Posted on 07/05/2008 7:54:19 AM PDT by ovrtaxt
Remember the optimist's creed, "If life gives you lemons, make them into lemonade"?
Well, ConocoPhillips and the Colorado Center for Biorefining and Biofuels are trying to do one better in a new, $5 million research partnership:
"If life gives you pond scum, turn it into alternative fuels. And while you're at it, fight global warming."
OK, trying to cram two good ideas into one slogan may make it too long for bumper stickers. But it is a classic example of the creative thinking that promises to reshape Colorado's future while creating jobs in the new energy economy.
Making fuels from pond scum isn't a new idea. Nature thought of it millions of years ago when it covered layers of algae and other organic matter with millions of tons of rock to produce today's deposits of oil and natural gas. But soaring energy prices have encouraged researchers to speed up that natural process.
Algae is very efficient at converting sunlight into oil, so much so that researchers say algae can produce more oil in an area the size of a two-car garage than an entire acre of soybeans. Best of all, in water-short regions like Colorado, algae fuels don't compete for scarce fresh water resources but can use seawater or wastewater to make biodiesel, biogasoline and other biofuels.
That means algae can be grown in areas where human food can't be grown, according to Al Weimer, executive director of the center. And how's this for a kicker: carbon dioxide from power-plant emissions can be used as a feedstock for the algae.
So instead of spewing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere from a coal or natural-gas fired power plant, we can recycle that greenhouse gas into algae-based fuels for cars and trucks — fighting global warming and the OPEC oil cartel at one stroke.
Maybe it's time to stop using "pond scum" as an insult and start using it to save our wallets and our planet.
Too salty.
Valcent’s system video looked like it was either under cover or shaded.
Algae ponds for oil? At what cost? Thousands of square miles of ponds in the desert? not likely.
Not after you dump half the med it it.
OBTW, so much for sea levels rising.
AOBTW, how much energy can you get for free, as all the water runs downhill?
Ok...so you are a drug-addled idiot, without clue or care with regard to science, and no hope of grasping an intelligent thought, if it passed by your pillow, as you digested your pond-scum food.
(Forgive me, but this response is equally as polite, and equally as intelligent, as yours was.)
Better idea, install turbines at the Panama Canal to take advantage of the difference in sea levels.
I honestly never thought of that.
Hmmmm.
Might be a problem, though - I remember reading some years ago, that the flow into the canal barely supported lock operations (Rainfall from the mountains).
Might have been a drought year, or something, I don’t know.
But, if there is excess water, heck yeah. Put in turbines.
So you are tripping and wasting people’s time
Valcent’s system video looked like it was either under cover or shaded.......
Shaded? WOW more crap in the desert to spend money on
There is nothing wrong with doing it that way. Just as there is nothing wrong with letting crops grow without fertilizer. In both cases though it helps to add a little to increase yield.
Take a look at the video and tell me what you think.
These clowns are selling systems for growing hydroponic lettuce which is valid--- But it has given them a swelled head and they figure they can do the same for algae biomass to petrol- byproducts
Are they fishing for private investment and government grants?
Will look for video
A different approach. Seems there’s quite a bit of innovation in this field.
Not particularly. You burn the "non-oil" fraction of the biomass (still carbonaceous material, and thus combustible) to generate process heat---just like sugar mills. Most of the "getting the algae goop free of most of the water" is done by filtration--not a hugely energy-intensive unit operation. Every city waste treatment "bio-oxidation" plant handles a similar process every day.
As I said before, when I worked for "le Giant chemical company", they also had a "biox plant" to let the buggies "eat" the organic content of their plant wastewater streams. The only difference between that biox plant and the envisioned algae-to-oil plants is the type of buggies used (and of course, the steps to separate the oil from the protein and carbohydrate fractions). But again--those are standard chemical engineering operations.
There is NO new technology needed to operate such plants---the new technology comes from finding (or genetically engineering) the right micro-organisms, and finding the optimum conditions to foster their growth.
Some interesting info on Valcent’s system and costs, etc. can be found at this google site. It is a company release well worth a look. Second or third page.
“Valcent’s Releases Profitable Initial Production Estimates for its Vertical Vegetable Growing Systems”
More Valcent— http://www.valcent.net/s/Ecotech.asp?ReportID=182039
Sounds logical (recycles the water) but the expenditures will enormous to get these racks of algae bags out in the desert. One nasty storm would topple them all
If you want to grow algae the way to go is ponds in a hot climate where you get rain or it is humid. Not plastic bags out in the desert
Dran right those are cool web pages. Lots of green and blue in them. Everyones favorite eco-colors
The problem with algae is that it uses Oxygen to photosynthesize. In the eutrophic Klamath system, algae growing in slack water can deplete the water of oxygen and kill fish. The ocean is already producing dead zones. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080214144547.htm The addition of so much algae could contribute to the problem. At least harvest of already growing algae on the Klamath could help the environment by increasing oxygen levels and eliminating the presence of algae mats which are a part of the habitat for C-Shasta and P minicornis - lethal fish diseases.
A recognized problem of open ponds is contamination with undesirable algae strains, like having crabgrass in your yard. And the necessity of bubbling co2 through the water to achieve high yields. Not to mention evaporation rates...
Open ponds may work well for catfish and such but for algae production, not so much so.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.