1

A Comparative Study on the Potential of Over-ripened Carica Papaya and Musa Acuminata

in the Production of Ethanol

Harry E. Bradborn

Asher N. Dangaran

Maisha L. David

Bea V. Navarro

Janessa A. Pongco

Zhongtian Zhang

Science 10

Brightwoods School

Angeles City

September 27, 2022

 2

Abstract

The burning of fossil fuels for energy generation has been driving environmental

degradation, making the search for sustainable alternatives a priority. This study was conducted

with the aim of determining which between over-ripened Carica Papaya and Musa Acuminata

has greater potential in ethanol production––an eco-friendly and sustainable

alternative––specifically in terms of boiling point, amount of distillate obtained, density, and

burning time. To conduct the study, the methodology involved two trials. For each fruit of each

trial, a yeast-water mixture, which was of 20 grams of baker’s yeast and 120 mL of distilled

water, was mixed with 200 grams of the fruit’s blended flesh, with distilled water added to a final

volume of 1000 mL. The mixtures were then fermented for ten days before undergoing

distillation and analysis. The findings indicated that the distillates obtained were not pure ethanol

but a mixture of ethanol and water; the boiling points and densities exhibited by both fruits in

both trials were indicative of ethanol concentrations in ethanol-water mixtures, with the results

from Musa Acuminata indicating higher ethanol concentrations and relatively close to the

standard measurements of ethanol. Additionally, more distillate was obtained from Musa

Acuminata for both trials. In terms of burning time, the combustion test, which included soaking

cotton balls in the distillates and recording the duration from the time the cotton balls have been

ignited with a lighter until they have completely extinguished, yielded no substantial results as

none of the cottons burnt. While the results determine that over-ripened Musa Acuminata has

greater potential in ethanol production than Carica Papaya, there are some limitations. This

study is limited with its use of simple distillation, which is insufficient to completely separate

water and ethanol. It is also limited to the specific species of the fruits used and only four

parameters. Future research should consider controlling the ripeness of the fruits to minimize
 3

variation between trials and ensure a more objective experimental environment. Identification of

the best time frames for fermentation and distillation is recommended, as well as conducting the

combustion test immediately to avoid potential evaporation of ethanol from the distillates, and

conducting more trials to gather more detailed data.

Keywords:

Fossil fuels: non-renewable energy source that are formed from ancient remains of plants

and animals buried in the Earth's crust

kg CO2-eq/kWh: a unit of measurement used to express the amount of greenhouse gas

emissions, measured in kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalent, generated per kilowatt hour of

electricity produced

Sugarcane bagasse: the fibrous residue left over after extracting juice from sugarcane,

which is used for various purposes including biofuel

Diesel thermoelectric process: a process powered by diesel fuel, a fossil fuel derived

from crude oil, for energy production

Hydrolysis: breakdown of a compound into its constituent molecules through the

addition of water

Ethylene: hormone that regulates ripening of fruits

Autoclave: a machine used for sterilization through high-pressure steam

GC analysis: Gas Chromatography analysis, a technique used in analytical chemistry to

separate and analyze the various components of a sample mixture

Specific gravity method: technique used to measure the density or concentration of

ethanol by comparing it to the density of water

 4

%v/v: expresses the concentration of a substance in a solution as the volume of the solute

divided by the total volume of the solution, multiplied by 100

P. tannophilus: Pichia tannophilus, a type of yeast that is commonly used in industrial

fermentation processes

Distillate: concentrated liquid obtained through the process of distillation

Introduction

Fossil fuels have been the most dominant energy resource for decades. However, the

burning of fossil fuels to generate power, transportation, and electricity, results in the detrimental

emission of large amounts of greenhouse gases (GHG) into the atmosphere (Sources of

Greenhouse Gas Emissions, 2023). Furthermore, our substantial use of fossil fuels, such as coal,

natural gas, and petroleum––that is, they are natural resources and hence are constantly

declining–– is compromising the future generations’ access to meet their own needs. The

accelerating global warming, whose main contributors are GHGs, and increasing exhaustion of

natural supplies have been the driving forces of research regarding the use of eco-friendly and

renewable alternatives–– one of which is ethanol, and in fact, according to the U.S Department

of Energy, it is already being utilized as one.

Ethanol is a clear, colorless liquid and is also called ethyl alcohol, EtOH, and grain

alcohol. Ethanol as fuel has long shown promise for the planet through its examined carbon

footprint and sustainability. The carbon footprint is the amount of GHGs emitted by an

individual or an activity over a period. The production of electricity from sugarcane bagasse in

an ethanol industry presented a low carbon footprint (0.227 kg CO2-eq/kWh), much lower than

the diesel thermoelectric process (1.060 kg CO2-eq/kWh). Considering that diesel-based

 5

electricity could be substituted, the result would be overall avoided emissions of –0.833 kg

CO2-eq/kWh (Carvalho et al., 2019, p. 2). Sustainability was also discovered in terms of the

energy balance of ethanol. Energy balance is the ratio of the energy we extract from the resource

to how much we extract for its production. It has been shown that ethanol, which was produced

from surplus agricultural waste, has a positive energy balance compared with gasoline. A

positive energy balance indicates that the energy content of ethanol is greater than the energy

used to produce it (Guerrero & Munoz, 2017). Ethanol can also be produced from starch and

sugar: more so, over-ripened fruit waste.

Due to agricultural processing and the failure to sell in markets, a huge amount of

over-ripened fruit waste is created. These fruit wastes possess high amounts of soluble sugars

that can be converted into ethanol. The chemical composition of fruits also fluctuates between

various ripening stages, with over-ripened fruits having relatively high ethanol concentrations

due to their relatively high sugar content (Flores et al., 2018, p. 3). In the Philippines, due to the

country’s high temperature and relative humidity, fruits are prone to early ripening.

Some-to-most of these become over-ripened and go to waste after agricultural processes and

failure to sell. This is a concern as agriculture is a viable contributor to the economy in light of

its abundance in the country. (Mopera, 2016, pp. 9, 12, 15). These fruit wastes can be rather

converted into energy by conversion to ethanol.

Therefore, the production of ethanol from over-ripened fruit waste is, and will be, an

eco-friendly and renewable alternative.

In producing ethanol from fruits, one of the crucial steps is fermentation. Fermentation is

the chemical process by which molecules are broken down anaerobically. Ethanol fermentation
 6

is a process accomplished by yeast, some kinds of bacteria, or a few other microorganisms to

convert sugars, such as those in fruits, into byproducts of ethanol and carbon dioxide.

Furthermore, for this study, the conversion of these sugars is enhanced due to the hydrolysis of

starch present in over-ripened fruits, hydrolysis being the breakdown of starch into sugar, and

further into ethanol in fermentation (Libretexts, 2016). Fermentation converts 1 mol of glucose, a

type of sugar, into 2 mol of ethanol and 2 mol of carbon dioxide.

Papaya

Papaya, of which Carica Papaya is a species, possesses papain, a powerful proteolytic

enzyme, also known as papaya proteinase I. This enzyme can be found in the plant’s leaves,

roots, and fruit, and it breaks down protein. (Kubala, 2018). Proteolytic enzymes, or protease,

were proven to increase fermentation rate and ethanol production by releasing amino acids, the

building block of proteins, for the yeast (Guillaume, 2019). This, therefore, makes it appropriate

for ethanol production.

Banana

Bananas, of which Musa Acuminata is a species, contain amino acids, pectin, vitamin C,

and high amounts of starch and sugar. Unfortunately, after harvest, almost 60% of banana

produce is left as waste in the world’s tropical countries. Banana is a promising material for

ethanol production due to its abundance and high sugar content. Banana waste, which does not

contribute to the competition between fuel and food (Gumisiriza et al., 2017), specifically, can be

used for ethanol production.

 7

As papayas (Fabi & Prado, 2019) and bananas (Elayabalan, 2017) ripen, ethylene

production is induced, which stimulates the production of enzyme amylase, which breaks down

starch into sugar. Both fruits become sweeter during each ripening stage. Over-ripened fruits will

hold a relatively high amount of sugar. A group from the Department of Biology from University

of Oklahoma tested the relationship between sugar concentration and ethanol fermentation rate.

To test their hypothesis, they conducted a series of tests, altering the sugar proportion with yeast

and measured ethanol production afterward to determine how the change in sugar levels affected

fermentation. The results of their experiment presented a direct relationship between the two

variables; a greater presence of sugar molecules resulted in an increase in ethanol fermentation

rate (Flores et al., 2018).

Researchers from Myanmar collected over-ripened waste pineapple and papaya for their

observation on the yield of ethanol from these two fruits. The fruits were peeled and their spoiled

sections removed. The fruits’ flesh were washed, sliced, and blended into mush respectively.

Each fruit’s collected mush was divided into two, the first sterilized in an autoclave and then

fermented with baker’s yeast, and the other directly fermented. Ethanol was then separated using

a distillation apparatus and measured using the GC analysis and specific gravity method.

Concentrating on the results of the papaya, the sterilized rejected pulp yielded ethanol strength of

20.154 %v/v and the pure rejected pulp yielded ethanol strength of 16.418%v/v (Aung et al.,

2016, pp. 3, 9).

Several studies by the research group of article A, (Uchôa et al., 2021), have been carried

out to reuse bananas from banana cultivation and industrialization for sustainable energy

discoveries, one of which is ethanol. Different residues or sections of the banana were used
 8

individually for ethanol production: banana flesh, peels, and pseudostem. On the other hand,

cited by Article A, another article, Article B (2018), evaluated, for the first time, the integrated

use of these three residues. The ratio between flesh, peels, and pseudostem, of 1:2:7 was used, by

using which ratio, the authors mentioned, higher ethanol had been obtained than when the

residues were used individually. Article C, on the other hand, used a similar ratio that showed

potential of raising the ethanol content by 18% (de Souza et al., 2019). Article A had the

differential of examining ethanol production by a similar scheme of simultaneously using banana

flesh, peels, and pseudostem waste in the ratio, 1:2:10, the same mass proportion in which these

residues are generated in the field and industrialization. With baker’s yeast and P. tannophilus,

the three-banana-waste simultaneous fermentation approach achieved high productivity and yield

in ethanol.

While papayas and bananas have been proven to respectively produce ethanol, the

comparison of both fruits’ potential in ethanol production using the same procedure and

equipment has not been yet fully elucidated.

The aim of this study is to determine which between over-ripened Carica Papaya and

Musa Acuminata has greater potential in ethanol production. Parameters of boiling point, amount

of distillate obtained, density, and burning time will be tested per fruit in two trials. Standard

measurements of ethanol and commercial ethanol will also be used for comparison.

Conceptual Framework

In this study, two kinds of over-ripened fruits, Carica Papaya and Musa Acuminata, were

utilized in the production of ethanol and were compared to each other to determine which has
 9

greater potential. The fruits are the study’s independent variables. To determine, parameters

namely

1. Boiling point (of the distilling mixtures),

2. Amount of distillate obtained,

3. Density (of the distillates),

4. Burning time,

were tested. A trial was also conducted on commercial ethanol for burning time for comparison.

The results will be the dependent variables. The amount of yeast, water, and fruit mush added,

environment in which they were stored for fermentation, amount of time given for the ethanol to

ferment and distill, and distillation assembly used were controlled for both fruits and trials.

Paradigm of the Study

Figure 1 presents the paradigm of the study.

Research Problem
 10

Generally, this study aims to determine which of the two over-ripened fruits, Carica

Papaya and Musa Acuminata, has greater potential in ethanol production. Specifically, it aims to

answer the following questions:

1. How may the ethanol produced from over-ripened Carica Papaya be compared to that

produced from Musa Acuminata in terms of:

a. Boiling point (of the distilling mixtures),

b. Amount of distillate obtained,

c. Density (of the distillates),

d. Burning time.

2. How may the ethanol produced from the over-ripened fruits be compared to the standard

or commercial ethanol in terms of:

a. Boiling point (of the distilling mixtures),

b. Amount of distillate obtained,

c. Density (of the distillates),

d. Burning time.

Hypothesis

NULL

Over-ripened Carica Papaya does not have greater potential in the production of ethanol

than over-ripened Musa Acuminata.

ALTERNATIVE

Over-ripened Carica Papaya has greater potential in the production of ethanol than

over-ripened Musa Acuminata.

 11

Method

The type of research that was employed in this study is experimental. An experimental

design is a research approach in which there is a hypothesis, a variable that is manipulated by the

researcher–– independent variable–– and a variable that can be analyzed, measured, and

compared––dependent variable–– depending on the ways of manipulation by the researcher on

the independent variable. The independent variable is manipulated so as to see its relationship

with or effect on the dependent variable. An experimental design also operates in a controlled

and objective environment, which means that there are also other variables which are kept the

same and unchanging–– controlled variables––for the entirety of the experiment to maximize

preciseness. An experimental research design aims to discover a relationship between the

independent and dependent variables. The relationship, for instance, can be the effectivity of the

independent variable on the dependent variable and is stated in the hypothesis. This relationship

is then either validated or rejected at the conclusion of the study (Tanner, 2018).

Procedure

For the procedure, the researchers conducted two trials––meaning the procedure beneath

was done twice––to obtain more results of the parameters for a more detailed study. Averages of

the results obtained were also calculated for. Standard measurements of ethanol or commercial

ethanol are shown for comparison.

Preparation
 12

Over-ripened Carica Papaya and Musa Acuminata were collected from a local

market in LNS Talipapa in Angeles City, Pampanga. Both over-ripened fruits were stored

in respective, identical tupperwares at room temperature for 24 hours. After 24 hours, the

fruits were subjected to sanitation by rinsing with water, soaking in distilled water, and

air drying. This specific procedure is based on a previous experiment (Chitranshi &

Kapoor, 2021). The fruits were then unpeeled and their flesh blended in a blender

separately. Peels were not included as the presence of an unwanted organism on the

fruits’ peels and surface could result in contamination or any unwanted result (Steps to

Safe and Healthy Fruits & Vegetables, 2023). 200 grams of each fruit’s mush was used

for the experiment. In a separate container, 20 grams of baker’s yeast was slowly blended

with 120 mL of distilled water and left to activate for 15 minutes. The quantity in this

yeast mixture is only for one fruit mush.

The measurements and specifications of materials that were used were based on

the experiments conducted by other researchers (Chitranshi & Kapoor, 2021) (Jahid et al.,

2018) (Abdulla & Derman, 2018) .

The scientific name for baker’s yeast is Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Especially

Saccharomyces cerevisiae among yeasts is the common microbes employed in ethanol

production due to its high ethanol productivity, high ethanol tolerance, and ability of

fermenting a wide range of sugars (Mohd Azhar et al., 2017).

Distilled water is a type of purified water from which chemicals, salt, organic

materials, and minerals were removed. It being chemically inactive makes it appropriate

for this experiment as it accounts for a controlled environment (Brenner, 2018).

 13

Fermentation of Mixture

200 grams of the fruit mush was combined with the mixture of 20 grams of

baker’s yeast and 120 mL of distilled water in a 1.5 liter jar, and distilled water was

added to a final volume of 1000 mL. This was also done in a separate, identical jar for the

other fruit mush.

Each mixture was then left to sit in a cool, dry place to ferment for a duration of

10 days. Supposedly, based on past experiments, fermentation was initially for 7 days.

However, for the first trial, which was accomplished during the writing of this paper, the

mixtures, due to unforeseen circumstances, were left to sit for 3 more days. To keep the

environment of the experiment controlled, both trials were fermented for 10 days.

(Chitranshi & Kapoor, 2021) (Aung et al., 2016)

Fermentation is a chemical process that occurs in the absence of oxygen, in which

molecules, such as glucose, are broken down. Ethanol fermentation is a type of

fermentation that is primarily carried out by yeast, some bacteria, and a few other

microorganisms. During this process, sugars found in fruits, such as glucose, fructose,

and sucrose, are converted into byproducts of ethanol and carbon dioxide. Over-ripened

fruits undergo enhanced sugar conversion due to the breakdown of starch into sugars

through hydrolysis, which further undergoes fermentation to produce ethanol. The

fermentation of 1 mole of glucose results in the production of 2 moles of ethanol and 2

moles of carbon dioxide. Thus, fermentation is necessary in the production of ethanol in

this study (Libretexts, 2016).

Distillation
 14

Once fermentation was completed, the mixtures were sieved, also with a cloth, to

filter. The mixtures were then distilled separately. The distillation was performed in a

simple distillation assembly for 4 hours each mixture. The distillation time is such and

optimized accordingly to obtain the maximum amount of ethanol available in the

mixtures, with, supposedly, 400mL of each mixture (Chitranshi & Kapoor, 2021).

However, due to time and tools available, the distillation was conducted on only 100 mL

of each mixture for one hour. In this process, the boiling point was observed. The

distillates were collected in respective flasks.

Distillation is a process involving converting a liquid into vapor which is

subsequently converted back to liquid form by means of condensation. Distillation is

used to separate liquids from nonvolatile solids, like the separation of ethanol or alcoholic

liquids from fermented materials, or to separate liquids of different boiling points, like

the separation of gasoline from kerosene or ethanol from other liquids. In the latter case,

the liquid of the lower boiling point, because it will boil first, will be the one converted to

vapor form and condensed back into liquid form, which is then the separated liquid.

(Britannica, T. Editors of Encyclopaedia (2022, August 22). distillation.) In order to

produce ethanol in this study, distillation was needed to separate the ethanol produced

from fermentation from the other components of the fruit mixtures. To confirm the

identity of the separated liquid as ethanol, the boiling points of the distilling mixtures will

be observed and compared to the standard boiling point of ethanol. Once confirmed, the

ethanol obtained can now be tested for the next parameters.

Testing of Parameters: Boiling Point (of the distilling mixtures)

 15

As distillation was occurring, the boiling points of the distilling mixtures were

observed.

The boiling point in distillation, which can be observed in the assembly’s

thermometer, is the temperature at which the vapor pressure of a liquid is equal to the

pressure of the atmosphere on the liquid. Because different compounds have different

boiling points, it is the boiling point that will confirm the identity of the separated liquid

from distillation as ethanol (Chorbngam & Anantpinijwatna, 2021).

It indicates volatility, with higher boiling points indicating lower volatility, and

conversely. Volatility is how easily a substance will vaporize. Ethanol has high volatility

(Asad et al., 2015), and a boiling point of one of the mixtures closer to that of ethanol

would indicate that it has greater potential in ethanol production for this parameter. (Vea

et al., 2020, p. 23).

Testing of Parameters: Amount of Distillate Obtained

After completing distillation, the amount of distillate obtained was measured

using a measuring cup.

Testing of Parameters: Density (of the distillates)

The formula that was used for computing for the density of the distillates is

𝑚
𝑝= 𝑉
, whereas

i. p = density

ii. m = mass (in grams)

iii. V = volume (in mL).

 16

(The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica, 2022)

The mass was taken using an electronic balance per 30mL per distillate. The

results were compared to the standard density of ethanol.

Testing of Parameters: Burning Time

Of each distillate, Carica Papaya and Musa Acuminata, and commercial ethanol,

a cotton ball was soaked to absorb 5 mL. The cotton ball was ignited with a lighter. The

duration from the time the cotton ball was ignited until it has completely extinguished

was recorded. The closer burning time of one of the two distillates to commercial ethanol

would indicate which fruit has greater potential in the production of ethanol for this

parameter.

Tables are used to show the results of the testing of parameters for all trials, the

comparison, and their averages considering the two trials. The standard measurements of ethanol

and burning time of commercial ethanol are shown for comparison.

Table 1. Boiling Points (of the Distilling Mixtures) (in °C)

Distilling Mixture Trial 1 Trial 2 Average

Carica Papaya

Musa Acuminata
Standard Boiling Point of Ethanol: 78.37°C

(Naveen et al., 2020)

Table 2. Amounts of Distillates Obtained (in mL)

 17

Distillate Trial 1 Trial 2 Average

Carica Papaya

Musa Acuminata

Table 3. Densities (of the Distillates) (in g/mL)

Distillate Trial 1 Trial 2 Average

Carica Papaya

Musa Acuminata
Standard Density of Ethanol: 0.7892 g/mL

(Puaud et al., 2018)

Table 4. Burning Time (in seconds)

Distillate Trial 1 Trial 2 Average

Carica Papaya

Musa Acuminata

Trial 1 Trial 2 Average

Commercial Ethanol

The materials that were used for this experiment are the following: Carica Papaya, Musa

Acuminata, distilled water, baker’s yeast, commercial ethanol, and cotton balls. The tools and

equipment that were used for this experiment are the following: tupperwares, a blender, jars,

beakers, a distillation assembly, measuring cups, an electronic balance, a lighter, and a

stopwatch.
 18

Results and Discussion

As simple distillation in a distillation assembly was used, the distillates were found to not

be pure ethanol. Since a mixture in simple distillation is only boiled and recondensed once, the

final composition of the product will match the composition of the vapor, which means it may

contain significant impurities (Brennan, 2015). In this experiment, the distillates, as well as the

distilling mixtures, due to fermentation, were ethanol-water mixtures. This is corroborated under

the tables below. As the aim of this study is to determine which of the two over-ripened fruits,

Carica Papaya and Musa Acuminata, has greater potential in ethanol production, for the

following tables of parameters, a higher ethanol concentration is more appealing.

Table 1. Boiling Points (of the Distilling Mixtures) (in °C)

Distilling Mixture Trial 1 Trial 2 Average

Carica Papaya 92°C 98°C 95°C

Musa Acuminata 87°C 91°C 89°C

Standard Boiling Point of Ethanol: 78.37°C

(Naveen et al., 2020)

Table 1 displays the boiling points of the distilling ethanol-water mixtures for both fruits

and trials and the averages for each fruit, together with the standard boiling point of ethanol,

which is 78.37°C. It is shown that, for both trials and the average, the mixture produced from

Musa Acuminata exhibited lower boiling points and closer ones to the standard.

An ethanol-water mixture that has a boiling point of 95°C, one that has been produced

from Carica Papaya as average in this experiment, has an ethanol concentration of 40-50%,

while one that has a boiling point of 89°C, one that has been produced from Musa Acuminata as

average in this experiment, has an ethanol concentration of 60-70% (Umpqua Community

 19

College, 2015). This inverse relationship between boiling point and ethanol concentration can be

explained by the boiling points of the liquids that compose the distilling mixtures, namely

ethanol and water, whose boiling points are 78.37°C and 100°C respectively (Vedantu, 2023).

For instance, as water has a relatively high boiling point, the higher the boiling point of the

mixture, the more water there is relatively, hence the lower the ethanol concentration.

On these accounts, it can be concluded that for this parameter, Musa Acuminata has

greater potential in ethanol production.

Table 2. Amounts of Distillates Obtained (in mL)

Distillate Trial 1 Trial 2 Average

Carica Papaya 67mL 31mL 49mL

Musa Acuminata 87.5mL 56mL 71.75mL

Table 2 shows the amounts of distillates obtained from both fruit mixtures’ distillation,

from both trials, and their averages. For both trials and the average, it can be seen that more

distillate was obtained from Musa Acuminata.

Table 3. Densities (of the Distillates) (in g/mL)

Distillate Trial 1 Trial 2 Average

Carica Papaya 0.92 g/mL 0.9 g/mL 0.91 g/mL

Musa Acuminata 0.88 g/mL 0.9 g/mL 0.89 g/mL

Standard Density of Ethanol: 0.7892 g/mL

(Puaud et al., 2018)

Table 3 shows the densities of the distillates obtained from both fruit mixtures’

distillation, from both trials, and their averages, together with the standard density of ethanol,

which is 0.7892 g/mL. It can be seen that, in trial 1, the distillate produced from Musa
 20

Acuminata has a density lower than that from Carica Papaya and relatively close to that of the

standard, while in trial 2, it is equal to that from Carica Papaya.

For Carica Papaya, the average of the densities of its distillates from the two trials is

0.91 g/mL, which is the density of an ethanol-water mixture of 50% ethanol. For Musa

Acuminata, the average of the densities of its two distillates is 0.89 g/mL, which is then the

density of an ethanol-water mixture of 60% ethanol (Dawson College, 2015). These correspond

to the data presented under Table 1. Likewise, this inverse relationship between density and

ethanol concentration can be explained by the densities of the liquids that compose the distillates,

namely ethanol and water. 100% ethanol has a density of 0.7892 g/mL, which is the standard.

100% water has a density of 0.997 g/mL (USGS, 2019).

Thus, after such comparison, it can be concluded that Musa Acuminata has greater

potential in ethanol production for this parameter.

Table 4. Burning Time (in seconds)

Distillate Trial 1 Trial 2 Average

Carica Papaya N/A N/A N/A

Musa Acuminata N/A N/A N/A

Trial 1 Trial 2 Average

Commercial Ethanol 303.43 seconds 303.43 seconds 303.43 seconds

Table 4 shows the burning time, via a combustion test, of the distillates obtained from the

two distilled mixtures for both trials, together with that of commercial ethanol, which is 303.43

seconds. This parameter was to test and compare if the end products behaved similarly to

commercial ethanol. However, none of the cottons soaked in any of the distillates burnt.
 21

Conclusion

Based on the results of the study, the following conclusions were drawn:

Comparing the ethanol-water mixtures of Carica Papaya to Musa Acuminata,

a. The Musa Acuminata mixture exhibited a boiling point that is indicative of a higher
amount of ethanol concentration than Carica Papaya for both trials and the average.
b. A higher amount of distillate was obtained from the Musa Acuminata mixture than that
from the Carica Papaya for both trials and the average.
c. The distillate obtained from Musa Acuminata had a density that is indicative of a higher
amount of ethanol concentration than Carica Papaya for trial 1 and the average. The
distillates from trial 2 had densities equal to each other.
d. No comparing conclusion can be derived in terms of burning time.

Comparing the ethanol-water mixtures produced from the two over-ripened fruits to the standard
measurements of ethanol:
a. The boiling points from both trials, and their average, of the ethanol-water mixtures
produced from Musa Acuminata are closer to the standard than those from Carica
Papaya.
b. No comparing conclusion can be derived in terms of the amount of distillate obtained.
c. The densities from trial 1 and the average of the distillates produced from Musa
Acuminata are closer to the standard than those from Carica Papaya. The distillates from
trial 2 had densities equal to each other.
d. No comparing conclusion can be derived in terms of burning time.

Based on the conclusions drawn, over-ripened Musa Acuminata has greater potential in
ethanol production than Carica Papaya. The null hypothesis has been proven true: over-ripened
Carica Papaya does not have greater potential in the production of ethanol than over-ripened
Musa Acuminata.

Recommendations
 22

Considering the aforementioned findings and conclusions, the following

recommendations are hereby suggested:
(1) Proven by the densities of the distillates, simple distillation in a distillation assembly is
insufficient to completely separate water and ethanol (Brennan, 2015). The researchers
recommend using equipment that will account for more precise results, such as a
fuel-water separator, as well as identifying the best time frame for distillation, allowing a
distillate of pure ethanol.
(2) Regarding the study's limitation to specific fruit species, it is recommended that future
research take this into consideration.
(3) The parameters of this study are limited to boiling point, amount of distillate obtained,
density, and burning time. More parameters are recommended to gather more detailed
data.
(4) Trials were not conducted simultaneously; the ripeness and quality of the fruits may have
not been consistent. Further research and usage of specific equipment to make this factor
controlled is recommended.
(5) The researchers recommend identifying the best fermentation time frame, one that
optimizes ethanol production.
(6) Initially, the second parameter for table 2 was Amount of Ethanol Obtained, with pure
ethanol as distillate. However, proven by the data of simple distillation’s inability to
completely separate ethanol and water and the results in table 3, the distillates obtained
were not pure ethanol but ethanol-water mixtures; thus the modification to Amounts of
Distillates Obtained. Further research is recommended to determine a clear connection
between the amounts of distillate obtained and the results suggesting the ethanol
concentrations of the mixtures from the other testing of parameters, in light of the fact
that there is a considerable difference between the results of Carica Papaya and Musa
Acuminata for the parameter governing table 2.
(7) The combustion tests of all trials were conducted a month, at the least, after the
distillation of the mixtures, which were in conical flasks covered with plastic over that
period. Ethanol is a highly volatile liquid– it has a lower boiling point than water–– and
can evaporate quickly, even at room temperature or when not tightly sealed
 23

(SophieTORGUE, 2021). In this case, the water could have been left behind in the flasks
as the ethanol evaporated over that period, causing an absence of combustion of the
cottons soaked in the ethanol-water mixtures. Thus, an immediate performance of the
combustion test after distillation and analysis is recommended.
(8) As only two trials were conducted for this experiment, the researchers recommend
conducting more trials to obtain further results that will account for more detailed data.
For instance, for each fruit, there is a considerable difference between trial 1 and 2 in
terms of the boiling points and amounts of distillates obtained. More trials might be able
to unveil the cause of this difference; and will, all in all, result in further preciseness.

References

Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions | US EPA. (2023, April 13). US EPA.

https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Ethanol Fuel Basics. (2015).

https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/ethanol_fuel_basics.html

Carvalho, M., Da Silva Segundo, V. B., De Medeiros, M. G., Santos, N. a. D., & Coelho, L. M.,

Junior. (2019). Carbon footprint of the generation of bioelectricity from sugarcane

bagasse in a sugar and ethanol industry. International Journal of Global Warming, 17(3),

235. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijgw.2019.098495

Guerrero, A., & Munoz, E. (2017). Life cycle assessment of second generation ethanol derived

from banana agricultural waste: Environmental impacts and energy balance. Journal of

Cleaner Production, 174, 710–717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.10.298

Flores, K., Neil, S., Nguyen, J. J., Capper, K., & Felder, M. (2018). Sugar rush: How

fermentation rate increases with glucose concentration. Journal of Undergraduate

Biology Laboratory Investigations, 1(1). https://doi.org/8522

 24

Mopera, L. E. (2016). Food loss in the food value chain: The Philippine agriculture scenario.

Journal of Developments in Sustainable Agriculture, 11(1), 8–16.

https://doi.org/10.11178/jdsa.11.8

Libretexts. (2016, April 12). 28: Starch hydrolysis. Libretexts.

https://bio.libretexts.org/Learning_Objects/Laboratory_Experiments/Microbiology_Labs/

Microbiology_Labs_I/28%3A_Starch_Hydrolysis

Kubala, J. (2018, February 17). Proteolytic enzymes: How they work, benefits and sources.

Healthline Media. https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/proteolytic-enzymes

Guillaume, A., Thorigné, A., Carré, Y., Vinh, J., & Levavasseur, L. (2019). Contribution of

proteases and cellulases produced by solid-state fermentation to the improvement of corn

ethanol production. Bioresources and Bioprocessing, 6(1).

https://doi.org/10.1186/s40643-019-0241-0

Gumisiriza, Hawumba, Okure, & Hensel. (2017). Biomass waste-to-energy valorisation

technologies: A review case for banana processing in Uganda. Biotechnology for

Biofuels, 10(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13068-016-0689-5

Fabi, J. P., & Prado, S. B. R. do. (2019). Fast and Furious: Ethylene-Triggered changes in the

metabolism of papaya fruit during ripening. Frontiers in Plant Science, 10.

https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2019.00535

Elayabalan, S. (2017). An Overview on Phytochemical Composition of Banana (Musa spp.).

Indian Journal of Natural Sciences .

Aung, A. A., Than, S. S., & KyawHla, P. (2016, January 1). MERAL portal. Meral.Edu.Mm.

https://meral.edu.mm/records/7729
 25

Uchôa, P. Z., Porto, R. C. T., Battisti, R., Marangoni, C., Sellin, N., & Souza, O. (2021). Ethanol

from residual biomass of banana harvest and commercialization: A three-waste

simultaneous fermentation approach and a logistic-economic assessment of the process

scaling-up towards a sustainable biorefinery in Brazil. Industrial Crops and Products,

174, 114170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2021.114170

de Souza, P. K., Souza, O., Sellin, N., & Marangoni, C. (2019). Evaluation of Second-Generation

Ethanol Production from Mixtures of Banana Pseudostem, Peel and Rejected Fruit Using

Aspen Hysys Simulation. Liebertpub.Com.

https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/full/10.1089/ind.2018.0040

Tanner, K. (2018). Experimental Research - An overview. ScienceDirect Topics.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/economics-econometrics-and-finance/experimental

-research

Steps to Safe and Healthy Fruits & Vegetables. (2023, January 31). Centers for Disease Control

and Prevention.

https://www.cdc.gov/foodsafety/communication/steps-healthy-fruits-veggies.html#:~:text

=Wash%20or%20scrub%20fruits%20and,produce%20wash%20is%20not%20recommen

ded.

Chitranshi, R., & Kapoor, R. (2021b). Utilization of over-ripened fruit (waste fruit) for the

eco-friendly production of ethanol. Vegetos, 34(1), 270–276.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s42535-020-00185-8

Jahid, M., Gupta, A., & Sharma, D. K. (2018). Production of bioethanol from fruit wastes

(banana, papaya, pineapple and mango peels) under milder conditions. Journal of

Bioprocessing & Biotechniques, 08(03). https://doi.org/10.4172/2155-9821.1000327

 26

Abdulla, R., & Derman, E. (2018). Fuel Ethanol Production from Papaya Waste using

Immobilized Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Sanrem, 11(2).

Mohd Azhar, S. H., Abdulla, R., Jambo, S. A., Marbawi, H., Gansau, J. A., Mohd Faik, A. A., &

Rodrigues, K. F. (2017). Yeasts in sustainable bioethanol production: A review.

Biochemistry and Biophysics Reports, 10, 52–61.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbrep.2017.03.003

Brenner, L. (2018, March 11). Why is distilled water a good control for science projects?

Sciencing. https://sciencing.com/distilled-good-control-science-projects-7418493.html

Britannica, T. Editors of Encyclopaedia (2022, August 22). distillation. Encyclopedia Britannica.

https://www.britannica.com/science/distillation

Naveen, S., Gopinath, K. P., Malolan, R., Ramesh, S. J., Aakriti, K., & Arun, J. (2020). Novel

Solar Parabolic Trough Collector cum Reactor for the Production of Biodiesel from

Waste Cooking Oil using Calcium Oxide catalyst derived from seashells waste. Chemical

Engineering and Processing - Process Intensification, 157, 108145.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cep.2020.108145

Chorbngam, N., & Anantpinijwatna, A. (2021). Normal Boiling Point - An overview.

ScienceDirect Topics.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/normal-boiling-point

Asad, U., Kumar, R., Zheng, M., & Tjong, J. (2015). Ethanol-fueled low temperature

combustion: A pathway to clean and efficient diesel engine cycles. Applied Energy, 157,

838–850. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.01.057

Vea, A., Barriga, J., Henson, V., Hizon, K., Sason, L., & Sunga, D. (2020). Ethanol Produced

from Annona muricata and Muntingia calabura. Ethanol Produced from Annona
 27

Muricata and Muntingia Calabura.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/18KhUjRN9jz5spwISNmLMUcPJ31qgCEh2/view

Britannica, T. Editors of Encyclopaedia (2022, August 15). density. Encyclopedia Britannica.

https://www.britannica.com/science/density

Naveen, S., Gopinath, K. P., Malolan, R., Ramesh, S. J., Aakriti, K., & Arun, J. (2020). Novel

Solar Parabolic Trough Collector cum Reactor for the Production of Biodiesel from

Waste Cooking Oil using Calcium Oxide catalyst derived from seashells waste. Chemical

Engineering and Processing - Process Intensification, 157, 108145.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cep.2020.108145

Puaud, M., Ossowska, Z., Barnard, J., & Milton, A. (2018, January 5). Research Data supporting

“Saccharin fading is not required for the acquisition of alcohol self-administration, and

can alter the dynamics of cue-alcohol memory reconsolidation.”

https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/270341

The Disadvantages of Simple Distillation. (2019, March 2). Sciencing.

https://sciencing.com/disadvantages-simple-distillation-8490343.html

Ethanol Boiling Point Diagram. (2015). Umpqua Community College.

Vedantu. (2023). Boiling Point. VEDANTU. https://www.vedantu.com/chemistry/boiling-point

Water-Ethanol Mixture. (2015).

https://www2.dawsoncollege.qc.ca/dbaril/Tools/Water-Ethanol.htm

Water Density | U.S. Geological Survey. (2019, October 22).

https://www.usgs.gov/special-topics/water-science-school/science/water-density
 28

SophieTORGUE. (2021b, August 19). Evaporation of alcoholic solutions. What residues are left

on equipment? A3P - Pharmaceutical & Biotechnology Industry.

https://www.a3p.org/en/evaporation-alcool-residus/
29