| Literature DB >> 25874756 |
Kuppam Chandrasekhar1, Yong-Jik Lee2, Dong-Woo Lee3.
Abstract
The current fossil fuel-based generation of energy has led to lclass="Chemical">arge-scale industrial develoclass="Chemical">pment. However, the reliance on fossil fuels leads to the significant declass="Chemical">pletion of natural resources of buried combustible geologic declass="Chemical">posits and to negative efEntities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25874756 PMCID: PMC4425080 DOI: 10.3390/ijms16048266
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Figure 1Scientometric analysis of the research on H2 production. Published items (A) and citations (B) in each year.
Figure 2Schematic representation of the diversity of H2 producing biocatalysts.
Figure 3Schematic representation of the primary biological routes integrated with various secondary processes for effective H2 production.
Figure 4Schematic illustration of H2 evolution through (A) direct/indirect biophotolysis and (B) dark fermentation: (A) PS II, photosystem II; PQ, plastoquinone; PQH2, plastoquinol; cyt b6f, cytochrome b6f complex; PC, plastocyanin; PS I, photosystem I; Fd, ferredoxin; and FNR, ferredoxin-NADP+ reductase. Approximately half of the evolved H2 is from water splitting, and the rest of the H2 is produced with e− made from the fixed carbon by the activity of the PS I; (B) Q, quinone; QH2, quinol; cyt bc1, cytochrome bc1 complex; and cyt aa3, the cytochrome aa3 oxidase.
Biological pathways for H2 production and the technical limitations.
| Type of Bioprocess | Technical Challenges |
|---|---|
| Dark fermentation |
low substrate conversion efficiency low H2 yield thermodynamic limitations mixture of H2 and CO2 gases as products, which require separation |
| Photofermentation | requirement of an external light source the process is limited by day and night cycles, with sunlight as the light source low H2 yield caused by extremely low light conversion efficiency |
| Direct biophotolysis | O2 generation caused by the activity of PS II requirement for customized photobioreactors low H2 yield caused by extremely low light conversion efficiency |
| Indirect biophotolysis | lower H2 yield caused by hydrogenase(s) requirement of an external light source total light conversion efficiency was very low |
A list of the processes integrated with the production of H2 from dark fermentation (DF, dark fermentation; PF, photofermentation; MEC, microbial electrolysis cell; BEH, bio-electrohydrolysis).
| Substrate | First Stage | Second Stage | Reference | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Process Type | Yield | Process Type | Yield | ||
| Cornstalks | Hydrogen (DF) | 58.0 mL/g | Methane (DF) | 200.9 mL/g | [ |
| Rice straw | Hydrogen (DF) | 20 mL/g | Methane (DF) | 260 mL/g | [ |
| Water hyacinth | Hydrogen (DF) | 38.2 mmol H2/L/day | Methane (DF) | 29 mmol CH4/L/d | [ |
| Water hyacinth | Hydrogen (DF) | 51.7 mL of H2/g of TVS | Methane (DF) | 43.4 mL of CH4/g of TVS | [ |
|
| Hydrogen (DF) | 115.2 mL of H2/g | Methane (DF) | 329.8 mL of CH4/g | [ |
| Cassava wastewater | Hydrogen (DF) | 54.22 mL of H2/g | Methane (DF) | 164.87 mL of CH4/g | [ |
| Microalgal biomass | Hydrogen (DF) | 135 ± 3.11 mL of H2/g/VS | Methane (DF) | 414 ± 2.45 mL of CH4/g/VS | [ |
| Glucose | Hydrogen (DF) | 1.20 mmol | Hydrogen (PF) | 5.22 mmol | [ |
| Cheese whey wastewater | Hydrogen (DF) | 2.04 mol | Hydrogen (PF) | 2.69 mol | [ |
| Vegetable waste | Hydrogen (DF) | 12.61 mmol H2/day | Electricity (DF) | 111.76 mW/m2 | [ |
| Fruit juice industry wastewater | Hydrogen (DF) | 1.4 mol H2/mol hexose | Electricity (DF) | 0.55 W/m2 | [ |
| Corn stover lignocellulose | Hydrogen (DF) | 1.67 mol H2/mol glucose | Hydrogen (MEC) | 1.00 L/L-d | [ |
| Cellobiose | Hydrogen (DF) | 1.64 mol H2/mol glucose | Hydrogen (MEC) | 0.96 L/L-d | [ |
| Distillery spent wash | Hydrogen (DF) | 39.8 L | Bioplastic | 40% dry cell weight | [ |
| Food waste | Hydrogen (DF) | 3.18 L | Bioplastic | 36% dry cell weight | [ |
| Pea shells | Hydrogen (DF) | 5.2 L of H2 from 4 L | Bioplastic | 1685 mg of PHB/L | [ |
| Food waste | Hydrogen (DF) | 69.94 mmol | Lipid | 26.4% dry cell weight | [ |
| Olive oil mill wastewater | Hydrogen (DF) | 196.2 mL/g | Biopolymer | 8.9% dry cell weight | [ |
| Molasses wastewater | Hydrogen (DF) | 130.57 mmol | Ethanol | 379.3 mg/L | [ |
| Food waste | Bioelectricity | 85.2 mW/m2 | Hydrogen (DF) | 0.91 L | [ |
| Starch hydrolysate | Hydrogen (DF) | 5.40 mmol H2/g of COD | Hydrogen (PF) | 10.72 mmol H2/g of COD | [ |
| Sucrose | Hydrogen (DF) | 0.98 ± 0.32 mol H2/mol | Hydrogen (PF) | 4.48 ± 0.23 mol H2/mol | [ |
| Glucose:xylose (9:1); Microalgae biomass | Hydrogen (DF) | 250 mL/L/h; 2.78 mol H2/mol | Mixotropic microalgae cultivation | 205 mL/L/h; 1.12 g of biomass/g of COD | [ |
Figure 5Schematic illustration of microbial electrolysis cells (MECs) integrated with the dark fermentation process for higher H2 yield (A: anode; C: cathode; Biofilm: electrochemically active mixed microbial population). Green, orange, brown, and blue symbols represent a mixed microbial population. In stage 1, initially, complex substrates were used for H2 production in dark fermentation, and in stage 2, acid-rich effluents were used as substrates in MECs for further H2 production.