Next Article in Journal
Assessing Coastal Erosion and Climate Change Adaptation Measures: A Novel Participatory Approach
Previous Article in Journal
Assessment of the Impact of a New Industrial Discharge on an Urban Wastewater Treatment Plant: Proposal for an Experimental Protocol
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Environments
Volume 10
Issue 7
10.3390/environments10070109
environments-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Carbon Dioxide Utilization Using Chlorella Microalgae

by
Natalia Politaeva
1,
Igor Ilin
2,
Ksenia Velmozhina
1,* and
Polina Shinkevich
1
1
Institute of Civil Engineering, Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University, Polytechnic Str., 29, Saint Petersburg 195220, Russia
2
Institute of Industrial Management, Economics and Trade, Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University, Polytechnic Str., 29, Saint Petersburg 195220, Russia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Environments 2023, 10(7), 109; https://doi.org/10.3390/environments10070109
Submission received: 28 March 2023 / Revised: 14 May 2023 / Accepted: 20 May 2023 / Published: 23 June 2023
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The problem of the excessive CO2 emitted into the atmosphere is one of the significant problems for the modern world and ecology. This article examines the dynamics of carbon dioxide absorption from thermal power plants, TPP, and waste gases by three types of microalgae, the most typical for the Russian Federation: Chlorella kessleri, Chlorella vulgaris, and Chlorella sorokiniana. The exhaust gases of the TPP contain up to 39% carbon dioxide. In this work, the rate of absorption of carbon dioxide from model exhaust gases with a CO2 content of up to 39% was studied. As a result of the study, a species of microalgae (Chlorella vulgaris) was identified, characterized by the maximum rate of absorption of CO2 = 0.412 g/L·day and the maximum volume of CO2 utilized in 1 day = 8.125 L. The conducted research proved the possibility of utilizing a large content (up to 39%) of carbon dioxide from the exhaust gases of the TPP with the help of microalgae of the genus Chlorella. A scheme for the utilization of CO2 with the help of microalgae is also proposed, which meets the principles of a circular economy (closed cycle).

1. Introduction

The problem of elevated carbon dioxide content in the atmosphere is a serious threat to the environment today [1,2]. The concentration of greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide (CO2) [3,4,5,6], has increased in the atmosphere since 1750 [7]. This led to a sharp increase in temperatures around the world [8].
In this regard, the introduction of technologies for capturing, utilizing, and storing carbon (carbon capture, utilization, and storage—CCUS) has become more and more active recently [9,10]. Carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) technology is considered an effective way to reduce greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide (CO2), which is significant for achieving carbon neutrality [11]. The International Energy Agency (IEA) assessed the emission reduction potential of CCUS, which could reduce 6.9 × 109 t of CO2 per year by 2070 in a sustainable development scenario, accounting for 19.27% of the total emission reduction [12]. A CCUS technology system covers several key technologies in the following fields: (1) CO2 capture and transport; (2) CO2 mineralization; (3) reduction and recycling; (4) biological carbon sequestration; (5) carbon geological storage; and (6) CO2 enhanced underground resource exploration [13,14,15,16,17,18]. They involve the use of adsorption, absorption [19], and membrane separation of CO2 [20], as well as cryogenic technologies [21] and biofixation methods [22]. Hybrid technologies based on a combination of different approaches are also being developed. However, according to a 2016 report by the Global CCS Technology Research Center, energy consumption in carbon sequestration projects is quite high, which creates additional problems [23]. The introduction of various systems for cleaning gases from CO2 will not be able to completely solve the problem of the carbon footprint, but it will help to significantly reduce the level of negative impact on the environment. The authors of many scientific papers agree with this statement [11,24].
Biological CO2 fixation usually occurs through photosynthesis by terrestrial plants and trees. However, they can eliminate only 3–6% of CO2 because of their slow growth, while other microorganisms, such as eukaryotic algae and cyanobacteria, can fix CO2 10–50 times faster [25,26].
In microalgae, chloroplasts play a key role in photosynthesis, that is, the process of converting light energy into chemical energy that can be used for life. The photosynthesis of microalgae consists of two types of reactions: light-dependent and light-independent. Light-dependent reactions occur in the thylakoids of chloroplasts and assist in the absorption of light energy, which is used to create high-energy molecules ATP and NADPH. ATP and NADPH, in turn, are used in light-independent reactions. Light-independent reactions occur in the stroma of chloroplasts and involve the fixation of carbon dioxide (CO2), which is then converted into organic compounds such as sugars, starches, and fats. These compounds are a source of energy and building blocks for microalgae and other living organisms. Thus, microalgae, thanks to their chloroplasts, can use light energy for photosynthesis and the conversion of carbon dioxide into organic compounds, which makes them biofactories. This is important for the ecological sustainability of our planet, as they are able to absorb carbon and reduce the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere [27].
The absorption of CO2 by microalgae has a number of advantages, which are due to the high efficiency of photosynthesis, the growth rate of microalgae, their adaptability to environmental conditions, and the reduction in energy use [28]. The decrease in energy expended is due to the production of energy from biomass by photosynthesis [29]. In addition, these organisms are able to transform the absorbed carbon dioxide into lipids, proteins, pigments, and carbohydrates and can become the basis for obtaining valuable components [30], such as biofuels [31,32], fertilizers, biologically active additives, or be used for cosmetic and pharmaceutical purposes [33,34].
According to approximate data, 100 tons of microalgae fix 183 tons of carbon dioxide during the period of maximum growth of biomass when cultivated for 8–10 days [35]. This value will vary depending on many factors (temperature, cultivator design, CO2 supply method, type of microalgae, etc.).
The optimal CO2 requirement for maximum growth enhancement in microalgae is found only when CO2-enriched gases are supplied. Therefore, air pumping to the medium is required for better microalgal production [36]. Unfortunately, the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is only 0.033%, and the extraction energy of 1 mol of CO2 from ambient air is 19.63 KJ/mol, a rare compound in air [37]. In addition to that, chemically graded CO2 supply for microalgal production leads to 30% greenhouse gas emissions [36]. However, the feed CO2 concentration for algae is similar to the flue gas composition [37], which reduces the extraction requirement and associated cost. Therefore, the use of flue gas as a carbon source is a robust complementary approach [38].
Using photoautotrophic organisms to reduce the noxious effects of industrial CO2 emissions in the atmosphere by sequestration under the form of biomass constitutes a relatively recent solution. This may become valuable if we obtain high-added-value products that can become economically and commercially attractive [39,40]. Due to the price increase in fossil fuel on the international market, this solution may become more and more feasible [41].
The biomass of microalgae absorbs CO2 as a result of photosynthesis, while oxygen is released and the biomass of microalgae increases. Algae convert energy without any evolution beyond the cells and easily adapt to environmental conditions [42]. The absorption of CO2 by microalgae cells occurs during the photosynthesis reaction, which is presented below:
CO2 + H2O → light chlorophyll C(H2O) + O2 + 120 kcal/mol,
Photosynthesis is a complex process that can be divided into two main stages. The first stage is the photoreaction stage, which occurs in the thylakoid membranes of chloroplasts and involves the conversion of light energy into chemical energy in the form of ATP and NADPH. This process is carried out by two photosystems, PSII and PSI, which work together to produce ATP and NADPH. The second stage is the dark reaction, which occurs in the stroma of chloroplasts and involves the conversion of CO2 into sugar molecules using the energy and reducing power provided by ATP and NADPH, as shown in Equations (2) and (3).
H2O + ADP + Pi + NADP+ → light O2 + ATP + NADPH + H+,
CO2 + ATP + NADPH + H+ → (CH2O) + ADP + Pi + NADP+,
This process is known as the Calvin cycle, and it involves a series of enzymatic reactions that convert CO2 into glucose and other sugars. Together, these two stages of photosynthesis allow plants and other photosynthetic organisms to produce the energy and organic compounds they need for growth and metabolism.
Photosynthetic carbon metabolism in microalgae is mainly dependent on the C3 cycle [43]. This process involves using ATP as an energy source to lower the energy level, deplete NADPH, and convert carbon dioxide into sugar through a series of steps known as carboxylation, reduction, and regeneration of ribulose-1,5-bisphosphate (RuBP), as shown in Equation (4). Within the carboxysome, RuBP is bound to CO2 by the enzyme ribulose-1,5-bisphosphate carboxylase/oxygenase (rubisco) and converted into two molecules of 3-phosphoglycerate (3-PGA). The 3-PGA then diffuses from the carboxysome to the cytoplasm through the pores of the hexamer shell protein. In the reduction phase, catalyzed by an enzyme, 3-PGA in the cytoplasm is converted into glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate (GAP), as shown in Equation (5). The regeneration of RuBP is critical to ensuring the continuous operation of the carbon sequestration cycle [44].
3RuBP + 3CO2 → GAP + 3RuBP,
PGA + ATP + NADPH + H+ → GAP + ADP + NADP+ + Pi,
The rubisco enzyme has the capability of performing two contrasting functions, i.e., carboxylation and oxygenation, and the choice of function is influenced by the relative concentrations of CO2 and O2 in the surroundings. Since the atmospheric concentration of O2 is relatively high, it favors the function of oxygenation and promotes photorespiration, which ultimately reduces the rate of photosynthesis. To overcome this limitation, microalgae have evolved a CO2-concentrating mechanism that enables them to maximize photosynthetic efficiency even under low CO2 concentrations or inorganic carbon conditions [45].
Biomass (plants, algae, etc.) annually produces more than 100 billion tons of organic matter as a result of photosynthesis, absorbs about 200 billion tons of CO2, and releases about 145 billion tons of oxygen into the environment. Studies [46] have shown that the efficiency of photosynthesis in microalgae is 10–20% higher than in plants.
The main ways of utilizing carbon dioxide are absorption and adsorption. Thus far, several chemical and physical materials have been proposed to serve as adsorbents, including carbon fiber monolithic adsorbents [47], activated carbon fiber–phenolic resin composites, melamine–formaldehyde highly porous adsorbent, and amine immobilized adsorbents [26,48]. Typical absorbents commercially available in a chemical absorption system include amine carbonate-based components such as mono-ethanolamine (MEA), diethanolamine (DEA), ammonia, and hot potassium carbonate [26,49]. Purification by these methods causes the generation of waste materials such as sludge and spent adsorbents that must be disposed of. It is impossible to create a waste-free carbon dioxide removal system using adsorbents and absorbents. Therefore, the question of finding the most effective, cheap, and affordable ways to absorb CO2 without the formation of by-products that require additional processing still remains relevant. The absorption of CO2 using a biofilter, where a suspension of microalgae is used as a bioload, is a cheap and affordable way to reduce CO2 emissions, as well as to provide high-speed biomass synthesis of microalgae of the genus Chlorella (C.). Microalgae can use inorganic carbon CO2 for the synthesis of organic carbon biomass [33].
Therefore, there is an increase in interest in the use of microalgae as a biofilter for removing CO2 in the world scientific community. Researchers from different countries propose various innovative projects to capture and absorb CO2 by microalgae.
Indonesian scientists found that the rate of CO2 absorption depends on the type of microalgae C. [50] and that C. vulgaris has the highest potential in the field of CO2 capture. It has been proven that cultivation with a higher initial cell density (0.325 g/dm3) demonstrates better resistance to carbon dioxide intake of 48.17 g/h with a carbon fixation of 37.95 g·dm3/day (58%) and production biomass 0.82 g·dm3/day [50].
Since the problem of reducing the carbon footprint has been faced by the scientific community for a long time, various researchers in the field of carbon dioxide reduction have already proven the possibility of using microalgae biomass as a biofilter [51]. However, most studies have studied the absorption of gases with a low CO2 content (no more than 20%) by microalgae [52,53]. So, for example, in the work of V.Yu. Kulabukhov et al., CO2 concentration was supplied from 0.2% to 16% [53]. This article proves that microalgae C. vulgaris and Scenedesmus are able to absorb gases with a CO2 content of up to 16%. However, the work does not reveal the potential of microalgae to absorb gases with a high content of carbon dioxide (up to 39%). Similarly, in the work “Isolation and selection of microalgae from coal-fired thermoelectric power plant for bio-fixation of carbon dioxide” [52], the CO2 concentration in the supplied gases did not exceed 18%.
Improvement of the nutrient medium for cultivating microalgae is carried out to increase the efficiency of CO2 capture [54,55,56]. For example, the initial deficiency of NH4HCO3 is more favorable for the growth of microalgae [55,56]. The addition of sodium bicarbonate to the nutrient medium led to a significant increase in the amount of biomass and the productivity of the carbon dioxide utilization process [57,58,59]. The maximum CO2 fixation rate and lipid content were recorded at a sodium bicarbonate concentration of 0.4% [59].
Figure 1 presents a simplified diagram of how microalgae utilize carbon dioxide. Firstly, inorganic carbon is absorbed from the environment, and then CO2 and HCO3 are transported to the chloroplast. Inorganic carbon passes through the thylakoid membrane and is converted to CO2 by carbonic anhydrase (CA) at a higher ambient pH, which increases the CO2 concentration near the rubisco enzyme and ultimately enhances photosynthetic rates [60]. Microalgae can uptake HCO3− through active transport and CO2 through passive diffusion. CA regulates the concentration of CO2 and HCO3− to maintain proper pH in the chloroplast stroma [44]. HCO3− is the preferred form of inorganic carbon storage due to its approximately 1000-fold lower permeability to lipid membranes than uncharged CO2 molecules.
Since the efficiency of carbon dioxide uptake by microalgae directly depends on the number of cells in the microalgae suspension, some success has recently been achieved in increasing the growth rate of the number of microalgae cells using genetic engineering, random mutagenesis, and adaptive evolution. The improvement of the photosynthesis process is achieved through many mechanisms. The main ones are increasing the efficiency of enzymes involved in CO2 fixation; strengthening metabolic processes; and reducing the size of the antenna, which can alleviate excessive absorption of sunlight [61,62].
The purpose of the presented studies was to study the effect of various species of algae of the genus C. and cultivation conditions on the rate of CO2 uptake and growth.

2. Materials and Methods

The objects of the study were various species of microalgae of the genus C.: C. kessleri, C. vulgaris, and C. sorokiniana.
The hermetic photobioreactor-biofilter (PhBR-B), with a capacity of 100 L (Figure 2), was created to assess the dynamics of CO2 uptake by the biomass of various microalgae species.
PhBR-B is equipped with the following systems: aeration, lighting, temperature sensors, carbon dioxide supply, measurement of gas mixture composition, and removal of microalgae biomass suspension. Illumination was carried out with fluorescent lamps, the illumination of which varies in the range of 2500 to 3000 Lx. The temperature of the suspension solution was maintained in the range of 25 to 30 °C by thermostats. PhBR-B was supplied with 50 L of microalgae suspension, and the remaining 50 L was filled with a gas–air mixture with a high CO2 content and aerated for 648 h (27 days). CO2 was added daily through aerators in a volume of 7.5–17.5 L (15–39%) of the unoccupied volume of PhBR-B. Intensive bubbling with gases with a high content of CO2 (15–39%) of the suspension of C. microalgae makes it possible to intensify the processes of absorption of CO2 by the biomass of microalgae. CO2 from gaseous emissions is not only a source of inorganic carbon for microalgae but also promotes more rapid reproduction of microalgae C. cells and maintains the required pH of the solution in the range of 6.0 to 9.0.
Carbon dioxide was supplied to the PhBR-B from a CO2 cylinder (imitation of gas emissions from power plants) through an aeration pipe located at the bottom of the PhBR-B with holes. The composition of the gas mixture in PhBR-B was measured using a GEOTECH ga200plus gas analyzer (Geotechnical Instruments (UK) Ltd., Sovereign House, Queensway, Leamington Spa, Warwickshire, CV31 3JR, UK).
The biomass of microalgae was settled during the day and poured into containers after 648 h (27 days) of the experiment.
The cultivation of microalgae biomass was carried out using a nutrient medium (Table 1), the composition of which was selected and described in the literature source [63]. In addition to the nutrient medium, diluted wastewater from food industry enterprises can be used [64] since they contain the elements necessary for the growth of microalgae.
The increase in biomass was estimated from the change in the optical density of the microalgae suspension at a wavelength of 750 nm, which was carried out using a CPP-3 (KFK-3) spectrophotometer. All measurements were carried out in triplicate. The measurement error was 3–7%.

3. Results

Comparative characteristics of six samples of C. microalgae according to various factors of their cultivation are presented in Table 2.
The initial optical density of the suspension of microalgae C. kessleri was 0.481 ± 0.014, C. vulgaris was 0.449, and C. sorokiniana was 0.720 at a wavelength of 750 nm.
When carbon dioxide was added, the pH shifted to an acidic environment, up to a value of 5.4. As the carbon dioxide was utilized by the suspension of microalgae, the pH turned into an alkaline medium, up to a value of 8.4.
The general graph of the dynamics of CO2 uptake by a suspension of microalgae C. kessleri for 27 days of cultivation and CO2 utilization is shown in Figure 3 (upper blue dots indicate a new supply of CO2 to the PhBR-B after the CO2 value has decreased to 0).
Figure 3 shows that the absorption of CO2 by the suspension of microalgae C. kessleri most actively occurs at the stage of exponential growth (7–24 days). The optical density of the biomass increased throughout the experiment and corresponded to the classical shape of the growth curve.
The period (Figure 4) from the maximum supply of CO2 32% (V = 15.5 L) to the complete absorption of 0% was studied to estimate the time of maximum absorption of CO2 and the dynamics of microalgae biomass. It turned out that 2.8 days are enough for the complete absorption of CO2 with a content of up to 32% in the air. Research data were recorded starting from the seventh day, which corresponds to the beginning of the exponential phase.
It follows from Figure 4 that 50 L of C. kessleri microalgae suspension absorbed 15.5 L of CO2 in 2.8 days.
The dynamics of CO2 uptake by a suspension of C. kessleri microalgae (initial optical density—0.95) for 9 h (on the seventh day from the start of the experiment) are shown in Figure 5.
It follows from Figure 5 that for 9 h (on the seventh day of cultivation), 50 L of C. kessleri microalgae suspension (initial optical density—0.95) absorbed 1.25 L of CO2.
Thus, 1 L of C. kessleri microalgae suspension (initial optical density—0.798) is able to absorb, on average, 0.0046 L of CO2 in 1 h, and in 1 day, on average, 0.11 L of CO2.
The mass of utilized CO2 was determined, taking into account that the density of CO2 (at a temperature of 27 °C) = 1.773 kg/m3. A total of 1 L of C. kessleri microalgae suspension (initial optical density—0.798) absorbs 0.195 ± 0.001 g of CO2 per day on average, increasing its absorption capacity as the number of biomass cells (optical density of the suspension) increases.
A similar experiment was carried out with microalgae C. vulgaris species.
The general graph of the dynamics of CO2 uptake by a suspension of microalgae C. vulgaris for 27 days of cultivation is shown in Figure 6.
The absorption of CO2 by the suspension of microalgae C. vulgaris most actively occurs at the stage of exponential growth (7–22 days), as can be seen in Figure 6. The optical density of the biomass increased throughout the experiment.
The dynamics of absorption of 15.55 L of CO2 by a suspension of C. vulgaris microalgae (the suspension volume was 50 L) is shown in Figure 7. CO2 was supplied on the seventh day from the start of the experiment, which corresponds to the beginning of the exponential phase.
Thus, it follows from Figure 7 that 50 L of C. vulgaris microalgae suspension absorbed 15.55 L of CO2 in 2.16 days.
The dynamics of CO2 absorption by a suspension of microalgae C. vulgaris (initial optical density—1.73) for 9 h (the seventh day from the beginning of the experiment) are shown in Figure 8.
It follows from Figure 8 that in 9 h (on the seventh day of the experiment), 50 L of C. vulgaris microalgae suspension (initial optical density 1.73) absorbed 3.9 L of CO2.
Thus, 1 L of C. vulgaris microalgae suspension (initial optical density—1.16) is able to absorb, on average, 0.006 L of CO2 in 1 h, and in 1 day, on average, 0.144 L of CO2.
To determine the mass of utilized CO2, the density of CO2 used (at a temperature of 27 °C) was equal to 1.773 kg/m3. A total of 1 L of suspension of microalgae C. vulgaris (initial optical density—1.16) absorbs 0.255 ± 0.001 g of CO2 per day, increasing its absorbing capacity as the number of biomass cells (optical density of the suspension) increases.
A similar experiment was carried out for C. sorokiniana algae. The general graph of the dynamics of CO2 uptake by a suspension of C. sorokiniana microalgae over 27 days of cultivation and CO2 utilization is shown in Figure 9.
The absorption of CO2 by the suspension of C. sorokiniana microalgae occurs most actively during the initial phase of exponential growth (days 2–10), as can be seen in Figure 9. The exponential phase begins faster (on the second day) than in the previous species. The biomass optical density increased throughout the experiment.
The dynamics of absorption of 14.3 L of CO2 by a suspension of C. sorokiniana microalgae (CO2 supply was carried out at 144 h (day 7 from the start of the experiment)) are shown in Figure 10.
Thus, it follows from Figure 10 that 50 L of C. sorokiniana microalgae suspension absorbed 14.3 L of CO2 in 2.24 days.
The dynamics of CO2 uptake by a suspension of microalgae C. sorokiniana (initial optical density—2.2) for 9 h (the seventh day from the beginning of the experiment) are shown in Figure 11.
It follows from Figure 10 that in 9 h (on the seventh day of the experiment), 50 L of C. sorokiniana microalgae suspension (initial optical density 2.2) absorbed 1.05 L of CO2.
Thus, 1 L of C. sorokiniana microalgae suspension (initial optical density—2) is able to absorb an average of 0.0053 L of CO2 in 1 h, and in 1 day, an average of 0.127 L of CO2.
A total of 1 L of suspension of microalgae C. sorokiniana (initial optical density—2) absorbs 0.225 ± 0.001 g of CO2 per day on average. In this case, the absorbing capacity increases as the number of biomass cells (optical density of the suspension) increases during the first nine days. In the future, even with an increase in optical density, the ability to absorb CO2 decreases.
Dry biomass was obtained from the suspension of microalgae remaining after the experiment. Dry biomass is a raw material for obtaining valuable components.
The method of purification of emissions from carbon dioxide by C. microalgae with subsequent production of dry biomass is shown in Figure 12.
Centrifugation followed by drying is recommended for biomass dehydration. It is possible to use freeze-, IR-, or natural drying, depending on the component of production from a given biomass.
The results of the studies showed a high potential for CO2 fixation (content in PhBR-B from 30% to 40% by free volume) by microalgae of all species of the genus C. (C. vulgaris, C. kessleri, and C. sorokiniana). This potential can be used to absorb CO2 from TTP. Emissions from combined heat and power plants contain, on average, about 39% CO2. The maximum absorption of CO2 occurs during the exponential growth phase (7–21 days) in all studied species of microalgae C. All studied species of microalgae C. are able to absorb gases with a high content of CO2 (up to 39%).
Table 3 shows the results of studying the ability to absorb CO2 by various types of microalgae of the genus C.
For 648 h (27 days), the optical density of C. kessleri biomass increased to 5.580, and C. vulgaris up to 4.631 at a temperature of 25 °C, and at a maximum temperature of 30 °C, the optical density increased in the following ratios: C. kessleri up to 5.061, C. vulgaris up to 4.36, and. C. sorokiniana up to 5.011.
The maximum rate of absorption of CO2 = 0.412 g/L·day and the maximum volume of CO2 utilized in 1 day = 8.125 L are observed in a suspension of microalgae C. vulgaris at T = 30 °C, O = 3000 Lx, and V CO2 = 19.5 L (39%).

4. Conclusions

Comparison of the dynamics of CO2 uptake by different species of microalgae of the genus C. shows that the maximum rate of uptake of CO2 = 0.412 g/L·day and the maximum amount of CO2 utilized in 1 day = 8.125 L belong to the suspension of C. vulgaris microalgae.
Carbon biological sequestration may be one of the most promising methods for the reduction of CO2 emissions in the energy sector, both from the cost and environmental points of view [65]. The optimal CO2 demand for maximum microalgal growth can only be realized when a CO2-rich gas is provided to the culture [38,66].
The problem of reducing the carbon footprint is a global problem for mankind. The introduction of biofilters based on microalgae will help reduce the negative impact of carbon dioxide on the environment. First of all, this is due to the ability of microalgae to absorb carbon dioxide from the emissions of thermal power plants, which will reduce the amount of carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere. In addition, when using biofilters based on microalgae, the spent absorbent is the biomass of microalgae, which can be used to create biofuel based on microalgae or as a co-substrate for the digestion of organic waste in order to increase biogas emissions [67,68]. This fact makes the development not only environmentally expedient but also economically profitable.
However, at this stage of development, the introduction of biofilters based on microalgae is associated with a few serious problems. First, this is because microalgae were used only in laboratory conditions and have not yet been tested on real thermal emissions. To a greater extent, this is due to the high initial costs of installing such technology for production and the company’s justified risks in this regard. To conduct real field studies, it is necessary to design and install a whole complex for the purification of industrial emissions using a biofilter from microalgae. That is why it is necessary to continue studying the mechanism of CO2 fixation by microalgae, not only for field studies but also for the implementation of the principles of sustainable development in various industries. These studies open a new step in promoting the principles of the circular economy and implementing these principles in real life. The study and development of new technologies to improve the environment and reduce the negative impact of production on the environment is an important element of scientific development since only through such modeling presented in this article is it possible to implement technologies in the future that can improve the life of every person.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, N.P.; methodology, N.P., K.V. and P.S.; investigation, N.P., K.V. and P.S.; resources, I.I. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The research was supported by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation (agreement no. 075-15-2022-1136 dated 1 July 2022).

Data Availability Statement

Detailed results of the author’s research are presented in the sources given in the References section.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Sumida, K.; Rogow, D.L.; Mason, J.A.; McDonald, T.M.; Bloch, E.D.; Herm, Z.R.; Bae, T.-H.; Long, J.R. Carbon dioxide capture in metal-organic frameworks. Chem. Rev. 2012, 112, 724–781. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  2. Zhang, S.; Liu, Z. Advances in the biological fixation of carbon dioxide by microalgae. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 2021, 96, 1475–1495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Wang, X.; Song, C. Carbon Capture From Flue Gas and the Atmosphere: A Perspective. Front. Energy Res. 2020, 8, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. United States Energy Information Administration, Department of Energy. Emissions of Greenhouses Gases in the United States 1996. DOE/EIA-0573(96). Available online: https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc697717/?q=%22United%20States%22 (accessed on 15 November 2022).
  5. Yamasaki, A. An overview of CO2 mitigation options for global warmingemphasizing CO2 sequestration options. J. Chem. Eng. Jpn. 2003, 36, 361–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Coyle, W.A. Global Perspective: The Future of Biofuels. 2007. Available online: https://naldc.nal.usda.gov/download/10246/PDF (accessed on 23 December 2022).
  7. Toebelmann, D. The impact of environmental innovation on carbon dioxide emissions. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 244, 118787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Crofcheck, C.; Monstross, M.; Xinyi, E.; Shea, A.; Crocker, M.; Andrews, R. Influence of media composition on the growth rate of chlorella vulgaris and scenedesmus acutus utilized for CO2 mitigation. Am. Soc. Agric. Biol. Eng. Annu. Int. Meet. 2012, 1, 532–549. [Google Scholar]
  9. Zhao, B.; Su, Y. Process effect of microalgal-carbon dioxide fixation and biomass production: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy 2014, 31, 121–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Koh, M.-H. CO2 Capture, Utilization, and Storage (CCUS) Policy Trends in the European Union (EU) and Major European Countries. Korean Public Land Law Assoc. 2022, 100, 463–483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Huang, L.; Hou, Z.; Fang, Y.; Liu, J.; Shi, T. Evolution of CCUS Technologies Using LDA Topic Model and Derwent Patent Data. Evolution of CCUS Technologies Using LDA Topic Model and Derwent Patent Data. Energies 2023, 16, 2556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. IEA. Energy Technology Perspectives 2020. Available online: https://www.iea.org/reports/energy-technology-perspectives-2020 (accessed on 5 January 2023).
  13. Hills, C.D.; Tripathi, N.; Carey, P.J. Mineralization technology for carbon capture, utilization, and storage. Front. Energy Res. 2020, 8, 142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Xiong, Y.; Hou, Z.; Xie, H.; Zhao, J.; Tan, X.; Luo, J. Microbial-mediated CO2 methanation and renewable natural gas storage in depleted petroleum reservoirs: A review of biogeochemical mechanism and perspective. Gondwana Res. 2022, in press. [Google Scholar]
  15. Luo, J.; Hou, Z.; Feng, G.; Liao, J.; Haris, M.; Xiong, Y. Effect of Reservoir Heterogeneity on CO2 Flooding in Tight Oil Reservoirs. Energies 2022, 15, 3015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Nocito, F.; Dibenedetto, A. Atmospheric CO2 mitigation technologies: Carbon capture utilization and storage. Curr. Opin. Green Sustain. Chem. 2020, 21, 34–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Ahmed, D.S.; El-Hiti, G.A.; Yousif, E.; Ali, A.A.; Hameed, A.S. Design and synthesis of porous polymeric materials and their applications in gas capture and storage: A review. J. Polym. Res. 2018, 25, 75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Ali, S.A.; Shah, S.N.; Shah, M.U.H.; Younas, M. Synthesis and performance evaluation of copper and magnesium-based metal organic framework supported ionic liquid membrane for CO2/N2 separation. Chemosphere 2023, 311, 136913. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Wang, M.; Lawal, A.; Stephenson, P.; Sidders, J.; Ramshaw, C. Post-combustion CO2 capture with chemical absorption: A state-of-the-art review. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 2011, 89, 1609–1624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Olajire, A.A. CO2 capture and separation technologies for end-of-pipe applications e a review. Energy 2010, 35, 2610–2627. [Google Scholar]
  21. Song, C.; Liu, Q.; Deng, S.; Li, H.; Kitamura, Y. Cryogenic-based CO2 capture technologies: State-of-the-art developments and current challenges. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2019, 101, 265–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Assis, T.C.; Calijuri, M.L.; Assemany, P.P.; Pereira, A.S.A.P.; Martins, M.A. Using atmospheric emissions as CO2 source in the cultivation of microalgae: Productivity and economic viability. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 215, 1160–1169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Xu, X.; Gu, X.; Wang, Z.; Shatner, W.; Wang, Z. Progress, challenges and solutions of research on photosynthetic carbon sequestration efficiency of microalgae. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2019, 101, 65–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Zhang, Q.; Wang, Y.; Liu, L. Carbon Tax or Low-Carbon Subsidy? Carbon Reduction Policy Options under CCUS Investment. Sustainability 2023, 15, 5301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Iasimone, F.; De Felice, V.; Panico, A.; Pirozzi, F. Experimental study for the reduction of CO2 emissions in wastewater treatment plant using microalgal cultivation. J. CO2 Utiliz. 2017, 22, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Molazadeh, M.; Ahmadzadeh, H.; Pourianfar, H.R.; Lyon, S.; Rampelotto, P.H. The Use of Microalgae for Coupling Wastewater Treatment With CO2 Biofixation. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 2019, 7, 42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  27. Daneshvar, E.; Wicker, R.J.; Show, P.-L.; Bhatnagar, A. Biologically-mediated carbon capture and utilization by microalgae towards sustainable CO2 biofxation and biomass valorization—A review. Chem. Eng. J. 2022, 427, 130884. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Herzog, H.; Golomb, D. Carbon capture and storage from fossil fuel use. Encycl. Energy 2004, 1, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Wang, B.; Li, Y.; Wu, N.; Lan, C.Q. CO2 bio-mitigation using microalgae. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2008, 79, 65–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Rawat, R.I.; Ranjith Kumar, R.; Mutanda, T.; Bux, F. Biodiesel from Microalgae: A Critical Evaluation from Laboratory to Large Scale Production. Appl. Energy 2013, 103, 444–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Wang, B.; Li, Y.; Wu, N.; Lan, C.Q. CO2 Bio-Mitigation Using Microalgae. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2008, 79, 707–718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Demirbas, A. Current Technologies for the Thermo-Conversion of Biomass into Fuels and Chemicals. Energy Sources 2004, 26, 715–730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Razzak, S.A.; Hossain, M.M.; Lucky, R.A.; Bassi, A.S.; de Lasa, H.I. Integrated CO2 Capture, Wastewater Treatment and Biofuel Production by Microalgae Culturing. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2013, 27, 622–653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Wang, S.K.; Stiles, A.R.; Guo, C.; Liu, C.Z. Microalgae Cultivation in Photobioreactors: An Overview of Light Characteristics. Eng. Life Sci. 2014, 14, 550–559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  35. Chauvy, R.; Meunier, N.; Thomas, D.; De Weireld, G. Selecting emerging CO2 utilization products for short- to mid-term deployment. Appl. Energy 2019, 236, 662–680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Lam, M.K.; Lee, K.T.; Mohamed, A.R. Current status and challenges on microalgae-based carbon capture. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Con. 2012, 10, 456–469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Mallapragada, D.S.; Singh, N.R.; Curteanu, V.; Agrawal, R. Sun-to-fuel assessment of routes for fixing CO2 as liquid fuel. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2013, 52, 5136–5144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Thomas, D.M.; Mechery, J.; Paulose, S.V. Carbon dioxide capture strategies from flue gas using microalgae: A review. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2016, 23, 16926–16940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Kadam, K.L. Power Plant Fuel as a Source of CO2 for Microalgae Cultivation: Economic Impact of Different Process Options. Energy Convers. Manag. 1997, 38, 505–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Watanabe, Y.; Saiki, H. Development of a photobioreactor incorporating Chlorella sp. for removal of CO2 in stack gas. Energy Convers. Manag. 1997, 38, 499–503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Benemann, J. CO2 mitigation with microalgae systems. Energy Convers. Manag. 1997, 38, 475–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Singh, U.B.; Ahluwalia, A.S. Microalgae: A promising tool for carbon sequestration. Mitig. Adapt. Strat. Glob. Change 2013, 18, 73–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Singh, S.K.; Sundaram, S.; Sinha, S.; Rahman, M.A.; Kapur, S. Recent Advances in CO2 Uptake and Fixation Mechanism of Cyanobacteria and Microalgae. Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2016, 46, 1297–1323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Li, G.; Xiao, W.; Yang, T.; Lyu, T. Optimization and Process Effect for Microalgae Carbon Dioxide Fixation Technology Applications Based on Carbon Capture: A Comprehensive Review. C 2023, 9, 35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Prasad, R.; Gupta, S.K.; Shabnam, N.; Oliveira, C.Y.B.; Nema, A.K.; Ansari, F.A.; Bux, F. Role of Microalgae in Global CO2 Sequestration: Physiological Mechanism, Recent Development, Challenges, and Future Prospective. Sustainability 2021, 13, 13061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Li, Y.; Horsman, M.; Wu, N.; Lan, C.Q.; Dubois-Calero, N. Biofuels from microalgae. Biotechnol. Prog. 2008, 24, 815–820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Thiruvenkatachari, R.; Su, S.; An, H.; Yu, X.X. Post combustion CO2 capture by carbon fibre monolithic adsorbents. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 1997, 35, 438–455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Meisen, A.; Shuai, X. Research and development issues in CO2 capture. Energy Convers. Manage. 1997, 38, S37–S42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Erga, O.; Juliussen, O.; Lidal, H. Carbon dioxide recovery by means of aqueous amines. Energy Convers. Manage. 1995, 36, 387–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Ismail, D. Utilization of chlorella vulgaris to fixate a high concentration of carbon dioxide in a compost-based medium. Int. J. Technol. 2016, 7, 168–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Chia, S.R.; Chew, K.W.; Leong, H.Y.; Ho, S.-H.; Munawaroh, H.S.H.; Show, P.L. CO2 mitigation and phycoremediation of industrial flue gas and wastewater via microalgae-bacteria consortium: Possibilities and challenges. Chem. Eng. J. 2021, 425, 131436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Kulabukhov, V.; Karyakin, D.; Mal’tsevckaya, N. Prospects for the Use of Microalgae to Absorb CO2 from the Flue Gases of Industrial Enterprises. Ecol. Ind. Russ. 2016, 20, 4–8. (In Russian) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. De Morais, M.G.; Costa, J.A.V. Isolation and selection of microalgae from coal fired thermoelectric power plant for biofixation of carbon dioxide. Energy Convers. Manag. 2007, 48, 2169–2173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Song, C.; Liu, J.; Xie, M.; Qiu, Y.; Chen, G.; Qi, Y.; Kitamura, Y. Intensification of a novel absorption-microalgae hybrid CO2 utilization process via fed-batch mode optimization. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 2019, 82, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Moreira, J.B.; Terra, A.L.M.; Costa, J.A.V.; Morais, M.G. Utilization of CO2 in semi-continuous cultivation of spirulina sp. and chlorella fusca and evaluation of biomass composition. Braz. J. Chem. Eng. 2016, 33, 691–698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  56. Song, C.; Qiu, Y.; Xie, M.; Liu, J.; Liu, Q.; Li, S.; Kansha, Y. Novel regeneration and utilization concept using rich chemical absorption solvent as a carbon source for microalgae biomass production. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2019, 58, 11720–11727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Ratomski, P.; Hawrot-Paw, M.; Koniuszy, A. Utilisation of CO2 from sodium bicarbonate to produce chlorella vulgaris biomass in tubular photobioreactors for biofuel purposes. Sustainability 2021, 13, 9118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Cordoba-Perez, M.; De Lasa, H. CO2-derived carbon capture and photon absorption efficiency by microalgae in novel photoBioCREC. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2020, 59, 14710–14716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Maryshamya, A.; Rajasekar, T.; Rengasamy, R. Carbon sequestration potential of scenedesmus quadricauda (turpin) and evaluation on zebra fish (danio rerio). Aquac. Rep. 2019, 13, 100178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Kong, W.; Shen, B.; Lyu, H.; Kong, J.; Ma, J.; Wang, Z.; Feng, S. Review on Carbon Dioxide Fixation Coupled with Nutrients Removal from Wastewater by Microalgae. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 292, 125975. [Google Scholar]
  61. Barati, B.; Zeng, K.; Baeyens, J.; Wang, S.; Addy, M.; Gan, S.-Y.; Abomohra, A.E.-F. Recent progress in genetically modified microalgae for enhanced carbon dioxide sequestration. Biomass Bioenergy 2021, 145, 105927. [Google Scholar]
  62. Li, J.; Pan, K.; Tang, X.; Li, Y.; Zhu, B.; Zhao, Y. The molecular mechanisms of Chlorella sp. responding to high CO2: A study based on comparative transcriptome analysis between strains with high- and low-CO2 tolerance. Sci. Total Env. 2021, 763, 144185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Politaeva, N.A.; Smyatskaya, Y.A.; Kuznetsova, T.A.; Olshanskaya, L.N.; Valiev, R.S. Cultivation and use of microalgae Chlorella and higher aquatic plants duckweed Lemna. Saratov Ts Nauka 2017, 125. Available online: https://search.rsl.ru/ru/record/01009542108 (accessed on 5 January 2023).
  64. Zibarev, N.V.; Politaeva, N.A.; Andrianova, M.Y. Use of microalgae Chlorella sorokiniana (Chlorellaceae, Chlorellales) for wastewater treatment in the brewing industry. Povolzhsky Ecol. J. 2021, 3, 262–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Sanda, V.; Nicolae, D.; Sever, S.; Lucia, I.; Daniela, S.; Ana, N.; Emil, S. Biological sequestration of carbon dioxide from thermal power plant emissions, by absorbtion in microalgal culture media. Rom. Biotechnol. Lett. 2009, 14, 4485–4500. [Google Scholar]
  66. Li, S.; Chang, H.; Zhang, S.; Ho, S.-H. Production of sustainable biofuels from microalgae with CO2 bio-sequestration and life cycle assessment. Environ. Res. 2023, 227, 115730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Velmozhina, K.A.; Shinkevich, P.S. The use of microalgae Chlorella kessleri for the intensification of anaerobic digestion of food waste. In Proceedings of the Waste Processing Technologies with Obtaining New Products: Materials of the IV All-Russian Scientific and Practical Conference with International Participation, Kirov, Russia, 30 November 2022; Vyatka State University: Kirov, Russia, 2022; pp. 183–184. [Google Scholar]
  68. Chusov, A.; Maslikov, V.; Badenko, V.; Zhazhkov, V.; Molodtsov, D.; Pavlushkina, Y. Biogas potential assessment of the composite mixture from duckweed biomass. Sustainability 2022, 14, 351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Environments 10 00109 g001 550
Figure 1. The simplified scheme for the utilization of carbon dioxide with the help of microalgae.
Figure 1. The simplified scheme for the utilization of carbon dioxide with the help of microalgae.
Environments 10 00109 g001
Environments 10 00109 g002 550
Figure 2. PhBR-B system with CO2 source: 1—PhBR-B, 2—CO2 supply system, 3—gas analyzer, 4—aerator, 5—microalgae biomass, 6—PhBR-B space for CO2 supply.
Figure 2. PhBR-B system with CO2 source: 1—PhBR-B, 2—CO2 supply system, 3—gas analyzer, 4—aerator, 5—microalgae biomass, 6—PhBR-B space for CO2 supply.
Environments 10 00109 g002
Environments 10 00109 g003 550
Figure 3. Dependence of CO2 content and optical density (D) of C. kessleri microalgae suspension on cultivation time (27 days).
Figure 3. Dependence of CO2 content and optical density (D) of C. kessleri microalgae suspension on cultivation time (27 days).
Environments 10 00109 g003
Environments 10 00109 g004 550
Figure 4. Dependence of CO2 content in PhBR-B and optical density (D) of C. kessleri microalgae suspension on cultivation time (2.8 days).
Figure 4. Dependence of CO2 content in PhBR-B and optical density (D) of C. kessleri microalgae suspension on cultivation time (2.8 days).
Environments 10 00109 g004
Environments 10 00109 g005 550
Figure 5. Dependence of CO2 content in PhBR-B and optical density (D) of C. kessleri microalgae suspension on cultivation time (9 h).
Figure 5. Dependence of CO2 content in PhBR-B and optical density (D) of C. kessleri microalgae suspension on cultivation time (9 h).
Environments 10 00109 g005
Environments 10 00109 g006 550
Figure 6. Dependence of CO2 content in PhBR-B and optical density (D) of C. vulgaris microalgae suspension on cultivation time (27 days).
Figure 6. Dependence of CO2 content in PhBR-B and optical density (D) of C. vulgaris microalgae suspension on cultivation time (27 days).
Environments 10 00109 g006
Environments 10 00109 g007 550
Figure 7. Dependence of CO2 content in PhBR-B and optical density (D) of C. vulgaris microalgae suspension on cultivation time (2,4 days).
Figure 7. Dependence of CO2 content in PhBR-B and optical density (D) of C. vulgaris microalgae suspension on cultivation time (2,4 days).
Environments 10 00109 g007
Environments 10 00109 g008 550
Figure 8. Dependence of CO2 content in PhBR-B and optical density (D) of C.vulgaris microalgae suspension on cultivation time (9 h).
Figure 8. Dependence of CO2 content in PhBR-B and optical density (D) of C.vulgaris microalgae suspension on cultivation time (9 h).
Environments 10 00109 g008
Environments 10 00109 g009 550
Figure 9. Dependence of CO2 content in PhBR-B and optical density (D) of C. sorokiniana microalgae suspension on cultivation time (27 days).
Figure 9. Dependence of CO2 content in PhBR-B and optical density (D) of C. sorokiniana microalgae suspension on cultivation time (27 days).
Environments 10 00109 g009
Environments 10 00109 g010 550
Figure 10. Dependence of CO2 content in PhBR-B and optical density (D) of C. sorokiniana microalgae suspension on cultivation time (2,24 days).
Figure 10. Dependence of CO2 content in PhBR-B and optical density (D) of C. sorokiniana microalgae suspension on cultivation time (2,24 days).
Environments 10 00109 g010
Environments 10 00109 g011 550
Figure 11. Dependence of CO2 content in PhBR-B and optical density (D) of C. sorokiniana microalgae suspension on cultivation time (9 h).
Figure 11. Dependence of CO2 content in PhBR-B and optical density (D) of C. sorokiniana microalgae suspension on cultivation time (9 h).
Environments 10 00109 g011
Environments 10 00109 g012 550
Figure 12. Block diagram of carbon dioxide emissions purification by microalgae C.: 1—PhBR-B, 2—a source of gases with a high content of CO2, 3—a stock culture supply unit, 4—block for centrifugation of the resulting biomass, 5—block for hydrophilic drying, 6—a raw material for obtaining valuable components, 7—sewage supply unit, 8—nutrient medium supply unit, 9—mixing unit of nutrient medium, wastewater, and residual culture after centrifugation, I—CO2, II—O2, III—stock culture, IV—biomass, V—biomass after centrifugation, VI—biomass after drying, VII—residual culture after centrifugation, VIII—wastewater, IX—nutrient medium, X—mixture of nutrient medium, wastewater, and residual culture after centrifugation.
Figure 12. Block diagram of carbon dioxide emissions purification by microalgae C.: 1—PhBR-B, 2—a source of gases with a high content of CO2, 3—a stock culture supply unit, 4—block for centrifugation of the resulting biomass, 5—block for hydrophilic drying, 6—a raw material for obtaining valuable components, 7—sewage supply unit, 8—nutrient medium supply unit, 9—mixing unit of nutrient medium, wastewater, and residual culture after centrifugation, I—CO2, II—O2, III—stock culture, IV—biomass, V—biomass after centrifugation, VI—biomass after drying, VII—residual culture after centrifugation, VIII—wastewater, IX—nutrient medium, X—mixture of nutrient medium, wastewater, and residual culture after centrifugation.
Environments 10 00109 g012
Table
Table 1. The composition of the nutrient medium.
Table 1. The composition of the nutrient medium.
Name of SubstancesConcentration, mg/L
ZnSO4·7H2O100
CuSO4·5H2O10
CoSO4·7H2O100
MnCl2·4H2O500
H3BO3·WF50
Na2MoO4·2H2O100
FeCl3·6H2O4000
Na2EDTA·2H2O6000
KNO33.03
KH2PO40.32
MgSO4·7H2O2.4
Table
Table 2. Influence of illumination, temperature, and supply volume on the rate of CO2 uptake and biomass growth of microalgae C.
Table 2. Influence of illumination, temperature, and supply volume on the rate of CO2 uptake and biomass growth of microalgae C.
FactorsSample No. 1Sample No. 2Sample No. 3Sample No. 4Sample No. 5Sample No. 6
Temperature, °C252525303030
Illumination (daylight lamp), Lux250025002500300030003000
The volume of supplied CO2, L/%15.5/3115.5/3115.5/3119.5/3919.5/3919.5/39
Optical density on the 1st day, D *0.4810.4490.7200.4810.4490.720
* Tables optical density measurement was carried out at a wavelength of 750 nm. Sample No. 1—C. kessleri (temperature (T) = 25 °C, illumination (O) = 2500 Lx, volume (V) of supplied CO2 = 15.5 L (31%)). Sample No. 2—C. vulgaris (T = 25 °C, O = 2500 Lx, V CO2 = 15.5 L (31%)). Sample No. 3—C. sorokiniana (T = 25 °C, O = 2500 Lx, V CO2 = 15.5 L (31%)). Sample No. 4—C. kessleri (T = 30 °C, O = 3000 Lx, V CO2 = 19.5 L (39%)). Sample No. 5—C. vulgaris (T = 30 °C, O = 3000 Lx, V CO2 = 19.5 L (39%)). Sample No. 6—C. sorokiniana (T = 30 °C, O = 3000 Lx, V CO2 = 19.5 L (39%)).
Table
Table 3. The results of the study of the absorption capacity of microalgae of the genus C. in relation to CO2.
Table 3. The results of the study of the absorption capacity of microalgae of the genus C. in relation to CO2.
FactorsSample No. 1Sample No. 2Sample No. 3Sample No. 4Sample No. 5Sample No. 6
The volume of supplied CO2, L/%15.5/3115.5/3115.5/3119.5/3919.5/3919.5/39
CO2 utilization time, days2.82352.44
Volume of CO2 utilized in 1 day by microalgae suspension, L *5.5007.5005.1003.9008.1254.875
CO2 uptake rate, g·L−1·day−10.1950.2250.2250.1540.4120.192
Optical density on the 1st day, D **0.4810.4490.7200.4810.4490.720
Optical density on the 27th day, D **5.5804.6315.3405.0614.3695.011
* With the addition of 15.5 ± 0.5 L of CO2 on the 7th day from the start of the experiment; ** volume of microalgae suspension is 50 L.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Politaeva, N.; Ilin, I.; Velmozhina, K.; Shinkevich, P. Carbon Dioxide Utilization Using Chlorella Microalgae. Environments 2023, 10, 109. https://doi.org/10.3390/environments10070109

AMA Style

Politaeva N, Ilin I, Velmozhina K, Shinkevich P. Carbon Dioxide Utilization Using Chlorella Microalgae. Environments. 2023; 10(7):109. https://doi.org/10.3390/environments10070109

Chicago/Turabian Style

Politaeva, Natalia, Igor Ilin, Ksenia Velmozhina, and Polina Shinkevich. 2023. "Carbon Dioxide Utilization Using Chlorella Microalgae" Environments 10, no. 7: 109. https://doi.org/10.3390/environments10070109

APA Style

Politaeva, N., Ilin, I., Velmozhina, K., & Shinkevich, P. (2023). Carbon Dioxide Utilization Using Chlorella Microalgae. Environments, 10(7), 109. https://doi.org/10.3390/environments10070109

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

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop