Ethanol Production in US - Illinois Sustainable Technology … · 2016-06-27 · Emerging Dry Grind Ethanol Processes Future of Ethanol Industry Cellulosic Ethanol. ... Ethanol Production

Ethanol Production in US

Vijay SinghAssociate Professor

Department of Agricultural & Biological EngineeringUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Waste Management & Research CenterOctober 17, 2007

CollaboratorsCollaborators

Ron Belyea University of MissouriMike Cotta NCAUR/ARS/USDABruce Dien NCAUR/ARS/USDADavid Johnston ERRC/ARS/USDABob Moreau ERRC/ARS/USDAEberhard Morgenroth University of IllinoisGanti Murthy Oregon State UniversityKent Rausch University of IllinoisVijay Singh University of IllinoisMike Tumbleson University of Illinois

Presentation OutlineEthanol Production Process (Video)Ethanol Industry

Ethanol Production CapacityGrowth in Industry

Issues Facing Ethanol IndustryEmerging Dry Grind Ethanol ProcessesFuture of Ethanol Industry

Cellulosic Ethanol

Ethanol Production Video

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2008

Year

Eth

anol

(Bill

ion

gallo

ns/y

r)

2004: 3.4 billion gallons 2006: 5.6 billion gallons 2008: 8.9 billion gallons

Ethanol Production in US

Plants Under Construction (79)

Plants in Production (115)

U.S. Dry Grind Corn FacilitiesU.S. Dry Grind Corn Facilities

Dry Grind Ethanol Plants in IllinoisDry Grind Ethanol Plants in Illinois

Benefits of EthanolBenefits of Ethanol

Reduces dependence on foreign oil importsExtend the domestic supplies of gasolineEnvironment friendly, reduces green house gasesIncrease octane rating of gasolineClean burning fuelIncreases demand for corn, stabilizes pricesRural Development

Issues Related To Ethanol IndustryIssues Related To Ethanol Industry

Water UsedApproximately 4 gallon water/gallon of ethanol produced

Emissions/OdorFood versus Fuel

Corn is also used for human consumptionLow Coproduct ValueEnergy Independence

Ethanol from corn is limited by corn productionConverting all the corn in the US into ethanol will only meet 20 to 25% of the annual gasoline demand

2.7 gal (10.2 L) of Ethanol

15 lb (6.8 kg) of DDGS

Ruminant Food

Corn Dry Grind Facility

One bushel of Corn(24.5 kg or 56 lb)

Corn Dry Grind Ethanol Process

Conventional Dry Grind Process

Saccharification& Fermentation

Yeast& Glucoamylase

CO2

Liquefaction

Mash

Corn

Water

Grinding (Hammermill)

BlendingOverhead product(Recycled back)

Dehydrationcolumn

Stripping/Rectifyingcolumn

Ethanol

CentrifugeThinStillage

Wet Grains Syrup

DDGS

Evaporator

Alpha-Amylase

DDGS Utilization (2005)

45 4644 45 46

35

3937 37

42

5 4 3 5 3

15

11

1613

9

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Dairy Beef Poultry Swine

% U

se a

s Fee

d

Source: Steve Markham, Commodity Specialists Company

Coproduct valuesCoproduct values

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

Cop

rodu

ct V

alue

($/t

on)

.

corn DDGS

Economic Research Service 2005: www.ers.usda.gov/db/feedgrains/

Emerging Technologies in Dry Grind Ethanol Production:

Corn Fractionation Process

Wet Corn Fractionation: Enzymatic Dry Grind Corn Process (E-Mill)

2.6 gal(9.84 L) Ethanol

3.7 lb(1.68 kg) Residual DDGS

3.3 lb (1.49 kg) Germ 4 lb

(1.81 kg) Pericarp Fiber

4 lb(1.81 kg)

Endosperm Fiber

Nonruminant Food

Ruminant Food

Corn Dry Grind FacilityBushel of Corn(24.5 kg or 56 lb)

DensitySeparation

DensitySeparation

SizeSeparation

Other Benefits of Fractionation Process: Recovery of Valuable Coproducts

Recovery of germ, pericarp and endosperm fiber as valuable coproducts

GermCorn Germ Oil

Pericarp and Endosperm FiberCorn Fiber OilCorn Fiber GumEthanol

Fiber Gum

Fiber Oil

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

14.00

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Fermentation Time

Eth

anol

Con

c. (%

v/v)

Conv E-Mill Conv R E-Mill R

Fermentation Profiles: Conventional and E-Mill Processes

Singh, V., Johnston, D.B., Naidu, K., Rausch, K.D., Belyea, R.L. and Tumbleson, M.E. 2005. Comparison ofmodified dry grind corn processes for fermentation characteristics and DDGS composition. Cereal Chem. 82:187-190.

DDGS Composition: Conventional and E-Mill Processes

Conv. E-Mill Soy CGMMeal

Crude Prot. 28.50 58.50 53.90 66.70(%)

Crude Fat 12.70 4.53 1.11 2.77(%)

Ash (%) 3.61 3.24 ---- ----

Acid Det. 10.8 2.03 5.95 6.88Fiber (%)

Singh, V., Johnston, D.B., Naidu, K., Rausch, K.D., Belyea, R.L. and Tumbleson, M.E. 2005. Comparison ofmodified dry grind corn processes for fermentation characteristics and DDGS composition. Cereal Chem. 82:187-190.


Development of New Corn

Transgenic Corn for Dry Grind Process

Saccharification& Fermentation

Yeast & Glucoamylase

CO2

Liquefaction

Mash

Water



Dehydrationcolumn

Stripping/Rectifyingcolumn

Ethanol


Wet Grains Syrup

DDGS

Evaporator

Alpha-amylase

Transgenic Corn

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

0 24 48 72

Control3%5%10%

Fermentation Time (hr)

Etha

nol C

onc.

% (v

/v)

500 ml FermentationsControl vs 3, 5 and 10% amylase corn addition

Singh, V, Batie, C.J., Aux, G.W., Rausch, K.D. and Miller, C. 2006. Dry grind processingof corn with endogenous liquefaction enzymes. Cereal Chem. 83:317-320.

02468

101214161820

0 24 48 72

Fermentation Time (hr)

Etha

nol C

onc.

(%v/

v)

Control1%2%3%

500 ml FermentationsControl vs 1, 2 and 3% amylase corn addition

Singh, V, Batie, C.J., Aux, G.W., Rausch, K.D. and Miller, C. 2006. Dry grind processingof corn with endogenous liquefaction enzymes. Cereal Chem. 83:317-320.

DDGS Composition

Components 3% amylase corn addition

Control Treatment

Crude Protein (%)Crude Fat (%)Crude Fiber (%)Ash (%)

26.1 ± 0.214.1 ± 0.16.6 ± 0.1

3.78 ± 0.1

25.8 ± 0.113.6 ± 0.26.8 ± 0.1

3.35 ± 0.1

No significant difference in composition of DDGS for 3% amylase cornaddition and control treatment

Singh, V. and Graeber, J.V. 2005. Effect of corn hybrid variability and planting location on ethanol yields. Trans. ASAE 48:709-714

Feedstock Development: Transgenic CornFeedstock Development: Transgenic Corn

Reduces requirement of exogenous alpha amylaseOnly 3% amylase corn addition is required with dent corn for complete liquefactionNo differences in DDGS composition between 3% amylase corn treatment and conventional treatment


Raw Starch Hydrolyzing Enzymes

Raw Starch Hydrolyzing Enzymes

Saccharification &Fermentation

Glucoamylase

CO2

Liquefaction

Mash

Corn

Water



Dehydration column

Stripping/Rectifying column

Alpha-Amylase

Yeast &

+ RSH Enzyme

Ethanol


Wet Grains Syrup

DDGS

Evaporator

Granular Starch Hydrolyzing (GSH) EnzymesGranular Starch Hydrolyzing (GSH) Enzymes

These enzymes have high granular starch (raw starch or native starch) hydrolyzing activityCan Liquefy and saccharify starch into glucose at low temperature (< 48°C)

Stargen 001, Genencor InternationalBPX, Novozymes NA

Wang, P., Singh, V., Xue, H., Johnston, D.B., Rausch, K.D. and Tumbleson, M.E.2006. Comparison of raw starch hydrolyzing enzyme with conventional liquefactionand saccharification enzymes in dry grind corn processing. Cereal Chem. 84(1):10-14.

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

0 20 40 60 80Time (hr)

Eth

anol

Con

c. (v

/v%

)

GSH EnzDG 1DG 2

Results: Ethanol Concentration

Results: Glucose Concentration

0.02.04.06.08.0

10.012.014.016.018.020.0

0 20 40 60 80Time (hr)

Glu

cose

Con

c. (w

/v%

)

GSH EnzDG 1DG 2


Results: Maltose Concentration

0.00.20.4

0.60.81.01.2

1.41.61.8

0 20 40 60 80Time (hr)

Mal

tose

Con

c. (w

/v%

)

GSH EnzDG 1DG 2


Results: Maltotriose Concentration

0.00.20.4

0.60.81.01.2

1.41.61.8

0 20 40 60 80Time (hr)

Mal

tose

Con

c. (w

/v%

)

GSH EnzDG 1DG 2


Results: DP4+ Concentration

0.0

0.51.0

1.5

2.0

2.53.0

3.5

4.0

0 20 40 60 80Time (hr)

DP4

+ C

onc.

(w/v

%)

GSH EnzDG 1DG 2


Granular Starch Hydrolyzing Enzymes

Final ethanol yield with GSH enzymes is comparable to conventional enzymesGlucose, maltose and maltotriose concentrations are consistently low with GSH enzymes throughout fermentationGSH enzymes work at same temperature conditions as conventional SSF

With GSH enzymes simultaneous liquefaction, saccharification andfermentation can be conducted

Dry GrindProcess

Boiler

PlantFeed

MM/GSFilters

Plant Output

Process Out

Boiler Makeup

SteamCoolingTower BD

RO Reject

ProcessNon RO

Cooling Tower

Deaerator

Storage Tank

ROProduct

Tank

Process RO

Boiler BD

Reverse Osmosis

Softner Regen

Water Use in Dry Grind Ethanol Plant

Regenerative Thermal Oxidizer

Food Versus Fuel

Food Versus Fuel

Food Versus Fuel

Wood chipsSwitchgrass/Miscanthus

Corn stover

Sugarcane

CottonwoodsPaper

Future: Ethanol from LignocellulosicFeedstocks

Thanks!

Ethanol Production in US - Illinois Sustainable Technology … · 2016-06-27 · Emerging Dry Grind Ethanol Processes Future of Ethanol Industry Cellulosic Ethanol. ... Ethanol Production

Documents