pubs.acs.

org/journal/ascecg Research Article

Compacted Silage Fermentation on Whole Sweet Sorghum Plant for

Distributed Bioethanol Production
Hongshen Li, Zefang Jia, Li Wei, Qian Lu, Wenxin Fan, Yuwei Wang, Limin Cao,* and Shizhong Li*
Cite This: ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. 2023, 11, 12739−12746 Read Online

ACCESS Metrics & More Article Recommendations *

sı Supporting Information
See https://pubs.acs.org/sharingguidelines for options on how to legitimately share published articles.
Downloaded via UNIV OF PENNSYLVANIA on September 28, 2023 at 17:45:41 (UTC).

ABSTRACT: The development of the bioethanol industry is facing a bottleneck due to challenges in the collection and storage of
biomass. In this study, we explored the use of compacted silage fermentation to preserve whole pulverized sweet sorghum. To
sterilize native and contaminant bacteria, we employed sulfur dioxide and inoculated SO2-tolerant Saccharomyces cerevisiae TSH4 for
long-term preservation in an ethanol atmosphere. Bagged silage experiments present the most effective preservation dosage, which
was 2000 ppm SO2 concentration and 2% TSH4 yeast inoculation. Based on these conditions, we found that compacted silage with
different compaction densities enabled all fermentations to be completed within 60 days. The highest ethanol concentration is
achieved at a compaction density of 600, at which ethanol conversion rate reaches to 93.4%. Higher compaction densities produce
more leachate, which results in ethanol loss up to 9.7%. During the 240 days of long-term storage, there was no significant change in
ethanol content despite an increase in acetic acid concentration. Additionally, distilled vinasse was found to be comparable to whole
silage maize in terms of nutrients, thus proving the feasibility of constructing distributed biofuel plants.
KEYWORDS: sweet sorghum, bioethanol, silage fermentation, compaction density, distributed biofuel plant

■ INTRODUCTION
Worldwide fuel ethanol production in 2022 amounted to 106.6
billion liters, which represents a 9% decrease compared to the
previous year, reflecting concerns over food security.1,2
However, rising attention toward addressing global warming
and increasing energy needs have led to a growing interest in
using non-food crops for fuel ethanol production.3,4 Among
those crops, sweet sorghum has shown great potential due to
its high biomass yield and rich fermentable sugar content in the
stalks.5 Advanced solid-state fermentation (ASSF) of sweet
sorghum for bioethanol production offers the advantages of
energy saving and the absence of waste water.6 Some 10,000-
ton scale sweet sorghum ethanol demonstration projects have
been launched in recent years.7−9 However, the challenge of
preserving sugar crops for large-scale fuel ethanol industrializa-
tion remains a primary obstacle.7,10 Sweet sorghum should be
preserved for over 10 months after harvest to satisfy year-
round production requirements. During the preservation
period, biomass degradation and sugar loss due to high soluble
sugar content will lead to a decline in ethanol production.11,12
Therefore, feedstock storage should be addressed to realize the
potential of sweet sorghum as a viable source of fuel ethanol.
Silage is a widely used method for fodder storage and
biomass refinery, as organic acids produced through microbial
fermentation can inhibit the growth of harmful bacteria and
fungi, thus preserving the effective content of biomass.13−16
When Saccharomyces cerevisiae is used as a silage additive in
sweet sorghum, it can produce ethanol from the sugars present,
thus further aiding in long-term preservation.17,18 Compared to
ASSF, silage fermentation offers several advantages, including a
Received: May 24, 2023
Revised: July 28, 2023
Published: August 17, 2023

© 2023 American Chemical Society https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.3c03083

12739 ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. 2023, 11, 12739−12746
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
longer fermentation period and a lack of requirement for
intense energy to yield ethanol.
The collection of biomass feedstock is another challenge in
biofuel development.19−21 With water and lignocellulosic
fractions comprising almost 90% of the total weight in sweet
sorghum stalk, they are ineffective components for bioethanol
production, resulting in additional costs for centralized
collection and transportation. To address this issue, distributed
bioethanol production can utilize the existing facilities in rural
areas, such as silage pools, to simultaneously preserve and
ferment sweet sorghum. Crude ethanol can then be extracted
using solid-state distillation and delivered to refineries to be
processed into fuel grade.9,22 Sweet sorghum seeds and leaves
contain essential nutrients such as starch and protein, making
the residual vinasse viable as fodder.23,24 With further
application of nanocellulose, producing functional materials
with sweet sorghum bagasse can be expected to be more
profitable in future.25−27
This study explores a process of compacted silage
fermentation on whole sweet sorghum plant for distributed
bioethanol production. To achieve this, sulfur dioxide was
added to the pulverized feedstock to eliminate native bacteria,
followed by inoculation with SO2 tolerant S. cerevisiae for
anaerobic fermentation. Compaction density affects the oxygen
content, water transfer, and carbon dioxide emissions in silage
fermentation. Pre-experiments were conducted with fermenta-
tion bags to determine the amount of sulfur dioxide and yeast,
followed by long-term preservation experiments with different
compacted densities to establish the optimal conditions for
fresh sweet sorghum fermentation using existing silage
facilities. The results of this study will contribute to establish
the basis for distributed bioethanol industrialization and
significantly reduce the costs of feedstock collection and
preservation.
■ EXPERIMENTAL SECTION
Raw Material. Sweet sorghum, the Liaotian No. 1 variety that was
harvested from Chaoyang District, Beijing, China, after a 108 day
growth period. The whole plant was pulverized with the stalks
measuring 1−2 cm and the leaves measuring 5−8 cm in length. The
pulverized material had an overall sugar hammer degree of 16.5 and a
moisture content of 79.26 ± 0.24%.
Silage maize for comparison of feed quality sourced from the 2022
conventional roughage at the Aoya Farm in Shandong Province,
China.
Yeast Strains and Reagents. For this study, the S. cerevisiae
THS4 strain was used, which was derived from the high-efficiency
ethanol yielding strain TSH2 through sulfur dioxide domestication
and mutagenesis.28,29 TSH4 yeast was twice expanded and cultured to
108/mL and then was inoculated in sweet sorghum pulverized
material in the appropriate weight ratios.
YPD cultures (10 g/L yeast extract, 20 g/L glucose, and 20 g/L
peptone) and 100 g/L sulfur dioxide aqueous solution were prepared
for use. All other reagents used, including ethanol, acetic acid,
glycerol, glucose, fructose, xylose, and arabinose, were purchased from
General Reagent, Shanghai, China, and were analytical grade without
further purification.
Sulfur Dioxide Tolerance Test. To test the effect of different
sulfur dioxide concentrations on growth, the TSH2 and TSH4 strains
were separately inoculated into YPD cultures containing 1000, 2000,
and 3000 ppm SO2 concentration. The cultures were then incubated
in a shaker at 30 °C and 200 rpm until they reached their maximum
bacteriological concentrations, which were measured every 4 h using
the spectrophotometer method.
Bagged Silage Fermentation. Two factors, SO2 concentration
and yeast inoculation, were chosen for the bagged silage fermentation
12740
pubs.acs.org/journal/ascecg Research Article
experiments, with three levels each. The control sample was left
untreated with the native strains on sweet sorghum reproducing.
Samples 1 to 9 were inoculated with different concentrations of sulfur
dioxide and TSH4 yeast, as shown in Table S1. The samples were
stored in self-sealing bags and were analyzed for composition at 1, 3,
7, 21, 60, 180, and 360 days to determine the optimal yeast
inoculation and SO2 concentration ratios for subsequent compaction
experiments. To simulate industrial scenario, fermentation bags were
not vacuumed. Instead, one-way valves were set up to allow for the
release of CO2 generated during fermentation, thus preventing the
bags from bursting.
Compacted Silage Fermentation. Five acrylic fermenters were
self-designed and fabricated as shown in Figure S1. Each fermenter
had an inner diameter of 250 mm and a height of 1600 mm, with a
loading height of 1500 mm and a loading capacity of 73.6 L. Three
150 mm diameter sampling connections were installed on each
fermenter, located at the top, middle, and bottom. Rubber plugs were
also installed, with a 5 mm hole at the center to allow for connection
to a 40% sodium hydroxide reagent bottle via a hose.
The compaction degree refers to the compacted density measured
in SI units. To achieve a desired compaction degree, an automatic
compactor is used. The compactor consists of an oil cylinder,
hydraulic station, oil supply tube, compacting plate, and bracket. The
maximum stroke of the oil cylinder is 1.2 m, and the compaction
speed is 1 m/min.
The bulk density of pulverized sweet sorghum was previously
measured to be 233.7 kg/m3.30 For this study, sweet sorghum was
compacted to densities of 300, 400, 500, 600, and 700 kg/m3. Based
on the results of the bagging experiment, the pulverized sweet
sorghum stalk was mixed with SO2 solution and inoculated with
TSH4 yeast. The calculated feedstock was then filled into the
fermenters and compacted using the compactor. After compaction,
the fermenters were sealed with rubber plugs and stored away from
light. The fermenters with insulation were placed at the atmosphere
temperature ranging from 10 to 25 °C. Not maintaining a constant
fermentation temperature could result in a slight reduction in ethanol
yield, but it aligns more closely with the practical silage pit
fermentation process and is more energy-efficient.
Composition Analysis. Samples were collected from different
locations at various periods during the silage process, including 1, 3, 7,
14, 28, 60, and 240 days. Leachate samples were also taken whenever
available. To analyze the samples, 10 g of the sample was mixed with
190 g of distilled water and homogenized for 15 min. The upper
liquid was analyzed by acidity meter (FE20, Mettler Toledo, Zurich,
Switzerland) and CO2 content detector (BXS-CO2, Qiwei, Hangzhou,
China). The content of glucose, fructose, xylose, arabinose, glycerol,
ethanol, and acetic acid was measured using high performance liquid
chromatography (LC-20AD, RID-20A, Shimadzu, Kyoto, Japan)
equipped with differential refractive index detector and ion-exchange
column (HPX-87H, Bio-Rad, CA, USA).
Moisture content in feedstock was determined by drying the oven
at 105 °C for 12 h. The weight of a 1 L reagent bottle filled with 40%
sodium hydroxide was measured, and at each sampling, the used
reagent bottle was replaced with a new bottle. The cumulative weight
increments were then recorded to determine the escaped CO2 mass
from the fermenter. Chemical composition analysis of fermentation
residues cited the literature data.31 The quality of vinasse feed was
analyzed according to AOAC standards.32
■ RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Tolerance with Sulfur Dioxide. Figure S2 evaluates the
fermentation performance of TSH2 and TSH4 in different SO2
concentration medium. The growth rates of TSH2 and TSH4
were almost identical in the logarithmic growth phase, but
there was a significant difference in the growth retardation
phase. Specifically, TSH2 required 15 h of retardation to begin
logarithmic growth in a 2000 ppm SO2 medium, while TSH4
only required an 8 h retardation period in the same
https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.3c03083
ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. 2023, 11, 12739−12746
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering pubs.acs.org/journal/ascecg Research Article

Table 1. Chemical Composition of Sweet Sorghum Feedstock before Silage Fermentation

glucose (g/kg) fructose (g/kg) glycerol (g/kg) acetic acid (g/kg) ethanol (g/kg)
38.59 ± 0.32 37.93 ± 0.27 5.71 ± 0.47 4.30 ± 0.27 3.05 ± 0.07

concentration medium. Furthermore, the final yeast number of strains on plants in bagging storage and transportation as type
TSH4 was higher than that of TSH2. These results suggest that II fermentation. The acetic acid content is higher than the
TSH4 is more tolerant to SO2 and more suitable to be applied theoretical value, which can be primarily attributed to the
in silage fermentation. anaerobic digestion of other native bacteria, such as Bacillus
Bagged Silage Fermentation. As shown in Figure S3, the aceticus, on sweet sorghum. Reduction by chemical equation
results of bagged silage fermentation in different SO 2 reveals that the sugar loss due to native yeast and bacteria type
concentrations and THS4 inoculation indicate that ethanol II fermentation is up to 19.2% during bagging and trans-
concentrations increased significantly in all samples compared portation. In practice, if site conditions allow, spraying SO2
to the control samples. The maximum ethanol concentration immediately after pulverization can be considered to establish
was similar among the samples, but the time to reach the an acidic environment. Moreover, the feedstock collection
maximum ethanol concentration varied slightly. Higher SO2 radius of distributed ethanol projects should not be too distant
concentrations and lower yeast inoculation resulted in longer to minimize the initial sugar loss.
fermentation retardation periods. Moisture Distribution and Leachate Generation in
In an acidic atmosphere, S. cerevisiae does not produce acetic Compacted Silage Fermentation. Affected by the pressure
acid through strict anaerobic fermentation. Therefore, the and gravity, water within sweet sorghum cells was compressed
acetic acid concentration increase can be an indicator of out of the cells and flowed downward. Intracellular sugars were
evaluate the preservation effect of silage fermentation. Under also enriched downward with water, resulting in non-uniform
low SO2 conditions, the acetic acid concentration began to rise distribution of water, sugars, yeast growth, and ethanol
in early stage, but ethanol atmosphere generated by TSH4 concentration differences in each layer. Moisture distribution
growth inhibited the growth of contaminant bacteria to a of each layer is displayed in Figure 1. The distribution of each
certain extent. As a result, the acetic acid and ethanol layer is uniform under compacted density of 300 kg/m3, with
concentrations gradually reached their maximum at different moisture increasing with compaction density.
times, and then started to decrease, indicating that the samples Although no leachate was produced at compaction degree of
were starting to spoil. This observation can be primarily 500, the moisture content in the bottom was higher. At
attributed to the inadequate sealing of the samples during the compaction degree of 600, a small amount of leachate
storage period. appeared in the late stage of fermentation, and the leaching
When the SO2 concentration reached to 2000 ppm, most of height was 1/10 of the loading height. This is because of the
the native strains in sweet sorghum were eliminated. In fact, further osmosis of intracellular water under the pressure
yeast growth was inhibited, this resulted in a positive effect on
feedstock preservation because the time to reach maximum
ethanol concentration was delayed. An ethanol atmosphere is
toxic to bacteria and fungi, so the acetic acid concentration
increased slowly until the ethanol concentration decreased.
Under the condition of 2000 ppm SO2 concentration and 2%
TSH4 inoculation, the maximum ethanol fermentation period
was found to be 25 days. Following 360 days of storage under
these conditions, the remaining ethanol concentration in the
samples was found to be the highest, indicating that overall
preservation was the most effective under these conditions.
Initial Sugar Loss in Compacted Silage Fermentation.
The major fermentable sugar component in sweet sorghum is
fructose and sucrose. Sucrose hydrolyzes to glucose and
fructose at the appropriate temperature. There are two
anaerobic fermentation pathways of S. cerevisiae in this study,
which are as follows:33
type I: C6H12O6 2C2H5OH + 2CO2 (pH < 7)
and

type II: 2C6H12O6 + H 2O C2H5OH + CH3COOH

+ 2C3H5(OH)3 + 2CO2 (pH 7)
Sweet sorghum used in this experiment was whole-plant
pulverized and packed into bags for transport. The time from
harvest to compacted fermentation test is 7 days. Table 1
shows that, in addition to fermentable sugars, the composition
of the feedstock included other substances such as acetic acid, Figure 1. Moisture distribution of each layer at different compaction
gluconic acid, and ethanol, which were produced by native degrees.

12741 https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.3c03083
ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. 2023, 11, 12739−12746
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering pubs.acs.org/journal/ascecg Research Article

Figure 2. Content changes of glucose (a), fructose (b), glucinium (c), and acetic acid (d) during silage fermentation.

Figure 3. Contour of ethanol concentration at different heights and compaction degrees.

difference after sugar depletion. When the compaction degree
reached 700, an observable leachate was present in the lower
1/3 section of the loading height, as shown in Figure S1.
Completion Time of Compacted Silage Fermenta-
tion. Figure 2 illustrates the content changes of each major
component during fermentation. The gradual decrease in
fructose and glucose concentrations indicates that the
fermentation process was proceeding normally in each sample.
The data show that during the initial phase, yeast preferentially
utilized glucose for both aerobic and anaerobic respiration,
resulting in higher glucose consumption. The fructose content
began to decline approximately 3 days later, and the
fermentation was considered essentially completed when the
12742
total sugar concentration was reduced to less than 3 g/kg. The
fermentation process was found to be achievable within 60
days at all compaction degrees studied. At compaction degrees
below 600, the acetic acid concentration increased during the
late stage of fermentation. This indicates that oxygen and
airborne contaminant bacteria had penetrated the feedstock’s
interspace from the seal gap, leading to the oxidation of part of
the ethanol to acetic acid.
Ethanol Concentration Variation at Each Compaction
Density. Figure 3 depicts the variation in ethanol concen-
tration of each fermenter at different heights. In the case of low
compaction degree, the upper material was in contact with the
vessel space, which included sufficient dissolved oxygen for
https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.3c03083
ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. 2023, 11, 12739−12746
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
yeast growth, leading to a higher fermentation rate than
observed at the bottom during the early stages of fermentation.
However, upon completion of fermentation, ethanol concen-
tration at each height tended to have similar profiles as Figure
3. When compaction degree was 500 and 600, the
fermentation rates at each height tended to be equal, with
relatively slower rates in the middle. The ethanol concentration
did not increase significantly until 15 days at compaction
degree of 600. It indicates that the yeast growth was slow in the
early stage when the air was compressed out of the feedstock.
In the case of compaction degree of 700, the ethanol
concentration rose faster when the yeast reproduced in an
anaerobic atmosphere at the beginning, and there was an
obvious concentration stratification along the height. As the
bottom feedstock was immersed in the leachate, the yeast
reproduced more slowly under SO2 stress and anoxic
conditions, however, the ethanol concentration tended to be
consistent in all layers when the fermentation completed. In
general, the ethanol fermentation rate was observed to be
related to both height and compaction during the study. The
faster fermentation rate observed on the top layer of the silage
pit is advantageous for layer-by-layer fetching during industrial
production.
During compaction, the sugars present in the upper layers
transferred downward with the water, leading to higher ethanol
concentration at the bottom upon completion of fermentation.
The final ethanol concentration was found to increase with
compaction, but the highest ethanol concentration was 43.5 g/
kg that occurred at the bottom of compaction degree 600
instead of 700. This was due to the leachate loss observed at
compaction degree 700, where the ethanol concentration in
the leachate was found to be 15.3% higher than in the solid
substrate. The ratio of total weight of the leachate to the
weight of initial feedstock at compaction degree 700 is 4.3 kg/
51.5 kg, which would have caused a 9.7% loss of ethanol in
practical production without effective impermeability meas-
ures.
The average ethanol conversion can be calculated according
to eq 1
c1 c 0
ethanol
=
0.511cs
where c1 and c0 are the finished and initial ethanol
concentrations, respectively, and cs is the initial total sugar
concentration. Table 2 presents the calculated ethanol
conversion at each compaction degree. The highest conversion
rate of 93.4% was also observed at a compaction degree of 600.
There is no significant difference in the pH value of each
layer including leachate under different compaction degree.
The average pH value decreased from 4.28 at the beginning of
fermentation to 4.02, mainly attributed to the increase of acetic
Table 2. Average Ethanol Conversion at Different
Compaction Degrees
compaction degree ethanol conversion rate ethanol conversion rate
(kg/m3) (60 days) % (240 days) %
300 55.71 55.64
400 73.23 76.61
500 74.61 67.89
600 93.36 91.91
700 84.97 85.43
pubs.acs.org/journal/ascecg Research Article
acid concentration. On one hand, the loss of ethanol observed
in low compaction conditions was due to the presence of air in
the uncompacted space. During the early stages of
fermentation, yeast reproduced in an aerobic atmosphere
consuming glucose without producing ethanol. On the other
hand, in cases of untight sealing, the uncompacted space is
prone to intake contaminant bacteria that oxidize the
fermented ethanol to acetic acid. When compaction degree is
excessive to 700, the ethanol conversion rate decreases due to
the loss of leachate. Therefore, compressing the space of
biomass as much as possible while minimizing leachate
production is essential to improve the ethanol conversion
rate in compacted silage fermentation.
Production and Emission of Carbon Dioxide. Although
the majority of CO2 produced during the fermentation process
comes from yeast anaerobic fermentation, other parts are also
generated during aerobic respiration and bacterial digestion. A
portion of the produced CO2 remains dissolved in the solid
substrate, while the rest is collected. NaOH can also absorb
SO2 gas discharged from feedstock. However, at ambient
temperature, the Henry coefficient of CO2 in water is 4 times
that of SO2, and the theoretical mass of producing CO2 is 18.6
times greater the mass of adding SO2. Therefore, it is
reasonable to assume that approximately 98.7% of the reagent
bottle’s added weight comes from CO2. Equation 2 can be
used to determine the CO2 emission rate (ECO2) d
0.987 M
ECO2 = × 100%
0.987 M + MSCCO2 (2)
where ∑δM is the accumulated weight change of the reagent
bottle before and after every sampling, CCO2 is the average CO2
d
concentration in fermented feedstock, and MS is the total
weight of feedstock.
Figure 4 demonstrates that both CO2 production and
emission rates are reduced with an increase in compaction
(1)
Figure 4. Variation of CO2 emission rate and CO2 production per kg
feedstock in different compaction degrees.
degree. The amount of CO2 produced by yeast aerobic
respiration is nearly three times higher than anaerobic
respiration. The increase in compaction degree leads to a
reduction in aerobic respiration and contaminant bacteria
mixed in, thereby reducing the CO2 production per unit mass.
12743 https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.3c03083
ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. 2023, 11, 12739−12746
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering pubs.acs.org/journal/ascecg Research Article

Figure 5. Comparison of pentose (a), hexose (b), acetic acid (c), and ethanol (d) concentration in feedstock for 60 and 240 days storage.

Table 3. Feed Quality Comparison

feed name dry matter crude protein ether extract crude fiber crude ash Ca P
whole silage sweet sorghum vinasse 18.90 8.52 2.27 34.98 10.05 0.74 0.41
whole silage maize 29.21 7.28 2.65 24.12 4.35 0.40 0.19
ASSF sweet sorghum stalk vinasse 21.87 6.49 1.86 34.91 10.38 0.39 0.12

Moreover, increasing compaction pressure enhances the
amount of CO2 dissolved in the solid substrate, which
decreases the CO2 emission rate.
For industrial application, a 100-ton scale silage pit typically
produces a volume exhaust of up to 1730 m3. Therefore, after
compaction, one-way exhaust valves should be installed on the
top mulch to vent CO2 gas and prevent gas emission from
breaking the mulch.
Long-Term Preservation Test. To ensure year-round
production, long-term preservation experiments were con-
ducted for an additional 180 days (double-cropping) after
fermentation completion. The analysis of the sampled data in
Figure 5 revealed significant changes. The acetic acid
concentration increased by 20 to 78%, compared to the
completion of 60 days of fermentation, which is attributed to
air entry and the contamination by stray bacteria during
preservation. Bacteria and fungi such as Bacillus acetate oxidize
some of the ethanol into organic acids, which is more evident
in low compaction degrees. Moreover, the pentose content in
12744
fermentation products significantly increased, while the hexose
content did not show any obvious changes. Due to the
prolonged preservation in an acidic environment, the surface
structure of lignocellulose was partly destroyed. Furthermore,
the intrusion of certain Aspergillus species decomposes
cellulose and hemicellulose into monosaccharides. While
glucose and fructose were utilized by yeast producing more
ethanol, the remaining xylose and arabinose were retained in
the solid substrate. Hence, the ethanol concentrations do not
decline obviously, even increase at 400 and 700 compaction
degrees.
In industrial silage fermentation, the entry of air and
contaminant bacteria during feedstock output process is
inevitable, similar to sampling in experiments. Although a
portion of produced ethanol will be oxidized, the degradation
of lignocellulosic substrate increases the sugar source,
supporting to maintain ethanol concentration during long-
term preservation. Therefore, proper sterilization and resealing
https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.3c03083
ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. 2023, 11, 12739−12746
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
after feedstock retrieval can ensure stable year-round operation
of the industrial silage fermentation plant.
Quality of Vinasse Feed. Table 3 displays the
composition of ethanol extracted from solid-state distillation
of silage-fermented sweet sorghum and compares the nutrient
composition of sweet sorghum stalk vinasse after ASSF and
whole maize after silage fermentation.30 The vinasse has a
lower dry matter content than silage maize because of
distillation. The whole silage vinasse had significantly higher
levels of crude protein, crude fat, and trace elements compared
to the sweet sorghum stalk vinasse obtained through ASSF due
to the addition of sorghum leaves and clusters. All nutrients of
whole silage sweet sorghum vinasse, except for crude fat, were
higher than those found in silage maize, because sweet
sorghum leaves have a high protein content while the seeds do
not contain as much fat as corn. Generally, the nutritional
composition of whole silage sweet sorghum vinasse is
comparable to that of whole silage maize, making it an
excellent choice as a high-quality feed for livestock.
Distributed Bioethanol Plants. Compacted silage
fermentation technology plays a vital role in the industrializa-
tion of distributed bioethanol plants located in rural areas,
based on livestock farms. The technology involves the use of
existing silage pits and facilities to compacted storage harvested
sweet sorghum biomass resources for fermentation. The crude
ethanol can be extracted by solid-state distillation after 60 days
fermentation and delivered regularly to near centralized
ethanol refineries. The vinasse obtained during distillation
can be used as feed for livestock on site. The distributed
bioethanol plants operation only involves engineering of
distillation columns, yeast culture system, crude ethanol tank,
and necessary labor costs. This technology will greatly reduce
the cost of storage, transportation, and pre-treatment of
biomass feedstock. It is expected to solve the bottlenecks in
biofuel development and promote the achievement of fossil
fuel submission.
■ CONCLUSIONS
This study illustrates the viability of compacted silage
fermentation on whole sweet sorghum plant for distributed
bioethanol production. The optimal TSH4 yeast inoculation
and SO2 concentration were confirmed for the silage
fermentation. The highest ethanol content and conversion
rate were achieved at a compaction degree of 600. Addition-
ally, due to the decomposition of lignocellulose extending the
sugar source, the ethanol content did not significantly change
during long-term storage. The distilled sweet sorghum vinasse
was found to be comparable in nutritional quality to whole
silage maize as feed. This green and sustainable biorefining
technology can address the challenges of biomass collection,
storage, and transportation, and is expected to contribute to
the growth of the bioethanol industry.
■ ASSOCIATED CONTENT
* Supporting Information
sı
The Supporting Information is available free of charge at
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acssuschemeng.3c03083.
Additional experimental details, materials, and methods,
including photographs of experimental equipment
(PDF)
12745
pubs.acs.org/journal/ascecg Research Article
■ AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding Authors
Limin Cao − College of Life Sciences, Capital Normal
University, Beijing 100048, China; orcid.org/0000-0001-
6435-7170; Email: caolimin@cnu.edu.cn
Shizhong Li − Institute of New Energy Technology, Tsinghua
University, Beijing 100084, China; Email: szli@
mail.tsinghua.edu.cn
Authors
Hongshen Li − Institute of New Energy Technology, Tsinghua
University, Beijing 100084, China; ENN Group Co. Ltd.,
Langfang, Hebei 065001, China; orcid.org/0000-0003-
1247-2649
Zefang Jia − College of Life Sciences, Capital Normal
University, Beijing 100048, China
Li Wei − Institute of New Energy Technology, Tsinghua
University, Beijing 100084, China
Qian Lu − Institute of New Energy Technology, Tsinghua
University, Beijing 100084, China
Wenxin Fan − College of Life Sciences, Capital Normal
University, Beijing 100048, China
Yuwei Wang − College of Life Sciences, Capital Normal
University, Beijing 100048, China
Complete contact information is available at:
https://pubs.acs.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.3c03083
Author Contributions
Hongshen Li: conceptualization, investigation, formal analysis,
and writing�original draft. Limin Cao: supervision, inves-
tigation, funding acquisition, and writing�review and editing.
Zefang Jia: investigation, formal analysis, writing�original
draft, and writing�review and editing. Li Wei and Qian Lu:
investigation and formal analysis. Wenxin Fan and Yuwei
Wang: writing�review and editing. Shizhong Li: conceptual-
ization, writing�review and editing, and funding acquisition.
Funding
This research was supported by the National Key R&D
Program of China (2016YFE0108500) and National Natural
Science Foundation of China (NSFC22278273).
Notes
The authors declare no competing financial interest.
■ ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors sincerely appreciate Profs. Wei Xiao and Xiaomei
Wang for their kind help on fermentation experiments and
manuscript improvements.
■ REFERENCES
(1) Statista. Fuel Ethanol Production Worldwide in 2022, By Country,
2023. https://www.statista.com/statistics/281606/ethanol-
production-in-selected-countries/ March 8, 2023.
(2) Hoang, T. D.; Nghiem, N. Recent developments and current
status of commercial production of fuel ethanol. Fermentation 2021, 7,
314.
(3) Lara-Serrano, M.; Sáez Angulo, F.; Negro, M. J.; Morales-
delaRosa, S.; Campos-Martin, J. M.; Fierro, J. L. G. Second-
Generation bioethanol production combining simultaneous fermenta-
tion and Saccharification of IL-pretreated barley straw. ACS Sustain.
Chem. Eng. 2018, 6, 7086−7095.
(4) Yang, M. L.; Dahlberg, J.; Baral, N. R.; Putnam, D.; Scown, C. D.
Identifying forage sorghum ideotypes for advanced biorefineries. ACS
Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2021, 9, 7873−7881.
https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.3c03083
ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. 2023, 11, 12739−12746
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
(5) Regassa, T. H.; Wortmann, C. S. Sweet sorghum as a bioenergy
crop: Literature review. Biomass Bioenergy 2014, 64, 348−355.
(6) Li, J. H.; Li, S. Z.; Han, B.; Yu, M. H.; Li, G. M.; Jiang, Y. A novel
cost-effective technology to convert sucrose and homocelluloses in
sweet sorghum stalks into ethanol. Biotechnol. Biofuels 2013, 6, 174.
(7) Li, H.; Liu, H.; Li, S. Feasibility Study on bioethanol production
by one phase transition separation based on advanced solid-state
fermentation. Energies 2021, 14, 6301.
(8) Li, S. Z.; Li, G. M.; Zhang, L.; Zhou, Z. X.; Han, B.; Hou, W. H.;
Wang, J. B.; Li, T. C. A demonstration study of ethanol production
from sweet sorghum stems with advanced solid state fermentation
technology. Appl. Energy 2013, 102, 260−265.
(9) Li, S.; Li, G. Continuous solid-state separation device and
process for producing fuel ethanol. U.S. Patent 10,239,806 B2, 2019,
Mar 26, 2019.
(10) Yang, X. L.; Li, M.; Liu, H. H.; Ren, L. T.; Xie, G. H. Technical
feasibility and comprehensive sustainability assessment of sweet
sorghum for bioethanol production in China. Sustainability 2018, 10,
731.
(11) Zegada-Lizarazu, W.; Monti, A. An integrated approach to
harvest and storage of sweet sorghum at farm scale. BioEnergy Res.
2015, 8, 450−458.
(12) Ratnavathi, C. V.; Chakravarthy, S. K.; Komala, V. V.; Chavan,
U. D.; Patil, J. V. Sweet Sorghum as Feedstock for Biofuel Production:
A Review. Sugar Tech 2011, 13, 399−407.
(13) Muck, R. E.; Nadeau, E. M. G.; McAllister, T. A.; Contreras-
Govea, F. E.; Santos, M. C.; Kung, L. Silage review: Recent advances
and future uses of silage additives. J. Dairy Sci. 2018, 101, 3980−4000.
(14) Bolsen, K. K.; Ashbell, G.; Weinberg, Z. G. Silage fermentation
and silage additives: Review. Asian-Australas. J. Anim. Sci. 1996, 9,
483−494.
(15) Kung, L. M.; Shaver, R. D.; Grant, R. J.; Schmidt, R. J. Silage
review: Interpretation of chemical, microbial, and organoleptic
components of silages. J. Dairy Sci. 2018, 101, 4020−4033.
(16) Baral, N. R.; Dahlberg, J.; Putnam, D.; Mortimer, J. C.; Scown,
C. D. Supply cost and life-cycle greenhouse gas footprint of dry and
ensiled biomass sorghum for biofuel production. ACS Sustain. Chem.
Eng. 2020, 8, 15855−15864.
(17) Li, H.; Han, X.; Liu, H.; Hao, J.; Jiang, W.; Li, S. Silage
fermentation on sweet sorghum whole plant for Fen-flavor Baijiu.
Foods 2021, 10, 1477.
(18) Rodrigues, P. H. M.; Pinedo, L. A.; Meyer, P. M.; Silva, T. H.;
Guimaraes, I. Sorghum silage quality as determined by chemical-
nutritional factors. Grass Forage Sci. 2020, 75, 462−473.
(19) Tian, Y.; Li, S.; Zhao, L.; Meng, H.; Huo, L. Life cycle
assessment on fuel ethanol producing from sweet sorghum stalks.
Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Mach. 2011, 42, 132−137.
(20) Duarah, P.; Haldar, D.; Patel, A. K.; Dong, C. D.; Singhania, R.
R.; Purkait, M. K. A review on global perspectives of sustainable
development in bioenergy generation. Bioresour. Technol. 2022, 348,
126791.
(21) Tao, J.; Yu, S. R.; Wu, T. X. Review of China’s bioethanol
development and a case study of fuel supply, demand and distribution
of bioethanol expansion by national application of E10. Biomass
Bioenergy 2011, 35, 3810−3829.
(22) Li, H.; Liu, H.; Li, Y.; Nan, J.; Shi, C.; Li, S. Combined vapor
permeation and continuous solid-state distillation for energy-efficient
bioethanol production. Energies 2021, 14, 2266.
(23) Qu, H.; Liu, X. B.; Dong, C. F.; Lu, X. Y.; Shen, Y. X. Field
performance and nutritive value of sweet sorghum in eastern China.
Field Crop. Res. 2014, 157, 84−88.
(24) Sifeeldein, A.; Wang, S.; Li, J.; Dong, Z.; Chen, L.; Kaka, N. A.;
Shao, T. Phylogenetic identification of lactic acid bacteria isolates and
their effects on the fermentation quality of sweet sorghum (Sorghum
bicolor) silage. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2019, 126, 718−729.
(25) Xu, T.; Du, H. S.; Liu, H. Y.; Liu, W.; Zhang, X. Y.; Si, C. L.;
Liu, P. W.; Zhang, K. Advanced nanocellulose-based composites for
flexible functional energy storage devices. Adv. Mater. 2021, 33,
2101368.
12746
pubs.acs.org/journal/ascecg Research Article
(26) Liu, K.; Liu, W.; Li, W.; Duan, Y. X.; Zhou, K. Y.; Zhang, S.; Ni,
S. Z.; Xu, T.; Du, H. S.; Si, C. L. Strong and highly conductive
cellulose nanofibril/silver nanowires nanopaper for high performance
electromagnetic interference shielding. Adv. Compos. Hybrid Mater.
2022, 5, 1078−1089.
(27) Liu, H.; Xu, T.; Cai, C.; Liu, K.; Liu, W.; Zhang, M.; Du, H.; Si,
C.; Zhang, K. Multifunctional superelastic, superhydrophilic, and
ultralight nanocellulose-based composite carbon aerogels for
compressive supercapacitor and strain sensor. Adv. Funct. Mater.
2022, 32, 2113082.
(28) Fu, X. F.; Li, P. S.; Zhang, L.; Li, S. Z. Understanding the stress
responses of Kluyveromyces marxianus after an arrest during high-
temperature ethanol fermentation based on integration of RNA-Seq
and metabolite data. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2019, 103, 2715−
2729.
(29) Li, P. S.; Fu, X. F.; Zhang, L.; Li, S. Z. CRISPR/Cas-based
screening of a gene activation library in Saccharomyces cerevisiae
identifies a crucial role of OLE1 in thermotolerance. Microb.
Biotechnol. 2019, 12, 1154−1163.
(30) Li, H. S.; Li, S. Z. Optimization of continuous solid-state
distillation process for cost-effective bioethanol production. Energies
2020, 13, 854.
(31) Li, H.; Li, S. Cellulose Nanofiber Preparation Combined with
Bioethanol Production from Fermented Sweet Sorghum Bagasse. ACS
Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2022, 10, 9820−9828.
(32) Cunniff, P.; Horwitz, W.; Latimer, G. Official Methods of
Analysis of AOAC; AOAC, 2000.
(33) Freeman, G. G.; Donald, G. M. S. Fermentation processes
leading to glycerol. Appl. Microbiol. 1957, 5, 197−210.
Recommended by ACS
Using a Novel Pervaporative Sequential-Co-immobilized
Two-Sectional Bioreactor with an Ultralow
Fouling–Biofouling Superhydrophobic Silicallite-1/PDM...
Fariba Sadat Kamelian, Toraj Mohammadi, et al.
FEBRUARY 03, 2023
ACS SUSTAINABLE CHEMISTRY & ENGINEERING READ
Effective Comprehensive Utilization Strategy for Upgrading
Red Seaweed via Chemocatalysis and a Newly Isolated
Pseudomonas rhodesiae in Tandem
Qing Liu, Zhaojuan Zheng, et al.
FEBRUARY 21, 2023
ACS SUSTAINABLE CHEMISTRY & ENGINEERING READ
Genetic Manipulation of a Twin Clostridia Consortium for
Co-production of n-Butanol and Isobutanol by Consolidated
Bioprocessing
Zhiqiang Wen, Mingjie Jin, et al.
OCTOBER 27, 2022
ACS SUSTAINABLE CHEMISTRY & ENGINEERING READ
Life Cycle Environmental Evaluation of Alternative Solvents
Used in Lipid Extraction─The Case of Algae Biodiesel
Santiago Zapata-Boada, Rosa M. Cuéllar-Franca, et al.
JULY 31, 2023
ACS SUSTAINABLE CHEMISTRY & ENGINEERING READ
Get More Suggestions >
https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.3c03083
ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. 2023, 11, 12739−12746