Bioprocess and Biosystems Engineering

, Volume 30, Issue 3, pp 189–196 | Cite as

Bioconversion of municipal solid waste to glucose for bio-ethanol production

  • Aiduan Li
  • Blanca Antizar-LadislaoEmail author
  • Majeda Khraisheh
Original Paper


Selected biodegradable municipal solid waste fractions were subjected to fifteen different pre-hydrolysis treatments to obtain the highest glucose yield for bio-ethanol production. Pre-hydrolysis treatments consisted of dilute acid (H2SO4, HNO3 or HCl, 1 and 4%, 180 min, 60°C), steam treatment (121 and 134°C, 15 min), microwave treatment (700 W, 2 min) or a combination of two of them. Enzymatic hydrolysis was carried out with Trichoderma reesei and Trichoderma viride (10 and 60 FPU g−1 substrate). Glucose yields were compared using a factorial experimental design. The highest glucose yield (72.80%) was obtained with a pre-hydrolysis treatment consisting of H2SO4 at 1% concentration, followed by steam treatment at 121°C, and enzymatic hydrolysis with Trichoderma viride at 60 FPU g−1 substrate. The contribution of enzyme loading and acid concentration was significantly higher (49.39 and 47.70%, respectively), than the contribution of temperature during steam treatment (0.13%) to the glucose yield.


Bioethanol Glucose Lignocellulose Municipal solid waste 



This research was undertaken at the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Laboratory of Environmental Engineering, Chadwick Building, University College London, UK, AL acknowledges the financial support provided by the Dorothy Hodgkin Postgraduate Award, and the technical support received at Wolfson Institute and Department of Biochemical Engineering at the University College London.


  1. 1.
    EC (2003) Directive 2003/30/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 May 2003 on the promotion of the use of biofuels or other renewable fuels for transport. Official J Eur Union L 123:42–46Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wingren A, Galbe M, Zacchi G (2003) Techno-economic evaluation of producing ethanol from softwood: comparison of SSF and SHF and identification of bottlenecks. Biotechnol Prog 19:1109–1117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Anselmo P, Badr O (2004) Biomass resources for energy in North-eastern Brazil. Appl Energy 77:51–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mtui G, Nakamura Y (2005) Bioconversion of lignocellulosic waste from selected dumping sites in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Biodegradation 16:493–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Defra (2006) Municipal Waste Management. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
  6. 6.
    Defra (2006) Impact of energy from waste and recycling policy on UK greenhouse gas emissions. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
  7. 7.
    McMillan JD (1994) Conversion of hemicellulose hydrolyzates to ethanol. In: (eds) Enzymatic conversion of biomass for fuels production, pp 411–437Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sun Y, Cheng JY (2002) Hydrolysis of lignocellulosic materials for ethanol production: a review. Bioresour Technol 83:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mosier N, Wyman C, Dale B, Elander R, Lee YY, Holtzapple M, Ladisch M (2005) Features of promising technologies for pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass. Bioresour Technol 96:673–686CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zhu S, Wu ZY, Wang C, Yu F, Jin S, Ding Y, Chi R, Liao J, Zhang Y (2006) Comparison of three microwave/chemical pretreatment processes for enzymatic hydrolysis of rice straw. Biosyst Eng 93:279–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Melander C, Adden R, Brinkmalm G, Gorton L, Mischnick P (2006) New approaches to the analysis of enzymatically hydrolyzed methyl cellulose. Part 2. Comparison of various enzyme preparations. Biomacromolecules 7:1410–1421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mandels M, Andreotti R, Roche C (1976) Measurement of saccharifying cellulose. Bioeng Symp 6:21–33Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Paquot M, Thonart P (1982) Enzymatical hydrolysis of regenerated cellulose. Holzforschung 36:177–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nguyen QA, Saddler JN (1991) An integrated model for the technical and economic-evaluation of an enzymatic biomass conversion process. Bioresour Technol 35:275–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    NREL (1994) Chemical Analysis and Testing Task Laboratory Analytical Procedure: Standard Method for Ash in Biomass. National Renewable Energy Laboratory.
  16. 16.
    Crampton EW, Maynard LA (1938) The relation of cellulose and lignin content to the nutritive value of animal feeds. J Nutr 15:383–395Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    NREL (1995) SSF Experimental protocols: Lignocellulosic Biomass Hydrolysis and Fermentation. National Renewable Energy Laboratory
  18. 18.
    Yañez R, Alonso JL, Parajó JC (2004) Production of hemicellulosic sugars and glucose from residual corrugated cardboard. Process Biochem 39:1543–1551CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Parajó JC, Alonso JL, Vázquez D (1993) On the behaviour of lignin and hemicelluloses during the acetosolv processing of wood. Biores Technol 46:233–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Esteghlalian AR, Hashimoto AG, Fenske JJ, Penner MH (1997) Modeling and optimization of the dilute-sulfuric-acid pretreatment of corn stover, poplar and switchgrass. Bioresour Technol 59:129–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Martin C, Galbe M, Nilvebrant NO, Jonsson LJ (2002) Comparison of the fermentability of enzymatic hydrolyzates of sugarcane bagasse pretreated by steam explosion using different impregnating agents. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 98:699–716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Li BW (1998) Comparison of microwave oven and convection oven for acid hydrolysis of dietary fiber polysaccharides. J AOAC Int 81:1277–1280Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Holtzapple MT, Lundeen JE, Sturgis R, Lewis JE, Dale BE (1992) Pretreatment of lignocellulosic municipal solid-waste by ammonia fiber explosion (Afex). Appl Biochem Biotechnol 34–5, 5–21Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kim S, Dale BE (2004) Global potential bioethanol production from wasted crops and crop residues. Biomass Bioenerg 26:361–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tengborg C, Galbe M, Zacchi G (2001) Influence of enzyme loading and physical parameters on the enzymatic hydrolysis of steam-pretreated softwood. Biotechnol Prog 17:110–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Voorhees JC, Ferrance JP, Landers JP (2006) Enhanced elution of sperm from cotton swabs via enzymatic digestion for rape kit analysis. J Forensic Sci 51:574–579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Clark TA, Mackie KL (1987) Steam explosion of the softwood Pinus-Radiata with sulfur-dioxide addition. 1. process optimization. J Wood Chem Technol 7:373–403Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Penner MH, Liaw ET (1994) Kinetic consequences of high ratios of substrate to enzyme saccharification systems based on trichoderma cellulase. In: (eds) Enzymatic conversion of biomass for fuels production, pp 363–371Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Huang XL, Penner MH (1991) Apparent substrate-inhibition of the Trichoderma-Reesei cellulase system. J Agric Food Chem 39:2096–2100CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Aiduan Li
    • 1
  • Blanca Antizar-Ladislao
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Majeda Khraisheh
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringUniversity College LondonLondonUK
  2. 2.Department of Water and Environmental Science and TechnologyUniversidad de CantabriaTorrelavega, CantabriaSpain

Personalised recommendations