Pond Scum: The Green Go Goo
This looks promising, and if you believe their 'facts', algae just might be a better solution to future energy needs than hydrogen. Initially the Department of Energy's "Aquatic Species Program" was about finding ways to sequester coal power plant CO2 emissions. But in that 18 year study, they discovered that some algae are very fast growing and have up to 50% oil content. The project has now shifted to research into use of algae as a source for biodiesel, and the future looks green and slimey.
From the results of the Aquatic Species Program2, algae farms would let us supply enough biodiesel to completely replace petroleum as a transportation fuel in the US (as well as its other main use - home heating oil)
Of course the beauty of this concept is that the sun is the source for this energy. The drawback is that it takes a considerable photosynthetic surface of growing algae to make this much fuel.
to replace all transportation fuels in the US, we would need 140.8 billion gallons of biodiesel, or roughly 19 quads (one quad is roughly 7.5 billion gallons of biodiesel). To produce that amount would require a land mass of almost 15,000 square miles.
The other "plus" of this solution to our energy needs is that algae can use excess nutrients in water that otherwise would be considered pollution.
By using waste streams (agricultural, farm animal waste, and human sewage) as the nutrient source, these farms essentially also provide a means of recycling nutrients from fertilizer to food to waste and back to fertilizer.Extracting the nutrients from algae provides a far safer and cleaner method of doing this than spreading manure or wastewater treatment plant "bio-solids" on farmland.
Keep your eye on this lowly organism--some form of algae was probably the first organism to harness sunlight and make the planet's oxygen. Now, it may have another important role to play in sustaining a livable planet.
Comments
Heck, 15,000 square miles? I bet we already have that much land area in use by dairy cow manure ponds :)
Sean
Posted by: Sean Pecor | December 29, 2005 6:33 AM
Another reply from IA seems appropriate as this state is interested in requiring usage of ethanol, a corn-based fuel. Someone here made an interesting point about energy sources in general: Regardless of what the source of energy is, if it is too cheap and convenient then it has the potential to destroy the environment. For example, if this generation figures out how to use fusion then is there any hope that this cheap sustainable source of energy can be held in check without resulting in too much strain on the planet through population growth and development? (sigh) Is there ever a simple answer?
Posted by: Jim | December 30, 2005 2:06 PM
The global warming issue is not addressed by the algae scenario, is it? Sigh. My first reaction to the algae was excitement, but now I'm back to square one.
Posted by: Kathy Barron | January 4, 2006 10:53 PM