The food industry is facing mounting pressure from all angles. With the population set to reach 9.8 billion in 2050 – and millions still going hungry – climate change already taking its toll on yields, and the UK in the grips of an obesity pandemic, something needs to change.
In a report entitled, ‘Fermentation, Fad or Future’, food experts Anthony Warner and Jacek Obuchowicz highlight the important role fermentation can play in addressing these challenges.
“It [Fermentation] might help us develop new proteins, create healthier food stuffs, produce products with smaller land footprints and valorise otherwise unused waste streams,” the report reads.
In order to get to this point, the authors say we need a greater understanding of not just what fermentation is but how we use it.
Different types of fermentation
Fermentation is an ancient practice and can be dated back as far as thirteen thousand years, with the production of cereal-based beers in 11000BC.
There are many types of fermentation used in food production, which can generally be grouped into three categories: traditional, biomass and precision.
“Traditional fermentation covers the many well-known processes used in food production that utilise microorganisms to transform ingredients, enhancing everything from flavour and texture to shelf life and functionality,” the report continues.
“Generally speaking, the microorganisms, which include bacteria, moulds and yeasts, act to break down complex molecules into simpler ones, turning carbohydrates, fats and proteins into lactic acid, amines and fatty acids.”
Examples of traditional fermentation include things like kefir, soured cream and cottage cheese. Vegetables and legumes have also always been widely fermented, with fermented soya taking many forms such as soya sauce, miso, and tempeh.
The authors explain that a key benefit of traditional fermentation in NDP is that it’s able to deliver “cleaner label products with clear techno-functional benefits”.
The report points to examples in the baking industry where shelf-life extension and fortification have been achieved this way. Yeast extracts are also being used widely to get savoury flavours in a variety of applications and are considered an effective natural replacement to MSG.
“In a world of shiny new technologies, it is easy to forget about traditional fermentation methods, but a combination of modern scientific understanding, advanced analytical techniques and traditional knowledge can deliver some powerful results if applied properly.”
The problem with biomass fermentation
While the authors acknowledge Quorn’s success with biomass fermentation, they also note the significant headwinds the business has witnessed over the last few years, including losses of £100 million in the last three, with revenues down 8.7% in 2024.
“That hardly feels like a landscape requiring a swathe of new players touting similar technologies,” the authors contend.
In order for biomass fermentation to take significant market share from its meat counterpart, a huge capex is needed to scale production. High operational costs also cause further issues.
According to the author’s estimates, for a facility producing just over 13,000 tonnes of mycoprotein, you’d need a £47 million investment for the fermentation tanks alone.
“At a 30-year depreciation, that is a capex cost of £1.40 per kg of product. Add the significant annual operational costs, including £1 million worth of glucose, £3 million of energy, plus additional ingredients, labour and administration, and the total cost (capex plus opex) per kg of product is around £5, which is slightly more expensive than the current wholesale price of chicken and pork.”
With insufficient interest in these alternatives and few willing to make the switch from meat to alternatives due to taste parity not being there yet and higher price tags, the cost of operations is outstripping demand.
“Animal rights concern aside, few consider mycoprotein to be more delicious than meat, so it is unlikely that the majority of people will ever pay more for it. Unless something changes dramatically, it is doubtful that biomass fermentation will form a major part of any global protein transition.”
In contrast, the report highlights a factory using traditional fermentation techniques to produce around 2,000 tonnes per year of tempeh that has a predicted manufacturing cost (capex plus opex) of around £1.90 per kg.
The problem with precision fermentation
Precision fermentation, as the report highlights, is already a sizeable industry, with a market value of around £4 billion globally.
Within this area, many have been looking at the production of animal fats and palm. However, the authors contend that the costs for this approach will be just as high as biomass fermentation.
“Any fats produced by microbial fermentation will have large input costs in terms of energy and feedstocks, but also capex costs similar to that of biomass fermentation. Yields are likely to be low and purification of fat from aqueous fermentate is also a challenge.
“A focus on some of the more interesting and high value fat fractions might improve commercial viability, but this is not likely to be as impactful in terms of food system sustainability.”
They add that for those looking at dairy proteins, for example whey and casein, “companies will be competing against the considerable scale and cost efficiency of the dairy industry”.
Regulation may also slow down progress, with any product produced by precision fermentation likely to be deemed a novel food. Although several precision fermented dairy proteins have been approved in the US, the same cannot be said for Europe.
Although the EU has set out a new strategy which promises to help innovations using advanced fermentation to scale up production and bring novel food products to market.
Molecular mining and farming
In the meantime, the authors say if there is a route to improve plant-based analogues that is likely to be a quicker option.
“The development of existing plant-based technologies could simply improve, slowly and incrementally through the normal NPD process. If fermented casein takes 10 years to reach the market, by that time, plant-based cheese will be in a far better place.”
They add that there is also a lot of potential in ‘molecular mining’ of plant-based ingredients.
“This involves analysis of the structure and function of proteins and other molecules found in plant-foods, looking for things that may naturally replicate animal derived products.”
Another approach is so-called molecular farming, where plants are genetically modified to produce target proteins or fats, often implanting genes from animals.
The authors claim the advantage of this approach is that it “potentially reduces both the prohibitive operational and capex costs of fermentation, as the resulting plants can be grown in a field using traditional agricultural techniques”.
However, they note that clean extraction of these proteins is likely to cause issues, alongside fears around GMOs.
Traditional approaches may be quicker
In conclusion, the report suggests that for those wanting to create innovative fermented foods over the next five or ten years are best focusing on traditional fermentation.
“A better understanding how microbes can positively interact with pulses, legumes, grains and vegetables to produce desirable foods is something that could have a surprisingly powerful impact on the food system.
“Persuading people to eat more wholegrains and beans is a difficult thing to do, but if fermentation can convert those ingredients into compelling new food products, then it could dramatically change consumption habits.”
Speaking with Warner on the report, he told Food Manufacture: “All types of fermentation have a place, but the economics drive what is viable. Cheap commodities will never be made by precision fermentation. Biomass fermentation will struggle to compete too. Targets need to be higher value.”
