Every time there is a great idea concerning biofuels it eventually turns out to be less than advertised.\u00a0 I thought algae would be something that could pan out as a brilliant form of fuel for the future.\u00a0 It would be easy to grow and would not compete with food for land.\u00a0 At present, though, it creates more net CO2 than expected.\u00a0 The CO2 production would not be a one-off, it would be something that would be repeated as more fuel is made, over and over again.\u00a0\u00a0 Last week, the government doled out more than $80 million in stimulus money for biofuels research, much of which will be focused on algae research.\u00a0 From GreenInc. and e360: <\/p>\n
Chris Richards for The New York Times: The need to feed nutrients directly to the water could be a limiting factor in the utility of algae as a biofuel, a new study suggests. <\/p>\n
Growing algae for biofuels is an energy-intensive process that can generate more greenhouse gases than the process sequesters, according to a new study. Examining the life cycle of algal biofuels, researchers from the University of Virginia found that the process emits high levels of greenhouse gases because algal production requires using large amounts of fertilizer. Those fertilizers often come from petroleum-based sources, and fertilizers also emit nitrous oxide, a greenhouse gas, according to the study.<\/p>\n
The study, published in the journal Environmental Science and Technology, said that while biofuel production from crops such as corn, canola, and switchgrass can result in a net carbon dioxide uptake, that is not yet the case with algal biofuels.\u00a0 The paper said that one promising way to overcome the environmental impact of using fertilizers to grow algal biofuels is to produce them with effluent from sewage treatment plants. Proponents of algal biofuels also said it is too early to make firm conclusions about the environmental impact of the technology because it is still in its infancy.<\/p>\n
This is disappointing!\u00a0 The paper suggests that one way to reduce the environmental impact of algae is to draw city wastewater into algae plantations, as a source of nitrogen and phosphorus.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
This could reduce the amount of fertilizer required, said Dr. Jardine.<\/p>\n
Numerous companies, large and small, are investing resources in algae biofuel research, including Exxon Mobil, which last summer devoted $600 million to the endeavor.<\/p>\n
EXXON is also surprising us in other ways . . . . or not.\u00a0 Turns out Exxon backs a carbon tax.\u00a0 No kidding! \u00a0 They want themselves taxed for carbon!<\/p>\n
Oil giant comes in from the cold<\/p>\n
Exxon funded global warming denial for years. Yesterday, in an astonishing U-turn, it called for the imposition of green taxes.<\/p>\n
By Stephen Foley in New York<\/p>\n
The boss of ExxonMobil, the world’s largest oil company, has called for a carbon tax to tackle global warming, marking a volte-face by the firm once described by Greenpeace as Climate Criminal No 1. Assailed from all sides by scientists and a new cadre [...]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Every time there is a great idea concerning biofuels it eventually turns out to be less than advertised.\u00a0 I thought algae would be something that could pan out as a brilliant form of fuel for the future.\u00a0 It would be … Continue reading