Anonymous at Mon, 29 Jul 2024 01:44:23 UTC No. 16301255

>>16301242
So long as a substance has carbohydrates, it has sugar. So long as it has sugar, it has energy. You CAN ferment grass and turn it into ethanol, but I would strongly suggest not doing so. Additionally, you may have macronutrients, but you don't have micronutrients. The grass that is fed in would suck massive dick with little to no vitamins. Those would have to be added externally. In other words, grass sucks. If instead you used some sort of fruit byproduct, then your efficiency would skyrocket. If you somehow go through with your plan, be warned, it will be very inefficient, costly, and likely would not be profitable.

Anonymous at Mon, 29 Jul 2024 01:46:17 UTC No. 16301260

>>16301255
This

Anonymous at Mon, 29 Jul 2024 01:50:34 UTC No. 16301264

>>16301255
>I would strongly suggest not doing so.
Why

Anonymous at Mon, 29 Jul 2024 01:53:51 UTC No. 16301266

>>16301255
the goal wouldn't be to get ethanol, it would be to use readily available sources of cellulose (lignocellulose?) to produce glucose, proteins, and fat.
ruminants already do this, but the idea is to cut out the animal (since those are expensive and finicky) so that the only inputs would be water, cellulose, and possibly sunlight.
ideally i could create a civillian lab setup (<$300, not including cultures) that operates under mesophilic conditions as a proof-of-concept
ethanol could be used a byproduct of yeast fermentation to sterilize the equipment or for other uses (fuel, vinegar production)

Anonymous at Mon, 29 Jul 2024 01:55:57 UTC No. 16301269

>>16301266
> water, cellulose, and possibly sunlight.
i meant water, plant material (which should contain both cellulose and micronutrients necessary for fermentation), and possibly sunlight

Anonymous at Mon, 29 Jul 2024 02:05:54 UTC No. 16301281

>>16301242
Cellulose is probably one of the most difficult macromolecules to recycle, the only one more difficult that is common in plants is probably lignin. The beta-1-4 linkage between glucose is surprisingly strong. When plants want to store energy, they tend to make starches, which use the relatively weaker alpha-1-4 linkage.

I would not be surprised if the easiest way to make something edible from cellulose would be to pyrolyze it to carbon monoxide, and use that to make vinegar. If you want glucose, you could pyrolyze to levoglucosan, and hydrolyze that to glucose.

Ordinary grass grows quite slowly, it would be better to use something that grows faster, like switchgrass.

Anonymous at Mon, 29 Jul 2024 02:18:17 UTC No. 16301293

>>16301266
here's a rough setup.
of course, i have no experience in a lab so don't assume i know what i'm talkiing about, lol
>>16301281
>Cellulose is probably one of the most difficult macromolecules to recycle, the only one more difficult that is common in plants is probably lignin.
it's not exactly a speedy process, but it's theoretically feasible
https://www.mdpi.com/2079-7737/13/2/102
>Ordinary grass grows quite slowly, it would be better to use something that grows faster, like switchgrass.
really, i was thinking of just using any cellulose-containing material as long as it was readily available. but you'd probably have to vet the specific plants used as source for soil contamination, phytotoxins, alkaloids, other compounds which could foul up fermentation or facilitate toxic byproducts, etc.
a few of the studies i skimmed on microbial saccharification use wheat grass or oat for this process

Anonymous at Mon, 29 Jul 2024 02:36:13 UTC No. 16301306

>>16301293
What is the range for which the cellulose decomposition will happen at a practical rate? In the paper you linked, I found one part where they said

>The cellulase activity of the isolates ranged from 0.80 U mL−1 to 2.48 U mL−1.

Is this sufficient? This is the only direct number I could find, I didn't look at their citations.