High productivity ethanol fermentations with crossflow membrane separation techniques for continuous cell recycling

Hoffmann, H. M. R.; Kuhlmann, W.; Meyer, H.‐D.; Schügerl, K.

doi:10.1016/s0376-7388(00)81283-1

Cited by 31 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The separation of microorganisms from fermentation broth is usually performed by centrifugation, but crossflow microfiltration is becoming more common, especially when it is used as cell separator in continuous fermentation or biological waste water treatment (Beaubien et al, 1996;Bouhabila et al, 1998;Hoffman et al, 1985, Iwasaki et al, 1991Sheehan et al, 1990). Both polymeric membranes and ceramic membranes are used.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Separation of lactic acid-producing bacteria from fermentation broth using a ceramic microfiltration membrane with constant permeate flow

Persson

Jönsson

Zacchi

2000

Biotechnol. Bioeng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The influence of several operating parameters on the critical flux in the separation of lactic acid‐producing bacteria from fermentation broth was studied using a ceramic microfiltration membrane equipped with a permeate pump. The operating parameters studied were crossflow velocity over the membrane, bacterial cell concentration, protein concentration, and pH. The influence of the isoelectric point (IEP) of the membrane was also investigated. In the interval studied (5.3–10.8 m/s), the crossflow velocity had a marked effect on the critical flux. When the crossflow velocity was increased the critical flux also increased. The bacterial cells were retained by the membrane and the concentration of bacterial cells did not affect the critical flux in the interval studied (1.1–3.1 g/L). The critical flux decreased when the protein concentration was increased. It was found that the protein was adsorbed on the membrane surface and protein retention occurred even though the conditions were such that no filter cake was present on the membrane surface. When the pH of the medium was lowered from 6 to 5 (and then further to 4) the critical flux decreased from 76 L/m2h to zero at both pH 5 and pH 4. This was found to be due to the fact that the lowering in pH had affected the physiology of the bacterial cells so that the bacteria tended to adhere to the membrane and to each other. The critical flux, for wheat flour hydrolysate without particles, was much lower (28 L/m2h) when using a membrane with an IEP of 5.5 than the critical flux of a membrane with an IEP at pH 7 (96 L/m2h). This was found to be due to an increased affinity of the bacteria for the membrane with the lower IEP. © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Biotechnol Bioeng 72: 269–277, 2001.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Separation of lactic acid-producing bacteria from fermentation broth using a ceramic microfiltration membrane with constant permeate flow

Persson

Jönsson

Zacchi

2000

Biotechnol. Bioeng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The compositions in terms of cellulose, hemicellulose, and lignin in those lignocellulosic feedstock were represented by Menon and Rao (2012) and Van Dyk and Pletschke (2012). The substrates that are mainly used for membrane technology-based bioethanol production are mainly pure and expensive carbohydrate sources such as glucose, fructose, sucrose, and lactose (Cheryan and Mehaia 1983, Hoffmann et al 1985, Melzoch et al 1991, Ding et al 2012, industrial waste (whey and molasses), and sludge-based materials (Mehaia and Cheryan 1990, Tin and Mawson 1993, Kaseno and Kokugan 1997, Lee and Yeom 2007. Time-consuming and expensive pretreatment processes are the main prerequisites to avoid membrane fouling while working with waste materials.…”

Section: Lignocellulosic Substrates For Membrane Technologybased Bioementioning

confidence: 99%

“…For that, the judicious selection, combination, and integration among microfiltration (MF), ultrafiltration (UF), and nanofiltration (NF) processes have been formulated by different researchers to make the overall process continuous, compact, and successful. The most widely used carbon sources for membrane reactor-based bioethanol production process have been pure and expensive carbohydrate sources such as glucose, fructose, sucrose, and lactose (Cheryan and Mehaia 1983, Hoffmann et al 1985, Melzoch et al 1991, Ding et al 2012 and industrial wastes such as whey, molasses, and sludge-based materials (Mehaia and Cheryan 1990, Tin and Mawson 1993, Kaseno and Kokugan 1997, Lee and Yeom 2007. Such waste substrates demanded time and expensive pretreatment strategies to avoid membrane fouling.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lignocellulosic bioethanol production: prospects of emerging membrane technologies to improve the process – a critical review

Dey

Pal

Kevin

et al. 2018

Reviews in Chemical Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AbstractTo meet the worldwide rapid growth of industrialization and population, the demand for the production of bioethanol as an alternative green biofuel is gaining significant prominence. The bioethanol production process is still considered one of the largest energy-consuming processes and is challenging due to the limited effectiveness of conventional pretreatment processes, saccharification processes, and extreme use of electricity in common fermentation and purification processes. Thus, it became necessary to improve the bioethanol production process through reduced energy requirements. Membrane-based separation technologies have already gained attention due to their reduced energy requirements, investment in lower labor costs, lower space requirements, and wide flexibility in operations. For the selective conversion of biomasses to bioethanol, membrane bioreactors are specifically well suited. Advanced membrane-integrated processes can effectively contribute to different stages of bioethanol production processes, including enzymatic saccharification, concentrating feed solutions for fermentation, improving pretreatment processes, and finally purification processes. Advanced membrane-integrated simultaneous saccharification, filtration, and fermentation strategies consisting of ultrafiltration-based enzyme recycle system with nanofiltration-based high-density cell recycle fermentation system or the combination of high-density cell recycle fermentation system with membrane pervaporation or distillation can definitely contribute to the development of the most efficient and economically sustainable second-generation bioethanol production process.

show abstract

“…Cell recycle by settling [26][27][28] requires a flocculent yeast strain, while dilution rate is limited by the settling velocity of the flocculent yeast. In the membrane cell recycle system, reactor operation is possible with a cell concentration above 100 g/L [29][30][31]. The increase in cell mass per unit volume of the fermentor means higher fermentor productivity provided that the specific productivity is independent of cell mass.…”

Section: Multi-stage Continuous (Msc)-hcdcmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multi-stage high cell continuous fermentation for high productivity and titer

Chang

Kim

Kang

et al. 2010

Bioprocess Biosyst Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We carried out the first simulation on multi-stage continuous high cell density culture (MSC-HCDC) to show that the MSC-HCDC can achieve batch/fed-batch product titer with much higher productivity to the fed-batch productivity using published fermentation kinetics of lactic acid, penicillin and ethanol. The system under consideration consists of n-serially connected continuous stirred-tank reactors (CSTRs) with either hollow fiber cell recycling or cell immobilization for high cell-density culture. In each CSTR substrate supply and product removal are possible. Penicillin production is severely limited by glucose metabolite repression that requires multi-CSTR glucose feeding. An 8-stage C-HCDC lactic acid fermentation resulted in 212.9 g/L of titer and 10.6 g/L/h of productivity, corresponding to 101 and 429% of the comparable lactic acid fed-batch, respectively. The penicillin production model predicted 149% (0.085 g/L/h) of productivity in 8-stage C-HCDC with 40 g/L of cell density and 289% of productivity (0.165 g/L/h) in 7-stage C-HCDC with 60 g/L of cell density compared with referring batch cultivations. A 2-stage C-HCDC ethanol experimental run showed 107% titer and 257% productivity of the batch system having 88.8 g/L of titer and 3.7 g/L/h of productivity. MSC-HCDC can give much higher productivity than batch/fed-batch system, and yield a several percentage higher titer as well. The productivity ratio of MSC-HCDC over batch/fed-batch system is given as a multiplication of system dilution rate of MSC-HCDC and cycle time of batch/fed-batch system. We suggest MSC-HCDC as a new production platform for various fermentation products including monoclonal antibody.

show abstract

High productivity ethanol fermentations with crossflow membrane separation techniques for continuous cell recycling

Cited by 31 publications

References 2 publications

Separation of lactic acid-producing bacteria from fermentation broth using a ceramic microfiltration membrane with constant permeate flow

Separation of lactic acid-producing bacteria from fermentation broth using a ceramic microfiltration membrane with constant permeate flow

Lignocellulosic bioethanol production: prospects of emerging membrane technologies to improve the process – a critical review

Multi-stage high cell continuous fermentation for high productivity and titer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About