CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 313Thermochemical Biomass Conversion ProcessesBiofuel production and bioconversionMining and Gasification Technologies

Thermochemical Ethanol via Indirect Gasification and Mixed Alcohol Synthesis of Lignocellulosic Biomass

Open access
US Department of Energy (USDOE), Washington, DC (United States). Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), Office of Sustainable Transportation. Bioenergy Technologies Office (BETO), Phillips, S., USDOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), Office of Sustainable Transportation. Bioenergy Technologies Office (BETO), National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Golden, CO (United States), Aden, A., Jechura, J., Dayton, D., Eggeman, T.·2007
DOI 10.2172/1216397
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This process design and technoeconomic evaluation addresses the conversion of biomass to ethanol via thermochemical pathways that are expected to be demonstrated at the pilot level by 2012.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2172/1216397

Cites

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Reducing the project contingency to three percent reduces the selling price by about $0.22/gal.

    “Reducing the project contingency to three percent of the total capital project, (similar to that used in Phillips et al. 2007), reduces the selling price by about $0.22/gal.”

    From Production of Gasoline and Diesel from Biomass via Fast Pyrolysis, Hydrotreating and Hydrocracking: A Design Case (2009) · cites this paper as Phillips et al. 2007

    Table 15 (Section 4.1, Capital Costs; page not provided) uses a 3% project contingency, but calculates it as a percentage of total installed cost. The same table gives contingency as 2% of total project investment, so it does not support the cited comparison if “total capital project” means total project investment. The $0.22/gal reduction is the citing authors’ own calculation, not a result attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 24

  1. E.D. Larson, G.W. McDonald, W. Yang, W.J. Frederick, K. Iisa, T.G. Kreutz, E.W. Malcom, and C.A. Brown, "A Cost-Benefit Assessment of Black Liquor Gasifier/Combined Cycle Technology Integrated into a Kraft Pulp Mill," Tappi Journal, 83(6): 57-, June 2000.
  2. Bain, R. L., K. R. Craig and R. P. Overend (2000). "Gasification for Heat and Power, Methanol, and Hydrogen," Chapter 9.2 of Industrial Uses of Biomass Energy, ed. F. Rosillo- Calle, et al., Taylor and France, London, UK, ISBN-0-7484-0884-3.
  3. Wyman, C.E., R. L. Bain, N.D. Hinman, and D.J. Stevens, (1993) "Ethanol and Methanol from Cellulosic Materials, "Chapter 21 of Renewable Energy: Sources for Fuels and Electricity, ed T.B. Johansson, et al, Island Press. 15 Chem Systems "Assessment of Costs and Benefits of Flexible and Alternative Fuel Use in the U.S. Transportation Sector", by Chem Systems, Tarrytown, NY, for the U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, D.C., Report No. DOE/PE--0093, 46 pp, November 1989.
  4. Wan, E. I. and M. D. Fraser, "Economic Assessment of Advanced Biomass Gasification Systems", by Science Applications International Corporation, McLean, VA, IGT Biomass Conference, New Orleans, LA, Feb 1989.
  5. Wyman, C.E., R. L. Bain, N.D. Hinman, and D.J. Stevens, (1993) "Ethanol and Methanol from Cellulosic Materials, "Chapter 21 of Renewable Energy: Sources for Fuels and Electricity, ed T.B. Johansson, et al, Island Press.
  6. Peters, M.S.; K.D. Timmerhaus. Plant Design and Economics for Chemical Engineers, 5 th Edition, McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York. 2003.
  7. Perry, R.H., Green, D.W., Maloney, J.O. Perry's Chemical Engineers' Handbook, 7 th ed., McGraw-Hill. 1997 28 October 2006 values used from http://www.che.com/inc/CEeconomicIndicators.php.
  8. Herman, R.G. (1991). "Chapter 7 -Classical and Non-classical Routes for Alcohol Synthesis." New Trends in CO Activation, L. Guczi, ed., Elsevier, New York, pp 265-349.
  9. Quarderer, G.J. "Mixed Alcohols from Synthesis Gas." Proceedings from the 78 th Spring National AIChE Meeting. April 6-10, 1986, New Orleans, LA.
  10. Nirula, S. "Dow / Union Carbide Process for Mixed Alcohols from Syngas" SRI International. March 1986. PEP Review No 85-1-4. Menlo Park, CA.
  11. Park, T.; et al.; "Kinetic Analysis of Mixed Alcohol Synthesis from Syngas over K/MoS 2 Catalyst." Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. Vol 36, 1997. pp 5246 -5257.
  12. Gunturu, A.; et al. "A Kinetic Model for the Synthesis of High-Molecular-Weight Alcohols over a Sulfided Co-K-Mo/C Catalyst." Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. Vol. 37, 1998. pp. 2107 -2115.
  13. Smith, K.; et al. "Kinetic Modeling of Higher Alcohol Synthesis over Alkali-Promoted Cu/ZnO and MoS2 Catalysts." Chemical Engineering Science, Vol. 45. 1990. pp. 2639 -2646.
  14. Weast, R.C., ed. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 62 nd ed., CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. 1981
  15. Peters, M.S.; K.D. Timmerhaus. Plant Design and Economics for Chemical Engineers, 5 th Edition, McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York. 2003.
  16. Wan, E. I. and Malcolm D. F. "Economic Assessment of Advanced Biomass Gasification Systems," in Energy from Biomass and Wastes XIII, Donald L. Klass, ed. Chicago: Institute of Gas Technology, pp.791-827. 1990.
  17. Fogler, H.S. Elements of Chemical Reaction Engineering. Second Edition. Prentice Hall. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. 1992.
  18. Kohl, A.L.; Nielsen, R.B. Gas Purification, 5 th Edition. Gulf Publishing Company. 1997
  19. Fierro, J. L. G. (1993). "Catalysis in C1 chemistry: future and prospect." Catalysis Letters 22(1- 2): 67-91.
  20. Herman, R. G. (2000). "Advances in catalytic synthesis and utilization of higher alcohols." Catalysis Today 55(3): 233-245.
  21. Wender, I. (1996). "Reactions of synthesis gas." Fuel Processing Technology 48(3): 189-297.
  22. Gunturu, A.; et.al. "A Kinetic Model for the Synthesis of High-Molecular-Weight Alcohols over a Sulfided Co-K-Mo/C Catalyst." Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. Vol. 37, 1998. pp. 2107 -2115.
  23. Gunturu, A.K., Kugler, E.L., Cropley, J.B., Dadyburjor, D.B., "A Kinetic Model for the Synthesis of High-Molecular-Weight Alcohols over a Sulfided Co-K-Mo/C Catalyst", Chapter 5 in "The Economical Production of Alcohol Fuels from Coal-Derived Synthesis Gas", Final Report, Contract # DE-AC22-91PC91034-25, West Virginia University Research Corporation on behalf of West Virginia University, March 1999.
  24. Gunturu, A.K., "Higher-Alcohol Synthesis from Carbon Monoxide and Hydrogen: Kinetic Studies Over MoS2-Based Catalysts", M.S. Thesis in Chemical Engineering, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia, 1997.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
US Department of Energy (USDOE), W., Phillips, S., USDOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), O. O. S. T. B. T. O. (., National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), G., Aden, A., Jechura, J., Dayton, D., & Eggeman, T.
Affiliations
  • National Laboratory of the Rockies (US)
  • Neoterics International, Inc., Lakewood, CO (United States)
ORCID
Publisher
Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)
Published
2007-04-01
DOI
10.2172/1216397
OpenAlex
W1533017454
Cited by
313
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 29 · 2015: 30 · 2014: 27 · 2013: 24 · 2012: 32
Type
report
Language
en
Open access
Locations
OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • USDOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), Office of Sustainable Transportation. Bioenergy Technologies Office (BETO)
  • DOE (AC36-99GO10337)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Thermochemical Biomass Conversion Processes
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Biofuel production and bioconversion
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Mining and Gasification Technologies
Keywords
indirect gasification, lignocellulosic biomass, biomass conversion, process design, pilot-scale demonstration

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