Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 79 (2017) 248–254

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rser

Photobioreactor design for microalgae production through computational MARK

fluid dynamics: A review
⁎
José C.M. Pires , Maria C.M. Alvim-Ferraz, Fernando G. Martins
LEPABE, Departamento de Engenharia Química, Faculdade de Engenharia, Universidade do Porto, Rua Dr. Roberto Frias, 4200-465 Porto, Portugal

A R T I C L E I N F O A BS T RAC T

Keywords: Microalgae are seen as the most promising flexible feedstock, being considered the crop of the future. They grow
Carbon dioxide uptake fast, just needing sunlight, carbon dioxide and minerals. They contain high value ingredients, such as proteins,
Computational Fluid Dynamics carbohydrates, lipids, nucleic acids and others (carotenoids and polymers). Thus, they can be produced for a
Growth kinetics wide range of markets, including human and animal nutrition, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals and biofuels.
Heat and mass transfer
However, the production cost is still high, limiting their commercial applications to high-valued compounds.
Light transfer
Microalgae
The reduction of these costs can be obtained with efficient bioreactor designs, which are able to achieve high
Photobioreactors areal biomass productivities. In this context, Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) may play an important role
Scale-up in the optimization of bioreactor design, analysing the interaction of hydrodynamics, light supply, heat and
mass transfer and biological kinetics. This study addresses the recent advances in CFD modelling of both open
pond and closed bioreactors.

1. Microalgae and main applications
Microalgae are a broad category that includes the eukaryotic
microalgae and the prokaryotic cyanobacteria. These microorganisms
are crucial for the ecosystems in the planet. An important characteristic
is their high growth rate (biomass concentration can double within
hours), which attributes to microalgae an undeniable economical
potential. Additionally, their cultivation is associated with several
beneficial environmental applications that have been intensively stu-
died in the recent years [1–4]: (i) CO2 capture; (ii) biomass production;
and (iii) nutrient uptake from wastewaters. Due to the chemical
composition of microalgal biomass, it can be used for different
applications, including human and animal nutrition, cosmetics, phar-
maceuticals and biofuels [5].
Despite of the advantages associated with microalgal production,
several phenomena should be studied before the application of this
technology at industrial scale. One important issue is the optimization
of photobioreactor (PBR) design. The geometry of PBR and its
operating conditions should be favourable for microalgal growth in
order to achieve high biomass productivities. Microalgal production in
a PBR is a complex system and the experiments with different
geometries will be waste of scientific efforts, time, and money. In this
context, the modelling of PBR will contribute to rapid advances in the
optimization of its geometry, aiming to increase biomass areal pro-
ductivities. Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) is a powerful tool to
simulate hydrodynamics, heat and mass transfer [6]. This paper aims
to review the recent studies focusing the application of CFD for the
optimization of PBR design for microalgal cultures.
2. Main culture variables
Cultures of autotrophic microalgae are influenced by the light
distribution, temperature, pH, nutrient qualitative and quantitative
profiles, dissolved oxygen and carbon dioxide concentrations and the
presence of toxic elements (mainly heavy metals). In the next sections,
these culture variables are described in detail and the associated
models are presented.
2.1. Light supply
The sunlight is the primary energy source. Autotrophic microalgae,
as well as terrestrial plants, convert light into chemical energy through
photosynthesis. Consequently, light is a key parameter for microalgal
culture [7–9]. Although solar radiation at ground level presents a wide
wavelength range, only the fraction corresponded to visible light (400
and 700 nm) can be used by microalgae. This fraction is also called
Photosynthetic Active Radiation (PAR) and represents 43% of the total
radiation [10]. The intensity of solar radiation is dependent on the
geographical location and climate conditions. However, microalgal
cultures do not require high light intensities. From a specific value,

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: jcpires@fe.up.pt (J.C.M. Pires).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.064
Received 16 September 2016; Received in revised form 23 November 2016; Accepted 15 May 2017
Available online 20 May 2017
1364-0321/ © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
J.C.M. Pires et al.
their growth stabilize, being this phenomenon called photoinhibition
(light saturation) [11,12]. It is mainly observed in outdoor cultures and
some authors have proposed to improve biomass productivity with a
certain degree of shading. Microalgal photoinhibition can occur in two
set of conditions: (i) cells growing at or near the surface during the
hours of strongest irradiance; and (ii) cells located in lower layers of the
culture (acclimated with low irradiance levels) that are suddenly
exposed to higher irradiance due to physical processes such as mixing.
On the other hand, the phenomenon of mutual shading may occur,
taking high relevance for high cell density cultures. Therefore, light is
efficiently distributed inside the culture (main drawback for cultivation
of photosynthetic microorganisms). Without a correct design of the
PBRs and a good definition of the operating variables, two regions are
defined: outer illuminated region and dark region. The gradient of light
intensity inside the PBR as a function of the distance to the surface can
be described by Lambert-Beer's Law equation [13]:
I = I0×e−k × C × d (1)
where I0 is the light intensity at the illuminated wall surface of the PBR,
k is the attenuation constant due to the culture of microalgae at
concentration C, and d is the distance from the irradiated surface.
According to this equation, light intensity decreases exponentially
though the light path. Therefore, there will be cells exposed to high
light intensities and others with no access to this source of energy. The
behaviour of specific growth rates for increasing light intensity was
described according to the model proposed by Steele [14]:
⎛ ⎞
μmax I ⎜1− I I ⎟
μ= ∙e⎝ opt ⎠
I opt (2)
where μmax corresponds to the maximum specific growth rate (in d−1)
achieved by the studied microorganisms, I denotes light irradiance (in
µE m−2 s−1) and Iopt corresponds to the optimal value of light irradiance
(in µE m−2 s−1) for microalgal/cyanobacterial growth.
In order to optimize the photosynthetic efficiency of microalgal
cultures, several researchers showed that the alternation of light and
dark periods may lead to increase biomass productivities [15,16], even
with intensities above the light saturation value. These research studies
showed that photoinhibition damage (damage of protein D1 in photo-
system II and consequent reduction of active “photon traps”) is less
evident in light/dark cycles. Grobbelaar et al. [17] concluded that the
photosynthetic rates increased exponentially with increasing of light/
dark cycle frequencies. In terms of PBR design, the increase of fluid
turbulence enhances the culture mixing process and this option forces
microalgae to alternate between illuminated and dark regions inside
the bioreactor, promoting short light/dark cycles to the cells.
2.2. Temperature
Temperature is also an important variable to control in microalgal
cultures as it directly influences metabolic activities, enzymatic activ-
ities and conformation of vital structures [18–20]. Optimal tempera-
ture values are between 15 and 26 °C. Higher values can inhibit
metabolic activity and reduces the solubility of gaseous components
(i.e. CO2) in the culture medium. Low values decrease the kinetics of
metabolic activities. However, there are some microalgae that can grow
with temperatures out of the optimal range. Based on the temperature
tolerance, microalgae can be classified in three groups [21]: psychro-
philic, mesophilic and thermophilic. The optimal values for mesophilic
species are between 20 and 25 °C, but microalgal cultures can tolerate
temperatures outside this range. However, values below 16 °C will slow
down the growth kinetics, while values above 35 °C may be lethal for
some species. The effect of temperature on microalgal growth rate can
be described by the following equation.
249
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 79 (2017) 248–254
⎧ 0,ifT < Tmin
⎪
⎪
(T − Tmax )(T − Tmin )2
μmax = ⎨ μopt (Topt − Tmin )[(Topt − Tmin )(T − Topt ) − (Topt − Tmax )(Topt + Tmin −2T )] , ifTmin
⎪
⎪
⎩ 0,ifT > Tmax
< T < Tmax (3)
where Tmin and Tmax are the limits from the range of temperatures that
are different from zero and Topt is the optimum value. According to Eq.
(3), the maximal growth rate (μopt) is achieved at Topt. Taking into
account the variability of microalgal growth and the climate conditions
in outdoor cultures, PBRs should have devices to promote the heat
transfer in order to maintain the temperature in the optimal range
values.
2.3. Media pH
The pH value has a high impact on microalgal culture with regards
to the availability and assimilation of the nutrients dissolved in the
medium. Chemical equilibrium between carbon species (CO2, HCO3-
and CO32-), precipitation of phosphates, volatilization of ammonia and
solubility of trace elements are pH dependent [22–25]. Moreover, there
are microalgal species sensitive to pH value; therefore, this parameter
may define the dominant specie in mixed cultures. The pH value in the
culture should be between 7 and 9, with optimal range between 8.2 and
8.7 [6,26]. In high density cultures, pH usually increases (reaching
limiting values of up to 9) and it can be corrected by aeration of CO2.
2.4. Mass transfer of CO2 and O2
Carbon is one of the most important nutrients for microalgal
growth, representing almost 50% of their biomass dry weight (1.8 g
of CO2 is required to produce 1 g of biomass). Carbon can be provided
to cultures as CO2 (dissolved in air streams), HCO3- and CO32-
(dissolved in culture medium). Feeding CO2, this gas is dissolved in
medium, forming carbonic acid which is used by microalgae during the
photosynthesis. As mentioned above, added CO2 has also an important
role for the pH control. Main limitation of CO2 transference from the
gaseous to liquid phase is its low mass transfer coefficient [27,28]. The
reduction of the bubble size improves the mass transfer (according
Fick's law), leading to faster dissolution, slow rising, and high surface-
to-volume ration [29,30]. On the other hand, oxygen produced by
photosynthesis can accumulate in culture medium to levels which can
be harmful for microalgae (photo-oxidative damage) [28,31,32].
Moreover, high O2 concentration promote the activity of oxygenase
enzymes, leading to high uptake preference of O2 rather than CO2 and
consequent loss of fixed carbon and reduction of biomass productivity.
Thus, dissolved oxygen should be maintained below 400% of the air
saturation value (corresponding to 30 mg L−1, assuming the equili-
brium solubility of O2 of 7.5 mg L−1 at 30 °C) [31,33,34]. Mass transfer
from medium to atmosphere (KL) depends on diffusion coefficient of O2
and the turbulence of the medium. The transference can be improved
by addition of an air stream containing a proper O2/CO2 concentration
ratio. In this context, the addition of flue gases to culture have
advantages concerning CO2 and O2 transfer, as it contains sufficient
CO2 for microalgal cultures and a reduced composition on O2, which
increases the driving force of mass transfer of this gas [35,36].
3. Photobioreactors
Microalgal cultures can be performed in open ponds or closed
systems [4,34,37–39]. Open ponds are the most applied to cultures at
commercial scale as it presents low capital and operating costs.
However, biomass productivities are lower than the ones achieved in
closed systems due to dependence of local climate and easy contam-
ination of predators. On the other hand, closed systems can achieve
high biomass productivities due to better control of culture variables
J.C.M. Pires et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 79 (2017) 248–254

[34,38]. These bioreactors lose less water by evaporation and CO2 to

atmosphere. They can have different configurations [40–44]: (i)
vertical column reactors (bubble columns or air-lift); (ii) tubular
reactors; and (iii) flat-plate reactors. The air-lift reactors have great
potential for industrial processes, due to low level and homogeneous
distribution of hydrodynamic shear, which constitutes a disadvantage
of closed photobioreactors to open ponds. The medium circulates in a
cyclic pattern through channels built for this purpose. The tubular
design is more appropriated to the outdoor culture, having large
illumination surface created by the disposition of the tubes [45].
They can be configured in vertical, horizontal or inclined planes. The
vertical tubular reactors increase the contact time between the gaseous
and liquid phases, increasing the CO2 mass transfer. However, this
disposition has the disadvantage of air pumping costs. On the other
hand, the flat-plate photobioreactors can achieve higher cell densities
Fig. 1. Interactions between in microalgal cultures.
than the other bioreactors (in more than an order of magnitude) [9].
Additionally, this type of bioreactors has: (i) lower power consumption;
4.3. Hydrodynamics
(ii) high mass transfer capacity; (iii) no dark volumes; and (iv) high
photosynthetic efficiency.
Several studies were already presented describing the fluid flow in
raceway ponds (RPs) [51–53], which are the most widely used
4. Computational Fluid Dynamics bioreactor for large scale microalgal production. These studies focused
on the influence of the RP geometry on energy consumption of paddles
4.1. General description wheels power, which represents a high percentage of operational
production costs. Regarding hydrodynamics, it is also important to
CFD is a discipline based on the theory of fluid dynamics. Fluid evaluate the spatial distribution of the fluid velocities, aiming to reduce
flows are described by partial differential equations that correspond to dead zones (stagnation regions within the flow) that contributes to the
conservation laws for mass, momentum and energy. CFD replaces decrease of RP productivity. Mendoza et al. [54] characterized the fluid
these equations by a set of algebraic equations that can be numerically dynamics for a real-scale raceway pond (100 m length ×1 m wide). The
solved. These equations describe how the velocity, pressure, tempera- objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of design and
ture, and liquid density are related. CFD provides a qualitative operational variables (water depth, liquid velocity and the presence/
prediction of fluid flows using [6]: (i) mathematical modelling absence of sump baffles to improve the CO2 mass transfer efficiency) on
(Navier-Stokes transport equations); (ii) numerical methods; and (iii) the power consumption, residence time and mixing. The equations that
software tools (solvers, pre and post-processing utilities). related these variables were then validated with experiments. Liffman
Process engineers and scientists use CFD models to study the et al. [55] modelled different raceway bend configurations to achieve a
complex and integrated systems, without the need for extensive low-energy consumption raceway pond. Significant reductions of
experiences. These models can complement the limitations of labora- energy loss (87%) were achieved with proposed configurations, when
tory experiments and they can be used in different steps of process compared with RPs with conventional bends. In addition, the observed
development, from initial design concept to final plant operation. In the reduction of stagnation regions can improve the biomass productivity
last years, CFD has been applied to model bioreactors [6,46–48]. in these bioreactors. Sompech et al. [56] tested and compared different
Regarding other optimization methods, it presents several advantages: configurations of raceway ponds in terms of energy consumption and
(i) low cost; (ii) reduced workload; and (iii) shorter design period. dead zones location for different flow velocities. CFD was applied to
calculate the power consumption for mixing the studied RPs. The
authors proposed a configuration with a minimum of three semi-
4.2. Bioreactors modelling
circular deflector baffles and a modified end of central divider to
increase energy efficiency and to completely eliminate the dead zones.
Bioreactor design should take into account lighting, mixing, water
Huang et al. [57] used Particle Image Velocimetry (PIV), usually
and CO2 consumption, O2 removal, nutrient supply and temperature
applied to validate CFD simulations. Novel mixers (slopping baffles)
maintenance. A complex design is more versatile, but more expensive
and flow deflectors were combined to increase the mixing degree and
to construct and operate. Thus, its selection depends on several factors
decrease power consumption. Zeng et al. [53] investigated the hydro-
[4,5,39,42,49]: (i) microalgal growth characteristics; (ii) chemical
dynamic characteristics of raceway pond with different paddle wheels
composition of medium; and (iii) commercial value of final product.
(the traditional ones and new configuration with inclined angle of the
For instance, for strict quality control products (human food, cosmetics
blades), validating simulation results using PIV. In CFD simulations,
and pharmaceutics), high variability of culture variables should be
two turbulence models were tested: large eddy simulations (LES) and
avoided to maintain the qualitative composition of microalgal biomass.
k-ε model. Based in PIV experiments, LES was more accurate than k-ε
On the other hand, for low cost applications of microalgal biomass
model for prediction of turbulence kinetic energy. However, this
(biofuels production), raceway ponds should be applied.
method takes more computational time. Fig. 2 presents a comparison
PBR geometry should maximize the biomass areal productivity.
between two tested raceway ponds regarding mixing. New configura-
Fig. 1 shows the main interactions between hydrodynamics, light
tion of paddle wheels with 15° inclined angle of blades promoted a
supply, mass and heat transfer and biological kinetics. These interac-
better mixing for the same power consumption. Cultures of Chlorella
tions determine the yield of the microalgal culture. Only the model
pyrenoidosa were performed with this new design of paddles and its
considering all these phenomena will correctly describe the microalgal
biomass areal productivity increased by 17% when compared with
growth [15,28,50]. Table 1 presents the main CFD studies for PBR
traditional ponds. Chiaramonti et al. [52] proposed and characterized a
modelling. Fluent and CFX are the most applied software codes in the
new RP, which innovation consisted in the reduction of culture depth
studies of PBR design. Due to the complexity of the studied phenom-
(limited to 5 cm). This change increases the biomass concentration in
ena, the majority of the studies only focus on the study of fluid
the culture. The paddle wheel was substituted by an axial pump to
dynamics.

250
J.C.M. Pires et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 79 (2017) 248–254

Table 1
Recent CFD studies focusing different PBRs.

Photobioreactor CFD code Modelled phenomena Refs.

Raceway pond EFDC FD; MT; LS: Steel's equation; BK. [74]
CFX FD: k-ε model. [56]
CFX 12 FD: k-ε model. [55]
COMSOL 4.4 FD: k-ε model; Particle tracking model. [51]
FLUENT 14.5 FD: standard k-ε model and k-ω model; LS: Beer-Lambert's law; MT: Henry law; BK: Monod model; EV: 120 m3 outdoor raceway [75]
pond.
CFX 12.1 FD: standard k-ε model; EV: PIV with 168 L raceway pond. [57]
CFX 12.0 FD: LES and k-ε models; EV: PIV with 3 m3 raceway pond. [76]
Internal air-lift CFX 4.2 FD: k-ε model; EV: two configurations of PBR. [77]
Air-lift flat panel CFX 5 FD: k-ε model; EV: 15 L and 300 L PBRs. [58]
FLUENT 6.3 FD: k-ε model; EV: 12.8 L PBR. [63]
CFX 12.1 FD: standard k-ε model; Particle tracking model; LS: Cornet model; EV: 15 L PBR. [71]
Flat-panel CFX 12.1 FD: standard k-ε model; Particle tracking model; LS: Cornet model; EV:three types of 15-L PBR [69]
Tubular FLUENT 6.0 FD: standard k-ε model; Particle tracking model; LS. [68]
FLUENT 12.1 FD: realizable k-ε model; Particle tracking model; LS. [70]
FLUENT FD: standard k-ε model. [61]
COMSOL FD: k-ε model; Particle tracking model. [60]
Flooded bed FLUENT 6.3 FD: k-ε model; MT: MT: Akita and Yoshida equation; BK: Monod model. [78]

FD – Fluid Dynamics; EV – Experimental Validation; BK – Biological Kinetics; LS – Light Supply.

improve energy efficiency. It was concluded that high energy savings
can be achieved if flow velocity is reduced with well-designed bluff-
bodies in the water flow. CFD was applied to evaluate the head losses in
RP. As expected, the majority of head losses were located at the bend.
Air-lift reactor presents several advantages regarding other bior-
eactors in terms of hydrodynamics and mass transfer. Yu et al. [58]
studied the relationship between microalgal growth rate and the
structure parameters of an air-lift reactor: (i) Ad/Ar (cross-section area
of the downcomer/cross-section area of the riser); (ii) h0 (clearance
from the upper edge of the baffles to the water level); and (iii) h1
(clearance from the lower edge of the baffles to the bottom of the
reactor). CFD was applied to simulate the hydrodynamic parameters
(turbulence kinetic energy of downcomers, duration of downcomer
period, cycle time and dead zones), which influence on microalgal
growth was evaluated for cultures of Isochrysis galbana in a 15-L air-
lift reactor. The results showed that CFD has a great potential for the
optimization and scale-up of PBRs. Rengel et al. [59] characterized
experimentally and by CFD the fluid flow in an air-lift with a riser
diameter of 0.1 m (air/water system), varying the superficial gas
velocity. The results showed an excellent agreement between experi-
mental and simulated values (gas holdup and liquid velocity in the
downcomer and in the riser).
In tubular PBR, CFD studies focused on reduction of power
consumption. The modification of the tubes design can increase the
flow turbulence with low fluid velocity [60]. The effect of wall
turbulence promoters at low fluid velocities (0.10–0.30 m/s) was
analysed with CFD. Main drawback of this modification is the forma-
tion of biofilm in the dead zones created by them. However, the
analysis of fluid velocities near the wall turbulence promoters showed
that at velocities higher than 0.20 m/s, the risk of biofouling is reduced.
At velocities between 0.20 and 0.25 m/s, this modification achieves
better mixing behaviour when compared with standard PBRs with
reduction of energy consumption between 60% and 80%. Wongluang
et al. [61] analysed the dead zones in U-bends and 90° elbows in the
conventional tubular PBR. This phenomenon is responsible for the
increase of energy consumption, formation of deposits and reduced
biomass productivity. Alternative designs (U-bend with a radius of
curvature of 0.35 m; 90° elbow with a radius of curvature of 0.3 m)
were proposed and evaluated with CFD modelling. New configurations
achieved an energy loss reduction by up to 15%. Zhang et al. [62]

Fig. 2. Velocity profiles (Uz – velocity in z direction – and U) in the traditional raceway pond (I) and the proposed raceway pond (II) with 15° inclined angle of the blades (adapted from
[76]).

251
J.C.M. Pires et al.
studied a tubular PBR with helical static mixers in terms of cell
trajectories and energy consumption. With this configuration, light/
dark cycles are created with microalgal cells changing between light
zone and dark zone of the PBR. The biomass productivity of Chlorella
sp. in this reactor increased 37.26% when compared with conventional
design.
4.4. Mass transfer
Regarding mass transfer, few modelling studies were performed
[63–66]. Massart et al. [63] defined and validated a CFD hydrodynamic
model for a flat panel air-lift reactor. In addition, air flow rate was
optimized to reduce the settling and shear stress of microalgae.
Cultures of Scenedesmus obliquus were performed to determine the
optimal air flow rate: 1.5 L min−1. According CFD simulations, this air
flow rate corresponded to a liquid flow rate of 3.5×10−5 m3 s−1. CO2
transfer from liquid to gas phase was characterized. Mass transfer
coefficient (kLa) of carbon dioxide in the culture medium was also
determined: 3×10−4 s−1. Razzak et al. [64] evaluated the influence of
hydrodynamics in CO2 mass transfer from gaseous to liquid phases.
Gas holdups and CO2 mass transfer were determined experimentally in
tubular PBR for liquid velocities ranging from 8.4 to 22.4 cm/s and for
superficial gas velocities ranging from 3.7 to 8.1 cm/s. Regarding CO2
mass transfer, the applied models presented good performance indexes
in the fitting to the experimental data.
4.5. Light supply
Light supply is an important variable for autotrophic cultures. The
optimization of light intensity and light/dark (L/D) cycles may
contribute to the increase of biomass productivities [49,67]. Thus, it
is important to predict the L/D cycle frequencies for PBR geometries
and this can be performed by simulating individual cell trajectories
[15]. Perner-Nochta and Posten [68] studied the temporal and spatial
variability of light patterns in PBRs with CFD modelling. The case
study was a tubular PBR with a static mixer (see Fig. 3), which
enhances the mixing, mass transfer and optimizes L/D cycle. With
static mixer, the L/D cycles presented a frequency between 3 and 25 Hz
for fluid velocity of 0.5 m/s, while frequencies of 0.2–3.1 Hz were
achieved without this device. Model simulations also showed that the
static mixer improved the radial tubular flow (see Fig. 4), increasing the
regularity of the liquid motion. Other research studies also highlight
the importance of the radial velocity in the performance of PBRs
[69,70]. Huang et al. [71] also developed a novel mixer to improve the
biomass productivities of an air-lift flat-plate PBR. The aim was to
Fig. 3. Helical mixer and its wire frame model (adapted from Perner-Nochta and Posten
[68]).
252
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 79 (2017) 248–254
Fig. 4. Particle tracking in the static mixer for fluid velocity of 0.5 m/s, showing the
radial movement of particles (adapted from Perner-Nochta and Posten [68]).
achieve a better mixing in the light attenuation gradient region to
shorten L/D cycle, which was accessed by CFD modelling. Cultures of
Chlorella pyrenoidosa were performed to verify the improvements of
novel mixers. The maximum biomass concentration was 0.89 g L−1,
33% higher than the one achieved in the control reactor. Thus, it was
concluded that the proposed mixer can significantly increase the fluid
velocity along the light attenuation region, increasing the L/D cycle
frequency.
Sato et al. [13] developed a virtual PBR for microalgal production.
It combines a numerical simulation of two-phase turbulent flow and a
photosynthesis model using the Lambert-Beer model to characterize
the light distribution in the PBR. The model was validated with other
work performed by the same authors [72]. The results showed the
agreement of experimental and simulated values in terms of O2
production per microalga and per unit of time. The developed model
can also be used to determine the amount of fixed CO2 and the growth
curve of microalgae. Consequently, it is possible to estimate biomass
productivities before performing cultivation experiments. However,
additional improvements of the model were defined: integration of the
effect of temperature change and effect of CO2 and nutrients concen-
trations. Wheaton and Krishnamoorthy [73] performed simulations of
light transfer and fluid hydrodynamics within an air-lift PBR. The effect
of air bubbles and biomass concentration on light transfer was
evaluated. The importance of bubble scattering diminishes for biomass
concentrations greater than 0.5 g L−1, when the absorption coefficient
of microalgal media takes more relevance.
4.6. Biological kinetics
Comparing with phenomena described above, the application of
CFD to describe biological processes is a less-explored. The simulation
of microalgal growth is the last step to fully characterize the PBR.
Consequently, the effect of physical and chemical variables of the
process on microalgal growth can be estimated. James and Boriah [74]
presented the first study that integrates hydrodynamics, heat and mass
transfer, light supply and microalgal growth kinetics. Environmental
Fluid Dynamics Code from United States (US) Environmental
Protection Agency and Water-Quality Code from US Army Corp of
Engineers were used to simulate the growth of Phaeodactylum
tricornutum in a raceway pond. The developed model can be applied
for raceway design (before construction) and definition of a set of
operational parameters (open depth, harvest frequency, flow speeds),
avoiding the often used trial-and-error method (savings in cost and
time).
Recently, Park and Li [75] integrated physical and environmental
effects to characterize microalgal growth in raceway ponds. The
proposed model comprised hydrodynamics, heat transfer and nutrient
J.C.M. Pires et al.
balance. Simulation results were then compared with values of
temperature, nutrient concentrations, and biomass concentrations
experimentally determined for Nannochloropsis salina cultivated in
an industrial scale raceway pond during 56 days. The results showed
that the models fit the experimental data: biomass concentration, CO2,
and nutrient concentrations.
5. Research needs
Future work will focus in the development of simulation model that
comprises all physical and biological phenomena in different closed
bioreactors. The distribution of light will be an important parameter for
PBR design, optimizing the ratio between illuminated area and
bioreactor volume. To fulfil this task, new devices should be studied
to promote the distribution of light inside the PBRs, increasing their
performance in terms of biomass productivity.
6. Conclusions
CFD has been considered a powerful tool to design PBRs, predicting
their performance without several expensive and time-consuming
experiments. Researchers have frequently focused in the simulation
of hydrodynamics for reduction of power consumption. In addition,
hydrodynamics influences the L/D cycle frequency, important para-
meter to increase biomass productivities. Despite the advances in CFD
modelling for this application, there is still a need for contributions
regarding the mechanisms of light distribution inside the bioreactor
and the development of an integrated model (comprising physical,
chemical and biological phenomena) for closed PBRs.
Acknowledgements
This work was financially supported by: Project POCI-01–0145-
FEDER-006939 (Laboratory for Process Engineering, Environment,
Biotechnology and Energy – LEPABE) funded by FEDER funds
through COMPETE2020 - Programa Operacional Competitividade e
Internacionalização (POCI) – and by national funds through FCT -
Fundaca̧ ̃ o para a Ciência e a Tecnologia; and fellowship SFRH/BPD/
112849/2015. J.C.M. Pires acknowledges the FCT Investigator 2015
Programme (IF/01341/2015).
References
[1] Munoz R, Guieysse B. Algal-bacterial processes for the treatment of hazardous
contaminants: a review. Water Res 2006;40:2799–815.
[2] Park JBK, Craggs RJ, Shilton AN. Wastewater treatment high rate algal ponds for
biofuel production. Bioresour Technol 2011;102:35–42.
[3] Olguin EJ. Dual purpose microalgae-bacteria-based systems that treat wastewater
and produce biodiesel and chemical products within a Biorefinery. Biotechnol Adv
2012;30:1031–46.
[4] Pires JCM, Alvim-Ferraz MCM, Martins FG, Simoes M. Carbon dioxide capture
from flue gases using microalgae: engineering aspects and biorefinery concept.
Renew Sust Energ Rev 2012;16:3043–53.
[5] Spolaore P, Joannis-Cassan C, Duran E, Isambert A. Commercial applications of
microalgae. J Biosci Bioeng 2006;101:87–96.
[6] Bitog JP, Lee IB, Lee CG, Kim KS, Hwang HS, Hong SW, et al. Application of
computational fluid dynamics for modeling and designing photobioreactors for
microalgae production: a review. Comput Electron Agric 2011;76:131–47.
[7] Goncalves AL, Simoes M, Pires JCM. The effect of light supply on microalgal
growth, CO2 uptake and nutrient removal from wastewater. Energ Convers Manag
2014;85:530–6.
[8] Zijffers JWF, Schippers KJ, Zheng K, Janssen M, Tramper J, Wijffels RH.
Maximum photosynthetic yield of green microalgae in photobioreactors. Mar
Biotechnol 2010;12:708–18.
[9] Slegers PM, Wijffels RH, van Straten G, van Boxtel AJB. Design scenarios for flat
panel photobioreactors. Appl Energ 2011;88:3342–53.
[10] Janssen M, Tramper J, Mur LR, Wijffels RH. Enclosed outdoor photobioreactors:
light regime, photosynthetic efficiency, scale-up, and future prospects. Biotechnol
Bioeng 2003;81:193–210.
[11] Grima EM, Sevilla JMF, Perez JAS, Camacho FG. A study on simultaneous
photolimitation and photoinhibition in dense microalgal cultures taking into
account incident and averaged irradiances. J Biotechnol 1996;45:59–69.
253
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 79 (2017) 248–254
[12] Han BP, Virtanen M, Koponen J, Straskraba M. Effect of photoinhibition on algal
photosynthesis: a dynamic model. J Plankton Res 2000;22:865–85.
[13] Sato T, Yamada D, Hirabayashi S. Development of virtual photobioreactor for
microalgae culture considering turbulent flow and flashing light effect. Energ
Convers Manag 2010;51:1196–201.
[14] Steele JH. Microbial kinetics and dynamics. In: Lapidus L, Amunson NR, editors.
Chemical reactor theory. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall; 1977. p.
405–83.
[15] Posten C. Design principles of photo-bioreactors for cultivation of microalgae. Eng
Life Sci 2009;9:165–77.
[16] Sastre RR, Coesgoer Z, Perner-Nochta I, Fleck-Schneider P, Posten C. Scale-down
of microalgae cultivations in tubular photo-bioreactors - A conceptual approach. J
Biotechnol 2007;132:127–33.
[17] Grobbelaar JU, Nedbal L, Tichy V. Influence of high frequency light/dark
fluctuations on photosynthetic characteristics of microalgae photoacclimated to
different light intensities and implications for mass algal cultivation. J Appl Phycol
1996;8:335–43.
[18] Butterwick C, Heaney SI, Talling JF. Diversity in the influence of temperature on
the growth rates of freshwater algae, and its ecological relevance. Freshw Biol
2005;50:291–300.
[19] Renaud SM, Thinh LV, Lambrinidis G, Parry DL. Effect of temperature on growth,
chemical composition and fatty acid composition of tropical Australian microalgae
grown in batch cultures. Aquaculture 2002;211:195–214.
[20] Goncalves AL, Pires JCM, Simoes M. The effects of light and temperature on
microalgal growth and nutrient removal: an experimental and mathematical
approach. RSC Adv 2016;6:22896–907.
[21] Chen CH, Berns DS. Thermotropic properties of thermophilic, mesophilic, and
psychrophilic blue-green-algae. Plant Physiol 1980;66:596–9.
[22] Silva NFP, Goncalves AL, Moreira FC, Silva TFCV, Martins FG, Alvim-Ferraz MCM,
et al. Towards sustainable microalgal biomass production by phycoremediation of a
synthetic wastewater: a kinetic study. Algal Res 2015;11:350–8.
[23] Fernandes TV, Shrestha R, Sui YX, Papini G, Zeeman G, Vet LEM, et al. Closing
domestic nutrient cycles using microalgae. Environ Sci Technol 2015;49:12450–6.
[24] Sayre R. Microalgae: the potential for carbon capture. Bioscience 2010;60:722–7.
[25] Pires J, Alvim-Ferraz M, Martins F, Simoes M. Wastewater treatment to enhance
the economic viability of microalgae culture. Environ Sci Pollut Res
2013;20:5096–105.
[26] Barsanti L, Gualtieri P. Algae: anatomy, biochemistry, and biotechnology, Second
edition. CRC Press - Taylor & Francis Group; 2014.
[27] Carvalho AP, Meireles LA, Malcata FX. Microalgal reactors: a review of enclosed
system designs and performances. Biotechnol Prog 2006;22:1490–506.
[28] Fernandez FGA, Sevilla JMF, Grima EM. Photobioreactors for the production of
microalgae. Rev Environ Sci Biotechnol 2013;12:131–51.
[29] Zimmerman WB, Zandi M, Tesar V, Gilmour DJ, Ying KZ. Design of an airlift loop
bioreactor and pilot scales studies with fluidic oscillator induced microbubbles for
growth of a microalgae Dunaliella salina. Appl Energy 2011;88:3357–69.
[30] AL-Mashhadani MKH, Wilkinson SJ, Zimmerman WB. Airlift bioreactor for
biological applications with microbubble mediated transport processes. Chem Eng
Sci 2015;137:243–53.
[31] Molina E, Fernandez J, Acien FG, Chisti Y. Tubular photobioreactor design for algal
cultures. J Biotechnol 2001;92:113–31.
[32] Singh P, Gupta SK, Guldhe A, Rawat I, Bux F. Microalgae isolation and basic
culturing techniques A2. In: Kim Se-Kwon, editor. Handbook of marine microalgae.
Boston: Academic Press; 2015. p. 43–54.
[33] Kunjapur AM, Eldridge RB. Photobioreactor design for commercial biofuel
production from microalgae. Ind Eng Chem Res 2010;49:3516–26.
[34] Chisti Y. Biodiesel from microalgae. Biotechnol Adv 2007;25:294–306.
[35] Posadas E, Morales MD, Gomez C, Acien FG, Munoz R. Influence of pH and CO2
source on the performance of microalgae-based secondary domestic wastewater
treatment in outdoors pilot raceways. Chem Eng J 2015;265:239–48.
[36] de Godos I, Mendoza JL, Acien FG, Molina E, Banks CJ, Heaven S, et al. Evaluation
of carbon dioxide mass transfer in raceway reactors for microalgae culture using
flue gases. Bioresour Technol 2014;153:307–14.
[37] Borowitzka MA. Commercial production of microalgae: ponds, tanks, tubes and
fermenters. J Biotechnol 1999;70:313–21.
[38] Pulz O. Photobioreactors: production systems for phototrophic microorganisms.
Appl Microbiol Biot 2001;57:287–93.
[39] de Vree JH, Bosma R, Janssen M, Barbosa MJ, Wijffels RH. Comparison of four
outdoor pilot-scale photobioreactors. Biotechnol Biofuels 2015:8.
[40] Wang B, Lan CQ, Horsman M. Closed photobioreactors for production of
microalgal biomasses. Biotechnol Adv 2012;30:904–12.
[41] Singh RN, Sharma S. Development of suitable photobioreactor for algae production
- A review. Renew Sust Energy Rev 2012;16:2347–53.
[42] Bahadar A, Khan MB. Progress in energy from microalgae: a review. Renew Sust
Energy Rev 2013;27:128–48.
[43] Vasumathi KK, Premalatha M, Subramanian P. Parameters influencing the design
of photobioreactor for the growth of microalgae. Renew Sust Energy Rev
2012;16:5443–50.
[44] Brennan L, Owende P. Biofuels from microalgae-A review of technologies for
production, processing, and extractions of biofuels and co-products. Renew Sust
Energy Rev 2010;14:557–77.
[45] Cuellar-Bermudez SP, Garcia-Perez JS, Rittmann BE, Parra-Saldivar R.
Photosynthetic bioenergy utilizing CO2: an approach on flue gases utilization for
third generation biofuels. J Clean Prod 2015;98:53–65.
[46] Hutmacher DW, Singh H. Computational fluid dynamics for improved bioreactor
design and 3D culture. Trends Biotechnol 2008;26:166–72.
J.C.M. Pires et al.
[47] Wu BX. Integration of mixing, heat transfer, and biochemical reaction kinetics in
anaerobic methane fermentation. Biotechnol Bioeng 2012;109:2864–74.
[48] Wu BX. Advances in the use of CFD to characterize, design and optimize bioenergy
systems. Comput Electron Agric 2013;93:195–208.
[49] Lee E, Pruvost J, He X, Munipalli R, Pilon L. Design tool and guidelines for outdoor
photobioreactors. Chem Eng Sci 2014;106:18–29.
[50] Perner I, Posten C, Broneske J. CFD optimization of a plate photobioreactor used
for cultivation of microalgae. Eng Life Sci 2003;3:287–91.
[51] Ali H, Cheema TA, Yoon HS, Do Y, Park CW. Numerical prediction of algae cell
mixing feature in raceway ponds using particle tracing methods. Biotechnol Bioeng
2015;112:297–307.
[52] Chiaramonti D, Prussi M, Casini D, Tredici MR, Rodolfi L, Bassi N, et al. Review of
energy balance in raceway ponds for microalgae cultivation: re-thinking a tradi-
tional system is possible. Appl Energy 2013;102:101–11.
[53] Zeng FX, Huang JK, Meng C, Zhu FC, Chen JP, Li YG. Investigation on novel
raceway pond with inclined paddle wheels through simulation and microalgae
culture experiments. Bioprocess Biosyst Eng 2016;39:169–80.
[54] Mendoza JL, Granados MR, de Godos I, Acien FG, Molina E, Banks C, et al. Fluid-
dynamic characterization of real-scale raceway reactors for microalgae production.
Biomass- Bioenergy 2013;54:267–75.
[55] Liffman K, Paterson DA, Liovic P, Bandopadhayay P. Comparing the energy
efficiency of different high rate algal raceway pond designs using computational
fluid dynamics. Chem Eng Res Des 2013;91:221–6.
[56] Sompech K, Chisti Y, Srinophakun T. Design of raceway ponds for producing
microalgae. Biofuels 2012;3:387–97.
[57] Huang JK, Qu XX, Wan MX, Ying JG, Li YG, Zhu FC, et al. Investigation on the
performance of raceway ponds with internal structures by the means of CFD
simulations and experiments. Algal Res 2015;10:64–71.
[58] Yu G, Li YG, Shen GM, Wang WL, Lin C, Wu HX, et al. A novel method using CFD
to optimize the inner structure parameters of flat photobioreactors. J Appl Phycol
2009;21:719–27.
[59] Rengel A, Zoughaib A, Dron D, Clodic D. Hydrodynamic study of an internal airlift
reactor for microalgae culture. Appl Microbiol Biot 2012;93:117–29.
[60] Gómez-Pérez CA, Espinosa J, Montenegro Ruiz LC, van Boxtel AJB. CFD
simulation for reduced energy costs in tubular photobioreactors using wall
turbulence promoters. Algal Res 2015;12:1–9.
[61] Wongluang P, Chisti Y, Srinophakun T. Optimal hydrodynamic design of tubular
photobioreactors. J Chem Technol Biot 2013;88:55–61.
[62] Zhang QH, Wu X, Xue SZ, Liang KH, Cong W. Study of hydrodynamic character-
istics in tubular photobioreactors. Bioprocess Biosyst Eng 2013;36:143–50.
254
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 79 (2017) 248–254
[63] Massart A, Mirisola A, Lupant D, Thomas D, Hantson AL. Experimental char-
acterization and numerical simulation of the hydrodynamics in an airlift photo-
bioreactor for microalgae cultures. Algal Res 2014;6:210–7.
[64] Razzak SA, Al-Aslani I, Hossain MM. Hydrodynamics and mass transfer of CO2 in
water in a tubular photobioreactor. Eng Life Sci 2016;16:355–63.
[65] Doucha J, Livansky K. Productivity, CO2/O-2 exchange and hydraulics in outdoor
open high density microalgal (Chlorella sp.) photobioreactors operated in a Middle
and Southern European climate. J Appl Phycol 2006;18:811–26.
[66] Grima EM, Fernandez FGA, Camacho FG, Chisti Y. Photobioreactors: light regime,
mass transfer, and scaleup. J Biotechnol 1999;70:231–47.
[67] Csogor Z, Herrenbauer M, Schmidt K, Posten C. Light distribution in a novel
photobioreactor - modelling for optimization. J Appl Phycol 2001;13:325–33.
[68] Perner-Nochta I, Posten C. Simulations of light intensity variation in photobior-
eactors. J Biotechnol 2007;131:276–85.
[69] Huang JK, Kang SF, Wan MX, Li YG, Qu XX, Feng F, et al. Numerical and
experimental study on the performance of flat-plate photobioreactors with different
inner structures for microalgae cultivation. J Appl Phycol 2015;27:49–58.
[70] Moberg AK, Ellem GK, Jameson GJ, Herbertson JG. Simulated cell trajectories in a
stratified gas-liquid flow tubular photobioreactor. J Appl Phycol 2012;24:357–63.
[71] Huang JK, Feng F, Wan MX, Ying JG, Li YG, Qu XX, et al. Improving performance
of flat-plate photobioreactors by installation of novel internal mixers optimized
with computational fluid dynamics. Bioresour Technol 2015;182:151–9.
[72] Sato T, Usui S, Tsuchiya Y, Kondo Y. Invention of outdoor closed type photo-
bioreactor for microalgae. Energy Convers Manag 2006;47:791–9.
[73] Wheaton ZC, Krishnamoorthy G. Modeling radiative transfer in photobioreactors
for algal growth. Comput Electron Agric 2012;87:64–73.
[74] James SC, Boriah V. Modeling algae growth in an open-channel raceway. J Comput
Biol 2010;17:895–906.
[75] Park S, Li YB. Integration of biological kinetics and computational fluid dynamics
to model the growth of nannochloropsis salina in an open channel raceway.
Biotechnol Bioeng 2015;112:923–33.
[76] Zeng F, Huang J, Meng C, Zhu F, Chen J, Li Y. Investigation on novel raceway pond
with inclined paddle wheels through simulation and microalgae culture experi-
ments. Bioprocess Biosyst Eng 2016.
[77] van Baten JM, Ellenberger J, Krishna R. Hydrodynamics of internal air-lift
reactors: experiments versus CFD simulations. Chem Eng Process
2003;42:733–42.
[78] Smith JD, Neto AA, Cremaschi S, Crunkleton DW. CFD-based optimization of a
flooded bed algae bioreactor. Ind Eng Chem Res 2013;52:7181–8.