# Summative Mass Closure

Laboratory Analytical Procedure (LAP) Review and Integration

Issue Date: April 2010

Revision Date: July 2011 (Version 07- 08 -2011)

J. Sluiter and A. Sluiter **Technical Report** 

NREL/ TP

- 510

- 48087

Revised July 2011

### Technical Report 

# Summative Mass Closure

NREL/ TP

- 510

- 48087
Revised July 2011 

## Laboratory Analytical Procedure (LAP) Review and Integration

Issue Date: April 2010

Revision Date: July 2011 (Version 07- 08 -2011)

J. Sluiter and A. Sluiter

Prepared under Task No. BB072230

NREL Laboratory Analytical Procedures for standard biomass analysis are available electronically at http://www.nrel.gov/biomass/analytical_procedures.html

National Renewable Energy Laboratory
1617 Cole Boulevard, Golden, Colorado 80401

- 3393
303

- 275

- 3000 **•** www.nrel.gov

NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC

Contract No. DE

- AC36

- 08

- GO 28308DISCLAIMER

These Standard Biomass Analytical Methods (“Methods”) are provided by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (“NREL”), which is operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC (“ASE”) for the Department Of Energy.

Access to and use of these Methods shall impose the following obligations on the user. The user is granted the right, without any fee or cost, to use, copy, modify, alter, enhance and distribute these Methods for any purpose whatsoever, except commercial sales, provided that this entire notice appears in all copies of the Methods. Further, the user agrees to credit NREL/ASE in any publications that result from the use of these Methods. The names NREL/ASE, however, may not be used in any advertising or publicity to endorse or promote any products or commercial entity unless specific written permission is obtained from NREL/ASE. The user also understands that NREL/ASE is not obligated to provide the user with any support, consulting, training or assistance of any kind with regard to the use of these Methods or to provide the user with any updates, revisions or new versions.

THESE METHODS ARE PROVIDED BY NREL/ASE "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL NREL/MRI BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, INDIRECT OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO CLAIMS ASSOCIATED WITH THE LOSS OF DATA OR PROFITS, WHICH MAY RESULT FROM AN ACTION IN CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS CLAIM THAT ARISES OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE ACCESS, USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THESE METHODS.

### Summative Mass Closure – LAP Review and Integration:
Feedstocks

NREL has developed a suite of Laboratory Analy tical Procedures (LAPs) for the analysis of biomass. Many of these methods build on years of research in the biomass analytical field. Choosing the appropriate combinations of LA Ps allows for the summative mass closure of biomass feedstocks and process intermediates. By combining the appropriate LAPs, the goal is to break the biomass sample down into constituents that sum to 100% by weight. Some of these constituents are individual components, such as individual carbohydrates, and some are groups of compounds, such as extractable material. Ho wever, the goal of these analyses is to characterize all of the material in the sample. It is imperative to follow the LAPs as they are written, as small deviations can have a large detrimental impact on the constituent values. This
document covers the summative mass closur e for biomass feedstocks only.

There are many subtle differences in the analytical suites for differing feedstocks. This LAP is designed to help in the decision making process. It will assist in the selection of appropriate LAPs and help organize the flow from one LAP to the next in the analysis sequence. It is not meant to replace the specific LAPs in any way, but to aid in the development of a comprehensive analysis specific to the feedstock. The LAPs have been optimized for corn stover and generally work well on woody feedstocks and herbaceous materials such as switchgrass, sorghum, and miscanthus, although minor adjustments may be necessary. Unusual feedstocks will typically require some method development to capture constituents not included in the LAP suite.

There are several important points within the compositional analysis suite where decisions must be made to optimize the analysis. Some of these decisions are based on the type of biomass present, and some decisions must be made to obtain complete summative mass closure of all
constituents. Discussions to aid these decisions are included with LAP discussions below. Following the LAP discussions is a flowchart of analyses and a walkthrough of the flowchart using an example feedstock, including some troubleshooting.

Preparation of Samples fo r Compositional Analysis Biomass samples typically arrive from the field in an intact or semi-intact state that includes soil or other debris and significant moisture content. Proper sample preparation will minimize interferences in subsequent compositional analys es. Sample drying, par ticle size reduction, and potential sieving are discussed in this LAP.

The first consideration for sample preparation is drying. If a sample contains greater than 10% moisture by weight, it must be dried to ensure compatibility with subsequent analyses. LAP “Preparation of Samples for Compositional Analysis” describes the appropriate drying procedures for the compositional analysis suite. Th ree options are presented within the LAP. One option is air-drying, most suitable for low ambien t humidity. When ambient humidity is too high to permit this technique, samples must be monitored for degradation and microbial growth until
the moisture content is less than 10% by weight. Convection oven drying at 45 o C, most suitable for samples likely to be unstable at ambient conditions or where ambient humidity does not allow for air-drying, is covered as well. Oven drying at 105 o C should be used with care, as many biomass types chemically change when exposed to prolonged heat. The last technique covered is

1lyophilization drying, or freeze drying, which is suitable for samples that are at risk for degradation at elevated temperature, and therefore are not suitable for convection oven drying or air-drying. Lyophilization is an unsuitable technique for large or bulk samples and those with large pieces of biomass.

Samples must be milled prior to compositional analysis if particle size is greater than 2 mm. Since the subsequent methods are optimized for a 2-mm or less particle size, milling the sample will likely be necessary. Prior to milling, the sample must meet moisture requirements discussed above. Milling wet samples can result in the degradation of the sample during milling. The mill must be monitored to ensure that it is operating at optimal temperature. An overheated mill can cause extractable material to separate from th e biomass and deposit on the heated metal portions of the mill. Milling with dry ice is not recommended, as the oils in dry ice leave a residue on the
biomass.

Sieving of a sample is sometimes necessary to accurately analyze a biomass feedstock but may interfere with representative sampling. The acid hydrolysis steps have been optimized for a -20/+80 particle size, and deviation to a larger particle size distribution will cause structural carbohydrates to be incompletely dissolved into solution. Such deviation will result in higher acid insoluble lignin values and lower overall st ructural carbohydrates, especially cellulose. Deviation from the recommended particle size to a smaller particle size may result in over hydrolysis of the structural carbohydrates, contributing to an overproduction of sugar degradation products, which can complicate the acid soluble lignin measurement.

Sieving was originally developed for the analysis of very homogeneous materials, such as wood samples. However, in herbaceous feedstocks, fi nes (-80 mesh) often cont ain a disproportionately large percentage of inorganic materials as comp ared to the bulk sample. Removal of the fines will cause an overall change in composition. In such cases sieving is not recommended, to ensure the integrity of the sample. Alternately, sieving may be performed, but the constituent values of the fines should be mathematically added back into the whole value before reporting; this calculation is not discussed. Sieving can be perfo rmed to remove a portion of the higher ash content fraction. This is only the case when the ash content of the extracted biomass is high enough to interfere with hydrolysis. Further disc ussion of ash interference is included with the hydrolysis discussions.

Determination of Total Solids in Biomass Due to the high variability of moisture content in biomass feedstocks, all biomass compositional analysis results are reported on dry weight basis. This allows for comparison of biomass samples
on a consistent baseline. At se veral points in the compositional analysis suite, a %Total Solids determination is required. The LAP “Determination of Total Solids in Biomass and Total Dissolved Solids in Liquid Process Samples” details appropriate pr ocedures for such
determinations. The LA P describes drying by convection oven at 105 o C and drying by infrared
moisture balance.

This determination should be done at the same time as the corresponding procedure that calls for a %Total Solids determination, as the moisture co ntent of a biomass sample can change quickly. The values obtained during this analysis are used to mathematically correct the sample back to a dry weight basis. The sample aliquot used fo r %Total Solids analysis has been exposed to

2elevated temperatures and shoul d not be used in further analyses, with the exception of determining ash content on an extremely limited sample quantity.

Calculation of %Total Solids is shown below.

݁ െ ܹ ௗ௥௬ ௣௔௡ ௣௟௨௦ ௗ௥௬ ௦௢௟௜ௗ௦ ݐ ݄݃ ሺܹ݁݅

ൌ ݏ݀ ݅ܵ݋݈݈ݐ݋ܽ%ܶ

௩௘ௗ ௜ ௦௔௠௣௟௘ ௔௦ ௥௘௖௘ ܹ݄݁݅݃ݐ ሻ ௗ௥௬ ௣௔௡ ݐ ݄݃݅ ൈ 100

Calculation of the dry weight of a sample or its Oven Dried We ight (ODW) is described in the following formula.

௔௜௥ ௗ௥ ݐ ݄ ሺܹ݁݅݃

ൌ ௦௔௠௣௟௘ ܹܱܦ ܽ ݐ ݋ܶ ൈ % ௘ௗ ௦௔௠௣௟௘ ௜
100 ሻ ݈ܵ݋݈݀݅ݏ

Determination of Ash in Biomass Inorganic materials are present in both whole and structural, or extracte d, biomass samples. In addition to contributing significantly to total mass closure, inorganic material may interfere with acid hydrolysis. LAP “Determination of Ash in Biomass” describes two methods for the
determination of %Ash in bioma ss. The LAP provides instructions for ash determination in a
muffle furnace set to 575 o C with prior preignition and descri bes the use of a ramping muffle furnace with no preignition. The calculation for determining %Ash is below.

ሻ ௥௖௨௖௜௕௟௘ ݐ ݄݃݅݁ െ ܹ ௥௖௨௖௜௕௟௘ ௣௟௨௦ ௔௦௛ ݐ ݄݃ ሺܹ݁݅

ൌ %ݏܣ݄

௦௔௠௣௟௘ ܹܱܦ ൈ 100

Determination of Protein in Biomass Herbaceous feedstocks can contain a significan t amount of protein in the stalks and leaves, which will interfere with lignin measurements in subsequent analyses. Quantification of the protein will allow this interference to be mathematically minimized. Measurement of protein in biomass is performed indirectly by measuremen t of nitrogen content and use of a nitrogen-to

protein conversion multiplier. The typically used nitrogen-to-protein conversion value of 6.25 is not generally applicable to biomass proteins. In stead, calculation of the conversion factor is done by measurement of individual amino acids in the feedstock of interest.

Because a portion of the protein is often removed during the extraction process, protein analysis is performed on both whole and extractives-free materials.

Determination of Extractives in Biomass Nonstructural materials in biomass often contribute significantly to the mass closure and will
interfere with the characterization of car bohydrates and lignin. LAP “Determination of
Extractives in Biomass” describes extraction pr ocesses to both remove and quantify the extractable portion of a biomass feedstock us ing successive ethanol and water extractions.

3Extraction with ethanol is required for all biomass types to ensure the removal of waxy materials that co-precipitate during filtration of the acid hydrolysate. When analyzing woody feedstocks, ethanol extraction alone is generally sufficient to remove interfering extractable material, including sap and resins. Herbaceous feedstocks require a water extraction prior to the ethanol extraction to allow for additional quantifi cation of components more commonly found in
herbaceous feedstocks. Nonstructural water soluble components comm only include inorganic material in the form of soil or fertilizers, proteins that are easily washed from the biomass, and a diverse array of carbohydrates, especially sucrose. Sucrose, a dimer of glucose and fructose, is of particular interest to fermentation and can be abundant in an herbaceous plant, but it is easily lost during the hydrolysis stages. Early removal and analysis of sucrose allows for better quantification of the structural glucose present in a feedstock as well. The LAP describes the sampling of the water extractable material to determine sucrose concentration.

Once a sample has been extracted, subsequent an alytical values must be corrected for that removal to bring all values to a whole bioma ss basis. That calculation is included in the
calculation list below.

Note that herbaceous feedstocks are typically higher in inorganic materials (commonly soil or fertilizer) and protein than woody feedstocks are. The water extraction process will remove some of these materials; therefore ash and protein measurements are recommended both before and
after extraction.

The formula below should be used in calcula ting %Extractives content for both water and
ethanol extractives.

௔௟௙௦௞ ݐ ݄݃݅݁ െ ܹ ௔௟௙௦௞ ௣௟௨௦ ௘௫௧௥௔௖௧௜௩௘௦ ܹ݄݁݅݃ݐ

ൌ %ݎݐݔܧܽܿݐ݅ݒ݁ݏ

௦௔௠௣௟௘ ܹܱܦ ൈ 100

The formula below is used when a portion of th e extractives are removed for sucrose analysis.

ݐݔܧ%ݎܽݐ݅ܿ ௣ ௞௦ ௙௟௔ ܹ݁݅ ݃ݐ݄

ൌ ݏ݁ ݒ ܹ݁

െ ௦௘௩

௣௠௔௦ ௘௟ ܹܦܱ ௔௟௙௦௞ ݐ ݄݃݅
ൈ ௔௧௢௧ ௟ ݉݁ݑ݈݋ܸ

௡௨௦ ௦௔௠௣௟௘ ௥௘௠௢௩௘ௗ ௜ ௨௧௜௢௡ ௠௟௦௢ ܸ݋݈ݑ݉݁ ௟௨௦ ௘௫௧௥௔௖௧௜ ௦௢௟௨௧௜௢௡ ൈ 100

The calculation to correct from an extractives free basis to a whole biomass basis for any component measured on the extract ed biomass is the following:

௕ ௘௟௢௛௪ ݐ ݋ܥ݌݉݋݊݁݊ ݁ݏ ݒ ݔܧݎݐ݅ܿܽݐ % െ 100
ൈ ௘ ௫௧௥௔௖௧௜௩௘௦ ௙௥௘௘ ݊ݐ݊݁݌݋݉݋ ܥ ൌ ௢௠௔௦௦ ௜ 100

௧௢௧௔௟ ௦௢௟௨௧௜௢௡ ݁݉ ݑ ݈݋ ܸ ൈ 1.9 ൈ ௟௚ ௨௖௢௦௘ ݊݋ܽݐ݅ݎݐ݊ ݋ܥ݊ܿ݁ ൅ ௡௢௜௨௧௢௟௦௔௟ ௧௢௧ ݁݉ ݑ ݈ ݋ ܸ ൈ ௘ ௦௖௥௢௦௨ ݊ܿ݁݋ܥ ݊ݎݐ݅ݐܽ݋݊

ൌ ݁ݏ݋ݎܿݑ%ܵ

௘௟௣௠௔௦ ܹܦܱ ௘௟௣௠௔௦ ܹܦܱ ൈ 100

4Determination of Structural Car bohydrates and Lignin in Biomass Structural carbohydrates and lignin make up the bulk of most feed stocks and often represent the most interesting portions. LAP “Determination of Structural Carbohydrates and Lignin in Biomass” describes the acid hydrolysis and subsequent analyses of acid soluble and acid insoluble portions. It describes the preparation and two-stage sulfuric acid hydrolysis of the sample and includes the use of sugar recovery standards, which are used to correct for loss of carbohydrates during hydrolysis. The LAP also describes carbohydrate analysis, including preparation of standards, hydrolysate neutra lization, HPLC method setup, and acetyl analysis.

The determination of carbohydrates using this method requires that all carbohydrates be in monomeric form. The presence of polymers i ndicates incomplete hydrolysis, and those carbohydrates will not be captured. During hydrol ysis, the conversion of polymers to monomers in the carbohydrates results in the addition of a hydrogen and a hydroxyl group to each monomer. An anhydro correction is used to math ematically convert the monomeric values back to a structural polymeric value.

Sugar recovery standards (SRSs) are used to account for sample sugar degradation during the dilute sulfuric acid step. SRSs are used to mimic the behavior and degradation of sample
monomers. Since these values can fluctuate depending on a variety of factors, SRSs are included with every sample analysis. They are independent from the sample but are run in parallel. Because carbohydrate concentration will affect degradation levels, it is imperative to mimic the sample carbohydrate concentrations as closely as possible in the SRSs. Since this correction is critical, duplicate or triplicate SRSs are recommended.

The LAP details the steps necessary to determine acid insoluble residue, including filtration of the hydrolysate and ash determination of the resi due. Acid insoluble residue, once corrected for ash and protein content if necessary, is consider ed high molecular weight lignin. This definition of lignin is considered a behavior-based lig nin definition, as opposed to a chemical based definition, which would include further characteri zation of the material. Acid insoluble residue must be corrected for ash, as a significant portion of the ash in the whole biomass is acid insoluble. Some herbaceous feedstocks may need to have the acid insoluble residue corrected for protein as well, as a significant portion of the protein from the feedstock can condense into that fraction. The specific amount of protein that will co-condense can vary between feedstocks.
Individual feedstocks need to be evaluated fo r protein condensation into the acid insoluble
residue. This evaluation is not included in the method.

Acid soluble lignin is low molecular weight lignin that is solubilized in the acidic hydrolysis solution. Inclusion of acid soluble lignin concentr ation in the total lignin value is necessary, as acid soluble lignin can represent an important portion of the lignin. The LAP describes the measurement of acid soluble lignin but does not de tail the determination of the proper extinction
coefficient for feedstocks. A short list of common ex tinction coefficients is included in the LAP.

This LAP contains several notable interferences, such as high moisture or ash content in the sample. High moisture content, above 10% by weight, dilutes the acid concentration beyond the specifications of the LAP, possibly resulting in incomplete hydrolysis. Similarly, ash content above 10% by weight may buffer the acid, causin g an effective reduction in acid concentration.

5However, not all inorganic material in biomass has this buffering effect. The buffering effect of excessive inorganic material should be determined prior to analysis if this problem is suspected.

Unextracted biomass feedstock will interfere with this met hod. Extractives can deposit on the filter during separation of the acid soluble and acid insoluble fractions, resulting in excessive filtration time and potentia l concentration of the liquid frac tion. Extractives can also partition irreproducibly between the acid soluble and aci d insoluble fractions, compromising the lignin
values.

The calculations for %Acid insoluble lignin (%AIL) and %Acid soluble lignin (%ASL) are included below along with necessary carbohydrate calculations.

௣௥௢௧௘ ݐ ݄݃݅݁ ܹ ൯ െ ௥௖ ௨௖௜௕௟௘ ݐ ݄݃݅݁ െ ܹ ௥௖௨௖௜௕௟௘ ௣௟௨௦ ௔௦௛ ݐ ݄ܹ݃݅݁ ൯െ൫ ௥௖௨௖௜௕௟௘ ݐ ݄݃݅݁ െ ܹ ௥௖ ௨௖௜௕௟௘ ௣௟௨௦ ஺ூோ ݄݃ݐ݅ ݁ ൫ܹ

ൌ ܮ%ܫܣ

௦௔௠௣௟௘ ܱܦܹ ௜௡ ൈ 100

Where Weight protein = amount of protein present in the acid insoluble residue, as determined in
LAP “Determination of Protein Content in Biom ass.” This measurement is only necessary for biomass containing high amounts of protein.

௣௠௔௦ ܱ ܦܹ ൈ ߝ ݋݊݅ ݐ ܦ ݑ݈݅ ൈ ௢௥ ௨ ௟௜௤௦௜௬௦௥௢௟௬ௗ௛ ݉݁ݑ݈݋ܸ ൈ ݏܷܸܾܽ

ൌ ܮܵܣ% ݄ ݐ ݈݄݃݊݁ ݐ ܽ ൈ ܲ ௘ ሺ௠௚ሻ௟ ൈ 100

Where:

UVabs = average UV-Vis absorbance for the sample at the appropriate wavelength

Volume hydrolysis liquor = volume of filtrate, 87mL

ௗ௜௟௨௧௜௡௚ ௦௢௟௩௘௡௧ ݁݉ ݑ ݈݋ ൅ ܸ ௦௔௠௣௟௘ ݈݉݁ݑ ܸ݋ Dilution ൌ

௦௔௠௣௟௘ ݈݉݁ݑ ܸ݋

ߝ ൌ Absorptivity of biomass at specific wavelength ሺ see table below ሻ

.

Table 1. Absorptivity Constants for Acid Soluble Lignin Measurement for Select Biomass Types

Biomass type Lambda max (nm) Absorptivity at lambda max (L/g cm) Recommended wavelength (nm) Absorptivity at
recommended wavelength (L/g cm)
Pinus radiate 198 25 240 12 Sugarcane bagasse 198 40 240 25

Corn stover 197 55 320 30 Populus deltoids 197 60 240 25

6Calculate the total amount of lignin on an extractive free basis as below:

ܮܵܣ ൅ % ܣܫܮ ൌ % ௘௫௧௥௔௖௧௜௩௘௦ ௙௥௘௘ %ܮ݅݃݊݅݊

For the determination of carbohydrates, first co rrect the sugar concentrations for degradation during hydrolysis:

ܮ݉ / ݉ ݃ , ݕܾ ܥܮܲܪ ݏ݅ݏݕ݈݋ݎ݀ݕ ݎ݁ݐ݂ܽ ݄ ݋ ݂ݎ݃ܽݑݏ

. ݊ܿ݋ܿ

ൌ ௦௨௚௔௥ %ܴ ൈ 100 ݉݃ ܮ/݉

, ݕܾ ܥܮܲܪ ݏ݅ݏ݈݋ݎ݀ݕ ݁ݎ݋ܾ݂݁ ݄ ݋ ݂ݎ݃ܽݑݏ

. ݊ܿ݋ܿ

݋݊݅ݐ݂ܽܿ ݋ݎ ݐ ݀ݑ݈݅ ൈ ௉௅஼ ு ݋ܥ ܿ݊

ൌ ௚௔௥ ௦௨ ݋ܥܿ݊ /100 ௥௔௚௦௨ %ܴ

Where:

Conc HPLC = concentration of an individual sugar as determined by HPLC after hydrolysis, mg/mL.

%R ave.sugar = average recovery of a specific SRS component (%R sugar )

Conc sugar = Conc corr.sample , concentration in mg/mL of a sugar in the hydrolysate sample after correction for loss on 4% hydrolysis.

Next, calculate the concentration of the polymeric sugars from the concentration of the corresponding monomeric sugars, using an an hydro correction of 0.88 (or 132/150) for C-5 sugars (xylose and arabinose) and a correcti on of 0.90 (or162/180) for C-6 sugars (glucose, galactose, and mannose).

݊݋݅ݐ݁ܿݎݎ݋ܿ ܣ ݋ݎ݀ݕ݄݊ ൈ ஼௢௥௥ ݋ܿ݊ ܥ ൌ ௥௢ ௬ௗ ௔௡௛ ݋ܥ ܿ݊

ൈ 100 1݃

݃݉ 1000 ݋ ൈ ܸ ௛௡௔ ௬ௗ௥௢ ܿ݊݋ܥ ൈ ௟௜௙௧௥௔௧௘ ݈

௘௟௣௠௔௦ ܦܹܱ ൌ ௙௥௘௘ ௫௧௘ ݎ݃ܽݑ%ܵ

ൈ 0.983 ௟௜௙ ௧௥௔௧௘ ݈݋ ൈ ܸ ௗ,ு௉௅஼

௘௟௣௠௔௦

ܦܱ ܹ ௜௖௔ ௖௜ ௧ ௔௖௘ ݋ܥ ܿ݊

ൌ ௙௥௘௘ ௫௧௘ ݈ݕݐܿ݁ܣ%

Determination of Starch in Biomass Starch, a non-crystalline glucose polymer, is of ten found in biomass feedstock that contains grain. LAP “Determination of Starch in Biomass” is a procedure that is based heavily on the

7ௌ௢௟௨௧௜௢௡ ܹ ݉݁ ܦܱ ݋ܸ ݑ݈ ൈ ௉௅஼ ு ݈ܩ ݁ݏ݋ܿݑܥ ݋݊ܿ

ൌ %ܵݐܽݎ݄ܿ

௦௧௔௥௖௛ ௦௧௔௡ௗ௔௥ௗ ݕݎ݁ ݒ ݋ܴ݁ܿ 1.11 ൈ % Megazyme Total Starch Assay (amyloglucosidase/ α -amylase method). The major difference in the NREL adaptation is the analysis for quantification of glucose. The LAP changes from a
derivatization for colorimetric detection to HPLC glucose analysis. Because the quantification of glucose is nonspecific to starch, extraction of the biomass is recommended prior to the starch assay to remove any nonstructural free glucose. Failure to remove free glucose will artificially elevate the starch content of the biomass sample . If this procedure is performed in conjunction with carbohydrate (cellulose a nd hemicelluloses) dete rmination, the contribution of glucose from starch will be included in the total glucose value.

ൈ 100

Example of Flowchart Use and Decisions The flow chart of analysis (Figure 1) provide s an example of a complete biomass feedstock analysis. The paragraphs below will step through an analysis of a whole feedstock sample, detailing the decisions necessary at each step.

For the purposes of demonstrating the flow ch art and decision making steps, a hypothetical
herbaceous feedstock will be used as an example. This feedstock is a potential energy crop that is harvested off of the ground. The plant is known to produce grain late in life, but this particular sample should not contain grain, according to the sample source. Before being shipped for analysis the sample was dried and milled through a 2-mm screen and sealed in a plastic bag.

As this sample has already been milled to an a ppropriate particle size distribution, the first decision to be considered for this sample is whether sieving is necessary. Initial ash
measurements indicate an ash c ontent of 12%, which is greater than the recommended 10%, and may interfere with the acid hydrolysis steps. Sieving could be tested to determine if some of the ash could be partitioned into the fines (-80 mesh), but as the plant was harvested off of the ground, the high ash content is likely soil and can be reduced by water extraction. Since the sample is herbaceous, water extraction is already part of the analysis suite.

Extraction is the next major consideration for th e sample. As discussed above, all herbaceous materials are extracted with water as well as with ethanol. Prior to extraction with water, samples must have protein and total solids measurements performed, in addition to the ash measurement, which has already been done. Water extraction is required to quantify sucrose levels for herbaceous materials, but it also proves to be efficient at reducing the ash content to 5%. If it had not, sieving would need to be reconsidered to reduce the ash content to less than 10% before hydrolysis. Ethanol extraction follows the water extraction to ensure no complications regarding acid insoluble lignin measurements. The sample is now extractives-free and ready for hydrolysis.

Prior to hydrolysis the sample must again ha ve total solids, protein, and ash measurements performed. Total solids will be used to convert values to a dry weight basis. Protein and ash
measurements are used to determine the am ount of these constituents removed during the extraction process.

8Hydrolysis is run as described in the LAP, but the sample seems to have difficulty filtering while removing the acid insoluble lignin. Carbohydrate analysis, acetyl analysis, and acid soluble lignin measurement proceed as expected.

Once the data is compiled, the glucan measurem ent seems disproportionately high and the mass closure is significantly below 100%, while the othe r constituent values are what can be expected in similar feedstocks. Additionally, the acid soluble lignin results seem to have higher than expected errors. These problems may stem from one issue or a combination of problems. Two potential areas of interference will be examined.

If the plant did contain grain that was not detected in the field, th e sample may have starch that was not accounted for. Since starch is measured as glucan in the analysis, starch content would explain the high glucan values, but not the low mass closure.

The unusually slow filtration of the acid insoluble lignin and the high acid insoluble lignin errors are commonly related. It is likely that there is something in the hydrolysate solution that the LAPs have not been optimized for, and an additional step is needed. In this case, further solvent extractions would be a good consider ation to remove add itional fractions of extractable material.

Closing
The LAPs described above cover the summative ma ss closure for biomass feedstocks only, and some are not appropriate for chemically or thermally altered materials. The goal is to break the biomass sample down into constituents that sum to 100% by weight. If the constituents do not sum to 100%, the LAP flow chart should be revisited to determine missing or incorrectly quantified components. There are ma ny subtleties in the analytical suites for differing feedstocks, and this LAP is not meant to replace the specific LAPs in any way.

List of Revisions
Version 07-08-2011:

**** Page 1: Drying temperature in a convection oven in sample prepara tion section has been
corrected from 105 o C to 45 o C.

**** Page 6: %ASL equation has been corrected.

**** Page 7: Acetic acid to acetate modifier has been corrected.

Original version (April 2010).

9Start 1 ) Determination of Total Solids in Biomass and Total Dissolved Solids in Liquid Process Samples

2 ) Preparation of Samples for Compositional Analysis

> 10 %
Moisture? Dry Yes

> 2 mm?

No

Mill No

Sieving? Yes

Sieve Yes

Process
Feedstock

No

Ash

% Solids Herbaceous ? Protein Yes

Water Extraction

Sucrose

Drying Ethanol
Extraction

No

Drying Solution

Extracted Solids

Solids % Solids

Separate by mesh
size Mill

Ash % Solids -20/+80

Ash % Solids -80 +20

Solids Solution 3 ) Determination of Ash in Biomass

4 ) Determination of Extractives in Biomass

5 ) Determination of Carbohydrates and Lignin in Biomass

6 ) Determination of Protein Content in Biomass

7 ) Determination of Starch in Biomass by HPLC 1

1

1

1 2 2 2

3

3

3

4

4

4 4

4 6

% Solids Herbaceous ?

Protein Yes Starch?

Starch Yes Ash Hydrolysis

Filter

Acid Insoluble

Lignin Solids

Ash Solution Solution

Acids Carbo Acid Soluble Lignin

Protein 1 3 5

5

5 5 5 5 5 5 6 7

Figure 1. Flow chart of analysis

10