Energy Balances and Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Crude Palm Oil Production System in Indonesia
Energy Balances and Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Crude Palm Oil Production System in Indonesia
Energy Balances and Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Crude Palm Oil Production System in Indonesia
Abstract.Indonesia is one of the largest palm oil producers in the world. The total exported crude palm oil (CPO) and its
derivatives in 2015 reached about 26.40 million tons or increase at 21% compared to the previous year (2014). However,
the further expansion of the CPO production system could potentially have environmental impacts. The objective of this
study is to analyze the energy balances and greenhouse gas emissions at mill P, PT X located in Sumatera Island. System
analysis approaches was applied to this study and the assessment was focused on a CPO production system in PT XYZ
located on the Sumatera Island. The system boundary was determined based on the field study. The data collection
consisted of all the input and output energy which involving all input materials (including fertilizers, herbicides,
pesticides, water, etc.) and energy consumption (consumption of diesel, electricity, etc.) starting from plantation activities
(at the oil palm plantation) to the conversion process (at the palm oil mill). The energy output from biodiesel was 480.46
GJ/ha (2014) and decreased to 450.79 GJ/ha (2015). Surplus energy from biogas was 15.21 GJ/ha (2014) and 13.57
GJ/ha (2015). The NEP was 494.56 GJ/ha and decreased to 317.84 GJ/ha. Meanwhile, the NER decreased from 3.27
(2014) to 3.17 (2015). The NEP in this mill is significantly higher than other related studies of similar palm oil
production system in other companies. The emission of the activities in the palm estate increased from 12.50
kgCO2eq/ton FFB to 22.057 kgCO2eq/ton FFB. In the palm oil mill, the emission decreased from 2,509.93 kgCO2eq/ton
CPO to 2,057.14 kgCO2eq/ton CPO.
INTRODUCTION
Indonesia is one of the largest crude palm oil producers in the world. The General Directorate of Estate [1]
estimated the crude palm oil production reached 30,948,951 tons in 2015. GAPKI also estimated that Indonesia
exported 26.40 million tons crude palm oil and its derivatives in 2015, or, increased up to 21% compared to exports
amount in 2014. Nevertheless, the sustainability of palm oil production is questionable according to some countries
and NGOs (Non-Governmental Organizations) [3, 4]. They claimed that further expansion could adversely affect the
environment, such as the increase of greenhouse gas emission due to peat land and forest conversion to oil palm
plantation. Not only the oil palm plantation, but also the palm oil mills could potentially affect the environment if
the wastes are not treated properly. The palm oil production system should be analyzed as a whole to identify
potential improvement strategy in order to reduce GHG emission as well as energy consumption.
Life-cycle assessment (LCA) is one of the tools that can be used. Researches on the LCA of palm oil and its
derivatives such as biofuel have been conducted in several countries, such as Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand.
Hidayatno et al. [5] studied the LCA of palm oil-based biodiesel production palm oil in Indonesia using cradle-to-
gate system. The largest environmental impact was climate change (40.52%), followed by photooxidant formation
(33.55%) and eutrophication (25.42%), according to Hidayatno et al [5]. If compared to another plant, i.e. Jatropha,
020064-1
the biodiesel derived from palm oil had larger environmental burden by 66% [6]. According to Aryapratama [7],
LCA results could be different based on the methods and material characteristics used in the production system.
The sustainability issue of palm oil production is not only related to the environmental impacts, but also the
energy consumption. The energy balance for a biofuel production system can be defined as the relation between the
energy produced (output per kg biodiesel) and the energy consumed (input per kg biodiesel) for each unit of product
[8]. In this study, it is assumed that the CPO will be converted to biofuel. Net energy balance comprises of total
energy consumption for the production (total energy input) and total yield energy (total energy output). The net
energy balance can be calculated from net energy ratio (NER) and net energy production (NEP). The higher the
positive values of NER and NEP, the better the performance of the production system.Therefore, the objective of
this study is to calculate and analyze the greenhouse gas emission and net energy balance of crude palm oil
production system in PT X located in Sumatera Island.
METHODS
020064-2
Fossil Primary
Water
resources Energy
System Boundary
Background Stage
Chemical
Energy Production
Production
Foreground stage
Fertilizer
Palm Estate
Land Application
FFB
WTP
Downstream
CPO
Industry
Kernel
Palm Oil Mill
Shell
Palm Kernel
Boiler
Oil Mill
Fiber
EFB
Incinerator Ash
020064-3
Where:
EF = output energy of biofuel (MJ/ha/yr)
EB = output energy of by-product (MJ/ha/yr)
EI = total energy input (MJ/ha/yr)
TABLE 1.Energy input in CPO production
No Item Unit Value Source
1 Urea (CH4N2O) MJ/Kg 33,2 [10]
2 Triple Super Phosphate (P2O5) MJ/Kg 2,8 [10]
3 Rock Phospate (P,Ca) MJ/Kg 1,3 [10]
4 Muriate of Potash (K,Cl) MJ/Kg 3,5 [10]
5 Kieserite (Mg) MJ/Kg 2 [10]
6 Dolomite (Mg, Ca) MJ/Kg 0,5 [10]
7 Herbicides MJ/Kg 215 [10]
8 Diesel Fuel MJ/Kg 47,6 [11]
9 Electricity MJ/Kg 10,47 [12]
10 NaOH MJ/Kg 19,87 [13]
11 Fosfat MJ/Kg 17,43 [13]
12 Sulfit MJ/Kg 0,0478 [14]
13 Alum MJ/Kg 212 [15]
14 Sodium Karbonat MJ/Kg 5,58 [16]
15 CaCO3 MJ/Kg 18 [18]
Where:
α = index for activity: production, transportation, and use of all inputs used in the palm estate and the
palm oil mill;
ε = index for pollutant emitted: CO2, CH4, N2O;
%Source = % source from FFB;
Aα =level of activity α (activity unit/year (y));
AFFB,α = level of activity α for palm estate (activity unit/t FFB/y);
ACPO,α = level of activity α for palm oil mill (activity unit/ton (t) CPO/y);
CPO = CPO produced (t CPO/y);
020064-4
FFB = FFB produced (t FFB/y);
EFFBε, α = emission of compound ε due to activity α for palm estate (kg pollutant/t FFB/y);
ECPOε, α = emission of compound ε due to activity α for palm oil mill (kg pollutant/t CPO/y);
EOverallε,α = total emission of compound ε due to activity α for palm oil production system (kg pollutant/t
CPO/y);
EFFB,ε = total emission of all activities in oil palm estate (kg pollutant/t FFB/y);
ECPO,ε = total emission of all activities in palm oil mill (kg pollutant/t CPO/y)
EOverall,ε = total emission of all activities in palm oil production system (kg pollutant/t CPO/y)
EFε,α = emission factor of compound εdue to activity α (g of compound ε/kg of activity α)
TABLE 2. Emission Factor
Activity Value Unit References
Emission factor for energy consumption and transportation
CO2 from biomass incineration 1.19 kg CO2eq/kg [20]
CO2 from diesel fuel consumption 3.14 kgCO2eq/liter [21]
Transportation and fuel consumption (loaded) 0.49 liter/km [21]
Transportation and fuel consumption (unloaded) 0.25 liter/km [21]
Emission from chemical substance consumption in boiler and Water Treating Plant
CO2 from NaOH consumption 0.47 kg CO2eq/kg [21]
CO2 from Phosphate consumption 3.01 kg CO2eq/kg [21]
CO2 from Sulphide consumption 1.50 kg CO2eq/kg [21]
CO2 from Alum consumption 0.53 kg CO2eq/kg [21]
CO2 from HCl consumption 0.75 kg CO2eq/kg [21]
CO2 from Sodium carbonate sonumption 1.19 kg CO2eq/kg [21]
CO2 from CaCO3 consumption 0.02 kg CO2eq/kg [21]
Emission from agrochemical production
Urea Fertilizer (kg N) 3.31 kg CO2eq/kg N [21]
N Fertilizer (kg N) 5.88 kg CO2eq/kg N [21]
P2O5 Fertilizer (kg P2O5) 1.01 kg CO2eq/kg [21]
K2O Fertilizer (kg K2O) 0.57 kg CO2eq/kg [21]
MgO Fertilizer (kg MgO) 1.07 kg CO2eq/kg [22]
CaO Fertilizer (kg CaO) 0.13 kg CO2eq/kg [21]
ZnSO4 Fertilizer (kg ZnSO4) 2.00 kg CO2eq/kg [22]
CuSO4 Fertilizer (kg CuSO4) 2.00 kg CO2eq/kg [22]
MgSO4 Fertilizer (kg MgSO4) 0.32 kg CO2eq/kg [22]
Borate Fertilizer (kg B2O3) 0.09 kg CO2eq/kg [22]
Herbicide, pesticide, rodenticide 10.97 kg CO2eq/kg [21]
Data Collection
According to the system boundary, there are background stage and foreground stage. Background stage is the
production system supporting the foreground stage. The emission coming from the background stage is indirect
emission from the crude palm oil production system. Meanwhile, background stage is the whole production system
that produces crude palm oil as the main product. The data were collected from mill P of PT X, located in Sumatera
Island for the year of 2014 and 2015.
020064-5
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
020064-6
TABLE 3. Energy input per activity
Process Input Unit Energy Input in 2014 Energy Input in 2015
If compared to Al Hakim’s study[25], the emission of the crude palm oil production system in Mill P, PT X are
still lower than those of PT Perkebunan Nusantara XII, Indonesia, i.e. 172.41 kgCO2eq in palm estate and 1,296.1
kgCO2eq in palm oil mill. According to Harsono et al [26], the palm estate could have high emission of greenhouse
gases if the land-use change (LUC) impact was calculated. The emission from the oil palm plantation was 5626.43
kgCO2eq including LUC emission. The similar study in Thailand [17] showed that the emission of activities in palm
plantation was 57 kgCO2eq/ton/yr FFB while in palm oil mill was 2,332 kgCO2eq/ton CPO/yr. In Thailand, the
crude palm oil production system was still applying chemical fertilizer and herbicide frequently. Furthermore, the
EFBs were not treated properly in an open dumping [17]. From those comparisons, it is clear that this company
relatively manage the emission properly, but, of course, the process could be more optimized, i.e. composting of
020064-7
EFB as the alternative processing for EFB. Hence, the emission from EFB incineration could be omitted. Although
the composting process also emits greenhouse gas emission, the emission factor is far below the incineration
process, i.e. the emission factor of composting is 0.1 kgCO2eq/kg [27] while those of biomass incineration is 1.19
kgCO2eq/kg [20].
TABLE 4. Greenhouse gases emission from oil palm estate
2014 2015
GHG
Source Emission GHG Emission
Activity level (unit Activity level (unit
(kgCO2eq (kgCO2eq per
per 1 ton FFB) per 1 ton FFB)
per ton ton FFB)
FFB)
Oil Palm Estate CO2
020064-8
TABLE 5. Greenhouse gases emission in Palm Oil Mill
2014 2015
CONCLUSIONS
The energy output from biodiesel was 480.46 GJ/ha (2014) and decreased to 450.79 GJ/ha (2015) due to
decreased CPO produced in the palm oil mill. Surplus energy from biogas was 1.155 MJ/kg bodiesel or 15.21 GJ/ha
(2014) and 1.099 MJ/kg biodiesel or 13.57 GJ/ha (2015). In the hectare basis, the NEP was 494.56 GJ/ha and
decreased to 317.84 GJ/ha. Meanwhile, the NER decreased from 3.27 (2014) to 3.17 (2015). The NEP in this mill is
significantly higher than other related studies of similar palm oil production system in other companies.
The emission of the activities in the palm estate increased from 12.50 kgCO2eq/ton FFB to 22.057 kgCO2eq/ton
FFB. In the palm oil mill, the emission decreased from 2,509.93 kgCO2eq/ton CPO to 2,057.14 kgCO2eq/ton CPO.
Mill P of PT X, relatively manages the emission properly mainly because the waste was treated and the POME was
converted to biogas for electricity. However, the process could be more optimized, i.e. composting of EFB as the
alternative processing for EFB, because the emission from EFB incineration was the highest of those in the mill
activities (1,0831.86 - 1,513.22 kgCO2eq/ton CPO/yr).
020064-9
REFERENCES
1. Directorate General of Estate Crops,Statistics of Estates in Indonesia 2013-2015(Directorate General of Estate
Crops, Jakarta, 2014).
2. GAPKI (GabunganPengusahaKelapaSawit Indonesia), “Reflection of Palm Oil Industry 2015 and its Prospect
in 2016,” Pers Conference GAPKI. http://www.gapki.or.id/Page/PressReleaseDetail?guid=39f6f3f2-0419-
42d4-8d1b-9524871d3cf2,accessed on April 20, 2016.
3. W. F. Laurance, L. P. Koh, R. Butler andN. S. Sodhi, Conserv. Biol.24, 377-381 (2010).
4. C. M. Yule, Biodivers. Conserv. 19, 393-409 (2010).
5. A. Hidayatno, T. Y. M. Zagloel, W. W. Purwanto, Carissa andL. Anggraini, Makara Journal of Technology15,
1, 9-16 (2011).
6. N. Nazir and D. Setyaningsih, “Life cycle assessment of biodiesel production from palm oil and Jatropha oil in
Indonesia,”in Biomass as Sustainable Energy, 7thBiomass Asia Workshop Proceedings(BPPT, Jakarta, 2010).
7. R. Aryapratama, “A Review on Life Cycle and Water Footprint Assessment of Biofuels: Towards Sustainable
Environment, Water, and Energy Security of Indonesia,”in Empowering National Pride with Knowledge
Collaboration, Conference Proceeding of The 6th Conference of Indonesian Students Association in Korea –
CISAK(Indonesian Students Association in Korea, Daejeon, 2013).
8. E. E. Y. Angarita, E. Lora, R. E. Da Costa and E. A. Torres, Renew. Energ.34,12, 2905-2913(2009).
9. H. Kamahara, U. Hasanudin, A. Widiyanto, R. Tachibana, Y. Atsuta, N. Goto, H. Daimon and K.Fujie,
Biomass Bioenerg.34, 1818-1824 (2010).
10. F. C. Boswell, J. J.Meisinger and N. L. Case, “Production, marketing, and use of nitrogen fertilizers,” in
Fertilizer technology and use, edited byO. P. Engelstad (Soil Sci. Soc. Am., Madison, Wisconsin, 1985), pp.
229-292.
11. M. S. Mudahar and T. P. Hignett, “Energy in plant nutrition and pest control,” inEnergy requirements,
technology, and resources in fertilizer sector. Ch. 2, Energy in world agriculture, vol. 2, edited by Z. R. Hesel
(Elsivier, Amsterdam, 1987), pp. 25-61.
12. Petroleum Energy Center, Report for making LCI of petroleum product by each oil type and environmental
impact assessment of petroleum product, 2000 [in Japanese].
13. A. Widiyanto, S. Kato, N. Maruyama, A. Nishimura and S.Sampattagul, “Environmental impacts evaluation
ofelectricity grid mix systems in four selected countries using a life cycle assessment point of view,”in
Environmentally Conscious Design and Inverse Manufacturing, IEEE Conference Proceedings Cat.
No.03EX895 (IEEE, Tokyo), pp. 26-33.
14. L. O. Williams, An End to Global Warming,(PERGAMON An Imprint Elsevier Science, UK, 2002).
15. J. A. S. Green, Aluminum Recycling and Processing for Energy Conservation and Sustainability(ASM
International, Ohio, 2007).
16. W. J. Rankin, Minerals, Metals and Sustainability: Meeting Future Material Needs (CSIRO Publishing,
Netherlands, 2011).
17. Weingaertner, The Extractive Crystallization of Sodium Chloride and Sodium Carbonate(University of
California, Berkeley, 1988).
18. A. V. Bridgwater, Developments in Thermochemical Biomass Conversion: Volume 2. Chemical Engineering
and Applied Chemistry (Aston University, Birmingham UK, 1998).
19. K. Saswattecha, C.Kroeze, W. Jawjit andL. Hein, J. Clean. Prod.100, 150-169 (2015).
20. J. H. Schmidt, “Life cycle assessment of rapeseed oil and palm oil,” Summary Report, Department of
Development and Planning, Aalborg University, 2007.
21. ISCC emission factors, ISCC 11-03-15, V 2.3-EU.
22. Ecoinvent, The ecoinvent Database Version 2.2 [WWW Document].Ecoinvent Assoc. URL.
http://www.ecoinvent.org/database/ accessed on Sep 28, 2016.
23. K. F. Yee, K. T. Tan, A. Z. Abdullah and K. T. Lee, Appl. Energ.86, 189–196 (2009).
24. A. Sugiyono, “Possibility of palm oil derived biodiesel as diesel fuel substitusion in Indonesia,” in Prospect of
Biofuel Development as Fuel, edited by H. S. Suharyonoand A. Nurrohim (BPPT, Jakarta, 2010), pp 29-39 [in
Indonesian Language].
020064-10
25. H. M. Al-Hakim, “Life cycle assessment (LCA) of crude palm oil (CPO) of plantation and mill in Plaihari PT
Perkebunan Nusantara XIII,” Thesis, University of GadjahMada, 2013 [in Indonesian Language].
26. S. S. Harsono, A. Prochnow, P. Grundmann, A. Hansen and C. Hallmann, GCB Bioenergy 4, 213-228 (2012).
27. S. Bellon and S. Penvern, Organic Farming, Prototype for Sustainable Agriculture(Springer, London, 2014).
020064-11