## 3 Results  
Exergy analysis was performed based on the proposed method. Gasification and pyrolysis processes were assessed under this framework. Chemical and physical energies were estimated, to obtain the mass exergy of flow streams. Table 4 reports specific chemical \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Area** & **Indicator** & **Formula** & **Worst** & **Best** \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Environment} & Renewable index & \(RI=\frac{\textit{Renewalibrients}}{\textit{Tealibrients}}\) & 0 & 1 \\  & Global warming & \(\textit{GWP}=\frac{\textit{TotalCO}_{\textit{dep}}}{\textit{MassProduct}}\) & All waste & 0 \\  & potential & \(y=\frac{\textit{MassProduct}}{\textit{Fealibrients}}\) & 0 & 1 \\  & Production yield & \(\eta_{E}=\frac{\textit{EnvironmentProductProduct}}{\textit{TotalUniformity}}\) & 0 & 1 \\  & Energy efficiency & Energy efficiency & \(\eta_{energy}=\frac{\textit{EnvironmentProduct}}{\textit{TotalUnipartecergy}}\) & 0 & 1 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Selected sustainability indicators and their best and worst values. exergies for components involved in the simulation of both processes. The total power for gasification was 18 kW/kg of product, with the corresponding exergy of work of 64.79 MJ/kg. The total heat flow for this process was 3696.22 MJ/kg of product (exergy of heat flow: 3538.62 MJ/kg of product). The corresponding exergy of utilities count both work and heat streams, which resulted in a total flow of 3603.42 MJ/h. Otherwise, the results for the pyrolysis process evidence a better energetic profile, with a total power of 0.77 kW/kg of product and a heat flow of 10.64 MJ/kg of product (exergy of heat flow: 8.87 MJ/kg of product). In summary, the exergy of utilities for this process corresponded to 11.64 MJ/kg of product. This outcome indicates that the heat recovery setting included in the pyrolysis reaction improves its energy efficiency. Table 5 summarizes the exergy results for the gasification and pyrolysis processes. The results of Table 5 show the better energetic numbers for the pyrolysis process, compared to gasification. A critical aspect of gasification processes is the amount of exergy wasted, due to the high utility requirements. In the case of pyrolysis, this effect is much less, by a long margin. In numbers, this means that gasification consumes 85% of the total inlet exergy. Meanwhile, pyrolysis only uses 21.22% of the total exergy for heat supply requirements. Figure 4 depicts a result comparison between the simulated gasification and pyrolysis processes, based on the proposed exergy analysis. The sustainability assessment complements the exergy analysis. Process data were used to estimate the performance indicators and their corresponding targets. Air and process water flows were supplied in both processes. These are renewable inputs, the same as biomass feedstock. The total energy consumption for the pyrolysis process was 12.93 MJ/kg of product, and for gasification, this value was 3695.78 MJ/kg of product. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline \hline
**Components** & **Chemical Exergy (kJ/kg)** \\ \hline Acetaldehyde & 51,402.00 \\ Acetate & 15,120.00 \\ Acetico Acid & 15,120.00 \\ Acetone & 46,229.00 \\ Acrylic acid & 39,382.00 \\ Ash & 1965.00 \\ Carbon & 34.16 \\ Carbon dioxide & 433.87 \\ Carbon monoxide & 9807.40 \\ Ethylene & 79,735.00 \\ Formaldehyde & 40,195.00 \\ Furfural & 24,341.00 \\ Glucan & 20,996.00 \\ Hydrogen & 118,095.00 \\ Lignin & 28,123.00 \\ Methane & 106,199.00 \\ Nitrogen & 25.71 \\ Nitrogen & 25.71 \\ Oxygen & 124.06 \\ Silicon Dioxide & 2.20 \\ Water & 50.00 \\ Xylan & 21,395.00 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Chemical exergy of active components.