Opuntia ficus-indica (OFI) is an emerging biomass that has the potential to be used as substrate in anaerobic digestion. The goal of this work was to investigate the effect of three pretreatment techniques (thermal, alkaline, acidic) on the chemical composition and the methane yield of OFI biomass. A composite experimental design with three factors and two to three levels was implemented, and regression modelling was employed using a total of 10 biochemical methane potential (BMP) tests. The measured methane yields ranged from 289 to 604 NmL/gVS; according to the results, only the acidic pretreatment (HCl) was found to significantly increase methane generation. However, as the experimental values were quite high with regards to the theoretical methane yield of the substrate, this effect still needs to be confirmed via further research. The alkaline pretreatment (NaOH) did not noticeably affect methane yields (an average reduction of 8% was recorded), despite the fact that it did significantly reduce the lignin content. Thermal pretreatment had no effect on the methane yields or the chemical composition. Scanning electron microscopy images revealed changes in the chemical structure after the addition of NaOH and HCl. Modelling of the cumulated methane production by the Gompertz modified equation was successful and aided in understanding kinetic advantages linked to some of the pretreatments. For example, the alkaline treatment (at the 20% dosage) at room temperature resulted to a μ (maximum specific methane production rate [NmLCH/(gVS·d)]) equal to 36.3 against 18.6 for the control.
This article studies the environmental impacts of cellulase production by using a comparative attributional life cycle assessment (LCA) of two different scenarios of production. The first one is the commonly used submerged fermentation (SmF) using a pure substrate (cellulose powder) and a specific microorganism (Trichoderma reesei). The second scenario considers a novel system to produce enzymes and simultaneously treat a waste using the solid-state fermentation (SSF) process of coffee husk (CH) used as substrate. Experimental data were used in this scenario. The complete production process was studied for these two technologies including the fermentation phase and the complete downstream of cellulase. Life cycle inventory (LCI) data were collected from the database EcoInvent v3 (SimaPro 8.5) modified by data from literature and pilot scale experiments. The environmental impacts of both production systems revealed that those of SmF were higher than those of SSF. A sensitivity analysis showed that the results are highly conditioned by the energy use in the form of electricity during lyophilization, which is needed in both technologies. The results point to a possible alternative to produce the cellulase enzyme while reducing environmental impacts.
One of the wastes associated with leather production in tannery industries is the hair residue generated during the dehairing process. Hair wastes are mainly dumped or managed through composting but recent studies propose the treatment of hair wastes through solid-state fermentation (SSF) to obtain proteases and compost. These enzymes are suitable for its use in an enzymatic dehairing process, as an alternative to the current chemical dehairing process. In the present work, two different scenarios for the valorization of the hair waste are proposed and assessed by means of life-cycle assessment: composting and SSF for protease production. Detailed data on hair waste composting and on SSF protease production are gathered from previous studies performed by our research group and from a literature survey. Background inventory data are mainly based on Ecoinvent version 3 from software SimaPro® 8. The main aim of this study was to identify which process results in the highest environmental impact. The SSF process was found to have lower environmental impacts than composting, due to the fact that the enzyme use in the dehairing process prevents the use of chemicals traditionally used in the dehairing process. This permits to reformulate an industrial process from the classical approach of waste management to a novel alternative based on circular economy.
The leather industry needs to switch from the traditional chemically based dehairing process to an environmentally friendly one so that the overall burdens to the environment are reduced. The primary goal of the work was thus to compare the chemical leather dehairing process to an enzymatically based one using the enzymes that are extracted after the application of solid state fermentation (SSF) on hair wastes generated after dehairing. The environmental burdens of the dehairing stage were determined using a life cycle assessment (LCA) approach by comparing the two aforementioned management scenarios. The first scenario was the commonly used technology in which hair is removed via a chemical process and then composted in open piles. This scenario included two subscenarios where hair waste is either incinerated or landfilled. In the second scenario, the proteolytic enzymes extracted during the SSF of the residual hair are used to dehair the new rawhides instead of chemicals. Industrial and laboratory data were combined with international databases using the SimaPro 8.0 LCA software to make comparisons. The environmental impacts associated with the enzymatic dehairing were significantly lower than the ones associated to the conventional chemical dehairing process. This difference is attributed to the impacts associated with the original production of the chemicals and to the electricity consumed in the conventional method. A sensitivity analysis revealed that the results are affected by the amounts of chemicals used during dehairing. Keywords:compost dehairing leather industry life cycle assessment (LCA) solid state fermentation solid waste management Supporting information is linked to this article on the JIE website
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.