![]() | POLL: CLM08 closed around $127 today..so, in the next 60 days, the front month price of CL will... | The Oil Drum | DrumBeat: May 18, 2008 | ![]() |
133 comments on Technology moves us forward and should be recognized
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
133 comments on Technology moves us forward and should be recognized
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
Search The Oil Drum with Google
Support The Oil Drum
Recently on TOD:World
TOD:Campfire
TOD:Europe
- Unique Times -- and the Future
- Peak Gold, Easier to Model than Peak Oil? - Part I
- Carbon Capture and Storage
TOD:Canada
- In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!
- The Round-Up: October 24, 2008
- Compressed Air Energy Storage - How viable is it?
TOD:Australia/NZ
- The Bullroarer - Friday 27th November 2009
- International Energy Agency calls 'Peak' on OECD Oil Demand
- Australian Senate: Peak Oil motion defeated 31:6
TOD:Net Energy
Blogroll
Energy Sites
- The Coming Global Oil Crisis
- Die Off
- Dry Dipstick
- Energy Bulletin
- From the Wilderness
- Life After the Oil Crash
- Peak Oil Crisis
- Peak Oil News and Message Boards
- Powerswitch
- Rigzone
- Matthew Simmons
- Wolf at the Door
Environment & Sustainability Sites
- The Daily Green
- EcoGeek
- Eco Street
- Green Car Congress
- Green Options
- green.alltop.com
- Gristmill
- RealClimate
- Sustainablog
- Treehugger
- WorldChanging
Blogs
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- David Strahan
- Early Warning
- The Energy Blog
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- Health After Oil
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Finance & Economics Blogs
- The Big Picture
- Calculated Risk
- The Crash Course
- Ecological Economics
- Econbrowser
- Environmental Economics
- Infectious Greed
- The Mess That Greenspan Made
- Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
Organizations
Peak Oil Primers
Beware email scams!
Beware email scams claiming to be from this site. We do not have any job openings. If anyone contacts you about a job at The Oil Drum, do not reply to them, and definitely do not give them any personal information or send them money. Read more here.
“No civilization can survive the physical destruction of its resource base.”
—Bruce Sterling
User login
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
Personnel
- Editors: Nate Hagens, Gail the Actuary, Prof. Goose
- DrumBeat Editor: Leanan
- Contributors: ace, Engineer-Poet, Heading Out, jeffvail, JoulesBurn, Sam Foucher, Robert Rapier
- TOD:Campfire: Glenn, Jason Bradford
- TOD:Europe: Chris Vernon, Euan Mearns, Francois Cellier, Jerome a Paris, Luís de Sousa, Rembrandt, Rune Likvern, Ugo Bardi
- TOD:Canada: benk, Libelle
- TOD:ANZ: Big Gav, Phil Hart, aeldric
- Emeritus: Stuart Staniford
- Technician: Super G
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.










GAIA Host Collective
Nice links and photos. I presume the 3rd photo is an artist rendering? Anyway, read National Geographic's article on the potential for algae ethanol and was impressed by how much more fuel could potentially be produced over a year's time. It was 3,000 gallons for corn ethanol, and as much as 50,000 gallons for algae ethanol, due in great part to the speed at which algae grows year round. Most people are not aware that the oil we use is the result of millions of years of compression and heat applied to dead algae. As the oceans stagnated algae filled them, then sank to the bottom, the ocean life died due to a lack of oxygen and soil filled over those layers, techtonic plates slipped and moved and eventually all that algae ended up as oil in two distinct layers in the crust, dating back from two eras 90 and 150 million years ago.
So it would seem that if oil can be mass produced as a viable form of ethanol, our best bet is to find ways to scale up algae ethanol production. We flew back from Oklahoma to California via an airline that flew too slow and too low, but what I realized from the view was just how many empty valleys there are in Arizona, Utah and Nevada that could be used to make ethanol.
I think the process of using CO2 enriched air as a way to capture it from Coal should not be requisite to make algae ethanol. It would seem that if plain old simple air is pumped fast enough the CO2 will get converted and we should have lots of fuel, but I'm not certain of that - please illuminate me. As a result, as an investor, I have been keeping my eye on Greenfuel Tech., waiting for that right company to invest in. My understanding is Verasun has a stake in Greenfuel, so if it does take off they may be a good bet. Right now I'm taking a wait and see approach. But certainly one to watch.
The window frame of opportunity to catch the world economy before it dumps in catastrope, by way of a scaled up mass produced fuel, is still open but we must move fast. Otherwise at some threshold of price for energy the world economy will stagnate, then price of energy and economic activity will balance/stalemate at some tepid level not conducive to well being of 6.5 billion people.
Addition to my prior post: That is 3,000 gallons per acre for corn versus 50,000 gallons per acre for algae ethanol.
Corn yields perhaps 2.8 gal/bu and averages ~150 bu/acre, so you're going to see around 420 gal/acre. Anyone claiming 3000 gallons from corn is smoking something.
Credible algae claims are in the region of 5000 to 10000 gal/ac. Even 2000 would be pretty darn good for a cheap process.
I'm probably stating the obvious or asking a stupid question, but...
Corn is a solid, is it not? So you ned to add the liquid, do you not? If making ethanol is anything like brewing drinking alcohol, then you need sugar, water, yeast. So wouldn't making ethanol have an impact on the water supply?
I'm sure it takes far more water to grow the corn than to process it, but the issue of contamination from wastewater can't be ignored.
Corn yields perhaps 2.8 gal/bu and averages ~150 bu/acre, so you're going to see around 420 gal/acre. Anyone claiming 3000 gallons from corn is smoking something.
That is for oone crop. Maybe some areas can have 3 crops a year, assuming 350 bushsls/acre and 3gal/bu, that would work. But it seems to be a stretch.
BTW, How much biomass is in the cobs and stalks, compared to corn kernels?
To me it seems that there is more potential in processing the "waste".
What strain of maize can come to maturity in 120 days at that yield? With enormous amounts of water, phosphate and nitrate I suppose you can do anything, but algae seem cheaper.
Around half (maybe more if cobs are included, I haven't checked lately). A bushel of corn is 56 pounds, so 150 bu/ac is 4.2 tons. The Corn Stover Collection Project found roughly 2 tons/acre of harvestable stover, after allowing for erosion control.