Ethanol production from molasses: Environmental and socioeconomic prospects in Pakistan: Feasibility and economic analysis

Environmental Technology & Innovation 14 (2019) 100317

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Environmental Technology & Innovation journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/eti

Ethanol production from molasses: Environmental and socioeconomic prospects in Pakistan: Feasibility and economic analysis Muhammad Arshad a , Mazhar Abbas a , Munawar Iqbal b , a b

∗

Department of Basic Sciences, CVAS, Jhang, Campus 35200, Pakistan Department of Chemistry, The University of Lahore, Lahore, Pakistan

highlights • • • • •

Ethanol production possibility from molasses in Pakistan is reviewed. The production cost is compared with gasoline. Raw material, processing, supply & demand (energy) and socioeconomic aspects were main categories. The current framework up gradation is suggested for sustainable energy development. Numerical benefits of ethanol production and effects on different aspects are presented.

article

info

Article history: Received 21 March 2016 Received in revised form 17 December 2018 Accepted 26 January 2019 Available online 1 February 2019 Keywords: Bioethanol Environment Socioeconomic indicators Molasses Sugar industry

a b s t r a c t The ethanol production from molasses was identified, considering various socioeconomic and environmental indicators in Pakistan. The environment, economic and social aspects were recognized and enumerated to the bioethanol production for sustainability development of the society. The indicators predicated on the basic of advantages to the communities such as implementation, thoughtful, clear, pre-emptive and extrapolative. The values of individual indicators were discussed and their applications for the context of ethanol production and necessities. Key socioeconomic effects of supply chain for bioethanol production system including feedstock (sugarcane) availability, transformation and blending of ethanol with gasoline have been analyzed in Pakistan’s perspectives. Collectively by means of indigenously preferred environmental and social issues, it was concluded that bioethanol is better option for sustainable development and Pakistan is able to produce ethanol from sugarcane industry by-product (molasses) and to date, distilleries working in Pakistan have ability to blend gasoline with 5% ethanol and this production can be increased just by installing new distilleries since molasses are available in huge quantity. © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Contents 1. 2. 3.

Introduction............................................................................................................................................................................................... Approach ................................................................................................................................................................................................... Expected environmental benefits and impact ........................................................................................................................................ 3.1. Abating of GHG gas emission ...................................................................................................................................................... 3.2. Offsetting of carbon dioxide (CO2 ) emission (carbon neutral)..................................................................................................

∗ Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: [email protected], [email protected] (M. Iqbal). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eti.2019.100317 2352-1864/© 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

2 2 4 4 5

2

M. Arshad, M. Abbas and M. Iqbal / Environmental Technology & Innovation 14 (2019) 100317

4. 5. 6.

7.

3.3. Energy balance ............................................................................................................................................................................. 3.4. Social potential in ethanol production ....................................................................................................................................... 3.5. Impact on the economy .............................................................................................................................................................. 3.6. As import substitution ................................................................................................................................................................ Ethanol cost analysis in Pakistan ............................................................................................................................................................. 4.1. Farmers benefits .......................................................................................................................................................................... Water re-use.............................................................................................................................................................................................. Sustainability in ethanol production ....................................................................................................................................................... 6.1. Food versus fuel............................................................................................................................................................................ 6.2. Employment generation ............................................................................................................................................................. 6.3. Employment creation at farm level ............................................................................................................................................ Conclusions ............................................................................................................................................................................................... References .................................................................................................................................................................................................

5 5 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 7 8 8

1. Introduction The human progression is honestly relying on frequently accessible energy means. Productivity in various fields is being enhanced through energy contingent technological applications. The dream of socio-economic improvement of developing countries like Pakistan is accomplished only by adopting the energy persistent sources (Asif, 2009; Domac et al., 2005). Since last few decades, the energy rations have been congregated by the fossil fuels like coal, oil and methane gas etc. and deployment of such energy sources were ignored such as massive volumes of gases (CO2 and CO) without considering the environment. However, in view of current environmental pollution (Babarinde and Onyiaocha, 2016; Hassan, 2016; Iqbal and Khera, 2015; Jafarinejad, 2016; Jamal et al., 2015; Majolagbe et al., 2016; Peter and Chinedu, 2016; Qureshi et al., 2015; Sayed, 2015; Shindy, 2016; Ukpaka, 2016a,b), there is need to adopt clean and sustainable technologies (Gangadhara and Prasad, 2016; Mumtaz et al., 2016). In addition tip offs that, the professed socioeconomic upraise is compelling us towards life’s initial point, undoubtedly which is of severe significances (Hendriks, 1994; Rossel, 2006). At present fossil fuels share in worldwide energy supply is above 80%, while nuclear sources provide only 6% and the balance is upheld by the renewable means (Bose, 2000; Stiles, 2009). The transport sector is socially distinct and major partner among the basic areas which utilize huge amount of energy of total consumption, which is constantly growing and at current utilizes 27% of primary energy and it is estimated that the demand will increase to 80% up to 2030 (Mindali et al., 2004; Outlook, 2010). Gasoline and related products utilization is 40 percent of the current energy obligations of Pakistan and this consumption increased very fast during the last decade and transportation was the major user and resultantly, whereas the prices raised many folds due to increased demand of fuel (Ribeiro et al., 2007; Khan and Kakar, 2013). At present, worldwide the environmental issues due to industrial pollution have been reviewed, which are mainly due to the use of conventional fuels. To minimize the effect of conventional fuels as an energy source, the exploration of renewable as substitutes is the need of advanced society. In this contest, ethanol is an excellent alternative and the production already has been commercialized and 3% gasoline use has been replaced with ethanol worldwide (Goldemberg, 2007; Imhof and van der Waal, 2013; Sun and Cheng, 2002). For ethanol production, industrial production needs the fermentation of hexoses (sucrose or starch) in sugar crops containing crops i.e., sugarcane, sugar beet, corn, and wheat and by-product produced during sugar production is utilized for ethanol production. Ethanol produced from cellulosic feed stocks such as switch grasses or agricultural and municipal wastes, is also a potential substitute and these waste are next target of researchers for ethanol production (Badger, 2002; Balat and Balat, 2009; Ribeiro, 2013; Sanchez and Cardona, 2008). To date, ∼100 countries are growing sugarcane crop and in 2011, the aggregate production was 1.8 × 109 tons, in which Brazil is major producer and up to 40% sugarcane is produced in Brazil of total world production. India, China, Thailand, Pakistan are contributing 19%, 6%, 5% and 3% share, respectively (Gerbens-Leenes and Hoekstra, 2012; Martinelli and Filoso, 2008; Rudorff et al., 2010). For ethanol production in Pakistan, sugarcane molasses is exclusive substrate, a by-product of sugar processing, which is produced in bulk as waste. At current, the molasses production is in the range of 2.1 to 1.3 million tons during last ten years. Sucrose is lost in molasses which affect process economy (Balat and Balat, 2009; Gasmalla et al., 2012), therefore, its transformation to ethanol contributes significantly to factory profit (Khan et al., 2007; Majid, 2007). Ethanol productions commercially will plays social roles in the development of rural areas and employment generation in Pakistan (Iqbal and Iqbal, 2014; Nazir et al., 2013). In article the socioeconomic role of the ethanol production in Pakistan is discussed in detail. The distilleries working at present in Pakistan and their capacities for ethanol production/pay are depicted in Fig. 1 and Table 1. The processing strategy is shown in Fig. 2. The cost of ethanol production and production of sugarcane molasses in Pakistan are shown in Tables 2 and 3, respectively. 2. Approach Primary and secondary data was used to evaluate the socioeconomic impact and ethanol production. Primary data was comprised of field survey; involving observation, interviews and discussion with experts. The secondary data sources include several socioeconomic and environmental studies conducted earlier (Silalertruksa and Gheewala, 2011).

M. Arshad, M. Abbas and M. Iqbal / Environmental Technology & Innovation 14 (2019) 100317

Fig. 1. Location of distilleries in Pakistan.

Fig. 2. Flow sheet diagram of ethanol production from sugarcane molasses.

3

4

M. Arshad, M. Abbas and M. Iqbal / Environmental Technology & Innovation 14 (2019) 100317 Table 1 Distilleries in Pakistan with the production capacity per day. S. No

Description

Capacity (L/per day)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

Al- Abbas Sugar Mills and Distillery Ltd, Mirwah, Mirpurkhas Ansari Sugar Mills and Distillery Ltd, Maatli, Badin Chashma Sugar Mills & Distillery Dera Ismail Khan Colony Sugar Mills and Distillery Ltd, Phalia Crystalline Chemical Industries Ltd. Sargodha Dewan Sugar Mills Ltd, Thatta Frontier Sugar Mills and Distillery Ltd, Takht- Bhai Habib Sugar Mills and Distillery Ltd, Nawabshah HaseebWaqas Sugar Mills and Distillery Ltd, Nankana Sahib Hunza Sugar Mills & Distillery Shah Kot Faisalabad Khanzana Sugar Mills and Distillery Ltd, Peshawar Matyari Sugar Mills and Distillery, Heyderabad Noon Sugar Mills and Distillery Ltd, Bhalwal Premier Sugar Mills and Distillery Ltd, Mardan Premier Chemical Industries, Sheikhupura Shakarganj Mills Ltd, Jhang Shahmurad Sugar Mills and Distillery Ltd, T.M. Khan Saleem Sugar Mills and Distillery Ltd, Charsadda Tandlianwala Sugar Mills and Distillery, Kanjwani Unicol Pvt. Ltd. MirpurKhas United Distillery Ltd, Sadiqabad Madina Distillery Faisalabad

165,000 100,000 100,000 125,000 100,000 125,000 25,000 150,000 125,000 125,000 25,000 100,000 80,000 46,000 425,000 325,000 125,000 40,000 125,000 100,000 120,000 125,000

Total

2,776,000

Table 2 Cost analysis of ethanol production in Pakistan. Year

Cost of molasses/t

Price of ethanol/L

other cost on ethanol/L

Final Cost /L

Cost/t US$

Average export price US$

2009–2010 2010–2011 2011–2012 2012–2013 2013–2014

8,184 8,043 7,334 8,971 9,970

34 34 31 37 42

6.5 6.9 7.15 7.23 7.45

41 40 38 45 49

507.5 505.16 471.35 557.61 612.4

630 610 620 700 650

Table 3 Production of sugarcane molasses and ethanol in Pakistan from 2010–14. Source: Pakistan sugar mills association. Year

a*

b*

c*

d*

e*

f*

g*

h*

i*

2009–2010 2010–2011 2011–2012 2012–2013 2013–2014

1,557,457 2,034,555 2,224,369 2,252,751 2,524,202

961,300 86,437 55,608 305,600 378,630

7,996 8,097 10,321 10,394 11,550

77,500 292,218 281,939 209,440 214,557

8,184 8,043 7,334 8,971 9,970

518,657 1,655,900 1,886,822 1,737,711 1,931,015

103,731.32 331,180.06 377,364.41 347,542.20 386,202.91

2,000 4,500 4,500 3,000 3,000

101,731 326,680 372,864 344,542 383,203

a f

Total Molasses produced, b Molasses Exported, c Average export price Rs. Per ton, d Domestic consumption, e Average Domestic Price Per ton in Rupees, Molasses Available for Ethanol Production, g Ethanol Production (in Tons), h Domestic consumption of ethanol (Tons) and i Available for Export (tons).

3. Expected environmental benefits and impact 3.1. Abating of GHG gas emission By adopting producing ethanol and its blending with conventional fuel is the major benefit. In this, way greenhouse gas (GHGs) generation can be minimized. This strategy is an indicator of better environmental performance and is essential for the foremost validations to increased biofuel utilization (Silalertruksa and Gheewala, 2011). Bioethanol impacts on environment are apparent at each phase along the bioethanol production value chain from sugarcane growth to the use of blended fuel (Hill et al., 2006). Blending of the ethanol with gasoline transmits great prospective of reducing GHGs emission. The transport sector is responsible for about 21% of the national emissions and also consumed more than half of the oil in Pakistan, which will be reduced by blending of ethanol with conventional fuel (Habib-ur-Rehman, 2010). The smoke and exhaust from transport sector in the atmosphere is increasing the air pollution in metropolitan cities of Pakistan (Ilyas et al., 2010) and is the major cause of different diseases such as lung cancer, respiratory disease, heart disease as well as brain, nerves, liver, or kidneys effects. The long term exposure to air pollution affects the children lungs (Bruce et al., 2000; Khwaja and Khan, 2005; Siddique and Nadeem-ullah, 2013). The air pollution also reported to be harmful to crop and reduced yield have been reported in various crop due to air pollution (Maggs et al., 1995; Wahid et al., 1995) The extent

M. Arshad, M. Abbas and M. Iqbal / Environmental Technology & Innovation 14 (2019) 100317

5

of carbon monoxide (CO) and un-combusted hydrocarbons in the exhaust can be reduced as ethanol contains more oxygen in comparison to conventional fuels (Agarwal, 2007). In Brazil the CO concentration in air reduced from 50 g/km (1980) to 5.8 g/km (1995) due ethanol blending with conventional fuels (Goldemberg, 2007; Ullah et al., 2015). It has been estimated that the lifecycle of GH) emissions in the production and use of ethanol at 29 gCO2 eq per MJ of ethanol can reduce the gases emission up to 67% versus comparison to gasoline emissions (Khatiwada and Silveira, 2009). 3.2. Offsetting of carbon dioxide (CO2 ) emission (carbon neutral) The CO2 emission per unit of energy consumption is relatively high in Pakistan due to use of pure fusel fuels (Athar et al., 2010). The quantity of CO2 released from combustion of ethanol, is almost same as it is utilized in photosynthesis process for the growth of the sugarcane (Arshad et al., 2011). The life cycle analysis of ethanol shows that there are very lowest CO emissions as compared to other fuels. Thus ethanol can positively contribute to mitigate GHG emission through by changing energy utilization strategy to avoid climate change (Khan and el Dessouky, 2009; Wang, 2005). The energy indexes and carbon equivalences in sugarcane industry was evaluated and it was concluded that current entire chain process of the sugarcane industry is one of major sources for carbon emission into the atmosphere and 66% of the discharge is from agricultural (Neamhom et al., 2016). Therefore, this emission can only be reduced by balancing the gases emission and assimilation between industry and agriculture. At current, the carbon emission from industry is significantly higher than carbon assimilation back to plants (Ainsworth et al., 2008). 3.3. Energy balance The ethanol is environmentally friendly fuel as well as energy efficient (Gangadhara and Prasad, 2016; Mumtaz et al., 2016). The ethanol production from molasses is the best alternate for every applications since molasses is the by-product of sugar industry and millions of tons molasses is produced annually worldwide (Arshad et al., 2007). Analysis revealed that the energy output per energy input ratio for molasses based ethanol is much better as compared to other feedstock as corn ethanol (Ruas, 2000). Corn seems to have an equal energy balance, reduces greenhouse gas emissions by less than 20% because fossil fuels are used as a fuel and fertilizers in the production process and the energy inputs are almost 80% of the energy output (Latif and Rajoka, 2001). Employment of energy efficient processes in the production of ethanol from sugarcane molasses can enhance the energy output-to-input ratio and cultivation of more sugarcane is also helpful to fulfill the sugar demand, which is increasing day by day and in this way the molasses production will also increase for the production of ethanol (Van den Wall Bake et al., 2009). At current, the fermentation technology for the conversion of sugars in molasses is best option because this technology already has been commercialized. Supplementary energy efficient ways such as consumption of molasses by-products can increases the energy ratio from 1.0 to 1.5. For the production of refined sugar from sugarcane, huge amount of bagasse is generated. In this case the energy output-to-input (fossil) ratio would be 1.1 to 2.0. If the sugarcane is directly processed for ethanol production via sugarcane juice, the bagasse can meet steam needs of the process, which will raise the energy balance to 2.0 to 4.0. The negative net energy value −13.05 MJ/l, positive net renewable energy value 18.36 MJ/l and energy yield ratio 7.47 for ethanol production from molasses are reported. The share of renewable energy was 91.7% of total energy requirements. While net energy value and net renewable energy value are −7 MJ/l and 17.7 MJ/l, and the energy yield ratio was 6.1 in case of study of ethanol production (Khatiwada and Silveira, 2009). Therefore, the ethanol production from molasses is bet option to meet the energy input–output balance. 3.4. Social potential in ethanol production The production of bioethanol put forwards both opportunities and challenges, especially in the countries having biofuels at embryonic stage. The self-oil production is very low in Pakistan and ethanol production from molasses will reduce the expensive oil imported (Arshad et al., 2008; Rashid and Altaf, 2008). It will also potentially provide an addition source income to farmers and the development of a bioethanol industry which can support local infrastructures and rural advancements. Moreover, it may be beneficial for rural poor peoples, in response better wages (Clancy, 2013; Malik et al., 2009). For the development of a sustainable biofuel industry ensure economical and efficient energy supplies to rural areas, assisting commercial activities with enduring enhancements in food security. To evaluate economic impacts of bioethanol, complete value chain from the production of feed stocks, processing, blending, distribution and marketing will have positive role in rural economy development as well as infrastructure in Pakistan (Malik et al., 2009). The cost performance analysis of molasses-based E10 with conventional gasoline revealed that the E10 better to reduce the fossil energy use as well as CO2 and NOx emissions. However, a total social cost was estimated to be higher than gasoline due to direct production costs and external costs. But the projection scenarios analysis showed that technological innovations towards cleaner production can maximize ethanol production benefits versus other energy production sources (Nguyen and Gheewala, 2008).

6

M. Arshad, M. Abbas and M. Iqbal / Environmental Technology & Innovation 14 (2019) 100317

3.5. Impact on the economy Sugarcane industry with 76 industrial units is ranked second after textile industry in Pakistan. Since 1990 an upward trend is observed in this sector. A production of 4 Mtons in 2003–04 was achieved. The local sugar production is sufficient in Pakistan. In 2004–05 and 2005–06 faced a deficiency, which was met through imports. In this scenario more sugar cane production will meet the national sugar needs and in sugar market, Pakistan will emerge and in this way ethanol production will favors the economy. This will indirectly improve the possibility of sugarcane cultivation and area expansion to meet the sugarcane industry demand (Amjid et al., 2011; Anonymous, 2008; Mirza et al., 2008; Rudorff et al., 2010). 3.6. As import substitution In last decade, a significant quantity of the molasses has been converted into alcohol in Pakistan. Fermentation units (∼21) in the country are operates for conversion of molasses into alcohol and 2.0 million tons of molasses to alcohol is converted/year. The price in the world market is enough high of ethanol and at current, it is used as anhydrous ethanol as fuel or blend with gasoline. Ethanol export has been improved rapidly over the last decade and most of the ethanol is imported to Japan and Italy. Price of various grades of alcohol are in the range of from US$ 800 to US$ 1000 per ton (Arshad and Amjad, 2012; Arshad et al., 2008, 2011; Bromberg and Cheng, 2010). In this way, distilleries owners brought 8 to 10% higher foreign exchange in Pakistan, which is an excellent value-addition in economy by converting molasses in to bioethanol. The petroleum products purchase in Pakistan was of worth US$ 3 billion in a fiscal year, resulting in a massive share of the country trade deficit. Therefore, transition to from indigenous fuel to ethanol utilization (initially at very low concentration) can save the country foreign exchange (Arshad, 2009, 2011). 4. Ethanol cost analysis in Pakistan It is assumed that global fossil fuel prices will stay up; the distillery technology breakthrough is a good option to decrease the ethanol cost versus fossil fuels. The import values fluctuate in last few years for fuels ought to be explosive; in the year of 2008–2009, crude petroleum prices were up surged at US$145/bbl (barrel). Bioethanol in Pakistan is produced totally from sugar production by-product (molasses). The molasses cost vary each year and also from season to offseason, therefore the cost of ethanol production differs accordingly (Anonymous, 2008; Arshad, 2011; Qureshi, 2004; Zafar and Owais, 2006). Up to 2000, the ethanol prices were not comparative to oil prices since the oil prices were very low ∼$45–50 per barrel. The escalation in oil prices, attained $100 per barrel and the devaluation of the Pakistani currency versus US $ was also one of the factors in oil price and now indigenous ethanol production is much cost competitive (Malik, 2008). The molasses valued was ∼100 $ /Mton in last three years and 250 liters of ethanol is yielded from one ton of molasses; thus raw material cost is estimated to be US$ 0.4 per liter. After inclusion of processing charges i.e., salary/wages of operational staff, investment capital cost, energy value of producing anhydrous alcohol and the cost of transport and marketing, the ethanol prices may reach to maximum US$ 0.46 per liter. It is much favorable as the current consumer price of petrol in Pakistan is more than US$ 1 per liter. The biogas collection (biogas) from stillage can reduce further this estimated price. Presently, USA is the leader in production of ethanol from corn and 85% ethanol is produced from corn with cost US$ 1.10/gal (Giersdorf, 2013; Pinguelli et al., 2013; Shapouri et al., 2006). The production of ethanol form corn is costly under current circumstances; therefore, molasses is better option for ethanol production and beneficial for Pakistan (Arshad et al., 2008, 2011; Bazmi et al., 2007; Gheewala et al., 2013). 4.1. Farmers benefits Sugarcane is an important cash crop of Pakistan and plays an important role in the up lift of socioeconomic conditions of the growers. The growth of sugar industry as well as ethanol production from molasses can contribute to economic development of farmers and country as well. At current, industrial advancement sugarcane is not only producing sugar, but by-products such as alcohol, chipboard, and dozens of others industrial chemical compound and can be manufactured during the sugarcane processing. Pakistan stands at 5th, 7th and 8th position in sugarcane production, sugar production and consumption, respectively in the world (Nazir et al., 2013). Unfortunately, the yield is very low as other sugar producing countries (Khan et al., 2009; Macedo et al., 2008). Pakistan cultivates sugarcane on 5% area of the total cropped area (Nazir et al., 2013). The sugar mills on average produce 40,000 to 50,000 tons of molasses worth US$ 3 to 4 million which was used for purchase of molasses. As a result of export of ethanol produced molasses, the income can be increased efficiently, which will also increase the wages of farmers (Khan et al., 2010; Rizvi, 2013). The average yield of sugarcane during the last few years ranges between 45 to 50 ton/hectare, this is too low among sugarcane producing countries as a major crop. The low yield is due to poor management practices and post-harvest losses. The traditional methods are commonly used in sugarcane management and labor is an important input in the sugarcane production process. Production process is not mechanized and is mostly labor intensive. Majority of the growers do not follow modern practices. In this regards, researcher identified various factor for low sugarcane yield in Pakistan (Keerio et al., 2003; Khaliq et al., 2005; Khan et al., 2005; Nazir et al., 2013) versus other major sugar producing countries i.e., Brazil and India (Ball-Coelho et al., 1993; de Resende et al., 2006; Lapola et al., 2010; Singh et al., 2007a,b; Soccol et al., 2010; Stamford et al., 2006; Sundara et al., 2002; Yadav and Prasad, 1992). Therefore, by adopting the integrated advanced management practices, the sugar can yield can be enhanced, which is helpful in enhancing the sugar production as well as ethanol production and indirectly, the farmer’s will get better wages in response of more income from sugar and ethanol production.

M. Arshad, M. Abbas and M. Iqbal / Environmental Technology & Innovation 14 (2019) 100317

7

5. Water re-use Water re-use after treatment is an option for extending water resources and constituting an alternative supply that could substitute freshwater and fertilizer. This practice is particularly interesting for water re-use, which do not require high quality standards (Anonymous, 1999). Researchers studied the effects of stillage on different corps and plant and positive responses are reported i.e., the effects of stillage on Jasmine (Oleaceae) of flowering yield were investigated along with nutrients like nitrogen, phosphorous and potassium. Results reveled stillage supply enhanced the Jasmine positively (Chandraju et al., 2013). In another study, effluent from anaerobic digestion plant was mixed with process water from ethanol fermentation unit. Ethanol production in the recycling batch was raised as compared to batch in which just freshwater was used. Moreover, process of anaerobic digestion was improved and by re-using the water, energy consumption can be reduced (Wang et al., 2014). Similarly, treated effluent in place of freshwater in ethanol production process and it was revealed that the ethanol production is feasible using treated water (Ramchandran et al., 2013). In response of high water consumption, the water consumption reduction was studied taking into account demand and supply quality restrictions (Chavez-Rodriguez et al., 2013). A water supply mix was suggested, with direct reuse of 648 L/t of cane, and another 176 L/t of cane covered indirectly by recycled streams. This reduces the required external withdrawal to 405 L/t of cane (a value within the limit mandated for the sugarcane industry). 6. Sustainability in ethanol production 6.1. Food versus fuel In Pakistan, the sugarcane processing by-product (molasses) is the one of the major sources for bioethanol production at industrial scale. The food crops i.e., maize, wheat, rice and potato are also cultivated in Pakistan as major crops, but could not be utilized ethanol production due to food insecurity (Bastiaanssen and Ali, 2003; Boddiger, 2007; Tenenbaum, 2008). Therefore, for sustainable advancement in energy sector and food security, the ethanol production from molasses is much favorable. In long term projects, this source of energy have great prospective in bioethanol technology, which need policy and motivation regarding socioeconomic benefits to the farmers as well as Government. On the other hand, it will also reduce the environmental pollution and ensure the food supply as well (Arshad, 2009, 2011; Arshad et al., 2008). 6.2. Employment generation The unique advantage of ethanol production is the rural employment since the employment opportunity will be created, and resultantly, rural residents will get better wages for the betterment of life. The sugarcane processing plants, mainly ethanol production unit comprising 76 sub-units and have capacity of engaging 75,000 (Asad et al., 2013). Therefore, along with substantial development, the employment generation is also another benefit. Sugarcane being a major cash crop provides the livelihood to farmers and 70% population in rural areas depend upon sugarcane cultivation. Bioethanol and biogas production units are the additional employment source along with ethanol production (Arshad, 2009). A single distillery can accommodate ∼200–250 skilled persons along with unskilled and laborers. Bulk quantity of molasses is currently exported unprocessed and merely trifling amounts are fermented into rectified alcohol for local use or exportation. At current, 270,000 tons ethanol is produced per annum and this quantity could be increased to 400,000 tons per annum by utilizing all the molasses produced in sugar mills and for this installation of new distilleries is compulsory, which will create the employment opportunities for local residents (Shaheen Aziz, 2010). In 1980, more than 800,000 peoples were working in ethanol industry Brazil and to date, this number have been increased many folds (Hira and De Oliveira, 2009) (Martines-Filho et al., 2006; Niemeyer, 2009). Bioethanol production in Pakistan will also create employment opportunities at farm and industry levels, which will definitely reduce the poverty (Shaheen Aziz, 2010). 6.3. Employment creation at farm level By adopting the ethanol production will is not only ensure the energy security, employment in industry and the environment cleanliness; but it also has a significant impact on employment at farm level (Wei et al., 2010). Reports revealed that the renewable energy sector generates more employment per unit of energy produced than the fossil fuel-based energy sector. Employments in the fossil fuel sector are declining at reasons rate. Therefore, a shift from fossil fuels to renewables energy sector will be responsible for job reaction at farm as well as at industrial level. The adoption of ethanol production for energy generation, the sustainable development will greatly enhance net positive impacts on the economy, employment and the environment (Blanco and Rodrigues, 2009; Engel and Kammen, 2009; Fankhaeser et al., 2008). Other than farmers, laborer will also find the opportunities for daily wages earning and working for small land holders will also increase since family members collectively work to manage the work load, in this way small land holder’s income will increase. The large land holders will hire skilled and laborer (Arshad, 2009, 2011; Arshad et al., 2008; Shaheen Aziz, 2010) and resultantly, whole community will find earning opportunity without traveling for wok to other areas.

8

M. Arshad, M. Abbas and M. Iqbal / Environmental Technology & Innovation 14 (2019) 100317

7. Conclusions The sustainable development has great impact on any society. The ethanol production has much capability to bring socioeconomic revolution in Pakistan due income increment at farm, industry and Government level. In view of raw material availability in Pakistan, there is great opportunity for ethanol production. This unique opportunity is largely ignored by the decision makers and stockholder. One of the major factors is the interest of stockholder and companies in oil since significant revenue is generated importing oil. The right national policies can produce appropriate socioeconomic and environmental positive impacts by adopting and increasing ethanol, which will be used local and can also be exported, which lessen the petroleum products import. This will create foreign exchange earnings and saves expensive spent on oil import. In view of lack of Government policies, the private sector should invest in this sector. Moreover, better incentives at farm level will direct the cultivation of sugarcane as food-stock and feed stock crop, which will be helpful in establishing the sugarcane based agro-industrial production of ethanol and scale up of distilleries. Keeping in view the bright outlook, the government, financial institutions and the investors must graft efforts jointly to explore innovative ways to unlock this boundless prospective for the rural society. The Joint production of sugar and ethanol will be of socioeconomic importance. Appropriate means should be adopted in promoting this industry. In second stages, other agriculture wastes might also be used for ethanol production since Pakistan is agricultural country and agricultural wastes are wasted without considering their actual value. Following are the key steps that can be taken into account to promote this environment friendly fuel for sustainable development of the country in energy sector. 1. At present distillery is capable to meet national 5% blending needs. Therefore, on short term basis 5% ethanol can be blended with gasoline fuel, which does not need any alteration in vehicle’s engines. 2. The blending level must be improved in next few years, however, this need new distilleries installation. 3. Minor adjustments in carburetors are required to utilize > 10% blended fuel with ethanol and auto vehicle manufacturers must manufacture flexible fuel automobiles. 4. Sugarcane production, the backbone of ethanol must be increased through yield and recovery of sugar loss during processing. 5. The possibility of ethanol fermentation directly from sugarcane juice should be explored as in case of Brazil. 6. The price of fuel ethanol should be fixed according to the price of the substrate (molasses). 7. The export of molasses and alcohol must be banned by the Government; which will ensure the availability of molasses for local ethanol production. References Agarwal, A.K., 2007. Biofuels (alcohols and biodiesel) applications as fuels for internal combustion engines. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 33, 233–271. Ainsworth, E.A., Rogers, A., Leakey, A.D., 2008. Targets for crop biotechnology in a future high-CO2 and high-O3 world. Plant Physiol. 147, 13–19. Amjid, S.S., Bilal, M.Q., Nazir, M.S., Hussain, A., 2011. Biogas, renewable energy resource for Pakistan. Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 15, 2833–2837. Anonymous, 1999. Options for the future: Balancing Water Demand and Water Resources. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK230248/. Anonymous, 2008. Fortnightly Mill Wise Statement for 15-05-2008. Pakistan Sugar Mills Association, Islamabad, Pakistan, Pakistan, pp. 1–4. Arshad, M., 2009. Employment generation through bio-ethanol production sector. In: Preecedings of National Seminar on ‘‘Policies and Strategies for Successful Implementation of Employment Generating Programmes in Renewable Energies, Biotechnology, Agriculture, Environment and ICTs’’ at Comsats/Comstech at Islamabad Pakistan, pp. 77–82. Arshad, M., 2011. Bioethanol: A sustainable and environment friendly solution for Pakistan. Sci. J COMSATS 16, 25–30. Arshad, M., Amjad, M., 2012. Medicinal use of sunflower oil and present status of sunflower in Pakistan: A review study. Sci. Tech. Dev. 31, 99–106. Arshad, M., Ilyas, M.K., Khan, M.A., 2007. Genetic divergence and path coefficient analysis for seed yield traits in sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) hybrids. Pak. J. Bot. 39, 2009–2015. Arshad, M., Khan, Z., Shah, F., Rajoka, M., 2008. Optimization of process variables for minimization of byproduct formation during fermentation of blackstrap molasses to ethanol at industrial scale. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 47, 410–414. Arshad, M., Zia, M.A., Asghar, M., Bhatti, H., 2011. Improving bio-ethanol yield: Using virginiamycin and sodium flouride at a Pakistani distillery. Afr. J. Biotechnol. 10, 11071–11078. Asad, R., Jubeen, S., Iqbal, S., 2013. Eeffect of industrial environment of health status of workers. A case study of Noon sugar mill Bhalwal. Acad. Res. Int. 4, 215–420. Asif, M., 2009. Sustainable energy options for Pakistan. Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 13, 903–909. Athar, M., Ali, M., Khan, M.A., 2010. Gaseous and particulate emissions from thermal power plants operating on different technologies. Environ. Monit. Assess. 166, 625–639. Babarinde, A., Onyiaocha, G.O., 2016. Equilibrium sorption of divalent metal ions onto groundnut (Arachis hypogaea) shell: Kinetics, isotherm and thermodynamics. Chem. Int. 2, 37–46. Badger, P., 2002. Ethanol from Cellulose: A General Review. Trend New Crop New Uses. American Society for Horticultural Science Press, Alexandria, VA, USA, pp. 17–21, Balat, M., Balat, H., 2009. Recent trends in global production and utilization of bio-ethanol fuel. Appl. Energy 86, 2273–2282. Ball-Coelho, B., Tiessen, H., Stewart, J., Salcedo, I., Sampaio, E., 1993. Residue management effects on sugarcane yield and soil properties in northeastern Brazil. Agron. J. 85, 1004–1008. Bastiaanssen, W.G., Ali, S., 2003. A new crop yield forecasting model based on satellite measurements applied across the Indus Basin, Pakistan. Agric. Ecosys. Environ. 94, 321–340.

M. Arshad, M. Abbas and M. Iqbal / Environmental Technology & Innovation 14 (2019) 100317

9

Bazmi, A.A., Bhutto, A.W., Ghauri, M., 2007. Ethanol Fuel as a Feasible and Desired Option in Pakistan. In: Abbottabad, Pakistan: International Conference on Environmentally Sustainable Development. ESDev-2007. Conference Paper, CIIT Abbottabad, Pakistan. Blanco, M.I., Rodrigues, G., 2009. Direct employment in the wind energy sector: An EU study. Energy Policy 37, 2847–2857. Boddiger, D., 2007. Boosting biofuel crops could threaten food security. Lancet 370, 923–924. Bose, B.K., 2000. Energy, environment, and advances in power electronics. In: Industrial Electronics, 2000. ISIE 2000. Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE International Symposium on. IEEE, vol. 11, pp. TU1–T14. Bromberg, L., Cheng, W., 2010. Methanol as an Alternative Transportation Fuel in the US: Options for Sustainable and/or Energy-Secure Transportation. Sloan Automotive Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA. Bruce, N., Perez-Padilla, R., Albalak, R., 2000. Indoor air pollution in developing countries: A major environmental and public health challenge. Bull. World Health Organ. 78, 1078–1092. Chandraju, S., Thejovathi, C., Kumar, C.C., 2013. Impact of distillery spentwash irrigation on the yield of Jasmine (Oleaceae) flowering plant. Current Bot. 3, 30–38. Chavez-Rodriguez, M.F., Mosqueira-Salazar, K.J., Ensinas, A.V., Nebra, S.A., 2013. Water reuse and recycling according to stream qualities in sugar–ethanol plants. Energy Sust Dev. 17, 546–554. Clancy, J., 2013. Biofuels and Rural Poverty. Routledge, Earthscan, London. Domac, J., Richards, K., Risovic, S., 2005. Socio-economic drivers in implementing bioenergy projects. Biomass Bioenergy 28, 97–106. Engel, D., Kammen, D.M., 2009. Green jobs and the clean energy economy. In: Copenhagen Climate Council’s Thought Leadership Series. Retrieved from http://rael.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/old-site-files/CopenhagenClimateConcill-GreenJobsTLS-04.pdf. Fankhaeser, S., Sehlleier, F., Stern, N., 2008. Climate change, innovation and jobs. Clim. Policy 8, 421–429. Gangadhara, R., Prasad, N., 2016. Studies on optimization of transesterification of certain oils to produce biodiesel. Chem. Int. 2, 59–69. Gasmalla, M.A.A., Yang, R., Nikoo, M., Man, S., 2012. Production of ethanol from sudanese sugar cane molasses and evaluation of its quality. J. Food Process. Technol. 3, 2–3. Gerbens-Leenes, W., Hoekstra, A.Y., 2012. The water footprint of sweeteners and bio-ethanol. Environ. Int. 40, 202–211. Gheewala, S.H., Damen, B., Shi, X., 2013. Biofuels: economic, environmental and social benefits and costs for developing countries in Asia. Wiley Interdisciplinary Rev.: Climate Change 4, 497–511. Giersdorf, J., 2013. Politics and Economics of Ethanol and Biodiesel Production and Consumption in Brazil. DBFZ Deutsches Biomasseforschungszentrum gemeinnützige, Leipzig. Goldemberg, J., 2007. Ethanol for a sustainable energy future. Science 315, 808–810. Habib-ur-Rehman, 2010. Transport and Communications. In: Economic Survey 2009-10. Ministry of Finance, Pakistan. Hassan, E., 2016. Comparative study on the biosorption of Pb(II), Cd(II) and Zn(II) using Lemon grass (Cymbopogon citratus): Kinetics, isotherms and thermodynamics. Chem. Int. 2, 89–102. Hendriks, C., 1994. Carbon Dioxide Removal from Coal-Fired Power Plants (Ph.D thesis), Department of Science, Technology, and Society, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands. Hill, J., Nelson, E., Tilman, D., Polasky, S., Tiffany, D., 2006. Environmental, economic, and energetic costs and benefits of biodiesel and ethanol biofuels. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 103, 11206–11210. Hira, A., De Oliveira, L.G., 2009. No substitute for oil? How Brazil developed its ethanol industry. Energy Policy 37, 2450–2456. Ilyas, S.Z., Khattak, A.I., Nasir, S., Qurashi, T., Durrani, R., 2010. Air pollution assessment in urban areas and its impact on human health in the city of Quetta, Pakistan. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 12, 291–299. Imhof, P., van der Waal, J.C., 2013. Catalytic Process Development for Renewable Materials. John Wiley & Sons. Iqbal, M.A., Iqbal, A., 2014. Sugarcane Production, Economics and Industry in Pakistan. American-Eurasian J. Agric. Environ. Sci. 14 (12), 1470–1477. Iqbal, M., Khera, R.A., 2015. Adsorption of copper and lead in single and binary metal system onto Fumaria indica biomass. Chem. Int. 1, 157b–163b. Jafarinejad, S., 2016. Control and treatment of sulfur compounds specially sulfur oxides (SOx) emissions from the petroleum industry: A review. Chem. Int. 2, 242–253. Jamal, M.A., Muneer, M., Iqbal, M., 2015. Photo-degradation of monoazo dye blue 13 using advanced oxidation process. Chem. Int. 1, 12–16. Keerio, H.K., Panhwar, R.N., Memon, Y.M., Arain, M., Qazi, R., 2003. Qualitative and quantitative performance of some promising and commercial sugarcane varieties under agro-climatic conditions of Thatta. Pak. J. Appl. Sci. 3, 670–673. Khaliq, A., Ashfaq, M., Akram, W., Choi, J.K., Lee, J.J., 2005. Effect of plant factors, sugar contents, and control methods on the Top Borer (Scirpophaga nivella F.) Infestation in selected varieties of sugarcane. Entomol. Res. 35, 153–160. Khan, N.A., el Dessouky, H., 2009. Prospect of biodiesel in Pakistan. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 13, 1576–1583. Khan, S.A., Hussain, M.Z., Prasad, S., Banerjee, U., 2009. Prospects of biodiesel production from microalgae in India. Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 13, 2361–2372. Khan, M.J., Kakar, Z.K., 2013. Green Fuel an ultimate need for Pakistan. World Appl. Sci. J. 23, 983–988. Khan, S.R., Khan, S.A., Yusuf, M., 2007. Biofuels Trade and Sustainable Development: The case of Pakistan. The Sustainable Development Policy Institute (SDPI), Working document. 2007. Khan, I.A., Khatri, A., Nizamani, G.S., Siddiqui, M.A., Raza, S., Dahar, N.A., 2005. Effect of NPK fertilizers on the growth of sugarcane clone AEC86-347 developed at NIA, Tando Jam, Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot. 37, 355–360. Khan, S.R., Yusuf, M., Khan, S.A., Abbasy, R., 2010. Biofuels trade and sustainable development: The case of sugarcane bioethanol in Pakistan. Biofuels production, trade and sustainable development. In: Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock. Government of Pakistan, Islamabad, Pakistan. Khatiwada, D., Silveira, S., 2009. Net energy balance of molasses based ethanol: The case of Nepal. Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 13, 2515–2524. Khwaja, M.A., Khan, S.R., 2005. Air pollution: Key environmental issues in Pakistan. Sustainable Development Policy Institute. Working document. Lapola, D.M., Schaldach, R., Alcamo, J., Bondeau, A., Koch, J., Koelking, C., Priess, J.A., 2010. Indirect land-use changes can overcome carbon savings from biofuels in Brazil. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 107, 3388–3393. Latif, F., Rajoka, M.I., 2001. Production of ethanol and xylitol from corn cobs by yeasts. Bioresour. Technol. 77, 57–63. Macedo, I.C., Seabra, J.E., Silva, J.E., 2008. Green house gases emissions in the production and use of ethanol from sugarcane in Brazil: The 2005/2006 averages and a prediction for 2020. In: Biomass Bioenergy, vol. 32, pp. 582–595. Maggs, R., Wahid, A., Shamsi, S., Ashmore, M., 1995. Effects of ambient air pollution on wheat and rice yield in Pakistan. Water Air Soil Poll. 85, 1311–1316. Majid, M., 2007. Sugarcane variety composition in Pakistan. Pak. Sug. J. 22, 2–21. Majolagbe, A.O., Adeyi, A.A., Osibanjo, O., 2016. Vulnerability assessment of groundwater pollution in the vicinity of an active dumpsite (Olusosun), Lagos, Nigeria. Chem. Int. 2, 232–241. Malik, A., 2008. How Pakistan is coping with the challenge of high oil prices. Pak. Dev. Rev. 46, 4–10. Malik, S., Maqbool, M., Khan, J., 2009. Air pollution control techniques: A case study of industrial air emissions. Nucleus 46, 187–195. Martinelli, L.A., Filoso, S., 2008. Expansion of sugarcane ethanol production in Brazil: Environmental and social challenges. Ecol. Appl. 18, 885–898. Martines-Filho, J., Burnquist, H.L., Vian, C.E., 2006. Bioenergy and the rise of sugarcane-based ethanol in Brazil. Choices 2nd Quarter 21 (2), 91–96. Mindali, O., Raveh, A., Salomon, I., 2004. Urban density and energy consumption: A new look at old statistics. Transp. Res. A 38, 143–162. Mirza, U.K., Ahmad, N., Majeed, T., 2008. An overview of biomass energy utilization in Pakistan. Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 12, 1988–1996.

10

M. Arshad, M. Abbas and M. Iqbal / Environmental Technology & Innovation 14 (2019) 100317

Mumtaz, M.W., Mukhtar, H., Dilawer, U.A., Hussain, S.M., Hussain, M., Iqbal, M., Adnan, A., Nisar, J., 2016. Biocatalytic transesterification of Eruca sativa oil for the production of biodiesel. Biocatal. Agric. Biotechnol. 5, 162–167. Nazir, A., Jariko, G.A., Junejo, M.A., 2013. Factors Affecting Sugarcane Production in Pakistan. Pak. J. Commer. Soc. Sci. 7, 128–140. Neamhom, T., Polprasert, C., Englande, A.J., 2016. Ways that sugarcane industry can help reduce carbon emissions in Thailand. J. Clean Product 131, 561–571. Nguyen, T.L.T., Gheewala, S.H., 2008. Fuel ethanol from cane molasses in Thailand: Environmental and cost performance. Energy Policy 36, 1589–1599. Niemeyer, L., 2009. Ethanol and the environment: The political economy of the cost–benefit analysis. Retrieved from International Development Economics Associates. Outlook, A.E., 2010. nergy Information Administration. Department of Energy. DOE/EIA-0383(2012) June 25, 2012 (2012), US Energy Information Administration, www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo. Peter, U.C., Chinedu, U., 2016. Model prediction for constant area, variable pressure drop in orifice plate characteristics in flow system. Chem. Int. 2, 80–88. Pinguelli, L., de Campos, C.P., Villela, R.A., 2013. Biofuels in Brazil in the context of South America Energy Policy. INTECH Open Access Publisher. Qureshi, S., 2004. Pakistan Sugar Mills Association: Significance of Sugar Industry in National Economy. Pakistan Sugar Book, pp. 108–120. Qureshi, K., Ahmad, M., Bhatti, I., Iqbal, M., Khan, A., 2015. Cytotoxicity reduction of wastewater treated by advanced oxidation process. Chem. Int. 1, 53–59. Ramchandran, D., Rajagopalan, N., Strathmann, T.J., Singh, V., 2013. Use of treated effluent water in ethanol production from cellulose. Biomass Bioenergy 56, 22–28. Rashid, T., Altaf, Z., 2008. Potential and environmental concerns of ethanol production from sugarcane molasses in Pakistan. Nature Precedings, hdl: 10101/npre.200814991. de Resende, A.S., Xavier, R.P., de Oliveira, O.C., Urquiaga, S., Alves, B.J., Boddey, R.M., 2006. Long-term effects of pre-harvest burning and nitrogen and vinasse applications on yield of sugar cane and soil carbon and nitrogen stocks on a plantation in Pernambuco, NE Brazil. Plant Soil 281, 339–351. Ribeiro, B.E., 2013. Beyond commonplace biofuels: Social aspects of ethanol. Energy Policy 57, 355–362. Ribeiro, S.Kahn, Kobayashi, S., Beuthe, M., Gasca, J., Greene, D., Lee, D.S., Muromachi, Y., Newton, P.J., Plotkin, S., Sperling, D., 2007. Transport and its infrastructure. Clim. Change 32, 3–385. Rizvi, J., 2013. Production of ethanol from sudanese sugar cane molasses and evaluation of its quality. J. Food Process. Technol. 3, 163–166. Rossel, C., 2006. Conversion of lignocellulose biomass (bagasse and straw) from the sugar-alcohol industry into bioethanol. Industrial perspectives for bioethanol. Editora Uniemp, São Paulo, ISBN: 85-98951-06-4, Ruas, D., 2000. Avaliação energética de fontes de matérias primas para a produção de álcool, Embrapa Milho e Sorgo-Artigo em anais de congresso (ALICE). In: Congresso Brasileiro De Economia E Sociologia Rural, 18., 1980, Rio de Janeiro. Agricultura e desenvolvimento. Rio de Janeiro: SOBER, 1980. p. 1-14. Rudorff, B.F.T., Aguiar, D.A., Silva, W.F., Sugawara, L.M., Adami, M., Moreira, M.A., 2010. Studies on the rapid expansion of sugarcane for ethanol production in São Paulo State (Brazil) using Landsat data. Remote Sens. 2, 1057–1076. Sanchez, O.J., Cardona, C.A., 2008. Trends in biotechnological production of fuel ethanol from different feedstocks. Bioresourc. Technol. 99, 5270–5295. Sayed, M., 2015. Efficient removal of phenol from aqueous solution by the pulsed high-voltage discharge process in the presence of H2 O2 . Chem. Int. 1, 81–86. Shaheen Aziz, S., 2010. Production Of Ethanol From Molasses Using Thermo Tolerant Kluyvetomces Marxianus (Thesis), Mehran University of Engineering & Technology, Jamshoro, Pakistan. Shapouri, H., Salassi, M., Fairbanks, N., 2006. The Economic Feasibility of Ethanol Production from Sugar in the United States. Department of Agricultural. Economic Research Service, Washington, DC. Shindy, H., 2016. Basics in colors, dyes and pigments chemistry: A review. Chem. Int. 2, 29–36. Siddique, G.U., Nadeem-ullah, M., 2013. Air pollution in Karachi its causes and effects on human health. J. Soc. Sc. Hum. 1, 137–145. Silalertruksa, T., Gheewala, S.H., 2011. The environmental and socio-economic impacts of bio-ethanol production in Thailand. Energy Procedia 9, 35–43. Singh, P., Shukla, S., Bhatnagar, V., 2007b. Optimizing soil moisture regime to increase water use efficiency of sugarcane (Saccharum spp. hybrid complex) in subtropical India. Agricl. Water Manag. 90, 95–100. Singh, K., Suman, A., Singh, P., Lal, M., 2007a. Yield and soil nutrient balance of a sugarcane plant–ratoon system with conventional and organic nutrient management in sub-tropical India. Nutr. Cyc. Agroecosys. 79, 209–219. Soccol, C.R., de Souza Vandenberghe, L.P., Medeiros, A.B.P., Karp, S.G., Buckeridge, M., Ramos, L.P., Pitarelo, A.P., Ferreira-Leitão, V., Gottschalk, L.M.F., Ferrara, M.A., 2010. Bioethanol from lignocelluloses: Status and perspectives in Brazil. Bioresourc Technol. 101, 4820–4825. Stamford, N., Lima, R., Santos, C., Dias, S., 2006. Rock biofertilizers with Acidithiobacillus on sugarcane yield and nutrient uptake in a Brazilian soil. Geomicrobiol J. 23, 261–265. Stiles, T.D., 2009. Renewable resources and the dormant commerce clause. Environ. Energy Law Policy J. 4, 34–37. Sun, Y., Cheng, J., 2002. Hydrolysis of lignocellulosic materials for ethanol production: A review. Bioresourc. Technol. 83, 1–11. Sundara, B., Natarajan, V., Hari, K., 2002. Influence of phosphorus solubilizing bacteria on the changes in soil available phosphorus and sugarcane and sugar yields. Field Crop. Res. 77, 43–49. Tenenbaum, D.J., 2008. Food vs. fuel: Diversion of crops could cause more hunger. Environ. Health Perspec. 116, A254–A257. Ukpaka, C., 2016a. BTX Degradation: The concept of microbial integration. Chem. Int. 3, 8–18. Ukpaka, C., 2016b. Empirical model approach for the evaluation of pH and conductivity on pollutant diffusion in soil environment. Chem. Int. 2, 267–278. Ullah, K., Sharma, V.K., Dhingra, S., Braccio, G., Ahmad, M., Sofia, S., 2015. Assessing the lignocellulosic biomass resources potential in developing countries: A critical review. Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 51, 682–698. Wahid, A., Maggs, R., Shamsi, S., Bell, J., Ashmore, M., 1995. Effects of air pollution on rice yield in the Pakistan Punjab. Environ. Pollut. 90, 323–329. Van den Wall Bake, J., Junginger, M., Faaij, A., Poot, T., Walter, A., 2009. Explaining the experience curve: Cost reductions of Brazilian ethanol from sugarcane. Biomass Bioenergy 33, 644–658. Wang, M., 2005. Energy and greenhouse gas emissions impacts of fuel ethanol, Center for transportation research energy system division, Argonne National Laboratory. NGCA Renewable fuels forum, the national Press club. Wang, K., Zhang, J.-H., Liu, P., Cao, H.-S., Mao, Z.-G., 2014. Reusing a mixture of anaerobic digestion effluent and thin stillage for cassava ethanol production. J. Clean Product 75, 57–63. Wei, M., Patadia, S., Kammen, D.M., 2010. Putting renewables and energy efficiency to work: How many jobs can the clean energy industry generate in the US? Energy Policy 38, 919–931. Yadav, R., Prasad, S., 1992. Conserving the organic matter content of the soil to sustain sugarcane yield. Exp. Agric. 28, 57–62. Zafar, S., Owais, M., 2006. Ethanol production from crude whey by Kluyveromyces marxianus. Biochem. Eng. J. 27, 295–298.