4.7 Article

Optimal plant design for integrated biorefinery producing bioethanol and protein from Saccharina japonica: A superstructure-based approach

期刊

ENERGY
卷 164, 期 -, 页码 1257-1270

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2018.09.007

关键词

Superstructure optimization; Biofuel; Technoeconomic analysis; Biorefinery; Mixed integer linear programming

资金

  1. Basic Science Research Program of the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Ministry of Science and ICT [2017R1A2B4004500]
  2. National Research Foundation of Korea [2017R1A2B4004500] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A superstructure-based approach was proposed for optimization of biorefineries that use Saccharina japonica as feedstock. The goal of this study was to determine the optimal flowsheet design to maximize the net present value by considering the mass and energy balance, capital and manufacturing costs. Multiple design alternatives reported in the literature were considered at each biorefinery processing stage, which transformed the superstructure optimization into a mixed integer nonlinear programming (MINLP) problem. In order to efficiently compute a solution for the resulting MINLP problem, the separable programming technique is employed by approximating the initial MINLP problem into a mixed integer linear programming (MILP) problem. The results indicated that the minimum ethanol selling price for optimal design is $1.97/gal, whereas the net present value of $61.5 million is obtained based on the current wholesale prices for both products and raw materials. Sensitivity analysis was performed to identify potential for economic improvement. The developed framework has the capacity to efficiently scan through processing alternatives to identify an economically optimal design for different potential objective functions. (C) 2018 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