Commercial Algae biodiesel.
Not to be lumped in with BioFuel by those who would rather not see it happen. I'm not keen on the whole sugar being used to make it. I'd take a lower yield rate using a waste stream as the carbon source vs the sugar. BioFuel is used by people who want to prevent Ethanol from being used as a fuel, Biodiesel get a good bit of smear.
Compression ignition is good. Spark is bad.
Oh well.
Plug-in Diesel Electric hybrid would be a market killer.
also - if you're headed to the reception tomorrow, best to RSVP as the invite requests.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
An interesting development. As you point out, using corn or cane as input source is not desireable - envirnmentally costly and energy intensive farming techniques. I wonder what the net efficiency is relative to producing ethanol from the same materials? Poking around, I couldn't find anything on this. Solazyme seems pretty tight lipped on this. The one advantage is diesel engines are more efficient than ignited engines, thus if net energy between biodiesel and ethanol are the same, the biodiesel fuel comes out ahead in solar to wheels efficiency.
The net energy for virgin soy based biodiesel is about 300%. The net energy for Ethanol isn't even close. Not comparable period.
That figure is from a publication I can't find (used it so frequently that i can picture it but it must be in storage with stuff from Michigan).
Since it is algae a large % of the oil will be from photosynthesis, the sugar may be a supplemental fuel that makes a significant increase in production to warrant adding it.
Actually, their process doesn't use sunlight. The algae consumes sugar in stainless tanks. From their website:
"Our proprietary microalgae are heterotrophic, meaning they grow in the dark (in fermenters) by consuming sugars derived from plants that have already harnessed the sun's energy."
That's why I wonder what the net energy is, as it appears no additional solar energy is put into the production once the sugar is harvested.
Right - reading comprehension today is sucking.
In that case their stuff is probably a bit skewed.
That said. using "foodstock" as feedstock for fuel is probably orders of magnitude more efficient than using that foodstock to feed livestock that 'we' would eat. Probably by a very large margin.
Biofuel opponents are rarely the ones who are vegans. A bit duplicitous from an analytical point of view. But then as I continue to proof, i'm only running at about 10% efficiency on my reading and explaining level
VW says not to use bio in my car (no more than 5% IIRC.
Who are they making it for?
Post a Comment