|
Monday, February 05, 2007 Algae-Based Fuels Set to BloomOil from microorganisms could help ease the nation's energy woes. By Kevin Bullis
Relatively high oil prices, advances in technology, and the Bush administration's increased emphasis on renewable fuels are attracting new interest in a potentially rich source of biofuels: algae. A number of startups are now demonstrating new technology and launching large research efforts aimed at replacing hundreds of millions of gallons of fossil fuels by 2010, and much more in the future. Algae makes oil naturally. Raw algae can be processed to make biocrude, the renewable equivalent of petroleum, and refined to make gasoline, diesel, jet fuel, and chemical feedstocks for plastics and drugs. Indeed, it can be processed at existing oil refineries to make just about anything that can be made from crude oil. This is the approach being taken by startups Solix Biofuels, based in Fort Collins, CO, and LiveFuels, based in Menlo Park, CA. Alternatively, strains of algae that produce more carbohydrates and less oil can be processed and fermented to make ethanol, with leftover proteins used for animal feed. This is one of the potential uses of algae produced by startup GreenFuel Technologies Corporation, based in Cambridge, MA. The theoretical potential is clear. Algae can be grown in open ponds or sealed in clear tubes, and it can produce far more oil per acre than soybeans, a source of oil for biodiesel. Algae can also clean up waste by processing nitrogen from wastewater and carbon dioxide from power plants. What's more, it can be grown on marginal lands useless for ordinary crops, and it can use water from salt aquifers that is not useful for drinking or agriculture. "Algae have the potential to produce a huge amount of oil," says Kathe Andrews-Cramer, the technical lead researcher for biofuels and bioenergy programs at Sandia National Laboratories, in Albuquerque, NM. "We could replace certainly all of our diesel fuel with algal-derived oils, and possibly replace a lot more than that." To be sure, the use of algae for liquid fuels has been studied extensively in the past, including through a program at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) that ran for nearly a decade. At the time, the results were not encouraging. The NREL program was terminated in 1996, largely because at the time crude-oil prices were far too low for algae to compete. But Eric Jarvis, an NREL scientist, says that enough has changed that NREL researchers expect to restart the program within the next six months to a year. When the program was cancelled in 1996, oil prices were relatively low. Today's higher oil prices will make it easier for algae to compete. Still, Jarvis cautions that "you have to be careful because there's a lot of hype out there right now."
|
 |
|
||
| |||
Audio »
Share »
Digg this
Add to del.icio.us
Add to Reddit
Add to Facebook
Slashdot It!
Stumble It!
Add to Newsvine
Add to Connotea
Add to CiteUlike
Add to Furl
Googlize this
Add to Rojo
Add to MyWeb
Favorite
Print
E-mail
Comments
nekote on 02/05/2007 at 8:38 AM
98
Gallons of Oil per Acre per Year
Corn 18
Soybeans 48
Safflower 83
Sunflower 102
Rapeseed 127
Oil Palm 635
Micro Algae 5000-15000
A 100 fold factor is an awfully powerful incentive to make it work.
VCRAGAIN on 02/05/2007 at 9:03 AM
32
Michael543 on 02/05/2007 at 9:47 AM
8
Hardheadjarhead on 02/05/2007 at 11:07 AM
15
We have numerous solutions to the present dependency problem. Biofuels, coal conversion, plug-hybrids, other renewables...
It'd be zippy to get them all going. The problems of climate change need also to be addressed, but short term weaning off of overseas oil (note Canada would be an exception here) would solve a lot of problems.
roger_leejr on 02/06/2007 at 3:36 AM
1
By tariffing Canadian oil, we would be doing them a favor.
Currently, Canada has no hope of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and our consumption is driving prices up in a nation that relies on petroleum and natural gas for heat, industry and transportation. The only issue then is how to keep the other vultures off of North American oil and gas supply, I.e., China and India. But a gradually increasing tax on imported oil may be our only path to national survival, as even as the oil is out there in the world, we are bleeding to death financially buying it
RC
Michael543 on 02/09/2007 at 10:16 AM
8
So would you support a tariff on non-NAFTA nations?
czorba on 11/27/2007 at 12:19 PM
2
Shlep_rock on 02/05/2007 at 6:55 PM
1
Michael543 on 02/09/2007 at 10:26 AM
8
microsrfr on 04/03/2008 at 4:06 PM
1
nick47g on 04/26/2007 at 1:58 PM
17
Tax fuel wastage and extravagance.
czorba on 11/27/2007 at 12:17 PM
2
Re: Floor price for petroleum. See www.bottombarrelbucks.com. Right on!
Nick7 on 02/08/2007 at 8:11 AM
1
We need to break our addiction now. And the sad truth is that we have the technology today to break the addiction. Sure Algae might be a solution, but I suggest using a collection of different methods to address our enduring and emerging energy needs. Specifically, we need to:
1. Provide significant incentives, in the way of tax relief or release, to companies that can produce alternatives. (Results equals Rewards)
2. Increase research funding by 500% in the areas of energy collection & storage (batteries) and energy production (Algae/Ethanol/Clean Burning Coal/Hydrogen perhaps) using non-traditional methods.
3. Remove all energy subsidies and divert funding to wind and solar exploitation.
4. 35 more nuclear power plants
5. In transition from Middle-Eastern, Nigerian, Russian, and Venezuelan oil, facilitate oil exploration and exploitation domestically. Yes, this means ANWAR.
6. Make hybrid vehicles a 1/1 dollar tax write-off with minimum standard of 50/50 MPG. Spend 25K on a hybrid and get a 25K tax write-off.
7. Set an aggressive timetable….5 years to energy independence…ala Manhattan…..
Disturbing is that we currently fund the very countries that actively pursue and pray for our demise. A reduction or elimination on our reliance of foreign oil will crush the very regimes that are hostile to Americans and our way of life. We don’t have to kill all of our enemies…we just have to drive them to their knees…financially.
Nick
Michael543 on 02/09/2007 at 10:37 AM
8
shigley on 02/13/2007 at 5:18 PM
2
BRUCE M. GRAUER on 04/24/2007 at 12:35 PM
3
equsnarnd on 05/11/2007 at 11:55 AM
1
I like your approach of rewarding rather than punishing. Too many people on this list are knee jerk fascists who think passing a law, using force is the answer to every problem. Most of their 'economic' solutions wouldn't work but they make great grist for politicians and bumper stickers. Thanks to you and all of you who think the use of intelligence and technology should trump law and force.
bluedog18820 on 04/27/2008 at 8:09 PM
1
SirLanse on 02/05/2007 at 9:07 AM
33
We have run off from phosphate mines, that
causes alea blooms in local ponds etc.
We also have lots of sun. Putting them together
should be a no-brainer.
Michael543 on 02/05/2007 at 9:58 AM
8
Collecting nuisance algae to recover as fuel will never be feasible for the same reasons that open ponds are unlikely to ever be feasible bioreactors. The cost of collection outweighs the possible return.
So the key is to identify the sources of excess nutrients and find economic ways to convert them to useful by-products.
Peopleunit on 03/05/2007 at 2:45 AM
4
The critical point (bottleneck) in the process is not in harvesting the algae, but in the subsequent drying stage. They're using artificial heat to speed drying, adding a significant energy expenditure and cost to the process.
BRUCE M. GRAUER on 04/24/2007 at 12:44 PM
3
Laz3333 on 04/16/2008 at 4:58 PM
1
Lazarus Long
239 495 2447
info@new-utopia.com
kitk on 02/05/2007 at 11:22 PM
50
To do the same now, would be great, but we cannot do it all with one old hippie and his backyard pond surrounded by protective hemp fields--as a lot of the proponents seem to envision. No, it WILL take huge patches of real estate--potentially offshore, Florida. It WILL take HUGE amounts of water, and require tens of millions of tons of algae to produce the volume of oil products we need. It can be done, but think of the cost. Give a mega company the incentive, and then they may commit tens of billions of their shareholders's dollars to the work. Don't suck it out with taxes, the government would waste it.
asdar on 02/06/2007 at 7:44 AM
60
I think Florida might just be a good place to have algae beds and might help deal with some of the runoff fertilizer from the farms.
The most exciting use I see is at coal power plants using the CO2 to power the algae growth.
abcarterjr on 02/07/2007 at 11:24 AM
45
power plants and the wide open checkerboard
spaces. Sneese. Future headline: Checkerboard hippos run algal tube farms near coal fired power plants ,with solar power, and mine water from
the air with............?
Michael543 on 02/09/2007 at 10:42 AM
8
By growing algae in controlled environments and using nutrient rich water stocks, we could reduce the amount of nuisance algae blooms that occur as a result of the dumping of that wastewater and runoff into streams, rivers and lakes.
abcarterjr on 04/26/2007 at 4:58 PM
45
nick47g on 04/26/2007 at 2:12 PM
17
We may not have an energy crisis so much as a WATER CRISIS.
The Colorado river and Oglala aquifer are already maxed out, so what do we do to get the water for algy farming [top-off to relace water taken up in the biocyle] or even coal gassification [feedstock].
We need the water in the desert or Montana, so what do we do, pump from the Pacific or Gulf of mexico?
I have no cle as to solution.
paulkoti on 06/05/2007 at 10:30 AM
2
May the God Lead the people together for a common good, better and the best Earth at an early date before it is too late.
paulkoti@yahoo.com
Gaetano Marano on 02/07/2007 at 11:13 AM
51
very interesting article!
in my opinion, algae have (at least) FOUR BIG advantages vs. the agricultural BioFuel production and plants:
1. algae's production and BioFuels plants can be located on very large (but unused) places of the planet (like deserts)
2. its production (and production plants) may be very very cheap!
3. sea-algae will need (near)zero priced saltwater (instead of very expensive potable water)
4. with sea-algae produced in the desert places NEVER will be any Food-OR-Fuel choice/decision to take
www.gaetanomarano.it
.
Colin on 02/07/2007 at 4:05 PM
6
1)Brackish water is probably more important to this technology than sea water. Of all the wells drilled for water around the world each year, many produce water not fit to drink. Many industrial processes create waste water not fit to drink. Agricultural runoff creates water quality issues that might be reduced if proper catchment is feasible and economical. Algae seem able to thrive in this brackish water.
2)The term "commercial cultivation" probably means that open sea or even open pond algae production is not efficient enough to attract early investment. Controlling the algal growth environment enables development and use of algae with 50% or more (by volume? by mass?) oil content. This could be a big money difference if capped ponds or plastic tubes are cheap enough at large scale.
3)Small scale algae to biofuel operations are probably a great way for enthusiasts to experiment with all the technology, from algae breeding and growth environment enhancement to oil extraction and biodiesel and/or ethanol production. BONUS--if you create a backyard or rooftop system that one person or one village can easily install, maintain and harvest, imagine what that could mean to people spending too much on fuel/energy all around the world.
http://www.unh.edu/p2/biodiesel/article_alge.html
http://www.americanenergyindependence.com/biodiesel.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algaculture
http://www.oilgae.com/
Go for it!
Colin
RD on 02/26/2007 at 2:14 PM
47