<DrumBeat: May 29, 2009 The Oil Drum DrumBeat: May 30, 2009>

142 comments on Cost Viability and Algae

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version

joule on May 29, 2009 - 12:49pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

aviator202 -

Unrealistic in what way? I was merely making a rough estimate of the amount of UV-resistant clear plastic that would be required to cover the 19,000 square miles of algae pond a previous poster said is what would be needed.

If there is an error in my calculations, please point it out so it can be corrected.

Now Delaware (where I happen to live) isn't a big state, and maybe I'm not imaginative enough, but I really have a tough time picturing completely covering even one Delaware with algae ponds, much less 9 Delawares.

As I have said before, if someone can come up with a way to grow algae in uncovered ponds in a stable and controllable manner, then the prospects for algae will increase by orders of magnitude.

PS: What on earth do 500,000 oil wells have to do with the question at hand?

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Heading Out on May 30, 2009 - 12:53am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

And, yes, folk are actually working on this - with some success.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
aviator202 on May 30, 2009 - 1:24am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

I'll answer your last question first..."...500,000 oil wells"....That is an incredible amount of infrastructure that we have built up over the last century (and more) to harvest/pump oil from the ground. An incredible amount of steel, carbide, physical effort went into creating this massive infrastructure...And land, yes, LOTS of land, maybe an area equal to (or greater than) the land mass of Delaware. I am sure that someone (yourself for example) would state BEFORE it was created...that this couldn't practically or economically be accomplished...yet it was!!!

You state that it would take huge amounts of land and "plastic"...and even pull a figure for that "plastic" out of the air.

I took your whole point to be that algae would never be practical as a replacement for petroleum because it required "TOO MUCH" land or "TOO MUCH PLASTIC" (and the plastic would be too expensive anyway).

Yet we have an INCREDIBLE amount of STEEL and LAND devoted to the harvesting/transport/refining of oil and its end products.

So let's consider that the REAL question is COMPARED TO PETROLEUM is the algae infrastructure greater/lesser/equal to the ALREADY EXISTING infrastructure for petroleum that it would eventually replace?

My thesis is that when you compare the two....the algae infrastructure will be somewhat but not prohibitively greater than the already existing petroleum infrastructure.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
FMagyar on May 30, 2009 - 1:08pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

My thesis is that when you compare the two....the algae infrastructure will be somewhat but not prohibitively greater than the already existing petroleum infrastructure.

How about if you compare it to infrastructure cost including ecological costs that will be necessary to extract liquid fuels from say Canadian tar sands. Is there a point at which conventional oil extraction costs becomes more expensive than production from renewable substitutes such as algae?

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
aviator202 on May 31, 2009 - 1:15am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Another man after my own twisted heart!!! Hear, hear!!!!

Total agreement!!!!!

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
anyone on June 1, 2009 - 9:08am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

1/4 inch thick plastic is way too much.

One can use a thin plastic film to cover a pond.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

142 comments on Cost Viability and Algae

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version