4.7 Article

Techno-economic assessment of microalgae production, harvesting and drying for food, feed, cosmetics, and agriculture

Journal

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
Volume 837, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.155742

Keywords

Microalgae; Production cost; Industrial scale; Tubular photobioreactor; Cost analysis

Funding

  1. Bio-based Industries Joint Technology Initiative under the EU [745754]
  2. Microalgae As a Green source of Nutritional Ingredients for Food/Feed and Ingredients for Cosmetics by cost-Effective New Technologies (MAGNIFICENT) - EU [745754]
  3. University of Cadiz
  4. Algades (Alga Development, Engineering and Services, SSL)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The objective of this study is to define the costs for an industrial microalgae production process by comparing different operation strategies, production scales, harvesting technologies, and drying methods. The results show that cultivating N. oceanica all year round is economically more attractive, and using centrifugation and freeze-drying can reduce costs.
The objective of this techno-economic analysis is to define the costs for an industrial microalgae production process, comparing different operation strategies (Nannochloropsis oceanica cultivation during the whole year or cultivation of two species, where Phaeodactylum tricornutum and Tisochrysis lutea alternate), production scales (1 and 10 ha), har -vesting technologies (centrifugation or ultrafiltration) and drying methods (freeze-drying or spray drying). This study is based on an industrial scale process established in the south of Portugal. The strategy of cultivating N. oceanica all year round is more attractive from an economic perspective, with production costs of 53.32 euro/kg DW anda productiv-ity of 27.61 t/y for a scale of 1 ha, a 49.31% lower cost and two-fold productivity than species alternation culture strat-egy. These results are for biomass harvested by centrifugation (10.65% biomass cost) and freeze-drying (20.15% biomass cost). These costs could be reduced by 7.03% using a combination of ultrafiltration and spray drying, up to 17.99% if expanded to 10 ha and 10.92% if fertilisers were used instead of commercial nutrient solutions. The study shows potentially competitive costs for functional foods, food, and feed additives, specialised aquaculture prod-ucts (live feed enrichment) and other high value applications (e.g., cosmetics).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available