PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 3, 2026Polymers2 citationsOpen Access

Benchmarking Chemical Hydrolysis and Bacterial Biosynthesis Pathways for Nanocellulose: A Sustainability-Focused Comparative Framework

LMLuis C. Murillo-ArayaUniversidad de Costa RicaMLMary LoprettiUniversidad de la República de UruguayDMDiego Batista MenesesNational Nanotechnology Center

Key Points

  • Bacterial nanocellulose scored 66 on a sustainability framework, significantly higher than hydrolyzed nanocellulose at 51.
  • Hydrolyzed nanocellulose shows a yield of 3.15% on dry biomass, while bacterial nanocellulose yields 1.065 g/L in culture volume.
  • Analysis employs a multicriteria evaluation framework highlighting lower water demand and purification stages for bacterial nanocellulose.
  • Study results present a laboratory-scale template for future life cycle assessment and techno-economic analysis of nanocellulose production.

Abstract

This study benchmarks two nanocellulose (NC) production architectures: sulfuric-acid hydrolysis of pineapple peel biomass to obtain hydrolyzed nanocellulose (HNC) and microbial biosynthesis of bacterial nanocellulose (BNC) by Rhizobium leguminosarum biovar trifolii in defined media. HNC and BNC were characterized by SEM, FTIR, AFM, and ζ-potential, and the routes were compared using a sustainability-focused multicriteria framework. The Visual Integration of Multicriteria Evaluation (VIME) (radar chart + weighted decision matrix) yielded a higher overall score for BNC (66) than HNC (51), driven primarily by lower downstream washing/neutralization water demand (~0.3 L vs. ~14 L per batch), fewer purification stages (~2 vs. ~5), and lower waste hazard. In contrast, HNC performed better in calendar time (~7 vs. ~18 days). AFM revealed route-dependent morphologies: BNC formed a homogeneous nanofiber network (37 ± 9 nm), while HNC formed heterogeneous lamellar fragments (70 ± 12 nm). Route-specific yields were 3.15% (w/w, dry biomass basis) for HNC and 1.065 g/L (culture-volume basis) for BNC. Although a full ISO-compliant Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and Techno-Economic Analysis (TEA) are beyond the scope of this laboratory-scale study, the defined system boundaries and reported process inventories provide an LCA/TEA-ready template for future mass- and cost-balanced comparisons.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Murillo-Araya et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69a75c58c6e9836116a25270https://doi.org/10.3390/polym18030342
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Nanocellulose2017 · 127 citations
  2. 2Symbiotic efficiency of Rhizobium leguminosarum sv. trifolii strains originating from the subpolar and temperate climate regions2024 · 18 citations
  3. 3Properties of nanocellulose isolated from corncob residue using sulfuric acid, formic acid, oxidative and mechanical methods2016 · 382 citations
  4. 4Cellulose and its derivatives: towards biomedical applications2021 · 1,153 citations
  5. 5Bioconversion of lignocellulosic biomass into bacterial nanocellulose: challenges and perspectives2022 · 51 citations