A comprehensive approach to pistachio oil production

Abstract

Purpose

The high content of unsaturated fatty acids and the elevated presence of bioactive compounds make pistachio oil a healthy product with great commercial potential. One of the primary constraints for its production is the lack of information regarding oil extraction from an industrial perspective. The purpose of this paper is to ensure the success of pistachio oil production at a commercial scale, attention should be paid to the effect of the main extraction procedures on the characteristics of oil, the consumer acceptance of these oils and their production cost.

Design/methodology/approach

Comparison and evaluation of the physicochemical and sensory characteristics and production cost of oil extracted using two different production lines (hydraulic press and screw press) are considered here.

Findings

Slight differences were found in the physicochemical analysis, but significant differences were identified in the sensory analysis. Consumer judges preferred the oil extracted with the hydraulic press. According to production costs, the break-even value that makes screw press extraction sustainable is €70.4 per litre, while for the hydraulic press it is €91.0 per litre, mainly due to a lower extraction yield and the longer extraction time required. As production costs of both methods are high, pistachio oil quality should prevail, making the use of the hydraulic press more advisable.

Originality/value

Although significant research has been conducted to analyse pistachio oil composition and nutritional value, little attention has been paid to differences that appear regarding consumer preferences and production costs depending on the production method used. This paper provides a comprehensive approach to high-quality pistachio oil production from an industrial perspective.

Citation

Rabadán, A., Álvarez-Ortí, M., Pardo, J.E., Gómez, R., Pardo-Giménez, A. and Olmeda, M. (2017), "A comprehensive approach to pistachio oil production", British Food Journal, Vol. 119 No. 4, pp. 921-933. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-08-2016-0373