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. Reviewer Comments Reviewer: 1 Criteria Score: 5 This is a "demonstration" project of sorts. The chemistry is not defined. The device apparently is. Now it is up to the Investigator to demonstrate the deliverable. I hope there are firm deliverables which are framed in yields and substantiated with appropriate techno-economic analyses and LCA analysis. Merely tossing off the costs of raw materials as manageable, or by-products as useable are not adequate for the evaluation of this process concept. Reviewer: 2 Criteria Score: 3 The purpose of the research is to achieve one-step chemical processing of algae to biofuels. Conversion of Scenedesmus gave methylene-like components that can produce "algae-crude". Challenges include cleanly separating volatiles and maintaining catalyst. The major gap appears to be clear demonstration that this apparently energy intensive process is actually a potential source of sustainable energy. Further, purported concerns about intellectual property kept the PI from addressing a key question about N and P recovery and recycling during the discussion. Reviewer: 3 Criteria Score: 7 •Establishing a commercially viable process for the conversion of algal biomass to biodiesel will go a long way towards widescale algal farming to meet alternative fuel requirements for the future The approach is to scale-up a ODU-patented process for a single-step conversion of algae to FAME biodiesel. Reviewer: 4 Criteria Score: 6 Goal is to develop and optimize an algae to biodiesel pilot plant. It is not clear how much biomass is needed for the testing; what biomass will be used for testing; or, if from the ODU ponds, how it will be harvested. Little detail is given on the planned testing procedures. Reviewer: 5 Criteria Score: 5 The project was focused on a one-step conversion process of algae to biofuel. The approach appeared sound but, due to time constraints, it was difficult to adequately evaluate this approach. Reviewer: 6 Criteria Score: 6 This is basically a pyrolysis approach that will suffer if the feedstock quality (moisture, pigments, carbohydrate/protein ratios) cannot be controlled, which is going to be difficult. The TMAH cost (or supply) is a critical factor, as well, and was mentioned but not presented. The PI claimed an energy balance being positive but showed very little data. Reviewer: 7 Criteria Score: 5 Specific goals for process performance and economics would be helpful. Presenter Response 2. Technical Progress and Accomplishments Please evaluate the degree to which the project has made progress in its objectives and stated project management plan has met its objectives in achieving milestones and overcoming technical barriers Page 200 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. Reviewer Comments Reviewer: 1 Criteria Score: 5 The device has been obtained as in shakedown studies. The real work begins now. Reviewer: 2 Criteria Score: 3 The project ends in May 2011 and was considered 65% complete at the report interval. The lack of presentation of an energy budget at this stage of this energy conversion project is somewhat concerning. Reviewer: 3 Criteria Score: 8 ODU has successfully selected, designed, and constructed a pilot-scale “algaenator” built around the design of a horizontal wiped-film reactor. It is recognized that significant progress has been achieved prior to funding by this program. Reviewer: 4 Criteria Score: 7 Tested "algenator" which didn't work or this was determined from a desk study--not clear. Switched reactors and site. Reviewer: 5 Criteria Score: 5 The project has made progress in achieving its intermediate goals but major components of the project (testing, optimization, and evaluation of conversion unit and characterization of products) are not complete. Unfortunately, it is likely that investigators will rush to "complete" this work by the project deadline (May 2011). Reviewer: 6 Criteria Score: 5 The pilot plant demonstration facility is quite good. No results past that were really given other than PID diagrams and statements of hope. At minimum a thermodynamic analysis could be been calculated and presented. Reviewer: 7 Criteria Score: 5 Detailed pilot data is avaiable, but were not presented. Presenter Response 3. Project Relevance The project both identifies with and contributes to meeting the platform goals and objectives of the Biomass Program Multi-Year Program Plan The project has considered applications of the expected outputs Reviewer Comments Reviewer: 1 Criteria Score: 5 This may or may not turn out to be relevant. DOE should be pushing for a true determination of the value or potential for this technology by project end. Reviewer: 2 Criteria Score: 4 Energy conversion processes are important, but must be demonstrated to be efficient to be a contributor to platform goals. Page 201 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:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150: 2011 Algae Platform Review - Review
Page 199: 2011 Algae Platform Review - Review
Page 223: 2011 Algae Platform Review - Review
show all

Reviewer Comments - EERE

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?