IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i3p2280-d1047337.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Technoeconomic Assessment of Biopolymer Production from Crustacean Waste with the UK as a Case Study

Author

Listed:
  • Oseweuba Valentine Okoro

    (BioMatter Unit—École Polytechnique de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB), Avenue F.D. Roosevelt, 50-CP 165/61, 1050 Brussels, Belgium)

  • Lei Nie

    (College of Life Sciences, Xinyang Normal University (XYNU), Xinyang 464000, China)

  • Oguzhan Gunduz

    (Center for Nanotechnology and Biomaterials Application & Research (NBUAM), Marmara University, Kadıköy, Istanbul 34722, Turkey)

  • Songul Ulag

    (Center for Nanotechnology and Biomaterials Application & Research (NBUAM), Marmara University, Kadıköy, Istanbul 34722, Turkey)

  • Masoud Hamidi

    (BioMatter Unit—École Polytechnique de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB), Avenue F.D. Roosevelt, 50-CP 165/61, 1050 Brussels, Belgium)

  • Amin Shavandi

    (BioMatter Unit—École Polytechnique de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB), Avenue F.D. Roosevelt, 50-CP 165/61, 1050 Brussels, Belgium)

Abstract

Marine pollution has increased in recent decades, largely due to the proliferation of seafood processing plants and the improper disposal of their associated waste streams. The waste streams consist mainly of shells that are composed of chitin, which is the most abundant aminopolysaccharide biopolymer in nature. Recognizing the value of chitin, the potential for the valorization of crustacean waste for chitin production was explored. In this regard, biogenic crab waste was subjected to chemical-only, enzymatic–chemical, and microbial treatments for chitin production. The results were employed as inputs for process simulation as a precursor to undertaking performance assessments. This study subsequently showed that the net present values (NPVs) of the chemical-only, enzyme–chemical, and microbial chitin production pathways were GBP 118.63 million, GBP 115.67 million, and GBP 132.34 million, respectively, indicating that the microbial chitin production pathway constituted the most appropriate technology for future investment. Employing a cost–benefit (CB) analysis, the CB ratios for the chemical-only, enzymatic–chemical, and microbial approaches were determined to be 7.31, 0.45, and 0.23, respectively. These results reinforced the dominant status of the microbial approach for chitin production from crab waste as the preferred valorization strategy. This study was able to provide information regarding the implications of executing alternative scenarios for crustacean waste.

Suggested Citation

  • Oseweuba Valentine Okoro & Lei Nie & Oguzhan Gunduz & Songul Ulag & Masoud Hamidi & Amin Shavandi, 2023. "Technoeconomic Assessment of Biopolymer Production from Crustacean Waste with the UK as a Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-19, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:3:p:2280-:d:1047337
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/3/2280/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/3/2280/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mohammad Al-Tamimi & John De-Clerk Azure & Ramakrishnan Ramanathan, 2023. "Corporate Reporting on Food Waste by UK Seafood Companies: Literature Review and an Assessment of Current Practices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-16, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:3:p:2280-:d:1047337. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.