Abstract
Purpose
Recently, the Thai government has been advancing the expanded use of biomass as an alternative source of energy substituting it for the fossil fuels that have been shown to be harmful to the environment. Rice husk, one of the main sources of biomass in Thailand, has already been used as an energy source in many different applications and has been successful in reducing the consumption of fossil fuels. At present (2011), the main use of rice husk in Thailand is as fuel to generate electricity. However, rice husk can potentially be used to produce other forms of energy such as cellulosic ethanol. This paper compares the environmental performance of the current main use of rice husk for energy purposes in the Thai context, i.e., for electricity generation with the prospective use, i.e., for cellulosic ethanol production. The results from this study will identify the more environmentally friendly option for use of rice husk for energy purposes.
Materials and methods
To determine the more environmentally friendly rice husk use option, that being the option that showed the greatest reduction of environmental impacts, the environmental impacts of the two selected rice husk use options were compared with the environmental impacts of their conventional energy production processes using the life cycle assessment (LCA). The LCA software package SimaPro 7.1.6 was used to assist in the analysis of the environmental impacts, with the impact assessment method ReCiPe 2008. The system boundary of the study was expanded to take into consideration the effects caused by the consumption of coproducts generated within the two rice husk options. To make the options comparable, the functional units defined for both options were based on processing 1,000 tonnes of rice husk in both rice husk use systems studied.
Results
Based on the available data and assumptions made for this study, the results show that the use of rice husk in both electricity and cellulosic ethanol options had a significant effect in reducing the impacts on fossil fuel depletion and climate change, when compared with the conventional processes. However, the use of rice husk in both options caused a slightly higher impact on particulate matter formation than the conventional processes. The option of using rice husk to generate electricity was preferred over the option of using rice husk as a feedstock to produce cellulosic ethanol for all other impact categories analysed, except particulate matter formation, marine eutrophication, photochemical oxidant formation and freshwater ecotoxicity. In addition, it was found that using rice husk to produce cellulosic ethanol caused a considerably greater impact on human toxicity than its conventional product.
Discussion
The environmental benefits gained by using rice husk depend on the materials that rice husk is replacing. This means that the reduction of environmental impact depends upon the use of the rice husk.
Conclusions
Overall, the option of using rice husk to generate electricity shows benefits over the option of using rice husk to produce cellulosic ethanol for most impact categories analysed. However, the cellulosic ethanol option is better than the electricity option in terms of particulate matter formation, marine eutrophication, photochemical oxidant formation and freshwater ecotoxicity.
Recommendations and perspectives
In the short run, the option of using rice husk to generate electricity is more environmentally friendly than the option of using rice husk to produce cellulosic ethanol. However, if rice husk is to be used for electricity generation, the ash generated in power plants should be sent out to be used in other industries. It should not be disposed of in landfills as it causes greater impacts than other ash use options. In the time of oil shortages, rice husk should be considered for use as a feedstock to produce cellulosic ethanol for use as a substitute for petrol to help reduce the dependency of oil importation for Thailand. However, the production process of cellulosic ethanol should be improved to help increase efficiency in reducing the environmental impacts in other impact categories.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aden A, Ruth M, Ibsen K, Jechura J, Neeves K, Sheehan J, Wallace B, Montague L, Slayton A, Lukas J (2002) Lignocellulosic biomass to ethanol process design and economics utilizing co-current dilute acid prehydrolysis and enzymatic hydrolysis for corn stover. National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Colorado
Amornkosit N (2007) Renewable energy policy: recent policies on SPP/VSPP. Paper presented at the renewable energy Asia 2007 conference, BITEC, Bangkok, 6 June 2007
Christensen TH, Gentil E, Boldrin A, Larsen AW, Hauschild MZ (2008) Biogenic carbon accounting in LCA-modelling: comparison of different criteria. ORBIT 2008, Wageningen, 13–15 October 2008
Chungsangunsit T, Gheewala SH, Patumsawad S (2004) Environmental assessment of electricity production from rice husk: a case study in thailand. In: International conference on electric supply industry in transition: issues and prospects for Asia, Bangkok, 14–16 January 2004
Ekvall T, Weidema BP (2004) System boundaries and input data in consequential life cycle inventory analysis. Int J Life Cycle Assess 9(3):161–171
Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (EGAT) (2009) Power development plan 2007: revision 2. EGAT, Bangkok
Energy Policy and Planning Office (1999) Privatisation and liberalisation of the energy sector in Thailand. http://www.eppo.go.th/doc/idp-07-PrivLib.doc. Accessed 20 Apr 2009
Energy Policy and Planning Office (2009) Data on IPP, SPP, VSPP. http://www.eppo.go.th/power/data/index.html. Accessed 20 Apr 2009
Energy Policy and Planning Office (EPPO) (2009) Energy statistics. http://www.eppo.go.th/info/5electricity_stat.htm. Accessed 25 May 2009
Goedkoop M, Spriensma R (2001) Eco-indicator 99: A damage oriented method for Life Cycle Impact Assessment: Methodology Report. PRé Consultants. Amersfoot, Netherlands
Goedkoop M, Effting S, Collignon M (2000) Eco-indicator 99: a damage oriented method for life-cycle impact assessment: manual for designers. PRé consultants. Amersfoot, Netherlands
Goedkoop M, Heijungs R, Huijbregts M, Schryver AD, Struijs J, Van Zelm R (2009) ReCiPe 2008: a life cycle impact assessment method which comprises harmonised category indicators at the midpoint and the endpoint level, first edition. Report I: characterisation. Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment (VROM), Den Haag
Goettemoeller J, Goettemoeller A (2007) Sustainable ethanol: biofuels, biorefineries, cellulosic biomass, flex-fuel vehicles, and sustainable farming for energy independence. Prairie Oak Publishing, Maryville
González-García S, Gasol CM, Gabarrell X, Rieradevall J, Moreira MT, Feijoo G (2009) Environmental aspects of ethanol-based fuels from Brassica carinata: a case study of second generation ethanol. Renew Sust Energ Rev 13(9):2613–2620
Grant T, Beer T, Campbell PK, Batten D (2008) Life cycle assessment of environmental outcomes and greenhouse gas emissions from biofuels production in Western Australia. Department of Agriculture and Food Government of Western Australia, Western Australia
Guinee JB (ed) (2002) Handbook on life cycle assessment: operational guide to the ISO standards, vol 7. Eco-Efficiency in Industry and Science. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht
International Rice Research Institute (2008) World rice statistics. http://beta.irri.org/statistics/index.php?option=com_frontpage&Itemid=1. Accessed 11 Jan 2009
IPCC (2006) 2006 IPCC Guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories, vol 4. Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use the National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme, Japan
Jungbluth N, Emmenegger MF, Dinkel F, Stettler C, Doka G, Chudacoff M, Dauriat A, Gnansounou E, Sutter J, Spielmann M, Kljun N, Keller M, Schleiss K (2007) Life cycle inventories of bioenergy: data v20. ESU-services Ltd., Uster
Kalayanamitr C (2004) Thai cogeneration policy experiences. Paper presented at the experiences 2004 cogeneration day in Lao PDR, Lane Xang Hotel, Vientiane, 2 October 2004
Lohsomboon P, Jirajariyavech A (2003) Final report for the project on life cycle assessment for Asian countries—phase III. Business and Environment Program, Thailand Environment Institute, Bangkok
Malakul P, Piumsomboon P, Pruitichaiwiboon P, Charutavai K, Mungcharoen T (2005) National LCI database development in Thailand. In: Capacity building on life cycle assessment in APEC economies, Bangkok, 15–16 December 2005, p 12
Nguyen TLT, Gheewala SH (2008) Fuel ethanol from cane molasses in Thailand: environmental and cost performance. Energy Policy 36(5):1589–1599
Office of Agricultural Economics (2009) Agricultural Production. http://www.oae.go.th/ewtadmin/ewt/oae_web/main.php?filename=agri_production. Accessed 7 Oct 2010
Office of the National Economic and Social Development Board (1992) The seventh national economic and social development plan (1992–1996). http://www.nesdb.go.th/Default.aspx?tabid=89. Accessed 15 Apr 2009
Prasara-A J (2010) Comparative life cycle assessment of rice husk utilization in Thailand. RMIT University, Melbourne
Prasara-A J, Grant T (2008) Environmental impacts of alternative uses of rice husks for Thailand. In: Nemecek T, Gaillard G (eds) The 6th international conference on LCA in the agri-food sector—towards a sustainable management of the food chain, Zurich, 12–14 November 2008. Agroscope Reckenholz-Tänikon Research Station ART, pp 390–398
Prasertsan S, Sajjakulnukit B (2006) Biomass and biogas energy in Thailand: potential, opportunity and barriers. Renew Energ 31(5):599–610
Saha BC, Cotta MA (2007) Enzymatic saccharification and fermentation of alkaline peroxide pretreated rice hulls to ethanol. Enzyme Microb Tech 41(4):528–532
Saha BC, Cotta MA (2008) Lime pretreatment, enzymatic saccharification and fermentation of rice hulls to ethanol. Biomass Bioenerg 32(10):971–977
Saha BC, Iten LB, Cotta MA, Wu YV (2005) Dilute acid pretreatment, enzymatic saccharification, and fermentation of rice hulls to ethanol. Biotechnol Prog 21:816–822
Songmuang P (2000) Use of Organic Fertilizers in Rice Field. Division of Soil Science, Department of Agriculture, Bangkok
Spatari S, Zhang Y, MacLean HL (2005) Life cycle assessment of switchgrass- and corn stover-derived ethanol-fueled automobiles. Environ Sci Technol 39(24):9750–9758
Tantithumpoosit W (2004) History, roadmap and success of using ethanol blended gasoline in Thailand. Paper presented at the 2nd Asian Petroleum Technology Symposium Program. www.revistavirtualpro.com/files/TIE06_200612.pdf
Thailand Environment Institute (TEI) (ed) (2004) Life cycle inventory for cement product and steel making towards sustainable development: final report for the Thailand research fund. TEI, Bangkok
Weidema B (2001) Avoiding co-product allocation in life-cycle assessment. J Ind Ecol 4(3):11–33
Acknowledgements
This work is part of a PhD study at the School of Global Studies, Social Science and Planning, RMIT University. The authors would like to thank Associate Professor Ian Thomas and Paul Dulfer for reviewing a draft version of this paper. Also, the authors thank the Royal Thai Government Scholarship for the financial support.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Responsible editor: Niels Jungbluth
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Prasara-A, J., Grant, T. Comparative life cycle assessment of uses of rice husk for energy purposes. Int J Life Cycle Assess 16, 493–502 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-011-0293-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-011-0293-7