Food waste represents a potential source to produce value-added materials replacing the use of virgin ones. However, the use of food waste as feedstock in biorefineries is still at an early stage of development and studies assessing its economic viability at large scale are lacking in the literature. This paper presents a techno-economic and profitability analysis of four food waste biorefineries that use wastes from tomato, potato, orange, and olive processing as feedstock. The study includes the assessment of potentially available quantities of those waste flows in Europe. Due to the low technology readiness level of this kind of biorefineries, a screening methodology to estimate the investment and manufacturing costs as well as two profitability ratios (the return on investment and the payback time) was adopted. Results show that not all the waste feedstocks have the same potential. The most profitable options are those related to implementing fewer plants, namely concentrating the production and capitalising on economies of scale while being at risk of increasing externalities, e.g. due to logistics of the feedstocks.

Food waste has gained prominence in the European political debate thanks to the recent Circular Economy package. Currently the waste hierarchy, introduced by the Waste Framework Directive, has been the rule followed to prioritize food waste prevention and management measures according to the environmental criteria. But when considering other criteria along with the environmental one, such as the economic, other tools are needed for the prioritization and optimization. This paper addresses the situation in which a decision-maker has to design a food waste prevention programme considering the limited economic resources in order to achieve the highest environmental impact prevention along the whole food life cycle. A methodology using Life Cycle Assessment and mathematical programing is proposed and its capabilities are shown through a case study. Results show that the order established in the waste hierarchy is generally followed. The proposed methodology revealed to be especially helpful in identifying "quick wins" - measures that should be always prioritized since they avoid a high environmental impact at a low cost. Besides, in order to aggregate the environmental scores related to a variety of impact categories, different weighting sets were proposed. In general, results show that the relevance of the weighting set in the prioritization of the measures appears to be limited. Finally, the correlation between reducing food waste generation and reducing environmental impact along the Food Supply Chain has been studied. Results highlight that when planning food waste prevention strategies, it is important to set the targets at the level of environmental impact instead of setting the targets at the level of avoided food waste generation (in mass).