Nutrient Removal & Greenhouse Gas Abatement with CO2 Supplemented Algal High Rate Ponds
Abstract
High rate algae ponds fed clarified domestic wastewater and CO2-rich flue gas are expected to remove nutrients to concentrations similar to those achieved in mechanical treatment technologies, such as activated sludge. However, the energy intensity of wastewater treatment with CO2-supplemented high rate ponds (HRPs) would be less than that of mechanical treatments. In conjunction with anaerobic digestion of algal biomass and co-substrates, the algae-based system would produce a substantial excess of electricity. Greenhouse gas abatement from such CO2-HRP/digestion systems would stem mainly from energy conservation and the offset of fossil fuel electricity with biogas-derived electricity. Laboratory experiments showed nutrient removals of >98% for ammonium and >96% for phosphorus with mixed culture microalgae grown on CO2-supplemented primary wastewater effluent. An engineering numerical model for CO2-HRP/digestion facilities (based in part on large-scale algae production under southern California conditions) indicates a potential energy surplus of 330 kWh/ML (1,200 kWh/MG) from biogas-derived electricity, compared to the net energy consumption of about 760 kWh/ML (2,900 kWh/MG) at typical activated sludge facilities with nitrification/denitrification. Considering the net electricity production and energy savings of the CO2-HRP/digestion systems, a greenhouse gas abatement potential of 660 kg CO2eq/ML (2,500 kg CO2eq/MG) treated is expected for a 100-ha facility treating 20 MGD.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
A suitable C:N:P for optimum growth of microalgae is about 50:8:1.
“According to Woertz et al. [91], a suitable C:N:P for optimum growth of microalgae is about 50:8:1.”
From Challenges and Opportunities to Increase Economic Feasibility and Sustainability of Mixotrophic Cultivation of Green Microalgae of the Genus Chlorella (2022) · cites this paper as [91]
Cites
A simple and precise method for measuring ammonium in marine and freshwater ecosystems
Holmes, R. M., Aminot, A., Kérouel, R., Hooker, B., & Peterson, B. J. (1999) · Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · doi:10.1139/f99-128 · Cited by 1,378 · see citing works
Andersen, R. A., & Phycological Society of America (2005) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.43-0925 · Cited by 1,299 · see citing works
Anaerobic co-digestion of algal sludge and waste paper to produce methane
Yen, H., & BRUNE, D. (2006) · Bioresource Technology · doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2005.11.010 · Cited by 789 · see citing works
Energetics of advanced integrated wastewater pond systems
Green, F. B., Lundquist, T., & Oswald, W. J. (1995) · Water Science & Technology · doi:10.1016/0273-1223(95)00488-9 · Cited by 130 · see citing works
Self-citationDevelopment of microalgae harvesting and high-rate pond technologies in California
Benemann, J. R., Koopman, H. F. J. M., Weissman, J. C., Eisenberg, D. M., & Goebel, R. P. (1980) · Cited by 77 · see citing works
Advanced Integrated Wastewater Pond Systems
Oswald, W. J. (1990) · Cited by 44 · see citing works
Wastewater treatment using membranes: the North American experience
Côté, P., & Thompson, D. (2000) · Water Science & Technology · doi:10.2166/wst.2000.0644 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Resource demand implications for us algae biofuels production scale-up
Pate, R., Klise, G., & Wu, B. (2011) · Applied Energy · doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2011.04.023 · Cited by 315 · see citing works
Biodiesel production from microalgae: Processes, technologies and recent advancements
Faried, M., Samer, M., Abdelsalam, E., Yousef, R. S., Attia, Y. A., & Ali, A. S. (2017) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.199 · Cited by 288 · see citing works
AlMomani, F. A., & Örmeci, B. (2016) · Ecological Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.ecoleng.2016.06.038 · Cited by 143 · see citing works
Dragone, G. (2022) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2022.112284 · Cited by 84 · see citing works
- Authors
- Woertz, I., Fulton, L., & Lundquist, T.
- Affiliations
- California Polytechnic State University (US)
- ORCID
- Lundquist, Tryg
- Venue
- Proceedings of the Water Environment Federation
- Publisher
- Water Environment Federation
- Published
- 2009-01-01
- Volume
- 2009
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 7924-7936
- ISSN
- 1938-6478 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1597079889
- Cited by
- 29
- References
- 7
- Citations by year
- 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 0.31
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Proceedings of the Water Environment Federation (publishedVersion)
- DigitalCommons - CalPoly (California State Polytechnic University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Energy › Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment › Algal biology and biofuel production
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Waste Management and Disposal › Wastewater Treatment and Reuse
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Waste Management and Disposal › Constructed Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment
- Keywords
- high rate algal ponds, elevated CO2, flue gas, nutrient removal, nitrogen removal, phosphorus removal, microalgae, anaerobic digestion, greenhouse gas emissions reduction, wastewater treatment energy consumption, activated sludge comparison, energy surplus
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
