Agri-Food Waste Streams Utilization for Development of More Sustainable Food Substitutes

Abstract

Substitution of food out of alternative biomass sources is aimed to supply consumers with food products similar in nutrition and with lower environmental impact compared to conventional products. At current state of development, meat substitutes are not competitive with chicken meat, except for plant based meat analogs (although they have weaker nutritional profile). Upscaling, further technological development and use of agri-food waste as main source substrate can assure the environmental benefits of insects (2 kW h of energy, 1 kg CO 2 eq., 1.5 m 2 of land and 0.1 m 3 of water) and single cell products (10 kW h, 2-4 kg CO 2 eq., 0.5 m 2 of land and 0.25 m 3 of water), making them more competitive compared to industrial chicken production. The results of the current research are preliminary and further studies are required to assure the industrial applicability of agri-food wastes use for food production.

Mycoprotein: environmental impact and health aspects

“…As) should be observed (Mleczek et al 2016)Cultured meatCultured meat demands large amounts of energy, resulting in an environmental impact more than 4 times higher than chicken (Smetana et al 2015)The biochemical composition of meat might be altered to make it healthier, e.g. the content of poly-unsaturated fatty acids can be increased (Post 2012)Public acceptance depends on an efficient production and resemblance to meat (Post 2012)The quality of the substrates and other compounds used in the culture medium imposes more risks than microbial contamination (Bhat and Fayaz 2011)MicroalgaeSmetana et al (2018) have associated the production of meat alternatives from microalgae to high energy consumption and low water footprintThey present an interesting nutritional protein value as well as high amounts of omega-3 fatty acids (Weinrich and Elshiewy 2019)The taste of Spirulina has been described as not fitting a stand-alone item. The use of flavorings and seasonings needs further investigation (Grahl et al 2018).…”

“…In another work, Smetana et al (2018) have reported the energy, land and water used in the production of meat substitutes. Mycoprotein figures among the most efficient alternatives when considering land (< 2 m 2 a/kg; compared to 5–7 m 2 a for chicken and 7–8 m 2 a for pork) and water use (~ 500 L/kg).…”

“…Moreover, if such streams are currently used for animal feed, the environmental impact caused by the replacement of these materials in the animal production can lead to an increased environmental impact. The successful utilization of the agri-food waste in the production of mycoprotein could reduce the environmental impact to 2–4 kg CO 2eq , the use of land to 0.5 m 2 a, and the consumption of water and energy to 250 L and 10 kWh, respectively, per kg of mycoprotein (Smetana et al 2018). However, the implementation of this technology in an industrial scale needs to previously overcome remaining challenges such as regulatory and safety approval, scale up of production, and large-scale trials (Lee et al 2015).…”

Sustainable protein sources from greenhouses : Desk study

“…The impact of insect-based food (1 kg) could be decreased to 2 kWh of energy use, around 1 kg CO 2 eq. of GWP, 1.5 m 2 of land use and 0.1 m 3 of water use (Smetana et al 2018).…”

Strategies for Sustainable Substitution of Livestock Meat

“…However to make mycoprotein based protein competitive to chicken, apart from further technological innovation, utilization of agri-food wastes has been recommended. These wastes, as substrates, have been reported to reduce the consumption of energy to 10 kW h, environmental impact to 2-4 kg CO 2 -eq, and land use to 0.5 m 2 [46]. More importantly, the mycoprotein footprint is mainly from energy consumption, which can be reduced through decarbonization.…”