J Mater Cycles Waste Manag (2017) 19:1457–1467
DOI 10.1007/s10163-016-0540-x
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Life cycle assessment of biodiesel fuel production from waste
cooking oil in Okayama City
Jinmei Yang1 • Takeshi Fujiwara2 • Qijin Geng1
Received: 28 December 2015 / Accepted: 18 August 2016 / Published online: 6 September 2016
Ó Springer Japan 2016
Abstract A life cycle assessment (LCA) is performed to
make clear of the actual environment impacts from con-
versation of waste cooking oil (WCO) to biodiesel fuel
(BDF) in Okayama. A scenario analysis is carried out
based on different participation rate of residents who sep-
arate WCO from general waste, corresponding to different
BDF utilisation rate in transportation system. Sub scenarios
complying with different gas emission standards regarding
vehicles are designed as well. Afterwards, life cycle impact
assessment is conducted to focus on global warming,
acidification, and urban air pollution. Overall improvement
of almost all kinds of life cycle inventories is significant
when diesel is replaced with BDF, demonstrating that a
shift from WCO-to-incineration to WCO-to-BDF is more
beneficial. Under carbon neutral, compared to base sce-
nario (S0), about 746.05 ton CO2 emission will be reduced
annually in the scenario with 100 % BDF utilisation in
vehicles (S4). Meanwhile, total external cost in three
environmental impacts (EI) sharply reduces by 51.90 %,
showing much economic sustainability in S4. Moreover,
the manufacturing cost for producing one litter WCO-to-
BDF is 97.32 Yen. Sensitivity analysis shows that the gas
emission standard regarding vehicles had much bigger
effect on EI than BDF manufacturing process in this
research.
& Jinmei Yang
yangjmwf@163.com; yangjm2011@yahoo.co.jp
1
College of Chemistry Chemical and Environmental
Engineering, Weifang University, No. 5147, Dongfeng
East Street, Weifang 261061, Shandong, China
2 Nagoya, Miyazaki, and Matsuyama [12]. Recently, annual
Solid Waste Management Research Center, Okayama
University, 3-1-1, Tsushima-Naka, Kita-ku,
Okayama 700-8530, Japan
Keywords Biodiesel fuel  Waste cooking oil  Life cycle
assessment  Life cycle impact assessment  Sensitivity
analysis
Introduction
Biodiesel fuel (BDF) is regarded as one of the alternatives
to petroleum-based fossil fuels, according to its prominent
attributions to environmental sustainability and energy
security [1–3]. There are various kinds of raw materials to
produce BDF, classified as food feedstock and non-food
feedstock. A number of researches have shown that fuels
derived from food feedstock caused a series of problems
such as land use change, food price, and increased life
cycle carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions [4–6]. Consequently,
much attention is focused on BDF production from non-
food feedstock, including waste cooking oil (WCO) [7–9].
In Japan, WCO is general household waste generated in
the cooking and frying of food with edible oil. In 2008, about
0.34 million ton WCO from business emitted with 80 % was
recycled; 0.1 million tons from household emitted while
recycled rate was less than 10 % [10]. Most of WCO emitted
from household was incinerated with other household waste
(WCO-to-incineration). Using WCO as feedstock to produce
BDF is considered more environmental sustainability in
Japan since it is a waste product and a transportation
fuel (WCO-to-BDF). Early since 2000, Japanese govern-
ment has constituted many national strategies and polices in
different areas to promote BDF [11]. Several cities thus
launched the WCO-to-BDF project to use BDF as fuel in the
waste collection vehicles and city buses, such as in Kyoto,
amount of BDF produced from WCO is gradually increasing,
from 4471 kl in 2006 to 8568 kl in 2009 [10].
123
1458
To determine environmental performance of BDF pro-
duction, recent years have seen increased attention being
given to life cycle assessment (LCA) studies, including
general studies [13–18], comparisons with conventional
diesel [19–21], process alternatives for producing BDF
[22–24], kinds of feedstocks [25–27], and different cata-
lysts [28, 29]. Against Kyoto, Terakawa and Tohno eval-
uated the utilisation system of BDF into bus by LCA
method, based on different recovery rate of WCO [30];
Yano et al. compared the effects of two types of BDF on
reducing environmental impacts and conducted a scenario
analysis based on different diesel vehicle types [31].
Among a mass of LCA literatures, significant variations
exist regarding the actual benefits of BDF, partly due to the
uncertainty around key input parameters [32]. Moreover,
there are very few investigations considering both of
recovery ratio of WCO and reform of vehicles type.
In another Japanese city Okayama, government had
planned to start WCO-to-BDF project in 2009. Okayama is
the capital city of Okayama Prefecture in the Chugoku
region. As of 2008, it had an area of 789.90 km2 and an
estimated population of 695 170. From June 2009, BDF
manufacturing plant started to work. Produced BDF was
used as fuel for waste collection vehicles within Okayama
city. The number of BDF-consumed vehicles increased
from 46 at the beginning to 109 in December 2009,
accounting for 88.62 % of total vehicles.
Before LCA analysis
Questionnaire on citizen’s behaviour
Prior to further research, a questionnaire is carried out to
briefly investigate the citizens’ behaviour of separating
WCO from general household waste. Results indicate that
in 366 households, participation rate of citizens who sep-
arate WCO from other household waste is 49.73 %,
including one household who started the separation before
the WCO-to-BDF project. 24.32 % of surveyed residents
don’t emit WCO. On the other hand, 25.95 % of residents
have not classified the WCO separately even the WCO-to-
BDF project has launched. It is expected that with
increasing environmental awareness, more and more resi-
dents will contribute to separate WCO from other waste.
Different participation rate of residents is considered as a
basis for setting scenarios, corresponding to different
recovery ratio of WCO-to-BDF.
Gravimetric factor
Usually, plastic bottles or other transparent containers with
varying capacity are encouraged as containers to collect
123
J Mater Cycles Waste Manag (2017) 19:1457–1467
WCO. For further calculation, it is necessary to inspect
gravimetric factor, defined as weight ratio of containers to
total weight of WCO and containers. In the investigation,
1107 bottles were collected. A minority of unexpected
containers such as glass bottles appeared and the number
share is 2.35 %. In the effective samples, 67.07 % of res-
idents collect WCO using plastic bottles (from 250 ml to
2 l) and most of them use 500 ml bottles (29.60 %). In
addition, 32.93 % of WCO is collected by edible cooking
oil container, mostly by oil container of 1 l. Apart from
unexpected containers, gravimetric factor is found between
5 and 11 %; an average value of 7.14 % is supposed in the
following research.
Materials and methods
Goal and scope definition
Before launching the WCO-to-BDF project in Okayama, a
preliminary LCA study was carried out and it was expected
that the business will reduce the negative environmental
burden, especially for CO2 [33]. To make clear of the
actual environment impacts, a follow-up LCA study was
performed herein, from the perspectives of life cycle
inventory and running cost. The considered life cycle
inventories are CO2, oxides of nitrogen (NOx), sulphur
oxide (SOx), carbon monoxide (CO), hydrocarbon (HC),
and particulate matter (PM). Actual experimental input
parameters regarding vehicles are cited to reduce the
uncertainty. A scenario analysis is carried out based on
different participation rate of residents, which conducted
by the questionnaire analysis. Afterwards this research
conduct a life cycle impact assessment, focusing on three
environmental impact categories as global warming (GW),
acidification (AC), and urban air pollution (UAP). The
integration results of environmental impacts are expressed
in monetary units. Moreover, cost in base scenario and
running cost of the project implementation in November,
2009 are calculated. Usually, WCO is classified as carbon
neutral over its life cycle because combustion of WCO
releases the same amount of carbon as it was captured by
the plant during its growth. Accordingly, for further
investigation of the reduction effect under carbon neutral,
the amount of reduction was recalculated as CO2 emission
from incineration of WCO and BDF usage considered as
‘0’.
Functional unit and system boundary
For a fair and consistent comparison, the functional unit is
required. In November 2009, the treatment amount of
WCO was 27.39 kl, set as functional unit. The treatment
J Mater Cycles Waste Manag (2017) 19:1457–1467 1459

amount includes the amount collected from household as
well as business. System boundary is illustrated as Fig. 1
and the border indicates boundary. It mainly includes three
parts as WCO collection and transportation (1), WCO
separation with incineration of containers (2), and BDF
manufacturing with produced BDF used in waste collection
vehicles (3). Life cycle inventory arising from input in
BDF manufacturing and manufacturing of diesel oil is
taken into consideration. However, final disposal of
incineration residues and construction of BDF plant are not
covered in this research.
System flow of WCO-to-BDF project operation in 2009
is represented in Fig. 2. For household WCO, in each
designated day, citizens in eastern Okayama bring the
WCO into the nearest stations (). Then, government
collects the WCO from each station and transports to
eastern recycling centre (´). On the other hand, WCO
emitted from western Okayama, first, is gathered in Shinpo
resource selection site () and then transported to the
eastern recycling centre (`´). WCO without collected
separately is sent for combustion with other waste (ˆ). For
the WCO emitted from business, BDF manufacturing plant
goes to collect the oil directly using designed tank (˜). In
the eastern recycling centre, after the separation of the
WCO and containers by hand, oil is collected and trans-
ported to BDF manufacturing plant using blue tank (Þ),
while the containers are sent for combustion (þ). There-
after, in the BDF manufacturing plant (¼), WCO is con-
verted into BDF by transesterification method in the
presence of alkaline catalyst (KOH). Finally, BDF product
is sold to eastern cleaning centre and Toshinden cleaning
centre, respectively, for feeding the waste collection
vehicles within Okayama city (½). Collection and trans-
portation of WCO using BDF is a part of waste collection
().
Scenario setting
A scenario analysis is designed based on different partici-
pation rate of residents, corresponding to different BDF
utilisation rate. BDF utilisation rate means the volume
share of consumed BDF into total fuel consumption. As a
base scenario (S0), all WCO was assumed to be collected
with general waste and incinerated, while diesel was used
as fuel for collecting waste. BDF utilisation rate is thus set
as ‘0’. With regard to a baseline scenario, current situation

Fig. 1 System boundary of

F inal disposal of C onstruction of B D F
entire research plant
incineration residues

Manufacturing of diesel
oil

WCO collection and

WCO separation (2) BD Fmanufacturing (3)
transportation (1)

Feed BDF 䐨 Eastern recycling/cleaning Transportation 䐧

center 䐡 BDF

Collection and transportation 䐢

Container 䐥
WCO with general waste
Collection and Collection and BDF manufacturing
transportation 䐟 Collection and transportation 䐟 Eastern recycling/cleaning transportation 䐤 plant (glycerol
Household (East) station
WCO and container WCO and container center 䐡 WCO treatment) 䐦

Collection and Collection and Collection and

transportation 䐟 transportation 䐟 Shinpo resource transportation 䐠
Household (West) WCO and container station
WCO and container selection site WCO and container

Collection and transportation (consignment of business) 䐣

Business
WCO

Transportation 䐧

Feed BDF 䐨
Toshiden cleaning center BDF

Fig. 2 Whole system flow of BDF project operation in 2009

123
1460 J Mater Cycles Waste Manag (2017) 19:1457–1467

Table 1 Unit emission parameters of corresponding vehicles in different regulation years

Regulation year Percentagea Fuel kind SFC Unit emission parameter (UEP)
km/l CO (g/km) HC (g/km) NOx (g/km) CO2 (g/km) PM (g/km) CO2 (kgCO2/l)

1998 22 % Diesel 8.7 1.72 0.58 1.48 297.70 0.13 2.59

BDF 8.3 1.98 0.49 1.59 310.30 0.34 2.58
2003 16 % Diesel 8.7 0.75 0.15 2.20 297.70 0.03 2.59
BDF 8.2 1.98 0.06 2.50 310.30 0.02 2.58
2005 62 % Diesel 8.5 0.06 0.00 1.21 297.70 0.01 2.59
BDF 8.5 0.03 0.01 1.46 310.30 0.01 2.58
Average (low standard) Diesel 8.6 0.54 0.15 1.43 297.70 0.04 0.15
BDF 8.4 0.77 0.13 1.65 310.30 0.08 0.13
a
Percentage means actual percentage of corresponding vehicles into total vehicles defined by field investigation
SFC means specific fuel consumption, km/l

Table 2 Summary of
Scenario Participation rate of BDF Collection share of WCO Gas emission standard
characteristics regarding each
residents/% utilisation from businessa/% regarding vehicles
scenario
rate/%

S0 0 0 0 Low
S1 49.73 70.35 47.34 Low
S20 75.68 86.62 47.34 Low
S3 75.68 86.62 47.34 High
S4 75.68 100 55.42 High
a
It denotes the amount percentage of WCO collected from business into total collection amount

of BDF project represented in Fig. 2 is set as scenario 1 Life cycle environmental impact
(S1). According to the questionnaire survey on citizen’s
behaviour, people who have not classified the WCO from Life cycle environmental impacts (LCEI) of WCO-to-BDF
household waste are encouraged to start the business. are calculated in this part. LIME1, a Japanese LCEI
Maximum participation rate of residents as 75.68 % is method, was developed for the first term of a national LCA
expected, defined as scenario 3 (S3). Scenario with all the project from the period of 1998 to 2003. LIME2, which
current waste collection vehicles using BDF as fuel is was based on endpoint modelling method, was developed
assumed to be scenario 4 (S4), that is 100 % BDF utili- for the second term (2003–2006). This study focuses on
sation rate. Moreover, to evaluate the impact of different three kinds of environmental impact (EI) categories as GW,
gas emission standard regarding vehicles, an intermediate AC, and UAP. The integration results of environmental
base scenario (S20) is designed. S20 has the same BDF impacts are expressed in monetary units, calculated by
utilisation rate with S3, while complies with different gas formula (1) [35]. The integration factors were retrieved
emission standard. Table 1 lists the different gas emission from the website of the Life Cycle Assessment Society of
standard in different years. Scenarios S0, S1, and S20 quote Japan (JLCA), listed in Table 3.
the average unit emission parameter (UEP) regarding
vehicles, set as low standard [34]. Contrarily, in S3 and S4,
Table 3 The integration factor (IF) for each substance W, Yen/kg
all waste collection vehicles are assumed to meet 2005
Japanese gas emission standard, set as high standard. Target substance, W Impact category
Table 2 tabulates the characteristics of each scenario. In GW UAP AC
S4, although all the emitted WCO from households was
CO2 2.33
assumed to produce BDF in the future, the value cannot
SOx 3760 120
fulfil the requirement of 100 % BDF utilisation. Hence, the a
expansion of WCO collection to more enterprises or other NOx 299 95.7
regions is needed; here, in simplicity, expansion to busi- PM 7460a
a
ness is supposed. Collected amount of WCO in all sce- Parameters of non-point source from Chubu region of Japan are
narios is adjusted to the same. cited

123
J Mater Cycles Waste Manag (2017) 19:1457–1467 1461

Table 4 Main input and output of material in BDF manufacturing plant in November, 2009
Item Material Unit Consumption amount Unit cost Unit Cost/1000 Yen

Input WCO kg 20,780 –

Methanol kg 3,550 30 Yen/l 134.30
KOH kg 354 375 Yen/kg 132.75
BHT kg 10 1000 Yen/kg 10
Activated white clay kg 480 230 Yen/kg 110.40
Pour-point depressant kg 14 790 Yen/kg 10.68
Utility Power kWh 3296 11 Yen/kWh 36.25
Output BDF l 18,607 –
Glycerine kg 8600 – Yen/kg –
Operator Person 2 700 Million Yen/year 1166.67
Management – 116.67
Cost depreciation – 93.03
Total Manufacturing cost: 97.32 Yen/L-BDF 1810.75

X X 
I¼ InvðW Þ  IFImpact ðW Þ :
Impact W
In which, I is the integration result based on economic
assessment (external cost), Yen/month, Inv (W) is the life
cycle inventory of the substance W, kg/month, IFImpact
(W) is the integration factor for the substance W, Yen/kg.
Data collection and processing
In the process of WCO collection and transportation
(Fig. 1, (1)), since municipal administration has provided
the records of respective consumed volume of diesel and
BDF fuel (L), we can calculate the travel millage (km)
integrating with Specific Fuel Consumption (SFC,
Table 1), as the waste collection distance in all scenarios.
Then, the environmental burden emitted from the collec-
tion process can be conducted when knowing the UEP of
each pollutant (Table 1). The UEP of SOx is converted
from the mass concentration of sulphur in each fuel. Since
the mass concentration in BDF is 2 ppm, the UEP of SO2 is
calculated as 3.52 g/kl (relative density of BDF is 0.88 kg/
l). According to the same method, UEP of SO2 in the diesel
oil is conducted as 84 g/kl based on 0.005 wt% of sulphur
(relative density of diesel oil is 0.84 kg/l). UEP of CO2 and
SOx is mainly considered in the manufacturing of diesel oil
[36].
In eastern recycling centre (Fig. 1, (2)), after separated
with WCO, containers are sent for incineration, simply
considered as plastic bottles. Emission of pollutants in the
incineration process is mainly caused by utility of elec-
tricity. UEP for each pollutant in incineration process refers
to the data in JEMAI-LCA pro and reference values
ð1Þ [36, 37]. NOx concentration is assumed as 100 ppm of air
pollution.
In BDF manufacturing process (Fig. 1, (3)), accurate
plant-specific data were used and the main input and output
of material, energy consumption in November, 2009 is
tabulated as Table 4. In the calculation of life cycle
inventory, not only the emissions from utilities, but also
from input material are taken into consideration. Environ-
mental burden emitted from input material is conducted
based on respective UEP for each raw material. Limited by
data, the UEP of NaOH is used instead of KOH. Since
pour-point depressant is used merely from second half of
December to March, the consumption is distributed into
each month averagely. The environmental burden from
electricity power is on the basis of UEP of Chugoku
Electric Power Co., Inc in JIMLCA handbook.
On the other hand, for cost calculation, the initial
investment on constructing BDF manufacturing plant is not
covered. In the process of WCO collection, fuel price in
BDF-consumed vehicles are set as 0 Yen/L. Cost arising
from incineration of WCO or container is calculated
according to the treatment cost of combusting general
waste in Eastern cleaning center [38]. Cost of electronic
power is assumed as 11 Yen/kWh as the same with that in
previous report. Other utilities such as nitrogen, steam and
water are directly generated in BDF manufacturing plant,
not covering extra cost. According to the report of New
Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organi-
zation (NEDO), the treatment fee of glycerine is usually
defined as 5 Yen/L-BDF. However, here, glycerine is
burning up as combustion aid material in its subsidiary
(Misakimachi), assumed no cost needed. Management fee
is 10 % of employment salary and cost depreciation is

123
1462 J Mater Cycles Waste Manag (2017) 19:1457–1467

Table 5 Monthly life cycle

Scenario Step CO2 NOx SOx CO HC PM
inventory of main pollutants in
each scenario, kg S0 WCO collection 66,498.23 318.98 2.19 119.78 33.62 8.61
WCO incineration 30,468.54 22.44 0.065 0.00 0.00 0.00
Diesel oil manufacturing 2,712.98 1.66
Subtotal 99,679.75 341.42 3.91 119.78 33.62 8.61
S1 WCO collection 69,915.73 360.43 0.25 156.49 29.74 15.81
Containers incineration 1115.44 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00
BDF manufacturing 4657.85 3.54 6.61 0.00 0.00 0.00
BDF transportation 328.24 2.65 0.00 2.09 0.06 0.02
WCO incineration 12,849.93 9.47 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00
Diesel oil manufacturing 875.10 0.53
Subtotal 89,742.29 376.14 7.42 158.58 29.81 15.83
S20 WCO collection 70,385.24 368.88 0.15 165.10 28.80 17.51
Containers incineration 1364.57 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
BDF manufacturing 5698.16 4.33 8.09 0.00 0.00 0.00
BDF transportation 401.55 3.24 0.00 2.56 0.08 0.03
WCO incineration 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Diesel oil manufacturing 425.79 0.26
Subtotal 78,275.31 376.52 8.50 167.66 28.88 17.54
S3 WCO collection 70,385.24 324.68 0.15 7.45 2.22 2.19
Containers incineration 1364.57 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
BDF manufacturing 5698.16 4.33 8.09 0.00 0.00 0.00
BDF transportation 401.55 3.24 0.00 2.56 0.08 0.03
WCO incineration 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Diesel oil manufacturing 425.79 0.26
Subtotal 78,275.31 332.32 8.50 10.01 2.30 2.22
S4 WCO collection 59,977.08 282.20 0.10 5.03 2.13 1.84
Containers incineration 1,364.57 0.08 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00
BDF manufacturing 5698.16 4.33 8.09 0.00 0.00 0.00
BDF transportation 401.55 3.24 0.00 2.56 0.08 0.03
WCO incineration 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Subtotal 67,441.36 289.85 8.20 7.59 2.21 1.87

assumed as 5 Yen/L-BDF. The manufacturing cost for
producing one litter of BDF from WCO is thus calculated
as 97.32 Yen, in which wages of operators accounting for
64.43 %.
Results and discussion
Life cycle inventory
As mentioned above, six steps such as WCO collection
(`˜Þ), containers incineration (´þ), BDF manu-
facturing (¼), BDF transportation (½), WCO incineration
(ˆ), and diesel oil manufacturing are included in the
research. Main environmental burdens emitted from each
step in each scenario are calculated and listed in Table 5.
Emission of CO2 and NOx in each step is plotted, respec-
tively, in Fig. 3a, b.
As shown in Fig. 3a, an effective reduction of CO2
emission is believed. Compared with S0, total amount of
CO2 emitted from S1 to S4 decreases by 9.97, 21.47, 21.47,
and 32.34 %. S20 and S3 have the same amount due to the
unchanged UEP of CO2 in WCO collection system.
Besides, most CO2 emitted in the WCO collection process
in each scenario, respectively, accounting for 66.71, 77.91,
89.92, 89.92, and 88.93 % of the total CO2 emission
amount. It is accompanied by emission from BDF manu-
facturing, which mainly arises from consumption of elec-
tricity. With the increasing requirement of BDF fuel,
amount of CO2 emitted from BDF manufacturing plant
increases from S1 to S4. For intuitive comparison among
scenarios, unit CO2 per volume of WCO is calculated, as

123
J Mater Cycles Waste Manag (2017) 19:1457–1467 1463

Diesel manufacturing 450

120000 WCO incineration

A m o u n t o f C O 2 e m is s io n in a ll s te p s ( k g )
WCO incineration BDF transportation
110000 400

A m o u n t o f N O x e m is s io n i n a l l s te p s ( k g )
BDF transportation BDF manufacturing
Container incineration
100000 BDF manufacturing 350 WCO collection
90000 container incineration
WCO collection 300
80000
70000 250
60000
200
50000
150
40000
30000 100
20000
50
10000
0 0
S0 S1 S20 S3 S4 S0 S1 S20 S3 S4
Scenario Scenario
(a) (b)
A m o u n t o f C O 2 e m i s s io n w ith c a rb o n n e u tra l (k g )

70000
Diesel manufacturing
WCO incineration
60000
BDF transportation
BDF manufacturing
50000
container incineration
WCO collection
40000

30000

20000

10000

0
S0 S1 S20 S3 S4
Scenario
(c)
Fig. 3 a Amount of CO2 emission in all steps, b amount of NOx emission in all steps and c amount of CO2 emission under carbon neutral

Table 6 Cost accounting in S0

Scenario Step Unit cost Total cost/1000 Yen
and S1
S0 WCO collection, diesel oil 89.9 Yen/L 2341.15
WCO incineration 15,744 Yen/t 181.01
Subtotal 2522.16
S1 WCO collection, diesel 89.9 Yen/L 703.94
WCO collection, BDF 0 Yen/L
Container incineration 15,744 Yen/t 12.26
BDF manufacturing, Table 3 1810.75
Separation WCO by hand, labour chargea 900 Yen/h 216.00
WCO incineration 15,744 Yen/t 70.85
Subtotal 2813.8
a
2 labours with past-time job, 20 days every month and 6 h/day

123
1464
S4
AC
UAP
GW
S3
Scenario
S20
S1
S0
0 100 200 300 400 500
External cost based on economic assessment (1000 Yen)
(a)
Fig. 4 External cost of three life cycle impact assessments a without carbon neutral, b with carbon neutral
3.64, 3.28, 3.28 2.86, 2.46 kg/l-(treated WCO) in each
scenario, denoting an obvious decreasing trend. Further,
from the perspective of the carbon neutral, the amount of
CO2 emitted from each step is re-evaluated and depicted in
Fig. 3c. Compared with the value in S0, the emission of
CO2 will experience great reduction by 59.44, 74.26 and
89.83 % in S1, S3 and S4. It is possible to speculate that
about 746.05 tons of CO2 will be reduced annually, if all
the current collection vehicles use BDF as fuel in place of
diesel fuel, as designed in S4. It is confirmed that a shift
from WCO-to-incineration to WCO-to-BDF makes its
great contribution to reduce CO2 emission.
Further, for most of the environmental burdens except
SOx, the biggest emission appears in the process of
WCO collection. Hence, improving the efficiency of
WCO collection is critical for WCO-to-BDF conversion
supply chain management. When moving the scenario
from S20 to S3, highest reduction of top three on a life
cycle basis is CO, HC and PM, with significant reduction
rate of 94.03, 92.03 and 87.37 %, respectively. A sig-
nificant reduction in HC amount shows a similar result
with the report by United States Environmental Protec-
tion Agency (USEPA) [39]. Obvious reduction of pol-
lutants is mainly from emission reduction in waste
collection process. The results show that if vehicles that
comply with 2005 gas emission standard (high standard)
are commonly used in the future, PM, HC and CO
emission will greatly decrease. For NOx, the emission
amount from WCO collection process experiences a
changing trend of first increase and then decreases, as
moving scenario from S0 to S4. One of important
123
J Mater Cycles Waste Manag (2017) 19:1457–1467
S4
AC
UAP
S3 GW
Soiranec
S20
S1
S0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
External cost based on economic assessment under carbon neutral (1000 Yen)
(b)
reasons for increasing trend is that UEP of NOx emitted
from BDF-consumed vehicles is higher than that in
diesel fuel vehicles, probably due to higher oxygen
content [19]. However, in scenario of S3 and S4 which
comply with 2005 high gas emission standard, amount of
NOx emission has an obvious decreasing trend, with a
significant reduction rate by 23.02 % from S20 to S4.
On the other hand, SOx is mainly emitted from BDF
manufacturing process, accounting for 89.08, 95.18 and
98.65 % in the scenario of S1, S3 and S4, caused by high
SOx emitted during methanol production processes.
Therefore, with the increase of treated WCO, the total
amount of SOx emission increases as well. However, the
amount of SOx emitted from collecting WCO shows a
significant reduction as from 2.19 kg in S0 to 0.10 kg to
S4, because concentration of sulphur in BDF-consumed
vehicles is much lower than in diesel-consumed ones.
Therefore, replacement of low sulphur diesel with BDF as
a transportation fuel is favourable in Japan. In scenario of
S4, almost all kinds of life inventory have obvious reduc-
tion, except SOx. Accordingly, the overall improvement of
life cycle inventory is significant when diesel is replaced
with BDF.
Cost arising from base scenario (S0) and running cost in
November, 2009 (S1) is calculated, as shown in Table 6.
Collecting process of WCO usually takes up much cost if
considering labour cost [10]. The vehicle cost and labour
charge in WCO collection are considered as the same in
two scenarios, not considered herein. In this research, the
total running cost in S1 is a little higher than that in S0.
With the increasing amount of BDF production, it is
J Mater Cycles Waste Manag (2017) 19:1457–1467 1465

S0 S0 S0
2.00 10.00 2.00
0.00 8.00 0.00
-2.00 6.00 -2.00
-4.00 -4.00
4.00
S4 -6.00 S1 -6.00
S4 2.00 S1 S4 S1
-8.00 -8.00
0.00
-10.00
-2.00 -10.00

S3 S20
S3 S20 S3 S20

(a) UEP of NOx decreases by 10% (b) UEP of NOx increases by 10% (c) UEP of CO2 decreases by 10%

S0 S0
S0 5.00
1.00
10.00
0.00 4.00
8.00
-1.00 3.00
6.00
-2.00 2.00
4.00
S4 -3.00 S1 S4 1.00 S1
S4 2.00 S1
-4.00 0.00
0.00
-5.00 -1.00
-2.00

S3 S20
S3 S20 S3 S20

(d) UEP of CO2 increases by 10% (e) UEP of PM decreases by 10% (f) UEP of PM increases by 10%
Fig. 5 Sensitivity analysis of factors from unit emission parameter as shown in the following: blue GW; red UAP; light green AC. a, for
(UEP) regarding BDF-consumed vehicles, %. Three coloured lines example, showed that if unit emission parameter of NOx decreases by
in a–f indicated three categories of life cycle environmental impacts, 10 %, acidification (AC) in scenario 4 (S4) will decrease by 9.21 %

expected that cost for producing BDF from WCO will
gradually decrease.
Life cycle environment impacts and interpretation
Integration result based on economic assessment in each
scenario is represented in Fig. 4, from three parts. First, it
is easily manifested that external cost of AC has no obvious
change in all scenarios, from 0.33 in S0 to 0.29 million Yen
in S4. Second, different scenarios have obvious impact on
GW and UAP. As a result of high SOx value in BDF
manufacturing process, UAP has a high value in S1 and S2.
However, external cost in GW is gradually decreasing from
S0 to S4. Under carbon neutral, external cost of GW will
reduce from 0.16 to 0.019 million Yen from S0 to S4, with
a significant reduction by 87.45 %. Accordingly, about
1.62 million Yen will be avoided to spend in treating GW
impact annually, when all existing waste collection
vehicles use BDF as fuel. Third, compared with S0,
external cost of GW, AC and UAP in S4 has varying
degree of decline by 32.36, 27.51 and 13.37 %. Total
external cost in three environmental impacts will reduce by
28.99 % as we move the scenario from S0 to S4. When
taking consideration of carbon neutral, the reduction rate
will reach to 51.90 %.
Sensitivity analysis
A sensitivity analysis was performed to understand how
parameter variations affect the overall results. One
parameter was changed (±10 %) at a time and the
influence on the results was studied. Parameter changes
were regarded as technology changes. According to
above research, gas emission standard and BDF utilisa-
tion ratio are greatly related to LCEI. Accordingly, two
kinds of factors analysed herein are UEP regarding BDF-

123
1466
S0
0.05
0.05
0.00 0.00
-0.05
-0.05
-0.10 -0.10
-0.15 -0.15
S4 -0.20 S1 S4 -0.20
-0.25
-0.25
-0.30 -0.30
-0.35 -0.35
S3 S20 S3
(a) Electricity efficiency improves by 10% (b) Amount of NaOH decreases by 10%
Fig. 6 Sensitivity analysis of factors from efficiency improvement in
BDF manufacturing plant, %. Three coloured lines in a–c indicated
three categories of life cycle environmental impacts, as shown in the
consumed vehicles and BDF manufacturing efficiency.
For the former factors, parameters related to EI are
analysed as NOx, CO2, SOx and PM, represented in
Fig. 5. Change to UEP of SOx had little effect on EI,
then ignored. Technology improvements in BDF-con-
sumed vehicles (Fig. 5a, c, e) had big positive effects on
EI reduction in S1, S20, S3 and S4. The reduction effect
increases with BDF utilisation ratio, except PM. Further,
the reduction of UEP of NOx (Fig. 5a) had strong effects
on EI reduction of AC and UAP, especially for AC
(6.72–9.21 %), while no effects on GW. It shows that
the NOx contribution to acidification can be significant.
Contrarily, the reduction of UEP of CO2 (Fig. 5c) has
apparent effects on GW (5.45–8.70 %). Change to UEP
of PM had more obvious effect on UAP (0.93–4.43 %)
than GW and AC.
Impacts of technology improvements in BDF manu-
facturing process on LCEI were also analysed in Fig. 6.
Improvement of electricity consumption (Fig. 6a) and the
reduction of NaOH utilisation amount (Fig. 6b) had
smaller positive effects on three EI reductions, because
most of the life cycle inventory appears in the waste
collection process. The improvement of UEPs from
methanol input had bigger effects by 0.24–2.51 %.
Conclusion
WCO-to-BDF as a fuel has shown promising potential in
the world, not only for contributing to the reduction of
environmental impacts, but also be a renewable energy.
This research investigates the change in life cycle
inventory with the different participation rate of residents
and different BDF utilisation ratio in vehicles. From
123
J Mater Cycles Waste Manag (2017) 19:1457–1467
S0
S0
0.50
0.00
-0.50
-1.00
-1.50
S1 S4 S1
-2.00
-2.50
-3.00
S20 S3 S20
(c) UEPs from methanol decrease by 10%
following: blue GW; red UAP; light green AC. a for example,
showed that if electricity efficiency improves by 10 %, global
warming (GW) in scenario 4 (S4) will decrease by 0.34 %
scenario of S0 to S4, the obvious reduction effects
happen on almost all environmental burdens, with a
reduction rate of 32.34, 15.11, 93.66, 93.43 and 78.28 %
for CO2, NOx, CO, HC and PM. In addition, it is found
out that CO2 emission per volume of WCO in each
scenario is 3.64, 3.28, 3.28, 2.86, 2.46 kg/l-treated WCO,
denoting a significant decreasing trend. Much greater
advantage can be found out in CO2 reduction considering
carbon neutral. Annually, about 746.05 tons CO2 will be
reduced, as we move scenario from S0 to S4. Mean-
while, total external cost in three kinds of environmental
impacts sharply reduces by 51.90 %, showing much
economic sustainability in S4.
Except SOx, the overall improvement of each kind of
life cycle inventory is significant when diesel is replaced
with BDF, demonstrating that a shift from WCO-to-incin-
eration to WCO-to-BDF is more beneficial in Okayama.
For SOx, replacement of low sulphur diesel with BDF as a
transportation fuel is favourable in waste collection pro-
cess. To obtain a steady source of WCO as feedback for
BDF production, understanding and cooperation from cit-
izens are important. There is a need for recycles to continue
to convince residents the benefits of recycling WCO. With
the increasing demand of WCO feedback, the expansion of
collecting WCO to near regions or cities will become
necessary.
Most of the life cycle inventory appears in the waste
collection process. Therefore, to promote WCO-to-BDF
project, it is required to construct effective collection sys-
tem. Using waste collection vehicles that comply with high
gas emission standard is proved successful in reducing
environmental burden in this paper. Moreover, setting up a
collection-storage-transportation mode is one of feasible
suggestions as well.
J Mater Cycles Waste Manag (2017) 19:1457–1467
Acknowledgments Research Fund of Doctoral Program in Weifang
University (2016BS02).
References
1. Dorado M (2003) Exhaust emissions from a Diesel engine fueled
with transesterified waste olive oilH. Fuel 82(11):1311–1315
2. Utlu Z, Koçak MS (2008) The effect of biodiesel fuel obtained
from waste frying oil on direct injection diesel engine perfor-
mance and exhaust emissions. Renew Energy 33(8):1936–1941
3. Demirbas A (2009) Progress and recent trends in biodiesel fuels.
Energy Convers Manag 50(1):14–34
4. Searchinger T, Heimlich R, Houghton RA, Dong F, Elobeid A,
Fabiosa J, Tokgoz S, Hayes D, Yu TH (2008) Use of U.S.
croplands for biofuels increases greenhouse gases through emis-
sions from land-use change. Science 319(5867):1238–1240
5. Fargione J, Hill J, Tilman D, Polasky S, Hawthorne P (2008)
Land clearing and the biofuel carbon debt. Science
319(5867):1235–1238
6. Sims RE, Mabee W, Saddler JN, Taylor M (2010) An overview
of second generation biofuel technologies. Bioresour Technol
101(6):1570–1580
7. Gnansounou E, Kenthorai Raman J (2016) Life cycle assessment
of algae biodiesel and its co-products. Appl Energy 161:300–308
8. Wang T, Yabar H, Higano Y (2013) Perspective assessment of
algae-based biofuel production using recycled nutrient sources:
the case of Japan. Bioresour Technol 128:688–696
9. Bennion EP, Ginosar DM, Moses J, Agblevor F, Quinn JC (2015)
Lifecycle assessment of microalgae to biofuel: comparison of
thermochemical processing pathways. Appl Energy
154:1062–1071
10. Asia Biomass Office (2011) Topics: biodiesel production arising
from waste cooking oil steady increases (in Japanese). http://
www.asiabiomass.jp/topics/1107_02.html. Accessed July 2011
11. Matsumoto N, Sano D, Elder M (2009) Biofuel initiatives in
Japan: strategies, policies, and future potential. Appl Energy
86:S69–S76
12. New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organiza-
tion (2005) Biomass energy introduction guide book (in Japa-
nese). http://www.nedo.go.jp/content/100759785.pdf. Accessed
2005
13. Pleanjai S, Gheewala SH, Garivait S (2009) Greenhouse gas
emissions from production and use of used cooking oil methyl
ester as transport fuel in Thailand. J Clean Prod 17(9):873–876
14. Portugal-Pereira J, Nakatani J, Kurisu K, Hanaki K (2016) Life
cycle assessment of conventional and optimised Jatropha bio-
diesel fuels. Renew Energy 86:585–593
15. Malça J, Freire F (2011) Life-cycle studies of biodiesel in Eur-
ope: a review addressing the variability of results and modeling
issues. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 15(1):338–351
16. Talens Peiró L, Lombardi L, Villalba Méndez G, Gabarrell I,
Durany X (2010) Life cycle assessment (LCA) and exergetic life
cycle assessment (ELCA) of the production of biodiesel from
used cooking oil (UCO). Energy 35(2):889–893
17. Yang J, Xu M, Zhang X, Hu Q, Sommerfeld M, Chen Y (2011)
Life-cycle analysis on biodiesel production from microalgae:
water footprint and nutrients balance. Bioresour Technol
102(1):159–165
18. Naik SN, Goud VV, Rout PK, Dalai AK (2010) Production of
first and second generation biofuels: a comprehensive review.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 14(2):578–597
19. Chua CBH, Lee HM, Low JSC (2010) Life cycle emissions and
energy study of biodiesel derived from waste cooking oil and
diesel in Singapore. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15(4):417–423
1467
20. Spirinckx C, Ceuterick D (1996) Biodiesel and fossil diesel fuel:
comparative life cycle assessment. Int J LCA 1(3):127–132
21. Nanaki EA, Koroneos CJ (2012) Comparative LCA of the use of
biodiesel, diesel and gasoline for transportation. J Clean Prod
20(1):14–19
22. Morais S, Mata TM, Martins AA, Pinto GA, CaV Costa (2010)
Simulation and life cycle assessment of process design alterna-
tives for biodiesel production from waste vegetable oils. J Clean
Prod 18(13):1251–1259
23. Kiwjaroun C, Tubtimdee C, Piumsomboon P (2009) LCA studies
comparing biodiesel synthesized by conventional and supercriti-
cal methanol methods. J Clean Prod 17(2):143–153
24. Kiss FE, Micic RD, Tomić MD, Nikolić-Djorić EB, Simikić MÐ
(2014) Supercritical transesterification: impact of different types
of alcohol on biodiesel yield and LCA results. J Supercrit Fluids
86:23–32
25. Liang S, Xu M, Zhang T (2013) Life cycle assessment of bio-
diesel production in China. Bioresour Technol 129:72–77
26. Escobar N, Ribal J, Clemente G, Sanjuan N (2014) Consequential
LCA of two alternative systems for biodiesel consumption in
Spain, considering uncertainty. J Clean Prod 79:61–73
27. Sajid Z, Khan F, Zhang Y (2016) Process simulation and life
cycle analysis of biodiesel production. Renew Energy
85:945–952
28. Mahesh SE, Ramanathan A, Begum KMMS, Narayanan A (2015)
Biodiesel production from waste cooking oil using KBr impreg-
nated CaO as catalyst. Energy Convers Manag 91:442–450
29. Ullah Z, Bustam MA, Man Z (2015) Biodiesel production from
waste cooking oil by acidic ionic liquid as a catalyst. Renew
Energy 77:521–526
30. Terakawa T, Tohno S (2008) Life cycle assessment for utilization
system of BDF from waste food oil in Kyoto City (in Japanese).
J Japan Soc Energy Resour 29(6):1–7
31. Yano J, Aoki T, Nakamura K, Yamada K, Sakai S-I (2015) Life
cycle assessment of hydrogenated biodiesel production from
waste cooking oil using the catalytic cracking and hydrogenation
method. Waste Manag 38:409–423
32. Larson ED (2006) A review of life-cycle analysis studies on
liquid biofuel systems for the transport sector. Energy Sustain
Dev 10(2):109–126
33. Okayama Government (2004) Investigation report of biodiesel
fuel manufacturing business in Okayama (in Japanese), internal
documents, Japan
34. Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism, Japan
(2004) Investigation commission of gas from using new fuel.
Survey report on gas emission from using new fuel (in
Japanese).
35. Itsubo N, Inaba A (2015) Integration of environmental impact-
s. In: LIME2: Life-cycle impact assessment method based on
endpoint modeling, Chap 3, JLCA News english edition, JLCA
News letter, No 19
36. Japan Society of Material Cyles and Waste Management (1997)
Solid waste handbook (in Japanese). Ohmsha Ltd, Tokyo
37. Ocean Policy Research Foundaion (2001) Research and devel-
opment report of ceramics engine for waste food Oil in 2001
fiscal year (in Japanese). T.N.F. Library, Japan
38. Environmental Bureau of Okayama City (2008) Business outline
of environmental bureau of Okayama city in 2009 (results in
fiscal year 2008, in Japanese). http://www.city.okayama.jp/con
tents/000063968.pdf
39. USEPA (2002) A comprehensive analysis of biodiesel impacts on
exhaust emissions. Draft Technical Report, vol EPA420-P-02-
001. https://www3.epa.gov/otaq/models/analysis/biodsl/p02001.
pdf. Accessed Oct 2002
123