Good question. Even industrial rotary drum filters: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotary_vacuum-drum_filter get clogged easily by the microscopic algae. Also "the container" to be economical must be these so- called raceway ponds and there is no "tilting" something the size of a farm.
Again if you read up, algae has been a proposed source of fuel for a very long time. Unfortunately the devil is in the engineering challenges (and the biology -- this is a kind of agriculture but with major disadvantages in that the "weeds" are microscopic). It seems like every problem conspires to make it more expensive.
I have a keen interest in algae biofuels and have been attending some of the communal events in San Diego. I just read this paper and it is pretty interesting...note leaders in algae biofuels since the 60's have the same reservations so this is not all "news". Nor are they deal breakers, there is no law of thermodynamics that says that some of these problems cannot be overcome. For example, one of the main energy "costs"(the paper says 40%) for algae is harvesting them. Grown in a pond, unless the algae flocculate they must be harvested by centrifugation -- very expensive. There may be ways to improve this part of the balance for example. Also note, intellectual honesty suggests that algae are not a cure all for CO2 emission, rather a possibly carbon neutral source of portable fuel, but with important long-term sustainability that our crops and fossil fuels do no offer. Finally some of what is propelling algae is the idea of energy independence for the good old USA. However to me this is very short sighted, as a long term part of the energy equation, many developing countries would be better sites for massive algae facilities. It would be good for the field if it would stop including the cost of land in CA and start considering the Baja.
First off I am a frequent lurker of the Polywell community and if you are being intellectually honest you know darn well that the potential device has only a slim chance of being better than ITER. The lack of funds is one thing true, the other is the performance of science (in this case fusion) without a proper amount of community (yes boring democratic government) peer review so that in 30 years on the most basic assumptions have yet to be verified.
Secondly were "climate change" false or a scam there would be zero reason to develop Polywell since this country has ample coal reserves -- enough to last 100's of years.
Thirdly I have been long been an academic researcher, now am in industry and I will tell you that nothing innovative in science comes except from government funding. The halcyon days of Bell Labs funding astronomy are long gone. There is a difference between science and technology.
Capitalism, as practiced worldwide has advantages in terms of efficiency, but few in terms of "the vision thing".
The trick might be that you would have to have a special GM modified (species) of human with these (and perhaps other) antifreeze proteins inserted in their DNA. This already works for plants: mammal data, not so good.
Simple transfusion of these in the blood of a normal human probably would never work (but is being explored to preserve organs)
And no guarantees about your brain making the trip to cold storage and back intact. We wont ask much of you when you get to Jupiter.
I think the quick answer is that Europa is not as simple as it sounds. A lander has to bring fuel to slow down on Europa, not so Titan which has a handy handy thick atmosphere with which to slow the descent. Even if you landed on Europa you then have to start scraping at the ice to get at those red stripes (they're rust -- sorry). The Titanian-space boat proposed will be equipped with a mass spec and I guarantee, there are probably a whole lot of interesting organic molecules swimming in that methane solvent. I rate Europa high but we need something big, nuclear powered, and coupled with a means to either drill or melt its way down.
And don't get me started that we don't have any. I've hatched a secret plan to use that high intensity solar energy at a facility orbiting the sun inside the orbit of mercury to power my accelerators. Sure it may
take my 50 years or so to make enough to launch a mission but, what the hey, that's a lot better than traveling the slow way. You have to take the long view. (Oh yeah the crew will be stored eggs and revived, raised, and educated on site by robots to save on mass)
Phobos and Deimos have a significant amount of water. How about a manned deep space mission to sample them...probably cheaper than a return to the moon, and demonstrably more interesting.
If your analogy holds true we should see some real changes in say 30 years.
As I watch the situation I look for only one barometer of popular dissent: when I hear about a police and/or military mutiny. That's when things are cooking.
This guy shows some serious thinking outside the Air(78% nitrogen: 20% oxygen etc) box in which we usually think. Unless we find some off-world oxy-synthetic critters it's really a CO2 universe out there.
So for extra credit, how could we make thrusters using only materials available on Europa, on Titan, on Ganyamede, or on Deimos?
To me the whole problem is the retail model; towit how about that $199 to $299 markup to have these darned things sitting on a shelf? It would be so much more efficient to cut out the middle men and supply iPOD's on demand...the fact is the blue collar tweekers got completely screwed by THE MAN. Their jobs were off-shored in favor of store clerks. Also this article doesn't focus on things like brooms and clothing and such. No such profits find their way back here due to intellectual property windfall. The fact is the jobs to make this things are gone with the wind and we let it happen because we are collectively too greedy to care.
I don't want to disparage the NASA scientists, I think they know what they're
doing. Well then how do they distinguish between the plume from resident
ices and possible unburned LOX/LH2 (which makes water by good old
fashioned chemistry)? Also ice build up on vessel.
OK between this and the General Fusion guys http://www.generalfusion.com/
Canada has got water and energy completely licked.
http://www.saltworkstech.com/
OK actually I'm still trying to run the numbers on the both of them (and waiting
for some peer reviewed publications.)
And by the way scientists who do not LOVE what they do are far more likely
to be in it for 1) Pride 2) ego 3) spite. Trust me: these are the ones who
stretch facts (or fabricate). A love of the finding out things and intense
curiousity are as necessary as brains. Love of money: please go elsewhere.
Interesting post in that we're going to have some data come in soon. Not only will rocket choice be a factor but the impacter on the moon may reveal whether "Destination Moon" is worth it or whether it's as dry as a bone up there.
The entire Sci Fi field suffers from this --> it's no different from the end of every fantasy movie you've ever seen. Harry Potter waves his
magic wand and shoots a green light at the Dark Lord whose red light appears much stronger and is about to engulf poor Harry until,
miracle of miracles he believes in himself or whatever. In how many episodes does a magic beam of reverse field tacheons or
whatever shoot out of the Enterprise to magically heal the planet or confuse the Borg or yadda yadda yadda?
Super science = super natural = BS. Please don't quote back A Clarke back at me.
Good sci fi is dirty and broken and messy. I used to say like Star Wars before it was ruined. How about like Alien.
I'm an interested attendee of some of these bio-fuel meetings in San Diego. You are correct in that the tools used by the biofuel researchers to date have been primitive when compared to Pharma and that Pharma is now involved (check out Synthetic Genomics created by J. Craig Venter). However the problem is far more daunting than that -- this is in a sense a new kind of agriculture where the only economical means to grow algae must be in the open air. This means that every biofuel producing pond is going to be contaminated by competitors and predators
all the time. Big Pharma has zero experience in how to contend with this -- cell culture vats are made sterile before every growth. That's one
reason why the products of cell culture are so expensive.
I think what's interesting in the vids is the proposal to service Hubble -- again. The
fix the satellite biz never panned out for the Shuttle but from a pure science
perspective the fix of Hubble is among the biggest science return of anything NASA
has ever done.
Humans in space can build and service stuff, we have an entire century of planet
hunting to do...with limited budgets we ought to go with our strengths.
--5-3-7
Sure, but you can't blame the public too much for
getting bored. I mean did you jump up with excitement
with today's slashdot story about Sony's portable reader
(truely would have been a wonder 30 years ago -- lines
around the block) or were you like -- whatever...
Science fiction is to blamed for making the future seem
all spandex sexy and immediate and the bummer is
that the laws of physics make the stars very far away.
The first "Life" world will be a blip of oxygen where it's
not supposed to be and maybe a funny pigment wavelength
that can't be modeled.
Then it will be time to send the probe at 0.1 c to go check
it out -- now let's wait a hundred years to get close ups of
that microbial ocean -- see how much we get bored doing
that.
I am hard at work myself creating a secret society where
patient machines will do all the dog work...don't tell anyone.
---537
Re:"If the new process, which has been demonstrated in the laboratory, works as well on a large scale as Joule Biotechnologies expects, it would be a marked change for the biofuel industry."
I've been attending some of the algae biomass workshops in the SD area. There's a lot of excitement out there. But the problems of engineering and
economics dwarf the problems in the lab. ï
Don't give this crowd your hard earned scratch until they've gone beyond pilot plant stage.
For a thorough review of the problems involved how about this position paper from a 40 year veteran of the field.
http://www.spirulinasource.com/bios/johnbenemann.html
---537
Based on the words of my stem cell buddies, making stem cells
is relatively easy. The hard part is differentiating them into the
tissue that you want -- safely. See if you inject stem cells into
an animal (or a person http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/55430/)
you generally get a tumor.
This creates a new paradigm of medicine. To get approved
a normal drug goes through three phases of evaluation where
phase I is "safety". With Stem cell treatment, Phase I is a
very big deal.
537
What is up with this approach then? I've read the internet news, perused the google
lecture, read a few papers (Bremstrahlung as a potential deal breaker on p + B?)
But why is this work not more mainstream peer-reviewed University of Wisconsin
type stuff?
It is obvious the ITER is not going to provide a working powerplant prototype even
if the benchmarks are obtained but why are the other configurations utterly unstudied?
537
My pet peeve with every robo-menace from
The "Terminator" to "mechagozilla": where
do they get their juice from? Where's the
power cord?
My four-year-old Powerbook laptop has a
battery that lasts five minute. I don't think
its going to take over the planet.
537
Slashdot Mirror
Good question. Even industrial rotary drum filters:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotary_vacuum-drum_filter
get clogged easily by the microscopic algae.
Also "the container" to be economical must be these so-
called raceway ponds and there is no "tilting" something
the size of a farm.
Again if you read up, algae has been a proposed source
of fuel for a very long time. Unfortunately the devil is in the
engineering challenges (and the biology -- this is a kind
of agriculture but with major disadvantages in that the "weeds"
are microscopic). It seems like every problem conspires to
make it more expensive.
This a link to a paper from a guy who has been in the field
for some time (and is sceptical of the hype).
http://www.futureenergyevents.com/algae/whitepaper/
I have a keen interest in algae biofuels and have been attending some of the communal events in San Diego. I just read this paper and it is pretty interesting...note leaders in algae biofuels since the 60's have the same reservations so this is not all "news". Nor are they deal breakers, there is no law of thermodynamics that says that some of these problems cannot be overcome. For example, one of the main energy "costs"(the paper says 40%) for algae is harvesting them. Grown in a pond, unless the algae flocculate they must be harvested by centrifugation -- very expensive. There may be ways to improve this part of the balance for example. Also note, intellectual honesty suggests that algae are not a cure all for CO2 emission, rather a possibly carbon neutral source of portable fuel, but with important long-term sustainability that our crops and fossil fuels do no offer. Finally some of what is propelling algae is the idea of energy independence for the good old USA. However to me this is very short sighted, as a long term part of the energy equation, many developing countries would be better sites for massive algae facilities. It would be good for the field if it would stop including the cost of land in CA and start considering the Baja.
Nice video -- at long last the Ftn' Irish have a music video that matches up to USC!
http://www.veoh.com/browse/videos/category/music/watch/e1131685gpf3GfW
Now if only we could lick 'em on the field!
537
First off I am a frequent lurker of the Polywell community and if you are being intellectually
honest you know darn well that the potential device has only a slim chance of being
better than ITER. The lack of funds is one thing true, the other is the performance of science
(in this case fusion) without a proper amount of community (yes boring democratic government)
peer review so that in 30 years on the most basic assumptions have yet to be verified.
Secondly were "climate change" false or a scam there would be zero reason to develop Polywell
since this country has ample coal reserves -- enough to last 100's of years.
Thirdly I have been long been an academic researcher, now am in industry and I will tell you
that nothing innovative in science comes except from government funding. The halcyon
days of Bell Labs funding astronomy are long gone. There is a difference between science
and technology.
Capitalism, as practiced worldwide has advantages in terms of efficiency, but few in terms of
"the vision thing".
Yes well maybe sorta. Let's find out.
The trick might be that you would have to have a special GM modified (species)
of human with these (and perhaps other) antifreeze proteins inserted in their DNA.
This already works for plants: mammal data, not so good.
Simple transfusion of these in the blood of a normal human probably would
never work (but is being explored to preserve organs)
And no guarantees about your brain making the trip to cold storage and back
intact. We wont ask much of you when you get to Jupiter.
537
I think the quick answer is that Europa is not as simple as it sounds. A lander has to bring fuel to slow down on Europa, not so
Titan which has a handy handy thick atmosphere with which to slow the descent. Even if you landed on Europa you then
have to start scraping at the ice to get at those red stripes (they're rust -- sorry). The Titanian-space boat proposed will
be equipped with a mass spec and I guarantee, there are probably a whole lot of interesting organic molecules swimming
in that methane solvent. I rate Europa high but we need something big, nuclear powered, and coupled with a means to either drill
or melt its way down.
Plus Jupiter's radiation is a b----!
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2001/03/010329075139.htm
Possible specific impulse for an antimatter based star ship?
http://www.engr.psu.edu/antimatter/introduction.html
10^3 - 10^6 s.
And don't get me started that we don't have any. I've hatched a secret
plan to use that high intensity solar energy at a facility orbiting the sun
inside the orbit of mercury to power my accelerators. Sure it may
take my 50 years or so to make enough to launch a mission but, what
the hey, that's a lot better than traveling the slow way. You have to
take the long view. (Oh yeah the crew will be stored eggs and revived,
raised, and educated on site by robots to save on mass)
Shhh. Don't tell anyone.
Phobos and Deimos have a significant amount of water.
How about a manned deep space mission to sample them...probably cheaper
than a return to the moon, and demonstrably more interesting.
If your analogy holds true we should see some real changes in say 30 years.
As I watch the situation I look for only one barometer of popular dissent:
when I hear about a police and/or military mutiny. That's when things
are cooking.
537
This guy shows some serious thinking outside the Air(78% nitrogen: 20% oxygen etc)
box in which we usually think. Unless we find some off-world oxy-synthetic critters
it's really a CO2 universe out there.
So for extra credit, how could we make thrusters using only materials
available on Europa, on Titan, on Ganyamede, or on Deimos?
To me the whole problem is the retail model; towit how about that $199 to $299 markup
to have these darned things sitting on a shelf? It would be so much more efficient
to cut out the middle men and supply iPOD's on demand...the fact is the blue collar
tweekers got completely screwed by THE MAN. Their jobs were off-shored in favor
of store clerks. Also this article doesn't focus on things like brooms and clothing and
such. No such profits find their way back here due to intellectual property windfall.
The fact is the jobs to make this things are gone with the wind and we let it happen
because we are collectively too greedy to care.
537
I don't want to disparage the NASA scientists, I think they know what they're doing. Well then how do they distinguish between the plume from resident ices and possible unburned LOX/LH2 (which makes water by good old fashioned chemistry)? Also ice build up on vessel.
OK between this and the General Fusion guys http://www.generalfusion.com/ Canada has got water and energy completely licked. http://www.saltworkstech.com/ OK actually I'm still trying to run the numbers on the both of them (and waiting for some peer reviewed publications.)
And by the way scientists who do not LOVE what they do are far more likely to be in it for 1) Pride 2) ego 3) spite. Trust me: these are the ones who stretch facts (or fabricate). A love of the finding out things and intense curiousity are as necessary as brains. Love of money: please go elsewhere.
Is the moon shooting back? 537
Interesting post in that we're going to have some data come in soon. Not only will rocket choice be a factor but the impacter on the moon may reveal whether "Destination Moon" is worth it or whether it's as dry as a bone up there.
The entire Sci Fi field suffers from this --> it's no different from the end of every fantasy movie you've ever seen. Harry Potter waves his magic wand and shoots a green light at the Dark Lord whose red light appears much stronger and is about to engulf poor Harry until, miracle of miracles he believes in himself or whatever. In how many episodes does a magic beam of reverse field tacheons or whatever shoot out of the Enterprise to magically heal the planet or confuse the Borg or yadda yadda yadda? Super science = super natural = BS. Please don't quote back A Clarke back at me. Good sci fi is dirty and broken and messy. I used to say like Star Wars before it was ruined. How about like Alien.
I'm an interested attendee of some of these bio-fuel meetings in San Diego. You are correct in that the tools used by the biofuel researchers to date have been primitive when compared to Pharma and that Pharma is now involved (check out Synthetic Genomics created by J. Craig Venter). However the problem is far more daunting than that -- this is in a sense a new kind of agriculture where the only economical means to grow algae must be in the open air. This means that every biofuel producing pond is going to be contaminated by competitors and predators all the time. Big Pharma has zero experience in how to contend with this -- cell culture vats are made sterile before every growth. That's one reason why the products of cell culture are so expensive.
I think what's interesting in the vids is the proposal to service Hubble -- again. The fix the satellite biz never panned out for the Shuttle but from a pure science perspective the fix of Hubble is among the biggest science return of anything NASA has ever done. Humans in space can build and service stuff, we have an entire century of planet hunting to do...with limited budgets we ought to go with our strengths. --5-3-7
Sure, but you can't blame the public too much for getting bored. I mean did you jump up with excitement with today's slashdot story about Sony's portable reader (truely would have been a wonder 30 years ago -- lines around the block) or were you like -- whatever... Science fiction is to blamed for making the future seem all spandex sexy and immediate and the bummer is that the laws of physics make the stars very far away. The first "Life" world will be a blip of oxygen where it's not supposed to be and maybe a funny pigment wavelength that can't be modeled. Then it will be time to send the probe at 0.1 c to go check it out -- now let's wait a hundred years to get close ups of that microbial ocean -- see how much we get bored doing that. I am hard at work myself creating a secret society where patient machines will do all the dog work...don't tell anyone. ---537
Re:"If the new process, which has been demonstrated in the laboratory, works as well on a large scale as Joule Biotechnologies expects, it would be a marked change for the biofuel industry." I've been attending some of the algae biomass workshops in the SD area. There's a lot of excitement out there. But the problems of engineering and economics dwarf the problems in the lab. ï Don't give this crowd your hard earned scratch until they've gone beyond pilot plant stage. For a thorough review of the problems involved how about this position paper from a 40 year veteran of the field. http://www.spirulinasource.com/bios/johnbenemann.html ---537
Based on the words of my stem cell buddies, making stem cells is relatively easy. The hard part is differentiating them into the tissue that you want -- safely. See if you inject stem cells into an animal (or a person http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/55430/) you generally get a tumor. This creates a new paradigm of medicine. To get approved a normal drug goes through three phases of evaluation where phase I is "safety". With Stem cell treatment, Phase I is a very big deal. 537
What is up with this approach then? I've read the internet news, perused the google lecture, read a few papers (Bremstrahlung as a potential deal breaker on p + B?) But why is this work not more mainstream peer-reviewed University of Wisconsin type stuff? It is obvious the ITER is not going to provide a working powerplant prototype even if the benchmarks are obtained but why are the other configurations utterly unstudied? 537
My pet peeve with every robo-menace from The "Terminator" to "mechagozilla": where do they get their juice from? Where's the power cord? My four-year-old Powerbook laptop has a battery that lasts five minute. I don't think its going to take over the planet. 537
If this is true why do people prefer the movies to live theater? I'll take my answer off-line.