The following was left as a comment in the algae biodiesel discussion by Sam Haynes. I felt it too interesting to be left buried deep in that other post, so here it is. Some eye-opening points here, please leave your comments…
"When I was first asked to write an article on alternate fuels for this blog, I did so to test my ability to write an article which would generate some interest, arouse some participation and stir the pot of discussion, so to speak.
I had no idea that what I wrote would stir the pot so well.
I have learned a lot reading these posts over the last few weeks. I encourage you to keep stirring, for I firmly believe that you can, one by one, piece by piece, come up with realistic approaches with meaningful ROI.
One of the early posts remarked that there is no one all encompassing solution to the alternative fuel pie challenge, rather various slices, each appropriate to a unique situation or set of constraints. I agree.
Marine Algae Biodiesel (MAB)is specific to the needs of our national transportation systems. The consumer infra-structure is already in place, needing only a change of signage on the pumps and station marquees. We could conclude that the arguments pro MAB are good and sufficient, requiring only resolution of the political and venture capital financial dog fights we are only too familiar with.
Ethanol from U.S. corn fields is a highly subsidized product requiring massive conversion of food grain acreage into subsidized corn production. The negative back lash against the status quo (AMD in case) is mounting daily and rightly so. The ROI number crunch is not friendly to Ethanol for fuel. Brazil is universally cited as a model for ethanol for transportation but hardly any mention is made of the massive and necessary technology changes in automobile fuel handling to make the system work. There seems to be too much smoke and mirrors around the concept for the U.S. to make Ethanol a meaningful fuel alternate.
Fuel cells and elementary Hydrogen are also two exciting alternatives, both of which would require massive industrial production and delivery technology changes. Both are worth further R&D and are feasible for limited specialized applications where cost is a minor factor.
Two of the most interesting alternate sources are Wind Turbines, excellent for remote power grid locations where wind is a constant reliable source, and Geothermal steam tukrbine power generators.
Of the two, Wind is a highly developed, currently in use application in remote and isolated regions globally. Its ROI based on location constraints is excellent.
Geothermal power generation is a sleeping giant currently being exploited around the world in some of the most unlikely locations. There is something almost seminal about drawing nourishment from the heart of mother earth.
The potential energy available from the hot strata deep within our crust is for all practical purposes, inexhaustible. The technology for deep well drilling is already available and currently being used. Deep strata sourcing can be drilled literally anywhere a rig can be set up.
More easily tapped geothermal sources can be made along any volcanic fault lines, of which the U.S. has several. (I used to live in Hawai'i (The comma actually belongs there) and local proposals to tap the main island volcano, Kiluea, for live steam production cum turbo electric power generation were met with controlled rage by some of the state's native Hawaian population who still cling to the pagan religious beliefs, especially those of Pele, goddess of fire and volcanos. Powerful stuff! There are more user friendly places.
Within the contiguous states, the most likely location is Yellowstone National Park. Yellowstone has several good reasons for establishing a large geothermal power plant there, the obvious one being evidenced by the geysers, numerous geysers, present in what geologists and volcanologists call the Yellowstone Caldera. The geothermal source is very close to the surface there, making its use more cost effective.
There is a more pressing reason to source power there and that is the history of Yellowstone Caldera. Some seventeen thousand years ago it blew up, sending a lethal layer of volcanic ash as far east as Kansas, killing everything it fell upon. The blow up was the latest in a cyclical blast that some geologists calculate to occur every 17,000 years, plus or minus.
It would seem that we are presently due for that big bang at Yellowstone any time now. Not impressed? Due diligence, my friends, due diligence. Google: "Yellowstone Caldera volcanic activity". BTW, I am citing all this off the top of my head from data I read some years ago. Check me out, please. Don't take anyone's word for anything until you personally have checked out their credibility. Me included!
Their is an ad by General Electric, I believe, currently running on TV, promoting geothermal energy. They make some mind boggling claims. Check that out.
I believe that, using all or some of the alternate energy pie slices above, that we could be totally energy independent within the next fifteen to twenty years.
We put a man on the moon, not once but many times. We can do anything if we set a national goal and commit to making personal sacrifices till we get it done.
The only thing standing in our way is our own apathy, a "Let George do it; I don't want to get involved" national curse. My friends, it is for me a struggle of morals and spirituality against the lust for power and greed for money.
Election day is coming up next Tuesday. Do you know whose bed your candidate is sleeping in tonight? Do you approve? Tell that scoundrel next week. Demand accountability. It is your right. One small vote can make a big difference."
Aloha oe,
Pathfinder
…thanks for that Sam, interesting stuff I'm sure you'd agree. So, what do you think…?
