Introducing the TransBIB Competence Pool - Interview with Dr. Christine Rasche

Head of Sustainable Chemistry | Fraunhofer IGB, Leuna

Dr Manfred Kircher: I am looking forward to talking to you today about the bioeconomy, your career, what you would like to contribute to the TransBIB expert network - and how you can be approached. What excites you about the bioeconomy? Perhaps you would like to start by briefly introducing yourself personally?

Dr Christine Rasche: Yes, thank you very much for the opportunity to introduce myself in this interview today.
I came to bioeconomy through my degree in food chemistry. There was a lecture on wood and plant chemistry that immediately fascinated me. It was an optional course that I took at the time - and the topic grabbed me straight away: the variety of molecules that nature provides us with and how we can utilise them. It's impressive how many interesting chemical structures we can already find that we could use almost directly.
At that time, this area was still being pursued comparatively little. I was then able to write my diploma thesis and later also my doctoral thesis in wood and plant chemistry - and bioeconomy has stayed with me ever since.
It was during this time that the topic gained in importance, and I think it's great that so many people are working on it today. It's a very lively environment in which a lot is happening and which offers many opportunities. And it's one of those topics that makes you want to get up in the morning - because you know that you can contribute something good in a small way.

Dr Manfred Kircher: Yes, and there is still a lot of untapped potential. That's what makes research in this area so exciting. Where did you study?

Dr Christine Rasche: That's right. I studied at the TU Dresden - as I said, food chemistry. I then moved on to wood and plant chemistry and did my doctorate at the TU.
My doctorate was part of a project on biomass digestion. At the end of my doctorate, there was still some budget left over and we were able to test the process we had developed - which involved the digestion of wheat straw - on a larger scale.
Until then, I had been working on a 10-litre scale, but that was exactly when the Fraunhofer CBP opened - about ten years ago.
I was then one of the first users of this pilot centre and was able to implement wheat straw digestion there on a 400-litre scale in an integrated biorefinery - including the utilisation of lignin and other components.
There were also vacancies for scientists at the time, as the centre was just being set up. So I came straight to the CBP and worked there as a project manager - in particular on scaling up various processes in the field of biomass digestion.

Dr Manfred Kircher: So you have moved from "pure science" at a technical university to very application-oriented work at the Fraunhofer Institute. You just mentioned the Fraunhofer CBP. What does CBP stand for?

Dr Christine Rasche: CBP stands for "Centre for Chemical-Biotechnological Processes".
It is a centre of the Fraunhofer IGB, our parent institute, which is based in Stuttgart. The IGB itself has several sites - including in Straubing, Biberach and the CBP here in Leuna.

The special thing about the CBP is that it is directly integrated into the Leuna chemical site. This decision was made deliberately because we have a particularly practice-orientated focus within the Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft, which generally conducts very application-oriented research. We work with a significantly higher level of technological maturity - no longer on a laboratory scale, but rather on a pilot to demonstration scale.

The CBP was founded over ten years ago - with the background that although there are many great ideas in the bioeconomy in the laboratory, they often do not reach market maturity. It is precisely this gap that we want to close and support the transfer of technology to an industrial scale.

Dr Manfred Kircher: There is currently a lot of investment going on in Leuna - for example by a paper company that is moving into wood-based chemistry. Could the CBP also support this process in its development?

Dr Christine Rasche: The process that the company is pursuing differs from the core processes that we work on at CBP, but we can of course provide accompanying support.
The fact that there is a research centre for bioeconomy directly on site certainly also plays a role. This enables scientific exchange and expert support.

Fraunhofer also has the task of training scientific and technical staff - such as university graduates, but also specialists with a technical background.
This is a major issue: how do you attract and qualify staff specialising in the bioeconomy?

As plants in the bioeconomy differ in terms of details, there is an opportunity to build up specific expertise - and this is precisely why local dialogue is so important.

Dr Manfred Kircher: You mentioned university research, as well as application research at the Fraunhofer CBP in Leuna, and you also touched on the subject of training. What are your current activities like?

Dr Christine Rasche: I would like to go into this in more detail. I initially worked as a scientist and project manager at Fraunhofer - particularly in the scaling of processes. We also developed our own processes that we wanted to scale up and later licence.

I often asked myself what actually happens in the background at the companies when they evaluate such technologies. As a scientist, this was a kind of black box for me. That's why I decided to change my perspective once again - and went into management consulting to get to know this other side.

I worked in London for two years - at AFRY Management Consulting (some may remember it under its former name Pöyry, a Finnish bioeconomy company). That's where I learnt the tools of the trade: technology scouting, technology assessment, strategic decision-making processes in companies and with investors. So, what happens before a company or an investor invests in a process? What studies are carried out in this context?

I led a number of such studies there - for bankers and private equity firms in London, among others, who were interested in certain technologies and wanted to know: How is the market developing? What competitors are there? What is really behind the technology? Is there freedom to operate? What does the IP situation look like?

These are all questions that need to be clarified before you are prepared to invest several million euros.
This time was extremely instructive for me because I completely changed my perspective and was able to understand the big picture - not just the research, but also how innovations can be economically evaluated and realised.

I then returned to Fraunhofer with this knowledge - initially as head of the "Regenerative Resources" department. Among other things, it deals with biomass digestion and chemical processes, including the scaling of such processes. In this context, we also deal with topics such as CO₂ utilisation, for example the conversion of CO₂ to methanol. We have now also built up scaling expertise in this area.
And I have now taken on a new role: I am currently head of the "Sustainable Chemistry" business unit at Fraunhofer IGB. This encompasses several locations and departments. My role is primarily one of strategic networking - in other words, identifying future topics, creating internal synergies, establishing external collaborations and representing the field externally.

Dr Manfred Kircher: Before we move on to specific examples of your current work, I would like to come back to your time in London - this is certainly a rather unusual step for many listeners. Many come from a scientific background, perhaps also with an interest in application - but the move into the business sector is rather rare. What was your most significant learning experience during this time? What was the most formative experience for you?

Dr Christine Rasche: Firstly, the methodological tools that I learnt there: How do I obtain information? How do I prepare it - and in such a way that it is presented in a way that is understandable and appropriate for the target group?

I had to prepare highly complex, technological content in such a way that bankers could understand it and the essential message was clearly recognisable. This is a completely different form of communication to what we know from science.

Another important point was to familiarise myself with new topics extremely quickly. You are constantly moving outside your own comfort zone. Incidentally, I can only recommend this to scientists as well.

Before, my comfort zone was clear: lignocellulose, biorefinery, lignin - that's my scientific hobbyhorse. But what has really helped me is that I can now represent topics of a very different nature.

For example, one week I'm giving a presentation on proteins, the next I'm talking to a customer about chitosan, then it's about CO₂ utilisation and methanol synthesis. I don't need to have in-depth expertise in every area - but I do need to be able to familiarise myself quickly, get to the heart of the issues and present them confidently. And not just superficially - it has to be substantial.

That was quite uncomfortable at first, because you prefer to work in your familiar area of expertise.
But I have learnt to rise to this challenge - even in situations that can be intimidating at first glance.
For example, when you are the only woman in a room with ten male decision-makers and have to face their tough questions. Today, I know what questions are asked in such contexts, what they look for - and I can prepare myself accordingly.

Dr Manfred Kircher: That sounds very exciting.
Perhaps you could give us a specific project example from your current work at the Fraunhofer IGB - and also explain which, as you said, "sharp questions" from bankers or investors you would expect in this context? After all, these are precisely the questions that many of the experts from research and development here don't normally get asked - but which are crucial to whether a project can really take off.

Dr Christine Rasche: I am no longer involved in the in-depth scientific work on specific technologies myself. My role today is more strategic and networking. I support the department heads in the content-related orientation of their research areas. And this is exactly what we are currently working on intensively - an ongoing process at our institute.

We look at the various topics we deal with - ranging from organosolv digestion and lignin splitting to CO₂ utilisation.

In this context, we ask ourselves strategic questions such as: Where is perhaps the last building block, the "little ribbon", still missing to make a process licenceable at all?

I can give you a specific example from my time as head of department - I was even more closely involved in the implementation: At that time, we developed a process for oilseed biorefinery, specifically for the utilisation of rapeseed. In contrast to the conventional process, which works with hexane, we used ethanol - this has several advantages: you get a higher quality protein fraction compared to the usual rapeseed meal, which is otherwise primarily used as animal feed with limited value.

We have developed, patented and scaled this process together with an industrial partner - including the construction and operation of a dedicated pilot plant.

Of course, such a project - especially when it comes to licensing - raises a number of questions: What does the system cost - i.e. CapEx and OpEx? What alternative processes are available on the market? What solutions are we competing with?
And these don't just have to be comparable extraction processes - a newly developed solvent may also emerge that addresses the same problem as our process, but is perhaps even simpler or cheaper.

Such competitive aspects can therefore come from very different directions - and that's exactly what you need to be prepared for.

In such cases, I organise targeted workshops to examine all these aspects together with the project teams: Where do we stand? Where is data still missing? What needs to be addressed in the next research project? Which partners could we win over for this?

After all, it can quickly take ten years or more to bring new processes to market maturity - and this process needs to be actively managed. That's why I ask these - sometimes unpleasant - questions in order to set the right course at an early stage.

Dr Manfred Kircher: Thank you very much for the illustrative example. I would like to take this up again with regard to the TransBIB network - and how interested parties can specifically approach you and the Fraunhofer IGB.
The oilseed biorefinery project you described was obviously very complex, time-consuming and associated with corresponding investments. However, many potential partners in the network may not be immediately ready to launch a large-scale project. Instead, they may first want to get involved with an expression of interest - and find out how a collaboration actually works.

So how can you approach the Fraunhofer IGB to discuss a question or concern - without it immediately turning into a multi-million euro project?

Dr Christine Rasche: That's actually the reality: the vast majority of our projects don't start in the millions. Even the large oilseed project started small - with a simple enquiry, an initial brainstorming session, a meeting to get to know each other.

The easiest way to get in touch with us really is to send us an e-mail - preferably directly to me. I'll then categorise it thematically and see how we can proceed.

We are very well networked, for example in the BioZ innovation network, which is also part of TransBIB. As the scientific coordinator there, I know many of the players and can assess relatively quickly where an idea might meet with interest - or whether there are already approaches in a similar direction.

And very importantly, it doesn't have to be a major research project straight away. An initial discussion is often enough to find out together what the actual issue is. What is the real question, what is the sticking point?

Once you have that clear, you can think about it: What resources do you really need? Can this be initiated internally? Would funding be necessary - and if so, what kind? Or would an initial small study, a laboratory test or a literature review be enough to determine the direction?

We don't have to reinvent the wheel. At IGB, we know our way around the bioeconomy: We have the relevant players on our radar and know what may have been published a long time ago - for example, the Organosolv digestion process was patented back in 1930.

That's why it's best to simply approach us in an uncomplicated manner. A brief meeting is often enough to get a good understanding of the issue. We can then see together how we can proceed.

Dr Manfred Kircher: I'll pick up on a keyword you just mentioned: Potential. The projects you are interested in are always about the question of application potential - in other words, how to transfer a technology into industrial practice. What TRL level do you expect when you start to take a serious look at a project?

Dr Christine Rasche: That is relatively broad. In principle, of course, Fraunhofer stands for applied research, typically TRL 3 to 4, so there should already be a certain basis.

However, we also work closely with universities, which means that it is absolutely not an exclusion criterion if someone only has an idea or initial thoughts. We then look together to see how far the topic has already been developed, what we can build on and where it might be better placed - for example, in a university environment or whether we can go a little further.

For the Fraunhofer IGB as a whole, access is therefore quite flexible.

However, when it comes to the Fraunhofer CBP - our Centre for Chemical-Biotechnological Processes, where we pilot and scale up technologies - the situation is somewhat different.
Here we already expect reliable laboratory data. A TRL of at least 3, preferably 4, is required because scaling is otherwise too risky.

For example, we need to be able to carry out safety evaluations and risk assessments - and for this we need reliable source material. After all, scaling is expensive and we don't want a customer to invest money in a process that doesn't work on a large scale.

However, this does not mean that we want to be involved at a late stage. On the contrary: it is actually very helpful if we are already involved during laboratory development.

Because partners often come to us and say: "Here is the finished lab process, please scale it up." And then, unfortunately, we have to say: "This and that step is not scalable."

A classic example is filtration: in the laboratory, a product is filtered slowly overnight. This does not work on a pilot scale with 10 cubic metres of liquid. Alternative processes need to be developed - and these optimisations should ideally be incorporated at an early stage.

Dr Manfred Kircher: This is also my experience: making contact at an early stage, asking specific questions - that always makes sense. And as you just said: You are simply approachable. The next opportunity to get to know you personally without any obligation will be in June - at the TransBIB annual meeting in Greifswald, your home town.

Dr Christine Rasche: I am really delighted that TransBIB has decided to organise the annual meeting in Greifswald. If you look at the map of bioeconomy initiatives and networks, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern was almost a black spot for a long time - wrongly so, because there are exciting biomasses and great potential there that can and should be utilised even more.
Lately, however, it has become clear that this is changing. More and more alliances and projects are emerging in and around Greifswald. So it's all the better that a conference is now also being held there.

To be honest, my parents were pretty flabbergasted that I'm doing business in Greifswald - that's never happened in the last ten years!
So I'm really looking forward to being there - and anyone who's interested can simply get in touch with me. Maybe over a fish sandwich - I'll tell you where to get the best!
I'm looking forward to the exchange.

Dr Manfred Kircher: Thank you very much for this lively, informative and really interesting conversation. I wish you many new contacts on the basis of this interview - and look forward to seeing you again in Greifswald.

___

We would like to thank Dr Christine Rasche for the interview.
The questions were asked by TransBIB project team member Dr Manfred Kircher.