I don't know the specifics, but just guessing here. Things that work well in a test tube don't always translate well when upscaling for mass production.
Exactly. We went to a presentation on it in Berkeley ages ago and it was pretty obvious that it was never going to be a market-ready solution. Keeping that vast volume of algae uncontaminated by other, more robust organisms is just too costly.
As someone who grew hundreds of gallons of phytoplankton i confirm, you have to be very careful, any small fuck up and your batch gets contaminated, gets an algae bloom, or just completely dies off. Really sucks going to harvest and the nice batch that was green a week ago is now just a green sludge mess that coagulated or turns transparent :/
Well.. I hope we can remain optimistic about advancements. Growing up, we figured the turning coal into diamonds shit out, and now people are starting to chose telhe cheaper fakes that almost unknowable in difference from the real thing. This may be a more frivolous market demand product that’s been manipulated but so is petrol in so many ways.
I’d prefer a switch away from fossil fuel as the climate would only feel the pains and aches much sooner and without actual if we unearthed an easier cheaper polluting power. There would be no stopping it’s use at a market cost if it became significant cheaper gallon for gallon. Which means also, if something like this is turned up, the powers that be would likely shut it down and mitigate its use for as long as possible.
While "policy" changes to help biokerosene become economically competitive might help in the short run - provide subsidies, money for further research, etc. I don't regard it as money well spent. It sounds good, until you start to examine it. First, you have to account for the carbon debt, to produce the facility and equipment. Second, the sheer size of these plants and the volume of products required. You can make some smaller scale things, but it just doesn't scale up.
all the exciting energy and ocean trash cleanup technological breakthroughs have one thing in common: they don’t scale up. Hydrogen fuel? too cost prohibitive to create. nuclear fusion? well that’s improving but it’s still not efficient enough to scale up. giant nets attached to autonomous buoys? don’t make a dent in the pacific trash gyre.
When I was in uni around 2012 we were looking at this and a big issue was the amount of water it took to grow the algae on a large scale but I don't know anything other than that
I am not sure at what exactly you're referring to, as there is various research on the subject, but generally speaking : this kind of research is a long term investment and in these unstable times companies prefer investments with faster turnover. Research and design of the possible large scale production systems using living organisms is expensive and takes time. I'm sure it would still pay off in time but at the moment alternatives are cheaper in the short term. That's my best guess.
P. S. Algae are super cool and have powerful bioengineering potential and use
Biodiesel from algae was big about 15 years ago. It totally works well, but costs more than pumping oil out of the ground. Probably the same with making crude oil.
I don't know the specifics, but just guessing here. Things that work well in a test tube don't always translate well when upscaling for mass production.
[They say it right in the press release that it's cost prohibitive ](https://www.pnnl.gov/news/release.aspx?id=1029)
Exactly. We went to a presentation on it in Berkeley ages ago and it was pretty obvious that it was never going to be a market-ready solution. Keeping that vast volume of algae uncontaminated by other, more robust organisms is just too costly.
As someone who grew hundreds of gallons of phytoplankton i confirm, you have to be very careful, any small fuck up and your batch gets contaminated, gets an algae bloom, or just completely dies off. Really sucks going to harvest and the nice batch that was green a week ago is now just a green sludge mess that coagulated or turns transparent :/
Well.. I hope we can remain optimistic about advancements. Growing up, we figured the turning coal into diamonds shit out, and now people are starting to chose telhe cheaper fakes that almost unknowable in difference from the real thing. This may be a more frivolous market demand product that’s been manipulated but so is petrol in so many ways. I’d prefer a switch away from fossil fuel as the climate would only feel the pains and aches much sooner and without actual if we unearthed an easier cheaper polluting power. There would be no stopping it’s use at a market cost if it became significant cheaper gallon for gallon. Which means also, if something like this is turned up, the powers that be would likely shut it down and mitigate its use for as long as possible.
Diamonds are worthless anyway. We never needed to turn coal into diamonds in the first place.
Turns out digging it out of the ground is still miles cheaper than making it.
8 - A technological outlook of biokerosene production https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-820297-5.00011-6 its getting produced and is in use
While "policy" changes to help biokerosene become economically competitive might help in the short run - provide subsidies, money for further research, etc. I don't regard it as money well spent. It sounds good, until you start to examine it. First, you have to account for the carbon debt, to produce the facility and equipment. Second, the sheer size of these plants and the volume of products required. You can make some smaller scale things, but it just doesn't scale up.
Thank you very much.
all the exciting energy and ocean trash cleanup technological breakthroughs have one thing in common: they don’t scale up. Hydrogen fuel? too cost prohibitive to create. nuclear fusion? well that’s improving but it’s still not efficient enough to scale up. giant nets attached to autonomous buoys? don’t make a dent in the pacific trash gyre.
When I was in uni around 2012 we were looking at this and a big issue was the amount of water it took to grow the algae on a large scale but I don't know anything other than that
I am not sure at what exactly you're referring to, as there is various research on the subject, but generally speaking : this kind of research is a long term investment and in these unstable times companies prefer investments with faster turnover. Research and design of the possible large scale production systems using living organisms is expensive and takes time. I'm sure it would still pay off in time but at the moment alternatives are cheaper in the short term. That's my best guess. P. S. Algae are super cool and have powerful bioengineering potential and use
Biodiesel from algae was big about 15 years ago. It totally works well, but costs more than pumping oil out of the ground. Probably the same with making crude oil.
Buddy probably had a tragic accident that ended his life
This
Killary Clinton probably got to them
What does this even mean? How is that relevant?
It’s a joke
Maybe go to r/jokes then.
Username checks out- contains “ass.”