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.
Reviewer Comments
Reviewer: 1
The project is useful. It could have perhaps been improved by a review of some of the assumptions and
boundaries selected. Nonetheless, it is a valuable contribution.
Reviewer: 2
This model shows the challenges still ahead for economic production of algal biofuels. Project should try
to incorporate full costs and do better sensitivity analysis on size of pond and productivity of algae.
Reviewer: 3
Much of this analysis is available in the photobioreactors literature.
Reviewer: 4
LCA Overall Impression: 2
Hydrodynamic Model Overall Impression: 6
How is this LCA project being coordinated with the Argonne LCA? This project seems to focus on the
existing Seabiotic plant, which is 1000x smaller than any feasible biofuel plant. In addition, 1000-m2
individual ponds are modeled, which are about 40x smaller than the size generally considered feasible for
biofuel feedstock production. The "Future Projection" system is better, but still too small. Use of
centrifugation for biofuel production is inappropriate on its face. The base-case should be abandoned as
irrelevant, and the Future Projection should be greatly adjusted. Collaboration with the Argonne LCA
project may be advisable, not to say that they are using appropriate assumptions either. Any feasible algae
biofuel process will use only the most simple, low-energy, and largest-scale processes conceivable, as
outlined in the Aquatic Species Program reports.
The hydrodynamic-biological model may be valuable for design details on very large raceway ponds. It
will be good to validate with the small-scale Seambiotic data or other >1000 m2 ponds.
Reviewer: 5
This seemed to be a reasonable (but predictable) project. It was not clear that this project represents a
significant advance compared to existing LCAs.
Reviewer: 6
Quite favorable for the reasons identified above.
Reviewer: 7
Previous LCA work appears to be more thoroguh and relevant. It is not clear what advances in pond flow
modeling have been made compared to previous work, and how those modeling advances can improve
pond design.
Project: 9.1.2.1 Brookhaven National Laboratory
Title: New technology: Improving Microalgal Oil Production Based on Quantitative Analysis of
Metabolism
Presenter: Jorg Schwender
Presentation Date: Friday, April 08, 2011
Criteria Avg Score Std Deviation Count
Page 127 of 223