Sie sind auf Seite 1von 16

Ethanol Production Using Organic

Waste
Daewon Pak, Jun Cheol Lee, Jae Hyung Kim
Graduate School of Energy and Environment
Seoul National University of Technology
Research Background
Bioethanol in Korea
3 - 5% ethanol blends 3 - 5% ethanol blends
High oil price High oil price
Reduce global warming gas Reduce global warming gas
3 - 5% ethanol blends
with gasoline
(E3 and E5)
3 - 5% ethanol blends
with gasoline
(E3 and E5)
Renewable energy
(5% of total energy in 2011)
Renewable energy
(5% of total energy in 2011)
Low bioenergy share
(5.3% of renewable energy
in 08)
Low bioenergy share
(5.3% of renewable energy
in 08)
Research Background
Organic waste produced in Korea
Food waste production Food waste production
(ton/day)
Separate collection (%)
Research Background
Food waste produced in Korea
ton/day
14,000
13,000 13,000
12,000
11,000
10,000
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Composition
C 46.1 ~ 48.1 %
H 6.8 ~ 7.2 %
pH 4.2~4.5
Ash 5 %
Research Background
Composition of kitchen refuse
H 6.8 ~ 7.2 %
O 32.4 ~ 36.7 %
N 3.5 ~ 4.1 %
Cl 1.9 ~ 2.2 %
Moisture
content
72.99 ~ 84.96 %
Crude Protein(%) 20~25 %
Crude Fiber(%) 8~20%
Crude Lipid(%) 5~15 %
Total Sugar(%) 47~54 %
weight percentage based on dry food wastes
Research Background
Food waste as alternative substrate for ethanol production
High sugar content
High potential of ethanol production
In abundant supply (about 5 million ton per year)
Potentially promising bioresource
High potential of ethanol production
High concentration of salt ( 1.9 2.2 %)
Does not lead to resource conflict (insufficient food supply)
Materials and Methods
pH
Salinity
(%)
Alkalinity
(mg/L)
Volatile
solid
(g/L)
Total solid
(g/L)
SCOD
(g/L)
TCOD
(g/L)
4.5 4.8 1.5-1.8 0.1 0.3 130 - 138 163 - 190 62 - 98 150 - 180
Substrate
Enzyme and microorganism
Microorganisms Saccharomyces
Enzyme
Carbohydrase (Asperrillus aculeatus, Viscozyme L)
Glucoamylase (Asperrillus niger, Spirizyme plus FG)
Materials and Methods
Experimental set-up
Enzymatic saccharification Enzymatic saccharification &
ethanol fermentation
Enzymatic saccharification of food waste using carbohydrase

control
Food wastes
Pre-
treatment
Saccharification
Enzyme
Hexose
00 03 06 09 12
0
5
10
15
20
25


g
l
u
c
o
s
e

c
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

(
g
)
time (hr)
control
0.36g(about 28.8 FBGU)
1.8g(about 144 FBGU)
3.6g(about 288 FBGU)
18g(about 1440 FBGU)
36g(about 2880 FBGU)
Enzymatic saccharification of food waste using carbohydrase
Dosage
Enzyme
Control 0.1% 0.5% 1.0% 5.0% 10.0%
Glucoamylase
(Spirizyme)
0.003 0.241 0.314 0.384 0.414 0.436
(Spirizyme)
0.003 0.241 0.314 0.384 0.414 0.436
Carbohydrase
(Viscozyme L)
0.003 0.379 0.481 0.495 0.522 0.627
Unit: g glucose/g total solids
Effect of salt concentration on S. cerevisiae for ethanol fermentation
60
80

E
t
h
a
n
o
l

c
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

(
m
g
/
L
)
control
NaCl 1%
NaCl 2%
NaCl 3%
00 04 09 14 19 24
0
20
40

E
t
h
a
n
o
l

c
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

(
m
g
/
L
)
Time (hr)
NaCl 3%
NaCl 5%
NaCl 10%
NaCl 15%
Comparison between S. cerevisiae and T. Ethanolics for ethanol production
4
6
8
10
2
3
4
5

g
l
u
c
o
s
e

(
g
)
glucose


ethanol
E
t
h
a
n
o
l

p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
(
g
)
(Mesophillic, yeast) S. cerevisiae T. Ethanolicus (Thermophillic, bacteria)
4
6
8
10
2
3
4
5

s
u
c
r
o
s
e

(
g
)
sucrose
ethanol
E
t
h
a
n
o
l

p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

(
g
)
00 03 06 09 12 15 18 21 24
0
2
4
0
1
2

g
l
u
c
o
s
e

(
g
)
Time (hr)
E
t
h
a
n
o
l

p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
(
g
)
Ethanol g / g-glucose
S. cerevisiae 0.51
T. ethanolicus 0.37
00020406081012141618202224262830323436384042444648505254
0
2
4
0
1
2
s
u
c
r
o
s
e

(
g
)
Time (hr)
E
t
h
a
n
o
l

p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

(
g
)
Separate enzymatic saccharification and ethanol fermentation
Saccharification
Enzyme
Food wastes Ethanol Fermentation
Microbes
Ethanol
00 12 24 36 48
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
glucose
inoculation

g
l
u
c
o
s
e

(
g
/

g

T
S
)
time (hr)
ethanol


e
t
h
a
n
o
l

(
g
/
g

T
S
)
0.8
1.0
0.8
1.0
glucose

g
l
u
c
o
s
e

(
g
/

g

T
S
)
ethanol
Simultaneous enzymatic saccharification and ethanol fermentation
Enzyme Microbes
00 12 24
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6

g
l
u
c
o
s
e

(
g
/

g

T
S
)
time (hr)

e
t
h
a
n
o
l
(
g
/
g

T
S
)
Saccharification &
Ethanol Fermentation
Food wastes
Ethanol
Comparison SHF and SSF
Ethanol production
SHF 0.43 g ethanol /g TS
SSF 0.31 g ethanol /g TS
Conclusions
Food waste is difficult to be utilized by ethanol producing microorganism. Pretreatment using
two different enzymes, carbohydrase (Aspergillus aculeatus, Viscozyme L) and glucoamylase
(Aspergillus niger, Spirizyme Plus FG) were tested for saccharification of food waste.
Carbohydrase was able to hydrolyze and produce glucose at 0.63 g glucose/g total solid
which was higher than glucoamylase.
The amount of carbohydrase added to food waste determines the rate of saccharification. As the
amount of enzyme addition increased, the rate of saccharification was increased. At higher than amount of enzyme addition increased, the rate of saccharification was increased. At higher than
1440 FBG of enzyme activity, the saccharification rate was not increased further.
In the separate enzymatic hydrolysis and ethanol fermentation, ethanol was produced at 0.43 g
ethanol /g TS. For simultaneous saccharification and ethanol fermentation, glucose concentration
increased rapidly and reached to a maximum which was less than the level obtained from the separate
saccharification and ethanol fermentation. Ethanol was produced at 0.31 g ethanol/g TS which
was less than the separate enzymatic hydrolysis and ethanol fermentation.