Environmental impact assessment of alternative technologies for production of biofuels from spent coffee grounds

Abstract In the strategy to combat climate change that has been caused by the world's overdependence on fossil fuels, current research is focusing on the decarbonisation of the energy sector through the production of renewable cleaner energy, such as biofuels. Spent coffee grounds (SCGs), the waste stream of the coffee brewing industry, are a potential feedstock for the production of valuable products, including biofuels. However, the environmental implications for the valorisation of this valuable waste need to be investigated. This study assesses the environmental impacts of six biomass‐to‐fuel processing technologies using SCGs as a feedstock, with the aim of identifying the most environmentally friendly technology. A cradle‐to‐gate life‐cycle assessment (LCA) was conducted on fast pyrolysis, fermentation, anaerobic digestion (AD), hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL), gasification, and biodiesel production. The mass and energy balances obtained from Aspen Plus simulations served as the life‐cycle inventory data. Using the ReCiPe 2016 midpoint (H) and Eco‐Indicator 99 as the assessment methods, potential environmental impacts were calculated in OpenLCA software. Electricity generation and carbon dioxide emissions were the biggest contributors of environmental impacts. For each category, the maximum result was set to 100% and the results of the other variants were displayed in relation to this result. AD, with the smallest total weighted score (160), was the most environmentally friendly biomass‐to‐fuel processing route, while HTL, with the biggest total weighted score (893), was the worst. A sensitivity analysis indicated that the environmental performance of biofuel production from SCGs was highly influenced by energy input flows and the source of energy generation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Energy Science & Engineering
Published
2024-10-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/ese3.1933
Citations
16
Primary Topic
Energy and Environment Impacts
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.13

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Environmental impact assessment of alternative technologies for production of biofuels from spent coffee grounds

Sudesh Rathilal, Wilberforce Kisiga, Manimagalay Chetty
16 citations
Energy Science & Engineering
Energy and Environment Impacts
2.13
article

Environmental impact assessment of alternative technologies for production of biofuels from spent coffee grounds

Sudesh Rathilal, Wilberforce Kisiga, Manimagalay Chetty
article en
16 citations

Abstract

Abstract In the strategy to combat climate change that has been caused by the world's overdependence on fossil fuels, current research is focusing on the decarbonisation of the energy sector through the production of renewable cleaner energy, such as biofuels. Spent coffee grounds (SCGs), the waste stream of the coffee brewing industry, are a potential feedstock for the production of valuable products, including biofuels. However, the environmental implications for the valorisation of this valuable waste need to be investigated. This study assesses the environmental impacts of six biomass‐to‐fuel processing technologies using SCGs as a feedstock, with the aim of identifying the most environmentally friendly technology. A cradle‐to‐gate life‐cycle assessment (LCA) was conducted on fast pyrolysis, fermentation, anaerobic digestion (AD), hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL), gasification, and biodiesel production. The mass and energy balances obtained from Aspen Plus simulations served as the life‐cycle inventory data. Using the ReCiPe 2016 midpoint (H) and Eco‐Indicator 99 as the assessment methods, potential environmental impacts were calculated in OpenLCA software. Electricity generation and carbon dioxide emissions were the biggest contributors of environmental impacts. For each category, the maximum result was set to 100% and the results of the other variants were displayed in relation to this result. AD, with the smallest total weighted score (160), was the most environmentally friendly biomass‐to‐fuel processing route, while HTL, with the biggest total weighted score (893), was the worst. A sensitivity analysis indicated that the environmental performance of biofuel production from SCGs was highly influenced by energy input flows and the source of energy generation.

Energy Science & EngineeringVol. 12(11)
Cape Peninsula University of Technology (ZA), Durban University of Technology (ZA)
Durban University of Technology
Responsible consumption and production
Openalex Percentile: Top 13%
Energy and Environment Impacts
2.13
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.