Algae Biofuels?

[EKublai]

Hey guys,

This isn't so much a stated opinion, but it's something that has been in the news recently.

I can't find a lot of research of the viability of algae biofuels, I was wondering if anything could help me on this. Obama's been getting alot of flack for the proposal of investing in developing this alt. fuel but a lot of the criticism seems to be centered around the "weirdness" of slime as energy.

For a side project, I've always wondered about Gingrich's lunar base proposal. It seems a little more fantastical but it's also a radical idea, and I'm just wondering where the inkling of possibility might have sprung from.

Thanks.

[Camarohusky]

At 45 minutes ago, EKublai wrote: a lot of the criticism seems to be centered around the "weirdness" of slime as energy.

How stupid are these critics? "Biofuel is bad because algae slime is gross." Hello, genius, oil IS algae biofuel.

There is a coal power plant in AZ (saw it on TV a while ago so I don't have the name) that is converting its pollution into food for algae. They are converting this bad pollution into usable oil. The problem is that it is extremely expensive to do this, but in terms of $ and in terms of land needed to do the tranformation.

[Korriken]

At 1 minute ago, Camarohusky wrote:

At 45 minutes ago, EKublai wrote: a lot of the criticism seems to be centered around the "weirdness" of slime as energy.

How stupid are these critics? "Biofuel is bad because algae slime is gross." Hello, genius, oil IS algae biofuel.

There is a coal power plant in AZ (saw it on TV a while ago so I don't have the name) that is converting its pollution into food for algae. They are converting this bad pollution into usable oil. The problem is that it is extremely expensive to do this, but in terms of $ and in terms of land needed to do the tranformation.

you can grow algae in almost any water environment, problem is, there needs to be a few more technological breakthroughs to make it efficient enough to mess with. Great part is, you don't need farmland to do it, it can be done by digging ponds in non farmable land, as long as it can be made to hold the water. warmer temperatures would support more algae, so maybe we can do something with a stretch of desert that serves little other purpose? of course, keeping the ponds from drying out would be a challenge in a desert.

[djack]

At 9 minutes ago, Korriken wrote:

At 1 minute ago, Camarohusky wrote:

At 45 minutes ago, EKublai wrote: a lot of the criticism seems to be centered around the "weirdness" of slime as energy.

How stupid are these critics? "Biofuel is bad because algae slime is gross." Hello, genius, oil IS algae biofuel.

There is a coal power plant in AZ (saw it on TV a while ago so I don't have the name) that is converting its pollution into food for algae. They are converting this bad pollution into usable oil. The problem is that it is extremely expensive to do this, both in terms of $ and in terms of land needed to do the transformation.

you can grow algae in almost any water environment, problem is, there needs to be a few more technological breakthroughs to make it efficient enough to mess with. Great part is, you don't need farmland to do it, it can be done by digging ponds in non farmable land, as long as it can be made to hold the water. warmer temperatures would support more algae, so maybe we can do something with a stretch of desert that serves little other purpose? of course, keeping the ponds from drying out would be a challenge in a desert.

Actually the way they do it is they have tubes filled with water and connected to the power plant, the CO2 released by the coal goes into the algae which uses it to grow and then they take most of the algae and burn it with the coal as a supplement. The coal is still needed and it requires a fundamental alteration to the power plants design in order to divert that CO2 without also diverting pollutants that would inhibit algael growth not to mention taking up even more land as those tubes need to be away from the facility so that the algae can get plenty of sunlight for photosynthesis. As for building algae farms, it would take huge amounts of land to produce enough algae for a practical power plant (it would have to compete with nuclear, coal, oil, and hydroelectric power sources so about 20-40 gigawatt hours per day just to be useful now and as time goes on that number would only to increase) and there's very little that can be done to increase the amount of energy we can get from algae and all of that would require spending lots of money to make something that would quickly become outdated and inefficient.

[All-American-Badass]

I personally have been a huge proponent of biofuels. if we can make more diesel vehicles while we develop biofuels to a commercial scale we can pretty much be energy independent.

[Camarohusky]

At 2 hours ago, All-American-Badass wrote: I personally have been a huge proponent of biofuels. if we can make more diesel vehicles while we develop biofuels to a commercial scale we can pretty much be energy independent.

Exactly. I see alternative fuels and energy more as an energy independence issue and as a backup plan in case oil starts to have problems. Oil is finite, and more and mroe people want it, so we have to find other fuels just to ensure we can still function.

[morefngdbs]

Look at the amount of cooking oil used in resturants. THis oil was until recently thrown away usually once a week or more. So if you take the resturant where my girlfriend used to cook at. there fryers were going through more than 25 gallons of oil a week. THis is just one resturant, This stuff is easily turned into biodiesel. Someone is already collecting the stuff, they just need plants to convert it into fuel instead of dumping it into a landfill.

I seen an article a couple of years ago that said that in the day time IF the rooves of the buildings in all the Southern USA states all had solar panels, that would be enough power in the day time for all needed electrical useage in the USA & then some.
You would need power plants at night, still, but it would mean you would burn much less oil & coal any reduction is good IMO.

[Camarohusky]

At 1 hour ago, morefngdbs wrote: Look at the amount of cooking oil used in resturants. THis oil was until recently thrown away usually once a week or more. So if you take the resturant where my girlfriend used to cook at. there fryers were going through more than 25 gallons of oil a week. THis is just one resturant, This stuff is easily turned into biodiesel. Someone is already collecting the stuff, they just need plants to convert it into fuel instead of dumping it into a landfill.

I seen an article a couple of years ago that said that in the day time IF the rooves of the buildings in all the Southern USA states all had solar panels, that would be enough power in the day time for all needed electrical useage in the USA & then some.
You would need power plants at night, still, but it would mean you would burn much less oil & coal any reduction is good IMO.

The problem with both of these is that they're extremely expensive. Western society has been seriously spoiled with Oil. it is cheap to get, cheap to use, asnd easy to mess around with. I'd venture a guess and say that per watt/Joule/Newton/whatevertermofenergyyouwishtouse oil it, even at it's high now, a good 1/4 the price of these other methods. You see how much whining and mess people make over a few cent gas jump, imagine that trouble they'll cause over a 4 fold increase in price.

[Elfer]

Biofuels are a decent interim solution for a lot of problems, but I think that we should be making a shift to electrically-driven motors wherever possible. Nuclear fusion is going to be an important, cheap source of energy once it's developed enough, say within 200 years.

You have to keep in mind that something like algae biofuel is, in many ways, a low-efficiency solar collector. We should still be focusing on alternative and decentralized electrical generation, and Solar PV is a really versatile, resilient option, which could really benefit from more investment.

[morefngdbs]

At 3 hours ago, Camarohusky wrote:

At 1 hour ago, morefngdbs wrote: Look at the amount of cooking oil used in resturants. This stuff is easily turned into biodiesel. Someone is already collecting the stuff, they just need plants to convert it into fuel
I seen an article a couple of years ago the buildings in all the Southern USA states all had solar panels, that would be enough power in the day time for all needed electrical useage in the USA & :

The problem with both of these is that they're extremely expensive. Western society has been seriously spoiled with Oil. it is cheap to get, cheap to use, asnd easy to mess around with. I'd venture a guess and say that per watt/Joule/Newton/whatevertermofenergyyouwishtouse oil it, even at it's high now, a good 1/4 the price of these other methods. You see how much whining and mess people make over a few cent gas jump, imagine that trouble they'll cause over a 4 fold increase in price.

;;;;
I realise its costly, but oil hasn't seen a substantial decrease in years , & over the long haul, it & all other fossil fuels have gotten & will contine to cost more.
But once you have a solar panel it works day after day at no additional cost to you & will eventually pay for itself. Oil has to be continually rebought, no matter how much you buy , you will always need more.
I am after researching it & following my friend who is now running solar & wind systems that he has upgraded so he no longer is on the grid, & electricity in Nova Scotia is one of the highest in all Canadian Provinces. Sure solar & wind systems will need to be repaired, replaced, battery storage is ever evolving & IMO we will need all of these in the future, bio fuels, solar, wind, tidal , thermal etc. Because we know that the world cannot sustain the oil industry for another thousand years ! Hell they don't know if we even have a hundred years worth left !
Waiting until we are in dire straights isn't the right way to proceed, more needs to be done now by all of us especially Government.

[Iron-Hampster]

We can make people less concerned about the future with little temporary solutions like this but here is the thing: there is no way we are going to make enough algae to support our needs. Remember, exponential growth is a built in factor to our economy that is not just driven by supply and demand, but by debt. If our economy does not grow, our economy collapses, if we keep growing, we will not have enough capacity to produce the energy needed to sustain it. Yes free market drives to alternatives yadyada that's all well and good but too bad we are forgetting that we have been attempting to over come survival of the fittest and there for, don't have a free market economy. Our economy doesn't create wealth it creates debt, forcing people to consume and TRY to create wealth.

Here is the final nail in the coffin for this biofuel: to create it, it requires more energy than Oil did, since Oil was a found substance that only needed to be taken from the earth, this fuel has to be created, requiring time and energy, with this in mind, we will have to produce much more algae than we were producing oil, just to compensate for the extra work and time needed. We will also need nutrients and various chemicals to keep the algae alive, creating this requires petroleum products, requiring that we make even MORE algae. So now we are gradually taking more and more of every resource on this planet to feed this algae. So basically we are using up too much of the planet as it is to pull this off. too bad.

[Th-e]

From what I have been hearing, the resources for making biofuels from algae cost more than it's ultimately worth, and would not really be useful except as a temporary thing.

But I wonder about another biofuel source: our own poop. How tough would it be to take shit and make it a viable resource? Human poo, dog poo, cow poo...

A prison in Rwanda gets 75% of its electricity from its own inmates' BMs. Well, cow pies are mixed in for better results...but you get what I'm saying.

[Iron-Hampster]

At 28 minutes ago, Th-e wrote: From what I have been hearing, the resources for making biofuels from algae cost more than it's ultimately worth, and would not really be useful except as a temporary thing.

But I wonder about another biofuel source: our own poop. How tough would it be to take shit and make it a viable resource? Human poo, dog poo, cow poo...

A prison in Rwanda gets 75% of its electricity from its own inmates' BMs. Well, cow pies are mixed in for better results...but you get what I'm saying.

Wouldn't solve the problem that most of our products are physically made out of petroleum products and that using that bio fuel would still require those to be economically feasible. Plus, that dung is used as a natural fertilizer for food, with out that, people would have to use more petroleum based fertilizers. Yet despite all of this, if it does manage to become efficient and some how make our oil last longer, here is what will happen.

Oil price goes down as demand falls, Investors see this and powered by the debt driven economy, start creating more petroleum products and using more petroleum fuelled vehicles until it the price evens out, now the economy grows as the same amount of oil is being used. Then the supply starts falling below demand again, but if this economy doesn't keep expanding it collapses, problem not solved.

[Earfetish]

At 1 day ago, Camarohusky wrote:

At 2 hours ago, All-American-Badass wrote: I personally have been a huge proponent of biofuels. if we can make more diesel vehicles while we develop biofuels to a commercial scale we can pretty much be energy independent.

Exactly. I see alternative fuels and energy more as an energy independence issue and as a backup plan in case oil starts to have problems. Oil is finite, and more and mroe people want it, so we have to find other fuels just to ensure we can still function.

I heard if we burn all of the oil we already have access to, we will all die.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2012/feb/
07/why-energy-industry-so-invested-climate-denail

Fuck the price of energy - although it is important, it's insignificant in comparison to impending global catastrophe.

So we should invest in alternative sources, most definitely, and algae biofuels are a great idea. Any low-carbon alternative is good. Science progresses so fast in these areas and with quantum technology and molecular biology and all that, algae could quickly become fast, user-friendly, land and cost-efficient and not likely to cause dramatic climate change for the next few generations to put up with.

[Earfetish]

http://capitalinstitute.org/blog/big-choice-0

should've linked to this instead

[Ravariel]

At 2 days ago, EKublai wrote: I can't find a lot of research of the viability of algae biofuels, I was wondering if anything could help me on this. Obama's been getting alot of flack for the proposal of investing in developing this alt. fuel but a lot of the criticism seems to be centered around the "weirdness" of slime as energy.

It's interesting, but mostly as a curiosity. The time, cost, and resources necessary to create what is a marginal amount of oil at best is immense. However, the techniques used to create this algae are extremely useful in other areas. The more immediately workable oil/coal alternatives continue to be photovoltaic, wind and nuclear, with decentralization being the catalyst to true energy independence.

For a side project, I've always wondered about Gingrich's lunar base proposal. It seems a little more fantastical but it's also a radical idea, and I'm just wondering where the inkling of possibility might have sprung from.

Why Newt's Moon base is a pipe dream. Bummer, really, because I want a moon base, too. Unfortunately his idea is retarded and would fail almost immediately.

[All-American-Badass]

I've actually seen online people who refine their own biodeisel from used cooking oil, and after about $2000 in equipment they claim you can make the stuff for maybe a $1.50-$2 a gallon (I've seen as low as 75 cents a gallon but those were several years old and the restaurants didn't charge for the used cooking oil, but they probably do now)

[Camarohusky]

At 4 hours ago, All-American-Badass wrote: I've actually seen online people who refine their own biodeisel from used cooking oil, and after about $2000 in equipment they claim you can make the stuff for maybe a $1.50-$2 a gallon (I've seen as low as 75 cents a gallon but those were several years old and the restaurants didn't charge for the used cooking oil, but they probably do now)

It'd take close to 1000 gallons for that to become profitable.

This also doesn't take into account the price of ingredients (though they are likely included in the $2/gallon) or the amount of time and space it would take to make that much biodiesel.

In other words, this ain't as economical as it seems.

[Cootie]

I still don't think that is the best thing to do, and we should concentrate all of our energy on either nuclear, solar, or electric vehicles. Splintering off onto too many ideas will only slow down the time to make one that actually works.

[All-American-Badass]

At 7 minutes ago, Camarohusky wrote:

At 4 hours ago, All-American-Badass wrote: I've actually seen online people who refine their own biodeisel from used cooking oil, and after about $2000 in equipment they claim you can make the stuff for maybe a $1.50-$2 a gallon (I've seen as low as 75 cents a gallon but those were several years old and the restaurants didn't charge for the used cooking oil, but they probably do now)

It'd take close to 1000 gallons for that to become profitable.
This also doesn't take into account the price of ingredients (though they are likely included in the $2/gallon) or the amount of time and space it would take to make that much biodiesel.

Well It would take several hours to a day to completely go through the process but as seen here and here the amount of space it takes up isn't enough to be a burden on the average home.

In other words, this ain't as economical as it seems.

[djack]

At 5 hours ago, All-American-Badass wrote: I've actually seen online people who refine their own biodeisel from used cooking oil, and after about $2000 in equipment they claim you can make the stuff for maybe a $1.50-$2 a gallon (I've seen as low as 75 cents a gallon but those were several years old and the restaurants didn't charge for the used cooking oil, but they probably do now)

They still don't charge for their used cooking oil because few enough people use it to make biodiesel that restaurants are just happy they don't have to pay someone to take the oil away. If demand went up they could begin charging for the oil without worrying about someone refusing to buy it and the cost of biodiesel would skyrocket. So after the $2,000 for the equipment and the $2 per gallon in ingredients and electricity required to convert it you now have to add the price of the cooking oil, if that's anything more than $2 a gallon you're now paying more for biodiesel than you would be if you just bought regular unleaded gas in California.

[Camarohusky]

At 1 hour ago, All-American-Badass wrote: Well It would take several hours to a day to completely go through the process but as seen here and here the amount of space it takes up isn't enough to be a burden on the average home.

This brings up 2 things. The amount it would take to break even is 1000 gallons. That's quite a bit of liquid, both hazardous, and toxis, that would need to be both created and stored. The average home doesn't have that kind of stroage, not that kind of room laying around.

Also, now that you bring up that this is for home use, it becomes even less economical. I drive a great deal. During my commutes to school, treatment, and to work I drive close to 300 miles a week. I have a very economical car and need to fill about once a week, at 10 gallons a pop. On my high driving amount it would take me close to 2 years to get 1000 gallons in my car. That is a very long time to make and store oil just to break even for the average American.

I am not trying to knock what seems like actually a good idea. I am trying to show that we are going to have to adjust our perception of what is adequate price for energy.

[All-American-Badass]

At 1 hour ago, djack wrote:

At 5 hours ago, All-American-Badass wrote: I've actually seen online people who refine their own biodeisel from used cooking oil, and after about $2000 in equipment they claim you can make the stuff for maybe a $1.50-$2 a gallon (I've seen as low as 75 cents a gallon but those were several years old and the restaurants didn't charge for the used cooking oil, but they probably do now)

They still don't charge for their used cooking oil because few enough people use it to make biodiesel that restaurants are just happy they don't have to pay someone to take the oil away.

Well if that's the case you could probably get it to under $1.50 a gallon when it's all said and done, cause a good percentage of the price difference between the 75 cents and the $2 was the assumption that the wasted cooking oil would be sold at a price.

If demand went up they could begin charging for the oil without worrying about someone refusing to buy it and the cost of biodiesel would skyrocket. So after the $2,000 for the equipment and the $2 per gallon in ingredients and electricity required to convert it you now have to add the price of the cooking oil, if that's anything more than $2 a gallon you're now paying more for biodiesel than you would be if you just bought regular unleaded gas in California.

I really doubt restaurants would charge much for used cooking oil seeing how they get it fresh in bulk, they would probably only charge at most a buck a gallon for it. so you're still at only $3 a gallon and by the time biodiesel would get there demand wise, gas would probably be as expensive here as it in Europe currently.

[All-American-Badass]

At 13 minutes ago, Camarohusky wrote:

At 1 hour ago, All-American-Badass wrote: Well It would take several hours to a day to completely go through the process but as seen here and here the amount of space it takes up isn't enough to be a burden on the average home.

This brings up 2 things. The amount it would take to break even is 1000 gallons. That's quite a bit of liquid, both hazardous, and toxis, that would need to be both created and stored. The average home doesn't have that kind of stroage, not that kind of room laying around.

Well you're not making 1000 gallons at once you'd only do about 20-30 gallons at a time which doesn't need that much space

Also, now that you bring up that this is for home use, it becomes even less economical. I drive a great deal. During my commutes to school, treatment, and to work I drive close to 300 miles a week. I have a very economical car and need to fill about once a week, at 10 gallons a pop. On my high driving amount it would take me close to 2 years to get 1000 gallons in my car. That is a very long time to make and store oil just to break even for the average American.

In your case you'd only need oil once every 2 weeks going by the logic of my last point. you'd use the 10 gallons up on the spot the use the rest of it in a week then repeat the process. It's like storing gas cans in your tool shed. Of course it would be better if you were using it to make fuel for a diesel pickup like the Trucks guy was doing, you'd have more use of it instead of processing the stuff every other weekend like you would if you were to theoretically do it.

I am not trying to knock what seems like actually a good idea. I am trying to show that we are going to have to adjust our perception of what is adequate price for energy.

[djack]

At 3 hours ago, All-American-Badass wrote: I really doubt restaurants would charge much for used cooking oil seeing how they get it fresh in bulk, they would probably only charge at most a buck a gallon for it. so you're still at only $3 a gallon and by the time biodiesel would get there demand wise, gas would probably be as expensive here as it in Europe currently.

I'm sorry, from your name I assumed that you were an American but clearly you're living in a communist nation otherwise you'd be familiar with the law of supply and demand. Restaurants can only have so much oil at one time creating a limited supply and if demand is sufficient to justify charging people for that oil there's no reason restaurants couldn't charge enough to make the price so that they're paying the equivalent to or more than what they would pay for gas especially since there are enough people out there that believe biodiesel is saving the environment from the pollution of regular oil and are willing to pay extra because of that belief.

[All-American-Badass]

At 47 minutes ago, djack wrote:

At 3 hours ago, All-American-Badass wrote: I really doubt restaurants would charge much for used cooking oil seeing how they get it fresh in bulk, they would probably only charge at most a buck a gallon for it. so you're still at only $3 a gallon and by the time biodiesel would get there demand wise, gas would probably be as expensive here as it in Europe currently.

I'm sorry, from your name I assumed that you were an American but clearly you're living in a communist nation otherwise you'd be familiar with the law of supply and demand. Restaurants can only have so much oil at one time creating a limited supply and if demand is sufficient to justify charging people for that oil there's no reason restaurants couldn't charge enough to make the price so that they're paying the equivalent to or more than what they would pay for gas especially since there are enough people out there that believe biodiesel is saving the environment from the pollution of regular oil and are willing to pay extra because of that belief.

Well that would be if there's only one restaurant. If there are multiple restaurants, they would compete with each other for the business of the people who get the used cooking oil. There's no way restaurant A would get rid of their used cooking oil if restaurant B is charging considerably less for their used cooking oil. and it's not just restaurants that use cooking oil, snack manufacturers, like Frito Lays, use mass quantities of it, so there can be likely enough used cooking oil to not cause. regarding the last part of your statement, I doubt there would be enough of the environmentalists with that much disposable income to make a majority of their customers on a national scale, so to keep their customer base they'll keep it cheap in most places. Your assumption would work in places like LA or San Fransisco, but someplace like where I live, the majority of the people who would want the used cooking oil for biodiesel would be farmers, ranchers, and blue collar workers who use diesel vehicles and would highly prefer not to spend $4 a gallon on fuel.

[Elfer]

At 16 hours ago, Camarohusky wrote: On my high driving amount it would take me close to 2 years to get 1000 gallons in my car. That is a very long time to make and store oil just to break even for the average American.

2 years is actually an incredibly short break-even time, just sayin'. In an industrial-type setting, anything under five years is an almost automatic green-light.

Also, not that I've actually researched the logistics of it (system capacity, time investment per gallon, etc), but couldn't these issues be easily resolved with a small biodiesel co-op? Say, five households splitting the set-up cost, paying in for operational costs relative to how much they take out, and maybe a nominal stipend for the person doing the leg work, or some sort of work-sharing schedule.

[Camarohusky]

At 3 hours ago, Elfer wrote: 2 years is actually an incredibly short break-even time, just sayin'. In an industrial-type setting, anything under five years is an almost automatic green-light.

2 years may be golden for industrial and commercial types. However, for an average homeowner? Especially in this economy, two years is quite a long ways away.

[Elfer]

At 7 hours ago, Camarohusky wrote: 2 years may be golden for industrial and commercial types. However, for an average homeowner? Especially in this economy, two years is quite a long ways away.

It's still a very good ROI, even for an individual. And like I mentioned, a co-op type setup would turn it around even faster.

[Cootie]

At 1 day ago, Camarohusky wrote:

At 3 hours ago, Elfer wrote: 2 years is actually an incredibly short break-even time, just sayin'. In an industrial-type setting, anything under five years is an almost automatic green-light.

2 years may be golden for industrial and commercial types. However, for an average homeowner? Especially in this economy, two years is quite a long ways away.

Thinking that the future isn't as important as the present is one of the top three ways people waste money.