Organosolv pulping of straws and other non-wood fibers was a favorite of my old prof Dr. Kyosti Saarkenen (University of Washington) in the late 70's. Does anyone have a recent review of organosolv pulping or hydrolysis? I'd like to know how far it has advanced.
Regards, Tom Miles At 04:53 AM 11/29/00 -0200, Antonio G. P. Hilst wrote: >Dear Tom. Harry and All, > >Take a look at organosolv hydrolisys: 10 min. reaction time, 70 % + >glucose and >xylose recovery, almost complete (95+%) biomass conversion, furfural >and acetic >acid recoverable with the organic solvent, HMF (Hydroxy Methyl Furfural) also. >Antonio > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> Dear Harry et al: >> >> Thank you for your repeat warning to the non-dreamers of this world. >> Cellulose hydrolysis was a done deal in the laboratory in 1900. >>During WWI a >> plant or two were built and torn down ASAP when the war ended. Same WWII. >> >> In my 25 years of monitoring various fuel options, I have seen >>startup plants >> probably yearly with great fanfare.... then nothing. Good for stock >> scams. Bad for energy. >> >> If acid hydrolysis fails, then enzymatic is touted; if enzymatic >>fails, then >> acid hyrdolysis is back in.. >> >> It is too bad that NREL doesn't have to be accountable for the millions they >> have spent on ethanol from cellulose over the last two decades. Beautiful >> plants that go nowhere. >> >> And don't forget, cellulose is only 50% of the biomass. Gasificaiton >> converts 100% to syngas and doesn't care much about the form. Efficiencies >> to methanol will be in excess of 50%. >> >> UUUCH >> >> TOM REED BEF CPC >> >> In a message dated 11/19/00 6:33:55 PM Mountain Standard Time, >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >> >> << Hello Dave and all, >> >> Cellulose hydrolysis has self-documented its own failure many many times = >> for over 50 years. There is no new science and engineering by which to = >> expect any changes in that dark future. There are inherrent limitations = >> of mass transfer rates, irreversible chemical reactions, and mechanical = >> complexity that constrain commercial success for cellulose hydrolysis of = >> woody materials, as I have said before to this forum. =20 >> >> >> If you MUST go from MSW to liquid fuel use a gasifier to convert the MSW = >> into CO and H2 and then react them produce either diesel fuel via FT = >> synthesis, or methanol for fuel. There is also a proven process that = >> converts methanol into high-octane gasoline. >> >> It is better just to burn MSW for boiler fuel in small local units, and = >> then gasify coal on a very large-scale for liquid fuels as needed. Coal = >> gasification is already commercial for petrochemicals at Kingsport Tenn. = >> Before coal is gasified commercially for transportaion fuels, natural = >> gas and natural gas liquids will be reformed/gasified for FT synthesis = >> into transportation fuels. This conversion is an area of active = >> planning and engineering by several major energy companies today. Shell = >> already has a commercial plant in Malaysia that produces premium no-S = >> no-N diesel fuel from natural gas and natural gas liquids. =20 >> >> >> >> Thanks for renewing the discussion of cellulose hydrolysis. Its = >> continued failure needs to be repeated for this group every few months. >> >> Harry >> >> >> The Gasification List is sponsored by >> USDOE BioPower Program http://www.eren.doe.gov/biopower/ >> and PRM Energy Systems http://www.prmenergy.com -------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~> eLerts It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free! http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/0/_/837408/_/975524847/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------_-> Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
