M Q LIBRARY

 

Michigan State
University

 

 

 

This is to certify that the
thesis entitled

SUSTAINABILITY OF JATROPHA CULTIVATION FOR
BIODIESEL FUELS

presented by

Paramjeet Pati

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for the

MS. degree in Environmental Engineering

 

 

#547094 0/77M72/A/

M rTFrofgssors Signature
)17; 075, 20/0

Date

 

MSU is an Aflinnative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
To AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5/08 ICIProi/AocapresIClRCIDateDueJndd

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY OF JATROPHA CULTIVATION FOR BIODIESEL FUELS
By

Paramjeet Pati

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE
Environmental Engineering

2010

ABSTRACT
SUSTAINABILITY OF JATROPHA CULTIVATION FOR BIODIESEL FUELS
By

Paramjeet Pati

The depletion of fossil fuel reserves and increases in oil prices have resulted in

the quest for the ideal biofuel feedstock. With corn-based ethanol contributing to
increased food prices, non-edible vegetable oil-seed plants (e.g., jatropha) and

second-generation alternatives (e.g., switchgrass and algae) are being explored
as potential feedstocks for biofuels. Biofuels provide a renewable alternative to

fossil fuels and have several potential benefits; environmental as well as societal.
However, there are concerns about the long-term sustainability of biofuels. This
thesis discusses some of the major concerns about the lifecycle behaviour and
the water footprint of jatropha-based biodiesel, while also addressing the socio-
economic impacts, the ethical issues and the overall sustainability of biofuels in

general.

“...You can't always get what you want
But if you try sometimes you might find

You get what you need...”

-The Rolling Stones

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I believe that my Masters thesis is integrally linked with my overall M.S.
experience. I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to the people who made

this journey possible.

I will start by thanking Mr. Dennis Seybert and Mr. Eric Christensen from the
University Printing Services, where I worked during my first year at MSU.
Dennis: I owe you my gratitude for giving me my first job in the United States.
Thank you for being patient with my mistakes.

Eric: You were the nicest supervisor and were always kind and fair to me. Thank

you.

I shall remain indebted to Dr. Susan Masten, Dr. Syed Hashsham, and my
thesis committee members Dr. Melvin Yokoyama and Dr. Irene Xagoraraki for

their valuable inputs, constant support and encouragement.

There are great advisors. Above that, there are awesome advisors. after which,
there’s a huge gap. And then there’s my advisor - Dr. Susan Masten.

Dr. Masten: I can never thank you enough for what you have done for me. But I
will say this: There are moments in life when we see a reason behind all the
madness, Chaos and turmoil — moments when disjointed events seem to connect
as if that Invisible Hand is joining the dots of life and showing us a pattern, a

path. These are moments are rare and fleeting, but when they occur, life just

iv

makes sense. Looking back at the last two years at MSU, I experienced one
such moment on the 31fit of October 2008 (Friday, my first Halloween in the US.)

at 9:20 am. That’s when you agreed to be my advisor.

Dr. Yokoyama: This thesis would not have been possible without your invaluable
inputs and guidance. Thank you for the samples, lab supplies and financial
support for the research. I really appreciated the flexibility you allowed me
throughout my research.

Dr. Xagoraraki: Thank you for your time and effOIt in reviewing my thesis draft.
Your suggestion to focus on nanopartcles for the project report in ENE 890
helped me find my research interest for my PhD.

Dr. Hashsham: I am thankful for your advice and guidance during my initial days
at MSU. Thanks for maintaining high expectations from me and for believing that

I could meet them.

I must thank my fellow graduate students - Alla Alpatova, Farhan Ahmad,
lndumathy Jayamani, Prianca Bhaduri and Deric Patton - for their help and
support over the last two years.

Alla: From how to use the Parafilm, to successfully run the software for the
HPLC setup - you taught me so much regarding lab work. Thanks for lending me
those textbooks, for the innumerable free rides and shopping trips, homemade

pizza and for teaching me a smattering of Ukrainian and Russian. You are one of

the kindest persons I have ever met and it is an honour being your friend.
Bol‘shoye spa ‘siba.

Farhan: I will remain ever grateful to you for all your help and suggestions. You
helped me navigate my way through the initial days at MSU and were always
there when I needed you. Thanks.

lndu: Thanks for your help with the coursework and for the troubleshooting tips
for HPLC. You truly an ‘idea-person’.

Prianca: Thank you for being a good friend. Thanks also for all the free food!
Deric: I owe you a huge “Thank you” for all your help in the courses throughout
my Masters degree. Our project for CE 421 was the best ‘team-experience’ l
have ever had. I could have never been the teaching assistant l was without your

invaluable suggestions regarding CSE 101. Thanks for everything.

My research would not have been possible without the support from Dr. Susan
Hengemuehle and Mr. Pan Yanlyang.

Sue: I walked into the lab with virtually no experience in research. You helped
me take my first faltering, baby steps in laboratory work and taught me that .
research can indeed be fun. Thanks for having so much faith in me. Also, thanks
for helping me print the final version of the thesis!

Pan: My laboratory work would not have been possible without all your help.
Thanks for your patience while handling my unending stream of questions. I will

always remain grateful for the hands-on laboratory skills I have learnt from you.

vi

I would like to thank our graduate secretary (Environmental Engineering) Ms.
Lori Lamar: Thank you for managing all my paperwork, ordering lab supplies
and helping me handle the two gadgets in ERC that I could never get to work -

the telephone and the printer. Lori, you are the best!

I will always remain grateful to the Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering for the financial support in the form of the teaching assistantship,

which, for me, was an absolute godsend.
I am also grateful to my parents and my family for their love and support. Most of
all, I must thank my grandfather Dr. Keshab Chandra Pati for the habits taught

early in life, which made me the person I am today.

Paramjeet Pati

25‘” March 2010

vii

Table of Contents

List of Tables: ....................................................................................................... ix
List of Figures: ...................................................................................................... x
Alternative sources of energy: The reemergence of biofuels ................................ 1
Lifecycle Assessment (LCA): ................................................................................ 7
Toxins and anti-nutritional factors in jatropha: .................................................... 27
Degradation of phorbol esters in jatropha oil during biofuel production: .. 29
Detoxification of phorbol esters: ............................................................... 30
Other anti-nutritional components: ........................................................... 31
The water footprint of jatropha: ........................................................................... 36
Challenges in water management: ........................................................... 49

Food vs. Biofuels: The effect of biofuels on food prices and the agricultural

industry ............................................................................................................... 55
Biofuel Policies: Social and Ethical Issues .......................................................... 64
Recommendations: ............................................................................................. 74
Conclusions: ....................................................................................................... 81
Appende ............................................. 83
Detoxification of Phorbol Esters in Jatropha Seeds using Ozone: ........... 83
Ozonation: ................................................................................................ 85
Results: .................................................................................................... 86
Discussion: ............................................................................................... 90
Calculations: ............................................................................................ 94
Bibliography ........................................................................................................ 96

viii

List of Tables:

Table 1 - PMA calibration (Raw data -1) ........................................................... 92
Table 2 - PMA calibration (Raw data - 2) ........................................................... 92
Table 3 - Ozonation (Raw data) .......................................................................... 93
Table 4 - Applied ozone dose ............................................................................. 94

List of Figures:

Figure 1 - Chemical structure of jatropha oil ....................................................... 43
Figure 2 - Schematic of experimental procedure ................................................ 84
Figure 3 - Schematic of ozonation setup ............................................................ 86
Figure 4 - Chromatogram of PMA standard ........................................................ 88

Figure 5- Chromatogram of ozonated and unozonated jatropha seed extracts .. 89

Figure 6 - PMA calibration curve ........................................................................ 93

Alternative sources of energy: The reemergence of biofuels1

In recent years, there has been much interest in the development of alternative

energy sources. The depleting reserves of fossil fuels, the growing awareness of
the negative environmental impacts of conventional fossil fuels (e.g., coalz,

petroleum3), and the geopolitical pressures to reduce the dependence on
imported fuel are the main driving forces behind the search for clean and
renewable sources of energy. Examples of alternative energy include wind

(windmills), solar (photovoltaic cells) and water (hydroelectricity). Apart from

these sources, biodiesel4 has received considerable attention as another
promising source of renewable energy (Murugesan et al. 2009, Ma and Hanna

1999, Raneses et al. 1999).

 

1 Giampietro et al. (1997) defined biofuel as “any type of liquid or gaseous fuel that can be produced
from biomass substrates and that can be used as a (partial) substitute for fossil fuels. Biodiesel,
ethanol, methanol are subcategories of biofuels.

2 Coal mining has come under severe scrutiny due to its negative environmental impacts. Palmer et al.
(2010) described mountain top mining with valley fills (MTM/VF) as “surface mining operations that
remove coal seams running through a mountain, ridge, or hill; it may also refer more broadly to large-scale
surface mining, including area or contour mining in steep terrain that disposes of excess rock in heads of
hollows or valleys with streams”. In mountain top mining of coal, the upper elevation forests are cleared
and stripped of the topsoil. The buried coal is accessed by blowing up the underlying rocks using
explosives. As a result, streams in the adjacent valleys get buried by the debris (mine "spoil"). Surrounding
ecosystems are severely affected, resulting in habitat loss, soil erosion and irreversible damage to terrestrial
and aquatic life.

OII fires In petroleum mInIng and refinery processes release harmful partrculate emrssrons, In addItIon to
greenhouse gases. Oil spills in natural water bodies cause severe damage to aquatic flora and fauna.

4 The National Biodiesel Board (NBB) defined biodiesel and biodiesel blend as follows:

Biodiesel, n - a fuel comprised of mono-alkyl esters of long chain fatty acids derived from vegetable oils
or animal fats, designated 13100, and meeting the requirements of ASTM D 6751.

Biodiesel Blend, n—a blend of biodiesel fuel meeting ASTM D 6751 with petroleum-based diesel fuel,
designated BXX, where XX represents the volume percentage of biodiesel fuel in the blend. [1]

However, biodiesel is not a new alternative to fossil fuels. Olive oil was used for

lighting lamps during the time of the Patriarchs (1950 — 1500 BCE) [1, 156].

Before the discovery of petroleum by Edwin Drake in 1859, ethanol5 was used as
a fuel (Kovarik 1998). Vegetable oils (castor, peanut), animal oils (whale oil,
tallow from beef or pork), refined turpentine, wood alcohol (methanol) and grain
alcohol (ethanol) were used as lamp oils in the United States and Europe in the
nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Samuel Morey invented the internal 1
combustion engine (patented in 1826), which ran on a “mixture of steam and the
vapour of heated turpentine” (Hodgson 1961). In 1860, German inventor
Nicholas Otto invented the four-stroke internal combustion engine that was
fuelled by ethanol (Solomon, Barnes and Halvorsen 2007). In 1896, Henry Ford

built his first automobile (the quadricycle) to run on pure ethanol. In 1900, at the
World Exhibition in Paris, Rudolf Diesel6 demonstrated his first engine that ran on

peanut oil (Shay 1993). Later, in 1908, Ford built the Model T automobile7 that
could run on ethanol, gasoline or a combination of both (Antoni, Zverlov and

Schwarz 2007).

 

5 Structurally, ethanol obtained from plant sugars (obtained by fermentation) is different from biodiesel,
which is essentially a mixture of mono-alkyl esters (obtained by transesterification).

6 In his paper “Historical perspectives on vegetable-oil based diesel firels”, Knothe mentioned that
the idea to use peanut oil might not have been Diesel’s own idea. According to Knothe, Diesel used peanut
oil in his engine’s demonstration at the Exposition Universalle (1900, Paris) at the request of the French
government, which wanted to test the applicability of Arachide (earth nut or pea nut) oil. (Arachide grew
plentifully in the French-occupied Afi'ican colonies and was a possible alternative to imported coal or oil.)
(Knothe, 2001)

7 This was the first ‘flexible fuel vehicle’ (FFV) invented (Keeney (2009). The hybrid vehicles and ‘flex-
cars’ of today derive the idea of using biodiesel blends fi'om the Model T automobile.

When the Union Congress imposed a $2.08 gallon'1 alcohol tax in 1862 (Mosher
and Beauchamp 1983) during the Civil War (1861 - 1865), ethanol-based biofuel

could no longer compete with gasolines. Although ethanol was used to fuel many
domestic army vehicles during World War II (Keeney 2009), biofuels were not

considered as a serious substitute for gasoline. While interest in biofuels waxed

and waned in the years that followed, the shockingly great increase in oil prices9

during the Arab oil embargo (1973) caused the reemergence of biofuels as a
domestic and renewable source of energy (Songstad et al. 2009, Shihata 1974).

The search for “green” fuels received further impetus as the health and

environmental effects of gasoline additives (TELIO, and later, MTBE) came to

light. Ethanol made a major comeback as a fuel additive in 2000 after the use of

MTBE11 as a fuel oxygenate was banned (Szklo, Schaeffer and Delgado 2007).

At present, ethanol can be obtained from starch- and sugar-based feedstocks
(e.g., corn, maize) or cellulosic feedstocks (plant biomass such as stalks, leaves,

trunks, branches, and husks). Biofuel can also be produced from edible

 

8 Later, in 1906, President Theodore Roosevelt repealed the tax (Carolan, 2009). However, this failed to
revive the ethanol industry completely, because by then gasoline was the accepted fuel in automobile
engines.

9 In 1973, the average price of a barrel of oil was $2.70 and the average cost of gasoline at the pump was

about 35¢ a gallon. By March 1974 oil prices had climbed to nearly $12 a barrel (nearly 330% increase).
Gasoline prices increased to 86¢ per gallon by 1979, and $1.19 a gallon by 1980 (Commoner, 1979)

10 The toxicity of tetraethyl lead (TEL) was suspected as early as 1922. The US Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) began to phase out leaded gasoline in 1975, which was deemed successful by 1986 (US
EPA).

1 . . . . .
1 Methyl tertiary-butyl ether (MTBE) IS suspected to be a human carcmogen. Groundwater contammatIon
from MTBE due to gasoline leaks and spills is suspected in at least 29 states in the United States (US EPA).

vegetable oils (e.g., soybean and sunflower). However, there are Concerns
regarding the use of food crops (e.g., maize, corn and sugarcane) for biofuel
production. With a growing world population, there is an increasing demand for
food and a pressing need to reduce food prices. On the other hand, there is also
an urgent call to produce more biofuels and to reduce the dependency on
imported oil. Biofuels would help bolster the national economy, mitigate the
environmental impacts of fossil fuels and fight global climate change by reducing

the emission of greenhouse gases (GHGS). In this context, ‘non-food-based’

feedstocks12 for biofuels can provide an alternative for biorenewable energy

while simultaneously mitigating food-insecurities across the world. Jatropha

curcasl3, a non-edible oilseed plant, has been proposed as a potential

 

12 Biofuels produced from non-food based feedstock are classified as second-generation biofuels while
those produced from food crops (e.g., cereals, sugar crops and oil seeds) are classified as first-generation
biofuels.

Examples of second-generation biofuel feedstock include ligno-cellulosic plant byproducts (e.g., cereal
straw, corn stalk, sugar cane bagasse, rice husks), non-edible whole plant biomass (e.g., grasses, plants or
trees grown for energy only), organic components of municipal solid wastes and byproducts fi'om animal
fat processing industry, microalgae etc.

At present, technologies for biofuel production from second-generation biofuels (e.g., biofuel from
microalgae) are still in their infancy and the feasibility of large-scale biofuel production fi'om newer
second-generation technologies is yet to be proved.

13 In the report “From 1" Generation to 2"" Generation Biofuel Technologies ”, (by the International

Energy Agency (IEA), www.iea.org) Jatropha curcas has been classified as a second-generation biofuel
feedstock.

Jatropha biodiesel is a vegetable oil based product similar to the biofuel produced fi'om palm oil or canola
oil. I believe that jatropha should be classified as a first generation biofuel feedstock because of the non-
toxic, edible varieties of jatropha found in Mexico. Moreover, the classification of biofuels as first or
second generation should also take into account the difference in the technologies used for the production
of biofuels. At present, biofuel production from jatropha involves transesterification of raw oil. The
technology (i.e., transesterification) therefore is no different from that used for producing biodiesel from
other vegetable oils (e.g., sunflower or soybean).

The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTD) has classified jatropha as a first
generation biofuel feedstock in the report “Biofuel production technologies: status, prospects and
implications for trade and development” (Larson, 2008).

feedstock for sustainable production of biodiesel (Achten et al. 2008, FoidI et al.

1996, Francis, Edinger and Becker 2005, Ye et al. 2009).

Jatropha cumas belongs to the Euphorbiaceae (pronounced yoo-for-bee-ay-see-
eye) plant family. It is a drought-resistant, oil-bearing shrub that is well adapted
for a variety of soils in tropical and semi-arid conditions, and has been referred to
as an “all purpose, zero waste perennial plant” (Verma and Gaur 2009). It is
widely distributed in the wild or semi-cultivated areas in Central and South
America, Africa, India and South East Asia. Jatropha can grow under a wide
range of rainfall regimes from 200 to over 1500 mm per annum. In low rainfall
areas and in prolonged rainless periods, the plant sheds its leaves to conserve

moisture (Openshaw 2000). As its fruit, leaves and stems have several toxins

and antinutritional components”, the plant cannot be used as a feedstock for
animals and is therefore used as a living fence to restrict farm animals from
grazing land (Heller 1996, Gubitz, Mittelbach and Trabi 1999, Aderibigbe et al.
1997). Various parts of the plant have medicinal value and antimicrobial
properties. Also, like all trees, it fixes atmospheric carbon, stores it as biomass

and assists in the build up of soil carbon, thereby acting as a carbon sink.

Jatropha can grow on marginal15 soils in semi-arid areas, improve the soil

 

14 . . . . . .
As mentioned before, non-tox1c vanetres of the plant are found In MeXIco.

15 A note on ‘marginal’ lands: One of the factors mentioned in favour of jatropha is that it grows on
degraded lands in semi-arid conditions. In the literature, the term ‘marginal’ is widely used to refer to these
lands. Gressel (2008) mentioned that such lands are ‘marginal’ only in the economic sense and the term
should be used in its proper context. The lands that have the least economic value are categorized as
marginal lands . This implies that the economic output from such lands is less than the expected outputs
fi'om jatropha cultivation and biofuel production. However, before allocating such lands for jatropha
cultivation, the social and environmental impacts should be carefully considered. Questions about the

structure, prevent soil erosion in degraded areas and help in land reclamation
(Ogunwole et al. 2008). Achten et al. (2008) estimated the average oil content in
jatropha seeds to be 34.4% (on a mass basis). The raw jatropha oil can be
converted to biodiesel by transesterification. In recent years, jatropha has been in
the news due to its potential as a ‘Iow input’ biofuel feedstock. Jatropha based
biofuel programmes are already being implemented in India, Indonesia, China

and Africa.

However, there are several uncertainties regarding the yield, water footprint and
the overall sustainability of jatropha, which must be addressed before cultivating
the plant on a large scale. Several issues related to the lifecycle behaviour and
the water requirements of jatropha (and biofuels in general) are discussed in the
chapters that follow. The socio-economic impacts of biofuels and the food-biofuel
conflict are also addressed. Lastly, recommendations are made for promoting
sustainable biofuel programmes and utilizing the potential environmental and

societal benefits of biofuels.

 

possible increased use of water, the need for irrigation and fertilizers, the cost of transportation from the
marginal sites to the processing plants should be factored into the equation before approving large scale
plantations in such ‘marginal’ lands.

Lifecycle Assessment (LCA):

Biofuels have been proposed as ‘environmentalIy-friendly’ alternatives to
conventional fossil fuels (e.g., Ragauskas et al. 2006, Sanderson et al. 2006,
Powlson, Riche and Shield 2005). However, several researchers have
questioned the sustainability of biofuels (e.g., Searchinger et al. 2008, Hill et al.
2006, Scharlemann and Laurence 2008, Pimentel and Patzek 2006). The
combustion of fossil fuels emits GHGS, which are considered to be responsible
for global warming (Anderson, Hayhoe and Liang 2010). While the combustion of

biofuels also emits GHGS, the plant biomass (i.e., biofuel feedstock) can
reabsorb 002 during photosynthesis. Theoretically, the net C02 flux into the

atmosphere may be negative (i.e., more carbon dioxide is absorbed by the

biomass than released into the atmosphere by the combustion of biofuels),

positive (i.e, there is a net C02 flux into the atmosphere) or zero (in the scenario

when the biofuel is ‘carbon neutral“). If the net 002 flux is positive but less than
that for fossil fuels, then biofuels are considered to be a ‘greener’ alternative to
fossil fuels due to the reduced global warming effect. A major area of uncertainty
is the assessment of the net C02 flux during the “lifetime” of the biofuel. From the
initial design and development to the end-of-life stage, every product has a

‘footprint’ due to the demands on resources and the environmental impacts. The

demand on the available resources and the net effect on the environment must

 

16 In the case of carbon neutral biofuels, the C02 emissions by the combustion of the biofuel are equal to

the C02 assimilated by the feedstock plant.

be quantified to assess the sustainability of any product. Lifecycle assessment
(LCA) is a tool for comparing and quantifying the environmental impact of the

“product” under consideration (e.g., Rebitzer et al. 2004, Pennington et al. 2004).

This chapter provides an introduction to the concept of LCA followed by a
discussion of some selected LCA studies on jatropha-based biodiesel. The
chapter also covers the major areas of uncertainty in LCA studies, the problems

associated with the comparative analysis of different LCA studies and estimating

the sustainability17 of the biofuels. Finally, some recommendations are made to
improve the comparability of the results of LCA studies in the future. The sections

of the discussion related to jatropha are also pertinent to biofuels in general.

In the United States, the methodology of LCA originated from the analytical

schemes developed by Harry E. Teasley Jr.18 in 196919 (Hunt and Franklin
1996). The term ‘LCA’ came into use in 1990. Until then, between 1970 and

1990, the term REPA - resource and energy profile analysis - was used for

 

17 Besides the GHG and energy balance, discussions of the sustainability of biofuels must also include
other factors such as the water footprint and social impacts. The water footprint and the socio-economic
impacts of biofuels are covered in the later chapters.

18 In 1969, the Coca Cola Company was considering various options related to packaging of the beverage.

The options included self-manufacturing beverage cans, using plastic bottles, refillable bottles or
disposable containers. The environmental consequences of the manufacturing and the packaging process
were also being considered. At that time, Teasley Jr. was managing the packaging functions of the
company. To make a decision regarding the packaging options, he visualized a method to “quantify the
energy, material and environmental consequences of the entire life cycle of a package from the extraction
of raw materials to disposal”. (Hunt and Franklin, 1996)

The concept of LCA originated fiom the work that followed.

19 Hunt and Franklin (1996) mentioned that around the same time (i.e., 1996) similar concepts of

environmental impact assessment and sustainability were being explored in Europe.

environmental lifecycle studies. Rebitzer et al. (2004) provided a comprehensive

definition of LCA:

“Life cycle assessment (LCA) is a methodological frame-work for
estimating and assessing the environmental impacts attributable to the life
cycle of a product, such as climate change, stratospheric ozone depletion,
tropospheric ozone (smog) creation, eutrophication, acidification,
toxicological stress on human health and ecosystems, the depletion of

resources, water use, land use, and noise—and others.”

Although the effects of a product on human health are included under the impact
assessment phase in LCA, the socio-economic impacts of the product are

peripheral to LCA studies, which primarily focus on the environmental impacts.

The emphasis on environmental impacts is also seen in the description of LCA

by the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC):

“LCA [Life Cycle Assessments] address the environmental aspects and
potential environmental impacts (e. g. resource use and environmental
consequences of releases) throughout a product’s life cycle from raw

material acquisition through production, use, end-of-life treatment and

disposal (i.e. cradle-to-grave).” [12] 20

 

20 In fact, it is mentioned on SETAC’s website that while environmental impacts, ecological health, human

health and resource depletion are covered under LCA studies, “it does not address economic
considerations or social eflects

The LCA process consists of the following main phases: definition of the goal and
the scope of study, definition of lifecycle inventories (LCls), lifecycle inventory
analysis, impact assessment, and interpretation of the results. In the goal
definition phase, the product and the processes involved are identified and
Clearly explained. Based on the scope of study, there can be large variations in
the results of LCA studies on the same product. These variations are caused by
the assumptions built into the following three components of LCA studies: the

system boundaries, the LCls and functional units.

The International Standards Organization (ISO) has defined the system boundary
as the “interface between a product system and the environment or other product
systems” (ISO 14040 section 3.17). For example, if all the processes in the
biofuel production Chain are included in the system, then the spatial boundaries
may be defined by the acreage of land and the temporal boundaries would
depend on the number of harvesting seasons or the carbon-debt payback period.
Moreover, the system boundaries would also depend on the processes included
in the system. For example, all the processes in the biofuel production (i.e., from

the production of biofuel from the feedstock plant seed to the consumption of the

|n21

final product - “from seed to whee ) may be included, or particular set of

processes (e.g., the pre-harvesting processes) may be excluded. Thus, the

 

21 In the LCA studies involving fossil fuels, such an approach is known as “well-to-wheel” approach. If the

system does not account for the emissions from the final product, then the approach is called the “well-to-
tank” approach. When the production processes (e.g., drilling, refining etc.) of the fossil fuel are excluded,
then the approach is known as “tank to wheel” approach.

10

Choice of the system boundaries strongly depends on the scope of the LCA

study.

Lifecycle inventories or LCIS are the components defining the system under
consideration. If the GHG balance for biofuels is cOnsidered, then the LCIS can
be: land (to account for the soil carbon lost during tillage), fertilizers, fossil fuels
consumed in the various steps of biofuel production (operating the agricultural

machinery, transport, production processes in the biofuel factory). and the final

product”. Also, if fertilizers are excluded from the analysis, the system
boundaries change accordingly. It is interesting to note this interdependence of
the system boundaries and the LCls. The interdependent nature of the system
boundaries and the LCls also underlines the complexities involved in LCA

studies.

Besides the system boundaries and the LCIS, functional units also play a
significant role in the final outcome of LCA studies. Functional units are a
measure for quantifying and comparing the inputs and the outputs involved in
any process. In LCA studies on biofuels, the two most commonly used functional
units are GHG and energy (Davis, Anderson-Teixeira and DeLucia 2009). While
GHG units are important for assessing the environmental impacts of biofuels,
energy units help in estimating the ‘amount’ of biofuels needed to yield the same

amount of energy as the fossil fuels that they replace. Several efficiency terms

 

Inventory impact assessment involves the quantification of these LCls, besides GHG emissions and
energy consumptions. The potential human and environmental impacts of the consumption of resources
(e.g., energy, water, land) and the emissions identified in the inventory analysis are covered in the impact
assessment phase of LCA studies. (‘Life Cycle Assessment: Principles And Practice’, US EPA)

11

(e.g., efficiencies of the processes for converting biomass into bioenergy,

efficiencies of the machinery used in the various production stages etc.) are used

to calculate the net GHG balance or the net energy value”. The assumptions
built into these efficiencies contribute to the uncertainties and the differences in
the final output of LCA studies. Despite the uncertainties, LCAs are widely used
in evaluating the energy efficiencies, GHG emissions and the overall

sustainability of biofuels.

A discussion of three selected LCA studies of jatropha by Gmunder et al. (2010),
Ndong et al. (2009) and Prueksakom and Gheewala (2008) follows next. The
objective of the following section is to discuss the differences in the
methodologies adopted for the LCA studies and the difficulties in comparing their
results. This section does not attempt to provide a comprehensive review of LCA
studies conducted on jatropha. These three studies have sharply different
objectives and methodologies for selecting the various components of LCA (e.g.,
functional units, energy units, system boundaries etc). While there are several
LCA studies of jatropha (e.g., Reinhardt et al. 2007, Whitaker and Heath 2009,

Dehue and Hettinga 2008, Lam, Lee and Abdul Rahman 2009), these three

 

23 Dale (2007) mentioned that ‘net energy’ is an “irrelevant” and “fundamentally wrong” metric when

comparing biofitels with fossil fuels. “Net energy is defined as ethanol’s heating value (a fixed, known
quantity) minus the fossil energy inputs required to produce the ethanol.” The author said that the concept
of ‘net energy is flawed as it considers all energy inputs as equivalent, i.e., “one megajoule (MJ) of coal
equals one M] of petroleum equals one MJ of natural gas”.

Although the energy values are same, the economic values are markedly different. Therefore, considering
all energy inputs as equivalent regardless of their forms is misleading.

The author explains the discrepancy using the classic ‘comparing-apples-with-oranges’ phrase as follows:
“Apples are good for making apple juice; apples are not good for making orange juice. Petroleum is
uniquely suited for making liquid fuels; neither coal nor natural gas are nearly so well-suited to make liquid
fuels. The net energy calculation includes coal, petroleum and natural gas. Thus it is misleading and
irrelevant as a public policy guide to use net energy to compare liquid fiJel alternatives.”

12

studies are selected for discussion because a comparison between the three
studies best demonstrates two things: 1) how the system boundaries, the
functional units and the end results of LCA studies of the same product can
vastly differ, based on the objectives of the studies 2) how the authors’
subjectivity in the choice of the various components of LCA makes comparisons

between LCA studies difficult.

First, the detailed methodologies and the results of the individual studies are

presented, followed by a discussion of the underlying differences“. While there
are several differences in the processes involved in the production Chain, the
following section focuses primarily on the differences in the components of LCA
(e.g., functional units, energy units etc). Lastly, the issues related to the land use

change (LUC), carbon debt, soil carbon and carbon sequestration are discussed.

Gmunder et al. (2010) conducted an LCA on jatropha for rural electrification in
Chhattisgarh, India. The authors used jatropha oil in a pilot power plant to
generate electricity. The reference system was based on fossil diesel. The
functional unit was chosen to be 1 kilowatt-hour of electrical energy. The system
boundaries were based on “all relevant processes necessary for electricity

generation, including transport and infrastructure”. All processes from the

cultivation of jatropha to the use of the final product were considered”. The

 

24 A discussion on the LCA studies would be difficult without an understanding of the methodology

involved. Therefore the methods of the individual studies are presented before the analysis of the
differences in the LCA.

25 Therefore, the approach may be likened to a ‘well-to-wheel’ approach.

13

study was based on young jatropha plants and a constant seed yield of “1 kg per
tree over the whole lifespan of 50 years” was assumed. While the energy content
of jatropha oil was used to allocate the energy value obtained, stoichiometry was
used to allocate the carbon value for GHG calculation. The energy requirement

was expressed as cumulative energy demand (CED), measured as MJ input per

MJ output. The calculations excluded the environmental burden of the

equipments’ (e.g., the expeller) disposal”. The land use change (LUC) and the
change in the soil carbon stock were not considered in this study. The saplings
were planted at the start of the monsoon season. It is assumed that the rainfall in
the monsoon season was sufficient for the plants’ growth and no irrigation was

necessary. During the first year, 4 g of diammonium phosphate (DAP) and 3 9

solid compost per plant was used as fertilizer”. After the first year, neither

fertilizers were applied nor were the plants irrigated. It was anticipated that 0.04 g

of Chloropyrifos 20EC insecticide would be used per plant every five years”.
The seeds were heated in a wood fired steam kettle to improve the oil extraction
in the expeller. The seedcake was mixed with fresh seeds and run through the
expeller once more to obtain an overall oil yield of 21% (by weight). The expeller

and the generator in the pilot plant were run on jatropha oil. The authors did not

 

26 . . . . .
CED calculations Involve accountrng for all energy consumptrons using a ‘cradle-to-grave’ approach.

Typically, the energy requirements for disposal are included in CED calculations.

27 The authors have not reported the total number of plants or the size of the plantation. Therefore the total
amount (“If fertilizer added could not be estimated. The authors have mentioned that the saplings were
“planted at the edge of fields and roads with a spacing of 2m X 2m per plant”.

8 . . . . .
At the time the article was written, the jatropha plantatIon was two years old.

14

mention if the same is true for the reciprocating pump that was used in the

filtration step that followed the extraction.

The GHG emissions were 0.27 kg COzeq (KW-h)'1 of electricity. 20.7%29 of the

total GHG emissions resulted from jatropha cultivation, while 79.3% of the
emissions were attributed to the other steps involved in generating electricity
from jatropha oil. The authors estimated that the global warming potential (GWP)

of jatropha oil is six times lower than that of diesel and elaborated that the use of
the jatropha oil for the generation of electricity can save 1.5 kg COzeq (KW-h)'1

of electricity generated and reduce the GHG emission by seven times as
compared to a diesel. The authors also estimated that considering the small input
of fertilizers, the eutrophication effect from jatropha cultivation is anticipated to be
was relatively large. (This eutrophication effect was not quantified in the report).
The authors suggested using the seedcake as either fertilizer, feedstock for

producing biogas or as briquettes for increased economic and energy returns.

Ndong et al. (2009) conducted an LCA study of jatropha in Western Africa, based
on the well-to-tank approach (i.e., the GHG emissions from the combustion of the
biodiesel were not considered). The functional unit was taken to be 1 MJ of

jatropha methyl esters (JME) (the end product of the transesterification process).

The 002 fixed by the plants during the lifecycle and the impacts of LUC were

excluded from this study. The yield was assumed to be 4 tonnes of dry seeds ha"

 

29 All numbers are presented as in the original article.

15

1[year'1] in the ‘baseline‘ scenario. The authors expressed the yield in “tonnes dry
seeds ha'1”. Dry seed yields from jatropha are commonly reported to be 5 tonnes

dry seeds ha'1year'1. From these values, it is assumed that the temporal

boundary used in this study was one year.

The authors considered four other scenarios for jatropha biodiesel production,

besides the baseline scenario. In scenario A, the yield was varied between 3 - 5
tonnes dry seeds ha'1[year'1]. In scenario 8 the effects of transportation of the oil

on the GHG emissions and energy yield were considered. In scenario C, the
energy needs of the manual labour involved in the cultivation process were taken
into account. Scenario D involved the use of neat jatropha oil in stationary
engines (i.e., the transesterification step was omitted). In the baseline scenario,
the energy yield was calculated to be 4.7 (i.e., for each MJ of fossil fuel
consumed, 4.7 MJ of JME energy was produced.) Transesterification was the
most energy consuming stage in JME production, accounting for 61% of the life-
cycle energy needs. The agricultural stage accounted for 52% of the GHG
emissions, with 93% of those emissions resulting from the use of fertilizers.

Transesterification contributed to 17% of the total emissions while 16% of the

emissions were due to the combustion of the final product3o.

The high GHG emission from the use of fertilizers and pesticides is attributed to

the large amount of energy required in the manufacture of these agrochemicals.

 

30 It is not clear how 16% GHG emissions resulted from the combustion of the final product, as the system
boundaries were based on a well-to-tank scheme.

16

The net GHG emission was 23.5 gCOzeq per MJ of JME. The authors mentioned

that the corresponding emission from conventional diesel fuel is 83.8 gCOzeq per

MJ of diesel. Thus, as per the LCA study, biodiesel production from jatropha
resulted in 72% reduction in GHG emissions as compared to conventional diesel

fuel.

The authors compared the four different scenarios mentioned earlier to conduct a
sensitivity analysis and to estimate the effect of yield, transportation, manual
labour and the end use of jatropha oil. In scenario A, GHG emissions increased
by 17% and energy consumption increased by 4% for the yield of 3 tonnes dry
seeds ha'1 [year’]. Using a yield data of 5 tonnes dry seeds ha"[year"] resulted
in a 10% reduction in GHG emissions and 2% reduction in energy consumption.
In scenario B, the transportation of jatropha oil over a distance of 564 km by
trucks increased the GHG emissions and energy needs by 8% and 14%,
respectively, as compared to the transportation by freight train. In scenario C,
including the energy cost of manual labour in the calculations, showed a 29%

increase in the net energy requirements to produce 1 MJ of JME. ln scenario D,

the local use of neat jatropha oil increased the energy yield from 4.7 to 26.431
(compared to the baseline scenario) and increased GHG savings from 72% to

85% (compared to conventional diesel).

 

31 The authors have considered that neat jatropha oil may be locally used as “fuel for fueling pumps, mills
or small-scale power production”. However, they do mention that using neat vegetable oils would require
modifications in the engines.

17

Prueksakom and Gheewala (2008) conducted a lifecycle “energy balance” of
jatropha-based biodiesel in Thailand. GHG emissions and LUC were not
considered in this study. The authors based all calculations on the cultivation of

jatropha on one hectare of land for twenty years. In this study, the use of diesel32

for the preparation of land, the inputs for irrigation33 and the use of fertilizers34

were taken into account. Energy requirements for manual labour were excluded
from the study. Considering various scenarios of yield, fertilizer requirement and
other factors in the process chain, the authors calculated the net energy ratio
(NER) for jatropha biodiesel to range from 0.53 to 2.70 if the byproducts
(seedcake, wood etc.) are not used for fuel. Using the byproducts as fuel yielded

an NER range of 193—1199. The average biodiesel yield from jatropha best-
case scenario was calculated to be 2.7 ton ha'1 year'1. The sensitivity analysis

showed the NER to be most sensitive to changes in co-products yield. A 10%

change in co-products yield resulted in a change in the NER by about 8%.

 

2 Diesel use for land preparation (ploughing, furrowing etc.) for jatropha cultivation was estimated to be
25—40 L/time/ha [L time'l ha-l].

The irrigation requirements have been reported as follows: “time of irrigation == 12.5 h/ha/time [h time-l
ha'l], fiequency of irrigation z 15 day/time [day time-l] for dry season only, and rate of diesel
consumption z 0.63 L/hour [L h-l]”.

The fertilizer requirements reported in the study are unclear. The authors have used two estimates for
the fertilizers requirements. For the worst case scenario (“poor land”), using data fiom the literature, the
NPK fertilizer requirements (N:P:l( 40:20:10) were estimated to be: 160 kg for the first year, 25.5 kg for
the second year, 63 kg for the third year, 126 kg for the fourth year, 252 kg for the fifth year and 378 kg for
the sixth year. The authors have reported this as: “The amount of chemical fertilizer for years 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,
6, and onward is 160, 25.5, 63, 126, 252, 378, and 378 kg oszPzK (40:20:10), respectively.” At the same
time, the authors have also mentioned that “[flrom second year to 20th year of plantation, JCL [Jatropha
curcas L.] seedcake is used instead of chemical fertilizers.”

For the best case scenario, (fertile land), the authors have estimated that 312.5 kg of NPK fertilizer (NszK
15:15:15) was used per year.

18

There are several differences in the methodologies of the three LCA studies.
While Gmunder et al. (2010) used 1 kilowatt-hour of electrical energy as the
functional unit, Ndong et al. (2009) used 1 MJ of energy from JME. Prueksakom
and Gheewala (2008) based all calculations on the cultivation of jatropha on one
hectare of land for 20 years. The choice of the functional units seems to be
strongly dependent on the system under consideration as well as the objective of
the study. Reinhardt et al. (2007) mentioned, “Depending on the questions to be
answered, different functional units might be necessary.” In fact, in their studies
of the lifecycle analysis of jatropha, Reinhardt et al. (2007) used the yield of
jatropha fruit from one hectare of land in one year as the functional unit because

in their studies, “most questions [were] relate[d] to land use efficiency". Achten et

al.35 used ‘100km driven with a 4X4 pick up’ as the functional unit in their LCA
studies ofjatropha. Since jatropha based biodiesel will be used to replace fossil
fuels, the most appropriate functional units would be those that relate the
services obtained (e.g., distance travelled, electricity generated, energy obtained)
or the environmental impacts (GHG emissions, eutrophication) to the unit
consumption of biodiesel and fossil fuel. Such functional units will help in making
comparative LCA studies. The complexity involved in the choice of the functional
unit is seen in the following example. Keeping the transportation sector in mind,

the distance travelled per unit of fuel may be an appropriate baseline to compare

 

35 The year and the details of this publication could not be found. The abstract of this article can be

accessed at:
http://wvirw.biw.kuleuven.be/lbh/lbnl/forecoman/pdf/Abstracts/Achten/Achten%20abstract°/oZOposter%20g
otheborg.pdf

19

the efficiencies of biodiesel and fossil fuel. The functional unit ‘distance travelled
per litre of biodiesel’ may seem to be useful in comparing the energy efficiency

and GHG emissions of biodiesel with that of the fossil fuel it would replace. In
that respect, the functional unit used by Achten et al.36 seems most

appropriate”. However, based on the engine’s efficiency assumed in such
calculations, there would be inconsistencies in the final results. Hence, there is
an urgent need to standardize the procedure for selecting functional units as they

provide a baseline for comparing the lifecycle behaviour of biofuels.

The inconsistencies in the energy units used in LCA studies also make
comparing different studies difficult. Gmunder et al. (2010) expressed the energy
requirements as cumulative energy demand (CED), measured as MJ input per
MJ output. Ndong et al. (2009) expressed the energy requirements in term of
energy yield (i.e., fossil fuel energy consumed to produce unit energy of
biodiesel), which is similar to the net energy ratio (NER) used by Prueksakom
and Gheewala (2008). CED and NER are different metrics and results expressed

in terms of these units are difficult to compare.

 

36 lOOkm driven with a 4X4 pick up

7 Runge and Senauer (2007) have suggested “greenhouse gas emissions per mile driven” to be used for
evaluating the environmental impacts of biofuels.

20

The sum of all energy inputs in the entire lifetime (production, usage and disposal

stages) of a product is called the Cumulative Energy Demand38 of that product.
Huijbregts et al. (2010) described the total CED as: “The total CED is composed
of the fossil cumulative energy demand (i.e., from hard coal, Iignite, peat, natural
gas, and crude oil) and the CED of nuclear, biomass, water, wind, and solar
energy in the life cycle." Thus CED is a ‘Cradle to grave’ approach to energy
accounting. In case of NER, the energy requirement depends on the system
boundaries and whether the approach to energy accounting is ‘weIl-to-tank,
‘tank-to-wheel’ or ‘well-to-wheel’. Based on the system boundaries, the energy
related to the auxiliary materials may be either included or excluded, whereas in
case of CED, all the raw materials and auxiliary inputs related to the product are
included in the calculations. (Gmunder et al. (2010) excluded the energy
associated with the disposal of equipments.) Moreover, as mentioned earlier, the
idea of treating different forms of energy as the same (i.e., equating 1 MJ of
petroleum to 1 MJ of coal) while accounting for energy requirements seems

flawed.

The yields from jatropha are another area of uncertainty in most studies. Francis

et al. (2005) reported that depending upon soil type, nutrient availability and

rainfall conditions, the seed yield for jatropha varies from 0.5 tons ha’1 year'1 to

 

38 Rohrlich et al. (2000) have explained the concept of CED as follows: “The life cycle of a product can
generally be subdivided into the three phases of ‘production‘ (P), ‘use' (U) and 'disposal‘ (D) in which final
energies, e.g. electricity or fuel, are engaged.”

“Beside the direct energy input for production, use and disposal of a product, production facilities, as well
as raw materials, auxiliary materials and consumables are also used. These are products which need energy
for their own production process. The total of all energy inputs, concerning the consumption of primary
energy, is called the Cumulative Energy Demand of a product.”

21

12 tons ha’1 year'1. Therefore the calculations for GHG emissions and the energy

requirements will differ significantly based on the assumed values of yield. There
are further complications with estimating the yield when other factors, e.g., the
maturity of the plants, soil type, irrigation inputs, the use of fertilizers, the

extraction efficiencies and the transesterification efficiencies are taken into

account. Yields also play a significant role in estimating the water footprint39 of

jatropha.

As seen from the studies, transesterification is the most energy consuming stage
in jatropha biodiesel production and the use of fertilizers has the maximum
contribution to GHG emissions. It important to minimize the use of chemical
fertilizers in jatropha cultivation as it significantly diminishes the GHG savings.
However, as jatropha does not fix nitrogen, fertilizers will be necessary to

replenish the lost nutrients (especially, nitrogen). lntercropping of jatropha with

other crops, especially leguminous plants, may be a solution“). Noting the
toxicity of jatropha, Benge (2006) has mentioned, “Closely spaced, Jatropha
would eliminate grasses and shrubs on which livestock feed”, which suggests
that there might be difficulties with intercropping other plants with jatropha.
Genetic modifications for the suppression of the toxins can make it possible to

intercrop legumes with jatropha, thereby minimizing the need for fertilizers.

 

39 The water footprint of biofuels is discussed in the next chapter.

40 The Lao Institute of Renewable Energy (LIRE) has experimented with intercropping of papaya, ground
nut, red and green peppers, tomatoes, and water melon with jatropha. [9]

22

Other factors that contribute to differences in the results of LCA studies are the

assumptions regarding transportation and the decentralized“ or centralized42
nature of the production facilities. The two factors are interrelated and site-
specific. The GHG emissions for transportation by truck would be more than that
by trains, due to the lower load capacity of trucks. Therefore, the existing
infrastructure for transportation must be efficiently utilized and the production
facilities should be sited accordingly. Also, the local use of raw jatropha oil offers
the dual advantage of GHG savings due to minimized transportation and energy
savings by avoiding transesterification. Thus, the end use of jatropha oil has

significant effects on the GHG- and energy-balance.

An important factor that was not considered in the three studies mentioned
earlier is the land use change (LUC) and its impacts. I believe that LUC is
integrally related to the concept of carbon debt, soil carbon content and the

temporal boundary of the life cycle assessment. The major impacts of LUC are

 

41 Decentralised systems: In decentralised systems of biofuel manufacture, all the production facilities are

located close to the plantations. The extraction and transesterification are usually accomplished in small-
scale plants. The raw oil is obtained by mechanical extraction and refined and either used directly or
transesterified to obtain jatropha biodiesel. The main byproducts in decentralized systems are husks, seed
cake (with residual oil) and glycerin (used for soap).

42 Centralised systems: Centralised systems are large-scale plants requiring larger amounts of feedstock,
which are transported over greater distances as compared to decentralized systems. Thus transportation
costs and the contribution to GHG emissions due to transportation are higher for centralized systems. In
such systems, mechanical extraction can be followed by solvent extraction. This results in higher oil yields
and lower specific energy inputs. Due to the additional solvent extraction step, the residual oil content in
the seed cake is very low.

Reinhardt et al. (2007) have reported that centralized systems offer environmental advantages due to lower
GHG emissions and lower specific energy requirements. The authors also mention that decentralized
systems are promising in terms of socio-economic development of the region and might prove beneficial
for sustainable development despite the lower environmental benefits.

23

deforestation, “carbon debt”, soil degradation”, the migration and resettlement
of the local population (forced or otherwise) and the competition with food crops
for resources. LUC may involve altering natural ecosystems either for the
cultivation of the biofuel feedstock or the crops displaced by biofuel feedstock. In
Malaysia, about 10% of the palm oil plantation is currently on peat land (that
accounts for 4.2 million hectares of land) (Chiew 2007). As peat land is
considered to be a globally important stock of soil carbon and acts as a net sink
of atmospheric carbon dioxide, its utilization as an agricultural land area would
increase the carbon dioxide flux into the atmosphere and hence contribute to
global warming (Waddington, Strack and Greenwood 2010, Hirano et al. 2009).

Clearing vegetation cover and replacing natural habitats with cropland by burning

(to clear forestland) and filling, releases COz trapped in the plant biomass and in

the soil. The amount of 002 released during the first fifty years of changing the
land use is called the “carbon debt" of land conversion (Fargione et al. 2008). As
energy crops can sequester 002, this carbon debt can be ‘repaid’ over time. It is

suggested that the temporal boundary in lifecycle assessments be based on the
payback period of the carbon debt. Fargione et al. (2008) mentioned, “Until the
carbon debt is repaid, biofuels from converted lands have greater GHG impacts
than those of the fossil fuels they displace.” Besides the carbon debt, the role of
soil carbon in the overall sustainability of biofuels must be understood in order to

study LUC and assess its long-term impacts. Carbon sequestration by the plant

 

Soil degradation may occur due to erosion by water and wind, salinization, loss of nutrients, soil organic
matter depletion.

24

biomass is at the core of the idea of GHG savings. Carbon sequestration goes
hand in hand with soil carbon, which in turn is integrally linked with soil quality
(and therefore, crop yield). Soil carbon plays a significant role in the water- and
nutrient-holding capacity, the resistance to erosion and the overall structure of
the soil. Besides, soil carbon also provides energy to the soil microorganisms
(Lal 2004). Lal (2004) has referred to soil carbon as “soil’s life support system”.
Soil carbon content can be improved by using recommended manufacturing

practices, the application of organic matter as nutrients (e.g., byproducts - seed

cake and husks in case of jatropha) and fertilizers“.

However, one must bear in mind that the soil carbon content in highly degraded
lands could be lower than the optimum value required for sustainable agricultural
practices. Jatropha cultivation on such lands will result in low yields. The soil
carbon incorporated into the plant biomass will not be replenished as the
byproducts yield is too low and the fertilizer demand would be too high.
Moreover, as mentioned before, the use of large amounts of fertilizers will
diminish the GHG savings promised by biofuels. Continued cultivation in such
low-yield areas will deplete soil carbon, result in progressively lower yields,
thereby resulting in an unsustainable practice. For degraded areas which do
have optimum levels of soil carbon, it is possible to improve the soil carbon
content by adhering to recommended manufacturing practices (RMPs). As Lal

(2004) has mentioned, sustainable agricultural practices will help break the

 

44 Lehmann (2007) has suggested the use of biochar for as an innovative method for increasing soil

carbon. Biochar is obtained by the low temperature pyrolysis of plant biomass (grasses, crop residues etc.).
Lehmann has mentioned that biochar has “twofold higher carbon content” than plant biomass and has
suggested that putting biochar back in the soil would help in trapping carbon in the soil.

25

“vicious cycle of declining productivity—depleting soil organic carbon stock—lower

yields”.

The lack of reliable data for yield and land use change raises questions about
jatropha’s sustainability. Trabucco et al. (2008) mentioned that if jatropha
plantations in ‘marginal’ areas were considered only, then the projected reduction
(by 2015) in global oil consumption would be only 3%. If yields in marginal areas
prove to be too low, other fertile areas might need to be devoted for jatropha
cultivation. This would raise concerns about deforestation and the possible
competition with food crops. This would also be in direct conflict with the
frequently mentioned advantage of jatropha — that its cultivation involves a high
energy-output-to-input ratio and it is not very ‘resource hungry’ as a biofuel
feedstock. For a positive energy balance of jatropha, the use of fossil fuels (in the
machinery used in various stages of biofuel production) and Chemical fertilizers
should be minimized, as these result in significant energy consumption (Ovando-
Medina et al. 2009). Keeping the concerns about jatropha’s sustainability in mind,

it is vital to reevaluate jatropha’s lifecycle performance.

There are always uncertainties in LCA studies. Rebitzer et al. (2004) mentioned
that LCA is “still a young and evolving application” and that there are “different
approaches, depending on the specific question at hand, and ultimately
depending on the decision that has to be supported by an LCA study”. However,
until a more robust methodology is developed, LCA will be an uneven ‘baseline’

for comparative studies of sustainability of alternative fuels.

26

Toxins and anti-nutritional factors in jatropha:

Jatropha curcas has been proposed as a promising source of non-edible
vegetable oil for biodiesel production. As mentioned before, jatropha can grow on
arid soils, improve the soil structure and help in land reclamation. Jatropha also
has several medicinal and antimicrobial properties. Makkar et al. (1997) studied
the nutritive potential of eighteen varieties of Jatropha curces and found the
crude protein concentrations of the jatropha seedcake to range from 19 - 31

percent (on a dry matter (DM) basis). In their experiments on the recovery of

protein from jatropha seedcake, Makkar et al. (2008) obtained 330 g kg’1 and

295 g kg"1 of protein from the residual oil-containing seedcake and the defatted

seedcake, respectively. However, the presence of several toxins in the seeds
makes the seedcake unsuitable as an animal feed. Rakshit et al. (2008)
conducted toxicity studies on rats, using treated and untreated jatropha meal.
Their studies showed reduced appetite and low diet intake, diarrhoea, reduced
motor activity and significant changes in body weight of the rats. The rats fed with
treated45 meals showed delayed mortality compared to those fed with untreated
meals. The authors also found that higher the residual oil content in seed cake,
higher the phorbol esters concentration and thus, higher the toxicity of the
seedcake. Ahmed and Adam (1979) studied the toxicity of jatorpha on sheep and

goats. They reported that jatropha poisoning caused haemorrhage in the rumen,

 

45 Jatropha meal was treated with aqueous solution of either 2% NaOH or 2% Ca(OH)2 and then
autoclaved at 121 °C for 30 min. The samples were dispersed in water in a ratio 1:5 (w/v) and kept for one

hour. The excess alkali and soluble tannins were removed by filtering through muslin cloth. The residue
was dried at 90 :I: 5 °C (Rakshit et al., 2008).

27

reticulum, lungs, kidneys and heart of the animals. At present, the seedcake is
primarily used as natural fertilizer. Detoxification of the seedcake will significantly

enhance its value as a byproduct.

Among the several anti-nutritional factors present in jatropha, phorbol esters
have been identified as the primary toxins (e.g., Makkar and Becker 1998,
Aregheore, Becker and Makkar 2003). Phorbol esters are naturally occurring
diterpenes found in the Euphorbiaceae and Thymeliaceae plant families (Haas
and Mittelbach 2000, Dimitrijevic et al. 1996). Besides jatropha, several plants
such as Sapium indicum, S. japonicum, Euphorbia frankiana, E. cocrulescence,
E. ticulli, Croton spareiflorus, C. tigilium, C. ciliatoglandulifer, Excoecaria
agallocha, and Homalanthus nutans are reported to contain toxic moieties of
phorbols. Haas et al. (2002) isolated six unstable intramolecular diterpene esters

from the seed oil of Jatropha curcas.

Phorbol esters exert several biological effects such as cell proliferation, tumour
promotion, inflammation and lymphocyte mitogenesis (Aitken 1986). The
biological effects of phorbol esters depend on the structure of the compound.
(The alcohol moiety called phorbol is inactive and non-toxic.) Phorbol esters by
themselves do not induce tumours but promote tumour growth following
exposure to a carcinogen at a subcarcinogenic dose. Therefore, they are
classified as cocarcinogens and tumour promoters (Goel et al. 2007). The
mechanism of phorbol esters‘ toxicity is related to the protein kinase C (PKC), the

major receptor of phorbol esters (e.g., Wink et al. 2000, Hundsdoerfer et al.

28

2005, Makkar et al. 1997, Goel et al. 2007). PKC is a family of kinases which
controls intracellular signal transduction and gene expression (Dimitrijevic et al.
1996). The activation of PKC results in a variety of cellular responses. The
interaction of phorbol ester with PKC affects the activities of several enzymes,
biosynthesis of protein, DNA, polyamines, cell differentiation processes, and

gene expression.

Degradation of phorbol esters in jatropha oil during biofuel production:

In their studies of the degradation of phorbol esters in the different steps of
biofuel production, Makkar et al. (2009) and Haas and Mittelbach (2000)
measured the phorbol esters content in different fractions of jatropha oil obtained
at various stages of processing (degumming, neutralization by acid, bleaching,
silica treatment and deodorization (or stripping». Makkar et al. (2009) found that
the phorbol esters’ content differed for solvent extraction and cold pressing.
While Makkar et al. (2009) found that degumming resulted in a 20% reduction in
phorbol ester content in the case of solvent extracted oil and 4% in case of cold
pressed oil, Hass and Mittelbach (2000) reported that degumming did not result
in any appreciable decrease in the concentration of phorbol esters concentration.
Although silica treatment reduced phorbol esters by 8% for solvent extraction, no
appreciable decrease in phorbol esters concentration was seen for cold pressed
oil (Makkar et al. 2009). (Hass and Mittelbach (2000) did not carry out silica
treatment). Hass and Mittelbach (2000) reported that neutralization of acid

followed by bleaching reduced phorbol esters content by 45%. Makkar et al.

29

(2009) found that deodorization46 reduced the phorbol ester content to non-
detectable levels. However, Hass and Mittelbach (2000) mentioned that
deodorization47 was ineffective in reducing the concentration of phorbol esters.
The variation in the results of deodorization may be explained by the difference in
the deodorization conditions used in the two studies. Makkar et al. (2009) noted

that the nature and toxicity of the degradation byproducts are currently unknown.

Detoxification of phorbol esters:

Phorbol esters’ concentration in jatropha seedcake can be decreased by different
chemical treatment methods (e.g., Haas and Mittelbach 2000, Aregheore et al.
2003). Phorbol esters are heat stable and could not be destroyed by heat
treatment for 30 minutes at 160 °C. (Makkar and Becker 1998). Aregheore et al.
(2003) treated defatted jatropha meal with sodium hydroxide in combination with
sodium hypochlorite and distilled water, followed by heat treatment at 121 °C for
30 minutes. Increasing the sodium hydroxide concentration from 2 - 3.5% (wlw,
without using sodium hypochlorite) decreased the phorbol esters concentration
from 0.89 - 0.18 mg 9'1. Using 10% (WW) sodium hypochlorite and increasing
the sodium hydroxide concentration from 2.5 - 4% (w/w) decreased the phorbol

esters concentration from 0.22 - 0.13 mg 9". Using 2% (w/w) sodium hydroxide

 

The deodorization of the raw jatropha oil was done in a laboratory-scale deodorizer at 260 °C and 3
millibar with 1% steam injection for one hour (Makkar et al., 2009).

47 The raw jatropha oil was steam distilled at 200°C at “normal" pressure for two hours (Haas and
Mittelbach, 2000). The authors did not mention the exact pressure or the composition of the steam
used for stripping.

30

and increasing the sodium hypochlorite concentration from 15 - 25% (WW)
decreased the phorbol esters concentration from 0.46 - 0.24 mg 9'1 Heat
treatment followed by washing four times with 92% methanol reduced the
phorbol ester content from 1.78 mg g'1 to 0.09 mg g'1. As mentioned before,

conventional steps in oil refining can significantly reduce the phorbol ester
content in jatropha seed oil. Although degumming and deodorization steps did
not show any effect, neutralization and bleaching reduced the phorbol ester
concentration by almost 50%. The mechanism suggested for this is the
hydrolysis of phorbol esters resulting in partial detoxification (Haas and

Mittelbach 2000).

Other anti-nutritional components:

Besides phorbol esters, several other toxins and anti-nutritional factors are found

in jatropha seeds.

Tmpsin inhibitors:

Trypsin inhibitors reduce the digestibility of the proteins by directly interacting
with the proteolytic enzymes secreted by the pancreas (Hajos et al. 1995).
Trypsin inhibitors are almost completely inactivated by heat treatment. van der
Poel et al. (1990) described the temperature effects on trypsin inhibitors by first
order kinetics, in which the inactivation occurred in two stages with differing
reaction rates. Trypsin inhibitors obtained from winged bean meal were stable
upon heat treatment at 60 °C for 60 minutes. Incubation at 80 °C for 5 minutes

resulted in complete inactivation. Microwave treatment on the extract had no

31

effect on the trypsin inhibitors in the meal. Infrared treatment of the meal for 60
seconds inactivated most of the trypsin inhibitors (Kadam and Smithard 1987).
Heat treatment at 160 °C resulted in rapid inactivation of trypsin inhibitors in

jatropha meal (Aderibigbe et al. 1997).

Liam

Lectins are carbohydrate-binding proteins that bind reversibly to specific
monosaccharides or oligosaccharides (Van Damme et al. 1998, Van Damme,
Lannoo and Peumans 2008, Arora et al. 2005, Reddy and Pierson 1994). Lectins
play an important role in the plant’s defense against pests. As with trypsin
inhibitors, Iectin activity decreases with heat treatment (Aderibigbe et al. 1997).
Extraction with ethanol, followed by treatment with sodium bicarbonate

considerably decreased Iectin activity (Martinez-Herrera et al. 2006).

Phfiate:

Phytate levels in jatropha meal reduce the bioavailability of minerals, especially
Ca2+ and Fe2+ (Martinez-Herrera et al. 2006). Phytates can also form complexes
with enzymes such as trypsin and pepsin and reduce protein digestibility (Reddy
and Pierson 1994). Phytates are not heat labile and are resistant to heat
treatment (Makkar, Aderibigbe and Becker 1998). Heat treatment with 80%
moisture at 160 °C for 30 minutes did not decrease the phytate content

appreciably (Aderibigbe et al. 1997). Treatment of defatted jatropha meal with

32

sodium bicarbonate, followed by irradiation at 10 kGy48 (at dose rate of

19.7053449 Gy per minute) resulted in a slight reduction in the phytate content

(Martinez-Herrera et al. 2006).

Saponins:

Plant saponins are known to have antimicrobial properties. Saponins protect the
plant from insects and pest and inhibit mould (Francis et al. 2002). The
bittersweet taste of saponins can make jatropha seed meal unpalatable for
animals. Saponins are also known to have beneficial effects, such as reduction of
plasma cholesterol in several mammalian species (Milgate and Roberts 1995,
Reddy and Pierson 1994). Saponin content in jatropha meal was reduced by
50% by extraction with ethanol followed by treatment with sodium bicarbonate.
However, the reduction was attributed mainly to the extraction step (Martinez-
Herrera et al. 2006). The concentration of saponins is reported to be reduced by
fermentation but not by cooking, indicating that heat treatment may be ineffective
for the reduction of saponin concentration (Reddy and Pierson 1994, Aderibigbe

et al. 1997).

Phenols:
Plant phenols are secondary metabolites that provide protection from animals

feeding on them (Singleton 1981). Phenolic compounds (such as flavonoids,

 

48 gray (Gy): SI unit of radiation dose.

Radiation dose is the amount of energy deposited per unit of mass. One gray (Gy) is defined to be the dose
of one joule of energy absorbed per kilogram of matter (named after the British physician L. Harold Gray)
[7, 143]

4 . . . . . .
9 The number IS presented as mentroned In the original paper by Martinez-Herrera (2006).

33

phenolic acids, stilbenes, tannins and lignin) are important for plant metabolic
processes and the normal growth and development of plants and are essential
for the defense against infection and injury (Kahkonen et al. 1999). Phenols also
have antioxidant properties. It is interesting to note that the antioxidant properties
of phenolic compounds in jatropha may be useful in slowing the degradation of
jatropha oil and biodiesel (El Diwani et al., 2009). In the detoxification
experiments using jatropha seedcake, negligible amounts of total phenols were
found after heat treatment (Aderibigbe et al. 1997, Makkar et al. 1998, Martinez-

Herrera et al. 2006).

Several other toxins such as amylase inhibitors and cyanogenic glucosides are
found in jatropha seeds. Aderibigbe et al. (1997) mentioned that these toxins

were not detected after heat treatment of the seed meal.

At present, chemical methods of detoxification of jatropha seedcake are feasible
only on a laboratory scale only. These methods are not economically viable for
large-scale application. Also, using chemicals and solvents for detoxification on a
large scale raises environmental concerns about their disposal. Besides heat-
and chemical-treatment procedures, ozonation can potentially provide another
means of detoxification of jatropha seedcake. Ozonation of jatropha seed extract
showed significant reduction in the concentration of phorbol esters. (The
methods and the results of the ozonation experiments are presented in the
Appendix.) As mentioned earlier in the chapter on lifecycle assessment, the end

use of the byproducts can significantly improve the lifecycle ‘behaviour’ of

34

jatropha’s agriculture. Therefore, advancements in detoxification of the nutrient-

rich jatropha seedcake are essential to improve its value as a byproduct.

35

The water footprint of jatropha:

Biofuels can potentially help in reducing the emission of greenhouse gases

(GHGS). At the same time, there are growing concerns about the shortage of

water in many parts of the worldso. Therefore the expected water usage must be
rigorously calculated before allocating the any part of the available water
resources for biofuel production. As the land and water are integral to agro-based
products such as biofuels, a thorough evaluation of the water footprint of biofuels
is essential to formulate sustainable biofuel programmes. Advocates of jatropha
cultivation have proposed that the plant will not compete with food crops, as it

can be grown in degraded and marginal lands. However, jatropha yields per

hectare would have to be high51 for jatropha-based biodiesel to compete with
and significantly decrease fossil fuel consumption. Without any additional inputs
(e.g., fertilizers and irrigation) jatropha yields from degraded lands might not be

sufficient to meet the increasing demands for biodiesel.

While jatropha seedcake and animal waste may be applied as natural fertilizers
to partially offset the requirement for chemical fertilizers and other
agrochemicals, irrigation requirements may prove to be the major bottleneck in

increasing yields in marginal lands. Irrigation requirements can be partly offset by

 

50 The WHO has reported that about 1.2 billion people live in areas where the water is physically scarce

(www.who.int). According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO): “By 2025, 1800 million
people will be living in countries or regions with absolute water scarcity, and two-thirds of the world
population could be under stress conditions.” (www.fao.org)

51

As there is considerable variability in the reported values of jatropha yields from field studies, the terms
‘high’ and ‘low’ are used only qualitatively to refer to yield.

36

using treated wastewater52 from the settlements close to jatropha plantations.
Due to the limitations of mechanized agricultural technologies, jatropha
cultivation and harvesting in developing nations will be done manually, in most
cases. Therefore, sections of the population may need to relocate close to the
plantation sites. A sudden relocation of a population to a new site will affect the
consumption and recycling patterns of the surrounding water resources.
Improper waste management and agricultural runoff containing fertilizers and
pesticides may also pollute the the water bodies in the nearby areas. In such
cases, wastewater treatment facilities can serve the dual purpose mitigating

pollution and providing water for irrigation. However, the treated effluent must

adhere to the agricultural water quality standards53. Only then can the
wastewater be used for irrigation, and help in reducing the jatropha’s water

footprint.

Gerbens-Leenes et al. (2009) calculated the water footprint for several crops

including jatropha. According to the authors, jatropha is the least efficient

bioenergy54 feedstock in terms of water usage. The authors report the total55

 

52 In its report “Crops and Drops: Making the best use of water for agriculture ”, the FAO provides

the following estimate: “As an example, a city with a population of 500000 and a water consumption of

120 litres.day-l person-l produces about 48000 In .day'1 of wastewater (assuming 80 percent of the water
used reaches the public sewerage system). If this treated wastewater were used in careful ly- controlled

irrigation at a rate of 5000 m /ha/year [m ha- year-l], it could irrigate some 3500 hectares.”

53 According to the World Health Organization (WHO): “More than 10% of people worldwide consume
foods irrigated by wastewater that can contain chemicals or disease-causing organisms.” [16]

54 Gerbens-Leenes et al. (2009) have assumed that the total biomass produced was utilized in the
generation of bioenergy. The water usage estimates are expressed as m3 of water required per 0] of energy

37

water footprint for jatropha to be 396 maGJ'1, while those for soybean and

sugarcane were 173 mz’GJ‘1 and 50 m3GJ'1 respectively. Thus, they conclude

that jatropha has a significantly higher water footprint as a biodiesel feedstock, as

compared to other energy crops.

By relating the bioenergy yield with the water usage, the authors provided a
baseline for comparing the water footprints of different plants. However, the
results do not depict the actual water footprint of jatropha. Jatropha will be grown
primarily for biodiesel production. Therefore, more accurate units for water usage
would be m3 of water per GJ of energy from biodiesel (instead of heat and
electricity). If byproducts are taken into account, then calculations must also
include the energy content of the seedcake and the husks. Secondly, the authors

assumed that the total plant biomass will be used for energy production. Again,

this is not true for biodiesel productionss.

 

(electricity) produced (units: mBGJ'l). The bioenergy in the calculations included heat, electricity,
bioethanol, and biodiesel.

55 In this study, Gerbens-Leenes et al. (2009) have divided the water footprint was divided into two
categories: blue water and green water.

Blue water: runoff water used for irrigation (including surface water and groundwater.)

Green water: Water that is available on-site (soil moisture and rainfall).

‘Total’ water footprint refers to the sum of blue and green water.

56 Plant byproducts (e.g., husks and stalks) may still be used as boiler feed in cogeneration plants to
produce electricity and reduce the consumption of fossil fuels during biodiesel production.

38

Maes et al. (2009a) describe the calculations by Gerbens-Leenes et al. (2009) as

“dramatically overestimated” as the effect of evapotranspiration57 has been
ignored in their calculations. Maes et al. (2009a) also mentioned the results of
another study by Kheira and Atta (2009) to argue that the water usage
calculations by Gerbens-Leenes et al. (2009) are incorrect. In their studies,
Kheira and Atta (2009) made rigorous calculations to determine the water use

efficiency of jatropha, while taking evapotranspiration effects into account. They
reported the average water consumption rate of jatropha to be 6 L week'1

throughout the growing season (75 days) and concluded that “jatropha can

survive and produce full yield with high quality seeds under minimum water

requirements, compared to other crops”58

Although the study by Kheira and Atta (2009) involves rigorous calculations of
water usage, the results of the study are site-specific. Therefore, the claims of
Gerbens-Leenes et al. (2009) cannot be disputed merely by comparing their
results with the field data from another site. Knowing that jatropha yields are

dependent on environmental conditions, it is not advisable to draw sweeping

 

7 Over 90% of the water required by terrestrial plants is not ‘used’ in any biochemical way but lost
through transpiration (Morison et al., 2008). All water usage estimates must take into account the losses by
transpiration and soil moisture evaporation. As evapotranspiration depends on several other variables (such
as solar radiation, temperature, vapour pressure, relative humidity and wind speed) accounting for
evapotranspiration would incorporate these variables into the calculation.

58 In this study, the authors have not compared jatropha’s water usage efficiency. The authors have used
farmyard manure and “recommended” dosage of NPK fertilizer. Neither the exact fertilizer dose is
mentioned, nor is the term “recommended” explained. As young plants were used in this study, there are
uncertainties regarding the water usage in case of firll-grown, mature plants.

39

conclusions about the water footprint of jatropha based on the studies in a single

area.

Gerbens-Leenes et al. (2009) mentioned that as per their assumptions, the water
use estimations are conservative. The authors assumed that the water use by
the crop is equal to the crop’s actual water requirement. In arid conditions, the
actual water consumption will be lower than the calculated values whenwater
stress occurs. The authors also mentioned that the future agricultural yields may
improve and therefore, their assumed values for yields would be lower than the
actual future yield values. Hence, the predicted water footprint would be larger
than the actual value. In their report on the GHG performance of jatropha, Dehue
and Hettinga (2008) reported that jatropha does not yields seeds until the fourth

year; yield increases till the ninth year and thereafter remains steady till the

twenty-third year59. Thus, the water footprint based on the field studies on

younger plants is likely to be overestimated.

Gerbens-Leenes et al. (2009) also made “optimistic assumptions” about the

conversion efficiencies of different biomass to bioenergy:

“For the efficiency of obtaining electricity or biofuels from biomass, we

have made optimistic assumptions by taking theoretical maximum values

 

59 Dehue and Hettinga (2008) have reported the yields in the different years as follows (the numbers
presented are from the original document):

Year 1-3 4 5 6 7 8 9-23
Seed yield (t/ha) 0 2.5 3.75 5 5.625 6.25 6.875

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4O

or values that refer to the best available technology. These assumptions

mean that the resulting WF [water footprint] figures are conservative.”

The authors’ explanation of how this assumption affects the calculated water

footprint seems incorrect. If the assumed conversion efficiency were higher, the
calculated water footprint (maGJ’1) would be lower as less water would be

required to produce one unit of bioenergy. To an extent, this would compensate
for the conservative estimations discussed earlier. It is therefore recommended
that all assumptions and their effects should be carefully evaluated (and

quantified, where possible) and factored into the calculated results.

Jongschaap et al. (2009) also pointed out that the data used by Gerbens-Leenes
et al. (2009) is inconsistent as yield data from non-irrigated young plantations
have been combined with water use data of mature plantations. Maes et al.
(2009a) mentioned that during the initial years of cultivation, there would be little
growth in the reproductive biomass (flowers and fruits). Primarily, the-non-
reproductive biomass would grow during the first three years of plantation.
Hence, the water footprint calculated by Gerbens et al. (2009) is unrealistically

high.

In another study of the plant-water relationships for jatropha and the response of

jatropha seedlings to water stress, Maes et al. (2009b) classified jatropha as a
stem succulent plant with low stem density (0.26 9'3) and high stem-water

content. Stem-succulent Species rely on their stem-water reserves during drought

conditions and cannot access water in the deeper layers. The authors theorized

41

that for stem succulent plants, the plant-water relationship is likely to remain

independent of the plant’s age“. If this is true, then, all conditions remaining
constant, the water usage estimates based on the younger plants might be
representative of the actual water footprint of mature plants, within acceptable
margins of error. Further studies on the water usage of mature jatropha plants

are recommended to verify the validity of this theory.

In the context of jatropha’s water usage, another area that merits attention is the
use of proper and consistent units for expressing the water footprint. Besides
rainfall and irrigation, seed yield will depend on several factors such as plant age,
soil characteristics, agricultural practices and the use of fertilizers and
agrochemicals. Biodiesel yield in turn will depend on seed yield, oil extraction
procedure, and the efficiency of transesterification process. All of these factors

must be incorporated into the calculations and units used to express the water

usage. Therefore, units other than biomass yield61 per unit of water or energy
yield per unit of water may be required to express water footprint. In the following
section, water use efficiency (WUE) is discussed as another means of

quantifying water usage.

Xu and Hsiao (2004) defined WUE at the physiological level as the ratio of

photosynthesis to transpiration. Citing that CO2 fluxes across the leaf are highly

 

60 The authors have recommended further studies on the plant-water relationships of mature jatropha
plants (Macs et al. 2009b).

61 While expressing water usage in terms of biomass yield, it must be clarified whether the calculations use
plant total biomass or the aboveground biomass only.

42

variablesz, the authors noted that photosynthetic WUE is difficult to monitor for
long periods of time and suggested the use of biomass-based WUE instead.

Morison et al. (2008) also pointed out that based on the scale of reference, WUE

may be calculated in terms of the economic63 yield or the biomass yield.

Jongschaap et al. (2007) presented a calculation for water usage based on
WUE. The authors calculated the molecular weight of jatropha oil from the

following chemical structure of jatropha oil:

0
II

H2C-0-C-(CH2)16-CH3

0
II

HC-O-C-(CH2)7-CH=CH-(C H2)7-C H3

0
II

HC-O-C-(CH2)7-CH=CH-CH2-CH=CH-(CH2)4-CH3

Figure 1 - Chemical Structure of jatropha oil

 

62 Jie et al. (2008) have shown the variability of WUE in six tree species (Prunus. avium, P.
pseudocerasus, P. armeniaca, P. persica, P. salisina and Malus pumila Mill). In their studies, WUE was
the highest at 7:00-8:00 am, the lowest at noon, increased 16:00-17:00 pm. Moreover, WUE was higher in
autumn than that in summer at the same time of the day. This diurnal and seasonal variability suggests that
it could be more beneficial to measure the biomass WUE. However, photosynthetic WUE is important for
a better understanding of the physiological response of jatropha to water stress.

By economic yield, the authors could either be referring to the financial gain per unit of water used or
the economically viable, end product yield (e.g., biodiesel in case of jatropha) per unit of water consumed.

43

Each molecule of jatropha oil comprises of 57 C (12 g mol'1), 107 H (1 g mol")
and 6 0 (16 g mol'1). Hence, the molecular weight of jatropha is calculated to be

about 0.888 gmmol'1 64.

The basic photosynthesis reaction is:

12 H20 + 6 002 + light -) C6H1206 + 6 02 + 6 H20.

It is assumed that the jatropha plant obtains all carbon required for the formation
of oil from photosynthesis. Therefore, 57 mmol CO2 are required for 57 mmOl of

carbon in jatropha oil.

The photosynthetic WUE values of Jatropha pandurr'folia L. and Jatropha

gossypifolia L. were reported as 3.68 mmol C02 (mmol H20)'1 and 2.52 mmol

C02 (mmol H20)'1 respectively65

Jongschaap et al. (2002) assumed a WUE value of 3 mmol C02 (mmol H20)’1 for
Jatropha curcas L. This means that the assimilation of 3 moles of C02 would
require 1 mole of H20. Similarly, 57 mmol of C02 correspond to 19 mmol H20 (or

0.342 9 H20). Therefore, 0.342 9 H20 is needed to produce 0.888 g of oil.

 

All numbers are presented as in the original paper.

65 Jongschaap et al. (2007) have noted that the WUE values reported by Li Guo (2002) are close to those
of other oil seed species such as soybean (3.90 mmol C02 (mmol H20)1 and oil palm (3.95-4.42 mmol
CO2 (mmol H20)".

44

Assuming the density of water and jatropha oil to be 1 kg L'1 and 0.92 kg L", the

water consumption was calculated to be 0.345 L water (L oil)”.

The authors mention that in this calculation, plant processes other than
transpiration were ignored. Although such simplifications can help in making
rough estimates and ‘back-of-the-envelope’ calculations, these simplistic

calculations will not yield accurate estimations of water usage.

Besides accounting for the effects of evapotranspiration and CO2 fluxes, WUE

may also provide a means to predict the water usage in one site, knowing the

WUE values at another site with different environmental conditions. The
variability of WUE with environmental conditions and CO2 levels in the

atmosphere may therefore be an added benefit in expressing water usage. While
it may not be feasible to have one constant WUE value for jatropha, knowing the

WUE values of the plant at one site could help in estimating the WUE value in

another region using empirical equations66 and models. Such models would help
in integrating the results of water usage estimates in different regions.
In his “opinionated review", Blum (2009) argued that effective use of water

(EUW), not WUE, is the key to obtaining better yields in water stressed

 

Hsiao (1993) had proposed empirical equations to WUE values in a new set of conditions from the
original WUE values and reference conditions. Upon testing these equations to predict WUE values of
cotton and maize, under irrigated conditions, Xu and Hsiao (2004) found the equations to work
“surprisingly well”. However, the validity of such equations should be tested in water-stressed conditions
as well. More research on formulating empirical equations and model to predict WUE values is
recommended.

45

conditions“. The argument presented by Blum is sound. While WUE is a
measure of a plant’s performance in different conditions, it is not the answer to
improving yields. However, WUE is still suggested as a possible ‘unifying‘ unit to
quantify water usage to improve the ‘generalizability’ of the data generated in

different field studies.

The results of water usage may also be made more ‘transferable’ by using
weights and indices in the calculations of water usage. This would also help in
reducing the margins of uncertainty in the calculations for water usage. lndices
may be defined on the basis of rainfall conditions, existing facilities for irrigation,

proximity of natural water bodies, possibility of using effluent from wastewater

treatment facilities, pumping costs, elevation68, possibility of rainfall harvesting
and other factors that contribute to the water footprint of jatropha. These weights
and indices, when factored into the calculations for water usage, would help in

using the field data from one site and estimating the water usage in another

region with different conditionssg.

 

7 Blum explains EUW as follows: “Effective use of water (EUW) implies maximal soil moisture capture
for transpiration which also involves reduced non-stomatal transpiration and minimal water loss by soil
evaporation.” Blum has also mentioned genetically increased drought resistance capacity of plants through
improved biochemistry of photosynthesis combined with other biotechnological advancements is the key to
obtaining higher yields in water stressed conditions.

Elevation can play a significant role in high altitude areas with adequate rainfall especially in
developing nations, where the runoff water can be harvested and used for irrigation without requiring
elaborate pumping facilities.

69 In their studies, Pfister and Hellweg (2009) have used a water stress index (WSI) to account for the
scarcity of water in the area under consideration.

46

Studies incorporating weights and indices in the actual field data must clearly
present all the assumptions built into the calculations along with the basis on
which the values of weights are decided. Also, the difference in soil
characteristics and agricultural techniques should be accounted for in the
assessment of water usage. The importance of clearly representing the
generated data from field studies is underscored by the fact that future policies
on land and water usage to support biofuel programmes will be formulated on the

basis of these studies.

As discussed before, biotechnological advancements70 hold the key to improved
drought tolerance, higher yields and overall sustainability of jatropha. Another
strategy to improve drought tolerance of jatropha is the use of symbiotic

microorganisms. The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI), India) has

successfully used mycorrhizal associations71 to obtain improved yield72 from

jatropha seedlings. Mycorrhizae have been shown to increase the drought

 

70 The Afiican Agricultural Technology Foundation (AATF) has joined the International Maize and Wheat

Improvement Center (CIMMYT) and Monsanto (a private agricultural company) in a public-private
partnership called Water Efficient Maize for Africa (WEMA) to develop a drought tolerant, high yielding
variety of maize, suitable for African conditions. Similar research is recommended to develop
biotechnologically advanced varieties of jatropha for higher yields and improved water usage.

71 Mycorrhizal firngi have coevolved with plants and soils for over 400 million years. They form symbiotic
associations with plants and coexist by forming colonies in the roots and trading inorganic nutrients and
water with the plants for carbon (sugars). This is especially important in degraded soils where nutrients,
which might have otherwise been unavailable to plants, can be accessed via the mycorrhizal fungi.

Thus, in such symbiotic interactions, plants show enhanced tolerance to environmental stresses. In case of
jatropha, the mycorrhizal interactions are interesting in light of the antimicrobial properties of the plant.
[27]

7 . . . . .
2 The ‘mycorrhrzed’ seedlings showed 95% success In seed gerrnrnatron, as compared to 50% success

with non-mycorrhized seeds. Yields improved by 20%-30% after mycorrhizal inoculation (TERI, India).

47

resistance of Ioblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.) and rose (Rosa hybrida L. cv. Ferdy)
(Davies et al. 1996). Soybean seed weight was shown to improve by the use of
arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (Aliasgharzad, Neyshabouri and Salimi 2006). An
8.0% increase in yield was seen after inoculating wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)
seeds with Azospin'llum brasilense, a plant growth-promoting rhizobacterium
(PGPR) (Diaz-Zorita and Fernandez-Canigia 2009). Besides enhancing the
drought tolerance in plants, symbiotic microorganisms also improve the soil
characteristics such as porosity, saturated hydraulic conductivity (Celik, Ortas
and Kilic 2004) and soil moisture retention (Auge et al. 2001). By making soil

nutrients more accessible to plants, these organisms reduce the dependence on
agrochemicals. Mycorrhizal fungi can sequester C02 [27] from the air with the

help of their fungal filaments and enrich soil carbon. Thus, symbiotic
microorganisms such as mycorrhizal fungi can help in improving soil quality in
degraded lands, thereby increasing yield and ultimately reducing the water
footprint of jatropha. Further research on other genetically improved symbiotic

microorganisms is recommended.

Once the water consumption for jatropha cultivation is estimated, the next step is
to formulate policies for agricultural water management vis-a-vis biofuels. Sound
water management policies and sustainable irrigation practices are essential for

the successful implementation of biofuel programmes. Some of the major issues

and challenges in water management are discussed in the following section.

48

Challenges in water management:

Developing nations with growing economies (e.g., China and India) are actively
pursuing biodiesel programmes involving jatropha. lnsecurities of food shortage,
the promise of rural development from jatropha cultivation, favourable climatic

conditions, reduction of imported oil and additional revenue from sustainable

practices73 are some of the reasons why these nations favour biodiesel from
jatropha over ethanol from corn or sugarcane. While domestic biofuel is attractive
from the point of energy security, there are several concerns about the

sustainability of biofuel programmes which must be addressed.

Countries such as India and China rely heavily on irrigated agriculture (de
Fraiture, Giordano and Liao 2008). Therefore, it is important to evaluate the
additional stess that jatropha cultivation would put on the limited freshwater
supplies in these regions. The concerns about unsustainable irrigation practices
are even more pertinent in countries like Africa where water is a precious and

often rare commodity. A major concern with biofuels is the irrigation requirement

for feedstock cultivation, which is the most water consuming step74 in biofuel

production. However, the water consumption in the actual production process

 

73 e.g., via Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) credits (Larson, 2008).

74 Corn cultivation in Nebraska requires intensive irrigation. The irrigation requirements show that the
production of each gallon of ethanol requires 1568 gallons of water (Varghese, 2007). From the water use
efficiency data fi‘om Minnesota’s ethanol plants, the average water consumption for each gallon of ethanol
was 5.9 gallons of water in 1998 and 4.5 gallons of water in 2005 (The numbers are calculated from the
data fi'orn Keeney and Muller, 2006).

49

(i.e., in the processing plants) will have local effects75 on the areas close to the
biofuel production plants. Therefore, while evaluating the water footprint of
biofuels, these local ‘water stresses’ should be taken into account, in addition to

the larger irrigation requirements.

With the increasing awareness of water-related sustainability issues, nations all
over the world are undertaking projects and formulating policies to improve their

water security. Recent examples of ambitious water management projects
include the South-to-North Water Diversion (SNWD) project in China76, the Inter-

Basin Water Transfer project (IBWT, or the ‘lnterlinking of Rivers’) in India77 and

 

5 For example, Coca Cola has been accused of exploiting the water resources in the small village of
Plachimada (Kerela, India). The operation of Coca Cola’s beverage factory is said to have caused
groundwater depletion due to unsustainable exploitation of the groundwater. The company also supplied
the industrial waste sludge for use as fertilizer to the local farmers. Upon testing the samples at the
University of Exeter (U K), it was found that the sludge contained a number of toxic chemicals including
cadmium and lead (BBC, (2003), Aiyer, (2007)) The application of the sludge as a fertilizer also resulted
in the contamination of the local water supply.

Biofirel production plants in developing nations raise similar concerns, especially because the
environmental laws and regulations in developing nations are neither as powerful nor as strictly
implemented as in the industrialized nations.

76 Mao Zedong proposed the idea of the diversion project in 1952. The SNWD project aims at drawing
water from the rivers in southern China and supplying to the drier regions in northern China. The main
rivers involved in this water diversion project are the Yangtze, Yellow River, Huaihe and Haihe rivers.
Displacement of large portions of the population, proposed industrialization along the diversion path and
the resulting pollution, loss of natural habitats — these are some of the major concerns surrounding this
project [14]. Similar concerns were expressed when the Three Gorges Dam project was proposed. The dam
was supposed to control the flow of the Yangtze River during floods. During the floods in 1998, four
thousand people died and fourteen million people became homeless. The economic losses were estimated
to be twenty four billion dollars. [13]

77 The government of India has proposed to join thirty-seven rivers through thirty links (fourteen in
northern India and sixteen in peninsular India), to address the spatial mismatch between the availability and
the demand of water in different parts of India. The project is deemed controversial and there are serious
concerns about the feasibility and long-term environmental, socio-economic and political impacts of such a
large-scale project. ‘River Linking: A Millenium Folly? is a compilation of articles on socio—economic
and technical issues surrounding this project. (Medha Patkar, a renowned social rights activist is the editor
of this book. She is actively involved in the issues related the riparian rights vis-a-vis river water diversion
projects.) An online booklet by Rivers for Life (an independent research action group) is recommended for

50

the proposal to divert the Hailaer River to Dalai Lake on the Russia-China
border". In the United States, several projects for diverting water from the Great

Lakes79 have already been implemented.

While such projects which aim at sustainable water management and efficient
irrigation practices are being proposed and implemented, it is essential to

evaluate the long term consequences of these projects in light of the lessons

80

learnt from past mistakes. The Aral Sea crisis is a grim reminder of the severe

 

further reading on the topic [8]. Jain et al. (2006) also discussed some of the major issues surrounding the
project.

78 After the water level in Dalai Lake has dropped, it was proposed to divert water fi‘om the Hailaer River

to Dalai Lake. The environmental concerns include loss of habitat, pollution of the Hailaer River and the
adverse effects on the population downstream of the point of diversion. [17]

9 Water from the Great Lakes is diverted to provide water for municipal, industrial and irrigation use in
Chicago, Detroit, London and Ontario. The water from the Great Lakes also supports shipping and
recreational boating in Illinois, Wisconsin, Ohio and New York, and hydroelectric power production in
Ontario. With the increasing population and the declining levels of groundwater in several parts of the
United States, there is a growing need for the conservation of the Great Lakes water.

The possibility of future trading of water from the Great Lakes is another concern. The Green Party of
Canada has reported the following on its website - According to the leaked minutes of a 2004 meeting of
the Task Force on the Future of North America, which led to the SPP: "No item, not Canadian water, not
Mexican oil, not American anti-dumping laws, is off the table.”

(Canada, the United States and Mexico are members of the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) of
North America, which came into being on March 31, 2005 to advance free trade and security cooperation.)

[11]

In the context of water trading in the future, the following (slightly unsettling) prediction by Rees-Mogg
(2007) was published on MoneyWeek magazine’s website:

“There are countries that have an over-abundance of water - and here there are opportunities for sale to
other countries. Canada, for example, has the same amount of water as China, but just 2.3% of its
population. Brazil has far less need of its water than many of its neighbours. As the value of water rises,
countries like these will start to export their spare reserves to those more in need — and willing to pay.
Pipelines will spring up, connecting states and countries. Tankers will transport water across the sea as
often as they do oil. Water will be on the move. And those who can transfer it will be there to benefit.”
Perhaps it is time we asked ourselves: ls water the next oil?

80 The Aral Sea is a saline endorheic lake (having no outflow). In thel9403, the Amu Darya and Syr Darya
rivers, which used to feed the Aral Sea, were diverted to irrigate cotton fields in Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan
and Kazakhstan. Although the region saw a brief period of prosperity and improved living conditions, there
were severe environmental, health and socio-economic repercussions. The land and water in that area is

51

health, environmental and socio-economic consequences of the mismangement

of transboundary water. The loss of habitat in the Colorado River Delta basinsl,

the shrinking of Lake Chad”, the increase in groundwater salinity in the Sfax

Basin (T unisia)83 — these are all cautionary examples of the negative impacts of

anthropogenic stressors on natural ecosystems.

Besides the environmental considerations, water management issues involve
political complexities as well. Several water bodies span across the boundaries
of neighbouring nations (eg, the Colorado and Rio Grande river (the Americas),
the Euphrates, Nile, Jordan rivers (Middle East), the Brahmaputra, Indus, and
Ganges rivers (South Asia)). These shared water resources can be sources of

national and international conflicts. In the United States, legal conflicts between

 

contaminated with pesticides. The salt from the exposed lake floor, contaminated with toxins, gets carried
with the wind. The surrounding region has an alarmingly high occurrence of liver, kidney and respiratory
diseases, infant and maternal mortality rates. Most of the health problems can be attributed to the toxic dust
storms. As the natural water cycle was disturbed, the winter rains in the region have become increasingly
rare, leading to acute shortage of fresh water in the region. This man-made ‘eco-disaster’ also resulted in
massive changes in the regions climate (Micklin (1988), Vitousek, et al. (1997), Badescu, (2010)).

81 The construction of the Hoover Dam (1932) damaged the ecosystem of the Colorado River Delta basin.
The loss of the natural wetland habitat caused a decline in the wildlife, which in turn affected the native
people in that region (Glenn et al., 2001).

82 Similar to the Aral Sea, Lake Chad is a saline endorheic lake. The main rivers flowing into the lake are
the Yedesram/Ngadda and Hadejia Jama’rare-Komadouguo/Yobe fi'om northeast Nigeria, and the Logone
and Chari rivers from the southwest Chad. Much of the shrinking of Lake Chad is due to natural
desertification and the arid conditions in the region. However, human activities, (especially irrigation)
exacerbated the desiccation of the lake [“Lake Chad: A Study of a Drying Freshwater Body", Guardian
Newspapers (date unknown), Coe and Foley (2001)].

Ironically, one of the definitions of the word ‘Chad’ in the online dictionary Dictionary.com is as follows:
African nation, former Fr. colony (Tchad), independent since 1960, named for Lake Chad, from a local
word meaning "lake, large expanse of water.“

3 Due to unsustainable irrigation practices in the Sfax Basin in Tunisia, the water table has fallen and the
use of saline water for irrigation has resulted in elevated groundwater salinity and soil salinization.
(Trabelsi et al., 2007). (The authors have not quantified the decrease in the level of the water table.)

52

Kansas and Nebraska84 have resulted over water issues. The Brahmaputra

River85 has been a cause for strained diplomatic relations between China and

India for several years. The Bakassi Peninsula has been a disputed territory

between Nigeria and Cameroon86 for decades. These conflicts indicate that the
policies involving water management should be formulated with a broader
perspective that takes into account the existing diplomatic relationships and the
potential conflicts that could result from water insecurity. The national and
international biofuel programmes must also consider the spatial mismatch
between availability and demand of water within nations and across the globe. As
jatropha cultivation is being actively pursued in Africa, such considerations are
especially important there, because many parts of the continent experience acute
water shortage and conflicts may result from water insecurities, given the volatile

political atmosphere.

It is important to increase the production of biofuels and gradually wean the world
from conventional fossil fuels. At the same time, it is vital to carefully evaluate the

the water consumption involved in producing biofuels. While the search for clean

 

84 According to the US. Water News online (June 2008): “Kansas contends Nebraska used about 80,000
acre feet, or roughly 26 billion gallons, more than it was allowed in 2005 and 2006. It has demanded more
than $72 million for the overuse in addition to a shutdown of wells that irrigate nearly half of the 1.2
million acres in Nebraska‘s portion of the river basin.” [10]

85 The river water diversion projects in south China and a feasibility study of the construction of a
hydropower plant along the section of the Brahmaputra River flowing through the Chinese territory raised
concerns about the water security in the north eastern parts of India. After denying the existence of such a
project for several years China has recently admitted that it is building a hydropower plant along the
Brahmaputra River. The effect of this project on the lndo-Sino relationship remains to be seen [38].

86 The Bakassi Peninsula has been a disputed territory between Nigeria and CMeroon for decades. Water
fisheries, the presence of potential oil reserves are the primary reasons for the conflict (Price 2005).

53

and renewable alternatives to fossil fuels gathers momentum, we must also
ensure that the drive for biofuels does not clash with the goal of providing safe

and Clean water to the growing world population.

'54

Food vs. Biofuels: The effect of biofuels on food prices and the agricultural

industry

Several researchers have questioned the sustainability of food-based biofuels
(e.g., Fitzherbert et al. 2008, Nelson and Robertson 2008, Pimentel et al. 2009,
Scharlemann and Laurence 2008). However, the most severe criticism against
these biofuels is due to their potential negative impacts on food security. The use
of biofuels is believed to compete with food for resources (e.g., land, water,
labour) and exacerbating world hunger (e.g., Pimente12009, Abbott, Hurt and
Tyner 2008, Leibtag 2007). At this time, when over a billion people in the world

are malnourished87, it is important to address the socio-economic and ethical
issues pertaining to the use of biofuels vis-a-vis global food prices and re-
evaluate the sustainability of biofuels in the context of food security. Analysing
the impact of the US. corn-based ethanol industry on national and global food
prices and on the agricultural industry can shed some light on these issues, since

the use of jatropha is not sufficiently widespread to conduct such an analysis.

In 2007, the inflation in food prices in the United States was twice that of the

overall inflation (Henderson 2008). The price of corn rose from $2.55 (per bushel)

in 2005 to $4.04 in 2007 (Hagenbaugh 2007)88 at the same time when com

 

87 In 2009, the Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) has estimated the number of undernourished
people worldwide to be 1.02 billion [6].

88 Leibtag, (2008) has reported the price rise as $2 per bushel in 2005 to $3.40 per bushel in 2007. (Runge
and Senauer (2007) have mentioned in their report that in March 2007, the price of corn rose to over $4.38
a bushel.

55

production in the US. reached record values“. The rising demand for corn90 in

the ethanol industry is said to have caused this inflation91 in the price of corn,
which in turn increased the price of corn-based retail food. However, other

factors (e.g., processing and packaging) in the manufacturing process of retail

food dampened this price rise to some extent. Apart from the ‘farm value’92 of

com, the extent of processing involved and value added services (e.g.,

advertising and packaging) also contribute to the final price of corn—based retail

food items (Leibtag, 2008)”. While the price of corn rose, the cost of the value

added services did not change as much. Therefore, the price of retail food

increased to a smaller extent as compared to the increase in the price of com94.

 

89 The corn production in 2007 was 13.1 billion bushels. The previous record was 11.8 billion bushels in
2004 (U .S. Department of Agriculture’s National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS))

90 In late 2006 in Mexico, the price of tortilla flour doubled due the rise in US. corn prices from $2.80 to

$4.20 a bushel. (Runge and Senauer, 2007).

91 Ethanol production in the United States was almost 5 billion gallons in 2006. This was about 1 billion
gallons more than in 2005 (Westcott, 2007).

i.e., the commodity cost or price per bushel

93 Although value added services have had a dampening effect of on the food prices, the cost of such

services has risen in the past few decades, adding to the increase in food price. Their effect, however, has
been more gradual. Henderson (2007) has mentioned that marketing costs (“the difference between the
farm value and consumer spending for food at grocery stores and restaurants”) have risen fiom fifty-nine
percent of the total retail food price in the 19503 to sixty-seven percent in the 19705 to eighty percent today.

94 Leibtag (2008) has made the following estimate: “Currently, about 4.1 percent of U.S.-produced corn is
made into high-fructose corn syrup. A 2-liter bottle of soda contains about 15 ounces of corn in the form of
high-fi'uctose corn syrup. At $3.40 per bushel, the actual value of corn represented is 5.7 cents, compared
with 3.8 cents when com is priced at $2.28 per bushel. Assuming no other cost increases, the higher corn
price in 2007 would be expected to raise soda prices by 1.9 cents per 2-Iiter bottle, or I percent. These are
notable changes in terms of price measurement and inflation, but relatively minor changes in the average
household food budget.”

56

Fifty to sixty percent of the com produced in the US. is used as animal feed95
(Westcott 2007). Higher corn prices affect the livestock sector by reducing the
profit margins for the meat, poultry and dairy industries. Thus the price rise of
corn has a ripple effect on the price of meat, eggs and dairy products. Moreover,
manufacturing these food items involves much less processing and value added
services as compared to other retail food items (e.g., corn-based cereals and
high fructose corn syrup based beverages). Hence, the price of meat and eggs is

more sensitive to the increase in the price of corn.

As mentioned before, the price of retail food in the US. depends on several
factors (besides the commodity price of corn), which coupled with the competition
between retailers, have a stabilizing effect on the food price. However, the effect
of the use com-derived ethanol on the price of food in developing nations is far
more drastic. The citizens in the developing nations consume less processed
food than those in the industrialized nations. Low cost grain is a dietary staple in

the developing nations. Therefore, the food prices in the import-dependent

developing countries are more closely tied to the commodity price of corn96. The

highest occurrence of world hunger is in the countries in Asia and the Pacific

 

95 Distillers grains, a coproduct of dry-mill ethanol production, can be used as livestock feed.
Ruminant animals, such as beef and dairy cattle, can readily use distillers grains. However it is less suitable
for monogastric animals, (e.g., hogs and poultry) (Westcott, 2007).

96 About forty percent of the world's total com is produced in the US. (Runge and Senauer, 2007).

Between 2003 and 2008, the average share of the US. in the total corn exports averaged sixty percent
(USDA).

57

region and Sub-Saharan Africa”. Increasing food prices will exacerbate the dire

situation in these nations. One of the causes of increasing food prices and

growing world hunger can be traced back to corn-based biofuels”.

In addition to directly affecting food prices, the increasing demand for corn for
ethanol production has indirect effects on the agricultural industry. The impact of

ethanol on the agricultural industry is comparatively large, as compared to its

share in the overall gasoline marketgg. Due to the growing profitability of corn
production, farmers are increasing the acreage allocated for corn at the cost of
other crops. As the cultivation of other food crops is reduced, their prices
increase as well, because the demand for those food crops does not decrease.
However, indiscriminately increasing the acreage for corn cultivation will have a
detrimental effect in the long term. In the US, corn is typically planted in rotation
with soybean (Runge and Senauer 2007, Westcott 2007). Soybean, being a
leguminous plant, fixes nitrogen, which helps in maintaining the soil fertility.

Increasing the frequency of corn cultivation at the cost of soybean will result in

 

97 The number of undernourished people in different parts of the world in 2009 is as follows:

Sub-Saharan Afiica: 265 million

Asia and the Pacific: 642 million

Latin America and the Caribbean: 53 million
Near East and North Afi'ica: 42 million
Developed countries: 15 million [5]

98 To put things in perspective, Runge and Senauer (2007) said:
“Filling the 25-gallon tank of an SUV with pure ethanol requires over 450 pounds of corn - which contains
enough calories to feed one person for a year.”

99 In 2006, ethanol represented about 3.5 percent of motor vehicle gasoline supplies in the United States.

However, about 14 percent of corn use went to ethanol production in the 2005/06 crop year (Westcott,
2007). “Even if the entire corn crop in the United States were used to make ethanol that fuel would replace
only 12 percent of current US. gasoline use.” (Runge and Senauer, 2007)

58

the depletion of nitrogen from the soil. Hence, to maintain soil fertility and
increase corn yields, large amounts of fertilizers would be required. The
cultivation of com (a row crop) contributes to soil erosion. This, coupled with the

higher usage of fertilizer, would increase water pollution due to agricultural

runoffloo.

The problem of water pollution by agricultural runoff has another component to it.

The conservation reserve programme (CRP)101

pays farmers for not cultivating
those lands that are highly susceptible to soil erosion. As corn prices rise and

increasing the acreage for corn cultivation becomes more profitable, the number

of farmers enrolling in this programme will decreaseloz. Increasing row crop
plantation on erodible lands exacerbates problem of water pollution by
agricultural runoff. This also affects the measures for conservation by

undermining the efficacy of the CRP.

 

100 The Gulf of Mexico and the Gulf of Trieste (Northern Adriatic Sea) (Italy-Croatia) are examples of
water bodies polluted by nutrient runoff (Diaz, 2001).

101 The Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) is a voluntary programme in which agricultural landowners

receive annual rental payments and cost-share assistance to establish long-term, resource-conserving covers
on eligible farmland.

CRP protects agricultural lands fi'om topsoil erosion and mitigates groundwater and surface water pollution
by reducing agricultural runoff. By mandating the plantation of resource-conserving vegetative covers the
CRP also contributes to increased wildlife populations [2].

102 The CRP contracts for 874722 acres expired in 2005. Only 318559 acres were reenrolled the next year.
In 2006, contracts for 686805 acres expired and only 241050 acres were reenrolled in 2007. The numbers
were obtained after summing the acreage enrolled in each state in the US. [4]. The typical duration of the
contracts is ten to fifteen years. According to the March 2010 CRP contact status report, the contracts for
4.4 million acres are scheduled to expire in 2011, 6.5 million acres in 2012 and 3.3 million acres in 2013. It
remains to be seen what fraction of these lands are reenrolled into the programme [3].

59

The increasing demand of corn for ethanol production has resulted in lower
annual ending stocks of corn. Lower carryover stocks of corn are maintained to
meet this increasing demand. This makes the agricultural prices more volatile
and susceptible to market fluctuations (e.g., reduced production due to drought

and loss of crop yield due to infestation by pests).

Besides ethanol, the production of biodiesel from food crops other than corn
(e.g., soybean, sunflower, cassava) also contributes to increasing food prices.
According to the estimates by the International Food Policy Research Institute

(IFPRI), the prices of oilseeds are projected to rise by 26% by 2010 and 76% by

103

2020. The price of cassava is expected to increase by 33% by 2010 and

135% by 2020.

In light of the evidence of the contribution of food-based biofuels to escalating
food prices, it is important to switch to alternative feedstock for biofuel
production. While second-generation biofuel feedstock (e.g., microalgae and
switchgrass) hold the promise of sustainable biofuels without competing with

food crops, the technology for second-generation biofuels is still in its infancy. In

 

3 Runge and Senauer (2007) have stressed on the potential problems with biofuels fi'om cassava. “The
production of cassava-based ethanol may pose an especially grave threat to the food security of the world‘s
poor. Cassava, a tropical potato-like tuber also known as manioc, provides one-third of the caloric needs of
the population in sub-Saharan Africa and is the primary staple for over 200 million of Africa‘s poorest
people. In many tropical countries, it is the food people turn to when they cannot afford anything else. It
also serves as an important reserve when other crops fail because it can grow in poor soils and dry
conditions and can be left in the ground to be harvested as needed”... “The likely result of a boom in
cassava-based ethanol production is that an increasing number of poor people will struggle even more to
feed themselves.”

60

this scenario, it is worthy to look at jatropha as a potential energy crop that does

not compete with food crops.

If jatropha is grown in areas that are not suitable for food crop production, there
is no danger of jatropha-based biofuels displacing food crops. However, if the
future market prices for biofuels continue to rise, farmers might find it more
lucrative to switch from food crops to jatropha or other energy crops. In such
cases, the governments in those nations would need to offer appropriate

monetary incentives to farmers to maintain food crop cultivation.

In a report published by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI)
(Braun and Pachauri 2006), the authors mention that the concerns and
insecurities related to food production can be laid to rest by the effective use of
degraded and “wastelands” for biofuel production, while reserving “favourable”
(more fertile) lands for food crops. The report also cites the example of jatropha

as a promising source of biofuel feedstock in wastelands and for achieving a

104. While the authors’

“sustainable balance” between biofuels and food crops
suggestion to use wastelands for jatropha cultivation is sound, the possibility of
jatropha competing with other food crops for other resources (e.g., water, labour,

agrochemicals) cannot be ignored. Also, the cultivation of jatropha or other plants

 

104 The report mentions the following plans for jatropha based biodiesel programme in India: “India has
60 million hectares of waste land, of which it is estimated that half might be used for Jatropha cultivation.
The cost of producing biodiesel fi'om Jatropha is just Rs. 20—25 (US $0.43-US $0.54) per liter. The Energy
and Resources Institute (TERI) of India announced in February 2006 that it is undertaking a 10-year
project, in conjunction with HP, to cultivate 8,000 hectares of wasteland with Jatropha and install the
equipment necessary to produce 9 million liters of biodiesel a year. The project will include a complete
analysis of the social and environmental impacts of the approach.” (Braun and Pachauri 2006)

61

on marginal lands is likely to require more fertilizers and other agrochemicals
than on more fertile lands. This would increase the potential for eutrophication

and diminish the GHG savings.

Braun and Pachauri (2006) mentioned that besides the lack of availability, food
insecurity is also closely related to poverty, as the “food-insecure” sections of the
population cannot afford to buy food even if it is available. In this context, can
biofuels generate employment and improve food security? Unfortunately, the
relationship between poverty, hunger, food prices and biofuels is not that
straightforward. Most of the world’s poor depend on agriculture for subsistence.
From this, it is tempting to conclude that higher commodity prices could raise
their income levels, allowing them to improve their living standards. But a deeper
look at the issue of rising commodity prices for corn shows that this is not true.

While increase in the commodity price may help the agricultural landowners, the

105

landless rural population stands to suffer . In this scenario, biofuel feedstock

cultivation (e.g., jatropha) could potentially generate employment for the landless

and poor sections of the population and help to mitigate food insecurities.

Although several factors (e.g., the rise in crude oil prices (Henderson 2008), the

weakening of the US. dollar (Abbott et al. 2008), adverse weather events106

 

1
05 Unless they are offered food security by their governments, NGOs or humanitarian organizations, the

unemployed landless poor population in the developing nations, they are likely to suffer at least in the short
term, before the efforts to make food more affordable and accessible bear fruit.

06 In the year 2007, droughts in southeast Europe, northwest Africa, Turkey and Australia, freeze in the

US. and Argentina and floods during the time of harvest in Northern Europe also contributed to higher
food prices (Trostle, 2008).

62

(Trostle 2008) have contributed to escalating food prices, it cannot be denied that
food-based biofuels have aggravated food insecurities as well. The situation is
likely to worsen in future, given the aggressive drive for biofuels. Therefore it is
recommended to switch to alternative, second-generation feedstock to avoid any
competition between food and biofuels. However, discontinuing the use of food-
based feedstock alone will not solve the problems associated with food insecurity
and hunger. The primary solution to eradicate world hunger is the development
and implementation of novel technologies for improving crop yields.
Biotechnological advancements for disease-resistant high-yielding crops,
engineering solutions for optimized agricultural practices and the sustainable use
of the available resources of land and water will ensure that the global foOd

prices are decreased and food insecurities are mitigated.

63

Biofuel Policies: Social and Ethical Issues107

As mentioned in the previous chapter on the food-biofuel conflict, food-based
biofuels have contributed to increased food prices and have exacerbated food
insecurities (e.g., Pimentel 2009, Abbott, Hurt and Tyner 2008, Leibtag 2007, de
Fraiture, Giordano and Liao 2008). However, sustainable policies and
programmes that promote non-food-based biofuels can create jobs, increase
income levels and help to improve food security in the developing world (e.g.,
Pingali, Raney and Wiebe 2008, Pinzi et al. 2009, Braun and Pachauri 2006).
Tropical climates are well suited for the growth of energy-rich biomass. If the
technological challenges of biofuel production can be overcome, many
developing nations, with the advantage of favourable Climate can become major
exporters of biofuel. The cultivation of biofuel feedstock requires the investment
of resources such as land, water and labour. In the case of jatropha, diverting
these resources from their existing uses to use in large-scale feedstock
cultivation would be a risky endeavour, due to the lack of reliable data regarding
yields, the uncertainty in the water requirements and the overall sustainability.
Achten et al. (2010) proposed the propagation of jatropha on a small scale in
rural areas before cultivating it in on a larger scale. In fact, the most promising
social benefit of biofuels is the potential upliftment of rural societies, especially in
underdeveloped nations. If biofuel programmes are implemented wisely while

protecting the interests of the local population, land-owning farmers and the

 

107 The chapter addresses some social and ethical issues pertaining to biofuels and their related policies.

While the issues involve biofuels in general, they are also applicable to jatropha-based biodiesel.

64

landless population, both stand to gainloe. Besides generating employment,

biofuels can help rural communities become self-sufficient in terms of their own

109

energy needs . The newly created jobs in the biofuel sector can also mitigate

rural depopulation110 both in the developing and the industrialized nations.

While the labour intensive cultivation process can result in employment
opportunities, the mere generation of jobs does not automatically guarantee
improved livelihood and living conditions. It muSt be ensured that the new jobs
meet national and international standards. Living standards are dependent upon

both economic factors (e.g., wage, bonus) and non-economic factors (e.g.,

1

healthcare 11, education, empowerment of women in rural societies). Besides

 

08 In jatropha cultivation, the fruits are harvested only after they mature. Since the fruits do not mature at
the same time and because agriculture is not mechanized in developing nations, cultivation of jatropha
(especially harvesting) very labour intensive. This demand for labour holds the promise of job creation and
raising income levels in rural communities. Agricultural landowners can benefit fi'om the revenue
generated by feedstock (e.g., jatropha) cultivation. The poor and landless sections of the rural population
can be employed in the various stages of the biofuel production process (e.g., cultivation, harvesting,
transport, oil refining and distribution).

09 Raw jatropha oil can be used in stoves, lamps and for running agricultural machinery (e.g., pumps,
mills and small generators) that currently use other fossil fuels. Byproducts of jatropha cultivation such as
seed husks can be used for combustion and gasification. In small-scale decentralized systems, the farmers
will have access to the seedcake, which can be used as a natural fertilizer (Achten et al., (2010). However,
the combustion products of jatropha oil must be analysed to ensure that using jatropha oil indoors for
cooking and lighting is safe.

110 In their studies on the depopulation of several rural counties in the U.S., Walser and Anderlik (2004)

have described the phenomenon to be “. . .a self- reinforcing cycle of decline: declining populations lead to
decreased economic vitality, and both lead to higher per capita costs; the higher costs provide incentives for
continued out- migration — and the downwardly spiraling quality of life and of the supporting infrastructure
in these counties makes it increasingly difficult for the counties to attract new businesses to the area.”

1 1 1 . . . . . .
Healthcare benefits are especrally pertinent In the context of jatropha. In developrng nations, seed

picking will most likely be done by hand, because most agricultural procedures (e.g., harvesting) are not
mechanized. Since phorbol esters in jatropha seeds are known to be co-carcinogens and tumour promoters
(Makkar et al.(1998), manual seed picking is carries potential health risks which merit careful
consideration. Also, as phorbol esters are a part of the extracted oil and the seedcake, measures should be

65

generating rural income, biofuel programmes must address these non-economic

factors as well.

In theory, biofuels may be beneficial for rural societies in developing nations.
However, due to the varying challenges involved in the production of biofuels and
the constraints regarding the availability of resources, it may not be possible to
implement sustainable biofuel programmes in some countries. Land is the most
important resource for expanding agricultural areas and accommodating
feedstock cultivation. Sustainable biofuel production may not be possible in land-
scarce, low-income and food insecure nations (e.g., Bangladesh) that lack both
the resources and the infrastructure for further agricultural expansion. Low-
income countries that have abundant unused land resources but lack the
infrastructure (e.g., Tanzania) will rely heavily on foreign investments to develop
new markets for biofuels. However, there are dangers of land rights violations in
such nations if appropriate polices are not implemented. Therefore, national
policies on biofuels must safeguard the interests of the rural communities.
National and local authorities must ensure that the land rights of the local

population are protected while allocating or leasing the land for feedstock

12

cultivation. This is especially pertinent when large corporations1 are involved in

the biofuel programmes in developing nations, where the rights of the rural poor

 

taken to avoid contact with the oil after extraction and in the downstream processes involved in biodiesel
production.

112 Daimler Chrysler has been involved in India’s jatropha programme. The Council of Scientific and

Industrial Research (CSIR, India), Daimler Chrysler and the University of Hohenheirn (Germany) are
working in collaboration on a biodiesel project in India [77].

66

are seldom well protected113

. 0n ther other hand, sometimes, well meaning
national policies may have unintended consequences, where short-term
economic benefits may be followed by negative social and environmental

impacts in the long term. An example of such an issue is the resettlement of a

section of the population in Laos114

due to a change in the agricultural policies
that resulted in improved living conditions in the short-term followed by severe
land degradation in the long term. Therefore, before implementing new policies,
the future impacts should be carefully assessed, while actively engaging the local

communities. Perhaps, the situation in Laos could have been avoided by

involving the local farmers who would have known that sustainable agricultural

 

113 While palm oil cultivation is considered to be a boon for the economies of Malaysia and Columbia, the

violation of land rights of the local farmers in these countries are examples of social injustice in the name
of growth and development. (Ayob and Yaakub (I 992), Colombia palm oil biodiesel plantations: A "lose-
lose" development strategy (2008))

114 Between 1975 and 1977, sections of the population in the highland areas in Laos were resettled in the

Ban Lak Sip village. The reasons behind the resettlement were 1) to make the medical and educational
services more accessible 2) to change the agricultural system fi'om a subsistence-centric, shifting
cultivation (practiced in the highland areas) to a more stable, market-oriented system.

Later, the Land Use Planning and Land Allocation (LUPLA) programme was introduced in 1989.
According to the new policies in the programme, each household in Ban Lak Sip was allotted three plots of
land for farming. (The size of the plots was not specified in the original report.) Agriculture was banned on
the remaining land surrounding the village. This land was later classified as ‘production forest’ (the use of
which was limited to hunting, collection of forest products, and timber extraction). The highland areas were
classified as ‘protection forests’. These protection forests were intended to reduce soil erosion and for
environmental conservation.

Initially, the policies had the desired effects. Forest cover increased in the depopulated areas. Medical and
educational services became more accessible. Livestock production improved. Teak and banana cultivation
and vegetable cultivation increased. However, there were unforeseen impacts that resulted in severe land
degradation in the area.

Limiting the land available for agriculture created an artificial land shortage. The farmers were forced to
double the cultivation period and shorten their fallow periods to meet their requirements. This resulted in
the rapid deterioration of the land due to the new and unsustainable agricultural practices. As yields
reduced, the farmers were forced to reduce the fallow periods even further, thereby hastening the
downward spiral of declining soil quality and crop yields. Thus, in the long term, the policies had the
opposite effect of what was originally intended. (Lestrelin et al., 2005)

67

practices would not be possible, based on the new agricultural policies that were

being introduced by the government.

International policies on biofuels have a significant role to play in the
development of new biofuel markets. Until the technology for biofuel production is
transferred from the developed nations, the primary role of the developing
countries would be that of biofuel feedstock exporters. In fact , biofuel feedstock
could be the major export for many developing nations. The economies of
developing nations are uniquely sensitive to policies made in the industrialized
nations. A look at the Philippines’ economy vis-a-vis the sugar industry is a
valuable example of how changes in international policies can affect a nation’s
economy. Sugar was Philippines‘ leading export crop, with most of the sugar
production exported to the United States. The Jones-Costigan Act (1934) and the
Sugar Act (1937) resulted in a duty free quota system for sugar imports in the
United States. In 1955, the Laurel Langley Trade Agreement was signed, by
which the Philippines were granted a high quota for sugar exports to the US.
until 1974. As the trade relations between the United States and Cuba
deteriorated following the Cuban Revolution (in 1959), the quota of all other
sugar exporting countries was increased. In 1961, the Philippines received fifteen

percent of Cuba’s previous share of sugar exports to the United States.

Later, when the US. beverage industry switched from sugar to high fructose corn
syrup, there were reductions in the quota allotted to sugar exporting countries.

The Philippines then had to sell sugar to the world market and had to compete

68

115

with sugar beet producing countries. As sugar was highly subsidized in the

world market, this made the competition even stiffer.

These factors, coupled with the fluctuations in sugar prices caused the
Philippines’ sugar industry (hence, the local economy) to be adversely affected.
Sugar prices plummeted from more than 60 cents (US) per pound in 1974 to
less than 3 cents (US) per pound in 1985, leading to an economic crisis in the

Philippines (Anunciacion 1962, Honda 1996, Bergsma et al. 2007). This also led

to unforeseen social and environmental impacts116

. As sugarcane cultivation
was no longer a source of viable income, sugar plantation owners were forced to
abandon their sugarcane fields and migrate to other areas. Previously, large
areas of forestland had already been cleared for sugarcane plantation. This,
coupled with the abandoned plantation sites added to the existing problems of

deforestation, soil erosion and loss of biodiversity, thereby severely affecting the

terrestrial ecosystem .

Vlfith “greener” biofuels from second generation feedstock promising improved
GHG performance, similar concerns regarding the economies of developing

nations would be raised in those developing nations, where jatropha-based

 

115 Sugar beet is a root crop, which grows best in temperate climate. A vast majority of sugar beet is

grown in the developed nations (e.g., Europe and North America) where agriculture is highly mechanized
and agricultural technologies are more advanced. So, in the world market for sugar, developing nations
like the Philippines are in direct competition with the developed nations. (Anunciacion 1962, Honda 1996,
Bergsma et al. 2007)

116 Since the 19505, the watershed area around Orrnoc had been planted with sugarcane, which does not

absorb flood waters (Anunciacion 1962, Honda 1996, Bergsma et al. 2007). The floods in Orrnoc (1991),
which resulted in over 5000 deaths, underline the severity and seriousness of deforestation.

69

biofuel programmes are being implemented, if later on, another plant is favoured
over jatropha as a biofuel feedstock. Biofuel programmes and biofuel-related
policies must ensure that the transition from one feedstock to another is gradual
while allowing the agricultural sector to adapt to the Change. For example, if the
biofuel industry in the US. were to suddenly switch from corn to switchgrass or
microalgae, corn prices would plummet and there would be severe financial
consequences in the agricultural sector. Therefore policies which safeguard the
fragile and budding economies (especially those in parts of Africa) should be
formulated and periodically evaluated. In addition to the influences of external
policies and market fluctuations, internal policies and laws (at state and national
level) and the volatile political climate in some parts of the world (e.g., Africa)

should be taken into consideration.

As mentioned in the chapter on LCA, soil organic carbon plays a vital role in the
quality of soil (hence yield). Jatropha-related biofuel policies should be extended
to account for not only land-use changes, but also carbon emission and
sequestration. The farmers should also be educated with regards the role of soil
carbon in agriculture, and the impact of soil carbon on the overall soil quality and
crop yields. The knowledge that proper recommended management practices
(RMPs) in agriculture can help in increasing the soil organic carbon content (and
ultimately the yield) would provide the necessary incentive for the farmers to
practice sustainable cultivation, focussing on crop yield as well as carbon

balance.

70

Agricultural policies for feedstock cultivation must also safeguard against
extractive agriculture and soil-degrading practices. Extractive agricultural
practices do not replenish the soil nutrients and have the detrimental effect on
the soil quality and crop yields in the long term (Végen, Lal and Singh, 2005). An
example of such agricultural practices would be the cultivation on corn as
monoculture with reduced fallow periods and without rotation with a nitrogen
fixing plant (e.g., soybean). Unsustainable practices and soil carbon depletion in
Sub-Saharan Africa have resulted in severe soil degradation and desertification,
resulting in continuous food shortage, poverty, hunger and substandard living
conditions. Hence agricultural policies Should be extended to minimize and
eliminate nutrient depleting and extractive cultivation, while encouraging
practices that result in soil restoration and overall soil quality improvement

(Végen, Lal and Singh 2005, La12004).

As mentioned in the previous Chapter, ethanol production from corn contributes
to escalating food prices. Therefore national policies in the US Should be revised
to reduce the existing subsidies for corn cultivation and instead, focus on the
research for non-food based second-generation feedstock (e.g., switchgrass,
microalgae) which may also offer improved GHG balance as compared to corn

based ethanol (Schenk et al. 2008, Gouveia and Oliveira 2009).

The agricultural stage of biofuels production is the most resource consuming step
and may initially involve a carbon debt when unused land is tilled. Moreover, the

biofuel production processes also involve GHG emissions. Some countries may

71

become exporters of biofuel feedstock, some both importers of feedstock and
exporters of the finished product (i.e., biofuel) while others may Simply be
importers of the finished product. In such cases, it would be essential to account
for the individual countrie’s contribution to the net GHG emissions and carbon
debt. Therefore, international authorities mandating laws on carbon emission

must ensure that such carbon debts and GHG emissions are appropriately

di117

‘share by the producer countries as well as the consumer countries.

Besides several economic and social factors, the subject of biofuels and their
related policies have an ethical angle as well. This is primarily due to the fact that
biofuels are, in some ways, responsible for excaberbating food insecurity.
Knowing that there are a billion hungry people in the world, it is tempting to be
swayed into thinking that biofuels are a scourge of the society and that the

debate of “Food vs. Biofuels” pitches the affluent, SUV118-drivers against the

impoverished millions119

. Therefore a balanced and rational approach to this
debate is essential. Switching from corn to non-food based biofuels will mitigate

the turf war between food and biofuels. It is also important to increase public

 

117 Based on the GHG emissions in different stages of biofuel production, different indices may be

assigned and the net ‘share’ of the carbon debt may be allocated. (Smith, 1991) suggested the use of a
‘Natural Debt Index’ to allocate the ‘responsibility’ of global warming to difi‘erent countries.

118 Sport utility vehicle

119 de F raiture et al. (2008) mentioned “Malnourishment occurs because of lack of access to food rather

than global food shortage.” Citing that in the developing nations, the commonly food crops used in biofuels
(e.g., sugarcane, corn and maize) are either used primarily as animal feed (com and maize) or as cash crops
(e.g., sugarcane), the authors have proposed that the effect of biofuels on the price of meat and eggs is more
pronounced than on the price of food grains. (“Globally 65% of all maize is used to feed animals; in the
USA it reaches 75%.”, de F raiture et al., 2008). Hence, the authors have concluded that the “unfolding
global conflict over food” - as eloquently coined by Brown (2006) — may not be between cars and the poor
as he [Brown] envisions, but rather between cars and carnivores.”

72

 

awareness about the emerging technologies related to biofuels and the steps
being taken to improve food security. Governments, NGOs and local authorities
have a responsibility to make the scientific information related to the biofuels
available to the public and raise public awareness regarding issues and trends
related to the sustainability of biofuels. While the news media is responsible for
portaying biofuels in an unbiased light, the public also has a responisibility for
choosing reliable, scientific and responsible sources for biofuels-related news,
while questioning and participating in the discussions on the biofuel policies and
critically evaluating the information provided, before forming any opinion on the

matter of biofuels.

73

Recommendations:

The biofuel industry is poised for rapid growth to meet the growing energy
demands of the world (e.g., McCormick et al. 2009, Sims et al. 2010). At the
same time, there are growing concerns regarding the environmental impacts and
the overall sustainability of biofuels (e.g., Searchinger et al. 2008, Hill et al. 2006,
Scharlemann and Laurance 2008, Pimentel and Patzek 2006). Also, there is
evidence suggesting that biofuels have contributed to increasing food prices
(e.g., Henderson 2008, Abbott, Hurt and Tyner 2008, Arrnah, Archer and Phillips
2009). Despite these concerns, it cannot be denied that the proper management
of biofuels can have environmental and societal benefits. Researchers and
policymakers must focus on several areas of improvement with regards to
biofuels and harness potential advantages. Some areas for improvement are
identified and the potential solutions are discussed in this chapter. While some
recommendations are made for jatropha-based biodiesel, they also apply to

biofuels in general.

At present, biofuels are being promoted mainly to replace fossil fuels in the
transportation sector. At the same time, the broader applications of biofuels to
meet household and industrial energy needs must not be ignored. Biofuels may
potentially be used for indoor heating in place of conventional fuels such as
propane. Clean burning biofuels may also replace liquefied petroleum gas (LPG)
as cooking fuel. Until large-scale production of biofuels becomes a reality,

resulting in Significant reductions in fossil fuel consumption in the transportation

74

sector, it is suggested that biofuels be promoted for use in households and small-

scale commercial establishments.

While there are unanswered questions regarding the sustainability of large-scale
biofuel production, promoting feedstock cultivation on a small-scale (community
level) can be beneficial. Biofuel feedstock cultivation can generate employment
and help rural economies, especially in the developing nations. This is especially
true for jatropha cultivation in the underdeveloped nations with favourable
climatic conditions. It is therefore recommended to promote jatropha on a
community level to evaluate its sustainability on a smaller scale. This can help
the local population become self-sufficient and meet its energy requirements by
using raw jatropha oil for cooking, lighting and in agricultural machinery. It is also
recommended that combustion byproducts of jatropha oil be analysed to ensure

that oil is safe to use indoors.

The idea of using jatropha for biodiesel production on smaller scale also raises

the question: Is it more beneficial to pursue biofuel production from different

feedstock in different regions of the world?120

Due to the varying climatic
conditions across the world, it seems unlikely that a single energy crop can
produce high yields everywhere and meet the local and global fuel requirements.

Therefore it would perhaps be beneficial for different regions of the world to use

 

120 Tilman et al. (2009) have discussed the use of five potential biofuel feedstock - 1) perennial plants

grown on degraded lands, 2) crop residues, 3) sustainably harvested wood and forest residues, 4) double
crops and mixed cropping systems and 5) municipal and industrial wastes. However, there are
technological challenges for large-scale biofirel fuel production from these feedstocks.

75

suitable indigenous plants as biofuel feedstock based upon climate, availability of

technology, and the feasibility of maintaining sustainable biofuel programmes.

This brings us to the issue of the sustainability of biofuels. Lifecycle assessment
(LCA) studies are the primary source of information regarding biofuels’
sustainability. However, due to the assumptions made by the researchers and
the site- and process-specific nature of most studies, comparative analyses of
LCA studies are not always possible. The primary areas of concern are the
inconsistencies in the use of functional units, the difference in the efficiencies of
various processes, the ambiguities in defining the system boundaries and the
authors’ subjectivity regarding the inclusion or exclusion of various components

from the lifecycle inventories (LCIS). Therefore, there is an urgent need to

standardize121

the procedures for LCA and incorporate more uniformity in future
LCA studies. LCA studies must also quantify the sensitivity to various parameters
(components in the LCIS) and should include recommendations for optimizing the
most influential parameters. Identifying the most important components of LCIS

will make the definitions of system boundaries more homogeneous in later

studies. The development of improved models122

that predict the lifecycle
behaviour of a biofuel feedstock in a given set of conditions (soil type, rainfall,

climate etc.) using the field data from sites with different conditions will also

 

1 . . . . . .
21 As mentioned In earlier chapter on LCA, the use of different functronal- and energy-units makes

comparative LCA studies difficult.

122 The GREET 1.6 and the GHGenius (www.ghgenius.ca) are examples of models used for lifecycle
analysis of firels.

76

improve the ‘generalizability’ and ‘transferability’ of the results of LCA studies.

Accurate results from LCA studies cannot be obtained without data and statistics

from field studies. Therefore, correct and reproducible data from field studies123

are necessary to make reliable assessment about the sustainability of biofuels.

Besides the GHG and energy balance in the LCA studies, there are considerable
uncertainties in the water footprint of biodiesels, especially in the case of
jatropha, due to the lack of data regarding the water usage in the agricultural
stage of biofuel production. The use of biomass-based water use efficiency
(WUE) is suggested as a possible ‘unifying’ unit to express the water usage of
jatropha and other biofuel feedstock. The variability in the WUE for a specific
plant with environmental conditions may prove to be useful in converting the
WUE data from one site to predict the values in other sites. As mentioned in the
earlier chapter ‘The water footprint ofjatropha’, the development of empirical
equations and models and the use of appropriate indices are recommended for
accurate prediction of water usage using WUE. Moreover, sustainable irrigation
practices must be adopted to cater to the water requirements of the biofuel
feedstock under consideration. At the same time, any competition for water
resources with food crops must be avoided. The use of wastewater treatment

plant effluent is suggested to minimize the freshwater consumption.

In the context of biofuels, another area of ambiguity is the improper use of

terminology. For example, ‘biodiesel’ refers to the finished product of the

 

123 The dearth of field data for yields and water consumption is especially true for jatropha.

77

transesterification of vegetable oils that adheres to ASTM standards. There are
standard tests and regulations that finished products should meet in order to be
categorized as “biodiesel”. As these standard procedures use specific raw
materials, catalysts and reaction conditions, the methods for biodiesel
manufacture and the finished products are expected to be similar for industrial
and laboratory scale procedures. However, in conducting this literature review on
biodiesels, it was observed that the term ‘biodiesel’ was used to refer to the end
products of transesterification, without examining if the product adhered to ASTM
regulations for emissions or engine performance. This becomes important when
estimating the “GHG emissions per mile” for the ‘biodiesel’ as the engine

performance plays a significant role in this estimation. It is therefore hard to

”124. It is understood

compare and contrast the performance of such ‘biodiesels
that many laboratories may not have the necessary facilities to produce
biodiesels that match all the ASTM criteria. It is suggested that a subcategory of
biodiesel be created with a minimum set of predefined physical and Chemical
properties. Transesteriflcation end products must meet this minimum set of

criteria for the experimental results to qualify as a study on biofuels. This will

ensure more homogeneity in the studies.

Biotechnological advancements are the key to improving the yield, the WUE, the

GHG performance and the energy balance of energy crops. Besides improving

 

24 In a letter to the editor of ‘Fuel’, Lois (2007) has emphasized on the need to define a set of properties
that the ‘finished product’ must adhere to, in order to qualify as ‘biodiesel‘. However, the author also warns
that if the definition is too strict, many experimental results might not result in publications. The author has
mentioned: “What is needed in my view is a minimum set of properties that characterize pure biodiesel,
before a paper is acceptable for publication.”

78

the aforementioned properties, in the case of jatropha, further research on the
genetic modification is recommended for improving the oil content and combining

non-toxic varieties with the high yielding toxic species to obtain seedcake with

significantly lower level of toxins125

. Further research on the genetic
modifications must aim to improve the drought tolerance of energy crops that can
produce high yields in marginal lands with low soil nutrient content. The
possibility of ‘inherently carbon negative’ energy crops must also be explored. By

‘inherently carbon negative’ energy crops, 1 am referring to the possibility of
improving the GHG balance to such an extent that the net 002 balance is

negative, in spite of the use of fertilizers and other agrochemicals. This is
different from the carbon negative biofuels discussed by Tilman et al. (2006).
Tilman et al. (2006) studied perennial grassland species grown on degraded soils
without irrigation or the use of agrochemicals. The authors found the carbon
balance to be negative, primarily because of the low inputs involved.

By ‘inherently carbon negative’ energy crops, 1 am suggesting that the carbon
balance be improved and made negative by biotechnological changes in the

plant, and not by any Changes in the agricultural practices.

Besides the members of the scientific community, the policymakers also have a
significant role to play in shaping the future of biofuels. The state and national

policies must promote sustainable biofuel programmes, and at the same time,

 

125 Gressel (2008) mentioned that the seed cake of jatropha currently has negative economic value due to
the presence of several toxins and has suggested that the phorbol esters content be suppressed by genetic
modifications. The author also suggested other genetic modifications to reduce the height of full-grown
jatropha plant, decrease branching and incorporate ‘anti-shatter’ genes to form ‘shatterproof seeds to help
in mechanizing the harvesting process.

79

protect the rights of the local population. lntemational policies must ensure that
the budding economies in the developing world are adequately protected from

future changes in biofuel-related policies in the industrialized nations.

It is vital to improve the existing biofuel technologies using an integrated,
multidisciplinary approach involving areas of genetics, plant breeding and
molecular biology. Simultaneously, national and international authorities must
revise biofuel policies to promote non-food based biofuels. The existing
uncertainties in the sustainability studies must be addressed by generating
reliable field data and using improved LCA techniques. Biofuel programmes must
also aim to increase public awareness to Clarify any misconceptions related to
biofuels, while making the information regarding novel technological
advancements available. These steps would go a long way in ensuring that the

potential environmental and societal benefits of biofuels are utilized.

80

Conclusions:

With an increasing world population and improving living standards, there are
increasing demands for food as well as fuel. Major improvements in both the
agricultural practices and biofuel technologies are essential to meet these twin,
and at times, antagonistic demands. Food-based biofuels (e.g., ethanol from
corn) aggravate food insecurities and exacerbate world hunger. Non-food-based,
second generation biofuels offer an alternative that does not compete with food.
However, the technologies and the capacity for the large-scale production of
second-generation biofuels (e.g., from switchgrass and algae) are still years
away. As the growth of plant biomass is strongly dependent on environmental
conditions, perhaps it is time to reevaluate if the search for the ‘wonder-crop’,
that one perfect biofuel feedstock is a mirage. Perhaps it is best to choose the
feedstock in any particular region based on the Climatic conditions, the available
resources and infrastructure. While second-generation biofuel technologies are
pursued in the industrialized nations, the developing nations with favourable
climates can produce biofuels. from first-generation, non-food feedstock such as

jatropha, to gradually wean the world from food-based biofuels.

Biofuels from non-food feedstock (e.g., jatropha) may also compete with food for
resources (e.g., land, water and labour). Therefore, the proper management of
these resources is essential to avoid any worsening of the agricultural impacts of
biofuels, to prevent negative environmental impacts (e.g., loss of habitat and

biodiversity) and to safeguard against unsustainable agricultural and irrigation

81

practices. The concerns regarding the sustainability of biofuels are integrally
linked to the findings in their LCA studies. While jatropha holds promise as a
biofuel feedstock, its sustainability is still questionable because of the lack of
established best practices in the agricultural and the biodiesel-production stages
as well as the uncertainties in the LCA studies. Besides the GHG balance, a
major area of uncertainty is the water footprint of jatropha. The sustainability of
biofuels depends on the feedstock as well as the scale of production. Therefore,
until further studies are conducted to validate jatropha’s sustainability on a larger
scale, it would be beneficial to promote jatropha at the community level to help
the rural population in the developing nations benefit from this multipurpose plant

and meet their energy demands.

The issues of the sustainability of biofuels, escalating food prices and the so
called ‘energy crisis‘ are intertwined; three aspects of the problem must be
clearly understood. First, there are genuine concerns about the depleting
reserves of fossil fuels and therefore there is a growing need for alternative,
renewable and sustainable energy sources. Secondly, as revealed by the food-
biofuel conflict, there is pressing need for promoting sustainable agricultural
practices with significantly improved production efficiencies. Lastly, it is essential
to educate consumers about the issues of sustainability while simultaneously
inculcating responsible consumption habits. These three areas of concern must
be addressed simultaneously for the future energy-related endeavours to be

successful.

82

Appendix:

Detoxification of Phorbol Esters in Jatropha Seeds using Ozone:

Materials and Methods:

Seed samples of Jatropha curcas from Mali (Biocarburant Jatropha Extraction
Plant, Kulikoro, Mali), Florida (University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida) and
India (M/s Gautam Global, Dehradun, India) were used for the initial
detoxification experiments. The seeds were ground (without removing the shells)
in a coffee grinder (Braun KMM 30 Coffee/Expresso Mill, Model 3045). 20 g of
ground seeds was extracted with 150 mL of methanol (99.99% purity, HPLC

grade, Sigma Aldrich) for 16 hours using a Soxhlet extractor.

The extract was allowed to settle in a fume hood and the solvent (methanol) was
allowed to evaporate under room temperature until the resulting volume was
approximately 50 mL. The concentrated extract was decanted and cold-
centrifuged (41:2 °C. set point: 4°C) at 20000 rpm for 60 minutes. The extract was
then filtered through 0.45 pm membrane filter (Millipore, catalog number
HAWP02500, filter material: mixed cellulose esters) and diluted with methanol
before analyzing in HPLC (Waters, with Waters 2487 Dual It Absorbance
Detector). The method for HPLC analysis was based on those used by Makkar et

al. (1997) and Haas and Mittelbach (2000) with some modifications.

HPLC conditions:

83

127

An isocratic solution of 80% acetonitrile126 and 20% HPLC grade water (with

128 per litre of water) was used, keeping a constant

1.75 mL orthophosphoric acid
flow rate of 1 mL min'1. In the initial stages of the project, a 150 mm x 4.6 mm, C-
18, end-capped 5 pm (Supelco) HPLC column was used. Later, this was
replaced with a 250 mm x 4.6 mm, Lichrospher C-18, end-capped 5 pm

(Supelco) for better separation. Phorbol-12-myristate-13-acetate (PMA) (Sigma

Aldrich, product number P8139) was used as the standard for phorbol esters.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Seed Sample Pretreatment:
grinding - Concentration of
methanol extract
HPLC
l' 0 Cold centrifuge
Solvent - . Filtration
extractIon o Dilution with methanol

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 2 - Schematic of experimental procedure

Sampling in HPLC:
The isocratic solution was run at 1 mL min'1 for 30 minutes to achieve stable

conditions in the column. After setting the UV wavelength at 235 nmlzg,

 

126 solvent A, 99.93%, HPLC grade, Sigma Aldrich, product number 34851

127 solvent B, J.T. Baker, product number 4218-03

128 85%, F luka, product number 79617

129 All conditions remaining equal, the peak area for the PMA standard was significantly higher for UV
wavelengths in the range of 230 - 240 run than at 280 nm. So, all the HPLC analyses were done with a UV
wavelength of 235 nm. (Almost all the methods referred to in the literature used 280 nm as the UV

84

methanol was injected into the HPLC system. All injection volumes were 20 [IL
Once a stable baseline was obtained the PMA standard was injected. The
residence time for the PMA standard was about 22 minutes for the 15 cm column
and 41 minutes for the 25 cm column. A calibration curve was prepared using
different concentration of the PMA standard. Using the peak areas from the

extract, the phorbol esters’ concentration was calculated from the calibration

curve (as PMA equivalent)13°.

200 pL of the jatropha seed extract was added to 1 mL of methanol and injected
into the HPLC system. The sample run time was set for 55 minutes. Before the
next sample injection, a gradient elution from 80% to 100% acetonitrile (with a
2.5% increase every 2 minutes) was used to flush out the residual hydrophobic
components in the column. The ratio of 100% acetonitrile and 0% water was
maintained for 10 more minutes. To prepare for the next run for the extract, the
ratio of the solvents was restored to 80% acetonitrile and 20% water (with a 2.5%
decrease every 2 minutes) to restore the isocratic conditions. The total runtime

was 97 minutes (55 min + 16 min + 10 min 16 min).

Ozonation:

One milliliter of the jatropha seed extract was diluted with 5 mL of methanol and

ozonated in a 10 mL vial using a ceramic diffuser connected to a glass tube. The

 

wavelength for HPLC analysis. Vogg et al. (1999) have used 220 nm wavelength for the UV detector in
HPLC prior to mass spectroscopic analysis of diterpene esters.)

1 . . . . .
30 The calibration curve and the related calculations are presented In the Appendix.

85

ozone generator (Ozotech) was run at the setting ‘8‘. The gas flow rate (oxygen +

1

ozone) was maintained at 1 L min' using a rotameter. The concentration of

ozone at the inlet was monitored with a digital ozone monitor (T eledyne
Instruments Model 454H). The residual ozone concentration could not be
checked, as a second ozone monitor was not available. The reading in the ozone

monitor fluctuated between 21 - 26 9 ms. Samples were ozonated for 2, 5, and

10 minutes and then analysed in HPLC131.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Oxygen - Dryer - Ozone - Rotameter
cylinder generator
Potassium O
iodide (Kl) Reactor 2°39
trap mon or
Figure 3 - Schematic of ozonation setup
Results:

Detoxification of jatropha seedcake would increase its value as a byproduct as it
may then be used as animal fodder. Ozonation was tried as a means of
detoxification. As fresh seedcake samples were not available, the detoxification
experiments were carried out using liquid extracts from the seeds. The first

batches of seed samples were obtained from Mali, Florida and India. A second

 

131 . . . .
The concentrations of phorbol esters (as PMA equivalent) before and after ozonation are presented In

the Appendix.

86

batch of seeds and seedcake was obtained from Mali. It was found that the
peaks for phorbol esters were not present in the older seed samples from Mali,
Florida and India. All the data and calculations presented are based on the

analysis of the second batch of samples from Mall.

132

The following results were found from the peak areas of the chromatograms

from HPLC:
a) Phorbol esters concentration in the jatropha seeds from Mali: 0.14 mg-g'1 of

seed (expressed as PMA equivalent).

b) An applied dose of 0.10 g of ozone was reduced the phorbol esters content by

72.6%.

 

1 . . . .
32 Calculatrons of concentratrons from peak areas are presented In the Appendix.

87

Became». <_2n_ ho EEmbEoEO - v 2:9".

 

 

om mv 0v mm on mN ON 0 —. o _. m
b p — — — P F P — P L p r — _ P P w h p h _ k — i. F b h H _ p h — ~ p h b p H b H b . H p h h h — — p _
'EliidttlltlfL ...;/ \ltrlrirl‘lllii‘zliglii‘) .. .v.’\. .rrihil\.\lfl)/¥l_ _ .3“

 

 

 

W.“ a M};

 

 

<_>_n_ - xmoa EmcmoumEoEo

 

 

 

W.
m.
w
m

cor
com
com
84
com
com
com
com

com

88

muogxo comm Enoch.— coumcouocs cam poemcouo e6 EmamofiEoEO - m 2:9".

mm 00 mm

355.: m

woSEE or

Comic noumconoc:

$55.... N
C

cm

9‘

CV

mm

on

mN

ON 9. or

concaono ao mmSEE a

 

com

com

co»~

com

com

CON

com

com

89

Discussion:
Phorbol esters concentrations in jatropha have been reported to be 2 - 5 mg-g'1

of seeds (Makkar et al. 2008) and 0.87 - 3.32 mg-g'1 of kernel (Makkar et al.

1997). Compared to these values, the concentration of phorbol esters found in

the seeds from Mall is much lower. (The concentration in non-toxic varieties is
reported to vary from non-detect levels to 0.11 mg-g'1 of seeds (Makkar,

Aderibigbe and Becker 1998).) It is believed that the low value of phorbol esters’
concentration is due to the fact that the seeds were not fresh and there might

have been some degradation during the transportation and storage of the seeds.

In the experiments, PMA was the only standard used for detecting phorbol esters
and the concentrations were expressed as PMA equivalent. Phorbol esters other
than PMA were not considered in the calculations. Moreover, based on the
literature review, peaks corresponding to other phorbol esters were not observed
close to the peaks for the PMA standard. As more than one variety of phorbol
esters are known to be present in jatropha seeds (Haas, Sterk and Mittelbach
2002), it is recommended that more than one standard for phorbol esters be
used for more accurate quantification. Phorbol-13-acetate, phorbol-12,13-
diacetate, phorbol-12, 1 3,20-triacetate, phorbol-12-N-methylanthranilate-13-
acetate, phorbol-12-deoxy-13-tetradecanoate are some of the standards used in

HPLC analyses of diterpene esters (Vogg et al. 1999).

90

Although the phorbol esters concentration was reduced by ozonation, further
research in this area is recommended to identify the ozonation byproducts and

assess their toxicities.

The stoichiometry of the reaction between ozone and phorbol esters was not
studied. Therefore the relation between ozone dose and the decrease in phorbol
esters concentration may not be linear (as assumed in the calculations for ozone
dose). A liquid sample (jatropha seed extract) was ozonated in all the
experiments conducted so far. However, the ozone dosage required for the
actual seedcake could be significantly different (expected to be more), as that
would involve ozonating the solid seedcake. Also, one must bear in mind that the
ozone dose mentioned in the calculations was the applied dose and not the

absorbed dose.

Ozonation is an expensive process. Most jatropha plantations and (therefore
detoxification facilities) would be located in the tropical belts, especially in
developing world. Therefore, low cost solar ozonators are a prerequisite for such

facilities to function, as the operating costs for conventional ozonation facilities

would be too high133.

 

33 Potivejkul et al. (1998) described the detailed design of solar powered ozone generator.

91

Raw Data:

Table 1 - PMA calibration (Raw data -1)

 

Area of
the peak
(uV-sec)

PMA
concentration

(mgL'1)

 

3.87E+O5

 

3.33E+05

 

3.11E+06

 

3.70E+06

 

4.02E+06

 

9.75E+06

 

8.67E+06

 

1 .00E+07

 

2.36E+07

 

2.08E+07

 

2.11E+07

 

4.77E+07

 

4.69E+07

 

 

 

5.32E+07

 

1
1
5
5
5

10

10

10

25

25

25

50

50

50

 

Table 2 - PMA calibration (Raw data -2)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Average PM A
area 0f concentration
the peak (m L'1)
(uV-sec) 9
3.60E+05 1
3.61 E+06 5
9.49E+06 10
2.18E+07 25
4.92E+07 50

 

 

 

92

 

NCO-5010)
00000

0

Concentration in mg L"1

 

_\
O

PMA calibration

l

L

y = 1E-06x
R2 = 0.9946

  
 
 
  

Li

 

 

 

I l "' l—

0.00E+00 2.00E+07 4.00E+07

Area of the peak (uV-sec)

Figure 6 - PMA calibration curve

Table 3 - Ozonation (Raw data)

 

 

 

 

 

area.
Sample peak (uV- concentration
sec) (mQL l
Unozonated
extract: 9.47E+06 9.47
After 2 min
of
ozonation 7.95E+06 7.95
After 5 min
of
ozonation 2.60E+06 2.60

 

 

 

 

93

]

6.00E+07

 

Percentage reduction in concentration after 5 minutes of ozonation
= (9.47 mgL'1- 2.60 mgL'1)/(9.47 mgL") * 100%

= 72.6%

Table 4 - Applied ozone dose

 

 

 

 

 

Average flow rate of ozone 21 g a?

Gas flow rate (ozone + oxygen) 1 |_ min" = 0,001 m3 min1
Flow rate of ozone in g min‘1 0,02 win'1

Applied ozone dose in 5 minutes 0.10 g

 

 

 

Therefore, an applied ozone dose of 0.10 g was required to achieve a 72.6%

reduction in the phorbol esters’ content.

Calculations:

Phorbol esters content in the jatropha seeds (shell + kernel) :
1 mL of extract was diluted with 5 mL methanol before ozonation.

Therefore, the dilution factor = 6

As seen from the previous data of the peak areas in the Chromatogram, the
phorbol esters’ concentration in the jatropha seed extract after dilution is 9.47

mgL'1

Therefore the concentration of phorbol esters in the seed extract before dilution
= 6 * 9.47 mgL‘1
= 56.84 mgL'1

Let the weight of PMA in 50 mL of the extract be x mg.

94

Therefore,
(x mg/50 mL)*(1000mL/L) = 56.84 mgL‘1

Or x = 2.84 mg

Therefore 20 g of ground jatropha seeds contain 2.84 mg of phorbol esters (as

PMA equivalent)

Thus, the concentration of phorbol esters in the jatropha seeds is

0.14 mg g'1 of seeds.134

 

134 Shell + kernel

95

10.

Bibliography

Biodiesel Definitions. National Biodiesel Board.
http://www.biodiesel.org/resources/definitions/

Conservation Reserve Program. USDA. 2010.
http ://www.apfo.usda. gov/FSA/webapp?area=home&subj ect=copr&topic=crp

Conservation Reserve Program - March 2010. USDA.
http ://www.fsa.usda. gov/Internet/FSA_File/march20 l Oonepager.pdf

Conservation Reserve Program Statistics. 2010. USDA.
http://www.fsa.usda. gov/F SA/webapp?area=home&subj ect=copr&topic=rns-css

FAQ: FAQs on Hunger. Food and Agricultural Organisation.
http://www.fao.org/hunger/faqs-on-hunger/en/#c4 1478

FAO: Hunger. Food and Agricultural Organization.
http://www.fao.org/hunger/en/

Glossary of Radiological Terms. 2006. Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention. http://www.bt.cdc.gov/radiation/glossary.asp#gray

Interlinking of India's Rivers - A Reality Check. AID-Austin.
http://studentorgs.utexas.edu/aidaustin/conf2004/reading_list/ILR_booklet_print
able_format.pdf

J 3.3 lntercropping. 2008. Lao Institute for Renewable Energy. http://www.lao-
ire.org/en/j3.3-intercropping.html

Nebraska appeals ruling against Republican River taxes. 2008. US. Water News

Online. http://www.uswatemews.com/archives/arcrights/8nebrappe6.htrnl

96

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

Security and Prosperity Partnership Q&A. 2009. Green Party of Canada.
http://greenparty.ca/en/policy/spp_FAQ#1 .

Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. http://www.setac.org/

The Great Wall Across the Yangtze.
http://www.pbs.org/itvs/greatwall/dam1 .htrnl

South-to-North Water Diversion Project, China. 2010. Net Resources
International. http://www.water-technology.net/proj ects/south_north/

The Olive Tree - The Olive Press - Olive Oil. 2007-2008. Bible Times.
http://www.bibletirnesonline.org/node/ 14

Water Scarcity. World Health Organisation.
http://www.who.int/features/factfiles/water/water_facts/en/index7.html

Wetlands Threatened by Water Diversion Project on Russia-China Border.
Pacific Environment. http://www.pacificenvironment.org/article.php?id=236O

Abbott, P. C., C. Hurt & W. E. Tyner. 2008. What’s driving food prices? Farm
Foundation.

Achten, W., E. Mathijs, L. Verchot, Singh, V.P. & B. Muys. Life-cycle
assessment of Bio-diesel from J atropha curcas L. energy balance, impact on
global warming, land use impact.

Achten, W. M. J ., W. H. Maes, R. Aerts, L. Verchot, A. Trabucco, E. Mathijs,
V. P. Singh & B. Muys (2010) Jatropha: From global hype to local opportunity.
Journal of Arid Environments, 74, 164-165.

Achten, W. M. J., L. Verchot, Y. J. Franken, E. Mathijs, V. P. Singh, R. Aerts &
B. Muys (2008) Jatropha bio-diesel production and use. Biomass & Bioenergy,
32, 1063-1084.

97

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

Aderibigbe, A. 0., C. Johnson, H. P. S. Makkar, K. Becker & N. F oidl (1997)
Chemical composition and effect of heat on organic matter- and nitrogen-

degradability and some antinutritional components of J atropha meal. Animal
Feed Science and Technology, 67, 223—243.

Ahmed, O. M. M. & S. E. 1. Adam (1979) Toxicity Of Jatropha-Curcas In Sheep
And Goats. Research in Veterinary Science, 27, 89-96.

Aitken, A. 1986. The biochemical mechanism of action of phorbol esters. Boca
Raton: CRC Press.

Aiyer, A. (2007) The allure of the transnational: Notes on some aspects of the
political economy of water in India. Cultural Anthropology, 22, 640-658.

Aliasgharzad, N., M. R. Neyshabouri & G. Salimi (2006) Effects of arbuscular
mycorrhizal fungi and Bradyrhizobium japonicum on drought stress of soybean.
Biologia, 61, $324-$328.

Amaranthus, M. Inoculate with Mycorrhizae, Rebuild Your Soil, and Help Stop
Global Warming. http:l/www.mycorrhiza.com/

Anderson, B. T., K. Hayhoe & X. Z. Liang (2010) Anthropogenic-induced
changes in twenty-first century summertime hydroclimatology of the
Northeastern US. Climatic Change, 99, 403-423.

Antoni, D., V. V. Zverlov & W. H. Schwarz (2007) Biofuels from microbes.
Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 77, 23-35.

Anunciacion, C. (1962) The Philippine sugar industry. Sugar News, 38, 204-
216.

Aregheore, E. M., K. Becker & H. P. S. Makkar (2003) Detoxification of a toxic
variety of J atropha curcas using heat and chemical treatments, and preliminary
nutritional evaluation with rats. The South Pacific Journal of Natural Science,
21, 51-56.

'98

32.

33.

34.

35.

36.

37.

38.

39.

40.

41.

42.

Aregheore, E. M. B., K. & H. P. S. Makkar (2003) Detoxification of a toxic

variety of J atropha curcas using heat and chemical treatments, and preliminary
nutritional evaluation with rats. The South Pacific Journal of Natural Science,
21, 51-56.

Armah, P., A. Archer & G. C. Phillips (2009) Drivers leading to higher food
prices: biofuels are not the main factor. In Vitro Cellular & Developmental
Biology - Plant, 45, 330-341.

Arora, R., H. C. Shanna, E. v. Dreissche & K. K. Sharma (2005) Biological
activity of lectins from grain legumes and garlic against the legume pod borer,
Helicoverpa armigera. International Chickpea and Pigeonpea Newsletter, 50-52.

Auge, R. M., A. J. W. Stodola, J. E. Tims & A. M. Saxton (2001) Moisture
retention properties of a mycorrhizal soil. Plant and Soil, 230, 87-97.

Ayob, A. M. & N. F. Yaakub (1992) Quality of life: post-project perception of
Dayak communities in three SALCRA land schemes. Sarawak Museum Journal,
43, 197-217.

Badescu, V. & R. D. Schuiling (2010) Aral Sea; Irretrievable Loss or Irtysh
Imports? Water Resources Management, 24, 597-616.

Bagchi, I. 2010. China admits to Brahmaputra project-Politics/Nation-News-
The Economic Times. The Economic Times.

BBC. 2003. Coca-Cole's 'toxic' India fertiliser.

Benge, M. 2006. Assessment of the potential of Jatropha curcas (biodiesel tree)
for energy production and other uses in developing countries.

Bergsma, G., B. Karnpman, H. Croezen & M. Sevenster. 2007. Biofuels and
their global influence on land availability for agriculture and nature. 88. Delfi.

Blum, A. (2009) Effective use of water (EUW) and not water-use efficiency
(WUE) is the target of crop yield improvement under drought stress. Field

99

43.

44.

45.

46.

47.

48.

49.

50.

51.

52.

Crops Research, 112, 119-123.

Braun, J. v. & R. K. Pachauri (2006) The promises and Challenges of biofuels
for the poor in developing countries. The promises and challenges of biofuels for
the poor in developing countries, 16 pp.

Celik, 1., I. Ortas & S. Kilic (2004) Effects of compost, mycorrhiza, manure and
fertilizer on some physical properties of a Chromoxerert soil. Soil & Tillage
Research, 78, 59-67.

Chiew, H. 2007. For Peat's Sake. The Star Lifestyle Focus.

Coe, M. T. & J. A. Foley (2001) Human and natural impacts on the water
resources of the Lake Chad basin. Journal of Geophysical Research-
Atmospheres, 106, 3349-3356.

Dale, B. E. (2007) Thinking clearly about biofuels: ending the irrelevant 'net
energy‘ debate and developing better performance metrics for alternative fuels.
Biofuels Bioproducts & Biorefining-Biofpr, 1, 14-17.

Davies, F. T., S. E. Svenson, J. C. Cole, L. Phavaphutanon, S. A. Duray, V.
OlaldePortugal, C. E. Meier & S. H. B0 (1996) Non-nutritional stress

acclimation of mycorrhizal woody plants exposed to drought. Tree Physiology,
16, 985-993.

Davis, S. C., K. J. Anderson-Teixeira & E. H. DeLucia (2009) Life-cycle
analysis and the ecology of biofuels. Trends in Plant Science, 14, 140-146.

de Fraiture, C., M. Giordano & Y. S. Liao (2008) Biofuels and implications for
agricultural water use: blue impacts of green energy. Water Policy, 10, 67-81.

Dehue, B. & W. Hettinga. 2008. GHG Performance Jatropha Biofirel. Ecofys
and D1 Oils.

Diaz-Zorita, M. & M. V. F ernandez-Canigia (2009) Field performance of a
liquid formulation of Azospirillum brasilense on dryland wheat productivity.

100

53.

54.

55.

56.

57.

58.

59.

60.

61.

European Journal of Soil Biology, 45, 3-1 1.

Dimitrijevic, S. M., U. Humer, M. Shehadeh, W. J. Ryves, N. M. Hassan & F. J.
Evans (1996) Analysis and purification of phorbol esters using normal phase
HPLC and photodiode-array detection. Journal of Pharmaceutical and
Biomedical Analysis, 15, 393-401.

El Diwani, G., S. El Rafie & S. Hawash (2009) Protection of biodiesel and oil
from degradation by natural antioxidants of Egyptian J atropha. International
Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 6, 369-3 78.

Evans, F. J. 1986. Naturally occurring phorbol esters. CRC Press (Boca Raton,
Florida).

Fargione, J ., J. Hill, D. Tilman, S. Polasky & P. Hawthorne (2008) Land
clearing and the biofuel carbon debt. Science, 319, 1235-1238.

Fitzherbert, E. B., M. J. Struebig, A. Morel, F. Danielsen, C. A. Bruhl, P. F.
Donald & B. Phalan (2008) How will oil palm expansion affect biodiversity?
Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 23, 53 8-545.

Foidl, N., G. Foidl, M. Sanchez, M. Mittelbach & S. Hackel (1996) Jatropha
curcas L as a source for the production of biofuel in Nicaragua. Bioresource
Technology, 58, 77-82.

Francis, G., R. Edinger & K. Becker (2005) A concept for simultaneous
wasteland reclamation, fuel production, and socio-economic development in
degraded areas in India: Need, potential and perspectives of J atropha
plantations. Natural Resources Forum, 29, 12-24.

Francis, G., Z. Kerem, H. P. S. Makkar & K. Becker (2002) The biological
action of saponins in animal systems: a review. British Journal of Nutrition, 88,
587-605.

Gerbens-Leenes, W., A. Y. Hoekstra & T. H. van der Meer (2009) The water
footprint of bioenergy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the
United States of America, 106, 10219-10223.

101

62.

63.

64.

65.

66.

67.

68.

69.

70.

71.

Giarnpietro, M., S. Ulgiati & D. Pimentel (1997) Feasibility of large-scale
biofuel production - Does an enlargement of scale change the picture?
Bioscience, 47, 587-600.

Glenn, E. P., F. Zamora-Arroyo, P. L. Nagler, M. Briggs, W. Shaw & K. Flessa
(2001) Ecology and conservation biology of the Colorado River delta, Mexico.
Journal of Arid Environments, 49, 5-15.

Gmunder, S. M., R. Zah, S. Bhatacharjee, M. Classen, P. Mukherjee & R.
Widmer (2010) Life cycle assessment of village electrification based on straight
jatropha oil in Chhattisgarh, India. Biomass & Bioenergy, 34, 347-355.

Goel, G., H. P. S. Makkar, G. Francis & K. Becker (2007) Phorbol esters:
Structure, biological activity, and toxicity in animals. International Journal of
Toxicology, 26, 279-288.

Gouveia, L. & A. C. Oliveira (2009) Microalgae as a raw material for biofuels
production. Journal of Industrial Microbiology & Biotechnology, 36, 269-274.

Gressel, J. (2008) Transgenics are imperative for biofuel crops. Plant Science,
174, 246-263.

Gubitz, G. M., M. Mittelbach & M. Trabi (1999) Exploitation of the tropical oil
seed plant J atropha curcas L. Bioresource Technology, 67, 73-82.

Haas, W. & M. Mittelbach (2000) Detoxification experiments with the seed oil
from J atropha curcas L. Industrial Crops And Products, 12, 111-118.

Haas, W., H. Sterk & M. Mittelbach (2002) Novel 12-deoxy-16-hydroxyphorbol
diesters isolated from the seed oil of J atropha curcas. Journal of Natural
Products, 65, 1434-1440.

Hagenbaugh, B. 2007. Corn Has Deep Economic Roots Are High Prices Create
Ripple Effect. USA Today.

102

72.

73.

74.

75.

76.

77.

78.

79.

80.

81.

82.

Hajos, G., E. Gelencser, A. Pusztai, G. Grant, M. Sakhri & S. Bardocz (1995)
Biological Effects And Survival Of Trypsin-Inhibitors And The Agglutinin
From Soybean In The Small-Intestine Of The Rat. Journal of Agricultural and
Food Chemistry, 43, 165-170.

Heller, J. 1996. Physic nut. Jatropha curcas L. Rome Italy: lntemational Plant
Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI).

Henderson, J. 2008. What is driving food price inflation?

Hill, J ., E. Nelson, D. Tilman, S. Polasky & D. Tiffany (2006) Environmental,
economic, and energetic costs and benefits of biodiesel and ethanol biofuels.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of
America, 103, 11206-11210.

Hirano, T., J. Jauhiainen, T. Inoue & H. Takahashi (2009) Controls on the
Carbon Balance of Tropical Peatlands. Ecosystems, 12, 873-887.

Ho, M. 2007. Jatropha Biodiesel Fever in India. http://www.i-
sis.org.uk/JatrophaBiodieseIlndia.php

Hodgson, A. D. 1961. Samuel Morey: Inventor Extraordinary of Orford, New
Hampshire. Historical Fact Publications.

Honda, Y. 1996. Philippine Sugar and Environment. In TED Case Studies.

Hooker, R. 1996. The Age of the Patriarchs (1950 - 1500 BC).

Colombia palm oil biodiesel plantations: A "lose-lose" development strategy.
2008. http://www.foodfirst.org.

Huijbregts, M. A. J ., S. Hellweg, R. Frischknecht, H. W. M. Hendriks, K.
Hungerbuhler & A. J. Hendriks (2010) Cumulative Energy Demand As
Predictor for the Environmental Burden of Commodity Production.

103

83.

84.

85.

86.

87.

88.

89.

90.

91.

Environmental Science & Technology, 44, 2189-2196.

Hundsdoerfer, A. K., J. N. Tshibangu, B. Wetterauer & M. Wink (2005)
Sequestration of phorbol esters by aposematic larvae of Hyles euphorbiae
(Lepidoptera : Sphingidae)? Chemoecology, 15, 261-267.

Hunt, R. G. & W. E. Franklin (1996) LCA- How it Came About
Personal Reflections on the Origin and the Development of LCA in the USA.
Int. J. LCA, 1, 4—7.

Jain, S. K., V. Kumar & N. Panigrahy (2006) Some issues on interlinking of
rivers in India. Current Science, 95, 728-735.

Jie, Y. L., H. Q. Yang & M. Fangfang (2008) The diurnal change of leaf water

use efficiency in six fruit trees. Proceedings of the International Symposium on
Sustainability through Integrated and Organic Horticulture, 379-385.

Jongschaap, R. E. E., R. A. R. Blesgraaf, T. A. Bogaard, E. N. van Loo & H. H.
G. Savenije (2009) The water footprint of bioenergy fi'om J atropha curcas L.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of
America, 106, E92-E92.

Jongschaap, R. E. E., W. J. Corré, P. S. Bindraban & W. A. Brandenburg. 2007.
Claims and facts on Jatropha curcas - Global J atropha curcas evaluation,
breeding and propagation programme. Plant Research International.

Kadam, S. S. & R. R. Smithard (1987) Effects Of Heat-Treatrnents On Trypsin-
Inhibitor And Hemagglutinating Activities In Winged Bean. Qualitas
Plantarum-Plant Foods for Human Nutrition, 37, 151-159.

Kahkonen, M. P., A. I. Hopia, H. J. Vuorela, J. P. Rauha, K. Pihlaja, T. S.
Kujala & M. Heinonen (1999) Antioxidant activity of plant extracts containing
phenolic compounds. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 47, 3954-
3962.

Keeney, D. (2009) Ethanol USA. Environmental Science &amp; Technology,
43, 8-11.

104

92.

93.

94.

95.

96.

97.

98.

99.

100.

101.

Keeney, D. & M. Muller. 2006. Water Use by Ethanol Plants: Potential
Challenges. IATP.

Kheira, A. A. A. & N. M. M. Atta (2009) Response of Jatropha curcas L. to
water deficits: yield, water use efficiency and oilseed characteristics. Biomass
and Bioenergy, 33, 1343-1350.

Knothe, G. (2001) Historical perspectives on vegetable oil-based diesel fuels.
Inform.

Kovarik, B. (1998) Henry Ford, Charles F. Kettering and the Fuel ofthe Future.
Automotive History Review, 32, 7 - 27.

Lal, R. (2004) Soil carbon sequestration impacts on global climate change and
food security. Science, 304, 1623-1627.

Lam, M., K. Lee & M. Abdul Rahman (2009) Life cycle assessment for the
production of biodiesel: a case study in Malaysia for palm oil versus jatropha
oil. Biofuels, Bioproducts & Biorefining, 3, 601-612.

Larson, E. D. 2008. Biofuel production technologies: status, prospects and
implications for trade and development. 49. United Nations Conference on
Trade and Development (UN CTAD).

Lehmann, J. (2007) A handful of carbon. Nature, 447, 143-144.

Leibtag, E. (2007) Corn Prices Near Record High, But What About Food Costs?
Amber Waves, 6.

Lestrelin, G., M. Giordano & B. Keohavong. 2005. When ‘Conservation’ Leads
to Land Degradation: Lessons from Ban Lak Sip, Laos.

105

 

102.

103.

104.

105.

106.

107.

108.

109.

110.

111.

Lois, E. (2007) Definition of biodiesel. Fuel, 86, 1212-1213.

Ma, F. R. & M. A. Hanna (1999) Biodiesel production: a review. Bioresource
Technology, 70, 1-15.

Makkar, H., A. Aderibigbe & K. Becker (1998) Comparative evaluation of non-
toxic and toxic varieties of J atropha curcas for chemical composition,
digestibility, protein degradability and toxic factors. Food Chemistry, 62, 207-
215.

Makkar, H., K. Becker, F. Sporer & M. Wink (1997) Studies on nutritive
potential and toxic constituents of different provenances of J atropha curcas.
Journal Of A gricultural And Food Chemistry, 45, 3 152-3 157.

Makkar, H., J. Macs, W. De Greyt & K. Becker (2009) Removal and
Degradation of Phorbol Esters during Pre-treatment and Transesterification of
Jatropha curcas Oil. Journal of the American Oil Chemists Society, 86, 173-181.

Makkar, H. P. S. & K. Becker. 1998. J atropha curcas toxicity: Identification of
toxic principle(s). In Toxic plants and other natural toxicants, 554-558. CABI.

Makkar, H. P. S., G. Francis & K. Becker (2008) Protein concentrate from
Jatropha curcas screw-pressed seed cake and toxic and antinutritional factors in

protein concentrate. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 88, 1542-
1548.

Martinez-Herrera, J ., P. Siddhuraju, G. Francis, G. Davila-Ortiz & K. Becker
(2006) Chemical composition, toxic/antimetabolic constituents, and effects of

different treatments on their levels, in four provenances of J atropha curcas L.
from Mexico. Food Chemistry, 96, 80-89.

McCormick, R. L., T. Alleman, A. Williams, Y. Coy, A. Hudgins & W. Dafoe.
2009. Status and Issues for Biodiesel in the United States.

Micklin, P. P. (1988) Desiccation Of The Aral Sea - A Water Management
Disaster In The Soviet-Union. Science, 241, 1 170-1175.

106

112.

113.

114.

115.

116.

117.

118.

119.

120.

121.

Milgate, J. & D. C. K. Roberts (1995) The Nutritional And Biological
Significance Of Saponins. Nutrition Research, 15, 1223-1249.

Morison, J. I. L., N. R. Baker, P. M. Mullineaux & W. J. Davies (2008)
Improving water use in crop production. Philosophical Transactions of the
Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 363, 639-658.

Mosher, J. F . & D. E. Beauchamp (1983) Justifying Alcohol Taxes to Public
Officials. Journal of Public Health Policy, 4, 422-439.

Moss, G. P. (1996) Basic terminology of stereochemistry. Pure and Applied
Chemistry, 68, 2193-2222.

Murugesan, A., C. Umarani, R. Subramanian & N. Nedunchezhian (2009) Bio-
diesel as an alternative fuel for diesel engines-A review. Renewable &amp;
Sustainable Energy Reviews, 13, 653-662.

Ndong, R., M. Montrejaud-Vignoles, 0. Saint Girons, B. Gabrielle, R. Pirot, M.
Domergue & C. Sablayrolles (2009) Life cycle assessment of biofuels from
Jatropha curcas in West Africa: a field study. GCB Bioenergy, 1, 197-210.

Nelson, G. C. & R. D. Robertson (2008) Green gold or green wash:
environmental consequences of biofuels in the developing world. Review of
Agricultural Economics (Boston), 30, 517-529.

Ogunwole, J. O., D. R. Chaudhary, A. Ghosh, C. K. Daudu, J. Chikara & J. S.
Patolia (2008) Contribution of J atropha curcas to soil quality improvement in a
degraded Indian entisol. Acta Agriculture Scandinavica. Section B, Plant Soil
Science, 58, 245-251.

Onyekakeyah, L. Lake Chad: A Study of a Drying Freshwater Bod. Guardian
Newspapers.

Openshaw, K. (2000) A review of Jatropha curcas: an oil plant of unfulfilled
promise. Biomass & Bioenergy, 19, 1-15.

107

122.

123.

124.

125.

126.

127.

128.

129.

130.

Ovando-Medina, 1., F. Espinosa-Garcia, J. Nufiez-Farfan & M. Salvador-
Figueroa (2009) Does Biodiesel fiom Jatropha Curcas Represent a Sustainable
Alternative Energy Source? Sustainability, 1, 1035-1041 .

Pennington, D. W., J. Potting, G. Finnveden, E. Lindeijer, O. Jolliet, T. Rydberg
& G. Rebitzer (2004) Life cycle assessment Part 2: Current impact assessment
practice. Environment International, 30, 721-739.

Pfister, S. & S. Hellweg (2009) The water shoesize vs. footprint of bioenergy.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of
America, 106, E93-E94.

Pimentel, D. (2009) Biofuel food disasters and cellulosic ethanol problems.
Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society, 29, 205-212.

Pimentel, D., A. Marklein, M. A. Toth, M. N. Karpoff, G. S. Paul, R.
McCormack, J. Kyriazis & T. Krueger (2009) Food Versus Biofuels:
Environmental and Economic Costs. Human Ecology, 37, 1-12.

Pimentel, D. & T. Patzek (2006) Green plants, fossil fuels, and now biofuels.
Bioscience, 56, 875-875.

Pingali, P., T. Raney & K. Wiebe (2008) Biofuels and food security: Missing the
point. Review of Agricultural Economics, 30, 506-516.

Pinzi, S., I. L. Garcia, F. J. Lopez-Gimenez, M. D. L. de Castro, G. Dorado &
M. P. Dorado (2009) The Ideal Vegetable Oil-based Biodiesel Composition: A

Review of Social, Economical and Technical Implications. Energy & Fuels, 23,
2325-2341.

Potivejkul, S., V. Kinnares & P. Rattanavichien. 1998. Design of ozone

generator using solar energy. In Circuits and Systems (The 1998 IEEE Asia-
Pacific Conference), 217-220.

108

131.

132.

133.

134.

135.

136.

137.

138.

139.

Powlson, D. S., A. B. Riche & 1. Shield (2005) Biofuels and other approaches
for decreasing fossil fuel emissions from agriculture. Annals of Applied Biology,
146, 193-201.

Price, F. 2005. The Bakassi Peninsula: The Border Dispute betwen Nigeria and
Cameroon. In ICE Case Studies.

Prueksakom, K. & S. H. Gheewa1a(2008) Full chain energy analysis of
biodiesel from J atropha curcas L. in Thailand. Environmental Science &
Technology, 42, 3388-3393.

Ragauskas, A. J ., C. K. Williams, B. H. Davison, G. Britovsek, J. Caimey, C. A.
Eckert, W. J. Frederick, J. P. Hallett, D. J. Leak, C. L. Liotta, J. R. Mielenz, R.
Murphy, R. Templer & T. Tschaplinski (2006) The path forward for biofuels
and biomaterials. Science, 311, 484-489.

Rakshit, K. D., J. Darukeshwara, K. R. Raj, K. Narasimhamurthy, P. Saibaba &
S. Bhagya (2008) Toxicity studies of detoxified J atropha meal (J atropha curcas)
in rats. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 46, 3621-3625.

Raneses, A. R., L. K. Glaser, J. M. Price & J. A. Duffreld (1999) Potential

biodiesel markets and their economic effects on the agricultural sector of the
United States. Industrial Crops and Products, 9, 151-162.

Rebitzer, G., T. Ekvall, R. F rischknecht, D. Hunkeler, G. Norris, T. Rydberg, W.
P. Schmidt, S. Suh, B. P. Weidema & D. W. Pennington (2004) Life cycle
assessment Part 1: Framework, goal and scope definition, inventory analysis,
and applications. Environment International, 30, 701-720.

Reddy, N. R. & M. D. Pierson (1994) Reduction In Antinutritional And Toxic
Components In Plant Foods (A) By Fermentation. Food Research International,
27, 281-290.

Rees-Mogg, A. 2007. Investing in water, water stocks, water crisis. In
MoneyWeek.

109

140.

141.

142.

143.

144.

145.

146.

147.

148.

149.

Reinhardt, G., S. Gartner, N. Rettenmaier, J. Munch & E. von F alkenstein. 2007.
Screening Life Cycle Assessment of Jatropha Biofuel. Heidelberg: Daimler AG,
Struttgart.

Rohrlich, M., M. Mistry, P. N. Martens, S. Buntenbach, M. Ruhrberg, M.
Dienhart, S. Briem, R. Quinkertz, Z. Alkan & K. Kugeler (2000) A Method to
Calculate the Cumulative Energy Demand (CED) of Lignite Extraction. Int. J.
LCA, 5, 369 - 373.

Rowlett, R. 2001. How Many? A Dictionary of Units of Measurement.
httpzllwww.unc.edul~rowlett/unitsldictG.html#gray

Runge, C. F. & B. Senauer (2007) How biofiiels could starve the poor. Foreign
Aflairs, 86, 41-48.

Sanderson, M. A., P. R. Adler, A. A. Boateng, M. D. Casler & G. Sarath (2006)
vaitchgrass as a biofuels feedstock in the USA. Canadian Journal of Plant
Science, 86, 1315-1325.

Scharlemann, J. P. W. & W. F. Laurance (2008) Environmental science - How
green are biofuels? Science, 319, 43-44.

Schenk, P. M., S. R. Thomas-Hall, E. Stephens, U. C. Marx, J. H. Mussgnug, C.
Posten, O. Kruse & B. Hankamer (2008) Second generation biofuels: high-
efficiency microalgae for biodiesel production. BioEnergy Research, 1, 20-43.

Searchinger, T., R. Heimlich, R. A. Houghton, F. X. Dong, A. Elobeid, J.
Fabiosa, S. Tokgoz, D. Hayes & T. H. Yu (2008) Use of US croplands for
biofuels increases greenhouse gases through emissions from land-use change.

Science, 319, 1238-1240.

Shay, E. G. (1993) Diesel Fuel From Vegetable-Oils - Status And Opportunities.
Biomass & Bioenergy, 4, 227-242.

Shihata, I. F. I. (1974) Destination Embargo Of Arab Oil - Its Legality Under
lntemational Law. American Journal of International Law, 68, 591-627.

110

150.

151.

152.

153.

154.

155.

156.

157.

158.

159.

Sims, R. E. H., W. Mabee, J. N. Saddler & M. Taylor (2010) An overview of
second generation biofuel technologies. Bioresource Technology, 101, 1570-
1 580.

Singleton, V. L. (1981) Naturally occurring food toxicants: phenolic substances
of plant origin common in foods. Advances in Food Research, 27, 149-242.

Smith, K. R. (1991) Allocating Responsibility For Global Warming - The
Natural Debt Index. Ambio, 20, 95-96.

Solomon, B. D., J. R. Barnes & K. E. Halvorsen (2007) Grain and cellulosic
ethanol: History, economics, and energy policy. Biomass and Bioenergy, 31,
416-425.

Songstad, D. D., P. Lakshmanan, J. Chen, W. Gibbons, S. Hughes & R. Nelson
(2009) Historical perspective of biofuels: learning from the past to rediscover
the fiiture. In Vitro Cellular Developmental Biology - Plant, 45, 189-192.

Spillman, S. 2006. Olive Oil vs. Petroleum Oil. Oil in Israel.
http://www.oilinisrael.net/oil-in-israel-articles/olive-oil-vs-petroleum-oil

Szklo, A., R. Schaefi‘er & F. Delgado (2007) Can one say ethanol is a real threat
to gasoline? Energy Policy, 35, 5411-5421.

TERI. The Energy Resources Institute, (TERI) India.

Tilman, D., J. Hill & C. Lehman (2006) Carbon-negative biofuels from low-
input high-diversity grassland biomass. Science, 314, 1598-1600.

Tilman, D., R. Socolow, J. A. Foley, J. Hill, E. Larson, L. Lynd, S. Pacala, J.
Reilly, T. Searchinger, C. Somerville & R. Williams (2009) Beneficial Biofuels-
The Food, Energy, and Environment Trilemma. Science, 325, 270-271.

111

160.

161.

162.

163.

164.

165.

166.

167.

168.

169.

Trabelsi, R., M. Zairi & H. Ben Dhia (2007) Groundwater salinization of the
Sfax superficial aquifer, Tunisia. Hydrogeology Journal, 15, 1341-1355.

Trabucco, A., W. Achten, J. van Orshoven, E. Mathijs & B. Muys (2008)
Sustainabilityof J atropha curcas for biofuel production: from global hype to
local solution.

Trostle, R. (2008) Global agricultural supply and demand: factors contributing
to the recent increase in food commodity prices. Electronic Outlook Report fiom
the Economic Research Service, 30 pp.

Van Damme, E. J. M., N. Lannoo & W. J. Peumans. 2008. Plant Lectins. In
Advances in Botanical Research, Vol 48, 107-209. London: Academic Press Ltd.

Van Damme, E. J. M., W. J. Peumans, A. Barre & P. Rouge (1998) Plant
lectins: A composite of several distinct families of structurally and evolutionary

related proteins with diverse biological roles. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences,
17, 575-692.

van der Poel, T. F. B., J. Blonk, D. J. van Zuilichem & M. G. van Oort (1990)
Thermal inactivation of lectins and trypsin inhibitor activity during steam

processing of dry beans (Phaseolus vulgaris) and effects on protein quality.
Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 53, 53 (2) 215-228.

Varghese, S. 2007. Biofuels and Global Water Challenges. IATP.

Verma, K. C. & A. K. Gaur (2009) Jatropha curcas L.: substitute for
conventional energy. World Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 5, 552-556.

Vitousek, P. M., H. A. Mooney, J. Lubchenco & J. M. Melillo (1997) Human
domination of Earth's ecosystems. Science, 277, 494-499.

Vogg, G., S. Achatz, A. Kettrup & H. Sandermann (1999) Fast, sensitive and
selective liquid chromatographic-tandem mass spectrometric determination of
tumor-promoting diterpene eaters. Journal of Chromatography A, 855, 563-573.

112

 

 

170.

171.

172.

173.

174.

175.

176.

177.

Vagen, T. G., R. Lal & B. R. Singh (2005) Soil carbon sequestration in sub-
Saharan Africa: a review. Land Degradation & Development, 16, 53-71.

Waddington, J. M., M. Strack & M. J. Greenwood (2010) Toward restoring the
net carbon sink function of degraded peatlands: Short-tenn response in C02
exchange to ecosystem-scale restoration. Journal of Geophysical Research-
Biogeosciences, l 15, 13.

Walser, J. & J. Anderlik. 2004. Rural Depopulation: What Does it Mean for the
Future Economic Health of Rural Areas and the Community Banks that Support
Them? FDIC Banking Review.

Westcott, P. C. 2007. Ethanol Expansion in the United States - How Will the
Agricultural Sector Adjust? USDA.

Whitaker, M. & G. Heath. 2009. Life Cycle Assessment of the Use of Jatropha
Biodiesel in Indian Locomotives. Colorado: National Renewable Energy
Laboratory.

Wink, M., C. Grimm, C. Koschmieder, F. Sporer & O. Bergeot (2000)
Sequestration of phorbolesters by the aposematically coloured bug Pachycoris

klugii (Heteroptera : Scutelleridae) feeding on J atropha curcas (Euphorbiaceae).
Chemoecology, 10, 179-1 84.

Xu, L. K. & T. C. Hsiao (2004) Predicted versus measured photosynthetic
water-use efficiency of crop stands under dynamically changing field
environments. Journal of Experimental Botany, 55, 2395-2411.

Ye, M., C. Y. Li, G. Francis & H. P. S. Makkar (2009) Current situation and
prospects of J atropha curcas as a multipurpose tree in China. Agroforestry
Systems, 76, 487-497.

113

1293 03083 635

“5
"I
H
Am
m3