LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT LCA is an objective evaluation procedure of products, processes or businesses energetic and environmental impact, carried out through the identification and quantification of energy, used materials and wastes released into the environment. The evaluation includes the whole life cycle of the product, process or activity, comprising extraction and the treatment of raw materials, manufacturing, transport, re-use, recycling, and waste treatment (SETAC,1990). The LCA phases are: 1) Goal Definition and Scope (ISO 14041); 2) Life Cycle Inventory Analysis (14041); 3) Life Cycle Impact Assessment (ISO 14042); 4) Life Cycle Interpretation and Improvement (ISO 14043) [1].The realisation of the third phase, Life Cycle Impact Assessment, is carried out by indicators of international use that allow to quantify the impacts. For the present study it has been used the Method of Eco- indicator 99 applied by means the code of calculation Sima Pro 5.0 [2]. ECO-INDICATOR 99 The Eco-indicator 99 method [3] considers three damage categories, to which some impact categories are associated. The damage categories are Human Health, Ecosystem Quality and Resources. The impact categories of Human Health are Carcinogens, Respiratory organics, Respiratory inorganics, Climate change, Radiation and Ozone layer (measured by DALY, Disability Adjusted Life Years). The impact categories of Ecosystem Quality are Ecotoxicity, Acidification/Eutrophication and Land-use (measured by PDF*m2y, Potentially Disappeared Fraction). The impact categories of Resources are Minerals and Fossil fuels (measured by MJ surplus). The Method relates the emission and the resources of the inventory data to the environmental impact categories and calculates their potential effects by means three phases: characterisation, normalisation and evaluation. In this study have been used the Eco-indicator99(E) CWE(NDP), modified for to include the water consumption, the energy consumption and the emissions in air and water of Ntot, Ptot, BOD, COD. Materials and Methods Conclusions The more important problems, after this preliminary analysis of LCA in the conventional olives cultivation are : the use of fertilizers, the use of pesticides for olive fly- capture and land-use. This study has been the goal to quantify numerically environmental damage of olives cultivation process and to estimate the opportunities to reduce the impacts by the comparison with the biological olives cultivation (sensitivity analysis). LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL INTEGRATED SYSTEM IN THE OLIVE OIL TUSCAN COMPANY G. Olivieri *, F. Falconi *, R. Pergreffi *, P. Neri **, A. Romani *** * Spinner c/o ENEA, ** ENEA, *** Università di Firenze, Abstract Life Cycle Assessment, in Tuscan company (Italy) for typical olive oil production, has been applied, particular focus in the analysis has been applied at cultivation olives phase. Virgin olive oil is an inherent part of the Mediterranean culture and diet important for our nutritional properties and organoleptic quality. This preliminary study makes part of a wider plan for implementation of an integrated system environment-quality to realize some guidelines useful for the acquisition of product mark (Agriquality, Regional Law 4/04/99 n. 25) and for the realization of an Environmental Certification ISO The plan involves OTA (an association that works in the olive-sector in Tuscany), ENEA and University of Florence. Introduction The aims are to consent that the typical agricultural and gastronomic tradition of Region Tuscany emerged and to guarantee a “clean” feeding. In fact, the agricultural and food-systems are the fulcrum of a production interested to Environment and Territory. The use of appropriated agricultural techniques and the maintenance of the resources are fundamental to a corrected management companies. Through LCA it has been attempted to characterize environmental critical states in cultivation and production of rendering traceable the origin and end-life of virgin oil. Results and discussions 1) Goal Definition and Scope The goal of this study is the determination of the environmental damage due to the olives cultivation in the conventional Tuscan company; the function of the system is the olive oil production for food field; the functional unit is 1 kg of olives produced; the system boundaries are the cultivation of a plot of ground until harvesting and storage olives. 2 ) Life Cycle Inventory Analysis The olives cultivation process is created by using the data supplied by Tuscan company, by OTA, by SimaPro 5.0 database (standard, IVAMLCA3) and Ecoinvent database. The inventory data are resumed by Tab.1. Tab.1 Qualitative synthesis of inventory data system Resources - Dung: organic fertilizer - P 2 O 5 : %organic fertilizer - N: %organic fertilizer - C organic: %organic fertilizer - Water Materials/fuels - Fertiliser NKP (15/15/12): inorganic fertilizer - Cu(OH)2: treatment for fungicide defence - X5CrNi18 (304) I: material of mechanical Cu vaporizer - Pesticide unspecified storehouse: pesticides for olive fly- capture Electricity/heat - Tillage harrowing - Mechanical spreading of organic fertilizers - Mechanical spreading of pesticides - Mechanical spreading of fertilizers - Mechanical spreading of Cu(OH)2 - Electric motor for mechanical Cu vaporizer - Harvesting olives process - Storage olives process Emissions to air - CO2 (non-fossil) - ethofumesate Emissions to water - K: fertilizer inorganic emission - N-tot: fertilizer inorganic emission - N-tot: fertilizer organic emission - Ptot: fertilizer inorganic emission - P-tot: fertilizer organic emission - Cu: fungicide defence emission - Ethofumesate: pesticide emission Emissions to soil - Ethofumesate: pesticide emission Non material emission - Occupation land of cultivation Waste to treatment Solid wood  Recycling wood (sub): treatment of plants end life Solid wood  incineration wood (sub): treatment of trimmings end life Solid steel scrap  Recycling ECCS steel B250: treatment of mechanical Cu vaporizer end life 3) Life Cycle Impact Analysis Figure 1 represents the characterisation analysis of olives cultivation process. The principal results are: in Human Health the total damage is 4,51E-6 DALY due to emissions of pesticides employ (79,43%); in Ecosystem Quality the total damage is 1,71 PDFm2y due to occupation land of cultivation (47,86%); in Resources the total damage is 0,197 MJ surplus due to Fertiliser NKP(15/15/12) (102,7%). The principal damage avoided is due to treatment of trimmings end life (energetic recovery by incineration wood). Tab. n represents the characterisation analysis for substances specification in the damage categories. Figure 2 represents the weighting analysis of olives cultivation process. The principal results of weighting analysis are: the total damage is 0.219Pt. The total damage is due to: direct emissions of olives cultivation process for 85.45%; Fertilizer NKP (15/15/12) for 13.97% and Mechanical spreading of organic fertilizers process for 1.44%. Fig.1 The characterisation analysis of olives cultivation process Tab.2 The characterisation for substances specification in Human Health (the first of third substances classification) Tab.3 The characterisation for substances specification in Ecosystem Quality (the first of third substances classification) Tab.4 The characterisation for substances specification in Resources (the first of third substances classification)NSubstanc.Com.UnitTotal damage % amo. contributio. process % Total of all compart. MJ surplus 0, crude oil IDEMAT Raw MJ surplus 0,077639,4421,9g Fertiliser NKP (81,34) 2 crude oil ETH Raw MJ surplus 0,068134,6319,2g Fertiliser NKP (53,69 ) 3 natural gas ETH Raw MJ surplus 0,051426,1116,5l Fertiliser NKP (123,6) NSubsta.CompUnitTot.Dam.(%)Amoun. contribu. process (%) Total of all compart ments DALY4,51E Ethofu.SoilDALY3,53E-678,26152mg olives cultivation process (100) 2dustAirDALY3,48E-77,73,17g Fertiliser NKP (105) 3 NO 2 AirDALY2,02E-74,42,27g Fertiliser NKP(98) Fig.3 The weighting analysis of comparison between conventional olives cultivation process & biological olives cultivation process NSubstance Comp. UnitTotdam.(%)amount Contributio. process (%) Tot. of all compartm. PDF* m 2 yr 1, Occupatio n land for cultivation Non mat. PDF* m 2 yr 0,8147,8 1,63m 2 a olives cultivation process (100) 2P-tot Wate r PDF* m 2 yr 0,7745,15,36g olives cultivation process (100) 3N-tot Wate r PDF* m 2 yr 0,084,94,31g olives cultivation process (99,9) Fig.2 The weighting analysis of olives cultivation process 4) Life Cycle Interpretation and Improvement: Sensitivity Analysis Has been carried out the comparison between conventional olives cultivation and biological olives cultivation. Figure 3 represents the weighting analysis of comparison. The total damage of conventional olives cultivation (0,219Pt) is greater than total damage of biological olives cultivation (0,128Pt). The damage difference is 26%. References [1] Curran M. A., Environmental Life Cycle Assessment, McGraw-Hill, [2] Pré Consultants B.V. SimaPro 5.0. Plotterweg 12, 3821 BB, Amersfoot, [3] The Eco-indicator 99, Methodology Report- Annex, PRé Consultants B.V., 5 October 1999.