Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                

Abbas I 2010

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 19

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 14 (2010) 919–937

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews


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

Biomass energy and the environmental impacts associated with its production
and utilization
Tasneem Abbasi, S.A. Abbasi *
Centre for Pollution Control & Energy Technology, Pondicherry University, Chinakalapet, Puducherry 605 014, India

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Article history: Biomass is the first-ever fuel used by humankind and is also the fuel which was the mainstay of the
Received 10 November 2009 global fuel economy till the middle of the 18th century. Then fossil fuels took over because fossil fuels
Accepted 10 November 2009 were not only more abundant and denser in their energy content, but also generated less pollution when
burnt, in comparison to biomass. In recent years there is a resurgence of interest in biomass energy
because biomass is perceived as a carbon-neutral source of energy unlike net carbon-emitting fossil fuels
of which copious use has led to global warming and ocean acidification.
The paper takes stock of the various sources of biomass and the possible ways in which it can be
utilized for generating energy. It then examines the environmental impacts, including impact vis a vis
greenhouse gas emissions, of different biomass energy generation–utilization options.
ß 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........................................ . . . . . 920


2. The logic of ‘carbon neutral’ nature of biomass energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........................................ . . . . . 921
3. Composition of biomass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........................................ . . . . . 921
4. Sources of biomass for energy generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........................................ . . . . . 921
4.1. Food crops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........................................ . . . . . 921
4.2. Hydrocarbon-rich plants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........................................ . . . . . 922
4.3. Waste . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........................................ . . . . . 922
4.4. Weeds and wild growths . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........................................ . . . . . 923
4.5. ‘Lignocellulosic’ biomass: fast-growing grasses and woody species. . . . . . . ........................................ . . . . . 923
5. Technical routes for obtaining different types of fuels from biomass . . . . . . . . . . . ........................................ . . . . . 924
5.1. Thermochemical convertion of biomass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........................................ . . . . . 924
5.1.1. Cogeneration or ‘combined heat and power (CHP)’ generation. . . ........................................ . . . . . 925
5.1.2. Electricity from biomass-fired power plants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........................................ . . . . . 925
5.1.3. Use of biomass gasifiers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........................................ . . . . . 925
5.2. Biochemical processing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........................................ . . . . . 926
5.2.1. Production of ethanol from lignocellulosic crop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........................................ . . . . . 927
5.3. Emerging technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........................................ . . . . . 928
6. Future outlook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........................................ . . . . . 929
7. Environmental impacts of biomass energy: centralized (large scale) systems . . . . ........................................ . . . . . 929
7.1. The proposed large scale systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........................................ . . . . . 929
7.1.1. Hydrocarbon-rich-arid-land plants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........................................ . . . . . 929
7.1.2. Aquatic weed farms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........................................ . . . . . 930
7.1.3. Kelp farms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........................................ . . . . . 930
7.1.4. Short rotation coppice willow/poplar, tall woody grasses such as miscanthus, switchgrass, and canary reed grass . . . . . . 931
7.1.5. Wheat, oilseed and fats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........................................ . . . . . 931
7.1.6. Corn and sugarcane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........................................ . . . . . 931

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +91 413 2655263.


E-mail address: prof.s.a.abbasi@gmail.com (S.A. Abbasi).

1364-0321/$ – see front matter ß 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.rser.2009.11.006
920 T. Abbasi, S.A. Abbasi / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 14 (2010) 919–937

7.2. The environmental impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 931


7.2.1. Biomass energy may be ‘carbon neutral’ but it is not ‘nutrient neutral’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 931
7.2.2. Land and water resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 932
7.2.3. Soil erosion and water run-off . . . . . . . . . . . . . .................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 932
7.2.4. Nutrient removal and losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 932
7.2.5. Loss of natural biota, habitats and wildlife . . . .................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 932
7.2.6. Social and economic impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 932
7.3. The real societal cost of grain-based biofuels . . . . . . . . . .................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 933
7.4. Conversion to utilizable energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 933
7.4.1. Impact of thermal processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 933
7.4.2. Impact of fermentation processes. . . . . . . . . . . .................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 933
7.5. Is there hope? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934
8. Biomass energy—dispersed systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934
9. Summary and conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934

1. Introduction contributes very little to the overall biomass potential of the world.
Therefore, subsequent discussion shall focus on phytomass and, as
If solar energy is the ‘mother’ of all other forms of renewable is popular convention, the term biomass shall be used to denote
energy, the primary source of food energy for all multi-cellular only the phytomass.
organisms is biomass. The total incident solar energy reaching the earth’s surface is
Biomass is the general term which includes phytomass or plant enormous—173,000 TW (terawatt) [3], which is 17,000 times what
biomass and zoomass or animal biomass. Sun’s energy when the present day humans consume in fossil fuels. The upper limit of
intercepted by plants and converted by the process of photosyn- capture efficiency of solar radiation in biomass may be as high as
thesis into chemical energy, is ‘fixed’ or stored in the form of 15% but in most of the species it is generally 1% or lower [4]. The
terrestrial and aquatic vegetation (Fig. 1). The vegetation when energy thus captured by photosynthesis is about 140 TW which is a
grazed (used as food) by animals gets converted into zoomass very small percentage of the total solar energy reaching our planet,
(animal biomass) and excreta. The excreta from terrestrial animals, yet the total volume of biomass that is created, is still very large—
especially dairy animals, can be used as a source of energy, while 10 times our present energy demand. About 100 billion tonnes of
the excreta from aquatic animals gets dispersed as it is not possible carbon is converted to biomass every year.
to collect it and process it for energy production. In countries (for These are attractive figures but, in practice, there are serious
example China and India) where per capita energy consumption is limitations on the extent to which biomass can be used as a source
low and the number of dairy animals large, even the excreta of of generating other forms of energy. Moreover, much of the natural
dairy animals has the potential to provide a sizeable fraction of the energy flow captured from sunlight is needed to run the
total energy requirement [1,2]. But, in general, animal biomass hydrological cycle and earth’s ecosystems. Humans cannot simply

Fig. 1. The solar energy–biomass energy pathways.


T. Abbasi, S.A. Abbasi / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 14 (2010) 919–937 921

divert excessive quantities of solar energy for use as fuel without conversion to other forms, is supposed to release only that much CO2
causing serious disruptions in global environment [5]. which had been captured recently by the biomass for its growth.
Nevertheless, till large-scale use of fossil fuels started in the This reasoning of ‘carbon neutral’ nature of biomass energy has
19th century, for the previous hundreds of thousands of years generated renewed interest worldwide to utilize biomass,
human progress had been intimately linked to it’s ability to utilize especially as a source of liquid fuels (methanol, ethanol, biodiesel,
biomass as fuel and as food. etc.) as substitutes for petrol and diesel. But, as discussed later in
The very first form of energy (other than food) humankind this chapter, biomass-based production of energy is not always
learnt to use was biomass energy. And it remained its primary fuel ‘carbon-neutral’ because in actual practice fossil fuel-based energy
right upto the end of 18th century. After discovering fire the next is utilized at several points in the course of conversion of biomass
major discovery humankind made was of agriculture. In effect into fuels. Even more significant is the fact, discussed in detail later,
agriculture is our way to direct solar energy towards growth of that large-scale production and utilization of biomass as energy
only those plants, mainly (crops), that we deem ‘useful’ to us, at the source can be enormously harmful to the environment unless very
exclusion of plants we do not want. great care is taken.
By facilitating the planting and growth of species of our choice Nevertheless, the anxiety to quickly find alternatives to fossil
while at the same time preventing other plants to grow on our fuels has prompted most countries of the world to explore
agricultural lands, we have appropriated much of the terrestrial biomass-based sources of energy.
environment and created a situation to use solar energy via
agriculture for our benefit. 3. Composition of biomass
There is historical evidence, based on cave drawings, that coal, a
fossil fuel, was used for heating by the cave man and the existence of Biomass contains varying amounts of cellulose, hemicellulose,
other fossil fuels has also been known since thousands of years [6]. lignin and small amounts of other organics besides inorganics. The
But, until the 18th century when coal mining began and coal relative proportion of the major organic components in biomass is
emerged as the dominant fuel of the industrial revolution, the particularly important in the development of processes for
human need for fuel was almost entirely met by biomass (in the form producing other fuels and chemicals.
of wood and charcoal). Then fossil fuels—first coal and then petrol, The combination of cellulose, hemicelluloses, and lignin—all
diesel, and natural gas—began to dominate our fuel economy. Inspite polymers—is called ‘lignocellulose’. It comprises around half of the
of this, biomass in the form of fuelwood continues to be a major plant matter produced by photosynthesis and represents the most
source of energy to this day, especially in developing countries. abundant renewable organic resource on earth. Cellulose, hemi-
Nearly 70% of India’s cooking energy requirement and 32% of its cellulose and lignin are strongly intermeshed in lignocelluloses
primary energy requirement is met with biomass [7]. Fuelwood and and are chemically bonded by non-covalent forces or by covalent
other forms of ‘traditional biomass’ contributes as much as 12.5% of crosslinkages [12].
Brazil’s energy needs [8]. Globally fuelwood, in its various forms, As of now only a small amount of lignocellulosic materials
accounts for about 64% the estimated total world supply of which is generated as by-products in agriculture or forestry is used,
combustible renewables [9]. The estimated worldwide annual the rest goes to waste.
generation of electricity from biomass amounts to about 185 TWh, of Cellulose is the largest component of lignocellulosic materials,
which nearly three-quarters are produced from solid biomass, 14% followed by hemicellulose and lignin. Whereas cellulose and
from biogas and 12% from municipal solid waste. If we consider the hemicellulose are macromolecules constructed from different
portion contributed by biomass to the total energy production in the sugars; lignin is an aromatic polymer synthesized from phenyl-
world, it comes to only less than 2% [10]. propaniod precursors. The composition and proportions of these
compounds differ from plant to plant [14,15]; as illustrated in
2. The logic of ‘carbon neutral’ nature of biomass energy Table 1.

When we burn biomass, or use it after converting it to other types 4. Sources of biomass for energy generation
of solid, liquid, and gaseous fuels (for example charcoal, ethanol,
methane), we release only that carbon to the atmosphere as CO2 Any and every type of biomass can be used to either burn it for
which the biomass had recently captured from atmosphere during energy or to derive one or other fuel from it. But some species
its photosynthetic growth. So there is no net addition of CO2. In provide better quality of fuel at lesser costs than other species.
contrast when we burn fossil fuels we make a net addition of CO2 in Energy-from-biomass programmes are built around such species.
atmosphere because fossil fuels are derived from plants and animals
that had lived millions of years back. In that era the plants and 4.1. Food crops
animals had sequestered billions of tonnes of carbon over several
thousand years. By burning large portions of that carbon per year we At present the following of the food crops are used in different
have released (and are continuing to release) enormous quantities of countries to produce biofuels (ethanol, biodiesel, petrol/diesel
CO2 within a very short time of about 200 years. The earth’s additives):
environment cannot sequester this much carbon at the rate at which
it is being released by fossil fuels. The result is the net enhancement i. Sugarcane
of CO2 concentration in the atmosphere, which, in turn, has led to ii. Corn or maize
global warming. The oceans have absorbed a third of all the extra CO2 iii. Soyabean
released in this period which has upset the CO2-CaCO3 balance of the iv. Wheat
oceans, causing a lowering in the ocean pH and setting in motion v. Sugar beet
cascading negative impacts in several directions. If net CO2 vi. Vegetable oils such as rapseed, palm, and sunflower oils.
emissions are to continue, the acidification of the oceans will also
continue, leading to consequences perhaps even more adverse than Food crops-to-energy programmes are under increasing scruti-
global warming alone is capable of causing [6,11]. For this reason ny because they compete with the use of these crops as food,
fossil fuels have been deemed ‘carbon positive’. Biomass, on the thereby pushing up food prices and threatening the existence of
other hand, is ‘carbon neutral’. Its use as fuel, directly or after subsisting human beings. They also seriously degrade land and
922 T. Abbasi, S.A. Abbasi / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 14 (2010) 919–937

Table 1
Lignocellulosic constituents of some biomass.

Lignocellulosic residues Hemicellulose (%) Cellulose (%) Lignin (%) Ash (%)

Nut shells 25–30 25–30 30–40 NA


Corn cobs 35 45 15 1.36
Paper 0 85–99 0–15 1.1–3.9
Rice straw 24 32.1 18 NA
Sorted refuse 20 60 20 NA
Leaves 80–85 15–20 0 NA
Cotton seeds hairs 5–20 80–95 0 NA
Waste paper from chemical pulps 10–20 60–70 5–10 NA
Primary wastewater solids NA 8–15 24–29 NA
Sugar cane bagasse 27–32 32–44 19–24 4.5–9
Wheat straw 26–32 29–35 16–21 NA
Barley straw 24–29 31–34 14–15 5–7
Oat straw 27–38 31–37 16–19 6–8
Rye straw 27–30 33–35 16–19 2–5
Bamboo 15–26 26–43 21–31 1.7–5
Coastal Bermuda grass 35.7 25 6.4 NA
Switch grass 31.4 45 12.0 NA
Rye grass (early leaf) 15.8 21.3 2.7 NA
Rye grass (seed setting) 25.7 26.7 7.3 NA
Orchard grass (medium maturity) 40 32 4.7 NA
Esparto grass 27–32 33–38 17–19 6–8
Sabai grass 23.9 NA 22.0 6.0
Elephant grass 24 22 23.9 6
Bast fiber seed flax 25 47 23 5
Bast fiber Kenaf 22–23 31–39 15–19 2–5
Bast fiber Jute 18–21 45–53 21–26 0.5–2
Banana waste 14.8 13.2 14 11.4
Hardwood stems 24–40 40–55 18–25 NA
Softwood stems 25–35 45–50 25–35 NA

water bodies. These aspects have been discussed in detail later in sawmill waste; food waste; and biomass components of municipal
this paper. solid waste. Substantial energy can be produced from these wastes
because, globally, several billion tonnes of biomass is contained in
4.2. Hydrocarbon-rich plants them. But to actually extract the energy in a clean and cost-
effective manner is a major challenge yet to be met. Among the
A large number of pants contain hydrocarbons in concentra- biggest problems is how to quickly and economically convert the
tions significant enough to become a potential source of a diesel- lignocellulosic component of these wastes into simpler sugars to
like fuel. In just the north-eastern region of India, 99 species of such enable their subsequent biochemical conversion to clean fuels like
‘laticiferous’ (latex-yielding) species have been identified [13]. ethanol and butanol. This aspect is dwelt upon at some length in
Well-known among hydrocarbon-rich plants are jatropha (seven Section 5.2.
species), and euphorbia (five species) but the potential of several In India alone over 500 million tonnes of agricultural and
others (Table 2) has also been indicated. In these plants the agro-industrial residue is generated every year. This quantity, in
organics are generally concentrated in stem and bark; leaves carry terms of heat content, is equivalent to about 175 million tonnes
much lower fractions of these (Table 3). of oil. A portion of agricultural residue is used for fodder and fuel
Even as great hope is pinned by some on these plants, the in rural areas but at least 150–200 million tonnes of it goes to
negative impact of their large-scale use is similar to that of food waste. Theoretically there is enough energy content in the waste
crops, as discussed later. to generate 15,000–25,000 MW of electrical power in India at
typically prevalent plant load factors [7]. Electricity can also be
4.3. Waste generated from biomass growing on wastelands, road side and
rail trackside plantations, etc. The quantum of electricity that can
‘Waste’ includes agricultural residues such as straw, vegetable/ be produced from such biomass has been estimated to be in
fruit peels, and crop wastes; forestry waste such as leaf litter and excess of 70,000 MW. Thus, the total electricity generation

Table 2
Some key constituents and fuel values of latex-bearing plants [13].

Species Oil (%) Polyphenol % Hydrogen (%) Fat (%) Protein (%) Gross heat in hexane extract

Plumeria alba 3.56 7.89 1.36 26.8 7.87 8325


Calotropis procera 3.07 8.42 2.04 24.3 11.26 9837
Ficus carica 1.21 4.26 0.94 21.2 8.21 –
Erythrina variegate 1.01 5.26 0.29 27.4 7.62 –
Euphorbia nerrifolia 3.87 12.49 3.28 30.6 12.68 9218
Allamanda catherlica 1.38 7.24 1.26 21.82 8.16
Neriumindicum 3.01 8.25 1.48 24.4 10.21 7145
Tabernaemontana divarieta 1.36 7.42 0.86 32.5 9.26 –
Mimusops elengi 5.37 10.26 3.12 24.7 11.23 8924
Euphorbia pulcherima 3.94 8.42 2.41 28.3 9.42 –
Crude oil – – – – – 10506
Gasoline – – – – – 11528
T. Abbasi, S.A. Abbasi / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 14 (2010) 919–937 923

Table 3
Distribution of organics in some hydrocarbon-rich species [13].

Species Plant parts Moisture content (%) Oil (%) Polyphenol (%) Hydrocarbon (%)

Plumeria alba Leaf 87.5 0.21 3.86 0.26


Stem 56.8 3.36 6.84 1.28
Bark 89.3 4.74 7.62 1.78
Whole plant 76.3 3.56 6.89 1.36

Calotropis procera Leaf 69.1 1.68 2.58 1.06


Stem 64.6 3.64 3.56 2.47
Bark 76.9 3.89 3.96 2.6
Whole plant 71.5 3.11 3.42 2.35

Euphorbia nerrifolia Leaf 73.8 2.46 4.67 0.42


Stem 62.4 3.56 9.63 2.58
Bark 86.9 4.95 12.68 2.93
Whole plant 78.6 3.87 11.49 2.28

Nerium indicum Leaf 64.3 2.1 4.21 0.34


Stem 62.4 3.71 6.23 1.36
Bark 70.9 3.24 8.25 1.78
Whole plant 67.2 3.24 7.54 1.45

Mimusops elengi Leaf 65.2 1.36 1.46 1.21


Stem 57 6.54 8.43 3.56
Bark 61.4 8.21 8.91 3.92
Whole plant 59.3 6.87 7.69 2.42

potential from biomass could reach a figure of about 100 GW in and reduced fossil fuel input requirements relative to annual crops
India alone [7] if the technological problems in the way of doing [31]. Poplars and miscanthus are also being intensively explored.
it can be solved. Even as production of ‘lignocellulosic biomass’ like switch-
grass is less stressful to environment than food-based crops, it is
4.4. Weeds and wild growths not without potential pitfalls. Care must be taken when selecting
species for use as biofuel crops, because the characteristics which
Invasive plants which outgrow their utility to humans are called make some species ideal for this use, such as C4 photosynthesis,
weeds. The terrestrials mimosa and lantana, the amphibian long canopy duration, lack of pests and diseases, and rapid spring
ipomea, and the aquatics water hyacinth, salvinia, and pistia are growth, are the ones also associated with invasiveness [32].
examples of weeds [16–22]. Invasive plants elbow out most other Many lignocellolosic crops can be grown with low agrochemical
species and have a destabilizing and degrading effect on the areas and fossil fuel inputs, but lure of quick profit can make farmers
they colonize. If such plants can be utilized as energy source it overuse this ability by employing intensive cropping practices
would become economically feasible to periodically harvest and with high or even excessive fertilizer and pesticide inputs [33]. If
use them, thereby controlling their spread and reducing the harm such misuse occurs, the advantage of carbon sequestration by
they cause [23]. switchgrass stands developed with high levels of nitrogen
fertilization many release N2O into the atmosphere and
4.5. ‘Lignocellulosic’ biomass: fast-growing grasses and woody species significantly offset the greenhouse gas mitigation potential of
such stands [34]. Lignocellulosic crop production can also have a
As stated in the beginning of this section a large number of large impact on wildlife habitat and biodiversity [35].
biomass species contain lignocelluclose but the term ‘lignocellu-
losic biomass’ is being commonly used in reference to species
which are being targeted for energy production principally for Table 4
their lignocellulosic content and do not compete with food crops. Lignocellulosic residues generated from different agricultural sources.
Lignocellulose being the main component of biomass, gigantic
Source Residue, million Volatile Ash (%)
quantities of it is generated across the globe. Agricultural residues— tonnes per year matter (%)
presently deemed waste—contain massive quantities of lignocellu-
Sugarcane bagasse 317–380 84.2 2.9
lose (Table 4). Lignocellulosic biomass also contains trace amounts
Maize straw 159–191 – –
of several inorganics which get concentrated in the ash (Table 5). Rice husk 157–188 81.6 3.5
Unlike some bioenergy crops like corn and soybeans, which are Wheat straw 154–185 83.9 11.2
annuals, lignocellulosic bioenergy crops are typically perennials. Soya straw 54–65 – –
They include: Yucca straw 40–48 – –
Barley straw 35–42 – –
Cotton fiber 17–20 88 5.4
(a) Woody species such as willows, Salix spp. [24], poplars, Populus Sorgoum straw 15–18 – –
spp. [25], and other hardwoods [26]. Banana straw 13–15 – –
(b) Herbaceous species such as switchgrass, Panicum virgatum [27]; Mani shell 9.2–11.1 – –
Sunflower straw 7.5–9.0 – –
big blustem, Andropogon gerardii [28]; reed canarygrass, Phalaris
Bean straw 4.9–5.9 – –
arundinacea [29]; and miscanthus, Miscanthus spp. [30]. Rye straw 4.3–5.2 – –
Pine waste 3.8–4.6 – –
Of these, switchgrass has received particular attention due to its Coffe straw 1.6–1.9 – –
high biomass yield, broad geographic range, efficient nutrient Almond straw 0.4–0.49 – –
Hazelnut husk 0.2–0.24 – –
utilization, low erosion potential, carbon sequestration capability,
924 T. Abbasi, S.A. Abbasi / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 14 (2010) 919–937

Table 5
1
Inorganics in biomass ash, ppmw (mg kg ).

Substance Na K Ca Al Fe Mg P Si Co Cr Cu Mn Ni S Zn
a a a
Bagasse 93 2682 1518 125 6261 284 17340 18 9 16 60 16
Coconut coir 1758 2438 477 148 187 532 47 2990 0.6 2 68 4 2 64 25
Coconut shell 1243 1965 1501 73 115 389 94 256 0.5 0.3 5 1 13 35 9
Coir pith 10564 26283 3126 1653 837 8095 1170 13050 3.2 0.2 1239 27 22 476 40
a a a a
Corn cob 141 9366 182 24 1693 445 9857 19 6 15 11
Corn stalks 6463 32 4686 1911 518 5924 2127 13400 8 11 32 12 13 564 32
a a a a
Cotton 1298 7094 3737 746 4924 736 13000 38 10 58 22
Groundnut shell 467 17690 12970 3642 1092 3547 278 10960 2.3 6 11 44 11 299 52
a a a a
Millet husk 1427 3860 6255 1020 11140 1267 150840 38 49 317 94
a a a
Rice husk 132 9061 1793 533 1612 337 220690 21 108 32 163 1244
a a a a
Rice straw 5106 5402 4772 205 6283 752 174510 463 45 221 47
a a a
Subabul 92 614 6025 614 1170 100 195 1 2 1 66 40
a a
Wheat straw 7861 28930 7666 2455 132 4329 214 44440 7 25 25 787 18
a
Below detectable levels.

5. Technical routes for obtaining different types of fuels from essentially involves heating biomass in the presence of differing
biomass concentrations of oxygen.
When biomass is heated in total absence of oxygen, the process –
Biomass can be, and is, directly used as fuel but this manner of called pyrolysis – produces various organic liquids that can be
use is a source of very substantial pollution [36,37]. Also biomass manipulated or refined to make liquid fuels. Alternatively, heating
cannot be used as it is to run vehicles, trains, ships, and airplanes. It with low concentrations of oxygen leads to gasification and the
is therefore, necessary to convert biomass into liquid fuels which production of hydrogen and organic gases which, in turn, can also be
can replace petrol and diesel. For other uses as fuel, biomass should converted into liquid fuels by the Fisher-Tropsch process. The
be converted to gases like methane which burn much more cleanly advantage of thermochemical processing is that it can convert nearly
than biomass. all the organic components of the biomass, whereas biochemical
A large variety of liquid and gaseous fuels can be derived from processing (described below), uses only the polysaccharide content
biomass (Fig. 2). These are all carbon-containing fuels which, on of the biomass. But the start-up and plant maintenance costs of
burning, generate mainly carbon dioxide and water vapour. thermochemical processes are high because of the demands of high-
Biomass can also be used to generate the non-carbon fuel temperature processing. In order to operate efficiently, thermo-
hydrogen (Fig. 3) but all existing technologies which do so are chemical processing must be done on a large scale which
too costly to be practicable. As may be seen from Fig. 3, there are necessitates the transportation of biomass over long distances,
two main routes available for producing fuels from biomass: resulting in an increase in cost. Also, thermochemical processes use
thermochemical and biochemical. up a lot of fossil fuels in the course of transportation of biomass and
its heating. Therefore such processes provide little benefit vis a vis net
5.1. Thermochemical convertion of biomass reduction of CO2 emissions. Additionally, such processes generate
substantial quantities of air pollutants, necessitating elaborate
In thermochemical processing biomass is converted into a treatment which is a major drain on energy and other resources.
range of products by thermal decay and chemical reformation. It There is also a risk of major accidents [38–44].

Fig. 2. Different types of fuels obtainable from biomass [170].


T. Abbasi, S.A. Abbasi / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 14 (2010) 919–937 925

Fig. 3. Routes by which hydrogen can be produced from biomass [170].

5.1.1. Cogeneration or ‘combined heat and power (CHP)’ generation the commissioned and ‘under implementation’ plants in India and
‘Cogeneration’ or CHP denotes the process which uses a single their capacity is given in Table 6. Among developing countries
fuel to produce more than one form of energy, in sequence. It is Brazil is the greatest producer of electricity from biomass-fired
possible to cogenerate steam and electricity, thereby significantly power plants [8]. In recent years developed countries are also
increasing the overall efficiencies of fuel utilization in process increasing their capacities and numbers of such systems [45].
industries. The thermodynamics of electricity production necessi-
tates the rejection of a large quantity of heat to a lower 5.1.3. Use of biomass gasifiers
temperature sink. In normal electricity generation plants, this Biomass gasifiers can be used to replace fossil-fuels in high fuel-
heat rejection takes place in condensers where up to 70% of heat in consuming industries such as the ceramics industry. The produc-
steam is rejected to the atmosphere. In cogeneration mode, tion of ceramics requires that raw items be baked for a pre-
however, this heat is not wasted and is instead used to meet specified period at a temperature of 900–1300 8C. This is carried
process heating requirement. The overall efficiency of fuel out in tunnel kilns, which operate continuously round the year. Oil
utilization can thus be increased to 60% or even higher in some or other suitable fuels are fired into the kilns to maintain the high
cases. Capacity of cogeneration projects can range from a few temperature. Typically, kerosene, diesel or LPG are used as fuels.
kilowatts to several megawatts of electricity generation along with These can be replaced by producer gas generated in biomass
simultaneous production of heat ranging from less than a hundred gasification systems. The typical oil consumption of ceramic
kWth (kilowatts thermal) to many MWth (megawatts thermal). factories is 2000–3000 l/day. After installation of biomass gasifiers,
Cogeneration requires heat and electricity in a favourable ratio, oil consumption could be reduced to less than a third. It is
which is ideally present in the sugar industry. For this reason sugar estimated that the Indian ceramic industry consumes 0.3–0.5
industry across the world has been using bagasse-based cogene-
ration for achieving economy of operations. In India, almost all
Table 6
sugar mills have been practicing cogeneration; some since 70–80 State-wise list of commissioned and ‘under implementation’ biomass based
years. Technology is now available for high-temperature/high- projects [7].
pressure steam generation using bagasse as a fuel. This makes it
State Commissioned projects Projects under
possible for sugar mills to operate at higher levels of energy implementation
efficiency and generate surplus electricity. CHP systems generally
Number of (MW) Number of (MW)
offer higher carbon savings than power only systems, but have less
projects projects
favourable economics mainly due to high initial capital costs [37].
Andhra Pradesh 37 194.2 11 70.25
Chhattisgarh 2 11 5 51
5.1.2. Electricity from biomass-fired power plants Gujarat 1 0.5 – –
Biomass-fired power plants have been explored, especially in Haryana 1 4 – –
developing countries. For example in India power-generation Karnataka 5 36 11 61
capacity of about 302 MW has been commissioned through 54 Madhya Pradesh 1 1 – –
Maharashtra 1 3.5 1 6
projects by India’s Ministry of New and Renewable Energy Sources
Punjab 1 10 1 6
[7]. A further capacity addition of about 270 MW through 39 Rajasthan 1 7.8 4 29.1
projects is under implementation. The biomass materials that have Tamil Nadu 4 34.5 6 48.5
been used for power generation in these projects include rice husk, Uttar Pradesh – – – –
cotton stalk, mustard stalk, Prosopis juliflora (vilayati babul),
Total 54 302.5 39 271.85
poultry litter, bagasse, cane trash, etc. State-wise distribution of
926 T. Abbasi, S.A. Abbasi / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 14 (2010) 919–937

million tonnes of oil per year. Seventy per cent savings on this in greater detail is shown in Fig. 5. In the food crops the sugars are in
figure would imply annual savings of 0.02–0.35 million tonnes of the form of starch which has to be first converted to simpler sugars –
oil. According to MNRE [7], about 100 ceramic factories in India out maltose, glucose, fructose – before fermentation to ethanol can be
of the estimated 500 are reported to have switched over to biomass accomplished. For this the substrate has to be pulverized and then
gasifiers. But it is necessary to assess the pollutant emissions and cooked in steam to cause gelatinization and then rupture of starch
other impacts from gasifiers in comparison to the emissions from granules. Cooling and addition of fungal amylase leads to hydrolysis
fossil fuel use before recommending the former. into simpler sugars. In the next, fermentation, stage these sugars are
converted by yeasts into ethanol.
5.2. Biochemical processing Only when sugarcane juice is the raw material for ethanol
production, the cooking and hydrolysis stages are not required.
Of the five alternatives available for biochemical processing of As the fermentation is done in presence of water the resulting
biomass (Fig. 3) the first two are only in experimental state. Of the ethanol is in a dilute form. To be usable as a fuel, ethanol must be
remaining three, anaerobic digestion, which has been used with freed of water. Most of the water is removed by distillation, but
increasing success in processing animal manure and wastewaters only upto 95–96% concentration of ethanol can be achieved due to
[46] has been besieged with operational problems and low the formation of water–ethanol azeotrope. The 95.6% (m/m)
efficiency when used to process phytomass [23,47]. In the (96.5%, v/v) ethanol, 4.4% (m/m) (3.5%, v/v) water mixture may be
esterification-to-biodiesel route the main challenge is to grow used as a fuel alone, but unlike anhydrous ethanol, it is immiscible
oil-rich plants in sufficiently large quantities per acre of land to in gasoline, so the water fraction has to be removed in further
maximize oil yield with minimum of environmental costs. In the treatment in order to produce ethanol pure enough to burn in
fermentation-to-ethanol route, also, this is a major concern but combination with gasoline in gasoline engines.
equally big concern is the conversion process which, as per Five processes are available to remove water from an azeotropic
mounting evidence, is far from ‘clean’. Indeed, as detailed in the ethanol/water mixture. The first process, used in many early fuel
later part of this paper, some scientists even claim that the overall ethanol plants, is called azeotropic distillation and consists of
process is so polluting, and consumes so much energy, that in the adding benzene or cyclohexane to the mixture. When these
ultimate analysis it generates more greenhouse gas emissions than components are added to the mixture, it forms a heterogeneous
the gasoline it replaces as a transportation fuel. In the context of azeotropic mixture in vapour–liquid–liquid equilibrium, which
this view-point as well as of the popular belief that biofuels are when distilled produces anhydrous ethanol in the column bottom,
‘clean’, the process of ethanol production is discussed in more and a vapour mixture of water and cyclohexane/benzene. When
detail below. condensed, this becomes a two-phase liquid mixture. Another
A broad overview of the route by which food crops other than early method, extractive distillation, consists of adding a ternary
cane sugar are converted to ethanol is presented in Fig. 4. The system component which increases ethanol’s relative volatility. When the

Fig. 4. A broad overview of the biomass-to-ethanol process using food crops (corn, maize, wheat, etc.) Adapted from [171].
T. Abbasi, S.A. Abbasi / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 14 (2010) 919–937 927

Fig. 5. Stages associated with the production of ethanol from starch contant of food crops Adapted from [172].

ternary mixture is distilled, it produces anhydrous ethanol on the all other parts of plants are full of lignocellulose. Hence for every
top stream of the column. acre of land committed to biomass-for-energy, much greater
All these processes consume substantial quantities of energy. quantities of lignocellulosic biomass can be produced than a food
Attempts have, therefore, been made to develop methods that crop. But lignocellulose is not as easily hydrolysable to simple
avoid distillation for achieving dehydration. One of such processes sugars as starch. It has to be pre-treated by much more ‘strong arm’
uses molecular sieves to remove water from ethanol. In this methods than are used for starch before sugars can be extracted
process, ethanol vapour under pressure passes through a bed of from it. The reason is as follows.
molecular sieve beads. The bead’s pores are sized to allow Plant cell walls are very sturdy fibre-composite materials that
absorption of water while excluding ethanol. After a period of make for much of the characteristic form and function of plants.
time, the bed is regenerated under vacuum to remove the absorbed Young growing plant cells are encased in a strong but flexible cell
water. Two beds are used so that one is available to absorb water wall, allowing cells and organs to expand as the plant grows. In
while the other is being regenerated. This dehydration technology older tissues, the cell walls become substantially rigidified and are
is less energy intensive than azeotropic distillation. reinforced by the deposition of secondary cell walls. It is these
As can be easily seen, substantial quantities of fossil fuel energy secondary cell walls that provide mature plant tissues with their
is consumed in the ethanol production process. From raising the strength and resilience, forming the woody tissues which, for
crop to harvesting, transporting, milling, and cooking, fossil fuels example, allow trees to attain their great sizes, and the stems of
are continuously used-up. Considerable energy is also consumed in crops such as wheat to bear the weight of seeds produced on the
the dehydration of ethanol. The ultimate product, in the opinion of plant. The major portion of plant cell walls is composed of
many, might consume more energy than it may provide. polysaccharides and hence is potentially a rich source of sugars for
fermentation to produce biofuels.
5.2.1. Production of ethanol from lignocellulosic crop The problem is that plant cell walls have evolved not only for
With growing opposition to the diversion of food crops for strength but also for resistance to biochemical attack by living
biofuel production, and growing acceptance of the fact (as detailed organisms. The cell wall is the first barrier between plant cells and
later in this paper) that it is not as clean and green a process as has the environment. Pests and pathogens try to penetrate the cell wall
been projected in the past, focus is shifting towards ‘lignocellulos- while the plants build their defenses by strengthening the cell wall.
ic’ biomass. Whereas the starch-rich seeds of corn or maize Even senesced woody tissues must resist pests to enable the
constitute but a small fraction of the biomass of the overall plant, tissues to perform their skeletal support function.
928 T. Abbasi, S.A. Abbasi / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 14 (2010) 919–937

Thus, plant cell walls have evolved as materials that are A comparative chart which clearly brings out the increasing
extremely resistant to enzymatic digestion. Obtaining sugars that complexity of ethanol production process as we move from cane
are locked in this structure is a major challenge. Among the existing sugar as raw material to lignocellulosic biomass, is presented as
routes to penetrate the plant cell walls is the acid hydrolysis method, Fig. 6.
which uses acids such as sulphuric acid or hydrochloric acid. It
involves costly, energy-demanding steps to recover the acid used, 5.3. Emerging technologies
and to condition the released sugars for fermentation.
The other option is enzymatic process, which uses enzyme New technologies for producing biofuels from biomass are
mixtures to obtain fermentable sugars from biomass. But rapidly emerging, including the development of engineered yeast
pretreatment is needed to allow the hydrolytic enzymes to access for increased ethanol yields [52], utilization of new microorgan-
their substrates. Several physical, chemical and enzymatic pre- isms for ethanol production [53], pretreatments for cellulosic
treatments have been developed to improve the digestibility of digestion [54], fuel cells for converting sugars directly to electricity
biomass, but the need to reduce the energy inputs, and the costs of [55], and catalysts for more efficient conversion of biomass to
the procedure in general, has generated consensus around the use syngas [56].
of simple thermochemical pretreatments. Pretreatments with Use of lignin degrading fungi is being explored and attempts are
ammonia improves digestibility by decreasing the crystallinity of being made to isolate—and if possible genetically modify—lignin-
cellulose fibrils or, at high temperatures, by depolymerizing lignins degrading microorganisms living in the gut of higher termites [57].
and releasing matrix polysaccharides [48]. A new biodiesel product, called microdiesel, can be generated in
One of the most cost-effective pretreatments is the use of dilute engineered bacterial cells that condense ethanol with fatty acids
acids (usually between 0.5 and 3% sulphuric acid) at moderate [58]. But these efforts are all in exploratory state with nothing
temperatures [49]. This enables the removal of hemicellulose and having come close to actual utilization.
the recovery of the component sugars. While lignins are not Considerable R&D is also being done on microalgae which are
removed by this treatment, their disruption results in a significant regarded as more photosynthetically efficient than terrestrial
increase in sugar yields. The efficiency of hydrolysis is increased by pants and as a consequence are more efficient CO2 fixers [59]. This
acid pretreatment, but this also raises the costs because of the need ability of algae to fix CO2 has been proposed as a method of
for costly equipment and post-treatment neutralization. removing CO2 from flue gases from power pants, thereby reducing
Following enzyme treatment, the sugars released need to be the GHG emissions. Many algae are rich in oil, which can be
recovered and conditioned into a form suitable for fermentation into converted to biodiesel. The oil content of some microalgae
the appropriate alcohol. Serious difficulties are encountered in this exceeds 80% of dry weight of the algal biomass [60,61].
step also because several byproducts of the cellulose pretreatment The net annual harvest of algal biomass cultivated in
(for example acetate, furfurals, furans, and aromatics) have the subtropical areas can be as high as 40 tons ha 1 (dry matter),
potential to inhibit microbial growth during the next, i.e., the even higher if CO2 is supplied. It is possible to produce about
fermentation stage. The end product sought is generally ethanol, 100 g m 2 d 1 of algal dry matter in simple cultivation systems
although there has also been renewed interest in the production of [62,63]. It has been calculated that acre to acre algae could produce
butanol in recent years [50]. The potential advantages of butanol almost 100 times more oil than soybean [64]. Most importantly
over ethanol as a transportation fuel are that butanol is less algae can be grown either in fresh-waters or marine waters
hygroscopic than ethanol, can be mixed at higher levels with thereby avoiding the use of land.
gasoline for uses in conventional engines, and has a higher energy Approximately half of the dry weight of microalgal biomass is
density in comparison with ethanol [51]. carbon (Miron et al., 2003), which is typically derived from CO2.

Fig. 6. Increasing number of pre-treatment steps associated with the production of ethanol from increasingly complex sugars; whereas sugarcane juice can be directly
fermented, starch containing food crops and lignocellulosic biomass need increasingly more challenging pretreatment Adapted from [173].
T. Abbasi, S.A. Abbasi / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 14 (2010) 919–937 929

Table 7
Leading options for biomass energy*.

Biomass-energy option Problems Advantages

Food to ethanol (C2H5OH) Very low net energy yield; competition Popularly perceived to be a ‘green’ and ‘clean’ option,
with food crops; air and water pollution; which in reality it isn’t
low yield per unit area
Food crop to butanol (C4H9OH) Net energy yield still quite low even if Better net energy yield than ethanol
better than ethanol; competition with
food crops; air and water pollution;
low yield per unit area
Lignocellulosic biomass to Unproven at a large scale; low net energy Higher yield per unit area; cultivable on degraded lands;
ethanol or butanol yield; positive attributes may lead to over less severe competition with food crops,; less natural
exploitation and consequent harm to the resource degrading then food crops
environment
Zoomass (animal waste) Conversion efficiency is not yet high enough; Proven technology; can use residues and wastes, turns
to methane (CH4) presently the unit cost is higher than from potential pollutant into an energy resource; CH4 capture
natural-gas deposits infrastructure is in place
Zoomass to hydrogen (H2) Conversion efficiency is very low; far from Can use residues and wastes; effects pollution control;
feasible as of present H2 can be used in fuel cells
Zoomass to electricity via the Technology is nascent; conversion efficiency Electricity infrastructure is in place; an MFC is a
microbial fuel cell (MFC) is not established combustionless, pollution free fuel-cell technology that
uses renewable organic fuel directly
Hydrocarbon-rich plants to Yield per unit area unproven; competes with Biodiesel is a high-density fuel that is as efficient as,
biodiesel food crops; lure of quick benefit may cause but less polluting, than petroleum
diversion of fertile lands to their cultivation
Phototrophic microorganisms Technology is at an early stage; may require Biodiesel is as efficient as but cleaner than petroleum;
(algae or cyanobacteria) to biodiesel significant capital investment possible to have very high yield per unit area, does not
compete with food crops
*
Adapted from Karp and Shield [169].

Thus, producing 1 kg of algal biomass fixes 1.6–1.8 kg of CO2. of efficient pentose fermentation, ethanol production from
Notwithstanding all the above-mentioned attractive prospects and hemicelluloses in switchgrass can be made more cost-effective
calculations, the use of algae for biofuel production is prohibitively [71].
costly and is not being attempted commercially at all. We can only Going by hindsight, even as improvements in genetics,
hope that breakthroughs in R&D will change this situation for the agronomy and the conversion process may help in the develop-
better. ment of economically feasible biofuel production systems from
All the biomass energy options with their pros and cons in switchgrass and other lignocellulosic biomass, the environmental
perspective, are summarized in Table 7. and social stresses associated with dedicating large geographic
areas for growing such species would remain major concerns,
6. Future outlook given the increasing requirement of land for producing food for the
increasing global population.
Even as USA, Brazil and several other countries are continuing
to use food crops like corn (maize), sugarcane, and soyabean for 7. Environmental impacts of biomass energy: centralized
generating biofuels [8,9,65,66], it is unlikely that this approach will (large scale) systems
be sustainable for long. In the subsequent parts of this paper we
have dealt elaborately on the technical, environmental and societal 7.1. The proposed large scale systems
problems associated with the use of food crops as an energy source.
Likewise there are serious environmental costs associated with Several basic system-types have been propounded.
large-scale use of hydrocarbon-rich plants like euphorbia and
jatropha. 7.1.1. Hydrocarbon-rich-arid-land plants
Extensive research is underway [67] to develop processes with Efforts to cultivate hydrocarbon-producing plants for fuel
which biomass can be fermented to hydrogen (‘dark’ anaerobic production had been made by the Italians in Ethiopia [72] and
digestion) and several other avenues are being explored as detailed the French in Morocco [73] but it was the initiative of the Nobel
in the preceding section. But none of the options is anywhere near Laureate (in chemistry) Melvin Calvin which caused great public
economic feasibility. attention towards the possible use of hydrocarbon-rich plants as a
At present great hope is pinned on high-yielding lignocellu- source of petrol-like fuel [74,75]. It was an interesting prospect and
losic biomass like switchgrass, which can be grown on degraded appeared particularly charming when articulated by a Nobel
lands, as a source of raw material for ethanol and other biofuels Laureate. It evoked great interest and was celebrated in various
[65,68,69]. But while the technology for conversion of food crops forms, including imaginative illustrations which showed petrol-
(corn, sugarcane, soyabean, etc.) to ethanol is well established, meters nailed to the trees, and the type of dispenser we see at
the conversion of lignocellulosic biomass to ethanol has still to petrol pumps hanging by its side. The artist’s intention being to
overcome challenges such as cost of pretreatment methods, cost portray trees as ‘petrol pumps of the future’. Some other
of hydrolytic enzymes and inefficient fermentation of pentoses. illustrations depicted trees in the form of cows from where liquid
Among the suggestions to improve the economics of bioethanol fuel was being ‘milked’.
production from switchgrass is by developing value-added by- With the passage of time it was realized that not one or two
products such as proteins [70]. There is need for better processes trees but hundreds of trees, covering several acres of land, would
which can efficiently utilize hemicellulose, as it accounts for be required to generate sufficient liquid fuel to run a single petrol
about 20–25% of switchgrass. It is being hoped that with the pump. Among the most promising of hydrocarbon-rich plants–
development of genetically engineered microorganisms capable Euphorbia lathyris–could at best yield energy equivalent of 25
930 T. Abbasi, S.A. Abbasi / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 14 (2010) 919–937

barrels (about 5000 litres) of petroleum per hectare! Much less weeds, on anaerobic digestion, yield about 300 l of biogas per kg of
than what an average petrol pump dispenses in a few hours! dried (105 8C) plant with a biogas of calorific value 600 BTU ft 3
Johnson and Hinman [76] estimated that it would require as much [80,85]. Innovative techniques developed recently by Sankar
as 12 million hectares (46,000 square miles) of E. lathyris Ganesh et al. [47,86] enable generation of upto 2 m3 of biogas
plantations to generate enough oil to meet a mere 10% of the per m3 of reactor volume. It also appears possible to convert the
petroleum demand of the USA. The stress such a massive ‘spent’ phytomass ensuing from the digesters to compost/
plantation would have caused on soil moisture—through uptake vermicompost [16,22]. But whereas these appear good pathways
as well as evapotranspiration of precious water—was not to utilize weeds and other waste phytomass present in MSW,
estimated but would obviously have been quite great. There thereby facilitating their gainful disposal, as also capturing
would have been other impacts of a large magnitude—on soil methane which is otherwise released to the atmosphere by the
productivity, microclimate, and wildlife—some of which would rotting of the phytomass in the open (thereby contributing to
have been disastrous to the ecology of the region. global warming), use of these processes to generate energy on a
So, Calvin’s idea was not given a serious trial as its short- large scale is another matter altogether. It would require as much
comings became more and more obvious with every step taken in as 8 million hectares (180,000 square miles) of primary-treated
the direction of assessing its feasibility. Very wide variations in sewage pond surface to generate 1 quad of gross energy. The
the yield of E. lathyris reported by different authors, which made it sewage from a city of population 5 million can supply sufficient
impossible to project with confidence the land area that would be nutrients to support a 260 km2 water hyacinth pond but cities of
required to generate latex equivalent to a barrel of gasoline [77] such size are not located near such large areas of free low-cost land.
did not help the cause. By-and-by the prospect of ‘extracting Further, the engineering implications of constructing, operating,
petrol in our own backyard’ receded from public memory. Then, and managing such gigantic sewage ponds can be staggering. It
for a short while, the Indians were given the dream of ‘herbal would be difficult to prevent percolation of sewage from such large
petrol’ by a self proclaimed intuitive scientist, Ramar Pillai. He ponds to the underground aquifers and the dangers of groundwa-
turned out to be a hoax and has been under investigation by India’s ter contamination would be very real. There would be other
Central Bureau of Investigation for possible involvement in large- problems to contend with such as mosquito menace and
scale frauds [78]. propagation of pathogens. The ponds may also release methane
Currently jatropha is one of the hydrocarbon rich trees which is and nitrous oxide from their anoxic zones, contributing massively
being given serious trial in India but without any large-scale or to global warming because CH4 and N2O have 25 and 300 times
widespread use up to now. Out of the 7 species of jatropha (Jatropha stronger global warming potential than CO2 [87,88]. Already
curcas, J. gossipifolia, J. glandulifera, J. tanjorensis, J. multifida, J. ‘constructed wetlands’ which are used extensively throughout the
podagrica, and J. integirrima), J. curcas is considered to be the most world for treating biodegradable wastewaters, have come under
versatile. A great deal of material continues to be generated on the scrutiny for their substantial contribution to GHG emissions in the
promise of hydrocarbon–rich plants but no single commercial form of CH4 and N2O [89].
application has emerged as yet. Indeed, observes Kalita [13] in the
context of India – which is one of the countries where a great deal 7.1.3. Kelp farms
of governmental patronage has been extended to jatropha The marine giant brown kelp (Microcystes pyrifera) can attain
cultivation – ‘we have not reached the stage of producing productivities comparable to fast-growing sweet-water weeds
hydrocarbon plants on a large scale and the conversion process such as water hyacinth [90–92]. It can be anaerobically digested to
is yet to be standardized’. produced energy in the form of methane [93]. The ocean biomass
As is the case with other biomass-based schemes for energy farm systems have been conceived around the culture of algae such
production, the initial calculations on jatropha look attractive. It as M. pyrifera by employing artificial upwelling techniques. The
has been estimated that upto 13 million hectares of land in India is original plan developed by Wilcox [94] called for the culture of kelp
available – including 3 million hectares of forest land and similar sporophylls in an aquarium. The cultures would then be attached to
sizes of agricultural, fallow, and waste lands – for jatropha. The plastic lines and divers would attach these lines to a large floating
possible multi-faceted use of jatropha has been recounted. For grid of pipes. The pipes would distribute nutrient-rich water,
example its litter enriches the underlying soil, it is useful as a pumped (with wave-power) from 300-m (1000 ft) depths. Harvest
medicinal and pest-repelling plant, and has other uses besides ships would be quite similar to those already used by the Kelco
providing fuel oil. But, as in every other activity, the real picture Company of San Diego to gather ‘wild’ kelp: these ships back
would emerge only if we consider the indirect costs and hitherto through the kelp bed and underwater clippers cut the fronds to a
unforeseen perils associated with widespread and large-scale depth of 1.2 m (4 ft), while a system of rakes and belts hauls the cut
implementation of the oil-from-jatropha programme. In a fronds into the ships’ holds. Each of the three ships now in
balanced overview, Ghosh et al. [79] have noted that not all of operation has a 400–500 tonne capacity. The project attracted wide
the wasteland is suitable to cultivate jatropha and that the plant is interest and large funds especially in the USA.
demanding in terms of nutrient requirement – especially nitrogen Three test farms were installed [94]. The operations did not
– if attractive yields are to be realized. While highlighting the include artificial upwelling of deep-ocean water. The first farm, 7
virtues of jatropha biodiesel and the multifaceted utility of the acres in size, was placed in open ocean conditions about a
other parts of the plant, the authors have also emphasized that the kilometer off the north-eastern tip of San Clemente Island,
overall environmental impact of large-scale jatropha cultivation California, in 100 m (300 ft) of water. About a 100 M. pyrifera
has not been studied so far. They have advocated careful plants were taken from nearby natural beds and attached to the
assessment of the long-term impact of toxicity of the plant and farm which was suspended approximately 10 m below the ocean
its products. surface. The plan was to observe this farm for over 2 years.
However, after 1 year, an anchor at one corner of the submerged
7.1.2. Aquatic weed farms grid came loose and the farm floated to the surface. A passing ship
Fast-growing aquatic weeds such as water hyacinth (Eichhornia presumably tore the farm to pieces the next day, although the
crassipes), salvinia (Salvinia molesta) and duckweed (Lemna minor) destruction might have been due to wave action [95].
can attain very high productivities, especially when cultivated on Subsequent efforts centered around the Quarter-Acre Module
nutrient-rich wastewaters such as domestic sewage [80–84]. The (QAM), a concept of wire and rope lattice. The lattice would be
T. Abbasi, S.A. Abbasi / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 14 (2010) 919–937 931

suspended from a buoy, on which the plants would be attached and natural gas or, increasingly, coal to create the steam that drives the
which would use diesel pumps to bring up water from a depth of distillations, adding fossil-fuel emissions to the carbon dioxide
1500 ft [96]. A number of problems emerged when the concept was emitted by the yeast [102,103]. Growing the fuel crops also
first put to practice. The OTA [95], reports: ‘It was not certain that requires nitrogen fertilizer, made with natural gas, and heavy use
sufficient nutrients would be provided by the artificial upwelling of diesel-fuelled farm machinery. Several LCA studies of the energy
to stimulate kelp growth. In any event, there was no way to balance—the amount of fossil energy needed to make ethanol
monitor the actual exposure of an individual plant to the pumped versus the energy it produces—suggest that the process ends up
water. Then, when the pumps shut down, there was a reverse flow using more greenhouse gas emitting fossil fuel than it displaces
which damaged plants by sucking them into the ports. Finally, in [103–107]. Even if the energy balance is positive, it is not positive
January 1979, a severe storm carried away essential parts of the by large-enough magnitude to offset the adverse environmental
system, which, in turn, caused the plants to become cut and impacts. Nor is it, by any stretch of imagination, significant enough
tangled. All of the original 100 kelp plants were destroyed’. to justify commitment of so much natural resources to produce
As the oil crisis began to ease in the 1980s, attempts were not fuel instead of the much bigger necessity, viz. food.
made to try the QAM further. In recent years a case is again being
made for marine biomas culture. For example Chynoweth [93] 7.2. The environmental impacts
points out that ‘the available ocean area and coastline area provide
under utilized resources for marine farming’, and that ‘all of the From the discussions in Sections 7.1.2 and 7.1.3, it is clear that
U.S. energy needs could be supplied by marine microalgae grown only land-based biomass energy projects deserve serious consid-
on about 260 million hectares (one million square miles) of ocean’. eration. Presently the focus indeed is on land-based projects. The
Studies summarized by the same author [97] suggest that following environmental impacts of large, land-based biomass
upwelling as a source of supply of nutrients for the marine energy projects can be discerned.
biomass culture is too costly and that major technical challenge
remains to successfully grow microalgae in the open ocean. 7.2.1. Biomass energy may be ‘carbon neutral’ but it is not ‘nutrient
However, assuming that such technical problems can be solved, neutral’
kelp farms would still require major construction efforts, far larger Central to the advocacy of biomass energy is the argument that
than any previous marine engineering project. The GHG emissions it is ‘carbon neutral’; it releases only that carbon back to the
that would result from the activities relating to the construction atmosphere which was earlier plucked out form the atmosphere in
and operation of such a project would be staggering. Whether such the act of photosynthesis. The argument is valid, too, even if we
a project will be able to yield carbon-neutral energy, that too consider the fact that atleast a part of the carbon fixed by the
without causing major disturbance in the already stressed ocean biomass in recent years might have been of fossil fuel origin.
ecosystem, is hard to imagine. But biomass is not merely a lump of carbon, it contains nitrogen
and several other essential nutrients. Any effort to intensively
7.1.4. Short rotation coppice willow/poplar, tall woody grasses such as cultivate biomass has implications other than carbon capture;
miscanthus, switchgrass, and canary reed grass horticulture’s contribution to the global nitrogen cycles is
High density plantations of upto 15,000 stools ha 1 have been associated with many deleterious environmental consequences
proposed for willow/poplar [98] and around 20,000 plants ha 1 for [108]. Presently agricultural activities generate >75% of emitted
grasses (Anon, 2004). Particular attention has been received by reactive nitrogen compounds [109]. Global atmospheric CO2
switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) as a ‘model energy crop’ due to its concentrations have increased by about one-third since 1750;
high biomass yields, broad geographic range, efficient nutrient during the same period, a 15% increase in atmospheric N2O
utilization, low erosion potential, carbon sequestration capability, concentrations has occurred. This figure begins assuming scary
and reduced fossil fuel input requirements relative to annual crops proportions if one realizes that each molecule of N2O has 300 times
[31]. greater global warming potential than a molecule of CO2 [110,111].
Moreover, anthropogenic disruptions in the nitrogen cycle have
7.1.5. Wheat, oilseed and fats led to an estimated 1100% increase in the flux of nonreactive
Wheat grain can be fermented and distilled to produce ethanol atmospheric nitrogen to reactive nitrogen compounds [110]. Once
(as a fuel additive to petrol) as described earlier. Oilseed and fats converted to a reactive state, nitrogen persists in the environment,
can be used to make biodiesel by one of the three processes: by passing through the forms of NH3, N2O, NOx, and NO3; resulting in
converting oil to its fatty acids and then to biodiesel, by acid- impacts such as the production of ground-level ozone, acidifica-
catalysed transesterification of oil, or by base-catalysed transes- tion, eutrophication, hypoxia, stratospheric ozone depletion, and
terification of oil. The latter process is the most common because it climate change [112]. Of these impacts eutrophication of surface
occurs at low temperature and pressure, requires no specialized water bodies and contamination of underground aquifers are
expensive construction, allows direct conversion, and gives high among the most widespread of the environmental impacts of
yields with minimal reaction time or side reactions [99–101]. agriculture. Phosphorous cycles are also effected leading to
eutrophication.
7.1.6. Corn and sugarcane It is not possible to sustain the intensive and repetitive
Of all the potential biomass-based energy sources, corn and production of biomass per unit land area envisaged in the
sugarcane have been given the largest-scale and longest trial thus biomass-based energy production programmes on the basis of
far. Both are fermented into ethanol which can either be used as the native nitrogen stocks in the soil as they are insufficient to
additive of petrol (in cars basically designed for petrol) or as a supply enough nutrients to sustain non-nitrogen-fixing crops, such
stand-alone fuel (for cars specially designed to run on ethanol). The as corn. The natural levels of nitrogen have to be augmented with
USA produced 4.86 billion gallons of ethanol from corn in 2006 and additional nutrients—generally in the form of synthetic fertilizer,
Brazil produced 3.96 billion gallons of ethanol from cane in 2005. although animal manures are also used (the latter have their own
The process, detailed earlier, gives off large amounts of high- hazard of emitting methane which, molecule to molecule, has 25
COD wastewater [46], besides carbon dioxide. The wastewater has times greater GW potential than CO2). Synthetic fertilizers are
BOD of the order of 18,000–37,000 mg L 1, requiring about 4 kcal made through energy-intensive processes; production of synthetic
of energy per kg of BOD treated [102]. Most ethanol plants burn fertilizers is estimated to be responsible for 1% of global primary
932 T. Abbasi, S.A. Abbasi / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 14 (2010) 919–937

energy consumption [113]. According to the National Academy of production of biomass are not seen by many whose attention is
Sciences, Washington [114] corn production uses more nitrogen riveted on the perceived ‘carbon neutral’ nature of biomass
than any other crop produced in the USA. energy.
Moreover soil organic matter, soil biota, water-holding capacity
of the soil, and numerous microneutrients can not be replaced with 7.2.3. Soil erosion and water run-off
fertilizers [115]. But even life-cycle assessments tend to neglect all Biomass energy production projects are likely to exacerbate
these aspects while calculating energy input to fuel output ratios of soil erosion problems. Although the use of available technologies
biofuel production options [101]. can minimize erosion, they are difficult and costly to implement.
In developing countries like India and Brazil they may not be
7.2.2. Land and water resources implemented at all [126–129]. Producing energy crops such as
Implementing a substantial biomass energy production pro- corn for ethanol requires additional agricultural land. To do this,
gram requires large amounts of water resources and land. marginal cropland that is highly susceptible to soil erosion would
Horticulture is a massive water consuming activity; hectare for have to be brought under corn cultivation. Soil erosion contributes
hectare, it requires more water by several orders of magnitude significantly in hastening water run-off, thus, retarding ground-
than is needed for domestic and industrial needs [116,117]. In water recharge; the nutrient-rich run-off can harm the quality of
some parts of western U.S. irrigated corn acreage, for instance in receiving rivers, lakes or estuaries by causing eutrophication
some regions of Arizona, groundwater is being pumped 10 times [130].
faster than the natural recharge potential of the aquifers [118]. It Moreover, as has happened with eucalyptus in developing
also contributes significantly to water pollution via the pesticides countries like India, the temptation to make quick profit from a
and fertilizers that are inevitably needed in sustaining any product with high current demand, prompts the farmers to
intensive cultivation [117,119]. The land used for increased substitute food crops with trees like eucalyptus, and harvest them
biomass production for energy competes with crops, forests, and more often than is sustainable, harming the environment as well as
urbanization [117,120]. This competition can be illustrated by their own long-term prospects [129,131,132]. Wherever possible,
comparing the crop land needed to feed one person with that natural forests and croplands are encroached upon for the
required to fuel one automobile for one year. If we assume that the plantation of ‘cash’ crops; with disastrous results.
average automobile travels 16,000 km per year and gets 15 km/l,
then 1200 l of gasoline will be required per year for an automobile. 7.2.4. Nutrient removal and losses
Using straight ethanol, the total in equivalent kcal would be 2000 l. Significant nutrient loss is incurred by the harvesting of crop
Assuming a zero energy charge (no high grade fuel used) for the residues for biomass energy. With the corn yield of 7840 kg/ha,
fermentation/distillation processes, then 2.2 ha of land would be the nutrients contained in both grain and residues are 224 kg N,
required to provide this much fuel. In comparison, about 0.5 ha of 37 kg P, 140 kg K, and 6 kg Ca [133], nearly half of the nutrients are
cropland is used to feed each person. Thus four times more land is in the residues. The amount of energy needed to replace the
needed to fuel an automobile than to feed one person. Further, the nutrients lost when the biofuel plants are harvested would be the
demand for agricultural and forest products is growing rapidly equivalent of at least 460 l of oil per hectare (Pimental et al.,
with time, enhancing the already wide gap between demand and 1994a,b).
supply, thus increasing ever more the competition for land and
water resources. In India biofuel extracted from jatropha is yet to 7.2.5. Loss of natural biota, habitats and wildlife
make any impact whatsoever on the country’s fossil fuel bill, yet Conversion of natural ecosystems into energy-crop plantations
jatropha cultivation has already impacted food prices in some will change both the habitat and food sources of wildlife and other
regions as farmers have shifted from food crops to jatropha biota [128–130]. Alteration of forests and wetlands will reduce
cultivation [121]. many preferred habitats and mating areas of some mammals,
Converting rainforests, peatlands, savannas, or grasslands to birds, and other biota [134,135].
produce food-based biofuels in Brazil, Southeast Asia, and the Monoculture plantations of fast-growing trees reduce the
United States has created a ‘biofuel carbon debt’ by releasing diversity of vegetation and the value of the areas as habitats for
17–420 times more CO2 than the annual greenhouse gas (GHG) many wildlife species. These monocultures are less stable than
reductions these biofuels provide by displacing fossil fuels climate forests and require increased energy inputs in the form of
[107]. pesticides and fertilizers to maintain productivity. Trees in
Accelerating demand for palm oil is contributing to the 1.5% profitable plantations are 2–3 times as dense as those of natural
annual rate of deforestation of tropical rainforests in Malaysia forests [135]; the high stand density may result in greater pest
and Indonesia [122]. An estimated 27% of concessions for new problems [127].
palm oil plantations are on peatland tropical rainforests, totaling
2.8  106 ha in Indonesia. Brazilian Cerrado is being converted to 7.2.6. Social and economic impacts
sugarcane and soybeans, and the Brazilian Amazon is being The major social impacts will be shifts in employment and
converted to soybeans [123,124]. Grassland in the US, primarily increases in occupational health and safety problems. Total
rangeland or land currently retired in conservation programs, is employment overall is expected to increase if the nation’s energy
being converted to corn production. Rising prices for corn, needs are provided by biomass resources [136]. The labour force
wheat, and soybeans could cause a substantial portion of the would be needed in agricultural and forest production to cut,
1.5  107 ha of land currently in the US Conservation Reserve harvest, and transport biomass resources and in the operation of
Program to be converted to cropland [125]. According to conversion facilities.
Fargione et al. [107] the net effect of this land-use change is The direct labour inputs for wood biomass resources are 2–3
to increase CO2 emissions for decades or centuries relative to times greater per million kcal than coal [133]. A wood-fired steam
fossil fuel use! plant requires, 4 times more construction workers and 3–7 times
The removal of biomass from land and water for energy more plant maintenance and operation workers than a coal-fired
production programme increases soil and water degradation, plant. Including the labour required to produce corn, about 18
flooding, and removal of nutrients. It also affects wildlife and the times more labour is required to produce a million kcal of ethanol
natural biota. These and other threats to the environment from the than an equivalent amount of gasoline [137].
T. Abbasi, S.A. Abbasi / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 14 (2010) 919–937 933

Associated with the possibilities of increased employment are (a) air pollution—emissions of particulates, carbon oxides, sulphur
greater occupational hazards [138,139]. Significantly, more oxides, nitrogen oxides;
occupational injuries and illnesses are associated with biomass (b) organic emissions—dioxin, hydrocarbons, toxic irritants such
production in agriculture and forestry than with either coal as acid, aldehyde, phenol, and carcinogenic compounds such as
(underground mining), oil, or gas recovery operations [140–143]. benzopyrene;
Agriculture reports 25% more injuries per man-day than all other (c) generation of solid wastes—bottom ash, flyash sometimes
private industries. containing toxic substances with accompanying pollution
problems;
7.3. The real societal cost of grain-based biofuels (d) water pollution—biological oxygen demand, chemical oxygen
demand, suspended solids, trace metals;
The energy inherent in grain is much better utilized for (e) pressure on land and water resources;
human benefit when the grain is directly consumed as food (f) household hazards—accidental fires;
instead of its use as a biofuel feedstock. Utilization as food also (g) occupational hazards—prolonged exposure to toxic and corro-
enables driving maximum benefit from the nutrients present in sive chemicals.
the grain. Hence use of corn and other grains to generate biofuel
amounts to a substantial depreciation of the grain’s value as the All in all the problems of air pollution associated with
most basic, life-sustaining, energy source. This translates, in the conversion of lignous biomass to energy are no less significant
ultimate analysis, into wastage of, rather than generation of, than the ones we are familiar vis a vis conversion of coal and oil
clean energy. [2,131]. These are significant even at the very small scale of
With the global reserve food stocks having reached their second residential wood-burning. The smoke has harmful levels of
lowest levels in history [144]; with the demand – hence the price – carcinogens and other toxicants. Lastly in terms of a million kcal
of food rising almost everywhere; and with thousands of additional output, forest biomass has several times more occupational
people sliding into the zone of the perpetually hungry by the injuries and illnesses than coal and oil mining [143].
minute, it appears strange logic to convert food into fuel on the
belief that such an endeavor will benefit mankind and reduce GHG 7.4.2. Impact of fermentation processes
emissions! Brazil has the biggest ‘fuel from biomass’ programme in the
How biofuel programmes can harm the interests of food- world based on fermentation process. It employed sugarcane
starved people can be illustrated by this example: Currently 3 grown over millions of hectares and produced by its fermentation
million tones of extra wheat produced by the UK is exported to the 3.96 billion gallons of ethanol in 2005 [103]. No comprehensive
needy countries but it is now being suggested to reduce that much environmental impact assessment of this activity has been done so
wheat production and use the freed land for biofuel crops [145]. In far but the situation is reflected in this comment by Gaulart
poorer countries like Brazil where a large number of undernour- (quoted in [103]): ‘‘if alcohol is a ‘clean’ fuel the process of making
ished human beings live, using land to produce biofuel instead of it is very dirty’’. To drive away snakes which inhabit large
food is particularly saddening. sugarcane plantations and to make the cane easier to remove
manually, the fields are usually burned before the harvest causing
7.4. Conversion to utilizable energy severe air pollution besides releasing greenhouse gases into the
atmosphere. Moreover natural forests are being increasingly
7.4.1. Impact of thermal processes cleared (often by burning the foliage after removing timber) to
Production of biomass is only one dimension of the biomass- make way for sugar plantations. These activities contribute a lot
based energy systems; its conversion to utilizable energy is more to global warming, over a shot term as well as a long term,
another and equally important dimension. Several technologies than the savings achieved by replacing some portions of gasoline
are available for biomass conversion (Fig. 2); of these the most by ethanol in transportation fuel [106,107].
widely used are direct combustion and pyrolysis [67,146]. By The US plans to divert a third of its maize crop to biofuel
now it is universally accepted that biomass utilization in this production in 2009. UK, Germany, Spain, and France also plan to go
manner is a source of not only GHG emissions but several highly for biofuel production [135,154]. In an independent assessment
toxic air pollutants as well [36,119,147,148]. Yet it is not only Kohl and Ghazoul [155] have identified numerous likely negative
continued to be used in this manner but is continued to be impacts of EU’s biofuel programmes and have advocated the need
promoted as ‘feasible’ without any consideration for the for comprehensive assessment of their environmental impacts.
environmental impact [146,149,150]. The government of India’s Eventhough life cycle assessment studies continue to be reported
Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE) in fact provides which show biofuels in favourable net energy balance (NEB) in
financial incentives to private entrepreneurs for installing comparison to the fossil fuels they replace [69,101], biofuels look
thermal and thermochemical conversion based biomass energy less and less attractive if viewed in the total context of energy
plants [7]; it is possible that governments elsewhere may be balance, GHG emissions, environmental impact, and humanism.
similarly subsidizing this form of biomass energy generation as There is increasing advocacy for bio-fuel production from
well. Interestingly, and in tune with the widely prevalent lignocelluloses-based energy crops such as switchgrass, willows,
(through unsubstantiated) belief that all forms of renewable and poplars [68,69], especially using agriculturally marginal land
energy production are a boon to the environment, MNRE calls the to reduce competition from food production. Several assessments,
biomass gasification process ‘relatively clean and acceptable in which leave out some or other aspects of the ‘cradle-to-the-grave’
environmental terms’ [7]. To get the energy needed for the journey of lignocelluloses-based energy crops [66,68,69,156,157]
production of ‘clean’ ethanol, huge quantities of bagasse are used show them in more favourable light than corn or sugarcane vis a vis
as fuel in Brazil contributing substantially to GHG emissions. net reduction in GHG emissions, but full-fledged energy balance
Even the optimists among the proponents of renewable energy and environmental impact assessment studies of these options
sources (for example [151,152]) acknowledge the serious have not yet begin to come out in profusion. According to Pimental
environmental pollution hazards associated with biomass and Patzek [102] converting switchgras into ethanol results in a
utilization as an energy source. negative energy return which is 50% or slightly higher than the
Broadly the impacts of thermal conversion technologies are: negative energy return for corn ethanol production. The two major
934 T. Abbasi, S.A. Abbasi / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 14 (2010) 919–937

energy inputs for switchgrass conversion into ethanol are steam gases, little or no treatment is possible, or done, at smaller scales
and electricity production. and none whatsoever at the household level. Dispersed use of
biomass is, in fact, more harmful than centralized use for this
7.5. Is there hope? reason. A large number of small backyard, neighborhood, or even
community-sized coal gasification or liquifaction plants would not
Biomass can become a great source of truly carbon-neutral only be less economical but ecologically more harmful than a
energy on a large-scale if processes can be developed to centralized facility with the same total output of synfuel. At lesser
economically and cleanly convert highly ligneous stems and scales it will be very difficult to achieve as stringent a level of air
branches of sugarcane, corn, woody grasses, etc.—which can and water treatment as is possible in the centralized systems. And
currently be used as energy source only via thermal or even if the dispersed plants dispose off the same total quantity of
thermochemical conversion—into ethanol-like liquid fuel. Inten- pollutants into the environment as the centralized plants, it is
sive R&D is going on [158–162] but there is no success in sight as likely that a greater reach of the habitat would be effected by the
yet. Likewise biofuel production from algae is also a great prospect former.
[58,63,64] but, sadly as of now, only a prospect! Moreover, the damage is not likely to be significantly more
diluted by dispersal than by centralization; in dispersed use the
8. Biomass energy—dispersed systems quantity of waste generated at a site is small but then the
preparedness to handle the waste is either very little or not at all.
Dispersed biomass energy utilization systems can be of two Whereas centralised systems are subjected to surveillance by
types: regulatory agencies and can afford to take pollution control
measures, such regulation is not possible in dispersed use. These
(a) household systems using biomass directly as a fuel; considerations may appear speculative, but are not far fetched if we
(b) community sized electricity/heat producing systems based on take into account the seriousness of air pollution problems already
pyrolysis, gasification or liquifaction. noticed during dispersed biomass utilization. Even in a developed
country such as UK, pollution generated per unit of electricity
The first type of dispersed systems is widely used in developing produced by small-scale biomass-based systems is much higher
countries, including India [163,164]. It has been estimated that than by larger scale systems mainly due to greater affordability of
nearly 70% of India’s cooking energy requirement, and about 32% of stricter pollution control in the latter [37]. It is also well-known that
all primary energy requirements, are still met with biomass [7]. small-sized neighborhoods and small-scale industries are able to get
Even more startling are the findings that as much as one-fourth of away more easily despite disposing untreated wastes on nearby
the household income in Indian villages may be coming from lands due to the difficulty in policing them [119].
biomass extracted from common lands. Though crop wastes form a
part of this supply, the bulk of the supply comes from firewood. 9. Summary and conclusion
Extraction of wood from forests to meet this requirement is one of
the major factors responsible for the loss of forests in developing When seen from the limited perspective of standing crop,
countries. It has been estimated that, in India alone, the current theoretical replenishabitity, and ‘carbon neutral’ character as a
annual withdrawal of fuelwood from forests is of the order of 220 fuel, biomass appears to be a very attractive source of renewable
million tonnes whereas the sustainable production capacity is only energy. Biomass energy is indeed a sustainable option, and has
about 28 million tonnes. There are no quantitative studies on the proved to be so for thousands of years, but only as long as it is used
impact that firewood extraction of this magnitude exerts on the to a very limited extent. The picture begins to change once the
underground water and soil productivity but considering the size likely impacts of biomass energy generation and utilization on the
of the extraction, the extent of the adverse impact is not difficult to large scale presently envisaged are considered.
imagine. Fuelwood can be sustainably derived from any unit of The paper estimates the different forms of biomass that are
land only if the rate of regrowth equals or exceeds the rate of theoretically utilizable as source of energy and catalogues the
extraction. But such favourable dynamics are not possible if the technological routes presently available to effect the utilization. It
essential energy needs of a populous country like India are to be then examines in detail the environmental impacts of large-scale
met, more so when fuelwood has to compete with agriculture for generation and utilization of biomass through different routes.
the limited land available. It is brought out that even as biomass may be ‘carbon neutral’, it
The use of fuelwood directly in homes is a very serious source of isn’t ‘nutrient neutral’; cultivation of all species independent of
air pollution, and a major health-hazard for women and children their productivity exert varying extents of pressure on the
who are exposed to this pollution for significant lengths of time nutrients contained in the soil on which the cultivation is done.
[165]. A great deal of effort has gone in designing ‘smokeless’ Moreover, the quantity of fossil fuel saved in the course of the
chulhas (burners) or chulhas with better fuel efficiency [166] but a production and the utilization of biofuels is not always greater than
very large number of rural households still use the conventional the quantity of fossil fuels used. These factors, besides the
mud-cast chulhas. High levels of air pollution builds up in environmental degradation and ecological disruptions caused in
dwellings which use biomass due to essentially poor cross- the course of large-scale biomass cultivation, put serious question
ventilation in such dwellings. It has been reported [2,153,167,168], marks on the sustainability of the existing biomass-to-energy
that the emissions of air pollutants such as carbon monoxide, programmes.
sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, organics, and particulates are
much larger—compared to other sources—from the burning of
biomass [148]. The emissions include carcinogens and teratogens References
[147,148].
[1] Seal KS. Animal wastes as a source of biomass production. Outlook on
As for community sized biomass-based energy sources the Agriculture 1992;21:91–7.
pollution problems are similar to large installations such as [2] Dai Y, Ren D. Review the status and effects of renewable energy of China in
thermal power plants. But, whereas in the latter, the centralized term of the energy issues faced by China during the national economy
development. Renewable Energy 2005;2:4–8.
nature of the problem and the economics of scale makes it possible [3] Goldemberg J, Johansson TB. World energy assessment overview: update.
to treat the air pollutants significantly before release of the flue New York: United Nations Development Programme; 2004.
T. Abbasi, S.A. Abbasi / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 14 (2010) 919–937 935

[4] Abbasi SA. Renewable energy from aquatic biomass. In: Terol S, editor. [37] Thornley P, Upham P, Huang Y, Rezvani S, Brammer J, Rogers J. Integrated
Proceedings of the international congress on renewable energy sources, 1987. assessment of bioelectricity technology options. Energy Policy 2009;37:890–
[5] Haber W. Energy, food, and land—the ecological traps of humankind. Envi- 903.
ronmental Science and Pollution Research 2007;14:359–65. [38] Khan FI, Abbasi SA. Accident hazard index: a multi-attribute method for
[6] Abbasi SA, Abbasi T. Renewable energy from phytomass. International Journal process industry hazard rating. Process Safety and Environmental Protection
of Environmental Studies 2009;in press. 1997;75:217–24.
[7] MNRE. Ministry of new and renewable energy Booklets on Renewable Energy [39] Khan FI, Abbasi SA. DOMIFFECT (DOMIno eFFECT): user-friendly software for
www.Mnes.nic.in; 2009 [last accessed on June 3, 2009]. domino effect analysis. Environmental Modelling and Software 1998;13:
[8] Lora ES, Andrade RV. Biomass as energy source in Brazil. Renewable and 163–77.
Sustainable Energy Reviews 2009;13:777–88. [40] Khan FI, Abbasi SA. Assessment of risks posed by chemical industries—
[9] Demirbas MF, Balat M, Balat H. Potential contribution of biomass to the application of a new computer automated tool MAXCRED-III. Journal of Loss
sustainable energy development. Energy Conversion and Management Prevention in the Process Industries 1999;12:455–69.
2009;50:1746–60. [41] Khan FI, Abbasi SA. Analytical simulation and PROFAT II: a new methodology
[10] World Energy Council (WEC). Survey of Energy Resources 2007. London: WEC; and a computer automated tool for fault tree analysis in chemical process
2007. p. 126. industries. Journal of Hazardous Materials 2000;75:1–27.
[11] Doney SC, Fabry VJ, Feely RA, Kleypas JA. Ocean acidification: the other CO2 [42] Khan FI, Abbasi SA. Attenuation of gaseous pollutants by greenbelts. Envi-
problem. Annual Review of Marine Science 2009;1:169–92. ronmental Monitoring and Assessment 2000;64:457–75.
[12] Perez-Garcia J, Lipke B, Commick J, Marniquez C. An assessment of carbon [43] Khan FI, Abbasi SA. An assessment of the likehood of occurence, and the
pools, storage and wood products market substitution using life-cycle anal- damage potential of domino effect (chain of accidents) in a typical cluster of
ysis results. Wood Fiber Science 2005;37:140–8 (Corrim Special Issue). industries. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 2001;14:283–
[13] Kalita D. Hydrocarbon plant – new source of energy for future. Renewable 306.
and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2008;2:455–71. [44] Khan FI, Abbasi SA. Effective design of greenbelts using mathematical models.
[14] Prassad S, Singh A, Joshi HC. Ethanol as an alternative fuel from agricultural, Journal of Hazardous Materials 2001;81:33–65.
industrial and urban residues. Resource Conserve Recycle 2007;50:1–39. [45] Thornley P. Increasing biomass based power generation in the UK. Energy
[15] John F, Monsalvem G, Medinam PIV, Ruiz CAA. Ethanol production of banana Policy 2006.
shell and cassava starch. Dyna Universidad Nacional de Colombia 2006; [46] Ramasamy EV, Gajalakshmi S, Sanjeevi R, Jithesh MN, Abbasi SA. Feasibility
73:21–7. studies on the treatment of dairy wastewaters with upflow anaerobic sludge
[16] Gajalakshmi S, Ramasamy EV, Abbasi SA. Assessment of sustainable vermi- blanket reactors. Bioresource Technology 2004;93:209–12.
conversion of water hyacinth at different reactor efficiencies employing [47] Ganesh PS, Ramasamy EV, Gajalakshmi S, Abbasi SA. Extraction of volatile
Eudrilus eugeniae Kinberg. Bioresource Technology 2001;80:131–5. fatty acids (VFAs) from water hyacinth using inexpensive contraptions, and
[17] Gajalakshmi S, Ramasamy EV, Abbasi SA. Potential of two epigeic and two the use of the VFAs as feed supplement in conventional biogas digesters with
anecic earthworm species in vermicomposting of water hyacinth. Biore- concomitant final disposal of water hyacinth as vermicompost. Biochemical
source Technology 2001;76:177–81. Engineering Journal 2005;27:17–23.
[18] Gajalakshmi S, Ramasamy EV, Abbasi SA. Screening of four species of detri- [48] Teymouri F, Laureano-Perez L, Alizadeh H, Dale BE. Optimization of the
tivorous (humus - former) earthworms for sustainable vermicomposting of ammonia fiber explosion (AFEX) treatment parameters for enzymatic hydro-
paper waste. Environmental Technology 2001;22:679–85. lysis of corn stover. Bioresource Technology 2005;96:2014–8.
[19] Gajalakshmi S, Ramasamy EV, Abbasi SA. High-rate composting-vermicom- [49] Wyman CE. Potential synergies and challenges in refining cellulosic biomass
posting of water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes, Mart. Solms). Bioresource to fuels, Chemicals, and Power. Biotechnology progress 2003;19:254–62.
Technology 2002;83:235–9. [50] Qureshi N, Saha BC, Cotta MA. Butanol production from wheat straw hydro-
[20] Gajalakshmi S, Ramasamy EV, Abbasi SA. Vermicomposting of different forms lysate using Clostridium beijerinckii. Bioprocess and Biosystems E ngineering
of water hyacinth by the earthworm Eudrilus eugeniae, Kinberg. Bioresource 2007;30:419–27.
Technology 2002;82:165–9. [51] Ezeji TC, Qureshi N, Blaschek HP. Bioproduction of butanol from biomass:
[21] Gajalakshmi S, Abbasi SA. Neem leaves as a source of fertilizer-cum-pesticide from genes to bioreactors. Current Opinion in Biotechnology 2007;18:220–
vermicompost. Bioresource Technology 2004;92:291–6. 7.
[22] Gajalakshmi S, Abbasi SA. Solid waste management by composting: state of [52] Alper H, Moxley J, Nevoigt E, Fink GR, Stephanopoulos G. Engineering yeast
the art. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology 2008; transcription machinery for improved ethanol tolerance and production.
38:311–400. Science 2006;314:1565–8.
[23] Ganesh PS, Gajalakshmi S, Abbasi SA. Vermicomposting of the leaf litter of [53] Seo JS, Chong H, Park HS, Yoon KO, Jung C, Kim JJ. The genome sequence of the
acacia (Acacia auriculiformis): Possible roles of reactor geometry, polyphe- ethanologenic bacterium Zymomonas mobilis ZM4. Nature Biotechnology
nols, and lignin. Bioresource Technology 2009;100:1819–27. 2005;23:63–8.
[24] Volk TA, Abrahamson LP, Nowak CA, Smart LB, Tharakan PJ, White EH. The [54] Mosier N, Wyman C, Dale B, Elander R, Lee YY, Holtzapple M, Ladisch M.
development of short-rotation willow in the northeastern United States for Features of promising technologies for pretreatment of lignocellulosic bio-
bioenergy and bioproducts, agroforestry and phytoremediation. Biomass and mass. Bioresource Technology 2005;96:673–86.
Bioenergy 2006;30:715–27. [55] Chaudhuri SK, Lovley DR. Electricity generation by direct oxidation of glucose
[25] Tuskan GA, Difazio S, Jansson S, Bohlmann J, Grigoriev I, Hellsten U, et al. The in mediatorless microbial fuel cells. Natural Biotechnology 2003;21:1229–
genome of black cottonwood, Populus trichocarpa (Torr. & Gray). Science 32.
2006;313:1596–604. [56] Salge JR, Dreyer BJ, Dauenhauer PJ, Schmidt LD. Renewable hydrogen from
[26] Geyer WA. Biomass production in the Central Great Plains USA under various nonvolative fuels by reactive flash volatilization. Science 2006;314:801–5.
coppice regimes. Biomass and Bioenergy 2006;30:778–83. [57] Warnecke F, (and 33 coauthors). Metagenomic and functional analysis of
[27] Parrish DJ, Fike JH. The biology and agronomy of switchgrass for biofuels. hindgut microbiota of a wood-feeding higher termite. Nature 2007;450:
Critical Reviews in Plant Science 2005;23:423–59. 560–5.
[28] Hallam A, Anderson IC, Buxton DR. Comparative economic analysis of peren- [58] Rittmann BE. Opportunities for renewable bioenergy using microorganisms.
nial, annual, and intercrops for biomass production. Biomass and Bioenergy Biotechnology and Bioengineering 2008;100:203–12.
2001;21:407–24. [59] Liu J, Ma X. The analysis on energy and environmental impacts of microalgae-
[29] Lewandowski I, Scurlock JMO, Lindvall E, Christou M. The development and based fuel methanol in China. Energy Policy 2009;37:1479–88.
current status of perennial rhizomatous grasses as energy crops in the US and [60] Chisti Y. Biodiesel from microalgae. Biotechnology Advances 2007;25:294–
Europe. Biomass and Bioenergy 2003;25:335–61. 306.
[30] Heaton E, Voight T, Long SP. A quantitative review comparing the yields of [61] Banerjee A, Sharma R, Chisti Y, Banerjee UC. Botryococus braunii a renewable
two candidate C4 biomass crops in relation to nitrogen, temperature and source of hydrocarbons and other chemicals. Critical Reviews in Biotechnol-
water. Biomass and Bioenergy 2004;27:21–30. ogy 2002;22:245–79.
[31] McLaughlin SB, Kszos LA. Development of switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) as [62] Patil V, Reitan KI, Knudsen G, Mortensen L, Kallqvist T, Olsen E, Vogt G,
a bioenergy feedstock in the United States. Biomass and Bioenergy 2005; Gislerød HR. Microalgae as source of polyunsaturated fatty acids for aqua-
28:515–35. culture. Current Topics in Plant Biology 2005;6:57–65.
[32] Raghu S, Anderson RC, Daehler CC, Davis AS, Wiedenmann RN, Simberloff D, [63] Patil V, Tran KQ, Giselrod HR. Towards sustainable production of biofuels
et al. Adding biofuels to the invasive species fire? Science 2006;313:1742. from microalgae. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2008;9:1188–
[33] Fike JH, Parrish DJ, Wolf DD, Balasko JA, Green Jr JT, Rasnake M, et al. Long- 95.
term yield potential of switchgrass-forbiofuel systems. Biomass and Bioe- [64] Chisti Y. Biodiesel from microalgae beats bioethanol. Trends in Biotechnology
nergy 2006;30:198–206. 2008;26:126–31.
[34] Conant RT, Paustian K, Del Grosso SJ, Parton WJ. Nitrogen pools and fluxes in [65] Hoekman SK. Biofuels in the U.S.—challenges and opportunities. Renewable
grassland soils sequestering carbon. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems Energy 2009;34:14–22.
2005;71:239–48. [66] Yu S, Tao J. Simulation-based life cycle assessment of energy efficiency of
[35] Green RE, Cornell SJ, Scharlemann JPW, Balmford A. Farming and the fate of biomass-based ethanol fuel from different feedstocks in China. Energy 2009;
wild nature. Science 2005;307:550–5. 34:476–84.
[36] Pei-dong Z, Guomei J, Gang W. Contribution to emission reduction of CO2 and [67] Saxena RC, Adhikari DK, Goyal HB. Biomass-based energy fuel through
SO2 by household biogas construction in rural China. Renewable and Sus- biochemical routes. A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews
tainable Energy Reviews 2007;11:1903–12. 2009;13:167–78.
936 T. Abbasi, S.A. Abbasi / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 14 (2010) 919–937

[68] Hill J. Environmental costs and benefits of transportation biofuel production [104] Pimentel D. Ethanol fuels: energy balance, economics, and environmental
from food- and lignocelluloses-based energy crops. A review. Agronomy for impacts are negative. Natural Resources Research 2003;12:127–34.
Sustainable Development 2007;27:1–12. [105] Patzek TW. Thermodynamics of the corn-ethanol biofuel cycle. Critical
[69] Schmer MR, Vogel KP, Mitchell RB, Perrin RK. Net energy of cellulosic ethanol Reviews in Plant Sciences 2004;23:519–67.
from switchgrass. USA: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 2008. [106] Searchinger T, Heimlich R, Houghton RA, dong F, Elobeid A, Fabiosa J, et al.
[70] Bals B, Teachworth L, Dale B, Balan V. Extraction of proteins from switchgrass Use of croplands for biofuels increases greenhouse gases through emissions
using aqueous ammonia within an integrated biorefinery. Biotechnology and from land-use change 10.1126/Science.1151861. Science 2008;319:
applied Biochemistry 2007;143:187–98. 1238–40.
[71] Sarath G, Mitchell RB, Sattler SE, Funnell D, Pedersen JF, Graybosch RA, Vogel [107] Fargione J, Hill J, Tilman D, Polasky S, Hawthorne P. Land cleaning and the
KP. Opportunities and roadblocks in utilizing forages and small grains for biofuel carbon debt 10.1126/science. 1152747. Science 2008;319:1235–8.
liquid fuels. Journal of Industrial Microbiology and biotechnology 2008;35: [108] Miller SA, Landis AE, Thesis TL. Environmental trade-offs of biobased pro-
343–54. duction. Environmental Science & Technology 2007;(August):5176–82.
[72] Frick GA. Cactus and Succulent Journal 1938;10:60. [109] Smil V. Nitrogen in crop production: an account of global flows. Global
[73] Steinhell P. Rev gen caoutch 1941;18:54–6. Biogeochemical Cycles 1999;13:647–62.
[74] Calvin M. Hydrocarbons via photosynthesis. International Journal of Energy [110] Gitay HA, Suarez T. In: Watson, Dokken DJ, editor. Climate Change and
Research 1977;1:299–327. Biodiversity. IPCC Technical Paper V. Geneva: Intergovernmental Panel on
[75] Calvin M. Petroleum plantations. Transactions of the British Ceramic Society Climate Change; 2002.
1979;1–30. [111] Fixen PE. West FB nitrogen fertilizers, meeting contemporary challenges.
[76] Johnson JD, Hinman CW. Oils and rubber from arid-land plants. Science AMBIO 2002;31:169–76.
1980;208:460–4. [112] Galloway JN, Aber JD, Erisman JW, Seitzinger SP, Howarth RW. The nitrogen
[77] Nemethy EK, Otvos JW, Calvin M. Analysis of extractables from one euphor- cascade. BioScience 2003;53L:41–356.
bia. Journal of the American Oil Chemists’ Society 1979;56:957–60. [113] Worrell E. Energy use and energy intensity of the U.S. chemical industry.
[78] Padmanabhan M, Ramer Pillai, had powerful patrons, The Hindu; 2000. Berkeley, CA: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory; 2000. p. 1–40.
hindu.com//04/25/stories/0225002.htm;2002;p 5. [114] NAS. Frontiers agricultural research: food, health, environment, and com-
[79] Ghosh DR, Chaudhary MP, Reddy SN, Rao J, Chikara JB, Pandya JS, et al. munities: Nat. Acad. Sciences, Washington: DC; 2003. http://dels.nas.edu/
Prospects for jatropha methyl ester (biodiesel) in India. International Journal rpt_briefs/frontiers_in_ag_final%20for%20print.pdf (11/05/05).
of Environmental Studies 2007;64(December (6)):659–74. [115] Pimentel D. Competition for land: development, food, and fuel. In: Kaliasha
[80] Abbasi SA, Nipaney PC. Infestation by aquatic weed of the fern genus salvinia, MA, Zcker A, Ballew KJ, editors. Technologies for a Greenhouse-constrained
its status and control. Environmental Conservation (Swiss) 1986;13:234–41. Society, Lewis, Boca Raton, FL; 1992. p. 325–48.
[81] Abbasi SA, Nipaney PC. Worlds worst weed—its control and utilisation. Dehra [116] Tandon HLS. Recycling of crop, animal, and industrial wastes in agriculture.
Dun: International Book Distributors; 1993. New Delhi: Fertiliser Development & Consultation Organization; 1995.
[82] Abbasi SA, Nipaney PC. Potential of aquatic weed salvinia for wastewater [117] Chari KB, Abbasi SA. A Study on the aquatic and amphibious weeds of
treatment and energy recovery. Indian Journal of Chemical Technology 1994; Oussudu Lake. Hydrology Journal 2005;28(September–December):89–98F.
1:204–13. [118] Pimentel D, Berger B, Filberto D, Newton M, Wolfe B, Karabinakis E, et al.
[83] Aoyama Nishizaki H. Uptake of nitrogen and phosphate, and water purifica- Water resources: current and future issues. BioScience 2004;5410:909–
tion by water hyacinth Eichhornia Crassipes (Mart Solms). Water Science & 18.
Technology 1993;28:47–53. [119] Abbasi SA. Environmental pollution and its control. Philadelphia/Pondi-
[84] Abbasi SA, Ramasamy EV. Biotechnological methods of pollution control. cherry: Cogent International; 1999.
Orient Longmans/UPIL; 1999. [120] Abbasi SA, Khan FI. Greenbelts for pollution control: concepts, design,
[85] Abbasi SA, Nipaney PC, Schaumberg GD. Bioenergy potential of eight com- applications. New Delhi: Discovery Publishing House; 2000.
mon aquatic weeds. Biological Wastes 1991;34:359–66. [121] Swamynathan MS. Quoted in ‘chapter, eco-friendly fuel from GM jatropha’,
[86] Sankar Ganesh P, Sanjeevi R, Gajalakshmi S, Ramasamy EV, Abbasi SA. Deccan Chronicle, May 24; 2009.
Recoveryof methane-rich gas from solid-feed anaerobic digestion of ipomoea [122] Hooijer M, Silvius H, Wosten S. Page. Peat CO2, Assessment of CO2 emissions
(Ipomoea carnea). Bioresource Technology 2008;99:812–8. from drained peatlands in SE Asia Tech Report No Q3943 (Delft Hydraulics);
[87] Kemenes A, Forsberg BR, Melack JM. Methane release below a tropical 2006.
hydroelectric dam. Geophysical Research Letters 2007;34:11–23. [123] Cerri CEP, Easter M, Paustian K, Killian K, Coleman K, Bernoux M, et al.
[88] Guerin F, Abril G, Tremblay A, Delmas. Nitrous oxide emissions from tropical Agricultural Ecosystem and Environmental 2007;122:58.
reservoirs. Geophysical Research Letters 2008;35:71–9. [124] Klink CA, Machado RB. Conservation Biological 2005;19:707.
[89] Maltais-Landry G, Maranger R, Brisson J, Chazarenc F. Greenhouse gas [125] Seechi S, Babcock BA. Impact of high crop prices on environmental quality: a
production and efficiency of planted and artificially aerated constructed case lowa and the Conversation Reserve Program, Report No; 07-WP-447
wetlands. Environmental Pollution 2009;157:748–54. (Center for Agricultural and Rural Development, lowa State University, Ames,
[90] Levit GJ. Primary production of Cape of Good Hope littoral and sub-littoral sea IA); 2007.
weeds. Transactions of the Royal Society of South Africa 1993;48:339–50. [126] CSE (Centre for Science & Environment). The state of India’s environment.
[91] Vozzhinskaya VB, Bek TA, Shcherbakov FA, Kuzin VS, Chistikova AV. Macro- New Delhi: Centre for Science & Environment; 1985.
phytes in white sea littoral zone. Izvestiya Akedemii Nauk Seriya Biologi- [127] Pimentel DM, Herdendrf S, Eisenfeld L, Olanden M, Carroquino C, Corson J, et
cheskaya 1994;6:929–35. al. Achieving a secure energy future: environmental and economic issues.
[92] Chynoweth DP, Owencs JM, Legrand RL. Renewable methane from anaerobic Ecological Economics 1994b;9:201–19.
digestion of biomass. Renewable Energy 2001;22:1–8. [128] Abbasi SA, Abbasi N. The likely adverse environmental impacts of renewable
[93] Chynoweth DP. Renewable biomethane from land, ocean, wastes, and outer energy sources. Applied Energy 2000;65:121–44.
space. Hortscience 2003;40:283–6. [129] Abbasi SA, Ramesh S, Vinithan S. Eucalyptus: enduring myths, stunning
[94] Wilcox H. Ocean farming. In: Proceedings of capturing the sun through realities. New Delhi: Discovery Publishing House; 2004.
bioconversion; 1976. p. 255–76. [130] Abbasi SA, Chari KB. Environmental management of urban lakes. New Delhi:
[95] OTA. Energy from open ocean kelp farms. Senate Committee on Commerce. Discovery Publishing House; 2008.
Science and Transportation. Office of Technology Assessment; 1980. [131] Abbasi SA, Vinithan S. Airshed studies in southern Pondicherry. Chemical
[96] Budiansky S. The great kelp controversy. Environmental Science and Tech- Environmental Research 1997;6:249–58.
nology 1980;14:1170–1. [132] Abbasi SA, Vinithan S. Ecological impacts of eucalyptus tereticornis-globulus
[97] Chynoweth DP. Review of biomethane from mrine biomass, A Report Prepared (Eucalyptus hybrid) plantation in a mining area. Indian Forester 1999;125:
for Tokyo Gas Company; 2002. 163–86.
[98] Hilton B. Growning short rotation coppice, best practice guidelines. DEFRA [133] Pimentel D, Friend C, Olson L, Schmidt S, Wagner Johnson K, Westman A,
Publication; 2002. Whelan AM, Feglia K, Poole P, Klein T, Sobin R, Bochner A. Biomass energy:
[99] Turley DB, Boatman ND, Ceddia G, Barker D, Watola G. Liquid biofuels— environmental and social costs. Environmental Biology Report 832. Ithaca
prospects and potential impacts on uk agriculture, the farmed environment, (NY): Cornell University 1983;2–83.
landscape and rural economy, Report for Defra, Prepared by Central Science [134] Chari KB, Abbasi SA, Ganapathy S. Ecology, habitat and bird community
Laboratory; 2002. structure at Oussudu lake: towards a strategy for conservation and manage-
[100] Rollefson, Jim, F.u, Gloria, Chan, Albert. Assessment of the environmental ment. Aquatic Conservation Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 2003;13:
performance and sustainability of biodiesel in Canada, Canada: National Re- 373–86.
search Council Canada Prepared for the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and [135] Rowe L, Street R, Taylor NR. GIdetifying potential environmental impacts of
Food, Ontario; 2004. large-scale development of dedicated bioenergy crops in the UK. Renewable
[101] Smith EG, Janzen HH, Newlands NK. Energy balances of biodiesel production and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2009;13:271–90.
from soybean and canola in Canada. Canadian Journal of Plant Science [136] Pimentel D. Biomass energy conversion, Final Report for the Energy Research
2007;87:793–801. Analysis Division. Washington: National Science Foundation; 1977.
[102] Pimental D, Patzek W. Ethanol production using Corn, switchgrass, and [137] ERAB. Biomass energy. Report of the ERAB, Panel on Biomass, Washington
wood; biodiesel production using soybean and sunflower. Natural Resources (DC): US Department of Energy; 1981.
Research 2005;14:65–76. [138] Anon. Alcohol Week 20 October BLS 1978. Chart Book on Occupational Injuries
[103] Bourne JK, Clark R. Green dreams. National Geographic 2007;(October): and Illnesses in1976, Report 535 Bureau of Labour Statistics. US Department of
38–59. Labour Washington (DC); 1980.
T. Abbasi, S.A. Abbasi / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 14 (2010) 919–937 937

[139] Morris SC. Health effects of residential wood fuel use. Connecticut: Broo- [156] Farrell AE, Plevin RJ, Turner BT, Jones AD, O’Hare M, Kammen DM. Ethanol can
khaven National Laboratory; 1981. contribute to energy and environmental goals. Science 2006;311:506–8.
[140] ERAB. Gasohol Report of the Gasohol study group, ERAB, Washington (DC): [157] Luo L, Voet E, Huppes G. An energy analysis of ethanol from cellulosic
Energy Research Advisory Board, Department of Energy; 1980. feedstock–corn stover. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2009;
[141] Braunstein H, Kanciruk MP, Roop RD, Sharples FE, Tatum JS, Oakes KM. 13:2003–11.
.Biomass energy systems and the environment. New York: Pergamon; 1981 [158] Hahn-Hagerdal B, Galbem M, Gorwa-Grauslundm MF, Lidenm G, Zacchim G.
[142] TEDDY. Tata energy data directory & yearbook 1994/95. New Delhi: Tata Bio-ethanol—the fuel of tomorrow from the residues of today. Trends in
Energy Research Institute; 1994. Biotechnology 2006;24:549–56.
[143] BLS. Chartbook on occupational injuries and illness. Report 535, Bureau of labor [159] Chang MC. Harnessing energy from plant biomass. Current Opinion in
statistics, Washington (DC): US Department of Labor; 1978. Chemical Biology 2007;11:677–84.
[144] Bourne Jr K. The end of plenty: the global food crisis. National Geographic [160] Gomez LD, Steele-King C/G, Mason J. Sustainable liquied pbiofuels from
2009;(June):38–59. biomass; the writing’s on the walls. New Phytologist 2008;178:473–85.
[145] NFU (National Farmers Union); 2006. /http://www.nfuonline.com/x4082. [161] Kotchoni SO, Gachomo EW. Biofuel production: a promising alternative
xmlS. energy for environmental cleanup and fuelling through renewable resources.
[146] Kirubakaran V, Sivaramakrishnan V, Nalini R, Sekar T, Premalatha M, Sub- Journal of Biological Sciences 2008;8:693–701.
ramanian PA. review on gasification of biomassm. Renewable and Sustain- [162] Keshwani DR, Cheng JJ. Switchgrass for bioethanol and other value-added
able Energy Reviews 2009;13:179–86. applications: a review. Bioresource Technology 2009;100:1515–23.
[147] Lewtas J. Air pollution combustion emissions: characterization of causative [163] Pokharel Chandrashekhar. Biomass resources as energy in Nepal. Natural
agents and mechanisms associated with cancer, reproductive, and cardio- Resources Forum 1994;18;225–30.
vascular effects. Mutation Research—Reviews in Mutation Research 2007; [164] Saxena S, Prasad R, Joshi V. Time allocation and fuel use in three villages of the
636:95–133. Garhwal Himalaya. India Mountain Research and Development 1995;5:57–
[148] Liu G, Lucas M, Shen L. Rural household energy can sumption and its impacts 67.
on eco-environment in Tibet: Takin g taktse country as an example. Renew- [165] Rehfuess E. Fuel for life: household energy and health. Geneva: World Health
able and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2008;12:1890–908. Organization Press; 2006.
[149] Babu BV. Biomass pyrolysis: a state-of-the-art review. Biofuels Bioproducts [166] Abbasi SA, Abbasi N. Alternative energy-development and management.
and Biorefining 2008;2:393–414. Dehradun: International Book Distributors; 1996.
[150] Gasol CM, Martınez S, Rigola M, Rieradevall J, Assumpció A, Carrasco J. [167] Smith KR, Khalil MAK, Rasmussen RA, Thorneloe SA, Manegdeg F, Apte M.
Feasibility assessment of popular bioenergy systems in the southern Europe. Greenhouse gases from biomass and fossil fuel stoves in developing coun-
Renewable and sustainable Energy Reviews 2009;13:801–12. tries: a Manila pilot study. Chemosphere 1993;26:479–505.
[151] Akpınar A, Komurcu MI, Kankal M, Ozolc-er IH, Kaygusuz K. Energy situation [168] Kandapal JB, Maheshwari RC, Kandapal TC. Release of air pollutants in indoor
and renewables in Turkey and environmental effects of energy use. Renew- air: comparison of traditional and metallic stoves. Renewable Energy—An
able and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2008;12:2013–39. International Journal 1994;4:833–7.
[152] Kannan R, Leong KC, Osman R, Ho HK. Life cycle energy, emissions and cost [169] Karp A, Shield I. Bioenergy from plants and the sustainable yield challenge.
inventory of power generation technologies in Singapore. Renewable and New Phytologist 2008;179:15–32.
Sustainable Energy Reviews 2007;11:702–15. [170] Muradov NZ, Veziroglu TN. Green’’ path from fossil-based to hydrogen
[153] Xiaohua W, Zhenmin F. Biofuel use and its emission of noxious gases in rural economy: An overview of carbon-neutral technologies. International Journal
China. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2004;8:183–92. of Hydrogen Energy 2008;33:6804–39.
[154] Streimikiene D, Sivickas G. The EU sustainable energy policy indicators [171] http://www.journeytoforever.org/biofuel_library/ethanol_motherearth/
framework. Environmental International 2008;24:1227–40. meCh1.html
[155] Koh LP, Ghazoul J. Biofuels, biodiversity, and people: understanding the con- [172] http://www.tpub.com/content/altfuels01/0663/06630062.htm
flicts and finding opportunities. Biological Conservation 2008;141:2450–60. [173] http://www.maes.msu.edu/upes/agtomm_2009/bioenergy.pdf

You might also like