SUSTAINABILITY OF PROTEIN PRODUCTION

BY BIOREACTOR PROCESSES USING SOLAR

AND WIND POWER AS ENERGY SOURCES

Jani Sillman, Antti Kosonen, Jero AholaAnd Risto Soukka

/ Introduction:Goal

• Find the current major protein sourcesUseImpactsTrends

• Make a review of bioreactor-based protein production using renewable energy sources

• Compare sustainability of conventional protein production and protein production by bioreactors

PhotobioreactorSyngas-based bioreactor

• Find research suggestions

• Research is a literature review

http://www.acatiimi.fi/2002/9_02/9_02i.htm

/ Conventional protein production

- Proteins are one of the important nutrients we need in our daily lives

- The trend of protein production is a growing one and thus agriculture causes more and more environmental impacts

70 %

11 %

19 %

Global water use

AgriculturalMunicipalIndustrial

10 %

21 %

14 %

6 %

24 %

25 %

Global greenhouse gas emissions

Other Energy

Industy

Transportation

Buildings

Agriculture, Forestry andOther Land UseElectricity and HeatProduduction

39 %

61 %

Global land use

AgricultureOther

/ Conventional protein production

• It isn’t reasonable to view every kind of protein quantities there isOnly major ones consideredThe protein flows are: feed, food, waste, other use and food wasteThe reference year is 2013

• Plant-based proteinsWheat, rice, maize, soybeans, barley, sorghum, canola, pulses

• Animal- and aquatic-based proteinsEggs, bovine meat, milk, cheese, mutton & goat, pig, poultry,Aquaculture and capture

• The amount of each protein source is taken from FAOstatdatabases

• Average protein contents of each protein sources are used to calculate the world’s protein production

Plant-based proteinsources Protein content [%]

Wheat 8–15Rice 7–9Maize 9–12Chickpeas 20–25Peas 20–30Soybeans 35–40Lupines 35–40Barley 8–15Sorghum 9–17Canola 17–26Pulses 20–36

Animal-based proteinsources Protein content [%]

Beef 20Pork 20Poultry 20Eggs 13Mutton & Lamb 20Milk 3,5Cheese 25Seafood from fisheries 16–20Seafood from aquaculture 17–20

Day 2013, Table 1 : Nijdam et al. 2012, Table 4

Nijdam et al. 2012, Table 4

/ Conventional protein production:Protein flows

• The feed flow is much bigger thanfood flow

• Sources rich on proteins used as feed instead of food

• A lot go to waste

• Proteins are usedunefficiently

• To produce 1 kg of high quality animal-based protein 6 kg of plant-based protein is needed.

This assumption used when making the flow chartIn real life, all the feed is not used to produce high quality animal-based proteins

/ Conventional protein production:Environmental impact values of plant-based protein production

• Plant-based protein production need fertilizersUsually the utilization efficiency is in range of 14 – 68 %Phosphorous fertilizers are considered non-renewable

• Rice and maize are the biggest sources producedRice consumes a lot of resourcesSoybeans and maize produces the biggest amounts of proteins

Product

Some GWP values from literature [kgCO2-eq/kgp]

Average land use based on yield

[m2/kgp]

(FAOSTATc)

Water use

[m3/kgp]

(Mekonnen and Hoekstra 2012, table 3)

Reference from literature [GWP]

GWP Land use Green Blue GreyPulses 4–10 26.5 11.36 0.5 2.62 Nijdam et al. 2012, Table 4Wheat 2.43–6.17 26.69 10.71 1.98 1.6 LCA Food Database 2007Barley 2.78–5.65 29.79 10.71 1.98 1.6 LCA Food Database 2007Canola 1.95–7.4 23.18 9.41 1.02 0.56 Gustafson et al. 2013, Table 4Soybean 1.36–2.56 10.7 5.39 0.59 0.32 Silva et al. 2010, Table 3Sorghum 1.91–2.26 48.33 9.48 1.75 1.42 Meki et al. 2013, Table 8

Maize 2.16–7.2 17.38 11.73 2.17 1.75Notarnicola et al. 2015,213;

Ma et al. 2012

Rice 24.1–36.59 27.79 15.4 2.85 2.3 Notarnicola et al. 2015, 215; Kasmaprapruet et al. 2009

Product

GWP

[kgCO2-eq/kgprotein]

LU based on yield

[m2/kgprotein]

(FAOSTATc)Maize 2.74 9.55Soybean 1.56 9.00Wheat 2.38 27.41

Production in U.S

/ Protein production via bioreactors

Solar and wind

energyPhotobioreactor

CO2

FertilizersSeawater

Air

Light radiation

Biomass

Solar and wind

energy

Syngas-based bioreactor

CO2

H2

O2

FertilizersFreshwater/Wastewater

Biomass

http://www.energydigital.com/renewableenergy/2820/Global-MobileTech:-Solar-wind-hybrid-power-in-Asiahttp://www.centerforcarbonremoval.org/blog-posts/2015/9/20/direct-air-capture-explained-in-10-questionshttp://www.biomarine.org/chlorella-smoothie-recipes/http://www.carlossaliente.com/biofuel-warning.htmlhttp://www.radtech-europe.com/news/industry-news/2014/perstorp-steps-its-bioplastics-competitivenessLehner et al. 2014, Figure 3.2

Photobioreactor uses microalgaecapable of photosynthesis

Syngas-based bioreactoruses hydrogen-oxidizingbacterium

/ Protein production via bioreactors:Bioreactor processes

The needed substances and optimal

growing conditions

ValueReference

fromliterature

CO2 [kg/kgbiomass]

1.85Matassa et al. 2014, 469

O2 [kg/kgbiomass] 1.02

Matassa et al. 2014, 469

H2 [kg/kgbiomass] 0.22

Matassa et al. 2014, 469

Optimaltemperature[°C]

30 Carcia et al. 2013

Optimal pH 6.7–6.9 Carcia et al. 2013

Optimal volumetric ratio [CO2:O2:H2]

1:2:7 Volova et al. 2013

The cell productivity [kg/m3]

91 Yu 2014, 8

The specific growth rate [-/hour]

0.25 Yu 2014, 8

The needed substances and optimal

growing conditions

Value Referencefrom literature

CO2 [kg/kgbiomass]

1.83 Chen et al. 2015, 443

Optimaltemperature[°C]

18–24 Sudhakar et al. 2011, Table 1

Optimal pH 8.2–8.7

Sudhakar et al. 2011, Table 1

Optimal light intensity

2500–5000

Sudhakar et al. 2011, Table 1

Optimal photoperiod ratio [light:dark]

16:8 (min)

Sudhakar et al. 2011, Table 1

Optimal saliity of growth medium [g/l]

20–24 Sudhakar et al. 2011, Table 1

The cell productivity [kg/m3]

4.0 Brentner et al. 2011, Table 1

The growth rate [g/l day] 3,8

Brennan and Owende 2010, Table 3

• Closed systemsBatchSemi-batchContinous

• Growth happens in medium solution in champer

• Circulation systems can be used• Compared to conventional

Higher yieldFaster productionBetter utilization efficiencies

Water, fertilizers and syngasHigher power consumption

• Bacterium culture’ harvesting is neededCentrifugesFlotationChemical flocculationFiltrarion

• Drying is also essential, if dry biomass is wanted

Freeze-dryingSolar dryingEtc

/ Protein production via bioreactors:Photobioreactor design

• More mature and developed technology than syngas-basedAlready used in large-scale applications

• Is already used to produce food

• More location depended than syngas-based application due to use of photosynthetization bacterium. Can be used indoors if artificial light is used not so energy eficientSeawater can be used and thus freshwater consumptio can be estimadet near zeroNeeds land area

• Most energy efficient application is flat panel photobioreactorsLow investment and operation costsHigh yields and efficiencies

• DesingsTubular systemsVertical-column reactorsInternally-illuminated reactors

Tredici et al. 2015, Figure 2

/ Protein production via bioreactors:Syngas-based bioreactor design

• Still developing technologyA lot of optimization problemsThe biggest bottle-neck is mass transfer between solid and liquid phaseNew innovations and applications still under researchNot used as food purposes

• However,…Faster biomass production compared to algae processesDoesn’t need light radiationHigh protein contentCan replace at least 25 – 50 % of animal dietNot location dependedProduces thermal energy as by productTechnology used in syngas fermentation processes

• Plans to make large-scale facilities

• DesingsStirred-tank reactor (commonly used)Bubble column reactorsMembrane based reactosRotating bed reactor (novel application, high mass transfer)

https://www.google.fi/search?q=stirred+tank+reactor&rlz=1C1AVNG_enFI649FI649&espv=2&biw=1920&bih=979&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi947uTuaTNAhXCExoKHSRpCjcQ_AUIBigB#imgrc=3m_0qzV09BfqpM%3A

/ Protein production via bioreactors:Energy consumption of bioreactor processes

The energy need ofphotobioreactor unitprocesses

Energy consum

ption [kwh/kgbi

omass]

Referencefromliterature

Culture bubbling 2.45 Tredici et al.2015, Table 3

Water pumping forcooling 0.40 Tredici et al.

2015, Table 3

Water pumping forgrowth mediumpreparation

0.04 Tredici et al.2015, Table 3

Culture and growthmedium pumping 0.05 Tredici et al.

2015, Table 3

Centrifuge 0.47 Grima et al.2003, Table 1

Drying and Storage 0.03 Acien et al.2012

DAC 1.63 Zhang et al.2014

Total 5.40

The energy need of syngas-based bioreactor unit

processes

Energy consum

ption [kwh/kgbiomass]

Referencefrom

literature

Bioreactor 0.010

Kadic and Heindel 2010, Figure 2

Centrifuge 0.010Grima et. all 2003, Table 1

Drying and Storage 0.031 Acien et. all 2012

DAC 1.644 Zhang et. all 2014

Water electrolyzer 11.015Bhandari et al. 2014, Table 1

Total 13.523

Bioreactor Gas circulation

Water + culture + nutrient

circulation

Centrifuge

Drying and storage

0,13 kg NH3

0,086 kg P2O2

Other nutrientsWater

0,01 kWh/kg biomass

0,91 kWh/kg biomass

0,0314 kWh/kgbiom

ElectolyzerDAC1,64 kWh/ kg

biomass

11,02 kWh/ kg biomass

1,85 kg CO2

0,22 kg H2

1,02 kg O2

0,726 kg O2

• Water electrolyzer consumes a lot of electricitycompared to other unit processes

• Needed thermal energy is assumed to be taken fromwaste sources

/ Results and key findings:GWP and LU

• Compared to conventional crop production in U.S, the GWP and land use are much lower while using bioreactors

Product

GWP

[kg CO2-eq/kgprotein]

LU

[m2/kgprotein] based on yield

Maize 2,74 9,55

Soybean 1,56 9,00

Wheat 2,38 27,41

Photobioreactor

GWP

[kg CO2/kg prtotein]

LU

[m2/kg protein]

Wind power -1,115 7,647

Solar power -0,853 7,432

Syngas-

based

bioreactor

GWP

[kg CO2/kg prtotein]

LU

[m2/kg protein]

Wind power -0.378 0.737

Solar power 0.138 0.314

• Photobioreactor needsless energy and has betterGWP value than syngas-based application

No need for hydrogenproduction

• Syngas-based system is not bound to location, hasbetter yield and has betterland use efficiency

/ Results and key findings:Discussion

• Hydrogen-oxidizing bacterium’s and microalgae’s biomasses have various usesAll possibilities should be viewed

• Right now, both processes are costly, but might change in the future due to changes in electricityprices and developing technologies

Should be researched

• DNA- engineering could provide better yields and more efficient biomass growth in the future

• The indoor application of photobioreactor should be researched to conclude, if there is a possiblityto make it more energy efficient application than syngas-based

• The viewed unit processe are quite specific and thus economically better solutions could beachieved, if different applications were to be used

/ Results and key findings:Discussion• The conventional protein sources are used unefficient

A major part of plant-based proteins are used as feedInsects are more sustainable protein sources than animal-basedUppcoming food cricis can be avoided, if consumption trends are changed

• Results are encouraging and could provide one solution to upcoming food and environmental crisisies

• However, needs more research due to developing unit processes and assumption madeNot all inputs and energy consumption processes includedo Pumps, minor inputs, facilities material etc.

http://www.acatiimi.fi/2002/9_02/9_02i.htm

Thank you!

Questions? Comments?

Questions? Comments?