TECHNO-ECONOMIC COMPARISON OF ACETONE-BUTANOL-ETHANOL FERMENTATION USING VARIOUS EXTRACTANTS

Abstract

This work seeks to compare various Acetone-Butanol-Ethanol (ABE) fermentation extraction chemicals on an economic and environmental basis. The chemicals considered are: decane, a decane/oleyl alcohol blend, decanol, a decanol/oleyl alcohol blend, 2-ethyl-hexanol, hexanol, mesitylene, and oleyl alcohol. To facilitate comparison a pure-distillation base case was also considered. The aforementioned extractants are a mix of both toxic and non-toxic extractants. Non-toxic extractants can be used directly in fermentation reactors, improving overall fermentation yield by removal of toxic butanol. The extractants were modelled in Aspen Plus V8.8 and separation trains were designed to take advantage of extractant properties. The separation section of the plant was then integrated with upstream and downstream units to determine the Minimum Butanol Selling Prices (MBSP) for second generation extractive ABE fermentation. Upstream processes include biomass (switchgrass) solids processing, biomass pre-treatment/saccharification and fermentation while downstream processes include utility generation and wastewater treatment. The cost of CO2 equivalent emissions avoided (CCA) was used as a metric to compare environmental impact of each process as compared to gasoline. The economic best and environmental best extractant is shown to be 2-ethyl-hexanol with a MBSP of $1.58/L and a CCA of $471.57/tonne CO2 equivalent emissions avoided. Wastewater treatment, which is often ignored in other works, was found to makeup over 30% of total installed capital cost for all extractants.