Comparative life cycle assessment of byproducts from sugarcane industry in Pakistan based on biorefinery concept
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
NOx, SOx, NH3, CO, and hydrocarbons emitted from producing/using fertilizers/pesticides, transport, burning coal/bagasse, and energy production were main contributing factors to HOFP, EOFP, and TAP.
“Moreover, NOx, SOx, NH3, CO, and hydrocarbons were given off on producing and using fertilizers and pesticides, transport, burning coal and bagasse, and energy production were the main contributing factors to the following: HOFP, EOFP, and TAP, as shown in Table 8 (Brizmohun et al. 2015, Costa et al. 2018, Ghani and Gheewala 2018, Ruiz et al. 2018).”
From Environmental and economic analysis of bioethanol production from sugarcane molasses and agave juice (2021) · cites this paper as Ghani and Gheewala 2018
These led to a greater impact on FEP than agave.
“all of which led to a greater impact on FEP than agave did (Figure 6 and Table 8)”
From Environmental and economic analysis of bioethanol production from sugarcane molasses and agave juice (2021) · cites this paper as Ghani and Gheewala 2018
Raw materials (coal, natural gas, oil) for producing diesel and chemical products were main contributing factors to FFP.
“Finally, the raw materials used (coal, natural gas, and oil) for producing diesel and chemical products were the main contributing factors to FFP (Table 8)”
From Environmental and economic analysis of bioethanol production from sugarcane molasses and agave juice (2021) · cites this paper as Ghani and Gheewala 2018
Differences in TAP and HTPc might be linked to different assumptions made, such as burning cane waste and producing biogas.
“The differences seen in the other two (TAP and HTPc) might have been linked to the different assumptions made, such as burning cane waste and producing biogas (Ghani and Gheewala 2018).”
From Environmental and economic analysis of bioethanol production from sugarcane molasses and agave juice (2021) · cites this paper as Ghani and Gheewala 2018
Similar values were observed in three categories (GWP, FEP, FFP) between this study and Ghani and Gheewala (2018).
“On comparing the results obtained for the five categories in this research and those by Ghani and Gheewala (2018), similar values were observed in three of them (GWP, FEP, and FFP).”
From Environmental and economic analysis of bioethanol production from sugarcane molasses and agave juice (2021) · cites this paper as Ghani and Gheewala 2018
Cites
Klüppel, H.-J. (2005) · The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment · doi:10.1065/lca2005.03.001 · Cited by 4,650 · see citing works
ReCiPe2016: a harmonised life cycle impact assessment method at midpoint and endpoint level
Huijbregts, M. A. J., Steinmann, Z. J. N., Elshout, P. M. F., Stam, G., Verones, F., Vieira, M., Zijp, M., Hollander, A., & van Zelm, R. (2017) · The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment · doi:10.1007/s11367-016-1246-y · Cited by 4,485 · see citing works
Macedo, I. C., Seabra, J. E. A., & Silva, J. E. A. R. (2008) · Biomass and Bioenergy · doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2007.12.006 · Cited by 943 · see citing works
Life Cycle Inventories of Agricultural Production Systems
Nemecek, T., & Kägi, T. (2007) · Cited by 482 · see citing works
Huijbregts, M. A. J., Steinmann, Z. J. N., Elshout, P. M. F., Stam, G., Verones, F., Vieira, M. D. M., Hollander, A., Zijp, M. C., & Rosalie Van Zelm, F. (2016) · Cited by 384 · see citing works
Rein, P. W. (2017) · Verlag Dr. Albert Bartens KG eBooks · doi:10.36961/cse · Cited by 316 · see citing works
Handbook of Cane Sugar Engineering
(2014) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/c2013-0-12437-3 · Cited by 253 · see citing works
Handbook of cane sugar engineering
Coombs, J. (1986) · Biomass · doi:10.1016/0144-4565(86)90047-8 · Cited by 211 · see citing works
Rossi, V., Cleeve-Edwards, N., Lundquist, L., Schenker, U., Dubois, C., Humbert, S., & Jolliet, O. (2014) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.08.049 · Cited by 210 · see citing works
Contreras, A. M., Rosa, E., Pérez-Gil, M., Langenhove, H. R. V., & Dewulf, J. P. (2008) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2008.12.001 · Cited by 187 · see citing works
Adding value to carbon dioxide from ethanol fermentations
Xu, Y., Isom, L., & Hanna, M. A. (2010) · Bioresource Technology · doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2010.01.006 · Cited by 151 · see citing works
Silalertruksa, T., Pongpat, P., & Gheewala, S. H. (2017) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.06.010 · Cited by 123 · see citing works
Self-citationComparative techno-economic assessment and LCA of selected integrated sugarcane-based biorefineries
Gnansounou, E., Vaskan, P., & Pachón, E. R. (2015) · Bioresource Technology · doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2015.07.072 · Cited by 118 · see citing works
Carbon footprint of sugar produced from sugarcane in eastern Thailand
Yuttitham, M., Gheewala, S. H., & Chidthaisong, A. (2011) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.07.017 · Cited by 112 · see citing works
Self-citationdos Santos, M. F. N., Battistelle, R. A. G., Bezerra, B. S., & Varum, H. (2013) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.06.039 · Cited by 96 · see citing works
Life cycle assessment of sugarcane ethanol production in India in comparison to Brazil
Tsiropoulos, I., Faaij, A. P. C., Seabra, J. E. A., Lundquist, L., Schenker, U., Briois, J.-F., & Patel, M. K. (2014) · The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment · doi:10.1007/s11367-014-0714-5 · Cited by 92 · see citing works
Leal, M. R. L. V., Walter, A. C. D. S., & Seabra, J. E. A. (2012) · Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery · doi:10.1007/s13399-012-0055-1 · Cited by 90 · see citing works
Life cycle assessment of bagasse waste management options
Kiatkittipong, W., Wongsuchoto, P., & Pavasant, P. (2009) · Waste Management · doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2008.12.006 · Cited by 89 · see citing works
Greenhouse gas savings potential of sugar cane bio-energy systems
Nguyen, T. L. T., Gheewala, S. H., & Sagisaka, M. (2010) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2009.12.012 · Cited by 74 · see citing works
Self-citationIrrigation in Southern and Eastern Asia in figures
Syaukat, Y. (2012) · Cited by 73 · see citing works
Multi-objective target oriented robust optimization for the design of an integrated biorefinery
Sy, C. L., Ubando, A. T., Aviso, K. B., & Tan, R. R. (2017) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.09.140 · Cited by 72 · see citing works
An assessment of harvesting practices of sugarcane in the central region of Thailand
Pongpat, P., Gheewala, S. H., & Silalertruksa, T. (2016) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.07.178 · Cited by 68 · see citing works
Self-citationFuel ethanol from cane molasses in Thailand: Environmental and cost performance
Nguyen, T. L. T., & Gheewala, S. H. (2008) · Energy Policy · doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2008.01.008 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Self-citation(2008) · International sugar journal · Cited by 52 · see citing works
Yasar, A., Ali, A., Tabinda, A. B., et al. (2014) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2014.11.038 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Productive potential and quality of rice husk and straw for biorefineries
Santos, F., Machado, G., Faria, D. J., et al. (2016) · Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery · doi:10.1007/s13399-016-0214-x · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Greenhouse gas assessment of palm oil mill biorefinery in Thailand from a life cycle perspective
Beaudry, G., Macklin, C., Roknich, E., et al. (2017) · Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery · doi:10.1007/s13399-016-0233-7 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
Recovery of carbon dioxide from sugarcane fermentation broth in the ethanol industry
Filho, R. B. D. A., Danielski, L., de Carvalho, F. R., et al. (2012) · Food and Bioproducts Processing · doi:10.1016/j.fbp.2012.09.009 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Enhancement in ethanol production from cane molasses by skim milk supplementation
Patil, S. G., Gokhale, D. V., & Patil, B. G. (1986) · Enzyme and Microbial Technology · doi:10.1016/0141-0229(86)90052-9 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
Pal, S., Joy, S., Kumbhar, P., et al. (2016) · Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery · doi:10.1007/s13399-016-0220-z · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Does Trash Burning Harm Arthropod Biodiversity in Sugarcane
Sajjad, A., Ahmad, F., Makhdoom, A. H., et al. (2012) · International Journal of Agriculture and Biology · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Environmental and economic analysis of bioethanol production from sugarcane molasses and agave juice
Parascanu, M. M., Sanchez, N., Sandoval-Salas, F., Carreto, C. M., Soreanu, G., & Sanchez-Silva, L. (2021) · Environmental Science and Pollution Research · doi:10.1007/s11356-021-15471-4 · Cited by 66 · see citing works
- Authors
- Ghani, H. U., & Gheewala, S. H.
- Affiliations
- Joint Graduate School of Energy and Environment (TH)
- Corresponding author
- Gheewala, Shabbir H.
- Venue
- Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery
- Published
- 2018-10-30
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 979-990
- ISSN
- 2190-6815 (ISSN-L)
- 2190-6823
- OpenAlex
- W2898957022
- Cited by
- 21
- References
- 31
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 3
- FWCI
- 1.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Environmental Impact and Sustainability
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Biofuel production and bioconversion
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Sugarcane Cultivation and Processing
- Keywords
- sugarcane biorefinery, life cycle assessment, environmental impact, sugarcane bagasse, filter cake, ash, wastewater, sludge, fertilizers, combined heat and power, ethanol, biogas, waste-to-energy, CO2 recovery, Pakistan
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
