This document discusses adapting novel food processing technologies to meat operations. It provides an overview of novel processing technologies such as high pressure processing, pulsed electric fields, UV light, and ohmic heating. It also discusses challenges in assessing the safety of these novel technologies, including ensuring microbial safety and evaluating potential chemical risks. Key knowledge gaps are identified regarding using novel technologies for meat processing and developing safety standards for foods processed using emerging methods.

1. Adapting Novel Processing
Technologies to Meat Operations
Tatiana Koutchma, PhD

2. Outline
Safety Risks of Modern Food Production
Review of Novel Processing Technologies
Technology Assessment and Gaps in Knowledge
FSWG’s Survey :
Food Safety and Novel Technologies

3. Safety Risks of
Modern Food Production
Products New Risks
 Higher quality - Mild treatment  Incomplete microbial inactivation
 Extended product shelf-life  Possible non respect of adequate
 “Fresher” quality, storage conditions and expiration
 RTE pre-cooked dates
 Convenience  Undercooking
 Low salt, sugar, fat  Overcooking
 Globalization of food supply  Generation of stress-resistant
organisms
 Emerging pathogens

4. Food Technologies
Branch of food science and engineering which deals with the actual
production processes to make foods.
Traditional processing concepts
1. Application of thermal energy to 5. Novel or emerging
elevate product temperatures to technologies
achieve long term or extended
stability or preservation
2. Removal of thermal energy to
Contemporary technical
reduce product temperature and innovations which represent
extend shelf-life progressive developments within
3. Removal of water from products a field for competitive advantage
structure and thus achieving of
extended shelf-life
4. Packaging or the step required to
maintain product properties
achieved during processing

5. Future Processing Trends
Traditional
vs Novel Technologies
Technologies
Improvements in Designs and
Control. Redesign Novel Processes
Improved Manufacturing Transformation &
Performance Preservation
Improved Product Quality Improved Quality and Safety
Traditional Foods Novel Foods

6. The Novel Foods
• Non-traditional foods with • Definitions available
no history of safe use and
manufactured, prepared,
in 6 countries
preserved or packaged by
a process that has not
been previously applied to
that food

7. Key Drivers
 Freshness & convenience & less preserved
 Enhanced safety and extended shelf-Life
 Heat labile functional ingredients
 Engineering functional ingredients for
delivery of healthy foods
 Lower carbon footprint
 Reduce water volume used
 Lower energy
 Lower waste
 Need for sound regulatory policy
 U.S., Canada, EU

8. Novel Processing Options
 Pressure - 6
 Electromagnetic energy - 7
 Electrical energy - 5
 Sonication - 3
 Chemical – 5
 Plasma, magnetic field -2
 Mechanical energy - 3
 Total - more than 30 OPTIONS!

9. High Pressure
Hydrostatic Pre-Packed Foods 2000
(HHP) MPa
Hydrodynamic Raw Meats 100
(HDP) MPa
Hydrodynamic Beverages 300
Homogenization MPa
(HDH)
Pressure and CO2 Juices 100
MPa
Pressure Cycling Extraction 300
(HPC) MPa
Hyperbaric Fresh Produce 900
kPa

10. Novel Processing Technologies
 Transform raw materials into food products
 Preserve fabricated foods and raw ingredients during transportation,
retailing and consuming foods
 Control safety at different points of supply chain
With Potential
Provide Safety attributes HIGHER than those of raw products
Maintain Health and Quality attributes at least EQUAL to raw products
Enhance Functional properties or create New Products
Provide Broader Sustainable and Environmentally friendly benefits

11. UV Technology

12. Technology Assessment
and
 Fundamental Physical Methods
 Technology Performance
 Technology Readiness
 Risk Assessment
 Regulatory Status
 Life Time Cycle
 Cost Efficacy

13. NASA Assessment
9 - Ready for full-scale commercialization
8 - Economic feasibility and regulatory issues
Emerged addressed
Technology Development
7 - Economic feasibility demonstrated or
regulatory issues addressed (but not both)
6 – Systems available commercially
Emerging 5 - System or prototype demonstration in
relevant environment (pilot scale)
4 - Component validation in relevant
environment
3 - Analytical and experimental critical function
and/or characteristic proof of concept
Under 2 - Technology concept and/or application
formulated
development 1 - Basic principles observed and reported

14. Thermal Processing Technologies
Traditional Emerging
Under
Retorting Pressure + Heat (8) Development
Microwave dielectric (8)
Aseptic High frequency or RF (5-6)
Pasteurization Infrared (6-7) Conductive
Hot, Cold-Fill Ohmic (6-7) Heating
Sous vide

15. Non-thermal
Processing Technologies
Emerged Emerging Under
Irradiation (9) Development
Pulsed Electric Fields (6-7)
High Hydrostatic Cold Plasma (3-4)
Pressure (8-9) UV light (6)
Electrolyzed water (5)
Filtration (9) Pressure and CO2 (6)
Sonication (5)
Ozone (8-9) Low dose e-beams (5)

16. Technology Knowledge
Traditional/Thermal Novel
 Established organism of public  Target organisms of concerns and
health concern surrogates has to be determined
 Understood destruction  Detailed knowledge of microbial
kinetics/mathematics dose-response behavior
 Knowledge of products heating in  Complete representation of
given processing systems distribution of the lethal agent
 Relationships between the  Process uniformity
organism of public health concern  Process monitoring &verification
and spoilage  Process Equivalency (FSO)
 Equivalent safety of different  Chemical safety
processing systems express in
“Lethality” terms  Risk assessment

17. What Understanding is Needed when
Establishing a Novel Process?
A B B
Process
Ingredients Product
B
z ard is Regulatory
Process Ha alys Acceptance
Design An V alid
ation
A

18. Challenges of Novel Processing
Safety Equivalence
O
O
O
Traditional Foods Vs Novel Foods
OH
• Nutritional, Allergenicity, Toxicological, Chemical
& =
Traditional Process Vs Novel Process
• Performance Objective, Food Safety Objective
• Validation, Verification, Monitoring

19. Safety of Novel Processes
Technology Microbial Risks Chemical Risks Other
HPP Incomplete Chemical reactions Spore inactivation
microbial at elevated
inactivation, temperature
recovery
PEF No spore Electrochemical Non homogeneity
inactivation reactions arcing
Metal transfer from
electrodes
UV light and pulsed Repair Photo oxidation Non-homogeneity
light reactions
Ohmic heating Survivors Metal transfer from under/over heating
electrodes
Microwaves Survivors Chemical reactions Non-homogeneity
Possible reduction
of power

20. Risk Assessment of Novel Foods
• Details of novel process
• Dietary Exposure
O
• History of organism O
O
• Nutritional considerations
– Dietary intakes OH
• Toxicology considerations
• Allergenicity considerations
• Chemical considerations

21. Microbiological Assessment
Product Food Chain
• Raw ingredients • Production
– Contamination – Local/Imported
• Semi-finished/
• Food Processing
– pH, Aw, composition, ToC
• Finished • Transportation
– Packaging/Storage
• Storage & Distribution
• Predictive modelling of – Food Services/Retail
growth/death/survival
• RTE
– Indigenous flora
– Shelf-life
– Safety in terms of target
• Consumption
pathogens of concern – Preparation

22. Chemical Hazards
Product Process
• Natural - Endogenous • Formed during food
toxicants processing
• Trypsin
• Mycotoxins  Migration
 from packaging
• Synthetic  Biphenols
Produced, through  Acrylamide
contamination of food  Furans
material or processing
environment  Lipid oxidation products
 Maillard reaction
• Pesticide residues in fruits
and vegetables
• Heavy metals, nitrites
• Drug residues in foods of
animal origin
• Allergens

23. Global Regulations
Novel Foods No Definition
 European Union  USA
 United Kingdom  Japan
 New Zealand  India
 Australia
 Canada
 China

24. USA
No definition can not be found
• US FDA considers food ingredients as novel that have not
been previously used
• New dietary compounds (NDI)
• As food additives under existing law, the principal law being
the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.
• The ‘Generally Recognised as Safe’ or GRAS concept is the
bench mark by which all foods, including novel foods, are
assessed.
• GRAS substances are: substances used before 1958
(excluding prior sanctioned food ingredients); and
substances for which there is scientific evidence of safety as
determined by competent experts and by published and
available safety information.

25. US Approvals of Novel Processes
• 2001, Code 21 CFR Part 179.39 was published to
improve the safety of fresh juice products: Source of UV
radiation (LPM at 254 nm) defined as a food additive
• 2004, USDA has approved High Hydrostatic Pressure as
an intervention method for Listeria contaminated pre-
packed ready-to-eat (RTE) meat products
• 2008, 73 FR 49593 The FDA published a final rule that
allows the use of irradiation for fresh iceberg lettuce and
fresh spinach
• 2009, the US FDA approved a petition for the commercial
use of Pressure Assisted Thermal Sterilization process
(PATS) for application in the production of LAF
 2010, US FDA first time approved novel sterilization
processing using 915 MHz microwave energy (MATS) for
producing pre-packaged, LAF

26. Novel Food Decisions in Canada
• Use of High Hydrostatic Pressure for Processing Ready to Eat
(RTE) Meat-containing Entrees, Meat-containing Salads and Meat
Products (Maple Leaf, December 2006)
• Use of High Hydrostatic Pressure for the Control of L.
monocytogenes in Ready to Eat (RTE) Meats and Poultry (Santa-
Maria, Foods, October 2006)
• Use of the Rinse and Chill Process as a Slaughter Process
Technology (MPSC Inc. of St. Paul, MN , October 2006)
• Applesauce and Applesauce/Fruit Blends Treated by High
Hydrostatic Pressure (Orchard Inc., Franklin Centre, QC, in
November of 2004)
• Ultraviolet light treatment of apple juice/cider using the CiderSure
3500 (Moore Orchards, July 15, 2003 )
26

27. Why High Hydrostatic Pressure
 Independent of product mass,
size and geometry
 Minimizing treatment time and scale up
 Inactivates all vegetative bacteria and spores
 Destroys enzymes
 Minimal impact on quality and nutrition
 Commercially economical processes
 Emerged as a post-lethality treatment
 Emerging as
Harvesting treatment
Pre-treatment before cooking
Sterilization of Low Acid Foods

28. HIGH HYDROSTATIC PRESSURE
Preservation Transformation Value Added
Shelf-life Meat
Sterilization Pasteurization Seafood
extension Protein
PATS RTE RTE meats
LAF meals Raw meats

29. HHP process parameters
• Process Pressure
• Constant holding pressure
• >700 MPa – “sterilization”
• 200-600 MPa – “pasteurization”
• <300 MPa – raw meat treatment
• Process Temperature
• Final product temperature after pressurization
• Process hold time
• Time recorded between end of
• compression and start of decompression

30. Other parameters affecting HHP
Product Packaging
• pH, water activity • Type of packaging: vacuum or
• Composition: MAP
• Fat • Packaging and material
• Salt content influence the log reduction data
• Design and geometry
• Physiological state of
bacterial cells
• From exponential or stationary
growth phase

31. Raw Meat Processing
Ambient Temperature at Pressure < 350 MPa
Harvest Processing Fresh Meats
 Hair/feather removal  Shelf-life Extension
 Loosens hair/feather follicles  Stops post-mortem glycolysis
 Eliminates scald tank  Improves meat quality
 Stabilizes pH >6.0
 Improves color
 Toenail removal  Increases water-holding capacity
 Loosens toenails from hoof  Decreases shear force
 Reduces fecal contamination  Increases tenderness

32. Fundamental Mechanisms
• The modifications of meat structure are strongly
dependent on the time post-mortem
• Pre- or post-rigor when HPP is applied
• Pressurisation of pre-rigor meat usually results in a
– rapid pH decrease
– intense contraction
– phenomena depend on treatment time, meat
temperature and muscle type.
• Pressurization of post-rigor meat
– no contraction was induced,
– Extensive modifications in sarcomere structure
– Cheftel, Meat Science, 1997
– Sun and Holley, JFS, 2009

33. HPP Preservation of RTE meals
Shelf Life Extension Sterilization
Pasteurization
 Marinated Meats  Pre-packed
 RTE meats and poultry (ESL)  Low Acid Foods (LAF) MREs
 Pre-treatment  Pressure Assisted Thermal
 Post-Lethality Sterilization (PATS)
Ambient & Mild Temperatures Elevated Temperature (>100oC)
400 – 600 MPa 700 MPA

34. Product and Process conditions for
Establishment of HHP preservation
HPP pasteurization HPP sterilization
Product parameters
pH, aw 3.5 <pH<4.6; pH<3.5 pH>4.6; aw >0.86
Process parameters
Temperature, oC ≤ 45 > 100
Pressure, MPa ≤ 600 > 700
Target microorganisms
Pathogenic E. coli; Listeria; Salmonella C. botulinum spores
Bacillus cereus
Spoilage Lactic bacteria, yeasts, molds Geobacillus spp.
Storage Refrigerated conditions Ambient temperature
Packaging Hermetically sealed Hermetically sealed
flexible containers flexible containers

35. Microbial Safety and Functionality in
Reduced Sodium Chloride Foods
 High sodium intake is a risk factor for hypertension, cardio vascular
and other diseases
 The WHO has set a target for daily intake of 5g or less of salt (<2g
sodium)
 Sodium intake
 commercially processed foods (CPF) (77 %)
 naturally occurring (12%),
 addition at the table (6%) and added during cooking (5%)
 NaCl is an important ingredient added to meats formulations
 increases gelation, water holding capacity and fat retention.
 decreases Aw
 retards growth of spoilage and pathogenic microbes, Listeria
monocytogenes.

36. HHP for Low Sodium Products
Pre-treatment Post-lethality
• HHP may have beneficial • HHP is effective intervention
effects on meat product methods against Listeria and
quality other pathogenic bacteria
– Improves water holding
capacity and decreased
water losses
• Pressures: 500 up to 600 MPa
– Induce changes in protein
• Temperature: ambient
• Pressures: 50 up to 300 MPa
Refrigerated or Ambient
• Temperature: Refrigerated or
• Time: up to 3min
Ambient
• Time: up to 5 min

37. Commercial HHP systems
Vessel layout – horizontal
Automatic loading / unloading
• Wave 6000 / 55 L
• Wave 6000 / 135L
• Wave 6000 / 300T L
• Wave 6000 / 420 L
• Maximum pressure – 600 MPa
• Pressure Hold Time – 3 min

38. Commercial HHP systems
• Wide range of HHP
systems
– 100 L - 600
– 215 L - 600
– 350 L - 600
– 687 L - 300
• 7 contract services
facilities in US

39. Lab scale HP units
• Avure
Laboratory Scale Pressure Test The QFP-2L-700 high pressure unit
System Model PT-100

40. BaoTou HHP Technology
 Lab size equipment
 3-5L 600 Mpa
 Commercial equipment
 30-50 L 600 MPa
 2 x 300L 600 MPa
 4x 600 L 600 MPa

41. Vessel Technologies
Wire winding Autofrettage
Vessel is subjected to over-pressure
which locks plastic strain in an
internal core
Autofrettage pressure is selected
http://www.avure.com/company/quintus.asp according to plastic behaviour od
steel used (15-15PH)
http://www.freshertechusa.com/index.html

42. FresherTech
• Mono - Single Chamber
Systems
• Duo - Dual Chamber
Systems
• Quattro - Four Chamber
Systems

43. Multivac and Uhde
• Multivac for HHP
packaging lines
• Fully automated and
integrated production
lines
– Filling, loading and
unloading robots,
inspection, weighting
• Continuous production
flow
http://us.multivac.com/our-products/hpp-high-pressure-
preservation.html

44. HHP - What are PROS?
 HHP is commercially available technology that solves
consumers' demands for safety, healthiness, clean label
and low sodium refrigerated foods
 HHP solves the retailers' needs for fresh foods with long
shelf life
 Capital and operating costs of HHP systems are now line
with the cost of chemical additives 2 to 8 cent per pound.
 HHP allows processors to meet both retailer and consumer
demands while potentially selling clean label products at a
premium with the advantage of post package food
pathogen inactivation

45. What are Cons?
CONS
 Batch process for pre-packed products
 Cost is still can be an issue
 Most popular applications – post-lethality treatment of
RTE meats, seafood
 Process uniformities needs to be monitored
 Application of HHP is limited :
 to fresh meat and sea products due to resulting
discolouration
 Fresh produce – texture

46. Why UV?
 Effective against microbial and chemical hazards
 Physical non-thermal method
 Chemicals free
 Cost effective
 Energy efficient
38 39
 Approved by Regulatory Agencies 33 33
25
23
 EPA 16 17
14
 US FDA (2001) 12
 Health Canada (2003)
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

47. Ultraviolet UV light
Energy per photon:
UV-V UV-C UV-B UV-A
6.20 – 12.4 eV 4.43 – 12.4 eV 3.94 – 4.43 eV 3.10 – 3.94 eV

48. Effectiveness of UV light
Against Food microflora
- Eschierichia coli O157:H7
- Listeria monocytogenes - Hepatitis A virus
- Salmonella enteredius - Norovirus
- Staphylococcus
aureus
Bacteria
Spores Viruses
Spoilage Parasites
microflora
- aerobic microflora - Cryptosporidium
- yeasts parvum
- molds - Giardia lamblia
- Lactic acid bacteria

49. Development and Applications of UV sources
Food Regulatory Environment
UV source Applications Industry Approval impact
Implementation
Low Pressure Air Water Surfaces YES Mercury
Mercury (LPM) Surfaces Water US FDA (2000) Glass
Amalgam (LPA) Juices Health Canada
Since 1930 (2003)
Medium Pressure Water Water NO Mercury
Mercury (MPM) Glass
Eximer Medical – Packed Surfaces Glass
Blood Plasma Cost NO
Curing
Pulsed (PL) Curing Produce Glass
RTE Food YES
Surfaces, Dry
ingredients
Light Emitting Lightings
Diodes (LED) Air NO NO NO

50. Why LEDs will replace UV lamps?
 UV Lamps: Wavelength are not  UV Lamps: short life time,
optimized for applications mercury, glass
• LEDs: Emit single peak  LEDs: Energy efficient, NO
Tunable mercury, long time, COST
LEDs are Building Blocks for Future UV systems

51. Guidelines For Choice of
UV source
1. Emission spectrum –
related to applications
2. Electrical and UV efficiency
3. Lifetime
4. Cost
5. Availability
6. Size
7. Shapes

52. Air, water
Non-food contact Pathogens
Safety surfaces
inactivation
Food contact
surfaces
Liquid foods and
beverages
Pasteurization
Preservation
Shelf-life extension
UV Whole and fresh
LIGHT cut produce
Vitamins
Functionality Antioxidants
Enhancement
Microbial
resistance
Toxins
Chemicals Patulin
Allergens
destruction Aflotoxins
Pesticides

53. UV on Food Plant
 Air and water treatments OFFERS UV-PROTECTION
 Non-food contact surfaces
 Walls, ceilings, floors • Airborne
– Molds Spores, human
 Food contact surfaces pathogens
 Conveyor belts • Waterborne
 Packaging materials – Viruses and Bacteria
 Equipment surfaces spores
• Foodborne
 Food surfaces – Bacteria, spores
 RTE meats • Spoilage
 Fresh produce – Yeast, molds, lactobacilli

54. Microbial Resistance to UV
Air Water Food
Fluids
Viruses Cryptosporidium Parasites
Bacteria Bacteria Bacteria
Yeasts Yeasts
Spores Spores Spores
Viruses Viruses
(Adenovirus)
Molds spores
RH, T,oC Turbidity pH, Aw
composition

55. Commercial UV unit
to Treat Odors

56. UV resistance of Listeria on Surfaces
• Agar: • Products
– D10= 0.5 mJ/cm2 – Frankfurters
D10 = 300 mJ/cm2
• Surfaces of packaging
materials, conveyor belts – Cut Pear
– D10 = 2.55 – 3.2 mJ/cm2
D10~ 2000 mJ/cm2

57. UV for Poultry, Fish and
RTE products
Raw RTE
Continuous UV
• Poultry reduction of
Salmonella without affecting • Effective against Listeria on the
color or increasing rancidity of surface of frankfurters
the meat • Up to 2-log reduction at 4 J/cm2
• Chicken Breast Fillet - L. • No changes in colour
monocytogenes without
negatively affecting meat color Pulsed UV
• Raw Salmon Fillets - PL • Effective against Listeria on the
caused visual color and quality surfaces of steel coupons
changes due to T increase
• Up to 4 log reduction at 6 J/cm2

58. Challenges of UV surface
inactivation
 Surface characteristics
 Quality parameters
 Duration of the treatment
 Continuous UV vs
Pulsed Light

59. Decontamination of Surfaces
UVC Tumbling Machines by Reyco Systems
• Frozen
• Fresh
• RTES
• Products prior to bulk
storage: onions, potatoes,
fruits, grain
Heraeus, Blue Light Module
Claranor: Packaging,
Caps, Cups

60. Novel UV Processes
UV pasteurization /
Transformation / Added value
Shelf-life Extension
 Fresh Juices
 Milk - Vitamin D synthesis
– Apple, apple cider, carrot,
 Mushrooms - Vitamin D2 synthesis orange
 Peanut butter, soy - reduce  Liquid sweeteners
allergenicity – Sucrose, fructose, glucose
 Fruits – increased nutrients content  Ice teas, soft drinks
 Carrots - increased AO capacity  Liquid egg products
 Fresh Cut Fruits/ Juices -  Milk, cheese milk and calf milk
enzyme Inactivation  Whey protein concentrates
 Brewery & winery
 Emulsions, brines, marinades

61. Challenge
High UV
~ 2 log reduction UV overdosing
absorbance Low microbial
at UV fluence of can lead to
of liquid foods at reduction
190 mJ/cm2 sensory changes
253.7 nm
Solutions
Improve designs of UV systems
Efficient mixing: Turbulent flow
Dean, Taylor-Coutte Flows
Match UV source for the
application
Optimized UV dose

62. Commercial Applications
Processing Finished product
 CIP water  Bottled water
 Packaging and product rinse  Fruit juice and fruit
water concentrates
 Isotonic and fortified drinks
Raw material application  Iced tea
 Wine
 Dilution water  Tetra-hopped beer
 Sugar syrup  Dairy
 Brines
 Liquid egg

63. UV units for Low UVT Liquids
Annular reactor “UltraDynamics” Thin film reactor “CiderSure”
L-NN L-N
Thin film mixers “Pure UV”/ “Iatros” Static Mixers – Dean Flow “Salcor”
Outlet
UV lamp
NL- Teflon tube
NL-
NN wound in
helix pattern NN
Inlet

64. UV units: Turbulent flow
SurePure turbulator Salcor 3G UV CiderSure

65. Commercial UV Unit
Sure Pure Turbulator
 Turbulent flow of the liquid over
 the lamps ensures a foul-free,
 self-cleaning system
 Multiple-lamp system
 Dosage of UV-C depends on
 Product turbidity and UV absorbance
 Initial microbiological load
 Flow-rate
 Desired log reduction
 Flow rate 4 000 L.h-1
 Retention time 0.608 s
 Lamp life 5000+ hours

66. UV treatment of Liquid Eggs
and Brines
Brine Water: 235 J/L

67. UV for Dairy Applications
• Raw ESL milk - up 25 day extension of
shelf-life
• Applied doses up to 1.5 kJ/l were
effective to reduce total viable counts,
psyhrophiles and coliforms up to 2, 3
and 4-log reductions
• E.coli O157:H7, Salmonella, Yersinia,
Staphylococcus, Listeria
monocytogenes and Campylobacter
jejuni – 5-log reduction at 1.3-1.7 kJ/l
• Microbiological efficacy is achieved
without any discernible denaturing of the
product`s consistency, color, flavor or
aroma

68. UV for Meat Applications
• Control of Listeria
• To reduce aging of beef
monocytogenes in recycled
carcases
chill brines
• Extension of retail
• Decontamination of poultry,
display of fresh beef
associated packaging and
packages in modified
contact surfaces
atmosphere
• Decontamination of poultry
carcasses

69. Savings Opportunities
 Energy savings :
 Steam, hot water
 non-thermal nature of the process
 Water :
 Drinking water
 Process water
 CIP rinse water
 Capital cost :
 Transportation
 Environmental impact
 Reduced waste

70. Energy use
in processing of apple juice
E. coli Capacity Specific Energy
Processing conditions
strain (L/s) (kJ/kg)
HTST 71.6 °C x 6 s O157:H7 1.0 180.4
HPP 500 MPa x 40 °C x 180 s O157:H7 1.25 283.5
PEF 25 kV/cm x ~50 °C x 50 ATCC 0.670 137.2
μs* 11775
UV 1.56 kW x 25 °C x 89 s K-12 1.1 5.2
UF 0.02 μm, 1.474 kPa, 5 Pseudomo 1.0 0.028
L/m2.s nas
diminuta

71. Energy for Processing
Fluid product by Novel Technologies
UF
UV
Technology
PEF
HTST
HPP
0 100 200 300 400 500
Energy consumption (J/g)

72. Food Safety Working Group (CIGR)
Survey: Food Safety and Novel Technologies
• To analyze commercial applications of novel technologies and their
development level in different countries/continents
• To evaluate the role that novel food processing technologies and
innovations can play to address global food safety issues and
challenges
• To analyze knowledge level of novel technologies in different countries
and professional groups
• To analyze factors that slow down the development of novel
technologies
• 18 questions
• Completion rate: 44.33%
• 25 countries

73. Summary
 Advances in science and engineering, progress in regulatory approvals make
Novel Processing Technologies (NPT) a viable option for commercialization in
foods preservation and transformation
 Preservation NPT comprise two general categories:
 (1) technologies suited for pasteurizing high-acid liquid products such as
HHP, PEF, US, UV and chemical processes, including gases
 (2) technologies for processing shelf-stable foods, e.g., HPP combined with
temperature, MW and RF heating, ohmic heating, and irradiation
 More sustainable NPT will lead to the production of processed products with
 safety attributes higher than those of raw products
 health and quality attributes at least equal to raw products
 broader environmentally friendly benefits
 potential saving opportunities in energy and water
Safety Quality Sustainability

74. Conclusion
• The scope of novel foods and novel ingredients
covered by the international regulations is broad and
diverse
• Safety evaluation is conducted on case-by-case
scenario
• Validation of novel processing technologies requires
new knowledge
• Education of food manufactures and regulators

75. Thank You !
Dr. Tatiana Koutchma
Contact info:
tnk08@live.com
AAFC
Guelph Food Research Center
93 Stone Road West
Guelph, ON, Canada