Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Title: Comparison of different pretreatments for birch bark: towards more efficient biorefinery.

Currently, the energy demand in Europe is constantly increasing, this leads to increasement of the energy insecurity in Europe. In order to fulfill the energy demands also in the future, some new technologies and innovations will need to take place. The use of biomass as a feedstock for energy and other valuable products has been a point of interest for several years now. Also, when considering the European Union’s targeted energy policies, among the national bioeconomy strategies, utilization of biomass seems promising. Pretreatment of biomass is targeting to decompose large molecules in biomass. By cleavage of bonds and fragmentation, the biomass is tried to separate to different fractions. In this study, three different pretreatment methods were studied in order to find the best alternative for bark residue. The formed fractions were identified by using Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) and nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR). The used methods are the following: 1st Steam explosion (SE), 2nd hydrothermal pretreatment (HT) and 3rd organosolv treatment (OS). As a process SE and HT are quite similar, the only difference is that in HT the water is in a liquid form instead of vapor. In OS, organic solvents are used to drive the reaction. The feedstock in this study was silver birch bark (petula pendula), which was obtained from Sweden. Each pretreatment resulted two fractions, solid and liquid. After the FTIR and NMR data were analyzed, it was noticed that in all pretreatments the total amount of phenolic compounds and extractives was lowered in solid residue. In turn, the concentration of mentioned compound groups in the liquid fraction was increased. The amount of lignin remained unchanged in SE and HT treatments. However, in OS treatment the increased share on lignin was detected in the liquid fraction. This was considered to be related to the nonpolar behavior of lignin, since organic solvents are nonpolar, they have an ability to dissolve nonpolar components.

Keywords: Pretreatment, Biomass, Bark, Silver Birch


  • No labels


  1. Dear Mikko,

    I find your subject and abstract very interesting. It is indeed a topical subject that is very well represented in your abstract. The keywords are well chosen and your abstract is very clear and well written. I really like the way you presented the methods used in this project. However, I would have some possible improvements:
    1) You talk about IRTF (and NMR, it would be interesting to explain the acronyms of the latter to understand what they correspond to.
    2) You can also mention the purpose of your research at the beginning of the abstract (comparison of different pre-treatment options to improve the efficiency of biorefinery , what is the purpose of your research ? ).
    3) It may be interesting to add some key number to support your result.

    I hope this helps with your developments
    Good job

  2. Hi Mikko,


    It's a very interesting topic and very relevant under the current global energy context, and listed below are my suggestions.


    You might want to synthesise some sentences in your abstract and avoid some oral phrases. For example, the first sentence (The current situation in Europe is that energy demand is constantly increasing, and fossil-based fuels are running out). Both the growing energy demand and the shortage of fossil fuels have caused energy insecurity in Europe. In this way, you can attract readers' interest.


    Since your abstract is not short, you may want to consider separating the text into different parts, following the order of background and objectives, research methods, results, and discussion. You might want to add your research objectives after the background part as right now it is missing in the text. 


    Hope it might help. 



    Kind regards,