Kinetic Study of Air Bubbles-Cetyltrimethylammonium Bromide (CTAB) Surfactant for Recovering Microalgae Biomass in a Foam Flotation Column

Abstract

Owing to their efficient photosynthesis, microalgae tend to possess superior growth rates and high lipid production, hence their significance to the biofuel sector. The bulk harvesting of microalgae from cultures is a substantial stage in advancing the production of biomass-based fuels. However, a reliable and cost-effective harvesting technology is not yet available. Foam flotation, which is a subcategory of the adsorptive bubble separation process, shows considerable promise for the harvesting and enrichment of microalgae biomass. The available literature indicates that virtually no data has been reported on the flotation kinetics of microalgae. Therefore, to better describe the recovery of microalgae by the flotation process, this work studied the flotation kinetics of the freshwater microalgae Chlorella vulgaris. The recovery of microalgae cells in a batch foam flotation column over time at different operating conditions was fitted to nine flotation kinetic models, including first, fractional, and second order kinetic models; a first order kinetic model with rectangular, exponential, gamma, and sinusoidal distributions of floatabilities; a second order kinetic model with rectangular distribution of floatabilities; a fully mixed reactor; and modified Kelsall flotation kinetic models. Evaluation of the kinetic models showed that the discrete rate constant model (i.e. modified Kelsall kinetic model) fitted the experimental data best. The modified Kelsall model shows the highest values of adjusted R 2 (>0.995) and the lowest values of mean squared error (<2.63). Apart from the modified Kelsall model, which has discrete rate constants, no single kinetic model, with or without a continuous distribution, was sufficient to represent the flotation data, and the optimal model may vary under different conditions. More work is recommended using different freshwater and marine microalgae species.

Various surface-active agents used in flotation technology for the removal of noxious pollutants from wastewater: a critical review

“…Kinetic model assessment exhibited that the discrete rate constant (i.e., modified Kelsall kinetic model) well-suited the trial data, where it showed the highest values of adjusted R 2 (>0.995). 75 Tributyl tetradecyl-phosphonium chloride (TTPC), a novel cationic surfactant for the separation of quartz from magnetite using cationic reverse flotation, was investigated in the study. From the thickness functional zeta potential, theory calculations, and measurement of an adsorption isotherm it is anticipated that TTPC may be a favorable type of collector, also, more preferable compared to dodecyl triethylammonium chloride.…”

Biosorption of Cu(II) Ions Using Living Microalgae Chlorella sp.: Effects of Microalgae Concentration, Salinity, and Light Color

“…However, this process is categorized as complex. This process's complexity will be significantly influenced by several factors, such as solution pH, temperature, biosorbent dosage, ionic strength, initial solute concentrate, agitation rate, time, nutrients, light intensity, and salinity (Shihab, Dhahir, and Mohammed, 2020;Luangpipat and Chisti, 2017;Lee, Jalalizadeh, and Zhang, 2015;Das, 2010). These process parameters can either support or conflict with the performance of the biosorption process.…”

Production of Liquid Biofuels from Microalgae Chlorella sp. via Catalytic Slow Pyrolysis

“…One of the alternative renewable energy resources that can meet global demand is biomass in the form of third-generation biofuels (Alaswad et al, 2015). The third generation of biofuels, especially those derived from microalgae biomass, is an ideal source of raw materials and has advantages over the first and second generations biofuels in terms of cultivation, lipid composition, product yield, viscosity, density, and calorific value of biofuels (Mahfud et al, 2020;Shihab et al, 2020). However, the conversion efficiency of biofuel production from microalgae compared with biofuels from other biomass is still very low (Rizzo et al, 2013).…”