Abstract
The combination of high-temperature fermentation and membrane separation has the potential to realize a simple on-site process to produce concentrated bioethanol. The performance of dehydration membranes in separating bioethanol was investigated in this study. Three types of zeolite membranes, LTA, MFI, and MOR, were synthesized. Their dehydration ability was compared using a bioethanol solution produced by high-temperature fermentation followed by vacuum distillation. The LTA zeolite membranes deformed and became amorphous while treating the distillate. On the contrary, no significant changes were observed in the MFI and MOR zeolite membranes analyzed by X-ray diffraction after treating the distillate. However, the flux declined when the membranes were in contact with the distillate (pH = 3.8). Neutralizing the distillate to pH 6.6 with sodium hydroxide did not prevent the flux decline. Even though flux decreased by about 20–30%, the MOR membrane showed quite high water-selectivity, with a water concentration of over 99.9% in the permeate, suggesting the feasibility of its application to concentrate bioethanol.
Highlights
We propose the combination of high-temperature fermentation and membrane separation for an on-site biorefinery process
The higher dehydration performance of LTA membranes was due to its lower Si/Al ratio (Si/Al = 1) compared to the MOR (Si/Al = 4.5) [15] and MFI (Si/Al = 13.1) [14]
The dehydration performance of three types of zeolite membranes was compared using bioethanol solution obtained from high-temperature fermentation followed by vacuum distillation
Summary
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. The overreliance on fossil fuels is causing environmental challenges today. A shift to more sustainable energy sources is urgently required. Biofuels are alternative choices that can be renewable, if managed properly. Biorefinery is often proposed to be centralized at a large scale to obtain benefits from the scaled-up process [1]. One of the drawbacks of such a model is the high cost of collecting and transporting the feedstock to the biorefinery plant. An alternative idea is the conversion of the biomass closer to its production area [2]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
