4.8 Article

Impact of feedstocks and downstream processing technologies on the economics of caproic acid production in fermentation by Megasphaera elsdenii T81

Journal

BIORESOURCE TECHNOLOGY
Volume 301, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2020.122794

Keywords

Caproic acid; Megasphaera elsdenii; Extractive fermentation; Jerusalem artichoke

Funding

  1. Korea Institute of Energy Technology Evaluation and Planning (KETEP) of the Republic of Korea [20173010092510]
  2. Ministry of Trade, Industry & Energy (MOTIE) of the Republic of Korea [20173010092510]
  3. Technology Development Program to Solve Climate Changes through the National Research Foundation (NRF) - Ministry of Science and ICT of the Republic of Korea [2017M1A2A2087635]
  4. Hanyang University [HY-201100000000233-N]
  5. Korea Evaluation Institute of Industrial Technology (KEIT) [20173010092510] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Caproic acid (CA) was produced by Megasphaera elsdenii T81 with Jerusalem artichoke tubers (JA) as a feedstock. More CA was produced under the medium with the acid hydrolysate of JA than the comparative medium with a carbon composition similar to that of JA. CA was produced up to 13.0 g/L and 0.52 g/L/h with extractive fermentation using a mixed solvent of alamine 336 in oleyl alcohol at 37 degrees C. The JA cost to produce 1 ton of CA is only 505 USD, which is much lower than that required for purchasing sucrose (860 USD) in CA production. As a result of the analysis performed using SuperPro Designer, including the cost of distillation to obtain pure CA, the estimated production cost for CA from dry JA is 1869 USD/ton CA at the production scale of 2000 ton/year, which is lower than the current market price for petroleum-derived CA (similar to 2500 USD/ton).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available