>From Wikipedia, the following information applies: Goldman Sachs <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldman_Sachs> recently cited /Jatropha curcas <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jatropha_curcas>/ as one of the best candidates for future biodiesel <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biodiesel> production.^[3] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jatropha#cite_note-2> However, despite its abundance and use as an oil and reclamation <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_reclamation> plant, none of the /Jatropha/ species have been properly domesticated <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestication> and, as a result, its productivity is variable, and the long-term impact of its large-scale use on soil quality and the environment is unknown.^[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jatropha#cite_note-Fairless-0>she
Don Libby wrote: > From: "David B. Benson" <[email protected]> > Newsgroups: gmane.science.general.global-change > To: "globalchange" <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 8:08 PM > Subject: [Global Change: 3126] Re: Energy Solutions > > > > On Feb 24, 2:43 pm, "Don Libby" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> ... >> >>> Yes algae is a promising feedstock, potentially yielding 100 times more >>> biodiesel per acre than soy, and 10 times more than palm. >>> >> How about than Jatropha? >> >> And more crucially (at least to me just now) how much faster will >> algae grow using ordinary CO2 levels? I've seen claims of 20x, even >> 30x, but these must be at enhanced levels of CO2, yes? >> > > Good questions - I don't know the answers since I didn't do the work, just > relayed findings from the research summary posted here > http://www.emerging-markets.com:80/algae/default.asp . > > A little more snooping on the site (see > http://www.emerging-markets.com/algae/Algae2020StudyandCommercializationOutlook.pdf) > > leads me to believe that CO2 enhancement is indeed used to come up with high > fuel production potentials. Since that would have some thermodynamic cost, > I wonder how these processes would compare on a life-cycle net energy basis, > but regardless of efficiency, it is the market value of inputs & outputs > that determines commercial viability. If carbon offset credits fetch a > higher price than biodiesel, it might be commercially viable to pyrolyze the > CO2-enhanced algae and dump char into a hole in the ground. > > If I were working in the area I might be tempted to pay the $3000 fee to see > the report, or ask my local librarian to do so. Otherwise, a good old > fashioned literature search might turn up the answers, and depending on your > speed and opportunity cost, perhaps with a smaller price tag - especially if > a graduate student does it for you. As a last resort, click here for a free > 328 page report from NREL, courtesy of US taxpayers: > http://www.nrel.gov/docs/legosti/fy98/24190.pdf > > Thanks, > -dl > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of global environmental change. Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not gratuitously rude. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
