| Literature DB >> 36213054 |
Harishankar Kopperi1,2, S Venkata Mohan1,2.
Abstract
A closed loop algal-biorefinery was designed based on a three-stage integration of dairy wastewater (DWW) treatment, hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL) of defatted algal biomass, and acidogenic process in a semi-synthetic framework. Initially, Coelestrella sp SVMIICT5 was grown in a 5 L photo-bioreactor and scaled up to a 50 L flat-panel photo-bioreactor using DWW. The microalgal growth showed higher photosynthetic efficiency, resulting in a biomass growth of 3.2 g/L of DCW with 87% treatment efficiency. The biomolecular composition showed 26% lipids with a good fatty acid profile (C12-C21) as well as carbohydrate (24.9%) and protein (31.8%) content. In the second stage, the de-oiled algal biomass was valorized via HTL at various temperatures (150°C, 200°, and 250°C) and reaction atmospheres (N2 and H2). Among these, the 250°C (H2) condition showed a 52% bio-crude fraction and an HHV of ∼29.47 MJ/kg (bio-oil) with a saturated hydrocarbon content of 64.3% that could be further upgraded to jet fuels. The energy recovery (73.01%) and elemental enrichment (carbon; 65.67%) were relatively greater in H2 compared to N2 conditions. Finally, dark fermentation of the complex-structured HTL-AF stream resulted in a total bio-H2 production of 231 ml/g of TOC with a 63% treatment efficiency. Life cycle analysis (LCA) was also performed for the mid-point and damage categories to assess the sustainability of the integrated process. Thus, the results of this study demonstrated comprehensive wastewater treatment and valorization of de-oiled algal biomass for chemical/fuel intermediates in the biorefinery context by low-carbon processes.Entities:
Keywords: acidogenesis/dark-fermentation; aliphatic/aromatic hydrocarbons; circular chemistry; decarbonization; flat-panel photo-bioreactor; nutrient recovery; semi-synthesis
Year: 2022 PMID: 36213054 PMCID: PMC9537770 DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2022.964070
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Bioeng Biotechnol ISSN: 2296-4185
FIGURE 1(A) Microscopic images and (B) size and shape of Coelestrella sp. (B) TOC removal and pH change and (C) nutrient removal with respect to time during SDWW treatment.
Chemical composition of the synthetic dairy wastewater (SDWW).
| Ingredient | Amount (gL−1) |
|---|---|
| Skim milk powder | 0.8 |
| Urea | 0.27 |
| CH3COONa | 0.21 |
| K3PO4 | 0.15 |
| (NH4)2SO4 | 0.06 |
| MgSO4·7H2O | 0.05 |
| NH4Cl | 0.54 |
| Na2HPO4⋅2H2O | 0.9 |
| NaHCO3 | 1.56 |
| KCl | 0.6 |
| CaCl2⋅H2O | 0.036 |
| TOC | 0.473 |
| NO3 − | 0.104 |
| PO4 3- | 0.118 |
FIGURE 6(A) System boundary of the integrated algal biorefinery considered in the LCA analysis. (B) Lifecycle analysis results of the biorefinery scenarios. (C) Sankey diagram representation of the global warming potential. (D) Endpoint/damage categories.
FIGURE 2(A) Maximal photosynthetic yield (Fv/Fm). (B) Biomass and specific growth rate. (C) Chlorophyll a, b, and carotenoids and (D) total carbohydrate and protein contents.
Composition analysis of Coelestrella sp. SVMIICT5 after cultivation.
| Component | Unit fraction |
|---|---|
| Biomass yields (DCW) | 3.2 ± 0.16 (g/L) |
| Specific growth rate | 0.43 ± 0.02 (g/L/d) |
| Carbohydrate | 24.9 ± 1.24% |
| Protein | 31.8 ± 1.5% |
| Total Lipid | 26 ± 1.3% |
| Neutral Lipid | 10 ± 0.5% |
| Fatty acids Composition | Fatty acid (%) |
| Undecanoic acid (C11:0) | 2.2 ± 0.1 |
| Lauric acid (C12:0) | 4.6 ± 0.2 |
| Tridecanoic acid (C13:0) | 5.9 ± 0.3 |
| Myristic acid (C14:0) | 7.3 ± 0.35 |
| Pentadecanoic acid (C15:0) | 6.2 ± 0.3 |
| Heptadecanoic acid (C17:0) | 11.5 ± 0.5 |
| Arachidic acid (C20:0) | 4.3 ± 0.21 |
| Myristoleicc acid (C14:0) | 8.6 ± 0.4 |
| Pentadecanoic acid (C15:1) | 14.1 ± 0.7 |
| Heptadecanoic acid (C17:1) | 16.9 ± 0.8 |
| Oleic acid (C18:1) | 8.6 ± 0.43 |
| Linolenic acid (C18:2 | 3.5 ± 0.17 |
| Eicosapentanoic acid (C20:5ω-3) | 6.3 ± 0.3 |
| SFA |
|
| MUFA |
|
| PUFA |
|
FIGURE 3(A–D) Chlorophyll a fluorescence. (E–H) P700 transients of Coelestrella sp.
FIGURE 4(A) Product distribution profile. (B) Aqueous fraction product profile. (C) Off-gas composition. (D) Pressure variation with respect to temperature.
Conversion effects of HTL process variation with respect to element and relative yields.
| Composition | Elemental ratio (%) | HHV (MJ kg-1) | Bio-crude (%) | Energy recovery (%) | H/C atom ratio | O/C atom ratio | N/C atom ratio | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Carbon | Hydrogen | Nitrogen | Sulphur | Oxygen | ||||||||
| Initial DAB | 48.1 | 6.3 | 9.5 | 0.5 | 35.6 | 21.39 | - | - | 1.56 | 0.55 | 0.17 | |
| 150°C | N2 | 53.5 | 8.5 | 7.8 | 0.69 | 29.45 | 26.50 | 25.5 | 31.58 | 1.89 | 0.41 | 0.12 |
| H2 | 53.2 | 8.6 | 8.1 | 0.61 | 30.1 | 26.46 | 47.1 | 58.26 | 1.92 | 0.42 | 0.13 | |
| 200°C | N2 | 56.4 | 8.9 | 7.9 | 0.74 | 26.5 | 28.29 | 41 | 54.22 | 1.88 | 0.35 | 0.12 |
| H2 | 57.6 | 8.6 | 6.8 | 0.4 | 27 | 28.14 | 52 | 68.4 | 1.77 | 0.35 | 0.1 | |
| 250°C | N2 | 58.5 | 8.6 | 7.3 | 0.5 | 25.1 | 28.68 | 44.1 | 59.13 | 1.75 | 0.32 | 0.1 |
| H2 | 59.6 | 8.9 | 6.1 | 0.61 | 24.1 | 29.47 | 53 | 73.01 | 1.77 | 0.30 | 0.08 | |
HTL effects on elemental enrichment (%).
| Composition | Element enrichment, % | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Initial DAB | Carbon | Hydrogen | Nitrogen | Oxygen | |
| At 150°C | N2 | 28.36 | 34.4 | 20.9 | 21.0 |
| H2 | 52.09 | 64.3 | 40.1 | 39.8 | |
| At 200°C | N2 | 48.0 | 57.9 | 34.1 | 30.5 |
| H2 | 62.27 | 70.9 | 37.2 | 39.4 | |
| At 250°C | N2 | 53.63 | 60.2 | 33.8 | 31.0 |
| H2 | 65.67 | 74.8 | 33.4 | 35.8 | |
FIGURE 5(A) Aqueous soluble fraction from the TOC analysis. (B) Total bio-H2 production. (C) Total VFA and individual acid profiles. (D) Percentages of TOC removal.