Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Effects of particle size on biomass pretreatment and hydrolysis performances in bioethanol conversion

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Many studies have investigated how particle size as a biomass physical feature influences sugar yield exclusively in enzymatic hydrolysis. However, without considering the effects of particle size on biomass preprocessing and pretreatment, it is difficult to select an optimal particle size range for bioethanol production considering the multistep nature of this process. Comprehensive effects of particle size on biomass preprocessing, pretreatment, and enzymatic hydrolysis were evaluated in this study by assessing biomass compositional and morphological features, characterizing biomass crystallinity and enzyme-accessible surface area, and studying hydrolysis sugar yield and its efficiency. Results indicated that submillimeter small particles (0.5, 0.25, and < 0.25 mm) experienced greater pretreatment severity and 5–10% more structural composition removal than their millimeter level counterparts (1–4 mm). Although small particles had about 10% higher enzymatic hydrolysis efficiency, the low pretreatment solid and sugar recoveries neutralized their enzymatic hydrolysis efficiency advantage over large particles. This trade-off suggested that there may exist little value in reducing particle size further under millimeter level, comparable total sugar yield can be achieved by biomass of millimeter particle sizes; in the meanwhile, employing millimeter particle sizes can conserve energy in biomass preprocessing since comminution is highly energy-intensive and costly.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Not applicable.

Code availability

Not applicable.

References

  1. Brodeur G, Yau E, Badal K, Collier J, Ramachandran KB, Ramakrishnan S (2011) Chemical and physicochemical pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass: a review. Enzyme Research, 2011. https://doi.org/10.4061/2011/787532

  2. Hess JR, Wright CT, Kenney KL (2007) Cellulosic biomass feedstocks and logistics for ethanol production. Biofuels, bioproducts and biorefining: innovation for a sustainable economy 1(3):181–190. https://doi.org/10.1002/bbb.26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Fan LT, Lee YH, Beardmore DH (1980) Mechanism of the enzymatic hydrolysis of cellulose: effects of major structural features of cellulose on enzymatic hydrolysis. Biotechnol Bioeng 22(1):177–199. https://doi.org/10.1002/bit.260220113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Zhu L, O’Dwyer JP, Chang VS, Granda CB, Holtzapple MT (2008) Structural features affecting biomass enzymatic digestibility. Biores Technol 99(9):3817–3828. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2007.07.033

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Sinitsyn AP, Gusakov AV, Vlasenko EY (1991) Effect of structural and physico-chemical features of cellulosic substrates on the efficiency of enzymatic hydrolysis. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 30(1):43–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02922023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Zeng M, Mosier NS, Huang CP, Sherman DM, Ladisch MR (2007) Microscopic examination of changes of plant cell structure in corn stover due to hot water pretreatment and enzymatic hydrolysis. Biotechnol Bioeng 97(2):265–278. https://doi.org/10.1002/bit.21298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Chang VS, Holtzapple MT (2000) Fundamental factors affecting biomass enzymatic reactivity. In twenty-first symposium on biotechnology for fuels and chemicals (pp. 5–37). Humana Press, Totowa, NJ. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-1392-5_1

  8. Digman MF, Shinners KJ, Casler MD, Dien BS, Hatfield RD, Jung HJG, Muck RE, Weimer PJ (2010) Optimizing on-farm pretreatment of perennial grasses for fuel ethanol production. Biores Technol 101(14):5305–5314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2010.02.014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Zhu J, Wan C, Li Y (2010) Enhanced solid-state anaerobic digestion of corn stover by alkaline pretreatment. Biores Technol 101(19):7523–7528. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2010.04.060

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Grohmann K, Mitchell DJ, Himmel ME, Dale BE, Schroeder HA (1989) The role of ester groups in resistance of plant cell wall polysaccharides to enzymatic hydrolysis. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 20(1):45–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02936472

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Chundawat SP, Venkatesh B, Dale BE (2007) Effect of particle size based separation of milled corn stover on AFEX pretreatment and enzymatic digestibility. Biotechnol Bioeng 96(2):219–231. https://doi.org/10.1002/bit.21132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Lamsal BP, Madl R, Tsakpunidis K (2011) Comparison of feedstock pretreatment performance and its effect on soluble sugar availability. Bioenergy Research 4(3):193–200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-010-9112-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Zhang P, Zhang Q, Pei ZJ, Pei L (2011) January. An experimental investigation on cellulosic biofuel manufacturing: effects of biomass particle size on sugar yield. In ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition 54891:321–326. https://doi.org/10.1115/IMECE2011-62721

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Dasari RK, Berson RE (2007) The effect of particle size on hydrolysis reaction rates and rheological properties in cellulosic slurries. In Applied biochemistry and biotecnology (pp. 289–299). Humana Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-60327-181-3_26

  15. Vidal BC, Dien BS, Ting KC, Singh V (2011) Influence of feedstock particle size on lignocellulose conversion—a review. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 164(8):1405–1421. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12010-011-9221-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kapoor M, Semwal S, Satlewal A, Christopher J, Gupta RP, Kumar R, Puri SK, Ramakumar SSV (2019) The impact of particle size of cellulosic residue and solid loadings on enzymatic hydrolysis with a mass balance. Fuel 245:514–520. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2019.02.094

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Bahcegul E, Apaydin S, Haykir NI, Tatli E, Bakir U (2012) Different ionic liquids favor different lignocellulosic biomass particle sizes during pretreatment to function efficiently. Green Chem 14(7):1896–1903. https://doi.org/10.1039/C2GC35318K

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Yang Y, Zhang M, Wang D (2018) A comprehensive investigation on the effects of biomass particle size in cellulosic biofuel production. Journal of Energy Resources Technology, 140(4). https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4039602

  19. Miao Z, Grift TE, Hansen AC, Ting KC (2011) Energy requirement for comminution of biomass in relation to particle physical properties. Ind Crops Prod 33(2):504–513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2010.12.016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Lin Z, Huang H, Zhang H, Zhang L, Yan L, Chen J (2010) Ball milling pretreatment of corn stover for enhancing the efficiency of enzymatic hydrolysis. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 162(7):1872–1880. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12010-010-8965-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Fernandes ÉS, Bueno D, Pagnocca FC, Brienzo M (2020) Minor biomass particle size for an efficient cellulose accessibility and enzymatic hydrolysis. ChemistrySelect 5(25):7627–7631. https://doi.org/10.1002/slct.202001008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Pielhop T, Amgarten J, von Rohr PR, Studer MH (2016) Steam explosion pretreatment of softwood: the effect of the explosive decompression on enzymatic digestibility. Biotechnol Biofuels 9(1):1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13068-016-0567-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. De Assis T, Huang S, Driemeier CE, Donohoe BS, Kim C, Kim SH, Gonzalez R, Jameel H, Park S (2018) Toward an understanding of the increase in enzymatic hydrolysis by mechanical refining. Biotechnol Biofuels 11(1):1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13068-018-1289-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Nguyen TAD, Kim KR, Han SJ, Cho HY, Kim JW, Park SM, Park JC, Sim SJ (2010) Pretreatment of rice straw with ammonia and ionic liquid for lignocellulose conversion to fermentable sugars. Biores Technol 101(19):7432–7438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2010.04.053

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Ballesteros I, Oliva JM, Negro MJ, Manzanares P, Ballesteros M (2002) Enzymic hydrolysis of steam exploded herbaceous agricultural waste (Brassica carinata) at different particule sizes. Process Biochem 38(2):187–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0032-9592(02)00070-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Chambon CL, Verdía P, Fennell PS, Hallett JP (2021) Process intensification of the ionoSolv pretreatment: effects of biomass loading, particle size and scale-up from 10 mL to 1 L. Sci Rep 11(1):1–15. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-94629-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Dougherty MJ, Tran HM, Stavila V, Knierim B, George A, Auer M, Adams PD, Hadi MZ (2014) Cellulosic biomass pretreatment and sugar yields as a function of biomass particle size. PLoS ONE 9(6):e100836. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0100836

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Weerachanchai P, Leong SSJ, Chang MW, Ching CB, Lee JM (2012) Improvement of biomass properties by pretreatment with ionic liquids for bioconversion process. Biores Technol 111:453–459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2012.02.023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Chang VS, Burr B, Holtzapple MT (1997) Lime pretreatment of switchgrass. In Biotechnology for fuels and chemicals (pp. 3–19). Humana Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-2312-2_2

  30. Theerarattananoon K, Xu F, Wilson J, Staggenborg S, Mckinney L, Vadlani P, Pei Z, Wang D (2012) Effects of the pelleting conditions on chemical composition and sugar yield of corn stover, big bluestem, wheat straw, and sorghum stalk pellets. Bioprocess Biosyst Eng 35(4):615–623. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00449-011-0642-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Kaar WE, Holtzapple MT (2000) Using lime pretreatment to facilitate the enzymic hydrolysis of corn stover. Biomass Bioenerg 18(3):189–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0961-9534(99)00091-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Karunanithy C, Muthukumarappan K (2011) Optimization of alkali, big bluestem particle size, and extruder parameters for maximum enzymatic sugar recovery using response surface methodology. BioResources 6(1):762–790

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Talebnia F, Karakashev D, Angelidaki I (2010) Production of bioethanol from wheat straw: an overview on pretreatment, hydrolysis and fermentation. Biores Technol 101(13):4744–4753. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2009.11.080

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Srivastava N, Shrivastav AK, Srivastava M, Mishra PK (2020) Biofuels production using wheat straw. In Recent Developments in Bioenergy Research (pp. 433–441). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-819597-0.00029-5

  35. Sluiter A, Hames B, Hyman D, Payne C, Ruiz R, Scarlata C, Sluiter J, Templeton D, Wolfe J (2008) Determination of total solids in biomass and total dissolved solids in liquid process samples. National Renewable Energy Laboratory 9:1–6

    Google Scholar 

  36. Chandra R, Ewanick S, Hsieh C, Saddler JN (2008) The characterization of pretreated lignocellulosic substrates prior to enzymatic hydrolysis, part 1: a modified Simons’ staining technique. Biotechnol Prog 24(5):1178–1185. https://doi.org/10.1002/btpr.33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Sluiter A, Hames B, Ruiz R, Scarlata C, Sluiter J, Templeton D, Crocker DLAP (2010) Determination of structural carbohydrates and lignin in biomass. Laboratory analytical procedure, (TP-510–42618)

  38. Sluiter A, Hames B, Ruiz R, Scarlata C, Sluiter J, Templeton D (2006) Determination of sugars, byproducts, and degradation products in liquid fraction process samples. Golden: National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 11, pp.65–71

  39. Dumitriu S ed. (2004) Polysaccharides: structural diversity and functional versatility. CRC Press

  40. Alvo P, Belkacemi K (1997) Enzymatic saccharification of milled timothy (Phleum pratense L.) and alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.). Bioresource Technology 61(3):185–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-8524(97)00068-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Lu YC, Lu Y, Lu ZL, Wei XY (2017) Detailed componential characterization of extractable species with organic solvents from wheat straw. International Journal of Analytical Chemistry, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/7305682

  42. Katz BS (2014) Analysis of chemical storage and transit times to characterize water movement through a thick unsaturated zone overlying the High Plains aquifer, northwestern Kansas (Doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas)

  43. Wang W, Chen X, Donohoe BS, Ciesielski PN, Katahira R, Kuhn EM, Kafle K, Lee CM, Park S, Kim SH, Tucker MP (2014) Effect of mechanical disruption on the effectiveness of three reactors used for dilute acid pretreatment of corn stover Part 1: chemical and physical substrate analysis. Biotechnol Biofuels 7(1):1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/1754-6834-7-57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Zhao J, Xu Y, Wang W, Griffin J, Wang D (2020) Conversion of liquid hot water, acid and alkali pretreated industrial hemp biomasses to bioethanol. Biores Technol 309:123383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2020.123383

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Rajan K, Carrier DJ (2014) Effect of dilute acid pretreatment conditions and washing on the production of inhibitors and on recovery of sugars during wheat straw enzymatic hydrolysis. Biomass Bioenerg 62:222–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2014.01.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Welf ES, Venditti RA, Hubbe MA, Pawlak JJ (2005) The effects of heating without water removal and drying on the swelling as measured by water retention value and degradation as measured by intrinsic viscosity of cellulose papermaking fibers. Prog Pap Recycl 14(3):1–9

    Google Scholar 

  47. Kim SB, Lee YY (2002) Diffusion of sulfuric acid within lignocellulosic biomass particles and its impact on dilute-acid pretreatment. Biores Technol 83(2):165–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-8524(01)00197-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Cadoche L, López GD (1989) Assessment of size reduction as a preliminary step in the production of ethanol from lignocellulosic wastes. Biol Wastes 30(2):153–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/0269-7483(89)90069-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Grethlein HE (1985) The effect of pore size distribution on the rate of enzymatic hydrolysis of cellulosic substrates. Bio/Technology 3(2):155–160. https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt0285-155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Park S, Venditti RA, Jameel H, Pawlak JJ (2006) Changes in pore size distribution during the drying of cellulose fibers as measured by differential scanning calorimetry. Carbohyd Polym 66(1):97–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2006.02.026

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Li C, Knierim B, Manisseri C, Arora R, Scheller HV, Auer M, Vogel KP, Simmons BA, Singh S (2010) Comparison of dilute acid and ionic liquid pretreatment of switchgrass: biomass recalcitrance, delignification and enzymatic saccharification. Biores Technol 101(13):4900–4906. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2009.10.066

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Hsu TA, Himmel M, Schell D, Farmer J, Berggren M (1996) Design and initial operation of a high-solids, pilot-scale reactor for dilute-acid pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass. In Seventeenth Symposium on Biotechnology for Fuels and Chemicals (pp. 3–18). Humana Press, Totowa, NJ. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-0223-3_1

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the National Science Foundation of the U.S. through Award 1562671.

Funding

This work was supported by the National Science Foundation of the U.S. through Award 1562671.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Industrial and Manufacturing Systems Engineering, Kansas State University, 2075 Rathbone Hall, 1701D Platt St, Manhattan, KS, 66506, USA

    Yang Yang & Meng Zhang

  2. Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, 66506, USA

    Jikai Zhao & Donghai Wang

Authors
  1. Yang Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Meng Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jikai Zhao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Donghai Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by Yang Yang and Jikai Zhao. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Yang Yang. Meng Zhang and Donghai Wang supervised the project and commented on and edited previous and current versions of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Meng Zhang.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

Not applicable.

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

All authors read and approved the final manuscript and certify that this manuscript consists of original, unpublished work which is not under consideration for publication elsewhere.

Additional declarations for articles in life science journals that report the results of studies involving humans and/or animals

Not applicable.

Conflict of interest/Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yang, Y., Zhang, M., Zhao, J. et al. Effects of particle size on biomass pretreatment and hydrolysis performances in bioethanol conversion. Biomass Conv. Bioref. 13, 13023–13036 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-021-02169-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-021-02169-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation