Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 376

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Photobioreactor design: Mixing, carbon utilization, and oxygen accumulation

Weissman, Joseph C., Goebel, Raymond P., Benemann, John R.·1988·Biotechnology and Bioengineering

Abstract

Photobioreactor design and operation are discussed in terms of mixing, carbon utilization, and the accumulation of photosynthetically produced oxygen. The open raceway pond is the primary type of reactor considered; however small diameter (1–5 cm) horizontal glass tubular reactors are compared to ponds in several respects. These are representative of the diversity in photobioreactor design: low capital cost, open systems and high capital cost, closed systems. Two 100‐m 2 raceways were operated to provide input data and to validate analytical results. With a planktonic Chlorella sp., no significant difference in productivity was noted between one pond mixed at 30 cm/s and another mixed from 1 to 30 cm/s. Thus, power consumption or CO 2 outgassing limits maximal mixing velocities. Mixing power inputs measured in 100‐m 2 ponds agreed fairly well with those calculated by the use of Manning's equation. A typically configured tubular reactor flowing full (1 cm diameter, 30 cm/s) consumes 10 times as much energy as a typical pond (20 cm deep flowing at 20 cm/s). Tubular reactors that flow only partially full would be limited by large hydraulic head losses to very short sections (as little as 2 m length at 30 cm/s flow) or very low flow velocities. Open ponds have greater CO 2 storage capacity than tubular reactors because of their greater culture volume per square meter (100–300 L/m 2 vs. 8–40 L/m 2 for 1–5‐cm tubes). However, after recarbonation, open ponds tend to desorb CO 2 to the atmosphere. Thus ponds must be operated at higher pH and lower alkalinity than would be possible with tubular reactors if cost of carbon is a constraint. The mass transfer coefficient, KL, for CO 2 release through the surface of a 100‐m 2 pond was determined to be 0.10 m/h. Oxygen buildup would be a serious problem with any enclosed reactor, especially small‐diameter tubes. At maximal rates of photosynthesis, a 1‐cm tubular reactor would accumulate 8–10 mg O 2/L/min. This may result in concentrations of oxygen reaching 100 mg/L, even with very frequent gas exchange. In an open pond, dissolved oxygen rises much more slowly as a consequence of the much greater volume per unit surface area and the outgassing of oxygen to the atmosphere. The maximum concentration of dissolved oxygen is typically 25–40 mg/L. The major advantage of enclosed reactors lies in the potential for aseptic operation, a product value which justifies the expense. For most products of algal mass cultivation, open ponds are the only feasible photobioreactor design capable of meeting the economic and operating requirements of such systems, provided desirable species can be maintained.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/bit.260310409

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 376

Metadata

Authors
Weissman, J. C., Goebel, R. P., & Benemann, J. R.
Venue
Biotechnology and Bioengineering
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1988-03
Volume
31
Issue
4
Pages
336-344
ISSN
  • 0006-3592 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0290
OpenAlex
W2079533032
Cited by
376
References
3
FWCI
2.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.