Cited by 256Algal biology and biofuel productionPhotovoltaic Systems and SustainabilityInnovations in Aquaponics and Hydroponics Systems

Techno-economic analysis of microalgal biomass production in a 1-ha Green Wall Panel (GWP®) plant

Open access
Tredici, Mario R., Rodolfi, Liliana, Biondi, Natascia, Bassi, Niccolò, Sampietro, Giacomo·2016·Algal Research

Abstract

The objective of this techno-economic analysis (TEA) was to define the production cost of the microalga Tetraselmis suecica in a 1-ha plant made of “Green Wall Panel-II” (GWP®-II) photobioreactors. The study was based on an energy analysis carried out for a similar plant located in Tuscany (Italy) and considers the steps from inoculum preparation to the wet algal paste. Costs of equipment and materials were obtained from manufacturers and suppliers, while operating costs and output data (e.g. biomass composition and productivity) were collected during several years of trials at the Fotosintetica & Microbiologica S.r.l. facilities (Florence, Italy). Other data were obtained from Microalghe Camporosso S.r.l. (Imperia, Italy), where a commercial 1500-m2 GWP®-I plant is in operation and two 250-m2 GWP®-II modules were built and used in the framework of the EU project BIOFAT. This TEA shows that, given a productivity of 36 tonnes per hectare per year, T. suecica biomass can be produced at a cost of €12.4 kg− 1 (dry weight). Using conservative assumptions it was estimated that at the 100-ha scale the cost will be €5.1 kg− 1. Locating the plant in more favorable climatic conditions (e.g. in Tunisia) will allow reaching 54 tonnes per hectare annually and reducing cost to €6.2 kg− 1 at the 1-ha scale and to €3.2 kg− 1 at the 100-ha scale. The major cost factors are labor at 1-ha scale in Tuscany and capital expenses in all the other cases. This TEA confirms that microalgal technologies have high potential not only for high-value, but also for medium- and low-value products, while the production of biofuels, protein, food and feed seems currently out of reach. However, the global scenario of agriculture commodities is rapidly changing and other factors (e.g. sustainability), besides a pure economic evaluation, will assume greater importance in the future.

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 · 10.1016/j.algal.2016.09.005

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Tredici et al. analyzed T. suecica algae production on a scale of 1 ha and obtained a cost of $15.8 kg-1 biomass produced; at the 100 ha scale, they estimated a cost of about $5.5 kg-1, which is much more than the $2 kg-1 needed to make algae biofuel competitive with petroleum-derived diesel.

    “Tredici et al. [77] have analyzed T. suecica algae production on a scale of 1 ha.They obtained a cost of $15.8 kg -1 biomass produced.At the 100 ha scale, they estimated a cost of about $5.5 kg -1 , which is much more than the $2 kg -1 that needed to make algae biofuel competitive with petroleum-derived diesel.”

    From The Perspective of Large-Scale Production of Algae Biodiesel (2020) · cites this paper as [77]

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 31 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tredici, M. R., Rodolfi, L., Biondi, N., Bassi, N., & Sampietro, G.
Affiliations
University of Florence (IT)
Corresponding author
Tredici, Mario R.
Venue
Algal Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-11
Volume
19
Pages
253-263
ISSN
2211-9264 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2532859241
Cited by
256
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 40 · 2021: 40 · 2020: 38 · 2019: 34 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 10
FWCI
5.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Algal Research (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Florence Research (University of Florence) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
FP7 Ideas: European Research Council (FP7-268211)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Energy › Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment › Algal biology and biofuel production
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Photovoltaic Systems and Sustainability
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Aquatic Science › Innovations in Aquaponics and Hydroponics Systems
Keywords
microalgae cultivation, Tetraselmis suecica, techno-economic analysis, production costs, algal productivity, scale-up, labor costs, capital costs

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