skip to main content

Development and Optimization of a Laboratory-Scale Bubble Column Bioreactor for Bioethanol Fermentation: A Computational Approach

1Faculty of Chemical and Process Engineering Technology, Universiti Malaysia Pahang Al-Sultan Abdullah, Lebuhraya Persiaran Tun Khalil Yaakob 26300 Kuantan, Pahang, Malaysia

2Department of Chemical Engineering, Ahmadu Bello University Zaria, Nigeria

3Department of Chemical Engineering, Federal University Wukari, Nigeria

Received: 22 Jan 2026; Revised: 27 Feb 2026; Accepted: 28 Feb 2026; Available online: 3 Mar 2026; Published: 30 Jun 2026.
Editor(s): Istadi Istadi
Open Access Copyright (c) 2026 by Authors, Published by Universitas Diponegoro and BCREC Publishing Group
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Fulltext View|Download

Citation Format:
Cover Image
Abstract

This study presents the design and optimization of a laboratory-scale bubble column bioreactor (BCB) for bioethanol fermentation. Python-based simulations in Google Colab were employed to analyze mass transfer dynamics, hydrodynamic behavior, and reactor scale-up strategies under varying aeration rates. Although ethanol production is an anaerobic process, oxygen transfer analysis was conducted to characterize reactor performance and establish oxygen-limited conditions suitable for Saccharomyces cerevisiae fermentation, incorporating mass transfer modeling, reaction kinetics, process control, and sparger design to enhance fermentation efficiency. To further enhance fermentation efficiency, Response Surface Methodology (RSM) was applied following a two-stage optimization approach. A working volume of 500 mL was defined using fermentation kinetics, including an oxygen uptake rate of 1.1 g O₂/g cells, biomass yield of 0.5 g/g glucose, and kLa of 50 h⁻¹. A perforated plate sparger with six 1.2 mm orifices achieved a gas velocity of 90.3 m/s and 2.68 mm bubble size. Aeration was dynamically controlled to maintain 0.002 g/L dissolved oxygen, while pH was regulated at 5.0–5.5 using NaOH dosing. These conditions yielded 44.3% ethanol. A full factorial design identified Time, Air Flow Rate, Cell Loading, and Bead Mass as significant factors. RSM with Central Composite Design confirmed a significant quadratic model (F = 14.14, p < 0.0001; R² = 0.9601, Adjusted R² = 0.9201). Cell Loading (F = 48.48) and Bead Mass (F = 26.53) had the strongest effects. Optimal conditions yielded 47.9% ethanol at 52.70 h, 1.55 L/min air, 1.51 g/L cells, and 47.20 g beads, with 0.84% prediction error. Copyright © 2026 by Authors, Published by Universitas Diponegoro and BCREC Publishing Group. This is an open access article under the CC BY-SA License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0).

Supporting Information (SI) PDF
Keywords: Bubble Column Bioreactor; Optimization; Design; Modelling; Google Co-Lab
Funding: Petronas Malaysia under contract UIC240814

Article Metrics:

  1. Abdul Kareem Joyia, M., Ahmad, M., Chen, Y.-F., Mustaqeem, M., Ali, A., Abbas, A., Ashraf Gondal, M. (2024) Trends and advances in sustainable bioethanol production technologies from first to fourth generation: A critical review, Energy Conversion and Management, 321, 119037. DOI: 10.1016/j.enconman.2024.119037
  2. Mohd Azhar, S.H., Abdulla, R., Jambo, S.A., Marbawi, H., Gansau, J.A., Mohd Faik, A.A., Rodrigues, K.F. (2017). Yeasts in sustainable bioethanol production: A review, Biochem. Biophys. Rep., 10, 52–61. DOI: 10.1016/j.bbrep.2017.03.003
  3. Mustafa, G., Alvi, A., Batool, S.T., Ilyas, H., Zahid, M.T., Jeon, B.-H., Shafiq, Z., Abbas, S.Z., Anwar, N., Rafatullah, M. (2025). Design of the novel bioreactors for efficient bioconversion of lignocellulose into bioethanol, in Biofuels and Sustainability, (pp. 395–421). Elsevier. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-443-21433-2.00021-9
  4. Mutaf, T., Oncel, S.S. (2023) Bubble column and airlift bioreactor systems for animal cell culture applications, Asia-Pacific Journal of Chemical Engineering, 18(1). DOI: 10.1002/apj.2872
  5. de Jesus, S.S., Moreira Neto, J., Maciel Filho, R. (2017). Hydrodynamics and mass transfer in bubble column, conventional airlift, stirred airlift and stirred tank bioreactors, using viscous fluid: A comparative study, Biochem. Eng. J., 118, 70–81, DOI: 10.1016/j.bej.2016.11.019
  6. Abutu, D., Aderemi, B.O., Ameh, A.O., Yussof, H.W., Agi, A. (2025). Nano-enhanced biocarriers: ferric oxide-modified chitosan and calcium alginate beads for improved fermentation efficiency and reusability in a bubble column bioreactor, Biotechnol. Lett., 47(4), 70, DOI: 10.1007/s10529-025-03611-6
  7. Thanapornsin, T., Sirisantimethakom, L., Laopaiboon, L., Laopaiboon, P. (2022). Effectiveness of Low-Cost Bioreactors Integrated with a Gas Stripping System for Butanol Fermentation from Sugarcane Molasses by Clostridium beijerinckii, Fermentation, 8(5), 214, DOI: 10.3390/fermentation8050214
  8. Yerima, E.A., Maaji, S.P., Samuel-Okey, F.C., Abutu, D., Afyenaku, S., Mudwa, D., Audu, S. (2025) An efficient and optimal adsorptive removal of glufosinate ammonium from wastewater using carbonized rice husk-clay blend briquettes, Ecological Engineering & Environmental Technology, 26(9), 1–12, DOI: 10.12912/27197050/208147
  9. Abutu, D., Aderemi, B.O., Ameh, A.O., Yussof, H.W., Gbonhinbor, J., Money, B., Nyah, F., Umunnawuike, C., Nwaichi, P.I., Agi, A. (2025) Optimization of Ethanol Fermentation in a Bubble Column Bioreactor Using Response Surface Methodology with Ferric Oxide Nanoparticle-Modified Supports, SPE Nigeria Annual International Conference and Exhibition, SPE, DOI: 10.2118/228638-MS
  10. Mast, Y., Ghaderi, A., Takors, R. (2025) Real Case Study of 600 m3 Bubble Column Fermentations: Spatially Resolved Simulations Unveil Optimization Potentials for l‐Phenylalanine Production With Escherichia coli, Biotechnol. Bioeng., 122(2), 265–286, DOI: 10.1002/bit.28869
  11. MÃller, K., Bro, C., PiÅkur, J., Nielsen, J., Olsson, L. (2002) Steady-state and transient-state analyses of aerobic fermentation in Saccharomyces kluyveri, FEMS Yeast Res., 2(2), 233–244, DOI: 10.1111/j.1567-1364.2002.tb00088.x
  12. Visser, W., Scheffers, W.A., Batenburg-van der Vegte, W.H., van Dijken, J.P. (1990) Oxygen requirements of yeasts, Appl. Environ. Microbiol., 56(12), 3785–3792, DOI: 10.1128/aem.56.12.3785-3792.1990
  13. Karadag, D., Puhakka, J.A. (2010) Direction of glucose fermentation towards hydrogen or ethanol production through on-line pH control, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 35(19), 10245–10251, DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.07.139
  14. Coletto, A., Poesio, P. (2024) Hold-up formation in bubble channel reactors: A bubble-scale investigation, Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 201, 1–17, DOI: 10.1016/j.cherd.2023.11.028
  15. Du, Y., Li, Y., Ren, P., Zhang, L., Wang, D., Xu, X. (2024) Oxygen transfer at mesoscale catalyst layer in proton exchange membrane fuel cell: Mechanism, model and resistance characterization, Chemical Engineering Journal, 494, 153021, DOI: 10.1016/j.cej.2024.153021
  16. Silva, C.A.A., Fonseca, G.G. (2024) Physiological parameters as a key tool for understanding and optimizing yeast metabolism and physiology in batch cultures, Chem. Eng. Commun., 211(12), 1908–1920, DOI: 10.1080/00986445.2024.2386310
  17. Yalçin, S.K., Özbas, Z.Y. (2004) Effects of different substrates on growth and glycerol production kinetics of a wine yeast strain Saccharomyces cerevisiae Narince 3, Process Biochemistry, 39(10), 1285–1291, DOI: 10.1016/S0032-9592(03)00252-8
  18. van Zyl, W.H., Lynd, L.R., den Haan, R., McBride, J.E. (2007) Consolidated Bioprocessing for Bioethanol Production Using Saccharomyces cerevisiae, 205–235. DOI: 10.1007/10_2007_061
  19. Wu, W.-H., Hung, W.-C., Lo, K.-Y., Chen, Y.-H., Wan, H.-P., Cheng, K.-C. (2016) Bioethanol production from taro waste using thermo-tolerant yeast Kluyveromyces marxianus K21, Bioresour. Technol., 201, 27–32, DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2015.11.015
  20. Turbin-Orger, A., Babin, P., Boller, E., Chaunier, L., Chiron, H., Della Valle, G., Dendievel, R., Réguerre, A.L., Salvo, L. (2015) Growth and setting of gas bubbles in a viscoelastic matrix imaged by X-ray microtomography: the evolution of cellular structures in fermenting wheat flour dough, Soft Matter., 11(17), 3373–3384, DOI: 10.1039/C5SM00100E
  21. Dong, L., Wang, W., Xie, Q., Du, X., Wang, Y., Niu, X.-Z., Cao, G. (2025) Self-adaptable HAc/NaAc buffer system enhanced biohydrogen production from dark fermentation of cellulose, Bioresour. Technol., 416, 131738, DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2024.131738
  22. Jia, M., Zhu, Y., Wang, L., Sun, T., Pan, H., Li, H. (2022) pH Auto-Sustain-Based Fermentation Supports Efficient Gamma-Aminobutyric Acid Production by Lactobacillus brevis CD0817, Fermentation, 8(5), 208, DOI: 10.3390/fermentation8050208
  23. Easwaran, S., Subramanian, A.M., Aadimoolam, S., Surianarayanan, M. (2024) Metabolic heat response of Kluyveromyces marxianus during Carboxypeptidase Y Production; Effect of Agitation, Aeration and pH control, Process Biochemistry, 112, 71-79. DOI: 10.22541/au.170667299.96643066/v1
  24. Junker, B. (2007) Foam and Its Mitigation in Fermentation Systems, Biotechnol. Prog., 23(4), 767–784, DOI: 10.1021/bp070032r
  25. Damayanti, A., Bahlawan, Z.A.S., Kumoro, A.C. (2022) Modeling of bioethanol production through glucose fermentation using Saccharomyces cerevisiae immobilized on sodium alginate beads, Cogent Eng., 9(1), DOI: 10.1080/23311916.2022.2049438
  26. Novia, N., Hasanudin, H., Hermansyah, H., Fudholi, A., Pareek, V.K. (2023) Recent advances in CFD modeling of bioethanol production processes, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 183, 113522, DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2023.113522
  27. Nyah, F., Ridzuan, N., Epelle, E., Abd Aziz, M.A.B., Money, B., Abutu, D., Agi, A. (2025) Cellulose bionanomaterial design for enhanced oil recovery: A review of existing, emerging technologies and future outlook, Petroleum Research, DOI: 10.1016/j.ptlrs.2025.12.002
  28. Yerima, E.A., Maaji, S.P., Ogbodo, C.V., Abutu, D., Yakubu, S.A., Nwankwo, F.O., Adamu, J.A. (2026) Efficient and optimal adsorptive removal of urea from agricultural effluent using acidified ball clay: optimization via response surface methodology, African Scientific Reports, 367, DOI: 10.46481/asr.2026.5.1.367
  29. Wang, Y., Chan, K.-L., Abdel-Rahman, M. A., Sonomoto, K., Leu, S.-Y. (2020) Dynamic simulation of continuous mixed sugar fermentation with increasing cell retention time for lactic acid production using Enterococcus mundtii QU 25, Biotechnol. Biofuels, 13(1), 112, DOI: 10.1186/s13068-020-01752-6
  30. González-Gloria, K.D., Rodríguez-Jasso, R.M., Saxena, R., Sindhu, R., Ali, S.S., Singhania, R.R., Ruiz, H.A. (2022) Bubble column bioreactor design and evaluation for bioethanol production using simultaneous saccharification and fermentation strategy from hydrothermally pretreated lignocellulosic biomass, Biochem. Eng. J., 187, 108645, DOI: 10.1016/j.bej.2022.108645
  31. Taghizadeh, M.H., Khajeh, K., Nasirpour, N., Mousavi, S.M. (2024) Maximization of uricase production in a column bioreactor through response surface methodology-based optimization, Biofabrication, 16(3), 035023, DOI: 10.1088/1758-5090/ad467f
  32. Mast, Y., Ghaderi, A., Takors, R. (2025) Real Case Study of 600 m3 Bubble Column Fermentations: Spatially Resolved Simulations Unveil Optimization Potentials for l‐Phenylalanine Production With Escherichia coli, Biotechnol. Bioeng., 122(2), 265–286, DOI: 10.1002/bit.28869
  33. Almeida Benalcázar, E., Noorman, H., Maciel Filho, R., Posada, J.A. (2020) Modeling ethanol production through gas fermentation: a biothermodynamics and mass transfer-based hybrid model for microbial growth in a large-scale bubble column bioreactor, Biotechnol. Biofuels, 13(1), 59, DOI: 10.1186/s13068-020-01695-y
  34. Abutu, D., Nwaichi, P.I., Umunnawuike, C., Nyah, F., Money, B., Yussof, H.W., Agi, A. (2025) Numerical Simulation of Microbial Biohydrogen Production under High-Pressure, High-Temperature Conditions for Enhanced Recovery from Depleted Reservoirs, Petroleum Research, DOI: 10.1016/j.ptlrs.2025.07.006
  35. David, A., Aderemi, B., Ameh, A.O. (2025) Development and Construction of a Laboratory-Scale Bubble Column Bioreactor for Immobilized Enzyme Fermentation Studies, in The 3rd International Electronic Conference on Catalysis Sciences: Session Catalytic Materials, Narendra Kumar, Ed., Basel, Switzerland: MDPI, Apr. 2025
  36. Umunnawuike, C., Abutu, D., Nwaichi, P.I., Nyah, F., Agi, A. (2026) Optimizing thermophilic fermentation for hydrogen production in depleted oil reservoirs, J. Environ. Chem. Eng., 14(1), 121160, DOI: 10.1016/j.jece.2026.121160
  37. Umunnawuike, C., Abutu, D., Nwaichi, P.I., Nyah, F., Agi, A. (2026) Thermophilic biohydrogen production from reservoir residual hydrocarbons using palm oil mill effluent–derived microbial consortia, Science of The Total Environment, 1016, 181482, DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2026.181482
  38. Money, B., Mahat, S.Q.A.B., Ismail, N., Modather, R.H., David, A., Nyah, F., ... & Agi, A. (2025) Characterization of Kuala Rompin clay (KRC) and empty fruit bunch ash (EFBA) for potential application in the formulation of geopolymer cement, Discover Concrete and Cement, 1(1), 12, DOI: 10.1007/s44416-025-00012-w
  39. Abutu, D., Ameh, A.O., Umunnawuike, C., Barima, M., Nyah, F., Nwaichi, P.I., ... & Yerima, E.A. (2025) Reinforcing concrete with nano-enhanced bio-additives: a path toward sustainable construction materials, Discover Concrete and Cement, 1(1), 20, DOI: 10.1007/s44416-025-00022-8
  40. Abutu, D., Wan Yussof, H., Nyah, F., Ikechukwu Nwaichi, P., Umunnawuike, C., Agi, A. (2026) Modelling biohydrogen production from residual hydrocarbons by immobilized bacteria using COMSOL multiphysics, Biomass Bioenergy, 211, 109165, DOI: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2026.109165
  41. Li, X., Lu, Y., Luo, H., Liu, G., Torres, C.I., Zhang, R. (2021) Effect of pH on bacterial distributions within cathodic biofilm of the microbial fuel cell with maltodextrin as the substrate, Chemosphere, 265, 129088, DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.129088
  42. Alam, M.A., Yuan, T., Xiong, W., Zhang, B., Lv, Y., Xu, J. (2019) Process optimization for the production of high-concentration ethanol with Scenedesmus raciborskii biomass, Bioresour. Technol., 294, 122219, DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2019.122219
  43. Agbor, E.A., Tiku, P.B., Hermann, M.D. (2022) Effect of Microbial Inoculant on Physicochemical and Microbiological Properties of Cassava Fermentation Process and Fufu Produced, Asian Food Science Journal, 21(3), 1-9. DOI: 10.9734/afsj/2022/v21i330411
  44. Bonan, C.I., Biazi, L.E., Dionísio, S.R., Soares, L.B., Tramontina, R., Sousa, A.S., Ienczak, J.L. (2020) Redox potential as a key parameter for monitoring and optimization of xylose fermentation with yeast Spathaspora passalidarum under limited-oxygen conditions, Bioprocess Biosyst. Eng., 43(8), 1509–1519, DOI: 10.1007/s00449-020-02344-2
  45. Bonan, C.I.D.G., Tramontina, R., dos Santos, M.W., Biazi, L.E., Soares, L.B., Pereira, I.O., Hoffmam, Z.B., Coutouné, N., Squina, F.M., Robl, D., Ienczak, J.L. (2022) Biorefinery Platform for Spathaspora passalidarum NRRL Y-27907 in the Production of Ethanol, Xylitol, and Single Cell Protein from Sugarcane Bagasse. Bioenerg. Res. 15, 1169–1181. DOI: 10.1007/s12155-021-10255-7
  46. Shin, W.-S., (2013) Application of Scale-Up Criterion of Constant Oxygen Mass Transfer Coefficient (kLa) for Production of Itaconic Acid in a 50 L Pilot-Scale Fermentor by Fungal Cells of Aspergillus terreus, J. Microbiol. Biotechnol., 23(10), 1445–1453, DOI: 10.4014/jmb.1307.07084
  47. Esperança, M.N., Mendes, C.E., Rodriguez, G.Y., Cerri, M.O., Béttega, R., Badino, A.C. (2020) Sparger design as key parameter to define shear conditions in pneumatic bioreactors, Biochem. Eng. J., 157, 107529, DOI: 10.1016/j.bej.2020.107529
  48. Wei, C., Wu, B., Li, G., Chen, K., Jiang, M., Ouyang, P. (2014) Comparison of the hydrodynamics and mass transfer characteristics in internal-loop airlift bioreactors utilizing either a novel membrane-tube sparger or perforated plate sparger, Bioprocess Biosyst. Eng., 37(11), 2289–2304, DOI: 10.1007/s00449-014-1207-4
  49. Chaudhary, G., Luo, R., George, M., Tescione, L., Khetan, A., Lin, H. (2020) Understanding the effect of high gas entrance velocity on Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cell culture performance and its implications on bioreactor scale‐up and sparger design, Biotechnol. Bioeng., 117(6), 1684–1695, DOI: 10.1002/bit.27314
  50. Elmisaoui, S., Elmisaoui, S., Benjelloun, S., Khamar, L., Khamar, M. (2022) CFD Investigation of Industrial Gas-Liquid Preneutralizer Based on a Bioreactor Benchmark for Spargers Optimization, Chem. Eng. Trans., 93, 73–78, DOI: 10.3303/CET2293013
  51. Zu, L., Zhou, H., Yang, S., Li, X., Yang, C., Mao, Z.-S. (2015) Configuration Optimization and Mass Transfer in a Dual-Impeller Bioreactor, Journal of Chemical Engineering of Japan, 48(5), 360–366, DOI: 10.1252/jcej.14we018
  52. Pino, M.S., Rodríguez-Jasso, R.M., Michelin, M., Flores-Gallegos, A.C., Morales-Rodriguez, R., Teixeira, J.A., Ruiz, H.A. (2018). Bioreactor design for enzymatic hydrolysis of biomass under the biorefinery concept, Chemical Engineering Journal, 347, 119–136, DOI: 10.1016/j.cej.2018.04.057
  53. Sonego, J.L.S., Lemos, D.A., Pinto, C.E.M., Cruz, A.J.G., Badino, A.C. (2016) Extractive Fed-Batch Ethanol Fermentation with CO 2 Stripping in a Bubble Column Bioreactor: Experiment and Modeling, Energy & Fuels, 30(1), 748–757, DOI: 10.1021/acs.energyfuels.5b02320
  54. Roy, P., Dutta, A., Chang, S. (2016) Development and evaluation of a functional bioreactor for CO fermentation into ethanol, Bioresour. Bioprocess., 3(1), 4, DOI: 10.1186/s40643-016-0082-z
  55. Sonego, J.L.S., Lemos, D.A., Pinto, C.E.M., Cruz, A.J.G., Badino, A.C. (2016) Extractive Fed-Batch Ethanol Fermentation with CO 2 Stripping in a Bubble Column Bioreactor: Experiment and Modeling, Energy & Fuels, 30(1), 748–757, DOI: 10.1021/acs.energyfuels.5b02320
  56. de Medeiros, E.M., Posada, J.A., Noorman, H., Filhob, R.M. (2019) Modeling and Multi-Objective Optimization of Syngas Fermentation in a Bubble Column Reactor, In Computer Aided Chemical Engineering (Vol. 46, pp. 1531-1536). Elsevier. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-818634-3.50256-3
  57. Garcia-Ochoa, F., Gomez, E., Santos, V.E., Merchuk, J.C. (2010) Oxygen uptake rate in microbial processes: An overview, Biochem. Eng. J., 49(3), 289–307, DOI: 10.1016/j.bej.2010.01.011
  58. Laplace, J.M., Delgenes, J.P., Moletta, R., Navarro, J.M. (1991) Alcoholic fermentation of glucose and xylose by Pichia stipitis, Candida shehatae, Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Zymomonas mobilis: oxygen requirement as a key factor, Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol., 36(2), 158–162, DOI: 10.1007/BF00164412
  59. Zhang, Z., Xiong, F., Wang, Y., Dai, C., Xing, Z., Dabbour, M., Mintah, B., He, R., Ma, H. (2019) Fermentation of Saccharomyces cerevisiae in a one liter flask coupled with an external circulation ultrasonic irradiation slot: Influence of ultrasonic mode and frequency on the bacterial growth and metabolism yield, Ultrason. Sonochem., 54, 39–47, DOI: 10.1016/j.ultsonch.2019.02.017
  60. González-Gloria, K.D., Rodríguez-Jasso, R.M., Saxena, R., Sindhu, R., Ali, S.S., Singhania, R.R. (2022) Bubble column bioreactor design and evaluation for bioethanol production using simultaneous saccharification and fermentation strategy from hydrothermally pretreated lignocellulosic biomass, Biochem. Eng. J., 187, 108645, DOI: 10.1016/j.bej.2022.108645
  61. Sriputorn, B., Laopaiboon, P., Phukoetphim, N., Uppatcha, N., Phuphalai, W., Laopaiboon, L. (2021) Very high gravity ethanol fermentation from sweet sorghum stem juice using a stirred tank bioreactor coupled with a column bioreactor, J. Biotechnol., 332, 1–10, DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiotec.2021.03.012
  62. Abbaspour, N. (2024) Fermentation’s pivotal role in shaping the future of plant-based foods: An integrative review of fermentation processes and their impact on sensory and health benefits, Applied Food Research, 4(2), 100468, DOI: 10.1016/j.afres.2024.100468
  63. Joyia, M.A.K., Ahmad, M., Chen, Y.F., Mustaqeem, M., Ali, A., Abbas, A., Gondal, M.A. (2024) Trends and advances in sustainable bioethanol production technologies from first to fourth generation: A critical review, Energy Convers. Manag., 321, 119037, DOI: 10.1016/j.enconman.2024.119037
  64. Jain, S., Kumar, S. (2024) A comprehensive review of bioethanol production from diverse feedstocks: Current advancements and economic perspectives, Energy, 296, 131130, DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2024.131130
  65. Baeyens, J., Kang, Q., Appels, L., Dewil, R., Lv, Y., Tan, T. (2015) Challenges and opportunities in improving the production of bio-ethanol,” Prog. Energy Combust. Sci., 47, 60–88, DOI: 10.1016/j.pecs.2014.10.003
  66. Deshavath, N.N., Woodruff, W., Singh, V. (2024) Sustainable strategies to achieve industrial ethanol titers from different bioenergy feedstocks: scale-up approach for better ethanol yield, Sustain. Energy Fuels, 8(15), 3386–3398, DOI: 10.1039/D4SE00520A
  67. Song, G., Sun, C., Madadi, M., Dou, S., Yan, J., Huan, H., Ashori, A. (2024) Dual assistance of surfactants in glycerol organosolv pretreatment and enzymatic hydrolysis of lignocellulosic biomass for bioethanol production, Bioresour. Technol., 395, 130358, DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2024.130358
  68. Najim, A.A., Radeef, A.Y., al‐Doori, I., Jabbar, Z.H., (2024) Immobilization: the promising technique to protect and increase the efficiency of microorganisms to remove contaminants, Journal of Chemical Technology & Biotechnology, 99(8), 1707–1733, DOI: 10.1002/jctb.7638
  69. Liu, Y., Zhang, G., Li, Y., Wu, X., Shang, S., Che, W. (2024) Enhancing immobilized Chlorella vulgaris growth with novel buoyant barium alginate bubble beads, Bioresour. Technol., 406, 130996, DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2024.130996
  70. Qin, Y., Zhai, C., (2024) Global Stabilizing Control of a Continuous Ethanol Fermentation Process Starting from Batch Mode Production, Processes, 12(4), 819, DOI: 10.3390/pr12040819
  71. Akroum, H., Akroum-Amrouche, D., Aibeche, A. (2024) Modeling of conversion kinetics in bioenergy production technologies, Int. J. Green Energy, 21(15), 3415–3430, DOI: 10.1080/15435075.2024.2377355
  72. Manmai, N., Unpaprom, Y., Ponnusamy, V.K., Ramaraj, R. (2020) Bioethanol production from the comparison between optimization of sorghum stalk and sugarcane leaf for sugar production by chemical pretreatment and enzymatic degradation, Fuel, 278, 118262, DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2020.118262
  73. Abbaspour, N. (2024) Fermentation’s pivotal role in shaping the future of plant-based foods: An integrative review of fermentation processes and their impact on sensory and health benefits, Applied Food Research, 4(2), 100468, DOI: 10.1016/j.afres.2024.100468
  74. Duncan, J.D., Devillers, H., Camarasa, C., Setati, M.E., Divol, B. (2024) Oxygen alters redox cofactor dynamics and induces metabolic shifts in Saccharomyces cerevisiae during alcoholic fermentation, Food Microbiol., 124, 104624, DOI: 10.1016/j.fm.2024.104624
  75. Bisschops, M., Vos, T., Martinez-Moreno, R., de la Torre Cortes, P., Pronk, J., Daran-Lapujade, P. (2015) Oxygen availability strongly affects chronological lifespan and thermotolerance in batch cultures of Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Microbial Cell, 2(11), 429–444, DOI: 10.15698/mic2015.11.238
  76. Sulieman, A.K., Putra, M.D., Abasaeed, A.E., Gaily, M.H., Al-Zahrani, S.M., Zeinelabdeen, M.A. (2018) Kinetic modeling of the simultaneous production of ethanol and fructose by Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Electronic Journal of Biotechnology, 34, 1–8, DOI: 10.1016/j.ejbt.2018.04.006
  77. Zani, S.H.M., Asri, F.M., Azmi, N.S., Yussof, H.W., Zahari, M.A.K.M. (2019) Optimization of process parameters for bioethanol production from oil palm frond juice by Saccharomyces cerevisiae using response surface methodology as a tool, IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng., 702(1), 012003, DOI: 10.1088/1757-899X/702/1/012003
  78. Pereira, L.M.S., Milan, T.M., Tapia-Blácido, D.R. (2021) Using Response Surface Methodology (RSM) to optimize 2G bioethanol production: A review, Biomass Bioenergy, 151, 106166, DOI: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2021.106166
  79. Veza, I., Spraggon, M., Fattah, I.M.R., Idris, M. (2023) Response surface methodology (RSM) for optimizing engine performance and emissions fueled with biofuel: Review of RSM for sustainability energy transition, Results in Engineering, 18, 101213, DOI: 10.1016/j.rineng.2023.101213
  80. Chang, Y.-H., Chang, K.-S., Chen, C.-Y., Hsu, C.-L., Chang, T.-C., Jang, H.-D. (2018) Enhancement of the Efficiency of Bioethanol Production by Saccharomyces cerevisiae via Gradually Batch-Wise and Fed-Batch Increasing the Glucose Concentration, Fermentation, 4(2), 45, DOI: 10.3390/fermentation4020045
  81. Khongsay, N., Laopaiboon, L., Jaisil, P., Laopaiboon, P. (2012) Optimization of Agitation and Aeration for Very High Gravity Ethanol Fermentation from Sweet Sorghum Juice by Saccharomyces cerevisiae Using an Orthogonal Array Design, Energies (Basel)., 5(3), 561–576, DOI: 10.3390/en5030561
  82. Kumoro, A.C., Damayanti, A., Shiddieqy Bahlawan, Z.A., Melina, M., Puspawati, H. (2021) Bioethanol Production from Oil Palm Empty Fruit Bunches Using Saccharomyces cerevisiae Immobilized on Sodium Alginate Beads, Periodica Polytechnica Chemical Engineering, 65(4), 493–504, DOI: 10.3311/PPch.16775
  83. Kumoro, A.C., Damayanti, A., Shiddieqy Bahlawan, Z.A., Melina, M., Puspawati, H. (2021) Bioethanol Production from Oil Palm Empty Fruit Bunches Using Saccharomyces cerevisiae Immobilized on Sodium Alginate Beads, Periodica Polytechnica Chemical Engineering, 65(4), 493–504, DOI: 10.3311/PPch.16775
  84. Orrego, D., Zapata-Zapata, A.D., Kim, D. (2018). Ethanol production from coffee mucilage fermentation by S. cerevisiae immobilized in calcium-alginate beads, Bioresour. Technol. Rep., 3, 200–204, DOI: 10.1016/j.biteb.2018.08.006
  85. Duarte, J.C., Rodrigues, J.A.R., Moran, P.J.S., Valença, G.P., Nunhez, J.R. (2013) Effect of immobilized cells in calcium alginate beads in alcoholic fermentation, AMB Express, 3(1), 31, DOI: 10.1186/2191-0855-3-31
  86. Kumoro, A.C., Damayanti, A., Shiddieqy Bahlawan, Z.A., Melina, M., Puspawati, H. (2021) Bioethanol Production from Oil Palm Empty Fruit Bunches Using Saccharomyces cerevisiae Immobilized on Sodium Alginate Beads, Periodica Polytechnica Chemical Engineering, 65(4), 493–504, DOI: 10.3311/PPch.16775

Last update:

No citation recorded.

Last update:

No citation recorded.