Home › Forums › Computers, Games and Technology › Science question
This topic contains 15 replies, has 8 voices, and was last updated by 
sidecar 3 years, 7 months ago.
- AuthorPosts
Okay I need help with a question that I have been pondering lately. Is it possible to generate large amounts of electricity utilizing algae as a form of fuel? I’ve been concepts of utilizing algae in jet engines perhaps even driving vehicle engines but haven’t seen any known concepts involving electrical generation.
http://energy.gov/eere/bioenergy/algal-biofuels
http://allaboutalgae.com/history/There’s already a working prototype that the US Navy engineered. There’s a video demonstration of it somewhere on the interwebz.
OPEC destroyed most alt-biofuels by crushing oil prices. They wanted to kill innovation and fraking so they can reap rewards by jacking the price in a few years.
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, it is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning; it is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.
OPEC destroyed most alt-biofuels by crushing oil prices. They wanted to kill innovation and fraking so they can reap rewards by jacking the price in a few years.
It’s a proven 10-year cycle. Every 10 years OPEC refuses production limits to bankrupt the competition. After a year or so – prices go back up like clockwork. This time around it was difficult with all the frackers, but most of them are out of business by now. Expect $3+ gas in a month or two
proud carrier of the 'why?' chromosome
Okay I need help with a question that I have been pondering lately. Is it possible to generate large amounts of electricity utilizing algae as a form of fuel?
It’s possible. All sorts of hydrocarbon fuels can be made from algae feedstocks to drive an internal combustion engine bolted to a generator. The question is: is it more cost effective than solar?
And the answer is: probably not.
The very best solar panels are about 50% efficient, but most commercial units average around 20%. That may seem inefficient, but it’s still better than you’re going to get going the algae → hydrocarbon → internal combustion engine → generator → electricity route. I believe the best oil producing bacteria are only 7% efficient. Then your engine is at best around 30% efficient. If your generator is very good it will run around 80% efficient, for for the whole chain from sun to electricity you get 7% * 30% * 80% = 1.7%. And that’s assuming you get 100% conversion of oil to fuel. And you have to maintain your algae farm and your engine and your generator.
Suddenly the 20% efficiency rate of cheap solar panels doesn’t seem so bad.
Of course biofuels do have an advantage in being more easily stored and can deliver greater peak power, but is that worth the tremendous cost in overall efficiency?
All valid points, OPEC currently remains a massive threat in terms of controlling global oil production even technological innovation. Other posts cite overall lack of efficiency due to the series of complicated steps required in creating bio fuels combined with the monopoly of oil industries…
not to mention the huge failure of ethanol means that algal fuel will likely not succeed in becoming a future energy source.The more steps that are taken the greater the inefficiency. It’s just simple physics.
Fuel – jet engine – thrust = sort of efficient
Fuel – car engine – gearbox – running gear – rolling resistance = crap
So I agree with SideC that stuff like solar, wind and wave maybe contribute efficiency and could develop further.
The reality at the moment is oil/gas, hydro and nuclear.
The main blocking point is governments and black ops.
So I agree with SideC that stuff like solar, wind and wave maybe contribute efficiency and could develop further.
It’s not entirely a matter of straight efficiency. There are other factors to consider as well, like energy source, energy storage, and energy application.
If you have a lot of sunlight and need electricity, then solar panels are easiest and most efficient way to go. Using the indirect sun -> algae -> oil -> biofuel -> engine -> generator -> electricity path would work, but it would give you a lot less electricity per square meter of sunlight while having a lot more stuff to maintain. So it doesn’t make much sense if all you want is electricity to power some home lighting or whatever.
However what if have a lot of sunlight and want to be able to move a vehicle on demand? Well with solar panels you’d have sun -> solar panel -> electricity -> charge controller -> battery -> motor -> transmission -> wheels. Unlike just creating electricity, to use solar panels to power a car you’ve had to add a whole lot of steps in between the sun and the wheels, some of which are pretty heavy and inefficient themselves (or very very expensive). And it gets worse if your sunny season is different from your driving season. So for a transportation application the algae biofuel has some real advantages. Sure you don’t get as many joules per square meter of sunlight, but biofuels are easier and cheaper to store than electricity in batteries, especially over time. With algae biofuels you can create the fuel in the sunny summer months and use it in the rainy winter months. That’s a lot harder to do using batteries. It’s also easier to transport liquid biofuels than charged batteries, and it takes a lot less time to fill a liquid fuel tank than charge a battery.
There’s an even simpler version of this using wind power. Say you have a lot of wind, and want to move a ship. You could set up a wind turbine and use that to charge up a bunch of heavy batteries that you load onto the ship to power a motor turning a propeller.
Or you could just put a bunch of sails on the ship.Basically what I’m saying is there is no perfect energy solution. The best solution depends entirely on what you have and what you need to do with it.
HHO can be an option.
Not based on algae but still viable.I have tinkered with it for some years now.
Although production of gasses needs electricity, it can be done using solar power
which is a cost but only on start up. Additionally, as two gasses are produced, they can
be separated and only clean gas can be used while oxygen component released into atmosphere.Zero Tolerance
I know that they can grow the algae and use it as biomass to be burned as fuel, but they also have to feed it something, like sugar of some form.
If the US really cared about alt green energy then they would get rid of restrictions on importing sugar from South America. They have cheap sources of sugar like sugar cane and some trees and have been using it to make ethanol forever. Using corn may well require more energy to produce/harvest/process to ethanol than the energy you get from burning the ethanol. It is not efficient, and corn is hard on soil and fertilizer already.
As for OPEC, yes, they are dropping oil price by flooding market to shut down fracking and oil exploration in US. Between finding it, buying land, getting permission from EPA, and getting equipment in place it takes 5-10 years to really get a location going. OPEC can lower price of oil to make it unattractive to spend the extra money per barrel needed for fracking, which takes more investment. This kills fracking, then they jack up price of oil.
I think it is hilarious that dems do everything in their power to stop fracking, not to mention stop oil drilling on federal land or in gulf, and they say that upping domestic supply won’t lower oil price. Then when we even start getting fracking going, OPEC drops the price of oil by increasing supply just to prevent us from increasing domestic production.
All we have to do is threaten to unleash fracking and OPEC drops price by increasing supply…just to prevent us from producing more oil domestically. We don’t even have to produce the oil, just threaten to, and they drop the price by flooding the market. Whatever the socialist/communists dictator wannabes may say, you NEVER beat supply and demand.
Before you say NAWALT, condemn those women publicly; it's like a signal flare to the good men you can't find. But. first...stop being THAT girl.
HHO can be an option.
Not based on algae but still viable.I have tinkered with it for some years now.
Although production of gasses needs electricity, it can be done using solar power
which is a cost but only on start up. Additionally, as two gasses are produced, they can
be separated and only clean gas can be used while oxygen component released into atmosphere.Unless you have a really advanced electrolysis rig, you’ll only get about 50% efficiency splitting the water into H2 and O2. Then you have to compress the gases to get any sort of storage capacity, consuming more power and further reducing your efficiency. Hydrogen is also a bugger to keep stored. Burning the hydrogen in a conventional internal combustion engine adds further inefficiencies, so you’re much better off using fuels cells.
There’s a reason why industrial hydrogen production rips it out of fossil fuels using high temperature steam. They only use electrolysis when they need super pure hydrogen gas. Powers systems don’t really need super pure hydrogen so much as they need a lot of it.
Sidecar, I’m not claiming I have any expert knowledge about HHO, I’m just saying it may be an option
regardless of how efficient it is if there a little to no other options. But, here are some answers any
handyman can use and learn about HHO.Unless you have a really advanced electrolysis rig, you’ll only get about 50% efficiency splitting the water into H2 and O2.
True up to a point. Gas, H2 and o2 separator cell is extremely important to get clean gas if that is
what one wants. But the actual gas generators are even more important because there are so many types and
some are far more efficient at production of gas than others.
The basic one plate bubbler cell is the least productive, next best the multiplate generator and the best
of the lot a dry cell gas generator. In addition, which electrolyte to use. Safest is clean water but gas production is somewhat on a poorer side. So good options are salt or baking soda but more dangerous which
I will address in the next paragraph or two.Then you have to compress the gases to get any sort of storage capacity, consuming more power and further reducing your efficiency.
Two methods. First by using weather balloons which needs not compress the gas but lets gas expand in the balloon naturally. Second method, using a simple two or four stroke
hand cranked engines as compressors.Hydrogen is also a bugger to keep stored.
Any gasses are problematic to store especially if they have
a Houdini like habits of penetrating through metal. Something many people cant get their heads around.
Along with that hydrogen’s corrosivenes. This is where weather balloons are good or rubberizing internals
of a storage tank which can be done easily depending on the size of the tanks.There’s a reason why industrial hydrogen production rips it out of fossil fuels using high temperature steam. They only use electrolysis when they need super pure hydrogen gas. Powers systems don’t really need super pure hydrogen so much as they need a lot of it.
As much as that statement is true, it is also true that power industries in general did not want to
have an emerging Hydrogen industry to be developed and rival the status quo.
For example: in USA it is hard to find or buy HHO machines and generators, yet if you simply browse
China.com you will find numerous HHO technology products from simple one plate cells to industrial
purpose machines. So what is going on ? Why is our so called advanced western society not only lagging
behind but actively working against good and viable technologies ?Once again, many arguments can be made against HHO industry but lets not forget that in general it was never given a good chance to be developed so it stays in the background to be used on small scale or
by individual’s who know and see its benefits.Well after nattering on about HHO, what I would really love to see is some leaked information on the
bloom box. If it ever got out and a few smart fellows could simplify it, it would be
f~~~ing fantastic. I know that I would get my hands dirty and build one or a dozen myself.Zero Tolerance
It is a bit hard for me to believe, considering everywhere in US has plumbing and water and that even tap water can be electrolyzed at home, that gas stations can’t just offer cheap hydrogen fuel. You would just have to compress the hydrogen that is generated from hydrolysis of water.
However, there is plenty of funding going into research at universities to find catalysts that can lower the applied voltage needed to split water. So, the electricity cost must be too high for simple electrolysis to be worth it. In addition to molecular catalysts (mostly organometalics) there used to be some work with semiconductor nanoparticles because they can use light to split the water. This actually can be done with CdS nanoparticles cadmium sulfide, and you can see bubbles appearing in real time. Of course cadmium is toxic and slightly radioactive…but we had plenty of cadmium sources as precursors and didn’t use any extra precautions for it being radioactive. The production of hydrogen this way from water splitting is still pretty slow though compared to how much you would need. Maybe this is why they don’t simply use CdS nanoparticles and sunlight…or maybe they don’t really want cheap hydrogen fuel. I’m not totally sure.
Before you say NAWALT, condemn those women publicly; it's like a signal flare to the good men you can't find. But. first...stop being THAT girl.
But the actual gas generators are even more important because there are so many types and some are far more efficient at production of gas than others.
But you generally trade off efficiency for production volume. TANSTAAFL.
First by using weather balloons which needs not compress the gas but lets gas expand in the balloon naturally.
Which leak rather shockingly. And it takes energy to suck the hydrogen back down out of the balloons against its inherent buoyancy. Also do you really want to drive around towing a bunch of weather balloons? Imagine what will happen when you hit the first power line.
Why do so many alternative energy “solutions” end up being so rube goldbergish?
Second method, using a simple two or four stroke hand cranked engines as compressors.
So wait? You’re actually proposing using muscle energy to compress the hydrogen? First off, you won’t get much compression, and you have to compress the f~~~ out of hydrogen to get a useful volumetric energy density. We’re talking around 10,000 psi – good luck achieving that by hand. Secondly, you’re going to be burning even more energy in calories than you would in joules by simply running an internal combustion driven compressor.
As much as that statement is true, it is also true that power industries in general did not want to have an emerging Hydrogen industry to be developed and rival the status quo.
Who the hell has been telling you that? Energy companies have been on the forefront of developing hydrogen burners. Why? Because they know the majority of so-called “clean” hydrogen will come from high output steam cracking fossil hydrocarbons, not from inefficient, low output electrolysis. A hydrogen based energy market would increase the demand for and therefore profit from their fossil fuel products.
The bloom box
…is a fuel cell based electricity generator intended to run off household natural gas or propane. While it could run off hydrogen, the inefficiencies of producing, storing, and transporting hydrogen make it less than viable. The point of the bloom box is not to move to a hydrogen energy economy, but rather to switch from centralized generation of electricity from fossil fuel gases in large power plants to distributed generation, thereby trading off transmission line losses for, hopefully, lower pipeline losses.
But you generally trade off efficiency for production volume. TANSTAAFL.
I do not disagree with what you say, I’m saying it can still be productive where no other option is available.
Which leak rather shockingly. And it takes energy to suck the hydrogen back down out of the balloons against its inherent buoyancy.
Again, I made no claim its a foolproof system but it will get the job done for short term purpose.
Also do you really want to drive around towing a bunch of weather balloons? Imagine what will happen when you hit the first power line.
Have you not seen cars in Europe being driven with balloons strapped to their roofs full of natural gas
during ww2 ?So wait? You’re actually proposing using muscle energy to compress the hydrogen
It has been done before and I see no reason why it can not be done nowday’s.
First off, you won’t get much compression, and you have to compress the f~~~ out of hydrogen to get a useful volumetric energy density. We’re talking around 10,000 psi – good luck achieving that by hand.
I never said that the production and storage was for industrial purpose or standards as we know them.
Who the hell has been telling you that? Energy companies have been on the forefront of developing hydrogen burners.
Name or give me
threetwo examples of products that are currently in civil use?Why? Because they know the majority of so-called “clean” hydrogen will come from high output steam cracking fossil hydrocarbons, not from inefficient, low output electrolysis.
So you would prefer that you water and soil be poisoned by steam cracking ? Steam cracking that uses
poisonous and carcinogenic chemicals which leach into everything including people ?
*
*
*
Look, I think that we are talking about two different types of manufacture, storage and purpose of the same
energy source HHO.
I never said that the methods I wrote about were for wide or industrial purpose. I was very clear in my second post that it was for handymen and individuals who can do it on a small scale. People are doing it.
Also, I neglected to talk about HHO for vehicle use but that is another story.Zero Tolerance
I do not disagree with what you say, I’m saying it can still be productive where no other option is available.
You can also fend off starvation by eating your own leg when no other option is available. That doesn’t make it a good thing.
But other options are available.
Have you not seen cars in Europe being driven with balloons strapped to their roofs full of natural gas during ww2 ?
Natural gas is not hydrogen. It’s a completely different animal. Also most of those cars were burning wood gas or “town gas” which was produced by cooking coal or wood which have some messy byproducts.
And again, just because something can be done doesn’t make it a viable technology.
It has been done before and I see no reason why it can not be done nowday’s.
Just because it can be done and has been done doesn’t mean it’s a good idea. Do you have any idea of what it takes to compress hydrogen with its low molecular weight to 10000psi by hand (or by foot)? Even the best bicyclists, assuming you use a pedal driven compressor, can produce no more than 500 watts for about an hour in one day.
I never said that the production and storage was for industrial purpose or standards as we know them.
It’s a matter of practicality, not standards. Say you build a hydrogen powered motorcycle. To get any sort of range out of it at any sort of practical fuel tank size you need to compress the hydrogen to about 10000psi. You could use a pedal powered compressor to achieve that compression (eventually), but you’d get a lot farther per calorie if you simply pedaled a bicycle instead.
Name or give me three two examples of products that are currently in civil use?
Read this:
http://www.forbes.com/2008/06/19/natural-gas-hydrogen-biz-energy-cx_wp_0620natgas.html
So you would prefer that you water and soil be poisoned by steam cracking?
Preference has nothing to do with it. It’s all about viability.
Hydrogen as a fuel is only viable for very specific situations, such as rocketry etc. The plain fact is that by itself it is intrinsically too difficult and inefficient to produce, transport, or store to be a replacement for our current fossil fuels. If it ever does come into common use it will be through fuel cells, not mere burners, and the source of the hydrogen will still be fossil fuels, not electrolysis.
There are a few places where hydrogen does become viable on the consumer level, but not many. One place where hydrogen does make sense is as a energy dump in home wind power systems that are not grid intertied. When the wind is blowing once the batteries are all charged and the domestic hot water is all heated, you can use the remaining energy surplus you get while the wind is still blowing to generate hydrogen and stuff it into your cooking gas tanks. It’s not very efficient, but since you’d be throwing away those watts anyways you might as well put them somewhere that they can be retrieved.
But that’s a very specialized application with a very limited market.
- AuthorPosts
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
921526
921524
919244
916783
915526
915524
915354
915129
914037
909862
908811
908810
908500
908465
908464
908300
907963
907895
907477
902002
901301
901106
901105
901104
901024
901017
900393
900392
900391
900390
899038
898980
896844
896798
896797
895983
895850
895848
893740
893036
891671
891670
891336
891017
890865
889894
889741
889058
888157
887960
887768
886321
886306
885519
884948
883951
881340
881339
880491
878671
878351
877678
