Inputs on algae oil costs

[cacofonix]

One area of contention and debate has been the actual costs to make biodiesel from algae. While I have done a fair bit of work, the figures given by various companies vary so widely that they are practically useless.

Any ideas on how one can go about estimating the true cost of making biodiesel from algae on a large scale?

I know it is not an easy question to answer, any thoughts and inputs will be welcome

[adsense][/adsense]

[Muckraker69]

I make biodiesel from waste veggie oil at present. The oil I pick up currently for free from a local restaurant. I buy Methanol and Lye for the process. Except for a few filters, there is not much expense other than my time. I figure my cost to be about $1 or less a gallon currently. The rise in fuel costs affected the price of methanol. IF you do not yet have a source of oil, you may be SOL as there has been a lot of guys trying to get ahold of oil including mine. That is the best reason for growing your own from algae. I can't get enough WVO, so I want to grow my own.

I see no reason why making biodiesel from algae oil would cost anything more. Once you have the oil, the rest of the process should be the same.

You may want to look into just converting the truck to run on the oil without making the biodiesel. You can get a conversion kit for as little as $800 if you install it yourself. That is my next step. Too much work making the bio. I would rather just filter it and use it.

[Howard]

Based on some research I did back in the spring, the fixed and variable costs to run a commercial biodiesel producing about 5 million gallons per year, was about 75 cents per gallon. The big cost is for the feedstock oil.

It takes about 7 pounds of feedstock oil to produce a gallon of biodiesel. So take the pump price of diesel fuel, (currently $4.60 around here), and subtract the 75 cents ($4.60 - .75) = $3.85. Then divide that by 7 = 55 cents per pound as a break even cost for your feedstock. This is before you add in any offsetting income from glycerin and the algae cake, if any.

Can the algae cake be fermented to produce ethanol to replace methanol in the catalyzation process (with the CO2 that produces flowing back to the alage). If so, at what cost?

For private use, close to break even is acceptable. For commercial use, you have to be at or below that to be viable. (And these numbers do not reflect the $1 per gallon blender's credit available to commercial producers). I'd suggest this be a straight up economic endeavor. What the government giveth, the government can taketh away.

[asavedlabrat]

Can one not just burn the oil straight especially in the summer. I remember on jouneytoforever website people were using straight vegatable oil in diesel engines with no problem. I do think there were a few modifications required, such as a preheater to address viscosity issues in colder weather. Looks like one could make and use straight algae oil, unless the properties of vegatable oil and algae oil are completely dis-similar as far as combustion is concerned, during warm climate. Converting to biodiesel would only be needed in cold weather.

Just a thought.

[asavedlabrat]

Just went to the journeytoforever website to clear up a few cobwebs I had about using straight vegetable oil. To do this successfully does require a type of conversion. Also mentions that the oil must be of suitable quality or will harm engine. Anyway, it is still something to think about and look into. Who knows algae oil may have superior qualites when compared to regular food grade vegetable oil and be more suitable for this application.

[Howard]

This study does not sound encouraging:

http://biopact.com/2007/07/scientist-skeptical-of-algae-to.html

What's more, it carries a 2007 publish date. Where has this been in my Google searches?

There is a link in this article to the published report, which is available to download.

[Muckraker69]

You can find all kinds of "scientists" that support the Global Warming fraud, too. There are many more that do not.
I think you will find similar conflict among scientist on this subject, as well.
We need more information and study of this topic, that is for sure.

[asavedlabrat]

Yeah, but it mostly downplays bioreactors and is only somewhat negative toward open ponds. Personally, I kind of believe the way he does regarding bioreactors. The cost of the tubes and etc. would be extreme. However, one thing that doesn't need to be overlooked is that many companies must install CO2 and NOx scrubbers anyway, with monitoring equipment that is extremely expensive. IF the production of oil from algae is a by-product and is comparable in price of other technologies why not go ahead and produce the oil. In the end capitalism will decide whether these systems are worth it or not. I would not totally give up on them.


Regarding open ponds, it is mainly the cost of harvesting. In most crops you harvest once a year and thats it. If you can get 100 gallons of oil per acre, it might not be much but at least you only had to harvest it once and extract it once. WIth algae one has to undergo multiple harvest to get the 1000 or so gallons. I don't think anyone should give up on algae because it has potential. Some strains of algae have almost a 10% solar efficiency, grow extremely fast, and have up to 50% lipid content. The shortcomings are there but with ingenuity it is possible to overcome them. I still believe oil from algae production favors the small scale producer. I would like to try harvesting the algae and then immediately undergo pyrolysis. Might be able to totally skip oil extraction. Alg 1 has stated that his algae, nannocholoropsis l., release the oil when they die and all one has to do is skim the top. I am still waiting for my order to come in to see if I can reproduce this result. I would also like to find out what percentage is released. If this is commonplace for this algae, then harvesting would not be that expensive.

[Howard]

My concern about the study has little to do with the cost of building a physical plant, but rather centers on the theoretical production limits imposed by the amount of solar energy available per unit of area. Goes directly to production claims of X gallons per acre, or whatever unit you want to work with. His math suggests the limits imposed by physics and thermodynamics are about 5% to 10% of what proponents (and most literature) suggest the potential yields could be.

By now, this should have been kicked around enough to have an answer. If in the real world, folks are matching their claims...by whatever method at whatever cost, then his analysis is wrong and you set about finding the optimal method of doing it. On the other hand, if he is right, then that changes everything (from a commercial production standpoint).

So which is it?

[asavedlabrat]

Concerns are warrented. I would place my bet that the study the government did years ago is where the theoretical limits were established. I could be wrong. However, without going through the computations, one can simply look at what is being established with other oil pressed plants and at least have the satisfaction of knowing that it can at least be 5x greater. The reason I say this is because the efficiency of most plants are around 1-3% at best. Algae are around 8 % and contain more lipid content. When someone touts 20000 or so gallons/acre, I'm skeptical, but I do believe 2000-5000gal/acre are possible.