Energy Sustainability Evaluation of Anaerobic Digestion

Ruggeri, Bernardo; Tommasi, Tonia; Sanfilippo, Sara

doi:10.1007/978-1-4471-6431-9_9

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, fuel savings is proportional to CO 2 savings. Energy ideal efficiency of separation (IES) of the system was calculated using the following equation Grisales Díaz and Olivar Tost (2016b) : where LHV is the lower heating value of solvents and hydrogen (MJ-fuel/kg-solvent), H S is the energy consumption of the separation (MJ-fuel/kg-solvent), R s is the solvent yield, and LHV GLUCOSE is the lower heating value of glucose, 16.45 MJ/kg (Ruggeri et al 2015 ). The energy efficiency was considered ideal because only the energy requirement of recovery and purification systems was calculated.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Techno-economic analysis of extraction-based separation systems for acetone, butanol, and ethanol recovery and purification

Díaz

Tost

2017

Bioresour. Bioprocess.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundDual extraction, high-temperature extraction, mixture extraction, and oleyl alcohol extraction have been proposed in the literature for acetone, butanol, and ethanol (ABE) production. However, energy and economic evaluation under similar assumptions of extraction-based separation systems are necessary. Hence, the new process proposed in this work, direct steam distillation (DSD), for regeneration of high-boiling extractants was compared with several extraction-based separation systems.MethodsThe evaluation was performed under similar assumptions through simulation in Aspen Plus V7.3® software. Two end distillation systems (number of non-ideal stages between 70 and 80) were studied. Heat integration and vacuum operation of some units were proposed reducing the energy requirements.ResultsEnergy requirement of hybrid processes, substrate concentration of 200 g/l, was between 6.4 and 8.3 MJ-fuel/kg-ABE. The minimum energy requirements of extraction-based separation systems, feeding a water concentration in the substrate equivalent to extractant selectivity, and ideal assumptions were between 2.6 and 3.5 MJ-fuel/kg-ABE, respectively. The efficiencies of recovery systems for baseline case and ideal evaluation were 0.53–0.57 and 0.81–0.84, respectively.ConclusionsThe main advantages of DSD were the operation of the regeneration column at atmospheric pressure, the utilization of low-pressure steam, and the low energy requirements of preheating. The in situ recovery processes, DSD, and mixture extraction with conventional regeneration were the approaches with the lowest energy requirements and total annualized costs.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s40643-017-0142-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%