| Literature DB >> 25874216 |
Srikanth Reddy Medipally1, Fatimah Md Yusoff2, Sanjoy Banerjee1, M Shariff3.
Abstract
The world energy crisis and increased greenhouse gas emissions have driven the search for alternative and environmentally friendly renewable energy sources. According to life cycle analysis, microalgae biofuel is identified as one of the major renewable energy sources for sustainable development, with potential to replace the fossil-based fuels. Microalgae biofuel was devoid of the major drawbacks associated with oil crops and lignocelluloses-based biofuels. Algae-based biofuels are technically and economically viable and cost competitive, require no additional lands, require minimal water use, and mitigate atmospheric CO2. However, commercial production of microalgae biodiesel is still not feasible due to the low biomass concentration and costly downstream processes. The viability of microalgae biodiesel production can be achieved by designing advanced photobioreactors, developing low cost technologies for biomass harvesting, drying, and oil extraction. Commercial production can also be accomplished by improving the genetic engineering strategies to control environmental stress conditions and by engineering metabolic pathways for high lipid production. In addition, new emerging technologies such as algal-bacterial interactions for enhancement of microalgae growth and lipid production are also explored. This review focuses mainly on the problems encountered in the commercial production of microalgae biofuels and the possible techniques to overcome these difficulties.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25874216 PMCID: PMC4385614 DOI: 10.1155/2015/519513
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Comparison of oil content, oil yield, and biodiesel productivity of microalgae with the first and the second generation biodiesel feedstock source [17, 18, 21, 22].
| Feedstock source | Oil content | Oil yield (oil in litres/ha/year) | Biodiesel productivity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oil palm | 36 | 5366 | 4747 |
| Maize | 44 | 172 | 152 |
| Physic nut | 41–59 | 741 | 656 |
| Caster | 48 | 1307 | 1156 |
| Microalgae with low oil content | 30 | 58,700 | 51,927 |
| Microalgae with medium oil content | 50 | 97,800 | 86,515 |
| Microalgae with high oil content | 70 | 136,900 | 121,104 |
Figure 1Different strategies involved in microalgae biomass and biofuel production.
Biomass and lipid productivities of some microalgae under phototrophic, heterotrophic, and mixotrophic conditions.
| Cultivation method | Microalgae | Biomass productivity | Lipid content | Lipid productivity | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phototrophic method |
| 0.02–0.20 | 50–58 | 11.2–40 | |
|
| 2.00–7.70 | 14.6–57.8 | 1214 | [ | |
|
| 0.23–1.47 | 19.0–22.0 | 44.7 | ||
|
| |||||
| Heterotrophic method |
| 0.15 | 23 | 35 | [ |
|
| 3.1–3.9 | — | 2400 | [ | |
|
| 1.48 | 23.3 | — | [ | |
|
| |||||
| Mixotrophic method |
| 0.25–0.26 | 20.0–22.0 | 52.0–56.0 | |
|
| 23.9 | 58.4 | 11,800 | [ | |
|
| 0.58 | — | 29.0–56.0 | ||
Comparison between open ponds and photobioreactors [51, 52, 58, 66–71].
| Factor | Open ponds | Photobioreactors |
|---|---|---|
| Area-to-volume ratio | Large | Small |
| Algal species | Restricted | Flexible |
| Species selection | Growth competition | Shear resistance |
| Sterility | Low | High |
| Cultivation period | Limited | Extended |
| Water loss through evaporation | Possible | Prevented |
| Controlling of growth conditions | Very difficult | Easy |
| Light utilization efficiency | Poor/fair | Fair/excellent |
| Gas transfer | Poor | Low-high |
| Temperature | Highly variable | Required cooling |
| Temperature control | None | Excellent |
| Automatic cooling system | None | Built in |
| Automatic heating system | None | Built in |
| Cleaning | Not required | Required due to wall growth and dirt |
| Weather dependence | High | Medium |
| Process control and reproducibility | Limited | Possible within certain tolerance |
| Microbiology safety | None | UV |
| Harvesting efficiency | Low | High |
| Population density | Low | High |
| Biomass productivity | Low | High |
| Biomass quality | Variable | Reproducible |
| Air pump | Built in | Built-in |
| Hydrodynamic stress on algae | Difficult | Easy |
| Shear | Low | High |
| CO2 transfer rate | Poor | Excellent |
| Mixing efficiency | Poor | Excellent |
| Volumetric productivity | High | Low |
| Water loss | Very high | Low |
| O2 concentration | Low due to continuous spontaneous out gassing | Exchange device |
| CO2 loss | High | Low |
| Land required | High | Low |
| Capital investment | Small | High |
| Periodical maintenance | Less | More |
| Operating cost | Lower | Higher |
| Harvesting cost | High | Lower |
| Most costly parameters | Mixing | O2, temperature control |
| Scale-up technology for commercial level | Easy to scale up | Difficult in most PBR models |
Figure 2Possible interactions between microalgae and bacteria: solid arrows indicate the positive interactions and dashed arrows indicate the negative interactions [118, 119].
Figure 3Microalgae biomass conversion processes [23, 135].