Remarkably, the availability of environmental impact information during optimization allows feed ingredients to be selected from those with similar prices and nutritional compositions, while ensuring the lowest environmental footprint for the considered feed. For instance, in our framework, corn from Brazil was rarely selected due to both the associated high impact of land stress on biodiversity and climate change (Fig. ). Despite having similar prices, the footprint for land stress is nine times greater and for climate change is three times greater for corn harvested in Brazil than for that harvested in Ukraine. Hence, due to its lower environmental impact, Ukrainian corn is a more profitable choice for both environmental and monetary costs than Brazilian corn (Fig. ).