Optimization of ethanol production from Garcinia kola (bitter kola) pulp agrowaste

Nzelibe, Humphrey Chukwuemeka; Okafoagu, Caritas U.

doi:10.5897/ajb2007.000-2314

Cited by 19 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This was carried out according to the method described by [4]. One hundred grams (100g) each of rice husks and groundnut shells were weighed into 2 litre capacity conical flasks.…”

Section: A Acid Hydrolysis Of Raw Materialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Utilization of Rice Husks and Groundnut Shells for Bioethanol Production

Rabah¹,

Oyeleke²,

Manga³

et al. 2014

IJESD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-In the study rice husks and groundnut shells were hydrolysed with 3, 4 and 5% concentrations of dilute hydrochloric acid and the reducing sugar concentration was determined using the dinitrosalicylic acid (DNS) colorimetric method. The concentration of the bioethanol produced was determined using the potassium dichromate method. The results revealed that there is no significance difference (p<0.05) in the yields of the reducing sugar obtained from the substrates at different treatment conditions (0.46mg/l from rice husks at 3%, 40oC for 30 minutes, 0.45mg/l from groundnut shells at 4%, 30oC for 25 minutes and 0.46mg/l from rice husks and groundnut shells at 5%, 30oC for 30 minutes). Similarly, the result revealed that both S. cerevisiae and Z. mobilis produced their highest bioethanol concentrations of 0.58% and 0.54% respectively from rice husks after 24 hours of fermentation while their combination produced its highest concentration (0.524%) after 72 hours. It is evidently clear that there despite the fact that there was no significance difference (p<0.05) in the yields of bioethanol produced by S. cerevisiae and Z. mobilis, S. cerevisiae proved to be a better choice in bioethanol production using these substrates that either Z. mobilis or their combination.

show abstract

“…This was carried out according to the method described by [4]. One hundred grams (100g) each of rice husks and groundnut shells were weighed into 2 litre capacity conical flasks.…”

Section: A Acid Hydrolysis Of Raw Materialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Utilization of Rice Husks and Groundnut Shells for Bioethanol Production

Rabah¹,

Oyeleke²,

Manga³

et al. 2014

IJESD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The volume of the distillate collected was determined using a measuring cylinder and expressed as quantity of ethanol produced in g/cm 3 by multiplying the volume of the distillate by the density of ethanol (0.8033 g/cm) (Humphrey and Okafoagu, 2007). Means ± standard errors were obtained and subjected to analysis of variance tests.…”

Section: Determination Of Quantity Of Ethanol Produced and Data Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Bioethanol production from cassava peels using different microbial inoculants

Chibuzor¹,

Uyoh²,

Igile³

2016

Afr. J. Biotechnol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The potential of bioethanol production using different microbial inoculants for the simultaneous saccharification and fermentation of cassava peels from three cassava cultivars was investigated. Peels obtained from three cassava cultivars namely TME 0505, TME 419 and TME 4779, were washed, dried in a laboratory air oven dryer at 120°C for 3 h, ground into a fine texture and sieved with 1.5 µ nylon sieve. The sieved material was cultured using the following inoculant combinations: A = Rhizopus nigricans + Saccharomyces cerevisiae; B = Aspergillus niger + Saccharomyces cerevisiae; C = Rhizopus nigricans + Aspergillus niger + Saccharomyces cerevisiae; D = Rhizopus nigricans + Spirogyra africana + Saccharomyces cerevisae; E = Aspergillus niger + Spirogyra africana + Saccharomyces cerevisiae. These combinations have not been tested before on cassava peels. The control was inoculated with S. cerevisiae only. The cultures were distilled on the 21 st day and the quantity of ethanol produced in each treatment group recorded. Results obtained showed significant differences (P<0.05) in the amount of ethanol produced and in its concentration among the five inoculants. Significant differences (P<0.05) were also obtained in ethanol yield from the three cassava varieties. Cassava peels from TME 4779 gave the highest ethanol yield of 14.46 ± 2.08 g/cm 3 using R. nigricans + S. africana+ S. cerevisiae. Similarly, cassava peels from TME 0505 gave the second highest ethanol yield of 13.33 ± 0.67 g/cm 3 using the same combination, namely R. nigricans + S. africana + S. cerevisiae. Low ethanol yields of 4.82 ± 1.00, 6.43 ± 0.58 and 7.77 ± 0.88 g/cm 3 were obtained from the cassava peels of TME 419, TME 0505 and TME 4779, respectively using S. cerevisiae alone. The yield reported in this study competes favorably with those reported from cassava peels, potato peels and millet husks using other inoculant treatments by other workers. Inoculants used in this study thus showed great potential for bioethanol production from cassava peels.

show abstract

“…g/l is equivalent to the yield of 100 g of dried substrate [66]. These ethanol yields were statistically analyzed, using ANOVA (Analysis of Variance) and compared.…”

Section: Determination Of Ethanol Yieldmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Studies of the Chemical Nature of Ethanol Product of Selected Wood Species

Afe¹

2016

Forest Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This thesis covers the process of making Ethanol from wood biomass instead of starchy biomass. The saw dust of Gmelina (Gmelina arborea), Eku (Brachystegia euricoma) and Mahogany (Entandrophragma cylindricum) was collected in a saw mill in Ore and used to produce ethanol by hydrolysis and fermentation processes. The density of each of the wood species was thereafter determined as 570 kg/m 3 , 750 kg/cm 3 and 600 kg/cm 3 respectively. The yield of ethanol from Eku, Mahogany and Gmelina wood was determined as 50.61 g/l per 100 g of dry sawdust, 55.43 g/l per 100 g of dry sawdust and 53.01 g/l per 100 g of dry sawdust respectively. The density of the ethanol produced from the wood of Eku, Mahogany and Gmelina was 0.8033 g/cm 3 , 0.7088 g/cm 3 , and 0.8033 g/cm 3 respectively. These results were subjected to Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and compared with conventional ethanol. The ANOVA result shows no significant difference among the ethanol yield and ethanol density obtained from the three wood species and that of the conventional ethanol. The ionic constituents of the ethanol of the three wood biomass was analyzed using Furrier Transform Infrared Spectrometric Analyzer (FTIR) and Atomic Absorption Spectrometric Analyzer (AAS). The AAS result shows that the ethanol obtained from the three wood species contains transition metals like Copper (Cu), Zinc (Zn), Cadmium (Cd) and Chromium (Cr) while the FTIR results show the presence of ethanol functional groups such as OH, Carbon to carbon single bond which are normal components of ethanol in the conventional ethanol as well as in the ethanol produced from each of the three wood species. moisture content, vessels and fibres properties [4]. Due to this diversity in characteristics, exploitation was selective and was limited to very strong and durable species like Melicia exelsa, Khaya ivorensis, Afzelia africana, Nauclea diderrichii [5,6] pointed out the need for more thorough investigation of the basic structure of woody elements from the tropics in a bit to get rid of diminishing traditional wood raw material resources. Physical properties of woodGenerally, the behaviour of wood is influenced by its physical properties. According to Panshin and Dezeeuw [7], the physical properties of wood are expressed in terms of cell wall substances that are present in given volume of wood, the amount of water present in the cell wall. It also includes the quantity of extraneous substances present, the arrangement and orientation of wall materials in the cell wall and the kind, size proportion and arrangement of the cell making up the wood (Xylem) tissue. Wood densityDensity is defined as the amount of wood substance per unit volume [7,8]. Dinwoodie [9] reported that the density of wood is a function of the cell wall thickness and also depends on the level of cell wall development. Chafe [10] reported that high cellulose content in wood is an indication of high density. Density varies greatly depending on the anatomical structure of wood.Variation in density occurs within as w...

show abstract

Optimization of ethanol production from Garcinia kola (bitter kola) pulp agrowaste

Cited by 19 publications

References 14 publications

Utilization of Rice Husks and Groundnut Shells for Bioethanol Production

Utilization of Rice Husks and Groundnut Shells for Bioethanol Production

Bioethanol production from cassava peels using different microbial inoculants

Comparative Studies of the Chemical Nature of Ethanol Product of Selected Wood Species

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About