| Literature DB >> 26106448 |
Jin Chen1, Jose A Gomez2, Kai Höffner2, Paul I Barton2, Michael A Henson1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A promising route to renewable liquid fuels and chemicals is the fermentation of synthesis gas (syngas) streams to synthesize desired products such as ethanol and 2,3-butanediol. While commercial development of syngas fermentation technology is underway, an unmet need is the development of integrated metabolic and transport models for industrially relevant syngas bubble column reactors.Entities:
Keywords: Bioprocess engineering; Ethanol production; Metabolic modeling; Microbial fermentation
Year: 2015 PMID: 26106448 PMCID: PMC4477499 DOI: 10.1186/s13068-015-0272-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biotechnol Biofuels ISSN: 1754-6834 Impact factor: 6.040
Fig. 1Bubble column reactor for microbial syngas fermentation
Fig. 2The effects of CO and H2 mass transfer and cellular uptake on biomass production and the distribution of metabolic products by C. ljungdahlii. The lines with arrows represent positive/activating effects and the lines with bars represent negative/inhibitory effects
Fig. 3Effect of the feed CO mole fraction on steady-state concentrations in the exiting liquid and gas streams. The dashed lines indicate the nominal feed CO mole fraction used in the other simulations
Fig. 4Effect of the superficial gas velocity on steady-state concentrations in the exiting liquid and gas streams. The vertical dashed lines indicate the nominal superficial gas velocity used in the other simulations. The horizontal dashed lines indicate the inlet gas concentrations of CO and H2
Fig. 5Effect of the CO gas–liquid mass transfer coefficient k on steady-state concentrations in the exiting liquid and gas streams. The H2 and CO2 mass transfer coefficients were set to be 2.5k and k , respectively. The dashed lines indicate the nominal k value used in the other simulations
Fig. 6Effect of the gas recycle ratio on steady-state concentrations in the exiting liquid and gas streams. No gas recycle was used in the other simulations
Fig. 7Effect of the CO and H2 maximum uptake rate parameters on steady-state biomass and byproduct concentrations at the top column. The dashed lines indicate the nominal CO maximum uptake rate used in the other simulations. The nominal H2 maximum uptake rate was v , = 70 mmol/gDW/h
Fig. 8Effect of CO inhibition of CO uptake (left) and H2 uptake (right) on steady-state biomass and byproduct production throughout the column. The nominal case corresponds to no inhibition (K , = K , = 106 g/L)
Nominal dissolved gas uptake parameters
| Substrate |
|
| Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| CO | 35 | 0.02 | [ |
| H2 | 70 | 0.02 | Specified |
| CO2 | 35 | 0.02 | Specified |
| Substrate |
| Source | |
| All | 10 | Specified | |
Nominal parameter values for the synthesis gas bubble column reactor
| Parameter | Symbol | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reactor length |
| 25 m | Specified |
| Reactor cross-sectional area |
| 5 m2 | Specified |
| Superficial gas velocity |
| 75 m/h | Specified |
| Liquid phase velocity |
| 0.25 m/h | Specified |
| Liquid phase dispersion coefficient |
| 0.25 m2/h | Specified |
| Temperature |
| 37 °C | [ |
| Pressure at top of column |
| 1.013×105 Pa | Specified |
| CO mole fraction in feed gas |
| 0.6 | Specified |
| H2 mole fraction in feed gas |
| 0.4 | Specified |
| CO2 mole fraction in feed gas |
| 0 | Specified |
| CO Henry’s law constant |
| 8×10−4 mol/L/atm | [ |
| H2 Henry’s law constant |
| 6.6×10−4 mol/L/atm | [ |
| CO2 Henry’s law constant |
| 2.5×10−2 mol/L/atm | [ |
| CO gas–liquid mass transfer coefficient |
| 80 h−1 | [ |
| H2 gas–liquid mass transfer coefficient |
| 200 h−1 | [ |
| CO2 gas–liquid mass transfer coefficient |
| 80 h−1 | Specified |
| Maximum gas volume fraction | ε | 0.53 | Fit to data |
| Gas volume fraction saturation constant |
| 540 m/h | Fit to data |
| Gas volume fraction | ε | 0.0646 | Calculated |
| CO concentration at reactor entrance |
| 80.64 mmol/L | Calculated |
| H2 concentration at reactor entrance |
| 53.76 mmol/L | Calculated |
| CO2 concentration at reactor entrance |
| 0 mmol/L | Calculated |
| Initial biomass concentration |
| 0.1 g/L | Specified |
| Initial gas phase CO concentration |
| 80.64 mmol/L | Calculated |
| Initial gas phase H2 concentration |
| 53.76 mmol/L | Calculated |
| Initial gas phase CO2 concentration |
| 0 mmol/L | Calculated |
| Initial liquid phase CO concentration |
| 1.642 mmol/L | Calculated |
| Initial liquid phase H2 concentration |
| 0.903 mmol/L | Calculated |
| Initial liquid phase CO2 concentration |
| 0 mmol/L | Calculated |
| Initial liquid phase ethanol concentration |
| 0 mmol/L | Specified |
| Initial liquid phase acetate concentration |
| 0 mmol/L | Specified |