Correct. My interest in algae was never about energy.
It was about food. My dad won the National Clean Plowing Championships two years running. Algae has been the next green revolution for a long time but now its time has come. On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Ken Deboer <barlaz...@gmail.com> wrote: > Maybe so, but burning ANYthing for energy forever, is not a great idea. > > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 12:06 PM, James Bowery <jabow...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> The short list of algal biomass production cost problems: >> >> 1) Capital cost per area of capturing insolation. >> 2) Operation of energy to sufficiently concentrate biomass from the >> growth medium. >> 3) Insurance against hail and other damaging weather conditions, to the >> capital equipment capturing insolation.. >> >> There are more but these have been the blocking factors in all systems >> that have actually gone to the trouble of demonstrating how much biomass >> they produce per investment. >> >> >> >> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 12:55 PM, James Bowery <jabow...@gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> The biomass production cost problem has been solved. I don't know when >>> the world will wake up. >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 12:47 PM, Ken Deboer <barlaz...@gmail.com>wrote: >>> >>>> I agree entirely with your assessment, James. 10 years ago I was >>>> intimately engaged in biofuels,raising my own and even starting the first >>>> Company in the state to get a biofuel production plant up. However, in >>>> collaboration with various colleagues in academia and commerce, after a >>>> year of discussions, conferences etc we very deliberately gave up the whole >>>> idea. A couple smallish biodiesel plants did form around this time, and >>>> all went belly up very soon, for the very good economic (and also >>>> environmental) reasons you mention. Most people now are convinced that >>>> biofuels may very well make a nice small niche market in some places, but >>>> never a major fuel contributor. (Cold fusion cars need no biofuel!) >>>> cheers, ken >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 11:37 AM, James Bowery <jabow...@gmail.com>wrote: >>>> >>>>> BTW: For a humorous insight into the DoE grant process, the UofMI >>>>> technology was paired with the aforementioned biomass production >>>>> technology >>>>> in the proposal to the DoE's Algaoleum initiative but the proposal was >>>>> rejected. The reason given for rejecting the proposal was that the >>>>> biomass >>>>> production technology (Algasol's patented photobioreactor) it was prone to >>>>> contamination of the algae species. >>>>> >>>>> For the punch-line, here is an excerpt from that proposal: >>>>> >>>>> "Structurally, the PBRs are enclosed flexible bags made out of polymer >>>>> film... the Algasol PBRs are inherently independent of each other; each >>>>> can >>>>> serve as its own laboratory vessel." >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I mean, come on.... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 12:16 PM, James Bowery <jabow...@gmail.com>wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Indeed, it was the U of Michigan crew. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 11:17 AM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net>wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Was this old story related to the grant in question ? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/04/100422153943.htm >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Not sure how this “new” technology from PNNL is very different. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *From:* James Bowery >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Coincidentally I had just, literally a minute ago, sent off a query >>>>>>> about this PNNL work to some coinvestigators in a grant proposal to the >>>>>>> DoE >>>>>>> for the production of biocrude because the PNNL process sounded so >>>>>>> similar, >>>>>>> I wanted to find out if there was any distinction. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The biggest problem remains the sufficiently economic production of >>>>>>> biomass -- and to the best of my knowledge after looking at that problem >>>>>>> for the past 20 years -- there is only one technology capable for that. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Brad Lowe wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Some links: >>>>>>> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/12/131218100141.htm >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/12/18/Scientists-Manufacture-Crude-Oil-The-End-of-Peak-Oil >>>>>>> http://www.genifuel.com/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
