| Literature DB >> 35966657 |
Shiqiu Zhang1,2, Lijie Zhang3, Geng Xu2, Fei Li1, Xiaokang Li4.
Abstract
Microalgae are the important part of carbon cycle in the nature, and they could utilize the carbon resource in water and soil efficiently. The abilities of microalgae to mitigate CO2 emission and produce oil with a high productivity have been proven. Hence, this third-generation biodiesel should be popularized. This review firstly introduce the basic characteristics and application fields of microalgae. Then, the influencing parameters and recent advanced technologies for the microalgae biodiesel production have been discussed. In influencing parameters for biodiesel production section, the factors of microalgae cultivation, lipid accumulation, microalgae harvesting, and lipid extraction have been summarized. In recent advanced technologies for biodiesel production section, the microalgae cultivation systems, lipid induction technologies, microalgae harvesting technologies, and lipid extraction technologies have been reviewed. This review aims to provide useful information to help future development of efficient and commercially viable technology for microalgae-based biodiesel production.Entities:
Keywords: biodiesel; lipid accumulation; lipid extraction; microalgae cultivation; microalgae harvesting
Year: 2022 PMID: 35966657 PMCID: PMC9372408 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2022.970028
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 6.064
FIGURE 1Evolution of biodiesel.
FIGURE 2Schematic diagram of main content in this review.
FIGURE 3Applications of microalgae.
Comparison of microalgae with other feedstocks.
| Plant name | Lipid content (%) | Lipid yield (L/ha⋅year) | Land use (m2 year/kg ⋅biodiesel) | Biodiesel yield (kg/ha⋅year) |
| Corn | 44 | 172 | 66 | 152 |
| Cannabis | 33 | 363 | 31 | 321 |
| Soybeans | 18 | 636 | 18 | 562 |
| Jatropha | 28 | 741 | 15 | 656 |
| Camelina | 42 | 915 | 12 | 809 |
| Canola | 41 | 974 | 12 | 862 |
| Sunflower | 40 | 1,070 | 11 | 946 |
| Castor | 48 | 1,307 | 9 | 1,156 |
| Palm | 36 | 5,366 | 2 | 4,747 |
| Microalgae (low lipid content) | 30 | 58,700 | 0.2 | 51,927 |
| Microalgae (medium lipid content) | 50 | 97,800 | 0.1 | 86,515 |
| Microalgae (high lipid content) | 70 | 126,900 | 0.1 | 121,104 |
FIGURE 4Schematic of biomass energy production from microalgae.
FIGURE 5Triacylglyceride (TAG) synthetic pathway in microalgae cell (Zienkiewicz et al., 2016).
FIGURE 6Triacylglyceride (TAG) is used to synthesize biodiesel through transesterification.
FIGURE 7Production process of microalgal biodiesel.
Comparison of the mainly parameters and technologies for biodiesel production.
| Main parameters | Factors | Microalgae type | Lipid content | Biomass growth/Productivity | ||
| Microalgae cultivation | Light | 2700 lx, | 19.44% | 1.05/d |
| |
|
| 520 mmol/m2 s | 22.2% | 0.36/d |
| ||
| Temperature |
| 25 °C | 14.7% | 0.14/d |
| |
| 25 °C | 16.8% | 0.87/d |
| |||
| pH | 8 | 23% | 0.1995 g/L |
| ||
|
| 7 | 30.9% | 1.41 g/L |
| ||
|
| ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| ||||||
| Microalgae cultivation systems | Agricultural wastewater |
| BBM | – | 0.25/d |
|
|
| POME | – | 0.23/d | |||
| Diluted swine w | 17.19% | 0.40 g/L |
| |||
| Industrial wastewater |
| Tofu wastewater | 23.25% | 0.8 g/L |
| |
|
| ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| ||||||
| Nutrient starvation stress | 2.9 mM Nitrates | Lipid productivity 3.31 ± 0.16 mg/L/d | Lipid productivity 4.73 ± 0.12 mg/L/d, 40.37 ± 1.01% increase in lipid yield L/day |
| ||
|
| 0.5 mM Phosphate | Lipid productivity 2.31 ± 0.62 mg/L/d | Lipid productivity 3.96 ± 1.04 mg/L/d, 33.57 ± 3.72% increase in lipid yield L/day | |||
| Salinity stress |
| 10 mM NaCl | Lipid productivity 1.78 ± 0.32 Mg/L/d | Lipid productivity 4.70 ± 0.24 mg/L/d, 40.18 ± 1.97% increase in lipid yield L/day |
| |
|
| 0.25 M NaCl | Lipid content 13 mg/g DW | Lipid content 195 mg/g DW, 15-fold increase in TAG content |
| ||
| Light stress |
| 400 μE/m⋅s | Lipid content 13 mg/g DW | Lipid content 195 mg/g DW, 15-fold increase in TAG content |
| |
| 40 μmol/m⋅s | – | Higher lipid content of 17.2% achieved |
| |||
| Temperature stress |
| High temperature 33 °C | Lipid intensity 5 × E10 | Lipid intensity 7 × E10, Increase in C20:5 fatty acid by 88%, PUFA improved |
| |
|
| 2 °C | Lipid content 19.5% | Lipid content peaked at 33.4 ± 4.0% |
| ||
| Carbon dioxide supplementation | 5% CO2 concentration | Lipid production 112.91 ± 17.34 | Maximum lipid production of 782.7 ± 24.49 mg⋅L− 1 attained |
| ||
| Arthrospira ZJU9000 | 171.2 mM HCO3–1 Concentration | Lipid content 9.5 (Wt%) | 3.8-fold higher expression of gene encoding ATP-synthase. |
| ||
|
| ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
| ||||||
| Chemical flocculation (Self-flocculation) |
| pH adjustment, NaOH; V = 30 L, pH = 10.8, HM = batch, CD = 9 mg/g | 98% |
| ||
| pH adjustment, Ca(OH)2, | 98% | |||||
| Ca(OH)2, V = 30 L; pH = 10.8; HM = batch, CD = 18 mg/g | ||||||
| pH adjustment, Mg(OH)2, V = 30 L; pH = 9.7; HM = batch, CD = 27 mg/g | 98% | |||||
| P: Polyacrylamide; C: High; S: 1000; FD: 34; T: 60 | 98% |
| ||||
|
| P: Polyacrylamide; MW: High; C: High; D: 0.26; S: 3000; FD: 5; T: 30 | 100% | ||||
| Bio-flocculation | pH = 8, chitosan concentration: 100 mg/500 mL, cationic inducer concentration: 50 mg/L, stirring speed: 240 rpm | 96.12% |
| |||
|
| Citrobacter W4; bacterial-algal ratio: 4:1, G value: 26.30 s–1, harvesting time: 6 h | 87.37 ± 2.96% |
| |||
| Flotation |
| Aluminum sulfate: 0.0314 ng Al/cell, pH = 7, Flotation time: 10 min | 98.9% |
| ||
|
| CTAB: 40 mg/L, pH = 8, Flotation time: 20 min | 90% |
| |||
|
| CTAB: 0.005 mequiv/L, pH = 7, Flotation time: 10 min | 54% |
| |||
| Chlorella | Ferric sulfate: 3.5 mg Fe/L, pH = 5.5, Flotation time: 10 min | 94% |
| |||
| Filtration |
| CPAM-assisted filtration with a 100-μm sieve | 90% |
| ||
|
| CF: 78 L/m2 h, F: 3 HZ | 68.8% |
| |||
| Centrifugation | Disk-stack centrifuge: 15 min | 93% |
| |||
|
| Decanter centrifuges, Energy consumption: 8 kWh/m3, Final slurry Concentration: 22.2% | 92% |
| |||