1. ACV del biodiesel de palma
incluyendo la utilización de
resíduos para la generación de
electricidad
IV Congreso de Energias Renovables y Biocombustibles, UNAL, Lima, Perú
Prof. Dr. Electo Eduardo Silva Lora
NEST/IEM/UNIFEI

2. For references look at:

3. Zoneamiento agro-ambiental en
Brasil

4. ASPECTOS DE SOSTENIBILIDAD DE
BIOCOMBUSTIBLES EN BRASIL: BIODIESEL

5. Anos de experiência na produção de etanol, incluindo o desarrolho de motores para o uso
de etanol puro.
Programa Nacional de Produção e Uso do Biodiesel: 2004
Capacidade atual de mais de 500 milhões de litros anuais
5

6. 6

9. LIMITACIONES DEL ACV
• La metodologia ACV no es capaz de considerar/incluir todos los
impactos relevantes (uso de la tierra y del agua, cambios indirectos
en el uso de la tierra y la competición con los alimentos) .
• El ACV falla al considerar la reducción en el uso del suelo relacionada
con la utilización de co-productos.con la utilización de co-productos.
• Se necesita de un abordaje mas amplio (tal como la EAI - Evaluación
Ambiental Integrada ).
• Alto número de categorias de impactos ambientales, lo que dificulta
el proceso de toma de decisiones.

10. INCONSISTENCIAS DEL ACV

12. ABORDAJE DE LA CERTIFICACIÓN BASEADA EM LA SOSTENIBILIDAD ??????????
TODO EL MUNDO HABLA DE ESTO !!

13. Experiencia del NEST/UNIFEI en estudios de
sostenibilidad utilizando el ACV.
Desde el año 2004 el NEST/UNIFEI ha realizado los
siguientes estudios utilizando la ACV:
• Biodiesel de palma,
• Tratamiento y disposición de vinazas de etanol,
• Metanol a partir del bagazo de caña.
• Aprovechamiento energético de los resíduos sólidos
urbanos.

14. C2
C3
C1

15. C1 C2 C3
Location in Colombia Eastern Region Northern Region Central Region
Palm area, Adults (ha) 1,200 3,436 4,675
Palm area, nursery (ha) 1,100 64 130
Crop Density (Palm trees
ha-1)
145 143 143
FFB Production (ton FFB
yr-1)
30,000 85,898 98,175
FFB Process
CHARACTERISTICS AND PARAMETERS
OF THE THREE EVALUATED COMPANIES
FFB Process
(ton yr-1)
101,324 85,898 154,352
Productivity
(ton FFB ha-yr-1)
25 25 21
OER
(Oil Extraction Rate, %)
19.8 21.1 20.4
Oil Yield
(ton oil ha-yr-1)
4.95 5.27 4.28
Brief description of the
energy supplies facilities
Isolated system
using diesel
and biogas in
engines
Purchase all
electricity from
the grid
Electricity from
the grid and low
efficiency
cogeneration

17. del biodiesel de palma
Esquema del inventario de ciclo de vida
del biodiesel de palma

18. RESIDUOS
DE
BIOMASA
EFB (20-23%)
CACHOS VACIOS
FRESCOS -FFB
100 %
Fruto
de la
palma
Fibras (11-14%)
Cáscaras (5-7%)
124.8 GJ/ ha.year

19. ETAPA AGRÍCOLA

20. INPUTS DE ENERGIA EN LA ETAPAINPUTS DE ENERGIA EN LA ETAPA
AGRÍCOLA

21. INPUTS DE ENERGIA DURANTE LAINPUTS DE ENERGIA DURANTE LA
EXTRACCIÓN DEL ACEITE

22. PARTICIPATION OF LC STAGES
IN TOTAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION

23. Inventario global del ciclo de vida delInventario global del ciclo de vida del
biodiesel de palma
Uso racional de
Fertilizantes
Biometanol o
etanol
Fertilizantes
VINAZAS ???

24. C2
C3
RELACIÓN UTPUT/INPUT (renovable/fosil)
C1

25. Seven thermal cogeneration schemes for the palm oil industry were simulated
by using Gatecycle software version 5.0.1, considering different sources and
levels of biomass use with a condensing-extraction (CET) and back pressure
turbines (BPT) with high pressure boilers (cases A, B, C, F, E F end G).

26. PERCENTAGE OF BIOMASS PRODUCED DURING
OIL EXTRACTION PROCESS USED AS A FUEL
IN THE BOILER
Case Turbine
% of biomass used as a fuel in the boiler
Fiber Shell EFB Biogas
A BPT 75 75 -- --A BPT 75 75 -- --
B CET 100 50 -- --
C CET 100 100 -- --
D BPT 100 100 100 100
E CET 100 100 50 --
F CET 100 100 100 --
G CET 100 100 100 100
30 t FFB/h plant, steam parameters were 2 MPa and 350°C.

27. Fuel
(MW)
Power
(MW)
Heat Rate
(MJ/kWh)
Effic. of
Electricity
Generation
* (%)
Generation
Index
(kWh.kg-1.
biodiesel)
A 21.013 1,74 39.10 9.21 0.2014
Electricity generation index
of the cogeneration systems.
B 22.546 1,86 39.25 9.17 0.2153
C 28.010 2,84 32.04 11.24 0.3287
D 51.814 3,96 40.84 8.81 0.4583
E 38.698 4,98 24.55 14.66 0.5764
F 49.368 7,03 21.88 16.45 0.8136
G 51.814 7,55 21.42 16.80 0.8738

28. Output/Input relation for biodiesel
production life cycle.
INPUT [MJ / kg Biodiesel] C1 C2 C3
Agricultural stage 3.20 4.23 2.63
Oil Extraction with
Cogeneration
1.06 1.27 0.72
Oil Refining 0.98 0.98 0.98
Transesterification 5.01 5.01 5.01
Total Input 9.96 11.20 9.05
OUTPUT [MJ / kg
Biodiesel]
C1 C2 C3
Biodiesel]
C1 C2 C3
Fiber 0.85 0.72 0.66
Shell, 2.79 2.64 1.85
Biogas 0.05 0.05 0.05
Kernel cake 2.54 2.38 2.46
Kernel Oil 6.00 5.64 5.82
Glycerin 2.09 2.09 2.09
Fatty acids 1.27 1.27 1.27
Biodiesel 39.60 39.60 39.60
Total Output 55.22 54.42 53.83
O/I (using EFB as
Fertilizer)
5.54 4.86 5.95

29. Case C2
(Without
Cogeneration)
Case A Case G
Surplus Generation Index
(kWh kg-1biodiesel)
0.00 0.201 0.979
INPUT (MJ/kg biodiesel)
Agricultural stage 3.93 3.93 4.23
Impact of cogeneration
on input/output index
Oil Extraction 1.27 0.92 0.92
Oil Refining 0.98 0.98 0.98
Transesterification 5.01 5.02 5.02
Total Input 11.20 10.86 11.16
OUTPUT (MJ/kg biodiesel)
Biodiesel 39.60 39.60 39.60
Electricity - Cogeneration 0.00 0.70 3.05
Total Output 54.42 55.12 54.05
Output /Input 4.86 5.08 4.85

30. • The LCA for two cases (cases
C2 and G) were carried out
using the Simapro software
and the results were
compared with the fossil
diesel production LCA indexesdiesel production LCA indexes
(at the refinery) through data
available in the Simapro
database.

31. Mid Point Categories
C2/G In relation to
C2, (%)
Carcinogens -2.41
Non-Carcinogens -0.67
Respiratory inorganics -4.50
Ionizing radiation -4.25
Ozone layer depletion -33.31
Respiratory organics -6.92
Aquatic ecotoxicity -4.15Aquatic ecotoxicity -4.15
Terrestrial ecotoxicity 0.23
Terrestrial acidification -1.20
Land use -148.11
Aquatic acidification -3.53
Aquatic eutrophication 3.32
Global warming -7.64
Non-renewable energy -16.62
Mineral extraction -11.63

32. Impact assessment
Single score
IMPACT 2002+ method.
C2 C2/G
Damage category Case C2 Case C2/G % Reduction
Total -5.85E-5 -7.925E-5 -35.457
Human Health 3.66E-5 3.517E-5 -4.068
Ecosystem Quality 1.153E-5 1.143E-5 -0.874
Climate Change -0.000152 -0.000164 7.643
Resources 4.53E-05 3.78E-5 -16.619
ENDPOINTSCATEGORIES
C2
FOSSIL
DIESEL
C2/G
ENDPOINTSCATEGORIES

33. CONCLUSIONS AND REMARKS
• The potential for energy production from oil palm
biomass residues is 124.8 GJ ha-1 year-1
• Transterification stage have the greater fossil energy input
due to the methanol utilization. Efforts must be done for
the commercial implementation of the methyl route
seeking an increase of biodiesel LC sustainability.seeking an increase of biodiesel LC sustainability.
• The electricity generation index can reach 1.02 kWh per
kg of biodiesel when the residues are fully used and a
condensing steam turbine with high steam parameters is
employed.
• The Output/Input energy ratio for the palm oil biodiesel
reaches values as 5.08, almost 3.5 greater than other
biodiesels from different vegetable oils.

34. CONCLUSIONS AND REMARKS
• Outpu/Input index is not able to accurately consider the
effect of cogeneration implementation as the energy
output of biomass residues is evaluated based on its
calorific value.
• In relation to the conventional process, the case with• In relation to the conventional process, the case with
cogeneration presents a very high positive impact on
Land occupation (-148%), Ozone layer depletion (-33%)
and non-renewable energy consumption (-16.62 %).
• Life cycle equivalent CO2 emissions were also reduced
from -0.5346 to -1.4053 kg for biodiesel with and without
cogeneration, respectively.

35. ESTUDIO DE ACV – Tratamiento de lasESTUDIO DE ACV – Tratamiento de las
vinazas del etanolvinazas del etanolvinazas del etanol

37. FCDCC- Fertirrigación “in natura”

39. SCDTT - Concentración de vinazas
hasta 40 % y fertirrigación

41. ABDCC - DIGESTIÓN ANAERÓBIA

43. SCCBA - CONCENTRACIÓN Y
COMBUSTIÓN DE VINAZAS

46. CONCLUSIONESCONCLUSIONES
• La evaluación de la sostenibilidad es un problema multicriterial.
• La eficiencia energética atraves de la cogeneración baseada en
sub-productos y la reducción del consumo de energia en las
diferentes etapas del ciclo de vida deven ser considerada.
• La metodologia ACV debe ser mejorada y normalizada.
Incertezas a resolver: volatilizacion de los componentes de los
fertilizantes, asignación de co-productos e impactos del uso de
la tierra.
• La certificación baseada en la reducción de las emisiones de
GEI, utilizando como herramienta la ACV es actual y debemos
saber utilizarla a nuestro favor.

47. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
• The authors are very grateful to the Oil
Palm Research Center of Colombia -
CENIPALMA and the palm oil mills for
providing all the information, so that thisproviding all the information, so that this
study could be carried out.
• Also to the Science Foundation of the
Minas Gerais State – FAPEMIG and the
National Research Council CNPq for the
finantial support and grants.

48. Muchas gracias
electo@unifei.edu.brelecto@unifei.edu.br
esl43@yahoo.com

49. Prof. Dr.Electo Silva Lora
electo@unifei.edu.br