Presentation at the Cassava Value Chains Workshop CIAT, Cali, Colombia. 24-26 August 2016 Speakers: I Okike, A Samireddypalle, ML Fadiga, D Enahoro, P Kulakow, G Thiele, C Fauquet, M Blummel

1. From Not-Want to Waste-Not: cassava peels as
product
I Okike, A Samireddypalle, ML Fadiga, D Enahoro, P Kulakow, G
Thiele, C Fauquet, M Blummel
Presentation at the Cassava Value Chains Workshop
CIAT, Cali, Colombia
24-26 August 2016

2. INTRODUCTION
Section I
2

3. Summary of contents (sections)
I. Introduction
II. The Problems : A case study in Oyo, Nigeria
III. Circumventing drying constraints
IV. The competitiveness of HQCP mashes
against maize in energy content
V. Implications of scaling the innovation
VI. Scaling pathways and business models
VII.Closing

4. Introduction
• Africa produces about 150 million tons of cassava per
year and Nigeria 50 million as world’s largest
producer
• Human population growing faster than animal source
food supply which is constrained by feed scarcity.
• Food grains, especially maize – in short supply –
constitute about half the total feed supply for
commercial feed production
• So, finding ways of reducing the competition for food
between man and livestock is imperative

5. Introduction
• At least 95% of the uses of cassava require
peeling
• Peeling is inefficient such that ‘peels’ (often
containing substantial amount of cassava flesh)
constitute 20% or more of the fresh tuber weight
• Hence the focus of the research on cassava
residues/waste (peels, under-size tubers at
harvest, waste water during dewatering)

6. Introduction
• For Africa, an estimated 50 million tons wet
cassava peels and under-sized tubers is wasted
annually
• As the study has shown, 3 tons of cassava peels yield
1 ton of high quality (energy) ingredients for animal
feeds,
• So, cassava residues could produce more than 15
million tons of high quality livestock feed ingredients
annually from Africa’s production.

7. Introduction
• At an industry-assessed price of US$150/ton, this
is potentially US$2.25 billion from product price
to the agricultural sector; and at least US$4.5
billion to the overall economy (multiplier effects)
annually
• 500,000 new jobs created with 400,000 of the
employees being women
• Feed scarcity is mitigated by 32 billion Kcal ME and
10 million tons of maize released by the feed
industry.

8. THE PROBLEMS : A CASE STUDY IN
OYO, NIGERIA
Section II
8

9. In a case study in Oyo State, 70 vans bring in 1.3 tonnes of cassava & 20 pick-
ups bring in 2.5 tonnes of cassava, twice daily amounting to approx. 250
tonnes daily for processing into garri

10. Processing of 250 tonnes is done by 1300 persons - 85% Female
& 15%. 4 persons peel a ton/day @ US$12 = US$3/person/day.
Peeling is manual and inefficient resulting in wastage.

11. Drying of peels is on bare floor. Drying is done over a 3-
day period in the dry season

12. When drying is 100% successful, one van load of wet
tubers (1.3 tonnes) yields about 220 kg of dried peels
(6 bags of the type in photo; about 35kg each)

13. but…..drying of peels is probably the biggest constraint.
Even in the dry season, floor space for drying is a
constraining factor.

14. Waste is available in large quantities around garri
processing centres

15. Unsuccessful attempts to eliminate cassava peels
through burning and natural decomposition

16. Unsuccessful attempts to eliminate cassava peels
through burning and natural decomposition

17. CIRCUMVENTING DRYING
CONSTRAINTS
Section III
17

18. GRATER
HYDRAULIC PRESS
PELLET MAKER
MECHANISED SIEVE
DRYING IN THE SUN & BY TOASTING
18
Commonly available equipment adapted for processing cassava peels

19. Processing into High Quality Cassava Peel
(HQCP) Mashes at ILRI
5-min clip

20. A recap of the steps in processing fresh cassava
peels into HQCP mashes
See also Okike et al. (2015) http://www.developmentbookshelf.com/doi/pdf/10.3362/2046-1887.2015.005

21. THE COMPETITIVENESS OF HQCP
MASHES AGAINST MAIZE IN ENERGY
CONTENT
Section IV
21

22. 3 bags of HQCP mash
(3 x 2200 Kcal/kg DM)
2 bags of maize
(2 x 3300 Kcal/kg DM)
=
22

23. Nutrient composition of HQCP mash
(CassaPeelMashTM)
Starch1 73.2 g/100g
Crude protein1 3.1 g/100g
Crude fibre1 6.3 g/100g
Crude ash1 5.1 g/100g
Crude fat1 1.0 g/100g
Hydrocyanic acid1 90 mg/kg
Aflatoxins (B1)2 1.35 ppb
Aflatoxins (B2)2 0.00*
Aflatoxins (G1) 2 0.00
Aflatoxins (G2) 2 0.00
1Analytical results from masterlab of The Netherlands – masterlab@nutreco.com
2Analytical results from the Nutrition Laboratory of the International Institute of
Tropical Agriculture (IITA)
*Zero means that Aflatoxin level is below detection limit

24. Contexts for the comparison
• Energy fractions – HQCP mash contains 2200 –
2300 kcal ME/kg DM; Maize 3200 – 3300 kcal.
About 2/3rd energy equivalent.
• Evolution of maize prices during 2009-2014
period (historical) complemented by maize
futures prices for 2014-18 (Chicago Board of
Trade) show Maximum US$530/t, average
US$367/t and historical low (US$240/t).

25. Contexts for the comparison
• At its energy equivalent price, HQCP mash has a
potential average market price of US$240/t
• The feed industry has so far indicated willingness
to pay about half the price of maize or a market
price of about US$180/t
• Calculations based on practices at existing garri
processing centres indicate a production cost of
US$150/t

26. Feeding trials in commercial broilers &
layers with Amo Byng (Nig.) Ltd.
• 5 treatments with 500 broilers
(control diet, 50kg/t, 75kg/t,
100kg/t, and 125kg/t)
• 100kg inclusion had the best
performance
– Best FCR across experiment
– Very good %DW against control
– Very good growth rate with lower
feed intake
– Low mortality (%) compared to
other treatments
• Trial with 22,000 broilers for
comparison against previous
batches produced with control
diet proved equally encouraging

27. HQCP Mash remains competitive into the future
even at 50% the price of maize

28. Sensitivity analysis showing that HQCP mash remains
competitive even when maize prices fall by 30% and its
production costs increase by 20%, for example.

29. IMPLICATIONS OF SCALING THE
INNOVATION
Section V
29

30. NUMBER OF ANIMALS AND
PRODUCTION SUPPORTED
30

31. Energy from 4 million tons of HQCP mash @
2200 kcal and 40g CP/kg DM (Nigeria only)
• Poultry: 1 million tons of fine HQCP mash would support energy demands of 300 million birds @ 10% and 15%
inclusion in broiler and layer diets (2ce Nigeria’s current commercial production needs!)
0
5
10
15
20
25
Dairy cattle Beef cattle Sheep & goats Pigs
No. of animals supported
(millions)
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
Milk Beef Chevon/Mutton Pork
Qty. of production supported
(million tons)

32. Employment created (women favoured
80%)
• 8 women and 2 men
produce 1 ton/day
• 10 mandays per ton =
150 million mandays
for 15 million tons
• @ 300 working
days/year = 500,000
jobs created, involving
at least 400,000 rural
women.

33. Decentralized and Centralized Uptake and Scaling
Options
Small scale processors Pressed peel cake HQCP mashes
Feed Industry
Flash dryer
Decentralized –
production by mass(es)
500,000 direct workers
Centralized –
production in mass

34. How could this fit in the IMPACT model???
The cassava/cassava peel/livestock value chain
activity-commodity framework

35. Related questions
• Livestock production has cassava crop but not its
peel as feed. Would IMPACT improvement work
make peel inclusion possible? For example in the
crop residue category?
• Cassava peels will need to be specified as one of
these ‘new commodities’ and appropriate
parameters provided by country/production
unit. How would this be done? Data sources?

36. Potentials explored (even broadly)
• the potential for an untapped feed resource that
could serve multiple developing countries;
• Competitive and complementary links of the
cassava VC to the livestock sector and to other
feed and food resources;
• country-level impacts on food security and
natural resources

37. Another product of potential interest
(carrier/substrate for AflasafeTM)
Sorghum grains
CassanulesTM - Granules
from cassava peels

38. CLOSING
Section VII
38

39. Closing
• The drying period of fresh cassava peels can be
reduced from 3 days to 6-8 hrs. sunshine period
or alternatively toasted or flash dried to achieve
high quality products that are competitive
against existing ones.
• Processing is done by simple machines that are
easy to operate by youths and women

40. Closing
• The drying period of fresh cassava peels can be
reduced from 3 days to 6-8 hrs. sunshine period
or alternatively toasted or flash dried to achieve
high quality products that are competitive
against existing ones.
• Processing is done by simple machines that are
easy to operate by youths and women

41. Closing
• Different modules exist for entry into the
business, each shown to be profitable.
• Converting waste to wealth is not only profitable
but
 cleans up the environment,
 provides employment
 supports reinvestment in cassava production
 boosts livestock production to provide more animal
source food
 releases grains from feed industry for human
consumption

42. This work is SO FAR financed by:
CGIAR Research Programs on RTB, Humidtropics and
Livestock & Fish.
It is being implemented in a partnership with IITA, CIP &
GCP21
Acknowledgements

43. Choices before us!
New livelihoods
& income,
employment
opportunities
(pro-women &
pro-youth),
increased
livestock
productivity,
clean
environment,
safe and storable
new products!
Potentially worth
US$2 billion per
annum for Africa
43
Unmitigated environmental
disaster and waste (existing
practice to dispose cassava
peels)
Choices before us!

44. The presentation has a Creative Commons licence. You are free to re-use or distribute this work, provided credit is given to ILRI.
better lives through livestock
ilri.org

45. THANK YOU