Is consciousness a quantum processes?

If the quantum processes are behind the consciousness and the free will, then the consciousness of the human being have to control and operate the quantum processes. It means consciousness cannot be probabilistic any more, but will be managed by being above the quantum process itself. Then who and what is this consciousness? It can't be anymore just the brain, that seems to be just a quantum machine. It cannot be also the quantum computation process itself as in the computers, since it is probabilistic, which opposes the concept of free will.

So what are we left with? Or to start to believe in some kind of human spirit, that can't be scientifically explained. Or in other words  we have to admitat that at todays knowledge we have no clue what we are. The alternative is to except that we are only machine without free will (like the animals of Descartes ), living in illusion of free will. But if we are just a machine, then again machines need creator who defines them or can it do the evolution by itself? And here we are back in the fields that can't be scientifically explained.
----------------------------

To start with, the scientific research of consciousness has became a respectable field of science only 30 years ago, probably due to computing science development, that brought the idea of consciousness as a computing system, that when reaching certain level of sophistication turns on the ilusion of conscious I.  This idea is contradictory to the subjective feeling of free will and all the rest.

Stuart Hameroff, an anesthetic started a research with microtubules, a hexagonal tube shaped carbon molecule that is one of the building molecules of the living cell and especially the neuron cell. The anesthesia is a process in which the consciousness is turned off. So he started research in this direction an started a collaboration with Roger Penrose , your acquaintance.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Penrose#Physics_and_consciousness
This collaboration brought the Orch-OR theory,  viz; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orchestrated_objective_reduction

Penrose's ideas concerning the three worlds: physical, mental, and the Platonic mathematical world. In his theory, the Platonic world corresponds to the geometry of fundamental spacetime that is claimed to support non-computational thinking.

The theory had several problems of energy waste, heat, and time. Some of these theoretical problems were solved with the time like the problem of energy efficiency of the process that uses similar quantum processes as the photosynthesis in the plants, its effectiveness of converting sun energy is almost 100%. Viz:
http://newscenter.lbl.gov/2010/05/10/untangling-quantum-entanglement/
The findings of Whaley/Fleming team if used by brain can solve some of efficiency problems of the theory and the heat problem.

Other critic of the Orch-Or theory are Jeffrey R. ReimersLaura K. McKemmishRoss H. McKenzieAlan E. MarkNoel S. Hush in article: “Consciousness in the universe: A review of the ‘Orch OR’ theory” say:

For quantum information processing one must have quantum information storage units such as qubits. All aspects of the proposal need to be considered in terms of how they either influence or are influenced by the properties of these storage units. For example, the involvement of quantum gravity in the manifestation of consciousness would need to be described in terms of how quantum gravity affected the operation of these qubits, as would any other effect that could impact on macroscopic neural processes, and the influence of any dynamical process taking place in, on, or around the microtubules.

In the current review Hameroff and Penrose suggest that the qubit could be either: (a) “interactive dipole states of individual tubulin proteins” such as “London-force dipoles” or (b) magnetic dipoles or (c) nuclear spins. “London force electric dipoles” have been discussed in previous publications but the other two options have been introduced for the first time. Previously, Hameroff and Penrose had also proposed that conformational switching could produce coupled electron–vibration qubits but this claim is withdrawn in the current review.

The London force is of quantum-mechanical origin. An instantaneous fluctuation of the electronic distribution creates a dipole in one molecule that in turn induces a dipolar response in a neighbouring molecule. This leads to a net attractive force. The key feature is that these electric dipoles are fluctuations, not states. Individual states are needed to construct a qubit, and the review makes no attempt at specifying how qubit states could be associated with these London fluctuations. Further, it is not explained how the magnetic dipole states could be constructed or how these states could be decoupled from the nuclear motions so as to achieve extended quantum coherence. No suggestion is made as to how states associated with nuclear spins in magnetic fields could be utilized as qubits in situ in microtubules, and the nuclei supposedly supporting the states are not named.

The Hameroff and Penrose answer to the previouse is

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1571064513001917

I'm not sure I fully understand their answer.

Ok, so the quantum entanglement solves the energy efficiency problem. Still I don't get, how it creates free will? To my understanding the superposition effect is influenced by the observer and it's result prediction is probabilistic. This doesn't sounds to me as free will. It is rather a predictable system with certain level of free choice within the limits of probability prediction.
As i understand these systems of superposition and entanglement can't be controlled, but rather influenced by observer, without to give him tools of control.  Yet the free will is all about conscious control, otherwise it would be eider chaotic or controlled by some other observer, who does have the tools of control. 
We could call this well equipped Superobserver God, but then all the jewdochristian believers will misinterpret this observation.