APS April Meeting 2015
Volume 60, Number 4
Saturday–Tuesday, April 11–14, 2015;
Baltimore, Maryland
Session K12: Invited Session: Carbon Capture and Sequestration
1:30 PM–3:18 PM,
Sunday, April 12, 2015
Room: Key 8
Sponsoring
Units:
FPS GERA
Chair: Valerie Thomas, Georgia Institute of Technology
Abstract ID: BAPS.2015.APR.K12.1
Abstract: K12.00001 : Anthropogenic CO$_{2}$ as a Feedstock for Cyanobacteria-Based Biofuels
1:30 PM–2:06 PM
Preview Abstract
View Presentation
Abstract
Author:
Ronald Chance
(Algenol Biofuels)
Biofuels have great potential as low-carbon alternatives to fossil-based
transportation fuels, and can serve as drop-in fuels for existing
transportation infrastructures. This talk will focus on utilization of
anthropogenic CO$_{2}$ in an advanced biofuel system and the
integration of that system with fossil-fuel power plants. The biofuel system
is the Algenol Direct to Ethanol$^{\mbox{\textregistered}}$ technology, which provides an efficient, cyanobacteria-based
system for producing ethanol, as well as a bio-crude
co-product [1]. The talk will begin with an overview of the
Algenol technology: the genetic enhancement approach for enabling ethanol
production in the organisms; ethanol and biomass production in outdoor
cultures contained in large photobioreactor arrays; downstream processing
systems; and phenomenological productivity modeling in terms of quantum
yields, photo-saturation effects, respiration, and carbon partitioning.
Overall, the results are consistent with a very efficient photosynthetic
system in which more than 75{\%} of the photosynthetically fixed carbon is
diverted into the ethanol production pathway.
The Algenol process consumes CO$_{2}$ in a solar energy
conversion process that yields a biofuel with much lower greenhouse gas
emissions than gasoline [2-3]. Different options for
CO$_{2}$ capture and utilization are considered and their impact on
the overall system operation evaluated. Comparisons of life-cycle carbon
footprints are made for the Algenol technology versus other transportation
fuel options, including electric vehicles [3]. Finally, we expand
the boundary of the life cycle analysis to include the power plant,
specifically considering natural gas and three coal-based options, and
compare carbon footprints for the integrated systems to CCS (carbon capture
and sequestration) as well as to the status quo of CO$_{2}$ release
to the atmosphere [4].
\\[4pt]
[1] For more information see www.algenol.com. This
talk summarizes the work of over 200 Algenol employees in Fort Myers,
Florida and Berlin, Germany, as well as collaborators at Georgia Tech.\\[0pt]
[2] D. Luo, Z. Hu, D. Choi, V.M. Thomas, M.J. Realff, and R.R.
Chance, ``Lifecycle Energy and Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Ethanol
Produced by Algae,'' \textit{Environmental Science and Technology }\textbf{44}, 8670 (2010).\\[0pt]
[3] Notice of EPA pathway approval:
http://epa.gov/otaq/fuels/renewablefuels/new-pathways/approved-pathways.htm\\[0pt]
[4] R. P. Lively, P. Sharma, D. Luo, B. McCool, J.
Beaudry-Losique, V. Thomas, M. Realff, and R. R. Chance, ``Anthropogenic
CO$_{2}$ as a feedstock for the production of algal-based
biofuels,'' \textit{Biofuels, Bioproducts, and Biorefining} (in press, July 2014, 10.1002/bbb.1505).
To cite this abstract, use the following reference: http://meetings.aps.org/link/BAPS.2015.APR.K12.1