LCA and LCC for EU research project for the Food And Feed of the Future (2019-2023)
With the global population expected to grow further, there is a need to find alternative protein sources that can meet future demands for food and protein sustainably. Microalgae have emerged as one of the most promising candidates to address this challenge. However, for the microalgae industry to become more sustainable and competitive, it is crucial to implement innovative technologies and cost-effective production processes. ProFuture (Microalgae Protein-Rich Ingredients for the Food And Feed of the Future) was a research project funded by the European Union's Horizon 2020 program, which aimed to scale up microalgae production and facilitate the market adoption of microalgae proteins as ingredients for innovative and sustainable food and feed products. This project brings together 31 European partners, including researchers, small and medium enterprises, large companies, and associations, each contributing their expertise in various fields.
LCA (life cycle assessment) and LCC (life cycle costing) elaborated by ESU-services
ESU-services was responsible for the life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle costing (LCC) of the new technologies and products developed in the ProFuture project. In the first step, microalgae single-cell protein (whole biomass) were evaluated. Different cultivation and drying technologies were tested on pilot scale. These production pathways have been compared using LCA and LCC to identify the most cost-efficient and environmentally sustainable alternatives. The results were integrated into the selection of technologies for up-scaling. In the second step, the most appropriate production pathways were implemented on industrial scale and different innovative food and feed products were produced. These products are benchmarked against conventional alternatives through LCA to evaluate the potential of microalgae as a protein source.
The results of the life cycle assessment and life cycle costing conducted within the framework of the ProFuture research project are presented in one report. Different cultivation and drying options were evaluated for the algae species A. platensis, C. vulgaris, T. chui and N. oceanica. Nine different foods and four different feed products were enriched successfully with microalgae. The main findings are:
- The most important stage from an environmental point of view in the microalgae value chain is the cultivation stage, primarily due to its high electricity consumption. Therefore, reducing electricity consumption should be a priority for improvement measures. With a combination of switching off pumps at night, electricity from photovoltaic and water reuse, a reduction potential of 43-88% for greenhouse gas emissions, 34-64% for overall environmental impacts and 40-63% for operational costs could be achieved.
- Heterotrophic cultivation was the cultivation approach with the lowest electricity consumption, and therefore also the approach with the lowest environmental impact and operating costs.
- The solar drier was found to be the best drying approach, but it operates as a batch process. The pulsed combustion drier and the agitated thin film drier could achieve higher automation levels but would require optimized drying yields to compete with the solar drier.
- The analysis of several food products per kg protein showed that the microalgae value chain has a significant impact on environmental indicators. Microalgae-enriched products with relatively high protein content performed better than dairy and meat-based products, and showed comparable results to plant-based products. However, these products used pea as the main protein source and not microalgae. Food products with lower protein content had higher environmental impacts.
- Feed products based on microalgae were not competitive with conventional control products.
- From an ecological point of view, the effort involved in cultivating microalgae therefore currently seems too high to recommend microalgae as a protein source. For better results, microalgae would have to be optimised for the food sector in terms of protein content and processability, e.g. colour.
Recommended actions include reducing the pumping of cultures at night in the short term and switching from grid electricity to renewable sources like photovoltaic systems in the mid-term. Future research should focus on two main topics: (i) reusing water, to better understand possibilities and limitations, and (ii) on species which grow heterotrophically.
References and presentations
Maresa Bussa, Martin Ulrich, Niels Jungbluth (2023) Report on Life Cycle Assessment and Life Cycle Costing. Deliverable 7.2. PROFUTURE: Microalgae Protein Ingredients for the Food and Feed of the Future. Project funded by the European Commission within the Horizon 2020 programme. Grant agreement: 862980. ESU-services Ltd.
Maresa Bussa, Niels Jungbluth (2022) Life cycle assessment of microalgae as protein source : comparison of drying technologies. Parallel Session XXIV (Sustainable Farming Systems VI – Miscellanea), 13.10.2022, 13th International Conference on Life Cycle Assessment of foods (LCA foods 2022), Lima, Peru
Maresa Bussa, Niels Jungbluth (2022) Life cycle assessment of microalgae: Challenges and lessons learned. 14.06.2022, Young Algaeneers Symposium 2022, online
