Concentrated levulinic acid production from sugarcane molasses

1 hour ago - Levulinic acid (LA) is generally produced from biomass through acid hydrolysis and has been recognized as one of the top platform chemica...
8 downloads 20 Views 922KB Size
Subscriber access provided by MT ROYAL COLLEGE

Communication

Concentrated levulinic acid production from sugarcane molasses Shimin Kang, Jinxia Fu, Naifu Zhou, Ribo Liu, Zhezhe Peng, and Yongjun Xu Energy Fuels, Just Accepted Manuscript • DOI: 10.1021/acs.energyfuels.7b03987 • Publication Date (Web): 30 Jan 2018 Downloaded from http://pubs.acs.org on February 1, 2018

Just Accepted “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication. They are posted online prior to technical editing, formatting for publication and author proofing. The American Chemical Society provides “Just Accepted” as a free service to the research community to expedite the dissemination of scientific material as soon as possible after acceptance. “Just Accepted” manuscripts appear in full in PDF format accompanied by an HTML abstract. “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been fully peer reviewed, but should not be considered the official version of record. They are accessible to all readers and citable by the Digital Object Identifier (DOI®). “Just Accepted” is an optional service offered to authors. Therefore, the “Just Accepted” Web site may not include all articles that will be published in the journal. After a manuscript is technically edited and formatted, it will be removed from the “Just Accepted” Web site and published as an ASAP article. Note that technical editing may introduce minor changes to the manuscript text and/or graphics which could affect content, and all legal disclaimers and ethical guidelines that apply to the journal pertain. ACS cannot be held responsible for errors or consequences arising from the use of information contained in these “Just Accepted” manuscripts.

Energy & Fuels is published by the American Chemical Society. 1155 Sixteenth Street N.W., Washington, DC 20036 Published by American Chemical Society. Copyright © American Chemical Society. However, no copyright claim is made to original U.S. Government works, or works produced by employees of any Commonwealth realm Crown government in the course of their duties.

Page 1 of 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

1

Concentrated levulinic acid production from sugarcane molasses

2

Shimin Kang1, Jinxia Fu2, Naifu Zhou1, Ribo Liu1, Zhezhe Peng1, Yongjun Xu1*

3

1

4

China

5

2

School of Chemical Engineering and Energy Technology, Dongguan University of Technology, Donguan,

Hawaii Natural Energy Institute, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI, USA

6 7

Abstract: Levulinic acid (LA) is generally produced from biomass through acid hydrolysis and has been

8

recognized as one of the top platform chemicals. In this study, concentrated LA was produced from

9

sugarcane molasses through superimposed reaction, in which the LA solution generated from hexoses

10

hydrolysis was further utilized as solvent for hydrolysis of sugarcane molasses to produce concentrated

11

LA. After 3rd and 5th superimposed reactions, LA solutions with a concentration of 148 g/L and 180 g/L

12

were obtained, with an average yield of 30.5 % and 23.9 %, respectively. The LA yield, however, is

13

comparably low due to the increase of LA concentration, and the superimposed reaction conditions

14

promote the formation of aqueous and solid byproducts.

15

Keywords: Levulinic acid, sugarcane molasses, biomass hydrolysis

16

1. Introduction

17

Levulinic acid (LA) is a platform chemical derived from hexoses through acid catalysis and is considered

18

as one of the top value-added chemicals from biomass1, 2. LA can be utilized to produce valuable

19

chemicals and fuel additives (e.g., levulinate esters, δ-amino levulinic acid, succinic acid, diphenolic acid,

20

γ-valerolactone and alkanes, etc.) etc.3-6. Lignocellulosic biomass containing 40-55%7-9 of cellulose are

21

usually selected for LA production. The hydrolysis process includes three major steps: (1) hydrolysis of

22

biomass to hexoses (MW = 180 g/mol), (2) dehydration of hexoses to 5-hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF)

23

and (3) rehydration of HMF to form equal molar formic acid and LA (MW = 116 g/mol)2,3,10. The

24

theoretical yield of LA derived from hexoses is 64.4%, and the actual LA yield is usually 50-60% of the

25

theoretical yield10-14. As high loading of lignocellulosic biomass in the reaction solution can cause low LA

26

yield13,15,16, the biomass loading concentration is usually ≤ 200 g/L. Thus, the hexoses concentration is

27

generally low, ≤100 g/L, which consequently causes a low final LA concentration, ≤ 40 g/L. It is

28

challenging to isolate and purify LA with low concentration due to the high solubility of LA (675 g/L)[17]

1

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

29

in aqueous solution. Large amount of extraction solvents would be required when a routine solvent

30

extraction technology is employed, and this may result in high manufacturing cost, high energy

31

requirement and potential environmental problems. In fact, separation and purification of LA from

32

aqueous solution has been regarded as a barrier for industrial production18, 19, and it was estimated that

33

approximately 50–70% of the total cost for LA production would come from downstream processing.19

34

The potential way to decrease the cost of downstream processing is to produce concentrated LA solution

35

directly from the hydrolysis reaction.

36

Molasses is a major byproduct of sugar manufacturing and accounts for approximately 30% of the

37

sugar produced20. The average annual global sugar production was 174 million metric tonnes from 2012

38

to 2016, and the average annual production of molasses was about 50–60 million metric tonnes21.

39

Molasses is usually used for yeast and ethanol fermentation or animal feed production22, 23. Value-added

40

application of molasses, therefore, is essential for the sugar production industry. Molasses is a potential

41

feedstock for LA production, as its main constitute is sucrose, that can be easily hydrolyzed to hexoses

42

(glucose and fructose)23.

43

LA is generally stable under the acidic conditions during glucose dehydration or HMF hydration24,

44

and LA can easily dissolve in water to form a co-solvent. A high LA concentration, therefore, might be

45

realized in a superimposed reaction, in which the LA solution formed from the hexose hydrolysis reaction

46

can be further used as the solvent for additional hexose hydrolysis to produce more LA. The LA formed

47

in multiple hexose hydrolysis reactions accumulates in the reaction solution, and concentrated LA can be

48

obtained. In this work, a superimposed reaction system (shown in Figure 1) was developed for LA

49

production through hydrolysis of sugarcane molasses to obtain concentrated LA (> 150 g/L).

50

2 Experimental Section

51

2.1 Materials

52

Sugarcane molasses was obtained from Donta group, Dongguan, China, and its composition and

53

properties are listed in Table S1.

54

2.2 Reaction for LA formation

55

The reactions in this work include one initial batch reaction and subsequent superimposed reactions

56

reusing the reaction solution. The reactions were conducted in a 100 mL polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE)

2

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 2 of 16

Page 3 of 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

57

reactor. After loading the samples, the PTFE reactor was placed in an air-circulated oven at given

58

temperatures. The reactor temperature reached the given temperatures (± 2 °C) in about 60 min, and the

59

reaction time was recorded afterwards. The reactor was cooled down using tap water after the reaction.

60

The sequential superimposed reaction process for reusing the reaction solution is shown in Figure 1.

61

In the first batch of the reactions, 40.0 mL of sugarcane molasses solution (0.2 mol/L H2SO4, 184.0 g/L

62

sugarcane molasses) was added in a 100 mL PTFE reactor, in which the concentration of sugars (sucrose,

63

glucose and fructose) is 100 g/L. The reaction was conducted at 180 ± 2°C for 3 h and the reaction

64

solution was separated from the solid residues by filtration afterwards. The solid residues were first

65

soaked in 100 ± 10 mL mL DI water for about 1 h, and then separated from the aqueous solution by

66

filtration and continuous transferring another 100 ± 10 mL DI water for washing. The 200 ± 20 mL

67

aqueous solutions collected were labeled as washing solution. 7.36 ± 0.01 g fresh sugarcane molasses was

68

then added in the reaction solution for the consequent superimposed reaction following the same

69

procedure mentioned above. As ~10% of initial H2SO4 (0.8 mmol H2SO4) was lost in the washing

70

solution, 0.8 mmol fresh H2SO4 was added back to the reaction solution before each superimposed

71

reaction. This process was repeated until a desired LA concentration was achieved. The yields of solid

72

residues, LA and formic acid were calculated based on the initial weight of sugarcane molasses.

73

2.3. Analysis

74

The concentrations of LA and formic acid in the aqueous solutions were analyzed using high performance

75

liquid chromatograph (HPLC, Shimadzu, Japan) with a C18 reversed-phase column. The aqueous

76

products were extracted by methylene dichloride and analyzed by Shimadzu QP 2010 Plus gas

77

chromatography−mass spectrometer (GC-MS). The functional groups were analyzed using Tensor 27

78

Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FT-IR, Bruker, Karlsruhe, Germany), and the surface

79

morphology of samples was studied using a JEOL JSM-6701F environmental scanning electron

80

microscopy (SEM, Tokyo, Japan).

81

3. Results and Discussion

82

3.1. Conventional batch reaction

83

In the conventional batch reaction, the hydrolysis products were separated from the reaction solution

84

after the test. Figures 2-4 show the influences of reaction conditions on the concentration of LA and

3

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

85

formic acid and the yield of solid residues. The acid concentration has more impact on the final LA and

86

formic acid concentrations in comparison with reaction time, and a higher acid concentration improves

87

the LA formation and results in a higher LA concentration (Figure 2 A). When the acid concentration was

88

too low (e.g. 0.05 mol/L H2SO4), the concentration of LA would be very low (65 g/L) even at short reaction time (e.g. 2-3 h). High yields of solid residues, however,

91

occurred when no catalyst H2SO4 or low concentration H2SO4 (e.g. 0.05 mol/L) were employed for the

92

reaction (Figure 2 C and D). These solid residues were probably produced from hydrothermal

93

carbonization due to lack of acid catalyst 25. Thus, a relative high concentration H2SO4 (i.e. 0.2 mol/L)

94

was utilized as the catalyst for the following works.

95

Temperature is another critical factor that affects the product distribution (Figure 3). Elevated

96

temperature (180 oC) increases the LA concentration and accelerates the reaction. The LA concentration,

97

however, may decrease when the reaction time is too long or the reaction temperature is too high (e.g. 190

98

o

99

realized when the temperature is relative mild, 150-160 oC, but a longer reaction time is required, >6 h.

C), indicating existence of side reactions. It is worth noting that a desirable LA concentration can also be

100

Theoretically, formic acid is formed along with LA in equivalent molar yield. Formic acid, however,

101

is unstable under elevated temperature conditions26. The concentration of formic acid increases at the

102

beginning of the reaction, but then it decreases with increase of temperature and/or reaction time (Figure

103

3B). It should be noted that the formic acid concentration began to decrease after 4 h at 180 oC with the

104

presence of 0.2 mol/L H2SO4 (Figure 3B). This is consistent with the trend of LA concentration change

105

(Figure 3A), indicating that the hydrolysis reaction completes after 4 h (0.2 mol/L H2SO4 at 180 oC) and

106

further increase of reaction time leads to low concentration of formic acid due to decomposition. The

107

solid residues generated from acid hydrolysis were mainly humins, that formed by polymerization of

108

hydrolysis intermediates (e.g., glucose and 5-hydroxymethylfurfural)27, and its yield increases with

109

reaction time and temperature regardless of the acid concentration level (Figures 2 and 3). These solid

110

residues are usually considered as low-value-added byproducts28, even though the recent studies reported

111

that humins can be utilized for the preparing adhesive and carbon materials29,30.

112 113

The impacts of process severity on the production of LA, formic acid and solid residues are expressed by the severity factor.

4

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 4 of 16

Page 5 of 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

114

Severity factor =log (t×exp((T-100)/14.75))-pH.

115

The severity factor is a combination of temperature (T, °C), reaction time (t, min), and solution acidity

116

(pH), and has been widely employed for evaluating the biomass hydrolysis process31. Figure S1 shows the

117

influence of severity factor on the concentrations of LA and formic acid and the yield of solid residues. A

118

relatively high severity factor (2.8-5.0) generally accelerates the polymerization reactions and results in

119

higher yield of solid residues. The concentration of LA first increased with severity factor but then

120

decreases with further increase of severity factor over ~4.3. A relative high LA concentration (>65 g/L)

121

can be achieved when the severity factor is in a range of 3.8-4.5. There is, however, no direct relationship

122

between the severity factor and the formic acid concentration, as formic acid is unstable, especially at

123

high temperatures (e.g., >180 oC).

124

As expected, a relative high LA and formic acid concentration can be realized through increasing the

125

initial concentration of sugarcane molasses (shown in Figure 4). A high LA concentration, 67 g/L, 85 g/L,

126

95 g/L and 113 g/L, was achieved when the initial concentration is high, 184 g/L, 277 g/L, 368 g/L, 552

127

g/L, respectively. The increased LA concentration, however, was realized by significantly sacrificing the

128

LA yield. The LA yield in the reaction with the above mentioned four initial concentrations of sugarcane

129

molasses was 36.5 %, 29.2 %, 24.8% and 18.1%, respectively (seen Table 1). The LA yield decreased

130

approximately 50% when the initial sugarcane molasses increased from 184 g/L to 552 g/L. Similar

131

phenomena were also observed for formic acid. The formic acid yield has to be sacrificed in order to

132

achieve a high concentration of formic acid. Thus, it is not desirable to increase the LA concentration

133

through the increase of sugarcane molasses concentration, and superimposed reaction was conducted in

134

this investigation as discussed below.

135

3.2 Superimposed reaction

136

The superimposed reaction was conducted at 180 oC for 3 h with 0.2 mol/L H2SO4 solution (severity

137

factor = 4.2). Figure S2 shows the stability of LA in 0.2 mol/L H2SO4 solution at 180 oC. Similar as the

138

results reported in previous works24, LA (100 g/L) is stable under the acidic aqueous reaction conditions

139

and LA-water co-solvent may be a potential solvent for sugarcane molasses hydrolysis. A high LA

140

concentration, therefore, can be realized through reusing the reaction solution containing the acid catalyst

141

and LA formed in previous runs. As listed in Tables 1 and 2, the superimposed reaction process can

142

effectively increase the LA concentration without significantly sacrificing the LA yield. For example,

5

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 6 of 16

143

148.1g/L of LA was obtained after the 3rd superimposed reaction with an average yield of 30.5 %, and

144

180.2 g/L of LA was achieved after the 5th superimposed reaction with an average yield of 23.9 %. It is

145

worth noting that 180.2 g/L is the highest LA concentration reported so far for carbohydrate conversion in

146

acidic solution. Similarly, a high concentration of formic acid (>50 g/L) was also obtained in the

147

superimposed reactions (listed in Table 2).

148

The superimposed reaction has significant advantages in comparison with the one-pot reaction. For

149

example, when the sugarcane molasses concentration is 552 g/L, the LA concentration and yield after the

150

superimposed reaction were 1.6 times (180 vs. 113) and 1.7 times (30.5% vs. 18.1%) higher than that

151

obtained from direct one-pot reaction (Table 1). It is worth noting that approximately 90% of the H2SO4

152

catalyst was left in the reaction solutions and can be reused to catalyze the hydrolysis reaction without

153

separation processes or other treatment (shown in Figure 1). The mineral acid, however, is usually

154

neutralized with alkali (e.g. CaO) and removed as gypsum (CaSO4) after conventional batch reaction 23.

155

As most of H2SO4 catalyst was reused in the superimposed reaction, the superimposed reaction is

156

considered as a desirable method for producing LA with high concentration.

157

Interestingly, the increase of LA and formic acid concentration lead to a slight decrease of LA yield

158

in the superimposed reactions (Table 1). Different from formic acid, LA is stable in the acidic water

159

solution at 180 oC. The decrease of LA selectivity in the superimposed reactions is probably a major cause

160

of the LA yield decrease. The byproducts in the aqueous solution and solid residues formed were also

161

analyzed. Under Brønsted acid catalytic condition, the conversion of sucrose includes (I) hydrolysis of

162

sucrose to equivalent amounts of glucose and fructose, (II) dehydration of glucose and fructose into HMF,

163

and (III) rehydration of HMF to LA23. It should be noted that sucrose can be easily hydrolyzed and form

164

the fructofuranosyl cation directly in a biphasic system containing both Lewis and Brønsted acids.32 Pure

165

glucose and fructose, therefore, were also employed to react in the aqueous and LA rich-in solution, and

166

compared with that of sugarcane molasses. As shown in Figure S3, LA is the major product in the

167

conversion of glucose, fructose and sugarcane molasses. The huge peak in the GC-MS spectra results

168

from the existence of high concentration LA, and the reason to select the extracted solution with high

169

concentration is identify other byproducts with comparably low concentration. Four aqueous byproducts,

170

i.e.

171

3-methyl-1,2-cyclopentanedione, were detected in the reaction solution after the 5th superimposed

(1)

2-methyl-2-cyclopentenone,

(2)

2,5-hexanedione,

6

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

(3)

gamma.-valerolactone,

(4)

Page 7 of 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

172

reaction of sugarcane molasses. Few of (1)-(3) and a relative low content of (4) were detected in the 1st

173

run of the superimposed reaction. None of the four aqueous byproducts, however, were found in the

174

reactions with glucose and fructose (Figure S3 A and B), indicating that the four byproducts were not

175

directly formed from glucose, fructose or LA. Although the formation mechanism of the four byproducts

176

is still under investigation, the existence of these byproducts demonstrates the occurrence of side

177

reactions in the superimposed reaction system.

178

Table S2 shows the results of glucose reactions with solvents containing 100-150 g/L LA or 45 g/L

179

formic acid. The presence of LA in the glucose solution inhibits the further LA formation, and the yield of

180

newly formed LA decreases with the increase of initial LA concentration in the reaction solution. The

181

presence of formic acid in the glucose solution also has similar impacts on the LA formation. In fact,

182

more glucose was converted to solid residues in the LA or formic acid rich solutions (Table S2). This is

183

consistent with the results listed in Table 2 that the yield of solid residues increased in the sequential

184

superimposed reactions. The SEM (Figure 5) and FT-IR (Figure S4) analysis illustrate that all the solid

185

residues are accumulated microspheres and have similar functional groups. The microspheres (diameter

186

1.5-5 um) after the 5th batch, however, are bigger and accumulates more closely in comparison with the

187

microspheres (diameter 1-3 um) after the 1st batch, meaning that the superimposed reactions promote the

188

growth of solid residues.

189

4. Conclusion

190

A superimposed reaction was developed for high concentration LA production from sugarcane molasses.

191

A LA solution with 148 g/L and 180 g/L were obtained in the 3rd and 5th superimposed reactions, with an

192

average yield of 30.5% and 23.9%, respectively. The superimposed reaction was found to be an effective

193

method to realize the LA production with high concentration, but reusing the LA rich reaction solution

194

causes the formation of aqueous byproducts and solid residues and sacrifices the LA yield.

195

196

Acknowledgments:

197

This article was made possible by Grant Number 21606045 from the National Natural Science

198

Foundation of China, Grant Number 2017A030313084 from Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong

7

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

199

Province of China, and Grant Number 2013508140001 from International Science & Technology

200

Cooperation Project of Dongguan.

201 202 203

Supporting Information

204

References

205

(1) Bozell, J. J. Science 2010, 329, 522-523.

206

(2) Hayes, D. J.; Steve, F.; Hayes, M. H. B.; Ross, J. R. H. The Biofine Process – Production of Levulinic

207

Acid, Furfural, and Formic Acid from Lignocellulosic Feedstocks In Biorefineries-Industrial

208

Processes and Products: Status Quo and Future Directions, B. Kamm, P. R. G. a. M. K., Ed.

209

Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH Weinheim, Germany, 2008; pp 139-164.

The Supporting Information is available free of charge on the ACS Publications website at DOI:.

210

(3) Morone, A.; Apte, M.; Pandey, R. A. Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 2015, 51, 548-565.

211

(4) Yan, K.; Jarvis, C.; Gu, J.; Yan, Y. Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 2015, 51, 986-997.

212

(5) Zhu, S.-L.; Li, J.-D.; Jiang, X.-X.; Hong-Min Yang, B.; Jiang, J.-C.; Ai-Ling Zhang, B. Biomass

213

Chem.Eng. 2016, 50, 53-59.

214

(6) Pildidis, F. D.; Titirici, M. M. ChemSusChem 2016, 9, 562-582.

215

(7) Harmsen, P. F. H.; Huijgen, W.; Bermudez, L.; Bakker, R. Literature review of physical and chemical

216

pretreatment processes for lignocellulosic biomass; Wageningen UR, Food & Biobased Research:

217

2010.

218

(8) Ye, S.; Cheng, J. Bioresour. Technol. 2002, 83, 1-11.

219

(9) Kumar, S.; Gupta, R. B. Energy Fuels 2009, 23, 5151-5159.

220

(10) Kang, S.; Yu, J. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2015, 54, 11552-11559.

221

(11) Kang, S.; Yu, J. Biomass Bioenergy 2016, 95, 214-220.

222

(12) Shen, J.; Wyman, C. E. AIChE J. 2012, 58, 236-246.

223

(13) Girisuta, B.; Janssen, L. P. B. M.; Heeres, H. J. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2007, 46, 1696-1708.

224

(14) Joshi, S. S.; Zodge, A. D.; Pandare, K. V.; Kulkarni, B. D. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2014, 53,

225

18796-18805.

226

(15) Girisuta, B.; Janssen, L. P. B. M.; Heeres, H. J. Chem. Eng. Res. Design 2006, 84, 339-349.

227

(16) Yuan, Z.; Long, J.; Xia, Y.; Zhang, X.; Wang, T.; Ma, L. BioResources 2016, 11, 3511-3523.

8

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 8 of 16

Page 9 of 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

228

(17) https://www.chemicalbook.com/ChemicalProductProperty_EN_CB3213533.htm

229

(18) Kazi, F. K.; Patel, A. D.; Serrano-Ruiz, J. C.; Dumesic, J. A.; Anex, R. P. Chem. Eng. J. 2011, 169,

230 231 232

329-338. (19) Lin, X.; Huang, Q.; Qi, G.; Shi, S.; Xiong, L.; Huang, C.; Chen, X.; Li, H.; Chen, X. Separat. Purif. Tech. 2017, 174, 222-231.

233

(20) Hatakeyama, T.; Hatakeyama., H. Geological Magazine 2005, 150, 1-22.

234

(21) Taylor. Outlook of the U.S. and World Sugar Markets, 2016-2026. North Dakota State University,

235

Fargo. 2017.

236

(22) Sangwan, S.; Gupta, S.; Singh, P.; Chawla., N. Sugar Tech. 2014, 16, 422-429.

237

(23) Kang, S.; Yu, J. Sugar Tech. 2017, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12355-017-0543-5.

238

(24) Karwa, S.; Gajiwala, V. M.; Heltzel, J.; Patil, S. K. R.; Lund, C. R. F. Catal. Today 2015, 263, 16-21.

239

(25) Shi, Y.; Zhang, X.; Liu, G. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. 2015, 3, 2237-2246.

240

(26) Yasaka, Y.; Yoshida, K.; Wakai, C.; Matubayasi, N.; Nakahara, M. 15th International Conference on

241 242 243 244 245

the Properties of Water and Steam, Berlin, Germany. 2008. (27) Heltzel, J.; Patil, S. K. R.; Lund, C. R. F. Humin formation pathways. In Reaction pathways and mechanisms in thermocatalytic biomass conversion II, Springer Singapore: 2016; pp105-118. (28) van Zandvoort, I.; Wang, Y.; Rasrendra, C. B.; van Eck, E. R.; Bruijnincx, P. C.; Heeres, H. J.; Weckhuysen, B. M. ChemSusChem 2013, 6, 1745-1758.

246

(29) Kang, S.; Fu, J.; Zhang, G.; Zhang, W.; Yin, H.; Xu, Y. Polymers 2017, 9, 373-382.

247

(30) Falco, C.; Marco-Lozar, J. P.; Salinas-Torres, D.; Morallon, E.; Cazorla-Amorós, D.; Titirici, M. M.;

248

Lozano-Castelló, D. Carbon 2013, 62, 346-355.

249

(31) Lee, J. W.; Jeffries, T. W. Bioresour. Technol. 2011, 102, 5884-5890.

250

(32) Gomes, G. R.; Rampon, D. S.; Ramos, L. P. Appl. Catal. A: General 2017, 545, 127-133.

251

9

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

252 253 254

Figure 1. The superimposed reaction process.

10

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 10 of 16

Page 11 of 16

40 (B)

0.2 mol/L H2SO4

80 (A)

0.1 mol/L H2SO4

70

Formica acid concentration (g/L)

LA concentration (g/L)

50 40 30 20

0.1 mol/L H2SO4 0.05 mol/L H2SO4

30 25 20 15 10 5

10

0

0 1

255

0.2 mol/L H2SO4

35

0.05 mol/L H2SO4

60

2

3

4 5 Reaction time (h)

6

7

1

8

2

3

4 5 Reaction time (h)

6

7

8

27.5 (D)

30 (C) 0.2 mol/L H2SO4

25.0

0.1 mol/L H2SO4

25

Without H2SO4 addition

22.5

0.05 mol/L H2SO4

20.0

20

Yield of residue (wt%)

Yield of solid residue (wt%)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

15 10 5

17.5 15.0 12.5 10.0 7.5 5.0 2.5

0

0.0

1

2

3

256

4

5

6

7

8

1

Reaction time (h)

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Reaction time (h)

257

Figure 2. Impacts of reaction time and acid concentration on the conversion of 184 g/L cane molasses

258

solution at 180 oC.

259

11

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Energy & Fuels

260 70

28 (B) 26 24

(A)

65

Formic acid concentration (g/L)

LA concentration (g/L)

60 55 o

190 C o 180 C o 170 C o 160 C o 150 C

50 45 40 35 30

20 1

261

22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6

o

190 C o 180 C o 170 C o 160 C o 150 C

4 2 0

25

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

1

2

Reaction time (h)

3

4 5 Reaction time (h)

6

7

8

20 (C) 18 16

Yield of solid residue (wt%)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 12 of 16

14 12 10

o

190 C o 180 C o 170 C o 160 C o 150 C

8 6 4 2 0 1

262

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Reaction time (h)

263

Figure 3. Impacts of reaction time and temperature on the conversion of 184 g/L cane molasses solution

264

in a 0.2 M H2SO4 solution

265

12

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 13 of 16

120 (A)

184 g/L

277 g/L

368 g/L

55 (B)

552 g/L

184 g/L

277 g/L

368 g/L

552 g/L

50

100

45

Formic acid concentration (g/L)

LA concentration (g/L)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

80 60 40 20

40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0

0

266 267

2

3

4 5 Reaction time (h)

6

7

2

3

4

5

6

7

Reaction time (h)

Figure 4. Influences of cane molasses concentration at 180 oC with 0.2 mol/L H2SO4.

268

13

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

269 270 271

Figure 5. SEM image of solid residues from the 1st run (A) and 5th run (B) of the superimposed reactions.

14

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 14 of 16

Page 15 of 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

272

Table 1. Comparison of one-pot batch reaction and superimposed reactions. Reaction conditions

The first run of superimposed

Total cane molasses used for 1 L

Average yield of LA

Average yield of formic

reaction solution (g)

(wt%)

acid (wt%)

184

36.5 ± 0.4

13.5 ± 0.3

368 (=184×2)

33.8 ± 0.5

11.6 ± 0.4

552 (=184×3)

30.5 ± 0.7

10.1 ± 0.4

736 (=184×4)

26.6 ± 1.1

8.1 ± 0.4

920 (=184×5)

23.9 ± 1.3

6.7 ± 0.4

277

29.2 ± 0.9

11.2 ± 0.3

368

24.8 ± 1.0

9.1 ± 0.4

552

18.1 ± 1.1

7.8 ± 0.4

reaction The first two runs of the superimposed reaction The first three runs of the superimposed reaction The first four runs of the superimposed reaction The first five runs of the superimposed reaction One-pot batch reaction of 277 g/L cane molasses One-pot batch reaction of 368 g/L cane molasses One-pot batch reaction of 552 g/L cane molasses

273 274

15

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

275

276 277 278

Table 2. Concentrations of LA, formic acid and yield of solid residues in the superimposed reactions. Runs of LA in Formic acid in Yield of LA in Formic acid in superimposed reaction washing solid residue washing reaction reaction. solution solution (g/L)1 (wt%) solution solution (g/L)1 (g/L)1 (g/L)1 1st 64.1 ± 0.3 0.6 ± 0.1 24.1 ± 0.1 0.2 ± 0.1 14.4 ± 0.3 2nd 113.2 ± 0.5 1.6 ± 0.1 39.2 ± 0.2 0.5 ± 0.1 17.7 ± 0.3 3rd 148.1 ± 0.7 1.8 ± 0.1 50.0 ± 0.3 0.5 ± 0.1 20.4 ± 0.4 4th 165.3 ± 1.0 2.1 ± 0.1 51.1 ± 0.3 0.5 ± 0.1 21.3 ± 0.4 5th 180.2 ± 1.3 2.5 ± 0.1 51.8 ± 0.3 0.5 ± 0.1 25.8 ± 0.5 1 The volumes of all reaction solutions and washing solutions are 40 mL and 200 mL, respectively.

16

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 16 of 16