The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Likely Features and Costs of Mature Biomass Ethanol Technology
Abstract
Analysis is undertaken motivated by the question: “What are the likely features and cost of a facility producing ethanol from cellulosic biomass at a level of maturity comparable to a refinery?” This question is considered with respect to cost reductions arising from increased scale, lower-cost feedstock, and process improvements in pretreatment and biological conversion, but not other process steps. An “advanced technology” scenario is developed that represents our estimate of the most likely features of mature biomass ethanol technology. A “best-parameter” scenario, intended to be indicative of the potential for R&D-driven cost reductions, is also developed based on the best values for individual process parameters reported in the literature. Both scenarios involve large plants (2.7 million dry t feedstock/yr). Feedstock costs are taken to be $38.60/delivered dry t for the advanced scenario and $34.00/delivered dry t for the best-parameter scenario. Projected selling prices, including operating costs and capital recovery corresponding to a 14.2% return on investment, are 50¢/gal (pure ethanol basis) for the advanced technology case and 34¢/gal for the best-parameter case. These are markedly lower than the 118¢ /gal selling price projected for base-case technology, with the largest share of cost reductions due to improved conversion technology. Key conversion technology improvements include, in order of importance, consolidated bioprocessing, advanced pretreatment, elimination of seed reactors, and faster rates. First-law thermodynamic efficiencies based on the biomass high heating value and production of ethanol and electricity are 61.2% for the advanced case and 69.3% for the best-parameter case, as compared to 50.3% currently. Combining advanced ethanol production technology of the type presented here with advanced gas turbine-based power generation is a promising direction for future analysis and may offer still further cost reductions and efficiency increases.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Features of promising technologies for pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass
MOSIER, N. (2005) · Bioresource Technology · doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2004.06.025 · Cited by 6,251
Microbial Cellulose Utilization: Fundamentals and Biotechnology
Lynd, L. R., Weimer, P. J., van Zyl, W. H., & Pretorius, I. S. (2002) · Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews · doi:10.1128/mmbr.66.3.506-577.2002 · Cited by 4,726
Self-citationEthanol from lignocellulosic biomass: techno-economic performance in short-, middle- and long-term
Hamelinck, C. N., Hooijdonk, G. V., & Faaij, A. P. (2005) · Biomass and Bioenergy · doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2004.09.002 · Cited by 1,620
Pretreatment: the key to unlocking low‐cost cellulosic ethanol
Yang, B., & Wyman, C. E. (2008) · Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining · doi:10.1002/bbb.49 · Cited by 1,524
Self-citationBio-ethanol – the fuel of tomorrow from the residues of today
Hahn-Hägerdal, B., Galbe, M., Gorwa-Grauslund, M. F., Lidén, G., & Zacchi, G. (2006) · Trends in Biotechnology · doi:10.1016/j.tibtech.2006.10.004 · Cited by 1,513
Metadata
- Authors
- Lynd, L. R., Elander, R. T., & Wyman, C. E.
- Venue
- Seventeenth Symposium on Biotechnology for Fuels and Chemicals
- Publisher
- Humana Press
- Published
- 1996
- Pages
- 741-761
- OpenAlex
- W2008188445
- Cited by
- 225
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 23.10
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Likely Features and Costs of Mature Biomass Ethanol Technology. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/978-1-4612-0223-3_70
- The paper
- Lynd, L. R., Elander, R. T., & Wyman, C. E. (1996). Likely Features and Costs of Mature Biomass Ethanol Technology. Seventeenth Symposium on Biotechnology for Fuels and Chemicals. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-0223-3_70
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
