Publication Details

Category Text Publication
Reference Category Journals
DOI 10.1007/s00253-010-2804-z
Document Shareable Link
Title (Primary) Biotechnological processes for biodiesel production using alternative oils
Author Azócar, L.; Ciudad, G.; Heipieper, H.J. ORCID logo ; Navia, R.
Source Titel Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology
Year 2010
Department UBT
Volume 88
Issue 3
Page From 621
Page To 636
Language englisch
Keywords Biodiesel; Waste lipids; Non-edible oils; Single cell oil; Lipase; Whole cell
Abstract As biodiesel (fatty acid methyl ester (FAME)) is mainly produced from edible vegetable oils, crop soils are used for its production, increasing deforestation and producing a fuel more expensive than diesel. The use of waste lipids such as waste frying oils, waste fats, and soapstock has been proposed as low-cost alternative feedstocks. Non-edible oils such as jatropha, pongamia, and rubber seed oil are also economically attractive. In addition, microalgae, bacteria, yeast, and fungi with 20% or higher lipid content are oleaginous microorganisms known as single cell oil and have been proposed as feedstocks for FAME production. Alternative feedstocks are characterized by their elevated acid value due to the high level of free fatty acid (FFA) content, causing undesirable saponification reactions when an alkaline catalyst is used in the transesterification reaction. The production of soap consumes the conventional catalyst, diminishing FAME production yield and simultaneously preventing the effective separation of the produced FAME from the glycerin phase. These problems could be solved using biological catalysts, such as lipases or whole-cell catalysts, avoiding soap production as the FFAs are esterified to FAME. In addition, by-product glycerol can be easily recovered, and the purification of FAME is simplified using biological catalysts.
Persistent UFZ Identifier
Azócar, L., Ciudad, G., Heipieper, H.J., Navia, R. (2010):
Biotechnological processes for biodiesel production using alternative oils
Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 88 (3), 621 - 636 10.1007/s00253-010-2804-z