Advertisement

Sugar Tech

, Volume 20, Issue 6, pp 692–699 | Cite as

Life Cycle Assessment of Sugarcane Growing Process in Fiji

  • Vineet V. ChandraEmail author
  • Sarah L. Hemstock
  • Onesmus N. Mwabonje
  • Antoine De Ramon N’Yeurt
  • Jeremy Woods
Research Article
  • 146 Downloads

Abstract

Sugarcane is an economically important crop in Fiji as it has considerable impact on the gross domestic product and around 22% (200,000) of the population is directly or indirectly dependent on the sugarcane industry. Considering the importance of this crop, a life cycle assessment (LCA) was performed in order to understand environmental impacts. In this paper, Fijian sugarcane production was assessed to produce a set of LCA results for defined impacts. The results can be used in subsequent assessments of sugarcane-related products and provide significant insights into the current impacts. Life cycle impact assessment results were generated using CML, ReCiPe and Impact 2002 + models running in Open LCA software using the Ecoinvent database. This connected the system flows and process flow to the product systems in order to calculate the life cycle impact assessment results to be based on local data for comparable and accurate evaluation. Previous analysis revealed that sugarcane production has a considerable impact on global warming potential because of the significant use of fossil fuels in farm machineries and transportation, and the production and use of agrochemicals. Results from this study show that sugarcane production has least impact on ozone layer depletion. Fertilizer production and usage was found to be one of the key issues affecting various impact categories. These results will assist further assessments on the sugarcane products and systems. However, in order to further develop the LCA tool for Fijian agricultural systems, development and testing of life cycle impact assessment models is necessary for Fijian conditions. This will ensure further accuracy of model outputs and supply more realistic and real-time results on emissions.

Keywords

LCA Climate change Global warming Environmental impacts CML 

References

  1. Amores, M.J., Fernando Daniel Mele, Laureano Jimenez, and Francesc Castells. 2013. Life cycle assessment of fuel ethanol from sugarcane in Argentina. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 18: 1344–1357.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-013-0584-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Carmo, Janaina Braga do, Solange Filoso, Luciana C. Zotelli, Eraclito R. de Sousa Neto, Leonardo M. Pitombo, Paulo J. Duarte-Neto, Vitor P. Vargas, et al. 2013. Infield greenhouse gas emissions from sugarcane soils in Brazil: Effects from synthetic and organic fertilizer application and crop trash accumulation. GCB Bioenergy 5(3): 267–280.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1757-1707.2012.01199.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chang, Fang-chih, Lang-dong Lin, Chun-han Ko, and Hsin-chuan Hsieh. 2017. Life cycle assessment of bioethanol production from three feedstocks and two fermentation waste reutilization schemes. Journal of Cleaner Production 143: 973–979.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. de Figueiredo, Eduardo Barretto, Alan Rodrigo Panosso, Rangel Romão, and Newton La Scala. 2010. Greenhouse gas emission associated with sugar production in southern Brazil. Carbon Balance and Management 5(1): 3.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1750-0680-5-3.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. Denmead, O.T., B.C.T. Macdonald, G. Bryant, T. Naylor, S. Wilson, D.W.T. Griffith, W.J. Wang, B. Salter, I. White, and P.W. Moody. 2010. Emissions of methane and nitrous oxide from Australian sugarcane soils. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 150(6): 748–756.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2009.06.018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism. 2004. Life Cycle Assessment. https://www.environment.gov.za/sites/default/files/docs/series9_lifecycle_assessment.pdf.
  7. Foley, Jeffrey, and Paul Lant. 2009. Regional normalisation figures for Australia 2005/2006-inventory and characterisation data from a production perspective. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 14(3): 215–224.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-009-0063-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Guerra, J.Paulo Macedo, J.Roberto Coleta, Luiza Carvalho Martins Arruda, Gil Anderi Silva, and Luiz Kulay. 2014. Comparative analysis of electricity cogeneration scenarios in sugarcane production by LCA. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-014-0702-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Humbert, Sébastien, An De Schryver, Xavier Bengoa, Manuele Margni, and Olivier Jolliet. 2012. IMPACT 2002 +: User Guide Draft. http://www.quantis-intl.com/pdf/IMPACT2002_UserGuide_for_vQ2.21.pdf: Quantis.
  10. IPCC. 2014. Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of climate change. In Working Group III Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, ed. O. Edenhofer, R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, E. Farahani, S. Kadner, K. Seyboth, and A. Adler, et al. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  11. ISO. 2016. Environmental management—Life cycle assessment—Principles and framework. https://www.iso.org/standard/37456.html. Accessed 13 Feb 2018.
  12. Khan, A. 2014. 2014 Annual Report. http://www.fsc.com.fj/AnnualReport.html. Fiji Sugar Corporation.
  13. Life Cycle Inventory Database. 2016. http://www.ecoinvent.org/database/database.html.
  14. Ometto, Aldo Roberto, Michael Zwicky Hauschild, and Woodrow Nelson Lopes Roma. 2009. Lifecycle assessment of fuel ethanol from sugarcane in Brazil. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 14: 236–247.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-009-0065-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Pereira, Lucas G., Mateus F. Chagas, Marina O.S. Dias, Otávio Cavalett, and Antonio Bonomi. 2014. Life cycle assessment of butanol production in sugarcane biorefineries in Brazil. Journal of Cleaner Production 96: 557–568.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.01.059.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Pippo, W.Alonso, Carlos A. Luengo, L.A.M. Alberteris, and P.G.Z. Cornacchia. 2011. Energy recovery from sugarcane-trash in the light of 2nd generation biofuels. Part 1: Current situation and environmental aspects. Waste and Biomass Valorization 2(1): 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Prasara-A, Jittima, and Shabbir H. Gheewala. 2014. Sustainability of sugarcane cultivation: Case study of selected sites in north-eastern Thailand. Journal of Cleaner Production 134(Part B): 613–622.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.029.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ramjeawon, Toolseeram. 2004. Life cycle assessment of cane-sugar on the island of mauritius. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 9: 254–260.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02978601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ramjeawon, Toolseeram. 2008. Life cycle assessment of electricity generation from bagasse in Mauritius. Journal of Cleaner Production 16: 1727–1734.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2007.11.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Renouf, Marguerite Anne, Malcolm K. Wegener, and Robert J. Pagan. 2010. Life cycle assessment of Australian sugarcane production with a focus on sugarcane growing. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 15: 927–937.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-010-0226-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Silalertruksa, Thapat, Patcharaporn Pongpat, and Shabbir H. Gheewala. 2016. Life cycle assessment for enhancing environmental sustainability of sugarcane biorefinery in Thailand. Journal of Cleaner Production 140: 906–913.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.06.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Sornpoon, Wilaiwan, Sébastien Bonnet, and Savitri Garivait. 2013. Measurement of greenhouse gas emissions from sugarcane plantation soil in Thailand. International Journal of Environmental and Ecological Engineering 7(12): 862–867.Google Scholar
  23. Souza, Glaucia Mendes, Reynaldo L. Victoria, Carlos A. Joly, and Luciano M. Verdade. 2015. Bioenergy & Sustainability: Bridging the gaps. São Paulo: Scientific Committee on Problems of the Environment.Google Scholar
  24. Stavropoulos, Panagiotis, Christos Giannoulis, Alexios Papacharalampopoulos, Panagis Foteinopoulos, and George Chryssolouris. 2016. Life cycle analysis: Comparison between different methods and optimization challenges. Procedia CIRP 41: 626–631.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2015.12.048.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Sugar Research & Promotion 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vineet V. Chandra
    • 1
    Email author
  • Sarah L. Hemstock
    • 1
  • Onesmus N. Mwabonje
    • 2
  • Antoine De Ramon N’Yeurt
    • 1
  • Jeremy Woods
    • 2
  1. 1.Pacific Centre for Environment and Sustainable DevelopmentThe University of the South PacificSuvaFiji
  2. 2.Centre for Environmental PolicyImperial CollegeLondonUK

Personalised recommendations