A comparison of the energy use of in situ product recovery techniques for the Acetone Butanol Ethanol fermentation

Victoria Outram*, Carl Axel Lalander, Jonathan G.M. Lee, E. Timothy Davis, Adam P. Harvey

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

44 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The productivity of the Acetone Butanol Ethanol (ABE) fermentation can be significantly increased by application of various in situ product recovery (ISPR) techniques. There are numerous technically viable processes, but it is not clear which is the most economically viable in practice. There is little available information about the energy requirements and economics of ISPR for the ABE fermentation. This work compares various ISPR techniques based on UniSim process simulations of the ABE fermentation. The simulations provide information on the process energy and separation efficiency, which is fed into an economic assessment. Perstraction was the only technique to reduce the energy demand below that of a batch process, by approximately 5%. Perstraction also had the highest profit increase over a batch process, by 175%. However, perstraction is an immature technology, so would need significant development before being integrated to an industrial process.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)590-600
Number of pages11
JournalBioresource Technology
Volume220
Early online date16 Sept 2016
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 2016

Funding

This work was sponsored by Green Biologics Ltd. and funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council ( EP/G037620/1 ).

Keywords

  • ABE fermentation
  • Economics
  • Energy
  • In situ product recovery
  • Process simulation

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'A comparison of the energy use of in situ product recovery techniques for the Acetone Butanol Ethanol fermentation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this