BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call FP7-SME-

Enabling European SMEs to Remediate wastes, Reduce GHG Emissions and Produce Biofuels via Microalgae Cultivation
Tạo điều kiện cho doanh nghiệp nhỏ đến chất thải châu Âu khắc phục, giảm phát thải khí nhà kính và Sản xuất nhiên liệu sinh học thông qua vi tảo trồng trọt

BioAlgae Sorb

Table 1.1: Application Identifier Enabling European SMEs to Remediate wastes, Reduce GHG Application Title Emissions and Produce Biofuels via Microalgae Cultivation Application BioAlgaeSorb Acronym Coordinating Arnold Kyrre Martinsen Person Funding European Commissions Seventh Research Framework Programme Organization Call Title Research for SME Associations Call 2 Call Identifier FP7-SME-2008-2 Funding Scheme Research for the benefit of specific groups (in particular SMEs) Application Stage 2 Application stage Table 1.2: List of Participants Participant Participant Legal Name No. 1 Norwegian Bioenergy Association (NoBio) (Coordinator European Biomass Association (AEBIOM) 2 3 British Trout Association Ltd (BTA) 4 Sea Marconi Technologies s.a.s (Sea Marconi) BV (Ingrepro) 5 IngrePro 6 Varicon Aqua Solutions Ltd (VAS) 7 Value for Technology BVBA (VFT) 8 Swansea University (SU) 9 Teknologisk Institutt AS (TI)

Country Norway European United Kingdom Italy Netherlands United Kingdom Belgium United Kingdom Norway

Organisation Type AG AC SME European SME AG SME AG MS SMEP SMEP SMEP SMEP RTD RTD

1 0 1 1 2

Durham University (UDUR) Hellenic Centre for Marine Research (HCMR) University of Florence (UFL)

United Kingdom Greece Italy

RTD RTD RTD

1

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call FP7-SME-

Contents
B1.1: SOUND CONCEPT AND QUALITY OF OBJECTIVES ............................................................................................... ........................................4 . B1.1.1: Overview and Aims ........................................................................................................................................................... .............4 B1.1.2: The Need for Capture and Remediation of Greenhouse Gases and Liquid Effluents ...................................................................5 B1.1.3: The Scale of GHG and Liquid Waste Emissions ...........................................................................................................................6 B1.1.4: The Role of Microalgal Biotechnology in Effluent Mitigation and Valorisation ...............................................................................8 B1.1.5: Markets of Microalgae Products ....................................................................................................................................................9 B1.1.6: Relevance and Improving Competitiveness of SME-AGs ...........................................................................................................11 B1.2: INNOVATIVE CHARACTER IN RELATION TO STATE OF THE ART ............................................................................................... ...................12 . B1.2.1: Overview ........................................................................................................................................................... ...........................12 B1.2.2: Effluent Remediation - Current State of the Art ...........................................................................................................................12 B1.2.3: Microalgae Production Technologies...................................................................................................................................... .....15 B1.2.4: Microalgal Cell Harvesting ........................................................................................................................................................... 17 B1.2.5: Microalgae Upgrading.......................................................................................................................................... ........................18 B1.3: CONTRIBUTION TO ADVANCEMENT OF KNOWLEDGE / TECHNOLOGICAL PROGRESS ....................................................................................21 B1.4: QUALITY AND EFFECTIVENESS OF S/T METHODOLOGY AND ASSOCIATED WORK PLAN ...............................................................................22 B1.4.1: Overall Strategy of the Work Plan ...............................................................................................................................................22 B1.4.2: Timing of Work Packages and their Components .......................................................................................................................23 B1.4.3: Work Package Descriptions....................................................................................................................................... ..................26 B1.4.4: Graphical Presentation of Work Packages ..................................................................................................................................41 SECTION B2: IMPLEMENTATION – QUALITY AND EFFICIENCY OF THE IMPLEMENTATION AND THE MANAGEMENT ....................42 B2.1: QUALITY OF THE CONSORTIUM AS A WHOLE ............................................................................................... ............................................42 . B2.1.1: Management structure and procedures .......................................................................................................................................42 B2.1.2: Description of the Consortium .....................................................................................................................................................46 B2.2: RESOURCES TO BE COMMITTED ............................................................................................................................... .............................. . 53 SECTION B3: IMPACT – THE POTENTIAL IMPACT THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT, DISSEMINATION AND USE OF PROJECT RESULTS ...................................................................................................................................... ....................................................................57 B3.1: CONTRIBUTION, AT THE EUROPEAN AND/OR INTERNATIONAL LEVEL, TO THE EXPECTED IMPACTS LISTED IN THE WORK PROGRAMME UNDER THE RELEVANT ACTIVITY.................................................................................................................................................

.................................57 B3.1.1: Improving the Competitiveness of SME-AG Members ................................................................................................................57 B3.1.2: Markets for BioAlgaeSorb Technologies ..................................................................................................................................... 58 B3.1.3: Economic Justification ........................................................................................................................................................... ......63 B3.1.4: Societal Aspects and Regulatory Drivers ....................................................................................................................................65 B3.1.5: Time to market ........................................................................................................................................................... ..................67 B3.2: APPROPRIATENESS OF MEASURES ENVISAGED FOR THE DISSEMINATION AND/OR EXPLOITATION OF PROJECT RESULTS, AND MANAGEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ............................................................................................................................................................. ..............67 B3.2.1: Project Results and Intellectual Property Rights..........................................................................................................................67 B.3.2.2 Dissemination and Use ........................................................................................................................................................... .....71 SECTION B4: ETHICAL ISSUES ....................................................................................................................................... ..............................73 SECTION B5: CONSIDERATION OF GENDER ASPECTS.......................................................................................................................... ...74 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................... ...............................................................................75

2

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call FP7-SME-

Tables
TABLE 1.1: APPLICATION IDENTIFIER ....................................................................................................................................... ....................1 TABLE 1.2: LIST OF PARTICIPANTS ....................................................................................................................................... ........................1 TABLE 1.3: RISK DESCRIPTION FOR THE PROJECT ..................................................................................................................................23 TABLE 1.4: TIMING OF WORK PACKAGES AND THEIR COMPONENTS ...................................................................................................24 TABLE 1.3A: WORK PACKAGE LIST ....................................................................................................................................... ......................26 TABLE 1.3B: DELIVERABLES LIST................................................................................................................................. ...............................26 TABLE 1.3C: WORK PACKAGE DESCRIPTION ....................................................................................................................................... .....27 TABLE 1.3D: SUMMARY OF STAFF EFFORT............................................................................................................................ ....................39 TABLE 1.3E: LIST OF MILESTONES ....................................................................................................................................... .......................40 TABLE 2.2: INDICATIVE BREAKDOWN OF THE OFFER FROM THE RTD PERFORMERS TO THE SME PARTICIPANTS.....................54 TABLE 2.3: BIOALGAECONSUMABLE COSTS PER PARTNER ..................................................................................................................55 TABLE 2.4: BUDGET ALLOCATION TABLE ....................................................................................................................................... ...........56 TABLE 4.1: ETHICAL ISSUES TABLE ....................................................................................................................................... .....................73

3

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call

FP7-SME-

B1.1: Sound Concept Quality of Objectives

and

B1.1.1: Overview and Aims This project addresses specific needs of several key European SME groupings, via integration of technologies for effluent water remediation and the production and exploitation of microalgae biomass for mitigation of climate change (renewable energy generation, carbon dioxide (CO2) capture, utilisation of organic wastes) and the production of valuable bio-products using a biorefinery approach. The BioAlgaeSorb concept is shown diagrammatically in Figure 1.1 below:

Figure 1.1 Microalgae are very small (microscopic) photosynthetic, single-celled organisms that play a key role in nature as a food source for higher animals (eg, zooplankton, fish), for transferring nutrients in aquatic food webs and for balancing the exchange of CO2 between the ocean and the atmosphere. They are a highly diverse group, ranging in size from several hundredths of a mm to several tenths of a mm, taking many different shapes and existing singly or in chains or groups. Microalgae occupy a very wide range of habitats, including forms that live in open water (phytoplankton) or on surfaces (benthic), and are adapted to extreme physical and chemical conditions (eg, extremes of temperature, salinity, pH). Well known natural phenomena involving these orgnaims include blooms of green algae in fresh wate r ponds or lakes during summer and―red tides‖ in the sea. Vi tảo rất nhỏ (vi) quang hợp, sinh vật đơn bào có vai trò quan trọng trong tự nhiên
như một nguồn thức ăn cho động vật bậc cao (ví dụ, động vật phù du, cá), để chuyển các chất dinh dưỡng trong lưới thức ăn thuỷ sản và để cân bằng sự trao đổi CO2 giữa đại dương và khí quyển. Họ là một nhóm rất đa dạng, khác nhau về kích thước từ vài trăm của một vài mm đến phần mười của một mm, mang nhiều hình dạng khác nhau và

hiện đơn lẻ hoặc trong dây chuyền hoặc các nhóm. Vi tảo chiếm một phạm vi rất rộng của môi trường sống, bao gồm các hình thức sống trong nước mở (thực vật phù du) hoặc trên các bề mặt (đáy), và đang thích nghi với điều kiện khắc nghiệt vật lý và hóa học (ví dụ, thái cực nhiệt độ, độ mặn, độ pH). Cũng được biết đến hiện tượng thiên nhiên liên quan đến các orgnaims bao gồm hoa của tảo xanh trong ao nước ngọt, hồ trong mùa hè và thủy triều đỏ ‖ trong biển.

Important features of interest for the commercial exploitation of microalgae include their rapid rate of cell division (very high growth rate compared to terrestrial plants), their ability to grow using just light and a simple nutrient mix (like plants), and their synthesis of a wide range of useful and valuable compounds (including oils, pigments and antioxidants). These attributes have encouraged the development of commercial techniques for microalgae mass cultivation and downstream processes for the extraction of value-added products, which will be extended and directed towards effluent remediation for European SME-AG members within the BioAlgaeSorb project. tính năng quan trọng của lãi suất cho
việc khai thác thương mại của các vi tảo có tốc độ nhanh chóng của họ phân chia tế bào (tốc độ tăng trưởng rất cao so với thực vật trên cạn), khả năng của họ để phát triển chỉ sử dụng ánh sáng và một hỗn hợp chất dinh dưỡng đơn giản (như thực vật), và tổng hợp của họ về một nhiều loại hợp chất hữu ích và có giá trị (bao gồm cả loại dầu, bột màu, và chất chống oxy hóa). Những thuộc tính này đã khuyến khích sự phát triển của kỹ thuật canh tác thương mại hàng loạt vi tảo và các quy trình hạ lưu để tách các sản phẩm giá trị gia tăng, sẽ được mở rộng và chỉ đạo khắc phục hậu quả đối với nước thải cho các thành viên châu Âu SME-AG trong dự án BioAlgaeSorb.

The overall aims of the project are to: Increase knowledge on the bioconversion of industrial and agricultural/aquacultural effluents to microalgae biomass, as a sustainable raw material for biofuels and other value added applications; Provide new carbon neutral fuel sources for biomass power plants and biodiesel manufacture; Provide new sources of sustainable and carbon neutral high quality fine chemicals extracted from microalgae biomass; 4

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call

FP7-SME-

Reduce the discharge of CO2 to the atmosphere from biomass and fossil fuel power plants and other industrial processes reliant on combustion of fossil fuels; Reduce the nutrient loading of effluent waters from livestock production systems which are responsible for the largest proportion of organic waste in Europe, including most ammonia emissions. Increase know how and competence within a range of European SME-dominated industries. The specific Scientific and Objectives of the project are to: Technological

Optimise parameters for the rapid growth of (especially carbon-rich) microalgae, using waste-water nutrients and/or CO2- rich industrial flue gases, to high densities and in scalable cultivation systems; Develop efficient and reliable microalgae harvesting and dewatering processes; Develop effective processes for the conversion of dewatered microalgal biomass into biofuels and/or directly into energy; Optimise physical and chemical fractionation and transformation methods for those biomass components not directly converted to biofuels or energy; Assess the viability of the new processes and products developed, incorporating coupled process and financial models; Develop an industry-based model to assess a variety of strategies that maximise the value of the microalgal biomass in a changing market environment.

B1.1.2: The Need for Capture and Greenhouse Gases and Liquid Effluents

Remediation

of

Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions For the past two decades, reduction of GHGs has been high on the political agendas for the European Union, individual Member States and worldwide organisations such as the United Nations. Recognizing that anthropogenic activities contribute significantly to climate change, the EU has adopted ambitious targets for reducing GHG emissions in the coming decades. This has led to current and emerging GHG mitigation agreements and incentives such as: The Kyoto Protocol, The EU2020, ref Directive 2003/87/EC, Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading and national agreements such as the UK Carbon Reduction Commitment. The current target of 20% reduction in EU GHG emissions by 2020 will not be achieved without significant reduction of CO2 emissions from power production, where the use of fossil fuels, primarily coal and gas, leads to approximately 40% of all CO2 emissions EU-wide, and totalled almost 5,000 million metric tonnes in 2005 (Europa report; International energy annual, 2006). These decreases are expected to be attained by reducing the carbon footprint of existing fossil fuel-based power generation and by developing alternatives to fossil fuels. Geological carbon capture and storage (CCS) from fossil fuel-based power plants is a current focus for technology development in the EU (e.g., proposed EC Directive on Geological Storage of CO2) and globally, however geological CCS will not be adaptable to all scales of operation or localities (e.g. where seismic events and other geological failures may cause broken pipes): additional technologies are needed to reduce GHG emissions from fossil fuel-based power plants. The BioAlgaeSorb project will benefit SMEs and other enterprises by developing technologies for biological carbon capture using microalgae. Biofuels Production The EC is committed to a target of 20% energy production from renewable sources by 2020. As part of this scheme, biofuels are to comprise 10% of European transport fuels by 2020, however biofuels have recently been the subject of much criticism within the EU

and globally, for diverting human food supplies and arable land to fuel production (euobserver.com). Photosynthetic microalgae can be cultured to produce biofuels that do not directly compete with food crop-based commodities, as they are not typically grown in arable land areas, nor is microalgae biomass a major food source for humans (although it is a high quality food supplement). Furthermore, microalgae naturally tend to produce a lipid fraction suitable for the manufacture of second generation transport biofuels that are compatible with current transport infrastructure and do not require vehicle modification. Also, microalgae produce higher oil yields (up to 50 % of algal body weight) than oil-palm trees (up to 20 % body weight) which are currently the largest producer of oil to make biofuels (Research and Markets). It is therefore very timely to develop technologies for microalgae mass cultivation in Europe as a source of environmentally sustainable, carbon neutral biofuels. Waste Water Treatment In parallel to measures to decrease European GHG emissions, the discharge of aqueous effluents is increasingly regulated across diverse business sectors within the EU. Eutrophication is caused by several industrial activities (Tusseau-Vuillemin (2001) and it has long been suggested that water pollution should become an international priority (Duda, 1993). There are some 20 EU Directives encompassing all aspects of water quality, including those affecting water abstraction and effluent discharge from agriculture and land-based aquaculture, municipal waste water treatment and food and drink production. Key 5

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call

FP7-SME-

legislation affecting businesses that produce soluble organic wastes include the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/E), the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive (91/272/EEC, amended by Commission Directive 98/15/EC); The Nitrates Directive (91/676/EEC) and the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Directive (2008/1/EC). These regulations are driving both better conservation of water (e.g. water re-use and recycling in land-based aquaculture systems) and upgrading of effluent treatment infrastructures, all of which have significant cost implications for SMEs and large enterprises in Europe. As an example, the EU Court of Auditors estimate the Europe-wide cost of constructing new sewer pipelines and secondary treatment plants in compliance with the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive to be about € 200 billion (The information centre, Scottish Parliament 1999). There is clearly a need to develop innovative, cost effective approaches to the treatment of effluents, preferably incorporating valorisation of wastes. Critically, as the global cost of fertilizers increases (N is fixed by the Haber process at great energetic cost, while natural P reserves are fast being exhausted) it will become all the more important to recover and reuse these nutrients rather than to deal with them as wastes. The EC Water Framework Directive and related legislation place great pressures upon the removal of this valuable resource; it is logical to combined the removal of nutrients with the production of biofuels. The BioAlgaeSorb project will provide EU SME groups in the livestock production sectors with new technologies implementing microalgae for effluent treatment – phycoremediation – yielding a valuable by- product in the form of microalgae biomass. B1.1.3: The Scale of GHG and Liquid Waste Emissions Power Generation (Fossil Fuels and Biomass) Based on average world data, fossil fuels currently supply over 85% of the world‘s ener y needsand will remain g in abundant supply well into the 21st century (International Energy Agency, 2001). Simultaneously, Biomass energy production is the fastest growing renewable energy resource in Europe (European Biomass Association, 2007), and in 2004 had contributed up to 66% of the total renewable energy. The carbon dioxide emissions from the exhaust gases of the biomass/fossil fuel-fired power plants are one of the major emitters of GHG, accounting for about a third of global CO2 emissions, and have been increasing in recent decades (Andrade and Zaparoni – Survey, 2009). Data for 2004 show that within the EU 27 member community, a total of 5142 Mt of CO2 was emitted of which about 1700Mt came from power plants emissions (EEA, 2009) This elevation of CO2 and other greenhouse gases concentrations in the Earth‘s atmos phere is leading to changes in the global climatic conditions caused by the rise in the terrestrial surface average temperature. Therefore there is need for stabilization of GHG: However, this will be difficult to achieve if coal-fired plants remain, unless carbon capture and storage emissions from coal fired stations becomes viable. Heavy Industry Nearly a third of the world‘s energy consumption and 36% of CO2 emissions are attributable to manufacturing industries. The large primary materials industries, i.e., chemical, petrochemicals, iron and steel, cement, paper and pulp, and other minerals and metals, account for more than two-thirds of this amount. The industry‘s use of energy has grown by 61% between 19 7 12004, although if the industry adopted advanced technologies, there would be a significant reduction in CO2 emissions (Global Warming Report, 2004). The cost of CO2 mitigation is expected to rise. The EU Emissions Trading Scheme covers CO2 emissions from the power sector (all fossil fuel generators over 20MW). Member States are required to develop a National Allocation Plan, setting targets for emissions

from the relevant sectors and allocating allowances to installations for the relevant periods. All installations (representing about 40% of EU emissions) are thus set an absolute emission cap (6,600 Mt CO2in Phase I of the scheme). Allowances are freely tradable – installations may buy or sell allowances as they see fit. Phase II of the EU ETS began in 2008 and imposes tighter restrictions, as well as auctioning the allowances instead of distributing them freely. The UK Carbon Reduction Commitment is a mandatory emissions trading scheme targeting large commercial and public sector organisations using more than 6,000MWh of electricity through mandatory half hourly meters. Organisations will have to buy allowances for emissions at an auction, with the total number of allowances set by the Government. Revenue from the auction will be recycled to scheme participants. The scheme is expected to begin in 2010. Aquacul ture The cultivation of finfish and shellfish is a substantial and expanding European industry. Following current and anticipated trends, sectoral growth is expected to enlarge markedly over the coming decades, as global population and the demand for seafood increases whilst harvest from wild stocks stabilises or declines. The systems used for finfish production can be broken down into three main categories: open ponds/tanks/ raceways, cages (typically marine) or closed water recirculation systems (Table X). Throughout the EU Member States, salmonid species (e.g. trout) dominate in terms of production and number of farms. In 2007, approximately 1600 thousand tonnes of fish were produced across Europe, of which approximately 81% (1274 thousand tonnes) were salmonids or eels (FEAP/Finfish News 2009). In the UK alone, there were over 240 individual farms producing rainbow trout in 2007 (Finfish news, 2009). The quantity and precise constituents of aquaculture waste vary between 6

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call FP7-SME-

production system and species farmed, with some studies (Ackefors & Enell, 1994; Chopin et al. 1999; Olsen et al., 2008) estimating that 44 - 78 kg N/ton of fish/year is released into the water column. Number of Quant Typical Member ity producti States (metric on Tilapia Tan 2 115 ks 0 African Catfish Tan 4 706 ks 1 Ponds, Sturgeon 6 207 tanks or 7 raceway Carp Ponds or tanks 8 703 41 Other coarse fish Ponds or tanks 2 124 1 European Eel Ponds or tanks 4 532 0 Freshwater salmonids (trout Ponds or tanks 2 3415 and Charr 2 64 Marine salmonids (Salmon Sea or loch 7 9271 and sea trout)fish cages 40 Other marine Sea cages or 1 2244 RAS 3 04 TOTAL 1580 More than 400,000 T of farmed fish pa are currently produced on land 298the EU, in conferring significant organic loading on receiving waters, while disposal of solid fish manures in many cases incurs a charge to operators and, in some situations (eg, where the manures contain a high salt content), is physically unsuitable for conventional land spreading practices. Increasingly stringent discharge regulations, driven principally by the EU Water Framework Directive, have furthermore encouraged greater water re-use and the adoption of water recycling technologies by land-based fish farms, in order to reduce total discharge water volumes and to enable more efficient separation of solids. These trends provide greater incentive and greater technical capacity for aquaculture SMEs, including members of the British Trout Association, to capture and valorise soluble aquaculture effluents via BioAlgaeSorb technologies. Fish There is industry wide apprehension of EU Water Framework Directive demands. To reach good ecological status by 2015, regulators may demand reduction of water abstraction and/or an increase in the cost of licences. The quantity and quality of water or effluent discharge, such as Phosphorus, may also be restricted with the threat that, for example, regulations governing livestock production industries may be amalgamated with heavy industry. Today, the precise demands are unknown but are likely to increase the cost of compliance (currently about 25 Euro/tonne trout – BTA, pers. comm.). In the UK, the Environment Agency is responsible for enforcement of environmental legislation and offences committed under such laws and regulations. Since 2000, there have been 1600 cases (including approximately 800 prosecutions) per year. The fine varies between 4,250 7,700 EURO, and in some circumstances leads to a jail term Intensive Agriculture Due to an increase in intensity of agriculture, ammonia concentrations have doubled in the last 50 years in Europe (http://www.ukpollutantdeposition.ceh.ac.uk/ammonia_network). There is an estimated 230kt ammoniaN per year produced from agricultural sources in the UK; in common with many other European countries, this accounts for about 80% of the total emission (Pain & Jarvis, 1999) and a substantial part of the anthropogenic emissions of methane and nitrous oxide (Duxbury, 1994, Philips & Pain, 1998), as well as being responsible for the largest part of the nutrient load put on the surface waters. Pig slurry has up to twice the Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD) as cattle slurry (SEPA, 2009). To illustrate, around 160 million pigs and 100 million cattle produce 220 and 1200 million tonnes of fresh excrement annually with a nominal concentration of 10 % dry matter (FAO, 2000; Eurostat, 2007). This is often diluted with water and mixed with bedding: including wastes from other animal types, terrestrial livestock farming in Europe is currently producing in excess of 2

billion tonnes of organic wastes annually. The hygiene impact potentially can affect all aspects of food production as well as presenting a broad threat to public health from land spreading practices (Guan & Holley, 2003). Anaerobic Digesters This technology processes organic waste, reducing overall volume, producing biogases suitable for fossil fuel replacement and nutrient rich liquid wastes. In recent decades, anaerobic digestion has been a major development in waste treatment technology across Europe. Consequently, it has captured a significant share of the market for the biological treatment of solid waste. In 2006, the European commission reported that for biological treatment of organic waste in general a total of 6 000 installations have been identified, including 3 500 composting and 2 500 anaerobic digestion (AD) facilities (mostly small scale on-farm units). 124 AD installation for treatment of bio-waste and/or municipal waste with a total capacity of 3.9 million tonnes, were operational in 2006 and this number is expected to grow. While AD technology is effective in producing combustible biogas from digested organic waste, it does release a nutrient-rich liquor as a by-product that must be dealt with appropriately to avoid contamination of receiving waters. 7

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call

FP7-SME-

Municipal Waste Water Waste water from dwellings constitutes grey water (from appliances, showers and sinks) and foul toilet water (sewage). The characteristics of both waste streams differ. Grey water contains less nitrogen and pathogens and thus has more potential applications (Li et al., 2003). The published literature indicates that the typical volume of grey water varies from 90 to 120 L/person/day in developed countries (Morel and Diener, 2006) while that of sewage (sludge only) per European country varies between ca. 30 – 250 million kg (Eurostat, 2009). Food Processing In 2006, 233,344 thousand tonnes of animal and vegetal waste and food processing waste (not including excreta) were produced in the 27 Member States of the EU (Eurostat, 2009). Waste material from food processing contributes significantly to environmental degradation such as eutrophication (Tusseau-Vuillemin, 2001). The composition of food waste varies but a recent review (Digman & Kim, 2008) categorised 5 different types of food waste with biological oxygen demands between 300 100,000m g/L. B1.1.4: The Role of Microalgal Biotechnology in Effluent Mitigation and Valorisation Effluents that pose a burden of environmental loading need not be regarded as an expensive, challenging problem without value. Using microalgae, BioAlgaeSorb will assist SME‘s to reducethe costs associated with effluent discharge and will generate new markets for microaalgal products, enabling current operations to offset their costs of discharge and to diversify operations. Feasibility of Microalgae Mass Cultivation Participants in this project include European SMEs with leading technologies for intensive microalgae cultivation in closed photobioreactors (Varicon Aqua Solutions Ltd) and in open raceways (Ingrepro BV). Working collaboratively with experts in water quality management, nutrient dynamics and process modelling (Swansea University & HCMR,), a range of improved products and processes will be developed for combined waste remediation and microalgae biomass production. Feasibility of Biofuel Production from Microalgae The biological characteristics of microalgae are favourable as biomass for biofuel in terms of their high areal productivity and biochemical composition (Chisti Y, 2007). They do not directly compete with food crop-based commodities and are typically grown in non-arable land areas (Patil, V et al (2008). Microalgae typically contain a much higher percentage of extractable oil than other oil crops– in excess of 50% compared to, e.g., 25% from rapeseed, and contain more long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids which can be converted to biofuels by pyrolysis or catalysis (Greenwell et al., 2008?). Biomass composition will be optimised within the BioAlgaeSorb project not only by selecting appropriate microalgae species, but also by manipulating the physico-chemical environment in which the microalgae are grown, e.g. by depleting nitrogen and phosphorous at key stages in the growth process to induce maximal hydrocarbon production. Feasibility of Waste Remediation Using Microalgae Microalgae are photosynthetic aquatic microorganisms that require inorganic nutrients

and CO 2 for growth (Carvalho, et al; ,2008; Eriksen, 2008). They are therefore well suited for fixing nutrients (especially inorganic nitrogen and phosphorous, which are a large, but often unconsidered cost in microalgae biotechnology) from effluent waters and are capable of capturing CO 2 from industrial flue gases (Doucha et al (2005) Wang et al 2008). RTD providers within the project have the resources to characterise the compositions of gaseous and aqueous effluents from industrial and agricultural processes and to perform experimental and dynamic modelling studies to identify the most suitable microalgae species and operating conditions for remediating and valorising the chosen waste categories. Feasibility of Harvesting Microalgae on Large Scale Chemical flocculation (e.g. using aluminium sulphate) is a relatively inexpensive and efficient method for separating microalgal cells from water and is used in municipal waste water treatment plants. The principles of large scale microalgae harvesting are thus well established, although it is desirable to exclude residual metals that may interfere with subsequent chemical or enzymatic conversion of biomass to valuable compounds. Among the participating SMEs, online centrifugation is successfully used as an alternative to chemical flocculation for harvesting freshwater microalgae. However, this method is considered inefficient at the larger scales required for algal biofuel production and is also less compatible with marine microalgae species (due to equipment corrosion). Well established separation methods will therefore be adapted to the current purpose within BioAlgaeSorb, involving a sequential dissolved air floatation and mechanical filtration process. Ozonation and pH manipulation will be tested as alternatives to chemical flocculants and process optimisation will take into account the physiological status of the microalgae during harvest.

8

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call

FP7-SME-

Feasibility of a Microalgaebased Biorefinery A biorefinery approach will be used to develop optimal biomass processing pathways tailored to local conditions and market opportunity. The development of an integrated biorefinery for microalgae biomass is a central innovative feature of the BioAlgaeSorb project, designed to maximise the numbers of usable microalgae products and economic return per unit biomass produced. The constituent processes are each well established, but will require adaptation for the particular raw materials and intended end uses. The elements of this biorefinery are: direct thermo-chemical conversion of intact biomass (or biomass residue following oil extraction) to liquid biofuel, physical separation of intact biomass into major fractions (protein, lipid, carbohydrate), upgrading of the lipid fraction into current generation biodiesel (trans-esterification) and into ― g r e ‖ n e biodiesel (decarboxylation and decarbonylation of fatty acids), and extraction of specific valuable pigments (phycobiliproteins). A new microalgal biorefinery will be developed within BioAlgaeSorb to provide a series of processing options that can be tailored to the needs of different SME-AG sectors and individual SMEs. The biorefinery will furthermore offer a template for the broader microalgal biotechnology sector internationally, raising the impact of the investment beyond the immediate consortium and providing opportunities to SMEs for licencing, etc. Feasibility of Optimising and Evaluating New Processes The configuration and management of processes and products to be developed within BioAlgaeSorb will be optimised via computer modelling. The approach to be taken is to start with an established mechanistic model of microalgal growth. This model is a dynamic (not steady-state) photoacclimative description of temperature-light-multinutrient limited growth. This type of model is essential to properly consider the cost-benefit implications of the process (for example, to properly include nutrient consumption, selfshading of suspensions etc.). The model is not a crude thermodynamic, Monod or Droop quota model. Rather it is founded on well-grounded physiological understanding, with feedback interactions describing nutrient transport (N, P, Fe, Si etc; differentiating between N-sources, for example), photosynthesis and photoacclimation (with changes in light and nutrients), respiration, and changing chemical stoichiometry (e.g. with changes in nutrient status). This modelling structure will be employed within BioAlgaeSorb to provide a mechanistic basis for a thorough and transparent analysis for the design, geometries and efficient operation of coupled microalgae photobioreactors and raceways at SME-AG member locations. B1.1.5: Markets Microalgae Products of

Established Markets Microalgal biomass production for established markets has approximately doubled recently from 5,000 to 10,000 tonnes per year dry weight, excluding live microalgae produced and used in marine aquaculture hatcheries (Pulz and Gross, 2004; Algal Industry Survey, 2008). Briefly, the particular markets include: Aquaculture and Agriculture feeds, Pigments, antioxidants, Functional foods and nutraceuticals, Cosmetics and cosmeceuticals and Omega 3 oils. In 2006, these markets had an estimated value of $5-6.5 billion per year (Pulz and Gross, 2004, Table 1.1). Table 1.1 – summary of microalgal product markets Current Product Prod Group uct Biomass Health Food Functional Food Feed additive Soil conditioner

Retail value (millions EURO) 180 0 57 0 21 5 50 0

Colouring substances

Antioxidants

Special products Emerging Product Group

Astaxan thin Phyocya nin phycoerythrin BCaroten Tocoph erol Antioxidant extract AR A DH A PUFA extract Toxi ns Isotop es Prod uct Biofuels and bioenergy C0 2 Effluent Remediation 9

11 0 7 1. 5 20 0 N/ A 11 0 1 5 107 5 7 2 3. 5 Retail value (millions EURO) N/A N/A N/A

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call

FP7-SME-

Around half of this production takes place in mainland China, with substantial commercial production also in Japan, Taiwan, U.S.A., Australia and India, and smaller volumes produced elsewhere. Aquaculture Feeds Microalgae are used ubiquitously as a feed source in the commercial hatchery production of juvenile marine fish and shellfish. There are thousands of marine hatcheries globally, producing billions of juvenile fish and shellfish annually. A relatively small number (~6-10) of easy-to-rear microalgae species have been adopted for this purpose. In most cases, the microalgae are cultured on site by hatchery personnel and presented live to the fish / shellfish larvae (see Fig x). Under this scenario, sales opportunities to hatcheries mainly consist of the equipment and consumables required for microalgae production: photobioreactors, pumps, lights, nutrient mixes, etc. However, there is a growing trend for hatcheries to purchase proprietary microalgae concentrates in order to simplify on-site operations. These concentrates are supplied by companies specialising in the large scale production and processing of microalgae. This market segment had an estimated value of EURO 500 million globally in 2004 (see Table 1) and has grown steadily since. There is further scope to develop the sector by introducing better quality products, since it is widely acknowledged that existing concentrated products still do not match live microalgae for hatchery applications (nutritional composition; physical attributes; product stability). Dried microalgae biomass (esp Arthrospira) is also widely used as an ingredient in formulated feeds for aquaculture species and terrestrial animals (farmed livestock, poultry, pets), where it has been demonstrated to have health promoting effects. Pigments & Antioxidants Microalgae produce a range of valuable compounds including carbohydrates, proteins, essential amino acids, pigments and vitamins, as well as bioactive molecules. The major pigments include chlorophyll a, b and c, β- carotene, phycocyanin, xanthophylls (astaxanthin, canthaxanthin, lutein) and phycoerythrin. These pigments have existing applications in food, feeds, pharmaceuticals and cosmetics, and there is an increasing demand for their use as natural colours in textiles and as printing dyes. The value of these pigments lies not only in their colorant properties, but also as antioxidants with demonstrated health benefits. The worldwide market value for all commercially-used carotenoids was estimated at EURO 640 million in 2004 and is expected to rise at an average annual growth rate (AAGR) of 2.9% to just over EURO 730 million by the end of the decade. Although the synthetic forms of carotenoid are less expensive than their natural counterparts, microalgal carotenoids have the advantage of supplying natural isomers in their natural ratio and are generally accepted as being superior to synthetic all-trans forms. The largest commercial outlet of carotenoids (synthetic and natural) is in feeds, mainly because of the outstanding importance of astaxanthin and canthaxanthin, eg for colouring the flesh of farmed salmon. Increasing demand for organically farmed fish has expanded the market for microalgaederived astazanthin. The big carotenoid marketing success in recent years has been lutein, when it was demonstrated that it can help reduce age-relatedm acular degeneration. This pushed lutein‘s m arket valu eup to EURO 100 million in 2004. Functional Foods & Nutraceuticals The documented bioactive properties of microalgae have led to a well developed market for dried biomass as a human nutritional supplement, sold in different forms such as capsules, tablets and liquids. The most important microalgae species for this purpose are Dunaliella salina, Arthrospira sp, Chlorella sp and Aphanizomenon flos- aquae. These are mainly produced in outdoor ponds or shallow raceways, but also in closed photobioreactors at more northerly latitudes including Europe. Certain cyanobacteria, for example Arthrospira platensis and A. maxina (formerly Spirulina) are also marketed as whole food, being particularly protein-rich (up to 77% dry mass) and containing all essential amino acids, a number of important essential fatty acids (EFAs) and vitamins of the B, C, D and E groups. This microalgae market segment is expected to grow in line with that of the wider nutraceuticals sector, which had a total global value of approximately EURO 58 billion in

2008, nearly EURO 6 billion of this being European. Helping to protect the sector during the economic downturn is the strong preven tive health care angle of nutriti nal supplements and the market‘s sizeable component of better-off o demographics, including an aging population. The sector is currently maturing beyond basic and sometimes unproven supplements to one of delivering more subtle benefits that aid absorption of nutrients, and prevent a range of conditions relating to energy metabolism, such as diabetes. Welsh HEIs and SMEs are well placed to deliver the appropriate applied science and to develop verified microalgae-based functional foods in response to this evolving marketplace. Cosmetics & Cosmeceuticals A number of microalgae species (esp Chlorella and Arthrospira) have become established in the cosmetics market. Some cosmetics companies (eg, Louis Vitton) have even invested in their own microalgae production capacity. Microalgae extracts can mainly be found in face and skincare products, eg anti-ageing cream, refreshing or regenerant care products, emollient and as an antiirritant in peelers. Microalgae are also represented in sun protection and hair care products. Omega 3 Oils The major source of omega 3 is from fish oils and they contribute about 85% of the market by volume. However, the supply of marine sourced omega 3 is being threatened by adverse environmental conditions that have contributed to lower DHA levels in fish oil especially from fish species from South American waters which are the major suppliers of fish oil and also depleting global fish stocks. The adverse environmental factors coupled by depleting fish stocks can aid the global market 1 0

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call

FP7-SME-

growth of algal based omega 3 which is currently contributing about 3% of the total omega 3 market. It is estimated that the EU market for algal-sourced omega 3 is currently at EURO 40 million and 90% of the total volume is being used for infant health products. Analyst have also revealed that omega 3 ingredients market is set to grow at 24.3% annually and projected all the way to 2014 when it will be worth EURO 1.2 billion and this figure is for both marine and microalgal sources omega 3. Over the years, the growth of microalgal based omega 3 has been hampered by a network of patents that have only allowed a few players in the market i.e. Martek Biosciences (US) and Lonza (EU). However, it is anticipated that M art k‘s paten will begin to expire in the next decade, and this will e ts encourage more players into the market and ultimately the global microalgal omega 3 market share will increase. Furthermore, the microalgal omega 3 market can appeal as a vegetarian source of omega 3.

Emerging Microalgae Markets Current global, European and national regulations suggest that algaculture will expand into future markets such as Biofuels and bioenergy, CO2capture and Effluent Remediation. Biofuels: The main types of biofuel currently in use can be divided into those based on ethanol from carbohydrate breakdown, e.g. from corn and sugar cane, and those based on fatty acid methyl esters (FAME) or fatty acid ethyl esters (FAEE) of lipid fractions, e.g. from rape seed oil or palm oil. Microalgae naturally tend to produce a lipid fraction of which a significant portion is suitable for fuel applications. First generation biofuels from algae are based on FAMEs, whilst second generation fuels will be based on de-oxygenated fatty acids. Second generation biofuels will be compatible with current transport infrastructure with no modification to vehicles. Carbon abatement / mitigation: Biofuels are a carbon neutral technology and therefore eligible for funding and tax breaks from governments as renewable sector revenue. Biofuel crops use CO2 to grow and therefore mitigate levels of CO2 in the atmosphere. Strains of microalgae have been shown to grow optimally under CO2 concentrations of 5-10% (Lee and Lee, 2003). Other strains grow well at CO2 saturations of 30-70% (Hanagata et al. 1992; Iwasaki et al. 1996; Sung et al. 1999). By controlling the pH and solution CO2 release algae could potentially grow at 100% CO2. (Olaizola, 2003), Carbon capture: Algae capture and store CO2 so can also be used directly reduce the discharge of industrial CO2 to the atmosphere. (Hall and House, 1993; Benemann, 1997; Hughes and Benemann, 1997; Sheehan et al., 1998; Chisti, 2007; Huntley and Redalje, 2007). Studies have reported on microalgae sequestering CO2 emissions from coal fired power plants, which are likely to dominate in energy generation throughout India and China (Sheehan et al, 1998). B1.1.6: Relevance and Improving Competitiveness of SME-AGs The innovative nature of BioAlgaeSorb creates a cost effective solution to the economic and environmental demands of sectors that produce gaseous and liquid effluents, while providing a cheap, constant and plentiful supply of raw materials to produce microalgae and associated value added products for a diversifying market. Participating SME –AG’s Members within the livestock (agriculture and aquaculture) production sector will gain a competitive advantage by improving the cost effectiveness of their waste treatment processes by generating a valuable by-product (microalgae biomass). Meanwhile, SME-AG ‘s representing biomass power generation will additionally benefit by re-using processed microalgae biomass for on- site energy production, as well as offering the potential for gaining carbon credits (directly or indirectly) by reducing their GHG emissions. Participating SMEs will undertake industrial validation of the microalgae production techniques and biomass

conversion processes developed by the RTD performers (Chaumont D, 1993). The technology is also transferable to other sectors - such as heavy industry, anaerobic digester operators, food processors and municipal water companies. Participating SME Technology Providers Those SMEs involved in developing the microalgae production and processing technologies will acquire IP that is exploitable both within Europe and globally, in addition to direct sale of processes and value added microalgal products. This includes SMEs such as bioreactor manufacturers and lighting specialists, fluid handling and clarification, chemical conversion and fractionation, biofuel manufacturers and specialized food supplement and pharmaceutical manufacturers. Indeed, the opportunities for export of expertise are increased by the fact that lower latitude countries have ambient environmental conditions (light and temperature) that may make them highly appropriate as locations for commercial microalgal production. There is without doubt a European and global opportunity for this industry (Farrell et al., (2008). Benefits of the Project Partnership The SME categories represented in the project (microalgae technologists; biofuel producers; agriculture and aquaculture producers) have limited in-house RTD capacity to resolve problems or meet the needs of their respective sectors, and less so to identify and exploit cross-sectoral opportunities. Current global economic conditions place further constraints on the 1 1

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call

FP7-SME-

resources available for in-house RTD. The higher level of private sector and government funding in this arena beyond Europe (approximately EURO 170 million, mainly from Californian investors –Biofuels International) represents a very real risk to the EU Member States, in terms of being able to compete economically and technically within this very important developing sector. The participating SME-AGs provide an important mechanism for collating, prioritising and conveying the needs and problems of their members to local, regional and EU funding agencies and RTD performers.

B1.2: Innovative Character in Relation to State of the Art
The overall aims of the project are to increase knowledge on the bioconversion of industrial and agricultural/aquacultural effluents to microalgae biomass, as a sustainable raw material for biofuels and other value added applications; B1.2.1: Overview A review of current remediation practices and recent research investigating phycoremediation is described below, followed by methods employed to grow and process algal biomass. The current and future markets for algal products are then described. Currently, there are a limited number of applied research publications investigating phycoremediation for individual industries, primarily at small (i.e. laboratory) scale. B1.2.2: Effluent Remediation Current State of the Art -

Power Generation (Fossil Fuels and Biomass) and Heavy Industry The increased awareness on the adverse consequences of global warming has resulted in the imposition of a number of policies with the objective of reducing emission greenhouse gases. Currently, power plants are reducing their CO2 emissions by improving on thermal efficiencies of the plants. However, current global CO2 emissions still need further reduction in order to meet with the GHG emission strategic requirements. Consequently, a number of carbon dioxide mitigation strategies have been investigated and these have been broadly classified under chemical reaction based and biological CO2 mitigation categories. These concentrated sources of CO2 can be potentially captured and a number of commentators indicate that it can technically be feasible. The most common removal processes that have been investigated for CO2 capture from flue gas can be classified in two general categories - post-combustion separation and pre-combustion separation. Post-combustion and pre-combustion separations: Post-combustion separation is the most established technique to remove CO2 from flue gases. In this procedure, the CO2 capture processes are based on chemical absorption where the CO2 is absorbed in a liquid solvent by formation of a chemically bonded compound and is removed after the flue gas combustion. This process has proven to be expensive due to large volumes of 'solvents' required and also the energy requirements in CO2 absorption process. Precombustion separation involves reacting CO2 with oxygen and/or steam to give mainly carbon monoxide and hydrogen. Combustion with oxygen, however, yields temperatures too large such that expensive specialised material would be required. Chemical reaction based strategies are known to be expensive because they involve a 3 stage process of separation, transportation and sequestration with cost of separation and compression. It has been reported that this technology may cost in the range between EURO 40-90 per avoided ton of CO2 for natural gas combined cycle plants and coal fired power plants (Amann et al, 2009). Therefore, because of the costly nature of the strategy, the mitigation benefits become marginal.

Geological carbon capture and storage (CCS): Geological carbon capture and storage from fossil fuel-based power plants is a current focus for technology development in the EU (eg, proposed EC Directive on Geological Storage of CO2) and globally, however geological CCS will not be adaptable to all scales of operation or localities (eg, where seismic events and other geological failures may cause broken pipes). The long term CCS economics has come under scrutiny because of the uncertainties regarding implications of CO2 leaking back into the atmosphere. Van der Zwaan and Smekens (2009) maintain that CCS would constitute a meaningful climate change mitigation option if leakage rates are <1%/year. Biological carbon dioxide mitigation by agricultural plants: Biological CO2 mitigation by agricultural plants has attracted much attention but however, it has been estimated that agriculture plants contribute about 3-6 % capture of the fossil fuel emissions, largely due to their slow growth rates. The slow growth rate limitation of agricultural plants for CO2 mitigation has led to increased interest in microalgae as carbon dioxide capturing agents. It is estimated that algae has the ability to fix carbon dioxide at an efficiency of between 10 to 50 times greater than that of agricultural plants, forestry and aquatic plants. The use of higher plants with standard power generators is generally unworkable because of the high concentration of SOx and NOx in flue emissions. CO2 removal using microalgae: The slow growth rate limitation of agricultural plants for carbon dioxide mitigation has led to increased interest in microalgae as CO2 capturing agents. It is estimated that algae has the ability to fix carbon dioxide at an 1 2

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call

FP7-SME-

efficiency of between 10 to 50 times greater than that of agricultural plants, forestry and aquatic plants. When compared to chemical reaction strategy, algae could completely recycle carbon dioxide into chemical energy that can be converted to fuels thereby limiting and/or eliminating CO2 disposal issues. Furthermore, carbon dioxide algal mitigation can be made more economically cost-effective from the production of other novel bioproducts. Microalgal CO2 fixation is potentially an ideal technological candidate for reduction of carbon dioxide emissions from power plants and other industries This potential has been demonstrated within a German CO2 fixation project for the production of microalgal biomass through the use of industrial exhaust gas (Pulz and Gross, 2004). The system was shown to be feasible for a 6000 L photobioreactor. Further, Kadam (2002) modelled the benefits of using power-plant flue gas as a source of CO2 for microalgae cultivation. The evaluations showed that in a 50 MW plant (which emits on average about 414,000t/yr of CO2) microalgae have the capacity to capture about 210,000 t/y. Hence, based on the European carbon dioxide emissions of 1700 Mt due to electricity generation plants, it can be seen from estimations that there is huge capacity in Europe for implementation of microalgal technologies for algal biomass production and carbon dioxide capture. Microalgae can integrate well in biomass-driven electricity generating power plants. Studies show that a number of algal species have high tolerance to flue gas carbon dioxide concentrations and moderate levels of SO x and NOx (up to 150 ppm). The marine algae Chlorococcum littorale is known to tolerate a carbon dioxide concentration of up to 40%. Other species such as Scenedesmus obliquus and Chlorella kessleri are also known to exhibit good tolerance to high CO2 concentrations (Table 1.2). Maeda et al, (1995) confirmed this by testing these species under similar flue gas concentration of coal fired thermal power plants for carbon dioxide concentrations of about 15% and concentrations of SOx and NOx of 10ppm and 30ppm respectively. Hence, due to this potential, energy companies and governments worldwide have a vested interest in carbon dioxide fixation. Recently, Avagyan (2005), showed that algae grown on the flue gas of an MIT cogeneration plant reduced carbon dioxide concentrations by about 40% and the NOx by around 86% of the smokestack emissions. A plant in Hawaii currently diverts flue gas from a small power plant to supply the CO2 required in microalgae production. Because of the potential for CO2 capture, countries such as Japan and the United States have increased research efforts to find economically feasible processes for the application of microalgal applications for carbon dioxide fixation and other environmental mitigation applications. It is against this background that BioAlgaeSorb will adapt the hybrid microalgae production approach for remediation of gaseous wastes from European power plant sources. This will extend the current state-of-the-art in terms of selecting suitable microalgae species, and defining processes for efficiently incorporating flue gases. Table 1.2 Microalgal strains investigated for CO2 mitigation

Aqueous Effluents It is now well known that microalgae have high potential to reduce nutrient, and organic loads from wastewater. Removal percentages of 75%, 84% and 89% for ammonia, nitrite and phosphorous respectively have been reported (de-Bashan, 2003). A combination of wastewater treatment and algal CO2 fixation provides incentives in the form of saving in water treatment chemicals and the subsequent environmental benefits. Furthermore, a pathway for removal of nitrogen, phosphorous and metal ions from wastewater is provided and the pathway provides algal biomass which can further be exploited for biofuel production and for other innovative products. 1 3

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call

FP7-SME-

Aquaculture Increasingly stringent national discharge regulations, driven principally by the EU Water Framework Directive, have encouraged greater water re-use and the adoption of water recycling technologies by land-based fish farms, in order to reduce total discharge water volumes and to enable more efficient separation of solids (Blancheton, 2000; Borges et al., 2003). This trend provides greater opportunities for capture and conversion of aquaculture effluents that will be exploited in this project. Although the precise quantity and composition of aquaculture waste may vary, it generally shares the common properties that they are in solution, suitable for algae to utilise. If treated as a resource rather than a waste, effluent valorisation would provide extra income to cope with effluent treatment costs and assist sustainability of the industry. Candidate aquaculture production systems, allowing the simultaneous downstream production and harvesting of algae, should be discrete systems with a low turnover of water. European finfish aquaculture, both pond and RAS, are excellent systems to add or combine algal culture in terms of existing technology and potential numbers of SME‘s that can be assisted. For land-based aquaculture production systems, it has been demonstrated experimentally that seaweeds can be used as a ― b i r‖ to remove soluble nutrients from liquid effluents (Deviller et al. 2004; ofilte Metaxa et al., 2006), thereby improving discharge water quality and enabling re-use of that water within RAS. Similarly, an alternative application for soluble effluents from aquaculture systems is as a nutrient source for the production of microalgae linked to the cultivation of edible bivalve molluscs: In the case of diffuse agricultural effluents entering coastal waters, Lindahl (2005) has shown that sea-based cultivation of blue mussels can be effective in ameliorating natural phytoplankton blooms, acting to recycle nutrients from the sea back to the land. Similarly, Borges et al (2005) outlined wastewater treatment possibilities with a fish-microalgae-clam integrated aquaculture system, using Phaeodactylum tricornutum and Tetraselmis suecica. Nutrient removal efficiency was very promising for ammonium and nitrite-nitrogen (80–100%). Integrated aquaculture systems can also incorporate food waste, algae and fish: Sunita & Rao (2003) c ollected 15 strains of algae from the wastewater of a mango processing plant and tested their ability to utilise the waste and toxicity. The resulting algal biomass was then evaluated as feed for Tilipia mossambica. Valderrama et al (2002) also treated recalcitrant industrial effluent with a mixture of micro and macroalgae. Such integrated aquaculture systems are considered a promising technology, but recent efforts have been essentially devoted to macroalgae which are only suitable for marine farms (Troell et al., 2003; Neori et al., 1998) and research with microalgae has been neglected (Wang, 2003). BioAlgaeSorb will investigate the potential to couple microalgae cultivation with fish production effluents in an integrated system, so that effluents can be treated more effectively and fresh water requirements reduced. Intensive Agriculture and Anaerobic Digestion The impact of organic wastes and effluent can potentially affect all aspects of food production as well as presenting a broad threat to public health from land spreading practices and associated leachates (Guan & Holley, 2003). Cultivating microalgae from soluble animal effluents, rich in nitrogen and phosphorus, presents an alternative to the current practice of land application and ensiling. Several studies have investigated this technology on laboratory to pilot scales in an attempt to optimise this strategy, and have shown promising results and development of this technology. Gonzalez et al (2008) and Tavieso et al (2006a) performed small scale studies to optimise Chlorella sorokiniana and C. vulgaris growth when exposed to swine slurry at high concentrations. The main inhibitory factor was identified as a combination of high pH levels and ammonia concentration. This was repeated at larger scale (16L) with pretreated swine and human effluent (Tavieso et al., 2006b) with the overall suggestion that dilution would be required to maintain efficient removal of nitrogen and phosphorous compounds. To counter this problem, De Godos et al. (2009) developed a medium scale biofilm-based photobioreactor and inoculated pre-treated swine slurry with the same algal species, recording impressive processing quantities and removal rates of nitrogen and

phosphorus. The innovative design allowed simultaneous denitrification and nitrification and the protection of microalgae from any potential inhibitory compounds. In addition, it gave efficient biomass retention of over 92% of the biomass generated during biodegradation. On larger scales, Kebede-Westhead et al., (2006) used 30m long algal turf scrubber raceways to estimate the cost of using filamentous green algae (Rhizoclonium sp.) to process dairy manure effluent. Removal of nitrogen and phosphorus was variable with up to 90% efficiency, while the projected operational cost (EURO 8 per kg N) were well below those cited for upgrading existing water treatment plants. Later work (Mulbry et al., 2008) showed that the fatty acid content of the algae was very constant and did not change with loading rate, manure composition or presence of auxiliary CO2. This may assist the further processing of harvested algae, as this work suggests that a standard composition of product will be available regardless of waste input. Clearly, there is a strategic need to address the current and future quantity of effluent produced by livestock. Current scientific research shows promising results in terms of efficacy and upscaling, suggesting that investment and development could yield significant ameliorative benefits. BioAlgaeSorb will work with SMEs to produce workable and industrially validated systems for the integration of liquid agriculture effluents for use in microalgae production, drawing on the expertise and experience of Ingrepro NV, who already apply their raceway systems for this purpose.

1 4

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call

FP7-SME-

Municipal Waste Water At the present time grey water usage is hampered by the lack of any clear guidelines or water quality standards for this resource, with only a few in existence in some countries (discussed by Li et al., 2009): To cleanse the water, a variety of physical, chemical and biological methods have been proposed, although these could be expensive or fail to meet re-use guidelines. Surprisingly, microalgal treatments were not evaluated in the review. Typical uses for grey water could include discharge into recreational water bodies, irrigation and aquaculture, fire fighting or road cleaning, and toilet flushing. To our knowledge, research has investigated treating grey water with algae. However, a few recent studies have started to optimise sewage treatment using this method. One of the main problems to overcome is harvesting the biomass from the treated effluent. To investigate this, De Bashan et al (2003) and Zhang et al (2008) immobilised Scendesmus sp and Chlorella sp on calcium alginate sheets or latex beads with a growth-promoting bacterium, which allowed very efficient removal of nitrogen and phosphorus compounds with a rapid turnover period. However, this approach needs to be upscaled to industrial operations. Food Processing Treatment processes for these wastes vary globally, depending on the prevailing regulations, infrastructure and markets. The European fishery and aquaculture industries for example, produce large quantities of potentially valuable processing byproducts that are currently under-utilised. When these wastes are processed for reuse, the existing conversion methods, such as ensiling, typically result in low grade materials of variable quality that are either discarded or used as low grade feed ingredients. In Norway alone, circa 500,000 T pa of solid by-products from processing of farmed fish are treated using ensiling (Bekkevold and Olafsen, 2007). Shell wastes coming from bivalve processing can represent up to 40% of total production requiring disposal/re-use (Bekkevold & Olafsen, 2007). Research investigating remediation of food processing waste is scant, but has shown good potential at laboratory scales for a variety of different food wastes. Travieso et al (2008) evaluated the performance of a laboratory-scale microalgae pond treating effluent from distillery wastewater. The biological oxygen demand was reduced by over 98% while removal of solids, nitrogen and phosphorus compounds was between 85 and 97% efficient. Similarly, Stevenson et al (1998) investigated the use of algae and rotifers to utilise waste water from maize processing. Research has also focused on utilising waste water from olive oil extraction which contains phenolic compounds (Pinto et al., 2003; Hodaifa et al., 2007), and is a major pollutant in some Mediterranean countries (Ramos-Cormenzana et al. 1995) due to its high BOD (Digman & Kim, 2008). The technology shares application with non-food waste water such as the pulp and paper industry wastewaters, which contain phenols comparable in concentration to those found in olive waste and are effectively utilised by diatoms and Chlorella sp. (Tarlan et al. 2002). Although significant removal of some waste fractions was achieved using Scenedesmus sp., the process remains to be optimised. BioAlgaeSorb will perfect the use of waste streams from participating SME-AG groups, enabling future crossover of the technology to a variety of other sectors. Project innovations, effluent remediation: • Some existing information exists on microalgae using industrial flue gases and liquid effluents. BioAlgaeSorb will bring innovation to this field by developing processes to reformulate these effluents into the most suitable form required by microalgae. This will enable microalgae production systems to maintain consistent performance despite the vagaries in effluent composition and quantity.

B1.2.3: Microalgae Production Technologies

The principles of microalgae cultivation in shallow open ponds, or raceways, and in closed photobioreactors (PBRs) were in place by the 1950s (Preisig and Andersen 2005). Cultivation, harvesting and processing have been refined in the intervening decades involving cross-disciplinary research and technological development encompassing biology, process engineering, mathematics and physics. The potential of culturing microalgae for the purposes of effluent bioremediation and biofuel production have long been recognised (reviewed by Chisti 2007). However existing commercial applications remain limited to relatively low volume / high value markets for specialty food and feed ingredients (Spolaore et al. 2006), whether as whole cell preparations (eg, Arthrospira sp, Chlorella sp), or extracts such as β-carotene and astaxanthin. Closed Photobioreactor (PBR) Systems Closed microalgae bioreactors offer theoretical advantages in terms of avoiding contamination, yielding higher culture densities and providing closer control over physicochemical conditions, with many more designs being described in the scientific literature (Carvalho et al. 2006, Eriksen 2008) and in patents than have been commercialised. These mainly involve photoautrophic production using natural or artificial lighting, although conventional stirred fermenters can be used to culture some microalgae species heterotrophically at high densities, without light (Harel and Place 2003).

1 5

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call

FP7-SME-

Complete PBR systems typically incorporate the following integrated components: (i) the culture vessel containing the microalgae culture, usually a light permeable vessel designed to present a short optical path under external illumination (see reviews by Carvalho et al. 2006, Eriksen 2008); (ii) the light delivery system typically consisting of, in the case of artificially illuminated reactors, banks of fluorescent or metal halide lamps that provide photosynthetically active radiation (PAR, 400700 nm) to the culture, while outdoor reactors may use natural incident light or solar collection devices of varying complexity; (iii) the gas exchange system which delivers carbon dioxide, and removes photosynthetically generated oxygen that may inhibit metabolism or otherwise damage the microalgae if allowed to accumulate; (iv) the harvesting system that is involved in concentrating the microalgae for downstream applications. Closed PBRs may be operated entirely manually, or, increasingly, incorporate automated monitoring and feedback subsystems to keep the internal culture conditions more stable. PBRs may be operated in batch, semi-continuous or continuous (chemostat) modes. Simple tubular PBRs are widely used in commercial aquaculture to produce live microalgae as a feed source for larvae of marine finfish, crustacea and bivalve molluscs (Muller-Feuga et al. 2003). The most common design is a semi-enclosed transparent column manufactured from polyethylene tubing or fibreglass (unit operating volume up to circa 500L, diameter to approximately 0.4 m), bubbled from the base with CO2-enriched air and illuminated externally via natural solar irradiation or artificial lighting. Such systems are not optimised in terms of illumination or gas transfer, but nonetheless offer a robust method of producing live microalgae at sufficient scale and with a suitable cost structure for commercial aquaculture hatcheries worldwide. More sophisticated closed PBRs are designed to offer shorter optical paths under external illumination, mainly achieved using tubular or flat plate vessel configurations manufactured from transparent materials (reviews by Carvalho et al. 2006, Eriksen 2008). These designs are intended to minimise light attenuation between the wall and the centre of the culture vessel, with typical tube diameters / plate thicknesses of ca. 0.05 m. Tubular PBRs vary in their configuration, including horizontal, vertical, helical and αshaped designs, whereas flat plate PBRs are typically thin rectangular chambers oriented vertically or inclined towards the sun, with or without alveolar (ribbed) plates incorporated. More novel methods of PBR illumination include solar collection devices such as light guides and fresnel lenses (Zijffers et al. 2008, Masojidek et al. 2009) and energy efficient, monochromatic light emitting diodes (Gordon and Polle 2007; Wang et al. 2007). The relatively high construction and operating costs and complexity of operation of closed PBRs limits the number of large-scale commercial systems operating globally to highvalue production runs. Despite their narrow dimensions, studies have demonstrated rapid light attenuation in high density closed PBRs within just several mm of the vessel wall, due to a combination of mutual shading and light scattering by microalgal cells and light absorption by their pigments (review by Eriksen 2008). Researchers have sought to explain the complexities of light distribution within PBRs using radial or diffuse light distribution models, enabling system productivity to be predicted in some cases (Eriksen 2008).

1 6

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call FP7-SME-

Open Ponds and Raceways By volume, most commercial microalgae production is for R-select species such as Chlorella sp., or extremophile species, such as Arthrospira sp, Dunaliella salina and Haematococcus pluvialis; these are grown in shallow fertilized ponds or raceways (Sheehan et al. 1998). Raceways typically consist of independent closed loop recirculation channels in which paddle wheel- generated flow is guided around bends by baffles placed in the flow channel; such systems can yield productivities of greater than 10 g ash free dry weight m-2 day-1 (Sheehan et al. 1998).

Figure 1.2. Illustration of an open raceway system (Tredici, 2009) and Photo Bioreactor System (nrel, 2009)

Engineering designs and operating procedures for cultivating these organisms in unmixed ponds and stirred raceways have been thoroughly studied (e.g. Borowitzka 2005). Shallow water depths of 0.2 to 0.3 m are typically used, while areal dimensions range from 0.5 to 1.0 ha for raceway or central pivot ponds (circular ponds incorporating centrally pivoted rotating agitator), to greater than 200 ha for extensive ponds used in Australia for D. salina production. Water management procedures vary according to the intensity of operation and may include direct CO 2 addition under automated pH-stat control in shallow raceways. Biomass may be harvested by flocculation or centrifugation (del Campo et al. (2007). While microalgae productivities will inevitably be sub-maximal in open raceways, it is generally envisaged that such systems will form the basis of microalgae production on the huge scale required for biofuels, due to their simplicity and low costs (Sheehan et al. 1998). Project innovations, microalgae culture systems: The project will adapt the hybrid microalgae production approach for remediation of aqueous and gaseous wastes from European industrial and agricultural/aquacultural sources. This will extend the current state-of-the-art in terms of selecting suitable microalgae species, defining processes for efficiently incorporating waste streams, optimising physico-chemical conditions in closed photobioreactors (PBRs) and downstream open raceways, maintaining hygiene / avoiding contamination, reusing nutrients and developing harvesting strategies. Mechanistic models will be developed and applied for the first time as a key innovation for optimising microalgae productions systems and operations.

B1.2.4: Microalgal Cell Harvesting Microalgal cultures are characterized by a high dilution ratio (a typical figure for the culture concentration is less than 1 g/L). Dewatering mechanisms are required for cell concentration and harvesting (as well as some extraction phases) which roughly correspond to 20–30% of the total cost of production ( Sukenik et al., 1988; Grima et al., 2003; Zittelli et al., 2006). Key operations currently used are gravity field sedimentation, centrifugation, flotation and filtration. The first challenge is to concentrate cells from a relatively dilute solutions 0.5 -5 kg.m-3 dry weight to solutions between 20 and 100 times more concentrated than the starting material. In a concentrated state, (7-10% solids) the rheology of the packed microalgae start to become non Newtonian and handling of the cells becomes problematic. At about 15-20% solids the systems are no longer fluid 1 7

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call

FP7-SME-

and not amenable to pumping, which makes handling more difficult. It is generally preferable to maintain the system as a liquid slurry of Newtonian character to facilitate efficient handling for further downstream processing using pumps. Although sedimentation is a simple process it is very slow (0.1 to 2.6 cm.h-1) (Choi et al, 2006) and in high temperature environments much of the biomass produced will deteriorate during such a harvesting process. Sedimentation alone is largely dismissed as a viable havesting method. However, flocculation caused by alkaline adjustment has been used to effectively remove Dunellial testolata (Horiuchi et al) and Cheatoceros sp from fluids (Csordas,2004, Knuckley, 2006). Centrifugation In most large-scale centrifuges, a centrifugal force equivalent to 5-10,000 g is possible and with large cells this can achieve over 95% removal under correct operational conditions (Molina Grima et al 2004). However, at large scale the use of centrifuges becomes more difficult as capital costs increase. This, together with the fact that specialised materials of construction (high strength, corrosion free alloys) and high maintenance costs required to operate in saline environments means that centrifugation is expensive. The energy costs of about 1kWh.m-3 have been quoted for centrifuges (Molina Grima et al 2004) and the lower capital, maintenance and management costs required for membrane filtration technology makes this approach more attractive (Wang et al 2006). Flotation Flotation is a commonly used approach to remove algae from reservoir water prior to its use as drinking water. It is well developed and mature set of processes. Typically the water is initially ozonated, after which the sensitised cells are then treated with about 10 ppm polyelectrolyte salts (typically aluminium) prior to being subjected to dissolved air flotation (DAF). DAF involves the generation of fine bubbles (< 10 μm) produced by a decompression of pressurized fluid, which then adhere to the flocs making them very buoyant causing them to rise rapidly to the surface of a separation tank. The resultant concentrated cell foam (7-10% dry weight) is then removed as slurry. These processes work well in fresh water and are capable of dealing with the large volumes required in commercial scale plant (>10,000 m 3 per day) (Crossley et al 2002). The main disadvantage of this approach is the contamination of the materials with the floc agent which may significantly reduce their value (Molina Grima et al 2003). Although these methods have not been proven in saline environments on a large scale, the integration of floatation into the bioreactor has been demonstrated. Using an integrated reactor and foam fractionator under appropriate conditions, up to 90% of a Chaetoceros sp. could be removed (Csordas and Wang 2004). Filtration There are many modes of filtration that can be used to concentrate cells, the most simple of which is dead end filtration. This is achieved with large quantities of dilute microalgae by using packed bed filters (mixed media or sand). T his type of filtration is limited by the rheological properties of the algae as these form compressible cakes which easily blind filters. This technique has been used successfully in the separation from reservoirs, where the algae concentrations are relatively low. The amount of water that can be processed is severely limited by the characteristics of algal materials, e.g. compressible cakes and the presence of extra-cellular foulant materials. These processes involve relatively very low energy consumption but the frequency of washing with loading increases energy costs and reduces filter productivity. Pressure or vacuum filtration can be used but concentration of the alga is required for these processes to be effective. Power consumptions for these operations are in the order of 0.3 to 2 kWh.m-3. To avoid problems in dead end filtration, cross flow filtration can be used; several studies have been published and demonstrate that high concentrations of algal cell can be attained (up to 100 kg.m 3). These filtration systems are easily upscaled, with rapid advances being made in their use and operation. Several studies have been carried out on laboratory scales and have shown that these systems are capable concentrating the algae and be used in downstream fractionation (Rossignol et al, 1999; Vandanjon et al 1999 and Rossi et al 2004). Reducing the process volume by at least a factor of 100 significantly reduces the costs of disruption and fractionation stages downstream. Although a definitive study on large scale algae harvesting has yet to be published, work has shown that the costs of the microfiltration river water are as low

0.2 kWh.m-3 of water processed. Several variables associated with the choice of membranes and type of organisms could increase this cost and there is considerable scope for optimisation of this process. As a guide to potential improvement, th e costs of desalination by reverse osmosis, where a far higher pressure process is used, have fallen dramatically (85%) over the past decade to less than €1/m-3 and with energy costs being a as low a 3 kWh.m-3. This is largely down to better membrane technology, greater membrane longevity; increase scale of operation and better system management. Project innovations, microalgae harvesting methods: Novel rapid separation technologies and separation schemes will be developed, exploiting the unique properties of microalgae to provide stable high quality concentrates and commodity materials e.g. protein and lipid fractions that will go for further refinement and purification to produce high value products; New methods of preservation and storage will be developed to allow high value algae-derived materials to be kept for long periods, thus maintaining their value and simplifying marketing and distribution.

B1.2.5: Microalgae Upgrading Cell disruption To maximise the value of the materials obtained from the processes, rapid and precise mechanical disruption of the cells is chosen in most cases as this avoids further chemical contamination of the algal preparation whilst preserving most 1 8

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call

FP7-SME-

of the functionality of the material within the cell. There are two processes proven on large scale, homogenisation and bead milling. Cell homogenisation involves the process fluid being forced through an orifice; this creates rapid pressure change as well high liquid shear impinges on the algae causing disruption. The second approach is the use of bead mills, these are vessels packed with small glass beads that are agitated at great speed. The result is that cells are disrupted, but the level of disruption is usually dependent upon the residence time in the system (Doucha and Livansky (2008). Cell strength size and shape of cells affect the performance of both methods. Optimisation of breakage is important as this involves the use of large amounts of energy and also affects the physical and chemical nature of the end product (e.g. extent to which lipid membranes are disintegrated). Scale up of these devices brings about some efficiency gains based on improved pump performance. Bead mills give an equivalent performance but design of the milling chamber and fluid mixing can have a significant affect, while disrupter requiring multiple passes are inefficient and allows poor mixing to given uneven process treatment of the cells. There is considerable scope to study these processes to find the correct breakage procedure, particularly the manipulation biological factors (cell wall strength and possible pre-treatments to achieve this) associated with this process. Fractionation and oil recovery After cell disruption, microalgal cells are fractionated. Generally, the principles of separation of materials from disrupted cells are well established and it is only the development of specific optimised protocols that recover all parts of the microalgae at maximum value. Many specific one-product protocols exist, for example the use of solvents (such as hexane) and salt precipitation of proteins which contaminate the fractions and require further remediation. It is for these reasons that methods of separation based upon size, charge and density are preferred: Fat droplet separation can be achieved by microfiltration, while the soluble proteins, using a diafiltration process, will pass through a microfiltration membrane creating a fat-free, soluble protein fraction that can be concentrated and dried. This material can be used as source for further refining (enzymes functional protein etc) alternatively the density differences may be exploited using centrifugation which is more effective in the absence of emulsifying soluble proteins. Further fractionation of the cell debris is also possible so that the cell wall materials (carbohydrates and silica) and other organics such as pigments may be isolated. Thermo-chemical conversion – pyrolysis Pyrolysis is a technique used to upgrade biomass at reasonably large scales through the slow heating in the absence of oxygen to produce gaseous, oil and char products. Cracking is a technique used to breakdown larger hydrocarbons, and other molecules, into smaller, more desirable hydrocarbons in the presence of a size selective catalyst and the absence of oxygen and can be used to further upgrade the oil fraction from pyrolysis processes. In a recent study Grierson et al (2008) investigated the pyrolysis of dried and finely ground algae biomass using a slow pyrolysis method; it was found that up to 43% by volume heavy bio-oil could be produced for Tetraselmis and Chlorella species. Catalysts used for cracking include zeolites (Twaiq 1999) and other mesoporous aluminosilicates (Twaiq 2003). A number of 3- dimensional structures called pillared clays containing various metals have also been investigated for their ability to crack vegetable oils such as canola oil, palm oil and sunflower oil into biofuels (Kloprogge 2005). During the last two decades pyrolysis has been optimised for a number of algal species using temperatures of up to 600°C, yielding liquid components of up to 70wt% of organics in the algal cell (3-10). Of primary importance is the Energy Consumption Ratio (ECR) for the process (defined as the energy required to heat the algal cells up to the reaction temperature over the available energy of oil produced). For microalgae, the process is more economical than processing lignocellulosic materials and is more easily manipulated. Weimin et al. (7) investigated the slow vacuum pyrolysis of dried samples of Chlorella protothecoides. The amount of oil and gas produced during pyrolysis was greater than the content of crude oil in the cells, indicating that other chemicals such as protein and water soluble carbohydrate were converted into fuel oil or gas by thermochemical techniques. In a successive study Miao et al. (10) compared the product of the fast pyrolysis of autotrophic and heterotrophic Chlorella p. They found that heterotrophic Chlorella has a stable bio-oil yield 3.4 times higher than autotrophic sample of the same cells, and double that of wood - suggesting that there is a commercial potential for large-scale production of liquid fuels from microalgae by fast

pyrolysis. In general, pyrolysis can be a useful approach for dried, or even untreated biomass and biomass residues, or for use in local co-firing of biomass. However, in pyrolysis of entire algal biomass, it remains unclear whether the return in oil in any way improves the yield that might be extracted from the biomass for upgrading. There is also the question of the high commercial value biochemicals; pyrolysis would destroy these. However, there may well be a place for pyrolysis of the residual biomass after oil and high value product extraction to maximize the yield from the biomass. Catalytic Trans-esterification Biodiesel is produced via trans-esterification, where triglycerides present in vegetable oils are catalytically esterified, usually with methanol (methanolysis), to yield the corresponding FAME and glycerol. Both homogenous (same phase) and heterogenous (different phase) catalysis can be used to drive this reaction. The main distinction between these two types is the possible recovery and recycling of the (solid) catalyst in heterogenous catalysis, potentially reducing the overall conversion costs. Homogeneous acid or base catalysis: Homogeneous acid or base catalysis have the advantage of the catalyst being in constant contact with the reaction mixture leading to increased rates, and is a generally used method for biodiesel production from seed oils. A problem with homogeneous (acid or base) catalysts is that they suffer from the requirement of a neutralisation step to remove the catalyst. Additionally, plant and algal oils can contain free fatty acids (FFAs) at; concentrations of up to 25% 1 9

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call

FP7-SME-

(Dunstan et al. 1994). If these are not pre-treated (esterified) then they can react with homogeneous base catalysts during trans-esterification and form the corresponding soaps, leading to downstream separation problems (Huber et al 2006). FFAs may also be formed from water reacting with FAME during storage; FAME fuels have a tendency to hydrolysis or undergo oxidative decomposition and storage of the fuel product must be maximized for longevity (Paligová et al 2008). Project innovations, microalgae-based products: The adoption of a biorefinery approach will increase both the numbers of products and the overall financial return per unit microalgal biomass compared to present processing techniques (e.g., by combining oil extraction for transport fuel with pyrolysis of residue for electricity generation); Biofuel production efficiency will be increased by using microalgal rather than traditional plant biomass, owing to higher areal productivity of microalgae and the ability to utilise the entire biomass; The screening of microalgal biomass fractions for useful chemical compounds and, vitally, as feedstock compounds for the traditional chemical industry will be extended. Pigments, PUFAs and other high value compounds have been identified and may be separated out with the oils suitable for upgrading to fuel and lubricant components (the latter fractions having received relatively little attention to date); The conversion of microalgal lipids to biofuels has been almost exclusively centred around the conversion to fatty acid methyl esters (FAME). A much smaller field is the production of decarboxylated fuel, which unlike FAME may directly replace current road transport and heating fuels. Within the project new solid catalysts will be investigated for the efficient production of both FAME and deoxygenated biofuels; Fractionated materials will be assessed for their suitability in food and feed applications. Efficient heterogeneous (solid) catalysts: Efficient heterogeneous (solid) catalysts offer economic benefits in producing biofuels since, unlike homogeneous catalysts, they are easily separated after trans-esterification, and so can be readily recycled, lowering production costs. The precise protocols have yet to be optimised but advances offer potentially robust and FFA tolerant catalysts for trans-esterification catalysts for microalgae lipid feedstocks.

2 0

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call FP7-SME-

B1.3: Contribution to Advancement of Knowledge / Technological Progress
As reported in the preceding Section, there is unprecedented global interest in cultivated microalgae for biofuels and other applications, coincident with tighter than ever EU regulation of industrial and agricultural emissions to mitigate climate change (GHGs) and maintain high water quality (soluble nutrients). Substantial work has been carried out in the past on specific aspects of effluent bioremediation (gaseous and aqueous) and on microalgae exploitation for different purposes, but the available technologies have not yet been combined or extended in the integrated manner proposed by BioAlgaeSorb for the benefit of diverse groups of SMEs. The BioAlgaeSorb approach will be developed from the existing knowledge base by an expert team of RTD performers in collaboration with well established commercial microalgae technology providers, acting on behalf of European SME AG members in the bioenergy and food production sectors. An integrated knowledge platform will be founded and synergistic links established between currently disparate SME – AG sectors and between SME-AGs / RTDs. The main contributions to advancement of knowledge / technological progress will be provided through: Enhanced understanding of requirements for microalgae mass cultivation using industrial and aquacultural/ agricultural effluents as nutrient sources. A novel approach will be developed to ensure that the effluents produced at SME-AG member locations are suitable for microalgae cultivation. Following characterisation of the different effluent streams, pre-treatment processes will be developed for each effluent category, followed by reformulation into a consistent nutrient package for microalgae. This will enable microalgae cultivation systems installed at SME-AG member locations to maintain consistent output despite variations in effluent abundance and composition and will furthermore yield a valuable source of nutrients for other applications such as plant growth. Development of reliable, scalable microalgae production processes tailored to particular effluent sources, guided by a mechanistic modelling approach. In order to capitalise on the remediation potential of microalgae, there is a pressing need to develop scalable biomass production processes for implementation at SMEAG member sites. The importance of this is reflected in the high abundance of scientific literature (often lab scale studies) and patents in the area of microalgae cultivation, contrasting with the relatively low numbers of processes and systems adopted commercially. BioAlgaSorb will be developed from the well proven microalgae production systems provided by participating SMEs. Uniquely, the configuration and management of these systems will be optimised for pre-treated effluents via computer modelling. The approach to be taken is to start with an established mechanistic model of microalgal growth. This model is a dynamic (not steady-state) photoacclimative description of temperature-light-multinutrient limited growth. This type of model is essential to properly consider the cost-benefit implications of the process (for example, to properly include nutrient consumption, self-shading of suspensions etc.). The model is not a crude thermodynamic, Monod or Droop quota model. Rather it is founded on wellgrounded physiological understanding, with feedback interactions describing nutrient transport (N, P, Fe, Si etc; differentiating between N-sources, for example), photosynthesis and photoacclimation (with changes in light and nutrients), respiration, and changing chemical stoichiometry (e.g. with changes in nutrient status). This modelling structure will be employed within BioAlgaeSorb to provide a mechanistic basis for a thorough and transparent analysis for the design, geometries and efficient operation of coupled microalgae photobioreactors and raceways at SME-AG member locations.

Enhanced understanding of microalgae harvesting and stabilisation methods. The harvesting of microalgae cells from dilute solutions (~1-5 kg biomass/m3 process water) poses a considerable technical challenge for large scale cultivation. The costs of current harvesting methods restrict commercial microalgae production to high value applications (eg, production of nutritional supplements – PUFA, pigments and vitamins). A number of established harvesting methods exist, but each of these has limitations, eg traditional approaches include dissolved air floatation (DAF) incorporating poly- ionic flocculants (Al, Fe or ionic polymers), centrifuges and flocculation. Most processes add materials to the system that are undesirable and devalue the quality of the material, and/or are reliant on very expensive equipment that is intolerant of saline solutions. BioAlgaeSorb will develop a series of processes that avoid the limitations of other harvesting methods and determ their most approprate usage in relation to various ― o p e r ngt ienvelop e encountered by SME-AG ine i a s‖ members. These operating envelopes are based upon the physical conditions associated with the process water (chemical and physical characteristics), the microalgae species (structural and physical properties) and the economics of the local operations. The following specific processing methods will be investigated and their potential for cost effective implementation evaluated: electroflocculation (EF); dissolved air flotation (DAF) using ozone as a pre-treatment; microfiltration; centrifugation; hybrid processes (combinations of the above). Once harvested, pre-treatment and preservation procedures (freezing of concentrates and spray drying) will be developed to provide high quality stable materials. Development of efficient processes for microalgae fractionation and biorefining, to yield biofuel and bioenergy substrates, food- and feedstuffs and fine chemicals. The development of an integrated biorefinery for microalgae biomass is a central innovative feature of the BioAlgaeSorb project, designed to maximise the numbers of usable microalgae products and economic return per unit biomass produced. The elements of this biorefinery are shown 2 1

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call

FP7-SME-

schematically in Figure 1 (Section 1) and encompass direct thermo-chemical conversion of intact biomass (or biomass residue following oil extraction) to liquid biofuel, physical separation of intact biomass into major fractions (protein, lipid, carbohydrate), upgrading of the lipid fraction into current generation biodiesel (trans-esterification) and into ― gee n‖ biodiesel (decarboxylation and decarbonylation of r fatty acids), and extraction of specific valuable pigments (phycobiliproteins). This new microalgal biorefinery will provide a series of processing options that can be tailored to the needs of different SME-AG sectors and individual SMEs. The biorefinery will furthermore offer a template for the broader microalgal biotechnology sector internationally, raising the impact of the investment beyond the immediate consortium and providing opportunities to SMEs for licencing, etc. Advancement of knowledge on the economic viability of “phyco-remediation” technologies for European SMEs. Of crucial importance, the BioAlgaeSorb project will examine the whole life cycle costs of the processes developed, requiring the coupling of a description of the processes themselves with that of an economic model. This will take into account not only the economics of running the new processes, but also the cost/benefit of not having to otherwise handle the previously unremediated effluents. A new coupled technical-economic model will be developed and run under different physical forcings (e.g., meteorological data, waste water stream composition) and also under different economic scenarios (cost of fertilizers, of land, energy, and of the engineering plant). From this analysis will emerge data that will indicate under which conditions the operation of the whole system will be cost negative, positive, or neutral, hence informing the SME-AGs and their members sector on where greatest leverage is to be gained in applying new BioAlgaeSorb technologies.

B1.4: Quality and Effectiveness of S/T Methodology and Associated Work Plan
B1.4.1: Overall Strategy of the Work Plan Introduc tion The participating SME AGs and AGs have identified complementary challenges and key areas of opportunity and have recruited an experienced RTD partnership to develop new processes and products on their behalf. The project work plan has been organised into an integrated series of work packages, A thorough scientific and technological foundation will be developed in WP 1 to guide the definition of specifications based on the needs and regulations in the industry and in regions of the EU. Based on the outputs from WP 1, the RTD performers with input from the SME-AGs and SMEs will in WPs 2-5 carry out RTD activities to define system and process specifications and to design & build prototypes, test and optimise and finally validate (WP 6) and implement the process into the industry by various activities including the establishment of demonstration, training and dissemination activities (WP7 & 8). Research and Technological Development Activities The work plan has been structured to exploit the skills of the participating RTD performers, namely SU (microalgae production technologies; mechanistic modelling; bio-process engineering), TI (fluids handling; process control, mechanical enginering, prototype design and manfacture), UDUR (upgrading of biomass lipids to biofuels, in particular via heterogeneous catalysts); HCMR (microalgae production technologies; microalgae-based effluent remediation) and UFL (thermo-chemical biomass conversions [incl pyrolysis]; liquid biofuels). All RTDs will be involved in building up the scientific and technological understanding in

WP1, with assistance from the SME- AGs who will contact their members and facilitate an information flow between SMEs and the RTDs. Preliminary characterisation of different effluent streams will also be performed in WP1 to guide the specific direction of the subsequent WPs. The next 4 WPs will develop technologies for each part of the value chain, involving combined inputs from the RTDs and SMEs. In WP2, HCMR will lead the RTD on microalgae biomass production aided by VAS and Ingrepro; SU will develop biomass harvesting processes for these SMEs in WP3; UDU will lead the development of biomass upgrading methods on behalf of VFT in WP4; and UFL will devise thermo-chemical conversions to biofuels for Sea Marconi in WP5. In WP6 include system integration to ensure focus on the whole value chain from micro-algae production to thermo-chemical conversion to biofuels. WP6 furher include industrial validation/benchmarking, economic evaluations as well as risk assessment and contingecy management of the RTD activities. Demonstration Activities Within WP7, the SME AGs will arrange demonstrations to their members as well as include the broader audience. The participating SMEs will further extend the audience for demonstration activities via their contact networks and existing custumer base. The demonstration will include the business of prototype equipment and processes for microalgae biomass production, harvesting, upgrading and thermo-chemical conversion that have been developed in the preceding WPs and will be coordinated with the running of lab and fulls scale tests of the different systems. 2 2

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call

FP7-SME-

Other Activities WP8 include Innovation Related Activities and Training. The SME-AGs will play a major role in the dissemination and exploration activities and a primary target for the activities will be their members across Europe. The dissemination channels will be input to publications, promotion and demo CDs, leaflets and other printed material, web based activity, online courses and exhibitions, conferences, seminars, especially towards enduser communities and associations in the relevant industrial sectors and especially the bio-energy sector. The success depends on the industry sector driving the system itself and that the system specifically targets the needs of the ME companies in the relevant sectors. Management Activities Co-ordination between the EC and project consortium ensuring that all milestones, reports, and project financial administration is prepared in accordance with the contractual requirements. Integration of effort between RTD performers and partners. Monitoring that each of the partners and the RTD performers use their own resources effectively through internal project management. Development of a technology implementation plan to aid the dissemination and exploitation process. Prepare Dissemination and Utilization plan (DUP). Ris ks Having undertaken an analysis for each of the project activities, the following risks have been identified and contingency measures put in place to minimise any impacts on delivery of the new BioAlgaeSorb technologies. Table 1.3: Risk Description for the Project Imp Prob act Risk Description ab. (L1 (L1 M2 M2 MANAGEMENT
Changes to consortium members or key personnel during Management disagreements among partners TECHNICAL Failure to develop effective methods for microalgae biomass production using pre-treated Failure to provide sufficient samples of microalgae biomass for Failure to develop novel biomass harvesting methods Failure to develop effective novel refinery and upgrading Failure to tailor pyrolysis processes for microalgae Failure to provide effective technical & economic appraisals of new BioAlgaeSorb INNOVATION-RELATED Mediu m Mediu m Mediu m Mediu m

Ris k Sco re
4

Preventive Actions
The consortium has the resources necessary for substitution Conflict resolution processes in place and conveyed from start of project Work plan focuses on effluents, systems and species that are known to fit criteria Selection of partners and technologies with proven track record New harvesting methods developed from proven of partners Selection and technologies with proven track record Pyrolysis methods will be extension of proven technologies Selection of partners and evaluation methods with proven track record i related

Solutions
Appoint new consortium members / assign replacement staff Follow conflict resolution rules and handle the conflict at appropriate level Adjust work plan for the most suitable effluent sources Obtain biomass samples from outside the Adjust work plan towards more conventional Confine the scope of RTD on refinery and upgrading to most Adjust pyrolysis RTD to fewer microalgae species Extend evaluation tasks more broadly within the consortium

4

Low

High

3

Low Mediu m Mediu m Low

High Low Mediu m Mediu m Low

3 3 4 3

High

3

IPR disagreements Ineffective dissemination

Mediu m Low

Mediu m Mediu m

4 3

IPR policy clear within consortium agreement from outset SME AGs suitably resourced for dissemination

Adhere to agreed written procedures Extend dissemination activities more widely within the

B1.4.2: Timing of Work Packages and their Components The timing of Work Packages and their components is summarised in Table 1.4, below.

2 3

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2 Table 1.4: Timing of Work Packages and Their Components
N WP 1 T 1.1 T 1.2 T 1.3 T 1.4 Task Time Scientific Understanding and Advancement of Operational Parameters Physico-chemical Requirements for Optimal Microalgae Production Microalgae Harvesting Processes Microalgae Biomass Conversion Processes Critique of Modelling Approaches for Technical and Economic Evaluations Lea SU SU SU UFL SU D HCM R SU HCM R HCM R T I SU SU SU SU SU SU SU UDU R SU SU UDU R UF L UFL UFL UFL UFL T I T I T I SU T I T I T I T I D D D D 1 2 3 4 5 Year 61 7 D D M 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 Year 12 1 8 9 2 0 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 5 2 6 2 7 2 8 2 9

Call FP7-SME-

Year 33 3 0 1

3 2

3 3

3 4

3 5

3 6

WP Optimization of Microalgae Cultivation on Effluents 2 T 2.1 T 2.2 T 2.3 T 2.4 T 2.5 WP 3 T T 3.2 T 3.3 T 3.4 T 3.5 WP 4 T 4.1 T 4.2 T 4.3 WP 5 T T 5.2 T 5.3 T 5.4 WP 6 T 6.1 T 6.2 T 6.3 T 6.4 WP 7 T 7.1 T 7.2 Effluent Characterization, Upstream Processing and Reformulation as Microalgae Nutrients Define Culture Conditions for Selected Microalgae Species Using Pretreated Aqueous and Gaseous Effluents Define Bioreactor and Raceway Operating Conditions for Selected Microalgae Species, Effluent Sourcesof Nutrient Delivery and Optimisation of Transfers in Microalgae Control and Operating Locations Cultivation Systems for Technical Evaluations Modelling Approaches Microalgae Harvesting Technologies Colloidal Characterisation of Selected Microalgae to Facilitate Optimal Optimisation of Conventional Harvesting Technologies in the Context of Microalgae Culturing Systems Concentrates and Their Preservation Characterisation of Microalgae Investigation of Hybrid Harvesting Technologies: Electro-Flocculation Development and Assessment of a Novel Flotation Technique Without the Use of Deleterious Additives Refinery and Upgrading Processes for Microalgae Biomass Disruption of Microalgae Physical Separation / Fractionation Schemes for Fractionation of Disruptates to Produce Stable Materials Conversions Chemical Thermo-chemical Conversions of Microalgae Biomass Design and Construction of a Laboratory Scale Pyrolysis Reactor Installation, System Set-up and Testing Chemical-Physical Characterisation of Products Preliminary Tests for Heat and Power Production System Integration and Industrial Validation System Integration Industrial Validation / Benchmarking Modelling Approaches for Economic Evaluations Risk Assessment and Contingency Management Demonstration Activities Demonstrations to SME Staff Demonstrations to IAG Staff

D

M

D

D

D

M

D M

D

D

D

D

D

24

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call FP7-SME-

WP 8 T 8.1 T 8.2 T 8.3 T 8.4 WP 9 T T 9.2 T 9.3 T 9.4

Innovation Related Activities / Training Protection of IPR Uptake of Results by Proposers Dissemination of Knowledge / Promotion of Knowledge Training Consortium Management Consortium Management Technical Management IRA Management Organise Meetings

NoB io AEBI OM NoBi o AEBI OM AEBI OM NoB io NoBi NoBi o AEBI OM NoBi o

D

d

d

d

d

D

d

d

d

D

d

D

D D

25

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2 B1.4.3: Work Package Descriptions Table W P N WP 1 WP 2 WP 3 WP 4 WP 5 WP 6 WP 7 WP 8 WP 9 Table Del iv. No D 1.1 D 1.2 D 2.1 D 2.2 D 2.3 D 2.4 D 2.5 D 2.6 D 3.1 D 3.2 D 3.3 D 3.4 D 4.1 D 4.2 D 4.3 D 4.4 D 4.5 1.3a: Work Package List Work Package Title Scientific Understanding and Advancement of Operational Parameters Optimization of Microalgae Cultivation on EffluentsHarvesting Technologies Microalgae Refinery and Upgrading Processes for Microalgae Biomass Thermo-chemical Conversions of Microalgae Biomassand Industrial System Integration Validation Demonstration Activities Innovation Related Activities / Training Consortium Management TOTAL 1.3b: Deliverables List Deliverable Title Reference document on current technologies for microalgae mass cultivation and biorefinery approaches suitable for BioAlgaeSorb applications Report reviewing existing modelling approaches suitable for technical and economic evaluation of microalgae-based effluent remediation Report on the composition, formulation and costs of effluent-derived microalgae nutrient media and gases the efficacy of pre-treated / reformulated Report on microalgae effluents and gases for microalgae cultivation - /laboratory Report on the efficacy of pre-treated reformulated microalgae effluents and gases for microalgae cultivation - photobioreactor and raceway studies Report on engineering processes for the controlled delivery of microalgae nutrients and efficient mixing and transport of microalgae within cultivation the technical feasibility of the methods Report on systems developed for effluent remediation and microalgae biomass production at SME AG member locations, based on computer Report on the performance of prototype microalgae cultivation units at SME AG member locations Report on the physical characteristics of the four microalgae species Report on optimal harvesting procedures using conventional technologies Report on physical and chemical properties of microalgae concentrates and their drying characteristics feasibility of novel microalgae Report on the harvesting processes: electro-flocculation and ozonated air floatation Report on the optimal conditions for biomass disruption of four microalgaethe production of stabilised, fractionated Report on species microalgal materials and their composition Report on transesterification and decarboxylation of model compounds using heterogeneous catalysts and enzyme catalysts Report on pyrolysis of microalgal fraction using heterogeneous catalysts Report on transesterification and decarboxylation of microalgal fractions using heterogeneous catalysts W P N 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 Natu re R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R Type of Activi RTD RTD RTD RTD RTD RTD DEM OTHE RMGT Lea d Part 8 1 1 8 1 0 1 2 9 9 1 1

Call FP7-SME-

Lea Pers d onPart mont SU 19.5 HCM RSU UDU R UFL T I T I NoBi o NoBi o 102. 52 6 4 4 8 1 46.5 2 5 3 6 2 4 404. 5

Star End t Mon Mon th 1 6 4 6 6 1 1 1 8 1 1 3 4 2 4 3 0 3 6 3 6 3 4 3 6 3 6

Disse m. Lev P U P U P U P U P U P U P U P U P U P U P U P U P U P U P U P U P U

Deliv ery Da Month 6 Month 6 Month 18 Month 18 Month 24 Month 18 Month 24 Month 30 Month 9 Month 12 Month 18 Month 24 Month 15 Month 24 Month 15 Month 24 Month 30

2 6

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2 D 5.1 D 5.2 D 5.3 D 5.4 D 6.1 D 6.2 D 6.3 D 7.1 D 8.1 D 8.2 D 8.3 D 8.4 D 8.5 D 9.1 D 9.2 Description of the design of the pilot reactor Description of the test program of the pyrolysis unit Report on the result of bio-oil production and analysis the result of bio-oil in prime movers Report on Report describing the work performed in WP6, including the building of prototype(s), system integration, functional testing and benchmarking plan Draft report on risk assessment and contingency Final report on risk assessment and contingency plan Report on results from the demonstration/ case study Project WEB site Draft report on potentially competitive patents and a plan for patent application(s) if required with exploitation agreements between the partners Final report on potentially competitive patents and a plan for patent application(s) if required with exploitation agreements between the partners Production of support material for transfer of the knowledge to the partners through case studies on training material and evaluation from the Report and a generic design guide participants Report on legal and societal aspects and implications of the project internal reporting and communication Procedure for between partners in the project 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 7 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 R R R R R R R R O R R R R R R

Call FP7-SMEP U P U P U P U P U P U P U P U P U P U P U P U P U P U P U Month 6 Month 12 Month 30 Month 36 Month 30 Month 18 Month 36 Month 34 Month 3 Month 18 Month 36 Month 30 Month 36 Month 36 Month 36

Table 1.3c: Work Package Description Work Package No. WP 1 Start Date or Start Month 1 Work Package Title ScientificEvent Understanding and Advancement of Operational Parameters Activity Type RTD Participant Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Person-months per 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 8 2 2 2 2 Participant Objectives To create a detailed scientific understanding of key variables required for the development of new BioAlgaeSorb processes within WPs 2 to 5. Description of Work Task 1.1 Physico-chemical Requirements for Optimal Microalgae Production Task leader SU and participants NoBio, AEBIOM, BTA, Ingrepro, VAS, HCMR The purpose of this task is to define parameters for the successful cultivation of microalgae at different SME AG member locations dealing with a range of effluent types and different prevailing environmental conditions. The physiological requirements for optimum microalgal growth will be reviewed with specific reference to commercially valuable species known to be culturable on effluents (aqueous effluents and industrial flue gases). Microalgae cultivation systems and processes will also be reviewed in detail to determine the most appropriate configurations for BioAlgaeSorb applications, focusing on the technological approaches for microalgae production used by the participating SMEs (ie, tubular photobioreactors and shallow raceways). The compositions of effluents produced at SME AG member sites will furthermore be analysed to best inform the pre-treatment steps required for using these effluents as nutrient and CO2 sources for microalgae cultivation. Task 1.2 Microalgae Harvesting Processes

2 7

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call FP7-SME-

Task 1.3 Microalgae Biomass Conversion Processes Task leader UFL and participants SU, UDUR Existing methods for refining and upgrading microalgae biomass will be examined in detail, with reference to applicable technologies used for other types of biomass, in order to direct RTD on microalgae disruption and fractionation, chemical conversion of microalgal oil fractions to biodiesel, and thermo-chemical conversion of intact or preextracted biomass to liquid biofuel. The specific processes to be interrogated are: physical cell disruption (homogenisation, sonication); fractionation of disruptates using micro-, ultra- and nano-filtration methods; extraction of microalgal pigments using mineral matrices; biodiesel production from microalgal oil fractions via heterogeneous catalysis and enzymatic reactions; and pyrolytic processes for the production of liquid biofuels from solid biomass. The operating conditions for these processes will be examined in relation to likely BioAlgaeSorb process streams and potential products, so as facilitate choice of recovery and upgrading operations and to identify critical variables for further study. Task 1.4 Critique of Modelling Approaches for Technical and Economic Evaluations Task leader SU Modelling is a critical component of the BioAlgaesorb project, providing a cost and timeefficient route to testing alternative routes to the deployment of microalgae for effluent remediation. Prior to commencing the modelling work it is necessary to perform an analysis of the state-of-the-art to ensure that i) work is not duplicated, ii) that the most appropriate modelling approaches are deployed to the project. This task will develop both critiques for the operational side of the processes (i.e., the biology-physics-engineering interface) and also of the economic life cycle analysis that runs in parallel with it. The work will involve experts in both subject areas as applied to the subject of deployment of microalgae as intermediaries in bioremediation and production of added value products. Analysis will extend into allied fields, notably those associated with the use of other microbes (bacteria, fungi) in similar arenas. Deliverables D 1.1 - Month 6 - Reference document on current technologies for microalgae mass cultivation and biorefinery approaches suitable for BioAlgaeSorb applications D 1.2 - Month 6 - Report reviewing existing modelling approaches suitable for technical and economic evaluation of microalgae-based effluent remediation Milestones M 1 - Month 6 - Completed specification criteria for development of BioAlgaeSorb technologies

Work Package No. Work Package Title Activity Type Participant Number Person-months per Participant

WP 2 Start Date or Start Month 4 Event Optimization of Microalgae Cultivation on Effluents RTD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 0 0.5 0 1 1 0 28 12 0

11 60

12 0

Objectives To develop processes for pre-treating and re-formulating aqueous and gaseous effluents as effective nutrient sources for cultivated microalgae; To select suitable microalgae species for mass cultivation on representative effluent sources; To develop robust methods for cultivating the selected microalgae species on representative effluent sources; Description of Work Task 2.1 Effluent Characterization, Upstream Reformulation as Microalgae Nutrients Task leader SU and participants NoBio, AEBIOM, BTA, Ingrepro, VAS, HCMR Processing and

Handling and pre-treatment of nutrient sources: Pre-treatment methods for 2 8

BioAlgaeSorb

Call FP7-SME-

2008-2 products from pyrolysis will also be investigated as nutrient sources. The influence of pre-oxidation by biological means will be investigated to remove organics. Microfiltration of digester fluids and other nutrient rich waste waters will be investigated. Finally methods of nutrient blending will also be investigated to give rapid balanced growth of the algae. Treatment of recycled water: Having produced clean nutrient streams in concentrated form, the appropriate kinetics and dosing to produce sterile streams will be investigated, including comparison of UV light, ozone and pasteurisation methods. The microbial content will be assessed before and after treatment and the capital and operational costs of the developed sterilisation methods calculated. Medium standardisation, medium formulation and control: Knowing the compositions of the selected microalgae, work will be carried out to formulate suitable nutrient mixes using the concentrated N and P sources and pre-treated gas. Formulations containing suitable N and P ratios will be manufactured for evaluation with selected microalgae in Task 2.2. The absorption of compounds from the gas phase will also be examined, including oxides of S and N, and prospects assessed for blending flue gas and air. The costs of formulating these media will be calculated. Task 2.2 Define Culture Conditions for Selected Microalgae Species Using Pre-treated Aqueous and Gaseous Efflue nts Task leader HCMR and participants SU Effluent-tolerant microalgae species identified from WP1 will be cultured at laboratory scale using the nutrient formulations and gas mixes developed in Task 2.1. This will include cultivation under different abiotic conditions (temperature, salinity, light intensity, etc) to ensure that the finally selected organisms are suitable for the prevailing local operating conditions of the SME AG members. Those microalgae species that are intolerant of the pre-treated effluent sources and/or varying abiotic conditions will be excluded from further work and up to 4 species (including freshwater and marine representatives) carried forward for process optimization. Task 2.3 Define Bioreactor and Raceway Operating Conditions for Selected Microalgae Species, Effluent Sources and Operating Locations Task leader HCMR and participants NoBio, AEBIOM, BTA, Ingrepro, VAS, SU Those microalgae selected from Task 2.2 will be cultured on larger scale in experimental tubular photobioreactors (PBRs) and shallow raceways based on the microalgae system technologies of the participating SMEs (Varicon Aqua Solutions Ltd; Ingrepro NV), in order to determine the most appropriate inoculation methods and delivery rates for recycled nutrients and flue gases. Nutrient management regimes will be developed for microalgae PBRs and raceways operated either independently or in sequence (ie, inoculation of high density microalgae from closed PBR into open raceway). Trials will be carried out at different partner locations and under different programmed environmental conditions representing the range of ambient abiotic conditions experienced by SME AG members. Task 2.4 Control of Nutrient Delivery and Optimisation of Transfers in Microalgae Cultivation Systems Task leader TI and participants Ingrepro, VAS Engineering processes will be devised for the controlled delivery of pre-treated aqueous and gaseous effluents into closed tubular PBRs and open raceways, to ensure efficient utilisation by the microalgae and to minimise losses to the environment.

This will incorporate automated feedback in response to status of the microalgae population and to water chemistry parameters. Pumping and gas transfer systems will also be developed to enable efficient mixing and transport of the selected microalgae species within the cultivation systems, with minimal physical damage. This will include options for continuous or batch harvesting of the microalgae. Task 2.5 Modelling Approaches for Technical Evaluations Task leader SU Dynamic models will be constructed of each component part of the microalgae production system, building on information obtained from Task 1.4 and Tasks 2.1 to 2.3 for the biological and physical processes involved. The purpose is to integrate information from other components of WP 2 into a dynamic testable platform for subsequent system integration and industrial validation activities (WP 6). The computer models will make use of mechanistic descriptions of microalgal physiology to ensure that the description of the biological behaviour takes appropriate account of changes in physical parameters including light, water turbidity, nutrient types and concentrations, temperature and pH. These biological descriptions will be placed within descriptions of commercial 2 9

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call FP7-SME-

PBRs and raceways of different size, shape, dilution, illumination, temperature, nutrient influx etc., ie factors that affect the ability of the microalgae to grow and remove nutrients. Combinations of different PBR and raceway configurations will be tested using these models. Coupled with these descriptors will be models describing the fate of material harvested from the reactors, especially with respect to the recycling of water and nutrients. Both the biological and physical descriptors will be flexible, enabling the examination of different scenarios both with respect to system configurations within a given geographic zone, and also between geographic zones. This is important given significant differences across Europe with respect to light, water supply, nutrient availability, land and energy costs, etc. Task 2.6 Prototype Development and Testing Task leader SU, participants HCMR, TI, AEBIOM, BTA, VAS, Ingrepro Based on the findings from Tasks 2.1 – 2.5, prototype microalgae production systems will be installed and operated at the premises of SME AG members - for flue gas remediation at an AEBIOM member site; for aqueous effluent remediation at a BTA member site. The performance of these prototypes will be assessed and tuned in relation to model parameters (Task 2.5); the prototypes will also be used for Demonstration purposes in WP 7. Deliverables D 2.1 - Month 18 - Report on the composition, formulation and costs of effluent-derived microalgae nutrient media and gases D 2.2 - Month 18 - Report on the efficacy of pretreated / reformulated microalgae effluents and gases for microalgae cultivation laboratory scale studies D 2.3 - Month 24 - Report on the efficacy of pre-treated / reformulated microalgae effluents and gases for microalgae cultivation - photobioreactor and raceway studies D 2.4 - Month 18 - Report on engineering processes for the controlled delivery of microalgae nutrients and efficient mixing and transport of microalgae within cultivation systems D 2.5 - Month 24 - Report on the technical feasibility of the methods developed for effluent remediation and microalgae biomass production at SME AG member locations, based on computer modeling D 2.6 - Month 30 - Report on the performance of prototype microalgae cultivation units at SME AG member locations Milestones M 2 - Month 18 - Processes developed for utilisation of aqueous and gaseous effluents for microalgae cultivation, ready for prototype development M3 – Month 34 – Prototype BioAlgaeSorb microalgae production systems tested

Work Package No. Work Package Title Activity Type Participant Number Person-months per Participant

WP 3 Start Date or Start Month 6 Event Microalgae Harvesting Technologies RTD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 24 0

10 0

11 0

12 0

Objectives To develop methods for harvesting the selected microalgae species with specific reference to costs and operability; To develop primary separation strategies based upon a sound physical basis using properties of the organisms and the process fluids; To provide a basis for choosing the harvesting process for different microalgal products; To investigate batch and Description of Work Task 3.1 Colloidal Characterisation of Selected Microalgae to Facilitate Optimal Harvest Conditions Task leader SU The selected microalgae species will be characterised with respect to their physical properties including size, shape, density and surface charge (zeta potential) as a function of culture age and nutrient status. The data obtained will be applied to establish appropriate operating conditions within the subsequent tasks. 3 0

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call FP7-SME-

process fluids and microalgae cells, and cultivation systems. This data will allow calculation of capital and operating costs of the operations. The rheological and gross composition of concentrated materials and their drying characteristics will be determined. Cross-flow microfiltration of the selected microalgae species will be carried at pilot scale to establish filtration characteristics during concentration; centrifugation methods will be tested at pilot scale using a disc-stack system; sieving methods (drum filtration) will be tested using laboratory scale apparatus involving a series of stainless steel and plastic meshes in the range 25 micron 100micron. The data obtained for each harvesting method will allow for optimal operating conditions, design and scale-up, together with a comparison of capital and operating costs at full scale operation. Task 3.3 Characterisation of Microalgae Concentrates and Their Preservation Task leader SU This task will characterise the physical and chemical composition of concentrated microalgae biomass and develop processes for stabilising these concentrates in preparation for further downstream processing / valorisation. Different preservation techniques will be compared, namely freezing, drying, freeze-drying and spray-drying. Gross biochemical composition and product quality (highly unsaturated fatty acid composition; protein functionality) will be compared for the different methods, including assessment of shelf life. Task 3.4 Investigation of Hybrid Harvesting Technologies: Electro-Flocculation Task leader SU This task will investigate the utility of electro-flocculation for harvesting the selected microalgae species, to establish the most appropriate operating conditions, and the limitations and potential of this harvesting approach. Based on laboratory-scale experiments, estimates will be made of harvesting costs as a function of microalgae concentration and comparisons made with traditional biomass recovery processes (section 3.2). Task 3.5 Development and Assessment of a Novel Flotation Technique Without the Use of Deleterious Additives Task leader SU A novel flotation-based microalgae harvesting technique will be developed and evaluated, suitable for high value end applications (eg, food and feed ingredients) where it is undesirable to use conventional metal-based flocculants. This work will involve interaction with WP 2, to determine how the harvesting technique can be integrated into large scale microalgae cultivation systems. Pre-treatment (ozonation) conditions: The effects of ozone concentration and exposure duration on surface modification of the selected microalgae species will be measured as a function of changes in surface chemistry (hydrophobicity) and surface charge (zeta potential). Flocculant selection: Flocculation properties of the ozone pre-treated microalgae will be investigated in the presence of different flocculants (chitosan, and protein), including

assessment of the interactions between different ozonation conditions and flocculants. Optimisation of flotation bubbles: Flotation experiments will be carried out at laboratory scale to identify the most efficient gas bubble size for different microalgae species and operating conditions, using dissolved air micro-bubbles < 10-1,000 μm (supersaturated water), fine bubbles (1-2 mm) and normal gas (2-10mm) Reuse of process gases for microalgae floatation: The feasibility of incorporating process gases (including flue gases) into the floatation processes developed above will be investigated, including measurements of gas bubble properties and microalgae floatation efficiency for gases with different compositions. This work will include measurement of the mass transfer of gases to and from the liquid phase. Deliverables D 3.1 - Month 9 - Report on the physical characteristics of the four microalgae species D 3.2 - Month 12 - Report on optimal harvesting procedures using conventional technologies D 3.3 - Month 18 - Report on physical and chemical properties of microalgae concentrates and their drying characteristics D 3.4 - Month 24 - Report on the feasibility of novel microalgae harvesting processes: electro-flocculation and ozonated air floatation Milestones 3 1

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call FP7-SME-

M 4 - Month 24 - Processes developed for harvesting and stabilising microalgae biomass

Work Package No. Work Package Title Activity Type Participant Number Person-months per Participant Objecti ves

WP 4 Start Date or Start Month 6 Refinery Event and Upgrading Processes for Microalgae Biomass RTD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 12 0 30 0 0

To fractionate and convert harvested microalgae biomass to obtain high value products, utilising all the materials to obtain chemicals, energy and recycled / cleaned process water. The focus will be on the production of valorised stable materials to serve as feedstock and ingredients, e.g. highly unsaturated fatty acids (HUFAs), proteins, carbohydrates and minerals (silicates), leaving the remaining materials available Description of Work Task 4.1 Disruption of Microalgae Task leader SU, participants Sea Marconi The harvested materials obtained in WP 3 will be used as raw materials for upgrading. Physical cell disruption has been shown to allow far better extraction of valuable materials than by direct solvent extraction or pressing. This task will investigate the best conditions of microalgae cell disruption (homogenization versus sonication) and will include investigation of the possible pre-treatments and optimisation of environmental conditions to minimise power consumption and ease further downstream processing. Task 4.2 Physical Separation / Fractionation Schemes for Fractionation of Disruptates to Produce Stable Materials Task leader SU The microalgae disruptates from task 5.1 will be treated using a combination of MF/UF and NF filtration systems to fractionate, wash and desalt the materials. In addition, specific absorption processes will be used to separate and refine protein fractions based on charge and hydrophobicity. Finally, the fractions obtained will be stabilised by freezing and/or drying. Four primary fractions will be produced: oils, soluble proteins, insoluble proteins and carbohydrates; further fractions may also be obtained depending on origin of the disruptates, eg silica from diatoms. The quality of these fractions will determine their value and as such the processing must be rapid and efficient. Chemical composition of the stabilised fractions will be measured and specifications for the processes determined. Task 4.3 Chemical Conversions Task leader UDUR, participants Sea Marconi, VFT The separated fractions produced in task 5.2 will be investigated for further upgrading to biofuels and for extraction of high value pigments. The following techniques will be developed to achieve upgrading: Task Heterogeneous catalysis 4.3.1

3 2

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2 catalysts a long are very good chain at turning two fatty

Call FP7-SMEacids into

ketone.

Task 4.3.3 Fractionation of phycobiliproteins Phycobiliproteins are another high value component of microalgae (used as colouring agents, dyes, and marker compounds) which are present are very low concentrations. Research has shown that certain mineral matrices are extremely effective at concentrating these compounds. Fractionation of phycobiliproteins will be tested in temperature gradient flow reactor systems packed with various mineral substrates. Deliverables D 4.1 - Month 15 - Report on the optimal conditions for biomass disruption of four microalgae species D 4.2 - Month 24 - Report on the production of stabilised, fractionated microalgal materials and their composition D 4.3 - Month 15 - Report on transesterification and decarboxylation of model compounds using heterogeneous catalysts and enzyme catalysts D 4.4 - Month 24 - Report on pyrolysis of microalgal fraction using heterogeneous catalysts D 4.5 - Month 30 - Report on transesterification and decarboxylation of microalgal fractions using heterogeneous catalysts Milestones M 5 - Month 24 - Primary separation processes developed for harvested microalgae biomass M 6 - Month 30 - Chemical conversion processes developed for biofuel production from microalgae lipid fraction

Work Package No. Work Package Title Activity Type Participant Number Person-months per Participant Objecti ves

WP 5 Start Date or Start Month 1 Event Thermo-chemical Conversions of Microalgae Biomass RTD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 0.5 0.5 0 1 0 0 1 0 12 0 0

12 66

Pyrolysis has been the subject of massive investigation in the last decades by the scientific community, due to its promising efficiency and reliability for both production of chemicals and power. The consortium will benefit of this background because extensive know-how in pyrolysis reactor design has been gained. The specific objectives of WP 5 are: To design and test a pyrolysis reactor to process microalgae To study the feasibility of bio-oil production from four species of microalgae To characterize the bio-oils with respect to fossil fuels

Description of Work Task 5.1 Design and Construction of a Laboratory Scale Pyrolysis Reactor Task leader UFL, participants Sea Marconi The purpose of this task is to build a working fast pyrolysis reactor to carry out test on microalgae biomass at a lab scale. A preliminary study of the pilot reactor (preliminary design) will be carried out supporting RTD work and in collaboration with SEA, and a detailed description developed. Later on, a final design will be released and therefore realized. UFL will be charged, along with SEA, to set the design specifications of the lab-scale plant, its size being in the order of 10 kg/h. Once built, the pilot reactor will be instrumented and installed in UFL facility. The pilot unit will only be used for the present project: first tests will be carried out with fresh water strains and only afterwards with seawater microorganisms, as the use of algae cultivated in salt water will most likely create problems and damages to the reactor, which is therefore a consumable. Nevertheless, It will provide useful indications and information for future work on this area. Moreover, we expect to be able to produce sufficient oil for subsequent testing (WP 5.5). 3 3

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call FP7-SME-

Task 5.2 Installation, System Set-up and Testing Task leader UFL The system will be assembled, installed and commissioned at the UFL premises. Once setup, the reactor will be fed with the four microalgae strains samples, provided by the consortium members. A study of the process parameters (i.e. operating temperature, pressure, inert flow rate, vapour residence time, etc) will be carried out, leading to the identification of the most promising combination for each of the strain. Task 5.3 Chemico-Physical Characterisation of Products Task leader UFL The oil product properties will be investigated, in order to identify the better strategy for its use in power and heat production. The analysis will be based on the existing standard and literature on the subject of pyrolysis oil characterization: the produced pyrolysis oil will therefore be analyzed according to this standards. The most critical parameters, in view of pyrolysis oil use in energy generation technologies, are: composition, viscosity, acidity, stability, carbon residue. The oil physical and chemical characteristics will also be evaluated versus transport fuels. Task 5.4 Preliminary Tests for Heat and Power Production Task leader UFL, participants NoBio, AEBIOM, Sea Marconi The produced bio-oil, if a sufficient amount will be available, will be tested in a modified prime movers, i.e. a microturbine or a small diesel engine, in order to verify its characteristic as a substitute for fossil fuel replacement. The test will be carried out in our facility. Recommendations for long-term operation, if possible, will also be given. Deliverables D 5.1 - Month D 5.2 - Month D 5.3 - Month D 5.4 - Month 6 - Description of the design of the pilot reactor 12 - Description of the test program of the pyrolysis unit 30 - Report on the result of bio-oil production and analysis 36 - Report on the result of bio-oil in prime movers

Milestones M 7 - Month 24 - Pilot reactor ready for testing M 8 - Month 30 - First repeatable production of bio-oil (few litres)

Work Package No. Work Package Title Activity Type Participant Number Person-months per Participant Objecti ves

WP 6 Start Date or Start Month 1 Event System Integration and Industrial Validation RTD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 8 9

10 4

11 18

12 4

Integration of the sub-processes produced in Work Packages 2, 3, 4 and 5 in order to obtain a fully functional microalgae- based effluent treatment system. Validation of the BioAlgaeSorb technology by demonstration of the fully integrated technology against the Objectives.

Description of Work Task 6.1 System Integration Close monitoring of progress in the different RTD WorkPackages in order to ensure coordination and integration of the technical activities and solutions in the production process from algae to bio-energy. Special focus on the interface between the different WorkPackages, especially the interface between WP 2 Microalgae Cultivation, WP3 Microalgae harvesting techologies and WP4 Refinary and Upgrading Process for microalgae Biomass. Further close focus in interface between WP4 Refinary and upgrading and WP5 ThermoChemica Conversion. 3 4

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call FP7-SME-

validation/benchmarking will focus on cost effectiveness and life cycle assessment and will closely follow ebaluate every step in the algae to bio-energy process. This task does include benhmarking the resuts (cost and technology) with competitive technologies and energy sources. Task leader TI assisted by RTD partners. Task 6.3 Modelling Approaches for Economic Evaluations Every process has a cost. Often however the whole life cycle costs are ignored. This project will examine the use of a product stream currently considered as a waste with an expense for disposal (i.e. nutrient-rich waste waters) as a feed for the growth of microalgae. To appreciate the true life cycle cost of the process requires the coupling of a description of the process itself with that of an economic model that takes account not only the economics of running the new processes (use of waste waters to support microalgal growth for production of energy and chemicals) but also of not having to otherwise handle the waste waters. This work package will couple the model developed and tested in WP2.5 with an economic costing of the processes, including the building and operation (whole life cycle) of the processing plant. The coupled model will be run under different physical forcings (e.g., meteorological data, waste water stream composition) and also under different economic scenarios (cost of fertilizers, of land, energy, and of the engineering plant). From this analysis will emerge data that will indicate under which conditions the operation of the whole system will be cost negative, positive, or neutral. Hence this work package will inform the commercial sector on where greatest leverage is to be gained in development of new more cost effective solutions. Task leader SU and participants all Task 6.4 Risk Assessment and Contingency Management Close monitoring of progress in the different RTD WorkPackages enabling assessment of the progress of both the WP and its inter-relationship with the entire project. Interrelationships between individual and particularly high-risk work packages and tasks will be evaluated and the likely tolerance band for under-delivery on each contributing task and individual work package assessed. Initiating corrective actions if required reassessing the cumulative effect of the changes on the predicted tolerance band of the major element deliverable and confirm that this is acceptable in relation to the overall project objectives. As a result of this analysis a corrective action plan will be constructed to re-iterate some of the tasks with changes to their content based on the Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) that are likely to produce an improved deliverable closer to the quantified target. The improved deliverable will then be re-integrated into the milestone assessment. Task leader TI assisted by all participants. Deliverables D 6.1 - Month 30 - Report describing the work performed in WP6, including the building of prototype(s), system integration, functional testing and benchmarking D 6.2 - Month 18 - Draft report on risk assessment and contingency plan D 6.3 - Month 36 - Final report on risk assessment and contingency plan Milestones: None

Work Package No. WP 7 Start Date or Start Month 18 Event Activities Work Package Title Demonstration Activity Type DEM Participant Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Person-months per 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 2 4 2 Participant Objectives Demonstration of the BioAlgaSorb technologies to SME AG members. To demonstrate the developed technology in case studies, where all the RTD activities are combined and tested. The demonstration will include technology deveoped in 2 Microalgae Cultivation, WP3 Microalgae harvesting techologies, WP4 Refinary and Upgrading Process for microalgae Biomass and WP5 Thermo-Chemica Conversion and be coordinated with the testing Description of Work SME AGs will arrange demonstrations to their members as well as include the broader audience. The participating SMEs will further extend the audience for demonstration activities via their contact networks and existing custumer base. The 3 5

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call FP7-SME-

demonstration will include the business of prototype equipment and processes for microalgae biomass production, harvesting, upgrading and thermo-chemical conversion that have been developed in the preceding WPs and will be coordinated with the running of lab and fulls scale tests of the different systems. Task 7.1 Demonstrations to SME Staff Demonstration as specied to the SME participants. The SME participants are furher encouraged to include their contact netgworks and existing customer base. Task leader TI assisted by other RTD partners Task 7.2 Demonstrations to IAG Staff Demonstrations as specified to the SME-AG participants and their member companies. This task will especially be coordinated with AEBIOM who will further include eccourage the participation via their 33 national member organisations to their members. Task leader TI assisted by other RTD partners Delivera bles D 7.1 - Month 34 - Report on results from the demonstration/ case study Milesto nes: Non e

Work Package No. Work Package Title Activity Type Participant Number Person-months per Participant Objecti ves

WP 8 Start Date or Start Month 1 Event Innovation Related Activities / Training OTHER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 5 3 2 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 0 0

10 0

11 0

12 0

Formulate/compile project results into a protectable form, including patents and develop an Exploitation Strategy; a Consortium Agreement signed between the partners and protection of the Intellectual Property Rights arising from the results of the BioAlgaeSorb project. Disseminate knowledge, experience and benefits from the pilot system to expert groups, system providers, SME-AGs and SME end-users as well as user communities, industrial contact networks, trade press, regional clusters and chambers of commerce networks at conferences, workshops, exhibitions to potential

Description of Work The SME-AGs will play a major role in the dissemination and exploration activities and a primary target for the activities will be their members across Europe. The dissemination channels will be input to publications, promotion and demo CDs, leaflets and other printed material, web based activity, online courses and exhibitions, conferences, seminars, especially towards end-user communities and associations in the relevant industrial sectors and especially the bio-energy sector. The success depends on the industry sector driving the system itself and that the system specifically targets the needs of the ME companies in the relevant sectors.. Task 8.1 Protection of IPR Task leader AEBIOM and participants SMEAGs and SMEs Carry out patent searches to assess the viability of a patent application. Prepare patent applications and submit through patent agent. Create a preliminary DUP at mid-term and a final version by final term. IPR ownership and exploitation agreements within the partnership and outside of the partnership in the form of potential licensee agreements will be created. 3 6

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call FP7-SME-

With focus on project results and implications for the relevant industrial sectors, especially the bio-energy sector. Produce publications, CDROMs, web based activity and exhibitions, especially towards end-user communities & associations and the especially on the aquaculture and bio-energy sector in northern and southern parts of Europe. Further to perform printing and distribution of the information to be disseminated. AEBIOM assisted by NoBio and BTA will be the highest responsible for the content of information to be disseminated and controlling that the content is in accordance to protection schemes. Task 8.4 Training Task leader AEBIOM and participants SMEAGs and SMEs Training the SME-AG staff. SMEs, execute training of SME- AGs staff outside the consortium in the results from the project. This initial role in the training activities in the project also involves testing and verification of educational and course material made by the RTDs for training purposes. Training of SMEs including the SME-AG members. Training of SME members, and secondly other SMEs outside their membership in the knowledge, procedures and technology developed for quick absorption and exploitation of the project results for them to further transfer the knowledge to a wider audience. Training the SME customer supply chain in the commercial aspects of the BioAlgaeSorb project results. Emphasis will be placed on the development and manufacture of system components and the integration skills required to realise and exploit the results from the BioAlgaeSorb project. Deliverables D 8.1 - Month 3 (and update every 3 months) - Project WEB site D 8.2 - Month 18 - Draft report on potentially competitive patents and a plan for patent application(s) if required with exploitation agreements between the partners D 8.3 - Month 36 - Final report on potentially competitive patents and a plan for patent application(s) if required with exploitation agreements between the partners D 8.4 - Month 30 - Production of support material for transfer of the knowledge to the partners through case studies and a generic design guide D 8.5 - Month 36 - Report on training material and evaluation from the participants Milestones: None

Work Package No. Work Package Title Activity Type Participant Number Person-months per Participant Objecti ves

WP 9 Start Date or Start Event Consortium Management MGT 1 2 3 4 5 6 5 3 3 3 3 3

Month 1 7 3 8 0.2 9 0.2 10 0.2 11 0.2 12 0.2

To ensure that there is an effective co-ordination of knowledge, management related activities, innovation related activities, legal aspects and technical activities at a consortium level. As well as ensuring adequate managing of time, resource allocation at a consortium level, facilities, representatives at meetings, general duties and

Description of Work Co-ordination between the EC and project consortium ensuring that all milestones, reports, and project financial administration is prepared in accordance with the contractual requirements. Integration of effort between RTD performers and partners. Monitoring that each of the partners and the RTD performers use their own resources effectively through internal project management. Development of a technology implementation plan to aid the dissemination and exploitation process. Prepare Dissemination and Utilization plan (DUP). Task 9.1 Consortium Management Task leader NoBio and participants all partners Legal, contractual, ethical, financial & administrative management of the consortium & managing the Consortium Agreement. 3 7

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2 Task 9.3 IRA Management Task leader AEBIOM Co-ordination of knowledge management and innovation related activities. Task 9.4 Organise meetings Task leader NoBio and participants all partners Organization of the project management and exploitation issue meetings.

Call FP7-SME-

Deliverables D 9.1 - Month 36 - Report on legal and societal aspects and implications of the project D 9.2 - Month 36 - Procedure for internal reporting and communication between partners in the project Milestones: None

3 8

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call FP7-SME-

Partner No.

Table 1.3d: Summary of Staff Effort The number of person months over the duration of the planned work for each participant and work package. The work package leader is indicated by a bold figure.
Par t. 1 NoBio Par t. 2 AEBIO M 1.5 0 0.5 00 0 0 0.5 0 0.5 0 1.0 0 1.0 0 3.0 0 3.0 0 3.0 0 3.0 0 8. 50 Par t. 3 BTA Par t. 4 Se a Marc 3.0 0 0.5 00 0 1.0 0 1.0 0 0.5 0 2.0 0 2.0 0 6.5 0 6.5 0 3.0 0 3.0 0 14. 50 Par t. 5 Ingrep ro 3.0 0 0.5 0 1.0 0 1.0 00 0 0.5 0 2.0 0 2.0 0 6.5 0 6.5 0 3.0 0 3.0 0 14. 50 Par t. 6 VAS Par t. 7 VFT Par t. 8 S U 80. 00 8. 00 28. 00 24. 00 12. 000 8.0 0 3.0 0 3.0 00 0 0.2 0 0.2 0 83. 20 Par t. 9 T I 35. 00 2.0 0 12. 000 0 12. 00 9. 00 3.0 0 3. 00 0 0 0.2 0 0.2 0 38. 20 Par t. 1 UDUR Par t. 1 HCMR Par t. 1 UFL Total IAG 4.5 0 1.5 0 0.5 00 0 1.0 0 1.5 0 3.0 0 3.0 0 10. 00 10. 00 11. 00 11. 00 28. 50 Total SMT 12. 00 2.0 0 2.0 0 2.0 0 2.0 0 2.0 0 2.0 0 8.0 0 8.0 0 26. 00 26. 00 12. 00 12. 00 58. 00 Total Total RTDP All 303. 319. 00 50 16. 19. 00 50 100. 102.50 00 24. 26. 00 00 42. 44. 00 00 78. 81. 00 46.50 00 43. 00 14. 25. 00 00 14. 25. 000 00 36. 00 0 36. 00 1.0 24. 0 00 1.0 24. 0 00 318. 404. 00 50

Short Name Research & Innovation Activities - Total WP 1 WP 2 WP 3 WP 4 WP 5 WP 6 Demonstration Activities - Total WP 7 Other Activities - Total WP 8 Management Activities - Total WP 9 TOTAL ACTIVITIES

1.5 0 0.5 00 0 0 0.5 0 0.5 0 1.0 0 1.0 0 5.0 0 5. 00 5.0 0 5. 00 12. 50

1.5 0 0.5 0 0.5 00 0 0 0.5 0 1.0 0 1.0 0 2.0 0 2.0 0 3.0 0 3.0 0 7. 50

3.0 0 0.5 0 1.0 0 1.0 00 0 0.5 0 2.0 0 2.0 0 6.5 0 6.5 0 3.0 0 3.0 0 14. 50

3.0 0 0.5 00 0 1.0 0 1.0 0 0.5 0 2.0 0 2.0 0 6.5 0 6.5 0 3.0 0 3.0 0 14. 50

36. 00 2.0 00 0 30. 00 0 4.0 0 2.0 0 2.0 00 0 0.2 0 0.2 0 38. 20

80. 00 2.0 0 60. 00 0 0 0 18. 00 4.0 0 4.0 00 0 0.2 0 0.2 0 84. 20

72. 00 2.0 00 0 0 66. 00 4.0 0 2.0 0 2.0 00 0 0.2 0 0.2 0 74. 20

39

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2 Table 1.3e: List of Milestones Mile Milestone Description st. No. Completed specification criteria for M1 development of BioAlgaeSorb technologies M2 Processes developed for utilisation of aqueous and gaseous effluents for microalgae cultivation, ready for prototype development Prototype BioAlgaeSorb microalgae production systems tested Processes developed for harvesting and stabilising microalgae biomass

Call FP7-SME-

WP( s) Invo 1

Expect ed Da

2

M3

2

M4

3

M5

Primary separation processes developed for harvested microalgae biomass Chemical conversion processes developed for biofuel production from microalgae lipid fraction

4

M6

4

M7

Pilot reactor ready for testing

5

M8

First repeatable production of bio-oil (few litres)

5

Means of Verification Technical manager plus Month 6 partners in WPs 2-5 to verify the suitability of Technical manager, together with partners 3, 5 Month and 6 to verify the 18 functionality of the developed manager, Technical together Month with partners 3, 5 34 and 6 to verify the functionality of the Technical manager, together with Month partners 5 and 6 to 24 verify the quality of the harvested manager, Technical together with partners 4 and 7 Month to verify the quality of 24 the separated fractions and Technical manager, together with partners Month 4 and 7 to verify quality of the 30 upgraded lipids and feasibility of Technical manager, together with Month partners 1, 2, 4 and 7 to verify the 24 operating performance manager, of Technical together with Month partners 1, 2, 4 and 30 7 to verify the production

40

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2 B1.4.4: Graphical Presentation of Work Packages

Call FP7-SME-

41

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call FP7-SME-

Section B2: Implementation Quality and Efficiency the Implementation and the Management
B2.1: Quality of Consortium as a Whole
B2.1.1: Management structure and procedures

– of

the

Description of Project Management Structure and Procedures We have set up a management structure that will include the competence and resources needed to effectively manage the project. The management structure proposed will be able to handle the general project management, the technological management and the management of knowledge and IPR through competent, experienced persons with clear roles and a well- defined set of rules to follow in their work. We have focused particularly on making a simple efficient management structure that is easily understood and accepted by all partners. Our project management structure is closely linked to the work to be done and the requirements for reporting and following up the project. We have tried to keep the management structure as slim as possible both to keep cost down and to economise by th e partners‘ time. By a simple efficient management, we will red ucethe time to reach a decision and try to keep the need for meetings a reasonable level. We will run the project by a simple set of rules based on good information exchange, discussions and if needed simple voting to decide on a case.

Management board

Decision, strategy, conflict, progress, control level. Decisions one partner one vote

Consorti um Manage ment NoBi o

Techni cal Manage ment Sea Marconi

IPR and Knowled ge Manage ment AEBIOM

Subcommittees Operational mgm level Risk mgm on consortium, Monitoring of RTD activity, dissemination and exploitation

WP leaders (WP9)

W P lead ers (WP

1)

W P lead ers (WP

2- 6)

WP leaders (WP 7-8)

P r o

j e c

t a

ctivity level RTD, training, demonstration, mgm activities

Management Board and its Functions The Management Board is comprised of representatives from each proposer and will control the project. The board will be the top-level management body of the project responsible for the strategic decisions, follow up of progress, initiating corrections and resolving conflicts. The functions of the board will be in accordance with the contractual obligations towards the EC and the coordinator will have the full responsibilities towards the EC as coordinator. The following areas will especially be the focus for the Management Board: General management progress and quality Technological and scientific progress and results The management of knowledge, of intellectual property and of other innovationrelated activities The monitoring of these activities will be based on reports and communication with the subcommittees, i.e. the Consortium Management, Technical Management and IPR/Dissemination/Exploitation committees respectively. These three subcommittees will provide short reports to the Management Board meetings and especially focus on progress, deviations and corrective actions taken or suggested. The Management Board will meet at least every 6 months. The Management Board meetings will involve formal presentations from each WP or task by the RTD partners actively working on the tasks. The board will pay particular attention to the subcontracted activities performed by the RTDs both monitoring value for money and technical progress. Representatives from

42

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call

FP7-SME-

the RTDs performing the work are required at the board meetings to report their subcontracted work by technical personnel. The board will suggest corrections or changes to WPs and tasks based on the reports and presentations. As the 36 month project period is divided into two reporting periods of 18 months, the Reporting Period one (RP1) meeting at month 18 and Reporting Period two/Final (RP2/Final) meeting at month 36 will also specially focus on the formal reporting to the European Commission. The scientific and/or financial officer in the EC shall be invited. Accordingly at the Management Board meetings at month 18 (RP1) and the project will be assessed against the milestones and deliverables listed in the Work Programme. At the Management Board meeting at month 36 (RP2/Final), the board will assess all deliverables and reports with particular focus on the reports outlining post project work on exploitation and use of the results. The Management Board will take an active role in suggesting strategic changes and corrections to the projects if needed to fulfil the overall goals. This implies that the board will see to amend the Description of Work if needed. The board will closely follow risks and suggest how to cope with risks according to the risk management plan. Running the Project Operational Management The managers of the different Sub-Committees, i.e. the consortium manager, the technical manager and the IPR/knowledge manager will perform the operational management of the project. The managers of the different Management Board SubCommittees will have clearly defined roles and they will report to the management board. Management Board Sub Role and responsibility

Headed by Arnold Kyrre Martinsen from NoBio. Responsible for day to day management of the BioAlgaeSorb project including Consortium communication with all partners and representing the point of Management communication between the consortium members and the EU Commission. Responsible for organizing submitting the delivery reports to the EUby well as Roggero from be submitted at Responsiblereporting Headed as Carlo the reports to Sea Marconi. the end for for the monitoring of the scientific and technical progress of the activity Techni performed by the RTD performers in order to monitor compliance with cal project objectives, industrial need and ensure ― alue for m oney for the RTD and v ‖ Manage Demonstration activity. Mr. Roggero will confer with and be assisted by ment personnelby Jean-Marc Jossartand coreAEBIOM. Responsible for all from other SMW-AGs from group SMEs. Headed IPR/Knowledg innovation related activities, including dissemination, exploitation, protection of foreground. Responsible for preparing and updatng ―Plan i e Management for Use and Dissemonation‖ . Will conferwith and be assisted especially by NoBio and BTA and will also confer with core group SMEs

Management Capability of Co-ordinator Norsk Bioenergiforening (NoBio) will take on the role as Coordinator for BioAlgaeSorb project and will be responsible for ensuring that the work programme is kept to schedule and that the project meets the interests of the partners. NoBio is a member association for enterprises in the bioenergy sector and work actively to promote production and use of bio-energy in Norway. The main activities of NoBio include promoting bio-energy, information activity, alliance and networking and support of members. NoBio is a very active member of the European Biomass Association (AEBIOM). NoBio has already demonstrated the active role by coordinating and managing to assemble the European Bio-energy sector in this project. Mr. Arnold Kyrre Martinsen, who is the managing director of NoBio will take on the responsibility as Consortium Manager. He was the Managing Director in NoBio from 1986 to 2000. Martinsen has a broad experience and knowledge in the bio-energy field. He has

studied Microbiology and Biochemistry at the Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Ås, where his main interest was anaerobic digestion and biogas. Based on his experience, he will be very competent for the role as Consortium Manager, ensuring that the work programme is kept to schedule and that the project meets the project objectives. He will act as the administrative interface with the Commission. Mr. Martinsen will be assisted by Mr. Cato Kjolstad. Mr.Kjolstad is the Managing Director in the Norwegian Bioenergy Association (NoBio). This is a position he has held since 2006. He holds an Master of Science in Business and Economics and has been working with lobbying and industrial policy for many years. Before coming to NoBio he worked as a business consultant and managing Director for a business and industry organisation

43

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call

FP7-SME-

NioBio will in the role as coordinator focus on the financial, legal, contractual and administrative aspects of the project to ensure efficient and professional consortium management in accordance with the EC contract obligations. As coordinator, NoBio will be responsible for: Communications between the consortium and the consortium and the EC Providing all deliverables and reports in required formats to EC on time The overall legal, contractual, ethical, financial and administrative management of the consortium; Preparing, updating and managing the consortium agreement between the participants; Resolution of any administrative or contractual issues within the partnership and with the Commission; Organisation of Project Management and Exploitation Board meetings; Take care of the promotion of gender equality in the project; Collation of all the cost statements & obtaining audit certificates by each of the participants; Coordinating payments and the distribution of money; Co-ordination at consortium level of participant contractual obligations and collective responsibilities; The Coordinator will endeavour to maintain team motivation, encourage creativity amongst the project team to ensure that all parties employ sound problem solving techniques, and to ensure that corrective actions are taken as necessary. Project Technical Management Mr. Carlo Roggero from Sea Marconi will be the Project Technical Manager. He is an experienced manager and has experience from product development and Research and Development Projects in this sector. Mr. Roggero will head the Technical Management Sub Committee and he will, on behalf of the SME-AG and SMEs take responsibility for ensuring that the technical work and deliverables are kept to schedule, within budget and that the project meets its technical objectives. He will work in close cooperation with the Work Package leaders and they will together form a team with high competence to be able to monitor the day-to-day work in the project. The results of the work of all partners will be monitored at monthly intervals ensuring that the project is progressing according to work program. Mr.Roggero will particularly keep close contact with the RTD partners performing the subcontracted work. In the event of a problems or unexpected deviations in a work package, the technical manger will flag the issue to the coordinator and if needed, take it to the management board. The board will determine the appropriate course of action such as further iterations of the development loop, adoption of alternate technologies or finding alternative development routes. The responsibilities of the technical manager include both the management of the technical progress towards the objectives of the project and the exchange of results and knowledge between the partners. In addition, the technical manager is expected to enable cross-fertilisation of ideas and data flow needed to support concurrent tasks. Management of Knowledge, IPR and Dissemination Activities According the principles of the Research for SME Associations, the knowledge arising from work carried out under the project is the joint property of NoBio, AEBIOM, BTAand the SME-core group. The protection and management of the knowledge, IPR dissemination and exploitation activity has been assigned to the SME Association partner AEBIOM who will take on the responsibility of securing any IPR generated, as well as preparing and updating the dissemination and exploitation plan.

Mr. Jean-Marc Jossart has agreed to take on the responsibility as IPR/knowledge management and will head the IPR/Knowledge Management Sub-Committee. The RTDs are expressly prevented from owning any of the resulting IPR from the project. Mr. Jean-Marc Jossart, is agronomist (university UCL, Belgium, 1989) and Secretary General of AEBIOM. He has a special expertise in agriculture, bioenergy systems, liquid biofuels. In total he participated in more than 10 European or national projects in the field of biomass, and several of them as coordinator. He will be assisted by Mrs Edita Vagonyte, also working av AEBIOM. She is specialised in EU public policies (Institute of Political Studies, Strasbourg, 2005) and European Affairs Manager for AEBIOM. She is European Affairs Manager for AEBIOM also responsible for communication activities such as writing AEBIOM newsletter, editing/writing AE BIOM yearly journal ―Biom ass News‖ etc. The dissemination activities will commence during the first year of product development and will begin with internal presentations disseminated by NoBio, AEBIOM and BTA. Further detailed description of knowledge, IPR and dissemination management is described in Section 3.2 of this proposal.

44

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call

FP7-SME-

Decision Making Mechanisms and the Responsibilities of Each Individual Partner In principle, major decisions of strategic importance shall be done at the management board level. All decisions that are controversial and/or disagreed upon among partners shall be brought up to the management board level. The management board shall hear all partners, discuss alternative solutions and try to come to an agreement. Primarily, decisions should be by consensus, If discussions do not lead to an agreement and consensus, the case is decided by simple voting. The SMEs/SME Associations have one vote each. RTD participants will be present with status as observer and with right to speak. However, the RTD performers do not carry a vote. Where a majority decision cannot be reached, external third party arbitration may be used and the RTDs may give advice, if asked. Based on arbitration and/or RTD advice, new voting between SME IAG/SME participants where the rule of majority does apply. Accordingly, the decisions strategy in the management board does follow this step-wise procedure: 1. Discussion with objective of a consensus decision 2. If not – voting between SME IAG/SME partners (one partner – one vote) and decision by simple role of majority 3. If no decision possible – arbitration or RTD advice 4. Based on 3 – new discussion and voting between SME IAG/SME partners (one partner – one vote) and decision by simple role of majority No decisions or voting can overrule the EC contract and/or the consortium agreement. Handling of IPR matters follows the above decision process. However, fair agreements among the partners should take into considerations each partners contribution to the project, their background knowledge and their interest in their specific markets. If an urgent solution to a problem is required, the management board may meet for a teleconference to discuss and solve the problem using the above rules. In the day-to-day work, decisions are to be made at the appropriate practical level. The coordinator, the technical managers or the IPR/exploitation mangers should, however be informed on decisions taken by WP- task leaders of the respective fields. Decisions taken at this level may be brought up to the management board and overruled. It is the particular responsibilities of each partner and the three managers to act and manage in ways that creates a positive and open atmosphere in the project and to resolve potential controversies as early as possible. Conflict Resolution Conflict Prevention Techniques will be used to avoid problems in decision-making, but should any conflict issues arise between parties then they will be submitted to the Coordinator for mediation and resolution. Resolution techniques employed by the Coordinator and based on a fact-finding exercise to investigate the circumstances of the issues and provide the conflicting parties with an objective report describing the facts, as determined by the Coordinator. Based on that report the parties will be asked to decide whether a dispute does exist and take steps to resolve it. An assessment will involve detailed scrutiny of the issues through individual interviews and group processes to develop a composite picture of conflict. All disputes arising in connection with this project, which cannot be settled within the Management Board, shall be finally settled by arbitration under the Rules of Conciliation and Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce by one or more arbitrators to be appointed under the terms of those Rules. In any arbitration in which there are three or more arbitrators, the Chairman shall be of juridical education. The award of the Arbitrator(s) shall be final and binding upon the Contractors concerned. Location of arbitration shall be agreed between the Participants concerned. Communication

Strategy The communication strategy is closely related to the decision-making and we believe that a proper communication strategy is important in avoiding conflicts and misunderstandings during the project. We will try to keep a balanced match between physical meetings where partners can meet face to face, teleconferencing and mail. It is important that the partners meet face to face to establish personal relationships among the partners. At the same time we realise that physical meetings is expensive and time consuming. We will therefore use teleconferencing supplied by a simple tool (such as Go to meeting/Skype) for sharingimportantinform ation on all participants‘ screens. We have good experience with this from other projects. We will implement the communication strategy with plans that ensures that all partners are updated and engaged at regular interval through the project. The communication directly related to the work programme progress will be regular, but controlled as needed by the involved partners. The plans for communications will be: Information exchange at management board level as described above every 6 months. Including a brief status report sent to all partners in advance of the meeting. Every 3 months the coordinator, technical and exploitation manager will review progress based on reports from the WP leaders and follow up work according to plan.

45

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call

FP7-SME-

The three managers and WP leaders will communicate regularly, but at least every four weeks the mangers will phone and or mail all partners to update them on progress and get a short status. We believe this is important to keep everybody involved and dedicated to the project. It will also be important as problems, need for small corrections and matters for discussion can be registered and dealt with as early as possible. Risk Managemen t The proposed project has been planned and set up to minimise risk. By organising the WP so that the results from the first WP will be a scientifically sound platform for further work and by building in corrective measures and possibilities for alternatives in the following WPs, we will secure smooth progress of the project. The close follow up by the managers will also make it possible to take action early and minimise risk. This includes also risks on cooperation and possible diverging interest that my come up in the project. We have set up a detailed plan for possible risks we see (table 1.4.1). Each risk are categorised in their consequences for the project, probability of the risk, how difficult it may be to find an alternative solution, preventive action taken in the planning and probable solutions to the problem. B2.1.2: Description of the Consortium Table 2.1: Profile of Each Participant Nam Norwegian Bioenergy Association (NoBio) e Participant No. 1 Organisation AC SME-AG Type

Countr y

Norway

Business Area: NoBio, the Norwegian Bioenergy Association, is an independent association whose goal is to promote a rational utilization of bioenergy in Norway. Since it was founded in 1985 it has worked to increase the use of bioenergy in exciting markets and introduce it in new sectors. NoBio has approximately 350 members of which 200 are companies of different sizes and 150 individual members. The members represent a broad range of enterprises producing and providing bioenergy, equipment and machinery for producing and converting biofuels, consultants and scientists. NoBio also have members from environmental and energy related organizations, and politicians with special interest of energy and environmental issues. NoBio also operate in a very useful International network, cooperating with the other Scandinavian bioenergy associations (SVEBIO, FINBIO and DANBIO) and other European bioenergy associations through the membership in AEBIOM. Role in the Project: NoBio will be the project co-ordinator and therefore lead WP9, consortium management, especially legal, contractual, ethical, financial & administrative management of the consortium & Managing the Consortium Agreement. NoBio willl also be responsible for set up the meetings and prepare the agenda and documents for the meetings. SNS will also communicate between the consortium and the EC. In addition NoBio will assist AEBIOM and the other Associations with WP7 Innovation related activities. Expected benefits: This kind of project is very much in line with the purpose of the Norwegian Bioenergy Association. NoBio expect BioAlgaeSorb project to contribute to increase use of bio-energy through development new and cost effective technologies using

46

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call FP7-SME-

Nam European Biomass Association (AEBIOM) e Participant No. 2 Organisation European SME- Countr European Type AG y Business Area: The European Biomass Association, AEBIOM, is a non-profit Brussels based international organisation (under Belgian law) founded in 1990 whose aim is to promote the sustainable development of the bioenergy sector in the EU. It is a network of 33 national biomass associations, and as each national association has its own members AEBIOM currently represents a network of more than 4000 companies, organisations or individuals. It should be noted that AEBIOM covers Europe and is not restricted to EU-27. Starting from 2007 AEBIOM is also open to direct membership of companies as associated members. So far, AEBIOM has more than 70 associate members - companies working in various bioenergy sectors. AEBIOM activities cover networking among its members, lobbying European institutions, communication activities, information dissemination and event organisation. AEBIOM also manages various European projects. Role in the Project: AEBIOM use their key position as an European SME-AG association to disseminate project results as widely as possible. AEBIOM will play a key role and lead the Innovation Related activities including training (WP7), especially by training the SME-AG staff, in addition to. SMEs, execute training of SME- AGs staff outside the consortium. AEBIOM will also make sure that the voice of their members are heard in the project and contribute with advices. Expected benefits: AEBIOM will assist their members in getting hold of new knowledge and technology that will increase their efficiency and competition. AEBIOM will distribute the project results through newsletters, WEB- sites, conferences and meetings with their members, Nam British Trout Association Ltd (BTA) e Participant No. 3 Organisation MS SME-AG Countr United Type y Kingdom Business Area: The British Trout Association, BTA, represents approximately 85% of trout production in the UK. The BTA plays a pivotal role in the continuing development of the industry on four fronts: (1) By ensuring that the UK trout industry has a reasonable legislative framework within which to operate, in terms of both EU and domestic legislation; (2) By maintaining a structured and relevant programme of research and development; (3) By generating an appropriate level of generic promotion to underpn the i marketing activities ongoing within the industry; (4) By administrating the industry‘s quality assurance schem e, Quality Trout UK Ltd. Established 26 years ago, the BTA is a limited company but operates on a non-profit basis, re-investing any surplus into either research and development or promotion activity. Through FEAP (Federation of European Aquaculture Producers), BTA takes part in a number of projects and are committed to continuing work in the subject area of improvement and innovation of aquaculture effluent treatment technology to the benefit of trout aquaculture. Role in the Project: Providing SME companies willing to host demonstrations of the developed technology, assisting with industrial assessment and validation.

47

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call FP7-SME-

Principal Research Personnel: Mr. David Bassett graduated with a Master of Arts in History and International Relations from the University of St Andrews (UK). He is Executive Secretary of the British Trout Association (BTA), Company Secretary to Quality Trout UK Ltd, a pioneering UK wide trout quality assurance scheme, serves as a director of both the Scottish Aquaculture Research Forum (SARF) and Aqua TT, is Chairman of the Federation of Scottish Aquaculture Producers (FSAP), and sits on both the Management Group of the Code of Good Practice for Scottish Finfish Aquaculture and Steering Committee of the WWF Trout Dialogue. Nam Sea Marconi Technologies s.a.s (Sea Marconi) e Participant No. 4 Organisation SMEP Countr Italy Type y Business Area: Sea Marconi Technologies was founded in 1968 and the company is mainly focused on providing technologies and services for the diagnosis, decontamination and detoxification of several matrices, mostly insulating oils from electrical equipment, contaminated by physical and chemical substances. From 1999 Sea Marconi, along with other European partners and under the sponsorship of European Commission developed an innovative thermo-chemical process called Haloclean®, with the original aim to solve the problem of electronic wastes in an environmentally friendly and cost effective manner. At the same time Sea Marconi and Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe started a set of activities to investigate other feasible applications for the Haloclean® technology. The most promising application is the treatment of biomass resources (primary biomasses and agricultural wastes) targeted to the production of fuels, to be used for joint power and heat generation. Sea Marconi is already able to build and deliver, on an industrial scale, plants for the pyrolysis of a wide range of biomass feedstocks. Sea Marconi is also involved in another research topic named Nanosponges (cyclodextrin-derived polymers for active molecule delivery) Role in the Project: Committed and driven SMEP with a precise wish-list delivered to the RTD providers. Expected benefits: Nam IngrePro BV (Ingrepro) e Participant No. 5 Organisation Type

SMEP

Countr y

Netherlands

Business Area: Ingrepro is a bio-tech company specialised in industrial large scale microalgae production. Since 2001 it has been actively involved in the development and exploitation of state-of-the-art Hybrid microalgae reactors for the production of taylor made microalgae. Ingrepro operates three large production sites in the Netherlands and is the largest industrial microalgae producer in Europe and unique in the world due to its in-depth knowledge of cultivating microalgae under extreme (stress) conditions in order to obtain Enriched Algal Biomass (EAB). For several major clients in the food and feed sector Ingrepro is producing clientspecific EAB. Role in the Project: Ingrepro will assist in the provision of raceway technology and provide access to swine farming operations and effluent. Expected benefits: Ingrepro aim to use the potential offered by alga culture in the processing of organic waste streams. The AlgaePro® concept has been developed with this objective in mind. 48

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call FP7-SME-

Principal Research Personnel: Mr. Carel Callenbach has a background in marketing and market research within the agricultural business sector (Economics, University of Wageningen). After working several years within the Dutch agricultural cooperation Cebeco- Handelsraad as export manager, and after that as commercial director of the French dairy group Serval, he invested in a start-up microalgae production company in 2001. There he was active as commercial director and in 2004 he took over the company under the name Ingrepro BV. He is also responsible for the development and introduction of new products and markets.

Nam Varicon Aqua Solutions Ltd (VAS) e Participant No. 6 Organisation SMEP Countr United Type y Kingdom Business Area: Varicon Aqua Solutions was founded in 2004 and the business activities cover a diverse area encompassing aquaculture, fisheries, amenities and renewables. VAS provides products and services into each sector, ranging through provision of consultancy, project management, consumables and hardware. VAS is both a trader and a manufacturer. The core of the business is the design, manufacturing and installation of the BioFence tubular photobioreactor systems, with capability to provide bespoke systems including process control and data acquisition. These are exported worldwide and installed by VAS engineers, with currently over 50 systems operational across the globe in fish hatcheries, various universities, cosmetic producers, nutraceutical producers, power utilities researching carbon abatement, plant science groups developing optimised microalgal strains for the emerging microalgae biofuels market, etc. VAS is oneof the world‘s leading technology providers in the Algae PBR sector. VAS works closely with Academia and Industry to develop and improve know-how in the microalgae biomass sector. Role in the Project: VAS will assist with the provision of photobioreactor technology. Expected benefits: Nam Value for Technology BVBA (VFT) e Participant No. 7 Organisation Type

SMEP

Countr y

Belgium

Business Area: VFT is developing business opportunities for technologies related to bio-based products. To reach this target, VFT covers different business activities such as technology brokering, feasibility studies, partner matching, edition of market reports and marketing plans, market introduction of new products and coordination of research activities. VFT is unique in its activity by always combining technical, commercial and financial aspects in its recommendation and specialising on renewable resource-based topics. In doing so, VFT contributes to the development of the bio-based economy. VFT is also partner in 2 European projects (Ecobinders, FP6 project, completed; VFT being part of the project coordination team) and Bioref-Integ (FP7 project, running; VFT being workpackage leader). VFT has completed several missions such as partner search for production of novel modified carbohydrates, market development plans for proteins, starches, furanic resins... in industrial applications, studies on bioplastics and biomaterials, development plan for industrial biotechnology in Flanders, several feasibility studies on integrated microalgae production, 49

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call FP7-SME-

Expected benefits: Development of novel applications for microalgae biomass Networking with other partners, leading to future business opportunities Principal Research Personnel: Philippe Willems, Bôke Tjeerdsma (Orineo) and Alain Bernard (Orineo) Nam Swansea University (SU) e Participant No. 8 Organisation RTD Countr United Type Kingdom Business Area: Two research centres at Swansea University willy co-work on the production of microalgae biomass and downstream bio-processing within the BioAlgaeSorb project. Details of the research centres are described below. A. Centre for Complex Fluids Processing (CCFP) The CCFP has an international reputation in the field of biochemical engineering, membrane process and colloids engineering. It is a collaboration of 5 academic staff and associated postdoctoral and postgraduate researchers, with an annual budget of over £2 million. The Centre has state of the art equipment for the analysis of colloidal materials (Particle sizing, zeta potential and as series of AFM instruments), chemical analysis (HPLC and GC) and a range of biochemical reactors including membrane bioreactors with full support facilities (Cat 2 fermentation lab, 24h steam etc, microbiology and biochemistry labs). The group has wide experience in the assessment and treatment of waste materials from agriculture and industry including handling and processing fish manures. We have worked on the development and construction of pilot scale Bioreactors and MBR for fermentation and enzyme-based hydrolytic processes. The Centre has a range of membrane equipment that will be used on this project both to study hydrolysis and microbial transformations and purification of intracellular materials to the pilot scale. B. Centre for Sustainable Aquaculture Research (CSAR) The CSAR is a state-ofthe-art research facility, housing a team of researchers working on applied aspects of sustainable aquaculture development, funded via a combination of competitive resear ch gran (eg, Research Councils UK; EU FP6, FP7) and commercial research contracts. The team‘s activities ts are directed towards integrated aqua-farming techniques that make efficient use of natural raw materials, enable recycling of resources and having a low environmental impact. CSAR has been selected as an RTD partner in this project on the basis of expertise on the nutritional requirements and feed development for farmed aquatic species, which will be applied in WP5 (Novel Conversion Processes). The Centre comprises a series of controlled environment laboratories incorporating water recirculation technology, with programmable air and water temperatures; lighting (light intensity, photoperiod); salinity; pH and redox. These are designed for culturing a wide range of aquatic organisms, from temperate-to-tropical and freshwater-to- marine environments, at scales ranging from laboratory- to pilot commercial scale (rearing systems up to 60,000 L volume). Being located on the campus of a large university, the Centre has access to and applies a comprehensive range of laboratory analytical techniques, including electrophoresis, microarray screening, realtime PCR and automated DNA sequencing, mass spectroscopy, ICP spectroscopy, gas liquid chromatography, HPLC, LC/mass spectrometry, microcalorimetry, rheometry, photo correlation spectroscopy, atomic force microscopy and laser defraction particle sizing. Role in the Project: SU Role in the project: SU will lead WP1 (Enhanced Scientific Understanding) and the development and testing of prototype microalgae technologies in WP2; will lead WP4 (microalgae harvesting technologies) and play a leading role in WP5 (refinery and upgrading processes); and will be responsible for model-based technical and economic evaluations of BioAlgaeSorb technologies in WPs 2 and 6.

50

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call FP7-SME-

for a multidisciplinary research programme incorporating water quality control, process modelling, bioprocess engineering, aquaculture feeds and nutrition and aquaculture health management. His particular expertise relevant to the BioAlgaeSorb project is in water recirculation technologies and microalgae mass culture.

Nam Teknologisk Institutt AS (TI) e Participant No. 9 Organisation RTD Countr Norway Type y Business Area: Teknologisk Institutt as (TI) is a non-profit private founded RTD organization that has grown from a governmental institute into a highly competent company. TI offers personnel with high level of skills and expertise in a great number of areas, among others, development of industry technological solutions, including technology for the waste water industry, and transferring new technology to SMEs and large companies in its competence areas. TI is not an IPR holding or exploiting business. TI's activities are divided into the following business areas: Materials Technology, Product Development and Production Technology, Environment and Safety, R&D EU programmes, Indoor Environment, Calibration, Certification and Training Services. TI's material laboratory is one of the leading laboratories in Norway, strongly supported by the specialists knowledge of employees and the modern range of equipment used for undertaking materials and product tests which cover most industrial requirements. All tests performed, from raw materials to final products are in accordance with national or international standards, and TI possess considerable expertise in developing individual test programs in accordance with customers‘ requirements. In add ition, TI has fully equipped accredited laboratories for food safety and water analysis, material testing, mechanical work shops, accredited laboratory including Scanning Electron Microscope with X-ray analyzer, emission measurement equipment, electronic lab equipment, analytic lab for physical and chemical analysis, electronic laboratory facilities with low & medium frequency signal generation and measuring equipment, basic simulation & analysis software. Role in the Project: The BioAlgaeSorb project will especially harness TIs competence and experience fluids handling; process control, mechanical enginering, prototype design and manfacturing. TI will especially particpate in WP2 Microalgae cultivation and WP5 Termo-Chemical Conversion and be resposible for WP6 Industrial integration, validation, risk assessment and contingency planning. TI will also participate in the transfer of project knowledge from the RTDs to SMEAGs and SMEs. Principal Research Personnel: Dr. Trygve Ask is Team Manager for Mechanical Engineering and Industrial Design at TI. He is project manager for two ―Researchfor SM E‖ projects underthe EC´s Framewo 7 Programme. He is an industrial designer and holds rk a Ph. D. (Dr. Ing.) in Industrial Design Theory from Oslo School of Architecture and Design in Norway. Prior to working at TI he was Head of R&D at the Norwegian lighting manufacturer SG Armaturen AS. He has also been teaching and researching for eight years at the Oslo School of Architecture and Design. The last year as Head Nam Durham University (UDUR) e Participant No. 10 Organisation RTD Countr United Type y Kingdom Business Area: The University of Durham, founded in 1832, has an excellent worldwide reputation. The University counts 15,000 students and employs over 3000 staff, and its academic teaching and research programmes are delivered through departments contained within three faculties: Arts and Humanities, Science, and Social Sciences and Health. Durham University is one of

51

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call FP7-SME-

number of international and Framework Programme projects including cooperation projects in ICT, Energy, Health, Marie Curie ITNs and Fellowships, and Capacities projects such as Research Infrastructures. The Chemistry Department is uniquely equipped to deliver the project; access will be given to a level of infrastructure and equipment, commensurate with a 5*-rated department. Role in the Project: To deliver research and development into catalysts design and function for microalgae lipid fraction upgrading. Expected benefits: Test and place new technologies within industry setting; access to novel support materials; access feedstock. Principal Research Personnel: Dr Chris Greenwell is the Addison Wheeler Fellow at Durham University, Affiliate Fellow of the Institute of Advanced Studies, Durham University and Honorary Research Fellow at the Department of Chemistry, University College London. Dr Greenwell obtained his PhD from the University of Cambridge in 2004 and has over 30 peer reviewed publications. Amongst other grants, Dr Greenwell currently leads a ca. €2M project looking at sustainable biodegradable additives for the offshore oil and gas drilling industry and supervises an industry funded project looking at upgrading biomass lipids using heterogeneous catalysis. Dr Greenwell now acts as a consultant in marine biofuel technologies to regional government and industry.

Nam Hellenic Centre for Marine Research (HCMR) e Participant No. 11 Organisation RTD Countr Greece Type y Business Area: Hellenic Center for Marine Research, HCMR, is a multi site organisation and the main research and advisory body for marine environment, fisheries and aquaculture in Greece. It was created in 2003 and has more than 500 employees. The Institute of Aquaculture, one of the five Institutes of HCMR, curries out basic and applied research into the rearing process of marine animals, improvement of quality and welfare. It has state of the art facilities on Crete for both experimental and pilot scale studies, including hatcheries, broodstock of several fish species, pre-growing and on-growing land facilities and also a net- pen cage farm. It has large-scale bioreactors for the production of phytoplankton, as well as experimental bioreactors and equipment for the maintenance and monitoring of stock cultures. Specialized laboratories support any experimental studies. Role in the Project: HCMR will lead and co-ordinate the activities in the project related to WP2 and more specifically to the selection of suitable microalgae species and optimization of the cultivation microalgae. Expected benefits: Assessment of possibility to utilize effluents nutrients and gases in production of microalgae. Principal Research

Nam University of Florence (UFL) e Participant No. 12 Organisation RTD Countr Italy Type y Business Area: The Research Center for Renewable Energy, CREAR, of the University of Florence, UFL, is a multi-disciplinary institution merging Energy Engineering, Agriculture, Forestry, Chemistry, Earth Science, etc. It has a long track of records on biomass and bioenergy as well as on other renewable energy sources. CREAR currently coordinates various EU and National funded projects in the field of biofuels and small scale bioenergy 52

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call FP7-SME-

engines and turbines. In addition, an important area of work is microalgae strain selection and cultivation, where close collaboration with the most important Italian Biodiesel industries has been established in the form of research contracts. Role in the Project: Investigation on the microalgae pyrolysis process and design of pyrolysis technology. Testing of microalgae as feedstock for pyrolysis. Product characterization and test in energy conversion systems. Expected benefits: Assessment of microalgae pyrolysis and investigation on quality characteristics of this biofuel. Principal Research Personnel: Dr Ing David Chiaramonti obtained his PhD in Energetics at the University of Florence. His main scientific interest is on the production and use of biofuels. His research work covers thermochemical biomass conversion processes as well as liquid biofuel production and use. He is a member of several associations and scientific committees. As regards pyrolysis, he has been working on this area for many years, developing and testing emulsions of diesel and pyrolysis oil from various biomasses in engines and boilers. Other researchers involved in the project : Prof.Ing.Francesco Martelli, dr Ing Matteo Prussi, Ing Andrea Maria Rizzo, Ing.Giovanni Riccio.

B2.2: Resources to be Committed
resources of the consortium to the skills required. In order to calculate the overall effort required, the Work Programme was constructed, focusing on enabling the delivery of the project objectives, deliverables and results, and the required man months and other costs were then calculated. The specific objectives are the translated form of the overall project goal which is enabling European SMEs to remediate wastes, reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and produce biofuels via micro-algae cultivation. The technical management activities are included in the individual tasks, whereas the overall consortium management is listed separately. We believe that through the specified technical work programme and management scheme, we have optimally mixed and combined the skills and resources available from the partners and the RTD performers. In particular, the skills are integrated to form a coherent delivery capability, and will ensure that the project objectives are met. A good balance between the intellectual and resource effort between NioBio, AEBIOM and BTA as SME-AGs, Sea Marconi, IngePro, Varicon and VFT as Core Group of SMEs and the RTD is proposed to ensure that the SME-AGs and SMEs remain in control and thus represent the best interest of the wider SME community. The costs included in the budget for the BioAlgaeSorb project is divided into five main categories of person months, travel & subsistence, consumables, durable equipment and sub-contracting. An outlining of the interpretation of these costs into the project budget is given in the following of this section. Justification for Allocated

Personnel Resources The percentage allocation of staff into the WPs demonstrate that we are using an optimum mix of manpower and that neither the RTD performers, SME-AGs nor SMEs are over-utilizing expensive staff resources which would lead to poor value for money for the project. Table 2.4.3 Budget Allocation Table provides information demonstrating how the volume of resources in person months, consumables and other costs (mostly travel costs), are distributed between the different activities of the project. The WorkPlan in Section B1.4 further provides information with regards to man months allocated to the different WPs as do the Staff Effort Form as table 1.3 d. The required man months have been calculated based on a task-by-task assessment of each of the WP activities to achieve the defined objectives. The pool of manpower resources and company expertise has been deployed into individual tasks relatve to each i partner‘s technical expertise. We have endeavoured also to manage the risk in the project by applying the higher cost and more expert and experienced researchers into individual tasks that are more technically challenging and can justify those costs. The SME- AGs and SME core group do not receive any major funding from the grant to offset their manpower resource costs, as they will receive exploitation rights from the results of the project. However, each partner will retain some of the grant to 53

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call

FP7-SME-

cover their ― o uotf p o ck et expenses including travel, consumables, tooling and patent protection. As the SM Es ‖ have little or no research capability, especially for the areas of critical risk in the proposed development, RTD performers will be needed in the technical research, development and validation areas. The funded EC grant enable SME-AGs and SME partners to effectively ― s ucontrac RTD performers as technological service providers, using the EC grant and being reimbursed at b t‖ 100% of th eir RTD activities. Management of Cost vs. Risk Through Application of Most Cost Effective Organisations Into WPs The cost for each partner is one of the first aspects of the project to be considered. When considering costs, great emphasis is put on expertise and quality of the partners‘ work as all project participants have varying depths of skill, expertise and experience, and their costs vary accordingly. In order to manage these costs as well as avoid risks, each task activity in the project has been assigned to the most appropriate partner, and we have asked each partner to provide the most appropriately skilled person within their organisation to deliver the outputs of the assigned tasks. The Table 2.2 shows the indicative breakdown of the costs of the RTD performers to the SME participants. Maximum Value for Money It is vital that the allocation of resource is focused towards the activities of greatest technical challenge. However, it is even more important that the allocation of resource is focused towards the output deliverables. This is the key indicator of value for money. No partner is expected to input resource at a large scale whilst deriving low levels of benefit, similarly, no partner is unfairly gaining from very high levels of potential benefit from only minimal resource input to the WP. Table 2.2: Indicative Breakdown of the Offer from the RTD Performers to the SME participants No. Proje RT Person Durable Overh Oth Total of ct D nel ead er by Perso Resu Consumables Pe Cost Cost Cos RT n/ lts rf. s s ts D Computing Mont No. Equipm. h SU 8 35088 0 1400 0 26917 1500 64905 1 TI 2 12320 0 2000 0 17741 1000 33061 1 UDUR 2 10200 0 2000 0 10513 1500 24213 1 HCMR 2 4000 0 1000 0 2400 1000 8400 1 UFL 2 5500 0 2000 0 4532 1500 13532 1 SU 28 122808 0 44000 0 94209 8500 269517 2 TI 12 73920 0 20000 0 106445 8000 208365 2 HCMR 60 120000 0 37000 0 72000 15000 244000 2 SU 24 105264 0 15000 0 80751 8000 209015 3 SU 12 52632 0 15000 0 40375 3000 111007 4 UDUR 30 153000 67200 50000 0 157689 12000 439889 4 TI 12 73920 0 60000 0 106445 7250 247615 5 UFL 66 181500 0 40000 0 149570 25000 369070 5 SU 11 48246 0 2000 0 37011 3000 90257 6 TI 12 73920 0 6000 0 106445 7000 193365 6 UDUR 6 30600 0 3400 0 31538 3000 68538 6 HCMR 22 44000 0 4000 0 26400 2000 76400 6 UFL 6 16500 0 2000 0 13597 5500 37597 6 Subtotal Total 317 1163418 67200 306800 0 1084578 113750

W P No . 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 4 4 5 5 6,7 6,7 6,7 6,7 6,7

2735746

Receipts

0

We have cross-referenced each task description with the allocations of the work to each partner and an assessment of hardware, software, production and development equipment necessary to execute each task. We have avoided duplication of equipment between partners and sought commitments that each partner will make the relevant equipment available in line with the project schedule. NoBio, AEBIOM and BTA have the highest rates for consumables with regards to the SME-AG and SME partners. AEBIOM has the most extensive dissemination tasks among the SME-AGs and does therefore have a higher consumable budget than the other SME-AGs and SME partners.

54

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call

FP7-SME-

Justification of Travel and Subsistence Costs During the framework of the 3-year duration of the project, we have in our best intension to achieve a functional project workforce, knowledge transfer and dissemination of results, estimated the number of travels required per partner and calculated the costs expended on this activity. Thus, the tables below shows the results of these estimations and calculations. Table 2.3: BioAlgaeConsumable Costs per Partner Short Co Pa Countr Description st Nam rt. y € e N SME SME-AGs and SMEs 1 NoBio Norway 450 Project promotion material for demo, training and 0 2 AEBIO Belgium 600 dissemination + web page leaflets, video, CDs, posters Project promotion material, MBTA 0 3 UK 300 etc Project promotion material, leaflets, video, CDs, posters 0 etc (painting sector) Se 4 Italy 100 Project promotion material, leaflets, video, CDs, posters a 0 etc (mechanical sector) Marc 5 Ingepr Netherlan 100 Equipment and other material for system tests o ds 0 Equipment and other material for validation tests 6 VAS UK 100 and training and demo activities 0 Equipment and other material for validation tests 7 VFT Belgium 100 and training and demo activities 0 RTD performers 8 S UK 774 Manufacture of prototypes, lab tests, industrial validaion, U 00 transportation costs. Test and survey material, communication costs, user 9 T Norway 880 trials demos and training I 00 material Consumables for development and tests in addition 1 UDUR UK 554 to company general equipment 0 00 Test consumables communication costs, user trials 1 HCMR Greece 420 demos and training material 1 00 (nationally) Test consumables communication costs, user trials 1 UFL Italy 440 demos and training material 2 00 (nationally) Subtotal SME AGs + 17 SMEs 500 Subtotal RTD Performers 3068 00 We have based our calculations on different costs related to travels in different European countries, and the location of each partner in accordance to easy/difficult access to airports and other transportation facilities. As being an international project with partners from different European countries, the project meetings will justify a number of travels for the partners. In addition, the project includes dissemination and demonstration objectives, which require participation at conferences, exhibitions, workshops and secondments and exchange of staff.

55

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2 Table 2.4: Budget Allocation Table

Call FP7-SME-

56

BioAlgaeSorb

Section B3: Impact – The Potential Impact Through Development, Dissemination and Use of Project Results

the

B3.1: Contribution, at the European and/or International Level, to the Expected Impacts Listed in the Work Programme Under the Relevant Activity Main Impact of BioAlgaeSorb Diversifying Europe's sustainable bioenergy supplies of GHG emissions Reduction Production of new value added natural products from microalgae Recovering of inorganic nutrients from effluents
Land based aquaculture in EU1 Direct employment Indirect employment Production value Volume Biomass Industry Indicative targets - Renewable Energy Sources 2 New biogas plants Biomass combined heat and power units New district / centralized heating units installations Facts & Figures EU-27 2006 Retail market value products from micro-algae CO2 output from the energy industry Contribution of bioenergy to primary energy supply Organic effluent stream Europe Table 3.1 - Fact box 1 118 84 283 >€4 630 M >265 000 tons 4.6 M GWh3 # 6000 # 450 # 13 000 € 4.0 B4 1577 M tons 3.7 % 244 M tons

B3.1.1: Improving the Competitiveness of SME-AG Members The commercial potential of microalgae has been recognised globally for biological carbon capture and for the sustainable production of biofuels, specialty chemicals, foods and feedstuffs, leading to major recent investments, including more than €200 million in combined investments and commitments to microalgae fuels-based public private partnerships, private companies and first stage commercial projects during 2008 (mainly USA). While there is substantial European expertise in this arena, there is an acute risk that European competiveness will be lost without a coordinated programme of technology development as offered to SME AG members by the BioAlgaeSorb project. This is justified not only to improve SME competitiveness, but also to support European sustainability measures, namely reduction of GHG emissions, protection of water quality and transition to a Low Carbon economy. This will be of high interest to all

concerned stakeholders, e.g. the general public, consumers, policy makers, and policy

EC Fisheries Directorate General, Forward study of community aquaculture,(1999, SSB ( 2006) 2 http://europa.eu.int/comm/energy/res/legislation/electricity_en.htm 3 Indicative targets for renewable electricity have been set by the EU 22.1% of total electricity production by 2010 4 Pulz & Gross (2004)
1

57

BioAlgaeSorb administrators / regulators. The long-term and shorter-term economic viability for both the SME sectors and general society will benefit significantly from the impacts created by the BioAlgaeSorb project. The technologies to be developed within the BioAlgaeSorb project will improve the competitiveness of SME-AG members via a common approach to effluent remediation. Microalgae cultivation will form the basis for biological CO 2 capture from industrial flue gases and recycling of soluble nutrients from aqueous agricultural and industrial effluents, generating a valuable new raw material (microalgae biomass) in the process. The competitiveness of the SMEs will be improved by reductions in their nutrient and carbon emissions (lower discharge tariffs; eligibility for carbon credits) and by the value of the microalgae biomass as a commodity to be used in-house (eg, for on-site bioenergy production) or for sale in processed form. Crucially, an integrated biorefinery approach will be developed, whereby the maximum economic yield is obtained per unit biomass and a range of value added products is made available. This contrasts with conventional exploitation paths for microalgae (eg, exclusive focus on oil fractions for biofuels) and assists with production economics. The development of food and feed ingredients from microalgae protein, carbohydrate, oil and other fractions furthermore aligns with increasing worldwide demand for health and wellbeing products and EU goals for preventative healthcare. The SME members of the European Biomass Association (AEBIOM; European SMEAG) and Norwegian Biomass Association (NoBio; AC SME AG) are engaged in bioenergy production, generating bio-heat, -electricity, -fuels and - gas. These businesses will benefit from BioAlgaeSorb both via a new sustainable source of combustible biomass and by a new technology to reduce their GHG emissions. Members of the British Trout Association (BTA) will be the first SME-AG beneficiaries from the aquaculture sector for the developed technologies. They will gain in competitiveness by being permitted to increase fish production per unit water consumption via improved remediation of effluents. Methods will furthermore be developed for BTA members to reuse harvested microalgae biomass in the fish farming process, eg for combined heat and power production or the production of safe high quality nutrients. The benefits accrued by BTA members will be transferable to the many other land-based fish farms in Europe, and also to intensive terrestrial livestock farms. With some modification, it is expected that production of microalgae from farm effluents will also be adaptable to municipal waste water treatment and some branches of food processing, greatly extending the impact of the BioAlgaeSorb project beyond the immediate partnership. The participating SMEs from the microalgae production sector will also gain enhanced competiveness, both for direct sales and IP exploitation. The benefits accrued will extend internationally, since for physical environmental reasons the largest land areas identified for commercial microalgae production (especially for biofuels) lie beyond Europe and technologies and know-how are widely sought after for this purpose. Increase in demand for microalgae systems via BioAlgaeSorb will furthermore have a positive effect on component suppliers from diverse business sectors, eg in the areas of pumping, filtration, plastics, sensors and control systems. B3.1.2: Markets for BioAlgaeSorb Technologies As indicated by the range of SME-AGs and SMEs participating, there are good markets for BioAlgaeSorb technologies across a broad supply chain, encompassing GHG emitters, livestock producers, biofuel manufacturers, food processors, sewage and waste water treatment businesses, and feed and food

manufacturers. The project is directly targeted at SME beneficiaries in the first three categories, but will have much broader applications in related sectors. GHG Emitters Biomass Power Generation Biomass power generation represents a growing proportion of total renewable energy generation in Europe (16.8% in 2006, source AEBIOM). BioAlgaeSorb will assist the sustainable growth of this sector by developing a new source of carbon neutral biomass from microalgae and associated processes to efficiently convert this biomass to electricity and fuel. A further environmental benefit will be accrued by reducing power plant CO 2 emissions by directing flue gases for microalgae growth. The processes and products developed for this sector will be transferable to other

58

Waste streams Amount Sewage sludge BioAlgaeSorb 11 M tons Animal faeces, urine, manure industries that are 125 M tons heavily reliant on fossil fuels (e.g., conventional goal/oil/gas Animal waste of food preparation & production power plants, steel manufacturers, flat glass production plants, cement plants, 13 M tons breweries, distilleries). Animal & vegetal waste 95 M tons As a renewable energy source, biomass power generation is key for European diversification away from fossil fuels5, reducing GHG emissions and current dependence on unreliable and volatile fossil fuel markets (in particular oil and gas). The growth of renewable energy sources also stimulates employment in Europe, creating new technologies and improving trade balance. The total electric energy production in the EU-27 (2007) was based on 3% biomass only, illustrating tremendous scope for growth. As expressed by the EC, ―Member States 6should work towards an indicative trajectory tracing a path towards the achievement of their final mandatory targets while having in mind that there are different uses of Biomass and therefore it is essential to mobilise new biomass resources. It is appropriate to monitor the impact of biomass cultivation, such as through land use changes, including displacement, the introduction of invasive alien species and other effects on biodiversity, and effects on food production and local prosperity. The Commission should consider all relevant sources of information, including the FAO hunger map. Biofuels should be promoted in a manner that encourages greater agricultural productivity and the use of degraded land.‖ As stated previously in this application, microalgal biomass fits these criteria very well and BioAlgaeSorb will provide a key means for Europe to diversify and expand the biomass power sector sustainably. GHG Emitters – Other Industries Other industries that emit large amounts of CO2 during their operations can also benefit from BioAlgaeSorb technologies to bioconvert CO2 to a usable biomass. Examples of such industries include: Coal Burning and Natural Gas Power Plants; Petrochemicals; Iron & Steel; Cements; Sugar; Tyres; Carbon Black; Mining; Aluminium; Paper; Inorganic Chemicals; Fertilizers Gaseous waste Amou streams nt Energy industries 1577 M tons CO2 equiv. All industrial processes 288 M tons (incl. metal prod.) tons The metal producing 96 M industry Table 3.2 - Overview of potential gaseous waste streams for utilisation 7 Enterprises Producing Nutrient-Rich Soluble Wastes or Solid Organic Wastes that can be Converted to Microalgae Nutrients There are several European industry sectors that produce vast amounts of effluent containing valuable nutrients for microalgal growth that otherwise form both an environmental and societal burden and require undesirable expenditure for their remediation. An overview of the quantities of wastes involved is provided in Table AT02, below.

Table 3.3 - Overview of potential aqueous waste streams for utilisation 8

Land-based aquaculture: The cultivation of finfish and shellfish is a substantial and expanding European industry. Following current and anticipated trends, industrial growth is expected to enlarge markedly over the coming decades, as global population and demand for healthy food sources increase, whilst harvest from wild stocks remains static at best or declines. More than 400,000 T of farmed fish pa are currently produced on land in the EU, conferring
http://ec.europa.eu/energy/renewables/index_en.htm DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC 7 http://nui.epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu 8 http://nui.epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu
5 6

59

BioAlgaeSorb significant organic loading on receiving waters, while disposal of solid fish manures in many cases incurs a charge to operators and, in some situations (eg, where the manures contain a high salt content), is physically unsuitable for conventional land spreading practices. Increasingly stringent discharge regulations, driven principally by the EU Water Framework Directive, have furthermore encouraged greater water re-use and the adoption of water recycling technologies by landbased fish farms, in order to reduce total discharge water volumes and to enable more efficient separation of solids. These trends provide greater incentive and greater technical capacity for aquaculture SMEs, including members of the British Trout Association, to capture and valorise soluble aquaculture effluents via BioAlgaeSorb technologies. Livestock agriculture: Livestock agriculture is responsible for the greatest proportion of organic effluents generated in Europe and for the greatest release of ammonia into surface waters. The amount of effluents produced by the 9350 M hens, 160 M pigs, 89 M cattle and 24 M dairy cows in the EU could find a new more valuable and environmental routing. In an increasingly regulated environment (ref. Water Framework Directive and others), it is vital for livestock producers to reduce the quantities of effluent released per unit stock production. High quality feeds and feed management regimes, together with installation of basic effluent water treatment systems, have been important in enabling improvements so far. BioAlgaeSorb will provide a key additional waste remediation technology that is applicable both to fish production and terrestrial livestock production, and has the added benefit of yielding a valuable commodity (ie, microalgae biomass). Example BioAlgaeSorb Impact: 10 The sewage/manure stream of 25 000 pigs will be able to bioconvert 600 tons of CO2 to microalgae biomass while powering a 500 kW biogas unit. By extension, adoption of BioAlgaeSorb technologies for all 160 M pigs farmed in Europe could potentially bioconvert 3840 M tons of CO2 in total. Sewage & grey water: Sewage & grey water treatment industries will also be able to benefit in future from BioAlgaeSorb technologies. Example BioAlgaeSorb Impact: The sewage sludge from 400 M people contains 1.8 M tons N and 0.3 M tons P that could potentially be recycled via microalgae production. Food processing: Food processing companies European businesses that produce large quantities of animal waste (eg, Pork, Poultry, Meat, Diary, Seafood) are increasingly converting this waste via anaerobic digestion (AD) into methane, which in turn is used as a heating fuel. The residual liquor from the AD process is rich in N and P that could be re-fixed via microalgae, thereby reducing the discharge of soluble effluents, bioconverting CO 2 from biomethane combustion and providing an additional source of biomass (ie microalgae) for further bioenergy production. An additional potential benefit to these companies would be the use of de-oiled microalgae meal as animal feed. SMEs from these and other sectors that produce low cost/ low value nutrient-rich liquid effluents (eg, those involved in anaerobic digestion of municipal wastes) will be able to exploit BioAlgaeSorb technologies, yielding biomass for energy production and reducing their GHG emissions thanks to CO2 uptake by microalgae. Enterprises Producing and Using

Products from Microalgae Microalgae production for established markets has approximately doubled in recent years from 5,000 to 10,000 T pa (Pulz and Gross, 2004; Algal Industry Survey, 2008). Market breakdown as of 2004 is summarised in Table 3.4. Product Group Biomass Product Health Food Functional Food Feed Additive Aquacultur Retail Value (U.S $×106) 1,250-2,500 800 300 700 Development Growi ng Growi ng Fastgrowing

Eurostat 10 Info: A. Verschoor, Ingrepro BV, 2008
9

60

BioAlgaeSorb Astaxant hin Phycocya nin β-Carotene Tocopherol Antioxidant Extract (CO2) ARA DHA PUFA Extracts Toxins Isotopes <150 >10 >2 >280 100-150 20 1,500 10 1-3 >5 Starti ng Stagn ant Promising Stagnant Growing Fast-growing

Colouring Substances

Antioxidants

Special Products

Table 3.4 - Overview of market values [USD] of selected products Business sectors that currently incorporate microalgae / microalgae extracts in their products include: Biopolymers & Bioplastics (Bioplastics fast market growth of more than 810% per year. 11Bioplastics cover approximately 10-15% of the total plastics market and will increase its market share to 25-30% by 2020. The market itself is huge and is expected to reached over € 7 B by 2020. Human Food & Food Supplements like natural anti oxidants (Astaxanthin) and other carotenoid products and essential polyunsaturated fatty acids (Omega 3). Frost & Sullivan (2005) estimates that astaxanthin is now one of the fastest growing carotenoids in Europe. European carotenoids were worth over € 300 M in 2003, with 17 per cent of this coming from supplements. But currently less than 1 ton of astaxanthin is going into supplements per year, compared to up to 150 tons for the aquaculture industry. The market size12 of astaxanthin for human use is currently valued at over €14M and is forecast to experience significant growth over the next few years, driven by the increase in awareness of its health benefits. Other growing markets include the following: Livestock & Fish feed, Shellfish diet, Marine fish larvae cultivation; Paints, Dyes and Colorants; Lubricants; Antimicrobials, Antiviral & Antifungal; Neural-protective products; Slimming related products; Anti-cellulite; Skin Anti-ageing & Sensitive skin treatment; Pulp and paper, Textiles dyeing; Metal finishing; Pharmaceutical; Biotechnology; Starch & cellulose Chemicals; Pesticides & insecticides; Fertilizers. Many businesses that use microalgae exploit primarily the protein component. For these companies, the adoption of a biorefinery approach is attractive, ie to extract the biomass oil (lipid) for biodiesel or nutritional supplements and use the de-oiled microalgae cake rich in proteins. Biofuels: Biofuels are a rapidly emerging industry globally, for reasons stated earlier in this document. The EU biofuel market in 2006 was still dominated by biodiesel (4074 MTOE) and vegetable oil (641 MTOE), that together represented 84 % of the total biofuel market (5601 MTOE, of which 871 was bioethanol and the remaining 15 MTOE biogas - EurObserv‘ER - Biofuels Barometer, 2008). In 2009, there are approximately 120 plants in the EU producing up to 6,100,000 tonnes of biodiesel annually. The EU currently represents 90% of global biodiesel production and consumption, reflecting the prevalence of diesel-powered vehicles in Europe. The European biodiesel market is expected to steadily grow during the next years, as estimated by the EU Commission, providing a particularly strong incentive for securing alternative feedstocks, in order to avoid the displacement of food crops by fuel crops (see Figure 3.1 below).

http://www.prlog.org/10047578-bioplastics-market-worldwide-with-high-growththrough-consumer-demands-for-nontoxic- products.html) 12 www.export.gov.il/Eng
11

61

BioAlgaeSorb

Figure 3.1 13 The impact of the BioAlgaeSorb technologies on the production of biofuel in the EU will be significant, as microalgae are globally considered to represent one of the most important and productive source of new biomass. European SMEs will benefit from the investigations carried out by RTD performers on a leading-edge technology, thus opening – if successful – new business areas and opportunities for huge EU and international markets. In particular, BioAlgaeSorb will focus on transforming extracted microalgal oils to second generation biofuels that are compatible with existing engine designs. This aligns with the global drive to replace first generation biofuels and the processes developed will therefore have international markets. Microalgae biomass is also suitable for the production of liquid fuels via pyrolysis, which involves rapidly heating the biomass (500oC/sec) to intermediate oC) followed by rapid cooling (residence times 1-2 s). These temperatures (400-600 reaction conditions allow the conversion of thermally unstable biomass compounds to a liquid product called bio-oils while minimizing undesired reactions (i.e. coke and gas formation). Fertilizers (re-assimilation of inorganic nutrients): Nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium are the three main nutrients of plants. Mineral fertilizers are made from naturally-occurring raw materials which have been transformed into a more plant-available form by industrial processing: Nitrogen (N), taken from the air. Cost >€1,000 per T Potassium (K), extracted from mined ores Phosphorus (P), extracted from mined ores. Cost >€1,000 per T Global phosphorus reserves are expected to be depleted in the next 50 to 100 years, therefore it is important to develop and apply techniques that can recapture these nutrients that are so important for agriculture. BioAlgaeSorb offers a means of doing this, by biologically fixing nitrogen and phosphorous from aqueous effluent streams into microalgae biomass. Conventional methods for fertilizer production furthermore discharge very large quantities of CO2 to the atmosphere (eg, circa 2T CO2 released per T N produced), providing a further incentive for recycling N and P from effluents.

13

Source: OECD, 2007

62

BioAlgaeSorb To illustrate the potential for recycling these inorganic nutrients in Europe, the 14 350 M hens, 160 M pigs, 113 M cows reared annually produce 125 M tons faeces, urine and manure, containing15 the following quantities of nitrogen, phosphorus: Waste from Animal faeces, urine, manure (125 M tons) Table 3.5 – Inorganic compounds in manure Nitrogen [N] (tons) 87 000 Phosphorus [P] (tons) 25 000

B3.1.3: Economic Justification The inputs required for microalgae production within BioAlgaeSorb (water, CO2, light, micro- and macro-nutrients) have low, zero or even negative costs, while the outputs are valuable commodities: clean water, energy, fuel, and high quality crude stabilised materials. Aqueous effluents become purified, CO 2 combustion gas (from biomass energy production plants and other sources) is captured and microalgal biomass becomes fuel for transport, energy generation and a range of high value products. The technology is very versatile, enabling local solutions to be developed for local effluent problems and providing flexibility in the desired microalgal end products. Microalgae are currently cultivated beyond Europe at large scale in inexpensive systems such as shallow open ponds or raceways with salt-, brackish- or fresh water. However, there are few technology providers with the requisite products and processes to cultivate microalgae cost effectively under European conditions: the BioAlgaeSorb partnership draws together SMEs and RTDs with leading technologies and expertise in this area, whom will adapt and extend existing technologies for the benefit of European SME AG members. Microalgae Production Costs Although large-scale microalgae cultivation has been undertaken internationally for over 40 years, knowledge and experience is still limited to a few selected species16 and to well defined operating conditions and applications that are less directly relevant to Europe and BioAlgaeSorb end users. Cost data for microalgae production reported in the literature varies depending on climate, species, growing systems and other conditions. 17 Comparison on base case capital and production cost for two production technologies is shown below. Production per microalgae Lipid content cost kg Racewa Photobiorea y ctor 19 € 2-718 € 30-70 15% 25%

Table 3.6 – Production costs algae The basic abiotic inputs for production of BioAlgaeSorb are without cost: Resource Sunlight Water (fresh, salt or brackish) CO2, Effluent (for N & P) Price Free Free Free Free or negative costs* Table 3.7 – Input costs for production

14 15

Eurostat Based on manure data Yara.no 16 Borowitzka M.A. (1992) Journal of applied phycology, 4(3), 267-279 17 Microalgae technologies & processes for biofuels/bioenergy production in British Colombia, AlabiTampier-Bibeau (2009) 18Benemann & Oswald (1996), Lolke Sijtsma-Reith et.al. (2006) 19 Moore (2001), Molina Grima (2003), Olaizola (2003)

63

Primary produce Value and prices Market size Water < ? 1/m3 but varies geographically Biomass from microalgae See derived products Derived products

BioAlgaeSorb

Astaxanthin for seafood and animals ? 1600/kg of pure staxanthin 21 26 M ton Astaxanthin for human consumption (potent anti oxidants)

*Depending on supply-demand situations and costs of transport ? 14 M The problem of CO2 emissions experienced by other industries is actually an Beta-Carotene opportunity for microalgae farms. 20An estimated one ton of CO2 could yield net ? 2.4 / ton revenues of around €137M used as the feedstock for an microalgae farm. Seen from ? 300 if a CO2 bioconversion perspective: Oils with Highly Unsaturated fatty Acids) Component Val ?4000 /ton ue € Biofuel 30 B ton 22 € Protein Feed from 58 € Methane biomass 19 € Fertilizer 20 € Carbon credits Microalgae oil for fuel 18 € Total ?360/ ton 137 Table 3.8 – Output value of production – based on 1 ton CO2 Bio-Plastic Per hectare of microalgae farm one could bioconvert about 100 tons of CO2 each year. ? 7 B by 2020 Products from BioAlgaeSorb and their market values: Alkali salts ? 250/ton (2008) raw material ? 1135/ton consumer ready product World abundance in danger. So future markets

Table 3.9 - Fact box 2 Valuable Products Derived from Microalgae Reuse of Nitrogen and Phosphorus: 22At current rates, phosphorus reserves will be depleted in the next 50 to 100 years. The price level of raw base material for phosphorus production surged from 36 €/ton (2007) to 250 €/ton (2008) while end user market prices for ready to use fertilizers are € 1350 per ton. Fertilizer costs are a major cost component for conventional microalgae cultivation – BioAlgaeSorb will resolve this by reusing N and P from effluents. Market price23 Weight fraction of microalgae Supply situation Nitrogen [N] € 1135 / ton 4-8 % Industrial production price connected to energy price levels. Phosphorus [P] € 1135 / ton 0,5 % Mined resource. Diminishing world abundance combined with rising demand.

20

http://www.csrinfo.org/en/component/content/article/386-polskie-wydarzenia-csr-kwiecie

21 22 23

www.algatech.com D.Cordell, Institute for sustainable futures, Univ. Of technology , Sydney, june 2008 Farmer weekly 2009

64

BioAlgaeSorb Content in solids of municipal and animal waste 0,68% of 136 M tons = ~1 M ton (10% of EU demand) 0,11% of 136 M tons = 0.15 M ton (5% of EU demand

Table 3.10 – Market situation and market value for N and P Microalgal fuels: One of the challenges for the viability of microalgal fuels as a new technology is to compete in financial terms with existing fossil fuel-based technologies. Much of the background work on microalgal biofuel production was carried out at the US National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) under the auspices of the Aquatic Species Program in the 1980‘s and 1990‘s. At the tim e of writing (1996)the main conclusion of that work was that it was not economically feasible to produce biodiesel from algae because even using the best-case scenarios, the price would still be twice as high as the price of a similar quantity of petroleum diesel. However, considering that the petroleum diesel price has more than doubled over the last 11 years, microalgal biodiesel production should now be viable. BioAlgaeSorb will be key to achieving profitable production of microalgal biofuels for Europe, incorporating a biorefinery approach to enhance production economics compared to more conventional, ― f ul-only‖ e microalga e appro ches. a Location cost: Microalgae cultivation is non-competitive with agriculture, aquaculture and urban development. Species of microalgae can be selected for growth in seawater, water from saline aquifers or even wastewater from municipal treatment plants. This provides good opportunity for locating at areas where land costs are low, assisted in the case of BioAlgaeSorb by co-location with effluent producers such as power plants. Over all Algae-to-bioenergy technologies are still pre-commercial and are in need for significant R&D to increase productivity, reduce costs and need to find other product market combination that gives a synergetic effect. AlgaeBioSorb will combine several technologies boosting the financial viability and will make this form of alternative energy and cleaning successful. B3.1.4: Societal Aspects Regulatory Drivers and

Employm ent24 Aquaculture contribution to rural development and poverty alleviation: Aquaculture has a positive role in rural development, both in coastal and inland situations. In inland circumstances, agriculture and forestry have been the main elements of such rural development programmes throughout Europe. Increased integration between aquaculture and agriculture could be a good means to improve rural life through multiple use of resources. Although the main element of aquaculture will remain food production, the importance of various services to be provided in recreation, rural tourism, nature conservation and water management will increase in the future, and this will provide employment and business opportunities for the rural populations. The contribution of marine aquaculture to employment and reduced rural migration has been noted in a number of countries, for example, Norway, United Kingdom/Scotland, and Greece, particularly in several rural areas where few

alternative economic activities have been able to provide stable, long term jobs. The estimates of jobs created in and by the biomass industry varies.The Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research25 mentions 1.27 FTE/ GWh which would indicate 260,000 FTE for each percent shift of European wide energy generation from fossil to biomass. Jobs created in Full Time Equivalent / Year Scenario Business as usual Scenario Biomass action planBAP-BAU Difference
24

Due to additional liquid 340 20 102627 686 07

Due to additional bioelectricity 443 70 963 90 520 20

Due to additional heat generation from 615 biomass 0 681 58 620 08

Tota l 8454 0 2671 75 1826 35

http://www.eubia.org/

25/www.tyndall.manchester.ac.uk/publications/Quantification

65

BioAlgaeSorb Table 3.11 - Employment creation European communities will benefit greatly from the conversion of effluents into energy, from lower CO 2 emissions, and decreased loading on local ecosystems caused by aqueous effluents from agriculture, aquaculture and industry. Topic Directive of the European Parliament, the Council and EU Communication (COM(2007) 1 Energy Sewage sludge 86/278/EEC 91/71/EEC Urbane waste water CO2 Kyoto Protocol on climate change to cut emissions by 8% from 1990 levels by 2008-2012 Renewable 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC energy Action Biomass COM(2005) 628 final - Official Journal C 49 of 28.02.2005 Plan The EU on Energy 26 EC communication) proposing an energy policy for Europe, with the goal to combat climate change and boost the E U‘s energy security a nd competitiveness is adopted. This set out the needfor the EU to draw up a new energy path towards a more secure, sustainable and low-carbon economy, for the benefit of all users. One aim is to give energy users greater choice, and another is to spur investment in energy infrastructure. Based on the European Commission‘s proposal, in March 2007 the Council endorsed the following targets: Reducing greenhouse gas emissions by at least 20 % (compared with 1990 levels) by 2020; Improving energy efficiency by 20 % by 2020; Raising the share of renewable energy to 20 % by 2020; Increasing the level of biofuels in transport fuel to 10 % by 2020 The EU on Sewage sludge The Sewage Sludge D i r e c t i v e 8 6 / 2 7 8 / E E C s e eks to encourage the use of sewage sludge in agriculture and to regulate its use in such a way as to prevent harmful effects on soil, vegetation, animals and man. To this end, it prohibits the use of untreated sludge on agricultural land unless it is injected or incorporated into the soil. Treated sludge is defined as having undergone "biological, chemical or heat treatment, long-term storage or any other appropriate process so as significantly to reduce its fermentability and the health hazards resulting from its use". The Directive also requires that sludge should be used in such a way that account is taken of the nutrient requirements of plants and that the quality of the soil and of the surface and groundwater is not impaired The EU on Urban waste water The Urban waste water treatment directive (91/71/EEC) concerns the treatment and discharge of urban waste water and the treatment of waste water from certain industrial sectors, including the fish-processing industry and other life stock and food processing industries. The EU on CO2 The EU has been taking serious steps to address its own greenhouse gas emissions since the early 1990s. In 2000 the Commission launched the European Climate Change Programme (ECCP). The ECCP has led to the adoption of a wide range of

new policies and measures. These include the pioneering EU Emissions Trading System, which has become the cornerstone of EU efforts to reduce emissions cost-effectively, and legislation to tackle emissions of fluorinated greenhouse gases.

26

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/energy/introduction

66

BioAlgaeSorb The EU on renewable energy Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources amending and subsequently repealing. When designing their support systems, Member States may encourage the use of biofuels which give additional benefits, including the benefits of diversification offered by biofuels made from waste, residues, non-food cellulosic material, ligno-cellulosic material and microalgae, as well as non-irrigated plants grown in arid areas to fight desertification, by taking due account of the different costs of producing energy from traditional biofuels on the one hand and of those biofuels that give additional benefits on the other The EU Biomass action plan The Communication from the Commission of 7 December 2005 - Biomass Action Plan [COM(2005) 628 final - Official Journal C 49 of 28.02.2005]. To cope with the increasing dependence on imported energy, the European Union (EU) must bring into play a new energy policy, the three main objectives of which are competitiveness, sustainable development and security of supply. It is in this wider context of an integrated and coherent energy policy and, in particular, of promoting renewable energy sources that the Commission is presenting this Biomass Action Plan. B3.1.5: Time to market The BioAlgaeSorb work plan is designed to yield proven prototype systems and processes by the end of 3 years. It is anticipated that the finalised BioAlgaeSorb technologies will be ready for market 12-18 months after completion of the project, providing commercialisation opportunities to the participants via both direct sales and license agreements on IP protected products and processes. The time to market will be expedited by rigorous early planning and project-long monitoring of: Customer needs and stability in product requirements or specifications; A well characterized, optimized product development process; A realistic project plan based on this process; Application and management of appropriate resources (financial, infrastructural and personnel)

B3.2: Appropriateness of Measures Envisaged for the Dissemination and/or Exploitation of Project Results, and Management of Intellectual Property
B3.2.1: Project Results Intellectual Property Rights and

The partnership has developed an Exploitation Strategy for the management of knowledge, intellectual property rights and of it‘s inter-relation with the various innovation-related activities planned. Details of the organization of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) and Knowledge Management are further described below. Clarification of

terminology:

67

BioAlgaeSorb Term Backgro und The information held by participants prior to the accession to the Grant Agreement, as well as copyright or other IP rights pertaining to such information, the application for which has been filed prior to their accession to the Grant Agreement, and which is needed for carrying out the project work or for using results. Means the results (including information, inventions, databases, software etc.) whether or not they can be protected, which are generated by the project. It also includes all related IP rights (copyright, designs, patents, plant variety rights and similar forms of protection). Refers to having the project results covered by IP rights. This sometimes implies for the partners to play an active role (by applying for the registration of certain IP rights, like patents,

Foregro und

Protecti on

The following principles are applied with regard to exploitation of results from the BioAlgaeSorb project: All partners keep the ownership to their own background established at the time of the project start Background owned by the SME-AGs, SMEs and RTD performers, which is or will be found necessary for the implementation of the project, will be granted royalty free to the partners with regards to project execution purposes. Post project, individual SME-AGs and SMEs partners will grant access to background from RTD partners in order to use exploit their foreground from the project on a royalty free basis Post project, individual SME-AGs and SME partners will grant access to background from other SME-AG and SME partners in order to exploit their foreground from the project on fair and reasonable conditions. Swansea University, Teknologisk Institutt, Durham University, Hellenic Centre for Marine Research and University of Florence are expressly prevented from owning any of the resulting foreground from the project.. The SME AGs and SMEs keep full ownership of foreground and reimburse at a 100 % the invoice for the RTD subcontracted to the RTD performers The RTD performers can use the results for further research (non commercial exploitation) at fair and reasonable conditions if those results are not identified as confidential and after obtaining approval of the SMEs. The RTD performers can publish the results after obtaining the agreement of the SME partners. There are no existing anticipated business agreements which may impose limitations on the subsequent exploitation or information or inventions generated as a result of the project. This will ensure that the project results will belong to the SME associations and that they will have access to needed background knowledge. According the principles of the Research for SME Associations, the knowledge arising from work carried out under the project is the joint property of NoBio,

AEBIOM, BTAand the SME-core group. The protection and management of the knowledge, IPR dissemination and exploitation activity has been assigned to the SME Association partner AEBIOM who will take on the responsibility of securing any IPR generated, as well as preparing and updating the dissemination and exploitation plan. Mr. Jean-Marc Jossart has agreed to take on the responsibility as IPR/knowledge management and will head the IPR/Knowledge Management Sub-Committee. The role and responsibily of this committee include: Responsibility for all innovation related activities, including dissemination, exploitation, protection of foreground.

68

BioAlgaeSorb Responsibility for prepa and updatng ―Plan for Use and Dissemonato n‖ . ring i i Consulting with and be assisted especially by NoBio and BTA and will also confer with core group SMEs TheIPR/Knowledge manager will manage the innovation related activities and co-ordinate the following issues: Ownership of the results by the SME-AGs Protection of the foreground and developed intellectual property Absorption of the results by the participants Discussions between the participants to determine the Exploitation agreement. Dissemination of the knowledge beyond the consortium Creation of preliminary (18 month) and final (36 month) Dissemination Use Plans (DUP) Activities promoting the exploitation of the results Transfer of best practices for the early use and exploitation of technologies Mr. Jean-Marc Jossart, is agronomist (university UCL, Belgium, 1989) and Secretary General of AEBIOM. He will be assisted by Mrs Edita Vagonyte, also working av AEBIOM. The RTDs are expressly prevented from owning or exploiting any of the resulting IPR from the project. The IPR/Knowledge Manager will report to the Managament Board. For further information regarding the project management structure and procedure, we refer to point B.2.1.1. A consortium agreement will be prepared and signed by all project partners before the grant agreement will be signed. The consortium, led by the IPR/Knowledge Manager, will develop an Exploitation Strategy-to be approved by the management board- as part of the consortium agreement for the dissemination and exploitation of all the results of the work within the consortium and, in principle, to companies outside the consortium after an initial period of confidentiality. Through the exploitation plan, each partner has a clear and unique role to play in the supply chain, its development and the promotion and protection of the results from the BioAlgaeSorb project. .After the project period, the exploitatioj of the results from the BioAlgaeSorb project will continue, especially with regards to further commercialisation. This process has already begun through concept developments and project market validation work carried by the partners within their existing customer base and activity performed in the projects as part of the Demonstration Activity and Innovation Related activity during the project period. The consortium expects to engage the services of a European Patent Attorney. All of these issues will be managed through the Consortium Agreement. WorkPackage 7, Innovation Related Activities, specifies the activities that will be carried in the project to prepare and file outline patents.

69

BioAlgaeSorb FP7-SME-2008-2 Table 3.2.2. Project Results (Including Knowledge) to be acquired by the SME-IAG and SME participants

Call

70

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call FP7-SME-

B.3.2.2 Dissemination and Use The foreground from the BioAlgaeSorb will be disseminated to the public. General public and experts in the shellfish and technology area will be informed of the results of the research work. Dissemination Activities: It is extremely important that market pull is further stimulated. To assist in this, the use of the technology pilot plant will be extended, after the end of the project, as a vehicle for pan-European technology transfer and dissemination. Initially, this will involve members of our End User Interest Group. The Management of foreground, IPR and Dissemination activities, has been assigned to SME-AG partner AEBIOM. They will be responsible for coordinating all innovation related activities, including dissemination, exploitation, protection of foreground and will be responsible for preparing and updating ―Plan for Use and Dissemination‖ . AEBIOM will closely consult and be assisted especially by NoBio and BTA as well ast the SME participants. Dissemination and training are key elements to the success of the project and to ensure optimal use of the project results. We have planned significant dissemination activities from the very start of the project in order to raise public participation and awareness, and have included demonstration ( ― t a k p‖ ) actions. All partne will play an active role in technology e-u rs transfer and dissemination, promoting the technology development to customers, and through networks of industrial contacts. The industrial partners will explore several different dissemination routes to reach parties which will have interest in the know- how and results from the BioAlgaeSorb project both in relevant sectors and especially the bio-energy sector. A preliminary plan for the use and dissemination of the foreground has been made which includes the following activities and methods: Establishing a project web-page where presentation of the project and relevant results are presented and updated as the project progresses. The project web page does consist of an open part (presenting results and new to the broader public and an internal part to be accessed by username and password by the project partners. NoBio as coordinator will be responsible for the update of the open and public part of the project web page and an update will be made minimum every 3 months, assisted by the RTD performers. The project web page is to be established within month 3 of the project. The project web site will function as an information hub for a wider distribution of foreground and public results and as a central point of report and news to the consortium vice a secure portal.

To transfer foreground from the RTD performers to the SME-AGs and SME participants through technology transfer events and interactions. The RTD performers are responsible for communicating project results to SME participants via the closed part of project web site not more than 1 month after actual work is performed. In addition, the project meetings will include know-how and technology transfer events presenting the project results to the consortium. Further promotion through case study demonstrations and Best Practice presentations initially at SME AGs a nd SME Core partner‘s web sites.
To broadcast the benefits of the developed MusselsAlive technology and foreground beyond the consortium to potential industrial user communities through the SME AGs and SMEs participation at Work-shops and Trade shows. SME-AGs and SME beneficiaries will exploit their network of member organizations and industrial contacts respectively RTDs will be responsible for validating the technology development on close

cooperation with the SME-AGs and SMEs. Case study presentations will be prepared for use of the BioAlgaeSorb results. Accordingly, the researchers participating in the project will be encouraged to make presentations for public and research papers, although followed by close monitoring from the SMEs ensuring that rules regarding confidentiality are adhered to. RTDs will publish consortium approved papers presenting key results of the BioAlgaeSorb project.. All such publications will be coordinated and approved by the SME partners. The project achievements will be presented through participation in the relevant exhibition. In addition, initiatives will be made in order to present project results in seminars and conferences held during these events for the bioenergy and aquaculture sector respectively.

7 1

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call FP7-SME-

With regards to the bio-energy and aquaculture sector respectively, the following table identify the main activies: Sector Activity Activities with regards to dissemination of results relevant for the bioenergy sector , especially use of microalgae to biofuel include: Presentation in annual conferances of AEBIOM Arrangement of Annial Workshop focusing om microalgae to biofuel including preparaion of ―Position P aper/ adm a p . t Ro ‖ Regulary newsletters distributed to the AEBIOM 33 national members and further distribution to the national AEBIOM members to the network of 4000 enterprises Activities with regards to dissemination of results relevant for the aquaculture industry, especially use of waste for bio-algae production include: Participation in key events including the annual conferances og and exhibutions of Aqua-Nor, European aquacultrue society and Word Aquaculture society. Publication in relevant journals including FishFarming Inernational Aquaculture Today, Aquaculture Europe and All publication material will be controlled by agreement from the SME-AGs and the SME core group to ensure uniformity and confidentiality of public release and all publications will be identified as results of a research project which is supported by the EC (FP7-SME). All publications will be identified as results of a research project which is supported by the EC (FP7-SME). Through our consortium partners and the network of the SME-AGs, especially the 33 national members of AEBIOM as well as the network of the SME partners the BioAlgaeSorb has a good starting point for reaching markets in all of Europe. These will all be used to network the results and provide dissemination. Validation of technology and absorption of project results The BioAlgaeSorb results will be validated all through the development work by the technology and process development in WPs 2 – 5 Susequent testing is performed and the RTDs will send each other testing results in the different RTD WorkPackages and the progress and interaction between the different WorkPackages are monitored through the activities in WP6. Training and Demonstration is included in the WP, wherein key personnel from the endusers will be educated and trained on the benefits of the results from the BioAlgaeSorb project. In this way they will be fully equipped to further bring the BioAlgaeSorn results into use. Responsibe

Bioenergy

AEBIOM, assisted by NoBio

Aquacult ure

British Trout Association( BTA)

7 2

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call FP7-SME-

Section B4: Ethical Issues
Table 4.1: Ethical Issues Table Research on Human Embryo / Foetus I CONFIRM THAT NONE OF THE ABOVE ISSUES APPLY TO MY PROPOSAL Research on Humans I CONFIRM THAT NONE OF THE ABOVE ISSUES APPLY TO MY PROPOSAL Privacy I CONFIRM THAT NONE OF THE ABOVE ISSUES APPLY TO MY PROPOSAL Research on Animals I CONFIRM THAT NONE OF THE ABOVE ISSUES APPLY TO MY PROPOSAL Research Involving Developing Countries I CONFIRM THAT NONE OF THE ABOVE ISSUES APPLY TO MY PROPOSAL Dual Use I CONFIRM THAT NONE OF THE ABOVE ISSUES APPLY TO MY PROPOSAL YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES

7 3

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call FP7-SME-

Section B5: Consideration of Gender Aspects
Equality of women and men is already recognised as a fundamental principle of the Amsterdam Treaty and one of the objectives and tasks of the Community. Moreover, a specific mission is conferred to the Community to mainstream the gender dimension in all its activities. According to this policy, all partners involved in the project do recognize that gender disp arities and inequalities are important barriers to development. Therefore, they assume the commitment to facilitate equitable participation in all the activities developed in the project at all responsibilities levels. Analysing the gender dimension has far- reaching implications for policy-making and preventive strategies. Gender analysis refers to ― t h socio-cultural construction of roles and relationships between m en and wo men‖ ra therthan being only e a ―women‘s issue‖ . One way of viewing women‘s involvement in development and closely linked with gender analysis is the consideration of women, their needs and concerns in developmental decisions, processes and mechanisms. In this project we will enhance the inclusion of women and rendering them visible in the development processes. Furthermore, special attention to gender issues will be paid in the projec dissemination t‘s activities, to encourage the involved and related sectors to address the gender disparities and inequalities. Women in Engineering - Considerable efforts have been undertaken by the EC to research the role of women in engineering and to encourage their participation – particularly. From this perspective, it is remarkable that all the participants in the BioAlgaeSorb project have adopted an equal opportunities policy for recruitment. Indeed, at least one of them, TI, has gone furtherand adopted the recommendations of theEC‘s review on wom en in research for imp roving the environment for women in engineering.

7 4

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call FP7-SME-

References
Adamsson, M, (2000) Potential use of human urine by greenhouse culturing of microalgae (Scenedesmus acuminatus), zooplankton (Daphnia magna) and tomatoes (Lycopersicon). Ecological Engineering 16 243-254. Amann JM, Kanniche M, Bouallou C, (2009) Natural gas combined cycle power plant modified into an O2/CO2 cycle for CO2 capture. Energy Conversion and Management 50, 510-521 Andrade, CR de, Zaparoli EL. A survey of the Carbon Dioxide Capture Technologies from power plant flue gases. http://www.bibl.ita.br/xencita/Artigos/62.pdf Aquatic Species Program—biodiesel from algae. National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO; Report NREL/TP-580–24190. Avagyan AB, (2008) A, contribution to global sustainable development: inclusion of microalgae and their biomass in production and bio cycles. Clean Technology and Environmental Policy 10, 313-317 Borges MT, Morais A, Castro PML, (2003) Performance of outdoor seawater treatment system for recirculation in an intensive turbot (Scophthalmus maximus) farm. Aquaculture International 11, 557-570. Maria-Teresa Borges1,2,∗, Patr´ıcia Silva1,2, L´ıdia Moreira1,2 & Rosa Soares1,2 Integration of consumer-targeted microalgal production with marine fish effluent biofiltration – a strategy for mariculture sustainability Journal of Applied Phycology (2005) 17: 187–197 Blancheton JP (2000) Developments in recirculation systems for mediterranean fish species. Aquacult. Eng 22: 17–31. Borowitzka, MA, (2005) Culturing microalgae in outdoor ponds. In, Andersen, RA (ed.) Algal Culturing Techniques: pp 205-218. Academic Press. Carvalho AP, Meireles LA, Malcata FX, (2006) Microalgal reactors: A review of enclosed system designs and performances. Biotechnology Progress 22, 1490–1506. Cao L, Wang W, Yang Y, Yang C, Yuan Z, Xiong S, Diana J (2007): Environmental Impact of Aquaculture and Countermeasures to Aquaculture Pollution in China. Env Sci Pollut Res 14 (7) 452–462 Chaumont D, (1993) Biotechnology of algal biomass production – a review of systems for outdoor mass-culture. Journal of Applied Phycology. 5, 593-604. Chisti Y, (2007) Biodiesel from microalgae. Biotechnology Advances. 25, 294-306. Csordas A,, Wang J-K, (2004) An integrated photobioreactor and foam fractionation unit for the growth and harvest of Chaetoceros spp. in open systems. Aquacultural Engineering 30, 15–30 Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) - Solicitation BAA08-07 - BioFuels Cellulosic and Algal Feedstocks http://www.darpa.mil/STO/solicitations/baa08-07/index.html

DEFRA (2002) Ammonia in the UK. Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. DEFRA Publications, London. www.defra.gov.uk 88 pages. Luz E. de-Bashan, Juan-Pablo Hernandez, Taylor Morey, Yoav Bashan Microalgae growthpromotng bacteria as ‗‗helpers‘‘ for i microalgae: a novel approach for removing ammonium and phosphorus from municipal wastewater *Water Research 38 (2004) 466–474 Del Campo JA, Garcia-Gonzalez M, Guerrero MG, (2007) Outdoor cultivation of microalgae for carotenoid production: current state and perspectives. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology. 74,1163-1174 7 5

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call

FP7-SME-

De Godos I, Gonzalez C, Becares E, et al (2009) Simultaneous nutrients and carbon removal during pretreated swine slurry degradation in a tubular biofilm photobioreactor. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology 82187-194 Brett Digman and Dong-Shik Kim Review: Alternative Energy from Food Processing Wastes Environmental Progress (Vol.27, No.4) 524 – 537 Michele Greque de Morais, Jorge Alberto Vieira Costa * Isolation and selection of microalgae from coal fired thermoelectric power plant for biofixation of carbon dioxide Energy Conversion and Management 48 (2007) 2169–2173 Doucha J, Straka F, Livansky K, (2005) Utilization of flue gas for cultivation of microalgae (Chlorella sp.) in an outdoor open thin-layer photobioreactor. Journal of Applied Phycology. 17(5) 403-412. DUDA, AM 1993 ADDRESSING NONPOINT SOURCES OF WATER-POLLUTION MUST BECOME AN INTERNATIONAL P R I O R I T Y 1 ST INTERNATIONAL CONF ON DIFFUSE ( NONPOINT ) POLLUTION : SOURCES, PREVENTION, IMPACT, ABATEMENT, SEP 19-24, 1993 CHICAGO IL WATER SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 28 1-11 Eriksen NT, (2008) The technology of microalgal culturing. Biotechnology Letters 30, 1525-1536. euobserver.com Europa report. http://europa.eu/index_en.htm EUROPEAN COMMISSION, 2003. Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) Reference document on best available techniques for intensive rearing of poultry and pigs. European Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Bureau Sevilla, Spain. A full list of BREF notes for each sector is available from the official website at: http://eippcb.jrc.es/ European Commission, 2008. Agricultural Statistics, Main Results, 2006-2007. Luxemburg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. 147pp. EUROSTAT, 2007. Europe in Figures: Eurostat yearbook 2006/07. European Commission 373 p. Chapter 10, Environment and Chapter 11, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. Available on line: http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu FAO, 2000. Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, Rome, FAOSTAT datasets: http://apps.fao.org/page/collections?subset=agriculture Farrell A, Brandt A, Arons S (2008) The Race for 21(st) Century Auto Fuels. Physics of Sustainable Energy. 1044, 235-250 Gonzalez C, Marciniak J, Villaverde S, Garcia-Encina PA, Munoz R, (2008) Microalgae-based processes for the biodegradation of pretreated piggery wastewaters. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology 80, 891-898 Gordon JM, Polle JE, (2007) Ultrahigh bioproductivity from algae. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology 76, 969-975. E.M. Grima, E.H. Belarbi, F.G.A. Fernández, A.R. Medina, Y. Chisti, Recovery of microalgal biomass and metabolites: process options and economics, Biotechnol.Adv. 20 (2003) 491– 515.

Halide, H; Stigebrandt, A; Rehbein, M, et al. 2009. Developing a decision support system for sustainable cage aquaculture ENVIRONMENTAL MODELLING & SOFTWARE 24 6 694-702 Harel M, Place AR, (2003) Heterotrophic production of marine algae for aquaculture. In, Richmond A (ed.) Handbook of microalgal culture: biotechnology and applied phycology. Wiley-Blackwell. Hodaifa, G; Martinez, ME; Sanchez, S (2008) Use of industrial wastewater from olive-oil extraction for biomass production of Scenedesmus obliquus Bioresource Technology 99, 1111-1117 Hossain ABMS, Salleh A. Biodiesel fuel production from algae as renewable energy. Am J Biochem Biotech 2008;4(3):250–4. Horiuchi J-I, Ohba I, Tada, K, Kobayashi M, Kanno T, Kishimoto M, (2003) Effective cell harvesting of the halotolerant microalga Dunaliella tertiolecta with pH Control. Journal of Bioscience and Bioengineering 95 412-415. 7 6

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2 International energy annual, 2006

Call FP7-SME-

Kadam KL, (2002) Environmental implications of power generation via microalgae cofiring. Energy 27, 905-922 Knuckey RM, Brown MR, Dion R, Frampton DMF, (2006) Production of microalgal concentrates by flocculation and their assessment as aquaculture feeds. Aquaculture Engineering 35 300-313 Lee SJ, Kim SB, Kim JE, (1998) Effects of harvesting method and growth stage on the flocculation of the green alga Botryococcus braunii. Letters in Applied Microbiology, 27, 14-18. Li, FY; Wichmann, K; Otterpohl, R (2009) Review of the technological approaches for grey water treatment and reuses. Science of the total Environment 407 3439-3449. Lindahl O., Hart R., Hernroth B., Kollberg S., Loo L.-O., Olrog L., Rehnstam-Holm A.-S., Svensson J,. Svensson S. and Syversen U. 2005. Improving marine water quality by mussel farming – A profitable measure for Swedish society. Ambio, Vol. 34, No. 2: 131-138. Maeda K, Owadai, Kimura, M*. 0mata K, Karube, I (1995) CO2 fixation from the flue gas on coal-fired thermal power plant by microalgae. Energy Conversion Management 36, 717-720 Masojidek, J; Sergejevova, M; Rottnerova, K; Jirka, V; Korecko, J; Kopecky, J; Zat'kova, I; Torzillo, G; Stys,D (2009) A two- stage solar photobioreactor for cultivation of microalgae based on solar concentrators. Journal of Applied Phycology 21, 55-63. Martinez, ME; Sanchez, S; Jimenez, JM, Yousfi El Muñoz L. (2000) Nitrogen and phosphorus removal from urban wastewater by the microalga Scenedesmus obliquus. Bioresource Technology 73, 263-272. Metaxa, E; Deviller, G; Pagand, P, et al. (2006) High rate algal pond treatment for water reuse in a marine fish recirculation system: Water purification and fish health. Aquaculture 252, 92-101. Molina Grima E, Belarbi E-H, Acein Fernandes FG, Medina R, Christi Y. (2003) Recovery of microlgal biomass and metabolites: process options and economics. Biotechnology Advances 20 491-515 Mulbry W, Kondrad S, Pizarro C, Kebede-Westheard E (2008) Treatment of dairy manure effluent using freshwater algae: Algal productivity and recovery of manure nutrients using pilot-scale algal turf scrubbers. Bioresource Technology 99, 8137-8142 Mulbry W, Kondrad S, Buyer J (2008) Treatment of dairy and swine manure effluents using freshwater algae: fatty acid content and composition of algal biomass at different manure loading rates. Journal of Applied Phycology 20, 1079-1085 Muller-Feuga A, Moal J, Kaas R, (2003) The microalgae of aquaculture. In, McEvoy, LA; Stottrup JG (eds.)Live Feeds in Marine Aquaculture: pp 206-252. Wiley-Blackwell. Neori, A; Ragg, NLC; Shpigel, M (1998) The integrated culture of seaweed, abalone, fish and clams in modular intensive land- based systems: II. Performance and nitrogen partitioning within an abalone (Haliotis tuberculata) and macroalgae culture system. Aquaculture Engineering 17, 215-239. Lalibert´e G, Proulx D, De Pauw N, De La No¨ue J (1994) Algal technology in wastewater treatment. Arch. Hydrobiol. Beih. Ergebn. Limnol. 42: 283–302.

Lasse M. Olsen1, Marianne Holmer2, Yngvar Olsen1,3 Final report, February 2008 Perspectives of nutrient emission from fish aquaculture in coastal waters Literature review with evaluated state of knowledge FHF project no. 542014 Fangyue Li a,⁎, Knut Wichmann a, Ralf Otterpohl (2009) Review of the technological approaches for grey water treatment and reuses bScience of the Total Environment 407 3439–3449 Patil, V; Tran, KQ; Giselrod, HR, (2008) Towards sustainable production of biofuels from microalgae. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 9, 1188-1195.

7 7

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call FP7-SME-

Pinto, G; Pollio, A; Previtera, L, Stanzione M, Temussi F (2003) Removal of low molecular weight phenols from olive oil mill wastewater using microalgae. Biotechnology Letters 25, 1657-1659 Pulz O, Gross W, (2004) Valuable products from biotechnology of microalgae. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology 65 (635648) Preisig HR, Andersen, RA, (2005) Historical review of algal culturing techniques. In, Andersen, RA (ed.) Algal Culturing Techniques: pp 1-12. Academic Press. Research and Markets http://www.researchandmarkets.com/research Rossignol N, Vandanjon, L, Jaouen P, Quemeneur F (1999) Membrane technology for the continous separation microalgae/culture medium: compared performances cross flow microfiltration and ultrafiltration Aquaculture Engineering 20 191-208 Rossi N, Jaouen P, Lentilhomme , and Petit I, (2004) Harvesting of cyanobacterium arthospira platensis using organic filtration membranes. Transactions of IChemE Food and Bioprocessing 82 244-250 Sarmidi Amin ―Review on biofuel oil and gas production processes from microalgae‖ Energy Conversion a nd Manageme nt 50 (2009) 1834–1840 O. Schneider*, V. Sereti, E.H. Eding, J.A.J. (2005) Verreth Analysis of nutrient flows in integrated intensive aquaculture systems Aquacultural Engineering 32 379–401 Schuenhoff A, Mata, L, Santos R, (2006) The tetrasporophyte of Asparagopsis armata as a novel seaweed biofilter. Aquaculture 252, 3-11 Sheehan J, Dunahay T, Benemann J, Roessler P, (1998) A look back at the U.S. Department of Energy's Spolaore P, Joannis-Cassan C, Duran E et al (2006) Commercial application of microalgae. Journal of Bioscience and Bioengineering 101, 87-96

S t ev en s on RA A, Sa r ma SS S , N an d i n i S 1998

Population dynamics of Brachionus calyciflorus (Rotifera : Brachionidae) in waste water from food-processing industry in Mexico. REVISTA DE BIOLOGIA TROPICAL Volume: 46 Issue: 3 Pages: 595-600 Stott, D 2009Environmental enforcement in the UK JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING 11 470-474 A. Sukenik, D. Bilanovic, G. Shelef, Flocculation of microalgae in Brackish and SeaWaters, Biomass 15 (1988) 187–199. Sunita, M; Rao, DG (2003) Bioconversion of mango processing waste to fish-feed by microalgae isolated from fruit processing industrial effluents. Journal of Scientific & Industrial Research 62, 344-347 The information centre, Scottish Parliament 1999 http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/research/pdf_r es_notes/rn99-15.pdf

Tam, N. F. Y. & Wong, Y. S. (1990). The comparison of growth and nutrient removal efficiency of Chlorella pyrenoidosa in settled and activated sewages. Environ.Pollut., 65, 93-108. Tarlan, E; Dilek, FB; Yetis, U (2002) Effectiveness of algae in the treatment of a woodbased pulp and paper industry wastewater. Bioresource Technology 84, 1-5 Travieso, L; Benitez, F; Sanchez, E, Borja R, Leon M, Raposo F Rincon B (2008) Assessment of a microalgae pond for post- treatment of the effluent from an anaerobic fixed bed reactor treating distillery wastewater Environmental Technology 29 985982. L. Traviesoa, F. Benı´t b, E. Sa´ ncheza, R. Borjaa,∗, A. M artı´n M .F.2006. Batch mixed culture of ez c, Chlorella vulgaris using settled and diluted piggery waste Colmenarejo d ecological engineering 2 8 158–165

7 8

BioAlgaeSorb 2008-2

Call

FP7-SME-

Travieso L, Benitez F, Sanchez E et al, (2006) Production of biomass (algae-bacteria) by using a mixture of settled swine and sewage as substrate. Journal of Environmental Science and Health Part A-Toxic/Hazardous Substances & Environmental Engineering. 41, 415-429 Troell M, Halling C, Neori A, Chopin T, Buschmann AH, Kautsky N, Yarish C (2003) Integrated mariculture: Asking the right questions. Aquaculture 226: 69–90. Tusseau-Vuillemin,MH 2001 D o f ood p roce ssi n g i n du stri e s con tri b u te e u trop h i cati on of aq u ati c syste ms? W o rkshop on Assessing and Controlling Industrial Impacts on the Aquatic Environment with Reference to Food Processing MAR 28-30, 2000 BUDAPEST HUNGARY ECOTOXICOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY 50 143152 to the

Valderrama, LT; Del Campo, CM; Rodriguez, CM, et al. 2002 T r e a t m e n t o f r e c a l c i t r a n t wastewater from ethanol and citric acid production using the microalga C h l o r e l l a v u l g a r i s a n d t h e m a c r o p h y t e L e m n a m i n u s c u l a W ATER RESEARCH 36 4185419 2 Van der Zwaan B, Smekens K, (2009) CO2 Energy-Climate Model. Environmental Model Assessments 14, 135-148 http://www.co2captureandstorage.info/networ ks/Biofixation.htm Capture and Storage with Leakage in an

Vandanjon L, Jaouen P, Rossignol N, Quemeneur F, Robert J –M, (1999) Cocnetration and desalting by membrane processes of a natrual pigment produced by a marine diatom Haslea ostrearia Simonsen. Journal of Biotechnology 70 393402 Wang J-K (2003) Conceptual design of a microalgae-based recirculating oyster and shrimp system. Aquacult. Eng. 28: 37–46. Wang CY, Fu CC, Liu YC, (2007) Effects of using lightemitting diodes on the cultivation of Spirulina platensis. Biochemical Engineering Journal 37, 21-15. Wang B, Li YQ, Wu N, (2008) CO2 bio-mitigation using microalgae. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology. 79, 707-718. Yamasaki, A 2003. An overview of CO2 mitigation options for global warming - Emphasizing CO2 sequestration options JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL ENGINEERING OF JAPAN 36 361375 Zhang ED, Wang B, Wang QH, Zhang S, Zhao B, (2008) Ammonia-nitrogen and orthophosphate removal by immobilized Scenedesmus sp isolated from municipal wastewater for potential use in tertiary treatment Bioresource Technology 99 3787379 3

Zijffers JWF, Janssen M, Tramper J, Wijffels RH, (2008) Design process of an area-efficient photobioreactor. Marine Biotechnology 10, 404-415. G.C. Zittelli, L. Rodolfi, N. Biondi, M.R. Tredici, Productivity and photosynthetic efficiency of outdoor cultures of Tetraselmis suecica in annular columns, Aquaculture 261 (2006) 932–943. Electronic references

http://www.global-green
warming.com/industry-CO2-emissions.html

house-

http://www.emergingmarkets.com/biodiesel/pdf/BiofuelsInternational_AlgaeInvestmentTrends_November2008_WillThurmond.pdf
(http://www.nrel.gov/biomass/pdfs/zemke.pdf)

(Networks, 2009) http://www.co2captureandstorage.info/networks/Biofixation.htm

http://209.85.229.132/search? q=cache:JPjV6HMSm1AJ:www.sepa.org.uk/land/guidance.aspx+slurry+BOD&cd=5&hl=en& ct=cl nk&gl=uk http://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/climate/ghg-country-profiles/tp-report-countryprofiles/eu-27-greenhouse-gas-profile- summary-1990-2020.pdf. 7 9