Techno‐Economic Evaluation of Producing Ethanol from Softwood: Comparison of SSF and SHF and Identification of Bottlenecks

By Anders Wingren, M. Galbe, Guido Zacchi. Biotechnology progress (Print), 2008

716 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e34a373f3fa573c3af92e7868c7ba7d0876a708d

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Biomedical Engineering

Citations in the corpus

Towards industrial pentose-fermenting yeast strains (2007, background): “…research in relation to four industrial benchmarks, which were singled out to have the greatest influence on the price of lignocellulosic ethanol (Wingren et al. 2003): – Process water economy – Inhibitor tolerance – Ethanol yield – Specific ethanol productivity Process concepts for the…”
Economics and environmental impact of bioethanol production technologies: an appraisal (2007, methodology): “The most important process improvement made for the enzymatic hydrolysis of biomass is the introduction of simultaneous saccharification and fermentation (SSF), which has been improved to include the co-fermentation of multiple sugar substrates (Figure 4) (Sreenath et al., 2001; Wingren et al., 2003”
Yield-determining factors in high-solids enzymatic hydrolysis of lignocellulose (2009, neutral): “Model-based estimations have shown significant reductions of operating costs of simultaneous saccharification and fermentation (SSF) of pretreated softwood when the initial solids concentration was increased [8].”
Thermotolerant fermenting yeasts for simultaneous saccharification fermentation of lignocellulosic biomass (2016, background): “The production of bioethanol at higher temperatures has been increasingly studied due to several advantages such as decrease in cooling costs, constant evaporation of ethanol from the culture broth under reduced pressure, lower chances of contamination, applicability of process in tropical regions, ”
Woody biomass pretreatment for cellulosic ethanol production: Technology and energy consumption evaluation. (2010, background): “Acid-catalyzed steam explosion is the most common steam pretreatment for woody biomass (De Bari et al., 2007; Galbe and Zacchi, 2002; Monavari et al., 2009b; Sassner et al., 2008a,b; Soderstrom et al., 2004; Wingren et al., 2003; Cullis et al., 2004; Ewanick et al., 2007).”
Pretreatment of lignocellulose: Formation of inhibitory by-products and strategies for minimizing their effects. (2016, neutral): “The cost of the fermenting microorganism is, however, a significant part of the total process cost (Wingren et al., 2003).”
Immobilization of β-glucosidase on Eupergit C for Lignocellulose Hydrolysis (2006, background): “Bioconversion of lignocellulosic feedstocks to fuelgrade ethanol is a promising route towards reduced dependence on fossil fuels and the mitigation of greenhouse gas production ( Wingren et al. 2003 ).”
Outlook for cellulase improvement: screening and selection strategies. (2006, background): “In addition, two other pretreatments– steam explosion and organosolv–have been intensively investigated (Arato et al., 2005; Bura et al., 2002, 2003; Galbe and Zacchi, 2002; Ohgren et al., 2005; Pan et al., 2005a,b; Pye and Lora, 1991; Sassner et al., 2005 ; Soderstrom et al., 2003; Wingren et al., ”
Hemicelluloses for fuel ethanol: A review. (2010, positive): “However, simultaneous saccharification and fermentation (SSF) processes have been proved to be more efficient compared to SHF (Marques et al., 2008; Olsson et al., 2006; Wingren et al., 2003).”
Bioconversion of lignocellulose: inhibitors and detoxification (2013, background): “However, the use of large inocula is considered to be a less attractive solution in an industrial context [87].”