Global Feed LCA Institute (GFLI) methodology and project guidelines
This document provides practical guidance on generating or updating a Global Feed LCA Institute (GFLI) dataset for feed ingredient or a group of feed ingredients. The guidance built on several international standards on product footprinting (FAO LEAP, EU PEF, ISO 14040) and follows the latest IPCC methodology for calculation of GHG emissions by countries in their National Inventory Reports.
Environmental dimension
The current version of the guidance covers GHG emissions as well as other environmental dimensions, such as water, that are not covered by PACT
Exemption rule
The current version of the guidance has an exemption rule of max. 1% cumulative on mass and energy and PCF
This is stricter than PACT and therefore, no other additional action is needed
Biogenic emissions and removals
The two guidance are not aligned yet, PACT has been adapted to reflect the forthcoming GHG Protocol Land Sector and Removals Standard. GFLI will incorporate biogenic emissions and removals in line with the GHG Protocol in the SBTi-FLAG version of the database they are currently developing. This version, along with the associated methodology, will be optional for data providers. The primary objective of the GFLI methodology remains alignment with the PEFCR for Feed, which is why they are creating two versions of the database, one aligned with PEFCR and one aligned with the GHG Protocol.
To align with PACT Methodology: Follow the requirements as indicated in Chapter 3.3.2.4 of the PACT Methodology
Recycling and energy recovery
Waste is neglectable in this industry, but if it is considered, because it is above the cut-off criteria, then the PEF methodology is recommended
To align with PACT Methodology: Use the recycled content method as indicated in Chapter 3.3.2.3 of the PACT Methodology
Activity data
The current version of the guidance does not specificy data source requirements for activity data
To align with PACT Methodology: Collect primary activity data as indicated in Chapters 4.1.2 Selecting primary data and 4.1.3.1 Activity data of the PACT Methodology
Validity period
The current version of the guidance does not specify a PCF validity period
To align with PACT Methodology: Follow the 3-year cycle or earlier if > 10% variance criteria as indicated in Chapter 3.2.3 of the PACT Methodology
Data quality metrics
The current version of the guidance mandates a DQR following a different matrix than PACT
To align with PACT Methodology: Use the data quality metrics as indicated in Chapter 4.2 of the PACT Methodology
Verification
The current version of the guidance does not include specific requirements about the level and basis for verification. However, another guidance provides guidance on what 3rd party reviewers are expected to be reviewing
To align with PACT Methodology: Follow the requirements specified in Chapter 5 of the PACT Methodology
