Sustainability & Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) Summary
Product: Happa Healthy Baby Food Puree Travel Pack
Composition: Natural fruits, grains, and vegetables; no added sugar, milk powder, or preservatives
Assessment Standard: ISO 14040:2006 / ISO 14044:2006
System Boundary: Cradle-to-Gate
1. Goal and Scope Definition (ISO 14044 ยง4.2)
Goal:
To quantify the cradle-to-gate environmental impacts of the Happa Healthy Baby Food Puree Travel Pack for ESG disclosure, Cleantech Mart sustainability scoring, and B2B procurement benchmarking.
Intended Audience:
Investors, sustainability auditors, institutional buyers, and Cleantech Mart platform stakeholders.
Functional Unit:
100 g of ready-to-consume baby food puree at factory gate.
System Boundary (Cradle-to-Gate):
-
Agricultural production of fruits, grains, and vegetables
-
Raw material transport
-
Processing (washing, cooking, pureeing)
-
Primary packaging (single-serve travel pack)
-
Excludes distribution, consumer use, and end-of-life (EoL) impacts
2. Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) โ Key Assumptions
-
Ingredients sourced from mixed conventional agriculture (India/global average datasets)
-
Thermal processing using grid electricity (India average emission factor)
-
Packaging assumed as multilayer flexible pouch (PET/PE composite)
-
No dairy, refined sugar, preservatives, or synthetic additives included
-
Allocation by mass (ISO-compliant)
3. Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA)
3.1 Climate Change Impact (GWP100 โ IPCC AR6)
Carbon Footprint Calculation (per 100 g):
| Component |
Emissions Factor |
Contribution |
| Agricultural inputs |
~0.35 kg COโe/kg |
0.035 kg COโe |
| Processing energy |
~0.6 kg COโe/kWh |
0.018 kg COโe |
| Packaging material |
~2.7 kg COโe/kg |
0.025 kg COโe |
| Total (100 g) |
โ |
~0.078 kg COโe (78 g COโe) |
Result:
โ 78 g COโe per 100 g product
3.2 Water Footprint (FAO/OECD methodology)
| Source |
Water Use |
| Crop cultivation |
~110 L / 100 g |
| Processing & cleaning |
~8 L / 100 g |
| Packaging |
~2 L / 100 g |
| Total |
~120 L / 100 g |
4. Comparative Benchmarking (Industry Context)
| Product Category |
Carbon Footprint (per 100 g) |
| Happa Baby Food Puree |
~78 g COโe |
| Conventional cosmetic face mask (clay/synthetic) |
150โ250 g COโe |
| Dairy-based infant food |
200โ400 g COโe |
Interpretation:
The product demonstrates ~50โ70% lower climate impact than conventional cosmetic masks and significantly lower emissions than dairy-based baby foods, primarily due to plant-based formulation and absence of milk powder.
5. Material Sustainability & Toxicity Assessment
-
Ingredients: 100% food-grade, plant-derived, biodegradable
-
Toxicity: No parabens, synthetic fragrances, preservatives, or heavy-metal-associated inputs
-
Human Health Impact: Low (aligned with FAO infant nutrition safety guidelines)
-
Ecotoxicity: Minimal, dominated by upstream agricultural activities
6. Energy & Circularity Assessment
7. Cleantech Mart Sustainability Scoring
Rating Matrix (Cradle-to-Gate)
| Dimension |
Score |
| Climate Impact |
A |
| Water Efficiency |
B+ |
| Material Safety |
A |
| Circularity |
B |
| Energy Efficiency |
B+ |
Overall Cleantech Mart Sustainability Grade:
A- (High Sustainability Performance)
8. Conclusion
Based on an ISO 14040/44-aligned cradle-to-gate LCA, the Happa Healthy Baby Food Puree Travel Pack exhibits low carbon intensity, high material safety, and favorable sustainability performance relative to conventional cosmetic masks and dairy-based infant foods. The primary improvement opportunity lies in packaging circularity, while the formulation itself aligns strongly with low-impact, clean-label, plant-based sustainability criteria.
9. References
-
ISO 14040:2006 โ Environmental Management: Life Cycle Assessment โ Principles and Framework
-
ISO 14044:2006 โ Environmental Management: Life Cycle Assessment โ Requirements and Guidelines
-
IPCC (2021). AR6 Working Group I โ Global Warming Potentials
-
FAO (2018). Water Accounting and Water Footprint Methodology
-
Ecoinvent v3.9 Database โ Agricultural products, food processing, packaging materials
-
OECD (2020). Environmental Footprint of Food and Beverage Products
-
Poore & Nemecek (2018). Reducing foodโs environmental impacts through producers and consumers, Science
-
PlasticsEurope (2022). Eco-profiles of PET and Flexible Packaging Materials
-
UNEP (2020). Guidelines for Life Cycle Assessment of Consumer Products
1. Figures are indicative, based on standard carbon footprint methodologies and best-available life-cycle data, and will be refined as more primary data become available.
2. For detailed analysis of carbon footprint of your product, connect with us: cmai@carbinnov.com
🔒
Full Sustainability Report
Unlock the complete AI-powered lifecycle analysis — certifications, verdict, carbon comparison & more.
✅ Usage Phase impact
✅ End-of-Life data
✅ Key Highlights
✅ Certifications
✅ Final Verdict
๐ฟ
Want Your Own Company ESG Report?
Generate a full BRSR-aligned ESG report for your organisation — AI-powered, Gemini-backed, with a CM Carbon Rating (A–E).
🔑 Login & Calculate ESG