Different pre-treatments and kinetic models for bioethanol production from lignocellulosic biomass: A review
- PMID: 37260877
- PMCID: PMC10227349
- DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e16604
Different pre-treatments and kinetic models for bioethanol production from lignocellulosic biomass: A review
Erratum in
-
Corrigendum to "Different pre-treatments and kinetic models for bioethanol production from lignocellulosic biomass: A review" [Heliyon 9(6) June 2023 e16604].Heliyon. 2024 Jul 20;10(14):e34757. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e34757. eCollection 2024 Jul 30. Heliyon. 2024. PMID: 39156591 Free PMC article.
Abstract
Lignocellulosic biomass is the generally explored substrate to produce bioethanol for environmental sustainability due to its availability in abundance. However, the complex network of cellulose-hemicellulose-lignin present in it makes its hydrolysis as a challenging task. To boost the effectiveness of conversion, biomass is pre-treated before enzymatic hydrolysis to alter or destroy its original composition. Enzymes like Cellulases are widely used for breaking down cellulose into fermentable sugars. Enzymatic hydrolysis is a complex process involving many influencing factors such as pH, temperature, substrate concentration. This review presents major four pre-treatment methods used for hydrolysing different substrates under varied reaction conditions along with their mechanism and limitations. A relative comparison of data analysis for most widely studied 10 kinetic models is briefly explained in terms of substrates used to get the brief insight about hydrolysis rates. The summary of pre-treatment methods and hydrolysis rates including cellulase enzyme kinetics will be the value addition for upcoming researchers for optimising the hydrolysis process.
Keywords: Cellulase enzyme; Environmental sustainability; Kinetic models; Lignocellulosic biomass; Pre-treatment.
© 2023 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper
Figures






References
-
- Gustavsson L., Nguyen T., Sathre R., Tettey U.Y.A. Climate effects of forestry and substitution of concrete buildings and fossil energy. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021;136(August 2020) doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2020.110435. - DOI
-
- Leibensperger C., Yang P., Zhao Q., Wei S., Cai X. The synergy between stakeholders for cellulosic biofuel development: perspectives, opportunities, and barriers. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021;137(November 2020) doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2020.110613. - DOI
-
- Zhao Y., Damgaard A., Xu Y., Liu S., Christensen T.H. Bioethanol from corn stover – global warming footprint of alternative biotechnologies. Appl. Energy. 2019;247(December 2018):237–253. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.04.037. - DOI
-
- Liu B., Rajagopal D. Life-cycle energy and climate benefits of energy recovery from wastes and biomass residues in the United States. Nat. Energy. 2019;4(8):700–708. doi: 10.1038/s41560-019-0430-2. - DOI
-
- Kumar R. Encyclopedia of sustainability science and technology. Encycl. Sustain. Sci. Technol. 2020 doi: 10.1007/978-1-4939-2493-6. - DOI
Publication types
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources