SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Ichy Smith who wrote (197950)8/18/2006 3:53:56 PM
From: Hawkmoon  Respond to of 281500
 
There is a practical alternative, easy to build, easy to use and it is greenhouse gas neutral and easy to use.

The company is called Dynamotive.....


Interesting.. and the chart looks speculatively attractive, although in a bit of a retracement and consolidation on the monthly chart:

bigcharts.marketwatch.com

Not sure I'm keen on the name of the corporation though, since it really doesn't clearly explain to investors what the company actually does.

Furthermore, the actual BTU value of this bio-oil they produce is less than 50% of normal fuel oil, which means more of it will be required to provide the same amount of power. That might be an issue for wide-spread praticality.

There was another company that had a process for turning all organic waste products, including Turkey guts, into bio-oil. They found, however, that when they actually set up shop next to a Turkey processing plant on the promise of having access to huge quantities of cheap feed stock (that the processor normally had to pay to have disposed of) that they had to start paying for the feedstock and their profitability dropped off markedly (as I recall).

That's the problem of "waste to energy" technologies. Market forces will eventually have to be factored into the equation, or the companies really need to form strategic joint-ventures with the feedstock supplier so that both have a equal stake in the ventures profitability.

Furthermore, my thinking on Bio-diesel has undergone a major transition over the past year, and I'm really thinking it might prove to be the key to decreasing our energy dependency.

If it can be developed from genetically engineering algae to increase oil production to 50% of mass, this could prove to be a significant alternative that is also "CO2 neutral".

NREL's research focused on the development of algae farms in desert regions, using shallow saltwater pools for growing the algae. Using saltwater eliminates the need for desalination, but could lead to problems as far as salt build-up in bonds. Building the ponds in deserts also leads to problems of high evaporation rates. There are solutions to these problems, but for the purpose of this paper, we will focus instead on the potential such ponds can promise, ignoring for the moment the methods of addressing the solvable challenges remaining when the Aquatic Species Program at NREL ended.

NREL's research showed that one quad (7.5 billion gallons) of biodiesel could be produced from 200,000 hectares of desert land (200,000 hectares is equivalent to 780 square miles, roughly 500,000 acres), if the remaining challenges are solved (as they will be, with several research groups and companies working towards it, including ours at UNH). In the previous section, we found that 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. To put that in perspective, consider that the Sonora desert in the southwestern US comprises 120,000 square miles. Enough biodiesel to replace all petroleum transportation fuels could be grown in 15,000 square miles, or roughly 12.5 percent of the area of the Sonora desert (note for clarification - I am not advocating putting 15,000 square miles of algae ponds in the Sonora desert. This hypothetical example is used strictly for the purpose of showing the scale of land required). That 15,000 square miles works out to roughly 9.5 million acres - far less than the 450 million acres currently used for crop farming in the US, and the over 500 million acres used as grazing land for farm animals


unh.edu

A generally good article that merits a full reading, IMO.

I'll keep an eye on Dynamotive though.. thanks!! Always looking for speculative plays.

Hawk