Can Microalgae Solve Global Fuel and Environmental Challenges?

Click For Summary
Microalgae present a promising solution to global fuel and environmental challenges, capable of producing biodiesel, ethanol, and hydrogen while also remediating waste and CO2. Research initiatives like the BEAM network focus on enhancing microalgal growth and efficiency for commercial biofuel production and environmental applications. Despite potential, there are significant technical and economic hurdles to overcome before microalgae can replace petroleum, although high oil prices may accelerate progress. Algae's ability to thrive on agricultural runoff and its high yield compared to traditional crops make it an attractive alternative. Overall, the discussion emphasizes the dual benefits of algae in energy production and environmental cleanup, highlighting its potential role in a sustainable future.
  • #91
Ivan Seeking said:
Ah, they are playing games with the footprint as opposed to height. In other words, by making a taller structure, one can capture the solar flux that would illuminate the adjacent acreage.

So where do I find some 98 octane algae?
I've been thinking about this all day.
 
Earth sciences news on Phys.org
  • #92
DaleSpam said:
The water rights to fill up the ponds to grow the algae of course! :biggrin:

Which makes a good point: In the long run it would seem to make the most sense to use salt-water algae.
 
  • #93
OmCheeto said:
So where do I find some 98 octane algae?
I've been thinking about this all day.
http://www.utex.org/
 
  • #94
Ivan Seeking said:
http://www.utex.org/

ummm...

http://www.utex.org
FAQ
Q: What strains can you recommended for biodiesel?
We are not studying this topic and you should check publications for information. http://www.oilgae.com/algae/oil/yield/yield.html

Well, I only need one gallon a day until my I get my poly-hybrid vehicle built.
So I'm curious about the process of turning the algae into biofuel.
But if you're not into giving out trade secrets, when does your company go public?:smile:
 
  • #95
Ivan Seeking said:
Which makes a good point: In the long run it would seem to make the most sense to use salt-water algae.

Do you have any info about the type of genetic modifications that might be done with algae for this application?
 
  • #96
There are plenty of strains of salt-water algae.
 
  • #97
OmCheeto said:
ummm...



Well, I only need one gallon a day until my I get my poly-hybrid vehicle built.
So I'm curious about the process of turning the algae into biofuel.
But if you're not into giving out trade secrets, when does your company go public?:smile:

Oilgae has links to all of the information that you could want. :biggrin: There are no simple answers, but many different approaches to each aspect of the process can be found.

We hit a bit of a delay with the company but hope to be back on track shortly.
 
  • #98
Ivan Seeking said:
Which makes a good point: In the long run it would seem to make the most sense to use salt-water algae.
That is an interesting idea. In a lot of places you have desert regions right on the coastline, that would be ideal for such algae farms. But most places you would still have to pump the water inland even though you wouldn't have to desalinate it. I bet you would still get a net gain even a hundred miles inland. Of course, I wonder what sea-water runoff would do to the land "downstream"?
 
  • #99
It seems to me that one would want to stay in the coastal areas for both of the reasons that you cited - salt contamination and energy.

Why do it on land?
 
  • #100
Ivan Seeking said:
Why do it on land?
I was thinking about that too, it has several advantages. Lots of surface area available with no property rights to worry about. Plenty of water. Easy access to worldwide markets. No need to level, grade, etc.

But containment would be difficult, particularly in the open ocean and particularly during big storms.
 
Last edited:
  • #101
It has been suggested that the entire Salton Sea could be used for algae production, but I have no idea what the supply rate of water might be of if the idea is practical.
 
Last edited:
  • #102
Ivan Seeking said:
It has been suggested that the entire Salton Sea could be used for algae production, but I have no idea what the supply rate of water might be of if the idea is practical.

Heh, appears it is not supposed to be there. A big oops.
http://www.parks.ca.gov/default.asp?page_id=639
One of the world's largest inland seas, Salton Sea was created by accident in 1905 when increased flooding on the Colorado River allowed water to crash through canal barriers and for the next 18 months the entire flow of the Colorado River rushed downhill into the Salton Trough. By the time engineers were finally able to stop the breaching water in 1907, the Salton Sea had been born - 45 miles long and 20 miles wide - equalling 110 miles of shoreline. This 360 square-mile basin is a popular site for boaters, water-skiers and anglers. Most fish currently caught are Tilapia, but Corvina, Gulf Croaker and Sargo have been known to jump on a line. Kayakers, birdwatchers and other visitors can enjoy the site's many recreation opportunities. Because the sea's low altitude (227 feet below sea level), atmospheric pressure improves speed and ski boat engine performance.
 
  • #103
DaleSpam said:
But containment would be difficult, particularly in the open ocean and particularly during big storms.

Unless you're breeding killer algae why would it need to be contained? The answer may be because when you mass produce a product of nature, it inevitably becomes a different strain and incompatible with its naturally produced cousins.

The ocean-based fish farms along the BC coast have been affecting the wild salmon and other marine life for about a decade. They are contained in pens that are immersed in the open ocean. What's happening is the fish excrement is pooling on the ocean floor just below them and killing off the natural habitat. The cultivated fish are also infested with sea lice which will latch on to oceanic, wild hatchlings, killing them within a few days. CoHo Salmon runs and Steal Head runs are dwindling as it is, due to international over-fishing. With their offspring threatened by an encroaching sea-lice population, things don't look too good.
 
  • #104
baywax said:
Unless you're breeding killer algae why would it need to be contained? The answer may be because when you mass produce a product of nature, it inevitably becomes a different strain and incompatible with its naturally produced cousins.

The ocean-based fish farms along the BC coast have been affecting the wild salmon and other marine life for about a decade. They are contained in pens that are immersed in the open ocean. What's happening is the fish excrement is pooling on the ocean floor just below them and killing off the natural habitat. The cultivated fish are also infested with sea lice which will latch on to oceanic, wild hatchlings, killing them within a few days. CoHo Salmon runs and Steal Head runs are dwindling as it is, due to international over-fishing. With their offspring threatened by an encroaching sea-lice population, things don't look too good.
Yeah, I don't know what the algae would do to other wild populations. It could be benign or it could be subtly detrimental like the salmon.

But my thought was actually economic rather than environmental. You want to contain the algae so that you can harvest it easily. That is really the same reason that the fish-farms are contained.
 
  • #105
DaleSpam said:
Yeah, I don't know what the algae would do to other wild populations. It could be benign or it could be subtly detrimental like the salmon.

But my thought was actually economic rather than environmental. You want to contain the algae so that you can harvest it easily. That is really the same reason that the fish-farms are contained.

I guess. Fish farming's the lazy way of fishing. It probably started in response to dwindling salmon runs. But, in the end, it only helps to ruin the industry and the salmon. There is a huge popular movement against farmed salmon too. You know, vote with your dollar. So they're not getting very far ahead in the long run.

I know it would cost more to contain the algae in tanks, but it wouldn't cost as much as oil does to extract, contain and basically muscle out of small countries. So why not design some containment tanks to avoid the risk to natural algae populations?

I was hiking along a glacial river near where it enters the ocean and, because of this thread, I was taking stock of the types of algae along the banks. Its a pretty large plant that seems to thrive well in both fresh and saline water.
 
Last edited:
  • #106
Ivan Seeking said:
Oilgae has links to all of the information that you could want. :biggrin: There are no simple answers, but many different approaches to each aspect of the process can be found.

We hit a bit of a delay with the company but hope to be back on track shortly.

Bio-engineering the algae seems like a good idea. I see that they have some that are 40% lipids by weight already. Sounds like you could almost pump it raw into an ICE and drive around town. Might smell like a dirty old pond instead of freedom fries running down the road, but what do I care. It's better than the smell of napalm. Unless of course you love that kind of thing... :rolleyes:
 
  • #107
Ivan can probably comment more, but I believe that the process of getting biodiesel from algae is essentially you compress it really hard and squeeze the oil out, then you do some minor processing like filtering and additives. No fermentation or distillation or anything like that required.

My understanding is that most of what is left is protein suitable for animal feed.
 
  • #108
DaleSpam said:
Ivan can probably comment more, but I believe that the process of getting biodiesel from algae is essentially you compress it really hard and squeeze the oil out, then you do some minor processing like filtering and additives. No fermentation or distillation or anything like that required.

My understanding is that most of what is left is protein suitable for animal feed.

Sounds like a win win arrangement. Unless you happen to be algae.-(
 
  • #109
Methods of extraction include but are not limited to:
1. Expeller/Press
2. Hexane solvent oil extraction
3. Supercritical Fluid extraction
4. Enzymatic extraction
5. Ozmotic shock
6. Ultrasonic assisted extraction

The residual mash is touted as a high quality feed.

A note from Zapper:
Algae could one day be major hydrogen fuel source
http://www.anl.gov/Media_Center/News/2008/news080401.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #110
The algal oil is then reacted to make biodiesel through a low-energy process called transesterifcation.

What is transesterification?

The process of converting vegetable & plant oils into biodiesel fuel is called transesterification, and is fortunately much less complex than it sounds.

Transesterification refers to a reaction between an ester (Ester – from Wikipedia) of one alcohol and a second alcohol to form an ester of the second alcohol and an alcohol from the original ester, as that of methyl acetate and ethyl alcohol to form ethyl acetate and methyl alcohol ( see also interesterification – Interesterification – from Cyber Lipid) . Chemically, transesterification means taking a triglyceride molecule or a complex fatty acid, neutralizing the free fatty acids, removing the glycerin and creating an alcohol ester. This is accomplished by mixing methanol with sodium hydroxide to make sodium methoxide (Sodium Methoxide – from Great Vista Chemicals, Sodium Methoxide MSDS – JT Baker) . This liquid is then mixed into vegetable oil. The entire mixture then settles. Glycerin is left on the bottom and methyl esters, or biodiesel, is left on top. The glycerin can be used to make soap (or anyone of 1600 other products) and the methyl esters is washed and filtered.

Transesterification is not a new process. Scientists E. Duy and J. Patrick conducted it as early as 1853. One of the first uses of transesterified vegetable oil was powering heavy-duty vehicles in South Africa before World War II.

Transesterification of Algal Oil into Biodiesel

Transesterification of algal oil is normally done with ethanol and sodium ethanolate serving as the catalyst. Sodium ethanolate can be produced by reacting ethanol with sodium. Thus, with sodium ethanolate as the catalyst, ethanol is reacted with the algal oil ( the triglyceride) to produce bio-diesel & glycerol. The end products of this reaction are hence biodiesel, sodium ethanolate and glycerol.[continued]
http://www.oilgae.com/algae/oil/biod/prod/prod.html
 
Last edited:
  • #111
This is from a resourceful website (no pun intended)

8. Talking practically, is it feasible to produce biodiesel from algae on a large scale?

Theoretically, biodiesel produced from algae appears to be the only feasible solution today for replacing petro-diesel completely. No other feedstock has the oil yield high enough for it to be in a position to produce such large volumes of oil. To elaborate, it has been calculated that in order for a crop such as soybean or palm to yield enough oil capable of replacing petro-diesel completely, a very large percentage of the current land available needs to be utilized only for biodiesel crop production, which is quite infeasible. For some small countries, in fact it implies that all land available in the country be dedicated to biodiesel crop production. However, if the feedstock were to be algae, owing to its very high yield of oil per acre of cultivation, it has been found that about 10 million acres of land would need to be used for biodiesel cultivation in the US in order to produce biodiesel to replace all the petrodiesel used currently in that country. This is just 1% of the total land used today for farming and grazing together in the US (about 1 billion acres). Clearly, algae are a superior alternative as a feedstock for large-scale biodiesel production.

In practice however, biodiesel has not yet been produced on a wide scale from algae, though large scale algae cultivation and biodiesel production appear likely in the near future (4-5 years).

See also: Widescale Biodiesel Production from Algae – Michael Briggs, University of New Hampshire

http://www.castoroil.in/reference/plant_oils/uses/fuel/sources/algae/biodiesel_algae.html

The Engine Manufacturer's Association has put out some interesting information about what forms of Biodiesel will pass regulatory requirements. Here are the conclusions from the PDF on their site with regard to these hurtles.


Conclusions
· Depending on the biomass feedstock and the process used to produce the fuel,
B100 fuels should meet the requirements of either ASTM D 6751 or an approved
European specification.
· Biodiesel blends up to a maximum of B5 should not cause engine or fuel system
problems, provided the B100 used in the blend meets the requirements of ASTM
D 6751, DIN 51606, or EN 14214. Engine manufacturers should be consulted if
higher percentage blends are desired.
· Biodiesel blends may require additives to improve storage stability and allow use
in a wide range of temperatures. In addition, the conditions of seals, hoses,
gaskets, and wire coatings should be monitored regularly when biodiesel fuels
are used.
· Although the actual loss will vary depending on the percentage of biodiesel
blended in the fuel, the net effect of using B100 fuel is a loss of approximately 5-
7% in maximum power output.
Page 6 of 6
· Neat biodiesel and biodiesel blends reduce particulate, HC and CO emissions
and increase NOx emissions compared with petroleum-based diesel fuel used in
an unmodified diesel engine. Neither B100 nor biodiesel blends should be used
as a means to improve air quality in ozone non-attainment areas.
· Biodiesel fuels have generally been found to be nontoxic and are biodegradable,
which may promote their use in applications where biodegradability is desired.
· Individual engine manufacturers determine what implications, if any, the use of
biodiesel fuel has on the manufacturers’ commercial warranties.
· Although several factors affect the cost of biodiesel fuel, its average cost
exceeds that of petroleum-based diesel fuel. The relative cost of converting an
existing fleet to biodiesel blends, however, is much lower than the cost of
converting to other alternative fuel.
DATED: February 2003

http://www.enginemanufacturers.org/admin/library/upload/297.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #112
Many of these issues have been or are being addressed daily. It depends on the company. For example, a buddy just bought a new Ford truck that is rated for B100. Synthetic materials make moot many of the concerns about seals and other soft components, but one certainly has to check with the manufacturer for any given engine before using strong mixes of biodiesel. Many people claim B20 as a safe limit.

Generally it is claimed that the superior lubrication provided by biodiesel as compared to petrodiesel offsets the slight reduction in the energy density [In either case, the paper is from 2003, and the price of fuel has gone up by 400% since then]. In support of this claim is the fact that using a B2 is as good as adding sulfur for lubrication, which is known to be true, but I have never checked to see if the mileage claim is supported by testing [late edit: I should say that I have never seen a comprehensive test]. Note that normally one doesn't run an engine at 100% of load capacity, so I don't think this reference rules out the claim that the fuel efficiency remains fairly constant in real applications.

The biggest problem that I know of is the production of NOxs, but I see this as a fairly minor technology challenge given the overall benefit of a conversion to biodiesel. Remember that we are talking about going from gasoline to diesel, not just diesel to biodiesel. A diesel engine is not only far more efficient - at least 20% to 30% more efficient - than gasoline engines, but again, biodiesel also has a higher energy density than does gasoline: 125,000 BTUs per gallon, as opposed to gasoline which has about 115,000 BTUs per gallon of available chemical energy. So regardless of whether one uses biodiesel or petrodiesel, there are significant energy savings as compared to using gasoline internal combustion. And, not only do you get higher efficiencies and more bang per gallon, but we also have fewer gallons to process and transport for the same energy requirement. So we see additional advantages in the supply chain. [late edit]This is especially true when we consider ethanol, which only has about 77,000 BTUs per gallon, or just over 60% of the energy density of biodiesel, which means that we have to transport 1.6 gallons of ethanol for every gallon of biodiesel in order to supply the same amount of energy to the market.

Or course the fact that we don't have to ship it half way around the world as crude helps a bit as well.

- Late edits -
 
Last edited:
  • #113
Ivan Seeking said:
Many of these issues have been or are being addressed daily. It depends on the company. For example, a buddy just bought a new Ford truck that is rated for B100. Synthetic materials make moot many of the concerns about seals and other soft components, but one certainly has to check with the manufacturer for any given engine before using strong mixes of biodiesel. Many people claim B20 as a safe limit.

Generally it is claimed that the superior lubrication provided by biodiesel as compared to petrodiesel offsets the slight reduction in the energy density. In either case, the paper is from 2003, and the price of fuel has gone up by 400% since then.

The biggest problem that I know of is the production of NOxs, but I see this as a fairly minor technology challenge given the overall benefit of a conversion to biodiesel. Remember that we are talking about going from gasoline to diesel, not just diesel to biodiesel. A diesel engine is not only far more efficient - at least 20% to 30% more efficient - than gasoline engines, but again, biodiesel also has a higher energy density than does gasoline: 125,000 BTUs per gallon, as opposed to gasoline which has about 115,000 BTUs per gallon of available chemical energy. So regardless of whether one uses biodiesel or petrodiesel, there are significant energy savings as compared to using gasoline internal combustion. And, not only do you get higher efficiencies and more bang per gallon, but we also have fewer gallons to process and transport for the same energy requirement. So we see additional advantages in the supply chain.

Or course the fact that we don't have to ship it half way around the world as crude helps a bit as well.

Thank you for all your work on this Ivan Seeking.
 
  • #115
  • #116
baywax said:
Texans and Canadians work well together!
As we say at Texas A&M: "hullabaloo, canuk, canuk"
 
  • #117
Ivan Seeking said:
Remember that we are talking about going from gasoline to diesel, not just diesel to biodiesel.
I don't think that is very realistic in the next two decades or more. You can switch from diesel to biodiesel with replacement of some minor parts like seals, but the conversion from gasoline to biodiesel will require a whole new engine. All of the existing gasoline vehicles will have to finish out their "lifespan".
 
  • #118
DaleSpam said:
I don't think that is very realistic in the next two decades or more. You can switch from diesel to biodiesel with replacement of some minor parts like seals, but the conversion from gasoline to biodiesel will require a whole new engine. All of the existing gasoline vehicles will have to finish out their "lifespan".

Americans spend 1/2 trillion dollars on new cars every year. I think today would be a good day to start selling multi-fuel capable cars. One's that will run on raw algae are starting to interest me.:rolleyes:
 
  • #119
I don't know of any multi-fuel engine that can do gasoline and diesel. The compression ratios are just too different. This isn't a trivial transition at all. I am not saying that it cannot happen, but it will take decades.
 
  • #120
DaleSpam said:
As we say at Texas A&M: "hullabaloo, canuk, canuk"

Cool. I was in College Station for a while and its a very different culture you guys have there. Mostly of the leatherhead variety. In BC we have the failing hockey team, The Canucks, (just got punted out of the playoffs... last year Dallas Stars took the Stanley Cup from us) and the slogan the Canuck management team came up with was...

"...we are all Canucks... "

but it boils down to saying we're all losers so... not the greatest marketing ploy. Then again... at least we're not algae.(snicker)