Biotech advances in the past decade could help. New genomic and proteomic technologies make it much easier to understand the mechanisms involved in algae-oil production. One of the challenges researchers have faced is that while some types of algae can produce large amounts of oil--as much as 60 percent of their weight--they only do this when they're starved for nutrients. But when they're starved for nutrients, they lose another of their attractive features: their ability to quickly grow and reproduce. Researchers hope to understand the molecular switches that cause increased oil production, with the added hope of triggering it without starving the algae. This could dramatically increase oil production and drive down prices.
A better understanding of biology may help researchers address another problem. The cheapest way to grow algae is in open ponds. But open ponds full of nutrients invite other species to take over, competing with the algae and cutting down production. LiveFuels, which is funding and coordinating research at its own lab and at those at both Sandia and the NREL, hopes to create algal ecosystems that resist such invaders by ensuring that all the nutrients are converted to forms the algae can easily use, says David Kingsbury, the chair of the company's scientific advisory board.
Recent tests of an algae-based system developed by GreenFuel, which, unlike LiveFuels, is developing closed bioreactors, showed that it could capture about 80 percent of the carbon dioxide emitted from a power plant during the day when sunlight is available. Although this carbon dioxide will later be released when the fuel is burned in vehicles, the carbon dioxide would have entered the atmosphere anyway. Reusing it in renewable liquid fuels makes it possible to prevent the release of carbon dioxide from fossil fuels, thereby decreasing total emissions.
The growing interest in regulating carbon-dioxide emissions could also be a boon to algal fuels. "If there is a carbon tax, or another way to basically make money by capturing carbon dioxide, that could definitely impact the economics," Jarvis says. But GreenFuel's John Lewnard, vice president of process development, says the company thinks it can reach competitive prices without carbon taxes.
But for now, lowering costs will mean overcoming many technical hurdles. "Clearly, [producing fuel from algae] can be done," says Lissa Morgenthaler Jones, LiveFuels's CEO. "The only question is whether we can do it cheaply. And the only way we're going to find that out is if we do it--if we actually go out, crank it through, spend some millions on it, and make it happen."
There is plenty of federal interest these days. In his State of the Union address, President Bush set an ambitious goal of replacing 20 percent of gasoline consumption in the United States by 2017, largely by producing 35 billion gallons of renewable fuels. Meeting those goals will be a challenge. Right now, biofuels come from food crops such as soybeans and corn; already the demand for corn to produce ethanol is driving up staple foods' prices and fueling protests in Mexico. One alternative to food sources is cellulosic materials such as wood chips, grass, and cornstalks, which are more abundant than corn grain. But these require special processing methods, and although some of these techniques have been demonstrated at small plants, they have yet to be proved commercially.
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
50
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