Use of the life cycle assessment (LCA) for comparison of

the environmental performance of four alternatives for the

treatment and disposal of bioethanol stillage †
By M.H. Rocha 1*, E.E.S. Lora 1, O.J. VenturinI 1, J.C.P. Escobar 1, J.J.C.S. Santos 1 and A.G. Moura 2

1 Excellence Group in Thermal Power and Distributed Generation (NEST), Federal University of Itajubá (UNIFEI)
Av. BPS, 1303, Itajubá, Minas Gerais, CEP 37500-903, Brazil.
2 Dedini Indústria de Base S.A. Rod. Rio Claro/Piracicaba, km 26,3, Bairro Cruz Caiada, Piracicaba,

São Paulo, CEP 13412-900, Brazil.

* Contact author: Email: mateus.rocha@unifei.edu.br

abstract

New alternative routes for the treatment and disposal of stillage should be proposed, as fertigation could become
unfeasible, due to the increasing transport costs and environmental concerns. The aim of this paper is to show
the results of the application of the Life Cycle Assessment methodology for the analysis and comparison of
four alternatives for stillage treatment and disposal: conventional ‘in natura’ fertigation, anaerobic digestion,
concentration until 40% for fertigation and concentration until 65% for combustion in boilers using fuel oil as
supplementary fuel. For the LCA study, a hypothetic Standard Sugar and Alcohol Mill was assumed with a milling
capacity of 1.99 million tonnes of sugarcane per crop, producing 154,000 tonnes of sugar and 81,000 m³ of ethanol.
The mill is located near the city of Sertãozinho, Brazil and local soil characteristics were also considered. The
environmental evaluation results comparing the 4 alternatives of disposal are shown. The Simapro® software and
the CML 2 baseline 2000 are used as support tools. Conventional and concentrated stillage fertigation alternatives
have the best environmental performance. In the combustion of stillage, we considered the installation of pollution
control devices for SOx and NOx with 95% efficiency. From the point of view of climate change, based on the life
cycle greenhouse gases balance, the best alternative was anaerobic digestion.

Keywords: anaerobic digestion, combustion, concentration, fertigation, life cycle assessment, stillage

Empleo de la Evaluación del Ciclo de Vida (LCA) para la comparación del Comportamiento ambiental de cuatro
alternativas para el tratamiento y disposición de las vinazas residuales del etanol

Es conveniente proponer nuevas rutas para el tratamiento y disposición de las vinazas residuales de la producción de etanol en cuanto la
fertirrigación puede resultar inviable debido a los incrementos de los costos de transporte y preocupaciones ambientales. El objetivo de este trabajo
es mostrar los resultados de la aplicación de la metodología de Evaluación del Ciclo de Vida (LCA, en inglés) para el análisis y la comparación de
cuatro (4) alternativas para el tratamiento y la disposición de las vinazas residuales: convencional con fertirrigación ‘al natural’, digestión anaeróbica,
concentración hasta el 40% (de sólidos) para fertirrigación y concentración a 65% para combustión en calderas empleando fuel oil como
combustible complementario. Para el estudio del LCA, se asumió un hipotético Central Productor de Azúcar y Alcohol (SSAM), con una capacidad
de molida de 1.99 millones de toneladas de caña por zafra, produciendo 154 mil toneladas de azúcar y 81 mil m³ de etanol. El central está localizado
cerca de la ciudad de Sertaozinho y se consideraron las condiciones de los suelos locales. Se presentan los resultados de la evaluación ambiental
al comparar las cuatro alternativas de disposición. Se emplearon como herramientas de soporte digital el software Simapro® y la baseline CML 2,
2000. Las alternativas de fertirrigación convencional y la de concentración tuvieron en general el mejor desempeño ambiental. En la combustión de
las vinazas consideramos la instalación de componentes de control de la contaminación, con 95% de eficiencia para SOx y NOx. Desde el punto
de vista del Cambio Climático, basado en el balance del Ciclo de Vida de Gases de Efecto Invernadero, la mejor alternativa resultó la biodigestión.

Nutzung der Lebenszyklusbewertung (LCA) zum Vergleich der Umweltleistung von vier Alternativen für die Behandlung
und Entsorgung von Bioethanolschlempe

Neue alternative Methoden zur Behandlung und Entsorgung von Schlempe müssen gefunden werden, da die Fertigation aufgrund der zunehmenden
Transportkosten und Umweltbedenken undurchführbar werden könnte. Das Ziel dieses Papers besteht darin, die Resultate der Anwendung der
Lebenszyklusbewertungs-Methodik zur Analyse und zum Vergleich von vier Schlempebehandlungs- und Entsorgungsalternativen aufzuzeigen:
konventionelle in Natura Düngung, anaerobe Gärung, Konzentration auf 40% zur Fertigation und Konzentration auf 65% zur Verbrennung
in Heizkesseln unter Nutzung von Heizöl als zusätzlichem Brennstoff. Für die LCA-Studie wurde eine hypothetische Standard-Zucker- und
Alkoholmühle mit einer Mahlkapazität von 1,99 Millionen Tonnen Zuckerrohr pro Ernte unterstellt, die 154.000 Tonnen Zucker und 81.000 m³ Ethanol
produziert. Die Mühle befindet sich in der Nähe der Stadt Sertãozinho, und lokale Bodeneigenschaften wurden ebenfalls mit in Betracht gezogen.
Gezeigt werden die Umweltbewertungsergebnisse, die die 4 Entsorgungsalternativen vergleichen. Als Support-Tools werden die Software Simapro®
und die CML 2 Baseline 2000 verwendet. Konventionelle und konzentrierte Schlempe-Fertigationsalternativen haben die beste Umweltleistung. Bei
der Verbrennung von Schlempe wurde die Installation von Vorrichtungen zur Kontrolle der Verschmutzung durch SOx und NOx mit einer Effizienz von
95% erwogen. Hinsichtlich des Klimawandels ist – wenn man die Treibhausgas-Lebenszyklusbilanz zugrunde legt – Biovergärung die beste Alternative.

CHECK OUT ISJ’S WEB PACKAGES - Visit www.isjbuyersguide.com www.internationalsugarjournal.com 611

 Use of the life cycle assessment (LCA) for comparison of the environmental performance of four alternatives…

Uso da avaliação do ciclo de vida (ACV) para a comparação do desempenho ambiental das quatro alternativas para o
tratamento e descarte da vinhaça do bioetanol

Novas rotas alternativas para o tratamento e disposição de vinhaça deverão ser propostas, já que a fertirrigação pode se tornar inviável, devido aos
custos de transporte e aumento das preocupações ambientais. O objetivo deste artigo é mostrar os resultados da aplicação da metodologia de
Avaliação do Ciclo de Vida para a análise e comparação das quatro alternativas para o tratamento e eliminação da vinhaça: fertirrigação ‘in natura’
convencional, a digestão anaeróbia, a concentração de até 40% para a fertirrigação e concentração de até 65% para a combustão em caldeiras
que utilizam óleo combustível como combustível suplementar. Para o estudo da ACV, um engenho padrão de açúcar e álcool hipotético com uma
capacidade de moagem de 1,99 milhões de toneladas de cana por safra, produzindo 154 mil toneladas de açúcar e 81 mil m³ de etanol. A fábrica
está situada perto da cidade de Sertãozinho e as características do solo local também foram consideradas. Os resultados da avaliação ambiental
comparando as quatro alternativas de escoamento são mostrados. O programa Simapro® e o CML 2 baseline 2000 são utilizados como ferramentas
de apoio. As alternativas de fertirrigação convencional e concentrada de vinhaça têm o melhor desempenho ambiental. Na combustão da vinhaça,
considerou-se a instalação de dispositivos de controle de poluição para SOx e NOx, com 95% de eficiência. Do ponto de vista das mudanças
climáticas, com base no ciclo de vida de gases de efeito estufa, a melhor alternativa é a biodigestão.

Nomenclature HTP Human Toxicity Potential

1,4-DB eq. 1,4 Dichlorobenzene equivalents
ACP Acidification Potential
ADP Abiotic Depletion Potential
CIP Clean In Place
ER Relationship between renewable energy output
and fossil fuel energy input
ETP Eutrophication Potential
ISO International Standard Organisation
LCA Life Cycle Assessment
LCI Life Cycle Inventory
LCIA Life Cycle Impact Assessment
MEP Marine Aquatic Ecotoxicity Potential
ODP Ozone Layer Depletion Potential

FEP Fresh Water Aquatic Ecotoxicity Potential POP Photochemical Oxidation Potential
FU Functional Unit SB System Boundaries
GHG Greenhouse Gases SSAM Standard Sugar and Alcohol Mill
GWP Global Warming Potential TEP Terrestrial Ecotoxicity Potential

Introduction be treated, and the inorganic matter, amounting to 6–7% of the

Stillage, the most important by-product of sugarcane bioethanol
production, is the aqueous by-product from the distillation of
bioethanol. On an average, 8-15 litres of stillage is generated for
every litre of alcohol produced.
The stillage generated from distillation of fermented mash is
in the temperature range 70-80ºC, deep brown in color, acidic in
nature (low pH), and has high concentration of organic materials
and solids. It is a very complex, caramelized and cumbersome
agro industrial waste. The pollution load of the distillery effluent
depends on different aspects related to the feedstock and
process (Parnaudeau et al., 2008). Stillage might be handled
several ways: discharge to an adjacent waterway or land area,
return to agricultural fields (fertigation), anaerobic digestion and
methane production, incineration, evaporation to an animal feed
or use as an aquaculture feed (Willington and Marten, 1982; Wilkie
et al., 2000; Pant and Adholeya, 2007; Mohana et al., 2009).
Different processes covering anaerobic, aerobic as well as
physico-chemical methods have been employed to treat this
effluent. Anaerobic treatment is the most attractive primary
treatment due to over 80% BOD removal combined with energy
recovery in the form of biogas. Thermophilic anaerobic digestion
of ethanol stillage achieves similar treatment efficiencies and
methane yields compared to mesophilic treatment, but at
almost twice the organic loading rate. Therefore, application
of thermophilic anaerobic digestion would improve process
economics, since smaller digesters and less stillage cooling are
required (Wilkie et al., 2000; Satyawali and Balakrishan, 2008).
Considering the incineration route, all the organic matter can
effluent, needs to be disposed. This material can be used as a
fertiliser. The concentration-incineration of stillage is the only
system that can provide a satisfactory solution to the pollution
problem, its only draw-back being its expensiveness (Navarro et
al., 2000; Patel, 2000).
Another route along incineration process is the gasification
of concentrated effluent. This process can be described as
substoichiometric combustion, in which oxidation reactions
between the organic matter and oxygen in the oxidant (air), and
reduction reactions between the products of combustion and
unconverted carbon, lead to the generation of a combustible gas
called producer syngas. This can be used as a fuel in an internal
combustion engine or gas turbine in single fuel or dual-fuel mode
to generate electricity (Patel, 2000).
Based on net energy analysis studies, which were first
published in the 1970s and following the thrust for a more
holistic approach to system analysis, there has recently been a
substantial development of life-cycle methodologies to assess
the energetic and environmental performance of product systems
from cradle-to-grave, approach to evaluate environmental
performance by considering the potential impacts from all
stages of manufacture, product use (including maintenance and
recycling), and end-of-life management, namely life cycle energy
analysis and life cycle assessment (LCA). These methodologies
have been receiving increasing attention, first by researchers and
product manufacturers and more recently among policy-makers
(Malça and Freire, 2006).
The ISO, a worldwide federation of national standards bodies,
has standardised this framework within the ISO 14040 series on

612 www.isjbuyersguide.com INTERNATIONAL SUGAR JOURNAL 2010, VOL. 112, NO. 1343
 Use of the life cycle assessment (LCA) for comparison of the environmental performance of four alternatives…

Figure 1. Localisation of the SSAM in São Paulo State, Brazil
electric power generation and the subsequent disposition of
the resulting effluent on farms.
• SCDTT: stillage concentration by evaporation up to 40%
of solids, distribution on farms through trucks.
• SCCBA: stillage concentration by evaporation up to 65%
of solids, to allow incineration in a boiler, together with an
auxiliary fuel for steam and electric power generation. The
ashes can be used for supplementary fertilisation.

Definition of the FU and SB

The FU is 1 m³ of stillage treated/disposal. In the agricultural

LCA (ISO, 1997; 1998; 1999 and 2000).
Preliminary attempts of LCA application for the evaluation
and comparison among alternatives of stillage treatment were
accomplished by Rocha et al. (2007) and Rocha et al. (2008).
The objective of this work is to accomplish a comparative
environmental analysis between the different scenarios
corresponding to different stillage treatment and disposal
alternatives.
LCA methodology for this study
Definition of the goal and scope
The function of the systems of products analysed in this work
relative to different alternatives for stillage treatment:
• FCDCC: conventional fertigation with ‘in natura’ stillage
distribution through concrete channels and dispersal on farms
through diesel-fuelled motor-pumps.
• ABDCC: stillage anaerobic digestion, with the biogas used for
Table 1. Necessary information for inventory accomplishment
Parameter Considered items
FU 1 m³ of treated stillage
Reference flow 83.3 litres of ethanol
Sugarcane corresponding to the FU 1.67 tonnes of sugarcane
Fertigated and non-fertigated areas total 0.0192 ha
Allocation method Mass or energy
Impacts evaluation methodology CML 2 baseline version 2000
Data requirements Data obtained from literature
Table 2. Parameters adopted for the process simulation
system, the sum of the fertigated area with application of
ashes and/or the area fertilised with mineral fertilisers will be
the same for the four scenarios, but the magnitude changes
(Table 1).
The operations of soil preparation, herbicide application,
pesticide and limestone, harvest and transport will not be
considered because they are the same for all scenarios.
The capital infrastructure contributes on average less than
5% of the global impact in all the impact categories (Rocha,
2009). So the build-up stage of the systems of stillage will not be
considered in this study.
A SSAM in the municipal district of Sertãozinho, State of São
Paulo, Brazil, was established, hypothetically (Figure 1). The total
period of operation will be 20 years, with 210 days of crop a year
(4440 useful hours of operation). The milling capacity is of 1.99
Mt of sugarcane per crop, producing 0.154 Mt of sugar and 81
000 m³ of ethanol.
The predominant soil in the region is of the type Rhodic
Hapludox and Typic Hapludox, with an average composition of
33.8% silt and 52.9% of clay (Alves, 2002).
Table 2 shows the main parameters adopted in process
simulation. It is considered that 12.0 litres of stillage per litre of
ethanol will be produced with the composition shown in Table 3
(Elia Neto and Nakahodo, 1995).
The main agricultural parameters considered for energy
and emission analyses are presented in Table 4. The diesel
consumption in the equipment used during conventional
fertilisation, fertigation with ‘in natura’ and concentrated
stillage and fertilisation with ashes was calculated starting from
indicators presented by Macedo et al., 2004. It is considered
that the cycle of the sugarcane consists of the plant cane and
four ratoon crops with an average productivity of 87 tc/ha.
In this work, it is assumed that the stillage is applied
in the plant and ratoon cane with nitrogen (48 kg/ha) and
phosphorus (125 kg/ha) complementation in the plant cane
(Penatti and Donzelli (2000)). The emissions originating from
the mineral fertilisation were calculated by the indicators
shown in Table 5.

Parameter Value Units Reference

Specific sugar production 80.0 kgsugar/tc UNICA (2008)
Specific ethanol production 50.0 lethanol/tc UNICA (2008)
Bagasse production 260.0 kgbagasse/tc Ometto (2005)
Mechanical power demand of cane preparation and juice extraction 16.0 kWh/tc Hassuani et al. (2005)
Electric power demand of sugar and ethanol process 12.0 kWh/tc Hassuani et al. (2005)
Specific steam consumption 540.0 kgsteam/tc Hassuani et al. (2005)

CHECK OUT ISJ’S WEB PACKAGES - Visit www.isjbuyersguide.com www.internationalsugarjournal.com 613

 Use of the life cycle assessment (LCA) for comparison of the environmental performance of four alternatives…

Table 3. Physic-chemical parameters of stillage anaerobic digestion process will be applied on

(Elia Neto and Nakahodo, 1995) farms through waterproof concrete channels and
the dispersal will be accomplished by diesel
Parameter BOD COD N P2O5 K2O CaO MgO MnO Fe2O3
motor-pumps (Figure 4).
Units mg/l
The rate of application of the digested stillage
Value 16 949 28 450 356 60 2034 515 225 5 25
in the agricultural soil is 266 m³/ha.
It is considered that the biogas has the
Table 4. Basic data for sugarcane production, harvesting
following composition: 60% CH4, 39% CO2 and
and transportation (Macedo et al., 2008)
1% H2S. The LHV and HHV of the biogas are
Item Units Value 18.20 MJ/kg and 20.19 MJ/kg respectively, the
Sucrose % cane stalks 14.22 specific mass is 1.10 kg/m³ and the mass flow
Fiber % cane stalks 12.73 0.593 kg/s.
Trash (dry basis) % cane stalks 14.00 The total electric power consumed by the
Cane productivity tc/ha 87.0 anaerobic digestion plant is 539.0 kW and, for
Fertiliser utilisation FU, the consumption will be 2.46 kWh.
The sizing of the power generation system was
P2O5 Plant cane kg/ha 125
accomplished using the software Thermoflex®,
Ratoon cane without stillage kg/ha 25
and consisted of 2 motor-generators Jenbacher®,
K2O Plant cane kg/ha 117
each one with a nominal power of 2.56 MW and
Ratoon cane without stillage kg/ha 114
global efficiency of 40.0% and 1 group motor-
Plant cane kg/ha 48
generator Wartsila® with a nominal power of 1.35
Nitrogen Ratoon cane with stillage kg/ha 75
MW and efficiency of 31.0%; in that way, the
Ratoon cane without stillage kg/ha 88
groups will generate 16.82 kWh/m³ of stillage.
Table 5. Emission factors resulting from mineral fertilisation
Scenario III: SCDTT - stillage concentration
Released substances Quantity Reference and fertirrigation
Emission to the air resulting from nitrogen fertilisation
CO2 3.64 kg CO2/kg N IPCC (2006) In this scenario, the stillage is concentrated by
N2O 0.05 kg N2O/kg N Crutzen et al. (2008) evaporation up to 40.0% solids. The design of
NOx 0.053 kg NOx/kg N Renouf et al. (2008) the plant was accomplished using the software
NH3 0.026 kg NH3/kg N Renouf et al. (2008) Aspen Plus® (Moura, 2008, Pers. Comm.).
Emissions to underground water (lixiviation) In the scheme, 5 evaporation effects were
considered also a condenser and a CIP system.
NO3- -
0.065 kg NO3 /kg N Renouf et al. (2008 Figure 5 displays the outline of the
-3 cogeneration plant for this case. The efficiency
PO4 0.128 kg P/kg P2O5 Bloesch et al. (1997)
of the cycle was 19.0%, therefore 173.29 kWh/
K+ 0.01 kg K+/kg K2O Paul et al. (1998) m³ of stillage are generated. In the whole plant,
2430 kW are consumed; therefore, to the FU, it
Description of evaluated scenarios corresponds to 11.11 kWh.
Surplus electricity is 142.14 kWh. The allocation of the
Scenario I: FCDCC - conventional fertirrigation atmospheric emissions will be based on the share of generated/
consumed electricity in the following way: 11.6% for the process,
The stillage application rate during fertirrigation is 183 m³/ha, 6.4% for the stillage concentration plant and 82.0% for surplus
calculated according to CETESB (2005). The scenario I scheme electricity.
is shown in Figure 2. The rate of application of concentrated stillage will be 9.25 m³/
The mass and energy balances were calculated using ha. The fertirrigated and non-fertirrigated areas for the FU will be
the software GateCycle® (Figure 3). The steam parameters 0.0081 e and 0.0111 hectares, respectively (Figure 6).
considered were 6.5 MPa and 480°C.
Information about environmental impacts to atmosphere from Scenario IV: SCCBA - stillage concentration and incineration
stillage application to soil is practically nonexistent; only CO2
emissions were considered according to Almeida (1983). The stillage is concentrated up to 65% to enable the combustion
of the stillage in boilers. The design of the plant was accomplished
Scenario II: ABDCC - stillage digestion using the software Aspen Plus® (Moura, 2008, Pers. Commun.).
The ashes that result from the combustion can be used in partial
The anaerobic digestion plant is composed of four internal substitution of the mineral fertilisers. The concentration plant will
circulation anaerobic reactors. have a scheme equivalent to the one in the previous scenario;
The generated biogas will be used in internal combustion however, it should have an additional evaporation effect, having
engines for electricity generation, the resulting effluent of the in total 6 effects (Figure 7).

614 www.isjbuyersguide.com INTERNATIONAL SUGAR JOURNAL 2010, VOL. 112, NO. 1343
 Use of the life cycle assessment (LCA) for comparison of the environmental performance of four alternatives…
Figure 2. Scheme of the FCDCC scenario

CHECK OUT ISJ’S WEB PACKAGES - Visit www.isjbuyersguide.com www.internationalsugarjournal.com 615

 Use of the life cycle assessment (LCA) for comparison of the environmental performance of four alternatives…

Figure 3. Steam and energy scenario of the FCDCC scenario

Figure 4. Scheme of ABDCC scenario

616 www.isjbuyersguide.com INTERNATIONAL SUGAR JOURNAL 2010, VOL. 112, NO. 1343
 Use of the life cycle assessment (LCA) for comparison of the environmental performance of four alternatives…

Figure 5. Cogeneration plant modeling results for SCDTT scenario

Figure 6. Stillage concentration plant modeling results for SCDTT scenario

CHECK OUT ISJ’S WEB PACKAGES - Visit www.isjbuyersguide.com www.internationalsugarjournal.com 617

 Use of the life cycle assessment (LCA) for comparison of the environmental performance of four alternatives…
Figure 7. Scheme of the SCCBA scenario

618 www.isjbuyersguide.com INTERNATIONAL SUGAR JOURNAL 2010, VOL. 112, NO. 1343
 Use of the life cycle assessment (LCA) for comparison of the environmental performance of four alternatives…
Figure 8. Rate of emission of CO2 in function of the electricity exported for
the public net
Figure 9. Energy inputs and outputs considered for the
evaluated scenarios for FCDCC
Figure 10. Energy inputs and outputs considered for the
evaluated scenarios for ABDCC
Results
Inventory of the consolidated life cycle
The methodology and indicators used in the LCI in this
work are described in detail in Rocha (2009). Three
evaluation categories were used for the evaluation of
the environmental loads in LCI: energy evaluation (output/
input energy relationship), GHG emissions balance
CHECK OUT ISJ’S WEB PACKAGES - Visit www.isjbuyersguide.com
in relation to the surplus electricity
exported for the public grid, and
characterisation/normalisation of the
environmental impacts in agreement
with a specific Eco-Indicator (CML 2
baseline 2000 version 2.03).
Electricity exported as a function of the
emission of CO2 equivalent
For the four appraised alternatives, the
value of the electricity exported to the
net was determined, and the emissions
of GHG released during the system
operation (emissions of the mineral
fertiliser, cogeneration, use of diesel
oil, decomposition of the stillage, etc.),
based on the characterisation model
developed by IPCC (2006).
The characterisation factors are expressed using the
global warming for a horizon of 100 years (GWP100), in
kg of CO2 equivalent/kg of emitted substance.
The substances considered in this study were CO2
(1.0 kg CO2 eq./kg), CH4 (23.0 kg CO2 eq./kg), CO (1.53
kg CO2 eq./kg) and N2O (296 kg CO2 eq./kg). The results
are shown in Figure 8.
The smallest emissions of GHG per kWh of generated
electricity correspond to the scenario ABDCC (1.92 kg
CO2 eq./kWh), followed by FCDCC (2.13 kg CO2 eq./
kWh), SCCBA (2.16 kg CO2 eq./kWh) and SCDTT (2.28
kg CO2 eq./kWh).
Evaluation of the energy flows (output/input relationship)
of the scenarios of disposition of the stillage
In the specific case of this study, the ER relation will
indicate which scenario contributes to the largest global
energy recovery from stillage before the final disposition
in the soil.
The amount of necessary ethanol to assist the
functional unit (83.3 litres) and the electricity exported to
the net were considered as exits of the system.
The outlet will be formed by the sum of the input
amounts multiplied by the respective energy coefficient
(Figures 9-12 and Table 6).
The alternative with the best energy performance was
FCDCC (20.9), followed by ABDCC (19.1) and SCDTT
(15.6). The SCCBA alternative presented an energy
balance of 4.7 which is lower than that reported in the
literature for the whole production cycle of ethanol (Macedo et al.,
2004). That is due to the use of fuel oil (9.66 kg fuel oil/m³ stillage)
as auxiliary fuel for stillage combustion.
Characterisation and normalisation of the
environmental impacts
In this stage, the potential effects caused by the environmental
loads emitted in the product system are described in terms of
www.internationalsugarjournal.com 619
 Use of the life cycle assessment (LCA) for comparison of the environmental performance of four alternatives…
Figure 11. Energy inputs and outputs considered for the
evaluated scenarios for SCDTT
Figure 12. Energy inputs and outputs considered for the
evaluated scenarios for SCCBA
Table 6. Energy balance for evaluated stillage disposal and
treatment scenarios
Scenario Renewable Fossil fuel ER
energy output energy input
(MJ/m³ stillage) (MJ/m³ stillage)
FCDCC 118.45 2477.36 20.9
ABDCC 133.17 2538.56 19.1
SCDTT 152.56 2372.96 15.6
SCCBA 544.16 2564.36 4.7
consumption of natural resources, or in impacts caused to the
ecosystem and human health, depending on the type of model
used (midpoint or endpoint indicator).
The LCIA of the four treatment alternatives and disposition of
the analysed stillage were accomplished through the use of the
method CML 2 baseline 2000, with the help of the computational
tool Simapro 7.0®.
Figure 13 displays a summary of the values of these categories
for the disposition alternatives and treatment of the analysed
stillage in percentile. Figure 14 presents a percentile comparison
of the contribution of each evaluated scenario in each impact
category.
In relation to the characterisation of the impacts (Figure 13),
the SCDTT scenario obtained the best environmental behaviour in
5 categories, FCDCC scenario was better in 2 categories, ABDCC
620 www.isjbuyersguide.com
scenario was better in 1 category and SCCBA was better
in 1 category (Table 7).
In relation to the normalisation of the impacts (Figure
14), the CML 2 baseline 2000 considers the emissions
of the equivalent substances for the year of 1995. The
normalisation factors are: ADP (6.32*10-12 kg Sb eq./
year), GWP (2.27*10-14 kg CO2 eq./year), HTP (1.67*10-14
kg 1,4-DB eq./year), FEP (4.83*10-13 1,4-DB eq./year),
MEP (1.32*10-15 kg 1,4-DB eq./year), TEP (3.79*10-12 kg
1,4-DB eq./year), POP (9.59*10-12 kg C2H4 eq./year), ACP
(3.09*10-12 kg SO2 eq./year) and ETP (7.53*10-12 PO-34 eq./
year). Therefore, in the global sum of all the categories,
dimensionless the option of SCDTT obtained the best
environmental performance (–1.14*10-11), followed by
FCDCC (–1.01*10-11), ABDCC (–9.47*10-12) and SCCBA
(–7.58*10-12).
Conclusions
Sustainability evaluation of biofuels is a multicriterial
problem. Many issues must be further investigated, such
as the ones related to fertiliser volatilisation, co-product
allocation and land use impacts. The LCA methodology
must be improved and normalised to ensure the
same approach to difficult and different issues, and to
compensate the lack of scientific understanding.
The recovery of the energy value of the stillage could
be accomplished before its final disposition. In this
scenario, the anaerobic digestion was shown to be quite
favourable in three indicators: use of the soil, emission
of GHG as a function of the generated kWh, and also
in the use of abiotic resources. The energy recovery
through combustion was shown to be environmentally
unfavourable due to the intensive use of auxiliary fuel
(fuel oil), which turned it into an unfavourable scenario
from the energy point of view.
The application of LCA for evaluation of the
environmental impacts caused by the stillage does
not allow a complete analysis, because associated
uncertainties exist about the lixiviation and volatilisation
of the stillage applied to the soil. Besides, ions in
the stillage, mainly potassium, phosphorus (phosphate)
and the nitrogen compounds can be lixiviated for the
water table. The great obstacle in relation to the quantification
of these impacts is the nonexistence of reliable information
on what really happens with the stillage when it is applied to
the soil.
Acknowledgement
We wish to thank the Brazilian National Research and Development
Council (CNPq), the Research Support Foundation of the State
of Minas Gerais (FAPEMIG) and the Coordinating Body for the
Improvement of Postgraduate Studies in Higher Education
(CAPES) for the funding of Research and Development projects,
the support of graduate students and the production grants that
allowed the accomplishment of the research projects whose
results are included in this paper.
INTERNATIONAL SUGAR JOURNAL 2010, VOL. 112, NO. 1343
 Use of the life cycle assessment (LCA) for comparison of the environmental performance of four alternatives…

Figure 13. Characterisation of the environmental impacts of the considered References

scenarios using the Eco-Indicator CML 2 baseline 2000
Almeida, M.T. (1983) Decomposição
da vinhaça incorporação ao solo
(evolução de CO2 e formação de
biomassa microbiana) e destino
da complementação nitrogenada.
Dissertação (Mestrado em Agronomia),
Escola Superior de Agricultura Luiz de
Queiroz, Universidade de São Paulo,
Piracicaba, 1983, 75 p.
Alves, M.E. (2002) Atributos
mineralógicos e eletroquímicos,
adsorção e dessorção de sulfato em
solos paulistas. Tese de Doutorado.
Universidade de São Paulo. Escola
Superior de Agricultura Luiz de Queiroz,
Figure 14. Percentile comparison of the contribution of each evaluated scenario in 2002, 169 p.
each impact category Bloesch, P.M, Rayment, G.E.
and Pulsford, J.S. (1997) Regional
total phosphorus budgets for sugar
production in Queensland. Proc. Aust.
Soc. Sugar Cane Technol. 19: 213-220.
CETESB. (2005) Companhia de
tecnologia de saneamento ambiental.
Norma Técnica CETESB - P4.231.
Vinhaça - Critérios e Procedimentos
para Aplicação no Solo Agrícola
jan./2005. 17 p.
Crutzen, P.J., Mosier, A.R., Smith,
K.A. and Winiwarter, W. (2008) N2O
release from agrobiofuel production
negates global warming reduction by
replacing fossil fuels. Atmos. Chem.
Phys. 8(2): 389-395.
Elia Neto, A. and Nakahodo, T.
(1995) Resíduos sólidos da agroindústria
sucroalcooleira - revisão - Projeto n°
9100873 RT 561-92/93 CTC - Centro de
Tecnologia Copersucar, Copersucar, Piracicaba, SP, p. 60.
†
Paper presented at the XXVIIth Congress of the Hassuani, S.J., Leal, M.R.L.V. and Macedo, I.C. (2005) Biomass power
International Society of Sugar Cane Technologists, generation: sugar cane bagasse and trash. Piracicaba: PNUD-CTC. Série
Veracruz, Mexico, March 2010 and published here Caminhos para a Sustentabilidade.
with the agreement of the Society. IPCC (2006) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Guidelines

Table 7. Characterisation of the environmental impacts of the considered scenarios

Impacts categories Unit FCDCC ABDCC SCDTT SCCBA

ADP kg Sb eq. –0.0455 –0.0551 –0.0171 0.1430
GWP kg CO2 eq. –698.0 –703.0 –749.0 –648.0
ODP kg CFC-11 eq. 0 0 0 0
HTP kg 1,4-DB eq. 66.9 66.9 61.3 66.7
FEP kg 1,4-DB eq. 0.0203 0.0204 0.0185 0.0234
MEP kg 1,4-DB eq. 36.0 38.1 33.1 43.2
TEP kg 1,4-DB eq. 0.00031 0.00523 0.00027 0.00373
POP kg C2H2 –0.00419 0.00337 –0.00264 0.00283
ACP kg SO2 eq. 0.0103 0.1950 0.0556 0.1670
-
ETP kg PO43 eq. 0.6430 0.6700 0.5970 0.5940

CHECK OUT ISJ’S WEB PACKAGES - Visit www.isjbuyersguide.com www.internationalsugarjournal.com 621

 Use of the life cycle assessment (LCA) for comparison of the environmental performance of four alternatives…
for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Volume 4: Agriculture, forestry
and other land use. Chapter 11: N2O Emissions from managed soils, and
CO2 emissions from lime and urea application. http://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.
or.jp/public/2006gl/pdf/4_Volume4/V4_11_Ch11_N2O&CO2.pdf
(Accessed: 14 August 2009).
ISO International Organisation for Standardisation. ISO series (1997;
1998; 1999 and 2000). Environmental management - life cycle assessment
- principles and framework, ISO 14040; Goal and scope definition and life
cycle inventory analysis, ISO 14041; Life cycle impact assessment, ISO
14042; and Life cycle interpretation, ISO 14043 (ISO, Geneva).
Macedo, I.C., Leal, M.R.L.V. and da Silva, J.E.A.R. (2004) Balanço
das emissões de gases do efeito estufa na produção e no uso do etanol
no Brasil. Secretaria do Meio Ambiente, Governo de São Paulo. Abril de
2004. 19 pg. + anexos.
Macedo, I.C., Seabra, J.E.A and Silva, J.E.A.R. (2008) Greenhouse
gases emissions in the production and use of ethanol from sugarcane in
Brazil: The 2005/2006 averages and a prediction for 2020. Biomass and
Bioenergy 32(7): 582-595.
Malça, J. and Freire, F. (2006) Renewability and life-cycle energy
efficiency of bioethanol and bio-ethyl tertiary butyl ether (bioETBE):
Assessing the implications of allocation. Energy 31(15): 3362-3380.
Mohana, S., Acharya, B.K. and Madamwar, D. (2009) Distillery spent
wash: Treatment technologies and potential applications. Journal of
Hazardous Materials 163(1): 12-25.
Navarro, A.R., Sepúlveda, M. and Rubio, M.C. (2000) Bio-concentration
of vinasse from alcoholic fermentation of sugar cane molasses. Waste
622 www.isjbuyersguide.com
Management, 20(7): 581-585.
Ometto, A.R. (2005) Avaliação do Ciclo de Vida do Álcool Etílico
Hidratado Combustível pelos Métodos EDIP, Exergia, e Emergia. Tese
(Doutorado em Engenharia Sanitária). Escola de Engenharia de São
Carlos, Universidade de São Paulo, São Carlos, 2005, 209 p.
Pant, D. and Adholeya, A. (2007) Biological approaches for treatment
of distillery wastewater: A review. Bioresource Technology 98(12): 2321-
2334.
Parnaudeau, V., Condom, N., Oliver, R., Cazevieille, P. and Recous,
S. (2008) Vinasse organic matter quality and mineralisation potential as
influenced by raw material, fermentation and concentration processes.
Bioresource Technology 99(6): 1553-1562.
Paul, J.P., Kwong, K.F.K. and Deville, J. (1998) Potassium leaching
in soils under rainfed sugar cane in Mauritius. Food and Agricultural
Research Council. AMAS 1998, Réduit, Mauritius, 71-74.
Patel, N. (2000) Studies on the Combustion and Gasification of
Concentrated Distillery Effluent. Thesis (Doctor of Philosophy). Faculty
of Engineering of Bagalore. Indian Institute of Science. Bangalore, 2000,
229 p.
Penatti, C.P. and Donzelli, J.L. (2000) Uso da Vinhaça na Lavoura de
Cana-de-açúcar. CTC - Centro de Tecnologia Copersucar, Copersucar,
Piracicaba, SP, 24 p.
Renouf, M.A., Wegener, M.K. and Nielsen, L.K. (2008) An environmental
life cycle assessment comparing Australian sugarcane with US corn and
UK sugar beet as producers of sugars for fermentation. Biomass and
Bioenergy 32(12): 1144-1155.
Rocha, M.H. (2009) Uso da Análise do Ciclo de Vida para a
Comparação do Desempenho Ambiental de Quatro Alternativas
para Tratamento da vinhaça. Dissertação (Mestrado em Engenharia
Mecânica), Instituto de Engenharia Mecânica, Universidade Federal de
Itajubá, 254 f., 2009.
Rocha, M.H., Lora, E.E.S. and Venturini, O.J. (2008). Life cycle analysis
of different alternatives for the treatment and disposal of ethanol vinasse.
Sugar Industry/Zuckerindustrie 133(2): 88-93.
Rocha, M.H., Lora, E.E.S. and Venturini, O.J. (2007) Life cycle analysis
of different alternatives for the treatment and disposal of ethanol vinasse.
Proc. Int. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol. 26: 1075-1081.
Satyawali, Y. and Balakrishnan, M. (2008)Wastewater treatment in
molasses-based alcohol distilleries for COD and color removal: A review.
Journal of Environmental Management 86(3): 481-497.
UNICA (2008) União da Indústria de Cana-de-açúcar. Dados e
Cotações - Estatísticas. See also: < http://www.unica.com.br/
dadosCotacao/estatistica/>.
Wilkie, A.C., Riedesel, K.J. and Owens, J.M. (2000) Stillage
characterisation and anaerobic treatment of ethanol stillage from
conventional and cellulosic feedstocks. Biomass and Bioenergy 19(2):
63-102.
Willington, I.P. and Marten, G.G. (1982) Options for handling stillage
waste from sugar-based fuel ethanol production. Resources and
Conservation 8(2): 111-129.
INTERNATIONAL SUGAR JOURNAL 2010, VOL. 112, NO. 1343