pure vegetable oil from algae oil

crude vegetable oil, diester, bio-ethanol or other biofuels, or fuel of vegetable origin ...
User avatar
toto65
Éconologue good!
Éconologue good!
posts: 490
Registration: 30/11/06, 20:01




by toto65 » 31/12/07, 18:25

I do not have it on hand anymore.
it dates from the month of November.
I would see if the original is still on the school workstation.
I promise you nothing.
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79112
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972




by Christophe » 31/12/07, 18:36

Too bad it seemed to be a really complete job ... if you find it send me the email stp. Thank you and bonane!
0 x
User avatar
toto65
Éconologue good!
Éconologue good!
posts: 490
Registration: 30/11/06, 20:01




by toto65 » 07/01/08, 21:49

Sorry I did not keep it on the IUT server.
a really complete job ...


No, not really there were a lot of pictures. The shape more than the bottom. The goal was to give a presentation in English. To see how we manage with the language of Shakespeare.
It was relatively basic. You would have been disappointed.

I had 12,5 ...
0 x
User avatar
rescwood
I understand econologic
I understand econologic
posts: 85
Registration: 05/09/05, 14:30
Location: Luxie (Southern Belgium)




by rescwood » 07/03/08, 18:53

Unless I'm wrong, these growth yields are huge:

70 to 150 000 L per Ha and per year, at the very least, minimum 50X the best yields obtained in intensive land cultivation !!!

The HVB of the HVB is 9032 Kcal / Kg, either 37800 KJ / Kg (1cal = 4,185J) or 10,5 KWh / Kg (1Wh = 3600J), 110 000 l per ha and per year this would make us (density 0,9 ): ((110 000 * 0,9) * 10,5) / 365 * 24 = the equivalent of 118 KW of power "installed" by Ha, 11,8 W / m2.

If we consider that it is the solar radiation which brings the energy necessary for the production of the oil, 23,6 W / m2 (the sun shines on average only 12H per day) ... Better than the PV of the market ( 10 to 15Wc / m2). In a very sunny region 230W / m2 (2000 KWh / year), this would give a conversion efficiency in oil of the order of 10%, not to mention that the plant breathes and synthesizes other substances for its growth that could also be valued .

Should see the energy invested in the process to have a global idea ...
0 x
Noïde738
I learn econologic
I learn econologic
posts: 22
Registration: 18/09/08, 09:40
Location: 17

Sheaths of algae




by Noïde738 » 23/12/08, 09:37

Be careful, avoid sheaths of PVC algae, it's a waste package.

I have tried to make a grinder and a centrifuge, I have not followed everything, but it is enough to crush the seaweed and centrifuge to separate the fat from the rest?
0 x
extend in harmony has the virtue rebirth (Nei Ching Su Wen)
Noïde738
I learn econologic
I learn econologic
posts: 22
Registration: 18/09/08, 09:40
Location: 17




by Noïde738 » 23/12/08, 09:46

Oops, so you also need a press.

For your diatom, if you want the list of minerals needed, I had even tried with fertilizer large area, but the seaweed does not like, isochrysis may please but I do not do not know his percentage of fat.

I have in breeding (in diatom) of Chatoceros Gracilis : Shock: and Calcitran cat.

It's funny as Gracilis name, it would not be the beast (no, the plant) sought?

In mineral solution, I use those of Conway, an American, more silica for diatoms than I have.
0 x
extend in harmony has the virtue rebirth (Nei Ching Su Wen)
Elec
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 779
Registration: 21/12/08, 20:38




by Elec » 11/01/09, 20:21

Fuels based on seaweed oil have an interest in air transport, but really no for individual cars. Much more ecological and economical solutions exist here and now.
0 x
Elec
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 779
Registration: 21/12/08, 20:38




by Elec » 14/01/09, 05:39

In terms of cost, according to the Shamash team, no team in the world has managed to go below $10per liter of microalgal biodiesel ... Which makes us 1590 euros a barrel, or 2557 dollars a barrel.

Problems:

- To constantly supply microalgae with minerals is expensive
- Filtering a few grams of oil in each liter of water is expensive in energy.
- Fighting crop infections is problematic
- Controlling physicochemical parameters is difficult
- Preventing the proliferation in the environment of microlalgal GMOs used in crops is impossible
- No prospective study has been carried out on the environmental impact of crops (water consumption, chemical pollution, eutrophication, etc.) if they were carried out on a large scale
- And especially: the competition of the hyper cheap electron fueling electric cars is very very rough!
0 x
User avatar
Cuicui
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 3547
Registration: 26/04/05, 10:14
x 6




by Cuicui » 14/01/09, 10:02

Elec wrote:Problems:
- To constantly supply microalgae with minerals is expensive
- Filtering a few grams of oil in each liter of water is expensive in energy.
- Fighting crop infections is problematic
- Controlling physicochemical parameters is difficult
- Preventing the proliferation in the environment of microlalgal GMOs used in crops is impossible
- No prospective study has been carried out on the environmental impact of crops (water consumption, chemical pollution, eutrophication, etc.) if they were carried out on a large scale
- And especially: the competition of the hyper cheap electron fueling electric cars is very very rough!

Certainly.
But the problems are made to be solved. It is not because it is difficult that it is not feasible. Must invest in research. Ideally, everyone can grow their algae and fuel at home. One way to use solar energy, with the advantage of not having to change diesel vehicles. If I could produce 2-3 liters a day, that would be enough for me.
0 x
Elec
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 779
Registration: 21/12/08, 20:38




by Elec » 14/01/09, 16:27

Cuicui wrote: Ideally, everyone can grow their algae and fuel at home.

Euro 10 per liter is for industrial production.

A homemade production, it would cost you 2 3 times more expensive (20 30 euros per liter), or more.
Beyond 6000 dollars a barrel (1 barrel = 159 liters), it hurts a little the bill auto;)

A basic fact: the surface yield of conversion of solar energy into chemical energy by photosynthetic organisms is very low. You can invest whatever you want in the search, you will not change this data. It's a physical limit.

Ministry of the Environment wrote:AGROFUEL AND ENVIRONMENT report, published in December 2008, page 8:

One of the first things to consider is the energy aspect of the problem. This aspect must be kept in mind permanently because it allows a fair comparison of the different solutions for the supply of energy to economic activities from a single variable: the power, ie the amount of energy available in a given time.

Agrofuels are in the zone of the lowest yields, they are in fact limited by the photosynthesis yield which is very low (<1%). The third generation, using algae, will remain largely less effective than any "electrical" solutions, including the use of solar energy. It is important to keep these considerations in mind, especially since the low yield of photovoltaics is often mentioned as a criticism of this mode of energy production. In fact, it is indeed the most profitable source of electricity in terms of mobilized area (...)
http://tempsreel.nouvelobs.com/file/614297.pdf


Image

The importance of the surfaces required by agrofuels comes from their physical characteristics. Energy power is defined as the power available, on average over the year, per unit of land area. With photosynthetic solar energy conversion efficiencies of less than 0,5%, the biomass energy output is between 0,01 W / m2 and 1,2 W / m2 (Smil, 2003). The highest energy output comes from intensively maintained forests, followed by sugar cane; the lowest energy intensity of unmanaged temperate forests; between these two extremes are residues and crops like maize. The productive hierarchies of ACG1 and ACG2, which respectively include sugar cane and managed forests, are based on a physical basis).

By comparison, fossil fuels are between 1 000 and 10 000 W / m2. They thus make it possible to mobilize little terrestrial surface to produce a huge quantity of fossil fuels, but obviously with different physical constraints, this time holding to the volumes in stock. This is why some researchers have suggested from the outset that CAs could not simply replace the needs covered by fossil fuels because they do not have a necessary surface on the land (Boardman, 1976). Agrofuels are part of a wide range of alternative energy sources to oil (IEA, 2008) and, in the competition between them, the physical characteristics of each will be important. They affect their potential for profitability.

The third-generation agrofuels, the ACG3, based on algae (which would no longer produce a fuel but hydrogen) would be around 3 W / m2 , or at the level of hydroelectricity over water. Wind power has nearly ten times the power output between 5 and 20 W / m2, and mountain hydropower stands between 10 and 50
W / m2


And with solar, we are between 100 and 200 W per square meter.
0 x

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "biofuels, biofuels, biofuels, BtL, non-fossil alternative fuels ..."

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 164 guests