How effective are traditional methods of compositional analysis in providing an accurate material balance for a range of softwood derived residues?

Biotechnology for Biofuels

Jack Saddler¹  Richard Chandra¹  Linoj Kumar¹  Sabrina Burkhardt¹ 

[1]Forest Products Biotechnology/Bioenergy, 2424 Main Mall University of British Columbia, Greater Vancouver, Canada

关键词: Steam pretreatment;    Lignin;    Extractives;    Bark;    Material balance;    Chemical composition;    Forest residues;   

Others  :  798010
DOI  :  10.1186/1754-6834-6-90

 received in 2013-03-26, accepted in 2013-06-11,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

Forest residues represent an abundant and sustainable source of biomass which could be used as a biorefinery feedstock. Due to the heterogeneity of forest residues, such as hog fuel and bark, one of the expected challenges is to obtain an accurate material balance of these feedstocks. Current compositional analytical methods have been standardised for more homogenous feedstocks such as white wood and agricultural residues. The described work assessed the accuracy of existing and modified methods on a variety of forest residues both before and after a typical pretreatment process.

Results

When “traditional” pulp and paper methods were used, the total amount of material that could be quantified in each of the six softwood-derived residues ranged from 88% to 96%. It was apparent that the extractives present in the substrate were most influential in limiting the accuracy of a more representative material balance. This was particularly evident when trying to determine the lignin content, due to the incomplete removal of the extractives, even after a two stage water-ethanol extraction. Residual extractives likely precipitated with the acid insoluble lignin during analysis, contributing to an overestimation of the lignin content. Despite the minor dissolution of hemicellulosic sugars, extraction with mild alkali removed most of the extractives from the bark and improved the raw material mass closure to 95% in comparison to the 88% value obtained after water-ethanol extraction. After pretreatment, the extent of extractive removal and their reaction/precipitation with lignin was heavily dependent on the pretreatment conditions used. The selective removal of extractives and their quantification after a pretreatment proved to be even more challenging. Regardless of the amount of extractives that were originally present, the analytical methods could be refined to provide reproducible quantification of the carbohydrates present in both the starting material and after pretreatment.

Conclusion

Despite the challenges resulting from the heterogeneity of the initial biomass substrates a reasonable summative mass closure could be obtained before and after steam pretreatment. However, method revision and optimisation was required, particularly the effective removal of extractives, to ensure that representative and reproducible values for the major lignin and carbohydrate components.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Burkhardt et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Yacobucchi BD: Biofuels Incentives: A Summary of Federal Programs. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service; 2012.
• [2]Sims REH, Mabee W, Saddler JN, Taylor M: An overview of second generation biofuel technologies. Bioresour Technol 2010, 101:1570.
• [3]Stephen JD, Mabee WE, Saddler JN: Will second-generation ethanol be able to compete with first-generation ethanol? Opportunities for cost reduction. Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining 2012, 6:159-159.
• [4]Bradley D: Canada Report on Bioenergy 2010. In IEA, editor. Bioenergy Task 40. Ottawa: ON: Climate Change Solutions; 2010.
• [5]Johansson A, Aaltonen O, Ylinen P: Organosolv Pulping - Methods and Pulp Properties. Biomass 1987, 13(1):45-65.
• [6]Browning B: Methods of Wood Chemistry. New York: Interscience Publishers; 1967.
• [7]McCarthy JL, Islam A: Lignin Chemistry, Technology, and Utilization: A Brief History. Washington DC: American Chemical Society; 2000.
• [8]Pettersen RC: The Chemistry of Solid Wood. Washington DC: American Chemical Society; 1984.
• [9]TAPPI: Kappa number of pulp. Atlanta, GA: TAPPI; 1993.
• [10]Hatfield R, Fukushima RS: Can Lignin Be Accurately Measured? Crop Sci 2005, 45:832.
• [11]Morrison IM: A semi-micro method for the determination of lignin and its use in predicting the digestibility of forage crops. J Sci Food Agric 1972, 23:455.
• [12]Templeton DW, Scarlata CJ, Sluiter JB, Wolfrum EJ: Compositional Analysis of Lignocellulosic Feedstocks. 2. Method Uncertainties. J Agric Food Chem 2010, 58:9054.
• [13]NREL: Summative Mass Closure: Review and Integration. Laboratory Analytical Procedure. Golden, Colorado: National Renewable Energy Laboratory; 2011. http://www.nrel.gov/biomass/pdgs/48087.pdf webcite
• [14]NREL: Determination of Structural Carbohydrates and Lignin in Biomass. Laboratory Analytical Procedure. Golden, CO: NREL; 2008. http://www.nrel.gov/biomass/pdfs/42618.pdf webcite
• [15]Hames B: Biomass compositional analysis for energy applications. Biofuel Humana Press 2009, 2009:145-167.
• [16]Xu J, Cheng JJ, Sharma-Shivappa RR, Burns JC: Lime pretreatment of switchgrass at mild temperatures for ethanol production. Bioresour Technol 2010, 101:2900.
• [17]Li C, Knierim B, Manisseri C, Arora R, Scheller HV, Auer M, et al.: Comparison of dilute acid and ionic liquid pretreatment of switchgrass: Biomass recalcitrance, delignification and enzymatic saccharification. Bioresour Technol 2010, 101:4900.
• [18]Agblevor F, Chum HL, Johnson DK: Energy from Biomass and Wastes. Chigago, IL: Institute of Gas Technology; 1993.
• [19]Sjostrom E: Wood Chemistry: Fundamentals and Applications. 2nd edition. San Diego: Academic press; 1993.
• [20]Huang F, Singh PM, Ragauskas A: Characterization of Milled Wood Lignin (MWL) in Loblolly Pine Stem Wood, Residue, and Bark. J Agric Food Chem 2011, 59:12910.
• [21]Laks PE, Hon DS, Shiraishi N: Chemistry of Bark. New York: Marcel Dekke; 1991:257-257. [Wood and Cellulosic Chemistry]
• [22]Kim KH, Tucker M, Nguyen Q: Conversion of bark-rich biomass mixture into fermentable sugar by two-stage dilute acid-catalyzed hydrolysis. Bioresour Technol 2005, 96:1249.
• [23]Robinson JR, Keating JK, Boussaid AB, Mansfield SM, Saddler JS: The influence of bark on the fermentation of Douglas-fir whitewood pre-hydrolysates. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 2002, 59:443.
• [24]Nguyen Q, Tucker M, Boynton B, Keller F, Schell D: Dilute acid pretreatment of softwoods. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 1998, 70–72:77.
• [25]Sluiter JB, Ruiz RO, Scarlata CJ, Sluiter A, Templeton D: Compositional Analysis of Lignocellulosic Feedstocks. 1. Review and Description of Methods. J Agric Food Chem 2010, 58:9043.
• [26]Ewanick SM, Bura R, Saddler JN: Acid-catalyzed steam pretreatment of lodgepole pine and subsequent enzymatic hydrolysis and fermentation to ethanol. Biotechnol Bioeng 2007, 98:737.
• [27]Drost C, Ni Y, Shewchuk D: Effect of mature and juvenile wood from five wood species on kraft pulp strength. Pulp & Paper-Canada 2003, 104(11):33-36.
• [28]Zobel B: The changing quality of the world wood supply. Wood Sci Technol 1984, 18:1.
• [29]Yeh T-F, Goldfarb B, Chang H-m, Peszlen I, Braun JL, Kadla JF: Comparison of morphological chemical properties between juvenile wood and compression wood of loblolly pine. Holzforschung 2005, 59:669-669.
• [30]Bamber RK: A general theory for the orgin of growth stresses in reaction wood: How trees stay upright. IAWA Journal 2001, 22:205.
• [31]Blanchette RA, Obst JR, Timell TE: Biodegradation of Compression Wood and Tension Wood by White and Brown Rot Fungi. Holzforschung 1994, 48:34.
• [32]NREL: Determination of Extractives in Biomass. Laboratory Analytical Procedure. Golden, CO: NREL; 2005.
• [33]McIntosh S, Vancov T: Optimisation of dilute alkaline pretreatment for enzymatic saccharification of wheat straw. Biomass and Bioenergy 2011, 35:3094.
• [34]Miranda I, Gominho J, Mirra I, Pereira H: Chemical characterization of barks from Picea abies and Pinus sylvestris after fractioning into different particle sizes. Industrial Crops and Products 2012, 36:395.
• [35]Hemmingson JA: Steam-Explosion Lignins: Fractionation, Composition, Structure and Extractives. J Wood Chem Technol 1987, 7:527.
• [36]Kurth EF: The Chemical Composition of Barks. Chem Rev 1947, 40:33.
• [37]Pietarinen S, Willför S, Ahotupa M, Hemming J, Holmbom B: Knotwood and bark extracts: strong antioxidants from waste materials. J Wood Sci 2006, 52:436.
• [38]Ajuong E, Breese M: Fourier Transform Infrared characterization of Pai wood (Afzelia africana Smith) extractives. Eur J Wood and Wood Products 1998, 56:139.
• [39]Valentín L, Kluczek-Turpeinen B, Willför S, Hemming J, Hatakka A, Steffen K, et al.: Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris) bark composition and degradation by fungi: Potential substrate for bioremediation. Bioresour Technol 2010, 101:2203.
• [40]Yazaki Y, Collins P: Wood adhesives based on tannin extracts from barks of some pine and spruce species. Eur J Wood and Wood Products 1994, 52:307.
• [41]Vázquez G, Parajó JC, Antorrena G, Thonart P, Paquot M: Sugars from pine bark by enzymatic hydrolysis effect of sodium chlorite treatments. Wood Sci Technol 1987, 21:167.
• [42]Kofujita H, Ettyu K, Ota M: Characterization of the major components in bark from five Japanese tree species for chemical utilization. Wood Sci Technol 1999, 33:223.
• [43]Yazaki Y, Aung T: Alkaline extraction of Pinus radiata bark and isolation of aliphatic dicarboxylic acids. Holzforschung 1988, 42(6):357-360.
• [44]Phatak L, Chang KC, Brown G: Isolation and Characterization of Pectin in Sugar-Beet Pulp. J Food Sci 1988, 53:830.
• [45]Li J, Gellerstedt G: Improved lignin properties and reactivity by modifications in the autohydrolysis process of aspen wood. Industrial Crops and Products 2008, 27:175.
• [46]Kumar L, Chandra R, Saddler J: Influence of steam pretreatment severity on post-treatments used to enhance the enzymatic hydrolysis of pretreated softwoods at low enzyme loadings. Biotechnol Bioeng 2011, 108:2300.
• [47]Kumar L, Chandra R, Chung PA, Saddler J: Can the same steam pretreatment conditions be used for most softwoods to achieve good, enzymatic hydrolysis and sugar yields? Bioresour Technol 2010, 101:7827.
• [48]Kumar L, Tooyserkani Z, Sokhansanj S, Saddler J: Does densification influence the steam pretreatment and enzymatic hydrolysis of softwoods to sugars? Bioresour Technol 2012, 121:190.
• [49]Várnai A, Siika-aho M, Viikari L: Restriction of the enzymatic hydrolysis of steam-pretreated spruce by lignin and hemicellulose. Enzyme Microb Technol 2010, 46:185.
• [50]Kumar L, Arantes V, Chandra RP, Saddler JN: The lignin present in steam pretreated softwood binds enzymes and limits cellulose accessibility. Bioresour Technol 2012, 103:201.
• [51]Baysal E, Altinok M, Colak M, Kiyoka Ozaki S, Toker H: Fire resistance of Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menzieesi) treated with borates and natural extractives. Bioresour Technol 2007, 98:1101.
• [52]Kadla JF, Kubo S, Venditti RA, Gilbert RD, Compere AL, Griffith W: Lignin-based carbon fibers for composite fiber applications. Carbon 2002, 40:2913.
• [53]NREL: Preparation of Samples for Compositional Analysis. Laboratory Analytical Procedure. Golden, CO: NREL; 2008.
• [54]Schevchenko SM, Chang K, Robinson J, Saddler JN: Optimization of monosaccharide recovery by post-hydrolysis of the water-soluble hemicellulose component after steam explosion of softwood chips. Bioresour Technol 2000, 72:207.