Advances in Biofuel Production

Berni, Mauro Donizeti; Dorileo, Ivo Leandro; Prado, Juliana M.; Forster‐Carneiro, Tânia; Meireles, M. Angela A.

doi:10.1002/9781118835913.ch2

Cited by 19 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to REN21 (Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st Century), in 2016, fossil fuels corresponded to 79.5% of the total final energy consumption [1]. Biofuels appear as a potential renewable energy source in replacing fossil fuels, particularly given their much lower greenhouse gases emissions [2,3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethanol Production from Hydrolyzed Kraft Pulp by Mono- and Co-Cultures of Yeasts: The Challenge of C6 and C5 Sugars Consumption

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Second-generation bioethanol production's main bottleneck is the need for a costly and technically difficult pretreatment due to the recalcitrance of lignocellulosic biomass (LCB). Chemical pulping can be considered as a LCB pretreatment since it removes lignin and targets hemicelluloses to some extent. Chemical pulps could be used to produce ethanol. The present study aimed to investigate the batch ethanol production from unbleached Kraft pulp of Eucalyptus globulus by separate hydrolysis and fermentation (SHF). Enzymatic hydrolysis of the pulp resulted in a glucose yield of 96.1 ± 3.6% and a xylose yield of 94.0 ± 7.1%. In an Erlenmeyer flask, fermentation of the hydrolysate using Saccharomyces cerevisiae showed better results than Scheffersomyces stipitis. At both the Erlenmeyer flask and bioreactor scale, co-cultures of S. cerevisiae and S. stipitis did not show significant improvements in the fermentation performance. The best result was provided by S. cerevisiae alone in a bioreactor, which fermented the Kraft pulp hydrolysate with an ethanol yield of 0.433 g·g −1 and a volumetric ethanol productivity of 0.733 g·L −1 ·h −1 , and a maximum ethanol concentration of 19.24 g·L −1 was attained. Bioethanol production using the SHF of unbleached Kraft pulp of E. globulus provides a high yield and productivity.Energies 2020, 13, 744 2 of 15 sustainability, has a low and stable price, and practically does not demand extra land [6,7]. There are some facilities producing 2G bioethanol on a commercial scale. However, large-scale production still faces some technological barriers that must be overcome in order to achieve a cost-competitive production [8]. Due to the recalcitrance of LCB, a costly pretreatment step is required, which is the main technological bottleneck of 2G bioethanol production. The release of enzymatic and fermentation inhibitors during pretreatment is another limitation [9].Pulp and paper mills have the infrastructures and logistics to handle LCB, and chemical mills employ technology required for LCB fractionation and conversion [10]. Bioethanol has been produced from different feedstocks such as Kraft pulp, spent sulfite liquor, and pulp and paper sludge [11]. Chemical pulping processes can be considered as a LCB pretreatment since they promote delignification and target hemicelluloses to some degree [12]. Chemical pulping represents about 77% of the virgin pulps produced globally, and more than 95% of these chemical pulps are Kraft pulps [13]. These pulps are produced by Kraft pulping involving the reaction of white liquor, i.e., an alkaline aqueous solution of sodium hydroxide and sodium sulfide with a pH of 14, with lignin at high temperature (150-170 • C). This reaction promotes lignin breakdown and degradation with the release of phenolic fragments, removing almost 90% of the lignin from the wood. Kraft pulping also leads to hemicelluloses and some cellulose loss and decreases the degree of polymerization of cellulose [14]. The utilization of Kraft pulping as a pretreatment method for LCB has ...

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethanol Production from Hydrolyzed Kraft Pulp by Mono- and Co-Cultures of Yeasts: The Challenge of C6 and C5 Sugars Consumption

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition to its cost-effective production, sorghum is drought and heat tolerant and represents an alternative crop in the Brazilian semi-arid regions unsuitable for growing other important crops like rice, maize, wheat, barley and soybean (Berni, Dorileo, Prado, Forster-Carneiro, & Meireles, 2014;Menezes et al, 2014;Sharma, Kumari, & Sharma, 2015). Sorghum anthracnose has been reported in cultivation areas worldwide and represents the major yield-limiting factor for sorghum production in many countries (Mishra & Siradhama, 1979;Ali, Warren, & Latin, 1987;Neya & Kabore, 1987;Thomas, Sissoko, & Sacko, 1996;Powell, Ellis, Alameda, & Sotomayor, 1977;Guimarães, Casela, Santos, & Ferreira, 1998;Ngugi, King, Abayo, & Reddy, 2002;Costa, Casela, Zambolim, & Ferreira, 2003;Chala, Tronsmo, & Brurberg, 2011;Prom et al, 2011;Chala & Tronsmo, 2012;Costa, Cota, Rodrigues, Tardin, & Lanza, 2009;Costa et al, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantification of yield losses caused by leaf anthracnose on sorghum in Brazil

Cota

Souza

Lanza

et al. 2017

Journal of Phytopathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The leaf anthracnose disease in sorghum, caused by Colletotrichum sublineolum (Henn. ex Sacc. & Trotter), is widely distributed throughout its Brazilian cultivation areas. The disease can cause significant losses in grain yield and quality. This study aimed to quantify the effects of leaf anthracnose on grain yield of different sorghum genotypes. Two elite inbred lines of sorghum, BR009 (susceptible) and BR008 (moderately resistant), and the hybrids, BR304 and MR43 (susceptible), BRS310 and DKB599 (moderately resistant) and BRS308 and AG1060 (resistant), were planted in a complete randomized block design with three replicates. The disease severity (DS) was evaluated weekly, starting from the onset of the first foliar symptoms, and yield losses were estimated using linear regression analysis. Leaf anthracnose significantly reduced sorghum yields in the susceptible genotypes. The highest yield loss of 86% was observed in the inbred line BR009, when the disease severity reached 100%. For the hybrids, the grain yield loss varied from 35% (BRS310) to 72% (BRS308). According to the adjusted model, a grain yield reduction of 23.48 kg/ha for BR304, 14.57 kg/ha for BRS310 and 15.91 kg/ha for DKB599 was observed for every 1% increase in disease severity. We demonstrate for the first time the effect of leaf anthracnose disease on grain sorghum yields under Brazilian conditions. The results from this study provide a starting point for developing new strategies for the integrated disease management of sorghum anthracnose.

show abstract

“…Residues generated from biomass worldwide represent a great potential resource for energy achievement [3]. These residues can become a major renewable resource for the production of new chemicals, fuels and energy [4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Supercritical Water Gasification of Biomass for Hydrogen Production: Variable of the Process

Lachos‐Perez¹,

Prado²,

Torres-Mayanga³

et al. 2015

fph

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Waste biomass has various origins, such as agricultural crops, food waste, animal waste, municipal solid waste, and has the potential to be converted into energy and applied in biorefineries, thus contributing with lignocellulosic material. The emerging technology "Supercritical Water Gasification" has a great potential for recycling biomass for the production of synthesis gas with a higher percentage of hydrogen. The supercritical water gasification (SCWG) does not require drying; thus, the problem of drying is largely avoided by the SCWG and can be used for biomass with high percentage of humidity. The conversion efficiency of the SCWG is generally higher when compared with conventional technologies. This paper reviews known and emerging key supercritical water properties that influence the SCWG of biomass (viscosity, density, dielectric constant and ionic product), the advantages of the SCWG with respect to conventional gasification, the economic viability of the process, and the kinetics of the biomass in the process, this review describes the factors that influence the process (temperature, pressure, residence time, concentration, effect of the catalyst, effect of the reactor geometry, reactor design, heating rate of the biomass particle and type of biomass). Finally, this article concludes that the technology "supercritical water gasification" has great potential for a cleaner biogas production, with a high percentage of hydrogen, by different types of biomass, thus reducing the pollution and CO 2 emissions.

show abstract

Advances in Biofuel Production

Cited by 19 publications

References 46 publications

Ethanol Production from Hydrolyzed Kraft Pulp by Mono- and Co-Cultures of Yeasts: The Challenge of C6 and C5 Sugars Consumption

Ethanol Production from Hydrolyzed Kraft Pulp by Mono- and Co-Cultures of Yeasts: The Challenge of C6 and C5 Sugars Consumption

Quantification of yield losses caused by leaf anthracnose on sorghum in Brazil

Supercritical Water Gasification of Biomass for Hydrogen Production: Variable of the Process

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About