Extracting wood lignin without dissolving or degrading cellulose: investigations on the use of food additive-derived ionic liquids
Abstract
Biodegradable plastics and biocompatible composites, generated from renewable biomass feedstock, are regarded as promising materials that could replace synthetic polymers and reduce global dependence on fossil fuel sources. Wood cellulose, the most abundant biopolymer on earth, holds great potential as a renewable biomass feedstock for the future. To unlock the entire scope of potential benefits of this feedstock, the wood components—namely cellulose, hemicellulose and lignin—need to be separated and processed individually. Current methods to separate wood components, such as Kraft pulping for example, suffer considerable drawbacks and cannot be considered environmentally benign. This work investigates the use of food-additive derived ionic liquids (ILs) for separating wood lignin, studying the influence of selected process parameters, such as extraction time, extraction temperature, IL moisture content, wood particle size, wood species, IL cation species, solvent composition, and IL recyclability on the lignin extraction efficiency. The lignin extract and the wood residues were characterised viainfrared spectroscopy, elemental analysis, thermogravimetric analysis, differential scanning calorimetry, X-ray diffraction, and gel permeation chromatography. An extraction efficiency of e = 0.43 of wood lignin was achieved in one gentle extraction step (T = 373 K, t = 2 h), and it was found that the presence of a co-solvent increased the extraction efficiency to e = 0.60. Gentle conditions during IL treatment did not decrease the crystallinity of the wood sample, and the extracted lignin had both a larger molar mass and a more uniform molar mass distribution, compared to commercially available Kraft lignin.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In ionic liquids, particularly those with non-functionalised cations such as dialkylimidazolium, the hydrogen-bond basicity/value of β is primarily influenced by the anion.
“In ionic liquids, particularly those with non-functionalised cations such as dialkylimidazolium, the hydrogen-bond basicity/value of β is primarily influenced by the anion.56”
From Deconstruction of lignocellulosic biomass with ionic liquids (2013) · cites this paper as [56]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 62 · Cited by 199
- Authors
- Pinkert, A., Goeke, D. F., Marsh, K. N., & Pang, S.
- Affiliations
- University of Canterbury (NZ)
- Corresponding author
- Pinkert, André
- ORCID
- Pang, Shusheng
- Venue
- Green Chemistry
- Publisher
- Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC)
- Published
- 2011
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 3124
- ISSN
- 1463-9262 (ISSN-L)
- 1463-9270
- OpenAlex
- W2031726861
- Cited by
- 199
- References
- 62
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 9
- FWCI
- 6.82
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Green Chemistry (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Lignin and Wood Chemistry
- Physical Sciences › Chemical Engineering › Catalysis › Ionic liquids properties and applications
- Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Biomaterials › Advanced Cellulose Research Studies
- Keywords
- lignin extraction, ionic liquids, wood, cellulose preservation, lignin separation, cosolvents, extraction efficiency, ionic liquid recyclability, biodegradable plastics, biocomposites, biomass feedstock
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