Basis for future industrial implementation

This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement N° 101036838. D6.4 – Basis for future industrial implementation August 2025 Authors: Salvador Navarro (GWC); Mari Carmen Cánovas (GWC); Sofía Martínez López (CTNC); José M. de la Torre Ramírez (DMC); Salvador García and María Nicolás (CETBIO); Fuensanta Monzó (CETEC) , Jaime Ortiz (CETEC); Víctor Fabregat (REGENERA) Ref. Ares(2025)8250145 - 30/09/2025 A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 2 І107 Technical references Project Acronym Agro2Circular Project Title TERRITORIAL CIRCULAR SYSTEMIC SOLUTION FOR THE UPCYCLING OF RESIDUES FROM THE AGRIFOOD SECTOR Project Coordinator Fuensanta Monzó CETEC [email protected] Project Duration October 2021 – March 2025 (42 months) Deliverable No. D6.4 Dissemination level* PU Work Package WP 6 - Demonstration of the A2C technological solution Task T6.3 - Setting the basis for the future industrial implementation Lead beneficiary Green World Compounding (GWC) Contributing beneficiary/ies CETBIO, CTNC, DMC, CETEC, REG Due date of deliverable 31 March 2025 Actual submission date 31 March 2025 * PU = Public PP = Restricted to other programme participants (including the Commission Services) RE = Restricted to a group specified by the consortium (including the Commission Services) CO = Confidential, only for members of the consortium (including the Commission Services) A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 3 І107 Document history V Date Comments v0.1 28/03/2025 First draft of document v0.2 31/03/2025 Revised version based on the comments of the Contributing beneficiaries V1.0 31/03/2025 Final version, approved by the WP leader and the project coordinator, (will be) submitted to EC. V2.0 08/08/2025 Second final version, approved by the WP leader and the project coordinator. Document Distribution Log Version Date Distributed to v0.1 28/03/2025 All contributing beneficiaries V1.0 31/03/2025 All contributing beneficiaries V2.0 08/08/2025 WP leader and coordinator Verification and approval Name Date Verification Final Draft by WP leader Salvador Navarro 08/08/2025 Approval Final Deliverable by coordinator Fuensanta Monzó 08/08/2025 A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 4 І107 Disclaimer and acknowledgement This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 101036838 Disclaimer This document reflects only the views of the author(s) the European Research Executive Agency (REA) is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains. Whilst efforts have been made to ensure the accuracy and completeness of this document, the A2C consortium shall not be liable for any errors or omissions, however caused. A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 5 І107 Table of contents 1 List of abbreviations ................................................................... 13 2 Introduction ................................................................................ 14 3 Executive summary ................................................................... 15 4 Demonstrator 1 .......................................................................... 18 4.1 Technology Transfer and Scalability Assessment ......................................... 18 4.1.1. Process description ...................................................................................... 18 4.1.2. Scaling factors .............................................................................................. 20 4.1.3. Waste management ..................................................................................... 21 4.2 Classification and Characteristics of the feedstock (waste or material coming from other Demos) ....................................................................................................... 22 4.3 Description of Final Products Obtained .......................................................... 23 4.3.1 Technical Specifications of Each Product..................................................... 23 4.3.2 Potential Applications and Market Viability ................................................... 24 5 Demonstrator 2 .......................................................................... 26 5.1 Technology Transfer and Scalability Assessment ......................................... 26 5.1.1 Process description ...................................................................................... 26 5.1.2 Scaling factors .............................................................................................. 29 5.1.3 Waste management ..................................................................................... 29 5.2 Classification and Characteristics of the feedstock (waste or material coming from other Demos) ....................................................................................................... 30 5.3 Description of Final Products Obtained .......................................................... 30 5.3.1 Technical Specifications of Each Product..................................................... 30 5.3.2 Potential Applications and Market Viability ................................................... 30 6 Demonstrator 3 .......................................................................... 32 A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 6 І107 6.1 Technology Transfer and Scalability Assessment ......................................... 32 6.1.1 Process description ...................................................................................... 32 6.1.2 Scaling factors .............................................................................................. 35 6.1.3 Waste management ..................................................................................... 35 6.2 Classification and Characteristics of the feedstock (waste or material coming from other Demos) ....................................................................................................... 36 6.3 Description of Final Products Obtained .......................................................... 37 6.3.1 Technical Specifications of Each Product..................................................... 37 6.3.2 Potential Applications and Market Viability ................................................... 37 7 Demonstrator 4 .......................................................................... 42 7.1 Technology Transfer and Scalability Assessment ......................................... 42 7.1.1 Process description ...................................................................................... 42 7.1.2 Scaling factors .............................................................................................. 45 7.1.3 Waste management ..................................................................................... 45 7.2 Classification and Characteristics of the feedstock (waste or material coming from other Demos) ....................................................................................................... 46 7.3 Description of Final Products Obtained .......................................................... 46 7.3.1 Technical Specifications of Each Product..................................................... 46 7.3.2 Potential Applications and Market Viability ................................................... 47 8 Demonstrator 5 .......................................................................... 49 8.1 Technology Transfer and Scalability Assessment ......................................... 49 8.1.1 Process description ...................................................................................... 49 8.1.2 Scaling factors .............................................................................................. 51 8.1.3 Waste management ..................................................................................... 52 8.2 Classification and Characteristics of the feedstock (waste or material coming from other Demos) ....................................................................................................... 53 8.3 Description of Final Products Obtained .......................................................... 53 8.3.1 Technical Specifications of Each Product..................................................... 53 8.3.2 Potential Applications and Market Viability ................................................... 54 9 DEMONSTRATORS 6 and 8 ..................................................... 55 A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 7 І107 9.1 Technology Transfer and Scalability Assessment ......................................... 55 9.1.1 Process description ...................................................................................... 55 9.1.2 Scaling factors .............................................................................................. 57 9.2 Description of Final Products Obtained .......................................................... 57 9.2.1 Technical Specifications of Each Product..................................................... 57 9.2.2 Potential Applications and Market Viability ................................................... 57 10 DEMONSTRATOR 7 AND 9 ...................................................... 59 10.1 Technology Transfer and Scalability Assessment ......................................... 59 10.1.1 Process description ...................................................................................... 59 10.1.2 Scaling factors .............................................................................................. 61 10.2 Description of Final Products Obtained .......................................................... 61 10.2.1 Technical Specifications of Each Product..................................................... 61 10.2.2 Potential Applications and Market Viability .......................................... 62 11 DEMONSTRATOR 10 ............................................................... 64 11.1 Demo 10 ............................................................................................................. 64 11.1.1 Architecture and components of the system ........................................... 64 11.1.2 Data integration and validation protocol .................................................. 65 11.1.3 Maintenance and legacy ............................................................................ 66 12 Study of the energy consumption of the Demos at an economy of scale ............................................................................................... 67 12.1 Methodology ...................................................................................................... 67 12.2 Demo 1 ............................................................................................................... 68 12.2.1 Demonstrator 1. Process 3 ........................................................................... 69 12.2.2 Demonstrator 1. Process 4 ........................................................................... 71 12.2.3 Demonstrator 1. Process 5 ........................................................................... 72 12.2.4 Demonstrator 1. Total ................................................................................... 74 12.3 Demo 2 ............................................................................................................... 74 12.3.1 Demonstrator 2. Process 8 (input: EG) ........................................................ 75 12.3.2 Demonstrator 2. Process 8 (input: lemon) .................................................... 77 A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 8 І107 12.3.3 Demonstrator 2. Total ................................................................................... 79 12.4 Demo 3 ............................................................................................................... 79 12.4.1 Demonstrator 3. Process 1 ........................................................................... 80 12.4.2 Demonstrator 3. Process 2 ........................................................................... 82 12.4.3 Demonstrator 3. Total ................................................................................... 84 12.5 Demo 4 ............................................................................................................... 85 12.5.1 Demonstrator 4. Process 1 ........................................................................... 85 12.5.2 Demonstrator 4. Process 2 ........................................................................... 87 12.5.3 Demonstrator 4. Total ................................................................................... 92 12.6 Demo 5 ............................................................................................................... 92 12.7 Demo 6 + 8 ......................................................................................................... 95 12.8 Demo 7 ............................................................................................................... 96 12.9 Demo 9 ............................................................................................................... 98 12.10 General trends analysis............................................................................... 100 12.10.1 Demo 5 ................................................................................................... 100 12.10.2 Demo 3 ................................................................................................... 101 13 Conclusions ............................................................................. 105 14 Bibliography ............................................................................. 107 A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 9 І107 FIGURES OF THE DOCUMENT Figure 1: Flowchart and interactions between demonstrators ............................................ 17 Figure 2 Process mass balance DEMO 1 .......................................................................... 19 Figure 3 PFC DEMO 1 ....................................................................................................... 20 Figure 4 Process mass balance DEMO 2 .......................................................................... 27 Figure 5 PFC DEMO 2 ....................................................................................................... 28 Figure 6: Cosmetic formulations ........................................................................................ 31 Figure 7 Process mass balance DEMO 3 .......................................................................... 33 Figure 8 PFC DEMO 3 ....................................................................................................... 34 Figure 9 Manufacture of strawberry jam with apple fibre ................................................... 39 Figure 10 . Manufacture of orange juice with phenolic lemon extract ................................ 39 Figure 11 Manufacture of vegetable dessert with apple fibre at ALM facilities ................... 40 Figure 12 Lemon juice production at CITRO facilities ........................................................ 41 Figure 13 Process mass balance DEMO 4 ........................................................................ 43 Figure 14 PFC DEMO 4 ..................................................................................................... 44 Figure 15 Nutraceutical based on artichoke extract (left). Nutraceutical based on Red grape extract (right) .................................................................................................... 48 Figure 16 Process mass balance DEMO 5 ........................................................................ 50 Figure 17 PFC DEMO 5 ..................................................................................................... 50 Figure 18: PFC of DEMOs 6 and 8 .................................................................................... 56 Figure 19: PFC of DEMOs 7 and 9 .................................................................................... 60 Figure 20: Flowchart of the relationship between processes and demonstrator ................ 67 Figure 21: Scale up trend curve for DEMO 5. Evolution of energy consumption per material input. ......................................................................................................................... 100 Figure 22: Scale up trend curve for DEMO 5. Evolution of energy consumption per material input at a closer scale ............................................................................................... 101 Figure 23: Figure 21: Scale up trend curve for DEMO 3. Evolution of energy consumption per material input. ..................................................................................................... 102 Figure 24: Scale up trend curve for DEMO 3. Evolution of energy consumption per material input at closer scale .................................................................................................. 102 A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 16 І107 degradation to produce recycled plastic compounds, aluminium flakes, ethylene glycol (EG), and terephthalic acid (TPA). • Demonstrator 2: Integrates fermentation technologies to upcycle PET monomers (EG and TPA) from Demonstrator 1 and lemon extract from Demonstrator 3 into ingredients for cosmetics, such as glycolic acid (GA), protocatechuic acid (PCA), and microbial oil. • Demonstrator 3: Focuses on upcycling organic agri-food waste from lemons, artichokes, apples, and broccoli to recover antioxidant extracts and dietary fiber extracts through enzymatic extraction, purification, and stabilization. * • Demonstrator 4: Extracts polyphenols and soluble dietary fibres from artichoke, lemon, and red grape waste using enzymatic and microwave-assisted extraction, followed by purification and stabilization methods like microencapsulation. • Demonstrator 5: Demonstrates the bioprocess scalability of converting lemon waste from Demonstrator 3 into PHBV biodegradable plastic and carotenoids using a halophilic microorganism in a 300 L bioreactor. • Demonstrators 6 and 8: Optimize blending and extrusion to produce biodegradable plastic compounds and films for food and agriculture, respectively, using PHBV from Demonstrator 5. • Demonstrators 7 and 9: Recycle plastic waste streams from Demonstrator 1. Demo 7 uses non-metallized plastic for food packaging, while Demo 9 incorporates modified aluminium to create agricultural mulch with special optical properties Demonstrator 10 complements the rest of the demonstrators as a powerful tool consisting of a central digital component aimed to support demos traceability and future industrial scalability and whose potential is explained in section 13. Moreover, the study of the energy consumption of the technical demos at an economy of scale is presented in section 12. A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 17 І107 Figure 1: Flowchart and interactions between demonstrators Each demonstrator integrates different processes and steps based on different technologies with the aim of recycling two specific types of waste generated by the agri-food industry in the Region of Murcia: fruit and vegetable waste and multi-layer/multi-material plastic waste. A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 18 І107 4 Demonstrator 1 4.1 Technology Transfer and Scalability Assessment 4.1.1. Process description Demonstrator 1 upcycles multilayer/multimaterial plastic waste by delaminating the different layers and removing the aluminium, obtaining fractions of recycled plastic fractions of higher purity. Demonstrator 1 consists of the following stages: 1 Step 1 Preliminary decontamination: This is the first step of the demonstrator, performed at the GWC pilot plant. The shredded waste is transported by a conveyor (1) to a washing hopper (2) for intense agitation, then into a washing tank (3) where blades remove remaining waste. The material is then dried in a centrifuge (4) and transported to a cyclone before it reaches the optical sorter. The washing hopper uses permeate water from the treatment of wastewater from the washing tank. The process operates in approximately 10-minute cycles and can handle 5 to 6 kg per cycle, resulting in a line capacity of 30-35 kg/h. The objective of this step is to remove organic contamination and dirt. 2 Step 1 Optical sorting: The optical sorting system, developed by IRIS technology, uses an optical device to discriminate metallized fractions. The optical device is integrated to a conveyor and mechanical sorting able to separate the metallised fraction from the non metallised fraction with 80% efficiency. The metallised fraction goes to step 3 and the non-metallised fraction goes to Demonstrators 7 and 9 3 .Step 3: Delamination & Aluminium removal: This technology has been developed by saperatec. The process uses a separation fluid with special additives that work at the interface, after delamination and washing, the material is separated, typically using a sink-float operation, polyethylene faction goes to Demos 7 and 9, PE-PET fraction goes to step 4 and aluminium can be recovered in the form of flakes. 4 Step 4 Enzymatic Degradation: the objective of this step is to enzymatically recycle the PET/PE plastic waste fraction that cannot be mechanically recycled. The PET/PE fraction first undergoes a pre-treatment to reduce PET crystallinity, then is A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 19 І107 enzymatically recycled in a bioreactor using a novel PETase enzyme to yield pure PE, terephthalic acid (TPA), and ethylene glycol (EG). The process requires a bioreactor with temperature and continuous pH control. Figure 2 shows the process mass balance and Figure 3 the process flow chart (PFC) Figure 2 Process mass balance DEMO 1 Table 1: List of equipment DEMO 1 Equipment Name Function Step Shredding machine Bags and films shredding 1 Conveyor Material transport 1 Washing Hopper Initial agitation for decontamination 1 Washing Tank Secondary cleaning and material transport 1 Centrifuge Material drying 1 Cyclone Ensures material is dry 1 A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 20 І107 Optical Sorting Equipment Discriminates metallized fractions 2 Delamination unit Delamination and aluminium removal 3 Twin-screw extruder Pre-treatment of PET/PE 4 Bioreactor Enzymatic recycling of PET/PE 4 Filtration equipment Separation of unreacted solid 4 Ultrafiltration (UF) system Water treatment 1 Figure 3 PFC DEMO 1 4.1.2. Scaling factors Key aspects to consider in the Scaling-Up of Demonstrator 1: • The preliminary de contamination is easily scalable by increasing the treatment capacity of the line A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 21 І107 • Material feeding into the optical sorting system is a critical step. The fragment size and the speed of feeding on the conveyor belt directly impact the classifier’s performance. Challenges like material overlap and dispersion on the conveyor belt must be considered for industrial scale-up to maintain performance. • The delamination capacity is limited by the low bulk density of the multi-layer films, not the technology itself. The current maximum loading (4 kg per batch), could be increased in stationary units by optimizing the design based on the amount of material to process. Bulk density is a key factor • The water from the washing line is treated by an ultrafiltration system to be reused in the process, which leaves a concentrated stream of pollutants/nutrients that can be used as a by-product. • The scale-up of the enzymatic degradation demonstrated that the process for converting PET into EG and TPA can be successfully transferred from lab scale without a loss in performance. For commercial scale-up, the bioreactor volume would be the primary scaling factor, with process parameters like temperature, pH, and stirring speed maintained to ensure consistent conversion rates. Compounds released during hydrolysis can affect enzymatic activity if not properly managed. 4.1.3. Waste management Water Treatment: The ultrafiltration system with a permeate production capacity of 800 L/h was more than sufficient for the demonstration's water volume (2000 L treated). The design and capacity of this system can be scaled linearly with the overall water volume of a fullscale industrial washing line. Delamination Fluid: The separation fluid used in the delamination process is not consumed and can be purified and recycled. Washing Water Concentrate: The concentrated wastewater (retentate from ultrafiltration) contains a high concentration of organic compounds and sugars. This stream, which would otherwise be a waste, can be reused as a carbon source for the bioproduction of PHBV in Demonstrator 5. The water composition would need to be tested and potentially mixed with an artificial solution for a large industrial operation. Unreacted Solids (from enzymatic recycling): The remaining solids after enzymatic degradation, composed of highly crystalline PET and non-enzyme-attacked PE, can be A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 22 І107 separated by simple flotation. The recovered PE can be reused as a pure material, while the unreacted PET is returned to the pre-treatment stage Non-hazardous Filter Residues: Filter residues from the water treatment system are classified as non-hazardous and can be thermally utilized. 4.2 Classification and Characteristics of the feedstock (waste or material coming from other Demos) The containers of multilayer aseptic bags are mixed waste originating from the industrial activity of the food sector. They are not classified as hazardous waste based on their origin and composition, therefore, they should be managed as non-hazardous waste. Table 2 DEMO 1 FEEDSTOCK CLASSIFICATION WASTE LER CODE DESCRIPTION Multilayer aseptic bag packaging 15 01 06 Mixed packaging [including packaging waste from municipal selective collection] To help with the waste management, this feedstock is identified and gathered in DEMO 10, the Data Integration System thanks to the mobile app, the blockchain service and the core cloud app. Link 1 shows the identification of the waste that was sent from MOCITOS to GWC. Link 2 generates the report for printing and signing. Table 3 WASTE REQUIREMENTS (Multilayer aseptic bag packaging) MULTILAYER ASEPTIC BAG PACKAGING -It must contain aluminium. -Waste must be pre-conditioned before storage. The cap should be removed, and the rest of the material should be cleaned before storage in order to eliminate impurities and organic matter, which could cause issues in subsequent treatments due to the high glucose content. -The waste should be stored in appropriate drums or containers, using protective and sealed covers to prevent external contamination. -Properly labelled waste. A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 23 І107 -The waste must come from exclusive food use and be processed optimally throughout the entire process to continue its path in the food sector. Agricultural mulch waste comes from the activities of the primary sector. They are not classified as hazardous waste due to their composition and origin; therefore, they should be managed as non-hazardous waste. Table 4 DEMO 9 FEEDSTOCK CLASSIFICATION. Agricultural mulch Table 5 WASTE REQUIREMENTS (Agricultural disinfection film) Agricultural disinfection film The most common base material for agricultural disinfection films is polyethylene (PE), especially high-density polyethylene (HDPE) or low-density polyethylene (LDPE). Multilayer composition. 4.3 Description of Final Products Obtained 4.3.1 Technical Specifications of Each Product PRODUCT COMPOSITION Characteristics LDPE-EVOH-PA flakes LDPE>95% Extrusion grade LDPE flakes LDPE>95% Extrusion grade Aluminium flakes Al> 95% Allowed materials (Layer structure): P1/Alu/P2 Flake size: >50mm: Below 5% <5mm: Below 10% A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 24 І107 P1/Alu/P1/P3 P1 monofoil P3 monofoil Where P1 is PE Where P2 is either PE or PET Where P3 is PET Where Alu is either metallised or foil Contamination (eg. other polymers than PE, PET; glass; dirt; organics; metal): max. 1% Throughput: 2...10% per batch, depending on bulk weight of the feedstock Ethylene glycol 3g EG/l aqueous solution Terephthalic acid TPA > 95% / 21g TPA/1L aqueous solution Both LDPE-EVOH-PA pellets and aluminium flakes are included as products in DEMO 10 in order to track feedstock transformation processes into products. Link 3 shows the traceability of a determined plastic lot in the shape of pellets for further compounding. 4.3.2 Potential Applications and Market Viability PRODUCT Potential application LDPE flakes Flexible packaging (DEMO 7) Agricultural films (DEMO 9) Aluminium flakes Filler for plastic composite Agricultural films (DEMO 9) Metallised pigment effect Ethylen glycol Bioproduction of Ethylene Glycol PET polymerisation Terephthalic acid Bioproduction of protocatechuic acid PET polymerisation Link 4 shows the Digital Product Passport of a potential agricultural mulch film traced on Data Integration System. A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 25 І107 In Demonstrator 1, various products and by-products are obtained, such as LDPE-EVOHPA flakes, which are further used in Demonstrator 7. Other final products from Demonstrator 1 are integrated into different demonstrators described later: aluminium flakes in Demonstrator 9, and ethylene glycol (EG) and terephthalic acid (TA) in Demonstrator 2 A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 32 І107 6 Demonstrator 3 6.1 Technology Transfer and Scalability Assessment 6.1.1 Process description Demonstrator 3, located at the CTNC's pilot plant, focuses on upcycling organic agri-food waste (from lemon, artichoke, apple, and broccoli). The process aims to recover antioxidant extracts rich in polyphenols and dietary fibre extracts. The technologies involved— enzymatic extraction, purification, and stabilization—were previously optimized at a laboratory scale and are now integrated at a pilot scale. The pilot plant is designed to process 100 kg/h of waste and has achieved a total extract production of more than 15 kg The process is divided into three main stages: extraction, purification, and stabilization. 1 Step 1 Pre-treatment and Enzymatic Extraction: The process begins with pretreatment, where waste is crushed using an industrial cutter to reduce particle size and homogenize the material. The pre-treated material is then subjected to enzymatic extraction (EAE) in a double-jacketed mixing tank. The optimized conditions for this stage include a solid-to-water ratio, temperature and treatment time. After the enzymatic extraction, the mixture is heated to deactivate the enzyme. 2 Step 2 Phase Separation and Purification: the liquid and solid phases are separated and the target compounds purify from each. The heated mixture is cooled and separated into a solid phase and a liquid phase using a decanter. The liquid phase, rich in phenolic compounds, is first concentrated using a filtration plant. It is then purified using an adsorption-desorption process. The solid phase, which contains fibre, is purified through a bleaching process with an oxidizing agent. This is followed by a final washing with water by showering 3 Step 3 Stabilization: The stabilisation of the final extracts increases their shelf life and facilitates handling. The liquid extract, rich in phenolic compounds, has the solvent evaporated in a rotary evaporator. The resulting extract is then dehydrated by freeze- A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 33 І107 drying to produce a powder. The purified solid fibre extract is dehydrated using a hot air convection chamber. Figure 7 shows the process mass balance and Figure 8 the process flow chart (PFC) Figure 7 Process mass balance DEMO 3 A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 34 І107 Figure 8 PFC DEMO 3 Table 8: List of equipment DEMO 3 Equipment Name Function Step Industrial Cutter Used for the pre-treatment of the agri-food waste 1 Double-Jacketed Mixing Tank Used for enzymatic extraction and enzyme inhibition by heating. 1 Decanter: used to separate the solid and liquid phases 2 Pilot Filtration Plant Used for concentrating the liquid phase before resin adsorption 2 A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 35 І107 Adsorption/Desorption Plant For purifying phenolic compounds using polymeric resins. 2 Rotary Evaporator: Evaporates the solvent from the purified phenolic extract 2 Freeze-Dryer Dehydrates the liquid extract to a powder. 3 Hot Air Convection Chamber Dehydrates the purified solid fiber extract 3 Industrial Steam Kettle Concentrates the sugar-rich liquid fraction for other demonstrators. 1 6.1.2 Scaling factors Key aspects to consider in the Scaling-Up of Demonstrator 3: • Stabilization (Bottleneck): The stabilization stage, particularly freeze-drying (lyophilization), was identified as a major bottleneck due to the low processing capacity of 1-2 kg/day compared to the extraction rate of 200 L/h and purification rate of at least 50 L/h. This stage is also highly energy-intensive and is recommended to be skipped if the extracts can be used directly by end-users. • Training in biotechnological processes and quality control. • Quality control: Testing for polyphenol content, fibre, moisture, stability. • Evaluate sanitary and industrial safety requirements for the use of extracts in food/cosmetics. • Due to the high variability of raw materials, a pretreatment is needed to homogenize. • Microbiological stability, polyphenol or fibre content. 6.1.3 Waste management Non-useful fractions (seeds, hard shells): must have a secondary valorization route: composting, biomass, animal feed. A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 36 І107 Wastewater: The purification of fibre generates significant wastewater from the washing process. Optimization efforts led to a 34.7% reduction in water consumption by reusing water from the first washes, reducing the total water consumed from 357.6 L to 233.6 L per 50 kg batch of waste processed. A counter-current washing system was also studied as a potential solution for further water optimization. Osmotised or treated network water, reusable after filtration. Solvent: The solvent used in the resin desorption process is a by-product that can be recovered by distillation and reused in the process, reducing chemical waste. Sugar-Rich Permeate: The liquid fraction that permeates after the resin adsorption step is rich in sugars and other organic compounds. This stream is concentrated and sent to other demonstrators (DEMO 2 and 5) to be used as a substrate for fermentation processes, specifically for producing PBHV and microbial essential oils. This action valorises a potential waste stream into a valuable resource for other processes 6.2 Classification and Characteristics of the feedstock (waste or material coming from other Demos) Table 9 WASTE REQUIREMENTS (Fruit & vegetable waste) Fruit & vegetable waste - Adequate microbiological quality (low microbiological load and absence of pathogens) - F&V waste not fermented or decomposed (to avoid generation of undesirable compounds that alter the composition) - Absence of chemical contaminants (avoid presence of pesticides, heavy metals, etc.). - Favourable composition. In particular: • Presence of antioxidant compounds (polyphenols, flavonoids, carotenoids), High fibre content. DEMO 10 also holds organic waste management, which begins with the identification of the lemon waste. A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 37 І107 6.3 Description of Final Products Obtained 6.3.1 Technical Specifications of Each Product Product Composition Liquid extract reach in sugar Sugar (about 5 % sugars by wet weight  > 30 % by dry weight) Phenolic extract (1) Moulds and yeasts, E. coli and mesophilic aerobes <10 cfu/g Absence of pathogens (Salmonella and Listeria) Pesticides <0.01 mg/kg Heavy metals <0.05 mg/kg Phenolic compounds content ≥ 15 % (dry weight) Fibre extract (2) Moulds and yeasts, E. coli and mesophilic aerobes <10 cfu/g Absence of pathogens (Salmonella and Listeria) Pesticides <0.01 mg/kg Heavy metals <0.05 mg/kg Fibre content ≥ 70 % (dry weight) All subproducts are gathered in DEMO 10, both liquid extract reach in sugars for DEMO 5 and extracts for final products formulations. Link 5 shows the traceability of the fiber extract obtained from the lemon waste. 6.3.2 Potential Applications and Market Viability Product Active principle Food formulations Phenolic extract: - Functional foods - Natural antioxidant - Dietary supplements Fibre extract: A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 38 І107 - Functional foods - Prebiotics - Dietary supplements - Thickener Cosmetic formulations Phenolic extract: - Antioxidant for the skin - Anti-aging creams Fibre extract: - Used as a thickening and texturizing agent - Used as a natural exfoliant 6.1.2.1. Food formulations During the implementation of the A2C project, the phenolic and fibre extracts obtained in DEMO 3 have been used by food companies for the development of new food formulations at pilot scale (formulations previously optimised at laboratory scale). Specifically, the following formulations have been developed: MCT Formulations Based on the results obtained in the laboratory-scale food formulation, Agrotransformados (MCT) has manufactured: o Apple compote with broccoli phenolic extract (production of 3000 kg) o Strawberry jam with apple fibre (production of 3000 kg) o Orange juice with phenolic lemon extract (production of 6000 kg) A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 39 І107 ALM Formulations Based on the results obtained in the laboratory-scale food formulation, Laboratorios Almond (ALM) has manufactured: o Vegetable dessert with apple fibre (production of 1500 kg) o Vegan hamburger powder with lemon fibre (production of 300 kg) o Vegan hamburger powder with artichoke fibre (production of 300 kg) Figure 9 Manufacture of strawberry jam with apple fibre Figure 10 . Manufacture of orange juice with phenolic lemon extract A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 40 І107 CITRO Formulations Based on the results obtained in the laboratory-scale food formulation, Citromil (CITRO) has manufactured: o Lemon juice with lemon fibre (production of 3000 kg) o Lemon juice with phenolic lemon extract (production of 3000 kg) Figure 11 Manufacture of vegetable dessert with apple fibre at ALM facilities A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 41 І107 Figure 12 Lemon juice production at CITRO facilities A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 48 І107 been prepared (CynaraCare), and 2 kg of nutraceuticals with encapsulated red grape extract (VitiCare). Each capsule contains 500 mg of the powder formulations with 100 mg of polyphenols. More than 3000 capsules of each type of nutraceutical were prepared. The capsules were packed in bottles of 30 units per bottle. These nutraceutical products are also included in DEMO 10. Thanks to all technologies gathered on DIS, it has been able to generate a final Digital Product Passport which identifies each individual bottle with all the traceability and characterization of the containing product. (Link 8). 7.3.2.2 Cosmetic formulations Using 4 of the extracts obtained in DEMO 4 (lemon polyphenols and aqueous and artichoke polyphenols with and without microencapsulation (beads)), Lolo prepared 4 emulsions with each active ingredient at 5% of the active ingredients with the following compositions The formulas were tested in terms of both sensitivity and specificity, and it was found that skin hydration increases in all the extracts tested, being the artichoke extracts the most promising ones. The encapsulated extracts perform better than their non-encapsulated equivalents. Figure 15 Nutraceutical based on artichoke extract (left). Nutraceutical based on Red grape extract (right) A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 49 І107 8 Demonstrator 5 8.1 Technology Transfer and Scalability Assessment 8.1.1 Process description Demonstrator 5 aims to demonstrate the scalability of a bioprocess that upcycles lemon waste from DEMO 3 into PHBV biodegradable plastic and carotenoids. The process uses a halophilic microorganism, which can grow in high salt concentrations, reducing the need for sterile conditions and allowing for co-production of both PHBV and carotenoids. The production is scaled up to a 300 L bioreactor. The process consists of three main stages: biomass production, PHBV extraction, and carotenoid recovery. Step 1 Biomass Production (Fermentation, Filtration, and Drying): PHBV-rich biomass is produced using lemon waste as a carbon source. The fermentation is performed at optimasing temperature, nutrient ratio, concentration of salt, agitation and aeration. After fermentation, the PHBV-rich biomass is concentrated using tangential filtration, then, the concentrated biomass is then added to a pressure-reduced evaporator to remove water at low temperature. Finally, the biomass is dried in an oven. Step 2 PHBV Extraction: High-purity PHBV is recovered from the dried biomass. This step is carried out using a "greener" solvent in a 1 L extraction pressure vessel. The dried biomass is loaded into the vessel with solvent and heated at optimised temperature and residence time. This dissolves the PHBV and carotenoids, which are then discharged and cooled to form a solvent-rich gel. Excess solvent is removed from the gel using a custom filter, carotenoids remain in the solvent and the PHBV pelletised Figure 17 shows the process mass balance and Figure 17 the process flow chart (PFC) A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 50 І107 Figure 16 Process mass balance DEMO 5 Figure 17 PFC DEMO 5 A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 51 І107 Table 12: List of equipment DEMO 5 Equipment Name Function Step Bioreactors fermentation 1 Tangential Filtration Unit Used for concentrating the biomass and removing brine 1 Evaporator Machine Removes water from the concentrated culture and brine by reducing pressure 1 Oven: Dries the biomass 1 Extraction Pressure Vessel Used for PHBV extraction 2 Filter Press Separates excess solvent from the PHBV gel 2 Electrodialysis Stack: A pilot system for salt recovery from the brine. 1 Extruder Used to pelletize the dry PHBV polymer 2 8.1.2 Scaling factors Biomass Fermentation: The fermentation process was successfully scaled up to 300 L, which is a significant achievement from laboratory-scale studies without a loss in performance, demonstrating its robustness. It requires a balance between cost, fermentation time, and yield, especially under non-sterile conditions. PHBV Extraction: The extraction process, developed at a 10 L pilot scale at WETSUS, was successfully replicated in a 1 L demonstrator unit, proving its principles are scalable. A key challenge for upscaling is to maintain a high-quality biomass with high thermal stability and a low content of unwanted solids to ensure efficient extraction. A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 52 І107 Waste Streams: The process successfully used agri-food waste (lemon extract) as a feedstock, replacing commercial sugars and demonstrating a circular economy approach. By-product Recovery: Technologies for recovering salts via electrodialysis and carotenoids from the extraction solvent have been developed at a lab scale and will be further tested in DEMO 5 at a pilot level. 8.1.3 Waste management Carotenoids recovery: The filtrate from the PHBV extraction, which is characteristically orange due to carotenoids content, can be further concentrated or purified for carotenoids recovery and characterization. A separate system involving electrodialysis is used to recover salts from the brine produced during tangential filtration. Brine and salt recovery: This brine is not a waste but a resource. Electrodialysis is used to recover the salts for reuse in new fermentation batches, thereby reducing waste and costs. The water from the biomass concentration is also evaporated and condensed, and the dry salts are collected to be reused in new fermentation batches The solid biomass remaining after PHBV extraction is considered a by-product. The quality of these solids can be improved through a mild SDS washing step, which removes soluble organic and inorganic matter. The remaining solids can be potentially valorised, using it as a nutrient in the fermentation Contaminated Solvent: The solvent used for PHBV extraction can be contaminated with non-PHA materials from the biomass. This "dirty" solvent is recovered through distillation and gel extrusion, which allows for its reuse in subsequent extraction cycles. An overall solvent recovery efficiency of about 75% was achieved. A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 53 І107 8.2 Classification and Characteristics of the feedstock (waste or material coming from other Demos) Table 13 WASTE REQUIREMENTS (Fruit waste) Fruit waste In the A2C project, the optimal fruit waste for the fermentative process aimed at obtaining PHBV and carotenoids had a total sugar concentration of 90 g/L. While any fruit waste with a high sugar concentration can be used as a carbon source, in Demo 5, lemon waste was the most suitable after also evaluating apple and grape waste. The high sugar concentration and its high availability in the liquid medium contributed to a significant yield in PHBV production. These residues were diluted in the culture medium to reach a final sugar concentration of 10 g/L at the start of fermentation. To meet these requirements, the liquid lemon residue was added at 14% (v/v). Since the lemon residue is in a liquid state, it is essential that the waste used has been previously treated to ensure its liquid form, facilitating mixing and sugar availability in the fermentation medium. Lemon extract subproduct is also included in DEMO 10, bringing the possibility of identifying the feedstock used for the PHBV production. 8.3 Description of Final Products Obtained 8.3.1 Technical Specifications of Each Product Product Composition Properties PHBV Biodegradable plastic 3-Hydroxy valerate (3HV) content (%)= 27 Melting point (ºC)= 143 Tensile Strength (MPa)= 14 Elongation at Break (%)= 26 PHBV as product is also included in DEMO 10, which will potentially be included in biodegradable plastic formulations. A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 54 І107 8.3.2 Potential Applications and Market Viability Product Composition Properties Formulations for packaging (DEMO6) PHBV-PBAT Biodegradable in soil and water Tensile strength>25 MPa Tensile strain>450 % Formulations for agricultural films (DEMO 8) PHBVStarch PAT Biodegradable in soil and water Tensile strength>25 MPa Tensile strain>450 % A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 55 І107 9 DEMONSTRATORS 6 and 8 9.1 Technology Transfer and Scalability Assessment 9.1.1 Process description Demonstrators 6 and 8 focus on optimizing the blending and extrusion processes to produce biodegradable plastic compounds and films for the food (Demo 6) and agricultural (Demo 8) sectors, using the PHBV obtained from Demonstrator 5. The process involves: 1 Step 1: dosing biodegradable resins gravimetrically 2 Step 2: mixing in a BANBURY® MIXER 3 Step 3: discharged into a transport conveyor 4 Step 4: extruder for granulation The material produced in Demonstrator 5 (PHBV) needs to be dried before this blending step, and the resulting blends must also be pre-dried to prevent the formation of gels or foaming during the extrusion of films This process has no by-products, the amount of biodegradable plastics formulating the blend produce the same quantity of blend. Figure 18 shows the process flow chart (PFC) A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 56 І107 Figure 18: PFC of DEMOs 6 and 8 Table 14: List of equipment DEMO 6 and 8 Equipment Name Function Step Gravimetric Feeding System Dosing the biodegradable resins in the mixer 1 Banbury mixer Preparation of the biodegradable blends 2 Conveyor Transport of the biodegradable blend from the mixer to the extruder 3 Extruder Blend granulation 4 A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 57 І107 9.1.2 Scaling factors Demonstrators 6 and 8 have been already developed at industrial level, the equipment used have a production capacity 30-36 Kg/h, allowing for the production of 500 Kg in a two-shift workday. • Mandatory material drying, both before and after the blending process, to prevent defects such as gel formation or foaming during film extrusion. which requires additional drying equipment for industrial implementation. • Accurate gravimetric dosing of biodegradable components is essential to ensure blend homogeneity at industrial scale. • Availability of industrial pelletizing capacity, required to convert the biodegradable blends into pellets suitable for blown film extrusion. 9.2 Description of Final Products Obtained 9.2.1 Technical Specifications of Each Product Product Composition Properties Formulations for packaging (DEMO6) PHBV-PBAT Biodegradable in compost, soil and water Tensile strength>25 MPa Tensile strain>450 % Formulations for agricultural films (DEMO 8) PHBVStarch PAT Biodegradable in compost soil and water Tensile strength>25 MPa Tensile strain>450 % 9.2.2 Potential Applications and Market Viability Demonstrated compatibility with conventional extrusion and conversion lines, used in both the food packaging sector (Eversia) for DEMO 6 and the agricultural film sector (Solplast) for DEMO 8, without requiring major equipment modifications. A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 64 І107 11 DEMONSTRATOR 10 11.1 Demo 10 In alignment with DoA and Task 6.3 - Setting the basis for future industrial implementation, Demo 10 consists of a central digital component aimed to support demos traceability and future industrial scalability. Moreover, it serves as knowledge preservation for being able to digitalize a complex circular economy system. Aligned with the ambitions of the European Green Deal, the Circular Economy Action Plan, and the upcoming Digital Product Passport Regulation, the DIS provides a scalable and transparent digital backbone that enables not only the consolidation and verification of project results, but also their transferability to real industrial environments. The presented work on this document complements the work carried out in deliverables D1.10 – Data Integration System BETA Version, which serves as a user guide for the A2C Data Integration System online platform, D1.12 - A2C Data Integration System (Final), that covers the development of a platform to digitize the circular processes in which multilayer and organic plastic waste is generated in the agri-food sector and D1.13 - A2C Data Integration System (Public Summary), which explores the challenges that necessitate the development of DIS, the technological solutions embedded within the system, its contribution to the A2C systemic approach, and its versatility for application beyond the project scope. 11.1.1 Architecture and components of the system The system architecture allows for secure access by different user types (e.g., agrifood waste producers, plastic recyclers, process operators, end-product manufacturers) with role-specific modules and interfaces. This ensures that each actor can upload, consult and validate the data relevant to their specific activity, without compromising the privacy or integrity of the wider value chain. This platform integrates: ● Web-based data management portal, providing traceability, access control and overall functionality. A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 65 І107 ● A mobile application that enables on-site data entry and QR code and watermark based traceability, both for technical and non-technical users. ● A blockchain infrastructure, based on the IOTA protocol, which secures critical events milestones and prevents data tampering. ● Digital Product Passport (DPP), which enables structured data visualisation and compliance with future EU requirements. ● A Decision Support Tool (DST), which offers descriptive and predictive analytics and supports multi-criteria decision-making. 11.1.2 Data integration and validation protocol Data from the different demonstrators has been integrated into DIS following a standardized digital protocol that ensures interoperability and consistency across all the platform. This protocol begins with data capturing either via QR or web interfaces, using structured data forms that reflect the key specific parameter of each process, such as origin of the material, its unique identification, process date… Each original residue batch is assigned a unique ID which is generated based on the waste manager who is responsible for its recycling, the date when it is produced and a serial number. This ID is linked to the Documento de Identificación de Residuos, which is required by the Spanish administration on industrial scale for waste management. Link 1 shows the identification of the waste that was sent from MOCITOS to GWC. Link 2 generates the report for printing and physical signing. Each batch is assigned a unique QR code and internal traceability ID, which connects it to all relevant upstream and downstream activities. The associated data points are stored within the cloud platform and hashed into the IOTA blockchain to ensure immutability and verifiability Link 4 shows the Digital Product Passport of a potential agricultural mulch film traced on Data Integration System. For example, both LDPE-EVOH-PA pellets and aluminium flakes are included as products in DEMO 10 in order to track feedstock transformation processes into products. Link 3 shows the traceability of a determined plastic lot in the shape of pellets for further manufacturing, like the agricultural mulch shown before. By this way, it is possible to trace front and back every residue, by-product and final product. For example, related to DEMO 2, Link 5 shows A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 66 І107 the traceability of the fiber extract obtained from the lemon waste, one of the by-products of the A2C solution. Another example of record as by-product is shown in Link 7, in which the grape extract is characterized and traced for providing the necessary information to formulators. One example of the formulations are the nutraceutical products, which are also included in DEMO 10. Thanks to all technologies gathered on DIS, it has been able to generate a final Digital Product Passport which identifies each individual bottle with all the traceability and characterization of the containing product. (Link 8). See DEMO 10 video to better understand the physical treatment of data and deliverable 6.2 with the user guide to access the tool. 11.1.3 Maintenance and legacy It is paramount to remark that the Data Integration System approach has always been to adapt to the A2C solution. As said in D1.12, it is key to understand that A2C solution is a complex system that holds many different technologies and partners, this means that any interest in joining the solution will need software adaptability to gather new requirements. DIS is currently deployed in a semi-public configuration (e.g. Beta-tested Android mobile app, web dashboard with partner login, public for final products information), the system is designed for post-project continuity. As described in Deliverable D1.10, the platform will be maintained for at least two years beyond project closure, with open access to all public data components and technical documentation. Furthermore, a technical support structure has been established (see contact in D1.10, Section 3.2), and public users will be able to access selected features, such as DPP verification, via anonymous QR scanning, reinforcing the long-term value and openness of the platform. To conclude, the integration of all demonstrators, processes, and validation steps into the A2C Data Integration System constitutes a major achievement of Task 6.3, and a significant contribution to the digitalisation of circular economy value chains. A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 67 І107 12 Study of the energy consumption of the Demos at an economy of scale The nine technical demonstrators built in Agro2Circular project involve 10 different processes to be considered for the energy consumption study at an economy of scale, according to the flowchart showed in Figure 20 Figure 20: Flowchart of the relationship between processes and demonstrator 12.1 Methodology In order to conduct the scale-up study of the energy consumption, a proprietary calculation system was utilized. This method gives a mathematical relation between the energetic OPEX, C1, of an industrial process for a reference size, S1, (reference input that the process can carry) and the estimated energetic OPEX, C2, of the same process but for a different size S2 (different input). This method, based on the six-tenths rule, has proved reliable as it is widely used in this type of studies, [1-3] including previous analysis conducted by our company in similar reports [4, 5]. The six tenths rule states: A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 68 І107 𝐶2=𝐶1(𝑆2 𝑆1)𝑛 Where n is the cost scaling factor, commonly taken as 0,6. Along this section, different tables that contain the results of the scale-up study will be included. These tables show the input (new size S2) and the estimated energetic OPEX (C2). However, this value will be shown as energy consumption (kWh) and as energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg or kWh/L), calculated dividing the energy consumption of the process/Demo by the considered input. The reference size (S1) and the energetic OPEX (C1) are usually taken from D1.9, although there is one process (Demo 1 – Process 4) where these data have been obtained from D6.1 due to the fact that this process was not registered in the time to deliver D1.9. Regarding section 11.10, a python program was developed in order to improve the calculation system and show a precise scale-up study trend curve. This program applies the six tenths rule to Demos 3 and 5 considering 10.000 scenarios (inputs/output), instead of the three scenarios considered for the scale-up study from sections 11.2 – 11.9. 12.2 Demo 1 Demonstrator 1 contains process 3, process 4 and process 5 (Table 16). Demo 1 runs with an input of 1,200kg so, in order to perform the scale-up study in each process from this Demo, three industrial scale scenarios have been considered: 25.000 kg, 500.000 kg and 2.500.000 kg. It should be taken into account that every energy consumption data for the Demo scale was extracted from D1.9. Table 16: Description of the processes involved in DEMO 1 PROCESS 3 Multilayer plastic waste preliminary decontamination + optical sorting PROCESS 4 Multilayer metallised plastic fraction delamination & sorting and aluminium removal and modification A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 69 І107 PROCESS 5 PE/PET plastic fraction pretreatment + enzymatic degradation 12.2.1 Demonstrator 1. Process 3 Process 3 is made of 2 subprocesses: pre-treatment and optical sorting. For the pre-treatment process, both electricity and natural gas have been used, therefore, energy consumption is divided into electricity energy consumption and natural gas energy consumption. From D1.9, it is known that pre-treatment consumes 2.880kWh from electricity and 27,72 kWh from natural gas. The energy consumption per input unit is 2,40 kWh/kg and 0,02 kWh/kg respectively. Applying the six tenths method, the following results were obtained: Table 17 Demonstrator 1 (process 3). Energy consumption scale-up for pre-treatment Process 3: Energy consumption scale-up (pre-treatment) Electricity Natural gas Product input scale-up Energy consumption (kWh) Energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg) Energy consumption (kWh) Energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg) 25.000 kg 17.809,34 kWh 0,71 kWh/kg 171,41 kWh 6,86 x 10-3 kWh/kg 500.000 kg 107.464,68 kWh 0,21 kWh/kg 1.034,35 kWh 2,07 x 10-3 kWh/kg 2.500.000 kg 282.258,97 kWh 0,11 kWh/kg 2.716,74 kWh 1,09 x 10-3 kWh/kg As in can be observed, this part of the process 3 requires much more electricity energy than natural gas energy and as the process input scale goes to higher inputs, the energy required A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 70 І107 in the form of natural gas decreases down to 1,09 x 10-3 kWh/kg (for an input of 2.500.000 kg). After the pre-treatment, an optical sorting process begins, resulting in an energy consumption of 264 kWh (0,22 kWh/kg per input unit). Scaling-up these data leads to: Table 18 Demonstrator 1 (process 3). Energy consumption scale-up for optical sorting Process 3: Energy consumption scale-up (fermentation) Product input scale-up Energy consumption (kWh) Energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg) 25.000 kg 1.632,52 kWh 0,07 kWh/kg 500.000 kg 9.850,93 kWh 0,02 kWh/kg 2.500.000 kg 25.873,74 kWh 0,01 kWh/kg Then, the total energy consumption of process 3 is 3.144kWh using electricity and 27,72 kWh using natural gas (2,62 kWh/kg and 0,02kWh/kg respectively). The scale-up study provides the following results: Table 19 Demonstrator 1 (process 3). Energy consumption scale-up. Process 3: Energy consumption scale-up (total) Electricity Natural gas Product input scaleup Energy consumption (kWh) Energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg) Energy consumption (kWh) Energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg) 25.000 kg 19.441,86 kWh 0,78 kWh/kg 171,41 kWh 6,86 x 10-3 kWh/kg 500.000 kg 117.315,61 kWh 0,23 kWh/kg 1.034,35 kWh 2,07 x 10-3 kWh/kg A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 71 І107 2.500.000 kg 308.132,70 kWh 0,12 kWh/kg 2.716,74 kWh 1,09 x 10-3 kWh/kg Along this section, it will be demonstrated that the scale-up study will lead to a decreasing energy consumption per input unit behaviour (besides the logical increase of the energy consumption in kWh), so the larger the input of the process is, the lower the energetic cost per input unit will be. This is illustrated by the previous table, where the energy consumption per input unit of process 3 for a 1.200 kg input (Demo scale) is 2,62 kWh (natural gas not included), while for a 2,5 million kg input (industrial scale) is 0,12 kWh/kg. 12.2.2 Demonstrator 1. Process 4 The scale-up study of process 4 has been conducted by considering real data obtained from D6.2. Process 4 is made of just one subprocess: delamination and sorting. This subprocess consumes over 31,18 kWh for an input of 5,8 kg. Then, the energy consumption per input unit is 5,38 kWh/kg. The six tenths rule was applied for the same three scenarios as those chosen in process 3 but adding one more scenario, 1.200 kg, whose objective is to give a total energy consumption for the entire Demo. Then, the following results are obtained: Table 20 Demonstrator 1 (process 4). Energy consumption scale-up. Process 4: Energy consumption scale-up Product input scale-up Energy consumption (kWh) Energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg) 1.200 kg 764,41 kWh 0,64 kWh/kg 25.000 kg 4.726,98 kWh 0,19 kWh/kg 500.000 kg 28.523,40 kWh 0,06 kWh/kg 2.500.000 kg 74.917,51 kWh 0,03 kWh/kg A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 72 І107 12.2.3 Demonstrator 1. Process 5 Process 5 consists of 3 subprocesses: PET/PE pre-treatment, PET/PE enzymatic degradation and MHET conversion. This process runs just with electrical power. PET/PE pretreatment consumes 6,20 kWh for the Demo input, meaning that the energy consumption per input unit for this part of the process 5 is 5,17 x 10-3 kWh/kg. Attending to the previous processes, this value is expected to decrease as the scale-up study goes on, leading to a very low energy consumption per input unit for an industrial scale input: Table 21 Demonstrator 1 (process 5). Energy consumption scale-up for PET/PE pretreatment Process 5: Energy consumption scale-up (PET / PE pre-treatment) Product input scale-up Energy consumption (kWh) Energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg) 25.000 kg 38,34 kWh 1,53 x 10-3 kWh/kg 500.000 kg 231,35 kWh 4,63 x 10-4 kWh/kg 2.500.000 kg 607,64 kWh 2,43 x 10-4 kWh/kg PET/PE enzymatic degradation process has an energy consumption of 24 kWh (0,02kWh/kg). The scale-up study was conducted, giving the following results: Table 22 Demonstrator 1 (process 5). Energy consumption scale-up for PET/PE enzymatic degradation. Process 5: Energy consumption scale-up (PET/PE enzymatic degradation) Product input scale-up Energy consumption (kWh) Energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg) 25.000 kg 148,41 kWh 5,93 x 10-3 kWh/kg A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 73 І107 500.000 kg 895,54 kWh 1,79 x 10-3 kWh/kg 2.500.000 kg 2.352,16 kWh 9,41 x 10-4 kWh/kg The energy consumption for the Demo scale input of the MHET conversion is 1,5. The energy consumption per input unit is 1,25 x 10-3 kWh/kg. Therefore, the six tenths method results in the following: Table 23 Demonstrator 1 (process 5). Energy consumption scale-up for MHET conversion. Process 5: Energy consumption scale-up (MHET conversion) Product input scale-up Energy consumption (kWh) Energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg) 25.000 kg 9,28 kWh 3,71 x 10-4 kWh/kg 500.000 kg 55,97 kWh 1,12 x 10-4 kWh/kg 2.500.000 kg 147,01 kWh 5,88 x 10-5 kWh/kg The entire process 5 consumes a total of 31,70 kWh, that is, 0,03 kWh/kg. As said before, this is not high, so it is expected to reach a lower energy consumption per input unit to run the entire process as the input for the process increases. The following data show this result: Table 24 Demonstrator 1 (process 5). Energy consumption scale-up Demo 1 (process 5): Energy consumption scale-up (total) Product input scale-up Energy consumption (kWh) Energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg) 25.000 kg 196,03 kWh 7,84 x 10-3 kWh/kg 500.000 kg 1182,86 kWh 2,37 x 10-3 kWh/kg A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 80 І107 12.4.1 Demonstrator 3. Process 1 Process 1 consists of three different subprocesses: Pre-treatment, enzymatic extraction + filtration and purification. For the pre-treatment, energy consumption is 1 kWh, which divided by 50 kg (Demo input) gives an energy consumption per input unit of 0,02 kWh/kg. Then, for the scenarios mentioned before, the following data have been calculated: Table 35 Demonstrator 3 (process 1). Energy consumption scale-up for pre-treatment Demo 3 (process 1): Energy consumption scale-up (pre-treatment) Product input scale-up Energy consumption (kWh) Energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg) 1.000 kg 6,03 kWh 6,03 x 10-3 kWh/kg 10.000 kg 24,02 kWh 2,40 x 10-3 kWh/kg 100.000 kg 95,64 kWh 9,64x10-4 kWh/kg Regarding the Enzymatic extraction + filtration subprocess, energy consumption is again divided into electricity and natural gas (as in Demo 1). This part of process 1 consumes 93,06 kWh at Demo scale, being 1kWh (0.02 kWh/kg) when using electricity and the other 92,06 kWh (1,84 kWh/kg) when using natural gas. The scale-up study results in the following: A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 81 І107 Table 36 Demonstrator 3 (process 1). Energy consumption scale-up for enzymatic extraction + filtration. Process 1: Energy consumption scale-up (Enzymatic extraction + filtration) Electricity Natural gas Product input scaleup Energy consumption (kWh) Energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg) Energy consumption (kWh) Energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg) 1.000 kg 6,03 kWh 6,03 x 10-3 kWh/kg 555,48 kWh 0.56 kWh/kg 10.000 kg 24,02 kWh 2,40 x 10-3 kWh/kg 2.211,39 kWh 0,22 kWh/kg 100.000 kg 95,64 kWh 9,64x10-4kWh/kg 8.803,72 kWh 0,09 kWh/kg Finally, for the purification part, energy consumption is 37,12 kWh, so its energy consumption per input unit is 0,74 kWh/kg. Applying the six tenths method, the following data is obtained: Table 37 Demonstrator 3 (process 1). Energy consumption scale-up for purification Demo 3 (process 1): Energy consumption scale-up (purification) Product input scale-up Energy consumption (kWh) Energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg) 1.000 kg 223,99 kWh 0,22 kWh/kg 10.000 kg 891,72 kWh 0,09 kWh/kg 100.000 kg 3.549,98 kWh 0,04 kWh/kg A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 82 І107 This entire process consumes 39,12 kWh (Demo scale) when using electricity and 92,06 kWh when using natural gas. The total energy consumption per input unit using electricity and natural gas is 0,78 kWh/kg and 1,84 kWh/kg respectively. The next table shows the scale-up study results for process 1: Table 38 Demonstrator 3 (process 1). Energy consumption scale-up Process 1: Energy consumption scale-up (total) Electricity Natural gas Product input scaleup Energy consumption (kWh) Energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg) Energy consumption (kWh) Energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg) 1.000 kg 236,06 kWh 0,24 kWh/kg 555,48 kWh 0.56 kWh/kg 10.000 kg 939,76 kWh 0,09 kWh/kg 2.211,39 kWh 0,22 kWh/kg 100.000 kg 3741,25 kWh 0,04kWh/kg 8.803,72 kWh 0,09 kWh/kg Both, electricity and natural gas energy consumption per input unit present the same trend, as seen in Demo 1. 12.4.2 Demonstrator 3. Process 2 In process 2, there are two subprocesses: Dehydration (solid phase) and Lyophilisation (liquid phase). Dehydration consumes a total of 38,40 kWh, meaning that the energy consumption per input unit is 0,77 kWh/kg. The scale-up study provides these results: A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 83 І107 Table 39 Demonstrator 3 (process 2). Energy consumption scale-up for dehydration (solid phase) Demo 3 (process 2): Energy consumption scale-up (dehydration (solid phase) ) Product input scale-up Energy consumption (kWh) Energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg) 1.000 kg 231,71 kWh 0,23 kWh/kg 10.000 kg 922,46 kWh 0,09 kWh/kg 100.000 kg 3.672,39 kWh 0,04 kWh/kg On the other hand, Lyophilisation consumes 240 kWh (4,80 kWh/kg). The six tenths method leads to these data: Table 40 Demonstrator 3 (process 1). Energy consumption scale-up for lyophilisation (liquid phase) Demo 3 (process 2): Energy consumption scale-up (Lyophilisation (solid phase) ) Product input scale-up Energy consumption (kWh) Energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg) 1.000 kg 1.448,20 kWh 1,45 kWh/kg 10.000 kg 5.765,40 kWh 0,58 kWh/kg 100.000 kg 22.952,46 kWh 0,23 kWh/kg Energy consumption for process 2 is 278,40 kWh and its energy consumption per input unit is 5,57 kWh/kg for the Demo scale. Therefore, scaling-up of these data gives: A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 84 І107 Table 41 Demonstrator 3 (process 2). Energy consumption scale-up Demo 3 (process 2): Energy consumption scale-up (total) Product input scale-up Energy consumption (kWh) Energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg) 1.000 kg 1.679,92 kWh 1,68 kWh/kg 10.000 kg 6.687,86 kWh 0,67 kWh/kg 100.000 kg 26.624,85 kWh 0,27 kWh/kg 12.4.3 Demonstrator 3. Total With both process 1 and process 2 scaled-up, it is possible to give an estimation of the energy consumption for the entire process for each scenario of the scale-up study. Adding the total energy consumption of process 1 and process 2 (and their energy consumption per input unit) for the 50 kg of input (Demo scale) gives 409,58 kWh (8,19 kWh/kg). Applying the six tenths method to these results will lead to the following data: Table 42 Demonstrator 3 (process 1). Energy consumption scale-up for purification Demo 3: Energy consumption scale-up Product input scale-up Energy consumption (kWh) Energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg) 1.000 kg 2.471,45 kWh 2,47 kWh/kg 10.000 kg 9.839,01 kWh 0,98 kWh/kg 100.000 kg 39.169,81 kWh 0,39 kWh/kg A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 85 І107 12.5 Demo 4 Demonstrator 4 also yields processes 1 and 2, being their subprocesses slightly different (Table 45). This Demo currently runs for an input of 100 kg, so the scale-up study will aim to calculate the energy consumption of Demo 4 with an input of 1.000 kg, 10.000kg and 100.000 kg. Table 43: Description of the process involved in DEMO 4 PROCESS 1 Fruit & vegetable waste pretreatment Enzymatic polyphenols and fibre extraction Separation of liquid and solid fractions PROCESS 2 Polyphenols MAE extraction, purification and dehydration Fibre purification and dehydration 12.5.1 Demonstrator 4. Process 1 Process 1 in Demo 4 consists of three subprocesses: pre-treatment, enzymatic extraction and centrifugation. Centrifugation, however, could be omitted but is included in this study in order to achieve a complete view of the demonstrator. Pre-treatment consumes over 0,28 kWh (2,83 x 10-3 kWh/kg). Thus, scaling-up these data will give: Table 44 Demonstrator 4 (process 1). Energy consumption scale-up for Pre-treatment. Demo 4 (process 1): Energy consumption scale-up (pretreatment) Product input scale-up Energy consumption (kWh) Energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg) A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 86 І107 1.000 kg 1,13 kWh 1,13 x 10-3 kWh/kg 10.000 kg 4,49 kWh 4,49 x 10-4 kWh/kg 100.000 kg 17,88 kWh 1,79 x 10-4 kWh/kg Energy consumption for enzymatic extraction is 3,00 kWh, resulting in a 0,03 kWh/kg energy consumption per input unit. Increasing the amount of input result in the following data: Table 45 . Demonstrator 4 (process 1). Energy consumption scale-up for enzymatic extraction. Demo 4 (process 1): Energy consumption scale-up (enzymatic extraction) Product input scale-up Energy consumption (kWh) Energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg) 1.000 kg 11,94 kWh 0,02 kWh/kg 10.000 kg 47,55 kWh 4,75 x 10-3 kWh/kg 100.000 kg 189,29 kWh 1,89 x 10-3 kWh/kg After the enzymatic extraction, the centrifugation process takes place, consuming over 20,00 kWh (0,20 kWh/kg) at Demo scale. Changing the scale, from Demo scale to industrial scale, results in: Table 46 Demonstrator 4 (process 1). Energy consumption scale-up for centrifugation. Demo 4 (process 1): Energy consumption scale-up (centrifugation) A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 87 І107 Product input scale-up Energy consumption (kWh) Energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg) 1.000 kg 79,62 kWh 0,07 kWh/kg 10.000 kg 316,98 kWh 0,03 kWh/kg 100.000 kg 1.261,91 kWh 0,01 kWh/kg By looking at these tables it is possible to estimate the total energy consumption of the process 1 for industrial scales. Knowing that the entire process consumes over 23,28 kWh (0,24 kWh/kg), the following is estimated: Table 47 Demonstrator 4 (process 1). Energy consumption scale-up Demo 4 (process 1) :Energy consumption scale-up Product input scale-up Energy consumption (kWh) Energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg) 1.000 kg 92,69 kWh 0,09 kWh/kg 10.000 kg 369,02 kWh 0,04 kWh/kg 100.000 kg 1.469,08 kWh 0,01 kWh/kg 12.5.2 Demonstrator 4. Process 2 In demonstrator 4, process 2 differs depending on the process input: solid phase or liquid phase. However, the scale-up study was elaborated considering the same three scenarios from process 1 for both phases. A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 88 І107 12.5.2.1 Solid phase: The solid phase input undergoes two subprocesses: Microwave extraction (MAE) and purification + concentration. Microwave extraction can only run for an input of 10 kg, so it has to run 10 times for the 100 kg of input from the Demo to work. Therefore, it consumes 33,33 kWh, resulting in a 0,33kWh/kg energy consumption per input unit. The scale-up study for this part of process 2 causes the following: Table 48 Demonstrator 4 (process 2). Energy consumption scale-up for microwave extraction. Demo 4 (process2, solid phase): Energy consumption scale-up (Microwave extraction) Product input scale-up Energy consumption (kWh) Energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg) 1.000 kg 132,70 kWh 0,13 kWh/kg 10.000 kg 528,30 kWh 0,05 kWh/kg 100.000 kg 2.103,19 kWh 0,02 kWh/kg The purification + concentration process consumes 2,50 kWh (over 0,03 kWh/kg). When applying the six tenths method, the following data are obtained: Table 49 Demonstrator 4 (process 2). Energy consumption scale-up for microwave extraction. Demo 4 (process 2, solid phase): Energy consumption scale-up (purification + concentration) A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 89 І107 Product input scale-up Energy consumption (kWh) Energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg) 1.000 kg 9,95 kWh 0,01 kWh/kg 10.000 kg 39,62 kWh 3,96 x 10-3 kWh/kg 100.000 kg 157,74 kWh 1,58 x 10-3 kWh/kg The entire process 2 for the solid phase input consumes 35,83 kWh (0,36 kWh/kg). Then, the scale up study sparks the following results: Table 50 Demonstrator 4 (process 2). Energy consumption scale-up (total) Demo 4 (process2, solid phase): Energy consumption scale-up Product input scale-up Energy consumption (kWh) Energy consumption per input unit (kW/kg) 1.000 kg 142,66 kWh 0,14 kWh/kg 10.000 kg 567,92 kWh 0,06 kWh/kg 100.000 kg 2.260,93 kWh 0,02 kWh/kg 12.5.2.2 Liquid phase The liquid phase also has two subprocesses: Ultrafiltration and dehydration. The ultrafiltration subprocess consumes over 7,50 kWh (0,08 kWh/kg). The scale-up study leads to: A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 96 І107 Table 63 Demonstrator 6 + 8. Energy consumption scale-up Demo 6 + 8: Energy consumption scale-up Product input scale-up Energy consumption (kWh) Energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg) 10.000 kg 1.323,28 kWh 0,13 kWh/kg 100.000 kg 5.268,05 kWh 0,05 kWh/kg 1 million kg 20.972,50 kWh 0,02 kWh/kg 12.8 Demo 7 Demo 7 holds process 6 (Table 70). Aluminium modification (process 4) is included in Demo 1, therefore, it has not been considered in this Demo. Process 6 consists of 4 subprocesses (Multilayer treatment, Extrusion + compatibilization and transformation) and runs for a 531 kg input. In order to perform the scale-up study, three industry scale scenarios according to its input have been considered: 10.000kg, 100.000kg and 1million kg. Table 64: Description of the process involved in DEMO 7 PROCESS 6 Non-metallised plastic fraction vacuum decontamination (multilayer treatment) Compatibilization and extrusion Material transformation into plastic films First, process 6 starts with the multilayer treatment. It consumes 182,21 kWh (for the previously mentioned input), which means that the energy consumption per input unit for the multilayer treatment is 0,34 kWh/kg. Taking that data into account and applying the six tenths method, the scale-up study results in the following: A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 97 І107 Table 65 Demonstrator 7. Energy consumption scale-up for the multilayer treatment. Demo 7: Energy consumption scale-up (Multilayer treatment) Product input scale-up Energy consumption (kWh) Energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg) 10.000 kg 1.060,51 kWh 0,11 kWh/kg 100.000 kg 4.221,97 kWh 0,04 kWh/kg 1 million kg 16,807,97 kWh 0,02 kWh/kg Then, the extrusion + compatibilisation process takes place, consuming 380 kWh, that is, 0,70 kWh/kg. For this subprocess, the scale-up study leads to the following results: Table 66 Demonstrator 7. Energy consumption scale-up for Extrusion + compatibilisation. Demo 7: Energy consumption scale-up (extrusion + compatibilization) Product input scale-up Energy consumption (kWh) Energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg) 10.000 kg 2.211,70 kWh 0,22 kWh/kg 100.000 kg 8.804,95 kWh 0,09 kWh/kg 1 million kg 35.053,14 kWh 0,03 kWh/kg Finally, for the transformation process, the energy consumption is 1.225,50 kWh (2,27 kWh/kg). By scaling-up these data, the results obtained are: Table 67 Demonstrator 7. Energy consumption scale-up for transformation Demo 7: Energy consumption scale-up (transformation) A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 98 І107 Product input scale-up Energy consumption (kWh) Energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg) 10.000 kg 7.132,74 kWh 0,71 kWh/kg 100.000 kg 28.395,96 kWh 0,28 kWh/kg 1 million kg 113.046,37 kWh 0,11 kWh/kg The total energy consumption for the entire process 6 is 1.787,71 kWh, which causes an energy consumption per input unit of 3,31 kWh/kg. By scaling-up those results, we obtain: Table 68 Demonstrator 7. Energy consumption scale-up (total). Demo 7: Energy consumption scale-up (total) Product input scale-up Energy consumption (kWh) Energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg) 10.000 kg 10.404,96 kWh 1,04 kWh/kg 100.000 kg 41.422,89 kWh 0,04 kWh/kg 1 million kg 164.907,48 kWh 0,16 kWh/kg Once again, the energy consumption per input unit decreases as the input for the process increases (that is an immediate result from the previous data regarding the subprocesses from this Demo) from 3,31 kWh/kg for the Demo scale to 0,16kWh/kg for an input of 1 million kg. 12.9 Demo 9 Demonstrator 9 just runs process 7 (Table 69). The multilayer treatment is not taken into account for this demonstrator as it was included in Demo 7. Aluminium modification (process 4) is included in Demo 1, therefore, it has not been considered in this Demo. A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 99 І107 Table 69: Description of the process involved in DEMO 7 PROCESS 7 Multilayer agro plastic waste compatibilization and extrusion Material transformation into plastic films From D1.9 we know that the energy consumption of this Demo, considering an 875kg of input, is 459,4 kWh, so the energy consumption per input unit at Demo scale is 0.525 kWh/kg. The scale-up scenarios considered to perform the study are the same as for Demo 7. The calculations were elaborated following the Six tenths method, reaching the following results: Table 70 Demonstrator 9. Energy consumption scale-up Demo 9: Energy consumption scale-up Product input scale-up Energy consumption (kWh) Energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg) 10.000 kg 2.006,22 kWh 0,20 kWh/kg 100.000 kg 7.986,91 kWh 0,08 kWh/kg 1 million kg 31.796,47 kWh 0,03 kWh/kg As it can be observed, total energy consumption increases as the scale-up takes place, increasing from 459,4 kWh for an 875 kg input to 31.796,5 kWh, but energy consumption per input unit decreases considerably (as said in Demo 1), being 0,2 kWh/kg for the first scenario (10 T), 0,08 for 100 T and 0,03 for the last scale-up scenario (1 million kg). A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 100 І107 12.10 General trends analysis Every Demo (and thus, every process from each one) presents the expected trend stated in the analysis of Demo 1: the energetic OPEX for a Demo/process, considering energy consumption per input unit (kWh/kg or kWh/L), decreases as its input increases. To illustrate this behaviour, a detailed study was conducted for Demos 3 and 5. In the previous sections, the scale-up study for every Demo was completed considering three different scenarios according to Demo input. The data extracted from those scenarios, although they allow us to discern the mentioned trend, are not enough if the trend curve wants to be observed. Therefore, a short Python program was developed to enhance the six tenths-based calculation method. This program was applied to multiple scenarios as needed to accurately depict the trend curve. The curve was obtained from the fitting of 10,000 scaling values (as opposed to 3, as in the previous sections), with the aim of conducting a much more in-depth study and obtaining an accurate curve for energy optimization in economies of scale. 12.10.1 Demo 5 Figure 21: Scale up trend curve for DEMO 5. Evolution of energy consumption per material input. A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 101 І107 As it can be observed, for Demo 5 the energy consumption per input unit exponentially decreases as the input increases. Let us take a closer look to better observe the curve: Figure 22: Scale up trend curve for DEMO 5. Evolution of energy consumption per material input at a closer scale 12.10.2 Demo 3 For this detailed study of Demo 3, the energetic OPEX per both input and output was taken into account. That is, the six tenths method was applied for the energy consumption per input unit of the Demo for its input (50 kg) and also to the energy consumption per output unit. Attending to the energetic OPEX per input unit, the trend curve is: A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 102 І107 Figure 23: Figure 21: Scale up trend curve for DEMO 3. Evolution of energy consumption per material input. Taking a closer look: Figure 24: Scale up trend curve for DEMO 3. Evolution of energy consumption per material input at closer scale A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 103 І107 On the other hand, the outputs that belong to Demo 3 are fiber extract (3,6 kg) and phenolic extract (0,6 kg), for an initial input of 50 kg. The energy consumption per output unit of Demo 3 is 47,10 kWh/kg and 618,63 kWh/kg respectively. The scale-up trend for the fiber extract is represented in the following graphic: Figure 25: Scale up trend curve for DEMO 3. Evolution of energy consumption per material input. And the curve for the phenolic extract is: A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 104 І107 Figure 26: Scale up trend curve for DEMO 3. Evolution of energy consumption per material input at a closer scale. Both of these curves and those referred to the Demo 3 input show, once again, the expected shape. This trend implies a saving in energy consumption per input unit as the process running is loaded with higher inputs (therefore, producing more outputs), so scaling-up the Demos to industrial scale would be beneficial in terms of energy saving, and thus, production cost reduction. A2C – Deliverable D6.4v2.0 Page 105 І107 13 Conclusions The scalability of the different technologies has been demonstrated by the construction of the different demonstrators at pilot scale but some challenges remain for their industrial implementation. This deliverable presents the significant progress made within the framework of the project, highlighting the integration of key technologies and their evaluation in a relevant industrial environment. Throughout the process, we have identified areas for improvement and optimization that will be crucial to ensure the scalability and sustainability of the solution in the long term: DEMO 1: the performance of the optical sorting highly depends on the feeding speed and size of the plastic fragments yield from the waste washing line. The delamination unit capacity is limited by the bulk density of the plastic to be treated. DEMO 2: Scaling up the bioconversion of TPA to PCA is a major challenge due to TPA solubility and uptake. The variability in the composition of waste-derived inputs requires prior validation and standardization to ensure process stability and consistent results. DEMO 3: The main bottleneck identified for this demonstrator is the stabilization stage, specifically the freeze-drying (lyophilization) process, which has a low processing capacity compared to the extraction and purification rates. Lyophilization is also highly energyintensive. The high variability of raw materials (e.g., in microbiological stability, polyphenol, or fibre content) necessitates a pre-treatment step to homogenize the waste. DEMO 4: Similar to Demonstrator 3, the purification step using resins is a bottleneck because it requires large quantities of resin and is a time-consuming process. The lyophilization process is also considered a bottleneck due to its high energy consumption. Homogenizing the variable raw materials is another challenge that requires proper pretreatment DEMO 5: A significant challenge for scaling up the PHBV extraction process is the need to maintain high-quality biomass with high thermal stability and a low content of unwanted