Future Directions and Perspectives

Most of the leading chemical pretreatment technologies that have been described herein are effective on one or more factors that contribute to lignocellulosics recalci­trance. Despite much research that has been dedicated to understanding the chemistry and the plant cell wall structure changes during various pretreatment technologies, the insufficient knowledge of cell wall structure, ultra structure, and pretreatment effects still limits the economics and effectiveness of pretreatment. For instance, the biological and chemical properties of plants are very complex in terms of composi­tion, structure, and ultra-structure [162]. Although researchers have put significant

Table8.7 Summary of various chemical pretreatments of lignocellulosic biomass [2, 129,156, 157]

Pretreatment

process

Advantages

Disadvantages

DAP

Hydrolyzes hemicellulose to xylose and other sugars; alters lignin structure

High cost; equipment corrosion; formation of toxic substances

Alkali

Removes hemicelluloses and lignin; increases accessible surface area

Long residence times required; irrecoverable salts formed and incorporated into biomass

Wet oxidation

Increase accessible surface area; removes lignin and hemicellulose to an extent

Expensive

SPORL

Slight degradation of cellulose, nearly complete solubilization of hemicellulose; partial delignification and lignin sulfonation

Possible need great capital investment

Organosolv

Hydrolyzes lignin and hemicelluloses

Solvents need to be drained from the reactor, evaporated, condensed, and recycled; high cost

ILs

Lignin and hemicellulose hydrolysis; ability to dissolve high loadings of different biomass types; mild processing conditions (low temperatures)

High solvent costs; need for solvent recovery and recycle

Ozonolysis

Reduces lignin content; does not produce toxic residues; increase accessible surface area; cost effective; does not cause formation of inhibitory compounds

Does not modify hemicelluloses; large amount of ozone required; expensive

effort into optimizing the pretreatment effectiveness, the fundamental science behind these optimizations is still not fully understood. Furthermore, there has been a lack of mechanistic understanding of the ultrastructural and physicochemical changes oc­curring within the cell wall at the molecular level and the cellular/tissue scale during various pretreatment technologies. It is thus essential to understand the effects of pretreatment on plant cell walls at a more fundamental level, in order to develop a cost-effective pretreatment technology with maximum fermentable sugar recovery, minimum inhibitor production and energy input, low demand of post-pretreatment processes, and low capital costs for reactors, water, and chemicals. In addition, ad­vances in the analytical chemistry would provide useful tools to investigate the cell wall deconstruction and understand the recalcitrance during the pretreatment process [163, 164].

Acknowledgments The authors are grateful for the financial support from the US Department of Energy (DOE biorefinery project: DE-EE0003144) for these studies.