4.7 Article

Evaluation of bioenergy potential from coffee pulp trough System Dynamics

Journal

RENEWABLE ENERGY
Volume 165, Issue -, Pages 863-877

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2020.11.040

Keywords

Biomass; Coffee pulp; Renewable energy; Simulation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Biomass is considered a popular alternative for renewable energy due to its consistency and stability, with studies often conducted at a pilot scale. However, there is a lack of emphasis on studying the logistical operations and key variables enabling the feasibility of biomass as an energy source at an industrial scale.
In the last years, renewable energies have been proposed as a solution to mitigate climate change. In this sense, biomass has become a more popular alternative than other sources of renewable energy, such as solar energy and wind power. As its main advantage, biomass is obtained from organic material, which makes it consistent throughout the year. Studies on biomass as a source of energy are usually conducted at a pilot scale to determine its energetic potential. However, there is less emphasis on studying the logistic operations and key variables that enable the feasibility of biomass as a source of energy at an industrial scale. To address this gap, we study the potential of coffee pulp as a source of biomass, and consequently, as a source of energy. To this end, we use the System Dynamics methodology. First, we developed a simulation model where the results indicate that one ton of coffee pulp can produce 180 m(3) of biogas, which in turn can generate 0.41 MW of net electricity. Then, we performed a 20-year sensitivity analysis to identify the key variables ensuring electricity generation from coffee pulp which include: harvested area (hectares), cherry coffee yield (ton/ha), and efficient usage of coffee pulp. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available