Food and Bioprocess Technology

, Volume 7, Issue 7, pp 1928–1937

Cost Analysis and Environmental Impact of Pulsed Electric Fields and High Pressure Processing in Comparison with Thermal Pasteurization

  • F. Sampedro
  • A. McAloon
  • W. Yee
  • X. Fan
  • D. J. Geveke
Original Paper

DOI: 10.1007/s11947-014-1298-6

Cite this article as:
Sampedro, F., McAloon, A., Yee, W. et al. Food Bioprocess Technol (2014) 7: 1928. doi:10.1007/s11947-014-1298-6

Abstract

The cost of high pressure processing (HPP) and the environmental impact of pulsed electric fields (PEF), HPP and thermal pasteurization of orange juice were estimated in the US. The cost analysis was based on commercial processing conditions that were validated for a 2-month shelf-life of orange juice under refrigeration conditions. Total electricity consumption was estimated to be 38,100 and 1,000,000 k Wh/year for thermal and HPP processing, respectively. Total pasteurization cost of HPP was estimated to be 10.7 ¢/l for processing 16,500,000 l/year (3,000 l/h). Of this, capital costs accounted for 59 % (6.3 ¢/l), labor costs accounted for 37 % (4.0 ¢/l) and utility charges, mainly electricity, accounted for 4 % (0.4 ¢/l). The total HPP cost was 7-folds higher than that of conventional thermal processing (1.5 ¢/l). The equivalent CO2 emission was 90,000 kg for thermal processing and 700,000 and 773,000 kg for PEF and HPP, respectively. This corresponds to an increase between 7- and 8-folds in comparison to the thermal processing. Increasing the production output by 2- to 6-folds reduced the total production costs of nonthermal processing by 50–75 %. A deeper knowledge of the processing costs and environmental impact of nonthermal technologies will afford companies a better understanding of the benefits and limitations of these novel systems.

Keywords

Cost analysisEnvironmental impactHigh pressurePulsed electric fieldsThermal processing

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York (outside the USA) 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • F. Sampedro
    • 1
    • 2
  • A. McAloon
    • 3
  • W. Yee
    • 4
  • X. Fan
    • 2
  • D. J. Geveke
    • 5
  1. 1.Center for Animal Health and Food Safety, College of Veterinary MedicineUniversity of MinnesotaSaint PaulUSA
  2. 2.Residue Chemistry and Predictive Microbiology Research Unit, Agriculture Research Service, U.S. Department of AgricultureEastern Regional Research CenterWyndmoorUSA
  3. 3.Sustainable Biofuels and Co-Products Research Unit, Agriculture Research Service, U.S. Department of AgricultureEastern Regional Research CenterWyndmoorUSA
  4. 4.Office of the Center Director, Agriculture Research Service, U.S. Department of AgricultureEastern Regional Research CenterWyndmoorUSA
  5. 5.Food Safety and Intervention Technologies Research Unit, Agriculture Research Service, U.S. Department of AgricultureEastern Regional Research CenterWyndmoorUSA