The path forward for lignocellulose biorefineries: Bottlenecks, solutions, and perspective on commercialization

Abstract

Lignocellulose biorefinery encompasses process engineering and biotechnology tools for the processing of lignocellulosic biomass for the manufacturing of bio-based products (such as biofuels, bio-chemicals, biomaterials). While, lignocellulose biorefinery offers clear value proposition, success at industrial level has not been vibrant for the commercial production of renewable chemicals and fuels. This is because of high capital and operating expenditures, irregularities in biomass supply chain, technical process immaturity, and scale up challenges. As a result, commercial production of biochemicals and biofuels with right economics is still lagging behind. To hit the market place, efforts are underway by bulk and specialty chemicals producing companies like DSM (Succinic acid, Cellulosic ethanol), Dow-DuPont (1,3-Propanediol, 1,4-Butanediol), Clariant-Global bioenergies-INEOS (bio-isobutene), Braskem (Ethylene, polypropylene), Raizen, Gran-bio and POET-DSM (Cellulosic ethanol), Amyris (Farnesene), and several other potential players. This paper entails the concept of lignocellulose biorefinery, technical challenges for industrialization of renewable fuels and bulk chemicals and future directions.

Environmental hotspots of lactic acid production systems

“…This is currently mainly limited by high costs associated with the conversion of these feedstocks into fermentable sugars (Bardhan, Gupta, Gorman, & Haider, 2015). Due to technological challenges associated with utilizing second generation feedstocks, for example, during the pretreatment phase of the biomass (Biddy et al, 2016;Chen & Qiu, 2010) and related economic challenges of biochemical production from second generation biomass (Chandel, Garlapati, Singh, Antunes, & da Silva, 2018;Lynd et al, 2017), alternative feedstock sources are increasingly receiving attention. These feedstocks include engineered crops, algae, and urban residues, such as household waste (third generation feedstock; Yang et al, 2015).…”

Techno‐economic and life‐cycle assessments of small‐scale biorefineries for isobutene and xylo‐oligosaccharides production: a comparative study in Portugal and Chile

“…Biorefineries initially followed oil refineries by using a single feedstock with huge processing capacities to achieve the maximum economy of scale, but the opportunities for installing such biorefineries in most rural areas in Europe, Latin American countries, and even worldwide are scarce. Studies have revealed that the main bottlenecks are associated with high capital expenditure (CAPEX) and operating expenditure (OPEX), and very often the lack of a sustainable biomass supply at regional level . Small‐scale biorefineries have been proposed as a potential solution to overcome most of these challenges because, when located in rural areas, they can promote territorial economic cohesion and generate local jobs directly and indirectly .…”

Analysis on Bioeconomy’s Contribution to GDP: Evidence from Japan

“…One possible reason for this finding is that the concept of bioeconomy is long-term in nature [58], and has not yet unleashed its full potential [25]. Another important reason may be that bioproducts have not fully hit commercialization [59], and consumers are generally unfamiliar with bio-based products [60]. Bioproducts are currently being promoted by policymakers as policymakers map up strategies [4] to realize bioeconomy dreams, but this initiative would be more successful if it was led by the market.…”