‘We can see the difference our research makes in the operations of real companies’

Gabriella Fioravanti is a researcher with the Kander Research Group at Thomas Jefferson University (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania), where she focuses on applied hemp science and industry collaboration. With a background in biomedical materials and an MBA, she brings both technical expertise and business insight to her work. Gabriella leads projects in fiber testing, sustainable retting, and CO2 degumming, helping bridge lab innovation with real-world applications.

HempToday: How would you describe the mission of the hemp research program at Thomas Jefferson University, and how have your relationships with industry partners helped shape both the direction of that research and the development of technologies that are directly applicable to real-world industrial use?

Gabriella Fioravanti: Thomas Jefferson University is a multi-disciplinary institution with areas of research spanning medicine, architecture, manufacturing, microbiology and chemistry (just to name a few). Similarly, hemp research across the University spans all of these fields. Broadly, the mission of the hemp research program is to re-learn what has been lost to time culturally and agriculturally about the plant and translate that into modern manufactured and medicinal products. Listening to our industry partners has been crucial to shaping the direction of our research, as their feedback helps us know if we are putting our efforts towards something that end-users want. Sometimes, they come to us with their own ideas that they need help bringing to life.

HT: Could you walk us through the function and significance of the Fiber Testing Suite at Thomas Jefferson University? How does it serve as a tool for growers, processors, and other stakeholders?

GF: The Fiber Testing Suite, housed within the Bruner Material Characterization lab, is a range of machines specifically curated to test bast fiber. The suite is a tool for both industry commission work and research. It is our hope that growers and processors can bring us their fiber and receive a range of useful information, including fiber fineness, strength, and color, which could be provided to manufacturers to aid in the sale and use of their product. Concurrently, students at Thomas Jefferson University use the machines to aid in longer-term study of the fiber, which will hopefully add to the body of knowledge on hemp and move the industry forward overall.

HT: Your team is exploring innovative approaches like closed-loop water retting and CO2 degumming. Can you share more about these projects and what’s needed to bring them to scale within a commercial or industry-facing context?

GF: The closed-loop water retting project and the supercritical CO2 extraction project are our attempts at thinking outside the box of traditional fiber processing. The closed-loop water retting prototype consists of, in short, a tank for hemp stalks, flowing water in a short loop, a custom filter, and controls for water temperature and pH. The hope is to emulate river water retting on a small and sustainable scale, so that we may reap the benefits of traditional water retting while eliminating the ecological effects on rivers. This project receives essential support from Natural Textiles Solutions, a natural fiber processor and supplier. Students have consulted many times over the past year with the owner-operators of the company to get feedback on their design, helping to refine it for what industry needs. After we gather our preliminary data on its function, we will make suggestions for a larger-scale prototype to our partner company, which can decide how to proceed.

The supercritical CO2 extraction project is a project attempting to degum hemp fiber by extracting lignin and pectin from fiber using CO2 in a supercritical state. Supercritical CO2 is a selectable and tunable solvent, depending on the temperature and pressure of the molecule. There are many supercritical extraction devices already in the manufacturing sector. Therefore, if we are successful, it would be relatively easy to scale up to a large reactor if there was an interested partner company that wanted to adopt our technique.

HT: Many university-led research efforts stay theoretical. Your team’s work—developing commercial-ready dyes, materials, and fiber testing infrastructure—seems different. How did this practical, market-facing approach evolve?

GF: From the start of the Kander Research Group, the majority of our projects have been with a direct industry partner. Dr. Kander and I work on “applied research” which focuses more on specific, practical problems rather than theoretical ones. A project will be born one of two ways. Either a company will come to us with a specific problem they need help with, or we come across an interesting technology in the literature that specifically has a large body of lab-scale research but has yet to jump to a TRL (technology readiness level) of 5-6, which we can help push to the text level by presenting the idea to the right industry partner. This type of work is very rewarding as we can see the difference our research makes in the operations of real companies.

HT: What are the biggest gaps or challenges you see today in North American hemp fiber supply chains, and how is your team helping to address them?

GF: The biggest challenges in North American fiber supply chains are the gaps. There remains a consistent, reliable supply chain providing good quality and affordable hemp fiber within the US. However, over the past year, I have seen many creative solutions to the problems within degumming and decortication. The Kander Research Group is contributing to this discussion through our research projects I described above. It is our sincere hope that through continued collaboration and “coop-itition” a superior method will arise and the whole industry will benefit.

HT: How do you view the opportunity for U.S. regional manufacturing hubs—like what you’re helping establish in Pennsylvania—within the broader global hemp landscape?

GF: I believe regional manufacturing hubs are going to be critical to processing hemp material at scale. Due to the extremely light and voluminous nature of plant material, manufacturers incur large costs shipping it long distances in an unprocessed state. It makes sense for logistical reasons such as fuel cost, as well as product quality reasons such as minimizing unwanted degradation of plant material, to create manufacturing hubs near where the plant is grown. Currently, a farmer growing hemp in Pennsylvania has very limited options for getting their fiber decorticated in-state. This is not a realistic scenario for creating a robust natural fiber supply chain.

HT: If you could wave a wand and create one new piece of infrastructure or policy for hemp fiber innovation, what would it be—and why?

GF: I would wave my magic wand and create a legal exemption for grain and fiber from cannabinoid testing. With all the hysteria in D.C. over the past couple years, legislation concerning agriculture has been totally swept under the rug. We are still operating under the 2018 Farm Bill and we have been due for a new one a couple times over. Every year that the needs of farmers get ignored by the government is another year of unnecessary overregulation and potential negative financial impact.

HT: Your career path highlights a rare blend of technical lab science and design thinking. How does your background in biomedical materials and your MBA inform your work in hemp innovation today?

GF: My work in biomedical labs aided my ability to think critically, understand the scientific method and continuous nature of research, and remain flexible by always needing to learn new skills. Such proficiencies can be translated across all fields of research and remain useful while working in the ever-changing landscape of hemp. Earning my MBA was an important learning experience as a career scientist. It connected me with professionals from all types of careers and taught me about economics and business models. These are experiences I draw from when working directly with industry professionals, so that I can better articulate technical work in ways that make sense to our non-technical partners.

HT: You’ve talked about finding your passion in sustainability and agriculture. What keeps you motivated in the day-to-day of research, given how slowly commercial systems sometimes move?

GF: Knowing that my students and I are working on products that improve lives while bringing minimal harm to the planet is extremely rewarding to me. Connecting with business partners and seeing them get excited about the project we complete for them is rewarding to me. Watching a student become passionately curious about their project, going through bouts of frustration, but ultimately succeeding in executing their assignment is rewarding to me. No matter the field of study, most of your research will fail, and you will have to “search” again. And again. And again. A quote attributed to Albert Einstein reads, “If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it?”.

HT: With so many concurrent projects underway at Thomas Jefferson University, what should industry stakeholders be keeping an eye on? Are there particular research breakthroughs, tools, or collaborations that you think are especially promising in the months and years ahead?

GF: You may not like this answer, but industry stakeholders should be keeping an eye on our student graduates. While it is a great privilege to work on so many important projects, my ultimate goal is to produce capable and knowledgeable students who can go into the world and concur its challenges. I think the most exciting “product” the Kander Research Group and other hemp researchers at Jefferson produce is the growing body of students with practical, non-mystified knowledge of hemp. The more people in industry who can view hemp with a non-sensational lens, the more likely it will be taken seriously as a material.