Very interesting, Jones! The article also makes a good case for _plug-in_ algoil-electric hybrids: no emissions in town, and inconsequential CO2-neutral emissions out of town. Regarding production sites I was wondering, couldn't the algae be grown in floating pools at sea rather than in saltwater pools on land as described?
Algoil definitely seems a very attractive energy production and storage solution to me, especially if it can be produced at sea. I think it would work nicely in the long term as well, because being BOTH CO2-neutral and of short term solar origin it can't generate any global warming. Unless we want it to of course! Indeed algoil in excess of the immediate needs could be produced and stored away, in order to: a/ remove the present excess carbon from the atmosphere b/ have it available for _controlled_ global warming in the future, e.g. if the planet tries to plunge into the next ice age and we don't want it to :) Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jones Beene" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "vortex" <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 8:19 PM Subject: [Vo]: Acedmeic data on BD >I have been as guilty as anyone in choosing to quote relevant yield and > efficiency data "at the high end" of a range - in order to promote a > particular strongly-held conviction - in this case the advantages of > biodiesel - specifically algoil to be grown from microalgae. > > Here is a more authoritative, conservative (more so than NREL)and > carefully considered acedemic viewpoint on national (US) energy > self-sufficiency, which is less gradiose than others have published - > but still extraordinarily optimistic about this new technology- which is > far and away more cost effective than wind, solar cells, geothermal or > any other short-term ecologically sound solution. > > http://www.unh.edu/p2/biodiesel/article_alge.html > > Executive summary: A national commitment on Algoil would equate to $46.2 > billion per year for all the required algae farms to yield all the oil > feedstock necessary for the entire country. Compare that to the $100-150 > billion the US spends each year just on purchasing crude oil from > foreign countries, with all of that money leaving the US economy... > > Is the correct short-term solution a no-brainer or what ??? > >
