Design of Raceway Ponds for Algae

Biomass Production using

Produced Water
Soumya Yadala,
Selen Cremaschi, PhD
The University of Tulsa

2014 International Petroleum Environmental Conference

Houston, TX
October 14-16,2014
October 15, 2014
 Presentation outline
2
Algae based-Biodiesel

Algae oil Production

Research Objective

Mathematical Modeling

Results

Future directions

Questions?
Soumya Yadala, Selen Cremaschi
2014 IPEC
 Motivation – Produced water
3 Introduction Application Methodology Results Conclusion

Salty water trapped in the reservoir rock and brought up along with oil or gas
during production

These waters exist under high pressures and temperatures

It can contain very minor amounts of chemicals, oil, and metals

Every year in the United States about 800 billion gallons of produced water is brought
to the surface along with oil and gas and about 98% of this water is routinely
disposed as a waste product
However, these large quantities of saline water have great potential value for algal
biofuel production

Scientists recently were successful in conducting the first pilot-scale test of algae
growth using water from an oil-production well in Jal, New Mexico

Soumya Yadala, Selen Cremaschi

2014 IPEC
 Advantages
4 Introduction Application Methodology Results Conclusion

Higher growth rates & productivities

CO2 capture

Higher oil yield

Algae oil

Grown on non-arable land Food vs. fuel

and using produced water

No sulfur, non-toxic & biodegradable

Soumya Yadala, Selen Cremaschi

2014 IPEC
 Challenges
5 Introduction Application Methodology Results Conclusion

High capital, operating & production costs

Relatively new technology

Variety of algae strains

Algae biofuel

Lack of optimal design of cultivation systems Difficulty in scaling up

Soumya Yadala, Selen Cremaschi

2014 IPEC
 Algae oil Production
6 Introduction Application Methodology Results Conclusion

Selection of Algae Varying oil content and specific growth rates

Species

Selection of
Influences climatic conditions and sunlight
Location

Algae
Cultivation

Harvesting

Drying

Extraction

Soumya Yadala, Selen Cremaschi

2014 IPEC
 Research Objective
7 Introduction Application Methodology Results Conclusion

Find a suitable algae

species for cultivation

Find the most

suitable location to
cultivate the selected
algae strain

Design an optimal cultivation

system depending on the
species and location selected

The purpose of the study is to

design a cultivation system
that suits an algae species
when cultivated at a selected
location

Soumya Yadala, Selen Cremaschi

2014 IPEC
 Optimization
8 Introduction Application Methodology Results Conclusion

Optimization focuses on finding the best solution from a set of available

alternatives subject to constraints.

Objective
Alternatives To minimize the cultivation costs of algae oil by
Function
designing optimal cultivation systems
Optimization
Decision
Constraints
Variables

Raceway Pond Cultivation Technology

CD = Pond depth
CW = Channel width
length = Pond length
p = Channel length
q = Pond width

Soumya Yadala, Selen Cremaschi

2014 IPEC
 Alternatives
9 Introduction Application Methodology Results Conclusion

Small capital investment Alternatives

Objective
Free solar energy Function
Easy maintenance Optimization
Lower energy requirements
Decision
Constraints
Variables

Variation
Growth rate
P.Tricornutum I.Galbana
Algae strain Oil content
Productivity

Latitude
Location Tulsa Hyderabad Cape Town Rio de Janeiro Longitude
Sunlight

Cultivation Raceway Ponds

Soumya Yadala, Selen Cremaschi

2014 IPEC
 Decision Variables
10 Introduction Application Methodology Results Conclusion

Alternatives
Objective Physical Properties
Function
Optimization
Decision
Variables Constraints

Culture Properties

Design Properties

Soumya Yadala, Selen Cremaschi

2014 IPEC
 Formulation
11 Introduction Application Methodology Results Conclusion

Objective ElecticCt + WaterCt + LaborCt 

Alternatives
Function 10
1 + NutrientCt + ChemicalCt 
Min Z = CpCt + ∑
n =0 (1 + MARR )
Optimization n  
+ MaintenanceCt 
Decision
Constraints
Variables

Capital Costs Operating Costs

1% Site Preparation
1% 0% 2%
5% 1% 3% Pond levees
1% 1% 4%
Paddle wheel 3% Nutrients
3%
4% 12% 18%
Harvesting Chemicals
8%
Flocculation 19% Labor
Extraction Maintenance and repair
44%
Water & nutrient supply Operating supplies
Waste treatment Taxes and insurance
Buildings, roads, drainage
Electric Supply and distribution
70% Instumentation and machinery
Engineering and contingency
Land

Soumya Yadala, Selen Cremaschi

2014 IPEC
 Formulation
12 Introduction Application Methodology Results Conclusion

Alternatives
Objective
Function
∑∑
i t
X i, t = 0 Mass balance constraint

Optimization 64 4drya lg ae
744 8 waterina
678 lg ae wastewater
678
Decision aCO2 + bH 2O + cP + gN → Ca H eO f N g Pc + hH 2O + iO2 + jH 2O
Constraints
Variables
a Concentration Extraction node
Growth node Thickening node Drying node
node
p
b f g h f g k f g f i
Pond
o

c ko iou
e l ut
j t

d
Harvesting nodes
l = waste water removed
a = carbondioxide inlet f = dry algae outlet i = water in algae remain
b = water inlet g = water in algae outlet Iout = water remain in algae removed
c = nitrogen inlet h = waste water outlet j = water in algae removed
d = phosphorous inlet k = waste water remain o = lipid
e = oxygen outlet Kout = waste water remain removed p = cake
∑X
t
algaeoil, t = 1000 tons/year Algae oil demand constraint
 Formulation
13 Introduction Application Methodology Results Conclusion

Objective 0.10 m ≤ CD ≤ 1 m
Alternatives
Function Bound
CW ≤ 10 m
Optimization constraints
0.15 m/s ≤ U avg d ≤ 0.30 m/s
Decision
Variables
Constraints BC d, t ≤ 10 kg/l
θ
Location relating constraints
 CD  CD
CD eq l,t =   CDeq
θ
 cos( θ )
l,t 
IO Ka
−(CDeql,t ×Kas ×BC l,t )
 I × [1 − e ] 
Iavg l,t =  Ol 
 CD eq l,t × Kas × BC l,t 
CDeq BC

B ×T pond d,t
µ max d,t = A × e
 µmax d,t × Iavg
n
 Relationship b/w culture properties (species) & location
µd,t = n d,t

 I k s + Iavg d,t
n

PrV d, t = µ d, t × BC d, t Constraint relating productivity and algae species

Soumya Yadala, Selen Cremaschi

2014 IPEC
 Formulation
14 Introduction Application Methodology Results Conclusion

X dryalgae, t = PrVl,t × V

X drya lg ae ,t
× 100 = % s Relationship b/w culture properties, algae species &
X WIA ,t + X drya lg ae ,t pond geometry

X 
X WW, t =  dryalgae, t  × ρ
 BC t 

m (t t t
)
& out,t × Cp × Tpond − Tsurr = Qp + Qs + Qa + Qev + Qcv + Qi
t t t t t
Energy balance constraint

Qpt = −εw × σ × Tpond

4
× SA Qev t = −met × Lw × SA
( )
t

Qst = (1 − fa )× Iot × SA Q cv t = hcv t × Tsurrt − Tpond t × SA

Qat = εw × εa × σ × Tsurr
4
t
× SA Q i t = me t × SA + X WIA, t + (1 − η recycle )× X WW, t

Soumya Yadala, Selen Cremaschi

2014 IPEC
 Formulation
15 Introduction Application Methodology Results Conclusion
2
U avg × RC 2
× length K × U avg
2
hT = hF + 2 × hK
hF = d
4 hk = d

D 3 2×g
h

m& × g × hT 2 × [(me d,t × SA ) + X WIA, d,t + (1 − η recycle )× X WW, d,t ]× µ × length × (2 × CD + CW )2

PP d, t = out, d, t PW d,t =
η PW ρ 2 × CD 3 × CW 3

Power Constraints

med,t × SA + ∑∑ XWIA,d,t + (1 − ηrecycle )∑∑ XWW,d,t 

1 
Adwater =  ∑∑
ρ d t d t d t 
Water Constraint

& out,t
m
πq 2 CW =
length = CW × 40 q = 2 × CW SA = + p×q V = SA × CD
4 ρ × CD × Uavgt

Design Constraints

Objective
Alternatives
Function
Optimization GAMS
(General Algebraic Modeling System) CONOPT
Decision
Constraints
Variables

Soumya Yadala, Selen Cremaschi

2014 IPEC
 Results
16 Introduction Application Methodology Results Conclusion

P.Tricornutum I.Galbana Production Costs

3%
3% 5%
0% Zraceway
Zwater
Tulsa Hyderabad Cape Town Rio de Janeiro
22% ZelectricPW
ZNutrients
67%
ZChemicals
Raceway Pond Zlabor

Depth Width Length I (µE m-2 Uavg (m PrV (g m-

Z ($) V (m3) SA (m2) avg -1 BC (g l -1) µ (h-1) Tpond (C)
(m) (m) (m) s ) s-1) 3 h-1)

1 275,383 0.103 5.45 217.92 242 2349 43 0.108 5.24 0.324 2381 21
2
183,454 0.105 4.07 162.80 138 1311 44 0.109 7.26 0.478 4185 28
3 347,304 0.104 6.29 251.46 326 3128 45 0.104 4.59 0.278 1771 19
4 236,427 0.100 4.95 198.01 194 1939 42 0.104 5.89 0.389 2974 26
5 423,761 0.100 7.08 283.10 396 3964 56 0.133 4.29 0.334 2148 21
6 227,540 0.100 4.73 189.15 177 1770 51 0.144 6.74 0.602 4811 28
7 662,802 0.118 9.07 362.75 770 6509 61 0.122 3.07 0.251 1106 19
341,389 0.100 6.22 248.96 307 3066 52 0.134 4.90 0.438 2777 26
8

Total cost of producing about 1000 tons/year of algae oil = $ 0.062 per gallon

Soumya Yadala, Selen Cremaschi

2014 IPEC
 Results
17 Introduction Application Methodology Results Conclusion

Soumya Yadala, Selen Cremaschi

2014 IPEC
 Sensitivity Analysis
18 Introduction Application Methodology Results Conclusion

Sensitivity Analysis -1 (Variation in pond depth)

Width Length Iavg (µE m- Uavg (m s- PrV (g m-3
Z ($) Depth (m) V (m3) SA (m2) 2 s-1) 1)
BC (g l -1) µ (h-1) Tpond (C)
(m) (m) h-1
2 183,454 0.105 4.07 162.80 138 1311 44 0.109 7.26 0.478 4185 28
9 198,838 0.300 4.20 167.91 418 1395 26 0.100 4.65 0.265 1379 29
10 213,816 0.500 4.33 173.25 742 1485 20 0.100 3.70 0.198 777 29

Sensitivity Analysis -2 (Variation in recycle efficiency)

Width Length Iavg (µE m- Uavg (m s- PrV (g m-3
Z ($) Depth (m) V (m3) SA (m2) 2 s-1) 1)
BC (g l -1) µ (h-1) Tpond (C)
(m) (m) h-1
11 424,689 0.100 4.14 165.40 135 1353 38 0.111 10.0 0.426 4262 28
12 298,429 0.100 4.13 165.22 135 1350 38 0.111 10.0 0.427 4272 28
2 183,454 0.105 4.07 162.80 138 1311 44 0.109 7.26 0.478 4185 28

Sensitivity Analysis -3 (Variation in length/width ratio)

Width Length Iavg (µE m- Uavg (m s- PrV (g m-3
Z ($) Depth (m) V (m3) SA (m2) 2 s-1) 1)
BC (g l -1) µ (h-1) Tpond (C)
(m) (m) h-1
13 183,319 0.105 5.79 115.72 137 1310 44 0.100 7.26 0.479 4198 28
2 183,454 0.105 4.07 162.80 138 1311 44 0.109 7.26 0.478 4185 28
14 183,585 0.105 3.32 199.06 138 1311 43 0.119 7.26 0.477 4171 28

Soumya Yadala, Selen Cremaschi

2014 IPEC
 Conclusions
19 Introduction Application Methodology Results Conclusion

A mathematical framework is developed to estimate the best combination of

algae species, geographical location, and raceway pond geometry by combining
experimentally validated temperature, irradiance, and algae growth models with
optimization
In order to represent the actual behavior of the outdoor raceway pond, the
current model takes into account the diurnal pattern of sunlight, temperature
fluctuations, the dynamic behavior of solar zenith angle, and mixing which makes
it more realistic compared to the other models in the literature

This method enables to record the change in culture properties such as

biomass concentration, productivity, and growth rate over time

Future directions
Model the dynamic behavior of algae biomass cultivation and biodiesel production
using HYSYS simulation software

Model the network flow topology of algae oil distribution in the United states

Soumya Yadala, Selen Cremaschi

2014 IPEC
 Acknowledgement
20 Introduction Methodology Application Results Conclusion

TUPSE Research Group

Department of Chemical Engineering, The University of Tulsa

Soumya Yadala, Selen Cremaschi

2014 IPEC
Total cost of producing about 10,000 gallons/day of biodiesel = $0.062/gallon

THANK YOU

Questions???
Soumya Yadala, Selen Cremaschi
2014 IPEC
October 15, 2014