Tuesday, April 20, 2010
8-86

Robustness of pretreatment methods towards feedstock variability: Wheat straw as a case study

Henning Jørgensen1, Jane Lindedam2, Richard Chandra3, and Jack N. Saddler3. (1) Danish Center for Forest and Landscape, Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Rolighedsvej 23, DK-1958 Frederiksberg C, Denmark, (2) Department of Agricultural Sciences, Plant and Soil Science Laboratory, Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Thorvaldsensvej 40, 1871 Frederiksberg C, Denmark, (3) Forest Products Biotechnology Group, University of British Columbia, 2424 Main Mall, Forest Sciences Centre, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada

A significant number of methods for pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass before enzymatic hydrolysis have been described in literature. Selection of pretreatment methods may be based on a number of criteria such as capital costs, operation costs, integration with other processes and not at least the type of biomass to be pretreated. Choice of pretreatment method has significant impact on the susceptibility of the lignocellulosic material towards enzymatic decomposition and it is generally recognised that optimum conditions/pretreatment severity differs among various types of biomass. However, less is known about how robust the pretreatment methods are in handle variations within the same type of biomass, e.g. wheat straw, and will different pretreatment methods respond similarly to variations within the feedstock?
In this study, the variability within one type of feedstock with respect to the susceptibility towards enzymatic hydrolysis after pretreatment is investigated. Based on preliminary studies, a subset of four wheat straw samples (two varieties both grown at two different locations in Denmark) has been selected and pretreated with three different pretreatment methods: SO2-catalysed steam pretreatment, organosolv pretreatment and hydrothermal pretreatment. The robustness of the pretreatment methods towards variation in the feedstock is investigated and it is observed if different methods respond differently. In addition, substrate characteristics of the four wheat straw samples are compared and related to the observed variation among varieties and pretreatments.