4.8 Article

Technoeconomic analysis of five microalgae-to-biofuels processes of varying complexity

Journal

BIORESOURCE TECHNOLOGY
Volume 102, Issue 20, Pages 9350-9359

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2011.08.010

Keywords

Biofuel; Economics; Microalgae; Open pond; Photobioreactor

Funding

  1. ConocoPhillips
  2. Biofuels R&D through the Colorado Center for Biofuels and Biorefining

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The economics surrounding five algae-to-fuels process scenarios were examined. The different processes modeled were as follows: an open pond producing either triacylglycerides (TAG) or free fatty acid methyl ester (FAME), a solar-lit photobioreactor producing either FAME or free fatty acids (FFA), and a light emitting diode irradiated (LED-lighted) photobioreactor producing TAG. These processes were chosen to represent both classical and esoteric approaches presented in the open literature. Viable (or suggested) processing techniques to liberate and purify (and convert) the microalgal triacylglycerides were then modeled to accompany each growth option. The investment and cost per kg of fuel or fuel precursor for each process was determined. The open pond produced TAG at similar to$7.50/kg, while the process using the LED-lit photobioreactor produced TAG at similar to$33/kg. The scenario containing the solar-lit photobioreactor produced FAME at similar to$25/kg, while the open pond produced FAME at similar to$4/kg. The scenario containing the solar-lit photobioreactor produced FFA at similar to$29/kg. The open pond scenarios appear to be closest to the $1/kg pricepoint at this time, and thus are the most viable economic options. Future technological advancements that reduce the cost of bioreactor vessels, LED lighting, and solvent recovery, may reduce the oil production costs of these scenarios to a more attractive level. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available