Energy 36 (2011) 5954e5967

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/energy

Energy and exergy utilization, and carbon dioxide emission in vegetable

oil production
Mustafa Özilgena, Esra Sorgüvenb, *
a
Department of Food Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Yeditepe University, 34755 Kayisdagi Istanbul, Turkey
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Yeditepe University, Ataşehir 34755, Kayisdagi Istanbul, Turkey

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

Article history: Energy and exergy utilization and carbon dioxide emission during production of soybean, sunflower, and
Received 26 April 2011 olive oils are assessed. In all cases, agriculture is the most energy and exergy intensive process and emits
Received in revised form most of the carbon dioxide, and diesel is the dominant energy and exergy source. The cumulative degree
8 July 2011
of perfection (CDP) for soybean and olive oil is 0.92 and 0.98, respectively, whereas the CDP for the
Accepted 12 August 2011
Available online 3 September 2011
sunflower oil is 2.36. Decreasing diesel consumption with good agricultural practices and substituting
with biodiesel from renewable resources would decrease the cumulative exergy consumption, as a result,
CDP of olive and soybean oil rises to 1.6 and sunflower oil to 2.9.
Keywords:
Olive oil
Major contribution to the carbon dioxide emission is due to the excessive use of fertilizers. The most
Sunflower oil energy intensive process is olive oil production. However, since the fertilizer consumption here is limited,
Soybean oil total carbon dioxide emission is less than those of the other two processes are. On the other hand,
Energy utilization excessive fertilizer consumption during the soybean agriculture results in a rather large CO2 emission.
Exergy analysis Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Carbon dioxide emission

1. Introduction
Globally, 220.9 million ton of soybean oil (56% of production),
9.0 million tons of sunflower oil (7% of production) and 2.9
million tons of olive oil (less than 1% of production) were produced
in 2008 [1]. In addition to their role in nutrition, soybean and
sunflower oils are raw materials for biodiesel production. Olive oil
is a delicassy and health food. Chemical fertilizers, agrochemicals
(insecticides, herbicides, and fungicides), irrigation water, diesel
and electric power are inputs of the vegetable oil agriculture
(Fig. 1). Consumption of chemicals and energy in production leads
to pollution. Common steps of vegetable oil production processes
include transportation and conveying of the raw material to the
factory; cleaning, grinding and pressing; separation, refining, and
packaging of the oil; and bottling, boxing, palleting and shrink
wrapping of the final product (Fig. 2).
The raw material is transported to the factories in trucks, passed
over magnets to remove traces of metal and then leaves, stems, and
twigs are removed. The seeds or olives are cleaned with water to
remove pesticides as well as sand and dirt; ground into a paste,
cold-pressed to provide minimal processing and obtain light-
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ90 216 578 0498; fax: þ90 216 578 0400.
E-mail address: sorguven@yeditepe.edu.tr (E. Sorgüven).
flavored oil. The paste is stirred with water for about 30 min,
generally by heating; this process allows small oil droplets to join
with larger droplets and make separation easier. In traditional
processes, oil may be permitted to drip out than separated from
water by decantation. In modern facilities, centrifuges are
employed to separate liquid from the pomace, and then oil is
separated from water by decantation. Separation may include
numerous recycling streams to improve the efficiency of the
process. Then the oil may be refined, bleached, and deodorized
before reaching the consumer.
In some practices oil remaining in the pomace is extracted with
solvents. Solvent extraction is avoided by many producers since
solvents are usually carcinogenic. The left over pomace is generally
used as an animal feed, and it is desired to leave some oil in the
pomace to maintain acceptable nutritional value [2]. If the vege-
table oil is being produced for human consumption, it is refined
after heating to 40e85
C and extracting with an alkaline substance
such as sodium hydroxide or sodium carbonate to remove color,
odor, and bitterness. Vegetable oils are bottled after separating the
phases.
The Kyoto Protocol was accepted in 1997 and entered into force
in 2005; Turkish Parliament approved ratification in 2009. Until
July 2010, 191 states have signed or ratified the protocol. Turkey is
among the Annex I countries, which agree to reduce their collective
greenhouse gas (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, sulfur

0360-5442/$ e see front matter Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.energy.2011.08.020
 M. Özilgen, E. Sorgüven / Energy 36 (2011) 5954e5967 5955

to identify energetically inefficient steps of processes and point the

Nomenclature need for new technology to improve them.

b stream availability, kJ/kmol

CDP cumulative degree of perfection 2. Methodology
CExC cumulative exergy consumption, kJ/kmol
h enthalpy, kJ/kmol First law of thermodynamics phrases conservation of energy;
m mass, kg the second law provides insight on irreversibility, quantifies the
Q heat, kJ energy losses and proposes measures to minimize it. Based on the
s entropy, kJ/(kmol K) second law, exergy (availability) is defined as the maximum work
T temperature, K that a system can produce, if it is brought to thermal, mechanical,
W work, kJ and chemical equilibrium with its surroundings via reversible
X exergy, kJ processes without violating the laws of thermodynamics. Cumu-
m chemical potential, kJ/kmol lative exergy consumption, (CExC), is defined as the sum of exergy
of all resources consumed in all the steps of a production process
Subscripts [3]. CExC is a function of the pathway that the process follows, and
0 restricted dead state quantifies the total consumption of exergy, including those of raw
i any species materials, transportation, work, and heat transfer for production.
in inlet Since cumulative energy consumption (CEnC) does not consider the
k index of heat sources non-energetic raw materials, it cannot provide a measure for the
out outlet impact of the process on the environment. CExC of various fuels and
industrial products have been calculated during the last decade
[4e8], but CExC calculations are rare in the food industry.
hexafluoride) emissions by 5.2% from the 1990 level in the period of Each unit operation in agriculture and production of oils is
2008e2012. In most countries, progress toward clean environment analyzed with the mass, energy and exergy balance equations to
is achieved only with the support of the public, which comes only determine the CEnC, CExC, total CO2 emission and the cumulative
after informing the people. degree of perfection (CDP). The governing equations employed here
In this study, energy utilization and carbon dioxide emission are:
during production of three different vegetable oils are assessed. Mass balance:
Although some, not all, of the data are available in the literature for X X
the inputs employed in the present study, exergy and energy ðmÞin  ðmÞout ¼ 0 (1)
utilization and carbon dioxide emission calculations for sunflower,
olive, and soybean oil production covering the entire processes Energy balance:
from farm to market by considering every step of the processes is X X
new to the literature. Our results are expected to help to evaluate ðmhÞin  ðmhÞout ¼ Q  W (2)
exergy and energy utilization and CO2 emission associated with one
Exergy balance:
ton of product, which may be used in the future by the producers to
compare the environmental cost of each product and start actions X X X  T

for savings. Environmentally conscious consumers are expected to ðmbÞin  ðmbÞout  Qk 1  0  W ¼ Xloss (3)
Tk
benefit from this study when they evaluate the impact of the k
alternative products on the environment. Exergy analysis may help Where k is the index of heat sources and b is the flow availability
of a stream (neglecting the kinetic and potential energy
contribution):
X
b ¼ h  T0 s  xi m0i (4)

CDP is the ratio of the chemical exergy of the product to the sum
of the exergies of all the raw materials and fuel consumed during
the production [3]:

Fig. 1. Flow chart of the olive, sunflower and soybeans agriculture. Chemical fertilizers,
water for irrigation, chemical pesticides and diesel (including utilization for machine
work) are the inputs of the processes.
ðmbÞproduct
CDP ¼ P P (5)
ðmCExCÞraw materials þ ðmCExCÞfuels
CDP value indicates the efficiency of the production technique.
An example for this is paper production [3]. The chemical exergy of
paper is 16.5 MJ/kg. Paper can be produced from standing timber by
consuming raw materials with a CExC of 72.0 MJ/kg and fuels with
a CExC of 16.1 MJ/kg. Accordingly, CDP is 0.19. If production is
performed in an integrated plant, where waste products are used as
fuels, CDP rises to 0.28, since CExC of the consumed raw materials
decrease to 19.0 MJ/kg and CExC of the consumed fuel becomes
40.9 MJ/kg. An even better production technique is using waste
paper as raw material, where the CExC of the raw materials is
17.0 MJ/kg and CExC of consumed fuel is 5.2 MJ/kg. With this
technique, CDP rises to 0.74. As this example illustrates, low CDP
values indicate the need for improved production techniques.
5956 M. Özilgen, E. Sorgüven / Energy 36 (2011) 5954e5967

Fig. 2. Common steps of vegetable oil production processes.

The system boundaries involve the agricultural production, oil
production, waste management, packaging, and distribution.
Hydrosphere, lithosphere, and atmosphere act as water and carbon
reservoirs, and are included within the system boundaries (Fig. 3).
Nutrient rich water consumed during production and process
water is fully recycled. Fertilizers, pesticides, and micronutrients
consumed during the agriculture are non-renewable chemicals,
and the environmental cost for these raw materials is accounted
for. Electricity used in all processes is generated from fossil fuels.
The energy or exergy consumed due to human labor is not
accounted for, since it was practically impossible to collect repre-
sentative data.
Data about agriculture of olives [9], sunflower [10] and
soybeans [11] are obtained from the literature to study energy
and exergy utilization and carbon dioxide emission. Information
regarding energy utilization and processing rates of the equip-
ment are obtained from the manufacturer web sites. All the
calculations are done considering agriculture and processing
of one metric ton (1000 kg) of olives, sunflower seeds, or
soybeans.
 M. Özilgen, E. Sorgüven / Energy 36 (2011) 5954e5967 5957

Fig. 3. System boundaries of vegetable oil production process.

Coastal regions with temperate climate are the major olive and
sunflower growing areas in Turkey. Big cities Istanbul, Ankara, and
Izmir are the major consuming areas. There are numerous vege-
table oil producing factories between the fields and the consuming
cities. The average distance between the fields and the factories is
about 50 km, and the distance between factories and the consumer
it is about 550 km. These numbers are determined by considering
the population of the cities. The distance between the fields and the
factory is multiplied by two to determine the actual distance
traveled, 100 km, since the trucks usually go the fields empty and
come back to the factory loaded with olives or sunflower seeds. The
product delivery trucks are considered to be making one-way trip
only, since in practice they usually carry other products on the way
back. The same distances were considered in all the calculations to
end up with comparable results.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Energy and exergy consumption and carbon dioxide emissions
during agriculture and transportation of the plant material
3.1.1. Chemical fertilizers and manure
Estimates of energy and exergy utilization and carbon dioxide
emission during agriculture and transportation of olives, sunflower
seeds and soybeans to the factory are given in Table 1. Total energy
associated with production (including packaging, transportation,
and application) is 78.2 MJ/kg for nitrogenous, 17.5 MJ/kg for
phosphorus and 13.8 MJ/kg for potassium fertilizers [12]. The CExC
values of nitrogenous, phosphorus and potassium fertilizers are
32.7 MJ/kg [3], 7.52 MJ/kg [13] and 4.56 MJ/kg [14], respectively.
When the crop yield is 0.5 tons of olives/ha, 1.42 kg/ha of
5958 M. Özilgen, E. Sorgüven / Energy 36 (2011) 5954e5967

Table 1
Energy and exergy utilization and carbon dioxide emission during olive, sunflower and soybean agriculture.

Input Energy utilization/ton of olives (MJ/ton) CExC/ton of olives (MJ/ton) CO2 emission/ton of olives (kg/ton)
Chemical fertilizers 247.0 102.5 27.5
Agro chemicals (pesticides, etc) 3317.0 3004.8 48.6
Diesel-oil 4908.8 4545.5 80.3
Water for irrigation 60.4 251.9 8.5
Total 8533.2 7904.7 164.9

Input Energy utilization/ton of sunflower seeds CExC/ton of sunflower seeds CO2 emission/ton of sunflower seeds
(MJ/ton) (MJ/ton) (kg/ton)
Chemical fertilizers 2898.4 1215.3 282.2
Agro chemicals (pesticides, etc) 238.1 318.8 5.6
Diesel-oil 2042.7 1891.6 33.4
Total 5179.2 3425.7 317.4

Input Energy utilization/ton of soybeans (MJ/ton) CExC/ton of soybeans (MJ/ton) CO2 emission/ton of soybeans (kg/ton)
Chemical fertilizers 1777.4 665.3 533.2
Agro chemicals (pesticides, etc) 150.2 132.2 2.3
Diesel-oil 2096.6 1941.4 34.3
Electric power 356.1 1484.9 49.9
Seeds 972.6 1358.1 36.4
Farm yard manure 719.8 511.0 100.8
Total 6072.7 6092.9 756.8

nitrogenous, 0.41 kg/ha of phosphorus, 0.38 kg/ha of potassium
chemical fertilizers are used [9]. This data leads to calculation of
energy utilization associated with production of one ton of olives to
be 222.1 MJ with nitrogenous, 14.4 MJ with phosphorus and 10.5 MJ
with potassium fertilizers. The total energy utilization associated
with the chemical fertilizers is 247.0 MJ/ton of olives. Similarly,
exergy consumed for cultivation of one ton of olives is 92.9 MJ for
nitrogenous, 6.2 MJ for phosphorus and 3.5 MJ for potassium
fertilizer production, implying that the total exergy consumed in
association with fertilizer use is 102.5 MJ/ton of olives. When we
combine the data provided by Kongshaug [15] and Helsel [12] we
calculate that CO2 emission associated with chemical fertilizer
production to be 0.09 kg CO2/MJ with nitrogeneous, 0.15 kg CO2/MJ
with phosphorus and 0.51 kg CO2/MJ with potassium fertilizer
production; which leads to the calculation of the total emission to
be 27.5 kg CO2/ton of olives.
When the crop yield is 1.8 tons of sunflowers/ha, 60 kg/ha of
nitrogenous and 30 kg/ha of phosphorus fertilizer are used in
sunflower cultivation [10], leading to calculation that energy utiliza-
tion associated with nitrogenous and phosphorus fertilizers as
2606.7 MJ/ton of sunflowers and 291.7 MJ/ton of sunflowers, respec-
tively. Exergy consumption associated with the nitrogenous and
phosphorus fertilizers are 1090.0 MJ/ton and 125.3 MJ/ton, respec-
tively. The total energy and exergy utilization associated with the use
of chemical fertilizers was 2898.4 MJ/ton of sunflowers and 1215.3 MJ/
ton of sunflowers, respectively (Table 1). When we apply the same
procedure as that of the olives, we calculate the emission associated
with chemical fertilizers as 282.2 kg CO2/ton of sunflower seeds.
When 1977 kg/ha of soybeans are produced, energy equivalent
of the chemical fertilizers is 3514 MJ/ha [11]; implying that the
specific energy utilization is 1777.4 MJ/ton of soybeans. As already
discussed in the case of agriculture of olives, the minimum emis-
sion is associated with nitrogenous fertilizer to be 0.09 kg CO2/MJ,
and the maximum emission is associated with production of
potassium fertilizer to be 0.51 kg CO2/MJ, therefore, we may expect
to have 160.0e906.5 kg CO2/ton of soybeans of emission, with the
average being 533.2 kg CO2/ton of soybeans (Table 1). When same
amounts of nitrogenous and potassium fertilizers are used to
produce one ton of soybeans, CExC allocation is calculated to be
371.6 MJ for nitrogenous, 293.7 MJ for potassium, and 665.3 MJ for
the total of both fertilizers.
In 1998, 1.2% of the world’s energy demand and approximately
1.2% of the total greenhouse gas emissions was associated with
fertilizer production; fortunately, energy consumption for chemical
fertilizer production is decreasing over the years and approaching
to the theoretical minimum in modern factories, e.g. 40 MJ/kg of
nitrogenous fertilizer [15,16]. Providing the chemical fertilizers
from energy efficient chemical plants may help to reduce energy
utilization. Chemical fertilizer use in agriculture is generally not
based on soil analysis, and is much more than the actual need [17].
Introducing some microorganisms to the soil may stimulate
nitrogen fixation, solubilize the insoluble minerals, and reduce the
need to produce and transport large amounts of chemical fertilizers
[18]. Fertilizer management practices may reduce energy utiliza-
tion up to 72%; consequently, herbicide utilization and pollution
also decrease [19e22].
Manure is a major input in soybean agriculture in India [11]
(Table 1). In Nigeria 0.35 MJ/kg energy consumed to produce
pelletized manure and about 94% of the consumed energy is
provided by electric power utilization (emission factor ¼ 0.14 kg
CO2/MJ) and the rest by man power [23]. If we should use the same
ratio, we will calculate carbon dioxide emission associated with
manure production as 100.8 kg CO2/ton of soybeans (Table 1). In
order to calculate the CExC of manure, the chemical exergy of the
raw materials and the CExC of the fuel consumed during the
production are added. 4221 kg cow dung and 12663 kg market
refuse are consumed to produce 9000 kg of organic manure [23].
The chemical exergy of animal waste is 8.4 MJ/kg [24], and the CExC
to generate 1 MJ of electricity from fossil fuel is 4.17 MJ/MJ [3].
Correspondingly, the CExC of the organic manure is calculated to be
5.3 MJ/kg. The total exergy consumption related to organic manure
use in soybean production is 511.0 MJ/ton.
3.1.2. Agrochemicals
When average yield is 0.5 tons of olives/ha, 24 kg/ha of herbicide
(energy equivalent ¼ 418.2 MJ/kg) and 1.8 kg/ha of insecticide
(energy equivalent ¼ 363.8 MJ/kg) are used [9], the total energy
utilization for agrochemicals in agriculture of olives is 3317.0 MJ/
ton of olives (Table 1). Emission factors are 6.3  2.7 kg CO2/kg of
herbicides and 5.1  3.0 kg CO2/kg of insecticides [25]. Then we
calculate emission associated with total of herbicide and insecticide
use to be 48.6 kg CO2/ton of olives (Table 1). During production of
1.8 ton of sunflower seeds/ha, 2.5 kg/ha of herbicides (energy
equivalent 171.4 MJ/kg of active ingredient) are used [10], implying
that energy utilization associated with herbicides is 238.1 MJ/ton of
sunflower seeds (Table 1). Lal [25] reported that the emission is
 M. Özilgen, E. Sorgüven / Energy 36 (2011) 5954e5967 5959

5.1  3.0 kg CO2/kg of insecticides and 3.9  2.2 kg CO2/kg of
fungicides. When we use the data provided by Kallivroussis et al.
[10] with the mean values reported by Lal [25], we may estimate
5.6 kg CO2 emission/ton of sunflower seeds, associated with the use
of chemicals (Table 1). When 1977 kg/ha of soybean is produced,
energy utilization for agrochemicals is 297 MJ/ha [11], implying
that the specific energy utilization for agrochemicals is 150.2 MJ/
ton of soybeans (Table 1). Since mostly herbicides are used in
soybean agriculture [26] carbon dioxide emission is estimated as
2.3 kg CO2/ton soybeans (Table 1). Kaltsas et al. [27] reported use of
insect traps instead of pesticides during cultivation of organic
olives. Improving the efficiency of these traps and extending their
use to the other crops may reduce the environmental impact and
energy cost of the agrochemicals.
There is a large range of CExC values for agrochemicals in the
literature. Earlier works reported rather low CExC values. For
example CExC for herbicides is given as 32.7 MJ/kg [3], for insecti-
cides as 7.5 [13] and for fungicides as 4.6 [14]. Brehmer [28]
analyzed a wide range of agrochemicals and concluded that there
is a noticeable variation based on the active ingredients. His results
show that the CExC values vary between 172 and 564 MJ/kg for
herbicides, between 21 and 667 MJ/kg for insecticides and between
38 and 474 MJ/kg for fungicides. Here the average values of the
ranges determined by Brehmer [28] are used for the calculations.
Correspondingly, a total CExC of 3004.8 MJ, 318.8 MJ and 132.2 MJ is
used for the agrochemicals to produce one ton of olives, sunflower
seeds, and soybeans, respectively.
3.1.3. Diesel utilization
During cultivation of 0.5 ton of olives/ha, energy equivalent of
machine work plus additional diesel utilization is 2454.4 MJ/ha [9],
implying that the specific diesel energy utilization is 4908.8 MJ/ton
of olives. Since emission factor ¼ 0.94 kg CO2/kg of diesel [25],
density ¼ 0.832 kg diesel/L, energy equivalent ¼ 57.5 MJ/kg of
diesel [29] and CExC ¼ 53.2 MJ/kg [3] carbon dioxide emission
associated with diesel utilization is calculated to be 80.3 kg CO2/ton
of olives and exergy consumption to be 4545.5 MJ/ton of olives
(Table 1). During cultivation of 1.8 ton/ha of sunflower seeds
64.0 kg/ha of fuel is used, implying that energy and exergy utili-
zation are 2042.7 MJ/ton and 1891.6 MJ/ton of sunflower seeds,
respectively [10]. When emission factor and density of the fuel are
the same as those of diesel, we can calculate the carbon dioxide
emission associated with fuel utilization to be 33.4 kg CO2/ton of
sunflower seeds (Table 1).
Heavy-duty trucks (capacity ¼ 10 tons, velocity ¼ 90 km/h)
utilize 0.287 L/km of fuel [30]. When the plant material is trans-
ported to 50 km away from the factory, energy and exergy
consumptions and carbon dioxide emission for transportation of
the plant material are calculated to be 80.9 MJ/ton, 75.2 MJ/ton and
0.2 kg CO2/ton (Tables 4 and 5).
3.1.4. Irrigation
During agriculture of olives (yield ¼ 0.5 ton olives/ha) 30.2 MJ/
ha of energy is utilized for irrigation [9]. When the irrigation system
is run with electricity (emission factor ¼ 0.14 kg CO2/MJ), energy
and exergy utilization and emission associated with irrigation
during production of one ton of oils are calculated to be 60.4 MJ,
251.9 MJ and 8.5 kg, respectively (Table 1). No irrigation is
employed in the fields where Kallivroussis et al. [10] and De et al.
[11] obtained their data.
3.1.5. Seeds
De et al.’s [11] data implies that 972.6 MJ energy is utilized to
produce seeds for cultivation of one ton of soybeans. When
percentage of diesel (85.5%, emission factor ¼ 0.02 kg CO2/MJ) and
electric power (14.5%, emission factor ¼ 0.14 kg CO2/MJ) are the
same as those of soybean agriculture, emission and CExC associated
with seeds production is calculated to be 36.4 kg CO2/ton soybeans
and 1358.1 MJ/ton of soybeans, respectively (Table 1). Energy
utilization for seeds production is negligibly small in olive or
sunflower cultivation due to extremely small seed to product ratio.
3.1.6. Agriculture in general
Table 1 indicates that the highest energy and exergy utilization
is associated with agriculture of olives and the highest emission is
associated with agriculture of soybeans. Olives are generally culti-
vated in the fields, where the land cannot be used for economically
more favorable products [27]. Eide [31], while studying the influ-
ence of the size of the dairies on the carbon dioxide emission
reported that energy efficiency increases with the capacity. High
amounts of diesel utilization in agriculture of olives may actually
point the problem associated with the small size of the orchards.
Diesel consumption data as reported by Polychchronaki et al. [9]
includes energy utilization for transportation of the olives to the

Table 2
a. Energy and exergy consumption and CO2 emission associated with production of olive oil packaging materials. b. Energy and exergy consumption and CO2 emission
associated with primary and secondary packaging of olive oil.

Packaging material Energy utilization for packaging CExC for packaging oil from CO2 emission during packaging oil
oil from one ton of olives (MJ/ton) one ton of olives (MJ/ton) from one ton of olives (kg/ton)
Polylactic acid for making bottles 371.3 538.1 12.4
Paper labels for bottles 49.9 55.7 5.0
Cardboard for bottles 8.6 74.3 1.1
Stretch film for secondary packaging 11.9 17.2 0.4
Total 441.7 685.3 18.9

Processing step and equipment details Capacity (ton Energy Energy utilization CExC for processing one CO2 emission during
of olives/h) consumption for processing ton of olives (MJ/ton) processing one ton
(MJ/h) one ton of olives (MJ/ton) of olives (kg/ton)
Packaging material 441.7 685.3 18.9
Carton printing and box making e e 27.0 112.6 3.6
machine (Shanghai Liu Xiang, China)
Carton filling (Shanghai Peifeng 15 box/min 36 33.4 139.3 4.7
Electronics Co., Ltd., China)
Palletizing (Dalian Jialin Machine 15e30 cartons/min 36 33.4 139.3 4.7
Manufacture Co., Ltd. China)
Total 535.5 1076.5 31.9
5960 M. Özilgen, E. Sorgüven / Energy 36 (2011) 5954e5967

Table 3
Energy and exergy consumption and CO2 emission associated with olive oil production process.

Processing step and equipment Capacity (ton of Energy Energy utilization for CExC for processing CO2 emission during
details olives/h) consumption processing one ton one ton of olives processing one ton
(MJ/h) of olives (MJ/ton) (MJ/ton) of olives (kg/ton)
Agriculture 8533.2 7904.7 164.9
Olive carrier-conveyor (Polat 6 Motor: 4.0 0.7 2.9 0.1
Machinery, Turkey) Aspirator: 10.9 1.8 7.5 0.3
Olive washing unit (Polat 6 3.6 0.6 2.5 0.1
Machinery, Turkey)
Olive Feeding Screw Conveyor (Siemens) 4 5.4 1.4 5.8 0.2
Crushing Machine (PMS 370-Polat 3 69.3 23.1 96.3 3.2
Machinery, Turkey)
Modular Mixing (Q4 100L 4A, Siemens) 0.3 23.8 79.2 330.3 11.1
Oil press machine (Anyang GEMCO Energy 0.3 39.6 132 550.4 18.5
Machinery, China; Model YZS-120)
Decanter (Centrifugation) (PX 40-Polat 5 69.9 14.0 58.4 2.0
Machinery, Turkey)
Pumping (Siemens inventor) 4 7.9 2.0 8.3 0.3
Screw Conveying (PD-22-Polat 3 5.4 1.8 7.5 0.3
Machinery, Turkey)
Seperating (PMS 405-Polat Machinery) 2 19.8 9.9 41.3 1.4
Oil pumping (Polat Machinery, Turkey) 2 tons of olive oil/h 5.4 0.7 2.9 0.1
Heat Exchanger System (PMS DB 80 3 tons of olive oil/h 6.5 0.5 2.1 0
Polat Machinery, Turkey)
Olive Oil Filling Machine (Jiangsu, 1000 Bottles/hour 11.2 1.4 5.8 0.2
Model ZP 7, China)
Bottle pasteurizer (Zhangjiagang City Steam (P ¼ 0.6 MPa) 470 458.2 28.2
Nanxin Technology, China) consumption rate 600 kg/h
Labeller (Shanghai Peiyu Machinery, Ltd, 5000 to 30 000 bottles/h 24 0.1 0.4 0.0
China; Model SPC-SORL-TL)
Packaging 535.5 1076.5 31.9
Transportation of olive oil to 550 kms 222.1 206.6 3.0
Waste management Batch process 1.4 5.8 57.3
Continuous process 2.8 11.7 114.4
Total 10028.6 10762.6 323.1

market; therefore, diesel consumption does not appear as a sepa-
rate entry in Table 3.
In order to demonstrate how different agricultural techniques
change the results, CEnC, CExC and CO2 emission for soybean
production is calculated based on four different data [11,14,26,32].
Energy and exergy consumption and carbon dioxide emitted
associated with seeds is omitted in this comparison. Results are
summarized in Figs. 4e6 and Table 7. The total amount of fertilizers
consumed is reported as 17.4 kg/ton by Fore et al. [26], 43.4 kg/ton
by Sheehan et al. [32] and 75.8 kg/ton of soybean by De et al. [11].

Table 4
Energy and exergy consumption and CO2 emission associated with the sunflower oil production process.

Processing step and equipment Capacity (ton of Energy Energy utilization for processing CExC for processing one CO2 emission during
details sunflower/h) consumption one ton of sunflower seeds ton of sunflower seeds processing one ton of
(MJ/h) (MJ/ton) (MJ/ton) sunflower seeds
(kg/ton)
Agriculture 5179.2 3425.7 317.4
Transportation of sunflower seeds 80.9 75.2 0.2
to 50 kms
Conveying (Motovario- V 1F D 4 14.8 3.7 15.4 0.5
24 P90)
Cleaning (TQLZ63  100) 5 0.5 1.8 7.5 0.2
Grinding (Jiadi Machinery, China; 6 66.6 11.1 46.3 1.6
ModeLTMJ-4)
Oil press machine (Anyang GEMCO 0.3 39.6 132 550.4 18.5
Energy Machinery, China; Model
YZS-120)
Extractor (Jiadi Machinery, China; 0.26 11.3 43.6 181.8 6.1
Model D-1688)
Refining (Jiadi Machinery, China, 0.4 136.8 342 1426.1 47.9
Model 10T)
Filling (Jiadi Machinery, China; 0.2 tons of sunflower oil/h 5.4 13.5 56.3 1.9
Model TNG8000R)
Bottle pasteurizer (Zhangjiagang Steam (P ¼ 0.6 MPa) 470 458.2 28.2
City Nanxin Technology, China) consumption rate 600 kg/h
Labeller (Shanghai Peiyu Machinery, 5000 to 30 000 bottles/h 24 2.4 10.0 0.0
Ltd, China; Model SPC-SORL-TL)
Packaging 1071 2152.9 63.8
Transportation of sunflower oil 444.2 413.1 6
to 550 km
Total 7795.4 8819.1 492.3
 M. Özilgen, E. Sorgüven / Energy 36 (2011) 5954e5967 5961

Table 5
Energy and exergy consumption and CO2 emission associated with the soybean oil production process.

Processing step and Capacity (ton of soybean/h) Energy Energy utilization for processing CExC for processing one CO2 emission during processing
equipment details consumption one ton of soybean (MJ/ton) ton of soybean (MJ/ton) one ton of soybean (kg/ton)
(MJ/h)
Agriculture 6072.7 6092.9 756.8
Transportation of 80.9 75.2 0.2
soybean seeds to
50 kms
Conveying 4 14.8 3.7 15.4 0.5
Cleaning 5 0.5 1.8 7.5 0.2
Grinding 6 66.6 11.1 46.3 1.6
Pressing 0.3 39.6 132 550.4 18.5
Extraction 0.26 11.3 43.6 181.8 6.1
Refining 0.4 136.8 136.8 570.5 19.2
Filling 0.2 tons of oil/h 5.4 5.4 22.5 0.8
Bottle pasteurizing Steam (P ¼ 0.6 MPa) 470 458.2 28.2
consumption rate 600 kg/h
Labeling 5000 to 30 000 bottles/h 24 1.0 4.2 0.0
Packaging 482.4 861.2 25.5
Transportation to 177.7 165.3 2.4
550 km
Total 7619.1 9051.4 860.0

Pimental and Patzek [33] reported that 4800 kg/ha of lime is used
in addition to the nitrogeneous, phosphorus and potassium fertil-
izer utilization, which are 3.7 kg/ha, 37.8 kg/ha and 14.8 kg/ha,
respectively. According to their data nearly half of the total
consumed energy (3746 Mcal/ha) comes from lime (1349 Mcal/ha).
Inspite of this rather large consumption of fertilizers, total energy
consumption is comparable to other data sets, since diesel and
electricity consumption are comparatively less than the rest of the
published data sets. However, exergy consumption and carbon
dioxide emission values are effected dramatically. Lime production
is an energy intensive process, where 10 MJ of exergy is consumed
and 0.79 kg of CO2 is emitted per kg of lime [33]. The CExC value is
calculated based on Pimental and Patzek [33] to be 19427 MJ/ton of
soybean, where 93.5% of the total exergy consumption is due to
fertilizers. The CO2 emission per ton of soybeans calculated based
on Pimental and Patzek [33] is 1534 kg, where 98.3% of this is due to
fertilizer consumption. This result draws attention to the point
about excessive fertilizer utilization as criticized by Esengun et al.
[17] (Figs. 4e6).
3.2. Energy and exergy consumption and carbon dioxide emission
for packaging
From one ton of olives 250 kg oil is produced, therefore 125
bottles (bottle volume ¼ 2 L, bottle weight 50 g, cap weight ¼ 5 g)
are needed. While producing one kg of polylactic acid (PLA) 1.6 kg
of fossil fuel with 54 MJ of energy is utilized and 1.8 kg
CO2 is emitted [34,35]. When energy is provided from natural
gas (CExC ¼ 48.7 MJ/kg [3]), the CExC of PLA is calculated to be
78 MJ/kg, implying that for 125 bottles (one ton of olives) 6.9 kg,
Table 6
Energy and exergy utilization and carbon dioxide emission associated with
production of the olive, sunflower, and soybean oils.
Product oil content Energy utilization/ CExC/ton of
of the seeds ton of oil (MJ/ton) oil (MJ/ton)
or fruit (%)
Olive oil 25 40114.3 43050.3
Sunflower oil 50 15590.7 17638.2
Soybean oil 20 38095.5 45256.8
371.3 MJ of energy and 538.1 MJ of exergy will be utilized and
12.4 kg of CO2 will be emitted (Table 2). For a typical 2 L bottle
(side surface area 942.48 cm2) 7.98 g of paper label is needed [36],
for 125 bottles 997.5 g of label is used. When 35% of the labels are
produced with recycled paper, energy utilization for producing
648.4 g of labels needed for olive oil produced from one ton of
olives is calculated to be 49.9 MJ. When half of this energy is
supplied by natural gas and the other half is supplied by electric
power CO2 emission for label making is calculated to be 5 MJ/ton
olives (Table 2). The CExC for paper produced from standing
timber is 88.1 MJ/kg. This value reduces to 59.9 MJ/kg if the plant
is integrated and the wastes are used as fuel [3]. Here, the average
of these two values is used as the CExC for paper. The CExC values
for the paper produced from waste paper are 22.2 MJ/kg [3].
When 35% of the labels are produced from recycled paper, the
total CExC for labels is calculated to be 55.7 MJ/ton of olives. The
labeling machine (Shanghai Peiyu Machinery Manufacturing Co.,
Ltd, China, Model: SPC-SORL-TL) had a capacity of labeling 5000
to 30000 bottles/h and utilizing 24 MJ/h. The required energy for
labeling 125 bottles is calculated to be 0.1 MJ/ton of olives and the
associated CExC and CO2 emission are 0.417 MJ/ton and 0.014 kg
CO2/ton of olives, respectively.
When 9 bottles are placed in a 320 mm*320 mm*324 mm
cardboard box and 24 cartons are placed on a pallet, for secondary
packaging of 125 olive oil bottles 13.9 corrugated cartons and 0.58
pallets are needed. Amount of cardboard needed to make one
carton is about 6195.2 cm2. Chow et al. [37] reported that
0.75e1.25 MJ/m2 energy is utilized for cardboard making. When
the average CEnC, 1.00 MJ/m2, is used, 8.62 MJ of energy con-
sumption is estimated to produce cardboard per one ton of olives.
When 90% of the energy is supplied from electricity (emission
coefficient ¼ 0.14 kg of CO2/MJ [38]) and the rest from natural gas
(emission coefficient ¼ 0.06 kg of CO2/MJ [38], CExC of natural gas is
48.7 MJ/kg [3]), CO2 emission associated with cardboard production
is 1.14 kg CO2/ton olives and CExC is 74.3 MJ/ton of olives. New high
technology plastic pallets are 100% recyclable and can make about
CO2 emission/ 250 trips, therefore energy consumption and CO2 emission asso-
ton of oil ciated with pallet making is not considered here [39]. For secondary
(kg/ton)
packaging of one pallet 10 m (375 g) of stretch film is needed,
1292.2 implying that for one ton of oil 0.58 pallets, i.e. 0.22 kg stretch film
984.6
4300.2
is used. Thus, 11.9 MJ of energy and 17.2 MJ of exergy are utilized,
and 0.4 kg of CO2 will be emitted while producing material for
5962 M. Özilgen, E. Sorgüven / Energy 36 (2011) 5954e5967

Fig. 4. Comparison of cumulative energy consumptions in soybean production.

secondary packaging of the oil produced from one ton of olives. It is
shown in Table 2 that the total energy and exergy utilization and
emission associated with the material used for primary and
secondary packaging of olive oils are 441.7 MJ/ton, 685.3 MJ/ton of
olives and 18.9 kg/ton of olives, respectively. Oil content of the
sunflower seeds is reported to be 50% [40]; therefore, 500 kg oil
(250 bottles) is required for one ton of sunflower seeds; implying
that energy and exergy utilization and carbon dioxide emission
associated with packaging of sunflower oil is twice as much as
those of olive oil (Table 4). When we consider that the oil content of
the soybeans are 80% of that of olives, energy and exergy utilization
and emission associated with packaging of soybean oil is calculated
as 482.4 MJ/ton, 861.2 MJ/ton of soybeans and 25.5 kg CO2/ton of
soybeans, respectively (Table 5).
3.3. Energy and exergy consumption and carbon dioxide emission
during olive oil and sunflower oil production
Common steps of oil production, including conveying, cleaning,
grinding, pressing, separation and storage is described in Fig. 2.
When the crops reach to the factory they are transported to the
washers with conveyors. Energy consumption data by each piece of
equipment employed in the oil plants are obtained from the web
sites of the equipment manufacturers, then energy consumption
for processing one ton of olives, sunflower seeds and soybeans is
computed as depicted in Tables 3,4 and 5, respectively.
Olive carrying conveyor (Polat Machinery; Turkey,
capacity ¼ 6 ton olives/h, motor power for carrying olives ¼ 4.0 MJ/
h, aspirator power for removing leaves and grass ¼ 10.9 MJ/h); olive

Fig. 5. Comparison of cumulative exergy consumptions in soybean production.

 M. Özilgen, E. Sorgüven / Energy 36 (2011) 5954e5967 5963

Fig. 6. Comparison of carbon dioxide emission in soybean production.

washing unit (Polat Machinery; Turkey, capacity ¼ 6 ton olives/h,
power ¼ 3.6 MJ/h); crushing machine (Polat Machinery, Turkey;
Model PMS 370, capacity ¼ 3000 kg olives/h, power
utilization ¼ 69.3 MJ/h); modular mixing machine (Siemens, Model
Q4 100L 4A, capacity ¼ 300 kg of olives/h, power
utilization ¼ 23.76 MJ/h); pressing machine (Anyang GEMCO
Energy Machinery, China, Model D-1688, capacity ¼ 0.3 tons/h,
energy utilization ¼ 39.6 MJ/h); centrifuge (Polat Machinery,
Turkey; Model PX 40, capacity ¼ 5000 kg olives/h, power
utilization ¼ 69.91 MJ/h); and phase separating machine (Polat
Machinery, Turkey; Model PMS 405 capacity ¼ 2000 kg of olives/h,
power utilization ¼ 19.8 MJ/h) are employed in the design (Table 3).
In filling process 11.2 MJ of electricity is consumed for filling 1000
bottles/h of olive oil. Carton printing and box making machine (Full
servo carton making machine, Shanghai Liu Xiang General Equip-
ment Co., Ltd, China) is capable of producing 250 cartons/min and
has a power of 486 MJ (including dryer); therefore, energy required
for printing and producing 13.9 cartons is calculated to be 27.0 MJ/
ton of olives. The associated CExC and CO2 emission for one ton of
olives are 112.6 MJ and 3.56 kg CO2, respectively (Table 2). For the
carton filling machine (Shanghai Peifeng Electronics Co., Ltd., China,
capacity ¼ 15 box/min, power ¼ 36 MJ), energy and exergy
utilization and CO2 emission for processing one ton of olives are
calculated to be 33.4 MJ, 139.3 MJ and 4.7 kg, respectively (Table 2).
Energy and exergy utilization and carbon dioxide emission data
of the equipment which may be employed in the sunflower oil are
depicted in Table 4. Cleaning machine, (TQLZ63  100) with
a capacity of 5000 kg sunflower seeds/h and a power utilization of
0.5 MJ/h, grinding machine (Jiadi Machinery, China, Model TMJ-4)
with a capacity of 6000 kg sunflowers/h and a power utilization
of 66.6 MJ/h; oil pressing machine (Anyang GEMCO Energy
Machinery, China; Model YZS-120) with a capacity of 300 kg
sunflower/h and a power utilization of 39.6 MJ/h, extractor (Jiadi
Machinery, China; Model D-1688) with a capacity of 260 kg
sunflower seeds/h and a power utilization of 11.3 MJ/h and refining
equipment (Jiadi Machinery, China; Model 10T) with a capacity of
400 kg sunflower seeds/h and a power utilization of 136.8 MJ/h.
Energy and exergy utilization for primary and secondary pack-
aging of sunflower and soybean oils are calculated by following the
same procedure as that of the olive oil. Oils were assumed to be
transported to an average distance of 550 km; by following the
same procedure as the transportation of sunflower seeds or
soybeans, energy utilization and carbon dioxide emission associ-
ated with transportation are calculated and depicted in Tables 3e5.

Table 7 3.4. Energy and exergy consumption and carbon dioxide emissions
Raw materials and fuels consumed to produce 1 ton of soybean. during waste management
Fore et al. Sheehan et al. De et al. Pimental and
[26] [32] [11] Patzek [33] After the extraction of the olive oil, 0.5e1.1 kg of wastewater/kg
Nitrogenous 1.79 4.58 11.36 1.39 of olives is produced [41]. A typical wastewater may consist of
fertilizer (kg) 80e83% water, 15e18% organic compounds, and 2% potassium and
Phosphorus 5.85 14.37 0.00 14.17 phosphate salts, etc [25]. Some of these substances are toxic and
fertilizer (kg)
not biodegradable; therefore, the waste cannot be used as fertilizer,
Potassium 9.79 24.46 64.40 5.55
fertilizer (kg) or irrigation water [42]. One of the best options for management of
Lime (kg) 0.00 0.00 0.00 1799.10 the olive oil wastewater would be combustion of the waste after
Herbicides (kg) 1.06 1.88 0.36 0.49 concentration by evaporation [25]. When the wastewater is fed to
Diesel (kg) 100.81 18.62 36.49 13.19 the evaporator at a rate of 0.85 kg/s, 1620 J/s of energy is utilized to
Gasoline (kg) 0.00 10.00 0.00 10.52
Electricity (MJ) 0.00 16.91 356.10 13.49
achieve evaporation, 1450 J/s of energy is gained upon condensa-
tion, and 2650 MJ/s of more energy is obtained after combustion,
5964 M. Özilgen, E. Sorgüven / Energy 36 (2011) 5954e5967

Fig. 7. Comparison of the cumulative energy and exergy consumptions to produce oil from one ton of olives, soybeans and sunflower seeds.

with a net energy gain of 2480 J/s [25]. Implying that in a batch
process, which produces 0.50 ton of waste water/ton of olives, the
net energy gain may be 1.4 MJ/ton of olives. This corresponds to an
exergy gain of 5.8 MJ/ton of olives, since less electricity will be
consumed. Suspended solids contents of the wastewater from both
batch and continuous separation processes are identical [41];
therefore, we may estimate that the net energy and exergy gain as
2.8 MJ/ton of olives and 11.7 MJ/ton of oils, respectively. When
evaporation is achieved by consuming mainly natural gas (emission
factor ¼ 0.06 kg CO2/MJ [38]), 57.3 kg CO2/ton of olives is emitted in
a batch extraction process or 114.4 kg CO2/ton of olives is emitted in
a continuous extraction process (Table 3).
Waste vegetable oils may be converted into biofuel, or used as
an alternative to diesel in heating oil burners. Energy consumption
in the production of biodiesel is 3.7 MJ/kg. Since most of the bio-
diesel, production process is run with electricity and 0.14 kg of CO2
is emitted/MJ of electricity used, we may calculate the emission
associated with waste management as 0.5 kg CO2/kg of fresh oil

Fig. 8. Comparison of the carbon dioxide emissions to produce oil from one ton of olives, soybeans and sunflower seeds.
 M. Özilgen, E. Sorgüven / Energy 36 (2011) 5954e5967
Table 8
Chemical exergy estimation for olive, sunflower, and soybean oil.
Triglycerid Chemical Composition in Chemical exergy of olive
based on Exergy (kJ/kg) olive oil oil (MJ/ton)
Oleic acid 42067.7 70.0 29447.4
Linoleic acid 41430.9 12.0 4971.7
Palmitic acid 42111.5 14.0 5895.6
Stearic acid 42697.9 3.0 1280.9
Linolenic 40787.4 1.0 407.9
acid
Total 42003.5
[26,43]. Since more energy and exergy (67 MJ/kg) will be obtained
after burning the biodiesel, energy and exergy utilization in asso-
ciation with biodiesel production for waste management will not
appear in Tables 3e5.
Most of the energy utilized in the oil production is in the form of
electric power (Tables 2e5). Electric power may also be produced
from wind, hydroelectric or nuclear power, etc. Electric power,
which is obtained from all of these resources, is combined in
national or international networks. The relation between the
amounts of carbon dioxide emitted and electric power consumed
depends on the contribution of each resource into overall electric
power generation. One MJ of electric power utilization causes
0.14 kg of CO2 emission [30]. In countries where electricity is
produced by burning fossil fuels only, amount of CO2 emitted
should be higher in comparison with the countries where majority
of electric power is obtained from hydroelectric power plants.
Consumers usually do not have information about electricity used
for the product they purchased and its environmental impacts
[41,44]. Results from a survey indicated that 79% of households and
81% of small and medium sized enterprisers are aware of the fact
that the use of fossil fuels contributes to climate change, but they do
not necessarily relate this to carbon dioxide emissions [45].
Providing information to the consumers about the energy cost and
CO2 emission associated with each product may also convince the
producers to use cleaner energy sources.
Here the oil production process is modeled as a generic plant, in
order to achieve comparable results for the three different oils
investigated. Comparison of the numerical results obtained from
our calculations with published data on olive oil, soybean oil and
sunflower oil production processes show a good agreement. In this
study, the total energy consumption during olive oil production is
calculated to be 1070.8 MJ/ton of olive oil. Avraamides [46] reported
total energy consumption of 962.8 MJ/ton of olive oil. Our estima-
tion for the total energy consumption during sunflower oil
production is 1068 MJ, whereas Nilsson [47] reported an energy
consumption of 1181.5 MJ/ton of sunflower oil. For soybean oil
production our estimation is 1645 MJ/ton of soybean oil; Sheehan
et al. [32] reported a consumption of 1481 MJ of electricity to
produce one ton of soybean oil. The differences between our esti-
mations and the reported data are about 10%.
3.5. Cumulative degree of perfection
Calculation of chemical the exergy of oils are based on their
composition as described by Sorguven and Özilgen [4] (Table 8).
Chemical exergy of the olive oil is the highest, due its high oleic acid
content. The CDP is calculated as the ratio of the chemical exergy of
the main product to the total exergy consumption, including raw
materials and fuels (Table 6). Exergy input from the renewable
inputs, including solar energy, are not taken into account. CDP of
olive oil, soybean oil, and sunflower oil is 97.6%, 92.1% and 236.5%,
respectively. Although the CExC to produce oil from 1 ton of crop is
5965
Composition in Chemical exergy of Composition in Chemical exergy of
soybean oil soybean oil (MJ/ton) sunflower oil sunflower oil (MJ/ton)
24.0 10096.2 28.0 11779.0
54.0 22372.7 61.0 25272.8
11.0 4632.3 7.0 2947.8
4.0 1707.9 4.0 1707.9
7.0 2855.1 0.0 0.0
41664.2 41707.5
comparable for all three oils, since the oil content of sunflower seed
is twice as much as olive as and 2.5 times larger than soybean
(Table 6), CDP of sunflower oil is much larger.
Energy intensity has been decreasing and approaching to the
theoretical minimum in most subsectors over the years [45]. If the
energy utilization trends reported by Nuibe [44] continue over the
next five years, at least 5% more decline can be expected in all the
processes employed in this study. About 15% deviation may be
expected between the equipment produced by different manufac-
turers; deviation in different agricultural practices may be larger.
Energy consumption and CO2 emission estimates are subject to
change with the scenario. Energy consumption may increase, as the
equipment gets older. Therefore, about 20% error may be expec-
ted in the values we report. The results of this study are based on
the assumption that olives and sunflower seeds and soybeans
contain 25%, 50% and 20% oil, respectively. Oil yield of sunflowers
vary substantially [40]. If the calculations should be based on the
varieties with less oil content, the results may change accordingly.
During the recent years, excellent studies are done to compare
either the efficiency or point out the inefficiency of the existing
plants and practices [31,48e52]. Exergy efficiency of vegetable oil
production process may be improved by benefiting from the
novelty reported in these studies, such as using waste heat from
heat pump elsewhere in the plant [53]. Combined contribution of
these and similar studies are expected to cause substantial increase
in energy efficiency and reduce carbon dioxide emission in the oil
producing plants in the near future. In the present study, we have
tried to be as realistic as possible. In Turkey, the producers are
highly keen to reduce exergy and energy cost of their processes.
Carbon dioxide emission to the atmosphere is planned to be taxed
soon. We have tried to choose as environment friendly inputs and
processes as possible. We believe that the manufacturers will
consider them for their production as studies like this one draw
their attention to those points.
In the present study energy and exergy utilization and carbon
dioxide emission during edible vegetable oil production have been
considered. Vegetable oils are also raw material for biodiesel
production. Interested readers are referred to the excellent studies
in the literature discussing the issue within that context [54,55].
4. Conclusions
During the agriculture, least amount of exergy is consumed to
produce sunflower; i.e. 3425.7 MJ/ton of sunflower. Soybean agri-
culture required an exergy consumption of 6092.9 MJ/ton and olive
agriculture required 7904.7 MJ/ton. The CExC values of oil produced
from the same amount of crop are comparable; i.e. 10762.6 MJ/ton
of olive, 8819.1 MJ/ton of sunflower and 9051.4 MJ/ton of soybean
(Fig. 7). However, the large difference between the oil content of
these crops differentiates the CExC of the produced oil; i.e.
17638.2 MJ/ton of sunflower oil, 43050.3 MJ/ton of olive oil and
45256.8 MJ/ton of soybean oil (Table 6).
5966 M. Özilgen, E. Sorgüven / Energy 36 (2011) 5954e5967
The CDP of soybean and olive oil is 0.92 and 0.98, respectively,
whereas the CDP of the sunflower oil is 2.36. Since the oil content of
the sunflower seed is much larger than olive and soybean (i.e. 50%),
its CDP is much larger.
Agriculture is the most energy and exergy intensive process and
emits most of the carbon dioxide for each of the investigated cases
(Fig. 8). Here diesel consumption is the dominant source of energy
and exergy consumption. Decreasing the diesel consumption with
good agricultural practices and employing biodiesel may improve
the situation. If we substitute diesel (CExC ¼ 53.2 MJ/kg) with
biodiesel obtained from renewable resources (CExC ¼ 8.8 MJ/kg) as
described by Sorguven and Özilgen [4], the CExC values would
decrease to 3859.6 MJ/ton of olives, 1847.1 MJ/ton of sunflower
seeds and 2347.1 MJ/ton of soybeans. As a result, CDP of olive and
soybean oil rises to 1.6 and sunflower oil to 2.9.
The malpractice of excessive fertilizers and agrochemicals use
makes the major contribution to carbon dioxide emission. The most
energy intensive process is olive oil production. However, since the
fertilizer consumption here is limited, total carbon dioxide emis-
sion is less than those of the other two processes are. On the other
hand, excessive fertilizer consumption during the soybean agri-
culture results in a rather large CO2 emission.
References
[1] Soy Stats. World statistics. Available at, http://www.soystats.com/2009/
Default-frames.htm; 2009.
[2] Alti M, Özilgen M. Statistical process analysis in Broiler feed formulation. JSFA
1994;66:13e20.
[3] Szargut J, Morris DR, Steward FR. Exergy analysis of thermal, chemical, and
metallurgical processes. New York: Hemisphere; 1988.
[4] Sorguven E, Özilgen M. Thermodynamic assessment of algal biodiesel utili-
zation. Renewable Energy 2010;35:1956e66.
[5] Rakopoulos CD, Giakoumis EG. Second-law analyses applied to internal
combustion engines operation. Progress in Energy and Combust Science 2006;
32:2e47.
[6] Caton JA. On destruction of availability (exergy) due to combustion process
-with specific application to internal combustion engines. Energy 2000;25:
1097e117.
[7] Ayres RU. Eco-thermodynamics: economics and the second law. Ecological
Economics 1998;26:189e209.
[8] Talens L, Villalba G, Gabarrell X. Exergy analysis applied to biodiesel
production. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2007;51:397e407.
[9] Polychchronaki EA, Douma AC, Dantsism TH, Giourga C, Lomou A. Energy
analysis as indicator of agricultural sustainability: the case of Western
Macedonia and Epirus, Greece. In: Proceedings of the 10th International
Conference on Environmental Science and Technology. Kos Island, Greece;
2007. pp. A1190eA1198.
[10] Kallivroussis L, Natsis A, Papadakis G. The energy balance of sunflower
production for biodiesel in Greece. Biosystems Engineering 2002;81:347e54.
[11] De D, Singh RS, Chandra H. Technological impact on energy consumption in
rainfed soybean cultivation in Madhya Pradesh. Applied Energy 2001;70:
193e213.
[12] Helsel ZR. Energy and alternatives for fertilizer and pesticide use. In: Fluck RC,
editor. Energy in farm production, vol. 6. New York: Elsevier; 1992. p. 177e201.
[13] Wittmus H, Olson L, Lane D. Energy requirements for conventional versus
minimum tillage. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 1975;3:72e5.
[14] Pimentel D. Ethanol fuels: energy, security, economics, and the environment.
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 1991;4:1e13.
[15] Kongshaug G. Energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions in fertilizer
production. In: IFA Technical Conference. Marrakech, Morocco; 1998.
[16] Anundskas A. Technical improvements in mineral nitrogen fertilizer produc-
tion. In: Harvesting energy with fertilizers. Brussels: European Fertilizer
Manufacturers Association; 2000.
[17] Esengun K, Erdal G, Gunduz O, Erdal H. An economic analysis and energy use
in stake-tomato production in Tokat province of Turkey. Renewable Energy
2007;32:1873e81.
[18] Aslantas R, Cakmakci R, Sahin F. Effect of plant growth promoting rhizobac-
teria on young apple tree growth and fruit yield under orchard conditions.
Scientia Horticulture 2007;111:371e7.
[19] Hülsbergen KJ, Feil B, Biermann S, Rathke GW, Kalk WD, Diepenbrock W.
A method of energy balancing in crop production and its application in a long-
term fertilizer trial. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 2001;86:
303e21.
[20] Snyder CS, Bruulsema TW, Jensen TL, Fixen PE. Review of greenhouse gas
emissions from crop production systems and fertilizer management effects.
Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 2009;133:247e66.
[21] Ren T, Christie P, Wang J, Chen Q, Zhang F. Root zone soil nitrogen manage-
ment to maintain high tomato yields and minimum nitrogen losses to the
environment. Scientia Horticulture 2010;125:25e33.
[22] Clements DR, Weise SF, Brown R, Stonehouse DP, Hume DJ, Swanton CJ.
Energy analysis of tillage and herbicide inputs in alternative weed
management systems. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 1995;52:
119e28.
[23] Fadere DA, Bamiro OA, Oni AO. Energy and cost analysis of organic fertilizer
production in Nigeria. Energy 2010;35:332e40.
[24] Ptasinski KJ, Prinsa MJ, Pierika A. Exergetic evaluation of biomass gasification.
Energy 2007;32:568e74.
[25] Lal R. Carbon emission from farm operations. Environment International
2004;30:981e90.
[26] Fore SR, Porter P, Lazarus W. Net energy balance of small-scale on-farm
biodiesel production from canola and soybean. Biomass Bioenergy 2011;35:
2234e44.
[27] Kaltsas AM, Mamolos AP, Tsatsarelis CA, Nanos GD, Kalburtji KL. Energy
budget inorganic and conversion olive groves. Agriculture, Ecosystems and
Environment 2007;122:243e51.
[28] Brehmer B. Chemical biorefinery perspectives: The valorisation of function-
alised chemicals from biomass resources compared to the conventional fossil
fuel production route. Available at. Wageningen University, http://www.
lcacenter.org/InLCA2006/Brehmer-abstract.pdf; 2008.
[29] Banaeian N, Omid M, Ahmadi H. Energy and economic analysis of greenhouse
strawberry production in Tehran province of Iran. Energy Conversion and
Management 2011;5:1020e5.
[30] Roy P, Nei D, Okadome H, Nakamura N, Orikasa T, Shiina T. Life cycle inven-
tory analysis of fresh tomato distribution systems in Japan considering the
quality aspects. Journal of Food Engineering 2008;86:225e33.
[31] Eide MH. Life cycle assessment (LCA) of industrial milk production. Interna-
tional Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 2002;7:115e26.
[32] Sheehan J, Camobreco V, Duffield J, Grabowski M, Shapouri H. Life cycle
inventory of biodiesel and petroleum diesel for use in an urban bus. Final
Report. USDA, USDE. Available at: http://www.tpub.com/content/altfuels05/
3813/38130001.htm; National Renewable Energy Laboratory; 1998.
[33] Pimental D, Patzek TW. Ethanol production using corn, switchgrass, and
wood; biodiesel production using soybean and sunflower. Natural Resources
Research 2005;14:65e76.
[34] Vink ETH, Rabago KR, Glassner DA, Gruben PR. Applications of life cycle
assessment to Nature WorksTM polylactide (PLA) production. Polymer
Degradation and Stability 2003;80:403e19.
[35] de Swaan Arons J, van de Kooi H, Sankaranarayanan K. Efficiency and
sustainability in the energy and chemical industries. Marcel Dekker; 2004.
[36] Uls. A Study of packaging efficiency as it relates to waste prevention. Report.
American Chemistry Council. Online at, http://www.americanchemistry.com/
plastics/doc.asp?CID¼1593&DID¼6072; 2007.
[37] Chow S, Ganji AR, Hackett B. Opportunities for energy efficiency and demand
response in corrugated cardboard manufacturing facilities. In: Industrial
Energy Technology Conference. Louisiana: New Orleans; 2005.
[38] PAS. Guide to PAS 2050, How to assess the carbon footprint of goods and
services. UK: Carbon Trust; 2008.
[39] Hurst T. Could high-tech plastic pallets mean the end for disposable wooden
pallets? earth and industry. Available at, http://earthandindustry.com/2010/
09/is-the-pallet-of-the-future-made-out-of-plastic; 2010.
[40] Davey M, Jan M. Sunflower (Heliant annulus L.): genetic improvement using
conventional and in vitro technologies. Journal of Crop Improvement 2010;
24:349e91.
[41] Vitolo S, Petarca L, Bresci B. Treatment of olive oil industry wastes. Bio-
resource Technology 1999;67:129e37.
[42] Niaousnakis M, Halvadakis CP. Olive processing waste management literature
review and patent survey. 2nd ed.; 2006. Greece.
[43] Poritosh R, Nei D, Okadome H, Nakamura N, Orikasa T, Shiina T. Life
cycle inventory analysis of fresh tomato distribution systems in
Japan considering the quality aspect. Journal of Food Engineering 2007;86:
225e33.
[44] Nuibe T. Energy intensity in industrial sub sectors. Available at. The Energy
Conservation Center, Japan, http://www.asiaeec-col.eccj.or.jp/eas/01/pdf/02.
pdf; 2007.
[45] Boardman B, Palmer J. Consumer Choice and carbon Consciousness for elec-
tricity. European Commission Altener Program Final Report, Environmental
Challenge Institute. Available at: http://www.electricitylabels.com/
downloads/4CE_Final_Report.pdf; 2003.
[46] Avraamides M, Fatta D. Resource consumption and emissions from olive oil
production: a life cycle inventory case study in Cyprus. Journal of Cleaner
Production 2008;16:809e21.
[47] Nilsson K, Flysjö A, Davis J, Sim S, Unger N, Bell S. Comparative life
cycle assessment of margarine and butter consumed in the UK,
Germany and France. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 2010;15:
916e26.
[48] Priambodo A, Kumar S. Energy use and carbon dioxide emission of Indonesian
small and medium scale industries. Energy Conversion and Management
2001;42:1335e48.
[49] Ramirez CA, Patel M, Blok K. From fluid milk to milk powder: energy use
and energy efficiency in the European dairy industry. Energy 2006;31:
1984e2004.
 M. Özilgen, E. Sorgüven / Energy 36 (2011) 5954e5967 5967

[50] Ramirez CA, Patel M, Blok K. How much energy to process one pound of meat?
A comparison of energy use and specific energy consumption in the meat
industry of four European countries. Energy 2006;31:2047e63.
[51] Xu T, Flapper J, Kramer KJ. Characterization of energy use and performance of
global cheese processing. Energy 2009;34:1993e2000.
[52] Zhang M, Li G, Mu HL, Ning YD. Energy and exergy efficiencies in the Chinese
transportation sector, 1980e2009. Energy 2011;36:770e6.
[53] Kapustenko PO, Ulyev LM, Boldyryev SA, Garev AO. Integration of a heat pump
into the heat supply system of a cheese production plant. Energy 2008;33:882e9.
[54] Peiró LT, Lombardi L, Méndez GV, Durany XG. Life cycle assessment (LCA) and
exergetic life cycle assessment (ELCA) of the production of biodiesel from
used cooking oil (UCO). Energy 2010;35:889e93.
[55] Peiró LT, Méndez GV, Sciubba E, Durany XG. Extended exergy accounting
applied to biodiesel production. Energy 2010;35:2861e9.