Ethanol, the ultimate feedstock

A technoeconomic evaluation of ethanol manufacture in fluidized bed bioreactors operating with immobilized cells
  • Robert M. Busche
  • Charles D. Scott
  • Brian H. Davison
  • Lee R. Lynd
Session 3 Bioprocessing Research

Abstract

Ethanol appears to be a key factor in the “biomass alternative” to fossil feedstocks for producing fuels and chemicals. If produced at a low enough price relative to crude oil, it and its derivates could account for 159 billion pounds, or 50%, of the US production of synthetic organic chemicals, presently valued at $113 billion. This use would consume 4.2 billion bushels, or about 54%, of the corn crop.

This study evaluated the potential savings in ethanol manufacture to be gained by applying advanced process engineering or genetic engineering of improved organisms, centering on the use of fluidized bed bioreactors operating at high cell densities with immobilized cells of either the Saccharomyces yeast or the bacterium: Zymomonas mobilis.

A new continuous plant could produce at about $1.82/gal based on Zymomonas or $1.97/gal based on the Saccharomyces yeast. The bacterium has a competitive edge as a result of its lower sensitivity to product inhibition.

There appears to be no inherent design limitation to effect the engineering improvements required for the advanced process. In a longer-term, more difficult research effort, it might be possible to reduce or eliminate product inhibition to reduce cost even further.

Index Entries

Ethanol technoeconomics fluidized bioreactor immobilized cells renewable biomass 

References

  1. 1.
    McNabb, J. E. (1986), World energy outlook through 2000, Conoco Inc., Wilmington, DE, Sept.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lynch, M. C. (1988), “Preparing for the next oil crisis”,Chem. Eng. Prog. 20. Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    McCartney, S. (1988), Surge in price of oil foreseen in next decade,News Journal, Wilmington, DE, B1O.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gupte, P. (1988), Price Surge Ahead,Forbes,55. Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Anon (1988), Oil futures prices jump,News Journal, Wilmington, DE, B6.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Layman, P. L. (1989), Middle East chemical industry eyes new products, markets,“C&E News, 20.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jasper, S. (1989), Oil service stocks are ready to soar,News Journal, Wilmington, DE, B1O.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Reisch, M. N. (1991), 50 top chemicals production resumed growth last year,C&E News,13. Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Busche, R. M. (1989),Appl. Biochem. & Biotech. 20/21, 655–674.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Buzanell, P. (1991), Sugar and sweetener situation and outlook,USDA ERS SSRV16N1. Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Busche, R. M. (1986), Ethanol industrial market volume and potential, Bio En-Gene-Er Associates, Inc., Wilmington, DE.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chem Mkt Reporter, March 24, 1989.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Margiloff, I. B. et al. (1981), Ethyl alcohol as a motor fuel, Alcohol Fuel Task Force, AIChE, New York.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Anon (1981), Second annual report on the use of alcohols in fuels, US Dept Energy, Office of Alcohol Fuels.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Katzen, R., Ackley, W. R:, Moon, G. D., Messick, J. R., Brush, B. F., and Kaupisch, K. F. (1978), Low energy distillation systems, Raphael Katzen Associates Int’, Inc, Cincinnati, OH.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Katzen, R. (1979), Grain motor fuel alcohol technical and economic assessment study, US Dept. Energy, HCP/J6639-01.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Moon, G. D., Messick, J. R., Easley, C. E., and Katzen, R. (1979), Grain alcohol motor fuel: Technology & economics, Automotive Technology Devt. Contracters Coordination meeting, Dept. of Energy, Dearborn, MI.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chem Mkt Reporter, April 8, 1991.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Davison, B. H. (1988), Oak Ridge National Laboratory, private communication.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kenyon, C. P., Prior, B. A., and van Vuurei H. J. J. (1986),Enzyme Microb. Technol. 8, 461–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mills, A. K. (1967),Aspects of Yeast Metabolism, F. A. Davis Co., Philadelphia, PA, pp. 62–64.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rose, A. H. (1978),Economic Microbiology, vol. 1:Alcoholic Beverages, pp 25–26; Vol. 2Primary Products of Metabolism, pp 415–418, Academic, New York.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Prescott, S. C. and Dunn, C. G. (1959),Industrial Microbiology, 3rd ed., McGraw Hill, New York, pp. 128–147.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Schwandt, W. R. (1988), Impurities in fermentation ethanol, A. E. Staley Mfg. Co., private communication.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Montenecourt, B. S. (1985),Biology of Industrial Microorganisms, A. L. Dumain and N. Solomon, eds., Ben Cummings, pp. 261–289.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Swings, J. and Deley, J. (1977),Bacterial Rev. 41, 1–46.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lewis, S. M. and Grimes, W. M. (1988), Economic time series analysis of the alcohol industry, Enzyme Technology Corp., Ashland, OH.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Cysewski, G. R. and Wilke, C. R. (1977),Biotech. & Bioeng. 19, 1125–1143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ghose, T. K. and Tyagi, H. D. (1979),Biotech. & Bioeng. 21, 1381–1400.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Del Rosario, E. et al. (1979),Biotech. & Bioeng. 21, 1477–1482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Cysewski, G. R. and Wilke, C. R. (1976),Biotech. & Bioeng. 18, 1297–1313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Bazua, C. and Wilke, C. R. (1976), Effect of alcohol concentration on kinetics of ethanol production bySaccharomyces cerevisiae, 1st Chemical Conference of North American Continent, Mexico City, Dec. 1–5.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ghose, T. K. and Tyagi, H. D. (1979),Biotech. & Bioeng. 21, 1402–1420.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Aiba, S., Shoda, M., and Nagatoni, M. (1968),Biotech. &Bioeng. 10, 846–864.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Lee, K. J. and Rogers, P. I. (1983),Chem. Eng J. 27, B31-B38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Rogers, P. I., Lee, K. J, Skotnicki, M. C, and Tribe, D. E. (1982),Adv. Biochem. Eng. 23, 37–84.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Bajpai, P. K. and Margaritis, A. (1987),J. Ferment. Tech. 65, #2, 233–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Jobses, I. M. L. and Roels, J. A. (1986),Biotech. & Bioeng. 28, 534–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Rogers, P. I., Lee, K. J., Skotnicki, M. L., and Tribe, D. E. (1982),Adv. Biochem. eng. 23, 37–84.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Rogers, P. I., Lee, K. J., and Tribe, D. E. (1980), High productivity ethanol fermentations withZymomonas mobilis, Process Biochem, U. New South Wales, Sidney, Australia.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Rogers, P. I., Lee, K. J., Skotnicki, M. L., and Tribe, D. E. (1981),Advances in Biotechnology, vol. 2, Young, M. M. and Robinson, C. W., eds., Permagon, pp. 189–194.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    McGhee, J. E., St. Julian, G., Detroy, R. W., and Bothast, R. J. (1982),Biotech. & Bioeng. 24, 1155–1163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Kosaric, N., Ong, S. C, and Duvnjak, Z. (1982),Biotech. & Bioeng. 24, 691–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Skotnicki, M. L., Tribe, D. E., and Rogers, P. I. (1980),Appl. & Environ. Microbiol. 40, 7–11.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Lee, K. J., Pagan, R. J., and Rogers, P. I. (1983),Biotech. & Bioeng. 25, 659–669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Tyagi, R. D. and Ghose, T. K. (1980),Biotech. & Bioeng. 22, 1907–1928.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Maiorella, B. L., Blanch, H. W., and Wilke, C. R. (1984),Biotech. & Bioeng. 26, 1003–1025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Davison, B. H. and Scott, C. D. (1986),Biotech. & Bioeng. Symp. 17, 629–632.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Davison, B. H. and Scott, C. D. (1988),Appl. Biochem. Biotech. 18, 19–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Scott, C. D. (1983),Biotech. Bioeng. Symp. 13, 237–298.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Torres, J. L., Grethlein, H. E., and Lynd, L. R. (1988), Computer simulation of the Dartmouth process for separation of dilute ethanol/water mixtures, Symp. Biotechnology for Fuels & Chemicals, Gatlinburg, TN.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Humana Press Inc. 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert M. Busche
    • 1
  • Charles D. Scott
    • 2
  • Brian H. Davison
    • 2
  • Lee R. Lynd
    • 3
  1. 1.Bio En-Gene-Er Associates, Inc.Wilmington
  2. 2.Oak Ridge National LaboratoryOak Ridge
  3. 3.Dartmouth CollegeHanover

Personalised recommendations