International Journal of Sustainabt 2015; 4(1-1): 20.32, Published online Deceriber 31, 2014 (http /Arvew sciencepublishinggroup.com/ise) oi: 10,116484 ise s 2015040101 14 nd Green Energy SeieneePG Scionce Publishing Group Biological purification processes for biogas using algae cultures: A review Rameshprabu Ramaraj, Natthawud Dussadee ‘School of Renewable Energy, Maejo University, Sansai, Chiang Mai-50290, Thailand Email address: srameshprebu@ gmail.com, rameshprabu@mjuac.th (Ramaraj R), natthawa@yahoo cam, nate @miju.acth (Dussadee N.) To cite this article: ‘Rameskprobu Ramaraj Natthared Dessadee. Biological Purification Processes for Biogas Using Algae Cultnzes: A Review. International Journal ef Sustainable and Green Energy. Special Issue: Renewable Energy Applications in the Agricultural Field andl Natural Resource ‘Technology’ Vol 4, No. 1-2, 2025, pp. 20-32. doi: 10.11688Hjve s 2015040202 14 Abstract: Bioenergy is a type of renewable energy made from biological soucces including algae, trees, or waste from agiculture, wood processing food materials, and municipalities. Currently, the uses of renewable fuels (bioethanol, biodiesel, ‘biogas and hydvogen) ere incressed in the transport sector worldwide. From an environmental and resowce-efficiency ‘perspective biogas hes several advantages in compasison to other biofuels. The main components of biogas are methane (CH,) ‘and cerbon diaride (CO}), but usually bioges also contains hydrogen sulphide (HS) and other sulphur compounds, water, other tuace gas compounds and other impurities. Pusification and upgrading of the gas is necessary because purified bioges provides reductions in green house gas emissions as well as several other environmental benefits when used as a vehicle fuel. Reducing CO; and H,S content will significantly improve the quality of biogas. Vasious technologies have been developed and available for bioges impuity removal, these include absorption by chemical solvents, physical absorption, cryogenic separation, ‘membrane separation and biological or chemical methods. Since physiochemical methods of removal are expensive and environmentally hezerdous, and biological processes are environmentally friendly and feasible. Furthermore, algae are abundant and omnipresent. Biogas purification using algre involved the use of algae’s photosynthetic ability in the removal of the impurities present in biogas. This review is aimed at presenting the algal characteristics, scientific approach, gather and clearly explain the main methods used to clean and purify biogas, increasing the calorific value of bioges and making this ges with characteristics closest as possible to natural gas through algae biological pusification processes. Keywords: Algse, Bioges, Biological Purificetion, Renewable Energy ‘alternative technology that hes lerger potential energy output 1. Introduction compared to green dese, biodiesel, bioethanol, and hydrogen Bioenergy should play an essential part in reaching targets to replace petroleum-based transportation fuels with a viable altemative, and in reducing longterm CO, emissions, if environmental and economic sustainability are considered carefully. The world continues to increase its energy use, ‘brought about by an expanding population and a desire for & greater stendard of living This energy use coupled with the sealization of the impact of CO; on the climate, las led us to seanalyze the potential of plant-based biofuels [1]. The term ‘biofuel isreferred to as liquid or gaseous fuels fos the transport sector thet are predominantly produced from biomass. A. variety of fuels cen be produced from biomass resources including liquid fuels, such as ethanol, methanol, biodiesel, Fischer-Tropsch diesel, and gaseous fuels, such 0s ‘biohydrogen and bioges ‘The process of bioges production from algel biomass is an production processes. Moreover, snaerobic digestion can be integrated info other conversion processes. The organic fraction of almost any form of biomass (from plants, algae and other microorganisms), including sewage sludge, animal ‘wastes and industrial effluents, cen be broken down through anaerobic digestion (AD) into CH, end CO; mixture called as “bioges”. The first methane digester plant was built at Bombay, Indie in 1859 [2, 3]. AD approaches steadily owing role in the renewable energy mix in many counties, AD is the process by which organic materials are biologically tuested in the absence of oxygen by naturally occuring ‘bacteria to produce “bioges’ which is a mixtwe of CHy (40-7096) and CO; (30-60%) with traces of other gases such as hyckogen, hydrogen sulphide and ammonia [4], the bioges ‘process also produces potentially useful by-products in the Form of aliquid or solid ‘digestate’ [5].Infernational Joumal of Sustainable and Green Enexgy 2015; 4(1-1): 20-32 a Normally, biogasis comprised of CHy, CO, and other trace ges compounds gases such as water vapour, HS, halogenated hhytkocerbons, sloxanes, ammonia, nitrogen, and oxygen [4] Biogas is a valuable fuel which is produced in digesters filled with the feedstock like dung or sewage. All types of biomass can be used as substrates for bioges production aslong es they contain carbohycketes, proteins, fats, cellulose, and emicelluloses as main components The composition of ‘biogas and the methane yield depends on the feedstock type, the digestion system, end the retention time. In general, the ‘use of plant biomass for energy generation today is problematic because of the competition with food or feed ‘production. Thisis because most of the plants used for energy generation today (crop plants, sugar cane, sugar beets, cancla, ete) have to be gown on arable lend Low demand altematives like switchgrass are only beginning to emerge ‘Algae have got a number of potential advantages compared to higher plants because of fester growth rates and the possibility of cultivation onnon- arable land areas or inlakes or the ocean, therefore attenuating food and feed competition [6,7]. OF the potential souces of bioges the most efficient producers of ‘biomass are the photosynthetic algne (micro and macroslgee) Photosynthetic pigments, including chlorophyll, have an important role since it provides the oxygen and the sowee of energy for al living things. Plant and algae growthis affected, ‘by the photosynthesis speed which depends on the aveilebility of CO}. Biological CO; fixation by algae is another such form; i.e, smlight being used to reduce CO; to carbon Capturing CO; from flue gases is the precautionary principle which needs preventive action, st both netional end international levels to minimize this potential action [8]. A promising approach therefore seems to be the use of fast-growing algne species for anaerobic fermentation to produce biogas, which then can substitute natural ges resources. To ulilize biogas as a transport fuel, CO; and HS must be removed fiom the concentration to leave biomethene. Bioges purification is the process where any impusities are removed such as sulphides and emmonie Biogas upgrading on the other hand is the process which removes CO; and the end product is bio-methane. The bio-methane which has been ‘upgraded is suitable for injection into the national gas gid or ‘vehicle fuel [4]. Biogas needs cleaning for two mein reasons, the first isto improve the celosific value of the product gas and the second is to reduce the chance of damaging downstream equipment which is due to the formetion of harmful compounds [9]. Thus, biogas has @ wide availability and renewable natue due to the orgenic materials and microorgenisms required for biogas synthesis Bioges puification methods can be divided into two generic categories: 1 Those involving physicochemical phenomena (reactive or nomtesctive absorption, seactive o: non-reactive adsorption), Those involving biological processes (contaminant consumption by living organisms end conversion to less ‘harmful forms). Biological processes are widely employed for CO; and HyS removal, especially in biogas applications For CO; capture from bioges, physical and chemical absorption methods ae generally epplied with fewer complications, however, these methods are needed to post tueat the waste materials for regeneration of cycling utilization ‘The biological methods of CO caphue from biogas are potentially useful [10]. Biological processes are widely employed for H:S removal, especially in bioges applications [11]. Furthermore, bioges is en environment friendly, clean, cheap and versatile fuel. Consequently, the purpose of the current paper is to present an integrated review of the bioges production methodologies end purification process, algal characteristics, approaches and cleesly explain the main methods used to clean and puify bioges, increasing the calorific value of biogas and making this gas with characteristics closest as possible to naturel gas through algne ‘biological purification processes 2. Growth Characteristics of Algae and Importance Algae ace the most importent primary producer in aquatic ecosystem [12]. Many species of algae are present such as, geen, red ad brown elgre which belong to the goup of Chlorophiyte, Rhodophyta and Phasopiyta, rempectively ‘Aigd govt is found in a wide range of habitats, lice fresh votes, marine water, sn deep oceans, in rocky shores, the planktonic and benthic algre cen become important Constituents of soil flora and can exist even in such extreme conditions asin mow, sinds(desert ori hot springs, open end closed ponds, photo bioreactors, sewage and wastewater, desert ag well es CO; emitting industries ete [13] Generally they ere found in damp places or water bodies and are commonin tenretril aswell as aquatic emaronments.Algne, ‘trond category encompassing euiceryotic microelgn eyenobacteria and macroslgre, can be culivated to produce ‘biomass fora wide range of applications [14] ‘Algae are a very diverse group of predominantly aquatic photosynthetic organisms of tremendous ecologial importance, because they were the begining ofthe food chain for other snimals. Algee played an importent role in self purification of contaminatednatual waters and offered en tltemative for advance mutntion removal in water or ‘wastewater [15, 16]. The idee to incorporate microslgee as en agent of bioremedition was firstly proposed by Onald end Goteas in 1957 [17]; the biomass recovered was converted to rethane, which was a major source of energy [18]. Hence, flgne provided the bass ofthe aquatic food chin and they were fundamental to keep CO; of carbon cycle vie photosynthesis as a substential role in biogeochemical cycles [12]. Most algae were photonutotrophic, converting solar ‘netgy into chemical forms though photosynthesis ‘The mechanisms of algal photosynthesis were very sniler to photosynthens in higher plants and their products are roleculaly equivelent to conventional agcuitural crops [19] ‘The main advantages of culturing algae asa source of biomass swere as follows (1) high photosynthetic yields (up to &22 Rameshprabu Ramanaj and Natthawad Dussadee merimum of 5.69% conversion of light ¢f 1-296 for the sujonity of terestriel plants); 2) the ability to grow in fresh, salt and wasteweter, 3) high oil content, (4) the ability to produce nomtoric end biodegradable biofuels, (3) meny species of algne can be induced to produce particularly high concentrations of chosen compounde-proteing carbohydrates, lipids end pigments - thet are of commercial value, (@) the ability to be used in congunction with wastewater treatment (13.17-20], Since signe was a key primary producer lobel-vide, elgee biomess was essential tiologial naturel resources which played an importent sole in mutient, food, fertilize, pharmaceutics and biofuel In adtion, algae eppliction is widely accepted in practice 5 one of the best strategies in bioengineenng There ave severel reasons for this approach: (1) the best growth rate ‘among the plants, (2) low impacts on world’s food supply, (3) specificity for CO, sequestretion without ger separation to seve over 70% of total cost, (4) excellent treatment for combustion ges exheusted with NOx and SOr, (5) high value of algae biomass including of feed food, mutntion pharmaceutical chemicals, ferthize, aquacultre,biofusl, ete [13,20]. Algee an important application forthe cultivation of sgn is the production of biomes for energy purposes Dus to the energy criss, renewable energy becomes a popularismie in this world today and there are severe altematives such ax bioenergy sole, wind tide, geothermal, ete For bioenergy, algae are the third generation biofuel [20] For the reasons of the best energy conversion efficiency of sunlight [15] andthe highest govth rate [15], alge have the best potential emong all the enexgy crops Because of the fast gowth, many high valuable products are generated e.g food, biofuel, et [Figure y Fine 1 Potential prodiets from algae Algee produce biomass, which can be convertedinto energy for en energy carrier through a munber of energy conversion, processes. They include thermochemical conversion (Gasification, direct combustion and pyrolysis), biochemical conversion (anaerobic fermentation, anserobic digestion and Biological Purification Processes for Biogas Using Algae Cultures: A Review photobilogjeal hydkogen production) and esterification of fatty acids to produce biodiesel [13.18.20], A lot of studies ‘was indicated the importance of algae in carbon diotide ‘Beatin [12-16,18,20}. Driver etal. [21] stated that algne axe an attractive feedstock for the production of liqud and gtstous biofuels that do not need to dcectly compete with food production Figue 2 illustrated the detailed information, process including alge stin selection, water type, cultivation ‘nethods, goth mode and harvesting methods Foethermore, the various scentrios for biofuel development from algae are represented Many options ere available with regard to algte type and strain choice, including both euceryohealgte and prokaryotic cyanobacteria, the souce of water for eulivation, tulivation method end mode of goth, the method of alge hhurvesting end the biofuel conversion process. The understanding of ‘biologicel phenomena, alga genetics, eusbon storage metabolism, photosynthesis and algal physiology, have the potential for significant advances in alga biofuel feasibility [21]. This is being driven by advances in genomic technologies to provide the potential for genetic and metabolic engineering plus the development of bigh-throughput techniques forthe screening of aad sais for suitable biofuel characteristics Fhpure 2 Agee prodition system 3. Algae Biogas Production Process and Technology Anaerobic digestion (AD) is a common process for the tuestment of a variety of organic materials and biogas production. Macroslgal end microalgel biomass can be AD to produce methane. Recently, microalgee have also become 8 topic of interest in the production of biogas through aneerobic fermentation [22] The AD of algee is a promective environmentally feasible option for cresting @ renewable sowce of energy for industrial and domestic needs. Algal ADInfernational Joumal of Sustainable and Green Enexgy 2015; 4(1-1): 20-32 3 on is a key unit process that integrates efficiency and ‘beneficially into the production of algal derived biofuels. Both, macro- and micronlgee are suitable renewable substrates for the anserobic digestion process. The process of biogas production from algal biomass is en altemstive technology that as larger potential energy output compared to green, diesel, biodiesel, bioethanol, and hydrogen production processes [4], Moreover, enserabic digestion cen be integrated into other conversion processes and, es a result, improve their sustainability and energy balance. Opposite to biohydrogen, ioethansl or biodiesel that only uses determined macromolecules (cerbohyékates and lipid), biogas is produced by biological means under anserobic conditions thet converts all algae macromolecules into methane [5, 8] Complex npc (cates pts pi) type aon eeenepaaiaiaeal Fine 3 Sages of Anaerobic Digestion ethane fermentation process) AD is an application of biological methenogenesis whichis ‘an anaerobic process responsible for degradation of much of the carboneceous matter in naturel environments where organic accumulation sesults in depletion of oxygen for aerobic metabolism. Since AD is a process by which almost any organic waste can be biologically convertedin the absence of oxygen. This process, whichis carried out by a consortium, of several different microorgenisms, is found in numerous environments, including sediments, flooded soils, animal intestines, and landfills Accordingly, this is a complex process, which requires specific environmental conditions end cifferent bacterial populations. Mixed bacterial populations degrade organic compounds, thus producing. as end-product, a valuable high energy mixture of gases (mainly CH, andCO;) termed biogas [9]. Methane fermentation is a complex process, which can be divided up into four phases: hydrolysis, acidogenesis, acctogenesis/dehydrogenstion, end methenstion (Figue 3). These four stages are involved in the breakdown of organic matter on the path to methane production, stages include hydrolysis, fermentation (or _acidogenesi), acetogenesis and eventual methamogensis (1). Hydkolyss involves the conversion of complex molecules and compounds-carbohydrates, lipids and proteins ~ found in organic matter into simple sugars, long chain fatty ecids and amino acids, respectively. Acidogenesis in tun converts these into volatile fatty acids, acetic acid, CO; and Hy. Acetogenesis converts the volatile fatty acids into more acetic acid, carbon, dioxide end hydrogen gas. Methanogens have the ability to produce methane by using the cerbon dioxide and hydrogen {ges or the acetic acid produced from both the acetogenic or acidogenic phases [10,11] 4.1. Anaerobic Digestion of Macroalgae Biowass Macroalgee is one such source of aquatic biomass and potentially represents a significant source of renewable energy ‘The average photosynthetic efficiency of aquatic biomass is, 6-8%, which is much higher than that of terestriel biomass (Q.8-22%), Macroalgee ace fest gowing merine end freshwater plants thet can grow to considerable size (up to 60 ‘m in lengtt). Annual primery production retes (grams Cm yr) are higher for the major marine macronlgee than for most terrestrial biomass [23]. Mecroelgee can be subdivided into the blue algee (Cyenophyts), green algae (Chlorophyts), town elgee (Phaeophyte) and the red alge (Rhodophyte). Either Freshwater macroslgee or marine macroalgae (kelp or seaweed) could be used for solar energy conversion and biofuel production [23]. Mecroal gee received, 4 lerge amount of attention as a biofuel feedstock due to its prolific growth in nahuel hebitat of freshwater system, eutrophic coastal water fouling beaches and coastal waterways, “Macroalgee can be converted to biogas by process of AD to ‘biogas (~ 60% CH,) [24]. Research conducted in the 1980°s, fon mactoalgee (giant brown kelp (Macrocystis)) [25] stil provides @ bench mark for bioges yields for e number of ‘macroalgal species, but since this time there heve been developments in AD technology and an enormous increese in, itsuse. In comparison to terrestrial biomass crops, macroalgne contain litle cellulose and no lignin and therefore undergo & more complete hydrolysis AD has been used to dispose and process this material for the production of bioges, the AD of macroslgae biomass could meet two curenily importent needs, the mitigation of the eutrophication effects and the production of renewable energy. Because of the abundance of seaweed) freshwater macroalgee biomass its conversion can, bbe highly desirable end convenient, mostly for countries with long coastlines or eutrophic environments [26] Investigations on the use of mecroelgee of the brown algae divisioniin processes of methane fermentation were conducted, by Vergare-Fernindes [27] He was exemining the possibility of epplying to this end the biomess of Macrocystis pyrifera and Duavillea antarctica macroslgae and a substrate based on, the mixtwe of these species. His study proved that for all substrates tested the yield of biogas production wes comperable and reached 180.441.5 dmicgdm.d Singh and Gu28] andPermar et el. [29] were also analyzing the yield of ‘biogas production with the use of microphytobenthos plants as, san orgenic substrate, They achieved the highest technological effects casing fermentation of Laminaria digitata brown algae belonging to the order Laminariales. In thet case, methane ‘production was high and reached 500 dm? CHy/kg o.dm. The use of Macrocystis sp. enabled ~— achieving24 Rameshprabu Ramanaj and Natthawad Dussadee 390-410 dm? CHy/egodm, whereas upon the use of Gracilaria sp. and Laminaria sp. methane production accomted — for 280-400 dm’ CHy/kgodm. and. 260-280 dm? CH /eg o.dm,, respectively [30] ‘The feasibility of biogss production from macroslgee collected from the Orbetello lagoon. Maroslgee biomass collected from the same lagoon was used for biogas production in batch reactors, He demonstrated thet it is possible to produce CH, directly from macroalgee, preserving the sponteneous epiphytic microorganisms as microbial starter of the digestion process. Moreover, it is possible to foster CH, yield by using anoxic sediments collected from the seme lagoon as a fusther microbial inoculum. In fact, the addition of sediment improved the degradation activity, accelerating the removal of volatile fatty acids (VA) from the ‘medium and their conversion into methane, reducing the digestion time and increasing CH, yield [31]. The promising results obtained despite the harsh conditions (high salts, sulphur and heavy metals concentration) have been favoured, in ow: opinion, thanks to @ pre-existing edaptetion and mutual interactions within the native microorganisms. The bactesiel pool was highly adapted both to biotic and abiotic factors, thet 48 to macroalgal tisaue composition end to the salts and toxic components present in water and sediments. Furthermore, this approach solely based on the exploitation of the intrinsic degradation potential of the reference ecosystem, proved to be suitable for a selective end non intensive anaerobic digestion of macroslgae. Inthe review by Dbowsld etal. [30] presented, the effectiveness of bioges production with the use of macrodlgae as a substrate in methane fermentation processes (Cable 1). Huesemann et al. [32] stated thet AD of macroalgae ‘was technically feasible at scale and it has been suggested that it could be a cost-competitive with anaerobic digestion of terrestiel biomass and municipal solid waste Table 1 Agectiveness of biogas prodhcton with he wwe of macroalgne as a substan methane fermentation processes Miserealgse ta Qanty fhiepasinetione ‘Dunvileaartneica 179 34502 dm’ CH gan Gracias. 280-400 én'kgodm Laminaria. 260-280 ém'kgodm Lamineviadigiaia 500 an'kgodm. Mecroesstis 390-410 dn'godm Macroctis 5. 1899 dm’ CHLigodm. Macrocyens irene 181.48523 dn! CHiegdm a 1M poriferat Duvillea aterctica 164 24849 dn! CHkgdn a Pilea Ketocarps+Bteromenpha. thas. Uhalarnca 4.2, Anaerobic Digestion of Microalgae Biomass Microsigne are highly productive and are abe to produce luge quits of biomass more efiiemly [1314.16] Genally, the composition of microalgae is Osis oNouPsas (13), tnd microalgte have been found to have severe constituents, mainly including lipids (723%), curboiydrates (5-239), and proteins (529). The chemical compositions of microalgie are mainly dependent on the Biological Puification Processes for Biogas Using Algae Cultures: A Review species end cultwe conditions Microslgne AD is a key unit ‘process thet integrates efficiency and beneficially into the ‘production of microalgae derived biofuels. The first authors to report on the anaerobic digestion of microslgee biomass were Golueke et al. [33]. They investigated the anserobic digestion of Chlorella vidgaris and Scenedesmus, microslgee species grown as part of a wastewater treatment process. ‘The technical feasibility data on the anserobic digestion of ‘algal biomass have been reported for many species of algae Among the microscopic algae, the following cultures have ‘been successfully used for the production of methane: the mixed culture of Scenedesmus sp. and Chlorella sp, the mixed culture of Scenedesmus sp, Chlorella ., Buglena sp., Oscillatoria sp, and Synechocystir sp, the culture of ‘Scenedesmus sp. lone, and together with either Spirulina sp., Buglena sp., Micractinivim sp., Melosira sp, or Osillatoria SP ‘The production of biogas through AD ‘offers significent advantages over other forms of bioenergy production Since AD consists of organic carbon degradation into organic acids ‘and biogas, Biogas mainly consists of methane (ground 65%), which is carbon most reduced state, and carbon dioxide (around 35%), which is its most oxidized state. Other gases (aomelly less than 196), such as nitrogen, nitrogen oxides, yckogen, ammonia and hydrogen sulphide are also formed (34,35) Table 2 ectiveness of biogas prochetin withthe use of microalgae as a substrate methane fermentation processes Mierealgae tana ‘Quantity fhaegasinetione Arnos platens qo1s138 amkgodm Chieanydomonas veined 5748.8 ém'kgodm, Chiorelia escent, 33547 Samlegoam, 190 dm! CHikegodm aaa 240 dm! CHAgodm Dinatelta sana 5084248 dn'kgodm, Fuglena gratis 48543 0dmikgodm Phacodacplio micormion 35043 0 dm’ CELlego.dm. ‘Seomedeamus obtinns 21083 0 dm’ CHLego.dm. ‘obliga: 297s101 dng dma ‘Scenedesmus sp+Chlorlasp. 986 émiegodma_ 18048 afd Scenedesmus sp+Chioellasp. T3428 ci’ 810396 cnn’ Spinuina maxina 240 dm! CHkgodm Spain platens, 28040 3 dm’ CHegodm. Sialve et al. [35] stated that an organic matter composition can be converted stoichiometsically into methane for calculating the theoretical methane yield. Thus lipids (014 Lig VS), followed by proteins (0.851 Lig VS) and carbohydrates (0.415 Lig VS) have the highest theoretical methane yield. Indeed, inducing « patticuler macromolecule accumulation in microalgre cells has proven to successfully increase the methane yield Research conducted with cerbohydrate-enriched cyanobacteria Arthvospira platensis by phosphorus limitation atteined a methane yield of 0.203 Lig COD when biomass hed 60% of cabohydtates in respect to 0.123 L/gCOD when the carbohydrate content was 20% [36] In the seview by Debowski et al. [30] presented the effectiveness of bioges production with the use of macroalgeeInfernational Joumal of Sustainable and Green Enexgy 2015; 4(1-1): 20-32 2s ‘asa substrate in methane fermentation processes (Table 2) ‘The biogas yield of plantsis generally limited by the greater cof lesser proportion of lignocellulose, which is difficult to secyele. Efficiency of bioges production is related to the species dependent, efficiency of cell degradation and presence ot absence of molecules. However, the use of microalgae with, # low lignocellulose content, for example Chlorella vulgaris, Phaeodactylion tricorn and Spirulina platensis, permits an almost complete utilization of the orgenic substance Golueke etal. [33] demonstrated the ability of microalgae to pass through an anaerobic digester intact end remain ‘undigested. The authors noted thet microslgal cells are known to be able to effectively resist bacterial attack and found intact microalgae cells in digestate leaving a digester after a 30-day ‘hydemulic retention time. The composition of the biogas and the yield could be varied depending on the cell contents, the cell well components and the stability of the cell wall. In particular the protein content of the cell plays a decisive role Depending on the type of algae, the biogas yield was between 280 and 400 Likg total volatile solids Generally the variability is related to two main aspects @ the macromolecule: composition, and (i) the cell wall characteristics of each microalgae species. The difference in anaerobic biodegradability due to the macromolecular composition les on the methane potential of different organic compounds in microslgee cells. Consequently, pretreatment techniques have been used to solubilize pasticulate biomass and improve the anaerobic digestion rate and extent. 4, Pretreatment Methods for Increased Biogas Production from Algae Algne snserobic biodegradsbility is limited by their complex cell wall structwe. Thus, pretreatment techniques are being investigated to improve algal methane yield Various pretreatment technologies have been developedinrecent years ‘These pretreatment technologies aim to make AD faster, ‘potentially increase bioges yield, and make use of new and/or locally available substrates, and prevent processing problems such es high electricity requirements for mixing or the formation of flostinglayers, Pretreatment methods can be divided into four categories: thermal, mechanical, chemical and biological processes Figue 4). Pretreatment methods have been studied in order to disintegrate microalgee cells, solubilise the orgenic content, and increase the anaerobic digestion sate and extent. Thermal pretreatments have been the most widely investigated already in continuous reactors and leading to net energy production [36, 37] Mechanical pretreatments have mostly been snvestigated in batch essays using algae cultures [38]. Thermal pretreatments have been the most widely studied already in continuous reactors and leading to net enesgy production [39] ‘Mechanical pretreatments were less dependent on algae species, but required a higher energy input if compared with, chemical, thermal end biologeal methods [38]. Chemical pretreatments have been proved successful, particularly when combined with heat [39]. Emymatic pretreatment seem to improve microalgse hydrolysis [40], which is promising due toits low energy input. —EE ——— || E> ew ae ao a Gee {mm ) ont — Finure 4 Prevecaments for improving algae biogas procion 41. Pretreatment Methods for Increased Biogas Production. ‘from Macroalgae Pretreatment of the algee is thus needed to aid both ‘mechanical transport (pumping) as well as microbiological AD. Biogas can be derived vie anaerobic fermentation of any organic matter, including the cellulose and hemicellulose within macroalgee, although the biomass must be subjected to pretreatment processes in order to Liberate the sugars needed for fermentation. The effect of the pretreatment technologies, thermal treatment, thermochemical treatment, mechanical treatment, wet oxidation, hydrothermal pretreatment, steam explosion, plasma-assisted pretreatment and ball milling One option is mechanical pretrestment of the algae, however ‘method which can handle the long fibrous material in macrorlgae species is needed Another method, which is relatively untested but promising is enymetic pretreatment which ducing recent years hes been tested on many substrates toinvestigate effect on biogas potential [41]. The mechanical pretreatment effectively broke up the structure of all macroalgee into homogenous sary. ‘Mechanical pretrestment could increase the soluble COD-conceniation of the tested algae by 15 to 3 times compared to raw elgee. Enzymatic treatment increased it by 1.3 to 17 times. The best results were achieved by combining mechanical and enzymatic treatment where the concentration could was increased 3.5 times compared to raw alge [42]. A. ‘mechanical pretreatment phase is usuelly the fist step not only for methane [43]. Nielsen and Heiske [44] was discussed the effect on methane yield of U. lachwca by various pretreetments including mechanical maceration and autoclavation Sodium Ihyckoxide sosking at room temperature prior to AD led to 8 18% increase in methane potential in macroalgae es (Palmaria palmata), possess « high methane potential 308 +9 mL guyz) [45]. Nielsen and Heiske [44] studied four macroalgee specieshervested in Denmark-for their suitability of ‘bioconversion to methane In batch experiments (53 °C)26 Rame:hprabu Ramana and Natthawad Dussadee ‘methane yields vasied from 132 ml g volatile solids(-1) (VS) for Gracillaria vermiculophylla, 152 ml gVS(-1) for Ulva lactica, 166 ml gVS(-1) for Chaetomorpha linn end 340 ml g VSC1) for Saccharina latissima following 34 days of sncubstion With an organic content of 21.1% (1.5-28 times ‘higher then the other algae) S latissima seems very suitable Biological Puification Processes for Biogas Using Algae Cultures: A Review for anaerobic digestion However, the methane yields of U. actuca, G. vermiculophyile and C. Linum could be increased with 68%, 11% and 17%, respectively, by pretreatment with maceration Nielsen and Heiske [44] date of methane potentials in different macroalge with pretrestments were presentedin Table 3 ‘Table 2-Methane potentials of diferent macroalgae with pretreatment, Micrealgae ten Reeatnet Median vid alg VE) Wetione predation only ese) ‘Bach severe of mates poral of ferent mao Chaetomorph non Washed, chopped 165.2435 u4a2se Chactomerpha non Washed macerated 195487 14al4s Saccheralanesina Washed chopped 304400 6322983 ‘Secchrinalatissina Washed macerted 3334641 65841287 Gracilertavermicniephplia Washed chopped i+600 173488 Gracilrravermicnopipla Washed macerated 1474563 1932739 Uvalarnea Washed chopped 124187 992121 Uraleenca Whshed macerted 2558477 165#308 Preveatments f U tcneal Uvalanea Ururashed chopped 142233 1282333 Uraleenca Unached macerted amisi62 1764112 Uvalanea Washed, chopped as23 12106 Uralecnca Washed macerted 2004110 43153 Uvalanea ‘Washed, 110 C20 min isr#134 1134096 Uralecnca ‘Washed, 130 C20 1974232 142172 Uhalanea Dried, gouded 1164173 9562942 {ote 34 ays of incubation; 42 days of incubation (Source: Nielsen and Heike ,7011) 42, Pretreatwent Methods for Increased Biogas Production. from Microalgae ‘The digestibility of microslgel biomass vasies significantly even between closely related species [46]. CH, yields from microalgee vary due to variation in cellular protein, carbohydrate and lipid content, cell wall structure, and process parameters such es the bioreactor type end the digestion temperatwe. Regarding the cell wall characteristics it is mostly composed of orgenic compounds with low biodegradability and/or bioavailability, such as cellulose and hemicellulose. This tough cell wall binders the methane production, since organic matter retained in the cytoplasm is not easily accessible to anaerobic bacteria [47]. AD is cassied out by heterogeneous microbial populstions involving multiple biological and substrate interactions Anaerobic ‘iodegredstion can be divided into fow mein phases nyckolysis, acidogenesis, acctogenesis and methanogenesis (before mentioned). AD (sometimes also called methanogenic fermentation) is widely applied in digestion of manwe, sewage sludge and organic fraction of municipal solid wastes in industri and agiatien societies. Anaerobic digestion of smicroalgal biomass hes been studied from many freshwater and marine microrlgee in various combinstions Rigid eukexyotic cell walls of microalgae can limit the anaerobic digestion of the biomass [33,47]. Pretreatment techniques were pointed out as a necessary step for microalgee cell disruption and biogas production by Chen and Oswald [47] ‘The effectiveness of pretyestment methods on bioges production depends on the characteristics of microalgae, ic, the toughness and structure of the cell wall, and the ‘macromolecular composition of cells For instance, Soenedesmus sp. has one of the most resistent cell wall since itis composed by multilayers of celldose and hemicellulose onthe inside, and sporopolenin and politerpane on the outside (48) Microslgne complex cell wall structure confers a resistance to biologel attack. Infact, species without cell wall (eg Dioaiela sp. and Pavlova cf sp) o¢ containing « sycoprotein cell wall (eg Chianydomonss sp, Euglena sp ‘nd Tetracelmis sp) showed higher methane yields than those swith a more complex cell wall, containing recalitrnt compounds («.g Scenedesmus sp. and Chlorella sp) [49] Rates and yields of CH formation from microalga biomass often increase with digestion temperetue. For exemple, 33] reported $-10% increase in digestibility of microalgal ‘biomass when the digestion tempereture was increased from 35 to 50 °C. Chen and Onveld [47] increased the CH, yield by 33% by heat pretesting micronige biomass at 100 °C for h Inboth examples, however, the amount of energy conmamedin the esting and pretresment was higher then the corresponding energy grin from increased CH, protaction {50} Retention times required to obtein high CHy yields from sunirested microsiga biomass are relatively long, 20-30 days [51,52]. AD of microsigal biomass has been investigated in batch and fed-batch systems aswell asin continuously stirred tenle reactors [50]. Zemelion et al [52] suggested that anaerobic sludge blanket reectors, anaerobic filter reactors and snserobic membrane bioreactors should be tested due to thei high volumetric conversionrates Inthe review by Passos et [30] presented the effectiveness of biogas production with the mein pros and cons of microslgte pretrestment methods (Teble 4). As can be seen, thermal pretestment seemsInfernational Joumal of Sustainable and Green Enexgy 2015; 4(1-1): 20-32 2 effective at increasing biogas production, while energy demand is low compared to mechanical ones. Nevertheless, ‘biomass thickening or dewatering is crucial. Scalability may be a handicap for microwave pretreatment, Regarding thermo-chemical pretreatment, studies have shown positive results on microslgee biodegradability increase, however fusther studies should evaluate the risk of conteminetion in continuous bench and pilot scale reactors, Table 4. Comparison of pretmecimert methods for increasing microalgce anaerobic bode grace Bena Wetianeyil 5, oe - schubilization increase Cons — oF emt(i00-% REPTEHNER yy W ia eee Tae 6rd ite doar Hydrothermal Tauperature; expose jy wW Scalability _biamaass; risk of formation of refractory Coos as asi panels oer ey we Ing any tnd yin explosion (>100°C) time; pressure Scalability dewatering, ae eee “ : reece w Sutbly pcan denis ewan saiiaa ey , rere og coarse saa a ‘time demand inhibitors; Cost, a ae eae ‘Thermochemical typ: temperature thy a demand ambibitars; Cost, Ear \ are eee ‘tine; pH, temperate, demand Cont 5. Algae Biogas Impurity Removal and ‘Upgrade Technology Biogas produced in AD plants or landfill sites is primarily composed of CH, and CO; with smaller amounts of HS, NH; and Nz. Trace amounts of Hy, VOCs and 0) may be also ‘present in biogas and landfill gas. Usually, the gasis saturated ‘with water vapor end may contain dust particles. Additionally, organic silicon compounds are ususlly present in pasticular with reference to landfill gas, however their presence was ‘highlighted also in AD biogas. The heating value of bioges is determined mainly by the methane content of the gas [53]. ‘The main impwsities are CO; which lowers the celotific ‘value of the gas and sulfwic acid @:S) which could cause several problem on the plants and for human health, in fect on. the plants it causes corrosion (compressors, gas storage tenke and engines), while it's toxic after its inhalation Although (COy is major problem in the biogas asits removal is useful to adjust the calorific value and the relative density, and the removal of HS canbe of crucial point to the technological and economic feasibility of upgrading process of the ges [54] Biogas production is growing end there is an increasing demand for upgraded biogas, to be used as vebicle fuel or injected to the natural gas gid. To ensble the efficient use of ‘biogas in these applications the gas must be upgraded, Since separation of CO; andN3 from CH, is significently important in natural gas upgrading, and cepture/removal of COs, CHy from sir (Np) is essential to greenhouse gas emission control ‘Removal of CO; is done in order to reach the required Wobbe index of ges. As methane hes a 23-fold stronger greenhouse ages effect than CO>, itisimportent to keep methane losseslow, for both economic and environmental reesons. In general, in the stendards requirements on Wobbe index ‘values and limits on the concentration of certain components suchas sulfur, oxygen, dust and the water dew point, aswell as ‘2 minimum methane volumettic concentration of 96% sre defined There ere several different commercial methods for reducing the CO; content of bioges Two common methods of removing carbon dioxide from biogas are sbsorption (water serubbing orgenic solvent scrubbing) and adsoiption (presse swing adsorption, PSA). Less frequently used are membrane separation cryogenic separation and process intemal upgading which we a relatively new method, curently under development. The upgraded bioges is often named biomethane. Various technologies can be applied for removal of contaminants When CO; and other impurities are removed during the ‘upgrading process, the methane concentration increases and tUmis the resulting biomethane cen be utilized as an alternative to natural gas, Staxr et al. [55] asticulated on the caybon capture technologies thet upgrade bioges by removingits CO; content. There are quite a few different technologies on the ‘market today. The main unit operations used are absorption, adsorption, membrane seperation and cryogenic separation, fusther information about these usit operations and their associated technologies shown in Table 5. A common factor of all of these techniques is thet the removed CO) is normally seleased back into the atmosphere. In some cases, i its quality is high enough, it can be used for industxiel purposes such as increasing the CO; concentration for photosynthesis in geenhouses ot for carbonation in food production Strevett et al. [56] investigated the mechanism and kinetics of chemo-eutotrophic biogas upgrading. In this experiment, cifferent methanogens using only CO; as a cazbon source and Hy as an energy source were exemined The selection between ‘mesophilic and thermophilic operation temperstwes is typically based on whether the completion of reaction or the rate of reaction is of primary concem Thermophilic28 Rame:hprabu Ramanaj and Natthawad Dussadee ‘methanogens exhibit rapid methenogenesis, while mesophilic ‘bacteria give moze complete conversion of the available CO; [56]. They selected Methanobacteriton thermoaustotrophictan ‘The organism works optimally at temperatures of 65-70 °C and has @ specific requirement for H,S, so both unwanted components are removed. A synthetic biogas of 50-60% CH, 30-~40% CO; and 12% HS was mixed with Hy to a final ‘mole fraction of Hy: CO; equaling0.79.0.21. The gas mixture was fed to the hollow fibers packed with organisms. This Biological Puification Processes for Biogas Using Algae Cultures: A Review ‘biological system can effectively remove CO; and H,S, while approximately doubling the orignal CH, mass. Alternative physicochemical teatment methods only remove the contaminating ges components, without changing CH, mass. Furthermore, physicochemical treatment generates additional waste and wawented end products, The pusified bioges contains about 96% CH, and 4% CO;, while Hy and H,S were not detected [56]. “ble 5. Charen biogns wperadingteclnlogies (akpted from Ser etal (35). Tait penton Tedaulogy Kaen Deeipien proces ‘Abserpion __Highpressuré water scribing HWS Vaur absarbs CO, underhigh pressure condtians Fagmaned by Gqesnaang, Chemicalsonbbng AS ‘Asana soliton sbeorbe CO.. The ane soktion cregmersted by heating Orenicplysialsenbbing OPS Polyetuylene glycol absorbs CO?.B isregmerated by hettng or depressuriing Highly ressurized gas ispassedtirough amedima such sactated carbon. Once the aaa San ee pressure sereduced the CO, ireland from the cxbon regerating 2 Membrane Membrane seperation Ms Pressurized biogas i pessed through a membrane which 5 selective for CO; Biogas is cooled with CO. changes toa igus or cod phase whe the mathane te oars ty es hangs to aqui or soi pas emans a gs. This los for easy seperation ‘Table & Compertton table af CO, ftom nthe uptake rate nel consinpticn apicine 7 anne cennecan canee couse = — (gin) ey wo) at aaa agate ——T ow C0 Chiorellasp. ao Bigmia sao%co) °% came ael Chola ase Banco) 4% A Spiniinaplatersis 15-10% CO: 291g 70(10% CO.) 2%a ‘Ramanan et al. [58] Mod Ditsintrenat mise peom Giaenetl (8 Inked CO, 1LSupttyas€ 02g 187 ex ee Dammt.gecs* Dien mek onsgncass) 2 os Sup Dani gecks* _Disin im oissgtass) 195 bm asa 13) ote: "the guera Chloe Oscilatoria Oedogontin, Anabaena Merosporand Iyngina “the gmera dnnbaena Chlorella Oedogori end Osciletera otal suspended soli (4s «bimass) 6. Biogas Purification Using Algae Biological Biogas Purification Methods and Techniques Microslgee are a group of unicellular or simple ‘multicellular photosynthetic microorganisms that cen fix CO, efficiently fiom different sowces [12-16], including the atmosphere, industrial exhaust gases, and soluble carbonate salts Furthermore, combination of CO; fixation, biofuel production, and wastewater treatment may provide a very promising alternative to current CO) mitigation strategies Presence of chlorophyll and other pigments help in carrying out photosynthesis. The true roots, stems or leaves are absent ‘Mostly they are photoautotrophic and carry on photosynthesis, some of these are chemo heterotvophic and obtein energy from chemical reactions as well as nutients from preformed organic matter Beside the plants, since algre hed high potential CO; fication in the current Imowledge ‘Microalgee cen fix CO; using solar energy with efficiency ten times greater than terrestrial plants (13, 16]. The issue of greenhouse gas attracts an enormous attention worldwide secently. When atmospheric CO} concentration increased, it would gradually disturb the balance of global climate to cause ‘uousuel and astounding phenomena on easth Therefore, we require the rapid development of bio-cabonfiretion technology to eliminate the adverse effects of COp, to transfer stmompheric CO) through the carbon cycle end to promote carbon balancing ecologeally Currently, many innovative alternatives of physical, chemicel end biclogical technologies of CO; mitigation ae rapidly developed. At present, algae application of CO) sequestration has developed as « popular topic end the curent interests axe including species, power plant flue ges utilization, seactor design, growth condition, growth kinetics and modeling The most studies in the literetuwe concemed the maximum CO, uptake rate by the ertificial photo-bioreactors (12, 13, 20] ‘Among those techs, bio-eco-technology is the most neturel ‘nd ecological way to accomplish the designed targets by the Uilizetion of “self-designed” bio-functions of nature [12, 13, 15, 16] The different sources end epprosches of algal CO; vplake sete and consumption efficiency was presented in Table 6. Accordingly, algee production hes a greet potential for CO; bio-fixation process and deserves # close look Biogas purification/scrubbing using algae involved the use of algee's photosynthetic bility in the removal of the ‘mpusities (mainly CO; and H,S) present in biogas, leaving « ‘punfied biogas containing elmost pure methane, which couldInfernational Joumal of Sustainable and Green Enexgy 2015; 4(1-1): 20-32 2» ‘be used for energy generation Biological pusification technology is worth examining because has double impact. ‘The method about removing CO) from biogas by microalgal culturing using the biogas effiuent af nutzient medium end effectively upgrade biogas also simultaneously reduce the ‘biogas effluent sutsient [61]. Using biogas as a sowce of carbon doride has two mein advantages the biomass production costs are reduced and the produced biomass does not contain harmful compounds, which cen ocew influe gases Hendvoko et al. [62] verified xhibit that microalgae (Scenedesmus sp) in laboratary experiments using bioges shury as growing medium and bioges are given periodically generate 21% of CO; compared with 24% of controls They summarized: digestion slurry with seed cake JatroMas cultivar ‘as saw material is able to incresse growth of microalgae Scenedesmus sp. higher than standard media, microalgae Scenedesmus sp. is able to caphwe COp gas in bio-methane, with integration of sury and bio-methene intake, there is tendency Scenedesmus sp. growth is more increasing, ‘Motualism symbiosis among slury, bio-methane and microalgae Scenedesmus sp. will give impact to increasing of CH, content in bio-methane. In other word, microalgae can be ‘work as purification biologic from bio-methane [62] ‘There are several authors (10, 62, 63] reported thet Artlaospiva sp, Chololera vulgaris SAG 211-118, Chlorella sp. MM2, Chlorella sp. MB-9, Chlorella vulgaris ARC1, Chlamydomonas sp. dan Scenedesmus sp. was a positive synergy with biogas. The productivity of the system with, Zexrouk media and bioges almost 5 times higher than that for the same media without biogas when piggery waste was used, the ublizetion of bioges brings a productivity gain of about 2-5 times higher [63] Keo etal [64] demonstrates thet the microslga Chlorella sp, ‘MB-9 was a potential strain which was able to utilize CO; for growth when eerated with desulfiwized biogas (HS < 50 ppm) produced from the anaerobic digestion of swine wastewater. ‘The demonstrated system can be continuously used to upgrade ‘biogas by utilizing a double set of photobicreactor systems and a ges cycle-switching operation Furthermore, they demonstrated that the efficiency of CO) capture from biogas could be maintained at 50% on average, and the CHy concentration in the effluent load could be maintained at 80% fon average, ic., upgrading was accomplished by increasing the CH, concentration in the bioges produced from the anaerobic digestion of swine wastewater by 10%. Some iterstues mentioned about the cultivation microalgae using biogas as CO; provider Keo et al. [64] used ‘biogas thet contained 2042% CO; for Chlorella sp. culture with variation of light intensity which was at cloudy and at sunny day. Keo et a. [10] used biogas thet contained 201% CO; for Chlorella sp. cultuxe with vatistion flow sate of bioges which was 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, 03 wm. Douskova et al. [65] investigated the potential of biogas es CO; provider for Chlorella vulgaris, and optimizetion of bioges production from distillery atllage is described. The growth kinetics of microalgze Chlorella sp. consuming biogas or mixtwe of ait and CO; in the concentration range of 2-20% (vA) (Simulating a fiue gas from biogas incineration) in Inborstory-scele photo-bioreactors. It was proven thet the raw ‘biogas (even without the removal of HyS) could be used as & source of CO; for growth of microalgae. The growth rate of smicroalgze consuming biogas was the same as the growthrate of the cultwe gown an a mixture of air end food-grade CO; Several species of algae can metabolize H,S [66]. Using « ‘biological system to remove HS has similar benefits to using one to remove COz lower upkeep costs, more environmentally sustainable and non-hazardous waste Furthermore, Tongprawhan et al [67] used oleeginous microalgae to capture CO; from biogas for improving ‘methane content and simultaneously producing lipid They screened several microslgee for identify their ability to grow ‘and produce lipid using CO; in biogas, Finally, they reported a ‘matine Chlorella sp. wes the most suiteble strein for capturing CO; and producing lipid using bioges (50% viv CO; in methane) as well as using 50% viv CO) in sir. Sumardiono et al, [68] established to evaluate the design of the photobioreactor system for purifying biogas through the culturing of microalgse. This system represented a simple promising way for the cwzent forthcoming technologies of ‘biogas pusification It helps to decrease the concentration of CO) in biogas concomitantly producing microalgee biomass ‘The microalgae Narmochloropsis is able to use CO; from ‘biogas produced from the eneerobic digestion of tannery sludge. The results show that cultivation of microslgne under the biogas to scrub out CO; end promote enrichment of ‘methane in the bioges in this work and obtained scrubbing of 27% from 30%. The biocepture of CO; by microalgae can be applied to improve the quality of biogas by reducing the CO; content as this would lead to an increase in the methane content [69]. The microalgae Chlorella sp was anslysedin terms of conditioning ‘biogas. As a sesult the bioges components CO, end HS could ‘be reduced up to 97.07% andl00%, sespectively. Also an increase of microalgae cell count could be documented, which ‘provides interesting altemnetives for the production of algae ingredients. Consequently, the algne biological purification is ‘an alternative to other biogas purification methods. 7. Conclusion Biogas is a promising end valusble renewable energy sowce. Biogas can be uilized in several ways, either raw or upgraded Asa minimum, biogashasto be cooled, drained and tied immediately after production, and almost always it hes tobe cleaned for the content of CO, HS and other impurities. Using the photosynthesis of algae to remove the CO, from ‘biogasis an alternative method thet solves the problems of the common non-biological methods. Algae are self-sustaining with the addition of minimal musients end light Algae were used as @ biological method to remove CO; tough photosynthesis. Algae has several advantages over conventional chemical CO; removal methods because algae is inexpensive to obtain, requires only light and minmal ‘nutrients in addition to the CO; for growth, and the waste can30 Rame:hprabu Ramanaj and Natthawad Dussadee ‘be harvested for biofuels. Several mecies of algae can metabolize HyS. The HS content in bioges, at levels higher than 300-500 ppm, damages the energy conversion technique Today biological cleaning seduces the content of hydrogen sulphide to a level below 100 ppm. Using @ biological system to remove HS has similar benefits to using one to remove COr: lower upkeep costs, more environmentally sustainable and non-hazardous waste. Maintaining a pure cultwe would increase the efficiency of the algae in processing CO. Using ‘iological metabolism to purify biogas is a promising means of biofuel production The incorporstion of algee in photobioreactors to pusify biogas has several advantages over conventional chemical methods of CO; removal. Obtaining algae is relatively inexpensive because cultwing algae requires minimal nutrients for their growth Growth of the algae requires a light sowce es well, which does not necessarily have to be expensive if illuminstionis provided by natural sunlight, which is not limited in supply. References [1] C.S. Jones, $.P Mayfield, “Algae biofuel: vexailty for the future of icenetgy”, Curent Opinion in Bioteclmology, 2012, 23:346-351, (D] PJ. Meynell, “Methane: planning a digestes”, New York Schocken Books, 1976 [B] A. Demubas, “Biofiel sources, biofiel policy, bioftel ‘economy and global biofiel projections", Enezzy Comvezsion ard Management, 2008, 49: 2105-2116. [4] N. Dussadee, Ko Reanruwan, R. Ramanj, “Potential development of compressed bio-methane gaz production fiom ppg fume and elephant grass silage for transportation in ‘Thailand’, Bioresource Technology, 2014, 155: 438-441 [5] G Lastella, C. Testa, G. Comacchia, M. Notomicola, F. Voltasio, V. K Shama, “Anaetbic digestion of semi-solid organic waste: biogas production and it: punficatio”, Energy CConvession ard Management, 2002, 43:63-75, [6] BE. Rittman, “Opportunities for renewable bioenergy using sicioomganicn", Biotechnology and Bioengineenng, 2008, 100, 203-2 (7) E Stephens, I-L. Ross, Z.King, JH. Mussgmg, O. Kmse, C Posten, M.A Borowiteka, B. Hankamer, “An economic and fechncal evahiation of micioalgal “biofuels”, Natue Biotechnology, 2010, 28, 126-128. (5) J. Muscgmg, V. Klassen, A. Schkiter, O. Kase, “Micioalgae as mubstrates for femnantative biogee production nt a combined biorefinery concept”, Joumal of Biotechnology, 2010, 150:51-56 []_ E. Ryckebosch, M_Drouillon, H. Vervaeren, “Techniques for ‘Transformation of Bioge: to Biomethane”, Joumal of Biomass ani Bioenergy, 2011, 35: 1633-1645. (10) C. ¥ Keo, $.¥. Chin, TT Huang, L. Dai, GH. Wing, C.P. ‘Teng, CH Chen, C. §, Lin, “A nattant stain of mictoalga Chlorella sp. for the caibon dioxide capture fiom biogas", Biomass and Bioenergy, 2012, 36: 132-140, Biological Puification Processes for Biogas Using Algae Cultures: A Review [11] N. Abatzoglou, S. A Boivin, “A review of biogas purification processes", Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining, 2009, 3 21. (12) R Raman, D.D-W Thai, PH. Chen, “Freshuvater microalgae niche of ait cabon diode mitigation’, Ecological Engineering, 2014; 68: 47-52 13] R Ramanj, Fresrater microalgae growthand Cabondionide Sequestration, Thichung, Taiwan National Chung Hsing ‘University, PRD thesis, 2013, (14] R. Ramargj, D. D-W. Thai, PH. Chen, “Algae Growth in Natural Water Resources", Joumal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2010, 42: 4397450. 15] R Raman, D. D-W. Tai, PH. Chen, “Chlorophyll is not ‘accurate mearurement for algal biomass”, Chiang Mai Joumal of Science, 2013, 40: 547-555. 16] R_Ramaraj, D. D-W Tai, PH. Chen, “An exploration ofthe relationship: between micioalgae biomass growth and related environmental vanable:", Joumal of Photochemicyy and Photobiology B: Biology, 2014, 135: 44-47. O17 C. Viele, 1, Gabayo, M. V. Lobato, J. M. Vega, “DMicioalgae mediated chemical: production ard waste removal Enzyme and Michal Technology, 1997, 20: 562-52 1S] WJ. Oswald, “My sixty years in applied algology”, Joumal of Applied Phycology, 2003, 15; 99-106. [19] L.E. Graham L. W. Wilcox, “Algae”, Prentice Hall Ine. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, 000, [20] D.D-W Tai, Watershed Reactor Analyris, CO; Eco-function and Threstold Management Study, Taichung, Taran, National Chang Hsing University, PRD thesis, 2012. [D1] TDsives, A. BajhaiyaJ.K Pithnan, “Potential of Bioenergy Production fiom Microalgae”, Cunent Sustainable/Renewable Energy Reporte, 2014, 1:94-103, D2] L. Yang, Ge. Xumeng, C. Wan, F Yu, ¥ Li, “Progress and perspectives in converting biogss to trampoitation fel”, Renewable & Sustainable Energy, 2014, 40: 1133-1152. [23] KW Gellesbeck, D. J.Chapman, “Seaweed uses: the outlook {for manicaltuse”, Endeavous, 1983, 7: 31-37. 4] A.B Ross, J.M Jones, M.-L. Kubacki, “Since macioalgae ae ‘again receiving attention @ a substrate for amerbic digestion”, Bioresouce Technology, 2008, 99: 6494-6504 25] D.P.Chymoweth, D.L. Klass, §. Ghosh, “Anaercbic digestion of kelp”, In Biomass conversion processes for enexgy and fuels, Edited by Sofer $8, Zaborsky OR. New York: Plemum Press; 198]: 315-318. [26] A.D. Hughes, M.S. Kelly, KD. Black, M.S. Stanley, “Biogse fiom Macioalgee: i it time to revisit the idea?” Biotechnology for Biofuels, 2012, 5: $6. DT] A. Vergara-Femindez, G. Vargas, N. Alarcon, A. Antonio, “Evaluation of manne algae a: a souce of biogas in a brostage anaerobic reactor system’, Biomass & Bioenergy, 00S, 32: 335-344. PS] J. Singh, $. Gu, “Commercialization potential of microalgae {for bioftel: production”, Renewable & Sustaimble Enesgy Reviews, 2010, 14: 2596-2610.Infernational Joumal of Sustainable and Green Enexgy 2015; 4(1-1): 20-32 al 09] A. Panay, N.K Singh, A. Pandey, E. Gnansouno, D. Madanovar, “Cyancbactena and microalgee: a positive ‘prospect for binftel", Bioreronuce Technology, 2011, 102 10163-10172 M. Debowski, M. Zielitski, A Grala, M. Dudek, “Algae ‘biomass az an altemative substrate im bioger production techrologies Review”, Renewable and Sustainable Enexgy Reviews, 2013, 27: 596-604, GBI] G Migliore, C. Alii, AR Spuocati, E. Masi, R.Ciccoli, M. Lenzi, A. Wang, C. Cremisin, “Amerobic digestion of smacroalgal biomass and sediments sourced fiom the Oibetello lagoon, Italy”, Biomass and Bioenergy, 42: 69-77 M. Huesemam, G Roesjadi, J. Benemann, FB. Metting, “Biofuel: fiom Micioalgae and Seaweeds. In Biomass 10 Biofuel”, Blackorell Publishing Ltd> Oxford, UK, 2010, 165-184, ol ©. G Goheke, W. J. Oswald, HB. Gotaas, “Anaercbie digestion of algae”, Applied Miciobiology, 1951, 5: 47-55. 1. Angelidala, BK. Aluing, “Thermophilie anaerobic digestion of livestock waste the effect of ammonia”, Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 1993, 38: 560-564 oH [35] B. Sialve, N. Bemet, O. Bemard, “Anencbic digestion of ricioalgee 2: a necessary step to make microalgal biodiesel sustainable”, Biotechnology Advances, 2008, 27: 409-416, G. Markou, I. Angelidali, E. Nerantais, D. Georgakale “Bioethanol Production by Cabohyriate-Ensiched Biomass of | Arthvospva Gpimlina) platersi”, Energies, 2013, 6 3937-2950. (B7] S. Sclovede, Z-U. Rehman, M. Geiber, C. Theiss, R. Span, “effects of thermal pretreatment on anaerobic digestion of Nemeclorepsis salina bionass", Bioresource Technology, 2013, 143: 505-511 S..Cho, $. Paxk, J Seon, J. Yu, T Lee, “Evahation of thermal, ultasonic and’ alkali pretreatment) on mixed-microalgal ‘biomass fo enhance aneiobic methane production”, Bioresource Technology, 2013, 143: 330-336. F Passos, M. Solé, J. Garcia, I. Fener, “Biogas production fiom micioalgae giown in wastewater: effect of microwave pretreatment”, Applied Enexgy, 2013, 108:168-175 [40] A. Mahy, L. Mendez, $. Blanco, M- Ballesteros, C Gonailes-Feimindes, “Protease cell ‘wall degradation of Chlorella vulgaris: effect on methane production’, Bioresource Technology, 2014, 171: 421-421. K. Ziemiieki, 1. Romanowsla, M. Kowalska, “Enzymatic preteatment of ligncellulosic waste: to improve biogas ‘production’, Waste Management, 2012, 32: 1131-1137. H. Li H. Kjentedns, E Temsttim, A. Davidsson, “Evaksation of pretieatment method: for increared biogas tay wa production fiom macro algae (Utvandering av forbehandlingsmetoder for oad biogasproduktion fin malaoalger)", SGC Rapport 2013, 278: 136 [ht Jaro ge selclfinderhsenfilesffiles/SGC278 pat] [43] S. Tedesco, T. M. Banoso, A. G. Olabi, “Optimization of mechanical’ pre-teatment of Lamanariaceae =pP Dbiomass-lenived biogas”, Renewable and Sustaindble Enexgy Reviews, 2013, 27: 596-604 [44] G.Jard, C. Damas, J.P Delgenes, H. Marfuing, B.Sialve, J.P. us) 6, un us) 9) 0) ou oI 3) ay 65) 6) on 63) 9) Steyer, H. Caniie, “Effect of thermochemical pretreatment on ‘he sokibilization and anaerobic biodegradability of the red macoalga Palmaria palmate”, Biochemical Engineering Journal, 2013, 79: 253-258. HB Nieken, S. Heiske, “Anaerobic digestion of macroalg amethane potential, pre-heatment, inhbition and co-digestio ‘Water Science Teclinology, 2011, 64: 1723-1729. A.M Lakariemi, O. H. ‘Thovinen, J. A. Puballa, “Anaercbic comvesion of mectoalgal biomass to austeiable eneigy camera review”, Bioresource Techrology, 2013, 135: 222-231 PH. Chen, WJ. Oswald, “Thermochemical eatment for algal fermentation’, Envuonment International, 1995, 24: 859-897, C. Gowziles-Femanles, B. Sialve, N. Bemet, JP. Steyer, “Tmmpact of microalgae characteristics on their conversion '© ‘bioftel, Pat Il Focus on biomethane production”, Bioftel, Biopoduct: & Biorefining, 2011, 6: 205-218. P Bolutskyi, M. J. Betexbaugh E. J. Bouwer, “The effect of alfemative pietteatment stafegies on anaerobic digestion and zethane production fiom different algal stain”, Bioresource Technology, 2014, 155: 366-372 B. Sialve, N. Bemet, O. Bemaud, “Anaerobic digestion of microalgae ao a necessaty step to make micioalgal biodiesel srustaimble”, Biotechnology Advance, 2009: 27, 409-416, M. Ras, L. Landon, B. Sialve, N. Bemet, J.P. Steyer, “Experimental study on a coupled process of production and amaerobic digestion of Chlorella vulgaris”, Bioresource ‘Technology, 2011, 102: 200-206 C. Zamalloa, E. Vaiteke, J, Albrecht, W. Vesstaete, “The techro-econmic potential of renewable energy though the anaerobic digestion of microalgae", Bioresource Technology, 2011, 102: 149-1158. L. Lombardi, E. Camevale, “Economic evaluations of an imovative biogas upgrading method with CO; storage”, Energy, 2013, 62: 88-94 P. lovane, F. Nanna, ¥. Ding, B. Bilson, A. Molino, “Experimental test with polymenc menbrane for the bioga: unification fiom CO, and HS”, Fuel, 014, 135: 352-358, K. Stam, X. Gabaunll, G. Villaba, L. Talene, L. Lombandi, “Life cycle assessment of biogas upgrading’ technologies", ‘Waste Management, 2012, 32: 991-999. K A. Stevelt, RF. Vieth, D. Grasso, “Cheme-autotophic ‘biogas punfication for methane ennchment: mechanism and and Kinetics”, The Chemical Engineering Joumal and the Biochemical Engineering Jourmal, 1995, 58-71-79. R. Have, H. Oilawa, C. Sasaa, M. Monta, Y. Watanabe, “Photorynthetic production of micioalgal biomacz in a saceway system under greenhouse conditions in Serdai City”, Journal of Bioscience andl Bioengineering, 2000. $9:157-163. R, Ramanan, K, Kannan, A. Deshkas, R. Yadav; T Chaluabast, “Enhanced algal CO2 sequestration tough calcite deposition bby Chlorella sp. and Spumlina platersis in a minizaceway pond, Bioresource Technology, 2010, 101: 2616-2622. FB. Green, L. Bertone, TJ. Lundguist, J. Mais, RB ‘Thesan, W. J. Ozwald, “Methane fermentation, submerged ga collection, and the fate of caibon in advanced integrated ‘wastewater pond systems”, Water Science Technology, 1995, 3155-65,2 (61) fe) (64) Rameshprabu Ramazaj and Nattharrad Dussadee: J.C. Weissman, D. M. let, “Aquatic Species Project Repost, NRELIMP-232-4174", In Brown LM, Sprague S (eds) National Reneorable Enexgy Laboratory, 1992, 41-58, ‘Technology, 2013, 139: 292-299. R. Hendioko, M. Kawaroe, Salafidin, G Saefurahman, NE. Fittanto, D. W San, ¥ Saks, “Biorefinery preliminary tudies integration of srry ae CO) as biomethane digester waste for smicioalgee Scenedesrms sp. growth’, Infemational erunar on chemical engineering Scchadi Relcowardojo, Baniung, October 5-7, 2011 L. Tiavieso, E. P. Sanchez, F Benitez, J. L. Conde, “Artmospira sp. intersive cultures for food and biogas punficaton’, Biotechnology Letters, 1993; 15:1091-1094. C.¥.Kao,$. ¥. Chi, TT Huang, L. Dai, L-K Hs, C.$. Lin, “Ability of a nattant stain of the microalga Chlorella =p. capture cabon dioxide for biogas upgrading”, Applied Energy, 2012, 93: 176-183. (65) (66) (en) (ss) (9) Biological Puification Processes for Biogas Using Algae Cultures: A Review 1. Douthova, F. Kaitanek, Y. Maleterova, P Kaitanek, J Doucha, V. Zachleder, “Utilization of distillery stillage for eneigy gerezation and conminent production of vahable micioalgel biomass ims the sequence Bioger-cogeneration microalgae-products", Enegy Conversion and Management, 2010, 51: 606-611 HE_Bich N. Pfennig, “Growthof sulfte-reducing bactesia with sulfur as electron acceptor”, Archives of Microbiology, 1977, 12: SA7. WW. Tongpravhan, $. Ssimanpan, B. Cheitilp, “Biocapture of | CO, fiom biogas by cleaginous microalgae for improving methane content and sinnltaneously producing lipid”. Bioresource Technology, 2014, 170: 90-99. 5 Sumasdion, IS. Budiyono, $.B. Sasongko, “Utlization of | Biogar as Cabon Dionde Provider for Spinuina platersis Culture", Canent Rereaich Joumal of Biological Sciences, 2014, 6:53-59, G. Mam, M. Schlegel R Schumam, A. Sakalauskar, “Bioga:-conlitioning with microalgae”, Agronomy Research, 2008, 7: 33-38,