i
BIOMASS BRIQUETTES MADE OF DRIED LEAVES (MANGO,
GMELINA, AND CORN) AS CHARCOAL ALTERNATIVES
A Research Paper
Presented to the Faculty of Senior High School Department
University of Cebu – Banilad
Cebu City, Philippines
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for
SH-3Is and SH – Work Immersion
By:
YESHEN CRSYTEL CUIZON
HANNAH BRIZA DEMECILLO
MARIEL ANTHONETTE C. FERIL
JAYMILAN R. LAURON
VANZ CODDY LEGASPINA
May 2023
RESEARCH ABSTRACT
BIOMASS BRIQUETTES MADE OF DRIED LEAVES (MANGO, GMELINA,
AND CORN) AS CHARCOAL ALTERNATIVES
YESHEN CRYSTEL CUIZON
HANNAH BRIZA DEMECILLO
MARIEL ANTHONETTE C. FERIL
JAYMILAN R. LAURON
VANZ CODDY LEGASPINA
(Researchers)
University of Cebu – Banilad Campus
ENG. GEORGINA FE ORTEGA
Adviser, University of Cebu
Keywords: Biomass briquettes, Mango dried leaves, Gmelina dried leaves, Corn dried
leaves, Charcoal alternative
Charcoal is a staple to many households mainly used for heating or cooking. The use
of wood charcoal as well as fossil fuels, emits harmful greenhouse gases that causes global
conflict. This quantitative experimental research explores the potentials of Mango tree
(Mangifera indica) dried leaves, Gmelina tree (Gmelina arborea) dried leaves and Corn
(Zea mays) dried leaves as charcoal alternative in terms of ignition time, burning rate and
water boiling time. It also compares the performance and sustainability of commercialized
charcoal. The results opened possibilities of making charcoal alternatives using dried
leaves. Given the stated conclusion, the researchers determined a significant difference
Gmelina dried leaves Concentration A and the other mixtures conducted Therefore, this
study concludes that the main variables: Mango tree (Mangifera indica) dried leaves,
Gmelina tree (Gmelina arborea) dried leaves and Corn (Zea mays) dried leaves and the
constant sub-variable: Cornstarch slurry, can be used as an alternative charcoal.
Department
Program
Research Started
Research Completed
: Senior High School
: Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics
: August 2022
: May 2023
UNIVERSITY OF CEBU
PROGRAM RESEARCH OFFICE
APPROVAL SHEET
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT of the requirements for SH-3I and SH
OJT/STEM, this research paper entitled BIOMASS BRIQUETTES MADE OF DRIED
LEAVES (MANGO, GMELINA, AND CORN) AS CHARCOAL ALTERNATIVES
submitted by Yeshen Crysel Cuizon, Hannah Briza Demecillo, Mariel Antonette C.
Feril, Jaymilan R. Lauron, Vanz Coddy Legaspina has been duly examined, accepted
and approved for ORAL DEFENSE EXAMINATION.
ENG. GEORGINA FE ORTEGA
Adviser
ACCEPTED AS
OJT/STEM
Partial Fulfilment of the requirements for the SH-3I and
RICHARD D. ARDEÑIO, LPT, MST(c)
MALEEN GRAFILO-ORDIZ, LPT, MAT
Program Research Coordinator
Principal, Senior High School Department
APPROVED by the tribunal at the ORAL DEFENSE EXAMINATION with the
grade of _____________.
JUNREL A. CAPUNO, M.Ed.
Chairman
RICHARD D. ARDEÑIO, LPT, MST(c)
Member
MALEEN GRAFILO-ORDIZ, LPT, MAT
Member
ANNAFER VISMANOS-MENDOZA, LPT
Statistician
Date of Oral Defense: 11 MAY 2023
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The researchers would like to express their sincere gratitude and appreciation to the
following individuals who have contributed significantly to the success of their research
project:
To our adviser, Ms. Georgina Fe Ortega, for her guidance and expertise
throughout the process. You are a great resource, and we are thankful for your patience in
answering our questions offering great advice.
To the panelists, Mr. Junrel A. Capuno, Ms. Maleen Ordiz, Mr. Richard
Ardenio, who were truly helpful, provided insights into how we could improve our work.
We really appreciate all your contributions.
To the statistician, Ms. Annafer Vismanos-Mendoza for her expert analysis of our
data which considerably improved the validity of our findings.
To our families and friends, for their unending support, understanding and
sacrifices, which provided us a constant source of encouragement.
Finally, we would want to give praise and appreciation
for giving us the
knowledge, courage, comfort, and strength we needed to get us through this research
adventure.
DEDICATION
We would like to dedicate this research paper to the following individuals:
To our darling families and friends, who have been our constant source of
inspiration and support;
To our committed advisors and mentors, whose guidance and patience
have been invaluable in shaping our research and nurturing our academic
growth;
And most importantly, to our mighty God, who has been our guiding light
in every step of this research.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PRELIMINARIES
PAGE
Title Page ...........................................................................
Research Abstract ..............................................................
Approval Sheet ..................................................................
Acknowledgement .............................................................
Dedication ………………………………………………
List of Tables......................................................................
List of Graphs……………………………………………
List of Figures....................................................................
i
ii
iii
iv
v
ix
xi
xiii
CHAPTER1
1
THE PROBLEM AND ITS SCOPE
Introduction ………………………………………..…
Rationale…...............................................
1
Conceptual Framework of the Study........
4
Related Literature ....................................
6
Related Studies ........................................
9
The Problem .................................................................
Statement of the Problem ........................
12
Statement of the Null Hypotheses ….......
13
Significance of the Study.........................
15
Scope and Delimitations of the Study............
16
Research Methodology ...............................................................
18
Research Design ...........................................
18
Research Locale ...........................................
18
Research Materials an Equipment.................
21
Research Procedure ......................................
25
Statistical Treatments .................................... 28
Definition of Terms .....................................................................
2
29
PRESENTATION, ANALYSES AND INTERPRETATION
OF DATA
Difference between I. aquatica and
T. catappa in Papermaking in
terms of Certain Variables ………………
59
Difference between I. aquatica and
T. catappa Infused with CaCO3 in
terms of Certain Variables ……………...
67
Difference between I. aquatica and
T. catappa with the Addition
of Sodium Hypochlorite (NaClO)
in terms of Certain Variables ……………
74
Difference between the Three Kinds
of I. aquatica Papers Made
(pure; pure with CaCO3;
pure with NaClO) in terms
of Certain Variables ……………………..
81
Difference between the three kinds
of T. catappa papers made
(pure; pure with CaCO3;
pure with NaClO) in terms
of Certain Variables ……………………..
3
88
SUMMARY, FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary..........................................................
96
Findings............................................................
98
Conclusions......................................................
100
Recommendations............................................
103
REFERENCES.............................................................................
105
APPENDIX………………………………………………..…….
114
A
Summary of Raw Data …………………........
114
B
Documentation ……...……………….............
116
C
Grammarly Results ………………………….
115
CURRICULUM VITAE...............................................................
118
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
THE PROBLEM AND ITS SCOPE
Rationale of the Study
Charcoal has been used for a variety of things over the years, including art and
medicine, but its usage as a household fuel has by far been its most significant use. It is
one of the most popular domestic fuels throughout the world. Even with the major
advancements in cooking technology, charcoal is still widely used as a fuel for cooking
and heating by people in their respective households. Worldwide, around 2.4 billion people
still cook using solid fuels such as charcoal and kerosene in open fires and inefficient stoves
(World Health Organization, 2022). Most of these people are poor and live in low- and
middle-income countries. A developing country like the Philippines, is no exception to
that. In the Philippines, nearly 30% of households use charcoal for cooking applications,
especially in rural areas (Belino et al., 2015). As much as it is convenient, too much usage
of charcoal as a cooking fuel negatively affects the environment in various possible ways.
An alternative to address this problem, biomass briquettes, is explored in recent studies.
Briquetting is a way to make use of biomass residues that would otherwise go to
waste, and replace the use of wood and charcoal (often produced unsustainably) as well as
fossil fuels, thus cutting greenhouse gas emissions (Bhavya et al., 2015). The country of
Ethiopia, one of the largest producers of charcoal in Africa where its urban consumers burn
over 3 million tons annually, is one of those who have witnessed the negative effects of
charcoal utilization in households on the environment. In a study conducted in Mecha
District, Ethiopia, it is found that households consumed 164,648.2 tons of charcoal in total
between 2014 and 2018. Accordingly, the total greenhouse gas emissions attributable to
the production and consumption of charcoal over this time period total to an alarming
266,244 tons of CO2e, with an average annual emission rate of 53,248 tons of CO2e (Tassie
et al., 2021). Its neighboring African country in the south, Rwanda, utilized biomass
briquettes for sustainability and achieved positive results for the environment. The
Rwandan jail system and educational institutions are supplied with briquettes by
Coopérative pour la Conservation et l’ Environment, also known as COOCEN. The
COOCEN's briquetting project is fundamentally preventing the burning down of 1,800 tons
of firewood or the chopping down of at least 9,000 trees annually. In effect, this is
anticipated to reduce about 297 tons of carbon dioxide emissions per year (Adambradford., 2012). In the Philippines, charcoal is also popularly used as a domestic fuel. In
a report by Bensel and Remegio (2022), it is estimated that Filipino households’ charcoal
usage was between 1.2 metric tons annually, equivalent to a massive 7.2 million tons of
wood, making this process harmful for the environment. In this regard, a study conducted
in Iloilo City, Philippines, have explored the use of biomass briquettes as a fuel alternative.
Results showed that biomass briquettes are not just positive for the environment, but are
also efficient and low-cost (Kraft & Romallosa, 2017). Most of these studies utilize a mix
of organic materials, including rice husk, bagasse, ground nut shells, municipal solid
wastes, and agricultural wastes. However, there is a lack of research focusing on biomass
briquettes with dried leaves only as a main ingredient, specifically in the chosen setting of
the study, Banilad, Cebu City.
Dried leaves are considered products of abscission – a natural process in which
plants shed undesirable organs in order to minimize transpiration load and guarantee new
tissues have enough water and nutrients to survive. This study will aim to examine the
feasibility of dried leaves as a main ingredient in making biomass briquettes as an
alternative for charcoal. Specifically, off the plants: Mango tree (Mangifera indica),
Gmelina tree (Gmelina arborea) and Corn (Zea mays). With the prevalence of charcoal or
solid fuel around the world, the researchers will aim to search for a better and sustainable
source of fuel. Through the results of this research, the researchers will also aim to spread
the process of briquetting in households, reducing the negative impacts of charcoal
production to the environment.
\
Conceptual Framework
Biomass
Evaluation of composite briquettes
from dry leaves in energy
applications for agrarian
communities in India (Kumar et
al., 2022)
Dried leaves are considered among
vegetation that undergoes the
natural process of abscission
(Patharkar & Walker, 2018; Agust
et al., 2012).
Mango tree
(Mangifera indica)
Leaves
Gmelina tree
(Gmelina arborea)
Leaves
Briquetting grass and tree leaf
biomass for sustainable production
of future fuels (Khorasgani N. et
al., 2020)
Corn
(Zea mays)
Leaves
Briquetting
Drying
Grinding
Mixing
Pressing
Dried leaves to cornstarch slurry ratio:
90% Mango/Gmelina/Corn/Assorted dried leaves :10% Cornstarch Slurry
75% Mango/Gmelina/Corn dried/Assorted leaves :25 Cornstarch Slurry
40% Mango/Gmelina/Corn dried leaves/Assorted: 60% Cornstarch Slurry
Burning
Rate
Ignition
Time
Data Analysis
Conclusion
Recommendation
Thermal
Fuel
Efficiency
Figure 1. Schematic Diagram of the Conceptual Framework of the Study
Figure 1 above shows that the study is anchored with the following literatures and
studies: Dried leaves are considered among vegetation that undergoes the natural
process of abscission (Patharkar & Walker, 2018; Agust et al., 2012); Evaluation of
composite briquettes from dry leaves in energy applications for agrarian communities in
India (Kumar et al., 2022); and, Briquetting grass and tree leaf biomass for sustainable
production of future fuels (Khorasgani N. et al., 2020). This study will primarily test the
feasibility of dried leaves as a main ingredient in making biomass briquettes as an
alternative for charcoal. Specifically, off the plants: Mango tree (Mangifera indica),
Gmelina tree (Gmelina arborea) and Corn (Zea mays). These will undergo the process of
briquetting step by step – drying, grinding, mixing, and pressing. Cornstarch slurry will be
used as a binder in making the briquettes. Following the experiment, the researchers will
gather the required data and analyze them using various standardized statistical tools. Next,
the researchers will formulate a conclusion out of the data analysis, and then propose
recommendations for future studies.
Related Literature
This section will present existing literatures that will support and further the study.
The following literatures are organized in accordance to its relevance to the study.
Charcoal is a black porous solid made up of carbon and any remaining ash.
Charcoal production is done through a method called pyrolysis of biomass. Pyrolysis is
described as the irreversible chemical process caused by heating biomass in an oxygenfree environment. This process of burning wood goes through a series of transformations
that often result in a black carbonaceous solid called charcoal as well as a mix of gases and
vapors. The emissions of most concern are carbon monoxide (CO), carbon dioxide (CO2),
sulfur oxides (SOx), and nitrogen oxides (NOx), all which are harmful to both humans and
the environment in large scales (Alkan et al., 2019). Worldwide, around 2.4 billion people
still cook using solid fuels such as charcoal and kerosene in open fires and inefficient stoves
(World Health Organization, 2022). This amount of people will need a large production of
charcoal, thus adding to the negative impacts of using coal to our environment. An
alternative to address this problem, biomass briquettes, is explored in recent studies and is
supported in existing literatures.
Biomass briquettes are biofuel substitute to coal and charcoal. They are created by
compressing biomass wastes into a solid piece that can be used as firewood or as charcoal.
In other words, this product is made purely from green waste and organic materials, making
it a renewable and environmental-friendly fuel source (Ramsay, 2021). These currently
serve as alternative to firewood, wood, pellets and charcoal in developing countries in
Africa, Asia and South America.
The concept behind briquetting is to take materials that would otherwise be wasted
because of their lack of density and compress them into a solid fuel that can be burned like
wood or charcoal. Briquettes may contain a mix of organic materials, including rice husk,
bagasse, ground nut shells, municipal solid wastes, and agricultural wastes. While previous
studies on biomass briquetting have been undertaken, they have focused primarily on
making briquettes which are composed of any material as long as it is a biomass. The
exploration of using solely one material as a main ingredient, particularly dried leaves,
have been lacking, and are yet to be explored. The research study, then, intends to fill in
this gap. Focusing on making an alternative for charcoal, the study attempts to make
biomass briquettes with dried leaves as a main ingredient.
Dried leaves are considered among vegetation that undergoes the natural process
of abscission. It is a process in which plants shed undesirable organs in order to minimize
transpiration load and guarantee new tissues have enough water and nutrients to survive
(Partharkar Walker, 2018; August et al., 2012).
Moreover, dried leaves are highly
combustible and are renewable, making it a potential ingredient in making biomass
briquettes. In this regard, the present study explores the feasibility of dried leaves as an
ingredient in making biomass briquettes, specifically off the plants; Mango Tree
(Mangifera indica), Gmelina Tree (Gmelina arborea) and Corn (Zea mays).
Mango tree leaves (Mangifera indica), is one of the most-grown fruits in the
Philippines. According to the Department of Agriculture (DOA), the Philippines ranked
tenth (10th ) in mango production around the world, and Central Visayas as third (3rd ) in
mango production in the Philippines. Mango tree undergoes a regular abscission that
happens many times a year to sustain its health and growth (Shah et al., 2010). Thus, dried
mango leaves (DML) are natural agricultural waste and a renewable source that can be
utilized as biomass briquette fuels.
Also common to the Philippines, Gmelina trees (Gmelina Arborea), is a fastgrowing plant. Due to its excellent medicinal and wood properties, is emerging as an
important plantation species (Pathala et al., 2015). However, it is a harsh, quickly
spreading, and invasive tree species that can outcompete many native trees for space and
sunlight. Its spread can be controlled and the distribution of nutrients to nearby plants can
be improved by using the leaves of these trees to make biomass briquettes.
On the other hand, Corn, one of the most important staple crops in the Philippines,
raking second to rice in the utilization of agricultural resources, has a record production
volume of over eight million metric tons in 2021 (Statistica, 2022). According to Ngubane
and Oyekola (2022), corn residue such as corn stover briquettes can be able to sustain
energy for its increasing demand. stalks and leaves, however, are one of its agricultural
waste that has no commercial value. This makes corn leaves a potential ingredient in
making biomass briquettes.
The dried leaves of these three aforementioned plants will be utilized in the study
to make biomass briquettes. Moreover, to test the feasibility of the briquettes made of dried
leaves from these plants, this study will also maneuver with commercial charcoal fuel.
Related Studies
This section will present existing studies that will support and further the study.
The following studies are organized in accordance to its relevance to the study.
In the Upper West Region of Ghana, a study was conducted to explore the
commercial charcoal production and sustainable development of the community. The
researchers found that in the villages that produce charcoal, roughly 24,000 trees with an
average size of between 10 and 44 centimeters in diameter at breast height and 15-20
meters high were processed into charcoal (Agyeman et al., 2012). If the degradation of the
vegetation is not stopped, many people's sources of income in the three research districts
are at risk. This shows how the production of charcoal negatively affects both the industry
and the environment.
In the Philippines, the same thing is observed in existing studies. A survey by the
National Statistics office was conducted to determine the certain percentage of charcoal
users in terms of house energy consumption. Results showed that in 1989, 1995, and 2004,
there were an average of 32.1%, 38.5%, and 34.2% charcoal users, respectively. In another
report by Bensel and Remegio (2022), it is estimated that home charcoal usage was
between 1.2 million and 2 million metric tons annually, with 1.2 million metric tons being
the best estimate. In metric tons, this is the same as 7.2 million tons of wood. This merely
demonstrates that despite the technological advancements like electrical stoves, LPG, and
kerosene, the Filipinos continue to use charcoal.
The demand for charcoal continues to increase. Therefore, if charcoal production
is not under control, it poses a major threat to both human life and the environment. The
environment needs to be seriously protected in light of this situation. To address this
problem, an alternative – biomass briquettes – will be explored in this study.
Innovations in biomass briquetting have been developed through time.
Additionally, this study will work towards the same objective of reducing the negative
impacts of charcoal on society and the environment.
A study conducted in Nigeria, explored the production and characterization of
briquette charcoal by carbonization of agro-waste. In this study, four briquette grades were
created, and their physical and combustive characteristics were determined. Results
showed that converting used maize cobs into briquette charcoal is an efficient way to
manage these solid wastes (Zubairu, 2014). Additionally, carbonized briquetting has the
potential to provide jobs for the throngs of unemployed youth in northern Nigeria due to
the amount of locally accessible naturally occurring binder materials and waste agricultural
biomass supplies.
Another study, conducted in Iloilo City, Philippines, investigated the recycling
potentials of using biomass wastes generated from municipal waste streams by turning
them into premium and high-quality briquettes. Results showed that using biomass wastes
is economically advantageous. Additionally, the standard for wood pellets and briquetted
biofuels, DIN 51731, was examined, and it was found that parameters including bulk
density, heating value, and moisture content of the briquettes fulfilled the standards.
These aforementioned studies show how utilizing wastes in making biomass
briquettes display positive effects for both the environment and the livelihood of its people.
As a result, the researcher intends to explore the feasibility of biomass briquettes made of
dried leaves as charcoal alternative.
This was further investigated by Kumar (2021) in the study "Evaluation of
composite briquettes from dry leaves in energy applications for agrarian communities in
India". This study evaluated briquettes made from dried leaves after 7 days and discovered
promising findings. The use of dry leaves for briquette production has been proven
effective in terms of heating value and durability performance. The study shows how to
limit the waste of dried leaves, which could be used to make biomass fuel. In this regard,
a study by Khorasgani (2019) evaluated the mechanical and thermal characteristics of
briquettes produced from grass and tree leaves. Results indicated that both grass and tree
leaves provided excellent mechanical and thermal properties, which can be used in a
number of different industrial applications.
The presented studies show the potential of utilizing dried leaves waste in making
biomass briquettes fuel. Similarly, the present study aims to explore the feasibility of
biomass briquettes made of dried leaves – Mango tree (Mangifera indica), Gmelina tree
(Gmelina arborea) and Corn (Zea mays) – in an attempt to propose a domestic fuel
alternative to charcoal.
THE PROBLEM
Statement of the Problem
This research study aims to explore the feasibility of dried leaves as a main ingredient
in making biomass briquettes for fuels alternatives, in which it will be compared and
contrasted with commercial charcoal at Banilad, Cebu City, Cebu, Philippines during the
Academic Year 2022-2023. The results of the study will be the basis for recommendations.
Moreover, the researchers aim to answer the following question:
1. Is there a significant difference on the proposed biomass briquette made of
Mango tree (Mangifera indica) dried leaves in terms of ignition time, burning rate,
and water boiling time using the following concentrations:
a. 60 g Mango tree dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch Slurry;
b. 70 g Mango tree dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch Slurry; and
c. 80 g Mango tree dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch Slurry.
2. Is there a significant difference on the proposed biomass briquette made of
Gmelina tree (Gmelina arborea) dried leaves in terms of ignition time, burning rate,
and water boiling time using the following concentrations:
a. 60 g Gmelina tree dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch Slurry;
b. 70 g Gmelina tree dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch Slurry; and
c. 80 g Gmelina tree dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch Slurry.
3. Is there a significant difference on the proposed biomass briquette made of Corn
(Zea mays) dried leaves in terms of ignition time, burning rate, and water boiling
time using the following concentrations:
a. 60 g Corn dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch Slurry;
b. 70 g Corn dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch Slurry; and
c. 80 g Corn dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch Slurry.
4. Is there a significance difference between the proposed biomass briquette and
wood charcoal counterpart in terms of:
4.1 Ignition time
4.2 Burning rate
4.3 Water boiling time
Statement of the Null Hypothesis
H01. There is no significant difference on the proposed biomass briquette made of
Mango tree (Mangifera indica) dried leaves in terms of ignition time, burning rate, and
water boiling time using the following concentrations:
a. 60 g Mango tree dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch Slurry;
b. 70 g Mango tree dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch Slurry; and
c. 80 g Mango tree dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch Slurry.
H02. There is no significant difference on the proposed biomass briquette made of
Gmelina tree (Gmelina arborea) dried leaves in terms of ignition time, burning rate, and
water boiling time using the following concentrations:
a. 60 g Gmelina dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch Slurry;
b. 70 g Gmelina dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch Slurry; and
c. 80 g Gmelina dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch Slurry.
H03. There is no significant difference on the proposed biomass briquette made of
Corn (Zea mays) dried leaves in terms of ignition time, burning rate, and water boiling time
using the following concentrations:
a. 60 g Corn dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch Slurry;
b. 70 g Corn dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch Slurry; and
c. 80 g Corn dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch Slurry.
H04. There is no significant difference between the proposed biomass briquette and wood
charcoal counterpart in terms of:
4.1 Ignition time
4.2 Burning rate
4.3 Water boiling time
Significance of the Study
This section presents how the study initiated by the researchers carries off benefits
to the following:
Consumers, would be given an efficient and a low-cost renewable solid fuel source
to be used for domestic purposes;
Industry, would benefit from the wider range of biomass briquettes available for
sale, as well as the ability to substitute wood with a faster renewable resource. These new
choices will lead to lower energy costs for industry, which can then be passed on to
consumers through lower prices.
Environment, would be in less harm due to its low greenhouse gas emission. This
study will lead to the development of a new generation of briquettes that are
environmentally friendly and have no adverse effects on humans, animals and the
ecosystem.
Future Researchers. would be able to use the findings of this study as a reference
material and guide;
Scope and Delimitations of the Study
This research study focuses on examining the feasibility of dried leaves as a main
ingredient in making biomass briquettes. The study will be specifically utilizing dried
leaves only from these plants that are accessible to the setting of the study, Banilad, Cebu
City: Mango tree (Mangifera indica), Gmelina tree (Gmelina arborea) and Corn (Zea
mays). The study will focus on how the use of dried leaves as a raw ingredient will affect
the efficiency of biomass briquettes, moreover, compare the proposed alternative to its
market-produced counterpart.
The following materials and ingredients, which are typically used to make
briquettes, will not be used by the researchers: cement and kaolin as a binding agent; wood
charcoal and mineral carbon as a heat fuel; sodium nitrate and waxes for burning speed;
calcium carbonate and limestone to give the briquettes' ashes a white color; sodium borate
for press release; cement and clay as filler. Moreover, the researchers will purely utilize
Mango, Gmelina, and Corn dried leaves as the biomass with cornstarch as the binder for
the briquettes. The briquettes will mainly be subjected to these three tests: Ignition time,
Burning rate, and Thermal Fuel Efficiency (TFE). In these three tests, a bunsen burner will
be utilized.
Chemical nitrates like sodium nitrate are mostly used as accelerants in the
briquetting process. There may also be other chemicals like ammonium and potassium
nitrate. The aforementioned chemicals are costly and harmful at the same time. Due to the
fact that the researchers are students themselves, they will not be using these substances in
this regard. In addition, due to the expensive cost of a briquette press machine, the
researchers will instead use a compound lever press to create the briquettes. A compound
lever press is a compression tool made of wood. It has a compression range of 300 mm to
190 mm and can produce square or traditional round briquettes with or without holes at a
rate of 12 units every 10 minutes from biomass fines. As this type of press is quite large
and heavy, the research will utilize two people to operate it efficiently.
Nevertheless, these limitations will not hinder the researchers in pursuing the
objective of this study, which is to create biomass briquettes made of dried leaves as
charcoal alternatives. Moreover, these limitations will instead underscore the economic
advantage of making biomass briquettes out of dried leaves, in which a costly procedure is
not necessary to create a charcoal alternative. Hence, the present study will promote an
environmental-friendly process of biomass briquetting that is feasible and affordable to
consumers. Further experimentations and observations of the variables in this study will be
conducted at the Physics Laboratory at the University of Cebu- Banilad Campus (Senior
High Schosol Building) only.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Research Design
The research design is a strategy for using empirical data to answer a research
question (Bhandari, 2022). Subsequently, it is the blueprint for data collection,
measurement, and analysis in the research problem. In this study, the researchers utilized
a quantitative approach to deal with measuring and analyzing statistical data to explore the
feasibility of the biomass briquettes made of dried leaves from mango tree (Mangifera
indica), gmelina tree (Gmelina arborea) and corn (Zea mays).
This study used an experimental design. Moreover, the experimental approach is
appropriate for the study as it deals with the independent and dependent variables. The
independent variables are the mango tree dried leaves (Mangifera indica), gmelina tree
dried leaves (Gmelina arborea) and corn dried leaves (Zea mays). The dependent variable
would be the results of tests subjected to the biomass briquettes made of the
aforementioned plants. The researchers aim to examine and explain the applicability of the
chosen variables.
Research Locale
Research locale is a term that refers to the geographic area in which a study is
conducted. It helps researchers understand how different locations affect the outcome of
their studies and how to best communicate results. Research locale also includes why the
researchers chose this location.
The research study was conducted in the laboratory of the University of Cebu Banilad Campus Senior High School Department at Gov. M. Cuenco Ave, Cebu City, 6000
Cebu City. The also selected the University of Cebu's Banilad Campus laboratory since it
has all the necessary equipment for conducting the experiment including the following
tests: ignition time, burning rate, TFE (Thermal Fuel Efficiency)
Location Map
Figure 1: Laboratory of University of Cebu – Banilad SHS Building
Coordinate of University of Cebu – Banilad
________________________________________________________________________
Location: Gov. M. Cuenco Ave, Cebu City, 6000 Cebu City
Latitude: 10.3417
Longitude: 123.9118
Research Subject
In this experimental research, variables that are present include dependent,
independent, and extraneous factors. The items that are put under experimental conditions
are known as experimental units in a study. Humans are referred to as subjects if they are
used as experimental units. The experimental manipulation of the dependent variables is
carried out by the independent variables.
This experimental research uses dried leaves from mango tree (Mangifera indica),
gmelina tree (Gmelina arborea) and corn (Zea mays) as the focus subject of the study.
The researchers use the subjects to develop biomass briquettes for charcoal
alternatives. These three aforementioned plants are common vegetations found throughout
Philippines and are considered as biowaste that can be utilized as a potential ingredient in
making biomass briquettes. Furthermore, the researchers use cornstarch slurry to help bind
the biomass briquettes.
The researchers used mango tree (Mangifera indica), gmelina tree (Gmelina
arborea) and corn (Zea mays) leaves, for it is an organic and renewable source that goes
the natural process of abscission that helps the process of briquetting by drawing out
moisture out from the leaves. Thus, it can be utilized as an efficient biofuel alternative for
consumers. Moreover, the researchers observed the significance of difference in
concentrations between dried leaves and cornstarch slurry.
The researchers use the subjects to develop biomass briquettes for charcoal
alternative. These three aforementioned plants are common vegetations found throughout
Philippines and are considered as biowaste that can be utilized as a potential ingredient in
making biomass briquettes. Furthermore, the researchers use cornstarch slurry to help bind
the biomass briquettes.
The researchers used mango tree (Mangifera indica), gmelina tree (Gmelina
arborea) and corn (Zea mays) leaves, for it is an organic and renewable source that goes
the natural process of abscission that helps the process of briquetting by drawing out
moisture out from the leaves. Thus, it can be utilized as an efficient biofuel alternative for
consumers. Moreover, the researchers observed the significance of difference in
concentrations between dried leaves and cornstarch slurry.
Research Materials and Equipment
Quantity
Materials
1 kg
Mango dried
leaves
(Mangifera
indica)
Image
Description and
Usage
is the fallen
foliage of a
mango tree
is used as a
main ingredient
in making the
biomass
briquettes
1 kg
Gmelina dried
leaves
(Gmelina
arborea)
is the fallen
foliage of a
gmelina tree
is used as a
main
ingredient in
making the
biomass
briquettes
1 kg
Corn dried
leaves (Zea
mays)
is one of the
agro-wastes of
corn is used as
a main
ingredient in
making the
biomass
briquettes
180 g
Cornstarch
is a white,
tasteless,
odorless
powder
is used as a
component in
making a
binder for the
briquette
720 ml
Water
is an inorganic,
transparent,
tasteless,
odorless, and
nearly colorless
is used as a
component in
making a
binder for the
briquette
1
Lever press
is a wooden
device
is used for
pressing
briquettes made
of dried leaves
1
Lighter
is a portable
device which
creates a
controlled
flame
1
Blender
an electrical
kitchen
appliance
is used for
grinding and
mixing the
briquette
solution
1
Charcoal
Chamber
a metal cylinder
with a grate
inside to allow
for airflow, the
briquettes are
inserted inside
Cooking oil
a plant or
animal liquid
fat used in
frying, baking,
and other types
of cooking
is one of the
component
used as a fire
starter
3
Plastic pails
is a round, open
container with a
handle
used as a
container for
the fallen
leaves
3
Container
is an object that
can be used to
hold or
transport
something
is used to hold
the briquette
solution before
transfer
1
Mass balance
is used to
measure the
mass of solids,
liquids, and
other samples
2
Spoon
an utensil
primarily used
for eating,
serving, and
cooking
constituents
1
Timer
is a specialized
type of clock
used for
measuring
specific time
intervals.
Tissue
a soft, thin,
pliable, and
absorbent paper
made from
wood or
recycled paper
is one of the
component
used as a fire
starter
1
Tongs
is a tool used
for tools to hold
or grip items
Research Procedure
This study aims to test the feasibility of biomass briquettes made of dried leaves –
mango tree (Mangifera indica), gmelina tree (Gmelina arborea) and corn (Zea mays) – in
an attempt to propose a domestic fuel alternative to charcoal. The procedures of this study
are arranged thematically in parts, under the following headings:
Collection of Dried Leaves
The researchers collected 3 kilograms of fallen leaves from the residential area of
one of the researchers. Specifically, these fallen leaves are off the following plants: Mango
tree (Mangifera indica), Gmelina tree (Gmelina arborea) and Corn (Zea mays). The
collected leaves will be stored in covered plastic pails in a well-ventilated room.
Preparation of Different Concentrations
The researchers will use cornstarch slurry as a binder for the briquette. Cornstarch
slurry was made by mixing 50 grams of cornstarch and 100 grams of water then stirred
until the solution is even all through. It will then be added to the following concentrations:
60 grams dried leaves, 70 grams dried leaves, and 80 grams dried leaves.
The researchers will place the dried leaves and cornstarch slurry mixture in three
containers (one for each kind of leaf). For the Mango tree (Mangifera indica) briquette
solution, the dried leaves and cornstarch slurry concentration will be as follows: 60 Mango
tree dried leaves, 150 grams Cornstarch Slurry; 70 Mango tree dried leaves, 150 grams
Cornstarch slurry; and 80 grams Mango tree dried leaves, 150 grams Cornstarch slurry. For
the Gmelina tree (Gmelina arborea) briquette solution, the dried leaves and cornstarch
slurry concentration will be as follows: 60 Gmelina tree dried leaves, 150 grams Cornstarch
Slurry; 70 Gmelina tree dried leaves, 150 grams Cornstarch slurry; and 80 grams Gmelina
tree dried leaves, 150 grams Cornstarch slurry. For the Corn (Zea mays) briquette solution,
the dried leaves and cornstarch slurry concentration will be as follows: 60 Corn tree dried
leaves, 150 grams Cornstarch Slurry; 70 Corn tree dried leaves, 150 grams Cornstarch
slurry; and 80 grams Corn tree dried leaves, 150 grams Cornstarch slurry.
Briquette Pressing
Each briquette solution will be transferred by the researchers to a mold of 4 cm in
height and 3 cm in width. A manual wooden briquette machine will be utilized in briquette
pressing. The design of which will be patterned from Biomass Briquette Lever Press by
Commando (2018). The briquettes produced will be then air dried for 48 hours.
Application of the Briquettes
To test the feasibility of the briquette, it will be used to boil water. Moreover, the
briquette will be specifically subjected to these three tests: ignition time, burning rate, and
water boiling time.
Ignition Time Test
Each briquette will be ignited by placing a fire starter on a platform 4 cm directly
beneath it. The researchers will use a 22 inches of tissue roll soaked in 10 ml of oil to
ensure a consistent fire in igniting the briquettes. Caution was taken to avoid flame spread
in the transverse directions. The burner was turned on until the briquette was fully ignited
and in its steady state burn phase. The time it takes for the briquette to ignite will be
recorded.
Burning Rate Test
The insulator, Bunsen burner, tripod stand, and wire gauze will be arranged on the
balance - the researchers will record its weight. The briquettes will be placed inside the
charcoal chimney and the fire starter will be ignited until the briquettes are completely
burnt and constant weight is obtained. The weight loss at specific time will be computed
from the expression:
𝑏𝑢𝑟𝑛𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒 =
𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑏𝑢𝑟𝑛𝑡 𝑏𝑟𝑖𝑞𝑢𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑒
𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒 𝑡𝑎𝑘𝑒𝑛
Water Boiling Time
Upon reaching the ignition burn of the briquette, a tin of 500 ml water is placed
above the ignited briquettes. The initial temperature of the water is then recorded
every 3 minutes. The time it takes for the water boil will be recorded.
Statistical Treatment
The data obtained by the researchers from the experiment were analyzed by
applying the statistical treatment ANOVA: Single Factor. Compute first the mean value of
each data per setup
1. For problems 1, 2, and 3, the researchers utilized t-test for two independent samples.
where:
x̄1 = Observed Mean of 1st Sample
x̄2 = Observed Mean of 2nd Sample
s1 = Standard Deviation of 1st Sample
s2 = Standard Deviation of 2nd Sample
n1 = Size of 1st Sample
n2 = Size of 2nd Sample
2. For problem 4, the researchers employed ANOVA.
To find the degrees of freedom:
𝑑𝑓𝑏 = 𝑘 − 1,
𝑑𝑓𝑤 = 𝑁 − 𝑘,
𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒:
𝑑𝑓𝑏 = 𝑑𝑒𝑔𝑟𝑒𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑟𝑒𝑒𝑑𝑜𝑚 𝑏𝑒𝑡𝑤𝑒𝑒𝑛,
𝑑𝑓𝑤 = 𝑑𝑒𝑔𝑟𝑒𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑟𝑒𝑒𝑑𝑜𝑚 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑛.
Definition of Terms
This section operationally defines the terms that are used in the study.
Biomass. Organic materials or waste from dried leaves which are utilized to
become a fuel, a renewable and sustainable source of energy used to create electricity or
other forms of power.
Briquettes. Are compressed blocks composed of leaves as biomass material used
for fuel and kindling to start a fire.
Charcoal. Black porous solid made up of carbon and any remaining ash which will
serve as basis for comparison with biomass briquettes.
Dried Leaves. Brown waste from mango tree (Mangifera indica), gmelina tree
(Gmelina arborea) and corn (Zea mays) that are rich in organic matter, predominantly
carbon based, and highly combustible.
Lever Press. A compression tool used in briquetting.
Renewable Energy. Energy from natural processes that are continuously replaced.
This includes sunlight, geothermal heat, wind, tides, water, and various forms of biomass.
CHAPTER 2
PRESENTATION, ANALYSES, AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
In alignment with the experimentation conducted by the researchers, hereof
presented, analyzed and interpreted, is the data gathered through statistical treatment of the
collected raw data in correspondence to the problems that the researchers established in the
study.
Difference between varying concentrations of Mango (Mangifera indica), Gmelina
(Gmelina arborea) and Corn (Zea Mays) Dried Leaves Briquettes in terms of its
variables
The graphs and tables shown below, presented the efficacy of biomass briquettes
made with Mango, Gmelina and Corn dried leaves with the following concentration:
concentration (a) 60 grams of (Mango/Gmelina/Corn) dried leaves¸150 ml cornstarch
slurry; concentration (b) 70 grams of (Mango/Gmelina/Corn)
dried leaves¸150 ml
cornstarch slurry; and concentration (c) 80 grams of (Mango/Gmelina/Corn) dried leaves,
150 ml cornstarch in terms of ignition time, burning rate, and water boiling time.
Graph 1. Difference between the different concentrations of Mango (Mangifera
indica) Dried Leaves Briquettes in terms of Ignition Time
Graph 1 presented the following results: (1) concentration A containing 60 grams
of Mango dried leaves and 150 ml cornstarch slurry had the shortest ignition time with an
average of 230.67 seconds; (2) concentration B containing 70 grams of Mango dried leaves
and 150 ml cornstarch slurry had an average ignition time of 251 seconds and; (3)
concentration C containing 80 grams of Mango dried leaves and 150 ml cornstarch slurry
had the longest ignition time with an average of 286.33 seconds. The data showed that the
higher the ignition time, the slower it was for the briquettes to ignite and enter a steady
state burn phase.
350
286.33
300
Ignition Time (seconds)
250
251
230.67
200
150
100
50
0
60 grams Mango Dried Leaves, 70 grams Mango Dried Leaves, 80 grams Mango Dried Leaves,
150 ml Cornstarch Slurry
150 ml Cornstarch Slurry
150 ml Cornstarch Slurry
Concentrations
Trial 1
Trial 2
Trial 3
Average
Table 1. Difference between the concentrations of Mango (Mangifera indica) Dried
Leaves Briquettes in terms of Ignition Time
Table 1 tabulated the difference in the ignition time between the different
concentrations of briquettes made from Mango (Mangifera indica) in a statistical method.
Specifics
Mean
SD
60 grams Mango Dried Leaves, 150
ml cornstarch slurry
230.67
6.11
70 grams Mango Dried Leaves, 150
ml cornstarch slurry
251
2.65
80 grams Mango Dried Leaves, 150
ml cornstarch slurry
286.33
13.20
N
3
Table 2. Variance Analysis between different concentrations of Mango (Mangifera
indica) Dried Leaves Briquettes in terms of Ignition Time
Table 2 displayed the Variance Analysis between the different concentrations of
Mango (Mangifera indica) Dried Leaves Briquettes in terms of Ignition Time.
Source of
Variation
Degrees of
freedom
Sum of
Squares
Mean
Squares
Between
Groups
2
4760.67
2380.33
Within Groups
6
437.33
Computed F
P-value
32.66
0.0006
72.89
s=significant at α=0.05
One-Way ANOVA was used by the researchers to compare the significant
difference between the ignition time of the biomass briquettes with different
concentrations. Table 2 confirmed that the ignition time of each concentration of the
alternative charcoal displayed a significant gap, [F (2,6) = 32.66], p-value = 0.0006 is lesser
than α=0.05. In implication, each concentration showed varying ignition time, with
Concentration A which prevailed among the three concentrations.
To validate this analysis, a study by Barre & Ycaza (2018), which is a study that
focuses on using carbonized Mango dried leaves as the main ingredient in making
briquettes. Results showed that the kindling point or the ignition time of the biomass
briquette is around 64.54-68.26 seconds.
The aforementioned study only uses a mixture of carbonized mango dried leaves
and starch as binder, just like the present study did. The only difference is that the present
study did not include carbonization of dried leaves, as it is harmful to the environment.
However, the ignition time that the mango briquettes displayed did not stray too far away
from the results the present study had gathered. Therefore, this study supports the result
since there is a significant difference between the concentrations of Mango (Mangifera
indica) dried leaves briquettes in terms of ignition time.
Graph 2. Difference between the different concentrations of Gmelina (Gmelina
arborea) Dried Leaves Briquettes in terms of Ignition Time
Graph 2 has presented the following results: (1) concentration A containing 60
grams of Gmelina dried leaves and 150 ml cornstarch slurry had the longest ignition time
with an average of 189.67 seconds; (2) concentration B containing 70 grams of Gmelina
dried leaves and 150 ml cornstarch slurry had an average ignition time of 233 seconds and;
(3) concentration C containing 80 grams of Gmelina dried leaves and 150 ml cornstarch
slurry had the shortest ignition time with an average of 272.67 seconds. The data showed
that the higher the ignition time, the slower it was for the briquettes to ignite and enter a
steady state burn phase.
300
272.67
233
Ignition Time (Seconds)
250
189.67
200
150
100
50
0
60 grams Gmelina Dried
Leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch
Slurry
70 grams Gmelina Dried
Leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch
Slurry
80 grams Gmelina Dried
Leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch
Slurry
Concentrations
Trial 1
Trial 2
Trial 3
Average
Table 3. Difference between the concentrations of Gmelina (Gmelina arborea) Dried
Leaves Briquettes in terms of Ignition Time
Table 3 tabulated the difference in the ignition time between the different
concentrations of briquettes made from Gmelina (Gmelina Arborea) in a statistical
method.
Specifics
Mean
SD
60 grams Gmelina Dried Leaves, 150
ml cornstarch solution
189.67
8.62
70 grams Gmelina Dried Leaves, 150
ml Cornstarch Solution
232.67
10.02
80 grams Gmelina Dried Leaves, 150
ml Cornstarch Solution
272.67
8.33
N
3
Table 4. Variance Analysis between the different concentrations of Gmelina (Gmelina
arborea) Dried Leaves Briquettes in terms of Ignition Time
Table 4 displayed the Variance Analysis between the different concentrations of
Gmelina (Gmelina Arborea) Dried Leaves Briquettes in terms of Ignition Time.
Source of
Variation
degrees of
freedom
Sum of Squares
Mean
Squares
Between
Groups
2
10338
5169
Within
Groups
6
488
Computed F
P-value
63.55
9.1592E-05
81.33
s=significant at α=0.05
One-Way ANOVA was used by the researchers to compare the significant
difference between the ignition time of the biomass briquettes with different
concentrations. Table 4 confirmed that the ignition time of each concentration of the
Gmelina Briquettes displayed a significant gap, [F (2,6) = 63.55], p-value = 0.00009 is
lesser than α=0.05. In implication, each concentration showed varying ignition time, with
Concentration A which prevailed among the three concentrations
Graph 3. Difference between the different concentrations of Corn (Zea mays) Dried
Leaves Briquettes in terms of Ignition Time
Graph 3 has presented the following results: (1) concentration A containing 60
grams of Corn dried leaves and 150 ml cornstarch slurry had the shortest ignition time with
an average of 169.33 seconds; (2) concentration B containing 70 grams of Corn dried
leaves and 150 ml cornstarch slurry had an average ignition time of 189 seconds and; (3)
concentration C containing 80 grams of Corn dried leaves and 150 ml cornstarch slurry
had the longest ignition time with an average of 204.33 seconds. The data showed that the
higher the ignition time, the slower it is for the briquettes to ignite and enter a steady state
burn phase.
Ignition Time (Seconds)
250
189
200
204.33
169.33
150
100
50
0
60 grams Corn Dried Leaves,
150 ml Cornstarch Slurry
70 grams Corn Dried Leaves,
150 ml Cornstarch Slurry
Concentrations
Trial 1
Trial 2
Trial 3
Average
80 grams Corn Dried Leaves,
150 ml Cornstarch Slurry
Table 5. Difference between the concentrations of Corn (Zea mays) Dried Leaves
Briquettes in terms of Ignition Time
Table 5 tabulates the difference in the ignition time between the different
concentrations of briquettes made from Corn (Zea mays) in a statistical method.
Specifics
Mean
SD
60 grams Corn Dried Leaves, 150 ml
cornstarch solution
169.33
11.15
70 grams Corn Dried Leaves, 150 ml
Cornstarch Solution
189.00
11.36
80 grams Corn Dried Leaves, 150 ml
Cornstarch Solution
204.33
10.07
N
3
Table 6. Variance Analysis between different concentrations of Gmelina (Gmelina
arborea) Dried Leaves Briquettes in terms of Ignition Time
Table 6 displayed the Variance Analysis between the different concentrations of
Corn (Zea mays) Dried Leaves Briquettes in terms of Ignition Time.
Source of
Variation
degrees of
freedom
Sum of
Squares
Mean
Squares
Between
Groups
2
1846.89
923.44
Within
Groups
6
709.33
Computed F
P-value
7.81
0.0214
118.22
s=significant at α=0.05
One-Way ANOVA was used by the researchers to compare the significant
difference between the ignition time of the biomass briquettes with different
concentrations. Table 4 confirmed that the ignition time of each concentration of the
Gmelina Briquettes displayed a significant gap, [F (2,6) = 7.81], p-value = 0.0214 is lesser
than α=0.05. In implication, each concentration showed varying ignition time, with
Concentration A which prevailed among the three concentrations.
Graph 4. Difference between the different concentrations of Mango (Mangifera
indica) Dried Leaves Briquettes in terms of Burning Rate
Graph 4 has presented the following results: (1) concentration A containing 60
grams of Mango dried leaves and 150 ml cornstarch slurry had the highest burning rate
with an average of 2.63 g/min; (2) concentration B containing 70 grams of Mango dried
leaves and 150 ml cornstarch slurry had an average burning rate of 2 g/min and; (3)
concentration C containing 80 grams of Mango dried leaves ad 150 ml cornstarch slurry
had the lowest burning rate with an average of 1.74 g/min. The data showed that the higher
the burning rate, the faster it was for the briquettes to be consumed by the fire.
3
2.63
Burning Rate (g/min)
2.5
2
2
1.74
1.5
1
0.5
0
60 grams Mango Dried Leaves, 70 grams Mango Dried Leaves, 80 grams Mango Dried Leaves,
150 ml cornstarch solution
150 ml Cornstarch Solution
150 ml Cornstarch Solution
Concentrations
Trial 1
Trial 2
Trial 3
Average
Table 7. Difference between the concentrations of Mango (Mangifera indica) Dried
Leaves Briquettes in terms of Burning Rate
Table 7 tabulates the difference in the burning rate between the different
concentrations of briquettes made from Mango (Mangifera indica) in a statistical method.
Specifics
Mean
SD
60 grams Mango Dried Leaves, 150
ml cornstarch solution
2.63
0.10
70 grams Mango Dried Leaves, 150
ml Cornstarch Solution
1.86
0.07
80 grams Mango Dried Leaves, 150
ml Cornstarch Solution
1.74
0.07
N
3
Table 8. Variance Analysis between different concentrations of Mango (Mangifera
indica) Dried Leaves Briquettes in terms of Burning Rate
Table 8 displayed the Variance Analysis between the different concentrations of
Mango (Mangifera indica) Dried Leaves Briquettes in terms of Burning Rate.
Source of
Variation
Between
Groups
Within
Groups
degrees of
freedom
Sum of
Squares
Mean
Squares
2
1.40
0.70
6
0.04
0.01
Computed F
P-value
103.76
2.21912E05
s=significant at α=0.05
One-Way ANOVA was used by the researchers to compare the significant
difference between the burning rate of the biomass briquettes with different concentrations.
Table 2 confirmed that the burning rate of each concentration of the alternative charcoal
displayed a significant gap, [F (2,6) =103.76], p-value = 0.00002 is lesser than α=0.05. In
implication, each concentration showed varying burning rate, with Concentration C which
prevailed among the three concentrations.
Graph 5. Graph of the Difference between different concentrations of Gmelina
(Gmelina Arborea) Dried Leaves Briquettes in terms of Burning Rate
Graph 5 has presented the following results: (1) concentration A containing 60
grams of Gmelina dried leaves, 150 ml cornstarch slurry had the highest burning rate with
an average of 2.42 g/min; (2) concentration B containing 70 grams of Gmelina dried
leaves, 150 ml cornstarch slurry had an average burning rate of 1.84 g/min and; (3)
concentration C containing 80 grams of Gmelina dried leaves, 150 ml cornstarch slurry
had the lowest burning rate with an average of 1.78 g/min. The data shows that the higher
the burning rate, the faster it is for the briquettes to be consumed by the fire.
3
Burning Rate (g/min)
2.5
2.42
1.84
2
1.78
1.5
1
0.5
0
60 grams Gmelina Dried
Leaves, 150 ml cornstarch
solution
70 grams Gmelina Dried
Leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch
Solution
Concentrations
Trial 1
Trial 2
Trial 3
Average
80 grams Gmelina Dried
Leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch
Solution
Table 9. Difference between the concentrations of Gmelina (Gmelina Arborea) Dried
Leaves Briquettes in terms of Burning Rate
Table 9 tabulates the difference in the burning rate between the different
concentrations of briquettes made from Gmelina (Gmelina Arborea) in a statistical method.
Specifics
Mean
SD
60 grams Gmelina Dried Leaves, 150
ml cornstarch solution
2.42
0.11
60 grams Gmelina Dried Leaves, 150
ml cornstarch solution
1.84
0.09
60 grams Gmelina Dried Leaves, 150
ml cornstarch solution
1.78
0.09
N
3
Table 10. Variance Analysis between different concentrations of Mango (Mangifera
indica) Dried Leaves Briquettes in terms of Burning Rate
Table 10 displayed the Variance Analysis between the different concentrations of
Gmelina (Gmelina Arborea) Dried Leaves Briquettes in terms of Burning Rate.
Source of
Variation
degrees of
freedom
Sum of
Square
Mean
Squares
Between
Groups
2
0.76
0.38
Within
Groups
6
0.06
Computed F
P-value
40.60
0.0003
0.01
s=significant at α=0.05
One-Way ANOVA was used by the researchers to compare the significant
difference between the burning rate of the biomass briquettes with different concentrations.
Table 2 confirmed that the ignition burning rate of each concentration of the alternative
charcoal displayed a significant gap, [F (2,6) =40.60], p-value = 0.0003 is lesser than
α=0.05. In implication, each concentration showed varying burning rate, with
Concentration C which prevailed among the three concentrations.
Graph 6. Graph of the Difference between different concentrations of Corn (Zea
mays) Dried Leaves Briquettes in terms of Burning Rate
Graph 1 has presented the following results: (1) concentration A containing 60
grams of Corn dried leaves and 150 ml cornstarch slurry had the highest burning rate with
an average of 3.30 g/min; (2) concentration B containing 70 grams of Corn dried leaves
and 150 ml cornstarch slurry had an average burning rate of 3.10 g/min and; (3)
concentration C containing 80 grams of Corn dried leaves and 150 ml cornstarch slurry
had the lowest burning rate with an average of 3.05 g/min. The data showed that the higher
the burning rate, the faster it was for the briquettes to be consumed by the fire.
3.4
Burning Rate (g/min)
3.3
3.30
3.2
3.10
3.1
3.05
3
2.9
2.8
2.7
60 grams Mango Dried Leaves, 70 grams Corn Dried Leaves,
150 ml cornstarch solution
150 ml Cornstarch Solution
Concentrations
Trial 1
Trial 2
Trial 3
Average
80 grams Corn Dried Leaves,
150 ml Cornstarch Solution
Table 11. Difference between the concentrations of Corn (Zea mays) Dried Leaves
Briquettes in terms of Burning Rate
Table 11 tabulates the difference in the burning rate between the different
concentrations of briquettes made from Corn in a statistical method.
Specifics
Mean
SD
60 grams Corn Dried Leaves, 150 ml
cornstarch solution
3.30
0.06
70 grams Corn Dried Leaves, 150 ml
Cornstarch Solution
3.10
0.04
80 grams Corn Dried Leaves, 150 ml
Cornstarch Solution
3.05
0.08
N
3
Table 12. Variance Analysis between different concentrations of of Corn (Zea mays)
Dried Leaves Briquettes in terms of Burning Rate
Table 12 displayed the Variance Analysis between the different concentrations of
Corn (Zea Mays) Dried Leaves Briquettes in terms of Burning Rate.
Source of
Variation
Between
Groups
degrees of
freedom
Sum of
Squares
Mean
Squares
2
0.10
0.05
6
0.02
Computed F
P-value
13.50
0.006007
0.004
Within Groups
s=significant at α=0.05
One-Way ANOVA was used by the researchers to compare the significant
difference between the burning rate of the biomass briquettes with different concentrations.
Table 2 confirmed that the ignition burning rate of each concentration of the alternative
charcoal displayed a significant gap, [F (2,6) =13.50], p-value = 0.0060 is lesser than
α=0.05. In implication, each concentration showed varying burning rate, with
Concentration C which prevailed among the three concentrations.
Graph 7. Graph of the difference between the different concentrations of Mango
(Mangifera indica) Dried Leaves Briquettes in terms of Boiling Water Time
Graph 1 has presented the following results: (1) concentration A containing 60
grams of Mango dried leaves and 150 ml cornstarch slurry had the shortest water boiling
time with an average of 1006 s; (2) concentration B containing 70 grams of Mango dried
leaves and 150 ml cornstarch slurry had an average water boiling time of 1105.33 s and;
(3) concentration C containing 80 grams of Mango dried leaves and 150 ml cornstarch
slurry had the highest water boiling time with an average of 1303.67. The data showed that
the shorter the water boiling time, the faster it was for the briquettes to boil the water.
1400
1303.67
Water Boiling Time (seconds)
1200
1105.33
1006
1000
800
600
400
200
0
60 grams Mango Dried Leaves, 70 grams Mango Dried Leaves, 80 grams Mango Dried Leaves,
150 ml cornstarch solution
150 ml Cornstarch Solution
150 ml Cornstarch Solution
Concentrations
Trial 1
Trial 2
Trial 3
Average
Table 13. Difference between the concentrations of Mango (Mangifera indica) Dried
Leaves Briquettes in terms of Water Boiling Time
Table 13 tabulates the difference in the water boiling time between the different
concentrations of briquettes made from Mango (Mangifera indica) in a statistical method.
Specifics
Mean
SD
60 grams Mango Dried Leaves, 150
ml cornstarch solution
1006.00
9.54
70 grams Mango Dried Leaves, 150
ml Cornstarch Solution
1105.33
8.50
80 grams Mango Dried Leaves, 150
ml Cornstarch Solution
1303.67
6.03
N
3
Table 14. Variance Analysis between different concentrations of Mango (Mangifera
indica) Dried Leaves Briquettes in terms of Water Boiling Time
Table 14 displayed the Variance Analysis between the different concentrations of
Mango (Mangifera indica) Dried Leaves Briquettes in terms of water boiling time.
Source of
Variation
degrees of
freedom
Sum of
Squares
Mean Squares
Between
Groups
2
137808.67
68904.33
Within
Groups
6
399.33
Computed F
P-value
1035.29
2.41217E08
66.56
s=significant at α=0.05
One-Way ANOVA was used by the researchers to compare the significant
difference between the water boiling time of the biomass briquettes with different
concentrations. Table 2 confirmed that the water boiling time of each concentration of the
alternative charcoal displayed a significant gap, [F (2,6) =[103.29], p-value = 0.00000002
is lesser than α=0.05. In implication, each concentration showed varying water boiling
time, with Concentration A which prevailed among the three concentrations.
Graph 8. Graph of the Difference between different concentrations of Gmelina
(Gmelina Arborea) Dried Leaves Briquettes in terms of Water Boiling Time
Graph 8 has presented the following results: (1) concentration A containing 60
grams of Gmelina dried leaves and 150 ml cornstarch slurry had the shortest water boiling
time with an average of
822.33 seconds; (2) concentration B containing 70 grams of
Gmelina dried leaves and 150 ml cornstarch slurry had an average water boiling time of
1044 seconds and; (3) concentration C containing 80 grams of Gmelina dried leaves and
150 ml cornstarch slurry had the longest water boiling time with an average of 1174.33
seconds. The data showed that the higher the burning rate, the faster it was for the briquettes
to be consumed by the fire.
Water Boiling Time (seconds)
1400
1174.33
1200
1000
1044
822.33
800
600
400
200
0
60 grams Gmelina Dried
Leaves, 150 ml cornstarch
solution
70 grams Gmelina Dried
Leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch
Solution
Concentrations
Trial 1
Trial 2
Trial 3
Average
80 grams Gmelina Dried
Leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch
Solution
Table 15. Difference between the concentrations of Gmelina (Gmelina Arborea) Dried
Leaves Briquettes in terms of Water Boiling Time
Table 15 tabulates the difference in the water boiling time between the different
concentrations of briquettes made from Gmelina (Gmelina Arborea) in a statistical method.
Specifics
Mean
SD
60 grams Gmelina Dried Leaves, 150
ml cornstarch solution
822.33
11.06
60 grams Gmelina Dried Leaves, 150
ml cornstarch solution
1043.67
0.09
60 grams Gmelina Dried Leaves, 150
ml cornstarch solution
1174.33
0.09
N
3
Table 16. Variance Analysis between different concentrations of Gmelina (Gmelina
Arborea)) Dried Leaves Briquettes in terms of Burning Rate
Table 16 displayed the Variance Analysis between the different concentrations of
Gmelina (Gmelina Arborea) Dried Leaves Briquettes in terms of Water Boiling Time.
Source of
Variation
degrees of
freedom
Sum of
Squares
Mean
Squares
Computed F
P-value
Between
Groups
2
189966.22
94983.11
442.47
3.05E-07
Within
Groups
6
1288.00
214.67
s=significant at α=0.05
One-Way ANOVA was used by the researchers to compare the significant
difference between the burning rate of the biomass briquettes with different concentrations.
Table 2 confirmed that the ignition burning rate of each concentration of the alternative
charcoal displayed a significant gap, [F (2,6) = [442.47], p-value = 0.0000003 is lesser than
α=0.05. In implication, each concentration showed varying burning rate, with
Concentration A which prevailed among the three concentrationss
Graph 9. Graph of the Difference between different concentrations of Corn (Zea
mays) Dried Leaves Briquettes in terms of Water Boiling Time
Graph 1 has presented the following results: (1) concentration A containing 60
grams of Corn dried leaves and 150 ml cornstarch slurry had the shortest water boiling time
with an average of 749.33 seconds; (2) concentration B containing 70 grams of Corn dried
leaves and 150 ml cornstarch slurry had an average burning rate of 832 seconds and; (3)
concentration C containing 80 grams of Corn dried leaves and 150 ml cornstarch slurry
had the lowest burning rate with an average of 943.67 seconds. The data showed that the
higher the burning rate, the faster it was for the briquettes to be consumed by the fire.
1200
943.67
Water Boiling Time (seconds)
1000
832
749.33
800
600
400
200
0
60 grams Corn Dried Leaves, 150 ml
cornstarch solution
70 grams Corn Dried Leaves, 150 ml
Cornstarch Solution
80 grams Corn Dried Leaves, 150 ml
Cornstarch Solution
Concentrations
Trial 1
Trial 2
Trial 3
Average
Table 17. Difference between the concentrations of Corn (Zea mays) Dried Leaves
Briquettes in terms of Water Boiling Time
Table 17 tabulates the difference in the burning rate between the different
concentrations of briquettes made from Corn in a statistical method.
Specifics
Mean
SD
60 grams Corn Dried Leaves, 150 ml
cornstarch solution
749.33
4.51
70 grams Corn Dried Leaves, 150 ml
Cornstarch Solution
831.67
63.00
80 grams Corn Dried Leaves, 150 ml
Cornstarch Solution
943.67
8.62
N
3
Table 18. Variance Analysis between different concentrations of Corn (Zea mays)
Dried Leaves Briquettes in terms of Water Boiling Time
Table 12 displayed the Variance Analysis between the different concentrations of
Corn (Zea Mays) Dried Leaves Briquettes in terms of Water Boiling Time.
Source of
Variation
degrees of
freedom
Sum of
Squares
Mean
Squares
Between
Groups
2
57088.22
28544.11
Within
Groups
6
8128.00
Computed F
P-value
21.07
0.00194
1354.67
s=significant at α=0.05
One-Way ANOVA was used by the researchers to compare the significant
difference between the burning rate of the biomass briquettes with different concentrations.
Table 2 confirmed that the ignition burning rate of each concentration of the alternative
charcoal displayed a significant gap, [F (2,6) =21.07], p-value = 0.00194 is lesser than
α=0.05. In implication, each concentration showed varying burning rate, with
Concentration C which prevailed among the three concentrations.
Difference between the Proposed Alternative Charcoal and Commercialized
Charcoal in terms of its variables
The graphs and tables shown below, presented the most effective of the biomass
briquettes made with Mango, Gmelina and Corn dried leaves as opposed to its commercial
counterpart in terms of ignition time, burning rate, and water boiling time.
Graph 10: Difference between the most effective concentration of Mango (Mangifera
indica) Dried Leaves Briquettes and its Commercial Counterpart in terms
of Ignition Time
Graph 10 presented the difference between the ignition time of the most effective
concentration of Mango (Mangifera indica) Alternative Charcoal which had a mean value
of 230.67 and its Commercial Counterpart which had a mean value of 261.
280
270
Ignition Time (Seconds)
261.00
260
250
240
230.67
230
220
210
200
Proposed Alternative Charcoal
Commercialized Charcoal
Charcoal
Trial 1
Trial 2
Trial 3
Average
Table 19: Difference between the most effective concentration of Mango (Mangifera
Indica) Dried Leaves Briquettes and its Commercial Counterpart in terms
of Ignition Time
Table 19 displayed the variance analysis between the ignition time of the most
effective concentration of Mango (Mangifera indica) Alternative Charcoal and its
Commercial Counterpart. The table showcased that there is a significant difference among
the treatments.
Specifics
Proposed
Alternative
Charcoal
Commercialized
Charcoal
Mean
SD
169.33
11.15
311.33
N
Mean
Difference
Computed t
p-value
3
-142.00
-20.10
0.0001
5.03
s=significant at α=0.05
The researchers applied a t-test of two independent samples to compare the
significant ignition time of the most effective concentration of Mango (Mangifera indica)
Alternative Charcoal and its Commercial Counterpart which showed that the Commercial
has a higher mean value; therefore, the ignition time of the Commercial Counterpart is
longer compared to the Concentration A of Mango Briquettes. Table 19 shows that there
was a significant difference between the most effective concentration of Mango Briquettes
(M = 169.33, SD = 11.15) and the commercialized counterpart (M = 311.33, SD = 5.03), t
(3) = -142, with the p – value = 0.0001 which is less than the alpha value = 0.05. Therefore,
the Alternative Charcoal prevailed in comparison to its commercial counterpart.
Graph 11: Difference between the most effective concentration of Gmelina (Gmelina
arborea) Dried Leaves Briquettes and its Commercial Counterpart in
terms of Ignition Time
Graph 11 presented the difference between the ignition time of the most effective
concentration of Gmelina (Gmelina arborea) Alternative Charcoal which had a mean
value of 189.67 and its Commercial Counterpart which had a mean value of 346.33.
450
400
346.33
Ignition Time (Seconds)
350
300
250
189.67
200
150
100
50
0
Proposed Alternative Charcoal (Gmelina Dried
Leaves Briquettes)
Commercialized Charcoal
Charcoal
Trial 1
Trial 2
Trial 3
Average
Table 20: Difference between the most effective concentration of Gmelina (Gmelina
arborea)Dried Leaves Briquettes and its Commercial Counterpart in terms
of Ignition Time
Table 20 displayed the variance analysis between the ignition time of the most
effective concentration of Gmelina (Gmelina arborea) Alternative Charcoal and its
Commercial Counterpart. The table showcased that there is a significant difference among
the treatments.
Specifics
Proposed
Alternative
Charcoal
Commercialized
Charcoal
Mean
SD
189.67
8.62
261.00
N
Mean
Difference
Computed t
p-value
3
-71.33
-5.86
0.0349
75.26
s=significant at α=0.05
The researchers applied a t-test of two independent samples to compare the
significant ignition time of the most effective concentration of Gmelina (Gmelina arborea)
Alternative Charcoal and its Commercial Counterpart which showed that the Commercial
has a higher mean value; therefore, the ignition time of the Commercial Counterpart is
longer compared to the Concentration A of Gmelina Briquettes. Table 20 shows that there
was a significant difference between the most effective concentration of Gmelina
Briquettes (M =198.67, SD =8.62) and the commercialized counterpart (M =261.00, SD
=75.26), t (3) = -5.86, with the p – value = 0.0349 which is less than the alpha value
= 0.05. Therefore, the Alternative Charcoal prevailed in comparison to its commercial
counterpart.
Graph 12: Difference between the most effective concentration of Corn (Zea mays)
Dried Leaves Briquettes and its Commercial Counterpart in terms of
Ignition Time
Graph 12 presented the difference between the ignition time of the most effective
concentration of Corn (Zea mays) Alternative Charcoal which had a mean value of 169.33
and its Commercial Counterpart which had a mean value of 311.33
350
311.33
Ignition Time (Seconds)
300
250
200
169.33
150
100
50
0
Proposed Alternative Charcoal
Commercialized Charcoal
Charcoal
Trial 1
Trial 2
Trial 3
Average
Table 21: Difference between the most effective concentration of Corn (Zea mays)
Dried Leaves Briquettes and its Commercial Counterpart in terms
of Ignition Time
Table 21 displayed the variance analysis between the ignition time of the most
effective concentration of Corn (Zea mays) Alternative Charcoal and its Commercial
Counterpart. The table showcased that there is a significant difference among the
treatments.
Specifics
Proposed
Alternative
Charcoal
Commercialized
Charcoal
Mean
SD
169.33
11.15
311.33
N
Mean
Difference
Computed t
p-value
3
-142.00
-20.10
0.0001
5.03
s=significant at α=0.05
The researchers applied a t-test of two independent samples to compare the significant
ignition time of the most effective concentration of Corn (Zea mays) Alternative Charcoal
and its Commercial Counterpart which showed that the Commercial has a higher mean
value; therefore, the ignition time of the Commercial Counterpart is longer compared to
the Concentration A of Corn Briquettes. Table 21 shows that there was a significant
difference between the most effective concentration of Corn Briquettes (M =169.33, SD
=11.15) and the commercialized counterpart (M =311.33, SD =5.03), t (3) = -20.10, with
the p – value = 0.0001 which is less than the alpha value = 0.05. Therefore, the Alternative
Charcoal prevailed in comparison to its commercial counterpart.
Graph 13: Difference between the most effective concentration of Mango (Mangifera
indica) Dried Leaves Briquettes and its Commercial Counterpart in terms
of Burning rate
Graph 13 presented the difference between the burning rate of the most effective
concentration of Mango (Mangifera indica) Alternative Charcoal which had a mean value
of 230.67 and its Commercial Counterpart which had a mean value of 261.
3
2.63
Burning Rate (g/min)
2.5
1.92
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Proposed Alternative Charcoal
Commercialized Charcoal
Charcoal
Trial 1
Trial 2
Trial 3
Average
Table 22: Difference between the most effective concentration of Mango (Mangifera
indica) and its Commercial Counterpart in terms of Burning Rate
Table 22 displayed the variance analysis between the burning rate of the most
effective concentration of Mango (Mangifera indica) Alternative Charcoal and its
Commercial Counterpart. The table showcased that there is a significant difference among
the treatments.
Specifics
Proposed
Alternative
Charcoal
Commercialized
Charcoal
Mean
SD
2.63
0.10
1.92
N
Mean
Difference
Computed t
p-value
3
0.71
11.32
0.0039
0.03
s=significant at α=0.05
The researchers applied a t-test of two independent samples to compare the significant
burning rate of the most effective concentration of Mango (Mangifera indica) Alternative
Charcoal and its Commercial Counterpart which showed that the Commercial has a higher
mean value; therefore, the burning rate of the Commercial Counterpart is longer compared
to the Concentration A of Mango Briquettes. Table 22 shows that there was a significant
difference between the most effective concentration of Mango Briquettes (M =2.63, SD
=0.10) and the commercialized counterpart (M =1.92, SD =0.03), t (3) = 11.32, with the p
– value = 0.0039 which is less than the alpha value = 0.05. Therefore, the Alternative
Charcoal prevailed in comparison to its commercial counterpart.
Graph 14: Difference between the most effective concentration of Gmelina (Gmelina
arborea) Dried Leaves Briquettes and its Commercial Counterpart in
terms of Burning Rate
Graph 14 presented the difference between the burning rate of the most effective
concentration of Gmelina (Gmelina arborea) Alternative Charcoal which had a mean
value of 2.42 and its Commercial Counterpart which had a mean value of 1.95.
3
2.42
Burning rate (g/min)
2.5
1.95
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Proposed Alternative Charcoal (gmelina Dried
Leaves Briquettes)
Commercialized Charcoal
Charcoal
Trial 1
Trial 2
Trial 3
Average
Table 23: Difference between the most effective concentration of Gmelina (Gmelina
arborea) Dried Leaves Briquettes and its Commercial Counterpart in
terms of Burning rate
Table 23 displayed the variance analysis between the burning rate of the most
effective concentration of Gmelina (Gmelina arborea) Alternative Charcoal and its
Commercial Counterpart. The table showcased that there is a significant difference among
the treatments.
Specifics
Proposed
Alternative
Charcoal
Commercialized
Charcoal
Mean
SD
2.42
0.11
1.95
N
Mean
Difference
Computed t
3
0.48
4.51
p-value
0.0053
2.47
s=significant at α=0.05
The researchers applied a t-test of two independent samples to compare the significant
burning rate of the most effective concentration of Gmelina (Gmelina
arborea)
Alternative Charcoal and its Commercial Counterpart which showed that the Commercial
has a higher mean value; therefore, the burning rate of the Commercial Counterpart is
longer compared to the Concentration A of Gmelina Briquettes. Table 23 shows that there
was a significant difference between the most effective concentration of Gmelina
Briquettes (M =2.42, SD =0.11) and the commercialized counterpart (M =1.95, SD =2.47),
t (3) = 4.51, with the p – value = 0.0053 which is less than the alpha value = 0.05. Therefore,
the Alternative Charcoal prevailed in comparison to its commercial counterpart.
Graph 15: Difference between the most effective concentration of Corn (Zea mays)
Dried Leaves Briquettes and its Commercial Counterpart in terms of
Burning Rate
Graph 15 presented the difference between the Burning rate of the most effective
concentration of Corn (Zea mays) Alternative Charcoal which had a mean value of 3.30
and its Commercial Counterpart which had a mean value of 1.69
4
3.30
Burning Rate (g/min)
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.69
1.5
1
0.5
0
Proposed Alternative Charcoal
Commercialized Charcoal
Charcoal
Trial 1
Trial 2
Trial 3
Average
Table 24: Difference between the most effective concentration of Corn (Zea mays)
Dried Leaves Briquettes and its Commercial Counterpart in terms
of Burning Rate
Table 24 displayed the variance analysis between the burning rate of the most
effective concentration of Corn Alternative Charcoal and its Commercial Counterpart. The
table showcased that there is a significant difference among the treatments.
Specifics
Proposed
Alternative
Charcoal
Commercialized
Charcoal
Mean
SD
3.30
0.06
1.69
N
Mean
Difference
Computed
t
p-value
3
1.60
24.67
0.00007
0.10
s=significant at α=0.05
The researchers applied a t-test of two independent samples to compare the significant
burning rate of the most effective concentration of Corn (Zea mays) Alternative Charcoal
and its Commercial Counterpart which showed that the Commercial has a higher mean
value; therefore, the burning rate of the Commercial Counterpart is longer compared to the
Concentration A of Corn Briquettes. Table 24 shows that there was a significant difference
between the most effective concentration of Corn Briquettes (M =3.30, SD =0.06) and the
commercialized counterpart (M =1.69, SD =0.10), t (3) = 24.67, with the p – value =
0.00007 which is less than the alpha value = 0.05. Therefore, the Alternative Charcoal
prevailed in comparison to its commercial counterpart.
Graph 16: Difference between the most effective concentration of Mango (Mangifera
indica) Dried Leaves Briquettes and its Commercial Counterpart in terms
water boiling time
Graph 16 presented the difference between the water boiling time of the most
effective concentration of Mango (Mangifera indica) Alternative Charcoal which had a
mean value of 1006 and its Commercial Counterpart which had a mean value of 740.
1200
1006
Water Boiling Time (seconds)
1000
740
800
600
400
200
0
Proposed Alternative Charcoal
Commercialized Charcoal
Charcoal
Trial 1
Trial 2
Trial 3
Average
Table 25: Difference between the most effective concentration of Mango (Mangifera
indica) Dried Leaves Briquettes and its Commercial Counterpart in terms
of Water Boiling Time
Table 25 displayed the variance analysis between the water boiling time of the most
effective concentration of Mango (Mangifera indica) Alternative Charcoal and its
Commercial Counterpart. The table showcased that there is a significant difference among
the treatments.
Specifics
Proposed
Alternative
Charcoal
Commercialized
Charcoal
Mean
SD
2.63
0.09
1.92
N
Mean
Difference
Computed t
p-value
3
0.71
16.01
0.0002
0.02
s=significant at α=0.05
The researchers applied a t-test of two independent samples to compare the significant
water boiling time of the most effective concentration of Mango (Mangifera indica)
Alternative Charcoal and its Commercial Counterpart which showed that the Commercial
has a higher mean value; therefore, the water boiling time of the Commercial Counterpart
is shorter compared to the Concentration A of Corn Briquettes. Table 25 shows that there
was a significant difference between the most effective concentration of Mango Briquettes
(M =2.63, SD =0.09) and the commercialized counterpart (M =1.92, SD =0.02), t (3) =
24.67, with the p – value = 0.00007 which is less than the alpha value = 0.05. Therefore,
the Commercial Charcoal prevailed in comparison to its commercial counterpart.
Graph 17: Difference between the most effective concentration of Gmelina (Gmelina
arborea) Dried Leaves Briquettes and its Commercial Counterpart in
terms of Water Boiling Time
Graph 17 presented the difference between the water boiling time of the most
effective concentration of Gmelina (Gmelina arborea) Alternative Charcoal which had a
mean value of 189.67 and its Commercial Counterpart which had a mean value of 346.33.
1000
Water boiling time (s)
950
923.33
900
850
822.33
800
750
700
Proposed Alternative Charcoal (Mango Dried
Leaves Briquettes)
Commercialized Charcoal
Charcoal
Trial 1
Trial 2
Trial 3
Average
Table 26: Difference between the most effective concentration of Gmelina (Gmelina
arborea) Dried Leaves Briquettes and its Commercial Counterpart in terms
of Water Boiling Time
Table 26 displayed the variance analysis between the water boiling time of the most
effective concentration of Gmelina (Gmelina arborea) Alternative Charcoal and its
Commercial Counterpart. The table showcased that there is a significant difference among
the treatments.
Specifics
Proposed
Alternative
Charcoal
Commercialized
Charcoal
Mean
SD
822.33
11.06
923.33
N
Mean
Difference
Computed t
p-value
3
-101.00
-7.23
0.0027
21.50
s=significant at α=0.05
The researchers applied a t-test of two independent samples to compare the significant
water boiling time of the most effective concentration of Gmelina (Gmelina arborea)
Alternative Charcoal and its Commercial Counterpart which showed that the Commercial
has a higher mean value; therefore, the water boiling time of the Commercial Counterpart
is longer compared to the Concentration A of Gmelina Briquettes. Table 26 shows that
there was a significant difference between the most effective concentration of Gmelina
Briquettes (M =822.33, SD =11.06) and the commercialized counterpart (M =923.33, SD
=21.50), t (3) = -7.23, with the p – value = 0.00027 which is less than the alpha value =
0.05. Therefore, the Alternative Charcoal prevailed in comparison to its commercial
counterpart.
Graph 18: Difference between the most effective concentration of Corn (Zea mays)
Dried Leaves Briquettes and its Commercial Counterpart in terms of
Water Boiling Time
Graph 18 presented the difference between the ignition time of the most effective
concentration of Corn (Zea mays) Alternative Charcoal which had a mean value of 169.33
and its Commercial Counterpart which had a mean value of 311.33
800
749.33
Water Boiling Time (s)
700
629.33
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Proposed Alternative Charcoal
Commercialized Charcoal
Charcoal
Trial 1
Trial 2
Trial 3
Average
Table 27: Difference between the most effective concentration of Corn (Zea mays)
Dried Leaves Briquettes and its Commercial Counterpart in terms
of Ignition Time
Table 27 displayed the variance analysis between the ignition time of the most
effective concentration of Corn (Zea mays) Alternative Charcoal and its Commercial
Counterpart. The table showcased that there is a significant difference among the
treatments.
Specifics
Proposed
Alternative
Charcoal
Commercialized
Charcoal
Mean
SD
749.33
4.51
629.33
N
Mean
Difference
Computed t
p-value
3
120
13.15
0.0029
15.41
s=significant at α=0.05
The researchers applied a t-test of two independent samples to compare the
significant water boiling time of the most effective concentration of Corn (Zea mays)
Alternative Charcoal and its Commercial Counterpart which showed that the Commercial
has a lower mean value; therefore, the water boiling time of the Commercial Counterpart
is shorter compared to the Concentration A of Gmelina Briquettes. Table 26 shows that
there was a significant difference between the most effective concentration of Gmelina
Briquettes (M =749.33, SD =15.41) and the commercialized counterpart (M =629.33, SD
=15.41), t (3) = 13.15 with the p – value = 0.0029 which is less than the alpha value = 0.05.
Therefore, the Commercial Charcoal prevailed in comparison to its alternative counterpart.
CHAPTER 3
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION
This chapter confers the summary of the overall study as well as the
findings that lead to the scientific and deductive formulation of the conclusion
and the recommendations to be addressed from then on.
Summary
This study was fully realized to the feasibility of dried leaves as
a main ingredient in making biomass briquettes for fuels alternatives, in which
it will be compared and contrasted with commercial charcoal at Banilad, Cebu
City, Cebu, Philippines during the Academic Year 2022-2023. The results of
the study will be the basis for recommendations.
Moreover, the researchers aim to answer the following question:
1. Is there a significant difference on the proposed biomass briquette
made of Mango tree (Mangifera indica) dried leaves in terms of
ignition time, burning rate, and water boiling time using the
following concentrations:
a. 60 g Mango tree dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch
Slurry;
b. 70 g Mango tree dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch
Slurry; and
c. 80 g Mango tree dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch
Slurry.
2. Is there a significant difference on the proposed biomass briquette
made of Gmelina tree (Gmelina arborea) dried leaves in terms of
ignition time, burning rate, and water boiling time using the
following concentrations:
a. 60 g Gmelina tree dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch
Slurry;
b. 70 g Gmelina tree dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch
Slurry; and
c. 80 g Gmelina tree dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch
Slurry.
3. Is there a significant difference on the proposed biomass briquette
made of Corn (Zea mays) dried leaves in terms of ignition time,
burning rate, and water boiling time using the following
concentrations:
a. 60 g Corn dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch Slurry;
b. 70 g Corn dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch Slurry; and
c. 80 g Corn dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch Slurry.
4. Is there a significance difference between the proposed biomass
briquette and wood charcoal counterpart in terms of:
4.1 Ignition time
4.2 Burning rate
4.3 Water boiling time
Findings of the Study
At the hindmost of the statistical analysis and interpretation of the
garnered raw data, the following affirmations were comprehended:
Difference between the concentrations of Mango (Mangifera indica),
Gmelina (Gmelina Arborea) and Corn (Zea mays) Dried Leaves
Briquettes in terms of Ignition Time, Burning Rate, and Water Boiling
Test
1. There was a significant difference on the proposed biomass briquette made of Mango
tree (Mangifera indica) dried leaves in terms of ignition time, burning rate, and water
boiling time using the following concentrations:
a. 60 g Mango tree dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch Slurry;
b. 70 g Mango tree dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch Slurry; and
c. 80 g Mango tree dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch Slurry
2. There was a significant difference on the proposed biomass briquette made of Gmelina
tree (Gmelina arborea) dried leaves in terms of ignition time, burning rate, and water
boiling time using the following concentrations:
a. 60 g Gmelina dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch Slurry;
b. 70 g Gmelina dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch Slurry; and
c. 80 g Gmelina dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch Slurry.
3. There was a significant difference on the proposed biomass briquette made of Corn
(Zea mays) dried leaves in terms of ignition time, burning rate, and water boiling time
using the following concentrations:
a. 60 g Corn dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch Slurry;
b. 70 g Corn dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch Slurry; and
c. 80 g Corn dried leaves, 150 ml Cornstarch Slurry
CONCLUSION
The researchers concluded that the variable Mango tree (Mangifera
indica) dried leaves, Gmelina tree (Gmelina arborea) dried leaves, Corn (Zea
mays) dried leaves and Cornstarch slurry has the potential to be an alternative
for commercialized charcoal. Based on the findings of the study, Gmelina tree
(Gmelina arborea) dried leaves Concentration A was the mixture that
prevailed in terms of ignition time and water boiling rate.
This study has tested various concentrations in terms of ignition time,
burning rate, and water boiling time. This resulted in opening possibilities for
making alternative charcoal using Mango tree (Mangifera indica) dried
leaves, Gmelina tree (Gmelina arborea) dried leaves, Corn (Zea mays) dried
leaves, and Cornstarch slurry at a place. Given the stated conclusion, the
researchers determined that there is a significant difference between Gmelina
tree (Gmelina arborea) dried leaves Concentration A and the other mixtures
conducted.
Therefore, this study concludes that the main variables: Mango tree
(Mangifera indica) dried leaves, Gmelina tree (Gmelina arborea) dried
leaves, Corn (Zea mays) dried leaves along with a sub-variable: Cornstarch
slurry can be used as an alternative charcoal.
Recommendations
Based on the findings and conclusion of the study, the
following recommendation are hereby offered:
1. To the future researchers who are interested in this line of study.
Experiment with different ratios of various dried leaf types to
see which one produces the most energy and has the best
combustion capabilities to optimize the briquette composition.
2. The researchers recommend to Iimprove the briquette production
process by exploring several methods for creating biomass
briquettes. Look into techniques like high pressure compacting
to increase the structure integrity and combustion efficiency.
3. The researchers also suggest carrying out a cost analysis in order
to assess the economic potential of generating biomass
briquettes on a bigger scale. Take into account elements like
the price of production equipment, labor, raw material costs,
and market demand.
4. It was further recommended for the future researcher to perform
a thorough investigation of the briquettes' quality parameters
efficiency to determine whether the biomass briquettes meet
or exceed the necessary criteria.
5. The researchers strongly recommend looking into long-term
sustainability by examining the availability and ability of
mango, Gmelina, and corn leaves to regenerate. Analyze the
effects of leaf harvesting on the ecosystem and nearby
communities, and Investigate methods for sustainable
sourcing
CONCLUSION
The researchers concluded that the variable Mango tree (Mangifera indica) dried
leaves, Gmelina tree (Gmelina arborea) dried leaves, Corn (Zea mays) dried leaves and
Cornstarch slurry has the potential to be an alternative for commercialized charcoal. Based
on the findings of the study, Gmelina tree (Gmelina arborea) dried leaves Concentration A
was the mixture that prevailed in terms of ignition time and water boiling rate.
This study has tested various concentrations in terms of ignition time, burning rate, and
water boiling time. This resulted in opening possibilities for making alternative charcoal
using Mango tree (Mangifera indica) dried leaves, Gmelina tree (Gmelina arborea) dried
leaves, Corn (Zea mays) dried leaves, and Cornstarch slurry at a place. Given the stated
conclusion, the researchers determined that there is a significant difference between
Gmelina tree (Gmelina arborea) dried leaves Concentration A and the other mixtures
conducted.
Therefore, this study concludes that the main variables: Mango tree (Mangifera
indica) dried leaves, Gmelina tree (Gmelina arborea) dried leaves, Corn (Zea mays) dried
leaves along with a sub-variable: Cornstarch slurry can be used as an alternative charcoal.
Recommendations
Based on the findings and conclusion of the study, the following recommendation
are hereby offered:
1. To the future researchers who are interested in this line of study. Experiment with
different ratios of various dried leaf types to see which one produces the most energy and
has the best combustion capabilities to optimize the briquette composition.
2. The researchers recommend to Iimprove the briquette production process by exploring
several methods for creating biomass briquettes. Look into techniques like high pressure
compacting to increase the structure integrity and combustion efficiency.
3. The researchers also suggest carrying out a cost analysis in order to assess the economic
potential of generating biomass briquettes on a bigger scale. Take into account elements
like the price of production equipment, labor, raw material costs, and market demand.
4. It was further recommended for the future researcher to perform a thorough investigation
of the briquettes' quality parameters efficiency to determine whether the biomass briquettes
meet or exceed the necessary criteria.
5. . The researchers strongly recommend looking into long-term sustainability by
examining the availability and ability of mango, Gmelina, and corn leaves to regenerate.
Analyze the effects of leaf harvesting on the ecosystem and nearby communities, and
Investigate methods for sustainable sourcing
\
References
Books
Agyeman, K.O., Amponsah, O., Braimah, I., & Lurumuah, S. (2012). Commercial
Charcoal Production and Sustainable Community Development of the Upper West
Region,
Ghana.
Journal
of
Sustainable
Development,
5,
149-164.
https://doi.org/10.5539/jsd.v5n4p149
Belino, M., Bosshard, H. F., Chen, S., Custodio, M., Lopena, J., Meris, P. & Saccuan, E.
(2015). Development of Efficient and Cleaner Charcoal Stoves for Cooking
Applications in a Rural Residential Dwelling. 13th Asia Pacific Conference on the
Built Environment. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1155797
Bensel, T.G. and Remedio, E.M. (202
2). Woodfuel Consumption and Production
in the Philippines: A Desk Study. FAO Bangkok, unpublished report
Bhavya, B., Singh, R. & Bhaskar, T. (2015). Preparation of Feedstocks for Gasification for
Synthetic Liquid Fuel Production. Gasification for Synthetic Fuel Production, 5771. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-85709-802-3.00003-5
Ngubane, N.F., & Oyekola, O.O. (2022). Optimisation of the Production of Pyrolysed
Corn Stover Briquettes and Its Techno-economic Analysis. Waste and Biomass
Valorization. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12649-022-01901-y
Journals
Agustí, J., Gimeno, J., Merelo, P., Serrano, R., Cercós, M., Conesa, A., Talón, M., Tadeo,
F. (2012). Early Gene Expression Events in the Laminar Abscission Zone of
Abscission-Promoted Citrus Leaves After a Cycle of Water Stress/Rehydration:
Involvement of CitbHLH1. Journal of Experimental Botany, 63(17), 6079–6091.
https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/ers270
Alkan, G.B., Kalender, S.S. (2019). Air Pollution. In: Hussain, C. (eds) Handbook of
Environmental
Materials
Management.
Springer,
Cham.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73645-7_77
Chidumayo, E. N., & Gumbo, D. J. (2013). The Environmental Impacts of Charcoal
Production in Tropical Ecosystems of the World: A Synthesis. Energy for
Sustainable Development, 17, 86-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esd.2012.07.004
Khorasgani, N. B., Sengul. A. B. & Asmautlu, E. (2020). Briquetting Grass and Tree Leaf
Biomass for Sustainable Production of Future Fuels. Biomass Conversion and
Biorefinery, 10, 915-924. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-019-00465-7
Kraft, E. & Romallosa, A.R. (2017). Feasibility of Biomass Production from Municipal
Waste Streams by Integrating the Informal Sector in the Philippines. Resources,
6(1), 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources6010012
Kumar, A., Mech, N., Ramesh, S.T. & Gandhimathi, R. (2022). Evaluation of Composite
Briquettes from Dry Leaves in Energy Applications for Agrarian Communities in
India.
Journal
of
Cleaner
Production,
350.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131312
TT, A. K., Mech, N., Ramesh, S. T., & Gandhimathi, R. (2022). Evaluation of
composite briquettes from dry leaves in energy applications for agrarian
communities
in
India.
Journal
of
Cleaner
Production,
350,
131312.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131312
Patharkar, O. R., & Walker, J. (2018). Advances in abscission signalling. Journal of
Experimental Botany, 69(4), 733-740. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erx256
Shah, K. A., Patel, M. B. & Parmar, P. K. (2010). Magnifera Indica (Mango).
Pharmacognosy Reviews, 4(7), 42-8. https://doi.org/10.4103/0973-7847.65325
Zubairu, A. & Gana S. A. (2014). Production and Characterization of Briquette Charcoal
by
Carbonization
of
Agro-Waste.
Energy
and
Power,
4(2),
41-47.
https://doi.org/10.5923/j.ep.20140402.03
Websites
Department of Agriculture (2021). Philippine Mango Industry Roadmap: 2017-2020.
https://www.da.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Philippine-Mango-IndustryRoadmap-2017-2022.pdf
Deanna Ramsay, M. N. (2021, May 4). Five things to know about briquettes and
sustainable bioenergy in Africa. CIFOR Forests News. Retrieved December 19,
2022,
from
https://forestsnews.cifor.org/72344/five-things-to-know-about-
briquettes-and-sustainable-bioenergy-in-africa?fnl=en
McCombes, S. (2022). What Is a Research Design | Types, Guide & Examples. Scribbr.
https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/research-design/
Research Guides: Organizing Academic Research Papers: Purpose of Guide. (2022).
https://library.sacredheart.edu/c.php?g=29803
Statistica (2022) Corn production in the Philippines 2021. Statistica. Retrieved December
19,
2022,
from
https://www.statista.com/statistics/751372/philippines-corn-
production/
World Health Organization. (2022). Household Air Pollution. https://www.who.int/newsroom/fact-sheets/detail/household-air-pollution-and-health
Appendix A
Location Map
Figure 2: Laboratory of University of Cebu – Banilad SHS Building
Coordinate of University of Cebu – Banilad
________________________________________________________________________
Location: Gov. M. Cuenco Ave, Cebu City, 6000 Cebu City
Latitude: 10.3417
Longitude: 123.9118
Yeshen Crystel Cuizon
Tapuko, Pit-os, Cebu
yeshencrystelc@gmail.com
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND
● Present Education: University of Cebu- Banilad Campus
Senior High School STEM Student
6000, Gov. M. Cuenco Ave, Cebu City, 6000 Cebu
2022– 2023
● Secondary Education: Pit-os National High School
Baas, Pagsabungan, Mandaue City
2015 – 2019
● Primary Education: Pulangbato Elementary School
Baas, Pagsabungan, Mandaue City
2008 – 2015
PERSONAL DATA
● Age: 18 years old
● Sex: Female
● Degree: Senior High School Student
● Civil Status: Single
● Religion: Roman Catholic
● Citizenship: Filipino
● Date of Birth: November 21, 2004
● Place of Birth: Cebu City
● Desired Job: Civil Engineer
ACHIEVEMENTS AND AWARDS
● Salutatorian (Elementary)
● With Honors (Junior High)
● Sci Quiz School and District Level Champion (2019)
SKILLS
● Responsible
● Innovative and Creative
● Problem Solving
● Motivation
● Openness
Hannah Briza Demecillo
Purok Kawayan 6, Tayud
Liloan, Cebu
brizademecillo@ gmail.com
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND
● Present Education: University of Cebu- Banilad Campus
Senior High School STEM Student
6000, Gov. M. Cuenco Ave, Cebu City, 6000 Cebu
2022 – 2023
● Secondary Education: Bright Minds In Action Learning Village
G. Pepito St., Tayud, Liloan, Cebu
2017 – 2021
• Primary Education: Bright Minds In Action Learning Village
G. Pepito St., Tayud, Liloan, Cebu
2011 – 2017
PERSONAL DATA
● Age: 18 years old
● Sex: Female
● Degree: Senior High School Student
● Civil Status: Single
● Religion: Born Again Christian
● Citizenship: Filipino
● Date of Birth: October 1, 2004
● Place of Birth: Cebu City
● Desired Job: BS Nursing
ACHIEVEMENTS AND AWARDS
● With Honors (Elementary)
● With Honors, 2017-2010 (Junior High)
SKILLS
● Practical
● Punctuality
Mariel Anthonette Feril
P. Sanchez St., Cubacub
Mandaue City, Cebu
marielferel16@gmail.com
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND
● Present Education: University of Cebu- Banilad Campus
Senior High School STEM Student
6000, Gov. M. Cuenco Ave, Cebu City, 6000 Cebu
2019 – 2021
● Secondary Education: Canduman National Highschool
Canduman, Mandaue City
2010 – 2011
● Primary Education: Fervent Academy
Baas, Pagsabungan, Mandaue City
2016 – 2017
PERSONAL DATA
● Age: 17 years old
● Sex: Female
● Degree: Senior High School Student
● Civil Status: Single
● Religion: Roman Catholic
● Citizenship: Filipino
● Date of Birth: May 14, 2005
● Place of Birth: Surigao City, Surigao del Norte
● Desired Job: BS Nursing
ACHIEVEMENTS AND AWARDS
● Salutatorian (Elementary)
● Valedictorian (Junior High)
● School Chess Champion (2015 – 2018)
● SSG President (2018-2019)
● Sudoku 1st runner up at University of Cebu – Banilad Campus (2020)
● Scrabble Champion in Sector 5, Pagsabungan Mandaue City (2017)
SKILLS
● Responsible
● Punctuality
● Innovative and Creative
● Does well in badminton
Jaymilan R. Lauron
J.P. Rizal St. Basak
Mandaue City, Cebu
lauronjaymilan@gmail.com
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND
● Present Education: University of Cebu- Banilad Campus
Senior High School STEM Student
6000, Gov. M. Cuenco Ave, Cebu City, 6000 Cebu
2022– 2023
● Secondary Education: Mandaue City Comprehensive National
High School
Baas, Pagsabungan, Mandaue City
2015 – 2019
● Primary Education: Basak Elementary School
Baas, Pagsabungan, Mandaue City
2008 – 2015
PERSONAL DATA
● Age: 18 years old
● Sex: Male
● Degree: Senior High School Student
● Civil Status: Single
● Religion: Roman Catholic
● Citizenship: Filipino
● Date of Birth: February 24, 2005
● Place of Birth: Mandaue City
● Desired Job: Medical Technologist
ACHIEVEMENTS AND AWARDS
● Salutatorian (Elementary)
● With High Honors (Junior High)
● MTAP Division 3rd place (2011)
● MTAP Division 3rd place (2016)
● Science Investigatory Project 2nd place (2016)
SKILLS
● Diligent
● Innovative and Creative
Vanz Coddy Legaspina
Lot 1115, Sitio Plaza,
Apas, Cebu
coddylegaspina@gmail.com
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND
● Present Education: University of Cebu- Banilad Campus
Senior High School STEM Student
6000, Gov. M. Cuenco Ave, Cebu City, 6000 Cebu
2022– 2023
● Secondary Education: Apas National High School
Omega St., Apas, Cebu City
2017 – 2020
● Primary Education: Camp Lapu Lapu Elementary School
Omega St., Apas, Cebu City
2011 – 2016
PERSONAL DATA
● Age: 18 years old
● Sex: Female
● Degree: Senior High School Student
● Civil Status: Single
● Religion: Roman Catholic
● Citizenship: Filipino
● Date of Birth: April 04, 2005
● Place of Birth: Lapu-Lapu City
● Desired Job: Licensed Architect
ACHIEVEMENTS AND AWARDS
● With Honors (Elementary)
● With Honors (Junior High)
● 1st Placer - Poster Making (2016)
● 3rd Placer - Poster Making (2015)
SKILLS
● Creative
● Motivation
● Artistic
● Self-discipline