Marine Conservation Society Feeding the fish of the future 9th November 2010 Paddy Campbell BioMar Ltd. Introduction • Raw material used in last 10 years – Fishmeal and protein sources – Fish oil and vegetable oils • Current raw material use and comparison of Scotland to Norway, Chile and Canada • Comparisons to other non Salmonid species reference: Tilapia (Note: Based mainly on BioMar’s view and industry figures) Raw materials • Key area for all feed manufacturers why? • Feed cost and flexibility • Feed performance • Processing / factory performance • Traceability and feed safety • Sustainability Raw materials used in fish feed are commodities with high price volatility EUR Price Development Selected Raw Materials Index January 2006 = 100 Wheat Soya Meal Fish Meal Fish oil Rapeseed oil 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 05/01/2006 05/01/2007 05/01/2008 05/01/2009 Fishmeal and alternative protein sources Average Fishmeal inclusion level in Scottish salmon feeds in relation to annual average fishmeal price 50 Fishmeal % Label Rouge 1200 Fishmeal % Scottish 45 800 30 25 600 20 400 15 10 200 5 0 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Year Price / tonne (GBP) 35 Inclusion (%) Fishmeal price (GBP) 1000 40 Use of fishmeal and it’s vegetable protein replacers over time in Scottish salmon feeds Fishmeal 40 Oilseed meals 35 Refined vegetable proteins % inclusion 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Year fishmeal Hi Pro Soya Sunflower cake Soy protein conc. Corn gluten Fishmeal and alternative proteins • • Apart from Label Rouge feeds, fishmeal levels in Scottish Salmon feeds has reduced from approx 36% to 23% over the last 10 years Replacement generally associated with: – – – – • • Increasing fishmeal price Change in price ratio of fishmeal to vegetable proteins (soya) Knowledge base of feed manufacturers Market acceptance With decreasing fishmeals the level of refined vegetable proteins has increased (SPC) and oils seed meals like Hi Pro soya and sunflower meal have decreased Fishmeal levels can come down further if need be (nutritional ‘task’ not needed for other reasons (human health benefits) Fish oil, vegetable oils and EPA and DHA| Fish Oil h e rrin g sa n d e e l ca p e lin a n ch o vy Sat 21 20 21 28 M onos 53 43 55 23 1 1 2 1 1 8 :2 n -6 2 0 :5 n -3 EPA 6 11 8 17 2 2 :6 n -3 DHA 6 9 6 9 EPA and DHA: Key fatty acids for human health Vegetable Oil choice soya ra p e p a lm o liv e lin s e e d 1 6 :0 11 4 44 10 7 1 8 :1 22 56 39 78 15 1 8 :2 n -6 53 26 11 7 18 1 8 :3 n -3 8 10 1 1 56 2 0 :5 n -3 E P A 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 :6 n -3 D H A 0 0 0 0 0 Average Fish / vegetable oil inclusion level in Scottish salmon feeds in relation to price 30 1200 Fish oil Label Rouge Fish oil Scottish vegetable oil Scottish 25 1000 Fish oil price (GBP) 20 800 15 600 10 400 5 200 0 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Year Fish oil Rapeseed oil 2009 2010 Price / tonne (GBP) Inclusion (%) Rape oil price (GBP) What does our use of fish oil and vegetable oil mean in regard to EPA and DHA levels in flesh? • Assume a use of both NH and SA fish oils with the majority being NH fish oils • Assume 26% EPA and DHA for SA fish oil • Assume 14% EPA and DHA for NH fish oil • Vegetable oil use as of today (average 4% inclusion in feeds) • Scottish salmon will have an average of approximately 16% EPA and DHA (% of flesh oil) • 2.25% of fillet (14% fat in fillet) IFFO data on world fish oil exports Tonnes / year Growth / year (%) Growth in Omega 3 refining industry / year and volume of fish oil used / year (GOED, 2010) Focus on EPA / DHA and fish oil supply Farming + human consumption 10% EPA and DHA in fillet fat Farming Supply Farming + human consumption 7.5% EPA and DHA Supply Farming Farming + 5.0% EPA and DHA human consumption Supply Farming Figure showing 3 scenarios for fish oil supply and use based on 10%, 7.5% and 5% EPA and DHA targets for farmed salmonids production (FHL, Norway) Improving efficiency of use of EPA and DHA 30 30 E P A + D H A i fis k 25 P ADHA +D H A% , %of av flesh fettsyrer oil EPAE& oil EPAE& P ADHA + D H A% , %ofav feed fettsyrer E P A + D H A i fô r 20 15 10 5 FO • 20 15 10 5 0 0 • 25 R30 R60 FO R30 R60 Decreasing EPA and DHA in feed increases retention efficiencies in flesh EPA and DHA therefore can be used more efficiently when using plant oils Fish oil, vegetable oils and EPA and DHA| • Only very modest replacement of fish oil with vegetable oil has taken place in Scotland • Scottish salmon therefore contains high levels of EPA and DHA (approx 16% of fillet fat) • Global supply of fish oil / EPA and DHA becoming critical • We use far more than other salmon producing countries / tonne of fish produced • Unlike fishmeal this is not a nutritional challenge but a market driven development Current raw material use and comparison of Scotland to Norway, Chile and Canada Current estimated raw material inclusion (weighted average of all products) in different salmon farming regions Starch sources 100% 90% 13 % inclusion 13 13 13 15 3 11 8 4 21 22 21 24 12 12 19 17 4 17 80% 70% 13 36 25 60% 24 15 30% 45 20% 10% 23 23 0% Scotland standard Vegetable oils Land animal proteins Vegetable proteins Fish oil Fishmeal 34 50% 40% Poultry oil Scotland LR Norway Country / feed type Chile Canada Total Marine Expected differences in feed cost based on different raw material profiles of feed types % of Scottish Standard feeds 120.0 115.0 110.0 105.0 100.0 95.0 90.0 85.0 80.0 Scotland standard Scotland LR Basis: Current European RM prices, 30ppm Asta Ex. mill price, Grower salmon feed with 30% Dig Protein 21 Mj/kg Dig Energy. Norway Country / feed type Chile Canada Current raw material use and comparison of Scotland to Norway, Chile and Canada • Main difference between Scottish feeds (non Label Rouge) and Norwegian feeds is the higher use of fish oil in Scotland • Main difference between Chilean and Canadian salmon feeds and European feeds is the use of land animal proteins and oil, principally poultry meal, feather meal, bloodmeal and poultry oil • Considering above currently feed price will be ± 10% from typical Scottish feed price Comparison to other species e.g. Tilapia Tilapia Grower feed in relation to Scottish salmon feed 100% 13 90% 4 35 80% % inclusion 70% 36 9 60% 10 50% 40% 24 41.5 30% 20% 23 10% 2 2.5 0% Scotland standard Tilapia Grower Feed type Starch sources Poultry oil Vegetable oils Land animal proteins Vegetable proteins Fish oil Fishmeal Comparison to other species e.g. Tilapia • Tilapia only have a small requirement for marine raw materials (approximately 6% total fishmeal and fish oil) • Tilapia feeds lower in protein (32%) and energy (15.5MJ/kg) • Tilapia utilize carbohydrate as energy source also hence higher level of starch sources (wheat, corn, sorghum) • Feed cost approximately 50% of salmon feed • Commercial FCRs 1.9 (Tilapia) vs. 1.2 (salmon) • No requirement to achieve a flesh EPA and DHA level Summary • • • • • • Fishmeal levels have decreased overtime, further decreases are possible depending upon knowledge and price A far bigger challenge is the use of Fish oil. We use far more fish oil / tonne of salmon in Scotland compared to all other salmon rearing countries, this is market driven not a nutritional requirement Use of LAPs of course gives Chile and Canada a major benefit in feed and hence production costs Scottish Salmon feeds are much higher in marine raw materials compared to feeds for other species such as Tilapia Differentiation in both feeds and salmon products has been far quicker in the UK than elsewhere, an important part of this has been healthy eating (EPA and DHA) and sustainability (choice of raw materials in particular marine raw materials) How do we continue to differentiate but deal with important issues like our fish oil use?
© Copyright 2024