Journal of Environmental Management 214 (2018) 267e275

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Environmental Management

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

Research article

Biomass to levulinic acid: A techno-economic analysis and

sustainability of biorefinery processes in Southeast Asia
V. Isoni*, D. Kumbang, P.N. Sharratt, H.H. Khoo
Process Science and Modelling, Institute of Chemical and Engineering Sciences, 1 Pesek Road, Jurong Island, 627833, Singapore

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Aligned with Singapore's commitment to sustainable development and investment in renewable re-
Received 30 October 2017 sources, cleaner energy and technology (Sustainable Singapore Blueprint), we report a techno-economic
Received in revised form analysis of the biorefinery process in Southeast Asia. The considerations in this study provide an over-
2 February 2018
view of the current and future challenges in the biomass-to-chemical processes with life-cycle thinking,
Accepted 3 March 2018
Available online 10 March 2018
linking the land used for agriculture and biomass to the levulinic acid production. 7e8 kg of lignocel-
lulosic feedstock (glucan content 30e35 wt%) from agriculture residues empty fruit bunches (EFB) or rice
straw (RS) can be processed to yield 1 kg of levulinic acid. Comparisons of both traditional and “green”
Keywords:
Biomass
alternative solvents and separation techniques for the chemical process were modelled and their relative
Levulinic acid energy profiles evaluated. Using 2-methyltetrahydrofuran (2-MeTHF) as the process solvent showed to
Biorefinery model approx. 20 fold less energy demand compared to methyl isobutyl ketone (MIBK) or approx. 180 fold less
Sustainability energy demand compared to direct distillation from aqueous stream. Greenhouse gases emissions of the
major operations throughout the supply chain (energy and solvent use, transport, field emissions) were
estimated and compared against the impact of deforestation to make space for agriculture purposes. A
biorefinery process for the production of 20 ktonne/year of levulinic acid from two different types of
lignocellulosic feedstock was hypothesized for different scenarios. In one scenario the chemical plant
producing levulinic acid was located in Singapore whereas in other scenarios, its location was placed in a
neighboring country, closer to the biomass source. Results from this study show the importance of
feedstock choices, as well as the associated plant locations, in the quest for sustainability objectives.
© 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
There is a growing demand for “greener” products, notably
those that are derived from renewable resources (Pawelzik et al.,
2013). An increasing number of chemical companies are attempt-
ing to produce solvents and fine chemicals from biomass for sus-
tainable reasons, and at the same time stop relying on fossil-based
products due to the concern over the depletion of non-renewable
feedstock (Biotech Industry Organization, ).
Levulinic acid is a platform chemical, important intermediate for
both fine chemicals and solvent production (Bozell et al., 2000;
Rackemann and Doherty, 2011; Luterbacher et al., 2014). Various
research and experimental studies concerning the production of
Levulinic Acid (LA) from biomass have been carried out; Ya'aini
et al. (Yaaini et al., 2012) for example, investigated the conversion of
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: isoniva@ices.a-star.edu.sg (V. Isoni).
glucose, EFB, and kenaf to levulinic acid over a new hybrid catalyst.
They reported 55.2% yield of LA at the experimental conditions of
145.2
C reaction temperature, 146.7 min reaction time and 12.0% of
catalyst loading. Upare et al. (2013) achieved a yield of 75% LA via
the selective decomposition of hexose sugars, glucose and fructose
by making use of a heterogeneous graphene oxide (GO)-based
catalysts with sulfonic acid (SO3H) functional groups (GOeSO3H).
LA produced from bagasse and RS mixed with different concen-
trations of hydrochloride acid (HCl) in a pressurized reactor was
done by Yan et al. (2008) They found that maximum yields of LA
(22.8 and 23.7% for bagasse and paddy straw, respectively) was
achieved with a reaction temperature of 220
C, reaction time of
45 min and 4.45% concentration of HCl.
Lately, ionic liquids have being applied in the area of lignocel-
lulose to LA conversion. Fu et al. (2016) produced LA via the hy-
drothermal decomposition reactions of cellulose, glucose, and
fructose. The substrates were catalyzed by 18 types of ionic liquids
with different anions. Reusability tests for [PrSO3HMIm]Cl and

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.03.012
0301-4797/© 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
268 V. Isoni et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 214 (2018) 267e275
[BSO3HMIm]HSO4 were carried out and revealed that [BSO3HMIm]
HSO4 can be used over four cycles without a loss of activity. In
another more recent investigation, Liu at al (Liu et al., 2018). applied
acidic ionic liquid [C3SO3Hmim]HSO4 to catalyze lignocellulose
conversion to LA. By optimizing reaction conditions, the highest
yield of LA was reported as 96.6 mol% (21.6 wt%) based on the
amount of C6-sugars in the biomass raw material. Various other
discussions and works have been published on the production of LA
from a variety of biomass resources; among them are the
comprehensive reviews provided by Pileidis and Titirici (2016) and
Antonetti et al. (2016) The challenges and possible mechanisms for
the transformation of carbohydrates and raw biomass into levulinic
acid were highlighted by Pileidis and Titirici (2016) Antonetti at al
(Antonetti et al., 2016). discussed in their study several catalytic
systems that have been developed to produce LA from waste and
raw biomass.
1.1. Industrial production
Current industrial production includes synthesis from furfuryl
alcohol which is subsequently converted into levulinic acid by
treatment with hydrogen chloride (Hart and Kenneth, 1956; Hsu
and Chasar, 1980; Klingler and Ebertz, 2000). Alternative routes
include Arkenol (Cuzens and Farone, 1998), Segetis (Mullen et al.,
2013), Biofine (Fitzpatrick, 1997) and other biorefinery processes
in which C6 and/or C5 sugars from cellulosic feedstock are con-
verted to levulinic acid and/or furfural, requiring overall less en-
ergy, solvent and chemical steps. The advantage of the biorefinery
technology relies on the possibility to convert lignocellulosic ma-
terial into valuable chemicals (Kamm and Kamm, 2004). This
concept, which explores the potential of production high added-
value bio-derived chemical products, have been explored exten-
sively by Kruse and Dahmen (2017) Large-scale manufacturers of
LA exist in China and India, but there are lack of biorefineries
producing LA within the geographical boundary of Southeast Asia.
This forms the basis of our research.
Although levulinic acid may be more easily purified by conver-
sion into derivatives (i.e. esters) (Murat Sen et al., 2012), in our LCA-
type approach we focused on the acid itself because of its central
role in many downstream process (i.e. angelica lactone, gamma-
valerolactone, 2-MeTHF, adipic acid), in order to provide the base
for future studies on specific biomass-to-chemicals processes.
1.2. Objectives
The objective of this case study is two-fold. One is to investigate
the environmental impacts, including energy consumption, of a
biomass-to-chemical biorefinery value chain; and the other is to
test the economic feasibility of the plant. In both analyses, the se-
lection of biomass feedstock, modes of transport and plant loca-
tions will be compared.
In the techno-economic investigation we attempt to answer the
questions of:
▪ the feasibility of setting up a biorefinery plant located in
Singapore
▪ cost estimation involved in logistics, storage, and operating
capacity
2. Materials and methods: LCA approach
Life cycle assessment (LCA) is a systematic environmental
management tool applied in industry for quantifying the input-
output inventory of a product system throughout its life cycle
stages, and projecting the environmental performance based on a
quantified service value (known as functional unit) of the product
(Khoo et al., 2016). Owing to the variety of biomass feedstock for
biorefinery processes, along with the debates on the final envi-
ronmental benefits or drawbacks of such systems, LCA has been
increasingly used to compare various bio-based material produc-
tion chains. In many cases, the focus of investigation is on the en-
ergy demands and CO2 emissions of the life cycle stages, starting
from agriculture land to the final conversion of biomass to chem-
icals (refer to Fig. 1).
For the techno-economic investigation, the following are
considered in the LCA system:
▪ Different feedstock choices including cultivation and land use
▪ Logistics and storage
▪ Energy demands
▪ CO2-eq emissions
▪ Plant capacity (20 ktonne/year)
▪ Costs
2.1. Case study: biorefinery model
In the past decade we observed large experimental efforts being
made to test the production of lignocellulose derived bio-products,
with bio-ethanol being a major object of desire of agro-industrial
biomass processes (Adsul et al., 2006; Girisuta et al., 2013; Saha
et al., 2013; Anwar et al., 2014). Alongside ethanol, more chemi-
cally intriguing compounds have been accessed in recent years
thanks to advances in both biochemical transformations of ligno-
cellulosic material and catalysis to upgrade and further valorize
bio-products, leading to new product lines such as specialty lignins
or sugar-based chemicals (Brethauer and Studer, 2015; Wu et al.,
2016; Rødsrud et al., 2012). Depending on different treatment
methods of lignocellulosic biomass, more than 200 valuable com-
pounds can be obtained, but important factors needs to be
considered in production scale scenarios such as collection and
storage logistics as well as biomass availability (Isikgor and Becer,
2015; Dusselier et al., 2014). Progresses towards optimization of
biomass to chemicals process have been reported in the literature
(Amore et al., 2016). Such research efforts attempt to generate bio-
based chemicals that are of good economic value, are sustainable
and have the potential to reduce the chemical industry's reliance on
petroleum (Dodds and Gross, 2007). Lignocellulosic biomass is
primarily made of the three most abundant polymers in nature:
cellulose, hemicelluloses and lignin. In the first chemical step,
lignin is separated from cellulose and hemicellulose and either
burned (to furnish energy) or used for other applications (Na €gele
et al., 2002). Acid hydrolysis of hemicellulose and cellulose pro-
duces C5 and C6 sugars which are subsequently converted into
furfural and/or levulinic acid, depending on the specific operating
conditions of the process (Sabesan and Spado, 2013). In accordance
with existing data (Khoo et al., 2015), we estimated that 6.6e7.6 kg
of biomass (glucan content 30e34 wt%) are required for the pro-
duction of one kg of levulinic acid (Fig. 2).
2.2. Feedstock choices
Indonesia and Malaysia are the two biggest producers of crude
palm oil and kernel palm oil in the world. After the milling process,
abundant quantity of empty fruit bunches are produced as waste. In
the context of Southeast Asia another type of lignocellulosic
biomass available in large quantity is rice straw. Thailand is a big
producer of rice and similar considerations for the rice straw can be
done. In our study we analyzed the biorefinery process with sus-
tainability objectives in mind, taking into consideration the three
 V. Isoni et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 214 (2018) 267e275 269

Fig. 1. Dashed line box defines the boundaries of the life cycle approach adopted in this work.

Fig. 2. Major chemical transformations occurring in a biomass-to-levulinic acid process. 1) The biomass is treated to remove lignin (delignification) leaving cellulose and hemi-
cellulose 2) Under acidic conditions, depolymerization occurs 3) The monomeric C6 and C5 sugars are rapidly converted into HMF and furfural, respectively 4) Under pressure and
high temperature HMF is converted into levulinic acid, formic acid and acetic acid whereas furfural yields formic acid and decomposition products. Subsequent separation and
purification steps are needed in order to yield pure levulinic acid.
270 V. Isoni et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 214 (2018) 267e275
pillars of a sustainable development: environment (emissions,
energy), economy (profit, logistics) and social (impact to local
community).
The growing demand for bio-based materials and chemicals also
led to the increased pressure for available land to grow crops used
for food (Pawelzik et al., 2013; Bringezu et al., 2012). Residual or
waste biomass is considered in this article as a potential sustainable
resource for the production of bio-products, with the consideration
that food supply will not become a threat to society. The environ-
mental impacts of crop cultivation involving palm trees grown in
Malaysia and Indonesia have already been reported in the literature
(Harsono et al., 2013; Kamahara et al., 2010). Field emissions from
rice cultivation in Thailand were extracted from Silalertruksa et al.
(Silalertruksa and Gheewala, 2013) Depending on the feedstock
choices, yields of crops and amount of feedstock demanded by the
biorefinery, the area of agricultural land necessary to produce
enough biomass supply to feed the process will be analyzed.
2.3. Logistics and cost
Singapore is strategically located between the two largest
sources of empty fruit bunches (EFBs) and it houses one of the
largest oil refining hub in the world. The infrastructure system is
well developed and from the business point of view it represents a
low risk factor. However, land is scarce in Singapore and lease of the
required land for the hypothesized biorefinery plant incises on the
capital cost. In order to reduce complexity of the scenarios, we
assumed that the labor involved, distance from field/mill to tran-
sition hub, vehicles/machineries engaged, and relevant price in-
dexes for Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand were all comparable.
Therefore, the costs for transportation and loading/unloading
would not affect the relevance of the choices made. Dumai in
Sumatra, Pontian in Johor and Laem Chabang in Thailand were
selected as the transition hub/port due to their close proximity to
the plantation areas.
Preliminary calculations demonstrated that the storage costs in
Malaysia, Indonesia and Thailand turned out to be minimal
compared to the total cost of operation. The storage cost in
Singapore was relatively higher ranging 160,000e600,000 USD per
year at present value (Fig. 3).
However, considering that the capital cost amounts to at least
hundreds of millions we concluded that from a business perspec-
tive, the logistic arrangement for all scenarios should be subject to
the priority of uninterrupted operation and therefore should not
represent itself as an economically important factor in plant site
selection. The EFB feedstock can be collected directly from the mill
after the processing of fresh fruit bunches, and subsequently
brought to the levulinic acid (LA) plant/biorefinery. The rice straw
on the other hand can be collected directly from the rice plantations
after the harvesting process (only the rice grains are transported to
Fig. 3. Major costs estimation for setting up a biomass-to-chemicals plant in Southeast
Asia.
the mills). The cost of feedstock is currently volatile and is observed
to fluctuate according to collection/transportation practices and
small market uncertainties. High costs of biomass, including pre-
treatment and on-site delivery, would affect the overall profit
margins, discouraging those companies initially motivated to invest
into biomass-to-chemicals technology. Conversely, if the proposed
price for the biomass is too low, it is foreseeable that the farmers
would rather use the biomass for other applications such as
mulching, energy generation or organic fertilization instead of
selling it (Gadde et al., 2009a, 2009b). Energy costs associated to
run the plant varied with the composition of the distillation
streams; in the best case scenario (2-MeTHF) the energy cost was
estimated to be around 66000 USD/year, resulting in little or no
impact in the economics of the plant (for an estimated minimum
selling price of levulinic acid at 774 USD/tonne). However, when a
more conventional organic solvent (MIBK) or direct distillation of
the aqueous stream were analyzed as alternatives, a much higher
energy cost was observed, estimated in 1.80M USD/year and 14.2M
USD/year respectively.
2.4. Process energy and modelling
In our analysis we considered the energy involved in the process
to convert the lignocellulosic feedstock into levulinic acid for an
annual production of 20 ktonne. The process was modelled in
HYSYS using the UNIQUAC fluids package (Fredenslund et al., 1975;
Santiago et al., 2009), selected for its capability to model non-ideal
mixes of fluids, which is the case in this system e a mix of water,
organic acids, mineral acids and predominantly organic solvent
mixture. The process starts with the biomass (either EFB or rice
straw) being fed into the mill; the obtained solids are mixed with
sulfuric acid in a separate tank. The obtained mixture is transferred
into a reactor where under the right reaction conditions (175
C,
9 bar) C5 and C6 sugars are converted into LA, formic acid and
acetic acid. The complex mixture is then filtered to remove any
humins followed by an alkaline wash to neutralize the excess sul-
furic acid. At this stage the reactor output stream was modelled to
have a composition of LA (2 wt%), water (90 wt%) and the
remainder as a mixture of acetic acid, formic acid and sulfuric acid,
similarly to what reported in literature (Fitzpatrick, 1997). In the
next step LA is separated from the aqueous stream and three
different isolation methods were investigated. Due to the high
water content and its associated specific heat capacity, direct
distillation of the stream required a large amount of energy.
Alternatively, liquid-liquid extraction of LA with two different sol-
vents (2-MeTHF or MIBK) followed by distillation to recover the
solvent and isolate the product, was considered. The resulting en-
ergy consumption is summarized in Table 1.
A schematic diagram of the biorefinery model is illustrated in
Fig. 4. The model was based on quantitative extraction of LA into
the organic solvent. In both cases (2-MeTHF, MIBK) the extracting
organic solvent was assumed to be recovered via distillation to a
purity of 99 wt%, a technical requirement in order to recycle the
solvent back into the system while reducing the environmental
impact.
The specific heat capacities of MIBK and 2-MeTHF were similar
at 2.14 kJ/kg/K and 1.96 kJ/kg/K respectively. However, the boiling
points for these materials were 118
C and 80.3
C respectively. This
meant that DT of MIBK was twice that of 2-MeTHF for the same
amount of material, leading to twice the amount of energy required
for heating to boiling point. The energy required for distillation is
also affected by the reflux ratio required for the separation of the
components in the stream. MIBK again requires more energy due to
its similar boiling point with acetic acid, which is also present in the
stream. A lower energy demand results in both a lower annual
 V. Isoni et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 214 (2018) 267e275 271

Table 1
Energy comparison for the isolation of levulinic acid via distillation from different streams.

Separation method Distillation (aqueous) Distillation (MIBK) Distillation (2-MeTHF)

Energy use per year 214 GWh 27 GWh 1 GWh

GHG (ktonne CO2/yr) 98e161 12e20 0.6e0.9
Relative ratio 177 22 1

Fig. 4. Simplified schematic representation of the biorefinery process under the three scenarios illustrated in Table 1. The biomass is fed to the mill and subsequently mixed in a
tank with sulfuric acid. The resulting heterogeneous mixture is fed into the reactor (cyan); the stream from the reactor undergoes a filtration step, followed by liquid-liquid
extraction (green) with an organic solvent (2-MeTHF or MIBK), neutralization and distillation (purple). In the scenario where direct distillation of the aqueous stream is per-
formed, the only difference resides in the missing liquid-liquid extraction step (green). (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to
the Web version of this article.)

energy cost and indirect greenhouse gases emissions; for these The corresponding GHG emissions are:
reasons, liquid-liquid extraction with 2-MeTHF followed by distil- h i
lation was considered in our analysis as the best available tech- Eqnð1Þ  Ef þ ½GHGT þ Field emissions  Feed (2)
nology for the process.
Since the majority of the energy going into the process was
attributed to heating of the materials stream for distillation pur-
poses, a simplified equation can was used to calculate the total Ef GHG Emission factor for natural gas in Malaysia, Indonesia,
energy required: Thailand and Singapore (in tonne/GJ)
Total energy: GHGT Emissions from transportation (ships or trucks) in tonne/
tonne feed

 Field emissions Emissions related to agricultural activities
DHi;j;k ¼ mi;j;k $ Cpi;j;k $DT þ mi;j;k $ Hvi;j;k $Cap=year (1) (tonne/tonne feed)
Feed Biomass (tonne) required to feed Cap/year

Truck emissions are based on Euro IV engines, and a 13300-

DHi,j,k Energy required for distillation of levulinic acid from tonne cargo ship is assumed for sea transportation. Data for emis-
streams i, j, k (GJ) sion factors (Ef) as well as each modes of transport (GHGT) can be
Cpi,j,k Heating capacities of i, j, k (GJ/tonne) found in Appendix 1.
DT Change in temperature (
C)
mi Mass of aqueous stream (i) in tonne
mj Mass of MIBK stream (j) in tonne 3. Results and discussions: two scenarios
mk Mass of 2-MeTHF stream (k) in tonne
Hvi,j,k Latent heat of vaporization of i, j, k (GJ) Two different scenarios were considered for the case study. In
Cap/year Plant size or annual production capacity (tonne/year) the first case we hypothesized a biorefinery plant placed near the
272 V. Isoni et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 214 (2018) 267e275

biomass source in which the lignocellulosic material is converted
into levulinic acid and shipped to Singapore, ready for use. In the
second scenario we assumed that the biorefinery plant is located in
Jurong Island (Singapore) where the biomass is received from
overseas (Thailand, Malaysia or Indonesia) and converted into
levulinic acid, ready for use. In both cases the emissions were traced
back to land use for agriculture and mass-allocated to the biomass.
The lignocellulosic biomass was assumed to have similar chemical
and physical properties which do not require any changes in the
process plant. The yield of levulinic acid was based on claims by
Biofine, related to the glucan content per kg of dry feedstock
(Appendix 1).
3.1. Scenario 1: biorefinery near biomass source
The agricultural residue was assumed to be transported to the
nearby biorefinery from the biomass growing area (rice straw) or
from the mill (EFB). The emissions related to the transport from the
mill to the plant were neglected due to the postulated proximity
(<35 km). The levulinic acid obtained from the biorefinery was
assumed to be stored in barrel/drums, packed in intermodal con-
tainers and shipped to Singapore ready for use (transport
emissions).
3.3. Comparison between the two scenarios
As expected the emissions for transport of levulinic acid resulted
lower in the first scenario due to the higher density of levulinic acid
compared to the biomass, requiring a minor number of trips. The
energy used to run the process (based on liquid-liquid extraction
using 2-MeTHF followed by distillation) was assumed to be the
same in every country, but the different mode of producing elec-
tricity provided a different GHG emission profile, with Singapore
having the lowest CO2-eq emissions. The emissions for the solvent
production were calculated as emission from the field to produce
the amount of biomass required to yield the desired quantity of 2-
MeTHF. The GHG emissions arising from energy use, solvent pro-
duction, transportation and field emissions for each country were
summed up and compared against each other and the two possible
scenarios (Fig. 6).

3.2. Scenario 2: biomass shipped to the biorefinery located in

Singapore

The biomass was assumed to be transported to the nearby port

(Laem Chabang or Dumai) or via truck (from Pontian) to port of
Jurong Island, Singapore. Only the main transport emissions from
collection hub/port (Thailand or Indonesia) or from collection hub
(Malaysia) to Singapore were considered (Fig. 5). Fig. 6. Comparison of the GHG emissions based on both location and scenario.

Fig. 5. Visual representation of the two possible scenarios.

 V. Isoni et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 214 (2018) 267e275
Rice straw from Thailand generated the highest CO2-eq results,
due to emissions of CH4 and N2O from the rice fields during the
cultivation of rice crop (Li et al., 2011). It was observed that for EFB,
the slight difference between Malaysia and Indonesia was mostly
due to the different way of transportation. An interesting result was
to observe that the overall emissions in both scenarios were similar,
indicating that the choice of the location for the biorefinery would
be driven more by business motivations rather than for ecological
purposes. It is important to note that most of the biorefineries
prefer to generate energy to fuel their process by burning lignin-
containing material because of its average energy content of
6.81 MJ/kg (Hayes et al., 2006). However, in our study we consid-
ered lignin as important raw material for production of higher
value products, therefore we assumed that lignin was separated
from cellulose and hemicellulose, but not burned. Also, this
approach allowed a better assessment of the indirect GHGs emis-
sions (energy use) instead of relying on estimations.
3.4. Deforestation: impact on emissions
Sustainable, long-term resources and food security concerns
have motivated research efforts into developing efficient methods
to convert biomass to materials (Pawelzik et al., 2013; Bringezu
et al., 2012). However, higher levels of biomass utilization will
require the demand for more land. In the previous sections,
deforestation was not considered in the emissions profile (Fig. 6).
However, this aspect can profoundly change all the considerations
presented in this article. Endangered animal species are threatened
of extinction with irreversible adverse effect of biodiversity
(Fitzherbert et al., 2008; Koh and Wilcove, 2008). Fires on peatland
and clearing of forest contribute to other social issues such as haze,
which result in negative impacts on the local community and
neighboring countries. According to Baccini et al. (2012) and Harris
et al. (2012a) impacts of deforestation are estimated to be around
0.33 ktonne CO2 per ha/year of land cleared from virgin rainforest
(Harris et al., 2012b). On a similar note, another study showed the
“carbon debt” expressed as years required by the new cultivation to
recapture CO2 emitted from converting native habitats (e.g. rain-
forest) into croplands (Fargione et al., 2008). For our case study, we
analyzed the influence of deforestation on different percentages of
the land dedicated to the main crop (rice or palm trees) was ob-
tained from previously existent virgin rainforest, then we
compared resulting the emissions (CO2-eq) from such practice with
the overall supply chain. The results suggested that deforestation
would contribute with additional CO2 emissions ranging from 3 to
16 times (for 1% deforestation) up to 294e1600 times higher (for
Fig. 7. Impact of deforestation on CO2-eq emissions of the biomass-to-levulinic acid
process.
273
100% deforestation) than the same process using biomass deriving
from land not related to deforestation (Fig. 7).
3.5. EFB or rice straw?
Both EFB and rice straw were chosen in this study because of
their abundant availability in the region and no land-food compe-
tition. Paddy fields contribute to CO2 emissions due to high
methane production, however palm trees cultivation is more often
associated with deforestation issues (Gilbert, 2012). Both crops
constitute source of food and wealth both locally and globally, and
due to forecasted increase of world population, a bigger demand of
both products and related lignocellulosic biomass is expected. In
recent years, companies in the food and cosmetics industry started
to shift to traceable sustainable supply chains for palm oil and
derivatives because of both environmental and socio-economic
aspects, selecting farmers who are members of the roundtable for
sustainable palm oil (RSPO) (Roundtable, ; P and G, 2017; Unilever,
2014). This led to an increased volume in the last few years of the so
called certified sustainable palm oil (CSPO) and related “certified
EFB”. In January 2018 it was reported that 11.9 Mtonne/year of CSPO
were produced globally. (Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil, )
However, only a fraction of this CSPO was certified as 100% sus-
tainable throughout the supply chain (19%), showing the niche
market for such a commodity. In economic terms, this poses an
issue on the long term, since more companies would be interested
into a traceable sustainable feedstock for their purposes and due to
the limited amount of certified biomass, this would lead to a situ-
ation in which there will not be enough certified EFB for the market,
resulting in an increased cost of what was originally considered
agriculture waste. Moreover, criticism on the RSPO for having “a
pro-industry bias that appears to be compromising its broader
mission to promote environmental sustainability” have been re-
ported, complicating the assessment of sustainable palm oil
(Laurance et al., 2010).
Arguably rice straw, the side product of rice cultivation, could be
seen as an alternative lignocellulosic feedstock for the biorefinery
process, because of the perceived minor impact on deforestation.
Moreover, as the largest staple food in the world, rice crops
generate an abundant amount of straw which can be utilized as a
cheap biomass resource. With an increasing global human popu-
lation requiring more food (rice), it is foreseeable that more land
dedicated to agriculture would be made available. We caution that
this should not occur at the expense of destroying forest lands as it
happened for example in Thailand between 1976 and 1989
(Cropper et al., 1999). Our conclusion was that in order to be in line
with sustainability objectives, the land yielding biomass should not
be related to deforestation, irrespectively of the primary use of that
land (agriculture for food or energy crops) or when the deforesta-
tion happened.
3.6. Nutrients depletion from soil: silicon and potassium
Currently biomass, is left on the field and/or burned to generate
energy, kill plant disease and return part of the minerals to the soil.
Burning rice straw poses serious health issues due to the high
content of silica. Some farmers use portions of the biomass residues
for the compost, but a huge amount is unused as reported by Gadde
et al., 2009a, 2009b Previous studies reported that the high content
of potassium and silica in rice straw similarly to EFB poses a
question for the land fertility when the biomass is removed from it.
Silicon is a crucial element for high and sustainable production of
rice (Ma et al., 2006); in order not to render the land sterile after
years of biomass removal, the need of fertilizers to replenish po-
tassium (and silicon in the case of rice straw) in the soil could be an
274 V. Isoni et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 214 (2018) 267e275
important factor for the food security (Dobermann and Fairhurst,
2002). A possible solution could be in the biorefinery process,
considering the aqueous streams from acid hydrolysis of the
biomass. We can imagine that the aqueous streams from the lignin
separation step could be adjusted to a suitable pH with potassium
bases (e.g. hydroxide, carbonate, oxide), providing a mixture of
both organic (deriving from lignin) and inorganic nutrients to serve
as potential fertilizers for the original crop cultivation. A concep-
tually similar approach was described by Cuzens et al. (Cuzens and
Farone, 1998) for the production of gypsum and silica gel as valu-
able side products while converting rice straw into fermentable
sugars.
3.7. Factors to green up the process/chain
It became apparent that the choice of the lignocellulosic feed-
stock should be based not only on its inherent content of sugars, but
also the location of growing areas. The adopted agriculture tech-
niques and whether or not the land used for cultivation was ob-
tained from clearing of rainforest impact profoundly on the
emissions profile of the all biorefinery supply chain. In our work,
two different scenarios were considered in which the biorefinery
plant was either located next to the biomass source or near the end
user of the produced levulinic acid. The results showed limited
difference in terms of overall emissions between the two scenarios,
suggesting that the decision for the location would be driven more
by business choice rather than environmental benefits. The choice
of the right solvent seemed to be critical in order to maximize the
energy efficiency of the distillation process and the related emis-
sions associated with the recovery of it. Also, it emerged from our
analysis that both deforestation and responsible use of nitrogenous
fertilizers are important for the carbon footprint of the process,
hence virtuous farmers should be involved in the supply chain in
order to be in line with sustainability objectives.
In order to maximize sustainability in the supply chain, priority
should be given to agriculture residues from crop-for-food culti-
vation on marginal lands and/or not linked to deforestation. The
cellulosic biomass to feed the biorefinery process showed to
possess a variable content of minerals which would lead to
depletion from the soil on the long term, affecting adversely the
production of the primary agriculture product. A possibility to
overcome such an issue could reside in the treatment of the
minerals-rich aqueous streams from the biorefinery process with
suitable base in order to yield a source of nutrients, both organic
and inorganic, to return to the soil. In this way we envisioned a
feasible sustainable process able to convert agricultural waste into
valuable chemicals returning minerals to the land in the form of
nutrients/fertilizers.
4. Conclusion
Sustainability has gained more attention in the past decade and
it has already started to impact chemical industries' design and
feasibility studies. However, due to its complex interdisciplinary
nature, life cycle thinking and/or assessment publications
(excluding bio-ethanol) are still limited in the biomass-to-
chemicals area. In the specific case of levulinic acid, we showed
that two of the most abundant types of biomass in Southeast Asia,
namely empty fruit bunches and rice straw, are the main contrib-
utors to both operational cost and field emissions. In reality the
impact in terms of GHGs of the whole process can be up to 1600
times higher than calculated if the land yielding the required
biomass was acquired through deforestation practices. Also,
continual removal of agriculture residue would cause the land to be
impoverished of minerals on the long run, unless a way to return
nutrients is in play. The results of this study suggest that designing
an efficient and “green” biomass-to-chemicals process based on a
renewable feedstock is certainly a step forward towards a sus-
tainable development, but in the quest for sustainability it is
important to stretch the life-cycle boundaries enough to uncover
potential trade-off.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data related to this article can be found at
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.03.012.
References
Adsul, M.G., Varma, A.J., Gokhale, D., 2006. Lactic acid production from waste
sugarcane bagasse derived cellulose. Green Chem. 9, 58e62.
Amore, A., Ciesielski, P.N., Lin, C.-Y., Salvachúa, D., i Nogue , V.S., 2016. Development
of lignocellulosic. Biorefinery technologies: recent advances and current chal-
lenges. Aus. J. Chem. 69, 1201e1218.
Antonetti, C., Licursi, D., Fulignati, S., Valentini, G., Galletti, A.M.R., 2016. New
frontiers in the catalytic synthesis of levulinic acid: from sugars to raw and
waste biomass as starting feedstock. Catalysts 6, 196e224.
Anwar, Z., Gulfraz, M., Irshad, M., 2014. Agro-industrial lignocellulosic biomass a key
to unlock the future bio-energy: a brief review. J. Radiat. Res. App. Sci. 7,
163e173.
Baccini, A., Goetz, S.J., Walker, W.S., Laporte, N.T., Sun, M., Sulla-Menashe, D.,
Hackler, J., Beck, P.S.A., Dubayah, R., Friedl, M.A., Samanta, S., Houghton, R.A.,
2012. Estimated carbon dioxide emissions from tropical deforestation improved
by carbon-density maps. Nat. Clim. Change 2, 182e185.
Biotech Industry Organization, Biotechnology solutions for renewable specialty
chemicals & food ingredients, http://www.bio.org/sites/default/files/Biotech%
20Derived%20Chemicals%20Updated%20May%202014%20Final.pdf (Accessed
Oct 2017).
Bozell, J.J., Moens, L., Elliott, D.C., Wang, Y., Neuenscwander, G.G., Fitzpatrick, S.W.,
Bilski, R.J., Jarnefeld, J.L., 2000. Production of levulinic acid and use as a platform
chemical for derived products. Resour. Conserv. Recy. 28, 227e239.
Brethauer, S., Studer, M.H., 2015. Biochemical conversion processes of lignocellu-
losic biomass to fuels and chemicals e a review. Chim. Intl. J. Chem. 69,
572e581.
Bringezu, S., O'Brien, M., Schütz, H., 2012. Beyond biofuels: assessing global land use
for domestic consumption of biomass: a conceptual and empirical contribution
to sustainable management of global resources. Land Use Pol. 29, 224e232.
Cropper, M., Griffiths, C., Mani, M., 1999. Roads, population pressures, and defor-
estation in Thailand, 1976-1989. Land Econ. 58e73.
Cuzens, J.E., Farone, W.A., 1998. A Method for the Production of Levulinic Acid and
its Derivatives. WO1998019986.
Dobermann, A., Fairhurst, T., 2002. Rice straw management. Better Crops Int. 16,
7e11.
Dodds, D.R., Gross, R.A., 2007. Chemicals from biomass. Science 318, 1250e1251.
Dusselier, M., Mascal, M., Sels, B.F., 2014. “Top chemical opportunities from carbo-
hydrate biomass: a Chemist's view of the biorefinery,”. In: Nicholas, K.M. (Ed.),
Selective Catalysis for Renewable Feedstocks and Chemicals. Springer Interna-
tional Publishing, Cham, pp. 1e40.
Fargione, J., Hill, J., Tilman, D., Polasky, S., Hawthorne, P., 2008. Land clearing and the
biofuel carbon debt. Science 319, 1235e1238.
Fitzherbert, E.B., Struebig, M.J., Morel, A., Danielsen, F., Brühl, C.A., Donald, P.F.,
Phalan, B., 2008. How will oil palm expansion affect biodiversity? Trends Ecol.
Evol. 23, 538e545.
Fitzpatrick, S.W., 1997. Production of Levulinic Acid from Carbohydrate-containing
Materials. US5608105.
Fredenslund, A., Jones, R.L., Prausnitz, J.M., 1975. Group contribution estimation of
activity coefficients in nonideal liquid mixtures. AIChE J. 21, 1086e1099.
Fu, J., Xu, X.X., Lu, X., Lu, X.Y., 2016. Hydrothermal decomposition of carbohydrates
to levulinic acid with catalysis by ionic liquids. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 55,
11044e11051.
Gadde, B., Bonnet, S., Menke, C., Garivait, S., 2009. Air pollutant emissions from rice
straw open field burning in India, Thailand and the Philippines. Environ. Pollut.
157, 1554e1558.
Gadde, B., Menke, C., Wassmann, R., 2009. Rice straw as a renewable energy source
in India, Thailand, and the Philippines: overall potential and limitations for
energy contribution and greenhouse gas mitigation. Biomass Bioenergy 33,
1532e1546.
Gilbert, N., 2012. Palm-oil boom raises conservation concerns. Nature 487, 14e15.
Girisuta, B., Dussan, K., Haverty, J.J., Leahy, M.H.B., Hayes, M.H.B., 2013. A kinetic
study of acid catalysed hydrolysis of sugar cane bagasse to levulinic acid. Chem.
Eng. J. 217, 61e70.
Harris, N., Brown, S., Hagen, S., Baccini, A., Houghton, R., 2012. Progress toward a
Consensus on Carbon Emissions from Tropical Deforestation. Policy Brief.
Winrock International. WHOI & Meridian Institute.
Harris, N.L., Brown, S., Hagen, S.C., Saatchi, S.S., Petrova, S., Salas, W., Hansen, M.C.,
 V. Isoni et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 214 (2018) 267e275
Potapov, P.V., Lotsch, A., 2012. Baseline map of carbon emissions from defor-
estation in tropical regions. Science 336, 1573e1576.
Harsono, S.S., Grundman, P., Lau, L.H., Hansen, A., Salleh, M.A.M., Meyer-Aurich, A.,
Idris, A., Ghazi, T.I.M., 2013. Energy balances, greenhouse gas emissions and
economics of biochar production from palm oil empty fruit bunches. Resour.
Conserv. Recy. 77, 108e115.
Hart, L.R., Kenneth, R., 1956. Process for the Manufacture of Levulinic acid Esters.
US2763665.
Hayes, D.J., Fitzpatrick, S., Hayes, M.H., Ross, J.R., 2006. The Biofine Process: pro-
duction of levulinic acid, furfural and formic acid from lignocellulosic feed-
stocks. Biorefineries 1, 139e164.
Hsu, C.C., Chasar, D.W., 1980. Process for the manufacture of levulinic acid and
esters. US4236021.
Isikgor, F.H., Becer, C.R., 2015. Lignocellulosic biomass: a sustainable platform for
the production of bio-based chemicals and polymers. Polym. Chem. 6,
4497e4559.
Kamahara, H., Hasanudin, U., Widiyanto, A., Tachibana, R., Atsuta, Y., Goto, N.,
Daimon, H., Fujie, K., 2010. Improvement potential for net energy balance of
biodiesel derived from palm oil: a case study from Indonesian practice. Biomass
Bioenergy 34, 1818e1824.
Kamm, B., Kamm, M., 2004. Principles of biorefineries. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol.
64, 137e145.
Khoo, H.H., Wong, L.L., Tan, J., Isoni, V., Sharratt, P., 2015. Synthesis of 2-methyl
tetrahydrofuran from various lignocellulosic feedstocks: sustainability assess-
ment via LCA. Resour. Conserv. Recy. 95, 174e182.
Khoo, H.H., Ee, W.L., Isoni, V., 2016. Bio-chemicals from lignocellulose feedstock:
sustainability, LCA and the green conundrum. Green Chem. 18, 1912e1922.
Klingler, F.D., Ebertz, W., 2000. Oxocarboxylic Acids. Ullmann's Encyclopedia of
Industrial Chemistry, Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA.
Koh, L.P., Wilcove, D.S., 2008. Is oil palm agriculture really destroying tropical
biodiversity? Conserv. Lett. 1, 60e64.
Kruse, A., Dahmen, N., 2017. Hydrothermal biomass conversion: quo vadis?
J. Supercrit. Fluids. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.supflu.2017.12.035 (in press).
Laurance, W.F., Koh, L.P., Butler, R., Sodhi, N.S., Bradshaw, C.J.A., Neidel, J.D.,
Consunji, H., Mateo Vega, J., 2010. Improving the performance of the roundtable
on sustainable palm oil for nature conservation. Conserv. Biol. 24, 377e381.
Li, D., Liu, M., Cheng, Y., Wang, D., Qin, J., Jiao, J., et al., 2011. Methane emissions from
double-rice cropping system under conventional and no tillage in southeast
China. Soil Tillage Res. 113, 77e81.
Liu, L., Li, Z., Hou, W., Shen, H., 2018. Direct conversion of lignocellulose to levulinic
acid catalyzed by ionic liquid. Carbohydr. Polym. 181, 778e784.
Luterbacher, J.S., Martin Alonso, D., Dumesic, J.A., 2014. Targeted chemical
upgrading of lignocellulosic biomass to platform molecules. Green Chem. 16,
4816e4838.
Ma, J.F., Tamai, K., Yamaji, N., Mitani, N., Konishi, S., Katsuhara, M., Ishiguro, M.,
Murata, Y., Yano, M., 2006. A silicon transporter in rice. Nature 440, 688e691.
Mullen, B.D., Leibig, C.M., Kapicak, L.A., Bunning, D.L., Strand, S.M., Brunelle, D.J.,
Rodwogin, D.M., Shirtum, R.P., Louwagie, A.J., Yontz, D.J., 2013. Process to Pre-
pare Levulinic Acid. WO2013078391.
275
Murat Sen, S., Gürbüz, E.I., Wettstein, S.G., Martin Alonso, D., Dumesic, J.A.,
Maravelias, C.T., 2012. Production of butene oligomers as transportation fuels
using butene for esterification of levulinic acid from lignocellulosic biomass:
process synthesis and technoeconomic evaluation. Green Chem. 14,
3289e3294.
Na€gele, H., Pfitzer, J., Na€gele, E., Inone, E.R., Eisenreich, N., Eckl, W., Eyerer, P., 2002.
ARBOFORM®-A Thermoplastic, Processable Material from Lignin and Natural
Fibers. Chemical Modification, Properties, and Usage of Lignin, Springer,
pp. 101e119.
P and G http://www.pg.com/en_US/sustainability/policies_practices/palmoil.shtml
(accessed Oct 2017).
Pawelzik, P., Carus, M., Hotchkiss, J., Narayan, R., Selke, S., Wellisch, M., Weiss, M.,
Wicke, B., Patel, M.K., 2013. Critical aspects in the life cycle assessment (LCA) of
bio-based materials e reviewing methodologies and deriving recommenda-
tions. Resour. Conserv. Recy. 73, 211e228.
Pileidis, F.D., Titirici, M.M., 2016. Levulinic acid biorefineries: new challenges for
efficient utilization of biomass. Chem. Sus. Chem. 9, 1e22.
Rackemann, D.W., Doherty, W.O., 2011. The conversion of lignocellulosics to levu-
linic acid. Biofuel. Bioprod. Bior. 5, 198e214.
Rødsrud, G., Lersch, M., Sjo €de, A., 2012. History and future of world's most advanced
biorefinery in operation. Biomass Bioenergy 46, 46e59.
Roundtable on sustainable palm oil, http://www.rspo.org/about (accessed Oct
2017).
Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil, https://rspo.org/about/impacts (Accessed Feb
2018).
Sabesan, S., Spado, C.J., 2013. Production of Furfural from Biomass. WO2013066541.
Saha, B.C., Yoshida, T., Cotta, M.A., Sonomoto, K., 2013. Hydrothermal pretreatment
and enzymatic saccharification of corn stover for efficient ethanol production.
Ind. Crop. Prod. 44, 367e372.
Santiago, R.S., Santos, G.R., Aznar, M., 2009. UNIQUAC correlation of liquideliquid
equilibrium in systems involving ionic liquids: the DFTePCM approach. Fluid
Phase equilibr. 278, 54e61.
Silalertruksa, T., Gheewala, S.H., 2013. A comparative LCA of rice straw utilization for
fuels and fertilizer in Thailand. Bioresour. Technol. 150, 412e419.
Unilever, Sustainable living, http://www.unilever.com/sustainable-living-2014/
reducing-environmental-impact/sustainable-sourcing/sustainable-palm-oil/
our-targets/(Accessed Oct 2017).
Upare, P.P., Yoon, J.W., Kim, M.Y., Kang, H.Y., Hwang, D.W., Hwang, Y.K., Kung, H.H.,
Chang, J.S., 2013. Chemical conversion of biomass-derived hexosesugars to
levulinic acid over sulfonic acid-functionalized graphene oxide catalysts. Green
Chem. 15, 2935e2943.
Wu, L., Moteki, T., Gokhale, A.A., Flaherty, D.W., Toste, F.D., 2016. Production of fuels
and chemicals from biomass: condensation reactions and beyond. Chem. Bio-
mol. Engr. 1, 32e58.
Yan, L., Yang, N., Pang, H., Liao, B., 2008. Production of levulinic acid from bagasse
and paddy straw by liquefaction in the presence of hydrochloride acid. Clean.
Soil Air Water 36, 158e163.
Yaaini, N., Amin, N.A.S., Asmadi, M., 2012. Optimization of levulinic acid from
lignocellulosic biomass using a new hybrid catalyst. Biores. Technol. 116, 58e65.