Energy Nexus 4 (2021) 100032

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy Nexus
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/nexus

Review on the recent structural advances in open and closed systems for
carbon capture through algae
Swastik Paul1, Souhardya Bera1, Rishav Dasgupta, Shibsankar Mondal, Subhasis Roy∗
Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Calcutta, 92 A.P.C ROAD, Kolkata 700009, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Keywords: Carbon capture has already been at the forefront of fighting global warming and ascending carbon dioxide emis-
Carbon capture sions. To cumulate for a net-zero world by 2050, scientists believe carbon dioxide sequestration to play a con-
Microalgae cultivation sequential role. For achieving this near impossible, technologies ranging from simple chemical absorption and
Open raceway ponds
adsorption to novel membrane and biological methods have been studied. This review paper focus tentatively on
Closed systems
one of the many carbon capture methods- the biological algal systems. Algae has nearly forty times the photosyn-
Photobioreactors
Microalgae carbon capture thesis rate than normal terrestrial organisms, and a circular bio-economy involving algae lead to diversification
Biomass production of feedstock and raw materials. After a short overview on the requisite for carbon capture and other technologies,
the article discuss the general strategies for macroalgae and microalgae mediated systems and their applicabil-
ity. Recent developments in the open raceway pond systems and the closed photobioreactor systems have been
reviewed extensively, and novel strategies have also been focused on. A brief discussion has also been added to
understand the relation of carbon capture technologies and their implications on the Energy-Water-Food nexus.
The present article also discuss the future roadmap for new research and development works that need to take
place and how the integration of certain different subjects can render microalgae as a prosperous commercial
feedstock.

1. Introduction dioxide emissions and need to be phased out as quickly as possible. As

Global warming is one of the major issues for many countries around
the world. Climate change is more a ‘threat’ than being a ‘change’. Even
if a tentatively small review is carried out, the issue continues to grow
as a critical one, for the impact of human intervention on the climate,
particularly colossal-scale deforestation related activities and burning
fossil fuels, that have grown manifold since the advent of the industrial
revolution, and currently still releasing enormous magnitudes of green-
house gas [1]. The global average surface temperature of the planet has
risen by 0.78 °C from 1900 to 2005 and consequently as forecasted by
the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a rise of 2–6 °C
can be expected by the end of this century. Fig. 1 shows the percentage of
global carbon emission by countries around the world in the year 2019
[2,3]. Even recently even IPCC had coded the climate change as Code
Red, which requires drastic measurements to combat climate change.
As Goldemberg had mentioned- “Fossil fuels cannot be considered
the world’s main source of energy for more than one or two genera-
tions” [4], fossil fuels continue to power some developed, and majority
of the developing countries. Data by the International Energy Agency
(IEA) shows how developing countries form the major chunk of carbon
∗
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: srchemengg@caluniv.ac.in (S. Roy).
1
Authors Swastik Paul and Souhardya Bera have contributed equally work.
a result of uncontrolled human activities over the last 150 years, atmo-
spheric levels of CO2 have increased by nearly ∼25%. It seems impos-
sible to scale out fossil fuels within the time scale of climate change.
Studies depict that in a rush to return businesses to pre-covid levels,
global emissions have been on a rise, with emission reduction targets
being severely compromised. The rise in the global energy CO2 release
has been as much as nearly 2% in the space of one year between Decem-
ber 2019 and December 2020 [5]. Fossil fuels burn to produce flue gas.
Flue gas emitted from the burning of coal mostly contains carbon diox-
ide (CO2 ), sulfur and nitrogen oxides (SOX and NOX ), nitrogen (N2 ),
oxygen (O2 ), and water vapor. But even then, CO2 forms the largest
component of flue gas [6]. Even at this point, it is worth mentioning,
that nearly a quarter of greenhouse gas emissions from land use, agri-
culture, forestry is rarely considered. Additionally, there are industries
where the production of CO2 is unavoidable, and therefore moving to
the net-zero forum require a major overhaul in process intensification.
There is only a fixed amount of carbon dioxide that the world can emit
to maintain global warming below a certain temperature limit, termed
the carbon budget. At the present rate of emissions, it be very difficult
to tackle emissions within the budget for a 2° C rise in global temper-
atures, which can still be compensated, if it can be managed to work
on negative emissions for the next half of the century. But it is always
better to remove and adjust emissions at the source than pursue capture
techniques when CO2 is at its lowest concentrations. And therefore, to

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nexus.2021.100032
Received 17 September 2021; Received in revised form 17 November 2021; Accepted 28 November 2021
Available online 30 November 2021
2772-4271/© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
S. Paul, S. Bera, R. Dasgupta et al.
reduce the amount of CO2 in the air, people around the globe are trying
numerous methods to capture and utilize carbon dioxide, from any and
every source possible.
A severe detrimental geochemical process that is often skipped is
ocean acidification, although oceans account for 25% of anthropogenic
carbon dioxide emission captures [7]. Excess amount of CO2 causes the
rise in production of H2 CO3 (or, carbonic acid), which then dissociates
into H+ positive ions and CO3 2− negative ions expeditiously. This causes
a decrease in pH from a normal of 8.1 to lower values, with paramount
implications on marine life and other biogeochemical cycles.
Carbon Capture and Utilization (CCU) sims not only truncate the
volume of atmospheric emissions but also achieve a benefit through the
use of CO2 for various industrial processes superseding conventional raw
materials [8]. This help facilitate the transition from low-carbon energy
production to capture and utilization while keeping emissions for large
emitters like steel, cement, thermal power stations under careful con-
trol for a move towards net-zero carbon emissions by 2050. The major
virtue of CCUS is that it is quite versatile, incorporating a fairly large
number of technologies applicable to multiple industries. CCU describes
the capture of CO2 from the power plant and industrial emissions and
utilizing it to produce value-added products. CO2 utilization can gener-
ate revenues which can contribute to offset costs associated with CO2
capture. captured carbon dioxide can find potential applications in:
i. Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) [9,10,11]
ii. Feedstock for production of urea, ammonia [12], carbonates [13,14]
etc.
iii. Feedstock for production of methanol [15,16], dimethyl ether
[17,18], syngas [19] etc. which may be done in combination with
renewable sources, most likely with solar cells, which have had very
good development over the last decade [20].
iv. CCU in mineralization in the cement industry [21].
CO2 utilization provides excellent opportunities for investment in in-
dustrial developmen t, innovation, and manufacturing, and is undoubt-
edly a captivating alternative to Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS),
given there are required economic incentives to invest in such projects
[22]. It is extremely necessary to maximize synergies between CCS and
CCU technologies to achieve the calibers of decarbonization required
to meet international climate goals. The different carbon dioxide cap-
ture techniques researched and used in commercial operations shows in
Fig. 2.
Algae, considered to be one of the simplest and ancient of the photo-
synthetic plants that grow in the aquatic systems, are distinguished for
their superior growth rate and carbon capture capacity compared with
other plants. Algae tend to have a higher photosynthetic competency
2
Energy Nexus 4 (2021) 100032
Fig. 1. Global carbon dioxide emissions by different
countries in the year 2019.
than usual terrestrial plants, for their greater capacity to capture light
and convert to usable energy [23,24,25].
Although microalgae reside in aqueous environments, they have
driven a similar photosynthetic process as in higher plants [26], where
directly passing CO2 -rich gases through their culture be a very efficient
way of capturing CO2 . Algae can grow fast and require a concentrated
source of CO2 for photosynthesis, given which has a very high energy
conversion efficiency. Moreover, they also have a carbon-concentrating
mechanism that suppresses photorespiration [27,28]. Algae-based CO2
capture is therefore becoming one of the viable options for anthro-
pogenic CO2 conversion.
Algae contain lipids (7–23%), carbohydrates (5–23%), proteins (6–
52%), and some percentage of fat. Although it varies with species,
most of the constituents can be converted for numerous commercial
applications, such as human food, medical drugs, cosmetics, biofuels,
biomolecules, and bio-fertilizers for specific applications. Additionally,
microalgal cells can be considered cell-level sunlight-driven factories,
which are capable of converting captured CO2 to biofuels, animal food,
chemical feedstocks, and bioactive compounds of high value [29,30,31].
For the power generation industry, these algae applications [32] are a
bonus after capturing CO2 from coal combustion. While Algal cultiva-
tion is expensive, algae biomass as feedstock can be utilized to produce
diverse products generate revenues, thereby rendering this route plau-
sible.
2. Past work and novelty in the present review
Microalgal carbon capture had found immense consequentiality as
to capturing carbon dioxide and how important it is to produce biofuels
to achieve a net-zero carbon society by 2050, and restrict temperature
rise to 2° Celsius. A lot of work had been reported in the field, with very
high-quality reviews present, highlighting important studies in the field
[33,34,35].
To understand the evolution of study in the field of microalgae me-
diated carbon capture, we searched for the number of articles published
over years in the science direct database with the title- “Carbon cap-
ture by microalgae” (dated: August 01, 2021) shows Fig. 3. It is erst-
while to note that the total number of studies have increased post-2015,
which can be understood from the strong stance taken by governments
to tackle the problem of rising carbon emissions and move towards a
more carbon neutral-net zero society. The problem associated with ac-
cepting carbon capture technologies had been the cost associated and
the economics of the processes have not been specified yet. But since
the cost of capture is not only attributed to only the process, but spread
over the whole flow diagram, from feedstock collection, process design
and specification, and finally production of required products or storage
S. Paul, S. Bera, R. Dasgupta et al. Energy Nexus 4 (2021) 100032

Fig. 2. Different technologies for CO2 separation and capture.

Fig. 3. A comparison between the number of papers published each year as indexed in Science Direct.

in an underground reservoir, thus a need for optimization rises in the
algae industry [36].
A fraction of past review papers have discussed the possibility of
genetically mutating different strains of microalgae to provide higher
CO2 tolerance, optimal use of nutrients and waste as feedstock, and
proper resistance to uncomfortable thermal and ionic parameters. Avail-
able strategies like random mutagenesis, which includes the likes of nu-
clear radiation mutagenesis, chemical mutagenesis, and UV mutagene-
sis. More prominent ones like adaptive evolution help cultivate specific
strains with desirable characteristics in previously specified conditions
[37]. The prospective of genetic and metabolic engineering is especially
interesting as they tend to provide better efficiencies in identically struc-
tured cultivation systems, with approaches to work on protein or genetic
modifications and modify the biochemical process [38,39]. This can al-
ternatively target high productivities with similar or lower production
costs [40]. The genetic and metabolic alterations can potentially target
to enhance the fixation pathway or in certain cases create additional
pathways for increased carbon dioxide uptake at higher efficiencies. A
more exciting prospect can be optimizing the performances of the en-
ergy harvesting complexes [41].
A major part of the review papers discusses the concept of a bio-
circular economy that can be formed around microalgae as the central
source of feedstock for biotechnical applications, involving renewable
biofuels, and bioactive compounds like nutraceuticals and cosmetics.
Being a very new center for being a ‘circular economy’ feedstock, scien-
tists believe it still can unlock new potential applications in bioactivities
and waste management [42,43]. The studies signify that algal species
are a major part of the solution to mitigate the problems of the energy

3
S. Paul, S. Bera, R. Dasgupta et al.
crisis, global warming, and water pollution. Thus, they tend to capture
the bio-cycle approach which is required for algae to be incorporated in
a biorefinery system [44,45]. A singular stand-alone microalgae biore-
finery system could be beneficial to produce economically important
biofuels and sustainable products, although an integrated power plant-
biorefinery system be more economically feasible and competitive in re-
gards to a CCS system [46]. Even, most were vastly focused on biofuel
production [47,48], such as its use as a feedstock to alleviate the biofuel
crisis. A holistic approach can be found in several papers, which dealt
with the research and development disciplines, in addition to defining
the improvements as a sustainable resource [49,50], and understanding
the thermochemical process advancements [51]. Case studies of differ-
ent countries with specific policies also focus to encourage the devel-
opment of biofuels, with specific mentions about how the developed
policies should have a global outlook [52,53,54,55,56,57,58].
Although every paper includes a part of their discussion on the cul-
ture strategies, there are very few reviews on the construction and un-
derstanding of how these functions. These tend to study the system only
to inform about the types. Very few reviews dig deep into the whole de-
velopment of the systems and the intricates [59,60]. But then it is very
important to understand the constructional features of systems than just
studying what the system consisted of, and this field has been highly de-
luded in terms of study and reviews [61]. Herein run through the rudi-
ments of carbon capture starting essentially from the basics of carbon
capture and then focusing on the macroalgae and microalgae mediated
carbon capture. The focus be on different recent developments in the
open and closed system, and how different strategies can be applied
in the field. The systems be discussed rigorously with the exhaustive
description provided to understand each result. The review paper adsc-
ititiously relish highlighting a future roadmap in the field, and how the
gradual incorporation can commence with the data already in hand.
2. A brief overview of all carbon capture techniques
The carbon capture techniques can be classified into pre-combustion
capture, post-combustion capture, and oxy-fuel combustion [62].
2.1. Post-combustion capture
In this route, CO2 is extracted from the flue gas after the burning of
fossil fuel and therefore does not require any transmutations to be made
to existing power station structures. This is especially important since
the lifespan of any power generating station are very high, and so the
replacement rate is low, with the associated financial costs of replace-
ment high. So, carbon capture post-combustion is an important CC tech-
nology implemented across countries. The processes that are involved
in post-combustion capture are adsorption, chemical absorption, cryo-
genic separation, and membrane separation technology. Projects like
the Boundary Dam and Petra Nova projects are already in service, and
further cost reduction is possible by increased deployment or the use of
other innovative solvents.
2.2. Pre-combustion capture
The method describes CO2 being captured from fossil fuels before
the combustion takes place. This process mainly involves the gasifica-
tion process done in a gasifier under a low oxygen level forming a syngas
from coal which mainly contains CO and H2 O (free from pollutants) and
this syngas undergoes water gas shift reaction with steam producing H2
and CO2 . Therefore, H2 becomes the fuel-producing electricity in the
turbine. But the design requires making radical changes to the present
power-generating stations, and so is limited to new-build power sta-
tions. Although the power input into the pre-combustion system can be
deemed analogous to coal-fired power stations, it is much less efficient
when compared to gas-fired power stations.
4
Energy Nexus 4 (2021) 100032
Scientists predict that coal gasification and gas reforming has already
been perfectly developed, and very advantageous for the high carbon
content pre-combustion, but still, the technology suffers from high pro-
cess costs [63].
2.3. Oxyfuel combustion capture
The process mentions high purity oxygen to be used in lieu of air
for combustion. But, the oxy-fuel process requires rearrangement of the
base design of power plants before the combustion takes place, as well
as renewed designing of the boiler. When the fossil fuels are burned in
presence of oxygen the flue gas consists of a high amount of CO2 , water,
particulates, and SO2 . So, there is a substantial reduction of toxic gasses
such as NOX for nitrogen is the major component removed in the oxy-
fuel method before combustion takes place. SO2 and particulates can
be removed by flue gas desulphurization and electrostatic precipitation
respectively [64]. Water present can also be separated by simple me-
chanical drying of the gas. So, the resulting flue gas just contains high
concentrations of CO2 (80–98%) only, which can easily be captured. Ad-
ditionally, the absence of nitrogen-containing compounds reduces the
infrastructural development required for flue gas treatment.
Due to the presence of a high concentration of carbon dioxide, effi-
ciency remains usually high, supported by well-developed air separation
techniques. But high corrosive nature and cost inefficiency limit its de-
ployment [65].
Increased deployment of renewables in the energy sector is a crit-
ical factor for incorporating CCU systems in power plant operations.
With more renewables lined up to be installed to cater to the rise of de-
mand in energy, thermal power plants need to be increased flexibility
to operate under seasonal variations in requirement. Since renewables
still require more development for use at the highest scales around all
seasons, till then retrofitting CCUS technologies to fossil fuel-powered
thermal power stations provide this flexibility to ensure a stable energy
supply. Long-term seasonal variation is a major challenge, for renew-
ables, and CCU facilities with thermal generators can play an important
role in the balance. This can also promote economic advantage at times
of low energy requirement from power plants.
Aside from these, many other biological routes [66] can be taken to
capture carbon dioxide such as
(a) Afforestation i.e., planting trees and forests so that they can use car-
bon dioxide in the air to produce oxygen thus reducing the concen-
tration of carbon dioxide in the air.
(b) Using renewable energy (or to a certain extent, carbon-negative en-
ergy sources) such as hydro, wind, solar, and biofuel to run vehi-
cles instead of petrol and diesel which produces a lot of carbon
dioxide when burned, although some of them are only near zero-
carbon emission fuel, whereas few requires incorporated CC systems
to reach net-zero carbon emission fuels.
(c) Biological sequestration- Ocean fertilization, algae cultivation, and
blue carbon nature restoration is mainly happening due to its effi-
ciency in capturing carbon dioxide, and alternatively, for its nature
conservation initiatives.
Certain advancements that are made in recent times are as follows
Currently the separation techniques of carbon dioxide from flue gas
(mainly by absorption, adsorption, and membrane separation) had some
efficient growth.
Singh et al. has provided a very elaborate comparative and descrip-
tive table on the various carbon capture techniques, their mechanisms,
advantages, and disadvantages [67].
3. Why algae?
Algae are multicellular or unicellular organisms whose growth is
based on the photosynthesis mechanism; they account for more than
50% of global organic carbon fixation [68]. Just like plants they also
S. Paul, S. Bera, R. Dasgupta et al.
Table 1
Advantages of microalgae and macroalgae towards carbon capture system.
Microalgae
• A sustainable process that reduces the carbon footprint
• Has high conversion efficiency
• High photosynthesis rate [69]
• Rapid growth rate [70]
• A highly efficient process with low operation cost
• Carbon losses are minimal and have good adaptability to
the environment
use carbon dioxide and light energy to produce oxygen and sugar. They
are mostly found in water and aquatic organisms mainly eat algae as
their main food. Of the two basic types of algae- (a) microalgae and
(b) macroalgae, microalgae find more extensive use than macroalgae
in the field of carbon sequestration. The advantages of microalgae and
macroalgae towards carbon capture system are shown in Table 1.
Microalgae can be used as food, to get useful proteins. They are also
regarded as an alternative to future renewable energy sources. Microal-
gae is very important in capturing CO2 from the flue gas due to their
small size property to control in a close system and its byproducts are
used for producing biofuels and various cosmetics, medical drugs, etc.
It is essential photosynthesis, which uses water and CO2 to produce
organic compounds without the consumption of any secondary energy
source. Its high photosynthesis rate [71] (at times nearly 40 times more
than terrestrial counterparts) is well supported by a rapid growth rate,
good environment workability, eco-friendly and low cost of operation
[72]. Essentially, it is the lipid content in microalgal species that are
responsible for food and fuel production in the future. The advantage
is that they can be cultivated without following traditional agricultural
procedures and under any water conditions (waste-water, sea-water, or
pure water) provide microalgae an edge over their terrestrial counter-
parts. Moreover, there is no additional drawback related to food secu-
rity, land use, and water scarcity. Additionally, they don’t require high
purity of CO2 to grow, and combustion products in the case of flue gas
being used act as nutrients to the system. Aquatic microalgae are ideal in
the production of liquid fuels since they can be consumed as sustainable,
environmentally friendly carbon-neutral fuels for their fast growth, en-
hanced biomass yields, variety of products, and their extremely simple
harvesting methodology in ponds and closed bioreactor systems [73,74].
Fig. 4 shows a general schematic of how microalgae is cultured and cul-
tivated to process bio-based product or convert to energy.
Inherently, the algae system can be a part of the biomass-derived
circular bio-economy, with waste products, side-residues, and industrial
wastes being important raw materials in the system. It help in the zero-
waste initiative, also helping in diversification in feedstock, leading to
a successful commercial market [75]. Even after varied interests, CCU
involving microalgae is not considered competitive, and major contrib-
utors to the capital requirements are equipment and labor costs. Com-
petitive strains need more focus to divulge a more competitive and ap-
propriate microalgae-mediated future [76].
Macroalgae-both cultivated and wild-grown prove to be a consider-
able sink for anthropogenic CO2 emissions, and proper use of macroal-
gae could make it a considerable choice to vent out carbon and green-
house emissions [77]. The species are already well-established bioen-
ergy options, with anaerobic digestion and fermentation frequently car-
ried out. But, tests for biofuel production from seaweeds have not been
high. Even then, the major advantage it provides is its high produc-
tivity even in areas that are non-arable and nutrient-deficient, thereby
avoiding the much-heated food v/s fuel debate. Ocean macroalgae is an
organism with high carbon capture potential, converting high levels of
inorganic carbon to biomass [78]. Carbon capture adds to the marine
bio-refinery concept and therefore, both optimized can have a power-
ful effect on capture potential in such algae refineries [79]. But com-
5
Energy Nexus 4 (2021) 100032
Macroalgae
• Reasonable carbon capture capacity
• Bioremediation of contaminants
• Higher net productivity
ing to carbon capture, macroalgae suffers from inadequate CO2 level
as a primary factor for macroalgae biomass production. Although there
have been studies to extensively understand the carbon preferences, and
how the amount of carbon affects macroalgae growth, the use in marine
macroalgae has not yet been quantified. Macroalgal species can be inte-
grated with coal and oil-fired power stations to produce biomass feeding
on both wastewater and flue gas, consequently producing bio-oil and
other associated products, with the major advantage that macroalgae
have higher productivities and carbon capture efficiency [80].
4. Mechanism of CO2 capture by microalgae
The simple presence and occurrence of photosynthesis in the algal
species define the demand for chlorophyll and CO2 . Similar to all ter-
restrial and chlorophyll-possessing plants, atmospheric CO2 is the pri-
mary source of carbon required for photosynthesis- the reason for higher
cell densities and increased metabolism rate. This occurs by undergoing
mainly two stages. The first type is the light-dependent stage and the
second one is a sequence of light-independent reactions. Fig. 5 shows a
tentative carbon dioxide flow within any microalgal species.
The principal objective of light-dependent processes is to supply
the biochemical reductant nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phos-
phate (NADPH2 ) as well as the chemical energy, adenosine triphos-
phate (ATP), required for inorganic carbon absorption. Two electrons
are taken from water molecules in this cycle, resulting in the release of
O2 , which is then transmitted through an electron transport chain, cul-
minating in the synthesis of NADPH2 . Protons are transferred from the
stroma into the intrathylakoid region at the same time, resulting in a pH
gradient. In a mechanism known as photophosphorylation, this gradient
stimulates ATP production, which is mediated by ATPase [81].
light energy∕chlorophyll
2NADP + 2H2 O + 2ADP + 2Pi ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←→
← 2NADPH2 + 2ATP + O2
This stage passes through several photosynthetic reactions in absence
of light. Carbon assimilation and photorespiration are the key reactions
here. The carbon assimilation step is the process of CO2 ¬fixation using
NADPH2 and ATP produced in the light-dependent stage. This mecha-
nism was discovered by Calvin and Benson. [82]
NADPH2; 3ATP
CO2 + 4H+ + 4e− ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←→
← CH 2 O + H2 O
Micro-algae have been found to possess carbonic anhydrase (CA),
which is a zinc-containing metalloenzyme that helps in carbon capturing
by catalyzing the reversible hydration of CO2 into bicarbonates and a
proton which further helps in CO2 capture from the air [84]. It speeds
up the equilibrium between CO2 and HCO3 − at physiological pH [85].
CO2 + H2 O ↔ HCO−
3 + H ↔ CO3 + 2H
+ 2− +
The CA enzyme converts the Bicarbonates to CO2 so that it can be
acted upon by the primary carbon fixation enzyme Rubisco (Ribulose-
1,5 bisphosphate carboxylase/oxygenate). But, since both CO2 and O2
are substrates for carbon fixation, it is in direct competition with pho-
torespiration. The carbon concentration mechanism (CCM) acts as an
additional enhancer of CO2 for the Rubisco enzyme [86]. This strategy
depends on the form of carbon being taken up by the algae. Since carbon
S. Paul, S. Bera, R. Dasgupta et al.
dioxide concentrations play a major role in the growth and metabolism
of microalgae, a continuous supply of it is maintained by Rubisco, which
depends on the rate of CCM and CA metabolism. Hence, CA and Rubisco
concentrations also turn out to be a controlling and limiting factor in
metabolism.
The idea is to use the biological process of photosynthesis in mi-
croalgae to capture CO2 and convert it into products that have some
economic value. In photosynthesis, CO2 , used as raw material and in
presence of water and sunlight, is converted to glucose and oxygen. Sun-
light is abundantly available in almost all corners of the earth and all
6
Energy Nexus 4 (2021) 100032
Fig. 4. General flow diagram associated with cultivation and
use of microalgae for carbon capture and fuel conversion.
Fig. 5. A tentative carbon dioxide loop in microalgae
species. [83] (Reprinted with permission. Elsevier).
around the year. The only problem can be lack of availability of sunlight
during night time. However, the use of artificial lighting might help in
counteracting this problem at a higher energy input cost but it will fa-
cilitate continuous production [87].
Not only have micro-algae been found to be effective in carbon cap-
ture but also the products obtained after this capturing are of great eco-
nomic value and the possibility of their conversion into more important
products makes the idea of the use of micro-algae for carbon capture
all the more lucrative. Microalgae produce a good quantity of lipids in-
side the cells and these lipids can, in turn, be converted into products
S. Paul, S. Bera, R. Dasgupta et al.
Table 2
A comparison of the open and closed microalgae cultivation system.
Cultivation type Advantages
Open • Economical
• Easy operation
• Easy scale-up
• Requires no specific nurture conditions
• Less energy requirement
• High stability
Closed • Good control over process parameters
• Fewer contamination risks
• A very low initial investment
• No evaporative losses
like biodiesel, gasoline, green diesel, pseudo-vegetable oil, etc. The ap-
proximate micro-algal cell carbon content is about 50 % by dry weight
[88] out of which approximately 1.8 kg CO2 can be fixed 1 kg of micro-
algae biomass [89]. Microalgae have also been found to fix CO2 with
an efficiency that is 10–50 times more effective than terrestrial plants.
gases like Sulphur and Nitrogen Oxides which are sometimes produced
with CO2 have been seen to have nutritional value for microalgae and
also microalgae do not always require pure CO2 which is why flue gas
containing CO2 can be directly used without the use of scrubbers. The
presence of SO2 is found to have a strong inhibitory effect on microalgae
growth, with concentrations above 100 ppm, microalgae cultivation be-
comes difficult [90]. The H+ released during hydrolysis of SO2 results in
an increase in acidity, causing an inhibitory effect on microalgal growth.
The decrease in pH can be understood to be the case for inhibition and
thus, in cases where pH is maintained artificially, microalgae growth
seems normal [91]. But, SO4 2− and HSO4 − can in some cases be also
found to have an inhibitory effect [92]. NOx concentrations have a con-
trasting behavior at low concentrations and higher concentrations. At
extremely low concentrations, it transforms in NO2 − which is a form of
nitrogenous nutrition [93], whereas, at concentrations above 300 ppm,
they inhibit microalgal growth [94].
A recent study has indicated using a microorganism-microalgae
co-culture system (fungi-bacteria-microalgae) for enhancing photosyn-
thetic performance and capture efficiency. The metabolism was found
to greatly increase and capture efficiency (73.54±6.83% removal effi-
cacy) was enhanced, though to be the effect of strigolactone (GR-24) on
the symbionts and microalgae [95].
All these factors make the use of micro-algae in carbon capture
highly lucrative and make us even more optimistic towards the idea
of achieving a green economy.
5. Microalgae cultivation technique
The potential of deriving valuable substances from micro-algae has
caused researchers to envision the possibility of using them as a source
from where those materials can be derived. The cultivation techniques
can be chosen as per (a) the source of nutrients, which is a very im-
portant factor for algal growth, (b) the desired products, and (c) the
investment cost. However, commercial production of those products re-
quire large-scale cultivation of the micro-algae to derive the products
in sufficient quantity. An ideal microalgae culturing system should pos-
sess the characteristics including (1) adequate light source, (2) effective
transfer of material across the liquid-gas barrier, (3) simple operation
procedure, (4) minimal contamination rate, (5) cheap overall building
and production cost, and (6) high land efficiency [96]. Hence, the loca-
tion of the cultivation is an integral factor of the climate and weather
conditions around the year, and other required entities for the success-
ful growth of microalgae with the highest biomass productivity. But, it’s
understandable that carbon capture from microalgae in any condition
is economical since algae can capture around 90% of CO2 under closed
conditions and up to 50% in open structures [97].
7
Energy Nexus 4 (2021) 100032
Disadvantages
• Difficult to control growth parameters
• Fixation rate low
• Large area required
• Contamination rate high
• High evaporation losses
• Low biomass productivity
• Biofilm formation on the interior side
• Scale-up difficult
• Large shear forces
Several techniques have been discussed below for the large-scale cul-
tivation of microalgae. But, previous to that, it is necessary to under-
stand the advantages and disadvantages of the closed and open system,
although a very good comparison is also available by Znad et al [98].
Table 2 furnishes a general comparison between open and closed mi-
croalgae cultivation techniques usually employed.
5.1. Open systems
These are simple and facile to build systems like ponds and tanks,
where the algae are allowed to grow and conventionally under natural
sunlight. However, CO2 fixation is customarily low and requires some
artificial lighting at night to be able to fix CO2 even in the absence of sun-
light. Consequently, it is difficult to maintain the requisite environmen-
tal conditions, such as pH, temperature, and mixing intensity. Contami-
nation of other algal species and external organisms causes low biomass
productivity, sometimes toxic and unusable. Seasonal variations addi-
tionally affect biomass productivity in cases [99,100,101]. The depth
of the open system is usually limited as sunlight can only penetrate a
certain distance [102]. Examples of open systems include: -
5.1.1. Simple pond
These are most simple and economical both in management and
construction of algae in open. Sometimes a rotating mixture might be
there to inhibit algal precipitation. Although they are cheap to build
and known for their simplicity of operation and ease of scaling up, it
is difficult to control the growth parameters like contamination of wa-
ter and temperature. Contamination can even occur due to rain where
other strains of micro-organisms can contaminate the culture medium
and that might hinder the growth of desired algae. As a solution, mi-
croalgae species that can survive saline or extreme alkaline environment
can be decided to be grown.
5.1.2. Open raceway pond (ORP)
Some alterations can be done to the simple pond to make a race-
way pond (looks like an automotive raceway circuit) which comprises
most of the open pond systems developed for carbon sequestration. The
ORP is usually made up of either plastic or concrete and either they are
located on the ground or they are dug on the ground. In case of dig-
ging, the walls have to be lined up for preventing the percolation of
water into the soil. The constructional morphology finds a direct cor-
relation with biomass production, nutrient uptake, and fixation rate.
The cultivation mixture is forced in a particular direction to keep the
algae suspended in the raceway pond, i.e., mixing is an important pa-
rameter to understand mass transfer rates in the system [103]. This is
done with the help of a paddle-wheel to keep the direction of water
flow fixed [104]. These systems provide better control but the huge area
that is required to grow the algae might cause a hindrance to the path
of their commercialization. Chlorella, Spirulina, etc. are the species of
micro-algae that can commonly be grown in this method. It is also pos-
sible to do the same in wastewater and on top of this, it can also be
S. Paul, S. Bera, R. Dasgupta et al. Energy Nexus 4 (2021) 100032

Fig. 6. A schematic of the design of an ORP showing the (a) top view, (b) front view, (c) right side view and, (d) the paddle wheel design. [117] (Reprinted with
permission Elsevier).

combined with the carbon capture technology in thermal power plants.

But ORPs suffer from low biomass productivity [105] and low residence
time of CO2 fixation, and additionally from evaporative losses, which
can be attributed to local climatic conditions [106]. Biomass productiv-
ity is found to have an exponential temperature dependence, that too up
to a certain temperature with productivity reducing thereafter. 25–350
Celsius can be taken as optimal growth temperature zone for species, al-
though marine species suffer from permanent cell damage and lessened
Fig. 7. Vertical column Bioreactor [138] License CC by 4.0.
productivity at temperatures above 28° Celsius. Seasonal variations also
impact the productivities and growth rate of biomass in ORPS. Summers
tend to have higher productivity when compared to the winters or the
incorporation of flue gas (FG). Both the ORPs were operated at a fixed
spring-autumn season [107]. High light intensity also causes the death
depth of 0.16 m and with a working volume of 60 L of the microalgal
of certain cultivable species due to the degradation of chlorophyll II,
culture solution. A paddle wheel was used at 16 rpm and the linear cir-
which can adversely affect microbial growth and cause photoinhibition
culation rate was kept at 30cms−1 . Gas spargers at equidistant points
[108]. Where high light intensity increases photosynthesis is highly vis-
ensured flue gas delivery at three equally aerated delivery zones. With
cous culture, less absorbance of light in dense mediums decreases pho-
the FG, they found a 3.5 times improvement in biomass productivities
toinhibition and increases productivity. In cases, light guides can help
under the semi-continuous mode but found that the microalgal culti-
increase light distribution and enhance the fixation rate of carbon diox-
vation entered a stationary phase, due to carbon source limitation and
ide in the culture [109]. CO2 supply plays an important role in bridging
reduced light penetration at high cell densities. Growth kinetics with FG
carbon demand in productivity and balancing carbon emissions to the
incorporation also depended on the irradiance period. They also noted
environment. The CO2 supply and efficiency depend on the mass trans-
that temperature and its fluctuations exerted certain problems with the
fer coefficient, mixing capacity, sparger type, the contact time in the
evaporation and biomass productivity concerned. However, the semi-
ORP, and pH, which should be optimally set and maintained [110]. The
continuous mode also proved to be a better model of operation with flue
CO2 mass transfer is critical to understanding the amount of CO2 to be
gas passed through it, which additionally showed better performance in
supplied and the economics it allows for. It is therefore of utmost impor-
terms of carbon footprint in the life cycle assessment, if merged with
tance to work for better mass transfer which depends on various fluid
any thermal power plants [117]. The researchers although receiving an
mechanical properties in the ORP [111,112]. The most preferred and
anticipated result concluded that there was a requirement for the whole
usually optimal pH remains around 6–8.76, which is preferred by most
energy to be more efficient, with the technologies and operation effi-
of the cultivated microalgal species [113]. The pH does not remain a
ciency more improved for an open system (Fig. 6).
major challenge for the capture of atmospheric CO2 but possesses grave
Advanced technologies and the use of the Internet of Things (IoT) to
challenges when under the effect of industrial flue gas, which contains
sustainably design a smart microalgae ORP, with a fixed pH controller
NOx and SOx emissions too. Reports also state that the varying amounts
and incoming light intensity. The CO2 supply could also be controlled
of CO2 in industrial flue gas emanating from different industries allows
to have an optimal photosynthetic and respiration rate for enhanced
for maximum productivity at different pH values [114,115]. Therefore,
biomass productivity, as both low and high CO2 concentrations lead
understanding biomass productivity at different pH values is important
to unnecessary growth inhibition, and the effect of the same amount
[116]. Even then, a balance needs to be established between CO2 mass
of concentration may conventionally vary the productivity in different
transfer rates and biomass productivity.
species. Paddle-wheels, which play an important role can controlling
Yadav et al. had tested an ORP system at Kharagpur India, developing
sunlight radiation for better growth and metabolism. The speeds can
a system on both batch and semi-continuous mode, with and without the
also be changed with the intensity of sunlight that is being received,

8
S. Paul, S. Bera, R. Dasgupta et al.
Fig. 8. Horizontal tubular bioreactor [139] Reprinted with permission.
Fig. 9. A schematic of bubble column PBR [140] Reprinted with permission.
Fig. 10. Flat type PBR [141] Reprinted with permission.
therefore at night the paddle-wheel automatically stops. IoT also can
control the CO2 inflow rate based on the pH and water speed. The in-
tegration of sensor devices is evident from the point that different IoT
devices such as the turbidity sensor help calculate the density of mi-
croalgal biomass [118]. Experiments prove open raceway ponds to have
enhanced areal biomass productivity using carbonation column reac-
tor (CCR), and the estimated cost seemed very low for the trials. The
team also proposed a novel electropreciflocculation (ePF) reactor and
filter press module to increase biomass productivity efficiency for Nan-
nochloropsis salina to around 98.24%. CO2 capture remained within a
very economical range of 45.38–208.12 tons ha−1 y−1 , with the average
hovering around 95.39 tons ha−1 y−1 [119]. Generally, the experiments
are conducted in a photo-heterotrophic mode with acetic acid or em-
ploying a photo-autotrophic with CO2. A mixotrophic mode of operation
reveals that microalgal species tend to achieve higher biomass produc-
tivity and a faster growth rate. C. vulgaris grows well under certain levels
of CO2 concentrations using the photoautotrophic mode of cultivation,
it also grows fast, and provides a better CO2 [120]. Yu et al. improvised
the system allowing for 5% CO2 [121]. The conditions stabled the pH
at around 7 based on NaCO3 -CO2 and acetic acid-sodium acetate buffer
respectively. That the activity of carbonic anhydrase and Rubisco was
inhibited, which was confirmed by the transcriptome sequencing analy-
sis and enzymatic activity assay attributed to the better performance of
this mode of operation. Suriya Narayan et al. studied the efficiency of
a novel algal species Coelastrella sp. FI69 [122,123], although very low
in percentage. This family of species has been found to possess diverse
traits with some of the major being its thermally tolerant nature and
higher biomass productivity [124]. In line with properties and expected
algal species’ properties, it adapted quickly to the exhaust conditions
and attained the highest biomass productivity, but there was scope for
9
Energy Nexus 4 (2021) 100032
further increase in its capture rate and biomass production. A summary
of the ORP systems discussed has been provided in Table 3.
Limited light penetration is a major reason why most of the con-
struction of most ORPs is often shallow. Computational Fluid Dynam-
ics (CFD) studies have been very beneficial lately to help give an idea
about the ORP dead zones, shear stress, power consumption, and other
hydrodynamic properties [127]. A strategy to mitigate the problem of
low biomass productivity in ORPs may be to construct a deep ORP in-
corporated with a transparent light scattering column (LSC). The LSC
is originally aimed to deal with the absence of light at deeper levels of
ORP, but this might additionally mitigate the problem of evaporation
losses. A similar model of operation by Sirikulrat et al. showed where
biomass productivity increased by about 48.3%, the evaporative losses
decreased by 13.6% for the cultivation of Spirulina [128]. It also affected
the cultivation period of the stationary phase and the net energy ratio,
thus providing an acceptable method to ORP problem mitigation. An-
other novel strategy can be using up-down chute baffles. This generates
alternate clockwise and anti-clockwise motion, which affects certain in-
fluential properties of the culture. This alternate vortex flow was impe-
rial to enhance the vertical fluid velocity, which was alternatively the
reason for the decreased dark-light cycle period of 1/12. There was also
found to be a 25% increase in the mass transfer coefficient because of
the sequential alternate motion [129].
5.2. Closed system
Closed systems or what is referred to as photobioreactors (PBRs) are
systems that prevent the direct exchange of gases between the system
and the environment and also prevent contamination.
They can provide more control over parameters like temperature,
pH and rate, and contamination due to other gases as the gas is usually
passed through a sterilized gas filter before being fed to the algae.
Closed raceway ponds (CRWP) are sometimes tested for high per-
formance to mitigate the intrinsic quandaries of an open system, and
incorporate the advantages of the closed-loop of reactors. But careful
calibration needs to be carried out in the mode of CO2 supply. Studies
found a strong correlation between the mode of supply-either contin-
uous or intermittent. Li and his group found that intermittent opera-
tion provided much higher capture capability at intermittent operation
(∼95%) for the microalgal strain Chlorella vulgaris than the maximum
CO2 capture efficiency in continuous operation (∼64%), which further
abbreviated on varying the gas flow rate [130]. A second strategy to
increment the capture efficiency in CRWP systems can be to increase
the raceway length which help increase the residence time and hence
the efficiency. This help maintain the continuous supply of CO2 in the
process.
The photobioreactors (PBRs) can be thought to be a closed complex
loop of biorefinery in itself, where all the necessary raw materials are
converted directly to the economically viable product in a single reactor
optimally. In addition to proper and increased control over cultivation
parameters and high biomass productivity, there are reduced chances of
evaporation and contamination [131]. PBR configuration is an impor-
tant parameter to gage the biomass productivity and the capacity of mi-
croalgae to remove pollutants. Additionally, the PBR diameter is a crit-
ical design element for microalgae activity. How the surface-to-volume
ratio impacts light penetration is a predominant factor defining the PBR
configuration [132]. Modifications made recently have been found to
majorly influence light utilization, adequate mixing of nutrients, and
better temperature control. The agitation system deserves special men-
tion, because of the operational stability it has brought in over years in
algal cultivation in a closed system. The extent of light intensity and dis-
tribution is an important factor in deciding biomass productivity. The
combination of light-harvesting capacity and light absorbance affects
PBR efficiency to a great extent [133]. Different microalgal species can
adapt themselves to the fluctuations in light intensity, which is impor-
tant to prevent photodamage by accepting just the optimum amount of
S. Paul, S. Bera, R. Dasgupta et al. Energy Nexus 4 (2021) 100032

Table 3
Summary of the ORP systems- the highest biomass productivities and CO2 fixation rate attained during a system.

System description Target of the study Algal species Maximum biomass CO2 fixation rate Ref.
productivity

Semi-continuous mode with FG Dependence on the mode of Chlorella vulgaris 0.428±0.12 g L−1 102.66±5.77 mg L−1 d−1 [121]
operation and effect of FG
Semi-automated integrated with Protocol for carbon capture from Chlorella sorokiniana 0.385 g L−1 – [125]
power plant a power plant with FG
CO2 supplementation using CCR Process to mass produce native Nannochloropsis salina 7.5 to 34.4 g m−2 d−1 95.39 tons ha−1 y−1 (average) [121]
marine algal strain
−1 −1 −1 −1
CO2 and acetic acid added Testing mixotrophic cultivation Chlorella vulgaris 0.237 g L d 0.294 g L d [122]
alternatively strategy
LPG burner exhaust gas Check efficiency of novel algal Coelastrella sp. FI69 0.116 g L−1 d−1 0.202 g L−1 d−1 [122][123]
species for CO2 sequestration.
Diesel-fueled heating boiler Evaluating CO2 mass transfer Scenedesmus sp. 17 g m−2 day−1 – [126]

Table 4
A comparative analysis of the different PBR systems in use for microalgae cultivation for carbon capture.

Reactor type Characteristics and advantages Drawbacks Schematic

Tubular type • High surface area and volumetric biomass density
• Usually uses transparent tubes to allow for illumination
• More energy demands
• Are typically of two types-vertical and horizontal
• CO2 residence time is high in horizontal reactor
• High concentration imbalance throughout the system Figs. 7 and 8
• Reactor clean up problematic
• Accumulation of oxygen-detrimental to biomass growth

Bubble column type • Possess higher CO2 conversion rate • Difficult scaling up Fig. 9
• Good mixing efficiency, thus having good gas exchange • High initial investment and maintenance cost
• Good light penetration

Airlift type • High mass transfer rate • Needs higher photosynthetic rates
• Good mixing available between phases with bare • Care to be taken so that there is no shear damage to cells
minimum shear stress due to aeration
• Low energy requirement

Flat plate • Large surface area to volume ratio • High hydrodynamic stress Fig. 10
• O2 accumulation minimum with available shortest path • Shear damage to cells rampant
• Exceptionally low power consumption • Imperfect gas mixing
• Low risk of culture contamination • Production of biomass per unit space is tentatively low
• Clean up difficult

Hybrid • Better control over process metrics • Requires control over hydrodynamic properties
• Increased productivity
• Low cost
• Low energy consumption

light to be utilized [134]. Longer exposures to higher light intensity can
cause photoinhibition, thus saturation light intensity is to be maintained
in PBR systems. The pH of the medium needs careful calibration with
algae showing the highest productivity in the range of 7–9, with some
showing growth capabilities in basic and acidic pH too. Modifications to
the pH level could potentially change the physiochemical characteris-
tics of cells such as their polarity or their biochemical properties [135].
Temperature is the rate-determining parameter of biomass productiv-
ity and CO2 fixation rate in PBR configuration. The optimum tempera-
ture range is 15–300 Celsius, but there have many different correlations
found with the amount of lipid production from biomass and the un-
saturated fatty acid concentrations in the medium. The speed of algal
growth is also affected under natural temperature conditions. Lipid pro-
duction is supported at a temperature range of about 25–300 Celsius,
but the amount of unsaturated fatty acid is seen to reduce with temper-
ature, which is also the case with fixation efficiency and PBR produc-
tivity [136]. Studies at lower temperatures found decreased photosyn-
thetic rates and chlorophyll content, whereas temperature fluctuations
affected the metabolism of cells greatly even in the acceptable range
[137].
Fundamental PBR designs have centered around the tubular-type,
airlift, bubble column, and plate type designs. A summary table has been
provided to have a clear knowledge about traditional photobioreactor
systems (Table 4).
Presently, developed bioreactors have moved on from traditional de-
sign to novel integrated systems for higher carbon dioxide fixation effi-
ciencies and biomass productivity. Innovative designs are now emerging
over the need for more varied environmental conditions and require-
ments.
Senatore and his team developed a novel self-forming dynamic mem-
brane integrated photobioreactor (MPBR), aimed at majorly increasing
biomass productivity and carbon capture from wastewater treatment
plants. They aimed at understanding the effect of operating principles
such as photosynthetic photon flux densities (PPFD), and the liquid/gas
ratio (L/G ratio), and incoming CO2 concentration. The biomass pro-
ductivity reached a high of 1.01 g L−1 and the carbon capture removal
efficiency a high of 80% at a PPFD of 120 μmol m−2 s−1 with an L/G ra-
tio of 15, both of which were the highest that was tested in the category
[142].
Several studies have compared the traditional existing PBRs with
new designs such as glass bottle PBRs, which seems to provide better
working conditions required at high reactor volumes. It is important
given the disadvantages of dealing with concentration imbalances in
high volumes of tubular PBRs, and the ease of using glass flask PBRs
in its place. However, glass flask PBRs provide better results neither at
0.04% nor 10% (v/v) CO2 flow rate. CO2 flow rate additionally, has also
been found to be an important parameter for growth rate and biomass
productivity with certain studies limiting the amount of around 5% v/v.

10
S. Paul, S. Bera, R. Dasgupta et al.
But, most importantly this study by Aghaalipour et al. has found stable
growth conditions for all studies of algal species, namely Scenedesmus
obliquus, Monoraphidium contortum, Psammothidium sp, and Chlorella vul-
garis at 10% v/v carbon dioxide [143]. The PBR systems found increas-
ing inorganic carbon concentration at higher CO2 concentrations, which
was responsible for increased sources of carbon in the system, leading
to increased bioremediation [144]. Even, inorganic concentrations were
found to be higher in vertical PBRs rather than in glass bottle reactors.
But, the higher efficiency of vertical tubular PBRs over glass flask coun-
terparts was simply due to its lower diameter and hence volume, which
aided in better mixing, and efficient mass transfer.
PBR systems in many cases have been studied in series with each
other. The growth pattern although remains typically the same, the
biomass productivity continuously reduces over the PBRs. This was at-
tributed to the reduction in CO2 concentration, which inherently in-
hibited microalgae biomass growth. But, PBRs in series provided bet-
ter fixation efficiency than a single PBR control system. The study con-
cluded that an optimum number of sequential-flow batch PBR (SFB-PBR)
systems was required to maintain efficient CO2 concentration over the
bioreactor systems in series. Also, the accumulation of dissolved oxy-
gen should be kept noticed, for it can inhibit microalgae productivity
[145]. Studies also directed at using Recirculating Media PBR (RMPBR)
which could increase CO2 capture without inhibiting microalgal growth,
which was made by optimizing the hydrodynamic condition of recir-
culating CO2 stream at a fixed concentration (in this case 5%) [146].
This led to decreased damage to the microalgal cells thus co-optimizing
both capture and productivity. The fundamental concept of two-phase
mass transfer helps develop high-rate in-line carbonation for increased
productivity. Jin et al. tested a few different microalgal cells with high
carbon dioxide (v/v) % in the air, for growth of most microalgal cells
gets inhibited at around 5% CO2 in the flue gas. Therefore, for higher
capture efficiency from flue gas in industries, microalgal cells should be
able to tolerate higher volumes of carbon dioxide, without compromis-
ing biomass productivity. The microalgal strain of Heynigia riparia SX01
had the highest tolerance towards a high-volume flow rate of CO2 and
can seem unaffected, with high biomass productivity at 15% CO2 con-
centration in the ambient airflow. It was also supportive of the result
of the BLAST analysis which showed 18S rRNA sequences had a high
identity in H. riparia CCAP 222/47 (100%) [147].
Studies, additionally signify the difference in biomass productivity
and carbon capture efficiency under formulated flue gas and real flue
gas. The studies concluded that the differences in conclusions can be ex-
plained by the actual CO2 concentration, and the feeding period, in addi-
tion to how both react to external factors like SO2 and NOx that also tend
to be present [148]. Unfiltered flue gas requires microalgal species to
slowly adapt over time, because of the sudden drop of pH in the medium
with the sudden influx of SOX and NOX . Focus can also be shifted to
having a mixed microalgal consortia, which can help in increased dom-
inance. A study also shows that Desmodesmus spp. is the most dominant
step, among other brackish and freshwater cultures [149]. The same
team also found out that microalgae in PBRs were also viable for heavy
metal capture from flue gases which contained a high amount of heavy
metals and alternatively provide quantitative biomass amount [150].
More than the original species, extractable mutants can be more
thermo-tolerant and CO2 tolerant than the original one and are easily ex-
tractable by NTG (N-methyl-N′-nitro-N-nitrosoguanidine) mutagenesis
[151]. The mutants also had increased tolerance to SOx and NOx gases
which are generally sequestered much less than carbon dioxide, whereas
alternatively they can be used for growth and increased biomass produc-
tivity. But the excess presence of gases like SO2 can cause high growth
inhibition due to a decrease in pH. NO hydrolysis can also cause a re-
duction in pH as direct consumption of NO by the algal cells is difficult.
In conclusion, the outdoor mode of PBR growth provided high biomass
productivity and carbon capture efficiency than an indoor mode of cul-
ture. Chen et al. also tried replicating real-time flue gas composition by
increasing the CO2 concentration from 6% to 20%, but for the case of
11
Energy Nexus 4 (2021) 100032
Dunaliella salina, it was found to be growth-inhibiting, and additionally,
the CO2 fixation rate also decreased, thus keeping 6% CO2 as the op-
timized flow rate. The study also concluded that oxygen, if present in
gas inhibits algal growth, and there can be nearly a 2.7-fold increase in
productivity even at higher CO2 concentrations [152]. But it was better
than its contemporary Nannochloropsis salina [153]. Table 5 presents the
advances in novel designs in PBR systms recently being developed for
different microalgal species.
Innovative PBR systems, such as air-lift flat-tube PBRs have been
incorporated with airfoil-shaped deflectors and tested for different hy-
drodynamic properties. It was found to increase the time of microalgae
suspension for better light accessibility. The biomass productivity and
additionally the CO2 fixation rate found around 18.3% and 10.9% en-
hancement due to the developed hydrodynamic condition [155]. 3-D
tangential swirl plate (TTSP) PBR is seen to increase the turbulence in
the system, which ultimately leads to an increase of microalgae CO2
fixation rate by 30% in the study conducted [156]. Microbubble-driven
PBRs (MDPBR) found increased cell growth rate by careful optimization
of bubble size, which increased the mass transfer [157]. Azhand et al.
found that compared to the internal sparger system, external sparger
had higher efficiency, but it was dependent on the cross-sectional area
of the riser and downcomer, and a strong correlation exists between
these parameters and the capture efficiency. The effect was more ev-
ident in the transient and heterogeneous flow regimes, where the gas
flow rate using external sparger was more than its counterpart due to
more cross-section area for the same superficial gas velocity [158]. The
input superficial gas velocity already plays a major role in understand-
ing various hydrodynamic and conclusive parameters in CO2 capture
systems in PBRs, and therefore, the dependence is very important and
requires intricate study (Fig. 11).
Many recent works have focused on devising novel PBR systems us-
ing CFD simulation study, which predict the hydrodynamic properties
and aeration rate optimally, and has been found quite successful. Hexag-
onal airlift flat plate (HAFP) PBRs using CFD simulation proved to have
better biomass productivity, with that being as high as 61%. Addition-
ally, the CO2 fixation and removal rate increased by nearly 80% and
90% respectively, and thus can be tested at a pilot scale with proper flue
gas incorporation [159]. Other studies involving CFD simulation were
around understanding the flow field which could be optimized using
double paddlewheels in a flat plate photoreactor. There was increased
agitation and the double paddlewheel intensified the flow of microal-
gal solution, which was proposed to be the cause of better microalgal
biomass growth. The study was targeted at understanding the flashlight
effect and the intensified flow field consequently enhancing the flash
cycle efficiency [160].
6. The energy-water-food (EWF) nexus using microalgae biomass
With algae biomass produced and used for varied purposes such as
the production of biofuels, a more carbon-neutral or at times carbon-
negative approach to CCS has been bioenergy based on the biomass and
then storage of the captured carbon, termed Bio-Energy based on Car-
bon Capture and Storage (BECCS). BECCS, also can produce value-added
chemical products like methanol and urea [161]. It is touted as the car-
bon negative approach, for its apparent end being the captured CO2
stored underground in geological storage. In addition to the production
of multiple value-added products, this utilization approach can invari-
ably process up to 3.7 Gt of CO2 emissions each year, a value equivalent
to nearly 10% of the global carbon emissions [162]. The EWF nexus with
this microalgae biomass and further products helps scientists around the
world understand the connections between these systems and the food
system scenario [163]. Most analysis within the EWF nexus has been fo-
cused on managing resource efficiency and alternatively environmental
emissions, which is typically non-existent [164]. BECCS coupled with
the capacity for agricultural greenhouse enrichment understands the
process model, supply chains, and geospatial analysis, and hence en-
S. Paul, S. Bera, R. Dasgupta et al. Energy Nexus 4 (2021) 100032

Table 5
Summary of the recent studies undertaken for microalgae assisted carbon capture with novel PBR systems.

Bioreactor type Microalgae species Biomass productivity∗ CO2 fixation rate∗ Carbon source Ref.
−1
MPBR Chlorella Vulgaris 1.01 g L – Conveyed flows [142]
Vertical Tubular Monoraphidium contortum 0.26 g L−1 D−1 1.4 g CO2 L−1 D−1 Specially prepared (similar to [142]
PBR Psammothidium sp 0.75 g L−1 D−1 3.23 g CO2 L−1 D−1 powerplant flue gas
Chlorella vulgaris 0.61 g L−1 D−1 3.35 g CO2 L−1 D−1 compositions)
Scenedesmus obliquus 0.45 g L−1 D−1 2.4 g CO2 L−1 D−1
SFB-PBR Chlorella vulgaris 0.83–0.86 g L−1 D−1 – Normal air but at different air [145]
flow rate
−1 −1 −1 −1
RM-PBR Chlorella vulgaris 0.0321 g L D 0.04566 g CO2 L D Recirculated 5% CO2 [146]
Bubble column PBR Chlorella 0.18±0.02 g L−1 D−1 0.34±0.01 g CO2 L−1 D−1 Filtered ambient air containing [147]
sorokiniana XJ02 0.03%, 5%, 10% and 15% (v/v)
Chlorella sorokiniana GS03 0.36±0.01 g L−1 D−1 0.66±0.01 g CO2 L−1 D−1 of CO2 .
Chlorella sp. NM01 0.22±0.01 g L−1 D−1 0.35±0.01 g CO2 L−1 D−1
Heynigia riparia SX01 0.39±0.01 g L−1 D−1 0.46±0.02 g CO2 L−1 D−1
Desmodesmus communis 0.20±0.03 g L−1 D−1 0.37±0.01 g CO2 L−1 D−1
GS05
Scenedesmus obliquus NM02 0.13±0.02 g L−1 D−1 0.24±0.02 g CO2 L−1 D−1
Hybrid Bubble Scenedesmus obtusiusculus 0.0690 g L−1 D−1 160.7 g CO2 L−1 D−1 Formulated flue gas [148]
column PBR AT-UAM 0.0418 g L−1 D−1 0.1114 g CO2 L−1 D−1 Real flue gas
Outdoor PBR Chlorella vulgaris ESP-31 (mutant 283) 0.24315±0.07 g L−1 D−1 0.45713±0.13305 g CO2 L−1 D−1 Simulated flue gas with 25% CO2 [151]
PBR Botryococcus braunii – 0.532 g CO2 L−1 D−1 20% CO2 mixed with N2 . [154]
Scenedesmus sp. – 2177 g CO2 L−1 D−1
∗
All data provided are the highest reported data mentioned in literature.

Fig. 11. The effect of input superficial gas

velocity on (a) the specific growth rate over
the whole culture time, (b) cell concentra-
tion over culture time, (c) CO2 removal ef-
ficiency, and (d) downcomer liquid circula-
tion time and riser superficial liquid velocity
[156]. (Reprinted with permission, Elsevier).

forces the synergy between EWF nexus and BECCS [165]. Since thermo-
electric power generation has multiple issues in the Energy-Water-CO2
nexus, technological alternatives have been proposed for carbon seques-
tration and air quality regulation, but it turns out that some of the pro-
posed methods although environmentally sustainable, is economically
expensive. Water concerns are also a major issue in power plants affect-
ing the water-energy nexus adversely [166]. The use of sophisticated
economic models using robust economic analysis should help identify
the potential trade-offs between economic and environmental tradeoffs
[167]. This is evident when studies suggest that Carbon Capture as a
greenhouse gas mitigation strategy increases water stress, because of
its high process water requirement [168]. But the continuous release
of CO2 that can result in degrading climate change, affects the water
availability and water supply, instead of influencing the water demand
much [169]. Enhancing agricultural productivity using CO2 fertilization
can also be a part of the prescribed model [170]. It has been seen that
BECCS sustainability depends profoundly on CO2 removal targets set,
and the choice and constrained number of resources available-an inter-
esting parameter that defines CCS [171]. The potential trade-offs be-
tween resource efficiency, environmental philanthropy, and technical
and economic performance needs proper design of BECCS value chain
and policy decisions [172]. Additionally, its prospect depends on the ul-
timate use of the carbon captured. The convenience of BECCS depends
on the distance and how captured carbon is delivered to a potential end-
user. The commercial prospect and viability of a BECCS plant therefore
finally depends on a fully-operational plant, which can answer the cer-

12
S. Paul, S. Bera, R. Dasgupta et al.
tain constraints EWF nexus assessment studies face [173]. Therefore, the
study of this nexus is important in Eco-Industrial Parks (EIP), which is
motivated by increasing demand for sustainable development in waste
integrated microalgal biorefinery. It is also run by the idea that collabo-
ration between certain industries can increase profit bars. Fouladi et al.
proposed a superstructure and optimization formula to capture the syn-
ergy between different sectors to develop a linkage between EWF nexus-
the economic and environmental trade-offs [174]. Alternatively, link-
ages and interconnections also exist between globalization, economic
growth, and carbon emissions, which is critical to fabricating future
sustainable development policies regarding carbon emissions [175]. It
is, therefore, also important to understand the power generation tech-
nology portfolios in association with such industries to assess the eco-
nomic risks and optimize the nexus [176]. Heavy emitting countries like
China require studying regional characteristics for reducing greenhouse
gas emissions incorporating both renewable energy and CCS. Therefore,
their policy portfolios, besides incorporating trade-offs should optimize
design and operational decisions [177].
With CCU already a trending topic in international meets like COP26,
interlinkages with EWF nexus are very important parameters and need
rigorous studies. It is also important for the holistic development of
CCUS routes, which can extend beyond its sectoral proved applications
[178,179]. A viability study for post-combustion capture plants con-
cluded that sharp trade-offs in the water, energy, and carbon nexus, and
therefore any policy decision by governments should depend on all the
complex processes involved [180]. Studies even conclude that amine in-
tegrated CC systems are not very water-intensive if the base power plant
is efficient enough [181]. Some also studied the performance of poly-
mers in carbon capture [182]. Even from the multitude of products that
can be produced from CCU method, methanol, which often describes
itself as a greener alternative as power and transportation fuel, is not
the better option when it comes to decarbonizing the electricity vectors.
Instead using renewable energy sources and direct carbon capture offer
greater environmental benefits, with no major bottlenecks in economic
parameters [183]. Various studies investigate integrated algae cultiva-
tion in processes like waste heat recovery from microturbine in seawater
desalinization, with encouraging results both on the economic and en-
vironmental forefront [184].
7. Future outlook and conclusive remarks
It is worthwhile to note that as researcher target for more species to
be tested, cultivated, and commercialized for carbon sequestration, they
have to take the potential impact of the climate change happening over
the years, and how they affect algae- both microalgae and macroalgae
growth. Because, the consequence of climate change has already started
to affect biodiversity and ecosystems gravely, and studies need to be
conducted under more severe conditions. As studies are undertaken,
temperature fluctuations from place to place should be kept in mind,
as a highly successful carbon-sequestering algal species in the hot and
humid temperature zones might lose its efficiency in a cold and arid cli-
mate. The majority of the studies are done with either air flowing inside
simulated near to those of real industrial flue gases. But there are very
few studies that actually incorporate flue gas from industries, and there-
fore future studies should aim more towards understanding the effect of
industrial flue gas which might have more either growth accelerating
or growth-inhibiting components, The CCM strategy might be an im-
portant tool to mitigate the carbon emission problems. Although there
is an urgent need to act, studies should deeply study the life-cycle as-
sessments and understand all environmental, social, and economic im-
pacts of the study in progress. Secondly, the selection of algal strain
and its optimum method of carbon fixation is of umpteen importance.
Biological characteristics and cultivation strategies can be different for
different species and should be tested before application in commercial
usage. This arises due to the interconnection of the different subjects in
the study of CO2 sequestration, and therefore a proper interconnection
13
Energy Nexus 4 (2021) 100032
needs to be brought in for proper commercial use. The water source also
plays an important role in biomass production, and often as a limiting
factor in both open and closed systems.
Commercial startups have already started in many different coun-
tries, with names ranging from AlgaEnergy, PhytoBloom-Microalgae by
Necton, A4F-Algae for Future, ALGAE Biotechnologia, Neoalgae, Syn-
oxis Algae, AlgoSource, and many others. For many, they are already
collaborating with industries and providing scalable solutions for reduc-
ing carbon emissions. But there remains room for expansion. For future
projections, after certain developments are made the cost of carbon cap-
ture should be taken care of. The cost for carbon sequestration should
not increase to the high value given that in some cases, it might be purely
out of environmental philanthropy without any economic incentive.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Acknowledgment
This work was supported by Science and Engineering Research Board
(SERB) grants funded by Department of Science and Technology (DST)
Central, Government of India through Teachers Associateship for Re-
search Excellence (TAR/2018/000195) (S. Roy). Author would also like
to acknowledge Department of Science and Technology (DST), Min-
istry of Science and Technology, Government of India funded project
under the MI IC#5′ Conversion of Sunlight to Storable fuels’ issued
by DBT-DST Joint Funding Opportunity, Central Government of In-
dia through Mission Innovation Programme DST(DST/TMD(EWO)/IC5-
2018/06, dated 15.11.2019) (S. Roy), for providing financial support.
Reference
[1] J. Houghton, Global warming, Rep. Prog. Phys. 68 (2005) 1343–1403.
[2] B. Raj, O. Singh, Study of impacts of global warming on climate change: rise in sea
level and disaster frequency, Global Warming - Impacts and Future Perspectives,
InTech, 2012.
[3] C.K. Chanda, D. Bose, Challenges of employing renewable energy for reducing
greenhouse gases (GHGs) and carbon footprint, in: Encyclopedia of Renewable and
Sustainable Materials, Elsevier, 2020, pp. 346–365.
[4] J. Goldemberg, Energy choices toward a sustainable future, Environment 49 (2007)
7–17.
[5] Global Energy Review: CO2 Emissions in 2020, International Energy Agency -IEA,
Paris, 2021.
[6] C. Song, W. Pan, S.T. Srimat, J. Zheng, Y. Li, Y.-H. Wang, B.-Q. Xu, Q.-M. Zhu,
Tri-reforming of methane over Ni catalysts for CO2 conversion to syngas with de-
sired H2/CO ratios using flue gas of power plants without CO2 separation, in: car-
bon dioxide utilization for global sustainability, in: Proceedings of 7ththe Interna-
tional Conference on Carbon Dioxide Utilization, Elsevier, 2004, pp. 315–322.
[7] P. Williamson, S. Widdicombe, The rise of CO 2 and ocean acidification, in: Ency-
clopedia of the Anthropocene, Elsevier, 2018, pp. 51–59.
[8] F. Nocito, A. Dibenedetto, Atmospheric CO2 mitigation technologies: carbon cap-
ture utilization and storage, Curr. Opin. Green Sustain. Chem. 21 (2020) 34–43.
[9] L. Zhu, X. Yao, X. Zhang, Evaluation of cooperative mitigation: captured carbon
dioxide for enhanced oil recovery, Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Change 25 (2020)
1261–1285.
[10] E. Adu, Y. Zhang, D. Liu, Current situation of carbon dioxide capture, storage, and
enhanced oil recovery in the oil and gas industry, Can. J. Chem. Eng. 97 (2019)
1048–1076.
[11] E.G. Hertwich, M. Aaberg, B. Singh, A.H. Strømman, Life-cycle assessment of car-
bon dioxide capture for enhanced oil recovery, Chin. J. Chem. Eng. 16 (2008)
343–353.
[12] E. Koohestanian, J. Sadeghi, D. Mohebbi-Kalhori, F. Shahraki, A. Samimi, A novel
process for CO2 capture from the flue gases to produce urea and ammonia, Energy
144 (2018) 279–285.
[13] W.N.R. Wan Isahak, Z.A. Che Ramli, M.W. Mohamed Hisham, M.A. Yarmo, The
formation of a series of carbonates from carbon dioxide: capturing and utilisation,
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 47 (2015) 93–106.
[14] M. Liu, G. Gadikota, Single-step, low temperature and integrated CO2 capture and
conversion using sodium glycinate to produce calcium carbonate, Fuel 275 (2020)
117887.
[15] D. Bellotti, M. Rivarolo, L. Magistri, A.F. Massardo, Feasibility study of methanol
production plant from hydrogen and captured carbon dioxide, J. CO2 Util. 21
(2017) 132–138.
[16] G. Leonzio, P.U. Foscolo, E. Zondervan, I.D.L. Bogle, Scenario Analysis of Carbon
Capture, Utilization (Particularly Producing Methane and Methanol), and Storage
(CCUS) Systems, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 59 (2020) 6961–6976.
S. Paul, S. Bera, R. Dasgupta et al.
[17] G.A. Olah, A. Goeppert, G.K.S. Prakash, Chemical recycling of carbon dioxide to
methanol and dimethyl ether: from greenhouse gas to renewable, environmentally
carbon neutral fuels and synthetic hydrocarbons, J. Org. Chem. 74 (2008) 487–498.
[18] S. Michailos, S. McCord, V. Sick, G. Stokes, P. Styring, Dimethyl ether synthesis via
captured CO2 hydrogenation within the power to liquids concept: A techno-eco-
nomic assessment, Energy Convers. Manage. 184 (2019) 262–276.
[19] S.S. Iyer, I. Bajaj, P. Balasubramanian, M.M.F. Hasan, Integrated carbon capture
and conversion to produce syngas: novel process design, intensification, and opti-
mization, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 56 (2017) 8622–8648.
[20] S. Bera, D. Sengupta, S. Roy, K. Mukherjee, Research into dye-sensitized solar cells:
a review highlighting progress in India, J. Phys. Energy 3 (2021) 032013.
[21] J. Skocek, M. Zajac, M. Ben Haha, Carbon Capture and Utilization by mineralization
of cement pastes derived from recycled concrete, Sci. Rep. 10 (2020).
[22] T.D. Moshood, G. Nawanir, F. Mahmud, Microalgae biofuels production: A system-
atic review on socioeconomic prospects of microalgae biofuels and policy implica-
tions, Environ. Chall. 5 (2021) 100207.
[23] A. Melis, Solar energy conversion efficiencies in photosynthesis: Minimizing the
chlorophyll antennae to maximize efficiency, Plant Sci. 177 (2009) 272–280.
[24] K.M. Weyer, D.R. Bush, A. Darzins, B.D. Willson, Theoretical Maximum Algal Oil
Production, Bioenerg. Res. 3 (2009) 204–213.
[25] H. Vieira de Mendonça, P. Assemany, M. Abreu, E. Couto, A.M. Maciel, R.L. Duarte,
M.G. Barbosa dos Santos, A. Reis, Microalgae in a global world: New solutions for
old problems? Renew. Energy 165 (2021) 842–862.
[26] C. Wiencke, M.N. Clayton, I. Gómez, K. Iken, U.H. Lüder, C.D. Amsler, U. Karsten,
D. Hanelt, K. Bischof, K. Dunton, Life strategy, ecophysiology and ecology of sea-
weeds in polar waters, Rev. Environ. Sci. Biotechnol. 6 (2006) 95–126.
[27] M.H. Spalding, Microalgal carbon-dioxide-concentrating mechanisms: chlamy-
domonas inorganic carbon transporters, J. Exp. Bot. 59 (2007) 1463–1473.
[28] C. Jansson, T. Northen, Calcifying cyanobacteria—the potential of biomineraliza-
tion for carbon capture and storage, Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 21 (2010) 365–371.
[29] P. Spolaore, C. Joannis-Cassan, E. Duran, A. Isambert, Commercial applications of
microalgae, J. Biosci. Bioeng. 101 (2006) 87–96.
[30] J.J. Milledge, Commercial application of microalgae other than as biofuels: a brief
review, Rev. Environ. Sci. Biotechnol. 10 (2010) 31–41.
[31] S.A. Razzak, M.M. Hossain, R.A. Lucky, A.S. Bassi, H. de Lasa, Integrated CO2 cap-
ture, wastewater treatment and biofuel production by microalgae culturing—A re-
view, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 27 (2013) 622–653.
[32] H.M. Singh, R. Kothari, R. Gupta, V.V. Tyagi, Bio-fixation of flue gas from thermal
power plants with algal biomass: Overview and research perspectives, J. Environ.
Manage. 245 (2019) 519–539.
[33] V. Bhola, F. Swalaha, R. Ranjith Kumar, M. Singh, F. Bux, Overview of the poten-
tial of microalgae for CO2 sequestration, Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 11 (2014)
2103–2118.
[34] W. Klinthong, Y.-H. Yang, C.-H. Huang, C.-S. Tan, A review: microalgae and their
applications in CO2 capture and renewable energy, Aerosol Air Qual. Res. 15 (2015)
712–742.
[35] J. Singh, D.W. Dhar, Overview of Carbon Capture Technology: Microalgal Biore-
finery Concept and State-of-the-Art, Front. Mar. Sci. 6 (2019).
[36] D. Narita, Economic optimality of CCS use: a resource-economic model, SSRN J.
(2009).
[37] J. Cheng, Y. Zhu, Z. Zhang, W. Yang, Modification and improvement of microalgae
strains for strengthening CO2 fixation from coal-fired flue gas in power plants,
Bioresour. Technol. 291 (2019) 121850.
[38] W.-R. Lin, S.-I. Tan, C.-C. Hsiang, P.-K. Sung, I.-S. Ng, Challenges and opportu-
nity of recent genome editing and multi-omics in cyanobacteria and microalgae
for biorefinery, Bioresour. Technol. 291 (2019) 121932.
[39] K. Jothibasu, D.W. Dhar, S. Rakesh, Recent developments in microalgal genome
editing for enhancing lipid accumulation and biofuel recovery, Biomass Bioenergy
150 (2021) 106093.
[40] A. Brar, M. Kumar, T. Soni, V. Vivekanand, N. Pareek, Insights into the genetic
and metabolic engineering approaches to enhance the competence of microalgae
as biofuel resource: a review, Bioresour. Technol. 339 (2021) 125597.
[41] B. Barati, K. Zeng, J. Baeyens, S. Wang, M. Addy, S.-Y. Gan, A. El-Fatah Abomohra,
Recent progress in genetically modified microalgae for enhanced carbon dioxide
sequestration, Biomass Bioenergy 145 (2021) 105927.
[42] R. Kholssi, P.V. Ramos, E.A.N. Marks, O. Montero, C. Rad, 2Biotechnological uses of
microalgae: a review on the state of the art and challenges for the circular economy,
Biocatal. Agric. Biotechnol. (2021) 102114.
[43] S.R. Chia, K.W. Chew, H.Y. Leong, S.-H. Ho, H.S.H. Munawaroh, P.L. Show, CO2
mitigation and phycoremediation of industrial flue gas and wastewater via microal-
gae-bacteria consortium: possibilities and challenges, Chem. Eng. J. 425 (2021)
131436.
[44] J. Arun, K.P. Gopinath, P. SundarRajan, V. Felix, M. JoselynMonica, R. Malolan, A
conceptual review on microalgae biorefinery through thermochemical and biolog-
ical pathways: Bio-circular approach on carbon capture and wastewater treatment,
Bioresour. Technol. Rep. 11 (2020) 100477.
[45] L.-L. Zhuang, M. Li, H. Hao Ngo, Non-suspended microalgae cultivation for wastew-
ater refinery and biomass production, Bioresour. Technol. 308 (2020) 123320.
[46] J.C.M. Pires, M.C.M. Alvim-Ferraz, F.G. Martins, M. Simões, Carbon dioxide capture
from flue gases using microalgae: Engineering aspects and biorefinery concept,
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 16 (2012) 3043–3053.
[47] V. Ananthi, R. Raja, I.S. Carvalho, K. Brindhadevi, A. Pugazhendhi, A. Arun, A real-
istic scenario on microalgae-based biodiesel production: Third generation biofuel,
Fuel 284 (2021) 118965.
[48] R. Ganesan, S. Manigandan, M.S. Samuel, R. Shanmuganathan, K. Brindhadevi,
14
Energy Nexus 4 (2021) 100032
N.T. Lan Chi, P.A. Duc, A. Pugazhendhi, A review on prospective production of
biofuel from microalgae, Biotechnol. Rep. 27 (2020) e00509.
[49] C. Debnath, T.K. Bandyopadhyay, B. Bhunia, U. Mishra, S. Narayanasamy,
M. Muthuraj, Microalgae: Sustainable resource of carbohydrates in third-genera-
tion biofuel production, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 150 (2021) 111464.
[50] Sk.A. Moyez, S. Roy, Dual-step thermal engineering technique: A new approach for
fabrication of efficient CH3 NH3 PbI3 -based perovskite solar cell in open air condi-
tion, Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 185 (2018) 145.
[51] A. Aliyu, J.G.M. Lee, A.P. Harvey, Microalgae for biofuels: A review of thermochem-
ical conversion processes and associated opportunities and challenges, Bioresour.
Technol. Rep. 15 (2021) 100694.
[52] D.F. Lozano-Garcia, S.P. Cuellar-Bermudez, E. del Rio-Hinojosa, F. Betancourt,
G.S. Aleman-Nava, R. Parra-Saldivar, Potential land microalgae cultivation in Mex-
ico: From food production to biofuels, Algal Res. 39 (2019) 101459.
[53] B.C. Klein, M.F. Chagas, M.D.B. Watanabe, A. Bonomi, R. Maciel Filho, Low carbon
biofuels and the New Brazilian National Biofuel Policy (RenovaBio): A case study
for sugarcane mills and integrated sugarcane-microalgae biorefineries, Renew. Sus-
tain. Energy Rev. 115 (2019) 109365.
[54] M. Ravanipour, A. Hamidi, A.H. Mahvi, Microalgae biodiesel: A systematic review
in Iran, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 150 (2021) 111426.
[55] N. Hossain, M.H. Hasan, T.M.I. Mahlia, A.H. Shamsuddin, A.S. Silitonga, Feasibil-
ity of microalgae as feedstock for alternative fuel in Malaysia: a review, Energy
Strategy Rev. 32 (2020) 100536.
[56] IPCC, Summary for Policymakers, in: V. MassonDelmotte, P. Zhai, A. Pirani,
S.L. Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N. Caud, Y. Chen, L. Goldfarb, M.I. Gomis,
M. Huang, K. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J.B.R. Matthews, T.K. Maycock, T. Waterfield,
O. Yelekçi, R. Yu, B. Zhou (Eds.)Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis.
Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergov-
ernmental Panel On Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, 2021 In Press.
[57] B. Behera, N. Aly, P. Balasubramanian, Biophysical model and techno-economic
assessment of carbon sequestration by microalgal ponds in Indian coal based power
plants, J. Clean. Prod. 221 (2019) 587–597.
[58] L. Ou, S. Banerjee, H. Xu, A.M. Coleman, H. Cai, U. Lee, M.S. Wigmosta, T. Hawkins,
Utilizing high-purity carbon dioxide sources for algae cultivation and biofuel pro-
duction in the United States: opportunities and challenges, J. Clean. Prod. (2021)
128779.
[59] J. Fu, Y. Huang, Q. Liao, A. Xia, Q. Fu, X. Zhu, Photo-bioreactor design for microal-
gae: a review from the aspect of CO2 transfer and conversion, Bioresour. Technol.
292 (2019) 121947.
[60] J.C.M. Pires, M.C.M. Alvim-Ferraz, F.G. Martins, Photobioreactor design for mi-
croalgae production through computational fluid dynamics: A review, Renew. Sus-
tain. Energy Rev. 79 (2017) 248–254.
[61] J. Assunção, F.X. Malcata, Enclosed “non-conventional” photobioreactors for mi-
croalga production: a review, Algal Res. 52 (2020) 102107.
[62] G.G. Zaimes, V. Khanna, Microalgal biomass production pathways: evaluation of
life cycle environmental impacts, Biotechnol. Biofuels 6 (2013) 88.
[63] T.F. Wall, Combustion processes for carbon capture, Proc. Combust. Inst. 31 (2007)
31–47.
[64] A. Mukhtar, S. Saqib, N.B. Mellon, M. Babar, S. Rafiq, S. Ullah, M.A. Bustam,
A.G. Al-Sehemi, N. Muhammad, M. Chawla, CO2 capturing, thermo-kinetic princi-
ples, synthesis and amine functionalization of covalent organic polymers for CO2
separation from natural gas: A review, J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 77 (2020) 103203.
[65] B.J.P. Buhre, L.K. Elliott, C.D. Sheng, R.P. Gupta, T.F. Wall, Oxy-fuel combustion
technology for coal-fired power generation, Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 31 (2005)
283–307.
[66] R. Verma, A. Srivastava, Carbon dioxide sequestration and its enhanced utilization
by photoautotroph microalgae, Environ. Dev. 27 (2018) 95–106.
[67] J. Singh, D.W. Dhar, Overview of carbon capture technology: microalgal biorefin-
ery concept and state-of-the-art, Front. Mar. Sci. 6 (2019).
[68] C.B. Field, Primary production of the biosphere: integrating terrestrial and oceanic
components, Science 281 (1998) 237–240.
[69] E. Suali, R. Sarbatly, Conversion of microalgae to biofuel, Renew. Sustain. Energy
Rev. 16 (2012) 4316–4342.
[70] H.J. Ryu, K.K. Oh, Y.S. Kim, Optimization of the influential factors for the improve-
ment of CO2 utilization efficiency and CO2 mass transfer rate, J. Ind. Eng. Chem.
15 (2009) 471–475.
[71] E. Suali, R. Sarbatly, Conversion of microalgae to biofuel, Renew. Sustain. Energy
Rev. 16 (2012) 4316–4342.
[72] B. Zhao, Y. Su, Macro assessment of microalgae-based CO2 sequestration: Environ-
mental and energy effects, Algal Res. 51 (2020) 102066.
[73] Y. Gao, C. Gregor, Y. Liang, D. Tang, C. Tweed, Algae biodiesel - a feasibility report,
Chem. Cent. J. 6 (2012).
[74] S. Fon Sing, A. Isdepsky, M.A. Borowitzka, N.R. Moheimani, Production of biofuels
from microalgae, Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Change 18 (2011) 47–72.
[75] F.G.A. Fernández, A. Reis, R.H. Wijffels, M. Barbosa, V. Verdelho, B. Llamas, The
role of microalgae in the bioeconomy, New Biotechnol. 61 (2021) 99–107.
[76] H. Leflay, J. Pandhal, S. Brown, Direct measurements of CO2 capture are essential
to assess the technical and economic potential of algal-CCUS, J. CO2 Util. 52 (2021)
101657.
[77] I.K. Chung, J. Beardall, S. Mehta, D. Sahoo, S. Stojkovic, Using marine macroalgae
for carbon sequestration: a critical appraisal, J. Appl. Phycol. 23 (2010) 877–886.
[78] D. Moreira, J.C.M. Pires, Atmospheric CO2 capture by algae: Negative carbon diox-
ide emission path, Bioresour. Technol. 215 (2016) 371–379.
[79] L.M.L. Laurens, M. Lane, R.S. Nelson, Sustainable seaweed biotechnology solutions
for carbon capture, composition, and deconstruction, Trend. Biotechnol. 38 (2020)
1232–1244.
S. Paul, S. Bera, R. Dasgupta et al.
[80] D.A. Roberts, N.A. Paul, M.I. Bird, R. de Nys, Bioremediation for coal-fired power
stations using macroalgae, J. Environ. Manage. 153 (2015) 25–32.
[81] J. Masojı´dek, M. Koblızek, G. Torzillo, Photosynthesis in microalgae, in: A. Rich-
mond (Ed.), Handbook of Microalgal Culture: Biotechnology and Applied Phycol-
ogy, Blackwell Science Ltd., Oxford, UK, 2004.
[82] M. Ras, J.-P. Steyer, O. Bernard, Temperature effect on microalgae: a crucial factor
for outdoor production, Rev. Environ. Sci. Biotechnol. 12 (2013) 153–164.
[83] S.S. Oncel, A. Kose, D.S. Oncel, Carbon sequestration in microalgae photobioreac-
tors building integrated, in: Start-Up Creation, Elsevier, 2020, pp. 161–200.
[84] M. Mondal, S. Khanra, O.N. Tiwari, K. Gayen, G.N. Halder, Role of carbonic anhy-
drase on the way to biological carbon capture through microalgae-A mini review,
Environ. Prog. Sustain. Energy 35 (2016) 1605–1615.
[85] D. Sültemeyer, Carbonic anhydrase in eukaryotic algae: characterization, regula-
tion, and possible function during photosynthesis, Can. J. Bot. 76 (1998) 962–972.
[86] J. Beardall, J.A. Raven, The potential effects of global climate change on microalgal
photosynthesis, growth and ecology, Phycologia 43 (2004) 26–40.
[87] L. Brennan, P. Owende, Biofuels from microalgae—A review of technologies for
production, processing, and extractions of biofuels and co-products, Renew. Sus-
tain. Energy Rev. 14 (2) (2010) 557–577.
[88] A.S. Mirón, M.C.C. Garcı́a, A.C. Gómez, F.G. Camacho, E.M. Grima, Y. Chisti, Shear
stress tolerance and biochemical characterization of Phaeodactylum tricornutum in
quasi steady-state continuous culture in outdoor photobioreactors, Biochem. Eng.
J. 16 (2003) 287–297.
[89] C.-H. Huang, C.-S. Tan, A Review: CO2 Utilization, Aerosol Air Qual. Res. 14 (2014)
480–499.
[90] J.T. Hauck, S.J. Scierka, M.B. Perry, Effects of simulated flue gas on growth of
microalgae, Am. Chem. Soc. Div. Polym. Chem. 41 (1996) 1391–1396.
[91] B. Zhao, Y. Su, Process effect of microalgal-carbon dioxide fixation and biomass
production: A review, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 31 (2014) 121–132.
[92] S.-Y. Chiu, C.-Y. Kao, T.-T. Huang, C.-J. Lin, S.-C. Ong, C.-D. Chen, J.-S. Chang,
C.-S. Lin, Microalgal biomass production and on-site bioremediation of carbon diox-
ide, nitrogen oxide and sulfur dioxide from flue gas using Chlorella sp. cultures,
Bioresour. Technol. 102 (2011) 9135–9142.
[93] B. Zhao, Y. Su, Process effect of microalgal-carbon dioxide fixation and biomass
production: A review, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 31 (2014) 121–132.
[94] D. Chaumont, Biotechnology of algal biomass production: a review of systems for
outdoor mass culture, J. Appl. Phycol. 5 (1993) 593–604.
[95] M. Xu, D. ou, Z. Xue, Y. Zhao, S. Sun, J. Liu, Enhancement of the photosynthetic
and removal performance for microalgae-based technologies by co-culture strategy
and strigolactone induction, Bioresour. Technol. 339 (2021) 125579.
[96] S.J.P. Jegathese, M. Farid, Microalgae as a renewable source of energy: a niche
opportunity, J. Renew. Energy 2014 (2014) 1–10.
[97] A. Jacob, A. Xia, J.D. Murphy, A perspective on gaseous biofuel production from
micro-algae generated from CO2 from a coal-fired power plant, Appl. Energy 148
(2015) 396–402.
[98] H. Znad, Microalgae culture technology for carbon dioxide biomitigation, in: Hand-
book of Algal Science, Technology and Medicine, Elsevier, 2020, pp. 303–316.
[99] A. Kumar, S. Ergas, X. Yuan, A. Sahu, Q. Zhang, J. Dewulf, F.X. Malcata, H. van
Langenhove, Enhanced CO2 fixation and biofuel production via microalgae: recent
developments and future directions, Trend. Biotechnol. 28 (2010) 371–380.
[100] B. Wang, Y. Li, N. Wu, C.Q. Lan, CO2 bio-mitigation using microalgae, Appl. Mi-
crobiol. Biotechnol. 79 (5) (2008) 707–718.
[101] D.L. Sutherland, J. Park, P.J. Ralph, R. Craggs, Ammonia, pH and dissolved inor-
ganic carbon supply drive whole pond metabolism in full-scale wastewater high-
-rate algal ponds, Algal Res. 58 (2021) 102405.
[102] A. Richmond, Open systems for the mass production of photoautotrophic microal-
gae outdoors: physiological principles, J. Appl. Phycol. 4 (1992) 281–286.
[103] B. Zhao, Y. Su, Process effect of microalgal-carbon dioxide fixation and biomass
production: A review, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 31 (2014) 121–132.
[104] J.N. Rogers, J.N. Rosenberg, B.J. Guzman, V.H. Oh, L.E. Mimbela, A. Ghassemi,
M.J. Betenbaugh, G.A. Oyler, M.D. Donohue, A critical analysis of paddlewheel–
driven raceway ponds for algal biofuel production at commercial scales, Algal Res.
4 (2014) 76–88.
[105] Photobioreactors: production systems for phototrophic microorganisms, Appl. Mi-
crobiol. Biotechnol. 57 (2001) 287–293.
[106] Y. Chisti, in: Large-Scale Production of Algal Biomass: Raceway Ponds, in: Algae
Biotechnology, Springer International Publishing, 2016, pp. 21–40.
[107] A. Parsy, L. Bidoire, M. Saadouni, M. Bahuaud, T. Elan, F. Périé, C. Sambusiti,
Impact of seasonal variations on Nannochloropsis oculata phototrophic productivity
in an outdoor pilot scale raceway, Algal Res. 58 (2021) 102375.
[108] N. Hossain, T.M.I. Mahlia, Progress in physicochemical parameters of microalgae
cultivation for biofuel production, Crit. Rev. Biotechnol. 39 (2019) 835–859.
[109] S. Sivakaminathan, J. Wolf, J. Yarnold, J. Roles, I.L. Ross, E. Stephens, G. Hender-
son, B. Hankamer, Light guide systems enhance microalgae production efficiency
in outdoor high-rate ponds, Algal Res. 47 (2020) 101846.
[110] J.L. Mendoza, M.R. Granados, I. de Godos, F.G. Acién, E. Molina, S. Heaven,
C.J. Banks, Oxygen transfer and evolution in microalgal culture in open raceways,
Bioresour. Technol. 137 (2013) 188–195.
[111] D. Chiaramonti, M. Prussi, D. Casini, M.R. Tredici, L. Rodolfi, N. Bassi, G.C. Zittelli,
P. Bondioli, Review of energy balance in raceway ponds for microalgae cultivation:
Re-thinking a traditional system is possible, Appl. Energy 102 (2013) 101–111.
[112] S. Kumar, J. Cheng, W. Guo, K.A. Ali, Y. Song, Self-rotary propellers with clock-
wise/counterclockwise blades create spiral flow fields to improve mass transfer and
promote microalgae growth, Bioresour. Technol. 286 (2019) 121384.
[113] U. Suparmaniam, M.K. Lam, Y. Uemura, J.W. Lim, K.T. Lee, S.H. Shuit, Insights
15
Energy Nexus 4 (2021) 100032
into the microalgae cultivation technology and harvesting process for biofuel pro-
duction: A review, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 115 (2019) 109361.
[114] A.B. Fulke, S.N. Mudliar, R. Yadav, A. Shekh, N. Srinivasan, R. Ramanan, K. Krish-
namurthi, S.S. Devi, T. Chakrabarti, Bio-mitigation of CO2 , calcite formation and
simultaneous biodiesel precursors production using Chlorella sp, Bioresour. Tech-
nol. 101 (2010) 8473–8476.
[115] S. Li, S. Luo, R. Guo, Efficiency of CO2 fixation by microalgae in a closed raceway
pond, Bioresour. Technol. 136 (2013) 267–272.
[116] M. U., N. J. Mehar, A. Shekh, R. Sarada, V.S. Chauhan, S. Mudliar, Automation of
pilot-scale open raceway pond: A case study of CO2 -fed pH control on Spirulina
biomass, protein and phycocyanin production, J. CO2 Util. 33 (2019) 384–393.
[117] G. Yadav, B.K. Dubey, R. Sen, A comparative life cycle assessment of microalgae
production by CO2 sequestration from flue gas in outdoor raceway ponds under
batch and semi-continuous regime, J. Clean. Prod. 258 (2020) 120703.
[118] I. Hermadi, I.R. Setiadianto, D.F. Al Zahran, M.N. Simbolon, G. Saefurahman,
D.S. Wibawa, Y. Arkeman, Development of smart algae pond system for microalgae
biomass production, IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 749 (2021) 012068.
[119] N. Mohan, P.H. Rao, A.B. Boopathy, R. Rengasamy, S. Chinnasamy, A sustainable
process train for a marine microalga-mediated biomass production and CO2 cap-
ture: A pilot-scale cultivation of Nannochloropsis salina in open raceway ponds and
harvesting through electropreciflocculation, Renew. Energy 173 (2021) 263–272.
[120] X.-M. Shi, H.-J. Liu, X.-W. Zhang, F. Chen, Production of biomass and lutein by
Chlorella protothecoides at various glucose concentrations in heterotrophic cul-
tures, Process Biochem. 34 (1999) 341–347.
[121] Q. Yu, H. Wang, X. Li, Y. Yin, S. Qin, B. Ge, Enhanced biomass and CO2 seques-
tration of Chlorella vulgaris using a new mixotrophic cultivation method, Process
Biochem. 90 (2020) 168–176.
[122] G. Suriya Narayanan, G. Kumar, S. Seepana, R. Elankovan, M. Premalatha, Utiliza-
tion of unfiltered LPG-burner exhaust-gas emission using microalga Coelastrella sp,
J. CO2 Util. 29 (2019) 283–295.
[123] Acute Exposure Guideline Levels for Selected Airborne Chemicals, National
Academies Press, 2016.
[124] P.-H. Chiu, K. Soong, C.-N.N. Chen, Cultivation of two thermotolerant microal-
gae under tropical conditions: Influences of carbon sources and light duration on
biomass and lutein productivity in four seasons, Bioresour. Technol. 212 (2016)
190–198.
[125] M. Acedo, J.R. Gonzalez Cena, K.M. Kiehlbaugh, K.L. Ogden, Coupling Carbon Cap-
ture from a Power Plant With Semi-automated Open Raceway Ponds For Microal-
gae Cultivation, JoVE, 2020.
[126] I. de Godos, J.L. Mendoza, F.G. Acién, E. Molina, C.J. Banks, S. Heaven, F. Rogalla,
Evaluation of carbon dioxide mass transfer in raceway reactors for microalgae cul-
ture using flue gases, Bioresour. Technol. 153 (2014) 307–314.
[127] H. Hadiyanto, S. Elmore, T. Van Gerven, A. Stankiewicz, Hydrodynamic evaluations
in high-rate algae pond (HRAP) design, Chem. Eng. J. 217 (2013) 231–239.
[128] K. Sirikulrat, J. Pekkoh, C. Pumas, Illumination system for growth and net energy
ratio enhancement of Arthrospira (Spirulina) platensis outdoor cultivation in deep
raceway pond, Bioresour. Technol. Rep. 14 (2021) 100661.
[129] J. Cheng, Z. Yang, Q. Ye, J. Zhou, K. Cen, Enhanced flashing light effect with up-
-down chute baffles to improve microalgal growth in a raceway pond, Bioresour.
Technol. 190 (2015) 29–35.
[130] S. Li, S. Luo, R. Guo, Efficiency of CO2 fixation by microalgae in a closed raceway
pond, Bioresour. Technol. 136 (2013) 267–272.
[131] R.N. Singh, S. Sharma, Development of suitable photobioreactor for algae produc-
tion – a review, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 16 (2012) 2347–2353.
[132] A.P. Carvalho, L.A. Meireles, F.X. Malcata, Microalgal reactors: a review of enclosed
system designs and performances, Biotechnol. Progr. 22 (2006) 1490–1506.
[133] H.C. Greenwell, L.M.L. Laurens, R.J. Shields, R.W. Lovitt, K.J. Flynn, Placing mi-
croalgae on the biofuels priority list: a review of the technological challenges, J. R.
Soc. Interface. 7 (2009) 703–726.
[134] P.J. Schnurr, D.G. Allen, Factors affecting algae biofilm growth and lipid produc-
tion: A review, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 52 (2015) 418–429.
[135] S.S. Rosli, W.N. Amalina Kadir, C.Y. Wong, F.Y. Han, J.W. Lim, M.K. Lam, S. Yusup,
W. Kiatkittipong, K. Kiatkittipong, A. Usman, Insight review of attached microal-
gae growth focusing on support material packed in photobioreactor for sustainable
biodiesel production and wastewater bioremediation, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
134 (2020) 110306.
[136] X. Xu, X. Gu, Zhongyang Wang, W. Shatner, Zhenjun Wang, Progress, challenges
and solutions of research on photosynthetic carbon sequestration efficiency of mi-
croalgae, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 110 (2019) 65–82.
[137] M.J. Raeesossadati, H. Ahmadzadeh, M.P. McHenry, N.R. Moheimani, CO2 biore-
mediation by microalgae in photobioreactors: Impacts of biomass and CO2 concen-
trations, light, and temperature, Algal Res. 6 (2014) 78–85.
[138] S. Huo, Z. Wang, S. Zhu, Q. Shu, L. Zhu, L. Qin, W. Zhou, P. Feng, F. Zhu, Z. Yuan,
R. Dong, Biomass accumulation of Chlorella Zofingiensis G1 cultures grown outdoors
in photobioreactors, Front. Energy Res. 6 (2018).
[139] A. Alaswad, M. Dassisti, T. Prescott, A.G. Olabi, Technologies and developments
of third generation biofuel production, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 51 (2015)
1446–1460.
[140] J.-S. Chang, P.-L. Show, T.-C. Ling, C.-Y. Chen, S.-H. Ho, C.-H. Tan, D. Nagarajan,
W.-N. Phong, Photobioreactors, in: Current Developments in Biotechnology and
Bioengineering, Elsevier, 2017, pp. 313–352.
[141] R.N. Singh, S. Sharma, Development of suitable photobioreactor for algae produc-
tion – A review, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 16 (2012) 2347–2353.
[142] V. Senatore, A. Buonerba, T. Zarra, G. Oliva, V. Belgiorno, J. Boguniewicz-Z-
ablocka, V. Naddeo, Innovative membrane photobioreactor for sustainable CO2
capture and utilization, Chemosphere 273 (2021) 129682.
S. Paul, S. Bera, R. Dasgupta et al.
[143] E. Aghaalipour, A. Akbulut, G. Güllü, Carbon dioxide capture with microalgae
species in continuous gas-supplied closed cultivation systems, Biochem. Eng. J.
163 (2020) 107741.
[144] M. Anjos, B.D. Fernandes, A.A. Vicente, J.A. Teixeira, G. Dragone, Optimization of
CO2 bio-mitigation by Chlorella vulgaris, Bioresour. Technol. 139 (2013) 149–154.
[145] Y.K. Dasan, M.K. Lam, S. Yusup, J.W. Lim, P.L. Show, I.S. Tan, K.T. Lee, Cultiva-
tion of Chlorella vulgaris using sequential-flow bubble column photobioreactor: A
stress-inducing strategy for lipid accumulation and carbon dioxide fixation, J. CO2
Util. 41 (2020) 101226.
[146] S. Dey, A. Bhattacharya, P. Kumar, A. Malik, High-rate CO2 sequestration using a
novel venturi integrated photobioreactor and subsequent valorization to microalgal
lipids, Green Chem. 22 (2020) 7962–7973.
[147] X. Jin, S. Gong, Z. Chen, J. Xia, W. Xiang, Potential microalgal strains for converting
flue gas CO2 into biomass, J. Appl. Phycol. 33 (2020) 47–55.
[148] A. Estrada-Graf, S. Hernández, M. Morales, Biomitigation of CO2 from flue gas by
Scenedesmus obtusiusculus AT-UAM using a hybrid photobioreactor coupled to a
biomass recovery stage by electro-coagulation-flotation, Environ Sci Pollut Res 27
(2020) 28561–28574.
[149] A. Aslam, S.R. Thomas-Hall, T.A. Mughal, P.M. Schenk, Selection and adaptation
of microalgae to growth in 100% unfiltered coal-fired flue gas, Bioresour. Technol.
233 (2017) 271–283.
[150] A. Aslam, S.R. Thomas-Hall, T. Mughal, Q. Zaman, N. Ehsan, S. Javied, P.M. Schenk,
Heavy metal bioremediation of coal-fired flue gas using microalgae under different
CO2 concentrations, J. Environ. Manage. 241 (2019) 243–250.
[151] H.-H. Chou, H.-Y. Su, X.-D. Song, T.-J. Chow, C.-Y. Chen, J.-S. Chang, T.-M. Lee,
Isolation and characterization of Chlorella sp. mutants with enhanced thermo- and
CO2 tolerances for CO2 sequestration and utilization of flue gases, Biotechnol. Bio-
fuels 12 (2019).
[152] Y.C. a, C.X. a, How to narrow the CO2 gap from growth-optimal to flue gas levels by
using microalgae for carbon capture and sustainable biomass production, J. Clean.
Prod. 280 (2021) 124448.
[153] Y. Chen, L. Zhang, C. Xu, S. Vaidyanathan, Dissolved inorganic carbon speciation
in aquatic environments and its application to monitor algal carbon uptake, Sci.
Total Environ. 541 (2016) 1282–1295.
[154] L.I. Rodas-Zuluaga, L. Castañeda-Hernández, E.I. Castillo-Vacas, A. Gradiz-Menji-
var, I.Y. López-Pacheco, C. Castillo-Zacarías, L. Boully, H.M.N. Iqbal, R. Parra-Saldí-
var, Bio-capture and influence of CO2 on the growth rate and biomass composition
of the microalgae Botryococcus braunii and Scenedesmus sp, J. CO2 Util. 43 (2021)
101371.
[155] J. Fu, Y. Huang, Q. Liao, Xun Zhu, A. Xia, Xianqing Zhu, J.-S. Chang, Boosting
photo-biochemical conversion and carbon dioxide bio-fixation of Chlorella vulgaris
in an optimized photobioreactor with airfoil-shaped deflectors, Bioresour. Technol.
337 (2021) 125355.
[156] Y. Song, J. Cheng, X. Lai, W. Guo, W. Yang, Developing a three-dimensional tan-
gential swirl plate photobioreactor to enhance mass transfer and flashlight effect
for microalgal CO2 fixation, Chem. Eng. Sci. 244 (2021) 116837.
[157] K. Wu, K. Ying, J. Zhou, D. Liu, L. Liu, Y. Tao, J. Hanotu, X. Zhu, Z. Cai, Opti-
mizing the growth of Haematococcus Pluvialis based on a novel microbubble-driven
photobioreactor, SSRN J. (2021).
[158] N. Azhand, A. Sadeghizadeh, R. Rahimi, Effect of superficial gas velocity on CO2
capture from air by Chlorella vulgaris microalgae in an Airlift photobioreactor with
external sparger, J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 8 (2020) 104022.
[159] P. Yaqoubnejad, H.A. Rad, M. Taghavijeloudar, Development a novel hexagonal
airlift flat plate photobioreactor for the improvement of microalgae growth that
simultaneously enhance CO2 bio-fixation and wastewater treatment, J. Environ.
Manage. 298 (2021) 113482.
[160] J. Xu, J. Cheng, X. Lai, X. Zhang, W. Yang, J.-Y. Park, H. Kim, L. Xu, Enhancing
microalgal biomass productivity with an optimized flow field generated by double
paddlewheels in a flat plate photoreactor with CO2 aeration based on numerical
simulation, Bioresour. Technol. 314 (2020) 123762.
[161] A. AlNouss, G. McKay, T. Al-Ansari, A techno-economic-environmental study eval-
uating the potential of oxygen-steam biomass gasification for the generation of
value-added products, Energy Convers. Manage. 196 (2019) 664–676.
[162] P.-C. Chiang, S.-Y. Pan, in: Carbon Dioxide Mineralization and Utilization, Springer,
Singapore, 2017, pp. 1–452.
[163] T. Al-Ansari, A. Korre, Z. Nie, N. Shah, Development of a life cycle assessment tool
for the assessment of food production systems within the energy, water and food
nexus, Sustain. Product. Consum. 2 (2015) 52–66.
16
Energy Nexus 4 (2021) 100032
[164] V. De Laurentiis, D. Hunt, C. Rogers, Overcoming food security challenges within
an Energy/Water/Food Nexus (EWFN) approach, Sustainability. 8 (2016) 95.
[165] I. Ghiat, F. Mahmood, R. Govindan, T. Al-Ansari, CO2 utilisation in agricultural
greenhouses: A novel ‘plant to plant’ approach driven by bioenergy with carbon
capture systems within the energy, water and food Nexus, Energy Convers. Manage.
228 (2021) 113668.
[166] J.F. Kim, E. Drioli, Transport membrane condenser heat exchangers to break the
water-energy nexus—a critical review, Membranes. 11 (2020) 12.
[167] K. Lee, B.R. Bakshi, Energy-water-CO2 nexus of fossil fuel based power generation,
Adv. Carbon Manag. Technol. (2020) 184–202.
[168] P.R.de C. Merschmann, E. Vasquez, A.S. Szklo, R. Schaeffer, Modeling water use de-
mands for thermoelectric power plants with CCS in selected Brazilian water basins,
Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 13 (2013) 87–101.
[169] F. Guedes, A. Szklo, P. Rochedo, F. Lantz, L. Magalar, E.M.V. Arroyo, Climate-ener-
gy-water nexus in Brazilian oil refineries, Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 90 (2019)
102815.
[170] T. Al-Ansari, R. Govindan, A. Korre, Z. Nie, N. Shah, An energy, water and food
nexus approach aiming to enhance food production systems through CO2 fertiliza-
tion, Comput. Aid. Chem. Eng. 43 (2018) 1487–1492.
[171] Solène Chiquier, Mathilde Fajardy, Niall Mac Dowell, The water-energy-carbon-
land nexus: Optimising the BECCS supply chain, CO2 Summit III: Pathways to Car-
bon Capture, Utilization, and Storage Deployment, Jen Wilcox (Colorado School
of Mines, USA) Holly Krutka (Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association-
Simona Liguori (Colorado School of Mines, USA) Niall Mac Dowell (Imperial, US-
ACollege, United, 2017 https://dc.engconfintl.org/co2_summit3/4.
[172] M. Fajardy, S. Chiquier, N. Mac Dowell, Investigating the BECCS resource nexus: de-
livering sustainable negative emissions, Energy Environ. Sci. 11 (2018) 3408–3430.
[173] T. Al-Ansari, A. Korre, Z. Nie, N. Shah, Integration of greenhouse gas control tech-
nologies within the energy, water and food nexus to enhance the environmental
performance of food production systems, J. Clean. Prod. 162 (2017) 1592–1606.
[174] J. Fouladi, A. AlNouss, T. Al-Ansari, Sustainable energy-water-food nexus integra-
tion and optimization in eco-industrial parks, Comput. Chem. Eng. 146 (2021)
107229.
[175] T.S. Adebayo, A.O. Acheampong, Modelling the globalization-CO2 emission nexus
in Australia: evidence from quantile-on-quantile approach, Environ. Sci. Pollut.
Res. (2021) 1–16.
[176] R. Govindan, T. Al-Ansari, A. Korre, N. Shah, Assessment of technology portfolios
with enhanced economic and environmental performance for the energy, water
and food nexus, Comput. Aid. Chem. Eng. 43 (2018) 537–542.
[177] M. Sharifzadeh, R.K.T. Hien, N. Shah, China’s roadmap to low-carbon electricity
and water: Disentangling greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from electricity-water
nexus via renewable wind and solar power generation, and carbon capture and
storage, Appl. Energy 235 (2019) 31–42.
[178] I. Ghiat, T. Al-Ansari, A review of carbon capture and utilisation as a CO2 abate-
ment opportunity within the EWF nexus, J. CO2 Util. 45 (2021) 101432.
[179] D. Kirikkaleli, New insights into an old issue: exploring the nexus between eco-
nomic growth and CO2 emissions in China, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 27 (2020)
40777–40786.
[180] J. Wang, Z. Yu, X. Zeng, Y. Wang, K. Li, S. Deng, Water-energy-carbon nexus: A life
cycle assessment of post-combustion carbon capture technology from power plant
level, J. Clean. Prod. 312 (2021) 127727.
[181] P. Brandl, S.M. Soltani, P.S. Fennell, N.M. Dowell, Evaluation of cooling require-
ments of post-combustion CO2 capture applied to coal-fired power plants, Chem.
Eng. Res. Des. 122 (2017) 1–10.
[182] M. Atilhan, R. Ullah, C.T. Yavuz, Carbon capture: Performance of porous covalent
organic polymers for CO2 capture at elevated pressure, in: The Water-Food-Energy
Nexus: Processes, Technologies, and Challenges, CRC Press, 2017, pp. 603–613.
[183] A. Al-Qahtani, A. González-Garay, A. Bernardi, Á. Galán-Martín, C. Pozo,
N.M. Dowell, B. Chachuat, G. Guillén-Gosálbez, Electricity grid decarbonisation
or green methanol fuel? A life-cycle modelling and analysis of today′s transporta-
tion-power nexus, Appl. Energy 265 (2020) 114718.
[184] M. Tajik Mansouri, M. Amidpour, J.M. Ponce-Ortega, Optimization of the inte-
grated power and desalination plant with algal cultivation system compromising
the energy-water-environment nexus, Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 42 (2020)
100879.