Environmental and economic analysis of bioethanol production from sugarcane molasses and agave juice

Abstract

In this article, sugarcane molasses and agave juice were compared as potential feedstocks for producing bioethanol in Mexico in terms of their environmental impact and economic factors. Life cycle assessment (LCA) using SimaPro was carried out to calculate environmental impacts by using a cradle-to-gate approach. A preliminary economic analysis was performed to determine the economic feasibility of the studied options. Also, capital goods costs were obtained using the Aspen Plus economy package. Moreover, a sensitivity analysis was involved to compare the environmental and economic viability of producing bioethanol from sugarcane molasses and agave juice. LCA results revealed that cultivation and fermentation were the most harmful stages when producing bioethanol from sugarcane molasses and agave juice, respectively. Furthermore, when it was derived from agave juice rather than sugarcane molasses, it had more environmental benefits. This was ascribed to the lower consumption rate of fertilizers, pesticides, and emissions given off from the former. Regarding financial aspects, the preliminary analysis showed that producing bioethanol was not economically viable when grid energy alone was used. However, if power from the grid is partially replaced with renewable energy, producing bioethanol becomes economically feasible, and sugarcane molasses is the most suitable feedstock. Graphical abstract

The need for hotspot-driven research

“…Despite these differences, the major hotspots are consistently identified as the post-fermentation distillation of ethanol from water and the agricultural production of the biomass. [12][13][14][15][16] Therefore, we can be confident that these process steps are the ones that need our attention most and finding solutions to these problems will result in the greatest environmental return on investment. Comparing hotspot identification in different studies eliminates the uncertainty surrounding the methods or assumptions of any single study.…”

Advances in the Micropropagation and Genetic Transformation of Agave Species

“…On the other hand, agave carbohydrates have been used as substitutes for sugars and fats with many applications in the food industry [13]. Potential use of agave species in bioethanol production is also promising due to significant biomass production, CAM physiology and the ability to survive in arid climates, leading to lower environmental impacts during production in comparison to sugarcane molasses or other sources of bioethanol [14][15][16].…”

Thermoanaerobacter Species: The Promising Candidates for Lig-nocellulosic Biofuel Production

“…Lignocelluloses such as wheat straw, rice straw and sugarcane bagasse were adopted for biofuels production [6][7][8], suggesting bio-processing of biomass is widely accepted due to the good perspective [9]. Unfortunately, biofuel engineers must face the fact that cellulosic ethanol still cannot match the low cost of petro-chemicals and first-generation (1G) ethanol (usually produced from cereal grains, sugar and amylaceous plants, popularly in USA and Brazil) [5,10]. The second and third-generation ethanol is obtained from lignocellulosic materials and algae, respectively, while the latter is not well developed due to some limited factors like the technology for extracting bioethanol from seaweed [11].…”