Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization, and

Environmental Effects

ISSN: 1556-7036 (Print) 1556-7230 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ueso20

Pyrolysis of biomass for efficient extraction of

biofuel

Ashok Patel, Basant Agrawal & B R Rawal

To cite this article: Ashok Patel, Basant Agrawal & B R Rawal (2019): Pyrolysis of biomass for
efficient extraction of biofuel, Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization, and Environmental
Effects, DOI: 10.1080/15567036.2019.1604875

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/15567036.2019.1604875

Published online: 17 Apr 2019.

Submit your article to this journal

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ueso20
ENERGY SOURCES, PART A: RECOVERY, UTILIZATION, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
https://doi.org/10.1080/15567036.2019.1604875

Pyrolysis of biomass for efficient extraction of biofuel

Ashok Patel, Basant Agrawal, and B R Rawal
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Shri G. S. Institute of Technology and Science, Indore, Madhya Pradesh,
India

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

Biomass is considered to be a renewable energy source and bears significant Received 13 November 2018
potential to contribute to the production of biofuels. The present paper aims to Revised 30 January 2019
determine optimum process parameters for the extraction of biofuels. The Accepted 10 February 2019
pyrolysis process can produce high-grade biofuels having a yield of 21.9 to 75 KEYWORDS
per cent depending upon the temperature of process, type of biomass and Biofuel; biomass; pyrolysis;
reactor. The cost of production is 0.09 to 0.21 USD per kg with an investment of renewable energy; pyrolysis
0.39 to 46 million USD. Among the slow, fast and flash pyrolysis, the fast pyrolysis reactor
requires relatively lower cost of equipment and yields 74 per cent of biofuels.
The temperature of the reactor is also lower (700–950 K) in comparison to the
flash pyrolysis in which the reactor temperature is in the range of 1050–1300 K.

Introduction
The energy production using biomass gives significant environmental advantages over fossil fuels.
There is a severe environmental pollution due to the exhaust of carbon dioxide by combustion of
fossil fuels. Currently, there is no existing way to reduce the carbon dioxide exhausted to atmosphere
by the combustion of fossil fuels, which results in greenhouse effect. To generate biomass feedstocks,
plant growth is essential which in turn removes carbon dioxide from atmosphere, which compen-
sates the increase in atmospheric pollution that produced by combustion of biomass fuels (Mohan,
Charles, and Pittman 2006).
In early days, some embalming agents were produced by pyrolysis (Mullaney). Day by day the
process is improved and now it is mostly used with production of coke and charcoal. Researchers
have found that the bio-oil yield can be increased by using fast pyrolysis, in which a raw biomass has
to be rapidly heated as well as vapor generated is also rapidly condensed. Global oil demand in 2017
rose by 1.6 MMb/d (1.7%). The demand of diesel accounted for 430 Kb/d of the growth and of
gasoline accounting for a significantly smaller 270 Kb/d (World Energy Statistic (C) OECD/IEA
2107, Energy Insights-Global Energy Perspective). In India, as transportation fuel the contribution of
gasoline and diesel is 24% and 46%, respectively. Demand of fuel in transportation is expected to rise
from 134 billion liters in 2015 to 226 billion liters in 2026. For the purpose of energy crises, the
government of India has made a plan to meet import of oil and natural gas dependency to half by
2030 (Dewangan, Yadav, and Mallick 2018).
For the conversion of biomass into fuel, various routes are available: pyrolysis is used to convert it
into liquid, and solid and gaseous fuels from different biomass like agriculture and forest residues
(Beattie, Berjoan, and Coutures 1983). These three output fractions directly or after upgradation can
be used as fuels. The liquid yield from pyrolysis can be used in internal and external combustion
engines, especially in diesel engines known as compression ignition (CI) type. The by-product of
solid char is generally used for heating or as dual fuel in power plants, and also used as fertilizer for

CONTACT Ashok Patel ashokpatel678@gmail.com Department of Mechanical Engineering, Shri G. S. Institute of

Technology and Science, 23 Sir M. Visvesvaraya Marg, Indore, Madhya Pradesh - 452003, INDIA
Color versions of one or more of the figures in the article can be found online at www.tandfonline.com/ueso.
© 2019 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2 A. PATEL ET AL.

soil and conditioner. There are many applications of pyrolysis gas (PG) such as in gas turbines, spark
ignition (SI) engines gas-fired boilers, or dual-fuel engines. As per current literature, there are
tremendous opportunities to produce IC engine fuels by using biomass pyrolysis (Naik, Goud,
and Rout et al. 2010). According to literature, much effort has been made to produce biofuels as
promising option to fossil diesel (Bose 2010; Carraretto, Macor, and Mirandola et al. 2004; Chisti
2007; Fukuda, Kondo, and Noda 2001; Knothe 2005; Meng, Yang, and Xu et al. 2009; Nabi, Akhter,
and Zaglul Shahadat 2006; Singh and Singh 2010). From human and animal health subject point of
view, the reduction in NOx level (−35%) in red beet was achieved by soil amendment using biochar
and transformation of mineral nitrogen into soil organic matter (Maroušek, Kolae, and Vochozka
et al. 2018). Water retention of topsoil can be increased by fertilization of beetroot using enriched
biochar. That reduces nitrate intake up to 28% and also improves the production economy
(Maroušek, Kolae, and Vochozka et al. 2017).
The main aim of this paper is to review some important aspects of pyrolysis process for the
production of green energy from biomass feedstocks, major components of biomass, process types,
and its effect on oil yield with economical considerations. Very less research work are underway on
pyrolysis of biomass and its utilizations as still now it is in the phase of development. The paper also
focuses the ongoing research and development (R&D) in the biofuel production technologies which
shall be beneficiary for internal combustion engine applications (Mondal et al. 2018).

Biomass pyrolysis considerations

The process of pyrolysis is characterized by thermal decomposition of feedstocks without the
presence of oxygen or with the presence of comparatively less oxygen than that required for
complete combustion. There is a significant difference between pyrolysis and gasification.
Gasification is characterized by decomposition of biomass to syngas by careful control of the amount
of oxygen present. When applied to biomass, the term pyrolysis is somewhat difficult to define. In
a review of recent literature, pyrolysis refers to description of process in which bio-oils are main
products. The time required for the pyrolysis is significantly fast for the recent processes. The
following are the sequential changes that occur during pyrolysis. Figure 1 shows the flow path of
pyrolysis process.
Recent literatures on fast or flash pyrolysis have shown higher yields of primary, non-equilibrium
liquids, and gases, including valuable chemicals, petrochemicals, chemical intermediates, and fuels
obtained from the biomass feedstocks. Consequently, the lower value of solid char by traditional

Heat transfer to feedstock from heat source

Primary pyrolysis reaction

Releases volatiles Forms char

Charcoal
Condensation of volatiles in cooler

Bio Fuels Fuel gas

Figure 1. Flow chart of pyrolysis process.

 ENERGY SOURCES, PART A: RECOVERY, UTILIZATION, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 3

slow pyrolysis is replaced by higher value of fuel gas, fuel oil and chemicals by fast pyrolysis
(Bridgwater, Czernik, and Piskorz 2001).

Major components of wood (biomass)

The pyrolytic chemistry of plant carbohydrate polymers sharply differs from other fossil feeds
because large amount of oxygen is present in plant feeds. Plant biomass and wood are generally
composed of polymers with oxygen contents.
The main structural constituents are carbohydrate polymers, oligomers (65–75%), and lignin
(18–35%), having higher mass on molar basis. Other low molar mass components present in wood are
organic extractives and inorganic minerals (usually 4–10%) (Finch 1986). Major constituents are
cellulose, hemicelluloses, lignin, inorganic minerals, and organic extractives. There is a variation in
weight percentage of cellulose, hemicellulose, and lignin in different biomass. Outcome of pyrolysis from
biomass is a combine result of the products from the pyrolysis of cellulose, hemicellulose, and extractives
individually. Moreover, secondary reactions are necessary among cross-reactions of primary product of
pyrolysis and between the original feedstock molecules and pyrolysis products. Elliott 2004, 2001) has
shown derivation of different chemicals using biomass as feedstock. Pyrolysis of individual component
present in biomass is a complex process and depends on many other factors.

Cellulose
Cellulose fibers are necessary for the strength of wood and have 40–50 wt% in dry wood (Finch
1986). Degradation of cellulose can occur at temperature of 240–350°C to form anhydrocellulose and
levoglucosan. If pyrolysis of cellulose occurs at the 12°C/min rate of heating with helium, an
endotherm is observed at 335°C (maximum weight loss temperature) and the reaction was com-
pleted at 360°C (Tang and Neill 1964). Levoglucosan forms when the glucosan radicals are generated
without the bridging oxygen.

Hemicellulose
Hemicellulose, which is also known as polyose, is the second major component chemically present in
wood. Hemicelluloses normally account for 35% of the mass of hardwoods, 25–35% in drywood and
28% in softwoods (Finch 1986). Hemicellulose is mixture of different subconstituents such as
glucose, mannose, galactose, xylose, arabinose, 4-O-methyl glucuronic acid, and galacturonic acid
residues. Hemicellulose has low molecular weights as compared to cellulose. The number of
repeating monomers is only ∼150, which is lower to the saccharide monomers in cellulose (5000–-
10000). Decomposition of hemicellulose occurs at 200–260°C, so it gives more volatiles, less tars, and
chars as compared to cellulose (Soltes and Elder 1981). In most cases, hemicelluloses do not give
significant quantity of levoglucosan. The loss of hemicellulose occurs in slow pyrolysis process of
wood in the temperature range of 130–194°C. Most of hemicellulose loss occurs above 180°C
(Runkel and Wilke 1951). However, in fast pyrolysis the mechanism of this high rapid rate of
decomposition in hemicellulose and cellulose is not recognized; it is completed within few seconds
with high heating rate.

Lignin
Lignin is the third largest major constituent present in wood. It accounts for 16–25% of the mass of
hardwood and 23–33% of softwood (Lanzetta and Blasi 1998). It is having with no exact structure and is
amorphous cross-linked resin. Lignin is highly branched, three-dimensional and polyphenolic substance
which is composed of an irregular array of differently bonded “hydroxy-” and “methoxy” substituted
phenylpropane units (Murugan and Gu 2015). Depending on the technology used to extract the lignin, the
4 A. PATEL ET AL.

chemical and physical properties of lignin are different. During isolation, lignin is partially degraded and
unavoidably modified, so that studies of heating decomposition on extracted lignin will not inevitably
match with the pyrolysis characteristics of this constituent when it is present in the original feedstocks. The
decomposition of lignin occurs at 280–500°C heating temperature (Singh and Singh 2010). During
pyrolysis, lignin yields phenols by the carbon–carbon linkages and cleavage of ether. Lignin is much
difficult to dehydrate as compared to cellulose or hemicelluloses. Lignin pyrolysis gives higher residual char
than that with the pyrolysis of cellulose. Kudo and Yoshida (1957) have proposed lignin decomposition in
wood to start at 280°C and it continues up to 450-500°C and the rate of maximum decomposition is
observed at 350-450 °C. The gaseous products coming out of it contains methane, ethane, carbon
monoxide and 10% weight of the original lignin. The liquid products, also known as pyroligneous acid,
have nearly 20% aqueous part and approximately 15% tar residue based on dry lignin. The aqueous part
consists of methanol, acetic acid, acetone, water and the tar residue, which is composed primarily of
homologous phenolic compounds.

Inorganic minerals
Small amount of mineral contents are also present in biomass feedstocks and they convert into ash in
the process of pyrolysis. Potassium, sodium, phosphorus, calcium and magnesium are mineral
components that present in biomass.

Organic extractives
Organic extractives are a fifth component present in wood. The extraction of these components can
be made by using methylene chloride, water, or alcohol known as polar solvents or toluene or hexane
as non-polar solvents. Fats, waxes, alkaloids, proteins, phenolics, simple sugars, pectins, mucilages,
gums, resins, terpenes, starches, glycosides, saponins, and essential oils are some notable examples of
organic extractives.

Principles of pyrolysis process

In older days, charcoal, which is known as less-smoke fuel, was used for the purpose of heating and it
was produced using wood biomass pyrolysis. The main disadvantages of old pyrolysis technology
have low energy outcomes, slow production, and excessive air pollution. Therefore, research is going
on for technological development to give the maximum possible energy yield from biomass. There
are three main ways frequently used for the energy extraction from biomass: (1) combustion
(exothermic), (2) gasification (exothermic), and (3) pyrolysis (endothermic) (Frassoldati et al.
2006). Combustion is characterized by the process of oxidation of fuel in which biomass is oxidized
completely and transformed into heat. However, this process has low efficiency of about 10% and
this method of use gives rise to substantial pollution (Pei-Dong, Guomei, and Gang 2007; Thornley
et al. 2009). Gasification is characterized by a partial oxidation process that forms a gaseous fuel
from solid fuel. Pyrolysis is the process of combination of combustion and gasification processes
(Somerville 2005). Thus, pyrolysis is a part of gasification and combustion and independent con-
version technology (Gronli, Varhegyi, and Blassi 2002), which is characterized by formation of solid,
liquid, and gaseous fuel from initial solid biomass using thermal degradation without oxidation. The
pyrolysis process of organic materials is somewhat complex. In pyrolysis, thermal degradation of
organic constituents present in biomass feedstock occurs at 350°C–550°C and completes at 700°C–
800°C without presence of air/oxygen (Fisher et al. 2002). The breakdown of long chains of carbon,
oxygen, and hydrogen compounds present in biomass into smaller molecules in the gaseous form,
solid charcoal, and condensable vapors (tars and oils) occurs in pyrolysis. The rate and amount of
component’s decomposition are largely dependent on the pyrolysis temperature, heating rate of
biomass, pressure, configuration of reactor, type of biomass, and other process parameters.
 ENERGY SOURCES, PART A: RECOVERY, UTILIZATION, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 5

Possible reaction sequence of wood biomass pyrolysis is shown in Figure 2. Starting with the
first order of reaction, the process includes three lumped product types. Lanzetta and Blasi (1998)
have shown that the pyrolysis starts at 250°C–300°C and the rate of release of volatiles is 10 times
high as compared to next step. Relative amount of the end constituents during the pyrolysis
process of biomass at different temperatures is represented by bar chart in Figure 3. Due to
different structural and compositional properties of different biomass, the process of pyrolysis is
not limited to follow the same reaction path (Sinha et al. 2000).

Types of pyrolysis
Pyrolysis processes can be classified into slow, fast, and flash pyrolysis, as per operating conditions
used in the process. Slow pyrolysis is also known as conventional pyrolysis. The main differences
between all these types are in temperature of process, rate of heating, solid residence time, and
biomass particle size. Table 1 shows relative outcomes of products that are largely dependent on
pyrolysis operating parameters and type of pyrolysis.
Different pyrolysis processes used in biofuel production are described below.

Gas (g)
(CO,CO2,CH4) Bio-oil (l) Char (s) +gas (CO2)+Bio-oil (l)

Wood (s) Wood vapours (g)

Char (s)
Gas (g) (CO,CO2,CH4)

Primary phase decomposition Secondary phase cracking + Re polymerisation

reactions condensation
450-550 0C 400-5000C Atmospheric
<1 S >1 S Weeks/months

Figure 2. Reaction sequence of wood biomass pyrolysis (Venderbosch and Prins 2010).

80
70
Y
i 60
e 50
l Biochar
40
d Biooil
30
(

% Gas
w 20 Water
t 10
)

0
425 450 500 550
Temperature (0C)

Figure 3. Relative amount of the end constituents during pyrolysis process of biomass at different temperature (International
Energy Agency 2006).
6 A. PATEL ET AL.

Table 1. Relative outcomes of end products in different types of pyrolysis (Balat et al. 2009; Bridgwater 2007).
Yield (%)
Type of pyrolysis Temp. range (K) Rate of heating (K/s) Residence time (s) Particle size (mm) Oil Gas Char
Slow 550–950 0.1–1 450–550 5–50 30 35 35
Fast 850–1250 10–200 0.5–10 <1 50 30 20
Flash 1050–1300 >1000 <0.5 <0.2 75 13 12

Slow pyrolysis
In early days, slow pyrolysis was used for char formation using low temperatures with low rate of
heating. Vapor residence time in this process is very high usually 5 min to 30 min and within the
vapor phase components continuously react with each other for the production of solid char and
volatile liquids (Bridgwater, Czernik, and Piskorz 2001). Slow pyrolysis has technological disadvan-
tages; therefore, it is less suitable for the production of high-quality bio-oil. Due to high residence
time, cracking of the primary feedstocks in this process occurs, which could severely affect bio-oil
quality and yield. Slow pyrolysis requires extra energy inputs because of long residence time and low
heat transfer rates (Demirbas 2005; Tippayawong, Kinorn, and Thavornun 2008).

Fast pyrolysis
In this process, in the absence of oxygen biomass is rapidly heated to a high temperature. Typically,
on weight basis fast pyrolysis produces 60–75% of oil and other liquids as oil product, with 15–25%
of biochar as solid product, and 10–20% of gaseous product according to biomass used. The fast
pyrolysis process is characterized by high heating rate with high heat transfer, short residence time,
and rapid cooling of aerosol and vapors to give high bio-oil yield and precise control of process
temperature (Demirbas and Arin 2002). Fast-pyrolysis technology is most popular for the produc-
tion of liquid fuels and different commodity chemicals. These liquid fuel products are easy to
transport and store, thereby it excludes handling of solid biomass (Brammer, Lauer, and
Bridgwater 2006). On a small-scale bases, fast pyrolysis technology involves low cost of investment
and high efficiencies as compared to other processes. Recently bio-oil production by fast pyrolysis
has received much attraction because of the following major benefits (Bridgwater 2005; Chiaramonti,
Oasmaa, and Solantausta 2007).

● Environment friendly and less cost.

● Renewable biofuel for boiler, IC engines, gas turbine, power plants, etc.
● Easy to store and transport of liquid fuels.
● Higher energy density as compared to biomass gasification fuel.
● Bio-oil production from second-generation biomass and waste materials.
● Separated minerals from the site of liquid fuel generation may be recycled to soil as nutrient.
● Secondary conversion for the use as motor-fuels, fuel additives and special chemicals.

Flash pyrolysis
For the production of solid, liquid, and gaseous fuels from biomass, flash pyrolysis is used. Flash
pyrolysis can give as high as 75% bio-oil yield from biomass feedstock (Demirbas 2000a). This
process is characterized by rapid decomposition in inert atmosphere with high rate of heating, high
temperatures between 450°C and 1000°C and very short vapor residence time of less than 1 s
(Aguado et al. 2002). This process has some major technical disadvantages like thermal instability,
corrosive nature of oil, solid particles in oil and viscosity may increase with time by catalyst in
biochar (Cornelissen et al. 2008).
 ENERGY SOURCES, PART A: RECOVERY, UTILIZATION, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 7

Discussion
Biomass potential
Recently in India the production of biomass is approximately 450–500 MT per year (Murugan and Gu
2015). Presently the biomass share is 32% of whole primary energy usage in India. According to Energy
Alternatives India (EAI) estimation the potential of power generation using biomass in country can rise
from about 18,000 MW to 50,000 MW if we expand the potential of biomass (Saha, Biswas, and Pal
2014). The recent trend of biofuel in gross fuel consumption is very less. The government has made the
policy of 5% of ethanol blending with petrol in 10 states (Nigam and Singh 2011). Presently, in Indian
fuel market biodiesel is not sold, although the government expects to achieve 20% of diesel requirements
up to 2020 using biodiesel in the country. In India some plants that can be grown in forest have been
identified for the extraction of biodiesel; some notable examples are jatropha seeds, neem, curcas, mahua,
etc. In India 40 million hectare of land can be used to grow the plants of jatropha from 63 million hectare
of available wasteland. Indian government implements many promotional schemes to motivate villagers
to use waste lands for the purpose of cultivation of jatropha.
Generally the term biomass is used with the meaning of plant base materials, but it also refers to
vegetable or animal waste-derived materials (Demirbas 2001; Garcia Perez, Chaala, and Roy 2002;
Mckendry 2002). Biomass materials are divided in two main categories: natural materials and
derived materials. For the purpose of energy production different organic materials such as plant
stems, components of trees and algae can serve as input. Biomass energy can be extracted from plant
and animal matter such as wood, agricultural waste, waste from industries, animal and human waste.
Resources of biomass are classified in three broad categories (Demirbas 2000b; White and Plaskett
1981): (1) energy crops, (2) products from forest and (3) waste from other sources like agriculture,
industry, medical etc.
Table 2 shows the summary of the different biomass materials used in the pyrolysis process to
extract biofuels based on previous literature. From table the amount of biofuel yield largely depends
on type of biomass used, pyrolysis temperature and reactor type.

Different biomass element composition and its physical properties

Table 3 shows the physical properties and elemental composition of different kind of biomass based on
previous literature. To measure the element composition of biomass feedstock ultimate and proximate

Table 2. Summary of the different biomass materials and their bio-oil yield.
Temperature Yield-Bio oil Type of
Feedstock (k) (%wt) Type of Reactor pyrolysis References
Sawdust-Pinewood 773 75 Conical spouted bed Flash (International Energy Agency 2006)
Wood sawdust 923 74 Cyclone Fast (Bridgwater 2005)
Jute stick 773 66.7 Fluidized bed Fast (Brammer, Lauer, and Bridgwater
2006)
Furniture sawdust 723 65 Fluidized bed Fast (Balat et al. 2009)
Corn cobs and corn 923 61.6 Fluidized bed Fast (Demirbas 2005)
stover
Rice husk 723 60 Fluidized bed Fast (Bridgwater 2007)
Corn cob 823 56.8 Fluidized bed Fast (Demibas and Arin 2002)
Waste from sugarcane 748 56 Fixed-bed Fast (Bridgwater, Czernik, and Piskorz
2001)
Pine tree hardwood 723 55 Tubular vacuum Fast (Gronli, Varhegyi, and Blassi 2002)
and softwood
Muncipal waste 773 39.7 Internal circulating Fast (Fisher et al. 2002)
fluidized bed
Plant thistle 823 27.3 Fixed-bed Slow (Lanzetta and Blasi 1998)
Grape bagasse 823 27.6 SS-fixed bed Fast (Somerville 2005)
8 A. PATEL ET AL.

Table 3. Chemical and physical properties of various kind of biomass (Fahmi et al. 2008; Mckendry 2002; Ringer, Putsche, and
Scahill 2006; Wang et al. 2006; Yaman 2004).
Feedstock C (%) H (%) O (%) N (%) Density (Kg/m3) Moisture content (%) Ash content (%) Volatile matter (%)
Wood 51.6 6.3 41.5 0.1 1186 20 0.4–1 82
Bituminous coal 73.1 5.5 8.7 1.4 – 11 8–11 35
Switchgrass 44.77 5.79 49.13 0.31 108 13–15 4.5–5.8 –
Barley strew 45.7 6.1 38.3 0.4 210 30 6 46
Wheat straw 48.5 5.5 3.9 0.3 1233 16 4 59
Birch 44 6.9 49 0.1 125 18.9 0.004 –
Paine 45.7 7 47 0.1 124 17 0.03 –
Polar 48.1 5.30 46.1 0.14 120 16.8 0.007 –

analysis has to be done. The characteristics of bio-oil largely depend on temperature and because of
their higher energy content it is used as liquid fuel (Simashkevich, Serban, and Bruc et al. 2016).

Implementation of green innovations in a non-green industry

Green innovations involve new or modified processes, practices, systems and products that are
beneficiary to environment and contribute to environmental sustainability. It is an important source
of cost reduction as it involves the reduction of inefficiencies and the rational use of natural
resources. On the other hand, considering increased consumer awareness on the environmental
impact of consumption choices, the environmental attributes of new products and services can be
used for marketing differentiation. Calza, Parmentola and Tutore (2017) proposed a theoretical
framework that classifies green innovations according to their impact on company’s competences
and analysis to how green innovations can be implemented in automotive sector. To implement
green innovations is a great challenge for non-green companies as it often requires the new resources
and competences that differ from their existing competences.
Biorefinery and petroleum refinery are similar except that first utilizes biomass instead of crude
oil for the production of transportation fuels, chemicals, and materials. Biomass is renewable and
carbon-neutral so the use of industrial biorefineries was identified as potential solution that may help
to mitigate the threat of climate change and for demand of energy, fuels, chemicals and materials
(World Economic Forum in 2008 and 2009). The main issues with biorefinery are land-use change
and its effect on GHG emissions and food security (Diep et al. 2012). These impacts must be taken
into consideration for ecological and social sustainability with expansion of global bio-energy
production. Various stakeholders need to play different roles in the industrialization process of
biorefinery systems to overcome these challenges. To support biorefineries for environmental
protection and energy security government should make significant investments in R&D, supply
chain, distribution infrastructure, and conversion capacity to ensure food security and avoid land-
use change. Mardoyan and Braun (2015) analyzed Czech subsidies for solid biofuels and have shown
that biofuels are beneficial but its synthesis requires caution. Phytomass combustion may produce
hazardous compounds, as application of fertilizers adds the amount of nitrogen and chlorine. So that
approach towards the charcoalization of fermentation residues in biogas stations is beneficiary, and
it is ecological and promising west management technique.

Economic considerations
Bioindustry faces diverse challenges such as financing new technologies, market and economic viability,
feedstock diversity, sustainability, consistent research development and demonstration (RD&D) and
investments. Sukumara et al. (2014) have proposed novel techno-economic analysis tool encompasses
multiple process and supply chain models into a comprehensive decision support tool. This claim was
further validated by performing a case study on a biological process to convert locally available corn
stover to ethanol. The results show that unique integration of process simulation, supply chain
 ENERGY SOURCES, PART A: RECOVERY, UTILIZATION, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 9

optimization and discrete event simulation can be used to validate the long-term economic viability of
a biorefining process. The decision support tool can be applied to estimate long-term economic and
environmental viability of biorefining processes in any given region of interest. Economic analysis of bio-
oil generation from wood species by fast pyrolysis is very important to know the profit gain and to know
the facilities required to complete the production. Cost of pyrolysis production plant can be classified in
two broad categories: capital investment and operating variable costs. The capital investment for biomass
can be reduced by using forest waste as biomass. Operating cost is associated with labor cost that reduces
the alarming unemployment rate in rural areas.
Many researchers have worked out the cost of crude bio-oil production based upon feed rate of
biomass (kg/hr), type of biomass and its cost (USD/tonne), plant size (tonne/day), type of pyrolysis
(fast/flash), utilization of system (h/day), Interest rate on capital (%), electricity cost (USD/kWh),
Labor cost (USD/h), feed separation cost and total capital investment. Table 4 shows the estimated
cost of bio oil based on the plant size, feedstock price and capital investment in reference to the
various reports. The electricity cost range of USD 0.04 to 0.65/kWh, low labor rate of USD 1.00/h
and interest rate on capital @ 10% were considered for the analysis.
From the last 25 years, researchers have learned much about the science and engineering of pyrolysis
of biomass. This knowledge has contributed to rapid advances in process hardware design improvements
and to a broad understanding of the physical and chemical properties of the resulting bio-oil product
during the same time period. Even with these advances, significant technical and economic challenges
remain to be addressed before fast pyrolysis technology gains commercial acceptance.

Enhancement of oil extraction from biomass

The final price of biodiesel largely depend on the extraction technology used. The higher yield
achieved in the past by use of solvents in combination with chemicals. Josef Maroušek et al. worked
on device of pressure shockwave to enhance oil yield from jatropha seeds and reported 94% oil yield
and further process optimization as per financial aspects (Maroušek, Itoh, and Higa et al. 2013).
Presently energy utilization of grass silage depends on anaerobic fermentation. It requires large
volume of fermentors and long time for reactions of organic matter. Reduction in anaerobic
fermentor dimensions from about thousands to tens of m3 and minimization in retention time
from months into hours was achieved by system of complex energy utilization of grass silage on the
bases of easily accessible organic matter (separation of organic matter from ballast) (Maroušek 2014).

Conclusions
Biomass pyrolysis provides opportunity for the production of clean energy by processing of waste
from wood, agriculture, forest, animal, human etc., as it involves comparatively simpler process and

Table 4. Summary of bio-oil production cost/selling price form different biomass (Arthur 1991; Cottam and Bridgwater 1994;
Gregoire 1992; Gregoire and Bain 1994; Isalm and Ani 2000; Mullaney 2002).
Biomass cost Size of plant Bio-oil cost Capital investment
Biomass type (USD/tonne) (tonne/day) (USD/kg) (million USD) References
Rice husk 22 24 0.18 0.39 (Isalm and Ani 2000)
Low-grade wood chips 36 200 0.21 8.8 (Mullaney 2002)
Low-grade wood chips 36 400 0.19 14 (Mullaney 2002)
7% moisture wood 46.50 1000 0.09 Not reported (Cottam and
Bridgwater 1994)
50% moisture wood 44 1000 0.11 46 (Gregoire and Bain
1994)
50% moisture wood 44 250 0.11 14 (Gregoire 1992)
Dry wood 40 250 0.10 14 (Arthur 1991)
Dry wood 40 1000 0.09 37 (Arthur 1991)
10 A. PATEL ET AL.

low fixed and operating cost. A detailed review of different biomass feedstock from which the biofuel
can be produced was performed and following outcomes were drawn.

● Process of fast pyrolysis can contribute to our need of liquid fuel and chemical production. It is
the most feasible option to transformation of biofuel from biomass.
● The bio-oil yield by pyrolysis process can be 21.9% to 75% depending upon the process
temperature, biomass type and reactor type. Pyrolysis yields high-grade fuel in association
with low cost of 0.09 to 0.21 USD/kg of crude biofuel production with capital investment of
0.39 to 46 million USD.
● For the competition with the fossil fuel, to gain commercial acceptance and its industrial
implications pyrolysis biofuel needs improvements in technological, economical and social
factors.
● Three main products can be derived from any type of biomass: bio-char, liquid fuel, and
gaseous fuels. Liquid biofuel is the viable option to use in transport sector like IC engines. Bio-
char and gaseous fuels can be used in power plants and industrial process heating purpose.
Biochar is used for soil amendment to reduce NOx level up to 35% and to improve water
retention capacity of topsoil.
● To achieve higher bio-oil yield in pyrolysis, proper selection of biomass is critical. Bio-oil yield
largely derived from cellulose (360°C reaction temperature) so that biomass containing higher
amount of cellulose should be chosen.
● It is required to establish a set of standard specifications for bio-oils that have broad acceptance
in the international community. Without standard specification the prime movers that accom-
modate biofuels cannot be designed.

In future work, on the long-term bases there is a need to use the species of plants that are available in
agriculture and forest west as biomass material like eucalyptus leaves for bio-oil production by
pyrolysis to cut down biomass cost. There is also a need to optimize processing parameters and
reactor configurations used in the pyrolysis plant like vacuum pyrolysis as it leads to reduce NOx
emission by removing air from reactor during fast pyrolysis, clean oil or oil with very little char
without using hot vapor filtration and larger particle size up to 2–5 cm of biomass can be used.

References
Aguado, R., M. Olazar, B. Gaisan, R. Prieto, and J. Bilbao. 2002. Kinetic study of polyolefin pyrolysis in a conical
spouted bed reactor. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 41:4559–66. doi:10.1021/ie0201260.
Arthur, J., Power and Associates, Inc. Feasibility Study. 1991. One thousand tons per day feedstock wood to crude
pyrolysis oils plant 542,000 pounds per year using fast pyrolysis of biomass process. Golden, CO: Prepared for Solar
Energy Research Institute
Balat, M., M. Balat, E. Kirtay, and H. Balat. 2009. Main routes for the thermo-conversion of biomass into fuels and
chemicals. Part 1: pyrolysis systems. Energy Conversion and Management 50:3147–57. doi:10.1016/j.
enconman.2009.08.014.
Beattie, W. H., R. Berjoan, and J. P. Coutures. 1983. High-temperature solar pyrolysis of coal. Solar Energy 31
(2):137–43. doi:10.1016/0038-092X(83)90074-9.
Bose, B. 2010. Global warming: Energy, environmental pollution, and the impact of power electronics. IEEE Industrial
Electronics Magazine 4 (1):6–17. doi:10.1109/MIE.2010.935860.
Brammer, J. G., M. Lauer, and A. V. Bridgwater. 2006. Opportunities for biomass-derived “bio-oil” in European heat
and power markets. Energy Policy 34:2871–80. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2005.05.005.
Bridgwater, A. V., S. Czernik and J. Piskorz. 2001. An overview of fast pyrolysis. Progress in Thermochemical Biomass
Conversion. doi:10.1002/9780470694954.ch80
Bridgwater, A. V., S. Czernik, and J. Piskorz. 2001. An overview of fast pyrolysis. In Progress in thermochemical
biomass conversion, ed. A. V. Bridgwater, Vol. 2, 977–97. London: Blackwell Science.
Bridgwater, A. V. 2005. Fast pyrolysis of biomass: a handbook. Newbury, UK: CRL Press.
Bridgwater, T. 2007. Pyrolysis of biomass. IEA bioenergy: task 34; bioenergy research group. Birmingham, UK: Aston
University.
 ENERGY SOURCES, PART A: RECOVERY, UTILIZATION, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 11

Calza, F. 2017. Types of green innovations: Ways of implementation in a non-green industry. Sustainability 9 (8):1301.
Carraretto C., A. Macor, A.Mirandola, A.Stoppato, and S. Tonon 2004. Biodiesel as alternative fuel: experimental
analysis and energetic evaluations. Energy. 29(12–15):2195–211. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2004.03.042.
Chiaramonti, D., A. Oasmaa, and Y. Solantausta. 2007. Power generation using fast pyrolysis liquids from biomass.
Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews 11:1056–86. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2005.07.008.
Chisti, Y. 2007. Biodiesel from microalgae. Biotechnology Advances 25 (3):294–306. doi:10.1016/j.
biotechadv.2007.02.001.
Cornelissen, T., Y. Yperman, G. Reggers, S. Schreurs, and R. Carleer. 2008. Flash co-pyrolysis of biomass with
polylactic acid. Part 1: influence on bio-oil yield and heating value. Fuel 87:1031–41. doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2007.07.019.
Cottam, M. L., and A. V. Bridgwater. 1994. Techno-economic modeling of biomass flash pyrolysis and upgrading
systems. Biomass and Bioenergy 7:267–73. doi:10.1016/0961-9534(94)00068-5.
Demirbas, A. 2000a. Recent advances in biomass conversion technologies. Energy Education Science and Technology
6:77–83.
Demirbas, A. 2000b. Mechanisms of liquefaction and pyrolysis reactions of biomass. Energy Conversion and
Management 41 (6):633–46. doi:10.1016/S0196-8904(99)00130-2.
Demirbas, A. 2001. Biomass resource facilities and biomass conversion processing for fuels and chemicals. Energy
Conversion and Management 42 (11):1357–78. doi:10.1016/S0196-8904(00)00137-0.
Demirbas, A., and G. Arin. 2002. An overview of biomass pyrolysis. Energy Source Part A 24:471–82. doi:10.1080/
00908310252889979.
Demirbas, A. H. 2005. Yields and heating values of liquids and chars from spruce trunkbark pyrolysis. Energy Source
Part A 27:1367–73. doi:10.1080/009083190523208.
Dewangan, A., A. K. Yadav, and A. Mallick. 2018. Current scenario of biodiesel development in India: Prospects and
challenges. Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization, and Environmental Effects 40:2494-501. doi:10.1080/
15567036.2018.1502849.
Diep, N., K. Sakanishi, N. Nakagoshi, T. Minowa and T. D. Xuan. 2012. Biorefinery: Concepts, current status, and
development trends. International Journal Of Biomass and Renewables 1:1–8.
Elliott, D. C. 2001. Issues in value-added products from biomass. In Progress in thermochemical biomass conversion, ed.
A. V. Bridgwater, Vol. 2, 1186–96. London: Blackwell Science.
Elliott, D. C. 2004. Chemicals from Biomass. In Encyclopedia of energy, edited by C. J. Cleveland, Vol. 1, 163-74.
Amsterdam, Boston: Elsevier.
Fahmi, R., A. V. Bridgwater, I. Donnison, N. Yates, and J. M. Jones. 2008. The effect of lignin and inorganic species in
biomass on pyrolysis oil yields, quality and stability. Fuel 87:1230–40. doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2007.07.026.
Finch, C. A. 1986. The chemistry of solid wood. In Acs advances in chemistry Series No. 207, edited by R. M. Rowell,
18: 352–52. Washington D.C.: American Chemical Society. doi:10.1002/pi.4980180524
Fisher, T., M. Hajaligol, B. Waymack, and D. Kellogg. 2002. Pyrolysis behaviour and kinetics of biomass derived
materials. Journal of Analytical and Applied Pyrolysis 62:331–49. doi:10.1016/S0165-2370(01)00129-2.
Frassoldati, A., G. Migliavacca, T. Crippa, F. Velata, T. Faravelli, and E. Ranzi. 2006. Detailed kinetic modeling of
thermal degradation of biomasses. Proceeding of the 29th Meeting on Combustion, Napoli, Italia, September.
Fukuda, H., A. Kondo, and H. Noda. 2001. Biodiesel fuel production by transesterification of oils. Journal of Bioscience
and Bioengineering 92 (5):405–16. doi:10.1016/S1389-1723(01)80288-7.
Garcia Perez, M., A. Chaala, and C. Roy. 2002. Vacuum pyrolysis of sugarcane bagasse. Journal of Analytical and
Applied Pyrolysis 65 (2):111–36. doi:10.1016/S0165-2370(01)00184-X.
Gregoire, C. E. 1992. Technoeconomic analysis of the production of biocrude from wood. NREL/TP-430-5435.
Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory.
Gregoire, C. E., and R. L. Bain. 1994. Technoeconomic analysis of the production of biocrude from wood. Biomass and
Bioenergy 7:275–83. doi:10.1016/0961-9534(94)00069-6.
Gronli, M. G., G. Varhegyi, and C. D. Blassi. 2002. Thermogravimetric analysis and devolatilization kinetics of wood.
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 41:4201–08. doi:10.1021/ie0201157.
International Energy Agency. 2006. Annual Report, 2006: IEA Bioenergy: Task 34, Pyrolysis of Biomass. Paris, France:
International Energy Agency
Isalm, M. N., and F. N. Ani. 2000. Techno-economics of rice husk pyrolysis, conversion with catalytic treatment to
produce liquid fuel. Bisource Technology 73:67–75. doi:10.1016/S0960-8524(99)00085-1.
Knothe, G. 2005. Dependence of biodiesel fuel properties on the structure of fatty acid alkyl esters. Fuel Processing
Technology 86 (10):1059–70. doi:10.1016/j.fuproc.2004.11.002.
Kudo, K. and E. Yoshida. 1957. On the decomposition process of wood constituents in the course of carbonization. I.
The decomposition of carbohydrate and lignin in Mizunara (Quercus Crispula Blume). Mokuzai Gakkaishi -The
Japan Wood Research Society 3:125–27
Lanzetta, M., and D. C. Blasi. 1998. Pyrolysis kinetics of wheat and corn straw. Journal of Analytical and Applied
Pyrolysis 44:181–92. doi:10.1016/S0165-2370(97)00079-X.
Mardoyan, A., and P. Braun. 2015. Analysis of czech subsidies for solid biofuels. International Journal of Green Energy
12 (4):405–08. doi:10.1080/15435075.2013.841163.
12 A. PATEL ET AL.

Maroušek, J., S. Itoh, O. Higa, Y. Kondo, M. Ueno, R. Suwa, Y. Komiya, J. Tominaga and Y. Kawamitsu. 2013.
Pressure shockwaves to enhance oil extraction from Jatropha Curcas l. Biotechnology & Biotechnological Equipment
27:3654-58. doi:10.5504/BBEQ.2012.0143
Maroušek, J. 2014. Biotechnological partition of the grass silage to streamline its complex energy utilization.
International Journal of Green Energy 11 (9):962–68. doi:10.1080/15435075.2013.833930.
Maroušek, J., L. Kolae, M. Vochozka, V. Stehel, and A. Maroušková. 2018. Biochar reduces nitrate level in red beet.
Environmental Science and Pollution Research. doi:10.1007/s11356-018-2329-z.
Maroušek, J., L. Kolae, M. Vochozka, V. Stehel, and A. Maroušková. 2017. Novel method for cultivating beetroot
reduces nitrate content. Journal of Cleaner Production. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.08.233.
Mckendry, P. 2002. Energy production from biomass (part 1): Overview of biomass. Bioresource Technology 83
(1):37–46. doi:10.1016/S0960-8524(01)00118-3.
Meng X., J. Yang, X. Xu, L. Zhang, Q. Nie, and M. Xian. et al. 2009. Biodiesel production from oleaginous
microorganisms. Renew Energy. 34(1):1–5. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2008.04.014.
Mohan, D., U. Charles, and P. H. Pittman. 2006. Steele: pyrolysis of wood/biomass for bio-oil: a critical review. Energy
& Fuels 20:848–89. American Chemical Society.
Mondal, S., M. V. Amit Kumar, S. Chintala, M. Tauseef, S. Kumar, and J. K. Pandey. 2018. Thermochemical pyrolysis
of biomass using solar energy for efficient biofuel production: A review. Biofuels. doi:10.1080/
17597269.2018.1461512.
Mullaney, H., I. H. Farag, C. LaClaire and C. Barrett. 2002. Technical, environmental and economic feasibility of bio-oil
in New Hampshire's north country. New Hampshire Industrial Research Center
Mullen C. A., A. A. Boateng, N. M.Goldberg, and Y. Lima. 2010. Bio-oil and bio-char production from corn cobs and
stover by fast pyrolysis. Biomass & Bioenergy. 34(1):67–74. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2009.09.012.
Murugan, S., and S. Gu. 2015. Research and development activities in pyrolysis–Contributions from Indian scientific
community–A review. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews 46:282–95. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2015.02.050.
Nabi, M. N., M. S. Akhter, and M. M. Zaglul Shahadat. 2006. Improvement of engine emissions with conventional
diesel fuel and diesel–Biodiesel blends. Bioresource Technology 97 (3):372–78. doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2005.06.006.
Naik S. N., V. V. Goud, P. K. Rout, and A. K. Dalai. 2010. Production of first and second generation biofuels:
a comprehensive review. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews. 14(2):578–97. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2009.10.003.
Nigam, P. S., and A. Singh. 2011. Production of liquid biofuels from renewable resources. Progress in Energy and
Combustion Science 37 (1):52–68. doi:10.1016/j.pecs.2010.01.003.
Ortega J. V., A. M. Renehan, M. W.Liberatore, and A. M. Herring. 2011. Physical and chemical characteristics of aging
pyrolysis oils produced from hardwood and softwood feedstocks. Journal of Analytical and Applied Pyrolysis. 91
(1):190–98. doi:10.1016/j.jaap.2011.02.007.
Pei-Dong, Z., J. Guomei, and W. Gang. 2007. Contribution to emission reduction of CO2 and SO2 by household
biogas construction in rural China. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews 11:1903–12. doi:10.1016/j.
rser.2005.11.009.
Ringer, M., V. Putsche, and J. Scahill. 2006. Large-Scale Pyrolysis Oil Production and Economic Analysis; Technical
Report NREL/TP-510–37779. Cole Boulevard, CO, USA: National Renewable Energy Laboratory.
Runkel, R. O. H., and K. D. Wilke. 1951. Zur Kenntnis des thermoplastischen Verhaltens von Holz. Holzals Rohund
Werkstoff 9:260–70. doi:10.1007/BF02617370.
Saha, S., S. Biswas, and S. Pal. 2014. Survey analysis, scope and application of biomass energy in India. Non
Conventional Energy (ICONCE), 2014 1st International Conference on, IEEE.
Simashkevich A., D. Serban, L. Bruc, N. Curmei, V. Hinrichs, and M. Rusu. 2016. Indium tin oxide thin-films
prepared by vapor phase pyrolysis for efficient silicon based solar cells. Thin Solid Films 610:35–41. doi:10.1016/j.
tsf.2016.04.047.
Singh, S. P., and D. Singh. 2010. Biodiesel production through the use of different sources and characterization of oils
and their esters as the substitute of diesel: A review. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews 14 (1):200–16.
doi:10.1016/j.rser.2009.07.017.
Sinha, S., A. Jhalani, M. R. Ravi, and A. J. Ray. 2000. Solar Energy Society of India 10:41–62.
Soltes, E. J., and T. J. Elder. 1981. Pyrolysis. In Organic chemicals from biomass, ed. I. S. Goldstein, 63–95. Boca Raton,
FL: CRC Press.
Somerville, C. 2005. Energy from biomass; workshop presentration for the inter academy council study report; lighting
the way: towards sustainable energy future. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: IAC.
Sukumara, S., W. Faulkner, J. Amundson, F. Badurdeen and J. Seay. 2014. A multidisciplinary decision support tool
for evaluating multiple biorefinery conversion technologies and supply chain performance. Clean Technologies and
Environmental Policy 16:1027-44. doi:10.1007/s10098-013-0703-6
Tang, W. K., and W. K. Neill. 1964. Effect of flame retardants on pyrolysis and combustion of α-cellulose. Journal of
Polymer Science: Polymer Symposia 6:65–81. doi:10.1002/polc.5070060109.
Thornley, P., P. Upham, Y. Huang, S. Rezvani, J. Brammer, and J. Rogers. 2009. Integrated assessment of bioelectricity
technology options. Energy Policy 37:890–903. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2008.10.032.
 ENERGY SOURCES, PART A: RECOVERY, UTILIZATION, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 13

Tippayawong, N., J. Kinorn, and S. Thavornun. 2008. Yields and gaseous composition from slow pyrolysis of
refuse-derived fuels. Energy Source Part A 30:1572–78. doi:10.1080/15567030701258550.
Venderbosch, R. H., and W. Prins. 2010. Review: fast pyrolysis technology development. Biofuel 4:178–208.
Wang, J., G. Wang, M. Zhang, M. Chen, D. Li, F. Min, M. Chen, S. Zhang, Z. Ren, and Y. Yen. 2006. A comparative
study of thermolysis characteristic and kinetics of seaweeds and fir-wood. Process Biochemistry 41:1883–86.
doi:10.1016/j.procbio.2006.03.018.
White, L. P., and L. G. Plaskett. 1981. Biomass as fuel. London: Academic Press Ltd.
Yaman, S. 2004. Pyrolysis of biomass to produce fuels and chemical feedstocks. Energy Conversion and Management
45:651–71. doi:10.1016/S0196-8904(03)00177-8.