Submitted:
27 June 2025
Posted:
27 June 2025
You are already at the latest version
Abstract

Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Materials
2.2. Alkali Treatment
2.3. Acid Hydrolysis
2.4. Functionalization
2.5. Characterization of Cellulose and Cellulose Whisker
2.6. Statistical Experimental Design and Analysis
3. Results and Discussions
3.1. Material Selection and Profiling of Biomass Wastes
3.2. Effects of Alkali Treatment on Cellulose Recovery and Conversion
3.3. Effects of Acid Hydrolysis on Cellulose Whisker Conversion
3.4. Effects of Acid Hydrolysis on Structural Composition of CW
3.5. Effects of Functionalization on Structure, Surface Wettability and Morphology of CW
3.6. Electrochemical Capacity of Cellulose Whisker
3.7. Hybrid Membrane with Cellulose Whisker as Filler
4. Conclusions
5. Patents
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- M. Philippot, G. Alvarez, E. Ayerbe, J. Van Mierlo, M. Messagie, Eco-Efficiency of a Lithium-Ion Battery for Electric Vehicles: Influence of Manufacturing Country and Commodity Prices on GHG Emissions and Costs, Batteries, 2019, 5, 23. [CrossRef]
- J. M. Allwood, J. M. Cullen, Sustainable Materials: With Both Eyes Open, 2012, UIT Cambridge Ltd, Cambridge, England.
- Deng J, Li M, Wang Y. Biomass-derived carbon: synthesis and applications in energy storage and conversion, Green Chem, 2016, 18, 4824–54. [CrossRef]
- K.D. Kreuer, On the development of proton conducting polymer membranes for hydrogen and methanol fuel cells, J Membr Sci., 2001, 185(1), 29-39. [CrossRef]
- J.P. Correa, J.M. Montalvo-Navarrete, M.A. Hidalgo-Salazar, Carbon footprint considerations for biocomposite materials for sustainable products: A review, J Clean Prod, 2019, 208,785–94. [CrossRef]
- O. Adekomaya, T. Jamiru, R. Sadiku, Z. Huan, A review on the sustainability of natural fiber in matrix reinforcement – A practical perspective, J Reinf Plast Compos, 2015, 35, 3–7. [CrossRef]
- H.R. Milner, A.C. Woodard, Sustainability of engineered wood products, Sustainability of Construction Materials, Woodhead Publishing, 2016, 159–80.
- D. D’Amato, M. Gaio, E. Semenzin, A review of LCA assessments of forest-based bioeconomy products and processes under an ecosystem services perspective, Sci Total Environ, 2020, 706, 135859. [CrossRef]
- R. Bergman, M. Puettmann, A. Taylor, K.E. Skog, The Carbon Impacts of Wood Products, Forest Prod J, 2014, 64, 220–31. [CrossRef]
- M. A. Shaharuzaman, S.M. Sapuan, M. R. Mansor, Sustainable materials selection: Principles and applications, Design for Sustainability: Green Materials and Processes, 2021, 57-84.
- R. A. Sheldon, Green chemistry, catalysis and valorization of waste biomass, J. Mol. Catal. A: Chem., 2016, 422, 3–12. [CrossRef]
- J. H. Clark and A. S. Matharu, in Issues in Environmental Science and Technology: Waste as a Resource, ed. R. E. Hester and R. M. Harrison, Royal Society, 2013, 37, pp. 66-82.
- T. Mekonnen, P. Mussone, D. Bressler, Valorization of rendering industry wastes and co-products for industrial chemicals, materials and energy: review, Crit. Rev. Biotechnol, 2016, 36, 120–131.
- M. J.H. Worthington, R.L. Kucera, J.M. Chalker, Green chemistry and polymers made from sulfur, Green Chem., 2017, 19(12), 3358-3393. [CrossRef]
- Y. Li, G. He, S. Wang, S. Yu, F. Pan, H. Wu, Z. Jiang, Recent advances in the fabrication of advanced composite membranes, Journal of Materials Chemistry A, 2013, 1(35), 10058–10077. [CrossRef]
- H.L. Teo, R.A. Wahab, Towards an eco-friendly deconstruction of agro-industrial biomass and preparation of renewable cellulose nanomaterials: A review, International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, 2020, 161, 1414–1430. [CrossRef]
- D. Klemm, B. Heublein, H-P, Fink, A. Bohn, Cellulose: Fascinating biopolymer and sustainable raw material, Angewandte Chemie International Edition, 2005, 44(22).
- X. Tang, D. Liu, Y.J. Wang, L. Cui, A. Ignaszak, Y. Yu, J. Zhang, Research advances in biomass-derived nanostructured carbons and their composite materials for electrochemical energy technologies, In Progress in Materials Science, 2021, 118. [CrossRef]
- J. P. S. Morais, M. F. Rosa, M.M.S. Filho, L. D. Nascimento, D. M. Nascimento, A. R. Cassales, Extraction and characterization of nanocellulose structures from raw cotton linter, Carbohydrate Polymers, 2013, 91(1), 229-235. [CrossRef]
- G.X. Gu, M. Takaffoli, A.J. Hsieh, M.J. Buehler, Biomimetic additive manufactured polymer composites for improved impact resistance, Extreme Mech Lett, 2016, 9, 317-323. [CrossRef]
- G. Clark, J. Kosoris, L. N. Hong, M. Crul, Design for Sustainability: Current Trends in Sustainable Product Design and Development, Sustainability, 2009, 1, 409-424. [CrossRef]
- Q. Zheng, T. Zhou, Y. Wang, et al., Pretreatment of wheat straw leads to structural changes and improved enzymatic hydrolysis, Sci Rep, 2018, 8, 1321. [CrossRef]
- S. M.L. Rosa, N. Rehman, M.I. G. Miranda, S. M.B. Nachtigall, C. I.D. Bica, Chlorine-free extraction of cellulose from rice husk and whisker isolation, Carbohydrate Polymers, 2012, 87(2), 1131-1138. [CrossRef]
- M.A. Karaaslan, M.A. Tshabalala, D.J. Yelle, G. Buschle-Diller, Nanoreinforced biocompatible hydrogels from wood hemicelluloses and cellulose whiskers, Carbohydr. Polym., 2011, 86, 192–201. [CrossRef]
- A. Bendahou1, Y. Habibi, H. Kaddami, A. Dufresne, Physico-chemical characterization of palm from phoenix dactylifera–L, preparation of cellulose whiskers and natural rubber–based nanocomposites, J. Biobased Mater. Bioenergy, 2009, 3, 81–90.
- A.T.W.M. Hendriks, G. Zeeman, Pretreatments to enhance the digestibility of lignocellulosic biomass, Bioresource Technology, 2009, 100, 10–18. [CrossRef]
- M. Li, J. Wang, Y.Z. Yang, G.H. Xie, Alkali-based pretreatments distinctively extract lignin and pectin for enhancing biomass saccharification by altering cellulose features in sugar-rich Jerusalem artichoke stem, Bioresource Technology, 2016, 208, 31–41. [CrossRef]
- A. Kljun, T. A.S. Benians, F. Goubet, F. Meulewaeter, J.P. Knox, and R. S. Balckburn, Comparative analysis of crystallinity changes in cellulose I polymers using ATR-FTIR, X-ray diffraction, and carbohydrate-binding module probes, BioMacromolecules, 2011, 12, 4121-4126. [CrossRef]
- S. M.L. Rosa, N. Rehman, M.I. G. Miranda, S. M.B. Nachtigall, C. I.D. Bica, Chlorine-free extraction of cellulose from rice husk and whisker isolation, Carbohydrate Polymers, 2012, 87, 2, 1131-1138. [CrossRef]
- R. Vârban, I. Crișan, D. Vârban, A. Ona, L. Olar, A. Stoie, R. Stefan, Comparative FTIR Prospecting for Cellulose in Stems of Some Fiber Plants: Flax, Velvet Leaf, Hemp and Jute, Applied Sciences, 2021, 11(18), 8570.
- D. Ciolacu, F. Ciolacu, V.I. Popa, Amorphous cellulose - Structure and characterization, Cellulose Chemistry and Technology, 2011, 45(1), 13-21.
- T. Theivasanthi, F.L. Anne Christma, Adeleke Joshua Toyin, Subash C.B. Gopinath, Ramanibai Ravichandran, Synthesis and characterization of cotton fiber-based nanocellulose, International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, 2018, 109, 832-836. [CrossRef]
- S. M. Mohomane, S. V. Motloung, L. F. Koao, T. E. Motaung, Effects of Acid Hydrolysis on the Extraction of Cellulose Nanocrystals (CNC): A Review, Cellulose Chem. Technol., 2022, 56 (7-8), 691-703. [CrossRef]
- A. Krishna Shailaja, B. Pranaya Ragini, Nanocellulose: Preparation, Characterization and Applications, J. Pharmaceutics and Pharmacology Research, 2022, 5(1).
- Q. Cheng, S. Wang, T. G. Rials, Poly(vinyl alcohol) nanocomposites reinforced with cellulose fibrils isolated by high intensity ultrasonication, Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing, 2009, 40, 2, 218-224. [CrossRef]
- M. J. Taherzadeh, K. Karimi, Enzyme-based hydrolysis processes for ethanol from lignocellulosic materials: a review, BioResources, 2007, 2(3), 707–38. [CrossRef]
- D. Kumar, B. Singh, J. Korstad, Utilization of lignocellulosic biomass by oleaginous yeast and bacteria for production of biodiesel and renewable diesel, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2017, 73, 654-671. [CrossRef]
- T. Zhong, R. Dhandapani, D. Liang, J. Wang, M. P. Wolcott et al., Nanocellulose from recycled indigo-dyed denim fabric and its application in composite films, Carbohyd. Polym., 2020, 240, 1116283. [CrossRef]
- H. A. Silvério. W. P. F. Neto, N. O. Dantas and D. Pasquini, Extraction and characterization of cellulose nanocrystals from corncob for application as reinforcing agent in nanocomposites, Ind. Crop. Prod., 2013, 44, 427. [CrossRef]
- Y. Habibi, L.A. Lucia, O.J. Rojas, Cellulose nanocrystals: Chemistry, self assembly, and applications, Chemical Reviews, 2010, 110(6), 3479-3500.
- M. Jakob, A. R. Mahendran, W. Gindl-Altmutter, P. Bliem, J. Konnerth, U. Müller, S. Veigel, The strength and stiffness of oriented wood and cellulose-fibre materials: A review, Progress in Materials Science, 2022, 125, 100916. [CrossRef]
- M. Sumita, K. Sakata, S. Asai, K. Miyasaka, H. Nakagawa, Dispersion of fillers and the electrical conductivity of polymer blends filled with carbon black, Polymer Bull, 1991, 25(2), 265-271. [CrossRef]
- N. Shaari, S. K. Kamarudin, Recent advances in additive-enhanced polymer electrolyte membrane properties in fuel cell applications: An overview, Int J Energy Res., 2019, 1–39. [CrossRef]
- P. Lu, Y.L. Hsieh, Preparation and properties of cellulose nanocrystals: rods, spheres, and network, Carbohyd Polym, 2010, 82, 329-336. [CrossRef]
- J. Shi, S.Q. Shi, H.M. Barnes, J.C.U. Pittman, A chemical process for preparing cellulosic fibers hierarchically from kenaf bast fibers, BioResources, 2011, 6, 879-890. [CrossRef]
- A.N. Nakagaito, A. Fujimura, T. Sakai, Y. Hama, H. Yano, Production of microfibrillated cellulose (MFC)-reinforced polylactic acid (PLA) nanocomposites from sheets obtained by a papermaking-like process, Compos Sci Technol, 2009, 69, 1293-1297. [CrossRef]
- R. Bergman, M. Puettmann, A. Taylor, K.E. Skog, The Carbon Impacts of Wood Products, Forest Prod J, 2014, 64, 220–31. [CrossRef]
- O. Selyanchyn, T. Bayer, D. Klotz, R. Selyanchyn, K. Sasaki, S. M. Lyth, Cellulose Nanocrystals Crosslinked with Sulfosuccinic Acid as Sustainable Proton Exchange Membranes for Electrochemical Energy Applications, Membranes, 2022, 12, 658. [CrossRef]
- L. Goetz, A. Mathew, K. Oksman, P. Gatenholm, A.J. Ragauskas, A novel nanocomposite film prepared from crosslinked cellulosic whiskers, Carbohydr. Polym., 2009, 75, 85–89. [CrossRef]
- S.H. Lee, Y. Teramoto, T. Endo, Cellulose nanofiber-reinforced polycaprolactone/polypropylene hybrid nanocomposite, Compos Part A, 2011, 42, 151-156. [CrossRef]
- W. Zhang, X.L. Yang, C.Y. Li, M. Liang, C.H. Lua, Y.L. Deng, Mechanochemical activation of cellulose and its thermoplastic polyvinyl alcohol ecocomposites with enhanced physicochemical properties, Carbohyd Polym, 2011, 83, 257-263. [CrossRef]
- M.A. Kabir, M.M. Huque, M.R. Islam, A.K. Bledzki, Mechanical properties of jute fiber reinforced polypropylene composite: effect of chemical treatment by benzenediazonium salt in alkaline medium, BioResources, 2009, 5(3), 1618-1625. [CrossRef]
- S. Nandi, P. Guha, A Review on Preparation and Properties of Cellulose Nanocrystal-Incorporated Natural Biopolymer, Journal of Packaging Technology and Research, 2018, 2, 149–166. [CrossRef]















| Independent Variable/Factor | Levels | Dependent Variables/ Responses | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low | Mid | High | ||
| NaOH Concentration, wt % | 5 | 10 | 15 | Yield and Structural Composition (FTIR) |
| Independent Variables/Factors | Levels | Dependent Variables/ Responses | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Low | High | ||
| H2SO4 Concentration, wt % | 55 | 60 | Yield, % Total Crystallinity Index, % Structural Composition and Evolution |
| Reaction Time, min | 45 | 60 | |
| Biomass Material | Composition | Cellulose, % | Lignin, % | Moisture, % |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coconut Fiber | ![]() |
96.4 | 71.8 | 12.8 |
| Saw Dust | ![]() |
84.3 | 52.8 | 11.9 |
|
Cotton Lint |
![]() |
79.6 | 23.2 | 11.0 |
|
Cotton Linter* |
![]() |
96.5 | - | 5.3 |
| Cotton Linter** | ![]() |
94.9 | - | 4.9 |
| Cotton Linter* | ![]() |
96.5 | - | 4.5 |
| Std | Run | Block | A: NaOH | Response |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conc, % | Yield, % | |||
| 1 | 1 | Block 1 | 5% | 92.77 |
| 3 | 2 | Block 1 | 10% | 92.64 |
| 5 | 3 | Block 1 | 15% | 90.45 |
| 6 | 4 | Block 2 | 15% | 91.48 |
| 4 | 5 | Block 2 | 10% | 92.58 |
| 2 | 6 | Block 2 | 5% | 92.70 |
|
Run |
Block |
Factor 1 A: Concentration, % |
Factor 2 B: Reaction Time, min |
Yield % |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Block 1 | 55 | 60 | 92 |
| 2 | Block 2 | 60 | 60 | 35 |
| 3 | Block 1 | 60 | 45 | 30 |
| 4 | Block 2 | 60 | 60 | 43 |
| 5 | Block 1 | 55 | 45 | 77 |
| 6 | Block 2 | 55 | 45 | 87 |
| 7 | Block 1 | 60 | 45 | 31 |
| 8 | Block 2 | 55 | 60 | 84 |
| Sample | CrI, % | TCI, % | Std Dev |
|---|---|---|---|
| 60/60 | 72.4 | 75.6 | 2.2 |
| 55/60 | 69.5 | 69.1 | 0.2 |
| 60/45 | 70.9 | 71.5 | 0.4 |
| 55/45 | 70.0 | 65.9 | 2.9 |
| CW Sample |
IEC, meq/g | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Replicate 1 | Replicate 2 | Average | |
| CW 1 | 1.82 | 1.72 | 1.77 |
| CW 2 | 1.74 | 1.61 | 1.68 |
| CW 3 | 1.60 | 1.42 | 1.51 |
| Tensile Strenght, MPa | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Filler loading, % | 0 | 3 | 5 | 8 |
| Replicate 1 | 13.36 | 14.32 | 14.37 | 10.60 |
| Replicate 2 | 13.61 | 13.13 | 13.15 | 8.05 |
| Average | 13.48 | 13.72 | 13.76 | 9.33 |
| Membrane | Conductivity (S/cm) | % Change |
|---|---|---|
| Pure PSU | 0.0173 | - |
| 3% fCW/PSU | 0.0182 | 5.2 |
| 5% fCW/PSU | 0.0192 | 10.9 |
| 8% fCW/PSU | 0.0189 | 9.3 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).





