Reviewer Comments - EERE

More documents

Recommendations

Info

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. ii. Feedstock Supply R&D (ex. biology, cultivation, resource use, biomass characteristics, harvesting/dewatering) iii. Downstream Refining R&D (ex. extraction, conversion, fuel, products, fuel/product infrastructure and end-use) iv. Environmental sustainability (example: water use, GMOs, energy consumption) Reviewer Comments Reviewer: 1 Criteria Score: 4 Critical success factors were not enumerated. It sounded like investigators were looking for them. I think they have not evaluated what are the real key deliverables, and what it would take to achieve them. Reviewer: 2 Criteria Score: 7 Procedures need to be refined to produce "clean" lipids. Reviewer: 3 Criteria Score: 7 Success factors: Low severity processing has opportunity to provide low cost pathway for extraction of high value fuels precursors Challenges: separations and gas cleaning Reviewer: 4 Criteria Score: 6 See Overall Impression text. Reviewer: 5 Criteria Score: 4 Among the critical success factors is "cost effective methods for production of fuel precursors." Overcoming this obstacle seems unlikely (even at the outset) using these technologies. Reviewer: 6 Criteria Score: 4 From a scale up perspective, this approach is extremely challenged from an energy balance or process control point of view. Reviewer: 7 Criteria Score: 3 A critical success factor is techno economic screencing of process concepts prior to initiation of lab work. This was not evident in the presentation. Presenter Response A criticism was leveled concerning the economic viability of using microwaves. We agree that if microwaves are used simply to heat the water in the algae/water slurry that this is an inefficient and (likely) uneconomical prospect. The reviewers failed to grasp that our hypothesis is that microwaves can be used selectively to effect cell wall rupture by hydrothermal degradation, thus liberating lipids which will spontaneously separate from the water phase and spent algal bodies (solids). Further, we have found that the aqueous phase contains most of the protein material from the cell walls. Thus, the microwaveassisted process is a way of effecting simultaneous extraction and separation of lipid materials from algae - this is the hypothesis being tested. This is being accomplished at very low severity conditions compared to other hydrothermal processes which operate at pressures of about 150 atm and temperatures around 350°C. Our work on pyrolysis is similarly providing evidence that fuels precursors can be effectively liberated from algae under low severity conditions. Gasification was found to produce a syngas with high tar loadings, so this pathway has been de-emphasized in the research program. Page 120 of 223
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. 5. Technology Transfer and Collaborations Please comment on the degree to which the project adequately interfaces and coordinates with other institutions and projects to provide additional benefits to the Biomass Program, such as publications, awards, or others. Reviewer Comments Reviewer: 1 The project is a collaboration, and coordination seemed to be adequate. The results need to be shared with the other OBP programs. Reviewer: 2 There is a high potential for effective tech transfer from this project. Reviewer: 3 Too early to tell. Reviewer: 4 See Overall Impression text. Reviewer: 5 Technology transfer potential is very good because of the commercial collaboration. Reviewer: 6 I did not see much in this regard. Reviewer: 7 The presentaition lacks evidence of colaberation in indentifying viable opportunities for thermochemcial options. Presenter Response 6. Overall Impressions Please provide an overall evaluation of the project, including strengths, weaknesses, the project approach, scope, and any other overall comments. Reviewer Comments Reviewer: 1 I believe with focus, this project would have real value. This is true no matter the outcome. If welldesigned, even negative results allow decisions to be made in the overall process. Reviewer: 2 The chemical extraction procedures being devised and tested are important and the project personnel are making good progress. The feedstock targets being analyzed are appropriate. Reviewer: 3 Interesting and worthwhile approach. I recommend support and continuation, as pyrolysis appears to Page 121 of 223
Page 1 and 2:
2011 Biomass Program Algae Platform
Page 3 and 4:
2011 Algae Platform Review - Review
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70: 2011 Algae Platform Review - Review
Page 119: 2011 Algae Platform Review - Review
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223:
show all

Reviewer Comments - EERE

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?