This study conducted a life cycle assessment for Argentinian beef meat across its entire production chain. Based on this analysis, a complete inventory was developed, and the environmental profile of Argentine beef was characterized by applying a harmonized impact assessment methodology and a wide range of impact categories. The primary stages considered were rearing, finishing, slaughter, and selling and two different finishing ways were included: traditional extensive and supplemented. global warming potential (GWP), stratospheric ozone depletion (SOD), freshwater and terrestrial ecotoxicity (FWEc and TEc), freshwater eutrophication (FWEu), terrestrial acidification (TA), fossil resource scarcity (FRS), mineral resource scarcity (MRS), water consumption (WC) and land use (LU) were the evaluated impacts. The rearing and slaughter phases had the most significant burden in inventory calculations. The rearing and finishing phases were the major contributors to GWP, SOD, FWEu, TA, and LU. Seeds and agrochemical production had a considerable burden on FWEc, TEc, and WC. Enteric fermentation produced about 50% of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions while those from the loss of soil organic carbon and residues and renewal from pasture cultivation were also remarkable. While supplementing livestock with high-quality feed reduces GHG emissions, other impacts such as FWEc, TEc, TA, FRS, MRS, and WC are increased up to 30%. Moreover, industrial phases should be included within the LCA scope due to their significant impact on the inventory. This comprehensive analysis provides a tool for comparing the environmental profiles of beef with other protein sources, ensuring a more accurate representation of the overall effects of beef production.

Plant-based sources are being assessed as alternatives to animal-based foods as a strategy to reduce environmental impacts. This study aimed to calculate the environmental footprint of dry bean flour made from Phaseolus vulgaris sp. cultivated in the Argentine Northwest. Since grain pre-treatment influences the flour’s nutritional value, three different processing methods were evaluated. A comparative Life Cycle Assessment was conducted for 1 kg of flour. Primary stages assessed were seed and grain production, transportation, processing, and flour production. Agrochemicals used in the field stages had a significant impact on ecotoxicity. Energy consumption from non-renewable sources represents a significant burden on pretreated flour.