This preprint is under consideration at Sustainable Environment Research. A preprint is a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
Research
Warinthorn Songkasiri
National Center for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7730-6388
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
An adoption of the circular economy concept to utilize the wastes and by-products in the cassava starch industry to produce the biogas is a high potential option. Thai cassava starch industry generates wastes and by-products, as such the wastewater of 21.00 million m3 y-1 and the cassava pulp of 9.50 million t y-1. This research analyzed the key drivers and challenges to increase the demand of biogas system, increasing the energy security, resource efficiency, and decreasing the environmental problem. Three-scenarios of (1) a factory has no biogas system, (2) a factory produces biogas using wastewater as a raw material, and (3) a factory produces biogas using both wastewater and cassava pulp as raw materials, were analyzed. The economic assessment, resource efficiency, water recovery, land use, and global warming potential were the parameter of comparison. Scenario 3 generated a highest net present value, and a shortest payback period for the 10-year operational period with 6.14 million USD and 4.37 y, respectively. Moreover, scenario 3 had the highest resource efficiency and water recovery with the lowest land (18.90 ha with 500 t starch d-1) use and global warming (144.33 kg CO2eq t-1 starch).
Keywords
anaerobic digestion, GHG emission, biogas, tapioca starch
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Loading...
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Under Review
Version (no preprint)
Posted 03 May, 2021
Editor assigned
On 03 May, 2021
Submission checks complete
On 03 May, 2021
Editor invited
On 03 May, 2021
This version was not preprinted
Version (no preprint)
Posted 26 Apr, 2021
Editorial decision: Minor revision
On 26 Apr, 2021
Editor assigned
On 07 Apr, 2021
Submission checks complete
On 07 Apr, 2021
Editor invited
On 07 Apr, 2021
This version was not preprinted
Version (no preprint)
Posted 08 Mar, 2021
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 08 Mar, 2021
Review #3 received
Received 07 Mar, 2021
Reviewer #3 agreed
On 20 Feb, 2021
Review #1 received
Received 16 Feb, 2021
Review #2 received
Received 14 Feb, 2021
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 03 Feb, 2021
Reviews received
Received 03 Feb, 2021
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 01 Feb, 2021
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 31 Jan, 2021
Editor assigned
On 25 Jan, 2021
Submission checks complete
On 25 Jan, 2021
Editor invited
On 25 Jan, 2021
First submitted
On 22 Jan, 2021
This version was not preprinted
Version 2
Posted 02 Feb, 2021
No community comments so far
Editor assigned
On 25 Jan, 2021
Submission checks complete
On 25 Jan, 2021
Editor invited
On 25 Jan, 2021
First submitted
On 20 Jan, 2021
Editorial decision: Revise before peer review
On 10 Nov, 2020
Version (no preprint)
Posted 20 Dec, 2020
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 20 Dec, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 17 Dec, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 11 Dec, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 01 Dec, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 28 Nov, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 28 Nov, 2020
Editor assigned
On 24 Nov, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 24 Nov, 2020
Editor invited
On 24 Nov, 2020
This version was not preprinted
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Revise before peer review
On 10 Nov, 2020
Editor assigned
On 02 Nov, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 02 Nov, 2020
Editor invited
On 02 Nov, 2020
First submitted
On 29 Oct, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Learn more about our company.
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
This preprint is under consideration at Sustainable Environment Research. A preprint is a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
Research
Warinthorn Songkasiri
National Center for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7730-6388
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Under Review
Version (no preprint)
Posted 03 May, 2021
Editor assigned
On 03 May, 2021
Submission checks complete
On 03 May, 2021
Editor invited
On 03 May, 2021
This version was not preprinted
Version (no preprint)
Posted 26 Apr, 2021
Editorial decision: Minor revision
On 26 Apr, 2021
Editor assigned
On 07 Apr, 2021
Submission checks complete
On 07 Apr, 2021
Editor invited
On 07 Apr, 2021
This version was not preprinted
Version (no preprint)
Posted 08 Mar, 2021
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 08 Mar, 2021
Review #3 received
Received 07 Mar, 2021
Reviewer #3 agreed
On 20 Feb, 2021
Review #1 received
Received 16 Feb, 2021
Review #2 received
Received 14 Feb, 2021
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 03 Feb, 2021
Reviews received
Received 03 Feb, 2021
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 01 Feb, 2021
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 31 Jan, 2021
Editor assigned
On 25 Jan, 2021
Submission checks complete
On 25 Jan, 2021
Editor invited
On 25 Jan, 2021
First submitted
On 22 Jan, 2021
This version was not preprinted
Version 2
Posted 02 Feb, 2021
No community comments so far
Editor assigned
On 25 Jan, 2021
Submission checks complete
On 25 Jan, 2021
Editor invited
On 25 Jan, 2021
First submitted
On 20 Jan, 2021
Editorial decision: Revise before peer review
On 10 Nov, 2020
Version (no preprint)
Posted 20 Dec, 2020
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 20 Dec, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 17 Dec, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 11 Dec, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 01 Dec, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 28 Nov, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 28 Nov, 2020
Editor assigned
On 24 Nov, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 24 Nov, 2020
Editor invited
On 24 Nov, 2020
This version was not preprinted
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Revise before peer review
On 10 Nov, 2020
Editor assigned
On 02 Nov, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 02 Nov, 2020
Editor invited
On 02 Nov, 2020
First submitted
On 29 Oct, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
An adoption of the circular economy concept to utilize the wastes and by-products in the cassava starch industry to produce the biogas is a high potential option. Thai cassava starch industry generates wastes and by-products, as such the wastewater of 21.00 million m3 y-1 and the cassava pulp of 9.50 million t y-1. This research analyzed the key drivers and challenges to increase the demand of biogas system, increasing the energy security, resource efficiency, and decreasing the environmental problem. Three-scenarios of (1) a factory has no biogas system, (2) a factory produces biogas using wastewater as a raw material, and (3) a factory produces biogas using both wastewater and cassava pulp as raw materials, were analyzed. The economic assessment, resource efficiency, water recovery, land use, and global warming potential were the parameter of comparison. Scenario 3 generated a highest net present value, and a shortest payback period for the 10-year operational period with 6.14 million USD and 4.37 y, respectively. Moreover, scenario 3 had the highest resource efficiency and water recovery with the lowest land (18.90 ha with 500 t starch d-1) use and global warming (144.33 kg CO2eq t-1 starch).
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Loading...