Energy xxx (2011) 1e10

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/energy

Energy utilization and carbon dioxide emission in the fresh, paste, whole-peeled, diced, and juiced tomato production processes
Ahmet Karakaya a, Mustafa zilgen a, b, *
a b

Department of Chemical Engineering, Yeditepe University, Kayisdagi, 34755 Istanbul, Turkey Department of Food Engineering, Yeditepe University, Kayisdagi, 34755 Istanbul, Turkey

a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history: Received 5 November 2010 Received in revised form 4 June 2011 Accepted 7 June 2011 Available online xxx Keywords: Tomato products Energy utilization Carbon dioxide emission

a b s t r a c t
Energy utilization and carbon dioxide emission during the production of fresh, peeled, diced, and juiced tomatoes are calculated. The energy utilization for production of raw and packaging materials, transportation, and waste management are also considered. The energy utilization to produce one-ton retail packaged fresh tomatoes is calculated to be 2412.8 MJ, whereas when the tomatoes are converted into paste, the energy utilization increases almost twofold; processing the same amount into the peeled or diced-tomatoes increases the energy utilization seven times. In case of juice production, the increase is ve times. The carbon dioxide emission is determined by the source of energy used and is 189.4 kg/t of fresh tomatoes in the case of retail packaging, and did not change considerably when made into paste. The carbon dioxide emission increased twofold with peeled or diced-tomatoes, and increased threefold when juiced. Chemical fertilizers and transportation made the highest contribution to energy utilization and CO2 emission. The difference in energy utilization is determined mainly by water to dry solids ratio of the food and increases with the water content of the nal product. Environmentally conscious consumers may prefer eating fresh tomatoes or alternatively tomato paste, to minimize carbon dioxide emission. 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

1. Introduction The food industry is among the worlds largest industrial sectors and the major energy consumers. Agricultural inputs like fertilizers and insecticides and transportation are produced by utilizing energy. The inputs and the outputs of the food industry are transported by utilizing fossil fuels. Equipment used in the food industry consumes electric power, natural gas, or diesel oil. Generally, energy consumption leads to pollution. Globally, tomatoes are among the foods, which are produced in largest quantities. Approximately 126 million tons of tomatoes are produced in the world annually, more than 30 million tons of which are processed [1]. China was the biggest tomato producer of the world with 33.6 million tons/year of production in 2007e2008 season, followed by the United States (14 million tons/year), India and Turkey (10 million tons each/year) and Egypt (9 million tons/year) [2,3]. In Turkey, tomatoes constitute 38% of the total vegetable production. About 20% of the Turkish tomato crop is processed and about 85% of

* Corresponding author. Department of Chemical Engineering, Yeditepe University, Kayisdagi Caddesi, 34755 Istanbul, Turkey. Tel.: 90 538 513 1044; fax: 90 216 578 0400. E-mail address: mozilgen@yeditepe.edu.tr (M. zilgen). 0360-5442/$ e see front matter 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2011.06.007

the processed tomatoes goes to paste; 10% goes to whole-peeled or diced-tomatoes and the rest are either dried or processed in different ways [1]. Priambodo and Kumar [4] while studying the energy use and the carbon dioxide emission by small and medium scale industries in Indonesia reported that the highest energy intensity, among the fabricated metal, chemical, textile and food industries, was in the food and beverage sector, similar results might be expected to apply to the other developing countries too. Flowchart associated with the growth of tomatoes destined to retail markets is depicted in Fig. 1. Chemical fertilizers, organic manure, chemical pesticides, diesel oil (for the machine work) and electric power (for irrigation and miscellaneous electrical engines) are the inputs required the growth of a tomato plant. Details of the cultural practices of tomato production in Turkey are described by Esengun et al. [5] and Hatirli et al. [6]. In Tokat soil tilling, the earliest operation for tomato growing, starts between October and May. The seedlings are transplanted to the elds in April or May. The rest of the practices are done between May and September. The harvest period is from August to October. MasseyeFerguson 240 tractors, which consume most of the diesel accounted in the study, are used extensively with the help of appliances such as discs, harrows, and plows. On the average, tomatoes are irrigated about 15 times during the cultivation period. Stakes, made of nylon twine and steel wire are used to support the plants during cultivation [5].

Please cite this article in press as: Karakaya A, zilgen M, Energy utilization and carbon dioxide emission in the fresh, paste, whole-peeled, diced, and juiced tomato production processes, Energy (2011), doi:10.1016/j.energy.2011.06.007

A. Karakaya, M. zilgen / Energy xxx (2011) 1e10

Fig. 1. Flowchart of the tomato production destined to retail markets.

Common steps of the paste, whole-peeled, diced-tomato, and the juice production processes are described in Fig. 2. Parts of the owcharts, which differ in each process, are described in Figs. 3e5. Fresh tomatoes are transported to a factory by trucks and conveyed to a ume, where they are washed (Fig. 2). With submerged centrifugal pumps water runs along the ume, pebbles, and other foreign materials are removed by lters, and then water is recycled. Water is agitated in the ume by a rotor for effective cleaning. Then the tomatoes go to the sorting tables, where they are transported on the rollers, while being washed under showers. Green, black-spotted, crushed, cracked, excessively small, and other inappropriate tomatoes are manually removed from the sorting table. This process eliminates about 5% of the incoming raw material. The waste is broken into small pieces in an industrial waste grinder and recycled as fertilizer for the tomato elds. Sequence of canning, cartoning, labeling, and packaging operations is described in Fig. 3. The canning unit of paste, peeled and diced-tomato production processes is replaced with the bottling unit in juice production process. In the paste production process, the tomatoes are crushed, pulped to 8 mm mesh size, and then concentrated in multi-effect evaporators, (Fig. 4). Production of the whole-peeled and dicedtomatoes is described in Fig. 5. Dicing and elimination of seeds and free water is employed in the diced-tomato production process only. In the peeling machine the fruit surface is subject to rapid heating by steam, then vacuum is applied to detach the skin partially; then the tomatoes are conveyed over the rotating rollers, which pick up the skin. In both the whole-peeled and the dicedtomato production processes, 70% tomato solids are mixed with balance 10  Brix juice in tanks with agitator rotating at low speed. Weight percent of solids in the total volume is referred to as  Brix in the food industry. Finally, the mixture is sterilized and lled into the cans and pasteurized. In the juice making process tomatoes are crushed, pulped into 5 mm mesh size, then blended with the tomato paste, of the same particle size, to obtain juice with 10  Brix solids content (Fig. 6). The juice is pasteurized in tubular counter current heat exchangers with overheated water. To avoid oxidation oxygen is removed from the product under vacuum. The hot product is lled into plastic bottles,

Fig. 2. Common steps of paste, whole-peeled, diced-tomato and juice production processes.

and then the bottles are capped. The bottles are pasteurized, then labeled and placed into cardboard crates. The Kyoto Protocol was accepted in 1997 and entered into force in 2005; Turkish Parliament approved ratication in 2009. Until July 2010, 191 states have signed or ratied the protocol. Turkey is among the Annex I countries, which agree to reduce their collective greenhouse gas (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, sulfur hexauoride) emissions by 5.2% from the 1990 level in the period of 2008e2012. In most countries, progress toward clean environment is achieved only with the support of the public, which comes only after informing the people. In this study, the energy utilization and the carbon dioxide emission during production of the fresh and the processed tomatoes (paste, peeled, diced, and juiced) are assessed. Environmentally conscious consumers are expected to benet from this study when they evaluate the impact of the alternative products on the environment.

2. Methodology Equipment for the production steps, e.g. conveying, washing, sorting, grinding, mixing, concentrating, canning or bottling, pasteurizing, primary and secondary packaging, etc., described in

Please cite this article in press as: Karakaya A, zilgen M, Energy utilization and carbon dioxide emission in the fresh, paste, whole-peeled, diced, and juiced tomato production processes, Energy (2011), doi:10.1016/j.energy.2011.06.007

A. Karakaya, M. zilgen / Energy xxx (2011) 1e10

Fig. 5. Product specic steps in whole-peeled and diced-tomatoes production processes.

Fig. 3. Flow diagram of the canning, cartoning, labeling, and packaging operations.

Figs. 1e5 are selected from the web sites of the major equipment providers for the tomato-processing industry. In addition to the suitability of the equipment to the process, details presented in the web site, especially about the energy utilization and the source of the energy is also taken into consideration while making the selection. All the calculations are done considering the growth or processing of one metric ton (1000 kg) of fresh tomatoes. The energy utilization in each process is computed by using the owcharts presented in Figs. 1e6. Although the common steps of the paste, whole-peeled, diced-tomato and juice production processes are described together in Fig. 2, the energy utilization and the CO2 emission has been calculated separately for each product, as described in Tables 3e6, due to the differences in the details. Antalya, Burdur, and Tokat are among the tomato producing regions in Turkey. The big cities Istanbul, Ankara, and Izmir are the

major consuming areas. There are numerous tomato-processing factories between the elds and the consuming cities. The average distance between the elds and the factories is about 75 km, and the distance between the factories and the consumer it is about 500 km. These numbers are determined by considering the population of the cities. About ve times more fresh and processed tomatoes are transported to Istanbul than Ankara, because of the difference in the populations of the distribution areas. The actual distance between the factory and the big cities are close to the numbers given in the map, but the real distance between the elds and the factory is longer than what is usually given in the map, because the trucks, at least during some part of their journey, need to follow winding roads especially around the small villages, where the tomatoes are grown. The distance between the elds and the factory is multiplied by two to determine the actual distance traveled, 150 km, since the trucks usually go the elds empty and come back to the factory loaded with the tomatoes. The product delivery trucks are considered to be making one-way trip only, since in the practice they usually carry other products on the way back. Experimental data obtained by Esengun et al. [5] in Tokat are employed in our calculations regarding agriculture of the fresh tomatoes. In Tokat, about 82% of the farmland is irrigated and 17% of

Fig. 4. Product specic steps in tomato paste production processes.

Fig. 6. Product specic steps of tomato juice production process.

Please cite this article in press as: Karakaya A, zilgen M, Energy utilization and carbon dioxide emission in the fresh, paste, whole-peeled, diced, and juiced tomato production processes, Energy (2011), doi:10.1016/j.energy.2011.06.007

A. Karakaya, M. zilgen / Energy xxx (2011) 1e10

it is arid but suitable for cultivation [5] and almost all the farmland consists of clay and sand mixture in varying proportions [7]. 3. Results and discussion 3.1. Energy consumption and carbon dioxide emissions for growth and transportation of tomatoes Growth and distribution of the fresh tomatoes are described in Fig. 1 and estimates of the energy utilization and the carbon dioxide emission associated with this process are given in Table 1. The numbers given in Table 1 are the average values reported by the farmers. Since most of the farmers use chemical fertilizers, and only a few use manure, contribution of the manure appears to be negligibly small compared to the chemical fertilizers. Helsel [8] reported the amounts of energy associated with the use of the chemical fertilizers (including production, packaging, transportation, and application) as 78.2 MJ/kg for nitrogenous, 17.5 MJ/ kg for phosphorus and 13.8 MJ/kg for potassium fertilizer. It is reported by Fadare et al. [9] that the energy utilization was 0.28 MJ/ kg for production of powdered and 0.35 MJ/kg for production of pelletized manure. Esengun et al. [5] reported that 289.7 kg/ha of nitrogenous, 295.6 kg/ha of phosphorus, 107.8 kg/ha of potassium chemical fertilizers and 28.6 t/ha of manure are used for the cultivation of tomatoes, when the crop yield is 97 t of fresh tomatoes/ha. These data are used to calculate the energy utilization associated with the nitrogenous fertilizer as 233.6 MJ/t of fresh tomatoes. The energy utilization is calculated as 53.3 MJ/t of fresh tomatoes with the phosphorus fertilizer and 15.3 MJ/t of fresh tomatoes with the potassium fertilizer. The total energy utilization associated with the chemical fertilizers is 302.2 MJ/t of fresh tomatoes. The average total energy utilization associated with the organic manure is 0.08 MJ/t of fresh tomatoes when the powdered manure is used. In case of the pelletized manure utilization 0.1 MJ/t of fresh tomatoes of energy is consumed. Since the energy utilization associated with the organic manure utilization is much smaller than of the chemical fertilizers, it is not included in Table 1. Table 1 shows that transportation requiring diesel oil utilization and the chemical fertilizers are the largest energy consumers in agriculture. The diesel oil utilization may be reduced by using energy efcient trucks and optimizing delivery plans. Energy consumption for chemical fertilizer production has been decreasing over the years and approaching the theoretical minimum in modern factories, e.g. 40 MJ/kg of nitrogenous fertilizer [10,11]. Providing the chemical fertilizers from the energy efcient chemical plants may help to reduce the energy utilization. Esengun et al. [5] reported that the chemical fertilizer use is not based on soil analysis, and probably, is much more than what is actually needed. Applying successful fertilizer management practices will supply the chemicals to soil in the exact amounts that the plants need, and reduce the energy utilization. This procedure may

Table 1 Energy utilization and carbon dioxide emission during the growth of fresh tomatoes. Activity Chemical fertilizers Chemicals (pesticides, etc.) Diesel consumption for transportation and machine work Water for irrigation Recycling waste tomatoes Total Energy utilization/ton of fresh tomatoes (MJ/t) 302.2 23.5 420.2 CO2 emission/ton of fresh tomatoes (kg/t) 57.3 0.7 5.8

19.4 164.7 930

2.7 22.8 89.3

also help to prevent pollution [12,13]. Ren et al. [14] reported that ammonium is readily available for plants, but it is converted into nitrate around the root zone in about ten days and lost in the environment. They developed a management scheme, so the amounts of ammonium are maintained just above the critical level in the root zone during cultivation of the tomato plants and therefore the losses to the environment are minimized. This management scheme was reported to achieve up to 72% reduction in the chemical nitrogenous fertilizer use. There are reports in the literature stating that introducing some microorganisms to soil may help to convert the insoluble minerals soluble form and reduce the need for the chemical fertilizers [15]. The microorganisms may also produce growth stimulants and contribute to nitrogen xation. Since only very small amounts of microorganisms are introduced to the soil, this practice also reduces the diesel oil consumption. There are publications in the literature, reporting that successful fertilizer management may also reduce the energy cost of the herbicide use [16]. Kongshaugs data [10] implies that in chemical plants, world average of, 2.71 kg CO2 emitted/kg phosphorus fertilizer, 25 kg CO2 emitted/kg potassium fertilizer and 7.11 kg CO2 emitted/kg of nitrogenous fertilizer. Using these estimates together with the amounts of each fertilizer used in the tomato agriculture as reported by Esengun et al. [5] yields that 57.3 kg CO2 emitted/ton of fresh tomatoes produced. Transportation and application of the fertilizers are achieved by diesel oil consuming devices; carbon dioxide emission and the energy cost of fertilizer application do not appear as a separate entry in Table 1. It is reported by Kongshaug [10] that the fertilizer production constitutes approximately 1.2% of the worlds energy demand and is responsible for approximately 1.2% of the total greenhouse gas emissions. Esengun et al. [5] reported that 4.71 kg/ha of pesticides (energy equivalent, 199 MJ/kg), 7.76 kg/ha of fungicides (energy equivalent, 92 MJ/kg), 2.64 kg/ha of herbicides (energy equivalent, 238.0 MJ/ kg) are used during production of 97 t/ha of fresh tomatoes, implying that the energy consumption for total of the agrochemicals is 23.5 MJ/t of fresh tomatoes (Table 1). Lal [17] reported that the emission is 6.3 2.7 kg CO2/kg of herbicides and 5.1 3.0 kg CO2/kg of insecticides and 3.9 2.2 kg CO2/kg of fungicides. When we use the data provided by Esengun et al. [5] with the mean values reported by Lal [17], we may estimate 0.7 kg CO2 emission/ton of fresh tomatoes, associated with the use of chemicals (Table 1). It is reported by Esengun et al. [5] that 723.8 L/ha of diesel oil is used during cultivation of the fresh tomatoes. Lal [17] reported that carbon dioxide emission factor of the diesel oil is 0.94 kg CO2/kg of diesel oil. After considering the tomato growth yield of 97 t/ha and the diesel oil density of 0.832 kg/L, we can calculate the carbon dioxide emission associated with the diesel oil utilization as 5.83 kg CO2/t of fresh tomatoes. Energy equivalent of the diesel oil is 56.31 MJ/L [18], which leads to calculation of the energy utilization as 420 MJ/t of fresh tomatoes in association with the diesel oil utilization. Since the mass ratio of seed tomatoes to the fresh tomato crop is very small, the energy utilization and the carbon dioxide emission associated with the seeds production does not appear in Table 1. Plants emit and uptake CO2 with photosynthesis and respiration, respectively; since these two activities cancel each others effect to some extent, CO2 emission associated with the growth of the tomato plant may be neglected [13]. Esengun et al. [5], reported that 2990 m3/ha of water with energy equivalent of 0.63 MJ/m3 is utilized during the cultivation of the tomatoes. Since the average yield of the tomatoes is 97 t/ha, we may calculate the energy utilization for irrigation to be 19.4 MJ/t fresh tomatoes. Since most of the irrigation systems are run with

Please cite this article in press as: Karakaya A, zilgen M, Energy utilization and carbon dioxide emission in the fresh, paste, whole-peeled, diced, and juiced tomato production processes, Energy (2011), doi:10.1016/j.energy.2011.06.007

A. Karakaya, M. zilgen / Energy xxx (2011) 1e10

electricity and 0.14 kg CO2 is emitted/ton of fresh tomatoes [19], we calculate the emission associated with the irrigation to be 2.7 kg CO2/t of fresh tomatoes. The energy utilization and the CO2 emission accounting associated with the growth of the tomatoes indicates that 765.3 MJ of energy is utilized and 66.5 kg of CO2 is emitted for growing one ton of fresh tomatoes (Table 1). When we consider the energy cost and the CO2 emission of recycling of the substandard tomatoes, these numbers increase to 930 MJ/t of fresh tomatoes and 89.3 kg CO2/t of fresh tomatoes. The carbon dioxide emission calculated in this study is substantially lower than the numbers reported by Roy et al. [20] for cultivation of tomatoes under the ambient conditions and under the plastic covers, as 192 kg CO2/t of fresh tomatoes or under controlled conditions in the greenhouses as 771 kg CO2/t of fresh tomatoes. In Turkey, unripe green tomatoes are harvested during the daytime, put into the crates, and transported at night with no cooling in the trucks. Their color becomes red, but tissue retains hardness during the transportation, which may take about 10e15 h. Using modied atmosphere packaging or cooled transportation, as reported by Roy et al. [20] would denitely increase the CO2 emission and the energy consumption. It is reported by Roy et al. [20] that the heavy-duty trucks with 10-ton capacity utilize 0.287 L/km of fuel while traveling at 90 km/ h. The packed tomatoes are transported to the market at 500 km of average distance to the plant. The density of diesel oil is about 0.832 kg/L, its energy equivalent is 56.31 MJ/L [18] and its carbon dioxide emission factor is 0.94 kg CO2/kg diesel oil [17]; therefore, we calculate the energy consumption and the carbon dioxide emission for transportation as 808.1 MJ/t of fresh tomatoes and 11.2 kg CO2/kg fresh tomatoes, respectively. About 5% of the tomatoes are found inappropriate for either packaging or processing in the plants. They are ground, and recycled to the elds as fertilizer in 50 g polylactic acid bags with the trucks which are making the round trip. Industrial waste grinder (grinding capacity: 500e2000 kg/h, energy utilization: 324 MJ/h; Tsingtao Donghao Plastics Machinery Co., Ltd., China) is considered in the design. Vink et al. [21] reported that 54 MJ of energy is utilized with 1.8 kg CO2 emission while producing one kg of polylactic acid. Therefore, the total energy utilization and the emission associated with recycling the waste tomatoes are calculated to be 164.7 MJ/t of fresh tomatoes and 22.8 kg CO2/t of fresh tomatoes. Roy et al. [20] reported that 4 kg of fresh tomatoes are send to the market in 430 mm 290 mm 75 mm cardboard boxes. Chow et al. [22] reported that 0.75e1.25 MJ/m2 energy is utilized for the cardboard making. If we should utilize the average, 1.00 MJ/m2, we calculate that 90 MJ of energy is needed to produce the cardboard per one ton of fresh tomatoes. In the cardboard manufacturing process, when 90% of the energy is supplied from electricity (0.14 kg of CO2 produced per MJ of electric power utilized [19]) and the rest from natural gas (0.06 kg of CO2 is produced per MJ of energy supplied from natural gas [19]), CO2 emission associated with the cardboard production is 11.9 kg CO2/t fresh tomatoes. New high technology plastic pallets are 100% recyclable and can make about 250 trips, therefore the energy consumption and the CO2 emission associated with the pallet making is not considered [23]. When we use 0.3 kg of polylactic acid stripes per ton of the fresh tomatoes, and the data provided by Vink et al. [21], we calculate that 16.2 MJ of energy will be utilized and 0.54 kg of CO2 will be emitted for one ton of fresh tomatoes. The carton printing and box making machine is capable of producing 250 cartons/min and have power of 486 MJ (including dryer) of energy (Full servo carton making machine, Shanghai Liu Xiang General Equipment Co., Ltd, China), therefore the energy required for printing and producing 250 cardboard boxes is 486 MJ/ t of fresh tomatoes and the associated CO2 emission is 68 kg CO2/t of

fresh tomatoes. In Turkey, the tomatoes are not usually cold stored in the retail markets, therefore no energy utilization and CO2 emission associated with cold storage appears in (Table 2). Each tomato box is 0.36 m2 and the cardboard had 0.126 kg/m2 of weight, therefore 11.3 kg of cardboard is needed for one ton of the fresh tomatoes. It is reported by Roy et al. [20] that the emission associated with the waste management is 0.5985 kg CO2/kg of cardboard, therefore 6.8 kg of CO2 is emitted for one ton of the fresh tomatoes sent to the retail market (Table 2). Small trucks of 1e1.5 t capacity are reported to consume 0.1667 L/km of fuel, while traveling at 60 km/h speed [20]. The emission factor is 0.94 kg CO2/kg of diesel oil After assuming that the waste is carried to 50 km of distance and following the same procedure as the transportation of the tomatoes, we calculate the energy consumption and the CO2 emission associated with the waste transportation to be 3.5 MJ/t fresh tomatoes and 0.05 kg CO2/t fresh tomatoes, respectively (Table 2). The waste is burned in most countries and energy is obtained from this process. Number of the incinerators are very limited in Turkey, therefore it is not possible to make a reasonable guess. In the big cities most of the paper, steel and plastics are collected from the garbage and recycled. Therefore the actual energy cost and the CO2 emission associated with the waste management is not expected to be higher than the numbers given in Tables 2, 5 and 6. All the plastics are replaced by polylactic acid in this study, since there is a signicant demand in the society toward using biodegradable materials in packaging. 3.2. Energy consumption and carbon dioxide emissions associated with tomato paste production Common steps of the paste, whole-peeled, diced-tomato and juice production processes are described in Fig. 2. Details of the canning, cartoning, labeling, and packaging operations are described in Fig. 3; and the product specic steps in the tomato paste production processes are depicted in Fig. 4. While carrying out the calculation for this process, the tomatoes are transported to a factory at 75 km distance to the eld with the heavy-duty trucks. The tomato-receiving ume with continuous system for mud and stone removal (Jiadi Machinery, China) is considered in this process. When the same procedure employed as the one used with the transportation of the fresh tomatoes, we calculate that the energy consumption with the transportation of the tomatoes is 161.3 MJ/t of fresh tomatoes and 2.3 kg CO2/kg fresh tomatoes (Table 3). When the fresh tomatoes reach the factory they are transported to the washers with the conveyors, sorted after washing, then crushed. The energy consumption data by the equipment which may be employed in the tomato paste production plant are obtained from the web sites of the equipment

Table 2 Energy utilization and carbon dioxide emission during retail marketing of fresh tomatoes. Activity Energy utilization/ton CO2 emission/ton of of fresh tomatoes (MJ/t) fresh tomatoes (kg/t) 89.3 1.1 11.9 0.5 68

Agriculture 930 Transportation to 50 km 78.8 Cardboard for case making 90 Polylactic acid stripes 16.2 486 Carton printing and box making machine (Shanghai Liu Xiang, China) Transportation to 500 km 808.1 Waste transportation 3.5 Waste management e Total 2412.8

11.2 0.05 6.8 189.4

Please cite this article in press as: Karakaya A, zilgen M, Energy utilization and carbon dioxide emission in the fresh, paste, whole-peeled, diced, and juiced tomato production processes, Energy (2011), doi:10.1016/j.energy.2011.06.007

A. Karakaya, M. zilgen / Energy xxx (2011) 1e10

Table 3 Energy consumption and CO2 emission associated with the tomato paste production process. Processing step and equipment details Capacity (ton of fresh tomatoes/h) e 20 40 40 40 40 62.5 e 100e200 cans/min 30 e e 15 box/min 15e30 cartons/min Energy consumption (MJ) Energy utilization for processing one ton of fresh tomatoes (MJ/t) 930 161.3 0.5 0.7 0.7 2.0 8.5 333.2 6.2 16.9 0.9 96.2 16.7 20.6 20.6 3134 4749.0 CO2 emission during processing one ton of fresh tomatoes (kg/t) 89.3 2.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 3.3 22.8 0.9 2.4 0.1 9.3 2.3 2.9 2.9 43.5 182.6

Agriculture Transportation of tomatoes to 150 km Conveying (Jiadi, China, Model JD-TS-20) Washing (Jiadi, China, Model JD-fx-40) Sorting (Jiadi, China, Model JD-JG-40) Crushing (Jiadi, China, Model JD-PS-40) Pulping to 0.8 mm mesh size (Jiadi, China, Model JD-DJ-40) Evaporator (end product: 28e30  Brix paste, Jiadi, China) Can-making (Shantou Zhengyi, China, Model FHZ-A) Can ller (Jiadi, China) Pasteurizer (Jiadi, China, Model JD-YR-30) Packaging material Carton printing and box making (Shanghai Liu Xiang, China) Carton lling (Shanghai Peifeng Electronics Co., Ltd., China) Palletizing (Dalian Jialin Machine Manufacture Co., Ltd. China) Transportation of paste to 500 km Total

e 10.8 27.4 27.4 66.6 133 Electricity: 2214 MJ Steam: 23,800 kg/h e 27 e e 36 36 e

manufacturers, and the energy consumption for processing one ton of fresh tomatoes is calculated from these data as depicted in Table 3. The evaporator (mango and tomato paste production line vacuum evaporator with capacity of processing 62.5 t/h of fresh tomatoes, Jiadi Machinery, China) is reported to be utilizing 2214 MJ of electricity and 23,800 kg/h of steam. The steam used in the pasteurization unit had 0.78 MJ/kg of heat of evaporation and produced from natural gas (emission factor: 0.06 kg of CO2/MJ of energy supplied from natural gas [19];). Therefore, the total energy utilized by the evaporator is 333.2 MJ/t fresh tomatoes, and the emission is 22.8 kg CO2/t fresh tomatoes (Table 3). In lling process 0.3 MJ of electricity is consumed for lling 4000e8000 L/h of tomato paste, which corresponds to 28e56 t/h of fresh tomatoes. The ller (Jiadi Machinery, China) has capacity of lling 100e200 cans/min (can volume 100e1000 mL). In each stage of the paste production process, the energy utilization is calculated from the data supplied by the equipment providers. Since this equipment runs with electricity, CO2 emission rates are obtained using an emission factor of 0.14 kg CO2/MJ. The evaporators employed in this design had capacity of processing 2400 L/h of crushed tomatoes. In the literature, solid content of the fresh tomatoes is reported to be 3.8e4.6  Brix [24]. A typical tomato paste has the solids content of 28e30  Brix. Since more than 95% of the crushed tomatoes is water density of the crushed tomatoes are assumed the same as that of water (1 kg/L). In Turkey most of the paste and the peeled tomatoes are placed in 850 cm3 (815 g) cans. A typical 425 mL can (15 oz, total surface area 332 cm2, side surface area 248 cm2) is made of 54.3 g of steel and 2.1 g of paper label [25]. The tomato solids are concentrated

Table 4 Energy consumption and CO2 emission associated with the production of the tomato paste packaging materials. Packaging step Energy consumption for processing one ton of fresh tomatoes (MJ/t) 52.0 0.29 5.4 38.5 96.2 CO2 emission during processing of one ton of fresh tomatoes (kg/t) 5.2 0.04 0.2 3.9 9.34

Steel for can-making Cardboard for cans Polylactic acid for cans Paper labels for packaging Total

from 5  Brix to 30  Brix in paste, therefore the packaging material is reduced by six times for the tomato paste when compared with the tomato pulp; 208 cans are needed for the paste made from one ton of fresh tomatoes. Total and side surface areas of an 830 mL can are 507 cm2 and 350 cm2, respectively. If we should assume that the amount of the steel used is proportional with the total surface area, and the amount of the label used is proportional with the rim surface area, we can calculate that 83 g of steel and 3.0 g of label is needed for one can, therefore 17.3 kg steel and 0.6 kg of paper label is needed for the paste made from one ton of fresh tomatoes. Schenck [26], while studying the environmental impact of producing canned beans (can size 15 oz or 425 mL) reported that 1973 t of steel can and 13 t of polyethylene are used for packaging canned beans made from 12,187 t of green beans. If we should substitute polyethylene with environment friendly polylactic acid and assume that the polylactic acid to steel ratio remains the same in the tomato paste production, we then calculate that 0.11 kg of polylactic acid will be needed for tomato paste produced from one ton of fresh tomatoes. It is calculated with the data provided by Vink et al. [21] that, 5.4 MJ of energy is utilized and 0.2 kg of CO2 is emitted in association with production of polylactic acid employed in packaging of the tomato paste produced from one ton of fresh tomatoes (Table 4). The cans are made from tin-plated steel sheet as thin as 0.15 mm. The layer of tin prevents corrosion of the can [27]. The theoretical minimum energy utilization for production of the steel, after including energy utilization for ore preparation, coke making, and yield losses is 2672e9348 MJ/t of steel [28]. When the steel is produced from coke, the carbon dioxide emission factor is 0.10 kg CO2/MJ [28]. The steel can is the most recycled container in the world. In 2007, the worldwide recycling rate was 68% [27]. Recycling the steel reduces the energy consumption by 75% and the CO2 emission by 80%, when compared to steel making from virgin ore [29]. When we consider the average energy consumption and the world average recycling percentage, 68%, in our calculations, we end-up with 2973 MJ energy utilization and 297 kg CO2 emission per ton of steel produced. Since 17.5 kg of steel is needed for one ton of fresh tomatoes, the energy utilization and the CO2 emission associated with the steel can production sufcient for one ton of fresh tomatoes are calculated to be 52.0 MJ and 5.2 kg, respectively (Table 4). In Turkey, 24 tomato paste cans are placed in one carton and 60 cartons are placed on a pallet; therefore, for 208 cans and

Please cite this article in press as: Karakaya A, zilgen M, Energy utilization and carbon dioxide emission in the fresh, paste, whole-peeled, diced, and juiced tomato production processes, Energy (2011), doi:10.1016/j.energy.2011.06.007

A. Karakaya, M. zilgen / Energy xxx (2011) 1e10 Table 5 Energy utilization and carbon dioxide emissions during whole-peeled and diced-tomato production processes. Process Capacity (ton of fresh tomatoes/h) Energy consumption (MJ) Energy utilization per ton of fresh tomatoes (MJ/t) 930 161.3 0.5 0.7 0.7 4.0 2.7 1.1 1098.3 1101.0 1129.0 1130.9 e 100e200 cans/min 30 e e 15 box/min 15e30 cartons/min e e 27 e e 36 36 e e 31.6 86.2 4.6 490.6 85.2 105.1 105.1 15983.4 e 18020.8 18022.7 Carbon dioxide emission per ton of fresh tomatoes (kg CO2/t) 89.3 2.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.4 0.2 92.7 93.1 95.0 95.2 4.6 12.2 0.5 47.4 11.7 14.8 14.8 221.9 1.1 409.2 409.4

Agriculture Transportation of tomatoes to 150 km Conveying (Jiadi, China, Model JD-TS-20) Washing (Jiadi, China, Model JD-fx-40) Sorting (Jiadi, China, Model JD-JG-40) Peeler/Skin Eliminator (Zhengzhou Huitong, China, Model HTQX2000) Dicer (Shandong Meiying, China, Model HTQX1000) Manual sorting machine (Langfang Huake, China) Subtotal (whole-peeled tomatoes) Subtotal (diced-tomatoes) 0.7 subtotal of whole-peeled-tomatoes 0.3 subtotal of juice 0.7 subtotal of diced-tomatoes 0.3 subtotal of juice Can making (Shantou Zhengyi, China, Model FHZ-A) Can ller (Jiadi, China) Pasteurizer (Jiadi, China, Model JD-YR-30) Packaging material Carton printing and box making (Shanghai Liu Xiang, China) Carton lling (Shanghai Peifeng Electronics Co., Ltd., China) Palletizing (Dalian Jialin Machine Manufacture Co., Ltd. China) Transportation of paste to 500 km Waste management Total (whole-peeled tomatoes) Total (diced-tomatoes)

e 20 40 40 2.0 1.0 5.0

e 10.8 27.4 27.4 7.9 2.7 5.4

8.6 corrugated cartons and 0.14 pallets are needed. Amount of the cardboard to make one carton is about 3440 cm2. Chow et al. [22] reported that 0.75e1.25 MJ/m2 energy is utilized for the cardboard making. If we should follow the same procedure as used for the energy and utilization and the CO2 emission for the fresh tomato cases, we calculate that 0.29 MJ of energy is needed to produce the cardboard for the paste produced from one ton of fresh tomatoes, and the CO2 emission associated with the cardboard production as 0.04 kg CO2/t fresh tomatoes (Table 4). The new high technology plastic pallets are 100% recyclable and can make about 250 trips [23], therefore the energy consumption and the CO2 emission associated with pallet making does not appear in Table 4. The energy utilization is considered as 10 GJ/t of virgin paper [30], but when the pulp is made of recycled paper, the energy utilization reduces by 64% [31]. After assuming that 35% of the labels are produced with the recycled paper, we may calculate that the energy utilization for producing 0.5 kg of labels, which is needed for the paste produced from one ton of tomatoes, is 38.5 MJ (Table 4). When half of this energy is supplied by natural gas and the other half is supplied by electric power CO2 emission for the label making process is calculated as 3.9 kg/t fresh tomatoes (Table 4). The carton printing and box making machine is capable of producing 250 cartons/min and has power of 486 MJ (including dryer) of energy (Full servo carton making machine, Shanghai Liu Xiang General Equipment Co., Ltd, China), therefore the energy required for printing and producing 8.6 cartons is calculated to be 16.7 MJ/t of fresh tomatoes and the associated CO2 emission is 2.3 kg CO2/t of fresh tomatoes (Table 3). The can-making line has capacity to produce 80e120 cans/min and utilizing 180 MJ/h (Model FHZ-A, Shantou Zhengyi Can-making Equipment Co., Ltd., China). Therefore, the energy utilization and the CO2 emission associated with the can-making process is 6.2 MJ/t of fresh tomatoes and 0.9 kg CO2/t of fresh tomatoes (Table 3). When the paste is transported with small trucks of 1.5 t capacity at 60 km/h speed 0.1667 L/km of fuel is utilized [20]. After assuming that the paste is carried to the average distance of 500 km by following the same procedure as the transportation of the

tomatoes, we may calculate the energy utilization as 3134 MJ/t fresh tomatoes and the carbon dioxide emission as 43.5 kg CO2/t fresh tomatoes (Table 3). When we apply the same procedure as those of the fresh tomatoes, we end-up with negligibly small numbers associated with the waste transportation and management of the cardboards utilized for the paste, therefore these items are not included in Table 3. 3.3. Energy consumption and carbon dioxide emissions associated with whole-peeled and diced-tomato production The owchart of the process specic steps of the whole-peeled and the diced-tomato production processes is given in Fig. 5. Table 5 shows the electrical power requirement and the carbon dioxide emission for each stage of the manufacturing process. The energy utilization and the carbon dioxide emission associated with the growth and the transportation are calculated to be the same as those of the tomato paste production process. Fruit and vegetable peeling machine, Zhengzhou Huitong Pipe Fittings Co., Ltd., (Henan, China) with capacity of peeling 2000 kg/of tomatoes/h and power utilization of 7.9 MJ/h; fruit dicing machine (Shandong Meiying Food Machinery Co. Ltd., Zhangqiu, China) with capacity 1000 kg/h and power utilization of 2.7 MJ/h and rolling rail type fruit sorting machine with production capacity of 800e5000 kg/h and power utilization of 2.7e5.4 MJ/h (Langfang Huake Light Industry Machinery, Co., China) are employed in the design (Table 5). The diced and the whole-peeled tomatoes are made of blending 70% tomato solids and 30% juice; the paste is about 6 times more concentrated than the diced and the peeled tomatoes and about 3 times more concentrated than the juice. Therefore, 5.1 times more energy utilization and CO2 emission is associated with the lling and sterilization of the cans, the packaging and the forth coming stages of the whole-peeled and the diced-tomato production processes than those of the paste. Among all the products covered in this study geometry of only the peeled tomatoes are important,

Please cite this article in press as: Karakaya A, zilgen M, Energy utilization and carbon dioxide emission in the fresh, paste, whole-peeled, diced, and juiced tomato production processes, Energy (2011), doi:10.1016/j.energy.2011.06.007

A. Karakaya, M. zilgen / Energy xxx (2011) 1e10

Table 6 Energy utilization and carbon dioxide emissions during tomato juice production process. Process Capacity (ton of fresh tomatoes/h) Energy consumption (MJ) Energy utilization per ton of fresh tomatoes (MJ/t) 930 161.3 0.5 0.7 0.7 2.0 3.3 93.3 5.6 3.1 1200.5 0.6 470 Carbon dioxide emission per ton of fresh tomatoes (kg CO2/t) 89.3 2.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.5 6.4 0.8 0.4 100.2 0.08 282

Agriculture Transportation of tomatoes to 150 km Conveying (Jiadi, China, Model JD-TS-20) Washing (Jiadi, China, Model JD-fx-40) Sorting (Jiadi, China, Model JD-JG-40) Crushing (Jiadi, China, Model JD-PS-40) Pulping to 0.5 mm mesh size (Jiadi, China, Model JDJ-20) Evaporator (28% of the end product is 28e30  Brix paste, Jiadi, China) Blender (Jiadi, China) Deaerator (Zhangjiagang Runyu Machinery Co., Ltd., China, Model CQ-2500) SUBTOTAL Bottle hot ller and capper (Zhangjiagang City Nanxin Technology, 2010) Bottle pasteurizer (Zhangjiagang City Nanxin Technology, China) Labeller (Shanghai Peiyu Machinery, Ltd, China, Model: SPC-SORL-TL) Packaging material Carton printing and box making machine (Shanghai Liu Xiang, 2010) Carton lling (Shanghai Peifeng Electronics Co., Ltd., China) Palletizing (Dalian Jialin Machine Manufacture Co., Ltd. China) Transportation of the juice to 500 km Waste management Total

e 20 40 40 40 20 e 2 2.5

e 10.8 27.4 27.4 66.6 66.6 e 27 18.7

8000 bottles/h Steam (P 0.6 MPa) consumption rate 600 kg/h 5000 to 30,000 bottles/h

23

24

0.2

0.02

e 15 box/min 15e30 cartons/min

e 36 36 e

1029.8 61.5 42 36 9402 e 12242.6

39.9 8.4 5.8 5.0 130.5 0.8 572.7

therefore only 60% of the incoming tomatoes may be used for the peeled tomatoes production. Since the rest may be used for either for the paste or the juice production, the loss in the peed tomatoes production is considered to be the same as the other products. The same procedure to that of the fresh tomatoes is employed to calculate the CO2 emission with the waste management of the whole-peeled and the diced-tomatoes. 3.4. Energy consumption and carbon dioxide emissions associated with tomato juice production The owchart of the product specic steps of the tomato juice production process is depicted in Fig. 6. Energy utilized by the evaporator for the tomato paste production is 333.2 MJ/t fresh tomatoes, and the emission is 22.8 kg CO2/t fresh tomatoes (Table 3). The energy utilized for evaporation in the juice production is calculated in proportion with (28%) the amount of the paste used in the juice making (Table 6). The juice bottles have 1800 mL (48 Fl Oz) of volume, (2 kg juice/ bottle, bottle weight 77 g, cap weight 5 g) [25]. Both the bottle and the cap are made of polylactic acid, therefore the energy and the emission associated with the production of the bottles is 948.0 MJ/t of fresh tomatoes and 31.6 kg CO2/t of fresh tomatoes, respectively (Table 7). The labeling machine (Shanghai Peiyu Machinery Manufacturing Co., Ltd., China, Model: SPC-SORL-TL) has capacity of labeling 5000 to 30,000 bottles/h and utilizes 24 MJ/h. Commercial tomato juice (solids content 12  Brix) is produced by blending 280 kg of paste (particle mesh size 0.5 mm, concentration 30  Brix 280 L) and 720 kg of natural tomato juice (particle mesh size 0.5 mm, solids content 12  Brix), therefore, 417 kg of juice has been produced from one ton of fresh tomatoes.

The bottle pasteurizer (Zhangjiagang City Nanxin Technology, 2010) is employed in the design to estimate the energy consumption and the CO2 emission associated with the pasteurization of the bottles after lling (Table 6). Steam used in the pasteurization unit is produced from natural gas (emission factor: 0.06 kg of CO2/MJ of energy supplied from natural gas [19];). It is considered that, 12 bottles are placed in one carton and 60 cartons are placed on a pallet. For 209 bottles 17.4 corrugated cartons and 0.3 pallets are needed. Amount of the cardboard needed to make one carton is about 6200 cm2. If we should follow the same procedure as used for the energy and utilization and the CO2 emission for the fresh tomato cases, we can calculate that 0.26 MJ of energy is needed to produce the cardboard for the juice produced from one ton of fresh tomatoes, and the CO2 emission associated with the cardboard production as 0.03 kg CO2/t fresh tomatoes (Table 7). Since the pallets are recycled for 250 times [23], no energy consumption and CO2 emission associated with pallet making is considered in Table 6. Energy cost and CO2 emission associated with labeling is proportional with the number and the volume ratio of the cans and the bottles and adapted from the calculations already performed for the tomato paste as 81.5 MJ/t of fresh tomatoes and 8.3 kg CO2/t of fresh tomatoes, respectively (Table 7). Energy utilization and carbon dioxide emission associated with cardboard making and carton printing for packaging the tomato juice is based on the calculations carried out for the tomato paste. The amounts increase with the amount of the cardboard utilized and calculated to be 61.5 MJ/t of fresh tomatoes and 8.4 kg CO2/t of fresh tomatoes (Table 6). Since the paste is three times more concentrated than the juice, energy consumed for transportation of the juice is calculated as three times of that of the paste. The same procedure is followed as that of the fresh tomatoes

Please cite this article in press as: Karakaya A, zilgen M, Energy utilization and carbon dioxide emission in the fresh, paste, whole-peeled, diced, and juiced tomato production processes, Energy (2011), doi:10.1016/j.energy.2011.06.007

A. Karakaya, M. zilgen / Energy xxx (2011) 1e10 Table 7 Energy consumption and CO2 emission associated with the production of the tomato juice packaging materials. Packaging step Energy consumption for processing one ton of fresh tomatoes (MJ/t) 948.0 0.26 81.5 1029.8 CO2 emission during processing of one ton of fresh tomatoes (kg/t) 31.6 0.03 8.3 39.9

Polylactic acid for making bottles Cardboard for bottles Paper labels for packaging Total

and the CO2 emission associated with that of the waste management of the juice cartons is calculated to be 0.8 kg CO2/t of fresh tomatoes (Table 6). The energy consumption and the carbon dioxide emission associated with the fresh and the processed tomatoes are summarized in Table 8. The energy utilization to produce one-ton retail packaged fresh tomatoes is 2412.8 MJ. When the tomatoes are converted into the paste the energy utilization increases almost twofold, whereas processing the same amount of tomatoes into the peeled or diced-tomatoes increases the energy utilization by seven, or into juice by 4.7 times. Carbon dioxide emission associated with one ton of retail package of tomatoes is 189.4 kg. It decreased a little when tomato paste is consumed. Carbon dioxide emission increased twofold with the peeled or the diced-tomatoes, or threefold with the tomato juice. The chemical fertilizers and the transportation made the highest contribution to the energy utilization and the CO2 emission. The difference between different products is affected mainly by the water to dry solids ratio. The energy cost of the processed tomatoes increased with the water content of the product. It is seen in Tables 1e7 that most of the energy utilized in the food industry is in the form of electric power. The electric power may also be produced from other resources like wind, hydroelectric or nuclear power. The electric power, which is obtained from all of these resources, is combined in national or international networks. The relation between the amounts of carbon dioxide emitted and the electric power consumed depends on the contribution of each resource into overall electric power generation. In PAS 2050, 0.14 kg of CO2 is assumed to be produced per each MJ of electric power utilized [19]. In countries where electricity is produced by burning fossil fuels only, amount of CO2 emitted should be higher in comparison with the countries where majority of electric power is obtained from hydroelectric power plants. Consumers usually do not have information about electricity used for the product they purchased and its environmental impacts [32,33]. Results from a survey indicated that 79% of households and 81% of small and medium sized enterprisers are aware of the fact that the use of fossil fuels contributes to climate change, but they do not necessarily relate this to carbon dioxide emissions [33]. Providing

information to the consumers about the energy cost and the CO2 emission associated with each product may also convince the producers to use cleaner energy sources. Carbon dioxide is not the only gas emitted during production and processing of tomato products. Emission of the other undesired gasses will be the subject matter of another study. Process requirements are based on capacities and power ratings of equipment selected from web sites of the major equipment manufacturers, and the energy utilization and the carbon dioxide emission are calculated for all the alternative products under the same conditions. Energy productivity is increasing steadily all around the world [33,34,36,37]. Therefore, the same product is usually produced with substantially less energy utilization and CO2 emission in the newer plants. Priambodo and Kumar [4] and Eide [35] reported that the energy efciency is low and the carbon dioxide emission is high in the smaller scale enterprises, therefore capacity of the processing plants is also expected to affect the results of the studies. Most of the plants produce these alternative products at the same time where it is not possible to distinguish how much energy is allocated for each product, therefore reliable experimental data is not easy to obtain. About 20% error may be expected in the reported values, but the relative amounts of the energy utilization and the carbon dioxide emission associated with each product are not expected to change as much when all the calculations are carried out with the data obtained under similar conditions. During the recent years, excellent studies are done to compare either the efciency or point out the inefciency of the existing plants [4,35,38e40]. Also new technology has been developed in some areas including combined heat and power systems for greenhouses [41], which may produce extra electricity in addition to reducing both energy utilization and carbon dioxide emission in the countries where tomatoes are cultivated in the greenhouse. Exergy efciency of a tomato paste process may be improved by increasing the number of evaporators in the cascade [42] and waste heat from heat pump may be used elsewhere in the plant [43]. Combined contribution of these and similar studies are expected to cause substantial increase in the energy efciency and reduce the carbon dioxide emission in the tomato-processing plants in the near future. In the present study, only fresh tomatoes and their alternatives with no additives are considered. Tomato ketchup is another major branch of tomato-processing industry. Readers who are interested in carbon dioxide emission during ketchup processing are referred to the excellent article by Andersson et al. [44]. 4. Conclusions Transportation appears to be the highest energy consumer and the most important source of CO2 emission in the tomato-processing industries. The energy consumption and the CO2 emission associated with production and application of the chemical fertilizers are among the stages where environment friendly progress seems to be possible. Optimizing logistics and preferring lower energy consuming means for transportation and applying fertilizer management programs may reduce the energy cost and the CO2 emission. The difference in energy utilization is determined mainly by the dry solids to water ratio ( Brix) of the food and increases with water content of the nal product. Although evaporation appears to be the major step in the paste production, it reduces the mass to be transported therefore the total amount the energy utilized for the paste is relatively less than those of the other processed products. Carbon dioxide emission depends on the energy source, the process steps where the major energy source is natural gas generates relatively less emission when compared with the steps where electric power is used. Environment sensitive

Table 8 Energy utilization and carbon dioxide emission associated with production of the fresh and processed tomatoes. Product Fresh tomatoes in cardboard packaging Tomato paste Whole-peeled tomatoes Diced-tomatoes Tomato juice Energy utilization/ton of fresh tomatoes (MJ/t) 2412.8 4749.0 18020.8 18022.7 12242.6 CO2 emission/ton of fresh tomatoes (kg/t) 189.4 182.6 409.2 409.2 572.7

Please cite this article in press as: Karakaya A, zilgen M, Energy utilization and carbon dioxide emission in the fresh, paste, whole-peeled, diced, and juiced tomato production processes, Energy (2011), doi:10.1016/j.energy.2011.06.007

10

A. Karakaya, M. zilgen / Energy xxx (2011) 1e10 [22] Chow S, Ganji AR, Hackett B. Opportunities for energy efciency and demand response in corrugated cardboard manufacturing facilities, Industrial Energy Technology Conference, New Orleans, Louisiana, May 11e12, 2005. [23] Hurst, T. Could high-Tech plastic pallets mean the end for Disposable Wooden pallets? Earth and Industry web site. Retrieved October 24, 2010 from <http://earthandindustry.com/2010/09/is-the-pallet-of-the-future-madeout-of-plastic/>. [24] Lijuan X, Ying Y, Lin H, Zhou Y, Niu X. Nondestructive determination of soluble solids content and pH in tomato juice using NIR transmittance spectroscopy. Sen Instrum Food Qual Saf 2008;2:111e5. [25] ULS Report, A Study of packaging efciency as it relates to waste prevention. Retrieved October 20, 2010 from. American Chemistry Council, <http://www. americanchemistry.com/plastics/doc.asp?CID1593&DID6072>; February, 2007. [26] Schenck R. Canning green beans, Ecoprole of Truitt Brothers process. Retrieved on September 5, 2010 from. Network for Business Innovation and Sustainability Institute for Environmental Research and Education, <http:// www.iere.org/documents/Canning-Beans-Ecoprole.pdf>; August 6, 2007. [27] World Steel Association. Environmental case study, steel food cans. Retrieved October 20 2010 from, <http://www.worldsteel.org/climatechange/les/7/ Food%20cans%20case%20study.pdf>; 2009. [28] Fruehan RJ, Fontini O, Paxton HW, Brindle R. Theoretical minimum energies to produce steel for selected conditions. Pittsburgh, USA: Carnegie Melon University; 2000. [29] Metals e Aluminum and steel recycling. Retrieved, October 20, 2010 from. Waste Online Website, <http://www.wasteonline.org.uk/resources/InformationSheets/ metals.htm>; 2010. [30] Biermann CJ. Essentials of pulping and Papermaking. San Diego: Academic Press; 1993. [31] Bureau of International Recycling. Information about recycling. Retrieved October 24, 2010 from, <http://web.archive.org/web/20070927175746/http:/ www.bir.org/aboutrecycling/index.asp>; 2010. [32] Poritosh R, Nei D, Okadome H, Nakamura N, Orikasa T, Shiina T. Life cycle inventory analysis of fresh tomato distribution systems in Japan considering the quality aspect. J Food Eng 2007;86:225e33. [33] Boardman B, Palmer J. Consumer Choice and carbon Consciousness for electricity. European Commission Altener Program Final Report. Environmental Challenge Institute; 2003. [34] Nuibe T. Energy intensity in industrial subsectors. Japan: The Energy Conservation Center; 2007. [35] Eide ME. Life cycle assessment (LCA) of industrial milk production. Int J LCA 2002;7(2):115e26. [36] Uhlin HE. Why energy productivity is increasing: an I-O analysis of Swedish agriculture. Agric Syst 1998;56:443e65. [37] Piringer G, Laura J, Steinberg LJ. Reevaluation of energy use in wheat production in the United States. J Ind Ecol 2006;10(1e2):149e67. [38] Ramirez CA, Patel M, Blok K. From uid milk to milk powder: energy use and energy efciency in the European dairy industry. Energy 2006;31: 1984e2004. [39] Ramirez CA, Patel M, Blok K. How much energy to process one pound of meat? A comparison of energy use and specic energy consumption in the meat industry of four European countries. Energy 2006;31:2047e63. [40] Xu T, Flapper J, Kramer KJ. Characterization of energy use and performance of global cheese processing. Energy 2009;34:1993e2000. [41] Compernolle T, Witters N, van Passel S, Thewys T. Analyzing a self-managed CHP system for greenhouse cultivation as a protable way to reduce CO2emissions. Energy 2011;36:1940e7. [42] Sogut Z, Ilten N, Oktay Z. Energetic and exergetic performance evaluation of the quadruple-effect evaporator unit in tomato paste production. Energy 2010;35:3821e6. [43] Kapustenko PO, Ulyev LM, Boldyryev SA, Garev AO. Integration of a heat pump into the heat supply system of a cheese production plant. Energy 2008;33: 882e9. [44] Andersson K, Ohlsson T, Olsson P. Screening life cycle assessment (LCA) of tomato ketchup: a case study. J Cleaner Production 1998;6:277e88.

consumers may prefer eating fresh tomatoes; their best alternative is the paste. Providing information to the consumers about the energy cost and CO2 emission associated with each product may convince the producers to use cleaner energy sources. References
[1] Bayrak S, Kaya L. World market of fresh and processed tomato products (in Turkish) Dnya Taze Domates ve islenmis Domates rnleri Piyasas. _ Retrieved September 5, 2010 from. Akdeniz Ihracat Birlikleri, <http://www. akib.org.tr/akib/UserFiles/File/arastirma/TAZEDOMATES.doc>; 2009. [2] Tomatoes and processed tomato products. Retrieved April 10, 2010 from. Turkey: USDA Foreign Agricultural Services, <http://www.agmrc.org/ commodities__products/vegetables/processed_tomatoes_prole.cfm>; 2009. [3] FAO. Production of fresh tomato in Turkey. Retrieved April 10, 2010 from. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, <http://www.fao. org/countries/55528/en/tur>; 2010. [4] Priambodo A, Kumar S. Energy use and carbon dioxide emission of Indonesian small and medium scale industries. Energy Conv Man 2001;42:1335e48. [5] Esengun K, Erdal G, Gunduz O, Erdal H. An economic analysis and energy use in stake-tomato production in Tokat province of Turkey. Renewable Energy 2007;32:1873e81. [6] Hatirli SA, Ozkan B, Fert C. Energy inputs and crop yield relationship in greenhouse tomato production. Renew Energy 2006;31:427e38. [7] Karaman SA. Study on investigation of soil and water sources in Tokat. Journal of the Agricultural Faculty of Gaziosmanpasa University 2006;23(1):37e44. [8] Helsel ZR. Energy and alternatives for fertilizer and pesticide use. In: Fluck RC, editor. Energy in farm production, vol. 6. New York: Elsevier; 1992. p. 177e201. [9] Fadare DA, Bamiro AO, Oni AO. Energy and cost analysis of organic fertilizer production in Nigeria. Energy 2010;35(1):332e40. [10] Kongshaug G. Energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions in fertilizer production. Paper presented at IFA Technical Conference, Marrakech, Morocco, 28 September e 1 October, 1998. [11] Anundskas A. Technical improvements in mineral nitrogen fertilizer production. In: Harvesting energy with fertilizers. European Fertilizer Manufacturers Association; 2000. [12] Hlsbergen KJ, Feil B, Biermann S, Rathke GW, Kalk WD, Diepenbrock W. A method of energy balancing in crop production and its application in a longterm fertilizer trial. Agric Ecosyst Environ 2001;86:303e21. [13] Snyder CS, Bruulsema TW, Jensen TL, Fixen PE. Review of greenhouse gas emissions from crop production systems and fertilizer management effects. Agric Ecosyst Environ 2009;133:247e66. [14] Ren T, Christie P, Wang J, Chen Q, Zhang F. Root zone soil nitrogen management to maintain high tomato yields and minimum nitrogen losses to the environment. Sci Hortic 2010;125:25e33. [15] Aslantas R, Cakmakci R, Sahin F. Effect of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria on young apple tree growth and fruit yield under orchard conditions. Sci Hortic 2007;111:371e7. [16] Clements DR, Weise SF, Brown R, Stonehouse DP, Hume DJ, Swanton CJ. Energy analysis of tillage and herbicide inputs in alternative weed management systems. Agric Ecosyst Environ 1995;52:119e28. [17] Lal R. Carbon emission from farm operations. Environ Int 2004;30:981e90. [18] Singh JM. On farm energy use pattern in different cropping systems in Haryana, India. Unpublished MS Thesis, International Institute of Management, University of Flensburg, Germany; 2002. [19] PAS. Guide to PAS 2050, How to assess the carbon footprint of goods and services. UK: Carbon Trust; 2008. [20] Roy P, Nei D, Okadome H, Nakamura N, Orikasa T, Shiina T. Life cycle inventory analysis of fresh tomato distribution systems in Japan considering the quality aspects. J Food Eng 2008;86:225e33. [21] Vink ETH, Rabago KR, Glassner DA, Gruben PR. Applications of life cycle assessment to NatureWorks polylactide (PLA) production. Polym Degrad Stab 2003;80:403e19.

Please cite this article in press as: Karakaya A, zilgen M, Energy utilization and carbon dioxide emission in the fresh, paste, whole-peeled, diced, and juiced tomato production processes, Energy (2011), doi:10.1016/j.energy.2011.06.007