Re: SPAM-LOW: Re: [oil_from_algae] Please Vote Here
Bobby - exactly. Once we understand the M&E balances, we are in a position to more accurately assess the viability, recognizing full well that different energy inputs have different unit values..
So for example if we rely on high cost energy inputs to generate an equivalently valued fuel (say ethanol) and overall there is little to no energy gain we should understand there are some serious questions regarding viability.
But if we use low cost energy input (say algae relying either on direct photosynthesis or on sugars or equivalent nutrient/source of energy, those mainly relying on photosynthesis) we then have a different case, admittedly needing still to establish mass scale economics and consistency of output.
Given all the usual hype and PR fluff algae and other alternate energy promoters are so adept at issuing (sometimes their sole core competency), transparent M&E balances and realistic investment and operating facility data for the whole system as well as understanding the owned or accessed intellectual property and organizational experience and key personnel skills are a must for making any reasonable assessment.
I apologize if this sounds too MBA like, but short-circuiting this disciplined assessment is an invitation to be scammed.
Subject: Re: SPAM-LOW: Re: [oil_from_algae] Please Vote Here
Alex,
You are correct - there are absurd claims being made.
I fear that there are lots of scam artists trying to follow whatever is hot this month to see if they can grab some crumbs.
Unfortunately, these two groups make it difficult for those people who are seriously trying to accomplish energy independence.
M&E balances are useful details to help us understand the claims being made.
But we must remember that even if only 10% of the incoming mass goes out as product, it can still be a viable process.
And even if we are using twice as many BTUs as the output oil, it can still be a viable process.
But don't get carried away with the thought - the reason the negative comments about corn ethanol are valid is that they are using a transportation fuel to produce a transportation fuel.
If we are using a transportation fuel to produce a transportation fuel and the energy balance is negative - we would be losing just like corn ethanol is. But if we are inputting a fuel that would be awkward to use as a transportation fuel and getting as output a fuel that is a viable transportation fuel, the energy balance is not necessarily a killer.
M&E balances are crucial in determining the sensitivity of the economic return. It is the framework along with unit costs by which viability can be established. Just seeing claimed returns does not satisfy my need to understand. All too often I have run across stated ROIs that were hypothetical and absurd if not outright cons/scams once all inputs and assumptions were made transparent.
Regarding oil from algae I am assuming companies seriously committed to commercial production and not just tapping money from well-intentioned investors are on a learning curve, accumulating experience and figuring out how to cut overall system costs while improving consistency and quality of the final product. Today they are not yet at the economic tipping point. Solazyme openly says $2/gallon is their target. I think others are saying the same.
Subject: Re: SPAM-LOW: Re: [oil_from_algae] Please Vote Here
Bobby,
Materials and energy balances are important to any process flow diagram for several reasons. However, your point is well taken. From a standpoint of economic viability, M&E balances are somewhat irrelavent. To determine if a process or product is viable, you only need to know what it costs you to produce it and what you can sell it for. If you can sell it at a profit, it is viable.
Production and distribution of industrial gases (such as hydrogen) stick out in my mind as good examples.
We are nowhere near the reality of anything. We don't need to alter biological productivity - almost everyone agrees that it should be possible to grow 2000 gallons of oil per acre with the current biology. Since that is on land that cannot grow crops, using water that is salty, and maybe even feeding the algae with wastes - we should be way ahead of all the alternatives.
We are nowhere near having the facts to do a realistic EROI.
I believe EROI was invented to let people who oppose progress to stand in the way of it. Let's consider a theoretical case. Coal is really cheap ($16 per ton is what I remember). Let's say we come up with an improvement to the Fischer-Trope( SP?) process that produces 1 pound of gasoline for every 2 pounds of coal input. That would have a terrible EROI - about 1/2. And any energy company would jump at it - because the 1 pound of gasoline is worth much more than 2 pounds of coal.
Let's make it more extreme. Let's say a city will pay us $5 per ton to take their garbage. We have a pyrolysis process that will produce a gallon of kerosene from that ton. That the garbage has a million BTUs and the kerosene has 150,000 BTUs is irrelevant. We are getting paid to take the input and can sell the output.
So how much energy goes in and how much comes out is irrelevant - the total cost of what goes in compared to what the output can be sold for is the important measure.
(Reality note - in both examples, there are lost of other costs that we must consider.)
Hey Bobby, its Brian but thanks for the complement :)
If you re-read his comment, it says 'even with aggressive assumption about biological productivity. ..' then you can adjust the numbers. My contention is that we are no where near the reality of 'aggressive assumption about biological productivity'. That is the hurtle, not the price of oil but increasing the production of algae.
I also content that there is another, more ominus hurtle that no one ever talks about, EROI. For the same reason that corn to ethanol is pretty dumb, I ask what is the EROI of algae to energy systems? According to Benemann and others, cost and EROI immediately throws out the concepts of PBR's. And even Dr Briggs has admitted to me that he regrets not publishing along with his famous essay that he didnt include EROI but as his own admission says 'its a complete unknown'. But what is crystal clear to me that the numbers drop way down once complete LCA calculations are run. 20000gal/ac/ year turns into a much smaller theoretical number when real live process engineering gets included.
I find it curious how people have clung to the same ideal of 'biofuels' with algae as they did with ethanol without the proper analysis of simple sets of baseline assumptions like 'does this algae energy system make more energy than it uses'. IMO, its the most important question to start with.
Subject: Re: SPAM-LOW: Re: [oil_from_algae] Please Vote Here
Brain,
I agree with your scepticism about all the PR being put out. Everyone talks about what they are going to do "real soon now" not what they have done.
However, you left out an important fact about Dr. Benemann's quotation. When he made that judgement, crude was selling for less than $20 per barrel. Today it is about $70. If algae oil is twice as expensive when crude is less $20, that would be less than $40 - compares pretty well with $70.
So his quotation should now be updated to say that theoretically it is possible for algae oil to be cost effective. Time to get to work to find out if the theory can be made reality.
My professional opinion comes from my years of Botany, renewable energy and catalysts research expertise. It is also formed from reading and establishing a very large library of algal research and developments from the 1910's on. And living on a lake where we can walk across the algae soup during August.
But more importantly, my professional opinion is based on;
In the NREL algae report itself, Dr Benemann states the following on pg 4; The factors that most influence cost are biological, and not engineering- related. These analyses point to the need for highly productive organisms capable of near-theoretical levels of conversion of sunlight to biomass. Even with aggressive assumptions about biological productivity, we project costs for biodiesel which are two times higher than current petroleum diesel fuel costs.
Lets assume for a moment that the guy who ran the algae program knows what he is talking about. He is saying that its not an engineering problem but a biological problem. So let me ask a set of questions;
have we solved the biological riddle of near theoretical level conversion levels? Answer No, not even close. Certainly not in a paddlewheel pond.
Has most of the PR and hype coming out been focused on the very thing, engineering improvments, rather than improving the organism itself that Dr Benemann states is the real issue? Answer is yes they most are foolishly working on equipment and not the organism itself.
Assuming that it will take a genetically engineered organism to make this all work, how many years does it take from Patent application to commercial production of a GMO organism? Likely over 10 years because of various hoops and red tape.
These and many more reasons are why Dr Benemann restated the obvious just a few years ago in this article; 6. Open ponds may plausibly be considered for algae biofuels production, but this assumes that indeed the required R&D is successful, a very BIG IF (but that is true of all R&D). But it is worthwhile trying, as we must try all plausible options. But we must also reject those that, as pointed out in this posting, violate first principles and have other major up-front failings.
This sums up my informed position, that its still R&D, maybe even valuable R&D but not even close to a commercial ideal yet. Because no one has proven anything close to neither EROI positive nor economically positive returns, Im not sure how anyone really believe that algoil is 3to5 years out. IMO, Benemann is right, 'Its Bizarre, its totally absurd'.
Im curious how and where your and other opinions are formed on the subject? Brian
I disagree. Algae to jet fuel (or renewable diesel) on a commercial, unsubsidized, competitive playing field is definitely within 5 years. Probably more like 3. Now you might not see meaningful contributions to the liquid fuel RFS, because the algal biocrude supply will first have to satisfy all of the jet fuel market. And from what I have heard, many standing purchase orders from jet fuel customers already exist, just waiting to be filled! That is a very motivating reason to stay in the algae 'hunt'.
I would point out that just proving one can mass produce something isnt the major threshold to overcome. People have been massproducing algae for 1000's of years.
I would say that the major thresholds to produce algae into energy/others is 2 fold;
Being able to produce bio feedstocks economica lly to fit the intended market.
Being able to produce bio feedstocks that are EROI positive to fit into the energy market.
Neither of these important thresholds are even close to becoming a reality.
I think Trent (and others) does a fine job of consistantly pointing this out, as should everyone before they drink the 'algae kool aid'.
Brian
From: Trent Creekmore <trent@...> Sent: Monday, June 29, 2009 6:36 PM To: oil_from_algae@ yahoogroups. com Subject: Re: [oil_from_algae] Please Vote Here
I would say not until it can be proven that it can be massed produced. There is a lot of hype in this area, but nobody still producing viable quantities for mass production, and not at a loss of revenue.
Until that can be feasible, how can there be a must?
Won't the feasibility be a function of geography and local conditions, the technology chosen and scale of operations? Maybe I am prematurely assuming that oil and/or chemicals from algae will prove to have commercial value. Intuitively this makes a lot more sense than other biomass based routes to manufacturing fuels.
Higher land use intensity
Can use marginal land
Brackish water options
High oil yield
Multiple real development efforts from credible organizations
Less sensitivity to other fuel costs than other routes
How are you? I hope all are fine and in a good health. I'm a Ph. D. student and work in my research on production of Biodiesel from microalgae. I put a vote on my web page and need all vote on this "Do we need to search about using of algae in biofuel production?, ". You find the voting part on the left side of the page.
Ok false, I will bite... My professional opinion comes from my years of Botany, renewable energy and catalysts research expertise. It is also formed from...
Brain, I agree with your scepticism about all the PR being put out. Everyone talks about what they are going to do "real soon now" not what they have done. ...
Hi Brian and Bobby, My name is Jody, (or jfarris73@yahoo). I don't know why it shows up as 'false' in this group. But anyway.. I am not sure where, or...
Jody, Dr. Benneman told me he only worked with Fat(lipids) in the cooler area of Eastern New Mexico. From My lab, the Petroleum oils from B.Braunii( like c30...
Jody, Dr. Benemann is a recognized expert. His opinion is just an opinion, but it is based on being involved in the largest research project ever on using ...
Hey Bobby, its Brian but thanks for the complement :) If you re-read his comment, it says 'even with aggressive assumption about biological productivity...'...
Brian, Sorry for the misspelling. We are nowhere near the reality of anything. We don't need to alter biological productivity - almost everyone agrees that it...
Bobby, Materials and energy balances are important to any process flow diagram for several reasons. However, your point is well taken. From a standpoint of...
... Just a comment from a newbie in this group: In my view this would be a a perpetual process - thus impossible from physics point of view. What one could...
Hi Jody, Im glad your name isnt False cuz that would have proven to be a tough childhood. Can I ask which piece of data specifically has come across your eyes...
Bobby, The last email I got from Dr. John Benemann,PhD he was with his Line in theory but still have a ways to go to be practical.. We have talked about this...
This wasn't about this group, but for some reason oil_from_algae came to mind when I read it. ...perhaps because there is so little real experience? …. most...
George, Good point - you left out the inexperienced trying to scam people. Bobby ... -- Toward freedom, Bobby Yates Emory George, Good point - you left out the...
Alex, You are correct - there are absurd claims being made. I fear that there are lots of scam artists trying to follow whatever is hot this month to see if...
Bobby, The difference in the coal example is that you do not have to account for the production of energy, you are taking about only conversion of energy. And...
Hans, I don't think you got my point. Let's say we find out that if we keep the algae ponds at 100F, the algae grows real well. So we have to burn lots of ...
Bobby, Yes..but heat is a waste product of electric power as well as the CO2.. Also they could make the raceways on top of the used mines as they dig and...
Even worse - experienced scammers screwing inexperienced scammees. Quite a
few of them in the algae area. In fact some of us may have fun compiling a
list of...
Bobby - exactly. Once we understand the M&E balances, we are in a position
to more accurately assess the viability, recognizing full well that
different energy...
Alex, All reasonable questions for an investor to ask a corporation. But remember that if a backyard inventor is not able to answer your questions, it does not...
Bobby: But the backyard inventor has to have some inkling about this so he does
not end up misleading herself or himself. All too often I hear of some...
Alex, Agreed - before Esso builds a thousand acres of algae ponds, someone needs run tests and do these studies. My concern is that as soon as someone has a...
Questions do not necessarily stifle. In fact they nay help by identifying a
path to follow. Studies need to be done under controlled and transparent
conditions...
Alex, I don't disagree, but the attitude should be - what you have done is great, how can we help you validate it - not - what you have done is not valid ...
Bobby: I have no problem with that approach. But I would not waste my time if the
invention was violating fundamental energy balance and mass balance...
Alex, I think we are talking about two different things. I am talking about a backyard experimenter who has solved one portion of the oil from algae puzzle. I...
Bobby, I am not sure we are talking about two different things. Even
tinkerers such as you are describing need to at least satisfy themselves and
others that...
Having problems with message search?
Fill out this form to ensure your group is one of the first to be migrated to the new message search system.
Offline 
Send Email