MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Local Biomass Processing is Practical for Facilitating Fermentation to Bioethanol

2013· article· en· W2009085336 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Technology Innovations in Renewable Energy · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiofuel production and bioconversion
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCellulaseCorn stoverBiomass (ecology)FermentationBiofuelStrawChemistryHydrolysisPulp and paper industryStoverEnzymatic hydrolysisWaste managementBiotechnologyFood scienceAgronomyBiochemistryEngineeringBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Local processing of biomass prior to fermentation at another site has advantages in transportation savings and in fermentation facility operation. To evaluate the feasibility of treating biomass locally to produce fermentation ready glucose an alkali-cellulase process was evaluated at laboratory scale using 5 g of three types of biomass. After pretreatment with an aqueous solution of NaOH (0.5% w/v, 20% w/w-biomass), T=100°C x 12 h, corn stover and wheat straw were shown to undergo cellulase hydrolysis to glucose; however, pine chips were not as susceptible. Commercially available cellulase was capable of producing glucose within three hours from corn stover and wheat straw. The NaOH pretreated biomass was mixed with enzymes in a small volume (50 mL) to conserve water. However, glucose inhibition of cellulase appeared to limit hydrolysis. Volume expansion by ten-fold dilution (500 mL) resulted in rapid release of glucose presumably by decreasing end product inhibition. Application at a commercial level will require increased water management. The resulting glucose solution could be concentrated by thermal or membrane technology for delivery to grain fermenting facilities to be used without further processing. Solids remaining after enzyme hydrolysis can be recycled locally to produce additional glucose. Scale-up of this alkali-cellulase process for local application appears feasible given the materials and conditions evaluated in this study. Local treatment of biomass using the alkali-cellulase process to produce glucose to be transported to existing grain fermenting facilities is a novel approach based on reliable technology and has been demonstrated at laboratory scale.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.673
Threshold uncertainty score0.371

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.263 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Technology Innovations in Renewable EnergySame topicBiofuel production and bioconversionFrench-language works237,207