Next Article in Journal
Water Information Extraction Based on Multi-Model RF Algorithm and Sentinel-2 Image Data
Previous Article in Journal
An Interval-Valued Intuitionistic Fuzzy Model Based on Extended VIKOR and MARCOS for Sustainable Supplier Selection in Organ Transplantation Networks for Healthcare Devices
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Industrial CO2 Capture by Algae: A Review and Recent Advances

Heat Power Engineering Department, Samara State Technical University, 443100 Samara, Russia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Current address: 244, Molodogvardeyskaya Str., 443100 Samara, Russia.
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Sustainability 2022, 14(7), 3801; https://doi.org/10.3390/su14073801
Submission received: 29 December 2021 / Revised: 25 February 2022 / Accepted: 28 February 2022 / Published: 23 March 2022

Abstract

:
The problem of global warming and the emission of greenhouse gases is already directly affecting the world’s energy. In the future, the impact of CO 2 emissions on the world economy will constantly grow. In this paper, we review the available literature sources on the benefits of using algae cultivation for CO 2 capture to decrease CO 2 emission. CO 2 emission accounts for about 77% of all greenhouse gases, and the calculation of greenhouse gas emissions is 56% of all CO 2 imports. As a result of the study of various types of algae, it was concluded that Chlorella sp. is the best at capturing CO 2 . Various methods of cultivating microalgae were also considered and it was found that vertical tubular bioreactors are emerging. Moreover, for energy purposes, thermochemical methods for processing algae that absorb CO 2 from flue gases were considered. Of all five types of thermochemical processes for producing synthesis gas, the most preferred method is the method of supercritical gasification of algae. In addition, attention is paid to the drying and flocculation of biofuels. Several different experiments were also reviewed on the use of flue gases through the cultivation of algae biomass. Based on this literature review, it can be concluded that microalgae are a third generation biofuel. With the absorption of greenhouse gases, the growth of microalgae cultures is accelerated. When a large mass of microalgae appears, it can be used for energy purposes. In the results, we present a plan for further studies of microalgae cultivation, a thermodynamic analysis of gasification and pyrolysis, and a comparison of the results with other biofuels and other algae cultures.

1. Introduction

The development of civilization is directly related to the increase in energy consumption. Since the beginning of the industrial revolution, more and more energy has been consumed by humanity. And as energy consumption grows, so does the output of greenhouse gases. From the mid-18th century to the early 21st century, carbon dioxide emissions increased from 3 metric tons to 8230 tons, respectively, according to the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center.
One of the first important attempts to limit CO 2 emissions was the Kyoto Protocol of ’97. Its essence was that all its participants should reduce the level of greenhouse gas emissions to below 5% of the 1990 level [1]. The effect of the Kyoto Protocol has been studied in many works [2,3,4]. When the Kyoto Protocol ended, it was replaced by the Paris Agreement.
The Paris Agreement was formally implemented on 4 November 2016. Its main goal is the same as that of the aforementioned Kyoto agreement—to maintain the average global temperature. In the long term, the outcome of the Paris Agreement will be climate change mitigation [5].
In a decade, the topic of decarbonizing the energy sector has come to the fore. For example, EU countries want to abandon hydrocarbon fuels by 2030. Furthermore, many large oil and gas companies have stopped investing in the exploration of new oil and gas fields and switched to the development of alternative energy sources. Therefore, there is a request for another type of fuel—biofuel. Previously, biofuels first and second were well studied. Generation first biofuels are waste of sugar, starch, vegetable oil, animal fat [6]. Biofuel of the second generation differs from the first generation in the use of non-food parts of plants—stems and husks [7]. However, there is also a relatively new, much less studied biofuel of the third generation—biomass of micro and macroalgae, since algae can accumulate lipids, capture CO 2 [8], thereby utilizing greenhouse gases.
After thermochemical regeneration, some types of algae have a calorific value at the level of peat or wood. The purpose of this work is a detailed review of algae cultivation and a review of the results of thermochemical algae regeneration. In addition, this review has another purpose—to determine the optimal conditions for the cultivation of algae and the further thermal regeneration of these algae. Considered are such optimal conditions for the cultivation of algae as flocculation, drying, pH level, lighting. Thermochemical regeneration of algae is not only a renewable alternative energy source, but also a good carbon dioxide trap. The capture of carbon dioxide by algae can have a direct impact on the environment because the consumption of traditional fuel will decrease, and, consequently, harmful emissions will decrease. Thus, macro and microalgae are a method of dealing not only with the consequences of environmental pollution, but with that which causes it.

2. The Impact of Greenhouse Gases on the Environmental Situation in the World

Continuous climate change is driven by rising emissions of carbon dioxide, the main component of greenhouse gases. The sources of carbon dioxide emissions include fossil fuels (oil, coal, peat, gas) and waste (animal husbandry, agriculture [9]). Atmospheric concentrations of N2O, CH4, and CO2 have increased by 20%, 150%, and 40% since 1750, respectively [10]. Parts of gas emissions in various energy-intensive industries [10] are shown in Table 1.
The problem of global warming and greenhouse gases is already directly affecting world energy and production. In the future, the impact of CO2 emissions will only grow. Many researchers are engaged in the description of solutions to the problem of greenhouse gases (GHG) [11,12,13,14]. Moreover, in 2013, the Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDC) Agreement was signed in Paris. This agreement states that it is necessary to reduce the global temperature by 2 °C in the 21st century. The main negative effects of climate change due to GHG emissions on the planet are presented in Table 2.
If we compare the CO2 emissions of the countries of the world economies for 2016 and 2019, we can see a directing a slight decrease in carbon dioxide emissions. For example, the share of CO2 emissions from China in 2019 was 28.8% of the total emissions compared to 29.3% in 2016. These data allow us to conclude that more developed countries have already embarked on the path of capturing CO2 to preserve the climate. However, at the moment, the methods of capturing CO2 have been scarcely researched, despite the existence of a wide range of publications on this topic.

3. Capture and Sequestration of Carbon Dioxide by Microalgae

Previously, a lot of research was devoted to the capture of carbon dioxide. Now, scientists from all over the world are actively offering a completely different approach—not only to capture CO 2 but also to immediately use it for energy reproduction. This approach to solving the greenhouse problem is very relevant because of the high cost and complexity of technologies for capturing CO 2 emissions, the same CO 2 storage facilities also need to be maintained, and they uselessly occupy a considerable area. Thus, the reproduction of biofuels together with the capture of carbon dioxide is an elegant and high-potential solution to the problem of global warming. CO 2 accounts for 77% of all greenhouse gases. Thus, despite the content of nitrogen oxides, hydrocarbons, and sulfur dioxide in greenhouse gases, it is necessary to capture CO 2 . Therefore, if you defeat uncontrolled mass emissions of CO 2 , you can also defeat a whole host of environmental problems, such as the drying up of natural freshwater, disruption of food chains, and the extinction of entire animal species, and so on.
Carbon dioxide is a stable and inert compound, so increasing the value of biofixed carbon dioxide is a major challenge. There is a detailed and in-depth review on this topic [15]. The authors of this review considered a range of technologies to increase the value of carbon dioxide, such as mineralization of carbon dioxide as an inorganic carbonate or supercritical carbon dioxide as a solvent.
The purpose of the study of the authors [16] is to analyze the impact of carbon dioxide on the environment and to justify the use of CO 2 in the reproduction of biofuels. By their nature, greenhouse gases in some quantities are vital for organic existence on Earth, as they absorb the thermal radiation of the Earth and reflect it. That is, greenhouse gases help to maintain a normal temperature for all living things on the planet. However, excessive amounts of greenhouse gases are already having a disastrous effect on our organic world, and their resulting amount must be reduced and constantly monitored. In addition to maintaining the number of greenhouse gases at an acceptable level, it is necessary to reduce the consumption of fossil irreplaceable natural resources, as this is also an urgent need for the survival of future generations of the planet.
In the works of researchers [16,17,18], it was noted that the combustion of traditional fuel brings 56% of all CO 2 emissions into the atmosphere. Carbon capture and sequestration technology are some of the most widely used methods need to be reduced the influence of CO 2 emissions in the world. Carbon dioxide is captured directly from the carbon source and transported to storage.
Storage facilities must ensure safe storage of CO 2 for hundreds of thousands of years, without dumping it into the atmosphere. Speaking about this method in more detail, the stages of CO 2 capture should be distinguished: separation of the gas phase, dissolution into liquid, absorption into a solid. When dissolved in a liquid, carbon dioxide is absorbed by a special liquid solvent, then this medium is heated until CO 2 is released and the cycle is repeated. Absorption into a solid is an adsorption process performed by decreasing pressure and increasing temperature. Capturing CO 2 before direct fuel combustion is possible only when using a thermochemical gasification process.
According to Rahman, Farahiyah Abdul, et al. [16], CO 2 capture before combustion is more economical than after combustion. One of the problems of CO 2 biofixation and safekeeping technology is also an insufficiently studied base from the political side. There is not enough research on the exact costs of capturing and general rules for storing CO 2 . Countries need to cooperate on these issues, and this is not happening properly at the moment. Therefore, the method of long-term storage of CO 2 cannot be preferable and it must be useful to utilize it in biofuels. According to the authors, there are very few studies on the simultaneous capture of CO 2 and the production of microalgae at present, although according to the authors, this is a promising area of modern science. Microalgae can actively absorb CO 2 from the exhaust gases for photosynthesis and self-reproduction.
In Alami, Abdul Hai, et al. [19] presented a deep research and understanding on the use of algae as traps for CO 2 from flue gases. The quality of such systems depends on many factors considered by the authors. In general, algae are resistant to external influences, so pure carbon dioxide for their high-quality cultivation may not be used. This means that flue gases are perfect as a source of carbon dioxide for micro and macroalgae. Under the right growing conditions, the degree of carbon dioxide capture by algae can reach 99%, and the slow supply of exhaust gases causes an increase in the growth rate of cultured organisms. Of the flue gases, only CO 2 is necessary for the growth of algae; however, it is necessary to take into account that, in addition to carbon dioxide, flue gases contain at least 140 different chemical compounds [17], which can affect the culture and the environment as a whole. For example, sulfur oxide is toxic to algae. The atmosphere contains a small amount of CO 2 , so the method of saturating the environment with outgoing gases remains more relevant. The growth ratio for most microalgae to the CO 2 introduced to them is about 1/10.
Bhola, V., et al. [20] claim that microalgae can biofix carbon dioxide 50 times more than plants. Algae can generate an average of about 280 tons of already dry biomass per 1 ha per year, provided that solar energy is available 9% of the time. These microalgae can absorb about 513 tons of carbon dioxide during their growth. Given the composition of the flue gases, namely the carbon dioxide content of 3–30%, the most important task is the correct selection of algae that can withstand and absorb such high concentrations of CO 2 . However, if it is not possible to cultivate exactly CO 2 -resistant algae, then it is necessary to constantly maintain the optimal pH level. Under these conditions, the crop will be able to multiply and effectively deal with CO 2 emissions by absorbing them. Moreover, when choosing algae, you should give preference to species that are resistant to NO X and SO X , because they form acids when interacting with water, which is destructive to most crops. It is worth noting that, according to studies, when cultivating algae in natural conditions (pond and sunlight), a pond with a volume of 4000 m 3 can absorb about 2200 tons of CO 2 /year.
The authors of the study [20] experimentally studied the degree of CO 2 capture, crop growth, and the kinetic velocity coefficient of algae such as Chlorella Vulgaris and Nannochloropsis gaditana. The authors found that algae of the types Chlorella, Scenedesmus, Spirulina, Nannochloropsis, and Chlorococcum are characterized not only by large and active growth but also by high tolerance to environmental conditions and CO 2 concentrations. Scientists claim that 1 kg of dry biomass accounts for 1.88 of carbon dioxide absorbed. However, such a rough assumption is not true, and each of the genera of algae must be studied separately by experimental measurement.
The objectives of Adamczyk, Michal et al.’s work are to assess CO 2 biofixing and the study of the growth rate of algae Chlorella Vulgaris and Nannochloropsis gaditana were carried out. Chlorella Vulgaris figure is green microalgae, 2–10 microns in size, spherical in shape, living in freshwater. Nannochloropsis is a cylindrical and spherical microalga that lives in saltwater. The diameter of Nannochloropsis cells is 3–4 microns. The cultivation was carried out under the artificial conditions of a bioreactor. The capacity of the bioreactor was 15 L. Additionally, the biomass was cultivated in plastic bottles with a volume of 1.5 L. The pH level in the bioreactor was maintained at 7, the temperature was 25 °C, the lighting period was 8 h, the CO2 concentration was 4 and 8%, and the gas consumption was 100 L/h. The incubation time of microorganisms is 15 days. Chlorella was grown in a 15 L bioreactor, in another Nannochloropsis bioreactor. The results of cultivation, in this case, can be compared, because the conditions for the penetration of light and the area of contact were the same for both algae. Artificial lighting, which was used in parallel with daylight, was more than twice the intensity of daylight.
According to the results of the experiment with a concentration of CO2 of 4% in the middle of the experiment, an extreme concentration of biomass can be observed. On the last day of the experiment, the level of biomass concentration was equal to the level of the first day. This statement is true for both types of algae. Other results showed the use of 8% carbon dioxide. Chlorella Vulgaris performed worse than Nannochloropsis gaditana. The concentration of Nannochloropsis gaditana for all the days of the experiment changed from 0.24 g/L to 4.0 g/L. This is a very high result. According to fixation, Nannochloropsis gaditana also showed a higher result, in comparison with Chlorella Vulgaris. Trapping was determined by two methods: the first-simplified and generally accepted, the second complex and more accurate. According to two methods, the fixation index of Nannochloropsis gaditana exceeded the biofixation of Chlorella Vulgaris by about two times. During the 9 days of the experiment, the density of microalgae cells increased more than 7–10-fold. According to the results of the kinetic analysis of the daily growth of crops, we can say that the authors obtained a growth rate coefficient of 0.5–0.4 per day.
The (Figure 1) shows algae Chlorella sp. in bulbs.
It is also worth mentioning the experimental study [22] of the efficiency of CO 2 capture by microalgae of the Scenedesmus obliquus type in an artificial photobioreactor. The results showed that the saturation of CO 2 in an amount per volume of 384.9 kg/m 3 /day, or in a percentage concentration of 15% CO 2 , ensures optimal CO 2 capture and crop survival. To meet these capture targets, the maximum biomass output was 0.36 kg/m 3 /day, the CO 2 conversion rate was 0.44 kg CO 2 /m 3 /day, and the oxygen release rate was 0.33 kg CO 2 /m 3 /day. Under these conditions, the maximum efficiency of CO 2 removal reached 30.76%. From a general point of view, the results obtained can be described as the potential for commercial use of such biofuels. However, Scenedesmus obliquus is not the most popular species for its cultivation for energy purposes compared to other algae species.
In addition, biofixation of greenhouse carbon dioxide by algae of the species Scenedesmus obliquus and Spirulina sp. was studied in detail at a temperature of 30 °C in a tubular bioreactor [23]. In the absence of carbon dioxide, microalgae showed low survival after the fifth day of the experiment. If we talk about the results before the death of crops, the best results from this sample were presented by microalgae of the species Spirulina sp. For the cultivation of these microalgae, a carbon-free environment was initially maintained, so that the microorganisms became more tolerant to carbon dioxide, they were slowly assimilated with CO 2 for 7 days. The light period in a tubular bioreactor with columns was 12 h. Without CO 2 , the biomass concentration of both microalgae increased until day 5, and then there was a specific extinction of the crops. Furthermore, the experiment was carried out with 6% and 12% carbon dioxide in microalgae runs; its duration was 21 days. The cultivation performance values of Spirulina sp. were still significantly higher than those of Scenedesmus obliquus. Thus, the species Spirulina sp. can be called suitable for cultivation to capture CO 2 .
The results of the analysis [24] on the amount of carbon dioxide absorbed under different conditions of various microalgae are presented below. From Table 3, we can conclude that Chlorella sp. best copes with carbon dioxide capture.
As already mentioned, the degree of carbon dioxide capture by algae directly depends on the environment. In [25], the authors investigated the absorption of CO 2 by microalgae, their productivity when cultured in a photobioreactor with bubble columns. For algae production for carbon dioxide biofix and further energy use to become part of everyday world practice, it is necessary to obtain a positive energy balance of this system. Thus, there is a clear understanding of the need to build artificial bioreactors that can both efficiently use lighting and minimize energy costs. The results of the laboratory study report that this kind of bioreactor design has a high potential in obtaining biofuel from algae. However, the results obtained after conducting experiments using the same bioreactor tell us that comparing alternative technologies without significant optimization can be unreliable.

4. Micro and Macro Algae—Rationale for the Use of Algae to Capture Carbon Dioxide

The importance of the cultivation of algae in various fields, including in the field of energy, is very high [26,27,28,29,30,31]. Algae as a reserve type of renewable fuel are considered thanks to the rapid growth of algae and the ability of algae to store lipids [32]. Kumar, B. Ramesh, et al. [33] shows not only the potential of this type of energy but also the natural insurmountable limitations of such a type of fuel as organic algae. Table 4 shows the results of the Proximate and ultimate analysis of various types of algae.
The energy potential of algae microalgae is very high, since it does not require complex expensive conditions for keeping and growing algae, and the compensation of non-renewable fuel is effective. If we talk about macroalgae, then the cultivation of such crops, on the one hand, is not too difficult a task. Their cultivation can take place in their natural environment—on the seashore, where there is a lot of sun. However, here you can face the problem of seasonality. Cultivation of macroalgae in the cold, low-sun period is a technical problem. In addition, for the introduction of this type of energy as a commercial project, it is necessary to increase the discounted profitability of the project and reduce the cost of yeast and strains of viable bacteria.
There are various ways to grow algae; two common options are bioreactors and open water. The selected algae need to create conditions close to ideal for their cultivation. Each type of microalgae has its conditions. According to studies [40,41,42], such algae as Spirulina and Dunaliella grow best in open water bodies. Prokaryotic and eukaryotic algae, which are most often grown in a reservoir, include Nannochloropsis sp., Chlorella sp., Tetraselmis sp., Arthrospira platensis, Dunaliella salina, Scenedesmus sp., Haematococcus pluvialis., Anractenaba sp.
In [32], the authors write that the cultivation of microalgae from seawater is more preferable to freshwater. The main reason is the acute shortage of drinking water in the world. However, the cultivation of algae in saltwater involves some difficulties—insufficient levels of nitrogen and phosphate, which are responsible for the production of algae. Thus, the problem of commercializing the bioenergy of algae arises, since the solution of the problem of phosphate and nitrogen content requires significant economic costs. The study was carried out for the Indian subcontinent, where the climate is favorable for the active growth of various types of microalgae. Strain samples were isolated from salt seawater and standing salt baths.
Mathimani et al. [32] investigated a total of 56 different strains of microalgae and cyanobacteria from different coastal regions in India. Microorganisms such as C. vulgaris showed the highest lipid content results—up to 22.2%. However, samples of this type of microorganism showed too wide a range of lipid percentages from 9.2% to 22.2%. Picochlorum showed the most consistently high results for the lipid component from 15.9% to 16.9%. Cyanobacteria showed a lower lipid content than microalgae. Various types of cyanobacteria contain between 2.3% and 10.2% lipids. The study further focused on the development of lower nitrogen and phosphorus combinations to make it possible to lower the cost of industrial-scale microalgae growing and make it profitable for business. As a result, the microalgae vulgaris BDUG 91771 with a high content of NaNO3, K2HPO4, corrected by HNHP, was found to have an increased weight of 0.2 g/L when the culture with LNLP corrections showed 0.06 g/L dry weight. If you pay attention to the percentage of lipids, you can see a different picture. Microalgae contain 22.3% lipids with corrections for HNHP, and 27.4% with corrections under LNLP conditions, which is 5% higher. In addition, the models constructed by the authors are highly determinate for objects—0.9902 and 0.987 for NaNO3 and K2HPO4, respectively, which means that the models can be trusted and these are suitable for interpolation and extrapolation to dry weight and lipid content.
In a study [32], Mathimani et al. reported that the most suitable microalgae for cultivation, for the reproduction of biodiesel, is C. vulgaris. In addition, these authors published the results of a study that seeks to review the problems associated with the cultivation and collection of microalgae that are cultivated for biofuel reproduction [43]. The authors considered marine microalgae such as Chlorella BDUG 91771 grown in an open pond in a semi-continuous mode. They successfully cultivated a 5 kL microorganism in an open pond. The control and measurement experiment lasted for 51 days. As a result, according to the presented figures, with a maximum optical density of 683 nm and the dry weight of C. vulgaris BDUG 91771 was 0.21–0.149 g/L. Furthermore, every 2 days, biomass was collected for 2 kL, which corresponded to 50% of all microalgae. The remaining 50% of the culture was added to the seawater environment, which contains NaNO3, K2HPO4. Thus, a working volume of the medium of up to 4 kL was obtained at a seeding depth of 30 cm. Then the dry weight and optical densities were 0.04 g/L and 0.09, respectively. A high volume of microalgae growth is achieved through a large number of harvests. In addition, the authors noted that the samples that were grown in laboratory conditions have a low survival rate in an open pond. The doubling time of the cultured microorganisms was approximately 37–40 h, which is higher than the cultivation of freshwater algae. Thus, it can be concluded that the quality of biomass for biodiesel is significantly influenced by the biomass content with limited sedimentation.
Among other things, it should be mentioned again that, according to recent studies, 1.88 kg of carbon dioxide is absorbed per 1 kg of biomass already produced [19,20]. The rate and quality of algae growth are strongly under influence the pH level. The optimum pH diapason for successful cultivation is 7–9. The pH is controlled directly by the CO 2 concentration. Temperature is an equally important factor in algal productivity. It should be kept at 20–30 °C. Temperature is a very important factor, since going beyond the highest optimal value by only 2 degrees can lead to a complete loss of the crop.
Now, microalgae already have an extensive history of cultivation. For the production of bio-oil, algae have some advantages, which will be discussed below. However, the complexity and cost of cultivating them outweigh the benefits of using microalgae as an energy source. Therefore, in addition to the main factors for the successful cultivation of biomass, such as light, temperature, and pH, the natural habitat of algae must also be taken into account if they are planned to be cultivated in open natural ponds.

5. Algae Cultivation Methods

The most common method for cultivating microalgae, which is also used on an industrial scale, is an open pond. Such an artificial pond should have a shallow depth of 0.3–0.5 m and be large in area for the growth of micro cultures [44]. Moreover, to mix the medium, introducing various nutrients, etc., such a pond must be equipped with a rotating impeller. In ponds for growing algae, it is necessary to maintain chemical and biological environmental conditions appropriate for the growth of crops, therefore, as necessary they are saturated with the required macronutrients for nutrition. In [45], the authors propose palm oil mill effluent as a nutrient medium for cultivating algae. In a study by Prakash Bhuyar, Sathyavathi Sundararaju et al., the following conclusion was obtained—the most effective conditions for the cultivation of Chlorella sp. are a carbon dioxide concentration of 10.9% and a light intensity of 9963.8 lux. In this paper, the authors study the growth rate of seaweeds, the content of lipids, and chlorophyll in a medium with different urea content [46]. The authors of the study found that the lower the urea content in the nutrient medium, the higher the production of low-weight lipids and vice versa.
Carbon dioxide, without which algae will not grow and multiply, enters the pond, usually through the atmosphere through a physical process of diffusion. This cultivation method is more in demand than others due to its relative simplicity and low cost, but it has some disadvantages. For example, it is necessary to provide unlimited access to water it is difficult to remove biomass. Since the conditions of such a pond are inherently natural, it is not uncommon for the environment or crops to become infected with parasites or infections [47,48,49,50]. Therefore, choosing an artificial open pond is good for Mexico, some European countries, such as Italy or Spain, and several US states, such as California.
One of the implemented ways of organizing an open pond is a source that looks like a racetrack. The authors of [47] spoke in detail about the implementation of such a pond in life. This is not just one large pond, it is a system of a narrow and shallow enclosed pond. The water in such a pond is constantly moving, thanks to the paddle wheel, a “snake” like a racing car on the track (Figure 2). Pond channels can be produced from a wide variety of products from concrete to soil. The grown microalgae enter the impeller as if from the rear, and the impeller captures the biomass [51,52,53,54,55].
The second way of cultivating microalgae is bioreactors (Figure 3). Bioreactors come in many different types. These differ in the type of design and, in general, all bioreactors are closed, isolated systems, which exclude the ingress of infections and parasites into the environment [57].
Special artificial conditions help to grow a specific type of algae or to select certain types of microorganisms. The earliest photobioreactors consisted of plastic bags [58] and had a number of maintenance and operational problems [57,59,60,61,62]. Furthermore, tubular vertical and horizontal bioreactors appeared which can now often be found in laboratory conditions. Special compressors now perform good mixing and aeration, which was difficult to carry out in outdated bioreactors, in tubular systems [63,64,65,66]. The disadvantages of a tubular horizontal bioreactor are the difficulty of accurate temperature control due to the adhesion of microalgae to the tube walls and low mass transfer. Therefore, predominantly vertical tubular bioreactors are commonly used. Vertical tubular bioreactors are equipped with bubble columns or split cylinders [67,68,69,70]. The last specific method of algae cultivation, which is not suitable for all crops, is dark systems [60,61]. Such crops are called heterotrophic, and they obtain carbon from glucose or acetate. Chlorella was successfully cultivated in dark systems as early as 1980. Growing conditions are not overly specific; it is necessary to maintain the pH from 6.1 to 6.5 and the concentration of nitrogen and phosphorus in a quantitative ratio of 9:1.25. The advantage of this method is the good productivity of high-concentration biomass up to 100 dm 3 /L.

6. Using Micro and Macroalgae as an Energy Resource

Algae are the fastest-growing plants on the planet. Algae’s ability to capture carbon makes them a promising biofuel. By maintaining precise growing conditions, which will be mentioned below, biofuels can be obtained from algae. The use of algae as a biofuel product has been reviewed many times in many studies [71,72,73,74,75,76,77]. For example, Mathimani, Thangavel et al. [78] investigated various types of thermochemical treatment of algae for energy and industrial purposes. Plouviez, Maxence et al. [75] point out some advantages of using microalgae, macroalgae, and cyanobacteria as energy fuel. The (Figure 4) demonstrate the main advantages of using algae as bio-oil. Equally of particular importance are experiments conducted with different types of algae about their lipid profile. The authors of this study experimentally found that, among the algae from the coast of Kuantan, Nannochloropsis sp. are the most suitable for biodiesel production. In addition, freshwater macroalgae Rhizoclonium sp. [79] were studied as an energy source in the form of biodiesel. The authors were able to optimize the biodiesel production process and obtain 6.044 g of macroalgae oil with ultrasonic treatment. In addition, there are studies on the production of bioethanol from the mass of macroalgae [80]. In this study, fermentation was applied by the method of two-way separate hydrolysis and fermentation. As a result, this study was able to confirm that macroalgae are excellent for bioethanol production.
Biofuels are a alternative source of unconventional energy in the world. The advantages of biofuels, besides being renewable, are sulfur-free and biodegradable. Biofuels are a low viscosity energy source with a high flash point. Thus, algae biofuels are a promising energy source. It is possible to obtain biofuel from algae during thermochemical treatment.
Thermochemical treatment of algae in comparison with other types of biofuels has the following advantages: high lipid content, which cannot be said about terrestrial crops; no competition with first generation biofuels (agricultural products) due to intensive growth; high absorption of CO 2 . Thermochemical processes include five types: pyrolysis, hydrolysis, carbonation, hydrothermal liquefaction, direct combustion. According to Mathimani, Thangavel et al. [78], hydrothermal liquefaction is the most optimal method for producing liquid fuels. The Table 5 shows the composition of microalgae combustion products at a temperature of 500 °C for 30 min.
Recently, the practice of reducing carbon dioxide emissions by saturating microalgae with flue gases has begun worldwide. Of all the five types of thermochemical treatment for the production of gas fuel—synthesis gas, supercritical gasification is the most preferable. The calorific value of biofuel, its volume, and quality are directly influenced by the choice of the type of algae. When gasification takes place at high temperatures, it becomes possible to obtain thermal and electrical energy by, for example, their combined generation. Gasification can be carried out in two ways—with less intensive drying (conventional gasification), with intensive drying (supercritical gasification). According to earlier studies, an increase in the calorific value of synthesis gas requires joint gasification of microalgae and, for example, wood. In addition, it has been found that supercritical gasification is most suitable for microalgae in terms of energy production. Supercritical gasification Nannochloropsis sp. at a temperature of 450–500 °C and 24 MPa gives synthesis gas with a composition of 32% H2, 30% CO2, and 30% CH4. You can also process microalgae using the carbonization method—obtaining solid fuels at temperatures from 280 °C and above. Then with the help of the obtained solid fuel, it is possible to generate both thermal and electrical energy.
In addition, it must be mentioned that the beneficial effect on the processes of thermochemical regeneration of carbon dioxide. Authors Parvez, Ashak Mahmud, et al. studies [82] reported that carbon dioxide has a beneficial effect on the pyrolysis and gasification processes in terms of controlling the H 2 output. Using carbon dioxide as a raw material also lowers the net yield of carbon dioxide and so provides serious ecological advantages. With all the positive aspects, the use of carbon dioxide during thermochemical conversion is limited because of the endothermic character of the gasification reactions. This limitation can lead to high-energy costs. Advanced carbon biofix and sequestration gasification technology allows up to 90% CO 2 to be permanently stored [82].
In addition, one of the processes of thermochemical conversion is pyrolysis—the process of decomposition of biomass in an environment without an oxidizing agent. Pyrolysis leads to the formation of char, oil, and gas [83]. The pyrolysis process can take place at temperatures of 400–700 °C, and the gasification process at temperatures over 900 °C. In addition, mention should be made of the thermochemical processing of algae for the production of biochar, a solid product obtained by pyrolysis of biomass in the atmosphere with complete or partial removal of oxygen [84,85,86,87,88,89]. The main task of obtaining biochar of good quality and in large quantities is to determine the optimal reaction temperature.

7. Algae Gasification

An alternative method to conventional combustion of biofuels, eliminating the main disadvantages of direct combustion of biomass, is gasification to obtain synthesis gas. The gasification process includes several stages that are carried out in one technical unit: drying (removal of moisture from biomass), thermal decomposition of dry biomass, oxidation of vapor–gas mixture components, and heat release during pyrolysis, synthesis gas evolution—gasification itself. Biofuel gasification is conducted by heating biofuel to a temperature of 1100…1300 °C and higher in an environment with a limited oxidant content [90,91,92,93]. During gasification, reactions occur both with the release of heat and with its absorption; therefore, to maintain the process, the autothermal condition must be provided, in which the total heat effect of all reactions will be zero. Next, we will consider experimental studies of the process of gasification of microalgae biomass.
In [94], the authors studied the properties of microalgae Nannochloropsis sp. during biofuel gasification. Gasification takes place in supercritical water, that is, the pressure and temperature of the water exceed its critical point 647 K, 22.1 MPa. This gasification results in the formation of heating gas. Traditional gasification technology is not suitable in this case since microalgae are inherently high-moisture biomass. There is a need for moisture evaporation for the appearance of dry raw materials. Gasification of microalgae in water with supercritical parameters allows avoidance of the stage of evaporation and drying of wet fuel [38,95,96,97]. The positive aspect of this method is that part of the energy that is spent on reaching supercritical water parameters can be captured and returned to the cycle [98,99,100].
Guan, Qingqing et al. [101] carried out some experiments with the microalga Nannochloropsis sp. Small bioreactors were used as a place of cultivation for the convenience of extracting experimental products in various phase states. The experiment was conducted in this way: the biomass of Nannochloropsis sp. in an amount of 0.24 g was immersed in a bioreactor with fresh water with a volume of 0.67 cm 3 . The dry weight of the algae immersed in the reactor had a solids content of 18%. Instead of air in the bioreactor, the authors of the study used a helium medium. The bioreactors were placed in a fluidized bed of alumina particles, but the valve had to be left on the surface due to supercritical conditions. A pressure of 24 MPa was maintained at 500 °C. The reactors remained in the layer of aluminum oxide particles for several minutes, after which they reached the surface, that is, the reaction proceeded extremely quickly. For the first time, the authors gave the exact organic composition as the reaction proceeded. During the experiment, it was found that the degree of loading of algae in the reactor does not significantly affect the yield of carbon or methane. In addition, the study showed that the composition of the released gas does not depend on the density of the water. However, in previous studies, the density of water influenced the mole fractions of carbon monoxide and hydrogen because of its effect on the reaction velocity of water gas conversion due to the use of quartz reactors. At the same time, the research results describe the influence of water denseness on carbon yield. The higher the authors recorded the value of the density of water, the higher the level of carbon yield. The same thing happens with the energy that was extracted from the resulting gas.
Moreover, Guan, Qingqing et al. [101], mentioned above, investigated supercritical gasification of microalgae Nannochloropsis sp. using catalysts. In this study, the authors used two homogeneous catalysts for sodium and potassium hydroxide and two heterogeneous catalysts—ruthenium catalyst and palladium black. The gaseous volatiles yield was the highest with the use of four catalysts. The best results were shown by an experiment using a ruthenium catalyst. The Ru/C catalyst enhances the yield of volatiles from biomass even at lower temperatures. Previously, it was not possible to gasify a compound that arose because of thermal reactions of gasification of microalgae—ethylbenzene. All four catalysts coped with the task of decomposition and yield of ethylbenzene. In addition, it should be noted that the catalysts work only up to three times of use, inclusive; with subsequent uses, they are not active. By spectroscopic study, a poisonous substance for ruthenium catalysts, sulfur, was found, thus it can be concluded that it is sulfur that deactivates Ru/C. Therefore, if sulfur is present in the algae, the use of a ruthenium catalyst is not recommended.
Furthermore, it is necessary to highlight the effect of CO 2 on thermochemical gasification, since the cultivation of algae presupposes the saturation of the biomass with CO 2 . This effect was investigated by the method of thermogravimetric analysis–gas chromatography [102], i.e., the emission of gases H 2 , CO 2 , CO, and CH 4 was assessed in their quantitative ratio depending on the temperature. Increases in S/C and CO 2 /C have been recorded at temperatures above 700 °C. The release of hydrogen was observed at temperatures above 450 °C; however, a decrease in hydrogen was observed at 700 °C and above. A decrease in aggressive ash content and carbonization was observed in the presence of CO2. The experiments were carried out on a combustion gasification test facility at the Catalysis Laboratory at Columbia University. Furthermore, the authors prepared samples of bark, needles, and grass by drilling, grinding, and drying. The sample weights varied from 16 to 110 mg. Rapid weight loss was observed at temperatures of 300–400 °C. The carbonization of the remaining mass took place in the further gasification process. Oxygen, which contributed to the high-temperature combustion, was introduced along with the steam. Substances with a low content of lignin polymer indicated a high mass residue.
The research goal is Butterman, Heidi C., and Marco J. Castaldi [102] was the determination of the optimal ratio of the operating mode and the ratio of CO2/C. The overall result of biomass gasification is synthesis gas with different ratios of hydrogen and carbon dioxide. As has been said many times earlier, such synthesis gas can be used in the future for the combined generation of heat and electricity. Most often, the air is used for gasification, since it is a more accessible and cheaper medium, but the use of oxygen increases the quality, that is, the calorific value of synthesis gas [103,104,105,106,107,108].
In a study by Butterman, Heidi C., and Marco J. Castaldi [102] pure oxygen obtained after air purification was used for gasification. In this work, three gasification modes were compared: direct heat supply when there is an external heat source for the gasifier, indirect heating in the presence of an external heat source for synthesis gas as a fuel, and indirect heating with an external heat source of biomass as fuel.
During direct heating with the added CO 2 , the H 2 /CO of the synthesis gas product decreased [102]. In general, it has been found that steam demand increases with the addition of CO 2 . With the addition of heat-synthesis gas, its consumption increases with the addition of CO 2 ; however, with a high O 2 /C ratio, the increased consumption of synthesis gas is required even slightly more since O2 also takes part in the production of additional CO 2 during the reaction. However, under all conditions, the addition of oxygen reduces the consumption of synthesis gas, since more biomass is burned. It is also clearly seen in this experiment that the added CO 2 favorably influences the results of gasification in any of the modes proposed by the authors. According to Butterman, Heidi C., and Marco J. Castaldi [102] of the three investigated gasification modes, the most effective is the mode using an external heat source such as biomass, since it is the most environmentally friendly and thermodynamically efficient.

8. Algae Pyrolysis

The pyrolysis process involves the thermal decomposition of organic compounds with a lack of oxygen. As mentioned, early pyrolysis is high-temperature and low-temperature. Pyrolysis up to 900 °C is considered low-temperature and, when it is carried out on biomass, solid fuels are predominantly obtained [109,110,111,112,113,114,115]. When sublimated at high temperatures, the final product will mainly gas. In terms of the course of the process, the more energy is received, the more freedom of connection the molecules have. In addition, the more freedom, the lighter the substance, since the distances between the molecules increase. Next, we will consider some experimental studies of pyrolysis on microalgae biomass.
Belotti, Gianluca et al. [116] researched the method of fast pyrolysis on algae of the Chlorella type. The fast pyrolysis method is potential due to the increased bio-oil yield. The work describes in detail the stages and content of the experiment with Chlorella. In short, BG-11 and BG-11* media with no sodium nitrate salt were used for cultivation. The cultivation took place in an artificial bioreactor with a volume of 5 L at a room temperature of 25 °C. The period of light irradiation was 12 h a day. The number of cells grown during the experiment was found by fixing the parameters of the optical density of the medium at a wavelength of 686 nm. Chlorella Vulgaris was collected using a centrifuge, dried in a hermetically sealed vacuum, and the dried biomass was ground to a size of 100–150 μm. Pyrolysis was performed in a different temperature between 400 and 700 °C with steps of 100 °C. The vapors formed after pyrolysis were cooled to 40 °C. Under these conditions, slow pyrolysis proceeded. Fast pyrolysis was carried out under conditions of constant contact between the particles of microalgae and the walls of the reactor, which made it possible to increase the heating rate up to values characteristic of such a thermochemical process. Furthermore, with the help of a centrifuge, the authors obtained bio-oil by separating from it the aqueous fraction—bio-oil. As a result, the concentration of Chlorella Vulgaris cultured in BG-11 medium will reach 1.7 g/L after 250 h. After drying, the grown culture will be 17% lipids. However, algae cultured in an environment without sodium nitrate showed much better results in terms of lipid content per unit of dry weight. Highest biomass content was reached after 200 h, and the percentage of lipids per dry weight was 28%, which is 9% more than in the BG-11 medium. As a result, the authors using nitrogen starvation of microalgae have shown that this increases the lipid content to 68% of the biofuel mass and increases the bio-oil yield.
Grierson, Scott et al. [117] selected six kinds of algae Tetraselmis chui, Chlorella like, Chlorella vulgaris, Chaetocerous muelleri, Dunaliella tertiolecta, and Synechococcus and studied their thermal conversion during slow pyrolysis. The choice of algae was due to their use in the world by humans, resistance to various environmental conditions, high lipid content in dry matter. Thus, already actively cultivated species of algae were selected for production, energy, growing animal feed, etc. The algae were cultivated in an artificial environment by enriching the saturated air with carbon dioxide—about 2%.
After performing standard slow pyrolysis, the dried processed biomass was subjected to thermal analysis using the method of computer thermal analysis. All volatiles were analyzed with a gas chromatograph. As a result of the analysis of the results, all types of algae showed a low-temperature endothermic peak in the range from 140 to 220 °C. The second endothermic peak occurred at 250–350 °C; these peaks are associated with the active release of carbon dioxide. The released CO2 was from 10 to 18% of the total mass already at 500 °C, depending on the studied culture of microalgae. As a result, the calorific value of each of the considered crops was also analyzed.
Grierson, Scott et al. [117] found that C. vulgaris has the highest calorific value at 4.8 MJ/kg, and the lowest in C. muelleri at 1.2 MJ/kg. Moreover, the results of the study showed that an growth in temperature from 500 to 550 °C will lead to an increase in calorific value by about 1.0 MJ/kg. As a result of the experiment on the percentage of solid, liquid, and gaseous products, C. vulgaris is predominant over other microalgae if gas is needed (25%). If solid is needed, then D. tertiolecta is the most preferred 63%, and for liquid biofuels, it is better to use T. chui—43%. Furthermore, the pyrolysis of microalgae of the species Scenedesmus sp. was considered [110]. Harman-Ware, Anne E., et al. [118] experimented with a temperature of 480 °C and a pressure of 1 atm. The cultivation of this species of algae took place in the natural environment of an open pond. The authors dried 76 L of microalgae at 60 °C for 24 h. After drying, the moisture content of the algae was 2.9%. After grinding, the size of the biomass fractions was 2 mm. The pyrolysis was spent according to the following criteria: temperature 480 °C, pressure 1 atm, stay of steam 2 s, and total operating time 120 min. After passing the high-temperature cyclone in the bioreactor, the biomass passed through four condensers in succession, where the bio-oil was collected. The original product Scenedesmus sp. characterized by several parameters. The volatiles content was 59.7% by weight of the product, the moisture content was 2.9%, the fixed carbon was 2.1%, and the ash content was 35.2%. The combustible mass of microalgae consists of C 32.1%, H 4.8%, N 5.3%, O 22.1%, S 0.5%. This high ash content has a considerable influence on quality of biofuels [115,119,120,121,122]. The content of proteins and lipids in the feedstock was 27.8% and 11.5%, respectively. This lipid content suggests that Scenedesmus sp. is not the best type of microalgae for pyrolysis, since there are species with a lipid content of up to 26%.
Furthermore, the authors considered the study of nonisothermal pyrolysis of algae of the species Porphyra tenera using spectrometry [123]. Kim, Young-Min, et al. write that the inorganic metals contained in the Porphyra tenera algae act as a catalyst for the pyrolysis process. Such a high advantage over other algae, which do not contain a sufficient amount of inorganic metals, immediately has a significant drawback—a high degree of slag formation during combustion. The purchased biomass samples were subjected to grinding using liquid nitrogen cryo-milling. The authors obtained fractions less than 500 μm in size. The authors gave the full composition of the working mass of the feedstock. From the features of the working mass, it can be noted that Porphyra tenera has a high ash content, nitrogen, and sulfur—8.43%, 7.32%, 1.98%, respectively.
Most of the decomposition of microalgae took place in the temperature range 200–500 °C. After pyrolysis, about 30% of the mass of the feedstock remained in the form of a solid residue; this is because of the high ash content of algae and the high content of fixed coal. The average heat of combustion during pyrolysis of P. tenera was 224.1 kJ/mol. The minimum enthalpy of biofuel was 165.1 kJ/mol, and the maximum one was 368.4 kJ/mol. The maximum heat of combustion of Porphyra tenera is due to the decomposition of proteins in the high-temperature region of the reaction.
In addition, attention should be paid to the formation of carbon dioxide and water during pyrolysis in low and medium temperature zones [124,125,126,127,128]. The authors explain their formation by reactions of dehydration and decarboxylation of algal components. Lipids decomposed in algae result in the creation of glycerol and hexadecanoic acid. The release of many combustion products is easily explained by the thermal effect on carbohydrates, lipids, and proteins that are contained in Porphyra tenera. However, when analyzing a detailed chromatogram, there are also difficult to explain components, such as hexadecanenitrile, hexadecanamide, 5,10-diethoxy-2,3,7, 8-tetrahydro-1H, 6H-dipyrrolo [1,2-a:1 ,2 -d] pyrazine. The reasons for the appearance of these compounds require separate study. However, it can be assumed that this is the result of a reaction with intermediate components of pyrolysis. As a result of separate consideration of the reaction in different temperature ranges, the authors were able to detect the products of intermolecular reactions between biopolymers in Porphyra tenera algae.
In the block diagram below (Figure 5), you can see the scheme for the preparation and further beneficial use of biomass.

9. Drying and Flocculation of Biofuels

For effective reproduction of biomass from algae, proper cultivation is not enough because of lighting, temperature, photobioreactor, and other conditions. It is important to pay special attention to biofuel dewatering and drying technologies. The quality of the resulting product, its calorific value directly depends on this [129,130,131,132,133]. For example, with excess water remaining in biomass there may be negative consequences the production of bio-oil and biodiesel. Moreover, although constant harvesting gives an increase in the amount of algae mass by 50–200 times, the water content in the algae mass will remain high [134,135,136,137]. That is why flocculation is a necessary procedure for converting biomass into stable, storable form.
The most popular way to dehydrate algae is flocculation [138]. The good thing about flocculation is that it helps to separate the cells of the microalgae from large parts of the total mass. In general, flocculation is used in the world for the purification of drinking water. Flocculation can be carried out in a variety of ways. The principle of operation of one of the types of flocculation is to neutralize the charging on the surface of microalgae. The addition of cations with a charge of +3, such as aluminum sulfate and poly aluminum chloride, can effectively neutralize the negative charge of algae cells. However, this method has a significant drawback, which is inhibition of chemical reactions due to lipid-saturated biomass. Furthermore, polymer flocculants can effectively dehydrate algae.
Natural starch-based flocculants are widely used in the collection and dehydration of algae because of its wide availability and low cost. Flocculation is the most common procedure to increase the sedimentation rate of microalgae. In addition to chemical flocculation, there is electrical and biological flocculation, which also has a high potential for widespread use. Now the most commonly used processes for dewatering and drying algae are flotation, filtration, and centrifugation. However, Chen et al. [138] propose to pay attention to an alternative and more inexpensive method of dehydration—flocculation and sedimentation. This method is not suitable for all microalgae; therefore, the appropriate method of dehydration is determined purely individually for each case. The same approach applies to methods for drying biomass.

10. Illumination for Algae Growth

For optimal algae growth, there is a so-called light saturation threshold. The level of illumination at which the algae will be limited in their growth only by the speed of the physical and chemical reactions. It is important to take into account the factor that, beyond the optimal luminosity threshold, the growth rate of algae will begin to decline because of the deactivation of key proteins in photosynthetic units. The optimal threshold of luminosity can be calculated; for this, there is a ratio of the rate of photosynthesis and the intensity of light. There are several methods for calculating this optimal threshold. Some researchers believe that the hyperbolic tangential model is suitable for this, while others claim a simplified model of light deceleration, and still others associate this value with the Poisson distribution [139]. In addition to the instantaneous influence of the ratio of the rate of photosynthesis and the intensity of light, there is also a preliminary one. Excessive exposure of cultures to light beforehand will have a bad influence on the future growth of crops. At the time of this study, there were more than 40 models in the literature that could somehow predict the productivity of algae. However, most of these models have a common drawback—insufficient consideration of the impact of external factors [140,141].
The need for lighting control during algae cultivation is still relevant, despite numerous studies [142,143,144,145,146]. Appropriate lighting control can simultaneously make photosynthesis production as efficient as possible and fix the temperature of microalgae photobioreactors, resulting in lower overall production costs. Here Nwoba, Emeka G. et al. [147] are researching new technologies to increase the efficiency of light conversion and fixation temperature. These innovations include spectral filtering, plasma waveguides, spectral shift, wireless light emitters, and insulated glazing that increases production of photosynthesis fearing an uncontrolled increase in temperature in bioreactors. The use of infrared radiation lowers the sharp rise in temperature of biomass in bioreactors. Spectral shift, plasma waveguide, switchable glass and the innovations of insulated glazing are able to improve the quality of light that microalgae absorb. According to the authors [145,148,149,150,151], of all the options considered, they believe that the potential approach to growing microalgae cultures in artificial and natural bioreactors is a synergistic combination of existing and new lighting control technologies to increase biological efficiency, lower costs and lower impact on the environment.
A study on the effect of light intensity and photoperiod on the growth and content of lipids in Nannochloropsis sp. was carried out by the authors [152]. Earlier it was found that the green species of microalgae contains a proportionally high level of lipids, which indicates a higher calorific value compared to other types of algae. Among the marine microalgae Nannochloropsis sp. showed the best potential to create biofuels, because this type of microalgae has high biomass productivity and high lipid content. Photoperiod cycles have a significant influence on the speed of growth crops. For photoautotrophic crops, light regime and photoperiod are critical components in determining crop biomass production. For example, if microalgae are cultured insufficiently deep ponds, then the light intensity must be increased so that it can penetrate the microalgae. Research has shown that, with a light intensity of 100 Lmolm 2 /s and a photoperiodic regime of 18/6 h, microalgae perform better. In short, the results indicated that the improvement in specific growth speed was accompanied by an increase in lipids.

11. Description of Flue Gas Disposal Experiments

The utilization of flue gases from various enterprises and thermal power plants is an extremely relevant topic. As mentioned earlier, algae are able to capture CO 2 and thereby increase their self-production [153,154,155,156,157,158,159,160,161,162]. Next, we will consider several different experiments devoted to the disposal of flue gases using the cultivation of algal biomass.
Chiu et al. [163] cultured Chlorella vulgaris use of exhaust gases from a coke oven of a steel mill. The study was carried out for 6 days based on an open photobioreactor with a volume of 50 L. When operating with intermittent air saturation of exhaust gases, the mean efficiency of carbon dioxide fixation was 60%, which is currently quite low. Moreover, the capture of NO and SO 2 could be maintained at 70% and 50%, respectively. In exhaust gases from the coke oven, the carbon dioxide content is 20–25%; therefore, the saturation of the flue gases with microalgae capable of capturing CO 2 is very high potential. The flue gas from the furnace was gathered in a spent gas storehouse and continuously blown into the bioreactor. The authors cultivated different strains of Chlorella sp. The growth ability of Chlorella vulgaris MTF-7 turned out to be much better than that of Chlorella vulgaris WT when saturated with exhaust gases. The highest biomass content in Chlorella vulgaris MTF-7 saturated with air 2%, 10% or 25% CO 2 were 1.67, 1.50 and 1.32 g/L. The growth potential of Chlorella vulgaris MTF-7 saturated with exhaust gases with steel mill coke oven flue gas, which contained approximately 25% CO 2 , 4% O 2 , 80 ppm NO, and 90 ppm SO 2 , was higher than crops aerated with 2%, 10%, or 25% CO 2 enriched gas without pH control. This study concludes that the flue gas saturation of the Chlorella vulgaris MTF-7 is effective in capturing CO 2 , NO, and SO 2 .
The next work considered is an experiment with the saturation of flue gases, spent in a boiler unit, used as part of the medium for growing Chlorella sp. [164]. The total area of the culture was 55 m 2 and the thickness of the microalgae growth layer was 6 mm. This layer is continuously moving along the walls of the bioreactor at a speed of 50 cm/s; the partial pressure of dissolved CO 2 (pCO 2 ) above 0.1 kPa was kept in suspension at the end of the cultivation zone 50 m long to prevent limiting the growth of algae with CO 2 . NO X and CO gases (up to 45 mgm—3NO X and 3 mgm—3CO in flue gases) did not have a negative effect on the growth of algae. Because of the study, it was determined that 4.4 kg CO 2 is required to obtain 1 kg (dry weight) of algal biomass. In addition, earlier (2005) it was estimated that, to capture CO 2 from exhaust gases from a thermal power plant with a capacity of 300 MW, an area of continuous microalgae harvest of up to 100 km 2 would be required. However, researchers have already significantly reduced the amount of space required by properly adhering to environmental conditions.
The topic of the next experiment is to study the effect of flue gases on the cultivation of microalgae, the degree of accumulation of heavy metals in the biomass saturated with exhaust gases from thermal power plants. In this study, Guruvaiah, Mahendraperumal, and Keesoo Lee [165] cultivated green algae Scenedesmus sp. from wastewater from the Serna power plant, Missouri, USA. The biomass contained two- and four-celled cyanobacteria. Cell productivity doubled every 72–96 h. The exhaust gases were directed into a deep pond with a diameter of 4 m and a volume of about 4000 L. Flue gases were diluted with 2% carbon dioxide by compressing air. The gas mixture was fed daily for 3 h. The authors used two media for algae nutrition. The first medium F/2 contained sodium nitrate, sodium monophosphate, thiamine hydrochloride (vitamin B1), vitamin B12, and biotin. The second F/2A medium contained FeCl 3 , CoCl 2 , ZnSO 4 , CuSO 4 , MnCl 2 , and Na2MoO4. Biomass was harvested at different times of the year: June, July, August, October, November, and December. In the period from June to July inclusive, the authors observed not only the growth of Scenedesmus sp., but also other species: the more dominant Navicula sp. and the less dominant Chlorococcum sp. From July to August, the authors notice a deceleration in increase when compared with the control biomass.
Analysis of the distribution of algae showed the appearance of large cells in two-cell coenobia up to four cells of Scenedesmus sp. The maximum number of cells in Scenedesmus sp. microalgae ranged from 50 cells to 210 (×106 cells/ml) for 30 days. During the cold season, an increase in Nitzschia was recorded. This species is salt-tolerant. Furthermore, a small number of Coelastrum sp. That is, this study showed that the genus Scenedesmus has a greater richness and amount of biomass in ponds that are saturated with exhaust gases. Diatoms include the genus Navicula sp., Nitizchia sp., and Synedra sp. presented the following subdominant abundance of ponds, and the species Coelastrum sp. was the most passive to growth among all identified strains. Concerning heavy metals, the authors found that heavy metals contained in flue gases actively penetrate microalgae.
The purpose of the study [166] is the development of a complex system for the biotransformation of carbon dioxide at oil refineries by cultivating Aphanothece microscopica Nägeli in a photobioreactor with a bubble column. The authors combined wastewater and wastewater saturated with gas from an oil refinery into a single system for the algae to capture CO 2 for photosynthesis.
Next, we will consider a method for reducing CO 2 emissions from a thermal power plant by capturing carbon dioxide by microalgae. De Morais et al. [167] for this purpose isolated two species of algae Scenedesmus obliquus and Chlorella kessleri from the treatment ponds of the Presidente Médici coal-fired power plant in the southern Brazilian state. Microalgae were cultivated in test tubes at a temperature of 30 °C and a 12-h light period. Cultures were examined every two days for their performance. The maximum density of Scenedesmus obliquus was shown with a concentration of carbon dioxide in the medium of 12%—1.14 g/L. This resistance to CO 2 can be easily attributed to the fact that samples of this microalga were collected in the wastewater of a coal-fired thermal power plant. In this study, biomass doubled in 3.2 days without CO 2 addition, and with 6% CO 2 in 2.7 days. The performance of the microalgae decreased over time, but the authors of the study did not affect the pH level, so a decrease in pH may be the reason for the low performance.

12. Conclusions

Based on this review of the literature, we can confidently conclude that microalgae are a third generation biofuel. However, for the successful use of microalgae as a biofuel, several important factors must be taken into account, for example, such factors as pH level in the range of 6–9, nutrient medium temperature 20–30 °C, the composition of the algae nutrient medium, nitrogen and phosphorus content in the nutrient medium. Currently, the vertical bioreactor equipped with bubble columns or split cylinders is the optimal method for cultivating micro and macroalgae. In addition, in this review, it was found that the most preferred of the five types of thermochemical regeneration is supercritical gasification to produce synthesis gas. At the moment, the topic of the cultivation of algae in the environment of exhaust flue gases has been little studied. This topic is now extremely relevant since algae can capture carbon dioxide while increasing their self-productivity. Therefore, the goals of our further research are analysis of the growth of algal cultures in laboratory conditions, thermodynamic analysis of gasification, and pyrolysis of microalgae of various species, both freshwater and marine.

Author Contributions

T.I.: formal analysis; investigation; writing—original draft preparation; writing—review and editing. P.I.: methodology; visualization; supervision. D.P.: conceptualization; methodology; software; resources; data curation; supervision; project administration. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Miyamoto, M.; Takeuchi, K. Climate agreement and technology diffusion: Impact of the Kyoto Protocol on international patent applications for renewable energy technologies. Energy Policy 2019, 129, 1331–1338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  2. Kuriyama, A.; Abe, N. Ex-post assessment of the Kyoto Protocol–quantification of CO2 mitigation impact in both Annex B and non-Annex B countries. Appl. Energy 2018, 220, 286–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Aichele, R.; Felbermayr, G. Kyoto and the carbon footprint of nations. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 2012, 63, 336–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  4. Maamoun, N. The Kyoto protocol: Empirical evidence of a hidden success. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 2019, 95, 227–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Bauer, A.; Menrad, K. Standing up for the Paris Agreement: Do global climate targets influence individuals’ greenhouse gas emissions? Environ. Sci. Policy 2019, 99, 72–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Morais, R.R.; Pascoal, A.M.; Pereira-Júnior, M.A.; Batista, K.A.; Rodriguez, A.G.; Fernandes, K.F. Bioethanol production from Solanum lycocarpum starch: A sustainable non-food energy source for biofuels. Renew. Energy 2019, 140, 361–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Xu, C.; Wang, H.; Li, X.; Zhou, W.; Wang, C.; Wang, S. Explosion characteristics of a pyrolysis biofuel derived from rice husk. J. Hazard. Mater. 2019, 369, 324–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Chowdhury, H.; Loganathan, B. Third-generation biofuels from microalgae: A review. Curr. Opin. Green Sustain. Chem. 2019, 20, 39–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Hasan, M.M.; Chongbo, W. Estimating energy-related CO2 emission growth in Bangladesh: The LMDI decomposition method approach. Energy Strategy Rev. 2020, 32, 100565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Xu, G.; Li, Y.; Hou, W.; Wang, S.; Kong, F. Effects of substrate type on enhancing pollutant removal performance and reducing greenhouse gas emission in vertical subsurface flow constructed wetland. J. Environ. Manag. 2021, 280, 111674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Khayyam, U.; Nazar, U. Energy production and CO2 emissions: The case of coal fired power plants under China Pakistan economic corridor. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 281, 124974. [Google Scholar]
  12. Ma, S.; Xiong, J.; Cui, R.; Sun, X.; Han, L.; Xu, Y.; Kan, Z.; Gong, X.; Huang, G. Effects of intermittent aeration on greenhouse gas emissions and bacterial community succession during large-scale membrane-covered aerobic composting. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 266, 121551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Zheng, J.; Fan, J.; Zhang, F.; Guo, J.; Yan, S.; Zhuang, Q.; Cui, N.; Guo, L. Interactive effects of mulching practice and nitrogen rate on grain yield, water productivity, fertilizer use efficiency and greenhouse gas emissions of rainfed summer maize in northwest China. Agric. Water Manag. 2021, 248, 106778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Paiva, S.L.; Savi, M.A.; Viola, F.M.; Leiroz, A.J. Global warming description using Daisyworld model with greenhouse gases. Biosystems 2014, 125, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Pan, S.Y.; Chiang, P.C.; Pan, W.; Kim, H. Advances in state-of-art valorization technologies for captured CO2 toward sustainable carbon cycle. Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2018, 48, 471–534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Rahman, F.A.; Aziz, M.M.A.; Saidur, R.; Bakar, W.A.W.A.; Hainin, M.; Putrajaya, R.; Hassan, N.A. Pollution to solution: Capture and sequestration of carbon dioxide (CO2) and its utilization as a renewable energy source for a sustainable future. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 71, 112–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Thiyagarajan, S.; Varuvel, E.G.; Martin, L.J.; Beddhannan, N. Mitigation of carbon footprints through a blend of biofuels and oxygenates, combined with post-combustion capture system in a single cylinder CI engine. Renew. Energy 2019, 130, 1067–1081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Aziz, M.B.A.; Kassim, K.A.; Bakar, W.A.W.A.; Marto, A. Fossil Free Fuels: Trends in Renewable Energy; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  19. Alami, A.H.; Alasad, S.; Ali, M.; Alshamsi, M. Investigating algae for CO2 capture and accumulation and simultaneous production of biomass for biodiesel production. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 759, 143529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Bhola, V.; Swalaha, F.; Kumar, R.R.; Singh, M.; Bux, F. Overview of the potential of microalgae for CO2 sequestration. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2014, 11, 2103–2118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Caetano, N.; Melo, A.; Gorgich, M.; Branco-Vieira, M.; Martins, A.; Mata, T. Influence of cultivation conditions on the bioenergy potential and bio-compounds of Chlorella vulgaris. Energy Rep. 2020, 6, 378–384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Deprá, M.C.; Dias, R.R.; Severo, I.A.; de Menezes, C.R.; Zepka, L.Q.; Jacob-Lopes, E. Carbon dioxide capture and use in photobioreactors: The role of the carbon dioxide loads in the carbon footprint. Bioresour. Technol. 2020, 314, 123745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. De Morais, M.G.; Costa, J.A.V. Biofixation of carbon dioxide by Spirulina sp. and Scenedesmus obliquus cultivated in a three-stage serial tubular photobioreactor. J. Biotechnol. 2007, 129, 439–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Ghorbani, A.; Rahimpour, H.R.; Ghasemi, Y.; Zoughi, S.; Rahimpour, M.R. A review of carbon capture and sequestration in Iran: Microalgal biofixation potential in Iran. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2014, 35, 73–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Hulatt, C.J.; Thomas, D.N. Productivity, carbon dioxide uptake and net energy return of microalgal bubble column photobioreactors. Bioresour. Technol. 2011, 102, 5775–5787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Tarhan, S.Z.; Koçer, A.T.; Özçimen, D.; Gökalp, İ. Cultivation of green microalgae by recovering aqueous nutrients in hydrothermal carbonization process water of biomass wastes. J. Water Process. Eng. 2020, 40, 101783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Aliyu, A.; Lee, J.; Harvey, A. Microalgae for biofuels via thermochemical conversion processes: A review of cultivation, harvesting and drying processes, and the associated opportunities for integrated production. Bioresour. Technol. Rep. 2021, 14, 100676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. You, X.; Zhang, Z.; Guo, L.; Liao, Q.; Wang, Y.; Zhao, Y.; Jin, C.; Gao, M.; She, Z.; Wang, G. Integrating acidogenic fermentation and microalgae cultivation of bacterial-algal coupling system for mariculture wastewater treatment. Bioresour. Technol. 2021, 320, 124335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Lim, Y.A.; Chong, M.N.; Foo, S.C.; Ilankoon, I. Analysis of direct and indirect quantification methods of CO2 fixation via microalgae cultivation in photobioreactors: A critical review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 137, 110579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Aron, N.S.M.; Khoo, K.S.; Chew, K.W.; Veeramuthu, A.; Chang, J.S.; Show, P.L. Microalgae cultivation in wastewater and potential processing strategies using solvent and membrane separation technologies. J. Water Process Eng. 2021, 39, 101701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Yew, G.Y.; Khoo, K.S.; Chia, W.Y.; Ho, Y.C.; Law, C.L.; Leong, H.Y.; Show, P.L. A novel lipids recovery strategy for biofuels generation on microalgae Chlorella cultivation with waste molasses. J. Water Process Eng. 2020, 38, 101665. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Mathimani, T.; Uma, L.; Prabaharan, D. Formulation of low-cost seawater medium for high cell density and high lipid content of Chlorella vulgaris BDUG 91771 using central composite design in biodiesel perspective. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 198, 575–586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Kumar, B.R.; Mathimani, T.; Sudhakar, M.; Rajendran, K.; Nizami, A.S.; Brindhadevi, K.; Pugazhendhi, A. A state of the art review on the cultivation of algae for energy and other valuable products: Application, challenges, and opportunities. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 138, 110649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Liu, S.; Yang, Y.; Yu, L.; Li, X. Thermodynamic and environmental analysis of solar-driven supercritical water gasification of algae for ammonia synthesis and power production. Energy Convers. Manag. 2021, 243, 114409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Parvez, A.M.; Wu, T.; Hong, Y.; Chen, W.; Lester, E.H.; Mareta, S.; Afzal, M. Gasification reactivity and synergistic effect of conventional and microwave pyrolysis derived algae chars in CO2 atmosphere. J. Energy Inst. 2019, 92, 730–740. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Yan, J.; Jiang, S.; Song, T.; Shen, L. Chemical looping catalytic steam gasification (CLCSG) of algae over La1−xBaxFeO3 perovskites for syngas production. Biomass Bioenergy 2021, 151, 106154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Zhao, M.; Raheem, A.; Memon, Z.M.; Vuppaladadiyam, A.K.; Ji, G. Iso-conversional kinetics of low-lipid micro-algae gasification by air. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 207, 618–629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Nurcahyani, P.R.; Hashimoto, S.; Matsumura, Y. Supercritical water gasification of microalgae with and without oil extraction. J. Supercrit. Fluids 2020, 165, 104936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Farobie, O.; Matsumura, Y.; Syaftika, N.; Amrullah, A.; Hartulistiyoso, E.; Bayu, A.; Moheimani, N.R.; Karnjanakom, S.; Saefurahman, G. Recent advancement on hydrogen production from macroalgae via supercritical water gasification. Bioresour. Technol. Rep. 2021, 16, 100844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Gallego-Cartagena, E.; Castillo-Ramírez, M.; Martínez-Burgos, W. Effect of stressful conditions on the carotenogenic activity of a Colombian strain of Dunaliella salina. Saudi J. Biol. Sci. 2019, 26, 1325–1330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Radmann, E.M.; Reinehr, C.O.; Costa, J.A.V. Optimization of the repeated batch cultivation of microalga Spirulina platensis in open raceway ponds. Aquaculture 2007, 265, 118–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Sirikulrat, K.; Pekkoh, J.; Pumas, C. Illumination System for growth and Net Energy Ratio Enhancement of Arthrospira (Spirulina) platensis Outdoor Cultivation in Deep Raceway Pond. Bioresour. Technol. Rep. 2021, 14, 100661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Mathimani, T.; Bhumathi, D.; Ahamed, T.S.; Dineshbabu, G.; Deviram, G.; Uma, L.; Prabaharan, D. Semicontinuous outdoor cultivation and efficient harvesting of marine Chlorella vulgaris BDUG 91771 with minimum solid co-precipitation and high floc recovery for biodiesel. Energy Convers. Manag. 2017, 149, 13–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Dębowski, M.; Zieliński, M.; Krzemieniewski, M.; Dudek, M.; Grala, A. Microalgae–cultivation methods. Pol. J. Nat. Sci. 2012, 27, 151–164. [Google Scholar]
  45. Bhuyar, P.; Sundararaju, S.; Rahim, M.H.A.; Ramaraj, R.; Maniam, G.P.; Govindan, N. Microalgae cultivation using palm oil mill effluent as growth medium for lipid production with the effect of CO2 supply and light intensity. Biomass Convers. Biorefin. 2021, 11, 1555–1563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Bhuyar, P.; Sundararaju, S.; Rahim, M.H.A.; Maniam, G.P.; Govindan, N. Enhanced productivity of lipid extraction by urea stress conditions on marine microalgae Coelastrum sp. for improved biodiesel production. Bioresour. Technol. Rep. 2021, 15, 100696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Pankratz, S.; Kumar, M.; Oyedun, A.O.; Gemechu, E.; Kumar, A. Environmental performances of diluents and hydrogen production pathways from microalgae in cold climates: Open raceway ponds and photobioreactors coupled with thermochemical conversion. Algal Res. 2020, 47, 101815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Noguchi, R.; Ahamed, T.; Rani, D.S.; Sakurai, K.; Nasution, M.A.; Wibawa, D.S.; Demura, M.; Watanabe, M.M. Artificial neural networks model for estimating growth of polyculture microalgae in an open raceway pond. Biosyst. Eng. 2019, 177, 122–129. [Google Scholar]
  49. De-Luca, R.; Trabuio, M.; Barolo, M.; Bezzo, F. Microalgae growth optimization in open ponds with uncertain weather data. Comput. Chem. Eng. 2018, 117, 410–419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. He, Q.; Yang, H.; Hu, C. Culture modes and financial evaluation of two oleaginous microalgae for biodiesel production in desert area with open raceway pond. Bioresour. Technol. 2016, 218, 571–579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Langholtz, M.H.; Coleman, A.M.; Eaton, L.M.; Wigmosta, M.S.; Hellwinckel, C.M.; Brandt, C.C. Potential land competition between open-pond microalgae production and terrestrial dedicated feedstock supply systems in the US. Renew. Energy 2016, 93, 201–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Xu, X.; Martin, G.J.; Kentish, S.E. Enhanced CO2 bio-utilization with a liquid–liquid membrane contactor in a bench-scale microalgae raceway pond. J. CO2 Util. 2019, 34, 207–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  53. Usha, M.; Chandra, T.S.; Sarada, R.; Chauhan, V. Removal of nutrients and organic pollution load from pulp and paper mill effluent by microalgae in outdoor open pond. Bioresour. Technol. 2016, 214, 856–860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Inostroza, C.; Solimeno, A.; García, J.; Fernández-Sevilla, J.M.; Acién, F.G. Improvement of real-scale raceway bioreactors for microalgae production using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD). Algal Res. 2021, 54, 102207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Banerjee, S.; Ramaswamy, S. Comparison of productivity and economic analysis of microalgae cultivation in open raceways and flat panel photobioreactor. Bioresour. Technol. Rep. 2019, 8, 100328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Xu, B.; Li, P.; Waller, P. Study of the flow mixing in a novel ARID raceway for algae production. Renew. Energy 2014, 62, 249–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Daneshvar, E.; Ok, Y.S.; Tavakoli, S.; Sarkar, B.; Shaheen, S.M.; Hong, H.; Luo, Y.; Rinklebe, J.; Song, H.; Bhatnagar, A. Insights into upstream processing of microalgae: A review. Bioresour. Technol. 2021, 329, 124870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Lehr, F.; Posten, C. Closed photo-bioreactors as tools for biofuel production. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 2009, 20, 280–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Paladino, O.; Neviani, M. Scale-up of photo-bioreactors for microalgae cultivation by π-theorem. Biochem. Eng. J. 2020, 153, 107398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Fard, G.H.; Mehrnia, M.R. Investigation of mercury removal by Micro-Algae dynamic membrane bioreactor from simulated dental waste water. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2017, 5, 366–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Sastre, R.R.; Csögör, Z.; Perner-Nochta, I.; Fleck-Schneider, P.; Posten, C. Scale-down of microalgae cultivations in tubular photo-bioreactors—A conceptual approach. J. Biotechnol. 2007, 132, 127–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Neviani, M.; Bagnerini, P.; Paladino, O. Gas bubble dynamics in airlift photo-bioreactors for microalgae cultivation by level set methods. Fuel 2021, 292, 120402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Christopher, F.C.; Kumar, P.S.; Vo, D.V.N.; Joshiba, G.J. A review on critical assessment of advanced bioreactor options for sustainable hydrogen production. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2020, 46, 7113–7136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Sun, L.; Tian, Y.; Zhang, J.; Cui, H.; Zuo, W.; Li, J. A novel symbiotic system combining algae and sludge membrane bioreactor technology for wastewater treatment and membrane fouling mitigation: Performance and mechanism. Chem. Eng. J. 2018, 344, 246–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Ma, L.; Wang, F.; Yu, Y.; Liu, J.; Wu, Y. Cu removal and response mechanisms of periphytic biofilms in a tubular bioreactor. Bioresour. Technol. 2018, 248, 61–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Paul, T.; Baskaran, D.; Pakshirajan, K.; Pugazhenthi, G. Continuous bioreactor with cell recycle using tubular ceramic membrane for simultaneous wastewater treatment and bio-oil production by oleaginous Rhodococcus opacus. Chem. Eng. J. 2019, 367, 76–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Cheng, J.; Xu, J.; Ye, Q.; Lai, X.; Zhang, X.; Zhou, J. Strengthening mass transfer of carbon dioxide microbubbles dissolver in a horizontal tubular photo-bioreactor for improving microalgae growth. Bioresour. Technol. 2019, 277, 11–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Hosseini, N.S.; Shang, H.; Ross, G.M.; Scott, J.A. Comparative analysis of top-lit bubble column and gas-lift bioreactors for microalgae-sourced biodiesel production. Energy Convers. Manag. 2016, 130, 230–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Laamanen, C.A.; Scott, J.A. Microalgae biofuel bioreactors for mitigation of industrial CO2 emissions. In Bioreactors; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2020; pp. 1–16. [Google Scholar]
  70. Serna-García, R.; Borrás, L.; Bouzas, A.; Seco, A. Insights into the biological process performance and microbial diversity during thermophilic microalgae co-digestion in an anaerobic membrane bioreactor (AnMBR). Algal Res. 2020, 50, 101981. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Savage, E.; Nagle, N.; Laurens, L.M.; Knoshaug, E.P. Nitrogen derived from Combined Algal Processing supports algae cultivation for biofuels. Algal Res. 2020, 50, 101987. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Banerjee, S.; Banerjee, S.; Ghosh, A.K.; Das, D. Maneuvering the genetic and metabolic pathway for improving biofuel production in algae: Present status and future prospective. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2020, 133, 110155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Khan, S.; Fu, P. Biotechnological perspectives on algae: A viable option for next generation biofuels. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 2020, 62, 146–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Adeniyi, O.M.; Azimov, U.; Burluka, A. Algae biofuel: Current status and future applications. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 90, 316–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Karthikeyan, S.; Periyasamy, M.; Prathima, A. Combustion analysis of a CI engine with Caulerpa racemosa algae biofuel with nano additives. Mater. Today Proc. 2020, 33, 3324–3329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Karthikeyan, S.; Periyasamy, M.; Prathima, A.; Sabariswaran, K. Performance analysis of diesel engine fueled with S. marginatum Macro algae biofuel-diesel blends. Mater. Today Proc. 2020, 33, 3464–3469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Plouviez, M.; Shilton, A.; Packer, M.A.; Guieysse, B. Nitrous oxide emissions from microalgae: Potential pathways and significance. J. Appl. Phycol. 2019, 31, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Mathimani, T.; Baldinelli, A.; Rajendran, K.; Prabakar, D.; Matheswaran, M.; van Leeuwen, R.P.; Pugazhendhi, A. Review on cultivation and thermochemical conversion of microalgae to fuels and chemicals: Process evaluation and knowledge gaps. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 208, 1053–1064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Saengsawang, B.; Bhuyar, P.; Manmai, N.; Ponnusamy, V.K.; Ramaraj, R.; Unpaprom, Y. The optimization of oil extraction from macroalgae, Rhizoclonium sp. by chemical methods for efficient conversion into biodiesel. Fuel 2020, 274, 117841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Khammee, P.; Ramaraj, R.; Whangchai, N.; Bhuyar, P.; Unpaprom, Y. The immobilization of yeast for fermentation of macroalgae Rhizoclonium sp. for efficient conversion into bioethanol. Biomass Convers. Biorefin. 2021, 11, 827–835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Onwudili, J.A.; Lea-Langton, A.R.; Ross, A.B.; Williams, P.T. Catalytic hydrothermal gasification of algae for hydrogen production: Composition of reaction products and potential for nutrient recycling. Bioresour. Technol. 2013, 127, 72–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Parvez, A.M.; Afzal, M.T.; Hebb, T.G.V.; Schmid, M. Utilization of CO2 in thermochemical conversion of biomass for enhanced product properties: A review. J. CO2 Util. 2020, 40, 101217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Li, Y.; Hong, C.; Li, Z.; Xing, Y.; Chang, X.; Zheng, Z.; Zhao, X. Study on the nitrogen migration mechanism during penicillin fermentation residue fast pyrolysis based on the substance transformation and canonical variational theory. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 737, 139739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Liu, P.; Rao, D.; Zou, L.; Teng, Y.; Yu, H. Capacity and potential mechanisms of Cd (II) adsorption from aqueous solution by blue algae-derived biochars. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 767, 145447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Ji, R.; Wu, Y.; Bian, Y.; Song, Y.; Sun, Q.; Jiang, X.; Zhang, L.; Han, J.; Cheng, H. Nitrogen-doped porous biochar derived from marine algae for efficient solid-phase microextraction of chlorobenzenes from aqueous solution. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021, 407, 124785. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  86. Chi, N.T.L.; Anto, S.; Ahamed, T.S.; Kumar, S.S.; Shanmugam, S.; Samuel, M.S.; Mathimani, T.; Brindhadevi, K.; Pugazhendhi, A. A review on biochar production techniques and biochar based catalyst for biofuel production from algae. Fuel 2021, 287, 119411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Ranguin, R.; Delannoy, M.; Yacou, C.; Jean-Marius, C.; Feidt, C.; Rychen, G.; Gaspard, S. Biochar and activated carbons preparation from invasive algae Sargassum spp. for Chlordecone availability reduction in contaminated soils. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2021, 9, 105280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Hung, C.M.; Huang, C.; Hsieh, S.L.; Tsai, M.L.; Chen, C.W.; Dong, C.D. Biochar derived from red algae for efficient remediation of 4-nonylphenol from marine sediments. Chemosphere 2020, 254, 126916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Zhang, Z.; Liu, J.; Shen, F.; Wang, Z. Temporal release behavior of potassium during pyrolysis and gasification of sawdust particles. Renew. Energy 2020, 156, 98–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Bakthavatsalam, A. A comparative study on growth and degradation behavior of C. pyrenoidosa on synthetic phenol and phenolic wastewater of a coal gasification plant. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2019, 7, 103079. [Google Scholar]
  91. Wijayanta, A.T.; Aziz, M. Ammonia production from algae via integrated hydrothermal gasification, chemical looping, N2 production, and NH3 synthesis. Energy 2019, 174, 331–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Su, H.; Hantoko, D.; Yan, M.; Cai, Y.; Kanchanatip, E.; Liu, J.; Zhou, X.; Zhang, S. Evaluation of catalytic subcritical water gasification of food waste for hydrogen production: Effect of process conditions and different types of catalyst loading. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2019, 44, 21451–21463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Raheem, A.; Ji, G.; Memon, A.; Sivasangar, S.; Wang, W.; Zhao, M.; Taufiq-Yap, Y.H. Catalytic gasification of algal biomass for hydrogen-rich gas production: Parametric optimization via central composite design. Energy Convers. Manag. 2018, 158, 235–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Guan, Q.; Savage, P.E.; Wei, C. Gasification of alga Nannochloropsis sp. in supercritical water. J. Supercrit. Fluids 2012, 61, 139–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Sun, J.; Feng, H.; Xu, J.; Jin, H.; Guo, L. Investigation of the conversion mechanism for hydrogen production by coal gasification in supercritical water. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2021, 46, 10205–10215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Wang, C.; Zhu, C.; Huang, J.; Li, L.; Jin, H. Enhancement of depolymerization slag gasification in supercritical water and its gasification performance in fluidized bed reactor. Renew. Energy 2021, 168, 829–837. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Gong, M.; Li, Z.; Wang, M.; Feng, A.; Wang, L.; Yuan, S. Effects of Lewis acid on catalyzing gasification of sewage sludge and model compounds in supercritical water. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2021, 46, 9008–9018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Liu, S.; Guo, L.; Jin, H.; Li, L.; Li, G.; Yu, L. Hydrogen production by supercritical water gasification of coal: A reaction kinetic model including nitrogen and sulfur elements. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2020, 45, 31732–31744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Shan, Y.Q.; Yin, L.X.; Djandja, O.S.; Wang, Z.C.; Duan, P.G. Supercritical water gasification of waste water produced from hydrothermal liquefaction of microalgae over Ru catalyst for production of H2 rich gas fuel. Fuel 2021, 292, 120288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Bogdan, V.I.; Koklin, A.E.; Bogdan, T.V.; Mishanin, I.I.; Kalenchuk, A.N.; Laptinskaya, T.V.; Kustov, L.M. Hydrogen generation by gasification of phenol and alcohols in supercritical water. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2020, 45, 30178–30187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Guan, Q.; Wei, C.; Ning, P.; Gu, J. Catalytic gasification of algae Nannochloropsis sp. in sub/supercritical water. Procedia Environ. Sci. 2013, 18, 844–848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  102. Butterman, H.C.; Castaldi, M.J. Influence of CO2 injection on biomass gasification. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2007, 46, 8875–8886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Valizadeh, S.; Lam, S.S.; Ko, C.H.; Lee, S.H.; Farooq, A.; Yu, Y.J.; Jeon, J.K.; Jung, S.C.; Rhee, G.H.; Park, Y.K. Biohydrogen production from catalytic conversion of food waste via steam and air gasification using eggshell-and homo-type Ni/Al2O3 catalysts. Bioresour. Technol. 2021, 320, 124313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  104. Prestipino, M.; Chiodo, V.; Maisano, S.; Zafarana, G.; Urbani, F.; Galvagno, A. Hydrogen rich syngas production by air-steam gasification of citrus peel residues from citrus juice manufacturing: Experimental and simulation activities. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2017, 42, 26816–26827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Jeong, Y.S.; Kim, J.W.; Seo, M.W.; Mun, T.Y.; Kim, J.S. Characteristics of two-stage air gasification of polystyrene with active carbon as a tar removal agent. Energy 2021, 219, 119681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Hwang, I.S.; Sohn, J.; Do Lee, U.; Hwang, J. CFD-DEM simulation of air-blown gasification of biomass in a bubbling fluidized bed gasifier: Effects of equivalence ratio and fluidization number. Energy 2021, 219, 119533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Said, M.S.M.; Ghani, W.A.W.A.K.; Tan, H.B.; Ng, D.K. Prediction and optimisation of syngas production from air gasification of Napier grass via stoichiometric equilibrium model. Energy Convers. Manag. X 2020, 10, 100057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Inayat, M.; Sulaiman, S.A.; Inayat, A.; Shaik, N.B.; Gilal, A.R.; Shahbaz, M. Modeling and parametric optimization of air catalytic co-gasification of wood-oil palm fronds blend for clean syngas (H2+CO) production. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2020, 46, 30559–30580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Chew, K.W.; Chia, S.R.; Chia, W.Y.; Cheah, W.Y.; Munawaroh, H.S.H.; Ong, W.J. Abatement of hazardous materials and biomass waste via pyrolysis and co-pyrolysis for environmental sustainability and circular economy. Environ. Pollut. 2021, 278, 116836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Phakedi, D.; Ude, A.U.; Oladijo, P. Co-pyrolysis of polymer waste and carbon-based matter as an alternative for waste management in the developing world. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 2021, 155, 105077. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. He, J.; Strezov, V.; Zhou, X.; Kumar, R.; Weldekidan, H.; Kan, T. Effects of co-pyrolysis of heavy metal contaminated biomass with magnesium carbonate on heavy metal deportment and pyrolytic product properties. Fuel 2021, 294, 120545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Qi, J.; Fan, C.; Li, S. Characteristics of lignite char derived from oxy-pyrolysis. Fuel 2021, 291, 120261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Sun, C.; Li, W.; Chen, X.; Li, C.; Tan, H.; Zhang, Y. Synergistic interactions for saving energy and promoting the co-pyrolysis of Polylactic acid and wood flour. Renew. Energy 2021, 171, 254–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Ellison, C.R.; Boldor, D. Mild upgrading of biomass pyrolysis vapors via ex-situ catalytic pyrolysis over an iron-montmorillonite catalyst. Fuel 2021, 291, 120226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Joardder, M.U.; Halder, P.; Rahim, A.; Paul, N. Solar assisted fast pyrolysis: A novel approach of renewable energy production. J. Eng. 2014, 2014, 252848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  116. Belotti, G.; de Caprariis, B.; De Filippis, P.; Scarsella, M.; Verdone, N. Effect of Chlorella vulgaris growing conditions on bio-oil production via fast pyrolysis. Biomass Bioenergy 2014, 61, 187–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Grierson, S.; Strezov, V.; Ellem, G.; Mcgregor, R.; Herbertson, J. Thermal characterisation of microalgae under slow pyrolysis conditions. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 2009, 85, 118–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Harman-Ware, A.E.; Morgan, T.; Wilson, M.; Crocker, M.; Zhang, J.; Liu, K.; Stork, J.; Debolt, S. Microalgae as a renewable fuel source: Fast pyrolysis of Scenedesmus sp. Renew. Energy 2013, 60, 625–632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Suriapparao, D.V.; Vinu, R. Biomass waste conversion into value-added products via microwave-assisted Co-Pyrolysis platform. Renew. Energy 2021, 170, 400–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Wen, Y.; Xie, Y.; Jiang, C.; Li, W.; Hou, Y. Products distribution and interaction mechanism during co-pyrolysis of rice husk and oily sludge by experiments and reaction force field simulation. Bioresour. Technol. 2021, 329, 124822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Li, Q.; Ye, H.; Wang, Z.; Zhou, H.; Wei, J. Characteristics and evolution of products under moderate and high temperature coal pyrolysis in drop tube furnace. J. Energy Inst. 2021, 96, 121–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Adánez-Rubio, I.; Fonts, I.; de Blas, P.; Viteri, F.; Gea, G.; Alzueta, M. Exploratory study of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons occurrence and distribution in manure pyrolysis products. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 2021, 155, 105078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Kim, Y.M.; Han, T.U.; Lee, B.; Watanabe, A.; Teramae, N.; Kim, J.H.; Park, Y.K.; Park, H.; Kim, S. Analytical pyrolysis reaction characteristics of Porphyra tenera. Algal Res. 2018, 32, 60–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Niu, Q.; Wang, J.; Cao, C.; Cheng, Z.; Zhu, Y.; Wen, W.; Wang, J.; Pan, Y.; Yan, B.; Chen, G.; et al. Comparative study of Different Algae Pyrolysis using Photoionization Mass Spectrometry and Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 2021, 155, 105068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Piloni, R.V.; Daga, I.C.; Urcelay, C.; Moyano, E.L. Experimental investigation on fast pyrolysis of freshwater algae. Prospects for alternative bio-fuel production. Algal Res. 2021, 54, 102206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Yu, D.; Hu, S.; Wang, L.; Chen, Q.; Dong, N. Comparative study on pyrolysis characteristics and kinetics of oleaginous yeast and algae. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2020, 45, 10979–10990. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Debiagi, P.E.A.; Trinchera, M.; Frassoldati, A.; Faravelli, T.; Vinu, R.; Ranzi, E. Algae characterization and multistep pyrolysis mechanism. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 2017, 128, 423–436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Casoni, A.I.; Zunino, J.; Piccolo, M.C.; Volpe, M.A. Valorization of Rhizoclonium sp. algae via pyrolysis and catalytic pyrolysis. Bioresour. Technol. 2016, 216, 302–307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Aziz, M.; Oda, T.; Kashiwagi, T. Enhanced high energy efficient steam drying of algae. Appl. Energy 2013, 109, 163–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Hussain, J.; Liu, Y.; Lopes, W.A.; Druzian, J.I.; Souza, C.O.; Carvalho, G.C.; Nascimento, I.A.; Liao, W. Effects of different biomass drying and lipid extraction methods on algal lipid yield, fatty acid profile, and biodiesel quality. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 2015, 175, 3048–3057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Chamola, R.; Khan, M.F.; Raj, A.; Verma, M.; Jain, S. Response surface methodology based optimization of in situ transesterification of dry algae with methanol, H2SO4 and NaOH. Fuel 2019, 239, 511–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Chang, K.L.; Lin, Y.C.; Shangdiar, S.; Chen, S.C.; Hsiao, Y.H. Hydrogen production from dry spirulina algae with downstream feeding in microwave plasma reactor assisted under atmospheric pressure. J. Energy Inst. 2020, 93, 1597–1601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Liu, K. Effects of sample size, dry ashing temperature and duration on determination of ash content in algae and other biomass. Algal Res. 2019, 40, 101486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Pongsiriyakul, K.; Kiatkittipong, W.; Adhikari, S.; Lim, J.W.; Lam, S.S.; Kiatkittipong, K.; Dankeaw, A.; Reubroycharoen, P.; Laosiripojana, N.; Faungnawakij, K.; et al. Effective Cu/Re promoted Ni-supported γ-Al2O3 catalyst for upgrading algae bio-crude oil produced by hydrothermal liquefaction. Fuel Process. Technol. 2021, 216, 106670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Li, M.H.; Robinson, E.H.; Tucker, C.S.; Manning, B.B.; Khoo, L. Effects of dried algae Schizochytrium sp., a rich source of docosahexaenoic acid, on growth, fatty acid composition, and sensory quality of channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus. Aquaculture 2009, 292, 232–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Kuda, T.; Eda, M.; Kataoka, M.; Nemoto, M.; Kawahara, M.; Oshio, S.; Takahashi, H.; Kimura, B. Anti-glycation properties of the aqueous extract solutions of dried algae products and effect of lactic acid fermentation on the properties. Food Chem. 2016, 192, 1109–1115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  137. Aziz, M.; Oda, T.; Mitani, T.; Kurokawa, T.; Kawasaki, N.; Kashiwagi, T. Enhanced energy utilization system of algae: Integrated drying, gasification and combined cycle. Energy Procedia 2015, 75, 906–911. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  138. Chen, C.L.; Chang, J.S.; Lee, D.J. Dewatering and drying methods for microalgae. Dry. Technol. 2015, 33, 443–454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Béchet, Q.; Shilton, A.; Guieysse, B. Modeling the effects of light and temperature on algae growth: State of the art and critical assessment for productivity prediction during outdoor cultivation. Biotechnol. Adv. 2013, 31, 1648–1663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Muñoz-Fernández, J.; Del Rosal, Y.; Álvarez-Gómez, F.; Hernández-Mariné, M.; Guzmán-Sepúlveda, R.; Korbee, N.; Figueroa, F. Selection of LED lighting systems for the reduction of the biodeterioration of speleothems induced by photosynthetic biofilms in the Nerja Cave (Malaga, Spain). J. Photochem. Photobiol. B Biol. 2021, 217, 112155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Chew, K.W.; Khoo, K.S.; Foo, H.T.; Chia, S.R.; Walvekar, R.; Lim, S.S. Algae utilization and its role in the developments of green cities. Chemosphere 2020, 268, 129322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Harmon, V.L.; Wolfrum, E.; Knoshaug, E.P.; Davis, R.; Laurens, L.M.; Pienkos, P.T.; McGowen, J. Reliability metrics and their management implications for open pond algae cultivation. Algal Res. 2021, 55, 102249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Aravind, S.; Barik, D.; Ragupathi, P.; Vignesh, G. Investigation on algae oil extraction from algae Spirogyra by Soxhlet extraction method. Mater. Today Proc. 2021, 43, 308–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Cao, Y.; Shao, P.; Chen, Y.; Zhou, X.; Yang, L.; Shi, H.; Yu, K.; Luo, X.; Luo, X. A critical review of the recovery of rare earth elements from wastewater by algae for resources recycling technologies. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2021, 169, 105519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Leong, Y.K.; Chew, K.W.; Chen, W.H.; Chang, J.S.; Show, P.L. Reuniting the Biogeochemistry of Algae for a Low-Carbon Circular Bioeconomy. Trends Plant Sci. 2021, 26, 729–740. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  146. Baskaran, V.; Saravanane, R. Experimental investigation on Spirulina algae based thermal still for effective bio-desalination. Environ. Nanotechnol. Monit. Manag. 2021, 15, 100434. [Google Scholar]
  147. Nwoba, E.G.; Parlevliet, D.A.; Laird, D.W.; Alameh, K.; Moheimani, N.R. Light management technologies for increasing algal photobioreactor efficiency. Algal Res. 2019, 39, 101433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Jacob, A.; Ashok, B.; Alagumalai, A.; Chyuan, O.H.; Le, P.T.K. Critical review on third generation micro algae biodiesel production and its feasibility as future bioenergy for IC engine applications. Energy Convers. Manag. 2020, 228, 113655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. You, X.; Xu, N.; Yang, X.; Sun, W. Pollutants affect algae-bacteria interactions: A critical review. Environ. Pollut. 2021, 276, 116723. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Laurens, L.M. A new algae technical standards focus group: Summarizing and guiding the algae state of the art. Algal Res. 2021, 53, 102141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Wray, J.L. Calcareous Algae; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  152. Wahidin, S.; Idris, A.; Shaleh, S.R.M. The influence of light intensity and photoperiod on the growth and lipid content of microalgae Nannochloropsis sp. Bioresour. Technol. 2013, 129, 7–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Yang, Y.; Zhang, Q.; Yu, H.; Feng, X. Tech-economic and environmental analysis of energy-efficient shale gas and flue gas coupling system for chemicals manufacture and carbon capture storage and utilization. Energy 2021, 217, 119348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  154. Cutshaw, A.; Daiek, C.; Zheng, Y.; Frost, H.; Marks, A.; Clements, D.; Uludag-Demirer, S.; Verhanovitz, N.; Pavlik, D.; Clary, W.; et al. A long-term pilot-scale algal cultivation on power plant flue gas–Cultivation stability and biomass accumulation. Algal Res. 2020, 52, 102115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  155. Singh, V.; Tiwari, A.; Das, M. Phyco-remediation of industrial waste-water and flue gases with algal-diesel engenderment from micro-algae: A review. Fuel 2016, 173, 90–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Chou, H.H.; Su, H.Y.; Chow, T.J.; Lee, T.M.; Cheng, W.H.; Chang, J.S.; Chen, H.J. Engineering cyanobacteria with enhanced growth in simulated flue gases for high-yield bioethanol production. Biochem. Eng. J. 2021, 165, 107823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Cheng, J.; Zhu, Y.; Zhang, Z.; Yang, W. Modification and improvement of microalgae strains for strengthening CO2 fixation from coal-fired flue gas in power plants. Bioresour. Technol. 2019, 291, 121850. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Chu, F.; Cheng, J.; Hou, W.; Yang, W.; Zhang, P.; Park, J.Y.; Kim, H.; Xu, L. Fecitrate converted from Fe2O3 particles in coal-fired flue gas promoted microalgal biomass and lipid productivities. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 760, 143405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Chen, H.W.; Yang, T.S.; Chen, M.J.; Chang, Y.C.; Lin, C.Y.; Eugene, I.; Wang, C.; Ho, C.L.; Huang, K.M.; Yu, C.C.; et al. Application of power plant flue gas in a photobioreactor to grow Spirulina algae, and a bioactivity analysis of the algal water-soluble polysaccharides. Bioresour. Technol. 2012, 120, 256–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Singh, H.M.; Kothari, R.; Gupta, R.; Tyagi, V. Bio-fixation of flue gas from thermal power plants with algal biomass: Overview and research perspectives. J. Environ. Manag. 2019, 245, 519–539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Jiang, Y.; Zhang, W.; Wang, J.; Chen, Y.; Shen, S.; Liu, T. Utilization of simulated flue gas for cultivation of Scenedesmus dimorphus. Bioresour. Technol. 2013, 128, 359–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Kumar, P.K.; Krishna, S.V.; Verma, K.; Pooja, K.; Bhagawan, D.; Himabindu, V. Phycoremediation of sewage wastewater and industrial flue gases for biomass generation from microalgae. S. Afr. J. Chem. Eng. 2018, 25, 133–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  163. Chiu, S.Y.; Kao, C.Y.; Huang, T.T.; Lin, C.J.; Ong, S.C.; Chen, C.D.; Chang, J.S.; Lin, C.S. Microalgal biomass production and on-site bioremediation of carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxide and sulfur dioxide from flue gas using Chlorella sp. cultures. Bioresour. Technol. 2011, 102, 9135–9142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Doucha, J.; Straka, F.; Lívanskỳ, K. Utilization of flue gas for cultivation of microalgae Chlorella sp.) in an outdoor open thin-layer photobioreactor. J. Appl. Phycol. 2005, 17, 403–412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  165. Guruvaiah, M.; Lee, K. Effect of flue gas on microalgae population and study the heavy metals accumulation in biomass from power plant system. Int. J. Appl. Sci. Biotechnol. 2014, 2, 114–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  166. Jacob-Lopes, E.; Franco, T.T. From oil refinery to microalgal biorefinery. J. CO2 Util. 2013, 2, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  167. de Morais, M.G.; Costa, J.A.V. Isolation and selection of microalgae from coal fired thermoelectric power plant for biofixation of carbon dioxide. Energy Convers. Manag. 2007, 48, 2169–2173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Algae Chlorella sp. in bulbs [21].
Figure 1. Algae Chlorella sp. in bulbs [21].
Sustainability 14 03801 g001
Figure 2. Conventional algal raceway pond [56].
Figure 2. Conventional algal raceway pond [56].
Sustainability 14 03801 g002
Figure 3. Green Wall Panel photo-bioreactors [58].
Figure 3. Green Wall Panel photo-bioreactors [58].
Sustainability 14 03801 g003
Figure 4. Advantages of producing bio-oil from algae.
Figure 4. Advantages of producing bio-oil from algae.
Sustainability 14 03801 g004
Figure 5. Scheme for the preparation and further utilization of algae biomass.
Figure 5. Scheme for the preparation and further utilization of algae biomass.
Sustainability 14 03801 g005
Table 1. Parts of gas emissions in various energy-intensive industries.
Table 1. Parts of gas emissions in various energy-intensive industries.
%NOXSO2SO3COSPMCO2CH4N2O
Domesticated6.67.08.60.91.8257.34.2
Industry9.322.232.10.42.816.64.12.6
Transport48.428.730.696.886.823.479.747.9
agriculture3.95.43.20.24.72.61.440.4
Oil refineriesNANANANANA3.20.70.4
Power plants31.836.725.51.73.929.16.74.4
Table 2. Climate threats due to greenhouse gases.
Table 2. Climate threats due to greenhouse gases.
No.Brief Description of ThreatsReference
1Continuous increase in the temperature of planet Earth[10]
2Melting glaciers (Himalayan glaciers have melted by 21% in the last 40 years)[3]
3Radiation exposure[11]
4Changes in the composition of the atmosphere[11]
5Sea level rise[12]
6Violation of the agricultural system[12]
7Increased flood risk[13]
Table 3. Comparison of the main results of the experiment.
Table 3. Comparison of the main results of the experiment.
Type of AlgaeBiomass Productivity, mg/LdCO 2 Content, mg/LdTemperature, °CThe Capture CO 2 , mg/Ld
Nannochloris sp.3501525658
Nannochloropsis sp.3001525564
Chlorella sp.95050351790
Chlorella sp.70020401316
Chlorella sp.3865025725
Chlorella sp.100015251880
Chlorella sp.5005025940
Chlorogleopsis sp.4055020.45
Hot spring algae266.71550501.3
Chlorocuccum littorale44502282
Table 4. Proximate and ultimate analyses of algae (ad, wt%).
Table 4. Proximate and ultimate analyses of algae (ad, wt%).
Proximate Analysis (wt.%)Ultimate Analysis (wt.%)
Moisture Volatile Fixed Carbon Ash C H O N S  
Nannochloropsis----43.36.025.16.40.5[34]
Chlorella-72.918.48.751.97.130.59.60.9[35]
Chlorella-12.3672.315.185.72.17.54.30.4[35]
Algae7.5375.5910.915.9742.310.8423.849.260.27[36]
Chlorella6.1885.852.665.3138.986.4648.250.510.16[37]
Spirulina4.4784.545.855.1436.296.1545.350.680.15[37]
Chlorella original---4.8947.937.3131.139.27-[38]
Chlorella after extraction---4.3747.357.0831.009.69-[38]
Chorda filum13.152.224.911.6139.14.737.21.41.6[39]
Fucus serratus11.445.524.223.433.54.834.42.41.3[39]
Gracilaria gracilis5.953.110.936.031.55.917.52.92.0[39]
Enteromorpha clathrata10.157.910.721.232.74.924.74.42.0[39]
Table 5. The composition of the combustion products of algae at 500 °C for 30 min [81].
Table 5. The composition of the combustion products of algae at 500 °C for 30 min [81].
SampleNaOH (M)Ni/
Al2O3
H2 (mol%)CO (mol%)CO2 (mol%)Methane (mol%)C2 –C4 (mol%)C V (MJ/m 3 )
Spirulina21.14.2636.221.216.927.9
Spirulina1.6760.521.914.631.3
Spirulina1.67Yes59.026.514.534.0
SpirulinaYes23.50.9737.921.616.126.3
Saccharina24.84.2350.212.08.7417.3
Saccharina1.6768.823.37.9425.2
Saccharina1.67Yes61.828.79.5327.6
SaccharinaYes26.01.8551.214.86.2313.7
Chlorella18.35.2845.017.114.322.8
Chlorella1.6757.325.916.833.3
Chlorella1.67Yes52.627.619.735.6
ChlorellaYes24.50.4534.622.717.728.2
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Iglina, T.; Iglin, P.; Pashchenko, D. Industrial CO2 Capture by Algae: A Review and Recent Advances. Sustainability 2022, 14, 3801. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14073801

AMA Style

Iglina T, Iglin P, Pashchenko D. Industrial CO2 Capture by Algae: A Review and Recent Advances. Sustainability. 2022; 14(7):3801. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14073801

Chicago/Turabian Style

Iglina, Tatyana, Pavel Iglin, and Dmitry Pashchenko. 2022. "Industrial CO2 Capture by Algae: A Review and Recent Advances" Sustainability 14, no. 7: 3801. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14073801

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop