.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOne thing to keep in mind is that the products are not fully comparable to each other because vendace was analysed as gutted fish and other fish products as fillets. The climate impact per kilogram of gutted fish is lower than that filleted fish of the same fish species. The vendace is the only fish that is typically cooked and served as gutted rather than fillet.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe climate impact for rainbow trout has been decreased considerably 1.8 kg CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e eq/kg from 5.5 kg CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e eq/kg to 3.7 kg CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e eq/kg in the previous study in Finland [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e]. The reasons for that are mainly methodological changes. The functional unit was then, however, different from this study, 1 kg of edible product. Further, the N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO-emissions of N-excretion of the metabolism of rainbow trout were assumed to be 10 times higher in previous study [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e], [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e31\u003c/span\u003e] and the characterization factor of N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO has lowered from 298 to 273. The share of N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO was in previous study 1.2 kg CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e eq/kg fish fillet, so this had a remarkable effect on the results. On the other hand, in some similar studies the N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO-emissions were not mentioned at all, e.g. [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e], [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e], [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e]. One remarkable change since previous investigation was the amount of soya in feed, which has declined to almost zero. The main replacing raw materials are animal-based by-products and some plant protein products.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThere has been published value 5.3 kg CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e eq/kg for farmed salmon in Norway with mass allocation [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e], [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e]. Reasons for differing results are combination of input-output model, different feed conversion factor, different modeling of N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO in farm level, different content of soya in the feed and species-based modeling of fish meal and fish oil. Higher amount of soy in feed causes remarkable climate impacts because of land use change, which were minimal in our study. The fish meal and fish oil were modeled in this study by average Ecoinvent-values [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e], but separate data of each fish species raw materials has been published [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e] and [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e]. This species-specific data had higher climate change impact than global averages of Ecoinvent 3 [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e] used Furthermore, in this study some share of climate impact was allocated to roe production, which is not essential for salmon cultivation. There were also differences in functional units: in a recent Norwegian study [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e] the functional unit is edible part of the fish (fillet without skin) and in this study unit was fillet with skin.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhen compared this study to other studies some has higher and some lower results than this study. In Central Europe, Spain and France the size of the rainbow trout is smaller, which can cause differences in climate impact results. For smaller fish, in Central Europe there has been published value 1.18 kg CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e eq/kg for liveweight rainbow trout [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e33\u003c/span\u003e] and 1.78 kg CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e eq/kg for liveweight rainbow trout in Spain [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e] and 1.76\u0026ndash;1.85 in France [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e34\u003c/span\u003e], which are lower than value of this investigation (2.1 kg CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e eq/kg fish). On the other hand in Norway there has been calculated higher result than this study [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e], 3.8 kg CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e eq/kg liveweight as well as in Germany: 2.24\u0026ndash;3.56 kg CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e eq/kg for liveweight rainbow trout [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e]. In that study was also recirculating aquaculture system in Denmark calculated and the value was 13.6 CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e eq/kg liveweight. In a review article [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e35\u003c/span\u003e] the climate change impact was 1.7\u0026ndash;3.3 kg CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e eq/kg liveweight and in one Norwegian study [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e] the result was 2.0 kg CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e eq/kg liveweight, which are on the same level as this study.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe climate impact is highly dependent on the farming system studied [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e] and the marketing size of fish [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e]. In the Central and South Europe rainbow trout is normally farmed in inland ponds and the marketing size is then below 500 grammes (portion size fish). The Finnish marketing size is 2\u0026ndash;3 kilos, and it is mostly farmed in net pens in brackish water. The marketing size of sea farmed rainbow trout is bigger in Norway (up to 5 kilos) and in Denmark (up to 4 kg). However, Denmark also produces a lot of portion size rainbow trout too. The difference of functional unit explained also the lower climate impact of this study compared to Finnish previous study [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e]. Functional unit is not in general the same in seafood life cycle assessment (LCA) investigations, which make it difficult to do comparisons between different LCA-studies and it has been edible part of fish or liveweight in most of the studies. Harmonized methods for LCA investigations of seafood are needed to make the results comparable to each other.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe LCA inventory results of this study were in general in line with previous climate studies of fish products In Norway there has been published fuel consumptions values for very many fishing methods [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e]. In this study, the average value for gillnet fishing were 0.13 l/kg for pikeperch and 0.15 l/kg for perch, so they are slightly lower than that study. generic value in Norway 0.19 kg fuel/kg fish for gillnet fishing [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e] and) in Denmark, 0.2\u0026ndash;0.4 l/kg [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e]. For seine, this study gives a number between 0.04 (winter) and 0.08 (summer) l/kg fish and the values are lower than generic value 0.09 kg l/kg fish in Norway [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e] and in Denmark [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e], which was 0.11\u0026ndash;0.16 l/kg fish. In pelagic trawl, the fuel consumption value was 0.09 l/kg fish, when the value for this study was in freshwater trawl fishery was 0.32 l/kg fish, in the trawling case the fuel consumption is higher in freshwater fishing than in pelagic fishing However, it is essential to notice that fishing conditions in the deep Atlantic coast with various fish species are very different compared to shallow coastal and inland waters in Finland.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe climate impact varies in this study a lot between fishers even for same species and fishing methods. For example, the variation or pikeperch fillet was between 1.6\u0026ndash;3.6 kg CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e eq/kg FU and vendace caught by trawl 1.6\u0026ndash;4.6 kg CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e eq/kg FU. The deviation of vendace caught by seine was 1.0-1.4 kg CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e eq/kg FU. This means that at highest the climate impact of caught fish can be as higher than farmed fish in some cases. This large variation should be taken in account when making LCA-assessment for specific fish products. This also reveals possibilities to fishers to lower their climate impact by intensifying fishing and choosing climate friendly fishing methods.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAccording to results by selecting caught low carbon fish products to diet it is possible to reduce climate impact of diets. However, the amount of fishermen has been continuously declining, which has an impact on domestic fish consumption in Finland [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhen compared to meat products in edible part, Finnish captured fish products have lower climate impact than Finnish chicken (3.4 kg), pork (5.0 kg) and beef (31.2 kg) according to [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e37\u003c/span\u003e], [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e38\u003c/span\u003e], [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e39\u003c/span\u003e] converted to edible part from carcass weight. Rainbow trout fillet has lower climate impact (3.7 kg) than pork and beef, but higher than chicken. Further, when comparing different protein sources in a review article [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e40\u003c/span\u003e] the climate impact of animal products like chicken was 3.1\u0026ndash;5.2 kg CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eeq/kg edible part, pork 4.1\u0026ndash;6.2 kg CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eeq/kg edible part and beef 28.0\u0026ndash;31.0 kg CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e eq/kg edible part. It means that by selecting caught carbon fish products to diet it is possible to reduce climate impact of diets. There is, however, trend in Finland, where the amount of fishers is continuously declining, which has an impact on domestic fish consumption in Finland.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe Nordic Nutrition Recommendations [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e41\u003c/span\u003e] advised for increasing intake from sustainably managed stocks supported both by effects on health outcomes and environmental footprint. It also recommended fish and seafood from sustainably managed farms and that wild stocks should be prioritized and consumption of species with high environmental impact should be limited. In Finland these advises could be fill by consuming herring, perch, pikeperch and some other freshwater species like roach.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"5. Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eIn general, climate impact for captured fish is lower than cultivated fish. Moreover, fish product caught by gillnet have higher climate impact than fish products caught by seine, trawl and fish traps, except vendace caught by trawl, which has the same climate impact as fish products caught by gillnet. According to the study, however, there is big variation between single fishermen in distances to fishing place, catch and transport volumes and transport distances. Captured fish, for example vendace, can have higher climate impact than farmed fish. On the contrary, the climate impact of captured fish is seldom high, when the catch amount is high. Therefore, the climate impact for different fishermen can vary significantly. This finding encourages fishermen to analyse their fishing to develop climate friendly fishing methods and practices.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003ch2\u003eAuthor contributions\u0026nbsp;\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFrans Silvenius: Data collection, Methodology, Investigation, Writing, Review, Editing\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eKirsi Silvennoinen: Review, Writing, Visualization\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJari Set\u0026auml;l\u0026auml;: Data collection, Writing, Review\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTapio Keskinen: Data collection, Writing, Review, Editing\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMarkus Kankainen: Data collection, Writing, Review K\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eKaija Saarni: Writing, Review\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJari Niukko. Data collection, Modelling, Writing\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIlkka Leinonen: Methodology \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgements\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThanks to the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, who funded the study. Thanks to interviewed fishermen, fish farming companies, fish processing companies and packaging manufacturers. Without them the project would not have to be possible to do.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eConflict of interest\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare not conflict of interests.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eData availability\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eYes. The datasets used and analysed during the current study available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWillet, W., Rockstr\u0026ouml;m, J., Loken, B., Springmann, M., Lang, T., Verneulen, S., Garnett, T., Tilman, D., DeClerck, F., Wood, A., Jonell, M., Clark, M., Gordon, L. J., Farzo, J., Hawkes, C., Zuryak, R., Rivera, J. A., De Vries, W., Sibanda, L. M., Afshin, A., Chaudhary, A., Herrero, M., Agustina, R., Branca, F., Lartey, A., Fan, S., Crona, B., Fox, E., Bignet, V., Troell, M., Lindah\u0026ouml;, T., Singh, S., Cornell, S. E., Reddy, K. S., Narain, S., Nishtar, S., Murray, C. J. L. 2019. Food in the Anthropocene: the EAT-Lancet Commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems. Lancet. 2019 Feb 2;393(10170):447-492. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31788-4. Epub 2019 Jan 16. Erratum in: Lancet. 2019 Feb 9;393(10171):530. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)30212-0. Erratum in: Lancet. 2019 Jun 29;393(10191):2590. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31428-X. Erratum in: Lancet. 2020 Feb 1;395(10221):338. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30144-6. Erratum in: Lancet. 2020 Oct 3;396(10256):e56. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31828-6. PMID: 30660336.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKoehn, J., Allison, E., Golden, C., Hilborn, R. 2022. The role of seafood in sustainable diets. Environ. Res. Lett. 17 (3). DOI:10.1088/1748-9326/ac3954\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFAO 2022. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2022. Towards Blue Transformation. Rome, FAO. https://doi.org/10.4060/cc0461en (accessed 9.6.2023).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFAO 2023. Consumption of Fish and Fishery Products. Fisheries and Aquaculture Division Rome. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFAO 2020. https://www.fao.org/news/story/en/item/1279179/icode/ (accessed 14.9.2023).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLuke 2023. Kalamarkkinakatsaus 2023. https://jukuri.luke.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/553302/Luke-luobio_43_2023.pdf?sequence=1 (accessed 14.9.2023)\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLuke 2023. Tilastotietokanta. https://statdb.luke.fi/PXWeb/pxweb/fi/LUKE/ (Accessed 14.9.2023)\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLuke 2024. Kalan kulutus 2023 [verkkojulkaisu]. Luonnonvarakeskuksen tilastotietokanta, Helsinki: Luonnonvarakeskus [viitattu: 18.11.2024]. Saantitapa: https://www.luke.fi/fi/tilastot/kalan-kulutus/kalan-kulutus-2023\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSuomen virallinen tilasto (SVT): Kaupallinen kalastus sis\u0026auml;vesill\u0026auml;. Helsinki: Luonnonvarakeskus \u003cbr\u003e http://www.stat.fi/til/aksis/index.html (accessed 19.7.2021).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSuomen virallinen tilasto (SVT): Vesiviljely. Helsinki: Luonnonvarakeskus\u003cbr\u003e http://www.stat.fi/til/vvilj/index.html (accessed 19.7.2021). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSchau, E. M., Ellingsen, H., Endal. A., Aanondsen, S. A. 2009. Energy consumption in the Norwegian fisheries. J. Clean. Prod. 17, 325-334.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZiegler, F., Jafarzadeh, S., Skontorp Hognes, E., Winther, U. 2021. Greenhouse gas emissions of Norwegian seafoods: From comprehensive to simplified assessment. J. Ind. Ecol. 26, 1908-1919. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.13150\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSchmidt, J. \u0026amp; Thrane, M. 2006. LCA study of pickled herring. in K\u0026oslash;rn\u0026oslash;v, L., Thrane, M., Remmen, A., Lund, H. (Eds.), In Tools for Sustainable Development. Aalborg Universitetsforlag, pp. 241-266.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSanchez-Matos, J., Regueiro, L., Gonz\u0026aacute;lez-Garc\u0026iacute;a, S., V\u0026aacute;zquez-Row, I. 2023.. Environmental performance of rainbow trout (\u003cem\u003eOncorhynchus mykiss\u003c/em\u003e) production in Galicia-Spain: A Life Cycle Assessment approach. Sci. Total Environ. 856, Part 2.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWinther, U., Ziegler, F., Hognes, E., Emanuelsson, A., Sund, V., Ellingsen, H. 2009. Carbon footprint and energy use of Norwegian seafood products. SINTEF Fisheries and Aquaculture, Norway. http://www.sintef.no/upload/Fiskeri_og_havbruk/Internasjonalt_R%C3%A5dgivning/2009_Carbon%20footprint%20of%20seafood%20products.pdf\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWinther, U., Hognes, E., Jafarzadeh, S., Ziegler, F., 2020. Carbon footprint and energy use of Norwegian seafood products in 2017. SINTEF Fisheries and Aquaculture, Norway\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSamuel-Fitwi, B., Nagel, F., Meyer, S., Schroeder, J. P., Schultz, C. 2013. Comparative life cycle assessment (LCA) of raising rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in different production systems. Aquac. Eng. 54, 85\u0026ndash;92.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBastardie, F., Hornborg, S., Ziegler, F., Gislason, H., Eigaard, O. R. 2022. Reducing the Fuel Use Intensity of Fisheries: Through Efficient Fishing Techniques and Recovered Fish Stocks. Front. Mar. Sci., Sec. Marine Fisheries, Aquaculture and Living Resources, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2022.817335\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSilvenius, F., Gr\u0026ouml;nroos, J., Kankainen, M., Kurppa, S., M\u0026auml;kinen, T., Vielma, J. 2017. Impact of feed raw material to climate and eutrophication impacts of Finnish rainbow trout farming and comparisons on climate impact and eutrophication between farmed and wild fish. J. Clean. Prod. 164: 1467\u0026ndash;1473.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCommission of the European communities 1996. Comparative study of conversion coefficients used for estimating the live weight of the fish caught by Community fishing vessels. Directorate Gerneral for Fisheries, Project 95/02, Final report.\u003cins cite=\"mailto:Silvennoinen%20Kirsi%20(LUKE)\" datetime=\"2025-03-03T14:55\"\u003e \u003c/ins\u003ehttps://www.fao.org/fishery/en/collection/global_fish_consump (accessed 10.3.2023). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eISO 2018. ISO 14067:2018: Greenhouse gases \u0026ndash; Carbon footprint of products \u0026ndash; Requirements and guidelines for quantification. The International Standards Organisation, Geneva.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePAS 2050(2008). Specification for the assessment of the greenhouse gas emissions of goods and services, Publicly available specification, BSL\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKallioniemi, H., Local Employment and Economic Development Offices (TE Offices), Personal comment 17.5. 2021Luke 2022. https://www.luke.fi/fi/tilastot/ravintotase/ravintotase-2021-lopullinen-ja-ennakko-2022 (accessed 14.9.2023)\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eIPCC Guideline for national Greenhouse Inventory, Volume 5, chapter 6\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e(Ecoinvent v3.10 2025) Ecoinvent database 3.10, https://ecoinvent.org/ecoinvent-v3-10/, assessed 3 March 2025.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAlakangas, E., Hurskainen, M., Laatikainen-Luntama, J. \u0026amp; Korhonen, J. 2016. Properties of fuels used in Finland. (In Finnish, Suomessa k\u0026auml;ytett\u0026auml;vien polttoaineiden ominaisuuksia. VTT technology 258.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSokka, L., Correia, S. \u0026amp; Koljonen, T. 2018. L\u0026auml;mmityspolttoaineiden elinkaariset kasvihuonekaasup\u0026auml;\u0026auml;st\u0026ouml;t. VT Technology 336.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFEFCO 2021: Calculation of a \u0026ldquo;Carbon footprint\u0026rdquo; for corrugated packaging https://www.fefco.org/calculation-%E2%80%9Ccarbon-footprint%E2%80%9D-corrugated-packaging. Cited 1.3.2021 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePlastics Europe 2016. High-density polyethylene (HDPE). Low-density polyethylene (LDPE) Linear Low-density polyethylene (LLDPE) Eco-Profiles and Environmental Product Declarations of the Europen Platics Manufacturer.Plastics Europe April 2014. Decemer 2016: update water balance. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePlastics Europe 2016. Polypropylene (PP). Eco-Profiles and Environmental Product Declarations of the Europen Platics. Manufacturer.Plastics Europe April 2014. Decemer 2016: update water balance \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHu, Z., Lee, J. W., Chandran, K., Khanal, S. K. 2012. Nitrous Oxide (N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO) Emission from Aquaculture: A Review. Environ. Sci. Technol. 46, 6470-80.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJohansen, U., Nistad, A.A., Ziegler, F., Mehta, M., Langeland, M., Wocken, Y., Hogn\u0026auml;s, E.W.S. 2022. Greenhouse gas emissions of Norwegian salmon products. SINTEF report 2022 01198.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWind, T., Schumann, M., Hofer, S., Schulz, C., Brinke, A. 2022. Life cycle assessment of rainbow trout farming in the temperate climate zone based on the typical farm concept. J. Clean. Prod. 380, Part 1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.134851.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePapatryphon, E., Petit, J., Van der Werf, H., Kaushik, S\u003cem\u003e. \u003c/em\u003e2003. Life Cycle Assessment of trout farming in France: a farm level approach. Life Cycle Assessment in the Agrifood sector. Proceedings from the 4th International Conference Dias Report 61, 71\u0026ndash;77. http://www.lcafood.dk/lca_conf/DJFrapport_paper_2_poster.pdf\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePelletier, N., Tyedmers, P., Sonesson, U., Scholz, A., Ziegler, F., Flysjo, A., Kruse, S., Cancino, B., Silverman, H. 2009. Not All Salmon Are Created Equal: Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of Global Salmon Farming Systems. Environ. Sci. Technol. 43, 8730\u0026ndash;8736. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLuke 2023c. Tilastotietokanta https://statdb.luke.fi/PxWeb/pxweb/fi/LUKE/LUKE__06%20Kala%20ja%20riista__02%20Rakenne%20ja%20tuotanto__02%20Kaupallinen%20kalastus%20merella/1a_meri_saalis_toimijat.px/table/tableViewLayout2/ (Accessed 14.9.2023)\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eUsva, K., Hietala, S., Nousiainen, J., Vorne, V., Vieraankivi, M-L., Marja Jallinoja, Leinonen, I., Environmental life cycle assessment of Finnish broiler chicken production \u0026ndash; Focus on climate change and water scarcity impacts, J. ]Clean. Prod., Volume 410, 2023, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.137097\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHietala, S., Heusala, H., Katajajuuri, J-M., J\u0026auml;rvenranta, K., Virkaj\u0026auml;rvi, P., Huuskonen, A., Nousiainen, J. 2021. Environmental life cycle assessment of Finnish beef \u0026ndash; cradle-to-farm gate analysis of dairy and beef breed beef production, Agric. Syst., Volume 194, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2021.103250.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHietala, S., Usva, K., Vorne, V., Vieraankivi, M.-L., Nousiainen, J., Leinonen, I. 2022. Sian- ja broilerinlihan ymp\u0026auml;rist\u0026ouml;kilpailukyky. Luonnonvara- ja biotalouden tutkimus 67/2022. Luonnonvarakeskus. Helsinki. 78 s.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHartikainen H., Pulkkinen, H. 2016. Summary of the chosen methodologies and practices to produce GHGE-estimates for an average European diet. In: Natural Resources and Bioeconomy Studies. Helsinki: Natural Resources Institute Finland, 58, 5\u0026ndash;38.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u003cins cite=\"mailto:Silvennoinen%20Kirsi%20(LUKE)\" datetime=\"2025-03-03T14:58\"\u003e \u003c/ins\u003eBlomhoff, R., Andersen, R., Arnesen, E.K., Christensen, J.J., Eneroth, H., Erkkola, M., Gudanaviciene, I., Halldorsson, T.I., H\u0026oslash;yer-Lund, A., Lemming, E.W., Meltzer, H.M., Pitsi, T., Schwab, U., Siksna, I., Thorsdottir, I., Trolle, E. 2023. Nordic Nutrition Recommendations 2023. Copenhagen: Nordic Council of Ministers. DOI: 10.6027/nord2023-003 (accessed 9.6.2023).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"scientific-reports","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"scirep","sideBox":"Learn more about [Scientific Reports](http://www.nature.com/srep/)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"Scientific Reports","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Scientific Reports","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"fishing, aquaculture, carbon footprint","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6152746/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6152746/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThis study focuses on counting the climate impacts of the most common Finnish fish products. The selected fish species were rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), Baltic herring (Clupea harengus membras), pikeperch (Sander lucioperca), perch (Perca fluviatilis) and vendace (Coregonus albula). Rainbow trout was farmed, and all the other fish species were caught wild fish. On the product level this study was limited to cover only fresh fillets and gutted fish (vendace).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe data was collected by surveys from typical enterprises from fisheries sector, like fishermen, aquaculture and fish processing companies. LCA methodology was used to count the impacts.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe farmed rainbow trout had the highest climate impact with 3.7 kg CO2 eq/kg/functional unit and the lowest Baltic herring caught with fish trap with 0.7 kg CO2 eq/kg/functional unit. In average the farmed products (rainbow trout) had higher climate impact than studied captured species. Gillnet fishing had higher climate impact than the action of trawling, seine and fish traps.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe main reason for higher impacts for farmed fish was a consequence of feed consumption. The differences between caught fish species were caused by different distance to fishing areas and volumes of catch. According to the results the carbon footprint of Finnish citizen can be lowered by using domestic caught fish.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"The Climate Change Impact of Finnish Fish Products","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-03-31 15:53:26","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6152746/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2025-05-02T08:42:35+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-04-25T10:10:10+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"307610615219937107835142726852422896756","date":"2025-04-24T07:05:19+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-04-22T14:43:31+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-03-28T10:38:24+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"263120379678517234045575600030458141214","date":"2025-03-24T08:35:05+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"303216938127317091191407614770452568579","date":"2025-03-24T07:29:25+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2025-03-23T04:38:28+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2025-03-23T04:20:55+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvited","content":"","date":"2025-03-19T13:34:42+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2025-03-19T08:19:15+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Scientific Reports","date":"2025-03-04T08:54:08+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"scientific-reports","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"scirep","sideBox":"Learn more about [Scientific Reports](http://www.nature.com/srep/)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"Scientific Reports","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Scientific Reports","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"66df0607-16fc-4e53-a979-7dab44016af0","owner":[],"postedDate":"March 31st, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"published-in-journal","subjectAreas":[{"id":46351633,"name":"Earth and environmental sciences/Environmental sciences"},{"id":46351634,"name":"Physical sciences/Engineering"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-10-27T16:25:47+00:00","versionOfRecord":{"articleIdentity":"rs-6152746","link":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-20628-z","journal":{"identity":"scientific-reports","isVorOnly":false,"title":"Scientific Reports"},"publishedOn":"2025-10-21 16:16:38","publishedOnDateReadable":"October 21st, 2025"},"versionCreatedAt":"2025-03-31 15:53:26","video":"","vorDoi":"10.1038/s41598-025-20628-z","vorDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-20628-z","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-6152746","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-6152746","identity":"rs-6152746","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}