4.2 Article

Performance comparison of ethanol and butanol production in a continuous and closed-circulating fermentation system with membrane bioreactor

Journal

PREPARATIVE BIOCHEMISTRY & BIOTECHNOLOGY
Volume 47, Issue 3, Pages 254-260

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/10826068.2016.1224242

Keywords

CCCF: continuous and closed-circulating fermentation; Butanol fermentation; ethanol fermentation; intensity; performance comparison; pervaporation; stability

Funding

  1. State Key Laboratory of Oil and Gas Reservoir Geology Exploitation (Southwest Petroleum University) [PLN1422]
  2. Scientific Research Starting Project of SWPU [2014QHZ017]
  3. Young Scholars Development Fund of SWPU [201331010040]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Since both ethanol and butanol fermentations are urgently developed processes with the biofuel-demand increasing, performance comparison of aerobic ethanol fermentation and anerobic butanol fermentation in a continuous and closed-circulating fermentation (CCCF) system was necessary to achieve their fermentation characteristics and further optimize the fermentation process. Fermentation and pervaporation parameters including the average cell concentration, glucose consumption rate, cumulated production concentration, product flux, and separation factor of ethanol fermentation were 11.45g/L, 3.70g/L/h, 655.83g/L, 378.5g/m(2)/h, and 4.83, respectively, the corresponding parameters of butanol fermentation were 2.19g/L, 0.61g/L/h, 28.03g/L, 58.56g/m(2)/h, and 10.62, respectively. Profiles of fermentation and pervaporation parameters indicated that the intensity and efficiency of ethanol fermentation was higher than butanol fermentation, but the stability of butanol fermentation was superior to ethanol fermentation. Although the two fermentation processes had different features, the performance indicated the application prospect of both ethanol and butanol production by the CCCF system.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available