Dear Andrew and colleagues,
As matter of fact I do not think there is too much difference,
particularly on how to run fish icing in an industrial context. You have to
achieve a commercial objective within a given cost level and make a profit,
if this is achieved then people will be happy, be a stakeholder of a big
company or a small fishermen in the middle of the bush. The main difference
is how the ice cost enters into the picture.
In an artisanal context ice is expensive and therefore the new product "iced
fish" shall have some recognised value added to produce the trick. In
developed countries the commodity is (was?) already iced fish. Actually in
developed countries consumers are starting again to reconsider iced (fresh)
fish as a value-added product (in opposition to frozen fish of the same
specie).
Which move us are values in general sense. If we look into monetary values
only it is clear that the fishermen in middle of the bush will be more
worried about the ice cost than the industry in Northern Europe or Canada.
In N Europe or Canada, the week variation (or even daily) of fish prices
makes for the manager no sense (in financial terms) to look into variations
much smaller than the price variation (he/she has a lot of other factors to
look at).
However, and here come the trick, when values in a more broad sense are
considered, industries become more aware of waste and environment and here
it is when the ice subject (and others) are revisited; to discover very
often that it was a hidden bonus there. This is the move towards clean and
lean production (both in developed and developing countries).
There is a recent publication from our cousins in UNEP : "Cleaner production
Assessment in Fish Processing" that it is probably one of the best
publications in clean (and lean) fish production available in English with a
large number of examples other than ice. The publication can be downloaded
from:
http://www.agrifood-forum.net/publications/guide/index.htm
<http://www.agrifood-forum.net/publications/guide/index.htm>
(in addition you will get the guides for meat and dairy too).
The hope is that this guides or what we were discussing here
regarding ice consumption could help
* people in developing countries to develop with less cost of energy
and waste and
* industry in developed countries to produce the same things wasting
less (even if this is not noticed in the financial ledgers).
Best regards to all.
Hector M. Lupin
Fish Utilisation and Marketing Service (FIIU)
Fish safety and quality assurance
Tel.: (39)(06)570-56459
Fax. (39)(06)570-55188
e-mail: hector.lupin@fao.org <mailto:hector.lupin@fao.org>
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Strak [mailto:abstrak@accesswave.ca]
Sent: Saturday, July 22, 2000 3:58 PM
To: Lupin, Hector (FIIU); jperalta@iloilo.net;
seafood@ucdavis.edu
Subject: Re: Amount of Ice to Chill Fish
Hector,
I think that in its true sense our opinions are not so
divergent although
our discussion ilustrates that nothing is truly simple and
our keen
awareness what we want to accomplish combined with the
knowledge about how
we can do that through icing are very critical in order to
be both effective
and efficient with the ice. We have had our limited
disagreements on the
issues how practically precise we have or can be and that
probably reflects
our particular background with specific handling methods
that have
conditioned us to certain 'situational' views and attitudes.
Although quite
a few of us have possibly worked in a range of situations
where on one side
of the spectrum a very precise ratio of the product/ice
could be applied
while on other being very generous with icing was the only
workable solution
to protect the catch.
Best regards,
Andrew Strak
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lupin, Hector (FIIU)" <Hector.Lupin@fao.org>
To: <jperalta@iloilo.net>; <seafood@ucdavis.edu>
Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2000 12:48 PM
Subject: RE: Amount of Ice to Chill Fish
>
> Dear colleagues,
>
> Thank you for your messages. I do not think I have the
right answers
> for all the questions you put forward, however, since I
was involved with
> this discussion I will try to give my opinion on the three
main areas I
have
> received messages.
>
> (i) I do not think it could exist an "ideal" insulated box
or crate
> suitable for any occasion. I think that it depends on the
whole chilling
and
> handling system you have in mind, and sometimes in the
capital you dispose
> for your objective. For instance if your idea is to move/
store middle
sized
> fish in an industrial environment with chilled hulls (on
board) and
chilled
> rooms after landing (4-5 degree C), then a boxing (or
crate) system with
the
> characteristics required by Mr Peralta could be utilised,
even under
> tropical and semi-tropical conditions. There are a number
of good
> boxes-crates with such characteristics in the market.
>
> However if the box/ crate will (or could be) be delayed at
a certain point
> in the chain (e.g. on the deck, on landing, when
transported to the plant
o
> market, in the market, etc.) then an insulated container
may be necessary.
> This will depend on the delays involved (I assume a
tropical semi-tropical
> condition). In this case some characteristics like the
possibility to
stack
> or nest could not be there. The reason is that the main
necessary
> characteristic of insulated containers is to be
(thermally) insulated.
>
> Other characteristics could change, for instance most of
insulated
> containers can be drained. However, drainage is in general
not allowed
> during storage because it will increase ice melting rate
(temperature is
> considered the chief parameter in this case, and it is
preferred to have
> fish near 0 degree C than to have fish just wet and not
submerged in
water).
> As happens with the design of simple boxes for a boxing
system, to design
> insulated fish container presents a number of alternatives
and to optimise
> one will means to sub-optimise the other and vice-versa.
>
> (ii) Regarding use of ice in developed countries I agree
that even though
> the cost of ice could be low it does not means that it
should not be taken
> into account. Insulated containers to keep fish with
limited amount of ice
> are utilised for instance in Denmark and Japan. In some
developed
countries,
> particularly in the Scandinavian countries, there is a
move towards clean
> (and lean) production, this means to the reduction of all
material (and
> energy) that could be reduced.
>
> The reduction of ice for instance means a reduction in
energy consumed and
> in effluents to treat, it also means a reduction in
storage volume needed
> and in some cases (depending on design) an increase in
productivity.
> Increase in productivity (and the consequent saving) due
to lower volumes
to
> handle or dispose of or clean (very often manually) could
in developed
> countries represents a much large figure than just the
cost of ice saved.
>
> My advice is to look into ice cost and use even if you are
running and
> industrial system utilising cheap ice.
>
> (iii) It is true that a lot of information is needed to
design a chilled
> fish chain, however, it is not a prohibitive amount of
information
> (definitely not the amount of information needed to put a
man in the
Moon).
> Most of the ice plant makers have standards procedures to
estimate the
size
> of ice plant you may need for a given purpose. However,
you may want to
> check and know by yourself. In this sense it is crucial to
know distances
> and time (of storage, transport, etc) and interact with
the thermal
> characteristics of your possible container. It is
necessary to know if ice
> should be carried to the point you are getting the fish or
not , etc. Some
> thermal test of containers in actual operations may be
necessary. We
should
> not forget that combined solutions can exist, for instance
refrigeration
> equipment (mounted in an insulated truck) combined with a
reduced amount
of
> ice.
>
> Limitations could be in the necessary insulation (too big
and heavy) or in
> the cost of the possible insulated container or system,
but again this has
> to be analysed case by case, there is no possibility to
give general
rules..
>
> I know that processes of this type have been conducted in
the past by
trial
> and error, however, it may lead to a wastage of money. If
there is a
> possibility to estimate or calculate it, it is better to
do so, and then
add
> a reasonable safety factor (as in any estimation).
>
> Hector M. Lupin
> Fish Utilisation and Marketing Service (FIIU)
> Fish safety and quality assurance
> Tel.: (39)(06)570-56459
> Fax. (39)(06)570-55188
> e-mail: hector.lupin@fao.org <mailto:hector.lupin@fao.org>
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jul 24 2000 - 03:11:16 PDT