4.7 Article

Simultaneous carbon dioxide sequestration and nitrate removal by Chlorella vulgaris and Pseudomonas sp. consortium

期刊

JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
卷 333, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.117389

关键词

Chlorella vulgaris; Pseudomonas sp; Co -culture; Sequestration; Flue gas

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A co-cultured microalgae/bacteria system, Chlorella vulgaris and Pseudomonas sp., was developed for simultaneous sequestration of CO2 and removal of nitrogen oxides from flue gas, as well as producing valuable microalgae biomass.
Carbon dioxide and nitrogen oxides are the main components of fossil flue gas causing the most serious envi-ronmental problems. Developing a sustainable and green method to treat carbon dioxide and nitrogen oxides of flue gas is still challenging. Here, a co-cultured microalgae/bacteria system, Chlorella vulgaris and Pseudomonas sp., was developed for simultaneous sequestration of CO2 and removal of nitrogen oxides from flue gas, as well as producing valuable microalgae biomass. The co-cultured Chlorella vulgaris and Pseudomonas sp. showed the highest CO2 fixation and NO3--N removal rate of 0.482 g L-1d-1 and 129.6 mg L-1d-1, the total chlorophyll accumulation rate of 65.6 mg L-1 at the initial volume ratio of Chlorella vulgaris and Pseudomonas sp. as 1:10. The NO3--N removal rate can be increased to 183.5 mg L-1d-1 by continuous addition of 0.6 g L-1d-1 of glucose, which was 37% higher than that of co-culture system without the addition of glucose. Photosynthetic activity and carbonic anhydrase activity of Chlorella vulgaris were significantly increased when co-cultured with Pseu-domonas sp. Excitation-emission matrix (EEM) fluorescence spectroscopy indicated that the humic acid-like substances released from Pseudomonas sp. could increase the growth of microalgae. This work provides an attractive way to simultaneously treatment of CO2 and NOX from flue gas to produce valuable microalgal biomass.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据