[TheAntiDoomer]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opi ... 149/print/

Joule says it now has “a library” of fossil-fuel organisms at work in its Massachusetts labs, each engineered to produce a different fuel. It has “proven the process,” has produced ethanol (for example) at a rate equivalent to 10,000 U.S. gallons an acre a year. It anticipates that this yield could hit 25,000 gallons an acre a year when scaled for commercial production, equivalent to roughly 800 barrels of crude an acre a year.

Joule says its “solar converter” technology makes the manufacture of liquid fossil fuels 50 times as efficient as conventional biofuel production – and eliminates as much as 90 per cent of carbon dioxide emissions. “Requiring only sunlight and waste C0{-2},” it says, “[this] technology can produce virtually unlimited quantities of fossil fuels with zero dependence on raw materials, agricultural land, crops or fresh water. It ends the hazards of oil exploration and oil production. It takes us to the unthinkable: liquid hydrocarbons on demand.”

Obama transition vet joins Joule board


http://www.bizjournals.com/boston/news/ ... board.html

Renewable fuels developer Joule Unlimited Inc. said John Podesta, a veteran of two White House administrations, has joined its board of directors.

[Maddog78]

It ends the hazards of oil exploration and oil production.

There goes my job.

[TheAntiDoomer]

Before I post the article, quick and serious question for AP, does this pass your "smell test"?

Podesta joins biotech firm with patent promising liquid fuels from solar energy
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/01/biot ... irectors/#

It was apparently so promising that John Podesta -- the current president of the Center for American Progress who served as President Bill Clinton's former chief of staff and helped oversee President Obama's transition into power -- has joined Joule's board of directors.

“I have seen and heard many proposals by renewable energy companies, and can unequivocally say that Joule has a technology and a system unlike any other, with industrial viability and a clear path to market within the next several years,” Podesta said in a prepared statement.

Game-Changing Technology Offers Unlimited Source Of Fuel

http://www.psfk.com/2011/01/game-changi ... fuel.html#

Joule Unlimited may have achieved such innovation. This past September, the Massachusetts-based lab received a patent for their genetically adapted E-Coli bacterium that feeds on carbon dioxide and excretes hydrocarbons. In other words, the company has managed to turn carbon dioxide into crude oil. The process nearly mirrors photosynthesis in that it requires only water, sunlight and carbon dioxide to complete, essentially manufacturing fossil fuels at an estimated cost of $30 dollars per barrel (US).

[vision-master]

Ya all hear about how NASA is working on plasma rockets. It wuz on PBS last night. They say the engines will have the power of the sun. Now were talking.

[mos6507]

Fossil fuels are stored photosynthesis. Any solar-based process, whether biofuels or splitting water into hydrogen or what not, is ultimately limited by the maximum energy potential of immediate sunlight, not the stored sunlight of fossil fuels.

We're already tying up a large percentage of that solar potential through agriculture, and what we're not tying up through agriculture probably needs to be left alone for a functional biosphere. So there's a limit to how much sunlight we can redirect for fuel production.

As such, no solar process, even if it were 100% efficient, could ever replace what fossil fuels do for us.

Not to say these developments are useless. We'll certainly take what we can get, but the rhetoric, which either implies or directly states that these things could be drop-in replacements for fossil fuels, is seriously flawed.

I really don't buy all those stories that say we could run the planet on the land area of greater houston or something. The math behind that stuff is really off.

This is probably why Lovelock is gangbusters for nukes, because it's the only real step up from fossil fuels in energy density. Either we perfect nukes or we do some serious powerdown, but I really don't think we can have a modern ecotopia off renewables.

[Timo]

Ecotopia is in the eye of the beholder. For me, ecotopia is possible, but that is only because i define it differently for myself than you or anyone else does. Needless to say, my vision of ecotopia is far less intricate than the standard of living we have all developed for ourselves. But, on the whole, i agree with most everything else you said.

[ian807]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/opinion/a-brave-new-world-of-fossil-fuels-on-demand/article1871149/print/
Joule says it now has “a library” of fossil-fuel organisms at work in its Massachusetts labs, each engineered to produce a different fuel. ... Obama transition vet joins Joule board
http://www.bizjournals.com/boston/news/ ... board.html

Renewable fuels developer Joule Unlimited Inc. said John Podesta, a veteran of two White House administrations, has joined its board of directors.

Like most cornucopian claims, it all makes perfect sense if you ignore things like "costs" "energy return" and "quantities."

[Maddog78]

So now that Chesapeake is exiting the natural gas business, do you plan on pumping biofools as your next scam?

No, I plan to move to Nor Cal and grow and sell weed.
Seems to be the way to go.

[vision-master]

Dude, hook me up.

[Maddog78]

pstarr said there is a treehouse for sale right beside him.
I'll bring some new seeds from B.C. and we're good to go.

[Windmills]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/opinion/a-brave-new-world-of-fossil-fuels-on-demand/article1871149/print/

has produced ethanol (for example) at a rate equivalent to 10,000 U.S. gallons an acre a year. It anticipates that this yield could hit 25,000 gallons an acre a year when scaled for commercial production, equivalent to roughly 800 barrels of crude an acre a year.

Gotta love those linear extrapolations. Everything always scales in a nice, straight line, doesn't it?

So Podesta is on board. I think we're supposed to be as impressed as when Google and others hopped on the Bloombox pump-and-dump. Bloom who? Exactly my point. Podesta is going to do his cameo, collect his fee, and get off when the ship sinks.

[Carlhole]

Gotta love those linear extrapolations. Everything always scales in a nice, straight line, doesn't it?

So Podesta is on board. I think we're supposed to be as impressed as when Google and others hopped on the Bloombox pump-and-dump. Bloom who? Exactly my point. Podesta is going to do his cameo, collect his fee, and get off when the ship sinks.

http://www.jouleunlimited.com/about/advisors

This is George Church's company. He's one of the world's leading geneticists in the world and is most famous for his work with the Human Genome Project. All of the company's Board, Management and Advisors are leading researchers in their fields. It's impressive to read over the credentials of such a high-caliber crew of academics.

Joule Unlimited is also not alone in this field. Craig Venter's Synthetic Genomics, which has a $600 million contract with Exxon to develop biofuels, is a competitor of Joule's. There are about a dozen research-oriented firms that show great promise in various bio-energy fuel production areas. Joule happens to be MY favorite in the field; I've posted stuff about it before.

The company has already demonstrated the operation of artificial photosynthesis in the lab. Now, the pilot plant has finished construction and pilot operations have begun. The news is all still very, very positive -- at least, nothing in the latest article on this company suggests any delays or difficulties.

[Homesteader]

Same old, same old. Let us know when the stuff is commercially available.


How is the scaling up of ethanol going?

[TheAntiDoomer]

Fossil fuels are stored photosynthesis. Any solar-based process, whether biofuels or splitting water into hydrogen or what not, is ultimately limited by the maximum energy potential of immediate sunlight, not the stored sunlight of fossil fuels.

We're already tying up a large percentage of that solar potential through agriculture, and what we're not tying up through agriculture probably needs to be left alone for a functional biosphere. So there's a limit to how much sunlight we can redirect for fuel production.

As such, no solar process, even if it were 100% efficient, could ever replace what fossil fuels do for us.

Not to say these developments are useless. We'll certainly take what we can get, but the rhetoric, which either implies or directly states that these things could be drop-in replacements for fossil fuels, is seriously flawed.

I really don't buy all those stories that say we could run the planet on the land area of greater houston or something. The math behind that stuff is really off.

This is probably why Lovelock is gangbusters for nukes, because it's the only real step up from fossil fuels in energy density. Either we perfect nukes or we do some serious powerdown, but I really don't think we can have a modern ecotopia off renewables.

Mos, let's do the math shall we?

One acre of land of land has the potential of 7.26 megawatts per day x365 = 2646 megawatst per year = 8805 Gigajoules per year

One barrel of oil contains about 6.1 Gigajoules

8805/6.1 = about 1440 Barrels of oil Equivalent potential, so to get their number for 800 barrels of oil per acre, it looks like they would have to be somewhere around 50% efficient.

So in summary Mos the numbers do they the Potential energy to produce 800 barrels of oil as they claim is there.

[diemos]

Plenty of deserts out there.

More than enough to provide our current energy needs if we had a way to convert 50% of incoming light into liquid fuel.

Which we don't.

[TheAntiDoomer]

Plenty of deserts out there.

More than enough to provide our current energy needs if we had a way to convert 50% of incoming light into liquid fuel.

Which we don't.

Joule says it now has “a library” of fossil-fuel organisms at work in its Massachusetts labs, each engineered to produce a different fuel. It has “proven the process,” has produced ethanol (for example) at a rate equivalent to 10,000 U.S. gallons an acre a year. It anticipates that this yield could hit 25,000 gallons an acre a year when scaled for commercial production, equivalent to roughly 800 barrels of crude an acre a year.

so they have proven they can do 300 baarrels or so a year, and claim they can get it to 800, not bad at all.

[Windmills]

example) at a rate equivalent to 10,000 U.S. gallons an acre a year. It anticipates that this yield could hit 25,000 gallons an acre a year when scaled for commercial production, equivalent to roughly 800 barrels of crude an acre a year.

so they have proven they can do 300 baarrels or so a year, and claim they can get it to 800, not bad at all.[/quote]

Rate equivalent is an extrapolation from some other production number. It doesn't mean they've actually achieved 10,000gal/acre/year. It could mean they've produced a few drops at a certain time rate that, when scaled up on the back of an envelope, gives 10,000 gal/acre/year. I'd just like to see some more clear numbers.

[crude_intentions]

I have a question. This man made organism can live in any type of water, needs only sunlight and CO2 to reproduce and creates fuel directly? What happens if this stuff were to get into the enviroment? I'd love cheap gas but not if I have to worry about some guy smoking on the beach and setting half the atlantic on fire.