Model Download

Stover-to-Ethanol Flowsheet with IL pretreatment (Waterwash)

Model Type: SuperPro Designer

File Format: .spf

Authors: N.V.S.N. Murthy Konda, Daniel Klein-Marcuschamer and Blake A. Simmons.

Publication

Download

There are two models in this section, which are referred to as water-wash (WW) and one-pot (OP) processes. While both the models employ IL pretreatment, they are different in terms of the configuration of the pretreatment section. In the WW process [1], due to the use of commercial enzymes (that are not tolerant to IL) for the hydrolysis, IL is removed prior to enzymatic hydrolysis using the water-wash step. On the other hand, in the OP process [2], due to the use of IL-tolerant enzymes, hydrolysis is carried out in the presence of IL which is subsequently recovered in the downstream. These models are developed using the dilute acid pretreatment based biorefinery model (that can also be downloaded from this wiki) and the configuration of the rest of the biorefinery (i.e., other than the pretreatment section) is similar in the WW and OP routes.

These two models are intended to serve as the representative models for the analysis in our recent study [3]. More specifically, these models represent advanced scenarios (i.e., with 50% biomass loading, 95% conversion of glucan/xylan in the pretreatment reactor, and reduced consumption of water and acid/base chemicals) considered in our study. More details of these two biorefinery models can be obtained from our work [3]. These models are flexible and necessary changes can be easily incorporated to study any other IL process configurations.


Questions/Comments?

Please contact N.V.S.N. Murthy Konda ([email protected]) If you have any suggestions to improve these models, please provide enough details including references for data etc. Please note that these models are developed in SuperPro Designer V8.5. If you are facing convergence problems (e.g., due to version upgrade) and for any other software related questions, please contact SuperPro Designer staff directly.


Please cite this work as:

These models can be cited through our publication [3].

References

1. Klein-Marcuschamer D, Simmons BA, Blanch HW: Techno-economic analysis of a lignocellulosic ethanol biorefinery with ionic liquid pre-treatment. Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining 2011, 5:562-569.


2. Shi J, Gladden JM, Sathitsuksanoh N, Kambam P, Sandoval L, Mitra D, Zhang S, George A, Singer SW, Simmons BA: One-pot ionic liquid pretreatment and saccharification of switchgrass. Green Chem 2013, 15:2579-2589.


3. Konda NVSNM, Shi J, Singh S, Blanch HW, Simmons BA, Klein‐Marcuschamer D: Understanding cost drivers and economic potential of two variants of ionic liquid pretreatment for cellulosic biofuel production. Biotechnology for biofuels 2014, 7:86.

  1. Download the SuperPro software. A free demo version can be downloaded here. If you own a license to the software, feel free to use it. The model runs on version 8.5. For more information about the software requirements or specifications, please contact Intelligen directly.
  2. Download the .spf flowsheet file using the button above
  3. Open the SuperPro Software, and then open the .spf file you downloaded in Step 2.
  4. You can explore the data populated in the flowsheet, or change the parameters and run the model again.
  5. If you encounter issues running the model, consult the Troubleshooting section.
  6. If you want to update the model, please follow the instructions in the "Updating the Model" section.
  7. Questions or comments can be directed to N.V.S.N. Murthy Konda

This technoeconomic model is meant to be a community-updatable tool, and we encourage and welcome suggestions, corrections, and modifications to the assumptions and parameters used. To do so, please contact N.V.S.N. Murthy Konda explaining why the model should be updated and how. Cite any peer-reviewed publications that support the data provided for the update. If the information was obtained from a vendor, please provide the vendor's contact information. Please attach to the email any relevant publications.

The presented model is quite complex with respect to number of unit operations, materials, and recycle loops. This means that it is normal for simulations to converge in a few minutes. Changes in some of the parameters may cause the simulations to either converge slowly or to give results that are very different from those expected. If a simulation does not converge quickly, try changing the tolerance to a high value, run the model and reduce the tolerance slowly after successive runs. Regarding unexpected results, it is important to run each scenario multiple times to make sure the values are consistent. Small variations are normal and expected. If problems with the software are experienced that are thought to be unrelated to the model itself (e.g. after manual checks), it is best to contact Intelligen, the maker of SuperPro, directly.

The following warning is normal and should be ignored: "W205.0026: The contents of equipment XYZ after XYZ is executed are non-zero. XYZ accumulates material so the batch cycle of XYZ is not repeatable." (where XYZ is the name of a piece of equipment)

Please contact Intelligen if you have questions about their software.

This work was part of the DOE Joint BioEnergy Institute supported by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of Biological and Environmental Research, through contract DE-AC02-05CH11231 between Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and the U.S. Department of Energy. Additional funding from the U.S.Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Commercialization and Deployment program, Statoil, Boeing, and General Motors is acknowledged. Special thanks go to Demetri Petrides, John Calandranis, and the entire Intelligen team for their help along the way. We thank the hard work of Steve Lane, responsible for setting up this wiki site and for teaching us how to use it best.

  1. Searcy, E. et al. The relative cost of biomass energy transport. Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology 137-140, 639-652(2007).
  2. Torget, R. et al. Dilute-Acid Pretreatment of Corn Residues and Short-Rotation Woody Crops. Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology 28-29, 75-86(1991).
  3. Lu, X.B. et al. Enzymatic Hydrolysis of Corn Stover after Pretreatment with Dilute Sulfuric Acid. Chemical Engineering & Technology 30, 938-944(2007).
  4. Aden, A. Lignocellulosic Biomass to Ethanol Process Design and Economics Utilizing Co-Current Dilute Acid Prehydrolysis and Enzymatic Hydrolysis for Corn Stover. (National Renewable Energy Laboratory: 2002)
  5. Roche, C.M. et al. Particle concentration and yield stress of biomass slurries during enzymatic hydrolysis at high-solids loadings. Biotechnology and Bioengineering 104, 290-300(2009).
  6. Blanch, H.W. & Clark, D.S. Biochemical engineering. (CRC Press: 1997).
  7. Ghose, T.K. & Tyagi, R.D. Rapid ethanol fermentation of cellulose hydrolysate. II. Product and substrate inhibition and optimization of fermentor design. Biotechnology and Bioengineering 21, 1401-1420 (1979).
  8. Helle, S., Cameron, D., Lam, J., White, B. & Duff, S. Effect of inhibitory compounds found in biomass hydrolysates on growth and xylose fermentation by a genetically engineered strain of S. cerevisiae. Enzyme and Microbial Technology 33, 786-792 (2003).
  9. Maiorella, B., Blanch, H.W. & Wilke, C.R. By-product inhibition effects on ethanolic fermentation by Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Biotechnology and Bioengineering 25, 103-121 (1983).
  10. Moon, N.J. Inhibition of the growth of acid tolerant yeasts by acetate, lactate and propionate and their synergistic mixtures. Journal of Applied Microbiology 55, 453-460 (1983).
  11. Kuyper, M. et al. Metabolic engineering of a xylose-isomerase-expressing strain for rapid anaerobic xylose fermentation. FEMS Yeast Research 5, 399-409 (2005).
  12. Jeffries, T.W. & Jin, Y. Metabolic engineering for improved fermentation of pentoses by yeasts. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol 63, 495-509 (2004).
  13. Wooley, R. et al. Lignocellulosic Biomass to Ethanol Process Design and Economics Utilizing Co-Current Dilute Acid Prehydrolysis and Enzymatic Hydrolysis Current and Futuristic Scenarios. (1999).at <http://www.osti.gov/bridge/servlets/purl/12150-rKCQEi/native/>
  14. McAloon, Taylor, Yee, Ibsen, K. & Wooley, R. Determining the cost of producing ethanol from corn starch and lignocellulosic feedstocks. (2000).
  15. McCabe, W.L., Smith, J.C. & Harriott, P. Unit operations of chemical engineering. (McGraw-Hill Professional: 2005).
  16. Sinnott, R.K., Coulson, J.M. & Richardson, J.F. Chemical Engineering Design. (Butterworth-Heinemann: 2005).
  17. Seader, J.D. & Henley, E.J. Separation process principles. (John Wiley & Sons Inc: 2006).
  18. Bothast, R.J. & Schlicher, M.A. Biotechnological processes for conversion of corn into ethanol. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology 67, 19-25 (2005).
  19. Starfelt, F., Thorin, E., Dotzauer, E. & Yan, J. Performance evaluation of adding ethanol production into an existing combined heat and power plant. Bioresource Technology 101, 613-618 (2010).
  20. Dutta A, Dowe N, Ibsen KN, Schell DJ, Aden A. An economic comparison of different fermentation configurations to convert corn stover to ethanol using Z. mobilis and Saccharomyces. Biotechnol Progress. 2009
  21. Piccolo C, Bezzo F. A techno-economic comparison between two technologies for bioethanol production from lignocellulose. Biomass and Bioenergy. 2009 Mar;33(3):478-491.
  22. Perrin R, Vogel K, Schmer M, Mitchell R. Farm-Scale Production Cost of Switchgrass for Biomass. BioEnergy Research. 2008 Mar 1;1(1):91-97.
  23. Liquid Transportation Fuels from Coal and Biomass: Technological Status, Costs, and Environmental Impacts [Internet]. National Research Council, National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering; 2009 [cited 2009 Dec 11]. Available from: http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12620
  24. Klein-Marcuschamer D, Oleskowicz-Popiel P, Simmons BA, Blanch HW. 2011. The challenge of enzyme cost in the production of lignocellulosic biofuels. Biotechnology and Bioengineering. DOI: 10.1002/bit.24370.
  25. Emme B. et al. Critical Factors in the Selection of the Process Layout for Hydrolysis and Fermentation of Lignocellulosic Materials. 32nd Symposium on Biotechnology for Fuels and Chemicals