Speaking of ponds, Jones. For spending a lazy afternoon on a dairy lagoon where the algae bloom, fed by wash-down nutrients and CO2 from Anerobic digestion of biomass sediment.
http://maps.google.com/maps?li=rwp&q=2295+CR+H,+CLOVIS,+NM+88101&ie=UTF8&t=h &om=0&z=18&ll=34.588589,-103.180574&spn=0.001762,0.005375&iwloc=addr Jones Beene wrote. > > > These cells might achieve 40% at noon in July after being cleaned, yet > only 10% at 9 am in December with the normal coating of grime which > silicon picks up rapidly -plus- the main point is that they are > extraordinarily expensive compared to ponds and plumbing (for CO2). > > NREL has reported tank grown mixed algae strains which can surpass the > 40% efficency figure anyway, and generally algae will continue to > multiply for several hours after the sun goes down. > > The only comparison which counts in the least - therefore, is this: > > How much net energy, averaged over a full year, can be captured and > stored per dollar of investment, less incremental costs. > > Under these criteria, which are the only ones which matter, it would not > surprise any expert if the advantage of algoil over advanced silicon > solar-cells turns out to be in the range of 50 times more energy > returned per dollar of investment. > > Jones >
