Scaling insect biotech: what we’re learning (and what we’re building)

The insect bioconversion conversation is shifting from hype to standards, scale, and evidence. After spending five days with almost 600 of the world’s most applied minds working within the industry earlier in the year, our time at the IFW was certainly an eye-opener as well as a useful time for reflection on what we have achieved so far.

Five days at the IFW, and it wasn’t an event full of big announcements and product reveals. Instead, it showcased what the best operators, researchers, and suppliers are spending their time thinking and talking about.

While this was our first year at the IFW, this year the message was clear: the insect sector is moving away from novelty and theory, and towards repeatable systems, measurable outcomes, and evidence-led claims. In other words, the conversation is maturing from “insects could…” to “insects can, but how do we do this properly, at scale, and in a way that holds up to scrutiny?”

That shift matters for the bigger picture.

Locally, at FKS, it’s where we’ve deliberately positioned ourselves from day one: practical, compliance-first, and built for real-world delivery.

Scale, engineering and biology

• Consistency of inputs (and the reality that food waste streams vary)
• Process control and variables
• Drying and energy use
• Quality assurance and standardisation
• Automation and the economics of throughput

Biology is the starting point, but biology alone does not create a reliable product. Across multiple discussions, the focus at the IFW kept returning to the same themes:

The takeaway is not “scale is hard” (we already know that based on how the industry has evolved). The takeaway is that scaling insect systems is increasingly being treated as an industrial discipline, with repeatability and standardisation at its centre.

That’s good news for credible operators, and it’s exactly why we talk about capacity, controls, and process as much as we talk about outputs.

Not all food waste is equal

A phrase we come back to internally is: inputs define outputs. Food waste is not a single, consistent material. It varies by source, season, storage, and handling. That reality shows up everywhere – in yield, in safety considerations, and in the predictability – and consistency – of end products.

What we heard at IFW reinforced a simple truth – if you want reliable outputs, you need:

• Clear rules around substrate selection
• Tight handling and hygiene practices
• Process visibility and documentation
• Feeling secure in the need for ongoing learning (because the system is biological, and biology responds to change)

For us, this is less about “optimising for best-case performance” and more about building a system that performs well, safely, and consistently under real operational conditions.

Frass and by-products

The most interesting conversations about frass are moving beyond broad claims and into specifics:

• What outcomes are measurable today
• Which conditions influence performance (soil type, moisture, crop type, application method)
• How to talk about results without pretending every farm is identical

We like that direction. Proof beats puffery.

It also creates a clearer lane for operators who take soil health seriously. No soil amendment or inprover is a miracle input. But the IFW created a space to think about how frass fits into the wider agronomy picture.

If the sector’s early story was “insect protein”, the next chapter is more nuanced: fractionation, purity, and multiple outputs.

The companies that will define the next phase of this industry will be those that can do more than produce a commodity ingredient. They will be the ones who can:

• Control quality tightly enough to serve higher-value use cases
• Separate and refine outputs intelligently
• Build partnerships that move products from “interesting” to “used in the real world”

That is where the idea of insects as a biotech platform becomes more than a slogan. It becomes a practical roadmap.

The sector is attracting more attention, and with attention comes standards and regulation. Regulation, economics, and proof from operational projects are increasingly the deciding factors. It’s no longer enough to have a compelling narrative. You need documentation, traceability, and the ability to defend your claims. We welcome that. It’s better for customers, better for partners, and better for long-term credibility.

What this means for FKS

IFW did not change our direction — it validated it. We’re building FKS to be:

• Local by default (keeping value close to where waste is produced)
• Industrial by design (repeatable systems, not one-off outcomes)
• Evidence-led in how we communicate and how we grow

If you’re working on waste supply, sustainable ingredients, soil health, or future-facing food systems — and you want to build with an operator focused on delivery — we’d love to talk. Get in touch with the team today.