Agreed. The location is no accident.Tom Ligon wrote:Joule Biotechnologies Inc
10101 Route 2243, Leander, TX 78641 United States
Try Mapquest, and switch to the satellite view. I'm seeing a wastewater treatment plant, which would be my choice for feedstock.
So Dies Peak Oil
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
Some waste treatment plants are designed to generate methane, which is then burned to produce some of the energy required to run the plant. In this case, the CO2 from burning the methane would be a convenient source for the bacteria. Much cleaner source than a coal fired plant. Not sure whether the volume would be sufficient.
Since burning the methane results in CO2 and H2O, couldn't you just condense the exhaust to get both the water and the CO2 that you need?
Since burning the methane results in CO2 and H2O, couldn't you just condense the exhaust to get both the water and the CO2 that you need?
One of the main methods of sewage treatment is to aerate the waste, and then aerate it some more.
Many processes start out with anaerobic digestion, which typically produces methane. Septic tanks work this way, as do cattle operations that use the methane to run generators. But after any anaerobic operation there is still a large load of material in the water that produces biological oxygen demand (BOD, i.e. oxygen consumption by living organisms) and chemical oxygen demand (oxygen consumption by dead stuff). Either one is burned up by aerating the sewage and letting it stand. The carbon pretty much winds up as CO2. So yes, you could make methane and burn it, but there's more CO2 available than that by a long shot.
The plant I saw in the satellite photo has old-fashioned circular ponds with a pair of arms. These spray sewage into the pond, aerating it. Some older plants spray the sewage onto a pile of large rocks, which become coated with a heavy layer of green slime. This is the old "trickle-bed" sewage treatment method. Algae is nothing new in this business.
Many processes start out with anaerobic digestion, which typically produces methane. Septic tanks work this way, as do cattle operations that use the methane to run generators. But after any anaerobic operation there is still a large load of material in the water that produces biological oxygen demand (BOD, i.e. oxygen consumption by living organisms) and chemical oxygen demand (oxygen consumption by dead stuff). Either one is burned up by aerating the sewage and letting it stand. The carbon pretty much winds up as CO2. So yes, you could make methane and burn it, but there's more CO2 available than that by a long shot.
The plant I saw in the satellite photo has old-fashioned circular ponds with a pair of arms. These spray sewage into the pond, aerating it. Some older plants spray the sewage onto a pile of large rocks, which become coated with a heavy layer of green slime. This is the old "trickle-bed" sewage treatment method. Algae is nothing new in this business.
Actually, it produces a lot of nitrogen too, you know, the 70ish percent of the air used to burn the CH4.crj11 wrote: Since burning the methane results in CO2 and H2O, couldn't you just condense the exhaust to get both the water and the CO2 that you need?
None-the-less, they could just pass the waste gasses thru the bioreactor and do quite well.
By-the-by, the "digestor gas" is not just CH4 but is about half CO2 as well so there is a bit more than otherwise suggested.
Maybe some day I'll find the notes I made back in the 1970's in which I looked at an algae-based system. It was based on several things:
1. There was a proposal on the table to fuel combustion powerplants with wood. The idea was to surround the plant with something like 60,000 acres of woodlands and grow the fuel. With more experience we now know that the land productivity would likely fall over several generations of trees.
2. Algae blooms due to sewage runoff were a problem, and we were working on upgraded sewage treatment.
3. We were starting to become concerned about CO2 emissions, oil prices were thru the roof and our dependence on foriegn oil laid us open to fuel embargos, etc. Coal ... between strip mining and coal miner stikes, there was little love for it.
I had a peculiar fascination with sewage treatment since I was a teen. My mind is funny that way, but between being environmentally conscious, interesed in all science, and liking to design systems, I had been known to grab a book and study the subject. So naturally I figured this was an interesting challenge.
Back then what we now call cyanobacteria were called blue-green algae. We knew they were unique but we lumped them with other algae, which are higher plants. For my purposes, either would do. I came up with a scheme for covered ponds of generic fast-growing algae (which should produce biomass faster than trees do), with the idea that a nearly continuous process could be rigged. Feed the thing partially treated sewage and use it as a "polishing" process to reduce nitrogen levels in the effluent. Feed it CO2 from a powerplant. As the algae mature, run them out on chain mail conveyors and sun dry them. Then forget any fancy fuel conversion, just burn the stuff in the power plant.
Attempting to extract hydrocarbons may be viable, but burning the entire product should yield more energy in every case, and with less processing cost.
1. There was a proposal on the table to fuel combustion powerplants with wood. The idea was to surround the plant with something like 60,000 acres of woodlands and grow the fuel. With more experience we now know that the land productivity would likely fall over several generations of trees.
2. Algae blooms due to sewage runoff were a problem, and we were working on upgraded sewage treatment.
3. We were starting to become concerned about CO2 emissions, oil prices were thru the roof and our dependence on foriegn oil laid us open to fuel embargos, etc. Coal ... between strip mining and coal miner stikes, there was little love for it.
I had a peculiar fascination with sewage treatment since I was a teen. My mind is funny that way, but between being environmentally conscious, interesed in all science, and liking to design systems, I had been known to grab a book and study the subject. So naturally I figured this was an interesting challenge.
Back then what we now call cyanobacteria were called blue-green algae. We knew they were unique but we lumped them with other algae, which are higher plants. For my purposes, either would do. I came up with a scheme for covered ponds of generic fast-growing algae (which should produce biomass faster than trees do), with the idea that a nearly continuous process could be rigged. Feed the thing partially treated sewage and use it as a "polishing" process to reduce nitrogen levels in the effluent. Feed it CO2 from a powerplant. As the algae mature, run them out on chain mail conveyors and sun dry them. Then forget any fancy fuel conversion, just burn the stuff in the power plant.
Attempting to extract hydrocarbons may be viable, but burning the entire product should yield more energy in every case, and with less processing cost.
It looks like simple math. How many carbon atoms are in a chain of hydro carbons? The carbon atoms taken from co2 are then placed in this chain. The results will be that the output will always be less than the input and this would create an energy market for co2. It would no longer be economical to throw the co2 away.
Vaguely.WillKell wrote:Does anybody remember the "anything into oil" story that came out years ago in Discover mag?
The magic number there was $80 a barrel because of the feed stock price? "turkey ofal"
This method will put a value on disgarded co2, this will cause the magic $30 figure to go up!
I remeber the "anything into oil" being a variant of thermal de-polymerization. Thermal de-polymerization is a good technology, but not energy generation. Its too expensive. However, it is a wonderful technology for recycling plastics, which needs to be done anyways.
The problem (currently) with plastics recycling:
http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/201 ... ealth.html
http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/201 ... ealth.html
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
I believe this has been mentioned in other threads. They built a plant next to a large Turkey processing plant. All of the organic waste and parts not used for anything else was fed into their machine. Apparently it worked pretty well in producing a useful oil. But, the price of crude oil did not remain above their break-even price of ~$80/ barrel. Also, they had a sole source of feedstock, and the plant was in the center of Carthage, Mo. and apparently the smell was horrendous. Apparently the process worked as predicted, but because of the iffy profit margin, and the odoriferous complaints, they gave up. I believe the process worked with wet materials. It did not have to be dried first and this was supposed to reduce cost and broaden the possible feedstock (any organic crud).WillKell wrote:Does anybody remember the "anything into oil" story that came out years ago in Discover mag?
The magic number there was $80 a barrel because of the feed stock price? "turkey ofal"
This method will put a value on disgarded co2, this will cause the magic $30 figure to go up!
Dan Tibbets
To error is human... and I'm very human.
Re: Sunshine States...
China wont be able to use this to be a domestic producer, not unless these bacteria can live in salt water. China is already in a water starved situation, with industry fighting with agriculture over limited water supply.Nik wrote:Well, that's the end of UK as an oil producer when the Continental Shelf wells run out...
Looking on the bright side, Australia may find itself a major petrochemical exporter to eg Japan, given that it is politically stable and can probably feed the bugs with CO2 captured from its coal-burning power stations...
FWIW, arid parts of eg China may soon be pressed into service...
And, yes, lots of US states may soon be rubbing hands in glee...
Piped CO2 beside piped oil, anyone ??
Turkey offal, CO2 capture, etc will wither on the vine of bad ideas once the govt. subsidies dry up.
Shale gas has reserves beyond wildest expectations and is flowing already. Gas to gasoline technology is matured already in NZ and South Africa for over 20 years, and ready to come on stream as soon the plants get built.
Turkey offal won't compete with shale gas, nothing will.
Shale gas has reserves beyond wildest expectations and is flowing already. Gas to gasoline technology is matured already in NZ and South Africa for over 20 years, and ready to come on stream as soon the plants get built.
Turkey offal won't compete with shale gas, nothing will.
The beauty of this scheme is you can use algae that live in salt water, or use wastewater.
The oceans are teeming with algae, so there are plenty of species to start from. Whatever genemod strategy they are using, splicing a gene into an existing organism probably will work in either salt or fresh. The main hazard is if the organism gets out into the ocean it has everywhere to go, instead of being confined to one watercourse. That can probably be offset by creating an organism that is only really productive at elevated temperature (which will almost certainly be the case in the solar tubes they prefer for the collection system).
With wastewater you do have to watch the heavy metal content. So the Chinese will have to watch lead and cadmium waste dumping. Hopefully that won't result in them putting even more of those into kids' toys.
Generally speaking, you probably don't want to have to pipe CO2 very far. It would make more sense to grow the algae close to the source. If you have waste heat available, utilizing that to process the algae is probably an economic benefit as well.
The oceans are teeming with algae, so there are plenty of species to start from. Whatever genemod strategy they are using, splicing a gene into an existing organism probably will work in either salt or fresh. The main hazard is if the organism gets out into the ocean it has everywhere to go, instead of being confined to one watercourse. That can probably be offset by creating an organism that is only really productive at elevated temperature (which will almost certainly be the case in the solar tubes they prefer for the collection system).
With wastewater you do have to watch the heavy metal content. So the Chinese will have to watch lead and cadmium waste dumping. Hopefully that won't result in them putting even more of those into kids' toys.
Generally speaking, you probably don't want to have to pipe CO2 very far. It would make more sense to grow the algae close to the source. If you have waste heat available, utilizing that to process the algae is probably an economic benefit as well.