2015
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-16640-7_14
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Abstract: Harvesting of dilute cultures of algae from large volumes of culture needed for production of biofuels and bioproducts is a substantial hurdle to the economic viability of algal biofuels. While centrifugation and sedimentation are already scaled to volumes that would allow direct application to algal biofuel production, their economics to the production of biofuel are not favorable. The industry has reevaluated the existing technologies and continues to innovate around the harvesting of microalgae for biofuels… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Harvesting and dewatering algal biomass is challenging due to the small size of algal cells, density similar to water, and dilute initial concentration (typically around 0.5 g/L from open pond systems). As a result, for some dewatering options the energy input required to harvest algal biomass can approach or exceed the energy content of the biomass [77], and can account for 20% to 30% of the overall cost of renewable fuel production [78] when considering standard approaches taken today, such as centrifugation by itself. Many harvesting and dewatering strategies have been investigated and are currently under development, including settling and gravity sedimentation, screen filtration, membrane filtration, flocculation, centrifugation, dissolved air flotation, filter presses, electrocoagulation, magnetic separation, and ultrasonic separation.…”
Section: Overviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Harvesting and dewatering algal biomass is challenging due to the small size of algal cells, density similar to water, and dilute initial concentration (typically around 0.5 g/L from open pond systems). As a result, for some dewatering options the energy input required to harvest algal biomass can approach or exceed the energy content of the biomass [77], and can account for 20% to 30% of the overall cost of renewable fuel production [78] when considering standard approaches taken today, such as centrifugation by itself. Many harvesting and dewatering strategies have been investigated and are currently under development, including settling and gravity sedimentation, screen filtration, membrane filtration, flocculation, centrifugation, dissolved air flotation, filter presses, electrocoagulation, magnetic separation, and ultrasonic separation.…”
Section: Overviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Many harvesting and dewatering strategies have been investigated and are currently under development, including settling and gravity sedimentation, screen filtration, membrane filtration, flocculation, centrifugation, dissolved air flotation, filter presses, electrocoagulation, magnetic separation, and ultrasonic separation. A full review of all harvesting and dewatering options and associated advantages and challenges is beyond the scope of this report, but has been well-documented elsewhere (for example, [78,79]). This report describes the dewatering operations included in the Aspen Plus model, either in forming the base case or evaluated as alternative sensitivity scenarios.…”
Section: Overviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Therefore, cost should be calculated for the different procedures to find out the overall expenditure on biofuel production. For example, centrifugation is the most efficient process to harvest any microbial biomass; however, it is a most expensive process and could account for 20–30% of the total price of end-product (Allnutt and Kessler 2015 ). After harvesting, drying of biomass can be done by thermal drying or solar drying; however, cost needs to be compared for both methods as it will further increase the expenditure (Brennan and Owende 2010 ; Lundquist et al 2010 ; Prakash et al 1997 ; Richmond and Hu 2013 ).…”
Section: Biofuel Feedstocks Affect Food Energy and Environmentmentioning
confidence: 99%