Advertisement

Improved Cellulosic Ethanol Titres from Highly Lignified Cotton Trash Residues Using Various Batch and Fed-Batch Process Configurations

  • S. McIntosh
  • J. Palmer
  • M. Egbuta
  • L. Liu
  • Tony VancovEmail author
Article
  • 92 Downloads

Abstract

This study investigates a fed-batch simultaneous saccharification fermentation (F-SSF) process to increase ethanol titres from highly lignified (41.6 wt.%) cotton gin trash residue. The optimal initial solid loading, enzyme dose, feed quantities and intervals to maximize substrate feed and subsequent ethanol titres were examined. Under batch SSF conditions, initial extracted cotton gin trash (ECGT) solid loadings were maximised at 19.35 wt.% and attained an ethanol titre of 23.3 g/l with a corresponding yield of 53.7%. Operating under optimised F-SSF mode, fermentations were initiated with 16.13 wt% EGCT solids followed by fresh ECGT feeds of 16.13 wt% and 12.9 wt.% at 12-h intervals. Cellulase levels were maintained at 44 FPU/g glucan throughout the fermentations. The final ethanol titre of 41 .4 g/l with a corresponding conversion rate of 70.1% was achieved after 72 h. Comparable ethanol yields of 40 g/l with 67.8% conversion were realized with lower cellulase dosing (25 FPU g/glucan) but only after extending the fermentation by 24 h.

Keywords

Cotton gin trash Fed-batch SSF High solid loading Saccharomyces cerevisiae strain Fali® 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Financial support was provided by Cotton Research Development Corporation (CRDC) for this work and NSW Department of Primary Industries (NSW DPI) and Southern Cross University (SCU).

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

12155_2019_10023_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (8 kb)
Figure S1 Correlation between final (96 h of hydrolysis) glucose concentration, glucan digestion and substrate load. (PDF 7 kb)
12155_2019_10023_MOESM2_ESM.pdf (8 kb)
Figure S2 Correlation between final (96 h SSF) ethanol titre, ethanol yield and substrate load. (PDF 8 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Guo MX, Song WP (2019) The growing US bioeconomy: drivers, development and constraints. New Biotechnol 49:48–57Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hudiburg TW, Wang W, Khanna M, Long SP, Dwivedi P, Parton WJ, Hartman M, DeLucia EH (2016) Impacts of a 32-billion-gallon bioenergy landscape on land and fossil fuel use in the US. Nat Energy 1:15005Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Alvira P, Tomás-Pejó E, Ballesteros M, Negro MJ (2010) Pretreatment technologies for an efficient bioethanol production process based on enzymatic hydrolysis: a review. Bioresour Technol 101(13):4851–4861Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wyman CE (2007) What is (and is not) vital to advancing cellulosic ethanol. Trends Biotechnol 25(4):153–157PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Paulova L, Patakova P, Branska B, Rychtera M, Melzoch K (2015) Lignocellulosic ethanol: technology design and its impact on process efficiency. Biotechnol Adv 33(6, Part 2):1091–1107PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    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(4):1109–1117PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Larsen J, Petersen MO, Thirup L, Li HW, Iversen FK (2008) The IBUS process - lignocellulosic bioethanol close to a commercial reality. Chem Eng Technol 31:765–772Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fan Z, South C, Lyford K, Munsie J, van Walsum P, Lynd LR (2003) Conversion of paper sludge to ethanol in a semicontinuous solids-fed reactor. Bioprocess Biosyst Eng 26(2):93–101PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    De Bari I, Viola E, Barisano D, Cardinale M, Nanna F, Zimbardi F, Cardinale G, Braccio G (2002) Ethanol production at flask and pilot scale from concentrated slurries of steam-exploded Aspen. Ind Eng Chem Res 41(7):1745–1753Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Liu Z-H, Qin L, Zhu J-Q, Li B-Z, Yuan Y-J (2014) Simultaneous saccharification and fermentation of steam-exploded corn stover at high glucan loading and high temperature. Biotechnol Biofuels 7(1):1–16Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Modenbach AA, Nokes SE (2013) Enzymatic hydrolysis of biomass at high-solids loadings – a review. Biomass Bioenergy 56:526–544Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kristensen J, Felby C, Jørgensen H (2009) Yield-determining factors in high-solids enzymatic hydrolysis of lignocellulose. Biotechnol Biofuels 2(1):1–10Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Koppram R, Tomás-Pejó E, Xiros C, Olsson L (2014) Lignocellulosic ethanol production at high-gravity: challenges and perspectives. Trends Biotechnol 32(1):46–53PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jørgensen H, Pinelo M (2017) Enzyme recycling in lignocellulosic biorefineries. Biofuels Bioprod Biorefin 11(1):150–167Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Maeda RN, Barcelos CA, Anna LMMS, Pereira N (2013) Cellulase production by Penicillium funiculosum and its application in the hydrolysis of sugar cane bagasse for second generation ethanol production by fed batch operation. J Biotechnol 163(1):38–44PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cheng N, Koda K, Tamai Y, Yamamoto Y, Takasuka TE, Uraki Y (2017) Optimization of simultaneous saccharification and fermentation conditions with amphipathic lignin derivatives for concentrated bioethanol production. Bioresour Technol 232:126–132PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhang T, Zhu M-J (2017) Enhanced bioethanol production by fed-batch simultaneous saccharification and co-fermentation at high solid loading of Fenton reaction and sodium hydroxide sequentially pretreated sugarcane bagasse. Bioresour Technol 229:204–210PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Raj K (2019) Improved high solid loading enzymatic hydrolysis of low-temperature aqueous ammonia soaked sugarcane bagasse using laccase-mediator system and high concentration ethanol production. Ind Crop Prod 131:32-40-2019 v.2131Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gao Y, Xu J, Yuan Z, Jiang J, Zhang Z, Li C (2018) Ethanol production from sugarcane bagasse by fed-batch simultaneous saccharification and fermentation at high solids loading. Energy Sci Eng 6(6):810–818Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Vancov T, Palmer J, Keen B (2018) A two stage pretreatment process to maximise recovery of sugars from cotton gin trash. Bioresour Technol Rep 4:114–122Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    McIntosh S, Palmer J, Egbuta M, Liu L, Vancov T (2019) Refining spent cotton gin trash following essential oil extraction for value added cellulosic sugars. Bioresour Technol Rep 7 (in Press)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chum H, Johnson D, Black S, Overend R (1990) Pretreatment-catalyst effects and the combined severity parameter. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 24-25(1):1–14Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sluiter A, Hames B, Ruiz R, Scarlata C, Sluiter J, Templeton D, Crocker D (2012) Determination of structural carbohydrates and lignin in biomass. NREL Laboratory Analytical Proceedure; NREL/TP-510-42618. Version 08-03-2012. Natl Renew Energy LabGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Chang VS, Holtzapple MT (2000) Fundamental factors affecting biomass enzymatic reactivity. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 84–86Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    dos Santos AC, Ximenes E, Kim Y, Ladisch MR (2019) Lignin–enzyme interactions in the hydrolysis of lignocellulosic biomass. Trends Biotechnol 37(5):518–531PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Weiss ND, Felby C, Thygesen LG (2019) Enzymatic hydrolysis is limited by biomass-water interactions at high-solids: improved performance through substrate modifications. Biotechnol Biofuels 12:3PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Cara C, Ruiz E, Oliva JM, Sáez F, Castro E (2008) Conversion of olive tree biomass into fermentable sugars by dilute acid pretreatment and enzymatic saccharification. Bioresour Technol 99(6):1869–1876PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Du J, Cao Y, Liu G, Zhao J, Li X, Qu Y (2017) Identifying and overcoming the effect of mass transfer limitation on decreased yield in enzymatic hydrolysis of lignocellulose at high solid concentrations. Bioresour Technol 229:88–95PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Vásquez MP, da Silva JNC, de Souza MB, Pereira N (2007) Enzymatic hydrolysis optimization to ethanol production by simultaneous saccharification and fermentation. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 137(1):141–153PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Jorgensen H, Vibe-Pedersen J, Larsen J, Felby C (2007) Liquefaction of lignocellulose at high solids concentrations. Biotechnol Bioeng 96:862–870PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Romaní A, Garrote G, Parajó JC (2012) Bioethanol production from autohydrolyzed Eucalyptus globulus by simultaneous saccharification and fermentation operating at high solids loading. Fuel 94:305–312Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Varga E, Klinke HB, Réczey K, Thomsen AB (2004) High solid simultaneous saccharification and fermentation of wet oxidized corn stover to ethanol. Biotechnol Bioeng 88(5):567–574PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Vancov T, Palmer J, Keen B (2019) Two-stage pretreatment process validation for production of ethanol from cotton gin trash. BioEnergy Research (in Press)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    McIntosh S, Vancov T, Palmer J, Morris S (2014) Ethanol production from cotton gin trash using optimised dilute acid pretreatment and whole slurry fermentation processes. Bioresour Technol 173:42–51PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Jeoh T, Agblevor FA (2001) Characterization and fermentation of steam exploded cotton gin waste. Biomass Bioenergy 21(2):109–120Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Sahu S, Pramanik K (2018) Evaluation and optimization of organic acid pretreatment of cotton gin waste for enzymatic hydrolysis and bioethanol production. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 186:1047–1060.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12010-018-2790-7 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Fockink DH, Maceno MAC, Ramos LP (2015) Production of cellulosic ethanol from cotton processing residues after pretreatment with dilute sodium hydroxide and enzymatic hydrolysis. Bioresour Technol 187:91–96PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    McIntosh S, Palmer J, Zhang Z, Doherty WOS, Yazdani SS, Sukumaran RK, Vancov T (2017) Simultaneous saccharification and fermentation of pretreated Eucalyptus grandis under high solids loading. Ind Biotechnol 13(3):131–140Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Dimos K, Paschos T, Louloudi A, Kalogiannis K, Lappas A, Papayannakos N, Kekos D, Mamma D (2019) Effect of various pretreatment methods on bioethanol production from cotton stalks, vol 5Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Rudolf A, Alkasrawi M, Zacchi G, Liden G (2005) A comparison between batch and fed-batch simultaneous saccharification and fermentation of steam pretreated spruce. Enzym Microb Technol 37Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Sassner P, Galbe M, Zacchi G (2006) Bioethanol production based on simultaneous saccharification and fermentation of steam-pretreated Salix at high dry-matter content. Enzym Microb Technol 39Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Elliston A, Collins SRA, Wilson DR, Roberts IN, Waldron KW (2013) High concentrations of cellulosic ethanol achieved by fed batch semi simultaneous saccharification and fermentation of waste-paper. Bioresour Technol 134:117–126PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Humbird D, Davis R, Tao L, Kinchin C, Hsu D, Aden A (2011) Process design and economics for biochemical conversion of lignocellulosic biomass to ethanol dilute - acid pretreatment and enzymatic hydrolysis of corn stover. Technical Report NREL/TP-5100-47764: 1–147. National Renewable Energy Laboratory, DenverGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Robak K, Balcerek M (2018) Review of second generation bioethanol production from residual biomass. Food Technol Biotechnol 56(2):174–187PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Berlin A, Gilkes N, Kurabi A, Bura R, Tu M, Kilburn D, Saddler J (2005) Weak lignin-binding enzymes. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 121(1):163–170PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Tu M, Chandra RP, Saddler JN (2007) Evaluating the distribution of cellulases and the recycling of free cellulases during the hydrolysis of lignocellulosic substrates. Biotechnol Prog 23(2):398–406PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Sassner P, Galbe M, Zacchi G (2008) Techno-economic evaluation of bioethanol production from three different lignocellulosic materials. Biomass Bioenergy 32(5):422–430Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Wang Z, Lv Z, YAng X, Tian S (2013) Fed-batch mode optimization of SSF for cellulosic ethnaol production from steam-exploded corn stover. BioResources 8(4):5773–5782Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Bauer N, Long C, Karki B, Gibbons W (2014) Increasing ethanol titer and reducing enzyme dosage via fed-batch, simultaneous Saccharification and fermentation in a high solids bioreactor. J Biomass Biofuels 1:38–48Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Lee D, Yu AHC, Saddler JN (1995) Evaluation of cellulase recycling strategies for the hydrolysis of lignocellulosic substrates. Biotechnol Bioeng 45(4):328–336PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Qi B, Chen X, Su Y, Wan Y (2011) Enzyme adsorption and recycling during hydrolysis of wheat straw lignocellulose. Bioresour Technol 102(3):2881–2889PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Lu Y, Yang B, Gregg D, Saddler JN, Mansfield SD (2002) Cellulase adsorption and an evaluation of enzyme recycle during hydrolysis of steam-exploded softwood residues. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 98(1):641–654PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Borjesson J, Engqvist M, Sipos B, Tjerneld F (2007) Effect of poly(ethylene glycol) on enzymatic hydrolysis and adsorption of cellulase enzymes to pretreated lignocellulose. Enzym Microb Technol 41(1–2):186–195Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Eriksson T, Borjesson J, Tjerneld F (2002) Mechanism of surfactant effect in enzymatic hydrolysis of lignocellulose. Enzym Microb Technol 31:353–364Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Kristensen JB, Börjesson J, Bruun MH, Tjerneld F, Jorgensen H (2007) Use of surface active additives in enzymatic hydrolysis of wheat straw lignocellulose. Enzym Microb Technol 40(4):888–895Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Tu M, Zhang X, Paice M, MacFarlane P, Saddler JN (2009) The potential of enzyme recycling during the hydrolysis of a mixed softwood feedstock. Bioresour Technol 100(24):6407–6415PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Tu M, Chandra RP, Saddler JN (2007) Recycling cellulases during the hydrolysis of steam exploded and ethanol pretreated lodgepole pine. Biotechnol Prog 23(5):1130–1137PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Crown 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.NSW Department of Primary IndustriesWollongbar Primary Industries InstituteWollongbarAustralia
  2. 2.Southern Cross Plant ScienceSouthern Cross UniversityLismoreAustralia

Personalised recommendations