Search

EP-4735574-A1 - BIOREACTOR SYSTEM AND METHODS

EP4735574A1EP 4735574 A1EP4735574 A1EP 4735574A1EP-4735574-A1

Abstract

A bioreactor systems and processes for the production of biomass are provided. The systems comprise: at least one bioreactor unit which comprises at least one liquid-containable compartment. The liquid- containable compartment comprises, (i) a first wall, wherein the first wall comprises a composite membrane that is permissible to transfer of gases therethrough, wherein the composite membrane comprises at least one barrier layer and at least one reinforcement layer; and (ii) a second wall, wherein the second wall comprises material that is optically transmissible to visible light and that is substantially less gas permeable than the first wall, wherein the first and second walls cooperate to define the liquid-containable compartment within the bioreactor unit.

Inventors

  • MELCHIORRI, Julian Paul
  • KEGLER, Ian Ross
  • SRIDHARA, Pruthvi Kumar Bangalore

Assignees

  • Arborea Ltd

Dates

Publication Date
20260506
Application Date
20240628

Claims (20)

  1. CLAIMS 1. A bioreactor system for the production of biomass, the system comprising: at least one bioreactor unit which comprises at least one liquid-containable compartment, wherein the liquid-containable compartment comprises, (i) a first wall, wherein the first wall comprises a composite membrane that is permissible to transfer of gases therethrough, wherein the composite membrane comprises at least one barrier layer and at least one reinforcement layer; and (ii) a second wall, wherein the second wall comprises material that is optically transmissible to visible light and that is substantially less gas permeable than the first wall, wherein the first and second walls cooperate to define the liquid-containable compartment within the bioreactor unit.
  2. 2. The system of claim 1, wherein liquid-containable compartment comprises an inlet and an outlet so as to permit circulation of liquid through the liquid-containable compartment.
  3. 3. The system of any one of claims 1 or 2, wherein the liquid-containable compartment is configured to withstand a hydraulic pressure of greater than 50 millibars, typically greater than 100 millibars, suitably greater than 500 millibars, or optionally greater than 1 bar.
  4. 4. The system of any one of claims 1 to 3, wherein the barrier layer is comprised of a gas permeable polymer material,
  5. 5. The system of any one of claims 1 to 4 , wherein the barrier layer is substantially non-porous.
  6. 6. The system of claim 4 or 5, wherein the gas permeable polymer barrier layer is comprised of a material selected from: silicones, polysiloxanes, polydimethylsiloxanes (PDMS), fluorosilicone, organosilicones, VMQ (Vinyl Methyl Siloxane), PVMQ (Phenyl vinyl methyl siloxane), silicon-oxide polymers, sulfonated polyetheretherketone (SPEEK), amino-organosilanes such as gamma- aminopropyltriethoxysilane (γ-APS), poly(ethylene oxide), poly(butylene terephthalate), poly(ethylene oxide), poly(butylene terephthalate) block copolymers (PEO-PBT), cellulose (including plant cellulose and bacterial cellulose), cellulose acetate (celluloid), nitrocellulose, or cellulose esters.
  7. 7. The system of any one of claims 1 to 6, wherein the composite membrane further comprises at least one intermediate layer.
  8. 8. The system of any one of claims 1 to 7, wherein the first and second walls cooperate to define an inwardly facing surface of the liquid-containable compartment within the bioreactor unit, and wherein the inwardly facing surface of the first and/or second walls is substantially hydrophobic.
  9. 9. The system of claim 8, wherein the inwardly facing surface has a contact angle with water of greater than 90 degrees.
  10. 10. The system of claim 8, wherein the inwardly facing surface of the first wall has a contact angle with water of greater than 90 degrees.
  11. 11. The system of any one of claims 1 to 7, wherein the first and second walls cooperate to define an inwardly facing surface of the liquid-containable compartment within the bioreactor unit, and wherein the inwardly facing surface of the first and/or second walls is substantially hydrophilic.
  12. 12. The system of any one of claims 1 to 11, wherein the first wall and/or the second wall are comprised of material having a Yield strength of not less than 0.5 MPa, 1 MPa, 1.5 MPa, 2 Mpa, 5 Mpa, 10 Mpa, or 20 Mpa.
  13. 13. The system of any one of claims 1 to 12, wherein second wall is comprised of a structurally rigid material.
  14. 14. The system of any one of claims 1 to 13, wherein the second wall is comprised of a material selected from: high density polyethylene (HDPE), acrylic, PVC, ETFE, PTFE, silicone rubber, polycarbonate, epoxy resin, or glass (including laminated glass).
  15. 15. The system of any one of claims 1 to 14, wherein the liquid-containable compartment has an elongate configuration.
  16. 16. The system of any one of claims 1 to 15, wherein the at least one bioreactor unit further comprises a housing that accommodates a portion of the at least one liquid-containable compartment, wherein the housing cooperates with the portion of the at least one liquid-containable compartment to define a chamber having an atmosphere within, and wherein the at least one liquid-containable compartment is orientated such that the first wall is exposed to the atmosphere within the chamber.
  17. 17. The system of any one of claims 1 to 16, wherein the at least one bioreactor unit comprises a plurality of liquid containing compartments.
  18. 18. The system of claim 17, wherein the plurality of liquid containing compartments are in fluid communication with each other and are connected to each other in series.
  19. 19. The system of claim 18, wherein the plurality of liquid containing compartments are arranged in parallel.
  20. 20. The system of any one of claims 1 to 19, wherein the system further comprises an auxiliary sub-system, wherein the auxiliary sub-system is in fluid communication with the liquid compartment within the at least one bioreactor unit.

Description

BIOREACTOR SYSTEM AND METHODS FIELD The invention is in the field of biomass production, particularly via the use of microbial or cellular bioreactors, more particularly in the field of photobioreactor systems. BACKGROUND The increasing global demand for bioproducts, such as speciality molecules, chemicals or food ingredients, has resulted in growing interest in microbial sources for such materials. The escalating growth of human populations, coupled with evolving consumption patterns and the perils of climate change, are jointly imposing unparalleled pressure on the global food, drug, and chemical production systems. By the year 2100 the human population is expected to exceed 11 billion and contemporary agriculture already exerts a significant environmental footprint in terms of greenhouse gas emissions, freshwater use, eutrophication, topsoil degradation and loss of biodiversity. The necessary expansion of the global food production system during the next few decades will simply increase environmental pressures if conventional agricultural and food production methods are relied upon. Photobioreactors (PBRs) are typically used to cultivate microalgae, cyanobacteria, and macroalgae. Many conventional photobioreactors suffer from several limitations, particularly poor light distribution, inefficient gas-transfer, inefficient mixing, inefficient biomass extraction, and the consumption of large amounts of water and energy. For example, microalgae have traditionally been cultivated in open photobioreactors such as “open raceways” due to the simplicity and apparently low operating cost of this type of design. Unfortunately, these open photobioreactors allow only limited control of the operating conditions. Moreover, the cultures can easily be contaminated. Hence, there is a need to move to improved photobioreactors that are closed systems and that can provide optimal growth conditions and thus enable the production of biomass from microalgae and other photosynthetic organisms. The transfer of gas into biomass production systems such as photobioreactors (closed or open systems) is usually achieved by using sparging technologies, such as by compressing CO2, O2, or air, and delivering the compressed gas into the liquid media through nozzles, or by bubbling or sparging the gas into the liquid media (see for example US2015/0230420, WO2015/116963). These techniques can be used to add a desired gas or can also work to remove excess gas which is not wanted (see for example US2015/0093924). Techniques of this kind can be disadvantageously inefficient in both energy requirements and infrastructure cost. When a soluble gas is bubbled through a liquid, only a small proportion of the gas will be successfully dissolved; consequently, the remaining gas is wasted, leading to a waste of energy and inefficient gas uptake. Furthermore, the soluble gas needs to be delivered in a pressurised state, therefore, the soluble gas needs to be pressurised, thus increasing energy consumption for its pressurisation or increasing costs for the supply of pressurised gas. Gas removal by this technique is limited by the gas which can be trapped in the bubbles produced, which provide only a limited surface area for effective gas exchange. Further, for operation in countries with warmer climates, problems can arise with build-up of humidity and condensation within parts of photobioreactor assemblies that are predominantly filled with gas or that are exposed to liquid. This can lead to reduced operational performance as well as accumulation of heat within the system as a whole, placing stress upon organisms that are being grown for biomass. It would be desirable to improve systems to allow better handling of humidity and heat resulting in higher operating efficiencies. While photosynthetic microorganism based photobioreactors have several advantages such as high biomass productivity, the ability to grow in non-arable regions, and potential for carbon capture; they also have several current-day challenges limiting scalability. Some of these obstacles include: 1. High capital and operating costs: where the cost of constructing a dedicated system can be several times that of a conventional open pond system. In addition, the energy required for pumping and mixing the culture media, as well as for illumination, if necessary, can also be expensive. 2. Risk of contamination: microorganism cultures are susceptible to contamination by rotifers, amoebas, bacteria, fungi, and/or other microorganisms that reduce the yield or quality of the biomass. Further, contamination can occur during the cultivation process or during the handling and processing of the harvested microorganism. 3. Difficulty in scale-up: photobioreactor systems are currently limited in size, which can hinder their scalability. Scaling up the production is strenuous due to economical and technical complexities of the systems. 4. Light attenuation: sufficient light is required for photosynth