Article No : o16_o01
Microalgae Reactors
CLEMENS POSTEN, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Karlsruhe, Germany
ROSA ROSELLO-SASTRE, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Karlsruhe, Germany
1. Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2. Growth Conditions for Microalgae . . . . . .
2.1. Light Saturation and Light Dilution . . . . .
2.2. Light Attenuation and Light-Path-Length
Reduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.3. Surface-to-Volume Ratio (SVR). . . . . . . . .
2.4. Light Fluctuation and Mixing . . . . . . . . . .
2.5. Carbon Dioxide Supply and Aeration . . . .
2.6. Mixing and Auxiliary Energy . . . . . . . . . .
1. Introduction
The word alga describes any organism with
chlorophyll a and a thallus, which is not differ-
entiated into roots, stem and leaves [1]. It also
includes microscopic phototrophic organisms.
Most algae are eukaryotes (like the red, green,
and brown algae and the diatoms). Only the
oxygenic phototrophic bacteria, also known as
cyanobacteria, are prokaryotes. It is likely that
more than 100 000 species of algae exist, both
salt and sweet water varieties. About 40 000
different kinds of microalgae species have been
identified all over the world. The chemical
composition of only a few hundred species is
well known and just about fifteen species are
cultivated on industrial scale. These facts show
the high biotechnological potential for micro-
algae as a source of new products and applica-
tions. The products from microalgae are both
the biomass itself and a wide range of intracel-
lular and extracellular molecules that are built
up by the cells. The world industrial production
of microalgae biomass in 2004 was about
5000 t, which amounted to $ 1.25
109. In the
late 2000s, about 75% of the produced biomass
is marketed as health food in form of tablets and
capsules, 20% (with growing trend) for aqua-
culture and animal feeding. The use of micro-
algae biomass as biofertilizer and biopesticide

2012 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
DOI: 10.1002/14356007.o16_o01
Article with Color Figures
. 145 3. Most Common Reactor Designs. . . . ..... . 150
. 146 3.1. Flat-Plate Reactors . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... . 150
. 146 3.2. Flat-Panel Airlift Reactor . . . . . . . . ..... . 151
3.3. Bubble Columns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... . 151
. 147 3.4. Tubular Reactors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... . 153
. 147 4. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... . 154
. 148 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... . 155
. 149
. 149
will become more important in the future [2–4].
Further commercialized products are fine che-
micals like pigments, vitamins, polyunsaturated
fatty acids (PUFA), or polysaccharides. The
pigments phycocyanin and phycoerythrin are
unique to algae; some preparations have already
been developed for food and cosmetics applica-
tion. In addition, these phycobiliproteins are
widely used in industry and clinical or research
immunology laboratories, due to their fluores-
cence properties, as fluorescent reagents [3].
Carotenoids of microalgae have also been es-
tablished on the market. For example, b-caro-
tene from the cyanobacterium Dunaliella is
used in health food as a vitamin A precursor,
astaxanthin from Haematococcus in aquacul-
ture for coloring muscles in fish. Lutein, zeax-
antin, and canthaxantin are used for chicken
skin coloration or for pharmaceutical purposes.
Other microalgae products like purified PUFA
are added to infant milk formulas in Europe and
hens are fed with special microalgae (like het-
erotrophically grown Schizochytrium) to pro-
duce ‘‘omega’’ eggs [2]. The use of new mole-
cules like toxins, isotopes, and other bioactive
compounds against AIDS, cancer, or stroke are
under investigation in order to be established in
a near future [5]. Due to the fast growth and high
lipid content, microalgae should be taken into
account as a renewable source for biodiesel [6].
 146 Microalgae Reactors
Production of biofuels from microalgae is a
promising sustainable option for the future, but
until now (2010) it has been too expensive
compared to fuel production from fossil energy
sources, owing to costly plant designs or high
demand of auxiliary energy [7].
2. Growth Conditions for Microalgae
From almost all the microalgae biomass yearly
produced, few thousand tons arise from open
ponds. Only a few hundred tons are produced in
closed photobioreactors.
Open ponds have been established on a large
commercial scale because of the easier and less
expensive operation compared to closed bior-
eactors. On the other hand, the productivity in
closed systems is much higher than in open
ponds, the losses of water and CO2 are lower,
and a larger variety of microalgae species can be
cultivated in closed bioreactors because culti-
vation conditions and contamination can be
much better controlled than in open systems.
Therefore, the development of photobioreactors
goes strongly towards closed systems that are
made up from cheap materials and are more
cost-effective to operate. The parameters that
must be taken into account for the rational
design development of photobioreactors will be
discussed in this section.
Open ponds as well as photobioreactors must
fulfill the tasks of mass transfer of all necessary
chemical compounds and also of light transmis-
color
fig
Figure 1. Interactions between fluid dynamics, biochemical reaction, and light transfer in photobioreactors and the phase
characteristics, which have to be considered in the reactor design
Vol. 23
sion from the environment to the single cells in
concentrations and amount which are optimal
with respect to algal growth and product forma-
tion [8].
A typical photobioreactor is, from the point of
view of process technology, a three-phase sys-
tem, namely the liquid phase, which is the medi-
um, the cells as the solid phase, and a gas phase.
Light, which is a unique feature of photoreactors,
is supplied as a superimposed radiation field,
sometimes but not uniquely called a fourth phase.
The design of an adapted photobioreactor re-
quires understanding of the interaction between
the environmental parameters and the biological
response. The main interactions are indicated in
Figure 1. Some of the interactions and their role
in the reactor design will be outlined in this
section.
2.1. Light Saturation and Light
Dilution
With respect to light, a the-more-the-better think-
ing is not appropriate for microalgae. Most of the
microalgae are adapted to low light intensities
representing only a fraction of the full daylight
even in midlatitude regions. A typical example of
the growth kinetics of Porphyridium purpureum
is given in Figure 2 [9]. While this growth
kinetics is measured for fully adapted continuous
cultures (photoacclimatization), similar curves,
e.g., for Chlamydomonas have been described in
short-time experiments resulting in the so-called
 Vol. 23
color
fig
Figure 2. Growth kinetics of P. purpureum [9]
Solid line with . ¼ Specific growth rates for cultivations in continuous mode and continuous light regimes; _ ¼ Specific growth
rates for different patterns of light–dark cycles. The values give the lengths of the light/dark periods in ms
photosynthesis–irradiance (PI) curve [10]. After
a linear increase of the growth rate with increas-
ing light intensity (Blackman kinetics), satura-
tion is approached in this case at about 400 mE
m2 s1, which is about 30% of the midday
sunlight intensity in a European summer. Light
in excess is dissipated as fluorescence and,
finally, heat [11].
The answer of process engineering is to design
vertically mounted photobioreactors with a large
surface area. These could be flat panels or alveo-
lar panels. The sunlight, falling on a given ground
area, is spread over a larger reactor surface area.
As a result, the microalgae are irradiated with
only a small fraction of the whole intensity of the
incident radiation and grow in the nonlimited
region of the light saturation curve as indicated in
Figure 2. To allow the light to reach the trans-
parent surfaces and its dilution in a horizontal
direction especially at day times with high radi-
ation, the fences are usually mounted in north–
south direction.
2.2. Light Attenuation and Light-Path-
Length Reduction
The spatial distribution of the light intensity
inside the reactor is, apart from the geometry,
mainly influenced by light attenuation caused by
mutual shading of the cells because of adsorption
by the pigments or scattering by the cells. Some
mechanistic formulae for calculating light gra-
dients in liquid particle systems have been pub-
Microalgae Reactors 147
lished; however, for a small and flat volume
element an exponential development depending
on biomass concentration can be assumed [12].
As long as the light path length exceeds the plate
thickness, more or less exponential growth can be
observed. For Porphyridium, e.g., the light path
length is 20 mm at a concentration cX ¼ 2.0 g/L.
After the biomass concentration reaches higher
values, there will be only linear growth, which
does not automatically mean that the process is
less efficient. As long as proper mixing and light
distribution is maintained, a linear increase in
biomass remains proportional to the incident
light. However, a fraction of the total volume is
dark, which does not contribute to productivity
but to energy cost. In addition, high concentra-
tions are reached faster when a smaller dark
volume fraction is present. High cell densities,
e.g., cX > 10 g/L, have big advantages in saving
energy for mixing and during downstream pro-
cessing. To achieve high cell densities, the reac-
tor thickness should be as small as possible.
RICHMOND [13] already focused on that point
arguing that short dark–light cycles (see Section
2.4 and Fig. 2) are a crucial point to obtain such
high cell densities.
2.3. Surface-to-Volume Ratio (SVR)
The two aspects given above can be summarized
by the requirements for a high surface-to-volume
ratio (SVR) [2]. Most current reactor designs
follow this principle. The three most important
 148 Microalgae Reactors
color
fig
Figure 3. Most common closed photobioreactor geometries
A) Flat-plate reactor; B) Bubble column, here as annular reactor; C) Tubular reactor
geometries are given in Figure 3. Other geome-
tries are deduced from them. Typical values for
SVRs are 80–100 m2/m3. Installing many plates
quite closely together (Fig. 3A) increases both
SVR and areal water coverage defined as the total
fluid volume per ground area. Bringing more
surface area to a given ground area should be
carefully counterbalanced with reducing volume
per ground area on the basis of the kinetics, which
is to provide no more light distribution than
necessary and to save volume for high biomass
concentration and reduced energy and material
costs.
2.4. Light Fluctuation and Mixing
Local turbulences carry the cells more or less
randomly through well-illuminated volume ele-
ments near the glass wall and poorly illuminated
reactor zones remote from light incidence, thus
each individual cell is exposed to statistical dark–
light cycles. These cycles have a strong effect on
algae growth. Several authors observed a depen-
dency of growth on mixing time constants in
laboratory-scale experiments. These studies
demonstrated [14] that the benefits of mixing
are not only due to better mass transfer but also to
an increased frequency of the light–dark cycles
[15]. In ideally illuminated laboratory-scale
modeling reactors (Fig. 4) light cycles and mix-
ing can be decoupled at least for low or moderate
biomass concentrations. While mixing is provid-
ed with an agitator as usual, illumination and
light–dark cycles are induced by artificial illu-
mination from light-emitting diodes (LEDs)
[16]. Data from such experiments under contin-
uous cultivation conditions are shown in Fig-
Vol. 23
ure 2. Cycles below 0.3 Hz lead to low growth
rates, even lower than expected from the light
times alone. Coupling of these cycles with intra-
cellular control loops on the epigenetic level is
discussed for explanation. Therefore, persistent
light–dark cycles that have mixing time constants
below 1 Hz should be avoided [17, 18], which is
not easy to manage in large-scale reactors and
may be the reason for low yields of some large
reactors. For very fast cycles in the range of
several kilohertz, light energy stored in the
photosystems during passage through bright
zones of the reactor can be used further in
metabolism during the passage through the dark
zones. This so-called ‘‘flashing light effect’’ has
been frequently investigated, e.g., [19], never-
color
fig
Figure 4. Model reactors for the measurement of kinetics and
dynamics. Light is homogeneously distributed either by using
the lens effect or by using thin plates. LEDs allow the
application of fast light–dark cycles with frequencies of up
to 1 kHz with high intensities.
A) 2.5-L reactor with a warm-white LED radiation of
2000 mE/m2s1 (Karlsruhe Institute of Technology);
B) Laboratory-scale 300-mL plate reactor with LEDs [49]
(Photo System Instruments)
Vol. 23
theless the occurrence assuming this strict defi-
nition (in contrast to slower cycles caused by
limitations due to the enzyme ribulose-1,5-bi-
sphosphate carboxylase oxygenase, RuBisCo)
has not yet been unequivocally proven in pilot
or production scale. However, also cycles be-
tween 1 Hz and 1 kHz are very useful. Such fast
mixing is accompanied by a high waste of me-
chanical energy and is, therefore, only likely to
become a viable option in future reactor
generations.
2.5. Carbon Dioxide Supply
and Aeration
Besides light transfer, the most important task of
photobioreactors is to feed the algal cells with
carbon dioxide for photosynthesis and to remove
the produced oxygen from the medium. The CO2
demand of the culture can be calculated on a
stoichiometric basis by the carbon content of the
biomass. The carbon fraction varies from 0.45 for
algae with high carbohydrate content up to 0.8 for
oil-rich cells. Accordingly, the stoichiometric
CO2 requirement of the algae lies at 1.85 g of
CO2 per gram biomass or higher. Assuming, for
example, a growth rate of m ¼ 1 g g1 d1 at a
biomass concentration of 1 g/L, the necessary
carbon dioxide transfer rate (CTR) would be
1.85 g L1 d1. This amount of carbon dioxide
has to be fed constantly to the reactor, which is
usually achieved by bubbling with CO2-enriched
gas bubbles. In this example, using 10 vol% CO2
in the gas phase, the CTR corresponds to a
minimum aeration rate, measured in volume gas
per volume medium and minute (vvm), of
0.006 vvm. Also pure CO2 is occasionally ap-
plied. A second constraint concerns the carbon
dioxide uptake kinetics. In order to ensure that
the algal cells can take up the carbon source, a
CO2 partial pressure of 0.1–0.2 kPa in the fluid
phase is necessary [20, 21] to avoid carbon
limitation. A considerable carbon source is car-
bonate, which can be used by some algae by
means of active transport. As the gas turnover of
the cells depends on light, a gradient of dissolved
gases along the light path could emerge. This
should usually not be a problem, especially if
good mixing in the normal direction is provided
(see Section 2.4). The formation of a gradient of
pO2 and pCO2, accompanied by a pH gradient,
Microalgae Reactors 149
between the gas inlet and gas outlet along the
main flow axis of the medium, especially in
tubular reactors, is more serious. Because of the
low solubility, the oxygen concentration is of
most concern. A possibly inhibitory concentra-
tion (for some algae > 120% air saturation, for
others > 200%) can occur already after 1 min in a
tube without gas exchange.
2.6. Mixing and Auxiliary Energy
Although volumetric mass transfer is more than
two orders of magnitude lower in photobiopro-
cess reactors than in heterotrophic stirred-tank
reactors (lower biomass concentration, lower
specific turnover rates), mixing is an important
issue. Along the light gradient in the culture,
mixing is known to be a key parameter in
photobioreactor operation [22] as indicated in
Section 2.4. Of equal importance is an enhanced
mass transfer along the main axis of the reactor,
which is the axial direction in tubes or the upward
direction in plates and columns (Section 2.5).
Keeping cells from settling is in fact a minor
problem but can be an issue in unfavorable de-
signs at some positions of the reactor and may
also be important to prevent fouling. However,
input of mechanical energy by bubbling or pump-
ing is limited for two reasons. Firstly, cells may
be damaged or at least stressed by high local
intensities of mechanical energy; secondly, en-
ergy supply is a major issue in production cost.
Therefore, hydrodynamics is directly coupled to
photosynthetic activity and therefore to biomass
production. Again, high biomass concentration
leads to reduction of specific energy require-
ments as already mentioned by RICHMOND [13].
Mechanical energy has to be supplied in a man-
ner as directly as possible [23].
For a proper photobioreactor design, compu-
tational fluid dynamics (! Computational Fluid
Dynamics) should be employed. A calculation
example for a tubular reactor with particle tra-
jectories [24] shows from frequency analysis that
mixing in radial direction, which means along the
radial light gradient, is good enough to prevent
the occurrence of slow light–dark cycles. To
achieve mixing with a minimum of auxiliary
energy, it would be favorable to limit turbulences
to one specific frequency, e.g., of several hertz.
Several means have been proposed to achieve
150 Microalgae Reactors
such highly defined flow patterns. For tubular
reactors, static helical mixers used in food indus-
try could be useful. An application with a positive
effect on productivity is shown in [25] for rela-
tively thick inclined tubes. Seemingly there is no
proof yet for a possible reduction of total energy
or improved productivity compared to the utili-
zation of thinner tubes or higher velocities.
Evocation of Dean vortices, which are radial
flow patterns in curved channels, is another
option. This effect is commonly used in ultravi-
olet (UV) sterilization devices, where a transpar-
ent glass tube is wrapped around the UV lamp
thus ensuring that all volume elements come
close to the lamp regularly and not only statisti-
cally. Dean vortices may play an important role
in helical reactors, where commercial laboratory-
scale reactors as well as large-scale installations
are in operation.
Radial Taylor vortices can also be exploited.
They occur in the gap between an outer static and
an inner rotating cylinder under defined longitu-
dinal flow conditions. This could be an option for
improved annular reactors, although the techni-
cal expenditure is quite high. The employment of
tangential flow to generate a three-dimensional
swirling motion is given by [26].
Considering that only 5% of the incident
radiation of the full sun spectrum is converted
into chemical energy by the algal cells, the
amount of mechanical energy input has to be
restricted especially for the production of low-
value products like biofuels to obtain a reason-
able energy balance. For sunny parts of Europe,
for instance, an annual average irradiance of
about 150 W/m2 can be considered. Thus energy
is harvested at a rate of 7.5 W/m2. Most outdoor
reactors work with more than 50 L areal water
coverage. Therefore, the (electrical) energy
need for mixing is about 2.5 W/m2, assuming
50 W/m3, which is 30% of the harvested energy.
This amount may be good enough for mixing (see
above), considering a 12-h dark phase with aera-
tion switched off but not considering the energy
demand for cell harvesting.
3. Most Common Reactor Designs
A wide variety of closed photobioreactor types
exist for the cultivation of microalgae. Neverthe-
less, a few standard designs (Fig. 3), which are
Vol. 23
outlined below, play a major role. They have all
in common a reasonable SVR. This leads directly
to the fact that at least one dimension is deter-
mined by the light path length, while the other
two dimensions (width and height) are free for
design and scale up. A detailed description of
different geometries is given in [27].
3.1. Flat-Plate Reactors
These reactors comprise the simplest design. A
thin layer of water is trapped between two trans-
parent surfaces so that a flat-plate reactor with
any desired light path length d in the range from a
few millimeters up to 70 mm can be easily real-
ized, which results in an SVR ¼ 1/d for one single
plate and about 50 m1 for practical installa-
tions. The shorter the light path lengths, the
higher concentrations of algae biomass are ex-
pected. Common flat plate reactors are built with
d ¼ 3 cm or more. Newer approaches have light
path length of only 1 cm so that biomass con-
centrations exceeding 10 g/L can be achieved.
While this reactor design has already been em-
ployed for decades, a comprehensive process
engineering characterization is available from
SIERRA [28]. Mixing and CO2 supply is accom-
plished by sparging with CO2-enriched air. For
the pilot-scale example reactor (2.5 m length,
0.07 m width, 1.5 m height) the authors report
aeration rates of 0.25 vvm, leading to a mixing
time of the medium of 150 s. Others [23, 29]
reported even much higher aeration rates up to
2.0 vvm, which have positive effects on the
growth of microalgae. Power supply for bubbling
was in the range of 50 W/m3. Even in relatively
compact arrangements of several plates close to
each other (e.g., 25 L/m2) this value is not too
high for an economically feasible production of
chemical energy (biomass itself, biodiesel) by
microalgae. In order to further minimize the
power supply, newer pilot plants are built
flatter (height of the plate about 40 cm instead
of 1–1.5 m) and the plate modules are closer to
each other. In this way not only the volumetri-
cally power supply is reduced (because of lower
hydrodynamic backpressure) but also expensive
racks for holding can be avoid. Mounting the
plates in a water basin (‘‘water-bed reactor’’)
helps to moderate the daily temperature fluctua-
tions and makes the plant generally less weather-
 Vol. 23
color
fig
Figure 5. The Solix G3 reactor [30], with kind permission of B. WILLSON
A) Schematic drawing showing the water as support; B) Photography of the low-ceiling design
dependent. Such an example of a scalable photo-
bioreactor system for efficient production has
been described by Solix Biofuel [30] and is
represented by the Solix reactor shown in Fig-
ure 5. In various embodiments, this system com-
bines increased surface areas to reduce light
intensity, an external water basin to provide
structural support and thermal regulation at low
cost, air sparging or membranes for gas ex-
change. It consists of flexible plastic or compos-
ite panels that are joined together to form trian-
gular or other cross-sectional geometries when
partially submerged in water. Thus, the Solix
reactor combines the basic design demands given
above, including a horizontal low-ceilinged in-
stallation without panels that would need frame-
works or racks and without the necessity of an
expensive external greenhouse. Productivities in
the range up to 30 g/L are reported [30].
3.2. Flat-Panel Airlift Reactor
A patented reactor type [31] attempts to increase
the longitudinal mass transfer rate and mixing in
normal direction to the plate by using a purely
pneumatic energy regime (Fig. 6). In this so-
called flat-panel airlift reactor, a directed flow is
generated by using the airlift principle. Cylindri-
cal eddies are evoked by means of horizontal
baffles as static mixers located in the interior of
Microalgae Reactors 151
the panels at right angles to the flow, thus trans-
porting the algae in a highly defined frequency
from the dark to the bright area. The baffles act
also as light-conducting structure, to enlarge the
inner surface in order to dilute the light over a
large internal surface, which saves material. The
individual reactor modules consist of deep-
drawn poly(vinyl chloride) panels. Typical mod-
ules are available in sizes of 35–135 L. Further
activities are under development by Subitec
(Germany) towards reducing the specific power
input to 200 W/m3. According to company in-
formation, concentrations of over 10 g/L and
average volumetric productivity of over 0.5 g
L1 d1 were achieved, where the photoconver-
sion efficiency (PCE) was specified as 4.75%
under Central-European outdoor conditions for
full sunlight spectrum. A 100-m2 demonstration
plant is under construction, with an estimated
fluid volume-to-footprint area of 30 L/m2.
3.3. Bubble Columns
Bubble columns are frequently used especially in
larger laboratory scale for indoor experiments. In
order to provide a sufficient working volume,
they have larger diameters of 20 cm and can
be compared with tubular reactors having a
considerable large dark fraction in the middle of
the cylinder. The large dark fraction does not
 152 Microalgae Reactors
color
fig
Figure 6. The flat-panel airlift reactor by Subitec [31], with kind permission of P. RIPPLINGER
A) Outdoor pilot plant; B) Single module; C) Induction of vortices by inbuilt bubbles
contribute to productivity and has even detrimen-
tal effects on growth (see Section 2.4). In order to
leave this partition out of the internal reactor
space, the so-called annular column has been
developed (Fig. 7) [32]. It consists of two 2-m-
high acrylic cylinders of 40 and 50 cm in diame-
ter placed one inside the other so as to form an
annular chamber. This can also be seen as a
wrapped flat-plate reactor. It is possible that the
inner surface does not contribute very much to
color
fig
Figure 7. Annular reactor from F&M (Italy) [32]
Vol. 23
overall radiation, but for indoor applications or
dark periods additional lamps could be fitted.
Consequently, typical aeration rates of 0.25 vvm
are in a similar range as for flat plates. In a well-
designed study [32] to estimate areal productiv-
ities, the authors measured a field of reactors
using dummy cylinders to mimic mutual shading
and reflection. The result was an areal productiv-
ity of PA ¼ 38 g m2 d1 with PCE ¼ 9% of the
photosynthetically active radiation (PAR). To
increase axial transport, the airlift principle has
been employed [33].
The downcomer is usually arranged as a
section of the cross section (split cylinder) or in
a coaxial inner cylinder (draft tube). In a small-
scale comparison study [34] reasonably good
axial gas transfer has been found. As this part
of the reactor is dark, the cells flow through riser
and downcomer regularly, inducting an addition-
al light–dark cycle in the range of 1–100 s as
investigated by [35, 36]. The authors of these
studies did not find opposing effects on yield for
low growth rates but state that no quantitative
information is available for slow light–dark cy-
cles. The effect can be minimized by reducing
the cross section of the downcomer with respect
to the riser. Also inclined airlift reactors have
been proposed [24]. However, these designs
have the same problem of slow cycles. Scalabili-
ty may be limited for the slower bubble velocity.
To overcome this problem, gas tubes along the
cultivation tubes can be used, providing multiple
Vol. 23
gassing and degassing points. In an optimal
design, the downcomer would also be on the
illuminated side of the airlift reactor (see
Fig. 6 for the flat-plate airlift reactor, where the
downcomer is in the middle of the plate). While
the reported aeration rates in bubble columns and
flat plates are definitely high enough to prevent
sedimentation and oxygen accumulation, it is
not clear whether the benefits from fast light–
dark cycles (41 Hz) can be gained. No reliable
information is yet accessible on whether the
bubbles themselves induce some kind of fast
mixing.
3.4. Tubular Reactors
This type of reactors consist of transparent tubing
arranged in parallel lines coupled by manifolds,
the so-called solar collector. The single tubes can
be straight or they can follow a meandering
course either flat on the ground or ordered in
panels or coils (‘‘helical’’ reactor type [37–39]).
The tubes have diameters of 10 to maximal
60 mm and lengths of up to several hundred
meters. The employment of tubes leads to a
relatively high SVR of over 100 m1, which is
one of the main advantages of this design. Fur-
thermore, the so-called lens or focusing effect has
the added advantage of homogenous light distri-
bution. Incident light is diluted along the circum-
ference and is in radial direction focused onto the
axis of the tube. In this way, exponential decrease
of light intensity by mutual shading of the cells is
to some extent compensated by a geometrically
enforced hyperbolic increase of radiation inten-
sity. In very thin tubes of, e.g., 1 cm [40] rela-
tively high biomass concentrations of more than
6 g/L can be obtained. Of course, the arrange-
ment of the tubes has to be thoroughly calculated
to achieve the most homogeneous incident light
conditions [41]. Pumping of the medium with
linear liquid velocities of 20–50 cm/s is either
done by airlift circulators or by centrifugal
pumps. Aeration and degassing is also achieved
in the airlift part, while a separate gas exchange
station has to be supplied along with the pumps.
A velocity of more than 1 m/s will cause micro-
eddies of diameters of less than 50 mm, which
can damage the cells [41]. A relatively high
velocity is necessary to achieve turbulent condi-
tions leading to acceptable light–dark cycles
Microalgae Reactors 153
[24]. For helical reactors, for example, high
values for volumetric productivities (PV ¼ 1.5 g
L1 d1) and efficiencies (PCE > 7% PAR) have
been reported [42]. The good results for tubular
reactors are also underlined by [43], where a
better performance compared to that of bubble
columns was found. However, the high energy
consumption of more than 2000 W/m3 is surely
one of the major drawbacks. For scale-up of a
single tube only the diameter and the length can
be considered. According to Chapter 2, increase
in diameter is possible only in narrow limits,
usually not more than 40 mm. Tubes with much
larger diameter (> 40 cm) have been occasion-
ally tried out [44] but yielded only low biomass
concentrations and low areal and volumetric
productivities, probably because the diameter
was much larger than the light path length.
Therefore, this development had to be withdrawn
from the market. Variation in the tube length
coupled to the residence time of the cells by
liquid velocity is restricted by formation of
axial gradients (see Section 2.5) and economy
of power consumption. GRIMA [45] gives an
elaborated scale-up criterion based on the
light–dark cycles evoked by velocity-dependent
turbulences. While power consumption and high
costs exclude tubular reactors for the production
of, e.g., energy products, the possibility of mono-
septic operation and well-defined conditions in-
side the reactors itself make them a good choice
for production of high-value compounds. Never-
theless, tube lengths of more than 100 m are
sufficient to build up relatively large outdoor
photobioreactors. Such large installations can be
found in the Negev (Israel) [46] or in Almeria
(Spain) [41]. In 1999, the worldwide largest
closed photobioreactor was erected in Kl€otze
(Germany) by Bisantech, following the instruc-
tions by IGV (Institut f€ur Getreideverarbeitung
GmbH) [47] (Fig. 8).
Production is carried out in glass tubes with a
complete length of 500 km. The photoactive
volume amounts to ca. 600 m3. Favorable tem-
peratures were set by the conurbation of the
modules in a greenhouse complex with a total
area of 1.2 ha, as well as suitable heating and
cooling equipment. Optimum hydrodynamic con-
ditions are created in order to avoid adherence of
the microalgae on the walls of the glass tubing
(also by using plastic beads) and to take advantage
of the fast radial mixing. Sunlight provides the
 154 Microalgae Reactors
color
fig
Figure 8. The world largest closed photobioreactor in Kl€otze (Germany) as a tubular reactor designed by PULZ [2]; with kind
permission of Bioprodukte Prof. Steinberg GmbH
A)Exterior view of a part of the greenhouse where the photobioreactor is operated; B) View of the tubular reactors; C) View of
the glass tubes distributors and part of the tube length
sole source of light and even the diffuse daylight
during winter time is sufficient to produce little
growth. The biomass is separated by means of
high-performance centrifuges. The clear concen-
trate is returned to the plant, whilst the pulpy
biomass is carefully dried in a spray dryer until a
residual moisture content of 5% is reached. The
production amounts to 100 t/a (higher values not
verified), thus showing a much higher areal pro-
ductivity than open ponds. For open ponds areal
productivities are given on an annual basis, e.g.,
20 t a1 ha1. For closed reactors such data are
sometimes given, but it must be noted that only
very few closed reactors cover an area of 1 ha or
more and are already operated for a whole year.
4. Conclusions
The design of photobioreactors in commercial
scale has made great progress since the late
1990s. The basic principles have been extensive-
ly developed into designs with relatively high
efficiencies. Suitable process engineering calcu-
lation methods have been published to give a
quantitative understanding of mass and light
transfer. But none of the existing pilot plants
have yet been proven economically on a large
scale [48]. The consideration of physiological
Vol. 23
demands of the algae is still far from being
resolved. The calculation of optimum plate
gauges or light distribution factors are also not
fully determined on the basis of measured growth
or product formation kinetics. Of course, com-
promises have to be made to end up with robust
and all-purpose reactor types. Also practical
questions, which are not considered in this arti-
cle, for example, for the best material with re-
spect to price, life span, or tendency for fouling,
are not fully answered to general contentment.
Several start-ups had to close down because of
exaggerated expectations. The reason behind this
development is that these companies did not
consider all the challenges and barriers that need
to be overcome before this technology can be
commercialized [48]. Development in process
engineering is one hurdle which can not be
avoided on the way from the algae cell to
large-scale production. However, the rapid in-
crease of interest and investment in algae for
production of biodiesel, biomethane, or hydro-
gen has brought additional considerations and
demands to the photobioreactor design. Firstly,
the costs must drop down below 40 e/m2 to allow
an economically feasible production of bioe-
nergy by algae. This prohibits, for example, the
use of greenhouses to cover the reactors. The
second item is the use of auxiliary energy for
Vol. 23
mixing and gas transfer. The energy needed
should ideally not exceed 2 W/m2, correspond-
ing to approximately 50 W/m3. As a third de-
mand, the concentration of the biomass has to be
higher than 20 g/L. Thus, in all three aspects the
performance has to increase by a factor of around
three comparing to current standards. This goal is
not so far from reality. Further consequent appli-
cation of quantitative engineering approaches is
one point. While we speak about square kilo-
meters of algae farms, industrial production of
transparent films or tubes with milli- or micro-
structures and several layers of different materi-
als will replace handmade constructions consist-
ing of components from the hardware store.
Furthermore, a paradigm shift can already be
observed, leading to the route of biodegradable
one-way reactors or to the route of highly struc-
tured intelligent production systems. Even high-
tech materials can become cheap when needed in
large amounts. A key parameter for achievement
of this goal is the fine-tuning of the conditions
inside the reactor with respect to the kinetics and
dynamics of the cells.
References
1 R.E. Lee (ed.): Phycology, 2nd ed., Cambridge Univer-
sity Press, Cambridge 1989, p. 645.
2 O. Pulz, W. Gross: ‘‘Valuable products from biotechnol-
ogy of microalgae’’, Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 65
(2004) no. 6, 635–648.
3 P. Spolaore, C. Joannis-Cassan, E. Duran, A. Isambert:
‘‘Commercial applications of microalgae’’. J. Biosci.
Bioeng. 101 (2006) no. 2, 87–96.
4 R. Raja, S. Hemaiswarya, N.A. Kumar, S. Sridhar, R.
Rengasamy: ‘‘A perspective on the biotechnological po-
tential of microalgae’’, Crit. Rev. Microbiol. 34 (2008) no.
2, 77–88.
5 J.N. Rosenberg, G.A. Oyler, L. Wilkinson, M.J. Beten-
baugh: ‘‘A green light for engineered algae: redirecting
metabolism to fuel a biotechnology revolution’’, Curr.
Opin. Biotechnol. 19 (2008) no. 5, 430–436.
6 Y. Chisti: ‘‘Biodiesel from microalgae’’, Biotechnol. Adv.
25 (2007) no. 3, 294–306.
7 F. Lehr, C. Posten: ‘‘Closed photo-bioreactors as tools for
biofuel production’’, Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 20 (2009)
280–285.
8 C.U. Ugwu, H. Aoyagi, H. Uchiyama: ‘‘Photobioreactors
for mass cultivation of algae’’, Bioresour. Technol. 99
(2008) no. 10, 4021–4028.
9 R. Rosello-Sastre: ‘‘Kopplung physiologischer und ver-
fahrenstechnischer Parameter beim Wachstum und bei
Microalgae Reactors 155
der Produktbildung der Rotalge Porphyridium purpur-
eum‘‘, PhD Thesis, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology,
Karlsruhe 2009.
10 A. Melis, J. Neidhardt, J.R. Benemann: ‘‘Dunaliella
salina (Chlorophyta) with small chlorophyll antenna sizes
exhibit higher photosynthetic productivities and photon
use efficiencies than normally pigmented cells’’, J. Appl.
Phycol. 10 (1999) 515–525.
11 J.H. Mussgnug, S. Thomas-Hall, J. Rupprecht, A. Foo, V.
Klassen, A. McDowall, P.M. Schenk, O. Kruse, B.
Hankamer: ‘‘Engineering photosynthetic light capture:
impacts on improved solar energy to biomass conver-
sion’’, Plant Biotechnol. J. 5 (2007) no. 6, 802–814.
12 J.F. Cornet, C.G. Dussap, J.B. Gros, C. Binois, C. Lasseur:
‘‘A Simplified Monodimensional Approach for Modeling
Coupling between Radiant Light Transfer and Growth
Kinetics in Photobioreactors’’, Chem. Eng. Sci. 50 (1995)
no. 9, 1489–1500.
13 A. Richmond, C.W. Zhang, Y. Zarmi: ‘‘Efficient use of
strong light for high photosynthetic productivity: inter-
relationships between the optical path, the optimal popu-
lation density and cell-growth inhibition’’, Biomol. Eng.
20 (2003) no. 4-6, 229–236.
14 V. Tichy, M. Poulson, J.U. Grobbelaar, F. Xiong, L.
Nedbal: ‘‘Photosynthesis, growth and photoinhibition of
microalgae exposed to intermittent light. Photosynthe-
sis’’, From Light to Biosphere 5 (1995) 1029–1032.
15 J. Grobbelar, L. Neddal, V. Tichy: ‘‘Influence of high
frequency light/dark fluctuations on photosynthetic char-
acteristics of microalgae photo acclimated to different
light intensities and implications for mass algal cultiva-
tions’’, J. Appl. Phycol. 8 (1996) 335–343.
16 R. Rosello-Sastre, Z. Coesgoer, I. Perner-Nochta, P.
Fleck-Schneider, C. Posten: ‘‘Scale-down of microalgae
cultivations in tubular photo-bioreactors - A conceptual
approach’’, J. Biotechnol. 132 (2007) no. 2, 127–133.
17 E. Molina Grima, J. Aci
en Fern
andez, F.G. Acien, Y.
Chisti: ‘‘Tubular photobioreactor design for algal cul-
tures’’, J. Biotechnol. 92 (2001) no. 2, 113–131.
18 M. Janssen, P. Slenders, J. Tramper, L.R. Mur, R.H.
Wijffels: ‘‘Photosynthetic efficiency of Dunaliella tertio-
lecta under short light/dark cycles’’, Enzyme Microb.
Technol. 29 (2001) no. 4-5, 298–305.
19 N. Zou, A. Richmond: ‘‘Light-path length and population
density in photoacclimation of Nannochloropsis sp
(Eustigmatophyceae)’’, J. Appl. Phycol. 12 (2000) no.
3-5, 349–354.
20 J. Doucha, F. Straka, K. Livansky: ‘‘Utilization of flue gas
for cultivation of microalgae (Chlorella sp.) in an outdoor
open thin-layer photobioreactor’’, J. Appl. Phycol. 17
(2005) no. 5, 403–412.
21 M.H. Spalding: ‘‘Microalgal carbon dioxide concentrat-
ing mechanisms: Chlamydomonas inorganic carbon
transporters’’, J. Exp. Bot. 59 (2008) 1463–1473.
22 J. Pruvost, L. Pottier, J. Legrand: ‘‘Numerical investiga-
tion of hydrodynamic and mixing conditions in a torus
photobioreactor’’, Chem. Eng. Sci. 61 (2006) no. 14,
4476–4489.
156 Microalgae Reactors
23 C.B. Alias, M.C.G.M. Lopez, F.G.A. Aci
en Fern
andez, J.
M.G. Sevilla, J.L.G. Sanchez, E.M. Grima: ‘‘Influence of
power supply in the feasibility of Phaeodactylum tricor-
nutum cultures’’, Biotechnol. Bioeng. 87 (2004) no. 6,
723–733.
24 I. Perner-Nochta, C. Posten: ‘‘Simulations of light inten-
sity variation in photobioreactors’’, J. Biotechnol. 131
(2007) no. 3, 276–285.
25 C.U. Ugwu, J.C. Ogbonna, H. Tanaka: ‘‘Light/dark cyclic
movement of algal culture (Synechocystis aquatilis) in
outdoor inclined tubular photobioreactor equipped with
static mixers for efficient production of biomass’’, Bio-
technol. Lett. 27 (2005) no. 2, 75–78.
26 A. Muller-Feuga, J. Pruvost, R. Le Guedes, L. Le Dean, P.
Legentilhomme, J. Legrand: ‘‘Swirling flow implementa-
tion in a photobioreactor for batch and continuous cultures
of Porphyridium cruentum’’, Biotechnol. Bioeng. 84
(2003) no. 5, 544–551.
27 A.P. Carvalho, L.A. Meireles, F.X. Malcata: ‘‘Microalgal
reactors: A review of enclosed system designs and per-
formances’’, Biotechnol. Prog. 22 (2006) no. 6, 1490–
1506.
28 E. Sierra, F.G. Acien, J.M. Aci
en Fern
andez, J.L. Garcia,
C. Gonzalez, E. Molina Grima: ‘‘Characterization of a flat
plate photobioreactor for the production of microalgae’’,
Chem. Eng. J. 138 (2008) no. 1-3, 136–147.
29 C.H. Wang, Y.Y. Sun, R.L. Xing, L.Q. Sun: ‘‘Effect of
liquid circulation velocity and cell density on the growth
of Parietochloris incisa in flat plate photobioreactors’’,
Biotechnol. Bioproc. Eng. 10 (2005) no. 2, 103–108.
30 http://www.solixbiofuels.com (accessed 11 November
2010) .
31 J. Degen, A. Uebele, A. Retze, U. Schmid-Staiger, W.
Trosch: ‘‘A novel airlift photobioreactor with baffles for
improved light utilization through the flashing light ef-
fect’’, J. Biotechnol. 92 (2001) no. 2, 89–94.
32 G.C. Zittelli, L. Rodolfi, N. Biondi, M.R. Tredici: ‘‘Pro-
ductivity and photosynthetic efficiency of outdoor cul-
tures of Tetraselmis suecica in annular columns’’, Aqua-
culture 261 (2006) no. 2, 932–943.
33 A.S. Miron, F.G. Garcia Camacho, A.C. Gomez, E.M.
Grima, Y. Chisti: ‘‘Bubble-column and airlift photobior-
eactors for algal culture’’, IChe J. 46 (2000) no. 9,
1872–1887.
34 S. Oncel, F.V. Sukan: ‘‘Comparison of two different
pneumatically mixed column photobioreactors for the
cultivation of Artrospira platensis (Spirulina platensis)’’,
Bioresour. Technol. 99 (2008) no. 11, 4755–4760.
35 M.J. Barbosa, M. Janssen, N. Ham, J. Tramper, R.H.
Wijffels: ‘‘Microalgae cultivation in air-lift reactors:
Modeling biomass yield and growth rate as a function of
mixing frequency’’, Biotechnol. Bioeng. 82 (2003) no. 2,
170–179.
36 M. Janssen, M. Janssen, M. de Winter, J. Tramper, L.R. Mur,
J. Snel, R.H. Wijffels: ‘‘Efficiency of light utilization of
Vol. 23
Chlamydomonas reinhardtii under medium-duration light/
dark cycles’’, J. Biotechnol. 78 (2000) no. 2, 123–137.
37 M. Morita, Y. Watanabe, T. Okawa, H. Saiki: ‘‘Photo-
synthetic productivity of conical helical tubular photo-
bioreactors incorporating Chlorella sp under various cul-
ture medium flow conditions’’, Biotechnol. Bioeng. 74
(2001) no. 2, 136–144.
38 D.O. Hall, F.G.A. Acien Fernandez, E.C. Guerrero, K.K.
Rao, E.M. Grima: ‘‘Outdoor helical tubular photobioreac-
tors for microalgal production: Modeling of fluid-dynam-
ics and mass transfer and assessment of biomass produc-
tivity’’, Biotechnol. Bioeng. 82 (2003) no. 1, 62–73.
39 F.G.A. Aci
en Fern
andez, D.O. Hall, E.C. Guerrero, K.K.
Rao, E.M. Grima: ‘‘Outdoor production of Phaeodacty-
lum tricornutum biomass in a helical reactor’’, J. Bio-
technol. 103 (2003) no. 2, 137–152.
40 P. Carlozzi: ‘‘Dilution of solar radiation through ‘‘cul-
ture’’ lamination in photobioreactor rows facing South-
North: A way to improve the efficiency of light utilization
by cyanobacteria (Arthrospira platensis)’’, Biotechnol.
Bioeng. 81 (2003) no. 3, 305–315.
41 F.G.A. Aci
en Fern
andez, J.M.F. Sevilla, J.A.S. Perez, E.
M. Grima, Y. Chisti: ‘‘Airlift-driven external-loop tubular
photobioreactors for outdoor production of microalgae:
assessment of design and performance’’, Chem. Eng. Sci.
56 (2001) no. 8, 2721–2732.
42 M. Morita, Y. Watanabe, H. Saiki: ‘‘Photosynthetic pro-
ductivity of conical helical tubular photobioreactor incor-
porating Chlorella sorokiniana under field conditions’’,
Biotechnol. Bioeng. 77 (2002) no. 2, 155–162.
43 M.C.G.M. Lopez, E.D. Sanchez, J.L.C. Lopez, F.G.A.
Aci
en Fern
andez, J.M.F. Sevilla, J. Rivas, M.G. Guerrero,
E.M. Grima: ‘‘Comparative analysis of the outdoor cul-
ture of Haematococcus pluvialis in tubular and bubble
column photobioreactors’’, J. Biotechnol. 123 (2006) no.
3, 329–342.
44 M. Olaizola: ‘‘Commercial Development of microalgal
biotechnology: from the test tube to the marketplace’’,
Biomol. Eng. 20 (2003) 459–466.
45 E.M. Molina Grima, F.G. Aci
en Fern
andez, F.G. Garcia
Camacho, F.C. Rubio, Y. Chisti: ‘‘Scale-up of tubular photo-
bioreactors’’, J. Appl. Phycol. 12 (2000) no. 3-5, 355–368.
46 S. Boussiba, C. Aflalo: ‘‘An insight into the future of
microalgae biotechnology’’, Innov. Food Technol. 28
(2005) 37–39.
47 O. Pulz: ‘‘Photobioreactors: production systems for
phototrophic microorganisms’’, Appl. Microbiol. Bio-
technol. 57 (2001) no. 3, 287–293.
48 E. Waltz: ‘‘Biotech’s green gold?’’, Nat. Biotechnol. 27
(2009) 15–18.
49 L. Rodolfi, G. Chini Zittelli, N. Bassi, G. Padovani, N.
Biondi, G. Bonini, M.R. Tredici: ‘‘Microalgae for Oil:
Strain Selection, Induction of Lipid Synthesis and Out-
door Mass Cultivation in a Low-Cost Photobioreactor’’,
Biotechnol. Bioeng. 102 (2009) no. 1, 100–112.