Algae BioFuels Issues Australasia License to PetroSun BioFuels

[jpak]

http://www.renewableenergyaccess.com/rea/news/story?id=48057

PetroSun, Inc. announced that the Board of Directors of Algae BioFuels, a wholly owned subsidiary of PetroSun, has issued the exclusive algae to biofuel production technology license to PetroSun BioFuels for the Australasian market.

PetroSun BioFuels is a wholly owned subsidiary of PetroSun and was formed to cultivate algae and refine the algal oil into biodiesel for distribution under the PetroSun brand throughout Australasia. Biodiesel produced from algae offers an alternative that is not subject to commodity risks as is crude oil, corn and soybeans and is capable of supplying a sustainable feedstock.

PetroSun BioFuels has commenced the search for an appropriate location to establish the initial Australia-based production plant that will cultivate algae in open and closed systems. The facility will include a biofuel refinery designed to produce up to 20 million gallons of biodiesel per year. The production and refining capacity will be increased based on market demand for biodiesel within the licensed territory. The current U.S. wholesale price of biodiesel exceeds $2.00 per gallon.

Independent studies have demonstrated that algae are capable of producing oil yields in excess of 55,000 kilograms per hectare annually. The oil yield per hectare annually from conventional crops such as palm oil (5,000), peanuts (890), rapeseed and sunflower (675), soybean (450) and corn oil and cottonseed (225) are far less than algae.

<more>

[glitch]

1. Now THIS is what we're talking about. K & R

Independent studies have demonstrated that algae are capable of producing oil yields in excess of 55,000 kilograms per hectare annually . The oil yield per hectare annually from conventional crops such as palm oil (5,000), peanuts (890), rapeseed and sunflower (675), soybean (450) and corn oil and cottonseed (225) are far less than algae.

[eppur_se_muova]

2. Sounds excellent. I have been very surprised at how well the algae-to-oil approach

seems to be developing. I would have been skeptical that the numbers would work out so well. Even if they were off by a factor of ten, they'd still beat the next best alternative.

[glitch]

3. Hey, this finally made it to the greatest. Cool. :) nt

[NMDemDist2]

4. we're doing some research here in my little town on this

we have lots of brackish water and lots of sunshine. the link below give lots more info on the process


http://www.cehmm.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=61&Itemid=50

[Dogmudgeon]

5. What do the algae eat?

The big question is "what do the algae need to produce oil?" It's the same with all biofuels. Algae seems to be an incredibly efficient producer biofuel, but those oil molecules still have to come from somewhere.

Biofuel nutrient supply seems to be one of those theoretical ecological limits that will bedevil us for decades to come.

--p!

[NMDemDist2]

6. sunlight mostly

read the link in my post above for some more info

[Dogmudgeon]

7. It doesn't say

Like other biofuels, algae convert other substances into fuels. Corn raised for biofuel is turned into ethanol, for instance. I am pretty sure algae "eat" carbohydrates (and a small amount of protein and/or nitrogen, and some minerals) and produce oils -- which can be harvested for fuel.

Even run-of-the-mill pond scum has carbohydrate in it, mostly from dead plants. But they can't "eat" sunlight. Sunlight is a source of energy; the matter used to produce the oil have to come from somewhere else. Although, as fuel production goes, commercial algal fuels should have a high EROEI.

The problem, though, is the potential conflict with producing food. It should be possible to feed algae material that humans can't eat, but take the recent example of ethanol. Switchgrass is suitable as the starting stock for ethanol production, but instead, edible corn is being used. It is driving up the price of corn, causing hardship in Central America.

What most of these start-ups DON'T tell us is how they plan to deal with their unintended consequences. (Fortunately or not, most of them are gone before they can even get a product on the market.) In the case of biofuels, scant attention has been given to these secondary problems. Those who do mention them are denounced as obstructionist.

My point is that we are not dealing with renewability in a renewable way. Ironic, huh? Our first priority should be to develop energy sustainability, so that we break out of the cycle of demanding more and more energy. But "energy sustainability" is a philosophy of planning. We have all the technology we need (though every improvement helps). What we need, desperately, is a way to plan to use what we have more efficiently, and to improve that efficiency fast. Re-localization is one way to do that, but it's still thought of as "hippie crap". Micro-cars and magnetic trains are "too French". Carbon trading markets are just getting started, but they are off to a bad start.

Biofuels can be a significant part of "The Solution", but most of these businesses are following the same old pattern with new-and-improved Miracle Green. Green or not, the age of limitless physical growth at the expense of the Earth is going to have to come to an end -- soon. Biofuel developers are going to have to figure out how to feed their inventions before taking them to market.

--p!

[jpak]

8. Ugh

These organisms are photosynthetic - not heterotrophic.

The only things they "eat" are sunlight, carbon dioxide and dissolved inorganic nutrients.

We have sunlight and CO2 in abundance - and lots of inorganic nutrients in treated sewage effluent to supply all the basics for "algal" biofuels.

Also, "pond scum" organims don't eat carbohydrates, they produce them...