Algae for biogas - AlgeCenter Danmark · Annette Bruhn 1, Michael Bo Rasmussen , Mette Nielsen , Sidsel Sode1, Henrik B. Møller2, Shiplu Sarker2, Jonas Høeg

Macroalgae – from research to industry 2012 AARHUS UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF BIOSCIENCE

Algae for biogas – in the Central Denmark Region (2010-2013)

Annette Bruhn1, Michael Bo Rasmussen1, Mette Nielsen1,

Sidsel Sode1, Henrik B. Møller2, Shiplu Sarker2, Jonas Høeg

Hansen3, Karin Svane Bech3, Jacob Wagner Jensen4, Lone

Mouritsen5

_________________

1 Aarhus University, Institute for Bioscience

2 Aarhus University, Institute for Engineering

3 Technological Institute

4 REnescience, DONG Energy

5 House of the Ocean, Grenå

2012 Macroalgae – from research to industry AARHUS UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF BIOSCIENCE

Algae for biogas - aims

Platforms

Cultivation

Network – integration of industry and research

Dissemination

Scientific/industrial focus points

Algae cultivation

Optimisation of biochemical composition

Bioremediation of waste streams

Pre-treatment technologies

Biogas production


Algae for Biogas – partners


Algae for biogas - contract

Cultivation facility

New technologies for energy production from algae

Scenario for large-scale cultivation

Exchange of knowledge – industry-GTS-science

Network based in Central Denmark Region

national and international

research and industry


Cultivation facility

Pilot scale

Recirculated water flow / open flow

Minimum of 12 tanks – 2 separate systems

Opening September 2010


New technologies for energy production

Mechanical Enzymatic Thermal

Bioremediation

Pretreatment

technology

Energy

production

Biomass

production


Cultivation – bioremediation

Hypotheses:

Waste streams are quality

nutrient/carbon supplies

Increase in protein content

No negative effect on metal

concentration

Efficient N,P,C removal

Degassed pig

manure

Reject water

Flue gas


Cultivation - bioremediation

Quality nutrient/carbon supplies

Increase in protein

Efficient N,P,C removal

No negative effects on metal

concentrations

Nielsen et al, 2011. Sode et al, in prep. Bruhn et al in prep.


Biogas – different seaweed species

9

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Laminaria Saccharina Chaetomorpha Linum

aschophyllum Ulva lactua Pilayella littoralis and Ectocarpus Siliculosus

90 days 7 2 7 8 24 0

60 days 34 12 18 54 50 1

30 daYS 257 206 162 119 100 117

L C

H4/k

g V

S

Methane potentials

Laminaria

digitata Saccharina

latissima

Chaetomor

pha linum

Ascophyllum

nodosum Ulva

lactuca

Pilayella

littoralis,&

ectocarpus


Seaweed boosting biogas from manure?

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

0

60

120

180

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Ulv

a,

VS

d-1

Me

tha

ne

, L/k

gV

S

Weeks

Ulva lactuca Laminaria digitata

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

0

50

100

150

200

250

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

La

min

ari

a,

VS

d-1

Me

tha

ne

, L/k

gV

S

Weeks

Average cattle manure

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

0

60

120

180

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Ulv

a,

VS

d-1

Me

tha

ne

, L/k

gV

S

Weeks

Average cattle manure

Continous thermophilic experiments


Negative effect of thermal pre-treatment

11

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

0 50 100 150 200 250

Lite

r C

H4

/kg

VS

Pre-treatment temperature (C)

Ulva (30 days)

Ulva (60 days)

Laminaria (30 days)

laminaria (60 days)


REnescience enzymatic pre-treatment

0,00

2,00

4,00

6,00

8,00

10,00

12,00

14,00

16,00

Raw Waste +Algae

Raw Waste

House hold waste ± Algae

Bioliquid total mass(kg)

DM (%) of bioliquid

Total DM (kg)

Solid Fraction wet (kg)

0,00

10,00

20,00

30,00

40,00

50,00

60,00

Raw waste +Algea Raw waste

Ko

mp

on

en

t (g

/l)

HPLC measurements

Glucose

Gluc+Lact

Xylose

Variation of waste

9 kg waste (4 replicates)

8 kg waste plus 1 kg Ulva lactuca (3 replicates)

Enzyme addition

Cellic CTec2


Nm

3 C

H4/t

on

VS

REnescience enzymatic pre-treatment

400

300

200

100

Quick fermentation

355 Nm3 CH4/ton VS

Raw waste

353 Nm3 CH4/ton VS

Raw waste + Algae

385 Nm3 CH4/ton VS

Industriel waste – higher lipid content


Scientific conclusions

Cultivation - bioremediation

Efficient bioremediation of nutrient rich waste streams

Fluegas/CO2 boosts production - bioremediation potential is limited

Biomass with high protein content (up to 40%)

Pretreatment

Enzymatic: no effect on biogas potential

Thermal: negative effect on biogas potential

Extrusion: no positive effect on biogas potential

Biogas production

Laminaria – highest biogas potential of species tested

Laminaria – positive effect on biogas production from manure (+100%)

Ulva – more than 10% - negative effect on biogas from manure

Rest product – suitable for use as soil improvement

Ulva

Laminaria


Dissemination - network

New exibition at the KattegatCentre: Havet i maven

(Eating from the ocean)

Teaching material – biotechnology (high school level)

Freely available on the internet

Algaecentre tour for high schools


Industry-science knowledge exchange

Industrial network

Based at Havets Hus

25 participants from entire

production chain

Conference

80-100 participants

National and international

algae environments

Industry

Research

Govermental organisations

Biomasse

Consortium

Project

A

Industrial network

Project

B

Project

C

Developement

Idea

generation

Research Documentation

Project

D

Ne

two

rk

Ex

ch

an

ge

of

kn

ow

led

ge

Str

ate

gy

Op

era

tio

ne

l

ly

Ac

tua

l

pro

jec

ts


International Networks

India

Jordan

BioWalk4Biofuel

(FP7)

MAB 3

Nordic Algae

Network


Overall conclusions

Energy → biorefinery

Landbased cultivation → cultivation at sea

Green algae → Laminaria

Great industrial interest and drive in Central DK region

Increasing political interest and focus

Large potential impact in Central DK region


Thanks for your attention

And thanks to:

Central Denmark Region

EU FP7 – BioWalk4Biofuels

Fredericia Spildevand

The Harbour master in Nakkebølle

Ph

oto

: P

ete

r B

ond

o C

hriste

nse

n


Products and commercial impact

3 peer-reviewed papers

Oral presentations

Posters

Dissemination events

3 Macroalgae conferences

Forskningens Døgn


Dissemination

› Popular › Papers › Talks › Posters

› Scientific › Peer-reviewed papers › Talks › Posters


Perspectives


Cultivation – bioremediation capacity

High N availability – high N

content – high protein

Amino acid composition OK

1 Nielsen et al, 2011. 2 FAO, 2008

Use of agricultural land2

Animal feed

Human feed

Energy


Seaweeds for biogas

0

0,050,1

0,15

0,2

0,250,3

0,35

0,4

M. p

orife

ra

A. n

odos

um

S. lat

issim

a

S. f

luita

ns

G. t

ikva

hiae

Cha

etom

orph

a sp

.

U. lac

tuca

Whe

at s

traw

Turf g

rass

Man

ure

m3 C

H4 k

g-1

VS

g

b

a a a

c d e e f

a: Chynoweth, 2005. b: Habig, et al, 1984. c: Nielsen et al, 2009. d: Bruhn, et al, 2011. e: McKendry, et al, 2002. f: Møller et al,

2003. g: Møller, 2011

Inhibiton – salt, sulphur

Inoculum – optimisation

a a a a


Cultivation - bioremediation efficiency

Aquaculture

Agriculture

Municipal

Output

Max clean water

Max N/P removal

Min energy cost

Construction of system2

1 Nielsen et al, 2011. 2 Neori et al, 2003.

Documents

Algae for biogas - AlgeCenter Danmark · Annette Bruhn 1, Michael Bo Rasmussen , Mette Nielsen , Sidsel Sode1, Henrik B. Møller2, Shiplu Sarker2, Jonas Høeg