Advancing a Biological Paradigm for Biomass Pretreatment · PDF filefor Biomass Pretreatment...
Transcript of Advancing a Biological Paradigm for Biomass Pretreatment · PDF filefor Biomass Pretreatment...
Advancing a Biological Paradigm for Biomass Pretreatment
Tom Richard, Qin Chen, Deepti Tanjore, Farzaneh Rezaei
Wayne Curtis, Ming Tien, Dan CosgrovePenn State University
Haiyu Ren, Novozymes
Ken Moore, Iowa State University
Corey Radtke, Idaho National Laboratory
Kevin Shinners, University of Wisconsin
Feedstock storage challengesHarvested once a yearNeed long term storage of large quantitiesMinimize dry matter lossEliminate risk of fire
Storage
Pretreatment
Bioconversion
Sugar, ethanol, chemicals, and materials
Harvest
Most Biomass is Wet
Ensiled StorageAdvantages:• High moisture content• Low pH for long term storage• Synergies may allow less intensive pretreatment through
hydrolysis and saccharification Disadvantages:• Hydrolysis products (sugar) may degrade and be lost• Additional cost if cell wall degrading enzymes, microbes,
and/or chemicals are applied additives
Scaleable technology
Storage and pretreatment
Biomass FeedstockCell wall
degrading enzymes
Microbes
Fuel and Chemical Production
Alternative Strategies for Biocatalysis
Ensilaged storage and Pretreatment
Downstream Processing
Expansins
Methods
Flow chart
Corn Stover Harvest
Storage (-15 ºC)
Ensiled at 37 °C in Incubator
Weight pH DM Fiber Fraction
Data Analysis by Multiple Factors ANOVA
and MTB
Comparison & Conclusion
WSC
Kinetic Examination of Ensiled Stover at day 0, day 1, day 7 and day 21.
Silage without Enzyme or with Multifect A 40 (Genencor)
Glucose& xylose
a) Harvest Machineb) Harvested Fieldc) Food Vacuum sealerd) Incubatore) Fiber Analyzerf) Daisy II Incubatorg) HPLC
a b c
d e f
g
Screening Commercial Enzyme Products
1.39
0.28
2.38
2.14
0.02
0.36
0.08
C:H
TL 1.39
TL0.28
TR2.38
TR2.14
TR0.02
AN0.36
AN0.08
543 U/ml390 U/mlSafizym fl300
5144 U/g18624 U/gDyadic Xylanase 2XPTrichodermalongibrachiatum
278 U/ml116 U/mlMultifect CL
2607 U/g1219. U/gDeerlandCellulase TR
109 U/ml5712 U/mlMultifect xylanaseTrichoderma reesei
384 U/g1075 U/gDeerlandHemicellulase
1904 U/g24805. U/gEnzecoxylanase A Concertrate
Aspergillus niger
CellulaseHemicellulaseBrand nameMicroorganism source
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
0
0.33
1
3
7
14
21
0
0.33
1
3
7
14
21
0
0.33
1
3
7
14
21
0
0.33
1
3
7
14
21
Control TL1.39 TR2.14 TR2.37
Days
% DM
WSC
Butyric acid
Isobutyric acid
Propionic acid
Acetic acid
Lactic acid
Differential Products
Long-term Storage Effects
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
0 1 7 21 63 189 0 1 7 21 63 189Days
% D
M
WSC
Butyrate
Isobutyrate
Propionate
Acetate
Lactate
Enzyme ControlTR 2.37 Control
-4.0
-2.0
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
0 1 7 21 63 189 0 1 7 21 63 189
Days
Fibe
r deg
rada
tion
(% D
M c
hang
e) Hemicellulose
Cellulose
Fiber Degradation(concentration basis)
Control
TR 2.37 Control
Consolidated BioProcessing Resultsclostridium phytofermentens
0
10
20
30
40
50
K L+ M N+
mM
EthanolAcetateFormateLactate
S it h C St
Switchgrass Corn Stover
w/out ensiled w/out ensiled
Other biocatalyst strategies
• Lignin degrading enzymes
• Expansins
• Microbe-enzyme-substrate interactions
Issues and Concerns
• How can we best generate and identify synergies with downstream processing?
• What are the upstream opportunities and synergies with plant biotechnology?
• What are the critical tradeoffs between on-farm storage/pretreatment and more centralized strategies?
• Are the energetic and economic costs of biological pretreatment competitive?