Journal of Oil Palm Research 22 (december 2010)

904

LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT OF THE 

PRODUCTION OF CRUDE PALM KERNEL 

OIL (part 3a)

VIJAYA SUBRAMANIAM*; CHOO YUEN MAY*; HALIMAH MUHAMMAD*; ZULKIFLI HASHIM*; 

YEW AI TAN* and PUAH CHIEW WEI*

Journal of Oil Palm Research Vol. 22 December 2010 p. 904-912

ABSTRACT

The present reality is that we have to deal with environmental deterioration. Mitigation using the life cycle 

assessment (LCA) concept must be viewed as an investment for our future generations, if not for ourselves, 

because efforts in mitigation of environmental degradation will translate into a concerted effort to combat the 

many environmental impacts resulting from mismanagement of natural resources and energy. The oil palm 

fresh fruit bunches (FFB) are a unique crop product. Two types of oil can be obtained from this raw material. 

Crude palm oil (CPO) is obtained from the mesocarp while palm kernel oil is obtained from the kernel within 

the nut. CPO is processed at palm oil mills, and the kernels which are removed from the cracked nuts is a 

by-product at the palm oil mills as has been discussed in the Part 3 article. These kernels are then transported 

by trucks to kernel-crushing plants that process the kernels into crude palm kernel oil (CPKO). The objective 

of this study is to identify the potential environmental impacts associated with the production of CPKO, and 

to evaluate opportunities to overcome the potential impacts. This study has a cradle-to-gate system boundary. 

This resulting article is part of LCA of the whole palm oil supply chain which is linked to the upstream LCA 

for nursery (Part 1), plantation (Part 2) and palm oil mill (Part 3). The article examines the life cycle impact 

assessment (LCIA) of the production of 1 t of CPKO at the kernel-crushing plant. For this study, six kernelcrushing plants were chosen for their locations which were well-distributed all over Peninsular Malaysia. 

Five kernel-crushing plants were located near the ports, while the remaining plant was located right beside a 

palm oil mill. This selection strategy was carried out to examine the different scenarios that exist in Malaysia, 

and also to ensure that they were representative of the scenarios of all kernel-crushing plants in Malaysia. 

Inventory data collection consisted of inputs and outputs of materials and energy. LCIA was carried out using 

the Simapro software version 7.1, and the Eco-indicator 99 methodology was selected.

Based on the results, the main impacts from upstream activities were from fertilizer production and 

application, and biogas emissions. The impacts directly associated with the production of CPKO were mainly 

from the transportation of palm kernels from the palm oil mills to the kernel-crushing plants and from the 

electricity consumption from the grid for the processing of the CPKO. The best scenario for the production of 

CPKO with the least environmental impact was when the kernel-crushing plant was integrated with a palm 

oil mill which captured the biogas.

* Malaysian Palm Oil Board,

P. O. Box 10620,

50720 Kuala Lumpur,

Malaysia.

E-mail: vijaya@mpob.gov.my

Keywords: life cycle assessment, life cycle impact assessment, kernel-crushing plant, palm kernel oil, palm kernel.

Date received: 6 October 2010; Sent for revision: 10 October 2010; Received in final form: 22 October 2010; Accepted: 25 October 2010.
905

LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT OF THE PRODUCTION OF CRUDE PALM KERNEL OIL (part 3a)

INTRODUCTION

The present reality is that we have to deal with 

environmental deterioration. Mitigation using the 

LCA concept must be viewed as an investment for 

our future generations, if not for ourselves, because 

efforts in mitigation of environmental degradation 

will translate into a concerted effort to combat 

the many environmental impacts resulting from 

mismanagement of natural resources and energy. 

Life cycle assessment (LCA) is a tool to evaluate 

the environmental impacts of a product or process 

throughout its entire life cycle (SETAC, 1993). LCA 

has become a common environmental management 

tool and a good analytical method for assessing and 

optimizing the environmental quality of a system 

over its whole life cycle (Stalmans et al., 1995).

Palm kernel oil exports increased by 6.7% from 

2008 to 1.12 million tonnes in 2009. USA was the 

major export market for palm kernel oil at 0.23 

million tonnes, followed by China, P R at 0.19 

million tonnes, the European Union (EU) at 0.10 

million tonnes and Japan at 0.08 million tonnes. 

Exports of palm kernel cake increased by 5.2% from 

2008 to 2.38 million tonnes. The major palm kernel 

cake export markets were the EU at 1.37 million 

tonnes, South Korea at 0.35 million tonnes and New 

Zealand at 0.32 million tonnes (Basri, 2010).

The oil palm fresh fruit bunches (FFB) are 

a unique crop product. Two types of oil can be 

obtained from this raw material. The palm fruit is 

drupe, oval in shape, and contains a kernel which is 

the seed (nut). The kernel is surrounded by the fruit 

wall made up of a hard shell (endocarp), fibrous 

fruit pulp or oil-bearing tissue (mesocarp) and the 

skin as shown in Figure 1 (Hamdan et al., 2000). 

Within the nut is the kernel. As shown in the crosssection of the oil palm fruitlet in Figure 1, crude 

palm oil (CPO) is obtained from the mesocarp while 

crude palm kernel oil (CPKO) is obtained from the 

kernel within the nut. CPO is processed at the palm 

oil mills and the kernels that are removed from the 

cracked nuts is a by-product at the palm oil mills.

As described in the Part 3 article on LCA of 

the production of CPO, palm kernels which are a 

by-product of the production of CPO are stored at 

the palm oil mill to be transported to the kernelcrushing plants. The palm kernels are transported 

to the kernel-crushing plants using 16-t trucks. The 

trucks deliver the palm kernels to the loading ramp 

at the kernel-crushing plant.

The flow chart of the kernel-crushing process 

is shown in Figure 2. The palm kernels are cleaned 

and then processed. CPKO is obtained by a simple 

mechanical pressing method using a continuous 

screw press, commonly known as an expeller. The 

expeller consists basically of a perforated cylindrical 

cage in which runs a worm or screw. The discharge 

end of the cage is fitted with an adjustable cone 

which restricts the discharge opening of the cage. 

The rotation of the worm transports the meal 

towards the outlet end of the perforated cage, and 

the outlet is restricted by the cone. This results in 

pressure building up in the cage, thus causing the 

oil to be squeezed out of the meal. The internal 

pressure in the cage is regulated by adjustments 

to the outlet cone. The extracted oil flows through 

the perforations in the cage, whilst the solid matter 

or cake is discharged from the opening around the 

cone. When efficiently operated, the residual oil in 

the palm kernel cake is between 5% and 6% (Ma, 

1994). All kernel-crushing plants in Malaysia use 

this double-press mechanical pressing method 

except for one crushing plant located in Pasir 

Gudang that uses the chemical extraction method. 

This study focused on the plants that use mechanical 

pressing only.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS

The objectives or goals of this study were to:

•	 identify the potential environmental impacts

associated with the production of CPKO; 

and

•	 to use this assessment for evaluating

opportunities to overcome the potential 

impacts.

SCOPE/SYSTEM BOUNDARY

The LCI data presented in this article have a gate-togate system boundary (Tables 3 and 4). The starting 

point is at the palm oil mills where the palm kernels 

are collected and transported to the kernel-crushing 

plants, and the end point is the production of CPKO 

at the kernel-crushing plants. LCIA is carried out 

for a cradle-to-gate system boundary as shown 

in Figure 3 which includes LCI from Part 1, Part 2 

Figure 1. Cross-section of an oil palm fruitlet. and Part 3 articles. This article is linked to LCA of 
Journal of Oil Palm Research 22 (december 2010)

906

Figure 2. Flow chart for processing of crude palm kernel oil (CPKO).

Figure 3. System boundary of life cycle inventory (LCI) for crude palm kernel oil (CPKO).

Palm oil mill System boundary

Legend:

CPKO: crude palm kernel oil

PK: palm kernel

CPKO

Palm kernel

cake or palm

kernel meal

Transportation

of PK to kernelcrushing plant

Diesel

Loading ramp for

palm kernels at

kernel-crushing plant

Electricity

from grid

Cleaning

Filter press Screw pressing

1st pressing

Screw pressing

2nd pressing Coarse screen filter

PK

Collection of

PK from the

mill
907

LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT OF THE PRODUCTION OF CRUDE PALM KERNEL OIL (part 3a)

oil palm seedling production (Part 1), LCA of FFB 

production (Part 2) and LCA of CPO production 

(Part 3). The functional unit for this study is 1 t of 

CPKO produced at the kernel-crushing plant.

METHODOLOGY

Inventory Data

Kernel-crushing plants are normally located near 

the ports to enable easy access to export facilities for 

both CPKO and the palm kernel cake. Inventory 

data were collected directly from the kernelcrushing plants through questionnaires which 

were developed specifically for data collection, 

and also through actual on-site measurements 

and quantification. Compliance with geographical 

coverage for data collection was adhered to by 

collecting data from different regions in Malaysia. 

The data validation procedure was carried out by 

on-site visits, on-site measurements, communication 

and discussions via e-mail and telephone, and 

interviews to verify the reliability of collected data.

For this study, six kernel-crushing plants 

were chosen for their locations which were welldistributed all over Peninsular Malaysia. Five of 

the kernel-crushing plants were located near the 

ports, namely, the Klang Port in the mid region, the 

Pasir Gudang Port in the south and the Kuantan 

Port in Pahang on the east coast of Peninsular 

Malaysia. The remaining kernel-crushing plant was 

located right beside a palm oil mill. This selection 

was done to examine the different scenarios that 

exist in Malaysia and also to ensure that they were 

representative of the various scenarios of kernelcrushing plants in Malaysia.

In this study, all processes were considered 

relevant unless excluded based on the exclusion 

criteria shown in Table 1. In general, processes are 

excluded if they are judged to have an insignificant 

contribution (< 3%) to the overall environmental 

load; if representative data for the processes are 

extremely difficult or impractical to gather; and if 

the processes are clearly part of a separate product 

system.

Data on all capital goods were collected from 

the kernel-crushing plants through actual visits 

and information from the kernel-crushing plants 

except where stated. The use of capital goods was 

obtained by estimating the total stock of capital 

goods divided by the amount of CPKO produced in 

the year 2008, followed by multiplying the estimate 

with a replacement factor expressing the fraction 

of the goods replaced each year. Based on the data 

collected from the six kernel-crushing plants with 

CPKO processing capacities ranging from small 

to large, the average total palm kernel processed 

was assumed to be 21 600 t yr-1. The capital goods 

involved in the production of CPKO are shown in 

Table 4.

Allocation of Co-products

More often than not, a system will yield more 

than one product. In such cases, allocation must be 

TABLE 1. SYSTEM BOUNDARY DEFINITION CRITERIA

Processing category Included

Excluded

Insignificant 

environmental

impact

Difficult to 

obtain 

representative 

data

Part of a 

different 

system

Not directly 

relevant to 

scope and 

goals of study

Production, maintenance 

and replacement of capital 

equipment

 - - - -

Transportation of capital goods -    -

Extraction of crude palm 

kernel oil (CPKO) from palm 

kernels

 - - - -

Electricity generation  - - - -

Transportation of palm kernels 

to the kernel-crushing plants

 - - - -

Capital goods  - - - -

Exporting of palm kernel cake 

as animal feed

- - -  -

Refining of CPKO - - -  -
Journal of Oil Palm Research 22 (december 2010)

908

made for input and output flows of each product. 

Allocation was carried out upstream at the palm 

oil mill where the palm kernels were produced. 

In view of this, the LCI data for the production 

of palm kernels shared the inputs and outputs 

of the production of CPO at the palm oil mill. In 

the kernel-crushing plants for the production of 

CPKO, the by-product is palm kernel cake or palm 

kernel meal. Weight allocation was carried out at 

the kernel-crushing plant between CPKO and palm 

kernel cake. The allocation between CPKO and 

palm kernel cake was 47:53.

Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA)

LCIA was conducted using the SimaPro software 

version 7.1 and the Eco-indicator 99 methodology. 

LCIA was conducted for two scenarios as follows:

Scenario 1: a kernel-crushing plant located 

near a port; uses electricity from the grid for 

processing; with biogas emissions at the palm 

oil mill.

Scenario 2: a kernel-crushing plant located 

beside a palm oil mill; uses the renewable 

energy from the mill for processing; with biogas 

capture at the palm oil mill.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Life Cycle Inventory

As discussed in the Part 3 article, CPKO is not 

the only product produced at the kernel-crushing 

plant. The by-product of the crushing process is 

palm kernel cake. In view of this, weight allocation 

was conducted to allocate part of the inputs and 

outputs to palm kernel cake.

Table 2 shows the LCI data for 1 t CPKO produced 

at the kernel-crushing plants located nearer to the 

ports, while Table 3 shows the LCI data for 1 t CPKO 

from a kernel-crushing plant that was located just 

beside a palm oil mill but far away from the ports.

The selected crushing plants all had identical 

processing methods and conditions. These crushing 

plants were typical of the majority of the crushing 

plants in Malaysia. All the kernel-crushing plants 

used the double squeezing method to press out as 

much CPKO as possible.

Based on Tables 2 and 3, one of the environmental 

inputs was the energy consumption for the whole 

system for processing of palm kernels into CPKO. 

The energy source was the electricity supply from 

the national grid. On average, about 448.6 MJ 

electricity was consumed for every tonne of CPKO 

produced.

The kernel-crushing plant (Table 3) which was 

located beside the palm oil mill also practiced 

processing methods identical with the other 

crushing plants, but it had one big difference which 

was the source of energy. The other five kernelcrushing plants used only one energy source for 

processing, which was electricity from the national 

grid supply. However, the kernel-crushing plant 

located beside the palm oil mill used the electricity 

supply from the neighbouring mill. In other words, 

the palm oil mill generated electricity for its own 

milling process as well as for the kernel-crushing 

plant nearby.

Life Cycle Impact Assessment

The characterization and weighted results for 

both the scenarios were for the system boundary 

which started from the nursery right up to the 

production of CPKO at the kernel-crushing plant. 

Land occupation by the kernel-crushing plant was 

not included in LCIA for both scenarios.

TABLE 2. LIFE CYCLE INVENTORY FOR THE 

PRODUCTION OF 1 t CRUDE PALM KERNEL OIL (CPKO) 

FOR FIVE KERNEL-CRUSHING PLANTS LOCATED NEAR 

PORTS (allocated)

Parameter Amount

Palm kernels (t) 1.07

Electricity from grid (MJ) 448.6

Transportation of kernels (tkm) 149.40 

Palm kernel cake (t) 1.12

TABLE 3. LIFE CYCLE INVENTORY FOR THE 

PRODUCTION OF 1 t CRUDE PALM KERNEL OIL (CPKO) 

FOR ONE KERNEL-CRUSHING PLANT LOCATED BESIDE 

A PALM OIL MILL FAR FROM THE PORTS (allocated)

Parameter Amount

Palm kernels (t) 1.07

Electricity from grid (MJ) 44.0

Electricity generated at palm oil 

mill (MJ)

421.30

Transportation of kernels (tkm) 2.24

Palm kernel cake (t) 1.12

TABLE 4. TOTAL CAPITAL GOODS AT 

KERNEL-CRUSHING PLANT (average of six plants, 

no allocation)

Weight 

(t)

Use of capital 

goods (kg t-1

CPKO)

Buildings, steel 490 2.57

Buildings, concrete 1 370 7.19

Kernel plant machinery 505 5.30

Tractors 6 0.08

Lorries 2 0.03
909

LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT OF THE PRODUCTION OF CRUDE PALM KERNEL OIL (part 3a)

Pt

Carcinogens Resp. organics Resp. inorganics Climate

change

Radiation Ozone layer Ecotoxicity Acidification/

eutrophication

Land use Minerals Fossil fuels

025

020

015

010

05

00

Analyzing 1 t CPKO (No LUC with biogas near ports) allocated Sept 2010, Method: Eco-indicator 99 (H) V2.03 /

Europe EI 99 H/A/ weighting.

CPKO (No LUC with Biogas near ports) allocated Sept 2010 Palm kernel (No LUC with biogas) Sept 2010 Electricity Malaysia Truck 16t B250

%

Carcinogens Resp. organics Resp. inorganics Climate

change

Radiation Ozone layer Ecotoxicity Acidification/

eutrophication

Land use Minerals Fossil fuels

0120

0100

080

060

040

020

00

Analyzing 1 t CPKO (No LUC with biogas near ports) allocated Sept 2010, Method: Eco-indicator 99 (H) V2.03 /

Europe EI 99 H/A/ characterization.

CPKO (No LUC with Biogas near ports) allocated Sept 2010 Palm kernel (No LUC with biogas) Sept 2010 Electricity Malaysia Truck 16t B250

Scenario 1

LCIA was conducted for 1 t CPKO produced at 

the kernel-crushing plant. The system boundary 

included:

•	 nursery;

•	 plantation (continued land use);

•	 palm oil mill (with allocation to palm kernels

and shells, with biogas); and

•	 kernel-crushing plant (located near a port

with allocation to palm kernel cake).

The characterization weighted results are shown 

in Figures 4 and 5, respectively.

The weighted results show that the most 

significant impact was from fossil fuels which 

showed the highest impact followed by the 

respiratory inorganics and climate change impact 

categories. The impact from upstream was from 

the production of palm kernels. This included the 

impacts from the plantation and the palm oil mill. 

In the plantation, the impact was caused by the 

production and application of fertilizers. At the 

palm oil mill, it was caused by the biogas emissions 

from the POME ponds. The other impacts for the 

production of CPKO came from the transportation of 

the palm kernels from the palm oil mill to the kernelcrushing plant, and the electricity consumption 

Figure 4. Characterization for life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) of 1 t crude palm kernel oil (CPKO) – continued 

land use, biogas, plant located near port.

Figure 5. Weighting for life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) of 1 t crude palm kernel oil (CPKO) – continued land 

use, biogas, plant located near port.

CPKO (No LUC with Biogas near ports) allocated Sept 2010 Palm kernel (No LUC with biogas) Sept 2010 Electricity Malaysia Truck 16t B250

CPKO (No LUC with Biogas near ports) allocated Sept 2010 Palm kernel (No LUC with biogas) Sept 2010 Electricity Malaysia Truck 16t B250
Journal of Oil Palm Research 22 (december 2010)

910

%

Carcinogens Resp. organics Resp. inorganics Climate

change

Radiation Ozone layer Ecotoxicity Acidification/

eutrophication

Land use Minerals Fossil fuels

0120

0100

080

060

040

020

00

Analyzing 1 t CPKO (No LUC with Biogas capture near mill) allocated Sept 2010, Method: Eco-indicator 99 (H) V2.03 /

Europe EI 99 H/A/ characterization.

CPKO (No LUC with biogas capture near mill) allocated Sept 2010

Electricity generated at POM

Truck 16t B250

Palm kernel (No LUC with biogas capture) Sept 2010

Electricity Malaysia

from the grid for processing under the fossil fuels, 

respiratory inorganics and climate change impact 

categories. The impact from transportation was 

mainly from the diesel consumption by the trucks 

or lorries. Due to the distance between the palm oil 

mill and the kernel-crushing plant, transporting the 

kernels which used fossil fuel caused the potential 

impact under fossil fuels. The kernel-crushing 

plants in Malaysia are situated nearer to the ports 

for easier access to facilities for exporting their 

CPKO and palm kernel cake. This is the reason 

for the distance between the palm oil mills and 

the kernel-crushing plants. The palm oil mills, on 

the other hand, are normally located nearer the 

oil palm plantations. The other parameter causing 

the impact was the electricity consumption from 

the national grid. Again being a fossil fuel-based 

energy source, this also contributed as an impact 

under the fossil fuels impact category.

Most kernel-crushing plants in Malaysia use 

predominantly electricity from the national grid for 

their processing. However, there are some kernelcrushing plants that use alternative energy sources. 

Although this is quite rare, there are crushing plants 

that are located right beside the palm oil mills. This 

type of kernel-crushing plant uses the electricity 

generated at the palm oil mill for its processing. 

When there is a shortage of generated electricity or 

shut-down of the palm oil mill, then the crushing 

plant uses the grid supply as back-up. In order to 

compare the differences between a kernel-crushing 

plant which uses electricity from the grid and is 

located near a port with a kernel-crushing plant 

which uses electricity from the neighbouring palm 

oil mill and is located near the mill, LCIA for the 

latter type of kernel-crushing plant was conducted, 

and the results are shown as Scenario 2.

Scenario 2

LCIA was conducted for 1 t CPKO produced at 

the kernel-crushing plant. The system boundary 

included:

•	 nursery;

•	 plantation (continued land use);

•	 palm oil mill (with allocation to palm kernels

and shells, with biogas captured); and

•	 kernel-crushing plant (located near a palm oil

mill with allocation to palm kernel cake).

The characterization weighted results are shown 

in Figures 6 and 7, respectively.

The weighted results show that when the kernelcrushing plant was located either within the palm 

oil mill compound or nearby, the impact from diesel 

consumption was almost negligible. The potential 

impact from electricity consumption from the grid 

also became very small. As the kernel-crushing 

plant used electricity which was generated at the 

palm oil mill, the use of fossil-based energy was 

displaced. As discussed in the Part 3 article, in the 

palm oil mills, pressed mesocarp fibre and shells are 

used as fuel in the boiler and are burnt to produce 

heat to convert water into steam. This steam is then 

used to run a turbine which generates electricity for 

the milling process and the whole mill compound. 

The pressed mesocarp fibre and shells are actually 

wastes from FFB which are recycled as boiler fuel. 

The pressed mesocarp fibre is the waste after oil 

has been pressed out of the mesocarp of the fruit. 

The shell is the outer layer of the nut which when 

cracked produces the kernel and shell. However, 

the kernel-crushing plant still has to consume some 

electricity from the national grid supply when the 

palm oil mill is not processing. It should be noted 

Figure 6. Characterization for life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) of 1 t crude palm kernel oil (CPKO) – continued 

land use, biogas, plant located near mill.

CPKO (No LUC with biogas capture near mill) allocated Sept 2010

Electricity generated at POM

Truck 16t B250

Palm kernel (No LUC with biogas capture) Sept 2010

Electricity Malaysia
911

LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT OF THE PRODUCTION OF CRUDE PALM KERNEL OIL (part 3a)

that the amount in such a situation is very low. The 

impact under climate change was also reduced due 

to the capture of biogas at the palm oil mill. What 

was left were only the impacts from upstream 

activities in the plantation. This result shows the 

best scenario for the production of CPKO, i.e. a 

kernel-crushing plant should be integrated with a 

palm oil mill which captures its biogas, and at the 

same time gets FFB from a plantation that has been 

cultivating oil palm for 50 years or more so that 

there is no land use change or continued land use 

change. Again the impacts from capital goods were 

negligible in both scenarios.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study are based on the 

Eco-indicator 99 methodology, and the system 

boundary was from nursery to kernel-crushing 

plant with weight allocation. Based on the results, 

the main impacts from upstream were from 

fertilizer production and application and from 

biogas emissions. The impacts directly associated 

with the production of CPKO were mainly from 

the transportation of palm kernels from the palm 

oil mill to the kernel-crushing plant, and from the 

electricity consumption sourced from the grid for 

the processing of CPKO. The best scenario for the 

production of CPKO with the least environmental 

impact is when the kernel-crushing plant is 

integrated with a palm oil mill which captures the 

biogas and which gets FFB from a plantation that 

has been cultivating oil palm for 50 years or more, 

i.e. practicing continued land use from oil palm to 

oil palm with no change.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors would like to thank the palm oil 

millers for allowing them to conduct the study at 

the mills.

REFERENCES

BASRI, W (2010). Overview of Malaysian oil 

palm industry 2009. MPOB, Bangi, Malaysia. 

p. 1-3. http://econ.mpob.gov.my/economy/

Overview_2009.pdf, accesses on 16 August 2008.

BASRI, W; CHOO, Y M; LIM, W S; LOH, S K; 

CHOW, M C; MA, A N; RAVI, M; MOHAMAD, 

S; NASRIN, A B; VIJAYA, S; AZRI, S; ASYRAF, K; 

MUZZAMMIL, N and NOOR FAIZAH, M (2008). 

Biogas Utilization in Palm Oil Mills. MPOB, Bangi. 

p. 8-9.

HAMDAN, M; MAZNAH, M; CHEW, T Y; FADZIL, 

A; SYED ANUAR, S S M and WAN SITI, N W A H 

(2000). Feasibility Study on Grid Connected Power 

Generation Using Biomass Cogeneration Technology. A 

study funded by the Malaysian Electricity Supply 

Industry Trust Fund. Pusat Tenaga Malaysia, Bangi, 

Selangor, Malaysia.

Figure 7. Weighting for life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) of 1 t crude palm kernel oil (CPKO) – continued land 

use, biogas, plant located near mill.

Pt

Carcinogens Resp. organics Resp. inorganics Climate

change

Radiation Ozone layer Ecotoxicity Acidification/

eutrophication

Land use Minerals Fossil fuels

018

016

014

012

010

08

06

04

02

00

Analyzing 1 t CPKO (No LUC with biogas capture near mill) allocated Sept 2010, Method: Eco-indicator 99 (H) V2.03 /

Europe EI 99 H/A/ weighting.

CPKO (No LUC with biogas capture near mill) allocated Sept 2010

Electricity generated at POM

Truck 16t B250

Palm kernel (No LUC biogas capture) Sept 2010

Electricity Malaysia

CPKO (No LUC with biogas capture near mill) allocated Sept 2010

Electricity generated at POM

Truck 16t B250

Palm kernel (No LUC with biogas capture) Sept 2010

Electricity Malaysia
Journal of Oil Palm Research 22 (december 2010)

912

MA, A N (1994). Extraction of crude palm oil and 

palm kernel oil. Selected Readings on Palm Oil and its 

Uses. PORIM, Bangi. p. 30-31.

SETAC (1993). Guidelines for Life-Cycle Assessment:

A Code of Practice. SETAC Publications, Brussels. 2 

pp.

STALMANS, M H; BERENBOLD, J; BERNA, 

L; CAVALI, A; DILLARSTONE, M; FRANKE, 

F; HIRSINGER, D; JANZEN, K; KOSSWIG, D; 

POSTLETHWAITE, T H; RAPPERT, C; RENTA, D; 

SCHARER, K P; SCHICK, W; SCHUL, H and VAN 

SLOTEN, T R (1995). European life-cycle inventory 

for detergent surfactants production. Tenside Surf. 

Det., (32): 84-85.

Announcement

In response to the numerous requests from the scientific community, academicians, students 

and readers, MPOB is pleased to announce that the Journal of Oil Palm Research (JOPR) will be 

published THREE times a year beginning 2010. 

Beginning 2010, JOPR is published in April, August and December. The Journal will continue to 

publish full-length original research papers and scientific review papers on various aspects of oil 

palm, palm oil and other palms. 

As part of our continuous effort to improve the quality and to offer value-added benefits to our 

valued readers, two new columns have been introduced in JOPR, i.e. Letters to Editor and Short 

Communications. 

Beginning JOPR December 2009, photos that are unique or related to the articles published in 

JOPR will be used for the cover. 

For more information on submission of manuscripts, subscription or advertisement in JOPR, please 

write to:

Editor-in-Chief

Journal of Oil Palm Research

P. O. Box 10620

50720 Kuala Lumpur

Malaysia

Tel: 603-8769 4400

Fax: 603-8925 9446

E-mail: pub@mpob.gov.my

Website: www.jopr.mpob.gov.my