What is Digg?47 Comments
- luckless, on 08/17/2008, -1/+7Next time someone calls me scum I'm going to take it as a compliment.
- greensky, on 08/17/2008, -1/+5Right now it's very difficult to get the yields they are talking about. If you grow in a pond, wild algae out compete your specially designed algae and you don't get nearly as much oil out of the process. If you grow them in glass containers, they tend to grow in very thing layers around the edge of the glass, lowering yields.
There is a ton of work going into solving these issues, and I'm pretty confident they'll find a way to make algae based bio-fuels work. - greensky, on 08/17/2008, -0/+4MeatyMcBeef : I've seen that and it does look promising. Here is another one I saw that looks cool if you're interested:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hGcLgE52rzw
I don't think this reactor has ever been actually created, but it looks like it would work. - thethinktank, on 08/17/2008, -2/+6not true.
you may want to watch this video:
http://cc.pubco.net/www.valcent.net/i/misc/Vertigr ...
Vertical algae growth. This company will be doing so in New Mexico. Quote from the video (i'm paraphrasing):
"If we use 1/10 of the surface area of the state of New Mexico using the Vertigro process, we'd provide enough biofuel to replace fossil fuels in the US" - thegrantman, on 08/17/2008, -1/+4Colosi and White are professors.There was no mention of fraternities.
- Enron, on 08/17/2008, -2/+5What the hell does algae have to do with fraternities?
- greensky, on 08/17/2008, -1/+3Actually, some places have made algae based bio-fuels already, but not in huge volumes. I'm pretty sure your right about the doubling rate being every 24 hours. There is a lot of work going into developing different strains of algae and to refine the processes they use to grow/harvest the algae to increase yields. I'm sure we'll see big advancements in both areas.
Petrosun opened an algae plant this year:
http://gas2.org/2008/03/29/first-algae-biodiesel-p ...
Another company makes algae based bio-diesel in closed (even to the sun) containers. They do this by feeding the algae sugars from other sources. The sugars are the same ones algae would produce through photosynthesis. Because they do it in a closed reactor, they can carefully control the algae they grow and produce specific types of bio-fuels very easily. I don't think they get huge yields from this process though.
Ok, I think this company is Solazyme..
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/02/chevron_ba ...
In the end, people are trying all sorts of different ways to grow algae based bio-fuels. I'm not sure which one will pan out, but I'm pretty confident something will. - thegrantman, on 08/17/2008, -3/+5Algae is cool stuff.This is one of many applications being investigated.
- stonewall123, on 08/17/2008, -1/+3How about scooping up some of this? Technically this could be a challenge but if there were some way to contain the fertilizers and algae and collect it without adversely affecting other more benefical zoo and phytoplankton this could be good.
http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jun2008/2008-06-18 ...
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/05/05 ... - D4N747, on 08/19/2008, -0/+2You are correct, forgive me. When I said "not really solve anything in the long run" I meant this proposition doesn't do much in terms of introducing an energy solution that does not operate on the principle of burning a substance to power our infrastructure (for lack of a better word-!). I think a step in the right direction would be finding ways to get rid of our dependency on such sources as coal, oil, fuel in general, and try harnessing the natural forces present in the world today. The technologies to do so are already present and in use (hydroelectric plants, wind turbines disregarding the ecological affect they pose on an ecosystem, solar panels, ect.), all we need to do is make them more prevalent.
- brad3378, on 08/17/2008, -1/+3Glad to see that the mainstream media is finally picking up on this.
This is the only technology that I believe has the potential of saving Detroit. - rlh1, on 08/17/2008, -1/+3Negative ? ---- billions of algae gave their lives just so we can drive our SUV's to Walmart --- It's just not fair.
- MeatyMcBeef, on 08/17/2008, -1/+3A network of clear tubes on large roof areas. It keeps the building cool in the daytime, the heat can be stored to keep the algae warm at night as well as the building. If an infrastructure for algae were set up, companies with large roof areas in the southern states could offset much of their heating/cooling costs with a system of tubing on their roofs by selling the algae. Then again that's probably a "pipe" dream. *chuckles at his own cleverness*
- MeatyMcBeef, on 08/17/2008, -1/+3A system of "hanging bags" has been developed that keeps the water moving quickly and concentration of algae low in the water allowing light to penetrate deep into the medium as opposed to sitting or flowing in pipes and growing on the walls. The efficiency is much better. So we're working on it, but it's still not ready for mainstream yet.
- thethinktank, on 08/17/2008, -2/+3What does that have to do with the 250,000,000 internal combustion cars on the road in the U.S.? those cars still need fuel. Electric cars should be the final solution, but we need smart, clean fuel to get us there. In the 20, 30 years it will take to phase into an electric car economy, algae fuel produced in the US could be our best option.
- lineweight, on 08/17/2008, -3/+4No more wars for oil. Instead, we'll battle over poop to feed the algae.
- thethinktank, on 08/17/2008, -3/+4@Brad3378: This fuel won't work in most every car produced in Detroit. For this (and other biofuels) to truly work, we need to put pressure on the US and our domestic automakers to increase the production of flex-fuel capable vehicles. Ironically, GM, Ford and Chrysler are miles ahead of Honda, Toyota and others on flex fuel car production. Let's hope that our next president and our domestic auto makers team up to dramatically increase the number of flex fuel capable cars on the road...
If you're still interested, here's an article I wrote on the subject for Gas2.org:
http://gas2.org/2008/08/11/beyond-obama-a-biofuel- ... - jdago, on 08/17/2008, -1/+2this sure sounds promising. we kill two birds with one stone LETS DO IT WE ARE OIL JUNKIES. plus i think it will stop a lot of friction between countries for the control of oil.
- quiggibub, on 08/17/2008, -2/+3No you don't. There are other ways of growing algae far more efficiently than in a pond. A network of clear tubes in a green house type setting would produce much more algae much more quickly than a single wide area. It would also be much easier to prevent contamination from bacteria and other organisms.
- nonstop87, on 08/17/2008, -3/+4Can someone tell me the negative aspects of using algae?
- codyman, on 08/17/2008, -3/+4I like the nuclear power plants for the power grid ---> electric cars / bikes / cycles / etc. (that charge off of this clean power source) approach...
- MeatyMcBeef, on 08/17/2008, -1/+2I'm sorry but the fastest growing algae doubles it's mass every 24 hours. Not several times a day. Unless there's been some new selectively bred species or genetically altered one devised. Furthermore 30 times more oil per acre than soybeans has only been achieved in the lab, we've yet to even see commercial production of bio-diesel from algae at all. The earliest slated production of algae biodiesel is set for end of 2009 or beginning of 2010.
- Scaryclouds, on 08/17/2008, -2/+3Well it may not be about totally replacing oil be taking a big chunk out of our dependency of it.
- BDOUG, on 08/17/2008, -0/+1This idea has come a long way since the Carter days. I hope they can make it work.
- D4N747, on 08/18/2008, -1/+2But in the end, we're still burning oil to power our cars/homes/ect. The goal should be to become independent from fuels altogether, not to find different kinds of fuels to burn. This approach of using "biofuels*" will still contribute to global warming (and pollution) and not really solve anything in the long run. Most of the world is addicted to oil, soon to be biofuel, and that is the problem at hand.
*I still find that term amusing. The only thing that separates biofuel from fossil fuel is that it's composed of recently dead organic material, not long dead organic material... - Travelsonic, on 08/17/2008, -0/+1Funny how Wikipedia is a sign of intelligence and foresight to you.
- malex, on 08/18/2008, -0/+1No... it's pretty much the same meaning.
- D4N747, on 08/19/2008, -0/+1http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/08/science/earth/08 ...
- jojopumpkin, on 08/18/2008, -0/+1Mosquitoes! you need stagnant water to produce algae. This is a jackpot pf mosquito reproduction. Just like algea can adapt to its surroundings so can mosquitoes.
- mmilton, on 08/18/2008, -0/+1What a dumb statement "...not really solve anything in the long run"? How about :
- increasing supply so that the price of energy comes down
- making us energy independent from the countries that hate us
- reducing the risk of war
- improving the economy
- saving jobs
- reducing the cost of food because we stop growing 25% of the corn for ethanol
Might not solve your issue but it could solve lot's of other problems. - gozroth, on 08/19/2008, -0/+1maybe I'm the only one that thought of this but doesn't algae produce like 70-80% of the worlds oxygen content. I think we're heading in the wrong direction here
- smurfsahoy, on 08/19/2008, -0/+1@D4N,
Algae, according to this article, is many many times more efficient per acre than biofuel crops now, so the cleared land is pretty much a non-issue. It also grows like nobody's business without any real need for fertilizers or pesticides, so pretty much zero chemical/cultivating energy has to be expended. - smurfsahoy, on 08/18/2008, -0/+1Wrong. Biofuels do NOT increase carbon in the atmosphere.
The algae gets carbon from the atmosphere, reducing carbon in the environment, then you burn it, releasing that carbon back again, leaving you right where you started. Digging up oil from the ground and burning it, on the contrary, adds carbon also, but takes nothing away. - dn11, on 08/17/2008, -3/+3can we put the nuclear waste in your yard?
- rasde, on 08/17/2008, -1/+1obligatry but can it blend
- smurfsahoy, on 08/18/2008, -1/+1A lot of kinds of algae are highly poisonous to fish. Perhaps not specially engineered ones, but if they make conditions favorable to algae in general, many kinds will inevitably thrive alongside the kinds we want to. And ALL algae sucks oxygen out of the water like nobody's business, which isn't good for marine life either.
Even if it's all on a farm, if you have the agricultural runoff go into rivers or oceans, the estuaries will be oxygen deprived and/pr poisonous. - hagfish70, on 08/17/2008, -3/+3Bah, my parents remember the gas crises of the 70's, (much worse than current) and there was talk about using algea then too. I predict the same thing that happened then will happen now. Smaller, better fuel efficient cars will become popular, gas prices will go back down 5 - 10 years later and ***** will again buy over sized gas guzzlers to compensate for their small penises.
- dragon76, on 08/17/2008, -2/+2I'm starting to sound like a broken record on digg.
There is not going to be a silver bullet when it comes to alternative fuel.
The upside to this is that there is going to be a lot of competition in providing energy in the future BECAUSE there is not going to be one single way to solve the upcoming energy crisis. - thegrantman, on 08/17/2008, -2/+2Scum.
- OfNumbers, on 08/17/2008, -2/+1Funny how you threw wikipedia at me as a gesture of intelligence and foresight.
- dorksport, on 08/18/2008, -1/+0I'm sorry but your thinking is flawed. There is no ideal replacement for fossil fuels, there will be no drop in replacement. Our best choice is to exploit all possible sources of energy and to then foster an environment which will allow the most ecologically sound choices succeed.
true cost economics is one strategy for forcing the most sound long term solutions to also be the most successful.
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/truecosteconom ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dichotomy - 80min700mb, on 08/17/2008, -1/+0Gives a new meaning to being "green".
- dn11, on 08/17/2008, -3/+2REPLY... have you heard of it?
- MeatyMcBeef, on 08/17/2008, -4/+2No. Not funny. Gtfo my internet
- latrosicarius, on 08/17/2008, -7/+2you would need very large areas of water with lots of sunlight to get enough biofuel. i know they were talking about using salt flats in deserts, but i wonder if that will be enough to supply an entire country or the entire world
- OfNumbers, on 08/17/2008, -13/+2Stopped at University of Virginia. Seriously America, when are we going to stop taking these dumb fraternities word for it when they say they did something cool?
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is