4.6 Article

A Cation Study on Rice Husk Biomass Pretreatment with Aqueous Hydroxides: Cellulose Solubility Does Not Correlate with Improved Enzymatic Hydrolysis

期刊

ACS SUSTAINABLE CHEMISTRY & ENGINEERING
卷 5, 期 6, 页码 5320-5329

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.7b00647

关键词

rice hulls; onium hydroxides; cellulose; kinetics

资金

  1. Australian Research Council [ARC DECRA DE130100770]
  2. King's College London

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Biomass pretreatment is a key first step in converting recalcitrant lignocellulosic biomass into value-added products. Aqueous hydroxide solutions can be effective biomass pretreatment media, and the cation of the hydroxide salt can have an extremely significant effect upon the physicochemical behavior of the hydroxide solution. However, the cation effect has not been comprehensively investigated with respect to biomass pretreatment. Here, we investigated pretreatment of rice husks (from Oryza sativa) and show that the cation indeed has a significant effect upon downstream enzymatic hydrolysis of the cellulose (with cellulase). In particular, the ability, of the solution to dissolve cellulose was negatively correlated with pretreatment effectiveness, as judged by the downstream glucose yield. This was observed by investigating aqueous solutions of lithium, potassium, cesium, tetramethylammonium, tetraethylammonium, tetrapropylammonium, tetrabutylammonium, and tetrahexylammonium hydroxide. Silica solubility was almost cation-independent, lignin solubility was moderately cation-dependent, while cellulose solubility was strongly cation-dependent. The rate of lignin extraction was inversely correlated with the size of the cation. As cellulose dissolution is a demanding chemical process, it initially limited the ability of the solution to disrupt the whole biomass, necessitated extensive washing of the pretreated rice husk, and still resulted in significant cation contamination downstream. Overall, lithium hydroxide was found to be the most effective hydroxide.

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

4.6
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