Bacterial protein for food and feed generated via renewable energy and direct air capture of CO2: Can it reduce land and water use?

Sillman, Jani; Nygren, Lauri; Kahiluoto, Helena; Ruuskanen, Vesa; Tamminen, Anu; Bajamundi, Cyril; Nappa, Marja; Wuokko, Mikko; Lindh, Tuomo; Vainikka, Pasi; Pitkänen, Juha-Pekka; Ahola, Jero

doi:10.1016/j.gfs.2019.09.007

Cited by 113 publications

(91 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The post-processes are designed similarly than described in study Sillman et al (2019). It can be assumed that the cultivation medium has a biomass concentration of 2.5% (Lee 2015).…”

Section: Post-processesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…H 2 and O 2 can be produced via water electrolysis and CO 2 can be provided from sources such as air. (Sillman et al 2019) Here, the approach is called a power-to-food (PtF) application. The main components of the PtF approach consist of a CO 2 source, bioreactor, water electrolysis, and post-processes for separating biomass from the cultivation medium and for drying.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The biggest avoided impacts were gained by using MP via water electrolysis, which is a similar kind of pathway to produce MP than the studied PtF application has. In addition, it has been shown based on quantitative literature review that it is possible to produce MPs with less direct land occupation area and freshwater use than conventional protein production by using renewable energy, in situ water electrolysis, direct air capture technology, and post-processes to separate microbial biomass from cultivation medium (Sillman et al 2019). However, to the extent of our knowledge, there are no LCA studies comparatively evaluating MP production via different PtF approaches, even though there are several LCA studies focusing on different PtX technologies (Koj et al 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A life cycle environmental sustainability analysis of microbial protein production via power-to-food approaches

Sillman

Uusitalo

Ruuskanen

et al. 2020

Int J Life Cycle Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Renewable energy produced from wind turbines and solar photovoltaics (PV) has rapidly increased its share in global energy markets. At the same time, interest in producing hydrocarbons via power-to-X (PtX) approaches using renewables has grown as the technology has matured. However, there exist knowledge gaps related to environmental impacts of some PtX approaches. Power-to-food (PtF) application is one of those approaches. To evaluate the environmental impacts of different PtF approaches, life cycle assessment was performed. Methods The theoretical environmental potential of a novel concept of PtX technologies was investigated. Because PtX approaches have usually multiple technological solutions, such as the studied PtF application can have, several technological setups were chosen for the study. PtF application is seen as potentially being able to alleviate concerns about the sustainability of the global food sector, for example, as regards the land and water use impacts of food production. This study investigated four different environmental impact categories for microbial protein (MP) production via different technological setups of PtF from a cradle-to-gate perspective. The investigated impact categories include global warming potential, blue-water use, land use, and eutrophication. The research was carried out using a life cycle impact assessment method. Results and discussion The results for PtF processes were compared with the impacts of other MP production technologies and soybean production. The results indicate that significantly lower environmental impact can be achieved with PtF compared with the other protein production processes studied. The best-case PtF technology setups cause considerably lower land occupation, eutrophication, and blue-water consumption impacts compared with soybean production. However, the energy source used and the electricity-to-biomass efficiency of the bioreactor greatly affect the sustainability of the PtF approach. Some energy sources and technological choices result in higher environmental impacts than other MP and soybean production. When designing PtF production facilities, special attention should thus be given to the technology used. Conclusions With some qualifications, PtF can be considered an option for improving global food security at minimal environmental impact. If the MP via the introduced application substitutes the most harmful practices of production other protein sources, the saved resources could be used to, for example, mitigation purposes or to improve food security elsewhere. However, there still exist challenges, such as food safety–related issues, to be solved before PtF application can be used for commercial use.

show abstract

“…The post-processes are designed similarly than described in study Sillman et al (2019). It can be assumed that the cultivation medium has a biomass concentration of 2.5% (Lee 2015).…”

Section: Post-processesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A life cycle environmental sustainability analysis of microbial protein production via power-to-food approaches

Sillman

Uusitalo

Ruuskanen

et al. 2020

Int J Life Cycle Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Indeed, some recent assessments have suggested that it might be possible to produce a protein yield several times higher than that of soybean production using the same land footprint and direct capture of atmospheric CO 2 and renewable electricity [224]. Such sustainability claims provide some indication of a new emerging priority in ingredient assessment, that of life-cycle assessment analysis and further work in this area is warranted [225,226].…”

Section: Next Stepsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Application of Single-Cell Ingredients in Aquaculture Feeds—A Review

Glencross

Huyben

Schrama

2020

Fishes

122

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Single-cell ingredients (SCI) are a relatively broad class of materials that encompasses bacterial, fungal (yeast), microalgal-derived products or the combination of all three microbial groups into microbial bioflocs and aggregates. In this review we focus on those dried and processed single-cell organisms used as potential ingredients for aqua-feeds where the microorganisms are considered non-viable and are used primarily to provide protein, lipids or specific nutritional components. Among the SCI, there is a generalised dichotomy in terms of their use as either single-cell protein (SCP) resources or single-cell oil (SCO) resources, with SCO products being those oleaginous products containing 200 g/kg or more of lipids, whereas those products considered as SCP resources tend to contain more than 300 g/kg of protein (on a dry basis). Both SCP and SCO are now widely being used as protein/amino acid sources, omega-3 sources and sources of bioactive molecules in the diets of several species, with the current range of both these ingredient groups being considerable and growing. However, the different array of products becoming available in the market, how they are produced and processed has also resulted in different nutritional qualities in those products. In assessing this variation among the products and the application of the various types of SCI, we have taken the approach of evaluating their use against a set of standardised evaluation criteria based around key nutritional response parameters and how these criteria have been applied against salmonids, shrimp, tilapia and marine fish species.

show abstract

“…Clearly, primate-range countries must develop a more balanced set of national priorities to build their internal economies in order to ensure food security for their growing human populations. These same countries must also safeguard their biodiversity by building their economies using sustainable practices, green technologies, reducing water, air and soil pollution, and mitigating the effects of climate change on their citizens and environment (Estrada et al, 2017;Sillman et al, 2019). While poverty, food security and protection of primate habitats are intricately linked, there are other social factors at play that impede human well-being, protecting biodiversity, and prioritizing primate conservation.…”

Section: Food Securitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Current and future trends in socio-economic, demographic and governance factors affecting global primate conservation

Estrada

Garber

Chaudhary

2020

PeerJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Currently, ~65% of extant primate species (ca 512 species) distributed in 91 countries in the Neotropics, mainland Africa, Madagascar, South Asia and Southeast Asia are threatened with extinction and 75% have declining populations as a result of deforestation and habitat loss resulting from increasing global market demands, and land conversion for industrial agriculture, cattle production and natural resource extraction. Other pressures that negatively impact primates are unsustainable bushmeat hunting, the illegal trade of primates as pets and as body parts, expanding road networks in previously isolated areas, zoonotic disease transmission and climate change. Here we examine current and future trends in several socio-economic factors directly or indirectly affecting primates to further our understanding of the interdependent relationship between human well-being, sustainable development, and primate population persistence. We found that between 2001 and 2018 ca 191 Mha of tropical forest (30% canopy cover) were lost as a result of human activities in the five primate range regions. Forty-six percent of this loss was in the Neotropics (Mexico, Central and South America), 30% in Southeast Asia, 21% in mainland Africa, 2% in Madagascar and 1% in South Asia. Countries with the greatest losses (ca 57% of total tree cover loss) were Brazil, Indonesia, DRC, China, and Malaysia. Together these countries harbor almost 50% of all extant primate species. In 2018, the world human population was estimated at ca 8bn people, ca 60% of which were found in primate range countries. Projections to 2050 and to 2100 indicate continued rapid growth of the human populations in these five primate range regions, with Africa surpassing all the other regions and totaling ca 4bn people by the year 2100. Socioeconomic indicators show that, compared to developed nations, most primate range countries are characterized by high levels of poverty and income inequality, low human development, low food security, high levels of corruption and weak governance. Models of Shared Socioeconomic Pathway scenarios (SSPs) projected to 2050 and 2100 showed that whereas practices of increasing inequality (SSP4) or unconstrained growth in economic output and energy use (SSP5) are projected to have dire consequences for human well-being and primate survivorship, practices of sustainability-focused growth and equality (SSP1) are expected to have a positive effect on maintaining biodiversity, protecting environments, and improving the human condition. These results stress that improving the well-being, health, and security of the current and future human populations in primate range countries are of paramount importance if we are to move forward with effective policies to protect the world’s primate species and promote biodiversity conservation.

show abstract

Bacterial protein for food and feed generated via renewable energy and direct air capture of CO2: Can it reduce land and water use?

Cited by 113 publications

References 44 publications

A life cycle environmental sustainability analysis of microbial protein production via power-to-food approaches

A life cycle environmental sustainability analysis of microbial protein production via power-to-food approaches

The Application of Single-Cell Ingredients in Aquaculture Feeds—A Review

Current and future trends in socio-economic, demographic and governance factors affecting global primate conservation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About