Techno-economic evaluation of pulsed electric field technology in polyphenol extraction from red grape pomace

IF 3.4 2区农林科学 Q2 BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY

Food and Bioproducts Processing Pub Date : 2025-06-23 DOI:10.1016/j.fbp.2025.06.012

Farid Soltanipour , Francesco Donsì , Giovanna Ferrari

{"title":"Techno-economic evaluation of pulsed electric field technology in polyphenol extraction from red grape pomace","authors":"Farid Soltanipour , Francesco Donsì , Giovanna Ferrari","doi":"10.1016/j.fbp.2025.06.012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study presents a techno-economic analysis of incorporating Pulsed Electric Field (PEF) technology as a pretreatment in Solid-Liquid Extraction (SLE) process to recover polyphenols from red grape pomace using hydroalcoholic solvents. Using SuperPro Designer software, five scenarios were analyzed: a baseline SLE process at optimal conditions without PEF (SLE-01), a PEF-assisted SLE process optimized for higher yield (PEF-02), and three PEF pretreatment scenarios designed to match the yield of SLE-01 while operating at milder conditions—lower extraction temperature (PEF-03), reduced processing time (PEF-04), and lower ethanol concentration (PEF-05). The production scale for SLE-01 was established through a scale-up procedure, targeting 22 kg/batch of antioxidant extracts (168 t/year) to minimize unit production costs (UPC). Economic analysis revealed that PEF-02 was the most cost-effective option when the product price was below 249 $/kg. At a product price of 233 $/kg—derived from a pure total polyphenol content (TPC) price of 500 $/kg—PEF-02 reduced UPC by 2.72 % and increased return on investment (ROI) by 8.11 % compared to SLE-01. The SLE-01 scenario remained favorable only for product prices ≥ 250 $/kg. Uncertainty and sensitivity analyses using Monte Carlo simulations in Oracle Crystal Ball software indicated a 28.51 % probability of achieving a 17.19 % ROI in PEF-02. Key factors influencing ROI included TPC price (+48.2 %), ethanol concentration in solvent (+31.1 %), ethanol price (-8.5 %), and solid-to-liquid ratio (+4.9 %). These findings highlight PEF as a promising technology for improving yield and cost-effectiveness in polyphenol extraction.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":12134,"journal":{"name":"Food and Bioproducts Processing","volume":"153 ","pages":"Pages 185-199"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Food and Bioproducts Processing","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960308525001269","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study presents a techno-economic analysis of incorporating Pulsed Electric Field (PEF) technology as a pretreatment in Solid-Liquid Extraction (SLE) process to recover polyphenols from red grape pomace using hydroalcoholic solvents. Using SuperPro Designer software, five scenarios were analyzed: a baseline SLE process at optimal conditions without PEF (SLE-01), a PEF-assisted SLE process optimized for higher yield (PEF-02), and three PEF pretreatment scenarios designed to match the yield of SLE-01 while operating at milder conditions—lower extraction temperature (PEF-03), reduced processing time (PEF-04), and lower ethanol concentration (PEF-05). The production scale for SLE-01 was established through a scale-up procedure, targeting 22 kg/batch of antioxidant extracts (168 t/year) to minimize unit production costs (UPC). Economic analysis revealed that PEF-02 was the most cost-effective option when the product price was below 249 $/kg. At a product price of 233 $/kg—derived from a pure total polyphenol content (TPC) price of 500 $/kg—PEF-02 reduced UPC by 2.72 % and increased return on investment (ROI) by 8.11 % compared to SLE-01. The SLE-01 scenario remained favorable only for product prices ≥ 250 $/kg. Uncertainty and sensitivity analyses using Monte Carlo simulations in Oracle Crystal Ball software indicated a 28.51 % probability of achieving a 17.19 % ROI in PEF-02. Key factors influencing ROI included TPC price (+48.2 %), ethanol concentration in solvent (+31.1 %), ethanol price (-8.5 %), and solid-to-liquid ratio (+4.9 %). These findings highlight PEF as a promising technology for improving yield and cost-effectiveness in polyphenol extraction.

查看原文本刊更多论文

脉冲电场法提取红葡萄渣中多酚的技术经济评价

本研究对脉冲电场（PEF）技术应用于固液萃取（SLE）工艺中提取红葡萄渣中的多酚进行了技术经济分析。使用SuperPro Designer软件，分析了五种方案：无PEF的基线SLE工艺（SLE-01）， PEF辅助SLE工艺优化以提高产率（PEF-02），以及三种PEF预处理方案，以匹配SLE-01的产率，在较温和的条件下操作-较低的提取温度（PEF-03），缩短处理时间（PEF-04）和较低的乙醇浓度（PEF-05）。SLE-01的生产规模通过放大程序确定，目标是22 kg/批次（168 t/年）抗氧化提取物，以最大限度地降低单位生产成本（UPC）。经济分析表明，当产品价格低于249美元/公斤时，PEF-02是最具成本效益的选择。pef -02的产品价格为233美元/公斤，纯总多酚含量（TPC）价格为500美元/公斤，与sle1 -01相比，pef -02的UPC降低了2.72 %，投资回报率（ROI）提高了8.11 %。SLE-01情景仅对产品价格≥ 250美元/公斤有利。在Oracle水晶球软件中使用蒙特卡罗模拟的不确定性和敏感性分析表明，PEF-02实现17.19 % ROI的概率为28.51 %。影响投资回报率的关键因素包括TPC价格（+48.2 %）、溶剂中乙醇浓度（+31.1 %）、乙醇价格（-8.5 %）和固液比（+4.9 %）。这些发现突出了PEF技术在提高多酚提取收率和成本效益方面的前景。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Food and Bioproducts Processing 工程技术-工程：化工

CiteScore

9.70

自引率

4.30%

发文量

115

审稿时长

24 days

期刊介绍： Official Journal of the European Federation of Chemical Engineering: Part C FBP aims to be the principal international journal for publication of high quality, original papers in the branches of engineering and science dedicated to the safe processing of biological products. It is the only journal to exploit the synergy between biotechnology, bioprocessing and food engineering. Papers showing how research results can be used in engineering design, and accounts of experimental or theoretical research work bringing new perspectives to established principles, highlighting unsolved problems or indicating directions for future research, are particularly welcome. Contributions that deal with new developments in equipment or processes and that can be given quantitative expression are encouraged. The journal is especially interested in papers that extend the boundaries of food and bioproducts processing. The journal has a strong emphasis on the interface between engineering and food or bioproducts. Papers that are not likely to be published are those: • Primarily concerned with food formulation • That use experimental design techniques to obtain response surfaces but gain little insight from them • That are empirical and ignore established mechanistic models, e.g., empirical drying curves • That are primarily concerned about sensory evaluation and colour • Concern the extraction, encapsulation and/or antioxidant activity of a specific biological material without providing insight that could be applied to a similar but different material, • Containing only chemical analyses of biological materials.