Team:UCL London/Economic Evaluation
From 2010.igem.org
(17 intermediate revisions not shown) | |||
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
==Economic Evaluation== | ==Economic Evaluation== | ||
+ | |||
[[Image:UCL-MONEYS1.png|300px|right]] | [[Image:UCL-MONEYS1.png|300px|right]] | ||
+ | |||
+ | Through means of auto induction, we hope not only to revolutionize the biopharmaceutical industries approach to protein expression, but we also hope to bring a wave of economic benefits; | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | '''1. Cost of IPTG is approximately $600.00 for 10,000L fermentation.''' | ||
+ | |||
+ | '''2. Average Facility of a pharmaceutical plant: 50 batches per year, total of $30,000 saving. ''' | ||
+ | |||
+ | '''3. Industry wide savings of millions of dollars.''' | ||
+ | |||
+ | '''4. Two tons of CO2 are produced for each innocculum volume of IPTG. (Source: BIA)''' | ||
+ | |||
+ | '''5. Saving an average facility 100 tons of CO2 annually''' | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | '''''Calculations''''' | ||
Estimate of IPTG cost for an industrial scale fermentation - say 1000L | Estimate of IPTG cost for an industrial scale fermentation - say 1000L | ||
Line 9: | Line 26: | ||
IPTG’s molar mass= 238.3 g/M | IPTG’s molar mass= 238.3 g/M | ||
- | 200* (1 M/ 1000 mM) = 0.2 M | + | |
- | 0.2 M * (238.3 g/M) = 47.66 g | + | 200* (1 M/ 1000 mM) = 0.2 M |
+ | 0.2 M * (238.3 g/M) = 47.66 g | ||
So its £32.30p for 47.66 grams, therefore £ 0.68 pence /gram | So its £32.30p for 47.66 grams, therefore £ 0.68 pence /gram | ||
From literature: 0.1 mM (This value is usually used for a high FAb production) | From literature: 0.1 mM (This value is usually used for a high FAb production) | ||
+ | |||
So using 0.1 mM, how much IPTG you need in grams: 0.1 mM * (1M/1000mM) = 0.0001 M | So using 0.1 mM, how much IPTG you need in grams: 0.1 mM * (1M/1000mM) = 0.0001 M | ||
- | 238.3 g/M * (0.0001 M) = 0.02383 grams<<< this is how many grams of IPTG you need per a kg of a feedstream. | + | 238.3 g/M * (0.0001 M) = 0.02383 grams<<< this is |
+ | how many grams of IPTG you need per a kg of a feedstream. | ||
+ | |||
Finally for a 1,000 L fermentation batch | Finally for a 1,000 L fermentation batch | ||
+ | |||
Using SuperPro Designer you can assume kg = L | Using SuperPro Designer you can assume kg = L | ||
+ | |||
So for 1,000 kg/batch, this is how much IPTG you need: | So for 1,000 kg/batch, this is how much IPTG you need: | ||
- | 1,000 * 0.02383 g * (1 kg/ 1,000 g) = 0.02383 kg /batch | + | |
+ | 1,000 * 0.02383 g * (1 kg/ 1,000 g) = 0.02383 kg /batch | ||
+ | |||
Cost of IPTG per a batch: | Cost of IPTG per a batch: | ||
- | 0.02383 (kg/batch) * 0.6777 (£/ gram) * (1,000 gram / 1 kg) = £ 16. 15 p / batch | + | 0.02383 (kg/batch) * 0.6777 (£/ gram) * (1,000 gram / 1 kg) = £ 16. 15 p / batch |
- | |||
+ | Below we have summarized the Economic Advantages and Disadvantages of Auto-Induction: | ||
- | ===Advantages=== | + | ==='''Advantages'''=== |
• Simple procedure, expression strain inoculated in the auto-inducing media | • Simple procedure, expression strain inoculated in the auto-inducing media | ||
Line 35: | Line 60: | ||
- And maybe a slight reduction in CIP and SIP costs | - And maybe a slight reduction in CIP and SIP costs | ||
- | • High titres achieved when auto-inducing compared to using IPTG | + | • High titres achieved when auto-inducing compared to using IPTG as proven by our circuit simulation |
- Reduces size of fermenter required (as there is more target protein per volume of culture), which lowers the USP equipment costs. | - Reduces size of fermenter required (as there is more target protein per volume of culture), which lowers the USP equipment costs. | ||
- | - Also number of batches produced per | + | - Also number of batches produced per year would be less |
- | ===Disadvantages=== | + | ==='''Disadvantages'''=== |
• Auto-induction uses complex medium | • Auto-induction uses complex medium |
Latest revision as of 20:14, 26 October 2010
Economic Evaluation
Through means of auto induction, we hope not only to revolutionize the biopharmaceutical industries approach to protein expression, but we also hope to bring a wave of economic benefits;
1. Cost of IPTG is approximately $600.00 for 10,000L fermentation.
2. Average Facility of a pharmaceutical plant: 50 batches per year, total of $30,000 saving.
3. Industry wide savings of millions of dollars.
4. Two tons of CO2 are produced for each innocculum volume of IPTG. (Source: BIA)
5. Saving an average facility 100 tons of CO2 annually
Calculations
Estimate of IPTG cost for an industrial scale fermentation - say 1000L
From Sigma Aldrich (readily available): Isopropyl-Beta-D-thiogalactopyranoside (IPTG) solution costs £32.30p for 200 mM IPTG
IPTG’s molar mass= 238.3 g/M
200* (1 M/ 1000 mM) = 0.2 M 0.2 M * (238.3 g/M) = 47.66 g
So its £32.30p for 47.66 grams, therefore £ 0.68 pence /gram
From literature: 0.1 mM (This value is usually used for a high FAb production)
So using 0.1 mM, how much IPTG you need in grams: 0.1 mM * (1M/1000mM) = 0.0001 M
238.3 g/M * (0.0001 M) = 0.02383 grams<<< this is how many grams of IPTG you need per a kg of a feedstream.
Finally for a 1,000 L fermentation batch
Using SuperPro Designer you can assume kg = L
So for 1,000 kg/batch, this is how much IPTG you need:
1,000 * 0.02383 g * (1 kg/ 1,000 g) = 0.02383 kg /batch
Cost of IPTG per a batch:
0.02383 (kg/batch) * 0.6777 (£/ gram) * (1,000 gram / 1 kg) = £ 16. 15 p / batch
Below we have summarized the Economic Advantages and Disadvantages of Auto-Induction:
Advantages
• Simple procedure, expression strain inoculated in the auto-inducing media
- No holding tank required for IPTG, therefore cost saving in equipment costs (Note: lowering the equipment costs, also lowers the capital investment)
- And maybe a slight reduction in CIP and SIP costs
• High titres achieved when auto-inducing compared to using IPTG as proven by our circuit simulation
- Reduces size of fermenter required (as there is more target protein per volume of culture), which lowers the USP equipment costs.
- Also number of batches produced per year would be less
Disadvantages
• Auto-induction uses complex medium
- Complex medium, more expensive
- Could increase the Cost of Goods (COG’s), dependent on the prices of IPTG and complex media.
• At high titres, nature of the feedstream has an impact on the purification steps
- Protein A resin required to capture more product
- High titres bring about more impurities, purification steps may struggle to remove this higher level of impurities.
- Resin lifetime reduces due to fouling, therefore more resin required
- Protein A resin expensive and a significant cost driver for DSP costs
• Possibility of unintended induction
- Could potentially kill cells and produce unexpected impurities that cannot be removed downstream or require further purification steps
• Cultures grown using auto-inducing media may not be suitable as frozen stocks.
- Limited time for use
- Potential risk; loss of stocks due to decrease in viability