My friend, this PDF has more details but I need more. Right now, my major concern is how to deploy this in the ocean near my wave farms. So, I am really interested in deployment schemes, infrastructures required, dimensions, anchor supports, and mechanisms and provisions for storm protection. There will be more questions later, but for right now, I am focusing on its compatibility and feasibility of codeployment with my wave farm.
For instance, might it be possible to integrate the PBRs into my pump floaters. This would significantly increase value and reduce CAPEX. One specific question. On the slides, there is provision for C02 injection into the photobioreactor. What is the source of this CO2, just atmospheric extraction or sea water extraction? Also, what are the provisions for piping and water circulation of sea water on the PBRs. This is another area where my existing wave pump might provide synergy. Jojo ----- Original Message ----- From: James Bowery To: vortex-l Sent: Monday, August 18, 2014 10:39 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:BLP picks up another 11 M from investors Here's the presentation from the European Algae Biomass 2013 https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/28447217/Algae%20Platform%2024-25%20april%202013-2.pdf I defy you to find comparably detailed information about pricing, productivity, biomass concentration, etc. from ANY other algae technology company. On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 9:33 PM, James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: 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 To: vortex-l 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 To: vortex-l 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 To: Analog Fan 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 >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... 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 Preview by Yahoo
