% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Schonhoff:908709,
author = {Schonhoff, Andreas and Ihling, Nina and Schreiber, Andrea
and Zapp, Petra},
title = {{E}nvironmental impacts of biosurfactant production based
on substrates from the sugar industry},
journal = {ACS sustainable chemistry $\&$ engineering},
volume = {10},
number = {29},
issn = {2168-0485},
address = {Washington, DC},
publisher = {ACS Publ.},
reportid = {FZJ-2022-02778},
pages = {9345–9358},
year = {2022},
abstract = {Regarding the omnipresent topic of climate change,
establishing a bio-economy appears reasonable, but requires
critical analysis of its products. This project-specific
study (project Bio²) presents previously unknown
environmental impacts caused by the novel production of
biosurfactants (rhamnolipids (RL) and mannosylerythritol
lipids (MEL)) based on substrates from sugar industry
(molasses and sugar beet pulp) using Life Cycle Assessment
(LCA). Identifying critical impacts and processes (e.g.,
extraction agent production) reveals optimization potentials
for the considered forward-looking process designs. Based on
surfactants’ specific cleaning performance, environmental
impacts vary substantially for RL and MEL. Primary causes of
MEL productions’ lower environmental impacts are
advantageous microbial properties and process designs.
Substrate choice does not play an essential role. An
analysis of realistic yield changes and comparisons with
conventional surfactants sharpens the view on the
development position of the chosen surfactants. In
particular MEL shows environmental benefits compared to
today’s oleo-/petrochemical produced surfactants.
Identified optimization options (e.g., increased agent
recycling) and yield increases could strengthen especially
the advantages of MEL. Summarizing, the results show
advantages of MEL compared to RL to some degree, indicate
weak points of current processes and highlight favorable
options for future design of RL and MEL production,
regarding their environmental impact.},
cin = {IEK-STE},
ddc = {540},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)IEK-STE-20101013},
pnm = {1112 - Societally Feasible Transformation Pathways
(POF4-111) / BioSC - Bioeconomy Science Center (BioSC)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-1112 / G:(DE-Juel1)BioSC},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
UT = {WOS:000830345900001},
doi = {10.1021/acssuschemeng.2c01256},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/908709},
}