Submitted Successfully!
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Ver. Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1 + 2092 word(s) 2092 2021-12-15 11:10:15 |
2 Format correct Meta information modification 2092 2021-12-24 01:52:56 |

Video Upload Options

Do you have a full video?


Are you sure to Delete?
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Geremia, E. Microalgae Wastewater Treatment. Encyclopedia. Available online: (accessed on 07 December 2023).
Geremia E. Microalgae Wastewater Treatment. Encyclopedia. Available at: Accessed December 07, 2023.
Geremia, Eugenio. "Microalgae Wastewater Treatment" Encyclopedia, (accessed December 07, 2023).
Geremia, E.(2021, December 23). Microalgae Wastewater Treatment. In Encyclopedia.
Geremia, Eugenio. "Microalgae Wastewater Treatment." Encyclopedia. Web. 23 December, 2021.
Microalgae Wastewater Treatment

The use of microalgae is being extended to different fields of application and technologies, such as food, animal feed, and production of valuable polymers. Additionally, there is interest in using microalgae for removal of nutrients from wastewater. Wastewater treatment with microalgae allows for a reduction in the main chemicals responsible for eutrophication (nitrogen and phosphate), the reduction of organic substrates (by decreasing parameters such as BOD and COD) and the removal of other substances such as heavy metals and pharmaceuticals.

microalgae algae urban wastewater bioremediation biomass production microalgae treatment

1. Introduction

A growth in the global population has coincided with agricultural intensification, industrial development, and urbanization, leading to a sharp increase in waste production and environmental pollution [1][2]. Among the various problems faced by modern society is the need for effective and sustainable management of urban wastewater. Untreated wastewaters can lead to the eutrophication of aquatic environments and represent a serious threat to water bodies. It is therefore necessary to apply appropriate treatment plans for the abatement and removal of substances such as ammonia (NH4+), nitrate (NO3) and phosphate (PO43) [1][3]. It is estimated that nitrogen pollution costs to the European Union are between 70 and 320 billion EUR/year [4]. Therefore, it is necessary to recycle nutrients and recover water: these, if recycled, can be considered a resource rather than waste [5].
Each year, 450 billion m3 of water are consumed globally for industrial and domestic use. Domestic use contributes to 70% of this consumption, and the consequent wastewater was to be used as a substrate for microalgae growth, about 23.5 billion tons of oil could be generated [6]. In addition to energy purposes, this algal biomass could also be used in human or animal nutrition, and owing to the presence of high-value molecules in cosmetics [6]. In Europe, improvements to wastewater management started with Directive 91/271/EEC, which deals with protecting the environment from eutrophication by establishing processes for wastewater treatment [7]. This was followed by Directive 98/15/EC which established discharge limits for total nitrogen and phosphorus (98/15/EC). According to this directive, for plants with over 100,000 personal equivalents, the maximum concentration of total phosphorus that can be released into the environment is 1 mg/L, while that of total nitrogen is 10 mg/L [8]. In the last 30–40 years, techniques for urban wastewater treatment have improved throughout most of Europe. In the 27 countries of the European Union, 69% of wastewater produced by the population undergoes tertiary treatment, while 13% undergoes only primary and secondary treatments. However, there are differences between the various European countries in the percentage of the population connected to urban wastewater treatment plants. Furthermore, a lack of data and the fact that not all of the population is connected to wastewater treatment plants does not allow for an exhaustive overall assessment [9]. Although wastewater treatment is a technology developed in the last century, some ancient civilizations around 4000 BC already adopted rudimentary water treatment methods such as filtration through coal, exposure to light and use of boiling water [10]. Nowadays, conventional secondary treatments of wastewater based on biological purification with activated sludge from microorganisms such as bacteria have some disadvantages, such as high energy consumption (related to the nitrification–denitrification process), high operating costs and the need for sludge disposal [11][12][13]. Cocultivation of microalgae and bacteria may be a valid alternative to conventional wastewater treatment (WWT) [14][15][16]. Microalgae can grow in many environments and on different substrates such as wastewater. When growing on wastewater, microalgae assimilate phosphorus and nitrogen, nutrients necessary for their growth. In addition, they can also assimilate heavy metals and pharmaceutical products from wastewater and capture atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2).
This, as well as favoring bioremediation of wastewater and protecting the environment from the risk of eutrophication, can also favor the removal of dangerous contaminants from wastewater and mitigate the negative effects caused by the excessive concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere. Lastly, this type of treatment, in addition to recycling water, can also produce microalgae biomass that can be destined for different uses, such as food, energy and other products at lower costs [17][18]. The use of microalgae for wastewater treatment dates back to the 1950s, when Oswald devised this type of treatment as an alternative to traditional waste-stabilization ponds (WSP) [19]. However, research on this field has only increased in the last decade [20][21], also responding to an increasing global demand for microalgae, from 10.51 million tons in 2000 to 30.45 million tons in 2015. In 2016, the microalgae sector generated an added value of EUR 1.69 billion, and 14,000 workers were employed in the microalgae sector and associated production chain [22]. The major producers of algal biomass were Asian countries, which produced 97% of the total production in 2015. Europe is only the third largest producer, after USA. In Europe, production is still fluctuating, from 0.30 million tons in 2000 to 0.23 million tons in 2015. Norway, accounting for 65%, was the largest European producer of microalgae biomass in 2015 [23]. Cultivation upon alternative culture media such as wastewater could further reduce algal production costs, ranging from 20 to 200 USD/r kg depending on the case [24]. A large part of the production costs of microalgae (up to 20%) are attributable to the use of industrial fertilizers used for their growth [25][26]. In this sense, cultivation upon wastewater could lead to both economic and environmental benefits.

2. Secondary Treatment with Microalgae

In addition to tertiary treatment, microalgae can sometimes also be used for secondary treatment of wastewaters. For example, microalgae with mixotrophic or heterotrophic metabolism could also be used for secondary wastewater treatments, due to their ability to absorb small organic molecules such as short-chain carbohydrates. This would result in a limited reduction in COD. Additionally, the cocultivation of microalgae with bacteria allows for secondary wastewater treatment by the removal of nutrients and organic matter, at reduced costs. These two approaches allow to carry out the treatment of wastewater with microalgae without sterilizing the wastewater [27], while avoiding the economic and energetic costs for the supply of oxygen (O2) for bacteria and CO2 for microalgae [28][29][30].

2.1. Secondary Treatment with Cocultivation Microalgae–Bacteria

Typically, conventional processes for secondary treatment (activated sludge) take place through the remediation with microorganisms, generally heterotrophic bacteria and this process depends on O2. The microorganisms, in the presence of O2, carry out the biological oxidation of the organic substance [1][31], since oxygen allows nitrification by bacteria [32]. Generally, O2 is produced by electromechanical blowers with high energy intensity. This supply of O2 for wastewater treatment has high costs. It consumes approximately 1 to 3% of the total electricity generated in developed nations, of which 40 to 60% is expended on supplying air to the aeration basin. [33]. Since mechanical aeration causes up to 50% of the operating costs of wastewater treatment plant (WWTP). To solve this problem, the cocultivation of microalgae and bacteria could lead to economic and environmental benefits [13][30][31]. Obviously, the benefits are not always clear and effective when moving from laboratory prototypes to an industrial scale [19]. This synergy between the two microorganisms promotes both the growth of microalgae and bacteria. The latter remove COD through heterotrophic growth, producing CO2, and at the same time the microalgae assimilate CO2 and the nutrients generated by bacteria, converting these substances into algal cell material through photosynthesis and producing O2 that stimulates bacterial activity [10][21][34]. This type of interaction is not always successful because in some cases the microalgae do not release enough oxygen to the bacteria for the degradation of COD. This, if not completely eliminated, could stimulate the mixotrophic metabolism of microalgae, thus reducing the net availability of oxygen for bacteria [34]. Further advantages generated by this interaction are the exchange of cofactors such as growth-promoting compounds, vitamins, organic compounds and extracellular matrix. The latter provides attachment sites for bacteria and allows flocculation and subsequent harvesting of microalgal biomass. [24][34][35]. However, cocultivation may be limited by competition between microalgae and bacteria for nutrients. Bacteria can inhibit the growth of microalgae by modifying the culture broth and secreting toxins. Microalgae can also negatively affect bacteria by inhibiting or suppressing bacterial activity by increasing the pH [36][34][37].

2.2. Secondary Treatment with Microalgae with Mixotrophic Metabolism

Microalgae with mixotrophic metabolism could be used for secondary wastewater treatments. With this type of treatment, the microalgae are able to oxidize organic matter in wastewater and to assimilate the resulting CO2 for photosynthesis [38]. The classic WWT is a two-step process that involves high energy consumption related to the supply of O2 (for the oxidation of organic matter) and CO2 (for photosynthesis). The advantage of the treatment with mixotrophic metabolism microalgae over traditional WWT systems is the fact that it is able to obtain the N, P and C discharge standards with a single treatment, also avoiding the energy consumption related to the supply of O2 and CO2 [28][39]. Generally, most of the studies concerning the WWT with microalgae are carried out with monospecific cultures on a laboratory scale in controlled environments. However, in large-scale outdoor cultivations microalgae are often contaminated with other microorganisms; this represents an important problem because it inhibits microalgae growth and lowers the quality of the bioproducts derived from them [40]. A possible solution to this problem is represented by the extremophilic red alga Galderia sulphuraria. This unicellular alga is able to live in acidic environments (pH between 1–5). It is one of the most adapted eukaryotes to acidic conditions and is predominant in extreme conditions where it is difficult for other organisms to grow [39][40]. Further, Galdieria sulphuraria can grow both in autotrophy, mixotrophy and heterotrophy [41]. Finally, its efficacy in wastewater treatment is well-documented [42][43]. This ability makes it very versatile and suitable for the removal of organic carbon from wastewater in a single phase instead of the two-step classic treatment. Regarding energy consumption, as reported by Oswald [44], in the conventional activated sludge secondary treatment, the removal of 1 kg of BOD is associated with the consumption of 1 kW/h for aeration and the emission of 1 kg CO2 equivalent. On the contrary, 1 kg of BOD removed in a mixotrophic algal system does not require energy inputs, and in theory, the microalgae biomass obtained could anaerobically generate methane for 1 kW/h of electricity. For all these reasons, large-scale treatment with mixotrophic metabolism microalgae could represent a valid solution, especially for lower energy consumption [29][30]. However, it remains crucial to identify the conditions that allow maximum oxidation of BOD coupled with photosynthetic CO2 fixation in order to maximize the net energy yields from wastewater treatment with microalgae with mixotrophic metabolism.

3. Conclusions

Microalgae can be grown on raw urban wastewater, treated urban wastewater and other wastewater such as digestate and centrate, deriving from the anaerobic digestion of activated sludge. However, the cultivation of microalgae on wastewater depends on several factors such as the selection of the species suitable for cultivation on wastewater, the type of wastewater, the technology used, the climatic factors (such as sunlight and temperature) and availability of CO2 that affects its yield. Through this approach, it is possible to obtain a production of microalgae biomass combined with the bioremediation of wastewater (mainly through the removal of substances such as nitrogen and phosphorus). This suggests that wastewater contains all the essential nutrients necessary for the cultivation and production of algal biomass, which can be used in different fields: (i) energy for the production of biofuels (biodiesel, biogas, biohydrogen, etc.), (ii) pharmaceutical products (derived from high-value biomolecules extracted from microalgae), (iii) foodstuffs (feed and food supplements), (iv) bioplastics and (v) chemicals (fertilizers and biochar). Microalgal biomass grown on wastewater is not yet completely safe, due to the possible presence of contaminants. However, it would be worthwhile to implement the knowledge and technologies in order to be able to allocate the microalgal biomass also to these purposes to expand their range of use. The use of microalgae provides a potential and valuable alternative to the conventional WWT, with the advantage of pursuing the goal of water treatment with less operational and energy costs and obtaining a resource such as microalgae biomass. A further advantage is associated with the fact that through this type of approach it is possible to use the CO2 released by other industrial plants for the cultivation of microalgae, subtracting such CO2 from emissions to the atmosphere. It should not be disregarded that this type of approach is representative of studies performed in the laboratory on a small scale, and the transition to a large-scale reality may present various obstacles such as high energy consumption and possible contamination by other microorganisms. A valid solution to this can be represented by the cultivation in mixotrophy of the extremophilic red alga Galdieria sulphuraria. The main bottlenecks that must be addressed are mainly the search for less expensive harvesting methods, both from an environmental and economic point of view, and the need for greater technological development of cultivation systems such as HRAP and PBR, in order to make the process feasible on large scale.


  1. Lima, S.; Villanova, V.; Grisafi, F.; Caputo, G.; Brucato, A.; Scargiali, F. Autochthonous microalgae grown in municipal wastewaters as a tool for effectively removing nitrogen and phosphorous. J. Water Process Eng. 2020, 38, 101647.
  2. Paddock, M.B. Microalgae Wastewater Treatment: A Brief History. Preprints 2019, 2019120377.
  3. Ruiz, J.; Arbib, Z.; Álvarez-Díaz, P.D.; Garrido-Pérez, C.; Barragán, J.; Perales, J.A. Photobiotreatment model (PhBT): A kinetic model for microalgae biomass growth and nutrient removal in wastewater. Environ. Technol. 2013, 34, 979–991.
  4. Gentili, F.G. Microalgal biomass and lipid production in mixed municipal, dairy, pulp and paper wastewater together with added flue gases. Bioresour. Technol. 2014, 169, 27–32.
  5. Zamalloa, C.; Boon, N.; Verstraete, W. Decentralized two-stage sewage treatment by chemical-biological flocculation combined with microalgae biofilm for nutrient immobilization in a roof installed parallel plate reactor. Bioresour. Technol. 2013, 130, 152–160.
  6. Abinandan, S.; Shanthakumar, S. Challenges and opportunities in application of microalgae (Chlorophyta) for wastewater treatment: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 52, 123–132.
  7. European Commission. European Commission Directive 91/271/EEC on Urban Wastewater Treatment. 1991. Available online: (accessed on 9 July 2021).
  8. Commission Directive 98/15/EC of 27 February 1998 Amending Council Directive 91/271/EEC with Respect to Certain Requirements Established in Annex I thereof (Text with EEA Relevance)—Publications Office of the EU. Available online: (accessed on 16 November 2021).
  9. Urban Waste Water Treatment in Europe—European Environment Agency. Available online: (accessed on 9 November 2020).
  10. Ho, L.; Goethals, P.L.M. Municipal wastewater treatment with pond technology: Historical review and future outlook. Ecol. Eng. 2020, 148, 105791.
  11. Petrini, S.; Foladori, P.; Donati, L.; Andreottola, G. Comprehensive respirometric approach to assess photosynthetic, heterotrophic and nitrifying activity in microalgal-bacterial consortia treating real municipal wastewater. Biochem. Eng. J. 2020, 161, 107697.
  12. Mantovani, M.; Marazzi, F.; Fornaroli, R.; Bellucci, M.; Ficara, E.; Mezzanotte, V. Outdoor pilot-scale raceway as a microalgae-bacteria sidestream treatment in a WWTP. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 710, 135583.
  13. Mennaa, F.Z.; Arbib, Z.; Perales, J.A. Urban wastewater photobiotreatment with microalgae in a continuously operated photobioreactor: Growth, nutrient removal kinetics and biomass coagulation–flocculation. Environ. Technol. 2019, 40, 342–355.
  14. Lavrinovičs, A.; Mežule, L.; Juhna, T. Microalgae starvation for enhanced phosphorus uptake from municipal wastewater. Algal Res. 2020, 52, 102090.
  15. Ruiz, J.; Álvarez-Díaz, P.D.; Arbib, Z.; Garrido-Pérez, C.; Barragán, J.; Perales, J.A. Performance of a flat panel reactor in the continuous culture of microalgae in urban wastewater: Prediction from a batch experiment. Bioresour. Technol. 2013, 127, 456–463.
  16. Miksch, K.; Cema, G.; Corvini, P.F.-X.; Felis, E.; Sochacki, A.; Surmacz-Górska, J.; Wiszniowski, J.; Zabczynski, S. R&D priorities in the field of sustainable remediation and purification of agro-industrial and municipal wastewater. New Biotechnol. 2015, 32, 128–132.
  17. Ferro, L.; Gorzsás, A.; Gentili, F.G.; Funk, C. Subarctic microalgal strains treat wastewater and produce biomass at low temperature and short photoperiod. Algal Res. 2018, 35, 160–167.
  18. Peralta, E.; Jerez, C.G.; Figueroa, F.L. Centrate grown Chlorella fusca (Chlorophyta): Potential for biomass production and centrate bioremediation. Algal Res. 2019, 39, 101458.
  19. Sforza, E.; Ramos-Tercero, E.A.; Gris, B.; Bettin, F.; Milani, A.; Bertucco, A. Integration of Chlorella protothecoides production in wastewater treatment plant: From lab measurements to process design. Algal Res. 2014, 6, 223–233.
  20. Arias, D.M.; García, J.; Uggetti, E. Production of polymers by cyanobacteria grown in wastewater: Current status, challenges and future perspectives. New Biotechnol. 2020, 55, 46–57.
  21. Solimeno, A.; García, J. Microalgae and bacteria dynamics in high rate algal ponds based on modelling results: Long-term application of BIO_ALGAE model. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 650, 1818–1831.
  22. Bussa, M.; Zollfrank, C.; Röder, H. Life-cycle assessment and geospatial analysis of integrating microalgae cultivation into a regional economy. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 243, 118630.
  23. Biomass Production, Supply, Uses and Flows in the European Union: First Results from an Integrated Assessment|EU Science Hub. Available online: (accessed on 16 January 2021).
  24. Robles, Á.; Capson-Tojo, G.; Galès, A.; Ruano, M.V.; Sialve, B.; Ferrer, J.; Steyer, J.-P. Microalgae-bacteria consortia in high-rate ponds for treating urban wastewater: Elucidating the key state indicators under dynamic conditions. J. Environ. Manag. 2020, 261, 110244.
  25. Delrue, F.; Álvarez-Díaz, P.D.; Fon-Sing, S.; Fleury, G.; Sassi, J.-F. The environmental biorefinery: Using microalgae to remediate wastewater, a win-win paradigm. Energies 2016, 9, 132.
  26. Romero Villegas, G.I.; Fiamengo, M.; Acién Fernández, F.G.; Molina Grima, E. Outdoor production of microalgae biomass at pilot-scale in seawater using centrate as the nutrient source. Algal Res. 2017, 25, 538–548.
  27. Acién, F.G.; Gómez-Serrano, C.; Morales-Amaral, M.M.; Fernández-Sevilla, J.M.; Molina-Grima, E. Wastewater treatment using microalgae: How realistic a contribution might it be to significant urban wastewater treatment? Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2016, 100, 9013–9022.
  28. Henkanatte-Gedera, S.M.; Selvaratnam, T.; Caskan, N.; Nirmalakhandan, N.; Van Voorhies, W.; Lammers, P.J. Algal-based, single-step treatment of urban wastewaters. Bioresour. Technol. 2015, 189, 273–278.
  29. Sforza, E.; Pastore, M.; Santeufemia Sanchez, S.; Bertucco, A. Bioaugmentation as a strategy to enhance nutrient removal: Symbiosis between Chlorella protothecoides and Brevundimonas Diminuta. Bioresour. Technol. Rep. 2018, 4, 153–158.
  30. Kohlheb, N.; van Afferden, M.; Lara, E.; Arbib, Z.; Conthe, M.; Poitzsch, C.; Marquardt, T.; Becker, M.-Y. Assessing the life-cycle sustainability of algae and bacteria-based wastewater treatment systems: High-rate algae pond and sequencing batch reactor. J. Environ. Manag. 2020, 264, 110459.
  31. Pastore, M.; Sforza, E. Exploiting symbiotic interactions between Chlorella protothecoides and Brevundimonas diminuta for an efficient single-step urban wastewater treatment. Water Sci. Technol. 2018, 78, 216–224.
  32. Petrini, S.; Foladori, P.; Beghini, F.; Armanini, F.; Segata, N.; Andreottola, G. How inoculation affects the development and the performances of microalgal-bacterial consortia treating real municipal wastewater. J. Environ. Manag. 2020, 263, 110427.
  33. Evans, L.; Hennige, S.J.; Willoughby, N.; Adeloye, A.J.; Skroblin, M.; Gutierrez, T. Effect of organic carbon enrichment on the treatment efficiency of primary settled wastewater by Chlorella vulgaris. Algal Res. 2017, 24, 368–377.
  34. Sforza, E.; Pastore, M.; Spagni, A.; Bertucco, A. Microalgae-bacteria gas exchange in wastewater: How mixotrophy may reduce the oxygen supply for bacteria. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2018, 25, 28004–28014.
  35. Hodaifa, G.; Sánchez, S.; Martínez, M.E.; Órpez, R. Biomass production of Scenedesmus obliquus from mixtures of urban and olive-oil mill wastewaters used as culture medium. Appl. Energy 2013, 104, 345–352.
  36. Ferro, L.; Colombo, M.; Posadas, E.; Funk, C.; Muñoz, R. Elucidating the symbiotic interactions between a locally isolated microalga Chlorella vulgaris and its co-occurring bacterium Rhizobium sp. in synthetic municipal wastewater. J. Appl. Phycol. 2019, 31, 2299–2310.
  37. Krustok, I.; Odlare, M.; Truu, J.; Nehrenheim, E. Inhibition of nitrification in municipal wastewater-treating photobioreactors: Effect on algal growth and nutrient uptake. Bioresour. Technol. 2016, 202, 238–243.
  38. Wang, Y.; Ho, S.H.; Cheng, C.L.; Guo, W.Q.; Nagarajan, D.; Ren, N.Q.; Lee, D.J.; Chang, J.S. Perspectives on the feasibility of using microalgae for industrial wastewater treatment. Bioresour. Technol. 2016, 222, 485–497.
  39. Henkanatte-Gedera, S.M.; Selvaratnam, T.; Karbakhshravari, M.; Myint, M.; Nirmalakhandan, N.; Van Voorhies, W.; Lammers, P.J. Removal of dissolved organic carbon and nutrients from urban wastewaters by Galdieria sulphuraria: Laboratory to field scale demonstration. Algal Res. 2017, 24, 450–456.
  40. Sakurai, T.; Aoki, M.; Ju, X.; Ueda, T.; Nakamura, Y.; Fujiwara, S.; Umemura, T.; Tsuzuki, M.; Minoda, A. Profiling of lipid and glycogen accumulations under different growth conditions in the sulfothermophilic red alga Galdieria sulphuraria. Bioresour. Technol. 2016, 200, 861–866.
  41. Gross, W.; Schnarrenberger, C. Heterotrophic Growth of Two Strains of the Acido-Thermophilic Red Alga Galdieria sulphuraria. Plant Cell Physiol. 1995, 36, 633–638.
  42. Minoda, A.; Sawada, H.; Suzuki, S.; Miyashita, S.I.; Inagaki, K.; Yamamoto, T.; Tsuzuki, M. Recovery of rare earth elements from the sulfothermophilic red alga Galdieria sulphuraria using aqueous acid. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2015, 99, 1513–1519.
  43. Selvaratnam, T.; Pegallapati, A.K.; Montelya, F.; Rodriguez, G.; Nirmalakhandan, N.; Van Voorhies, W.; Lammers, P.J. Evaluation of a thermo-tolerant acidophilic alga, Galdieria sulphuraria, for nutrient removal from urban wastewaters. Bioresour. Technol. 2014, 156, 395–399.
  44. Oswald, W.J. My sixty years in applied algology. J. Appl. Phycol. 2003, 15, 99–106.
Contributor MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to :
View Times: 589
Revisions: 2 times (View History)
Update Date: 24 Dec 2021