Production routes to bio-acetic acid: life cycle assessment.
Identifieur interne : 000112 ( Main/Corpus ); précédent : 000111; suivant : 000113Production routes to bio-acetic acid: life cycle assessment.
Auteurs : Erik Budsberg ; Rodrigo Morales-Vera ; Jordan T. Crawford ; Renata Bura ; Rick GustafsonSource :
- Biotechnology for biofuels [ 1754-6834 ] ; 2020.
Abstract
Background
Similar to biofuels, numerous chemicals produced from petroleum resources can also be made from biomass. In this research we investigate cradle to biorefinery exit gate life cycle impacts of producing acetic acid from poplar biomass using a bioconversion process. A key step in developing acetic acid for commercial markets is producing a product with 99.8% purity. This process has been shown to be potentially energy intensive and in this work two distillation and liquid-liquid extraction methods are evaluated to produce glacial bio-acetic acid. Method one uses ethyl acetate for extraction. Method two uses alamine and diisobutyl ketone. Additionally two different options for meeting energy demands at the biorefinery are modeled. Option one involves burning lignin and natural gas onsite to meet heat/steam and electricity demands. Option two uses only natural gas onsite to meet heat/steam demands, purchases electricity from the grid to meet biorefinery needs, and sells lignin from the poplar biomass as a co-product to a coal burning power plant to be co-fired with coal. System expansion is used to account for by-products and co-products for the main life cycle assessment. Allocation assessments are also performed to compare the life cycle tradeoffs of using system expansion, mass allocation, or economic allocation for bio-acetic acid production. Finally, a sensitivity analysis is conducted to determine potential effects of a decrease in the fermentation of glucose to acetic acid.
Results
Global warming potential (GWP) and fossil fuel use (FFU) for ethyl acetate extraction range from 1000-2500 kg CO
Conclusions
Overall the alamine/diisobutyl ketone extraction method results in lower GWP and FFU values compared to the ethyl acetate extraction method. Only the alamine/diisobutyl extraction method finds GWP and FFU values lower than those of petroleum based acetic acid. For both extraction methods, exporting lignin as a co-product produced larger GWPs and FFU values compared to burning the lignin at the biorefinery.
DOI: 10.1186/s13068-020-01784-y
PubMed: 32905422
PubMed Central: PMC7469289
Links to Exploration step
pubmed:32905422Le document en format XML
<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Production routes to bio-acetic acid: life cycle assessment.</title><author><name sortKey="Budsberg, Erik" sort="Budsberg, Erik" uniqKey="Budsberg E" first="Erik" last="Budsberg">Erik Budsberg</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>School of Environmental and Forest Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Box 352100, WA 98195-2100 USA.</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Morales Vera, Rodrigo" sort="Morales Vera, Rodrigo" uniqKey="Morales Vera R" first="Rodrigo" last="Morales-Vera">Rodrigo Morales-Vera</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>School of Agricultural and Forest Sciences, Catholic University of Maule, Center of Biotechnology of Natural Resources (CENBIO), Talca, Chile.</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Crawford, Jordan T" sort="Crawford, Jordan T" uniqKey="Crawford J" first="Jordan T" last="Crawford">Jordan T. Crawford</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>AECOM Corp, Richland, WA USA.</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Bura, Renata" sort="Bura, Renata" uniqKey="Bura R" first="Renata" last="Bura">Renata Bura</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>School of Environmental and Forest Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Box 352100, WA 98195-2100 USA.</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Gustafson, Rick" sort="Gustafson, Rick" uniqKey="Gustafson R" first="Rick" last="Gustafson">Rick Gustafson</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>School of Environmental and Forest Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Box 352100, WA 98195-2100 USA.</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">PubMed</idno><date when="2020">2020</date><idno type="RBID">pubmed:32905422</idno><idno type="pmid">32905422</idno><idno type="doi">10.1186/s13068-020-01784-y</idno><idno type="pmc">PMC7469289</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Corpus">000112</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Main" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="PubMed">000112</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title xml:lang="en">Production routes to bio-acetic acid: life cycle assessment.</title><author><name sortKey="Budsberg, Erik" sort="Budsberg, Erik" uniqKey="Budsberg E" first="Erik" last="Budsberg">Erik Budsberg</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>School of Environmental and Forest Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Box 352100, WA 98195-2100 USA.</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Morales Vera, Rodrigo" sort="Morales Vera, Rodrigo" uniqKey="Morales Vera R" first="Rodrigo" last="Morales-Vera">Rodrigo Morales-Vera</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>School of Agricultural and Forest Sciences, Catholic University of Maule, Center of Biotechnology of Natural Resources (CENBIO), Talca, Chile.</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Crawford, Jordan T" sort="Crawford, Jordan T" uniqKey="Crawford J" first="Jordan T" last="Crawford">Jordan T. Crawford</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>AECOM Corp, Richland, WA USA.</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Bura, Renata" sort="Bura, Renata" uniqKey="Bura R" first="Renata" last="Bura">Renata Bura</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>School of Environmental and Forest Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Box 352100, WA 98195-2100 USA.</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Gustafson, Rick" sort="Gustafson, Rick" uniqKey="Gustafson R" first="Rick" last="Gustafson">Rick Gustafson</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>School of Environmental and Forest Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Box 352100, WA 98195-2100 USA.</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><series><title level="j">Biotechnology for biofuels</title><idno type="ISSN">1754-6834</idno><imprint><date when="2020" type="published">2020</date></imprint></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en"><p><b>Background</b></p><p>Similar to biofuels, numerous chemicals produced from petroleum resources can also be made from biomass. In this research we investigate cradle to biorefinery exit gate life cycle impacts of producing acetic acid from poplar biomass using a bioconversion process. A key step in developing acetic acid for commercial markets is producing a product with 99.8% purity. This process has been shown to be potentially energy intensive and in this work two distillation and liquid-liquid extraction methods are evaluated to produce glacial bio-acetic acid. Method one uses ethyl acetate for extraction. Method two uses alamine and diisobutyl ketone. Additionally two different options for meeting energy demands at the biorefinery are modeled. Option one involves burning lignin and natural gas onsite to meet heat/steam and electricity demands. Option two uses only natural gas onsite to meet heat/steam demands, purchases electricity from the grid to meet biorefinery needs, and sells lignin from the poplar biomass as a co-product to a coal burning power plant to be co-fired with coal. System expansion is used to account for by-products and co-products for the main life cycle assessment. Allocation assessments are also performed to compare the life cycle tradeoffs of using system expansion, mass allocation, or economic allocation for bio-acetic acid production. Finally, a sensitivity analysis is conducted to determine potential effects of a decrease in the fermentation of glucose to acetic acid.</p></div><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en"><p><b>Results</b></p><p>Global warming potential (GWP) and fossil fuel use (FFU) for ethyl acetate extraction range from 1000-2500 kg CO</p></div><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en"><p><b>Conclusions</b></p><p>Overall the alamine/diisobutyl ketone extraction method results in lower GWP and FFU values compared to the ethyl acetate extraction method. Only the alamine/diisobutyl extraction method finds GWP and FFU values lower than those of petroleum based acetic acid. For both extraction methods, exporting lignin as a co-product produced larger GWPs and FFU values compared to burning the lignin at the biorefinery.</p></div></front></TEI><pubmed><MedlineCitation Status="PubMed-not-MEDLINE" Owner="NLM"><PMID Version="1">32905422</PMID><DateRevised><Year>2020</Year><Month>09</Month><Day>28</Day></DateRevised><Article PubModel="Electronic-eCollection"><Journal><ISSN IssnType="Print">1754-6834</ISSN><JournalIssue CitedMedium="Print"><Volume>13</Volume><PubDate><Year>2020</Year></PubDate></JournalIssue><Title>Biotechnology for biofuels</Title><ISOAbbreviation>Biotechnol Biofuels</ISOAbbreviation></Journal><ArticleTitle>Production routes to bio-acetic acid: life cycle assessment.</ArticleTitle><Pagination><MedlinePgn>154</MedlinePgn></Pagination><ELocationID EIdType="doi" ValidYN="Y">10.1186/s13068-020-01784-y</ELocationID><Abstract><AbstractText Label="Background" NlmCategory="UNASSIGNED">Similar to biofuels, numerous chemicals produced from petroleum resources can also be made from biomass. In this research we investigate cradle to biorefinery exit gate life cycle impacts of producing acetic acid from poplar biomass using a bioconversion process. A key step in developing acetic acid for commercial markets is producing a product with 99.8% purity. This process has been shown to be potentially energy intensive and in this work two distillation and liquid-liquid extraction methods are evaluated to produce glacial bio-acetic acid. Method one uses ethyl acetate for extraction. Method two uses alamine and diisobutyl ketone. Additionally two different options for meeting energy demands at the biorefinery are modeled. Option one involves burning lignin and natural gas onsite to meet heat/steam and electricity demands. Option two uses only natural gas onsite to meet heat/steam demands, purchases electricity from the grid to meet biorefinery needs, and sells lignin from the poplar biomass as a co-product to a coal burning power plant to be co-fired with coal. System expansion is used to account for by-products and co-products for the main life cycle assessment. Allocation assessments are also performed to compare the life cycle tradeoffs of using system expansion, mass allocation, or economic allocation for bio-acetic acid production. Finally, a sensitivity analysis is conducted to determine potential effects of a decrease in the fermentation of glucose to acetic acid.</AbstractText><AbstractText Label="Results" NlmCategory="UNASSIGNED">Global warming potential (GWP) and fossil fuel use (FFU) for ethyl acetate extraction range from 1000-2500 kg CO<sub>2</sub> eq. and 32-56 GJ per tonne of acetic acid, respectively. Alamine and diisobutyl ketone extraction method GWP and FFU ranges from -370-180 kg CO<sub>2</sub> eq. and 15-25 GJ per tonne of acetic acid, respectively.</AbstractText><AbstractText Label="Conclusions" NlmCategory="UNASSIGNED">Overall the alamine/diisobutyl ketone extraction method results in lower GWP and FFU values compared to the ethyl acetate extraction method. Only the alamine/diisobutyl extraction method finds GWP and FFU values lower than those of petroleum based acetic acid. For both extraction methods, exporting lignin as a co-product produced larger GWPs and FFU values compared to burning the lignin at the biorefinery.</AbstractText><CopyrightInformation>© The Author(s) 2020.</CopyrightInformation></Abstract><AuthorList CompleteYN="Y"><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Budsberg</LastName><ForeName>Erik</ForeName><Initials>E</Initials><Identifier Source="ORCID">0000-0002-7386-514X</Identifier><AffiliationInfo><Affiliation>School of Environmental and Forest Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Box 352100, WA 98195-2100 USA.</Affiliation><Identifier Source="GRID">grid.34477.33</Identifier><Identifier Source="ISNI">0000000122986657</Identifier></AffiliationInfo></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Morales-Vera</LastName><ForeName>Rodrigo</ForeName><Initials>R</Initials><AffiliationInfo><Affiliation>School of Agricultural and Forest Sciences, Catholic University of Maule, Center of Biotechnology of Natural Resources (CENBIO), Talca, Chile.</Affiliation><Identifier Source="GRID">grid.411964.f</Identifier><Identifier Source="ISNI">0000 0001 2224 0804</Identifier></AffiliationInfo></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Crawford</LastName><ForeName>Jordan T</ForeName><Initials>JT</Initials><AffiliationInfo><Affiliation>AECOM Corp, Richland, WA USA.</Affiliation><Identifier Source="GRID">grid.420742.7</Identifier><Identifier Source="ISNI">0000 0001 0549 9881</Identifier></AffiliationInfo></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Bura</LastName><ForeName>Renata</ForeName><Initials>R</Initials><AffiliationInfo><Affiliation>School of Environmental and Forest Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Box 352100, WA 98195-2100 USA.</Affiliation><Identifier Source="GRID">grid.34477.33</Identifier><Identifier Source="ISNI">0000000122986657</Identifier></AffiliationInfo></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Gustafson</LastName><ForeName>Rick</ForeName><Initials>R</Initials><AffiliationInfo><Affiliation>School of Environmental and Forest Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Box 352100, WA 98195-2100 USA.</Affiliation><Identifier Source="GRID">grid.34477.33</Identifier><Identifier Source="ISNI">0000000122986657</Identifier></AffiliationInfo></Author></AuthorList><Language>eng</Language><PublicationTypeList><PublicationType UI="D016428">Journal Article</PublicationType></PublicationTypeList><ArticleDate DateType="Electronic"><Year>2020</Year><Month>09</Month><Day>03</Day></ArticleDate></Article><MedlineJournalInfo><Country>England</Country><MedlineTA>Biotechnol Biofuels</MedlineTA><NlmUniqueID>101316935</NlmUniqueID><ISSNLinking>1754-6834</ISSNLinking></MedlineJournalInfo><KeywordList Owner="NOTNLM"><Keyword MajorTopicYN="N">Acetic acid</Keyword><Keyword MajorTopicYN="N">Biochemicals</Keyword><Keyword MajorTopicYN="N">Bioconversion</Keyword><Keyword MajorTopicYN="N">Bioproducts</Keyword><Keyword MajorTopicYN="N">Biorefinery</Keyword><Keyword MajorTopicYN="N">Fossil fuel use</Keyword><Keyword MajorTopicYN="N">Global warming potential</Keyword><Keyword MajorTopicYN="N">Life cycle assessment</Keyword></KeywordList><CoiStatement>Competing interestsThere are no competing interests involved in the research presented here.</CoiStatement></MedlineCitation><PubmedData><History><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="received"><Year>2019</Year><Month>12</Month><Day>20</Day></PubMedPubDate><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="accepted"><Year>2020</Year><Month>08</Month><Day>08</Day></PubMedPubDate><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="entrez"><Year>2020</Year><Month>9</Month><Day>9</Day><Hour>18</Hour><Minute>14</Minute></PubMedPubDate><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="pubmed"><Year>2020</Year><Month>9</Month><Day>10</Day><Hour>6</Hour><Minute>0</Minute></PubMedPubDate><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="medline"><Year>2020</Year><Month>9</Month><Day>10</Day><Hour>6</Hour><Minute>1</Minute></PubMedPubDate></History><PublicationStatus>epublish</PublicationStatus><ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">32905422</ArticleId><ArticleId IdType="doi">10.1186/s13068-020-01784-y</ArticleId><ArticleId IdType="pii">1784</ArticleId><ArticleId IdType="pmc">PMC7469289</ArticleId></ArticleIdList><ReferenceList><Reference><Citation>Materials (Basel). 2016 Jul 12;9(7):</Citation><ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">28773687</ArticleId></ArticleIdList></Reference><Reference><Citation>J Bacteriol. 1973 May;114(2):743-51</Citation><ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">4706193</ArticleId></ArticleIdList></Reference><Reference><Citation>J R Soc Interface. 2012 Jun 7;9(71):1105-19</Citation><ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">22467143</ArticleId></ArticleIdList></Reference><Reference><Citation>Bioresour Technol. 2009 Nov;100(21):4919-30</Citation><ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">19553106</ArticleId></ArticleIdList></Reference><Reference><Citation>Biotechnol Biofuels. 2016 Jun 23;9:141</Citation><ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">28616077</ArticleId></ArticleIdList></Reference><Reference><Citation>Biotechnol Biofuels. 2016 Aug 11;9:170</Citation><ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">27525039</ArticleId></ArticleIdList></Reference></ReferenceList></PubmedData></pubmed></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Bois/explor/PoplarV1/Data/Main/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000112 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Main/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 000112 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Bois
|area= PoplarV1
|flux= Main
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= pubmed:32905422
|texte= Production routes to bio-acetic acid: life cycle assessment.
}}
Pour générer des pages wiki
HfdIndexSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Main/Corpus/RBID.i -Sk "pubmed:32905422" \
| HfdSelect -Kh $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Main/Corpus/biblio.hfd \
| NlmPubMed2Wicri -a PoplarV1
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.37. |  |