Crustacea processing waste management

January 2008

Research & Development

SR593

Working with the seafood industry to satisfy consumers, raise standards, improve efficiency and secure a sustainable future. The Sea Fish Industry Authority (Seafish) was established by the Government in 1981 and is a Non Departmental Public Body (NDPB). Seafish activities are directed at the entire UK seafood industry including the catching, processing, retailing and catering sectors. Seafish Research: We promote the sustainable use of fish resources, quality, the reduction of waste and the improvement of safety through practical applied research. We also develop standards, training programmes and learning support materials. We also promote training opportunities for all sectors of the sea fish industry through a national network of Group Training Associations. Quality award schemes are available for processors and friers.

ISBN No: 0 903941 79 1

Seafish Research & Development Author(s): Michaela Archer David Russell (Food Processing Knowledge Transfer Network) Date: November 2007 Crustacea processing waste management Summary: With changes in waste legislation, shellfish waste management has become increasingly difficult and expensive. This has significantly affected the shellfish processing sector, particularly the crustacea sector as there is a lack of cost-effective outlets for their waste. Disposal costs of more than £60 per tonne are common, which is not economically viable for many businesses. To establish whether it is possible for UK processors to generate an income or reduce the costs of crustacea waste disposal, Seafish initiated a project to look at the range of options available for crustacea waste management and identify which have potential for the UK processing sector. The project looked at all the crustacea species processed in the UK and the range of products or extracts that can be produced. The project identified two main options for crustacea waste management; use or disposal as ‘waste’ off-site or making it available for use in other products. Each option has its own issues; legalities, technical feasibility, outlets for the products etc. On the basis of the information collected, it will continue to be difficult for the crustacea processing industry to cost-effectively meet the demands of waste disposal legislation for the foreseeable future. Many different routes have and are being explored, but no breakthrough technology or solution has emerged. There are

SR593 © Seafish i

some opportunities to generate a financial return from crustacea waste, but investments in capital and the requirements for effective management remain a significant hurdle to achieving a return on investment. There is no single, simple, cost-effective solution for crustacea waste management. This report summarises the main finding of the project. Further detailed information is available on the Seafish B2B website (Gaining Value from Crustacea Waste Project). This includes an Excel workbook which will be periodically updated with new information as it becomes available. The spreadsheet can be accessed at http://www.seafish.org/b2b/info.asp?p=102

SR593 ii ©Seafish

Table of Contents: 1. Introduction ......................................................................................................... 1

2. Legislation overview............................................................................................ 2

3. The UK crustacea sector and waste production.................................................. 4

3.1. The UK crustacea processing sector ........................................................... 4

3.2. Crustacea waste production and usage....................................................... 4

4. Crustacea waste management options ............................................................... 6

4.1. Main options for crustacea processors ........................................................ 7

4.2. Use or disposal as-is (Option 1)................................................................... 8

4.3. Supply for the development of other products (Option 2)............................. 9

4.3.1. Stabilisation methods............................................................................ 9

4.3.2. Outlets for stabilised shell ................................................................... 10

5. Research activities ............................................................................................ 19

5.1. Current UK research activities ................................................................... 19

5.2. Areas for further research .......................................................................... 19

6. Discussion......................................................................................................... 21

7. Further information............................................................................................ 23

SR593 iii ©Seafish

1. Introduction With changes in waste legislation, shellfish waste management has become increasingly difficult and expensive. In 2003, the Animal By-products Regulation introduced additional requirements for the production, handling, transport, storage, use and disposal of animal waste including shellfish waste. This has significantly affected the shellfish processing sector, particularly the crustacea sector. When the legislation came into effect, there was little infrastructure available for shell. This situation has slightly improved in some regions of the UK over the past four years but there continues to be a wide-scale lack of cost-effective outlets for crustacea waste. Disposal costs of more than £60 per tonne are common which is not economically viable for many businesses. In June 2005, Seafish published a Strategic Framework for Seafood Waste Management. This outlined the major impact of legislation on the methods and economics of disposing of seafood waste. Part of the Strategy aimed to identify options that could generate an income or economic return from the waste material. To establish whether it is possible for UK processors to generate an income from or reduce the disposal costs of crustacea waste, Seafish initiated a project to look at the range of options available for crustacea waste management and identify which have potential for the UK processing sector. Many different routes to utilise crustacea waste have been explored, ranging from the extraction of high value compounds with a global market (e.g. chitin, glucosamine, pigments) through to bulk uses such as land remediation, use in composting systems or disposal to landfill. The project considered the main crustacea species processed in the UK and the range of products or extracts that can be produced. It involved liaising with relevant contacts, companies or organisations across the UK, Europe and rest of the world. A comprehensive literature review was also undertaken. The information was gathered during 2007. The main results of this project are summarised in this report, which covers crustacea waste production, current uses, main options available for crustacea waste management etc. Further detailed information is available on the Seafish B2B website (Gaining Value from Crustacea Waste Project).

SR593 1 ©Seafish

2. Legislation overview The production, utilisation, handling, transport and disposal of all waste, particularly animal waste, are strictly regulated by numerous pieces of complex waste legislation. The costs of operating waste facilities to the specific standards are passed onto disposers of waste, encompassing the polluter pays principle. Of primary importance for all animal waste are the Animal By-product Regulations (ABPR) which came into force in 2003 after concerns about Foot & Mouth disease and BSE. They introduced greater controls on seafood waste including shell. Many other pieces of legislation stipulate additional requirements for waste activities. These include; Waste Framework Directive 91/156/EEC, Environmental Protection Act 1990, Pollution Prevention and Control Regulations 2000, Waste Management Licensing Regulations 1994, Landfill Tax Regulations 1996, EU Landfill Directive, Food and Environment Protection Act 1985 amongst others. With such a number of pieces of legislation applicable to waste disposal, it is difficult to get a comprehensive overview. It is made more difficult by the need to communicate with a number of official regulators, agencies or departments. For seafood waste in England this includes Defra Animal Health, the Environment Agency, the Food Standards Agency, Trading Standards and Local Authorities etc. Each regulator has a different remit, responsibility and concern. The complexity is also compounded by some differences between devolved regions in the implementation of the rules. The complexity of waste legislation leads to difficulties when trying to develop solutions. What can look like a promising outlet by one piece of legislation is often stymied by another, or additional requirements may only become apparent further down the line. The ABPR permits specific methods for treating all animal waste, including;

• Incineration • Rendering including fishmeal production • Rendering followed by incineration • Rendering followed by landfill • Transformation into technical products • Used as a raw material in pet foods & animal feeds • Digestion • Composting • For material of fish origin, ensiled • Where authorised, used as a feed for zoo, circus, fur animal, hounds, maggot

/ worm (as bait) • For free of flesh shell, i.e. shells from which all the flesh has been removed,

there is a general approval for technical uses, such as; (i) the production of aggregates; (ii) use in gardens; (iii) the construction, maintenance or repair of footpaths; (iv) use in draining the land; or (v) ornamental use

SR593 2 ©Seafish

Animal waste must only be used or disposed of in premises approved under ABPR or through specific licensed or registered outlets. After the material has been treated to ABPR standards, it may be utilised in different products or uses, however for some of these, additional licensing or permissions may be required. For example, in land application shell that is free of flesh can be used for making paths and tracks. There is a general approval under ABPR to produce the free-of-flesh shell, but in order to utilise the shell for paths/tracks it has to be registered with the local environmental regulator. Further information on the extent of licensing required is available from the relevant regulators. Seafish has produced a guide to legislation for the utilisation or disposal of seafood waste http://www.seafish.org/upload/file/legislation/ABPQAV2.pdf

SR593 3 ©Seafish

3. The UK crustacea sector and waste production Crustacea is a generic term covering a number of shellfish species. In the UK this includes crab (brown), lobster, Nephrops norvegicus (also referred to as langoustine, Dublin bay prawn or nephrops), cold water prawns, warm water prawns and shrimp. In the context of this report it does not include other shellfish species such as molluscs, whelks etc.

3.1. The UK crustacea processing sector Information on the crustacea trade (landings, imports and exports) is included in Table 1. Table 1 – Crustacea landings, imports and exports for 2005

Direct landings into the UK (live weight

equivalent)

Imports Exports Species

Weight (tonnes)

Value (£m) Weight (tonnes)

Value (£) Weight (tonnes)

Value (£)

Crab 20,500 £24.3m 2,185 £9.9m 15,370 £33.5m Nephrops 33,900 £84.2m No data No data No data No data Lobster 1,300 £12.2m No data No data No data No data Shrimp 500 £0.9m Prawns No data No data Other shrimps and prawns

No data No data

89,919

£336.7m

22,967

£81.3m

Others No data No data 5,830 £25.4m 25,057 £131.6

The processing sector is dispersed around the UK, with some regional concentrations of crab and Nephrops. The main concentrations are in Scotland (North-East and Southern regions), England (North, Yorkshire Coast, South-West) and Northern Ireland.

3.2. Crustacea waste production and usage It is impossible to accurately quantify the amount of crustacea waste produced in the UK because there are so many variables. For example, the extent of processing varies according to whether the crustacea is sold whole or processed. Table 2 provides an estimate of the range of quantities of crustacea waste produced and how it is used or disposed of.

SR593 4 ©Seafish

Table 2 – Estimated quantity and current usage of crustacea waste Estimated

quantity (tonnes)

Current usage

Crab 3,485 to 6,970(a) Disposal (incineration, composting) Land application Landfill Product (for dressed crab) Bait

Nephrops 6,526 to 13,052(b) Heat treated and used in other products Exported Disposal (incineration, composting) Land application Landfill

Lobster None – typically sold live or whole

None

Shrimp No information No information Prawns Processed

elsewhere – no significant waste presumed in UK

None

Other shrimps and prawns

Processed elsewhere – no significant waste presumed in UK

None

a – assumes between 25% and 50% of whole crabs are processed in the UK. b – Assumes 50% of Nephrops are landed as tails only with the waste discarded at sea. Of the Nephrops which are landed whole, between 50-100% will be processed on-shore. Further information on crustacea waste production is also available from other organisations see Gaining Value from Crustacea Waste Project on the Seafish website

SR593 5 ©Seafish

4. Crustacea waste management options

Crustacea processing waste can be utilised in other products or disposed of as a waste. The type and properties of shell dictate how it can be managed after processing. For example, soft shells are unsuitable for many uses which are relevant to hard shell, or the head and claws parts of Nephrops and prawns may be used for products that are not derived from just the tail shell alone. Crab and lobster shell is dense and hard, more similar to scallop or whelk shell. Hence some of the uses for scallop and whelk may be suitable for crab shell. Nephrops, prawn and shrimp shell have soft tail shell which may not be suitable for some uses. The main waste management options are categorised according to the waste hierarchy (reduce, reuse, recycle, disposal), see Table 3.

Table 3 – Main waste management options Use or Disposal option

Reduce Soups stocks and sauces Shell used in product

Reuse / Recycle

Aerobic digestion Alkaline Hydrolysis Anaerobic digestion Autoclaving Biofuels Chitin, chitosan and pigments Composting Cultch Direct animal feed including bait Ensiling Fertilisers and soil conditioners Incineration with energy recovery Landspreading Mechanical and biological Treatment Mollusc shell based products Pharmaceuticals, cosmetics and fine chemicals Rendering to fish or crustacea meal

Disposal Disposal at sea Incineration without heat recovery Landfill

If the material is treated as a waste it usually results in the processor paying a disposal cost. Typically it involves the processor contracting a third party or waste management company to take the waste away for further treatment. Once treated, the waste may be used for other purposes i.e. composting is a waste management activity but the compost is a product used for other purposes.

SR593 6 ©Seafish

The exception to this is waste reduction i.e. minimising the amount of waste produced. Processors already maximise the yield of product, often leaving little opportunity to reduce wastage this way, however, shell can be used in some products e.g. crab carapace used in dressed crab products. This option is already used widely in the UK and there appears to be little scope to expand it to other crustacea products. The availability and suitability of each waste management option depends on a number of different factors such as legality, cost, markets / outlets for products, throughput requirements etc. As such there is no single, ‘one size fits all’ solution for managing crustacea waste. Each business has to consider the range of options available and decide which one is most appropriate for their circumstances. 4.1. Main options for crustacea processors The options for crustacea processors fall into two main categories; use or dispose of the material as-is, or make it available for the production of other products, see Figure 1.

Crustacea waste

Option 1 Option 2 Use or dispose as-is Supply for the development

of other products

Initial treatment or

stabilisation in-house

Figure 1 – Main options for crustacea processors In order to identify the current status of these, a number of individuals, businesses and organisations were contacted. Sections 4.2 and 4.3 provide an overview of these findings, an assessment of the current status of each option and an indication of the main issues.

Provide to treatment facility in the UK

Export

SR593 7 ©Seafish

4.2. Use or disposal as-is (Option 1) There are several different routes available for the ‘disposal’ of crustacea waste (Table 4). Most if not all involve paying a third party or company to take the material away from the processing site for use or disposal elsewhere. The waste producer will not usually gain financial benefit from these options. The process used to treat the waste must be approved by the relevant regulators.

Table 4 - the main use or disposal options available and current costs and availability

Waste treatment option Suitability for crustacea Cost per tonne to the producer

Current Usage in UK

Aerobic digestion Depends on the technology but typically not suitable for hard shell

£40 - £60 plus transport costs Limited

Alkaline hydrolysis Yes No data available No plant operational

Anaerobic digestion Soft shells such as Nephrops and prawns only £40 - £80 plus transport Limited

Autoclaving Yes No data available Limited

Composting Yes £40 - £60 plus transport costs Limited

Crustacea meal Can make crustacea meal from whole prawns but generally not suitable for crab waste

No data available Very limited

Direct animal feeding (bait) Yes providing it is acceptable to the fisherman and only used in pots or on hooks. Suitable for small quantities of waste.

From free (for bait) to £40 Widespread but local / small-scale

Ensiling (excluding heat treatment)

Not suitable for hard shell. It is only permitted as a storage method. If the ensiled material is heat treated then it can be used for other purposes.

£25 excluding transport and off-site treatment

No usage reported for shellfish

Incineration Yes but shell has little energy value in energy recovery plants £100 - £160 plus transport Limited

Land spreading (including initial treatment)

Yes (providing complies with ABPR standards and Waste Management Licensing)

£10 to £200 depending on extent of initial treatment and including licensing and transport costs

Widespread but used on a local / regional level

Landfill

Illegal for raw or non-treated seafood wastes including Nephrops tail shell. Is legal for cooked crab waste which is classed as a former foodstuff.

£40 - £60 plus transport costs Limited

Mechanical and biological treatment

Yes but this is typically used only for municipal wastes No data available Limited

Rendering Depends on the treatment company but typically not suitable for shell

£60 - £100 plus transport Limited

Use at sea Only free of flesh crab carapace and molluscan shellfish as it has to be of benefit to the sea bed

£45 - £55 Limited – difficult to get licensed

Although the number of approved facilities will increase each year the associated costs will not fall below current levels, instead increasing in time. The capacity for waste treatment will vary on a regional basis which will also affect costs and options.

SR593 8 ©Seafish

There are options to reduce waste disposal costs such as dewatering shell or storing/bulking up material to transport it to a licensed facility on a less frequent basis. This obviously requires resources (financial, workforce, space etc) which will vary between businesses. 4.3. Supply for the development of other products (Option 2) In theory, crustacea waste can be used to develop a wide range of products. This usually necessitates the crustacea waste to be stabilised at the crustacea processing plant before it is supplied to the third party treatment facility. The treatment facility may either use it as whole product or may treat the waste to extract valuable materials. Stabilisation methods are explained in Section 4.3.1 whilst Section 4.3.2 provides an overview of the possible outlets for the stabilised shell.

4.3.1. Stabilisation methods A number of possible methods for stabilising crustacea waste are available, see Table 5. Each has its own advantages and disadvantages, with no singular method suitable or cost-effective for treating all types of crustacea waste.

Table 5 – Possible methods to stabilise crustacea waste Method Description Acid preservation/ensiling

Ensiling is a method used in the preservation of finfish waste, but could be adopted for preservation of shellfish waste, though its use is not reported. Acid preservation, at <pH 3.5 will prevent microbial spoilage. Acids used are typically formic or propionic acid. If ensilage is desired, lactic acid may be added. It has size flexibility, is a low technology process, and can give long shelf life, and is a low to medium cost.

Chilling Storing the waste typically <4oC. Low cost solution, which will only keep the waste stable for a few days.

Dewatering Reducing the water content to reduce the weight of waste. Conventional techniques are pressing or compacting, and are a medium to low cost option. This step will not in itself increase shelf life, but by reducing bulk facilitates other methods of stabilisation.

Drying Water removal to a moisture content which gives a microbiologically stable ingredient. It is conventionally done by heating the waste to >90oC. Drying is usually accompanied by size reduction. This method has the advantage of meeting ABP regulations, but the disadvantage of high cost.

Freezing Reducing the temperature of the waste to -2 to –18oC. This is a medium-high cost solution, but stability is maintained for months

Vacuum packing Storing the waste in an oxygen free environment. e.g. a vacuum, to slow down microbial spoilage, will increase shelf life by a few days. Packed product can be chilled to further increase shelf life. An advantage of the technique is that product can be more easily handled during storage and transportation, but a disadvantage is a medium to high cost.

Washing Removing the flesh from crustacea waste removes the degradable component. After washing, the exoskeletal component may be free of flesh. Equipment has been developed to assist with washing shell. This is a lower cost solution, applicable to producers of crab shell, although there are implications for trade effluent charges.

SR593 9 ©Seafish

SR593

10 ©Seafish

There have been no significant recent advances in developing cost-effective methods to stabilise crustacea waste. The solution adopted by each producer remains a choice determined by the individual circumstances of each plant, according to volume, type, location, and the technical and financial resources available. The method used to stabilise the shell will also very much depend on the specification of the company who is taking the stabilised shell for further treatment. The UK government is supporting initiatives to improve sustainability with a “carrot-and stick” approach. The “stick” includes restrictions on landfill and an increase in the landfill tax. The “carrot” includes a drive to produce energy from waste. Financial incentives are being provided and technology is increasingly available to take advantage of these incentives. Thus local initiatives to produce and utilise this new source of energy may provide a double benefit of both disposing of the waste and also of using low-cost energy to enable the waste producers to stabilise product more economically.

4.3.2. Outlets for stabilised shell

Crustacea waste is available in large quantities globally and many different approaches are used to extract valuable ingredients in order to generate financial value. Crustacea waste products or extracts fall into three main categories; high value chemicals; food use ingredients; and non-food use ingredients. A summary of the extracts and products, their uses, production methods, recent developments and current status in the UK are provided in Tables 6, 7 and 8.

Table 6 - High added value chemicals

Extract or product Description Uses Production methods Current situation

Chitin

Chitin is a naturally occurring, non-toxic, biodegradable polymer.

A wide range of potential uses e.g. as an antimicrobial agent, in edible and biodegradable film, as a food additive, and in biomedical and pharmaceutical applications

Crustacea waste contains 25-35% of chitin on a dry weight basis. The shells are typically washed in dilute acid and rinsed in water. The proteins are then removed by washing with concentrated alkaline solution and then rinsed with water. The material is dried to produce powdered chitin. Alternative, “greener” methods of extraction have been developed based on fermentation and enzymic action. These less aggressive methods have proved more expensive, and have not been implemented on a commercial scale.

Chitosan Chitosan is a derivative of chitin in a readily usable form.

Wide range of potential uses e.g. food ingredient, medical treatment, cosmetics, nutraceuticals,

Chitin is treated with an alkaline solution to produce chitosan. It is then dried into flakes or powdered form. Again there are biological/enzymic methods but these have not been proven on a commercial scale.

The world market for chitin is estimated at USD1billion annually There are significant manufacturing facilities in Asia for this process. The cost structure of these operations makes the UK economically uncompetitive as a manufacturing base for this process, and this situation is unlikely to change in the foreseeable future. Large amounts of work have been done to exploit the high value chemicals in crustacea waste. Work on the biochemical extraction of chitin done in Queens University Belfast in recent years offered the promise of a less aggressive, and thus potentially more attractive, technology than conventional hydrolysis. However, although chitin extraction was shown to be feasible, the economics of the process were insufficient to justify investment in a manufacturing plant. In parallel, research work on the lactic acid fermentation of crustacea waste at Loughborough University did not result in any commercially exploitable process. CCFRA has evaluated the possibility of deriving biodegradable packaging from crustacea waste using a fermentation process to extract the biopolymer, chitin, from the waste stream. The technical feasibility was seen as promising, but a financial analysis suggested that the process was unlikely to be economic Currently there is no chitin/chitosan extraction facility, existing or planned, in the UK that would utilise significant quantities of waste. It is unclear whether either production method complies with ABPR

Carotenoid pigments

Carotenoids are lipid soluble pigments found in the photosynthetic-protein complex of phytoplankton and algae. They are important in animal

Natural colorants for animal feed, particularly fish.

Astaxanthin is present as an ester in crustacea waste at low levels 50 – 200mg/kg. Pigments are extracted from shellfish wastes during chitin and chitosan production, Most sources of pigments are either chemically synthesised or, for natural

Astaxanthin is the most commercially important pigment used in farmed fish, particularly salmon. Pigments can account for up to 25% of feed costs. EU regulations limit the amount of synthetic colourant that can be added to fish food, creating a market for natural colourant. Large global market with increasing demand for natural colourant.

SR593 11 ©Seafish

metabolism, as well being the chemicals responsible for giving fish and shellfish their red and pink colouring, taken up in the diet.

pigments, obtained from none marine sources.

Currently there is no carotenoid extraction facility in the UK, existing or planned. However there is an aquaculture feed manufacturer taking dried Nephrops waste for incorporation into fish feed to utilise the pigments content. Further information is limited due to commercial confidentiality.

Glucosamine and chondroitin sulphate

Substances found naturally in the body. Glucosamine is believed to play a role in cartilage formation and repair. It is a component of chitin. Chondroitin sulphate is part of a large protein molecule (proteoglycan) that gives cartilage elasticity.

Both are sold as dietary or nutritional supplements, for humans and pets. Medical evidence is not conclusive.

Manufactured glucosamine is derived by hydrolysing chitin. Chondroitin sulphate is derived from shark or beef cartilage, or bovine trachea).

The global market for the two ingredients combined is estimated at 6000tonnes per year. Currently there is no facility in the UK, existing or planned. Cheaper imports from other countries and the legal barriers to overcome mean that it would be difficult to produce it cost-effectively from seafood in the UK unless it was part of a facility extracting a range of different products.

Alkaline phosphatase (ALP)

ALP is an enzyme that is present in the soft tissues of shellfish

It is used in diagnostic testing kits, as well as being used as a modifying enzyme in molecular biology

It is heat sensitive, produced by a temperature controlled, multi-stage extraction process.

Glycosoaminoglycans Glycosoaminoglycans are polysaccharide molecules present in all tissue

They have a key role in cellular interactions, with potential medical application.

They can be isolated from crustacea waste by specialised extraction processes

Biotec (Norway) manufacture and market high value enzymes that are derived from shrimp shells, but are reported to be now made by recombinant technology. A research facility in Scotland is investigating the potential of utilising shellfish waste as the feedstock for the production of high value nutraceuticals / pharmaceuticals such as ALP and glycosaminoglycans. This pioneering work, though exciting, will take many years to have a significant impact on the volume of crustacea waste in the UK. An innovative venture to extract value from crustacea waste is currently being investigated in Scotland. The novelty of the venture is to combine different biochemical treatments in the one processing plant, so that the operation has several high added value ingredients as an output. The value of each ingredient itself is unlikely to be economic, but by spreading costs over a number of outputs, the total venture is potentially more viable. This is currently subject to commercial confidentiality. It is unlikely that this facility will utilise significant quantities of waste in the short or medium term.

SR593 12 ©Seafish

Omega-3 and Omega-6 fatty acids

Fatty acids that are essential for health

Sold as dietary / nutritional supplements

They can be isolated from crustacea waste by sophisticated extraction processes

Omega –3 and –6 fatty acids have grown in commercial importance with increasing awareness of their health benefits to humans and animals. In recent times the possibility of extraction from crustacea waste been considered, but little data of methods and potential is available. Primarily available from flesh material rather than shell, Whether it is commercially viable from crustacea waste requires further assessment.

SR593 13 ©Seafish

Table 7 – Food or feed use Extract or product Description Uses Production methods

Current situation

Crustacea meal

Ground and dried crustacea waste has been used as a component of animal or fish food to deliver nutrition required for growth and health.

Fish feed, animal feed

Typically involves heat treatment of the waste to facilitate the extraction of oils & water, to a level where it is stabilised. This product is usually incorporated into fish feed to provide a balanced feed. Includes natural pigments etc of benefit to salmonids.

Dried Nephrops shell is currently used in fish feed largely for pigment content. A project to undertake a feasibility study to evaluate the potential for using Nephrops shell in fish feed has been submitted to Seafish’s Industry Project Funding programme. The project includes a cost-effective method of stabilising the shell. If successful, this could be very promising. This project needs to assess the raw material, logistics, costs, legality, quality/traceability and outlets for the meal to determine the commercial viability of this route.

Flavouring An extract, added to food products to add or enhance flavour.

Soups, stocks, sauces

Crustacea waste is broken down by enzymic action, or fermentation, or by heat, to extract the flavour compounds. The extract is usually concentrated to a thick liquid and/or dried to a powder.

Although utilised in other countries, there is not a big market in UK. Some processors have produced a soup/bisque from crab. This route will not utilise significant quantities of waste.

Pet food Nephrops and shrimp shells have been used in pet foods as varietal claims e.g. “with shrimp”

wet and dry pet foods,

The shells are either directly incorporated into the pet food or ground and dried and added as a meal.

Although this route has taken significant quantities of waste in previous years, current uptake is significantly reduced. The consumer demand or the relevant varieties of petfood determines the market for the product, and there is no indication that this demand will turn round. Technical and cost issues are not the main driver.

SR593 14 ©Seafish

Table 8 - Non-food use

Extract or product Description Uses Production methods

Current situation

Fertiliser Crab, nephrops and shrimp shells have been used in fertilisers.

Used directly as a fertiliser or blended with other products.

The waste must be treated to full ABP standards. The shells are typically heat treated and crushed/ground into a powdered form ready for use as a fertiliser.

Crushed clean crab shells have been marketed as a nematicide in horticultural use for some years. Feedback on the efficacy has been mixed, such that sales of the product are very low. Crustacea waste is reported as being exported from non-EU countries used as a fertiliser. The shell is cleaned, dried and ground, and then exported to Japan and Korea where it is used as an eco-friendly natural fertiliser on golf greens. Not currently realised in the UK although there are developments in SW England to develop this on a commercial scale.

Quicklime Calcium oxide. Sold in different degrees of purity, e.g. 95 or 98%

Used in the construction industry to combine with sand to form lime mortar. Lime from certain shells (scallop) has a market as a “natural” interior wall plaster, claimed as giving a superior surface finish

Quicklime is produced by heating calcium carbonate >900oC and some shellfish crustacea contain high levels of calcium carbonate. The technical feasibility of making quicklime from these shells has been established.

Projects have been proposed to investigate this option further. Funding is being sought. Major cement production companies (Castle and Lafarge) have investigated / are investigating the feasibility of utilising shell in cement kilns. Cost is a key factor as current feedstock is widely available and inexpensive. Whether this option is available for utilising crustacea shell remains to be seen.

Filtration systems Free of flesh crab shells Used as a filtration

medium. Clean, dry, crush and sort to a particle size

Clean, dry, crushed crab shells have good properties as a filtration medium, and successful trials have been conducted in different industries. However the use has not proved commercially viable in the UK

SR593 15 ©Seafish

16 ©Seafish

SR593

Free of flesh crab shell – technical uses

The shell waste is cleaned to become free of flesh shell. Only suitable for crab carapace.

Technical uses - land drainage, aggregates. Possible scope for use as a filtration media. As cultch, the shell is laid on the seabed as a substrate on which oyster spat can grow

The crab carapace is treated to a simple cleaning process such as washing, to ensure it becomes free of flesh. This means that there is no visible sign of flesh left on the shell. Free of flesh crab waste can be spread on the land under EMX7A of waste management licensing. Cultch is only permitted as part of a shellfish aquaculture facility.

This outlet for crustacea waste was widely used for many years but is now in decline due to the legal requirements. It is still a viable route providing the material is completely free of flesh and only used for specific purposes such as paths and tracks, aggregates etc. It is still a possible route for free of flesh crab carapace but it remains to be seen whether Nephrops shell can be made free of flesh through cost-effective means. Not aware of any aquaculture facilities using crab shell as cultch.

Free of flesh crab shell – use at sea

The shell waste is cleaned to become free of flesh shell. Only suitable for crab carapace

The material may be used for infill of dredged area, for sea bed enhancement, habitat creation etc.

The crab carapace is treated to a simple cleaning process such as washing, to ensure it becomes free of flesh. This means that there is no visible sign of flesh left on the shell. This activity has to be registered with the relevant regulators. In order to utilise shell at sea for any purpose, a licence must be granted from the relevant regulator. It is important to engage with them from the outset to help reduce the timescales involved and avoid any unnecessary work or delays.

Disposal at sea is not permitted but using free of flesh shell for beneficial uses in the sea is permitted. However licences are usually only granted in exceptional circumstances. In the UK there is currently only one licence for putting shell in the sea. There are no licences held by crustacea processors. Government policy and the licensing process, which is difficult and expensive, discourage use at sea of shell.

It is apparent that there are, in theory, many different types of extracts and products can be derived from crustacea waste, and many different options have been evaluated. However there are still major issues in the development of commercially viable routes which will utilise significant quantities of waste and either reduce costs or generate income for the waste producer. In the UK there are currently very few facilities or outlets available for the utilisation of crustacea shell, and there are formidable barriers to developing these routes. These barriers include the cost of establishing a production facility, the expertise needed to operate a facility, the cost of stabilising and transporting feedstock to these facilities, ensuring compliance with legislation, and the availability of cheaper product in the global market. Products that do not need sophisticated plant or expertise usually do not provide significant financial return. These barriers are not easy to overcome, and it is difficult to see any developments in this area in the short or medium term.

4.3.2.1 Export opportunities A number of companies were contacted to identify any opportunities for exporting stabilised crustacea waste. Commercial sensitivity restricts the amount of information that is available. Where crustacea waste is exported, it is largely for the manufacture of chitin. The global centres of commodity chitin manufacture are in China and India. Added value chitin is also made in Scandinavia and Europe. The established export routes are summarised in Table 9.

Table 9 – Established export routes

Product Export routes Chitin

Nephrops tails are currently exported in frozen form to Asia for processing. The shell is removed and used in chitin production, whilst the flesh is returned to the UK. There are significant manufacturing facilities in Asia for chitin extraction. Chinese companies are interested in obtaining supplies from the UK but they require samples etc. No further information is available on costs, availability of this option etc. It is reported that export of crustacea waste from UK to India or China is being evaluated as a commercially viable option, but as the shell has to be dried the costs may be prohibitive. It is also reported that Scandinavia based manufacturers are potential buyers of crustacea waste for processing. Discussions with companies in North America have revealed that most of the crabshell in Canada is dried and sent to China for use in the manufacture of chitin.

Fertiliser It is reported that North American companies have developed an export market for crustacea waste as a fertiliser. The shell is cleaned, dried and ground, and then exported to Japan and Korea where it is used as an eco-friendly natural fertiliser on golf greens.

SR593 17 ©Seafish

It is clear that outlets exist in Asia for stabilised crustacea waste and that there is unlikely to be any technical barrier to making a product to the desired specification, e.g. particle size and moisture, or in setting up the necessary quality assurance systems including traceability. The main challenges in developing the export market are thus logistical, administrative and economic. Also it is likely that this would only be successful on a collaborative basis, necessitating UK processors to work together to establish critical mass of crustacea waste and perhaps more cost-effective treatment and transport routes. Wider concerns about exporting ‘waste’ can be alleviated as the waste would only be used for the development of other products, which is preferable to disposal as waste.

SR593 18 ©Seafish

5. Research activities The situation with research is ever changing. This section provides an overview of research projects that have been or are being progressed, as well as areas where further research is required. Information on other areas of research will be periodically updated (see section 7).

5.1. Current UK research activities

Anaerobic Digestion - The UK government is proposing to double the value of Renewal Obligation Certificates (ROC) for energy obtained from anaerobic digestion (AD) from 2009. This financial incentive will make AD a potentially attractive method of disposal of food waste. Work at the Biogen / Sustainable Development Research Centre has looked at the feasibility of using AD for food waste treatment in NE Scotland. Seafish provided funding to assess the feasibility of AD of nephrops tail shell. The preliminary results were promising. However it is currently unclear if AD is suitable for crab waste. Information received from a commercial AD plant in England indicates that the crab shell did not break down in the digester, causing the plant to shut down. However other AD plant operators feel that this problem could be overcome. Biochemical Extracts from crustacea waste - A start-up company spun-out from a research project at Cambridge University is seeking support for work to use fermentation technology to transform crustacea waste into chitin and other valuable components. Export market - Enquiries continue with a chitin extraction company in China for the specification of crustacea waste that they could accept. 5.2. Areas for further research Biofuel - The EU has a commitment to increase the medium term use of biofuels. There is some controversy over the use of food grade products to generate this biofuel. Crustacea waste contains a high proportion of carbohydrate, which if utilised could achieve the double benefit of utilising a waste in the production of the biofuel. Anaerobic Digestion - The potential use of crustacea waste in anaerobic digestion should continue to be investigated. The planned doubling of the ROC for AD from 2009 is stimulating many initiatives in this area. Bioremediation - Anecdotal evidence was received that cleaned crabshell had some potential in very preliminary trials as a remediation agent, particularly in absorption of heavy metals in soil. This avenue could be explored further. Animal/fish/poultry feed – The use of crustacea waste in fish feed is permitted and further research is needed to overcome any product, technical, logistical, and

SR593 19 ©Seafish

economic hurdles. The current situation for its use in other animal feeds needs to be clarified. Lower cost stabilisation/ABPR treatment - Low cost drying of crustacea waste would facilitate its economic use, transport to treatment centre, or shipment as an export commodity. The need to make crustacea waste safe according to the Animal By-Product regulations is a major constraint on its economic utilisation. A lower cost method of meeting the regulations could open up opportunities currently denied. Export - The evaluation of export opportunities is an opportunity for the industry, especially to manufacturers of high value chemicals, and also as a fertiliser. The barriers to developing a route to utilise significant volumes are not technological but economic and commercial, requiring industry wide co-operation.

SR593 20 ©Seafish

6. Discussion The crustacea processing sector produces a significant quantity of seafood waste each year, mainly comprising crab and Nephrops. At present, crustacea processors have major difficulties with waste disposal. Where waste disposal options are available, associated costs have increased significantly in recent years adversely affecting many businesses. Crustacea processors have two main options for waste management; use or dispose of the waste as-is or make it available for the development of other products. Within each of these options are a range of alternative routes and possibilities. There is no single, one-size-fits-all solution to the problem Use or disposal of the waste as-is involves a cost to the waste producer. Where facilities are available, disposal costs typically range from £40 per tonne for composting up to £160 per tonne for incineration. Although more facilities are expected to be available in future it is unlikely that the costs will fall below current levels. Making crustacea waste available for the development of other products is a possibility. There is a wide range of extracts and products which can be made from crustacea waste and much research and development work has been devoted to identifying processes and end uses for these derivatives. Some of these products have a high market value with a significant global demand. In order to develop other products from crustacea waste, crustacea processors would be required to treat or stabilise the material on-site, incurring a financial cost. It is very difficult to determine these costs as they will vary between businesses and type of method used. Each business would have to undertake a cost-benefit analysis of the options before investing in any in-house treatment facility. It is particularly important that an established outlet for the stabilised product is available, which may cover the costs of stabilising the crustacea processing waste. At best such an outlet may generate a small income. However, the processes used to derive the extracts and products require significant investment, are expensive to run, and need a high level of expertise to operate in order to deliver ingredients to the desired price and consistency. On this basis it is not considered feasible for a seafood processor to develop an in-house extraction facility. Instead it is best undertaken by a separate company which specialises in this field. However, there are currently no major crustacea extraction facilities in the UK and this situation is unlikely to change for the foreseeable future. Currently there are at least two consortia in the UK investigating the feasibility of establishing facilities to extract high value products from crustacea waste. These developments are at an early stage, and though promising, are unlikely to absorb significant quantities of crustacea waste in the short to medium term.

SR593 21 ©Seafish

There is a possibility of exporting stabilised crustacea waste but again there are issues to resolve with cost, logistics, technical feasibility, legal compliance and quality/traceability requirements. Further work is required to investigate this further. Generation of energy from waste, especially via anaerobic digestion, will receive significant financial incentives, and may provide a direct or indirect solution in the medium to longer term. Again this requires further assessment. On the basis of the information collected and the current situation, it will continue to be difficult for the crustacea industry to meet the demands of waste legislation through cost-effective means. Companies have little alternative other than to continue to use disposal routes where available. Although there are opportunities to generate a small economic return from crustacea waste, this requires the processor to invest in equipment and facilities to produce stabilised waste. In addition, it requires a facility to be developed to extract a range of different products from the crustacea waste. This is at least three years away, as significant time is required to evaluate all the regulatory, financial, logistical, quality and market issues. Even with the current developments in this area there are no guarantees that this will become commercial reality.

SR593 22 ©Seafish

7. Further information This report has been produced using a range of different sources of information, contacts, references etc. It provides only a basic overview of the current options and situation. The information gathered during the project, including contacts, references, sources of information etc has been collated in an excel workbook that is more readily updatable and easy to use. It contains more detailed information on;

• Quantities of crustacea waste produced in the UK • An overview of relevant legislation • A summary of the methods to stabilise crustacea waste • An overview of the extracts and products that can be produced • Collated data on the composition of different types of crustacea waste • A summary of waste treatment options • An overview of the potential markets for crustacea derived extracts • A summary of the costs of the different options • A SWOT analysis • A list of the UK crustacea processors • A list of companies and products on the internet produced from crustacea

waste or extracts • Key contacts made during the project • List of references used

The workbook is available on the Seafish B2B website http://www.seafish.org/b2b/info.asp?p=102 or it can be provided in other formats by contacting Seafish Research & Development Department – m_archer@seafish.co.uk or tel 01482 327837

SR593 23 ©Seafish