Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 15: 712742, 2015

Copyright Taiwan Association for Aerosol Research

ISSN: 1680-8584 print / 2071-1409 online
doi: 10.4209/aaqr.2014.11.0299

Review

A Review: Microalgae and Their Applications in CO2 Capture and Renewable

Energy
Worasaung Klinthong, Yi-Hung Yang, Chih-Hung Huang, Chung-Sung Tan*
Department of Chemical Engineering, National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu 30013, Taiwan
ABSTRACT
Fossil fuels, which are recognized as unsustainable sources of energy, are continuously consumed and decreased with
increasing fuel demands. Microalgae have great potential as renewable fuel sources because they possess rapid growth rate
and the ability to store high-quality lipids and carbohydrates inside their cells for biofuel production. Microalgae can be
cultivated on opened or closed systems and require nutrients and CO2 that may be supplied from wastewater and fossil fuel
combustion. In addition, CO2 capture via photosynthesis to directly fix carbon into microalgae has also attracted the attention
of researchers. The conversion of CO2 into chemical and fuel (energy) products without pollution via this approach is a
promising way to not only reduce CO2 emissions but also generate more economic value. The harvested microalgal
biomass can be converted into biofuel products, such as biohydrogen, biodiesel, biomethanol, bioethanol, biobutanol and
biohydrocarbons. Thus, microalgal cultivation can contribute to CO2 fixation and can be a source of biofuels. This article
reviews the literature on microalgae that were cultivated using captured CO2, technologies related to the production of
biofuels from microalgae and the possible commercialization of microalgae-based biofuels to demonstrate the potential of
microalgae. In this respect, a number of relevant topics are addressed: the nature of microalgae (e.g., species and
composition); CO2 capture via microalgae; the techniques for microalgal cultivation, harvesting and pretreatment; and the
techniques for lipid extraction and biofuel production. The strategies for biofuel commercialization are proposed as well.
Keywords: Microalgae; Pretreatment; Extraction; CO2 capture; Biofuels.

INTRODUCTION
Currently, global energy exigency is increasing greatly
with the increasing world population and improving quality of
life. In general, fossil fuels have been the major source of
energy. Nevertheless, decreasing fossil fuels with increasing
fuel demand is unavoidable. To replace fossil fuels, various
biomass feedstocks, including both terrestrial plants and
aquatic algae, have been discovered to generate renewable
fuels (Bahadar and Khan, 2013). Aquatic microalgae are
ideal for producing liquid fuels because their rapid growth,
high biomass yields, product variety and simple harvest
from ponds or closed bioreactor systems allow them to be
potentially consumed as sustainable environmentally friendly
carbon-neutral fuel sources (Gao et al., 2012; Sing et al.,
2013).
Microalgae are microscopic organisms that typically grow
suspended in water and are driven by the same photosynthetic
process as that of higher plants (Hanelt et al., 2007).

Corresponding author.
Tel.: 886-3572-1189; Fax: 886-3572-1684
E-mail address: [email protected]

Microalgae can comprise bacteria (cyanobacteria), diatoms

(e.g., Chromalveolata), other protists (e.g., Chromista), and
unicellular plants (e.g., Chlorophyta) (Bahadar and Khan,
2013). However, unlike higher plants, microalgae do not
require a vascular system for nutrient transport, as every
cell is photoautotrophic with directly absorbing nutrients.
Microalgal cells are sunlight-driven cell factories that can
convert carbon dioxide (CO2) into raw materials for producing
biofuels (e.g., biohydrogen, biodiesel, and bioethanol),
animal food chemical feedstocks and high-value bioactive
compounds (e.g., Docosahexaenoic acid (DHA)) (Spolaore et
al., 2006; Milledge, 2011; Razzak et al., 2013). In particular,
the ability of these cells to absorb CO2 suggests microalgae
cultivation as an attractive alternative for CO2 sequestration
that can be applied to fossil fuel power plant gas effluents
to facilitate the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions
(Yun et al., 1997).
CO2 fixation via microalgae is a potential and promising
method for CO2 capture and storage (Masakazu and
Masahiro, 1997; Naoto and Masahiro, 1997; Razzak et al.,
2013; Zhao and Su, 2014). CO2 fixation and storage via
microalgae are essentially photosynthesis, which can
transform water and CO2 to organic compounds without
extra energy addition or consumption and without secondary
pollution. Compared to other carbon capture and storage

Klinthong et al., Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 15: 712742, 2015

(CCS) methods, CO2 fixation via microalgae has many

benefits, such as a high photosynthesis rate (e.g., 6.9 104
cells/mL/h (Suali and Sarbatly, 2012)), a rapid growth rate
(0.73.2 day1 (Maeda et al., 1995; Ryu et al., 2009)),
good environmental adaptability and low cost of operation.
As a special advantage, biomass from microalgae for
energy consumption is provided after CO2 capture. The
performance of CO2 fixation via microalgae and biomass
production depends on the cultivation conditions (e.g.,
temperature, light, pH, and nutrient availability), species of
microalgae, CO2 concentration and toxic pollutants in the
flue gas (Zhao and Su, 2014).
The high CO2 and nutrient requirements of microalgae
can be supplied by flue gases and waste water from other
industrial processes, providing ecological advantages while
lowering the cost of biomass production. Microalgae can be
used as bioremediation agents to remove inorganic nutrients
from wastewaters (cost of wastewater treatment about
0.156.0 USD/m3 (Fu et al., 2008; Yuan et al., 2010)) and
to improve water quality due to their high capacity for
nutrient uptake (Razzak et al., 2013). Microalgae that grow
in the bioremediation of waste are further processed into a
wide spectrum of fuel products, including (1) hydrogen
(H2) via direct and indirect biophotolysis, (2) biodiesel
through transesterification, (3) biomethane via anaerobic
digestion, (4) bioethanol and biobutanol via fermentation,
(5) bio-oil via thermochemical conversion and (6) green
diesel and gasoline through direct catalytic hydrothermal
liquefaction (Demirbas, 2009a, b; Damartzis and Zabaniotou,
2011; Nigam and Singh, 2011; Huang and Tan, 2014). An
integration of microalgal cultivation with CO2 utilization
and microalgal application as biofuel is presented in Fig. 1.
Microalgae grow by consuming nutrients that are dissolved
in water or wastewater and CO2 from ambient air or the
exhaust gases from combustion process under solar energy.
Here, the microalgae biomass is obtained, and O2 is released
into the atmosphere. Finally, the biomass is converted into
energy and food supplementation for humans and animals

713

through a process including extraction (e.g., organic

solvent extraction, supercritical fluid (SCF) extraction,
etc.), fermentation, transesterification, etc. Therefore, the
cultivation of microalgae provides three important benefits,
including (1) CO2 capture from a fossil fuel-based power
plant, (2) wastewater treatment and (3) renewable energy
sources (Razzak et al., 2013).
Recently, studies are being developed to establish
processes and technologies for application of microalgae at
the industrial scale. However, the transition from pilotscale to industrial-scale operations often exposes microalgae
cells to hostile circumstances, resulting in reduction of
product yields. The recovery of microalgae from highly dilute
suspensions requires steps to lyse cells and reduce the
extract yield. Therefore, the integration of the best microalgae
cells and bioprocessing engineering methods to ensure
economic and environmental feasibility and to minimize the
number of full-scale tails is still challenging. Conditions for
technically and economically viable biofuel resources should
be competitive or cost less than petroleum fuels, have low
to no additional land use, enable air quality improvement
(e.g., CO2 sequestration), and have minimal water use
(Bahadar and Khan, 2013). Production costs associated
with microalgae-based biofuels are the major barrier in the
commercialization of biofuel, but fuels from microalgae
are still promising in the view of competition with petroleum
fuels.
This article reviews the literature on microalgae that
were cultivated using captured CO2, technologies related
to the production of biofuels from microalgae and the idea
of the commercialization of microalgae-based biofuels to
demonstrate the potential of microalgae. In this respect, a
number of relevant topics are addressed: the nature of
microalgae (e.g., species and composition); CO2 capture
via microalgae; the techniques for microalgae cultivation,
harvesting and pretreatment; and the techniques for lipid
extraction and biofuel production. The strategies for biofuel
commercialization are proposed as well.

Fig. 1. An integration of microalgae cultivation with CO2 utilization and their applications as biofuels.

714

Klinthong et al., Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 15: 712742, 2015

MICROALGAE SPECIES AND THEIR

COMPOSITIONS
Microalgae are made up of eukaryotic cells. Microalgae
cells consist of cell wall, plasmatic membrane, cytoplasm,
nucleus and organelles, such as mitochrondria, lysosomes
and golgi (Taher et al., 2011). Microalgae also have plastids,
the bodies with chlorophyll that carry out photosynthesis.
However, various strains of microalgae have different
combinations of chlorophyll molecules - some have only
Chlorophyll A, some A and B, while other strain, A and C
(Um and Kim, 2009). The biomass of microalgae contains
three main components: proteins, carbohydrates and lipids.
The biomass composition of various algae is shown in
Table 1. To achieve the maximum benefits from microalgae
cultivation, it is essential to pay attention to the selection
of suitable species. Microalgae cultivation is composed of a
single specific strain that is precisely selected for producing
the desired product and the most beneficial outcome of the
cultivation process. The cultivation conditions, including (1)
water media with adequate pH and temperature, (2) necessary
contained nutrients and (3) CO2 dosed in a controlled
manner in the presence of sunlight, are also required for
microalgae cultivation. The nitrogen source (e.g., ammonia
and nitrates), other minerals and vitamins are the nutrients
that must be provided sufficiently to ensure the proper
growth of microalgae.
CULTIVATION TECHNIQUES
A wide range of microalgae cultivation techniques has
been reported in the literature (Wang et al., 2008; Suali
and Sarbatly, 2012; Bahadar and Khan, 2013; Zhao and
Su, 2014). There are many types of microalgae cultivation
techniques depending on (1) the investment cost, (2) the

desired products, (3) the source of nutrients and (4) CO2

capture. The cultivation systems are categorized into open
and closed systems. The open systems are outdoor facilities
consisting of ponds, lagoons, deep channels, shallow
circulating units and others. In contrast, the closed systems
are vessels or tubes with walls that are made of transparent
materials and that are located in outdoors under sunlight
irradiation or artificial irradiation (Razzak et al., 2013).
Open System
Until now, open ponds have been used for large-scale
microalgae cultivation considering their simple construction
and easy operation. The cultivation systems can be classified
as (1) natural waters (e.g., lakes, lagoons, ponds, etc.) and
(2) artificial water systems (e.g., artificial pond, tanks, and
container). The shapes, sizes and types (agitated, inclined,
etc.) of open systems depend on the applications. There are
various types of ponds, including unstirred, raceway and
circular ponds. Unstirred ponds (Fig. 2(a)) are the most
economical due to their simple management and construction.
Commercial unstirred ponds are built in natural water
ponds of less than half a meter in depth. Unstirred ponds
are commercially used for some microalgae species, such
as Dunaliella salina (Borowitzka and Borowitzka, 1990).
However, this type of pond is very limited in its
applications, given that microalgae are not able to grow
under frequently poor growth conditions and competitive
growth with contaminating protozoa, bacteria and viruses
(Chaumont, 1993).
Raceway ponds (or stirred paddle wheel open ponds)
(Fig. 2(b)) are the most famous open system in current use.
Raceway ponds are usually shallow, between 15 and 25 cm in
depth. These ponds are normally constructed as either a single
channel or groups of channels that are built by connecting
individual raceway ponds. The productivity of the biomass

Table 1. Compositions of microalgae based on dry matter (Um and Kim, 2009; Sydney et al. 2010; Singh et al., 2012).
Microalgae specie
Anabaena cylindrical
Aphanizomenon flos-aquae
Arthrospira maxima
Botryococus braunii
Chlamydomonas rheinhardii
Chlorella pyrenoidosa
Chlorella vulgaris
Dunaliella bioculata
Dunaliella salina
Euglena gracilis
Isochrysis sp.
Neochloris oleoabundans
Porphyridium cruentum
Prymnesium parvum
Scenedesmus obliquus
Spirogyra sp.
Spirulina maxima
Spirulina platensis
Synechococcus sp.
Tetraselmis maculata

Protein (%)
4356
62
6071
817
48
57
5158
49
57
3961
3151
2060
2839
2845
5056
620
6071
4663
63
52

Carbohydrate (%)
2530
23
1316
820
17
26
1217
4
32
1418
1114
2060
4057
2533
1017
3364
1316
814
15
15

Lipid (%)
47
3
67
21
21
2
1422
8
6
1420
2022
3554
914
2238
1214
1121
67
49
11
3

Klinthong et al., Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 15: 712742, 2015

715

Fig. 2. Cultivation systems: (a) unstirred pond, (b) raceway pond, (c) circular pond (Chen et al., 2009), (d) tubular
photobioreactor (Carvalho et al., 2006), (e) plastic bag photobioreactor (Richmond, 2008), (f) air-lift loop reactor (Barbosa
et al., 2003) and (g) flat plate photobioreactor (Carvalho et al., 2006).
in the raceway pond is 60100 mg dry weight/L/day
(Razzak et al., 2013). Raceway ponds are mostly used for
the commercial culturing of four species of microalgae:

Chlorella sp., Spirulina platensis, Haematococcus sp. and

Dunaliella salina (Moheimani and Borowitzka, 2006). The
circulation of the cultivation media in the raceway pond is

716

Klinthong et al., Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 15: 712742, 2015

induced by paddle. The optimal circulation velocity is

required for water flow without the deposition of
sedimentation or the aggregation of cells (Brindley et al.,
2002). However, problems with solid deposition in stagnant
areas are difficult to overcome.
Circular ponds (central pivot) (Fig. 2(c)) are the oldest
large-scale algae-cultivation open ponds. The depth of
these ponds is approximately 2530 cm. Microalgae are
usually grown in concrete circular ponds of up to 45 m in
diameter with agitation by rotating paddles. A 20-to-30cm-thick layer of inorganic nutrient solution with algae is
exposed to sunlight and CO2 bubble under the continuous
movement of paddle wheels (Lee, 2001).
Although there are many advantages of the open systems,
as described above, their limitations are as follows: (1)
poor light consumption by cells, (2) evaporative losses, (3)
diffusion limitation of CO2 from the atmosphere, (4) large
land area requirement and (5) easy contamination by
unwanted algae, mold, and bacteria (Razzak et al., 2013).
These limitations can be overcome using translucent plastic
covers or greenhouses over the open ponds. However, this
proposal cannot solve the contamination issues; in addition,
the high capital cost, maintenance and overheating make
open ponds that are covered by translucent plastics
impractical due to the large land area of the pond.
Closed System
Microalgae can be grown in a closed system under
controlled conditions, such as light utilization, area required
and percentage of carbon dioxide. The closed system can
address some of the problems that are associated with open
systems. Photobioreactors are a type of closed pond system
that are used for microalgae cultivation, as they can reduce
contamination risk from unwanted algae, mold, and
bacteria; control temperature; minimize water evaporation;
and remove carbon dioxide losses. However, it should be
noted that although photobioreactors significantly reduce the
growth of competitive algal weeds, they cannot completely
eliminate the growth of contaminants. Two disadvantages
of this system are that it is difficult to construct and operate
and is costly. The various designs of photobioreactors
include flat plate, tubular, etc. (Borowitzka, 2007).
Tubular photobioreactors (Fig. 2(d)) are made with
transparent materials and are placed in outdoor facilities
under sunlight irradiation. Gas exchange vessels to supply
CO2, air and nutrients and to remove O2 are connected to
the main reactor (Richmond, 2004; Chisti, 2007). For the
design of these cultivation vessels, a large surface area per
unit volume is required to maximize the exposure of
microalgae to sunlight. The tube sizes are generally less
than 10 cm in diameter to maintain sunlight permeability. In a
typical tubular microalgae cultivation system, the medium is
circulated through the tubes, where it is exposed to sunlight
for photosynthesis. The medium is circulated back to a
reservoir using a mechanical or an airlift pump. The pump
also helps to maintain a highly turbulent flow within the
reactor to prevent the flocculation of microalgal biomass
(Chisti, 2007). A fraction of microalgae is usually harvested
after it circulates through the solar collector tube, permitting

the continuous operation of the system. However, tubular

photobioreactors are still studied on the laboratory scale
but are not practical. In some photobioreactors, the tubes
are a coiled spiral, forming helical-tubular photobioreactors.
These types of reactors are suitable for the cultivation of
microalgal species in the presence of sunlight. An artificial
light sometime replaces natural light to enhance
microalgae growth. However, the use of artificial light
adds to the investment costs, leading to the helical-tubular
photobioreactors only being adequate for the manufacture of
high-value added products (Morita et al., 2001; Briassoulisa
et al., 2010).
Microalgae can be cultivated in transparent polyethylene
bags, called plastic bag photobioreactors (Fig. 2(e)). These
bags are hung or placed in a cage under sunlight irradiation,
while the microalgae are mixed with air in the bottom of
the bags (Razzak et al., 2013; Xia et al., 2013). Transparent
polyethylene sleeves that are sealed at the bottom in a
conical shape are used to prevent cell settling.
Airlift photobioreactors (Fig. 2(f)) are simple and costeffective reactors for the mass cultivation of various types of
microalgae. Acrylic glass is used as a material to construct
airlift photobioreactors because it is inexpensive and
available. There are two zones in airlift photobioreactors,
including dark (called rinser) and irradiated zones. The airlift
photobioreactors are believed to meet the desired criteria
for the new generation photobioreactors of high light
penetration and biomass production, ease of maintenance, and
minimal contamination (Barbosa et al., 2003). However,
airlift photobioreactors are sometimes difficult to scale-up
given their complex flow pattern (Mirn et al., 2000).
Vertical bubble columns and airlift cylinders can attain a
substantially increased radial movement of fluid, with a
high cycling of medium between the irradiated and dark
zones. The advantages of these units include (1) high mass
transfer, (2) good mixing with low shear stress, (3) low
energy consumption, (4) relatively easy operation under
sterile conditions, (5) good for the immobilization of algae
on moving particles and (6) less photo inhibition and
oxidation. However, the limitations of these units include
(1) high manufacturing and maintenance costs, (2) smaller
irradiation per unit surface area, (3) more sophisticated
construction materials, (4) higher shear stress on microalgal
cultivations, and (5) larger number of units needed to
construct a commercial plant (Razzak et al., 2013).
Flat plate photobioreactors (Fig. 2(g)) are very effective for
the biomass cultivation of microalgae. These photobioreactors
provide a high surface area to volume ratio for illumination
and have a convenient modular design for scale-up (Barbosa
et al., 2005). The biomass productivity of microalgae
rapidly increases with the mixing rate, which can provide a
proper amount of CO2 to the cultivation while removing
excess oxygen and increasing the flashing effect. Flat plate
photobioreactors are suitable for outdoor and indoor
cultivations, are good for algae immobilization, and are
relatively cheap and easy to clean (Ugwu et al., 2008).
Vertical flat plates can be accommodated in 10002000 L
volume capacity units that are successfully operated for a
long time period. Therefore, these are fully scalable

Plastic bag

Flat plate

Bubble column

Airlift

Type of
photobioreactor
Tubular

Phaeodactylum tricornutum
Phaeodactylum tricornutum
Porphyridium cruentum
Spirulina sp.
Spirulina platesnsis
Spirulina platensis
Spirulina sp.
Botryococcus branuii
Chaetoceros sp.
Chlorella sp.
Chlorella vugaris
Haematococcus pluvialis
Nannochloropsis sp.
Aphanothece microscopica
Chaetoceceros sp.
Chlorella vulgaris
Cyanobium sp.
Phaeoductylum sp.
Isochrysis aff. Galbana
Monodus sp.
Monoraphidium sp.
Scenedesmus obliquus
Spirulina sp.
Chlorella vulgaris
Dunaliella sp.
Dunaliella tertiolecta
Nannochloropsis sp.
Nannochloropsis sp.
Phaeodactylum sp.
Tetraselmis sp.

Strain

Capacit
y (L)
200
75
6000
10000
5.5
65
100
3
170
n/a
2
3
n/a
3
170
1.8
1.8
1.9
5
64
4.5
1.8
3.5
1.53.0
3.4
30
200
440
5
50

Biomass
concentration
1.19 g/L
1.38 g/L
35 g/m2/d
25 g/m3/d
0.62 g/L
32.5 g/m2/d
0.01 g/L/g
2.31 g/m3/d
0.80 g/L
109264
0.28-0.89 g/L/d
4.09 g/L
32.595.3 g/m3/d
0.77 g/L/d
3.31 g/L
1.41 g/L
0.071 g/L
n/a
n/a
0.030.20 g/L
23 g/m3/d
2.12 g/L
4.13 g/L
0.0270.045 g/L/h
1.5 g/L
3.42 g/d
0.225 g/L
0.27 g/L
1.38 g/L
2030 g/m3/d
1. Excellent light use and
temperature control,
2. Low cooling
requirement,
3. High gas transfer
coefficient.
-

1. Scalable; homogeneous
culture environment,
2. Low cooling
requirement,
3. Effective light use.

1. Good light use,

2. High temperature
control,
3. High mass transfer
coefficient

1. Very effective light use,

2. Excellent temperature
control,
3. Reasonable scale up.

Advantage

Reference

Acien Fernndez et al., 2001.

Hall et al., 2003.
Sakai et al., 1995.
Torzillo et al., 1986.
Huntley and Redalje, 2007.
Negoro et al., 1993.
Chiu et al., 2008.
1. Low hydrodynamic Avila et al., 2001.
stress on algae,
Krichnavaruk et al., 2007.
2. Difficult to scale up. James and Al-Khars, 1990.
Hanagata et al., 1992.
Kaewpintong et al., 2007.
James and Al-Khars, 1990.
Increased shear stress Jacob-Lopes et al., 2009.
by pumps limiting
Krichnavaruk et al., 2007.
biomass productivity. de Morais and Costa, 2007b.
Henrard et al., 2011.
Brindley et al., 2002.
Mandalm and Palsson, 1998.
Bosma et al., 2007.
Miyamoto et al., 1988.
de Morais and Costa, 2007b.
de Morais and Costa, 2007b.
Difficult to scale up. Satoh et al., 2001.
Barbosa et al., 2005.
Chang and Yang, 2003.
Richmond and Wu, 2001.
Richmond and Wu, 2001.
Meiser et al., 2004.
Trotta, 1981.

Fouling with some

growth along walls.

Disadvantage

Table 2. Cultivation of microalgae species in closed photobioreactor systems.

Klinthong et al., Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 15: 712742, 2015
717

Klinthong et al., Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 15: 712742, 2015

718

photobioreactor units (Richmond, 2004). The ideal strain,

advantages and disadvantages of each photobioreactor that
has been used to cultivate microalgae are summarized in
Table 2.
CO2 CAPTURE VIA MICROALGAE
Biotechnological techniques for CO2 fixation are conducted
to reduce CO2 emission. These processes are based on the
use of reactors to generate photosynthetic reactions in
which microalgae are used as biocatalysts in a series of
biochemical reactions that are responsible for the conversion
of CO2 into photosynthetic metabolic products (Jacob-Lopes
et al., 2010). Microalgal biomass contains approximately
50% carbon by dry weight (Mirn et al., 2003). This carbon is
typically obtained from carbon dioxide; roughly, 100 tons
of microalgal biomass fixes 183 tons of CO2 (Huang and
Tan, 2014). Microalgae are capable of using three different
inorganic carbon assimilation pathways: (1) direct carbon
dioxide assimilation via the plasmatic membrane; (2) the use
of bicarbonate by inducing the enzyme carbonic anhydrase,
which converts HCO3 to CO2; and (3) the direct transport
of bicarbonate via the plasmatic membrane. However,
there are a few differences in inorganic carbon assimilation
pathways for different microalgae as demonstrated in Table 3.

CO2 must be fed continuously during daylight hours. The

control of CO2 feeding can be evaluated by pH measurements
to minimize the loss of CO2. As a result, CO2 fixation using
microalgae can reduce the CO2 emission from power plants,
which has the positive environmental impact (Inoue et al.,
1995; Yun et al., 1997; Abu-Khader, 2006; Brennan and
Owende, 2010).
Photosynthesis
A promising pathway to capture CO2 in the form of
microalgal biomass is provided by biological processes via
photosynthesis. In microalgae, photosynthesis releases
oxygen and can be called oxygenic photosynthesis. CO2 is
converted into lipids and other hydrocarbons in this process,
explaining the designation of CO2 fixation process. In
oxygenic photosynthesis, water is the electron donor, and
oxygen is released after hydrolysis. The equation for
photosynthesis can be written as follows:
H2O + CO2 + Photons (light) [CH2O]n + O2

In this reaction, the standard free energy for the synthesis

of glucose is 2,870 kJ/mol (Zhao and Su, 2014). The
overall reaction can be divided into two pathways: (1) lightdependent reaction and (2) dark or light-independent reaction.

Table 3. Pathway for inorganic carbon assimilation for microalgae (+, present; -, absent; n/a, not available).
Species
Chlamydomonas reinhardtii
Dunaliella terteolecta
Scenedesmus obliquus
Chlorella saccharophila
Chlorella ellipsoidea
Chlorella kesslerii
Navicula pelliculosa
Phaeodactylum tricornutum
Cyclotella sp.
Ditylum brightwellii
Skeletonema costatum
Chaetoceros calcitrans
Thalassiosira punctigera
Thalassiosira pseudonanna
Porphyridium cruentum
Emiliania huxleyi
Dicrateria inornata
Isochrysis galbana
Phaeocystis globosa
Vischeria stellata
Eremosphaera viridis
Nannochloris atomus
Nannochloris maculata
Amphidinium carterae
Heterocapsa oceanica
Nannochloropsis gaditana
Nannochloropsis oculata
Monodus subterraneus

CO2
(pathway (1))
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
n/a
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+

(1)

carbonic
anhydrase
(pathway (2))
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-

HCO3
(pathway (3))
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
n/a
+
+
n/a
+
+
n/a
+
+
+
-

Reference
Sltemeyer et al., 1989.
Amoroso et al., 1998.
Palmqvist et al., 1994.
Rotatore and Colman, 1991.
Rotatore and Colman, 1991.
Bozzo et al., 2000.
Rotatore and Colman, 1992.
Colman and Rotatore, 1995.
Rotatore et al., 1995.
Korb et al., 1997.
Korb et al., 1997.
Korb et al., 1997.
Elzenga et al., 2000.
Elzenga et al., 2000.
Colman and Gehl, 1983.
Elzenga et al., 2000.
Colman et al., 2002.
Colman et al., 2002.
Elzenga et al., 2000.
Huertas et al., 2002.
Rotatore et al., 1992.
Huertas et al., 2000a.
Huertas et al., 2000a.
Colman et al., 2002.
Colman et al., 2002.
Huertas et al., 2000b.
Huertas et al., 2000b.
Huertas et al., 2002.

Klinthong et al., Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 15: 712742, 2015

The light-dependent reaction involves both photochemical

and redox reaction steps. The overall equation for light
reaction is as follows (Mukherjee and Moroney, 2011;
Razzak et al., 2013):
2H2O + 2NADP+ + 3ADP + 3P + light 2NADPH + 2H+
+ 3ATP + O2
(2)
where ADP, P and NADP are adenosine diphosphate,
phosphate and nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate.
Light energy is used to synthesize ATP (adenosine
triphosphate) and NADPH (nicotinamide adenine
dinucleotide phosphate) which are energy storage molecules.
In the light-independent reaction or dark reaction, the
enzyme ribulose bisphosphate carboxylase/oxygenase
(RuBisCO) captures CO2 from the atmosphere. This process
requires the newly formed NADPH, called the CalvinBenson Cycle (Peter et al., 2010). To be more specific,
carbon fixation produces an intermediate product that is
then converted into the final carbohydrate products. The
carbon skeletons that are produced by photosynthesis are
then used in a variety of ensuing processes, forming other
organic compounds. For example, cellulose is the precursor
for lipid and amino acid biosynthesis or is a fuel for
respiration. The overall equation for the light-independent
reaction is as follows (Razzak et al., 2013):
3CO2 + 9ATP + 6NADPH + 6H+ C3H6O3-phosphate +
9ADP + 8P + 6NADP+ + 3H2O
(3)
The fixation or reduction of CO2 takes place by combining
CO2 with a five-carbon sugar, ribulose 1,5-bisphosphate
(Ru5BP), generating two molecules of a three-carbon
compound, glycerate 3-phosphate (GP), also called 3phosphoglycerate (PGA). In the presence of ATP and
NADPH (from light-dependent stages), GP is reduced to
glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate (G3P). This product is also
referred to as 3-phosphoglyceraldehyde (PGAL) or even as
triose phosphate. Most of the G3P that is produced is used
to regenerate Ru5BP so that the process can continue. Of
the six molecules of triose phosphates, one is not recycled
and often condenses to form hexose phosphate, yielding
sucrose, starch and cellulose. The sugars that are produced
during carbon metabolism yield carbon skeletons that can
be used for other metabolic reactions, such as the production
of amino acids and lipids (Razzak et al., 2013).
CO2 Source
Microalgae use CO2 as a carbon source. These
microorganisms cannot grow without a CO2 supply. An
insufficient CO2 supply is often the limiting factor of
productivity. Thus, reducing the atmospheric CO2 by
microalgal photosynthesis is considered safe and
advantageous for the human ecosystem (Mukherjee and
Moroney, 2011).
The growth performance of some microalgae, e.g.,
Chlorella sp., can be negatively affected by CO2 at a higher
than 5% (v/v) concentration (Silva and Pirt, 1984; Lee and
Tay, 1991; Cheng et al., 2006). However, some microalgae

719

can grow under a flue gas CO2 concentration level (10

15%), but the carbon fixation and biomass production rates
are less than that under lower CO2 concentration. Very few
microalgal species are able to tolerate extremely high CO2
levels of up to 70% (e.g., Chlorella sp. KR-1 and Chlorella
sp. ZY-1) and 100% (e.g., Chlorella sp. T-1). The optimal
CO2 concentration for most microalgal species is usually
recommended to be 0.03810%, for example, the maximum
biomass production was observed at 2.5% CO2 for microalgae
Chlorella sp. (Chiu et al., 2008) and at 6% for Scenedesmus
obliquus and Chlorella kessleri (de Morais and Costa, 2007b).
Toxic Pollutants in Combustion Flue Gas
SO2
The presence of SO2 strongly inhibits microalgae growth.
When the SO2 concentration exceeds 100 ppm, it is almost
impossible to grow most microalgae (Hauck et al., 1996).
Some microalgal species are able to grow with difficultly
under conditions of high SO2 concentration; however, they
have a longer lag phase than in the absence of SO2. When
the SO2 concentration increases, the inhibition effect is
enhanced, resulting in a sharp reduction in carbon fixation
and biomass production, for instance, even chlorella sp.
KR-1, which is considered a high-performance microalgal
species, could not survive under the conditions of 150 ppm
SO2 with 15% CO2 (Lee et al., 2000). SO2 may not directly
inhibit the microalgal growth (Matsumoto et al., 1997).
The inhibition effects of SO2 on microalgae growth may be
attributed to the increased acidity. The H+ release that is
generated by the hydrolysis of SO2 results in an increase in
the acidity of the cultivation medium (Du et al., 2010). When
the pH is less than 3.0, the microalgae cells are killed (Maeda
et al., 1995). However, if the pH of the cultivation medium
is artificially maintained constant by the neutralization
method, the microalgal growth characteristic is approximately
the same as that without SO2 (Zhao and Su, 2014). These
results seem to indirectly demonstrate that the effect of
SO2 on microalgae is transmitted through the pH value in
the batch strategy; however, this situation is not seen in all
occasions. Other investigations have indicated that the effect
of SO2 on microalgae is related not only to the pH value
but also to SO42 and HSO4 obtained from the hydrolysis
of SO2. SO42 and HSO4 are also inhibition factors of
microalgal growth (Chiu et al., 2011).
NOx
In flue gas, the NOx emission level varies from several
hundred to several thousand ppm with more than 9095%
NO and 510% NO2. After the flue gas de-NOx process,
NO is still at the level of 50200 ppm. It is difficult for NO
to directly impact the growth of microalgae via pH in the
cultivation medium. The NO concentration usually has a
two-sided influence on the growth of microalgae. An
extremely low concentration of NO may even be absorbed
by the cultivation medium and transformed into NO2- as
the source of nitrogen nutrition for microalgae when using
inorganic forms (Zhao and Su, 2014). However, this positive
influence is quite limited: the increased NO concentration
results in at least a decreased growth rate of microalgae for

Klinthong et al., Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 15: 712742, 2015

720

most microalgal species; NO at higher than 300 ppm may

decrease microalgae growth (Chaumont, 1993)
Typically, SOx and NOx in flue gas can be treated
separately by flue gas desulfurization (FGD) and selective
catalytic reduction (SCR) processes, respectively, or
simultaneously by the combined treatment systems before
the treated gas stream enters a microalgae reactor. The FGD
commonly uses CaCO3 to absorb SO2 to form CaSO4. SCR
uses ammonia or urea and a catalyst such as titanium oxide,
silico-alumino-phosphate, zeolite, Al2O3, etc. to decompose
NOx into N2 and H2O (Jin et al., 2005; Hende et al., 2012).
The examples of combined treatment systems are the
DeSoNox or SNOX processes, where a catalytic reduction
of NOx is combined with a catalytic oxidation of SO2 (Trozzi
et al., 2010).
CO2 Fixation
Microalgae can eventually produce some CO2 overnight,
as occurs with other plants; however, the net CO2 uptake is
still positive. The CO2 fixation rate is directly related to the
light utilization efficiency and the cell density of microalgae.
Microalgal CO2 fixation involves photoautotrophic growth in
which anthropogenically derived CO2 may be used as a
carbon source. Therefore, biomass measurements and growth
rate evaluations are critical in assessing the potential of a
microalgal cultivation system for direct CO2 removal (Costa
et al., 2004; Cheng et al., 2006). The CO2 removal efficiency
in a photobioreactor with microalgal cultivation can be
determined as the difference in the CO2 concentration of
the incoming and outgoing effluents. The removal efficiency
(%) can be determined using the following formula (Chiu
et al., 2009):
Efficiency (%)

Influent of CO2 Effluent of CO2

100
Influent of CO2
(4)

The efficiency of CO2 removal or fixation in a closed

cultivation system depends on the (1) microalgal species,
(2) CO2 concentration, (3) photobioreactor design and (4)
operating conditions (de Morais and Costa, 2007a; Chiu et
al., 2009). Chlorella vulgaris possesses a maximum CO2
removal efficiency of 55.3% at 0.15% CO2 in a membrane
photobioreactor, and Spirulina sp. and Scenedesmus obliquus
possess a maximum CO2 removal efficiency of 2738% and
713%, respectively, in a three serial tubular photobioreactor
(Cheng et al., 2006), while their CO2 fixation efficiencies
were reduced to 717% and 49% under 12% CO2 aeration
(de Morais and Costa, 2007). In the other words, the CO2
removal efficiency and fixation depend on the species of
microalgae due to the physiological conditions of microalgae,
such as the potential for cell growth and CO2 metabolism.
The CO2 fixation rate could be determined from the
carbon content of the microalgal cell (Yun et al., 1997).
The fixation rate was calculated as follows:
RCO2 CC L (

M CO2
MC

(5)

where RCO2 and L are the fixation rate (g CO2/m3 h) and the
volumetric growth rate (g dry weight/m3 h), respectively,
while MCO2 and MC are the molecular weights of CO2 and
elemental C, respectively. CC is the average carbon content
as measured by elemental analysis. The microalgal growth
rate is determined in the linear growth regime.
Due to climatic, land and water restrictions, there are
challenges to collecting and utilizing microalgae directly
on site. However, the economics of microalgae utilization
can be increased using a two-stage process. In such a process,
the CO2 from a power plant or other source is first scrubbed
(e.g., amine scrubber) and concentrated with a conventional
process (Rochelle, 2009; Yu et al., 2012). The concentrated
CO2 is then transported to a suitable site for microalgae
production. This process can be compared to the economics
of other conventional CO2 processes where CO2 capture
involves a separation process followed by transportation
and finally disposal in deep oceans and/or depletion in gas
wells (Razzak et al., 2013). One should consider that some
microalgae species are tolerant to relatively high temperatures
(close to and greater than 30C). These types of microalgae
can be cultivated in conjunction with the use of hightemperature flue gases from industrial neighbor sites (Wang
et al., 2008). These thermo-tolerant strains may also simplify
species control, as the optimum growth temperature of most
microalgal species is in the range of 2030C. Several
unicellular microalgae strains, for example, Chlorella sp.,
grow at temperatures of up to 42C, and their tolerance to
both high temperatures and a high CO2 content makes them
potentially appropriate microbial cells for photobioreactors
that are involved in CO2 capture for flue gases (Wang et
al., 2008). Table 4 presents the microalgae strains that
have been studied for CO2 fixation.
Improvement and Application of the CO2 Fixation Process
Until now, CO2 fixation by microalgae, biomass production
and energy consumption have experienced great progress
in both laboratory-scale scientific research and pilot-scale
applications (Chisti, 2010; Chi et al., 2011; Chisti and Yan,
2011). Process improvement as a middle measurement is
necessary to more efficiently guarantee CO2 fixation and
biomass production. Whether in laboratory-scale research
or pilot-scale application, the performance of CO2 fixation
and biomass production highly depend on the process
conditions and parameters. For laboratory-scale research,
the microalgae selection, cultivation and promotion to obtain
high performance of microalgae species may be important
factors. The evaluations of microalgae performance under
drastic process and environmental factors, such as high CO2
concentration, high temperature and toxic pollutants in flue
gas, are also required. For pilot-scale application, microalgal
cultivation is mainly affected by the cultivation temperature,
light exposure and hydrodynamic conditions. Open
cultivation is more influenced by outdoor temperature, light
intensity (day and night) and season (adversely influences
microalgal growth) compared to closed cultivation (Zhao
and Su, 2014).
For closed systems, the improvements of the process
parameters for CO2 fixation and biomass production are

Spirulina sp.

Chlorella sp. AG10002

Chlorella sp. WT
Chlorella sp. MTF-7
Dunaliella tertiolecta
Haematococcus pluvialis
Scenedesmus obliquus

Chlorella sp.

Aphanothece microscopica
Botryococcus braunii
Chlorococcum littorale
Chlorella kessleri
Chlorella valgaris

Strain

CO2
(%)
15
15
40
18
15
Air
Air
10
40
5
20
5
25
25
3
1634
Air
Air
12
12

Temperature
(C)
35
30
30
30
27
25
25
22
42
26
18
20
25
25
27
20
17
30
30
30
8.0
8.3
5.5
6.4
7.0
6.0
9.4
8.2
7.2
7.0
7.0

pH

N
(mg/L)
24.71
1250
34.65
125.4
1250
1250
2.25
46.33
12.35
17.65
37.06
37.06
1000
51.66
51.66
173.27
173.27

P
(mg/L)
7.13
1250
17.10
1250
1250
13.36
4.76
1.29
0.29
3.88
3.88
535
4.46
4.46
284.93
284.93

Biomass productivity
(g/L d)
0.800
1.1
0.087
0.360
0.040
0.024
0.278
0.207
0.271
0.335
0.200
0.358
0.170
0.076
0.009
0.016
0.140
0.220

CO2 fixation rate

(g/L d)
1.5
> 1.0
1.0
0.163
0.624
0.075
0.045
0.522
1.0
0.389
0.510
1.446
0.376
0.674
0.313
0.143
0.016
0.031
0.26
0.413

Reference
Jacob-Lopes et al., 2009.
Murakami and Ikenouchi, 1997.
Iwasaki et al., 1998.
de Morais and Costa 2007b.
Yun et al. 1997.
Scragg et al. 2002.
Scragg et al. 2002.
Stephenson et al., 2010.
Sakai et al. 1995.
Chiu et al., 2008.
Zhao and Su, 2014.
Ryu et al., 2009.
Chiu et al., 2011.
Chiu et al., 2011.
Kishimoto et al. 1994.
Huntley and Redalje 2007.
Gomez-Villa et al. 2005.
Gomez-Villa et al. 2005.
de Morais and Costa 2007b.
de Morais and Costa 2007b.

Table 4. Cultivation compositions (CO2, pH, amount of N and P sources) and CO2 fixation of microalgae strain.

Klinthong et al., Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 15: 712742, 2015
721

722

Klinthong et al., Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 15: 712742, 2015

mainly physicochemical parameters, including light exposure,

nutrition conditions and hydrodynamic parameters, such as
mixing and mass transfer rates by increasing the gas-liquid
contact area and retention time, even though the economy
nd practical use are in contention for their scale-up (Mirn
et al., 1999). CO2 fixation and biomass production can be
improved using a high aeration rate to achieve turbulence
mixing, a high CO2 mass transfer rate and a high removal
rate of excess oxygen in the cultivation medium (Sierra et al.,
2008). Nevertheless, high stress to microalgal cells and high
operating costs are still important challenges (Zhao and Su,
2014).
As a result, CO2 fixation through microalgae and biomass
production in practical use are influenced by various factors,
such as microalgal species and physicochemical and
hydrodynamic conditions. To maximize the CO2 fixation
and biomass production performance, the synergistic effect
and optimization process parameters are of concern and
still need to be solved when using microalgae for CO2
fixation and mass production on industrial scales.
HARVESTING OF THE MICROALGAE BIOMASS
Harvesting is an expensive and problematic segment of
the industrial production of microalgae biomass due to the
low cell density of microalgae, being typically in the range
of 0.30.5 g/L, with exceptional cases reaching 5 g/L.
However, the optimal requirement for the industrial scale
is a cell sludge containing at least 300-400 g/L. Thus, the
effluent microalgal suspension needs to be concentrated at
least 100 times, which is an energy-intensive process (Wang
et al., 2008).
After microalgae cultivation has reached the stationary
phase, it is separated from water and the biomass recovered for
downstream processes. However, the microalgae-harvesting
process possesses a challenging task because microalgae
have a micron size (120 m) and are suspended in liquid.
Currently, there are several methods to harvest microalgae,
including (1) bulk harvesting to separate microalgae from
suspension, such as natural gravity sedimentation, flocculation
and floatation, leading to a concentration factor of 100800
times, and (2) thickening to concentrate the microalgae slurry
after bulk harvesting, such as centrifugation and filtration,
leading to a concentration factor of 30 times. Flocculation
and flotation are widely used for the bulk harvesting. The
flocculation mechanism is to neutralize or reduce the negative
charge on the microalgal cellular surface to aggregate cells in
suspension, which can be collected by adding flocculants
such as multivalent cations and cationic polymers (Molina
et al., 2003). Flocculation can be performed by adjusting
the pH of the cultivation to between 10 and 10.6 using NaOH
to neutralize the negative charges on the cell surface, and
the non-ionic polymer Magnafloc LT-25 is added. The
ensuring flocculate is harvested and neutralized to generate
a final concentration factor of between 200- and 800-fold.
Here, significant breakthroughs in developing polymeric
flocculants are urgently required through intensive research
to further strengthen the potential use of flocculation in the
harvesting process (Lam and Lee, 2012). Flotation depends

on trapping cells by dispersed micro-air bubbles without

the addition of any chemical reagents. The flotation can
capture particles with a diameter of less than 500 mm by
collision between a bubble and a particle and the subsequent
adhesion of the bubble and the particle. The flotation
process where microalgae float to the surface of medium is
prone to harvest in microalgae mass culture, and has been
used for specific strain, such as Spirulina platensis (Zhang
et al., 2014). The obtained sludge is very clean. However,
the floating method is still challenging at a large scale
(Wang et al., 2008). The Centrifugation is an efficient but
energy-intensive method (Molina et al., 2003). The efficiency
of centrifugation depends on the settling characteristics of
the cells, the residence time of the cell slurry, and the
settling depth. The settling depth can be kept small by the
design of the centrifuge, and the resident time of the slurry
can be controlled by the flow rate. The centrifugal recovery of
the biomass is feasible for high-value products because it
can process large volumes relatively rapidly, and the
biomass remains fully contained during recovery (Heasman et
al., 2000). Filtration, which operates under pressure or
vacuum, is the preferred method for harvesting relatively
large filamentous microalgae; however, the small cells of
microalgae are not suitable, while membrane microfiltration
and ultrafiltration are possible alternatives. However, current
large-scale microalgal biomass production facilities do not
generally apply membrane filtration because of its cost, to
which membrane replacement and pumping are the major
contributors (Hung and Liu, 2006). Moreover, microfiltration
is more cost-effective than centrifugation (Molina et al.,
2003). As a strategy to save biomass-harvesting costs, easyto-harvest microalgal strains for CO2 fixation and biomass
production should be selected (Wang et al., 2008). The
comparison of harvesting methods is demonstrated in Table 5.
BIOFUEL PRODUCTION BASED ON
MICROALGAE
Pretreatment
Drying of Microalgae Biomass
The extensive drying of microalgae biomass is required
for biofuel production, as the presence of water will inhibit
several downstream processes, such as lipid extraction and
transesterification. Nevertheless, the drying step is energyintensive, which adds to the cost complexity of the overall
production process. The microalgal slurry moisture content
must be reduced to at least 10% by drying and dehydration.
There are many types of drying technologies, such as drum
drying, oven drying, freeze drying, and spray drying, that
have been used with microalgae. The selection of the best
drying method depends on the required operation scale and
desired product value. Sun drying is an old and cheap
drying method that can be performed easily by exposure to
solar radiation. However, solar drying is not feasible,
taking a long drying time and requiring a large drying area
due to limited sunlight and uncertain sunlight time (Taher
et al., 2011; Lam and Lee, 2012). Moreover, sun drying
does not have any sterilization effect, unlike oven or drum
drying. In contrast, spray drying can be used for high-value

Klinthong et al., Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 15: 712742, 2015

723

Table 5. Comparison of microalgal harvesting and drying methods (Taher et al., 2011; Zhang et al., 2014).
Harvesting

Method
Flocculation
Floatation
Sedimentation
Centrifugation
Filtration

Drying

Sun drying

Spray drying
Drum drying
Oven drying

Freeze drying

Advantage
1) Wide range of flocculants available
2) Ease of use
1) Prone to harvest in mass culture
1) Low power consumption
2) Low requirement for skilled operators
3) Useful as a pre-concentration step
1) High harvesting efficiency
2) Rapid separation process
3) Easy to operate
1) Water and nutrient reuse
2) Wide variety of filter and membrane types
available
1) Cheap (no running cost, low capital cost)

1) Fast
2) Continuous
3) Efficient
1) Fast
2) Efficient
3) High temperature sterilization
1) Fast
2) Efficient
3) High temperature sterilization
4) Batch or continuous
1) Gentle
2) Low species deterioration

products but has the disadvantages of being expensive and

possibly significantly deteriorating the algae. Among the
drying technologies that can be applied to microalgal
concentrate, freeze drying is favored for its mild operating
onditions. Thermal drying, although commonly used in
laboratory practice, is not recommended because it degrades
thermodegradable lipids, results in the evaporative loss of
volatile lipids, and yields powder of a nonuniform particulate
size (Pourmortazavi and Hajimirsadeghi, 2007). Moreover,
freeze drying has the advantage of breaking up species cells
and turning them into fine powder, making homogenization
unnecessary (Ahlgren and Merino, 1991). However, freeze
drying is a slow process and requires a very high capital
investment. Table 5 summarizes the advantages and
disadvantages of each drying technique.
Particular Size Reduction
Once dried, microalgal biomass forms powder or
agglomeration that can be milled into different particulate
sizes. Reducing the particulate size of microalgal powder
prior to lipid extraction generally enhances lipid recovery
because it increases the interfacial surface area that is
available for biomass-solvent contact and shortens the
diffusion pathway of the extraction solvent. However, the
exceedingly small particulate size of the microalgal powder

Disadvantage
1) Chemical contamination
2) Removal of flocculants
3) Highly sensitive to pH level
1) Challenging at a large scale
1) Slow sedimentation rates
2) Low cell recovery
1) High capital and operational costs
2) Cell damage
3) Difficult bulk harvest
1) Fouling
2) Slow process
3) Suitable for large microalgal cell
1) Difficult
2) Slow
3) Weather dependent
4) Large area requirement
5) Easy contamination
1) Cost intensive
2) Species deterioration (i.e., pigments)
1) Cost intensive
2) Species deterioration
1) Cost intensive
2) Species deterioration
1) Slow process
2) Cost intensive

may lead to a higher tendency of lipid re-adsorption and fluid

channeling effects in the extraction vessel (for supercritical
carbon dioxide (scCO2) extraction) and in homogeneous
lipid extraction (Pourmortazavi and Hajimirsadeghi, 2007).
Pourmortazavi and Hajimirsadeghi (2007) also conducted
a study on the scCO2 extraction of oil from biomass and
verified that smaller biomass resulted in higher oil recoveries.
Cell Disruption Technique
The cell disruption method aims to destruct the cell wall
of microalgae to release the intracellular components and to
enhance the efficiency of the extraction. Cell wall disruption
methods can be categorized into biological, chemical and
physical methods.
1) Biological Method
Enzymatic Disruption
Enzymes can be applied in oil extraction from microalgae,
as they can mediate the hydrolysis of cell walls, enabling
the release of their content. For cell wall degradation,
cellulases are the most frequently applied enzymes (Mercer
and Armenta 2011; Gonalves et al., 2013). Despite being
expensive, enzymes offer several advantages over other
cell wall disruption methods. Enzymes present a higher
degradation selectivity than physical methods. Furthermore,

724

Klinthong et al., Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 15: 712742, 2015

microalgal cell walls are more recalcitrant than those of

other microorganisms, being very resistant to degradation.
Thus, the use of physical methods requires higher energy
amounts (Gonalves et al., 2013). Chen et al. (2013) studied
bacteria of Flammeovirga yaeyamensis in co-cultivation
with microalgae of Chlorella vulgaris ESP-31. The cell
wall of the microalgae was hydrolyzed by hydrolytic enzymes
(i.e., amylases, cellulases and xylanase) that were produced
by the bacteria, increasing the microalgae oil extraction
efficiency by nearly 100%.
2) Chemical Method
Ozonation
Ozone is an effective oxidizer of organic compounds and
an effective disinfecting agent that is capable of deactivating
a variety of organisms. Ozonation has been widely used in
water treatment for disinfection and for the oxidative
removal of contaminants (Huang et al., 2014). Cell rupture
by ozonation is due to the oxidative reaction of ozone, which
compromises the cell membranes ability to regulate the
permeability of substances, eventually leading to the outflow
of the cytoplasm (Erden et al., 2010; Yang et al., 2013).
Recently, the pressure-assisted ozonation (PO) technique
was developed, which is capable of solubilizing cellular
materials at high efficiency via cell wall disruption (Cheng
et al., 2012). Huang et al. (2014) examined the performance
of ultrasonication, conventional bubbling ozonation (CBO)
and PO as cell disruption techniques to obtain microalgae
lipids from Chlorella vulgaris BG11. The highest lipid
yield was obtained using PO, whereas the lowest yield was
obtained using CBO. Using CBO and PO involving ozone,
saturated fatty acids (C16:0 and C18:0) were predominant.
Thus, PO is an effective cell disruption method for biodiesel
production with a high yield of lipids and saturated
hydrocarbon products.
Hydrogen Peroxide
Alkaline hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) treatment is
recognized to decrystallize cellulose and has widely been
used for bleaching high-lignin wood pulps. The role of H2O2
is to provide highly reactive radicals. When the pH is above
6, H2O2 is readily decomposed to active radicals such as
hydroxyl radical (OH) and superoxide anion radicals (O2).
These active radicals can degrade and oxidize cell wall of
biomass (Gould, 1985; Phan and Tan, 2014). Chlorella
vulgaris was pretreated by aqueous solution of H2O2 and
H2O2 with FeSO4 (Fentons reactant) to disrupt cell wall
prior to lipid extraction (Steriti et al., 2014). The use of
H2O2 allowed increasing the extraction lipid yield from 6.9
to 9.2%, while that with FeSO4 led to a corresponding
increase of lipid yield to 17.4%. According to the Fentons
reaction, the reaction between H2O2 and Fe2+ ion (from
FeSO4) can produce hydroxyl radical (OH) which in turn
may attack and degrade the organic compounds constituting
the cell wall. Probably such a reaction occurs preferentially
in specific zones of the cell wall constituted by organic
compounds that are easily oxidized by OH radicals,
leading to the disruption of cell wall and the release of the
intracellular material, including lipids (Wu et al., 2010).

Once transferred in the liquid bulk, even lipids, especially

unsaturated lipids, might be attacked by hydroxyl radical
generating degradation products such as lipid peroxide
(Gonzlez et al., 2012), leading to positive effect for
upgrading fatty acid methyl ester composition in biodiesel.
Acid Treatment
The acids that are commonly applied in the cell disruption
step are hydrochloric acid and sulfuric acid, which are
everyday industrial chemicals carrying minimal toxicity in
their applied concentrations. The acid treatment is preferable,
as it provides high efficiency in converting polysaccharidecontaining materials. In the case of microalgal biomass,
complex carbohydrates are entrapped in the cell wall; thus,
cell disruption through acid hydrolysis is preferred. Harun
and Danquaha (2011) explored the influence of acid
exposure as a microalgal pretreatment strategy for bioethanol
production. Using a 1% sulfuric acid solution at 140C for
30 min as a pretreatment to hydrolyze the cell wall of
Chlorococcum humicola enhanced the bioethanol yield
from 16% to 52% (g bioethanol/g microalgae) due to the
release and conversion of the carbohydrates that were
entrapped in the microalgae cell wall into simple sugars
prior to the fermentation process. Recently, acid-catalyzed
hot water was used to treat wet microalgae of Chlorella
vulgaris before lipid extraction for the production of
biodiesel. The use of hot water weakened or disrupted the
crystal structure of cellulose and acid (i.e., sulfuric acid),
aimed to improve the efficiency of hot water through acid
hydrolysis. The extracted-lipid yield was enhanced through
pretreatment by acid-catalyzed hot water (Park et al., 2014).
3) Physical Method
Electrical Method
The application of electrotechnologies, such as pulsed
electric field (PEF) and high voltage electric discharges, were
promising for intracellular extraction from bio-suspensions
(Lebovka et al., 2011). PEF seems to be a potential alternative
for oil extraction from microalgae. This technique applies
brief pulses of a strong electric field to cells in the range of
nanoseconds to microseconds, inducing the non-thermal
permeabilization of the cell membrane and improving mass
transport across the cell membranes. Permeabilization
depends on the field strength and pulse number (Guderjan
et al., 2005; Taher et al., 2011). Under sufficient conditions,
irreversible damage of the membrane is reached, and the
hardness of the cell is lost; thus, PEF can lead to the complete
disruption of cells into fragments. Moreover, PEF requires
less time and energy than other applied methods (Guderjan
et al., 2005), and its use as a pretreatment for organic
solvent extraction requires fewer organic solvents (usually
presenting high toxicity) than the conventional organic
solvent extraction (Guderjan et al., 2007). Nevertheless, few
studies have applied PEF to pretreat microalgae. Grimi et
al. (2014) investigated the intracellular extraction from the
microalgae Nannochloropsis sp. disrupted by PEF, which
permitted the selective extraction of water-soluble ionic
components and microelements, low-molecular-weight
organic compounds (amino acids) and water-soluble proteins.

Klinthong et al., Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 15: 712742, 2015

However, this electrically based disruption technique was

ineffective for the extraction of pigments, which required
subsequent application of such methods as ultrasonication and
high-pressure homogenization, but its power consumption
was always noticeably smaller.
Ultrasonication
Another method that can be used to promote the cell
wall disruption of microalgal cells is the application of
ultrasonication. In ultrasonic-assisted pretreatment, cavitation
emerges in the solvent. When cavitation bubbles suddenly
burst, the extreme high pressure and temperature destroy
the adjacent tissue. In this case, the cell walls are damaged
by the repeated bursting of cavitation bubbles (Adam et
al., 2012). The application of this ultrasound-assisted method
to microalgal biomass can improve extraction efficiencies
by reducing the extraction times and increasing the oil
recovery yields. The experiments that were performed by
Cravotto et al. (2008) with the microalgae Crypthecodinium
cohnii showed cell disruption after applying ultrasonic
pretreatment prior to Soxhlet extraction with n-hexane,
resulting in an increase in the oil extraction yields from 4.8
to 25.9% compared to Soxhlet extraction without any
pretreatment. Additionally, Ranjan et al. (2010) compared
the oil extraction yields from Scenedesmus sp. using the
following methods: (1) Bligh and Dyers method and (2)
ultrasound-assisted extraction followed by Bligh and Dyers
method. The obtained results demonstrated that method (2)
generated a greater yield of oil extraction than method (1)
due to the disruption of the cell wall and the release of the
cell components to the solvent after pretreatment.
Microwave
Microwave pretreatment is frequently used in biochemical
extraction from plants. In the microwave process, the
oscillation of polar species and ionic conduction causes the
temperature to rapidly increase, thereby improving the
extraction efficiency (Ganzler et al., 1990). When
microwaves irradiate the interior of a cell, the oscillation of
polar substances causes rapid heating, moisture evaporation
and increasing pressure, which lead to cell rupture
followed by the release of the cell contents. Cravotto et al.
(2008) applied organic solvent extraction with n-hexane
and microwave-assisted solvent extraction (using the same
solvent) to the microalgae Crypthecodinium cohnii, achieving
oil recovery yields of 4.8 and 17.8%, respectively. Recently,
Balasubramanian et al. (2011) promoted the cell wall
disruption of Scenedesmus obliquus using the microwave-

725

assisted method for oil extraction. Oil analysis indicated

that microwave-extracted oil contained higher percentages
of unsaturated and essential fatty acids (indicating higher
quality) than that extracted without pretreatment. This
study also validated for the first time the efficiency of a
continuous microwave system for the extraction of lipids
from microalgae. Higher oil yields, faster extraction rates and
superior oil quality demonstrated that this system is feasible
for oil extraction. Ma et al. (2014) used dichloromethane
to extract oil from microalgae that were pretreated with
microwave and ultrasound. The microwave pretreatment
was more effective than the ultrasonic pretreatment for cell
disruption because the microwave process provided pressure
change through the rapid heating of the microalgae cells,
whereas in the ultrasonic process, this rupture was caused
by a shock wave outside of the microalgae cells.
Mechanical Method
The mechanical method is the most traditional method
of disruption. For example, bead milling is a common way
to grind materials into fine powder by shear force, which is
caused by the mechanical force. Zheng et al. (2011) used
bead milling as a pretreatment for microalgae, obtaining an
approximately 10% lipid yield. However, a greater lipid
yield could be obtained with manual grinding in liquid
nitrogen. A blender was also used to disrupt the cell of
Nannochloropsis oculata. The results in Table 6 show that
the blender has a relatively high efficiency in breaking the
microalgae cell wall and is the most energy efficient
method (McMillan et al., 2013).
Laser
In an application of laser for cell disruption, it is
suspected that the cell is disrupted by thermal effects
similar to those associated with the thermolysis technique.
It may be possible that cavitation bubbles induce shear
damage, as well. McMillan et al. (2013) applied a laser to
a microalgae slurry. The typical damage of perforated cells
showed that lipid matter was released, and dried lipid
matter was observed on the underside of the cover slip that
was in contact with the sample and had risen to the top of
the treated solution. Heavily deformed cells displaced lipid
material, demonstrating that high temperatures were a
major influence on disruption, even more so than bubble
cavitation. Large air bubbles were also observed in the
sample that encapsulated the lipid matter and pushed away
disrupted cells and debris in their path. Cell disruption was
achieved at 96.53% though laser pretreatment (Table 6).

Table 6. Merit for different treatments, defined as disruption per unit applied Joule/1000 mL per volume fraction of device
(McMillan et al., 2013).
Disruption
Energy
Sample volume
(%)
(J/1000 mL)
(mL)
Microwave
94.9
74565
10
Ultrasonic
67.7
132
350
Blender
93.0
540
80
Laser
96.5
16000
0.003
a
Fractional volume is referred to a ratio of sample volume to volume of device.
Treatment method

Volume of device
(cm3)
27500
1050
320
-

Fractional
volumea
0.00036
0.33
0.25
1

726

Klinthong et al., Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 15: 712742, 2015

Use of a laser is the most efficient disruption method, but

only slightly better than the microwave. However, laser
lysis was highly energy consuming and spatially limited to
processing very small volumes at a time.
As above, there are many works focused on cell disruptions
with biological, chemical and physical methods. However,
only merits of physical method were reported (McMillan
et al., 2013). Thus, the merits of biological and chemical
methods are suggested to be further investigated.
Extraction
Lipids are one of the main components of microalgae,
depending on the species and growth conditions. Microalgae
contain lipids at approximately 260% of the total cell dry
weight. Lipid oils that are derived from microalgae are
interesting because these oils contain fatty acids (mostly
16 carbons to 22 carbons in chain length) and triglyceride
compounds that can be transesterified into biodiesel.
Technology for the production of biodiesel from microalgae
must have a high specificity for lipids to minimize
contaminants, i.e., carbohydrates, proteins, etc. (Banerjee
et al., 2002). Purification technology should also favor the
production of acylglycerols over other lipids, such as
ketones, chlorophylls, sterols, polar lipids, and carotenes,
which are not readily converted into biodiesel (Mojaat et
al., 2008). Moreover, technology should have low operating
and capital costs, require little energy and time, be safe, and
show no sign of reaction with lipids. Table 7 demonstrates
the methods, including organic solvent extraction, Soxhlet
solvent extraction, and supercritical fluid extraction, that
have been used to extract lipids from microalgae.
Organic Solvent Extraction
Lipid-solvent systems are governed by the principle of likedissolves-like in which lipids are extracted using non-polar
organic solvents, such as chloroform or hexane (Geciova et
al., 2002). This extraction can be classified into five steps:
(1) the microalgae are exposed to the solvents, which
penetrate the cell membrane and enter the cytoplasm; (2)
the solvent interacts with neutral lipids via van der Waals
forces to form a solvent-lipid complex; (3) this complex
diffuses across the cell membrane, such that the neutral lipids
enter the organic phase, while water and solvent-contaminant
complexes (with carbohydrates or proteins) enter the
aqueous phase; (4) the organic phase is further separated;
and (5) crude lipids are transesterified to generate biodiesel
(Lewis et al., 2000; Halim et al., 2012; Bahadar and Khan,
2013). However, the disadvantages of using chemical
solvents are mostly related to their high toxicity to humans
and the surrounding environment. Chemical solvents, such
as n-hexane, methanol, and ethanol, and mixed polar/nonpolar solvents, such as methanol/chloroform (2:1 v/v, Bligh
and Dyer method) or isopropanol/hexane, are effective at
extracting microalgae lipid, but the extraction efficiency is
highly dependent on the microalgae strains. One study
found that using isopropanol as a co-solvent (0.068 g of
lipid/g of microalgal biomass) increased the lipid yield
from Chlorococum sp. by up to 300% more than using
pure hexane (0.015 g of lipid/g of microalgal biomass)

(Halim et al., 2011). Another study reported that beadbeaten Botryococcus braunii was exposed to five different
organic solvents; chloroform/methanol yielded the highest
lipid content (0.29 g of lipid/g of microalgal biomass). Nonpolar solvent n-hexane, although widely used to extract oil
from various seed crops, is insufficient to extract microalgae
lipids because microalgal lipids are composed of a high
concentration of unsaturated fatty acids; thus, the selectivity
of lipids toward the solvent is largely reduced (Ranjan et
al., 2010; Lam and Lee, 2012). n-Hexane, methanol and
chloroform are highly toxic compounds that can cause
safety and health hazards if proper precautionary steps are
not taken. In contrast, ethanol emerged as a greener solvent
because it has low toxicity level and can be generated from
renewable sources. However, ethanol always generates a
low extraction efficiency due to an azeotrope mixture (5%
water), and the presence of water will reduce the extraction
efficiency (Lam and Lee, 2012).
Organic solvent extraction is usually carried out in a
non-continuous batch process, limiting lipid mass transfer
equilibrium (Medina et al., 1998). Soxhlet solvent extraction
continuously evaporates and condenses the solvent, avoiding
the lipid mass transfer limitation and reducing solvent
consumption (Wang and Weller, 2006). Soxhlet lipid
extraction is more effective than batch extraction (Halim et
al., 2011). However, the continuous distillation is an
energy-consuming process. For extraction using organic
solvents, diffusion is always the rate limiting factor in the
overall mechanism. This factor becomes more serious in
microalgae because the cell wall further resists solvent
penetration into the inner cell. Thus, the cell disruption
method (as describe above) can be used to increase solvent
diffusion efficiency and results in the improvement of the
microalgae lipid recovery rate. Although a higher
microalgae lipid yield can be achieved after cell disruption,
additional energy is required (Lam and Lee, 2012).
Direct Liquefaction
Oil can be directly obtained from dried or wet microalgae
by liquefaction. The high moisture content of microalgae
requires much energy to remove water. Liquefaction directly
converts the biomass into oil via reaction with water and
carbon monoxide/hydrogen in the presence of sodium
carbonate. These processes require high temperatures and
pressures. In the liquefaction process, biomass is decomposed
first into small molecules. These small molecules are unstable
and reactive and can repolymerize into oily compounds with a
wide range of molecular weight distributions. Liquefaction
can be attained directly or indirectly. Direct liquefaction
involves rapid pyrolysis to produce liquid tars and oils and/or
condensable organic vapors. Indirect liquefaction involves
the use of catalysts to convert non-condensable gaseous
products of pyrolysis or gasification into liquid products.
Minowa et al. (1995) used direct liquefaction at 300C and
10 MPa to produce oil with a yield of 78.4% from
Dunaliella tertiolecta with a moisture content of 78.4%.
For high-moisture Botryococcus braunii treated with or
without a catalyst of 5% Na2CO3 at 300C, more than 95%
hydrocarbons was recovered (Bahadar and Khan, 2013).

Supercritical fluid

Soxhlet

Extraction method
Organic solvent

Phaeodactylum tricornutum
Botryococcus branuii
Chlorella vulgaris
Chlorococcum sp.
Isochrysis sp.
Nannochloropsis gaditana
Scenedesmus almeriensis
Scenedesmus obliquus
Tetraselmis sp.
Crypthecodinium cohnii
Chlorococcum sp.
Isochrysis sp.
Nannochloropsis gaditana
Nannochloropsis sp.
Scenedesmus almeriensis
Scenedesmus sp.
Spirulina platensis
Tetraselmis sp.
Tetraselmis sp.

Species
Chaetoceros muelleri
Chlorococcum sp.

Solvent
1-Butanol
Isopropanol/hexane
Hexane
Ethanol
DBU/octanol
Hexane
Hexane
Methanol/Chloroform
Methanol/Chloroform
Methanol/Chloroform
Hexane
Methanol/Chloroform
CO2
CO2
CO2
CO2
CO2
CO2
CO2
CO2
CO2
CO2

Yield (wt%)
94
6.8
1.5
29
81
1.8
3.2
23.1
17.7
22.4
40.7
18.1
9
5.8
14.7
12.9
25
13.2
7.4
8.6
14.8
10.9

Time (min)
60
450
450
1440
240
140
330
1080
1080
1080
600
1080
180
80
90
90
360
90
720
60
90
720

Table 7. Methods used to extract lipids from microalgae.

T (C)
70
80
80
25
60
70
80
105
105
105
65
105
50
60
45
45
40
45
53
40
45
40

P (MPa)
30
1050
30
30
55
30
50
40
30
15

Reference
Nagle and Lemke, 1990.
Halim et al., 2011.
Halim et al., 2011.
Fajardo et al., 2007.
Samor et al., 2010.
Suarsini and Subandi, 2011.
Halim et al., 2011.
Hernndez et al., 2014.
Hernndez et al., 2014.
Hernndez et al., 2014.
Balasubramanian et al., 2011.
Hernndez et al., 2014.
Couto et al., 2010.
Halim et al., 2011.
Hernndez et al., 2014.
Hernndez et al., 2014.
Andrich et al., 2005.
Hernndez et al., 2014.
Taher et al., 2014b.
Sajilata et al., 2008.
Hernndez et al., 2014.
Li et al., 2014.

Klinthong et al., Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 15: 712742, 2015
727

728

Klinthong et al., Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 15: 712742, 2015

Supercritical Fluid Extraction

Supercritical carbon dioxide (scCO2) can be used as a
solvent for lipid extraction from microalgae. scCO2 extraction
is a green technology that promises to replace organic
solvent extraction. The basic principal of this technology is
achieving a supercritical phase that is beyond the critical
point of the fluid, at which separation of the liquid and vapor
phase disappears and a single homogeneous phase appears.
scCO2 extraction is very efficient for lipid extraction for
several reasons: (1) the crude lipid products are solvent free,
(2) the rapid penetration of scCO2 into microalgae cells
promotes a high lipid yield, (3) the properties of scCO2 are
tunable through the adjustment of the operating temperature
and pressure, and (4) degumming is not required because
scCO2 is not able to solubilize polar phospholipids (Mendes
et al., 2003; Herrero et al., 2006; Sahena et al., 2009).
The applications of scCO2 to extract microalgae lipids
for biodiesel production have been explored recently. Lipid
from wet paste Chlorococum sp. biomass was extracted
using scCO2 with a yield of 7.1% at a temperature of 60C,
a pressure of 30 MPa and an extraction time of 80 min.
Moreover, the lipid yield obtained from the wet paste was
greater than that obtained from the dried paste (5.8%),
indicating that the energy consumption for the drying process
can be reduced. The presence of water in the system acts
as a natural polar co-solvent, facilitating the extraction of
polar lipids and improving the total lipid yield (Halim et
al., 2011). However, scCO2 extraction and organic solvent
extraction were compared by extracting lipid from
Crypthecodinium cohnii. The lipid yield attained from organic
solvent extraction was approximately twice that from
scCO2 extraction, indicating that microalgae strains and
cultivation conditions play a significant role in determining
the appropriate lipid extraction methods (Couto et al.,
2010). Lipid extraction from Chlorococcum sp. using scCO2
yielded 0.058 g of lipid/g of microalgae with a resident
time of 80 min, while that using Soxhlet solvent extraction
yielded 0.032 g of lipid/g of microalgae after 5.5 h (Halim
et al., 2011). One study showed that 90% of lipids was
recovered from Spirulina platensis using scCO2 at 70 MPa
and 55C for 15 min, while the same amount was obtained
using Soxhlet hexane extraction for 6 h (Bahadar and Khan,
2013). Chen et al. (2013) used a continuous high-pressure
CO2 extraction process to extract lipid from microalgal
biomass with an extraction yield of 90.56%. Recently,
scCO2 (pressure of 50 MPa at 50C and a flow rate of 3
mL/min) was applied for lipid extraction from Scenedesmus
sp. and compared with static n-hexane extraction (shaker at
50C and 100 rpm, overnight) (Taher et al., 2014a). The
lipid extraction yield obtained from the former was 75%
greater than that obtained from the latter. Taher et al. (2014b)
also optimized the conditions for scCO2 extraction. scCO2
extraction was superior to other extraction techniques
(Soxhlet, Bligh and Dyer lipid extraction, n-hexane, nhexane/isopropanol). The best operating conditions were
53C, 50 MPa and a flow rate of 1.9 g/min, producing a
lipid extraction yield of 7.41%. Li et al. (2014) extracted
lipid from Tetraselmis sp. (strain M8) using different
extraction methods, including Bligh and Dyer lipid extraction,

organic solvent extraction, direct saponification and scCO2

extraction. scCO2 extraction technique (15 MPa, 40C, 12
h for soaking and a flow rate of 5 mL/min for 30 min for
flushing) resulted in the most effective extraction of
microalgal lipids, especially for long-chain unsaturated
fatty acids.
CO2-Expanded Liquid Extraction
CO2-expanded liquids (CXLs) have been applied in
extraction, reaction and separation (Chen and Tan, 2007;
Golmakani et al., 2012; Yang et al., 2012; Lin et al., 2013;
Wei et al., 2013). CXLs can be continuously tuned from
the neat organic solvent to scCO2 through changing the
CO2 composition in liquid by adjusting operating pressure
(Jessop and Subramaniam, 2007). CXLs have the benefit
of requiring mild operating pressure and temperature,
leading to the reduction of energy consumption hence the
cost of the process (Sih et al., 2008). Similar to supercritical
fluids, CXLs have shown to improve mass transfer by
decreasing interfacial tension, reduce viscosity and increasing
diffusivity (Eckert et al., 2007; Lin and Tan, 2008a, b;
Herrero et al., 2013). Recenty, the CO2-expanded ethanol
(CXE) has been applied for extraction of valuable bioactive
from natural sources, since ethanol emerges as a greener
solvent than other organic solvents. One work studied the
extraction of gamma-linolenic acid from Arthrospira platensis
(Spirulina) using CXE showed its extraction yield similar
to pressurized extraction but greater than scCO2 extraction
(Golmakani et al., 2012). CXE was also applied to extract
polar antioxidant of astaxanthin from Haematococcus
pluvialis. Temperature and ethanol content had significant
influences on astaxanthin yield and antioxidant activity
(Reyes et al., 2014). Our group successfully applied CXE
as the solvent to extract docosahexaenoic acid (DHA)-rich
lipid from Schizochytrium sp. in continuous extraction
process (Wang, 2014a). The lipid yield extracted via CXE in
continuous extraction for 30 min was obtained approximately
87% of total lipid content determined by 48-h Soxhlet
extraction, much better than ethanol and pressurized
ethanol regarding yield and extraction time. The obtained
results indicated that the CXE was appropriate for fast and
efficient lipid extraction resulting from high diffusion, low
viscosity and easy penetration into microalgae cell.
Biofuel Products
Biohydrogen
Renewable biohydrogen production is of increasing
interest because fossil fuel supplies are being depleted.
Hydrogen gas has excellent potential as a renewable energy
source because it produces only water when combusted,
unlike the carbon pollution of fossil fuels. Biohydrogen
has become a viable source given the current energy
demand and environmental issues. The main objective is to
improve hydrogen yield to make this process more
economically available. However, the low yield and rate of
hydrogen production are barriers for the commercialization
of biohydrogen production. Cheap raw materials, efficient
production techniques, and pilot tests of photofermentation
plants should make biohydrogen a commercially available

Klinthong et al., Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 15: 712742, 2015

source of energy in the near future (Bahadar and Khan,

2013). Biohydrogen can be produced by photolyzing water
using solar energy and hydrogenase and/or nitrogenase
enzymes. Microalgae use solar energy to transfer electrons
to NADPH and ferredoxin to generate hydrogen. Photolysis
can be classified into several subcategories: direct photolysis
involves splitting water into hydrogen and oxygen using
sunlight energy as follows:
2H2O + light energy 2H2 + O2

(6)

Hydrogen is produced in two steps. First, photosystem II

adsorbs light and generates electrons that are transferred to
ferredoxin using light energy, which is absorbed by the
photosystem. Hydrogenase then accepts the electron from
ferredoxin to generate hydrogen. Indirect photolysis is well
suited for nitrogenase-based systems. The reaction is as
follows:
12H2O + 6CO2 + light energy C6H12O6 + O2

(7)

C6H12O6 + 12H2O + light energy 12H2 + 6CO2

(8)

However, hydrogen production from a nitrogenase-based

system is 1000-fold lower than that from a hydrogenasebased system (Bahadar and Khan, 2013). Nitrogenase is
prohibited by oxygen; thus, oxygen must be removed from
these systems. A CO2 concentration between 4 and 18% is
optimal, resulting in higher cell densities and more hydrogen
production (Das and Veziroglu, 2008). Chlamydomonas
reinhardtii, Calothrix sp., Oscillatoria sp., Synechococcus
sp. and Gloeobacter sp. can produce hydrogen via both
hydrogenase and nitrogenase (Abed et al., 2009; Hallenbeck,
2009). Photosynthetic hydrogen production is the best for
converting solar energy into hydrogen; therefore, the current
focus of research is to increase the light-use efficiency and
to design better reactors for hydrogen production (Bahadar
and Khan, 2013).
Biodiesel
The extracted lipid from microalgae is further converted
into biodiesel. Biodiesel is a promising renewable energy
that does not require engine modification and reduces CO
(by 50%) and CO2 (by 78%) emissions (Chisti, 2007). A
main problem of microalgae-based biofuels is their high
viscosity. Such high-viscosity fuels are difficult to combust
and leave deposits on the fuel injector of diesel engines.
Thus, biodiesel is usually blended with conventional diesel.
There are several techniques to overcome this problem,
including pyrolysis, micro-emulsification, dilution and
transesterification (Marchetti et al., 2007). Among these
techniques, transesterification offers the most promise for
lowering the viscosity.
1) Transesterification
The chemistry of biodiesel synthesis is relatively simple
and occurs via transesterification, in which a triglyceride
(from the lipid) reacts with a mono-alcohol (most commonly
ethanol or methanol) in the presence of a catalyst as follows:

729

(9)
The reaction converts three moles of alcohol and one
mole of triglyceride into one mole of glycerol and three
moles of methyl esters. Although this reaction requires
much alcohol, the methyl ester yield is greater than 98%
(Chisti, 2007). A homogeneous base catalyst (e.g., KOH or
NaOH) is usually used to accelerate the reaction. However,
the base catalyst can react with free fatty acids in microalgae
lipids to form soap, leading to a lower biodiesel yield and
increasing the difficulty of separating biodiesel from
glycerol. Acid catalysts (e.g., H2SO4) are alternative options
because a catalyst is not sensitive to the free fatty acid
level in oil; therefore, esterification (in which free fatty
acid is converted into alkyl ester) and transesterification
can occur simultaneously (Lam and Lee, 2012). However,
base-catalyzed reactions are 4000 times faster than acidcatalyzed ones (Bahadar and Khan, 2013). Commercially,
alkoxides of sodium and potassium are used at 1% per
weight of lipid formed because they have a greater catalytic
activity than simple alcohols. Base catalyst reactions are
optimized at 60C under atmospheric pressure for 90 min.
At higher temperatures and pressures, although the reaction
is faster, the operating cost is greater. The reaction generates
two layers of excess methanol and oil. The biodiesel is
then separated from contaminants, for instance, glycerol
and solids, in a flask separator (Hossain et al., 2008). The
biodiesel may be then washed with water to remove
contaminated free fatty acids, which cause saponification.
Transesterification consumes 4.3 MJ/L biodiesel (Demirbas,
2007).
Heterogeneous catalysts (base or acid) have also been
explored extensively for transesterification to produce
biodiesel. Unlike homogeneous catalysts, the heterogeneous
catalyst can be recycled, regenerated and reused for a
subsequent transesterification reaction. Furthermore, this
catalyst can be easily separated through filtration after the
reaction is finished, which can minimize the product
contamination and the number of water-washing cycles for
purification. Until now, the application of a heterogeneous
catalyst in microalgae biodiesel production is still restricted
because it is a relatively new feedstock and is not
commercially available in the market. Therefore, additional
breakthrough findings are required to address the feasibility
of heterogeneous catalysts in the microalgae biodiesel
industry (Lam and Lee, 2012). CaO supported by Al2O3
was tested for very a short time in the transesterification of
lipid from Nannochloropsis oculata. The obtained yield
was 97.5% at a reaction temperature of 50C, with a
methanol-to-lipid ratio of 30:1, a catalyst loading of 2% and a
reaction time of 4 h (Umdu et al., 2009). Fu et al. (2013)

730

Klinthong et al., Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 15: 712742, 2015

synthesized a sulfonated carbon-based solid acid catalyst

through the in situ partial carbonization and sulfonation of
microalgae residues with sulfuric acid. The obtained catalyst
possessing a high acid density (5.3 mmol/g) was used in
the transesterification of triolein with methanol for biodiesel
production. The yield of methyl ester was 24% for a 12-h
reaction time. Chlorella vulgaris ESP-31 containing 22.7%
lipid was used as the oil source for biodiesel production via
transesterification catalyzed by SrO/SiO2. The solid catalyst
SrO/SiO2 worked well with water-removed, centrifuged
Chlorella vulgaris ESP-31 and a biodiesel conversion of
80% (Tran et al., 2013).
2) In Situ Transesterification
In situ transesterification is a simple process that permits
extraction and transesterification to occur in one step, in
which the lipid-bearing biomass is directly in contact with
the chemical solvent in the presence of a catalyst. There
are two roles of the chemical solvent, including (1) a solvent
for the extraction of lipid from biomass and (2) a reactant
for the transesterification reaction. The advantages of in
situ transesterification over conventional transesterification
include a minimized solvent separation step, a reduced
processing time and, consequently, a reduced overall
biodiesel production cost (Shuit et al., 2010).
Many studies have investigated the in situ
transesterification of microalgae. Chlorella sp. was in situ
transesterified under a reaction temperature of 60C, with
methanol to lipid ratio of 315:1, a H2SO4 concentration of
0.04 mol and a reaction time of 4 h to produce a 90%
biodiesel yield (Ehimen et al., 2010). As a result, high
methanol consumption was required. However, methanol
consumption can be reduced by adding a co-solvent during
in situ transesterification. Chlorella pyrenoidosa with an oil
content of 56.2% was subjected to in situ transesterification,
and a 95% biodiesel yield was attained with a hexane (cosolvent) to lipid molar ratio of 76:1, a methanol to lipid
molar ratio of 165:1, a reaction temperature of 90C, 0.5 M
H2SO4 and a reaction time of 2 h (Miao et al., 2011). Other
solvents, such as toluene, chloroform and dichloromethane,
were also suggested for use during in situ transesterification
(Xu and Mi, 2011). However, using wet paste, microalgae
biomass has an adverse effect on in situ transesterification;
thus, the wet microalgae biomass must be initially dried to
ensure efficient and optimum performance during in situ
transesterification. Recently, the microalgae biomass with
a water content greater than 31.7% caused the inhibition of
in situ transesterification, leading to negligible biodiesel
conversion (Ehimen et al., 2010). Sathish et al. (2013)
reported that microalgal biomass with a moisture content
greater than 20% by mass led to statistically significant
reductions in biodiesel discovery. Three explanations have
been commonly presented to describe this inhibitory effect:
(1) the formation of free fatty acid methyl esters is a
reversible reaction, and therefore, water can hydrolyze
biodiesel back to methanol and free fatty acids; (2) water
contained within the biomass can shield lipids from the
extracting solvent, preventing lipids from being brought
into the reaction; and (3) the acid catalyst can be deactivated

due to water competing for available protons in the reaction.

To avoid adverse effects, water must be removed from the
recovered methanol or ethanol before the methanol or ethanol
is used for subsequent in situ transesterification; otherwise,
the subsequent reaction might not proceed under optimum
conditions due to the presence of water. Therefore, extensive
biomass drying is also required prior to reaction to avoid
the unrequired side reaction and to simplify the subsequent
separation processes (Lam and Lee, 2012). Im et al. (2014)
proposed the method for the in situ transesterification of
wet Nannochloropsis oceanica (65% moisture content)
using chloroform, methanol and sulfuric acid in a one-pot
reaction. The addition of chloroform can improve the
performance of transesterification with methanol by reducing
the diffusion limit of the reactant to the liquid reaction phase.
This study provided a yield of greater than 90% without
the addition of extra energy inputs for drying microalgae
prior to in situ transesterification. Thus, this method can
reduce the production cost of biodiesel from microalgae.
3) Supercritical Fluid Transesterification
Supercritical methanol transesterification is now being
tested for the production of biodiesel. In the supercritical
state, depending on pressure and temperature, intermolecular
hydrogen bonding in the methanol molecule will be
significantly decreased. As a result, the polarity and dielectric
constant of methanol are reduced, allowing it to act as a
free monomer. Subsequently, methanol under supercritical
conditions can solvate the non-polar triglycerides to form a
single-phase lipid/methanol mixture and yield fatty acid
methyl esters and diglycerides (Saka and Kusdiana, 2001).
These advantages make the supercritical methanol process
more beneficial than conventional transesterification methods,
in which homogeneous and heterogeneous catalyst processes
often face difficulties due to the free fatty acid content and
water content in the feedstock, resulting in lower yields
and requiring purification of the final product to meet the
biodiesel standards (Tan et al., 2011). Patil et al. (2011) used
a one-step process for the direct liquefaction and conversion
of wet microalgal Nannochloropsis sp. biomass containing
approximately 90% water to biodiesel under supercritical
methanol conditions. This one-step process enables the
simultaneous extraction and transesterification of wet
microalgal biomass. Optimal conditions for this process
are reported as follows: wet algae to methanol (w/v) ratio of
approximately 1:9 and a reaction temperature and a time of
approximately 255C and 25 min, respectively. A more than
84% yield of fatty acid methyl esters was obtained. Moreover,
the direct conversion of microalgal Nannochloropsis sp.
biomass into biodiesel using supercritical methanol compared
with microwave-assisted transesterification methods was
investigated by Patil et al. (2012). Wet algal biomass was
used as feedstock in the supercritical methanol process,
and dry algal biomass was used for the microwave-assisted
transesterification. A higher yield of fatty acid methyl esters
was obtained using the supercritical methanol process.
A concurrent extraction and transesterification of lipids
can also be achieved under supercritical ethanol conditions.
Similar to methanol, the dielectric constant of ethanol

Klinthong et al., Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 15: 712742, 2015

decreases into the range of organic solvents with increasing

temperature, and the exothermic hydrogen bonding in
ethanol shifts toward the free monomer above critical
conditions, permitting the extraction of lipids from wet
microalgae and ethanol to perform the transesterification of
triglycerides to fatty acid ethyl esters. Recently, supercritical
ethanol was used for the simultaneous extraction and
transesterification of lipids in algae to produce fatty acid
ethyl esters (Reddy et al., 2014). A maximum yield of
approximately 67% of fatty acid ethyl esters was obtained
at 265C with 20 min of reaction time and a 1:9 dry algae
to ethanol (w/v) ratio. Furthermore, the obtained fatty acid
ethyl esters possessed high oxidative stability and a calorific
value of 43 MJ/kg, comparable to that of regular diesel fuel.
Significant energy savings were possible by eliminating the
microalgae drying step through the simultaneous extraction
and conversion of wet algae to biodiesel. Thus, these green
conversion processes have the potential to provide an
energy-efficient and economical route for the production
of renewable biodiesel.
Biomethanol
Microalgae can be used to produce biomethanol as a
renewable fuel. Methanol was synthesized theoretically by
the following reaction:
CmH2n + mH2O mCO + (m + n)H2

(10)

CO + 2H2 CH3OH

(11)

To convert hydrocarbons into methanol, the reforming

of hydrocarbons in the syngas is carried out by a water-gas
shift reaction, indicated by Eq. (10). Then, to achieve the
reaction indicated by Eq. (11), the ratio of H2/CO is
adjusted to the ideal value of 2 by the next step of watergas shift reaction indicated by Eq. (12):
CO + H2O H2 + CO2

(12)

Spirulina sp. is converted to methanol by gasification

(Hirano et al., 1998). The Spirulina biomass was partially
oxidized at temperatures of up to 1000C to produce H2,
CO, CO2 and hydrocarbon. The maximum yield was 0.64
g of methanol per gram of microalgal biomass at 1000C.
The carbon dioxide produced by the reaction was removed
by absorption using alkanolamine.
Bioethanol
Generally, two methods are normally modified for the
production of bioethanol from biomass. The first method is
a biochemical process, i.e., fermentation, and the other
method is a thermo-chemical process or gasification. The
recent attempts at producing ethanol have focused on
microalgae as a feedstock for the fermentation process.
Microalgae are rich in carbohydrates (Table 1), which are
entrapped within their cell wall; an economical physical
pretreatment process, such as extrusion or mechanical
shear, is required to break down the cell wall so that the
carbohydrates can be released and used as carbon sources

731

for fermentation. Bacteria, yeast and fungi are used to

ferment carbohydrates to produce ethanol under anaerobic
conditions. The products include not only ethanol but also
CO2 and H2O, as demonstrated in the following equation:
C6H12O6 2CH3CH2OH + 2CO2

(13)

According to this equation, the stoichiometric yields are

0.51 kg of ethanol and 0.49 kg of CO2 per kg of carbon
sugar, i.e., glucose.
The most recent studies of bioethanol production by
fermentation have been reported. Chlorella vulgaris and
Chlorococcum sp. are widely used for bioethanol production
because of their high starch contents. Harun et al. (2010)
used Saccharomyces bayanus for the fermentation of
Chlorococcum sp. with 3.83 g/L ethanol produced from 10
g/L lipid-extracted microalgae. Chlorella vulgaris cake was
enzymatically hydrolyzed and fermented with Saccharomyces
cerevisiae to produce the reducing sugars and ethanol. The
yields obtained for reducing sugars and ethanol were 0.55
and 0.17 g/g of cake, respectively (Moncada et al., 2013).
Schizochytrium sp. was separated into sugars (mainly Dglucose and L-galactose), lipids and proteins. The separated
sugars were then converted to ethanol by Escherichia coli
KO11, resulting in 11.8 g of ethanol/L being produced
from 25.7 g/L of glucose (Kim et al., 2012).
The bioethanol fermentation from microalgae involves
less intake of energy, and the process is much simpler
compared to the biodiesel production system. In addition,
the undesired CO2 byproduct can be recycled as a carbon
source to cultivate additional microalgae, resulting in the
reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. However, the
commercial production of bioethanol from microalgae is
still being investigated (Singh and Gu, 2010; Bahadar and
Khan, 2013).
Biobutanol
Biobutanol has been identified as a potential fuel from
renewable sources. Comparing with ethanol, butanol provides
several benefits as a biofuel such as higher energy contents,
lower vapor pressure and lower hygroscopy. Moreover, it can
be partially or totally blended with gasoline or diesels fuels
(Ventura and Jahng, 2013). In general, a fermentation of
sugars with Clostridium sp. can produce acetone, butanol and
ethanol (ABE) in the ratio of 3:6:1 acetone:butanol:ethanol,
which can be called ABE fermentation (Potts et al., 2012).
ABE fermentation is typically featured by anaerobic bacterial
metabolisms, acidogenesis and solventogenesis. The acetic
acid and butyric acid are the primary acid produced during
acidogenesis. Clostridia species absorb these acids to produce
ABE. In contrast to the ABE fermentation, Ramey (2006)
proposed to accomplish the fermentation in two steps to
improve yield, in which sugar was converted to butyric
acid in the first step by bacterium such as Clostridium
tryobutyricum in acidogenesis phase, and butyric acid to
butanol in the second step by solventogenesis bacterium
such as Clostridium beijerinckii (Du et al., 2012; Ellis et
al., 2012; Potts et al., 2012). However, in order to convert
butyric acid to butanol, additional energy in the form of

732

Klinthong et al., Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 15: 712742, 2015

glucose is required, adversely affecting the selection of twostep fermentation methods. Microalgae are carbohydratesrich biomass which can be regarded as a source for butanol
production. Ellis et al. (2012) used Clostridium
saccharoperbutylacetonium N1-4 for ABE fermentation of
acid- pretreated wastewater microalgae with 2.26 g/L
butanol produced from 8.92 g/L total soluble sugar. Acidpretreated microalga Scenedesmus obliquus was fermented
by Clostridium saccharoperbutylacetonium to produce ABE.
The obtained butanol yield was 1.91 g/L (Anthony et al.,
2013). An isolated Chlorella vulgaris was used in butanol
fermentation with a Clostridium acetobutylicum via ABE
fermentation. 3.37 g/L butanol was produced from 111 g
of acid-pretreated biomass of Chlorella vulgaris (Wang et
al., 2014).
Bio-Oil and Biohydrocarbon
Hydrothermal liquefaction can be an alternative way to
produce bio-oil from microalgae through the aqueousconversion method, in which freshly harvested wet
microalgae biomass are directly processed without drying.
During hydrothermal liquefaction, water is heated to a subcritical condition between 200 and 350C under pressurization
to reduce its dielectric constant. The dielectric constant can
even drop to a value similar to that of ethanol; therefore,
sub-critical water is able to solubilize a less polar compound
(Duan and Savage, 2011; Kumar et al., 2011). In other
words, water at the sub-critical condition can serve as an
effective solvent with significantly less corrosion than
other chemical solvents. In an experiment, 43% yield of
bio-oil was obtained by hydrothermal liquefaction of
Nannochloropsis sp. (initial water content of 79%) at
350C and 35 MPa for 60 min. Major bio-oil constituents
included phenol and its alkylated derivatives, heterocyclic
N-containing compounds, long-chain fatty acids, alkanes
and alkenes, and derivatives of phytol and cholesterol. CO2
was always the most abundant gas product. However, the
bio-oil required deoxygenation and denitrogenation to N and
O-containing compounds to upgrade the bio-oil (Brown et
al., 2010).

Alkanes were also produced by hydrogenation and

decarbonylation of microalgae oil. The reaction was
catalyzed by a Ni/ZrO2 to produce ketone intermediates,
which were then hydrogenated to aldehydes in the presence
of Ni catalysts. The reaction was performed in an autoclave.
Propane (3.6%) and methane (4.6%) were the main products
in the vapor phase, which were formed by the hydrogenolysis
of triglyceride and the methanation of CO/CO2 with H2,
respectively (Fig. 3). The total liquid yield contained a
70% yield of n-heptadecane and a 75% yield of total liquid
alkanes (Peng et al., 2012a). The alkanes in the range of
C15 to C18 were synthesized through hydrodeoxygenation
of microalgae oil in the presence of 10% Ni on Hbeta
zeolite (Ni/Hbeta, Si/Al = 180) in an autoclave at 260C in
the presence of hydrogen at 4 MPa. The obtained products
yielded 78% liquid alkanes (60% C18, octadecane), 3.6%
propane and 0.6% methane. A Ni/Hbeta catalyst increased
the hydrogenation rate and produced propane and fatty
acids from saturated triglyceride (Peng et al., 2012b).
A methane fermentation technology can be applied to
microalgae to produce methane. The gross stoichiometry
of the methane fermentation from glucose as a substrate
can be approximated by the following (Klass, 1984):
C6H12O6 (aq) CH4 (g) + 3CO2 (g)

(14)

The methane from anaerobic digestion by anaerobic

microorganisms can be used as fuel gas and be converted
to generate electricity (Holm-Nielsen et al., 2009). The
residual biomass from anaerobic digestion is further
processed to make fertilizers. Due to the absence of lignin and
lower cellulose, microalgae exhibits good process stability
and high conversion efficiency for anaerobic digestion (Singh
and Gu, 2010). Frigon et al. (2013) screened microalgal
strains for the production of methane, which was obtained
from anaerobic digestion of microalgae. The strains
Scenedesmus sp., Isochrysis sp. and Scenedesmus dimorphus
displayed the best methane yield, with 410, 408 and 397
mL of CH4/g of total volatile solid, respectively (Table 8).
Thermal pretreatment using an autoclave at 120C for 40 min

Fig. 3. Main reaction pathways for microalgae oil transformation to alkanes over Ni/ZrO2 catalyst (Peng et al., 2012a).

Klinthong et al., Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 15: 712742, 2015

733

Table 8. The methane production from microalgae (Frigon et al., 2013).

Strain
Botryococus braunii
Botryococus braunii
Chlamydomonas debaryana
Chalamydomonas sp.
Chlorella sorokiniana
Chlorella sorokiniana
Chlorella vulgaris
Chlorella vulgaris
Chlorella sp.
Chlorella sp.
Isochrysis sp.
Micractinium sp.
Nannochloropsis gaditana
Neochloris oleoabundans
Porphyridium aeruginosa
Scenedesmus dimorphus
Scenedesmus sp.
Scenedesmus sp.
Scenedesmus sp.
Thalassiosira weissflogii
a
TVS is referred to total volatile solid.

TVSa (g/kg)
153
240
138
143
255
218
200
254
233
290
305
215
263
189
184
246
234
330
210
133

was conducted to treat Chlorella vulgaris and Scenedesmus

sp. to enhance carbohydrate solubilization, resulting in the
enhancement of anaerobic digestibility and 2150% methane
production compared with untreated microalgae (Mendez
et al., 2014). Alzate et al. (2014) reported that the anaerobic
digestion of lipid-extracted Nannochloropsis sp. exhibited
higher CH4 production rates than its non-extracted
counterpart. Moreover, thermal pretreatment supported a
CH4 productivity enhancement of 40% for the nonextracted Nannochloropsis sp. and 15% for the lipidextracted Nannochloropsis sp. As a result, it appears that
the pretreatment and lipid removal are important processes
to enhance the yield of methane production.
As indicated above, microalgae are a promising source for
biofuel production. They are also used for the generation of
other products. The cost of producing microalgae-based
biofuel can be compensated for by earnings received from
other co-products of the microalgal biomass. The integrated
production of microalgae-based biofuels can recover energy
consumed in bioenergy production processes, meaning that
the final products in the form of biodiesel, ethanol and
methane can compensate for their energy input or loss (Zhu,
2014). As a result, a hybrid microalgae refinery is more
profitable compare to only a product-based or energy-based
biorefinery. The challenge lies in the identification of suitable
species and in minimizing the costs of production (Singh
and Gu, 2010). The use of microalgae presents numerous
routes to the integration of raw materials, processes and
products to create a hybrid biorefinery, as presented in Fig. 4.
STRATEGIES FOR COMMERCIALIZATION OF
MICROALGAE-BASED BIOFUELS
There are five key strategies for successful microalgae

Methane production (mL/g TVS)

343
370
302
333
283
331
361
263
309
302
408
360
228
308
352
397
258
410
306
265

biofuel commercialization, including (1) faster, (2) fatter, (3)

cheaper, (4) easier and (5) fractionation marketing approaches
to help producers reduce costs and accelerate the
commercialization of microalgae-based biofuels (Thurmond,
2009). First, faster is a primary strategy for most microalgaebased biofuel producers, who search for microalgae species
possessing a high oil content and a quick growth rate for
biofuel production. Microalgae with a high oil content,
such as Botryococcus braunii, grow slowly and can be
harvested only a few times a week, while algae with a lower
oil content, such as Dunaliella sp. or Nannochloropsis sp.
(20-40% oil content), will grow more quickly and can be
harvested daily or a few times a day. For this reason, most
algae research and development projects and pre-commercial
projects consume algal strains with 2040% oil content.
Second, for fatter, microalgae producers are especially
interested in using microalgal species with a high triglyceride
oil content for biofuel production, resulting in a significant
reduction of capital and operating costs and savings for
systems twice their size using species with a lower oil
ontent. As a result, signification innovation and improvement
are the challenges for microalgae producers to lower costs to
enter biofuel markets. Next, in view of economic processes
for the commercialization of microalgae-based biofuel and
ease of implementation, cheaper and easier processes are
the next two important strategies. The estimated costs to
produce microalgae oils and microalgae biodiesel range
from $9 to $25 per gallon in ponds and from $15 to $40 in
photobioreactors. Because several sub-sets of systems (i.e.,
harvesting, drying, pretreatment, extraction, etc.) are required,
a reduction in the number of steps in microalgae-based
biofuel production is necessary to provide easier, better
and lower cost systems. A crucial economic challenge for
microalgae producers is to discover low cost oil extraction

734

Klinthong et al., Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 15: 712742, 2015

and harvesting methods. Extraction systems have estimates

of up to $15 per gallon of oil produced, depending on the
extraction method, which can be less than cost effective
(Singh and Gu, 2010). For example, the combination of
harvesting, pretreatment and extraction system technology
into a single process can reduce system complexity and costs
for microalgae producers. Finally, the co-production of
some more valuable fractions and their marketing is also
important to success. This biomass fraction of microalgae
contains valuable proteins, chemicals or molecular compounds
that can be used to produce animal feeds, green plastics,
detergents, cleaners and biodegradable polymers and can
be sold at a premium price over traditional petroleum-based
products. These biomass co-product marketing strategies
will be crucial to the success of biofuel producers. As a
result, a hybrid biofuel refinery concept (Fig. 4) can be
implemented profitably for microalgae-based biofuels. CO2
and nutrients can be recycled for microalgae cultivation and
thus help in carbon sequestration. The biofuel part and
other valuable products can be co-generated to make the
commercialization process a profitable venture.
Currently, a commercial-scale microalgae-based biofuel
industry is still not available due to the high cost deriving
from start-up and running operations, maintenance and
management (Zhu and Ketola, 2012). However, this cost
might be reduced if microalgal productivity and/or lipid
concentration is substantial. This industry might become
more attractive if substantial subsidies or tax breaks are
made available. Thus, the future of microalgae-based biofuels
looks bright and promising. Additionally, a certain amount
of research and innovation is still demanded, which can
include research and development programs focusing on
solutions for future energy concerns and on making
economically practical biofuels.
CONCLUSIONS
Microalgae have recently received growing attention
due to their potential for CO2 capture and utilization in
renewable energy. The use of microalgae exhibits a number
of advantages over the use of other plant feedstock, including
(1) high photosynthetic conversion, (2) rapid production, (3)
high capacity to produce a wide variety of biofuel feedstock,
(4) high capability for environmental bioremediation, such
as CO2 fixation from the atmosphere/flue gas and water
purification, and (5) non-competitiveness for land with
crops and food. In addition, the net CO2 emission is assumed
to be essentially zero if CO2 released from the microalgaebased biofuel can be recycled and reused for the cultivation of
microalgae. As a result, these advantages and potentials
make microalgae suitable candidates to solve CO2 reduction
and energy issues.
For the cultivation of microalgae, the cultivation
conditions, including water media at the adequate pH and
temperature, nutrients and CO2 dosed in a controlled manner
in the presence of sunlight, are a concern. The cultivation in
closed photobioreactor systems is more promising than that
in open ponds or raceways for meeting the need of biofuel
industries.

Klinthong et al., Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 15: 712742, 2015

Pretreatment, especially cell disruption, prior to solvent

extraction is necessary to effectively recover the lipid.
However, it should be noted that some of the cell
disruption methods require a large energy input that may
lead to a negative energy balance. For extraction, the
selected technology should be efficient (both in terms of
time and energy), non-reactive with the lipid, relatively
cheap (both in terms of capital cost and operating cost) and
safe. Notably, the lipid extraction yield is influenced by the
techniques and operating conditions of cell disruption and
extraction, which is also related to the microalgae strain.
As a result, combination techniques, instead of a single
method, are proposed by researchers.
The biofuels obtained from microalgae are not only
biodiesel but also biohydrogen, biomethanol, bioethanol,
biobutanol and biomethane. These products are conventionally
produced using transesterification, fermentations, liquefaction,
etc. A hybrid biofuel refinery concept, rather than an
individually product-based or energy-based biorefinery, can
be implemented profitably for microalgae-based biofuels
through recycling of CO2 and nutrients. The biofuel part
and other valuable products can be co-generated to make
the commercialization process a profitable venture.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors wish to express their thanks to the financial
support from the ROC Ministry of Science and Technology
(grant number NSC103-3113-P-007-004) and National
Tsing Hua University at Hsinchu, Taiwan, ROC.
REFERENCES
Abed, R., Dobretsov, S. and Sudesh, K. (2009). Applications
of Cyanobacteria in Biotechnology. J. Appl. Microbiol.
106: 112.
Abu-Khader, M.M. (2006). Recent Progress in CO2
Capture/Sequestration: A Review. Energy Sources Part
A 28: 12611279.
Acien Fernndez, F.G., Fernandez Sevilla, J.M.F., Prez,
J.A.S., Grima, E.M. and Chisti, Y. (2001). Airlift-driven
External-loop Tubular Photobioreactors for Outdoor
Production of Microalgae: Assessment of Design and
Performance. Chem. Eng. Sci. 56: 27212732.
Adam, F., Abert-Vian, M., Peltier, G. and Chemat, F.
(2012). Solvent-free Ultrasound-assisted Extraction of
Lipids from Fresh Microalgae Cells: A Green, Clean and
Scalable Process. Bioresour. Technol. 114: 457465.
Ahlgren, G. and Merino, L. (1991). Lipid Analysis of
Freshwater Microalgae: A Method Study. Arch.
Hydrobiol. 121: 295306.
Alzate, M.E., Muoz, R., Rogalla, F., Fdz-Polanco, F. and
Prez-Elvira, S.I. (2014). Biochemical Methane Potential
of Microalgae Biomass after Lipid Extraction. Chem.
Eng. J. 243: 405410.
Amin, S. (2009). Review on Biofuel Oil and Gas Production
Processes from Microalgae. Energy Convers. Manage.
50: 18341840.
Amoroso, G., Sltemeyer, D., Thyssen, C. and Fock, H.P.

735

(1998). Uptake of HCO3 in Cells and Chloroplasts from

the Microalgae Chlamydomonas reinhardtii and Dunaliella
tertiolecta. Plant Physiol. 116: 193201.
Andrich, G., Nesti, U., Venturi, F., Zinnai, A. and Fiorentini,
R. (2005). Supercritical Fluid Extraction of Bioactive
Lipids from the Microalga Nannochloropsis sp. Eur. J.
Lipid Sci. Technol. 107: 381386.
Anthony, R.J., Ellis, J.T., Sathish, A., Rahman, A., Miller,
C.D. and Sims, R.C. (2013). Effect of Coagulant/
Flocculants on Bioproducts from Microalgae. Bioresour.
Technol. 149: 6570.
Avila, A., Coleman, P.J.R., Russin, W.A., Graham, J.M. and
Graham, L.E. (2001). Carbonic Anhydrase Localization in
Charophycean Green Algae: Ecological and Evolutionary
Significance. Int. J. Plant Sci. 162: 127135.
Bahadar, A. and Khan, M.B. (2013). Progress in Energy
from Microalgae: A Review. Renewable Sustainable
Energy Rev. 27: 128148.
Balasubramanian, S., Allen, J.D., Kanitkar, A. and Boldor, D.
(2011). Oil Extraction from Scenedesmus Obliquus Using
a Continuous Microwave System-design, Optimization,
and Quality Characterization. Bioresour. Technol. 102:
33963403.
Banerjee, A., Sharma, R., Chisti, Y. and Banerjee, U.
(2002). Botryococcus braunii: A Renewable Source of
Hydrocarbons and Other Chemicals. Crit. Rev. Biotechnol.
22: 245279.
Barbosa, M.J., Janssen, M., Ham, N., Tramper, J. and
Wijffels, R.H. (2003). Microalgae Cultivation in Air-lift
Reactors: Modeling Biomass Yield and Growth Rate as
a Function of Mixing Frequency. Biotechnol. Bioeng.
82: 170179.
Barbosa, M.J., Zijffers, J.W., Nisworo, A., Vaes, W., van
Schoonhoven, J. and Wijffels, R.H. (2005). Optimization
of Biomass, Vitamins, and Carotenoid Yield on Light
Energy in a Flat-panel Reactor Using the A-stat
Technique. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 89: 233242.
Borowitzka, L.J. and Borowitzka, M.A. (1990). Commercial
Production of -carotene by Dunaliella salina in
Openponds. Bull. Mar. Sci. 47: 244252.
Borowitzka, M.A. (2007). Algal Biotechnology Products
and Processes Matching Science and Economics. J.
Appl. Phycol. 4: 267279.
Bosma, R., van Zessen, E., Reith, J.H., Tramper, J. and
Wijffels, R.H. (2007). Prediction of Volumetric
Productivity of an Outdoor Photobioreactor. Biotechnol.
Bioeng. 97: 11081120.
Bozzo, G.G., Colman, B. and Matsuda, Y. (2000). Active
Transport of CO2 and Bicarbonate is Induced in Response
to External CO2 Concentration in the Green Alga
Chlorella kessleri. J. Exp. Bot. 51: 13411348.
Briassoulisa, D., Panagakisa, P., Chionidisa, M., Tzenosb, D.,
Lalosb, A., Tsinosb, C., Berberidisb, K. and Jacobsenc, A.
(2010). An Experimental Helical-tubular Photobioreactor
for Continuous Production of Nannochloropsis sp.
Bioresour. Technol. 101: 67686777.
Brennan, L. and Owende, P. (2010). Biofuels from
Microalgae-A Review of Technologies for Production,
Processing, and Extractions of Biofuelsand Co-products.

736

Klinthong et al., Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 15: 712742, 2015

Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 14: 557577.

Brindley, C., Garcia-Malea, M.C., Acien, F.G., Fernandez,
J.M., Garcia, J.L. and Molina, E. (2002). Influence of
Power Supply in the Feasibility of Phaeodactylum
tricornutum Cultures. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 87: 723733.
Brown, T.M., Duan, P. and Savage, P.E. (2010).
Hydrothermal Liquefaction and Gasification of
Nannochloropsis sp. Energy Fuels 24: 36393646.
Carvalho, A.P., Meireles, L.A. and Malcata, F. X. (2006).
Microalgal Reactors: A Review of Enclosed System
Designs and Performances. Biotechnol. Prog. 22: 1490
1506.
Chang, E.H. and Yang, S.S. (2003). Some Characteristics
of Microalgae Isolated in Taiwan for Biofixation of
Carbon Dioxide. Bot. Bull. Acad. Sinica44: 4352.
Chaumont, D. (1993). Biotechnology of Algal Biomass
Production: A Review of Systems for Outdoor Mass
Culture. J. Appl. Phycol. 5: 593604.
Chen, K.T., Cheng, C.H., Wu, Y.H., Lu, W.C., Lin, Y.H.
and Lee, H.T. (2013). Continuous Lipid Extraction of
Microalgae Using High-pressure Carbon Dioxide.
Bioresour. Technol. 146: 2326.
Chen, P., Min, M., Chen, Y., Wang, L., Li, Y., Chen, Q.,
Wang, C., Wan, Y., Wang, X., Cheng, Y., Deng, S.,
Hennessy, K., Lin, X., Liu, Y., Wang, Y., Martinez, B. and
Ruan, R. (2010). Review of Biological and Engineering
Aspects of Algae to Fuels Approach. Int. J. Agric. Biol.
Eng. 2: 130.
Chen, Y.C. and Tan, C.S. (2007). Hydrogenation of pchloronitrobenzene by Ni-B Nanocatalyst in CO2expanded Methanol. J. Supercrit. Fluids 41: 272278.
Cheng, C.J., Andy-Hong, P.K. and Lin, C.F. (2012).
Improved Solubilization of Activated Sludge by Ozonation
in Pressure Cycles. Chemosphere 87: 637643.
Cheng, I., Zhang, I., Chen, H. and Gao, C. (2006). Carbon
Dioxide Removal from Air by Microalgae Cultured in a
Membrane-photobioreactor. Sep. Purif. Technol. 50: 324
329.
Chi, Z., OFallon, J.V. and Chen, S. (2011). Bicarbonate
Produced from Carbon Capture for Algae Culture. Trends
Biotechnol. 29: 537541.
Chisti, Y. (2007). Biodiesel from Microalgae. Biotechnol.
Adv. 25: 294306.
Chisti, Y. (2010). Fuels from Microalgae. Biofuels 1: 233
235.
Chisti, Y. and Yan, J. (2011). Algal Biofuels A Status
Report. Appl. Energy 88: 32773279.
Chiu, S.Y., Kao, C.Y., Chen, C.H., Kuan, T.C., Ong, S.C.
and Lin, C.S. (2008). Reduction of CO2 by a Highdensity Culture of Chlorella sp. in a Semicontinuous
Photobioreactor. Bioresour. Technol. 99: 33893396.
Chiu, S.Y., Kao, C.Y., Huang, T.T., Lin, C.J., Ong, S.C.
and Chen, C.D. (2011). Microalgal Biomass Production
and On-site Bioremediation of Carbon Dioxide, Nitrogen
Oxide and Sulfur Dioxide from Flue Gas Using Chlorella
sp. Cultures. Bioresour. Technol. 102: 91359142.
Chiu, S.Y., Kao, C.Y., Tsai, M.T., Ong, S.C., Chen, C.H.
and Lin, C.S. (2009). Lipid Accumulation and CO2
Utilization of Nannochloropsis oculata in Response to

CO2 Aeration. Bioresour. Technol. 100: 833838.

Colman, B. and Gehl, K.A. (1983). Physiological
Characteristics of Photosynthesis in Porphyridium
cruentum: Evidence for Bicarbonate Transport in a
Unicellular Red Alga. J. Phycol. 19: 210213.
Colman, B. and Rotatore, C. (1995). Photosynthetic
Inorganic Carbon Uptake and Accumulation in Two
Marine Diatoms. Plant Cell Environ. 18: 919924.
Colman, B., Huertas, I.E., Bhatti, S. and Dason, J.S.
(2002). The Diversity of Inorganic Carbon Acquisition
Mechanisms in Eukaryotic Microalgae. Funct. Plant
Biol. 29: 261270.
Costa, J.A., Colla, L.M. and Duarte, P.F. (2004). Improving
Spirulina platensis Biomass Yield a Fed-batch Process.
Bioresour. Technol. 92: 237241.
Couto, R.M., Simes, P.C., Reis, A., Da Silva, T.L., Martins,
V.H. and Snchez-Vicente, Y. (2010). Supercritical Fluid
Extraction of Lipids from the Heterotrophic Microalga
Crypthecodinium cohnii. Eng. Life Sci. 10: 158164.
Cravotto, G., Boffa, L., Mantegna, S., Perego, P., Avogadro,
M. and Cintas, P. (2008). Improved Extraction of
Vegetable Oils under High-intensity Ultrasound and/or
Microwaves. Ultrason. Sonochem. 15: 898902.
Damartzis, T. and Zabaniotou, A. (2011). Thermochemical
Conversion of Biomass to Second Generation Biofuels
through Integrated Process Design-A Review. Renewable
Sustainable Energy Rev. 15, 366378.
Das, D. and Veziroglu, T.N. (2008). Advances in Biological
Hydrogen Production Processes. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy
33: 60466057.
Demirbas, A. (2007). Importance of Biodiesel as
Transportation Fuel. Energy Policy 35: 46614670.
Demirbas, M.F. (2009a). Biorefineries for Biofuel Upgrading:
A Critical Review. Appl. Energy 86: 151161.
Demirbas, A. (2009b). Biofuels Securing the Planet's Future
Energy Needs. Energy Convers. Manage. 50: 22392249.
de Morais, M.G. and Costa, J.A.V. (2007a). Isolation and
Selection of Microalgae from Coal Fired Thermoelectric
Power Plant for Biofixation of Carbon Dioxide. Energy
Convers. Manage. 48: 21692173.
de Morais, M.G. and Costa, J.A.V. (2007b). Carbon Dioxide
Fixation by Chlorella kessleri, C. vulgaris, Scenedesmus
obliquus and Spirulina sp. Cultivated in Flasks and
Vertical Tubular Photobioreactors. Biotechnol. Lett. 29:
13491352.
Du, J.J., Zeng, P., Shi, Y.J., Wang, Q. and Zhang, F. (2010).
Cultivation of Wild Mixed Microalgae by Synthetic Flue
Gas. Res. Environ. Sci. 23: 366370.
Du, J., McGraw, A., Lorenz, N., Beitle, R.R., Clausen,
E.C. and Hestekin, J.A. (2012). Continuous Fermentation
of Clostridium tyrobutyricum with Partial Cell Recycle
as a Long-term Strategy for Butyric Acid Production.
Energies 5: 28352848.
Duan, P. and Savage, P.E. (2011). Hydrothermal Liquefaction
of a Microalga with Heterogeneous Catalysts. Ind. Eng.
Chem. Res. 50: 5261.
Eckert, C., Liotta, C., Ragauskas, A. and Hallett, J. (2007).
Tunable Solvents for Fine Chemicals from the Biorefinery.
Green Chem. 9: 545548.

Klinthong et al., Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 15: 712742, 2015

Ehimen, E.A., Sun, Z.F. and Carrington, C.G. (2010).

Variables Affecting the in Situ Transesterification of
Microalgae Lipids. Fuel 89: 677684.
Ellis, J.T., Hengge, N.N., Sims, R.C., Miller, C.D. (2012).
Acetone, Butanol and Ethanol Production from Wastewater
Algae. Bioresour. Technol. 111: 491495.
Elzenga, J.T.M., Prins, H.B.A. and Stefels, J. (2000). The
Role of Extracellular Carbonic Anhydrase activity in
Inorganic Carbon Utilization of Phaeocystis globosa
(Prymnesiophyceae): A Comparison with Other Marine
Algae Using the Isotopic Disequilibrium Technique.
Limnol. Oceanogr. 45: 372380.
Erden, G., Demir, O. and Filibeli, A. (2010). Disintegration of
Biological Sludge: Effect of Ozone Oxidation and
Ultrasonic Treatment on Aerobic Digestibility. Bioresour.
Technol. 101: 80938098.
Fajardo, A.R., Cerdan, L.E., Medina, A.R., Fernndez,
F.G.A., Moreno, P.A.G. and Grima, E.M. (2007). Lipid
Extraction from the Microalga Phaeodactylum
tricornutum. Eur. J. Lipid Sci. Technol. 109: 120126.
Frigon, J.C., Matteau-Lebrun, F., Abdou, R.H., McGinn,
P.J., OLeary, S.J.B. and Guiot, S.R. (2013). Screening
Microalgae Strains for Their Productivity in Methane
Following Anaerobic Digestion. Appl. Energy 108: 100
107.
Fu, T., Chang, M. and Zhong, L. (2008). Reform of
Chinas Urban Water Sector. London: IWA Publishing
Limited.
Fu, X., Li, D., Chen, J. Zhang, Y., Huang, W., Zhu, Y.,
Yang, J. and Zhang, C. (2013). A Microalgae Residue
Based Carbon Solid Catalyst for Biodiesel Production.
Bioresour. Technol. 146: 767770.
Ganzler, K., Szinai, I. and Salg, A. (1990). Effective
Sample Preparation Method for Extracting Biologically
Active Compounds from Different Matrices by a
Microwave Technique. J. Chromatogr. A 520: 257262.
Gao, Y., Gregor, C., Liang, Y., Tang, D. and Tweed, C.
(2012). Algae Biodiesel-A Feasibility Report. Chem.
Cent. J. 6: 116.
Geciova, J., Bury, D. and Jelen, P. (2002). Methods for
Disruption of Microbial Cells for Potential Use in the
Dairy Industry-A Review. Int. Dairy J. 12: 541553.
Golmakani, M.T., Mendiola, J.A., Rezaei, K. and Ibaez,
E. (2012). Expanded Ethanol with CO2 and Pressurized
Ethyl Lactate to Obtain Fractions Enriched in Linolenic Acid from Arthrospira platensis (Spirulina).
J. Supercrit. Fluids 62: 109115.
Gomez-Villa, H., Voltolina, D., Nieves, M. and Pina, P.
(2005). Biomass Production and Nutrient Budget in
Outdoor
Cultures
of
Scenedesmus
obliquus
(Chlorophyceae) in Artificial Wastewater, under the
Winter and Summer Conditions of Mazatlan, Sinaloa,
Mexico. Vie Milieu. 55:121126.
Gonalves, A.L., Pires, J.C. and Simes, M. (2013). Green
Fuel Production: Processes Applied to Microalgae.
Environ. Chem. Lett. 11: 315324.
Gonzlez, P.M., Piloni, N.E. and Puntarulo, S. (2012). Iron
Overload and Lipid Peroxidation in Biological Systems.
In Lipid Peroxidation, Catala, A. (Ed.), InTech,

737

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/46181.
Gould, J.M. (1985). Studies on the Mechanism of Alkaline
Peroxide Delignification of Agricultural Residues.
Biotechnol. Bioeng. 27: 225231.
Grimi, N., Dubois, A., Marchal, L., Jubeau, S., Lebovka,
N.I. and Vorobiev, E. (2014). Selective Extraction from
Microalgae Nannochloropsis sp. Using Different Methods
of Cell Disruption. Bioresour. Technol. 153: 254259.
Guderjan, M., Tpfl, S., Angersbach, A. and Knorr, D.
(2005). Impact of Pulsed Electric Field Treatment on the
Recovery and Quality of Plant Oils. J. Food Eng. 67:
281287.
Guderjan, M., Elez-Martnez, P. and Knorr, D. (2007).
Application of Pulsed Electric Fields at Oil Yield and
Content of Functional Food Ingredients at the Production
of Rapeseed Oil. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 8: 55
62.
Halim, R., Gladman, B., Danquah, M.K. and Webley, P.A.
(2011). Oil Extraction from Microalgae for Biodiesel
Production. Bioresour. Technol. 102: 178185.
Halim, R., Danquah, M.K. and Webley, P.A. (2012).
Extraction of Oil from Microalgae for Biodiesel
Production: A Review. Biotechnol. Adv. 30: 709732.
Hall, D.O., Fernandez, F.G.A., Guerrero, E.C., Rao, K.K.
and Grima, E.M. (2003). Outdoor Helical Tubular
Photobioreactors for Microalgal Production-modeling of
Fluid-dynamics and Mass Transfer and Assessment of
Biomass Productivity. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 82: 6273.
Hallenbeck, P.C. (2009). Fermentative Hydrogen Production:
Principles, Progress, and Prognosis. Int. J. Hydrogen
Energy 34: 73797389.
Hanagata, N., Takeuchi, T., Fukuju, Y., Barnes, D.J. and
Karube, I. (1992). Tolerance of Microalgae to High CO2
and High Temperature. Phytochemistry 31: 33453348.
Hanelt, D., Bischof, K. and Dunton, K. (2007). Life
Strategy, Ecophysiology and Ecology of Seaweeds in
Polar Waters. Rev. Environ. Sci. Biotechnol. 6: 95126.
Harun, R., Danquah, M.K. and Gareth, M.F. (2010).
Microalgal Biomass as a Fermentation Feedstock for
Bioethanol Production. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 85:
199203.
Harun, R. and Danquah, M.K. (2011). Influence of Acid
Pre-treatment on Microalgal Biomass for Bioethanol
Production. Process Biochem. 46: 304309.
Hauck, J.T., Olson, G.J., Scierka, S.J., Perry, M.B. and
Ataai, M.M. (1996). Effect of Simulated Flue Gas on
Growth of Microalgae. Am. Chem. Soc., Div. Polym.
Chem. 41: 13911396.
Heasman, M., Diemar, J., OConnor, W., Sushames, T.
and Foulkes, L. (2000). Development of Extended
Shelf-life Microalgae Concentrate Diets Harvested by
Centrifugation for Bivalve Mollusks-A Summary.
Aquacult. Res. 31:637659.
Hende, S.V.D., Vervaeren, H. and Boon, N. (2012). Flue
Gas Compounds and Microalgae: (Bio-) Chemical
Interactions Leading to Biotechnological Opportunities.
Biotechnol. Adv. 30: 14051424.
Henrard, A.A., de Morais, M.G. and Costa, J.A.V. (2011).
Vertical Tubular Photobioreactor for Semicontinuous

738

Klinthong et al., Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 15: 712742, 2015

Culture of Cyanobium sp. Bioresour. Technol. 102: 4897

4900.
Hernndez, D., Solana, M., Riao, B., Garca-Gonzlez,
M.C. and Bertucco, A. (2014). Biofuels from Microalgae:
Lipid Extraction and Methane Production from the
Residual Biomass in a Biorefinery Approach. Bioresour.
Technol. 170: 370378.
Herrero, M., Castro-Puyana, M. and Mendiola, J.A. (2013).
Compressed Fluids for the Extraction of Bioactive
Compounds. TrAC, Trends Anal. Chem. 43: 6783.
Hirano, A., Hon-Nami, K., Kunito, S., Hada, M. and Ogushi,
Y. (1998). Temperature Effect on Continuous Gasification
of Microalgal Biomass: Theoretical Yield of Methanol
Production and Its Energy Balance. Catal. Today 45: 399
404.
Herrero, M., Cifuentes, A. and Ibanez, E. (2006). Sub- and
Supercritical Fluid Extraction of Functional Ingredients
from Different Natural Sources: Plants, Food-by-products,
Algae and Microalgae: A Review. Food Chem. 98: 136
148.
Holm-Nielsen, J.B., Seadi, T.A. and Oleskowicz-Popiel, P.
(2009). The Future of Anaerobic Digestion and Biogas
Utilization. Bioresour. Technol. 100: 54785484.
Hossain, A., Salleh, A., Boyce, A.N., Chowdhury, P. and
Naqiuddin, M. (2008). Biodiesel Fuel Production from
Algae as Renewable Energy. Am. J. Biochem. Biotechnol.
4: 250254.
Huang, Y., Hong, A., Zhang, D. and Li, L. (2014).
Comparison of Cell Rupturing by Ozonation and
Ultrasonication for Algal Lipid Extraction from Chlorella
Vulgaris. Environ. Technol. 35: 931937.
Huang, C.H. and Tan, C.S. (2014). A Review: CO2
Utilization. Aerosol Air Qual. Res. 14: 480499.
Huertas, I.E., Colman, B., Espie, G.S. and Lubian, L.L.
(2000a). Active Transport of CO2 by Three Species of
Marine Microalgae. J. Phycol. 36: 314320.
Huertas, I.E., Espie, G.S., Colman, B. and Lubian, L.L.
(2000b). Light Dependent Bicarbonate Transport and
CO2 Efflux in the Marine Microalga Nannochloropsis
gaditana. Planta 211: 4349.
Huertas, I.E., Colman, B. and Espie, G.S. (2002).
Inorganic Carbon Acquisition and Its Energization in
Eustigmatophyte Algae. Funct. Plant Biol. 29: 271277.
Hung, M.T. and Liu, J.C. (2006). Microfiltration for
Separation of Green Algae from Water. Colloids Surf., B
51: 157164.
Huntley, M.E. and Redalje, D.J. (2007). CO2 Mitigation
and Renewable Oil from Photsynthetic Microbes: A
New Appraisal. Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Change 12:
573608.
Im, H., Lee, H., Park, M.S., Yang, J.W. and Lee, J.W.
(2014). Concurrent Extraction and Reaction for the
Production of Biodiesel from Wet Microalgae. Bioresour.
Technol.152: 534537.
Inoue, S.S., Dote, Y. and Yokoyama, S.Y. (1995). CO2
Fixation and Oil Production through Microalga. Energy
Convers. Manage. 36: 729731.
Iwasaki, I., Hu, Q., Kurano, N. and Miyachi, S. (1998). Effect
of Extremely High-CO2 Stress on Energy Distribution

between Photosystem I and Photosystem II in a HighCO2 Tolerant Green Alga, Chlorococcum littorale and
the Intolerant Green Alga Stichococcus bacillaris. J.
Photochem. Photobiol., B 44:184190.
Jacob-Lopes, E., Revah, S., Hernndez, S., Shirai, K. and
Franco, T.T. (2009). Development of Operational
Strategies to Remove Carbon Dioxide in Photobioreactors.
Chem. Eng. J. 153: 120126.
Jacob-Lopes, E., Scoparo, C.H.G., Queiroz, M.I. and
Franco, T.T. (2010). Biotransformations of Carbon Dioxide
in Photobioreactors. Energy Convers. Manage. 51: 894
900.
James, C.M. and Al-Khars, A.M. (1990). An Intensive
Continuous
Culture
System
Using
Tubular
Photobioreactors for Producing Microalgae. Aquaculture
87: 381393.
Jessop, P.G. and Subramaniam, B. (2007). Gas-expanded
Liquids. Chem. Rev. 107: 26662694.
Jin, Y., Veiga, M.C. and Kennes, C. (2005). Bioprocesses
for the Removal of Nitrogen Oxides from Pollutaed. J.
Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 80:483494.
Kaewpintong, K., Shotipruk, A., Powtongsook, S. and
Pavasant, P. (2007). Photoautotrophic High-density
Cultivation of Vegetativecells of Haematococcus Pluvialis
in Airlift Bioreactor. Bioresour. Technol. 98: 288295.
Kim, J.K., Um, B.H. and Kim, T.H. (2012). Bioethanol
Production from Micro-algae, Schizocytrium sp., Using
Hydrothermal Treatment and Biological Conversion.
Korean J. Chem. Eng. 29: 209214.
Kishimoto, M., Okakura, T., Nagashima, H., Minowa, T.,
Yokoyama, S.Y. and Yamaberi, K. (1994). Co2 Fixation
and Oil Production Using Micro-algae. J. Ferment. Bioeng.
78: 479482.
Klass, D.L. (1984). Methane from Anaerobic Fermentation.
Science 223: 10211028.
Korb, R.E., Saville, P.J., Johnston, A.M. and Raven, J.A.
(1997). Sources of Inorganic Carbon for Photosynthesis
by Three Species of Marine Diatom. J. Phycol. 33: 433
440.
Krichnavaruk, S., Powtongsook, S. and Pavasant, P. (2007).
Enhanced Productivity of Chaetoceros Calcitrans in
Airlift Photobioreactors. Bioresour. Technol. 98: 2123
2130.
Kumar, M.S.Y., Dutta, R., Prasad, D. and Misra, K. (2011).
Subcritical Water Extraction of Antioxidant Compounds
from Seabuckthorn (Hippophae rhamnoides) Leaves for
the Comparative Evaluation of Antioxidant Activity.
Food Chem. 127: 13091316.
Lam, M.K. and Lee, K.T. (2012). Microalgae Biofuels: A
Critical Review of Issues, Problems and the Way Forward.
Biotechnol. Adv. 30: 673690.
Lebovka, N., Vorobiev, E. and Chemat, F. (2011).
Enhancing Extraction Processes in the Food Industry.
Series: Contemporary Food Engineering, CRC Press,
Taylor & Francis LLC, p. 592.
Lee, J.N., Lee, J.S., Shin, C.S., Park, S.C. and Kim, S.W.
(2000). Methods to Enhance Tolerances of Chlorella
KR-1 to Toxic Compounds in Flue Gas. Appl. Biochem.
Biotechnol. 8486: 329342.

Klinthong et al., Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 15: 712742, 2015

Lee, Y.K. and Tay, H.S. (1991). High CO2 Partial Pressure
Depresses Productivity and Bioenergenetic Growth Yield
of Chlorella pyrenoidosa Culture. J. Appl. Phycol. 3: 95
101.
Lee, Y.K. (2001). Microalgal Mass Culture Systems and
Methods: Their Limitation and Potential. J. Appl. Phycol.
13: 307315.
Lewis, T., Nichols, P.D. and McMeekin, T.A. (2000).
Evaluation of Extraction Methods for Recovery of Fatty
Acids from Lipid-producing Microheterotrophs. J.
Microbiol. Methods 43: 107116.
Li, Y., Naghdi, F.G., Garg, S., Catalina, T., Adarme-Vega,
T.C., Thurecht, K.J., Ghafor, W.A., Tannock, S. and
Schenk, P.M. (2014). A Comparative Study: The Impact
of Different Lipid Extraction Methods on Current
Microalgal Lipid Research. Microb. Cell Fact. 13: 1422.
Lin, I.H. and Tan, C.S. (2008a). Diffusion of Benzonitrile
in CO2-expanded Ethanol. J. Chem. Eng. Data 53: 1886
1891.
Lin, I.H. and Tan, C.S. (2008b). Measurement of Diffusion
Coefficients of p-chloronibtrobenzene in CO2-expanded
Methanol. J. Supercrit. Fluids 46: 112117.
Lin, H.W., Yen, C.H., Hsu, H. and Tan, C.S. (2013). CO2
Promoted Hydrogenolysis of Benzylic Compounds in
Methanol and Water. RSC Adv. 3: 1722217227.
Ma, Y.A., Cheng, Y.M., Huang, J.W., Jen, J.F., Huang, Y.S.
and Yu, C.C. (2014). Effects of Ultrasonic and Microwave
Pretreatments on Lipid Extraction of Microalgae.
Bioprocess. Biosyst. Eng. 37: 15431549.
Maeda, K., Owadai, M., Kimura, N., Omata, K. and Karube,
I. (1995). CO2 Fixation from the Flue Gas on Coal-fired
Thermal Power Plant by Microalgae. Energy Convers.
Manage. 36: 717720.
Mandalm, R.K. and Palsson, B.O. (1998). Elemental
Balancing of Biomass and Medium Composition Enhances
Growth Capacity in High-density Chlorella vulgaris
Cultures. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 59: 605611.
Marchetti, J., Miguel, V. and Errazu, A. (2007). Possible
Methods for Biodiesel Production. Renewable Sustainable
Energy Rev. 11: 13001311.
Masakazu, M. and Masahiro, I. (1997). The Biological
CO2 Fixation and Utilization Project by Rite (2)-screening
and Breeding of Microalgae with High Capability in Fixing
CO2. Energy Convers. Manage. 38: 493497.
Matsumoto, H., Sioji, N., Ikuta, Y. and Hamasaki, A.
(1997). Influence of CO2, SO2 and NO in Flue Gas on
Microalgae Productivity. J. Chem. Eng. Jpn. 30: 620624.
McMillan, J.R., Watson, I.A. and Jaafar, M.A.W. (2013).
Evaluation and Comparison of Algal Cell Disruption
Methods: Microwave, Water Bath, Blender, Ultrasonic
and Laser Treatment. Appl. Energy 103: 128134.
Medina, A.R., Grima, E.M., Gimnez, A.G. and Gonzalez, M.
(1998). Downstream Processing of Algal Polyunsaturated
Fatty Acids. Biotechnol. Adv. 16: 517580.
Meiser, A., Schmid-Staiger, U. and Trosch, W. (2004).
Optimization of Eicosapentaenoic Acid Production by
Phaeodactylum Tricornutum in the Flat Panel Airlift
(FPA) reactor. J. Appl. Phycol. 16: 215225.
Mendes, R.L., Nobre, B.P., Cardoso, M.T., Pereira, A.P.

739

and Palavra, A.F. (2003). Supercritical Carbon Dioxide

Extraction of Compounds with Pharmaceutical Importance
from Microalgae. Inorg. Chim. Acta 356: 328334.
Mendez, L., Mahdy, A., Ballesteros, M. and GonzlezFernndeza, C. (2014). Methane Production of Thermally
Pretreated Chlorella vulgaris and Scenedesmus sp.
Biomass at Increasing Biomass Loads. Appl. Energy
129: 238241.
Miao, X., Li, P., Li, R. and Zhong, J. (2011). In Situ
Biodiesel Production from Fast-growing and High Oil
Content Chlorella Pyrenoidosa in Rice Straw Hydrolysate.
J. Biomed. Biotechnol. 2011: 18.
Milledge, J.J. (2011). Commercial Application of Microalgae
Other than as Biofuels: A Brief Review. Rev. Environ.
Sci. Biotechnol. 10: 3141.
Minowa, T., Yokoyama, S.Y., Kishimoto, M. and Okakurat,
T. (1995). Oil Production from Algal Cells of Dunaliella
Tertiolecta by Direct Thermochemical Liquefaction.
Fuel 74: 17351738.
Mirn, A.S., Gmez, A.C., Camacho, F.G., Grima, E.M.
and Chisti, Y. (1999). Comparative Evaluation of
Compact Photobioreactors for Large-scale Monoculture
of Microalgae. J. Biotechnol. 70: 249270.
Mirn, A.S., Camacho, F.G., Gmez, A.C., Grima, E.M.
and Chisti, Y. (2000). Bubble-column and Airlift
Photobioreactors for Algal Culture. AlChE J. 46: 1872
1887.
Mirn, A.S., Garcia, M.C., Gmez, A.C., Camacho, F.G.,
Grima, E.M. and Chisti, Y. (2003). Shear Stress Tolerance
and Biochemical Characterization of Phaeodactylum
tricornutum in Quasi Steady-state Continuous Culture in
Outdoor Photobioreactors. Biochem. Eng. J. 16: 287297.
Miyamoto, K., Wable, O. and Benemann, J.R. (1988).
Vertical Tubularreactor for Microalgae Cultivation.
Biotechnol. Lett. 10: 703708.
Moheimani, N.R. and Borowitzka, M.A. (2006). The Longterm Culture of the Coccolithophorid Pleurochrysis
carterae (Haptophyta) in Outdoor Raceway Ponds. J.
Appl. Phycol. 18: 703712.
Mojaat, M., Foucault, A., Pruvost, J. and Legrand, J. (2008).
Optimal Selection of Organic Solvents for Biocompatible
Extraction of -carotene from Dunaliella salina. J.
Biotechnol. 133: 433441.
Molina, G.E., Belarbi, E.H., Fernandez, A.F.G., Medina, A.R.
and Chisti, Y. (2003). Recovery of Microalgal Biomass
and Metabolites: Process Options and Economics.
Biotechnol. Adv. 20: 491515.
Moncada, J., Jaramillo, J.J., Higuita, J.C., Younes, C. and
Cardona, C.A. (2013). Production of Bioethanol Using
Chlorella vulgaris Cake: A Technoeconomic and
Environmental Assessment in the Colombian Context.
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 52: 1678616794.
Morita, M., Watanabe, Y., Okawa, T. and Saiki, H. (2001).
Photosynthetic Productivity of Conical Helical Tubular
Photobioreactors Incorporating Chlorella sp. under
Various Culture Medium Flow Conditions. Biotechnol.
Bioeng. 74: 136144.
Mercer, P. and Armenta, R.E. (2011). Developments in Oil
Extraction from Microalgae. Eur. J. Lipid Sci. Technol.

740

Klinthong et al., Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 15: 712742, 2015

113: 539547.
Mukherjee, B. and Moroney, J.V. (2011). Algal Carbon
Dioxide Concentrating Mechanisms, eLS John Wiley &
Sons Ltd., Chichester.
Murakami, M. and Ikenouchi, M. (1997). The Biological
CO2 Fixation and Utilization Project by RITE (2):
Screening and Breeding of Microalgae with High
Capability in Fixing CO2. Energy Convers. Manage. 38:
S493S497.
Nagle, N. and Lemke, P. (1990). Production of Methyl
Ester Fuel from Microalgae. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol.
24: 355361.
Naoto, U. and Mashiro, I. (1997). The Biological CO2
Fixation and Utilization Project by Rite (1)-highly
Effective Photobioreactor System. Energy Convers.
Manage. 38: 487492.
Negoro, M., hamasaki, A., Ikuta, Y., Makita, T.,
Hirayama, K. and Suzuki, S. (1993). Carbon Dioxide
Fixation by Microalgae Photosynthesis Using Actual Flue
Gas Discharged from a Boiler. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol.
3940: 643653.
Nigam, P.S. and Singh, A. (2011). Production of Liquid
Biofuels from Renewable Resources. Prog. Energy
Combust. Sci. 37: 5268.
Palmqvist, K., Yu J.W. and Badger, M.R. (1994). Carbonic
Anhydrase Activity and Inorganic Carbon fluxes in
Low- and High-Ci Cells of Chlamydomonas reinhardtii
and Scenedesmus obliquus. Physiol. Plant. 90: 537547.
Park, J.Y., Oh, Y.K., Lee, J.S., Lee, K., Jeong, M.J. and
Choi, S.A. (2014). Acid-catalyzed Hot-water Extraction
of Lipids from Chlorella vulgaris. Bioresour. Technol.
153: 408412.
Patil, P.D., Gude, G.V., Mannarswamy, A., Deng, S.,
Cooke, P., Munson-McGee, S., Rhodes, I., Lammers, P.
and Nirmalakhandan, N. (2011). Optimization of Direct
Conversion of Wet Algae to Biodiesel under Supercritical
Methanol Conditions. Bioresour. Technol. 102: 118122.
Patil, P.D., Gude,V.G., Mannarswamy, A., Cooke, P.,
Nirmalakhandan, N., Lammers, P. and Deng, S. (2012).
Comparison of Direct Transesterification of Algal
Biomass under Supercritical Methanol and Microwave
Irradiation Conditions. Fuel 97: 822831.
Peng, B., Yuan, X., Zhao, C. and Lercher, J.A. (2012a).
Stabilizing Catalytic Pathways via Redundancy: Selective
Reduction of Microalgae Oil to Alkanes. J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 134: 94009405.
Peng, B., Yao, Y., Zhao, C. and Lercher, J.A. (2012b).
Towards Quantitative Conversion of Microalgae Oil to
DieselRange Alkanes with Bifunctional Catalysts.
Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 124: 21142117.
Peter, J., Williams, B. and Laurens, M.L. (2010). Microalgae
as Biodiesel and Biomass Feedstocks & Analysis of the
Biochemistry, Energetics and Economics. Energy Environ.
Sci. 3: 554590.
Phan, D.T. and Tan, C.S. (2014). Innovative Pretreatment
of Sugarcane Bagasse Using Supercritical CO2 Followed
by Alkaline Hydrogen Peroxide. Bioresour. Technol.
167: 192197.
Potts, T., Du, J., Paul, M., May, P., Beitle, R. and Hestekin, J.

(2012). The Production of Butanol from Jamaica Bay

Macro Algae. Environ. Prog. Sustainable Energy 31: 29
36.
Pourmortazavi, S.M. and Hajimirsadeghi, S.S. (2007).
Supercritical Fluid Extraction in Plant Essential and
Volatile Oil Analysis - Review. J. Chromatogr. A 1163:
224.
Ramey, D.E. (2006). Prodution of Butyric Acid and Butanol,
DE-F-G02-00ER86106, U.S. Department of Energy,
Morganotown, WV, USA.
Ranjan, A., Patil, C. and Moholkar, V.S. (2010). Mechanistic
Assessment of Microalgal Lipid Extraction. Ind. Eng.
Chem. Res. 49: 29792985.
Razzak, S.A., Hossain, M.M., Lucky, R.A. and Bassi, A.S.
(2013). Integrated CO2 Capture, Wastewater Treatment
and Biofuel Production by Microalgae Culturing-A
Review. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 27: 622
653.
Reddy, H.K., Muppaneni, T., Patil, P.D., Ponnusamy, S.,
Cooke, P., Schaub, T. and Deng, S. (2014). Direct
Conversion of Wet Algae to Crude Biodiesel under
Supercritical Ethanol Conditions. Fuel 115: 720726.
Reyes, F.A., Mendiola, J.A., Ibaez, E. and del Valle, J.M.
(2014). Astaxanthin Extraction from Haematococcus
pluvialis Using CO2-expanded Ethanol. J. Supercrit.
Fluids 92: 7583.
Richmond, A and Wu, Z.C. (2001). Optimization of a Flat
Plate Glass Reactor for Mass Production of
Nannochloropsis sp. Outdoors. J. Biotechnol. 85: 259
269.
Richmond, A. (2004). Principles for Attaining Maximal
Microalgal Productivity in Photobioreactors: An Overview.
Hydrobiologia 512: 3337.
Richmond, A. (2008). Handbook of Microalgal Culture:
Biotechnology and Applied Phycology. John Wiley &
Sons. Oxford, p. 195.
Rochelle, G.T. (2009). Amine Scrubbing for CO2 Capture.
Science 325: 16521654.
Rotatore, C. and Colman, B. (1991). The Active uptake of
Carbon Dioxide by the Unicellular Green Algae Chlorella
saccharophila and C. ellipsoidea. Plant Cell Environ.
14: 371375.
Rotatore, C. and Colman, B. (1992). Active Uptake of CO2
by the Diatom Navicula pelliculosa. J. Exp. Bot. 43: 571
576.
Rotatore, C., Lew, R.R. and Colman, B. (1992). Active
Uptake of CO2 during Photosynthesis in the Green Alga
Eremosphaera viridis is Mediated by a CO2-ATPase.
Planta 188: 539545.
Rotatore, C., Colman, B. and Kuzma, M. (1995). The
Active Uptake of Carbon Dioxide by the Marine Diatoms
Phaeodactylum tricornutum and Cyclotella sp. Plant Cell
Environ. 18: 913918.
Ryu, H.J., Oh, K.K. and Kim, Y.S. (2009). Optimization of
the Influential Factors for the Improvement of CO2
Utilization Efficiency and CO2 Mass Transfer rate. J.
Ind. Eng. Chem. 15: 471475.
Sahena, F., Zaidul, I., Jinap, S., Karim, A., Abbas, K. and
Norulaini, N. (2009). Application of Supercritical CO2 in

Klinthong et al., Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 15: 712742, 2015

Lipid Extraction-A Review. J. Food Eng. 95: 240253.

Sajilata, M., Singhal, R.S. and Kamat, M.Y. (2008).
Supercritical CO2 Extraction of -linolenic Acid (GLA)
from Spirulina Platensis ARM 740 Using Response
Surface Methodology. J. Food Eng. 84: 321326.
Saka, S. and Kusdiana, D. (2001). Biodiesel Fuel from
Rapeseed Oil as Prepared in Supercritical Methanol.
Fuel 80: 225231.
Sakai, N., Sakamoto, Y., Kishimoto, N., Chihara, M. and
Karube, I. (1995). Chlorella Strains from Hot Springs
Tolerant to High Temperature and High CO2. Energy
Convers. Manage. 36: 693696.
Samor, C., Torri, C., Samor, G., Fabbri, D., Galletti, P.
and Guerrini, F. (2010). Extraction of Hydrocarbons
from Microalga Botryococcus Braunii with Switchable
Solvents. Bioresour. Technol. 101: 32743279.
Satoh, A., Kurano, N. and Miyachi, S. (2001). Inhibition of
Photosynthesis by Intracellular Carbonic Anhydrase in
Microalgae under Excess Concentrations of CO2.
Photosynth. Res. 68: 215224.
Sathish, A., Smith, B.R. and Sims, R.C. (2013). Effect of
Moisture on in Situ Tranesterification of Microalgae for
Biodiesel Production. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 89:
137142.
Scragg, A.H., Illman, A.M., Carden, A. and Shales, S.W.
(2002). Growth of Microalgae with Increased Calorific
Values in a Tubular Bioreactor. Biomass Bioenergy 23:
6773.
Shuit, S.H., Lee, K.T., Kamaruddin, A.H. and Yusup, S.
(2010). Reactive Extraction of Jatropha curcas L. Seed
for Production of Biodiesel: Process Optimization Study.
Environ. Sci. Technol. 44: 43614367.
Sierra, E., Acin, F.G., Fernndez, J.M., Garca, J.L.,
Gonzlez, C. and Molina, E. (2008). Characterization of
a Flat Plate Photobioreactor for the Production of
Microalgae. Chem. Eng. J. 138: 136147.
Sih, R., Armenti, M., Mammucari, R., Dehghani, F. and
Foster, N.R. (2008). Viscosity Measurements on Saturated
Gas-expanded Liquid Systems-ethanol and Carbon
Dioxide. J. Supercrit. Fluids 43: 460468.
Silva, H.J. and Pirt, S.J. (1984). Carbon Dioxide Inhibition
of Photosynthetic Growth of Chlorella. Microbiology
130: 28332838.
Sing, S.F., Isdepsky, A., Borowitzka, M.A. and Moheimani,
N.R. (2013). Production of Biofuels from Microalgae.
Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Change 18: 4772.
Singh, J. and Gu, S. (2010). Commercialization Potential
of Microalgae for Biofuels Production. Renewable
Sustainable Energy Rev. 14: 25962610.
Singh, A., Pant, D., Olsen, S.I. and Nigam, P.S. (2012).
Key Issues to Consider in Microalgae Based Biodiesel
Production. Energy Educ. Sci. Technol. Part A 29: 687
700.
Spolaore, P., Joannis-Cassan, C., Duran, E. and Isambert,
A. (2006). Commercial Applications of Microalgae. J.
Biosci. Bioeng. 101: 8796.
Steriti, A., Rossi, R., Concas, A. and Cao, G. (2014). A
Novel Cell Disruption Technique to Enhance Lipid
Extraction from Microalgae. Bioresour. Technol. 164:

741

7077.
Stephenson, A.L., Dennis, J.S., Howe, C.J., Scott, S.A. and
Smith, A.G. (2010). Influence of Nitrogen-limitation
Regime on the Production by Chlorella vulgaris of
Lipids for Biodiesel Feedstocks. Biofuels 1: 4758.
Suali, E. and Sarbatly, R. (2012). Conversion of Microalgae
to Biofuel. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 16:
43164342.
Suarsini, E. and Subandi, S. (2011). Utilization Ultrasonic
to Increase the Efficiency of Oil Extraction for Microalgae
Indigenous Isolates from Pond Gresik, East Java. In:
Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE First Conference on
Clean Energy and Technology (CET), p.275279.
Sltemeyer, D.F., Miller, A.G., Espie, G.S., Fock, H.P. and
Canvin, D.T. (1989). Active CO2 Transport by the Green
Alga Chlamydomonas reinhardtii. Plant Physiol. 89:
12131219.
Sydney, E.B., Sturm, W., de Carvalho, J.C., Thomaz-Soccol,
V., Larroche, C., Pandey, A. and Soccol, C.R. (2010).
Potential Carbon Dioxide Fixation by Industrially
Important Microalgae. Bioresour. Technol. 101: 5892
5896.
Taher, H., Al-Zuhair, S., Al-Marzouqui, A.H., Haik, Y.
and Farid, M.M. (2011). A Review of Enzymatic
Transesterification of Microalgal Oil-based Biodiesel
Using Supercritical Technology. Enzyme Res. 2011:
468292, doi:10.4061/2011/468292.
Taher, H., Al-Zuhair, S., Al-Marzouqi, A.H., Haik, Y. and
Farid, M. (2014a). Effective Extraction of Microalgae
Lipids from Wet Biomass for Biodiesel Production.
Biomass Bioenergy 66: 159167.
Taher, H., Al-Zuhair, S., Al-Marzouqi, A.H., Haik, Y., Farid,
M. and Tariq, S. (2014b). Supercritical Carbon Dioxide
Extraction of Microalgae Lipid: Process Optimization
and Laboratory Scale-up. J. Supercrit. Fluids 86: 5766.
Tan, K.T., Gui, M.M., Lee, K.T. and Mohamed A.R.
(2011). Supercritical Alcohol Technology in Biodiesel
Production: A Comparative Study between Methanol
and Ethanol. Energy Sources Part A 33: 156163.
Thurmond, W. (2009). Five Key Strategies for Algae
Biofuels Commercialization. Biofuels International 12.
Tran, D.T., Le, B.H., Lee, D.J., Chen, C.L. and Wang, H.Y.
(2013). Microalgae Harvesting and Subsequent Biodiesel
Conversion. Bioresour. Technol.140: 179186.
Trotta, P. (1981). A Simple and Inexpensive System for
Continuous Monoxenic Mass Culture of Marine
Microalgae. Aquaculture 22: 383387.
Trozzi, C., Rentz, O., Oertel, D., Woodfield, M. and
Stewart, R. (2010). Energy Industries. Combustion in
Energy and Transformation Industries. Air Pollutant
Emission Inventory Guidebook. European Environment
Agency.
Torzillo, G., Pushparaj, B., Bocci, F., Balloni, W., Materassi,
R. and Florenzano, G. (1986). Production of Spirulina
Biomass in Closed Photobioreactors. Biomass 11: 6174.
Ugwu, C.U., Aoyagi, H. and Uchiyama, H. (2008).
Photobioreactors for Mass Cultivation of Algae. Bioresour.
Technol. 99: 40214028.
Um, B.H. and Kim, Y.S. (2009). Review: A Chance for

742

Klinthong et al., Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 15: 712742, 2015

Korea to Advance Algal-biodiesel Technology. J. Ind.

Eng. Chem. 15: 17.
Umdu, E.S., Tuncer, M. and Seker, E. (2009).
Transesterification of Nannochloropsis oculata Microalga's
Lipid to Biodiesel on Al2O3 Supported CaO and MgO
Catalysts. Bioresour. Technol. 100: 28282831.
Ventura, J.S. and Jahng, D. (2013). Improvement of Butanol
Fermentation by Supplementation of Butyric Acid
Produced from a Brown Alga. Biotechnol. Bioprocess
Eng. 18: 11421150.
Wang, H.C. (2014a). Using CO2-Expanded Liquid as Green
Solvent in Microalgae Lipid Extraction. Masters Thesis.
National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu.
Wang, Y., Guo, W.Q., Chang, J.S. and Ren, N.Q. (2014b).
Butanol Production Using Carbohydrate-Enriched
Chlorella vulgaris as Feedstock. Adv. Mater. Res. 830:
122125.
Wang, B., Li, Y., Wu, N. and Lan, Q. (2008). CO2 Biomitigation Using Microalgae. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol.
79: 707718.
Wang, L. and Weller C.L. (2006). Recent Advances in
Extraction of Nutraceuticals from Plants. Trends Food
Sci. Technol. 17: 300312.
Wei, H.H., Yen, C.H., Lin, H.W. and Tan, C.S. (2013).
Synthesis of Bimetallic Pd-Ag Colloids in CO2-expanded
Hexane and Their Application in Partial Hydrogenation
of Phenylacetylene. J. Supercrit. Fluids 81: 1-6.
Wu, Y., Zhou, S., Qin, F., Zhenga, K. and Yea, X. (2010).
Modeling the Oxidation Kinetics of Fentons Process on
the Degradation of Humic Acid. J. Hazard. Mater. 179:
533539.
Xia, L., Ge, H., Zhou, X., Zhang, D. and Hu, C. (2013)
Photoautotrophic Outdoor Two-stage Cultivation for
Oleaginous Microalgae Scenedesmus obtusus XJ-15.
Bioresour. Technol. 144: 261267.
Xu, R. and Mi, Y. (2011). Simplifying the Process of
Microalgal Biodiesel Production through in Situ
Transesterification Technology. J. Am. Oil Chem. Soc.
88: 9199.
Yang, S.S., Guo, W.Q., Meng, Z.H., Zhou, X.J., Feng, X.C.,
Zheng, H.S., Liu, B., Ren, N.Q. and Cui,Y.S. (2013).
Characterizing the Fluorescent Products of Waste
Activated Sludge in Dissolved Organic Matter Following

Ultrasound Assisted Ozone Pretreatment. Bioresour.

Technol. 131: 560563.
Yang, L., Pan, Q. and Rempel, G.L. (2012). Recovery of
Wilkinsons Catalyst from Polymer Based Matrix Using
Carbon Dioxide Expanded Methanol. J. Supercrit. Fluids
68: 104112.
Yu, C.H., Huang, C.H. and Tan, C.S. (2012). A Review of
CO2 Capture by Absorption and Adsorption. Aerosol Air
Qual. Res. 12: 745769.
Yuan, Z., Zhang, L. and Bi, J. (2010). Which is More Costeffective? A Comparison of Two Wastewater Treatment
Models in China-Singapore Suzhou Industrial Park,
China. J. Cleaner Prod. 18: 12701275.
Yun, Y.S., Lee, S.B., Park, J.M., Lee, C.I. and Yang, J.W.
(1997). Carbon Dioxide Fixation by Algae Cultivation
Using Wastewater Nutrient. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol.
69: 451455.
Zhang, X., Rong, J., Chen, H., He, C. and Wang, Q. (2014)
Current Status and Outlook in the Application of
Microalgae in Biodiesel Production and Environmental
Protection. Front. Energy Res. 2: 115.
Zhao, B. and Su, Y. (2014). Process Effect of Microalgalcarbon Dioxide Fixation and Biomass Production: A
Review. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 31: 121
132.
Zheng, H., Yin, J., Zhen, G., Haung, H., Ji, X. and Dou, C.
(2011). Disruption of Chlorella vulgaris Cells for the
Release of Biodiesel-producing Lipids: A Comparison
of Grinding, Ultrasonication, Bead Milling, Enzymartic
Lysis, and Microwave. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 164:
12151224.
Zhu, L. (2014). The Combined Production of Ethanol and
Biogas from Microalgal Residuals to Sustain Microalgal
Biodiesel: A Theoretical Evaluation. Biofuels, Bioprod.
Biorefin. 8: 715.
Zhu, L. and Ketola, T. (2012). Microalgae Production as
Biofuel Feedstock: Risks and Challenge. Int. J. Sustainable
Dev. World Ecol. 19: 268274.
Received for review, December 11, 2014
Revised, February 23, 2015
Accepted, February 24, 2015