Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Predicting the techno-economic performance of a large-scale second-generation bioethanol production plant: a case study for Kenya

  • Original Research
  • Published:
International Journal of Energy and Environmental Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study investigates the effect of varying cost and process parameters on bioethanol production rate and the minimum bioethanol selling price (MBSP) during large-scale production of second-generation bioethanol from Sila sorghum stalks found in Kenya. Aspen Plus was used to model and simulate the process that was considered in this study. The flow rate of biomass was varied between 10,000 and 300,000 kg/h which gave rise to a bioethanol flow rate of between 2134.49 and 62,707.33 kg/h. Bioethanol production rate decreased from 21,759.5 to 19,397.6 kg/h when the feed stage position in the beer column increased from 2 to 8. MBSP increased from $0.81/L to $1.11/L when the cost of biomass was varied from $20/tonne to $100/tonne. MBSP increased from $0.9/L to $1.0/L when the cost of enzymes was varied by − 50% and + 50%. MBSP increased from $0.83/L to $1.54/L when discount rate varied by 5% and 30%. MBSP increased from $0.85/L to $1.06/L when fixed capital investment was varied by -35% and + 35%. MBSP reduced from $1.28/L to $0.95/L when plant life varied from 10 to 30 years. MBSP increased from $0.89/L to $0.99/L when income tax rate varied from 0 to 40%. The study indicates that second-generation bioethanol is able to compete with gasoline in Kenya when no levies and taxes are imposed on the MBSP, at a plant life of 15 years and beyond and at an income tax rate of between 0 to 40%.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

(Source: Table 8)

Fig. 4

(Source: Table 9)

Fig. 5

(Source: Table 10)

Fig. 6

(Source: Table 11)

Fig. 7

(Source: Table 14)

Fig. 8

(Source: Table 16)

Fig. 9

(Source: Table 17)

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

The article contains all the relevant data. The corresponding author would provide any additional data upon request.

Abbreviations

2GBE:

Second-generation bioethanol

DCFROR:

Discounted cash flow rate of return

DPC:

Direct production cost

EPRA:

Energy and petroleum regulatory authority

FCI:

Fixed capital investment

IRR:

Internal rate of return

kg/h:

Kilogram per hour

kmol/h:

Kilomole per hour

kW:

Kilowatt

LGB:

Lignocellulosic biomass

l/min:

Liters per minute

MBSP:

Minimum bioethanol selling price

NPV:

Net present value

PFD:

Process flow diagrams

Q:

Heat quantity

RadFrac:

Rigorous distillation

Rstoic:

Stoichiometric reactor

SHCF:

Separate hydrolysis and co-fermentation

SSCF:

Simultaneous saccharification and co-fermentation

TCI:

Total capital investment

TPC:

Total product cost

$:

United States of America dollar

WCI:

Working capital investment

References

  1. Dias, M.O.S., Cunha, M.P., Jesus, C.D.F., Rocha, G.J.M., Pradella, J.G.C., Rossell, C.E.V., Bonomi, A.: Second generation ethanol in Brazil: compete with electricity production. Bioresour. Technol. 102, 8964–8971 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Mustafa, B., Havva, B., Cahide, O.: Progress in bioethanol processing. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 34, 551–573 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Kumar, R., Tabatabaei, M., Karimi, K., Sárvári, H.I.: Recent updates on lignocellulosic biomass derived ethanol—a review. Biofuel Res. J. 9, 347–356 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Sims, R.E.H., Mabee, W., Saddler, J.N., Taylor, M.: An overview of second-generation biofuel technologies. Bioresour. Technol. 101, 1570–1580 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Hector, H., Hughes, S., Liang-Li, X.: Developing yeast strains for biomass to ethanol production. Ethanol Producer Magazine, June 2008 Issue (2008)

  6. Mosier, N., Wyman, C., Dale, B., Elander, R., Lee, Y.Y., Holtzapple, M., Ladisch, M.: Features of promising technologies for pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass. Bioresour. Technol. 96, 673–686 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Li, Q., He, Y., Xian, M., Jun, G., Xu, X., Yang, J.: Improving enzymatic hydrolysis of wheat straw using ionic liquid 1-ethyl-3-methyl imidazolium diethyl phosphate pretreatment. Bioresour. Technol. 100, 3570–3575 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Salimi, M.N., Lim, S.E., Yusoff, A.H., Jamlos, M.F.: Conversion of rice husk into fermentable sugar by two stage hydrolysis. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 908, 012056 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Svetlana, N., Jelena, P., Ljiljana, M.: Challenges in bioethanol production: utilization of cotton fabrics as a feedstock. Chem. Ind. Chem. Eng. 22, 375–390 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Chang, V.S., Holtzapple, M.T.F.: Fundamental factors affecting biomass enzymatic reactivity. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. Res. 84, 5–37 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Kumar, P., Barrett, D.M., Delwiche, M.J., Stroeve, P.: Methods for pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass for efficient hydrolysis and biofuel production. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 48, 3713–3729 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Zhang, Y.P., Lynd, L.R.: Towards an aggregated understanding of enzymatic hydrolysis of cellulose: non complexed cellulase systems. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 88, 797–824 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Afsahi, B., Kazemi, A., Kheirolomoom, A., Nejati, S.: Immobilization of cellulase on non-porous ultrafine silica particles. Sci. Iran. 14(4), 379–383 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Lili, W., Xiaoyan, Y., Jing, S.: Immobilization of cellulase in nano fibrous PVA membranes by electrospinning. J. Membr. Sci. 250, 167–173 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Muktham, R., Bhargava, S.K., Bankupalli, S., Ball, A.S.: A review on 1st and 2nd generation bioethanol production—recent progress. J. Sustain. Bioenergy Syst. 6, 72–92 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Joshi, B., Bhatt, M.R., Sharma, D., Joshi, J., Malla, R., Sreerama, L.: Lignocellulosic ethanol production: current practices and recent developments: review. Biotechnol. Mol. Biol. 6, 172–182 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Tan, K.T., Lee, K.T., Mohamed, A.R.: Role of energy policy in renewable energy accomplishment: the case of second-generation bioethanol. Energy Policy 36, 3360–3365 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Agfax On-line: Super Sorghum: high yielding and drought tolerant. http://www.agfax.net (2011)

  19. Mailu S.K., Mulinge, W.: Excise tax changes and their impact on Gadam sorghum demand in Kenya. In: 5th International Conference of AAAE, United Nations Conference Centre, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 23–26th September (2016)

  20. Lopes, T.F., Cabanas, C., Silva, A., Fonseca, D., Santos, E., Guerra, L.T., Sheahan, C., Reisa, A., Girioa, F.: Process simulation and techno-economic assessment for direct production of advanced bioethanol using a genetically modified Synechocystis sp. Bioresour. Technol. Rep. 6, 113–122 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Boakye-Boaten, N.A., Kurkalova, L., Xiu, S., Shahbazi, A.: Techno-economic analysis for the biochemical conversion of Miscanthus x giganteus into bioethanol. Biomass Bioenergy 98, 85–94 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Aspen Plus: Aspen Plus User Guide, Version 10.2. Aspen Technology, Inc., Cambridge, MA (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Tgarguifa, A., Abderafi, S., Bounahmidi, T.: Modeling and optimization of distillation to produce bioethanol. Energy Procedia 139, 43–48 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Zhao, L., Zhang, X., Xu, J., Ou, X., Chang, S., Wu, M.: Techno-economic analysis of bioethanol production from lignocellulosic biomass in China: dilute-acid pretreatment and enzymatic hydrolysis of corn stover. Energies 8, 4096–4117 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. da Silva, A.R.G., Ortega, C.E.T., Rong, B.G.: Techno-economic analysis of different pretreatment processes for lignocellulosic-based bioethanol production. Bioresour. Technol. 218, 561–570 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Porzio, G.F., Prussi, M., Chiaramonti, D., Pari, L.: Modeling lignocellulosic bioethanol from poplar: estimation of the level of process integration, yield and potential for co-products. J. Clean. Prod. 34, 66–75 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Quintero, J.A., Moncada, J., Cardona, C.A.: Techno-economic analysis of bioethanol production from lignocellulosic residues in Colombia: a process simulation approach. Bioresour. Technol. 139, 300–307 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. PIEA. Petroleum Institute of East Africa: quarterly industry report on petroleum sale in Kenya, Nairobi, PIEA (2019)

  29. Dalberg. Scaling up clean cooking in urban Kenya with LPG & bio-ethanol, a market and policy analysis (2018)

  30. Ministry of Energy Kenya: National Energy Policy. Kenya Government Press, Nairobi (2018)

  31. Kazi, F.K., Fortman, J.A., Anex, R.P., Hsu, D.D., Aden, A., Dutta, A., Kothandaraman, G.: Techno-economic comparison of process technologies for biochemical ethanol production from corn stover. Fuel 89, S20–S28 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Aspen Plus V8.4. AspenTech Inc., Burlington, MA (2013)

  33. Barreraa, I., Amezcua-Allieri, M.A., Estupinan, L., Martínez, T., Aburtob, J.: Technical and economical evaluation of bioethanol production from lignocellulosic residues in Mexico: case of sugarcane and blue agave bagasses. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 107, 91–101 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Humbird, D., Davis, R., Tao, L., Kinchin, C., Hsu, D., Aden, A.: Process Design and Economics for Biochemical Conversion of Lignocellulosic Biomass to Ethanol Dilute-Acid Pretreatment and Enzymatic Hydrolysis of Corn Stover. National Renewable Energy Laboratory Golden, Golden (2011)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  35. Ngigi, W.T.: Optimizing the conversion of pretreated sila sorghum stalks to simple sugars using immobilized enzymes. Int. Res. J. Eng. Technol. 4, 1–5 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Sinnott, R.K.: Coulson and Richardson, Chemical Engineering Design, vol. 6, 3rd edn. Butterworth-Heinemann Linacre House, Oxford (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  37. EPRA: Clarification on the high petroleum pump prices for the period 15th March to 14th April 2021, Press release, Nairobi (2021)

  38. Tgarguifa, A., Abderafi, S., Bounahmidi, T.: Energy efficiency improvement of a bioethanol distillery, by replacing a rectifying column with a pervaporation unit. Renew. Energy. 122, 239–250 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Frankó, B., Galbe, M., Wallberg, O.: Bioethanol production from forestry residues: a comparative techno-economic analysis. Appl. Energy. 184, 727–736 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Osborne, S.: Energy in 2020: assessing the economic effects of commercialization of cellulosic ethanol, office of competition and economic analysis, manufacturing and services competitiveness report (2007)

  41. Republic of Kenya: The Income Tax Act (CAP 470). Kenya Government Press, Nairobi (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Li, H., Liu, H., Li, S.: Feasibility study on bioethanol production by one phase transition separation based on advanced solid-state fermentation. Energies 14, 6301 (2021)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Piccolo, C., Bezzo, F.: A techno-economic comparison between two technologies for bioethanol production from lignocellulose. Biomass Bioenergy 33, 478–491 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to Africa Development Bank (AFDB), Africa Centre of Excellence (ACEII-PTRE), and Moi University, Kenya, for supporting this work financially.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Chemical and Process Engineering, Moi University, Eldoret, 3900-30100, Kenya

    Wiseman Ngigi, Anil Kumar & Moses Arowo

  2. Department of Mechanical, Production and Energy Engineering, Moi University, Eldoret, 3900-30100, Kenya

    Zachary Siagi

Authors
  1. Wiseman Ngigi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Zachary Siagi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Anil Kumar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Moses Arowo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wiseman Ngigi.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix 1

Appendix 1

See Tables 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17.

Table 4 Results of dilute acid pretreatment and SSCF process
Full size table
Table 5 Composition of feed to the purification and dehydration section
Full size table
Table 6 Composition of product stream from the purification section
Full size table
Table 7 Costs involved in economic analysis
Full size table
Table 8 Effect of varying LGB flow rate on bioethanol production rate
Full size table
Table 9 Effect of varying SSCF conversion of cellulose to glucose on bioethanol production rate
Full size table
Table 10 Effect of varying feed stage position of the beer column on bioethanol production rate
Full size table
Table 11 Effect of varying LGB cost and the impact on bioethanol production cost and MBSP
Full size table
Table 12 Effect of varying enzyme cost on MBSP
Full size table
Table 13 Percentage cost contribution
Full size table
Table 14 Effect of varying discount rate on MBSP
Full size table
Table 15 Effect of varying FCI on MBSP
Full size table
Table 16 Effect of varying plant life on MBSP
Full size table
Table 17 Effect of varying income tax rate on MBSP
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ngigi, W., Siagi, Z., Kumar, A. et al. Predicting the techno-economic performance of a large-scale second-generation bioethanol production plant: a case study for Kenya. Int J Energy Environ Eng 14, 95–108 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40095-022-00517-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40095-022-00517-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation