Exploring Microalgae as Solutions to Global Fuel Issues

[dlgoff]

It looks like Obama finally read my letter.


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/02/23/147_obama_if_we_could_make_energy_out_of_algae_well_be_alright.html

I thought of you Ivan when I heard

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. ...

Maybe you should write him and ask for a grant.

 

[mattlomb]

Has research gone into coupling algae growth and fuel production with today's biggest human emitters of carbon dioxide - i.e. power stations? It seems to me that this could simultaneously solve three problems - the problem of what to do with the carbon dioxide emitted from these power centers, the problem of where to get free carbon for algae growth, and the problem of transporting the fuel required to generate electricity.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

Interesting analysis of biofuels in general by Dr Tom Murphy, essentially whilst they're good they don't get round the problem of needing vast amounts of space
http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/2011/11/the-biofuel-grind/

Personally I'm more interested in the idea of artificial photosynthesis. If we could cut out the middle man and just make solar panels capable of taking in water and CO2 and secreting Oil and O2 and do it cheaply and efficiently our problems will be greatly mitigated.

 

[mheslep]

Has research gone into coupling algae growth and fuel production with today's biggest human emitters of carbon dioxide - i.e. power stations? It seems to me that this could simultaneously solve three problems - the problem of what to do with the carbon dioxide emitted from these power centers, the problem of where to get free carbon for algae growth, and the problem of transporting the fuel required to generate electricity.

A browse through some of the single cell biofuel companies (algae, bacteria) will turn up references to where they claim to have agreement with some large CO2 emitter such as a large power plant to supply the required carbon. It seems though that the more direct solution would be to eventually use biofuels in a (tighter) closed loop: grow them from the power plant carbon and then burn as fuel in the power plant; the power plant electricity is then used instead to run the (future electrified) transportation system instead of biofuels.

 

[OmCheeto]

Has research gone into coupling algae growth and fuel production with today's biggest human emitters of carbon dioxide - i.e. power stations? It seems to me that this could simultaneously solve three problems - the problem of what to do with the carbon dioxide emitted from these power centers, the problem of where to get free carbon for algae growth, and the problem of transporting the fuel required to generate electricity.

I saw a video once of researchers at MIT doing this. As I recall, the heat loving algae progeny survived their cold blooded brethren, and did quite well.

It gave me hope.

But then, I'm that way.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Interesting analysis of biofuels in general by Dr Tom Murphy, essentially whilst they're good they don't get round the problem of needing vast amounts of space
http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/2011/11/the-biofuel-grind/

Personally I'm more interested in the idea of artificial photosynthesis. If we could cut out the middle man and just make solar panels capable of taking in water and CO2 and secreting Oil and O2 and do it cheaply and efficiently our problems will be greatly mitigated.

I didn't read the link entirely yet bt I saw that he goes right to corn-ethanol. That is a horrible example that is well known to be a loser. The increased yield per acre-year is one of the biggest advantages algae [and perhaps bacteria] has over other biofuel technologies.

As for the closed-loop power-plant concept mentioned above, note that in a closed loop, not only the water, but also the nutrients could in principle be preserved. Nitrogen fertilizer alone is a significant cost for an algae farm. So it seems to me that a closed loop power scheme may be the first viable option [economically] for a practical algae farm.

The entire farm would be, in effect, a biological solar cell farm.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

I didn't read the link entirely yet bt I saw that he goes right to corn-ethanol. That is a horrible example that is well known to be a loser. The increased yield per acre-year is one of the biggest advantages algae [and perhaps bacteria] has over other biofuel technologies.

It starts with that but then goes onto algae which he does admit is better but has it's own problems.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

It starts with that but then goes onto algae which he does admit is better but has it's own problems.

He seems to be too reliant on the notion of genetic engineering for solving the problems. Then he dismisses GE as a deal breaker without considering that other options exist.

The numbers for algae are certainly more favorable than for traditional (proven) biofuel sources. But keep in mind that we don’t see a clear path yet to squeeze useful juice from algae at appropriate scales/efficiencies. Much of the talk is around genetic engineering to make the algae excrete something useful in quantity. I need not repeat my case for non-complacency regarding this prospect. Also, anyone who has failed at aquarium maintenance (everyone who has tried?) knows how pernicious algae can be at clogging the plumbing and sticking to tube walls, etc. So they should also be working on genetically engineered teflon-coated algae. By that time I’ll also be able to enjoy that three-headed goat!

I can tell you first hand that he's right to express these concerns. But these are not insurmountable problems that can only be solved with genetic engineering. Note also that algae is already grown commercially, so some of these problems have already been managed for decades.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

ievolve brought to my attention this recent breakthrough in processing algae, announced today. Thanks ievolve!

The Michigan team’s findings will be presented today, Nov. 1 at the 2012 American Institute of Chemical Engineers Annual Meeting in Pittsburgh.

http://newenergyandfuel.com/http:/n.../11/01/breakthrough-algae-to-oil-in-a-minute/

I also spotted this encouraging interview from last April
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzWvl9WDBnw

He mentions that NASA is playing with growing algae in big bladders in the ocean, which was suggested and discussed earlier in this thread. Based on my experience, temperature stability is a huge advantage in partially submerged bladders, nevermind the endless supply of water.

When asked, if he had all the money he needed, how long would it take to start producing 100,000 barrels of fuel [oil] from algae a day, the answer he gave was - one year.

 

[mheslep]

...
When asked, if he had all the money he needed, how long would it take to start producing 100,000 barrels of fuel [oil] from algae a day, the answer he gave was - one year.

Given your background knowledge, and that they currently have zero production capability, what credence do you give such a claim?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Given your background knowledge, and that they currently have zero production capability, what credence do you give such a claim?

I don't know the inside story with Origin oil but it has always been a matter of the cost at the pump. And I believe that is just a problem of throwing enough money at this to work through the mechanics of it. So given a Manhattan Project... sounds pretty optimistic but they clearly know more than I do about this. By March of 2008 I was arguing that given a Manhattan project, we could do this in five years.

What did he say the price was for pure algae oil, I think $5.25? At that price they are almost competitive at the pump now.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

When he mentioned that NASA's approach looks very promising, that suggested to me that they recognize the cost and other practical problems with land-based systems.

It will be intersting to see how NASA plans to manage heavy seas and storms. The only solution that made sense to me was to have a simple ballast system that allows you to submerge the containers to a safe depth until conditions are calm again.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

One last thought. It seems to make sense that retired oil platforms could be used as the hub of the farm. I did a quick google and found this. I got a number of other types of hits including converting retired platforms into luxury resorts.

The nonprofit Hubbs-SeaWorld Research Institute wants to use Venoco Inc.'s decommissioned Grace platform, in waters about 10 miles west of Ventura, to build an experimental operation that could produce up to 300 tons of fish annually.

http://articles.latimes.com/2004/feb/13/local/me-vnfishfarm13

 

[dlgoff]

I don't know the inside story with Origin oil but it has always been a matter of the cost at the pump.

Gasoline is one thing but could existing "home oil heating" users benefit? Wouldn't that cost be competitive?

BTW Have you considered getting back into this somehow; invest, develop, etc?

Regards

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Gasoline is one thing but could existing "home oil heating" users benefit? Wouldn't that cost be competitive?

BTW Have you considered getting back into this somehow; invest, develop, etc?

Regards

Anything that can burn diesel should work. I know some specialized systems can but I don't know about typical oil burners. Like diesel, biodiesel and algae oils require high compression or very high temperatures to burn.

As for me, I have all of my eggs in other baskets now.

 

[dlgoff]

Anything that can burn diesel should work. I know some specialized systems can but I don't know about typical oil burners. Like diesel, biodiesel and algae oils require high compression or very high temperatures to burn.

Thanks for the info Ivan. I'm not a user of "home heating oil", unless propane is considered to be, so I'll have to do some checking on how the burners deliver the fuel. Probably similar to how these work.

http://r1.coleman.com/ProductImages/Regular/425f499g_500.jpg

 

[Andre]

Whilst I can imagine future reasons to follow this path like aviation fuel, I'm wondering if things like if getting enough CO2 to the algeae photo assimilation process has been thought of.

 

[mheslep]

Whilst I can imagine future reasons to follow this path like aviation fuel, I'm wondering if things like if getting enough CO2 to the algeae photo assimilation process has been thought of.

Yes. Some of the photosynthetic plays have deals with local power plants and have built their demo operations immediately adjacent one, with the limitation that they become dependent on such sources. Then there are the bio fuel approaches fed by carbohydrates, i.e. they get their carbon direct from feedstock, and that approach thus becomes dependent on the transportation of biomass. Also note the concentration of CO2 in water, where the microorganism are grown, is several multiples of that which is present in the atmosphere.

 

[Andre]

Also note the concentration of CO2 in water, where the microorganism are grown, is several multiples of that which is present in the atmosphere.

Sure, but consider some algae growing device in the ocean. I see 28 ppm carbon for seawater, so that would be 28 gram per cubic meter, but when you have converted that to algeae, it's essentially done. So if you want more yield, you'd need to provide carbon in some form.

Edit: Obviously more CO2 will enter from the atmosphere. But the total per year seems in the order of magnitude of 100 PgC (10¹⁷ gram) per year, the ocean area is about 361,132,000 km2 so the average flux would seem to be in the order of magnitude of 280 gram carbon per square meter per year. That seems a lot.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Sure, but consider some algae growing device in the ocean. I see 28 ppm carbon for seawater, so that would be 28 gram per cubic meter, but when you have converted that to algeae, it's essentially done. So if you want more yield, you'd need to provide carbon in some form.

Edit: Obviously more CO2 will enter from the atmosphere. But the total per year seems in the order of magnitude of 100 PgC (10¹⁷ gram) per year, the ocean area is about 361,132,000 km2 so the average flux would seem to be in the order of magnitude of 280 gram carbon per square meter per year. That seems a lot.

I'm not sure what you're getting at here. Are you taking the amount of CO2 that enters the water naturally? As was discussed beginning at about post 340, CO2 is provided through forced aeration. Growth rates are too slow otherwise. And the aeration is ideally CO2 enriched. If we assume a nominal value of 60% processing efficiency for a farm, then we would expect 40% of all carbon could be returned to the system through the exhaust gases from combustion for power generation. So any farm could have it's own CO2-enriched supply of air.

 

[mheslep]

Sure, but consider some algae growing device in the ocean. I see 28 ppm carbon for seawater, so that would be 28 gram per cubic meter, but when you have converted that to algeae, it's essentially done. So if you want more yield, you'd need to provide carbon in some form.

...

See further down in your reference. The percent CO2 of dissolved gasses in seawater is 15%, versus 0.04% in the atmosphere.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Two things that caught my attention were the optical density of their algae solution, and something he said. In my testing, the algae was taken to about a 1% solution by weight. And it was like thick pea soup. He mentioned a 0.1% solution, which surprised me. But their algae solution looks more like tea than pea soup so they do seem to be operating with a comparitively dilute solution, and I'm wondering why. Running a thinner solution would likely reduce clogging issues and such, and perhaps their process of coaxing the algae out of solution requires a lower density of algae than traditional techniques.

 

[OmCheeto]

I just heard about these yesterday.

I think I'll make 5 dozen.

http://c276521.r21.cf1.rackcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/calleja_co2_lamp-e1334185077368.jpg
Algae Lamp​

How to Grow Bioluminescent Algae at Home

Green Light! Algae-Powered Lamp Needs TLC to Provide Light

Ha Ha!

Sometimes the world mimics PF:

This Micro-Algae Lamp Absorbs 150-200 Times More CO2 than a Tree! (Video)

French biochemist and Shamengo pioneer Pierre Calleja has invented this impressive streetlight that is powered by algae which absorbs CO2 from the air. We have featured algae-powered lamps before but this one takes out 1 ton (!) of CO2 per year. This is as much CO2 as as a tree absorbs on average during its entire life.

And then the comments start:

Oh no, where will one ton of CO2 fit in that tiny lamp!? What happens when it's full!? Seriously people? Google photosynthesis, then comment. The CO2 isn't "captured". It can't get "full". It uses the CO2, breaks it down to feed itself, and releases O2, just like every other plant. (headbang)

+115 more comments...

I love Science.

 

[Astronuc]

Sara Volz, who investigated increasing the oil content of algae to create an economically viable source of biofuel, received the top award of $100,000 at the Intel Science Talent Search 2013, a program of Society for Science & the Public.

http://newsroom.intel.com/community/intel_newsroom/blog/2013/03/12/teenage-girl-explores-algae-powered-biofuel-wins-intel-science-talent-search/

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/this-co...zing-breakthrough-her-home-lab-165831291.html

 

[OmCheeto]

http://newsroom.intel.com/community/intel_newsroom/blog/2013/03/12/teenage-girl-explores-algae-powered-biofuel-wins-intel-science-talent-search/

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/this-co...zing-breakthrough-her-home-lab-165831291.html

That is awesome!

I really like the fact that her lab is under her bed.

This young lady is the embodiment of science.

Someone go find her and sign her up for PF! I'll pay for her lifetime membership! :!)

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Based on a preliminary look, I am quickly becoming a fan of Origin Oil.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXsaj6OTzZM#!

 

[jlefevre76]

So, I've heard there are some challenges with algae biofuels. How serious are they as far as getting in the way of harvesting?

Challenges:
1. Algae are very sensitive to environmental conditions such as temperature, salinity, pH, etc. A slight change in one of them can kill it (depending on the species). The more resilient species that grow anywhere are not necessarily the ones that yield high lipid counts.
2. Diseases such as fungi and other aquatic microbes can ravage and perhaps even erradicate algae populations, especially if the algae is GMO and the genetic changes made to it have a drawback as far as natural defenses go.
3. Once the algae has been successfully grown in the desired quantity, there is still a harvesting step and an oil/lipid separation step. This can require a fair amount of energy for the process.
4. CO2 supply required, which can also require a fair amount of input energy to the process (pumps, etc). Algae is sometimes also circulated via pump, which requires energy.

So, all of these affect the EROI of algae biofuels and its viability as a future energy source. Will these obstacles be overcome anytime soon? (I think it would be awesome if they can.)

Also, is it possible to harvest existing algae directly from the ocean, and then process them? Wouldn't that save a fair amount of time and resources?

 

[OmCheeto]

So, I've heard there are some challenges with algae biofuels. How serious are they as far as getting in the way of harvesting?

Challenges:
1. Algae are very sensitive to environmental conditions such as temperature, salinity, pH, etc. A slight change in one of them can kill it (depending on the species). The more resilient species that grow anywhere are not necessarily the ones that yield high lipid counts.

Do you have a source for this? It is my recollection that an experiment done a few years ago indicated that the rapid reproductive rate of algae yielded an evolution of the source strain to a species that was quite happy with their ultimate environment.

2. Diseases such as fungi and other aquatic microbes can ravage and perhaps even erradicate algae populations, especially if the algae is GMO and the genetic changes made to it have a drawback as far as natural defenses go.
3. Once the algae has been successfully grown in the desired quantity, there is still a harvesting step and an oil/lipid separation step. This can require a fair amount of energy for the process.

This is true of everything. As long as the net algae energy/$ output is greater than the net human energy/$ input, then the system will be profitable.

4. CO2 supply required, which can also require a fair amount of input energy to the process (pumps, etc). Algae is sometimes also circulated via pump, which requires energy.

That is a problem. One of my PF friends is working on that problem. (The crazy one...)

So, all of these affect the EROI of algae biofuels and its viability as a future energy source. Will these obstacles be overcome anytime soon? (I think it would be awesome if they can.)

It would require someone with math skills greater than mine, but my guess is; Yes.

Also, is it possible to harvest existing algae directly from the ocean, and then process them? Wouldn't that save a fair amount of time and resources?

I posted something to that effect a few years ago.

The local river runs green with algae in summer.

As I recall, the ROI was not worth it.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

So, I've heard there are some challenges with algae biofuels. How serious are they as far as getting in the way of harvesting?

Challenges:
1. Algae are very sensitive to environmental conditions such as temperature, salinity, pH, etc. A slight change in one of them can kill it (depending on the species). The more resilient species that grow anywhere are not necessarily the ones that yield high lipid counts.

Yes, this is why I have previously argued that closed systems are the only practical way to do this. To my knowledge no open system has ever proven to be sustainable.

2. Diseases such as fungi and other aquatic microbes can ravage and perhaps even erradicate algae populations, especially if the algae is GMO and the genetic changes made to it have a drawback as far as natural defenses go.

I don't know about GMO but yes, the answer is the same as the previous question.

3. Once the algae has been successfully grown in the desired quantity, there is still a harvesting step and an oil/lipid separation step. This can require a fair amount of energy for the process.

This has been a key aspect of driving down the price. If you watch the videos linked above, Origin Oil claims to have a process that allows them to produce algae oil at $5.75 a gallon, which is down from $20-$30 a gallon just a few years ago.

4. CO2 supply required, which can also require a fair amount of input energy to the process (pumps, etc).

CO2 is required to accelerate the growth rate as well as to balance the Ph. Given that at best we might hope for a processing efficiency around 60%, we might expect that 40% of oil could be burned to power the farm, which would provide a ready supply of CO2 from the generator's exhaust gases. The same might be true for Nitrogen. It seems that diesel engines could be used to produce a good percentage of the required nitrogen in the form of oxides of nitrogen, that in turn could be reacted with water to produce nitrates.

Algae is sometimes also circulated via pump, which requires energy.

Yes, in particular this is required because only the algae at the surface [the top fraction of an inch of water] are active.

So, all of these affect the EROI of algae biofuels and its viability as a future energy source. Will these obstacles be overcome anytime soon? (I think it would be awesome if they can.)

Companies like those linked above claim to be getting close to a competitive price.

Also, is it possible to harvest existing algae directly from the ocean, and then process them? Wouldn't that save a fair amount of time and resources?

The energy density and yields likely make this impractical. As you indicated, dominant strains tend to be poor producers. But some companies are wanting to produce large algae blooms in the ocean in order to gain CO2 credits. The algae absorbs large quantities of CO2 and then sinks into the cold deep ocean, where the captured CO2 ideally remains trapped.

 

[jlefevre76]

Thanks OmCheeto and Ivan Seeking. Both responses are appreciated. It looks like I'll be attending ASU soon, and I will be interested in working with their algae biofuel lab if the opportunity comes up. My background is in heat transfer and thermodynamics, and my MS thesis was on solar distillation (for desalination). I hope to work on the radiation analysis of the algae, maybe optimizing the geometry of a bioreactor to improve light absorption. Or maybe something totally new to me. I've done some raytracing and things like that, and I'm interested to see if I can apply some of what I've done to this area of research.

 

[OmCheeto]

Thanks OmCheeto and Ivan Seeking.

You're welcome. But looking at the two responses, you should recognize that Ivan is an expert, and I'm an armchair quarterback. The only algae experiment I've done has a bunch of fish swimming around in it.

Both responses are appreciated. It looks like I'll be attending ASU soon, and I will be interested in working with their algae biofuel lab if the opportunity comes up. My background is in heat transfer and thermodynamics, and my MS thesis was on solar distillation (for desalination). I hope to work on the radiation analysis of the algae, maybe optimizing the geometry of a bioreactor to improve light absorption. Or maybe something totally new to me. I've done some raytracing and things like that, and I'm interested to see if I can apply some of what I've done to this area of research.

One of my ideas was to harvest automotive exhaust. Burning hydrocarbons creates CO₂ and H₂O. Extracting the water is easy. All you have to do is cool the gas below 212°F. Collecting the CO₂ is going to require some energy. How much, I have not a clue. Separating out the N₂ is also a problem I would imagine.

Also, algae is pretty old, and appears to have originated when there was no free oxygen in the atmosphere, so a diet of carbonated water might be to their liking. It may just be my imagination, but the Horsetail plants I've been watching over the last ten years seem to be growing bigger every year. They originated when CO₂ levels were much higher. I can imagine that algae all over the world are cheering the increasing levels of CO₂. Food!

Anyways, good luck with your studies.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

While I appreciate Om's kind words, I am no expert. But I did start a company and formed a group, and worked hard for two years towards the practical implementation of existing technologies to produce biodiesel from algae. In the end it was obvious that this was too big of a problem for the little guy attack yet - probably hundreds of $millions of research was still needed back in 2007/2008, but it wasn't long before Exxon, BP, DARPA, and a number of major players started coming onto the scene. So I would bet that a career slanted towards this problem will eventually produce good employment opportunities.

If you go back to about page 20,
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=211274&page=20
I discuss in detail my logic and efforts, which had a heavy emphasis on the energy side of the equation - the energy per net gallon yield required to run a farm and produce fuel. The other major consideration is the cost per square foot for the bioreactors as this is likely the greatest long-term cost in producing algae fuels. When you do the math, the bioreactors have to be either fantastically inexpensive or have a very long life.

While I focused entirely on a land-based system, I would emphasize that in the end, my best estimate of the problems suggests that the best option is to grow algae in large bladders in the ocean [or perhaps in some lakes], as NASA is now exploring.

 

[OmCheeto]

While I appreciate Om's kind words, I am no expert.

Um, if no one at the forum knows more about the topic than you, then that makes you the expert.

But I did start a company and formed a group, and worked hard for two years towards the practical implementation of existing technologies to produce biodiesel from algae. In the end it was obvious that this was too big of a problem for the little guy attack yet - probably hundreds of $millions of research was still needed back in 2007/2008

I'm going to wear out my Professor Chu anecdotes one of these days.

http://tech.mit.edu/V131/N56/chu.html
December 2, 2011

During the talk, Chu stressed that “federal support is critical to technology leadership.” He gave the example of the advent of airplanes, which started with Samuel Langley and the Wright brothers. Even though Langley, funded by the government, designed a failed prototype while the Wright brothers succeeded without any government support, Chu said that it was ultimately the efforts of federal government that lead to the advancement of the U.S. aviation industry.

When Professor Chu stopped by my workplace a couple of months ago, it would appear that he'd read the above article, and presented a much different analysis of Langley vs Wright. He is still capable of learning, it would appear.

Unfortunately, I don't have the transcript, nor do I have the 20 pages of notes I took that night.

, but it wasn't long before Exxon, BP, DARPA, and a number of major players started coming onto the scene. So I would bet that a career slanted towards this problem will eventually produce good employment opportunities.

If you go back to about page 20,
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=211274&page=20
I discuss in detail my logic and efforts, which had a heavy emphasis on the energy side of the equation - the energy per net gallon yield required to run a farm and produce fuel. The other major consideration is the cost per square foot for the bioreactors as this is likely the greatest long-term cost in producing algae fuels. When you do the math, the bioreactors have to be either fantastically inexpensive or have a very long life.

While I focused entirely on a land-based system, I would emphasize that in the end, my best estimate of the problems suggests that the best option is to grow algae in large bladders in the ocean [or perhaps in some lakes], as NASA is now exploring.

Ivan, just take a tums, sit back, and listen to the kids.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_d6y69fiYMw

With so many kids interested in the problem, it will, one day, be solved.

http://grist.org/list/16-year-old-turns-algae-into-biofuel-makes-rest-of-us-feel-unaccomplished/

 

[OmCheeto]

And on a "never trust wiki" side note...

I was reading up on Cyanobacteria the day I responded to jlefevre76, and ran across a funny statement:

Carbon fixation
Cyanobacteria account for 20–30% of Earth's photosynthetic productivity and convert solar energy into biomass-stored chemical energy at the rate of ~450 TW^[10]

450 TW sounded like a lot, so I checked reference [10].

Light-Dependent Electrogenic Activity of Cyanobacteria
Background
Cyanobacteria account for 20–30% of Earth's primary photosynthetic productivity and convert solar energy into biomass-stored chemical energy at the rate of ~450 TW ^[1].

So I checked reference [1].

Widespread occurrence of a unicellular, marine, planktonic, cyanobacterium
Nature 277, 293-294 (25 January 1979)

For some reason, I was able to read the 1 page article at work on Wednesday, but I'm unable to read it from home. It may be because I accessed it via our "edu" library portal?

Anyways, there was absolutely no mention of this "~450 TW" statement in the "apparent" source article.

I want to purchase this article
Price: $32

$32 for a 1 page article that doesn't even contain the information I'm looking for? I don't think so.

I don't have time to check the validity of the number today, but it yields: 14.2 billion tera joules of energy per year. (= 14.2 zettajoules)

The zettajoule (ZJ) is equal to 10²¹ joules. Annual global energy consumption is approximately 0.5 ZJ.

Ok I have to get ready for work and a wedding now bye bye

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Back in 2006 and 2007, after starting a company dedicated to the production of biodiesel from algae, and while still in the preliminary stages, I put together a crude power point presentation intended for investors. In the end it was my opinion that while feasible, the practical implementation of this technology for commercial fuel sales was still beyond the scope of a small company - this was still a problem for the Exxon's and BP's of the world.

Without the accompanying narrative a lot is lost and at times the context may not be clear. Also, it is now somewhat out of date, a few errors may be found, and there is definitely spin and perhaps a bit of friendly sarcasm - this was a sales pitch after all. Still, every effort was made to provide accurate information. It was always meant to be honest. It was also successful in its own right. The name of my former company has been deleted.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HkEGp6RzD8