Thanks to everyone who’s followed the biofuel blog here at GreenOptions.

In November, we launched a new blog, Gas 2.0 (http://gas2.org), which is entirely dedicated to covering biofuels, with news, analysis, and how-to information on moving away from petroleum as a fuel source.

If you’re interested in using alternative fuels, or just want to keep up with the latest news on algae biodiesel or cellulosic ethanol, take a look at Gas 2.0.

Recent posts that may be of interest:

How to Get Infinity MPG: Fisker’s Eco-Chic Karma vs Chevy Volt

Chevy Volt: Where Is GM’s Electric Car?

GM Announces Biofuel Partnership: Cheap, Green Ethanol?

Note: For the latest on Algae Biodiesel, head over to Gas 2.0 (http://gas2.org).

Looking to buy your own algae biodiesel manufacturing plant?
You may be in luck.

AlgaeLink has developed the first made-to-order industrial algae production facility in the world.

Sure, we’ve all read 50 stories about algae biodiesel the panacea—the only biofuel that will make a serious dent in petroleum usage—but none of those stories have materialized yet. But the fact that commercially harvesting algae could produce yields of 10,000 gallons of oil per acre on agriculturally poor land has not been lost on green entrepreneurs. See my other posts on the topic here. While most of my coverage on algae biofuel research has focused on the United States, AlgaeLink N.V., based in the Netherlands, is the first company to market industrial algae production systems. The 5-year old company began selling units in the third quarter of 2007, after 4 years of investment and research.

How are AlgaeLink systems different?

Industry trend has primarily focused on development of closed bioreactors, most commonly an array of clear tubing that maximizes light and nutrient flow. In this model, algae is grown inside this transparent tubing with a constantly circulating supply of carbon dioxide and food. AlgaeLink’s design doesn’t seem much different than some of the other proposed systems I’ve already discussed: it’s based on 118 feet of 25 inch diameter tube fed by a water pump.

But several improvements make AlgaeLink unique, most notably the claim that they’ve solved the high-yield photoefficieny problem. As algae growth increases, the photobioreactor tubes get clogged with biomass, thereby reducing light that can penetrate into the center and reducing overall yield. AlgaeLink is currently patenting some mysterious technology that allows them to get around this.

Economically speaking, the company has also improved efficiency of transport and assembly of plant materials, along with creating proprietary sensing technology that can monitor algal growth from anywhere in the world. Such a sensing system would ostensibly allow the company to provide tech support from half a world away. The system is also self-cleaning, so no disassembly interrupts production.

AlgaeLink requires a demonstration plant for each potential site in order to optimize algal strain and test local climate conditions. Since AlgaeLink ships the reactors with 10 species of algae, there’s plenty room for experimentation.

How Much Does it Cost?

About $98,000 for the demonstration plant, which is required, and $821,000 to $14 million for different sized models.
You can also take a two-day algae production course in the Netherlands for $2,547.

Does it work?

Apparently, a demonstration plant is already running, producing about 2-4 kg of dry weight biomass per day. AlgaeLink claims yields of 10-100 TONS per day after 4-6 months of site monitoring to optimize algae strain based on local climate and water conditions. 10 tons is a lot more than 2-4 kg, so the scalability of the system must be incredible.

How much biodiesel is that?

I’m not really sure about that, but AlgaeLink has conducted an analysis on the suitability of producing algae biodiesel.

How much does the oil cost?

Cost of production varies by climate, but AlgaeLink claims their demonstration plant in the Netherlands is currently producing oil for 50 cents per gallon.

So why hasn’t anyone else made this technology available?

I’ll let the company’s president and CEO, Hans van de Ven, speak for himself:

We have a unique system and that’s the reason nobody else can offer it. They don’t know how to do it.

Someone needed to be first. We have put at least four years of work into our system. We have put a great deal of money into it and have had engineers and biologists working on it all over the world. We are ready to sell commercial plants. A lot of people over the Internet have been ripped off by people who promised a lot and nothing happened. We have a very good name in the industry and we would like to keep it like that.

See the original article from the Nov. 2007 Biodiesel Magazine here.

Photo Credit: AlgaeLink.com

Digg this story.

It looks like ethanol subsidies may impede efforts to reduce the size of the Dead Zone in the Gulf of Mexico. A draft report from the EPA Science Advisory Board says that ethanol subsidies could lead to a dramatic increase in nutrient loading in the Mississippi river basin, due to diverting cropland to corn production.

Recent energy policies, combined with pre-existing crop subsidies, tax policies, global market conditions and trade barriers all provide economic incentives for conversion of retired and other cropland to corn production for use in ethanol production. Such conversions could lead to corn production on an additional 16 million acres…

The Dead Zone, an area in which there isn’t enough dissolved oxygen to support aquatic life, has been measured in the Gulf of Mexico since 1985. It’s caused by agricultural runoff overenriching the waters at the end of the Mississippi River - the downstream effect of millions of acres of intensely fertilized crops. Nitrogen and phosphorous, intended for corn but ending up in the river, make their way to the Gulf causing excessive phytoplankton production. In the process, all available oxygen is used up (hypoxia), and marine life has to move out or suffocate.

It turns out that the greater Mississippi-Atchafalaya River Basin (MARB) drains a grand total of 40% of the contiguous United States. The cumulative effect of all this runnoff creates a Dead Zone approximatly 20,500 sq. km. - roughly the size of the state of New Jersey.

To address this issue, the Science Advisory board recommends a 45% reduction in nitrogen and phosphorous fluxes from farmland. Unfortunately, recent trends pushing corn-based biofuels are not exactly aligned with this strategy:

Certain aspects of the nation’s current agricultural and energy policies are at odds with the goals of hypoxia reduction and improving water quality. . .[A]n emerging national strategy on renewable fuels has granted economic incentives to corn-based ethanol production.

Without some change to the current structure of economic incentives favoring corn-based ethanol, N[itrogen] loadings to the MARB from increased corn production could increase dramatically in coming years, rather than decreasing, as needed…

The alternative is cellulosic ethanol and avoiding corn-based fuels altogether:

Alternatively, the use of perennial crops and other feedstocks for cellulosic ethanol requires a more complex refining process that produces more net energy and results in lower fertilization and thus less nutrient runoff than corn-based ethanol.

The Dead Zone in the Gulf of Mexico is a symptom our farming practices, and converting cropland to grow fuel will only exacerbate the problem. This is just another chapter in the corn-based ethanol saga. The EPA’s Science Advisory Board will vote on approval of the draft report in December.

Green Car Congress: EPA Science Advisory Board Suggests Revisions to Ethanol Incentives Necessary to Reduce Gulf of Mexico “Dead Zone”
Science Advisory Board (SAB) Hypoxia Panel Draft Advisory Report

Photo Credit

Despite promises of imminent commercial viability and tremendous productivity, the development of algae cultivation for biofuel production has been painfully slow. Most of us following biofuel news have been frustrated by the sluggish pace of real progress.

GreenFuel Technologies has finally produced some results:

This summer, GreenFuel Technologies and Arizona Public Service Company (APS) were able to grow algae successfully at APS’ Redhawk natural gas power plant at levels 37 times higher than corn and 140 times higher than soybeans using CO2 from a natural gas-fired power plant as input to theGreenFuel system.

Algae cultivation has always promised exceptional yields for multiple end-use products: oils are processed into biodiesel, starches into ethanol, and the remaining protein components are used in animal feed. It’s a great idea, but no one has been able to do it in real life yet. GreenFuel Tech., in conjunction with APS, was the first to make commercially viable biodiesel and ethanol from algae cultivated at a commercial power plant in 2006, but these new results are the first indicator that commercially viable production levels are possible.

The comparison above is based on the amount of usable material grown per unit area, and GreenFuel’s tests (even with suboptimal weather conditions) blew away projected productivity goals.

A 2-week field-test was performed on GreenFuel’s proprietary algae propagation technology, called the 3D Matrix System (3DMS). 3DMS differs from the transparent tubing we’ve all seen in pictures (as depicted above), which are usually used to grow preparatory seed cultures. GreenFuel isn’t offering too many details about the 3DMS, but claims the matrix system boosts photosynthesis by increasing the surface-to-volume ratio of the algal culture.

The goal of this program was to assess the performance (areal productivity) of the 3DMS technology for at least two continuous weeks of growth. Based on the previous performance of a lab-scale system, target average areal productivity of 80 g/m2/d was set. Achieving this goal would allow a commercial algal system to significantly decrease its footprint, minimizing one of the main limiting factors of large-scale algal farming – land cost and availability.

The performance of the 3DMS system exceeded the target goal. Average areal productivity of 98g/m2/d (ash free, dry weight basis), with highs of over 170 g/m2/d, was achieved during a run time of 19 days. Thus, this is one of the most productive algal cultivation systems ever built.

The next step will be testing the system on a coal-fired plant, and ramping up the production scale. Algae produced from the waste of electrical-generation could offer another significant feedstock for biofuel production while mitigating greenhouse gas emissions and other harmful pollutants.

Latest update on Algae Biodiesel: Algae Biodiesel: First Industrial Algae Plants Go Online

GreenCar Congress: GreenFuel Technologies and APS to Test 3DMS Algae System on Coal-Fired Plant
Performance Summary Report Evaluation of GreenFuel’s 3D Matrix Algae Growth Engineering Scale Unit

More by this author:
Algae Biodiesel May Soon Be Reality
Algae Biodiesel Startups Plan Large-Scale Algae Farms
Algae Biofuel May Be Future For Aviation

Photo Credit.

Trying to improve your gas mileage? Use biodiesel? Or just want to save a buck?
With all the hoopla around different fuel and vehicle choices these days, it’s easy to be confused. Hybrids? Diesels? Biofuels?
Which one of these choices is actually best for you?

While there isn’t necessarily a clear winner in terms of environmental friendliness, each option has some particular pros and cons that I’ve compiled here. I’ve tried to stick to options that are readily available, so things like fuel-cells and electric cars will have to wait. Want to kick the oil habit? Here are some options:

1. & 2. Get rid of your car / Walk or Drive Less.

Ok, obvious one first. For some, ditching the car isn’t an option. But
if you live in a city with decent public transportation, or a smaller
town (< 50,000) this may be your best bet. Consider walking, biking,
carpools, or public transport. Also consider moving to a walkable area. As Sheryl Canter from ED so aptly put it: "If you live in a car-dependent area, moving to a walkable area will do
more to fight global warming than buying a fuel-efficient hybrid car."

PROS:

• health and well-being decreased stress

• decreased pollution and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions

• increased savings (vehicles cost, maintenance, fuel, insurance)

• participation encourages pedestrian-friendly city planning

CONS:

• public transportation unavailable/unreliable in some areas
• can be difficult to walk or bike especially in certain seasons (or can be impossible due to distance > 5 miles)

CONCLUSION: When feasible, the single best thing you can do for your wallet, the environment, and your community. For some ideas and a real-world example, check out Kelli’s post: Why I Sold My Car, or How I Learned to Stop Driving and Love the Bus.

3. Hybrids/Plug-in Hybrids.

Popular and a good bet for many, especially for city driving.

PROS:

• significant increases in mpg (~46 mpg)
• significant state and federal tax credits
• save on fuel costs
• 2008 models may blow the competition away by doubling fuel efficiency (94 mpg)

CONS:

• still uses gasoline
• mileage not always as good as comparable diesels, which are considerably cheaper
• not useful for all climates/locations/users
• these vehicles are usually expensive

CONCLUSION: Hybrids have always seemed like a lot of technology for little gain, considering that a 1982 Datsun Diesel gets the same mileage as a 2008 Ford Escape Hybrid - but they still offset gas guzzling vehicles that might otherwise be on the road. While often expensive (around $22,000), tax credits can soften the blow by several thousand dollars and may even make the cost comparable to other new vehicles. You may also be able to find cheaper new or used gas models, like the Toyota Corolla, that get good mileage (37 mpg highway). But the 2007 Toyota Prius tops the charts at 45-48 mpg. And we can expect newer models to get even better.
Also see Joshua’s new post: Prius No Longer Golden Child of Green Motorists.

4. Buy a diesel and use biodiesel.

May be the most environmentally friendly option.

PROS:

• decreases most pollutants by 50% (when compared to diesel fuel)
• decreases net greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
• no engine conversion needed
• fuel not as harmful to humans/environment if spilled
• fuel can be produced locally
• more vehicle choices than hybrids
• can get better mileage than hybrids while using renewable fuel
• older diesel vehicles can be cheap
• new 2008 diesels will be cleaner (emissions-wise) than comparable gas engines

CONS:

• biodiesel not always available or convenient
• have to blend it with diesel in winter (usually at 50%)
• feedstocks may be questionable - food competition concerns
• older diesels produce 10-100x dirtier emissions than comparable gas models

CONCLUSION: Buying used newer model diesel vehicles is a popular choice where biodiesel is available. Some models, like the VW Golf, Jetta, and Passat, can get upwards of 45-50 mpg on regular diesel or biodiesel. While older diesels are dirtier at the tailpipe, using biodiesel can offset considerable carbon dioxide emissions. To find an old diesel, try Craigslist or Autotrader.
To find a local biodiesel pump, try this map.
If you need to find biodiesel on the road, there’s now a biodiesel tucker hotline, 1-866-BIODIESEL (246-3437) that will help you locate the nearest source of fuel.
List of new diesel vehicles available.
More on biodiesel: Biodiesel Mythbuster.

5. Buy a diesel and convert it to run on straight-vegetable-oil (SVO).

For people that want to kick the oil habit, but still need a vehicle.

PROS:

• only fuel that can be carbon negative
• fuels is a recycled waste product
• waste oil is usually free
• never stop at a gas station again (almost)

CONS:

• requires considerable investment in vehicle conversion and maintenance.
• requires getting your hands dirty (or rather, oily)
• waste oil requires time/effort to process. may be difficult during certain times of the year (cold winters) or without proper facilities.
• may eventually be limited by consumer demand
• regulatory structure not in place for SVO. requires personal responsibility to pay road taxes
• lack of refining may increase harmful pollutants (such as acrolein) from combustion
• no available long-term studies support or refute the use of vegetable oil in diesel engines

CONCLUSION: SVO works great for all kinds of people, but requires significant commitment in fuel acquisition and use. Using waste vegetable oil can almost eliminate fuel costs, although legal use still requires paying a nominal sum in road taxes. This is generally not a choice for the faint of heart, but is gaining popularity.

For more information, try the VegTruck blog.

So which one is best?
Hybrids and newer diesels running on biodiesel tend to be the most popular options, and for good reason: great mileage, comfort, availability, etc. For now, a hybrid may be your best bet if you can afford it (and if that type of car works for you). Those of us with smaller bankrolls can still get by on high-mileage gas models or diesels. In terms of environmental benefits, buying a used, high-mileage diesel (like a VW Jetta, Passat, or Bug) and running the highest blend of biodiesel available, may have the most significant environmental impact. There are plenty of used diesels out there in good shape, and for more adventurous types, many waiting to be fixed up. Keep in mind that buying a new vehicle entails considerable embodied energy costs that may not be reflected in the sticker price. Looking to the future: in 2008, expect drastic changes in both hybrids and diesel models, including dramatic increases in fuel economy and cleaner emissions.

Good Luck!

Kiplinger: Best Values in Clean Cars
eMagazine: Here Come the Cleaner, Greener Cars

We’d been waiting for what seemed like hours, uncomfortably seated, shoulder-to-shoulder on a gritty lake-bed. Tense anticipation was rapidly dissolving into indifference, while the never-ending stream of deafening electronic music assailed us from every direction. The Man stood impassively in the midst of this: a giant, neon-green effigy looming over a half-mile ring of what must have been every fire dancer in North America. It was the only time at Burning Man I’d felt like a spectator, and by day 5 I’d seen enough fire dancers.

"B-O-R-I-N-G MAN!" the guy next to me yelled, and the crowd erupted into laughter.
We all wanted them to burn the damn thing.

Thankfully, the dancing finally stopped, and a shower of sparks preceded a surprisingly benign fireworks display. It could have been any town in America on the 4th of July.
More sparks, and then suddenly - *BOOM*.

An immense fireball consumed the Man and the entire supporting platform. There wasn’t even time to hit the deck, and the shock wave knocked everyone back. In a split second of calm, about the time between the initial shock and sound of the explosion, the entire crowd was united in awestruck silence.

And then it was over. The Man was burned until the rest of the structure collapsed.

—————————————————–

Last week I mentioned the total CO2 impact of the Burning Man festival, and how an obsession with profligate pyrotechnic displays might not strictly adhere to a thematically ‘Green’ festival. But there was a considerable behind-the-scenes effort to make up for the party. For example, few ravers were aware that many of the discotheques were biodiesel-powered? Numerous camps this year used b100 biodiesel (or a blend) in their generators, including most of the main festival’s generators (11,000 gallons total) and one of the biggest music party camps on the playa:

For five years running, now, Taylor and some 80 friends have built a series of structures that host thousands of dance music enthusiasts every night of the week-long festival. This year, the music systems and lighting in Taylor’s elaborate domes, measuring 30, 60 and 90 feet in diameter, were powered by an industrial generator producing 2.5 kilowatts, driven by a B30 blend of biodiesel (30 percent biodiesel and 70 percent diesel.)

The power draw required by the dance complexes was staggering - literally the loudest music I’ve ever heard - and other forms of renewable energy just wouldn’t cut it. Since the generators were loners, organizers weren’t willing to use B100 (and presumably straight vegetable oil) and instead relied on diesel/biodiesel blends. Had I known that the music was "powered by biodiesel", it might have put more spring in my step.

Speaking of biodiesel, one of the biggest attention-grabbers on the playa was a CO2-to-algae display where exhaust from the gas generators was being fed to living algae. It looked just like the pictures we’ve all seen of algae-biodiesel displays: greenish plastic bags with a lot of churning and bubbling going on. The display was created by a group of scientists and industry types (called the Chlorophyll Collective), who are trying to put together open-source information for growing and harvesting algae. As per usual, it all sounded great, but to my knowledge sufficient amounts of algae for harvesting were never actually produced.

The playa was abound with other green-tech type exhibits, including one I wish I’d seen, the "mechabolic": a giant model gastrointestinal tract that turned just about any waste product into fuel via gasification. Apparently, you could walk through it and see "digestion" at various stages of completion.

Burning Man also had a plethora of scheduled events, including open discussions on green tech and several environmentally-related video series. Despite these events being ridiculously hard to find (especially in the afternoon dust storms), I managed to attend one biodiesel-from-algae forum with some industry types and Inside Greentech. According to these folks, algae biodiesel is a long way off because they can’t get yields even close to what would make it economical. There was also the usual biodiesel-is-great blather, such as biodiesel is "emissions free." Whoops, I guess they need to read my biodiesel mythbuster.

Obviously, the festival is an emergent property of what everyone puts into it, and "Burners" in general seem to maintain a greater-than-average ecological awareness. Litter was scarce to nonexistent, despite the festival offering no trash receptacles. Pack-it-in-pack-it-out was the norm, even to the extent of individual camps collecting greywater from coolers, bathing, etc. (I brought home 3 gallons). Most larger camps set up black tarp greywater systems to evaporate waste water, leaving relatively little residual impact on the playa.

So what’s the upshot when it’s all said and done, the Man’s been burned, and the last bicycle has left the playa? I would like to think that festival-goers had a renewed commitment to environmental activism in their own lives, but I’m not sure that would be true. We all continue to travel, eat, and party the way we’re used to, even if it’s in the middle of the Nevadan desert. Despite these tendencies, Burning Man provided some opportunity for expanding green conscientiousness for many, and reinforced personal aspirations for others . It may be cliche, but every year should be the Green Man, or at least maintain the trend toward reduction of the festival’s ecological footprint — even if Burning Man’s overall impact pales in comparison to other world events. If, however, in our efforts to reduce global warming and practice sustainability, we as a society decide to throw out the party, the art, the dance, the music, and other forms of personal expression first — well, that just wouldn’t make much sense.

Biodiesel Mythbuster
Behind the scenes biodiesel generators: Partying to biodiesel
The Green Man
Cleantech: Carbon and algae from the playa to you.

Last week, 46,000 revelers finally broke camp and split the scene of this year’s Burning Man festival, The Green Man. You could call it the "biggest party in the world," though it defies categorization and convention: part art, music, rave, pyrotechnics show, and costume orgy, it’s probably the only place in America you’d see a 1,000-foot-tall mushroom cloud intended for politically-minded artistic expression.

Yep, that’s right - a 1,000 ft. mushroom cloud, and no, that doesn’t mean above-ground nuclear testing has resumed in the Nevada desert. It just means that the artist who built Crude Awakenings - a 100 ft. tall oil derrick - wanted to blow it up at the end of the festival (to "dramatize the worshipful relationship and dependence modern man has toward oil"), and to do so he used 900 gallons of jet fuel (apparently off-spec fuel given to him by NASA) and 2,000 gallons of liquid propane, not to mention the timber and steel used in the structure. You can see it on YouTube here.

So how does such a staggering display of firepower — the largest explosion in the events history — contribute to an event thematically-focused on reneewable energy and green tech? Well, lets just say it’s "green in theme"…

"If you were really green, you would have walked."
- Posted sign at the entrance to Burning Man

Burning Man was founded on a novel concept: take a population the size of a small town, institute a gift economy (no vending or sales allowed) but maintain basic legal structure (state and federal laws still apply, mostly), and then demolish all regularly-maintained social conventions. Want to dress up like a samurai? Great. Don’t feel like wearing any clothes at all? No problem. Don’t want to sleep ever again? That’s a given. It’s like the Matrix meets Never-Never-Land.

So just how Green was this Man, anyway?

Now don’t get me wrong — I dig the theme. In fact, it’s part of the reason I went this year, and I drove to the festival without burning a drop of petroleum. But a remotely-located, 46,000-person party based on the primal need for really loud electronic music and torching large wooden effigies doesn’t strike me as particularly low-impact.

Consider the amount of road and air travel required by those attending the event (the kids next to me spent $300 in fuel to get there, and only stayed 2 nights). People attend from every corner of the globe, which involves considerable international travel, and thousands of road trips that otherwise may not have happened. Add to this the absolutely massive scale of pyrotechnic displays, and the total CO2 bill for the 8-days of Burning Man comes out to about 27,000 tons of CO2 each year (2006 data).

Seems like a lot, except when compared to the 23,013,698 metric tons of CO2 the US emits anyway in those same 8 days. (2005 data - EIA). In case you were wondering, Burning Man represents an increase of 1/10th of a percent over business as usual. And since many travelers are taking regularly scheduled work vacations to attend the event, it would be hard to claim this is a unique increase.

Even so, the festival has made some effort to reduce its impact. In 2005, the "Cooling Man" project was founded to offer carbon offsets for festival-goers. The project’s web site estimates that if 70% of burners (32,200 people) offset 1 ton of carbon dioxide emissions, Black Rock City would become the first carbon negative city in the world. Of course, that depends on how you feel about carbon offsets, and who actually participates. Since offsetting 1 ton only costs $10, it’s unclear why they don’t just tack this onto the ticket price (tickets cost around $250 anyway). So far this year, the Cooling Man project has offset 627 tons of CO2.

As you may have heard, the big deal this year was the Green Pavilion underneath the man, with 30,000 square feet of decidedly science-fair-like green-tech exhibits, including solar and wind power, alternative fuels (a Greasecar SVO conversion), and one electric car plastered white with playa dust. At least 50% of the power for the displays came from a 30 kW solar array that was given to Gerlach, NV, after the event (which will generate $3 million of electricity over the next 20 years, at no cost to Gerlach/Lovelock residents). Two other solar projects were also designed and sponsored by Burning Man, including a 120 kW solar array in Gerlach, Nevada and a 60 kW solar array in Lovelock, Nevada. Burning Man also swapped out all of Gerlach’s (population 500) old light-bulb’s and replaced them with compact fluorescents.

These would be considerable investments for a group of partiers that didn’t really care about their impact, but I think it’s fair to say they do, and next week I’ll talk about more of the smaller-scale environmentally-minded steps "Burners" were taking, including powering their dance music with biodiesel. I’ll also hit on a few of the other cool exhibits, like the CO2-to-algae display, and have some general conclusions about this year’s fest.

To be continued…

"The Green Man" from WorldChanging

"Crude Awakening Arises at Burning Man" from Wired

Researchers want to produce biodiesel at the coast. Building on last week’s post, University of Delaware researchers are interested in developing a type of mallow, the seashore mallow, for biodiesel and ethanol production:

And unlike soybeans and corn, which require annual plantings on valuable farmland to feed the growing appetite for biofuels, the pink-flowered seashore mallow is both a perennial and a halophyte, or salt-tolerant plant, that can grow in areas where other crops can’t.

“You don’t have to divert land that is presently used for producing food and feed to the process of making biodiesel,” said Gallagher, who runs UD’s Halophyte Biotechnology Center with his wife and fellow researcher, Denise Seliskar.

Coastal intrusion of seawater is important in many parts of the world, with more than 20 countries actively studying saltwater food crops. But the idea to use some of these crops as a fuel source is a more recent development. As it happens, seashore mallow comes from the same plant family as cotton, and has an oil content similar to soybeans and cottonseed.

At least for now, first-generation biofuels (those made from food crops) seem like they’ll be sticking around for awhile, and the door is wide-open for niche biofuel feedstocks that don’t compete with our food supply. But the there’s an underlying concept here that’s even more important: finding solutions to ecological problems that preserve or enhance ecosystem services. Many of these services are taken for granted (coastal buffers being a big one - think about the last tsunami), but they carry out tasks nearly impossible to emulate economically. The existing Canadian Boreal forest, for example, is more valuable for its role in water purification and regional climate impact than the the total profit from cutting down and processing the entire forest. This is an extreme example, but it highlights the importance of things we forget about at the smaller level too. While intact natural systems should be preserved at both macro and micro levels, there is also great potential to repair or enhance them.

While the seashore mallow might be handy for a quick snack, the sturdy plant also has provided Gallagher food for thought in addressing a smorgasbord of environmental problems, ranging from global warming to the disappearance of coastal farmland…

With the threat of sea water encroaching on farmland and coastal aquifers in response to global warming, Gallagher believes the seashore mallow could help preserve the economic value of arable land transitioning to marsh land.

Seashore mallow has other desireable attributes as well:

The meal left over after oil is extracted from mallow seeds has enough protein to be used for animal feed, while the stems, which multiply each year during the life of the plant, have potential for use in cellulosic ethanol, Gallagher said. The roots of the plant, cousin to one used by ancient Romans for a confection that lent its name to the marshmallow, could be used to make industrial gum.

A crop that desalinates land, acts as a coastal buffer, increases biodiversity, and provides a sustainable fuel and animal feed source? Sounds like a winner. While seed yields need to increase before commercialization is realistic, halophytic crops could fill a vast niche:

According to Bushnell, some 250 halophytes are potential food staple crops, while thousands more might be available as fuel biomass. With two-thirds of the earth’s available fresh water used for conventional agriculture and more than 40 percent of its land mass considered desert or wasteland, the advantages of agriculture using marginal soils and abundant seawater are readily apparent, according to Bushnell.

For the full story, click here.

UD researcher sees biofuel potential in salt-tolerant plant

Photo Credit: Delaware Online

What if you could use plants to turn industrial waste sites into fertile, productive cropland? Better yet, what if you could produce biofuels in the process? By marrying bio-remediation and crop production, a group of Carnegie Mellon University graduates hopes to do just that: produce biodiesel and ethanol on reclaimed land.

"It’s a proven technology, but in an unproven environment," said Mr. Butcher, 27. "The idea of growing energy crops is not necessarily a new one; the idea of growing them on distributed sites on vacant land, in an urban context, is kind of a new idea."

Kind of. It’s happening elsewhere, in dribs and drabs. Monroeville’s Cardinal Resources plants poplar trees, which suck up toxic waste, at manufacturing sites around the country, but doesn’t convert those plants into fuels. In Los Angeles, a design team funded by the Annenberg Foundation has turned a 32-acre rail yard into a massive cornfield and garden. But that project, dubbed "Not a Cornfield," is more urban artwork than laboratory. The closest parallel can be found in Michigan, where Michigan State University researchers are turning a 2-acre dump site into land for biodiesel and ethanol crops.

Using plants, enzymes, fungi, or microorganisms to depollute contaminated areas isn’t an entirely novel concept. Phytoremediation - using plants to clean up the soil - has been practiced for centuries. Due to general increases in industrial pollution and the sheer potential of the idea, using naturally and (more recently) genetically-engineered organisms to ameliorate pollution has gained special emphasis in the last 20 years.

The CMU group is taking the next logical step in bioremediation by attempting to create a usable byproduct, in this case fuel:

GTECH [Growth Through Energy and Community Health], a nonprofit that sprang out of a master’s thesis, is hoping to bring all of the divergent threads together, stitching a strategy that will cleanse contaminated industrial land, occupy vacant urban plots and produce renewable fuels, the last of which happens to be one of the hot political topics du jour.

Test crops already have been planted. At the former LTV Steel site in Hazelwood, the GTECH crew has taken over six barren acres of fill and planted hybrid poplar trees, switchgrass and sunflowers. The first two can be reduced into cellulosic ethanol — that is, ethanol that isn’t corn- or grain-based — while sunflowers become conventional biodiesel.

Testing several types of crops is important, since each plant removes different contaminants. For example, ragweed and poplar trees sequester lead. Barley and sugar beets excel at removing salt and have commonly been used to desalinate agricultural land. Naturally occurring bacteria can be harnessed to assist in cleaning up oil spills. And sunflowers are apparently well-suited to remove arsenic and uranium from soils - just in case you had a chemical explosion or a nuclear meltdown.

It’s also important to find crops with properties conducive to making biofuels. Growing ethanol- or biodiesel-producing crops on contaminated land bypasses the food vs. fuel issue and could make more land available for cultivation.

But it isn’t clear that any of these crops will actually work for the intended purpose, especially on really polluted sites. Will it take a succession of several different crops or polyculture to fully remediate the soil? Will the plants even grow under such poor conditions? And more importantly for the project, will the biofuels meet ASTM fuel standards, considering the contaminant load they could contain?

"We’re not growing on even farmland, which is hard enough to grow on," said Ms. Koch, 33. "We’re growing on vacant properties, which are usually demolished houses that have brick and glass and cement and rebar and all kinds of terrible things. [Crop] quality is going to be a concern," especially in the first years. It’s a concern at Michigan State, too. Will the end product meet industry standards — and, should they come to pass, federal standards — for what makes usable biofuel?

Time will tell.  In any case, it’s a great idea, and the group deserves a nod:

"You’re going to see a lot more land, whether it’s a brownfield or otherwise, get utilized for crops like that. I wouldn’t be surprised to someday see all the highway grass be switchgrass instead," he said. Rather than paying PennDOT workers to mow grass along the sides of highways, farmers or biofuel companies might bid for the rights to harvest the switchgrass, which sprouts perennially and grows well in poor soil and cooler climates.

CMU grads want to use blighted industrial, residential sites to produce bio-fuel crops. July 10, 2007. Post-Gazette.
Wikipedia: Phytoremediation
Wikipedia: Bioremediation

Photo Credit: Post-Gazette

It’s all fun and games until the IRS knocks on your door. At least that’s what Bob Teixeira must be thinking after his home state of North Carolina fined him $1,000 for converting his 1981 diesel Mercedes to run on straight-vegetable-oil (SVO). Bob was minding his own business when fuel inspectors, out to nab weekend-RVers using illegal fuel, noticed his “Powered By 100% Vegetable Oil” bumper sticker. After being fined by the state for allegedly avoiding motor fuel taxes, Bob was told he should also expect a nice fat $1,000 fine from the Feds, in addition to a $2500 bond if he wants to continue using vegetable oil in his fuel tank.

Prompted by high gas prices, global warming, and good old curiosity, more and more proud diesel owners are converting their vehicles to run on 100% vegetable oil. While the concept isn’t new, the number of dedicated users is steadily increasing, and this means more potential conflict with regulators who have no idea what to do with the vegetable oil crowd. Since vegetable oil is not recognized by the EPA as an official alternative fuel, most states have not decided how to handle the issue.

Few states. . .are prepared to regulate the new fuels, says the National VegOil Board, which promotes vegetable oil fuel.

“State offices do not have the forms to appropriately and fairly deal with VegOil, nor the staff to enforce the nonexistent forms,” said director Cynthia Shelton. “So either they tell people inquiring about compliance to get lost, or they make them jump a bunch of arbitrary hoops.”

It really comes down whether revenue collectors see using a more-or-less free fuel, vegetable oil, as blatant avoidance of paying the road tax. Unfortunately, the public typically receives mixed messages from different departments within the same state. The Department of Energy in Oregon actually offers tax credits for alternative fuel vehicles and fueling stations of 25% of the conversion or construction cost (up to $750/year). That’s what the law says, but call up the office or the Department of Revenue and you may here a different story.

Under the present circumstances it seems reasonable to promote grassroots activity focused on alternative transportation, so why doesn’t Uncle Sam just leave SVO’ers alone? Obviously, the road tax is an important source of revenue ($1.2 billion/year in NC), but it no one would argue that SVO, at least today, significantly affects that.

Is there any reason why these backyarder-greaseballs should get a free ride?

Well, ingenuity perhaps? Or doing there part to reduce our nation’s reliance on foreign oil? At a time when groundbreaking biofuel legislation passes daily, and the Department of Energy is practically throwing money at anything combining the words “cellulosic” and “ethanol”, this seems a little incongruous.

State Sen. Stan Bingham, R-Denton, is known around Raleigh for his diesel Volkswagen fueled by used soybean oil. The car sports a “Goodbye, OPEC” sign. “If somebody was going to go to this much trouble to drive around in a car that uses soybean oil, they ought to be exempt” from state taxes, he said.

If you want to find out where your state stands on the issue, call your state Department of Energy and see what they have to say about it. You might also consider offering to pay road taxes for the road miles you use each year, but don’t expect this to be a straightforward process. Also keep in mind that these taxes apply to homebrew biodiesel, though proper regulation should already be in place.

If you get busted by the man for attempting sustainable transportation, don’t say I didn’t warn you.

Interested in SVO or want to learn how a vehicle can actually be converted? - stay tuned for more posts on the subject. In the mean time, (and not that I’m trying to give anyone away to the Feds) check out Megan’s recent post on the subject.

Driver ticketed for using biofuel: Vegetable oil sticks him with $1,000 fine. Bruce Henderson, The Charlotte Observer

National VegOil Board