4.7 Article

Comparison of fermentative hydrogen production from glycerol using immobilized and suspended mixed cultures

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY
卷 46, 期 13, 页码 8986-8994

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2021.01.003

关键词

Glycerol; Biohydrogen; Immobilization; Dark fermentation

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51338005]
  2. Program for Changjiang Scholars and Innovative Research Team in University [IRT-13026]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study demonstrated that using immobilized microorganisms for hydrogen production from glycerol can enhance both cumulative hydrogen production and hydrogen yield, with improved tolerance to high substrate concentration and higher capability in glycerol utilization. The enhanced hydrogen production may be attributed to the favorable micro-environment created for different microorganisms in immobilized beads.
This study explored the fermentative hydrogen production by immobilized microorganisms from glycerol, which is the byproduct of biodiesel production, and compared it with suspended fermentation. The effect of immobilization on hydrogen production process was examined. Results showed that both cumulative hydrogen production (CHP) and hydrogen yield (HY) were enhanced by microbial immobilization. The highest CHP and HY of 64 mL/100 mL and 0.52 mol H-2/mol glycerol were obtained by immobilized microorganisms, compared to 9 mL/100 mL and 0.29 mol H-2/mol glycerol in suspended microorganisms. Immobilization enhanced CHP and HY by 611.1% and 79.3%. In addition, immobilized microorganisms showed stronger tolerance to high substrate concentration and higher capability in glycerol utilization, which is of great significance for hydrogen production from glycerol. The enhanced hydrogen production may be due to the favorable micro-environment for different microorganisms in immobilized beads. (C) 2021 Hydrogen Energy Publications LLC. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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