The influence of solid/liquid separation techniques on the sugar yield in two-step dilute acid hydrolysis of softwood followed by enzymatic hydrolysis

BackgroundTwo-step dilute acid hydrolysis of softwood, either as a stand-alone process or as pretreatment before enzymatic hydrolysis, is considered to result in higher sugar yields than one-step acid hydrolysis. However, this requires removal of the liquid between the two steps. In an industrial process, filtration and washing of the material between the two steps is difficult, as it should be performed at high pressure to reduce energy demand. Moreover, the application of pressure leads to more compact solids, which may affect subsequent processing steps. This study was carried out to investigate the influence of pressing the biomass, in combination with the effects of not washing the material, on the sugar yield obtained from two-step dilute acid hydrolysis, with and without subsequent enzymatic digestion of the solids.ResultsWashing the material between the two acid hydrolysis steps, followed by enzymatic digestion, resulted in recovery of 96% of the mannose and 81% of the glucose (% of the theoretical) in the liquid fraction, regardless of the choice of dewatering method (pressing or vacuum filtration). Not washing the solids between the two acid hydrolysis steps led to elevated acidity of the remaining solids during the second hydrolysis step, which resulted in lower yields of mannose, 85% and 74% of the theoretical, for the pressed and vacuum-filtered slurry, respectively, due to sugar degradation. However, this increase in acidity resulted in a higher glucose yield (94.2%) from pressed slurry than from filtered slurry (77.6%).ConclusionPressing the washed material between the two acid hydrolysis steps had no significant negative effect on the sugar yields of the second acid hydrolysis step or on enzymatic hydrolysis. Not washing the material resulted in a harsher second acid hydrolysis step, which caused greater degradation of the sugars during subsequent acid hydrolysis of the solids, particularly in case of the vacuum-filtered solids. However, pressing in combination with not washing the material between the two steps enhanced the sugar yield of the enzymatic digestion step. Hence, it is suggested that the unwashed slurry be pressed to as high a dry matter content as possible between the two acid hydrolysis stages in order to achieve high final sugar yields.

[1]  I. Cullis,et al.  Effect of initial moisture content and chip size on the bioconversion efficiency of softwood lignocellulosics , 2004, Biotechnology and bioengineering.

[2]  G. Zacchi,et al.  Comparison of S 02 and H 2 S 0 4 Impregnation of Softwood Prior to Steam Pretreatment on Ethanol Production , 2022 .

[3]  M. Galbe,et al.  Design and operation of a bench-scale process development unit for the production of ethanol from lignocellulosics , 1996 .

[4]  M. Galbe,et al.  Two-step steam pretreatment of softwood by dilute H2SO4 impregnation for ethanol production , 2003 .

[5]  Steam Pretreatment of Douglas-Fir Wood Chips , 2000 .

[6]  K. Kim,et al.  Effects of Pressing Lignocellulosic Biomass on Sugar Yield in Two‐Stage Dilute‐Acid Hydrolysis Process , 2002, Biotechnology progress.

[7]  Melvin P. Tucker,et al.  Dilute acid pretreatment of softwoods , 1998 .

[8]  Recycling of process streams in ethanol production from softwoods based on enzymatic hydrolysis , 1998, Applied biochemistry and biotechnology.

[9]  Michael M. Wu,et al.  Optimization of steam explosion to enhance hemicellulose recovery and enzymatic hydrolysis of cellulose in softwoods , 1999 .

[10]  P. H. Dare,et al.  Steam Explosion of the Softwood Pinus Radiata with Sulphur Dioxide Addition. II. Process Characterisation , 1989 .

[11]  M. Galbe,et al.  Influence of Enzyme Loading and Physical Parameters on the Enzymatic Hydrolysis of Steam‐Pretreated Softwood , 2001, Biotechnology progress.

[12]  Mats Galbe,et al.  Effect of Washing on Yield in One‐ and Two‐Step Steam Pretreatment of Softwood for Production of Ethanol , 2004, Biotechnology progress.

[13]  A. Stams,et al.  Utilisation of biomass for the supply of energy carriers , 1999, Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology.

[14]  F. P. Eddy,et al.  Two-stage dilute-acid pretreatment of softwoods , 2000, Applied biochemistry and biotechnology.

[15]  Mats Galbe,et al.  Optimisation of steam pretreatment of SO2-impregnated mixed softwoods for ethanol production , 1998 .

[16]  A. Aden,et al.  Continuous countercurrent extraction of hemicellulose from pretreated wood residues , 2001, Applied biochemistry and biotechnology.

[17]  Mats Galbe,et al.  Comparison of SO2 and H2SO4 impregnation of softwood prior to steam pretreatment on ethanol production , 1998 .

[18]  M. Galbe,et al.  Separate versus Simultaneous Saccharification and Fermentation of Two‐Step Steam Pretreated Softwood for Ethanol Production , 2005 .

[19]  D. Schell,et al.  Dilute Acid Pretreatment of Softwoods Scientific Note , 1998 .

[20]  M. Galbe,et al.  Bio-ethanol--the fuel of tomorrow from the residues of today. , 2006, Trends in biotechnology.

[21]  C. Wyman,et al.  Features of promising technologies for pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass. , 2005, Bioresource technology.

[22]  Melvin P. Tucker,et al.  Dilute acid hydrolysis of softwoods , 1999 .

[23]  G. Zacchi,et al.  The generation of fermentation inhibitors during dilute acid hydrolysis of softwood , 1999 .

[24]  Amie D. Sluiter,et al.  Determination of Structural Carbohydrates and Lignin in Biomass , 2004 .

[25]  M. Galbe,et al.  Two-step steam pretreatment of softwood with SO2 impregnation for ethanol production , 2002, Applied biochemistry and biotechnology.

[26]  Mark Holtzapple,et al.  Coordinated development of leading biomass pretreatment technologies. , 2005, Bioresource technology.

[27]  John A. Heitmann,et al.  Feedstock pretreatment strategies for producing ethanol from wood, bark, and forest residues , 2008, BioResources.

[28]  Guido Zacchi,et al.  Ethanol from lignocellulosics: A review of the economy , 1996 .