BCC technology converts lignocellulosic biomass, found in grass, wood, and various agricultural and forestry wastes, into a bio-oil product that can be further upgraded to transportation fuels.  The conversion of cellulosic biomass to bio-oil represents a significant commercial opportunity that also offers important benefits, including using post-harvesting waste rather than competing with food crops; promoting environmental sustainability; reducing reliance on fossil fuels such as crude oil; and enabling economic development and job creation in rural areas. 

  “The key technical problem in the conversion of cellulosic biomass into usable fuels is how to open up the inaccessible solid fibrous ‘woody’ material, so that it can be effectively transformed. Most of the existing processes to unlock the woody structures are quite costly and intensive of energy or chemicals,” says Paul O’Connor, founder and president of BIOeCON.  “BIOeCON has developed a simple non-energy intensive way to make the woody biomass accessible to catalysts and convert to a bio-oil product with significantly improved product properties compared to other thermal-chemical processes.  

Doug Cameron, Khosla Ventures’ Chief Scientific Advisor: “BIOeCON has a strong R&D network and solid scientific fundamentals. We have done a thorough evaluation of the technology and research programs and believe this can be a breakthrough technology.” 

 “Securing funding from a strategic and visionary venture capital company like Khosla Ventures is a major step forward”, says Rob van der Meij, CEO of KiOR Inc.” Khosla’s experience and expertise in technology startups is unmatched in the industry and we are looking forward to the acceleration that Khosla Ventures no doubt will bring.” 

KiOR’s concept and approach is unique and has the potential to become a large scale, widely applied technology, that can improve energy availability and sustainability to both the developed and developing world. The BCC technology unlocks the energy of vast amounts of biomass waste and converts it into a high valued energy product. This will not only reduce net carbon dioxide emission, but can also improve the energy independence of many countries.  

About BIOeCON
BIOeCON was founded in 2006 by Paul O’Connor with the aim to develop new, large scale technology to convert biomass, particularly the recalcitrant polymeric biomass residue, in a more efficient and cost-effective way to valuable molecules which can be utilized by the chemical and energy industry. BIOeCON is a privately funded company, which operates through an international network of top-scientists and institutions to bring together know-how, expertise and experience from heterogeneous catalysis, biomass processing, process development and technology commercialization. BIOeCON is based in Hoevelaken, the Netherlands. www.bio-e-con.com  

About Khosla Ventures
Khosla Ventures offers venture assistance, strategic advice and capital to entrepreneurs. The firm helps entrepreneurs extend the potential of the Internet to new markets such as mobile and supports breakthrough scientific work such as bio refineries. Vinod Khosla founded the firm in 2004 and was joined in 2006 by two partners. The partners have been involved in founding or growing billion dollar businesses such as Sun Microsystems, Juniper Networks and AOL. Vinod has been labeled the #1 VC multiple times by Forbes and Fortune recently labeled him as one of the nation’s most influential ethanol advocates, noting “there are venture capitalists, and then there’s Vinod Khosla.” The firm’s capital comes entirely from its own partners and a portion of all profits are donated to charitable causes, with an emphasis on micro-finance, education, the environment and affordable housing. Khosla Ventures is based in Menlo Park, California, USA. www.khoslaventures.com

Dr Adam Best, project leader and employee of the CSIRO Energy Technology Division “predicts that the first power shirts - or flexible energy devices- could be developed within five years,” states a Sydney Morning Herald report. Their concept includes the technology of piezoelectrics as the energy generating material. This popularly researched material produces a charge displacement when it is flexed. It naturally occurs in soft chrystalline structures like quartz, and Rochelle salts.

The idea is to develop a fabric woven with piezoelectric material so that any movement on, in, or around your body would stimulate the fiber to generate power. The clothing would be woven with flexible batteries that could act as storage unit series for your devices. The next step is to figure out how to wirelessly transmit that power collected in your t-shirt to your mobile phone without damaging your body due to intense exposure to electro-magnetic fields.

Dr. Best believes that the development of this concept could revolutionize the form and usage of daily appliances. “With printable flexible circuit boards, the day may not be far off when people could make phone calls simply by talking into their collars.”

Interestingly, defense programs and departments are commonly funding projects that develop the potential for remote electrical energy generation. The Australian Defense Department sees this as an opportunity to power “back-to-base” medical monitoring equipment, radios, and other such powered devices used in the field. As it could revolutionize battle in the field, it could also serve as a highly effective tool in field research and remote backpacking trips to power gps devices, emergency radios, data recording and transmittance devices…

There are many similar ideas out there along the lines of energy generating wearables. A collaboration team with members from Michigan Technological University, Arizona State, and NanoSonic, Inc., is developing a backpack with piezoelectric fibers integrated into the straps. Alberto Villarreal, a young San Francisco-based designer, has gained recognition for a concept shoe that harnesses electricity from your step. With the development of these concepts into real products we could be actively moving towards an energy revolution.

A Norwegian company called Renewable Energy Corporation (REC) will build the complex, which will be completed in different stages to incorporate wafer, cell, and module production. REC already operates the world’s current largest solar plant in Norway, which produces about 650 megawatts of energy annually.

A solar manufacturing plant would be the first of its kind in Southeast Asia, and REC looked at 200 locations before settling on Singapore. A combination of tax incentives, grants, and a skilled workforce were some of the reasons REC liked it. Likewise, Singapore officials are thrilled about playing center stage in the world’s rush to clean technology. Ko Kheng Hwa of the Economic Development Board explained:

The project will be a ‘queen bee’ to attract a hive of solar activities to Singapore — big companies and young start-ups engaged in research and development, manufacturing and innovation, as well as the supplier ecosystem… This investment will be a tremendous boost to our national drive to develop the solar industry.

Once completed in 2010, the capacity of all the products the plant produces will generate up to 1.5 gigawatts (GW) of energy each year — that’s compared to the total global industry output of 2 GW in 2006. That large of an impact, combined with the 3,000 expected jobs, shines a new light on an emerging area of the world hungry for innovative and clean technology.

Accelerating Innovation
All Headline News
Manufacturing.net

One British strategic communications firm argued that the airline industry essentially needs a PR makeover. Steve Dunne of the Brighter Group went so far as to say that the industry risks sliding into a reputation akin to that of cigarette manufacturers in the U.S.: "The aviation industry is just not representing itself properly or effectively to put the lobbying efforts of the eco-warriors into some kind of perspective."

I’m not convinced the risk is that dramatic — at least here in the U.S. While there are certainly efficiency measures airlines should be considering — such as being towed to a starting point on the runway instead of burning fuel to get there – advocating a total ban on air travel as some do (or even very high taxes) is a losing cause (by the way, I want to hear a convincing argument as to why flying on a commercial plane isn’t public transportation, like taking the bus).

But the pollution problems for the industry could take off: The United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) says that while the CO2 emissions per passenger kilometer have decreased, the increased number of passengers overall has negated that efficiency. Furthermore, the World Wildlife Fund predicts airlines to make up 15 percent of all global CO2 emissions by 2041.

So while the airlines may not be likened to cigarette manufacturers yet, they should consider some reputation management now. And there are good things happening: The International Air Transport Association says they saved 6 million tons of CO2 by shortening routes worldwide. Virgin’s Richard Branson just announced that he’s planning a 747 biofuel test flight for early next year, and Northwest put together a taskforce of employees and managers that came up with ways to cut inefficient fuel use by 31 million gallons per year. To keep up with the increasing number of passengers and the increasing concern about global warming (including carbon regulation), however, the airlines industry will have to continue decreasing their contribution to the problem and keep telling the public about it. Telling their side of the story — while performing real, meaningful leadership — will keep their reputation from taking a nose dive.

Cross posted on Maria Energia

International Herald Tribune

Powered entirely by the sun, these high-tech homes that exhibit superior efficiency are “likely to help shape America’s clean energy future,” states a press release from the Department of Energy. The first Solar Decathlon was in 2002. I am partially inspired by this event as my old alma mater, the University of Michigan, competed in the 2005 competition. Although Michigan is not competing this year, many of the students from participating schools and prospective schools took notes on the flaws present in 2005, and went home to improve, reinvent, and discover new technologies for this year’s event.

As a result of seeing the 2005 University of Michigan MISO (Michigan Solar) home, I can tell you that these teams are consciously composed. With students from disciplines ranging from Engineering, Architecture, and Design to Urban Planning andEnvironmental Studies, these projects are guaranteed to be well-conceived. “These solar homes are powerful, comfortable, and stylish. They are relaxed, elegant, wasting neither space nor energy.” Since these projects come from an academic setting, a place where exploring concepts and visions for the future is fostered and encouraged, these homes are creative, innovative, and surprising.

Not only is this an opportunity for students to learn, explore, and experience solar home construction; it is also an occasion for the public to come view the solutions and learn about the best in energy efficiency and home design. If you are in the DC area and have a chance to stop by, the exhibition hosts an entrée of tours, seminars, workshops, and talks by students and professionals. Starting this Friday October 12, the exhibition is open to the public. Next Thursday, October 18 is a day devoted to building industry professionals, and the official awards ceremony is next Friday October 19. Enjoy!

And while this idea may be just short of the computer in terms of overall impact, it very well could be one of those ideas that are so extravagant, it might just work.

Two of Britain’s premiere scientists — James Lovelock and Chris Rapley — may just have come up with a way to save the world. And while some of you may shake your head at my doomsday-ing, the fact remains, global warming is doing damage to our planet.

In a "Letter to the Editor" in the latest edition of Britain’s journal Nature, the pair wrote that the installation of millions of pipes across the earth’s oceans could help in repairing the damage that we have done to the planet.

"We need a fundamental cure for the pathology of global heating," wrote Lovelock and Rapley. "Emergency treatment could come from stimulating the Earth’s capacity to cure itself."

Their proposed plan involves vertical pipes that are 100 to 200 meters deep, and 10 meters in diameter, that would pump the healthier nutrient-rich waters from well below the surface, up to mix with the barren water at the surface.

The fundamental problem is that what were normally the earth’s ways to manage the sun are now furthering the damage done. The prime example is that of the polar ice-caps, which should be reflecting sunlight back in to space but, due to the waters absorbing more warmth, are diminishing and thus exposing more water to warmth.

The method that Lovelock and Rapley are hoping to manipulate to their ends is that of using the ocean as a carbon sink, like I touched on a few weeks ago. The problem is that the top layer of the ocean, which should be full of algae and nutrients, is devoid of it. These nutrients are what help in the process of drawing carbon down to the bottom of the ocean — the carbon sink. So their disappearance is once again causing an increase in atmospheric carbon.

"We wondered if we could restore algal growth with its capacity to draw down carbon dioxide and to emit dimethyl sulphide, the precursor of clouds."

Clouds have a very similar to the function to that of the polar ice-caps, as they too reflect the sun’s rays back in to space. The lack of dimethyl sulphide in the oceans has diminished the amount of clouds that are regularly created.

"We wanted to use this approach to illustrate the value of action to halt climate change that was based on the recognition of the Earth as a self regulating system at present in a state of failure," Lovelock said.

Their plan to give the planet a helping hand in its processes has both merit and scientific backing.

They want to start off small, too, hoping to run a small-scale test with a tropical island and a coral reef. From there, if the plan worked, they could then possibly extend their field of impact to, say, the Gulf of Mexico. Of course, such an expansion would require an additional 10,000 to 100,000 pipes at least a hundred meters long.

"With average wave height, one metre, each pipe moves about five tons of water per second — this might be enough to change the surface sufficiently for algal growth in a few years," Lovelock explained.

This sort of plan would no doubt be a welcome relief for the smaller countries, especially those who are classified as an island. At Monday’s United Nations high-level event on climate change, leaders from attendant developing and small island nations were given five minutes each to make statements to the council.

"It is an irony that the least-developed countries and small island states, which are the least responsible for the climate change, are the worst affected," said Sahana Pradhan, Nepal’s minister of foreign affairs. "Industrialized nations have a special obligation to mitigation," she added.

The small island countries that aren’t New Zealand and Australia, and the developing countries across the world, have very little ability to deal with such problems like global warming, and any attempt often comes at the expense of their populations safety and/or health. Such a plan may very well have the political backing of both industrialized and developing nations, and the scientific ability to work.

Whether my theorizing comes to fruition or not is not really for any of us to say, but maybe only to hope. But it is clear that global warming — its effects and precursors — are becoming more and more the center of popular focus.

A recent BBC poll has found that 79% of people believe that human activity causes global warming. Some 22,182 people in Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China, Egypt, France, Germany, Britain, India, Indonesia, Italy, Kenya, Mexico, Nigeria, the Philippines, Russia, South Korea, Spain, Turkey and the United States were interviewed.

9 out of 10 people believe action is necessary, with 65% choosing the strongest position, "It is necessary to take major steps starting very soon." One of the questions asked — which received a 73% favorability in all but two countries — if developing nations would cut their emissions in exchange for financial assistance and technology from developed countries.

Now whether the poll managed to capture just those who recognize the scientific consensus on global climate change, and bypassed those who disagree with global warming, one can never tell. But the sample of people seems to indicate that the results are in, and people want change!

We can only say, it’s about bloody time!

Nature - Mixing the oceans proposed to reduce global warming

Physorg - Giant ocean-based pipes could curb global warming: scientists

TreeHugger - Small Island Nations "Can Only Do So Much" To Impede Climate Change

Physorg - BBC survey: Humans cause global warming

More from GO

India to Test South Atlantic Carbon Sink in 2009

Image Courtesy of JPL / NASA

The Canadian navy has traditionally had a good relationship with the garbage on board its ships: the cold Arctic temperatures have kept the mess frozen, allowing refuse and olfactory senses to live harmoniously.

Then came global warming. The increased temperatures have caused quite the stink on Canadian naval ships, so much so that the navy is relaxing regulations and allowing ships to dump the garbage and even raw sewage at sea. A portion of an internal navy memo was reprinted by The Canadian Press:

The changes ‘help alleviate our COs (commanding officers’) concerns (with regard to) accumulated food remnants stored in garbage bags on decks during ever-increasing global warming summers…These food remnants may decay or putrefy and generate an occupational health and safety issue on board ships (that) our COs can ill afford while striving to enforce Canadian sovereignty in our internal Arctic waters."

The orders – part of the more relaxed provisions in the Arctic Water Pollution Prevention Act – allow for dumping if there are "operational" or safety reasons, or if capacity is exceeded.

These provisions, and the increased number of ships being sent north on sovereignty patrols, have many people arguing that taking the smelly garbage to a port for unloading is the worth the inconvenience, especially when the alternative is dumping it at sea.

However, navy officials say dumping would be worst-case-scenario, and that navy ships are still much more restrictive in their environmental stewardship than the law requires them to be.

The Canadian Press

The first set of experiments transforms messy power cords into functional household items: "Shelf" (image above) and "ToothHold." Depending on where the outlets are in your home (usually at a functional reaching level), you now can use this cord to have reachable necessities throughout the home. Whether you are reaching for a toothbrush or a book, your outlets are put to greater use. Thinking beyond common functionality, maybe you can even use this shelf as a seat…

The second set of experiments are nothing but aesthetic wall dressings. Their titles insinuate the additional meaning: "Grow Plug" and "Single Vase AC." These houseplant retrofits cover up tacky wall outlets while adding an element of fresh-cut or freshly-growing nature to the room.

The third, and my personal favorite, is simply titled "Off." This is a light switch hook designed so that the it only functions as a hanger when switched to the "off" position. The switch is still fully functional, but the added bonus encourages you to think about your actual lighting needs.

Designer and experimenter Scott Amron has performed and exhibited a large portfolio of functionality experiments incorporating basic principles of engineering and physics while challenging their common conceptions. One outstanding project among these is called "Brush and Rinse," which won a Best of Category award in this year’s I.D. Annual Design Review, a highly acclaimed annual design competition. Scott has a B.E. in Electrical Engineering, and is a declared freelance electrical engineer, designer, conceptual artist, inventor, and founding principal of Amron Exptl.

Check it out. His products don’t cost you your shiniest penny, and they will provide your houseguests with a challenging surprise.

John Kanzius, from Erie, Pennsylvania, has come across a way to burn sea-water. Obviously, scientists have not seen this as a viable research goal, (seeing as water is all wet and everything.) According Kanzius, the man who was originally trying to find a cure for cancer, given the right circumstances, sea-water may be able to provide us with a very renewable energy source.

First thought of as a hoax, this discovery was later backed up by Rustum Roy, a professor of chemistry at Penn State University, who recreated the experiment in his own controlled lab. Roy describes this discovery as "the most remarkable in water science in 100 years.”

His colleagues at Penn State warned him “not to be fooled”, explaining the phenomenon away by saying that Kanzius had just put electrodes in the water. However, Roy proved the theory true in the Materials Research Laboratory in State College.

Radio frequency directed at the water breaks down the bonds that hold together the elements that make up salt water – sodium chloride, hydrogen and oxygen – which then makes hydrogen. When ignited, hydrogen will burn continuously as long as it is exposed to the RF energy field produced by Kanzius’ generator, originally made to desalinate water and help in the treatment of cancer. An independent source – outside of Penn State and Kanzius’ reach – measured the flame’s temperature, and noted that it exceeded 3,000 degrees Fahrenheit.

Dr. Roy – who has taken up the research of this discovery – will have already met with U.S. Department of Energy and Department of Defense officials in Washington by the time you are reading this, to discuss the discovery and to hopefully gain funding for further research.

"We will get our ideas together and check this out and see where it leads," Dr. Roy said. "The potential is huge. In the life sciences, the role of water is infinite, and this guy is doing something new in using the most important and most abundant material on the face of the earth."

Mr. Kanzius isn’t just your average scientist, who stumbled upon this discovery. His novel treatment to cancer – targeting cancer cells with metallic nanoparticles then destroying them with radio-frequency – is already proceeding at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center and at the University of Texas’ MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston.

Apparently while he was demonstrating the generators ability to heat nanoparticles, someone noted that there was condensation on the inside of the test tube, and suggested that Kanzius use his equipment to desalinate water. When he attempted this unexpected suggestion, a spark was emitted, and in time he and his laboratory partners struck a match and ignited the water, which continued to burn as long as the test tube remained within the radio field. "This is the most abundant element in the world. It is everywhere," Dr. Roy said of salt water. "Seeing it burn gives me chills."

One can only hope then, that maybe, just maybe, we’ve found one of our answers.

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette - Salt water as fuel? Erie man hopes so

via Treehugger - "Fuel" from Salt Water?

YouTube Video Demonstration

Sony recently announced their current activity in developing a new bio-battery. The battery generates electricity from carbohydrates (currently sugar) and utilizes enzymes as the catalyst. The sample battery has proven to be able to output 50 mW, or enough to power a portable mp3 player. This is the world’s highest yet for a passive-type bio battery.

According to the Sony Press Release:

Sony developed a system of breaking down sugar to generate electricity that involves efficiently immobilizing enzymes and the mediator (electronic conduction materials) while retaining the activity of the enzymes at the anode. Sony also developed a new cathode structure which efficiently supplies oxygen to the electrode while ensuring that the appropriate water content is maintained. Optimizing the electrolyte for these two technologies has enabled these power output levels to be reached.

The newly developed bio battery incorporates an anode consisting of sugar-digesting enzymes and mediator, and a cathode comprising oxygen-reducing enzymes and mediator, either side of a cellophane separator. The anode extracts electrons and hydrogen ions from the sugar (glucose) through enzymatic oxidation as follows:
Glucose -> Gluconolactone + 2 H+ + 2 e-
The hydrogen ion migrates to the cathode through the separator. Once at the cathode, the hydrogen ions and electrons absorb oxygen from the air to produce water:
(1/2) O2 + 2 H+ + 2 e- -> H2O
Through this process of electrochemical reaction, the electrons pass through the outer circuit to generate electricity.

Since the battery does not require the user to do any mixing or formulating, the process is quite simple and it requires very little of the owner. But, each cm2 can only produce 1.5 mW in the first minute, so the battery has to be quite large. The current dimensions are 39×39x39mm- I don’t know how portable and functional it makes this object, but it is a step in an interesting direction.

The most applicable situation I see for this technology is for remote electrical generation necessities (which puts an interesting spin on neighborly sugar supply). For locations or trips that could not benefit from portable solar panels, sugar is a new alternative. As the design progresses and the technology is tuned, I am sure they will be able to come up with something on a more practical and portable scale.

Again, the question arises about genetically modified sugar due to increased demand of the material. Will we begin manufacturing it in the lab and what will this do to the sugar farmers across the world? These questions are always something to consider with the development of any technology using a finite, consumable resource.

It is although fun to imagine one day giving your cell phone a shot of liquid sugar when it starts beeping with low battery indication… Instead of cords, we will have IVs of liquid sugar lying about our apartment floor with a portal into our computer, our radio, our coffee maker…interesting.

The NH3car (NH3 is the chemical formula for ammonia) is a demonstration project of a University of Michigan graduate student in physics who is studying the use of ammonia as an alternative fuel. The test vehicle can be run either on 100% gasoline or on an 80% ammonia/20% gasoline mixture, and can be switched from one to the other at any time. According to a news story, the test vehicle gets 27 miles per gallon whether it is running on gasoline or the gas/ammonia mix. When gasoline is higher that $2.10/gallon, it becomes more economical to use the fuel mix.

More importantly, however, the vehicle produces much cleaner emissions than a fossil fuel burning vehicle. Moving to an ammonia fuel system would drastically cut transportation CO2 emissions. Because there is no carbon in ammonia (molecularly, ammonia is one nitrogen atom and three hydrogen atoms), there is no carbon dioxide or carbon monoxide in the emissions from the ammonia combustion. According to the vehicle team, the only by-products are water vapor and nitrogen gas.

"Onthe basis of either weight or volume, ammonia’s the next best thing when liquid petroleum fuels can’t be used,” said Grannell, a University of Michigan doctoral student of applied physics. "I believe this is the only economically viable … replacement for liquid petroleum fuels, especially for transportation use."

One drawback to the ammonia fueled vehicle is that commercial ammonia needs to be manufactured. Unlike fossil fuels, it is not a resource that can simply be mined or pumped from the ground. And most commercial processes for manufacturing ammonia rely on natural gas as a feedstock.

An interesting synergy might be in place here. Presently, ammonia is used extensively as a farm fertilizer. Using ammonia as a fuel, when its principal use is as fertilizer, would be a cause for concern about the food versus fuel dilemma this causes, much the same as people have concerns about food versus fuel regarding E85 ethanol being derrived from corn, and about food cropland being taken away to be used instead for fuel cropland. However, as more farms move to organic production, the need for ammonia fertilizer should decline, and rather than having to worry about a slumping market, the excess production could be diverted to direct fuel use instead.

Ammonia fueled transportation may be a viable possibility. The NH3car team has also stated that the conversion from gasoline to ammonia could cost consumers less than $1,000. An important question would be whether or not the price of ammonia would remain stable if it began to be widely used as a fuel, or if its price would rise to make it uneconomical to use. Distribution would be another issue. As with other alernative fuel scenarios, the storage and distribution infrastructure for ammonia is not widespread and readily available for transportation uses. Ammonia needs to be stored in pressurized tanks and at low temperatures in order to remain as a gas. Like liquid natural gas or hydrogen, a whole new range of storage and distribution equipment would be needed in order to have widespread use of ammonia as a fuel. But with all of the potential benefits it offers, it may be worth exploring the possibilities it offers.

via: Ann Arbor News

Cross-posted from EcoGeek.org

I had the occasion to stumble upon two uniquely imagined facets of the same future over the past week. The first: The World Without Us, an eerily quiet scenario in which humans disappear from the Earth and nature slowly and persistently takes over. The second: Children of Men, a visually stunning dystopia in the form of a sterile and slowly vanishing human race.

Alan Weisman’s The World Without Us uses a rational, scientific approach to describe post-human Earth. Surprisingly, the book reads like a summer page-turner…that really makes you think. The story meanders from the planet’s wildest places - a primeval forest in Belarus and Poland - to areas where human conflict has driven human abandonment and nature has found peace - in Cyprus and Korea.

Weisman’s artistic description of what falls apart, what lasts, and what happens when we’re gone is like candy for the imagination. "In a dream, you walk outside to find your familiar landscape swarming with fantastic beings. Furry rhinoceroses, big hairy elephants, and even bigger sloths-sloths??" He continues, "a dream, or a congenital memory? This was precisely the world that Homo sapiens stepped into as we spread beyond Africa, all the way to America. Had we never appeared, would those now-missing mammals still be here? If we go, will they be back?"

He also describes how man-made structures would fare the conquest of nature. For example, even on a sunny day, the people who keep New York City’s subway system working have to pump 13 million gallons of water away. Without us, Manhattan would soon turn into a system of streams and rivers. Weisman paints a vaguely haunting picture of the future, but at the same time, it’s powerfully peaceful.

Children of Men explores a slightly different future. Faced with mass infertility, our flimsy facade of civilization quickly degenerates into widespread warfare and depravity. We continue to destroy not only our own creations, but also our planet. The cause of human sterility is never explained in the movie, but one cannot help but connect the dots to the many chemicals and plastics that infiltrate our air and water today.

Weisman also explores infertility in The World Without Us - through the eyes of the founder of the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement, Les Knight. His image of a sterile population is much more peaceful: "Like retired business executives who suddenly find serenity by tending a garden, Knight envisions us spending our remaining time helping rid an increasingly natural world of unsightly and now useless clutter, in pursuit of which we’d once swapped something alive and lovely. ‘The last humans could enjoy their final sunsets peacefully, knowing they have returned the planet as close as possible to the Garden of Eden."

How/if we ever go, it will remain true that human action has fundamentally altered the Earth’s climate. The effects will persist for centuries, whether we’re here to feel them or not - but it’s certainly fascinating to imagine the world in a state that we, by definition, could never see: without us.

Your House Without You

It’s far reaching – both in terms of what it would do for the country, and that actually passing it may be a bit of a reach.

Representative Edward Markey (D-MA) has authored a bill that increases the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFÉ) standards (a.k.a. “fuel efficiency”) to 35 miles per gallon (mpg) by 2018. Currently the requirement is 27.5 mpg – and that number has hardly changed in more than 10 years.

Unlike the current requirement, however, Markey’s proposed standard does not have a lower mpg rate for most pickups and SUVs. The Senate’s 35 mpg version that passed earlier this summer also didn’t distinguish between cars and pickups/SUVs. The Senate bill was strongly opposed by the auto industry and lawmakers from states with auto factories.

On the other hand, Reps. Baron Hill (D-IN) and Lee Terry (R-NE) have a bill requiring cars to have a 35 mpg standard and trucks to reach 32 mpg by 2022. This version is supported by automakers.

CNN reports that speculation is swirling over what will happen in the House. If neither of these fuel efficiency proposals makes it to the House floor, then the House will work off the Senate’s version – which is stronger than the Hill-Terry proposal. So in the end, the House may not vote on fuel efficiency standards at all, thus avoiding the gamble that the Hill-Terry bill passes and guaranteeing that the Senate version heads to conference committee.

Or, is a perfect bill the enemy of a good bill in this case? If there’s a piece of legislation, supported by automakers, that gets us to 35 mpg for cars and 32 mpg for trucks by 2022, should we pass it in 2007 in lieu of waiting for perhaps another bill and another vote in 2008? Or, are we setting the bar too low altogether?

CNN
National Public Radio

Global warming concerns, government policies, and money-saving efficiency benefits have spurred clean energy systems to spring up all over the world. But a giant wind farm in the middle-of-nowhere North Dakota doesn’t do much good if there aren’t transmission lines to connect the power with the more populated areas that need it.

Europeans are facing similar distribution and reliability issues with their burgeoning renewable energy growth, and some see a continent-wide grid as the solution. Dr. Jurgen Schimd of ISET, a renewable-energy institute at the University of Kassel in Germany, says a transmission system that stretches across Europe is the answer. It could, for example, move electricity generated from a Spanish wind farm to the Netherlands where the wind is not blowing.

Norway is key to Dr. Schmid’s plans, as the Scandinavian nation is well-supplied with hydroelectric plants that can store energy from sources like the wind. For instance, the wind power is used to pump water up into the reservoirs that feed the hydroelectric turbines, so the power is “on tap” when needed. According to Dr. Schmid, even if the wind died and wind farms shut down all across Europe, Norway’s hydropower would leap to action and fill in the gap for up to four weeks.

This continent-wide transmission system for renewable energy has also sparked a renewed interest in direct current (DC). Over 100 years ago, when power grids covered shorter distances, alternating current (AC) transmission was favored because it loses less electricity than DC. However, as transmission lines have grown longer, high-voltage DC lines now suffer lower loses than AC. So using a DC transmission system would allow electric grids to be restructured more efficiently, losing less energy while transmitting it from Point A to Point B.

Some nations have already started work on a DC transmission system. A group of Norgwegian companies have begun building high-voltage DC lines between Scandinavia, the Netherlands, and Germany. An Irish wind power company called Airtricity proposes what it calls a Supergrid that would link offshore wind farms in the Atlantic Ocean with customers in northern Europe.

The electric grid in the U.S. is in sore need of an upgrade, and we should consider ideas that utilize the different forms of renewable energy abundant across the country (like hydroelectric in the Northeast, wind in the Midwest, solar in the Southwest). It’s a combination of these renewable sources – along with crucial upgrades in efficiency – that will provide a clean, reliable network of distribution in the 21st century.

Thanks to Working Dad at Housekept for the tip.

The Economist
Wikipedia

By Ecotality blogger Bill Hobbs. Originally published on July 23, 2007.

Regular readers of my writings here at the Ecotality blog know I have an abiding faith in the ability of profit-incentivized innovators and entrepreneurs to come up with solutions to the problems all tangled up in the global warming/energy puzzle, and today comes news out of Wales that fits thgreenbox.bmpat expectation to a tee.

It’s called the “Greenbox” and what it does is trap CO2 emissions from a vehicle’s exhaust system, and hold them for future use in making biofuel. Reuters reports:

The world’s richest corporations and finest minds spend billions trying to solve the problem of carbon emissions, but three fishing buddies in North Wales believe they have cracked it. They have developed a box which they say can be fixed underneath a car in place of the exhaust to trap the greenhouse gases blamed for global warming — including carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide — and emit mostly water vapor. The captured gases can be processed to create a biofuel using genetically modified algae.

Dubbed “Greenbox”, the technology developed by organic chemist Derek Palmer and engineers Ian Houston and John Jones could, they say, be used for cars, buses, lorries and eventually buildings and heavy industry, including power plants. “We’ve managed to develop a way to successfully capture a majority of the emissions from the dirtiest motor we could find,” Palmer, who has consulted for organizations including the World Health Organisation and GlaxoSmithKline, told Reuters.

The inventors “stumbled across the idea while experimenting with carbon dioxide to help boost algae growth for fish farming,” Reuters said, and they now are seeking venture capital either from government or industry.

A Greenbox small enough to fit under a car would hold the CO2 emission from burning on tank of gasoline, they say.

The crucial aspect of the technology is that the carbon dioxide is captured and held in a secure state, said Houston. Other carbon capture technologies are much more cumbersome or energy-intensive, for example using miles of pipeline to transport the gas.

“The carbon dioxide, held in its safe, inert state, can be handled, transported and released into a controlled environment with ease and a minimal amount of energy required,” Houston said at a demonstration using a diesel-powered generator at a certified UK Ministry of Transportation emissions test centre.

More than 130 tests carried out over two years at several testing centers have, the three say, yielded a capture rate between 85 and 95 percent.

Engadget, where I first read the story today, suggests that while the technology appears to work, people won’t be wanting to slide under their cars to remove the Greenbox and replace it with an empty Greenbox at each fill-up. That’s true. But that problem just needs its own environmental solution. Step one would be for filling station operators to realize that they now have a potential second business - emptying Greenboxes into a larger holding tank, and selling it to biofuels makers. And the Greenbox folks need to design a way for a filling station to plug in a hose and empty the Greenbox, rather than remove it.

Instead of solar and wind power to supply to your own house - which are both weather dependent - has anyone thought about systems that might require some actual work, but provide a usable amount of power?

I was thinking, what if each member of my family carried a 40lb bag up 3 floors and hung it on a hook that was connected to a generator; would an effort like that actually provide a significant amount of energy? Just a thought.

Regards,

Jens, London

Oh Jens…you don't even know what you've done! Your question is totally a word problem from a physics exam. And as much as this will likely frighten most people reading this, I'm going to treat it as such.

If 120 lbs is lifted thirty feet and then allowed them to drop slowly over twelve hours, how much energy will be produced?

120 lbs * 30 ft = 3600 ft/lbs = 4880 joules = 1.356 watt hours / 12 hours = 0.113 watts.

So, in answer to your question, no, that would not provide a significant amount of electricity. In fact, in order to power one 60 watt equivalent CFL for twelve hours, each member of your family would have to march up the stairs about ten times.

But that doesn't mean that you don't have an excellent point. Every person is a magical little energy factory. Whataburgers go in…watt hours come out, and it is possible to harness that energy.

Some schemes in converting muscle power to electric power even seem pretty intelligent. A gym in Hong Kong has hooked its treadmills to a battery bank, using the energy of its clients to power the lights. A subway in Japan harnesses the energy used by people walking through turnstiles to power lights. And we've all seen various gadgets that can be shaken, squeezed, cranked or yanked to generate the juice that makes them work.

But a more personal and powerful option for a muscle-powered home is a pedal generator. Basically, it's just your average exercise bike, except there's a generator on the inside. The maximum output for a toned adult would be about 500 watts, but a sustainable level for someone like me (who's eaten his share of Whataburgers) is more like 150 watts. Amazingly, this would be enough to power both of my laptops, two CFL light bulbs and my cell phone charger for as long as I kept pedaling.

There are two problems though. First, no one can pedal forever. And second, they're not yet selling pedal generators at your local hardware store. But if you can get your hands on one, like the $230 pedal-a-watt bike-to-generator conversion kit, you could easily lower your electric bills, or charge an emergency backup battery, and become a healthier EcoGeek at the same time.

Ask the EcoGeek is a column provided by EcoGeek.org. If you've got a clean technology question for the ecogeek, you can send it to him through our form.

In honor of the holiday and the American Dream of freedom and exploration, I am going to help you declare an “energy independence” today (at home anyway). Today, we are going to decrease our dependency on finite natural resources such as coal and natural gas used to generate much of the energy we consume in this country. The interesting lesson is that these finite resources are burned to generate steam that drives a shaft through magnets, resulting in an electromagnetic inductive reaction that generates electricity; the same principles on which wind power is generated.

Today’s topic to shout from the mountaintops is how to make your own affordable wind turbine. Did you know that the energy in the wind more or less follows the human 24-hour power consumption cycle? So I’m here to say, lets utilize that wind while we simultaneously use up the electricity.

I have personally not built this mechanism, but being a declared experimental designer, I like to rig things up and love to figure out how things work. Thus, I have reviewed many instructions and debriefed for you an informative and simple process from a Do-It-Yourselfer in Arizona who built his for under $150. If you crave more specific instructions, visit his site or one of the many options at the bottom of the page. There are hundreds of ways to build each sub-construction, so get creative and think about efficiency in weight, size, and aerodynamics.

Without further ado, following is a simple and cheap process of instructions on how to build your own wind turbine at home!

The bare necessities that every wind turbine has in common:
1. A Generator
2. Blades
3. A mount and wind vane to keep it turned to the wind
4. A tower to put it up in the sky
5. Rechargeable batteries and an electronic control system

With that said we will follow these 5 recommended steps to simplify your way to a great affordable turbine.

1. The Generator
First, the heart of the whole mechanism: the generator. An electric generator is quite simple when you refer back to your knowledge of physics. To put it simply, the generator will convert the mechanical energy in the wind intercepted by the blades and into electrical energy. If you want to learn how a common generator works inside, refer to this site. To get the basic principles of electromagnetism, refer here.
Electric generator: image courtesy of wvic.com

Generator Shopping:
Many electric motors work as generators, as they function the same fundamentally only in reverse. Instead of outputting a voltage from the crank of a shaft, a motor would crank the shaft from an applied voltage. The only problem is that many motors have to be driven much faster as a generator to reach their rated voltage.

I am told that Ametek motors are the best for home built turbines. The Ametek 99 voltDC, although large, is the best one they make. But word on the street says it’s a hard one to find, so if you can't find the top dog, don’t worry, they make many alternatives as do other companies.
The best advice for motor/generator shopping I can give you is look for a motor that is rated for:
1. High DC voltage
2. Low rpm’s
3. High current

If you’d like to leverage the properties of the different Ametek generators visit this site!

Another great motor I’ve heard a lot about is the MiniGen Motor. Although it doesn’t have a huge power output, it is small and can serve as your hub to attach your rotor blades to directly. It outputs AC power so when you get to the electronic controller stage you will need a rectifier instead of a blocking diode.

MiniGen Motor

Once you’ve acquired and decided on your generator we are ready to move on to the blades.

2. The Rotor Blades and Hub

Many people use ABS, or PVC piping. You can carve your own out of wood, which I have done, but be sure to use as light a wood as possible. If you want to get real slick and sexy, you could use styrofoam and carbon fiber, but those materials are neither sustainable nor healthy. A great site to refer to while constructing aerodynamic efficiency is the Danish Wind Industry Association.

With a plastic pipe 6” in diameter and 24-36” long depending on the intended scale of your project. This is what you want to do (scale is set for 24” blades).
1. Cut the pipe into 4 equal parts around the circumference (you only need 3)
2. Cut the blade at the angle you prefer (usually about 20 degrees)
3. Sand the edges to maximize the aerodynamics
4. Next you need a hub to bolt your blades onto (4-6” diameter hub will be perfect) with a hole in the center that will fit the motor shaft.
5. Mount the ends of the blades onto the hub with screws and bolts each 120 degrees from the other.
6. If you can find a plastic half sphere to cover the front of this construction, it will improve the airflow therefore the efficiency of the unit by directing air into the rotor blades.
Hub and Blades: Image courtesy of Mike Davis

3. The Mount

The mount and wind vane are important because they hold all the parts and direct the blades into the wind. The wind vane or tail is the balancing tool of the mechanical energy operation. It keeps the turbine from capsizing, therefore sacrificing harvestable wind.

1. It is easiest to use a 2×4” piece of wood about 35” long. This measurement can be imprecise as long as it fits the motor and is long enough to allow the vane to work with ease, so feel free to use any scrap lying around. Again, it is important to keep this whole construction light. This will facilitate movement of the mount in the direction of the wind.
2. Mount the motor to one end of the 2×4 so that the motor shaft is fully extended beyond the end of the wooden mount. (It is a good idea to cover the motor with something to insulate it form weather conditions-metal electrical boxes work as well as a piece of PVC pipe.)
3. Mount the rotor blades and hub construction onto the motor shaft.
4. Next, Wind Vane: All you need is a rigid piece of material to stand up about 8 inches and extend down the mount about 14 or longer. This is the mechanism that really controls the direction of the turbine. It is very important. Although the rotor blades can catch the wind and aid turning the construction in the right direction, the vane does this with much more ease. (Common materials are sheet aluminum, plastic, or even a thin wood. If you want to go green and creative- find a piece of flashing that’s laying around, cut up an old plastic binder, or cut up the lid to an old Tupperware container. [Note: all these materials are very light].)
5. Cut a groove in the wooden mount just wide enough for the thickness of your chosen vane material.
6. Slide it in. If it’s not tight enough, glue it into place to secure stability and function.
7. Add a weight of any sort to the bottom of the wind vane end on the 2×4. This will be your counterweight to the generator. You can use a lead weight (although not a magnet), a sand filled balloon…

An alternative to this construction is to find a 2 ¼” pipe or something large enough to fit the generator into. Insert the generator. Attach the hub to one end. Cut a slit in the other end in which to insert your wind vane. You can also place your counterweight inside the pipe. This construction is a bit sleeker in appearance.

4. The Tower

The height of your tower will be highly dependent upon your location in this world. If you live amongst many a canopy of tall trees, you will have a lot of interference to compete with. If you live on the plains, the wind will “go whipping o’r the plain” freely and quite low in the sky.

What you need for the tower is a long pole with something that functions as a bearing at the top to allow the mount to turn freely towards the wind. These are the step-by-step instructions from Michael Davis of Arizona who scratched his head at the local home center store over this for a couple hours. I think his solution is quite functional yet the resistance/friction on the bearing could be lower and more efficient.

1. Attach a 1” pipe fitting to the bottom of the generator end of the mount about 7-8” in.
2. Screw a 1” diameter, 6-12” long pipe nipple into the pipe fitting
3. Slip the pipe nipple into a 1 ¼”, 10-20’ conduit (depending on your locational interference).

With this construction you can drill a hole in the 2×4” mount and feed the wires from the generator right down through the pipe fitting, through the nipple, down the conduit, and out to the control system.

4. Find a scrap piece of wood that is about 2×2’. This will serve as your base.
5. Make a U shaped assembly out of 1” pipe fittings and pipes.

The Tee construction will function as a hinge that will allow you to raise and lower the tower.

6. In the center of the assembly put a 1 4” Tee. Insert in it a 1 ¼” close nipple, a 1 ¼” to 1” reducing fitting, and a screw into that a 1” diameter, 12” pipe nipple.
7. Drill a hole in pipe nipple, large enough for the wire to come out from the conduit.
8. Next drill holes 1” in diameter in the base platform that line up with the pipe fittings. This will allow you to drive shafts into the ground to stabilize your platform. The shafts will extend from the earth into the parallel components of the U construction, thus grounding the tower!
9. Attach 4 guy-lines to the conduit about 10’ up. Tie a rope to each line. Anchor each rope 90 degrees from the other in the earth with some stakes. Make sure these are secure, as you don’t want your turbine to come tumbling down. If you see this unnecessary then skip the whole u construction and anchor the conduit directly into the ground.
Mike's Base Construction

5. The Controller System

Here comes the interesting part that takes a bit of research, but once you do it step by step it all begins to make sense. The controller stores the power created by the spinning turbine and sent down by the generator.

Here are the items you need, what they do, and how they work:
1. First the power sent down from the generator is stored in one or more small batteries.
2. The surplus power is sent out to a larger storage/load when the primary batteries get fully charged, because they will.
3. A 40 amp blocking diode. These are one-way valves that allow the charge to be pumped in but not back out. This prevents the batteries from powering the generator as a motor and spinning the turbine voluntarily. If you use an AC motor you will want to use a rectifier instead. Rectifiers capture the peak and trough of an alternating current. I referred to this earlier in the generator section.
4. A charge controller. The controller monitors the voltage in the batteries and decides where the power from the turbine is needed and should be stored. If you are savvy with wiring up your own electronics this site will show you detailed diagrams of circuit construction and a couple links to help you out. If you don’t want to go there, then search eBay or some of the sites below for a wind power controller. Our friend Mike in Arizona built a fully functional controller, check it out.
5. The cord. If you have an old extension cord, dysfunctional on one end, perfect! If not find some insulated electrical wire with a decent size gauge (¼ – ½”). Attach a couple spade lugs to each end. Attach one to each output on the generator. Then thread the chord through the conduit and connect the spade lugs on the other end to the controller unit.
6. A 120-volt inverter. This is very important because it allows you to use the DC power generated. You will connect this to the battery load unit. It converts the 12V DC power stored in the batteries and into 120V AC power. From this you can plug in any household device you would plug into the wall: your computer, a toaster, a lamp…
Going Further Bonus: you can get a digital or analog computer-interface multimeter (can be found at Radio Shack or your local Electronics supply shop) that will connect to you computer for data logging!
Ahhh, I think I pretty much covered it all. Now that you have all the parts put together, you have yourself a beautiful turbine that initiates or enhances your independence from the communal electric power grid!

I challenge you to get as creative as possible in your project. In my research, I saw project constructed of 100% reused materials. It isn’t difficult, you just have to dig a little bit deeper. Maybe the shape or material you need is in that object you just put in the recycling bin, or even better in the trash. I also saw collapsible and portable turbines to take camping and on road trips. Here are a couple sites that I hope will inform and inspire your project:

Science Fair Wind Generators
Minigen
Otherpower.com Discussion Board: My First Wind Turbine
Otherpower.com Discussion Board: Wind
How I Home-Built an Electricity-Producing Wind Turbine

Also, get creative on how you hook up the power supply. You could connect it to your water heater or your electric oven. You could rig it up so you have multiple removable secondary loads. Use the secondary battery packs to take inside and power your computer throughout the day or your telephone (but don’t forget to take the inverter too). If you think you are harvesting enough power, look into connecting it to the power supply in your home. If you are not quite there yet don’t worry, the experiments have just begun. Have fun, and please let me know if I can direct you to additional information.

What, you might ask, is ’synfuel’? As noted previously, ’synfuel’ is a synthetic fuel most commonly made from coal or natural gas. Ok, master of the obvious I know, but let me provide a little more detail: coal, natural gas, or in some cases, biomass, can be converted into a mixture of gases through a process known as gasification. Gasification is basically burning something (at >400 C) in the presence of a limited amount of oxygen to produce a specific mixture of gases, namely carbon monoxide (CO), carbon dioxide (CO2), and hydrogen (H2).

Ok, stay with me here, and don’t forget about the carbon dioxide that’s produced during gasification - that’s important.

This gaseous mixture of CO, CO2, and H2 is the precursor to making synthetic liquid diesel fuel (synfuel), via another production method known as the ‘Fischer Tropsch‘ process. The reaction uses a catalyst to convert carbon monoxide and hydrogen into hydrocarbon chains, which composes the basic structure of diesel fuel. This is a historically important process: German researchers Franz Fischer and Hans Tropsch developed the reaction in 1923, and it provided Nazi Germany with as much as 124,000 barrels of synthetic diesel per day during WWII (1).

To recap:

Coal =(gasification)=> CO + H2 + CO2
CO + H2 =(Fischer Tropsch)=> synthetic diesel + CO2

Now, keep that in mind as we jump back to the Air Force, which plans on testing synthetic diesel in a 50/50 blend with regular jet fuel:

“The acquisition of these 315,000 gallons of synthetic fuel this year is one more step toward meeting the Air Force goal of testing and certifying the entire fleet for use of the fuel by 2010. Additional acquisitions of synthetic fuel will be made for testing and certification over the next three years. The ultimate goal of the Air Force is to acquire 50 percent of its [Continental United States] fuel by 2016 from domestic sources producing a synthetic fuel-blend and using carbon capture and sequestration technology,” said William C. Anderson, Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Installations, Environment & Logistics.”

Boeing’s prediction seems right on the money: The short-term fuel replacement, at least for the Air Force, will be synthetic diesel. Whether or not that’s a good idea is hazier. Synfuel actually burns a bit cleaner than regular fuel, because it doesn’t contain the sulfur and aromatics contained in diesel. But there’s one major problem, if you remember the chemical equation above. The standard conversion of coal to synthetic fuel nearly doubles life-cycle emissions of the fuel it replaces. If synthetic diesel from coal was widely implemented for air travel, it would double the greenhouse gas emissions for that form of travel.

Fortunately, according the the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), this problem could be mitigated or even overcome by the use of biomass as a feedstock, instead of coal. NREL states in one report that synfuel from biomass can be ‘largely carbon neutral’. (3)

While a transition to synthetic aviation fuel seems inevitable, it must once again be highlighted that the sustainability of alternative fuels depends entirely on their source materials and production methods. Nevertheless, welcome to the future of aviation…

Southwest Nebraska News: Synfuel Contract Awarded by Defense Department (June 11, 2007)
(1) U.S. DOE: The Early Days of Coal Research
(2) U.S. DOE Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy: Catalytic Conversion
(3) NREL: Improving the technical, environmental and social performance of wind energy systems using biomass-based energy storage
(4) Clean Diesel from Coal A novel catalytic method could let you fill up your tank with coal-derived diesel, cutting U.S. dependence on foreign oil.

Solaicx, a manufacturing company that produces high-efficiency silicon wafers for photovoltaic solar power, has announced a new facility planned for Portland, Oregon.

The 136,000-square-foot plant will produce silicon ingots, which are logs of pure silicon that get heated to high temperatures and sliced like lunch meat to make silicon wafers. The wafers are the semiconductor materials in solar panels. The process for producing and processing silicon wafers for solar power is difficult and expensive, but Solaicx claims it uses silicon more efficiently and thus creates a more cost-competitive product.

The plant will provide about 100 new green collar jobs and, by the time it reaches full capacity in 18 months, may produce enough material for 142 megawatts of solar panels.

Why Portland? The Oregon Department of Energy created a Solar Energy Working Group charged with developing and implementing a strategic plan to lure clean tech companies to Portland. Jeff Jones, Vice President of Manufacturing for Solaicx, said the state’s incentives were key in the company’s decision to locate there:

"We looked at the state of Oregon's generous financial incentives for renewable energy and Portland's deep base of skilled labor in silicon manufacturing, and decided that the port is an ideal place for our continued growth as a company. This welcoming atmosphere will allow us to meet our goals and rapidly ramp-up to full production by the end of 2008."

Although many manufacturing facilities are located in or are moving to China, precision manufacturing is expanding in the U.S., Japan, and Europe.

CNET News
Oregon Energy Model
Solaicx

Enter the polyethylene “photobioreactor” bag, where light, temperature, CO2, and nutrients can be tightly controlled. The CO2 concentration can be supplemented by waste CO2 from any industrial process, but especially coal-power plants. Initially, this would seem to constrain the utility of algae-farming to having a nearby coal plant, but smaller process produce wast CO2 too. Solix plans on working with the New Belgium Brewery in Ft. Colins to produce algae from waste CO2 produced in the brewing process. (Check back later for an interview with New Belgium). Under the right conditions, algae can be coaxed to double their volume overnight, and this means a lot of oil:

“If we were to replace all of the diesel that we use in the United States” with an algae derivative, says Solix CEO Douglas Henston, “we could do it on an area of land that’s about one-half of 1 percent of the current farm land that we use now.”

Idealistic? Maybe. I’ve heard this kind of thing for wind power too. But it seems possible given the proposed technology, and I know that coal power and it’s perpetual waste CO2 stream isn’t going anywhere anytime soon. The algae farm is also “infinitely scalable”, so rapid expansion seems like a no brainer:

John Sheehan, an energy analyst with the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) in Golden, Colo., believes these goals are within reach. “There is no other resource that comes even close in magnitude to the potential for making oil,” says Sheehan, who worked in the lab’s algae program before it was shut down by the Department of Energy. One of algae’s great strengths, Sheehan adds, is its ability to grow well in brackish water. In the desert southwest, where much of the groundwater is saline and unsuitable for other forms of agriculture, algae can proliferate.”

All that waits to be seen now is when algae biodiesel will actually become economically viable. Keep your fingers crossed - it may be by the end of the decade.

Latest update on Algae Biodiesel: Algae Biodiesel: First Industrial Algae Plants Go Online

Pond-Powered Biofuels: Turning Algae into America’s New Energy (March 29th) Popular Mechanics
Solix Biofuels: Fueling a Better World
GreenFuel Technologies Corp.

Photo Credit: Solix Biofuels