Evaluates the technical and economic viability of a continuous-flow rice husk gasifier for bakeries, indicating significant savings and energy efficiency.
The search for sustainable and affordable energy is critical for small-scale industries like bakeries in agricultural countries like the Philippines. Valorizing rice husk into a sustainable energy source addresses waste management challenges in rural areas while contributing to energy security by using rice husk as a fuel for baking. While biomass gasification is known, an integrated techno-economic performance of continuous-flow rice husk gasifiers specifically designed for standard bakery rack ovens is yet to be explored. This study focused on the technical and economic viability of continuous-flow rice husk gasifier for bakery oven applications. The research aimed to design and fabricate the system, evaluate its performance against an LPG-fired oven, and perform cost analysis. The novelty lies in the holistic validation of a continuous-flow system for this specific application. This study proposes a comprehensive waste-to-energy pathway for rice husk waste in the Philippines, by designing and evaluating a continuous-flow rice husk gasifier system for bakery rack oven. The technical, economic product acceptability were evaluated. The technical viability of the designed continuous-flow rice husk gasifier for rack oven revealed a total of 34.31 mins baking time, with baking energy efficiency of 36.69%, rice husk consumption rate of 8.1kg/hr. Economically, the cost of operation of the continuous flow rice husk gasifier is PhP 70.46 thereby reducing the fuel cost by PhP 50.66 per hour. The system generated a total savings of PhP 72,955.09 per year and a payback period of 4.32 months. The study concludes that the continuous-flow rice husk gasifier is a technologically feasible and economically superior solution for small bakeries, successfully valorising agricultural waste into a valuable energy resource thereby contributing in mitigating agricultural wastes in the country.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Catherine E. Pueyo (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: