IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/ijbmjn/v18y2024i6p143.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessment Method of Bioenergy in the Industrial Sector

Author

Listed:
  • Fábio de Oliveira Neves
  • Eduardo Gomes Salgado
  • Arthur Arnoni Occhiutto
  • José Augusto Zorel
  • Ernandes Benedito Pereira

Abstract

The industrial sector is one of the major energy consumers and polluters in emerging countries. With the great demand for a maximum reduction of gas emissions that aggravate the increase in Earth temperature, alternative sources of energy are being adapted for use in the industrial sector, such as bioenergy. Along with methodologies that ease implementation and use, several decision-making methods are currently under development to provide industrial managers with better scenario alternatives for the implementation of bioenergetic factors. This work aims to develop a decision-making method for the use and exploitation of bioenergy in Brazil, considering the initial assessment of sustainability and the implementation of technologies that compose the process of electricity generation through bioenergy. Fuzzy logic was used as the model development structure. It was used to analyze three case studies of manufacturing companies. As a result, there is an applicability of the method through government subsidies, regionalization of biomass for energy generation, and efforts in adapting and maintaining equipment for energy conversion with a strong driver of reduction of environmental impacts. This proposal, in addition to being useful for the industrial sector, helps the government sector with the reduction of energy, taking knowledge beyond the university using a new structured method, environmentally conscious, in this emerging area.

Suggested Citation

  • Fábio de Oliveira Neves & Eduardo Gomes Salgado & Arthur Arnoni Occhiutto & José Augusto Zorel & Ernandes Benedito Pereira, 2024. "Assessment Method of Bioenergy in the Industrial Sector," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 18(6), pages 143-143, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:ibn:ijbmjn:v:18:y:2024:i:6:p:143
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ijbm/article/download/0/0/49450/53396
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ijbm/article/view/0/49450
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. P. Polglase & A. Reeson & C. Hawkins & K. Paul & A. Siggins & J. Turner & D. Crawford & T. Jovanovic & T. Hobbs & K. Opie & J. Carwardine & A. Almeida, 2013. "Potential for forest carbon plantings to offset greenhouse emissions in Australia: economics and constraints to implementation," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 121(2), pages 161-175, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Regan, Courtney M. & Connor, Jeffery D. & Summers, David M. & Settre, Claire & O’Connor, Patrick J. & Cavagnaro, Timothy R., 2020. "The influence of crediting and permanence periods on Australian forest-based carbon offset supply," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    2. Grundy, Michael J. & Bryan, Brett A. & Nolan, Martin & Battaglia, Michael & Hatfield-Dodds, Steve & Connor, Jeffery D. & Keating, Brian A., 2016. "Scenarios for Australian agricultural production and land use to 2050," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 70-83.
    3. Hagger, Valerie & Waltham, Nathan J. & Lovelock, Catherine E., 2022. "Opportunities for coastal wetland restoration for blue carbon with co-benefits for biodiversity, coastal fisheries, and water quality," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 55(C).
    4. Yuyang Yu & Jing Li & Zixiang Zhou & Li Zeng & Cheng Zhang, 2019. "Estimation of the Value of Ecosystem Carbon Sequestration Services under Different Scenarios in the Central China (the Qinling-Daba Mountain Area)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-18, December.
    5. Philip Wallis & Michael Ward & Jamie Pittock & Karen Hussey & Howard Bamsey & Amandine Denis & Steven Kenway & Carey King & Shahbaz Mushtaq & Monique Retamal & Brian Spies, 2014. "The water impacts of climate change mitigation measures," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 125(2), pages 209-220, July.
    6. Salles, Thiago Taglialegna & Nogueira, Denismar Alves & Beijo, Luiz Alberto & Silva, Liniker Fernandes da, 2019. "Bayesian approach and extreme value theory in economic analysis of forestry projects," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 64-71.
    7. Mayberry, Dianne & Bartlett, Harriet & Moss, Jonathan & Davison, Thomas & Herrero, Mario, 2019. "Pathways to carbon-neutrality for the Australian red meat sector," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 13-21.
    8. Ross Kingwell, 2021. "Agriculture’s carbon‐neutral challenge: The case of Western Australia," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 65(3), pages 566-595, July.
    9. Nordblom, T.L. & Hume, I.H. & Finlayson, J.D. & Pannell, D.J. & Holland, J.E. & McClintock, A.J., 2015. "Distributional consequences of upstream tree plantations on downstream water users in a Public–Private Benefit Framework," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 271-281.
    10. Lu, Ze-Yu & Li, Wen-Hua & Xie, Bai-Chen & Shang, Li-Feng, 2015. "Study on China’s wind power development path—Based on the target for 2030," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 197-208.
    11. Shu Wang & Fenglian Liu, 2023. "Spatiotemporal Evolution of Land Use Efficiency in Southwest Mountain Area of China: A Case Study of Yunnan Province," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-24, July.
    12. Dong, Ming & Bryan, Brett A. & Connor, Jeffery D. & Nolan, Martin & Gao, Lei, 2015. "Land use mapping error introduces strongly-localised, scale-dependent uncertainty into land use and ecosystem services modelling," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 63-74.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ibn:ijbmjn:v:18:y:2024:i:6:p:143. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.