4.7 Article

Batch biohydrogen production from dilute acid hydrolyzates of fruits-and-vegetables wastes and corn stover as co-substrates

期刊

BIOMASS & BIOENERGY
卷 140, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2020.105666

关键词

Dark fermentation; Dilute acid; Factorial experimental design; Hydrolyzates; Overliming

资金

  1. Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnologia (Conacyt) [714579]
  2. [02-106534-PST-15/123]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Fruits-and-vegetables wastes (FVW) and corn stover (CS) are two of the most recurred lignocellulosic biomasses used for biofuel production. In this work, the co-processing of FVW and CS for biohydrogen production was proposed and evaluated through a set of experimental designs. First, a 5. 2 general factorial was applied on the dilute acid pretreatment at five levels of FVW:CS ratios (0:1, 1:3, 1:1, 3:1 and 1:0 dry mass basis) and two levels of the type of catalyst (HCl or H2SO4 at 0.5% in volumetric basis). Then, biohydrogen production using the dilute acid hydrolyzates was carried out in batch mode at 35 degrees C in a 32 factorial design, the factors being the inoculum to substrate ratio (0.8, 1.0, and 1.2 g g(-1)) and the initial concentration of reducing sugars (10, 13 and 16 g L-1). The effects of the type of acid catalyst and the FVW:CS ratio were significant in terms of sugars production and yield. The best catalyst was HCl for the 3:1 FVW:CS ratio, which produced monomeric sugars concentrations of 10.0, 3.7 and 2.9 g L-1 for glucose, xylose and arabinose, respectively. The hydrolyzates were suitable for biohydrogen production, reaching yields of 2.31 mol H-2 mol(-1)glucose and hydrogen production rates of 8.83 mL H-2 h(-1). An economic prospection at lab scale demonstrated that hydrogen production presented net revenues of 0.009 USD per kg of co-substrates, resulting in 24% profitability of hydrogen production over its production costs. Therefore, this co-processing is an interesting proposal with further applications on biorefinery models.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据