Techno-economic assessment of microalgae production, harvesting and drying for food, feed, cosmetics, and agriculture
Open accessAbstract
The objective of this techno-economic analysis is to define the costs for an industrial microalgae production process, comparing different operation strategies (Nannochloropsis oceanica cultivation during the whole year or cultivation of two species, where Phaeodactylum tricornutum and Tisochrysis lutea alternate), production scales (1 and 10 ha), harvesting technologies (centrifugation or ultrafiltration) and drying methods (freeze-drying or spray drying). This study is based on an industrial scale process established in the south of Portugal. The strategy of cultivating N. oceanica all year round is more attractive from an economic perspective, with production costs of 53.32 €/kg DW and a productivity of 27.61 t/y for a scale of 1 ha, a 49.31% lower cost and two-fold productivity than species alternation culture strategy. These results are for biomass harvested by centrifugation (10.65% biomass cost) and freeze-drying (20.15% biomass cost). These costs could be reduced by 7.03% using a combination of ultrafiltration and spray drying, up to 17.99% if expanded to 10 ha and 10.92% if fertilisers were used instead of commercial nutrient solutions. The study shows potentially competitive costs for functional foods, food, and feed additives, specialised aquaculture products (live feed enrichment) and other high value applications (e.g., cosmetics).
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
Detailed techno-economic assessments are required before full-scale implementation, as changes in cell characteristics such as morphology or cell wall composition can impact downstream processing costs, regulatory compliance, and genetic stability.
“Detailed techno-economic assessments are required before full-scale implementation, as changes in cell characteristics—such as morphology or cell wall composition—can impact downstream processing costs, regulatory compliance, and genetic stability.”
From Microalgae biotechnology and its role in sustainable and healthy food design (2025) · cites this paper as Vázquez-Romero et al., 2022
Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredTranslating these findings into industrial practice requires careful validation, as process performance and economic feasibility can differ significantly when scaled up.
“Translating these findings into industrial practice requires careful validation, as process performance and economic feasibility can differ significantly when scaled up.”
From Microalgae biotechnology and its role in sustainable and healthy food design (2025) · cites this paper as Vázquez-Romero et al., 2022
The Introduction (page not provided) says industrial production must guarantee process stability and economic viability. In “Case 3. Production scale—1 ha vs 10 ha” (page not provided), the modeled scale-up reduces biomass cost by 18.01%, supporting the point that economics change with scale. The paper does not expressly call for validation before industrial implementation, and its modeled energy use per kilogram remains similar at both scales; it does not establish a significant change in process performance. (LLM, conf=0.83)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredDownstream stages such as concentration, harvesting, drying, and purification/storage represent substantial fractions of total production costs.
“Furthermore, recent cost assessment studies highlight that downstream stages—such as concentration, harvesting, drying, and purification/storage—cannot be neglected, as they represent substantial fractions of total production costs (Vázquez-Romero et al., 2022; Kim et al., 2025).”
From Microalgae biotechnology and its role in sustainable and healthy food design (2025) · cites this paper as Vázquez-Romero et al., 2022
The “Case 2. Processing—harvesting and drying” section reports that harvesting and drying increase biomass costs, with each drying method adding about 20%. The harvesting-technologies section also describes concentration, but the passages do not assess purification or storage costs, so the citation does not support those parts of the sentence. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe lack of more economical and efficient technologies prevents microalgae-based products from competing with conventional ingredients of plant and animal origin, limiting their insertion into other niches.
“The lack of more economical and efficient technologies prevents microalgae-based products from competing with conventional ingredients of plant and animal origin, limiting their insertion into other niches (Vázquez-Romero et al., 2022; Gao et al., 2024; Zhu et al., 2024).”
From Microalgae biotechnology and its role in sustainable and healthy food design (2025) · cites this paper as Vázquez-Romero et al., 2022
The Introduction (page not provided) identifies high production costs and technological limitations as barriers to expanding microalgae products beyond high-value markets. Section 3.1, Commercialisation (page not provided), says commercialisation is concentrated in speciality niches where microalgae can be competitive. The paper does not specifically compare microalgae products with conventional plant- or animal-derived ingredients, so that part of the claim is not established. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredFrom an economic perspective, the energy required by conventional microalgae harvesting methods, such as centrifugation, flocculation, flotation, and filtration, as well as the initial investment in a bioreactor, is extremely costly.
“In particular, from an economic perspective, the energy required by conventional microalgae harvesting methods, such as centrifugation, flocculation, flotation, and filtration, as well as the initial investment in a bioreactor, is extremely costly.”
From Microalgae biotechnology and its role in sustainable and healthy food design (2025) · cites this paper as Vázquez-Romero et al., 2022
In Case 2 (Processing—harvesting and drying), centrifugation has slightly higher energy consumption and produces biomass at a higher cost than ultrafiltration. The Conclusions identify photobioreactors as the largest equipment-investment cost. But Case 2 describes flocculation and flotation as low-cost alternatives, rather than extremely costly methods; the paper does not establish that energy use makes every listed harvesting method extremely costly. (LLM, conf=0.91)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Production becomes more feasible when peptides are generated as part of a multi-product biorefinery that also recovers pigments, oils, or other high-value components.
“Production becomes more feasible when peptides are generated as part of a multi-product biorefinery that also recovers pigments, oils, or other high-value components [184,185].”
From Navigating the potential of algal peptides: health effects, market applications, and scientific challenges (2026) · cites this paper as [184]
The Introduction describes a biorefinery that separates different microalgal compounds and says economic viability is necessary for large-scale production. It does not say that producing peptides alongside pigments, oils, or other products makes production more feasible; the cost improvements analysed in Section 3.2 concern other factors. (LLM, conf=0.78)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe majority of these investigations have been conducted at the laboratory scale.
“However, it is important to recognize that the majority of these investigations have been conducted at the laboratory scale.”
From Microalgae biotechnology and its role in sustainable and healthy food design (2025) · cites this paper as Vázquez-Romero et al., 2022
The Introduction discusses gaps in knowledge about large-scale microalgae cultivation, while §2.2.3 describes this paper’s 1- and 10-hectare simulations. Neither passage says that most prior investigations were conducted at laboratory scale; searches for laboratory-scale studies and their prevalence found no such statement in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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
Recovery of microalgal biomass and metabolites: Process options and economics
Molina Grima, E., Belarbi, E.-H., Acién Fernández, F. G., Robles Medina, A., & Chisti, Y. (2003) · Biotechnology Advances · doi:10.1016/s0734-9750(02)00050-2 · Cited by 2,286 · see citing works
Valuable Products from Biotechnology of Microalgae
Pulz, O., & Gross, W. (2004) · Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology · doi:10.1007/s00253-004-1647-x · Cited by 2,132 · see citing works
The composition of Standard Seawater and the definition of the Reference-Composition Salinity Scale
Millero, F. J., Feistel, R., Wright, D. G., & McDougall, T. J. (2007) · Deep Sea Research Part I Oceanographic Research Papers · doi:10.1016/j.dsr.2007.10.001 · Cited by 1,314 · see citing works
Harvesting techniques applied to microalgae: A review
Barros, A. I., Gonçalves, A. L., Simões, M., & Pires, J. C. M. (2015) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2014.09.037 · Cited by 1,015 · see citing works
Microalgal production — A close look at the economics
Norsker, N.-H., Barbosa, M. J., Vermuë, M. H., & Wijffels, R. H. (2011) · Biotechnology Advances · doi:10.1016/j.biotechadv.2010.08.005 · Cited by 819 · see citing works
Self-citationMelis, A. (2009) · Plant Science · doi:10.1016/j.plantsci.2009.06.005 · Cited by 796 · see citing works
Production cost of a real microalgae production plant and strategies to reduce it
Acién, F. G., Fernández, J. M., Magán, J. J., & Molina, E. (2012) · Biotechnology Advances · doi:10.1016/j.biotechadv.2012.02.005 · Cited by 735 · see citing works
A review of the harvesting of micro-algae for biofuel production
Milledge, J. J., & Heaven, S. (2012) · Reviews in Environmental Science and Bio/Technology · doi:10.1007/s11157-012-9301-z · Cited by 679 · see citing works
Towards industrial products from microalgae
Ruiz, J., Olivieri, G., de Vree, J. H., Bosma, R., Willems, P., Reith, J. H., Eppink, M. H. M., Kleinegris, D. M. M., Wijffels, R. H., & Barbosa, M. J. (2016) · Energy & Environmental Science · doi:10.1039/c6ee01493c · Cited by 661 · see citing works
Self-citationCurrent Status of the Algae Production Industry in Europe: An Emerging Sector of the Blue Bioeconomy
Araújo, R., Vázquez Calderón, F., Sánchez López, J., Azevedo, I. C., Bruhn, A., Fluch, S., Garcia Tasende, M., Ghaderiardakani, F., Ilmjärv, T., Laurans, M., et al. (2021) · Frontiers in Marine Science · doi:10.3389/fmars.2020.626389 · Cited by 653 · see citing works
Techno-economic evaluation of microalgae harvesting and dewatering systems
Fasaei, F., Bitter, J. H., Slegers, P. M., & van Boxtel, A. J. B. (2018) · Algal Research · doi:10.1016/j.algal.2017.11.038 · Cited by 621 · see citing works
Innovating for Sustainable Growth: A Bioeconomy for Europe
European Commission (2012) · Industrial Biotechnology · doi:10.1089/ind.2012.1508 · Cited by 519 · see citing works
Microalgae-based products for the food and feed sector: an outlook for Europe
(2014) · Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling · doi:10.2791/3339 · Cited by 318 · see citing works
The role of microalgae in the bioeconomy
Acién, F. G., dos Reis, A. J. D., Wijffels, R. H., Barbosa, M. J., Verdelho, V., & Llamas, B. (2020) · New Biotechnology · doi:10.1016/j.nbt.2020.11.011 · Cited by 294 · see citing works
Self-citationMicroalgae biomass production using wastewater: Treatment and costs
Gouveia, L., Graça, S., Sousa, C., Ambrosano, L., Ribeiro, B., Botrel, É. P., Neto, P. C., Ferreira, A. F., & Silva, C. (2016) · Algal Research · doi:10.1016/j.algal.2016.03.010 · Cited by 265 · see citing works
Techno-economic analysis of microalgal biomass production in a 1-ha Green Wall Panel (GWP®) plant
Tredici, M. R., Rodolfi, L., Biondi, N., Bassi, N., & Sampietro, G. (2016) · Algal Research · doi:10.1016/j.algal.2016.09.005 · Cited by 256 · see citing works
(2013) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/c2009-0-61216-2 · Cited by 243 · see citing works
Dasan, Y. K., Lam, M. K., Yusup, S., Lim, J. W., & Lee, K. T. (2019) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.06.181 · Cited by 231 · see citing works
Microalgae Production Cost in Aquaculture Hatcheries
Oostlander, P. C., van Houcke, J., Wijffels, R. H., & Barbosa, M. J. (2020) · Aquaculture · doi:10.1016/j.aquaculture.2020.735310 · Cited by 134 · see citing works
Self-citationAnsari, F. A., Gupta, S. K., Nasr, M., Rawat, I., & Bux, F. (2018) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.098 · Cited by 78 · see citing works
High-value biochemical products & applications of freshwater eukaryotic microalgae
Russell, C., Rodríguez, C., & Yaseen, M. (2021) · The Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.151111 · Cited by 66 · see citing works
Techno-economics of algae production in the Arabian Peninsula
Schipper, K., Jabri, H. M. S. J. A., Wijffels, R. H., & Barbosa, M. J. (2021) · Bioresource Technology · doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2021.125043 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Self-citationFucoxanthin production from Tisochrysis lutea and Phaeodactylum tricornutum at industrial scale
Pereira, H., Sá, M., Maia, I. B., Rodrígues, A., Teles, I., Wijffels, R., Navalho, J., & Barbosa, M. (2021) · Algal Research · doi:10.1016/j.algal.2021.102322 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
Self-citationUtilization of seawater for cost-effective cultivation and harvesting of Scenedesmus obliquus
Jung, J.-Y., Lee, H., Shin, W.-S., et al. (2014) · Bioprocess and Biosystems Engineering · doi:10.1007/s00449-014-1284-4 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
Towards microalgal triglycerides in the commodity markets
Benvenuti, G., Ruiz, J., Lamers, P. P., Bosma, R., Wijffels, R. H., & Barbosa, M. J. (2017) · Biotechnology for Biofuels · doi:10.1186/s13068-017-0873-2 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
Self-citationContribución de las microalgas al desarrollo de la bioeconomía
Acién, F. G., Fernández-Sevilla, J. M., & Grima, E. M. (2018) · Mediterráneo económico · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Araújo, R., 2019. Report on the community of practice workshop: algae production in Europe: status, challenges and future developments, Brussels. https://ec.europa.eu/jrc.
- European Commission, 2018. A Sustainable Bioeconomy for Europe: Strengthening the Con- nection Between Economy, Society and the Environment. https://doi.org/10.2777/ 478385. · DOI
- Kim, S.K., 2015. Handbook of Marine Microalgae: Biotechnology Advances, Handb. Mar. Microalgae Biotechnol. Adv, pp. 1-585 https://doi.org/10.1016/C2013-0-19117-9. · DOI
- UN General Assembly, 2015. Transforming our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sus-tainable De- velopment -Resolution A/RES/70/1 Adopted by the General Assemblyon 25 September 2015. https://doi.org/10.1891/9780826190123.ap02. · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Microalgae proteins as sustainable ingredients in novel foods: recent developments and challenges
Mosibo, O. K., Ferrentino, G., & Udenigwe, C. C. (2024) · Foods · doi:10.3390/foods13050733 · Cited by 140 · see citing works
Photobioreactor configurations in cultivating microalgae biomass for biorefinery
Barboza-Rodríguez, R., Rodríguez-Jasso, R. M., Rosero-Chasoy, G., Rosales Aguado, M. L., & Ruiz, H. A. (2024) · Bioresource Technology · doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2023.130208 · Cited by 97 · see citing works
Microalgae cultivation: closing the yield gap from laboratory to field scale
Guieysse, B., & Plouviez, M. (2024) · Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology · doi:10.3389/fbioe.2024.1359755 · Cited by 70 · see citing works
Microalgae as future food: rich nutrients, safety, production costs and environmental effects
Gao, L., Qin, Y., Zhou, X., Jin, W., He, Z., Li, X., & Wang, Q. (2024) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.172167 · Cited by 55 · see citing works
Microalgae biotechnology and its role in sustainable and healthy food design
Schneider, A. T., Machado, R. L. S., Dutra, D. A., Machado, E. F., Dias, R. R., Deprá, M. C., Zepka, L. Q., & Jacob-Lopes, E. (2025) · Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology · doi:10.3389/fbioe.2025.1716473 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Zheng, J., Geng, J., Li, J., Li, D., Yang, S., Lu, X., Liu, J., Zhang, C., & Sun, H. (2025) · Future Foods · doi:10.1016/j.fufo.2025.100776 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
The power of microalgae: Cutting-edge applications and groundbreaking innovations
McKinley, K., & Ozbay, G. (2026) · New Biotechnology · doi:10.1016/j.nbt.2026.04.003 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Enhancing the sustainability of microalgae cultivation through biosensing technology
Ugya, A. Y., Chen, H., & Wang, Q. (2025) · Materials Today Sustainability · doi:10.1016/j.mtsust.2025.101139 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Khaliq, M., Noor, Z., Moazzam, M., Saeed, F., Tul-Zohra, K., Tariq, E., Muhammad Shahbaz, H., & Khaliq, K. (2026) · Annals of Medicine · doi:10.1080/07853890.2026.2637282 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
“Production becomes more feasible when peptides are generated as part of a multi-product biorefinery that also recovers pigments, oils, or other high-value components [184,185].”
Tubular photobioreactors applied to algal production
Santos Corrêa, P., Galvão de Morais Júnior, W., & de Sá Caetano, N. (2025) · Algal Bioreactors · doi:10.1016/b978-0-443-14058-7.00040-3 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Conventional and advances approaches in algal downstream processes
Silva Machado, R. L., Schneider, A. T., Dias, R. R., Deprá, M. C., Zepka, L. Q., & Jacob-Lopes, E. (2025) · Algal Bioreactors · doi:10.1016/b978-0-443-14059-4.00026-x · Cited by 2 · see citing works
- Authors
- Vázquez-Romero, B., Perales, J. A., Pereira, H., Barbosa, M., & Ruiz, J.
- Affiliations
- Universidad de Cádiz (ES)
- Necton (Portugal) (PT)
- Corresponding author
- Ruiz, Jesús
- Venue
- Science of The Total Environment
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2022-09
- Volume
- 837
- Pages
- 155742
- ISSN
- 0048-9697 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4229062803
- Cited by
- 180
- References
- 26
- Citations by year
- 2026: 62 · 2025: 49 · 2024: 37 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 4
- FWCI
- 5.31
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- The Science of The Total Environment (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- RODIN (Universidad de Cádiz) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- Universidad de Cádiz
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Energy › Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment › Algal biology and biofuel production
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Aquatic Science › Aquaculture Nutrition and Growth
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Aquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton Dynamics
- Keywords
- microalgae cultivation, techno-economic analysis, Nannochloropsis oceanica, Phaeodactylum tricornutum, Tisochrysis lutea, harvesting costs, centrifugation, ultrafiltration, freeze-drying, spray drying, production costs, scale-up, functional foods, feed additives, cosmetics, fertilizer use
- MeSH terms
- Cosmetics, Food, Aquaculture, Biomass, Microalgae, Haptophyta
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
