Economic analysis of intensive and super-intensive Litopenaeus vannamei shrimp production in a Biofloc Technology system

Abstract

In recent decades, new aquaculture technologies have been developed and improved, such as the Biofloc Technology system, which is considered an alternative to the conventional aquaculture model. This study compared the bioeconomic viability of intensive production in nurseries and super-intensive production of shrimp Litopenaeus vannamei bioflocs greenhouses. The investment for implementing the project was US$ 767,190.18 for intensive production and US$ 807,669.16 for super-intensive production. The analyses showed Net Present Value of US$ 363,718.21 and US$ 385,477.42, Equivalent annual value of US$ 59,830.66 and US$ 63,410.00, Net future value of US$ 965,052.69 and US$ 1,022,786.35, Payback Period 4.12 and 4.11, Discounted payback period 5.64 and 5.63, Profitability Index 1.47 and 1.48, Internal Rate of Return 20.49 and 20.55%, and Modified Internal Rate of Return 14.61 and 14.64%. The investment analysis used in this study showed that super-intensive production in a greenhouse is the best investment option. The development of a new scenario simulating the super-intensive production of shrimp in a Biofloc Technology system, considering land use as a premise, made it possible to observe the possibility of obtaining financial gains in scale, both in the reduction of production costs and in the economic performance of the enterprise. However, the financial contribution for the implementation and operation of the project increased substantially.

Biofloc Technology (BFT) in Aquaculture: What Goes Right, What Goes Wrong? A Scientific-Based Snapshot

“…The high stocking density of BFT requires constant monitoring and maintenance of water quality parameters [148][149][150]. Despite the significant investment required to implement and operate BFT systems [151], it offers environmental, sanitary, and economic advantages [111,117,[152][153][154]. Stocking density has a direct impact on production and profitability [120,155,156].…”

“…Implementing BFT systems can be challenging and expensive due to inappropriate water quality management, lack of skilled staff, inappropriate system design, the higher installation and operating costs associated with intensive aeration, and the removal of suspended solids in the water column [18,117,186].…”

“…Operating aeration on standby and utilizing different aeration units, particularly microaerators and blowers, can be more efficient in BFT technology. Moreover, BFT systems are susceptible to adverse weather conditions like windstorms and hurricanes [117]. To tackle these challenges, alternative energy sources can be employed to decrease the significant electricity consumption involved in intensive aeration and pumping, thereby reducing operating expenses.…”