Department of Engineering · Public University of Navarre
His research on the valorization of waste from the coffee industry —specifically the feasibility of vermicomposting of spent coffee grounds and silverskin— was born from an R&D project between the university and a Navarrese SME, funded by the Government of Navarre and the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF).
In this interview he tells us what it was like to start a research line from scratch in the middle of a pandemic, the surprising variability of experimental results, and why he believes that coordination between science, policy, and business is the pending subject of environmental remediation.
My interest in this topic arose, in a way, by chance. I had the opportunity to participate in an R&D project between the Public University of Navarre and a small Navarrese company, within the framework of a joint project funded by the Government of Navarre and the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), aimed at designing a vermicomposting machine.
From the various tests required for the project development, the possibility arose to give an approach beyond the purely technical and turn part of the work into scientific research with publication potential. This led us to develop a line of work with scientific-technical rigor and high academic interest.
Over time, continuous contact with this subject matter naturally increased my interest, to the point of becoming fully involved in it.
The main challenge was starting practically from scratch in terms of specific knowledge of the topic. Unlike other cases where there is a consolidated research line, in this project we had to face a new subject for the group.
Although we already worked on waste valorization, mainly inorganic materials through other routes such as recycling or incineration, in this case we focused on organic waste, which involved completely new challenges both technically and experimentally.
Added to this was the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, which posed a significant additional difficulty: interrupted trials, operational limitations, and the need to keep live organisms, such as earthworms, during periods of inactivity. All of this made the beginnings especially complex.
What surprised me most was the variability of the results. Sometimes they matched the hypotheses, but other times they deviated completely from what was expected.
Furthermore, when comparing the results with the scientific literature, one notices that in many cases published studies tend to mainly reflect positive results, which can generate a somewhat biased perception. This leads one to question at times whether the work is being done correctly, although in reality this variability is a natural part of the research process.
I believe it would be essential to strengthen coordination between scientific research, public policies, and practical application in the field.
There is currently a significant gap between knowledge generation in academia and its real implementation in companies and society. Reducing this distance would allow a more effective, faster, and sustainable response to the environmental and climate problems we currently face.
I would recommend approaching this field with genuine interest and passion, since research requires a great investment of time, effort, and persistence, and results are not always immediate or visible.
Likewise, it is important not to be afraid to ask questions and rely on people with more experience. This not only helps resolve doubts, but also facilitates networking, the exchange of ideas, and the development of new opportunities and synergies.
Desde MycoData creemos que la ciencia se construye compartiendo conocimientos y experiencias. We deeply thank Miguel Ángel for his time and generosity in answering these questions.
🌱 Want to know more?
Explore our interactive mycoremediation map or read other interviews.
Explore MycoData →