IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i5p2358-d507703.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Energetic and Economic Evaluation of Zero-Waste Fish Co-Stream Processing

Author

Listed:
  • Kęstutis Venslauskas

    (Institute of Energy and Biotechnology Engineering, Vytautas Magnus University, K. Donelaičio g. 58, LT-44248 Kaunas, Lithuania)

  • Kęstutis Navickas

    (Institute of Energy and Biotechnology Engineering, Vytautas Magnus University, K. Donelaičio g. 58, LT-44248 Kaunas, Lithuania)

  • Marja Nappa

    (VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland Ltd., 02150 Espoo, Finland)

  • Petteri Kangas

    (VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland Ltd., 02150 Espoo, Finland)

  • Revilija Mozūraitytė

    (SINTEF Ocean, 7010 Trondheim, Norway)

  • Rasa Šližytė

    (SINTEF Ocean, 7010 Trondheim, Norway)

  • Vidmantas Župerka

    (Institute of Energy and Biotechnology Engineering, Vytautas Magnus University, K. Donelaičio g. 58, LT-44248 Kaunas, Lithuania)

Abstract

This study evaluates the possibility of recovery of high-quality valuable fish oil and proteins from fish co-streams by traditional means or a combination of several technologies. A techno-economically feasible and sustainable zero-waste process is needed for full utilisation of this co-stream’s potential. This study aims to determine the energy efficiency and economic feasibility of four different zero-waste bio-refineries based on salmon filleting co-streams. The study covers four concepts: (I) biogas and fertiliser production from salmon co-streams, (II) fish silage production, (III) thermal processing of salmon co-streams for producing oil, protein concentrate, and meal, and (IV) novel two-stage thermal and enzymatic process for producing high-quality oil and protein hydrolysate, while the solid residue is converted to biogas and fertilisers. Monte Carlo simulation is used to evaluate uncertainties in economic evaluation. The results show that the two-stage processing of fish co-streams leads to recovery of both high-quality marine oil and proteins, showing the largest profitability and return on investment during the economic analysis. It is a more tempting option than the currently used thermal treatment or traditional silage processes. The possibility of producing food-grade fish protein hydrolysate is the biggest benefit here. Concepts studied are examples of zero-waste processing of bioproducts and illustrate the possibilities and benefits of fully utilising the different fractions of fish as fillets, oil, protein, fertilisers, and energy production.

Suggested Citation

  • Kęstutis Venslauskas & Kęstutis Navickas & Marja Nappa & Petteri Kangas & Revilija Mozūraitytė & Rasa Šližytė & Vidmantas Župerka, 2021. "Energetic and Economic Evaluation of Zero-Waste Fish Co-Stream Processing," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(5), pages 1-16, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:5:p:2358-:d:507703
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/5/2358/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/5/2358/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Josep G. Canadell & E. Detlef Schulze, 2014. "Global potential of biospheric carbon management for climate mitigation," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 5(1), pages 1-12, December.
    2. Vita, A. & Italiano, C. & Previtali, D. & Fabiano, C. & Palella, A. & Freni, F. & Bozzano, G. & Pino, L. & Manenti, F., 2018. "Methanol synthesis from biogas: A thermodynamic analysis," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 673-684.
    3. Gustavsson, Leif & Haus, Sylvia & Ortiz, Carina A. & Sathre, Roger & Truong, Nguyen Le, 2015. "Climate effects of bioenergy from forest residues in comparison to fossil energy," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 36-50.
    4. Susanne Theuerl & Christiane Herrmann & Monika Heiermann & Philipp Grundmann & Niels Landwehr & Ulrich Kreidenweis & Annette Prochnow, 2019. "The Future Agricultural Biogas Plant in Germany: A Vision," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-32, January.
    5. Dimitris Diakosavvas & Clara Frezal, 2019. "Bio-economy and the sustainability of the agriculture and food system: Opportunities and policy challenges," OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers 136, OECD Publishing.
    6. Furtado Amaral, Andre & Previtali, Daniele & Bassani, Andrea & Italiano, Cristina & Palella, Alessandra & Pino, Lidia & Vita, Antonio & Bozzano, Giulia & Pirola, Carlo & Manenti, Flavio, 2020. "Biogas beyond CHP: The HPC (heat, power & chemicals) process," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    7. Bücker, Francielle & Marder, Munique & Peiter, Marina Regina & Lehn, Daniel Neutzling & Esquerdo, Vanessa Mendonça & Antonio de Almeida Pinto, Luiz & Konrad, Odorico, 2020. "Fish waste: An efficient alternative to biogas and methane production in an anaerobic mono-digestion system," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 147(P1), pages 798-805.
    8. Prodromidis, George N. & Coutelieris, Frank A., 2017. "Thermodynamic analysis of biogas fed solid oxide fuel cell power plants," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 1-10.
    9. Giampietro, Mario, 2019. "On the Circular Bioeconomy and Decoupling: Implications for Sustainable Growth," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 143-156.
    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.
    1. G. Venkatesh, 2022. "Circular Bio-economy—Paradigm for the Future: Systematic Review of Scientific Journal Publications from 2015 to 2021," Circular Economy and Sustainability,, Springer.
    2. Luo, Tao & Khoshnevisan, Benyamin & Huang, Ruyi & Chen, Qiu & Mei, Zili & Pan, Junting & Liu, Hongbin, 2020. "Analysis of revolution in decentralized biogas facilities caused by transition in Chinese rural areas," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    3. Roberto Eloy Hernández Regalado & Jurek Häner & Elmar Brügging & Jens Tränckner, 2022. "Techno-Economic Assessment of Solid–Liquid Biogas Treatment Plants for the Agro-Industrial Sector," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-20, June.
    4. Roopnarain, Ashira & Rama, Haripriya & Ndaba, Busiswa & Bello-Akinosho, Maryam & Bamuza-Pemu, Emomotimi & Adeleke, Rasheed, 2021. "Unravelling the anaerobic digestion ‘black box’: Biotechnological approaches for process optimization," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    5. Lange, Steffen & Pohl, Johanna & Santarius, Tilman, 2020. "Digitalization and energy consumption. Does ICT reduce energy demand?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    6. Erik Nelson & Virginia Matzek, 2016. "Carbon Credits Compete Poorly With Agricultural Commodities In An Optimized Model Of Land Use In Northern California," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 7(04), pages 1-24, November.
    7. Marcin Zieliński & Marcin Dębowski & Joanna Kazimierowicz, 2022. "Outflow from a Biogas Plant as a Medium for Microalgae Biomass Cultivation—Pilot Scale Study and Technical Concept of a Large-Scale Installation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-18, April.
    8. Soha, Tamás & Papp, Luca & Csontos, Csaba & Munkácsy, Béla, 2021. "The importance of high crop residue demand on biogas plant site selection, scaling and feedstock allocation – A regional scale concept in a Hungarian study area," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    9. Park, Min-Ju & Kim, Hak-Min & Gu, Yun-Jeong & Jeong, Dae-Woon, 2023. "Optimization of biogas-reforming conditions considering carbon formation, hydrogen production, and energy efficiencies," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 265(C).
    10. Felizitas Winkhart & Thomas Mösl & Harald Schmid & Kurt-Jürgen Hülsbergen, 2022. "Effects of Organic Maize Cropping Systems on Nitrogen Balances and Nitrous Oxide Emissions," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-30, June.
    11. Kung, Chih-Chun & Wu, Tao, 2021. "Influence of water allocation on bioenergy production under climate change: A stochastic mathematical programming approach," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 231(C).
    12. Federico Battista & Nicola Frison & David Bolzonella, 2019. "Energy and Nutrients’ Recovery in Anaerobic Digestion of Agricultural Biomass: An Italian Perspective for Future Applications," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-13, August.
    13. Truong, Nguyen Le & Dodoo, Ambrose & Gustavsson, Leif, 2018. "Effects of energy efficiency measures in district-heated buildings on energy supply," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 1114-1127.
    14. Befort, N., 2020. "Going beyond definitions to understand tensions within the bioeconomy: The contribution of sociotechnical regimes to contested fields," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    15. Sanchez, Daniel L. & Callaway, Duncan S., 2016. "Optimal scale of carbon-negative energy facilities," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 170(C), pages 437-444.
    16. Wolfgang Onyeali & Michael P. Schlaile & Bastian Winkler, 2023. "Navigating the Biocosmos: Cornerstones of a Bioeconomic Utopia," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-32, June.
    17. Pérez-Sánchez, Laura À. & Velasco-Fernández, Raúl & Giampietro, Mario, 2022. "Factors and actions for the sustainability of the residential sector. The nexus of energy, materials, space, and time use," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    18. Benoit Mougenot & Jean-Pierre Doussoulin, 2022. "Conceptual evolution of the bioeconomy: a bibliometric analysis," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 1031-1047, January.
    19. Gustavsson, Leif & Haus, Sylvia & Lundblad, Mattias & Lundström, Anders & Ortiz, Carina A. & Sathre, Roger & Truong, Nguyen Le & Wikberg, Per-Erik, 2017. "Climate change effects of forestry and substitution of carbon-intensive materials and fossil fuels," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 612-624.
    20. Awais, Fawad & Flodén, Jonas & Svanberg, Martin, 2021. "Logistic characteristics and requirements of Swedish wood biofuel heating plants," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).

    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:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:5:p:2358-:d:507703. 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.