MultiBiorefinery (SAICTPAC/0040/2015 - POCI-01-0145-FEDER-016403)NORTE-01-0145-FEDER-00000

Dourado, Fernando

Ferreira, Eugénio C.

Forte, Ana Cristina Figueiras

Gama, F. M.

English

Universidade do Minho: RepositoriUM

Economic & environmental assessment of bacterial cellulose productionAna Forte, Fernando Dourado, Miguel Gama, Eugénio C. FerreiraCentre of Biological Engineering, University of Minho, Campus de Gualtar, 4710-057 Braga, PortugalMultibiorefinery Final Meeting, 05/02/2021What is Bacterial Cellulose?Komagataeibacter sucrofermentans• Gram negative• Obligate aerobes200,000 Glc / min !Appealing propertiesProperties ReferencesDegree of polymerization up to 8000 (Wu et al., 2016)Crystallinity 60–90%. (Klemm et al., 2005)Nanofibers’ diameter 20–100 nm (Wu et al., 2016)Nanofibers’ length 1–9 µm (Foresti, Vázquez and Boury, 2017)Density 1.50 g·cm−31.25 g·cm−3(Hervy et al., 2018)(Lee, Blaker and Bismarck, 2009b)Surface area 2.7–37 m2·g−1 (Kim, Nishiyama and Kuga, 2002)Water absorption 610.5 - 320% (Potivara and Phisalaphong, 2019)(Rathinamoorthy et al., 2019)Water vapor permeability765.95–1045.55 g·m−2·day−12.38×10−11 g·m−1·s−1·Pa−1 151 g·m−2·day−11.26×10−10 g·m−1 h−1·Pa−11–11×10−13 g·m−1·s−1·Pa−1(Kamal, Misnon and Fadil, 2020) (Cazón, Velázquez and Vázquez, 2019)(Rathinamoorthy et al., 2019)(Jebel and Almasi, 2016)(Tomé et al., 2010)Young’s modulus1044 MPa5–17 GPa93.8 MPa138 GPa114 GPa15–35 GPa(Cazón, Velázquez and Vázquez, 2019)(Potivara and Phisalaphong, 2019)(Jebel and Almasi, 2016)(Hu et al., 2011)(Lee, Blaker and Bismarck, 2009b)(Klemm et al., 2005)Tensile strength20.8 MPa 70–300 MPa26.3 MPa2 GPa200–300 MPa(Cazón, Velázquez and Vázquez, 2019)(Potivara and Phisalaphong, 2019)(Jebel and Almasi, 2016)(Hu et al., 2011)(Klemm et al., 2005)Elongation2.3%0.5%–5.0%6.1 %1.5–2.0%(Cazón, Velázquez and Vázquez, 2019)(Potivara and Phisalaphong, 2019)(Jebel and Almasi, 2016)(Klemm et al., 2005)Niyazbekova et al. (2018). An Overview of Bacterial Cellulose Applications. Biotechnology. Theory and practice. 10.11134/btp.2.2018.3.Advantages of bacterial cellulose fermentation technologyCOTTON6-8 monthsTREES7-12 yearsBAMBOO3-7 yearsBACTERIAL CELLULOSE30 days0.45 Tons 3.5 Tons 12 Tons390 TonsReference area: football fieldFIELD TOYIELDThe combination of recyclability, sustainability, biodegradability and new end-useopportunities makes BC the potential super material of the future.Efforts towards cost-effective BC productionDifferent strains                       Different media composition                       Different culture conditions                     Low BNC yieldsDourado, F., et al. (2016). Bacterial Nanocellulose. Amsterdam, Elsevier: 199-214Ullah, M.W., Manan, S., Kiprono, S.J., Ul-Islam, M. and Yang, G. (2019). Nanocellulose (eds J. Huang, A. Dufresne and N. Lin).Appealing marketable applications(but confined mostly to health/biomedical)HealthBiomedicalCosmeticsFoodPulp & PaperCompositesHigh value-addedNich marketsGengiflex®(surgery and dental implants) Bioprocess®XCell® Biofill®Dermafill®Gengiflex® (wound dressings)Low value-addedLarge volumeNata de coco:Asian Countries(several companies) Cellulon®, Primacel®:Cetus Co. (USA)Weyerhaeuser Co. (USA)CPKelco (USA) AxCel®PX, AxCel®CG-PX, AxCel®PG, CellulonTMPX….Xylos (USA)Biofill (Brazil)JenNaCell(Germany)Hylomorph (Switzerland)Asian Countries(several companies) Bowil Biotech (Poland)Active companiesBeyond biomedical?Scaling upHow expensive?Economic assessment of the BC productionStatic & agitated culture conditionsSuper-Pro process flowsheet for BNC production≈ 3.5 Ton/year, dried basis (500 Ton/year wet)≈ 3.5 Ton/year: ≈ 3600 USD$/Kg dried BC!(Asian Countries ≈ 60 USD$/Kg dried nata de coco)Capital Investment Cost ( M USD$) AGITATED STATICDirect Costs (DC) 12.5 9.2Indirect Costs (IC) 3.1 2.1Fixed Capital Investment (FCI) 15.6 11.3Working Capital (WC) 2.3 1.7TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT (TCI) 17.9 13.0Estimation of the Annual Product Manufacturing Cost (M USD$)Manufacturing Costs (MC) 6.25 5.4Direct Production Cost (Variable costs) 2.4 2.2Fixed charges 3.0 2.1Plant overhead Costs (50-70% OL, DS & CL, and M & R) 0.85 1.1General Expenses (GE) 1.8 2.0TOTAL PRODUCT COST (TPC): MC + GE 8.0 7.4Profitability (M USD$) (500 MTon/year, at a selling price of 25 USD$/Kg)Total income: Selling Price X Quantity of product 12.5 12.5Gross income: Total Income - Total Product Cost 4.5 5.1Taxes: 30-40% Gross Income 1.6 1.8Net Profit: Gross Income - Taxes 3.0 3.4Rate of Return: Net Profit*100/TCI 7% 11%Payout Period: FCI/(Net Profit + Depreciation) 5 Years 4 YearsDourado, F., et al. (2016). Process Modeling and Techno-Economic Evaluation of an Industrial Bacterial NanoCellulose Fermentation Process. Bacterial Nanocellulose. Amsterdam, Elsevier: 199-214Dourado, F., et al. (2017). Process modelling and techno-economic evaluation of an industrial air-lift bacterial cellulose fermentation process. Nanocellulose and Sustainability: Production, Properties, Applications, andCase Studies. CRC Press in press.M.S. Peters, K.D. Timmerhaus, in: M.S. Peters, K.D. Timmerhaus (Eds.) Plant Design and Economics forChemical Engineers, McGraw-Hill, Singapore, 1991, pp. 150-215.And what about the wastewaters?Low cost subtrates(agroindustrial wastes)High COD, BOD!$$$ Uphill/DownhillBiodegradability tests: significant amount of biogas was obtained from WaF and WaW, along with reduced COD values.UASB assay: while lower methane yield was obtained due to low HRT (40 h and 80h), this study showed the feasibility ofusing AD for the valorization of the wastewaters from the BC fermentation process.Anaerobic digestionContinuous reactor assayLIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENTBACTERIAL CELLULOSEenvironmental, health and resource depletion Methodology: ISO 14040 and 14044      • Description of the BC production process• Goal and scope definition and description ofsystem boundaries• Inventory Analysis• Impact AssessmentFunctional unit: 1 kg of BC (bone-dry mass), equivalent to 139 kgof final (wet) productImpact AssessmentGabi Pro softwareReCiPe 2016Total (kg)Production of materials (%)Transport of materials (%)Culture Medium Preparation (%)Inoculum Propagation (%)Stactic Culture Fermentation (%)Downstream Process (%)Wastewater treatment (%)Resources (Total) 38,863.9 45.9 0.0 3.8 8.5 9.9 19.9 12.0Energy resources 7.311 58.3 1.4 5.0 4.0 12.6 14.2 4.4Material resources 38,856.5 45.9 0.0 3.8 8.5 9.9 19.9 12.0Non renewable elements 0.4 81.9 0.0 5.7 0.6 0.9 3.1 7,8Non renewable resources 20.6 31.8 0.1 8.1 5.6 11.0 19.4 24,1Renewable resources 38,835.6 45.9 0.0 3.8 8.5 9.9 19.9 12,0Water 36,129.8 49.3 0.0 4.0 9.1 10.7 21,3 5,7Other renewable resources 2,705.8 0.8 0.0 0.8 0.3 0.5 1,5 96,1Deposited goods 13.5 25.3 0.1 7.7 6.8 7.6 19.2 33.4Emissions to air 2,96.0 29.9 0.1 5.4 11.2 18.2 27.2 8.1Emissions to fresh water 35,861 47.9 0.0 1.6 8.8 10.6 18.1 12.9Analytical measures to fresh water 0.2 39.3 0.0 0.5 0.9 1.1 2.2 56,0ecoinvent long-term to fresh water 0.4 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0Inorganic emissions to fresh water 0.3 73.1 0.2 0.9 1.6 2.1 4.0 18,0Other emissions to fresh water 35,554.3 47.9 0.0 1.6 8.9 10.7 18.2 12,8Radioactive emissions to fresh water 305.8 50.3 0.3 2.1 4.2 5.0 10.2 28,0Emissions to sea water 58.2 21.0 0.0 11.5 5.3 23.4 26.9 11.8Emission (total) 72,089.7 47.8 0.0 1.7 8.8 10.7 18.2 12.9Mass balance of input (resources) and output (deposited goods and emissions) flows of the BC life cycle (1 kg BC, dry mass).Energy consumption for the whole life cycle of BC production. Values are based on the functional unit of 1kg BC dry basis).Environmental impacts of life cycle of BC using ReCiPe 2016 Midpoint (H) for 1 kg of dried BC, blue bars represent positive values while red bars represent negative values.Midpoint Impact categoryUnits Total Production of materialsTransport of materialsCulture Medium PreparationInoculum PropagationStactic Culture FementationDownstream ProcessWastewater treatmentClimate change, default, excl biogenic carbon [kg CO2 eq.] 16.774 7.3500 0.3200 1.0300 0.8330 2.6700 2.9400 1.6200Climate change, incl biogenic carbon [kg CO2 eq.] 16.729 6.4100 0.3200 1.0300 0.8310 2.6700 2.9400 2.5200Fine Particulate Matter Formation [kg PM2.5 eq.] 0.016 0.0123 0.0004 0.0003 0.0003 0.0008 0.0009 0.0006Fossil depletion [kg oil eq.] 6.565 3.7850 0.1050 0.3610 0.2340 0.8880 0.9380 0.2560Freshwater Consumption [m3] 0.470 0.7740 0.0000 0.8590 0.1170 0.0329 1.1800 -2.5000Freshwater ecotoxicity [kg 1,4 DB eq.] 0.086 0.0600 0.0000 0.0002 0.0001 0.0001 0.0003 0.0258Freshwater Eutrophication [kg P eq.] 0.004 0.0024 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0016Human toxicity, cancer [kg 1,4-DB eq.] 0.826 0.6930 0.0000 0.0013 0.0007 0.0013 0.0027 0.1280Human toxicity, non-cancer [kg 1,4-DB eq.] 13.765 7.6479 0.0021 0.0464 0.0173 0.0170 0.0808 5.9500Ionizing Radiation [Bq C-60 eq. to air] 0.342 0.3009 0.0001 0.0016 0.0025 0.0029 0.0066 0.0268Land use [Annual crop eq.·y] 0.967 0.6260 0.0000 0.0137 0.0703 0.0842 0.1400 0.0332Marine ecotoxicity [kg 1,4-DB eq.] 0.123 0.0856 0.0003 0.0003 0.0002 0.0002 0.0006 0.0353Marine Eutrophication [kg N eq.] 0.004 0.0010 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0001 0.0030Metal depletion [kg Cu eq.] 0.113 0.0639 0.0000 0.0240 0.0032 0.0012 0.0276 -0.0070Photochemical Ozone Formation, Ecosystems [kg NOx eq.] 0.030 0.0175 0.0024 0.0010 0.0011 0.0028 0.0033 0.0021Photochemical Ozone Formation, Human Health [kg NOx eq.] 0.029 0.0163 0.0024 0.0010 0.0011 0.0028 0.0032 0.0021Stratospheric Ozone Depletion [kg CFC-11 eq.] 0.000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Terrestrial Acidification [kg SO2 eq.] 0.043 0.0323 0.0010 0.0008 0.0010 0.0027 0.0028 0.0020Terrestrial Ecotoxicity [kg 1,4-DB eq.] 15.625 14.2683 0.0317 0.1800 0.1530 0.1870 0.3660 0.3950Fermentation process: Energy consumptionCorn syrup production,Disodium phosphate,Sodium hydroxide,Polyethylene,Carton productionCulture medium:Washing BC:Plastic bags & Cartonproduction:Associate Professor with Habilitationfmgama@deb.uminho.ptMiguel GamaAssistant Researcherfdourado@deb.uminho.ptFernando DouradoFuncarb groupFUNctional andCARBohydratesNanobiotechnologyLABORATORYOptimization of Bacterial Cellulose fermentation;Proof of concept: food & cosmetic formulationscontaning BCPILOTScale-up of BC fermentation;Food product formulationscontaning BCCosmetic formulationscontaining BCR&DPROJECT FUTURE DIRECTIONSDesign of the industrial BC production facilityRegulatory approval of BC as a novel food ingredientet for humanconsumption in EURegulatory assesment of BC for cosmetic applications in EUExploring several paths for the comercial exploitation of the BC production technology & products2013 2014    – 2018                                                     2020 Navigator Products & Technologies, S.A.BUILD - Bacterial cellulose leather Inpactus - Innovative Products and Technologies from Eucalyptus

Economic & environmental assessment of bacterial cellulose production

http://repositorium.sdum.uminho.pt/bitstream/1822/70158/1/FD_2021.pdf

Economic & environmental assessment of bacterial cellulose production

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Universidade do Minho: RepositoriUM