Herbert, 2016

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 59 (2016) 292308
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rser
Quantifying environmental performance of biomass energy

G.M. Joselin Herbert n, A. Unni Krishnan
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Noorul Islam University, Kumaracoil, Thackalay 629180, India
art ic l e i nf o
a b s t r a c t
Article history:
Received 28 August 2014
Received in revised form
22 December 2015
Accepted 27 December 2015
Available online 21 January 2016
The world needs an enormous amount of energy to maintain the future economic developments. India
has facile ways to overcome the immediate demand on energy supply by renewable energy resources. It
has a huge potential of biomass resources to reduce the dependence on fossil fuels and to produce
electrical and heat energy. The biomass energy can contributes to social and economic development. It
has been identied as an alternative for the future energy demand in India. As part of furthering the
development of biomass technology, it is essential to understand the environmental merits and demerits
of biomass. It also aims to increase the use of biomass energy for domestic purposes. The interest behind
the review is boosted by the rapid development of biomass conversion techniques and continual increase
of biomass energy generation. It has motivated the authors to collect the quintessential literature of
environmental aspects of biomass energy. The objective of the research work is to quantify and focuses
the environmental performance of biomass energy. It also deals with the environment monitoring and
control, pricing, standard and regulations of the bio-energy for the future development.
& 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords:
Environmental aspects
Biomass energy
Conversion techniques
Monitoring
Control and emission
Contents
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Biomass scenario . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Positive aspects of biomass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.1.
Merits of biomass over fossil fuels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2.
Benets of bio-waste . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.3.
Merits of recycling of biomass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.4.
Biomass conversion emission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.5.
Dry wood biomass. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.6.
Benets of agricultural plantations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.7.
Alternative fuels. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.8.
Other applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Negative aspects of biomass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.1.
Land and water degradations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.2.
Solid bio-waste disposals problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.3.
Impacts of agriculture practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.4.
Impacts of biomass combustion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.5.
Demerits of alternative fuels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Environmental monitoring and control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Biomass conversion technologies, process and conversion products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Policy and regulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Corresponding author. Tel.: 91 4651268789.

E-mail address: joselindev@yahoo.co.in (G.M. Joselin Herbert).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.12.254
1364-0321/& 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
293
293
294
295
295
295
295
296
297
297
298
298
298
299
299
300
301
302
303
303
G.M. Joselin Herbert, A. Unni Krishnan / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 59 (2016) 292308
293
8. Bio-economic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303
9. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 304
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305
1. Introduction
The electrical form of energy has become virtually important
for human activities [1]. Energy is a critical input for socioeconomic development. The renewable energy resources are
indigenous, non-polluting and virtually inexhaustible [2]. Over the
last 50 years, the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has increased by 30% and other Green House Gas (GHG)
has also been increased alarmingly. As a result, the average surface
temperature of the earth has increased by about 0.6 C over last
100 years due to burning of fossil fuels. Over the next 20 years,
global warming is expected to increase by 0.2 C per decade. The
deforestation and land use pattern contribute to 15% of carbon
emission every year. The adverse effect leads to increase the climate change fourfold between the year 1980 and 2010. In 2003,
around 0.7 lakh deaths have occurred in Europe due to the diseases caused by rising temperatures [3]. As per world health
organizations study in the European region, the premature death
caused by air pollution was about 6 lakhs in the year 2010. The
indoor air pollution also resulted an additional premature death of
about 1.17 lakh which is ve times more than that in the developed countries [4].
Bell and Davis reassessed the smog from combustion of coal in
London. In 1952, more than 12,000 deaths have been reported due
to the rigorous smog incident [5]. Main et al. evaluated the impact
of particulate emissions and ambient Suspended Particulate Matters (SPM) levels from a coal red steam power plant in the
upwind and downwind directions. The result indicated that in the
upwind direction the ground level SPM concentration was about
4% of the total downwind SPM concentrations [6].The energy
demand and economic growth are highly related to carbon emissions in developing countries. According to the Kyoto Protocol the
fossil fuels account for more than two-thirds of the GHG emissions. The developed countries were responsible for over 50% of
carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions [7].
Fossil fuels in the US provide for more than 85% of the all the
energy consumed and are responsible for 99% of the CO2 emissions
[8]. India's per capita emissions will be well below that of a
developed countrys average for the next decade or two [9]. Arora
et al. projected CO2 emissions by highway vehicles in India. By
2040, the number of highway vehicles in India would have been
206309 million. The corresponding annual CO2 emissions are
projected to be 1.22.2 billion metric tons [10]. Brimblecombe
studied the air pollution and their effects and identied the poor
air quality which is responsible for the adverse health effects even
in ancient Greece and during the period of the Roman Empire [11].
Balaras et al. analyzed the environmental impact of European
apartment buildings. The value of air borne emissions such as CO2,
CO, NOx, SO2 and CH4 from buildings are 663.3 t, 0.6 t, 1.1 t, 3.8 t
and 0.02 t respectively [12]. Fossil fuels, when burnt, produce a
large amount of GHG i.e. CO2 in the atmosphere. These GHGs trap
sunlight and cause planet to warm. The burning of coal and oil
increases the temperature and causes global warming [13]. Global
warming and acidication potentials are estimated in terms of CO2
and SO2 equivalents [14].
Uwe Remme et al. analyzed and examined the potential technology pathways to reduce CO2 emission in India. The aim is to
reduce 50% of the global energy based CO2 emissions by 2050
compared to 2005 levels. In 2007, the CO2 emissions in India,
China and the United States of America (U.S.A) were 1.34 Gt,
6.25 Gt and 5.92 Gt respectively. Indias CO2 emission was much
lower than that of China and the U.S.A [15]. With the fossil fuels
gradually depleting and expiry, we are compelled to think in terms
of searching for and developing alternative sources of energy.
Biomass is one of the most abundant resources in the world [1]. To
overcome the depletion of fossil fuel, the world is considering new
effective biomass crops technologies for energy purposes. Behind
the coal and oil biomass is the third largest energy resource in the
world [16]. It can make a contribution in all sectors. One billion
tons of residues of biomass were also used for biofuels production.
It is providing nearly 10% of total CO2 emission reduction [17].
Bioenergy is the energy which is contained inside plants and
animals. It reduces dependency on fossil fuels. Biomass energy, for
the most part, creates no harmful CO2emissions and receives tax
credit from the US government and it is good for the environment
[18]. Dai et al. mentioned that biomass energy reduces GHG
emissions signicantly [19]. Studies suggest that bio-fuels reduce
GHG up to 65% [13].
Vandamme et al. explained implications of the use of biomass
as a source for energy [20]. Van Swaaij et al. presented about
biomass energy in the World Conference held in Rome. The
remarkable activities such as research and development need for
better implementation and use of biomass [21]. Biomass technologies are needed to substantially reduce emissions in Indian
power [11]. It can play an important role in energy if the available
resources are utilized in a sustainable way [7]. Research and
development programs need to be comprehensively studied
because a large number of environmental factors are involved in
the biomass energy production in developing countries [22]. The
objectives of the study are to know the following aspects such as:
biomass scenario, use of biomass energy, development of biomass
conversion techniques, the positive and negative aspects of biomass energy, the control of biomass emission, methods and
approaches for environmental monitoring, policy, standard, regulations and economic of bio-energy development. This could
provide positive effects on the swift development of biomass
power projects and it also useful for the researchers and the
experts in the area of bio-energy.
2. Biomass scenario
The global and Indian biomass energy status has been studied
to identify the prospects of bio-energy as depicted below:
According to Retka Schill of International Energy Agency, the top
countries such as Brazil, the U.S.A and India are utilizing all sources
of biomass for energy. The U.S.A and India each had a 16% share of
global industrial biomass use for energy [23]. The size of biomass
power plant is below 50 MW, where as the size of coal-red plant
is in the range of 1001000 MW [24]. Vakkilainen et al. analyzed
the global primary energy supply for the year 2009. The global
biomass based energy supply accounted for 10.22% (52 EJ) of the
global total primary energy supply (509 EJ) in 2009. The global
primary energy supply in 2009 from oil, natural gas, nuclear,
hydropower, biomass, coal and others was 171 EJ, 106 EJ, 29 EJ,
12 EJ, 52 EJ, 138 EJ and 1 EJ respectively [25]. Reddy et al. edited
with prospects and challenges of energy in New York. A majority
of the people used biomass fuels (wood, animal dung and crop
294
residues) in the developing countries [26]. A total of 280 TWh of

bio-energy electricity, i.e. 1.5% of world electricity generation, was
generated globally in 2010 [27]. Biomass still provides about 1.25
billion tons of oil equivalent (btoe) or about 14% of the worlds
annual energy [17]. The USA generates 2% of heat energy from
wood [28] and obtains about 4% of its energy from biomass [16].
The food and agricultural organization estimated that about
60% of the world's total wood had been used for energy purposes
till 2010. There are around 4000 industrial anaerobic digesters in
operation in the world. The European Environmental Agency
estimated that the European Union (EU) primary energy requirement would be at 1.8 billion toe in 2020 out of which 13% or 236
million toe would come from biomass contribution. In Flanders,
there are 36 agro-industrial digester plants in operation with1.64
million tones of wet biomass digested per year. It provides
61.7 MW of power to the grid [20]. Josef Spitzer presented the road
maps for bio energy technology. The bio energy share in total
electricity generation will increase from 1.5% in 2010 to 7.5% in
2050. The Biomass demand for heat and power reaches 57 billion
tons in 2050. It shows that bio energy has a signicant scope to
make a greater contribution to secure a sustainable energy provision [17]. Haberl et al. (2011) analyzed the factors which affect
the future global bio-energy production from agricultural lands by
the year 2050 using biomass balance model. The future bio-energy
production depends on diets, agricultural yields, cropland expansion, bio-fuels supply provision, bio-energy production and climate change and soil fertility management. They also evaluate
possible impacts of changes in temperature, precipitation, and
elevated CO2 on agricultural yields using the dynamic global
vegetation model [29]. Richard Arthur et al. explained the biogas
potential and its implications in Ghana. It has established a little
over 100 biogas plants and has the technical potential of constructing about 278,000 biogas plants. Ghana has vast biomass
organic waste potential for biogas production to replace wood fuel
and fossil fuel [30]. Out of the 230 EJ (Exa Joules) of estimated
global primary energy, 56 EJ, nearly one-fourth of the global primary energy is used for agricultural practices [16]. Voegele presented bio-energy capacity for the selected countries. The bioenergy production capacity in 2012 from the U.S.A, China, India
and the OECD countries was 12.1 GW, 8 GW, 4.2 GW and 78 TWh
respectively. In the U.S.A, the predicted total renewable capacity
for the year 2018 will be 247 GW. In China, India and the OECD
countries (U.S.A, Canada, Mexico and Chile), the predicted bioenergy power capacity will be increased to 25 GW, 6 GW and 99
TWh respectively in the year 2018. It thus shows that the bioenergy capacity can provide the expected energy growth rate [31].
The biomass contributes to approximately 14% of the global total
energy requirement [1].
Anselmo Filho and Badr assessed the energy potentials of the
main biomass resources such as sugarcane and bamboo in the
northeastern region of Brazil. The annual energy potential from
sugarcane bamboo and municipal solid waste is 40.57 TW h,
30.8 TW h and 16.7 TW h respectively. The states with the greatest
potential for generating electricity from that biomass resource are
Alagoas, Pernambuco, Bahia and Paraba, with annual potentials of
68.2, 39.5, 12.4 and 9.3 PJ, respectively [32]. About 35% of the total
energy consumed in Indonesia is from biomass [22]. Sweden is
implementing initiatives to increase the use of biomass energy. It
obtains about 13% of its energy from biomass [16]. Forsell et al.
evaluated the future use of biomass sources by using energy system models to identify biomass sources in Sweden and France. The
biomass sources could provide 250 PJ and 1470 PJ of bio-energy in
Sweden and France respectively by 2050 [33]. The technically
feasible potential for bagasse cogeneration is estimated to be
around 5 GW. Another 39 GW (30% efciency, 60% load factor) can
be obtained from the other agricultural and plantation residues

[15].
Banwari and Reddy studied the biomass gasier program in
India. The biomass gasication program is governed by the Ministry of Non-Conventional Energy Sources (MNES) renamed as
Ministry of New and Renewable Energy Sources. The MNES launched an ambitious research, development and demonstration
program on biomass gasier in early 1986. The use of small gasier
systems for village electrication, our grinding, and drinking
water pumping have been technically successful in a few sites in
Gujarat, Haryana, Karnataka, and Uttar Pradesh. The Indian
renewable energy development agency provides nancial support
to the use of biomass gasier in India [34]. The potential of agricultural residues in India is 145 Mt. The principal total biomass
potential in India is estimated to be around 6570 GW [11]. In
India, the total development of grid interactive biomass power is
20 MW which is 1.83% of the total development of Grid Interactive
Renewable Power (GIRP) (1092.70 MW) in 20132014. The targets
of GIRP and biomass power are 4325 MW and 105 MW respectively. The cumulative achievement of the off-grid power both
from biomass (non-bagasse) cogeneration and biomass gasier is
654.08 MW as on 30-09-2013. The number of cumulative family
biogas plant installed in India as on 30-09-2013 is 4,683,000. A
cumulative achievement of GIRP from renewable sources was
29,464.51 MW as on 30-09-2013 [35].
Chauhan has performed biomass resources assessment for
power generation in India. It generates over 370 million tonnes of
biomass every year. It has been estimated that about 17 GW of
power can be generated through cogeneration, combustion and
gasication routes from the available biomass. Being an agricultural state, Haryana has a huge potential of biomass availability
in the form of crop residue and saw dust. In the agricultural sector,
a total 24.697 Mt y 1 of residue is generated, of which 71% is
consumed in various domestic and commercial activities within
the state. While in agro based industrial sector, a total of
646 kt y 1 of sawdust is generated, of which only 6.65% is consumed in the state. Of the total generated biomass in the state,
45.51% is calculated as basic surplus, 37.48% as productive surplus
and 34.10% as net surplus. The power generation potentials from
all these three categories of surplus biomass are 1.499 GW,
1.227 GW and 1.120 GW respectively [36]. Tamil Nadu's rst
20 MW capacity biomass plant is operating at Toothukkudi. The
main fuel used is juliora and also all types of agro wastes like
pulse stalk, cotton stalk, cane trash, coconut shells etc with a
requirement of about 1.50 lakh tones per annum. The plant has
already supplied 50.52 million units of power to state grid [37].
There is need for large-scale biomass demonstration power systems in different parts of India [38]. Since the contribution and
potential of biomass energy are appreciable, it is further decided to
study the positive and negative aspects of biomass.
3. Positive aspects of biomass

The positive aspects of biomass are narrated as follows: Biomass is an effective renewable energy source because the growth
of new plants and trees replenishes the supply [1]. Since most of
the sources like manure, corn, switch grass, soya beans, waste
from crops and plants are renewable, these crops can be replanted
again and again continuously [13]. It would help to reduce GHG
emissions which may affect the climate change, provide environmental sustainability, improve health, increase agricultural productivity and also reduce the workload of women in households.
The biogas technology is a practicable one and it is promising,
reliable and successful also provider of a clean alternate energy
globally [30].
3.2. Benets of bio-waste
Table 1
Greenhouse gas emission reductions.
Fuel
Fuel wood
Charcoal
LPG
Kerosene
Total
295
Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions

(kg CO2 equiv)
CO2
CH4
N2O
CO
TNMOC
0
0
22.21
16.69
38.90
243.75
43.36
0.01
0.04
287.16
150.17
10.54
0.73
0.30
161.74
216.39
53.48
0.22
0.19
270.28
152.78
68.65
1.35
0.82
223.60
Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions is 981.68 kg CO2 Equiv. per year [42].
3.1. Merits of biomass over fossil fuels

A brief comparison between biomass and fossil fuel is made:
plant based fuels that come from renewable source can be grown
anywhere and have lower carbon emissions as compared with
fossil fuels [13]. Biomass energy is not entirely clean. Some GHG
are still produced; although the levels of these gases are far less
than those produced by fossil fuels [1]. The locally grown crops
have reduced the nation's dependence on fossil fuels [13]. Sioux
Trail and Prior Lake have collected 50,000 t/year of biomass fuels
for the Shakopee Tribes Biomass Power Project. The reduced
emission of CO2 and SO2 were 1,800,000 t/year and 500 t/year
respectively compared with the fully controlled coal plant emissions [39]. Shaikh Rashedur Rahman et al. explained the merits
and demerits of biomass energy. The biomass fuels have relatively
a clean combustion when compared with the fossil fuels [1]. Coring biomass with coal will be an important option to achieve
short-term emission reductions, and make use of standing assets
[27].
The VGB power tech (2008) explained the advantages and
limitations of biomass co-combustion with fossil fuel red power
plant. It reduces NOx and SOx emission into environment because
biomass fuel contains less content of N and S than coal. The
unburnt carbon in biomass ash is lower because of its higher
content of volatile matter [40]. Several municipalities have started
to produce biogas from household refuse and agricultural waste
for transportation purpose. It limits the emissions produced by
urban public transport vehicles operated by petrol [41]. The sugar
factory may contribute to the reduction of GHG emissions by
replacing fossil fueled thermal power plants with biomasspowered plants. Compared with oil and coal fuels, biomass has
much lower sulfur content. This reduces SO2 emissions and lowers
the risk of soil and water acidication. The GHG emission reductions are given in the Table 1.
It shows that the green house reductions by the combustion of
fuel wood are higher than the other types of fuels such as charcoal,
liquid petroleum gas and kerosene. The total reduction of GHG
emission was 981.68 kg CO2 equiv. per year. The 100 kWe biomass
generating system in the United Kingdom (UK) will lead to a CO2
emission reduction of around 600 t per unit each year; this is
compared with emissions from fossil fuel red heat and electricity
production. This is a signicant saving which will greatly benet
the environment by reducing the release of CO2 and GHGs, into the
atmosphere. The total GHG mitigation by implementing the Dan
Chang bio-energy (bagasse-red) project in Thailand by combustion process is expected around 278,610 t of CO2 equivalent per
year [42]. It can signicantly reduce net carbon emissions when
compared with fossil fuels. For this reason, sustainable biomass
fuel is considered to be a clean development mechanism for the
reducing GHG emissions [16].
The merits of energy recovered from bio-waste are given

below: Case Kaunas et al. compared the energy and material
recovery of Household Waste Management (HWM) from the
environmental point of view. The results suggest that the energy
recovery from bio-waste could be a better recommendable HWM
than the material recovery from households waste [43]. Pavlas
et al. presented and discussed the alternative plans for waste
management with respect to negative attitudes to the constructions of new wastes to energy plants [44]. Mishra et al. presented
the biological reclamation of y ash by forest plantation near
Chachai (Madhya Pradesh). After six years of plantation of twelve
species of growing plants ultimately stabilize the y ash and
reduced the environmental pollution due to y ash [45].
3.3. Merits of recycling of biomass
Recycling helps to reduces energy usages, consumption of fresh
raw materials, air pollution, water pollution and GHG emissions. It
helps in protecting the environment in the most balanced manner.
It also helps in conserving the important natural resources such as
wood, and ensures its optimum use [46]. In the UK, biomass fuels
are made from the recycled chicken droppings. In the USA and
Russia, there are plentiful forests for lumber to be used in the
production of biomass energy [18]. Seal described the importance
of the animal waste as a source of biomass energy generation. In
China and India, the numbers of dairy animals are large. The
excreta of dairy animals are a potential resource to provide a
considerable amount of energy of the total energy requirement
[47]. The understanding of recycling of biomass product is essentially required the mutual existence of human beings and good
environment [46].
3.4. Biomass conversion emission
The advanced useful techniques to reduce the emission are
described as follows: The UN environmental programme (2009)
explained a compendium of biomass technologies to convert the
waste agricultural biomass into useful energy. It will be used to
identify environmentally sound technologies for converting cellulosic biomass into energy [42]. Huang et al. (2013) focused on
the biomass fueled trigeneration system integrated with organic
Rankine cycle. It offers extremely low CO2 emission. The ash
content and moisture content of biomasss ranges from 0.57 to
14.26% and 10.6 to 33.51% respectively [48]. Alanne and Saari
estimated the environmental burdens of residential energy supply
systems. The operation of a heating system produces a major part
of environmental burdens. Micro-cogeneration provided a viable
alternative for the energy supply when considered in terms of
water and abiotic resources consumption. Micro cogeneration may
decrease the annual use of abiotic resources and water to some
extent [14]. Srirangan et al. reviewed the recent development of
biomass for clean energy production. The clean energy can be
produced by the use of biomass feed stock. The microbial conversion systems can offer more effective ways to generate energy
products with minimum pollutants [49]. Chen et al. investigated
the benets of the torrefaction of pulverized biomass. The torrecation process promoted the heating value and efciency of the
processed biomass [50]. Moreno et al. studied the drying characteristics of forest biomass (Pinus radiate) particles in southern
Chile. When it is dried at temperatures about 1878 C, leads to a
change in their mass due to moisture loss. The high drying temperature of biomass lowers the specic energy consumption [51].
Yazan et al. analyzed the effect of three spatial variables (cultivation area size, land dispersion, and accessibility to cultivation
296
areas) on the Environmental Performance (EP) of energy balance

Bioenergy Production Chains (BPCs). An enterprise inputoutput
model is used as a planning tool to evaluate the BPCs performance.
The results show that higher land dispersion degree and less
accessibility levels reduce the EP of the BPCs. The energy-balanced
BPCs chain reduces the negative impacts on environment caused
by fossil energy use in the processes of the BPC [52]. Modolo
Ferreira et al. suggested that the ashes produced from combustion
of forest biomass residues in uidized bed can be used as aggregate in making mortar formation [53]. Mcllveen-Wright et al.
proposed a technical analysis on large scale biomass combustion
plants in the UK. The efcient conversion of biomass fuel can
reduce CO2 emission. The large coal red biomass combustion
emits less emission per kWh than the small bubbling uidised bed
systems [54]. Fuels that have been extracted from plants and crops
are known as bio-fuels. Biofuels are produced from wheat, corn,
soya beans and sugarcane and they are sustainable. The Forssan
Energia power plant was the rst co-generation power plant in
Finland, which used 100% wood as fuel [55]. The efciency of
conventional power plant is 35%. The efciency of cogeneration
plant can reach 90% or more [20].
The 30 MW commercial cogeneration systems in Spain produce
electricity from waste products of olive oil using incineration
technology [42]. The rst large-scale Holsworthy biogas plant in
UK has the capacity to process 146,000 t per annum of cattle, pig
and poultry manure plus organic food waste (20%) [56]. The
Brompton mill commercial cogeneration plant in Canada produced
100 MW of electricity from paper mill sludge, bark and other wood
residues using combustion technology. The environmental benets of this cogeneration plant include an annual reduction in GHG
equivalent to removing 18,000 vehicles from the road, reduction in
future land lling of paper mill sludge, particle waste, reduction in
the risk of leachate contamination as a result of reduced land
lling of bark, reduction in fossil fuel consumption and an overall
improvement in air quality. The TSerong cogeneration plant in
Malaysia produces electricity and heat from rice husk residue by
combustion technology. It is estimated that the net GHG emission
reduction resulting from the process is equivalent to 7900 t of CO2
[42]. The cogeneration of heat and electricity by biomass based
system can achieve a low primary energy use and reduces CO2
emissions [57].
Mamphweli et al. produced biogas from biomass material
received from saw mill operation using gasication technology.
The average gas composition was found to be 30% H2, 2.7% CH4,
18.4% CO, 19% CO2and 30% N and other inert gases. The heating
value of combustible gases in the produced bio gas was found to
be 6.4 MJ/Nm3. It is more attractive [58]. Ozgoli et al. considered
the environmental aspects of biomass gasication (solid oxide fuel
cell systems / gas turbine) hybrid power generation systems. The
biomass wood chips and bagasse are used as fuels. These systems
reduce emission considerably. The humidied air is admitted to
the gasication system. This approach reduces carbon emissions
and toxic gases like CO, S and H2S, equal to 6.66% and
9.61 10 3 t per year respectively. It also increases the overall
efciency of the system [59]. Wang et al. proposed a multi
objective, mixed-integer nonlinear programming model for the
superstructure optimization of hydrocarbon bioreneries via
gasication pathway under environmental criteria. The optimal
solution reveals that the high temperature gasication, direct
cooling, internal hydrogen production and cobalt catalysis have
the best environmental performances [60].
A 10 m3 biodegradable waste based biogas plant was installed
in the Tamil Nadu Agricultural University. It is an effective tool to
serve the power supply needs of the institution [61]. A 20 kW
Hosahalli biomass gasier plant was installed in Karnataka village
to meet all the rural electricity needs in an environmentally
sustainable manner. The average percentage of diesel saved due to

duel fuel (diesel and biomass) mode was 40.54% l/kW h [38]. Kalia
and Singh explained the operating experience of an 85 m3 oating
drum biogas plant installed at the dairy farm of Himachal Pradesh
Agricultural University, Palampur, to meet the energy needs of
cooking needs in the hostel mess and for dairy farm requirements.
This gas was just sufcient to meet 73% (9466 MJ/month) and 53%
(7019 MJ/month) of the energy needs for cooking meals in the
hostel alone in the summer and winter months, respectively [62].
Grierson et al. demonstrated the environmental impact of
micro alge biomass for pyrolysis process. The more efcient drying
of the harvested microalgae biomass for pyrolysis process is
essential levers for reducing the environmental impact [63]. The
brief positive environmental impacts of biogas plants are as follows: it is renewable, non-polluting, reduces landlls, cheaper
technology, creates job opportunities, little capital investment and
reduces green house effect. Remote locations receive off grid
electric power supplies from these plants [64]. The environmentally better technologies can be identied from the compendium
of biomass conversion system. The environmental advantages of
various biomass conversion systems such as trigeneration,
microcogeneration, microbial conversion, torrefaction, cogeneration and combustion technology with gasication process are
reviewed in this section. It will be useful for the selection of suitable techniques for bio-energy conversion process.
3.5. Dry wood biomass
The positive aspects of dry wood are described as below:
Dodoo et al. studied the primary energy use and carbon footprint
of wood-frame conventional and passive houses with biomassbased energy supply. The wood frame passive house design
reduces the primary energy use CO2 emission and climate impact
of the built environment [65]. Haque and Somerville estimated the
environmental impact of biomass dryer. The GHG emissions have
been estimated for drying biomass. The total Global Warming
Potential (GWP) of biomass drying process as expressed in CO2
equivalent units is 9.3 kg/ton of oven-dry biomass using dry wood
waste as fuel for a rotary drum dryer. The considerable reduction
in potential of CO2 emission was identied for dry wood power
station, compared with black coal-red power plant [66]. Gustavsson and Sathre analyzed the energy use and the CO2 emission
of wood and concrete building materials. The wood recovered by
demolition of building and wood by products substituted in the
place of fossil fuels considerably lower energy use and CO2 emission. The use of wood for construction instead of concrete materials would be an effective way of reducing fossil fuel consumption
and CO2 emission to the atmosphere [67].
Gustavsson et al. analyzed the primary energy consumption
and the CO2emission of an eight-storey wood-framed apartment
building. The building operation and heating system strongly
inuences the primary energy use and CO2 emission. The use of
wood products and its residue instead of fossil fuels can signicantly reduce the emission of CO2 [57]. Kong et al. investigated
the effect of waste wrapping paper ber with biomass pellets
made from wood sawdust. The results indicated that the addition
of waste wrapping paper ber and densied process decrease the
emission of semi-smoke. The compression of waste wrapping
paper ber /waste wood saw dust in a mass ratio of 1/3 under
6 MPa pressure is an effective way for preparing CO2 neutral biofuel from wood sawdust [68]. Almost 70% of the people living in
developing countries are using wood or charcoal to heat and cook
their dwellings and food respectively [69]. The CO2 emission in the
atmosphere can be reduced by the use of dry wood waste as fuel,
wood for construction and cogeneration (electricity and heat) by
biomass.
3.6. Benets of agricultural plantations

The merits of agricultural plantations such as mulberry, corn,
microalgae, willow biomass, herbaeas plants and straw and
eucalyptus are reviewed as follows: Lu et al. presented the role of
marginal agricultural land-based mulberry planting in biomass
energy production in China. Mulberry biomass produced more
than 6000 t of cocoons in 2005. It also produced huge amounts of
woody biomass through annual pruning. The annual average dry
matter of pruned mulberry biomass is about 17.022.5 t/ha. It is
high when compared with the annual biomass growth of many
fast growing trees and perennial herbaceous energy crops. Mulberry prunings for fuel wood exceed household energy requirements and also help reduce GHG emissions to the atmosphere,
conserve forests and promote biodiversity [69].
Beach et al. examined the impact of biodegradable polymer
resin in USA. The substitution of cornstarch-based biodegradable
polymer resins for petroleum-based plastic materials and resins
will ostensibly improve the environmental quality and helping
with waste management [70]. Handler et al. examined environmental impacts from the cultivation of microalgae biomass, algal
oil harvesting, extraction and conversion to green jet fuel using the
renewable jet fuel process [71]. Heller et al. estimated the environmental benets of generating electricity from willow biomass.
The co-ring of 10% biomass decreases net GWP by 710% and SO2
emissions are reduced by 9.5%. A signicant reduction in a NOx
emission is also expected [72]. Chanakya et al. (2009) described
the biogas production by using the weed and herbaceous biomass
residues by fermentation (biomethanation) process. It provides a
clean energy for cooking and other activities in rural areas [73].
Kanwar et al. evaluated the performance of a modied Deenbandhu biogas anaerobic digester plant working under hilly conditions. It operated successfully within the optimum limits. It had
a digester volume of 2.65 m3 and Hydraulic Retention Time (HRT)
of 55 days. The daily average (over one year) bio-gas production
from this plant was 1.23 m3/d. The plant production efciency was
70.589.4% of its rated capacity [74].
Kanwar and Guleri evaluated the performance of a family size
rubber-balloon biogas plant under hilly conditions. The daily
average bio-gas production in the rubber-balloon plant was
0.92 m3/d. A reduction in the rate of biogas production from the
rubber-balloon plant was found to be about 77% during winter
months as compared to the summer months [75]. Das et al. analyzed the mixed residues such as sh-feed, cow dung and Azolla
pinnata for biogas generation. The gaseous energy production of
about 20.23% as methane could be achieved from the mixed
residues containing cow dung and Azolla pinnata (1:0.4) digester
as compared to other residues. Conventional sh-feed (20%) along
with the digested Azolla slurry was observed to be most suitable
for biogas production [76]. Chakradhar et al. analyzed the bioenergy production from the pulp processing cotton digestion
wastewater. The observed biogas yield was 0.440.48 m3 of
methane with 2.0 day and 1.5 days detention time respectively
[77]. Meher and Gollakota produced 0.397 m3/kg of biogas by
biomethanation of de-oiled mohwa seed cake. The optimum HRT
and Total Solid (TS) loading rate was 15 days and 3%. More than 12
lakhs of biogas plants have been installed in India based on cattle
dung as a feed material [78]. Meher and Gollakota (1994) produced 304 l/kg of biogas with 57% methane using oil expelled
tobacco seed cake. The optimum HRT and loading rate was 25 days
and 4% TS. The pH and volatile fatty acid of the digesting slurry
was 7.2 and 1763 mg/l, respectively [79]. Balasubramanium and
Kasturi Bai studied the importance of biogas plant efuent as an
organic fertilizer in sh polyculture. The efuent was collected
from a Khadi and Village Industries Commission (KVIC) model
biogas plant fed on cattle waste. It was applied at 0.15%
297
concentration at 3 day intervals. They identied a considerable

growth rate on sh [80].
Nguyen et al. presented the environmental performance of
wheat straw for energy utilization in Denmark. The impact
assessment shows that the substitution of straw either for coal or
for natural gas reduces global warming, non-renewable energy
use, human toxicity and ecotoxicity, but increases eutrophication,
respiratory inorganic, acidication and photochemical ozone. The
straw biomass is a potential signicant reduction in emissions of
nitrogen oxides (NOx) by implementing selective catalytic reduction.The use of straw for fossil fuels as an energy source in power
plants would yield environmental benets [81]. Garcia-Orenes
et al. studied soil biological quality activity under the inuence of
different agricultural management systems in a semiarid Mediterranean agro ecosystem in south east Spain. The addition of oat
straw to soil improved soil quality because of an increase of
organic carbon and microbial activity to soil [82].
The merit of plantation of eucalyptus tree is given as below:
Vinithan has studied the environmental impacts of eucalyptus
plantations. It has become topics of acrimonious discussions on all
scientic and social platforms. It is highly suitable for social forestry. The eucalypts tree has commercial and medicinal signicance. It produced woodier biomass than the other species.
Eucalyptus plantations in the midst of farmlands act as windbreaks, increase humidity and cut down radiation to increase
photosynthetic activity in nearby agricultural crops, which
increased 23% in the yields of wheat in Gujarat, India. Eucalyptus
plantations have reportedly improved soil fertility contents such
as organic carbon, phosphorus, and potassium in the soil. It
attracts crows which then damaged grain crops [83]. Singhal et al.
mentioning an experimental result to show that humication is
faster under eucalyptus. They also report that because of this
reason the chances of loss of organic matter from the soil are also
reduced. According to them the humication is brought about by
eucalyptus debris, which produces humic acid, increases the
polysaccharides, and hastens the rate of polymerization with
reduction in dispersion, thus enhancing the fertility of the soil
[84]. The use mulberry biomass, cornstarch, microalgae, willow
biomass and bio gas produced from biomass would reduce the
GHG emission in the atmosphere. The use of cornstarch, straw and
plantation of eucalyptus will improve the quality of the soil.
3.7. Alternative fuels
The merits of conversion of biomass into alternative fuels such
as ethanol, biodiesel, biogas, biomethonal and methane are
described below: Ethanol is produced from the biomass crops
which reduce the GHG emission. The CO2 produced during production of ethanol is being supplied into the plant for the purpose
of fermentation. This would reduce air pollution. The blended
ethanol with gasoline burns clearly and releases less emission into
the environment than pure gasoline [85]. Demirbas presented
environmental impacts of bio-fuels. Ethanol, biodiesel is an
environmentally friendly alternative liquid fuel that has the
potential to reduce GHG emissions into the atmosphere. Most
traditional bio-fuels, such as ethanol, a biodiesel from biomass
reduce the consumption of crude oil and environmental pollution.
Ethanol addition to gasoline has reduced CO2 and hydrocarbon
emissions. Biodiesel increases NOx emissions when used as fuel in
diesel engine. Oxygenated diesel fuel blends have a potential to
reduce the emission of particulate matter [86]. Martin et al. analyzed the environmental impacts of integrated bio-ethanol and
biogas production processes using a life cycle approach. This
integration achieved environmental performance improvement
through the use of stillage as a feed stock material for biogas
production [87].
298
Galdos et al. analyzed the environmental advantage of the

harvesting of sugarcane for ethanol production without burning of
residue in Brazil. The black carbon emissions will be 216 times
lower than that harvested with burning [88]. Yu and Tao evaluated
the environmental emission of three biomass-based (corn, wheat
and cassava) E10 (a blend of 10% gasoline and 90% ethanol by
volume) fuel ethanol projects based on the life cycle assessment
and Monte Carlo simulation method. The emissions results show
that they emit less CO2 and volatile organic compounds than
conventional gasoline [89]. MacLean et al. reviewed the environmental, characteristics of cellulosic ethanol fuel technology. The
cellulosic ethanol is an alternative fuel for diesel engine. It would
greatly reduce CO2 emissions [90]. Gonzalez-Garcia et al. addressed the Environmental Performance (EP) of a passenger car driven
by ethanol fuel derived from popular biomass. It helps to reduce
the contributions to global warming and ozone layer depletion up
to 62% and 36% respectively [91]. Starfelt et al. investigated the
impact of lignocellulosic ethanol yields in polygeneration with
district heating and electricity generation. It helps to mitigate the
climate change [92]. Gonzalez-Garcia et al. compared the EP of
two alternative bio-energy products such as bio-ethanol and
bioelectricity using the life cycle analysis methodology.The bioelectricity scenario seems to be a suitable alternative for global
warming is concern. The willow based energy systems is more
favorable for the environment concern [93].
Chynoweth et al. analyzed environmental impacts of production of methane. It would replace the fossil fuel-derived energy
and reduce the global warming and acid rain CO2 and other
emissions through emission. The derivation of methane from
energy crops and organic wastes could play a major benet to
society by providing a clean fuel [94]. Gerber et al. illustrated the
environmental optimization of combined synthetic natural gas,
and the electricity production from lignocellulosic biomass using
consideration of the environmental impact allows the engineers to
suitably address a pertinent impact reduction measures process
[95]. The alternative fuels improve global warming and human
health aspects.
3.8. Other applications
The main advantages of electricity generation from biomass are
described below: The people of Bhalupani hamlet near Bhubhaneswar were living in darkness without grid electricity and using
kerosene for lighting and cooking purposes. In 2006, biomassgasier-based electricity generation plant has been installed to
provide electricity in Bhubhaneswar. The smile on the faces of the
villagers during the biogas plant inauguration speaks volumes of
their happiness [96]. Suntana et al. studied the benets of forest
biomass as a source of bio-energy that reduces carbon emissions
in Indonesia. In Indonesia methanol produced from forest biomass
could provide electricity to more than 42 million households
annually. The use of biomethanol for electricity generation and as
substitute for gasoline can avoid 938% and 835% of total annual
carbon emission respectively. The number of rural and urban
households received benets from biomass [22].
The energy and resources institute formally known as Tata
Energy and Resources Institute (TERI) has developed an ecofriendly gasier-based crematorium for cremation purpose. It is
likely to get cultural and social acceptability because of its substantial fuel saving (over 50%) with the pay-back period of about
one year [97]. TERI has developed the new gasier powered silk
reeling system with energy efciency of 60%. It increased the silk
production by 3.7% [98]. Somashekhar et al. demonstrated a
20 kW woody-biomass-based gasier system connected to a diesel
engine to generate the decentralized electricity. The electricity
produced is utilized for lighting, pumping water for domestic use
and operating a our mill. It has also gained environmental benets [99]. The biomass is also used for electricity generation, cremation purpose and silk reeling system.
4. Negative aspects of biomass

A brief negative environmental impact of biomass energy can
be discerned under this section. The occupational injuries and
illness associated with agriculture and forest biomass energy
production systems are several times more than underground coal
mining and oil mining operations [100]. In terms of a million
kilocalories of output, forest biomass has 14 times more occupational injuries and illnesses than underground coal mining and 28
times more than oil and gas extraction [28]. A wood-red steam
plant requires 4 times more construction workers and 37 times
more plant maintenance and operation workers than a coal-red
plant. Including the labor required to produce corn, about 18 times
more labor is required to produce a million kcal of ethanol than an
equivalent amount of gasoline [100]. The safe harvesting practices
and equipment should be developed to reduce the occupational
injuries while harvesting and agricultural production for energy
[28].
Abbasi and Naseema Abbasi have evaluated the adverse
environmental impacts of the biomass energy production system.
The plantation of a very large-scale centralized biomass production systems and the dispersed biomass production systems are
the major contributors for environmental impacts [100]. The high
rank of burden of disease is attributed to Bangladesh, India,
Myanmar and Pakistan with percentage ranging from 3.2 to 4.6.
The international commitment was built from the EU member
countries to work and tackle these issues together. The urgent
need of improving access of the poor to cleaner energy sources
was agreed by the international community [7]. Around 15% of the
carbon released in the environment is due to deforestation. The
actions have been already taken to save the world from such terrible effects of climate change [3]. The negative aspects of biomass
such as land and water degradation, waste disposals, impact of
agricultural practices, impact of biomass combustion and demerits
of alternative fuels are described in the following pages.
4.1. Land and water degradations
The biomass is not entirely clean, it requires a large amount of
storage room and a great deal of land and water are needed [1].
The area of the crop land required to feed each person is about
0.5 ha [100]. Gumartini studied the emission from biomass energy
in Asia Pacic region. About 22% of the world total CO2 was
emitted by developing countries in the Asia-Pacic region with
4.9% annual increases of CO2emissions since 1990. In this region,
the top ten ranks of CO2 emitting countries are China, India and
Japan [7]. Soil erosion contributes signicantly in hastening water
run-off, thus, retarding ground- water recharge; the nutrient-rich
run-off can harm the quality of receiving rivers, lakes or estuaries
by causing eutrophication [100]. Pimental and Kounang reviewed
the soil erosion rate in ecosystems. They found that the average
soil erosion rate on U.S. croplands was approximately 5.3 t per acre
per year. Pastureland was found to be have a soil erosion rate of
2.4 t per acre per year which is approximately half that of cropland
[101]. Pimentel explained limits of biomass utilization. The productivity of the soil is diminished by soil erosion due to agriculture
activities. One mm of soil erosion results 15 t of soil loss or
degradation per hectare. The soil erosion on agricultural land in
the US and developing countries caused by inefcient farming
practices and removal of biomass from the land are
approximately13 t/ha per year and 30 t/ha per year respectively
[28]. The production of biofuels from large scale industries waste

large amounts of emissions, cause heavy soil erosion and emit
small scale water pollution [13].
Smith presented the environmental limitations on biomass
production from Colorado's forest. The heavy harvesting of biomass would rob forests of future soil [102]. Qian et al. analyzed the
mineral contents of three types of biomass feed-stocks such as
switchgrass, sorghum and red cedar by inductively coupled
plasma analysis. The major minerals included P, Ca, K, and Mg have
more than 0.1 weight percentage while the minor (o0.1 wt%)
minerals included Na, Fe, Zn, Cu and other heavy metals. Among
the major minerals, K was the most abundant component in
switchgrass (0.89%) and sorghum (0.42%), while Ca was the
highest (0.65%) in red cedar [103]. The nutrients contained in both
grain and residues of 7840 kg of corn produced per hectare are
224 kg N, 37 kg P, 140 kg K, and 6 kg Ca [104]. The global estimated
depress of food production will be in the range from 15 to 30% by
the year 2020 due to continuing degradation of agricultural land.
The soil nitrogen leached after forest removal was 6 to 9 times
greater than in forests with normal cover. The conventional corn
production lost an average of about 20 t/ha/yr of soil compared
with only about 5 t/ha per year with ridge- and no-till. The crop
residues contain about 1% N, 0.2% P, and 1.2% K. It is estimated that
7080% of these nutrients is lost from the soil during burning
process [28]. Fires provide benets such as creating new soil [102].
Ajai et al. studied the land degradation status of India. One
third of geographic area (around 105 million hectares of land) are
being degraded in India [105]. The land required to generate biofuels was 30 Mha in 2013 and it will be expected to increase to
100 Mha in 2050 [17]. The biomass production system requires a
large amount of land [100]. The value of land would be reduced
due to monoculture plantation of tress [104]. The Centre for Science and Environment (1991) explained the state of India's
environment. The land used for forests, and urbanization greatly
affected by increased biomass energy production [106]. A great
deal of land and water are needed for some biomass crops to be
produced and, when they have grown, the product requires a large
amount of storage room before being converted into energy [1].
Pimental et al. explained the problems of removal of biomass from
water bodies and land areas for energy production. It may increase
water degradation and soil, ooding, and removal of nutrients
[107].
Fertilizers can have harmful effects on surrounding environment and may cause water pollution. The irrigation of biofuel
crops could impose strain and unsustainable pressure on local
water resources [13]. The production of about 8000 kg/ha of corn
grain requires more than 5 million liters per hectare of water
during corn crop growing season [28]. The spread of the noxious
weeds in many watersheds across the landscape destroys the
quality of water. Removing trees degrades structure needed for
prevailing and future wildlife habitat [102]. Bijoy Nandan and
Abdul Azis studied the pollution of coconut husk from retting
areas in the Kayals of Kerala. The retting zones are exposed to
prolonged periods of anoxic condition. It resulted from oxygen
depletion and high concentrations of hydrogen sulde. It caused
extensive damage to the living, aquatic resources in the region
[108].
4.2. Solid bio-waste disposals problems
The biomass waste might be used as fuel for power generation
and cogeneration (heat and electricity). Singhal et al. analyzed the
status and future directions of solid waste management in India.
The generation of municipal solid waste has been estimated to
exceed 260 million tons in the year 2047 [109]. Kumar et al. estimated the methane emission from waste landlls for the period of
299
19801999 in India The atmospheric methane concentration has

been increasing in the range of 12% per year. The estimation of
the national level methane emission from solid waste disposal
areas using the default methodology and using triangular pattern
of gas generation methodology varies from 263.02 Gg to 502.46 Gg
and 119.01 Gg to 400.66 Gg respectively in year 1980 to in year
1999 [110]. Raja Sekhar et al. analyzed the pollution potential of
septic tank efuents and their impact on ground water quality in
an unsewered area of Tirupati. The results indicated that the septic
tank efuents contain carbonaceous and nitrogenous matters in
addition to phosphorous and high bacterial population. It also
indicated wide spread variations in the ground water quality with
ground water pollution [111]. Using animal and human waste to
power engines may save carbon dioxide emissions, but it increases
methane gases, which are also harmful to the earths ozone layer.
Using trees and tree products to produce power results in major
topological changes and destroys the homes of countless animals
and plants [18].
Hand in Hand, a Public Charitable Trust (2007) presented the
potential risks of solid waste management to the environment and
to human health. Waste landlls generate carbon dioxide,
methane and refuse eets. The open combustion of wastes produces dioxins, furan and heavy metals like mercury and lead. The
severe health problems affect the workers handling waste.
According to the central pollution control board, an average Indian
generates near about 490 g of waste per day and generates 400 g
of biodegradable waste per household per day to be composted
into organic manure. In 2025, the per capita generation of wastes
could be expected around 700 g per day [112]. With good biodegradable waste management and advanced technologies reliable
bio-energy can be produced sustainably.
4.3. Impacts of agriculture practices
The negative impacts of agricultural practices are reviewed as
follows: The Tata Energy Research Institute (1994) described the
limitations of biomass energy production. The major limitation is
capture of solar energy by plants. An average of 0.1% of light
energy is being captured by plant material [113]. In the EU, the
biomass reduces emissions between 55% and 98% compared with
the fossil fuel mix. The biomass feedstock such as charcoal from
forest residues and bagasse briquettes has higher emissions. The
environmental concerns such as biodiversity, soil quality, and
water habitats are associated with the production of biomass
feedstock [114]. Abbasi and Naseema Abbasi highlighted the
improvement of environmental impact analysis of bio-energy
source. The adverse impacts of intensive agriculture practices are
water logging, salinization, depleted soil productivity and pollution. This study also considered taking steps to utilize renewable
energy sources without facing environmental backlashes [115].
The US department of agriculture (2011) performed an environmental assessment on giant bio-mass miscanthus establishment
and production in Arkansas, Missouri, Ohio, and Pennsylvania
project areas. It indicated some endangered species within the
proposed project areas. The identied species are birds, sh, plants
and reptile. Invasive plant species can have signicant negative
impacts on biological resources including decreases in native
wildlife and plant species populations. The total of 7.28 million
gallons of water was used per day for the establishment of giant
biomass miscanthus crop in US [116].
Jorgensen indicated a potential re risk of growing bio-fuels
crops (giant miscanthus). The dead plant materials contribute to
increased re risk and it also increased the risk to human health.
The mitigation and monitoring plan is required to reduce severe
re hazards [117]. Semere and Slater identied an improvement on
wildlife habitat life because they ate perennial biomass grasses
300
which contain less agricultural chemicals than traditionally managed row crops [118]. The conventional method of bio-fuel production involves steam-blasting of switchgrass and straw to
separate lignin from the cellulose, which is needed to create the
bio-fuel. The process requires electricity, produced by either coal
or natural gas, to generate the steam. The process releases considerable amounts of carbon dioxide, while maintaining the
dependency on fossil fuels. Treating switchgrass and straw with an
alkaline substance removes the lignin with limited formation of
the harmful compounds, but the resulting slurry is highly alkaline
and very salty. A neutralization step was therefore required before
the fermentation process could begin [119].
Fargione has found a potential loss of bird biodiversity in high
input low diversity bio-energy crops, such as corn and soybeans.
The bird species population increased in low input high diversity
bio-energy crops, such as native prairie. The planted switch grass
for biomass feedstock could increase the overall insect diversity
[120]. Cadoux et al. studied the recommended rate of nutrient or
fertilizer requirements for miscanthus biomass plant. Eight
pounds of nitrogen and potassium fertilizer and 1.5 pounds of
phosphorus fertilizer are required to produce one ton of miscanthus biomass. The biomass harvest of miscanthus removes
approximately 4.9 g/kg of dry matter and 0.45 g/kg of N and 7.0 g/
kg phosphorus and potassium [121]. Heaton estimated the water
requirement for the giant miscanthus plant. It requires approximately 2679 gallons of water to produce approximately
2.2 pounds of biomass [122]. Sokhansanj et al. developed a modeling environment to simulate corn stover biomass supply in Lowa.
The events of operations involved in the ow of biomass feedstacks from eld to biorenery are combining, shredding, baling,
transportation and stacking and storing. The carbon emission from
the power equipments for these operations are 0.45 kg/dt, 1.75 kg/
dt, 3.99 kg/dt, 1.03 kg/dt, 0.00 kg/dt respectively [123]. The effects
of intensive agricultural practices of changes in environment must
be taken into account for the extraction of bio-energy.
4.4. Impacts of biomass combustion
The demerits of biomass combustion are described as below:
The outstanding issues of biomass energy are air pollution and
global warming. Badarinath et al. analyzed the characterization of
aerosols from biomass burning in India.The characterization of the
resultant trace gases and aerosols from biomass burning is
important for the atmospheric radiactive processes. Columnar
content of aerosols was observed to be high during the burning
period in addition to the drastic reduction of visibility [124].
Boman carefully and systematically studied the emissions from
small-scale residential biomass combustion. It includes a number
of air pollutants with potential adverse health effects. The emissions from the products of incomplete wood combustion (35
350 mg/MJ) were considerably higher than that of pellets combustion (1545 mg/MJ). Non-methane volatile organic compounds
emissions for wood stoves and for pellet stoves were determined
in the range of 202500 mg/MJ and 120 mg/MJ respectively. The
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon total emissions for wood stoves
and for pellet stoves were determined in the range of 1300
220,000 g/MJ and 2300 g/MJ respectively [125].
Jaworek et al. presented the comparative experimental studies
on the properties of biomass and coal y ashes deposited in
electrostatic precipitator (ESP). The percentage of Si, Al, Na, Fe, and
Ti in y ash from coal-red boilers is much higher than from
biomass, and in the opposite, the percentage of Mg, K, Ca, Mn, Mo,
S, Cl, and P in biomass ash exceeds that in coal y ash. The effects
of biomass combustion products like salts, acids, tar leaving the
boiler on the construction elements of the electrostatic precipitator have been also discussed.The effects of bio ash and gas
component tar emission and moisture from biomass contributes

are corrosion, contamination, degradation of constituened elements, electrodes and high voltage insulators of ESP [126]. Less
sulfur and high chlorine content in the biomass reduce the efciency of ESP and increases the risk of corrosion respectively [40].
The chlorine content with alkalies in agricultural residues, grasses
and straws also induces aggressive corrosion. The synthetic gas
produces the product of NOx while combustion. The downdraft
biomass xed bed gasication technology and cross-ow biomass
gasication technology produces about 47% of carbon and high
level of carbon (33%) in the ash respectively [24].
Yin et al. focuses on the grate-ring of biomass for heat and
power. The issues such as primary pollutant formation and control,
deposit formation and corrosion associated with grate-red boilers burning biomass are also highlighted; the pollutant emissions
due to incomplete combustion can be mitigated and controlled by
improved combustion by improved mixing and increased residence time in the combustion zones. The pollutant emissions from
fuel properties such as ash, heavy metals, Chlorine, and Sulfur can
be controlled by the pre-treatment of the biomass and, wellcontrolled combustion technology. Biomass conversion on the
grate plays a key role in reducing the overall performance of gratered boilers (e.g., efciency, pollutant emissions, deposition, and
corrosion) [127]. Demirbas discussed the biomass combustion
related problems in boiler and its environmental issues. The
inorganic constituents cause to major critical problems of toxic
emissions, fouling and slagging. Metals in ash, combined with
other fuel elements such as silica and sulfur in the presence of
chlorine, produce undesirable reactions in furnaces. The ash
composition for the biomass is basically different from the ash
composition for the coal. The biomass fuel elements including K,
Na, S, Cl, P, Ca, Mg, Fe, Si are involved in combustion reactions
leading to ash fouling and slagging [128].
Williams et al. reviewed the pollutants from the combustion of
solid biomass fuels. The use of biomass for heating or cooling
produces particulates, carbonaceous smoke and NOx. It could be a
serious environmental impact to the atmosphere. The carbonaceous element, is burned out in the combustion chamber by good
mixing, and removed from the ue gases; even then it is a
potential health problem from submicron inorganic particles
[129]. Rinnea et al. performed multivariate analysis on adverse
impact of indoor air pollution from biomass combustion on pulmonary function among women and children in rural Ecuador.The
children living in homes are exposed to tobacco, smoke and other
biomass fuel [130]. Lucassen et al. investigated the fuel-nitrogen
conversion in the combustion of small amines using dimethylamine and ethylamine as biomass fuels. The results indicated that
the formation of nitrogenated intermediates and toxic species
hydrogen cyanide during the combustion [131]. Lin et al. observed
the biomass burning emissions in South East Asia (SEA) using
satellite. The, biomass burning is considered as one of the major
factors affecting the global carbon cycle.The seasonal maxima of
CO2, CH4, CO and ozone were repeatedly observed at the downwind path of biomass burning emissions from northern SEA and
the average NOx level was 19.8 ppb at Chiang Mai urban site [132].
The direct burning of biomass is a hazardous contributor to
global warming [1]. Musialik-Piotrowska et al. performed the
analyses of air pollutants emitted from a 15 kW retort boiler
operated by wood, wheat and rape straws. Biomass combustion
helps to reduce the emissions of gaseous pollutant in the atmosphere and it is an interesting fuel for heat production in the rural
areas [133]. Traditional biomass energy is burned with poor and
inefcient technology which results in incomplete combustion. It
produces dangerous toxic pollutant and other compounds and
causes indoor air pollution to households posing health hazards.
Globally, indoor air pollution was responsible for around 2.7% of
the burden of disease in 2000 [7]. The emission of air pollutants

causes large scale of illness and premature death [90]. The burning
of wood produces about 15% of the air pollution in the United
States [28]. Fullerton et al. studied on the indoor air pollution from
biomass fuel smoke. It disproportionately affects women and
children by global mortality and morbidity [134]. The energy
research centre of the Neitherland (2006) compared ash releases
between the combustion of biomass and coal. The ash release from
biomass (bark, woodchips, waste wood and olive residues) and
coal varies between in the range of 3050% per kg dry fuel and 8
36% per kg dry fuel respectively [135].
The smallest concentration of CO was generated by the combustion of wooden pellet in the range of 1000 and 1600 ppm.The
combustion of rape straw produced the highest concentration of
carbon monoxide in the range of 16,50030,000 ppm. The lowest
nitrogen monoxide occurred for combustion of rape straw varied
from 100 to 130 ppm [133]. Bostrom et al. assessed the cancer risk
from the biomass (residential wood) combustion. The wood
degradation products, volatile organic compounds, polycyclicaromatic hydrocarbons and soot particles are associated with major
cancer risks due to incomplete combustion of wood [136]. Shelton
compared the quality of softwood with hardwood. The hardwoods
are often considered to be a high quality fuel than softwoods,
because softwood burns with black smoke due to its high pitch
content [137]. Avakian et al. explained health effects of combustion of biomass fuels. Incomplete combustion of residential wood
combustion was a major concern for environmental health. It
emits major emission source of soot particles [138]. Granier et al.
reviewed several inventories of anthropogenic and biomass
burning emissions based on inverse modeling for a few species
such as CO, NOx and black carbon. The bond inventory gives trends
in the emissions of black and primary organic carbon emissions
between 1850 and 2000 [139].
Pennise of center for entrepreneurship in international health
and development of California presented biomass pollution and
their effect on human. The products of in-complete combustion of
1 kg of wood contain 454 g carbon. In India the combustion of
wood in cook stove produces 37.5 g of CO, 3.8 g of methanecarbon
and 6.3 g of hydrocarbon and 2 g particulate matters. The biomass
combustion smoke produces severe physiologic changes on
human body even initiation of tumor growth when inhaled.The
human activities contribute about 70% of global CO emission. The
chemicals in wood are polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons such as
anthracene, chrysene, perylene and retene etc. The trace elements
in wood are such as Cr, Mn, Fe, Ni, Cu, Cu, Zn, Br, Pb and elemental
carbon [140]. Runge analyzed the environmental impact of bioenergy power plants. Combusting biomass leads to sulfur oxides,
nitrogen oxides, and hydrogen chloride, dioxin and urans, and
heavy metal emissions. Sulfur oxides have a negative effect on
respiratory systems and can lead to the formation of acid rain.
Nitrogen oxide emissions contribute to smog formation and particulate formation in the atmosphere that have negative effects on
the respiratory system. Biomass with high chlorine content can
lead to hydrogen chloride formation during combustion, which
can have negative effects on the human respiratory systems and
can cause acid rain formation [8].
Tumuluru et al. reviewed the biomass densication technologies. The range of bulk density for agricultural straws and grasses
and woody biomass, like wood chips are varies from 80 to 100 kg/
m3 and 150 to 200 kg/m3. Because of low bulk density it is difcult
to feed the fuel into the boiler and also it reduces the burning
efciencies. The biomass is mechanically compressed using pellet
mills, other extrusion processes, briquetting presses and roller
presses to increase its density about tenfold which is required to
overcome feeding, storing, handling, and transport problems [16].
The fuel and electricity are produced by combustion of leached
301
rice straw residue in U.S.A. Unfortunately, rice straw, as it is

available immediately following grain harvest, contains a combination of silica and potassium that leads to heavy slagging and
fouling if red in conventional combustion power plants. Chlorine
in straw also accelerates corrosion in furnaces and boilers. Potassium and chlorine are readily leached with water from biomass,
including straw [42]. The burning sugarcane residue leads to GHG
and black carbon (BC) emissions. The BC emissions have a net
warming effect and cause health problems [88]. The combustion of
biomass fuels generates air pollution in the form of particulate
matter, CO2, NO, SO and a variety of hydrocarbons this leads to
increase of atmospheric temperature.
Brown et al. analyzed the optimal conceptual design of biomass
gasication energy conversion systems to identify operating conditions that minimize tar formation to avoid equipment fouling.
Fluidized biomass bed coupled with Internal Combustion Engine
(ICE) and Gas Turbine Combined Cycle (GTCC) required cold gas
cleaning and hot gas cleaning respectively. The operating conditions which maximize ICECC cycle efciency with cold gas
cleaning favor minimal tar formation. For GTCC with hot gas
cleaning provided a high tar concentration. Higher the concentration of tar increases equipment fouling [141]. Chirone et al.
(2008) explained the Fluidized Bed Combustion (FBC) of pelletized
biomass. The ne primary ash particles are found as residual ash
upon complete burnoff of wood pellets. The size of primary ash
particles generated upon complete burnoff of pelletized straw is
largely affected by ash softening and melting, partly associated
with encapsulation of bed material [142].
Vamvuka investigated the thermal behavior, slagging and
fouling and environmental impact of Olive kernel ash produced by
xed/FBC. Olive kernel ash was rich in Ca, Si and P minerals and
contained substantial amounts of alkali when combustion takes
place below 1100 C. The high leachability of Mn, Zn and Cr from
the y ash was probably attributed to their binding with carbonates, suldes, sulfates or organic matter to avoid ash melting and
the companion problems. Trace elements showed little preference
for the y ash. The elements Cr, Cu, Ni and Mn were enriched in
xed bed ash. Toxic metal ions were released in low quantities in
the soil, below the legislative limit values, with the exception of Cr
cation-exchange capacity of the soil. The specic technology for
the protection of the environment is also important [143]. The
biomass generally contains negligible sulfur and much less ash
than that of coal. However, actual emission depends on the
methods of combustion technologies.
4.5. Demerits of alternative fuels
In this section a brief account of demerits of biofuels are presented. The major negative aspects of biofuel are lack of technology advancements; impurities on a large scale and unstable continuous operation of bioplants [64]. Methane is responsible for the
greenhouse effect and with the production of biomass energy [1].
Biofuels are extracted from plants and crops and it leads to
shortage of food and increase food prices as well [13]. Methane is
the second most abundant GHG after CO2, accounting for 14% of
global emissions. Approximately 3% of these emissions come from
the biomass sources. Global anthropogenic methane emissions for
2010 were estimated at 6875 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent
[144]. Swamy and Bhattacharya estimated the GHG emission from
Indian livestock using country-specic emission coefcients. The
estimated methane emission is 9.0 Tg and nitrous oxide emission
is 1 Gg. Fermentation is the major source of methane, accounting
for 90% of total methane [145]. The local impacts such as acidication and eutrophication increase with integrated bio-ethanol
and biogas production method [87].
302
The wheat-based E10 (a blend of 10% gasoline and 90% ethanol

by volume) and cassava-based E10 can generate more emissions of
CO, CH4, N2O, NOx, SO2, PM10 and corn-based E10 can have more
emissions of CH4, N2O, NOx, SO, PM10 [82]. The biodiesel increases
NOx emissions when used as fuel in diesel engine [86]. Tonini and
Astrup explained the future environmental impact of biomass
based energy system. The use of biofuels for heavy terrestrial
transportation was responsible for most environmental impacts in
the 2050 scenarios. The cultivation of energy crops for biofuels
caused signicant environmental loads and change land use pattern [146]. If engines are specically designed for biofuels, the
emission can be reduced drastically.
5. Environmental monitoring and control

The methods to monitor and control emissions that emanating
from biomass are described below: Haberl et al. underlined the
necessity of sound methods for environmental monitoring and
explained Austrias embodied Human Appropriation of Net Process
chain of a Product (HANPP) related to agricultural biomass. The
embodied HANPP is a promising approach to integrate biodiversity
concerns in trade-related environmental information systems. It is
an indicator of the biodiversity loss and environmental change in
environmental reporting systems. It gives information about the
pressures on the ecosystems and biodiversity related to land use in
a country. It is also used to calculate the land-use change related
GHG emissions related to the biomass-based products consumed
in a country [147]. Kong et al. reviewed that the use of biomaterial
(bio-char) prepared from palm oil tree could reduce a large
amount of GHG emission (1222%) [148]. Kuhad et al. quoted
according to the United State(US) department of energy the
ethanol obtained from lignocelluloses biomass decreases the
consumption of conventional fuels and GHG emission of 80% lower
than that of gasoline [149].
The production of heat and power from biomass can signicantly reduce emissions by responsible management of production and logistics. The risks of large-scale biomass production
on the environment and society can be managed and mitigated
through mechanisms, new legislations and standards. The sustainable and responsible biomass extraction strategies should be
considered. The forest and agriculture management practices need
to be developed to protect biodiversity. It is specically important
to use biomass for heat and power production. The use of waste
biomass for energy is an attractive option to reduce an environmental problem. The sufcient safeguards and regulations and
best-practice management guidelines on biomass usage reduce
the environmental impact considerably. Larger-scale production,
the introduction of new technologies, production guidelines and
processes may pose new challenges on bio-energy development. It
will be monitored and managed in all geographies [114].
Pre-treating biomass in the range of 100130C improves its
physical, chemical, and binding characteristics [16]. Aravind and
Wiebren de Jong explained the high temperature gas cleaning
methods for biomass gasication product gas for Solid Oxide Fuel
Cells (SOFCs) and inuence of biomass derived contaminants on
SOFCs. The potential contaminants of bio syngas are tar, particulates, H2S and HCl, alkali compounds. The potential contaminants
of gasication product gas can be cleaned to meet the requirements of SOFCs at high temperatures in the range of 10231223 K
[150]. The biomass fuel may be a suitable candidate for ring
applications in utility boilers if operational and environmental
problems caused by the high content of alkali and Cr, of the
agricultural byproduct are mitigated by control methodologies
[143]. Jegannathan and Nielsen summarized the environmental
assessment of enzyme use in industrial production. The
implementation of enzymatic processes in place of conventional

processes particularly leads to reduction of global warming, acidication, eutrophication, photochemical ozone formation and
energy consumption and save agricultural raw materials. Enzyme
is a promising process technology which provides cleaner industrial production [151].
Liang et al. explained the environmental impacts of selective
catalytic reduction (SCR) technology in China. The SCR technology
is an effective method for reducing NOx emission. It is an environmental friendly option and provided for assessing potential
improvements in the environmental performance of the system of
reducing NOx emission [152].
Van Dael et al. evaluated a biomass energy conversion system
using integration model. The integrated model allows the use of a
co-digester to avoid pollution risk and environmental benets can
be realized from this model [153]. The air taken from the hall
passes through a bio-lter in order to reduce any risk of odor. The
asteurization process takes one hour and kills all weed seeds,
pathogens and viruses (including foot and mouth disease, TB and
the like). The processed material that eventually leaves the plant is
therefore of higher value for farmers to spread on their elds, and
the risk of disease spread has been removed [55]. A KVIC type
85 m3 oating drum biogas plant can work for more than eight
years without any major technical problem. To ensure the high
rate of gas production, it is essential to maintain the proper feed
rate, insulate and heat the plant by using solar energy [62].
Neela Banerjee explained the emission of methane in US. An
annual average decrease of methane emissions was 41.6 million
metric tons from 1990 to 2010. This is due to better pollution
control by the oil and gas industry. The states like Texas, Oklahoma
and Kansas alone contribute for about one-quarter of US methane
emissions. The environmental protection agency's recent decision
is to reduce the national natural gas emissions by 2530% [154].
Chau et al. analyzed the emission from wood biomass boilers for
the greenhouse industry. Wood biomass combustion generates
more particulate matters than coal based fuel. However, an
advanced emission control methods could signicantly reduce this
emission from wood biomass combustion to a relatively similar
level as for natural gas [155]. Alonso et al. discussed the process of
biomass combustion in a uidized bed using CaO sorbent. The CO2
captured with CaO during biomass combustion in a uidized bed
during low temperature [156]. Many people have started looking
for advanced biomass conversion strategies to control emission on
the environment.
Table 2
Technologies, processes and biomass conversion products [157].
Sl. no. Conversion
technologies
Conversion processes
Thermal conversion
(a) Direct
combustion
(b) Pyrolysis
(c) Gasication
Thermo mechanical
conversion
Liquefaction
Fermentation
(a) Aerobic digestion

(b) Anaerobic
digestion
Conversion
products
Heat and Power
Hydrogen
Alcohol
Olens
Gasoline and
Diesel
Hydrogen
Methane and
Bio-oils
Bio-ethanol
Bio-diesel
Bio-butanol
Methane and
Other specic
chemicals
6. Biomass conversion technologies, process and conversion

products
The various bio conversion technologies, processes required to
produce different biomass conversion products are shown in
Table 2. It shows the better technologies for the preparation of bio
energy products. The available technologies are thermal conversion, thermo mechanical conversion and fermentation. Thermal
conversion process such as direct combustion, pyrolysis and
gasication are used for producing heat and power, hydrogen,
alcohol, olens, gasoline and diesel by the adoption of thermal
conversion technology. The biomass conversion products such as
hydrogen, methane and bio-oils are extracted by using liquication process with support of thermo mechanical conversion
technology. The aerobic and anaerobic digestion processes could
be utilized to make bio-ethanol, bio-diesel, bio-butanol, methane
and other specic chemicals products with the help of fermentation technology. The advanced research is going on to prepare
hydrocarbon, hydrogen, gases and electrical energy by various
processes such as bio-photolysis, extraction of hydrocarbons,
hydro gasication and fuel cells.
7. Policy and regulations

The high levels of biomass production with proper management need local and global support for environmental protection.
The policy and regulations that promote bio-energy production
are described below: In 2009, the Minister of State for environment and forests of India presented that the India's natural forests
already covered some 165 million acres. India expected support
from the UN framework convention on climate change for reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in
developing countries [9]. Poffenberger demonstrated a powerful
hybrid driver to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest
degradation in northwest Cambodia. The local drivers are controlled by communities and the national drivers are controlled by
policy actions. It requires strong partnerships between diverse
institutions. Earlier clean development mechanism was used on
afforestation and reforestation activities [158].
Omer et al. expressed the two options to policy makers of
biomass energy. The rst option is to utilize the biomass resources
instead of conventional resources as an ideal one. The second
option is to use hybrid resource, i.e.) combination of bio-fuel and
conventional fuels which is the most suitable option [159]. The
environmental production of UK (2012) explained the emission
limits for biomass boiler. The emission limit values of NOx from
biomass boiler smaller than 5 MW capacities and greater than
5 MW capacities are 200 mg/m3 and 140 mg/m3 respectively
according to Dutch BEAMS standards [160]. Kosinkova et al. narrated according to the IEA projection, 25% of the total bio-fuel
could be produced from the biomass wastes [161]. Sweden and
other countries have established a regulation that limits the extent
to which biomass residues and stumps can be removed from the
forest. Illegal and unsustainable logging often raises environmental concerns. In developing countries, the agricultural and
forestry management issue is more complex [114].
The policy, institutional and nancial support spread environmentally sustainable biomass power systems in India and other
developing countries [38]. Chandel et al. studied the various
initiatives to reduce emission in India according to the national
action plan on climate change. India has decided to promote off
grid small capacity biogas plants (3250 kW) using agriculture,
animal and municipal solid wastes [162]. The Indian national
policy on bio-fuels will bring about accelerated development and
promotion of the cultivation, production and use of bio-fuels to
303
increasingly substitute petrol and diesel for transport and be used

in stationary and other applications, while contributing to energy
security, climate change mitigation, apart from creating new
employment opportunities and leading to environmentally sustainable development [2]. The new analysis performed by Michael
Obeiter of world resources institute (2013) shows that the existing
state policies and improved use of infrastructure of Colorado could
reduce 29% emissions by 2020. The renewable portfolio standard
and the energy efciency resource standard were passed in 2007
would reduce Colorados emissions by 7% and by 5% respectively
by 2020 compared to 2011 levels [163].
The Indian national policy on bio-fuels will bring about accelerated development and promotion of the cultivation, production
and use of bio-fuels to increasingly substitute petrol and diesel for
transport, while contributing to energy security, climate change
mitigation, apart from creating new employment opportunities
and leading to environmentally sustainable development [2].
Carneiro and Ferreira analyzed the environmental and strategic
value of biomass energy corps in Portugal under the support of
Renewable Energy Sources. The results suggested the need of
specic Feed in Tariff for biomass. It may be justied both by the
perceived project risk and by the expected strategic and environmental value [164]. Manuilova et al. performed Environment
Impact Assessment (EIA) of CO2 capture and storage in Canada.
The life cycle impact assessment methodologies are applied to EIA
to increase the level of accuracy of environmental assessment. The
future carbon capture and storage projects need an effective regulation to prevent any adverse impact on environment [165].
Bryan et al. performed landscape futures analysis as on environmental targets settings. This environmental target can be
achieved through spatial planning and it may have substantial
environmental benets. The sheer magnitude of the changes in
land use and land management is required to achieve environmental targets. The impact of environmental targets is greatly
dependent upon climate change and internal decisions [166].
Iddrisu et al. studied the Ghana's bio-energy policy. It target to use
20% of transport fuel from bio-fuel (palm oil and cassava) in the
year between 2020 and 2030 [167]. It is essential to promote
practices and policies to support bio-energy research and development projects. The world will move towards realization of
actual potential of bio-energy resources.
8. Bio-economic
The cost and employment opportunities of biomass are
described below: Lam et al. prescribed for commercial applications
of bio-mass an economic analysis is much predominant. The
acceptance to change from old techniques is required for the
development of bio energy [168]. Feng Guo et al. briey introduced the solid acid mediated hydrolysis techniques of biomass for
producing bio-fuels. The carbonaceous solid acid catalysts are
considered the most promising catalyst for cellulose hydrolysis.
Solid Acid Catalysts (SAC) have distinct advantages over liquid acid
catalysts in recycling, separation, and environmental friendliness.
In future, the combination of green solvents, nanoparticle techniques and SAC could be used for production of bio-fuels from biomass. It can be expected to emerge as the new bio-economic
industries [169].
Bilgen et al. presented an outlook and economy for biomass
energy in the country Turkey.It has decided to generate7530 Btep
of biomass energy from the most cost effective agricultural and
traditional products such as wood and dung [170]. The cost of
producing biomass for use as fuels and energy sources is very
cheap compared with the cost of nding and extracting fossil fuels
[1]. Piwowar and Dzikuc outlined the problem and cost related
304
with the combined combustion of biomass with fossil fuel in

Poland. It adversely reduces the negative impact on the surroundings [171].The operation and maintenance cost of biomass
power systems ranged from Rs 5.85/kW h at a load of 5 kW to Rs
3.34/kW h at a load of 20 kW [38]. Bilgili and Ozturk studied the
bio economic development in G7 countries. The option of policy
promulgation is necessary for the prospects of bio energy in these
countries by the support of biomass in these countries by the
support of biomass infrastructure and its input [172].
Berhane et al. addressed the operation of hydrocarbon biorenery via fast pyrolysis, hydrotreating and hydrocracking of
hybrid poplar feedstock under environmental criteria. The optimization results reveal that the unit production cost of the
hydrocarbon bio-fuels is $2.31 per Gallon of Gasoline Equivalent
(GGE) for the maximum net present value solution and $3.67/GGE
for the minimum GWP design. The corresponding greenhouse
emission is 8.07 kg of CO2-eq/GGE. The analysis shows that the
environmental performance of the hydrocarbon bio-reneries can
be improved by compromising their production. The hydrocarbon
bio-reneries via these technologies are promising for GHG
reduction [173]. Sadhukhan et al. integrated the microbial electro
synthesis systems with the bio reneries wastes. It improves the
economic and environmental patterns by the production of biofuels and chemicals from recycle of CO2 and clean water [174].
Diogo et al. evaluated the economic potential of bio-fuel extraction
in Argentina. The potential of soy bio diesel and switch grass bioethanol were 368 PJ and 1.1 EJ respectively. The production cost of
soy bio diesel and switch grass bio-ethanol were in the range of
100155 US $ per ton and 2045 US $ per ton respectively [175].
In comparison to a coal-red power plant, biomass incineration
at the plant reduces the emission of CO2 by about 110,000 t per
year [42]. Witzel et al. reviewed the economic production of
miscanthus biomass. It depends on the yield, prices, life span and
other cost. The range of yield, prices and life span were 1048 t dry
matter/ ha, 48134 /ton dry matter and 1020 years respectively
[176]. The employment prospects are expected to increase if the
nation's energy needs are provided by biomass resources [100].
The projected increase in employment would be 5% when 11% of
the US energy needs were met by biomass [28]. Wang and Tao
studied the bio-jet fuel conversion techniques. The cost of
separation of decomposed biomass slurries in bio-renery was in
the range of 50 to70% of the capital and operating cost [177].
Ethanol production has created more jobs in rural areas as it is
produced from domestically grown crops. The overall reduction of
carbon footprint is one of the benets from the use of ethanol as a
fuel [85].
Shamshirband et al. analyzed the agricultural systems in Iran as
a case study. It provides energy supply, food security and also
improves the world economics in the form of bio-energy [178].
Vijay et al. explained the importance of biogas energy for rural
development in India. Biogas is a potential renewable energy
source for rural India and it might reduce unemployment and
contribute signicantly to alleviate poverty. It reduces the gap
between the energy availability and energy demand in the rural
areas. It can replace the commercial and nonrenewable energy
sources to a considerable extent in a variety of production activities [179]. Kumar et al. reviewed the biomass resources in India.
The government of India allocated Rs. 46 crores for implementation of biomass gasier program in the 12th ve year plan [180].
Pimental et al. have reported the environmental impacts of biomass energy. The direct labor input requirement to produce a
million kcal of energy from wood biomass energy sources is 23
times greater than that of coal based conventional sources of
energy [104]. One disadvantage of biomass fuel production is that
it is quite expensive, with costs including paying for the large
amount of labor involved and transportation costs as this type of
energy must be produced close to where the source is obtained

[1]. These things have to be carefully considered and weighed
when determining if biomass energy is a viable alternative energy
source [18]. The cost of biomass energy also depends on the
selection of potential land areas for plantations. The operating cost
of biomass power plant must be relatively low and the fuel supply
should be affordable and reliable.
9. Conclusion
Bio-energy is a universally available perpetual reserve of power.
It is convertible into electrical energy using conversion techniques.
The development of advanced energy conversion technologies is
currently required to reduce climate change disorder and to
mitigate GHG emission in environment. This review underscores
the positive and negative impacts of biomass energy which is
associated with the environment. The following points were studied from this review:
It is highly anticipated to seek proper understanding of environmental impacts of biomass energy.
Biomass provides the important of bio-energy for better implementation and utilization
It outlines the biomass synario and it shows that bio-energy has

signicant scope to make a greater contribution to secure and

sustainable energy production.
This study also compares the advantages biomass energy over
fossil fuels. The biomass fuels have a relatively clean combustion when compared to fossil fuel.
It presents the positive aspects of biomass energy such biowaste, recycling of biomass, biomass conversion techniques,
dry-wood biomass and agricultural plantations. It reveals that
the biomass gasier plant has the best environmental performance. The advanced combustion techniques increased the
efciency of biomass power plant. The plantation of eucalyptus
tree in the midst of farmlands increases the photosynthesis
there by increase the yield of product. The addition of straw to
earth improves the quality of soil.
The alternative fuels which are produced from biomass have the
considerable potential to reduce GHG emission into the atmosphere. Even though, methane and biodiesel which are produced from biomass are responsible for green house effect and
NOx emission respectively.
The electricity produced from biomass fetches happiness on
villagers since it is used for lighting, pumping water, house hold
use and operative our mills.
The study also highlights the negative impacts of biomass such
as occupational injuries, illness, more maintenance and operation labor required than a coal based power plant, land and
water degradations, water disposal, agricultural practices and
biomass combustion.
It also reveals that emission produced by biomass can be controlled and mitigated by effective methods.
The information on changes of ecosystem and biodiversity due
to biomass are outlined by the environmental monitoring
methods.
The feasible biomass conversion technologies are thermal conversion technology, thermo mechanical conversion technology
and fermentation technology.
It presents the policy, standards and regulations to protect the
environment.
The result reveals that the operation and maintenance cost of
biomass power system ranged from 585 kW h of a load of
5 kW. The cost of biomass fuel is very cheap than that of
fossil fuels.
This review could help to carryout different case studies for the
production of biogas from locally available biomass resources
without affecting the environment.
This study will be used to do environmental protection planning, rational site selection, prognostic maintenance plan and to
create the general awareness for the future installation of biomass
power plants. The future use of biogas is bright even it faces slight
environmental problems.
References
[1] Rahman Shaikh Rashedur, Mahmud Nahid Al, Rahman Mumtahina, Hussain
Md Yeakub, Sekendar Ali Md. Overview of biomass energy. Int J of Eng Res
Technol 2013;2(11):37985.
[2] National policy on bio-fuels. Ministry of New & Renewable Energy 2013,
Government of India, Last updated on: 26/06/2013, http://mnre.gov.in/lemanager/UserFiles/biofuels_policy.pdf. [accessed 12.07.14].
[3] 35 Facts about climate change, conserve energy future, be green stay green.
http://www.conserve-energy-future.com/various-climate-change-factsphp [accessed 09.12.13].
[4] Air-pollution-costs-european-economies-us$-1.6-trillion-a-year-in-diseasesand-deaths,-new-who-study-says. http://www.euro.who.int/en/media-cen
tre/sections/press-releases/2015/04/ [accessed 25.11.15].
[5] Bell ML, Davis DL. Reassessment of the lethal London fog of 1952: Novel
indicators of acute and chronic exposure to air pollution. Environmental
Health. Environ Health Perspect 2001;109(3):38994.
[6] Main S, Sinha SB, Khan A, Jha C, Verma PC. Gupta. Impacts of a coal-red
steam generation plant on ambient SPM levels. Indian J Environ Prot 1994;14
(6):40610.
[7] Gumartini T. Biomass energy in the Asia-Pacic region: Current status, trends
and future setting. Asia-Pacic forestry sector outlook study II; 2009.
Working Paper No. APFSOS II/WP/2009/26.
[8] Runge TM. Economic and environmental impact of biomass types for bioenergy power plants. Environmental and economic research and development program of Wisconsin's focus on energy, Final Report August; 2013.
http://www. focusonenergy. com /sites/default/les/research/1010RungeFinalReportx.pdf [accessed 17.07.14].
[9] India seeks cooperation from America in research projects, environmental
planning and building institutional capacities, Embassy Archives, New Delhi
(Press Information Bureau), Embassy of India, Washington, D.C, USA, http://
www.indianembassy.org/archives_details.php?nid 1077%20 , 19 July; 2009
[accessed 12.12.14].
[10] Arora S, Vyas A, Johnson LR. Projections of highway vehicle population,
energy demand and CO2 emissions in India to 2040. Nat Resources Forum
2011;35(1):4962.
[11] Brimblecombe P, Holgate ST, Samet JM, Koren HS, Maynard R. Air pollution
and health history. Air Pollut Health 1999;1999:518.
[12] Balaras CA, Droutsa K, Dascalaki E, Kontoyiannidis S. Heating energy consumption and resulting environmental impact of European apartment
buildings. Energy Buildings 2005:42942.
[13] Advantages and disadvantages of biofuels, conserve energy future, be green
green stay green. http://www.conserve-energy-future.com/advantagesand-disadvantages-of-biofuels.php [accessed 09.12.13].
[14] Alanne K, Saari A. Estimating the environmental burdens of residential
energy supply systems through material input and emission factors. Building
Environ 2008;43:173448.
[15] Remme Uwe, Trudeau Nathalie, Graczyk Dagmar, Taylor Peter. Technology
development prospects for the Indian power sector, information paper,
International Energy Agency (IEA). Feb.; 2011 https://www.iea.org/publica
tions/freepublications/publication/technology_development_india.pdf.
[16] Tumuluru JS, Wright Christopher T, Kenny KL, Richard Hess J. A review on
biomass densication technologies for energy application. http://www.inl.
gov/technicalpublications/documents/4886679.pdf;
2010
[accessed
12.07.14].
[17] Josef Spitzer. IEA Biofuels & bio energy technology road maps, Euroclima bio
energy workshop, http://iet.jrc.ec.europa.eu/remea/sites/remea/les/les/
documents/events/spitzer_iea_biofuels_bioenergy_technology_roadmaps_12march2013-2.pdf. Santiago de chile, 1214 March; 2013
[18] Advantages and disadvantages of biogas, conserve energy future, be green
green stay green. http://www.conserve-energy-future.com/advantagesand-disadvantages-of-biogas.php [accessed on 09.12.13].
[19] Dai J, Cui H, Grace JR. Biomass feeding for thermo chemical reactors. Progress
Energy Combust Sci 2012;38:71636.
[20] Vandamme E, Anthonis T, Dobbelaere S. Implications and limitations of the
use of biomass as a source for food, chemicals, materials and energy. Royal
Belgian Academy Council of Applied Science 2011. Industrial Biomass: Source
of Chemicals, Materials, and Energy. http://www.kvab.be/downloads/stp/tw_
bacas_ biomass_01022011.pd. [accessed 12.07.14].
305
[21] Van Swaaij WPM, Fjallstrom T, Helm P, Grassi A. Proceedings of the second
world biomass conference-biomass for energy. Industry and Climate Protection, vol 1 and 2. Rome, ETA Florence, Italy, 10-14 May; 2004.
[22] Suntana AS, Vogt KA, Turnblom EC, Upadhye R. Bio-methanol potential in
Indonesia: Forest biomass as a source of bio-energy that reduces carbon
emissions. Appl Energy, 86; 2009. p. S21521.
[23] Retka Schill S. Large industrial users of energy biomass, IEA Bio energy, task
40, Sustainable international bio energy trade Source: Biomass Magazine.
September; 2013 http://biomassmagazine.com/articles/9444/iea-task40biomass-provides-10-percent-of-global-energy-use.
[24] EPA combined heat and power partnership, biomass CHP Catalog, Biomass
conversion technologies. p. 3061, http://www.epa.gov/chp/documents/
biomass_chp_catalog_part5.pdf- [accessed 10.12.13].
[25] Vakkilainen E, Kuparinen K, Heinimo J. Large industrial biomass users
http://www.bioenergytrade.org/downloads/t40-large-industrial-biomassusers.pdf, 12th September; 2013 [accessed 12.07.14].
[26] Reddy AKN, Williams RH, Johansson TB. Energy after Rio: prospects and
challenges. New York: United Nations Publications; 1996.
[27] IEA working together to ensure reliable, affordable and clean energy, Bio
Energy. http://www.iea.org/topics/bioenergy/ [accessed 27.11.13].
[28] Pimentel D. Biomass utilization, limits of, Encyclopedia of physical science
and technology, EN002C-60, 2001; March 14, P1: FJU/LPB P2: FJU. http://
www.energyjustice.net/les/ethanol/pimentel2001.pdf.[accessed 12.07.14].
[29] Haberl H, Erb KH, Krausmann F, Bondeau A, Lauk C, Muller C, Plutzar C,
Steinberger JK. Global bioenergy potentials from agricultural land in 2050:
Sensitivity to climate change diets and yields. Biomass Bioenergy
2011;35:475369.
[30] Richard Arthur A, Martina Francisca Baidoo A, Edward Antwi B. Biogas as a
potential renewable energy source: a Ghanaian case study. Renew Energy
2011;36(5):15106.
[31] Voegele E.IEA: US bioenergy capacity to reach 14.4 GW by 2018. http://
biomassmagazine.com/articles/9159/iea-us-bioenergy-capacity-to-reach-144-gw-by-2018, July 01st; 2013 [accessed 12.07.14].
[32] Anselmo Filho P, Badr O. Biomass resources for energy in North-Eastern
Brazil. Appl Energy 2004;77:5167.
[33] Forsell N, Guerassimoff G, Athanassiadis D, Thivolle-Casat A, Lorne D, Millet
Guy, Assoumou Edi. Sub-national TIMES model for analyzing future regional
use of biomass and biofuels in Sweden and France. Renew Energy
2013;60:41526.
[34] Banwari L, Reddy MRVP. Biomass gasier programme in India. Wealth from
waste. Last updated on: 31 December. 2011 [accessed 14.07.14].
[35] Cummulative achievements of various renewable energy in the country as 30
September 2013. http://indianpowersector.com/home/tag/mnre/ [accessed
10.12.13].
[36] Chauhan S. Biomass resources assessment for power generation: a case
study from Haryana state, India. Biomass Bioenergy 2010;34(9):13008.
[37] Tamil Nadus rst biomass combustion project, ENVIS Centre on Renewable
Energy and Environment(ENVISCREE), Last updated on: 31/10/2011, http://ter
ienvis.nic.in/index3.aspx? sslid 273 &subsublinkid87&langid 1&mid 1
[38] Biomass gasier for village electrication, ENVISCREE, last updated on: 31/
10/2011.
[39] Sioux Trail NW, Prior Lake MN. Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community,
Koda energy LLC, Biomass to energy project. http://www.cleanairchoice.
org/energy/shakopeetribesbiomasspowerproject.pdf. [accessed 28.11.13].
[40] VGB power tech, advantages and limitations of biomass co-combustion in
fossil red power plant. http://www.vgb.org/vgbmultimedia/News/News
letter/Biomass_ Co-combustion_March_2008-p-2141.pdf, March; 2008
[41] Biogas vehicle, last updated on: 31/10/2011. http://www.energie-cites.org/
db/lille_113_en.pdf [accessed 15.07.14].
[42] United Nations Environment Programme. Int. Environmental Technology Centre,
Converting waste agricultural biomass into a resource, compendium of technologies. Osaka/Shiga, Japan. DTI/1203/JP. http://www.unep.org/ietc/Portals/
136/Publications/Waste
%20Management/WasteAgriculturalBiomassEST_Com
pen`d`ium.pdf; 2009 [accessed 14.07.14].
[43] Case Kaunas L, Luoranen M, Soukka R, Denafas G, Horttanainen M. Comparison of energy and material recovery of household waste management
from the environmental point of view. Appl Thermal Eng 2009;29:93844.
[44] Pavlas M, Tous M, Bebar L, Stehlik P. Waste to energy an evaluation of the
environmental impact. Appl Thermal Eng 2010;30:232632.
[45] Mishra PN, Mishra AK, Williams AJ, Dugaya D, Banerjee SK. Biological
reclamation of y ash by forest plantation. Environ Econ 1995;13(1):114.
[46] Advantages and disadvantages of recycling, conserve energy future, be green
green. stay green. http://www.conserve-energy-future.com/advantagesand-disadvantages-of-recycling.php [accessed 09.12.13].
[47] Seal KS. Animal wastes as a source of biomass production. Outlook Agric
1992;21(2):917.
[48] Huang Y, Wang YD, Rezvani S, McIlveen-Wright DR, Anderson M, Mondol J,
Zacharopolous A, Hewitt NJ. A techno-economic assessment of biomass
fuelled trigeneration system integrated with organic Rankine cycle. Appl
Thermal Eng 2013;53:32531.
[49] Srirangan K, Akawi L, Moo-Young M, Chou CP. Towards sustainable production of clean energy carriers from biomass resources. Appl Energy
2012;100:17286.
306
[50] Chen WH, Cheng WY, Lu KM, Huang YP. An evaluation on improvement of
pulverized biomass property for solid fuel through torrefaction. Appl Energy
2011;88:363644.
[51] Moreno R, Antolin G, Reyes A, Alvarez P. Drying characteristics of forest
biomass particles of pinus radiate. Biosyst Eng 2004;88(1):10515.
[52] Yazan DM, ClaudioGaravelli A, Petruzzelli Antonio Messeni, Albino Vito. The
effect of spatial variables on the economic and environmental performance
of bioenergy production chains. Int J Prod Econ 2011;131:22433.
[53] Modolo Ferreira VM, Tarelho LA, Labrincha JA, Senff L, Silva L. Mortar formulations with bottom ash from biomass combustion R.C.E. Constr Building
Mater 2013;45:27581.
[54] McIlveen-Wright DR, Huang Y, Rezvani S, Redpath D, Anderson M, Dave A,
Hewitt NJ. A technical and economic analysis of three large scale biomass
combustion plants in the UK. Appl Energy 2013:396404.
[55] The rst 100% biomass red CHP plant in Finland, Last updated on: 31/10/
2011.
http://www.energie-cites.org/db/forssa_139_en.pdf
[accessed
12.07.14].
[56] Holsworthy Biogas Plant, ENVISCREE http://terienvis.nic.in/index3.aspx?
sslid 255&subsublinkid 79&langid 1&mid 1 [accessed 15.07.14].
[57] Gustavsson L, Joelsson A, Sathre R. Life cycle primary energy use and carbon
emission of an eight-storey wood-framed apartment building. Energy
Buildings 2010;42:23042.
[58] Mamphweli NS, Meyer EL. Implementation of the biomass gasication project for community empowerment at Melani village, Eastern Cape, South
Africa. Renew Energy 2009;34:29237.
[59] Ozgoli HA, Ghadamian H, Farzaneh H. Energy efciency improvement analysis considering environmental aspects in regard to biomass gasication
PSOFC/GT Power Generation System. Procedia Environ Sci 2013;17:83141.
[60] Wang B, Gebreslassie BH, You F. Sustainable design and synthesis of
hydrocarbon biorenery via gasication pathway: Integrated life cycle
assessment and techno economic analysis with multi objective superstructure optimization. Comput Chem Eng 2013;52:5576.
[61] Biogas from kitchen and food waste, last updated on: 07/05/2013.mnre.gov.
in/le-manager/akshay-urja/may-june-2012/EN/36-37.pdf
[accessed
12.07.14].
[62] Kalia AK, Singh SP. Case study of 85 m3 oating drum biogas plant under
hilly conditions. Energy Convers Manag 1999;40(7):693702.
[63] Grierson Scott, Strezov Vladimir, Bengtsson Jonas. Life cycle assessment of a
microalgae biomass cultivation, bio-oil extraction and pyrolysis processing
regime. Algal Res 2013;2:299311.
[64] Advantages and disadvantages of biogas, conserve energy future, be green
green. Stay green. http://www.conserve-energy-future.com/advantagesand-disadvantages-of-biogas.php [accessed 09.12.13].
[65] Dodoo A, Gustavsson L. Life cycle primary energy use and carbon footprint of
wood-frame conventional and passive houses with biomass-based energy
supply. Appl Energy 2013;112:83442.
[66] Haque N, Somerville M. Techno-economic and environmental evaluation of
biomass dryer. Procedia Eng 2013;56:6505.
[67] Gustavsson L, Sathre R. Variability in energy and carbon dioxide balances of
wood and concrete building materials. Building Environ 2006;41:94051.
[68] Kong L, Tian SH, He C, Du C, Tu YT, Xiong Y. Effect of waste wrapping paper
ber as a solid bridge on physical characteristics of biomass pellets made
from wood sawdust. Appl Energy 2012:339.
[69] Lu L, Tang Y, Xie J, Yuan Y. The role of marginal agricultural land-based
mulberry planting in biomass energy production. Renew Energy 2009:1789
94.
[70] Beach ED, Boyd R, Uri ND. Expanding biodegradable polymer resin use:
Assessing the aggregate impact on the US Economy. Appl Math Model
1996;20(5):38898.
[71] Handler RM, Canter CE, Kalnes TN, Lupton FS, Oybek K, David RS, Paul B.
Evaluation of environmental impacts from microalgae cultivation in open-air
raceway ponds: analysis of the prior literature and investigation of wide
variance in predicted impacts. Algal Res 2012;1:8392.
[72] Heller MC, Keoleian GA, Mann MK, Volk TA. Life cycle energy and environmental benets of generating electricity from willow biomass. Renew Energy
2004;29:102342.
[73] Chanakya HN, Reddy BVV, Modak Jayant. Biomethanation of herbaceous
biomass residues using 3-zone plug ow like digesters a case study from
India. Renew Energy 2009;34(2):41620.
[74] Kanwar SS, Gupta RK, Guleri RL, Singh SP. Performance evaluation of a l m3
modied xed dome Deenbandhu biogas plant under hilly conditions.
Bioresour Technol 1994;50(3):23941.
[75] Kanwar SS, Guleri RL. Performance evaluation of a family size rub-ber-ballon
biogas plant under hilly conditions. Bioresour Technol 1994;50(2):11921.
[76] Das D, Sikdar K, Chatterjee AK. Potential of Azolla pinnata as biogas generator and as a shfeed. Indian J Environ Health 1994;36(3):18691.
[77] Chakradhar B, Kau SN, Na-geswar GD. Bioenergy recovery from pulp processing wastewater. J Environ Sci Health 1995;A30(5):9719.
[78] Meher KK, Gollakota KG. Biomethanation of de-oiled mohwa seed cake.
Indian J Environ Prot 1994;14(10):7379.
[79] Meher KK, Gollakota KG. Alternative feed stock (to-bacco cake) for biogas
production. Indian J Environ Prot 1994;14(9):6824.
[80] Balasubramanian PR, Kasturi Bai R. Biogasplant efuent as an organic fertiliser in sh polyculture. Bioresour Technol 1994;50(3):18992.
[81] Nguyen TLT, Hermansen JE, Mogensen L. Environmental performance of crop

residues as an energy source for electricity production: the case of wheat
straw in Denmark. Appl Energy 2013;104:63341.
[82] Garcia-Orenes F, Guerrero C, Roldan A, Mataix-Solera J, Cerda A, Campoy M,
Zornoza R, Barcenas G, Caravaca F. Soil microbial biomass and activity under
different agricultural management systems in a semiarid Mediterranean
agroecosystem. Soil Tillage Res 2010;109:1105.
[83] Vinithan S. Studies on environmental impact assessment.1996. http://www.
google.co.in/url?sat&rct j&q &esrcs&source web&cd7&ved 0CE
MQFjAG&urlhttp%3A%2F%2Fdspace.pondiun [accessed 02.12.13].
[84] Singhal RM, Banerjee SP, Pathak TC. Effects of Eucalyptus monoculture on
the status of soil organic matter in natural Sal (Shorca robusta) Zone in Doon
Valley. Indian For 1975;101(l2):7307.
[85] Conserve energy future, Be green green. Stay green. http://www.conserveenergyfuture.com/ethanol-fuel.php [accessed 09.12.13].
[86] Demirbas A. Political, economic and environmental impacts of biofuels: a
review. Appl Energy 2009;86:S10817.
[87] Martin M, Svensson N, Fonseca J, Eklund M. Quantifying the environmental
performance of integrated bioethanol and biogas production. Renew Energy
2014;61:10916.
[88] Galdos M, Cavalett O, Seabra JEA, Nogueira LAH, Bonomi A. Trends in global
warming and human health impacts related to Brazilian sugarcane ethanol
production considering black carbon emissions. Appl Energy 2013;104:576
82.
[89] Yu S, Tao J. Economic, energy and environmental evaluations of biomassbased fuel ethanol projects based on life cycle assessment and simulation.
Appl Energy 2009;86:S17888.
[90] MacLean HL, Lave LB. Evaluating automobile fuel/propulsion system technologies. Progress Energy Combust Sci 2003;29:169.
[91] Gonzalez-Garcia S, Gasol CM, Gabarrell X, Rieradevall J, Moreira MT, Feijoo G.
Environmental prole of ethanol from poplar biomass as transport fuel in
Southern Europe. Renew Energy 2010;35:101423.
[92] Starfelt F, Daianova L, Yan J, Thorin E, Dotzauer E. The impact of lignocellulosic ethanol yields in polygeneration with district heating a case
study. Appl Energy 2012;92:7919.
[93] Gonzalez-Garcia S, Iribarren D, Susmozas A, Dufour J, Murphy RJ. Life cycle
assessment of two alternative bioenergy systems involving Salix spp.biomass: bioethanol production and power generation. Appl Energy
2012;95:11122.
[94] Chynoweth DP, Owens JM, Legrand R. Renewable methane from anaerobic
digestion of biomass. Renew Energy 2001;22:18.
[95] Gerber L, Gassner M, Marechal F. Systematic integration of LCA in process
systems design: Application to combined fuel and electricity production
from lignocellulosic biomass. Comput Chem Eng 2011;35:126580.
[96] Lighting up village lives, Last updated on: 31/10/2011. http://mnes.nic.in/
akshayurja/ sept-oct-2007-e.pdf [accessed 14.07.14].
[97] Development of biomass gasier based crematorium, Last updated on: 31/
10/2011.
http://www.teriin.org/projects/ES/ES1999BE63.pdf[accessed
14.07.14].
[98] Gasier system for silk industry, Last updated on: 31/10/2011. http://www.
teriin.org/case_inside.php?id 17066 [accessed 14.07.14].
[99] Somashekhar HI, Dasappa S, Ravindranath NH. Rural bioenergy centres
based on biomass gasiers for decentralized power generation: case study of
two villages in southern India. Energy Sustain Dev 2000;4(3):5563.
[100] Abbasi SA., Naseema Abbasi. The likely adverse environmental impacts of
renewable energy sources. http://www.aseanenvironment.info/Abstract/
41013178.pdf; 1999 [accessed 14.07.14].
[101] Pimental D, Kounang N. Ecology of Soil Erosion in Ecosystems. Ecosystems
1998;1:41626.
[102] Smith R. Environmental limitations on biomass production from colorados
forests, Colorado Wild at the conference on the future of forest biomass in
Colorado.
http://digitool.library.colostate.edu///exlibris/dtl/d3_1/apache_
media/L2V4bGlicmlzL2R0bC9kM18xL2FwYWNoZV9tZWRpYS80OTI1.pdf, 21
February; 2008 [accessed 14.07.14].
[103] Qian K, Kumar A, Patil K, Bellmer D, Wang D, YuanW, Huhnke RL. Effects of
biomass feed stocks and gasication conditions on the physiochemical
properties of char. Energies 2013;6:397286. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/
en6083972.
[104] Pimental D, Frqiend C, Olson L, Schmidt S, Wagner WB, Johnson K, Westman
A, Whelan AM, Feglia K, Poole P, Klein T, Sobin R, Bochner A. Biomass energy:
environmental and social costs. Environ Biol Rep 1983:283.
[105] Ajai AS, Arya PS, Dhinwa S, Pathan K, Ganesh Raj K. Desertication/land
degradation status mapping of India. Current Sci 2009;97(10):147883.
[106] State of Indias environmenta citizen's report 1991. Centre for Science &
Environment 3, p 41-70.
[107] Pimental D, Fast S, Chao WL, Stuart E, Dintzis J, Einbender G, Schlappi W,
Andow D, Broderick K. Water resources in food and energy production.
Bioscience 1982;32:8617.
[108] Bijoy Nandan S, Abdul Azis P. Pollution indicators of coconut husli retting
areas in the Kayals of Kerala. Int J Environ Standard 1995;47(1):925.
[109] Singhal S, Pandey S. Solid waste management in India: status and future
directions Tata Energy Research Institute (TERI)TERI Information Monitor on
Environmental Science, vol. 6 (1). 2001. p. 14.
[110] Kumar S, Gaikwad SA, Shekdar AV, Kshirsagar PS, Singh RN. Estimation
method for national methane emission from solid waste landlls. Atmos
Environ 2004;38:34817.
[111] Raja Sekhar CR, Vasudeva Reddy C, Kotaiah B. Ground water pollution from
unsewered sanitation-a case study in Tirupati. Indian. J Environ Prot 1994;14
(11):8457.
[112] Hand in Hand. A proposal for solid waste management Environmental
Protection that Benets the Poor Hand in Hand is a Public Charitable Trust.
http://www.globalgiving.org/pl/1716/projdoc.pdf;
2007
[accessed
02.12.13].
[113] TERI. Advantages, improvements, agricultural practicesm. Tata energy data
directory & yearbook 1994/95). 1994. p. 61-262.
[114] Biomass for heat and power, Opportunity and economics, sustainability 1-72.
http://www.europeanclimate.org/documents/Biomass_report_-_Final.pdf
[115] Abbasi SA, Abbasi Naseema. The likely adverse environmental impacts of
renewable energy sources. Applied Energy 2000;65:12144.
[116] United States department of agriculture. Final -environmental assessment giant
miscanthus establishment and production biomass crop assistance program in
Arkansas, Missouri, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, Sponsored by Aloterra Energy LLC
and MFA Oil Biomass LLC Farm Service Agency. http://www.fsa.usda.gov/Inter
net /FSA_File/naleagiantmcanthus.pdf; 2011 [accessed 14.07.14].
[117] Jorgensen U. Benets versus risks of growing biofuel crops: the case of
Miscanthus. Current Opin Environ Sustain 2011:32430.
[118] Semere T, Slater FM. Ground ora, small mammal and bird species diversity
in miscanthus (Miscanthus x giganteus) and reed canary-grass (Phalaris
arundinacea) elds. Biomass Bioenergy 2007;31:209.
[119] Mary Helen Stoltz. A process that could improve biofuel production, Last
Updated On: 07/05/2013 S&T microbiologist patents process that could
improve biofuel production Missouri, S &T, News & Events, http://news.mst.
edu/2012/09/st_microbiologist_patents_proc/; 2012 [accessed 14.07.14].
[120] Fargione J. Is bioenergy for the birds? An evaluation of alternative future
bioenergy landscapes Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2010;107(44):187456.
[121] Cadoux S, Riche AB, Yates NE, Machet JM. Nutrient requirements of miscanthus x giganteus: Conclusions from a review of published studies. Biomass Bioenergy 2011:19.
[122] Heaton EA, Dohleman FG, Miguez AF, Juvik JA, Ozovaya VL, Widholm J,
Zabotina OA, Mcisac GF, David MB, Voigt TB, Boersma NN, Long SP. Miscanthus: a promising biomass crop. Adv Bot Res 2010;56:75137.
[123] Sokhansanj S, Turhollow AF, Wilkerson E. Integrated biomass supply and
logistics, A modeling environment for designing feedstack supply systems for
biofuel production. ASBE Resource Mag 2008 Engineering and technology for
a sustainable world. September 2008, pp. 1518, www.asabe.org/media.
[124] Badarinath KVS, Madhavi Latha K, Kiran Chand TR, Gupta Prabhat K, Ghosh
AB, Jain SL, Gera BS, Singh Risal, Sarkar AK, Singh Nahar, Parmar RS, Koul S,
Kohli SR, Nath Shambhu, Ojha VK, Singh Gurvir. Characterization of aerosols
from biomass burninga case study from Mizoram (Northeast), India.
Chemosphere 2004;54(2):16775.
[125] Boman C. Thesis on Particulate and gaseous emissions from residential biomass combustion. Energy Technology and Thermal Process Chemistry (ETPC)
Report 05-03, ISBN 91-7305-871-8. Sweden: UMEA University; 2005. p. 160,
SSN
1653-0551.
http://umu.divaportal.org/smash/get/diva2:143635/
FULLTEXT01.
[126] Jaworek A, Czech T, Sobczyk AT, Krupa A. Properties of biomass vs. coal y
ashes deposited in electrostatic precipitator. J Electrostat 2013;71:16575.
[127] Yin C, Rosendahl L, Kaer SK. Grate-ring of biomass for heat and power
production. Progress Energy Combust Sci 2008;34:72554.
[128] Demirbas A. Potential applications of renewable energy sources, biomass
combustion problems in boiler power systems and combustion related
environmental issues. Progress Energy Combust Sci 2005;31:17192.
[129] Williams A, Jones JM, Ma L, Pourkashanian M. Pollutants from the combustion of solid biomass fuels. Progress Energy Combust Sci 2012;38:11337.
[130] Rinne ST, Rodas EJ, Bender BS, Rinne ML, Simpson JM, Galer-Unti R, Glickman
LT. Relationship of pulmonary function among women and children to
indoor air pollution from biomass use in rural Ecuador. Resp Med
2006;100:120815.
[131] Lucassen A, Zhang K, Warkentin J, Moshammer K, Glarborg P, Marshall P,
Kohse-Hoinghaus K. Fuel-nitrogen conversion in the combustion of small
amines using dimethylamine and ethylamine as biomass-related model fuels.
Combust Flame 2012;159:225479.
[132] Lin NH, Tsay SC, Maring HB, Yen MC, Sheu GR, Wang SH, Chiet KH. An
overview of regional experiments on biomass burning aerosols and related
pollutants in Southeast Asia: from BASE-ASIA and the Dongsha Experiment
to 7-SEASq. Atmos Environ 2013;78:119.
[133] Musialik-piotrowska A, Odzimierz kordylewski W, Joanna C, Krzysztof M.
Characteristics of air pollutants emitted from biomass combustion in small
retort boiler. Environ Protect Eng 2010;36:2.
[134] Fullerton DG, Bruce N, Gordon SB. Indoor air pollution from biomass fuel
smoke is a major health concern in the developing world. Trans R Soc Trop
Med Hyg 2008;2008(102):84351.
[135] ECN energy research centre of the Neitherlands, Comparision of ash releases
between fuels, IEA Bioenergy task 32/ Thermalnet workshop, Glasgow.
http://www.ieabcc.nl/workshops/task32_Glasgow_ws_ash/02_Korbee.pdf,
21 September; 2006 [accessed 14.07.14].
[136] Bostrom CE, Gerde P, Hanberg A, Jernstrom B, Johansson C, Kyrklund T,
Rannug A, Trnqvist M, Victorin K, Westerholm R. Cancer risk assessment,
indicators and guidelines for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in the
ambient air. Environ Health Perspect 2002;110:45189.
307
[137] Shelton JW. Jay Shelton's solid fuels encyclopedia. Vermont: Garden Way
Publishing; 1983.
[138] Avakian MD, Dellinger B, Fiedler H, Gullet B, Koshland C, Marklund S,
Oberdorster G, Safe S, Sarom A, Smith KR, Schwartz D, Suk WA. The origin,
fate and health effects of combustion by-products: a research framework.
Environ Health Perspect 2002;110(11):115562.
[139] Granier C, Bessagnet B, Bond T, Angiola AD, Van der Gon HD, Frost GJ, Heil A,
Johannes W. Evolution of anthropogenic and biomass burning emissions of air
pollutants at global and regional scales during the 19802010 period. Clim
Change 2011;109:16390. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0154-1. http://
dare2.ubvu.vu.nl/bitstream/handle/1871/33494/280080.pdf?sequence2.
[140] Pennise D. Center for Entrepreneurship in International Health and Development, Biomass pollution basics. University of California-Berkeley, http://
www.who.int/indoorair/interventions/antiguamod21.pdf
[accessed
14.12.13].
[141] Brown D, Gassner M, Fuchino T, Marechal F. Thermo-economic analysis for
the optimal conceptual design of biomass gasication energy conversion
systems. Appl Thermal Eng 2009;29:213752.
[142] Chirone R, Salatino P, Scalaa F, Solimene R, Urciuolo M. Fluidized bed combustion of pelletized biomass and waste-derived fuels. Combust Flame
2008;155:2136.
[143] Vamvuka D. Comparative xed/uidized bed experiments for the thermal
behavior and environmental impact of olive kernel ash. Renew Energy
2009;34:15864.
[144] Global methane emissions and mitigation opportunities, global methane
initiative. https://www.globalmethane.org/documents/analysis_fs_en.pdf
[accessed 14.07.4].
[145] Swamy M, Bhattacharya S. Budgeting anthropogenic greenhouse gas emission from Indian livestock using country-specic emission coefcients general articles. Current Sci 2006;91(10):134053.
[146] Tonini D, Astrup T. LCA of biomass-based energy systems: a case study for
Denmark. Appl Energy 2012;99:23446.
[147] Haberl H, Kastner T, Schaffartzik A, Ludwiczek N, Erb KH. Global effects of
national biomass production and consumption: Austria's embodied HANPP
related to agricultural biomass in the year 2000. Ecol Econ 2012;84:6673.
[148] Kong S-H, Loh S-K, Bachmann RT, Rahim SA, Salimon J. Bio-char from oil
palm biomass: A review of its potential and challenges. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev 2014;39:72939.
[149] Kuhad RC, Deswal D, Sharma S, Bhattacharya A, Jain KK, Kaur A, Pletschke BI,
Singh A, Karp M. Revisiting cellulose production and redening current
strategies based on major challenges. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2016;55:24972.
[150] Aravind PV, de Jong Wiebren. Evaluation of high temperature gas cleaning
options for biomass gasication product gas for solid oxide fuel cells. Progress Energy Combust Sci 2012;38:73764.
[151] Jegannathan KR, Nielsen PH. Environmental assessment of enzyme use in
industrial production-a literature review. J Clean Prod 2013;42:22840.
[152] Liang Z, Ma X, Lin H, Tang Y. The energy consumption and environmental
impacts of SCR technology in China. Appl Energy 2011:11209.
[153] Van Dael M, Van Passel S, Pelkmans L, Guisson R, Reumermann P, Marquez
Luzardo N, Witters N, Broeze J. A techno-economic evaluation of a biomass
energy conversion park. Appl Energy 2013;104:61122.
[154] Neela Banerjee. Science, Los Angel Time,2013; 27 November, 4.24 p.m
http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-methane-emis
sions-higher-than-estimated-epa-20131127,0,320051.story#axzz2luXnGq2S
[155] Chau J, Sowlati T, Sokhansanj S, Preto F, Melin S, Bi X. Techno-economic
analysis of wood biomass boilers for the greenhouse industry. Appl Energy
2009;86:36471.
[156] Alonso M, Rodriguez N, Gonzalez B, Arias B, Abanades JC. Capture of CO2
during low temperature biomass combustion in a uidized bed using CaO
Process description, experimental results and economics. Energy Procedia
2011;4:795802.
[157] Menon Vishnu, Rao Mala. Trends in bioconversion of lignocellulose: Biofuels,
platform chemicals & biorenery concept. Progress Energy Combust Sci
2012;38:52250.
[158] Poffenberger M. Cambodia's forests and climate change: mitigating drivers of
deforestation. Nat Resources Forum (Special issue: special issue on climate
change and sustainable development) 2009;33(4):28596.
[159] Omer AM. Green energies and the environment. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2008;12:1789821.
[160] Combined heat and power: air quality guidance for local authorities February
2012, Environmental Protection UK, Dutch BEMS Standards. http://www.
iaqm.co.uk/text/guidance/epuk/chp_guidance.pdf [accessed 12.12.13].
[161] Kosinkova J, Doshi A, Maire J, Ristovski Z, Brown R, Rainey TJ. Measuring the
regional availability of biomass for bio-fuels and the potential for microalgae.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;49:127185.
[162] Chandel SS, Shrivastva R, Sharma V, Ramasamy P. Over view of the initiatives
in renewable energy sector under the national action plan on climate change
in India. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016;54:86673.
[163] Obeiter Michael. New analysis shows colorado can meet future carbon
emissions standards. Press release. Washington: World resource Institute;
2013. http://www.wri.org/news/new-analysis-colorado-can-meet-futurecarbon-emissions-standards.
[164] Carneiro P, Ferreira P. The economic, environmental and strategic value of
biomass. Renew Energy 2012;44:1722.
308
[165] Manuilova A, Suebsiri J, Wilson M. Should life cycle assessment be part of the
environmental impact assessment? Case study: EIA of CO2 capture and storage Energy Procedia 2009;2009(1):45118.
[166] Bryan BA, Crossman ND, King D, Meyer WS. Landscape futures analysis:
Assessing the impacts of environmental targets under alternative spatial
policy options and future scenarios. Environ Model Softw 2011;26:8391.
[167] Iddrisu I, Bhattacharyya SC. Ghana's bio-energy policy: is 20% bio-fuel integration achievable by 2030? Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;43:329.
[168] Lam SS, Liew RK, Jusoh A, Chong CT, Ani FN, Chase HA. Progress in waste oil
to sustainable energy, with emphasis on pyrolysis techniques. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev 2016;53:74153.
[169] Feng Guo Zhen Fang, Charles Xu C, Richard L Smith Jr. Solid acid mediated
hydrolysis of biomass for producing biofuels. Progress Energy Combust Sci
2012;38:67290.
[170] Bilgen S, Keles S, Sarikaya I, Kaygusuz K. A perspective for potential land
technology of bio-energy in Turkey: Present case and future view. Renew
Sustain Energy Rev 2015;48:22839.
[171] Piwowar A, Dzikuc M. Outline of the economic and technical problems
associated with the co-combustion of biomass in Poland. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev 2016;54:41520.
[172] Bilgili F, Ozturk I. Biomass energy and economic growth nexus in G7 countries: Evidence from dynamic panel data. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2015;49:1328.
[173] Berhane H, Gebreslassie, Slivinsky Maxim, Wang Belinda, You Fengqi. Life
cycle optimization for sustainable design and operations of hydrocarbon
[174]
[175]
[176]
[177]
[178]
[179]
[180]
biorenery via fast pyrolysis, hydrotreating and hydrocracking. Comput

Chem Eng 2013;50:7191.
Sadhukhan J, Lloyd JR, Scott K, Premier GC, Yu EH, Curtis T, Head IM. A critical
review of integration analysis of microbial electro synthesis systems with
waste bio-reneries for the production of bio-fuel and chemical from reuse of
CO2. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016;56:11632.
Diogo V, Hilst FV, Eijck JV, Verstegen JA, Hilbert J, Carballo S, Volante J, Faaij A.
Combining empirical and theory-based land-use modelling approaches to
assess economic potential of biofuel production avoiding iLUC: Argentina as a
case study. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2014;34:20824.
Witzel C-P, Finger R. Economic evaluation of Miscanthus production a
review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016;53:68196.
Wang W-C, Tao L. Bio-jet fuel conversion technologies. Renew Sustain Energy
Rev 2016;53:80122.
Shamshirband S, Khoshnevisan B, Youse M, Bolandnazar E, Anuar NB,
Wahab AWA, Khan SUR. A multi-objective evolutionary algorithm for energy
management of agricultural systemsa case studies in Iran. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev 2015;44:45765.
Vijay VK, Prasad R, Singh JP, Sorayan VPS. A case for biogas energy application
for rural industries in India. Renew Energy 1996;9(14):9936.
Kumar A, Kumar N, Baredar P, Shukla A. A review on biomass energy
resources, potential, conversion and policy in India. Renew Sustain Energy
Rev 2015;45:5309.

Herbert, 2016

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Herbert, 2016

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 59 (2016) 292308

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

Quantifying environmental performance of biomass energy

Corresponding author. Tel.: 91 4651268789.

residues) in the developing countries [26]. A total of 280 TWh of

be obtained from the other agricultural and plantation residues

3. Positive aspects of biomass

3.2. Benets of bio-waste

Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions

3.1. Merits of biomass over fossil fuels

The merits of energy recovered from bio-waste are given

areas) on the Environmental Performance (EP) of energy balance

sustainable manner. The average percentage of diesel saved due to

3.6. Benets of agricultural plantations

concentration at 3 day intervals. They identied a considerable

Galdos et al. analyzed the environmental advantage of the

4. Negative aspects of biomass

[28]. The production of biofuels from large scale industries waste

19801999 in India The atmospheric methane concentration has

component tar emission and moisture from biomass contributes

the burden of disease in 2000 [7]. The emission of air pollutants

rice straw residue in U.S.A. Unfortunately, rice straw, as it is

The wheat-based E10 (a blend of 10% gasoline and 90% ethanol

5. Environmental monitoring and control

implementation of enzymatic processes in place of conventional

(a) Aerobic digestion

6. Biomass conversion technologies, process and conversion

7. Policy and regulations

increasingly substitute petrol and diesel for transport and be used

with the combined combustion of biomass with fossil fuel in

energy must be produced close to where the source is obtained

It is highly anticipated to seek proper understanding of environmental impacts of biomass energy.

It outlines the biomass synario and it shows that bio-energy has

signicant scope to make a greater contribution to secure and

[81] Nguyen TLT, Hermansen JE, Mogensen L. Environmental performance of crop

biorenery via fast pyrolysis, hydrotreating and hydrocracking. Comput

Potrebbero piacerti anche