In April 2008 Texas requested a waiver from the RFS. Shortly after receiving the waiver request, U.S. EPA initiated a public comment during which it received over 15,000 comments to the proposal.  According to U.S. EPA, a number of the public comments raised substantive issues and included significant economic analysis.  

U.S. EPA is also required to consult with the Departments of Agriculture and Energy in considering whether to grant or deny the waiver request and has begun these consultations.  U.S. EPA is expected to reach a decision by the end of August 2008. 

Does anyone truly believe U.S. EPA will go against Texas in the last months of the Bush Administration?  One short call from Dick Chaney to Steve Johnson and the waiver will be granted. 

INEOS, world’s third largest chemical company, said it had patented a method of producing fuel from municipal solid waste, agricultural waste and organic commercial waste and it planned to sell the bioethanol fuel in industrial quantities by 2010. The bioethanol that INEOS produces will have to be combined with a fossil fuel as very few cars in Britain run solely on bioethanol.

Peter Williams, the chief executive of INEOS Bio, told the Times : "This should mean that, unlike with other biofuels, we won’t have to make the choice between food and fuel." Williams said the company planned to produce commercial amounts of bioethanol fuel for cars from waste within two years.

INEOS claims that it can produce about 400 litres of ethanol from one tonne of dry waste. The new process works by heating the waste to produce gases, then feeding the gases to bacteria, which produce ethanol that can be purified into a fuel. The development of fuel from waste could be a relief for motorists who have watched pump prices soar.

According to the report, INEOS is talking to authorities in the United States, Canada and Europe about selling the fuel when it is made on an industrial scale. The company began research into the biochemical process about 20 years ago in Arkansas. A pilot plant was built and researchers have been working with a variety of waste materials since 2003.

Source: timesofindia.indiatimes.com

Pickens thinks tax incentives for industry will be helpful such as the production tax credit and would allow companies to  invest in long-term projects. Offshore drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf and Arctic Wildlife Refuge is a must.  Picens said, "I said, 'I'm for everything that's American.' ... I only have one enemy, and that's foreign oil. That's what I want to get rid of."

His Plan would include  installing wind farms in the mid-America and with government assistance, could produce 20 percent of electricity consumed domestically, which would decrease the need to use natural gas to make electricity. In addition,  natural gas along with biofuels would power all transportation, reducing foreign oil dependence (about 1/3).

To read more please click here.

Five interdependent areas should be politically booming, where the red-greens should be taking the initiative by turning them into vote winners and realms of popular support. These are: the environment, terrorism, globalisation, socialist ideology and the factionary subject of nationalism.

___________________

Environmentalists have long stated their claim for the theory of peak oil, and the dangerous race for biofuels. We are now seeing the results of these issues. The basic premise of demand and supply is that as the supply of oil goes down and the demand of oil stays the same or increases, then the price of oil will go up. Peak oil fits into this under supply. As oil is a natural resource, it is going to run out, there is not an endless supply of it. [http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/102302_campbell.html] There has not been a discovery of a ‘giant’ oil field since 1976 with a capacity of over 10 billion barrels. [http://www.peakoil.net/AIMseminar/UU_AIM_Robelius.pdf] Originally, oil companies would refuse to acknowledge the idea of peak oil, however now speculation of peak oil works to the benefit of oil companies because it drives up the price of oil and therefore profits. This is not to say that peak oil is just a theory, but instead supports the idea of regulating oil companies, taxing them more and using this money to lower petrol prices. So where are the socialists arguing this case? Even better than using the money to lower fuel bills is to plough the money into renewable energy to make Britain self-sufficient, lower carbon emissions and lower fuel bills. So where are the environmentalists arguing this case?

By becoming energy self-sufficient, we can end the terrorist threat - face it, the only reason we are encamped in the Middle East is because of oil - fight globalisation, and for the more conservative of you, will support British (renewable)energy companies.

There is further nationalism within the environmentalist movement because of its promotion of local produce, and by supporting British farmers. By fighting with this nationalistic stance, the left can win support from the floaters deflecting towards the far-right while at the same time help Britain end its reliance on foreign countries and lower its carbon emissions.

Biofuels is another ‘I told you so’. Politicians have long pushed for biofuels, believing them to be the best way to combat climate change without investing heavily into renewable sources. Environmentalists, instead of being appeased, are livid at such ignorance. [http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11811-biofuel-production-may-raise-price-of-food--.html, http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/consumer_goods/article602228.ece] Although not all biofuels are bad biofuels, the demand for ethanol from crops such as corn has helped lead to an increase in the price of food. [http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/green-living/food-price-rises-force-biofuel-uturn-859979.html] As more crops are being used to feed our cars, there is less food to feed ourselves. Again, supply decreases so price goes up. It is simple economics! I have a letter from the office of the Transport Minister in 2007 (Stephan Ladyman) that claims they have found no correlation between high wheat prices and the pursuit of biofuels. (I will post it up here when I am next near a scanner). It is great to see our Government on top of things, I wonder what they would say now. [http://www.thetechherald.com/article.php/200828/1423/UK-government-to-proceed-cautiously-on-biofuels]

As with oil prices, the left need to be seizing the opportunity of high food prices to win the support of those worse off; the Tories, while providing the only opposition to New Labour, are not going to help them. [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jul/21/conservatives.labour, http://www.labourhome.org/story/2008/7/18/74035/5652]

It pains me not to see the left take greater advantage of the current financial crisis. As with regulating and taxing oil companies, the same should happen to energy companies who will soon be passing on their increased costs to their customers.

Despite the unions becoming more active in support of pay rises for its workers, we see the demands being denied while business men in the city give themselves higher than inflation pay rises and bonuses. [http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/02/uk-chancellor-attacks-city-bonuses.html, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2022636/City-bonuses-defy-credit-crunch-and-hit-new-record-of-andpound13bn.html]

The current climate is perfect to preach higher taxes for the rich to decrease the wealth gap between the rich and the poor. Moreover, perhaps socialists should abandon their interest in the free trade market to preach protectionism in the case of the fear of businesses moving aboard when faced with higher taxes. ‘If you leave Britain when it needs you, you will never be able to come back and exploit its public.’ We are currently a consumerist market; no business will want to lose us. The change in attitude of the left to free trade markets and protectionism would be the perfect example of how the left can adapt and modernise, without falling into the hands of the affluent as Labour did in the early 90’s. (I do realise that Marx did state that free trade can be described as exploitation, yet it appears that free trade has appeared  to have been accepted by many modern day socialists).

___________________

So come on you socialists, you environmentalists, you angry liberal Brits, let us unite and fight this wave of bitterness.

It wasn't long ago that corn ethanol seemed like a win-win idea from all angles. In the US, farmers, environmentalists and politicians of all stripes piled on. A few did acknowledge that Brazilian sugarcane was a better idea, and even fewer did point out the risk to food prices, but overall their voices and better sense were drowned by a wave of euphoria around corn ethanol.

Energy prices, of course, are the main cause behind increase in food prices, but not many dispute the fact that corn ethanol had a role too. In hindsight, that relationship is not hard to grasp: when demand for corn surged, the price did too without a similar spike in supply. It's economics 101 - basic supply and demand.

Now, consider another plant that's being widely touted as the ideal source of biofuels - jatropha. Jatropha is not a food crop,and it can be grown in barren and waste land with relatively little water. What's not to like, huh?

Well, let's apply some basic economics principles to this situation. Whenever the market price for a certain product increases, there will be more willing suppliers of that product. And that will be true for jatropha seeds too.

Large areas of the country have increasingly experienced drought conditions. Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Karnataka have seen thousands of farmer suicides in recent years because of crop failures due to drought. It is not far fetched to think some of these farmers might find it easier to grow jatropha than, say, rice.

Leveling rice and wheat yields per hectare is a worrying sign in itself. If fuel crops like jatropha intrude into this traditional crop land, the price pressures on food grain will be compounded.

As the euphoria around jatropha grows, it will pay to remember the harsh lessons learnt from the corn ethanol experience. India has more than enough waste and barren land suitable for jatropha - 63.85 million hectares - to make a significant dent in the nation's energy needs even with low biodiesel yields (say 650 litres/hectare as opposed to published highs of 1800 or 2200 litres/hectare).

If jatropha is allowed to take over too much food grain land, however, the only way to compensate for that with very little fertile land left to cultivate, will be with efficiency increases in food crops. And that's something the country has failed to achieve in the last few years.

The seminar will be held at Vantage Career Center located at 818 N. Franklin St. in Van Wert, Ohio on Thursday, July 24 from 10 a.m. to noon with a boxed lunch immediately following.

The seminar will feature a presentation by Ross O. Youngs on "Algae Initiative: Growing Fuel, Technology & Jobs in Ohio". Ross Youngs is an inventor and serial entrepreneur as well as former SBA National Business Person of the Year and CEO of the five-time Inc 500 Fastest Growing Company, Univenture, Inc. The presentation will describe how Ohio can effectively commercialize algae-based technologies that can be rapidly brought to market to add jobs, reduce petroleum dependency and increase economic activity. In addition to Mr. Youngs, Dr. Joseph Hager of The Edison Materials Technology Center (EMTEC) and Ron Erd, of Independence Bio Products, have been asked to speak about the science and application of algae energy and the economic impact it is expected to have. Following the presentations, there will be a Q&A and opportunity to network over lunch.

The Van Wert County OSU Extension Economic Development Group is excited to be working with Univenture, The Green Belt Coalition, EMTEC, and others to encourage the development and commercialization of algae-based technologies that will help to grow and diversify economies in our region. The seminar is free, however to get an accurate count for lunch, reservations are requested. Contact the OSU Extension Economic Development Office at 419-238-2999 to register, or register by e-mailing to: nbowen@vanwert.org. The deadline to register is Tuesday, July 22.

Plant biomass is largely composed of cellulose, hemicellulose, and lignin. Lignin has been the hard nut to crack. It is the glue holding biomass together, and tends to gum up many chemical processes that try to extract the energy from biomass. Researchers at Peking University may have developed a better process for breaking lignin down to hydrocarbon fuels.

The researchers used near-critical water as a solvent and treated the white birch sawdust over a series of active carbon supported catalysts (Ru/C, Pd/C, Rh/C, and Pt/C) under modest pressures of H2 under varying conditions. Treatment of the sawdust in a mixture of dioxane and near-critical water (364°C and 190 atm) in a ratio of 1:1 combined with 1 wt% H3PO4 over Pt/C and Rh/C catalysts yielded about 45 wt% monomers (very close to the calculated maximum) and 12 wt% dimers. The catalysts can be reused directly after reaction without any apparent deactivation.

Following extraction, the monomers and the dimers were transferred to the second step for conversion into alkanes and methanol. _Read more at GCC

These catalysts are rather expensive, and may later be replaced by custom-made nanocatalysts made of more common materials such as carbon. The yields for this procedure are not optimal, so much work remains. Still, this process is an alternative to gasification, which tends to break biomass down more than necessary, only to be forced to build liquid fuels almost from component atoms.

More on this process from New Scientist

In fact a lot of people DO believe what OPEC says. Don’t believe me? Just watch TV news for 20 minutes or so, and you’ll see what I’m talking about. They are quoting 30 year-old efficiency studies, and blaming the price of food on Ethanol – instead of the high price of diesel.

Fortunately, the biofuels industry is getting their voice heard as well. In an open letter to OPEC, the World BioFuels Industry refutes these ridiculous claims. You can read an article about it (as well as see a scan of the original letter) here: www.goodfuels.org/opec

This is like putting a fire out by pouring gasoline on it (if you happen to have some extra laying around).

Fortunately, the World BioFuels Industry has published an open letter to OPEC (and the rest of us) refuting these baseless claims. I just hope people pay attention. We can’t continue to demagogue biofuels, and let the foreign lobbyists control the conversation.

Check out the article on GoodFuels here: www.goodfuels.org/opec

I am so happy to see that oil prices have come down in the last week. Now, we need to throw our support behind World BioFuels Industry. They published a letter in the Financial Times to OPEC refuting the claims that the Cartel was making that Ethanol and other biofuels are raising the price of gas.

Read the article on GoodFuels here: www.goodfuels.org/opec
Check out the press release here: http://www.prweb.com/releases/2008/7/prweb1115304.htm 

This was actually created as a briefing and presentation. Many of the terms and concepts used would be familiar and shared with the intended audience.

Making the Case for Biofuels.

In 2008, with rapidly rising fuels costs from traditional hydrocarbon sources, there is increasing pressure on business and society to provide energy for our national needs, and for our growing and ever power-hungry global civilization. Currently, it is estimated that we use approximately 15 terawatts of electricity globally[1], much of this being use in the internal combustion engines of modern cars or in electrical power generation from liquid, solid, or gas fossil fuels. Rising costs of power have a cascading effect on all costs in our world, since all processes in the modern world require or rely on electrical powered industrial activities. If we are to keep increasing our energy demands, the cost of power will continue to rise if we continue to rely so heavily on non renewable energy. Some form of replacement power source that can expand with our demand expansion need to be found. This principle is generally known as scalability. For us to grow, we don’t need to merely do “more for less”. It is also crucial that we find new and expandable sources of energy.

[2]

There is another factor pushing our need for new energy sources to replace the traditional fossil fuels. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report has announced that anthropogenic[3] sources of greenhouse gases seem to be driving temperatures higher and higher. "Most of the observed increase in globally averaged temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic (human) greenhouse gas concentrations," it says. According to the IPCC, this means a greater than 90 % chance.[4] A huge source of this temperature increase is likely to be from carbon and other “greenhouse gases” released into the atmosphere by the burning of fossil fuels. Whether or not one chooses to agree with the IPCC, it is hard to argue that liberating massive amounts of carbon formerly sequestered into the Earth over geological timescales, in the short span of a few hundred years, is completely benign. There is no question that human activity has changed the carbon cycle in the last 8,000 years.

The following chart shows carbon cycle flux of the earth, with boxes indicating reservoir values and the arrows indicating annual change. Red arrows indicate the changes made by human beings in the time we have been conducting the ecological experiment of civilization.

[5]

In addition to the above reasons to investigate alternative fuels and sources of energy, one can include a grab-bag of other agendas and motivations. “The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007”, recently signed by U.S. President George W. Bush may be one.[6] This act mandates the inclusion of biofuel into the traditional gasoline available at the pumps, in part the key provisions include "Near-term usage requirement goes to 9 billion gallons in 2008 and 15.2 billion gallons in 2011" and “expands mandate for U.S.-grown biofuels such as ethanol, to 36 billion gallons in 2022, versus current levels near 6.5 billion gallons”. Other similar provisions in Canada[7] and Europe[8] seem to suggest a shift of public and governmental direction in the use of energy.

[9](The “The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007” seeks to provide energy security for the United States against uncontrollable import irregularities.)

There are a number of interesting proposed methods to supply this power, but due to the above mentioned legislations, as well as the popular and media interest, I will look at biofuels directly. It is also my personal feeling that biofuels can be made to work well in replacing traditional energy sources and providing a crucial bridge from current technologies to a truly energy independent future.

Biofuels, in particular biodiesel, can be made to work with existing technology and using existing infrastructure, which is an important step since an ‘energy-constrained’ future also means a future in which large scale infrastructure change is more difficult. They provide a solution with minimum disruption that can be easy fit into our existing economic models. They are also, as I will demonstrate, capable of remediating the negative impact we have already caused on the biosphere that is condemned by the IPCC report.

Challenges posed by biofuels

There are a number of problems associated with the wide scale use of biofuels. One of these is the ecological damage they can cause when unregulated market forces drive economic activity that is destructive to the ecology that we seek to protect. According to the CBC:

“Rainforests are now being cleared to make way for palm oil plantations, a rich source of biodiesel. The problem is particularly serious in Malaysia where the palm oil industry began in 1917. The country hopes to apply its experience to meet the rising demand for biofuels coming from Europe and India.”[10]

This pattern is repeated in the Amazon and other tropical forest areas around the world, as poor nations attempt to cash in on the high price of energy and food. This pattern is not new, however it is exacerbated to supply energy when every newly cleared section of forest becomes a potential “oil well” for vegetable and cellulose energy. The ‘vanishing rainforest’ problem of the 1980s has not disappeared, in fact it has accelerated.[11] Much of the worlds forest cover has already disappeared, as evidenced on the following map created by Canadian Geographic:

Converting our already farmed cropland into “Oil well” can also have very negative consequences, as we have witnessed in the lead up to summer 2008. Bob Macdonald of the CBC observes:

“In North America and Mexico, another disturbing trend is developing: The use of corn as biofuel stock. Other than the fact that it takes a lot of energy to grow corn in the first place, corn is food. With the rising threat of droughts brought on by climate change, and a growing world population, how long will our thirst for fuel go before we’re putting food in vehicles instead of mouths?”[12]

So, biofuels threaten to exacerbate already current problems and negate any gains they might make with unseen offsets and consequences. Is there a way to keep the benefits of plant-based fuel solutions while mitigating or controlling the consequences?

Algae?

Algae is one of the oldest known forms of life on earth, and it has a wide variety of species filling a wide variety of ecological niches. Algal farming has been practiced by humans for thousands of years, and is currently farmed industrially in the west to provide nutrient and health products as well as various chemical food applications. It is known to be a prolific grower, and a primary producer getting its energy directly from the sun. The photosynthesis performed by algae gives us an opportunity to tap the enormous power of the sun to meet our current and future fuel needs.

"While a number of bio-feedstock are currently being experimented for biodiesel (and ethanol) production, algae have emerged as one of the most promising sources especially for biodiesel production, for two main reasons (1) The yields of oil from algae are orders of magnitude higher than those for traditional oilseeds, and (2) Algae can grow in places away from the farmlands & forests, thus minimizing the damages caused to the eco- and food chain systems. There is a third interesting reason as well: Algae can be grown in sewages and next to power-plant smokestacks where they digest the pollutants and give us oil!"[13]

I will break down this claim and see it if stands up to facts.

To begin with, how productive can algae farming be? Algae is a single celled organism, its not carrying around a lot of superfluous specialized equipment. It is extremely efficient at using light and available nutrients to its advantage. Its growth and productivity is 30 to 100 times higher than crops like soybeans. It has the potential to be remarkably productive.

Secondly, it is claimed that “Algae production does not compete with agriculture. Algae production facilities are closed and do not require soil for growth, use 99% less water than conventional agriculture, and can be located on non-agricultural land far from water. Since the whole organism converts sunlight into oil, algae can produce more oil in an area the size of a two-car garage than an entire football field of soybeans.”[14] We will explore this further later, to see if other scientists agree. As for the third claim, “Algae thrive on a high concentration of carbon dioxide. And nitrogen dioxide (NO2), a pollutant of power plants, is a nutrient for the algae. Algae production facilities can thus be fed exhaust gases from fossil fuel power plants, and even breweries, to significantly increase productivity and clean up the air.” This is in fact one of the impetuses that lead us to look at biofuels in the first place, that is their potential to clean up the environment and scrub our industrial activities. Algae live specifically on the gas that we would like to remove from effluent. [15](Algae LIVE on CO2)

The comparisons between algae productivity and other biofuel feedstocks can be summed up as follows:

Yield of Various Plant Oils

Crop Oil in Liters per hectare

Castor 1413

Sunflower 952

Safflower 779

Palm 5950

Soy 446

Coconut 2689

Algae 100000

[16]

The numbers represented here seem to be a fairly accurate representation of much of the literature I surveyed. The numbers for algae may be slightly on the high side, and probably represent a “bioreactor” factory process. Nevertheless all the sources seem to agree that algae is extremely prolific and productive, with up to 50% of their weight taken up by lipids[17], depending on the species.

, Hawaii)[18]

Here we must address scalability. Is it possible to grow enough algae in North America to supply our needs? After all, as Nathan Lewis has pointed out, using traditional biofuels it would take a significant portion of the Earths total biotic production to power our civilization.[19]

According to some, the growing area needed using an ‘open pond’ system is actually quite reasonable when compared to other crops. Information from the University of New Hampshire indicates the following:

"NREL[20]'s research showed that one quad (7.5 billion gallons) of biodiesel could be produced from 200,000 hectares of desert land (200,000 hectares is equivalent to 780 square miles, roughly 500,000 acres), if the remaining challenges are solved (as they will be, with several research groups and companies working towards it, including ours at UNH). In the previous section, we found that to replace all transportation fuels in the US, we would need 140.8 billion gallons of biodiesel, or roughly 19 quads (one quad is roughly 7.5 billion gallons of biodiesel). To produce that amount would require a land mass of almost 15,000 square miles. To put that in perspective, consider that the Sonora desert in the southwestern US comprises 120,000 square miles.”[21]

Or approximately 1/8^th of the size of the Sonora desert in the United States. This compares favorably not only to other crops considered for biofuels, but also with space needs for projects like a Photo Voltaic power system proposed by Mr. Lewis.[22]

B. Greg Mitchell is a Research Biologist at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography. He works on algae, and has an apparently keen interest in using algae as a renewable energy. According to him,

"Soybean Based Biodiesel will never contribute more than a few percent of the possible US diesel fuel market… (however) approximately 20-30 million acres of algae would supply ALL U.S. transportation fuel"[23]

This is a little less optimistic than the previous estimate we looked at from University of New Hampshire, which for comparison converts to 9.6 million acres. However, they are clearly in the same ballpark. B. Greg Mitchell goes on to detail what he considers to be the biggest benefits of developing an algae feedstock for biofuel production.

Advantages of Algae

• Uses all nutrients, minimizing eutrophication

• Uses underutilized land, e.g. deserts

• Yields >10x those for land plants

• Can grow in salt, or brackish water

• Non-fuel fraction is high in protein

• capture CO2 at point source

• Can produce high yields of – Lipids for biodiesel & starch / polysaccharides for ethanol

You will recall that the University of New Hampshire estimates placed the hypothetical fields in the Sonora desert. This is not merely for comparison; it highlights one of the strengths of algae farming. Namely, that it can be done in conditions that are suboptimal for other agriculture. Algae needs sun, carbon, and water. Just about any water will do, depending on the species.

As noted by B. Greg Mitchell, salty or brackish water is fine so there is no need to divert precious drinking water. So is sewage waste, which algae could actually help clean up by using the carbon and nitrogen found there. Ideally then, water treatment facilities could use algae ponds to help them clean up their waste mimicking services already performed by natural systems. The non fuel components are high in protein, so dead algae could be used as animal feed or even supply more human foods.

We already use oil for food, why not use algae?

[24]

So harvest the algae from salt water desert ponds, put it through a digester process like that shown above, and out comes food, fuel, and probably some Ambrosia[25] from Olympus. At least, that’s the model. Is this a reality or a fantasy? Is this kind of progress achievable and if so how close are we?

What we have, what we need.

Stephen Mayfield[26] of the Scripps research Institute (a college of Dr. Mitchells), gives an assessment of where we are at. According to Mayfield, these are the things we need to achieve in order to get to the vision above:

-"We need Bigger and better knowledge base on algae."

-"We need to identify and characterize a large number of diverse algal species; Genomic, proteomic and metabolic profiles."

-"We need to develop molecular tools for breeding”

-"We need to develop molecular tools for engineering"

-"We need to develop agricultural practices for algal growth, harvesting, and processing." i.e. “Industrializing algae”

And this is what we now have:

-"We have many species identified with limited characterization, but showing ...fantastic potential."

-"We already know how to grow algae on a modest scale"

-"We have a few algal genomes sequenced and annotated."

"We have nuclear and chloroplast transformation for a handful of species." (engineering)

"We know that algae can be grown at agricultural scale at costs approaching agricultural costs."

What would an algae feedstock farm business look like?

It turns out that there are already quite a few companies who are developing or have developed what they consider to be a workable business model. One particularly interesting company is Greenfuel technologies.

According to their website,

“Using technology licensed from a NASA project, GreenFuel builds bioreactors--in the shape of 3-meter-high glass tubes fashioned as a triangle--to grow algae. The algae are fed with sunlight, water and carbon-carrying emissions from power plants. The algae are then harvested and turned into biodiesel fuel.”[27]

According to Smart Economy, quoting New Scientist[28]:

"To produce fuel from CO2, the flue gases are fed into a series of transparent “bioreactors”, which are 2 metres high and filled with green microalgae suspended in nutrient-rich water.  The algae use the CO2, along with sunlight and water, to produce sugars by photosynthesis, which are then metabolised into fatty oils and protein.  As the algae grow and multiply, portions of the soup are continually withdrawn from each reactor and dried into cakes of concentrated algae.  These are repeatedly washed with solvents to extract the oil.  The algal oil can then be converted into biodiesel through a routine process called transesterification, in which it is processed using ethanol and a catalyst.  Enzymes are then used to convert starches from the remaining biomass into sugars, which are fermented by yeasts to produce ethanol."

(A Greenfuel Bioreactor)

They have a pilot project, which has successfully created biodiesel for local school buses. This process uses a carbon stream straight from a heavy carbon source and ideally it would use the carbon and prevent it from being released into the atmosphere. Unfortunately, there have been a few design hitches, including a problem with the algae actually growing over abundantly and clogging up the system. Algae deep in the reactor could not get sunlight and died. The Biofuel reactor had to be shut down for redesign, but the company hopes to have it up again shortly.

Another company which shows some promise is Global Green Solutions. They have solved a problem that Greenfuels has encountered, by growing their algae in thin tubes, constantly circulating to allow all the algae to receive the necessary light. Global Green Solutions have a very interesting website, on which can be seen a video of their process in action along with interviews with their scientists explaining the process.[29] They also claim to have various strains of algae which produce for them various types of fuel, such as jet fuel, gasoline, etc.

A third company is Solix Solutions[30], which has an interesting website that provides a lot of basic information. They are the descendant of the NERL National Renewable Energy Lab Government program in the U.S. Solix has a second generation prototype of a bioreactor which they are currently testing.

It seems that there are a lot of good concepts out there, and some workable proofs-of-concept, but very little that’s ready to roll out right now for a profitable industry. This concern cannot work as a charity. One of the bigger problems is that the algae must themselves be harvested and digested in order to get at the oils they are producing and storing in their systems. In essence, everything we have been talking about up till now has been a ‘crop’ model.

(Industrial Algae Process)

Another model

Can we cut out the harvesting and processing altogether? Scientists have known for some time that algae will produce very small amount of hydrogen under certain conditions. Enter Tesios Melis and other new geneticists to rethink the entire process and bring some economy to the whole system.

"Researchers have found a metabolic switch in algae that allows the primitive plants to produce hydrogen gas -- a discovery that could ultimately result in a vast source of cheap, pollution-free fuel."[31]

Tesios Melis at the University of Berkeley discovered this in 2000, experimenting with an algae species called Chlamydomonas reinhardtii in the lab. He explains that ``an alternative metabolic pathway'' exists in the algae to exploit stored energy reserves anaerobically -- in the absence of oxygen. A hydrogenase enzyme was activated, splitting large amounts of hydrogen gas from water and releasing it as a byproduct. The algae still doesnt produce all the hydrogen that it should. A "hydrogen gap" exists between what it should be producing, by the laws of chemistry, and what it is. If that hydrogen gap is solved it could boost the hydrogen production up to levels needed to be industrially feasible.

"Switching 100 percent of the algae's photosynthesis to hydrogen might not be possible."The rule of thumb is, if we bring that up to 50 percent, it would be economically viable," Melis says. “With 50 percent capacity, one acre of algae could produce 40 kilograms of hydrogen per day. That would bring the cost of producing hydrogen to $2.80 a kilogram. At this price, hydrogen could compete with gasoline, since a kilogram of hydrogen is equivalent in energy to a gallon of gasoline."

This is a factory model of algae fuel production, with the algae acting as tiny living factories.

Carbon inà(algae growth)àharvestingàprocessingàfuel

Vs.

Carbon inà (algae growth and processing) à fuel

Designing life

Tasios has done some work for another likeminded scientist, Dr. J. Craig Venter. Dr. Venter has been widely regarded in the biosciences community as a saint and a devil. Dr. Venter has made friends, gathered often worshipful attention from the media, and angered a lot of people including his own shareholders who still seem to easily forgive him and flock to the next project.

Venter is the former president and a co-founder of Celera Genomics, famous for running a private version of the Human Genome Project of its own, for economic commercial purposes, using so called “shotgun sequencing” technology. His method widely criticized by the international scientific community who doubted its effectiveness. The aim of the Celera project was to create a database of data to which users could subscribe – for a price. However when Both Celera and the Human Genome project both announced jointly the completion of their projects, much of the criticism stopped. However, giving in to international pressure to reveal their results, Celera failed to recoup much of their investment and Venter was hounded out of his position.

This however did not deter him. He set up the private foundation “J. Craig Venter Institute” and launched a sloop to sail around the world taking surveys of the ocean life. According to the Institute[32]:

“In a quest to unlock these mysteries, the J. Craig Venter Institute (JCVI) launched the Sorcerer II Global Ocean Sampling (GOS) Expedition in 2004. Inspired by 19th Century sea voyages like Darwin’s on the H.M.S. Beagle and Captain George Nares on the H.M.S. Challenger, The Sorcerer II circumnavigated the globe for more than two years, covering a staggering 32,000 nautical miles, visiting 23 different countries and island groups on four continents."

There have been some amazing discoveries made on that trip, the details of which I won’t delve into here. Much of it, however, concerned the most basic of life; bacterial, algal, photosynthetic organisms.

Venter also set up Synthetic Genomics[33] which now leads the world in bioinformatics[34] research, and hard science. Their list of current projects reads like a wish list of future biological technologies. The crown jewel, the centerpiece of his work, is a stripped down “minimal cell”. That is, a cell that is capable of living at the most basic level, with the barest minimum of genes. With this cell, they will then be able to insert any other genes they want, in packages. The combined effect will be like building any custom designed cell you want, out of lego blocks. Want a cell that produces hydrogen? Or any other product you care to name?

(Minimal cell)+(Tasios Melis’ Metabolic Pathway for Hydrogen)+(Photosynthesis)+(Highest available Algae reproduction rates)+(Squid gene for luminosity) = An algae cell that will glow while its delivering you cheap, fast hydrogen from the sun.

Sitting on a salty wastewater pond in the middle of the desert.

Too good to be true? Maybe. But if anybody can deliver on something like this, it’s probably Nobel Laureate, first man to have a full sequence of his own DNA, J. Craig Venter. He says he’ll have it in two years.

Is it worth looking forwards to? Absolutely.

It is strange that a well experienced journalist in the largest Swedish morning news paper is so extreamly one way oriented regarding bioethanol as fuels for vehicles. In article after article he blames ethanol for all bad things possible and if that is not enough he blames the persons and organisations that talkes positive regarding ethanol as a fuel in the same way.

Latest in the Sunday edition (July 20) he has a full page, but unusually this time in the main debate page, the most important page for debate in Sweden. He accuses the green organisation "Gröna Bilister" (Green drivers) for beeing a paid lobbing organisation with dubios goals.

In a way one could say he is right, this organisation has always got a lot of financial support from authorities like the Swedish "Vägverket" (the National Road Authority) and also one of the board members for some years ago was Per Carstedt who is the main profile in Swedish ethanol development. But what is wrong with the situation that an authority finance projects like investigations and publishing of reports in the field of best environmental car with a lot of facts with the purpose to help people to find new car models?

One must ask why do Lasse Swärd keep on with such a force against ethanol.

Ethanol has become a great thing in Sweden today. You can buy ethanol in most filling stations, a very high propotion of the cars sold are ethanol cars and the press (not Lasse Swärd) has written texts like the large heavy engine cars are almost impossible to sell. Added to this is the fact that if you have an ethanol car you will get free parking in some cities and also no road tulls in Stockholm.

Maybe theis is the reasson. Lasse Swärd probably has a lot of connections to the industry that is based on selling petrol and large high consuming cars. Often when you read his columns you will find articles about new models of this type. Maybe it is not sexy to write about small economic environmentally friendly cars.

He had in many articles before tried to throw dirt on ethanol profiles and during the latest spring and early summer huge campaigns was blowing over Sweden in which he of course was an active partner. Some companies got afraid and kept a very low profile. The company Toyota on the other hand went out with big ads saying "We sell ethanol free cars.

Only a week ago Lasse Swärd managed to plant a news item in most of the Swedish press by leting a message be published in his webpages of DN Motor saying that Financial Times writes that secret sources says that the American government had a report that they kept away from publishing saying that ethanol was behind the world food crisis. This was quoted also by the public owned main TW news. Why is he blaiming other when he is so god himself in lobbying and why is he doing this, a journalist in the largest Swedish morning newspaper?

Today top article in DN Motor webversion is a presentation and tests of Audi R8 4,2 Quattro with a base price of more than 100 000 Euro, 8 cyl. 4,2 l engine volume, top speed 300 km/h and with emissions of 349 mg CO2 349 for each km. This is maybe a car of Lasse Swärd taste!

Lennart Ljungblom

The full text of lasse Swärds article (in swedish) you will find here A print out from Swedish moring paper Dagens Nyheters web edtition

En utskrift från Dagens
Nyheters nätupplaga, DN.se.
Uppdaterad 20 jul 2008 00:50

"Medier låter sig luras av Gröna bilisters kampanjer"
Motorjournalist klandrar medier för flathet gentemot professionell lobbyist: Gröna bilisters utspel ligger helt i linje med uppdragen för en pr-firmas kunder. Gröna bilisters talesman Mattias Goldmann är till vardags yrkeslobbyist på den stora pr-firman Westander i Stockholm. Men få journalister tycks se något publicistiskt problem med att hans utspel ligger helt i linje med de uppdrag som hans pr-firma har från sina kunder. Att föreningen historiskt har band till etanolindustri sägs inte när Gröna bilister avfärdar kritiken mot etanolbränsle. Inte heller ifrågasätts att en förening med drygt tusen medlemmar får miljonbelopp av skattemedel för sina kampanjer. Gröna bilisters genomslag framstår mer och mer som ett praktexempel på när man sänker garden inför något man uppfattar som ideellt, skriver Lasse Svärd reporter vid DN-Motor.

Föreningen Gröna bilister har lyckats nå en position i miljöbilsdebatten som medierna bör fundera närmare kring. Föreningens talesman Mattias Goldmann, som till vardags är yrkeslobbyist på den stora pr-firman Westander i Stockholm, tycks ha i det närmaste fritt tillträde till en rad redaktioner. En sökning på hans namn plus etanol ger närmare 1 000 träffar, varav flera hundra i landsortstidningar och i riksmedier, framför allt i radio och teve. Hans budskap förmedlas ofta utan kritiska frågor om vem som säger vad och varför. Få tycks se något publicistiskt problem med att Goldmanns utspel ligger helt i linje med de uppdrag som hans arbetsgivare har från sina kunder.

Bland dessa finns Lantmännen Energi, som driver etanolfabriken i Norrköping. I uppdraget sägs att Westander ska bedriva "opinionsbildning och påverkan för en kostnadseffektiv ökning av andelen biobränslen för fordonsdrift".

Goldmanns uppdrag är, enligt Westanders hemsida, att vara "projektledare för en rad klimat- och trafikrelaterade uppdragsgivare".

Som talesman för Gröna bilister har Goldmann skrivit otaliga inlägg i landsortstidningar som svar på etanolkritiska insändare. En tydlig linje i svaren är att ibland medge vissa brister, men alltid understryka etanolens fördelar.

För att ge vetenskaplig tyngd åt argumentet om klimatnyttan med etanol hänvisar Goldmann konsekvent till Naturvårdsverket, Vägverkets och Konsumentverkets årliga skrift "Index över nya bilars klimatpåverkan". Där sägs att etanolbilarna ger en minskad klimatpåverkan med 57 procent.

Vad han inte säger är att skriften producerats av hans egen arbetsgivare Westander i samråd med en arbetsgrupp från berörda verk. Inte heller nämner han den reservation som arbetsgruppen fört in i rapporten.

"Det är dock viktigt att betona att beräkningarna baseras på antaganden, och inte utgör ställningstaganden från myndigheterna om etanol- och gasbilarnas klimatnytta".

Den 13-14 juni presenterade Gröna bilister resultaten i den egna rankningen av "Miljöbästa bil 2008". Föreningen lockade redan i förhandsannonseringen med att juryns arbete skulle skildras av TV 4 och att SVT skulle sända när vinnarbilen (Ford Focus) körde ett varv runt banan inför finalen i tävlingen STCC i Göteborg den 14 juni.

I det följande pressmeddelandet står att vinnarbilen släpper ut endast 59 gram fossil koldioxid per kilometer, medan genomsnittet i Sverige för alla nya bilar är 181 gram. Siffran 59 gram har inte stöd någonstans. Etanol är inte ett certifierat bränsle och därför finns inga officiellt vedertagna siffror över hur stora utsläppen blir. Därför anges alltid utsläppen från etanolbilar med de värden som gäller för bensindrift. Detta är bakgrunden till att Saab i flera länder tvingats dra tillbaka sina påståenden i reklamen om att deras etanolbilar är gröna och bra för miljön. Saab kan inte styrka detta och får därför inte marknadsföra sig på det viset.

Goldmanns arbetsgivare Westander har inte bara Lantmännen som kunder. Bland övriga märks Taxi 020, som Gröna bilister lyfter fram bland goda gröna exempel.

Gröna bilister har också nära historiska band till etanolindustrin. Etanolkoncernen Sekabs koncernchef Per Carstedt satt under 2004 och 2005 i föreningens styrelse. Carstedt leder inte bara Sekab, han har också starka familjeband till bilkedjan Carstedts Bil, som säljer Ford. Till storsäljarna hör Gröna bilisters favoritbil Ford Focus, som vunnit omröstningen "Miljöbästa bil" varje år sedan 2006.

Kritiken mot etanol har intensifierats det senaste halvåret. Bland forskarna råder i stort sett samsyn om att dagens etanol gjord av spannmål inte är hållbar, vare sig ekonomiskt eller miljömässigt. Detta budskap fick riksdagens trafikutskott i en hearing så sent som i våras. Finns det någon trend i alla dessa rapporter är det att klimatnyttan med etanol, även den som är gjord av sockerrör, minskar med nya effektivare analysmetoder, som tar hänsyn även till indirekta markeffekter. Just nu pågår en intensiv global debatt om biodrivmedlens roll i matprisökningarna.

Gröna bilisters strategi tycks vara att tona ned dessa kopplingar och i stället peka på andra förklaringar till att priserna stiger.

Föreningen har varit direkt avvisande till andra alternativa drivmedel som exempelvis metanol genom förgasning. Den tekniken ger enligt forskarna (bland annat i Oljekommissionen) väsentligt större drivmedelsutbyte av insatt råvara jämfört med etanol av cellulosa, som är huvudspår i Sekabs strategi. Och som Gröna bilister hyllar.

Mattias Goldmann var tidigare aktiv i Miljöpartiet, samma parti som var med och drev igenom den starkt kritiserade pumplagen. Den tvingar större mackar att investera i minst en pump med alternativt drivmedel. Eftersom det kostar tiofalt mer att bygga en gaspump jämfört med en etanolpump väljer nästan alla etanol. Det har gett svåra inlåsningseffekter på bränslemarknaden i ett enda alternativt bränsle, något som många instanser varnade för i remissrundan.

Gröna bilister har inte sett problemet på det sättet. Tvärtom, utbyggnaden av antalet etanolpumpar applåderades flitigt i olika utspel. Inte heller har föreningen gjort något för att få ned bränsleförbrukningen i etanolbilarna. I tider när allt fokus ligger på bränslesnålare bilar har etanolbilarnas genomsnittliga förbrukning ökat med närmare 20 procent sedan 2004 (Vägverket).

I en mycket påkostad kampanj valde föreningen i stället att rikta udden mot bensinbilars förbrukning (finansierad av Naturvårdsverket 2005)

Med så få medlemmar som Gröna bilister har (1 100 enligt egna uppgifter från 2006) räcker inte avgifterna långt, särskilt som föreningen håller sig med bemannat kansli, aktuell hemsida och producerar mängder av informationsmaterial. Finansieringen säkras med offentliga bidrag. Under tre år uppgick stödet enbart från Vägverket till 1,3 miljoner kronor. Det motsvarade närmare 1 200 kronor per medlem.

Föreningen har också lyckats få omfattande stöd från Naturvårdsverket (1,46 miljoner kronor sedan 2004) och från Konsumentverket. Man kan med fog säga att föreningens kampanjer till övervägande del finansieras av skattemedel.

Detta faktum och Mattias Goldmanns dubbla roller gör det svårt att värdera föreningens utspel. Vem säger vad och varför? Vilken hatt har Goldmann på sig när han säger att vi ska åka Taxi 020? Westanders? Gröna bilisters? Taxi 020:s? Eller när han i Gröna bilisters namn i teve säger att etanol ger 57 procents klimatnytta? Talar han bara för föreningen eller samtidigt för Sekab? Eller enbart för Westander? Det här problemet gäller naturligtvis inte bara Goldmann, utan hela föreningen. Var det i själva verket Naturvårdsverket som drev kampanjen mot bensinbilarna? Var det samma verk som beslutade att inte engagera sig i etanolbilarnas skenande förbrukning?

Att byrån Westander och i synnerhet dess miljölobbyist Mattias Goldmann gläds över uppmärksamheten i alla medier är inget konstigt. Säkerligen är många pr-människor avundsjuka över vad de åstadkommit.

Problemet ligger på de medier som inte ställer några kontrollfrågor om vad föreningen står för, vilka dess representanter egentligen är och vilka som har intressen av att deras budskap förs ut.

Även de statliga verkens synnerligen generösa stöd till en så liten förening kan ifrågasättas.

Gröna bilisters genomslag i medierna framstår mer och mer som ett praktexempel på hur det kan gå när man sänker garden inför något man uppfattar som ideellt, i detta fall en förening som bäddar in sitt budskap i ett förment grönt skimmer.

Lasse Svärd

© Detta material är skyddat enligt lagen om upphovsrätt.

livemint.com
The global food versus fuel debate will be rendered irrelevant by its biofuel business model, claims Reliance Life Sciences or RLS.
“Our model is unique in the sense that it reverses the whole argument of fuel versus food, which the Western world is currently battling with, as it leads to fuel with food, with the promotion of food intercrops,” says K.V. Subramaniam, CEO and president of RLS, part of the Mukesh Ambani-led Reliance Industries Ltd or RIL group. The company says it is currently testing intercropping of jatropha and pongamia non-edible fuel crops along with a diverse set of food crops including corn, mango, medicinal plants and vegetables in its research and development farms at Gandhar in Baruch, Gujarat, and Nagothane in Raigad, Maharashtra.

Related article

• Inside the world's first billion-dollar home

"We're borrowing money from China to buy oil from the Persian Gulf to burn it in ways that destroy the planet. Every bit of that's got to change, " summarized Gore.

Both of the 2008 US presidential candidates reacted to his speech very shortly . The Republican candidate John McCain expressed his trust in Al Gore's view on the future of US consumption of energy from the alternative sources when saying:  "if the Vice President says it's doable, I believe it's doable."

The Democratic candidate Barack Obama also gave voice to Gore's belief when he said: "I strongly agree with Vice President Gore that we cannot drill our way to energy independence, but must fast-track investments in renewable sources of energy like solar power, wind power and advanced biofuels."

The rally was closed with the triumphal tones of the U2's Beautiful Day. Wil.i.am from Black Eyed Peas was also at the rally as a support of Al Gore's views on the future directions of the US environmental politics.

To see whole Al Gore's speech, follow this link: http://www.wecansolveit.org/

Some of the pictures that I managed to take despite the fact it was prohibited to bring cameras inside are posted here...

Two announcements - the closure of processing in the UK by D2 oil and the opening of a "micro biodiesel facility" that will use waste oil and jatropha oil by De-Ord Fuel indicate the over optimism around Jatropha and the uncertainty in the market.

De-Ord's micro plant, which will produce only 4.5 million litres a year will distribute biodiesel directly to bus and truck fleets. This, along with careful raw material sourcing will apparently allow it to be sustainable and possibly become a model for other European installations.

On the other hand D1 Oils has had to close and sell off plant as they are unable to compete with US imports using rapeseed as a feedstock. They will therefore be concentrating on their Jatropha operations, which have been part of their business approach since their establishment. The fact that inputs are required to optimise Jatropha production and that full scale production, which seemed to be pretty much in control 2 years ago,

is only due in 2011 are the realities compared to the hype that abounds in many projects.

Dear Visitor

I've just released a position paper 'BEST PRACTICES FOR LONG-TERM JATROPHA DEVELOPMENT' in line with JatrophaWorld Hamburg 2008 from October 20-21, 2008. And it's available to you NOW for F.REE!

'Best Practices for Long-term Jatropha Development' Please download your Free Position Paper: Jatropha Position Paper This paper is an update on my successful 'Sustainable Biodiesel Feedstock: Jatropha--A Strategic Option', which has been downloaded by over 2000 individuals from all over the world and was one of the most discussed papers at JatrophaWorld 2008 series which has attracted over 800 participants from 55 countries.   To Your Success with Jatropha, Dr. R Rajagopal COO Knowgenix

p.s. JATROPHAWORLD 2008 is the most happening platform for all stakeholders in the biofuels business! Don't miss out on this opportunity to access latest information and insights which will shape your investment in Jatropha! Exhibit your Jatropha technologies, products and services to the stakeholders in the biofuels business! Register for JATROPHAWORLD HAMBURG 2008 today! ]]> http://energyandbiofuelsevents.wordpress.com/?p=116 Fri, 18 Jul 2008 07:13:54 +0000 globalconference http://energyandbiofuelsevents.wordpress.com/?p=116

BiomassWorld 2008, Sep 23-24, 2008 in Beijing, Examines Competitive Advantages of Biomass for Power and Cellulosic Biofuels.

BiomassWorld 2008 will be held in Beijing, China on September 23-24, 2008. This gathering of major authorities and project stakeholders from Asia, Europe and the US, with discussion focusing on integrating biomass into the energy value chain, through biomass power generation and Cellulosic ethanol.  Technological advancements & favorable renewable energy policies will set the tone for the more than 20 experts sharing insights on commercializing biomass to energy. This conference will be the premier networking venue for the industry and play a critical role in developing vital business relationships. 

The BiomassWorld 2008 will map the dynamic shift of the global renewable energy industry to encompass biomass As the modern global energy market and world governments are seeking to adapt existing renewable energy policy and regulatory structures to encourage the development of Biomass to Energy Projects, the timely BiomassWorld 2008 will look at two issues that are critical to the widespread commercialization of Biomass:

-->Biomass as the answer to the rising costs in the power generation sector & rural electrification projects. 

--> Cellulosic Ethanol derived from the Lignocellulosic conversion of biomass sources as the ideal solution to the food vs. fuel debate & a viable source of biofuel.  

The conference features insights from major authorities on the integration of biomass from its conversion to power, gas and liquid fuels as an alternative energy source as well as the latest technological, policies, projects and market trends. Focused case studies from biomass energy, power generation and cogeneration projects in China, Malaysia, India, Pakistan, Thailand and the Philippines will put regional developments in Biomass into broader perspective.

Top Chinese Bioenergy companies National Bio Energy Co. and COFCO will be sharing their insights on the biomass to power generation and cellulosic ethanol in China at BiomassWorld 2008 in Beijing. As the world’s third largest producer of Ethanol and rich in agricultural and forestry waste materials, the Chinese government is pushing ahead in establishing Biomass power plants. On May 21, 2008, China Holdings Inc reported that by year 2012, the total b