Biofuels from algae:

Abstract

Algae biofuels may provide a viable alternative to fossil fuels;

however, this technology must overcome a number of hurdles before
it can compete in the fuel market and be broadly deployed. These
challenges include strain identification and improvement, both in
terms of oil productivity and crop protection, nutrient and resource
allocation and use, and the production of co-products to improve the
economics of the entire system. Although there is much excitement
about the potential of algae biofuels, much work is still required in the
field. In this article, we attempt to elucidate the major challenges to
economic algal biofuels at scale, and improve the focus of the scientific
community to address these challenges and move algal biofuels from
promise to reality.

Importance & challenges of algal biofuels

The global economy requires fossil hydrocarbons to function, from

producing plastics and fertilizers to providing the energy required for
lighting, heating and transportation. With our increasing population
and expanding economy, there will be increased fossil fuel use. As
countries improve their gross domestic product per capita, data
suggest that their fossil fuel use will increase, and competition for
these limited resources will increase. In addition, there comes
increasing atmospheric CO2 concentration, and the potential for
significant greenhouse gas-mediated climate change [1], which now
seems likely to affect all parts of the world. Finally, petroleum, which
is partially derived from ancient algae deposits, is a limited resource
that will eventually run out or become too expensive to recover [2–4].
These factors are driving the development of renewable energy
sources that can supplant fossil fuels, and allow greater access to fuel
resources for all nations, while greatly reducing carbon emissions into
the atmosphere. A number of technologies have been examined as
renewable energy sources and, although no single strategy is likely to
provide a total solution, it seems possible that a combination of
strategies can be employed that will substantially decrease our
dependence on fossil fuels [4]. The challenge that remains is to
develop renewable energy industries that operate sustainably and can
be cost competitive with existing energy options.

Fossil fuels are used for the generation of electrical power, as well as
liquid fuels. There are a variety of renewable or low atmospheric
pollution technologies that can generate electrical power, including
solar, wind, hydroelectric, geothermal and nuclear. However,
renewable technologies to supplement or replace liquid fossil fuels are
still in their early developmental stages. The International Energy
Agency expects that biofuels will contribute 6% of total fuel use by
2030, but could expand significantly if undeveloped petroleum fields
are not accessed or if substantial new fields are not identified (Figure
1). The most promising sustainable alternatives are almost exclusively
categorized under the moniker ‘biofuels’. This term describes a
diverse range of technologies that generate fuel with at least one
component based on a biological system. The major technologies
presently employed for biofuels begin with terrestrial plants and
culminate with ethanol, whether this is corn starch to sugar to
ethanol, or sugarcane sugars to ethanol. The regional success of some
of these strategies is well noted; in particular, the sugarcane-to-
ethanol production in Brazil [5]. To a lesser degree, oils from
terrestrial plants – for example, soy and palm – are used to produce
biodiesel. These strategies are functional at the small scale; however,
as their use has increased, it is evident that they are not sustainable,
owing to the enormous amount of agricultural land that would be
required to supplant a significant fraction of petroleum using this
strategy [6,7]. A number of hybrid strategies have been discussed or
are currently being deployed. Examples of such strategies include
conversion of cellulose to sugars for fermentation into fuel, and
gasification of residual biomass into syngas that can then be used to
produce liquid fuels [8]. Although each of these strategies is being
used to produce fuels, they are insufficient to accommodate the global
demand for liquid fuels.
Previous and predicted global petroleum sources
(A) Global liquid fuel use in 2006 was predominantly (96.3%) conventional petroleum,
with slightly less than 1% being biofuels. (B) In 2030, the International Energy Agency
estimates that 29% of liquid fuels will originate from current conventional oil sources,
57% will be from undeveloped or unidentified conventional oil sources and 6% will be
biofuels [4]. The large gray area of undeveloped or unidentified sources provides ample
and possibly necessary expansion for nonconventional sources.

In this article, we discuss the potential of a burgeoning alternative

strategy: microalgae-produced liquid fuels. The high lipid content,
high growth rate and ability to rapidly improve strains and produce
co-products, without competing for arable land, make algae an
exciting addition to the sustainable fuel portfolio. This article will
focus on the requirements for establishing microalgae as an
environmentally and economically viable platform, with an emphasis
on combining fuel production with production of co-products, which
we view as an essential strategy for the economic viability and, hence,
broad adoption, of this potential fuel source (Figure 2).
A combination of factors is expected to be required for algal fuels (red line) to
become cost competitive with petroleum (green line: limited petroleum supply,
resulting in increased costs; blue line: business as usual scenario)
These improvements will require years of research and cover (A) bioprospecting for
high-oil-producing, low-input-requiring species; (B) engineering to improve growth,
harvesting and nutrient recycling; (C) further strain improvement through breeding,
selection and random mutagenesis; and (D) bioengineering to improve fuel traits,
produce co-products and crop protection. Estimates given in this figure are for
illustration purposes based on our best guesses. We believe that bioprospecting has
high potential to identify a solid biofuel species in the next few years but subsequent
improvement of that species, as well as solving engineering challenges to improve cost
efficiency, will not occur as rapidly.

resent economic reality of liquid fuels

There are considerable challenges to making biofuels capable of

competing with petroleum. Certainly, a premium price is warranted
for clean fuels (fuels that have a 50% lower CO2 cradle-to-grave
footprint than petroleum); however, estimated costs of a barrel of
algae-based fuel using current technology is US$300–2600, compared
with $40–80 (2009) for petroleum [9–12]. Although some estimates
for a barrel of algae oil in specific regions reach as low as $84 [13].
The higher dollar estimates are more common and similar to our own
estimates, and exclude algal oil from the current liquid fuel market.
The challenges and strategies to tackle this economic discrepancy are
discussed in this article.

Benefits of microalgal biofuels

Microalgae are a diverse group of single-celled organisms that have

the potential to offer a variety of solutions for our liquid
transportation fuel requirements through a number of avenues. Algal
species grow in a wide range of aquatic environments, from
freshwater through saturated saline. Algae efficiently use CO2, and are
responsible for more than 40% of the global carbon fixation, with the
majority of this productivity coming from marine microalgae [14,15].
Algae can produce biomass very rapidly, with some species doubling
in as few as 6 h, and many exhibiting two doublings per day [16,17].
All algae have the capacity to produce energy-rich oils, and a number
of microalgal species have been found to naturally accumulate high oil
levels in total dry biomass [18]. For example, some Botryococcus spp.
have been identified that have up to 50% of their dry mass stored as
long-chain hydrocarbons [19]. With potentially millions of species,
algal diversity gives researchers many options for identifying
production strains and also provides sources for genetic information
that can be used to improve these production strains. The microalgal
species being investigated as potential biofuel crops originate from
groups whose ancestral relationships are significantly broader than
the most diverse land plants, providing a wealth of genetic diversity
[20,21]. The groups most often considered when discussing
microalgae are diatoms, green algae, golden brown, prymnesiophytes,
eustigmatophytes and cyanobacteria [16], and members from all of
these groups have been examined as potential fuel production strains.
However, it should be noted that cyanobacteria are not algae but a
class of photosynthetic bacteria.

Microalgae have additional advantages over terrestrial plants. Since

they are single-celled organisms that duplicate by division, high-
throughput technologies can be used to rapidly evolve strains. This
can reduce processes that take years in crop plants, down to a few
months in algae. Algae have a reduced impact on the environment
compared with terrestrial sources of biomass used for biofuels [9].
They can be grown on land that would not be used for traditional
agricultural, and are very efficient at removing nutrients from water.
Thus, not only would production of algae biofuels minimize land use
compared with biofuels produced from terrestrial plants but, in the
process of culturing these microalgae, waste streams can be
remediated. Potential waste streams include municipal wastewater to
remove nitrates and phosphates before discharge, and flue gas of coal
or other combustible-based power plants to capture sulfates and
CO2 [22–24]. Algae production strains also have the potential to be
bioengineered, allowing improvement of specific traits [25,26] and
production of valuable co-products, which may allow algal biofuels to
compete economically with petroleum. These characteristics make
algae a platform with a high potential to produce cost-competitive
biofuels.

Challenges for algal fuel commercialization

The high growth rates, reasonable growth densities and high oil
contents have all been cited as reasons to invest significant capital to
turn algae into biofuels. However, for algae to mature as an
economically viable platform to offset petroleum and, consequently,
mitigate CO2 release, there are a number of hurdles to overcome
ranging from how and where to grow these algae, to improving oil
extraction and fuel processing. The algal biofuels production chain is
outlined in Figure 3 and shows that the major challenges include
strain isolation, nutrient sourcing and utilization, production
management, harvesting, coproduct development, fuel extraction,
refining and residual biomass utilization.
Making algal growth & harvesting more efficient

Improved engineering will make a significant impact on algae biofuel

production. These improvements include efficient strategies for
nutrient circulation and light exposure, and have been reviewed
elsewhere [27,28]. In brief, there are significant challenges for
engineers to either design photobioreactors (PBRs) that are cheap
enough for large-scale deployment, or for engineers and biologists to
combine forces to develop species that grow efficiently in low-cost
open systems [29]. PBRs have advantages over open systems in that
they can more easily maintain axenic cultures, and can maintain more
controlled growth environments, which may lead to increases in
productivity; however, contained systems are challenged by
efficiencies in gas exchange and a requirement for supplemental
cooling [28]. Despite the advantages of decreased contamination and
increased productivity, it is unclear whether PBRs will ever become
cost competitive with open pond systems. Regardless of the growth
strategy employed, substantial improvements over current
technologies for the growth, harvesting and extracting oil from algae
need to be made, and coordinated efforts will be needed to couple
engineering advances with improved production strains.
Improving oil extraction & downstream processing

Oil extraction is another challenge that is most easily addressed from

the engineering side. There are three major strategies for extracting
oil from algae: oil press/expeller, hexane extraction, and supercritical
CO2 fluid extraction [30]. These technologies have all been successfully
demonstrated but are relatively expensive, either in terms of
equipment needed or energy required to extract the oil. Fortunately,
all are amenable to engineering improvements. Once extracted,
because crude algae oil is chemically similar to crude fossil fuel oil, the
engineering challenges associated with algae oil conversion to usable
liquid fuels are similar to those already well managed by petroleum
companies, although improved catalysts will be required to improve
gasoline production from bio-oil [31]. Because of these similarities, it
seems reasonable to assume that collaborations between algae
production companies and major oil companies are likely, since these
companies have extensive experience maximizing downstream
processing efficiencies.

Land use

Regardless of the growth strategy employed and efficiency of oil

extraction, the scale of implementation that is required to replace a
meaningful amount of fossil fuel is significant. In 2008, the USA alone
required 19,497,950 barrels of oil per day [32]. For algae, or any other
biofuel feedstock, to impact this number, significant acreage must be
dedicated to production facilities, with estimates suggesting that 30
million acres will be required to meet US oil demand. Different models
have been presented for how large-scale aquaculture can be achieved.
Although both terrestrial strategies and marine strategies may be
required, in this article we focus on the terrestrial aquaculture, since
marine strategies are completely unknown at present and may
require engineering significantly different from what is practiced
today. The terrestrial models use land that is not presently used for
food agriculture, and has minimal known environmental or other
significant economic utility.
Water use

Water is potentially a major limiting factor in algal growth. Expansion

of algal growth into nonarable land will require water; fortunately,
many of these regions have substantial alkaline or saline water
reservoirs beneath them, providing a significant source of nonpotable
water that is suitable for growth of many algal species. Perhaps
surprisingly, algae grown in open ponds have water requirements per
unit area similar to that of cotton or wheat, but less than that of corn,
to replenish the water lost in evaporation (for an overview of water
requirements of terrestrial plants used in biofuel production see [33]).
It is imperative when considering broad deployment of algae, to
consider water use to avoid a future ‘water versus fuel’ debate.
Although substantial alkaline reserves are available, water will remain
a central issue for algae biofuels production and will need to be
considered carefully as the industry expands.

Nutrient challenge

Algae require nutrients, light, water and a carbon source, most often
CO2, for efficient growth. The major nutrients required by most algae
include phosphorous, nitrogen, iron and sulfur. Often, the nutrient
requirement necessary for algal growth is ignored, since algae are
very efficient at sequestering these nutrients when present in their
environment [34,35]. Changes in nutrient load and algal growth have
been studies extensively in terms of eutrophication of lakes and
coastal regions, but not as heavily in terms of productivity in large-
scale aquaculture [36,37]. If terrestrial agriculture is a model for some
of the challenges for algal aquaculture, then providing sufficient
nutrients for large-scale algal growth is a significant challenge. Micro-
and macro-nutrient supplements, or fertilizer, account for significant
costs in the current terrestrial agriculture industry [38], and biofuels
are not expected to be an exception. The use of fertilizers has been
increasing globally. Unfortunately, many fertilizer components are
generated from fossil fuels or mined and, as such, they are not
renewable [39–42]. Algae, similar to plants, require sources of
phosphorus, nitrogen and potassium, which are the major
components of agricultural fertilizers, and large-scale aquaculture will
impact these already limited supplies. In addition, optimal growth of
many algal species requires chelated iron and sulfur.

Phosphorous makes up slightly less then 1% of total algal biomass and

is required at approximately 0.03–0.06% in the medium to sustain
algal growth. Fertilizers in the USA used for agriculture currently
contain a less than optimal concentration of phosphate owing to
limited supplies. Presently, less than 40 million tons of phosphate is
mined from the USA annually, and the maximum phosphate
production from this mining peaked in the late 1980s. If algal biofuels
are to completely replace petroleum in the USA, an additional 53
million tons of phosphate must be acquired annually. This is a
significant challenge, given that the total amount of phosphate in the
USA is estimated to be approximately 2.8 billion tons. This leaves few
options other then efficient recycling the phosphate back into the
algae ponds or significantly increasing mining output, a prospect that
would seem to provide a temporary solution at best.

Nitrogen, unlike phosphorous, is not limited in supply but is often a

limiting macronutrient when it comes to plant and algae growth. Algae
require nitrogen to be fixed into ammonia, nitrates and similar
molecules, in order to be used as a nutrient source [43]. Some
bacteria, such as rhizobia, have the ability to fix their own nitrogen
and some form symbiotic relationships with terrestrial plants,
providing the plants with this crucial nutrient to sustain protein and
nucleic acid synthesis [42,44]. Some cyanobacteria also have the
ability to fix nitrogen, while almost all algal species identified to date
require an exogenous source of fixed nitrogen, and most prefer
ammonia, as it is less energetically demanding than nitrate or nitrite
[45]. Providing a cheap source of fixed nitrogen will be important for
algae biofuel production, and the possibility of using nitrogen-fixing
cyanobacteria to supply this nitrogen may help minimize these costs
[46].

In the open oceans, iron is a major limiting nutrient for algal growth,
as demonstrated by the induction of algal blooms by the addition of
exogenous iron to open oceans [47]. Interestingly, the addition of iron
to induce an algal bloom has been considered and tested as a strategy
to sequester CO2 [47–49]. Biologically, iron is required for electron
transport in all known photosynthetic organisms,
including Chlamydomonas reinhardtii, and is typically found in iron-
sulfur clusters in a variety of photosynthetic proteins [50]. Iron in its
oxidized form is not optimal for uptake, and most algae prefer
chelated iron. Fortunately, iron can be easily acquired and is more
available than many of the other required nutrients.

Sulfur, in addition to its key role in the electron transport chain, is also
required for protein synthesis and lipid metabolism. Sulfur deficiency
has been shown to limit algal density and stunt growth [51]. Thus, it
seems likely that sulfur will be important for optimal algal growth, and
cost/benefit analysis will need to be considered to determine the
optimal amount of sulfur to add to the media for the best economic
return.

The acquisition of the aforementioned nutrients, as well as potassium

and at least nine other micro- and macro-nutrients, should not be
overlooked when considering the implications of scaling algal biofuel
production to meaningful levels [52]. Many of the nutrients may be
supplemented by combining nutrient-rich waste water or agricultural
runoff with algal growth facilities, streamlining water remediation and
optimizing economic fuel production. These strategies appear to be
viable at some scale; however, alternative possibilities must also be
developed. Ultimately, a combination of methods may be required,
and perhaps a recycling of micro- and macro-nutrients will have to be
developed for algae-based biofuels to reach a capacity that impacts
present fossil fuel use. One of the most promising techniques for
recycling nutrients in algal ponds is to use anaerobic digestion [53].
This bacterial process produces methane gas, while keeping the
majority of the nutrients in a bacterial slurry that can be killed and the
mix used for algal fertilizer. Methane gas is not currently a high-
value commodity, but can help provide energy to operate algae farms,
and cheap anaerobic digestion will preclude producing some types of
higher value proteins in the algae. Therefore, a balance should be
reached between efficient anaerobic digestion and high-value co-
products, as shown in Figure 4.
Figure 4
To maximize algae biofuel sustainability, nutrients must be recycled

This is a model of how we expect nutrient utilization to occur as the field matures. Algae
will be harvested and the oil will be extracted, the remaining biomass
(carbohydrates/proteins) will either be recycled for nutrients through anaerobic
digestion or similar means, producing methane gas and a nutrient-rich slurry, which can
then be fed back into the algal pond, rather than exogenously produced fertilizers, or
used to for high-value co-products, ranging from industrial enzymes, nutraceuticals or
animal feed stocks. Some of these nutrients can be recycled through waste water, while
others will be lost due to runoff.

Crop protection: minimizing algae death from biotic & abiotic

factors

Much like terrestrial monocultures, large algal monocultures will be

invaded by pests and pathogens, and therefore, crop protection is a
major challenge to algal pond sustainability. Identifying strains
resistant to pathogens, along with many other strategies, will need to
be employed. These strategies, discussed later, may include
engineering specific pest resistance into production species that have
robust growth characteristics and significant lipid composition. Other
approaches may include using multiple species, which may be
sufficient to the slow spread of specific pests and minimize crop loss
in large algal facilities.

Microalgal growth facilities can be an excellent habitat for a wide

variety of undesirable guests. In most cases, these will be detrimental
for algal growth by acting as competitors (other algae with low oil
production or bacteria), parasites (virus, fungus or protozoans) or
predators (protozoans, fungus or aquatic invertebrates [54–57]. Algae
biofuel projects are considering both open and closed systems. These
options have significantly different challenges. Closed systems, such as
PBRs, have the potential to minimize contamination, but this comes at
a high capital expense. Outdoor pond systems have lower initial
capital costs, but historically these open pond systems have relied
mainly on outcompeting contaminating organisms by using densely
grown axenic (or nearly axenic) starter cultures [58,59]. This high-
density inoculation allows algae populations to expand rapidly,
minimizing end-product loss due to contamination. Unfortunately, this
strategy might not be feasible for the extremely large culture volumes
required for biofuel production, especially if continuous harvesting
strategies are employed. Another solution to minimize contamination
is to use microalgae that can grow under extreme conditions, which
are not suitable for most of the potential contaminants. This would be
the case with Dunaliella salina and Arthrospira, which can withstand
up to 35% salinity and pH 10, respectively [59–61]. Unfortunately, not
all production strains can survive in extreme conditions, and there is
still the possibility for an extremophile contamination to arise [62].

Microalgae have developed morphological, behavioral and chemical

mechanisms for defending themselves from pathogens and predators.
Chemical defense is widely present in the ‘algae group’ against
bacteria, fungus, protozoans, aquatic invertebrates, other algae and
even viruses [63–65]. The majority of antibiotic extracts studied so far
have been from marine macro- and micro-algae [65–67]; however,
they are also present in many freshwater species [67–69]. Most
antibiotics from microalgae have come from cyanobacteria,
haptophytes, chrysophytes, diatoms, dinoflagellates and chlorophytes.
The chemical nature of these substances is very diverse, including
fatty acids, bromophenols, tanins, polysaccharides, alcohols,
halogenated compounds, peptides, lipopeptides, alkaloids, amides,
tertiary sulfoniums, and many other unique substances [65,66]. Some
of these chemicals accumulate within cells so they only act after the
algae is damaged or ingested. In other species, toxins are secreted into
the media by the algae to avoid negative interactions [70]. The mode
of action of toxins against predators can be further classified into
acute toxicity, reduced fitness (growth reduction and/or reduced
progeny), feeding inhibition and avoidance. Morphological and
behavioral defense mechanisms also complement the chemical
repertoire against algae grazers [57,70,71].

Given these natural defense mechanisms, it seems wise to take

advantage of them, along with other strategies adapted from
agriculture, to secure ‘crop’ protection for biofuel production. The
simplest solution would be to pick a production strain with
extremophile characteristics and a broad repertoire of antibiotic
properties. However, this might not occur naturally in a single species,
so the next simplest solution would be to coculture a set of microalgae
that synergistically contribute to protect the entire crop. Additionally,
a single species could be engineered to produce one or more of these
algal antibiotics or other natural products [63,72,73]. However, these
are mostly secondary metabolites that require several enzymes to be
synthesized. As an alternative, antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) could be
expressed from a single heterologous gene, as has been shown in the
nucleus and chloroplast of plants [74,75]. Some of these molecules
have been shown to be broad-spectrum antibacterial, antifungal or
antiprotozoal agents for which pathogens have a limited capability to
develop resistance [76,77]. Moreover, they can also be specifically
designed and screened for a specific crop protection function [78].

Alternative bactericidal proteins (non-AMPs) have been expressed in

algae. The Chlorella ellipsoidea nuclear genome was engineered to
produce rabbit neutrophil peptide-1, which proved to be effective
agent against human pathogens in vitro [79].
Transformed Chlamydomonas reindhartii chloroplast accumulated 5%
total soluble protein (TSP) of the mammary-associated serum amyloid
A3 peptide, but its antimicrobial activity was not tested [80,81].
Recently, expression of bovine lactoferricin was achieved in nuclear
transformants of Nannochloropsis oculata. Algal extracts from strains
expressing this protein were effective against Escherichia
coli and Vibrio parahemolyticus [82].

The aforementioned proteins might be effective against

microorganisms but aquatic invertebrates could still feed freely on
these algae. A future solution might come from the expression of
‘insecticidal’ proteins, such as those with similar function to the ones
from Bacillus thuringensis and Bacillus sphaericus. These proteins have
already been expressed in plants and cyanobacteria, and shown to be
detrimental towards aquatic insects, aquatic larvae and daphnids
[73,83–85]. On the other hand, some aquatic invertebrates might be
beneficial for algae, and could be used as a biological control strategy.
Certain species have strict preference for prey other than algae, such
as the heterotrophic protists [57,70]. For example, copepods have
been shown to directly contribute to the blooming of the
alga Phaeocystis (Haptophyceae) by selectively eating its protozoan
predators [86].

Fundamentally, the challenges described can be overcome in algae, as

they have in terrestrial crops, but this may require many years of
basic research to understand algal/pathogen interactions that impact
crop production. In addition, we will need to balance the cost of
solutions relative to increase productivity and, hence. return on
investment, and this analysis may prove difficult in the short term, as
there are little fundamental data to base this analysis on.

Go to:

Competition with petroleum: getting the price right

With current estimates of algal-based biofuels ranging from US$300–

2600 per barrel based on current technology, technical hurdles need
to be overcome to improve this price. Some of these improvements
can come from improving growth strategies and engineering, as
discussed previously, but improvements can also come from
optimizing the use of the entire organism. Although the final price of a
barrel of algae oil when production goes to large scale is difficult to
extrapolate from the present small production facilities, system
improvements will certainly bring costs down. Figure 5 illustrates our
estimates of the relative impacts of technological improvements on
the economic viability of algae biofuels. Most analysts do not predict
full parity with petroleum in the near future. More likely, the initial
selling point of algal fuels will be approximately twofold higher than
petroleum, but the environmental costs will be substantially lower
than our current strategy of depending on fossil fuels.
 Algae biofuels

Algae biofuels
Algae biofuels are advanced renewable fuels derived from algal
feedstock via different conversion processes, this is due to the oil-
rich composition of this feedstock that can be associated with its
ability to abundantly photosynthesize.
Algae are a promising source for biofuel production due to their high
biomass productivity and fast growth rate. Here are some abstracts about
algae biofuel production:
 Utilization of algae for biofuel, bio-products and bio-remediation
This review discusses the use of algae for biofuel production, including biodiesel,
bioethanol, biobutanol, and biohydrogen. It also covers the environmental
applications of algae, such as wastewater treatment and CO2 sequestration
 Biofuels from Algae
This chapter discusses the constraints and aspects associated with the
commercialization of algal biofuels. It also covers the potential conversion
technologies for algal biofuels, such as transesterification, pyrolysis, and
fermentation.
 Review: Biofuel production from plant and algal biomass
This review discusses the cultivation of algal biomass for biofuel production,
including the use of photobioreactors and open-air systems. It also covers the
different methods for converting biomass into biofuels, such as thermochemical,
chemical, biochemical, and direct combustion.
 The potentials and challenges of algae based biofuels
This review discusses the resource, economic, and life cycle assessments of
microalgae biofuel production. It also highlights the need for harmonized
assessments to enable direct comparisons of alternative processing technologies.
Using Algae for Biofuel Production: A Review
This review discusses the potential of algae for biofuel production, including the
quality of biofuels obtained from microalgae and the need to develop methods for
inexpensive biomass production.