Budsberg Erik, Morales-Vera Rodrigo, Crawford Jordan T, Bura Renata, Gustafson Rick
School of Environmental and Forest Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Box 352100, WA 98195-2100 USA.
School of Agricultural and Forest Sciences, Catholic University of Maule, Center of Biotechnology of Natural Resources (CENBIO), Talca, Chile.
Biotechnol Biofuels. 2020 Sep 3;13:154. doi: 10.1186/s13068-020-01784-y. eCollection 2020.
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.
Global warming potential (GWP) and fossil fuel use (FFU) for ethyl acetate extraction range from 1000-2500 kg CO 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 eq. and 15-25 GJ per tonne of acetic acid, respectively.
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.
与生物燃料类似,许多从石油资源中生产的化学品也可以由生物质制成。在本研究中,我们调查了使用生物转化工艺从杨树生物质生产乙酸从摇篮到生物精炼厂出口大门的生命周期影响。为商业市场开发乙酸的一个关键步骤是生产纯度为99.8%的产品。该过程已被证明可能能源密集,在本工作中,评估了两种蒸馏和液液萃取方法以生产冰醋酸生物乙酸。方法一使用乙酸乙酯进行萃取。方法二使用阿拉明和二异丁基酮。此外,还对生物精炼厂满足能源需求的两种不同方案进行了建模。方案一涉及在现场燃烧木质素和天然气以满足热/蒸汽和电力需求。方案二仅在现场使用天然气满足热/蒸汽需求,从电网购买电力满足生物精炼厂需求,并将杨树生物质中的木质素作为副产品出售给燃煤发电厂与煤共燃。系统扩展用于主要生命周期评估中的副产品和联产品核算。还进行了分配评估,以比较使用系统扩展、质量分配或经济分配进行生物乙酸生产的生命周期权衡。最后,进行了敏感性分析,以确定葡萄糖发酵为乙酸减少的潜在影响。
乙酸乙酯萃取的全球变暖潜能值(GWP)和化石燃料使用量(FFU)分别为每吨乙酸1000 - 2500千克二氧化碳当量和32 - 56吉焦。阿拉明和二异丁基酮萃取方法的GWP和FFU范围分别为每吨乙酸 - 370 - 180千克二氧化碳当量和15 - 25吉焦。
总体而言,与乙酸乙酯萃取方法相比,阿拉明/二异丁基酮萃取方法导致更低的GWP和FFU值。只有阿拉明/二异丁基萃取方法的GWP和FFU值低于石油基乙酸。对于两种萃取方法,与在生物精炼厂燃烧木质素相比,将木质素作为副产品出口产生了更大的GWP和FFU值。