Oilgae Club - an Online Community for Algae Fuel Enthusiasts Worldwide.

60 times more oil from algae at low cost !! 62

Hideki Kanda, a japanese scientist has developed a method using DME, liquified Dimethyl Ether, to extract oil from blue - green algae at room temperature.

His method takes advantage of the mixing ablility of DME with water and oil.

DME can dewater blue-green algae and extract oils from it concurrently at room temperature, the amount of energy required for dewatering and drying can be reduced drastically when compared to conventional methods.
With no organic solvents required for extraction, the process can be a low-cost and environment-friendly method of extraction.

CRIEPI, a japanese organisation where Hideki Kanda, is the chief scientist, has successfully extracted over 60 times more green crude oil (based on the dry blue-green algae weight) in its experiments than traditional methods.

Isnt that amazing !!

Wed July 21 2010 01:26:28 PM by Emily dme  |  oil extraction  |  dewatering 8912 views

Comments - 18

  • Mahesh wrote:
    Wed July 21 2010 03:02:03 PM

    Thats nice, but separation of DME from the oil, that is second set of downstream processing may cost and it may remain in the final product(traces), which may bring down the quality of end product...

    Vote Up! 8 Vote Down! 0

  • Douglas wrote:
    Wed July 21 2010 06:05:55 PM

    I totally agree with this concept. Itz far less expensive..more natural....in the words of native prophecy....it will B the ancestors who will come to life to change the way we live...hence algae oldest ancestor....thnkx for posting this

    Vote Up! 5 Vote Down! 0

  • Veronica wrote:
    Wed July 21 2010 11:32:14 PM

    That is great ! Thanks Emily for the post.Any further information on usage of DME is welcome.
    Mahesh's apprehension is valid.
    But am sure it will be addressed and solutions sought soon.

    Vote Up! 1 Vote Down! 0

  • Shankar wrote:
    Thu July 22 2010 07:54:33 AM

    Am not sure about the 60 times more oil !
    Sounds terrific. but it implies that at present a lot of oil is not extracted.
    From whatever I studied and heard from experts, I never thought that there is so much oil left behind in algae after extraction. cant be 60 times . is that a typo ?

    Vote Up! 1 Vote Down! 0

  • Thomas wrote:
    Thu July 22 2010 09:46:45 AM

    its nice to hear but i need to know how much percent did he extract with other solvents and what is the percentage of lipid in that algae and also as blue greens have harder cell walls when compared with other algae it may need a stronger solvent like ether

    Vote Up! 7 Vote Down! 0

  • Adiabatics wrote:
    Thu July 22 2010 12:51:34 PM

    Emily's blog and the press release do state that an ether is used. What am I overlooking in Thomas' comment?

    The press release does not identify the "traditional method" so the claim of 60X improvement --- while not a typo --- is not sufficiently substantiated.

    Vote Up! 9 Vote Down! 0

  • Krupali wrote:
    Thu July 22 2010 02:17:51 PM

    Thanks Emily for the post. This post is very important for all algae fuel researchers.
    The article/ blog posted by Emily gives several urls.
    The one that is important is
    Just cut and paste this and you wont doubt anymore that 60 times is a type Mr shankar.:-)

    Vote Up! 3 Vote Down! 0

  • Shankar wrote:
    Thu July 22 2010 02:35:13 PM

    Thanks Krupali.
    I am inerested in knowing as to how people like
    Bglager who is a researcher in this field will react to such a finding. Bglager are u there !!
    I am looking for your expert comments .
    there may be other experts in this club and there comments too are welcome.

    Vote Up! 1 Vote Down! 0

  • Duncan wrote:
    Sun July 25 2010 02:40:09 AM

    Agree with Adiabatics. There is a need to substantiate the claim 60 x.

    Vote Up! 1 Vote Down! 0

  • Natalia wrote:
    Fri July 30 2010 12:03:30 PM

    60 x ?

    Vote Up! 0 Vote Down! 0

  • Shankar wrote:
    Fri October 01 2010 09:42:18 PM

    60 X !!

    Any further news on this.
    We need a breakthrough like this ie something that does produce oil much better than the present models.

    Vote Up! 1 Vote Down! 0

  • Pitts wrote:
    Fri October 01 2010 10:09:44 PM

    This is very very interesting.

    Vote Up! 1 Vote Down! 0

  • Mon October 04 2010 09:41:29 PM

    Delome says
    " Omega-3 fatty acids are not only healthy to consume, but may also have a large role in a new algae-based biofuel. During a research screening process intended to sift through hundreds of microorganisms that could potentially aid in omega-3 fatty acid production, Ocean Nutrition Canada, a supplier of omega-3 fatty acid supplements, found a heterotrophic strain of microalgae that is 60 times more productive compared to other strains."

    I have not heard or read about this finding of Ocean Nutrition of Canada.

    In both cases it is important to clearly state
    " 60 x than ...."

    We need a english translation of this pdf

    Vote Up! 0 Vote Down! 0

  • Natalia wrote:
    Thu October 07 2010 02:54:11 PM

    Any further news on this !?

    Vote Up! 0 Vote Down! 0

  • Fri October 08 2010 03:22:20 AM

    It seems obvious that this story is screwed up to the max!
    Lets take an example of an algae sample with 50% by wieght of oil in a dry algae sample of say 10 lbs. OK, we press out 50% of the total wieght as oil which would be 5 lbs of our 10 lbs. of dry algae.

    ( I know it is impossible to recover 100% of the oil by pressing, but for the sake of this discussion lets assume we could.)

    So we have recovered 5 lbs. of oil from our 10 lbs. of dry algae. This guy claims to have a system that is 60 times better than a "traditional" method. Any traditional method, he dosen't specify any particular one, he is 60X better than all of them. Evan if he ment 60 percent better (more production, more efficient??? what??) he would be way out in left field. So he says he is 60X better, more oil,
    60 X 5 lbs. = 300lbs. of oil from a 10 lb sample.

    As A.A. would say: BBB "Bullshit Baffles Brain"

    F.O.A. don't swallow everything you read on the internet. It may leave a bad taste in you mouth.
    Just put some simple math and logic to thier statements and see the truth, if it is there.

    Alan Schaefer

    Vote Up! 0 Vote Down! 0

  • Shankar wrote:
    Tue February 15 2011 03:15:28 AM

    I saw the some news about this in oilgae newsletter recently. !!

    Vote Up! 0 Vote Down! 0

  • Gopinelli wrote:
    Wed March 09 2011 06:18:30 PM

    60 times is great science fiction, if the claim is of extracting oil from biomass.

    I think the info is misleading. There are limits for certain things.You may claim 60 times more biomass yield supported by a ground breaking technology, but not more oil than what the cells actually contain.

    Let us look closely at Hideki's 60.

    A cell can't be 100% lipid. Currently algae species with up to 50% oil yield are known.

    Their claim is not 60 times. Its 60 times more than what we have now. So it is 60 1= 61 times of what we have.

    If they extract 500 kg lipids out of 1 ton biomass of 50% lipid content, the industry should currently be extracting only 8.2 kg oil out of 1000 kg biomass.

    1000 kg x 50% = 500 kg oil

    If Hideki Kanda extracts the entire oil, then his maximum yield is 500 kg.

    then the industry average should be 500 kg/61 =8.2kg.

    What I understand is 20% oil extraction is quite common in the industry. That is 200 Kg oil out of 1000 kg biomass. If Hideki can extract 60 times more oil from bimass he should be extracting 12,200 Kg oil out of 1000 kg biomass!!!! Thats awsome. but where does these extra kilos (or tons) come from?

    This should be Ramar petrol of the 90's or he should be having a palm oil mill next to his algae facility. Or else, our elimentary school maths are totally wrong.


    Vote Up! 0 Vote Down! 0

  • Tumadman wrote:
    Sat March 02 2013 10:06:29 PM

    how to text a girl you like what to text a girl you like things to text a girl you like good morning texts sweet good morning text

    Vote Up! 0 Vote Down! 0

Login to Post a Comment