Imagine paying over $300 for a gallon of gas. That was essentially what Exxon was paying in 1989 when their oil tanker, Valdez, split open and released over 10 million gallons of oil into Prince William Sound, Alaska. The cleanup alone is estimated to have cost roughly $2.5 billion and settlements over $1.1 billion. Divide $3.6 billion by 10 million gallons and Exxon paid well over $300 a gallon for oil they never even sold at the pump. Include all the bad PR and the total cost of the whole incident could easily double.

If current estimates are correct about BP’s monster oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico then there is roughly 5 to 6 million gallons of crude floating around in need of some immediate attention. And immediate is the key word because statistics show that the cost to clean up a gallon of oil on land can run 10 to 30 times more than it does at sea.

So what should BP do? Wait and hope the booms hold and the oil never makes it to land. But when it does, they can expect to start paying over $300 a gallon. This wait and hope is not the answer. The answer is in the backs, equipment and know-how of the Gulf area fisherman.

Imagine if BP gathered up all the out of work fishermen and said let’s start a line here. We are looking to get this monster cleaned up as fast as possible, and most importantly, at sea where you gentlemen have the equipment and fortitude to get it done. We will be paying two dollars for every gallon of floating crude you bring us.

What a bargain for BP. Cleaning up the crude at two dollars per gallon is astronomically cheaper than $300 plus. If 90 percent of the floating crude is recovered at sea by the local fisherman the cleanup cost to the company would only be somewhere around $10 million. The fishermen would have a source of income for awhile and BP could avoid years of litigation and settlement costs not to mention all the good PR they would surely get. But most importantly the Gulf area would avoid another catastrophe and get back to business as usual in a matter of no time.

This however is not likely to happen because the politicians and lawyers will surely get between BP and the fishermen. Have we lost the American spirit of self reliance and working together given to us by our freedom and only think lawsuit instead of team work. Forget the lawsuits. You may die before you see a penny. Let’s work together and get back to life. BP, where does the line start?

Author Randy Kubick is pursuing education in mechanical engineering, business and journalism. He teaches diesel power mechanics at Pickens Technical College in Colorado.

photo: cobalt123

Related posts:

• Oil Spill in Brazil Bigger Than Chevron Admits, NGO Says
• BP to Commit Up to $500 Million to Oil Spill Research
• Gulf Oil Spill Booms to be Recycled in Production of Chevy Volt
• Green Coalition Files Lawsuit Over U.S. Arctic Drilling Approval
• Interactive Resource Tracks Gulf Spill Response in Near Real-Time

Algae biofuels are receiving more and more attention in the media and from the Obama administration. Evidence of this can be seen through increasing number of algae related stories in the news as well as several recent actions by the administration, most important of which is the U.S. Department of Energy awarding millions of dollars in research grants for the study of algae .

Recent government grants like this in addition to many private organizations like Exxon investing hundreds of millions of dollars in the future of algae fuels have only added to the drive of many small companies looking to develop the best way to grow algae. Many of these organizations have decided on bioreactor growth systems and are looking at either using artificial or natural lighting to maximize the growth of algae.

However, one company is taking more of an “all of the above” approach in developing an algae growth system. BioMarine Fuels, a development-stage company focused on the production of algal biomass, is developing a system that will incorporate the best aspects of both artificial and natural light systems in addition to several other key features.

In an interview,  BioMarine’s CEO John Ericsson said that the “key to success is a combination of things” and not the strict focus on one method over another. He pointed out that if combined, each system can help overcome the flaws or shortcomings of the other.

For example, by using sunlight, you get a free, but limited source of energy. But when combined with low-cost artificial lighting, a more efficient 24-hour growing cycle for algae production can be achieved. This is what BioMarine is striving to accomplish with their “SolarMagnatron” photobioreactor design.

With a name like SolarMagnatron, many have probably already surmised that this photobioreactor uses something more than just light to grow the algae feedstock. In fact, their system uses electromagnetic field technology in addition to natural and artificial light to help stimulate algae growth.

This technology, according to Ericsson, irradiates the water to make the algae “healthier and divide faster.” According to the BioMarine Web site, “electromagnetic energy of a specific resonance has been demonstrated by leading scientists to accelerate algae reproduction (mitoses) by up to 300 percent.”

However, BioMarine’s photobioreactor model is just one part in an integrated algae growth system. Referred to as the Symbiotic Energy System (SES), this system will enable the SolarMagnatron to “neutralize fossil fueled smokestack pollution while capturing the waste CO2 and converting the discharged pollutant chemicals into algae nutrients and feedstock,” which can ultimately be converted into fuel, food, or essentially any oil based product.

Unlike some other growth systems, BioMarine’s does not rely on a specific source of water. In fact, they are currently using saltwater since there research center is located near the ocean. With freshwater use being one of the main criticisms of algae production, having a system that can use the essentially limitless supply of saltwater will make any arguments moot. However, the system can be adapted to use brackish or freshwater depending on what is accessible in the given area.

One other major feature of BioMarine’s system is the expected high yield of biomass per unit. Ericsson stated that just one SolarMagnatron unit could produce enough algal biomass to create roughly thirty-three gallons of fuel a day. A building the size of a standard Wal-Mart store (50,000 square feet) could house roughly 400 to 500 of these units. That means that a building that size could produce enough algal biomass to create about 16,000 gallons (380 barrels) of fuel per day.

Overall, BioMarine Fuels is still in the commercial prototype research & development phase but is quickly approaching the point where they can create a sustainable and energy efficient biomass production system. Recent partnerships, like the one formed with Fluid Imaging Technologies , will only help push the company closer to their goals. Right now, they are seeking investors familiar with the field so that they can begin implementing the next phase of their research and development plan.

The principal owners of the company have invested mostly their own funds to date and are soon  to reach several important milestones over the next couple of months such as filing their final patent application on several break through components comprising their  SolarMagnatron biomass production system.

With BioMarine Fuels’ system offering some unique benefits, they will most likely become a major player in the algae field when it is successfully commercialized. Until then, be sure to keep a look out for any future announcements from this unique company by visiting the BioMarine Fuels Web site.

Article by Jonathan Williams appearing courtesy Celsias.

photo: t2ll2t

Related posts:

• Algae Yield Increases With New Technology
• Biofuel Production from Algae Years from Commercialization
• Team Algae to the rescue
• Chilean Company Farming Algae for Future Production of Biofuels
• Betting on Algae and Big Oil?

Does that headline grab you? If not, these numbers should:

If that has not grabbed your attention yet, consider that in January of this year, Continental Airlines completed a test flight using a biofuel mixture, which included fuel derived from algae. The test flight yielded a 1.1 percent increase in fuel efficiency compared to a jet engine using traditional jet fuel.

That isn’t exactly a great leap forward, but achieving incremental increases in fuel efficiency coupled with the latest engine technology, as well as use of new materials in aircraft production, such as the Boeing 787, could signal a dynamic shift for the airline industry.Leaders of the G-20 agreed in Pittsburgh to commit to phase out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies in the medium-term. While no specifics were mentioned on how this policy will be implemented or how long “medium-term” actually means, this commitment signals a recognition by the G-20 that such subsidies inhibit the growth of clean tech industries.

In addition to the massive investment that Exxon and similarly situated companies have thrown into the algae arena and the policy shift by the G-20, there is growing desire by Congress to stimulate investment in algae.

Senate Bill 1250, currently in the Senate Finance Committee, proposes to add a tax credit for producers of algae-based biofuels. The language of the Algae-based Renewable Fuel Promotion Act of 2009 seeks to add algae-based biofuel as part of the cellulosic biofuel producer tax credit (Internal Revenue Code 40). Under this section, if the legislation were to pass, producers of algae-based biofuels would be entitled to a tax credit of $1.01 for each gallon of qualified algae-based biofuel production.

For purposes of the tax credit, “qualified algae-based biofuel production’ means any algae-based biofuel produced by the taxpayer which is sold to another person or used by the producer: (1) for use in the production of a qualified algae based biofuel mixture (in that other person’s trade or business); (2) for use by the buyer as a fuel in that person’s trade or business; or (3) who sells the algae based biofuel at retail.

The Senate bill also provides producers of algae-based biofuels with bonus depreciation for property which is used in the United State to produce algae-based biofuels.

It seems clear that without the massive capital investment of big oil companies, pilot projects and test facilities to determine whether algae-based biofuels can scaled up would be very difficult to construct. It may also take Big Oil’s lobbying efforts to obtain tax credits for the algae-based biofuel industry.

Moreover, the ultimate success of algae-based biofuels may largely depend on the vast distribution networks of big oil companies. In other words, algae and Big Oil are inextricably linked, for better or for worse.

[photo credit: Flickr]

Related posts:

• Is Algae Biofuel Ready to Take Off?
• Biofuels Takes Off on Commercial Flights
• Algae Biofuel Will Take Many Years To Become a Reality, Says New Report
• Algae Yield Increases With New Technology
• Algae Company Gets Key Distribution Deal

As a continuation of my post from Monday (What is CleanTech… and, is it really an “industry?”), my thesis continues to be it is not an industry, but CleanTech is indeed a “movement” or a shift in business thinking that will allow for some very new and creative businesses solutions to emerge.  Today I expand into the first of the three pillars (environment, energy, and international cooperation/legislation) that will increasingly bring all business sectors together and drive them to innovate and incorporate clean technologies… or, not at our species’ peril.

1. ENVIRONMENT
Not unlike bacteria, humans continue to produce (and reproduce) until they have reached an unsustainable peak. Evidence of this is the persistent need for expansion as was seen in the Roman Empire; or more starkly, the rapid decline of the Mayan culture.  While the recent financial turbulence may not have long-term effects on overall population growth, as we project our consumption rate of our available resources and crowd into the space we have left to grow into, it has become increasingly apparent that our environment is a very real constraint to continued unbridled growth.

In the past we have, slowly, identified alarming symptoms and traced them to their cause. Slower still, we have used legislation and economics to curb the unchecked exploitation of the environmental commons.  Yet, as some humans have attempted to slow deforestation and reduce the use of many carcinogens, noxious chemicals, ozone depleting gasses and more through controls, their efforts are often stymied by a global capitalist economic system allows for graft and lobbying efforts by those who profit (at least on the short term) from looser and less sustainable regulation.  Consequently, our environmental situation is becoming increasingly dire.

As the human race has moved into almost every cranny of the Earth, even those previously vacated because of environmental degradation, we have come to realize that it is not a very big place after all. Sustainable economic success is predicated by some level of environmental harmony lest we wipe ourselves or our customers out. We have become too adept at taming nature to suit our short term needs, and as the World’s population grows, we see that there is no where else to go.  Economically driven environmental disasters like Bhopal and the Exxon Valdez oil spill produced effects felt by fellow humans globally, in the past these have been the kickstart needed to curb environmental exploitation.

The success, if not comfort, of our species hinges on recognizing that there is an equilibrium and that we should not produce things that the earth cannot reabsorb in a balanced fashion.  The energy resources we have grown accustomed to using have shown themselves to be finite, especially when consumed in the quantities we are familiar with. Furthermore there is strong evidence to suggest that the earth will face repercussions from carbon and other effluents of fossil fuel – climate change is only one of them.  Similarly, myopic humans cannot consider ‘geologic time’ which means we cannot accurately estimate the long-term effects of nuclear radiation on our containment strategies.

Our environmental situation is such that processes that don’t operate in a sustainable cycle will need to be eliminated. Or we can wait for cataclysmic disasters. Or we need to have much smaller population then we will once again be able to trash a campsite and move on to the next one in the hopes that by the time the next human arrives nature will have repatriated our trash into organic matter and smoothed the ripple of our presence.

I wouldn’t worry too much about “mother earth” – she will continue to exist well beyond us, the question becomes can we keep it as a place that is inhabitable by humans.

More to come on Energy and International Legislation… in the meantime, don’t forget to vote for CleanTechies. As they say, vote early and vote often – you can do it once every 24 hours.

-Ian

Related posts:

• Vol. IV: Is CleanTech really an industry? (Today: A welcome to President Obama, International Collaboration & Legislation)
• Vol. III: Is CleanTech really an industry? (Today: Energy)
• Nothing New About the New Green Deal
• What is CleanTech… and, is it really an “industry”?
• Obama’s win: Bright future for CleanTech?