Present and prospective energy use potentials of selected agricultural wastes in

Nigeria
C. N. Anyanwu, C. N. Ibeto, I. S. Eze, and S. L. Ezeoha

Citation: Journal of Renewable and Sustainable Energy 5, 032703 (2013); doi: 10.1063/1.4808046
View online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4808046
View Table of Contents: http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/jrse/5/3?ver=pdfcov
Published by the AIP Publishing

Articles you may be interested in

Modeling of formaldehyde and nitrogen oxides from a proposed renewable energy biogas facility in Canada
J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 6, 043121 (2014); 10.1063/1.4893353

Pyrolysis characteristics and kinetics of lignin derived from three agricultural wastes
J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 5, 063119 (2013); 10.1063/1.4841215

1-allyl-3-methylimidazolium chloride pretreatment of seaweed industrial waste for bioethanol conversion

J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 5, 063111 (2013); 10.1063/1.4830267

Potential of low pressure agricultural waste briquettes: An alternative energy source for cooking in Nigeria
J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 5, 013109 (2013); 10.1063/1.4781048

Energy recovery from sugarcane biomass residues: Challenges and opportunities of bio-oil production in the light
of second generation biofuels
J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 1, 063102 (2009); 10.1063/1.3259170

This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to IP:
130.88.90.110 On: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 02:10:32
 JOURNAL OF RENEWABLE AND SUSTAINABLE ENERGY 5, 032703 (2013)

Present and prospective energy use potentials of selected

agricultural wastes in Nigeria
C. N. Anyanwu,1,a) C. N. Ibeto,1 I. S. Eze,1 and S. L. Ezeoha2
1
National Center for Energy Research and Development, University of Nigeria, Nsukka,
Enugu State 410001, Nigeria
2
Department of Agricultural and Bioresources Engineering, University of Nigeria, Nsukka,
Enugu State 410001, Nigeria
(Received 17 December 2012; accepted 13 May 2013; published online 4 June 2013)

The present study reviews the potential energy applications of wastes derived from
rice, cocoa, and oil palm to augment energy needs while helping to abate
environmental pollution. It also highlights the potentials of animal dungs for energy
production in Nigeria. The country currently produces about 2.7  106 tons of rice
annually, containing 0.540  106 tons of rice husk and a similar quantity of straw,
which can be used for energy production. About 6.22  109 MJ of energy can be
derived from the 266 000 tons (which could rise to 490 000 tons by 2015) of cocoa
pods, which are currently produced and discarded annually. This could be utilized to
generate process heat, either through thermal cycle or biochemical conversion. With
respect to oil palm wastes, Nigeria generated about 0.344  106 tonnes of empty fruit
bunches, 0.246  106 tonnes of palm shells, 0.633  106 tonnes of palm oil mill
effluent, and 0.382  106 tonnes of mesocarp fibre in 2012, which are capable of
producing substantial amounts of energy. Nigeria’s livestock population is increasing
at an annual rate of 3.2%, with current dung production of 407  103 tons/day (cow),
28  103 tons/day (pigs), 6.6  103 tons/day (chicken broilers), etc., which is
estimated to produce 6.8  106 m3 of biogas daily. Electricity derivable from this
quantity of biogas can provide lighting for 2.4  106 rural households in Nigeria.
C 2013 AIP Publishing LLC. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4808046]
V

I. INTRODUCTION
As part of efforts to diversify her national economy, which relies heavily on revenue from
crude oil exports, the Nigerian government is currently implementing intervention programs for
a number of key agricultural produce of the country. The Nigerian economy is dependent on
the petroleum sector for the provision of over 80% of public finance, despite instability in the
international crude oil market. However, in spite of its significance to the national economy,
the oil sector has not spurred real economic growth in the country. It has rather created very
few jobs and its wealth has been distributed amongst a small elite.1 The daily needs of the
Nigerian rural populace for primary energy are met almost entirely from fuel wood. Petroleum
products such as kerosene and gasoline are purchased in the rural areas at prices 1.5 times their
official pump prices. Such areas may remain unserved for the near future. Fortunately, Nigeria
is endowed with abundant renewable energy resources such as solar, wind, biomass, and small
hydropower potentials. The logical solution is increased penetration of renewables into the
energy supply mix and biomass energy resource is one of the best options for rural energy
supply.
Of Nigeria’s total primary energy supply2 of 111 156 ktoe, biomass (notably, fuel wood for
cooking) accounts for 81.2%, natural gas (8.2%), petroleum products (5.3%), crude oil (4.8%),
hydro-electric (0.4%), coal and peat (<0.01%). The biomass resources of Nigeria have been

a)
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. Electronic mail: cnasofia@gmail.com. Tel.: þ2348051980070.

1941-7012/2013/5(3)/032703/13/$30.00 5, 032703-1 C 2013 AIP Publishing LLC

V

This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to IP:
130.88.90.110 On: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 02:10:32
 032703-2 Anyanwu et al. J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 5, 032703 (2013)

estimated to be about 8  102 MJ,3 but this could increase when certain agricultural by-products
are taken into account. Government is currently pursuing an aggressive economic diversification
program intended to reposition agriculture as the mainstay of the economy. In terms of employ-
ment, agriculture is by far the most important sector of Nigeria’s economy, engaging about
70% of the total labor force.
Although agricultural holdings are generally small and scattered and farming is often of the
subsistence variety, characterized by simple tools and shifting cultivation, these small farms
account for 80% of the total food.4 About 30.7  106 ha or 33% of Nigeria’s land area is under
cultivation. Nigeria’s diverse climate, from the tropical areas of the coast to the arid zone of
the north, makes it possible to produce virtually all agricultural products that can be grown in
the tropical and semi-tropical areas of the world. Under the Agriculture Transformation Agenda
(ATA) of the Federal Government of Nigeria, there are plans to establish about 240 000 ha of
oil palm plantation between 2012 and 2015.
The agricultural products of Nigeria can be divided into two main groups: food crops, pro-
duced for home consumption, and export or cash products. Energy potentials of food crop resi-
dues are often difficult to harness, since most of these crops are not processed centrally.
Several authors have considered the importance of agro-derived residues as a renewable energy
resource in Nigeria3,5,6 but the present review is intended to quantify the energy potentials of
some important agro-waste streams generated from animal wastes and some cash crops in the
country. These include rice, oil palm, and cocoa. The article also considers the near-future
potentials of these agro-wastes in view of on-going government intervention programs in
agriculture.

II. RICE WASTE

Rice is the world’s most important staple food crop consumed by more than half of the
world population as represented by over 4.8  109 people in 176 countries with over 2.89  109
people in Asia, over 150.3  106 people in America, and over 40  106 people in Africa.7
Global production of rice, the majority of which is grown in Asia, is approximately 550  106
tons/year. Since the mid-1980s, rice consumption has increased at an average annual rate of
11% with only 3% explained by population growth. Also, within the decade of the 1990s,
Erenstein et al.8 reported a 14% annual increase in the demand for rice in Nigeria. Nigeria’s
rice production in 2011/12 is forecast at 2.7  106 tons, up from a revised 2.6  106 tons in
2010/11. Rice cultivation is widespread within the country under five production systems (or
ecologies) classified as rain-fed upland, rain-fed lowland, irrigated lowland, deepwater, and
mangrove swamp accounting for 30%, 47%, 17%, 5%, and 1% of the total rice areas, respec-
tively. The level of domestic rice production in Nigeria is about 3  106 metric tons, while the
domestic demand for rice is about 5  106 metric tons which has led to a huge gap of about
2  106 metric tons annually thereby motivating the continued dependence on importation to fill
the existing gap.9 In fact, Nigeria is ranked as the second largest importer of rice in the
world.10
There is the presidential initiative to increase rice production to 6.0  106 tons within
3 years11,12 Local rice production was stipulated to grow substantially in 2012, following the
resolve by Olam International, a global agricultural company, to commence large-scale cultivation
and processing of rice by the last quarter. The Singaporean company recently announced that it
would invest $49.2  106 ( 7.675  109) in rice farming and milling facility in Nasarawa, one of
the nation’s major rice growing states. The project is expected to provide 60 000 tons of paddy
annually to the processing facility, which would then be converted into 36 000 tons of milled
rice.13 Also, the Federal Government Agricultural Transformation agenda got another boost as the
Sokoto State Government announced that it has signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU)
for the establishment of a 35  109 rice production, processing and marketing company in
Sokoto. The state targets the production of about 200 000 tons of milled rice per annum.14
The cultivation of rice results in two major types of residues, i.e., straw and husk having
attractive potential in terms of energy. A ton of rice paddy produces 290 kg rice straw. 290 kg

This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to IP:
130.88.90.110 On: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 02:10:32
 032703-3 Anyanwu et al. J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 5, 032703 (2013)

rice straw can produce 100 kWh of power, when combusted (having a calorific value of
10.05 MJ/kg (2400 kcal/kg)). Also, 1 ton of rice paddy produces 220 kg rice husk and 1 ton rice
husk is equivalent to 410–570 kWh electricity having a calorific value of 3000 kcal/kg.15 Also,
rice husk has energy content of roughly 14 GJ/ton. Approximately 20% of the weights of rice
are rice husks.16,17 Rice husk, a milling by-product of rice, has a good value as a biomass fuel
and is used as a source of thermal energy to produce steam for parboiling of raw rice. This bio-
mass amounts to 20% of total rough rice (paddy) produced. Rice husk is mainly used as fuel
for parboiling and drying of paddy before milling. In a study conducted in West Bengal, India,
it was reported that 1659 MJ of biomass energy was consumed for rice parboiling.7 In another
study by the IDRC (International Development Research Center, Canada), it was reported that
theoretically the net energy demand for hot soaking, steaming, and drying were 360 MJ,
105.5 MJ, and 574 MJ, respectively, to process 1 ton of paddy. It was also mentioned that about
200 kg of rice husk (2800 MJ) was needed to process 1 ton of paddy if the efficiency of a husk
fired boiler is 45%.18
For biogas production, Uzodinma et al.19 reported that blends of rice husk with brewer’s
spent grain, cassava waste water, and carbonated soft drink sludge increased biogas yield by
over 240%, 250%, and 40%, respectively, while also reducing significantly the time taken for
gas flammability to set in. Rice husk is also used for some non-energy purposes such as incor-
poration in soil, bio-fertilizer additive, animal husbandry as low quality feed and litter material,
sorbent material in environmental remediation, building material with good thermal insulation,
and pest control agent.20,21 Rice husk has the potential to generate 16.5 to 22  106 tons of ash
containing over 90% amorphous silica that could be used as a substitute for silica fume, which
can be used in the cement and steel industries further decreasing the need to import these mate-
rials.15 Rice straw is a great bio-resource, obtained by the stripping process of rice using
machine at the field where the rice straw was removed and left to dry and is also one of the
abundant lignocellulosic waste materials in the world. Global annual production is about
731  106 tons of which 20.9  106 tons is distributed in Africa. One potentially attractive
option for rice straw utilization is for energy production. Rice straw has a higher heating value
of about 16 MJ/kg. Rice husk has low bulk density of only 70–110 kg/m3, 145 kg/m3 when
vibrated or 180 kg/m3 in form of briquettes or pellets. It, thus, requires large volumes for stor-
age and transport, which makes transport over long distances uneconomical. When burnt, the
ash content is 17%–26%, a lot higher than fuels (wood 0.2%–2% and coal 12.2%). This means
that large amounts of ash need to be handled when it is used for energy generation. However,
rice husk has a high average calorific value of 14267.78 kJ/kg or 1.4267  104 kJ/kg and, there-
fore, is a good, renewable energy resource.20,21
Rice straw can either be used alone or mixed with other biomass materials in direct com-
bustion, whereby combustion boilers are used in combination with steam turbines (CHP option)
to produce electricity and heat. The energy content of rice straw is around 14 MJ/kg at 10%
moisture content. The by-products are fly ash and bottom ash, which have an economic value
and could be used in cement and/or brick manufacturing, construction of roads and embank-
ments, etc.22 Also, in a study by Teghammar et al.,23 anaerobic digestion of rice straw resulted
in 22 Nml CH4/g raw material showing it is a potential feedstock for biogas production. Rice
straw can also potentially produce 205  109 l bioethanol per year, which is about 5% of total
consumption.24 Rice straw has 37% cellulose, 24% hemicelluloses, and 14% lignin. The highest
bioethanol yield produced from the fermentation was 0.102 g/g rice straw, which is equivalent
to 62.61% of theoretical bioethanol yield.25 The regional potential bioethanol production (GL)
from wasted rice grain and rice straw is shown in Table I.28
Rice chaff is an agricultural waste which remains after the processing of the rice crop,
such as rice straw and rice husk. It can be used as feedstock for biogas production. Cumulative
biogas production of 161.5 ml has been obtained for a retention time of 60 days and 140.5 ml
for a retention time of 70 days.26 Another product of rice processing is rice bran and under
supercritical condition, biodiesel can be produced from rice bran and dewaxed-degummed rice
bran oil.27 Of all the residues of rice, rice husk appears to be the most useful in terms of energy
content. There are diverse energy applications of the residues of rice but the most convenient is

This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to IP:
130.88.90.110 On: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 02:10:32
 032703-4 Anyanwu et al. J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 5, 032703 (2013)

TABLE I. Regional potential of bioethanol production (GL) from wasted rice grain and rice straw. Reprinted with permis-
sion from S. Kim and B. E. Dale, “Global potential bioethanol production from wasted crops and crop residues,” Biomass
Bioenergy 26, 361–375 (2004). Copyright 2004 Elsevier B. V.

From Gasoline
From grain From Total equivalent
wasted replaced rice bioethanol (GL) from
grain by DDGS straw (GL) wasted grain

Africa 0.52 0.19 5.86 6.57 4.72

Asia 10.5 3.87 186.8 201.2 144.5
Europe 0.01 0.004 1.10 1.11 0.80
North America 0.46 0.17 3.06 3.69 2.65
Central America 0.04 0.01 0.77 0.83 0.59
Oceania 0.01 0.004 0.47 0.49 0.35
South America 0.68 0.25 6.58 7.51 5.39.04
World 12.3 4.5 204.6 221.4 159.0

their use as fuel at or close to the rice mill through combustion to generate heat for cook
stoves, furnaces, and steam turbines for various thermal applications.

III. OIL PALM WASTE

The oil palm (Elaeis guineensis Jacq) is one of the most economic tree crops in the tropics
and the highest source of vegetable oil of all oil-bearing plants.29 Before 1965, Nigeria was the
world’s leading producer and exporter of palm oil. However, since 1965, there has been a no-
ticeable decline in Nigeria’s oil palm production.30 Nigeria is currently the fifth largest producer
of palm oil in the world after Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, and Colombia, with an annual pro-
duction volume of 850 000 tonnes.31 The oil palm tree is found in about 27 states in Nigeria.32
Three varieties of oil palm are available in Nigeria, namely Dura, Pisifera, and Tenera. The
preferred variety is the high bred Tenera, which is a crossbreed of the Dura (female) and the
Pisifera (male). Tenera hybrid are produced by the Nigeria Institute for Oil Palm Research
(NIFOR) and very often referred to as the extension work seeds (EWSs).4 In terms of compari-
son, the fruit of the Tenera variety contains 25% oil, by weight, and the Dura variety 18%. The
palm oil industry besides producing crude palm oil (CPO) and palm kernel oil (PKO) produces
palm kernel shell (PKS), mesocarp fibre (MF), empty fruit bunches (EFBs), palm oil mill efflu-
ent (POME), palm trunk (PT) (during replanting), and palm fronds (PF) (during pruning).
Almost 70%–76% of the volume from the processing of fresh fruit bunch (FFB) is removed as
waste.33–35

A. Quantity of oil palm wastes currently produced in Nigeria

Nigeria has two main palm production systems, the wild/semi-wild grove and the planted
farms with the wild/semi-wild grove producing about 80% of total fruits for processing. Within
the oil palm belt in Nigeria, 80% of production comes from dispersed small holder farmers
who harvest wild/semi-wild plants. Several million small holders are spread over an estimated
area ranging from 1.65  106 ha to 2.4  106 ha and to a maximum of 3  106 ha. The estimate
for oil palm plantations in Nigeria ranges from 169 000 ha (72 000 ha of estate plantation and
97 000 ha of small holder (1–5 ha) plantations) to 360 000 ha of plantations.4
Given that the wild/semi-wild grove tends to yield about 1.4 tonnes FFB/ha, while the
plantations yield on average 4.5 tonnes/ha,39 the total production of FFB is about 5.7  106
tonnes per year. With palm oil extraction rates averaging 15%,32 the total production of oil in
Nigeria is in the realm of 855 000 tonnes of CPO per annum. However, based on the USDA31
figure of 850 000 tonnes of CPO per annum for 2012, the estimated quantities of oil palm
wastes in Nigeria for 2012 are shown in Table II. Based on this table, Nigeria currently

This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to IP:
130.88.90.110 On: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 02:10:32
 032703-5 Anyanwu et al. J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 5, 032703 (2013)

TABLE II. Estimate of Nigeria’s oil palm wastes in 2012.

S No. Wastes Location DM, per tonne of CPOa Nigeria production (tonne DM)

1 Oil palm fronds (OPF) Field 1.82–2.2 1.55–1.87  106 (1.71)

2 Roots Field (every 20/30 yr) 0.96 816 000
3 Trunks Field (every 20/30 yr) 0.44–0.74 374 000–629 500 (501 500)
4 EFB Mill 0.35–0.46 297 500–391 000 (344 250)
5 MF Mill 0.35–0.5 297 500–467 500 (382 500)
6 Palm shells (PS) Mill 0.14–0.44 119 000–374 000 (246 500)
7 POME Mill 0.39–1.1 331 500–935 000 (633 250)
8 Palm kernel cake (PKC) Mill 0.07 59 500

a
Values of DM, per tonne of CPO are based on Ref. 40 and on 850 000 tonnes of CPO/yr for Nigeria.

generates on the average, not less than 344 250 dry tonnes of EFB, 382 500 dry tonnes of MF,
246 500 dry tonnes of PS, and 633 250 dry tonnes of POME annually.

B. Quantity of oil palm wastes expected in future

There are plans to continuously increase oil palm production in Nigeria. The government
of Cross River State plans to provide 50 000 ha of land to expand the State palm oil planta-
tions.36 The Okitiputa oil palm Plc. has plans to cultivate her still uncultivated 3000 ha of
land,37 while the Araroni-Ayesan Oil palm Plc. in Ondo State has about 2900 ha of uncultivated
land on the verge of utilization. Under the ATA of the Federal Government of Nigeria, there
are plans to establish about 240 000 ha of oil palm plantation between 2012 and 2015.38 Also,
under the Vegetable Oil Development Program of the Federal Government, Nigeria has a set
target of planting 1  106 ha of oil palm in 5 yrs.39 Thus, the oil palm sector is expected to
receive a boost of about 1.12  106 ha of plantation by 2017 bringing the total hectarage to
about 4.48  106 at an annual growth rate of 6%. Therefore, the oil palm waste estimates in
Nigeria by the year 2017 are as shown in Table III. Based on this table, Nigeria by 2017 will
be generating on the average, not less than 660 000 dry tonnes of EFB, 733 000 dry tonnes of
MF, 472 000 dry tonnes of PS, and 1.21  106 tonnes of POME annually.

C. Energy use potentials of oil palm wastes in Nigeria

In Africa, no part of the oil palm is considered waste. The palm kernel cake is useful in
feeding livestock. The leaves of oil palm are used for making brooms, roofing and thatching,
baskets, and mats. The thicker leave-stalks are used for walls of village huts. The bark of the
palm frond is peeled and woven into baskets.41

TABLE III. Estimates of Nigeria’s oil palm wastes by 2017.

S No. Waste Location DM, per tonne CPOa Nigeria estimate (tonnes DM/yr)

1 OPF Field 1.82–2.20 2.96–3.48  106 (3.22  106)

2 Roots Field 0.96 1.56  106
3 Trunks Field 0.44–0.74 717 200–1.21  106 (963 600)
4 EFB Mill 0.35–0.46 570 500–749 800 (660 150)
5 Fibre Mill 0.35–0.55 570 500–896 500 (733 500)
6 Shells Mill 0.14–0.44 228 200–717 200 (472 700)
7 POME Mill 0.39–1.10 635 700–1.79  106 (1.21  106)
8 PKC Mill 0.07 114 100

a
Values of DM/tonne of CPO are based on Ref. 40 and on 1.63  106 tonnes of CPO/yr for Nigeria.

This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to IP:
130.88.90.110 On: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 02:10:32
 032703-6 Anyanwu et al. J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 5, 032703 (2013)

TABLE IV. Ethanol yields from EFB, trunks, and fronds. Reprinted with permission from J. Lim Meng Hon, “A case study
on palm empty fruit bunch as energy feedstock,” SEGi Rev. 3(2), 3–15 (2010). Copyright 2010 SEGi University.

Biomass EFB Trunks Fronds

Glucose (g/g DM) 0.43 0.65 0.47

Xylose (g/g DM) 0.26 0.12 0.24
Ethanol (l/tonne DM) 427 496 415

The tree itself can be split and used as supporting frames in buildings. The sap tapped
from the tree is processed into palm wine, which is a veritable source of yeast. The palm wine
can be fermented and distilled into a gin.42 The EFB, the shell and the fiber that remain after
oil extraction are used for mulching, manuring, and as fuel.43
In energy terms, however, the main products and the wastes from oil palm contain high
energy potentials. The estimated thermal energy potential or calorific value for CPO and PKO
is 44 GJ/tonne.44 The calorific values are 20.46 GJ/dry tonne and 22.88 GJ/dry tonne for fibre
and shell, respectively.44,45 Dry EFB has a heating value of about 15.5 GJ/tonne (3702 kcal/
kg), while the frond and trunk wood have heating values of 3.0 MJ/kg and 7.4 MJ, respec-
tively.46 The biogas generated from 1 ton of FFB is estimated at 19.6 m3 with a calorific value
of 22.9 MJ/M3.44 The electricity generating potential of palm oil mill residue (biomass) and
POME is estimated as 195.4 GWh and 55–77 GWh per million tonne.47,48 The yields of
cellulose-ethanol from EFB, palm trunks, and palm fronds have been estimated as 39% giv-
ing 427, 496, and 415 l-ethanol per tonne dry matter (DM), respectively (Table IV).50,51
Waste palm cooking oil (WPCO) also has high potential as a practical future source of bio-
diesel with 80% biodiesel yield at optimum condition.49 Based on these estimated energy
potentials of oil palm products, the potentials for Nigeria are given for 2012 and 2017
(Tables V and VI).

IV. COCOA WASTE

The cocoa tree originally came from South American Amazon forest. The plant was first
given its botanical name by Swedish natural scientist Carl Von Linne (1707–1778), who called it
“Theobroma” (food of the gods) Cocoa. It thrives well in the tropical zone between 15 N and

TABLE V. Estimated energy potential of oil palm wastes for Nigeria in 2012.

Biomass Average annual

(BMS) production (tonnes DM) BMS energy potential Total energy potential (annual)
6
OPF 1.71  10 3.0 GJ/tonne DM 5.13  106 GJ
195.4 GWh/mil-tonne DM 334 GWh
415 l ethanol/tonne DM 710  106 l ethanol
Trunks 501 500 7.4 GJ/tonne DM 3.7  106 GJ
195.4 GWh/mil-tonne DM 98 GWh
496 l ethanol/tonne DM 249  106 l ethanol
EFB 344,250 15.5 GJ/tonne DM 5.34  106 GJ
195.4 GWh/mil-tonne DM 67 GWh
427 l ethanol/tonne DM 147  106 l ethanol
MF 382 500 20.46 GJ/tonne 7.83  106 GJ
195.4 GWh/mil-tonne DM 75 GWh
Shells 246 500 22.88 GJ/tonne DM 5.64  106 GJ
195.4 GWh/mil-tonne DM 48 GWh
POME 633 250 66 GWh/mil-tonne 41.8 GWh
284 m3 biogas/tonne 180  106 m3 biogas

This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to IP:
130.88.90.110 On: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 02:10:32
 032703-7 Anyanwu et al. J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 5, 032703 (2013)

TABLE VI. Estimated energy potential of oil palm wastes for Nigeria in 2017.

Average annual
Biomass production
(BMS) (tonnes DM) BMS energy potential Total energy potential (annual)

OPF 3.22  106 3.0 GJ/tonne DM 9.66  106 GJ

195.4 GWh/mil-tonne DM 629 GWh
415 l ethanol/tonne DM 1336  106 l ethanol
Trunks 963 600 7.4 GJ/tonne DM 7.13  106 GJ
195.4 GJh/mil-tonne DM 188 GWh
496 l ethanol/tonne DM 478  106 l ethanol
EFB 660 150 15.5 GJ/tonne DM 10.2  106 GJ
195.4 GWh/mil-tonne DM 129 GWh
427 l ethanol/tonne DM 282  106 l ethanol
MF 733 500 20.46 GJ/tonne DM 15  106 GJ
195.4 GWh/mil-tonne DM 143 GWh
Shell 472 700 22.88 GJ/tonne DM 10.8  106 GJ
195.4 GWh/mil-tonne DM 92 GWh
POME 1.21  106 66 GWh/mil-tonne DM 80 GWh
284 m3 biogas/tonne 344  106 m3 biogas

15 S of the equator. The cocoa tree reaches maturity within 5–6 yr and can live up to 50 yr.52 In
West Africa, the harvesting season is in September/October but can extend to January/March. It
is a plant that needs plenty of water and thrives in a continuation of sandy and loamy soils.
Traditionally, cocoa is cultivated in producing countries and sold for export in the form of
beans. Importing countries then process the beans, transforming the raw goods into finished or
semi-finished products (cocoa butter, cocoa liqueur, cocoa powder, etc.). During the 19th cen-
tury, increasing demand for cocoa led to its introduction in Africa, including Sao Tome and
Principe, Fernando Po, Nigeria, and Ghana. Between 1925 and 1939, African production
expanded to Cameroon, concurrent with its colonization.
Recently, in an effort to increase the value of exports, some producer countries, such as the
Ivory Coast, Ghana, Nigeria, and Brazil, have developed their own facilities for grinding beans.
World cocoa consumption is estimated at 2.8  106 tons per year. The largest cocoa importers
are Europe (more than 1.2  106 tons per year) and the United States (0.4  106 tons per year).
The largest importer nations are Holland, the US, Germany, Britain, and Brazil.
Nigeria produced 242 000 tons of cocoa in 2008. The National Cocoa Development
Committee (NCDC), made up of the 14 cocoa producing states in the country, has distributed
new high yield cocoa seedlings to cocoa farmers, and continues to allow the purchase of chemi-
cals and inputs at 50% subsidy. This is in line with plans to increase production to 700 000
metric tons by 2015 from about 380 000 tons at the end of 2011 by providing farmers with
access to new seeds, fertilizers, and finance.53 Cocoa is Nigeria’s second-biggest foreign-
exchange earner after crude oil. Nigeria’s cocoa trees produce an average of 450 kg/ha but
newer varieties can produce up to 2000 kg/ha. Ivory Coast, Ghana, and Indonesia are the largest
producers, according to the International Cocoa Organization.54

A. Cocoa processing
Harvested cocoa pods are opened—typically with a machete—to expose the beans. The
pulp and cocoa seeds are removed and the rind is discarded. The pulp and seeds are then piled
in heaps, placed in bins, or laid out on grates for several days. During this time, the seeds and
pulp undergo “sweating,” where the thick pulp liquefies as it ferments. The fermented pulp
trickles away, leaving cocoa seeds behind to be collected. Sweating is important for the quality
of the beans, which originally have a strong bitter taste. If sweating is interrupted, the resulting
cocoa may be ruined; if under-done, the cocoa seed maintains a flavor similar to raw potatoes
and becomes susceptible to mildew. Some cocoa producing countries distil alcoholic spirits

This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to IP:
130.88.90.110 On: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 02:10:32
 032703-8 Anyanwu et al. J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 5, 032703 (2013)

using the liquefied pulp. During on-farm processing of cocoa beans, the pulp is removed by fer-
mentation and is hydrolyzed by microorganisms. Hydrolyzed pulp is known in the industry as
“sweatings.” Approximately 40 l of pulp can be obtained from 800 kg of wet beans,55 i.e., 50 l
per ton of wet beans. The sweatings are also allowed to drain off as liquid waste in the farms.
The sweatings and wastes from cocoa pod husks have already found uses and studies are being
undertaken to determine their viability as commercial products.
Cocoa husk or pod is the part, which contains the bean in the raw cocoa fruit.56 After
removing the beans, the pod which is left forms on the average, about 75% of the weight of
the whole fruit, and at present constitutes an undesirable waste product in the cocoa industry.
The utilization of such waste for the extraction of value added ingredients such as pectin or for
energy generation would help to improve waste disposal. An average of 10 g of pectin could be
extracted from every 100 g of husk by-product. Cocoa bean shells, the thin skin immediately
surrounding the cocoa nib (edible portion), constituting at least 10% of the weight of the bean,
are a waste product from the chocolate manufacturing industry.

B. Energy use potentials

The cocoa production stage generates a large amount of solid waste in the form of pod
husks. The pod husk constitutes about 67%–75% of the fresh pod weight.56,57 At present, pod
husks are largely a waste product of the cocoa industry, and present a serious disposal problem.
Utilizing pod husks for thermal energy generation in the Nigerian cocoa industry could greatly
reduce dependence on grid electricity for process heating. Currently, about 266 000 tons of
cocoa pods are produced annually in the country (70% of 380 000 tons). This quantity of waste
could produce about 6.22  109 MJ of energy taking the average calorific value of cocoa pods as
23.4 MJ/kg.58,59 A huge amount of thermal energy could be generated for self use by the industry.
This is already being practiced in some cocoa producing countries. For instance, at the San Pedro
factory in Cote d’Ivoire, some of the cocoa shells are combusted in a boiler, which generates
60%–70% of the factory’s steam requirements for its processes and machinery.60 The remaining
amounts of cocoa bean shells are discarded or incinerated with no energetic use. Tung et al.60 went
further to assess this current use of cocoa bean shells and consider the possibility of utilizing some
or all of this material as substrate for biogas production through anaerobic fermentation. The biogas
would then be used to replace or offset current butane and grid electricity requirements.
According to the authors, an improvement in energy efficiency can be achieved by utilizing
the biogas from cocoa bean shell to replace or offset the factory’s demands for grid electricity
and LPG (butane) for thermal energy. The simulations showed that the best short term scenario
(up to 7 years) from a financial perspective would be to invest in a small biogas plant of about
300 kW to offset the thermal energy currently provided by butane. This would, however, pro-
vide only a minimal (about 16%) reduction in carbon emissions with a payback period of
3.3 yr. The scenario of investing in a larger biogas plant of about 1.4 MW to offset as much
grid electricity as possible provided the best long term financial result. This latter scenario
could reduce carbon emissions by 49% with a payback period of 5.5 yr.

V. ANIMAL WASTE
A. Highlights of Nigerian livestock resources
Nigerian livestock population totals, combining estimates from both the 1990 traditional
sector survey and the 1992 survey of commercial livestock enterprises, are given in Table VII.
These estimates, based on standardised, systematic methods of sampling, are the most reliable
population figures currently available, with standard error margins of less than 5% for major
livestock species.61 Regional differences in livestock distribution are illustrated in a series of
maps, generated using MAPICS software, an unsophisticated form of Geographical Information
System (GIS). From another source, the livestock population is presented in a bar chart as
shown in Fig. 1,62 which is almost similar to that in Table VII. Based on 3.2% growth in

This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to IP:
130.88.90.110 On: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 02:10:32
 032703-9 Anyanwu et al. J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 5, 032703 (2013)

TABLE VII. Nigerian livestock population 1992 and 2005. Other poultry include pigeon, ducks, guinea fowl, and turkeys.

Livestock 1992 population estimate (103) 2005 population estimate (103)a

Chicken 82 400 116 678

Goats 34 500 48 852
Sheep 22 100 31 293
Cattle 13 900 19 682
Pigs 3500 4956
Donkeys 900 1274
Horses 200 283
Dogs 4500 6372
Cats 3300 4672
Rabbits 1700 2407
Guinea pigs 500 708
Giant rats 60 85
Other poultry 31 900 45 170

a
2005 figures were estimated (nearest thousand) based on an average annual growth rate of 3.2% from 1992 figures.
Reprinted with permission from C. N. Anyanwu et al., “Biofuels: An alternative resource for mitigating primary energy short-
falls in Nigeria,” Int. Energy J. 9(Special Issue 61), 31–36 (2008). Copyright 2008 Asian Institute of Technology (RERIC).

livestock from Akinbami et al.,63 Anyanwu et al.5 showed that Nigerian animal population by
2005 would be as shown in Table VII.
According to Anyanwu et al.,5 a substantial percentage of the chicken, pig, goat, sheep,
and cow populations are reared on commercial basis. Availability of animal dungs in this work
is limited to the five species that are reared commercially, namely chicken broilers, cow, goat,
sheep, and pigs (Table IX). It has been reported elsewhere that about 85% to 90% of the animal
dung is water and that the dung production by livestock specie represents about 5% to 6% of
its body weight.64 Considering that feeds and feeding ration of these animals are not the same
globally, it is estimated that animal dung production in Nigeria per day per animal specie is
only about 3% of their body weight which resulted in the values in column 4 (Table VIII) from
the 2005 livestock population estimate.
In Nigeria, identified feedstock substrate for an economically feasible biogas production
includes water lettuce, water hyacinth, dung, cassava leaves and processing waste, urban refuse,
solid (including industrial) waste, agricultural residues, and sewage.63,65,66 Although commer-
cial biogas plants are not widespread in Nigeria, a number of research works on the science,
technology and policy aspects of biogas production have been carried out by various scholars
in the country.6,67–84

FIG. 1. Livestock population estimate. Reprinted with permission from M. C. Ndinechi et al., “Economic potentials of ani-
mal dung as a viable source of biomass energy,” Acad. Res. Int. 2(1), 83–89 (2012). Copyright 2012 SAVAP International.

This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to IP:
130.88.90.110 On: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 02:10:32
 032703-10 Anyanwu et al. J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 5, 032703 (2013)

TABLE VIII. Potential dung production from commercial livestock species. Reprinted with permission from C. N.
Anyanwu et al., “Biofuels: An alternative resource for mitigating primary energy shortfalls in Nigeria,” Int. Energy J.
9(Special Issue 61), 31–36 (2008). Copyright 2008 Asian Institute of Technology (RERIC); I. S. Eze, “Characterization
and modelling of kinetics of biogas/syngas production from animal dungs,” Ph.D. dissertation (University of Nigeria,
Nsukka, 2012). Copyright 2012 Unpublished work.

Livestock Population Daily dung Daily dung Daily energy

average estimate production production Energy content potential
weight 2005 (106) (kg/animal/day) (tons/day) (MJ/ton) (GJ/day)

Chicken broilers (1.5 kg) 146.7 0.045 6601.5 13.0  103 85.82
Goat (45 kg) 61.4 2.25 138 150 15.35  103 2120.60
Sheep (45 kg) 39.4 2.25 88 650 15.57  103 1380.28
Cow (550 kg) 24.7 16.50 407 550 16.65  103 6785.71
Pig (150 kg) 6.2 4.50 27 900 15.38  103 429.10

1. Electricity generation from animal dungs in Nigeria

Eze,5 working with a 0.124 m3 digester producing 0.041 m3/day of biogas on average,
established that this gave thermal energy of 4019.47 kJ or 1.12 kwh of electricity. Since 1 kg of
fresh animal waste produces about 0.03 m3 gas according to Akinbami et al.,63 it follows that
Nigeria can produce about 6.8  106 m3 of biogas every day. This estimation by Akinbami
et al.63 is within the range of biogas production per kg of animal dung as expressed in other
work done elsewhere (Table IX).
From the 2005 (Tables VII and VIII) animal population estimate, and waste production
rate of each animal at 3% of body weight per day, it may be inferred that Nigeria generates
about 668855.5 ton/day of animal dung from the commercially reared animals. This translates
to 2.01  107 m3/day of biogas. Research work carried out on Nigerian animal dungs6 shows
that 0.041 m3/day of biogas can produce 1.12 kWh of electricity. It, therefore, implies that on
daily bases Nigeria is capable of generating 2.3  107 kWh of electricity. According to
Mathew,85 2.4 kWh of electricity is needed to power a single 100 W light bulb for 1 day. It
can, therefore, be inferred that daily biogas production in Nigeria can light about 9.6  106
bulbs in a day if properly harnessed. At an average of 4 bulbs per rural home, it implies that
this can light about 2.4  106 homes of Nigerians living out of reach of national grid.

TABLE IX. Gas production potential of various types of dung. Reprinted with permission from the Food and Agriculture
Organization (FAO), 1996, see Table 2 in Biogas technology: A training manual for extension (FAO/CMS, 1996).
Copyright 2012, FAO.

S No. Type of dung m3/kg

1 Cattle 0.023–0.040
2 Pig 0.040–0.059
3 Poultry (chicken) 0.065–0.116
4 Human 0.020–0.028

TABLE X. Energy derived from utilization of petroleum products in Nigeria (2010 data).

Annual Energy Energy

consumption content utilization
Type of fuel (106 l) (MJ/l) (PJ/yr)

Petrol (PMS) 8643 32.2 278.3

Diesel (AGO) 883 36.0 31.8
Kerosene (DPK) 496 37.7 18.7
Fuel Oil (LPFO) 40 38.3 1.5

This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to IP:
130.88.90.110 On: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 02:10:32
 032703-11 Anyanwu et al. J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 5, 032703 (2013)

TABLE XI. Annual energy potentials of animal waste and crop residues.

Annual production Energy content Energy potential

Type of waste (103 tons) (GJ/ton) (PJ/yr)

Chicken broiler dungs 2409.4 13.00 31.322

Cattle dungs 148 800 16.70 2484.960
Pig dungs 10 184 15.4 156.834
Rice husk 660 14.00 9.240
Rice straw 870 10.05 8.744
Cocoa pods 266 23.40 6.224

This clearly indicates that an enormous amount of fossil energy could be saved in the
country by using biogas, in addition to numerous health and environmental benefits, which jus-
tify the need to explore and encourage the use of animal dung as a viable energy source with
regards to its economic potentials.
The quantity of (and energy derived from) petroleum products utilized in Nigeria2 is shown
in Table X, while the energy potential of animal wastes and crop residues produced is presented
in Tables V and XI.

VI. CONCLUSION
Nigerian agriculture generates a huge quantity of waste resources, which can be converted
to useful renewable energy to augment the country’s primary energy needs. Current government
intervention under the agricultural transformation agenda program is expected to increase rice
production from about 2.7  106 metric tons to 6.0 MMT by 2015, which would lead to com-
mensurate increases in both straw and husk. The oil palm industry generates huge quantities of
by-products annually in the form of EFB, POME, etc. It is concluded that a substantial quantity
of fossil energy could be saved if renewable energy from agricultural wastes is harnessed into
the country’s energy mix.
The present review has shown that Nigeria’s renewable energy potential from oil palm,
rice, cocoa, and animal wastes is huge and could be exploited to provide such alternative fuels
as ethanol, biogas, and solid fuel, for both automobile use and electricity generation. It is rec-
ommended that these renewable energy resources should be harnessed for self-use by the agri-
cultural industries as well as by the rural populace.

1
C. Nwajiuba, see http://www.ng.boell.org/downloads/Agriculture_Green_Deal_Study.pdf for “Nigeria’s agricultural and
food security challenges” (November 15, 2012).
2
See http://www.utwente.nl/mb/cstm/research/urbanenergy/reports/nigeria_rep.doc/ for “Friends of the environment.
Enabling urban poor livelihood policy making: Understanding the role of energy studies” (April 24, 2013).
3
F. S. Ikuponisi, “Status of renewable energy in Nigeria,” paper presented at An International Conference On Making
Renewable Energy a Reality, Abuja/Port Harcourt/Calabar, Nigeria, 2004.
4
L. A. Dada, “The African export industry: What happened and how can it be revived?,” Case study on the Nigerian oil
palm industry, Agricultural Management, Marketing and Finance Working Document, Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations Organization, Rome, 2007.
5
C. N. Anyanwu, I. S. Eze, O. U. Oparaku, V. K. Sharma, G. Braccio, and L. Contuzzi, “Biofuels: An alternative resource
for mitigating primary energy shortfalls in Nigeria,” Int. Energy J. 9(Special Issue 61), 31–36 (2008).
6
I. S. Eze, “Characterization and modelling of kinetics of biogas/syngas production from animal dungs,” Ph.D. dissertation
(University of Nigeria, Nsukka, 2012).
7
M. Bruntrup, “The rice market in Senegal,” Agric. Rur. Dev. 13, 1–23 (2006).
8
O. Erenstein, F. Lancon, O. Osiname, and M. Kebbeh, “Operationalizing the strategic framework for rice sector revital-
ization in Nigeria. The Nigerian rice economy in a competitive world: Constraints, opportunities and strategic choices,”
Project Report, 2004, p. 38.
9
A. O. Ogbe, V. O. Okoruwa, and O. J. Saka, “Competitiveness of Nigerian rice and maize production ecologies: A policy
analysis approach,” Trop. Subtrop. Agroecosyst. 14, 493–500 (2011).
10
L. M. Contreras, H. Schelle, C. R. Sebrango, and I. Pereda, “Methane potential and biodegradability of rice straw, rice
husk and rice residues from the drying process,” Water Sci. Technol. 65(6), 1142–1149 (2012).
11
M. Rondon and M. David, “Nigeria: grain and feed annual global agricultural information network report,” GAIN Report
No. NI11015, USDA Agricultural Service, April 15, 2011.

This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to IP:
130.88.90.110 On: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 02:10:32
 032703-12 Anyanwu et al. J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 5, 032703 (2013)

12
L. Flake and M. David, “Nigeria grain and feed annual. Nigeria’s wheat inports surge,” ASDA Foreign Agriculture
Service Grain Report No. NI10007, Global Agriculture Information Network, 2010.
13
J. Olajide, “Rice availability. The moment,” Nigeria Most Independent Newspaper, September 14, 2012.
14
I. Bello, “Sokoto signs memorandum of understanding for 35 bn. Rice project,” Nigerian Daily Times Newspaper,
August 31, 2012.
15
S. Zafar, see http:www.bioenergyconsult.com for “Biomass resources from rice industry” (August 15, 2012).
16
F. R. Kargbo, J. Xing, and Y. Zhang, “Pretreatment for energy use of rice straw: A review,” Afr. J. Agric. Res. 4(13),
1560–1565 (2009).
17
P. Roy, N. Shimizu, T. Shiina, and T. Kimura, “Energy consumption and cost analysis of local parboiling processes,”
J. Food Eng. 76, 646–655 (2006).
18
E. V. Araullo, D. B. de Padua, and M. Graham, “RICE postharvest technology,” IDRC-53e, International Development
Research Centre, Ottawa, Canada, 1985, pp. 198–200.
19
E. O. Uzodinma, A. U. Ofoefule, J. I. Eze, and N. D. Onwuka, “Biogas Production from blends of Agro-industrial
wastes,” Trends Appl. Sci. Res. 2(6), 554–558 (2007).
20
A. Belonio, Rice Husk Gas Stove Handbook (Appropriate Technology Center, Department of Agricultural Engineering and
Environmental Management, College of Agriculture, Central Philippine University, Iloilo City, Philippines, 2005), p. 155.
21
P. Olivier, see http://www.thelaststraw.org/backissues/articles/Rice%;20Hull%20House.pdf for “The rice hull house,”
2004 (August 30, 2012).
22
S. Zafar, see http:www.bioenergyconsult.com for “Rice straw as bioenergy resource,” (June 20, 2012).
23
A. Teghammar, K. Karimi, I. S. Horvath, and M. J. Taherzadeh, see http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2011.10.019 for
“Enhanced biogas production from rice straw, triticale straw and softwood spruce by NMMO pretreatment” (2011).
24
N. Yoswathana and P. Phuriphipat, “Bioethanol production from rice straw,” Energy Res. J. 1(1), 26–31 (2010).
25
A. M. Roslan, P. L. Yee, U. K. M. Shah, S. A. Aziz, and M. A. Hassan, “Production of bioethanol from rice straw using
cellulose by local Aspergillus sp.,” Int. J. Agric. Res. 6(2), 188–193 (2011).
26
S. Vivekanandan and G. Kamaraj, “The study of biogas production from rice chaff (karukka) as co-substrate with cow
dung,” Indian J. Sci. Technol. 4(6), 657–659 (2011).
27
N. S. Kasim, T. Tsai, S. Gunawan, and Y. Ju, “Biodiesel production from rice bran oil and supercritical methanol,”
Bioresour. Technol. 100(8), 2399–2403 (2009).
28
S. Kim and B. E. Dale, “Global potential bioethanol production from wasted crops and crop residues,” Biomass
Bioenergy 26, 361–375 (2004).
29
U. Omoti, “Oil palm in Africa: Evolution during the last decade, trends and new challenges,” Invited paper, in XIV
International conference on palm oil: The alternatives in oils and fats in Latin America, Colombia, 23–26 September 2003.
30
B. Mgbeje, see http://www.rmrdc.gov.ng for “Report on survey of selected Agricultural Raw materials in Nigeria,” Raw
materials Research and Development Council (RMRD), Abuja, 2004 (June 22, 2006).
31
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), 2012, see http://www.fas.usda.gov/oilseeds/circular/current.htm for
“Oilseeds: world supply and distribution monthly circular (Table 11: Palm oil: World Supply and Distribution)”
(September 14, 2012).
32
M. Eshalomi, see http://www.manufacturingtodaynigeria.com/index.php/agribusiness/58-agribusiness/47! for “Palm oil
development outlook in Nigeria 2012,” (September 10, 2012).
33
S. Zafar, see http://www.cleantechloops.com/biomass-energy-in-malaysia/ for “Biomass energy prospects in Malaysia”
(September 15, 2012).
34
FAO, see http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/y4355E/ye355e07.htm#Top for “Small scale palm oil processing in Africa
(environmental considerations)” (September 15, 2012).
35
N. Saifudin and S. A. Fazlili, “Effects of microwave and ultrasonic pretreatments on biogas production from anaerobic
digestion of palm oil mill effluent,” Am. J. Eng. Appl. Sci. 2, 139–146 (2009).
36
The Business Editor, “Indian firm to boost Nigeria’s oil palm production with N32 billion investment,” The Nigerian
Guardian, Friday, June 17, 2011.
37
F. A. Anoro, “Okitipupa oil firm gets new Chairman, rolls out new recovery plan,” The Nigerian Guardian, Sunday,
January 29, 2012.
38
J. Falaju, “Government hands over seedlings to oil palm estates,” The Nigerian Guardian, Wednesday, September 5,
2012.
39
Partnership Initiatives in the Niger Delta (PIND), see http://pindfoundation.net/wp-content/uploads/palm oil value chain
analysis.pdf for “Palm oil industry in Nigeria: Valuechain analysis. A report on palm oil value chain analysis in the Niger
Delta,” 2011 (September 3, 2012).
40
N. W. Elbersen, J. E. G. Van Daa, and R. R. Bakker, “Oil palm by-products as a biomass source: Availability and sus-
tainability,” in 14th European Biomass Conference, Paris, France, 17–21 October 2005.
41
M. F. Komolafe and D. C. Joy, Agricultural Science for Senior Sec. School (University Press Ltd, Bk. 1. Ibadan, Nigeria,
1990).
42
V. A. Akinyosoye, Senior Tropical Agriculture for West Africa, 1st ed. (Macmillan Education Ltd, London and
Basingstoke, 1976).
43
K. O. Soyebo, A. J. Farinde, and E. Dionco-Adetayo, “Constraints of oil palm production in Ife Central LGA of Osun
state,” Niger. J. Soc. Sci. 10(1), 55–59 (2005).
44
S. Yusoff, “Renewable energy from palm oil—Innovation and effective utilization of waste,” J. Cleaner Prod. 14, 87–93 (2006).
45
N. S. Chua, “Optimal utilization of energy sources in a palm oil processing complex,” PORIM Engineering News 25, 3–6
(1992).
46
Anon, see http://www.rebiomass.blogspot.com/2007/01/energy-recovery-from-palm-oil-wastes.html for information on
energy recovery from oil palm wastes. (September 3, 2012).
47
M. Hashim, “Present status and problems of biomass energy utilization in Malaysia,” in APECATC—Workshop on
Biomass Utilization, Tokyo and Tsukuba, 19–21 January 2005.
48
B. G. Yeong, “A technical and economic analysis of heat and power generation from biomethanation of palm oil mill
effluent,” in Electricity Supply Industry in Transition: Issues and prospects for Asia, 14–16 January 2004.

This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to IP:
130.88.90.110 On: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 02:10:32
 032703-13 Anyanwu et al. J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 5, 032703 (2013)

49
K. T. Tan, K. T. Lee, and A. R. Mohammed, “Potential of waste palm cooking oil for catalyst–free biodiesel production,”
Energy 36(4), 2085–2088 (2011).
50
NIRAS, “Biofuels for the Malaysian transport sector,” A report prepared under the Malaysian-Danish Environment
Cooperation Programme, Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Component, 2006.
51
J. Lim Meng Hon, “A case study on palm empty fruit bunch as energy feedstock,” SEGi Rev. 3(2), 3–15 (2010).
52
Anonymous Commodity Fundamentals 2004 articles, see http://www.crbtrader.com/publicity/yb.asp, “Commodity
Research Bureau (CRB) Commodity Yearbook,” 2004.
53
E. Bala-Gbogbo, “Nigeria targeting annual Cocoa production of 700,000 Metric Tonnes by 2015,” The Guardian
Newspapers, August 5, 2011.
54
See http://www.icco.org/about/press for ICCO Press Release 30th November, 2011, International Cocoa Organization.
55
A. Figueira, J. Janick, and J. N. BeMiller, “New products from Theobroma cacao: Seed pulp and pod gum,” in New
Crops, edited by J. Janick and J. E. Simon (Wiley, New York, 1993), pp. 475–478.
56
K. Owusu-Domfeh, “The future of cocoa and its by-products in the feeding of livestock,” Ghana J. Agric. Sci. 5, 57–64
(1972).
57
A. Ntiamoah and G. Afrane, “Environmental impacts of cocoa production and processing in Ghana: life cycle assessment
approach,” J. Cleaner Prod. 16, 1735–1740 (2008).
58
K. G. M. Bouafou, B. A. Konan, T. Dally, and S. Kati-Coulibally, “Waste and by-products of cocoa in breeding:
Research synthesis,” Int. J. Agron. Agric. Res. 1(1), 9–19 (2011).
59
E. M. Aregheore, “Chemical evaluation and digestibility of cocoa (Theobroma cacao) by-products fed to goats,” Trop.
Anim. Health Prod. 34, 339–348 (2002).
60
P. Tung, T. Helle, and M. Brunotte, “Using Cocoa bean shells for biogas: A case study of a cocoa factory in Cote
d’Ivoire,” SENCE Research Project 2 Report, West Africa, 2011.
61
D. Bourn, W. Wint, R. Blench, and E. Woolley, “Nigerian livestock resources survey,” World Animal Review 78, 49–58
(1994).
62
M. C. Ndinechi, I. M. Onwusuru, and O. A. Ogungbenro, “Economic potentials of animal dung as a viable source of bio-
mass energy,” Acad. Res. Int. 2(1), 83–89 (2012).
63
J. F. K. Akinbami Ilori, M. O. Oyebisi, T. O. Akinwumi, and O. Adeoti, “Biogas energy use in Nigeria: Current status,
future prospects and policy implications,” Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 5, 97–112 (2001).
64
Anonymous, see http://www.daff.qld.gov.au/14789_15575.html for “Queensland Government, Environmental manage-
ment, Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries,” 2005 (23 November 2012).
65
R. N. Okagbue, “Fermentation research in Nigeria,” MIRCEN J. 4, 169–182 (1988).
66
A. O. Ubalua, “Cassava wastes: Treatment options and value addition alternatives,” Afr. J. Biotechnol. 6, 2065–2073 (2008).
67
S. M. Dangogo and C. E. C. Fernando, “A simple biogas plant with additional gas storage system,” Nigerian J. Sol.
Energy 5, 138–141 (1986).
68
V. A. Ezeokoye and C. E. Okeke, “Design, construction and performance evaluation of plastic biodigester and the storage
of biogas,” Pac. J. Sci. Technol. 7, 176–184 (2006).
69
E. C. Okorigwe and S. N. Agbo, “Gas evacuation effect on quantity of gas production in a biogas digester,” Trends Appl.
Sci. Res. 2(3), 246–250 (2007).
70
A. H. Igoni, M. J. Ayotamuno, C. L. Eze, S. O. T. Ogaji, and S. D. Probert, “Designs of anaerobic digesters for producing
biogas from municipal solid-waste,” Appl. Energy 85, 430–438 (2008).
71
T. O. Akinluyi and O. Odeyemi, “Comparable seasonal methane production of five animal manures in Ile-Ife, Nigeria,”
in Abstracts, 14th Annual Conference, Nigerian Society for Microbiology (1986), pp. 5.
72
M. M. Abubakar, “Biogas generation from animal wastes,” Nigerian J. Renewable Energy 1, 69–73 (1990).
73
A. K. Lawal, T. A. Ayanleye, and A. O. Kuboye, “Biogas production from some animal wastes,” Nigerian J. Microbiol.
10, 124–130 (1995).
74
P. Mathew, “Gas production from animal wastes and its prospects in Nigeria,” Nigerian J. Sol. Energy 2(98), 103 (1982).
75
S. J. Ojolo, S. A. Oke, O. K. Animasahun, and B. K. Adesuyi, “Utilization of poultry, cow and kitchen wastes for biogas
production: A comparative analysis,” Iranian J. Environ. Health Sci. Eng. 4, 223–228 (2007).
76
A. A. Zuru, H. Saidu, E. A. Odum, and A. O. Onuorah, “A comparative study of biogas production from horse, goat and
sheep dung,” Nigerian J. Renewable Energy 6, 43–47 (1998).
77
E. I. Atuanya and M. Aigbirior, “Mesophilic biomethanation and treatment of poultry wastewater using a pilot scale
UASB reactor,” Environ. Monit. Assess. 77, 139–147 (2002).
78
M. O. Ilori, A. Adebusoye, A. K. Lawal, and O. A. Awotiwon, “Production of biogas from banana and plantain peels,”
Adv. Environ. Biol. 1, 33–38 (2007).
79
A. A. Adeyanju, “Effect of seeding of wood-ash on biogas production using pig waste and cassava peels,” J. Eng. Appl.
Sci. 3, 242–245 (2008).
80
A. U. Ofoefule and E. O. Uzodinma, “Biogas production from blends of cassava (Manihot utilissima) peels with some
animal wastes,” Int. J. Appl. Phys. Sci. 4(7), 398–402 (2009).
81
A. U. Ofoefule, J. I. Nwankwo, and C. N. Ibeto, “Biogas production from paper waste and its blend with cow dung,”
Adv. Appl. Sci. Res. 1(2), 1–8 (2010).
82
I. S. Eze, A. U. Ofoefule, E. O. Uzodinma, E. C. Okorigwe, N. F. Oparaku, J. I. Eze, and O. U. Oparaku,
“Characterization and performance evaluation of 11 m3 biogas plant constructed at NCERD University of Nigeria,
Nsukka,” Cont. J. Renewable Energy 2(1), 1–6 (2011).
83
M. O. L. Yusuf, A. Debora, and D. E. Ogheneruona, “Ambient temperature kinetic of biogas production from co-
digestion of horse and cow dung,” Res. Agric. Eng. 57, 97–104 (2011).
84
S. Fariku and M. I. Kidah, “Biomass potentials of Lophira lanceolata fruit as a renewable energy resource,” Afr. J.
Biotechnol. 7, 308–310 (2008).
85
C. Mathew, see www.renewableenergyworld.com for “Clean Technology Opportunities on the Rise. World no 1
Renewable Energy Network for news and information,” 2011.

This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to IP:
130.88.90.110 On: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 02:10:32