Reviewer Comments - EERE

2011 Algae Platform Review – Reviewer Comments
Reviewer Comments are direct transcripts of commentary and material provided by the Platform’s
Review Panel. They have not been edited or altered by the Biomass Program.
Goals listed in presentation are numerous and presented is somewhat disjointed fashion: Technology gap
analysis, cost analysis (aka techno-economic analysis), resources analysis, infrastructure compatibility,
algae logistics module (similar to woody biomass analysis), and baseline facility designs,
Harvesting and dewatering technologies selected thus far are mostly conventional and obviously too
expensive and/or energy intensive for algae biofuel. Pond sizes being assessed are 1 acres and 10 acre. 1
acre is obviously too small to be economical.
I don't see how this technology analysis and model designs are different from the many others in the
recent literature and in Aquatic Species Program reports. Isn't this also somewhat a duplication of the
technology assessment being done by NAABB/NREL?
Reviewer: 5
The apparent overlap with an NREL project was disconcerting (at the very least, they should collaborate).
The challenge in gaining access to proprietary engineering information seems very problematic and there
was no clear path to overcoming this obstacle.
Reviewer: 6
Overall this project needs more realism in terms of the systems it models.
Reviewer: 7
The challenge of acquiring scenarios supported by pilot data appears to be the greatest hurdle. The
integrated assesment framework appears to be a valuable, or perhaps essential tool for production
scenario evaluation and selection, but it is only useful if validated process data is available. building the
tool around available data instead of relevant data does not appear to help advance the technology.
Presenter Response
Many of the overall impression comments have been addressed (see respective sections above). When
completed the IAF will provide DOE with the first spatially-explicit estimate of open pond microalgae
production potential and resource demands for the conterminous United States. It will meet many of the
DOE roadmap goals for modeling including the ability to combine disparate databases, optimize facility
location and supply chain logistics, include a number of approaches, scales, and levels of detail required
for a particular assessment, and to be easily modified to incorporate new technologies as they become
available. Data from pilot scale and commercial algal production farms will be incorporated based on
availability of data through literature, partnerships, and collaborations as described previously. As
suggested by the reviewer, a full testing and verification plan will be delivered as part of the conclusion to
the initial two year project. These activities will be performed to the degree that resources allow through
the development process, and a comprehensive testing matrix will be established for potential continued
work. We have read and continue to refer to the foundational literature indicated by the reviewers. These
papers reflect the state of technology applications at the time the reports were generated. Our model is
designed to encompass those technologies (and clearly it should be consistent with them) but also to
expand beyond those technologies; and combine spatial resource information with production and supply
chain logistics. INL and NREL have begun collaborating in this area and look to leverage unique aspects
of each modeling approach. The modeling framework being developed at the INL in support of the IAF is
providing a plug-and-play architecture for investigating a broad range of technologies and design
concepts for algae supply systems. This approach is a natural extension of several initial techno-economic
assessments that have been performed to date. Furthermore, the logistics modeling framework being
Page 108 of 223