Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 52 (2015) 781792

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rser

Rethinking sustainable biofuel marketing to titivate

commercial interests
Margaret E. Edeseyi a, Aminu Y. Kaita b, Razif Harun c, Michael K. Danquah b, Caleb Acquah b,
Joseph Kee Ming Sia a,n
a

Department of Marketing and Management, Curtin University, Sarawak Malaysia, CDT 250, 98009 Miri, Sarawak, Malaysia
Department of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University, Sarawak Malaysia, CDT 250, 98009 Miri, Sarawak, Malaysia
c
Department of Chemical and Environmental Engineering, Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400 Serdang, Malaysia
b

art ic l e i nf o

a b s t r a c t

Article history:
Received 21 August 2014
Received in revised form
20 June 2015
Accepted 27 July 2015

Even though considerable strides have been made in the development of effective technologies for the
production of different biofuels in some commercial quantities, global consumer patronage in biofuel
utilisation has been discouraging. This has triggered signicant inquisitions and research into different
key aspects of the biofuel supply chain some of which are; techno-economic innovations targeted at
reducing production cost, product marketing and packaging, and sustainable resources for biomass
generation. This paper seeks to investigate biofuel marketing modalities beyond the current scope of a
majority public sector industry to aid the development and promotion of biofuels to commercial and
public sectors. The need for marketing in the biofuel industry is explored to identify innovative
strategies, trending capacities, and key success factors to revolutionise marketing schemes with the
potential to predict future trends. Scholarly positions on effective strategies using well-known marketing
paradigms are discussed to suit the need of the industry. A proposal for the application of a strategic
marketing framework built on sustainability precept is put forward, concluding that sustainable
marketing (green and social marketing) could be used concurrently and continuously to improve
growth and development through increased sales and competitive scoping.
& 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:
Biofuel
Marketing
Supply chain
Sustainability
Commercial

Contents
1.
2.
3.

4.
5.

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Materials and methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Microalgal bioethanol production chain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.1.
Precursors for commercial bioethanol production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2.
Microalgae cultivation for biomass development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.3.
Harvesting and dewatering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.4.
Biomass pre-treatment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.5.
Hydrolysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.6.
Fermentation process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.7.
Bioethanol recovery. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Current marketing schemes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Marketing and environmental challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.1.
Demand and supply . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.2.
Foodfuel debate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.3.
Geographic dispersion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.4.
Government intervention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

782
783
783
783
784
784
784
786
786
786
786
788
788
788
788
789

Abbreviations: SHF, Separate hydrolysis and fermentation; SSCF, Simultaneous saccharication and co-fermentation; SSF, Simultaneous saccharication and fermentation;
ASTM, American Society for Testing and Materials; OMCs, Oil marketing companies; WOS, Web of Science; DDGS, Distiller's Dried Grains with Solubles; GM, Green
marketing; SM, Social marketing; LCA, Life cycle assessment; UNICA, Unio da Indstria de Cana-de-Acar
n
Corresponding author. Tel.: 60 85 443939.
E-mail address: joseph@curtin.edu.my (J.K.M. Sia).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.07.117
1364-0321/& 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

782

M.E. Edeseyi et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 52 (2015) 781792

6.

New perspectives. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 789

6.1.
Industrial consumers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 789
6.1.1.
Aviation biofuel consumers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 789
6.1.2.
Marine biofuel consumers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 789
6.2.
Private sector/retail customers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 790
6.2.1.
Road transport users and domestic consumers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 790
6.2.2.
Product . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 790
6.2.3.
Price . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 790
6.2.4.
Place/distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 790
6.2.5.
Promotion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 790
6.3.
Sustainable marketing-resource advantage perspective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 790
7. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 791
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 791

1. Introduction
The anticipation that the environmental dilemma the world is
facing today is curtailing with the growth of cleaner energy
options to meet the need of an ever increasing global demand
for energy seems to be fading with each passing day. Despite
continued efforts on the part of governments and state-owned
companies towards biofuel and renewable energy crusade, the
industry still exhibits stunted growth patterns. The growth of the
biofuel industry has evidently not been as projected [1]. Expectations abound that biofuel purchase and trending calculus would
follow natural economics to expedite the industry. Another school
of thought posits that government subsidies and intervention are
required for the industry to develop with the expectation of
subsidy reduction as the product becomes economically viable.
Whilst the public sector has been the driving force for biofuel
growth especially in the area of product development, production
channels and efciency [2] similar to any other products, it is
imperative that the focus is not solely put on product development. In certain spheres, an innovative product may promote itself
exclusively due to the ingenuity of the idea, lack of substitute and/
or the need it fullls. The idea that biofuel will market itself
adequately given that sustainability is the buzzword in current
business practices and commercial pursuits has turned out to be
awed as projected sales growth has not been met and the
industry shows a protracted slow sales yield.
Various kinds of biofuels exist including bioethanol, biodiesel,
biohydrogen and biogas. However, their marketing has been
limited to public sector oil marketing companies (OMCs) and
policy development. It is often proposed that governments should
instil utilitarian values in societies by providing regulations to
boost the use of biofuels and commercialisation of the industry
vis--vis policy-making, mandates, targets and other support
mechanisms. Despite rapid technological advancements in the
industry, focus is on governments to provide funding support
necessary to scale production up to commercial quantities and
bring prices down to competitive levels [3,4]. Although a necessity
for growth, government policies and subsidies cannot sustain the
industry in the long-term. The future of biofuel cannot be
completely or too heavily reliant on government interventions
and subsidies as the trend shows yearly reduction in government
funding and increased capabilities for competition. However,
governments can introduce carbon tax exemption policies to credit
biofuel-consuming public. In Brazil, for example, bioethanol is not
subsidised but competes with exported oil [2]. Marketing biofuels
has not really caught the attention of investors and the industry in
general. Effort has been limited to the sales trend in hybrid
vehicles with partial biofuel intake as a means of identifying the
market potential. Whilst the use of a product is an indicator of

possible sales forecast, it does not necessarily show the full picture
of the commercial potential.
Processing and marketing are critical factors that need to be
explored to understand how economic situations can impact on
the long-term growth of the industry [4]. This conceptual study
will look at the role of marketing strategies as an effective means
to revitalise the industry. Although biofuels have been dubbed too
expensive, according to Gustafson [5], some consumers would
pay a premium for biofuel that is renewable, cleaner, and more
desirable from a climate-change perspective [5,6]. Remarkably,
some biofuels can fulll the criteria above as alternatives
for energy generation. They are renewable; possess competitive
combustion efciency; can be carbon neutral with lower carbon
emissions; and demonstrate faster biodegradability [7]. Also,
popular concerns relating to uctuations in oil prices, depletion
of fossil resource base, and the continuous need for cleaner
alternatives make biofuels relatively competitive [8,9]. In addition,
bioenergy in general accounts for 10% of primary global energy
supplies with a potential of providing up to 60% of the world's
primary energy [4]; hence it is ascertained that a lucrative market
exists for biofuels and as such, the market potential of the industry
cannot be over emphasised.
Consumer choices are changed and are still evolving more
towards greener options and this supported by investment scepticism studies show consumers are willing to pay premium prices
for green, and that sustainability is now seen as a new dimension
of quality [10]. If likened to luxury products marketing, the key is
in showing customers the value of the extra-dollars they pay,
either based on emotive feelings or where the product is seen as a
premium [11]. The benets of biofuels as an option for renewable
energy are not limited to sustainability but can go beyond to
deliver competitive lower cost products to the end user market
[12]. For instance, Brazil, the largest exporter of bioethanol, has the
lowest cost of production of biofuels with only 1.6% of its crop land
being utilised for this course with further expansion in production
capacity [13]. Arguably, it is believed that the recent decline in oil
prices could further affect the biofuel industry positively [14]. This
is attributed to the fact that the agricultural sector which is 45
times more energy demanding compared to the manufacturing
sector will benet in terms of low cost of fertilisers and associated
chemicals, low opportunity cost and fuelling of agricultural
machineries for mass cultivation [14]. This awareness is expected
to bring forth signicantly increased purchases which in turn
make for a booming market, making the industry lucrative for
investment. This therefore becomes a major driver of competition
whereby increased purchases/usage cultivates competition and
competition fosters productivity and innovation.
Biofuels should be seen as any other product with marketing
strategies developed based on the market environment. With
sustainability as the zeitgeist of many industries and the biggest

M.E. Edeseyi et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 52 (2015) 781792

pursuit of the global developmental agenda, a cyclic model is

proposed where sustainable marketing can be used to steer the
market in the right direction. Sustainable marketing proposed
in this paper refers to a combination of green and social
marketing.
1. Green marketing (GM), often seen as selling for deeper human
benets, is a tool for product marketing that denes values as
the motive to purchase products since decision to purchase
goods or services is emotive rather than rational [6,15].
2. Social marketing (SM) promotes well-being and good social
behaviours by convincing buyers to do a good deed by
purchasing a product.
This study primarily focuses on understanding the role of
marketing in promoting the commercial patronage of sustainable
biofuels. It has been a common assumption that biofuels possess
the natural tendency to compete with petroleum diesel in the
global fuel market due to their perceived environmental sustainability attributes and with governmental interventions. Comprehensive life cycle assessment (LCA) reveals that most biofuels
possess net carbon emissions hence are not environmentally
friendly. This certainly remain a major challenge to marketing
efforts based on the sustainability of conventional biofuels. Microalgal based biofuels, on the other hand, represent third generation
biofuels with the capacity to achieve zero net carbon emissions
and environmental sustainability, resulting from the effective
photo-conversion capacity of microalgae for carbon recycling
during upstream photosynthesis. Microalgal biofuels are therefore
uniquely placed to enhance sustainable marketing efforts for
biofuels. As a result, the main goal of this paper is to propose
effective green and social marketing strategies for sustainable
biofuels from various end-user segments as complementary tools
in conjunction with sustainability and governmental policies.

2. Materials and methods

This study aims to develop an innovative commercial marketing framework for bioethanol, being one of the most technologically advanced biofuel types in terms of production and process
engineering. In pursuance of green and sustainable marketing of
bioethanol, microalgal biomass is used as the feedstock for this
study with an overview of the production process. Extensive
discussions into diverse assertions, perceptions, present and some
foreseeable universal challenges embroiled around the commercial feasibility and protability of producing biofuels are made. In
addition, possible remedies to titivate and help fast track biofuel
commerce for different end-user segments are put forward based
on the proposed green and social marketing strategies. Most of the
required information were obtained from systematic review and
meta-analysis of literature in PubMed, Web of Science (WOS) and
other related scientic publishing media using Thompson Reuters
software through the Curtin library system as well as information
solicited from recognised reports in relation to biofuel production
and marketing. The study covered information from the outset of
the 21st century with various word combinations in sets of two
and/or three keywords to obtain meaningful information for
discussion. These included biofuels, biofuel marketing strategies,
bioethanol, fossil fuels, environment, fuel market, sustainability,
green and social marketing strategies, biofuel feedstock, microalgae, bioethanol production and processes, biofuel consumers,
challenges and market growth, global fuel commerce, sustainable
biofuels, microalgae biofuels, environmental sustainability, and
biofuel market trend.

783

3. Microalgal bioethanol production chain

3.1. Precursors for commercial bioethanol production
Fossil fuels have played a critical role in human civilisation
since the 18th century. Petroleum, diesel, coal and natural gas are
key examples of fossil-based fuels widely applied as reliable fuel
sources in households and power plants. The combustion of fossil
fuels emits large amounts of greenhouse gases and other pollutants such as NOx, SOx and COx which leads to acid rain, air
pollution and greenhouse effect. Therefore, the utilisation of fossil
fuels as energy sources is regarded as unsustainable [16]. Although
prices of fossil fuel have dropped in recent times, the continuous
use and dependence on the depleting fossil fuel resource amidst
instability in the Middle East triggered the random escalation in
petrol, gas, diesel and electricity prices. This is attributed to the
ever-growing energy demands, industrialisation and increasing
population, subsequently creating the need for alternative fuel
sources to support energy demands. Bioethanol is one of such
alternatives to effectively replace conventional gasoline in vehicles
and other similar applications. It is produced from bioconversion
processes which utilise biomass resources such as sugarcane,
wheat and corn [17,18]. Bacteria, yeast and fungi are some of the
microorganisms for converting biomass embedded carbohydrates
into bioethanol under anaerobic conditions. Aside bioethanol,
which is the main product, carbon dioxide, water and Distiller's
Dried Grains with Solubles (DDGS) are also formed as by-products.
Bioethanol possesses numerous advantages that make it very
appealing as an alternative energy source to economists, industrialists and environmentalists. Bioethanol is biodegradable and
less toxic compared to petroleum fuels, hence has reduced greenhouse gas emissions and chemical pollutants released into the
atmosphere [9]. DDGS are also known to be suitable for use
as substitutes for conventional human and animal food and feedstock [19].
Large-scale production of bioethanol to meet global energy
demands comes with various bottlenecks particularly in relation
to the generation of large quantities of biomass as raw materials to
feed the bioethanol industry. Most of the current raw materials,
such as corn and sugar cane, used as biomass feedstock for
bioethanol production have high value for food applications as
the food components of the plants are used for bioethanol
production, thus requiring large areas of arable land for mass
cultivation. This will either necessitate the expansion of farmlands
and the agricultural industry to accommodate the new demand for
bioethanol or reduce the world food supply and economy if
farmers decide that it is more protable to pursue bioethanol
than food crops [1,20,21]. Other issues with current raw materials
for bioethanol production are the environmental impacts of soil
erosion, deforestation associated with crop vegetation and
destruction of natural parks. The lack of suitable raw materials
to support current fuel demands hinders full-scale production and
commercialisation of bioethanol. The different types of feedstock
available for bioethanol production are presented in Table 1.
Beside the challenges of bioethanol feedstock, there have been
calls for cautious use of DDGS as feedstock substitute. Although
generally high in carbon content, they may contain mycotoxins,
sulphur, pathogenic species such as bacteria, or antibiotic residue
that pose health and environmental safety threats [19,22]. Also,
the continuous availability of agro-waste and animal feedstock
may not be reliable in terms of demand quantities for commercial
scale production of bioethanol.
Microalgae, an autotrophic organism which grow through the
process of photosynthesis just like land based plants, are reported
to have the potential to overcome production issues associated
with existing bioethanol feedstock materials [27]. Microalgae can

784

M.E. Edeseyi et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 52 (2015) 781792

Table 1
Different types of feedstock for bioethanol production.
Type

Biomass

Sucrose based

Sugar cane, sugar beets, sweet sorghum, sweet potatoes

Require more herbicides or nitrogen fertilizer

Cause soil erosions
Higher cost of pre-treatment, harvesting and transportation

[23,24]

Starch based

Wheat, corn, barley, grain, rice, potatoes

Hydrophilic nature
Poor mechanical properties
Higher cost of pre-treatment, harvesting and transportation

[25]

Lignocellulosic

Wood, straw, grasses

Contain lignin hence very difcult to degrade biologically

High pre-treatment cost

[24,26]

harbour substantial amounts of carbohydrates and proteins that

can be used as carbon sources for bioethanol production. In
addition, they display greater commercial advantages and sustainability over other feedstocks. These include:
1. Microalgae grow rapidly and practically anywhere with or
without soil; hence do not compete with food production and
supply logistics [28].
2. Microalgae cells have a very short harvesting cycle (  1416
days considered optimum) compared to other feedstock.
Microalgal harvesting could be performed at multiple cycles
to provide enough biomass supplies to meet bioethanol production demands [20,29].
3. Microalgae have the potential to absorb CO2 and other greenhouse gases for photosynthesis; thus reducing the concentration of greenhouse emissions into the atmosphere [30,31].
4. Microalgae can rely on wastewater or hyper saline water as a
source of nutrient for cultivation. Aside promoting bioremediation of waste streams, microalgae cultivation sustains freshwater production and usage cycle [20,32].
5. Microalgae have a low percentage of lignin and hemicellulose
as compared to other lignocellulosic plants [33] hence do not
require extreme physicochemical condition for biomass pretreatment.

Limitations

Reference

suitable for large-scale or commercial cultivation of microalgae.

The pond is usually designed like a raceway track with paddlewheels embedded to uniformly mix solidliquidgas components
of microalgae cells, dissolved nutrient, and CO2 supply by circulation. Open ponds can be further categorised as raceway, circular,
inclined and unmixed ponds [35]. Some advantages of open
system include easy operation, accessibility to sunlight as photon
source, and inexpensive to build. A major disadvantage to this
system is the lack of control over cultivation conditions.
Closed systems are more expensive to operate than open
systems. The higher cost for closed systems is due to the energy
cost associated with the mixing mechanism [7] and also photon
generation for indoor closed systems. Photobioreactors offer a
closed culture environment, which is protected from direct fallout
and relatively safe from other microorganisms. Closed systems,
despite their prohibitive cost of operation, especially for largescale cultivation, have several advantages over open systems.
These include reduce susceptibility to contamination; better control of cultivation parameters such as pH, temperature and light;
prevention of water evaporation; and higher cell densities [36].
Different types of photobioreactors designed and applied for
microalgal cultivation include tubular, at panel, helical and
hybrid photobioreactors.
3.3. Harvesting and dewatering

The amount of bioethanol produced from microalgae varies

with the type of microalgal species and even different strains of
same species. This is because microalgal species and strains vary
greatly in terms of growth rate and productivity, light requirements, and carbohydrates and other biochemicals accumulation
rates. Bioethanol production from microalgae requires 5 major
process steps: biomass development; biomass pre-treatment;
hydrolysis; fermentation; and product recovery.
3.2. Microalgae cultivation for biomass development
The prospect of microalgal biofuel production is dependent on
the quantity of biomass generated during cultivation. In order to
produce sufcient quantity of biomass for biofuel synthesis,
optimal cultivation conditions and dewatering technologies have
to be implemented to achieve high concentrations of biomass and
carbohydrate. There are various designs of microalgal cultivation
systems but are generally classied as open system or raceway
pond and close system or photobioreactor. Each of these systems
has their benet and challenges for a large scale production of
biomass. However, an effective culture system should consist of
the following criteria: (1) effective illumination area, (2) optimal
gasliquid transfer, (3) easy to operate, (4) low contamination
level, (5) low capital and production cost and (6) minimal land
area requirement [34]. An open pond system is simple and most

Harvesting and dewatering are done using the same techniques

but the main difference is the extent of biomass concentration.
During harvesting, the biomass is concentrated to 1020% while at
the dewatering stage it is further concentrated to about 80%.
Culture harvesting is performed when the stationary growth phase
is reached and it is usually reported around 1416 days after
inoculation [29]. Hence, continual harvesting at the same phase of
microalgae growth would ensure a relatively constant composition
of microalgae culture and biomass concentration [37]. Due to the
small size of microalgal cells and dilute nature of the cultures,
harvesting microalgae for high biomass recovery is difcult and
expensive [38]. Approximately 25% of the processing cost is
incurred during harvesting and this includes the cost of electricity,
reagents and maintenance of separation equipment [39]. The
various techniques employed to harvest microalgae include
(1) bulk harvesting to separate microalgae from suspension,
such as natural gravity sedimentation, occulation and oatation
and (2) thickening to concentrate the microalgae slurry after
bulk harvesting, such as centrifugation and ltration [40].
3.4. Biomass pre-treatment
Biomass pre-treatment is essential to separate cellulose,
hemicellulose and lignin required for hydrolysis. Most of the

M.E. Edeseyi et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 52 (2015) 781792

785

Fig. 1. Algal bioethanol production process [7,75](SHF, separate hydrolysis and fermentation; SHCF, separation hydrolysis and co-fermentation; SSF, Simultaneous
saccharication and fermentation; SSCF, simultaneous saccharication and co-fermentation; CBP, consolidated bioprocessing).

carbohydrates present in microalgae are entrapped in the cell wall

hence this process step is critical [28]. Cell disruption is used to
free available complex carbohydrates from the cell wall system

for hydrolysis and fermentation. There are two main methods

used in biomass pre-treatment namely physical and chemical
method. Most physical pre-treatment methods involve mechanical

786

M.E. Edeseyi et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 52 (2015) 781792

Table 2
Fossil/bio-fuel production and consumption comparison in million barrel
per annum.
Source: F.O. Licht, World Ethanol and Biofuels Report & United States Energy
Information Administration [51].
Year

World bioethanol
production

World
bioethanol
consumption

World
gasoline
production

World gasoline
consumption

1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013

113.37
112.83
129.33
123.52
117.63
108.54
115.80
132.48
165.82
183.21
210.98
256.21
332.33
438.45
473.16
542.98
528.69
a
743.78
a
416.61

105.08
105.85
118.45
113.78
110.31
103.35
95.58
110.72
129.75
159.80
180.47
227.58
290.99
398.74
457.20
502.58
492.61

6710.35
6869.58
7028.34
7141.68
7127.37
7251.92
7300.96
7397.89
7484.73
7676.88
7797.87
7767.70
7768.58
7817.64
8121.84
8138.87

6594.82
6692.32
6814.91
6973.18
7087.30
7257.59
7327.42
7369.53
7451.63
7617.99
7724.37
7840.06
7919.25
7817.63
7935.98
8042.21

Source: http://www.afdc.energy.gov/data/.

treatment and heat exposure where biomass is subjected to high

temperature. This process is simple but requires high energy
consumption thus making application under large-scale conditions prohibitive. Examples of specic processes under this category include chipping, milling and gridding. Chemical treatment is
most commonly used for conventional feedstock such as corn and
sugar cane for bioethanol production. Pre-treatment by this
method is performed by acid or alkaline treatment. The acid pretreatment is more preferable as it provides higher efciency in
converting cellulosic material [41].
3.5. Hydrolysis
Hydrolysis is performed to convert extracted polysaccharides to
fermentable sugars [16]. Two main hydrolysis methods are widely
used to produce monomeric sugars for fermentation. These are
acid and enzymatic hydrolysis. Enzymatic hydrolysis utilises
carbohydrate digestion enzymes to release fermentable sugars
from extracted cellulosic material. An acid hydrolysis process
dissolves the hemicellulosic component of the biomass and disassembles the cellulose into fermentable sugars that are available
to enzymes [42,43]. Most literature report shows that the use of
dilute acid is more preferable for this process as concentrated acid
is costly, corrosive to containment material and prone to form
inhibiting compounds [24].
3.6. Fermentation process
Carbohydrates in the forms of disaccharides or monosaccharide
are the main substrates utilised during fermentation. In the
process of fermentation, the fermentable sugar is converted into
pyruvic acid and pyruvic acid further converted into ethanol [44].
In order to achieve high conversion and effective energy utilisation, different congurations are employed for the fermentation
process. These are separate hydrolysis and fermentation (SHF),
simultaneous saccharication and co-fermentation (SSCF), and
simultaneous saccharication and fermentation (SSF). Briey, in
SHF, hydrolysis and fermentation are run in two different vessels
whilst in SSF the hydrolysis and fermentation processes are run in

the same vessel; hence released fermentable sugars are converted

directly to ethanol by the fermenting microorganism. SSCF
combines the hydrolysis of cellulose to glucose and the cofermentation of pentose and hexose sugars in one reaction vessel
[17]. The ow diagram for microalgal production supply chain is
shown in Fig. 1.
3.7. Bioethanol recovery
Crude bioethanol is produced after fermentation with high
water content. The challenge is to reduce water content and purify
bioethanol from the impurities. There are several techniques that
can be used but distillation is most commonly practised. Distillation is used to separate two liquids with different boiling points.
However, to achieve high purity, multiple distillation steps may be
required. These materials could have degree of intermolecular
interactions with each other; thus two materials would co-distil
during the process. Hydrous ethanol is usually produced through
conventional distillation containing between 92.8 and 93.5 wt%
ethanol [45]. Consequently, the product has to undergo further
treatment to produce anhydrous ethanol by dehydration. Hydrous
ethanol is not effective as fuel and could damage engines.

4. Current marketing schemes

The economics of demand versus supply regardless of direction
applies to all products including bioenergy and biofuel products.
Researchers often hypothesise that the demand for biofuel products, if it will be complimentary or substitutable to petroleum or
not, will determine the supply and growth consequently [46].
Consumer demand theories characterise the fulllment of needs
and wants as the pointer for decision making on the consumption
pattern of products and services available on a market. Zooming
into the big picture, bioenergy in general accounts for 10% of
primary global energy supply [47] with an estimated escalation in
demand potential to as much as 60% [48]. Projected global total
primary energy consumption is 1250 QBtu (1.32  1021 J) by 2050
[49] with projected biofuel supply exceeding 6.5 million barrels
per day by 2030 [50].
Clearly, the world bio-ethanol production as seen in Table 2
shows a reasonable percentage of the consumption levels of
gasoline worldwide. Bio-fuel production in the US and Canada
reached a peak of 1 billion gallons in 2012 [52]; which was all
swept off the market in domestic and export use; Brazil also
exported 540 million gallons of ethanol to the US in 2012. Also, an
increase of 6.1% in global biofuel production was reported for the
year 2013, attributable to the fact that the production of bioethanol reached about 25 million tonnes of oil equivalent whereas
biodiesel was about 4 million tonnes of oil equivalent with both
accounting to global increments of 6.1% and 6.2% [53]. Notably,
majority of these productions were from North and Central
America in the ratio 45.1% and 28.7% with Europe and Asia Pacic
being 16.3% and 9.3%, respectively. Major contribution to biofuel
production for different countries can be seen in Table 3 and Fig. 2
for the year 2013 [53]. The anticipation by some countries to
improve their energy efciency and reduce carbon footprint will
also boost the continuous demand for biofuels. Typical amongst
them is Sweden, which aims at improving its transport sector to
be free of fossil fuel in 2030 and eventually a carbon neutral
economy by 2050 [54]. In addition, following the success of
production in Brazil of up to 5880 million gallons in 2012 from
3347 million gallons in 1995; it is clear that with improved focus
on efciency, the country was able to produce to meet 90% of their
domestic energy needs.

M.E. Edeseyi et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 52 (2015) 781792

787

Table 3
Global production of biofuel data in tonnes of oil equivalent [53].
Continent

Countries

Thousand tonnes of oil equivalent

North, Central and South America

USA
Canada
Argentina
Brazil
Colombia
Other North, South and Central American Countries
France
Germany
Netherlands
Spain
United Kingdom
Poland
Belgium
Other European and Eurasia Countries
Middle East
Africa
Australia
China
Indonesia
Thailand
Other Asia Pacic

28,440
1011
1884
15,783
634
510
1936
2615
1182
674
449
664
660
2807
4
23
416
1680
1608
1251
1115
65,346

Europe and Eurasia

Middle East
Africa
Asia Pacic

Total amount produced

Fig. 2. Global production of biofuels for 2013.

Brazil, as a model for example, has been actively promoting

bio-fuels from two levels policy driven demand as well as
customer driven demand where awareness of the benets of
bio-fuels, information on blending availability and uses have
ensured increased consumers condence in the product whilst
governmental policies on mandatory use within all sectors could
be responsible for the increase in business to business consumption. Through the trend of industry, the potential can be easily
deduced to include a rise in the cost of carbon emission brought

about by the policy on payment for carbon emission. Global

support for increased governmental policies will make bio-fuels
much more popular especially in developing countries where the
lens of sustainability is soon to seat on. In other words, the world
will begin to embrace greener options of energy and big investors
will reap the harvest of the rst mover advantage it brings.
Bio-fuels has received more attention by the general public and
some companies in recent times but almost all companies that
dabble in the market do so at reduced scale for fear of the

788

M.E. Edeseyi et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 52 (2015) 781792

unknown and uncertainties or even based on the high investment

costs and lead times, continuous policy changes across different
regions amongst others. Key success factors for growth in the
market include a need for government support to standardise
strategic policy-making and implementation, and a call for an
understanding of the need for large scale commercialisation of
production. These can be achieved with collaborations between
the governments on the one hand and consolidated business
owners on the other hand to wield their power towards inuencing favourable policies whilst joint ventures and mergers will
assist in maximising efciencies of scale to reduce operating costs
and minimising individual company's risks.
This demonstrates a huge demand for full-scale commerce and
that the potential of the biofuel industry is still largely determined
following the pull strategy. The premise of success of pull strategy
is that the product will promote itself or draw a following where
customers will be drawn to the product. The combination of the
push pull strategy would be a better option since products benets
can be highlighted or pushed to customers whilst the pull
strategies ensure repeat purchases and loyalty subsequently,
similar to the case of organic products which has now seen a
following within all sectors.
Investors and major oil corporations appear to be operating on
the principle of invest only if it makes money now or why make
it a core business when we still can exploit petroleum based fuels
for decades to come. Like any new product on the market, the
margin for early adopters is usually an insignicant share of the
market relative to eventual growth and with proper marketing
strategies and positioning, the market is expected to grow to keep
up with demand. Even though there clearly exists commercial
capacity for biofuel products with signicant potential for growth,
biofuel marketing is an important factor that presents uncertainties [55,56], and this interrogates suitable marketing schemes to
harness the opportunities the products brings. Considering the
growth in global demand for commercial bio-products, biochemicals and bio-economy as a result of companies looking to
reduce net emissions of greenhouse gases and save cost, it is
expected that the biofuel market would commensurately expand.
The general anticipation is that this could lead to a generation of
about US$1015 billion worth of proceeds [57]. Some big players in
the energy business like Shell and Chevron are currently involved
in biofuels but not as a core business venture in their product
portfolio; and this could majorly be seen as either adhering to
governmental demands/policies or as a way of green-washing
their way into less societal criticisms or pressures from environmentalists. Some argue that the biofuel transition process is slow
whilst others declare it as an increased investment portfolio
scheme. Nonetheless, the current ratio of biofuel investment to
petroleum is signicantly low.
Despite the unconventional nature of the bioethanol market,
growth has been limited to conventional market expectations and
metrics used to explore investments options and prot generation
have been limited to examining demand and supply alone. Market
viability has been carried out like any other investment option
which looks at prot generation using demand and supply. Major
drawbacks often highlighted are mostly on the supply side and a
lack of possible steady supply of the product despite current
production levels of up to 22,715 million gallons between the US
and Brazil as well as a projected production capacity of 36 billion
gallons by 2022 in the US alone [58]. One major rationale often
postulated by investors is that uncertainties seem to abound in
factoring the risks associated with the supply side into the
demandsupplyprot continuum. This thence could inhibit the
adoption of the potential market or mark the end of the viability
evaluation process. This may lead to a neglect of the exploration of
strategies that usually follow business environmental scanning

towards how to mitigate uncertainties to take opportunity of

the demand

5. Marketing and environmental challenges

5.1. Demand and supply
Global demand for energy security and response to global
warming together with unstable oil prices, eventual depletion of
oil reserves and efcient governmental policies are major driving
forces of the biofuel market hence the need for the products. It is
imperative to also note that evidence from the past afrms that
the sustained drive in increasing supply and demand for biofuels
has been due to mandatory policies to incorporate biofuel for
various blending ratios and the quest to mitigate global carbon
emission rates. Market analysis in USA by Farmdoc daily, December 2014, in the wake of the lowest crude oil prices ever in the past
5 years, suggests that the breakeven point for the production of
ethanol to gasoline, considering a 10% blending rate, will continue
to remain r1.0 owing to governmental policies. This means that
ethanol production continues to remain an economically viable
venture with a price base that should be able to survive both high
and low oil prices with their protability and demand not only
linked to high crude oil prices but also prudent policies [59].
According to UNICA, Brazil alone accounts for large bioethanol
exports to US, Japan and India. Despite China's growing production, export supply distance is covered to procure the product.
Looking at the Brazilian model which generated economics of
scale in excess production capacities surpassing the demand [60],
commercial uncertainties were all tackled to create a positive
market environment where the reverse can be the case if uncertainties are appropriately factored to be mitigated by market
advancements.

5.2. Foodfuel debate

Most of the challenges brought about by the biofuel industry
are seen to be in existence before the biofuel boom, and the extent
to which biofuel affected food markets were over-estimated [61].
In hindsight, the loss of agriculture land to non-agriculture use
debate needs to be ended since bioethanol production only affects
sugar needs, and research has shown that sugarcane production in
Brazil alone can meet global sugar demand with excess substantially enough for low-cost ethanol production [60]. Unconstructive
criticisms need to be put aside and focus should now be shifted to
improving agricultural efciencies especially in cropping systems
to support both the food and biofuel industries.

5.3. Geographic dispersion

Another big challenge often ascribed to producing and marketing biofuels is the geographic distance between feedstock and
reneries. For an example, major companies have factories in
China, purchase raw materials from Africa and source out customers from all around the world. Whilst some may argue that the
nature of the product hinders this process adoption, looking at the
supply chain of the petroleum sector, oil reserves are also fairly
dispersed around the world but this does not hinder production
and supply. Although biomass supplies for biofuel fuel production
such as sugarcane are sourced from various regions, transportation
efciencies could be developed to overcome or ease these
challenges.

M.E. Edeseyi et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 52 (2015) 781792

789

Fig. 3. Biofuel production supply chain and target markets categorisation.

5.4. Government intervention

Governments have been a major driving force in promoting the
biofuel industry especially in the establishment of policies that
favour the growth of the industry and the development of the
public sector OMC for marketing purposes. Governmental policies
are constantly being introduced to support alternative energy use.
Brazil's National Alcohol programme which brought about a
complete change of their energy mix transformed a dependence
of 80% imported petroleum use in 1973 to ethanol production that
meets the country's energy demand in excess of over 16% for
exports by 2006 [60,62]. Notwithstanding, some existing challenges facing the biofuel industry include the lack of focus and
policies to reduce dependency on crude oil in some major oil
producing countries in the Middle East and Africa. We see a
moderate response of governments in Asia and a plethora of
policies in Europe and the US plagued by constant changes and
amendments targeted at designing the appropriate policies to
boost the industry. This however could create an unstable legal
environment and increase insecurity in the market.

6. New perspectives
Over time marketing has gone beyond commodication to a
trend of the decision process involving deeper benets, and this
needs to be seen as the tool to redene the biofuel sector without
disregarding its role of offering the product; a means of identifying
new value creation opportunities [63]. To this end, segmentation
and targeting are critical to divide consumers based on criteria
relevant to identify how to market to different subdivision
businesses, wholesalers/bulk-buyers, retailers [64]. Market segmentation and clustering are important in targeting buyers of any
product, and one marketing strategy may differ from the other
for each segment. The mainstream segments of consumers of
biofuels include the industrial customers transportation industry
consisting of aviation, marine, heavy duty customers, and the
retail customers domestic home-use consumers. This priority

grouping will ensure widespread consumer uses are understood

and targeted to increase sales. Fig. 3 gives an illustration of this
perspective for different market segments and proposed marketing schemes.
6.1. Industrial consumers
6.1.1. Aviation biofuel consumers
A focal point of the aviation industry in carbon footprint
reduction is alternative fuel source hence targeting the aviation
industry for forecasting and marketing endeavours is imperative.
With the ASTM approval on full biofuel use in 2011, airbus
estimates that fuel from plant-derived sources may account for
30% of aviation fuel consumption by 2030 (www.bloomberg.com)
[65]. Notably though, after a series of test runs on biofuels in 2011,
Lufthansa retracted the use of bioethanol despite good trial
success until the fuel is more widely produced and this was
attributed to uncertainty for sustained production [66]. The aviation industry is rife with tactical green positioning. Changing
technology and large production quantities for commercialisation
makes for a structured market ready for trading [12,67,68].
Production needs persistence and marketing to this sector need
to be geared up to show the benets of signicantly reduced
environmental risks, sustainability and accessibility, lowered price
of production and sustainability of supply. This will in turn drive
investments in the sector.
6.1.2. Marine biofuel consumers
The projected marine biofuel use by 2020 is estimated at over
33 million tonnes (www.dnv.nl). With no standardized fuel
specication for marine grade and major marine insurance companies willing to provide premium reduction or credit insurance
on equipment that runs on biofuels, this group of consumers face
the challenge of migration from petroleum based energy to biofuels [69]. The possibility of biofuel replacing petroleum completely has been tested using Norwegian ships and the potential
problems associated with these were minor with possible

790

M.E. Edeseyi et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 52 (2015) 781792

solutions. With the imminent approval of tri-fuel alternatives,

bioethanol E15 in marine technology is under consideration as
testing is underway in countries like the US and Brazil to probe
potential limitations. The market potential for this sector still
exists as bioethanol is required in large quantities for blending, in
high speed main and auxiliary ship engines as well as other
innovative products like bio-lubricants.

be essential to mitigate all effects of price sensitivity. It is

imperative that biofuels compete with petroleum based fuels
given the economic complexities associated with it, inclusive of
the complex relationship between supply, demand, fuel trading
futures and limited reserves [72]. Strategic pricing via selective
subsidies could be given to different segments of consumers to
reduce the end-users price. Penetration pricing could also be
adopted until pricing structures is further stabilized.

6.2. Private sector/retail customers

6.2.1. Road transport users and domestic consumers
The use of energy in homes and ofces amounts to a large
percentage of the market. In the past, energy consumers choices
have solely been dependent on price and performance but recent
shifts show consumers are now putting more thoughts in their
buying processes and decisions. Green marketing redenes conventional marketing with societal realities of marketing environment [70]. As biofuel products are certied green, investors can
benet from green positioning as well as prot generation, thus
achieving the triple bottom line. Although price could be higher
than conventional petroleum based fuels, consumers would pay if
huge benets of using the products over its alternatives are
appropriately communicated and understood [71]. With EPA's
approval of the use of E15 for model year 2001 in newer cars
and trucks, biofuel downstream sector could possibly account for
the world's retail energy market similar to petroleum. Given the
types of biofuels produced from various countries and exported or
used domestically, and as consumer market expectations around
the world converge towards green awareness, especially in terms
of energy procurement, we can consider the product to be
marketed globally and apply marketing mix to tactically understand the benets of re-structuring the current marketing
scenario.
6.2.2. Product
Although gasohol (10% ethanol and 90% gasoline) is widely
used, generally, the assortment of the different types and choices
of biofuels and blending requirements to enhance suitability for
engine application makes the product complex and may result in
incompatibility, poor engine feedback, safety and performance
issues, and infringement of regulatory standards. This makes
customer sceptical to use them. Segmentation enables research
and technological changes to be more focused on the end-user
thus eliminating too many variations that confuse consumers.
Although some benets exist in adapting product design to local
needs, in this case standardisation is a better choice to enable
research focus on target groups. Feedstock availability and use
could be used to determine which supply sources would cater for
different market needs as in the case of petroleum which is
classied into light and heavy products for easier customer needs
identication, target market and specic marketing strategies.
6.2.3. Price
With major uncertainties in the supply chain relating to the
cost of transport, tariffs and import duties, exchange rate uctuations, available purchase power, economic environment of markets
and high production costs are the major limitation of biofuel
production. This affects the capacity to compete with petroleum.
Economies of scale in production, research and development, and
better process management that comes with standardisation
prices will be competitive in the near future. Pricing is a sensitive
and important aspect to consider if marketing the product is to be
successful. Price marketing different segments with different
prices is suggested. Green marketing strategies known to sell the
intrinsic value of sustainability as the benchmark for quality will

6.2.4. Place/distribution
Another important marketing angle for consideration is the
place/distribution channels. One of the most complex aspects of
marketing biofuels is the distribution channels of the market.
Examining the supply chain, whilst research focus abounds on the
cost of operations, harvest scheduling and in some cases upstream
transportation, downstream operation and distribution logistics/
networks have only been studied for petroleum-based fuels [72].
This needs to be improved to reect higher efciency in identifying and reaching target customers. One major challenge that needs
to be investigated will be the nature of the sources of biomass
around the world and the need for minimising geographic distance between farms and rening plant. Biomass and feedstock
availability, harvest-scheduling models, improved yield scheduling
dispersion and transportation towards optimisation of the supply
chain for prot maximisation has been studied in different parts of
the world [72]. Research needs to be focused on improved biofuel
classication towards harnessing the potential of different areas
and types to supply specic needs. Green distribution strategies
need to be implemented to establish a competitive advantage over
petroleum fuels.
6.2.5. Promotion
To make biofuel customers aware of the products, classications and applications, the different product portfolios need to be
heavily publicised through active demonstrations to especially desensitise the market of misconceptions, myths and wrong information. Promotional activities need to include advertising with
ethos, sales tactics to guarantee word of mouth, promotions,
demonstrations, and direct marketing to the end users. Government policies and tendering should constantly target coercing
large companies to invest and use biofuels. Governmental subsidies and policies available in different countries should be
sourced and made known to private sector consumers to increase
awareness of the available opportunities in using biofuels.
6.3. Sustainable marketing-resource advantage perspective
Looking at the biofuel marketing scene from the invariably
traditional demandsupply continuum as the only measure of
market cultivation, the market environment will be skewed
especially given its stage on the innovation adoption cycle graph.
There is an urgent need to develop strategies that will harness the
potential for resource maximisation whilst producing sustainably.
Sustainable marketing applies to the concept of developing strategies geared towards ecological business practices within, and
supportive of, sustainable economic development [73]. Resource
advantage on the other hand seeks to stimulate growth using
collaboration and/or competition amongst organisations in a
particular industry. Market projections and evaluations of the
biofuel industry have traditionally been seen from an endogenous
perspective. Flipping over the theory of international trade
between countries and the ensuing globalisation of production,
Hunt identied the intersection between sustainable marketing
and resource advantage leading to a dynamic competition growth
theory for prot driven rms where competition becomes the key

M.E. Edeseyi et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 52 (2015) 781792

for growth, innovation in efciencies and productivity [73]. Firmspecic resources need to be pulled together to form clusters of
companies in competition to combat the high-risk uncertainty
often postulated to hamper investment choices in biofuels, and to
harness the ensuing boost in reputation and image brought about
from less green washing accusations and the competitive advantage that follows. The role of renewable sources of energy has been
dubbed as an essential factor for future energy growth path [74].
Investors cannot afford to overlook the potential of this sector.
Joint ventures and collaborative strategies amongst the big players
in the oil and gas sector will be relevant to improve distribution
channels. This will increase economies of scale, production and
distribution efciencies as focus will be on working together to
pull resource capabilities jointly hence, avoiding duplication.

7. Conclusion
Uncertainties created by the differences in biofuels, frequent
standards changes by lawmakers, vulnerability to risk due to
weather, pests and diseases make investments more difcult and
this weakens the market despite falling biofuels production costs
brought about by private sector innovation. From a marketing
standpoint, to titivate the market, biofuel products need to be reassessed using the 4P's product classication, pricing, place and
promotion; to do so will mean a revamp of the current practices.
Green and sustainable marketing strategies could be used to get
different segments of the market to see and understand the
benets the products offer as a means of pushing the products
to customers whilst businesses need to consolidate towards
collaborative efforts to minimise possible threats and uncertainties
that have been unduly ascribed to the industry.
Upscale production of the product will see a reduction in production price but this can best be achieved if integrated bio-reneries that
will produce bio-fuels and other outputs (natural bres and polymers
used in automotives, pharmaceuticals, chemicals for lubricants, solvents, surfactants etc.) from different types of bio-mass could be built.
The key to this and a way of harnessing the potential market that
exists for bio-fuels would invariably be partnerships; this could be in
the form of private companies joint-ventures and/or publicprivate
partnership which will see the merging of OMC's with current oil
companies coming together with the singular purpose of satisfying the
interests and needs of its members, participants and stakeholders
towards a more sustainable product provision and business. PPP's
have been seen to address most of the issues identied as success
factors (effectively overcoming policy and market weaknesses and
failures by catalysing policies, creating standards, strengthening price
signals, mobilising and directing capital, and supporting technology
development) to foster green economy due to consolidated efforts
that aid in overcoming market failures that could not be singlehandedly dealt with, and the advantage of resource efciency, dealing
with constraints of pricing, immaturity stage of the adoption of the
technology (3GF Report 2012). There is no question of the potential of
the sector but to harness and stimulate the market for growth, key
players need to take the necessary steps to succeed.
References
[1] Popp J, Harangi-Rkos Z, Lakner M, Fri M. The effect of bioenergy expansion:
food, energy, and environment. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2014;32:55978.
[2] Zhang J, Zhang WJ. Controversies, development and trends of biofuel industry
in the world. Environ Skept Crit 2012;1:4855.
[3] Warwick. G. Governments key to commercializing biofuels; 2012.
[4] Zhang W, Yu EA, Rozelle S, Yang J, Msangi S. The impact of biofuel growth on
agriculture: why is the range of estimates so wide? Food Policy
2013;38:22739.
[5] Gustafson CR. Biodiesel: an industry poised for growth? America: American
Agricultural Economics Association; 2003.

791

[6] Brannan DB, Heeter J, Bird L. Made with renewable energy: how and why
companies are labeling consumer products. Contract 2012;303:2753000.
[7] Demirbas MF. Biofuels from algae for sustainable development. Appl Energy
2011;88:347380.
[8] Rosegrant MW, Tingju Zhu, Siwa Msangi, Timothy Sulser. Global scenarios for
biofuels: impacts and implications. Appl Econ Perspect Policy
2008;30:495505.
[9] John RP, Anisha GS, Nampoothiri KM, Pandey A. Micro and macroalgal
biomass: a renewable source for bioethanol. Bioresour Technol
2011;102:18693.
[10] Ottman JA. The new rules of green marketing: strategies, tools, and inspiration
for sustainable branding. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.;
2011.
[11] Samli Coskun A. Marketing strategy for global luxury products. International
consumer behavior in the 21st century. New York: Springer; 2013. p. 14351.
[12] Awudu I, Zhang J. Uncertainties and sustainability concepts in biofuel supply
chain management: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2012;16:135968.
[13] Crago CL, Khanna M, Barton J, Giuliani E, Amaral W. Competitiveness of
Brazilian sugarcane ethanol compared to US corn ethanol. Energy Policy
2010;38:740415.
[14] Baffes J, Kose MA, Ohnsorge F, Stocker M. The great plunge in oil prices:
causes, consequences, and policy responses. World Bank Group, Development
Economics; 2015.
[15] Lozanova S. Four strategies for green marketing. Available on: http://www.
triplepundit.com/2010/02/4-strategies-for-green-marketing/; 2010 [accessed
01.07.15].
[16] Nigam PS, Singh A. Production of liquid biofuels from renewable resources.
Prog Energy Combust Sci 2011;37:5268.
[17] Larissa C, Anuj Kumar C, Thais Suzane Dos Santos M, Felipe A, Amp Xf, et al.
Bioconversion of sugarcane biomass into ethanol: an overview about composition, pretreatment methods, detoxication of hydrolysates, enzymatic saccharication, and ethanol fermentation. BioMed Res Int 2012, 115;2012
(2012).
[18] Fang Z, Liu X, Chen L, Shen Y, Zhang X, Fang W, et al. Identication of a laccase
Glac15 from Ganoderma lucidum 77002 and its application in bioethanol
production. Biotechnol Biofuels 2015;8:54.
[19] Mjoun K, Rosentrater KA. Co-products of the United States biofuels industry as
alternative feed ingredients for aquaculture; 2012.
[20] Schenk P, Thomas-Hall SR P, Stephens E, Marx U, Mussgnug J, Posten C, et al.
Second generation biofuels: high-efciency microalgae for biodiesel production. BioEnergy Res 2008;1:2043.
[21] Subhadra B, Edwards M. An integrated renewable energy park approach for
algal biofuel production in United States. Energy Policy 2010;38:4897902.
[22] Makkar HP. Biofuel co-products as livestock feed-opportunities and challenges. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations
(FAO); 2012.
[23] Pimentel D, Marklein A, Toth MA, Karpoff M, Paul GS, McCormack R, Kyriazis J,
Krueger T. Biofuel impacts on world food supply: use of fossil fuel, land and
water resources. Energies 2008;1(2):4178. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/
en1010041.
[24] Sun Y, Cheng J. Hydrolysis of lignocellulosic materials for ethanol production:
a review. Bioresour Technol 2002;83:111.
[25] Mojovi L, Rakin M, Vukainovi M, Nikoli S, Pejin D, Gruji O, et al. Progress
in the production of bioethanol on starch-based feedstocks. Chem Ind Chem
Eng Q 2009;15:21126.
[26] Kumar P, Stroeve P, Barrett DM, Delwiche MJ. Methods for pretreatment of
lignocellulosic biomass for efcient hydrolysis and biofuel production. Ind Eng
Chem Res 2009;48:371329.
[27] Nguyen THM, Vu VH. Bioethanol production from marine algae biomass:
prospect and troubles. Journal of Vietnamese Environment 2012;3(1):259.
[28] Harun R, Danquah MK. Inuence of acid pre-treatment on microalgal biomass
for bioethanol production. Process Biochem 2011;46:3049.
[29] Bai A, Stndl L, Brsony P, Fehr M, Jobbgy P, Herpergel Z, et al. Algae
production on pig sludge. Off J Inst Natl Rech Agron 2012;32:6118.
[30] Sayre R. Microalgae: the potential for carbon capture. BioScience
2010;60:7227.
[31] Klinthong W, Yang Y-H, Huang C-H, Tan C-S. A review: microalgae and their
applications in CO2 capture and renewable energy. Aerosol Air Qual Res
2015;15:71242.
[32] Packer M. Algal capture of carbon dioxide; biomass generation as a tool for
greenhouse gas mitigation with reference to New Zealand energy strategy and
policy. Energy Policy 2009;37:342837.
[33] John RP, Anisha GS, Nampoothiri KM, Pandey A. Micro and macroalgal
biomass: a renewable source for bioethanol. Bioresour Technol 2011;102:
18693.
[34] Lam MK, Lee KT. Microalgae biofuels: a critical review of issues, problems and
the way forward. Biotechnol Adv 2012;30:67390.
[35] Suali E, Sarbatly R. Conversion of microalgae to biofuel. Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews 2012;16(6):431642. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
rser.2012.03.047.
[36] Singh RN, Sharma S. Development of suitable photobioreactor for algae
production a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2012;16:234753.
[37] Danquah MK, Harun R, Halim R, Forde G. Cultivation medium design via
elemental balancing for tetraselmis suecica. J Chem Biochem Eng 2010;24:
3619.

792

M.E. Edeseyi et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 52 (2015) 781792

[38] Uduman N, Qi Y, Danquah MK, Forde GM, Hoadley A. Dewatering of microalgal

cultures: a major bottleneck to algae-based fuels. Renew Sustain Energy 2010,
115;2.
[39] Genady B, Irina Konstantinov. "Separating microalgae from water without
rupturing cells; occulation, otation and dehydration, where the otation
column has adjustable height to enable the overow unit to align with the
foam layer for efcient removal." U.S. Patent 6,524,486, issued February 25,
2003.
[40] Chen CY, Yeh KL, Aisyah R, Lee DJ, Chang JS. Cultivation, photobioreactor
design and harvesting of microalgae for biodiesel production: a critical review.
Bioresource technology 2011;102(1):7181.
[41] Rabelo SC, Filho RM, Costa AC. Lime pretreatment of sugarcane bagasse for
ethanol production. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 2009;153:13950.
[42] Harun R, Liu B, Danquah MK. Analysis of process congurations for bioethanol
production from microalgal biomass. Progress in biomass and bioenergy
production. Intech Science, Technology & Medicine, Croatia ISBN; 2011.
978-53.
[43] Wyman CE, Decker SR, Himmel ME, Brady JW, Skopec CE, Viikari L. Hydrolysis
of cellulose and hemicellulose. Polysaccharides: structural diversity and
functional versatility 2005;1:102362.
[44] Madigan MT, Martinko JM, Parker J, Brock. TD. Biology of microorganisms. .
Upper Saddle River, NJ: prentice hall; 1997.
[45] Dias MOS, Ensinas AV, Nebra SA, Maciel Filho R, Rossell CEV, Maciel MRW.
Production of bioethanol and other bio-based materials from sugarcane
bagasse: integration to conventional bioethanol production process. Chem
Eng Res Des 2009;87:120616.
[46] Darzins A, Pienkos P, Edye L. Current status and potential for algal biofuels
production. A report to IEA. Bioenergy Task 2010, 1131;39.
[47] Haberl H, Beringer T, Bhattacharya SC, Erb KH, Hoogwijk. M. "The global
technical potential of bio-energy in 2050 considering sustainability constraints.". Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2010;2
(5):394403.
[48] Richard TL. Challenges in scaling up biofuels infrastructure. Science
2010;329:7936.
[49] De La Torre Ugarte Daniel G, English Burton C, Jensen K. Sixty billion gallons
by 2030: economic and agricultural impacts of ethanol and biodiesel expansion. Am J Agric Econ 2007, 118;89.
[50] Finley M. The oil market to 2030: implications for investment and policy. Econ
Energy Environ Policy 2012;1:2536.
[51] Licht FO. World Ethanol and Biofuels Report & United States Energy Information Administration.
[52] Solecki M, Richey D, Epstein B. Advanced biofuel market report; 2011.
[53] Petroleum B. Statistical review of world energy; 2014.
[54] Sanches-Pereira A, Gmez MF. The dynamics of the Swedish biofuel system
toward a vehicle eet independent of fossil fuels. J Clean Prod
2015;96:45266.
[55] Tao L, Aden A. The economics of current and future biofuels. In Vitr Cell Dev
Biol Plant 2009;45:199217.
[56] Janda K, Kristoufek L, Zilberman D. Biofuels: policies and impacts. Agric Econ
2012;58:37286.

[57] de Jong E, Higson A, Walsh P, Wellisch M. Bio-based chemicals value added

products from bioreneries. IEA Bioenergy, Task42 Biorenery; 2012.
[58] Koshel P, McAllister K. Expanding biofuel production and the transition to
advanced biofuels: lessons for sustainability from the upper midwest:
summary of a workshop. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press; 2010.
[59] Pfuderer S, Davies G, Mitchell I. The role of demand for biofuel in the
agricultural commodity price spikes of 2007/08. Annex 5. The 2007/08
agricultural price spikes: causes and implications; 2010.
[60] Leite R, Leal M, Cortez L, Grifn W, Scandifo M. Can Brazil replace 5% of the
2025 gasoline world demand with ethanol? Energy 2009;34:65561.
[61] Oladosu G, Msangi S. Biofuel-food market interactions: a review of modeling
approaches and ndings. Basel: MDPI AG; 2013. p. 5371.
[62] Torres D, Pray C, Martha Junior G, Jun Y, Siwa M, Scott R, et al. The Brazilian
ethanol industry: an overview of its production, technology, location, land use,
regulations, and futures prospects. Embrapa Estudos e Capacitao-Artigo em
anais de congresso (ALICE): In: Proceedings of the international consortium on
applied bioeconomy research conference sustainability and the bioeconomy,
15, 2011. Rome. Anais Rome: ICABR; 2011.
[63] Kotler, Phillip, Jain D, Suvit M. Marketing moves: a new approach to prots,
growth, and renewal. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press; 2002.
[64] Kotler, Philip, Brown L, Adam, Stewart, Burton S, et al. Marketing: Pearsons
Education Australia; 2007.
[65] (www.bloomberg.com). Airlines win approval to Use PlantBased Biofuels on
commercial ights. Accessed from: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/
2011-07-01/airlines-win-approval-to-use-plant-based-biofuels-on-commer
cial-ights.html.
[66] Hitipeuw J. Lufthansa wraps up biofuel test on German ights. Available on:
http://english.kompas.com/read/2012/01/12/07124430/Lufthansa.Wraps.up.
Biofuel.Test.on.German.Flights. [accessed on 11.06.15].
[67] Fuglie K, Heisey P, King JL, Day-Rubenstein K, Schimmelpfennig D, Wang SL,
et al. Research investments and market structure in the food processing,
agricultural input, and biofuel industries worldwide. USDA-ERS Economic
Research Report; 2011.
[68] Regulatory T. The state of the biofuels market; 2014.
[69] Nayyar MP. The use of biodiesel fuels in the US marine industry. PRIME, Inc.,
under Maritime Administration Contract No. DTMA1D05007/TO090000055;
2010.
[70] Belz F, Peattie K. Sustainability marketing: a global perspective. Chichester:
Wiley; 2009.
[71] Montoro Rios FJ, Luque-Martinez T, Rodriguez-Molina M-A. How green should
you be: can environmental associations enhance brand performance?."
Journal of Advertising Research 2008;48:54763.
[72] An H. Optimization and Simulation for Designing the Supply Chain of the
Cellulosic Biofuel Industry. Texas A&M University; 2011.
[73] Hunt SD. Sustainable marketing, equity, and economic growth: a resourceadvantage, economic freedom approach. Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science 2011;39(1):720 nd performance?." Journal of Advertising Research 48,
2008, 547-563.
[74] Global Energy Outlook. Global energy outlook 2050 policy options; 2020.
[75] Taherzadeh MJ, Karimi K. Enzymatic-based hydrolysis processes for ethanol.
BioResources 2007;2:70738.