Comments on: Aquaflow successfully harvests wild algae

By: TED

TED — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 03:26:52 +0000

The amount of water that needs to be moved during the harvesting of the algae consumes nearly all the energy contained in the algae.
In sewage ponds wild algae concentration is around 100 -200 grams per cubic meter . That is a 1 to 10,000 algae to water ratio – you then have to separate the algae down to at least a 1 to 4 ratio (that is quite difficult) before you can process it – which also consumes energy – then you have to refine it in to products etc It does not stack up energy wise let alone financially basically you are changing electricity into fuel – not very and thats not very .efficient.

By: Eddie G

Eddie G — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 01:50:22 +0000

Personally, I don’t see anything wrong with harvesting green algae from Algal Bloom prone locations. In fact, there are numerous articles on the Internet decribing its explosive growth, espeially off the coast of Louisiana, where it ultimately dies and causes an 8-10,000 square miles dead zone. http://www.houmatoday.com/article/20080716/ARTICLES/807160312

Why can’t we invest in the harvesting, straining and Ethanol fermenting technology and make something useful out of it?

By: don d

don d — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 21:56:20 +0000

Harvesting Algae from the ocean would be stealing food from the Phtoplakten that in turn feeds the krill. But when you have run away Algae formation like what is going on in the Gulf of Mexico, not even krill can live. This area is called the dead zone. Our farm run off has created the biggest Algae farm on earth. If we could harvest this from the dead zone we could clean area devoid of fish or any life and produce Biofuels in the process. just a thought

By: The algae (claims) just keep getting better | Me Too!

The algae (claims) just keep getting better | Me Too! — Sun, 15 Jun 2008 07:36:56 +0000

[...] from agricultural runoff and other polluted sources. Another startup, Aquaflow, said it could just skim up unwanted wild algae, which it may use for jet [...]

By: Hamish

Hamish — Wed, 14 May 2008 00:52:46 +0000

Don’t confuse this company’s process with all manufacturers of all types of biofuels. This process uses algae which grows naturally (wild) in sewerage ponds. Until now, not only have local authorities(throughout the world) had to regularly clean out these ponds because of a build up or surplus of live and dead algae, but the unclean waste discharge usually ends up in the ocean. The process above has achieved the following: cleaned the ponds by harvesting the wild algae from them and used the end product to create a viable clean burning fuel, remediated polluted water (which improves the quality of the discharge), and further creates what is rapidly becoming a valuable global resource – clean, useable water for irrigation, industry and ultimately drinking (Australia does it – drinks it I mean!). So, no valuable land used for fuel crops instead of food crops, no pinching food from the food chain in the oceans, and creating clean burning fuel with the by product being clean water!! These guys need all the help they can get in my opinion.

By: Anthony Kuhn

Anthony Kuhn — Thu, 17 Apr 2008 18:44:19 +0000

I’m all in favor of harvesting algae to make fuel as long as it is raised in non-”wild” locations and specifically for biofuel generation. Harvesting algae in the wild is a terrifically bad idea that could have long-lasting harmful side effects for many years to come.

By: grmd

grmd — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 00:06:24 +0000

folks

according to those who know the most, wild algae cultivation in open ocean isnt feasible, nor is it where these efforts are headed.

most of the work is focused on using saline water found in aquifers in the american southwest or in other salt water where the cultivation happens in advanced and dedicated ponding systems. These processes create more algae in these close systems than exists in total in the natural world, resulting in an ambient increase in carbon sequestering biomass.

This is NOT stealing algae from open oceans, as previous poster points out, algae thrives quite well…in the right conditions, and the open ocean simply is not the right place to engage in harvesting for fuel or other purpose–wont work economically, so there is no chance of somehow stealing algae from the bottom of the ocean’s food chain.

there is a compelling body of evidence showing that much of the world’s oil stems from ancient aglal deposits from when the earth was a much different place climatically. conceptually, harvesting algae is using today’s solar energy rather than stored solar energy from oil.

So, biomass cultivation, when does sustainably, is nothing more than using solar energy. algae appears to be one of the game changers, although much more work needs to be done to see if it can be scaled in a significant way.

By: Biology Guy

Biology Guy — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 22:56:44 +0000

I’ve got my criticisms with bio fuel…

I hold nothing against the guys cultivating their own algae, but there are huge problems with companies harvesting wild algae.

First of all the majority of the world’s oxygen comes from our oceans – yes algae produces oxygen.

2ndly this does disrupt the food chain. Krill eat algae, which pound for pound is the most abundant species in the world. Fish eat krill, whales eat krill, larger fish eat smaller fish… etc etc.

I’m not a global warming Al Gore supporting hippie or anything.

Just the facts.

Don’t forget there is an international rice and wheat crisis going on right now. Bio-fuel is not an alternative.

By: anon

anon — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 18:34:00 +0000

Suffering through another algae bloom in my aquarium. Plecostomus can’t keep up. The bane of all aquarists. Impossible to stop growth, multiple varieties (green in lighted areas, brown in shaded). While I am sure “…Algae are notoriously difficult to grow in the wild …” is true for these biofuel varieties, I am always amazed at the tenacity and growth of my own undesired algae farms (two tanks).

By: Mike

Mike — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 14:21:06 +0000

Well this algae sounds like it might be preferable to utilizing farm areas for producing biofuels. Prices for a lot of products have increased recently because farms are being used to make biofuels instead of regular crops. This would circument that, seeing as it utilizes water instead of farmland.

I think in the future, most biofuels will be produced by artificial life that scientists create. However, this is a step in the right direction.

By: Markz

Markz — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 13:15:05 +0000

My concern with biofuel projects is that they have uncertain impacts on our ecosystem – for example, in this case, couldn’t we end up disrupting an important part of the food/oxygen chain?

We’ve seen similar undesirable consequences in other so-called renewables areas, e.g. sharply increased food prices in response to crop switching for ethanol production.

Seems like solar, wind and wave have the least probability of undesirable externalities and that’s where we should be focusing.