Life Cycle Assessment of Bamboo Biochar Production: A Case Study of a Malaysian Manufacturer

 

 

A.   Goal, Functional Unit, and System Boundary

The goals of this study are to assess the life cycle of bamboo biochar produced by a local manufacturer and to provide recommendations for sustainable production practices. In this study, the functional unit is defined as 1 kg of bamboo biochar produced by the local manufacturer. Moreover, a cradle-to-gate approach is adopted, which consists of two main phases: production and transportation. This study excludes the assessment of environmental impacts during the usage and disposal phases, as the data for these stages are highly variable and difficult to obtain accurately. Fig. 1 presents the system boundary framework of this study.

 

Fig. 1: System boundary framework of 1 kg bamboo biochar.

 

 

B.   Life Cycle Inventory (LCI)

The LCI data, including materials, water, electricity, and fuel consumption, were collected through a qualitative approach. A semi-structured interview was conducted with the production manager of the manufacturing plant to obtain the necessary data. Furthermore, on-site observations during plant visits were also conducted to fully understand the manufacturing process and to gather additional information.

 

C.   Life Cycle Impact Assessment and Interpretation

OpenLCA software version 2.2.0 was used to assess the life cycle of 1 kg of bamboo biochar. The Industrial Design & Engineering Materials (IDEMAT) and Environmental Footprint 3.0 (EF 3.0) databases were used as datasets for the assessment. Thirteen environmental impact categories were evaluated, including acidification,  climate change, ecotoxicity (freshwater) eutrophication (freshwater), human toxicity (cancer), human toxicity (non-cancer), land use, ozone depletion, particulate matter, photochemical ozone formation, resource use, fossils, resource use (minerals and metals), water use. These impact categories were selected due to their significance in assessing the environmental impacts associated with bamboo biochar production.

 

A.   Production flow of bamboo biochar

The production of bamboo biochar in the selected company begins with the transportation of bamboo from the plantation, located more than 350 km from the manufacturing plant. The moisture content of the bamboo, as reported by the manufacturer’s laboratory department, is approximately 18.5% on average. However, the specific bamboo species used was not disclosed due to business confidentiality. After transportation, raw material processing is carried out, which involves several steps such as removing impurities (e.g., soil and dust particles, crushing, and drying process. The drying process is typically performed using an indoor dryer to facilitate efficient drying and to prevent disruptions caused by unpredictable weather conditions. Once completely dried, the bamboo is transferred to the carbonization furnace and undergoes pyrolysis at high temperatures. However, the exact operating temperature was not revealed by the manufacturer for confidentiality reasons. After carbonization, the bamboo biochar is cooled down, which is then collected for packaging. According to the manufacturer, the yield rate of bamboo biochar from the process is approximately 25%. The packaging process involves the use of a sealed packaging machine and plastic bags, after which the final product is stored in a warehouse before being distributed to resellers. Fig. 2 shows the overall production flow of bamboo biochar.

 

Fig. 2: System boundary framework of 1 kg bamboo biochar.

 

B.    LCI data of bamboo biochar production

Table 1 shows the LCI data collected of 1 kg bamboo biochar through semi-structured interviews and observations. The LCI data were categorized into four main stages, namely Transportation to the Manufacturing Plant, Raw Materials Processing, Carbonization, and Packaging Process. Data such as fuel and electricity usage, as well as materials used, were collected for further analysis. The cooling process is neglected as it is naturally air-dried and does not involve any significant inputs or outputs. In addition, storage and distribution are excluded from this study, as the assessment focuses only on the cradle-to-gate stages.

 

C.   LCA evaluation

Table 2 summarizes the life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) results for the 1 kg of bamboo biochar. The results are expressed according to their respective characterization units based on the ReCiPe midpoint indicators. The acidification potential is 0.0106 mol H⁺ eq, while the climate change potential amounts to 5.066 kg CO₂ eq. The freshwater ecotoxicity is 0.494 CTUe, and the freshwater eutrophication potential is 1.91×10⁻⁶ kg P eq.

 

For human health-related impacts, the human toxicity (cancer) and human toxicity (non-cancer) potentials are 5.24×10⁻¹¹ CTUh and 6.64×10⁻⁹ CTUh, respectively. The land use impact is 2.894 Pt, while the ozone depletion potential is 1.78×10⁻¹⁰ kg CFC-11 eq. The particulate matter formation and photochemical ozone formation potentials are 1.77×10⁻⁷ disease incidence and 0.00665 kg NMVOC eq, respectively.

 

Each indicator represents a distinct environmental mechanism; therefore, the values should not be compared directly across categories. Instead, they provide a profile of potential environmental burdens, allowing further interpretation once normalized or weighted according to regional or methodological criteria.

 

TABLE I
LCI data of 1 kg bamboo biochar

 

 

 

 

 

TABLE 2
LCA RESULTS for the 1 kg of bamboo biochar

 

Fig.3 shows the percentage contribution of each life cycle stage—namely transportation to manufacturing plant, raw materials processing, carbonization, and packaging process—to various environmental impact categories. The results are based on midpoint indicators following the ReCiPe methodology.

 

Overall, the raw materials processing stage was identified as the primary contributor across most impact categories, including acidification (65.92%), climate change (68.29%), ecotoxicity, freshwater (68.74%), human toxicity, cancer (61.52%), and non-cancer effects (67.44%). This is mainly attributed to the intensive energy and material consumption during the pretreatment and mechanical processing of bamboo.

 

The transportation to manufacturing plant stage also contributed noticeably, particularly to eutrophication, freshwater (80.90%), land use (29.50%), and ozone depletion (31.37%), reflecting the environmental burden associated with fuel combustion and logistics. In contrast, the Carbonization process showed a moderate contribution ranging between 2% and 28% across most categories, mainly due to thermal energy consumption and gaseous emissions during pyrolysis. The packaging process contributed the least (<5% in most categories), indicating minimal environmental load compared to other life cycle stages.

 

For resource-related categories, the raw materials processing again dominated, contributing 67.98% to resource use, fossils and 36.11% to resource use, minerals and metals. A similar pattern is observed for water use, where transportation accounted for 97.94%, primarily due to upstream water consumption linked to fuel production and supply chains. In summary, the analysis indicates that raw materials processing and transportation are the most environmentally demanding stages in the bamboo biochar production chain.

 

Fig. 3: System boundary framework of 1 kg bamboo biochar.

D.   Suggestion for Sustainable Practice

Figures From the life cycle assessment results, raw material processing and transportation to the manufacturing plant were identified as the main contributors to the overall environmental impacts of bamboo biochar production. The significant impact during the raw material processing stage is primarily attributed to the energy-intensive drying process, which requires approximately 24 hours of continuous operation. This prolonged drying duration leads to substantial electricity and fuel consumption, particularly when conventional heat sources are used.

 

To address this issue, one sustainable solution is to adopt natural drying methods—such as air drying or sun drying—which utilize ambient conditions and renewable solar energy to remove moisture. These methods can significantly reduce energy demand and carbon emissions. However, natural drying also has limitations: it is highly weather-dependent, takes longer to complete, and may result in inconsistent moisture content due to fluctuations in atmospheric humidity. Therefore, it may not be ideal for large-scale or continuous production, where consistent quality and process control are essential.

 

To achieve a balance between production efficiency and sustainability, hybrid drying systems that combine solar pre-drying with low-energy mechanical drying can be employed. This approach shortens drying time while lowering energy consumption. Additionally, optimizing air flow, batching, and temperature can further enhance drying efficiency.

 

During the transportation phase, environmental impacts can be reduced by optimizing logistics routes, employing low-emission vehicles, and sourcing bamboo from nearby plantations to minimize fuel use. In the carbonization process, the regeneration of waste heat for pre-drying and the implementation of emission control systems can further mitigate environmental burdens. Although the packaging stage contributes relatively little to the total impact, it can be improved through the use of biodegradable or recyclable materials.

 

Overall, the adoption of renewable energy sources, hybrid drying technologies, and efficient logistics management are effective strategies to enhance the sustainability of bamboo biochar production. Further improvements can be achieved through circular resource utilization, such as recycling bamboo residues and valorizing carbonization by-products, thereby minimizing the overall life cycle environmental impacts.

This study assessed the environmental performance of the production of bamboo biochar according to a life cycle assessment. It was determined that the greatest environmental effect came from the raw materials processing phase owing mainly to the 24-hour energy-intensive drying process. The transportation phase also contributed significantly due to fuel usage and emissions. In contrast, the carbonization and packaging phases had relatively lower effects. To make it more sustainable, natural or solar drying can reduce energy consumption, though they are weather-dependent and slower in drying. A combined system for solar and mechanical drying is a more balanced solution. Additionally, the use of renewable energy, efficient transport logistics, and biodegradable packaging materials can also reduce the environmental footprint. Generally, improving the energy efficiency and adopting cleaner production measures are paramount to making the production of bamboo biochar more sustainable.

 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This research was supported by Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia (UTHM) through Multidisciplinary Research Grant (MDR) vot (Q721)

[1] K. R. Hakeem, S. Ibrahim, F. H. Ibrahim, and H. Tombuloglu, “Bamboo Biomass: Various Studies and Potential Applications for Value-Added Products,” in Agricultural Biomass Based Potential Materials, K. R. Hakeem, M. Jawaid, and O. Y. Alothman, Eds., Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2015, pp. 231–243. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-13847-3_11.

[2] M. Pimid and K. Thevan, “Expert panel opinions on carbon sequestration through bamboo utilisation in Malaysia: Rehabilitation of tin mines,” in IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, Institute of Physics, 2024. doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/1426/1/012012.

[3] K. Chaturvedi et al., “Bamboo for producing charcoal and biochar for versatile applications,” Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery, vol. 14, no. 14, pp. 15159–15185, 2024, doi: 10.1007/s13399-022-03715-3.

[4] T. Kumar, S. A. Ansari, R. Sawarkar, A. Agashe, L. Singh, and P. v Nidheesh, “Bamboo biochar: a multifunctional material for environmental sustainability,” Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery, 2025, doi: 10.1007/s13399-025-06608-3.

[5] [S. Alfei and O. G. Pandoli, “Bamboo-Based Biochar: A Still Too Little-Studied Black Gold and Its Current Applications,” Journal of Xenobiotics, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 416–451, 2024, doi: 10.3390/jox14010026.

[6] X. Li, J. Zeng, S. Zuo, S. Lin, and G. Chen, “Preparation, Modification, and Application of Biochar in the Printing Field: A Review,” Materials, vol. 16, no. 14, 2023, doi: 10.3390/ma16145081.

[7] N. K. Yadav et al., “Chapter 16 - Biochar production methods vis-a-vis aquaculture applications: a strategy for sustainable paradigm,” in Organic Farming (Second Edition), Sarathchandran, U. M.R., S. Thomas, and D. K. Meena, Eds., Woodhead Publishing, 2023, pp. 537–559. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-99145-2.00010-0.

[8] M. Varkolu et al., “Recent Advances in Biochar Production, Characterization, and Environmental Applications,” Catalysts, vol. 15, no. 3, 2025, doi: 10.3390/catal15030243.

[9] J. T. George and N. Gujeran, “Biochar: A Revolutionizing Approach for Turning Waste into Value Through Pyrolysis,” in Solid Waste Management: A Roadmap for Sustainable Environmental Practices and Circular Economy, A. Pandey, S. S. Suthar, and K. T.T. Amesho, Eds., Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland, 2025, pp. 63–100. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-78420-0_4.

[10] B. H. Anandapadmanaban, Y. S. Chan, C.-W. Lin, and S.-H. Liu, “Optimizing the generated waste proportion to improve the characteristics of biochar for CO2 sequestration and other applications,” Environment, Development and Sustainability, 2025, doi: 10.1007/s10668-025-06187-3.

[11] B. Garcia, O. Alves, B. Rijo, G. Lourinho, and C. Nobre, “Biochar: Production, Applications, and Market Prospects in Portugal,” Environments, vol. 9, no. 8, 2022, doi: 10.3390/environments9080095.

[12] I. Curcio, R. Gigli, F. Mormile, and C. Mormile, “A comprehensive review on biochar, with a particular focus on nano properties and applications,” Nano Trends, vol. 10, p. 100117, 2025

[13] M. A. Curran, “Life Cycle Assessment: a review of the methodology and its application to sustainability,” Current Opinion in Chemical Engineering, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 273–277, 2013, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coche.2013.02.002.

[14] A.-M. Tillman, “4 - Methodology for Life cycle Assessment,” in Environmental Assessment and Management in the Food Industry, U. Sonesson, J. Berlin, and F. Ziegler, Eds., Woodhead Publishing, 2010, pp. 59–82. doi: https://doi.org/10.1533/9780857090225.2.59.

[15] S. Marzeddu, A. Cappelli, A. Ambrosio, M. A. Décima, P. Viotti, and M. R. Boni, “A Life Cycle Assessment of an Energy-Biochar Chain Involving a Gasification Plant in Italy,” Land, vol. 10, no. 11, 2021, doi: 10.3390/land10111256.

[16] D. M. Saharudin, H. K. Jeswani, and A. Azapagic, “Biochar from agricultural wastes: Environmental sustainability, economic viability and the potential as a negative emissions technology in Malaysia,” Science of The Total Environment, vol. 919, p. 170266, 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.170266.