Slashdot Mirror
Bio-diesel Made from Sewage
tito writes "A New Zealand company has successfully turned sewage into modern-day gold. New Zealand Herald is reporting that a Marlborough-based Aquaflow Bionomic yesterday announced it had produced its first sample of bio-diesel fuel from algae in sewage ponds.
It is believed to be the world's first commercial production of bio-diesel from 'wild' algae outside the laboratory - and the company expects to be producing at the rate of at least one million litres of the fuel each year from Blenheim by April."
How much is that compared to the oil consumption of New Zealand? How many of those factories would be needed to be independent of crude oil and would that be feasible?
Remember folks - there is not going to be a single replacement for fossil fuels, but many (and lets not forget the other half of the equation - reducing our energy consumption).
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
Another reason is that gasprices in the US are incredibly low from a european point of view, mostly due to taxes. Biofuel would be less likely te be as heavily taxed over here, making it cheaper at the gas station.
Sig (appended to the end of comments I post, 54 chars)
The thing about this is that it doesn't take up any extra land. We already have sewage outfalls and treatment plants, so stick this algae on top and farm them off. As long as you generate more fuel than you use in the farvesting process, that's free fuel with no lose of acres.
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
Then their back of the napkin calculations would be wrong. To replace all the transportation fuels we use in the US, about 25% of what the world uses, would require roughly 15,000 square miles of the Sonora Desert, which is around 120,000 square miles total. This was previously reported on /. and the pilot testing for large scale production has already been completed. More detail and a good overview here.
The funny thing about all this is that the oil producing algae research was first conducted by our very own US Dept. of Energy. And just like Brazil is taking the lead in showing the world how to achieve energy independence, another country is taking our research and showing how to make themselves less dependent on foreign oil. Kind of funny to watch the rest of the world passing us by in energy research, education, and manufacturing while Bubba and his red state buddies think it's just a hoot to haul their gas burning 4 wheelers out to the recreation area in their pickups that get 9 miles to a gallon, which they absolutely have to drive all the time because they need a truck big enough to haul their gas toys on the weekend.
It's like living in a continuous showing of Hee Haw.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
Okay, so we all know a million liters of fuel isn't much in the grand scheme of things. Worldwide, many billions of gallons and tons of assorted fossil fuels are consumed, which means that a million gallons a year from one facility is pretty small potatoes when stacked up against the fuel demands of the world.
I think we're forgetting that the fuel need not leave town, though. Locally produced bio-fuels could supply limited geographic areas with at least some quantity of cheap fuel, which at least helps whoever lives there. It doesn't have to travel, meaning it retains much more of its value since less energy and effort has to be spent to move it from point 'A' to point 'B', and since a township produces it, a township reaps the benefits, immediately benefitting the local economy. It's like the farmer's market for gas, yaknow?
I have to wonder if anyone here has ever heard the phrase, "Think global, act local." I also have to wonder if anyone here considers that it's pretty stupid to rely on just one source of fuel. Let me lay it out for you, here - we already have an absolutely massive bio-fuel 'portfolio', detailing dozens of ways that businesses and communities can produce useful quantities of bio-deisel and ehtanol, but using just one or two of them probably isn't going to be enough to take oil out of the picture, especially if only a few people give it a shot. Right now, we need to take what we can get, and the ability to produce fuel in the process of purifying wastewater is something nobody should overlook. If nothing else, the cost of water purification could be offset by fuel sales, potentially reducing utility costs.
Another is that the crops we produce are net-energy negative. When you use petrolium-based fertalizer, you're putting more stored energy into the crop than you can hope to get out of it, nevermind the energy used in extraction.
Ethanol might be a stop-gap measure, but we cannot rely on it for any long term means. Repeat after me:
Energy is a zero-sum game.
You get out no more than was put in. We are using at a faster rate than it can be replenished. Now, I'm environmentally friendly to a point - I try to remember the two more useful corners of the conservation triangle: "Reduce, Reuse" as well as the third one we all know. I love puppies, and I don't want to kill any spotted owls, etc. But, the only 100 year + solution I see right now is to move to nuclear power. In a sense, you get more from nuclear power than it costs to find it, extract it, etc. Moving all of our gas powered or coal powered lifestyle choices to nuclear power is probably quickly becoming the best option. The environmental impact can be bad on a small local scale for aquatic wildlife wherever a dam needs to be built to accumulate cooling water; but the overall impact will be much less.
sig?
Sweet. Now us chronically overweight Americans can not only process our shit to get biodiesel, but when we get lipo we can process the fat for additional fuel. I sense a solution to fuel shortage, wastewater processing, and obesity all in one!
Indeed, this seems to be the mistake most people make regarding nearly all renewable energy generation techniques (which apart from hydro-electric, only make up a tiny fraction of power generation). Most of the plants built up until today have been little more than feasibility projects.
But - as is starting to be seen in some European countries - significant cheap energy contributions can be made when the technology begins to mature and get the sort of level of massive investment traditional energy generation techniques receive. The companies (and the therefore the countries) spearheading the investment also stand to make a lot of money when the technology starts to be installed worldwide.
You seem to be incorrectly assuming that anyone, anywhere, is suggesting that we entirely switch over to this for our oil needs.
In fact, in terms of oil dependency this is almost entirely useless. If my waste was pure gasoline coming out of my body with the same mass, I'd still be right on the edge of being able to supply my own driving needs. So it's not going to get us off of oil.
However, a "waste shortage" sounds like a good thing to me. Much better than a surplus, no?
It's just one of many steps towards increasing the efficiency of our society. Long-term, we're going to beat the oil shortage by decreasing our energy usage, not increasing our oil production, but it's technologically infeasible to jump straight to that. This is one step of many towards better efficiency, recovering energy we're currently tossing out.
about 28,000 square kilometers, or about 11,000 square miles. To put this in perspective, that is about 1/8th the size of Kansas
Well, in that case, we might as well cover the other 7/8ths too, and make some for export. If anyone from Kansas asks what's going on, tell them God did it.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
How much money can we save by forgetting that the middle east exists? Even if E85 were no cheaper per mile than gasoline, the savings from not counting on a bunch of psychopaths to support our economy should be impressive.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?