Biofuel breakthrough: Quick cook method turns algae into oil

[ScienceRocks]

Biofuel breakthrough: Quick cook method turns algae into oil

Published on Oct 31, 2012 Contact Kate McAlpine, (734) 763-4386, kmca@umich.edu or Nicole Casal Moore, (734) 647-7087, ncmoore@umich.edu

ANN ARBOR—It looks like Mother Nature was wasting her time with a multimillion-year process to produce crude oil. Michigan Engineering researchers can "pressure-cook" algae for as little as a minute and transform an unprecedented 65 percent of the green slime into biocrude.

"We're trying to mimic the process in nature that forms crude oil with marine organisms," said Phil Savage, an Arthur F. Thurnau professor and a professor of chemical engineering at the University of Michigan.

The findings will be presented Nov. 1 at the 2012 American Institute of Chemical Engineers Annual Meeting in Pittsburgh.

Savage's ocean-going organism of choice is the green marine micro-alga of the genus Nannochloropsis.

To make their one-minute biocrude, Savage and Julia Faeth, a doctoral student in Savage's lab, filled a steel pipe connector with 1.5 milliliters of wet algae, capped it and plunged it into 1,100-degree Fahrenheit sand. The small volume ensured that the algae was heated through, but with only a minute to warm up, the algae's temperature should have just grazed the 550-degree mark before the team pulled the reactor back out.

Previously, Savage and his team heated the algae for times ranging from 10 to 90 minutes. They saw their best results, with about half of the algae converted to biocrude, after treating it for 10 to 40 minutes at 570 degrees.

University of Michigan News Service | Biofuel breakthrough: Quick cook method turns algae into oil

http://che.engin.umich.edu/people/savage.html WHITE!

 

[waltky]

$10M to research turnin' algae into fuel...

Energy Dept. Spending $10M to ‘Unlock’ Potential of Algae
January 17, 2013 - One year after President Obama was mocked for including algae in his "all-of-the-above" energy strategy, his Energy Department is pressing ahead with efforts to turn algae into fuel.

On Thursday, the department announced "up to $10 million to help unlock the potential of biofuels made from algae." The money will go to research projects aimed at making algae cultivation systems more productive (getting more of it per acre); and developing energy-efficient and low-cost algae harvesting and processing technologies. The Energy Department hopes the new technologies will speed commercialization of domestically-produced, cost-competitive biofuels from algae. Researchers from industry, academia, and national laboratories are encouraged to apply for the federal funding.

In a Feb. 23, 2012 speech at the University of Miami in Florida, President Obama vowed that "With or without this Congress, I will continue to do whatever I can to develop every source of American energy so our future isn’t controlled by events on the other side of the world." He mentioned natural gas development -- and algae: "We’re making new investments in the development of gasoline and diesel and jet fuel that’s actually made from a plant-like substance -- algae. You’ve got a bunch of algae out here, right? (Laughter.) If we can figure out how to make energy out of that, we’ll be doing all right. "

Obama's comment drew snorts from conservatives. "This is the kind of stuff that's Cloud Cuckoo Land," said Newt Gingrich. Rush Limbaugh joked that Obama needed to hire a “pond-scum czar” to oversee his algae-into-energy vision.

And Charles Krauthammer wondered, "Why are we drilling for oil?" when algae is so plentiful: "I think he's on to something here that is truly revolutionary," Krauthammer joked. "Why would you build a pipeline, the Keystone pipeline with real oil from Canada to put in real refineries and put in real existing cars when you can do algae? I think he is on to something. And I think this shows the vision, the hope and change he promised in 2008."

Energy Dept. Spending $10M to ?Unlock? Potential of Algae | CNS News

 

[whitehall]

Do we actually fund this junk science with taxpayer dollars?

 

[Mr. H.]

I like the slow-cook method of hydrocarbons. More BTU for the buck.

 

[ROLAND]

What about the neccissary oxygen production derived from plant life LETS find a biological renewable recource that doesnt require pillaging our natural recources

 

[Mr. H.]

Natural resources are for pillaging, ya twit.

 

[Underhill]

Do we actually fund this junk science with taxpayer dollars?

How the hell is that junk science?

 

[Mr. H.]

Do we actually fund this junk science with taxpayer dollars?

How the hell is that junk science?

In its purest form, the "science" may not be junk.

But when the science chases the numbers then yes there is room for pause.

Hydrocarbons ARE biofuels. And they have no equal.

 

[Underhill]

Do we actually fund this junk science with taxpayer dollars?

How the hell is that junk science?

In its purest form, the "science" may not be junk.

But when the science chases the numbers then yes there is room for pause.

Hydrocarbons ARE biofuels. And they have no equal.

I still don't see your point. This is valuable research.

And yes hydrocarbons are biofuel. In the same way that flying from earth to the next nearest universe could be an interesting trip.

 

[Mr. H.]

Now that I've sobered up, I don't quite understand my post either.

 

[whitehall]

The fossil fuel we are burning took a billion years to create. You can't make fuel out of a pond plant and expect it to cost less than $100,000 per gal by the time the federal government finishes fooling with it.

 

[Underhill]

The fossil fuel we are burning took a billion years to create. You can't make fuel out of a pond plant and expect it to cost less than $100,000 per gal by the time the federal government finishes fooling with it.

So Applied Resource Associates and Chevron (among others) are now a branch of the US government?

This is already being done. These guys are researching potentially cheaper ways of producing the stuff. A good idea if ever there was one. But research takes cash.

 

[Old Rocks]

The fossil fuel we are burning took a billion years to create. You can't make fuel out of a pond plant and expect it to cost less than $100,000 per gal by the time the federal government finishes fooling with it.

So Applied Resource Associates and Chevron (among others) are now a branch of the US government?

This is already being done. These guys are researching potentially cheaper ways of producing the stuff. A good idea if ever there was one. But research takes cash.

****** posts more nonsense cold sober than Mr. H does dead drunk.

 

[Mr. H.]

Hey! I resemble that remark.

 

[whitehall]

The fossil fuel we are burning took a billion years to create. You can't make fuel out of a pond plant and expect it to cost less than $100,000 per gal by the time the federal government finishes fooling with it.

So Applied Resource Associates and Chevron (among others) are now a branch of the US government?

This is already being done. These guys are researching potentially cheaper ways of producing the stuff. A good idea if ever there was one. But research takes cash.

If they are funded by the government you can bet your ass(ets) that they will be a branch of the government as long as the funding lasts and maybe longer.

 

[Underhill]

The fossil fuel we are burning took a billion years to create. You can't make fuel out of a pond plant and expect it to cost less than $100,000 per gal by the time the federal government finishes fooling with it.

So Applied Resource Associates and Chevron (among others) are now a branch of the US government?

This is already being done. These guys are researching potentially cheaper ways of producing the stuff. A good idea if ever there was one. But research takes cash.

If they are funded by the government you can bet your ass(ets) that they will be a branch of the government as long as the funding lasts and maybe longer.

Except they aren't. They are private companies already producing fuel by this method.