Supporting Material. Distillation for Fully Off-Grid Production of. Cellulosic Bioethanol

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Supporting Material. Distillation for Fully Off-Grid Production of. Cellulosic Bioethanol"

Transcription

1 Supporting Material Combining Solar Steam Processing and Solar Distillation for Fully Off-Grid Production of Cellulosic Bioethanol Oara Neumann,#,, Albert D. Neumann,, Shu Tian, #,, Christyn Thibodeaux,#, Shobhit Shubhankar,#, Julius Müller,#, Edgar Silva, Alessandro Alabastri,#, Sandra W. Bishnoi,#, Peter Nordlander,#, and Naomi J. Halas *,,,,# Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Department of Civil Engineering, Department of Chemistry, Department of Mechanical Engineering, # Laboratory for Nanophotonics and the Smalley-Curl Institute, Rice University, 6100 Main Street, Houston, Texas Equal contribution

2 Extinction (a.u.) Wavelength (nm) Figure S1: Extinction spectra of Au-nanoshells Figure S2: Schematic representation and photographs of solar biomass thermo-hydrolysis process: A Parr Instruments Model 4621 pressure vessel equipped with an electrical heating unit

3 has been used. The loaded vessel was heated to a certain temperature which was kept constant for a defined time period. 5 D-Glucose (mg/ml) Temperature ( o C) Figure S3: The D-Glucose concentration versus temperature as a product of thermal sugar cane hydrolysis used to establish the thermal extraction condition. Time (min) Cellobiose (mg/ml) Glucose (mg/ml) Mannose Arabinose (mg/ml) Table T1: Sugar concentrations versus time as a result of thermo-hydrolysis process using an electrical source. The feedstock was heated and kept at 150 C for different amount of time, without releasing the pressure.

4 Figure S4: The HPLC chromatogram of the sugar units extract from cellulosic biomass Table T2: The sugar yield from different feedstock as a result of thermal-hydrolysis process using electrical heating source

5 Structural Sugars Coastal Hay (mg/ml) Sugar Cane (mg/ml) Glucose Xylose Galactose e e-002 Arabinose e-002 Manose e e-002 Free Sugars Sugar Cane (mg/ml) Coastal Hay (mg/ml) Glucose Fructose Sucrose Table T3: The carbohydrates, lignin, and free sugars extracted accordingly with the NREL Laboratory Analytical Procedures

6 Vapor mole fraction of bioethanol a b c Figure S5: Mole % of bioethanol extracted from fermented sugar cane versus different type of yeast (a) Saccharomyces bayanus-champagne yeast, (b) Saccharomyces cerevisiae, (c) Saccharomyces bayanus-premier Cuvee. The Au nanoshell concentration was 0.25 x part/ml Depending on the type of yeast, the fermentation took several days in a water bath at 34 C if using Premier Cuvee and Superstart yeast or room temperature if using Pasteur Champagne yeast.

7 Energy comparison of the solar and electrical based pre-treatment steps. Solar Performance: The average solar intensity in Houston, TX during a summer sunny day at noon is 0.7 /. The area of the mirror is Then the total available power is: The time to reach the autoclave is 120. The average reaction time is: 10. Therefore the total energy utilized is Considering that the autoclave, for the solar case has a volume of 7.5 and it is 7% full and that glucose from sugar cane (sc) and coastal hay (ch) production are respectively, 7.9 / and, 1.38 /, then the energy efficacy _, respectively / and _, /,, Electric Performance: The heater utilized, based on its specifications, dissipates a maximum power of During the experiments it was operated at a 50% power capacity, then 610. The time to reach the autoclave is 65. The average reaction time is: 10. Therefore the total energy utilized is Considering that the autoclave, for the electric case has a volume of 1 and it is 30% full and that glucose from sugar cane (sc) and coastal hay (ch) production are respectively, 6.23 / and, 1.17 /, then the energy efficacy _, 1.47 / and _, 7.82 / respectively. If we assume,,

8 electricity is produced by natural gas (ng), the most efficient method among coal, petroleum and nuclear*, with an efficiency of 0.43*, then the final efficacies, _, for the electric case are: _,,/ 3.42 / and _,,/ /. *Sources: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Form EIA-923, "Power Plant Operations Report," and predecessor form(s) including U.S. Energy Information Administration, Form EIA- 906, "Power Plant Report;" and Form EIA-920, "Combined Heat and Power Plant Report;" Form EIA-860, "Annual Electric Generator Report." (