The Waste Biorefinery Platform

Maximising the value from agri-food chain

biomass

Keith Waldron

NRP Biorefinery CentreInstitute of Food Research

Quantities of waste

• Europe (EU27):• 90 Million tonnes per annum• [European Commission, 2010]

• Globally• Over 1/3rd of food produced for human consumption is wasted

• 1.3 Billion Tonnes

• Per capita = mostly in industrialised nations

• 100 kg/person in EU;

• 6-10 Kg/person in sub Sahara Africa![Gustavsson et al 2011]

Increased demand for food

• Continued increase in population will result in increased demand for natural resources– Land

– Water

– Energy

– Food

• World Bank predicts– global demand for food will rise by 50% by 2030,

(for meat by 85%) and by 100% by 2050.

Sustainability and Waste

• Making better use of resources is going to

become more pressing

• There will be increased pressure to avoid a

food-fuel conflict

• There will be increasing pressures and

opportunities to make use of biomass-

waste

Overview

• Examples of high value components

from agri-food chain wastes

• Exploitation of residues– High quality growing media as a peat replacement

– Conversion of lignocellulose to fuels and

chemicals

• Where Next?

Waste from the Food Chain

Processing

waste

Field Waste

Product

Transport, Retail

More transport

More storage

Ingested

food

Agronomy

Consumer

Municipal

Waste

Seed

Packaging waste

Out of

spec / date waste

Crop

Storage,

transport

& Processing

“BIOREFINERY” Concept

Stabilised

Co-product

Organic

Waste

Material

HIGH VALUE

Nutriceuticals

Cosmetics

Food & feed

Additives

Feed Additives

Including fish

Feed

Non-food uses

e.g.

biodegradable

Packaging etc

Composting

% energy use

LOW

VALUE

Ind

us

trial a

nd

co

ns

um

er p

latfo

rms

RE

CO

VE

RY

Breakdown

and

fractionation

HACCP

Feedback processConsumer+retailor acceptance RISK assessment

polymersO

HOH2 C

o o

O

O

CH2 OH

HOH2 C

o o

A Hierarchy of Structures

plant

tissue

cell

cell wall

How are cell walls constructed?

cellulose microfibril

© K. W. Waldron, Institute of Food Research

OHOH2C

o o

O

O

CH2OH

HOH2C

o o

O

O

CH2OH

HOH2C

o o

1,4-linked glucose

cellulose

microfibrils hemicelluloses

proteins

lignin

© K. W. Waldron, Institute of Food Research

Adding Value to Waste Co-products

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

Bifidobacteria Bacteroides Lactobacilli Clostridia Eubacteria

Dif

fere

nces i

n b

acte

rial

po

pu

lati

on

siz

e (

%)

FOS

Bergamot

Adding Value to Waste Co-products

Faulds et al 2010.

Traditional approach e.g.FAIR CT96-1184

Conversion ofEnvironmentally-unfriendly

Onion wasteinto

Food ingredients

Institute of Food Research (UK)

University Autonoma de Madrid (Spain)

Herbstreith and Fox (Germany)

ATO [Wageningen University] (Netherlands)

TOP (Netherlands)

Onion waste: The Problem

400,000 tonnes grown in UK (1999)160,000 tonnes peeled57,600 tonnes = waste - disposed of – much by landfill

In UK:600,000 consumption

Allium cepa L.

Vegetable, prized for its flavour, aroma.

Medicinal qualities.Rich in quercetin, an antioxidant

> 500,000 tonnes of onion waste produced annually in Europe

Industrial peeling of onions

Top n’ tail

Blast with air

Score vertically Outer papery scales (brown)

+ outer fleshy scales (grey)

removed

Inner fleshy scales

Retained for further

processing

Onion peel Waste

White tissues

Crude Pulp

Instant

thickener

Evaluated Food Additives

TDF/IDF

Flavours

+ FOS

+ sugars

Supplemented Foods

Flavours

Sweet onion

juice

Possible process stream

Brown tissues

Brown IDF

finely ground

Low-

viscosity

SDF White

IDF

Instant-thickening agent from onion waste

Waldron K, Useful ingredients from onion waste. Food Sci Technol (2001).

By-product

• Microbiologically compromised

• Difficult mixtures•Contain meat and veg/fruit

• Insufficient economies of scale

• Untraceable

Composting Bio-alcohol

High value, patentedoutputs

residue

Professional Growers:

•Increasing requirement for horticultural growing media

•EU Wetlands Directive

•Consumer and retailer pressure

•Poor quality / unsuitable peat alternatives

Food processors

•Large quantities of organic, plant-based waste

•Pressure from EU landfill directive / UK landfill tax

The Problem: Sustainability*

Growing-media manufacturers and

composters:

•Paucity of knowledge of functional criteria of peat

•Paucity of understanding of composting process

*Margaret Becket’s speech at opening of

CSD meeting, 28th April, 2003

Developing a peat replacement

Waste

Stream

HQ

GMCo-productprovision

CompostingAndProcessing

Plant TrialsTailoring ofMedia

Madestein

Ltd

Required characteristics of a growing

medium

• Water holding and drainage

• Blendable

• Handling quality (e.g. cohesiveness)

• Defined nitrogen and nutrient status

Why is peat a good growing medium?

Somerset

Sedge H7-8

Ballycommon

H4-5

Latvian

Blonde

H2-3

Why is peat a good growing medium?

Why is composted material different

from “peat”?

Str

uctu

re

0%Time

Controlling the Composting Time Line

100%

What happens during

peat formation?

Changes in peat with age

What happens during composting?

• In Vessel composting: using the bespoke COBRA I and II

• Specific ‘windrow’ trials – generally in the order of 16 tonnes

ZEE 20160 TSB

COBRA vesselThermal control unit

Filling shute

Electrical control system

Air pump

Electrical control system

Thermal control system showing pumps and valves

Hydraulic pump and

electrical drive

Sources of plant waste

• Cereal Wastes monocot, cross-linked,

analogous to sedge

• Vegetable and fruit

wastesdicot, closer to parenchyma cells

of mosses

Waste streams included:

Changes in composition during composting

0.00

50.00

100.00

150.00

200.00

250.00

300.00

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Time (days)

Su

ga

rs (

ug

/mg

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Lig

nin

(%

w/w

)

Rhamnose

Fucose

Arabinose

Xylose

Mannose

Galactose

Glucose

GalA

lignin

LIGNIN

GLUCOSE

XYLOSEARABINOSE

Plant selection criteriaSpecies Reason for choosing species

Mossy saxifrage Alpine Subject

Lavender Careful water management essential.

Jasminum officinale Climbing subject

Buddleia alternifolia Hardy deciduous long term crop

Pyracantha Hardy ever green long term crop.

Ceanothus Hardy ever green long term crop. Careful water management essential.

Lobelia Herbaceous Perennial - quick summer crop

Erysimum High feed requirements, perennial medium length crop. Repeat from earlier work

Dianthus Medium term Dianthus crop

Echeveria elegans Needs to be grown very dry

Phlox paniculata Outside over winter Herbaceous Perennial

Veronica Outside over winter Herbaceous Perennial

Euphorbia griffithii Outside over winter Herbaceous Perennial

Argyranthemum Pot plant crop grown on capillary matting.

Cyclamen Pot plant crop grown on capillary matting.

Anemone Problem crop due to potential corm rot - careful water management essential.

Osteospermum Problematic crop, susceptible to water logging.

Dahlia Quick bedding crop grown on capillary matting.

Gypsophila Quick, bedding crop with some watering challenges.

Lupin Seed raised over winter Herbaceous Perennial

Chaenomeles Slow, long crop, often difficult to reach required size

Hibiscus Woody, long term crop with nutritional challenges

Lincolnshire Herbs (coriander)

Stockbridge Violas

Farplants: Mossy Saxifrage

Farplants: Erysimum

Blocking media

Characterising the Growing Media for

basis of functionality

Industry-standard physical properties

• Moisture retention

• Water potential

• pH

• electrical conductivity

• Bulk density

• dry bulk density

• Air-filled porosity

• Particle size distribution

B

4 3

232

4

BA

C

6

Air Porosity

Dry Bulk

Density

Moisture

Retention

5

Peat-based

collection

Very immature

Composts

Plant structure

relatively

undegraded

Completely mature

Composts with little or

no structure

1

Arrow represents

direction of loss

of structure

during composting

Fig. 5. Principal components analysis of physical properties of peat and compost-based samples. White circles: general

samples; light grey circles 1-5: compost time course over 4 months; dark grey circles: 75% compost + 25% peat samples;

black circles: peat-based products.

A

C

C

B

4 3

232

4

BA

C

6

Air Porosity

Dry Bulk

Density

Moisture

Retention

5

Peat-based

collection

1

Fig. 5. Principal components analysis of physical properties of peat and compost-based samples. White circles: general

samples; light grey circles 1-5: compost time course over 4 months; dark grey circles: 75% compost + 25% peat samples;

black circles: peat-based products.

6x Viola 105%

Gypsophila 100%

Lavender 105%

Lobelia 93%

Anemone 130%

Dianthus 109%

Hibiscus 1:1 90%

Jasmin 103%

Cyclamen 81%

Buddleia 96%

Pyracantha 76%

Ceanothus 80%

6x Viola 92%

Gypsophila 75%

Lavender 111%

Anemone 111%

Dianthus 106%

Hibiscus 1:1 90%

Lobelia 103%

Echeveria good, shrnk

Buddleia 60%

Cyclamen 103%

2x Viola 93%

Pyracantha 55%

Ceanothus 73%

Mossy saxifrage 100%

Phlox 100+%

Erysimum 90%

Mossy saxifrage 100%

Phlox 100+%

Erysimum 92%

Mossy saxifrage 100%

Phlox 100+%

Erysimum 86%

Lobelia 94%

Viola 107%

Anemone 85%

Hibiscus 89%

3x viola 82%

A

2x Viola 99%

Gypsophila 67%

Dianthus 106%

Lavender 91%

C

B

4 3

232

4

BA

C

6

Air Porosity

Dry Bulk

Density

Moisture

Retention

5

Peat-based

collection

1

Fig. 5. Principal components analysis of physical properties of peat and compost-based samples. White circles: general

samples; light grey circles 1-5: compost time course over 4 months; dark grey circles: 75% compost + 25% peat samples;

black circles: peat-based products.

6x Viola 105%

Gypsophila 100%

Lavender 105%

Lobelia 93%

Anemone 130%

Dianthus 109%

Hibiscus 1:1 90%

Jasmin 103%

Cyclamen 81%

Buddleia 96%

Pyracantha 76%

Ceanothus 80%

6x Viola 92%

Gypsophila 75%

Lavender 111%

Anemone 111%

Dianthus 106%

Hibiscus 1:1 90%

Lobelia 103%

Echeveria good, shrnk

Buddleia 60%

Cyclamen 103%

2x Viola 93%

Pyracantha 55%

Ceanothus 73%

Mossy saxifrage 100%

Phlox 100+%

Erysimum 90%

Mossy saxifrage 100%

Phlox 100+%

Erysimum 92%

Mossy saxifrage 100%

Phlox 100+%

Erysimum 86%

Lobelia 94%

Viola 107%

Anemone 85%

Hibiscus 89%

3x viola 82%

A

2x Viola 99%

Gypsophila 67%

Dianthus 106%

Lavender 91%

IMPACT

Output – ability to measure and control (using SI units) the key physical parameters that

determine the quality of growing media from composted food chain co-products.

2 patents granted: GB2445560 and US 8,361,171B2

One (refereed) publicationWaldron, K.W., Moates, G.K., Merali, S.R.A., Collins, D.R., Wilson, T.F., Brocklehurst, T.F., Bragg, N.C., and

Carter, S. (2013). Retaining cell wall structure in producing quality composts to replace peat as growing media.

Acta Hort. 1013: 181-188.

Most promising Innovator of 2011

New DEFRA project started 1st January 2015

Transition to responsibly sourced

growing media use within UK horticulture

www.adas.uk

Dr Barry Mulholland (ADAS), Prof. Keith Waldron (IFR), Dr

Henri Tapp (IFR), Graham Moates (IFR), Chloe Whiteside

(ADAS) and Ryan Hickinbotham (ADAS)

Dove Associates

PAUL WALLER

CONSULTING

Susie Holmes

Consulting Ltd

Biorefining on the Norwich Research Park

biomass

distillation

bioalcohol

Simplified scheme for ethanol production from biomass

PretreatmentAvailable cellulose

hydrolysis sugars

fermentation alcohol

•Steam explosion

•Extrusion

•Acid/alkali

•Temperature

•Milling

•Hot solvent

•etc

•Hot acid

•Enzymatic

•Thermophilic?

•Multi enzyme

•Combination?

•Glucose

•Xylose

•Arabinose

•Uronic acid

•etc.

Problem of inhibitors

•Lignin

•Enzyme inhibitors

•Product and

metabolite inhibition

Range of fermenting

micro-organisms

•Yeasts

•Bacteria

Distillation or membrane technologies

10 x 5 x 2 x 2 x 3 x 2 = 1200 permutations (non-optimised)

Academic partners(Environment for invention)

LIGNO-

CELLULOSEBIO-

ALCOHOL

Selection and

categorisation

Digestion and

Release of sugars

And oligosaccharides

Fermentation &

separation

Research programme: Environment for invention and innovation

FEEDBACK

CHAIN INTEGRATION

Task 3: Further

saccharification and

Fermentation

MEEP

Industrial

Bio-alcohol

Task 1: Supply and

characterise

Lignocellulosic co-

products

Provision of industrial

wastesoptimising

combustion

Task 4:

Evaluation of

Combustion

Industrial partners(environment for exploitation)

Task 2: Cell wall

disassembly

depolymerisation and

saccharification

Industrial

enzymes

Pre

treatment

HOOCH

Straw: 500g

10% Ethanol

750-800ml

Ethanol 75-80ml

High torque

bioreactor

Elliston A., Faulds C. B., Roberts I. N., Waldron K. W. (2014)

Biorefining of waste paper biomass: Increasing the concentration of glucose by optimising

enzymatic hydrolysis at high substrate loads

Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology 172 3621-3634

Elliston A., Collins S. R. A., Wilson D. R., Roberts I. N., Waldron K. W. (2013)

High concentrations of cellulosic ethanol achieved by fed batch semi simultaneous saccharification

and fermentation of waste-paper.

Bioresource Technology 134 117-126

Impact of steam explosion on methane

production from OSR straw

Steam explosion and biogas production at 36 hours

Vivekanand et al (2012) Bioresource Technology 123, 608-615

Adding value to lignocellulosic

residues

• What about products other than

ethanol?

Sugar

Source

distillation

bioalcohol

Pretreatment

hydrolysis sugars

fermentation alcohol

Conversion of Lignocellulose to ???

Different fermenter

=

Different product

co-products

1. Four Carbon 1,4-Diacids

(Succinic, Fumaric, and Malic)

2. 2,5-Furan dicarboxylic acid (FDCA)

3. 3-Hydroxypropionic acid (3-HPA)

4. Aspartic acid

5. Glucaric acid

6. Glutamic acid

7. Itaconic acid

8. Levulinic acid

9. 3-Hydroxybutyrolactone

10. Glycerol

11. Sorbitol

12. Xylitol / Arabinitol

(Bozell and Petersen 2010)

Top 12 chemical opportunities

High-throughput screening of

yeast biodiversityfor the production of

high value bio-based chemicals

from agri-food waste

100 litre pilot

WHERE NEXT: chemicals from yeasts

• UK's premier collection of yeast cultures

• over 4000 strains collected over 50 years

• large collections of brewing yeast, genetically-defined

yeast (used in many applications including cancer

research), yeast associated with food spoilage and yeast

of medical and industrial importance.

• Robotic screening

systems

• Small, medium, large

scale digestion and

fermentation facilities

(Biorefinery)

Where do yeasts in the NCYC collection originate from?

NCYC 2254: Sugar factory

NCYC 2895: Hibiscus flower

NCYC 582: Strawberry juice

NCYC 2493: Nematode worm

NCYC 2610: Fish paste

NCYC 3788: Guava plant

NCYC 3064: Apple skin

NCYC 2869: Insect frass

NCYC 3729: Banana

NCYC 3264: Lici fruit

NCYC 3391: Seawater

NCYC 546: Fruit fly

Antarctic Yeast

• Yeast isolates sent to NCYC for

identification

• Growth temperature testing at

25°C and 1°C

• Cultures are pink and mucoid

• Synthesises carotenoid pigment

• Potential industrial applications

e.g. low temperature

biochemistry and/or source of UV

protectant molecules

Scanning electron micrograph (SEM) of a

yeast recovered from a glacier ice sample

Rhodotorula isolates grown at 1°C for 3 weeks on YM agar

Hydrolysis

Biomass

Pretreatment

Fermentation

Purification

Hydrolysis

Biomass (4)

Pretreatment

Fermentation

Purification

4

Hydrolysis

Biomass (4)

Pretreatment (4)

Fermentation

Purification

16

Hydrolysis (4)

Biomass (4)

Pretreatment (4)

Fermentation

Purification

64

Hydrolysis (4)

Biomass (4)

Pretreatment (4)

Fermentation

(4k)

Purification

256,000

Hydrolysis (4)

Biomass (4)

Pretreatment (4)

Fermentation

(4k)

Purification (4)

High through-put screening

Effect of volumeElliston et al (2015) Biotechnology for Biofuels

OK – but what about lignocellulose?

– it is solid!!!!

Repeatable aliquoting of finely milled biomass

19

8

11

17

16

10

13

9

18

3

1 7

valine

15

1412

4

ethanol

6

5

2

0

1E+10

2E+10

3E+10

4E+10

5E+10

6E+10

7E+10

8E+10

1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 49 52 55 58 61 64 67 70 73 76 79 82 85 88 91 94 97

NM

R in

ten

sity

Low producers

Ethanol

0

1E+09

2E+09

3E+09

4E+09

5E+09

6E+09

7E+09

8E+09

1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 49 52 55 58 61 64 67 70 73 76 79 82 85 88 91 94 97

NM

R in

ten

sity

Low producer

High producer

Succinic acid

co-products

Sugar

Source

distillation

bioalcohol

Pretreatment

hydrolysis sugars

fermentation alcohol

RESIDUE???

co-products

dry bulk

density

air-filled

porosity

moisture

retention

Little structure Over-structured

190oC

195oC

200oC

180oC

210oC

Horticultural Trials

Bioethanol production from duckweed

A high productivity

BACKGROUND

• Dry mass of 20 t ha-1 y-1 in 25 m2 lagoon Culley et al. 1981. J World Mariculture Soc. 12,27-

49.

• 105 t ha-1 y-1 was harvested in waste

water system.Xu et al. 2012. Biofuels. 3,589-601.

• Other potential energy crops:

willow 10 t ha-1 y-1,

poplar 9 t ha-1 y-1,

switchgrass 12 t ha-1 y-1

World Watch Institute. London: Earthscan; 2007.

http://biorefinerycentre.ifr.ac.uk/

Acknowledgements• Ian Wood

• Sam Collins

• David Wilson

• Graham Moates

• Adam Elliston

• Peter Ryden

• Henri Tapp

• Klaus Wellner

• Zara Merali

• Xin Zhao

• Ian Roberts

• Jo Dicks

• Ian Bancroft

• Andrea Harper

• David Boxer

• David Richardson

• BBSRC

• Defra

• Innovate UK

• EEDA

• EU