My INSURER PTE LTD - Insurtech Innovation Award 2024
Modeling a nipa based biofuel industry
1. Modeling a Nipa-based
Bioethanol Industry
Fiorello B. Abenes, Ph.D.
STRIDE Faculty and Institutional Development Manager
Professor Emeritus, CalPoly University Pomona
8. 8
Nypa fruticans
Sap contains 10-‐20% sugar
Can be tapped 100 days for 50
years
Very efficient converter of solar
energy to sugar
9. 9
17-‐21 Sept, 1770, Captain James Cook arrived in
Savu, Indonesia, and recorded use of nipa palm
sugar:
– “I have already observed, that it is given
with the husks of rice to the hogs, and that
they grow enormously fat without taking
any other food: we were told also, that this
syrup is used to fatten their dogs and their
fowls…”
Voyages, by Captain James Cook
10. Natural Nipa Stands
Indonesia – 700,000 ha
Papua New Guinea – 500,000 ha
Malaysia – 20,000 ha
Philippines – 8,000 ha (20,000 total Mangrove
areas)
10
11. 11
8,000 ha of Philippine
Nipa can potentially
supply 96,000,000 L of
bioethanol.
13. How can a distributive Nipa bioethanol production
system fit under the mainstream centralized
bioethanol production system
13
14. T or F
Ethanol up to 190 proof (95% strength) can be produced
using simple reflux distillation.
Removal of the last 5% water from an ethanol solution
requires more complex methods.
Hydrous (water containing) ethanol can be used neat (at
100% rate) in a modified gasoline engine.
If the ethanol is to be blended with gasoline at any rate, the
ethanol must be completely anhydrous (dry) - 200 proof.
Otherwise, separation of the fuels will occur.
https://www.doe.gov.ph/energy-resources-alternative-fuels/biofuels/bioethanol
14
18. Green Futures
Innovation, Inc.
Bioethanol and cogeneration plant in San Mariano, Isabela
Total cost = Php 6,000,000,000
Utilizes sugarcane sources from 11,000 ha = 180,822 L/day
Capacity to produce 200,000 liters of anhydrous alcohol per day
Excess capacity = 19,178 L per day
18
19. Nipa Biorefineries in Cagayan
Nipa Stand = 1000 ha
Potential Ethanol Production 1 ha = 12,000 L of ETOH/yr
100 distributive biorefineries
Cost per biorefinery = Php 200,000
Total Php 20,000,000
19
22. 22
Nipa can supply more
ethanol than traditional
feedstocks per unit of
land area
23. 23
Green Futures spent Php 6,000,000 to produce 200,000 liters per day of pure ethanol
Nipa producer spends Php 200,000 to produce 60 L per day of 95% ethanol (equiv to
57pure)
Capital cost per Liter:
GF = 6,000,000/200,000 L = Php 30,000/L
NP = 200,000/57 L = Php 3,508/L
Nipa distributive biorefineries are 8.5X less expensive
than GF centralized biorefinery
Capital Cost
24. 24
Green Futures uses farm land produce 200,000 L/d
Nipa producers use mangrove land to produce 12,000 L/d of 95% ethanol (equiv to
11,400 L/d)
Land requirement per Liter:
GF = 11,000/200,000 = 550 sq m/L of arable land
NP = 1,000/11,400 = 877 sq m/L of mangrove land
Nipa and Sugarcane are non-competitive in land use
Land Utilization
25. 25
Sugar cane is seasonal; it takes 7 months to grow and
harvest
Nipa Sap is available year round
Nipa and Sugarcane are complementary
and enables GF to smooth out supply
chain
Feedstock Availability
26. Simple process improvements can more
than double the yield of Nipa Sap
Increased frequency of pre-treatment (i.e. beating) of stalks before
tapping
Longer stalks
Younger palms
Increased frequency of tapping (2X/day more than doubles the yield)
26
27. Simple process improvements can more
than double the yield of Ethanol
Increase anaerobic fermentation time
Reflux distillation process
27
28. The Model can be replicated in all areas where there
are BOTH Nipa stands and a large-scale biorefinery.
Biorefineries can sign supply contracts with Nipa
ethanol producers in the same manner that they
contract out sugar cane production
28
There are several disadvantages to using these feedstocks. Growing these feedstocks rely heavily on non-renewable fossil fuels and exploitation of forest lands which has negative social and environmental impacts. Furthermore, the collection for the sugar source of ethanol is usually practiced after cutting down the plant which consequently produces large biomass waste such as straw, leafs and tops as well as bagasse as residue after juice extraction.
Needless to say, growing these crops also require huge tracks of land, that are not available in our part of the world. The issue of using these lands for food vs fuel is ever present due to the population in these areas.
Palms, too, have been a sugar sources from the ancient times. Main sugar-yielding palms like coconut palm (Cocos nucifera), palmyra palm (Borassus flabellifer), sugar palm (Arenga pinnata) and nipa (Nypa fruticans) have all been tapped for their sweet sap. With palms, only the infructerence is cut off and the stalk is tapped daily to obtain the saps. For tall trees, this could be a problem since a tapper has to climb high to obtain the saps
Unless it is Nipa. Nipa lacks an upright stem: leaves and inflorescences simply arise from a branched rootstock. The palm develops a globose infructescence, at a height of about 1 m, which makes tapping for sap relatively easy. Saps are generally collected from stalks bearing young or mature infructescence. The cut infructescence is generally consumed as local dessert. Therefore, tapping results in no biomass wastes and does not have any deleterious effect on the palm growth. In terms of yield and management, tapping is easy, produces no waste and the environment protected, as it grows in brackish water environments where fresh and sea water mingle. Furthermore, Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations (FAO) has declared the nipa palm as a nonthreatened and underutilized palm in South Asia. Therefore, abundant nipa palms are available for sap collection purposes in this region.
In microeconomics, the utility maximization problem is the problem consumers face: "how should I spend my money in order to maximize my utility?