Use of concentric-tube airlift

photobioreactors for microalgal

outdoor mass cultures
F. Garcı́a Camacho, A. Contreras Gómez, F. G. Acién Fernández,
J. Fernández Sevilla, and E. Molina Grima

Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Almerı́a, Almerı́a, Spain

A vertical concentric-tube airlift photobioreactor (ALP) was used to cultivate Phaeodactylum tricornutum UTEX
640 in outdoor continuous mode during the summer. A mathematical model is developed to estimate the
irradiance profile and average irradiance inside the culture, and hence, to compare the biomass production
capability of the airlift device with a horizontal-loop tubular photobioreactor (HLTP) located at the same place
as the ALP. The maximum biomass productivities were similar in both photobioreactors in spite of the higher
light availability in HLTP; thus, the photosynthetic efficiency was higher in ALP. This behavior was attributed
to photoinhibition in HLTP and the negative effects of an inappropriate light-dark cycling. © 1998 Elsevier
Science Inc.

Keywords: Microalgal culture; photobioreactor; Phaeodactylum tricornutum

Introduction Airlift reactors allow better gas exchange, a more ordered

Algal culture systems are generally classified according to
their engineering and hydraulic characteristics as open
systems (including ponds, deep channel, shallow circulating
units, etc.) and closed or fully hydraulic systems commonly
called photobioreactors. Both have been extensively re-
viewed.1–5 The industrial-scale production of algal biomass
for highly valuable products (e.g., polyunsaturated fatty
acids, sulfated polysaccharides, pigments, etc.) is feasible
only in enclosed photobioreactors because contamination of
culture must be prevented. Of enclosed bioreactors, the
horizontal tubular photobioreactors in which the circulation
of fluids is induced by bubbling air are now the best
accepted.6 –11 Although the horizontal tubular systems have
notable advantages relative to conventional facilities (e.g.,
open ponds), they also have serious limitations such as
difficult temperature control, the need for frequent recar-
bonation because of the tube length, growth inhibition by
dissolved oxygen, foaming, fouling, etc. These limitations
imply additional costs that may be justifiable only for
high-value products.12 A possible alternative for overcom-
ing the noted constrains may be the airlift reactor (ALP).
Address reprint requests to Dr. F. G. Camacho, University of Almeria,
Department of Chemical Engineering, E-4071 Almeria, Spain
Received 13 November 1997; revised 29 June 1998; accepted 16 July 1998
liquid flow, and hence, a more efficient exposure of cells to
light.
The choice of a suitable photobioreactor is a complicated
issue. Productivity comparison between culture systems
may be a sufficient selection criterion. Availability of light
is another important factor that affects productivity; how-
ever, illumination is difficult to control in outdoor cultures
because of the variation in solar radiation during the day and
nonhomogeneous distribution of radiation in a cylindrical
geometry. Until now, the only model for light distribution
and average solar irradiance inside a horizontal-loop tubular
photobioreactor (HLTP) for outdoor microalgal culture was
that developed by Acién Fernández et al.13 The HLTP was
horizontally arranged (surface slope, b, equal to 0°) and
placed on a solar receptor where the disperse radiation
distribution on tubes surface had singular characteristics
(reflectance around 2). In addition, one of the main con-
strains of this reactor and its emplacement (Almerı́a Bay,
36°489N, 2°549W) was related to the photoinhibition effect
which reduced the productivity of the system during the
summer because of the high peak irradiance values. This
effect was the main drawback of this type of photobioreac-
tor which otherwise had excellent performance.14
In the present study, a concentric-tube airlift (ALP) was
used to cultivate Phaeodactylum tricornutum UTEX 640 in
outdoor continuous mode during the summer. Using a
similar methodology to Acién Fernández et al.13 a mathe-

Enzyme and Microbial Technology 24:164 –172, 1999

© 1998 Elsevier Science Inc. All rights reserved. 0141-0229/99/$–see front matter
655 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10010 PII S0141-0229(98)00103-3
 Airlift photobioreactors for microalgal cultu: F. Garcı́a Camacho et al.

Figure 1 Scheme of outdoor culture system. Vertical concentric-tube airlift photobioreactor (1); medium reservoir (2); biomass
reservoir (3); temperature control system (4); pH controller (5); O2 register (6); solenoid valve (7); gas flow meter (8); CO2 cylinder (9);
air (10)

matical model is developed here to estimate the irradiance
profile and average irradiance inside the culture, and hence
to compare the biomass production capability of ALP with
that of the HLTP used by Acién Fernández et al.14
Materials and methods
Organism and culture medium
The alga, P. tricornutum UTEX 640, and the culture medium were
the same as those previously used by Molina Grima et al.7 Nutrient
concentrations for the outdoor operation were successively in-
creased to avoid growth limitation; eventually the concentration
level was threefold that used by Molina Grima et al.7
entrance of the draft tube. Air was used in all experiments. The
oil-free air was filter sterilized (0.5 mm sterile filter) prior to use.
Solar radiation measurement
A Meteocenter-386 (Geonica S. A., Madrid, Spain) weather station
was used to check the daily global radiation, H, during the
experimental run.
Analytical measurements
The biomass concentration, C b , chlorophylls, carotenoids, and
biomass absorption coefficient, Ka, were measured in accordance
with Acién Fernández et al.13

Outdoor culture system

The culture system located in Almerı́a, Spain (36°489N, 2°549W)
was a plexiglas airlift photobioreactor 0.096 m in diameter and 2 m
high (working volume of 12 3 1023 m3). The vessel contained a
1.5 m high concentric tube (riser). The cross-sectional areas of the
riser and downcomer were 2.83 3 1023 m2 and 2.8 3 1023 m2,
respectively. The bottom clearance was 0.1 m. A diagram of the
culture system is shown in Figure 1. The photobioreactor was
operated during summer as continuous culture at different dilution
rates; thus, fresh medium was added at a constant rate for a 12-h
daylight period, stopping dilution during the night until biomass
concentration at sunrise was the same for four consecutive days.
The cultures were operated at constant pH 7.7 that was maintained
by on-demand injection of CO2. The pH was measured with an
Ingold pH glass probe. The dissolved oxygen was measured by an
Ingold polarographic probe.
Agitation and gassing were achieved by injecting air through a
perforated pipe with 30 holes of 1023 m diameter. The sparger
(0.02 m in diameter, 0.03 m high) was located just inside the lower
Mathematical model
The mathematical model determines the distance travelled by an
incident ray of light to any point inside the culture and estimates
the local irradiance taking into account the light attenuation due to
biomass.
The incident total radiation is divided into direct and disperse
radiation. The former is characterized by having a direction
defined as a function of the position of the sun at any given
moment while the latter, being reflected radiation, has no specific
direction.
The model developed here is based on that of Acién Fernández
et al.13 but there are important differences to account for the
geometry of the airlift reactor.
Angle of incidence of direct radiation
The angle of incidence of direct radiation on the photobioreactor
surface, that is, the angle between the incident beam and the

Enzyme Microb. Technol., 1999, vol. 24, February 15/March 165

Papers
Table 1 Equations used to estimate the local and average irradiances inside culture

cosu 5 sind z sinf z cosb 2 sind z cosf z sinb z cosg 1 cosd z cosf z cosb z cosv 1 cosd z cosf z sinb (1)
z cosg z cosv 1 cosd z sinb z sing z sinv
d 5 23.45 z sin [360 z (28/4 1 N )/365] (2)
v 5 15 z (12 2 sh ) (3)

Ho 5 S 24
p D S
z Isc z 1 1 0.033 z cos S
360 z N
365 DD S
z cos f z cos d z sinvs 1
2 z p z vs
360
z sinf z sind D (4)

cosv s 5 2tand z tanf (5)

Kh 5 H / H o (6)
H d / H 5 1.390 2 4.027 z Kh 1 5.530 z Kh 2 2 3.108 z Kh 3 (7)
HB 5 H 2 Hd (8)
I 5 H z Ef z SD Sp
24
z x 1 y z cosv) z Scosv z cosvs
sin vs 2 vs z cosvs D (9)

Id 5 Hd z Ef z SD S p
24
z
cosv z cosvs
sinvs 2 vs z cosvs D (10)

x 5 0.409 1 0.5016 z sin(vs 2 60) (11)

y 5 0.6609 2 04767 z sin(v s 2 60)
IB 5 I 2 Id (13)
cos u~g, v! (14)
Rb 5
cos uz ~v!
RD 5 ~1 1 cos b!/2 (15)
cos u z 5 cosd z cosf z cos v 1 sind z sinfa (16)
I Bt 5 R b z I B (17)
I dt 5 R D z I d
~1 2 cos b! (19)
Ir 5 ~IB 1 Id! z r z
2
I Dt 5 I dt 1 I r (20)
l 5 a z sinv 5 ri z cosw 2 R z cos « (21)
h 5 a z cosv 5 R z sin« 2 ri z sinw (22)
a 5
~ri z cos w 2 R z cos ε!
sinv
) 5 S
R z sine 2 ri z sin w
cos v
)
(23)

Pdisperse 5 Î ~h 1 I !
2 2 (26)
pdisperse 5 Î ~ri z sinw 2 R z sinε)2 1 (ri cosw 2 R z cosε)2 (27)

Eqs. (1)–(19) were obtained from Duffie and Beckman16 and Eqs. (21)–(27) from Acién Fernández et al.13,14
a
cos uz should be replaced with cosu [Eq. (1)] with g 5 v for any surface tangent to the ALP surface and not oriented north-south

normal to the surface, u, may be estimated at any given moment as
a function of five variables: day of year (N); solar hour (sh);
geographic latitude (f); surface slope (b), that is, the angle
between the plane surface in question and the horizontal, and
surface azimuth angle (g), that is, the deviation of the projection on
a horizontal plane of the normal to the surface from the local
meridian, with zero due south, east negative, west positive.15,16
The angles u and g were not used by Acién Fernández et al.13 For
a vertical airlift column, surface azimuth angle (g) will have
infinite possible values between 2180° and 180° because the
surface is cylindrical.
The equation relating the angle of incidence of direct radiation
and the other variables is shown in Table 1 [Eq. (1)]. The
declination, d, and the angle corresponding to the solar hour, v,
needed for solving Eq. (1) are calculated according to Eqs. (2) and
(3), respectively.
Solar irradiance estimation
The total daily radiation, H, daily diffuse radiation, H d , and daily
direct radiation, H B , on a horizontal surface were calculated
according to Eqs. (4)–(8) (Table 1). The theoretical values of H
and the measured data agreed within 9% error.
The photosynthetically active hourly direct, I B , and diffuse, I d ,
irradiance on a horizontal surface were estimated by substituting H
and H d in Eqs. (9)–(10) (Table 1), respectively, for firstly
obtaining I and I d , and after in Eq. (13) to estimate I B . The hourly
direct and diffuse radiation values estimated in this way are valid
for horizontal surfaces. On a tilted surface, the geometric factors,
R b (the ratio of the beam radiation on the tilted surface, I Bt , to that
on a horizontal surface), and R D (the ratio of diffuse radiation on
the tilted surface, I dt , to that on a horizontal surface) must be taken
into account [see Eqs. (14)–(18)].
Also, the solar radiation diffusely reflected from the ground, I r ,
was estimated by Eq. (19) (Table 1). A value of 0.5 was used for
the ground reflectivity, r, because reflecting surfaces existed in the
surroundings of ALP (solar receptor of HLTP, white walls, etc.).
The selected value of r was in between 0.7 and 0.2 that were
recommended by Liu and Jordan15 for diffuse ground reflectance
of 0.2 with and without snow cover, respectively. Henceforth,
hourly disperse irradiance on the ALP surface, I Dt , will refer to the
sum of the diffuse radiation and the solar radiation diffusely
reflected from the ground [Eq. (20)].
Eqs. (14)–(19) were not used by Acién Fernández et al.14
because of the singular distribution of disperse radiation on
surfaces of horizontal tubes.
Length of path travelled by a ray of light
The distance, p Direct, travelled by a direct ray from the tube surface
to a point within the culture may be determined from the position
of the sun and the location of the point (ri, w) (Figure 2). Figure
3 shows the various angles in the cross-section of the tube. In spite
of the vertical orientation of the airlift, the trigonometric relation-
ships identical to those of Acién Fernández et al.13 could be used
to determine the transverse light path length, a (the projection of

166 Enzyme Microb. Technol., 1999, vol. 24, February 15/March

 Airlift photobioreactors for microalgal cultu: F. Garcı́a Camacho et al.

Figure 2 Relation of characteristic angles with light path length associated with the penetration of direct radiation to an internal point
in the culture ( r i , w)

the true light path, p Direct, on the cross-section). The Eqs. (21)–
(23) of Table 1 were used, but the e value was p/2 2 g; thus, the
true light path, p Direct , was related to a (Figure 2) by the equation:
a z cos v R z sin e 2 ri z sin w
p Direct 5 5 (24)
cos~p/ 2 2 u9z ! cos~p/ 2 2 u9z !
where u9z is the zenith angle modified by the light refraction in the
culture. The angles u9z and u z are related to the indexes of
refraction in accordance with Snell’s law:
n 1 sinu9z
5 (25)
n 2 sinu z
where n 1 5 1 and n 2 5 1.33 are the refractive indexes of air and
water, respectively.
The path, p disperse, travelled by any disperse ray was deter-
mined as for HLTP [Eqs. (26) and (27), Table 1).

Local and average irradiance inside the culture

In a well-mixed microalgal mass culture system, light attenuation Figure 3 Projection of the characteristic angles and the solar
by biomass gives rise to a heterogeneous illumination profile ray on the normal section of the tube containing the considered
inside the culture bulk for which mathematical evaluation is point ( r i , w)

Enzyme Microb. Technol., 1999, vol. 24, February 15/March 167

Papers

Figure 4 Effect of dilution rate, D , on steady-state biomass concentration, biomass productivity, and average irradiance inside the
culture

essential in order to estimate the average irradiance on which the
growth of the microalgae depends.17 Lambert-Beer’s law usually
represents this attenuation; therefore, the local direct, I Bt (r i , w),
and local disperse I Dt (r i , w), irradiances may be estimated with
the following equations:
I Bt ~r i , w! 5 I Bt ~g, v! z exp[2Ka~Xp! z C b z P Direct ]
I Dt ~r i , w! 5 I Dt ~v! z exp[2Ka~Xp! z C b z P dirperse ]
Summing Eqs. (28) and (29) provides the total hourly irradiance at
any point inside the culture. If this summation is extended to the
full culture volume, the hourly average irradiance, I av , may be
estimated by:
with growth severely limited by self-shading. This effect is
better observed in the variation of the average irradiance
[calculated by Eq. (30)] with the dilution rate (Figure 4). As
in previous works,17,19,21 the specific growth, m, and aver-
age irradiance, I av , in light-limited cultures followed a
(28) hyperbolic relationship.
(29)
Discussion
Normally, the optimization of photobioreactor orientation is
based on the same criteria as those for any solar process;

HS E E D
thus, for maximum annual energy availability, a surface
1 slope equal to latitude seems to be the best; a horizontal
I av 5 I Bt ~r i , w!rd rd w
p z R2 surface has the highest peak value of irradiance; however, at
R w

S EEE
1 pear.21–23 The slope is therefore, an important design factor
1 I Dt ~r i , w!rd rd wde
2zp
R w e horizontal or inclined tubular photobioreactors, this design
Results
In Figure 4, the steady-state biomass concentration and
biomass productivity are shown as a function of dilution
rate, D. The pattern obtained was typical of a light-limited
continuous culture as previously reported;7,18 –20 that is, the
higher the dilution rate or specific growth rate, the lower the
steady-state biomass concentration since availability of light
is greater. The steady-state biomass concentration attained,
C b , is determined by the imposed dilution rate since the
limiting growth factor is light availability which is limited
by shelf-shading of the cells in dense cultures; thus, high
dilution rates can be supported by fast-growing cells whose
illumination requirements can only be met at low biomass
concentrations, and low dilution rates give rise to cultures
DJ
high irradiances, negative photoinhibition effects can ap-
(30) with regard to future yield of culture systems.9 In outdoor
variable cannot be varied significantly because of fluid-
dynamic problems and cells settling; however, the vertically
positioned bubble columns and airlift photobioreactors have
not been used extensively in outdoor or indoor conditions.
The vertical arrangement will avoid the high irradiances in
summer and spring, and during noonday for each day of the
year when the temperature is high and the photooxidative
processes in the cell are most marked. This effect can be
seen in Figure 5 where average radiation on a monthly basis
on both vertical (b 5 90°) and horizontal (b 5 0°) surfaces
oriented N-S has been estimated from Eqs. (7) and (8). The
maximum value of total radiation on the horizontal surface
is reached when it is minimum on the vertical surface and
vice versa; however, the averaged total radiation received
by both surfaces would be equal only if the latitude of
facility was 45°. In contrast, it would be higher in horizontal

168 Enzyme Microb. Technol., 1999, vol. 24, February 15/March

 Airlift photobioreactors for microalgal cultu: F. Garcı́a Camacho et al.
surfaces as photobioreactor nears the equator and lower as it
moves away from it. Because in this work, the location of
the ALP was at latitude 36°.489N, close to 45°, the averaged
total radiation received by both surfaces were similar
(19,942 kJm22 day21 for the vertical surface and 21,660
kJm22 day21 for the horizontal surface).
In spite of these theoretical considerations in favor of
photobioreactors arranged vertically, the maximum biomass
volumetric productivity obtained in the ALP was approxi-
mately 1 g l21 day21 (Figure 4) which was about half that
obtained by Acién Fernández et al.14 in a HLTP of 5 cm
internal diameter using the same algal species and time of
year; however, the comparison may be misleading if the
experimental conditions are not considered. In the HLTP
culture system, the bioreactor diameter was smaller (5 cm
versus 9.5 cm in ALP). Also, the external loop was located
Enzyme Microb. Technol., 1999, vol. 24, February 15/March
Figure 5 Annual variation of direct, diffuse,
and reflected monthly radiation on horizon-
tal (b 5 0°) and vertical (b 5 90°) surfaces in
Almerı́a (Spain), 36°489N latitude. There is no
reflected radiation for b 5 0° in accordance
with Eq. (19) of Table 1
on a solar receiver with albedo values (reflectance) around
2.14 These special culture conditions increased the available
light to the cells. Consider a hypothetical case where a
steady-state biomass concentration of 1.9 g l21 and a
pigment content of 2.221% on dry weight (obtained in this
work for D 5 0.033 h21) is maintained through the year in
a HLTP like the one used by Acién Fernández et al.13 but
with the same internal diameter as the concentric tube airlift
(ALP). As shown in Figure 6, the average irradiance inside
the HLTP culture would be always higher.
Acién Fernández et al.14 proposed a kinetic model for
estimating the year-long biomass productivity of microalgal
cultures. That model reproduced the experimental results
with less than a 10% error. The specific growth rate m was
related only to I av and to mean daily photosynthetic irradi-
ance measured inside the thermostatic water pond of a
Figure 6 Comparison of annual variation of
average irradiance, I av , for ALP and HLTP (with
solar receiver) for C b 5 1.9 g l21
169
Papers
Figure 7 Polar plot of irradiance profiles in the cross-section of ALP (dashed lines) and HLTP (solid lines) for the 0.0414 m and 0.023
m internal radiuses at the 8 and 12 solar h
HLTP solar receiver. This model applied irrespective of the
tube diameters employed; thus, using the highest value of
I av (220 mEm22 s21 during the summer) calculated for
HLTP (Figure 6) in the model proposed by Acién Fernán-
dez et al.14, the expected biomass productivity in the HLTP
would be 0.95 g l21 day21. This value is similar to that
obtained experimentally in the ALP for D 5 0.033 h21 and
C b 5 1.9 g l21 (productivity 5 0.75 g l21 day21) and
during the same time of the year.
This behavior of HLTP, in spite of a higher illumination,
must be related to the negative effects of an inappropriate
modulation of the light-dark cycle due to the interaction
between light distribution inside the culture and hydrody-
namics. Light is not always beneficial. Excessively high
photon flux density may reduce productivity via photoinhi-
bition.24 Photoinhibition is caused by oversaturation of
photosystem II which damages the D1 protein that carries
the binding site of the electron carrier.22,25 This photoinhi-
bition effect is quite distinct from that of temperature
increase that occurs in uncontrolled systems as a function of
the photon flux density. Whereas a single cell of microalgae
cannot be simultaneously photolimited and photoinhibited,
in bioreactors photolimited and photoinhibited cell popula-
tions may coexist because of variations in photointensity in
different zones.
At low light intensities, the few damaged D1 protein
molecules are replaced rapidly and the net damage to the
photosynthetic apparatus is negligible. Under this situation,
a dark period reduces growth rate (photosynthesis) because
fewer photons are captured but no gain is obtained from the
dark time. In contrast, under conditions of intense illumi-
nation, part of the light energy impairs the photosynthetic
170 Enzyme Microb. Technol., 1999, vol. 24, February 15/March
apparatus. Repair and damage proceed simultaneously and
the observed growth is the sum of the two processes. If a
dark period is introduced under this situation, the duration
of the photosynthetic period declines, but the damaging
period is also reduced while the photon trap repair continues
during the dark time. Consequently, during the next light
period, a substantially rejuvenated photon trap compensates
for the loss in photosynthetic time. Under these circum-
stances, alternating light/dark periods do not reduce growth
which may in fact be slightly enhanced; nevertheless, the
length of the dark period is important. Lengthening the light
period beyond an optimal value will produce loss of growth.
The optimal or critical dark period is not a fixed quantity;
instead it depends on the photon flux density of the previous
light period and the fluid residence time in zones of
different irradiance. Clearly, therefore, the principal prob-
lem of designing or choosing a photobioreactor is assuring,
for any species with preestablished photosynthetic charac-
teristics, that the largest possible fraction of cells experi-
ences optimal exposure to light in the largest possible
reactor volume.
In this sense in Figure 7, the local irradiance profiles in
both photobioreactors at 8 and 12 solar h are shown. As
expected, as the solar hour changes, curves of local irradi-
ance at the same internal ratio adjust to the position of the
sun for both ALP and HLTP photobioreactors. In the
morning (sh 5 8), the ALP surface facing the sun had
much higher direct irradiance values than the opposite side;
this difference is lower in HLTP; however, at noon, the
irradiance distribution in ALP, unlike HLTP, was practi-
cally homogeneous. That is, the local irradiance value at the
same internal radius did not depend on the angle w. This
 Airlift photobioreactors for microalgal cultu: F. Garcı́a Camacho et al.
profile is because during midday, the contribution of dis- Acknowledgments
perse irradiance to total irradiance in relation to the direct
Assistance of Dr. Yusuf Chisti with the preparation of this
irradiance is very great in the ALP; thus, although the level
manuscript is greatly acknowledged. This research was
of irradiance for each internal radius and for any hour of the
supported by the Comision Interministerial de Ciencia y
day was higher in HLTP than in ALP, irradiance distribu-
Tecnologı́a (CICYT) (BIO-95-0652), Spain; Plan Andaluz
tion inside the culture as well as the pattern of cell de Investigación II, Junta de Andalucı́a, Spain; and the EEC
movement inside the photobioreactors were different. project BRPR CT97-0537.
The improved productivity in the ALP was apparently
due to a better combination of mixing and light distribution
in the riser and the downcomer. The mixing was higher List of symbols
inside the ALP than HLTP. A value of 0.04 m2 s21 was
calculated previously for the axial dispersion coefficient for a Projection of direct path length over cross-
the ALP26 and a value of 0.015 m2 s21 for the 5 3 1022 m section (m)
internal diameter HLTP was calculated following the ALP Vertical airlift photobioreactor
method described by Levenspiel27; moreover, with respect Cb Biomass concentration (g l21 or g m23)
to illumination, a certain grade of order exists in the flow of E13
f Photosynthetic efficiency of solar radiation,
the ALP because the culture is forced to circulate regularly 1.74 6 0.07 mE z J21
from an well-illuminated zone (downcomer) to a dark zone H Daily radiation on a horizontal surface (kJ
(riser). This would be in agreement with other works m22 d21)
showing that ordered flow and the increasing mixing im- HB Daily direct radiation on a horizontal surface
prove photosynthetic productivity.28,29 The calculated pho- (kJ m22d21)
tosynthetic efficiency30 also inferred this behavior; thus, Hd Daily diffuse radiation impinging on a hori-
during summer, the efficiency was approximately 20% for zontal surface (kJ m22 d21)
the ALP (C b 5 1.9 g l21) but only 9% for the hypothetical HLTP Horizontal-loop tubular photobioreactor
situation in the HLTP. Ho Daily global solar radiation on the atmosphere
surface, extraterrestrial radiation (kJ m22 d21)
In conclusion, vertically oriented concentric-tube airlift
I Hourly incident photosynthetic radiation
photobioreactors may be as productive a culture system as
(mE m22 s21)
HLTP; moreover, the productivity of the ALR may be
Iav Photosynthetically active hourly average irra-
higher when a comparison is made under identical illumi-
diance inside culture (mE m22 s21)
nation conditions. This conclusion is also supported by
IB Photosynthetically active hourly direct irradi-
other experimental work in a tubular-loop photobioreactor.9
ance on a horizontal surface (mE m22 s21)
Lee and Low9 also reported that despite the large differ- IBt(g, v) Direct hourly irradiance on ALP surface
ences in the amount of photosynthetic radiance absorbed by (mE m22 s21)
the algal cultures positioned at the various angles of IBt(ri, w) Local direct hourly irradiance inside ALP
inclination (0 – 80°), the overall biomass production rate (mE m22 s21)
over an 8-h period was comparable. Another advantage of a Id Photosynthetically active hourly diffuse irra-
vertical orientation is the smaller land area demand and the diance on a horizontal surface (mE m22 s21)
ease of scale-up. Idt Photosynthetically active hourly diffuse irra-
As seen in Figures 5 and 6, moreover, the highest values diance on a sloped surface (mE m22 s21)
of average irradiance inside the culture are attained during IDt(v) Disperse hourly irradiance on ALP surface
summer and spring in the HLTP whereas for the ALP, this (mE m22 s21)
occurs during autumn and winter (Figure 6); thus, the costs IDt(ri, w) Local disperse hourly irradiance inside ALP
of cooling should be lower with the ALP. (mE m22 s21)
Ir Photosynthetically active hourly reflected ir-
radiance on a surface (mE m22 s21)
Conclusions Isc Universal solar constant 1,353 W z m22
Ka Absorption coefficient (m2 g21)
The closed horizontal tubular systems have notable advan- Kh13 Daily clearness index, 0.74 6 9% (r2 5
tages relative to other more conventional photobioreactors; 0.918)
however, the horizontal tubular devices present significant N Day of the year
photoinhibition problems during the summer because of pDirect Path travelled by a direct radiation ray from
high peak irradiances. As shown in this work, the vertically the tube surface through the culture to an
oriented concentric-tube airlift systems offer a credible internal point (m)
alternative to horizontal tubular photobioreactors for cul- pdisperse Path travelled by any disperse ray (m)
tures at latitudes close to 45°. The vertical arrangement R ALP radius (m)
avoids the high irradiances in the summer and spring, and at Rb Geometric factor for direct radiation
noonday all through the year; thus, the airlift system seems RD Geometric factor for diffused radiation
to provide a more appropriate combination of local irradi- sh Solar hour
ance distribution, mixing, and ordered flow to assure a x Constant
suitable modulation of the light-dark periods. y Constant

Enzyme Microb. Technol., 1999, vol. 24, February 15/March 171

Papers
b Surface slope (rad)
g Surface azimuth angle (rad)
d Declination (rad)
u Angle between the beam radiation on a sur-
face and the normal to that surface (rad)
u9 Angle u modified by the light refraction in the
culture (rad)
uZ Zenith angle of the sun (rad)
u9Z Zenith angle of the sun modified by the light
refraction in the culture (rad)
r Reflectance of surroundings (value used was
0.5)
f Latitude (in our case 36°489N) (rad)
v Angle corresponding to the solar hour (rad)
vs Hour angle at sunrise (rad)
References
1. Terry, K. L. and Raymond, L. P. System design for the autotrophic
production of microalgae. Enzyme Microb. Technol. 1985, 7, 474 –
487
2. Lee, Y. K. Enclosed bioreactors for the mass cultivation of photo-
synthetic microorganisms: The future trend. Trends Biotechnol.
1986, 4, 186 –189
3. Richmond, A. and Becker, E. W. Technological aspects of mass
cultivation, a general outline. In: CRC Handbook of Microalgal
Mass Culture (Richmond, A., Ed.). CRC Press Inc., Boca Raton,
FL, 1986, 245–263
4. Richmond, A. Large scale microalgal culture and applications.
Prog. Phycol. Res. 1990, 7, 269 –329
5. Chaumont, D. Biotechnology of algal biomass production: A review
of systems for outdoor mass culture. J. Appl. Phycol. 1993, 5,
593– 604
6. Gudin, C. and Chaumont, D. Solar biotechnology study and devel-
opment of tubular solar receptors for controlled production of
photosynthetic cellular biomass. In: Proceedings of the Workshop
and ECContractors’ Meeting in Capri (Palz, W. and Pirrwitz, D.,
Eds.). Reidel Publ. Co., Dordrecht, 1983, 184 –193
7. Molina Grima, E., Garcı́a Camacho, F., Sánchez Pérez, J. A., Urda
Cardona, J., Acién Fernández, F. G., and Fernández Sevilla, J. M.
Outdoor chemostat culture of Phaeodactylum tricornutum UTEX
640 in a tubular photobioreactor for the production of eicosapenta-
enoic acid. Biotechnol. Appl. Biochem. 1994, 20, 279 –290
8. Richmond, A., Boussiba, S., Vonshak, A., and Kopel, R. A new
tubular reactor for mass production of microalgae outdoors. J. Appl.
Phycol. 1993, 5, 327–332
9. Lee, Y. K. and Low, C. S. Effect of photobioreactor inclination on
the biomass productivity of an outdoor algal culture. Biotechnol.
Bioeng. 1991, 38, 995–1000
10. Tapie, P. and Bernard, A. Microalgae production: Technical and
economic evaluations. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 1988, 32, 873– 885
11. Watanabe, Y., de la Noüe, J., and Hall, D. O. Photosynthetic
performance of a helical tubular photobioreactor incorporating the
cyanobacterium Spirulina platensis. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 1995, 47,
261–269
12. Weissman, J. C., Goebel, R. P., and Benemann, J. R. Photobiore-
actor design: Mixing, carbon utilization, and oxygen accumulation.
Biotechnol. Bioeng. 1988, 31, 336 –344
172 Enzyme Microb. Technol., 1999, vol. 24, February 15/March
13. Acién Fernández, F. G., Garcı́a Camacho, F., Sánchez Pérez, J. A.,
Fernández Sevilla, J. M., and Molina Grima, E. A model for light
distribution and average solar irradiance inside outdoor tubular
photobioreactors for the microalgal mass culture. Biotechnol. Bio-
eng. 1997, 55, 701–714
14. Acién Fernández, F. G., Garcı́a Camacho, F., Sánchez Pérez, J. A.,
Fernández Sevilla, J. M., and Molina Grima, E. Modelling of
biomass productivity in tubular photobioreactors for microalgal
cultures. Effects of dilution rate, tube diameter, and solar irradiance.
Biotechnol. Bioeng. 1997, 58, 605– 616
15. Liu, B. Y. H. and Jordan, R. C. The interrelationship and charac-
teristic distribution of direct, diffuse and total solar radiation. Solar
Energ. 1960, 7, 53– 65
16. Duffie, J. A. and Beckman, W. A. Solar Engineering of Thermal
Processes. John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1980,
17. Molina Grima, E., Garcı́a Camacho, F., Sánchez Pérez, J. A.,
Fernández Sevilla, J. M., Acién Fernández, F. G., and Contreras
Gómez, A. A mathematical model of microalgal growth in light-
limited chemostat culture. J. Chem. Tech. Biotechnol. 1994, 61,
167–173
18. Goldman, J. C. Outdoor algal mass cultures. II. Photosynthetic field
limitations. Water Res. 1979, 13, 119 –160
19. Molina Grima, E., Sánchez Pérez, J. A., Garcı́a Camacho, F., Garcı́a
Sánchez, J. L., and López Alonso, D. n–3 PUFA productivity in
chemostat cultures of microalgae. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol.
1993, 38, 599 – 605
20. Molina Grima, E., Sánchez Pérez, J. A., Garcı́a Camacho, F.,
Fernández Sevilla, J. M., and Acién Fernández, F. G. Productivity
analysis of outdoor chemostat culture in tubular air-lift photobiore-
actors. J. Appl. Phycol. 1996, 8, 369 –380
21. Molina Grima, E., Fernández Sevilla, J. M., Sánchez Pérez, J. A.,
and Garcı́a Camacho, F. A study on simultaneous photolimitation
and photoinhibition in dense microalgal cultures taking into account
incident and averaged irradiances. J. Biotechnol. 1996, 45, 59 – 69
22. Jensen, S. and Knutsen, G. Influence of light and temperature on
photoinhibition of photosynthesis in Spirulina platensis. J. Appl.
Phycol. 1993, 5, 495–504
23. Vonshak, A. and Guy, R. Photoinhibition as a limiting factor in
outdoor cultivation of Spirulina platensis. In: Algal Biotechnology
(Stadler, T., Mollion, J., Verdus, M. C., Karamanos, Y., Morvan, H.,
and Christiaen, D., Eds.). Elsevier Science Publ., New York, 1988,
365–370
24. Powells, S. B. Photoinhibition of photosynthesis induced by visible
light. Ann. Rev. Plant Physiol. 1984, 35, 15– 44
25. Barber, J. A. A. Too much of a good thing: Light can be bad for
photosynthesis. Trends Biochem. Sci. 1992, 17, 61– 66
26. Merchuk, J. C., Contreras, A., Garcı́a, F., and Molina, E. Studies of
mixing in a concentric-tube airlift bioreactor with different spargers.
Chem. Eng. Sci. 1997. 53, 709 –719
27. Levenspiel, O. The Chemical Reactor Omnibook. OSU Book Stores,
Corvallis, OR, 1979
28. Laws, E. A., Terry, K. L., Wickman, J., and Chalup, M. S. A simple
algal production system designed to utilize the flashing light effect.
Biotechnol. Bioeng. 1983, 25, 2319 –2335
29. Märkl, H., Modelling of algal production systems. In: Algal Biomass
(Shelef, C. J., Ed.). Elsevier/North Holland, Amsterdam, 1980,
361–383
30. Molina Grima, E., Garcı́a Camacho, F., Sánchez Pérez, J. A., Acién
Fernández, F. G., and Fernández Sevilla, J. M. Evaluation of
photosynthetic efficiency in microalgal cultures using averaged
irradiance. Enzyme Microb. Technol. 1997, 21, 375–381