Important, albeit somewhat depressing, post about biofuels from algae on chemical engineer Robert Rapier's always excellent blog.
Here's his introduction to the article, which you should read in its entirety:
The following is a guest post by John Benemann. John has many years of expertise in biomass conversion, and previously co-wrote a guest piece on cellulosic ethanol. On the subject of biodiesel from algae, he literally wrote the book.
I originally wrote an article over a year ago in which I mentioned the potential of algal biodiesel. I still believe, as I did then, that biodiesel (or more broadly, renewable diesel) is a far superior fuel to ethanol for reasons I outlined in that essay. However, over the past year, the more I learned about the prospects of biodiesel from algae, the more it started to look to me like cellulosic ethanol: Technically feasible? Yes. Commercially feasible? Nowhere close, and the prospects don't look good any time soon.
This was a bit disheartening for me, because I had high hopes that we had an option for replacing a large amount of our fossil fuel usage. I no longer believe that, and recent work by Krassen Dimitrov (PDF warning) had reinforced my doubts. When I read the guest post at The Oil Drum by fireangel, "Has the Algae Cavalry Arrived", my first thought was "Nice work." My second thought was, "I should have jumped on this and investigated thoroughly eight months ago when those nagging doubts started to creep in."
But should there be any further doubts, here is a guest post from a man who knows as much about this subject as anyone else in the world. And he bears bad news for those who had visions of driving around in algae-fueled transportation.
Gore on the Daily Show: extended dance remix
Blowing up our clean energy future
Comments
View as Flat
Jason Peterson Posted 10:12 am
15 May 2007
Permalink
ffletcher Posted 6:12 pm
15 May 2007
Permalink
Ron Steenblik Posted 10:40 pm
15 May 2007
Permalink
JMG Posted 1:47 am
16 May 2007
So the sooner these magic bullets are investigated and shown not to work, the better, because it means that we'll start dealing with the real technological hurdles (the ones between the ears) sooner.
"An optimist is someone who thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. A pessimist is someone who is afraid that the optimist is right."
Permalink
GreyFlcn Posted 4:11 am
16 May 2007
I got hooked on the concept of algae when I came to Grist. Not being able to choose between the potential of Electric cars versus Algae powered cars.
I was able to find out however that everything besides Algae would be far too devestating to follow through with.
Looks like the one lone liferaft supporting biofuels just got popped.
_
So Electric it is.
A technology that has not only been shown to be technically possible, but has been on the road proving itself for decades.
This is the type of thing we need to tell our legistlators.
Not only are conventional biofuels bad now, but they also have no future.
And that they need to cut investment and focus on electricity.
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 4:28 pm
16 May 2007
What that post by Fireangel really points out is that the DeBeers operation in SA is a scam. There is an arm of it in Montana too.
The claims made and lack of actual performance make closed bioreactor algal biodiesel seem impossible. With a 50 year payback on the polycarbonate bioreactor tubes used, that would have to be replaced due to UV degradation in 15 years.
Even the expert you linked to points out that closed bioreactors over 100 bucks per square meter can never work economically. He says under 10 dollar per square meter open ponds might be economically feasible. Failing to mention the deal breaker, contamination by algae strains that don't have high oil content.
How about closed bioreactors that use good old, cheap, uV resistant glass and durable concrete tanks? How about bioreactors for less than 20 bucks per square meter? How about if they cogenerate heat and electricity and purify and recycle water?
Hmmm. R and D is needed yep, I agree with that ending part of his statement.
But your one note conslusion. Another wondertoy debunked, is not justified. Nor does the expert conclude that.
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 4:41 pm
16 May 2007
The Montana branch of the South African scam.
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog
Permalink
GreyFlcn Posted 5:13 pm
16 May 2007
How much more effective would Algae be as compared to an abiotic H2Car style program.
Essentially,
Hydrogen from electrolysis
+ CO2 from power plants
= Liquid fuel
_
And while Algae may be possible, I doubt it would be as effective as making serial hybrid electric cars.
Permalink
JMG Posted 5:34 pm
16 May 2007
Meanwhile, I think you have this burden thing backwards--it's the people singing about the next big thing who have to show that it's real, not the people who've seen plenty of them come and go without ever actually panning out.
Since none of these wondertoys are here reducing CO2 emissions today (global emissions are climbing, and the energy reserves needed to accomplish a cutover to a more sustainable path are shrinking) the burden is on the people writing about all this stuff to show that it's more than hot air.
I'll gladly eat a hat for every wondertoy that actually pays off and makes a difference. Meanwhile, time is extremely short--since there's no ejection lever on this flight, we need to change course NOW. If the wondertoys come out of fantasyland and into reality, then hey, great!
"An optimist is someone who thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. A pessimist is someone who is afraid that the optimist is right."
Permalink
sunflower Posted 11:50 pm
16 May 2007
Not as sexy as green pond solar cars but far more effective, fast ROI, and employs existing technology without subsidies. Side benefits include lower fleet maintenance and lower gasoline costs.
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 11:58 pm
16 May 2007
With mass adoption of that fuel saving technology, oil would hold out long enough to advance battery technology so that synthetic fuel will never be needed on a scale anywhere near present gasoline and diesel consumption.
As that expert says though, it's still worth pursuing algal biodiesel. Why?
Because it's the most efficient plant for photosynthetic energy conversion. All it's energy goes into making more algae. No roots, leaves, branches,complex reproduction.
Integrated with other solar technology, concentrating PV, heat collection, solar distillation and with biogas digestion and fuel cells it can be part of a system that feeds on the waste stream, captures GHG, and prevents GHG release from the waste stream.
With clean water, organic fertilizer,and a renwewable backup electric power source for other harder to store renewable energy sources like wind and solar as very valuable byproducts. Along with the biodiesel of course.
Symbiotic systems that all fit together and use the complex biochemistry of bacteria and algae to reduce the land footprint of energy production to rooftops and over parking lots. Land already dedicated to human activity.
And simultaneously reduce the human carbon footprint to an insignifigant portion of the planetary carbon cycle. A carbon footprint that can be erased by turning devestated chemical farmland into organic farmland.
10% of present GHG from internal combustion based transportation energy would be possible to truly offset, by absorbing it with organic farming that sequesters it in a restored soil ecosystem. Building soil year after year as it did on the prairies before sodbusters came along.
20+ feet of soil instead of a chemical dustbowl ready to break out with the next GHG drought cycle. Restored aquifers that resist drought. It's possible with organic fertlizer and methods used on a mechanized industrial farming scale.
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog
Permalink