IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i18p8103-d1745440.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Inherent Safety Analysis of a Cascade Biorefinery for the Utilization of Avocado Hard Waste from the South Colombian Region

Author

Listed:
  • Eduardo Andres Aguilar-Vasquez

    (Research Group in Nanomaterials and Computer-Assisted Engineering (NIPAC), Chemical Engineering Program, Faculty of Engineering, University of Cartagena, Avenida del Consulado #Calle 30 No. 48 152, Cartagena de Indias 130015, Colombia)

  • Segundo Rojas-Flores

    (Institutos y Centros de Investigación, Universidad Cesar Vallejo, Trujillo 13001, Peru)

  • Ángel Darío González-Delgado

    (Research Group in Nanomaterials and Computer-Assisted Engineering (NIPAC), Chemical Engineering Program, Faculty of Engineering, University of Cartagena, Avenida del Consulado #Calle 30 No. 48 152, Cartagena de Indias 130015, Colombia)

Abstract

Cascade biorefineries have demonstrated potential due to their ability to further valorize a wide variety of waste, including agricultural residues such as avocado hard waste. The intrinsic safety aspects of these technologies have been scarcely studied. Therefore, an inherent safety analysis was applied to identify and assess the risks of an avocado cascade biorefinery in the Amazon region. Several available databases (online) were used to determine the safety data of the substances in the process, such as CameoChemicals, INCHEM, and NIOSH. Additionally, data from extended mass and energy balance (based on the literature) were collected to assess the process operating conditions. The results show that the process is slightly unsafe, with an overall inherent safety score of 25, and that it achieved a performance of 96% relative to the neutral operating point (24). Chemical risks represented the most critical challenges of the process, with a score of 16, with exothermic reactions, hazardous substances, and dangerous chemical interactions being the most significant sources of risks. On the other hand, the process safety indicator scored 9, indicating that these aspects are not a major source of risk, as the process had mostly low operating conditions (near-environment temperatures and pressures; low inventory), with equipment being the only significant risk factor. Nonetheless, the safety structure subindex for this process was 2, as no clear and recognizable risks existed (at least in the literature) for this type of scheme at the scale analyzed (small scale). This score needs to be studied to properly assess the risks in bioprocesses like cascade biorefineries. Finally, replacing acid hydrolysis with enzymatic hydrolysis, along with another method for bioactive extraction, is recommended to reduce the inherent risks.

Suggested Citation

  • Eduardo Andres Aguilar-Vasquez & Segundo Rojas-Flores & Ángel Darío González-Delgado, 2025. "Inherent Safety Analysis of a Cascade Biorefinery for the Utilization of Avocado Hard Waste from the South Colombian Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-22, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:18:p:8103-:d:1745440
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/18/8103/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/18/8103/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Juan Camilo Solarte-Toro & Carlos Ariel Cardona Alzate, 2023. "Sustainability of Biorefineries: Challenges and Perspectives," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(9), pages 1-24, April.
    2. Casson Moreno, Valeria & Papasidero, Salvatore & Scarponi, Giordano Emrys & Guglielmi, Daniele & Cozzani, Valerio, 2016. "Analysis of accidents in biogas production and upgrading," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 96(PB), pages 1127-1134.
    3. Battista, Federico & Zanzoni, Serena & Strazzera, Giuseppe & Andreolli, Marco & Bolzonella, David, 2020. "The cascade biorefinery approach for the valorization of the spent coffee grounds," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 1203-1211.
    4. Stefany A. Valdez-Valdes & Lesly P. Tejeda-Benitez & Ángel D. González-Delgado, 2024. "Assessing the Environmental Impacts of the Valorization of Creole-Antillean Avocado via an Extractive-Based Biorefinery in the Montes de María Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(24), pages 1-20, December.
    5. Djukić-Vuković, A. & Mladenović, D. & Ivanović, J. & Pejin, J. & Mojović, L., 2019. "Towards sustainability of lactic acid and poly-lactic acid polymers production," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 238-252.
    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. Czekała, Wojciech & Łukomska, Aleksandra & Pulka, Jakub & Bojarski, Wiktor & Pochwatka, Patrycja & Kowalczyk-Juśko, Alina & Oniszczuk, Anna & Dach, Jacek, 2023. "Waste-to-energy: Biogas potential of waste from coffee production and consumption," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 276(C).
    2. Ni, Ji-Qin, 2024. "A review of household and industrial anaerobic digestion in Asia: Biogas development and safety incidents," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    3. Fiala, Khanittha & Rublaim, Angsumalee & Leesing, Ratanaporn, 2025. "Boosting wet yeast-based biodiesel production by in-situ transesterification using a novel acid-base bifunctional carbon-based catalyst derived from spent coffee ground and cement residue," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 241(C).
    4. Khan, Abir & Sapuan, S.M. & Yusuf, J. & Siddiqui, Vasi Uddin & Zainudin, E.S. & Zuhri, M.Y.M. & Tuah Baharuddin, B.T. Hang & Ansari, Mubashshir Ahmad & Rahman, A. Azim A., 2023. "An examination of cutting-edge developments in Bamboo-PLA composite research: A comprehensive review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    5. Cardarelli, Alessandro & Pinzi, Sara & Barbanera, Marco, 2022. "Effect of torrefaction temperature on spent coffee grounds thermal behaviour and kinetics," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 704-716.
    6. Britte Bouchaut & Lotte Asveld & Ulf Hanefeld & Alexander Vlierboom, 2021. "Value Conflicts in Designing for Safety: Distinguishing Applications of Safe-by-Design and the Inherent Safety Principles," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-13, February.
    7. Casson Moreno, Valeria & Guglielmi, Daniele & Cozzani, Valerio, 2018. "Identification of critical safety barriers in biogas facilities," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 81-94.
    8. Wang, Xuemei & Yan, Rui & Zhao, Yuying & Cheng, Shikun & Han, Yanzhao & Yang, Shuo & Cai, Di & Mang, Heinz-Peter & Li, Zifu, 2020. "Biogas standard system in China," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 1265-1273.
    9. Bartolucci, L. & Cordiner, S. & Di Carlo, A. & Gallifuoco, A. & Mele, P. & Mulone, V., 2024. "Platform chemicals recovery from spent coffee grounds aqueous-phase pyrolysis oil," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    10. Ingryd Mayer Krinski & Vinícius Reisdorfer Leite & Luis Mauro Moura & Viviana Cocco Mariani, 2025. "Critical Extraction Parameters for Maximizing Oil Yield from Spent Coffee Grounds," Energies, MDPI, vol. 18(6), pages 1-17, March.
    11. Sánchez, Antonio Santos & Silva, Yuri Lopes & Kalid, Ricardo Araújo & Cohim, Eduardo & Torres, Ednildo Andrade, 2017. "Waste bio-refineries for the cassava starch industry: New trends and review of alternatives," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 1265-1275.
    12. Zhu, J.Y. & Pan, Xuejun, 2022. "Efficient sugar production from plant biomass: Current status, challenges, and future directions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    13. Stolecka, Katarzyna & Rusin, Andrzej, 2021. "Potential hazards posed by biogas plants," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    14. Sun, Ce & Li, Wenlong & Chen, Xiaojian & Li, Changxin & Tan, Haiyan & Zhang, Yanhua, 2021. "Synergistic interactions for saving energy and promoting the co-pyrolysis of polylactic acid and wood flour," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 254-265.
    15. Vincenzo Luongo & Grazia Policastro & Anish Ghimire & Francesco Pirozzi & Massimiliano Fabbricino, 2019. "Repeated-Batch Fermentation of Cheese Whey for Semi-Continuous Lactic Acid Production Using Mixed Cultures at Uncontrolled pH," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-12, June.
    16. Milani Shirvan, Kamel & Mirzakhanlari, Soroush & Mamourian, Mojtaba & Kalogirou, Soteris A., 2017. "Optimization of effective parameters on solar updraft tower to achieve potential maximum power output: A sensitivity analysis and numerical simulation," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 725-737.
    17. Abbas, Tahir & Ali, Ghaffar & Adil, Sultan Ali & Bashir, Muhammad Khalid & Kamran, Muhammad Asif, 2017. "Economic analysis of biogas adoption technology by rural farmers: The case of Faisalabad district in Pakistan," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 431-439.
    18. Long, Aoife & Murphy, Jerry D., 2019. "Can green gas certificates allow for the accurate quantification of the energy supply and sustainability of biomethane from a range of sources for renewable heat and or transport?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    19. Zvanaka S. Mazhandu & Edison Muzenda & Tirivaviri A. Mamvura & Mohamed Belaid & Trust Nhubu, 2020. "Integrated and Consolidated Review of Plastic Waste Management and Bio-Based Biodegradable Plastics: Challenges and Opportunities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-57, October.
    20. Ishtiaq Ahmed & Muhammad Anjum Zia & Huma Afzal & Shaheez Ahmed & Muhammad Ahmad & Zain Akram & Farooq Sher & Hafiz M. N. Iqbal, 2021. "Socio-Economic and Environmental Impacts of Biomass Valorisation: A Strategic Drive for Sustainable Bioeconomy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-32, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:18:p:8103-:d:1745440. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.