Journal of Engineering Science and Technology

Vol. 13, No. 9 (2018) 2779 - 2791

© School of Engineering, Taylor’s University

COMBUSTION CHARACTERISTICS
OF BIO-DEGRADABLE BIOMASS BRIQUETTES

SULAIMAN ABDULKAREEM1, *, BADEJO A. HAKEEM1,

ISMAILA I. AHMED2, TAJUDEEN K. AJIBOYE1,
JELEEL A. ADEBISI2, TAIWO YAHAYA2
1Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering & Technology,
University of Ilorin, P.M.B. 1515, Ilorin, Nigeria
2Department of Materials & Metallurgical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering &

Technology, University of Ilorin, P.M.B. 1515, Ilorin, Nigeria

*Corresponding Author: abdulkareem.s@unilorin.edu.ng

Abstract
This paper reports on the combustion characteristics of biodegradable biomass
briquettes prepared from charcoal, sawdust and sugarcane bagasse. The three
materials were mixed in respective ratio of 20:20:60, 20:30:50, 20:40:40,
20:50:30 and 20:60:20. The briquettes were produced using Budenberg dial
gauge hydraulic compression machine with the formation of briquettes under 64
MPa pressure with 120 seconds dwell time. Combustion characteristics such as
proximate analysis, fuel-burning rate, fuel ignition time and afterglow time of the
produced briquettes were determined. Results show that briquette with sample
composition of 20:50:30 has better calorific value of 24613.69 kJ/kg and sample
with ratio 20:30:50 has lowest calorific value of 22500.3 kJ/kg, while sampling
with ratio 20:30:50 has better physical properties with shatter resistance of
99.61% and porosity index value of 47.40%.
Keywords: Biodegradable, Briquette, Calorific value, Combustion characteristics,
Solid.

2779
2780 S. Abdulkareem et al.

1. Introduction
Recently, serious interest in research and development (R & D) in other to exploit
the renewable energy sources (green energy), both for environmental and economic
reasons [1]. Biomass is naturally abundant in rural communities and presents a
renewable energy opportunity that could serve as an alternative to fossil fuel [1-3].
High-energy consumption has been associated with better quality of life, which
has a direct relationship with Gross National Product (GNP). The economy of a
nation amongst nations has drawn interest to global energy resource inventories
and regional energy source endowments. Every nation excavates its own resources
in the search for suitable, sustainable, reliable and more importantly renewable
energy sources [4].
The requirement for renewable and sustainable alternative sources of energy are
on the rise as a result of depletion of the non-renewable fossil energy resources and
the demerit associated with fossil fuels which include; global warming, increasing
price and intermittent supply. In light of this, biomass is of great interest because of
its availability, low price, carbon dioxide neutral feature, and high potential [4-7].
The use of sawdust, water hyacinth, sugarcane bagasse, rice husk, corn cob as
composite materials for solid fuel briquettes has been found to be good sources of
renewable energy for domestic cooking [8]. Similarly, the conversion of agricultural
by-products like wood waste and coal dust to high-energy value briquettes for
cooking and drying purposes have been investigated and found to be feasible [9].
Many researchers have carried out studies on varieties of biomass materials
with the aim of utilizing waste materials (i.e. agro-waste and another type of waste)
as alternative sources of energy. Among these researchers are; Emerhi [7] carried
out a study on briquettes produced from a mixture of sawdust of three tropical
hardwood species (Afzelia africana, Terminalia superba and Melicia elcelsa) with
starch, cow dung and wood ash independently used as binders. He mixed the
sawdust in the ratio of 50:50 with the binder using a different ratio. He studied the
combustion-related properties such as percentage volatile matter, percentage ash
content, percentage fixed carbon and calorific value of the briquettes. He concluded
that briquette produces from a sample of Afzelia africana and Terminalia superba
combination bonded with starch is more suitable for an alternative source of energy,
having a highest calorific value of 33116 kcal/kg.
Zubairu and Gana [10] carbonized agricultural biomass (corn cobs) in a metal
kiln of 900mm height and 600mm diameter. They produced four different grades
of charcoal briquettes using a locally sourced tapioca starch as a binder at
concentrations of 6.0, 10.0, 14.0 and 19.0% w/w. Their briquettes were
characterized and compared with bagasse and wood charcoal; it concluded that
carbonizing corn cobs biomass resources into briquettes charcoal is an effective
means of managing solid wastes and a viable means of alternatives energy source.
Davies et al. [11] investigated the combustion characteristics of briquettes
produced from water hyacinth with plantain peel used as binders, red mangrove
wood, charcoal and anthronotha macrophylla (firewood). The characteristics
investigated were calorific value, ignition time, burning rate, specific fuel
consumption, fuel efficiency and water boiling time. Their results showed that
water hyacinth competes favourably with charcoal, firewood and red mangrove

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology September 2018, Vol. 13(9)

 Combustion Characteristics of Bio-Degradable Biomass Briquettes . . . . 2781

wood for having a fuel efficiency of 28.17±0.88%, which was surpassed only by
charcoal with fuel efficiency value of 31.29±0.19%. They concluded that water
hyacinth briquettes are a good alternative source of energy with high material
strength as well as high-value combustible fuel. In a related work of Adetogun et
al. [12], they examined combustion properties of briquettes produced from maize
cob sieved into different mesh sizes of 2.30 mm, 4.75 mm and 6.30 mm with starch
as a binder. They observed from their result that the calorific value is directly
proportional to the maize cobs particle size. Therefore, they concluded that sample
with a particle size of 6.30mm has the highest calorific value of 24970 kcal/kg.
It can be observed from the above-highlighted work that charcoal, sawdust and
sugarcane bagasse are rarely combined to be used as solid fuel. Therefore, this
study is to investigate the combustion and physical characteristics of combinations
of charcoal, sawdust and sugarcane bagasse for production of solid fuel briquettes
with a mixture of sodium silicate and molasses used as a binder.

2. Experimental Procedure
2.1. Materials preparation
The materials (Fig. 1) used in this study are charcoal, sawdust and sugarcane
bagasse. The samples were dried for 7 days for constant mass. The charcoal was
pulverized using ingredient milling machine while sugarcane bagasse was grinded
with a grinder. The materials were then sieved (Fig. 2) through the screens of 0.7
mm (for charcoal and sawdust) and between 1.5 and 2.41 mm (for sugarcane
bagasse). Sodium silicate and molasses were combined as a binding agent.

(a) Charcoal (b) Sawdust (c) Sugarcane bagasse

Fig. 1. Materials used for the study before processing.

(a) Charcoal (b) Sawdust (c) Sugarcane bagasse

Fig. 2. The materials after processing.

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology September 2018, Vol. 13(9)

2782 S. Abdulkareem et al.

2.2. Production of briquette samples

The briquettes were produced using Budenberg dial gauge hydraulic compression
machine (Fig. 3) with maximum compression capacity of 1560 kN used for
densification together with a cylindrical mould (Fig. 4) of 64mm internal diameter.
Briquettes of varied biomass proportions were produced by blending the materials;
charcoal, sawdust and sugarcane bagasse in various proportions of 20:20:60,
20:30:50, 20:40:40, 20:50:30, and 20:60:20 respectively. For each proportion of
briquette, three pieces were produced and 13.8% (18 g) Sodium silicate (Na2SiO3)
and 9.2% (12 g) molasses based on total mass of 130 g combined together was used
as binder. A pressure of 64 MPa with 120 seconds dwell time was maintained
throughout the briquettes production. The briquettes produced is shown in Fig. 5

Fig. 3. Briquetting process.

Fig. 4. Mould used.

Fig. 5. Briquettes produced.

(All proportions are in charcoal, sawdust and sugarcane bagasse respectively)

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology September 2018, Vol. 13(9)

 Combustion Characteristics of Bio-Degradable Biomass Briquettes . . . . 2783

2.3. Experimental methods for analysis of briquette

2.3.1. Proximate analysis
Proximate analysis is important to determine the calorific value of a fuel, and it
comprises of the determination of the moisture content, ash content, volatile matter
and fixed carbon content of the fuel.

2.3.2. Moisture content

The presence of moisture in a fuel usually have the resultant effect of high ignition
time, low calorific value and it also makes the fuel to evolve excessive smoke. The
mass of the samples was taken immediately after compression and noted and the
mass taken after 5 days of drying in still air at room temperature when a constant
mass was attained. The moisture content was determined using Eq. (1) [13].
𝑚𝑏 − 𝑚𝑎
% 𝑀𝑜𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠 = ( ) ∗ 100% (1)
𝑚𝑏

where mb is the mass of fuel immediately after compression and ma is the mass of
fuel after drying in still air.

2.3.3. Percentage ash content

The ash content of the solid fuel is the amount of non-aqueous residue that remains
after a fuel sample has been burned completely. The Percentage ash content was
determined according to [14, 15] by heating 2 g of the briquette samples in a furnace
at a temperature of 550°C for two hours (2 hrs) when it was found to be completely
converted to ash. The mass of the fuel was noted before burning in a furnace, and the
weight of the ash was measured with a digital weighing scale after cooling in a natural
convection air. The percentage ash content was determined using Eq. (2) [15].
𝐴−𝐶
𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑎𝑠ℎ 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑡 = × 100 (2)
𝐵−𝐶

where A is the mass of the crucible with the ash, B is the mass of the crucible with
the briquette, and C is the mass of the crucible.

2.3.4. Volatile matter

The volatile matter of the produced briquette was determined in line with [16]. The
residual dry sample from moisture content determination was heated at 300 oC in a
furnace for 30 minutes to drive off the volatiles. The volatile matter was obtained
using Eq. (3) according to Onuegbu et al. [13].
𝐸−𝐹
𝑉𝑜𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑙𝑒 𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑟 (%) = × 100 (3)
𝐸

where E is the mass of the briquette before heating, and F is the mass of the
briquette after heating.

2.3.5. Fixed carbon content

Fixed carbon represents the amount of burnt carbon in a material by drawing air
through hot bed of a fuel. The fixed carbon content of the samples was obtained
using Eq. (4) as used by [13].
𝐹𝐶 (%) = 100 − (𝑀𝐶 (%) + 𝑉𝑀 (%) + 𝐴𝐶 (%)) (4)

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology September 2018, Vol. 13(9)

2784 S. Abdulkareem et al.

where FC (%) is the percentage of fixed carbon content, MC (%) is the percentage
of moisture content, AC (%) is the percentage of ash content, and VM (%) is the
percentage of volatile matter.

2.3.6. Calorific value

The calorific value is also known as heating value or energy value of a briquette is
the amount of heat liberated per unit mass of the briquette. Calorific values were
calculated using the fixed carbon content and volatile matter of the briquettes
according to the method and Eq. (5) presented in [12].
𝐻𝑉 = 2.326(147.6𝐹𝐶 + 144 𝑉𝑀)𝑘𝐽/𝑘𝑔 (5)
where 𝐻𝑉 is the calorific value, FC is the percentage of fixed carbon content, and
VM is the percentage of volatile matter.

2.3.7. Fuel burning rate

Briquette burning rate was determined using the method used by Onuegbu et al.
[17]. Briquettes of known mass were ignited (Fig. 6) over the flame from a Bunsen
burner. Throughout the combustion process, a stopwatch was used to take the time,
until the briquettes were completely burnt. The fuel-burning rate was then
computed using Eq. (6) as used by [9]:
𝑊𝑇
𝐵𝑟 = (6)
𝑇𝑇

where Br is the fuel-burning rate, WT is the weight of fuel burnt, and TT is the time
taken.

(a) Samples set-up during burning the test

(b) Burning of a sample (c) Burnt sample after the test

Fig. 6. Fuel burning rate test.

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology September 2018, Vol. 13(9)

 Combustion Characteristics of Bio-Degradable Biomass Briquettes . . . . 2785

2.3.8. Ignition time

Ignition time is the total time measured in seconds, that it will take a briquette to
start burning when in contact with flame. It was carried out on each briquette
sample to determine the required time for each sample to ignite as specified by [11].
The test was carried out at room temperature, each sample was ignited using flame
from a Bunsen burner, and stopwatch used to record the time. The time was
measured from immediately the briquette come in contact with the flame, until a
uniform flame was establish on the briquettes. The time required for the flame to
ignite the briquette was recorded as the ignition time.

2.3.9. Afterglow time

Afterglow is the glow that remains after the light has gone off and the time it takes for the
light to go out is known as afterglow time. Afterglow time was determined by igniting the
fuel briquettes using the flame from a Bunsen burner as specified by [11]. The flame was
extinguishing after consistent flame has been established on the fuel, thereafter, the time
in seconds within which the glow is perceptible was taken as the afterglow time.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Moisture content
Table 1 shows the result of the moisture content of different percentage combination
by weight of charcoal, sawdust and sugarcane bagasse used in this study. According
to Ajobo [18], the ideal operating ranges of moisture content should be between 10-
15% for making briquette, also Thailand Industrial Standards Institute (TISI)
mandates that the moisture content of solid fuel briquettes not exceed 8% by weight
[19, 20]. It can be observed from Table 1 that the fuel with proportion 20:50:30 has
the minimum moisture of 13.66%, which is within the value recommended [18], other
fuels proportions have moisture content above this value, especially in 20:40:40
where it is observed to be highest. This can be said to be as a result of the hygroscopic
nature of both sawdust and sugarcane bagasse and the method used in processing the
raw material (sun drying) may likely to be responsible. According to Psomopoulos
[15] moisture content for solid fuel depends on the target market as the moisture
content that a solid fuel produced for industrial purpose is expected to be lower than
that of a solid fuel produced for commercial purposes and also, moisture content of
commercial briquette depends on country policy on the refuse developed fuel as
Finland, Italy and United Kingdom requires that the moisture content by percentage
weight (% wt.) of solid fuel should be maximum of 35%, 25% and 28% respectively
[15]. If these standards are adopted, then the moisture content obtained in this study
is generally acceptable by the standard.

Table 1. Moisture content.

Sample Mass of fuel Mass of fuel Moisture
ratio before drying after drying content
C:Sa:Su (g) (g) (%)
20:20:60 115.00 93.67 18.55
20:30:50 115.33 95.33 17.34
20:40:40 115.67 92.67 19.88
20:50:30 114.67 99.00 13.66
20:60:20 116.33 95.67 17.75
C for Charcoal, Sa for Sawdust and Su for Sugarcane bagasse

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology September 2018, Vol. 13(9)

2786 S. Abdulkareem et al.

3.2. Ash content

Ash, which is the inorganic matter left out after complete combustion of biomass
was found to be between the ranges 11.18% and 16.25% as it can be seen in Table
2. This is the percentage of impurity that will not combust during and after
combustion of the fuel. Biomass of higher ash content tends to consume more fuel
than the biomass of lower ash content [21]. According to Kishor and Singh [22],
percentage ash content is one of the factors that affect specific fuel consumption of
the fuel negatively, the percentage ash content as reported by [22] for coal was
18.23%, while the present study recorded ash content that is generally below this
value. Jekayinfa and Omisakin [23] reported the ash content values for some
agricultural wastes as follows; Palm oil effluent 10.97%, Corn cob 4.85%, Yam
peels 4.56%, Mango peels 4.33% and Orange peels 2.66%. Prasityousit and
Muenjina [24] were able to record values between 9.84% and 14.39% of ash
content for some municipal waste, while [15] recorded 22.5% ash content for
rubber and [25] recorded 36% ash content for briquettes made from fibre material
and refuse-derived fuel (RDF). The present study ash content values, which are
generally below 16.4%, were within the range of these values for obtained ash
contents. The low ash contents indicate that the fuel briquettes are generally
suitable for thermal utilization.

Table 2. Ash content.

Sample Mass Mass Ash
ratio of fuel of ash content
C:Sa:Su (g) (g) (%)
20:20:60 2 0.22 11.00
20:30:50 2 0.33 16.50
20:40:40 2 0.28 14.00
20:50:30 2 0.28 14.00
20:60:20 2 0.29 14.50
C for Charcoal, Sa for Sawdust and Su for Sugarcane bagasse

3.3. Volatile matter

The result of volatile matter obtained for this study is shown in Table 3. The volatile
matter was observed to be maximum in the fuel ratio 20:40:40 and lowest in the
fuel ratio 20:20:60.

Table 3. Volatile matter.

Mass Mass
Samples Volatile
before after
ratio matter
heating heating
C:Sa:Su (g) (g) (%)
20:20:60 2.00 1.48 26.00
20:30:50 2.00 1.49 25.50
20:40:40 2.00 1.45 27.50
20:50:30 2.00 1.47 26.50
20:60:20 2.00 1.46 27.00
C for Charcoal, Sa for Sawdust and Su for Sugarcane bagasse

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology September 2018, Vol. 13(9)

 Combustion Characteristics of Bio-Degradable Biomass Briquettes . . . . 2787

3.4. Fixed carbon content

The fixed carbon content obtained is tabulated in Table 4. The fixed carbon content
for this work is observed to be highest in the fuel with ratio 20:50:30 and lowest in
the fuel with ratio 20:40:40, this result is influenced by the percentage moisture
content, ash content and volatile matter present in these fuel briquettes as the fixed
carbon contents is dependent on these factors.

Table 4. Fixed carbon content.

Fixed
Samples Moisture Ash Volatile
carbon
ratio content content matter
content
C:Sa:Su (%) (%) (%) (%)
20:20:60 18.55 11.00 26.00 44.45
20:30:50 17.34 16.50 25.50 40.66
20:40:40 19.88 14.00 27.50 38.62
20:50:30 13.66 14.00 26.50 45.84
20:60:20 17.77 14.5 27.00 40.75
C for Charcoal, Sa for Sawdust and Su for Sugarcane bagasse

3.5. Calorific value

The average result for calorific values obtained in this work is 23296.04 kJ/kg
(5564.164 kcal/kg) as shown in Table 5. The calorific values in this study are lower
compared to that obtained by [7] for briquettes made from Afzelia Africana bonded
with starch; this may likely due to the fact that [7] carbonized his materials. The
calorific value obtained in this study compared favourably with those recorded for
coconut husk by [23] and that of maize cob with a calorific value of between 20930
kJ/kg and 24970 kJ/kg obtained by [12].
In this study, the average heating value obtained is higher than the calorific
value of bagasse at 20567 kJ/kg, wood charcoal at 8270kJ/kg, 19534kJ/kg recorded
for briquettes from a mixture of palm kernel cake (PKC) with sawdust and 18936
kJ/kg recorded for sawdust with some hardwood species [26]. This is higher than
the recommended standard value of 17500 kJ/kg for a material to be regarded as
having adequate calorific value Austria Standard (ONORM M7135), Sweden
Standard (SS 187120) and Germany Standard (GS/DIN51731). This implies that
the calorific values obtained are reasonable for thermal utilization.

Table 5 Calorific value.

Samples Volatile Fixed Calorific Calorific
ratio matter carbon value value
C:Sa:Su (%) (%) (kJ/kg) (kcal/kg)
20:20:60 26.00 44.45 23969.01 5710.14
20:30:50 25.50 40.66 22500.34 5394.62
20:40:40 27.50 38.62 22469.89 5366.84
20:50:30 26.50 45.84 24613.69 5864.12
20:60:20 27.00 40.75 23030.25 5485.10
C for Charcoal, Sa for Sawdust and Su for Sugarcane bagasse

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology September 2018, Vol. 13(9)

2788 S. Abdulkareem et al.

3.6. Fuel burning rate

The burning rate values of the energy sources ranged between 0.4386 (g/min) and
0.5173 (g/min) as presented in Table 6. The rate is observed to be lowest in the fuel
ratio 20:40:40. This observation could be adduced to porosity (even though its
porosity is less than that of 20:50:30 and 20:60:20) exhibited between inter and
intra-particles which enable easy infiltration of oxygen and outflow of combustion
briquettes. It is also believed that briquettes with higher density will have longer
burning time [11], it is observed that the burning rate is highest in the fuel ratio
20:50:30 and 20:60:20 where the ratio of sawdust is more pronounced.
Prasityousit and Muenjina [24] used rejected material of municipal waste
composting for solid fuel production and they obtained a burning time that ranges
between 188 min and 211 min, [27] also obtain a burning rate between 1.63 (g/min)
and 2.25 (g/min) for briquettes made from water hyacinth and phytoplankton scum
as binder, [22] obtain the burning rate values of 1.5 (g/min) to 3.5 (g/min) for coal
briquettes made from spear grass (Imperata Cylindrica) and [28] obtained values
between 0.97 (g/min) and 2.05 (g/min) as burning rate for briquettes made from water
hyacinth. A low burning rate like that obtained in this work is of great advantage
compared to the past work because the briquettes do not burn-out rapidly, as a result,
it continues to generate useful energy for a longer period of time.

Table 6. Burning characteristics of fuel briquettes.

Fuel After
Sample Ignition
burning glow
ratio time
rate time
C:Sa:Su (s) (g/min) (s)
20:20:60 120.6 0.5099 306.6
20:30:50 129.0 0.5005 312.0
20:40:40 94.8 0.4386 439.8
20:50:30 123.6 0.5173 366.0
20:60:20 126.6 0.5170 307.8
C for Charcoal, Sa for Sawdust and Su for Sugarcane bagasse

3.7. Ignition time

The ignition time of the studied fuels varied between 94.8 seconds for the fuel
ratio 20:40:40 and 126.6 seconds.for fuel ratio 20:60:20 as can be observed in
Table 6. According to [29-31] briquettes for domestic use must be easily
ignitable, with low porosity index, low volatile content and low ash content. The
values of ignition time obtained in this work falls between the ranges of ignition
time of 84.33±0.28 and 138.29±0.19 seconds reported by [11], the values of
between 33 seconds to 186 seconds obtained by Kishor and Singh [22] and that
of Hassan et al. [21], which is between 65 and 273 seconds. The results of this
work can be said to be reasonable and acceptable.

3.8. Afterglow time

Table 6 shows the result obtained for the afterglow time characteristics of the
briquette produced in this work. Afterglow time of 375 seconds is reported by [30]
for solid fuel briquettes produced from cassava and yam peel, this is somehow

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology September 2018, Vol. 13(9)

 Combustion Characteristics of Bio-Degradable Biomass Briquettes . . . . 2789

averaged the values of 306.6 seconds and 439.8 seconds obtained in this study.
These results show that the afterglow time is good for the burning characteristics
of the fuel produced.

4. Conclusions
Some concluding observations from the investigation are given below.
 Sample with charcoal, sawdust and sugarcane bagasse in the proportion of
20:40:40 has the lowest ignition time of 94.8 seconds, lowest fuel-burning rate
of 0.4385g/min, highest afterglow time of 439.8 seconds.
 It can be concluded that briquette fuel of ratio 20:40:40 has good thermal
utilization properties based on its best performance in combustion
characteristics tests.
 Sample with charcoal, sawdust and sugarcane bagasse is the proportion of
20:50:30 has the highest calorific value of 24613.69 kJ/kg.
 Briquette fuel with ratio 20:30:50 has the lowest calorific value of 22500.3 kJ/kg.
 It can be concluded that all the fuel samples produced are good for
thermal utilization because the lowest calorific values recorded in this work
is higher than the minimum calorific value set by Germany standard
(GS/DIN 51731), Sweden standard (SS 18 71 20) and that of Austria standard
(ONORM M7135).

Nomenclatures

A Mass of the crucible with ash, g

AC Ash content, %
B Mass of the crucible with the briquette, g
Br Fuel burning rate, g/min
E Mass of the fuel briquette before heating, g
F Mass of the fuel briquette after heating, g
FC Fixed carbon, %
HV Calorific value, kJ/kg
MC Moisture content, %
Sa Sawdust
Su Sugarcane bagasse
TT Time taken, s
VM Volatile matter, %
WT Weight of fuel burnt, g

Abbreviations
AS Austria Standard
GNP Gross National Product
GS German Standard
PKC Palm Kernel Cake
RDF Refuse Derived Fuel
SS Sweden Standard
TISI Thailand Industrial Standards Institute

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology September 2018, Vol. 13(9)

2790 S. Abdulkareem et al.

References
1. Sampson, R.N.; Wright, L.L.; Winjum, J.K.; Kinsman, J.D.; Benneman, J.;
Kursten, E.; and Scurlock, J.M.O. (1993). Biomass management and energy.
Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 70 (1-4), 139-159.
2. Trebbi, G. (1993). Power production options from biomass: The vision of a
southern European utility. Bioresource Technology, 46(1-2), 23-29.
3. Okey, F.O.; Adeboye, B.S.; and Aneke, N.N. (2014). Biomass briquetting and
rural development in Nigeria. International Journal of Science, Environment
and Technology, 3(3), 1043-1052.
4. Adegoke, C.O.; and Lawal, G.T. (1997). Preliminary investigation of sawdust
as high grade solid fuel. Journal of Renewal Energy, 1(2); 102-107.
5. Adegbulugbe, A.O. (1994). Energy-environmental issues in Nigeria.
International Journal of Global Energy Issues, 6(1-2), 7-18.
6. Sambo, A.S. (2009). Strategic development in renewable energy in Nigeria.
Retrieved October 15, 2016, from https://www.iaee.org/en/publications/
newsletterdl.aspx?id=75.
7. Emerhi, E.A. (2011). Physical and Combustion properties of briquettes from
sawdust of three hardwood species and different organic binders. Advances in
Applied Science Research, 2(6), 236-246.
8. Kuti, O.A. (2009). Performance of composite sawdust briquette fuel in a
biomass stove under simulated condition. Assumption University Journal of
Technology, 12(4), 284-288.
9. Kuti, O.A; and Adegoke, C.O. (2008). Comparative performance of composite
sawdust briquette with kerosene fuel under domestic cooking conditions.
Assumption University Journal of Technology, 12(1), 57-61.
10. Zubairu, A.; and Gana, S.A. (2014). Production and characterization of
briquette charcoal by carbonization of agro-waste. Energy and Power, 4(2),
41-47.
11. Davies, R.M.; Davies, O.A.; and Mohammed, U.S. (2013). Combustion
characteristics of traditional energy sources and water hyacinth briquettes.
International Journal of Scientific Research in Environmental Sciences, 1(7),
144-151.
12. Adetogun, A.C.; Ogunjobi, K.M.; and Are, D.B. (2013). Combustion
properties of briquettes produced from maize cob of different particle sizes.
Journal of Research in Forestry, Wildlife and Environmental, 6(1), 28-38.
13. Onuegbu, T.U.; Ogbu, I.M.; Ilochi, N.O.; Ekpunobi, U.E.; and Ogbuagu, A.S.
(2010). Enhancing the properties of coal briquette using spear grass (Imperata
Cylindrica). Leonardo Journal of Sciences, 17, 47-58.
14. American Society for Testing and Materials. (2004). Standard test method for
total ash content of activated carbon. ASTM D2866-94.
15. Psomopoulos, C.S. (2014). Residue derived fuels as an alternative fuel for the
hellenic power generation sector and their potential for emissions reduction.
AIMS Energy, 2(3), 321-341.
16. American Society for Testing and Materials. (2004). Standard test method for
volatile matter in the analysis sample of refuse derived fuel. ASTM E897-88.

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology September 2018, Vol. 13(9)

 Combustion Characteristics of Bio-Degradable Biomass Briquettes . . . . 2791

17. Onuegbu, T.U.; Ekpunobi, U.E.; Ogbu, I.M.; Ekeoma, M.O; and Obumselu,
F.O. (2011). Comparative studies of ignition time and water boiling test of coal
and biomass briquettes blend. International Journal of Recent Research and
Applied Studies, 7(2), 153-159.
18. Ajobo, J.A. (2014). Densification characteristics of groundnut shell
International Journal of Mechanical and Industrial Technology, 2(1), 150-154.
19. Thailand Industrial Standards Institute, Ministry of Industry. (2002). Briquette
Coke. Retrieved October 15, 2016, from http://www.tisi.go.th.
20. Thailand Industrial Standards Institute, Ministry of Industry. (2002). Briquette
Charcoal. Retrieved November 13, 2016, from http://www.tisi.go.th
21. Hassan, S.; Kee, L.S.; and Al-Kayiem, H.H. (2013). Experimental study of
palm oil mill effluent and oil palm frond waste mixture as an alternative
biomass fuel. Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (JESTEC), 8(6),
703-712.
22. Kishor, K.; and Singh, N. (2015). Enhancing the heating properties of coal
briquette blending rice husk. International Journal for Scientific Research and
Development, 3(04), 1953-1955.
23. Jekayinfa, S.O.; and Omisakin, O.S. (2005). The energy potentials of some
agricultural wastes as local fuel materials in Nigeria. Agricultural Engineering
International: the CIGR E-Journal. VII EE 05 003, 1-10.
24. Prasityousit, J.; and Muenjina, A. (2013). Properties of solid fuel briquettes
produced from rejected material of municipal waste composting. Proceedings
of the 3rd International Conference on Sustainable Future for Human Security,
Kyoto, Japan, 603-610.
25. Kers, J.; Kulu, P.; Arunitt, A.; Laurmaa, V.; Krizan, P.; Soos, L.; and Kask, U.
(2010). Determination of physical, mechanical and burning characteristics of
polymeric waste material briquettes. Estonian Journal of Engineering, 16(4),
307-316.
26. Hroncová, E.; Ladomerský, J.; and Puskajler, J. (2014). Emission of pollutants
from torrefaction of wood. European Journal of Environmental and Safety
Sciences, 2(1), 19-22.
27. Alakangas, E. (2009). Wood combustion and standards, processes,
environmental and climate technologies. European Standards for Solid
Biofuels, 13(2), 7-20.
28. Markson, I.E.; Akpan, W.A.; and Ufot, E. (2013). Determination of
combustion characteristics of compressed pulverized coal-rice husk briquettes.
International Journal of Applied Science and Technology, 3(2), 61-64.
29. Davies, R.M.; and Davies, O.A. (2013). Physical and combustion
characteristics of briquettes made from water hyacinth and phytoplankton
scum as binder. Journal of Combustion, Article ID 549894, 1-8.
30. Demirbaş, A.; and Şahin, A. (1998). Evaluation of biomass residue:
Briquetting waste paper and wheat straw mixtures. Fuel Processing
Technology, 55(2), 175-183.
31. Oladeji, J.T.; and Oyetunji, O.R. (2013). Investigations into physical and fuel
characteristics of briquettes produced from cassava and yam peels. Journal of
Energy Technologies and Policy, 3(7), 41-46.

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology September 2018, Vol. 13(9)