Comparative techno-economic and carbon footprint analysis of 2,3-butanediol production through aerobic and anaerobic bioconversion of carbon dioxide with green hydrogen

Simple item page
dc.coverageDOI: 10.1016/j.ceja.2024.100659
dc.creatorLueckel, Fabio Bozzolo
dc.creatorScott, Felipe
dc.creatorAroca, Germán
dc.date2024
dc.date.accessioned2025-11-18T19:55:40Z
dc.date.available2025-11-18T19:55:40Z
dc.description<p>Renewable CO<sub>2</sub> and hydrogen have the potential to be the feedstocks of a decarbonized chemical industry, and biochemical conversions offer new alternatives for the industry. There are two options among chemolithotrophic bacteria capable of CO<sub>2</sub> fixation: under aerobic conditions, through the use of the Calvin-Benson-Basham cycle, known to produce large-chain compounds, and under anaerobic conditions, through the Wood-Ljungdahl pathway, known to produce short-chain organic molecules. Here, we report a comparison of both bioconversions, made at a simulated industrial scale, considering techno-economic and environmental variables, and using renewable CO<sub>2</sub> and H<sub>2</sub> as feedstocks. 2,3-butanediol, a mid-range chain compound that can be produced via both routes, was selected for comparison. The comparison was set up in Chile due to expected low-cost renewable hydrogen and renewable CO<sub>2</sub> availability. The assessment showed that the minimum selling price of 2,3-butanediol in the anaerobic case was higher (3.91 (USD kg<sup>−1</sup>)) than in the aerobic case (3.36 (USD kg<sup>−1</sup>)), with hydrogen being the largest expense in both processes (50 % and 70 % of total expenses respectively). Further, owing to metabolic restrictions, the anaerobic process required almost five times more CO<sub>2</sub> than the aerobic process to produce the same amount of 2,3-butanediol. A Monte Carlo analysis showed that in most scenarios the aerobic process was more economically favorable. In environmental terms, the aerobic process had a smaller carbon footprint in all the evaluated scenarios. Therefore, the results suggest that the aerobic process is a more suitable alternative to anaerobic bacteria-based processes for producing 2,3-butanediol from renewable CO<sub>2</sub> and hydrogen.</p>eng
dc.identifierhttps://investigadores.uandes.cl/en/publications/e29b464c-33d2-4d51-a889-e003cb28d2df
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositorio.uandes.cl/handle/uandes/59385
dc.languageeng
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.sourcevol.20 (2024) date: 2024-11-15
dc.subject2,3-butanediol
dc.subjectAcetogenic
dc.subjectCarbon dioxide fixation
dc.subjectHydrogen
dc.subjectKnallgas
dc.subjectLCA
dc.subjectSDG 7 - Affordable and Clean Energy
dc.titleComparative techno-economic and carbon footprint analysis of 2,3-butanediol production through aerobic and anaerobic bioconversion of carbon dioxide with green hydrogeneng
dc.typeArticleeng
dc.typeArtículospa
Files
Collections
PURE