scholarly journals Enhancing Bioenergy Yields from Sequential Bioethanol and Biomethane Production by Means of Solid–Liquid Separation of the Substrates

Energies ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (19) ◽  
pp. 3683 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisandra Rocha-Meneses ◽  
Jorge A Ferreira ◽  
Nemailla Bonturi ◽  
Kaja Orupõld ◽  
Timo Kikas

The production of second-generation ethanol using lignocellulosic feedstock is crucial in order to be able to meet the increasing fuel demands by the transportation sector. However, the technology still needs to overcome several bottlenecks before feasible commercialization can be realized. These include, for example, the development of cost-effective and environmentally friendly pretreatment strategies and valorization of the sidestream that is obtained following ethanol distillation. This work uses two chemical-free pretreatment methods—nitrogen explosive decompression (NED) and synthetic flue gas explosive decompression—to investigate the potential of a bioethanol production sidestream in terms of further anaerobic digestion. For this purpose, samples from different stages of the bioethanol production process (pretreatment, hydrolysis, and fermentation) and the bioethanol sidestream went through a separation process (involving solid–liquid separation), following which a biomethane potential (BMP) assay was carried out. The results show that both factors being studied in this article (involving the pretreatment method and the separation process) served to influence methane yields. Liquid fractions that were obtained during the process with NED gave rise to methane yields that were 8% to 12% higher than when synthetic flue gas was used; fermented and distillation sidestream gave rise to the highest methane yields (0.53 and 0.58 mol CH4/100 g respectively). The methane yields from the liquid fractions were between 60–88% lower than those that were obtained from solid fractions. Samples from the bioethanol sidestream (solid fraction) that were pretreated with NED had the highest methane yield (1.7 mol CH4/100 g). A solid–liquid separation step can be a promising strategy when it comes to improving the energy output from lignocellulosic biomass and the management of the ethanol distillation sidestream.

2019 ◽  
Vol 62 (4) ◽  
pp. 973-984
Author(s):  
Sébastien Fournel ◽  
Édith Charbonneau ◽  
Simon Binggeli ◽  
Jean-Michel Dion ◽  
Doris Pellerin ◽  
...  

Abstract. Several strategies are available for mitigating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with dairy manure management in barns, storage units, and fields. For instance, incorporation of manure into the soil, solid-liquid separation, composting, enclosed manure storage, and anaerobic digestion have been identified as good options. However, these strategies are not widely adopted in Canada because clear information on their effectiveness to abate the whole-farm GHG footprint is lacking. Better information on the most cost-effective options for reducing on-farm GHG emissions would assist decision making for dairy producers and foster adoption of the most promising approaches on Canadian dairies. In this context, whole-farm modeling provides a tool for evaluating different GHG abatement strategies. An Excel-based linear optimization model (N-CyCLES) was used to assess the economics and the nutrient and GHG footprints of two representative dairy farms in Québec, Canada. The farms were located in regions with contrasting climates (southwestern and eastern Québec). The model was developed to optimize feeding, cropping, and manure handling as a single unit of management, considering the aforementioned mitigation options. Greenhouse gas emissions from the different simulated milk production systems reached 1.27 to 1.85 kg CO2e kg-1 of corrected milk, allowing GHG reductions of up to 25% compared to the base system described in Part I. Solid-liquid separation had the greatest GHG mitigation potential, followed by the digester-like strategy involving a tight cover for gas burning. However, both options implied a decrease in farm net income. Manure incorporation into the soil and composting were associated with high investment relative to their GHG abatement potential. The most cost-effective option was using a loose cover on the manure storage unit. This approach lessened the manure volume and ammonia-N volatilization, thereby reducing fertilizer and manure spreading costs, increasing crop sales and profit, and enhancing the whole-farm N and GHG footprints. Consequently, covering the manure tanks appears to be an economically viable practice for Québec dairy farms. Keywords: Anaerobic digestion, Composting, Dairy cow, Farm net income, Greenhouse gas emission, Incorporation, Nutrient footprint, Solid-liquid separation, Storage cover, Whole-farm model.


AIChE Journal ◽  
1977 ◽  
Vol 23 (6) ◽  
pp. 851-859 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph D. Henry ◽  
Lee F. Lawler ◽  
C. H. Alex Kuo

AIChE Journal ◽  
1976 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 433-441 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph D. Henry ◽  
Alain P. Lui ◽  
C. H. Kuo

2015 ◽  
Vol 187 ◽  
pp. 37-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
David A. Sievers ◽  
James J. Lischeske ◽  
Mary J. Biddy ◽  
Jonathan J. Stickel

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document