And by the way did you even bother looking at the DoE proposal? I did provide you with the URL to my dropbox.
On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 9:30 PM, James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: > You obviously haven't been looking at algae technology. I have for 20 > years. Algasol has provided far more detailed and specific information > than any other company in that 2 decades of research. The fact that you > don't find it via Google is neither here nor there. Google is not due > diligence. Any investment group that has any competent analysts could do > what I did. Its not magic. You get on the phone and talk to people. > > > > > > > On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Jojo Iznart <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> James, I find myself increasingly interested in this technology yet am >> having difficulty in finding detailed information. The blogs you sent >> while helpful is a little incomplete for my needs. I am currently googling >> for Algasol but I find their web site skimpy on details, just lots of >> generalization and rhetoric on how revolutionary their tech could be. I >> need more just to even begin due diligence. >> >> Do you know of a site with a whitepaper, some pictures, deployment >> infrastructure, engineering drawings, etc of this technology. If you have >> some, please shoot them my way. >> >> James, could it be that the reason why this technology is not getting >> funded is as simple as skimpy information available. Could it be that the >> proponents of the technology are simply doing a lousy job of disseminating >> relevant information about the technology? If that is not the case, maybe >> I am just doing a lousy job of looking for it. Please send links or info >> my way. >> >> >> >> Jojo >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> *From:* James Bowery <[email protected]> >> *To:* vortex-l <[email protected]> >> *Sent:* Monday, August 18, 2014 2:26 AM >> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:BLP picks up another 11 M from investors >> >> 1) Areal CAPEX is lower than open ponds. Specific OPEX, including >> energy, is well below that required for competition with crude oil. >> >> 2) No. The initial installations compete with open ponds. They are on >> dry land desert areas. You can get better economy in the ocean but you >> don't need it. You can beat crude oil and open ponds on dry land. Hail is >> the main threat on dry land and is dealt with by temporarily submerging the >> PBRs so the hail hits the flotation medium (brackish water). >> >> 3) Photobioreactors are closed hence contamination is excluded. >> >> 4) The food arithmetic is worked out in the article I sent previously. >> >> 5) No, the primary output would _not_ be for biofuel. Read the article I >> sent previously. Although it is true that the biomass can be used for fuel >> and would be competitive, the entire point of the prior link I sent is food >> -- not fuel. There is no more point in talking about a system for direct >> production of human food than there is in talking about growing soybeans >> for direct consumption by humans. It is even more absurd to talk about >> such direct consumption when you are already reducing areal requirements by >> a factor of 20 over soybeans. >> >> If you really insist on looking at biofuel from this system, here is the >> DoE proposal: >> >> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/28447217/3_0811-1538_LBNL_Project.pdf >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Jojo Iznart <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Thanks James. I have a few questions: >>> >>> 1. What is the infrastructure cost of such an Alga6 photobioreactor? >>> What is the ongoing energy cost? >>> >>> 2. It appears that it has to be installed in tropical doldrums? right? >>> Areas with no storms? cause I presume a storm would run havoc with the >>> photobioreactors? >>> >>> 3. Has the problem with algae contamination been solved. Contamination >>> of other algae species seems to be a perenial problem with Algae reactors. >>> >>> 4. What's the required ocean area for an algal field sufficient to >>> support the nutritional needs of say 10,000 people? >>> >>> 5. So, the primary output would be algae primarily for oil (for >>> biofuel) and algae dry matter for livestock? No direct food for humans? >>> Do you know of a system for direct production of human food? >>> >>> >>> >>> Jojo >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> *From:* James Bowery <[email protected]> >>> *To:* vortex-l <[email protected]> >>> *Sent:* Monday, August 18, 2014 12:25 AM >>> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:BLP picks up another 11 M from investors >>> >>> http://jimbowery.blogspot.com/2014/05/greenhouses-are-not-next-green.html >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Aug 16, 2014 at 9:22 PM, Jojo Iznart <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> James, Please elaborate on this technology. If it is enormously >>>> profitable as you claim, I might be able to integrate this with my wave >>>> power to produce food. We need cheap food here in the Philippines to feed >>>> an exponentially growing population. >>>> >>>> >>>> Jojo >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> *From:* James Bowery <[email protected]> >>>> *To:* Analog Fan <[email protected]> >>>> *Cc:* [email protected] >>>> *Sent:* Sunday, August 17, 2014 3:34 AM >>>> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:BLP picks up another 11 M from investors >>>> >>>> As far as I can see there is nothing _but_ dumb money out there. Let >>>> me define what I mean: >>>> >>>> I know of at least one technology that has, since 2009, been waiting on >>>> nothing more than about $10M dollars to reduce civilization's ecological >>>> footprint by at least a factor of 2 while increasing protein production to >>>> the point that, even passing through multiple trophic layers in the >>>> agricultural foodchain to high value meat and fish, would provide a diet so >>>> rich the problem wouldn't be malnutrition but gout. >>>> >>>> When I say "waiting on" I mean it is demonstrated and the production >>>> line to manufacture it is already specified. >>>> >>>> Oh, I guess I failed to point out that what I mean by "demonstrated" is >>>> that its economics are not just profitable, they are _enormously_ >>>> profitable. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sat, Aug 16, 2014 at 1:47 PM, Analog Fan <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Thursday, August 14, 2014 6:43 PM, Jojo Iznart < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >Why would you assume that the investors would have done lousy due >>>>> diligence? >>>>> >>>>> I never assume lousy due diligence. But it is fair to wonder how much >>>>> diligence they did do. >>>>> >>>>> It's indisputable that there is 'dumb money' out there - the history >>>>> of poor due diligence on investments is legendary. I've seen a ~$90 >>>>> million dollar investment fund up close, and you would be surprised at the >>>>> lack of due diligence. I was surprised when the SEC stepped in to reveal >>>>> the fund was a house of cards. >>>>> >>>>> >Why is it that we always believe that we understand more than the >>>>> investors >>>>> >who would have been up close and personal with the people and >>>>> scientists at >>>>> >BLP and have seen the technologies and prototypes more closely? >>>>> >>>>> You may as well ask why people do inexplicable things? It's clear that >>>>> Mills has personal charisma and is able to raise money, and that is >>>>> impressive. But in my opinion any sort of scientific or business results >>>>> look to be extremely unlikely at this stage. Mills has raised and spent a >>>>> lot of money, that's for sure. >>>>> >>>>> The details do not add up to me - for example, why on earth does a >>>>> company involved in speculative research spend millions to buy a fifty >>>>> thousand square foot building in New Jersey, when their team could fit in >>>>> a >>>>> smaller leased lab? >>>>> >>>>> 493 EDINBURG RD, East Windsor Township owned by BLACKLIGHT REAL ESTATE >>>>> C/O R.MILLS - NJParcels.com New Jersey Property Data >>>>> <http://njparcels.com/property/1101/5/3> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >Let's give BLP some time and credit shall we? >>>>> >>>>> Surely you jest? As I pointed out, they've had 22 years, and yet it is >>>>> they that keep shifting the goalposts. All of this skepticism would cease >>>>> if they had a working product. >>>>> >>>>> AF >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 493 EDINBURG RD, East Windsor Township owned by BLACKLIGHT REAL >>>>> ESTATE C/O R.MILLS... <http://njparcels.com/property/1101/5/3> >>>>> Information regarding Block 5, Lot 3 (493 EDINBURG RD), owned by >>>>> BLACKLIGHT REAL ESTATE C/O R.MILLS in East Windsor Township. >>>>> View on njparcels.com <http://njparcels.com/property/1101/5/3> >>>>> Preview by Yahoo >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >
