Journal of Cleaner Production 230 (2019) 1085e1095

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Life cycle assessment of biodiesel production from solaris seed tobacco

F.S. Carvalho a, c, **, F. Fornasier b, J.O.M. Leita
~o b, J.A.R. Moraes a, c, R.C.S. Schneider a, b, *
a
Programa de Po ~o Em Tecnologia Ambiental, Universidade de Santa Cruz do Sul e UNISC, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil
s-graduaça
b
Departamento de Química e Física Universidade de Santa Cruz do Sul e UNISC, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil
c
Departamento de Engenharias, Arquitetura e Ci^ rias, Universidade de Santa Cruz do Sul e UNISC, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil
encias Agra

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

Article history: Tobacco is the most profitable and main nonfood agricultural crop worldwide, from which leaves for
Received 2 February 2019 cigarette manufacturing are obtained. Despite the proven harm of cigarettes to human health, thousands
Received in revised form of families are financially dependent on the crop for the purpose of cigarette production. From efforts to
8 May 2019
install tobacco farming to produce biodiesel, which promote agricultural diversification, the objective of
Accepted 15 May 2019
Available online 16 May 2019
this study was to apply a life cycle assessment (LCA) from agricultural seed production to biodiesel
production. Thus, the Solaris tobacco, which receives treatment that is similar to the cultivation of
conventional tobacco, was evaluated. The LCA was performed in steps: tobacco seed production, oil
Keywords:
Tobacco energy
extraction from tobacco seed and biodiesel production. The research was performed considering the
Solaris functional unit of 1 kg of biodiesel produced. The SimaPro 8.5 software, which contains the Ecoinvent 3.4
LCA database and the evaluation methods Ecological Scarcity 2006, EDIP2003, EPD 2008, BEES, CML 2, CML
LCIA 2001, Eco-Indicator 99, EPS 2000, IMPACT 2002þ, ReCiPe and TRACI 2, were the analytical tools. The
SimaPro production of Solaris tobacco biodiesel creates impacts that are similar to those that have been identified
in biodiesel production from other crops. The total damage for the production of 1 kg of biodiesel from
Solaris tobacco was determined to be 1.07 10-5 Daly, 7.13  10-8 species yr-1 and $1.42 for categories
related to human health, ecosystems and resources, respectively. The LCA results served as a tool to
improve biodiesel production and prevent future environmental impacts. Our analysis of the LCA
normalization results in each phase revealed that fertilizers and energy use were the largest contributors
to the environmental impact.
© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction effectively began in Brazil with a smoking ban in closed places

Tobacco is the most important nonfood crop in the world with
more than 4 million hectares of extension and the highest ratio
between the aerial part/roots of agricultural plants (Poltronieri,
2016b). This culture is investigated worldwide due to the poten-
tial to explore new biotechnological derivatives products. All parts
of plants can be harnessed; however, the use of leaves for cigarettes
production is economically recognized (Gao et al., 2013).
The cigarette industry, which uses the profitable tobacco leaves,
is under great pressure due to increasing demand to control the use
and production of tobacco for smoking. Smoking restrictions
* Corresponding author. Av Independe ^ncia, 2293, CEP 96815-900, Santa Cruz do
Sul, RS, Brazil.
** Corresponding author. Programa de Po s-graduaça
~o em Tecnologia Ambiental,
Universidade de Santa Cruz do Sul e UNISC, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil.
E-mail address: rosana@unisc.br (R.C.S. Schneider).
(Brazil Law Decree No 8.262, 2014), whereas a global anti-smoking
campaign began in Geneva (Marín Tuya , 2003), which corresponds
to a serious challenge for the production, trade and industrializa-
tion of tobacco (Chiririwa et al., 2014; Lidon-Moyano et al., 2018).
Several agro-industrial regions are under the economic domi-
nance of tobacco production. In Zimbabwe, approximately 30% of
jobs and gains in foreign currency of the country were attributed to
tobacco. Tobacco-producing countries include Turkey, Bulgaria,
Macedonia, India, England, Pakistan, Serbia, Cuba, Colombia, East
Africa, Ecuador, Fiji, Guatemala, Haiti, Iran, the United States, China
and Tanzania, as well as Brazil (Atabani et al., 2013; Chiririwa et al.,
2014; Giannelos et al., 2002). According to the tobacco industry
union, Brazil is the second largest producer of tobacco, and China is
the world's largest tobacco exporter (Kist, 2018).
In the Rio Pardo Valley region of southern Brazil, where planting
and harvesting tobacco leaves is the most important economic
activity on family farms, more than 731,390 tons of tobacco leaves
are harvested to produce cigarettes and boost exports (Schneider

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.177
0959-6526/© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1086 F.S. Carvalho et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 230 (2019) 1085e1095
Abbreviations
LCA life cycle assessment
LCI life cycle inventory
LCIA life cycle impact assessment
GHG greenhouse gas
FED fossil energy depletion
LPG liquefied petroleum gas
WCO waste cooking oil
CML Centre of Environmental Science, Leiden
kg 1.4-DB eq kg 1.4 dichlorobenzene equivalent
DALY Disability-Adjusted Life Years
PDF Potentially Disappeared Fraction
CC climate change
OD ozone depletion
HT human toxicity
POF photochemical oxidant formation
et al., 2017).
Similar to other agricultural crops, the economy based on to-
bacco can be diversified due to other uses of tobacco. Tobacco is
recognized as a stimulant and can be employed for medicinal
purposes (antispasmodic, diuretic, expectorant, and sedative since
the Mayan times) or can even be used to manufacture shampoos,
shoe polish and other products (Groark, 2010; Jude, 2013).
By improving the synthesis of artemisinic acid in the chloro-
plasts of tobacco plant, tobacco can contribute to combatting ma-
laria. By adding “accessory genes” that render artemisinic acid
production more efficient, 120 mg per kilogram of biomass can
replace the expensive cultivation of sweet wormwood (Artemisia
annua) (Fuentes et al., 2016). Tobacco has also stimulated sub-
stantial interest in the biosynthesis capacity that results in an oil
content in its seed of up to 40% (Andrianov et al., 2010).
Vegetable oils are associated with the search for alternatives to
petroleum-derived fuels due to their composition in triacylglycer-
ols, which enables biodiesel production (Giannelos et al., 2002;
Knothe, 2010; Usta et al., 2011; Veljkovic et al., 2006). Tobacco
biodiesel is a second generation biodiesel that is derived from
nonfood crops, such as the biodiesel from Jatropha multifida, Mad-
huca longifolia, Gossypium hirsutum L., Pongamia, Dipteryx odorata,
Azadirachta indica, Moringa oleifera and Hevea brasiliensis L.
(Atabani et al., 2013; Kumar and Sharma, 2015).
In Brazil, soybean oil is the main raw material for biodiesel
production, followed by animal fat and cottonseed oil (2% in 2015)
(Lima et al., 2017). It is also worth noting that the agro-industrial
diversification of biodiesel production is an important alternative
for the development of regions with agricultural vocations, which
provide farmers new opportunities in various parts of the world
(Guil-Guerrero et al., 2017).
Therefore, biodiesel production can contribute to the diversifi-
cation of the economy associated with new uses of tobacco. An
alternative is the use of agricultural varieties with substantial seed
production (Grisan et al., 2016). Similar to the tobacco cultivars for
smoking, this alternative use of tobacco drives to farmers toward a
new industrial branch of a different tobacco variety. Therefore,
there is a need for the production of a different variety of tobacco,
such as Solaris provided by Sunchem Holding, in southern Brazil.
This tobacco variety (http://www.sunchem.nl/solaris/) is free of
nicotine and has a high yield of oil in the seeds (Poltronieri, 2016a);
the oil has characteristics similar to those of other edible oils and
has the potential for biodiesel production (Fornasier et al., 2018).
In addition, the traditional tobacco (Virginia and Burley), two
PMF particulate matter formation
IR ionizing radiation
TA terrestrial acidification
FE freshwater eutrophication
ME marine eutrophication
TET terrestrial ecotoxicity
FET freshwater ecotoxicity
MET marine ecotoxicity
ALO agricultural land occupation
ULO urban land occupation
NLT natural land transformation
WD water depletion
MD mineral resource depletion
FD fossil resource depletion
NR natural resources
HH human health
ES ecosystems
varieties with nicotine and produced exclusively for harvesting
leaves, is different of energetic tobacco (Solaris). The formation of
flowers is not allowed because the energy of the plant should be
used to produce better leaves and not flower and seed. Thus, it is
not possible to produce the leaf for cigarette and the seeds for
biodiesel, from the same plant. The seed of these tobaccos are
produced exclusively by the specialized agroindustry.
Thus, to intensify efforts to convert tobacco into a promising
alternative for biofuel production, studies are needed to demon-
strate that tobacco is competitive with traditional oleaginous plants
and to identify the impacts and important technological bottle-
necks. There is also the need to demystify the use of this agricul-
tural crop since society is only concerned with its use in the
production of cigarettes.
To contribute to this agro-industrial diversification among to-
bacco producers, this study investigates new crops with the po-
tential for biodiesel production. In addition, a gradual increase in
the percentage of biodiesel is detected in the diesel distributed in
the fuel stations in Brazil, which is currently 10% in diesel (B10)
since March 2018.
The use of biodiesel from tobacco seeds underwent a pilot study
to contribute to the productive implementation process. To
improve the use of this biodiesel, a life cycle assessment (LCA)
served as a tool to understand the impacts that are attributed to the
process. An LCA enables an evaluation since the experimental
farmer can use this biodiesel in farm vehicles, which produce
several emissions.
An LCA is a systematic tool that compiles and evaluates aspects
in relation to environmental impacts of products or production
stages and considers primary environmental issues and final
disposal after use.
According to the environmental management - life cycle
assessment - principles framework, an LCA is regulated in phases:
goal and scope, life cycle inventory (LCI), life cycle impact assess-
ment (LCIA) and critical analysis (ISO, 2006).
The biodiesel production LCA in Brazil has already been devel-
oped for other crops, such as cottonseed oil the production chains
(Lima et al., 2017), the palm-based oil biorefineries (Delivand and
Gnansounou, 2013; Vaskan et al., 2018), the sunflower production
systems (Matsuura et al., 2017), and the comparison between
soybean and beef tallow (Esteves and Pereira, 2017). Research
related to a biodiesel LCA indicates the action should be taken to
make the process more environment friendly. A Malaysian study
showed that palm oil biodiesel reduces 38% of the CO2 emitted
 F.S. Carvalho et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 230 (2019) 1085e1095
compared with petrodiesel (Yee et al., 2009).
In other countries, several evaluations confirmed the impact
reduction with biodiesel. Using LCA to evaluate the production of
algae and jatropha biodiesel, the processes showed reductions of
36e40% in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and 10e25% in fossil
energy depletion (FED) compared with fossil diesel impacts
(Ajayebi et al., 2013). Another study showed a reduction in CO2
emissions with bio-oil from palm oil or cooking oil biobased with
petrodiesel (Intarapong et al., 2016; Sajid et al., 2016).
In Chile, the environmental assessment showed that colza has a
better environmental profile than sunflower for biodiesel produc-
tion, with a greater impact in 9 of the 11 impact categories that
were evaluated (Iriarte et al., 2010).
Kaercher et al. (2013) investigated the impact of sunflower
biodiesel in southern Brazil and demonstrated the environmental
benefits and impacts from a pilot plant. The partner association
installed a new biodiesel plant to produce a sufficient amount of
biodiesel from used biobased cooking oil for use in fleets of trucks.
In relation to tobacco, agricultural technology with a high yield
in leaves is adaptable to other varieties (Chiririwa et al., 2014;
Giannelos et al., 2002; Jude, 2013; Poltronieri, 2016b; Sharma
et al., 2015; Usta et al., 2011). Diversification in the area of to-
bacco cultivation should consider the capacity of income genera-
tion, security and stability in production and commercialization
and the possibility of family farm production, family health and
environment care (Vargas and Oliveira, 2012).
Diversification initiatives evaluated by the LCA can facilitate the
installation of a new business scenario from the perspective of
determining if the technology is clean and its associated impacts.
Brazil is a producer and exporter of oil; the development of
renewable energy in Brazil is a strategic goal for public authorities,
which provides a new impetus for this sector to replace the fossil
energy resources.
Garraín et al. (2014) showed that biofuels have the potential to
be optimized to improve the environmental performance through
the use of industrial symbiosis concepts. Even if integration pro-
duces environmental benefits, not all impact categories achieve
benefits. The results depend on the allocation methods, energy
system, and choices. Amouri et al. (2016) explored the LCA of
second-generation biodiesel derived from Ricinus communis in
Algeria and concluded that it is a promising alternative with a
positive return-on-energy investment of 2.6.
Thus, LCA is a tool that can be effectively applied in assessing
various renewable energy sources to help policymakers choose
ideal energy sources for specific purposes. In addition, biodiesel
production has high requirements of material and energy inputs
and emits substances to air and water depending on the process.
For this reason, any inputs or outputs in the production stage
cannot be disregarded (Sajid et al., 2016).
The objective of this research was to evaluate the life cycle of
biodiesel production from Solaris tobacco seeds, considering to-
bacco cultivation and harvesting, and oil extraction and trans-
esterification from a perspective of “cradle to gate” analysis and
assuming that the combustion of biodiesel from several plants is
similar.
2. Methodology
All systematic LCAs involved the scope and objective of the
evaluation, the LCI, the LCIA and the interpretation. The software
SimaPro 8.5.0.0 PhD, which was developed by PRe  Consulants 2017,
and the Ecoinvent 3.4 database were applied. The phases of seeds
cultivation, oil extraction and biodiesel production were investi-
gated. In the LCA, transport related to the raw material or finished
product was not considered since the proposition is based on the
1087
pilot unit, which may be installed next to the crop.
This software enabled the investigation of the process using
different methods available in this version: Ecological Scarcity
2006, EDIP2003, EPD 2008, BEES, CML 2, CML 2001, Eco-Indicator
99 (individualist perspective) EPS 2000, IMPACT 2002þ, ReCiPe
(midpoint and endpoint individualist perspective) and Tool for the
Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and other environmental
Impacts (TRACI 2).
3. Goal and scope
The production was performed in the Rio Pardo Valley, Rio
Grande do Sul using an experimental crop (Fig. 1) for the produc-
tion of Solaris tobacco seeds by Sunchem Brazil. Data were obtained
from a 10-ha experimental farmer, and oil extraction was con-
ducted by pressing and biodiesel production, both on a pilot scale.
The data were collected from the experimental farm, and the
responsible producer was interviewed about the resources and
quantities used in the planting, crop productivity, number of plants
per area, machinery, fuel consumption per hour, inputs and waste.
The planting of the greenhouse seedlings was the beginning of
the process, which was performed in the winter, with a transplant
for the crop in the spring. Two seed harvests were conducted in the
summer. Mechanization was employed for soil preparation and soil
correction (subsoiling, sorting and fertilization), and transplanting
and harvesting of the seedlings were manually performed.
The mechanized operations involved desiccation to eliminate
other plants before preparing the soil; insecticide and fungicide
application pretransplant to control insects and fungi; application
of boron for plant nutrition; posttransplant preventive and post-
transplant fungicide application; nitrogen fertilization for plant
nutrition and fungicide preventive application if necessary, during
the development phase of the crop. Harvesting was manually
performed, and the seeds were cleaned using a screening system
with a classifier (Vence Tudo brand and CA40 model) and a capacity
of 200 kg h-1.
Extraction and biodiesel production data were collected in the
pilot plant of the university. A survey of the installed power in the
equipment, inputs, liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) consumption,
process yield of product and co-product, generation of by-products,
and waste generated was conducted.
For the oil extraction, the seeds were heated using a cooker
(Scott Tech brand, SMR600 e G model) that assisted in the partial
removal of moisture; the seeds were heated at 90  C. Pressing was
performed with a mechanical press (Scott Tech brand, ERT6011 -
STD model) with a capacity of 60 kg h-1.
The pressing was conducted in tubular radial extractor equip-
ment that forces the seeds through a cylinder that was modified for
small seeds and had small holes to separate tobacco cake and oil-
slurry.
The oil-slurry was separated by decantation and filtration. The
decanted oil was also centrifuged at 3600 rpm, and the separated
slurry mass was added to the slurry mass obtained in the decan-
tation. This residual biomass was composted; however, the activ-
ities and emissions of the compost were not included in the
inventory.
Likewise, the impact of CO2 consumption by photosynthesis
during plant growth was not included in the inventory. This input is
positive for the climate change category since it removes carbon
from the atmosphere (Khatri et al., 2017).
Thus, the carbon incorporation into biomass was not considered
because absorbed carbon would be released to the environment in
composting or burning as fuel (Nguyen et al., 2017).
In biodiesel production, the extracted and centrifuged oil was
submitted to transesterification. The pilot biodiesel production
1088 F.S. Carvalho et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 230 (2019) 1085e1095

Fig. 1. Location of tobacco production where Solaris tobacco experimental farming was installed.

conditions followed the optimization of biodiesel production on a batch and can produce 300 L in one day. Equipment were built to
laboratory scale according to (Fornasier et al., 2018). obtain biodiesel from several types of oil and may employ a
The pilot plant (Fig. 2) has the capacity to produce 100 L per methanolysis or ethanolysis process.
 F.S. Carvalho et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 230 (2019) 1085e1095
In this study, methanolysis with alkaline catalysis (CH3ONa) was
employed at 65  C for 1 h with 450e500 rpm of agitation. After the
reaction, the glycerol and the residual alcohol were separated.
The agricultural productivity of the crop is 6 tons of seed per
hectare for each crop, which is equivalent to the occupation of
1.67 m2 for the production of 1 kg of seed. For the extraction of the
oil, 2.95 kg of seeds were needed to obtain 1 kg of oil. The seeds
were the input to the oil production, and oil was the input to
generate 1 kg of biodiesel. Therefore, 1 kg of biodiesel produced
from Solaris tobacco seeds was adopted as a functional unit. It was
considered that the heat capacity of biodiesel is 8.823 cal g-1 or
36.97 MJ kg-1 and that the heat capacity of tobacco oil is 10.119 cal g-
1
or 39.4 MJ kg-1 (Giannelos et al., 2002; Sharma et al., 2015). Fig. 3
shows the system boundaries adopted in this study for the tech-
nological system that consists of the following phases: tobacco
cultivation, oil extraction and biodiesel production.
4. Life cycle inventory (LCI)
Table 1 shows the inventoried data during the steps of tobacco
cultivation and seed harvesting, seed oil extraction and biodiesel
production; the data include the inputs, energy consumption and
emissions and are organized similar to other authors (Castanheira
and Freire, 2016; Herrmann et al., 2013; Lima et al., 2017). The
agrochemicals were inserted in the inventory based on the active
principle.
From the inventory, three co-products were recognized: tobacco
biomass, which corresponds to stems and roots after harvesting the
Fig. 2. Pilot plant used for tobacco biodiesel production.
1089
seeds; the tobacco cake after the extraction of oil; and glycerin after
transesterification. These co-products were exploited in other
studies as renewable inputs. Moreover, the glycerol can be used by
various industries; the stem and root can be used in lignocellulosic
ethanol production and the protein-rich tobacco cake can be used
for animal feedstock once it is nicotine-free. Therefore, biodiesel
industry may be a multiproduct biorefinery feedstock because it is
economically and environmentally attractive, as suggested by
Vaskan et al. (2018).
5. Life cycle impacts assessment (LCIA)
The LCIA was performed by obtaining all impacts generated
from each of the methods available in the SimaPro 8.5.0.0 software,
which were cross-referenced in an Excel spreadsheet to select the
possible impacts to be compared among the methods, taking into
account the unit and the type of impacts. The main impacts iden-
tified by the methods were related to eutrophication, land use,
global warming, acidification and toxicity.
The evaluation of the impacts using the different available
methods enabled the calculation of CO2, NOx, SO2 emissions for air
and N and PO3 4 emissions for water and land use, as shown in
Table 2. The potential of emissions to the atmosphere are mainly
associated with the categories of global warming, photochemical
smog and acidification, and N and P emitted to water have conse-
quences for the eutrophication category. The land use was pre-
sented as the Potentially Affected Fraction (PAF)/m2/year.
1090 F.S. Carvalho et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 230 (2019) 1085e1095

Fig. 3. System boundaries for Life Cycle Assessment of the tobacco biodiesel production.

Table 1 5.1. Global warming potential

Inputs and outputs to obtain 1 kg of tobacco biodiesel.

Main steps Input/output Quantities In the analysis performed for the biodiesel production of the
Cultivation Seed (kg) 2.93
Solaris tobacco, the methods presented in the SimaPro software
Area (m2) 1.67 were compared. In the global warming category, the impact values
Diesel (g) 8.96 (Table 2) were 6.67 ± 0.04 kg CO2, which was equivalent to a low
N-Fertilizer (g) 34.63 relative standard deviation (0.6%).
P-Fertilizer (g) 21.30
Regardless of the method, the values are higher than those
K-Fertilizer (g) 23.67
Boric acid (g) 3.33 obtained for most of the studies that address biodiesel production
Fungicide (g) 1.50 for the same mass unit. From sunflower oil, 1.24 kg CO2 eq (De
Herbicide (g) 1.21 Marco et al., 2016), microalga lipid with >2 kg CO2 eq (Ajayebi
Insecticide (g) 0.97
et al., 2013), soybean oil 0.6 kg CO2 eq (Panichelli et al., 2009),
Oil extraction Cake (kg) 1.85 Colombian palm oil 0.925 kg CO2 eq (Castanheira and Freire, 2016),
LGP (kg) 0.15 cooking oil 2.6 kg CO2 eq (Intarapong et al., 2016), cotton oil
Seed (kg) 2.95
1.475 kg CO2 eq (Lima et al., 2017), and colza oil 4.292 kg CO2 eq in
Water (kg) 0.07
Electricity (kWh) 0.76 the worst case (Malça et al., 2014) were obtained.
Wastewater e untreated (ton) 0.074 From tobacco oil, the environmental impact values may be lower
Solid residue with oil (kg) 0.059 on the industrial scale, considering co-products exploitation and
Transesterification Glycerin (kg) 0.1 evaluating a plant in operation with automation. Crude glycerin is
Tobacco oil (kg) 1 fully utilized in the animal feed, as suggested by (Herrmann et al.,
Methanol (kg) 0.13 2013) with an energy ratio of approximately 1:1 in the same
Ethanol (kg) 0.05
manner that soybean meal is used for feed production, with sus-
Sodium methoxide (kg) 0.02
Electricity (kWh) 28.92 tainability levels depending on the crop (Ferna ndez-Tirado et al.,
Methanol emission (kg) 0.0029 2017). To minimize the global warming potential, the consumption
Ethanol emission (kg) 0.048 of agricultural inputs should be optimized once the crop is
commercially developed. For tobacco, the study started with exper-
imental farming and equipment on a pilot scale, and, therefore, in less

Table 2
Comparison of assessment methods for global warming, photochemical smog, acidification and eutrophication.

Method Global Warming (GWP100) Acidification Eutrofization Land use

kg CO2 eq kg kg SO2 eq Kg kg N eq Kg kg PO3

4 eq Kg m2yr

BEES 6.65 e 1.52  10-3 e

CML 2 6.65 7.84  10-3 e 3.00  10-3 e
CML 2001 6.65 7.93  10-3 6.66  10-3 3.00  10-3 5.46  10-1
EDIP2003 6.67 e 7.41  10-4 5.58  10-4 e
EPD 2008 6.65 6.98  10-3 e 3.04  10-3 e
TRACI 2 6.66 e 5.85  10-3 e e
Ecoindicator 99 e e e e 5.31  10-1
Impact 2002 e 8.07  10-3 e 8.00  10-4 2.77  10-1
ReCiPe 6.76 7.03  10-3 8.67  10-4 6.37  10-4 5.33  10-1
Average 6.67 7.57  10-3 3.53  10-3 1.794  10-3 4.70  10-1
SD (%) 0.60 6.90 89.70 65.90 27.41
 F.S. Carvalho et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 230 (2019) 1085e1095 1091

Fig. 4. Graphical representation of the production of tobacco biodiesel in relation to the AICV categories using the ReCiPe Midpoint. Where: A) agricultural production, B) oil
extraction and, C) biodiesel production.
1092 F.S. Carvalho et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 230 (2019) 1085e1095
Table 3
Human toxicity and ecotoxicity of biodiesel production from tobacco Solaris.
METHOD UNIT CML 2001
Human toxicity kg 1.4-DB eq 1.00400
Fresh water aquatic ecotoxicity kg 1.4-DB eq 0.35800
Marine aquatic ecotoxicity kg 1.4-DB eq 0.22500
Terrestrial ecotoxicity kg 1.4-DB eq 0.00144
efficient conditions than the industrial scale. Another beneficial
environment effect may be automation, according to Castanheira
et al. (2015), which attained 0.137 kg of CO2 eq with LCIA.
The estimated production of tobacco biodiesel generates 0.18 kg
CO2 eq per MJ. These data are higher than that obtained from
soybean biodiesel. The industrial data of soybean biodiesel ob-
tained by the research of Castanheira et al. (2015) that used bio-
diesel from Brazil (MT, GO, PR and RS) and considered 37 MJ kg-1 of
biodiesel indicated 1.369e1.517 kg of CO2 eq for each kg of biodiesel
with 0.037e0.041 kg of CO2 eq per MJ.
5.2. Eutrophication and photochemical smog
In tobacco biodiesel production, the eutrophication potential
was 1.74  10-3 kg PO3 -3
4 eq and 3.53  10 kg N eq per kg of bio-
diesel produced with a high relative standard deviation of 65.9 and
89.7%, respectively.
The differences among the values obtained by the different
methods are attributed to the calculations using the same in-
ventory. ReCiPe is considered the residence time of the nutrients in
fresh or seawater and uses the Eutrend model, which inserts the
residence time of the nutrient (Hauschild et al., 2012).
According to Caldeira et al. (2019), who investigated biodiesel
blends (palm, soya, rapeseed and waste cooking oil (WCO)), the
eutrophication was important for LCIA interpretation. These au-
thors obtained 2.41 to 4.35  10-4 kg PO3 4 eq with better results for
WCO blends.
The average phosphate equivalent was less than the values
obtained with only rapeseed cultivation (5.26  10-3 kg PO3 4 eq) in
Italy (Forleo et al., 2018). Compared with other studies, the bio-
diesel life cycle eutrophication potential is higher than that of
petrodiesel; for soybean, jatropha, and microalgae, the biodiesel life
cycle eutrophication potential was 3.96, 2.25 and 1.53 times,
respectively, higher than that of petrodiesel (Ajayebi et al., 2013).
The values obtained with the tobacco biodiesel can be compared
using the CML 2001 method; with the values from Hou et al. (2011),
the potential for eutrophication with tobacco is assumed to be
higher.
The values of 6.95, 6.60 and 6.21 kg eq NOX were calculated
(Table 2). In the cultivation stage, the greatest impact is attributed
to the use of fertilizers and agrochemicals, as shown in Fig. 4A.
_
According to Krzyzaniak et al. (2018), the use of fertilizers can cause
a 30 to 56 times greater impact on freshwater eutrophication.
Although the presence of phosphorus in the fertilizer is responsible
for this impact category, nitrogen also has a relevant role.
According to Nemecek et al. (2007), approximately 17% of the
total nitrogen consumed as urea is sublimated as NeNH3 and
potentially contributes to N2O emissions due to the microorgan-
isms action in the agricultural stage, since denitrification corre-
sponds to 21% of the N2O produced. In addition, Liu et al. (2018)
showed that 1e2% of N in N-fertilizer is released as N2O.
As in the case of sunflower biodiesel, eutrophication was
directly associated with the cultivation stage, with the greatest
impact given in kg of N eq (Harris et al., 2015).
5.3. Acidification
RECIPE In relation to acidification, an average of 0.007570 kg of SO2 eq
0.1830
with a relative standard deviation of 6.9% was obtained, which shows
0.0014 a coherence among the values obtained with the different methods
0.0108 presented in Table 2 and the minimum variation among the methods
0.0075 of AICV. According to Seppa €la
€ et al. (2005), the acidification values
were considered an indicator of the category, cumulative excess
emission and regionalization, and constituting characterization fac-
tors, which were recommended in 2002 for the CML.
5.4. Toxicity
The results of ecotoxicity and human toxicity are presented in
Table 3. The results of CML 2001 and ReCiPe are not consistent since
the coverage is global in the former and based on Europe in the
latter; however, the results reveal that the production process of
the biodiesel contains inputs and energy responsible for impacts on
biota and man. Based on CML 2001, impacts on the organisms
present in the sediments of 0.373 and 0.714 kg 1.4-DBeq for marine
and freshwater, respectively, are observed.
5.5. Land use
The raw materials for biofuels must consider land use and land
use transformation because the production includes tillage. Ac-
cording to Williams et al. (2015), land use consists of the man-
agement of land for economic benefit, maintenance, and harvest
activities, as well as conservation practices.
The data indicate 4.70  10-1 m2 yr for the Potentially Affected
Land Fraction in tobacco biodiesel production. Several oleaginous
plants may compete for food and land in the future, and WCO
currently is a potential solution and inedible plants are investigated
for biodiesel production (Fornasier et al., 2018; Pen ~ arrubia
Fernandez et al., 2017). For this reason, tobacco is one option, but
land use remains an environmental impact.
5.6. Determining factors for environmental impact generation
To determine the factors involved in environmental impacts
generation, the production system was analyzed in three steps: A)
agricultural production, B) oil extraction, and C) biodiesel
production.
Agricultural production (Fig. 4A) mainly includes impacts
related to the use of fertilizer and agrochemicals; the normalized
values revealed a greater impact of land use in the same way that
was identified for the use of sunflower for biodiesel (Sanz Requena
et al., 2011).
In oil extraction (Fig. 4B), the use of electricity and LPG for the
extruder and the cooker machine represents a lower impact than
the seed production in the cultivation step.
The production of nonedible tobacco oil requires the use of land,
and the cultivation is a predominant factor because soil fertility and
pest control are also required. It is highlight that the agricultural
impacts compared with those for edible oil source production may
be diminished. Current Solaris tobacco production demands the
same treatment that other tobacco varieties require. Knowledge of
the technological peculiarities of this new tobacco can reduce these
inputs.
Regarding the cleaning of the equipment, the treatment of
wastewater that contains oil and detergent is similar to that of
residential kitchen effluent. Ethanol was also used in the cleaning,
which generates environmental impacts due to its partial disposal
with wastewater. These impacts can be minimized since the
wastewater presents high biochemical demands of oxygen, oils and
 F.S. Carvalho et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 230 (2019) 1085e1095
surfactants and solids in suspension. This wastewater was also
obtained in the last stepdthe transesterification processdwhen
methanol and glycerin residuals were added. The need to treat this
wastewater corroborates the impacts identified in the categories
(Daud et al., 2015).
The negative environmental impacts from biodiesel production
are clearly related in several categories due mainly to the energy
use for the reaction and recuperation of the excess of methanol
(Fig. 4B). Geraldes Castanheira et al. (2014) highlighted that elec-
tricity, fertilizers, chemicals and fossil fuel contribute to green-
house gases generated in the biodiesel production that directly
interfere in the climate change (CC) category. The observed impacts
in the land use and smog potential were also related to the gen-
eration of electricity. The electricity used for the Brazilian studies
contains >80% hydroelectric power (Herbert et al., 2016).
Based on Fig. 4C, the impacts are directly related to obtaining the
raw material (tobacco oil) and electricity consumption. This figure
gathers all inputs and outputs to obtain biodiesel and shows
agreement with the research of Sajid et al. (2016), who worked with
Jatropha and WCO.
5.7. Endpoints or long term impacts
With respect to the endpoints, additional damages are related to
the natural resources used in the life cycle, and the input that
contribute the most was the electricity used during the trans-
esterification. Similar results, which reveal the preponderant
impact of energy, were obtained from other oleaginous plants, such
as soybean and palm investigated in Spain (Escobar et al., 2014) and
Brazil (Rocha et al., 2014), sunflower in United State of America
(Harris et al., 2016), jatropha and used cooking oil in Canada (Sajid
et al., 2016) and cotton in Brazil (Lima et al., 2017).
The values analyzed from the ReCiPe and Ecoindicator 99
methods were similar in relation to human health (Table 4). As
obtained for the midpoint assessment, the eutrophication and
ecotoxicity categories differed between these two methods.
Note that the long-term impacts were directly related to the use
of electric energy (>84% of damage) in biodiesel production;
however, the majority of these effects of inputs and outputs dis-
appears over time. The influence of oil production, which involves
agricultural and extraction steps, corresponds to damage: 10.19% to
natural resources (NR), 2.33% to human health (HH), and 1.86% to
ecosystems (ES).
For the total long-term impacts, considering only the results of
ReCiPe, the values in points and the damage category are shown in
Table 4.
These results indicate that decision-making about tobacco bio-
diesel production can be improved from the perspective of envi-
ronmental impacts, which associates the LCA with other traditional
decision-making tools and helps to solve problems in the produc-
tion stages (Dong et al., 2018).
Table 4
Damage to pilot scale tobacco biodiesel production using the Recipe and Ecoindicator 99 methods.
Damage Impacts
Seed production
unit Recipe Ecoind. 99
HH DALY 8.04  10-08 3.43  10-08
ES PDF*m2yr 3.51  10-10 1.22  10-03
NR MJ surplus 1.30  10-01 5.47  10-04
HH points 5.35  10-06 7.38  10-06
ES 4.67  10-07 2.18  10-07
NR 1.29  10-05 1.58  10-06
1093
The impacts related to the use of energy and land and the use of
agricultural inputs for pest control and plant nutrition are pre-
ponderant to the chemical inputs used in transesterification.
Therefore, these impacts by damage categories can be reduced in
other scenarios that involve changes in the energy matrix and
organic cultivation systems. Improvements from an environmental
point of view may render the production of tobacco biodiesel more
competitive with other oil crops.
Therefore, improvements in the process, such as organic adu-
bation, the use of natural products for pest control, the use of
firewood to generate heat as a substitution for electricity and the
reduction of the volume of wastewater from cleaning equipment,
are possible. However, these improvements can be implemented in
industrial system production since the study of environmental
impacts from a pilot plant can help reduce the impacts in larger
scale deployment.
5.8. Sensitivity analysis
In relation to the sensitivity analysis, it was investigated how the
uncertainties of the input data affect the results. Uncertainties were
estimated using the Monte Carlo method for standardized cate-
gories that represent a minimum of 25% of the highest impact
category. The uncertainties were similar using the CML and
Ecoindicator 99 methods for equivalent categories. The effect due
to uncertainty can be substantial (Fig. 5).
Several sources of uncertainties have been identified in LCA
modeling as it pertains to land use: values that were not directly
obtained, values that vary over time, or nitrous oxide emissions of
soils that depend on the location and biota composition (Sanchez
et al., 2012). Singlitico et al. (2019) show that data inaccuracy,
environmental changes, societal changes, LCA definitions (goal and
functional unit), several uses of materials, and interpretation of
cause-effect relation, are examples of sources of uncertainty.
6. Conclusion
The life cycle of Solaris tobacco biodiesel production highlights
impacts related to seed production and oil extraction, which are
considered in the final stage of transesterification as impacts of the
main raw material. The energy required for the reaction and the
chemicals that are employed in planting to conversion to methyl
esters are relevant. The greatest environmental impacts are related
to the use of energy in the transesterification step.
The total damages for 1 kg of biodiesel production of the tobacco
variety Solaris were 1.07  10-5 DALYS, 7.13  10-8 species year-1
and $1.42 for human health, the ecosystem and natural resources,
respectively.
Producing Solaris tobacco seed biodiesel causes impacts similar
to those that are identified for other oilseeds; however, the values
were higher because the production was performed on a pilot scale.
Oil production Biodiesel production
Recipe Ecoind. 99 Recipe Ecoind. 99
2.80  10-07 7.44  10-08 1.20  10-05 1.95  10-06
1.65  10-09 1.11  10-02 8.91  10-08 5.73  10-01
6.90  10-01 3.23  10-03 67.62  10-01 5.97  10-02
1.86  10-05 1.60  10-05 8.00  10-04 4.20  10-04
2.20  10-06 1.27  10-06 1.19  10-04 1.02  10-04
6.87  10-05 9.30  10-06 6.74  10-04 1.72  10-04
1094 F.S. Carvalho et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 230 (2019) 1085e1095
Fig. 5. Graphical representation of the AICV uncertainties of midpoint impact categories for the biodiesel production of Solaris tobacco using the ReCiPe method.
The main factor that causes environmental impacts, which is the
use of energy, can be minimized in the upscale, because the system
design can allow a better energy efficiency, avoiding the use of
electric energy, as occurs on pilot scale. Thus, these results can aid
in decision-making about changes in the process that are aimed at
increasing the scale of production. These measures will provide a
strategy to improve the sustainability of biodiesel production.
Acknowledgements
Conselho Nacional de Pesquisa (CNPq) -Protocol Number
rio de Cie
306178/2012-5, Ministe ^ncia, Tecnologia e Inovaça
~o (MCTI)
- Agreement Number 01.0144.00/2010, SDECT/RS e Protocol
Number 209-2551/14-1 and Nelson Tatsch (tobacco farmer).
References
Ajayebi, A., Gnansounou, E., Kenthorai Raman, J., 2013. Comparative life cycle
assessment of biodiesel from algae and jatropha: a case study of India. Bio-
resour. Technol. 150, 429e437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2013.09.118.
Amouri, M., Mohellebi, F., Zaïd, T.A., Aziza, M., 2016. Sustainability assessment of
Ricinus communis biodiesel using LCA Approach. Clean Technol. Envirn. 19 (3),
749e760. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-016-1262-4.
Andrianov, V., Borisjuk, N., Pogrebnyak, N., Brinker, A., Dixon, J., Spitsin, S., Flynn, J.,
Matyszczuk, P., Andryszak, K., Laurelli, M., Golovkin, M., Koprowski, H., 2010.
Tobacco as a production platform for biofuel: overexpression of Arabidopsis
DGAT and LEC2 genes increases accumulation and shifts the composition of
lipids in green biomass. Plant Biotechnol. J 8 (3), 277e287. https://doi.org/
10.1111/j.1467-7652.2009.00458.x.
Atabani, A.E., Silitonga, A.S., Ong, H.C., Mahlia, T.M.I., Masjuki, H.H., Badruddin, I.A.,
Fayaz, H., 2013. Non-edible vegetable oils: a critical evaluation of oil extraction,
fatty acid compositions, biodiesel production, characteristics, engine perfor-
mance and emissions production. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 18, 211e245.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2012.10.013.
Caldeira, C., Freire, F., Olivetti, E.A., Kirchain, R., Dias, L., 2019. Analysis of cost-
environmental trade-offs in biodiesel production incorporating waste feed-
stocks: a multi-objective programming approach. J. Clean. Prod. 216, 64e73.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.126.

Castanheira, E.G., Freire, F., 2016. Environmental life cycle assessment of biodiesel
produced with palm oil from Colombia. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 22 (4), 587e600.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-016-1097-6.

Castanheira, E.G., Grisoli, R., Coelho, S., da Silva, G.A., Freire, F., 2015. Life-cycle
assessment of soybean-based biodiesel in Europe: comparing grain, oil and
biodiesel import from Brazil. J. Clean. Prod. 102, 188e201. https://doi.org/10.
1007/s11367-016-1097-6.
Chiririwa, H., Hapanyengwi, A., Muzenda, E., 2014. Tobacco seed oil as an
economically viable alternative for the tobacco industry. In: Int'l Conf. On
Chemical Engineering & Advanced Computational Technologies
(ICCEACT’2014), pp. 24e25. Pretoria (South Africa).
Daud, N.M., Sheikh Abdullah, S.R., Abu Hasan, H., Yaakob, Z., 2015. Production of
biodiesel and its wastewater treatment technologies: a review. Process Saf.
Environ. 94, 487e508. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2014.10.009.
De Marco, I., Miranda, S., Riemma, S., Iannone, R., 2016. Biodiesel production from
16 sunflower: an environmental study. Chem. Eng. Trans. 49, 331e336. https://
doi.org/10.3303/CET1649056.
Delivand, M.K., Gnansounou, E., 2013. Life cycle environmental impacts of a pro-
spective palm-based biorefinery in Para State-Brazil. Bioresour. Technol. 150,
438e446. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2013.07.100.
Dong, Y., Miraglia, S., Manzo, S., Georgiadis, S., Sørup, H.J.D., Boriani, E., Hald, T.,
Tho€ ns, S., Hauschild, M.Z., 2018. Environmental sustainable decision makinge
the need and obstacles for integration of LCA into decision analysis. Environ. Sci.
Policy 87, 33e44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2018.05.018.
Escobar, N., Ribal, J., Clemente, G., Sanju an, N., 2014. Consequential LCA of two
alternative systems for biodiesel consumption in Spain, considering uncer-
tainty. J. Clean. Prod. 79, 61e73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.05.065.
Esteves, R.A., Pereira, R.G., 2017. Comparing the environmental impacts of ethyl
biodiesel production from soybean oil and beef tallow through lca for brazilian
conditions. Indep. J. Manag. Prod. 8 (4), 1285e1308. https://doi.org/10.14807/
ijmp.v8i4.644.
Fernandez-Tirado, F., Parra-Lo pez, C., Romero-Ga mez, M., 2017. Evaluating the
environmental sustainability of energy crops: a life cycle assessment of Spanish
rapeseed and Argentinean soybean cultivation. Spanish J. Agric. Res. 15 (1), 7.
https://doi.org/10.5424/sjar/2017151-9287.
Forleo, M.B., Palmieri, N., Suardi, A., Coaloa, D., Pari, L., 2018. The eco-efficiency of
rapeseed and sunflower cultivation in Italy. Joining environmental and eco-
nomic assessment. J. Clean. Prod. 172, 3138e3153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jclepro.2017.11.094.
Fornasier, F., Gomez, J.F.C., Sansone, F.D.C., Schneider, R.D.C.d.S., Costa, A.B.d.,
Moraes, J.A.R., Bravo, C.A.G., 2018. Biodiesel production from energy tobacco.
Orbital - Electron. J. Chem. 10 (2), 123e132. https://doi.org/10.17807/
orbital.v10i2.1120.
Fuentes, P., Zhou, F., Erban, A., Karcher, D., Kopka, J., Bock, R., 2016. A new 39
synthetic biology approach allows transfer of an entire metabolic pathway from
 F.S. Carvalho et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 230 (2019) 1085e1095
a 40 medicinal plant to a biomass crop. eLife 5, e13664. https://doi.org/10.7554/
eLife.13664.
Gao, W., Chen, K., Xiang, Z., Yang, F., Zeng, J., Li, J., Yang, R., Rao, G., Tao, H., 2013.
Kinetic study on pyrolysis of tobacco residues from the cigarette industry. Ind.
Crops Prod. 44, 152e157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2012.10.032.
Garraín, D., Herrera, I., Lecho  n, Y., Lago, C., 2014. Well-to-Tank environmental
analysis of a renewable diesel fuel from vegetable oil through co-processing in a
hydrotreatment unit. Biomass Bioenergy 63, 239e249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
biombioe.2014.01.035.
Geraldes Castanheira, E.,  Grisoli, R., Freire, F., Pecora, V., Coelho, S.T., 2014. Envi-
ronmental sustainability of biodiesel in Brazil. Energy Policy 65, 680e691.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.09.062.
Giannelos, P.N., Zannikos, F., Stournas, S., Lois, E., Anastopoulos, G., 2002. Tobacco
seed oil as an alternative diesel fuel: physical and chemical properties. Ind.
Crops Prod. 16 (1), 1e9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0926-6690(02)00002-X.
Grisan, S., Polizzotto, R., Raiola, P., Cristiani, S., Ventura, F., di Lucia, F., Zuin, M.,
Tommasini, S., Morbidelli, R., Damiani, F., Pupilli, F., Bellucci, M., 2016. Alter-
native use of tobacco as a sustainable crop for seed oil, biofuel, and biomass.
Agron. Sustain. Dev. 36 (4), 55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-016-0395-5.
Groark, K.P., 2010. The angel in the gourd: ritual, therapeutic, and protective uses of
tobacco (nicotiana tabacum) among the tzeltal and tzotzil Maya of Chiapas,
Mexico. J. Ethnobiol. 30 (1), 5e30. https://doi.org/10.2993/0278-0771-30.1.5.
Guil-Guerrero, J.L., Guil-Laynez, J.L., Guil-Laynez, A.,  2017. Bioprospecting for seed
oils from wild plants in the Mediterranean Basin for biodiesel production.
J. Clean. Prod. 159, 180e193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.05.064.
Harris, T.M., Hottle, T.A., Soratana, K., Klane, J., Landis, A.E., 2016. Life cycle assess-
ment of sunflower cultivation on abandoned mine land for biodiesel produc-
tion. J. Clean. Prod. 112, 182e195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.057.
Harris, T.M., Zaimes, G.G., Khanna, V., Landis, A.E., 2015. Sunflower cultivation on
coal mine refuse piles in appalachia for diesel biofuel production from a life-
cycle perspective. Procedia Eng. 118, 869e878. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
proeng.2015.08.525.
Hauschild, M.Z., Goedkoop, M., Guine e, J., Heijungs, R., Huijbregts, M., Jolliet, O.,
Margni, M., De Schryver, A., Humbert, S., Laurent, A., Sala, S., Pant, R., 2012.
Identifying best existing practice for characterization modeling in life cycle
impact assessment. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 18 (3), 683e697. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s11367-012-0489-5.
Herbert, A.-S., Azzaro-Pantel, C., Le Boulch, D., 2016. A typology for world electricity
mix: application for inventories in Consequential LCA (CLCA). Sustain. Prod.
Consum. 8, 93e107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2016.09.002.
Herrmann, I.T., Jørgensen, A., Bruun, S., Hauschild, M.Z., 2013. Potential for opti-
mized production and use of rapeseed biodiesel. Based on a comprehensive
real-time LCA case study in Denmark with multiple pathways. Int. J. Life Cycle
Assess. 18 (2), 418e430. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-012-0486-8.
Hou, J., Zhang, P., Yuan, X., Zheng, Y., 2011. Life cycle assessment of biodiesel from
soybean, jatropha and microalgae in China conditions. Renew. Sustain. Energy
Rev. 15 (9), 5081e5091. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2011.07.048.
Intarapong, P., Papong, S., Malakul, P., 2016. Comparative life cycle assessment of
diesel production from crude palm oil and waste cooking oil via pyrolysis. Int. J.
Life Cycle Assess. 40 (5), 702e713. https://doi.org/10.1002/er.3433.
Iriarte, A., Rieradevall, J., Gabarrell, X., 2010. Life cycle assessment of sunflower and
rapeseed as energy crops under Chilean conditions. J. Clean. Prod. 18 (4),
336e345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2009.11.004.
ISO, 2006. Environmental ManagementdLife Cycle AssessmentdPrinciples and
Framework. International Organisation for Standardization, Geneva,
Switzerland.
Jude, C.A., 2013. Extraction, characterization and industrial applications of tobacco
seed oil (nicotiana tabacum). Extraction 3 (2).
Kaercher, J.A., Schneider, R.d.C.d.S., Klamt, R.A., da Silva, W.L.T., Schmatz, W.L., da
Silva Szarblewski, M., Machado, E.L., 2013. Optimization of biodiesel production
for self-consumption: considering its environmental impacts. J. Clean. Prod. 46
(0), 74e82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.09.016.
Khatri, P., Jain, S., Pandey, S., 2017. A cradle-to-gate assessment of environmental
impacts for production of mustard oil using life cycle assessment approach.
J. Clean. Prod. 166, 988e997. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.08.109.
Kist, B.B., 2018. Anua rio Brasileiro Do Tabaco 2018, p. 132.
Knothe, G., 2010. Biodiesel and renewable diesel: a comparison. Prog Energy
Combust. 36 (3), 364e373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2009.11.004.
_
Krzyzaniak, M., Stolarski, M.J., Warmin  ski, K., 2018. Life cycle assessment of Virginia
mallow production with different fertilisation options. J. Clean. Prod. 177,
824e836. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.275.
Kumar, M., Sharma, M.P., 2015. Assessment of potential of oils for biodiesel pro-
duction. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 44, 814e823. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.rser.2015.01.013.
Lidon-Moyano, C., Sampedro-Vida, M., Matilla-Santander, N., Martin-Sanchez, J.C.,
Gonzalez-Marron, A., Bunch, K., Martinez-Sanchez, J.M., 2018. Attitudes towards
tobacco product regulations and their relationship with the tobacco control
policies. Prev. Med. 111, 67e72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2018.02.019.
^
Lima, A.M.F., Torres, E.A., Kiperstok, A., de Freitas Moreira Santos, G., 2017. Envi-
ronmental impacts of the biodiesel production chain of cotton seed in Bahia,
Brazil. Clean Technol. Envirn. 19 (5), 1523e1534. https://doi.org/10.1007/
1095
s10098-017-1347-8.
Liu, H., Huang, Y., Yuan, H., Yin, X., Wu, C., 2018. Life cycle assessment of biofuels in
China: status and challenges. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 97, 301e322. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.08.052.
Malça, J., Coelho, A., Freire, F., 2014. Environmental life-cycle assessment of
rapeseed-based biodiesel: alternative cultivation systems and locations. Appl.
Energy 114, 837e844. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.06.048.
Marín Tuya , D., 2003. Convencio n de Ginebra para el control del tabaco: la salud
prevalece sobre el producto. Med. Clínica 121 (7), 253e255. https://doi.org/10.
1016/S0025-7753(03)75190-2.
Matsuura, M.I.S.F., Dias, F.R.T., Picoli, J.F., Lucas, K.R.G., de Castro, C., Hirakuri, M.H.,
2017. Life-cycle assessment of the soybean-sunflower production system in the
Brazilian Cerrado. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 22 (4), 492e501. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s11367-016-1089-6.
Nemecek, T., K€ agi, T., Blaser, S., 2007. Life Cycle Inventories of Agricultural Pro-
duction Systems, Ecoinvent Report Version, p. 15.
Nguyen, T.A., Maeda, Y., Kuroda, K., Otsuka, K., 2017. Inclusive impact assessment for
the sustainability of vegetable oil-based biodiesel - Part II: sustainability
assessment of inedible vegetable oil-based biodiesel in Ha Long Bay, Vietnam.
J. Clean. Prod. 168, 173e188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.08.238.
Panichelli, L., Dauriat, A., Gnansounou, E., 2009. Life cycle assessment of soybean-
based biodiesel in Argentina for export. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 14 (2),
144e159. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-008-0050-8.
Pen~ arrubia Fernandez, I.A., Liu, D.-H., Zhao, J., 2017. LCA studies comparing alkaline
and immobilized enzyme catalyst processes for biodiesel production under
Brazilian conditions. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 119, 117e127. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.resconrec.2016.05.009.
Poltronieri, P., 2016a. Alternative energies and fossil fuels in the bioeconomy era:
what is needed in the next five years for real change. Challenges 7 (1), 11.
https://doi.org/10.3390/challe7010011.
Poltronieri, P., 2016b. Chapter 6 - Tobacco Seed Oil for Biofuels, Biotransformation of
Agricultural Waste and By-Products. Elsevier, pp. 161e187.
Rocha, M.H., Capaz, R.S., Lora, E.E.S., Nogueira, L.A.H., Leme, M.M.V., Reno , M.L.G.,
Olmo, O.A.d., 2014. Life cycle assessment (LCA) for biofuels in Brazilian condi-
tions: a meta-analysis. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 37, 435e459. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.05.036.
Sajid, Z., Khan, F., Zhang, Y., 2016. Process simulation and life cycle analysis of
biodiesel production. Renew. Energy 85, 945e952. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
renene.2015.07.046.
Sanchez, S.T., Woods, J., Akhurst, M., Brander, M., O'Hare, M., Dawson, T.P.,
Edwards, R., Liska, A.J., Malpas, R., 2012. Accounting for indirect land-use
change in the life cycle assessment of biofuel supply chains. J. R. Soc. Inter-
face 9 (71), 1105e1119. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2011.0769.
Sanz Requena, J.F., Guimaraes, A.C., Quiro s Alpera, S., Relea Gangas, E., Hernandez-
Navarro, S., Navas Gracia, L.M., Martin-Gil, J., Fresneda Cuesta, H., 2011. Life
Cycle Assessment (LCA) of the biofuel production process from sunflower oil,
rapeseed oil and soybean oil. Fuel Process. Technol. 92 (2), 190e199. In: https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2010.03.004.
Schneider, R.d.C.d.S., Anacker, L.A., da Silva Szarblewski, M., da Silva, L.d.F.F.,
Moraes, M.S.A., Corbellini, V.A., 2017. Bioethanol production from residual to-
bacco stalks. Curr. J. Appl. Sci. Technol. 24 (6), 9. https://doi.org/10.9734/CJAST/
2017/37948.
Seppa €l a
€, J., Posch, M., Johansson, M., Hettelingh, J.-P., 2005. Country-dependent
characterisation factors for acidification and terrestrial eutrophication based on
accumulated exceedance as an impact category indicator (14 pp). Int. J. Life
Cycle Assess. 11 (6), 403e416. https://doi.org/10.1065/lca2005.06.215.
Sharma, K., Diwakar, M.K.P., Balakrishnan, K., Gopalakrishnapillai, S.V., 2015. Bio-
diesel production from tobacco (nicotiana tabacum) seed oil. J. Earth 61e65.
Environment and Health Sciences.
Singlitico, A., Goggins, J., Monaghan, R.F.D., 2019. The role of life cycle assessment in
the sustainable transition to a decarbonised gas network through green gas
production. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 99, 16e28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
rser.2018.09.040.
Usta, N., Aydog an, B., Çon, A.H., Ug uzdog €
an, E., Ozkal, S.G., 2011. Properties and
quality verification of biodiesel produced from tobacco seed oil. Energy Conv-
ers. Manag. 52 (5), 2031e2039. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2010.12.021.
Vargas, M.A., Oliveira, B.F.d., 2012. Estrate gias de diversificaça~o em areas de cultivo
de tabaco no Vale do Rio Pardo: uma ana lise comparativa. Rev. Econ. e Soc.
Rural 50 (1), 157e174. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-20032012000100010.
Vaskan, P., Pacho n, E.R., Gnansounou, E., 2018. Techno-economic and life-cycle as-
sessments of biorefineries based on palm empty fruit bunches in Brazil. J. Clean.
Prod. 172, 3655e3668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.07.218.
Veljkovic, V., Lakicevic, S., Stamenkovic, O., Todorovic, Z., Lazic, M., 2006. Biodiesel
production from tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) seed oil with a high content of
free fatty acids. Fuel 85 (17e18), 2671e2675. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.fuel.2006.04.015.
Williams, C.L., Dahiya, A., Porter, P., 2015. Chapter 1 - introduction to bioenergy. In:
Dahiya, A. (Ed.), Bioenergy. Academic Press, Boston, pp. 5e36.
Yee, K.F., Tan, K.T., Abdullah, A.Z., Lee, K.T., 2009. Life cycle assessment of palm
biodiesel: revealing facts and benefits for sustainability. Appl. Energy 86,
S189eS196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2009.04.014.