Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from steam power plants through optimal integration with algae and cogeneration systems

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper presents an optimization approach for mitigating CO2 emissions in the electric power generation through integrated algae and cogeneration systems. A framework is proposed for the integration of biofixation of CO2 through the cultivation of microalgae, conversion of microalgae to biodiesel, and a steam power plant with cogeneration that is thermally coupled with an industrial facility. A systematic multi-objective optimization approach is developed to integrate the considered units while simultaneously addressing technical, economic, and environmental objectives. The solution of the optimization problem is carried out via a hierarchical decomposition approach, a genetic algorithm, and the ε-constraint method for solving the multi-objective optimization problem. A case study is considered to integrate an existing thermoelectric power station in Mexico with an algae-and-cogeneration system. The results show that important environmental, economic, and energy benefits can be achieved as a result of the proposed integration approach.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

C BD :

Unit price for biodiesel produced ($/ton)

C bf :

Unit cost for biofuel bf ($/ton)

C bm :

Unit cost for external biomass bm ($/ton)

C CENTABS :

Concentration of algal biomass (g/L)

C EP :

Unit price for electricity ($/MW)

C f :

Unit cost for fossil fuel f ($/ton)

C GLY :

Unit price for glycerol produced ($/ton)

C hex :

Unit cost for hexane ($/ton)

C n :

Unit cost for nutrient n ($/ton)

C w :

Unit cost for make-up water ($/ton)

H Y :

Hours of operation for the plant (h)

H V :

Heating value (MJ/ton)

K F :

Factor used to annualize the capital costs

Ghge:

Unit greenhouse gas emissions (ton CO2 equiv./MJ)

S GHG :

Unit subsidy for reduction of GHG emissions ($/ton)

w OIL :

Lipid content in algal biomass (wt% of dry biomass)

ε :

Parameter of the ε-constraint method

\(\alpha_{\text{AC}}^{{{\text{CO}}_{ 2} }}\) :

Utilization efficiency of CO2

\(\alpha_{\text{AH}}^{\text{CENT}}\) :

Recovery fraction of algal biomass in secondary harvesting (centrifugation)

\(\alpha_{\text{AH}}^{\text{FLOC}}\) :

Recovery fraction of algal biomass in primary harvesting (flocculation)

α OIL :

Recovery fraction of lipid in the oil extraction stage

\(\delta_{{{\text{CO}}_{ 2} }}\) :

CO2 demand in kg-CO2/kg-biomass

\(\tau_{\text{DT}}\) :

Fraction of the whole-day hours that feed gas is delivered to the cultivation stage

\(\rho_{\text{SOL}}^{\text{CENT}}\) :

Density of the biomass slurry leaving secondary step (g/L)

ρ W :

Density of liquid water (g/L)

A heater :

Area of the feedwater heater (m2)

CAP u :

Capital cost of each main equipment unit u ($)

CC:

Annual capital cost of the system ($/year)

E AC :

Power requirement for microalgae cultivation (MW/year)

E AH :

Power requirement for algal biomass harvesting (MW/year)

E BP :

Power requirement for biodiesel production stage (MW/year)

E PP :

Power requirement for pumping of feedwater in the power plant (MW/year)

E OE :

Power requirement for oil extraction stage (MW/year)

F AC :

Flowrate of algal biomass produced in the cultivation stage (ton/year)

\(F_{\text{AH}}^{\text{CENT}}\) :

Flowrate of algal biomass leaving secondary harvesting (centrifugation) (ton/year)

\(F_{\text{AH}}^{\text{FLOC}}\) :

Flowrate of algal biomass leaving primary harvesting (flocculation) (ton/year)

F B :

Flowrate entering to the deaerator (ton/year)

F BD :

Flowrate of biodiesel produced (ton/year)

F bf :

Flowrate of biofuel bf (ton/year)

F bm :

Flowrate of biomass bm (ton/year)

\(F_{{{\text{CO}}_{ 2} }}^{\text{acs}}\) :

Flowrate of CO2 sent to the algae cultivation system (ton/year)

\(F_{{{\text{CO}}_{ 2} }}\) :

Flowrate of CO2 generated in the boiler of the power plant (ton/year)

F GLY :

Flowrate of glycerol produced (ton/year)

F f :

Flowrate of fossil fuel f (ton/year)

F rb :

Flowrate of recirculated biomass bm (ton/year)

F HEX :

Flowrate (consumption) of hexane (ton/year)

F LD :

Flowrate of lipid-depleted algal biomass (ton/year)

F n :

Flowrate (consumption) of nutrient n (ton/year)

\(F_{{{\text{N}}_{2} }}\) :

Flowrate (consumption) of nitrogen (ton/year)

F OIL :

Flowrate of lipid recovered from algal biomass (ton/year)

F PH :

Flowrate (consumption) of phosphate (ton/year)

F MW :

Flowrate (consumption) of make-up water (ton/year)

F WLOP :

Water losses due to evaporation and leakages (ton/year)

F PH :

Flowrate (consumption) of phosphate (ton/year)

GHGE:

Greenhouse gas emissions (ton CO2 equiv./year)

h WEV :

Daily evaporation depth (m/d)

h WL :

Daily water loss due to leakages (m/d)

NEP:

Net electric power for the integrated energy system (MW/year)

OC:

Operating cost of the system ($/year)

P w :

Pumping power (kW)

PROFIT:

Annual gross profit ($/year)

Q L :

Heat removed from the condenser (kW)

REVENUE:

Revenue from the sale of electricity and bioproducts ($/year)

TAC:

Total annualized cost ($/year)

TAX CREDIT:

Total subsidy due to the reduction of GHGE ($/year)

W ST :

Power generated by the turbine (kW)

γ AB :

Algal culture productivity (g/m2 day)

bf:

Biofuel

bm:

Biomass

COND:

Condenser

f:

Fossil fuel

n:

Nutrient

NU:

Number of units in the system

rb:

Recirculated biomass

TURB:

Turbine

u :

Main equipment unit

w:

Water

References

  • Al-Azri N, Al-Thubaiti M, El-Halwagi MM (2009) An algorithmic approach to the optimization of process cogeneration. Clean Technol Environ Policy 11(3):329–338

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andiappan V, Ko AS, Lau VW, Ng LY, Ng R, Chemmangattuvalappil NG, Ng DK (2015) Synthesis of sustainable integrated biorefinery via reaction pathway synthesis: economic, incremental environmental burden and energy assessment with multiobjective optimization. AIChE J 61(1):132–146

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bamufleh HS, Ponce-Ortega JM, El-Halwagi MM (2013) Multi-objective optimization of process cogeneration systems with economic, environmental, and social tradeoffs. Clean Technol Environ Policy 15:185–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartela L, Skorek-Osikowska A, Kotowicz J (2014) Thermodynamic, ecological and economic aspects of the use of the gas turbine for heat supply to the stripping process in a supercritical CHP plant integrated with a carbon capture installation. Energy Convers Manag 85:750–763

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brune DE, Lundquist TJ, Benemann JR (2009) Microalgal biomass for greenhouse gas reductions: potential for replacement of fossil fuels and animal feeds. J Environ Eng 135:1136–1144

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bruno JC, Fernandez F, Castells F, Grossmann IE (1998) A rigorous MINLP model for the optimal synthesis and operation of utility plants. Chem Eng Res Des 76:246–258

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cau G, Cocco D, Tola V (2014) Performance assessment of USC power plants integrated with CCS and concentrating solar collectors. Energy Convers Manag 88:973–984

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Diwekar UM (2003) Introduction to applied optimization. Kluwer, Dordrecht

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • DOE (2015) Fuel prices. http://www.afdc.energy.gov/fuels/prices.html. Accessed Jan 2015

  • El-Halwagi MM (1997) Pollution prevention through process integration: systematic design tools. Academic Press, San Diego

    Google Scholar 

  • El-Halwagi MM (2006) Process integration. Elsevier, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • El-Halwagi MM (2012) Sustainable design through process integration: fundamentals and applications to industrial pollution prevention, resource conservation, and profitability enhancement. Butterworth-Heinemann/Elsevier, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Farrelly DJ, Everard CD, Fagan CC, McDonell KP (2013) Carbon sequestration and the role of biological carbon mitigation: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 21:712–727

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gebreslassie BH, Waymire R, You F (2013) Sustainable design and synthesis of algae-based biorefinery for simultaneous hydrocarbon biofuel production and carbon sequestration. AIChE J 59:1599–1621

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg DE (1989) Genetic algorithms in search, optimization, and machine learning. Addison-Wesley, Reading

    Google Scholar 

  • Gong J, You F (2014) Optimal design and synthesis of algal biorefinery processes for biological carbon sequestration and utilization with zero direct greenhouse gas emissions: MINLP model and global optimization algorithm. Ind Eng Chem Res 53(4):1563–1579

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Goyal R, Sharma D, Soni SL, Gupta PK, Johar D (2015) An experimental investigation of CI engine operated micro-cogeneration system for power and space cooling. Energy Convers Manag 89:63–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gutiérrez-Arriaga CG, Serna-González M, Ponce-Ortega JM, El-Halwagi MM (2013) Multi-objective optimization of steam power plants for sustainable generation of electricity. Clean Technol Environ Policy 15:551–566

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gutiérrez-Arriaga CG, Serna-González M, Ponce-Ortega JM, El-Halwagi MM (2014) Sustainable integration of algal biodiesel production with steam electric power plants for greenhouse gas mitigation. ACS Sustain Chem Eng 2(6):1388–1403

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habka M, Ajib S (2014) Studying effect of heating plant parameters on performances of a geothermal-fuelled series cogeneration plant based on Organic Rankine Cycle. Energy Convers Manag 78:324–337

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Harun R, Singh M, Forde GM, Danquah MK (2010) Bioprocess engineering of microalgae to produce a variety of consumer products. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 14(3):1037–1047

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • IEA (2008) CO2 emissions from fuel combustion: 1971/2006, vol 21. International Energy Agency, Paris, pp 1–530

  • IEA (2010) World energy outlook, vol 21. International Energy Agency, Paris, pp 1–530

  • IPCC (2007) Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenni KE, Baker ED, Nemet GF (2013) Expert elicitations of energy penalties for carbon capture technologies. Int J Greenh Gas Control 12:136–145

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kelloway A, Daoutidis P (2014) Process synthesis of biorefineries: optimization of biomass conversion to fuels and chemicals. Ind Eng Chem Res 53(13):5261–5273

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kemp I (2009) Pinch analysis and process integration—a user guide on process integration for the efficient use of energy, 2nd edn. Butterworth-Heinemann, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Li S, Jin H, Gao L, Zhang X, Ji X (2014) Techno-economic performance and cost reduction potential for the substitute/synthetic natural gas and power cogeneration plant with CO2 capture. Energy Convers Manag 85:875–887

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Moran MJ, Shapiro HN (2006) Fundamentals of engineering thermodynamics. John Wiley & Sons, London, United Kingdom

    Google Scholar 

  • Ng RTL, Hassim MH, Ng DKS (2013) Process synthesis and optimization of a sustainable integrated biorefinery via fuzzy optimisation. AIChE J 59:4212–4227

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Noureldin MMB, Bao B, Elbashir NO, El-Halwagi MM (2014) Benchmarking, insights, and potential for improvement of Fischer–Tropsch-based biomass-to-liquid technology. Clean Technol Environ Policy 16:37–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pokoo-Aikins G, Nadim A, El-Halwagi MM, Mahalec V (2010) Design and analysis of biodiesel production from algae grown through carbon sequestration. Clean Technol Environ Policy 12:239–254

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rao AB, Rubin ES (2002) A technical, economic, and environmental assessment of amine-based CO2 capture technology for power plant greenhouse gas control. Environ Sci Technol 36:4467–4475

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rickman M, Pellegrino J, Hock J, Shaw S, Freeman B (2013) Life-cycle and techno-economic analysis of utility-connected algae systems. Algal Res 2:59–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rizwan M, Lee JH, Gani R (2013) Optimal processing pathway for the production of biodiesel from microalgal biomass: a superstructure based approach. Comput Chem Eng 58:305–314

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin ES, Zhai H (2012) The cost of carbon capture and storage for natural gas combined cycle power plants. Environ Sci Technol 46:3076–3084

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin ES, Chen C, Rao AB (2007) Cost and performance of fossil fuel power plants with CO2 capture and storage. Energy Policy 35:4444–4454

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SENER-CONUEE (2009) Methodologies for quantifying greenhouse gases emissions and energetic consumptions avoided by the sustainable use of energy. Mexican Ministry of Energy, Mexico City

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheppard MC, Socolow RH (2007) Sustaining fossil fuel use in a carbon constrained world by rapid commercialization of carbon capture and sequestration. AIChE J 53:3022–3028

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z. Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M, Miller HL (2007) Climate change: the physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, New York

  • Soltani R, Mohammadzadeh Keleshtery P, Vahdati M, KhoshgoftarManesh MH, Rosen MA, Amidpour M (2014) Multi-objective optimization of a solar-hybrid cogeneration cycle: application to CGAM problem. Energy Convers Manag 81:60–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stauffer PH, Keating GN, Middleton RS, Viswanathan HS, Berchtold KA, Singh RP, Pawar RJ, Mancino A (2011) Greening coal: breakthroughs and challenges in carbon capture and storage. Environ Sci Technol 45:8597–8604

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tredici MR (2010) Photobiology of microalgae mass cultures: understanding the tools for the next green revolution. Biofuels 1:143–162

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ventura JRS, Yang B, Lee YW, Lee K, Jahng D (2013) Life cycle analyses of CO2, energy and cost for four different routes of microalgal bioenergy conversion. Bioresour Technol 137:302–310

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner W, Cooper JR, Dittmann A, Kijima J, Krestzschmar HJ, Kruse A, Mares R, Oguchi K, Sato H, Stocker I (2000) The IAPWS industrial formulation 1997 for the thermodynamic properties of water and steam. J Eng Gas Turbine Power 122:150–182

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wang L, Yang Y, Shen W, Kong X, Li P, Yu J, Rodrigues AE (2013) CO2 capture from flue gas in an existing coal-fired power plant by two successive pilot-scale VPSA units. Ind Eng Chem Res 52:7947–7955

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Yuan Z, Chen B, Gani R (2013) Applications of process synthesis: moving from conventional chemical processes towards biorefinery processes. Comput Chem Eng 49:217–229

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the financial support from the Mexican Council for Science and Technology (CONACyT) and the Council for Scientific Research of the Universidad Michoacana de San Nicolás de Hidalgo. Also this project was funded by the Deanship of Scientific Research (DSR) at King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, under Grant No. 3-34/RG. Therefore, the authors acknowledge with thanks DSR technical and financial support.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to José María Ponce-Ortega.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOC 84 kb)

Appendix 1: Algae-to-biodiesel production model

Appendix 1: Algae-to-biodiesel production model

This appendix presents the model for the algae cultivation system, which produces biodiesel and glycerol. This model is described as follows.

The algal biomass (F AC) produced in the cultivation stage is computed as follows:

$$F_{\text{AC}} = \frac{{\alpha_{\text{AC}}^{{{\text{CO}}_{ 2} }} \tau_{\text{DT}} F_{{{\text{CO}}_{ 2} }} }}{{\delta_{{{\text{CO}}_{ 2} }} }} = \frac{(0.7)(0.5)}{1.83}F_{{{\text{FCO}}_{ 2} }} ,$$
(14)

where \(\alpha_{\text{AC}}^{{{\text{CO}}_{ 2} }}\) is the efficiency of CO2 transfer into the algal growth medium, \(\delta_{{{\text{CO}}_{ 2} }}\) is the CO2 demand in kg-CO2/kg-biomass, τ DT is the fraction of the whole-day hours that CO2 from the power plant (feed gas) is delivered to the cultivation stage, and \(F_{{{\text{FCO}}_{ 2} }}\) is the flowrate of CO2 generated by the power plant boiler.

Also, the feed gas delivery is carried out only during the day, so τ DT = 0.5. Thus, the mass balance equations for algal biomass in both harvesting steps are expressed as follows:

$$F_{\text{AH}}^{\text{FLOC}} = \alpha_{\text{AH}}^{\text{FLOC}} \;F_{\text{AC}} = (0.97)F_{\text{AC}}$$
(15)
$$F_{\text{AH}}^{\text{CENT}} = \alpha_{\text{AH}}^{\text{CENT}} \;F_{\text{AH}}^{\text{FLOC}} = (0.85)F_{\text{AH}}^{\text{FLOC}} ,$$
(16)

where \(\alpha_{\text{AH}}^{\text{FLOC}}\) and \(\alpha_{\text{AH}}^{\text{CENT}}\) are the recovery fractions of algal biomass in primary and secondary harvesting, respectively; \(F_{\text{AH}}^{\text{FLOC}}\) and \(F_{\text{AH}}^{\text{CENT}}\) represent the algal biomass flowrates leaving the flocculation and centrifugation operations, respectively.

In the oil extraction stage, the amount of recovered triglycerides (F OIL) from algal biomass is

$$F_{\text{OIL}} = \alpha_{\text{OIL}} w_{\text{OIL}} F_{\text{AH}}^{\text{CENT}} = (0.8)(0.3)F_{\text{AH}}^{\text{CENT}} ,$$
(17)

where α OIL is the recovery fraction of oil using n-hexane as solvent and w OIL is the lipid content in algal biomass (wt% of dry biomass).

The consumption of fresh hexane for oil extraction is calculated as follows:

$$F_{\text{HEX}} = (0.5)(0.02)F_{\text{AH}}^{\text{CENT}} = 0.0016F_{{{\text{CO}}_{ 2} }} .$$
(18)

The lipid-depleted algal biomass or residual biomass (F LD) generated by the extraction operation is obtained by the following relationship:

$$F_{\text{LD}} = (1 - \alpha_{\text{OIL}} w_{\text{OIL}} )F_{\text{AH}}^{\text{CENT}} = \left[ {1 - (0.8)(0.3)} \right]F_{\text{AH}}^{\text{CENT}} .$$
(19)

Combining Eqs. (14), (15), (16), and (18), the following relationship is obtained:

$$F_{\text{LD}} = \sigma_{\text{Algae}} F_{{{\text{FCO}}_{ 2} }}$$
(20)

with

$$\sigma_{\text{Algae}} = \frac{{(\alpha_{\text{AC}}^{{{\text{CO}}_{ 2} }} )(\tau_{\text{DT}} )(\alpha_{\text{AH}}^{\text{FLOC}} )(\alpha_{\text{AH}}^{\text{CENT}} )(1 - \alpha_{\text{OIL}} w_{\text{OIL}} )}}{{\delta_{{{\text{CO}}_{2} }} }} = 0.1198.$$
(21)

The biodiesel (F BD) and glycerol (F GLY) produced in the final stage of the system are determined as follows:

$$F_{\text{BD}} = F_{\text{OIL}}$$
(22)
$$F_{\text{GLY}} = (0.11)F_{\text{OIL}} .$$
(23)

Equations (14), (15), (16), and (22) give a simple expression for biodiesel produced in terms of the variable \(F_{{{\text{FCO}}_{ 2} }}\):

$$F_{\text{BD}} = \frac{{(\alpha_{\text{AC}}^{{{\text{CO}}_{ 2} }} )(\tau_{\text{DT}} )(\alpha_{\text{AH}}^{\text{FLOC}} )(\alpha_{\text{AH}}^{\text{CENT}} )(\alpha_{\text{OIL}} w_{\text{OIL}} )}}{{\delta_{{{\text{CO}}_{2} }} }}F_{{{\text{CO}}_{2} }} = 0.03785F_{{{\text{CO}}_{2} }} .$$
(24)

The nitrogen and phosphate requirements for microalgae cultivation can be computed from the following equations:

$$F_{{{\text{N}}_{ 2} }} = (0.182)F_{\text{BD}} = (0.00689)F_{{{\text{CO}}_{ 2} }}$$
(25)
$$F_{\text{PH}} = (0.039)F_{\text{BD}} = (0.001475)F_{{{\text{CO}}_{ 2} }} .$$
(26)

The water losses due to evaporation and leakages (F WLOP in ton/year) can be expressed as

$$F_{\text{WLOP}} = 1 \times 10^{6} \frac{{(h_{\text{WEV}} + h_{\text{WL}} )}}{{\gamma_{\text{AB}} }}F_{\text{AC}} = = 31.8761F_{{{\text{CO}}_{ 2} }} ,$$
(27)

where h WEV is the daily evaporation depth (m/day), h WL is daily water loss due to leakages (m/day), and γ AB is the algal culture productivity (g/m2 day). In Eq. (27), 1 × 106 is the conversion factor between g and ton.

After the secondary harvesting step, all the water presents in the outlet stream (F WLC) that is directed to the dryer is also lost. This water loss is calculated as follows:

$$F_{\text{WLC}} = \left( {\frac{{\rho_{\text{SOL}}^{\text{CENT}} }}{{C_{\text{ABS}}^{\text{CENT}} }} - 1} \right)F_{\text{AH}}^{\text{CENT}} ,$$
(28)

where \(\rho_{\text{SOL}}^{\text{CENT}}\) is the density of the biomass slurry leaving the secondary step and \(C_{\text{ABS}}^{\text{CENT}}\) is the concentration of algal biomass in that stream. This equation can be rearranged to another useful form:

$$F_{\text{WLC}} = \left( {\frac{{\rho_{\text{SOL}}^{\text{CENT}} }}{{C_{\text{ABS}}^{\text{CENT}} }} - 1} \right)\frac{{(\alpha_{\text{AC}}^{{{\text{CO}}_{ 2} }} )(\tau_{\text{DT}} )(\alpha_{\text{AH}}^{\text{FLOC}} )(\alpha_{\text{AH}}^{\text{CENT}} )}}{{\delta_{{{\text{CO}}_{ 2} }} }}F_{{{\text{CO}}_{ 2} }} = 0.8936F_{{{\text{CO}}_{ 2} }} .$$
(29)

To obtain this equation, \(C_{\text{ABS}}^{\text{CENT}}\) = 150 g/L53 and \(\rho_{\text{SOL}}^{\text{CENT}}\) = 1000 g/L.

Thus, the amount of make-up water that must be added to the algae-to-biodiesel process to compensate for the loss of water can be expressed as

$$F_{\text{MW}} = W_{\text{WLOP}} \rho_{\text{W}} + F_{\text{WLC}} = 0.9565\rho_{\text{W}} F_{{{\text{CO}}_{ 2} }} + 0.8936F_{{{\text{CO}}_{ 2} }} ,$$
(30)

where ρ W is the density of liquid water.

The annual net electric power for the integrated energy system is given as the difference between the electric power generated by the power plant and that consumed by the algae-to-biodiesel subsystem:

$${\text{NEP}} = 400{\text{ MW}} - E_{\text{AC}} - E_{\text{AH}} - E_{\text{OE}} - E_{\text{BP}} - E_{\text{PP}} ,$$
(31)

where E AC, E AH, E OE, E BP, and E PP are the annual electricity requirements for microalgae cultivation, algal biomass harvesting, oil extraction, biodiesel production, and pumping of feedwater in the power plant, respectively (see Fig. 2). The energy consumptions for the stages of the algae-to-biodiesel system were calculated using the data shown in Table 1.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lira-Barragán, L.F., Gutiérrez-Arriaga, C.G., Bamufleh, H.S. et al. Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from steam power plants through optimal integration with algae and cogeneration systems. Clean Techn Environ Policy 17, 2401–2415 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-015-0982-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-015-0982-1

Keywords

Navigation