4.8 Article

Syngas fermentation by Clostridium carboxidivorans P7 in a horizontal rotating packed bed biofilm reactor with enhanced ethanol production

期刊

APPLIED ENERGY
卷 187, 期 -, 页码 585-594

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.11.084

关键词

Syngas fermentation; Rotating packed bed biofilm reactor; Mass transfer; Ethanol production

资金

  1. NSF Process and Reaction Engineering [CBET-1438042]
  2. Iowa Energy Center [11-02]
  3. Iowa State University Bailey Award

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Gasification of lignocellulosic biomass followed by syngas fermentation is a promising process for producing fuels and chemicals. Syngas fermentation, however, is commonly limited by low mass transfer rates. In this work, a horizontally oriented rotating packed bed (h-RPB) reactor was developed to improve mass transfer and enhance ethanol production. In the h-RPB reactor, cell attachment materials were packed in the reactor and half submerged in the liquid and half exposed to the headspace. With continuous rotation of the packing materials, the cells in biofilm were alternately in contact with liquid and headspace; thus, transport of syngas to the cells occurred in both the liquid phase and headspace. The volumetric mass transfer coefficient (k(L)a) of the h-RPB reactor was lower than that in a traditional continuous stirred tank reactor (CSTR), indicating the mass transfer in the liquid phase of h-PRB was lower than CSTR, and the mass transfer in the headspace phase played an important role in syngas fermentation. The syngas fermentation of Clostridium carboxidivorans P7 in h-RPB resulted in a 7.0 g/L titer and 6.7 g/L/day productivity of ethanol, respectively, 3.3 times higher than those obtained in a CSTR under the same operational conditions. The results demonstrate that the h-RPB reactor is an efficient system for syngas fermentation, making cellulosic ethanol biorefinery one step closer to technical and economic feasibility. (C) 2016 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

4.8
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