Skip to main content
ARS Home » Northeast Area » Wyndmoor, Pennsylvania » Eastern Regional Research Center » Microbial and Chemical Food Safety » Research » Publications at this Location » Publication #262704
Title: Are the nonthermal technologies cost effective and environmentally friendly

Author
item SAMPEDRO, FERNANDO - Polytechnic University Of Valencia (UPV)
item McAloon, Andrew
item Yee, Winnie
item Fan, Xuetong
item Geveke, David

Submitted to: Meeting Abstract
Publication Type: Abstract Only
Publication Acceptance Date: 6/14/2011
Publication Date: 6/14/2011
Citation: Sampedro, F., Mcaloon, A.J., Yee, W.C., Fan, X., Geveke, D.J. 2011. Are the nonthermal technologies cost effective and environmentally friendly [abstract]. June 13-15, 2011, New Orleans, LA. p.1.

Interpretive Summary:

Technical Abstract: The main goal of the application of nonthermal technologies such as pulsed electric fields (PEF) and high pressure processing (HPP) is to produce safe, fresher and more nutritious food. However, despite extensive microbiological data available, cost analysis and environmental impact studies of these processes are still scarce. The objective of the present study is to analyze the cost of pasteurized orange juice by PEF, HPP and thermal processes and the impact on the environment. Fresh squeezed orange juice was treated at commercial conditions for thermal pasteurization juice (87.5C for 5 s), HPP commercial conditions for fruit juices (550 MPa for 90 s) and PEF estimated commercial conditions (32 kV/cm, 50 us at 60C). The juices were compared on their shelf-life of two months. A medium-sized facility processing 16,500,000 liters of orange juice per year with a throughout of 3000 L/h was used as a basis in the cost model. The overall production cost of thermal processing was estimated to be 1.5 cents/L of juice processed where labor costs accounted for 85%. In the case of PEF technology, the estimated cost was 6.0 cents/L where energy costs represented 33.5%, whereas labor and capital costs accounted for 22 and 44.5%, respectively. HPP technology represented the most costly technology among the three processes with an estimated cost of 10.5 cents/L, where 5, 38 and 57% accounted for the energy, labor and capital costs, respectively. The production costs of nonthermal processing were on average 400-700% greater than those of thermal processing. PEF processing was found to be the technology with the highest energy consumption with respect to the rest of processes. A deeper knowledge of the production costs and energy demand will afford companies a better understanding of the benefits and limitations of the nonthermal technologies and aid them in deciding whether or not to implement the new processes.