Renewable Energy 149 (2020) 1339e1351

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/renene

Oleaginous feedstocks for hydro-processed esters and fatty acids

(HEFA) biojet production in southeastern Brazil: A multi-criteria
decision analysis
Lorena Mendes de Souza a, c, *, Pietro A.S. Mendes b, Donato A.G. Aranda c
a
Centro de Pesquisas e Ana
lises Tecnolo

gicas (CPT), Ag^
encia Nacional do Petro
leo, Ga


s Natural e Biocombustíveis (ANP), Setor de Grandes Areas Norte 603 -
Asa Norte, Brasília, DF, 70830-902, Brazil
b
Ag^encia Nacional do Petro
leo, Ga
s Natural e Biocombustíveis (ANP), Av. Rio Branco, 65 - Centro, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, 20090-003, Brazil
c
Programa de Po
s-Graduaça ~o em Engenharia de Processos Químicos e Bioquímicos (EPQB), Escola de Química (EQ), Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro
(UFRJ), Av. Athos da Silveira Ramos, 149, Cidade Universita
ria, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, 21941-909, Brazil

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This work establishes a ranking of the potential oleaginous feedstocks for HEFA biojet production in
Received 27 March 2019 southeast Brazil, and consolidates their advantages and limitations, in order to assist in prioritizing
Received in revised form strategic actions, such as research, R&D investment, and incentives for the most promising regional
28 August 2019
oilseeds. The oilseeds and the criteria considered were determined from a bibliographical review, using
Accepted 22 October 2019
Available online 24 October 2019
two multi-criteria tools in the evaluation: the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and the Technique for
Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS). The economic criterion and the oil cost sub-
criterion were considered the determining factors for the choice of oilseeds, which obtained the
Keywords:
Biojet
following ranking: soybean, jatropha, sunflower, castor bean, macauba palm, cotton, and peanut. Soy-
Hydro-processed Esters and Fatty Acids bean ranked first mainly because of the lower cost of its oil and high agricultural maturity. Hence,
(HEFA) soybean should be used first in HEFA biojet production. However, considering that soybean oil is the
Oleaginous feedstocks main feedstock for biodiesel production in the country, it is also important to evaluate other potential
Multi-criteria decision analysis crops. Thus, stimulating research aimed at reaching the technological domain of new local oleaginous
Analytic hierarchy process (AHP) plants is essential to increase the scale of production, reduce oil costs, and make HEFA production more
Technique for Order of Preference by competitive and sustainable.
Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS)
© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction total international civil aviation carbon emissions above 2020

The air transport sector accounts for approximately 2% of global
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions [1]. To reduce this contribution, in
2009, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) set the
goal of capping net emissions through carbon-neutral growth from
2020 and cutting net emissions in half by 2050, compared with
2005 [1]. With this in mind, the ICAO, with the participation of
almost 200 countries, approved the Carbon Offsetting and Reduc-
tion Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA) [2]. The scheme
provides for the limitation and offsetting of any annual increase in
* Corresponding author. Centro de Pesquisas e An
alises Tecnolo
gicas (CPT),
^ncia Nacional do Petro
Age
leo, G

as Natural e Biocombustíveis (ANP), Setor de


Grandes Areas Norte 603 - Asa Norte, Brasília, DF, 70830-902, Brazil.
E-mail addresses: lmsouza@anp.gov.br, enamendes@hotmail.com (L.M. de
Souza), pmendes@anp.gov.br (P.A.S. Mendes), donato@eq.ufrj.br (D.A.G. Aranda).
levels. National emission reduction commitments were taken
through Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) under the
Paris Agreement signed at the 21st Conference on Climate Change
(COP 21). The commitment assumed by Brazil is to reduce its
emissions by 37% by 2025 and 43% by 2030, based on 2005 emis-
sions [3]. To honor the commitment, one of the measures of the
Brazilian Government was the creation of the National Biofuels
Policy (RenovaBio), in December 2016 [4]. The program aims to
promote the expansion of biofuels in the Brazilian national energy
matrix [5] via the creation of the Biocarbon Decarbonation Credit
(CBIO), a kind of carbon market coin to price the contribution of
each agent into reduction targets.
The use of biojet produced from renewable feedstocks can
contribute to achieving these ambitious targets [6e10] due to its
potential to reduce CO2 emissions by up to 80% throughout the life
cycle of biojet production and use [1]. Nevertheless, the use of

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2019.10.125
0960-1481/© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1340 L.M. de Souza et al. / Renewable Energy 149 (2020) 1339e1351
biofuels in Brazilian aviation is still negligible because they are
considered to have low competitiveness with fossil jet fuels [11,12].
This is because there are so many challenges to be overcome in the
biojet market [10e22]. One in particular relates to feedstock for this
form of biofuel production [7,13,23]. Connelly et al. [13] identified
the main actions necessary to promote the biojet market across the
world. Out of 37 actions ranked based on multi-criteria analysis, the
most important was ‘investing in research to reach more produc-
tive feedstock’.
To address this challenge, several studies have been conducted
to solve the technical and economic challenges related to feed-
stocks for hydro-processed esters and fatty acids (HEFA) biojet
production [24e32]. Although these studies seek to mitigate this
bottleneck, there are no studies comparing the raw materials for
biojet production from multiple aspects, that is, from multi-criteria
evaluation. Studies of this nature have already been carried out
around the world for biodiesel production, a more mature market
than the biojet market [33e38], and for bioenergy production in
Africa [39].
For a multi-criteria evaluation of bioenergy feedstocks for biojet
production in Brazil, it is necessary to first define the production
process, as different processes are associated with the use of
different feedstocks. In terms of process complexity, yield, market
maturity, and economic viability, the most advantageous biojet
production process among all internationally approved processes is
the HEFA [40e43], produced by hydrotreatment of oil such as
vegetable oil. Brazil, although not yet producing biojet, already has
great experience with hydrotreating. This technological process is
already used in Petrobras’ Brazilian oil refineries to remove sulfur,
nitrogen, oxygen, and aromatics from mineral diesel. In addition, in
2006, Petrobras patented a renewable diesel production technol-
ogy (H-Bio), by adding up to 10% vegetable oil to the diesel-refining
process in the hydrotreating units [44]. Petrobras is today the
leading company with the expertise and infrastructure to start
biojet production in the country, and will certainly be the pioneer
in the production of this biofuel in Brazil. The current context of
national and international pressure to reduce aviation emissions
has created an opportunity for the company to include biofuel
production in its investment plan. In December 2018, Petrobras’
Board of Directors approved the Business and Management Plan for
2019 to 2023, which signals Petrobras’ participation in biojet pro-
duction in plants integrated with oil refineries [45]. The evaluation
of strategic feedstocks, in this case, may assist Petrobras in making
the biojet production project viable, based on the technical analysis
of oilseeds, which represents about 70% of the total cost of biojet
production.
To evaluate potential oleaginous feedstocks for HEFA biojet
production in Brazil, it is also important to consider the use of
regional crops in specific production systems, as each region has a
soil and climate that favors a different type of feedstock cultivation
[46]. Diversification of production at the regional level should be
considered not only due to climatic, market, infrastructure, and
regional development differences, but also due to logistic issues
[47]. Of the five Brazilian regions, the southeast of Brazil has the
largest concentration of consumption of fossil jet fuel, 64% in 2017
[48]. The use of local feedstocks in this region can facilitate the
production of biojet around this large consumer center. Given the
wide range of vegetable oil feedstocks available for biojet produc-
tion in the southeast region, it is necessary to consider the advan-
tages and limitations of each one, based on efficient technical
criteria, to judge the best alternative. Furthermore, choosing the
best alternative from multiple technical criteria is critical in helping
decision-makers direct efforts, resources, investment, and research.
Clemen [49] indicates that decision-making is a complex pro-
cess because it involves different perspectives that may lead to
different conclusions. Thus, in the search for better results, the
authors [49] specify that it is essential to differentiate a good de-
cision from a lucky decision. The first is based on a rational process,
resulting from the analysis of different variables. However, the
second is not necessarily made based on a rational and safe process,
but is simply a decision that, luckily, brings a good result. According
to the authors, from a normative point of view, the first differs from
the second because it is the result of a rationally elaborated process
that can be repeated and will bring the same results of analysis.
Thus, it is important to create a framework for analysis that will
provide decision-makers with guidance on the best way forward
from the various variables involved. An interesting tool for this
judgment is multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA), which can be
very useful in decision-making processes that involve prioritizing
one alternative over others in a situation in which decisions need to
be guided by objective and transparent technical criteria [50,51].
Decisions involving complex issues with high uncertainty, con-
flicting objectives, and multiple interests and perspectives are
taken efficiently from MCDA [52e54].
Several MCDA tools are available, and it is almost impossible to
decide which one is the best method [55]. Løken [54] states that the
ideal one must be easy to use and to understand. Two important
multi-criteria tools that satisfy this are the analytic hierarchy pro-
cess (AHP) and the Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity
to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) [56,57]. The AHP, one of the most recent
and talked-about MCDA techniques, can efficiently handle tangible
as well as intangible criteria [55]. TOPSIS is more efficient in
handling tangible attributes, and there is no limit in terms of
number of criteria or alternatives [55]. Previous studies [56e63]
have already used the combination of these tools in decisions
involving renewable energy.
Against this background, this work aims to rank the potential
oleaginous feedstocks for biojet production in the Brazilian region
with the highest consumption of fossil jet fuel: southeast Brazil
[48], and consolidates their advantages and limitations. The present
work complements the study by Souza et al. [12], which reviewed
the current scenario of the Brazilian biojet market, as well as its
main uncertainties. The authors [12] made recommendations to
mitigate these uncertainties, including a multi-criteria evaluation
to select feedstocks for biojet production. Besides contributing to
the mitigation of the main bottleneck of this market, the study will
allow decision-makers, stakeholders, and researchers to direct
policies, investment, and research to the most promising oleagi-
nous feedstocks in a strategic way, based on technical criteria. The
proposed study is one of the actions that aims to position Brazil as a
world leader in biojet production and use, contributing to the
achievement of the national and international goals of GHG
reduction and also to regional development, through the genera-
tion of employment, income, and development of the regional in-
dustry. Beyond that, this work may guide future studies of multi-
criteria analysis which seek to select oleaginous feedstock for bio-
jet production in other regions and countries.
2. Aspects of production, quality, and regulation of biojet in
Brazil
Biojet can be obtained through different production processes,
including: 1. chemical processes, through the hydroprocessing of
oils; 2. biochemical processes, from the use of genetically modified
yeast or bacteria; and 3. thermochemical processes, from cracking,
gasification, and catalytic synthesis [11]. However, not all biojet
production processes are approved for production and use in
aircraft. To approve a new process, American Society for Testing and
Materials (ASTM) International approval is required based on tests
provided by ASTM D4054 [64]. Once approved, the specification is
 L.M. de Souza et al. / Renewable Energy 149 (2020) 1339e1351
included in ASTM D7566 [65], which sets out the minimum quality
requirements of alternative jet fuel. In Brazil, ANP Resolution 778/
2019 [66], which is based on the ASTM approval process, provides
the quality regulation of this fuel.
Currently, only five alternative jet fuels are approved by ASTM
International, and consequently by Brazil [65,66]: FischereTropsch
Synthesized Paraffinic Kerosene (FT-SPK) and Aromatic
FischereTropsch (FT-SPK/A), produced by the thermochemical
method; Synthesized Iso-Paraffins (SIP) and Aviation Fuel Alcohol
(ATJ-SPK), produced by the biochemical method; and Synthesized
Paraffinic Kerosene of Hydroprocessed Esters and Fatty Acids
(HEFA), produced by the chemical method. All can be considered
biojet if renewable raw material is used. Biojets produced by other
processes, such as hydrothermolysis, fast pyrolysis and hydro-
deoxygenation, are under testing at ASTM and have not yet been
approved [67].
As presented in section 1, of the five approved routes, the HEFA
biojet is the most advantageous in terms of process complexity,
yield, market maturity, and economic viability. Neuling and
Kaltschmitt [40] evaluated the complexity of the processes
involved in biojet production, and concluded that HEFA is the least
complex process because it is the only conversion pathway that
uses direct biosynthesis. The authors [40] also state that HEFA is the
process that results in the best yields, also contributing to a more
mature biojet in the global market. Vonortas and Papayannakos
[43], and Vasquez et al. [42], indicate that HEFA is the most widely
used biojet production process because it can be used in existing
refinery infrastructure. De Jong et al. [41] evaluated the short-term
economic viability of biojet production routes and concluded that
the HEFA process is the best short-term option because the tech-
nology has lower costs.
The HEFA process involves triglyceride hydrogenation and
deoxygenation reactions in the presence of catalysts to remove
unsaturated carbon chains and oxygen from fatty acids. The
removal of unsaturated carbon chains considerably improves the
stability of the final fuel. In turn, the removal of oxygen ensures low
reactivity with water and increased calorific power. These reactions
occur under temperature conditions ranging from 250 to 450
C
and hydrogen pressure of 10e300 bar, depending on the reactor
configuration and catalyst used [68]. Because lipids generally have
mostly aliphatic chains containing 16 to 20 carbon atoms, the
deoxygenation process leads to the formation of long-chain hy-
drocarbons that need to be broken down into smaller and more
branched chains. The ramifications considerably favor the reduc-
tion of biojet freezing temperature, as required by aircraft subjected
to high altitudes and low temperatures [69]. Thus, in addition to
hydrogenation and deoxygenation, an additional or simultaneous
step involving cracking and isomerization reactions is required
[68]. In the isomerization step, linear hydrocarbons are converted
to branched species of the same molecular formula in the presence
of a catalyst. Several types of catalysts can be employed in both
cracking and isomerization, such as sulfonated metals, noble
metals, bimetallic materials, and oxides [68]. Metal-based catalysts
are generally the most efficient for deoxygenation reactions. By
contrast, acid catalysts act mainly in cracking and isomerization
reactions [68].
For biojet HEFA production, it is ideal that vegetable oil has few
unsaturation. The more saturated the oil, the lower the hydrogen
consumption in the hydrogenation step. The hydrogen required in
the HEFA biojet production steps can be generated by water elec-
trolysis, catalytic reforming, or synthesis gas separation. Thus, for
the short-term viability of HEFA biojet production in Brazil, it is
essential to use the infrastructure of existing mineral oil-refining
units. This is because the refineries already have hydrogen pro-
duction plants based on partial oxidation of heavy hydrocarbon
1341
fractions, or steam reforming of light fractions and natural gas [70].
There is also the possibility of integrating non-petroleum hydro-
carbon gasification processes, such as biomass, for combined-cycle
electricity generation (integrated gasification combined cycle, or
IGCC) producing hydrogen [70,71].
Finally, it is noteworthy that the HEFA biojet produced from the
process described above must meet the minimum quality re-
quirements of ASTM D7566 [65] and ANP Resolution 778/2019 [66],
regardless of the oil used as feedstock. This is because ASTM defines
the HEFA biojet as paraffin kerosene obtained by the hydrogenation
of free fatty acids and fatty acid esters that meet the expected
specification. Thus, any fatty acids from different oils can be used,
requiring process adjustments, such as a more severe pretreatment
of oil to remove acidity or a higher demand for hydrogen to saturate
the chain, so that the final product meets the stated specification.
3. Methodological procedures
3.1. Oleaginous feedstocks evaluated
In Brazil, several crops with high oil content and high energy
density are being evaluated for HEFA biojet production. To choose
the oilseeds to be evaluated in this work, research was conducted
on studies published in peer-reviewed journals in the last 15 years
(January 2002 to January 2017) from the Scopus database that cite
oilseeds for biojet production in Brazil. To make the review more
efficient, an advanced search using the conjunctions “AND” and
“OR” was considered. The term “biojet”, commonly used to refer to
aviation biofuels, is not a ubiquitous term in the literature. Different
studies use various terms such as “biokerosene”, “renewable avia-
tion fuel”, “alternative aviation fuel”, and others. In addition, the
terms “oilseed” and “vegetable oils” can be used to describe high-
oil raw materials in their composition. Thus, the following key-
words were considered: (biojet OR “aviation biofuel” OR “renew-
able jet fuel” OR “aviation renewable fuel” OR “renewable aviation
fuel” OR biokerosene OR “alternative aviation fuel” OR “alternative
jet fuel” OR “alternative kerosene”) AND (“oilseeds” OR “oilseed”
OR “vegetable oils”) AND (brazil*). The asterisk (*) was used in
“brazil*" because it allows searching for all variations of the term.
Thus, the terms “brazil”, “brazilian”, and “brazilians” were included.
From the search, 55 articles were found and 25 were selected for
citing at least one oilseed for biojet production in Brazil. The
feedstocks available in the southeast region of Brazil that were
most cited in the selected works were: soybean (16 references),
followed by jatropha (14 references), sunflower (11 references),
peanut (7 references), cotton (6 references), and castor bean (5
references). In addition to the six most cited feedstocks, macauba
palm was included in the assessment due to the Pro-macauba Law
(Law No. 19,485, of January 13, 2011) [72], which established the
state policy to encourage cultivation, extraction, marketing, con-
sumption and processing of macauba. The law aims to stimulate
and make the macauba supply chain sustainable for biojet pro-
duction in the country.
Table 1 shows the oleaginous feedstocks evaluations, as well as
the references consulted.
3.2. Setting the assessment criteria and sub-criteria
To select the criteria and sub-criteria, the authors searched
through the scientific articles of the Scopus database for the main
desirable parameters for the success of oleaginous feedstocks in
HEFA biojet production. The search was based on studies published
in peer-reviewed journals in the last 15 years (January 2002 to
January 2017). The following keywords were used: (biojet OR
“aviation biofuel” OR “renewable jet fuel” OR “aviation renewable
1342 L.M. de Souza et al. / Renewable Energy 149 (2020) 1339e1351

Table 1
Oleaginous feedstocks evaluated.

Oleaginous Feedstocks Name References

Cotton (Gossypium sp.) F1 [19,20,73e76]

Peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) F2 [19,20,73,75e78]
Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) F3 [10,16,19,73e80]
Macauba palm (Acrocomia aculeata.) F4 [76,81]
Castor bean (Ricinus communis L.) F5 [20,73,76,82,83]
Jatropha (Jatropha curcas L.) F6 [19e21,40,75e78,83e88]
Soybean (Glycine max L.) F7 [10,16,19e22,40,73e77,80,83,87,89]

fuel” OR “renewable aviation fuel” OR biokerosene OR “alternative
aviation fuel”) AND (hydroprocessed OR hydroprocessing OR
hydrotreatment OR hydrogenated OR hydrogenation) AND (“oil-
seeds” OR “oilseed” OR 00 vegetable oils”). From the search, 78 pa-
pers were found and 21 were selected for containing at least one
desirable parameter for the selection of oilseeds for the HEFA biojet
production process. Beyond that, desirable parameters for this
purpose were searched in publications in Brazilian government
institutions: the Ministry of Mines and Energy (MME), Ministry of
Agriculture, Livestock and Supply (MAPA), and Brazilian Agricul-
tural Research Corporation (Embrapa). Criteria and principles of
international sustainability standards such as the Roundtable on
Sustainable Biomaterials (RSB), Global Bioenergy Partnership
(GBEP), and International Sustainability and Carbon Certification
(ISCC) were also considered. Table 2 presents the criteria and sub-
criteria chosen, the references consulted, as well as the desired
solution (i.e. whether it is desirable to minimize or maximize the
value of the sub-criterion).
3.3. Criteria and sub-criteria weighting
The multi-criteria AHP, proposed by Saaty [118], was chosen to
weight the defined criteria and sub-criteria. This method was
chosen because it is based on mathematics and psychology [119],
which allows the comparison of qualitative criteria, also consid-
ering the subjective aspects of the decision-making. Saaty [118]
introduced the idea that a decision-maker can use a pairwise
comparison mechanism to give weight to the criteria and sub-
criteria as they do not necessarily have the same importance.
The problem in AHP analysis is divided into a hierarchy of
descending levels, each of which can be decomposed into new
levels [120]. Al-Harbi [121] summarizes the process in four basic
steps: (a) hierarchical structuring, (b) applying the parity compar-
ison of elements at each level of the system, (c) prioritization
principle, and (d) synthesizing priorities. The hierarchical struc-
turing step consists of the problem formulation, that is, the defi-
nition of the overall objective and decomposition of the system into
levels of hierarchy [121]. In the problem in question, the objective
of the AHP problem is to define the weight of each sub-criterion,
which is used in the subsequent application of the TOPSIS method.
In pairwise comparison, Saaty [120] recommends the use of a
numerical scale ranging from 1 to 9. The value 1 means no differ-
ence in importance of one criterion over the other. The value 9
means the extreme importance of one criterion over another. The
numbers 2, 4, 6, and 8, in turn, represent the intermediate stages of
importance between levels. The assessment indicates how one
criterion is more important than another, or at the level of sub-
criteria, how one sub-criterion is more important than another. It
should be noted that Saaty [120] also proposes an evaluation of the
consistency of the judgments, considering 0.10 as the maximum
inconsistency recommended in the judgments of the decision-
makers.
In this study, 42 biojet specialists from different areas (business
sector, government, research institutions, and non-profit in-
stitutions) were invited to respond to the form containing pairwise
comparison. Initially, many experts were invited so that at least one
representative from each area could respond to the form, making
the research unbiased. Of the 42 invited, 18 answered, of whom 6
were from the business sector, 6 from the government, 3 from
research institutions, and 3 from non-profit institutions. It is
noteworthy that the non-participation of some of the 42 invited
experts did not compromise the research, as there were re-
spondents from across all areas. In surveys involving AHP, there is
no minimum or maximum requirement for responses from experts.
For example, in previous AHP assessments involving bioenergy, the
study by Aras [122] and Majumdar [55] was conducted with only
one expert for pairwise comparison of criteria, Karahalios’s work
[57] was conducted with 10 experts, Khang [34] with 18 experts,

Table 2
Criteria and sub-criteria evaluated.

Criteria Name Ref. Sub-criteria Name Ideal Solution References

Economic C1 [90e92] Oil Cost SC1 Minimize [7,14,93e97]

Oilseed Cost SC2 Minimize [7,14,93,94,96,98]
Environment C2 [90e92] Land use: oilseed productivity SC3 Maximize [7,46,94,96,97,99e105]
Land use: oil yield SC4 Maximize [7,14,94,96,97,100,103,104]
Water requirements SC5 Minimize [14,91,92,98,102,106e108]
Social C3 [90e92] Extractivism dependence SC6 Minimize [102,107,108]
Oil food dependence SC7 Minimize [14,92,95,99,106,108]
Production Scale C4 [7,101] Annual agricultural production SC8 Maximize [92,93,97,101,109]
Planted area SC9 Maximize [7,94,96,98,101,102,110,111]
Oil content SC10 Maximize [46,93,94,96e99,102e105,109,112]
Harvest period (seasonality) SC11 Maximize [46,93,94,97,102]
Registered cultivars SC12 Maximize [94,101,102,111]
Oil and oilseed quality C5 [113,116] Oil Net Calorific Value SC13 Maximize [7,19,93,100,113e115]
Oil acidity SC14 Minimize [103,113,117,129]
Oil moisture SC15 Minimize [100,103,113,129]
Saturated fatty acids content in oil SC16 Maximize [19,102,103,117]
Oilseed moisture SC17 Minimize [92,104]
 L.M. de Souza et al. / Renewable Energy 149 (2020) 1339e1351
and Ziolkouwska [33] and Mendes [123] with 20 experts.
The 18 expert responses to the paired comparison form allowed
the application of the AHP method to determine the relative
importance of each criterion and sub-criterion.
3.4. Evaluation of alternatives
The multi-criteria method Technique for Order of Preference by
Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) was used to establish the
oleaginous feedstock ranking. The TOPSIS algorithm, developed by
Hwang and Yoon [124], is a technique for evaluating performance
of alternatives through similarity with an ideal solution. According
to this technique, the best alternative is the one closest to the ideal
solution and furthest away from the non-ideal solution [125,126].
TOPSIS assumes that the positive ideal solution (PIS) is the one that
maximizes the benefit criteria (the ideal solution is the one with
the highest possible value, such as “oil content”) and minimizes the
criteria for losses (the ideal solution is the one that has the lowest
possible value, such as “oil cost”). The negative ideal solution (NIS),
in turn, maximizes the criteria for losses and minimizes those for
benefits [124].
According to the basic concept of this tool, the best oleaginous
feedstock will be the one closest to the PIS and furthest away from
the NIS [127]. This premise defines the similarity coefficient, ob-
tained by combining the Euclidean distances in relation to the ideal
positive and negative solutions, which was used to establish the
feedstock ranking. For the method’s application it is necessary to
know the performance of each sub-criterion in relation to each
alternative (oleaginous feedstocks), initially constructing a perfor-
mance matrix.
The data collection for the performance matrix was initially
based on the research carried out to identify oilseeds in Brazil,
which included peer-reviewed articles published in the last 15
years (January 2002 to January 2017) from the Scopus database. The
following keywords were considered: (biojet OR “aviation biofuel”
OR “renewable jet fuel” OR “aviation renewable fuel” OR “renew-
able aviation fuel” OR biokerosene OR “alternative aviation fuel” OR
“alternative jet fuel” OR “alternative kerosene”) AND (“oilseeds” OR
“oilseed” OR “vegetable oils”) AND (brazil*). The search identified
78 papers, which were minimally evaluated to collect the data
needed to construct the performance matrix of the feedstocks for
each sub-criterion. As this is a developing area of research, with few
works exclusively focused on biojet production in Brazil, the pub-
lished and peer-reviewed scientific papers were not enough to fill
the entire performance matrix. Thus, the research was redone, also
including publications by Brazilian government institutions, mas-
ter’s dissertations, and doctoral theses.
Table 3 presents the performance matrix (rating value) of the
feedstocks for each sub-criterion, and the consulted references.
Fig. 1 summarizes the multi-criteria problem evaluated.
4. Results
4.1. Weighting of the criteria: AHP application
Tables 4 and 5 show the weights of the criteria and sub-criteria
obtained from the AHP evaluation by expert groups and the overall
preferences, considering the AHP evaluation from the responses of
the 18 biojet specialists.
For the group of experts from the business sector, government
and research institutions, the criterion considered of greatest
importance was the economic one. For the specialists from non-
profit institutions, the scale of production was considered the
most important criterion. All the respondent groups considered the
social criterion of least importance. From the overall evaluation, the
1343
criterion considered most important was the economic one, with a
level of importance of 28.16%. The oil and oilseed quality and the
production scale reached second and third place in the prioritiza-
tion of the criteria, reaching 25.42% and 21.85%, respectively. The
least important criterion according to the specialists consulted was
social, with 8.97%.
The assessment by groups shows that the specialists are aligned
in their preference for the main sub-criterion. All sectors under-
stand that the cost of oil is the most important attribute for crop
selection for HEFA biojet. The group of specialists from non-profit
institutions was the most dissociated from the other groups, giv-
ing high weight to the planted area and annual agricultural
production.
To evaluate the consistency of the responses, consistency tests
were applied to the groups of specialists. The results obtained
geometrically indicate that the groups of specialists were consis-
tent, demonstrating the following average consistency levels:
business sector: 0.05, government: 0.06, research institutions: 0.09,
non-profit institutions: 0.08. As such, according to Saaty’s method,
the results were deemed valid (with average consistency of less
than 0.10) [120].
4.2. Evaluation of alternatives: TOPSIS application
Regarding the economic criterion, the best performance in
terms of oil cost was obtained by soybean. The cost of soybean oil in
the southeast is US$691.1 per ton, five times lower than the cost of
peanut oil, for example. The oilseed cost, in turn, performed better
than that of the macauba palm, which costs US$61.9 per ton of the
crop. The castor bean, whose oil costs US$ 283.15 per ton, per-
formed worst on this issue.
For the environmental criterion, the macauba palm was distin-
guished by its efficiency in use of land, characterized by produc-
tivity of oilseed and yield in oil. The productivity of this oilseed can
reach 24,000 kg/ha and its oil yield can reach 4 tons/ha, much
higher than the other feedstocks evaluated. Second position in
terms of productivity and yield was occupied by jatropha. It has a
maximum productivity four times lower than that of macauba, and
its oil yield is three times smaller. On the other hand, the water
requirement of the macauba palm is the highest among all. Cotton,
peanut, sunflower, castor bean, jatropha, and soybean all require an
average of 600 mm of rainfall per crop cycle, while macauba palm
requires 1750 mm.
For the social criterion, high dependence on the extractivism of
the macauba palm and jatropha assured low performance of these
oleaginous feedstocks, as it is expected that the use of cultures for
energetic purposes could negatively affect families that depend on
extractivism for survival. Castor bean and jatropha showed better
performance in terms of oil food dependence as they are non-edible
crops.
Regarding the “scale of production”, soybean stands out in the
sub-criteria of annual agricultural production, planted area, and
registered cultivars. Annual soybean production in the region is
7375 thousand tons per year and the planted area is 2300 thousand
hectares. Other crops, however, have negligible annual yield and
planted area. In terms of technological domain, soybean stands out
with 1674 cultivars registered. Cultivars are species of cultures
improved by man, possessing characteristics that the original did
not possess [88]. The second-largest crop in terms of registered
cultivars is sunflower, with 265 registered cultivars. Macauba palm
and jatropha presented the worst performance in this sub-
criterion, with only one cultivar recorded for each species. Soy-
bean did not perform better in terms of oil content or seasonality.
The average oil content in peanut, sunflower, macauba palm, and
castor bean is 43% m/m, higher than the average of 20% in cotton
1344 L.M. de Souza et al. / Renewable Energy 149 (2020) 1339e1351

Table 3
Oleaginous feedstocks performance matrix (raiting value).

Sub-Criteria Oleaginous Feedstocks

F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 F7
a
SC1 Value (US$/ton) 1592.9 3493.2 1746.6 928.3 1967.6 774.9 691.1
Reference [128] [128] [128] Adapted from Ref. [129] [128] [130] [128]
SC2 Value (US$/ton) 233.1 184.8 283.1 62.0 604.9 113.2 243.9
Reference [128] [131] [128] [132] [132] [130] [132]
SC3 Value (kg/ha) 2069 3030 1041 24000 1151 6000 3224
Reference [133] [134] [134] [135] [134] [136] [134]
SC4 Value (t/ha) 0.361 0.78 0.66 4 0.75 1.5 0.56
Reference [133] [133] [133] [137] [136] [138] [133]
SC5b Value (mm) 575 648 600 1750 700 600 650
Reference [139] [140] [141] [137] [110] [142] [139]
SC6c Value (Dimensionless) 0 0 0 1 0 1 0
Reference [143] [143] [143] [144,145] [143] [146] [143]
SC7d Value (Dimensionless) 0 0 0 0 1 1 0
Reference [147] [147] [147] [148] [149] [149] [147]
SC8 Value (103t/ano) 58.1 418.37 8.49 0 0.24 0 7375.33
Reference [133] [134] [134] [150] [134] [150] [134]
SC9 Value (103ha) 28.1 118.78 8.15 0 0.23 0 2300.73
Reference [133] [134] [134] [150] [134] [150] [134]
SC10e Value (%m/m) 19 45 43 43.45 45 35.5 20
Reference [133] [133] [133] Adapted from Refs. [151,152] [133] [153] [133]
SC11 Value (months) 3 3 3 4 3 12 3
Reference [154] [137] [137] [155] [137] [138] [137]
SC12 Value (Dimensionless) 176 29 265 1 39 1 1674
Reference [156] [156] [156] [156] [156] [156] [156]
SC13 Value (Kcal/l) 8050 8000 7950 8529 8000 8021 8125
Reference [157] [157] [100] [158] [100] Adapted from Ref. [159] [157]
SC14f Value (mg de KOH/g) 6.11 2.0 0.18 57.45 12.33 15.12 1.71
Reference [160] [161] [120] Adapted from Refs. [151,152] [162] [163] [164]
SC15f Value (% m/m) 0.20 0.06 0.04 0.80 0.41 0.37 0.27
Reference [165] [166] [16] Adapted from Refs. [151,152] [162] [163] [167]
SC16f Value (%m/m) 29 20 11 20.35 2.95 20.3 14.3
Reference [168] [168] [169] Adapted from Refs. [151,152] [170] [171] [172]
SC17 Value (%m/m) 10.45 7 5.8 34.75 6.47 6.8 9.5
Reference [173] [174] [175] [152] [176] [177] [178]
a
The cost of vegetable oil refers to refined oil due to the lack of quotation of some oils in nature (crude). This consideration does not compromise the analysis of the sub-
criterion, since standardization was done for the quotation of refined oil in all crops analyzed.
b
The water demand for crop was evaluated in terms of rainfall, since the greater demand for rainfall increases the demand of crop for irrigation. Thus, the water demand per
cycle of the crop was considered as indicative of the need for additional irrigation.
c
To make this quantitative criterion, value 1 was assigned to crops with a high dependency on extractivism, 0.5 for crops with some type of dependence on extractivism, but
the crop is also destined to agroindustry, and 0 for commercial crops with low or no dependence on extractivism.
d
To make this quantitative criterion, value 1 was assigned to crops producing edible oil, which is therefore used in the food industry, and value 0 for crops whose oil is not
edible, i.e. unfit for human consumption.
e
The oil content was established on a dry basis.
f
To determine the acidity, moisture content and saturated fatty acids in the oil, the crude oil (in nature) of the oleaginous was considered.

and soybean, and 35.5% in jatropha. In terms of seasonality, jatro- 5. Discussion

pha stands out as a perennial crop, which can be harvested
throughout the year once planted.
Regarding oil and oilseed quality, all raw materials evaluated,
with the exception of macauba palm, presented similar behavior.
The macauba palm had the lowest performance in oil acidity, and in
oil and oilseed moisture. In relation to the content of saturated fatty
acids, the castor bean presented the worst behavior, as it has a high
content of unsaturated fatty acids in its oil, requiring a greater
amount of hydrogen in the hydrogenation stage of the HEFA
process.
Based on the performance matrix (Table 3) and the final weight
(across all specialists) established for each criterion (Table 4) and
sub-criterion (Table 5), the TOPSIS method was applied, establish-
ing the following final ranking: soybean (F7), jatropha (F6), sun-
flower (F3), castor bean (F5), macauba palm (F4), cotton (F1), and
peanut (F2), as shown in Table 6.
From Table 6 it is possible to observe the rank similarity ob-
tained from the evaluation of each group. Soybean and jatropha
occupied the first and second rank in all groups. Peanut, by contrast,
took the last position in all evaluations.
The economic criterion and the oil cost sub-criterion, chosen as
the most important in the general evaluation of the experts, agrees
with Anderson et al. [15], who stated that the viability of HEFA will
be set by vegetable oil price. The economic viability of HEFA biojet
is linked to the production cost of this fuel [17,87]. Of the total cost,
about 70% is represented by feedstock cost [7,15,179]. The greater
weight attributed by non-profit organizations to scale of produc-
tion can be explained by the profile of these institutions. In Brazil,
most of the NPOs related to biojet are formed by representatives of
the production chain of the raw material, that is, representatives
who are concerned with the production scale gain of feedstocks.
The TOPSIS tool provided the following ranking of oleaginous
feedstocks in southeast Brazil, in descending order: soybean,
jatropha, sunflower, castor bean, macauba palm, cotton, and pea-
nut. Soybean was ranked highest due to its high performance in oil
cost, water requirements, extractivism dependence, registered
cultivars, planted area, annual agricultural production, and good oil
and oilseed quality. Although the groups of specialists assigned
different weights to the sub-criteria, similarity in the rankings of
feedstocks per group was evidenced. Soybean and jatropha
 L.M. de Souza et al. / Renewable Energy 149 (2020) 1339e1351 1345

Fig. 1. Multi-criteria structure to rank oleaginous feedstocks for HEFA biojet produc-
tion in Southeastern Brazil.
occupied the first and second position in the rankings obtained
from all the groups. Peanut occupied the last position unanimously.
This similarity is explained by the high weight attributed by all
groups to the cost of the oil. Soybean oil and jatropha cost US$691.1
and US$774.9 per ton, respectively. Peanut oil, by contrast, is five
times more expensive, costing US$3493.2 per ton.
The high cost of peanut oil is explained by the high production
cost of the crop [180], of which 25% corresponds to the expense of
the application of agricultural pesticides [181]. Besides, the high
cost of this oil (due to its high required quality for the food in-
dustry) compromises its use for energy purposes [182]. The
development of new pest-resistant cultivars is a way to reduce oil
costs, making it more attractive for biojet production. Regarding
the oil cost of jatropha, although there is still no commercial pro-
duction in the southeast of Brazil, the low cost of oil can be
explained by the low cost of this feedstock production, and high
availability in its native form. Jatropha is a native crop that is easy to
grow, with high resistance to drought, and it adapts to various
fertile soils [183].
Regarding soybean, the large market of this oilseed in Brazil
allows the cost of oil to be lower than the other oleaginous feed-
stocks evaluated. Since the early 1970s, soybeans have boosted
Brazil’s agricultural development, and became the most exported
product in the country [184]. Unlike traditional agriculture, soy-
bean agribusiness is loaded with modernity, capital-intensive, and
has a high level of technology integrated into its production process
[185], as can be verified by its number of registered cultivars (1674).
This number shows that this oilseed has a technological dominance
when compared to any of the other crops evaluated.
Cantarella et al. [7] reviewed the main feedstocks for biojet
production in Brazil, based on an evaluation focused on the costs
involved and technical efforts required. Among the evaluated
feedstocks (lignocellulosic, oilseeds, waste, sugar, and starches), the
authors concluded that the production of biojet from oleaginous
feedstocks (HEFA process) would be the first to reach commercial
scale. The authors also concluded that among the oil crops, soy-
beans would remain the most viable option of feedstock for biojet
in the short term. However, considering that soybean is currently
the main feedstock for biodiesel production, it is important to
consider additional oleaginous feedstocks for biojet production, as
it is not strategic for the country to rely on only one source, because
the two sectors would compete with each other [112]. In addition to
soybean, other crops already have a relatively high level of pro-
duction scale, such as sunflower, castor bean, peanut and cotton.

Table 4
Weight (%) of the criteria based on the evaluation of each specialists group.

Criteria Business sector Government Research institutions Non-profit institutions Overall specialists

C1 32.18 31.49 29.24 18.54 28.16

C2 17.78 17.57 15.45 12.43 15.60
C3 8.09 8.22 7.42 11.76 8.97
C4 16.63 21.80 18.57 31.23 21.85
C5 25.32 20.93 29.33 26.04 25.42

Table 5
Weight (%) of the sub-criteria based on the evaluation of each specialists group.

Sub-criteria Business sector Government Research institutions Non-profit institutions Overall specialists

SC1 24.96 24.35 23.36 15.93 22.65

SC2 7.21 7.14 5.87 2.62 5.51
SC3 3.66 3.88 3.73 2.59 3.47
SC4 6.51 7.32 3.52 5.63 5.63
SC5 7.61 6.36 8.20 4.21 6.49
SC6 5.59 2.14 1.89 4.50 3.50
SC7 2.50 6.08 5.53 7.26 5.47
SC8 1.52 3.76 4.66 10.36 4.60
SC9 1.54 4.54 3.37 10.20 4.45
SC10 6.61 7.88 6.30 2.85 6.25
SC11 2.64 3.55 2.98 3.83 3.62
SC12 4.32 2.07 1.26 3.98 2.92
SC13 5.39 3.88 7.35 6.52 5.79
SC14 4.35 3.71 5.8 7.08 4.67
SC15 4.64 4.18 3.84 4.95 4.40
SC16 6.54 4.65 8.57 4.75 5.73
SC17 4.39 3.76 4.33 3.29 4.03
1346 L.M. de Souza et al. / Renewable Energy 149 (2020) 1339e1351
Table 6
Ranking of oleaginous feedstocks for HEFA biojet production in Southeastern Brazil.
Feedstock Business sector Government
Ciþ Rank Ciþ
Cotton (F1) 0.525 5 0.434
Peanut (F2) 0.371 7 0.354
Sunflower (F3) 0.577 3 0.509
Macauba (F4) 0.538 4 0.472
Castor bean (F5) 0.510 6 0.474
Jatropha (F6) 0.627 2 0.565
Soybean (F7) 0.662 1 0.608
The production of these oleaginous feedstocks in southeast Brazil,
although small, makes these crops promising alternatives for biojet.
Sunflower, after soybean, is the oilseed among the evaluated ones
which has the second-highest number of cultivars registered by
MAPA, and it has a high oil content of 43%. However, the cost of its
oil is still high (US$1746.6 per ton).
In addition to crops commercially produced in Brazil, the native
plants jatropha and macauba palm (still without planted area in the
country) have potential for biojet mainly due to their high pro-
ductivity, oil yield, and oil content. The oil content of macauba palm
reaches 43.45% m/m, and 35.5% m/m in jatropha, compared to only
20% m/m in soybean. Further, these oleaginous plants have high
productivity and yield, which guarantees them high efficiency in
land use. The productivity of macauba palm reaches 24000 kg/ha,
and 6000 kg/ha in jatropha, compared to only 3224 kg/ha in soy-
bean. The oil yield reaches 4 tons of oil per hectare in macauba palm
and 1.5 in jatropha, against only 0.56 tons of soybean oil per hectare
planted. That is, when planting the same area of soybean, macauba
palm, and jatropha, we could extract 7.5 times more oil from the
plantation of macauba palm and 2.7 times more oil from the
plantation of jatropha than from that of soybean.
Besides having the advantage of efficient land use, jatropha, as a
perennial crop, covers the soil with dry matter, and can be used in
soil conservation, reducing erosion and flooding, and enriching the
soil with decomposed organic matter [186]. Furthermore, jatropha
and castor bean deserve recognition in relation to oil food
competition. The oil extracted from these oleaginous feedstocks is
highly toxic. Therefore, these oils cannot be used as human and
animal food. This means their production can be dedicated fully to
energy purposes, rather than competing with food production
[187]. However, despite the advantages presented, the commercial
cultivation of jatropha and macauba palm faces many obstacles,
with the lack of genetic improvement being the most limiting. The
high toxicity of jatropha may be a positive factor for non-
competition with food use, but it could also be a challenge. Due
to the presence of toxic components in the seeds, an efficient
detoxification system is necessary for it to be used as an animal
feed, the main market for oilseed [188]. Seed toxicity does not
minimize the potential of its oil in HEFA biojet production, as there
is no change in seed processing cost. However, the co-product
generated will become unviable for its current main destination
of oilseed extraction residues, which necessitates a detailed
assessment of the best destination for waste generated from oil
extraction of the different oilseeds. An alternative for jatropha solid
waste is, for example, use as fuel in boilers for power generation, as
fertilizer, or for biogas production [189]. Therefore, it is also
important to consider studies of the co-products and residues
generated by the extraction of oil from the various evaluated crops.
The height of the plant is also a problem in jatropha cultivation,
which hampers harvesting on a large scale [188]. Regarding the
macauba palm, one of the biggest hurdles is the high acidity of its
Research Non-profit Overall specialists
institutions institutions
Rank Ciþ Rank Ciþ Rank Ciþ Rank
6 0498 5 0.343 5 0.474 6
7 0.400 7 0.277 7 0.363 7
3 0.499 4 0.347 4 0.518 3
5 0.493 6 0.309 6 0.489 5
4 0.505 3 0.378 3 0.492 4
2 0.612 2 0.404 2 0.590 2
1 0.627 1 0.697 1 0.635 1
oil. The current extractivist form of obtaining this crop compro-
mises the quality of its oil [190]. Macauba and jatropha should be
considered in studies of genetic improvement, so they can also
become viable for biojet production.
Castor bean, another non-edible plant, also has the advantage of
not competing with food production. Moreover, it is an unde-
manding oilseed that grows very well in tropical conditions and
provides high oil yields [191]. Castor bean is the plant with the
highest oil content among the evaluated oleaginous feedstocks,
reaching 45% m/m. However, the high cost of its oil makes it un-
feasible for biojet production purposes.
Each oleaginous feedstock has some advantage over the others,
as observed in the performance distribution shown in Table 3.
There is no perfect isolated feedstock to produce an aviation biofuel
in Brazil. All have advantages and limitations, and the ideal scenario
is that biojet production can take place from different raw materials
to ensure greater availability and large-scale production. However,
the study shows that the advantages of cotton, peanut, sunflower,
macauba palm, castor bean and jatropha are still lower than the
advantages of soybean. This means that in the short term, for Brazil
to start producing sustainable aviation fuels, and to meet aviation’s
ambitious GHG emission reduction targets, soybean must be
treated as the immediate feedstock for hydroprocessing.
6. Final remarks and conclusion
The use of biojet can contribute to the achievement of the
ambitious goals of reducing GHG emissions proposed by the ICAO
and Brazilian NDC. In addition to the targets, the new market could
contribute to environmental development, considering the eco-
nomics of carbon emissions; economic development, from the
generation of wealth and economically viable production; and so-
cial development, from the generation of employment, income and
opportunities. However, for biojet usage to become a reality in
Brazil and in the world, it is necessary to make it economically
competitive with fossil jet fuel.
In southeast Brazil, soybean is the most promising crop for HEFA
biojet production. Thus, considering the need for a timely imple-
mentation of biojet production in Brazil to achieve the ambitious
emission reduction targets of GHG, soybean is initially suggested as
the feedstock for production of HEFA biojet in this region. At the
same time, seeking the best solutions for the future of sustainable
aviation, it is necessary to reduce the bottlenecks related to alter-
native soybean crops in Brazil. Therefore, it is necessary to invest in
research that seeks the technological domain of crops that have
high productivity, yield and oil content, seeking the desirable
qualities of these oils for hydrotreating. Domestication of potential
crops should be considered in public policymaking and govern-
ment agroenergy programs, considering the opportunity for local,
regional and national development. It is also important to consider
studies that focus on co-products and residues generated by oil
 L.M. de Souza et al. / Renewable Energy 149 (2020) 1339e1351
extraction from the various evaluated crops. It is expected that,
with the advancement of technology in oilseed crops, new options
for protein concentrates will favor animal production, also stimu-
lating the biojet market.
Another important aspect to consider is the concept of local
production arrangements around biojet industrial plants. At pre-
sent, as there are no specific biojet plants yet, production ar-
rangements around existing oil refining units should be considered.
These arrangements are important because in many cases the
feedstock supply center is far from the transformation center,
which raises costs and increases sustainability risks. Local pro-
duction arrangements should be organized to enhance logistics and
supply, ensuring that biojet production from these sources is sus-
tainable from an economic, social and environmental point of view.
It is also necessary to consider the concept of biorefinery to enable
HEFA biojet. All the oils mentioned in this work can be used, for
example, in the pharmaceutical, cosmetics, and lubricant in-
dustries, among others. The development of biojet production
processes that can simultaneously generate other products and
integrate processes, such as the use of existing hydrogen generation
infrastructure in oil refineries, has the potential to enable biojet
production at more competitive prices.
As a limitation of this work, it is highlighted that some impor-
tant sub-criteria were not included in the research. This is because
there is a lack of information in the literature regarding the per-
formance of some oleaginous feedstocks in relation to desirable
characteristics. For the TOPSIS application, it is fundamental to
know the performance of all alternatives in relation to all criteria
and sub-criteria evaluated. The main sub-criteria not considered in
relation to the economic criteria were: 1. the production cost of
HEFA, considering the use of each oilseed, 2. oilseed participation in
the GDP, and 3. cost of all co-products generated, such as peel, bran,
and almond. Regarding the social aspect, the number of jobs
generated in the production of each oilseed and the average income
of the workers were not considered.
Regarding the environmental criteria, the sub-criterion not
evaluated was greenhouse gas reduction. This is because there is
only a small number of published papers related to the Life Cycle
Analysis (LCA) of HEFA biojet. Although some works related to the
topic have been published [7,19,28,192,193], not all the oilseeds of
the southeast region of Brazil were considered in the published
works on LCA. Moreover, there is still no consensus on methodol-
ogies to evaluate emissions in the production of agricultural crops
[19,20,22]. It is noted that not having considered such sub-criteria
did not have a significant impact on this study, as the published
works [7,19,28,192,193] show that oilseeds, in general, reduce car-
bon footprint by around 50% [192,193], with higher percentages
possible in cases of cultivation in degraded areas [194]. Thus, it is
inferred that the sustainable production of oilseeds for the HEFA
process causes a considerable reduction in emissions, regardless of
the raw material used. To ensure the sustainable production of
feedstock it is important to ensure that the production of these
crops will not lead to undesirable changes in land use. That is,
increased agricultural production cannot be associated with
deforestation or the depletion of biodiversity from the conversion
of natural ecosystems. To ensure this, important strategic measures
should be adopted to reduce unwanted changes in land use, such
as: 1. R&D investment to increase productivity and agricultural
income; 2. improving agricultural management; 3. promotion of
the use of marginal lands; 4. elaboration of agro-ecological zoning
of oil crops; 5. increased monitoring and control of land use; 6.
strengthening of laws and policies to protect natural forests, pas-
tures, savannas, and freshwater regions; and 7. creation of wildlife
corridors and restoration of natural vegetation. All these measures
could serve as mechanisms to guarantee the high potential of HEFA
1347
in reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Thus, researchers are encouraged to study these gaps for future
inclusion in the assessment. Knowing the performance of the
feedstock in relation to a greater number of criteria and sub-criteria
would make the evaluation more complete and efficient. It is also
encouraged, in future research with the use of multi-criteria tools,
to determine the prioritization of oleaginous feedstocks in other
regions of Brazil, and the prioritization of locations for HEFA biojet
facilities, as has already been done for biodiesel [195e197], biogas
[51], and biorefinery [198,199]. The mapping of strategic locations
for the implantation of HEFA biojet refining centers should consider
smaller distances to the supplier of feedstocks and to the great
consumers, the airports.
Finally, decision-makers, stakeholders, and researchers are
encouraged to make investment-related decisions, policies, and
research regarding HEFA biojet production based on the results of
this study. Thus, efforts are expected to be carried out strategically
to optimize biojet production.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the National Agency of Oil,
Natural Gas and Biofuels (ANP), INCT Midas, and the Post-Graduate
Program on Engineering of Chemical and Biochemical Process
(EPQB) - Chemical School (EQ) of Federal University of Rio de
Janeiro (UFRJ) for making this study viable.
References
[1] IATA, Annual Review, 2016, 2016, http://www.iata.org/publications/Pages/
annual-review.aspx. (Accessed 13 December 2017).
2 A. Larkin, J. Kuriakose, M. Sharmina, K. Anderson, What if negative emission
technologies fail at scale? Implications of the Paris Agreement for big emitting
nations, Clim. Policy 18 (2018) 690e714, https://doi.org/10.1080/
14693062.2017.1346498.
[3] X. Pan, M. den Elzen, N. Ho €hne, F. Teng, L. Wang, Exploring fair and ambitious
mitigation contributions under the Paris Agreement goals, Environ. Sci.
Policy 74 (2017) 49e56, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2017.04.020.
[4] Brazilian Government, Law No. 13,576 of December 26, 2017, 2017, http://
legislacao.planalto.gov.br/legisla/legislacao.nsf/Viw_Identificacao/lei%2013.
576-2017?OpenDocument. (Accessed 15 March 2018).
[5] Brazilian government, Instrumentos do Renovabio (in portuguese), http://
www.mme.gov.br/web/guest/secretarias/petroleo-gas-natural-e-
combustiveis-renovaveis/programas/renovabio/instrumentos. (Accessed 3
December 2017).
[6] D.B. Agusdinata, F. Zhao, K. Ileleji, D. DeLaurentis, Life cycle assessment of
potential biojet fuel production in the United States, Environ. Sci. Technol. 45
(2011) 9133e9143, https://doi.org/10.1021/es202148g.
[7] H. Cantarella, A.M. Nassar, L.A.B. Cortez, R. Baldassin, Potential feedstock for
renewable aviation fuel in Brazil, Environ. Dev. 15 (2015) 52e63, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.envdev.2015.05.004.
[8] L.A.B. Cortez, F.E.B. Nigro, A.M. Nassar, H. Cantarella, L.A.H. Nogueira,
M.A.F.D. de Moraes, R.L.V. Leal, T.T. Franco, U. Schuchardt, Roadmap for
Sustainable Aviation Biofuels for Brazil d A Flightpath to Aviation Biofuels in
Brazil, Editora Edgard Blücher, 2014, https://doi.org/10.5151/BlucherOA-
Roadmap.
[9] P. Krammer, L. Dray, M.O. Ko €hler, Climate-neutrality versus carbon-
neutrality for aviation biofuel policy, Transp. Res. D Transp. Environ. 23
(2013) 64e72, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2013.03.013.
[10] F. Lüdeke-Freund, D. Walmsley, M. Plath, J. Wreesmann, A. Klein, Sustainable
plant oil production for aviation fuels, Sustain. Accounting, Manag. Policy J. 3
(2012) 186e217, https://doi.org/10.1108/20408021211282313.
[11] D. Chiaramonti, M. Prussi, M. Buffi, D. Tacconi, Sustainable bio kerosene:
process routes and industrial demonstration activities in aviation biofuels,
Appl. Energy 136 (2014) 767e774, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.apenergy.2014.08.065.
[12] L.M. de Souza, P. Mendes, D. Aranda, Assessing the current scenario of the
Brazilian biojet market, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 98 (2018), https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.09.039.
[13] E.B. Connelly, L.M. Colosi, A.F. Clarens, J.H. Lambert, Risk analysis of biofuels
industry for aviation with scenario-based expert elicitation, Syst. Eng. 18
1348 L.M. de Souza et al. / Renewable Energy 149 (2020) 1339e1351
(2015) 178e191, https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21298.
[14] T. Kandaramath Hari, Z. Yaakob, N.N. Binitha, Aviation biofuel from renew-
able resources: routes, opportunities and challenges, Renew. Sustain. Energy
Rev. 42 (2015) 1234e1244, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.10.095.
[15] S. Anderson, J. Cooper, N. Gudde, J. Howes, Aviation renewable fuels: tech-
nical status and challenges for commercialisation, Aeronaut. J. 116 (2012)
1103e1122, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0001924000007521.
[16] H.M. Noh, A. Benito, G. Alonso, Study of the current incentive rules and
mechanisms to promote biofuel use in the EU and their possible application
to the civil aviation sector, Transp. Res. D Transp. Environ. 46 (2016)
298e316, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2016.04.007.
[17] J.P. Deane, S. Pye, Europe’s ambition for biofuels in aviation - a strategic
review of challenges and opportunities, Energy Strateg. Rev. 20 (2018) 1e5,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2017.12.008.
[18] P.M. Smith, M.J. Gaffney, W. Shi, S. Hoard, I.I. Armendariz, D.W. Mueller,
Drivers and barriers to the adoption and diffusion of sustainable jet fuel (SJF)
in the U.S. Pacific Northwest, J. Air Transp. Manag. 58 (2017) 113e124,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2016.10.004.
[19] P.A. Cremonez, M. Feroldi, A.V. de Araújo, M. Negreiros Borges, T. Weiser
Meier, A. Feiden, J. Gustavo Teleken, Biofuels in Brazilian aviation: current
scenario and prospects, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 43 (2015) 1063e1072,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.11.097.
[20] L.A.B. Cortez, F.E.B. Nigro, L.A.H. Nogueira, A.M. Nassar, H. Cantarella,
M.A.F.D. Moraes, R.L.V. Leal, T.T. Franco, U.F. Schuchardt, R. Baldassin Junior,
Perspectives for sustainable aviation biofuels in Brazil, Int. J. Aerosp. Eng.
2015 (2015) 1e12, https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/264898.
[21] J.I. Hileman, R.W. Stratton, Alternative jet fuel feasibility, Transp. Policy 34
(2014) 52e62, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2014.02.018.
[22] M.A.F.D. Moraes, A.M. Nassar, P. Moura, R.L.V. Leal, L.A.B. Cortez, Jet biofuels
in Brazil: sustainability challenges, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 40 (2014)
716e726, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.07.210.
[23] G.W. Diederichs, M. Ali Mandegari, S. Farzad, J.F. Go €rgens, Techno-economic
comparison of biojet fuel production from lignocellulose, vegetable oil and
sugar cane juice, Bioresour. Technol. 216 (2016) 331e339, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.biortech.2016.05.090.
[24] E. Mupondwa, X. Li, L. Tabil, K. Falk, R. Gugel, Technoeconomic analysis of
camelina oil extraction as feedstock for biojet fuel in the Canadian Prairies,
Biomass Bioenergy 95 (2016) 221e234, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.biombioe.2016.10.014.
[25] W.-C. Wang, Techno-economic analysis of a bio-refinery process for pro-
ducing Hydro-processed Renewable Jet fuel from Jatropha, Renew. Energy 95
(2016) 63e73, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2016.03.107.
[26] G. Marrs, R. Zamora-Cristales, J. Sessions, Forest biomass feedstock cost
sensitivity to grinding parameters for bio-jet fuel production, Renew. Energy
99 (2016) 1082e1091, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2016.07.071.
[27] I. Ganguly, F. Pierobon, T.C. Bowers, M. Huisenga, G. Johnston, I.L. Eastin,
‘Woods-to-Wake’ Life Cycle Assessment of residual woody biomass based
jet-fuel using mild bisulfite pretreatment, Biomass Bioenergy 108 (2018)
207e216, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2017.10.041.
[28] K. Lokesh, V. Sethi, T. Nikolaidis, E. Goodger, D. Nalianda, Life cycle green-
house gas analysis of biojet fuels with a technical investigation into their
impact on jet engine performance, Biomass Bioenergy 77 (2015) 26e44,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2015.03.005.
[29] S. Michailos, Process design, economic evaluation and life cycle assessment
of jet fuel production from sugar cane residue, Environ. Prog. Sustain. Energy
37 (2018) 1227e1235, https://doi.org/10.1002/ep.12840.
[30] M. Elmoraghy, I.H. Farag, Bio-jet fuel from microalgae: reducing water and
energy requirements for algae growth, Int. J. Eng. Sci. 1 (2012) 22e30.
[31] Y. Zhang, P. Bi, J. Wang, P. Jiang, X. Wu, H. Xue, J. Liu, X. Zhou, Q. Li, Pro-
duction of jet and diesel biofuels from renewable lignocellulosic biomass,
Appl. Energy 150 (2015) 128e137, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.apenergy.2015.04.023.
[32] H. Wang, S. Yan, M. Kim, S.O. Salley, K.Y. Simon Ng, Jet fuel hydrocarbons
production from catalytic cracking and hydrocracking of soybean oil, Curr.
Catal. 1 (2012) 132e139, https://doi.org/10.2174/2211544711201020132.
[33] J.R. Ziolkowska, Evaluating sustainability of biofuels feedstocks: a multi-
objective framework for supporting decision-making, Biomass Bioenergy
59 (2013) 425e440, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2013.09.008.
[34] D.S. Khang, M.A.B. Promentilla, R.R. Tan, N. Abe, P.D. Tuan, L.F. Razon, Multi-
criteria approach to assess stakeholders preferences for selection of biodiesel
feedstock in Vietnam, Int. J. Bus. Syst. Res. 10 (2016) 306, https://doi.org/
10.1504/IJBSR.2016.075738.
[35] R. Blackshaw, E. Johnson, Y. Gan, W. May, D. McAndrew, V. Barthet,
T. McDonald, D. Wispinski, Alternative oilseed crops for biodiesel feedstock
on the Canadian prairies, Can. J. Plant Sci. 91 (2011) 889e896, https://
doi.org/10.4141/cjps2011-002.
[36] F.B. Ahmad, Z. Zhang, W.O.S. Doherty, I.M. O’Hara, A multi-criteria analysis
approach for ranking and selection of microorganisms for the production of
oils for biodiesel production, Bioresour. Technol. 190 (2015) 264e273,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2015.04.083.
[37] E. Nwokoagbara, A.K. Olaleye, M. Wang, Biodiesel from microalgae: the use
of multi-criteria decision analysis for strain selection, Fuel 159 (2015)
241e249, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2015.06.074.
[38] S. Xue, Y. Steinberger, J.S. Wang, G.Y. Li, X.Y. Xu, G.H. Xie, Biodiesel potential
of nonfood plant resources from Tsinling and Zhongtiao mountains of China,
BioEnergy Res 6 (2013) 1104e1117, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-013-
9346-z.
[39] O. Kibazohi, R.S. Sangwan, Vegetable oil production potential from Jatropha
curcas, Croton megalocarpus, Aleurites moluccana, Moringa oleifera and
Pachira glabra: assessment of renewable energy resources for bio-energy
production in Africa, Biomass Bioenergy 35 (2011) 1352e1356, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2010.12.048.
[40] U. Neuling, M. Kaltschmitt, Conversion routes for production of bio-
kerosenedstatus and assessment, Biomass Convers. Biorefinery 5 (2015)
367e385, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-014-0154-2.
[41] S. de Jong, R. Hoefnagels, A. Faaij, R. Slade, R. Mawhood, M. Junginger, The
feasibility of short-term production strategies for renewable jet fuels - a
comprehensive techno-economic comparison, Biofuels, Bioprod. Biorefining.
9 (2015) 778e800, https://doi.org/10.1002/bbb.1613.
[42] M.C. Va
squez, E.E. Silva, E.F. Castillo, Hydrotreatment of vegetable oils: a
review of the technologies and its developments for jet biofuel production,
Biomass Bioenergy 105 (2017) 197e206, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.biombioe.2017.07.008.
[43] A. Vonortas, N. Papayannakos, Comparative analysis of biodiesel versus
green diesel, Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Energy Environ. 3 (2014) 3e23, https://
doi.org/10.1002/wene.78.
[44] L.A.H. Nogueira, Does biodiesel make sense? Energy 36 (2011) 3659e3666,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2010.08.035.
[45] PETROBRAS, 2018. http://www.petrobras.com.br/pt/quem-somos/plano-
estrategico/plano-de-negocios-e-gestao/. (Accessed 5 August 2019).
[46] J. Bergmann, D. Tupinamb
a, O.Y. Costa, J.R. Almeida, C. Barreto, B. Quirino,
Biodiesel production in Brazil and alternative biomass feedstocks, Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 21 (2013) 411e420, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.rser.2012.12.058.
[47] J.J. Reimer, X. Zheng, Economic analysis of an aviation bioenergy supply
chain, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 77 (2017) 945e954, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.rser.2016.12.036.
[48] ANP, Anu
ario estatístico. http://www.anp.gov.br/wwwanp/publicacoes/
anuario-estatistico/3819-anuario-estatistico-2017, 2017. (Accessed 21
August 2017).
[49] R.T. Clemen, T. Reilly, Making Hard Decisions with DecisionTools, Cengage
Learning, 2013.
[50] S. Michailos, D. Parker, C. Webb, A multicriteria comparison of utilizing sugar
cane bagasse for methanol to gasoline and butanol production, Biomass
Bioenergy 95 (2016) 436e448, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.biombioe.2016.06.019.
[51] S. Silva, L. Alçada-Almeida, L.C. Dias, Biogas plants site selection integrating
Multicriteria Decision Aid methods and GIS techniques: a case study in a
Portuguese region, Biomass Bioenergy 71 (2014) 58e68, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.biombioe.2014.10.025.
[52] J.-J. Wang, Y.-Y. Jing, C.-F. Zhang, J.-H. Zhao, Review on multi-criteria decision
analysis aid in sustainable energy decision-making, Renew. Sustain. Energy
Rev. 13 (2009) 2263e2278, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2009.06.021.
[53] S.D. Pohekar, M. Ramachandran, Application of multi-criteria decision
making to sustainable energy planningda review, Renew. Sustain. Energy
Rev. 8 (2004) 365e381, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2003.12.007.
[54] E. Loken, Use of multicriteria decision analysis methods for energy planning
problems, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 11 (2007) 1584e1595, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2005.11.005.
[55] A. Majumdar, B. Sarkar, P.K. Majumdar, Determination of quality value of
cotton fibre using hybrid AHP-TOPSIS method of multi-criteria decision-
making, J. Text. Inst. 96 (2005) 303e309, https://doi.org/10.1533/
joti.2005.0013.
[56] S. Sindhu, V. Nehra, S. Luthra, Investigation of feasibility study of solar farms
deployment using hybrid AHP-TOPSIS analysis: case study of India, Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 73 (2017) 496e511, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.rser.2017.01.135.
[57] H. Karahalios, The application of the AHP-TOPSIS for evaluating ballast water
treatment systems by ship operators, Transp. Res. D Transp. Environ. 52
(2017) 172e184, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2017.03.001.
[58] D. Choudhary, R. Shankar, An STEEP-fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS framework for
evaluation and selection of thermal power plant location: a case study from
India, Energy 42 (2012) 510e521, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.energy.2012.03.010.
[59] R. Kumar, S.K. Singal, Penstock material selection in small hydropower plants
using MADM methods, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 52 (2015) 240e255,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.07.018.
60 A. Balin, H. Baraçli, A fuzzy multi-criteria decision making methodology based
upon the interval type-2 fuzzy sets for evaluating renewable energy alterna-
tives in Turkey, Technol. Econ. Dev. Econ. 23 (2015) 742e763, https://doi.org/
10.3846/20294913.2015.1056276.
[61] S. Cebi, C. Kahraman, I. Kaya, Soft computing and computational intelligent
techniques in the evaluation of emerging energy technologies, in: Innov.
Power, Control. Optim., IGI Global, n.d.: pp. 164e197. doi:10.4018/978-1-
61350-138-2.ch005.
[62] A.R. Restrepo-Garce
s, D.F. Manotas-Duque, C.A. Lozano, Multicriteria Hybrid
Method - ROA, for the choice of generation of renewable sources: case study
in shopping centers, Ingeniare. Rev. Chil. Ing. 25 (2017) 399e414, https://
doi.org/10.4067/S0718-33052017000300399.
[63] A.T. Balafoutis, E. Papageorgiou, Z. Dikopoulou, S. Fountas, G. Papadakis,
 L.M. de Souza et al. / Renewable Energy 149 (2020) 1339e1351
Sunflower oil fuel for diesel engines: an experimental investigation and
optimum engine setting evaluation using a multi-criteria decision making
approach, Int. J. Green Energy 11 (2014) 642e673, https://doi.org/10.1080/
15435075.2013.777912.
[64] ASTM D4054-17, Standard Practice for Evaluation of New Aviation Turbine
Fuels and Fuel Additives, 2017. West Conshohocken, PA.
[65] ASTM D7566-18, Standard Specification for Aviation Turbine Fuel Containing
Synthesized Hydrocarbons, 2018. West Conshohocken, PA.
[66] National Agency of Oil, Natural Gas and Biofuels (ANP), ANP Resolution No.
778, of, 2019, 2014, http://legislacao.anp.gov.br/?path¼legislacao-anp/resol-
anp/2019/abril&item¼ranp-778-2019. (Accessed 20 July 2019).
[67] T.J. Morgan, A. Youkhana, S.Q. Turn, R. Ogoshi, M. Garcia-Pe
rez, Review of
biomass resources and conversion technologies for alternative jet fuel pro-
duction in Hawai’i and tropical regions, Energy Fuel. 33 (2019) 2699e2762,
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.8b03001.
[68] C.A. Scaldaferri, V.M.D. Pasa, Production of jet fuel and green diesel range
biohydrocarbons by hydroprocessing of soybean oil over niobium phosphate
catalyst, Fuel 245 (2019) 458e466, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.fuel.2019.01.179.
[69] S.J. Reaume, N. Ellis, Synergistic effects of skeletal isomerization on oleic and
palmitic acid mixtures for the reduction in cloud point of their methyl esters,
Energy Fuel. 26 (2012) 4514e4520, https://doi.org/10.1021/ef3006564.
[70] J.L. Borges, Diagrama de fontes de hidroge ^nio (in portuguese), Masters
dissertation, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, 2009.
[71] A.S. Szklo, Fundamentos do refino de petro
leo, Intercie
^ncia, 2005.
[72] (in portuguese), Minas Gerais Government, Plataforma Mineira de Bio-
querosene, 2015, http://www.sede.mg.gov.br/pt/transparencia/page/1877-
plataforma-mineirade-bioquerosene. (Accessed 18 August 2016).
[73] J.A.P. Rico, I.L. Sauer, M. Pompelli, A. Orozco, M. Oliviera, B. Rodrigues,
M. Barbosa, M. Santos, A. Oliveira, J. Almeida-Cortez, L. Fonseca-Moreno,
A review of Brazilian biodiesel experiences, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 45
(2015) 513e529, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.01.028.
[74] E.S. Jensen, M.B. Peoples, R.M. Boddey, P.M. Gresshoff, H. Hauggaard-Nielsen,
B.J.R. Alves, M.J. Morrison, Legumes for mitigation of climate change and the
provision of feedstock for biofuels and biorefineries. A review, Agron. Sus-
tain. Dev. 32 (2012) 329e364, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-011-0056-7.
[75] S. Blakey, L. Rye, C.W. Wilson, Aviation gas turbine alternative fuels: a re-
view, Proc. Combust. Inst. 33 (2011) 2863e2885, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.proci.2010.09.011.
[76] M. Pompelli, A. Orozco, M. Oliviera, B. Rodrigues, M. Barbosa, M. Santos,
A. Oliveira, J. Almeida-Cortez, L. Fonseca-Moreno, Global energy crisis and
the Brazilian role in the bio-fuels issue, Agron. Colomb. 29 (2011) 231e240.
[77] P. Andre
Cremonez, M. Feroldi, W. Ce
zar Nadaleti, E. de Rossi, A. Feiden,
M.P. de Camargo, F.E. Cremonez, F.F. Klajn, Biodiesel production in Brazil:
current scenario and perspectives, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 42 (2015)
415e428, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.10.004.
[78] J. Zhao, Development of China’s biofuel industry and policy making in
comparison with international practices, Sci. Bull. 60 (2015) 1049e1054,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12934-015-0803-2.
[79] A.J. Steidle Neto, D.C. Lopes, F.A.C. Pinto, S. Zolnier, Vis/NIR spectroscopy and
chemometrics for non-destructive estimation of water and chlorophyll sta-
tus in sunflower leaves, Biosyst. Eng. 155 (2017) 124e133, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2016.12.008.
[80] P. Hugues, E. Assoumou, N. Maizi, Assessing GHG mitigation and associated
cost of French biofuel sector: insights from a TIMES model, Energy 113
(2016) 288e300, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2016.06.146.
[81] L.N. Silva, C.C. Cardoso, V.M.D. Pasa, Synthesis and characterization of esters
from different alcohols using Macauba almond oil to substitute diesel oil and
jet fuel, Fuel 166 (2016) 453e460, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2015.10.070.
[82] R.C. Hendricks, D. Bushnell, Particulate emissions hazards associated with
fueling heat engines, Int. J. Rotating Mach. 2011 (2011) 1e10, https://doi.org/
10.1155/2011/415296.
[83] J. Popp, Z. Lakner, M. Harangi-Ra
kos, M. Fa
ri, The effect of bioenergy
expansion: food, energy, and environment, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 32
(2014) 559e578, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.01.056.
[84] V.M. Spinelli, L.A.S. Dias, R.B. Rocha, M.D.V. Resende, Estimates of genetic
parameters with selection within and between half-sib families of Jatropha
curcas L, Ind. Crops Prod. 69 (2015) 355e361, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.indcrop.2015.02.024.
[85] K. Roberts, The world’s first transatlantic commercial passenger flight using
biojet... Save Export Print Cite K. Roberts, the world’s first transatlantic
commercial passenger flight using biojet fuel derived from Jatropha Curcus
oilseed fee, Chem. Ind. 10 (2011). https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-
267808555.html. (Accessed 13 March 2018).
[86] L. Rye, S. Blakey, C.W. Wilson, Sustainability of supply or the planet: a review
of potential drop-in alternative aviation fuels, Energy Environ. Sci. 3 (2010)
17e27, https://doi.org/10.1039/B918197K.
[87] P. Gegg, L. Budd, S. Ison, The market development of aviation biofuel: drivers
and constraints, J. Air Transp. Manag. 39 (2014) 34e40, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jairtraman.2014.03.003.
[88] €
T. Dettmer, S. Ibbotson, G. Ohlschl €
ager, C. Herrmann, S. Kara, Technical ap-
plications of Jatropha oildenvironmental effectiveness of renewable re-
sources, Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 20 (2015) 1376e1386, https://doi.org/
10.1007/s11367-015-0953-0.
[89] US Environmental Protection Agency, Renewable fuel standard program:
1349
standards for 2017 and biomass-based diesel volume for 2018, fed, Regist 81
(2016) 89746e89804. https://www.epa.gov/renewable-fuel-standard-
program/final-renewable-fuel-standards-2017-and-biomass-based-diesel-
volume. (Accessed 21 December 2017).
[90] M. Munasinghe, Environmental Economics and Sustainable Development,
The World Bank, 1993, https://doi.org/10.1596/0-8213-2352-0.
[91] (in portuguese), GLOBAL BIOENERGY PARTNERSHIP, 22a Reuni~
ria
ao Ordina
da Ca

^mara Setorial do Açúcar e do Alcool, 2012, http://www.agricultura.gov.
br/arq_editor/file/camaras_setoriais/Acucar_e_alcool/22RO/App_parceria_
global_GBEP.pd. (Accessed 5 January 2018).
[92] H.I. Cobuloglu, I.E._ Büyüktahtakın, A stochastic multi-criteria decision anal-
ysis for sustainable biomass crop selection, Expert Syst. Appl. 42 (2015)
6065e6074, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2015.04.006.
[93] Ministe
rio do Meio Ambiente, Caracterizaç~ ao das oleaginosas para produç~ ao
de biodiesel (in portuguese), 2006, http://www.mma.gov.br/estruturas/sqa_
pnla/_arquivos/item_5.pdf. (Accessed 6 December 2017).
[94] J.M.G. Monteiro, Plantio de oleaginosas por agricultores familiares do semi-

rido nordestino para produç~
a ao de biodiesel como uma estrate
gia de miti-
gaça ~o e adaptaç~ ao as mudanças clim
aticas (in portuguese), Universidade
Federal do Rio De Janeiro, 2007, http://www.ppe.ufrj.br/ppe/production/
tesis/mmonteirojmg.pdf. (Accessed 13 January 2017).
[95] M. Kousoulidou, L. Lonza, Biofuels in aviation: fuel demand and CO2 emis-
sions evolution in Europe toward 2030, Transp. Res. D Transp. Environ. 46
(2016) 166e181, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2016.03.018.
[96] M.E. Wehrmann, J. Vianna, L. Duarte, Biodiesel de soja: política energe
tica,
contribuiç~ ao das oleaginosas e sustentabilidade (in Portuguese), III Encontro
da Associaça ~o Nacional de Po
s-graduaça ~o e Pesquisa em Ambiente e Socie-
dade, 23, Brasília, http://www.anppas.org.br/encontro_anual/encontro3/
arquivos/TA457-28032006-162404.DOC. (Accessed 18 January 2017).
[97] G. Caixeta, Estudo de cen
ario de produça ~o de biodiesel, Universidade Federal
do Rio de Janeiro, 2009 (in portuguese), http://186.202.79.107/download/
estudo-de-cenario-de-producao-de-biodiesel.pdf. (Accessed 18 January
2017).
[98] L.T.T. Dinh, Y. Guo, M.S. Mannan, Sustainability evaluation of biodiesel pro-
duction using multicriteria decision-making, Environ. Prog. Sustain. Energy
28 (2009) 38e46, https://doi.org/10.1002/ep.10335.
[99] A.D. Padula, M.S. Santos, L. Ferreira, D. Borenstein, The emergence of the
biodiesel industry in Brazil: current figures and future prospects, Energy
Policy 44 (2012) 395e405, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.02.003.
[100] K.M. Araújo, Estudo comparativo te
cnico e econo ^ mico de diferentes o
leos
vegetais brasileiros para produça ~o de biocombustível (in portuguese), in:
Procedings of the 4th Encontro de Energia no Meio Rural, 2002, https://
www.feagri.unicamp.br/energia/agrener2002/jdownloads/pdf/0055.pdf.
(Accessed 11 January 2017).
[101] B.G. Laviola, Disponibilidade e Oportunidade de Diversificaça ~o de Mate
rias
Primas Biodiesel (in portuguese), Semina
rio Nacional de Avaliaça ~o do Selo
Combustível Social e MDA, 2015, http://www.agricultura.gov.br/assuntos/
camaras-setoriais-tematicas/documentos/camaras-setoriais/oleaginosas-e-
biodiesel/anos-anteriores/disponibilidade-de-materias-primas-e-
oportunidades-de-diversificacao-embrapa.pdf. (Accessed 9 January 2017).
[102] S. Crestana, Mate
rias-primas para produç~ ao do biodiesel: priorizando alter-
nativas (in portuguese), 2005, https://www.agencia.cnptia.embrapa.br/
Repositorio/matprima1_000gevvbauw02wx5ok0dnrsvx8drsue9.pdf.
(Accessed 18 January 2017).
[103] A.E. Atabani, A.S. Silitonga, H.C. Ong, T.M.I. Mahlia, H.H. Masjuki,
I.A. Badruddin, H. Fayaz, Non-edible vegetable oils: a critical evaluation of oil
extraction, fatty acid compositions, biodiesel production, characteristics,
engine performance and emissions production, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
18 (2013) 211e245, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2012.10.013.
[104] A.C. Carginin, Potencial da macaubeira como fonte de mate
ria-prima para
produça ~o de biodiesel, Embrapa Cerrados, 2008. https://www.embrapa.br/
busca-de-publicacoes/-/publicacao/571923/potencial-da-macaubeira-como-
fonte-de-materia-prima-para-producao-de-biodiesel. (Accessed 20 January
2017).
[105] A. Baglivi, G. Fiorese, G. Guariso, C. Ugge , Valuing crop diversity in biodiesel
production plans, Energy 93 (2015) 2351e2362, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.energy.2015.10.080.
[106] T. Buchholz, V.A. Luzadis, T.A. Volk, Sustainability criteria for bioenergy
systems: results from an expert survey, J. Clean. Prod. 17 (2009) S86eS98,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2009.04.015.
[107] ISCC. http://www.iscc-system.org/en/. (Accessed 19 January 2017).
[108] RSB, http://www.scsglobalservices.com/files/standards/10-11-12%20RSB-
STD-01-001-PCs%20Version%202.pdf, Accessed date: 19 January 2017..
109 A. Del Gatto, M.G. Melilli, S.A. Raccuia, S. Pieri, L. Mangoni, D. Pacifico,
M. Signor, D. Duca, E. Foppa Pedretti, C. Mengarelli, A comparative study of
oilseed crops (Brassica napus L. subsp. oleifera and Brassica carinata A. Braun)
in the biodiesel production chain and their adaptability to different Italian
areas, Ind. Crops Prod. 75 (2015) 98e107, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.indcrop.2015.04.029.
[110] J.M.L. Meneses, Ana
lise e estimativa da produtividade da cultura da mamona
para produça ~o de biodiesel em funça ~o do período chuvoso no estado do
Ceara
(in portuguese), Universidade Federal do Cear
a, 2007, http://www.
uece.br/macfa/index.php/arquivos/category/26-dissertacoes?down-
load¼125%3Aanlise-e-estimativa-da-produtividade-da-cultura-da-
mamona-para-produo-de-biodiesel-em-funo-do-perodo-chuvoso-no-
1350 L.M. de Souza et al. / Renewable Energy 149 (2020) 1339e1351

estado-do-cear. (Accessed 20 January 2017). [136] MME, Ministe
rio do Meio Ambiente, Caracterizaç~ ao das oleaginosas para
[111] E.C. Petrou, C.P. Pappis, Biofuels: A Survey on Pros and Cons, Energy & Fuels produç~ ao de biodiesel (in portuguese), http://www.mma.gov.br/estruturas/
23 (2009) 1055e1066, https://doi.org/10.1021/ef800806g. sqa_pnla/_arquivos/item_5.pdf. (Accessed 18 May 2017).
[112] B. Laviola, G. Capdeville, Mate
rias-primas oleaginosas para a produça ~o de [137] A. da S. Ce
sar, F. de A. Almeida, R.P. de Souza, G.C. Silva, A.E. Atabani, The
bioquerosene e oportunidades e desafios (in portuguese), in: Empres. Bras. prospects of using Acrocomia aculeata ( macauba ) a non-edible biodiesel
Pesqui. Agropecu
aria, 2015, https://www.embrapa.br/busca-de-noticias/-/ feedstock in Brazil, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 49 (2015) 1213e1220,
noticia/3344909/artigo-materias-primas-oleaginosas-para-a-producao-de- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.04.125.
bioquerosene–oportunidades-e-desafios. (Accessed 11 December 2017). [138] B.G. Laviola, A.A. Alves, A.K. Kobayashi, E.F. Formighieri, Pinha ~o-manso Na
[113] X. Zhao, L. Wei, J. Julson, First stage of bio-jet fuel production: non-food Embrapa Agroenergia (in portuguese), 2015, pp. 2177e4447. ISSN, https://
sunflower oil extraction using cold press method, AIMS Energy 2 (2014) ainfo.cnptia.embrapa.br/digital/bitstream/item/122754/1/cot12-Bruno-Pin-
193e209, https://doi.org/10.3934/energy.2014.02.193. hao-final.pdf. (Accessed 27 May 2017).
[114] S. Baroutian, M.K. Aroua, A.A.A. Raman, A. Shafie, R.A. Ismail, H. Hamdan, [139] I.R. Carvalho, C. Korcelski, G. Pelissari, A.D. Hanus, G.M. Rosa, Demanda
Blended aviation biofuel from esterified Jatropha curcas and waste vegetable hídrica das culturas de interesse agrono ^ mico (in Portuguese), Centro Cien-
oils, J. Taiwan Inst. Chem. Eng. 44 (2013) 911e916, https://doi.org/10.1016/ tífico Conhecer 9 (2013) 969.
j.jtice.2013.02.007. [140] L.C. Silva, T.V.R. Rao, Avaliaça ~o de me
todos para estimativa de coeficientes da
[115] A.C. Petcu, F.G. Florean, I. Porumbel, C. Berbente, V. Silivestru, Experiments cultura de amendoim, Rev. Bras. Eng. Agrícola Ambient. 10 (2006) 128e131,
regarding the combustion of camelina oil/kerosene mixtures on a burner, https://doi.org/10.1590/S1415-43662006000100019.
Energy Sustain. Dev. 33 (2016) 149e154, https://doi.org/10.1016/ [141] E.G. Junior, J.F. De Medeiros, T.K. De Melo, J.E. Sobrinho, G. Bristot, B.M. De
j.esd.2016.05.004. Almeida, Necessidade hídrica da cultura do girassol irrigado na chapada do
[116] M. Braun-Unkhoff, U. Riedel, Alternative fuels in aviation, CEAS Aeronaut. J. 6 Apodi, R. Bras. Eng. Agríc. Ambiental 17 (2013) 261e267.
(2015) 83e93, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13272-014-0131-2. [142] L.G. De Araujo, K.C. Souza, Pinha ~o-manso para produça ~o de biodiesel (in
[117] M.A.M.F. Melo, Avaliaça ~o das propriedades de o
leos vegetais visando a Portuguese), Revista Anhangüera 9 (2008) 95e119.
produça ~o de biodiesel (n.d.), 2014, http://bdtd.biblioteca.ufpb.br/handle/ [143] A.L. Genovese, M.E. Udaeta, L.C.R. Galvao, Aspectos energe
ticos da biomassa
tede/7149. como recurso no Brasil e no mundo (in Portuguese), in: Proceedings of the 6,
[118] R.W. Saaty, The analytic hierarchy processdwhat it is and how it is used, Encontro de Energia no Meio Rural, 2006.
Math. Model. 9 (1987) 161e176, https://doi.org/10.1016/0270-0255(87) [144] G.M. Lorenzi, Acrocomia aculeata (Jacq.) Lodd. ex Mart.-Arecaceae: bases
90473-8. para o extrativismo sustenta
vel (in portuguese), Doctoral thesis (2006),
[119] F.L.R. Mussoi, Modelo de decis~ ao integrado para a priorizaç~
gio
ao multiesta Universidade Federal do Paran
a, https://acervodigital.ufpr.br/handle/1884/
de projetos de distribuiça ~o considerando a qualidade da energia ele
trica (in 5279. (Accessed 20 May 2017).
portuguese), Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, https://repositorio.ufsc. [145] A.B. De Alencar, A.B. F Callou, R. Berger, O.A. Pageú, R.S. Oliveira,
br/handle/123456789/106933. (Accessed 20 January 2017). T.M.S. Almeida, Organizaça ~o produtiva do extrativismo da Macauba (Acro-
[120] T.L. Saaty, How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process, Eur. J. comia intumescens Drude) no distrito Arajara na Area
de Proteça ~o Ambiental
Oper. Res. 48 (1990) 9e26, https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(90)90057-I. Chapada do AraripeeBarbalha (in Portuguese), Cadernos de Agroecologia 10
[121] K.M.A.-S. Al-Harbi, Application of the AHP in project management, Int. J. Proj. (2016) 3.
Manag. 19 (2001) 19e27, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0263-7863(99)00038-1. [146] D. Toledo, Ana
lise te

cnica, econo ^mica e ambiental de macauba e de pinha ~o-
[122] H. Aras, Ş. Erdogmuş, E. Koç, Multi-criteria selection for a wind observation manso como alternativas de agregaç~ ao de renda na cadeia produtiva de
station location using analytic hierarchy process, Renew. Energy 29 (2004) biodiesel (in portuguese), Doctoral thesis, Universidade Federal de Viçosa,
1383e1392, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2003.12.020. 2010, http://locus.ufv.br/handle/123456789/3035. (Accessed 10 June 2017).
[123] P.A.S. Mendes, A.K. Barros, L.A. D’Avila, A.M. Antunes, Multicriteria mapping [147] H. Fonseca, L.E. Gutierrez, Composiça ~o em a
cidos graxos de o
leos vegetais e
of stakeholder preferences for the sustainability of the Brazilian program for gorduras animais, An. Da Esc, Super. Agric. Luiz Queiroz. 31 (1974) 485e490,
biodiesel production and use, Environ. Prog. Sustain. Energy 32 (2013) https://doi.org/10.1590/S0071-12761974000100038.
1262e1270, https://doi.org/10.1002/ep.11724. [148] C.A. Martin, V.V. de Almeida, M.R. Ruiz, J.E.L. Visentainer, M. Matshushita,
[124] C.-L. Hwang, K. Yoon, Multiple Attribute Decision Making, Springer Berlin N.E. de Souza, J.V. Visentainer, Acidos
graxos poliinsaturados o ^mega-3 e
Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1981, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642- ^ mega-6: importa
o ^ncia e ocorre ^ncia em alimentos, Rev. Nutr. 19 (2006)
48318-9. 761e770, https://doi.org/10.1590/S1415-52732006000600011.
[125] J.K.W. Wong, H. Li, Application of the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in

[149] R. Antoniassi, S. Freitas, Arvore do conhecimento: tecnologia de Alimentos
multi-criteria analysis of the selection of intelligent building systems, Build. (in portuguese), Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecua
ria, http://www.
Environ. 43 (2008) 108e125, https://doi.org/10.1016/ agencia.cnptia.embrapa.br/gestor/tecnologia_de_alimentos/arvore/
j.buildenv.2006.11.019. CONT000gc8yujq302wx5ok0. (Accessed 13 April 2017).
[126] K. Gdoura, M. Anane, S. Jellali, Geospatial and AHP-multicriteria analyses to [150] R.N. Pinotti, J.G.C. Do Amaral, Informaço ~es econo ^micas da mamona como
locate and rank suitable sites for groundwater recharge with reclaimed biocombustível (in portuguese), Pesquisa & Tecnologia 10 (2013) 1, http://
water, Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 104 (2015) 19e30, https://doi.org/10.1016/ www.aptaregional.sp.gov.br/acesse-os-artigos-pesquisa-e-tecnologia/
j.resconrec.2015.09.003. edicao-2013/jane. (Accessed 21 July 2017).
[127] M. Tavana, A. Hatami-Marbini, A group AHP-TOPSIS framework for human [151] F.H.L. Almeida, Desenvolvimento, acúmulo de o
leo e armazenamento de
spaceflight mission planning at NASA, Expert Syst. Appl. (2011), https:// coco Macauba (in portuguese), Masters dissertation, Universidade Estadual
doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.04.108. de Montes Claros, 2014.
[128] CREFBio, Centro de Refere ^ncia da Cadeia de Biocombustíveis para Agricultura [152] F.P. Amaral, Estudo das características físico-químicas dos o
leos da ame ^ndoa
Familiar (in portuguese), 2017, http://biomercado.com.br/conteudo.php? e polpa da macauba [Acrocomia aculeata (Jacq.) Lodd. ex Mart] (in portu-
id¼8#. (Accessed 23 April 2017). guese), Masters dissertation, Universidade Estadual Paulista, 2007.
[129] H.J.N. Díaz, Produça ~o de e
steres alquílicos de a

cidos graxos a partir do o
leo [153] B.G. Laviola, L.A. dos S. Dias, Teor e acúmulo de nutrientes em folhas e frutos
da polpa de macauba com a
lcoois em condiço ~es supercríticas: estudo da de pinha ~o-manso, Rev. Bras. Cie ^ncia do Solo 32 (2008) 1969e1975, https://
cine
tica de reaça
~o e dos custos de manufatura em escala industrial (in por- doi.org/10.1590/S0100-06832008000500018.
tuguese), 2016, https://repositorio.ufsc.br/xmlui/handle/123456789/168266. [154] T. Sluszz, J. Machado, Características das potenciais culturas mate
rias-primas
(Accessed 24 April 2017). do biodiesel e sua adoça ~o pela agricultura familiar (in Portuguese), in: Pro-
[130] A.G. da Silva Júnior, R. Perez, R.A. Motta, J.C.C Ervilha, M.A.V. Leite, Viabili- ceedings of the 6, Encontro de Energia no Meio Rural, 2006.
dade Econo ^mico-Financeira da Produça ~o e Industrializaç~
ao do Pinha~o Manso [155] R.C. AVELAR, Características fitote
cnicas do pinha ~o-manso, visando a  colheita
(in portuguese), https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ronaldo_Perez/ mecanizada (in portuguese), Doctoral thesis, Universidade Federal de Lavras,
publication/266593784_VIABILIDADE_ECONOMICO-FINANCEIRA_DA_ 2009, http://www.livrosgratis.com.br/download_livro_94337/
PRODUCAO_E_INDUSTRIALIZACAO_DO_PINHAO_MANSO/links/ caracteristicas_fitotecnicas_do_pinhao-manso_visando_a_colheita_
54ca85620cf2c70ce5221fd7.pdf, Accessed date: 16 may 2017. mecanizada. (Accessed 26 June 2017).
[131] Portal Agropecu
ario Agrolink. https://www.agrolink.com.br/cotacoes/. [156] MAPA, Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Supply, Registro Nacional de
(Accessed 16 May 2017). Cultivares e RNC (in portuguese), http://www.agricultura.gov.br/guia-de-
[132] CONAB, Preços agropecua
rios (in portuguese), http://www.conab.gov.br/ servicos/registro-nacional-de-cultivares-rnc, Accessed date: 03 july 2017..
detalhe.php?a¼1409&t¼2. (Accessed 17 May 2017). [157] TEC, Net calorific value table. http://www.teccalor.com.br/PDF/
[133] (in portuguese), MAPA, Ministe
rio da Agricultura, Pecua
ria e Abastecimento, TabelaPoderCalorifico.pdf. (Accessed 3 July 2017).
Anu
ario Estatístico da Agroenergia, 2014, http://www.agricultura.gov.br/ [158] A.C. Cardoso, Caracterizaça ~ o b

asica de spray de mistura terna
ria diesel-
assuntos/sustentabilidade/agroenergia/arquivos-publicacoes-agroenergia/ ethanol-o
leo vegetal, 2016. http://bdm.unb.br/handle/10483/14493.
anuario-esta. (Accessed 17 May 2017). (Accessed 19 July 2017).
[134] IBGE, Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística, Levantamento sis- [159] D. Agarwal, A.K. Agarwal, Performance and emissions characteristics of
tem
atico da produça ~o agrícola (in portuguese), ftp://ftp.ibge.gov.br/ Jatropha oil (preheated and blends) in a direct injection compression ignition
Producao_Agricola/Levantamento_Sistematico_da_Producao_Agricola_ engine, Appl. Therm. Eng. 27 (2007) 2314e2323, https://doi.org/10.1016/
[mensal]/Fasciculo/lspa_201702.pdf. (Accessed 18 May 2017). j.applthermaleng.2007.01.009.
[135] F.C.M. Martins, Monitoramento do crescimento da macauba utilizando [160] A.A.E.-R. Mohdaly, K.A. El-Hameed Seliem, A.E.-M. Maher Abu EL-Hassan,
imagens ae
reas (in portuguese), 2014, http://locus.ufv.br/handle/ A.A.T. Mahmoud, Effect of refining process on the quality characteristics of
123456789/777. (Accessed 20 May 2017). soybean and cotton seed oils, Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. Appl. Sci. 6 (2017)
 L.M. de Souza et al. / Renewable Energy 149 (2020) 1339e1351 1351

207e222, https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2017.601.026. [180] A.F. Dutra, A.S. de Melo, W.F. Dutra, F. G da Silva, I.M. de Oliveira,
[161] G.M. Bortoletto, Extraça ~o de o
leo de amendoim para produça ~o de biodiesel J.F. Suassuna, J.G. Neto, Agronomic performance and profitability of castor
(in portuguese), https://uspdigital.usp.br/siicusp/ bean (’Ricinus communis’ L.) and peanut (’Arachis hypogaea’L.) intercrop-
cdOnlineTrabalhoVisualizarResumo? ping in the Brazilian semiarid region, Aust. J. Crop. Sci. 9 (2015) 120e126.
numeroInscricaoTrabalho¼2425&numeroEdicao¼17. (Accessed 8 July 2017). [181] R.F. Santos, A. Todeschini, Evoluça ~o e perspectiva da cultura do amendoim
[162] F.R. Rodrigues, A.P. Mafra, G.M. Melo, T.N. Sousa, G.C. Santos, L.G. Viana, para biocombustível no Brasil1, Revista Brasileira de Energias Renova
veis 1
L.E. Silva, A.F. Vasconcelos, K.C. Martins, L. Martins, Avaliaç~ ao das caracter- (2012) 197e220.
ísticas físico-químicas de o
leo de mamona bruto obtido por prensa pista ~o- [182] J.L.S. Ferreira, Cobertura vegetal, teor de o
leo e produtividade de linhagens
cilindro com acionamento hidr
aulico (in Portuguese), Sociedade Brasileira de interespecíficas de amendoim no sudoeste de Goia
s (in Portuguese), Masters
Química (SBQ), 2016. http://sec.sbq.org.br/cdrom/33ra/resumos/T2583-1. dissertation, Universidade Federal de Goia
s, 2015.
pdf. (Accessed 8 July 2017).
gas, J.A.G. Silveira, The role of organic
[183] E.N. Silva, S.L. Ferreira-Silva, R.A. Vie
[163] M.N. Penha, M.D. Silva, K.K. Mendonca, J.F. Costa, A.P. Maciel, F. Silva, and inorganic solutes in the osmotic adjustment of drought-stressed Jatro-
Extraç~ ao e caracterizaça ~o físico-química do o
leo de pinh~ao manso (Jatropha pha curcas plants, Environ. Exp. Bot. 69 (2010) 279e285, https://doi.org/
Curcas L.) (in Portuguese), in: Reuni~ ao Anual da SBPC, vol. 60, SBPC, Cam- 10.1016/j.envexpbot.2010.05.001.
pinas, 2008, 2008. [184] A.J. Cattelan, A. Dall’Agnol, The rapid soybean growth in Brazil, OCL 25 (2018)
[164] A.C. Vieira, V.M. Vasconcelos, P.C.G. Silva, R.P. Oliveira, G.F. Silva, Winter- D102, https://doi.org/10.1051/ocl/2017058.
izaç~ ao do o
leo de soja associado a  degomagem para a produç~ ao de biodiesel [185] A.P.S. Virgílio, Agricultura moderna brasileira e aprofundamento da
(in portuguese), in: Congresso brasileiro de mamona, 4 & Simpo
sio Inter- depende ^ncia a partir dos anos 1990: o caso do agronego
cio da soja (in
nacional De Oleaginosas Energe
ticas, 2010, p. 1978. portuguese), Universidade Federal da Bahia, https://repositorio.ufba.br/ri/
[165] M. Siradze, I. Berdzenishvili, G. Jokhadze, Improvement of the process of handle/ri/25817. (Accessed 15 July 2017).
cottonseed oil refining, Int. J. Food Sci. Nutr. Eng. 7 (2017) 29e31, https:// [186] A.A.C. Purcino, Pinh~ ao Manso, EPAMIG, 1986, p. 7p. Belo Horizonte.
doi.org/10.5923/j.food.20170702.01. [187] C.R. Ranucci, H.J. Alves, C. da Silva, M.R. Monteiro, K.A. dos Santos,
[166] A.L. Pighinelli, Extraç~ ao mec^ anica de o
leos de amendoim e de girassol para a R.A. Bariccatti, E.A. da Silva, Obtença ~o de bioquerosene de Pinh~ ao-manso
produça ~o de biodiesel via cat
alise b
asica (in portuguese), https://www. (jatropha curcas l.) e suas misturas ao querosene fo
ssil, Revista Tecnolo
gica,
embrapa.br/agroenergia/busca-de-publicacoes/-/publicacao/882698/ 2015, pp. 43e52, https://doi.org/10.4025/revtecnol.v0i0.25927.
extracao-mecanica-de-oleos-de-amendoim-e-de-girassol-para-producao- [188] J.C. da S. Pereira, A.W.P. Evangelista, B.G. Laviola, T.D.A. Portes, J. Alves Júnior,
de-biodiesel-via-catalise-basica, 14july 2017. D. Casaroli, Canopy growth and productivity of Jatropha genotypes, Semina
[167] S. Yan, M. Kim, S.O. Salley, K.Y.S. Ng, Oil transesterification over calcium Cie^ncias Agra
rias 38 (2017) 135, https://doi.org/10.5433/1679-
oxides modified with lanthanum, Appl. Catal. Gen. 360 (2009) 163e170, 0359.2017v38n1p135.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcata.2009.03.015. [189] A. Kumar, S. Sharma, An evaluation of multipurpose oil seed crop for in-
[168] E.G. Giakoumis, Analysis of 22 vegetable oils’ physico-chemical properties dustrial uses (Jatropha curcas L.): a review, Ind. Crops Prod. 28 (2008) 1e10,
and fatty acid composition on a statistical basis, and correlation with the https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2008.01.001.
degree of unsaturation, Renew. Energy 126 (2018) 403e419, https://doi.org/ [190] D.B. de Rezende, M.H.C. de Andrade, V.M.D. Pasa, Processo alternativo de
10.1016/j.renene.2018.03.057. desacidificaça ~o do o
leo da polpa da macauba (acrocomia aculeata) visando
[169] R. Sarin, M. Sharma, S. Sinharay, R.K. Malhotra, JatrophaePalm biodiesel acoplamento em usinas de produç~ ao de biodiesel, The Journal of Engineering
blends: an optimum mix for Asia, Fuel 86 (2007) 1365e1371, https://doi.org/ and Exact Sciences 2 (2016) 061e080, https://doi.org/10.18540/jcecv-
10.1016/j.fuel.2006.11.040. l2iss3pp061-080.
[170] M.A.F. Finocchio, o
leos vegetais como substituto para o
leos minerais iso- [191] V. Scholz, J.N. da Silva, Prospects and risks of the use of castor oil as a fuel,
lantes, Revista e
cnico-Científica 1 (2017). Biomass Bioenergy 32 (2008) 95e100, https://doi.org/10.1016/
[171] G.D.P. Augustus, M. Jayabalan, G. Seiler, Evaluation and bioinduction of en- j.biombioe.2007.08.004.
ergy components of Jatropha curcas, Biomass Bioenergy 23 (2002) 161e164, [192] P. Trivedi, H. Olcay, M.D. Staples, M.R. Withers, R. Malina, S.R.H. Barrett,
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0961-9534(02)00044-2. Energy return on investment for alternative jet fuels, Appl. Energy 141
[172] M.E.F. de Almeida, J.H. de Queiroz, N.M.B. Costa, S.L.P. Matta, Lipídeos se
ricos (2015) 167e174, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.12.016.
e morfologia hep
atica de ratos alimentados com diferentes fontes lipídicas [193] R.W. Stratton, H.M. Wong, J.I. Hileman, Quantifying variability in life cycle

leo de soja, gordura de peixe e porco, margarina e manteiga), Rev. Nutr. 24
(o greenhouse gas inventories of alternative middle distillate transportation
(2011) 143e152, https://doi.org/10.1590/S1415-52732011000100014. fuels, Environ. Sci. Technol. 45 (2011) 4637e4644, https://doi.org/10.1021/
[173] A.S. Dutra, S. Medeiros Filho, Teste de deterioraç~ ao controlada na determi- es102597f.
naça ~o do vigor em sementes de algod~ ao, Rev. Bras. Sementes 30 (2008) [194] S. Ukaew, R. Shi, J.H. Lee, D.W. Archer, M. Pearlson, K.C. Lewis, L. Bregni,
19e23, https://doi.org/10.1590/S0101-31222008000100003. D.R. Shonnard, Full chain life cycle assessment of greenhouse gases and
[174] G. Alves de Azeredo, R.D.L. Alcantara Bruno, K. Pinheiro lopes, A. Silva, energy demand for Canola-derived jet fuel in North Dakota, United States,
E. Diniz, A. Alves de Lima, Conservaça ~o de sementes de amendoim (Arachis ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 4 (2016) 2771e2779, https://doi.org/10.1021/
hypogaea L.) Em funç~ ao do beneficiamento, embalagem e ambiente arma- acssuschemeng.6b00276.
zenamiento, Pesqui. Agropecua
ria Trop. 35 (2005) 37e44. [195] B. Amigun, J.K. Musango, An analysis of potential feedstock and location for
[175] F.N. de Oliveira, S.B. Torres, F.E.R. Vieira, E.P. de Paiva, A.S. Dutra, Qualidade biodiesel production in Southern Africa, Int. J. Sustain. Energy 30 (2011)
fisiolo
gica de sementes de girassol avaliadas por condutividade ele
trica, S35eS58, https://doi.org/10.1080/1478646X.2011.579611.
Pesqui. Agropecua
ria Trop. 42 (2012) 279e287, https://doi.org/10.1590/ [196] S. Zhou, Y. Zhang, X. Bao, Methodology of location selection for biofuel re-
S1983-40632012000300007. finery based on fuzzy TOPSIS, in: 2012 IEEE Int. Conf. Autom. Logist, IEEE,
[176] L. Souza, O. Tonetti, A. Davide, Determinaça ~o do teor de a
gua em sementes 2012, pp. 431e436, https://doi.org/10.1109/ICAL.2012.6308246.
de mamona (Ricinus communis L.) pelos me
todos de estufa e forno micro- [197] Y. Costa, A. Duarte, W. Sarache, A decisional simulation-optimization
ondas (in portuguese), in: II Congresso Brasileiro de Plantas Oleaginosas, framework for sustainable facility location of a biodiesel plant in Colombia,


Oleos, Gorduras e Biodiesel, 2005. J. Clean. Prod. 167 (2017) 174e191, https://doi.org/10.1016/
[177] T.H. Chaves, O. Resende, V.C. Siqueira, R. Ullmann, Qualidade fisiolo
gica das j.jclepro.2017.08.126.
sementes de pinh~ ao manso (Jatropha curcas L.) durante o armazenamento [198] N. Martinkus, W. Shi, N. Lovrich, J. Pierce, P. Smith, M. Wolcott, Integrating
em tre ^s ambientes, Semina Cie ^ncias Agra
rias 33 (2012) 1653e1662, https:// biogeophysical and social assets into biomass-to-biofuel supply chain siting
doi.org/10.5433/1679-0359.2012v33n5p1653. decisions, Biomass Bioenergy 66 (2014) 410e418, https://doi.org/10.1016/
[178] B.C. Mo € hler, Avaliaç~ao das características de secagem dos gra ~os de soja (in j.biombioe.2014.04.014.
portuguese), http://hdl.handle.net/10183/35186, Accessed date: 19 july [199] N. Martinkus, S.A.M. Rijkhoff, S.A. Hoard, W. Shi, P. Smith, M. Gaffney,
2017.. M. Wolcott, Biorefinery site selection using a stepwise biogeophysical and
[179] J.J. Steiner, K.C. Lewis, H.S. Baumes, N.L. Brown, A feedstock readiness level social analysis approach, Biomass Bioenergy 97 (2017) 139e148, https://
tool to complement the aviation industry fuel readiness level tool, BioEnergy doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2016.12.022.
Res 5 (2012) 492e503, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-012-9187-1.