journal article·2025-10-29Open access

Chickpea-Based Burgers as a Sustainable Meat Alternative: Life Cycle Assessment and Preliminary Economic Evaluation

Alexandra Mari, Tryfon Kekes, Christos Boukouvalas, Georgia Frakolaki, Christina Panou, Panagiota Thasitou, Magdalini Krokida

Applied Sciences· Volume 15· Issue 21

Abstract

The meat industry is widely regarded as one of the most environmentally and economically burdensome sectors, playing a significant role in greenhouse gas emissions, resource depletion, and public health challenges. Additionally, its high production costs and inefficiencies in resource use exacerbate the economic strain on both local and global scales, making it a major contributor to unsustainable practices in food production. This study investigates the environmental and economic benefits of replacing conventional meat burgers with plant-based vegan burgers, through a cradle-to-gate Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and economic evaluation. The assessment was conducted using the GaBi 2023 software, applying the ReCiPe 2016 impact assessment method to evaluate multiple environmental indicators. The LCA results reveal substantial environmental advantages of vegan burgers, including a 92.25% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, a 99.51% decrease in fine particulate matter formation, and significant reductions in water and land usage. Additionally, the human health and ecosystem impacts associated with vegan burgers are markedly lower, highlighting their advantages as a healthier dietary option. An estimated ±10% data variability is expected, though it does not significantly affect the comparative results, as uncertainty applies consistently to both scenarios. From an economic perspective, the production of vegan burgers proves more cost-effective, with a production cost of €0.24 per vegan burger compared to €0.66 per meat burger. In conclusion, plant-based vegan burgers present a compelling alternative to conventional meat products, offering environmental, health, and economic benefits that support more sustainable food systems.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact · Food Waste Reduction and Sustainability · Organic Food and Agriculture

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

School of Chemical Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, Zografou, 15780 Athens, Greece

Hellenic Catering S.A., 1st Street, Industrial Area of Thessaloniki (VI.PE.TH.), Sindos, 57022 Thessaloniki, Greece

Funding

European Regional Development Fund of the European Union

References (27)

Show source-provided references
1. Gil, M., Rudy, M., Duma-Kocan, P., Stanisławczyk, R., Krajewska, A., Dziki, D., and Hassoon, W.H. (2024). Sustainability of Alternatives to Animal Protein Sources, a Comprehensive Review. Sustainability, 16.10.3390/su16177701 ↗
2. Red meats: Time for a paradigm shift in dietary advice10.1016/j.meatsci.2014.06.024 ↗
3. Meat consumption, health, and the environment10.1126/science.aam5324 ↗
4. Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers10.1126/science.aaq0216 ↗
5. Gerber, P.J., Steinfeld, H., Henderson, B., Mottet, A., Opio, C., Dijkman, J., Falcucci, A., and Tempio, G. (2013). Tackling Climate Change Through Livestock—A Global Assessment of Emissions and Mitigation Opportunities, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO).
6. Steinfield, H., Castel, V., and Wassenaar, T. (2006). Livestock’s Long Shadow Environmental Issues and Options, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
7. A Global Assessment of the Water Footprint of Farm Animal Products10.1007/s10021-011-9517-8 ↗
8. Andreani, G., Sogari, G., Marti, A., Froldi, F., Dagevos, H., and Martini, D. (2023). Plant-Based Meat Alternatives: Technological, Nutritional, Environmental, Market, and Social Challenges and Opportunities. Nutrients, 15.10.3390/nu15020452 ↗
9. Life cycle assessment for food production and manufacturing: Recent trends, global applications and future prospects10.1016/j.promfg.2019.06.113 ↗
10. Using life cycle assessment to achieve a circular economy10.1007/s11367-020-01856-z ↗
11. Cradle to grave environmental impact evaluation of the consumption of potato and tomato products10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.143662 ↗
12. Cellura, M., Cusenza, M.A., Longo, S., Luu, L.Q., and Skurk, T. (2022). Life Cycle Environmental Impacts and Health Effects of Protein-Rich Food as Meat Alternatives: A Review. Sustainability, 14.10.3390/su14020979 ↗
13. Optimization configuration model and application of product service system based on low-carbon design10.1016/j.spc.2023.01.007 ↗
14. Herrmann, M., Mehner, E., Egger, L., Portmann, R., Hammer, L., and Nemecek, T. (2024). A comparative nutritional life cycle assessment of processed and unprocessed soy-based meat and milk alternatives including protein quality adjustment. Front. Sustain. Food Syst., 8.10.3389/fsufs.2024.1413802 ↗
15. Tang, M., Miri, T., Soltani, F., Onyeaka, H., and Al-Sharify, Z.T. (2024). Life Cycle Assessment of Plant-Based vs. Beef Burgers: A Case Study in the UK. Sustainability, 16.10.3390/su16114417 ↗
16. Martin, C.H., and Keoleian, G.A. (2018). Beyond Meat’s Beyond Burger Life Cycle Assessment: A Detailed Comparison Between a Plantbased and an Animal-Based Protein Source, University of Michigan.
17. Becker, G., Janssen, J.N., Kalev-Altman, R., Meilich, D., Shitrit, A., Penn, S., Reifen, R., and Ornan, E.M. (2024). Plant and Insect Proteins Support Optimal Bone Growth and Development; Evidences from a Pre-Clinical Model. arXiv.10.2139/ssrn.4923156 ↗
18. (2006). Environmental Management—Life Cycle Assessment—Principles and Framework (Standard No. ISO 14040:2006).
19. (2006). Environmental Management—Life Cycle Assessment—Requirements and Guidelines (Standard No. ISO 14044:2006).
20. Farjana, S.H., Mahmud, M.A.P., and Huda, N. (2021). Introduction to Life Cycle Assessment. Life Cycle Assessment for Sustainable Mining, Elsevier.10.1016/B978-0-323-85451-1.00001-9 ↗
21. Mari, A., Kekes, T., Boukouvalas, C., Drosou, C., Krokida, M., and Tsartsaris, C. (2024). Evaluating the Environmental and Economic Benefits of New Technologies in Low-Salt Olive Fermentation. Agriculture, 14.10.3390/agriculture14112077 ↗
22. Muralikrishna, I.V., and Manickam, V. (2017). Life Cycle Assessment. Environmental Management, Elsevier.10.1016/B978-0-12-811989-1.00005-1 ↗
23. Comparative life cycle assessment of plant and beef-based patties, including carbon opportunity costs10.1016/j.spc.2021.07.017 ↗
24. Evaluation of the influence on water consumption and water scarcity of different healthy diet scenarios10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112687 ↗
25. Meat Consumption and Sustainability10.1146/annurev-resource-111820-032340 ↗
26. Environmental impacts of food consumption in Europe10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.06.080 ↗
27. Life cycle assessment of burger patties produced with extruded meat substitutes10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127177 ↗