Integrated Sugar and Bioethanol Production from Sugarcane

UNIVERSITAS INDONESIA
INTEGRATED SUGAR AND BIOETHANOL PRODUCTION

FROM SUGARCANE
Report Assignment 1
GROUP 17
GROUP PERSONNEL:
Ahmad Jamal (1506746342)
Andreas Emil S. (1506746260)
Anissa Clarita (1506746374)
Dionisius Parsaoran W (1506746071)
Muhammad Fachri L. (1506717992)
CHEMICAL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

ENGINEERING FACULTY
DEPOK
SEPTEMBER 2018
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Sugarcane is an important commercial crop in Indonesia. It is the main

source of sugar produced for both export and domestic consumption. Currently,
most sugarcane is used for sugar production due to the its quantity. The total current
sugarcane production is above the Indonesia’s annual demand for the commodity.
Thus, research carried out in the country during the past ten years shows that the
Indonesia has become a net exporter of the commodity.
The increase in energy demand and environmental concerns is calling for a
shift to the use of renewable energy sources. Thus, sugarcane has a potential to be
developed as a biofuel as it converted into bioethanol with fermentation process.
Most of sugarcane have been projected to produce sugar, moreover, it could be
projected to produce bioethanol since the process is similar with sugar plant.
Several processes are needed to produce bioethanol from sugar, such as
fermentation and distillation. The bagasse from sugar production could be used to
produce bioethanol as well. Bioethanol also takes place to reduce sugar production
residual (bagasse). Bagasse only need to be hydrolysed, then coming through with
the fermentation and distillation processes, and then dehydrated to remove the water
content in ethanol. The integration of sugar and bioethanol plant has an advantage
over the stand-alone second generation bioethanol plant, because bagasse is already
available at the site of production, making it economically more favorable.
The annual sugar demand is 6.13 million tonne per year. This plant can
supply 0.8% of total sugar consumption, so the production capacity of our plant is
about 50,000 tonne per year from 350,000 tonne of sugarcane, with working hour
of 4000 hours per year. The ethanol is produced mainly from bagasse with a small
addition from molasses from sugar production. This plant will produce 14,307
tonnes of ethanol per year. The integrated plant will be located in Lamongan, East
Java due to some considerations such as approximity with raw material suppliers
and also the buyers of the product.
There are two major paths to produce bioethanol from biomass; by
biochemical conversion and thermochemical conversion. Biochemical conversion
utilizes microbial fermentation to produce ethanol, while thermochemical
ii Universitas Indonesia
conversion uses the process of gasification, producing syngas (H2 and C) and then
reassembling them to alcohol. Biochemical conversion is chosen because the
process has been developed and widely used in the industry, the operating condition
is much more sustainable than thermochemical process, and the cost is more
reasonable. The biochemical path undergoes pretreatment, hydrolysis,
fermentation, distillation, and dehydration.
Alkali pretreatment is chosen because it requires lower temperatures and
pressures than other pretreatment technologies. Enzymatic hydrolysis is chosen
because the process is simple, by using bacterial and fungi as biocatalyst, and the
cost is relatively cheaper than acid hydrolysis because chemical compounds are
relatively expensive. The fermentation process will be operated in batch reactor
with Saccharomyces as its yeast. For each kilogram of glucose, 470 grams of
ethanol can be produced, representing a yield of 92% of theoretical maximum. The
fermentation temperature will be 33oC. Ethanol from fermentation process is
recovered by distillation with temperature of at least 95oC.
The mass and energy balance calculation were done by using simulation in
both SuperPro and UniSim. Alternately, we did simulation that combine both
simulators. SuperPro was used because of its advantages which can proceed and
provide bio-solid material properties such as biomass, whereas UniSim cannot.
Based on the simulation, the sugar and ethanol that can be produced is 48000 tonne
and 14100 tonne per year, respectively, converted from 350,000 of sugarcane feed.
This ethanol-furfural production may reduce national ethanol needs. The
operational conditions - in the simulators - are obtained from many sources such as
paper, book, and trial-error to get the highest ethanol yield. The purity of ethanol is
93.6%. The production conversion efficiency is 17.93%, and the total energy
required per hour for the plant is 38,960 kWand the energy required to produce
sugar and bioethanol is 2,482.26 kW
iii Universitas Indonesia

TABLE OF CONTENT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................... ii

TABLE OF CONTENT ....................................................................................... iv
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................. vi
LIST OF TABLES .............................................................................................. vii
1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION.................................................................. 1
1.1. Background ............................................................................................. 1
1.2. Review of Literature .............................................................................. 2
1.2.1. Sucrose .............................................................................................. 3
1.2.2. Glucose.............................................................................................. 4
1.2.3. Bioethanol ......................................................................................... 5
1.3. Raw Material Selection ......................................................................... 8
1.4. Raw Material Analysis........................................................................ 10
1.4.1. Sugarcane ........................................................................................ 10
1.4.2. Calcium Oxide ................................................................................ 11
1.4.3. Saccharomyces cerevisiae ............................................................... 12
1.5. Market and Capacity Analysis ................................................................... 13
1.5.1. Market Segmentation ...................................................................... 13
1.5.2. Supply and Demand ........................................................................ 14
1.5.3. Capacity Analysis............................................................................ 16
1.5.4. Plant Location Analysis .................................................................. 17
CHAPTER II PROCESS SELECTION ........................................................... 18
2.1. Process Synthesis .................................................................................. 18
2.2. Process Description for Sugar Production ......................................... 18
2.2.1. Extraction of Sugarcane .................................................................. 19
2.2.2. Juice Treatment for Producing Sugar .............................................. 20
2.2.3. Concentration of Sugarcane Juice ................................................... 20
2.2.4. Crystallization and Separation of Sugars ........................................ 21
2.2.5. Sugar Drying ................................................................................... 21
2.3. Alternative Processes for Bioethanol Production .............................. 22
2.3.1. Biochemical Conversion ................................................................. 22
2.3.2. Thermochemical Conversion .......................................................... 24
2.4. Process Selection ................................................................................... 27
2.5. Synthesis of Process Selection.............................................................. 29
2.5.1. Lime Pretreatment ........................................................................... 29
2.5.2. Hydrolysis ....................................................................................... 32
2.5.3. Fermentation ................................................................................... 37
2.5.4. Distillation ....................................................................................... 40
2.5.5. Ethanol Dehydration ....................................................................... 41
2.6. Block Flow Diagram ............................................................................. 42
CHAPTER III MASS AND ENERGY BALANCE ......................................... 45
3.1 Mass Balance......................................................................................... 50
3.1.1 Mass Balance Washer ..................................................................... 50
3.1.2 Grinder 1 ......................................................................................... 51
3.1.3 Grinder 2 ......................................................................................... 52
3.1.4 Mills ................................................................................................ 53
iv Universitas Indonesia
3.1.5 Extractor ........................................................................................... 54
3.1.6 Sulphitation Process ......................................................................... 55
3.1.7 Heater 1 ............................................................................................ 56
3.1.8 Evaporator 1 ..................................................................................... 57
3.1.9 Evaporator 2 ..................................................................................... 59
3.1.10 Evaporator 3 ..................................................................................... 61
3.1.11 Evaporator 4 ..................................................................................... 63
3.1.12 Evaporator 5 ..................................................................................... 65
3.1.13 Crystalization Process ...................................................................... 67
3.1.14 Centrifugator 1 ................................................................................. 69
3.1.15 Heater 2 ............................................................................................ 71
3.1.16 Rotary Drying .................................................................................. 72
3.1.17 Sterilization Process ......................................................................... 74
3.1.18 Cooler ............................................................................................... 75
3.1.19 Hydrolysis Process ........................................................................... 76
3.1.20 Mixer ................................................................................................ 79
3.1.21 Fermentation Process ....................................................................... 81
3.1.22 Centrigugator 2 ................................................................................ 83
3.1.23 Distillation Coloumn ........................................................................ 85
3.2. Energy Balance ..................................................................................... 87
3.3. Product Conversion Efficiency............................................................ 87
3.4. Product Yield ........................................................................................ 88
3.5. Energy Consumption of Unit Product ................................................ 88
CHAPTER IV CONCLUSION.......................................................................... 89
REFERENCES .................................................................................................... 90
v Universitas Indonesia
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1. 2D Structure of Sucrose……………………………………………....4

Figure 1.2. 2D Structure of Glucose…………………………………………..….4
Figure 2.1. Process of sugar production from sugarcane……………………..…19
Figure 2.2. Biomass conversion path……………………………………………22
Figure 2.3. Integrated biogas and bioethanol
production………………………….………………………….…………………23
Figure 2.4. Conceptual Flow Diagram of Gasification based Biomass to Fuel
System……………………………………………………………………………25
Figure 2.5 Schematic diagram of the jacketed reactor system for lime pre-
treatment under nonoxidative (N2 supply) and oxidative (air supply) conditions.30
Figure 2.7. Simplified scheme of the distillation process for production of
hydrated ethanol…………………………………………………….……………41
Figure 2.8. Block Flow Diagram of Sugar and Ethanol Production from
Sugarcane………………………………………………………………………...42
Figure 2.9. PFD of Sugar Production……………………………………………43
Figure 2.10. PFD of Bioethanol Production……………………………………..44
Figure 3.1 SuperPro Simulation for Overall Plant………………………………46
Figure 3.2 SuperPro Simulation for Pre-Treatment……………………………..48
Figure 3.3 SuperPro Simulation for Juice Treatment……………………………47
Figure 3.4 SuperPro Simulation for Sugar Production………………………….48
Figure 3.5 SuperPro Simulation for Bioethanol Production………………..……49
vi Universitas Indonesia
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.1. Potential Raw Material Analysis………………………………………9

Table 1.2. Raw Material Scoring………………………………………………...10
Table 1.3. Bioethanol Producer and Production…………………………………14
Table 1.4. Total Bioethanol demand in Indonesia……………………………….15
Table 1.5. Composition of Sugarcane…………………………………………...16
Table 2.1. Comparison betweenbiochemical and thermochemical conversion…28
Table 2.2. Main Process Scoring………………………………………...………28
Table 2.3 Selected bacterial and fungi strains for glycosyl hydrase
production…….………………………………………………………………….28
Table 2.6. Hydrolysis Process Selection………………………………………...37
Table 2.7. Advantages and disadvantages of fermentation systems…………….38
Table 2.8. Operating conditions for Fermenter………………………………….40
Table 3.1 Mass Balance for Washer……………………………………………..50
Table 3.2 Mass Balance for Grinder……………………………………………..51
Table 3.3 Mass Balance for Grinder……………………………………………..52
Table 3.4 Mass Balance for Mills………………………………………………..53
Table 3.5 Mass Balance for Extractor…………………………………………...54
Table 3.6 Mass Balance for Sulphitation Process……………………………….55
Table 3.7 Mass Balance for Heater 1……………………………………………56
Table 3.8 Mass Balance for Evaporator 1 for Input Stream……………………..57
Table 3.9 Mass Balance for Evaporator 1 for Output Stream…………………...58
Table 3.10 Mass Balance for Evaporator 2 for Input Stream……………………59
Table 3.11 Mass Balance for Evaporator 2 for Outline Stream…………………60
Table 3.12 Mass Balance for Evaporator 3 for Output Stream………………….62
Table 3.14 Mass Balance for Crystalization Process for Input Stream………….67
Table 3.15 Mass Balance for Crystalization Process for Output Stream………..68
Table 3.16 Mass Balance for Centrifugator 1 for Input Stream…………………69
Table 3.17 Mass Balance for Centrifugator 1 for Output Stream……………….70
Table 3.15 Mass Balance for Heater 2…………………………………………..71
Table 3.16 Mass Balance for Rotary Drying for Input Stream………………….72
Table 3.16 Mass Balance for Rotary Drying for Output Stream………………...73
Table 3.17 Mass Balance for Sterilization Process……………………………...74
Table 3.18 Mass Balance for Cooler…………………………………………….75
Table 3.19 Mass Balance for Hydrolysis Process: Input Stream (1) ……………76
Table 3.19 Mass Balance for Hydrolysis Process: Input Stream (2) ……………77
Table 3.19 Mass Balance for Hydrolysis Process: Output Stream………………78
Table 3.20 Mass Balance for Mixer for Input Stream…………………………...79
Table 3.20 Mass Balance for Mixer for Output Stream…………………………80
Table 3.21 Mass Balance for Fermentation Process for Input Stream…………..81
Table 3.21 Mass Balance for Fermentation Process for Output Stream………...82
vii Universitas Indonesia

Table 3.22 Mass Balance for Centrifugator 2 for Inlet Stream………………….83
Table 3.22 Mass Balance for Centrifugator 2 for Outlet Stream………………..84
Table 3.23 Mass Balance for Distillation Coloumn for Inlet Stream……………85
Table 3.23 Mass Balance for Distillation Coloumn for Outlet Stream………….86
Table 3.24 Overall Energy Balance……………………………………………...89
viii Universitas Indonesia

1 CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background
As the growth of Indonesia’s industrial sector each year tends to increase,
the need for industrial raw materials will also rise. One of the most valuable feed
stock in chemical industry is ethanol because it has numerous applications for the
production of parfume, medicines, alcoholic beverages and dye. Ethanol, an organic
compound with the formula C2H6O, is mainly used as a solvent in the production
of food coloring.
The high need for ethanol in Indonesia is not currently fully supported by
the government or private companies. This causes Indonesia to import the material
from other countries. Whereas ethanol can be produced through fermentation
derived from biomass. Biomass-based ethanol plants have by-products namely
sugar. The sugar is produced in the stage of changing biomass to glucose. Hence, it
is a necessity to establish a manufacture of ethanol here in Indonesia.
Ethanol can be produced from bagasse, sweet potato, sugar cane, corn,
sorghum, beetroot, grass, and poplar. The source of ethanol which is quite potential
to be developed in Indonesia is sugar cane. Because it has long been known by
Indonesian farmers, the development of sugar cane to be processed into ethanol raw
materials is not too difficult. Sugar cane as a raw material for the sugar industry is
one of the plantation commodities which has a strategic role in the economy in
Indonesia. With an area of about 458.26 thousand hectares, the sugar industry made
from sugar cane is one of the sources of income for thousands of sugar cane farmers
and workers in the sugar industry. Sugar is also one of the basic needs for most
people and a relatively cheap source of calories. The increase in sugar consumption
in Indonesia from year to year provides wide opportunities for increasing the
production capacity of sugar mills. In addition, the amount of sugar production in
the country is currently felt unable to meet the needs of sugar in Indonesia. With
this step, the price of sugar cane will become stable so as to provide sufficient
profits for farmers.
1 Universitas Indonesia
2
1.2. Review of Literature

The efficiency of bioethanol production is obtained through the correct
selection of types of microorganisms, raw materials, and control of the fermentation
process. Drops are the remainder of the crystallizing process of sugar which still
contains sugar and organic acids so that it is a good raw material for ethanol
production. Compared to other raw materials, drops have the advantage that in
addition to the low price they also contain 50% simple sugar which can be
fermented directly by yeast into ethanol without pretreatment (Murtagh, 1995).
Floc-forming Saccharomyces cerevisiae is a yeast that is capable of forming floc or
cell clumps that settle rapidly in its growth medium, which plays an important role
in bioethanol production because it facilitates the purification process which
eliminates the centrifugation process so as to reduce production costs (Kida et al.,
1991).
Ethanol can be made in the following ways: Ethanol for consumption is
generally produced by fermentation or fermentation of food ingredients that contain
starch or carbohydrates, such as rice, and tubers. The reaction for fermentation is
as follow:
C6H12O6 → 2C2H5OH + 2CO2 + 311,2 kcal
Alcohol produced from the fermentation process is usually low. To get
higher levels of alcohol, the purification process is needed through distillation or
distillation. Ethanol for industrial use on a larger scale is produced from drip
fermentation, namely by-products in the sugar cane or sugar beet industry. Ethanol
fuel produced from sugar cane juice will be easier than carbohydrate fermentation
from corn. Beside that, sugar cane is also easier to plant, can produce sugar and the
pulp is used to produce electricity. Sugar cane plants can be harvested manually or
mechanically and can be transported to various regions. At the refinery, milled
sugarcane is pressed with a rotating cylinder to obtain the juice of sweet liquids and
leave fibrous residues or bagasse. Sweet liquid can be directly fermented by yeast
which will break down sugar into CO2 and ethanol. The distilled or heated ethanol
mixture is evaporated to obtain ethanol or alcohol with a 5% water content. This
alcohol can already be sold for car fuel. But if it is desired as an additive by adding
Universitas Indonesia
3
10% to gasoline (gasohol), then the alcohol needs to be purified up to 100%.

Purification up to 100% can be done by absorption.
1.2.1. Sucrose
Sucrose is a non-reducing disaccharide composed of glucose and fructose
linked via their anomeric carbons. It is obtained commercially from sugarcane,
sugar beet, and other plants and used extensively as a food and a sweetener. Sucrose
is derived by crushing and extraction of sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum) with
water or extraction of the sugar beet (Beta vulgaris) with water, evaporating, and
purifying with lime, carbon, and various liquids. Sucrose is also obtainable from
sorghum. Sucrose occurs in low percentages in honey and maple syrup. Sucrose is
used as a sweetener in foods and soft drinks, in the manufacture of syrups, in invert
sugar, confectionery, preserves and jams, demulcent, pharmaceutical products, and
caramel. Sucrose is also a chemical intermediate for detergents, emulsifying agents,
and other sucrose derivatives. Sucrose is widespread in seeds, leaves, fruits, flowers
and roots of plants, where it functions as an energy store for metabolism and as a
carbon source for biosynthesis. The annual world production of sucrose is in excess
of 90 million tons mainly from the juice of sugar cane (20%) and sugar beet (17%).
In addition to its use as a sweetener, sucrose is used in food products as a
preservative, antioxidant, moisture control agent, stabilizer and thickening agent.
Hydrolysis breaks the glycosidic bond converting sucrose into glucose and
fructose. Hydrolysis is, however, so slow that solutions of sucrose can sit for years
with negligible change. If the enzyme sucrose is added, however, the reaction will
proceed rapidly. Hydrolysis can also be accelerated with acids, such as cream of
tartar or lemon juice, both weak acids. Likewise, gastric acidity converts sucrose to
glucose and fructose during digestion, the bond between them being an acetal bond
which can be broken by an acid. Given (higher) heats of combustion of 1349.6
kcal/mol for sucrose, 673.0 for glucose, and 675.6 for fructose, hydrolysis releases
about 1.0 kcal (4.2 kJ) per mole of sucrose, or about 3 small calories per gram of
product.
4
Figure 1.1. 2D Structure of Sucrose

(Source: Sulaeman, 2017)
1.2.2. Glucose
Glucose is a monosaccharide containing six carbon atoms and an aldehyde
group and is therefore referred to as an aldohexose. The glucose molecule can exist
in an open-chain (acyclic) and ring (cyclic) form, the latter being the result of an
intramolecular reaction between the aldehyde C atom and the C-5 hydroxyl group
to form an intramolecular hemiacetal. In water solution both forms are in
equilibrium and at pH 7 the cyclic one is the predominant. Glucose is a primary
source of energy for living organisms. It is naturally occurring and is found in fruits
and other parts of plants in its free state. In animals glucose arises from the
breakdown of glycogen in a process known as glycogenolysis. Glucose is
synthesized in the liver and kidneys from non-carbohydrate intermediates, such as
pyruvate and glycerol, by a process known as gluconeogenesis. D-Glucose is found
to be associated with 3-methyl-crotonyl-glycinuria, growth hormone deficiency,
and primary hypomagnesemia, which are inborn errors of metabolism.
Figure 1.2. 2D Structure of Glucose

(Source: Sulaeman, 2017)
5
Glucose is the most abundant monosaccharide. Glucose is also the most

widely used aldohexose in most living organisms. One possible explanation for this
is that glucose has a lower tendency than other aldohexose to react nonspecifically
with the amine groups of proteins. This reaction-glycation-impairs or destroys the
function of many proteins, e.g. in glycated hemoglobin. Glucose's low rate of
glycation can be attributed to its having a more stable cyclic form compared to other
aldohexoses, which means it spends less time than they do in its reactive open-chain
form. The reason for glucose having the most stable cyclic form of all the
aldohexoses is that its hydroxyl groups (with the exception of the hydroxy group
on the anomeric carbon of D-glucose) are in the equatorial position. Presumably,
glucose is the most abundant natural monosaccharide because it is less glycated
with proteins than other monosaccharide. Another hypothesis is that glucose, being
the only D-aldohexose that has all five hydroxyl substituents in the equatorial
position in the form of β-D-glucose, is more readily accessible to chemical
reactions, for example, for esterification or acetal formation. For this reason, D-
glucose is also a highly preferred building block in natural polysaccharides
(glycans). Polysaccharides that are composed solely of Glucose are termed glucans.
Glucose is produced by plants through the photosynthesis using sunlight,
water and carbon dioxide and can be used by all living organisms as an energy and
carbon source. However, most glucose does not occur in its free form, but in the
form of its polymers, i.e. lactose, sucrose, starch and others which are energy
reserve substances, and cellulose and chitin, which are components of the cell wall
in plants or fungi and arthropods, respectively. These polymers are degraded to
glucose during food intake by animals, fungi and bacteria using enzymes. All
animals are also able to produce glucose themselves from certain precursors as the
need arises. Nerve cells, cells of the renal medulla and erythrocytes depend on
glucose for their energy production. In adult humans, there are about 18 g of
glucose, of which about 4 g are present in the blood. Approximately 180 to 220 g
of glucose are produced in the liver of an adult in 24 hours.
1.2.3. Bioethanol
The principle fuel used as a petrol substitute for road transport vehicles is
bioethanol. Bioethanol fuel is mainly produced by the sugar fermentation process,
6
although it can also be manufactured by the chemical process of reacting ethylene

with steam.
The main sources of sugar required to produce ethanol come from fuel or
energy crops. There is also ongoing research and development into the use of
municipal solid wastes to produce ethanol fuel.
Ethanol or ethyl alcohol (C2H5OH) is a clear colorless liquid, it is
biodegradable, low in toxicity and causes little environmental pollution if spilt.
Ethanol burns to produce carbon dioxide and water. Ethanol is a high octane fuel
and has replaced lead as an octane enhancer in petrol. By blending ethanol with
gasoline we can also oxygenate the fuel mixture so it burns more completely and
reduces polluting emissions. Ethanol fuel blends are widely sold in the United
States. The most common blend is 10% ethanol and 90% petrol (E10). Vehicle
engines require no modifications to run on E10 and vehicle warranties are
unaffected also. Only flexible fuel vehicles can run on up to 85% ethanol and 15%
petrol blends (E85).
Bioethanol has a number of advantages over conventional fuels. It comes
from a renewable resource i.e. crops and not from a finite resource and the crops it
derives from can grow well in the UK (like cereals, sugar beet and maize). Another
benefit over fossil fuels is the greenhouse gas emissions. The road transport network
accounts for 22% of all greenhouse gas emissions and through the use of bioethanol,
some of these emissions will be reduced as the fuel crops absorb the CO2 they emit
through growing. Also, blending bioethanol with petrol will help extend the life of
the UK’s diminishing oil supplies and ensure greater fuel security, avoiding heavy
reliance on oil producing nations. By encouraging bioethanol’s use, the rural
economy would also receive a boost from growing the necessary crops. Bioethanol
is also biodegradable and far less toxic that fossil fuels. In addition, by using
bioethanol in older engines can help reduce the amount of carbon monoxide
produced by the vehicle thus improving air quality. Another advantage of
bioethanol is the ease with which it can be easily integrated into the existing road
transport fuel system. In quantities up to 5%, bioethanol can be blended with
conventional fuel without the need of engine modifications. Bioethanol is produced
7
using familiar methods, such as fermentation, and it can be distributed using the
same petrol forecourts and transportation systems as before.
Ethanol can be produced from biomass by the hydrolysis and sugar
fermentation processes. Biomass wastes contain a complex mixture of carbohydrate
polymers from the plant cell walls known as cellulose, hemi cellulose and lignin.
In order to produce sugars from the biomass, the biomass is pre-treated with acids
or enzymes in order to reduce the size of the feedstock and to open up the plant
structure. The cellulose and the hemi cellulose portions are broken down
(hydrolysis) by enzymes or dilute acids into sucrose sugar that is then fermented
into ethanol. The lignin which is also present in the biomass is normally used as a
fuel for the ethanol production plants boilers. There are three principle methods of
extracting sugars from biomass. These are concentrated acid hydrolysis, dilute acid
hydrolysis and enzymatic hydrolysis.
The Arkanol process works by adding 70-77% sulphuric acid to the biomass
that has been dried to a 10% moisture content. The acid is added in the ratio of 1.25
acid to 1 biomass and the temperature is controlled to 50C. Water is then added to
dilute the acid to 20-30% and the mixture is again heated to 100C for 1 hour. The
gel produced from this mixture is then pressed to release an acid sugar mixture and
a chromatographic column is used to separate the acid and sugar mixture.
The dilute acid hydrolysis process is one of the oldest, simplest and most
efficient methods of producing ethanol from biomass. Dilute acid is used to
hydrolyse the biomass to sucrose. The first stage uses 0.7% sulphuric acid at 190C
to hydrolyse the hemi cellulose present in the biomass. The second stage is
optimized to yield the more resistant cellulose fraction. This is achieved by using
0.4% sulphuric acid at 215oC.The liquid hydrolates are then neutralized and
recovered from the process.
Instead of using acid to hydrolyse the biomass into sucrose, we can use
enzymes to break down the biomass in a similar way. However this process is very
expensive and is still in its early stages of development.
The hydrolysis process breaks down the cellulose part of the biomass or
corn into sugar solutions that can then be fermented into ethanol. Yeast is added to
the solution, which is then heated. The yeast contains an enzyme called invertase,
8
which acts as a catalyst and helps to convert the sucrose sugars into glucose and
fructose (both C6H12O6). The chemical reaction is shown below:
The fructose and glucose sugars then react with another enzyme called zymase,
which is also contained in the yeast to produce ethanol and carbon dioxide. The
chemical reaction is shown below:
The ethanol, which is produced from the fermentation process, still contains
a significant quantity of water, which must be removed. This is achieved by using
the fractional distillation process. The distillation process works by boiling the
water and ethanol mixture. Since ethanol has a lower boiling point (78.3oC)
compared to that of water (100oC), the ethanol turns into the vapor state before the
water and can be condensed and separated.
1.3. Raw Material Selection
Sugar and ethanol can be produced from various raw materials, with the
most common one being the first generation of bioethanol produced from feed
stock. The second generation of bioethanol, produced from biomass, will be
considered as well. The considerations for raw material selection are based on some
criterias shown in Table 1.1.
9
Table 1.1. Potential Raw Material Analysis

Feedstock Lignocellulosic Biomass
Criteria
Sugarcane Sorghum Corn Stover Rice Straw
The largest
The largest
producers of rice
East Java is the It is most producer of corn
are West Java,
largest available in East in Indonesia is
Central Java, and
producer of Nusa Tenggara each java with
East Java, with
Sugarcane and North the total
total production
(1,052,700 Sulawesi. Total production of
Availa- of 11-13 million
tonnes for the Sorghum 6.13 million
bility tonnes (2015) for
year of 2012), production in tonnes per year
each province.
almost half of Indonesia is not (2015). The
The rice straw
Indonesia's much, which is stover waste that
that can be
total sugarcane only about 7695 can be utilized is
utilized is around
production. tonnes (2012). about 320,000
11-19.5 tonnes
tonnes per year
per year.
Does not compete with feedstock

Side Can be processed to two main resource, more affordable raw
benefits products; sugar and ethanol material, reduces crop waste by
processing them
The average
Sugarcane to ethanol
Sugar: 120-160 production is 23-
Sugar content: 7- Lignocellulose to
kg/ton 27% of the total
12%, Ethanol Sugar: 21-39%.
Sugarcane to corn stover mass.
Yield produced directly Sugar to Ethanol:
Ethanol: 74 The ethanol is
from juice: 3000 42% from the
l/ton, Molasse produced from
L/ha sugar yielded.
to Ethanol: the hydrolysis of
256.78 l/ton glucose and
xylose.
Cost of
IDR 500,000 - IDR IDR IDR 220,000-
Raw
700,000/tonne 1,500,000/tonne 700,000/tonne 500,000/tonne
Material
(Source: Badan Pusat Statistik, 2017 (Reproduced))
10
Each potential raw material is scored and multiplied by a weight for each
criteria to determine the raw material which will be used. Based on the analysis, the
scoring table is shown below in Table 1.2.
Table 1.2. Raw Material Scoring

Sugarcane Sorghum Corn Stover Rice Straw
Criteria Weight
Rate Score Rating Score Rating Score Rating Score
Availa-
5 5 25 2 10 4 20 5 25
bility
Side
3 5 15 5 15 5 15 5 15
benefits
Yield 5 5 25 4 20 4 20 3 15
Cost of
Raw 5 4 20 2 10 4 20 5 25
Material
Total 19 85 13 55 17 75 18 80
Based on the scoring, sugarcane is selected as the raw material for sugar and
bioethanol plant. In the industry, one advantage for the integrated sugar and
bioethanol plant, rather than stand-alone second generation bioethanol plant is
clear: since they are already available at plant site (for bagasse). Second generation
bioethanol production may share part of the infrastructure where first generation
ethanol production takes place (for instance concentration, fermentation,
distillation, storage and cogeneration facilities). It also yields more product,
providing a more favorable economic result.
1.4. Raw Material Analysis
1.4.1. Sugarcane
Sugarcane, (Saccharum officinarum), perennial grass of the
family Poaceae, primarily cultivated for its juice from which sugar is processed.
Most of the world’s sugarcane is grown in subtropical and tropical areas.
The plant is also grown for biofuel production, especially in Brazil, as the canes can
be used directly to produce ethyl alcohol (ethanol). The by-products from cane
sugar processing, namely the straw and bagasse (cane fibres), can be used to
produce cellulosic ethanol, a second-generation biofuel. Other sugarcane products
include molasses, rum, and the plant itself can be used as thatch and
as livestock fodder.
11
1.4.2. Calcium Oxide

Calcium oxide, CaO, is also known as quicklime and can be prepared from
sea shells. Sea shells are composed of calcium trioxocarbonate(IV), CaCO3.The
action of strong heat upon CaCO3 produces calcium oxide, together with
carbon(IV) oxide.
CaCO3(s) → CaO(s) + CO2(g)
Calcium oxide has properties as follow:
1. It is a white solid.
2. It has a high melting point (about 600oC).
3. It is hygroscopic and is used to dry ammonia gas.
4. When water is added drop wise onto CaO, it cracks with a hissing sound and
breaks up into a powdery form, with the liberation of enormous heat. The
product formed is Ca(OH)2 and is known as slaked lime and the reaction
process is called slaking.
CaO(s) + H2O(l) → Ca(OH)2(s)
5. It is a strong base. It reacts with acids to form salts and water only. It displaces
ammonia from ammonium salts.
CaO(s) + 2HCl(aq) → CaCl2(aq) + H2O(l)
CaO(s) + 2NH4Cl(aq) → CaCl2(aq) +H2O(l) + 2NH3(g)
Calcium Oxide is a compound that can be used for so many applications in
the following ways:
1. In the manufacture of slaked lime, Ca(OH)2
2. In the building industry for the preparation of mortar and for the manufacture
of cement.
3. In the manufacture of calcium carbide.
4. In smelting processes.
5. In the manufacture of refractory furnace linings.
6. In the manufacture of glass.
7. For drying ammonia in the laboratory.
12
1.4.3. Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Saccharomyces cerevisiae is the most employed yeast for ethanol
production at industrial level though ethanol is produced by an array of other yeasts,
bacteria, and fungi. The characteristics of the yeast is described as follow:
 Adaptations: Saccharomyces cerevisiae has adapted in several important ways.
One is the fact that they are able break down their food through both aerobic
respiration and anaerobic fermentation. They can survive in an oxygen
deficient environment for a period. Another adaptation they have is their ability
to have both sexual and asexual reproduction. Very few other Ascomycota can
do both processes. And very few organisms can do all four of these processes.
This allows this species to live in many different environments. (Madigan, 457)
 Nutrition: Saccharomyces cerevisiae gets its energy from glucose.
 Life Cycle: Saccharomyces cerevisiae has both asexual and sexual
reproduction.
 In asexual reproduction the haploid of the yeast under goes mitosis and forms
more haploid yeasts. There is an a and ά strain of these haploids. Then these
haploid yeasts, one from each strain, can fuse together and become on cell.
Then the nuclei of both cell fuses together and this cell is now the zygote. These
diploid cells can go through mitosis, which they call budding, and four more
zygotes or they can under go meiosis and from an ascus which will split into
four ascospores. These haploids can then under go germination and become
haploid yeast again. (Madigan, 457)
 Importance: Saccharomyces cerevisiae is one of the most important fungi in
the history of the world. This yeast is responsible for the production of ethanol
in alcoholic drinks and is the reasons your mother’s bread dough rises in the
pan. That is where the names brewer’s and baker’s yeast come from. The
process in which it produces ethanol is one way this yeast converts glucose into
energy. There are two ways Saccharomyces cerevisiae breaks down glucose.
One way is through aerobic respiration. This process requires the presence of
oxygen. When oxygen is not present the yeast will then go through anaerobic
fermentation. The net result of this is two ATP, and it also produces two by
products; carbon dioxide and ethanol. So if this yeast is allowed to grow in a
13
container lacking oxygen it will produce ethanol (alcohol). Humans have been
isolating this process since the beginning of history. The yeast helps in the
rising of bread with it’s other by-product carbon dioxide. The gas that is
produce inside the dough causes it to rise and expand. Both of these processes
use the haploid of this yeast for this process. In industry they isolate one strain,
either a or ά, of the haploid to keep them from undergoing mating. (Madigan,
457) In the baker’s yeast they have a strain were the production of carbon
dioxide is more prevalent then ethanol and vice versa for brewing. Another
importance is that “live yeast supplementation to early lactating dairy goats
significantly increased milk production”. (Stella, A.V.;1)
1.5. Market and Capacity Analysis
1.5.1. Market Segmentation
The development of sugar imports during 2012-2016 was quite fluctuating.
In 2012-2013, the total weight of sugar imports experienced an increase of around
21.86 percent, while in 2014 it decreased by 12.26 percent. In 2014 the weight of
Indonesia's sugar imports reached 2.93 million tons with an import value of US $
1.31 billion. In 2015 the weight of sugar imports increased by around 14.87 percent
or to 3.37 million tons with a value of US $ 1.25 billion. In 2016 the weight of
imported sugar experienced a significant increase to 4.75 million tons or an increase
of around 40.83 percent and its value reached US $ 2.08 billion.
The lack of domestic sugar supply requires Indonesia to import sugar from
various countries. The government urges and supprots the idea of the use of
bioethanol as an alternative for conventinal fuel, as a plan fo r the future. Although
one of the problem is the produced ethanol is only being used as a foodstock and
the rest would be transported for export purposes, if the ethanol produced want to
be used as a fuel then the fuel grade must be enhanced to about 99.5% fuel grade
(Rinaldy Dalimi, DEN member 2017). This thing will make the fuel become so
expensive. As for the market segmentation of Ethanol, we are assuming that it will
be sold domestically, in Indonesia. Although, the production capacity has been
constantly increasing over the last years, but it is still insufficient to meet the full
demand.
14
1.5.2. Supply and Demand

1.5.2.2. Sugar
Domestic sugar production continues to fluctuate from 2012 to 2016. Total
production in 2012 was 2.59 million tons, in 2013 it was 2.55 million tons, in 2014
it was 2.58 million tons, in 2015 it was 2.53 million tons, and in 2016 amounted to
2.33 million tons. Due to the absence of data on the amount of sugar needed in
Indonesia, the amount of sugar needs will be calculated based on the amount of
sugar production in the country and added with the amount of sugar imports carried
out. In 2012-2013, the total weight of sugar imports experienced an increase of
around 21.86 percent, while in 2014 it decreased by 12.26 percent. In 2014 the
weight of Indonesia's sugar imports reached 2.93 million tons with an import value
of US $ 1.31 billion. In 2015 the weight of sugar imports increased by around 14.87
percent or to 3.37 million tons with a value of US $ 1.25 billion. In 2016 the weight
of imported sugar experienced a significant increase to 4.75 million tons or an
increase of around 40.83 percent and its value reached US $ 2.08 billion. So the
amount of sugar demand in Indonesia in 2014 was 5.41 million tons, in 2015 it was
5.9 million tons, and in 2016 it was 7.08 million tons.
1.4.2.2. Ethanol
First, we have to calculate how much ethanol which have been produced in
Indonesia until now. Then we calculate the import and export flow of ethanol so it
will be known the total supply value of ethanol. The list of current ethanol producer
can be seen in table below.
Table 1.3. Bioethanol Producer and Production
Raw Production
Producer Location
Material (kL/year)
PT. Molindo
Molasses Malang
Raya 30000
PT. Energi Agro
Molasses Mojokerto
Nusantara 30000
Total Production 60000
(Source: Kompas, 2014)
15
From the table we know that current ethanol production each year in
Indonesia is around 60000 kL/year. Based on Indonesia biofuels annual report
2017, we found that ethanol demand is always increasing in these few years as well
as for the future demand. The demand projection of ethanol can be seen in the table
below.
Table 1.4. Total Bioethanol demand in Indonesia
Bioethanol Demand
Year
(KL/year)
2009 314.333
2010 323.994
2011 333.714
2012 434.725
2013 354.073
2014 364.658
2015 375.598
2016 386.866
2017 398.472
2018 410.426
2019 422.739
2020 435.421
2021 448.483
2022 461.938
2023 475.795
2024 490.07
2025 504.772
2026 519.915
2027 535.513
(Source: BPPT, 2016)
16
1.5.3. Capacity Analysis

1.5.3.1. Sugar
To determine our sugar plant product capacity, we take the average value of
the annual demand above and it will take:
𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑢𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝐶𝑎𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦 = 𝐴𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑆𝑢𝑔𝑎𝑟 𝐷𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑛𝑑
𝐴𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑆𝑢𝑔𝑎𝑟 𝐷𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑛𝑑 = 𝟔. 𝟏𝟑 𝒎𝒊𝒍𝒍𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝒕𝒐𝒏𝒏𝒆/𝒚𝒆𝒂𝒓
This plant can supply 0.8% of total sugar consumption, so the production capacity
of our plant is about
𝑆𝑢𝑔𝑎𝑟 𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑢𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝐶𝑎𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦 = 0.8% × 6.13 𝑚𝑡𝑝𝑦 = 50,000 𝑡𝑜𝑛𝑛𝑒
Therefore, the minimum amount of our industry production capacity would be
50,000 tonne/year.
1.5.3.2. Ethanol
To determine the ethanol production capacity, we calculate the amount of
sugarcane that we use in one year.
𝑆𝑢𝑔𝑎𝑟𝑐𝑎𝑛𝑒 𝑓𝑒𝑒𝑑 = 350000 𝑡𝑜𝑛𝑛𝑒/𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟
As we know one of the materials to make produce is bagasse. After that we have to
calculate the amount of bagasse in sugarcane composition that we produce in one
year. Composition of sugarcane can be seen in Table 1.5.
Table 1.5. Composition of Sugarcane
Composition Mass%
Sucrose 13.85%
Water 69.35%
Bagasse 15.14%
Redicing sugars 0.59%
(Source: Pina, 2015)
With 1 tonne bagasse we can produce 27% ethanol. So the amount of
ethanol can be produced is 14,307 tonne per year, with a small addition of the
bioethanol from molasses yielded from the sugar production.
17
1.5.4. Plant Location Analysis

Plant location is an important factor that affect the plant activities, raw
material procurements, manufacturing process, and the distribution of the products
to customers. Selecting plant location requires several considerations, as it
indirectly affect the production cost and the distribution of the products. There are
several factors that we consider when selecting our plant location, as mentioned
below:
 Accessibility
The plant must be located near the raw materials suppliers, or at least located
near a facility in which the raw materials can be transported to. The plant should
also be located in a place where the products can be transported to customers
with ease and fast. We choose our plant near the raw material supplier
(sugarcane), PT Kebun Tebu Mas, along with other sugarcane producing farms.
 Availability
Another consideration is the availability of the lot size for our plant. Our plant
size depends on the equipment’s sizes, as well as another facility that we want
to build in our plant, so we need to consider the equipment specifications and
facilities before choosing the suitable lot for our plant.
 Facility
The main and crucial facilities for our plant are running water and electricity.
Another thing to consider is the availability of a place where we can do waste
treatment.
 Cost
Cost is the most crucial part for deciding the location for our plant. Each region
in Indonesia has their own electricity and water pricing regulations, tax price and
land pricing. These aspects have to be considered when we have to pick a place
for our plant.
From the considerations mentioned above, it has been decided that the plant
will be located in Lamongan, East Java Site is located near our primary raw material
supplier, PT Kebun Tebu Mas along with other sugarcane farms. It is also located
near the Tanjung Perak Port, making the transportation of other raw materials and
products easier.
CHAPTER II
PROCESS SELECTION
2.1. Process Synthesis

This plant design is generally related to the system and method through the
production of sugar and ethanol. The typical mill has an upfront section that is
common to the ethanol distillery and sugar factory composed by the following
processes: cane reception, cane preparation, and juice extraction. The extracted
juice is sent to the juice treatment system, in which impurities are removed from
the juice, in order to provide an adequate material for the subsequent steps; although
most of the operations of juice treatment are common for both sugar and ethanol
production, each process has its own specificities. During processing in the sugar
factory, a concentrated residual solution obtained after sugar crystallization
(molasses) is produced.
Ethanol can be produced either from the sugarcane juice, molasses, bagasse,
or the combination of the three. There are two different paths to produce ethanol
from the sugarcane residue; biochemical conversion, and thermochemical
conversion. With biochemical conversion, sugarcane from the ethanol juice
treatment is blended with molasses, and hydrolysed bagasse, fermented using yeast
(which is recovered and reused in the fermentation process), and the fermentation
product containing ethanol is sent for distillation and dehydration. In the sugar
house the juice is concentrated, crystallized, centrifuged, and dried. With
thermochemical conversion, bagasse can be utilized to produce bioethanol. The
bagasse is milled, dried, gasified, compressed, and alcohol is then synthesized.
Ethanol is then purified from methanol and higher alcohols.
There are some alternatives from the pretreatment process of converting
biomass to sugar and ethanol. The process selection is then will be analyzed by
using heuristic approach and the scoring method.
2.2. Process Description for Sugar Production
The process of producing sugar from sugarcane consist of harvesting,
milling, sulfitation, liming, heating, clarification, evaporation, cooling,
crystallization and centrifugation, and drying. The process is shown in Figure 2.1.
19
Figure 2.1. Process of sugar production from sugarcane.

(Source: Amores, 2013)
2.2.1. Extraction of Sugarcane
Upon arrival at the factory, mechanically harvested sugarcane is discharged
upon tables and sent to the cleaning system or directly to the feeding tables that lead
to the cane preparation section. In the case of chopped sugarcane, a dry-cleaning
system should be used in order to prevent sugar losses. In this stage some mineral
and vegetable impurities are removed and cleaned cane is sent to cane preparation.
The efficiency of soil removal in the cleaning process is 70%. Sugarcane is chopped
in a series of knives and shredders which promote cell opening and lead to a uniform
cane layer, producing an adequate material for the subsequent step (juice
extraction). Previously to extraction, a magnet is used for metal removal.
Juice extraction is mainly carried out using mills, which consist of sets of
three to five rolls where sugarcane is pressed, separating juice from bagasse (fibrous
fraction of the sugarcane stalks). Bagasse is sent to cogeneration system with
moisture 50% contain. The cogeneration system in ethanol and sugar plants is
commonly composed by a steam cycle using sugarcane bagasse as fuel in the boiler.
The efficiency of sugar extraction in extraction system is 96.2%. Juice extraction is
usually groups of four to six mills in tandem (sets of rolls) are employed, with
bagasse from the first mill being fed to the subsequent mill and so forth; warm water
for imbibition is added in the last tandem, increasing sugar recovery in the juice.
Juice produced in the last tandem is used as imbibition to increase the extraction of
sugars in the previous tandem, and so forth up to the third mill tandem. Sugarcane
20
juice is sent to a screen, where a fraction of the fibers dragged with the juice are
removed and recycled to the second mill for recovery of sugars. Usually, juice from
the first mill is sent to sugar production because it contains higher sugar purity,
while juice obtained in the second mill (called mixed juice) is diverted for ethanol
production.
Mills and other equipment in the cane preparation are usually driven by
steam turbines, which require more energy as steam than electric energy in efficient
electric engines. Diffusers can also be used in juice extraction with increased sugar
recovery and less energy consumption than the milling tandem (Palacios-Bereche,
2014).
2.2.2. Juice Treatment for Producing Sugar
The juice treatment for sugar production begins with the screening and the
sulphitation process in order to remove some colour components of juice. Then the
juice is heated first at 105oC.
Juice treatment for sugar production is ideally comprised by the same steps
as the juice treatment for ethanol production for production of raw sugar (VHP –
very high polarization, or VVHP – very very high polarization). However, more
CaO is necessary for sugar production in comparison with ethanol. CaO consumtion
is 0.5 kg/ton cane. In the production of white sugar, SO2 must be added in order to
decrease the color of the syrup in a process called sulphitation. Sucrose contain in
filter cake is 2% and moisture contain in filter cake is 70%.
2.2.3. Concentration of Sugarcane Juice
The concentration of treated juice for sugar also takes place in a multiple-
effect evaporation system of 5 effects until sucrose content of 55.4% (syrup). The
evaporator is arranged in series at a pressure of 1.69 bar, 1.31 bar, 0.93 bar, 0.54
bar and 0.16 bar. Vapour bleedings with different pressures and temperatures
resulting from the concentration process are used to cover heat demands in other
parts of the plant. For this case, without consider the heat integration, vapour
bleedings of first effect are used for heating in juice treatment and for heating the
vacuum pans in crystallization step.
21
2.2.4. Crystallization and Separation of Sugars

The syrup obtained in concentration step is sent to the crystalization process,
which is accomplished in vacuum pans, in order to maintain low temperatures in
massecuite, which has high content of soluble solids. In this way, problems of
sucrose inversion can be avoided. Vapour bleeding from the first effect is used for
heating vacuum pans. Then, sugar is separated from molasses through centrifugal
separation.
Different types of sugar can be produced: export (VHP or VVHP) and white
sugar, for the domestic market; the main difference between them is the chemical
treatment, which includes sulphitation in the white sugar production. In the two-
boiling system, two types of sugars are produced. In the first centrifuge A-
massecuite (produced in the first vacuum pan- crystallizer sequence) is fed, sugar
crystals are washed with water (and/or steam) and the run-off syrup (mother liquor)
is drained, producing grade A sugar and A-molasses. These A-molasses are sent to
pan B, where A-molasses are concentrated by evaporation and crystallization is
initiated by seeding, consisting of the introduction of fine sucrose crystals. After an
appropriate residence time, which depends on the type of equipment and agitation
used, the B-massecuite is sent to the crystallizer, which includes a cooling system
where further crystallization takes place and the mixture is stored prior to being
centrifuged. Afterwards, B-massecuite is centrifuged in continuous basket
centrifuges generating grade B sugar (magma) and molasses, which are sent to
alcoholic fermentation. This grade B sugar is an intermediate sugar stream that is
recycled and used as seed for the crystallization of A-massecuite in pan A. The A-
massecuite is sent to the crystallizer, promoting further crystallization, and then it
is feed in the basket centrifuge, producing A-sugar and A-molasses. The grade A
sugar produced is either white sugar or raw sugar, depending on prior process
characteristics.
2.2.5. Sugar Drying
Finally, air at 100oC heated by turbines exhaust steam is used to reduce the
sugar moisture content in the drying process. Sugar produced in the centrifuges is
usually dried in a rotary drum drier, in which its moisture is reduced to around 0.05–
22
2.0% depending on the type of sugar produced, then cooled and stored prior to
distribution.
2.3. Alternative Processes for Bioethanol Production
In biomass conversion, there are few processes to convert biomass into
energy according to its product, as shown in Figure 2.2.
Figure 2.2. Biomass conversion path.

(Source: Chung et. al, 2013)
2.3.1. Biochemical Conversion
Biochemical conversion entails breaking down biomass to make the
carbohydrates available for processing into sugars, which can then be converted
into biofuels and bioproducts by the use of microorganism. The process of ethanol
production by biochemical conversion is shown in the Figure 2.3.
23
Figure 2.3. Integrated biogas and bioethanol production

(Source: Rabelo et. al, 2011)
a. Pretreatment
In plants, cellulose is protected by a sheath of lignin and hemicellulose.
Pretreatment is done to hydrolyze hemicellulosic sugars and open up the structure
of biomass to allow further enzyme hydrolysis of the cellulose to glucose.
b. Hydrolysis
The general concept of conversion of cellulosic fraction into fermentable
sugars involves the pretreatment of the raw material folloed by its enzymatic
hydrolysis. Enzymatic hydrolysis is an ideal approach for degrading cellulose into
reducing sugars because mild reaction conditions (pH between 4.8 to 5.0 and
temperature between 45 to 50oC) can be used; it does not present corrosion
problems in the reactors and result in negligible byproduct formation with high
sugar yields. However, hydrolysis depends on optimized conditions for maximal
efficiency (hydrolysis temperature, time, pH, enzyme loading, and substrate
concentration) and suffers from end-product inhibition and biomass structural
restraints. To overcome the end-product inhibition and reducing the time,
hydrolysis and fermentation can be combined, so-called simultaneous
24
saccharification and fermentation (SSF), or simultaneous saccharification and

cofermentation (SSCF). (Canilha, et.al., 2012)
c. Fermentation
Fermentation is an anaerobic process (occurs in the absence of oxygen) that
breaks down the glucose within organic materials. It is a series of chemical reactions
that convert sugars to ethanol. The basic fermentation process involves the
conversion of a plant’s glucose (or carbohydrate) into alcohol or acid.
Microorganisms are added to the biomass material, which feed on the sugars to
produce ethanol (an alcohol and carbon dioxide).
d. Distillation
The ethanol obtained from fermentation is distilled and dehydrated to obtain
a higher concentration of alcohol to achieve the required purity for the use as
automotive fuel. The vinasse residue from the fermentation process can be used as
feed for anaerobic digestion to produce methane.
2.3.2. Thermochemical Conversion
Thermochemical conversion technologies rely on heat and/or physical
cataysts to break cellulose from biomass into syngas (CO and H2) and reassemble
it into products such as ethanol. The cellulose with lignin-rich parts cannot be easily
converted biochemically. Cellulose in biomass is burned into syngas. The gases
formed then go to tar reformer to be cleaned to get closer to pure CO and H2. The
cleaned gas compress and run across a catalyst that will make the gases back up
into molecules like ethanol or hydrocarbons. The process conversion biomass into
ethanol is in catalytic synthesis process. Energy requirement for thermochemical
process is very high because it requires high temperature.
The major products are alcohol. Alcohol yielded from the synthesis process
is high, but it consists of various alcohols. The ethanol is the major product in the
synthesis of alcohol is about 80%. The minor product are higher alcohols and small
quantities of aldehydes and methyl ester. The simplified flow diagram of the
process is shown in Figure 2.4.
25
Figure 2.4. Conceptual Flow Diagram of Gasification based Biomass to Fuel System
(Source: Puettmann et. al, 2011)
a. Feed Handling and Preparation
The biomass feed stock is dried to 10 wt% moisture using hot flue gases
from the char combustor and tar reformer catalyst regenerator.
b. Gasification
Biomass is indirectly gasified. Heat for the gasification reactions is supplied
by circulating synthetic olivine sand that is pre-heated in a char combustor and fed
to the gasifier. Steam is injected into the gasifier to stabilize the flow of biomass
and olivine through the gasifier. Gasification temperature is typically >850oC.
Within the gasifier, biomass thermally deconstructs to a mixture of syngas
components (CO, H2, CO2, CH4, etc), tars, and solid char containing residual
carbon from the biomass and coke deposited on the olivine. Cyclones at the exit of
the gasifier separate the char and olivine from the syngas. The solids flow to the
char combustors where the char is burned in air in a fluidized bed, resulting in
olivine temperatures greater than 982oC. The hot olivine and residual ash is carried
out of the combustor by the combustion gases and separated using a pair of
cyclones.
26
c. Gas Cleanup
Syngas cleanup is defined as reforming of tars, methane, and other
hydrocarbons followed by cooling, quench, and scrubbing of the syngas for
downstream operations. The water gas shift reaction also occurs in the reformer.
Tars, methane, and light hydrocarbons are reformed to syngas in a circulating,
fluidized, solid catalyst system that resembles a small-scale fluid catalytic cracker
(FCC), complete with reforming and regeneration operations in separate beds. The
syngas is reacted with tar reforming catalyst in an entrained flow. The catalyst is
then separated from the effluent syngas in a cyclone. From the cyclone, the spent
catalyst flows to the catalyst regenerator.
The hot catalyst is separated from the combustion flue gas in the regenerator
cyclone and flows back to the tar reformer reactor to provide the energy necessary
for the reforming reactions. Additional syngas and unreacted gases from the
methanol synthesis reactor may also be combusted to provide all the heat necessary
for the endothermic reforming reactions. The hot reformed syngas is cooled
through heat exchange with other process streams and scrubbed with water to
remove persistent impurities such as particulates, ammonia, halides, and
recalcitrant tars. Scrubber water is purged and treated continuously in an on-site
wastewater treatment facility.
d. Syngas Compression
Cooled low pressure syngas enters a six-stage centrifugal compressor
system where the pressure is increased to approximately 3,000 psi (207 bar). The
pressurized syngas is fed to the tube sides of two vertical tubular reactors (shell
and tube type) operating in parallel.
e. Alcohol Synthesis
A sulfide-type mixed alcohol catalyst is packed within the tube of the
reactor, which is oriented in a down-flow configuration. Reactions at above 300oC
convert a portion of the syngas to oxygenate and hydrocarbon products. Heat from
the reactions is removed by the steam generation in the shell side of the tubular
reactor. The reactor effluent consisting of mixed alcohols, gaseous by-products,
and unconverted syngas is cooled through heat exchange with other process
streams As the reactor effluent cools, alcohols and water are condensed and sent to
27
downstream separation and purification equipment. Unconverted syngas and gas-

phase byproducts flow to an acid gas removal. Once the H2S and CO2 are
removed, the syngas is recompressed through the reactor and acid gas clean up
system, and is recycled to the alcohol synthesis reactors.
f. Alcohol Separation
Cooled crude alcohols are depressurized and degassed in a flash separator.
The evolved gas is recycled to the gas cleanup section as a feed to the tar remover.
The depressurized liquid stream is dehydrated using a molecular sieve system.
Downstream of the molecular sieve, the dehydrated alcohol stream is introduced
to the crude alcohol distillation column, which separates methanol and ethanol
from higher molecular weight alcohols. The overhead stream from the crude
alcohol is separated in a second column to a crude methanol stream and an ethanol
product that meets ASTM fuel ethanol specifications. The methanol overhead
stream is split and utilized for other purposes.
2.4. Process Selection
Before determining the main process to the base of this plant, both processes
are compared according to the criterions below:
 Operating conditions stability
Temperature and pressure of reactors and other equipments.
 Yield of process
Amount of ethanol production.
 Time for process
Amount of time needed for conversion.
 Capital and operating expenses
Capital and operating cost will determine feasibility of the plant.
 Field experience
Field experience represents the technology, whether it is widely used,
developed, and safe.
 Manufacturing
Difficulty in manufacturing will determine payback period of the plant
28
 Waste treatment
Waste treatment may be directly discared, recycled, or processed as materials
in process based on Human Safety Environment
Each criterion will have a percentage that will be used to evaluate the
qualifying process. Both biochemical and thermochemical processes are compared
and then scoring with a matrix of scoring described below:
 1 = worst
 2 = worse
 3 = acceptable
 4 = better
 5 = best
Table 2.1. Comparison betweenbiochemical and thermochemical conversion.

No Criteria Biochemical Thermochemical
Conversion Conversion
1 Operating condition 30oC, pH 4.5 Gasification: >850oC
sustainability Alcohol Synthesis:
300oC
2 Yield of process 34-36 g/L of glucose Alcohol: High
Ethanol: Medium
3 Time for process 90 hours of Shorter
fermentation
4 Capital and Medium High
operating expenses
5 Field experience Common
6 Manufacturing Short term Short term
7 Waste Treatment Waste from ethanol High emission, more
production is waste
integrated for
cogeneration
Table 2.2. Main Process Scoring

No Criteria Percentage Biochemical Thermochemical
Rating Score Rating Score
1 Operating 10%
0.4
condition 4 2 0.2
sustainability
2 Yield of 25%
4 1 3 0.75
process
29
Table 2.2. Main Process Scoring (continued)

No Criteria Percentage Biochemical Thermochemical
Rating Score Rating Score
3 Time for 20%
4 0.6 4 0.8
process
4 Capital and 15%
operating 3 0.45 4 0.6
expenses
5 Field 10%
4 0.4 0.3
experience
6 Manufacturing 15% 3 0.2 4 0.6
7 Waste 5%
4 0.45 2 0.1
Treatment
Total 100% 3.5 3.35
Rank 1 2
From the scoring, it can be concluded that biochemical conversion is
preferred due to higher ethanol yield and better operatin sustainability. The
technology for this process is also more developed, and the yield is specific towards
ethanol production. Whereas in thermal conversion, despite ethanol being the main
product, the process yields other alcohols as well.
2.5. Synthesis of Process Selection
Biological conversion of cellulosic biomass (sugarcane bagasse) to fuels
and chemicals offers the high yields to products vital to economic success and the
potential for very low costs.
2.5.1. Lime Pretreatment
Some bases can be used for the pretreatment of lignocellulosic materials,
and the effect of alkaline pretreatment depends on the lignin content of the
materials. Alkali pretreatment processes utilize lower temperatures and pressures
than other pretreatment technologies. Alkali pretreatment can be carried out at
ambient conditions, but pretreatment times are on the order of hours or days rather
than minutes or seconds. Compared with acid processes, alkaline processes cause
less sugar degradation, and many of the caustic salts can be recovered and/or
regenerated. Sodium, potassium, calcium, and ammonium hydroxides are suitable
alkaline pretreatment agents. Of these four, sodium hydroxide has been studied the
most.89-92 However, calcium hydroxide (slake lime) has been shown to be an
effective pretreatment agent and is the least expensive per kilogram of hydroxide.
30
It is possible to recover calcium from an aqueous reaction system as insoluble

calcium carbonate by neutralizing it with inexpensive carbon dioxide; the calcium
hydroxide can subsequently be regenerated using established lime kiln technology.
The apparatus for the laboratory-scale lime pretreatment of biomass. The process
of lime pretreatment involves slurrying the lime with water, spraying it onto the
biomass material, and storing the material in a pile for a period of hours to weeks.
The particle size of the biomass is typically 10 mm or less. Elevated temperatures
reduce contact time.
Figure 2.5 Schematic diagram of the jacketed reactor system for lime pretreatment under
nonoxidative (N2 supply) and oxidative (air supply) conditions.
(Source: Rapello, 2011)
The enzymatic hydrolysis of lime-treated biomass is affected by structural
features resulting from the treatment. These are the extents of acetylation,
lignification, and crystallization. Lime pretreatment removes amorphous
substances (e.g., lignin and hemicellulose), which increases the crystallinity index.
Chang et al. reported correlations between enzymatic digestibility and three
structural factors: lignin content, crystallinity, and acetyl content. They concluded
that (1) extensive delignification is sufficient to obtain high digestibility regardless
of acetyl content and crystallinity, (2) delignification and deacetylation remove
parallel barriers to enzymatic hydrolysis; and (3) crystallinity significantly affects
initial hydrolysis rates but has less of an effect on ultimate sugar yields. These
31
results indicate that an effective lignocellulose treatment process should remove all
of the acetyl groups and reduce the lignin content to about 10% in the treated
biomass. Therefore, alkaline pretreatment can play a significant role in exposing
the cellulose to enzyme hydrolysis.
Lignin removal increases enzyme effectiveness by eliminating
nonproductive adsorption sites and by increasing access to cellulose and
hemicellulose. Kim et al. pretreated corn stover with excess calcium hydroxide [0.5
g of Ca(OH)2/g of raw biomass] in nonoxidative (in the presence of nitrogen) and
oxidative (in the presence of air) conditions at 25, 35, 45, and 55 °C. The enzymatic
digestibility of lime-treated corn stover was affected by the change of structural
features such as acetylation, lignification, and crystallization resulting from the
treatment. Extensive delignification required oxidative treatment and additional
consumption of lime [up to 0.17 g of Ca(OH)2/g of biomass]. Deacetylation reached
a plateau within 1 week, and there were no significant differences between
nonoxidative and oxidative conditions at 55 °C; both conditions removed
approximately 90% of the acetyl groups in 1 week at all temperatures studied.
Delignification highly depended on temperature and the presence of oxygen. Lignin
and hemicellulose were selectively removed or solubilized, but cellulose was not
affected by lime pretreatment at mild temperatures (25-55 °C). The degree of
crystallinity increased slightly with delignification (from 43% to 60%) because
amorphous components such as lignin and hemicellulose were removed. Lee et al.
reported that the rate of enzymatic hydrolysis depends on enzyme adsorption and
the effectiveness of the adsorbed enzymes, instead of the diffusive mass transfer of
enzyme. Lignin removal increases enzyme effectiveness by eliminating
nonproductive adsorption sites and by increasing access to cellulose and
hemicellulose. Kong et al. reported that alkalis remove acetyl groups from
hemicellulose (mainly xylan), thereby reducing the steric hindrance of hydrolytic
enzymes and greatly enhancing carbohydrate digestibility. They concluded that the
sugar yield in enzymatic hydrolysis is directly associated with acetyl group content.
32
2.5.2. Hydrolysis
2.5.2.1. Acid Hydrolysis
Acid hydrolysis of surplus cellulosic materials, such as bagasse, into
fermentation sugars offers enormous opportunity worldwide to add incremental
value to farming operations and displace expensive, imported, polluting oil fuel
products. Arkenol has developed and patented a strong acid hydrolysis process
which can economically convert cellulose into ethanol for transportation fuel.
Acid hydrolysis of cellulose into glucose by sultiric acid was first noted by
Bracormet in 1819. Since then numerous investigators have developed processes
attempting to cost effectively convert the cellulose and hemicellulose fraction of
plant matter into sugar for various purposes, primarily fermentation. Arkenol was
established in 1991 to extrapolate the basic research its affiliate company, an
independent power developer, had done in seeking to devise a thermal user business
for its cogeneration power plants.
Arkenol has now patented an acid hydrolysis process which economically
converts cellulose and hemicellulose into sugar for fermentation into ethanol.
Alternative methods have various uneconomic characteristics which preclude their
application in today’s petrochemical age except in non-market based economies of
war time or political isolation. The key Arkenol improvements to regain economic
competitiveness with petroleum are:
1. High solids, high concentration hydrolysis of minimally prepared feed stock to
yield high sugar concentration of above 15%. This is achieved without energy
use for hydrolysate drying nor sugar drying. The results of this improvement
are reduction in the energy and capital equipment needed to grind the feedstock
and then the achievement of 8% ethanol in the fermentation beer with
consequent distillation energy consumption typical of the best grain to ethanol
fermentation plants.
2. Separation of the hydrolysate liquor into pure acid and sugar streams for
product recovery and acid recycling. Purities are better than 98% and
concentrations are maintained high for both fractions of interest, 15% sugar
and 25% acid, which facilitates their efficient use.
33
3. Concentration of acid fraction with hydrolysate contaminants has been

achieved to minimize acid and lime consumption as well as gypsum
production, which provides major economic advantages in reagent cost and
handling the low value gypsum product.
4. Pure sugar stream and proprietary cultivation of yeast enables efficient
fermentation of both hexose and pentose sugars by a single, conventional
organism which eliminates the need for the expense of dual process trains and
special microbe handling.
5. All process streams have been designed for reuse or to make a co-product,
avoiding the waste water stream typical of grain to ethanol plants and the acid
waste of older processes This design strategy raises economic yield of the
process and reduces disposal costs.
The installation of an acid hydrolysis business can eliminate these problems by:
 Using all bagasse;
 Creating a value for the cane tops and leaves increasing value per hectare;
 Provide base electrical load giving economic and technical capability for
stabilizing power plant operations;
 Reduce seasonality of plantation operations by using cane tops and leaves in
the off season and producing readily storable tiel, lignin, for use in the off
season;
 Producing additional products, electricity, ethanol, gypsum, lignin, carbon
dioxide.
Concentrated acids such as H2SO4 and HCl have also been used to treat
lignocellulosic materials. Pretreatment with acid hydrolysis can result in
improvement of enzymatic hydrolysis of lignocellulosic biomasses to release
fermentable sugars. Although they are powerful agents for cellulose hydrolysis,
concentrated acids are toxic, corrosive, hazardous, and thus require reactors that are
resistant to corrosion, which makes the pretreatment process very expensive. In
addition, the concentrated acid must be recovered after hydrolysis to make the
process economically feasible.
Dilute-acid hydrolysis has been successfully developed for pretreatment of
lignocellulosic materials. Sulfuric acid at concentrations usually below 4 wt %, has
34
been of the most interest in such studies as it is inexpensive and effective. Dilute
H2SO4 has been used to commercially manufacture furfural from cellulosic
materials.74,75 Dilute H2SO4 is mixed with biomass to hydrolyze hemicellulose to
xylose and other sugars and then continues to break xylose down to form furfural.
The dilute H2SO4 pretreatment can achieve high reaction rates and
significantly improve cellulose hydrolysis. Dilute acid effectively removes and
recovers most of the hemicellulose as dissolved sugars, and glucose yields from
cellulose increase with hemicellulose removal to almost 100% for complete
hemicellulose hydrolysis. Hemicellulose is removed when H2SO4 is added and this
enhances digestibility of cellulose in the residual solids. High temperature in the
dilute-acid treatment is favorable for cellulose hydrolysis. Recently developed
dilute-acid hydrolysis processes use less severe conditions and achieve high xylan
to xylose conversion yields. Achieving high xylan to xylose conversion yields is
necessary to achieve favorable overall process economics because xylan accounts
for up to onethird of the total carbohydrate in many lignocellulosic materials.
Two types of dilute-acid pretreatment processes are typically used: a high-
temperature (T > 160 °C), continuous-flow process for low solids loadings (weight
of substrate/weight of reaction mixture ) 5-10%) and a low-temperature (T < 160
°C), batch process for high solids loadings (10-40%) The most widely used and
tested approaches are based on dilute sulfuric acid. However, nitric acid,
hydrochloric acid, and phosphoric acid have also been tested. Numerous plant
materia1s have been examined, including legume byproducts; reed canary grass;
corn (husks, cobs, and stover); mixed hardwood (10% map1e and 90% birch); and
hardwood bark from aspen, poplar, and sweet gum. Thompson et al. used dilute
H2SO4 to pretreat mixed hardwood and observed that the crystallinity index,
although not a function of pretreatment temperature, still increased as a
consequence of pretreatment. The removal of amorphous cellulose fractions,
leaving a more crystalline fraction behind, could explain this observation.
Addition of very dilute sulfuric acid (about 0.1% versus the 0.7-3.0% typical
for batch dilute-acid technology) in a flow through reactor configuration is effective
at acid levels lower than 0.1%. Despite achieving excellent hemicellulose sugar
yields and highly digestible cellulose with low acid loadings, the equipment
35
configurations and the high ratio of water to solids employed in flow-through

systems require significant energy for pretreatment and product recovery. Although
dilute-acid pretreatment can significantly improve cellulose hydrolysis, its cost is
usually higher than those of physicochemical pretreatment processes such as steam
explosion or AFEX. Neutralization of pH is necessary for the downstream
enzymatic hydrolysis or fermentation processes. Dilute-acid pretreatment is also
known to have a negative influence on the enzymatic hydrolysis of biomass. In a
recent article, Selig et al. reported the formation of spherical droplets on the surface
of residual corn stover following dilute-acid pretreatment at high temperature. They
suggested that the droplets formed were composed of lignins and possible lignin-
carbohydrate complexes. It was demonstrated that these droplets were produced
from corn stover during pretreatment under neutral and acidic pHs at and above
130°C and that they can deposit onto the surface of residual biomass. The
deposition of droplets produced under certain pretreatment conditions (acidic pH,
T > 150 °C) and captured on pure cellulose was shown to have a negative effect on
the enzymatic saccharification of the substrate. Therefore, it is extremely important
to carefully examine the appropriate dilute-acid pretreatment of lignocellulose
biomass species. It has been shown that materials that have been subjected to acid
hydrolysis can be harder to ferment because of the presence of toxic substances.
Further, acid pretreatment results in costly materials of construction, high pressures,
neutralization and conditioning of hydrolysate prior to biological steps, slow
cellulose digestion by enzymes, and nonproductive binding of enzymes to lignin.
2.5.2.2. Enzymatic Hydrolysis
Enzymatically based cellulosic ethanol production technology was selected
as a key area for biomass technology development in the 1980s, and the US
Department of Energy (DOE) has actively supported the scale up of ethanol
production since the Office of Alcohol Fuels was created in the DOE after the
‘energy crisis’ of the 1970s. Although biological conversion of cellulosic biomass
to fuels and chemicals through enzymatic hydrolysis of cellulose offers the potential
for higher yields, higher selectivity, lower energy costs and milder operating
conditions than chemical processes, such technology was judged to be too high risk
for industry to pursue at that time.
36
It is noteworthy that many microorganisms in nature, mostly bacteria and

fungi, are capable of producing biomass-degrading enzymes. Cellulolytic microbes
may evolve as individual degraders or as part of a ‘chain reaction’ in microbial
communities of some ecosystems. Cellulolytic enzymes secreted by such
microbe(s) are classes of glycoside hydrolases (GHs), including lignin-modifying
catalysts in some cases. Enzyme and microbe combinations vary in different
biomass degrading ecosystems depending on the initial biomass source and
environmental factors. With emerging biotechnology tools, there is great potential
to develop new enzyme sources that offer more desirable enzyme features,
including higher specific activities with more balanced synergism, better thermal
stability, better resistance to environmental inhibitors and improved combination of
various enzymes (e.g., cellulose, hemicellulose, pectinase and proteinase) activities
that maximize sugar yields at low cost.
Table 2.5 Selected bacterial and fungi strains for glycosyl hydrase production
(Source: Unuratu, 2015)
37
2.5.2.3. Hydrolysis Process Selection

From the options of hydrolysis process, acid and enzymatic hydrolysis are
scored and the option with the highest score will be selected. The scoring table is
shown in Table 2.6.
Table 2.6. Hydrolysis Process Selection
Acid Enzymatic
Criteria
Hydolysis Hydrolysis
Maturity 0 0
Product Conversion 1 -1
Capacity 1 -1
Treatment Process -1 1
Simplicity -1 1
Capital Expenditure -1 1
Operational Expenditure -1 1
Total -2 2
Based on the criteria above, hydrolysis process that choose as the treatment
before the fermentation is enzymatic hydrolysis. There are several benefits to use
enzymatic hydrolysis. Below shown the benefits of using enzymatic hydrolysis.
 Basic treatment process. The treatment that suitable for using enzymatic
hydrolysis is liming the cellulose.
 The process is simple because using bacterial and fungi as biocatalyst
 Cost relatively cheaper than acid hydrolysis because chemical compounds
relatively expensive.
2.5.3. Fermentation
Ethanol fermentation is a biological process in which sugars are converted
by microorganisms to produce ethanol and CO2. The microorganism most
commonly used in fermentation process is the yeast, among the yeast,
Saccharomyces cerevisiae is the preferred choice for ethanol fermentation. This
yeast can grow on both simple sugars, such as glucose, and on the disaccharide
sucrose. S. cerevisiae has high resistance to ethanol, consumes significant amount
of substrate in adverse conditions, and shows high resistance to inhibitors present
38
in the medium. Yet, S. cerevisiae is still incapable (unless genetically modified) of

fermenting pentose sugars (e.g. xylose and arabinose) derived from second
generation lignocellulose feedstocks. Ethanol productivities of genetically modified
strains fermenting xylose are quite low, around 0.23-0.34 g/g sugar.
There are three of processes to produce ethanol from sugarcane bagasse.
The first process is called separate (or sequential) hydrolysis and fermentation
(SHF) where hydrolysis of lignocellulosic material and ethanol fermentation is
done separately. Bagasse is pretreated, and the pretreated material is enzymatically
hydrolyzed separately to recover the sugars. The recovered sugar solution (hexose
sjugars) is then fermented with appropriate microorganism into ethanol. SHF is a
little staggered process. The other two kinds of processes are called simultaneous
saccharification and cofermentation (SSCF), where both enzymatic hydrolysis and
fermentation of released sugars into ethanol occur simultaneously, making the
overall process short. In the SSF process, the glucose (from cellulose hydrolyzed)
is fermented separately of pentoses (from hydrolysate) in a separate reactor, while
that in the SSCF process, fermentation of xylose and glucose occurs together in the
same reactor.
Fermentation may be operated by batch, continuous, fed-batch, or
immobilized system The advantages and disadvantages are described by the
following table:
Table 2.7. Advantages and disadvantages of fermentation systems
Fermentation Advantages Disadvantages

System
Batch (microbial Large capacity, simple, µmax (short) Unbalanced,
inoculum introduced robust, traditional. asynchronous. Low
into fermentation Ease of sterilization and productivity. Low cell
medium and left cleaning. densities. Labour
until complete) Complete substrate intensive.
conversion
39
Table 2.7. Advantages and disadvantages of fermentation systems (continued)

Fermentation Advantages Disadvantages
System
Fed-batch (Nutrient Traditional (baker’s yeast) Low µ
fed incrementally, or and modern (therapeutic Unbalanced (growth
batch-wise, to a proteins). Extends rate)
growing yeast exponential phase (high cell Labour intensive
culture) densities). Complete
substrate conversion
Continuous (Nutrient Steady-state system. Growth Costly interruptions due
fed into a growing rate controlled by dilution to contamination and
yeast culture at a rate rate (D = µ). High mutation of productions
equal to removal of productivity. Nutrient yeast strains.
culture broth) balanced (chemostat). Low
labour costs and good
uitilisation of the reactor.
Valuable research tool (e.g.
adaptive evolution).
Immobilised (Cells High yeast concentration Un-tested on a large
entrapped in a 108—109 cells/ml. Cheap scale bioethanol
polymeric on the support materials (e.g. wood production.
surface of an inert chips). Continuous
support material) operation.
(Source: Walker, 2010)
Yet, hydrolysis process and fermentation operates on different operating
conditions such as temperature. The ideal temperature for hydrolysis is around 45-
50oC, whereas fermentation is around 30oC. Based on the considerations above,
separate Hydrolysis Fermentation is chosen with genetically modified
Saccharomyces cerevisiae as its yeast with a batch system.
For each kilogram of glucose fermented, around 470 grams of ethanol can
be produced, representing a yield of 92% of theoretical maximum. The fermentation
system that is going to be used fermentation is temperature condition which is 33oC.
40
The input stream would be glucose, yeast, and water. The output stream is ethanol
and water. Output stream then will be centrifuged to recover yeast cells.
Table 2.8. Operating conditions for Fermenter
Parameter Value
Temperature 33oC
pH 4.5
Residence Time 20 h
2.5.4. Distillation
The recovery of ethanol from fermented media is predominantly performed
by distillation. Distillation refers to separation of mixtures of two or more chemicals
on basis of volatility difference, which is the ratio of the partial pressure to the mole
fraction in the liquid.
In order to produce fuel ethanol, wine must be purified to at least 95oC;
centrifuged wine is purified in the distillation and rectification columns, producing
hydrous (around9 3wt%) ethanol. The most common configuration of the
distillation columns is illustrated in Figure 2.6. Wine is fed at the top of column A1,
located between columns D and A. At the top of column D, volatile compounds are
removed, while vinasse which containsmostly water is obtained at the bottom of
column A.Ethanol-rich streams (phlegms) containing around 50wt% ethanol are
obtained at columns D and A. This first set of columns is called distillation. The
second set, comprised by columns B and B1, is named rectification. Phlegms are
fed to these columns, and the rest of the water is removed at the bottom of column
B1, while hydrated ethanol is produced at the top of column B.
41
Figure 2.7. Simplified scheme of the distillation process for production of hydrated ethanol
(Source: Rapello, 2011)
Vinasse is used to pre-heat wine in the heat exchanger. Wine is also pre-
heated by heate xchange with ethanol vapor from the top of column B (Econdenser)
before it is fed into column A1 Vinasse is used in fertirrigation of the sugarcane
fields, promoting nutrients (mostly potassium) recycle. Fusel oil, a mixture of
organic compounds which has isoamyl-alcohol as its main component, is produced
as a side stream of columns B–B1.
This configuration of the distillation columns presents relatively high steam
consumption. Multiple effect operation of the distillation columns and production
of wine of higher ethanol content are some options to reduce steam consumption in
distillation.
2.5.5. Ethanol Dehydration
In order to be used in a mixture with gasoline in gasoline-driven engines,
ethanol must be concentrated to 99.3 wt%, at least. This purity must be
accomplished by means of alternative purification systems, since ethanol and water
form an azeotrope with ethanol concentration od around 95 wt%. the most common
dehydration systems used are azeotropic distillation with cyclohexane, extractive
distillation with monoethyleneglycol and adsorption on molecular sieves.
42
2.6. Block Flow Diagram
Figure 2.8. Block Flow Diagram of Sugar and Ethanol Production from Sugarcane
Figure 2.9. PFD of Sugar Production
Figure 2.10. PFD of Bioethanol Production
CHAPTER III
MASS AND ENERGY BALANCE
From process flow diagram in the previous chapter, mass balance energy
balance for this plant, mass balance and the energy balance is calculated for a day.
SuperPro Designer software is used as the simulation software. SuperPro Designer
is chosen to be the simulators of our plant because it defines biomass as its material
stream and proceed material. The SuperPro simulation is shown in Figure 3.1 to
Figure 3.5.
46
Figure 3.1 SuperPro Simulation for Overall Plant
47
Figure 3.2 SuperPro Simulation for Pre-Treatment
Figure 3.3 SuperPro Simulation for Juice Treatment
Figure 3.4 SuperPro Simulation for Sugar Productio
Figure 3.5 SuperPro Simulation for Bioethanol Productio
50
3.1 Mass Balance

3.1.1 Mass Balance Washer
Table 3.1 Mass Balance for Washer
Input Stream Output Stream

Molecular Weight
Composition Before Washing After Washing
(kg/kgmol)
% Mass kg/hr % Mole kgmol/hr % Mass kg/hr % Mole kgmol/hr
Ash 200 1,07 936,18446 0,00133 4,6809223 0,10804153 93,62126 1,05668E-05 0,4681063
Celulose 162,14 6,301 5512,98908 0,009663 34,0014129 6,36233289 5513,15447 0,000767557 34,0024329
Glucose 180,157 0,59 516,21386 0,000814 2,86535555 0,59574296 516,22935 6,46833E-05 2,86544153
Hemicellulose 132,12 3,698 3235,5235 0,006959 24,4892787 3,73399572 3235,62057 0,000552827 24,4900134
KCl 74,543 0,2 174,98775 0,000667 2,34747394 0,20194677 174,993 5,29925E-05 2,34754437
Lignin 122,49 3,15 2756,05707 0,006394 22,5002618 3,18066158 2756,13975 0,000507927 22,5009368
Sucrose 342,299 13,85 12117,9017 0,01006 35,4015107 13,9848136 12118,2653 0,000799163 35,4025728
Sulfur Dioxide 64,059 1,79 1566,14037 0,006948 24,4484049 1,80742356 1566,18735 0,000551905 24,4491383
Water 18,015 69,35 60677,0024 0,957164 3368,1378 70,0250414 60678,8228 0,0760332 3368,23884
Total 99,999 87493,0002 1 3518,87242 100 86653,0338 0,079340821 44299,58
87493,00024 86653,0338
Total Mass in Each Stream
51
3.1.2 Grinder 1
Table 3.2 Mass Balance for Grinder
Molecular Input Stream Output Stream

Composition Weight Feed to Reactor Hot Fluid
(kg/kgmol)
Ash 200 0,108041526 93,62126 0,000133 0,4681063 0,10804153 93,62126 0,013318281 0,4681063
Celulose 162,14 6,36233289 5513,15447 0,009674 34,0024329 6,36233289 5513,15447 0,967416957 34,0024329
Glucose 180,157 0,595742962 516,22935 0,000815 2,86544153 0,59574296 516,22935 0,081525835 2,86544153
Hemicellulose 132,12 3,733995716 3235,62057 0,006968 24,4900134 3,73399572 3235,62057 0,696775266 24,4900134
KCl 74,543 0,201946767 174,993 0,000668 2,34754437 0,20194677 174,993 0,066790933 2,34754437
Lignin 122,49 3,180661575 2756,13975 0,006402 22,5009368 3,18066158 2756,13975 0,640183244 22,5009368
Sucrose 342,299 13,9848136 12118,2653 0,010073 35,4025728 13,9848136 12118,2653 1,007252902 35,4025728
Sulfur Dioxide 64,059 1,807423562 1566,18735 0,006956 24,4491383 1,80742356 1566,18735 0,695612312 24,4491383
Water 18,015 70,0250414 60678,8228 0,958311 3368,23884 70,0250414 60678,8228 95,83112427 3368,23884
Total 100 86653,0338 1 3514,76503 100 86653,0338 100 3514,76503
Total Mass in Each Stream 86653,0338 86653,0338
52
3.1.3 Grinder 2
Table 3.3 Mass Balance for Grinder

Molecular Weight
Composition Feed to Reactor Hot Fluid
(kg/kgmol)
Ash 200 0,108041526 93,62126 0,013318 0,4681063 0,10804153 93,62126 0,013318281 0,4681063
Celulose 162,14 6,36233289 5513,15447 0,967417 34,0024329 6,36233289 5513,15447 0,967416957 34,0024329
Glucose 180,157 0,595742962 516,22935 0,081526 2,86544153 0,59574296 516,22935 0,081525835 2,86544153
Hemicellulose 132,12 3,733995716 3235,62057 0,696775 24,4900134 3,73399572 3235,62057 0,696775266 24,4900134
KCl 74,543 0,201946767 174,993 0,066791 2,34754437 0,20194677 174,993 0,066790933 2,34754437
Lignin 122,49 3,180661575 2756,13975 0,640183 22,5009368 3,18066158 2756,13975 0,640183244 22,5009368
Sucrose 342,299 13,9848136 12118,2653 1,007253 35,4025728 13,9848136 12118,2653 1,007252902 35,4025728
Sulfur Dioxide 64,059 1,807423562 1566,18735 0,695612 24,4491383 1,80742356 1566,18735 0,695612312 24,4491383
Water 18,015 70,0250414 60678,8228 95,83112 3368,23884 70,0250414 60678,8228 95,83112427 3368,23884
Total 100 86653,0338 100 3514,76503 100 86653,0338 100 3514,76503
52
53
3.1.4 Mills
Table 3.4 Mass Balance for Mills
Molecular Input Stream Output Stream

Composition Weight Feed to Reactor Hot Fluid
(kg/kgmol)
Ash 200 0,108041526 93,62126 0,013318 0,4681063 0,10804153 93,62126 0,013318281 0,4681063
Celulose 162,14 6,36233289 5513,15447 0,967417 34,0024329 6,36233289 5513,15447 0,967416957 34,0024329
Glucose 180,157 0,595742962 516,22935 0,081526 2,86544153 0,59574296 516,22935 0,081525835 2,86544153
Hemicellulose 132,12 3,733995716 3235,62057 0,696775 24,4900134 3,73399572 3235,62057 0,696775266 24,4900134
KCl 74,543 0,201946767 174,993 0,066791 2,34754437 0,20194677 174,993 0,066790933 2,34754437
Lignin 122,49 3,180661575 2756,13975 0,640183 22,5009368 3,18066158 2756,13975 0,640183244 22,5009368
Sucrose 342,299 13,9848136 12118,2653 1,007253 35,4025728 13,9848136 12118,2653 1,007252902 35,4025728
Sulfur Dioxide 64,059 1,807423562 1566,18735 0,695612 24,4491383 1,80742356 1566,18735 0,695612312 24,4491383
Water 18,015 70,0250414 60678,8228 95,83112 3368,23884 70,0250414 60678,8228 95,83112427 3368,23884
Total 100 86653,0338 100 3514,76503 100 86653,0338 100 3514,76503
54
3.1.5 Extractor
Table 3.5 Mass Balance for Extractor

Molecul Input Stream Output Stream
ar
Compositi Feed to Reactor S-101 Baggase to Ethanol Plant
Weight
on
(kg/kgm % kgmol/h kgmol/h kgmol/h
ol) % Mass kg/hr Mole r % Mass kg/hr % Mole r % Mass kg/hr % Mole r
0,108041 93,6212 0,0133 0,46810 0,550538 93,6212 0,16803 0,46810
Ash 200 526 6 18 63 0 0 0 0 991 6 087 63
6,362332 5513,15 0,9674 34,0024 32,42005 5513,15 12,2054 34,0024
Celulose 162,14 89 447 17 329 0 0 0 0 609 447 72 329
0,595742 516,229 0,0815 2,86544 0,70414 490,417 0,084116 2,72216 0,151784 25,8114 0,05142 0,14327
Glucose 180,157 962 35 26 153 13 88 711 944 121 7 878 209
Hemicellul 3,733995 3235,62 0,6967 24,4900 19,02703 3235,62 8,79090 24,4900
ose 132,12 716 057 75 134 0 0 0 0 814 057 545 134
0,201946 0,0667 2,34754 1,029044 0,84267 2,34754
KCl 74,543 767 174,993 91 437 0 0 0 0 788 174,993 167 437
3,180661 2756,13 0,6401 22,5009 16,20745 2756,13 8,07690 22,5009
Lignin 122,49 575 975 83 368 0 0 0 0 542 975 893 368
13,98481 12118,2 1,0072 35,4025 16,5294 11512,3 1,039263 33,6324 3,563067 605,913 0,63540 1,77012
Sucrose 342,299 36 653 53 728 188 52 218 441 565 26 322 863
Sulfur 1,807423 1566,18 0,6956 24,4491 9,209950 1566,18 8,77623 24,4491
Dioxide 64,059 562 735 12 383 0 0 0 0 856 735 297 383
70,02504 60678,8 95,831 3368,23 82,7664 57644,8 98,87662 3199,82 17,84106 3033,94 60,4529 168,411
Water 18,015 14 228 12 884 399 817 007 69 403 114 461 942
86653,0 3514,76 69647,6 3236,18 17005,3 278,583
Total
100 338 100 503 100 515 100 152 100 823 100 515
Total Mass in Each
Stream 86653,0338 86653,0338
55
3.1.6 Sulphitation Process
Table 3.6 Mass Balance for Sulphitation Process

Molecular Weight
Composition S-101 S-104
(kg/kgmol)
Ash 200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Celulose 162,14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Glucose 180,157 0,704141302 490,41788 0,084117 2,72216944 0,7041413 490,41788 0,084116711 2,72216944
Hemicellulose 132,12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
KCl 74,543 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lignin 122,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sucrose 342,299 16,52941879 11512,352 1,039263 33,6324441 16,5294188 11512,352 1,039263217 33,6324441
Sulfur Dioxide 64,059 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Water 18,015 82,76643991 57644,8817 98,87662 3199,8269 82,7664399 57644,8817 98,87662007 3199,8269
Total 100 69647,6515 100 3236,18152 100 69647,6515 100 3236,18152
55
56
3.1.7 Heater 1
Table 3.7 Mass Balance for Heater 1

Molecular Weight
(kg/kgmol)
Ash 200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Celulose 162,14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Glucose 180,157 0,704040216 490,41788 0,084102 2,72216944 0,70404022 490,41788 0,084102285 2,72216944
Hemicellulose 132,12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
KCl 74,543 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lignin 122,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sucrose 342,299 16,52704583 11512,352 1,039085 33,6324441 16,5270458 11512,352 1,039084985 33,6324441
Sulfur Dioxide 64,059 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Water 18,015 82,76891396 57654,8817 98,87681 3200,382 82,768914 57654,8817 98,87681273 3200,382
Total 100 69657,6515 100 3236,73661 100 69657,6515 100 3236,73661
57
3.1.8 Evaporator 1
Table 3.8 Mass Balance for Evaporator 1 for Input Stream
Input Stream
Composition Molecular Weight (kg/kgmol) S-111
% Mass kg/hr % Mole kgmol/hr
Ash 200 0 0 0 0
Celulose 162,14 0 0 0 0
Glucose 180,157 0,704040216 490,41788 0,084102 2,72216944
Hemicellulose 132,12 0 0 0 0
KCl 74,543 0 0 0 0
Lignin 122,49 0 0 0 0
Sucrose 342,299 16,52704583 11512,352 1,039085 33,6324441
Sulfur Dioxide 64,059 0 0 0 0
Water 18,015 82,76891396 57654,8817 98,87681 3200,382
Total 100 69657,6515 100 3236,73661
Total Mass in Each Stream 69657,65152
58
Table 3.9 Mass Balance for Evaporator 1 for Output Stream
Molecular Output Stream

Composition Weight S-113 S-112
(kg/kgmol)
Ash 200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Celulose 162,14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Glucose 180,157 0,936605734 490,41788 0,119570549 2,72216944 0 0 0 0
Hemicellulose 132,12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
KCl 74,543 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lignin 122,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sucrose 342,299 21,98642285 11512,352 1,477295922 33,6324441 0 0 0 0
Sulfur Dioxide 64,059 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Water 18,015 77,07697141 40358,4172 98,40313353 2240,2674 100 17296,4645 100 960,114599
Total 100 52361,187 100 2276,62201 100 17296,4645 100 960,114599
59
3.1.9 Evaporator 2
Input Stream
Ash 200 0 0 0 0
Celulose 162,14 0 0 0 0
Glucose 180,157 0,936605734 490,41788 0,119571 2,72216944
KCl 74,543 0 0 0 0
Lignin 122,49 0 0 0 0
Sucrose 342,299 21,98642285 11512,352 1,477296 33,6324441
Water 18,015 77,07697141 40358,4172 98,40313 2240,2674
Total 100 52361,187 100 2276,62201
60
Table 3.11 Mass Balance for Evaporator 2 for Outline Stream

(kg/kgmol)
Ash 200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Celulose 162,14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Glucose 180,157 1,218318675 490,41788 0,16965401 2,722169441 0 0 0 0
Hemicellulose 132,12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
KCl 74,543 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lignin 122,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sucrose 342,299 28,59951481 11512,35199 2,09607779 33,63244412 0 0 0 0
Sulfur
Dioxide 64,059 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Water 18,015 70,18216652 28250,89201 97,7342682 1568,187178 100 12107,52514 100 672,0802187
Total 100 40253,66188 100 1604,541791 100 12107,52514 100 672,0802187
61
3.1.10 Evaporator 3
Input Stream
Ash 200 0 0 0 0
Celulose 162,14 0 0 0 0
Glucose 180,157 1,218318675 490,41788 0,169654 2,72216944
KCl 74,543 0 0 0 0
Lignin 122,49 0 0 0 0
Sucrose 342,299 28,59951481 11512,352 2,096078 33,6324441
Water 18,015 70,18216652 28250,892 97,73427 1568,18718
Total 100 40253,6619 100 1604,54179
62

(kg/kgmol)
Ash 200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Celulose 162,14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Glucose 180,157 1,54324311 490,41788 0,240032088 2,72216944 0 0 0 0
Hemicellulose 132,12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
KCl 74,543 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lignin 122,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sucrose 342,299 36,22697828 11512,352 2,96560004 33,6324441 0 0 0 0
Sulfur Dioxide 64,059 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Water 18,015 62,22977861 19775,6244 96,79436787 1097,73102 100 8475,26761 100 470,456154
Total 100 31778,3943 100 1134,08564 100 8475,26761 100 470,456154
63
3.1.11 Evaporator 4
Input Stream
Ash 200 0 0 0 0
Celulose 162,14 0 0 0 0
Glucose 180,157 1,54324311 490,41788 0,240032 2,72216944
KCl 74,543 0 0 0 0
Lignin 122,49 0 0 0 0
Sucrose 342,299 36,22697828 11512,352 2,9656 33,6324441
Water 18,015 62,22977861 19775,6244 96,79437 1097,73102
Total 100 31778,3943 100 1134,08564
64

(kg/kgmol)
Ash 200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Celulose 162,14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Glucose 180,157 2,054696291 490,41788 0,391682873 2,72216944 0 0 0 0
Hemicellulose 132,12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
KCl 74,543 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lignin 122,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sucrose 342,299 48,23312506 11512,352 4,839247746 33,6324441 0 0 0 0
Sulfur Dioxide 64,059 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Water 18,015 49,71217865 11865,3746 94,76906938 658,638614 100 7910,24976 100 439,09241
Total 100 23868,1445 100 694,993228 100 7910,24976 100 439,09241
65
3.1.12 Evaporator 5
Input Stream
Ash 200 0 0 0 0
Celulose 162,14 0 0 0 0
Glucose 180,157 2,054696291 490,41788 0,391683 2,72216944
KCl 74,543 0 0 0 0
Lignin 122,49 0 0 0 0
Sucrose 342,299 48,23312506 11512,352 4,839248 33,6324441
Water 18,015 49,71217865 11865,3746 94,76907 658,638614
Total 100 23868,1445 100 694,993228
66

(kg/kgmol)
Ash 200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Celulose 162,14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Glucose 180,157 2,346294865 490,41788 0,513293816 2,72216944 0 0 0 0
Hemicellulose 132,12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
KCl 74,543 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lignin 122,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sucrose 342,299 55,07827805 11512,352 6,341752765 33,6324441 0 0 0 0
Sulfur Dioxide 64,059 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Water 18,015 42,57542708 8899,03098 93,14495342 493,978961 100 2966,34366 100 164,659654
Total 100 20901,8008 100 530,333574 100 2966,34366 100 164,659654
67
3.1.13 Crystalization Process
Table 3.14 Mass Balance for Crystalization Process for Input Stream
Input Stream
Ash 200 0 0 0 0
Celulose 162,14 0 0 0 0
Glucose 180,157 2,346294865 490,41788 0,513294 2,72216944
KCl 74,543 0 0 0 0
Lignin 122,49 0 0 0 0
Sucrose 342,299 55,07827805 11512,352 6,341753 33,6324441
Water 18,015 42,57542708 8899,03098 93,14495 493,978961
Total 100 20901,8008 100 530,333574
68
Table 3.15 Mass Balance for Crystalization Process for Output Stream
Output Stream
Molecular Weight
(kg/kgmol)
Ash 200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Celulose 162,14 3,9398205 490,41788 6,80637472 2,72216944 0 0 0 0
Glucose 180,157 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hemicellulose 132,12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
KCl 74,543 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lignin 122,49 95,7027233 11912,8084 87,01802598 34,8023465 0 0 0 0
Sucrose 342,299 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sulfur
Dioxide 64,059 0,35745618 44,49515 6,175599304 2,46989453 100 8454,07943 100 469,280013
Water 18,015 100 12447,7214 100 39,9944104 100 8454,07943 100 469,280013
Total 20901,80085
69
3.1.14 Centrifugator 1
Table 3.16 Mass Balance for Centrifugator 1 for Input Stream
Input Stream
Ash 200 0 0 0 0
Celulose 162,14 0 0 0 0
Glucose 180,157 2,346294865 490,41788 6,806375 2,72216944
KCl 74,543 0 0 0 0
Lignin 122,49 0 0 0 0
Sucrose 342,299 56,9941723 11912,8084 87,01803 34,8023465
Water 18,015 0,212877112 44,49515 6,175599 2,46989453
Total 59,55334428 12447,7214 100 39,9944104
70
Table 3.17 Mass Balance for Centrifugator 1 for Output Stream
Output Stream
Molecular Weight
Composition Sugar S-123
(kg/kgmol)
Ash 200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Celulose 162,14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Glucose 180,157 0 490,41788 6,80637472 2,72216944 100 490,41788 100 2,72216944
Hemicellulose 132,12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
KCl 74,543 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lignin 122,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sucrose 342,299 99,6279 11912,8084 87,01802598 34,8023465 0 0 0 0
Sulfur Dioxide 64,059 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Water 18,015 0,3721 44,49515 6,175599304 2,46989453 0 0 0 0
Total 100 12447,7214 100 39,9944104 100 490,41788 100 2,72216944
Total Mass in Each
Stream 12447,72142
71
3.1.15 Heater 2
Table 3.15 Mass Balance for Heater 2

Molecular Weight
Composition Dry Air Sugar
(kg/kgmol)
Nitrogen 28,013 76,7 170,63892 99,97341 6,09141898 76,7 170,63892 99,97341306 6,09141898
Oxygen 31.999 23,3 51,83686 0,026587 0,00161995 23,3 51,83686 0,026586938 0,00161995
Ash 200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Celulose 162,14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Glucose 180,157 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hemicellulose 132,12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
KCl 74,543 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lignin 122,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sucrose 342,299 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sulfur Dioxide 64,059 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Water 18,015 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 0 222,47578 100 6,09303894 100 222,47578 100 6,09303894
72
3.1.16 Rotary Drying
Table 3.16 Mass Balance for Rotary Drying for Input Stream
Input Stream
Molecular Weight
Composition Hot Dry Air Sugar
(kg/kgmol)
Nitrogen 28,013 76,7 170,63892 99,97341 6,09141898 0 0 0 0
Oxygen 31.999 23,3 51,83686 0,026587 0,00161995 0 0 0 0
Ash 200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Celulose 162,14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Glucose 180,157 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hemicellulose 132,12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
KCl 74,543 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lignin 122,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sucrose 342,299 0 0 0 0 99,6279 11912,8084 93,37336724 34,8023465
Sulfur Dioxide 64,059 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Water 18,015 0 0 0 0 0,3721 44,49515 6,626632761 2,46989453
Total 100 222,47578 100 6,09303894 100 11957,3035 100 37,272241
73
Table 3.16 Mass Balance for Rotary Drying for Output Stream

Composition Weight Sugar Product Saturated Air
(kg/kgmol)
Nitrogen 28,013 0 0 0 0 63,9167 170,63892 71,13705842 6,09141898
Oxygen 31.999 0 0 0 0 19,4167 51,83686 0,018918196 0,00161995
Ash 200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Celulose 162,14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Glucose 180,157 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hemicellulose 132,12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
KCl 74,543 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lignin 122,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sucrose 342,299 100 11912,8084 100 34,8023465 0 0 0 0
Sulfur Dioxide 64,059 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Water 18,015 0 0 0 0 16,6667 44,49515 28,84402339 2,46989453
Total 100 11912,8084 100 34,8023465 100,0001 266,97093 100 8,56293347
74
3.1.17 Sterilization Process
Table 3.17 Mass Balance for Sterilization Process

Molecular Weight
Composition Molasses S-125
(kg/kgmol)
Nitrogen 28,013 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Oxygen 31.999 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ash 200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Celulose 162,14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Glucose 180,157 100 490,41788 100 2,72216944 100 490,41788 100 2,72216944
Hemicellulose 132,12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
KCl 74,543 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lignin 122,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sucrose 342,299 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sulfur Dioxide 64,059 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Water 18,015 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 100 490,41788 100 2,72216944 100 490,41788 100 2,72216944
75
3.1.18 Cooler
Table 3.18 Mass Balance for Cooler

Composition Molecular Weight (kg/kgmol) Molasses Sterilized Molasses
Nitrogen 28,013 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Oxygen 31.999 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ash 200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Celulose 162,14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Glucose 180,157 100 490,41788 100 2,72216944 100 490,41788 100 2,72216944
Hemicellulose 132,12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
KCl 74,543 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lignin 122,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sucrose 342,299 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sulfur Dioxide 64,059 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Water 18,015 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 100 490,41788 100 2,72216944 100 490,41788 100 2,72216944
76
3.1.19 Hydrolysis Process
Table 3.19 Mass Balance for Hydrolysis Process: Input Stream (1)
Molecular Input Stream

Composition Weight Bagasse
(kg/kgmol)
Nitrogen 28,013 0 0 0 0
Oxygen 31.999 0 0 0 0
Ash 200 0,5505 93,62126 0,168031 0,4681063
Celulose 162,14 32,4201 5513,15447 12,20547 34,0024329
Glucose 180,157 0,1518 25,81147 0,051429 0,14327209
Hemicellulose 132,12 19,027 3235,62057 8,790905 24,4900134
KCl 74,543 1,029 174,993 0,842672 2,34754437
Lignin 122,49 16,2075 2756,13975 8,076909 22,5009368
Sucrose 342,299 3,5631 605,91326 0,635403 1,77012863
Sulfur Dioxide 64,059 9,21 1566,18735 8,776233 24,4491383
Water 18,015 17,8411 3033,94114 60,45295 168,411942
Calcium Hydroxide 74,095 0 0 0 0
Carbon Oxide 44,01 0 0 0 0
Total 100,0001 17005,3823 100 278,583515
77
Table 3.19 Mass Balance for Hydrolysis Process: Input Stream (2)
Molecular Input Stream

Weight Ca(OH)2 Nitrogen Source
Composition
(kg/kgmol kg/h %
) % Mass r % Mole kgmol/hr Mass kg/hr % Mole kgmol/hr
Nitrogen 28,013 0 0 0 0 76,7 1509,34717 99,9734131 53,8802402
Oxygen 31.999 0 0 0 0 23,3 458,51094 0,02658694 0,01432891
Ash 200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Celulose 162,14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Glucose 180,157 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hemicellulos
e 132,12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
KCl 74,543 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lignin 122,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sucrose 342,299 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sulfur
Dioxide 64,059 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Water 18,015 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Calcium
Hydroxide 74,095 50 50 37,26345201 0,67480937 0 0 0 0
Carbon Oxide 44,01 50 50 62,73654799 1,13610543 0 0 0 0
Total 100 100 100 1,8109148 100 1967,85811 100 53,8945692
78
Table 3.19 Mass Balance for Hydrolysis Process: Output Stream

Molecular Weight
Composition
(kg/kgmol) Output Stream
Glucose 30.45% S-132
Nitrogen 28,013 0 0 0 0 42,394 1509,34717 68,25470471 53,8802402
Oxygen 31.999 0 0 0 0 12,8785 458,51094 0,018151661 0,01432891
Ash 200 0,6037 93,62126 0,171419623 0,4681063 0 0 0 0
Celulose 162,14 2,133 330,78927 0,747097518 2,04014598 0 0 0 0
Glucose 180,157 30,4546 4722,85347 9,59995901 26,2152093 0 0 0 0
Hemicellulose 132,12 9,389 1456,02926 4,035688024 11,0205061 0 0 0 0
KCl 74,543 1,1284 174,993 0,859666213 2,34754437 0 0 0 0
Lignin 122,49 17,7726 2756,13975 8,239799584 22,5009368 0 0 0 0
Sucrose 342,299 3,9071 11912,80839 12,74455203 34,8023465 0 0 0 0
Sulfur Dioxide 64,059 0 605,91326 3,463748499 9,45867497 43,9905 1566,18735 30,9718128 24,4491383
Water 18,015 16,5966 2573,77631 52,31817439 142,868516 0 0 0 0
Calcium
Hydroxide 74,095 0,0645 10 0,049422777 0,13496187 0 0 0 0
Carbon Oxide 44,01 0 0 0 0 0,7371 26,24131 0,755330831 0,5962579
Xylose 132 17,602 2729,68977 7,572781208 20,679468 0 0 0 0
CaCO3 100,087 0,3484 54,03172 0,197691123 0,53984753 0 0 0 0
Total
99,9999 27420,64546 100 273,076263 100,0001 3560,28677 100 78,9399654
Total Mass in Each Stream
30980,93223
79
3.1.20 Mixer
Table 3.20 Mass Balance for Mixer for Input Stream
Input Stream
Molecular Weight
Composition Glucose 30.45% Sterilized Molasses
(kg/kgmol)
Nitrogen 28,013 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Oxygen 31.999 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ash 200 0,6037 93,62126 0,17142 0,4681063 0 0 0 0
Celulose 162,14 2,133 330,78927 0,747098 2,04014598 0 0 0 0
Glucose 180,157 30,4546 4722,85347 9,599959 26,2152093 100 490,41788 100 2,72216944
Hemicellulose 132,12 9,389 1456,02926 4,035688 11,0205061 0 0 0 0
KCl 74,543 1,1284 174,993 0,859666 2,34754437 0 0 0 0
Lignin 122,49 17,7726 2756,13975 8,2398 22,5009368 0 0 0 0
Sucrose 342,299 3,9071 11912,8084 12,74455 34,8023465 0 0 0 0
Sulfur Dioxide 64,059 0 605,91326 3,463748 9,45867497 0 0 0 0
Water 18,015 16,5966 2573,77631 52,31817 142,868516 0 0 0 0
Calcium Hydroxide 74,095 0,0645 10 0,049423 0,13496187 0 0 0 0
Carbon Oxide 44,01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Xylose 132 17,602 2729,68977 7,572781 20,679468 0 0 0 0
CaCO3 100,087 0,3484 54,03172 0,197691 0,53984753 0 0 0 0
Total 99,9999 27420,6455 100 273,076263 100 490,41788 100 2,72216944
80
Table 3.20 Mass Balance for Mixer for Output Stream
Output Stream
Composition Molecular Weight (kg/kgmol) Ca(OH)2
Nitrogen 28,013 0 0 0 0
Oxygen 31.999 0 0 0 0
Ash 200 0,5852 93,62126 0,22071301 0,4681063
Celulose 162,14 2,0677 330,78927 0,9619327 2,04014598
Glucose 180,157 32,5865 5213,27135 13,644029 28,9373788
Hemicellulose 132,12 9,1012 1456,02926 5,1961895 11,0205061
KCl 74,543 1,0938 174,993 1,10687162 2,34754437
Lignin 122,49 17,2278 2756,13975 10,6092344 22,5009368
Sucrose 342,299 3,7874 605,91326 0,83461901 1,77012863
Water 18,015 16,0879 2573,77631 67,362776 142,868516
Calcium Hydroxide 74,095 0,0625 10 0,06363478 0,13496187
Xylose 132 17,0624 2729,68977 9,75040835 20,679468
CaCO3 100,087 0,3377 54,03172 0,25453914 0,53984753
Total 100,0001 15998,255 100 212,088224
81
3.1.21 Fermentation Process
Table 3.21 Mass Balance for Fermentation Process for Input Stream
Input Stream
Molecular Weight
Composition S-131 Nitrogen
(kg/kgmol)
Nitrogen 28,013 0 0 0 0 100 70508,8909 100 2517,00606
Oxygen 31.999 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ash 200 0,6037 93,62126 0,200639 0,4681063 0 0 0 0
Celulose 162,14 2,0677 330,78927 0,874445 2,04014598 0 0 0 0
Glucose 180,157 32,5865 5213,27135 12,4031 28,9373788 0 0 0 0
Hemicellulose 132,12 9,1012 1456,02926 4,723596 11,0205061 0 0 0 0
KCl 74,543 1,0938 174,993 1,006202 2,34754437 0 0 0 0
Lignin 122,49 17,2278 2756,13975 9,644325 22,5009368 0 0 0 0
Sucrose 342,299 3,7874 605,91326 0,75871 1,77012863 0 0 0 0
Sulfur Dioxide 64,059 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Water 18,015 16,0879 2573,77631 61,23613 142,868516 0 0 0 0
Calcium Hydroxide 74,095 0,0625 10 0,057847 0,13496187 0 0 0 0
Carbon Oxide 44,01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Xylose 132 17,0624 2729,68977 8,863609 20,679468 0 0 0 0
CaCO3 100,087 0,3377 54,03172 0,231389 0,53984753 0 0 0 0
Ethyl Alcohol 46,049 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 100 15998,255 100 233,30754 100 70508,8909 100 2517,00606
82
Table 3.21 Mass Balance for Fermentation Process for Output Stream
Output Stream
Molecular Weight
Composition CO2 Vent Product
(kg/kgmol)
Nitrogen 28,013 58,354 70508,8909 68,7631956 2517,00606 0 0 0 0
Oxygen 31.999 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ash 200 0 0 0 0 0,129 468,10628 0,016785746 2,3405314
Celulose 162,14 0 0 0 0 0,5622 2040,14597 0,090239621 12,5826198
Glucose 180,157 0 0 0 0 0,3987 1446,86894 0,05759758 8,03115583
Hemicellulose 132,12 0 0 0 0 3,0369 11020,50604 0,598217563 83,4128523
KCl 74,543 0 0 0 0 0,6469 2347,54437 0,225856779 31,4924858
Lignin 122,49 0 0 0 0 6,2006 22500,93682 1,317425766 183,696112
Sucrose 342,299 0 0 0 0 0,4878 1770,12864 0,037087314 5,17129364
Sulfur Dioxide 64,059 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Water 18,015 0 0 0 0 67,5019 244951,5632 97,51515968 13597,0893
Calcium Hydroxide 74,095 0 0 0 0 0,0372 134,96187 0,013063164 1,82147068
Carbon Oxide 44,01 42,646 50320,6425 31,2368044 1143,3911 0 0 0 0
Xylose 132 0 0 0 0 0,4559 1654,35744 0,089883837 12,5330109
CaCO3 100,087 0 0 0 0 0,1488 539,84749 0,038682951 5,39378231
Ethyl Alcohol 46,049 0 0 0 0 20,394 74006,13024
Total 100 120829,533 100 3660,39717 99,9999 362881,0973 100 13943,5646
Total Mass in Each
Stream 483710,6306
83
3.1.22 Centrigugator 2
Table 3.22 Mass Balance for Centrifugator 2 for Inlet Stream
Input Stream
Composition Molecular Weight (kg/kgmol) Product
Nitrogen 28,013 0 0 0 0
Oxygen 31.999 0 0 0 0
Ash 200 0,129 468,10628 0,015051 2,3405314
Celulose 162,14 0,5622 2040,14597 0,080914 12,5826198
Glucose 180,157 0,3987 1446,86894 0,051645 8,03115583
Hemicellulose 132,12 3,0369 11020,506 0,536394 83,4128523
KCl 74,543 0,6469 2347,54437 0,202515 31,4924858
Lignin 122,49 6,2006 22500,9368 1,181274 183,696112
Sucrose 342,299 0,4878 1770,12864 0,033254 5,17129364
Water 18,015 67,5019 244951,563 87,43726 13597,0893
Calcium Hydroxide 74,095 0,0372 134,96187 0,011713 1,82147068
Xylose 132 0,4559 1654,35744 0,080595 12,5330109
CaCO3 100,087 0,1488 539,84749 0,034685 5,39378231
Ethyl Alcohol 46,049 20,394 74006,1302 10,3347 1607,11699
Total 100 362881,097 100 15550,6816
84
Table 3.22 Mass Balance for Centrifugator 2 for Outlet Stream
Output Stream
Molecular Weight
Composition Light Phase Heavy Phase
(kg/kgmol)
Nitrogen 28,013 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Oxygen 31.999 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ash 200 0 0 0 0 1,0657 468,10628 0,67552616 2,3405314
Celulose 162,14 0 0 0 0 4,6448 2040,14597 3,63160642 12,5826198
Glucose 180,157 0 0 0 0 3,2941 1446,86894 2,31795902 8,03115583
Hemicellulose 132,12 0 0 0 0 25,0903 11020,506 24,0746883 83,4128523
KCl 74,543 0 0 0 0 5,3446 2347,54437 9,08938803 31,4924858
Lignin 122,49 0 0 0 0 51,2277 22500,9368 53,0185282 183,696112
Sucrose 342,299 0 0 0 0 4,03 1770,12864 1,49254317 5,17129364
Sulfur Dioxide 64,059 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Water 18,015 76,7975 244951,563 89,42978698 13597,0893 0 0 0 0
Calcium Hydroxide 74,095 0 0 0 0 0,3073 134,96187 0,52571442 1,82147068
Carbon Oxide 44,01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Xylose 132 0 0 0 0 3,7665 1654,35744 3,61728826 12,5330109
CaCO3 100,087 0 0 0 0 1,2291 539,84749 1,55675804 5,39378231
Ethyl Alcohol 46,049 23,2025 74006,1302 10,57021302 1607,11699 0 0 0 0
Total 100 318957,693 100 15204,2063 100,0001 43923,4039 100 346,475315
Total Mass in Each
Stream 318957,6934
85
3.1.23 Distillation Coloumn
Table 3.23 Mass Balance for Distillation Coloumn for Inlet Stream
Input Stream
Composition Molecular Weight (kg/kgmol) Product
Nitrogen 28,013 0 0 0 0
Oxygen 31.999 0 0 0 0
Ash 200 1,0657 468,10628 0,015051 2,3405314
Celulose 162,14 4,6448 2040,14597 0,080914 12,5826198
Glucose 180,157 3,2941 1446,86894 0,051645 8,03115583
Hemicellulose 132,12 25,0903 11020,506 0,536394 83,4128523
KCl 74,543 5,3446 2347,54437 0,202515 31,4924858
Lignin 122,49 51,2277 22500,9368 1,181274 183,696112
Sucrose 342,299 4,03 1770,12864 0,033254 5,17129364
Water 18,015 0 0 0 0
Calcium Hydroxide 74,095 0,3073 134,96187 0,011713 1,82147068
Xylose 132 3,7665 1654,35744 0,080595 12,5330109
CaCO3 100,087 1,2291 539,84749 0,034685 5,39378231
Ethyl Alcohol 46,049 0 0 0 0
Total 100 43923,4039 2,228039 346,475315
86
Table 3.23 Mass Balance for Distillation Coloumn for Outlet Stream
Output Stream
Molecular Weight
Composition Ethanol 93.6% Water 99.3%
(kg/kgmol)
Nitrogen 28,013 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Oxygen 31.999 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ash 200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Celulose 162,14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Glucose 180,157 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hemicellulose 132,12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
KCl 74,543 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lignin 122,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sucrose 342,299 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sulfur Dioxide 64,059 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Water 18,015 6,3275 4899,03126 14,72409796 271,941785 99,3872 240052,532 99,7593648 13325,1475
Calcium Hydroxide 74,095 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Carbon Oxide 44,01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Xylose 132 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
CaCO3 100,087 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ethyl Alcohol 46,049 93,6725 72526,0076 0 1574,97465 0,6128 1480,1226 0,24063519 32,1423397
Total 100 77425,0389 14,72409796 1846,91643 100 241532,654 100 13357,2898
Total Mass in Each
Stream 318957,6934
3.2. Energy Balance
Table 3.24 Overall Energy Balance
Energy In Energy Out
Equipment Requirenment
(kWh/h) (kWh/h)
Washing 3007,836 3007,858 -0,022
Grinding 1 2248,344 2681,609 -433,265
Grinding 2 2681,609 3028,221 -346,612
Milling 3028,221 2248,244 779,977
Extraction 2248,534 1648,634 599,9
Sulphitation 1179,136 1779,136 -600
Pump 1779,136 1779,922 -0,786
Heating HX-
1179,922 6974,215 -5794,293
101
Extraction 1 6974,215 16351,433 -9377,218
Extraction 2 2994,405 10064,336 -7069,931
Extraction 3 926,315 8121,048 -7194,733
Extraction 4 1578,763 7334,521 -5755,758
Extraction 5 1194,448 3269,156 -2074,708
Crystallization 966,628 1348,104 -381,476
Centrifugation 367,309 391,455 -24,146
Rotary Dryer 374,019 106,512 267,507
Sterilization 23,705 35,177 -11,472
Cooler 35,177 8,659 26,518
Hydrolysis 487,194 564,102 -76,908
Mixer 373,964 373,964 0
Fermentation 388,256 603,529 -215,273
Centrifuge 423,458 452,226 -28,768
Distilation 294,079 1543,115 -1249,036
TOTAL 34754,673 73715,176 -38960,503
The overall energy balance is

𝐼𝑛 − 𝑂𝑢𝑡 − 𝑅𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 = 0
3.3. Product Conversion Efficiency
The feed will be converted to Sugar and Bioethanol according to overall
mass balance, the product conversion efficiency is:
𝑚̇𝑠𝑢𝑔𝑎𝑟 × 𝑚𝑏𝑖𝑜𝑒𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑜𝑙
̇
η=( ) × 100%
𝑚𝐸𝐹𝐵
̇
(12,11875 + 3,576825)𝑡𝑜𝑛/ℎ
η=( ) × 100%
87,5 𝑡𝑜𝑛/ℎ
88
η = 17.93%
3.4. Product Yield
Yield based on sugar and bioethanol, respectively is:
12,11875 𝑡𝑜𝑛/ℎ
𝑌𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑑 𝑜𝑛 𝑠𝑢𝑔𝑎𝑟 = × 100% = 13.85%
3,576825𝑡𝑜𝑛/ℎ
𝑌𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑑 𝑜𝑛 𝑏𝑖𝑜𝑒𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑜𝑙 = × 100% = 4.09%
3.5. Energy Consumption of Unit Product

The total required energy shown in the Table 3.24 is -38960.503 kWh/h. the
energy required to get the sugar and bioethanol is:
24ℎ
38960.503 𝑘𝑊ℎ/ℎ × 𝑑𝑎𝑦 𝑘𝑊ℎ
24ℎ ≈ 2482.26
(12,11875 + 3,576825)𝑡𝑜𝑛/ℎ × 𝑘𝑔 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑢𝑐𝑡
𝑑𝑎𝑦
89
CHAPTER IV
CONCLUSION
Based on the explanation in previous chapters, there are some important

information that can be concluded:
 The plant will be located in Lamongan, East Java Site near primary raw
material supplier, PT Kebun Tebu Mas.
 The raw material comes from Sugarcane with composition of cellulose,
sucrose, hemicellulose, water, ash, KCl , sulfur dioxide, and lignin, obtained
from PT Aneka Gas Industri, Bontang, East Kalimantan.
 The main products produced by this plant are sugar and ethanol made from
sugarcane.
 The process of producing sugar from sugarcane consists of harvesting, milling,
sulfitation, liming, heating, clarification, evaporation, cooling, crystallization
and centrifugation, and drying.
 Cellulose and hemicellulose processed using the hydrolysis method are
converted to Glucose, while glucose is fermented to form ethanol.
 The ethanol is made from fermentation of a mixture of baggase and molasses
through a fermentation and distillation process.
 The flowrate of sugar product is 104,356.008 ton/year and flowrate of ethanol
product 635,327.760 ton/year.
 The purity of ethanol produced from this plant is 93.6%.
 The feed will be converted to Sugar and Bioethanol according to overall mass
balance. The product conversion efficiency is 17.93%
 Total energy required per hour for the plant is 38,960.503 kWh/h and the
energy required to get the sugar and bioethanol is 2,482.26 kWh/kg product.
90
REFERENCES
Albernas-Carvajal, Y., Corsano, G., Morales-Zamora, M., Gonzalez-Cortez, M.,

Santos-Herrero, R., & Gonzalez-Suares, E. (2014). Optimal Design for An
Ethanol Plant Combining First and Second-Generation Technology. Scielo.
Cuzens, J. C., & Miller, J. R. (1997). Acid Hydrolysis of Bagasse for Ethanol
Production. Pergamon, 285-290.
de Souza Dias, M. O., Filho, R. M., Mantelatto, P. E., Cavalett, O., Rosell, C. E.,
Bonomi, A., & Leal, M. R. (2015). Sugarcane processing for ethanol and
sugar. Elsevier, 35-51.
Fasahati, P., & Liu, J. J. (2012). Process simulation of bioethanol production from
brown algae. The International Federation of Automatic Control, 597-602.
Kang, A., & Lee, T. S. (2015). Converting Sugars to Biofuels: Ethanol and Beyond.
Bioengineering Basel, 184-203.
Kumar, P., M., D. B., Delwiche, J. M., & Stroeve, P. (2009). Methods for
Pretreatment of Lignocellulosic Biomassfor Efficient Hydrolysis and
Biofuel Production. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research.
Lavarack, B., Griffin, G. J., & Rodman, D. (2002). The acid hydrolysis of sugarcane
bagasse hemicellulose to produce xylose,arabinose,glucose and other
products. Pergamon, 367-380.
Muhammad, M. I., Muhammad, B. I., Ali, M. I., & Jibril, M. (2014). Design and
Construction of Bioethanol Pilot Plant in Nigeria. Journal of Applied
Phytotechnology in Environtmental Sanitation, 11-16.
Pina, E. A., Palacios-Bereche, R., Chavez-Rodriguez, M. F., Ensinas, V. A.,
Modesto, M., & Nebra, S. A. (2017). Reduction of process steam demand
and water-usage through heat integration in sugar and ethanol production
from sugarcane Evaluation of different plant configurations. Elsevier, 1263-
1280.
Rabelo, S. C., Filho, R. M., & Costa, A. C. (2008). Lime Pretreatment of Sugarcane
Bagasse for Bioethanol Production. Applied Biochem Biotechnol, 139-150.
Wong, Y. C., & Sanggari, V. (2014). Bioethanol Production from Sugarcane
Bagasse using Fermentation Process. Oriental Journey of Chemistry, 507-
513.

Integrated Sugar and Bioethanol Production from Sugarcane

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Integrated Sugar and Bioethanol Production from Sugarcane

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

UNIVERSITAS INDONESIA

INTEGRATED SUGAR AND BIOETHANOL PRODUCTION

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

Sugarcane is an important commercial crop in Indonesia. It is the main

iii Universitas Indonesia

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................... ii

Figure 1.1. 2D Structure of Sucrose……………………………………………....4

Table 1.1. Potential Raw Material Analysis………………………………………9

vii Universitas Indonesia

viii Universitas Indonesia

1.2. Review of Literature

10% to gasoline (gasohol), then the alcohol needs to be purified up to 100%.

Figure 1.1. 2D Structure of Sucrose

Figure 1.2. 2D Structure of Glucose

Glucose is the most abundant monosaccharide. Glucose is also the most

although it can also be manufactured by the chemical process of reacting ethylene

Table 1.1. Potential Raw Material Analysis

Does not compete with feedstock

(Source: Badan Pusat Statistik, 2017 (Reproduced))

Table 1.2. Raw Material Scoring

1.4.2. Calcium Oxide

1.4.3. Saccharomyces cerevisiae

1.5.2. Supply and Demand

Table 1.3. Bioethanol Producer and Production

Table 1.4. Total Bioethanol demand in Indonesia

1.5.3. Capacity Analysis

Table 1.5. Composition of Sugarcane

1.5.4. Plant Location Analysis

2.1. Process Synthesis

Figure 2.1. Process of sugar production from sugarcane.

2.2.4. Crystallization and Separation of Sugars

Figure 2.2. Biomass conversion path.

Figure 2.3. Integrated biogas and bioethanol production

saccharification and fermentation (SSF), or simultaneous saccharification and

downstream separation and purification equipment. Unconverted syngas and gas-

Table 2.1. Comparison betweenbiochemical and thermochemical conversion.

Table 2.2. Main Process Scoring

Table 2.2. Main Process Scoring (continued)

It is possible to recover calcium from an aqueous reaction system as insoluble

3. Concentration of acid fraction with hydrolysate contaminants has been

configurations and the high ratio of water to solids employed in flow-through

It is noteworthy that many microorganisms in nature, mostly bacteria and

(Source: Unuratu, 2015)

2.5.2.3. Hydrolysis Process Selection

Table 2.6. Hydrolysis Process Selection

in the medium. Yet, S. cerevisiae is still incapable (unless genetically modified) of

Table 2.7. Advantages and disadvantages of fermentation systems

Fermentation Advantages Disadvantages

Table 2.7. Advantages and disadvantages of fermentation systems (continued)

Table 2.8. Operating conditions for Fermenter

2.6. Block Flow Diagram

Figure 3.1 SuperPro Simulation for Overall Plant

Figure 3.2 SuperPro Simulation for Pre-Treatment

Figure 3.3 SuperPro Simulation for Juice Treatment

3.1 Mass Balance

Table 3.1 Mass Balance for Washer

Input Stream Output Stream

Table 3.2 Mass Balance for Grinder

Molecular Input Stream Output Stream

Table 3.3 Mass Balance for Grinder

Input Stream Output Stream

Table 3.4 Mass Balance for Mills

Molecular Input Stream Output Stream