Large scale biodiesel from algae for $5.64 / gallon

[dcfirefighter]

From the high end estimate from the NREL's 1995 calculations of $1.40 - $4.40 gallon. Not bad for a fuel that can use most of our infrastructure, especially for freight movement.

Also not bad for a production process that can reduce the amount of P and N dumped in our rivers and bays. Not bad for a process that could offer truly competitive domestic producers of fuel. Not bad for a process that could be carbon negative.

Link to report (.pdf): http://www.biodieselamerica.org/site/downloads/articles/Biodiesel%20from%20Algae.pdf

[Coastie for Truth]

1. Not unreasonable

Given that "diesel" engines give you better MPG. Figure that in, subtract out Federal excise taxes and state taxes, and you're within "spitting distance" of gasoline.

As "peak oil" takes hold a lot of "alternatives" look good.

[NNadir]

2. I like this idea, depending on the nature of the extraction solvent.

The nice thing as you say is that it gives impedus to removing phosphorous and nitrogen from waters where they do not belong.

It is not carbon negative however. It is carbon neutral. It also requires fair quantities of water.

[dcfirefighter]

3. is, 'could'

a fine point, i know, but if a Carbon tax / carbon credit were large enough, it would probably be economical to sequester the proteins & some of the carbohydrates (those not used for etoh production), as well as possibly the glycerol from the conversion to biodiesel. Also, some of the proteins & carbs used for animal feed wind up as carbon in the soil.

As for the alcohol, it would be possible to be straight algae oil in some motors, particularly those in warm climates, at fixed locations, or with specialized equipment. It seems the main problem with SVO now is viscosity in a cold motor. I imagine that fixed location motors, as well as high duty cycle motors (trains, trucks, ships) could easily run on SVO. Apparently most automotive diesels can run on SVO if they have a small pony tank of diesel for starting and warm up. Motor heat is then circulated through the SVO tank to warm it up, at which point the SVO is thin enough to be used directly.

Now that I finished the last paragraph, I realize that you're talking about the solvent used for removing the lipids from the algae. I'm not too particularly familiar with that end of the process, though apparently a new solvent is taking over from the 'old' solvent, I can't remember which either of them were.

Probably a more important point, at $5+ a gallon, use patterns would likely change.

[NNadir]

4. Actually, the glycerol is a pretty good feedstock for making syn gas.

Right now though, the world glycerin market is saturated. Glycerol for all purposes is sometimes land filled.

As for the alcohols, these are readily available by carbon neutral means. At $5.00/gallon, ethanol is certainly competitive.

For meaningful advances in carbon neutral fuels, high prices are required. Now, personally I wish this came about through a tax equivalent to the external cost of the fuel, but if it takes the form of rapacious plunder for Cheney's buddies, the effect is the same. A drive toward replacement of fossil fuels and an impetus for conservation.

The emergency is so dire in my mind, that I am willing to accept the result irrespective of the means.

A major caveat in all of this is that the capacity for these things represents at best, a fraction of the oil demand. It is palliative, not curative.

[midnight armadillo]

5. I've been wondering about that

So what exactly would we do with all the excess glycerol assuming widespread production of biodiesel? What exactly is syn gas? thanks NNadir!

[NNadir]

6. Syn gas is a mixture of hydrogen and carbon monoxide.

Syn gas can be used to make just about any fuel you wish. When it is used to make fuels like gasoline, diesel fuel, etc, the reaction is called the Fischer-Tropsch synthesis, sometimes referred to as FT. You will see in the literature from time to time - "FT diesel" or "FT gasoline."

FT chemistry can also be used to make clean fuels like dimethyl ether, DME.

Syn gas can generated from almost any carbon source, including unfortuantely, coal. Jimmy Carter's "syn fuel" program was pretty much exactly that, coal based FT chemistry.

I referenced a paper here from Energy and Fuels on the subject of glycerol generated syn gas. We're at level 3 now, and I can't search. Remind me when we're at a lower level and I'll find it for you.

[phantom power]

7. There doesn't seem to be much limit on capacity.

At least, the authors of that ASP program summary didn't seem to think so. Their assessment seemed to be that economics was the big show-stopper. I thought their prediction of "cheap diesel thru 2015" was quaint.

[NNadir]

8. But there is. Water is the limiting reagent.

[Massacure]

9. Algae can grow in salt water.

Algae blooms in the gulf of mexico aren't unheard of.

[NNadir]

10. Ah but are they good things? The sea is an ecosystem. Using it as

an algae farm may be worse than using it as an oil field.

[Massacure]

11. Plenty of old craters from nuclear tests in the Arizona desert.

It can't be that hard to fill them up with water can it?

[phantom power]

12. I guess I don't see why.

Are you referring to the expense of supplying salt-water to the algae farms?

I wonder if there's any reason we couldn't just farm algae right in the ocean? Grow it offshore. Heck, maybe we could even reform it offshore. Build refineries on some platform, like a drilling platform.

[jpak]

13. Not possible or advisable

Fertilized patches of water are at the mercy of winds, currents and tides - nutrient-induced phytoplankton blooms would quickly migrate and dissipate. This harvest of phytoplankton in the open ocean would be an exercise in futility.

Filtration of large quantities of seawater to harvest phytoplankton would kill vast numbers fish larva and other organisms.

Fertilization of coastal waters lead to the formation of so-called Dead Zones (benthic hypoxia and anoxia), which would be sources of methane and nitrous oxide (greenhouse gases that also participate in stratospheric ozone depletion).

Containment of large areas of open ocean is simply not feasible.

The American Society of Limnology and Oceanography has forcefully lobbied against large-scale iron fertilization of the open ocean as a means to draw down atmospheric CO2 - any plans for large-scale phosphorus and nitrogen fertilization would also be opposed by the marine science community...

[phantom power]

14. The scheme I had in mind was a bit different.

Something like cultivation ponds, but floating on the water. So the water would only interact with the sea at controlled times. The main advantage would simply be that when replacement water was needed, it would literally be all around. Just open a gate and circulate it through.

[jpak]

15. Oceanographers have a hard time maintaining open ocean mesocosms

(medium scale experimental enclosures - I work with these things in lakes and they are a pain in the ass to maintain in those relatively benign environments).

The ocean engineering required to build and maintain larger scale enclosures (at least at the scale needed to supply US biodiesel demand) just doesn't exist.

It might be more feasible (and economic) to use large numbers of terrestrial ponds located at sewage treatment plants.

You could produce biogas (and generate electricity) with anaerobic sewage digesters and grow phytoplankton for biodiesel (or for solar greenhouse hydroponics) with the nutrient laden effluent.

Two energy products and cleaner final effluent discharges.

Back In The Day - they used to call these schemes The New Alchemy...

http://www.vsb.cape.com/~nature/greencenter/newalchemy.html

http://www.aliciapatterson.org/APF0103/Greene/Greene.html

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1510/is_n62/ai_7422461

whheeeeeezzzee...

:hi:

[dcfirefighter]

16. Limiting factors

land, water.

Fertilization isn't absolutely necessary, algae could obtain nutrients from air - though the yield per area would be drastically lower. Trace minerals would likely be needed. Saltwater can be used to no real ill effect, in fact, the trace minerals in saltwater might make it more productive than unfertilized freshwater.

The floating ponds might not be a terribly bad idea, though I think that weather and wave action would be problematic. I recall seeing (on tv) offshore fish farming done in australia. A large, membraneous 'bag', might be useful - it would absorb minerals and CO2 from the ocean, while releasing O2. The dead zones due to algal blooms aren't due to the activity of algae, but rather due to the decomposition of dead algae. Were the algae harvested before sinking below the photic zone, the aerobic bacteria wouldn't have their deoxygenating feast. Large bags full of algae would, however, keep the food chain from being formed in that area, such that they could only take up a small fraction of the marine system in question.

I don't think that domestic production would be that competitive without being able to capture local beneficial externalities (reduced water pollution) or assessing harmful externalities against conventional fuels. Land is much much cheaper, the growing season is longer, and sunlight is more intense in equatorial third - world countries. Should algae-based fuel become widespread, likely most production would be concentrated in those countries, leading to 21st century 'Algae' republics replacing the bananna republics of yesterday.

For me, it all boils down to how to most equitably and efficiently use the very limited resources given to us on this earth: land, water, and of course atmosphere. Manufactured goods & services are generally well distributed by open market actions - the real breakdown occurs with natural resources because no price level will increase production, only further speculation (See real-estate bubble). To this end, I'm a huge supporter of the economic theories of Henry George.

[NNadir]

17. Here are the two threads discussing this research on syn gas from glycerol

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=115&topic_id=26539

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=115&topic_id=27772