Coffee Cherry Pulp as a Beef Fat Substitute? The Surprising Future of Healthier Burgers

 The idea that “every part of coffee is valuable” keeps proving itself more and more true. As we know, during the post-harvest processing of coffee cherries, one crucial step is removing the outer skin. In most cases, this skin is either discarded as waste or used as compost on farms.

Because of this, many studies and product innovations have focused on finding ways to reuse coffee byproducts and increase their value. One example that some of us may already be familiar with is cascara tea, made from coffee cherry skins. But is that all coffee skins can be used for?

Recently, I came across a new scientific study that genuinely surprised me: coffee cherry pulp can actually be used as a substitute for beef fat.

This research was published in a food science journal under Nature, where scientists found that hydrated coffee cherry pulp powder (CCPP, also known as cascara powder) can partially replace beef fat in burger patties. Not only does it improve certain nutritional values, but it also maintains high sensory scores in taste and texture.

At first glance, this makes burgers seem a bit healthier. As consumer interest in safe and health-enhancing foods continues to grow, the food industry has been increasingly driven to reformulate products. One of the main goals behind these new formulations is to replace traditional ingredients with healthier alternatives. We’ve already seen many improved products receive positive market feedback—after all, people still want indulgent food, just with a little less guilt.

In this particular study, researchers used coffee cherry pulp powder sourced from a private coffee producer in Saudi Arabia. The powder was hydrated using a 3:1 water-to-powder ratio for 24 hours, then incorporated into burger mixtures.

They prepared 100-gram patties using 65% lean beef, with a control sample containing 20% beef fat. Four additional variations were tested, where 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100% of the beef fat were replaced with hydrated coffee cherry pulp powder. The patties were cooked at 180°C (356°F) for 5 minutes, reaching an internal temperature of 73°C (163°F).

Meanwhile, a sensory panel of 50 participants aged 25–40 evaluated the burgers using a 9-point hedonic scale—a standard method for measuring pleasure and overall enjoyment. The results showed that the burgers enhanced with coffee cherry pulp powder were well received.

Among the tasters, the formulations with 50% and 75% fat replacement scored the highest. These versions also performed well across multiple factors, including overall acceptability, appearance, color, texture, juiciness, and flavor.

A burger that’s both delicious and healthier? That’s something to look forward to. The reformulated patties demonstrated improved nutritional profiles compared to traditional versions—lower fat, fewer calories, reduced cholesterol, and higher fiber content.

Additionally, researchers found that coffee cherry pulp powder contains phenolic compounds, flavonoids, and antioxidant activity, all of which contribute extra functional and nutritional benefits.

This research offers a fresh perspective for the food industry—especially when it comes to classic American burgers, which are known for their hearty portions and high calorie counts. If taste can be preserved while introducing new ingredients like CCPP as a fat substitute, it opens the door to developing lower-calorie burgers that still meet consumers’ nutritional needs, while reducing fat and saturated fat intake.

Honestly, that sounds pretty close to perfect.

Would You Drink Coffee Made from Food Waste? The Rise of Beanless Coffee Explained

 Every single second, the world consumes about 26,000 cups of coffee. On Shanghai’s Huaihai Road alone—less than two kilometers long—you can find nearly 50 cafés, each with its own style. Coffee has long since become a nationwide obsession. Enthusiasts eagerly debate bean origins, processing methods, and flavor notes, yet few stop to ask a deeper question: What hidden burden does this beloved drink place on the planet?

From a food-industry carbon-emissions perspective, coffee ranks just behind beef, lamb, cheese, and chocolate. Data shows that producing a single cup of coffee consumes roughly 140 liters of water, while growing and processing one kilogram of coffee beans generates about 17 kilograms of CO₂.

Viewed through the lens of Western environmental narratives, this kind of data practically screams: ban it.

How could such an “unethical” product escape scrutiny in one of the world’s environmental flag-bearers—the UK? British research has already sounded the alarm: by 2050, nearly 50% of land currently used for coffee cultivation may become unsuitable for farming. Traditional coffee growers may be forced to abandon their farms, leading to future supply shortages. Meanwhile, climate change pushes coffee cultivation to higher altitudes, accelerating deforestation and creating a vicious cycle. Production costs rise, premium beans grow scarcer—and where there’s a problem, there’s also a business opportunity.

That’s where beanless coffee enters the picture.

Biotech startups have begun exploring alternatives, and the concept sounds eerily similar to lab-grown meat. Roasted coffee contains over 1,000 volatile compounds—how could anyone possibly recreate that? Even the most advanced labs admit that perfect replication is impossible. And yet, a few companies have come remarkably close.

So far, three players stand out.

Atomo: Brewing Coffee from Food Waste

Seattle-based startup Atomo took a bold shortcut. Instead of chasing all 1,000 compounds, they identified 28 key components responsible for what our taste buds recognize as “coffee.” If those are present, the brain fills in the rest.

Even more intriguing: caffeine levels are fully customizable. Unlike traditional decaf processes, Atomo can make coffee completely caffeine-free or turn it into a high-octane stimulant. In short: what you can taste, we replicate; what you can’t, we skip. As for how awake you want to be—just set the dial.

Their ingredients are even more radical. They extract usable compounds from items like dates, chicory root, and grape skins—essentially food waste—and convert them into those 28 key elements. In a street blind-tasting, 70% of participants said Atomo’s “waste-based coffee” tasted smoother and sweeter than Starbucks. The company has already launched canned coffee, priced at $6 per can.

Compound Foods: Fermentation Meets Terroir

Compound Foods uses microbial fermentation to recreate coffee flavors. Through food science and fermentation technology, sustainably grown microorganisms produce beverages that the company claims are sweeter, brighter in acidity, and more aromatic than traditional shelf coffee.

They’re also building a massive coffee flavor database, aiming to replicate the distinctive profiles of beans from different regions. While they haven’t disclosed detailed ingredient sources, they likely overlap with Atomo’s approach.

VTT: Lab-Grown Coffee Cells

Finland’s nonprofit research institute VTT takes a different route. Scientists extract cells from coffee plants and grow them in nutrient-rich bioreactors. The result is a floating biomass that, once dried and roasted, resembles freeze-dried powder. Add water, and you get a cup of “lab-grown coffee.”

No need to cultivate entire coffee trees—just grow the drinkable cells. That said, one might reasonably ask: Don’t coffee plants themselves also impose ecological costs?

The Promise—and the Pushback

These beanless coffees do offer compelling advantages. Compound Foods claims their method reduces greenhouse gas emissions and water use by up to 90%, while Atomo says its process cuts resource consumption by 94%. Production is also climate- and season-independent; as long as technology and hygiene standards are met, “coffee farms” could exist anywhere in the world, slashing transportation costs.

But among hardcore coffee lovers, even fully automatic pour-over machines are dismissed as “soulless.” Beanless coffee, then, feels almost heretical.

And there’s a bigger ethical question: What about regions whose livelihoods depend on coffee farming? You can’t just eliminate an industry and tell people to wait for sustainability to trickle down from the sky. When survival itself is at stake, preaching environmentalism can feel hollow.

So the question remains: If coffee no longer comes from beans, would you still drink it?