It's been a long and challenging road, but algae biofuels are finally at the point where investors should take notice as technology advances and variety of strategic partnerships-from oil and gas to power utilities, agricultural processes and chemical plants--are replacing subsidies to eventually make the industry commercially viable on its own merits.
Algae produces some carbon dioxide when burned, but it takes the same carbon dioxide in to grow. So when algae farms grow massive quantities to be turned into biofuels, the end result is that they actually suck greenhouse gas out of the air. It also has other advantages over biofuels from corn or soybeans, in that it does not require soil or fresh water to grow. It also has the potential to produce more energy per hectare than any land crop.
Currently, high cost of capital and operations limit bio-based materials and chemicals to a few facilities located where corn and cane are plentiful and cheap. Algae can change that.
All that's been missing is the necessary technology to harness mass production.
A recent study put out by the respected energy research firm SBI predicts a compound annual growth rate of 43.1% and a $1.6 billion market in 2015 for algae biofuels. That is double digit growth for the emerging industry, which is receiving a sizable development boost as strategic partnerships are gradually replacing the millions in loans from the US Department of Energy since 2009.
SBI's "Algae Biofuels…
It's been a long and challenging road, but algae biofuels are finally at the point where investors should take notice as technology advances and variety of strategic partnerships-from oil and gas to power utilities, agricultural processes and chemical plants--are replacing subsidies to eventually make the industry commercially viable on its own merits.
Algae produces some carbon dioxide when burned, but it takes the same carbon dioxide in to grow. So when algae farms grow massive quantities to be turned into biofuels, the end result is that they actually suck greenhouse gas out of the air. It also has other advantages over biofuels from corn or soybeans, in that it does not require soil or fresh water to grow. It also has the potential to produce more energy per hectare than any land crop.
Currently, high cost of capital and operations limit bio-based materials and chemicals to a few facilities located where corn and cane are plentiful and cheap. Algae can change that.
All that's been missing is the necessary technology to harness mass production.
A recent study put out by the respected energy research firm SBI predicts a compound annual growth rate of 43.1% and a $1.6 billion market in 2015 for algae biofuels. That is double digit growth for the emerging industry, which is receiving a sizable development boost as strategic partnerships are gradually replacing the millions in loans from the US Department of Energy since 2009.
SBI's "Algae Biofuels Technologies: Global Market and Product Trends 2010-2015" specifically points out that the production of algae for biofuels is the "most viable and attractive" of biofuels because of its high yield per acre and minimum environmental impact.
"Strategic partnerships from ExxonMobil, Chevron, BP, Dow Chemical, Desmet Ballestra and many others will drive the investment needed to successfully commercialise algae biofuels. Private investment and venture capital will also provide funding through 2015," according to SBI.
One particular area of promising investment is the technology being developed to harness algae's potential.
One example is the US Department of Energy's Idaho National Labs (INL) purchase order of two test-scale units for dewatering algae and removing contaminants from frack water from Origin Oil, Inc. The significance of this is that it boosts algae technological development as Origin Oil focuses both on cleantech processes for oil and gas and for harvesting algae.
INL is optimistic that the new equipment would significantly reduce the algal dewatering barrier, which in turn would allow for the dewatering of larger quantities of algae for use in the production of feedstocks blended from algae biomass. A key problem contributing to costs is the quick evaporation of pond water, which is expensive to continually replenish.
This is a strategic partnership between OriginOil and the INL, via a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRADA). Specifically, OriginOil's Algae Appliance Model 4 can continuously concentrate up to four liters of algae production per minute. OriginOil also has a joint venture in Ennesys, in Paris, where it is testing algae in urban energy generation also using the Algae Appliance Model 4.
Another boost to the industry is the 2 August Senate Finance Committee mark-up of the Family and Business Tax Cut Certainty Act of 2012, which contained a proposal to extend the $1/gallon biodiesel tax credit and make algae eligible for the credit. The proposal extends the tax credit for another year after it expires on 31 December 2013 and is effective retroactively to 31 December 2011. In addition, the algae tax credit will apply to producers who sell their fuel to refineries for further processing, rather than only to producers selling for end use as a fuel. This is a significant point and a significant victory for the biofuels industry.
There are plenty of naysayers, particularly when it comes to the current cost of using algae in biofuels production. According to Lux Research, right now algae is a "cost-intensive loser". Lux analysts claim that algae cultivation yields a 48% loss because of the high capital costs for growing algae at an industrial scale. They put the price at about $202,000 per hectare.
The costs are high for the time being, but we view investment from a development perspective and we see forward movement in this emerging industry and are particularly upbeat about the shift away from energy department loans to strategic partnerships that will work to tap the vast potential of algae for biofuels production and render it commercially viable. Getting in now on the technology will translate into an advantage.
Check out the 6th Annual Algae Biomass Summit in Denver, Colorado from 24-27 September for more insight into technological advances and how innovators are working to unlock the full potential of algae as a feedstock for fuel, food and other co-products.
By. Oilprice.com analysts
To read the full article
Please sign up and become a premium OilPrice.com member to gain access to read the full article.
Register Login
Comments
Their are major reasons for these changes away from algae biofuel development:
Regardless of all the green hype, algae biofuel production at significant scale uses NPK fertilizer and competes directly with human food production. Four major mass balance studies have also concluded this.
Because algae biofuel at scale is dependent on NPK it means it is also dependent on the petroleum that NPK production is dependent upon. This means that algae biofuel production is neither renewable, nor sustainable as long as it is petroleum dependent.
Of the three basic elements of NPK, nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium - phosphorus is the critical one. The US who used to be the worlds larges phosphate fertilizer producer has in the last decade become dependent on importing more than half of its fertilizer ingredients and at least 15% of its phosphates for its agricultural needs (USDA 2011 Fertilizer Import Summary). What this means is that algae biofuel production like oil - makes us more foreign energy dependent - not less. Worse it makes us more dependent on foreign interest for our food production as well - a logically untenable economic and military strategic position.
Finally, algae biofuel production has had another major economic hurdle to cross. The development of major US gas reserves has made the production of liquid fuels from natural gas even more expensive. Major LNG refineries are claiming fuel cost at less than $60 per barrel. Algae biofuels have yet to come close to competing even with current high oil prices, much less their production costs and now US natural gas reserves (300+years) are lowering our dependence on foreign oil consumption and international oil prices.
I fail to see how any of the above facts makes algae biofuel either environmentally or economically attractive to any investor that goes beyond algae biofuel PR clams. Other alternative energy sources such as solar, wind and tide are sustainable, even closer to competing head on with petroleum than biofuels and offer a sustainable future that doesn't compete with human food production - I suggest you explore those.
If the politicians can just agree to a limit on their election expenditure so that they can safely get by without the need for funding from big industries such as fossil fuel and big pharma, to name but two, we might be able to combat climate change.
If we went on a war-footing and treated LFTR reactors to a Manhattan Project type development programme, we could have the technology developed to full scale production possibly within two years and thus be on our way to reversing the current temperature rise. This rise, if left unchecked, is on its way to making the planet a pretty dire place to live. (Eden to Elsan in a few short years.)
We must not forget that LFTR reactors do not enable the safe production of nuclear weapons and also that they can be made in modular form, which will make them transportable to anywhere in the world. (Think exports, think profits if that is what excites you.)
The only fly in the ointment is the green movement, who will at the very mention of 'nuclear' go all gaga and chant their "Nuclear bad, four legs good" mantra that they got from a monumental misreading of Animal Farm.
Perhaps technology may yet save the day. It will only do so, however, if it is given the chance to.
Obviously, at the heart of the quesion is satisfactory function of the fuel metering systems employed by the different engines that will use this fuel.