U.S. patent application number 13/127697 was filed with the patent office on 2012-01-05 for biological clean fuel processing systems and methods.
This patent application is currently assigned to The University of Wyoming Research Corporation d/b/a Western Research Institute, The University of Wyoming Research Corporation d/b/a Western Research Institute. Invention is credited to Alan E. Bland, Patricia Colberg, Paul Fallgren, Song Jin, Jeffrey M. Morris, Jesse D. Newcomer, Patick Richards.
Application Number | 20120003705 13/127697 |
Document ID | / |
Family ID | 43529672 |
Filed Date | 2012-01-05 |
United States Patent
Application |
20120003705 |
Kind Code |
A1 |
Jin; Song ; et al. |
January 5, 2012 |
Biological Clean Fuel Processing Systems and Methods
Abstract
Methods and systems to achieve clean fuel processing systems in
which carbon dioxide emissions (1) from fossil fuel consumption
sources (2) may be processed in at least one processing reactor (4)
containing a plurality of chemoautotrophic bacteria (5) which can
convert the carbon dioxide emissions into biomass (6) which may
then be used for various products (21) such as biofuels,
fertilizer, feedstock, or the like. Sulfate reducing bacteria (13)
may be used to supply sulfur containing compounds to the
chemoautotrophic bacteria (5).
Inventors: |
Jin; Song; (Fort Collins,
CO) ; Fallgren; Paul; (Laramie, WY) ; Morris;
Jeffrey M.; (Laramie, WY) ; Bland; Alan E.;
(Laramie, WY) ; Richards; Patick; (Laramie,
WY) ; Newcomer; Jesse D.; (Laramie, WY) ;
Colberg; Patricia; (Laramie, WY) |
Assignee: |
The University of Wyoming Research
Corporation d/b/a Western Research Institute
Laramie
WY
|
Family ID: |
43529672 |
Appl. No.: |
13/127697 |
Filed: |
July 27, 2010 |
PCT Filed: |
July 27, 2010 |
PCT NO: |
PCT/US10/43392 |
371 Date: |
May 4, 2011 |
Related U.S. Patent Documents
|
|
|
|
|
|
Application
Number |
Filing Date |
Patent Number |
|
|
61228898 |
Jul 27, 2009 |
|
|
|
61358700 |
Jun 25, 2010 |
|
|
|
Current U.S.
Class: |
435/136 ;
435/160; 435/161; 435/167; 435/168; 435/170 |
Current CPC
Class: |
C10L 1/026 20130101;
Y02P 20/152 20151101; Y02E 20/32 20130101; Y02E 50/17 20130101;
C12N 1/20 20130101; Y02E 50/13 20130101; Y02A 50/2358 20180101;
B01D 53/62 20130101; C12P 7/649 20130101; Y02E 50/10 20130101; Y02P
30/00 20151101; B01D 53/84 20130101; Y02E 20/326 20130101; F23J
15/02 20130101; Y02E 50/30 20130101; C10G 2300/1011 20130101; Y02P
30/10 20151101; Y02C 10/02 20130101; Y02P 30/40 20151101; Y02P
30/20 20151101; Y02C 10/04 20130101; Y02P 20/59 20151101; Y02A
50/20 20180101; B01D 2251/95 20130101; Y02C 20/40 20200801; Y02E
50/343 20130101; Y02P 30/446 20151101; C10G 2300/4043 20130101;
F23J 2215/50 20130101; Y02P 20/151 20151101; B01D 2257/504
20130101; C10G 2300/405 20130101; Y02E 50/346 20130101 |
Class at
Publication: |
435/136 ;
435/170; 435/161; 435/160; 435/167; 435/168 |
International
Class: |
C12P 1/04 20060101
C12P001/04; C12P 3/00 20060101 C12P003/00; C12P 7/16 20060101
C12P007/16; C12P 5/02 20060101 C12P005/02; C12P 7/40 20060101
C12P007/40; C12P 7/06 20060101 C12P007/06 |
Claims
1-70. (canceled)
71. A multistep biological and chemical process for the capture and
conversion of carbon dioxide and/or other sources of inorganic
carbon, into organic compounds, where one or more steps in the
process utilize obligate and/or facultative chemoautotrophic
microorganisms, and/or cell extracts containing enzymes from
chemoautotrophic microorganisms, to fix carbon dioxide or inorganic
carbon into organic compounds where carbon dioxide gas alone or in
a mixture or solution as dissolved carbon dioxide, carbonate ion,
or bicarbonate ion including aqueous solutions such as sea water,
or in a solid phase including but not limited to a carbonate
mineral, is introduced into an environment suitable for maintaining
chemoautotrophic organisms and/or chemoautotroph cell extracts,
which fix the inorganic carbon into organic compounds, with the
chemosynthetic carbon fixing reaction being driven by chemical
and/or electrochemical energy provided by electron donors and
electron acceptors that have been generated chemically or
electrochemically or input from inorganic sources or waste sources
that are made accessible through the process to the
chemoautotrophic microorganisms in the chemosynthetic reaction step
or steps.
72. A method according to claim 71, whereby said electron donors
include but are not limited to one or more of the following
reducing agents: ammonia; ammonium; carbon monoxide; dithionite;
elemental sulfur; hydrocarbons; hydrogen; metabisulfites; nitric
oxide; nitrites; sulfates such as thiosulfates including but not
limited to sodium thiosulfate (Na.sub.2S.sub.2O.sub.3) or calcium
thiosulfate (CaS.sub.2O.sub.3); sulfides such as hydrogen sulfide;
sulfites; thionate; thionite; transition metals or their sulfides,
oxides, chalcogenides, halides, hydroxides, oxyhydroxides,
phosphates, sulfates, or carbonates, in dissolved or solid phases;
as well as conduction or valence band electrons in solid state
electrode materials.
73. A method according to claim 71, whereby said electron acceptors
include but are not limited to one or more of the following: carbon
dioxide; oxygen; nitrites; nitrates; ferric iron or other
transition metal ions; sulfates; or valence or conduction band
holes in solid state electrode materials.
74. A method according to claim 71, whereby the said chemosynthetic
step or steps is proceeded by one or more chemical preprocessing
steps whereby said electron donors and/or said electron acceptors
used to drive chemosynthesis and/or other nutrients needed to
support the chemoautotrophic culture are generated or refined from
more unrefined raw input chemicals and/or recycled from process
output chemicals and/or the waste streams from other industrial,
mining, agricultural, sewage or waste generating processes.
75. A method according to claim 71, whereby the said chemosynthetic
step or steps is followed by one or more process steps for the
separation of the organic and/or inorganic chemical products of
chemosynthesis from the process stream and for the processing of
these products into a form suitable for storage, shipping, and
sale; as well as one or more process steps for the separation of
cell mass from the process stream and for the recycling of cell
mass needed to maintain the chemoautotrophic culture back into the
said chemosynthetic steps, and/or for surplus biomass to be
processed into a form suitable for storage, shipping, and sale
76. A method according to claim 71, whereby the said chemosynthetic
step or steps is followed by one or more process steps where waste
products and/or impurities or contaminants are removed from the
process stream including the nutrient medium used to maintain the
chemoautotrophic culture, and disposed of.
77. A method according to claim 71, whereby the said chemosynthetic
step or steps is followed by one or more process steps where any
unused nutrients and/or process water left after the removal of
chemoautotrophic cell mass and/or chemical co-products of
chemosynthesis and/or waste products or contaminants are recycled
back into the chemosynthetic process steps to support further
chemosynthesis.
78. A method according to claim 71, whereby the given
chemoautotrophic microorganisms include but are not limited to one
or more of the following: Acetoanaerobium sp.; Acetobacterium sp.;
Acetogenium sp.; Achromobacter sp.; Acidianus sp.; Acinetobacter
sp.; Actinomadura sp.; Aeromonas sp.; Alcaligenes sp.; Alcaligenes
sp.; Arcobacter sp.; Aureobacterium sp.; Bacillus sp.; Beggiatoa
sp.; Butyribacterium sp.; Carboxydothermus sp.; Clostridium sp.;
Comamonas sp.; Dehalobacter sp.; Dehalococcoide sp.;
Dehalospirillum sp.; Desulfobacterium sp.; Desulfomonile sp.;
Desulfotomaculum sp.; Desulfovibrio sp.; Desulfurosarcina sp.;
Ectothiorhodospira sp.; Enterobacter sp.; Eubacterium sp.;
Ferroplasma sp.; Halothibacillus sp.; Hydrogenobacter sp.;
Hydrogenomonas sp.; Leptospirillum sp.; Metallosphaera sp.;
Methanobacterium sp.; Methanobrevibacter sp.; Methanococcus sp.;
Methanosarcina sp.; Micrococcus sp.; Nitrobacter sp.; Nitrosococcus
sp.; Nitrosolobus sp.; Nitrosomonas sp.; Nitrosospira sp.;
Nitrosovibrio sp.; Nitrospina sp.; Oleomonas sp.; Paracoccus sp.;
Peptostreptococcus sp.; Planctomycetes sp.; Pseudomonas sp.;
Ralstonia sp.; Rhodobacter sp.; Rhodococcus sp.; Rhodocyclus sp.;
Rhodomicrobium sp.; Rhodopseudomonas sp.; Rhodospirillum sp.;
Shewanella sp.; Streptomyces sp.; Sulfobacillus sp.; Sulfolobus
sp.; Thiobacillus sp.; Thiomicrospira sp.; Thioploca sp.;
Thiosphaera sp.; Thiothrix sp.; sulfur-oxidizers;
hydrogen-oxidizers; iron-oxidizers; acetogens; methanogens; as well
as a consortiums of microorganisms that include chemoautotrophs,
where the chemoautotrophs may be native to environments including
but not limited to: hydrothermal vents; geothermal vents; hot
springs; cold seeps; underground aquifers; salt lakes; saline
formations; mines; acid mine drainage; mine tailings; oil wells;
refinery wastewater; coal seams; the deep sub-surface; waste water
and sewage treatment plants; geothermal power plants; sulfatara
fields; soils; where the said chemoautotrophs may or may not be
extremophiles including but not limited to thermophiles,
hyperthermophiles, acidophiles, halophiles, and psychrophiles.
79. A method according to claim 71, whereby said electron donors
and/or electron acceptors are generated or recycled using
renewable, alternative, or conventional sources of power that are
low in greenhouse gas emissions including but not limited to one or
more of the following: photovoltaics, solar thermal, wind power,
hydroelectric, nuclear, geothermal, enhanced geothermal, ocean
thermal, ocean wave power, tidal power.
80. A method according to claim 71, whereby molecular hydrogen acts
as electron donor and is generated through electrolysis of water
including but not limited to approaches using Proton Exchange
Membranes (PEM), liquid electrolytes such as KOH, high-pressure
electrolysis, high temperature electrolysis of steam (HTES); and/or
thermochemical splitting of water through methods including but not
limited to the iron oxide cycle, cerium(IV) oxide-cerium(III) oxide
cycle, zinc zinc-oxide cycle, sulfur-iodine cycle, copper-chlorine
cycle, calcium-bromine-iron cycle, hybrid sulfur cycle; and/or the
electrolysis of hydrogen sulfide; and/or the thermochemical
splitting of hydrogen sulfide; and/or through other electrochemical
or thermochemical processes known to produce hydrogen with low- or
no-carbon dioxide emissions including but not limited to: carbon
capture and sequestration enabled methane reforming; carbon capture
and sequestration enabled coal gasification; the Kv.ae
butted.rner-process and other processes generating a carbon-black
product; carbon capture and sequestration enabled gasification or
pyrolysis of biomass; and the half-cell reduction of H.sup.+ to
H.sub.2 accompanied by the half-cell oxidization of electron
sources including but not limited to ferrous iron (Fe.sup.2+)
oxidized to ferric iron (Fe.sup.3+) or the oxidation of sulfur
compounds whereby the oxidized iron or sulfur can be recycled to
back to a reduced state through additional chemical reaction with
minerals including but not limited to metal sulfides, hydrogen
sulfide, or hydrocarbons.
81. A method according to claim 71, whereby said electron donors
are generated from minerals of natural origin including but not
limited to one or more of the following: elemental Fe.sup.0;
siderite (FeCO.sub.3); magnetite (Fe.sub.3O.sub.4); pyrite or
marcasite (FeS.sub.2), pyrrhotite (Fe.sub.(1-x)S (x=0 to 0.2),
pentlandite (Fe,Ni).sub.9S.sub.8, violarite (Ni.sub.2FeS.sub.4),
bravoite (Ni,Fe)S.sub.2, arsenopyrite (FeAsS), or other iron
sulfides; realgar (AsS); orpiment (As.sub.2S.sub.3); cobaltite
(CoAsS); rhodochrosite (MnCO.sub.3); chalcopyrite (CuFeS.sub.2),
bornite (Cu.sub.5FeS.sub.4), covellite (CuS), tetrahedrite
(Cu.sub.8Sb.sub.2S.sub.7), enargite (Cu.sub.3AsS.sub.4), tennantite
(Cu.sub.12As.sub.4. S.sub.13), chalcocite (Cu.sub.2S), or other
copper sulfides; sphalerite (ZnS), marmatite (ZnS), or other zinc
sulfides; galena (PbS), geocronite (Pb.sub.5(Sb,As.sub.2)S.sub.8),
or other lead sulfides; argentite or acanthite (Ag.sub.2S);
molybdenite (MoS.sub.2); millerite (NiS), polydymite (Ni.sub.3
S.sub.4) or other nickel sulfides; antimonite (Sb.sub.2S.sub.3);
Ga.sub.2S.sub.3; CuSe; cooperite (PtS); laurite (RuS.sub.2);
braggite (Pt,Pd,Ni)S; FeCl.sub.2.
82. A method according to claim 71, whereby said electron donors
are generated from pollutants or waste products including but are
not limited to one or more of the following: process gas; tail gas;
enhanced oil recovery vent gas; biogas; acid mine drainage;
landfill leachate; landfill gas; geothermal gas; geothermal sludge
or brine; metal contaminants; gangue; tailings; sulfides;
disulfides; mercaptans including but not limited to methyl and
dimethyl mercaptan, ethyl mercaptan; carbonyl sulfide; carbon
disulfide; alkanesulfonates; dialkyl sulfides; thiosulfate;
thiofurans; thiocyanates; isothiocyanates; thioureas; thiols;
thiophenols; thioethers; thiophene; dibenzothiophene;
tetrathionate; dithionite; thionate; dialkyl disulfides; sulfones;
sulfoxides; sulfolanes; sulfonic acid; dimethylsulfoniopropionate;
sulfonic esters; hydrogen sulfide; sulfate esters; organic sulfur;
sulfur dioxide and all other sour gases.
83. A method according to claim 71, whereby the delivery of
reducing equivalents from the said electron donors to the
chemoautotrophs for the said chemosynthetic reaction or reactions
is kinetically and/or thermodynamically enhanced through means
including but not limited to: the introduction of hydrogen storage
materials into the chemoautotrophic culture environment that can
double as a solid support media for microbial growth--bringing
absorbed or adsorbed hydrogen electron donors into close proximity
with the hydrogen-oxidizing chemoautotrophs; the introduction of
electron mediators such as but not limited to cytochromes, formate,
methyl-viologen, NAD.sup.+/NADH, neutral red (NR), and quinones to
help transfer reducing power from poorly soluble electron donors
such as but not limited to H.sub.2 gas or electrons in solid state
electrode materials, into the chemoautotrophic culture media; the
introduction of electrode materials that can double as a solid
growth support media directly into the chemoautotrophic culture
environment--bringing solid state electrons into close proximity
with the microbes.
84. A method according to claim 71, whereby said electron donors
are generated or recycled through non- or low-carbon dioxide
emitting chemical reactions with hydrocarbons including but not
limited to the thermochemical reduction of sulfate reaction (TSR)
and the Muller-Kuhne reaction for the production of hydrogen
sulfide or reduced sulfur; or methane reforming-like reactions
utilizing metal oxides in place of water such as but not limited to
iron oxide, calcium oxide, or magnesium oxide whereby the
hydrocarbon is reacted to form solid carbonate with little or no
emissions of carbon dioxide gas along with hydrogen electron donor
product.
85. A method according to claim 71, whereby said chemosynthetic
reaction or reactions are performed by chemoautotrophic
microorganisms that have been improved, optimized or engineered for
the fixation of carbon dioxide and/or other forms of inorganic
carbon and the production of organic compounds through methods
including but not limited to one or more of the following:
accelerated mutagenesis, genetic engineering or modification,
hybridization, synthetic biology or traditional selective
breeding.
86. A method according to claim 71 whereby the said chemosynthetic
reaction or reactions results in the formation of chemicals
including but not limited to acetic acid, other organic acids and
salts of organic acids, ethanol, butanol, methane, hydrogen,
hydrocarbons, sulfuric acid, sulfate salts, elemental sulfur,
sulfides, nitrates, ferric iron and other transition metal ions,
other salts, acids or bases.
87. A method according to claim 71, whereby the organic and/or
inorganic chemical products recovered from the chemoautotrophic
growth medium of the said chemosynthetic reaction or reactions have
applications including but not limited to: as biofuels or as
feedstock for biofuel production; in the production of fertilizers;
as leaching agents for the chemical extraction of metals in mining
or bioremediation, as chemicals reagents in industrial or mining
processes.
88. A method according to claim 71, whereby biomass and/or
biochemicals produced through the said chemosynthetic reaction or
reactions has applications including but not limited to: as a
biomass fuel for combustion in particular as a fuel to be co-fired
with fossil fuels; as a carbon source for large scale fermentations
to produce various chemicals including but not limited to
commercial enzymes, antibiotics, amino acids, vitamins,
bioplastics, glycerol, or 1,3-propanediol; as a nutrient source for
the growth of other microbes or organisms; as feed for animals
including but not limited to cattle, sheep, chickens, pigs, or
fish; as feed stock for alcohol or other biofuel fermentation
and/or gasification and liquefaction processes including but not
limited to direct liquefaction, Fisher Tropsch processes, methanol
synthesis, pyrolysis, or microbial syngas conversions, for the
production of liquid fuel; as feed stock for methane or biogas
production; as fertilizer; as raw material for manufacturing or
chemical processes; as sources of pharmaceutical, medicinal or
nutritional substances; soil additives and soil stabilizers.
89. A method according to claim 71, whereby said chemoautotrophic
microorganism cultures are maintained in apparatus known in the art
and science of microbial culturing including but not limited to:
airlift reactors; biological scrubber columns; bioreactors; bubble
columns; continuous stirred tank reactors; counter-current, upflow,
expanded-bed reactors; digesters and in particular digester systems
such as known in the prior arts of sewage and waste water treatment
or bioremediation; filters including but not limited to trickling
filters, rotating biological contactor filters, rotating discs,
soil filters; fluidized bed reactors; gas lift fermenters;
immobilized cell reactors; membrane biofilm reactors; mine shafts;
pachuca tanks; packed-bed reactors; plug-flow reactors; static
mixers; tanks; trickle bed reactors; vats; vertical shaft
bioreactors; wells caverns; caves; cisterns; lagoons; ponds; pools;
quarries; reservoirs; towers--with the vessel base, siding, walls,
lining, or top constructed out of one or more materials including
but not limited to bitumen, cement, ceramics, clay, concrete,
epoxy, fiberglass, glass, macadam, plastics, sand, sealant, soil,
steels or other metals and their alloys, stone, tar, wood, and any
combination thereof.
90. A method according to claim 71 where additional sequestration
of carbon dioxide is accomplished through steps in the carbon
capture and conversion process where carbon dioxide is reacted with
minerals including but not limited to oxides or hydroxides to form
a carbonate or bicarbonate product.
Description
PRIORITY CLAIM
[0001] This application is an international PCT application
claiming priority to and the benefit of U.S. Provisional
Application No. 61/228,898 filed Jul. 27, 2009 and U.S. Provisional
Application No. 61/358,700 filed Jun. 25, 2010, each hereby
incorporated by reference herein.
TECHNICAL FIELD
[0002] This invention relates to the technical field of clean
processing systems, specifically, methods and apparatus for
capturing and converting carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel
consumption sources. Through perhaps the use of chemoautotrophic
bacteria, the invention provides apparatus and methods that can be
used to capture and reduce carbon dioxide emissions into the
atmosphere.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
[0003] Carbon sequestration is a topic receiving enormous attention
in the media and among government agencies and industries involved
in fossil fuel production and use. Combustion of fossil fuels is
responsible for approximately 83% of greenhouse gas emissions in
the U.S. Currently, the U.S. emits 6.0.times.10.sup.9 tons carbon
dioxide per year and this value is expected to increase by 27% over
the next 20 years. Furthermore, the reported link between
increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases such as carbon
dioxide (CO.sub.2) in the atmosphere and global climate change has
prompted several countries to adopt environmental standards that
cap CO.sub.2 emissions and aim to reduce current emissions.
Although the U.S. has not adopted a similar set of standards, in
April 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that carbon dioxide was a
pollutant and that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S.
EPA) has the authority and obligation to regulate carbon dioxide
emissions from automobiles. Recently, the U.S. EPA has decided that
carbon dioxide poses a threat to human health and the environment
and that it will now be added to a list of 5 other greenhouse gases
that can be regulated under the Clean Air Act. Given recent
activity regarding carbon dioxide emission regulations, it is
projected that the federal government may enact a carbon
cap-and-trade bill. When this eventually occurs, utility companies
and coal producers are in a position to be particularly affected by
federal carbon dioxide regulation due to the large carbon dioxide
footprint of coal-fired power plants. Although no carbon dioxide
standards have been applied to power plant emissions in the U.S.,
plans for dozens of new coal-fired power plants have either been
scrapped or delayed due to issues revolving around states concerned
with future climate change legislation. Whether there is global
consensus on the causes of climate change or not, it appears that
carbon dioxide-emitting industries in the U.S. will soon be
required to implement carbon management protocols that reduce
emissions and (or) purchase or produce carbon credits.
[0004] The present invention seeks to aid the United States in the
pursuit of Energy Security in an environmentally safe manner. An
objective of the present invention may be to set the stage for
achieving the vision of "Clean Coal" by turning carbon dioxide into
a valued resource rather than a costly expense and long-term
liability risk. In addition to coal, embodiments of the present
invention have applications in carbon dioxide capture for fossil
fuel conversion sources, natural gas-fired power plants and perhaps
even distributed generation fuel cells, as well. Solving the carbon
dioxide challenge for both coal and natural gas may assure the
commercial viability of United States energy industries in a carbon
constrained world and in turn may secure the Nation's economic
prosperity.
[0005] Subsurface injection of carbon dioxide (also termed
"geological carbon sequestration") has been considered as a default
method for large-scale carbon sequestration, even though the
associate costs of carbon dioxide isolation and purification from
flue gas, compressing, transportation, and injection are
prohibitive, and little is known about the long term sustainability
and potential environmental impacts. Therefore technologies that
can achieve source capture and sequestration of carbon dioxide is
highly desired. Technically and economically, capture and
conversion of carbon dioxide in proximity of emission sources, such
as power plants, can offer the most cost-effective model of
sustainable carbon sequestration.
[0006] Biological techniques as represented by microalgae reactors
have been investigated since the 1970s and are now implemented at
pilot scale for carbon dioxide capture and conversion to biomass.
Although the algae-based technology shows potential in carbon
dioxide capture, it may be limited by the light source (i.e.
sunlight) for photosynthesis, the primary carbon dioxide-fixation
pathway in algae. Another limitation may be the large area of land
required to operate the photobioreactors. These obstacles, however,
may be overcome by the bacterial reactor in the various embodiments
of the present invention. Bacteria may be the best candidates in
bio-trapping of carbon dioxide thanks to their high reproduction
rate and ubiquitous distribution.
DISCLOSURE OF THE INVENTION
[0007] The present invention may provide biological carbon capture
and conversion systems and methods to remove carbon dioxide from
emissions. In embodiments, the present invention may integrate a
carbon capture process into existing fossil fuel combustion sources
including combustion power plants and natural gas fueled fuel cell
plants as a biological carbon capture and conversion system to
remove carbon dioxide from emissions.
[0008] The resulting biomass produced may be reprocessed as
fertilizer, feedstock, biofuel, or the like or may even be directly
injected into the combustion facility (such as perhaps in co-fired
applications). It is a goal of the present invention to utilize
carbon dioxide as a value-added product of fossil-fuel power plants
rather than a production-limiting waste product. In this way the
carbon originally released from coal combustion can be captured and
recycled in perhaps a closed-loop system, thus, significantly
lowering overall carbon emissions and even improving plant
efficiency.
[0009] It is another goal of the present invention, in embodiments,
to enhance economic and energy security of the U.S. through the
development of a technology that can reduce energy-related
emissions of greenhouse gas and possibly improve the energy
efficiency of power generation utilities and perhaps even to ensure
that the U.S. can maintain a technological lead in this field.
Additionally, this concept may support many goals of the
Administration's Energy and Environment Agenda including investment
in the next generation of energy technologies, producing more
energy at home and promoting energy efficiency (perhaps through
biofuel and co-fire applications for the biomass produced), closing
the carbon loophole, and promoting U.S. competitiveness.
[0010] The impacts of embodiments of the present invention may
provide utility companies with an environmentally responsible and
economically viable carbon capture system. Furthermore, the
utilization of this technology can be relatively rapid compared to
other options for carbon capture such as geologic sequestration
which may still require years of testing and modeling as well as
sophisticated site characterization and large capital costs with
each deployment to ensure injection activities do not create a
legacy of potential liability for end users and future generations
of Americans. In addition to the potential for a relatively rapid
R&D phase, low risk to the end user in terms of long term
liability, and the ability to improve plant efficiency through
biofuel production and (or) co-fire applications, the biologic
carbon capture system can almost certainly create new green jobs
associated with the design, construction, maintenance and operation
of these systems at power plants across the country as well as spur
increased activity and innovation in the bio-processing/biofuel
industries focused on utilizing the enormous quantities of biomass
that can be produced.
[0011] Naturally, further objects, goals and embodiments of the
inventions are disclosed throughout other areas of the
specification and claims.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0012] FIG. 1 shows a conceptual model of bacterial reactor system
for carbon dioxide capture and conversion into biomass in
accordance with some embodiments of the present invention.
[0013] FIG. 2 shows a conceptual model of an overall biological
carbon capture and conversion process in accordance with some
embodiments of the present invention.
[0014] FIG. 3 is an example of a schematic summary of a
chemoautotrophic CO.sub.2 capture Calvin Cycle in accordance with
embodiments of the present invention.
[0015] FIG. 4 is an example of a conceptual model of the CAT
biological carbon capture and bioproducts process in accordance
with embodiments of the present invention.
[0016] FIG. 5 is an example of an integrated CO.sub.2 Capture, CAT
and Bioproducts system diagram in accordance with embodiments of
the present invention.
[0017] FIG. 6A is an example of catalytical transesterification in
accordance with embodiments of the present invention.
[0018] FIG. 6B is an example of a system dynamic modeling for
market penetration in accordance with embodiments of the present
invention.
[0019] FIG. 7 is an example of a schematic diagram of the drop-in
CAT process integrated into about 600 MWe power plant with the flow
rate unit of Mlb/hr (the biomass conversion is assumed to be 95%)
in accordance with embodiments of the present invention.
[0020] FIG. 8 is an example of a schematic diagram of the energy
balance around the CAT process with the unit of energy flow of
Btu/hr.
[0021] FIG. 9 is an example of a general system in accordance with
embodiments of the present invention.
MODE(S) FOR CARRYING OUT THE INVENTION
[0022] The present invention includes a variety of aspects, which
may be combined in different ways. The following descriptions are
provided to list elements and describe some of the embodiments of
the present invention. These elements are listed with initial
embodiments, however it should be understood that they may be
combined in any manner and in any number to create additional
embodiments. The variously described examples and preferred
embodiments should not be construed to limit the present invention
to only the explicitly described systems, techniques, and
applications. Further, this description should be understood to
support and encompass descriptions and claims of all the various
embodiments, systems, techniques, methods, devices, and
applications with any number of the disclosed elements, with each
element alone, and also with any and all various permutations and
combinations of all elements in this or any subsequent
application.
[0023] The present invention, may provide in various embodiments,
methods of reducing carbon dioxide pollutants and perhaps even
processing systems for reduction of carbon dioxide pollutants. For
example, a method may include but is not limited to producing at
least some carbon dioxide emissions from a fossil fuel consumption
source; containing said at least some carbon dioxide emissions from
said fossil fuel consumption source; efficiently introducing said
at least some carbon dioxide emissions from said fossil fuel
consumption source into at least one processing reactor;
chemoautotrophically digesting carbon dioxide of said at least some
carbon dioxide emissions with a plurality of chemoautotrophic
bacteria in said at least one processing reactor; biologically
producing at least some biomass from said chemoautotrophic
digestion of said carbon dioxide with said chemoautotrophic
bacteria; and perhaps even ecologically reducing atmospheric
release of said carbon dioxide emitted from said fossil fuel
consumption source. A system may include but is not limited to a
supply of at least some carbon dioxide emissions from a fossil fuel
consumption source; an emissions container configured to contain at
least some of said carbon dioxide emissions from said fossil fuel
consumption source; at least one processing reactor configured to
receive said at least some of said carbon dioxide emissions from
said fossil fuel consumption source; a plurality of
chemoautotrophic bacteria in said at least one processing reactor
configured to digest at least some of said carbon dioxide; an
amount of biologically produced biomass by said chemoautotrophic
bacteria located in said at least one processing reactor; and
perhaps even an ecological reduction of atmospheric release of said
carbon dioxide emissions.
[0024] Initial understanding of the present invention may begin
with the fact that embodiments using chemoautotrophic bacteria
perhaps even in a bioreactor for carbon dioxide consumption may be
combined with various technologies such as but not limited to:
fossil fuel consumption sources, power generation source, cement
producing plants, coal refineries, oil refineries, refineries, lime
producing plants, non-power generation sources, coal-fired power
plants, natural gas-fired power plants, generation fuel cells,
combustion power plants, or the like. Fossil fuel consumption
sources may include any type of system or application in which a
fossil fuel may be consumed or perhaps even converted in the
process. For example, coal is heated in cement plants and power
generation sources in the production of cement and energy and
perhaps even crude oil may be converted into gasoline, diesel fuel,
asphalt, or the like at refineries and the like. In embodiments,
fossil fuel conversion sources may include any system or industrial
system in which carbon dioxide is generated and emitted into the
atmosphere.
[0025] Generally, chemoautotrophic bacteria, such as
sulfur-oxidizing bacteria, may be a candidate species to fix carbon
dioxide emitted from various processes. Chemoautotrophic bacteria
may utilize elemental sulfur, various sulfide minerals, sulfur
containing compounds, or other products as an energy source (e.g.,
electron donors) and carbon dioxide as their primary carbon source.
Chemoautotrophic bacteria may efficiently oxidize sulfur containing
compounds, sulfur and perhaps even sulfides, may fix carbon
dioxide, and may even produce biomass or perhaps even high cell
biomass as an end product. Chemoautotrophic bacteria (5) may be a
carbon dioxide emissions scrubber in which they may be utilized to
scrub carbon dioxide from emissions of fossil fuel consumption
sources which may be considered a carbon dioxide capture technique
for the purpose of meeting emission values imposed by cap and trade
legislation or the like.
[0026] One example of a flow process representing various
embodiments of the present invention is demonstrated in FIG. 1,
where at least one processing reactor (4) may be configured to
receive and even process emissions such as raw flue gas from stack
emissions from a fossil fuel consumption source (2). A fossil fuel
consumption source (2) may release emissions which may include a
supply of carbon dioxide emissions (1) and other emissions (8) such
as nitrogen, nitrogen oxide, sulfur oxide, oxygen, combinations
thereof, or the like emissions. Carbon dioxide emissions may be
efficiently introduced, perhaps even passing through a heat
exchanger (32) for cooling of the emissions in some embodiments,
into at least one processing reactor (4). Efficient introduction
may include filtering, channeling, flowing, directing, capturing,
moving, transporting, connecting (either directly or indirectly)
and the like of emissions from a fossil fuel consumption source to
at least one processing reactor. A plurality of chemoautotrophic
bacteria (5) may be included in at least one processing reactor to
which the plurality of chemoautotrophic bacteria (5) may be
configured to chemoautotrophically digest carbon dioxide from the
emissions. Chemoautotrophic bacteria may include a plurality of
bacteria of the same species or may even include a plurality of
bacteria from more than one species of bacteria and may be carbon
fixing bacteria and sulfur oxidizing bacteria, such as but not
limited to A. ferrooxidans, Sulfolobus spp., and combinations
thereof. These biologically based carbon dioxide capture
technologies may utilize natural occurring reactions of carbon
dioxide within living organisms like chemoautotrophic bacteria.
Carbon dioxide from emissions may be enzymatically transformed and
integrated into the bacteria, thus carbon may be stored in the cell
biomass. The biologically produced endproduct biomass (6) may be
dominantly amino acids, carbohydrates, and water. It is noted that
the chemoautotrophic bacteria may be utilized in various carbon
dioxide capture technologies with or without a processing reactor
and the chemoautotrophic bacteria may be supplied from any kind of
source for use in these systems. In embodiments, a processing
reactor may include any type of vessel, reactor, container, system,
or the like.
[0027] An amount of biologically produced biomass (6) may be
collected from at least one processing reactor with a biomass
collector (29). In embodiments, a biomass collector (29) may
include a continuous biomass removal element for continually
removing biomass from at least one processing reactor such as but
not limited to a concentrator, centrifuge, disk-stack centrifuge,
or the like. The produced biomass may be readily collected and
removed from the reactor to allow recycling of the medium. Biomass
(6) may be processed or even converted into a product (21) which
may include but is not limited to methane, hydrogen, alcohol,
fertilizer, feedstock, bioenergy, food, biofuel, biodiesel,
military fuels, ethanol, plastics, animal feedstock, food
amendments, or the like; therefore, perhaps a sellable end-product
which can off-set operational expenses or even generate surplus
profit. The process may be cost-effective in capturing carbon
dioxide from emissions, let alone the side benefit from the biomass
end product. The commercial value of this technology, perhaps when
used in scaled up operations, could be unlimited.
[0028] A variable amount of biomass can be produced through this
process depending on the level of carbon sequestration required by
the emissions source; however, even modest amounts of carbon
capture and conversion may result in the production of massive
amounts of biomass. The ability of the Nation to become
self-sufficient with sustainable energy technologies is an
essential aspect for achieving energy security and, in turn,
economic security and prosperity. Our consumption rate of domestic
coal may be slowed by feeding the biomass into the plant as a fuel
along with perhaps a smaller amount of coal. This may lengthen the
duration that our domestic coal can be used to achieve energy
security. Utilizing the biomass to produce transportation fuels may
enable lessening import of foreign oil from Venezuela and the
Middle East.
[0029] As mentioned above, the present invention may provide an
energy supply (9) perhaps even a chemoautotrophic bacteria energy
supply to a plurality of chemoautotrophic bacteria (5) which may be
located in at least one processing reactor (4). The energy supply
(9) needed to drive biological carbon fixation to the
chemoautotrophic bacteria in this type of reactor can be added, for
example, as a supply of sulfur containing compounds (16) such as
metal sulfides, hydrogen sulfide (H.sub.2S) or perhaps even
elemental sulfur, of which there may be large stockpiles worldwide
as this is a waste product of the oil refining process.
Additionally, it may be possible to recycle an energy supply to the
chemoautotrophic bacteria with a recycled chemoautotrophic bacteria
energy supply (10) within a system and perhaps even from a second
processing reactor (11) which may generate the chemoautotrophic
bacteria energy supply. In some embodiments, a recycled
chemoautotrophic bacteria energy supply may be recycled from within
the same processing reactor. A processing reactor, or in some
instances a second processing reactor (11), may include sulfate
reducing bacteria which could reduce sulfate generated by the
chemoautotrophic bacteria to sulfides to which the sulfides can
then be utilized by and even recycled to the chemoautotrophic
bacteria as their energy supply. Thus, in embodiments, a second
processing reactor (11) may produce a supply of sulfur containing
compounds (16) and may even be a sulfate-reducing processing
reactor. A supply of sulfur containing compounds (16) may include
elemental sulfur, sulfides, metal sulfides, hydrogen sulfide, or
the like which can be consumed by chemoautotrophic bacteria.
Further, the sulfate-reducing bacteria may also produce biomass (6)
which may be collected and processed as discussed herein.
[0030] Accordingly, in embodiments, recycling of an energy supply,
for example sulfur containing compounds, to the chemoautotrophic
bacteria may include providing sulfate reducing bacteria (13) in a
second processing reactor (11), connecting (either directly or
indirectly) at least one processing reactor (4) containing the
plurality of chemoautotrophic bacteria to the second processing
reactor (11) containing the sulfate reducing bacteria with perhaps
a connection (14), generating sulfate (15) in the least one
processing reactor (4) containing the chemoautotrophic bacteria
(5), supplying sulfate (18) from the at least one reactor (4)
containing the chemoautotrophic bacteria to the second processing
reactor (11) containing the sulfate reducing bacteria (13),
generating sulfur containing compounds (16) in the second
processing reactor (11) containing the sulfate reducing bacteria
(13); and perhaps even supplying sulfur containing compounds (19)
from the second processing reactor (11) containing the sulfate
reducing bacteria (13) to the at least one processing reactor (4)
with the plurality of chemoautotrophic bacteria (5) as may be
understood from FIG. 1. In this embodiment, the at least one
processing reactor (4) may be configured to generate sulfate (15)
(perhaps by the chemoautotrophic bacteria) and the second
processing reactor (11) may be configured to generate sulfur
containing compounds (16) (perhaps by the sulfate reducing
bacteria) and the two reactors may be connected (14) (either
directly or indirectly) so that the sulfate and sulfur can be
supplied each other. The two reactors may be physically apart from
each other, may be connected or even joined by a permeable membrane
or the like as may be understood in FIG. 2, or even any type of
connection or attachment including but not limited to tubes, flows,
pipes, or the like. In other embodiments the contents of the two
reactors may be combined into one reactor and perhaps even multiple
processing reactors may be used.
[0031] Alternatively, a sulfate reducing bacteria energy supply
(35) may be provided to the sulfate reducing bacteria (13) which
may include waste organic carbon, organic matter, recycled organic
matter such as cell mass or other residual materials collected from
the biomass or byproducts of the sulfate reducing bacteria and
recycled back to the sulfate reducing bacteria, combinations
thereof or the like. The sulfate reducing bacteria energy supply
(35) may be recycled within a system or may even be supplied from
an outside source. In this case, the energy input to drive the
sulfate reducing processing reactor could be in the form of waste
organic carbon sources including but not limited to waste dairy
products, returned milk, waste dairy byproducts, cheese whey,
straw, woodchips, or the like. In other embodiments, a recycled
process biomass residue electron donor supply (45) may be supplied
to the sulfate reducing bacteria such that recycled process biomass
residue may be used by the sulfate reducing bacteria as an electron
donor supply.
[0032] In embodiments and as can be understood from FIG. 2,
emissions from a fossil fuel consumption source including carbon
dioxide emissions (1) and perhaps even other emissions (8) as
discussed herein may be contained as they exit the fossil fuel
consumption source (2) perhaps even in an emissions container (3).
An emissions container (3) may prevent up to about 100% of the
emissions, in particular carbon dioxide emissions, from entering
the atmosphere and may transport the emissions to at least one
processing reactor (4). In other embodiments, a system may prevent
up to about 65%, up to about 70%, up to about 75%, up to about 80%,
up to about 85%, up to about 90%, up to about 95%, up to about 99%,
and perhaps even between about 65% to about 100% of carbon dioxide
emissions from entering the atmosphere. An emissions container may
be a receptacle, filter, channel, pipe, enclosure, or the like. In
embodiments, emissions may be processed prior to being introduced
into the at least one processing reactor. An emission pretreatment
element (31) may pretreat the emissions perhaps even minimally to
separate carbon dioxide from the other emissions. In this respect,
an emission pretreatment element (31) may be a carbon dioxide
emission separator. After emissions may be treated in the emission
pretreatment element (31), carbon dioxide may be sent (40) to at
least one processing reactor (4) for carbon digestion as discussed
herein.
[0033] A processing reactor (4) may contain a growth medium (27)
which may include but is not limited to bacteria, mineral salts,
trace vitamins, enzymes, a commercially available enzyme for pH
control, pH control (33), or the like. The growth medium (27) may
have adequate retention for carbon dioxide thus providing a carbon
dioxide retainer but other gases such as nitrogen may flow through
with perhaps no solubility. Bacteria such as chemoautotrophic
bacteria in the processing reactor may digest carbon dioxide at a
digestion rate which is up to or even equal to a carbon dioxide
inflow rate into the processing reactor. This may provide for
optimal operation.
[0034] As biomass (6) may be removed and collected from at least
one processing reactor (4) and perhaps even from a second
processing reactor (11) into a biomass collector (29) it may
contain both biomass (6) and water (37). Water (37) may be returned
(39) back to the processing reactor(s) or otherwise recycled into a
system. These may be separated out with a separator (38) and may
even be dried in a biomass dryer (22) to which the biomass may be
further processed into various products (21) as discussed herein.
In embodiments, the biomass may be injected or even fed back into a
fossil fuel consumption source with perhaps a fossil fuel
consumption source system injector (25) perhaps as fuel for the
consumption source.
[0035] Embodiments of the present invention may also potentially
extend the supply of non-renewable fuel sources such as coal or the
like. Biomass produced in the processing reactor(s) may be
processed into biofuel such as biodiesel or perhaps even ethanol or
can be co-fired with coal in the power plant, then the carbon
dioxide initially liberated from coal through combustion can be
captured and re-combusted. This process can potentially recycle the
carbon dioxide several times, and thereby reduce the amount of
non-renewable fuel required to meet a plant's energy production
goals. Further, any undigested carbon dioxide (41) remaining in the
processing reactor (4) may be recycled. For example, an undigested
carbon dioxide recycling element (23) may recycle unprocessed
carbon dioxide (41) back into a system perhaps even back into the
fossil fuel emissions or even into an emission pretreatment element
(31) as can be understood from FIG. 2. A processing reactor may
discharge other gases such as nitrogen (34) and oxygen (36) from
the reactor and release them into the atmosphere or otherwise
release these byproducts. In embodiments, waste products,
impurities, contaminants or the like may be removed from the
processing reactors or system as well.
[0036] Embodiments of the present invention may achieve the vision
of "Clean Coal" by turning carbon dioxide into a value-added
product of coal-fired power plants, as well as other fossil fuel
based consumption systems, rather than a production-limiting waste
product that needs to be disposed of through costly processes
(e.g., deep subsurface injection/sequestration). As can be
understood from the discussion above, one concept of the system may
include flue-gas injection into an aqueous reactor where
chemoautotrophic bacteria such as carbon-fixing bacteria may pull
carbon out of solution and may incorporate it into their biological
tissues and lipids (e.g., carbon fixation), perhaps effectively
capturing the carbon dioxide and converting it into biomass that
can be continually harvested from the processing reactor. This
biomass can potentially be reprocessed as fertilizer, feedstock,
biofuel, or perhaps even directly injected into a combustion
facility (e.g., co-fired applications) to offset the amount of coal
needed to achieve the plant's Btu goals and, therefore, perhaps
dilute other impurities in the flue gas such as NO.sub.x and
SO.sub.x stemming from coal combustion. In this way the carbon
originally released from coal combustion can be captured and may
even be recycled in a closed-loop system, perhaps, significantly
lowering overall net carbon dioxide generation and emissions
perhaps allowing a plant to maintain power production without
exceeding allowable carbon dioxide limits. Embodiments of the
present invention may elucidate optimal conditions that maximize
carbon assimilation rates of chemoautotrophic bacteria in a
bacterial system which may include a two-part bacterial system as
illustrated in FIGS. 1 and 2
[0037] There are many advantages to utilizing non-photosynthetic
organisms, such as chemoautotrophic bacteria, for carbon capture
including the ability to operate in various parameters such as but
not limited to all latitudes and climates, 24 hours a day, and
perhaps even in densely populated reactor tanks rather than
operating only when and where adequate sunlight may be available in
ponds or transparent tubes that may require large amounts of
surface area to achieve sufficient illumination for photosynthesis,
temperature control systems, and even supplemental lighting for
24-h operation. The need for adding heat during the winter season
in northern climates may be avoided with non-photosynthetic
organisms and the additional controls and design of algae-based
systems may also add significant capital and maintenance costs that
can be significantly reduced in a simple chemoautotrophic bacterial
growth tank that can be located underground to help eliminate
exposure to the elements as well as reducing the overall process
footprint on site. Therefore, in embodiments, a processing reactor
may be operated in any climate, up to 24 hours a day, and may even
contain a dense population of chemoautotrophic bacteria.
[0038] In embodiments, optimal conditions (e.g., pressure,
temperature, and pH), nutrient concentrations (if any), sulfur
concentrations, sulfur species concentration, inorganic carbon
concentrations (e.g., CO.sub.2, HCO.sub.3.sup.-, or CO.sub.3.sup.2-
depending on pH), inorganic ion concentrations, bacterial cell
densities, and the like can be determined for maximum carbon
fixation rates of various species/strains of carbon fixing
bacteria. Inorganic carbon may be introduced as pure carbon dioxide
for preliminary tests and then in simulated flue gas mixtures for
more sophisticated tests that may also determine the lowest level
of flue gas purity (i.e., least amount of pretreatment required and
largest cost savings) for efficient bacterial growth and subsequent
carbon capture. As discussed above, the reactor may also be
equipped with a disk-stack centrifuge or similar device capable of
continually removing biomass from the reactor at pre-determined
cell densities to produce a bacterial paste that can be used for
determining the quality of the biomass and potential applications
such as biofuel production or use as a co-fired fuel for blending
with coal.
[0039] Alternative embodiments of the present invention may include
a multistep biological and chemical process for the capture and
conversion of carbon dioxide and/or other sources of inorganic
carbon, into organic compounds, where one or more steps in the
process utilize obligate and/or facultative chemoautotrophic
microorganisms, and/or cell extracts containing enzymes from
chemoautotrophic microorganisms, to fix carbon dioxide or inorganic
carbon into organic compounds where carbon dioxide gas alone or in
a mixture or solution as dissolved carbon dioxide, carbonate ion,
or bicarbonate ion including aqueous solutions such as sea water,
or in a solid phase including but not limited to a carbonate
mineral, is introduced into an environment suitable for maintaining
chemoautotrophic organisms and/or chemoautotroph cell extracts,
which fix the inorganic carbon into organic compounds, with the
chemosynthetic carbon fixing reaction being driven by chemical
and/or electrochemical energy provided by electron donors and
electron acceptors that have been generated chemically or
electrochemically or input from inorganic sources or waste sources
that are made accessible through the process to the
chemoautotrophic microorganisms in the chemosynthetic reaction step
or steps.
Exhibit A
BACKGROUND OF ALTERNATIVE EMBODIMENTS OF THE INVENTION
[0040] The present invention may include a Chemoautotrophic ("CAT")
bacteria-based CO.sub.2 consuming process for the production of
biodiesel and other bio-based products. The CAT process can provide
the energy sector and industrial emitters with a carbon capture and
conversion technology that may produce salable products perhaps
thereby turning an environmental hazard and expense (such as a
greenhouse gas "GHG") into a valued resource with the potential to
significantly reduce or perhaps even eliminate all foreign oil
imports. If all power plant CO.sub.2 emissions are converted to
biodiesel such as perhaps to about 64 billion barrels of biodiesel,
then the domestic transportation fuel market could be well supplied
providing the U.S. with a strong export product creating a double
benefit for the U.S. trade deficit. Power plant efficiency can
improve and the cost of electricity ("COE") impact to Americans may
be well below the ARPA-E target of less than a 20% increase.
SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVE EMBODIMENTS OF THE INVENTION
[0041] A variety of bacteria can be developed and evaluated for
CO.sub.2 consumption and the biomass precursor quality from which
bio-oils may be extracted and end products produced. A two
bioreactor system may be advanced to facilitate reduction of
SO.sub.4.sup.2- to H.sub.2S using sulfur-reducing bacteria ("SRB").
H.sub.2S may supply an energy source to the CAT bioreactor. The
SO.sub.4.sup.2- produced in the CAT bioreactor may be recycled to
generate additional H.sub.2S in a first bioreactor. Non-extractable
fractions may be converted to nutrients to drive the bacterial
system and perhaps even supply essentially all of the nutrient
needs. Biomass generated in both the CAT and SRB bioreactors can be
processed to obtain purified lipids and other substances for
processing into biodiesel, bioproducts, and other materials.
Experiments may elucidate data needed to design and establish
operational parameter performance and control values for a
bioreactor. The bio-oils may be used as a precursor to synthesize
bioproducts and petroleum replacement products.
[0042] Modeling and systems integration can be conducted for
large-scale power plant applications and perhaps even small-scale
operations such as cement and fertilizer manufacturing facilities
as a "drop in" process into a conventional biodiesel plant and may
even impact of different amounts of carbon capture on power plant
efficiency and costs. An important aspect of the deployment project
may entail assessing market penetration for CAT biodiesel and other
end products. Bio-oils can spur several domestic industries--a
number of transportation fuels and other chemicals and polymers
needed to sustain domestic U.S. industries and infrastructure
assets, such as highways, airport runways, or the like. This may be
a dramatically different approach compared to coal gasification for
domestic production of such end products. The proposed concept may
represent a transformational pathway to convert CO.sub.2 into
petroleum replacement products such as biodiesel and may even
provide an efficient and economical method of capturing
CO.sub.2.
[0043] Naturally, further objects, goals and embodiments of the
inventions are disclosed throughout other areas of the
specification claims.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVE EMBODIMENTS OF THE
INVENTION
[0044] As mentioned earlier, the present invention includes a
variety of aspects, which may be combined in different ways. The
following descriptions are provided to list elements and describe
some of the embodiments of the present invention. These elements
are listed with initial embodiments, however it should be
understood that they may be combined in any manner and in any
number to create additional embodiments. The variously described
examples and preferred embodiments should not be construed to limit
the present invention to only the explicitly described systems,
techniques, and applications. Further, this description should be
understood to support and encompass descriptions and claims of all
the various embodiments, systems, techniques, methods, devices, and
applications with any number of the disclosed elements, with each
element alone, and also with any and all various permutations and
combinations of all elements in this or any subsequent
application.
[0045] Embodiments of the present invention may investigate carbon
assimilation rates of chemoautotroph bacteria such as sulfur
oxidizing bacteria (bacteria that fix inorganic carbon (CO.sub.2)
through the oxidation of chemicals rather than from sunlight). This
process may use these organisms in a biological carbon capture and
conversion system to remove carbon dioxide (CO.sub.2) from utility
and industrial facility emissions.
[0046] The proposed approach may rely on the concept that synthetic
symbiosis between sulfur reducing bacteria and sulfur oxidizing
bacteria can be sustained in a controlled manner with perhaps
predictable biomass production rates in a specified operating
regime. Furthermore, this may be accomplished through chemical
looping of sulfur between sulfur reducing heterotrophs and sulfur
oxidizing chemolithioautotrophs. In addition, the technical
approach may lend itself to tailoring of the operational conditions
for the harvesting of biological lipids and fatty acids perhaps for
the purpose of producing biofuels and other petroleum replacement
products. Also, the harvested materials may display unique
attributes, in that bacteria may produce a wide range of
high-valued bioproducts such as paraffin class hydrocarbons, as
well as perhaps even standard biodiesel precursor lipids. The
non-extractable biomass residue may be used as the nutrient source
for the sulfur-reducing bacteria. The concept herein may address
the deficiencies of the state of the art by producing a system that
may not be reliant on an uncontrolled source of energy for the
conversion of anthropogenic CO.sub.2 into biofuels, perhaps even
while providing a low-cost carbon capture technology for GHG
emitting facilities.
[0047] Embodiments of the present invention may address specific
societal goals in that it (1) may enhance economic and energy
security of the U.S. through the development of a technology that
could produce energy-dense, infrastructure compatible liquid fuels
from CO.sub.2 perhaps as the only carbon source thereby reducing
petroleum imports (2) may effectively capture stationary sources of
energy-related emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG), (3) may improve
the energy efficiency of GHG emitting facilities, such as power
generation utilities and industrial and manufacturing facilities,
and perhaps even (4) may ensure that the U.S. could maintain a
technological lead in this field. Additionally, the concept may
support many of the goals of the US administration including
investment in the next generation of energy technologies, producing
more energy at home and promoting energy efficiency (by producing
biofuels and bioproducts that store carbon), and perhaps even
promoting U.S. competitiveness. As such, the technology can bring
about a transformation of the industry, providing a leap in
advancement to overcome a number of obstacles that are currently
limiting the deployment of biofuels and carbon capture for
retrofitting utility and industrial GHG facilities for GHG
emissions control.
[0048] Embodiments of the present invention may include CO.sub.2
removed from a flue gas and injection into an aqueous reactor where
carbon-fixing bacteria may use carbon and incorporate it into their
biological tissues and lipids. The process may capture CO.sub.2
using chemoautotrophic bacteria in an anaerobic bioreactor, which
may be fueled by H.sub.2S supplied by perhaps a separate bioreactor
occupied by perhaps sulfate reducing bacteria ("SRB"). The
SO.sub.4.sup.2- generated as a product of sulfide oxidation in the
CAT bioreactor may be used as a source of electron acceptors for
making sulfides (electron donors) in the anaerobic system. The
biomass may be harvested from the bioreactor and processed into
biofuel and/or petroleum replacement products. The residual biomass
from the oil extraction may be used as the nutrient source for the
process. Oil yields may be estimated to be sufficient to provide
residual biomass to meet up to about 100% of the nutrient needs of
the process.
[0049] Biofuels may be currently one of the few commercial
alternatives to continued dependency on oil. The Energy
Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA) established a goal of
36 billion gallons of biofuels by 2022 to power our cars, trucks,
jets, ships, mining equipment, locomotives and tractors. Today only
12 billion gallons of biofuels are produced annually. The EIA's
reference case for the 2010 Annual Outlook projects that most of
the growth in liquid fuel supply will be met by biofuels--yet EIA
also projects that the industry will not meet the 2022 goal. The
existing biofuels industry represents three generations of fuels
that in their own right were transformational and market
disruptive.
[0050] The first-generation agricultural-based ethanol biofuels
industry has grown from 1% of the U.S. fuel supply to 7% in 2008.
However, the Renewable Fuel Standard in the EISA has effectively
placed a 15 billion gallon cap on ethanol production from corn as
part of the new 36 billion gallon target for 2022. The remainder of
the target has to be met with second and third generation advanced
biofuels, including cellulosic ethanol, biobutanol, biobased
diesel, and other biofuels that are a direct replacement for
petroleum-based fuels.
[0051] While corn ethanol has played a key role in establishing the
U.S. biofuel industry, it remains controversial, due in part to the
fact that using corn for biofuels displaces crops that would
otherwise have been used for humans, requires high water use, and
requires high amounts of land. Recent estimates are that corn based
ethanol has replaced 32% of the corn crop in the U.S. for ethanol
production.
[0052] While cellulosic ethanol may hold great promise, the lack of
commercial-scale facilities in test or in operation has created a
degree of uncertainty regarding the true operating expenses
required for producing cellulosic ethanol. While cellulosic ethanol
is transformational over corn based ethanol, unmodified engines may
be unable to process volumetric blends above 10% ethanol without
significant damage. Although Flex Fuel Vehicles (FFVs) enable the
driver to choose between using gasoline or ethanol blends up to 85%
(E85), market acceptance in the U.S. is very low, since only 1% of
U.S. gas stations offer E85 ethanol pumps.
[0053] The third-generation of biofuels, based on algae may allow
for the production of `drop-in fuels` while also making use of the
pre-existing petroleum infrastructure. As such, algae may secrete
lipids with chemical compositions similar to petroleum-based
hydrocarbons. Algae-based fuels may have growth pattern and
harvesting processes qualitatively different from any other
alcohol- or oil-producing biomass. Algae, due to their high oil
yield (up to about 50.times. the amount of biofuel compared to
other leading feedstocks), uptake and cycling of CO.sub.2, and
perhaps even capacity to be grown on marginal land in brackish
and/or saline water may have spurred its development. Algae may
have yields of about 2,000 gallons per acre per year in open ponds
and yields may be increased up to about 10,000 gallons per acre per
year, depending upon the genetically modified organisms ("GMO")
strains that are used and perhaps even the utilization of
photobioreactors (PBRs). However, those strains that produce high
yields may also tend to have slower growth rates, thereby creating
even higher land burdens for production.
[0054] The proposed chemoautotrophic-based technologies may be the
fourth generation biofuel with perhaps equivalent transformational
and market disruption attributes that the third generation
algae-based biofuels industry had over the first and second
generation ethanol biofuels. Like third-generation biofuels, the
bacteria-based technologies may allow for `drop in` fuels that
replace and are compatible with petroleum-based fuels, not solely
as an additive. Although CAT based systems may not produce a very
high lipid content, they may have unique compositions that may
allow for other very high valued other products such as essential
equivalent lipid yields with bacteria as with algae.
[0055] Due to the fact that CAT based systems do not need sunlight
for growth, the land area required for the CAT bacteria growth may
be about 1/50.sup.th the size needed for open algae-based
production and may be about 1/10.sup.th the size for algae in
photobioreactors that need expensive energy-consuming artificial
lighting. Fourth-generation bio-fuels, due to their smaller
footprint, may be more amenable to be co-located with small local
and large CO.sub.2 sources, such as power plants.
[0056] Biofuels production may not be the only benefit of
bacteria-based systems. Emerging bacteria-based biofuels production
processes may also be carbon capture technologies. According to the
EIA, the United States energy industry emitted over 5.9 billion
metric tonnes of CO.sub.2 in 2006 and is projected to emit over 6.4
billion metric tonnes/yr by 2030, an 8% increase in emissions.
Those fuels with the largest emissions are coal and oil, with 2.5
and 2.6 billion metric tonnes/year, respectively. As a result of
climate change debate, the U.S. is considering mandatory reductions
in CO.sub.2 in incremental stages, as such 5% additional reduction
of CO.sub.2 per every 5 years in order to qualify for credits.
[0057] Carbon capture and storage (CSS) technologies may be
expensive and may consume large amounts of parasitic power. The
high parasitic power load with CCS decreases plant net efficiency
from perhaps about 36.8% to only about 24.9%, perhaps resulting in
increased CO.sub.2 emissions if power is purchased to offset the
parasitic power. It is important to note that every about 1% of net
plant efficiency decrease releases another about 20 million tons of
CO.sub.2 emissions fleet-wide annually. The high capital of CCS and
the parasitic load may result in an increase in cost of electricity
(COE) of between about 70 and about 80% with rates increasing from
about 6.4 cents/kWh to about 11.4 cents/kWh.
[0058] The value to the power plant of an alternate CCS technology
such as bacteria-based capture which may not significantly increase
parasitic power can be calculated from these COE increases. For
example, the total value to the utility of about 65% carbon capture
on the about 550 MWe plant may result in about 10.4 cents/kWh,
based on interpolated DOE's data between zero and about 90% percent
capture. Assuming values of about 8000 hrs of annual plant
operation and about 550 MWe net electric output, the total
additional cost that would be incurred to meet about 65% CCS is
estimated to be about $176 million annually. Clearly, the
implementation of the proposed CAT bacteria biofuels process could
significantly reduce the economic burden of carbon capture on the
utility and the ratepayers, but also on the economics of the
biofuels produced, enhancing energy and environmental security.
[0059] There may be an ongoing development in the area of
bacteria-based biofuels. Although most bacteria generate complex
lipid for specified chemical production, it has been reported that
some bacteria can accumulate oils under some special conditions
with maximum oil content of about 80%. Development of bacteria
based biofuels and other energy related technologies have started
to gain momentum in industrial applications. Some applications may
include supplementing algae systems during non peak sunlight
conditions to perhaps increase production. Other trends in the
field include Amery's focus on utilizing bacteria as a
micro-refinery by feeding the bacteria sugar cane and then `milking
the microbe` to secrete synthetic diesel. The microbe (e.g., algae,
bacteria and the like) may be a mini-processor of biomass feedstock
directly into fuels. Other companies may appear to have engineered
both yeast and E. coli bacteria to make use of previously
undiscovered metabolic pathways to convert sugars into hydrocarbon
products than can be put straight into your gas tank, or perhaps
even sent off to a refinery for processing. This may be nearly
carbon neutral and may be about 65 percent less energy intensive
than ethanol fermentation. The utility industry may have studied
bacteria for waste treatment; one successful application is
THIOPAQ.RTM. technology owned by a Netherlands company, Paques.
This technology may have been adapted for sulfur removal from
utilities. Chen has demonstrated that methane production may be
possible from reverse microbial fuel cell. In this application, the
nutrient source may typically acetate and a voltage may be applied
across the cell to increase and/or perhaps stimulate the oxidation
of the nutrient source. It has been documented that this process
can be accomplished in lab-scale equipment with an overall energy
balance of about 80%. Embodiments of the present invention may be
totally different from these technologies due to its use of
sulfur-based shuttle. Dual bacteria species may be used, the
conversion of residue to supply the nutrients needed, (as opposed
to use of external waste streams as the nutrient source) and the
production of biodiesel and other bioproducts are examples of the
process differences.
[0060] Embodiments of the present invention may include a CAT
bacteria biofuels process which may be based on the synthetic
symbiosis of bacteria by creating an energy shuttle through the use
of sulfur recycling, which may represent a transformational step to
the biofuels industry. Biofuels can be produced from CO.sub.2
sources using chemoautotrophic (CAT) bacteria such as Thiobacillus
ssp. and sulfur reducing bacteria (SRB) such as Desulfovibrio
desulfuricans to form biomass that can be converted to
biofuels.
[0061] The microbial processes employed may be derived from two
specific categories, sulfur reducing bacteria (SRB) and sulfur
oxidizing bacteria (SOB). Sulfur reducing bacteria may use sulfate
or sulfite to oxidize organic material for biomass generation, and
release sulfides or elemental sulfur. Sulfur oxidizing bacteria
(for example, lithotrophs) consume sulfides in combination with
inorganic carbon such as CO.sub.2 to produce biomass and may
release sulfates. This process may be represented by the Calvin
cycle and one variant may be depicted in FIG. 3. Sulfide may be a
known biologic poison, and removal of the sulfide may stimulate
growth of the sulfur reducing bacteria and perhaps even the
transport of sulfides to the chemolithoautotrophs may supply them
with the needed sulfur for their metabolism. In return the
chemolithotrophs may oxidize the sulfide to sulfate or sulfite and
it is returned to the SRB by recycle. Resulting biomass from both
bacterial subsystems may be recovered using standard separation
methods and may be processed as sources of lipids and paraffin for
the production of petroleum replacement bio-products. The biomass
residue present after lipid extraction may be used as a nutrient
source for the SRB bioreactor.
[0062] One embodiment of a conceptual model of the process is
provided in FIG. 4. Nutrients delivered to the system at Nu1 may
provide metabolic carbon to the SRB reactor bacteria. SRB reactor
bacteria may convert sulfates and sulfites into H.sub.2S which may
be removed from the reactor through S1. To further enhance the
removal of H.sub.2S from the SRB reactor, nitrogen or low oxygen
flue gas can be sparged through inlet SWG1. The sulfide rich gas
stream may enter the SOB reactor from S1 and may be combined with
CO.sub.2 sparged from inlet C1. The CO.sub.2 may be metabolically
fixed in the bacteria of the SOB reactor and low CO.sub.2
concentration flue gas may be removed from the system via outlet
C2. During the process of fixing carbon in the SOB reactor,
H.sub.2S may be converted to H.sub.2SO.sub.4 and other sulfates and
sulfites. These highly soluble sulfur species may then be returned
to the SRB reactor in a recycle loop S2. Each reaction vessel may
be monitored for pH and additions of buffering solutions may be
added to each reactor through pH1 and pH2, respectively. As biomass
may accumulate in the given reactors there can come a time when
critical mass has been achieved and the biomass may be ready for
harvesting. Harvesting may be accomplished by removal of the
biomass laden broth through B1 and B2 for each reactor respectively
and delivering it to the associated biomass separators. Make up
wash water may be delivered to each reactor through inlets 1 and 3.
The biomass separators may be the first level biomass stream
condensing stage in which the bulk broth may be removed and
recycled through return streams 2 and 4 for each reactor subsystem.
Depending on the separation technique employed, chemical addition
such as flocculants and surfactants can be added through inlet
streams 5 and 6.
[0063] Condensed biomass streams B3 and B4 may then be transported
to lipid and perhaps even oil extraction equipment perhaps either
as individual stream or as combined streams. The CAT system can be
dropped into a biofuels production loop as presented in FIG. 5.
[0064] CO.sub.2 rich gas may leave the emissions source through
flow C1 and may be supplied to the SOB reactor of the CAT system.
Gas cleanup units may be inserted in the C1 and C2 flow, and then
CO.sub.2 lean gas may be returned to the emissions source for
venting through a stack or even reused in the system elsewhere.
Condensed biomass streams may be delivered to the biofuels and
petroleum replacement products (PRP) production unit or may be
delivered to a combination of units as perhaps either separate or
combined streams through B1. B2 may convey the bioresidue left over
after lipids and oil extraction to a bioresidue conversion process,
where the residue may be broken down into a more readily
metabolized nutrient source for microbial activity. Then the
converted biomass may be fed back to the CAT system as nutrients
for the SRB reactor. Biofuels and other PRP may then exit the
system to be transported to end use nodes. Water treatment
by-products produced during harvesting could be land-filled.
[0065] The products extracted from the SRB-CAT bacterial biomass
may provide advantages for processing biofuels. Materials extracted
from the biomass may contain lipids and paraffin. A study conducted
by Davis (1968) indicated that the SRB Desulfovibrio desulfuricans
contained 5 to 9% lipids with 25% of the lipids consisting of
paraffin. Paraffin may be a high-valued component used for
industrial purposes including synthesis of ozone inhibitors in
rubbers and hot climate asphalt additives. The expected lipid
content of CAT bacteria may be in the range of between about 20 to
about 30%. The existence of paraffin in biomass generated by the
CAT bacteria may be a unique part of the CAT biofuels and
bioproduct process. If successful, the concept may leapfrog over
today's ethanol and algae approaches perhaps due to its siting
flexibility as well as accommodating large CO.sub.2 sources due to
favorable economics with carbon capture credits and its
non-reliance on local, dispersed and small scale-sources of
nutrients.
[0066] Embodiments of the present invention may have the potential
to be transformational in that it may provide a new, highly
efficient pathway for biofuels production options, that can reduced
the nation's dependence on both domestic and foreign oil perhaps by
up to about 64 billion barrel crude equivalents annually and can be
rapidly deployed. A CAT bacteria-based system may provide the
transportation sector with `drop-in` fuels, such as biodiesel,
aviation fuel, and gasoline perhaps providing a leap forward in
commercial deployment relative to algae. The uniqueness of the CAT
bacterial process may occur in three areas--process, product, and
integration with a CO.sub.2 source.
[0067] Embodiments of the present invention may provide a CAT
bacteria process which may employ a unique shuttling system based
on sulfur, which may be abundant on the earth. It may not use any
expensive rare earth elements or perhaps even any organic redox
shuttles. Unlike other bacteria-based systems that may use
metal-containing solids, a CAT bacteria system may be gas- and
liquid phase perhaps avoiding the complications of transfer of fine
solids in (and between) reactors, which may allow superior mixing
and bacteria growth. By replacing solid particle based electron
shuttling systems with soluble gases the tendency for biofilm on
the shuttle substrate may be eliminated.
[0068] In embodiments, a feature of a CAT bacteria concept may
employ a dual reactor system with perhaps different bacteria and
different conditions thereby allowing for optimization of each
bacteria growth. A system can modify CO.sub.2 conditions to meet
H.sub.2S production in a controlled manner to produce the optimum
production of biomass.
[0069] Unlike photosynthesis-based biofuels production process, a
CAT-based process may not be driven by photosynthesis. Unlike
photosynthesis based algae that may capture less or no CO.sub.2
during low light conditions, thus perhaps complicating their
integration with a variety of CO.sub.2 sources, even with the use
of artificial lighting, a CAT bacteria process may provide a
controlled and perhaps even constant capture of CO.sub.2
independent of lighting conditions maximizing yield.
[0070] Bacteria can be harvested separately to produce biofuels
that may meet industry specifications and may maximize the recovery
of high value components, such as paraffin or together for lipid
yield and biofuel production. CAT bacteria used produced lipid
yields may be comparable to algae and may be used in petroleum
replacement products as well as biofuels such as biodiesel. The SRB
bacteria can produce one quarter of its extractable mass as
paraffins, which may have high value use in ozone proofing rubber
and as a hot climate asphalt additive. Heterotrophic bacteria may
have similar growth rates to algae, perhaps affording reasonable
lipid yields.
[0071] The footprint of the CAT bacteria-based system may be
projected to be lower than ethanol or open algae production systems
(acres/ton of biomass) perhaps by a factor of about 50 compared to
open algae production systems and a factor of about 10 compared
with algae photobioreactors that require external lighting at
significant operating costs perhaps resulting in less restriction
on CAT siting.
[0072] A CAT bacteria-based concept can be produced in reasonably
sized modules to meet varying sized CO.sub.2 sources and may be
compatible with commercially available lipid extraction and
biodiesel production process, thereby allowing for rapid
deployment.
[0073] Embodiments of the present invention may be self sufficient
with respect to nutrients by converting a non-oil portion of a
biomass into nutrients needed in the process. Other microbial
processes that require external nutrient sources may be limited in
scale due to the quantity of local nutrients available and the
infrastructure cost to deliver it to the CO.sub.2 source, perhaps
restricting potential deployment sites.
[0074] In a CAT bacteria-based process, CO.sub.2 can be selectively
removed from the flue gas and any remaining flue gas, CO.sub.2 and
other flue gas species can be can be handled through existing plant
stack and plant infrastructure (fans), affording easy retrofit.
[0075] Unlike open algae systems with high evaporative water
losses, the embodiments of the present invention may employ
recycling in an essentially closed loop. Makeup water can also be
supplied by low rank coal upgrading processes or even by produced
waters from the coalbed methane and oil and gas production.
[0076] The bacteria-based concept may be unique and may offer many
attributes making it a transformational and market disrupting
technology with rapid development and broad and rapid commercial
deployment options.
[0077] The bioreactor media and gas conditions may impact the
assimilation rates of selected chemoautotrophs and these
chemoautotrophs may impact the product composition related to
biofuels and petroleum replacement products. Other process data
needed may include bacteria/strains growth rates, extractable
product characteristics, water quality treatment needs, and perhaps
even baseline data for operation of bioreactors.
[0078] Species/strains of bacteria for use in the anaerobic sulfur
reducing bioreactor and the chemoautotrophic CO.sub.2 capture
bioreactor may be determined experimentally based on process
efficiencies of bacteria species known to perform the required
assimilations. Bacteria evaluated for use in the sulfur reducing
system may include Desulfovibrio ssp. The chemoautotrophic bacteria
evaluated for use in the CO.sub.2 capture bioreactor may include
species from three (3) genuses, Thiobacillus ssp, Paracoccus ssp,
and perhaps even Thiovulum ssp. Thiobacillus denitrificans may be
the primary candidate to be well characterized and may have been
shown to be effective for sulfide oxidation. Other species from the
Thiobacillus genus such as T. thioparus, T. caldus and T.
hydrothermalis may also prove to be effective. Several available
species from the Paracoccus and Thiovulum geneses are expected to
be effective.
[0079] Bioreactors may be used to culture the bacteria to determine
perhaps the most prolific species for the capture of CO.sub.2 and
reactor sizing. Optimal conditions within the bioreactors can be
determined for each bacteria/strain using a number of environmental
variables. Process parameters may be controlled using computer
systems equipped to maintain constant conditions and perhaps to
identify small changes in biomass production. The impact of
nutrient combinations and sources on bacteria populations and
assimilations can also be determined.
[0080] Bacteria cultures for use in the sulfur reducing bioreactor
and the chemoautotrophic CO.sub.2 capture bioreactor may be
acquired from the American Type Culture Collection (ATCC) bacteria
performance/engineering design. Chemoautotrophic bacteria cultures
can be evaluated for maximum carbon fixation rates and perhaps even
lipid production based on optimal conditions including but not
limited to: temperature, pH, nutrient concentrations (micro- and
macro-nutrients), H.sub.2S concentrations, inorganic carbon
concentrations (e.g., CO.sub.2, HCO.sub.3.sup.- or CO.sub.3.sup.2-
depending on pH), inorganic ion concentrations, bacterial cell
densities, or the like. Sulfur reducing bacteria can be assessed
for maximizing the conversion of SO.sub.4.sup.2- to H.sub.2S based
on optimal environmental conditions in the bioreactor. Lipids
associated with biomass generated by the bacteria may be quantified
and characterized to determine an amount and quality of extractable
product for end-use applications such as biofuels and petroleum
replacement products. Water quality may impact assimilation rates
in the bioreactor systems. Tests using a range of soluble salt
concentrations can be conducted using the candidate
bacteria/strains. Water exiting the bioreactor can be tested to
determine the need for treatment, particularly when using
wastewaters or alternate sources such as coal bed methane produced
waters.
[0081] Optimization studies may determine the conditions required
to maximize the production of biomass perhaps using the most
prolific bacterium. Deployment may use the highest biomass
producers under the most favorable environmental conditions
identified. Methods can be integrated to improve biomass quantity
and quality including but not limited to: (1) harvesting point; (2)
optimizing CO.sub.2 incorporation into the bioreactor solution to
reach maximum biomass production; and perhaps even (3) the use of
an electrical current to improve the kinetics of CO.sub.2
assimilation. The biomass may be harvested during an exponential
growth phase of the bacteria. An optimal concentration for
harvesting bacterial biomass may be determined experimentally for
each of the species/strain of bacteria. Other considerations for
optimization may include methods of injecting CO.sub.2 into the
bioreactor solution using either gas sparging (bubbles) or perhaps
even membrane infuser systems (microscopic bubbles), such as being
developed by Carbon2Algae (C2A). Higher levels of solution CO.sub.2
may enhance biomass yields to a maximum for each bacteria/strain
evaluated (potentially about 3 to about 5 times higher with
membrane infusers). Another potential optimization agent may be
associated with the use of an electrical current to enhance
bio-reactions. The use of electrical current may have been shown to
enhance chemoautotrophic bacteria growth rate in an anaerobic
system and may improve oxidation of sulfides in an oxidizing
bioreactor resulting in higher assimilation of CO.sub.2 and
corresponding increased biomass yield. Electron use by bacteria may
not have a direct relationship with sulfate reduction as electrons
can reduce SO.sub.4.sup.2-.pi.directly without bacterial
involvement and therefore may be unlikely to improve bio-reactions
in the anaerobic system. Biomass may be harvested from the
chemoautotrophic bioreactors at intervals near the peak in the
growth phase of the bacteria. The impact of biomass removal on
growth rate of the bacteria may be determined with the objective of
establishing the optimum removal point that will not detract from
the continued pace of CO.sub.2 assimilation. CO.sub.2 can be
incorporated into the chemoautotrophic bioreactor using injection
methods. The rate of CO.sub.2 assimilation can be determined for
each injection method evaluated. The maximum solution
concentrations of CO.sub.2 can be determined along with the
corresponding rate of CO.sub.2 assimilation. An electrical current
may be established in the chemoautotrophic bioreactor to perhaps
assess impact on the kinetics of the CO.sub.2 assimilation
reactions. A series of tests of currents may determine the
corresponding CO.sub.2 assimilation rates to determine whether or
not an advantage may be gained with the addition of the electrical
current.
[0082] The conventional method of harvesting the bacteria from the
bioreactors may be by filtration, followed by a drying step, an oil
extraction step and perhaps even the production of the biodiesel.
It may be desirable to assess advanced technologies being developed
by others as to their applicability to any core chemoautotrphic
bacteria carbon capture and biofuels process. There may be a number
of advanced harvesting techniques that are being developed for
other biofuels and other industries that may have promise with the
process of the embodiments of the present invention. Most
harvesting methods available for microbial process may have been
originally developed for animal tissues and plant materials. The
development of harvesting processes may depend on the conditions of
the culture media, nature of the bacteria cells, or perhaps even
the type of extract desired. The following process steps may be
examined: (1) killing or forced dormancy of the bacteria can be
achieved by several approaches, including heating, cooling,
foaming, addition of chemical agents such as acid, base, sodium
hypochlorite, enzymes, or antibiotics; (2) the technologies
available to separate the bacteria from the bulk culture media may
involve centrifugation, rotary vacuum filtration, pressure
filtration, hydrocycloning, flotation, skimming, and perhaps even
sieving. These technologies can be applied in conjunction with
other techniques, such as addition of flocculating agents, or
coagulating agents. The relevant parameters to be determined may
include bacteria size, density and tendency to coalesce into larger
flocks; (3) water may need to be removed from the harvested
bacteria to prevent the occurrence of lipolysis or perhaps even
metabolically the breakdown of triglycerides into free fatty acids
within bacteria cells. Various technologies may be used for the
drying step, such as perhaps direct and even indirect methods; and
perhaps even (4) after dewatering, the lipids and fatty acids may
be separated from the bacterial mass, or even extracted. It may be
important during the extraction to prevent auto-oxidative
degradation and perhaps even to minimize the presence of artifacts
to ensure high yield of triglycerides. Available approaches may
include but are not limited to centrifugation, high pressure
homogenization, filtration, as well as solvents such as methanol or
ethanol extraction. Solvent extraction can be a combination of
mechanical and chemical cell lysis, or cell disruption. Mechanical
methods of lysis as well as chemical methods and ezymes may also be
examined.
[0083] It may be desirable to assess the application of advanced
technology for biodiesel production as well as other bio-products,
such as green plastics. From a chemical point of view, biodiesel
may be mainly composed of fatty acids mono-alkyl esters. It may be
produced from triglycerides (the major compounds of oils and fats)
with short chain alcohols perhaps via catalytical
transesterification as shown in the example of FIG. 6A. Depending
on the type of catalyst adopted, the methods for biodiesel
production can be classified as conventional or perhaps even enzyme
based. For the former, alkali catalysts, such as KOH and NaOH, with
the combination of acid catalyst, such as phosphorus acid, may be
used. For the latter, enzyme, such as lipase, may be used as
catalyst. The effort can determine if these techniques are
applicable to various embodiments of the present invention.
Extracted microbial oil can also be applied for the production of
green plastics including packaging films mainly for use as shopping
bags, containers and paper coatings, disposable items such as
razors, utensils, diapers, cosmetic containers and cups, as well as
medical surgical garments, upholstery, carpets, packaging,
compostable bags and lids or tubs, or the like. Investigations may
be performed to explore several factors related to effective
green-plastic production. The quality of resultant green plastics
can be determined through ASTM D6866. The major component of the
residue may be the cell debris leftover from oil and fatty acid
extraction. Like algae, cell debris of the bacteria may contain
cellulose and perhaps even a variety of glycoproteins. These
components may be analyzed and evaluated for end use
applications.
[0084] Bacteria can be produced from various types of lipid
materials, including paraffins and triglycerides. In the early
stages of bacteria harvesting, the triglyceride, paraffinic, and
other lipid materials from these processes may require some
chemical characterization. Characterization of the triglyceride
material prior to transesterification may be important to help
determine the potential yield of the eventual biodiesel conversion
process. This may involve using thin layer or column chromatography
to evaluate the polar vs. non-polar lipids content. Triglyceride
lipids may be transesterified with methanol (to perhaps biodiesel),
further characterization can be performed using a gas
chromatography/mass spectrometry techniques to provide a fatty acid
type and distribution for the material. The standardized
characterization of biodiesel for use as a transportation fuel may
follow ASTM method D6751.
[0085] Control of dual reactors and perhaps even the resultant
products under continuous operation may be assessed. These may
represent critical items for commercial deployment. In addition,
the operational issues such as fouling and perhaps even scaling may
need to be known and may be resolved prior to progressing to the
next development phase.
[0086] Embodiments of the present invention may include a plant
design, development and perhaps even validation may consist of
integration of two bacteria bioreactors and verification of
operational parameters. A system may be based on two independent
bacterial systems perhaps providing essential sulfur looping to
sustain carbon capture at a constant and predictable rate. It may
be desirable to size, determine and optimize operational conditions
perhaps to ensure efficient coupling of the systems within the
operational regime. Bacterial species selection may be key in this
effort, perhaps due to the highly specific needs of individual and
consortium bacterial species. Design parameters may specify fluid
stream flow rates and chemical composition for control of nutrient
addition, pH, H.sub.2S recovery and delivery systems, operational
temperatures for the subsystem reactors, and perhaps even working
volume for desired output parameters for each of the subsystems.
Also, the system design may consider comparison of state-of-the-art
membrane gas infusion techniques in comparison with traditional gas
sparging. In addition, techniques developed for harvesting
microalgae may be evaluated for bacteria, and may have to be
modified accordingly.
[0087] Embodiments of the present invention may include but are not
limited to vessel sizing, line sizing, input/output identification,
system parameter monitoring specification, and perhaps even biomass
density calculations. This may include design of H.sub.2S recovery
units for the control of toxic H.sub.2S levels in the primary
sulfur reducing reactor, and may even include delivery units for
the infusing of H.sub.2S into the secondary carbon fixing reactor.
Also, CO.sub.2 species control through pH and monitoring of these
species online and integrated into the control system may be
designed. This may involve assigning process control steps to
develop relationships between CO.sub.2 uptake, carbon cycling in
the reactor, H.sub.2S to CO.sub.2 uptake, and perhaps even the best
source reduction or increase to accomplish these reactions in a
controlled manner while maximizing carbon conversion. Gas feed to
the reaction vessels can be designed with the flexibility to
evaluate multiple gas sparging and perhaps even membrane based gas
infusion technologies. This may include comparison of existing
technologies for extraction of oils from bacteria and perhaps even
determination of the most suitable choice for the application, or
the development of new technologies to tailor the extraction
technique to bacterial applications.
[0088] System performance may determine a system's flexibility to
evaluate external processing techniques such as but not limited to
membrane gas infusion, cyclonic separation of biomass, high
pressure homogenization and perhaps even additional
state-of-the-art bacteria based oil extraction techniques, and
operational improvements may be evaluated for reducing
bio-fouling.
[0089] A system startup and shakedown may be completed in several
stages. The system may be run with sterile water for operational
checks. Next, the seed reactors may be run to provide biomass for
analysis to ensure that the species may be produced and conform to
bench-scale data. Then each of the large bioreactors may be run
independently to ensure working parameters meet the expected
operational regimes. Finally integrated operation of the combined
systems may be performed and operational conditions determined for
steady state operation. Initially operation of the seed vessel may
focus on the use of traditional gas sparging methods. A seed vessel
may be fitted with state-of-the-art membrane gas infusion
technology and the operational parameters at different pressure,
temperature and nutrient feed rates may be quantified to define
scaling factors for unit operation. The parameters needed to
recover the system from an upset in operational conditions may be
determined, such as a loss in productivity in the sulfur reducing
reactor or a sudden change in pH in both tanks as well as perhaps
quantifying the system integrity over longer term runs for
stability. Biomass may be produced and even recovered using
industry standard dewatering techniques and then the effective
biomass can be tested for adaptability of algae based oil
extraction techniques and the two sub-streams of biomass and oil
can be analyzed for acceptability and conformity to bench-scale
results. Additional information on bio-fouling can be evaluated
during the production runs and vessel liners to prohibit microbial
attachment.
[0090] The biodiesel module may be tested to ascertain the
performance of the reactor design and reaction control, separator
design and control, parameter monitoring, as well as reactor and
separator scale-up. The yield of biodiesel may be compared with the
results for the other feed materials. The quality of resultant
biodiesel can be examined according to ASTM D 6751 in terms of
flash point, water and sediment, carbon residue, sulfated ash,
density, kinematic viscosity, sulfur, cetane number, cloud point,
copper corrosion, acid number, free glycerin, total glycerin,
density and perhaps even iodine number; the results can be compared
with petroleum diesel fuel.
[0091] Embodiments of the present invention may provide CAT based
system integration and deployment strategies. It may be desirable
to assess the scalability of the CAT process using modeling
approaches, the efficiency and cost modeling results for the
integration of the CAT process for various sized CO.sub.2 sources,
an infrastructure/product market assessment, including the impacts
of regulations in the CO.sub.2 emissions area and the legislative
initiatives for enhanced biofuels production and an engineering
scale-up and perhaps even estimate a pre-commercial-scale module of
the CAT process.
[0092] In order to affect scale-up of the CAT biodiesel/bioproducts
production process, the modeling of the system may be necessary.
Operational test data can be used to refine the preliminary model
both functionally and quantitatively. In order to understand the
commercial transition and the impact on both the facility supplying
the CO.sub.2 and the biodiesel/bioproducts market, CAT process
integration at the CO.sub.2 generating site can be conducted. Three
scenarios may be addressed: (1) Fossil-fuel fired utility that
generates electric power at a nominal 570 MW scale and need to be
retrofitted with 65% carbon capture; (2) Refinery that may have a
CO.sub.2 source, H.sub.2S source and easy integration into the
refinery products; and perhaps even (3) Industrial-scale facility,
such as cement, lime, or fertilizer manufacturing facility, with a
local biodiesel/bioproducts market.
[0093] The modeling and system integration can be based on the CAT
process model performance. The fossil-fuel fired utility case can
expand on the preliminary mass balance as discussed below. The base
case power plant may produce at least about 4 million tons/yr of
CO.sub.2 emissions before about 65% capture.
[0094] Embodiments of the present invention may address the CAT
process as a `drop in` biofuels process into a conventional
biodiesel plant and may even evaluate the impact of different
amounts of carbon capture on plant efficiency and costs. The use of
the CAT process residue biomass for various products as feed for
aquaculture and livestock feed and nutrient source for process can
be assessed. A similar analysis of the integration of the CAT
process into a refinery that has a CO.sub.2 source, an H.sub.2S
source to perhaps reduce the load requirements for the CAT process
and which could provide easy integration into the biocrude refining
to various refinery products. The model input may use about 4
million tons of CO.sub.2 as the base refinery input parameter to
perhaps study the bioprocess integration with a refinery
application and about 65% CO.sub.2 capture. In addition, it may be
desirable to examine a smaller-scale application such as an
industrial-scale cement, lime or fertilizer manufacturing facility,
with perhaps a local biodiesel/bioproducts market. For the cement
plant, a CO.sub.2 emissions of about 0.5 million tons may be
considered. There are several local markets for biodiesel,
including at mines, railroad fueling stations, or even municipality
and perhaps even school district markets.
[0095] The integration may be based on the biocrude yield from the
pilot-scale tests and the quality of biodiesel and other
co-produced products. The configuration can also include the use of
the bio-residue product as a nutrient source or alternatively
produce other bioproducts, such as aquaculture and livestock feed
supplements.
[0096] , Embodiments of the present invention may address the
system dynamic modeling for CAT biodiesel market penetration. An
example of the strategy model analysis for CAT biodiesel, modeled
after an ethanol model by NREL, is presented in FIG. 6B. Following
a similar protocol, a similar model and analysis can be developed
and performed for CAT biodiesel. As explained above, there may not
be a "one-size-fits-all" solution. CAT biodiesel market penetration
can be built upward as in the NREL model (FIG. 6B) from the policy
and the external economy basis. The policy space can include
government funding opportunities, legislative mandates such as the
Renewable Portfolio Standard, low carbon fuel as well as government
(both federal and state) subsidies in the form of tax credits and
perhaps even loan guarantees. The legislative policies may also
include the impact on the CO.sub.2 source, such as carbon capture
and storage legislation, carbon credits and impact of alternate
carbon capture options on parasitic power and cost of electricity.
The external economy factors that may include interest rates and
price of competing technologies may assess the government policies
tax credits, and subsidies. Note that international agreements may
also put pressure on the U.S. to reduce GHG. It may be desirable to
examine the supply infrastructure, pre-commercial R&D and
perhaps even evaluation of the investment potential for each type
of application. Deployment at industrial-scale facilities may need
a distributed biodiesel market-based, while larger-scale CO.sub.2
sources siting strategy may allow for infrastructure compatible
fuel distribution. All of these analysis components may be needed
to minimize risk for investment and permitting decisions that
allows for commercial deployment.
[0097] Embodiments of the present invention may include preliminary
evaluations of the preliminary mass balance for the system,
preliminary system energy balance, projected composition of the
biodiesel that can be produced from microbial materials,
preliminary cost estimates for the CAT bacterial biofuel process,
and perhaps even a preliminary mass balance for the system.
[0098] A CAT process may involve a symbiosis of two types of
bacteria with very different attributes and metabolic requirements.
Chemolithotrophic bacteria may have been shown to fix inorganic
carbon in conjunction with oxidation of sulfides. When lactate, a
relatively common nutrient, may be used, one possible metabolism is
listed as follows:
2CH.sub.3CHOHCOO.sup.-+SO.sub.4.sup.2-.fwdarw.2CH.sub.3CHOO.sup.-+2HCO.s-
ub.3.sup.-+HS.sup.-+H.sup.+ [0099] .DELTA.G.degree.'=-160 kJ/mol
sulfate A possible metabolism for the sulfide oxidation may
include:
[0099]
6CO.sub.2+3H.sub.2S+6H.sub.2O.fwdarw.C.sub.6H.sub.12O.sub.6+3H.su-
b.2SO.sub.4 [0100] .DELTA.G.degree.'=226.8 kJ/mol sulfate In
addition, it has been reported that CO.sub.2 fixing rate at the
sulfide oxidation bio-reactor may be 0.132 g CO.sub.2/g
Bacteria/hr. In the sulfate reduction bio-reactor, nutrient
(lactate) consumption rate may be about 2.1 g Lactate/g
Bacteria/hr, and sulfate reduction rate may be about 1.2 g
Sulfate/g Bacteria/hr. This may leads to about 1.9 g Nutrient
(lactate) for about 1.0 g CO.sub.2 to be captured.
[0101] A schematic of a typical about 570 MWe coal-fired power
plant is shown in FIG. 7. Depending on the fuel characteristics, a
coal-fired power plant may emit approximately 4 million tons of
CO.sub.2 annually. The plant may also have a limited amount of
SO.sub.2 and NOx emissions that might be beneficial in a CAT
process. FIG. 7 represents the mass balance around the drop-in CAT
process integrated into the power plant. CO.sub.2 emission from a
603 MW PRB power plant may be about 1195 Mlb/hr. If it is assumed
that about 65% of CO.sub.2 can be captured by CAT process, around
about 1476 Mlb/hr nutrient will be needed for the bacteria
cultivation according to the aforementioned calculation, i.e.,
about 1.9 g Nutrient (lactate) for about 1.0 g CO.sub.2 to be
captured. Assuming that about 95% biomass conversion in the
bioreactors, biomass production rate can be about 2140 Mlb/hr,
about 30% of which can be used for biodiesel production. The rest
(about 70%), i.e., about 1476 Mlb/hr, can be recycled to the
bioreactors as the nutrients through the conversion step, thereby
meeting the system nutrient needs.
[0102] In embodiments, to generate about 603 MW of electricity, the
PRB coal and air input may be about 633 and about 5038 Mlb/hr,
respectively, with a flue gas amount of about 5671 Mlb/hr. After
sulfur and ash removal, the amount of cleaned flue gas may be about
4659 Mlb/hr, about 25.6 wt % of which is CO.sub.2, i.e., about 1195
Mlb/hr. Assuming that about 65% of CO.sub.2 will be captured by CAT
process, about 1476 Mlb/hr nutrients may be needed for the bacteria
cultivation according to the preliminary study, i.e., about 1.9 g
nutrient (lactate) for about 1.0 g CO.sub.2 to be captured.
Assuming that about 95% biomass conversion in the bioreactors,
biomass production rate can be about 2140 Mlb/hr, about 30% of
which can be used for biodiesel production. The rest (about 70%),
i.e., about 1476 Mlb/hr, can be recycled to the bioreactors as the
nutrients through the conversion step, thereby perhaps eliminating
the external nutrient supply. When other waste nutrients may be
available, there may be additional residue available to partially
replace consumption.
[0103] The overall process energy balance may include three
subsystems, i.e., biomass production, biodiesel production from
about 30% lipids extract, and perhaps even bioresidue conversion
(about 70%), as well as its surroundings. As illustrated in FIG. 8,
the corresponding conversion efficiencies of the biomass
production, biodiesel production and biomass conversion are assumed
to be about 100%, about 80% and about 95%, respectively. The
overall energy balance around the CAT process may be,
E.sub.co1+E.sub.bp+E.sub.bc=E.sub.bi+E.sub.de+E.sub.by
The energy flow for each stream may be listed in the FIG. 8. When a
material stream may be involved, its energy may be calculated
according to its enthalpy of combustion. Note that the value of
E.sub.bp may contain the enthalpy value of methanol input for the
biodiesel production, i.e., about 5485.04 Btu/hr. Thus, the
thermodynamic conservation (process) efficiency, (.eta.).sub.p, of
the CAT process, may be
( .eta. ) p = E bi E co 2 + E bp + E by .times. 100 % = 10557.6 0 +
11882 + 4924 .times. 100 % = 63 % ##EQU00001##
[0104] Biodiesel can contain no more than about six or about seven
fatty acid esters. This renders it possible to estimate the
properties of each pure component, and then compute the mixture
properties based on the available mixing rules. The properties of
anticipated biodiesel fuel may exceed industry targets (see Table
1).
TABLE-US-00001 TABLE 1 WRI Proposed Targets Component Target Liquid
fuel type: diesel fuel, JP-8 51 cetane aviation fuel and/or higher
octane Biodiesel Fuel fuels for four-stroke internal combustion
engines Anticipated liquid fuel energy density 42 MJ/kg Anticipated
liquid fuel heat of 0.06 MJ/kg vaporization Anticipated liquid
fuel-energy-out to >63% photon/electrical energy-in of the
envisioned system Rare earth elements or organic redox Economical
at distributed shuttles generation, industrial facility and central
power plant scales
[0105] Nutrients for bacteria cultivation may be about $0.50/kg
with the lactate price close to about $0.50/kg. Energy requirements
for bacteria harvesting based on the mechanical methods can be
approximately $0.10/kg. For microbial oil extraction, the cost
could be around $0.60/kg when methanol is used as extraction
solvent with the price may be about $0.3/kg. The cost for biodiesel
production may be about $0.20/kg through the conventional method.
It may be important to note that methanol used for microbial
extraction may also serve as the only reactant besides bio-oil for
the biodiesel production. Thus, total cost for the biodiesel may be
about $1.20/kg, or about $3.87/gallon. The cost estimation is
summarized in Table 2. Similar analyses may be needed for site
specific deployment of the CAT process.
TABLE-US-00002 TABLE 2 Estimation of the Production Cost (US$/kg)
of Biodiesel from Bacterial- Based Oils Cost Bacteria Bacaterial
oil Biodiesel Total cost structure Nutrients harvesting extraction
production (per kg) In US$ $0.50 $0.10 $0.40 $0.20 $1.20
With the expected energy density of biodiesel to be about 42 MJ/kg,
the cost of fuel could be about $0.30/MJ, or about
$3.0.times.10.sup.-5/Btu based on about 1 MJ equal to about 948
BTU.
[0106] Biodiesel may generally contain no more than about six or
about seven fatty acid esters enabling estimating the properties of
each pure component, and then computing the mixture properties
based on the available mixing rules. No rare earth elements may be
used and organic redox shuttles involved may not be easily deployed
economically at large scale. Integration with coal fired power
plants may enable use of low grade thermal energy and may even
provide a ready supply of nutrients.
[0107] The biodiesel fuel can be a next generation renewable fuels
that may easily integrate into the U.S. current biofuel refining
and distribution infrastructure at both large central plant and
local distributed scale plant, perhaps while not diverting
resources currently utilized for food production. In fact, one end
product can be domestic fertilizer to lower costs for domestic farm
livestock and produce production. The proposed concept may not use
photosynthetic autotrophic production. If the over 2.5 billion
metric tons of CO.sub.2 emitted in the U.S. each year from coal
power plants may be converted to bio-oils and transportation fuels,
this technology may present the potential to avoid the net
expenditures for imported crude oil (and petroleum products)
estimated to reach about $377,000,000,000 U.S. dollars by 2030.
This may have a tremendously positive impact of the U.S. trade
deficit, and may be even better if exports result.
[0108] The technology may leverage synthetic biology and metabolic
engineering advances to modify microbiological metabolic pathways
and perhaps even develop novel biological systems that can directly
utilize electrons and reduced metal ions as a source of reducing
equivalents for conversion of CO.sub.2 to liquid fuels. At an
overall system efficiency >about 60%, the technology may
effectively and efficiently convert CO.sub.2 into a diesel fuel.
The concept may entail the development of a sulfur-based Calvin
cycle variant that accepts reducing equivalents from regenerable
agents other than Photosystems I and II or even directly from solar
current. In addition, the CAT process may be a specifically
engineered system and set of bioreactors to provide an ecosystem
environment that cultures bacterium and may be self-sustaining
resulting in a robust organism engineered ecosystem well suited for
commercial scale integration with coal power plants. This may allow
easy access to organisms and biosynthetic routes to conduct
independent, unbiased validation. The various species created may
be readily analyzed with existing technology. The technology may be
forward thinking in that the nutrient sources used for stimulation
and augmentation of the biologic growth may be supplemented with
biomass recycling and waste stream organics, perhaps resulting in
creative approaches and innovation to design, development, and
integrated practical and economically viable production systems. By
well-engineered integration, the concept may maximize energy and
water conservation, may maximize efficiency and may even minimizes
costs. Further the system and major components may be well-known
equipment within various industry sectors making it scalable,
robust, and perhaps even relatively straightforward to maintain and
operate by traditional skilled workforce with only minor
training.
[0109] As can be easily understood from the foregoing, the basic
concepts of the present invention may be embodied in a variety of
ways. It involves both biological conversion techniques as well as
devices to accomplish the appropriate biological converter. In this
application, the biological conversion techniques are disclosed as
part of the results shown to be achieved by the various devices
described and as steps which are inherent to utilization. They are
simply the natural result of utilizing the devices as intended and
described. In addition, while some devices are disclosed, it should
be understood that these not only accomplish certain methods but
also can be varied in a number of ways. Importantly, as to all of
the foregoing, all of these facets should be understood to be
encompassed by this disclosure.
[0110] The discussion included in this application is intended to
serve as a basic description. The reader should be aware that the
specific discussion may not explicitly describe all embodiments
possible; many alternatives are implicit. It also may not fully
explain the generic nature of the invention and may not explicitly
show how each feature or element can actually be representative of
a broader function or of a great variety of alternative or
equivalent elements. Again, these are implicitly included in this
disclosure. Where the invention is described in device-oriented
terminology, each element of the device implicitly performs a
function. Apparatus claims may not only be included for the device
described, but also method or process claims may be included to
address the functions the invention and each element performs.
Neither the description nor the terminology is intended to limit
the scope of the claims that will be included in any subsequent
patent application.
[0111] It should also be understood that a variety of changes may
be made without departing from the essence of the invention. Such
changes are also implicitly included in the description. They still
fall within the scope of this invention. A broad disclosure
encompassing both the explicit embodiment(s) shown, the great
variety of implicit alternative embodiments, and the broad methods
or processes and the like are encompassed by this disclosure and
may be relied upon when drafting the claims for any subsequent
patent application. It should be understood that such language
changes and broader or more detailed claiming may be accomplished
at a later date (such as by any required deadline) or in the event
the applicant subsequently seeks a patent filing based on this
filing. With this understanding, the reader should be aware that
this disclosure is to be understood to support any subsequently
filed patent application that may seek examination of as broad a
base of claims as deemed within the applicant's right and may be
designed to yield a patent covering numerous aspects of the
invention both independently and as an overall system.
[0112] Further, each of the various elements of the invention and
claims may also be achieved in a variety of manners. Additionally,
when used or implied, an element is to be understood as
encompassing individual as well as plural structures that may or
may not be physically connected. This disclosure should be
understood to encompass each such variation, be it a variation of
an embodiment of any apparatus embodiment, a method or process
embodiment, or even merely a variation of any element of these.
Particularly, it should be understood that as the disclosure
relates to elements of the invention, the words for each element
may be expressed by equivalent apparatus terms or method
terms--even if only the function or result is the same. Such
equivalent, broader, or even more generic terms should be
considered to be encompassed in the description of each element or
action. Such terms can be substituted where desired to make
explicit the implicitly broad coverage to which this invention is
entitled. As but one example, it should be understood that all
actions may be expressed as a means for taking that action or as an
element which causes that action. Similarly, each physical element
disclosed should be understood to encompass a disclosure of the
action which that physical element facilitates. Regarding this last
aspect, as but one example, the disclosure of a "reactor" should be
understood to encompass disclosure of the act of
"reacting"--whether explicitly discussed or not--and, conversely,
were there effectively disclosure of the act of "reacting", such a
disclosure should be understood to encompass disclosure of a
"reactor" and even a "means for reacting." Such changes and
alternative terms are to be understood to be explicitly included in
the description.
[0113] Any patents, publications, or other references mentioned in
this application for patent are hereby incorporated by reference.
Any priority case(s) claimed by this application is hereby appended
and hereby incorporated by reference. In addition, as to each term
used it should be understood that unless its utilization in this
application is inconsistent with a broadly supporting
interpretation, common dictionary definitions should be understood
as incorporated for each term and all definitions, alternative
terms, and synonyms such as contained in the Random House Webster's
Unabridged Dictionary, second edition are hereby incorporated by
reference. Finally, all references listed below or other
information statement filed with the application are hereby
appended and hereby incorporated by reference, however, as to each
of the above, to the extent that such information or statements
incorporated by reference might be considered inconsistent with the
patenting of this/these invention(s) such statements are expressly
not to be considered as made by the applicant(s).
U.S. PATENT APPLICATION PUBLICATIONS
TABLE-US-00003 [0114] Publication Publication Name of Patentee or
Applicant Number Date of cited Document 20100120104 A1 2010 May 13
Reed
NON-PATENT LITERATURE DOCUMENTS
TABLE-US-00004 [0115] Akoh, C. C., S. Chang, G. Lee and J. Shaw,
"Enzymatic approach to biodiesel production," J. Agric. Food Chem.,
55, 8995-9005, 2007. Antoni, D., V. V. Zverlov, and W. H. Schwarz,
"Biofuels from microbes," Appl. Microbiol. Biot., 77, 23-35, 2007.
Bland, A., J. Newcomer, T. Zhang, K. Sellakumar, "Pilot testing of
WRI's novel mercury control technology by recombustion thermal
treatment of coal", Report to U.S. Department of Energy, Contract
No. DE-FC26-98FT40323 Task 79, June 2009. Certick, M. and S.
Shimizu, "Review: biosynthesis and regulation of microbial
polyunsaturated fatty acid production," J. Biosci. Bioeng., 87,
1-14, 1999. Certik, M. and R. Horenitzky, "Supercritical CO2
extraction of fungal oil containing y-linolenic acid," Biotechnol.
Tech., 13, 11-15, 1999. Chen, G., "A microbial
polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHA) based bio- and materials industry,"
Chem. Soc. Rev., 38, 2434-2446, 2009. Ciferno, J., "Pulverized coal
oxycombustion power plants - final results" (revised), U.S.
Department of Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory, Nov.
1, 2007. Cooney, M. J., E. Roschi, I. W. Marison, C. Comninellis,
and U. Von Stockar, "Physiologic studies with the sulfate reducing
bacterium Desulfovibrio desulfuricans: Evaluation for use in a
biofuel cell," Enzym. Microb. Tech., 8, 358-365, 1996. Dasu, B. N.,
and K. L. Sublette, "Microbial Removal of sulfur dioxide from a gas
stream with net oxidation to sulfate," Appl. Biochem. Biotech., Vol
20/21, 207-220, 1989. Davis, J. B., "Paraffinic hydrocarbons in the
sulfate reducing bacterium Desulfovibrio desulfuricans," Chem.
Geol., 3, 155-160, 1968. Demirbas, Ayhan, "Sustainable cofiring of
biomass with coal," Energy Conversion and Management, Vol 44,
1465-1479 Dhar, B. R., and K. Kirtania, "Excess methanol recovery
in biodiesel production process using a distillation column: a
simulation study," Chemical Engineering Research Bulletin, 13,
45-50, 2009. DOE/NETL, "Cost and performance baseline for fossil
energy plants-Vol. 1: bituminous coal and natural gas to
electricity," DOE/NETL-2007/1281, May 2007, Revision 1, August
2007. Garces, R., R. Alvarez-Ortega, E. Martinez-Force, S.
Cantisan, "Lipid characterization in vegetative tissues of high
saturated fatty acid sunflower mutants," J. Agric. Food Chem., 47,
78-82, 1999. Green Econometrics, "Understanding the cost of solar
energy," http://greenecon.net/understanding-the-cost-of
solarenergy/energy_economics.html, 2007. GTM Research,
"Transitioning from 1st generation to advanced biofuels," a white
paper from Enterprise Florida and GTM Research, February 2010.
Howard, E. E., "Systems and methods for large-scale production and
harvesting of oil-rich algae," PCT/US2007/006466, W02007/109066 A1.
Kadam, K. L., "Environmental implications of power generation via
coal-microalgae cofiring," Energy, Vol 27, 905-922, 2002. Kelly, D.
P, "Thermodynamic aspects of energy conservation by
chemolithotrophic sulfur bacteria in relation to the sulfur
oxidation pathways," Arch Microbial, 171, 219-229, 1999 Li, Q., W.
Du, and D. Liu, "Perspectives of microbial oils for biodiesel
production," Appl. Microbiol. Biot., 80; 749-756, 2008. Mona, K.
G., H. O. Sanaa, and M. A. Linda, "Single cell oil production by
Gordonia spp. DG using agro-industrial wastes," World J. Microbiol.
Biotechnol., 24, 1703-1711, 2008. Monteiro, M. R., A. R. P.
Ambrozin, L. M. Liao, and A. G. Ferreira, "Critical review on
analytical methods for biodiesel characterization," Talanta, 77,
593-605, 2008, Parawira, W., "Biotechnological production of
biodiesel fuel using biocatalyzed transesterification: A review,"
Cr. Rev. Biotechn., 29, 82-93, 2009. Rabus, R., T. A. Hansen and F.
Widdel, "Dissimilatory sulfate- and sulfur-reducing prokaryotes,"
Prokaryotes, 2, 659-768, 2006. Scott, K. M., and C. M. Cavanaugh,
"CO2 uptake and fixation by endosymbiotic chemoautotrophs from the
bivalve Solemya velum," Appl. Environ. Microb., 73, 1174-1179,
2007. Shively, J. M., G. van Keulen, and W. G. Meijer, "Something
from almost nothing: carbon dioxide fixation in chemoautotrophs,"
Annu. Rev. Microbiol, 52, 191-230, 1998. Thurmond, W., Algae 2020:
Algal Biofuels Demand Drivers, Players, Business Models, Markets
& Commercialization Outlook, 1st edition, 2009,
www.emerging-market.com. van Lier, R. J. M., C. J. N. Buisman, and
N. L. Piret, "THIOPAQ .RTM. technology: versatile high- rate
biotechnology for the mining and metallurgical industries,"
Proceedings of the TMS Fall Extraction and Processing Conference, v
3, p 2319-2328, 1999. Yuan, W., A. C. Hansen, and Q. Zhang,
"Predicting the physical properties of biodiesel for combustion
modeling," T. ASAE, 46, 1487-1493, 2003. Zhang, T., and L. T. Fan,
"Significance of dead-state-based thermodynamics in designing a
sustainable process," Design for Energy and the
Environment-Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on
the Foundations of Computer-Aided Process Design, Eds., M. M.
El-Halwagi and A. A. Linninger, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL,
pp.233-241, 2010. Zhang, X., R. Luo, Z. Wang, Y. Deng, and G. Chen,
"Application of (R)-3- hydroxyalkanoate methyl esters derived from
microbial polyhydroxyalkanoates as novel biofuels,"
Biomacromolecules, 10, 707-711, 2009.
[0116] Thus, the applicant(s) should be understood to have support
to claim and make a statement of invention to at least: i) each of
the biological conversion devices as herein disclosed and
described, ii) the related methods disclosed and described, iii)
similar, equivalent, and even implicit variations of each of these
devices and methods, iv) those alternative designs which accomplish
each of the functions shown as are disclosed and described, v)
those alternative designs and methods which accomplish each of the
functions shown as are implicit to accomplish that which is
disclosed and described, vi) each feature, component, and step
shown as separate and independent inventions, vii) the applications
enhanced by the various systems or components disclosed, viii) the
resulting products produced by such systems or components, ix) each
system, method, and element shown or described as now applied to
any specific field or devices mentioned, x) methods and apparatuses
substantially as described hereinbefore and with reference to any
of the accompanying examples, xi) the various combinations and
permutations of each of the elements disclosed, xii) each
potentially dependent claim or concept as a dependency on each and
every one of the independent claims or concepts presented, and
xiii) all inventions described herein.
[0117] With regard to claims whether now or later presented for
examination, it should be understood that for practical reasons and
so as to avoid great expansion of the examination burden, the
applicant may at any time present only initial claims or perhaps
only initial claims with only initial dependencies. The office and
any third persons interested in potential scope of this or
subsequent applications should understand that broader claims may
be presented at a later date in this case, in a case claiming the
benefit of this case, or in any continuation in spite of any
preliminary amendments, other amendments, claim language, or
arguments presented, thus throughout the pendency of any case there
is no intention to disclaim or surrender any potential subject
matter. It should be understood that if or when broader claims are
presented, such may require that any relevant prior art that may
have been considered at any prior time may need to be re-visited
since it is possible that to the extent any amendments, claim
language, or arguments presented in this or any subsequent
application are considered as made to avoid such prior art, such
reasons may be eliminated by later presented claims or the like.
Both the examiner and any person otherwise interested in existing
or later potential coverage, or considering if there has at any
time been any possibility of an indication of disclaimer or
surrender of potential coverage, should be aware that no such
surrender or disclaimer is ever intended or ever exists in this or
any subsequent application. Limitations such as arose in Hakim v.
Cannon Avent Group, PLC, 479 F.3d 1313 (Fed. Cir 2007), or the like
are expressly not intended in this or any subsequent related
matter. In addition, support should be understood to exist to the
degree required under new matter laws--including but not limited to
European Patent Convention Article 123(2) and United States Patent
Law 35 USC 132 or other such laws--to permit the addition of any of
the various dependencies or other elements presented under one
independent claim or concept as dependencies or elements under any
other independent claim or concept. In drafting any claims at any
time whether in this application or in any subsequent application,
it should also be understood that the applicant has intended to
capture as full and broad a scope of coverage as legally available.
To the extent that insubstantial substitutes are made, to the
extent that the applicant did not in fact draft any claim so as to
literally encompass any particular embodiment, and to the extent
otherwise applicable, the applicant should not be understood to
have in any way intended to or actually relinquished such coverage
as the applicant simply may not have been able to anticipate all
eventualities; one skilled in the art, should not be reasonably
expected to have drafted a claim that would have literally
encompassed such alternative embodiments.
[0118] Further, if or when used, the use of the transitional phrase
"comprising" is used to maintain the "open-end" claims herein,
according to traditional claim interpretation. Thus, unless the
context requires otherwise, it should be understood that the term
"comprise" or variations such as "comprises" or "comprising", are
intended to imply the inclusion of a stated element or step or
group of elements or steps but not the exclusion of any other
element or step or group of elements or steps. Such terms should be
interpreted in their most expansive form so as to afford the
applicant the broadest coverage legally permissible.
[0119] Finally, any claims set forth at any time are hereby
incorporated by reference as part of this description of the
invention, and the applicant expressly reserves the right to use
all of or a portion of such incorporated content of such claims as
additional description to support any of or all of the claims or
any element or component thereof, and the applicant further
expressly reserves the right to move any portion of or all of the
incorporated content of such claims or any element or component
thereof from the description into the claims or vice-versa as
necessary to define the matter for which protection is sought by
this application or by any subsequent continuation, division, or
continuation-in-part application thereof, or to obtain any benefit
of, reduction in fees pursuant to, or to comply with the patent
laws, rules, or regulations of any country or treaty, and such
content incorporated by reference shall survive during the entire
pendency of this application including any subsequent continuation,
division, or continuation-in-part application thereof or any
reissue or extension thereon.
* * * * *
References