Issue
Korean Journal of Chemical Engineering,
Vol.38, No.12, 2493-2499, 2021
The effect of enzymatic hydrolysis of pretreated wastepaper for bioethanol production
Enzymatic hydrolysis of waste biomass for bioethanol production is considered a decades old traditional, inexpensive, and energy-effective approach. In this study, waste office paper was pretreated with diluted sulfuric acid (H2SO4) and hydrolyzed with one of the most available and cost-effective enzymes, cellulase derived from Trichoderma reesei, under submerged static condition. Three different pretreatment approaches--cut into 2 cm2, blended with distilled water, and pretreated with diluted H2SO4--have been implemented, and pretreatment with diluted H2SO4 was the most effective. Hydrolysis with different concentrations--0.5M, 1.0M, 1.5M, 2.0M of H2SO4--was performed. The maximum glucose content was obtained at 2.0M H2SO4 at 90 min reaction time, and glucose yield was 0.11 g glucose/ g wastepaper. The cut paper, wet-blended, and acid-treated wastepaper was hydrolyzed with cellulase enzyme for 2, 4, and 5 consecutive days with 5mg, 10mg, 15mg, and 20mg enzyme loadings. The maximum glucose content obtained was 9.75 g/l from acid-treated wastepaper, after 5 days of enzymatic hydrolysis with 20mg enzyme loading and a glucose yield of a 0.5 g glucose/g wastepaper. The wastepaper hydrolysate was further fermented for 6, 8, and 10 hours continuously with Saccharomyces cerevisiae (yeast), and at 10 hours of fermentation, the maximum glucose consumption was 0.18 g by yeast. Further, HPLC analysis of the fermented medium presented a strong peak of bioethanol content at 16.12min. The distillation of bioethanol by rotary evaporator presented 0.79ml bioethanol/fermented solution, which indicated the conversion efficiency of 79%.
[References]
  1. Lim S, Teong LK, Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev., 14, 938, 2010
  2. Balasbaneh AT, Marsono AKB, Khaleghi SJ, J. Building Eng., 20, 235, 2018
  3. Hossain N, Razali AN, Mahlia TMI, Chowdhury T, Chowdhury H, Ong HC, Shamsuddin AH, Silitonga AS, Energies, 12, 3947, 2019
  4. Ahorsu R, Medina F, Constanti M, Energies, 11, 3366, 2018
  5. Clauser NM, Gonzalez G, Mendieta CM, Kruyeniski J, Area MC, Vallejos ME, Sustainability, 13, 794, 2021
  6. Muller J, Waste disposal rate in malaysia in 2020. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1133319/malaysia-waste-disposalrate-by-method/
  7. Annamalai N, et al., Waste and Biomass Valorization, 11, 121 (2020).
  8. Tadmourt W, Khiari K, Boulal A, Tarabet L, Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization, and Environmental Effects, 1 (2020).
  9. Byadgi SA, Kalburgi P, Procedia Environ. Sci., 35, 555, 2016
  10. Wang L, Sharifzadeh M, Templer R, Murphy RJ, Appl. Energy, 111, 1172, 2013
  11. Garg R, Srivastava R, Brahma V, Verma L, Karthikeyan S, Sahni G, Sci. Rep., 6, 1, 2016
  12. Hossain N, Zaini JH, Mahlia T, Int. J. Technol., 8, 5, 2017
  13. Lin CY, Peng MT, Tsai YC, Tsai SJ, Wu TY, Chien SY, Tsai HJ, Asian J. Agric. Food Sci., 3, 333, 2015
  14. Kusmiyati, Mustofa A, Jumarmi, IOP Conf. Series: Mater. Sci. Eng., 358 (2018).
  15. Rocha J, Alencar B, Mota H, Gouveia E, Cell Chem. Technol., 50, 243, 2016
  16. Dubey AK, Gupta P, Garg N, Naithani S, Carbohydr. Polym., 88, 825, 2012
  17. Chua K, Sahid EJM, Leong Y, ST-4: Green & Energy Management, 4, 1 (2011).
  18. Ioelovich M, J. Sci. Res. Rep., 905 (2014).