The nation is abuzz with talk of replacing imported oil with
"biofuels" produced from homegrown materials. This
past April, for example, the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency honored singer Willie ("On the Road Again")
Nelson for his efforts to promote the use of biodiesel
through his "BioWillie" brand, which is now being
distributed at filling stations nationally. Clearly, many
hurdles stand in the way of making such biofuels
commercially competitive with traditional sources. Indeed,
it remains very difficult to forecast whether powering our
vehicles with crop derivatives will ever be a truly economic
proposition. Still, it's not too early to ponder what the
widespread adoption of biofuels would mean for the
environment and to take a hard look at the best strategy
available, which may require tapping a very unconventional
crop.
Some back-of-the-envelope calculations are helpful in
this regard. Michael S. Briggs, a biodiesel advocate at the
University of New Hampshire, has estimated that the United
States would need about 140 billion gallons of biodiesel
each year to replace all the petroleum-based transportation
fuels currently being used. This calculation is premised on
the idea that Americans could over time switch to using
diesel vehicles, as European drivers are clearly doing.
(Half the cars sold in Europe now run on diesel.) Although
one could make a similar appraisal for the amount of
biomass-derived ethanol needed to fill all of our
transportation-fuel needs, it would be unlikely that drivers
would ever want to tank up entirely on ethanol, which
contains only two-thirds the energy of gasoline gallon for
gallon, whereas biodiesel (according to Briggs) ends up
being only 2 percent less fuel-efficient than petroleum-based
diesel. Hence a switchover would demand no new technology and
would not significantly reduce the driving range of a car or
truck.
The chief feedstock for biodiesel is plant oil
derived from one crop or another. Many candidates have been
considered—including hemp. Perhaps a more reasonable
choice is rapeseed oil. An acre of rapeseed could provide
about 100 gallons of biodiesel per year. To fuel the
country this way would thus require 1.4 billion acres of
rapeseed fields. This number is a sizable fraction of the
total U.S. land area (2.4 billion acres) and considerably
more than the 400 million or so acres under cultivation in this
country. So the burden on freshwater supplies and the general
disruption that would accompany such a switch in fuel sources
would be immense.
This simple exercise is sobering.
It suggests that weaning ourselves from petroleum fuels and
growing rapeseed instead to power the nation's vehicles
would be an environmental catastrophe. Are more productive
oil crops the answer? Oil palms currently top the list
because they can provide enough oil to produce about 500 gallons
of biodiesel per acre per year, which reduces the land
requirement fivefold. Yet its cultivation demands a tropical
climate, and its large-scale production, which currently
comes from such countries as Malaysia and Indonesia, is a
significant factor in the ongoing destruction of what
rainforest remains there. Conservationists have been warning
that palm oil production poses a dire threat to the
dwindling population of orangutans, for example, which exist in
the wild only in Borneo and Sumatra. Even the World Bank
attributes the accelerating rate of forest clearing in
Indonesia largely to the establishment of oil-palm
plantations. So here again, the prospect of dedicating
sufficient land to growing feedstock for the world's
transportation needs promises to be an environmental
nightmare.
There is, however, a "crop" that is
widely recognized as having the potential to meet the
demands of a biodiesel-based transportation fleet without
devastating the natural landscape: algae. Some varieties of
these single-celled plants can contain 50 percent or more
oil. And they grow much more rapidly than ordinary
cultivars—with doubling times that can be as short as
several hours.
The U.S. Department of Energy funded considerable research
on biofuel production using algae after the oil shocks of
the 1970s, an effort known as the Aquatic Species Program.
Although this DOE program was terminated in the mid-1990s,
much experience was gained through research and various
demonstration projects. The results suggested that algae can
be grown in sufficient density to provide for the production
of several thousand gallons of biodiesel per acre
per year—a full order of magnitude better than can be
expected using palm oil and two orders of magnitude better than
soybeans.
So it is no wonder that many scientists and
entrepreneurs are once again looking hard at the prospects
for using algae to produce transportation fuels. And sizable
amounts of money are being invested in various schemes for
doing so. "When Katrina hit and the price of diesel
went to $3.20, that's when the flood gates opened,"
says David J. Bayless, a professor of mechanical engineering
at Ohio University in Athens, Ohio.
Bayless and his
colleagues have been working with scientists at Oak Ridge
National Laboratory to engineer a device that can grow
cyanobacteria ("blue-green algae"). It uses carbon
dioxide from power-plant flue gases and sunlight that is
captured by a parabolic dish and distributed to the growing
surfaces through optical fibers. With his enclosed
bioreactor, Bayless claims to be able to produce as much as
60 grams of biomass per square meter of growing surface per
day, which is about twice the highest long-term productivity
achieved by the Aquatic Species Program in a large-scale
demonstration in Hawaii using open ponds. Whether Bayless's
system can be scaled up and operated economically remains to
be seen, but some people appear to think there's a possibility:
Manhattan-based Veridium Corporation has licensed this invention
in hopes of commercializing it.
Isaac Berzin, who
left MIT to found a Cambridge startup named GreenFuel
Technologies Corporation, is developing algal bioreactors
that would similarly exploit the carbon dioxide coming out of
power plants to fertilize the growth of algae that can then
be used to produce biodiesel. John Lewnard, who is vice
president of process development for GreenFuel, is keenly
aware of the challenges involved in devising a bioreactor
that costs little and supports sufficient productivity that
excessive land use is not a factor.
GreenFuel
Technologies operated a prototype system at the MIT
cogeneration facility and is currently setting up a more
advanced bioreactor at a natural-gas fired power station at
an undisclosed location in the American Southwest, where
having abundant sunlight for growing algae is presumably
less of a problem than in Cambridge. Lewnard says that
productivities of about 100 grams of algae per meter squared
per day (about three times what was demonstrated during the
Aquatic Species Program) is needed to achieve commercial
viability, adding that "we're working very hard to meet
that target."
Another recent effort of this type is
being carried out by Kent SeaTech Corporation, which has its
headquarters in San Diego. This company has gained
experience growing algae in conjunction with its striped
bass aquaculture operations near California's Salton
Sea. So it was poised to respond when the California state
government started looking for ways to treat the water flowing
into this closed basin, which receives huge quantities of
nutrient-laden runoff from adjacent agricultural lands.
"It's no real difficult feat to turn nutrients into
algae," says Kent SeaTech's director of research, Jon C.
Van Olst, "but how do you get it out of the water? They
are almost impossible to harvest." Van Olst and his
coworkers have been devising ways to enhance the settling of
the algae, and they are currently doing research on turning
algal biomass into useful fuel. Van Olst believes that
several separate benefits have to come together to make
growing algae an attractive proposition—the removal of
nutrients from wastewater, the capture of carbon dioxide
that would other otherwise go into the atmosphere, the
production of biodiesel from algal oils and the use of the
remaining biomass for animal feeds. "All those things
together might [make] this cost effective," he
says.
The people now working on these and several similar
commercial ventures are clearly eager to make growing algae
a going business in this country. Yet it's not hard to find
experts who view such prospects as dim indeed. John R.
Benemann, a private consultant in Walnut Creek, California,
manages the International Network on Biofixation of
CO2 and Greenhouse Gas Abatement with Microalgae
for the International Energy Agency. He helped author the
final report of the Aquatic Species Program and has decades of
experience in this field. "Growing algae is cheap," he
says, but "certainly not as cheap as growing palm
oil." And he is particularly skeptical about attempts
to make algal production more economical by using enclosed
bioreactors (rather than open ponds, as were used for the
Aquatic Species Program). He points out that Japan spent
hundreds of millions of dollars on such research, which
never went anywhere. Asked to comment about why there is so
much effort in that direction now, he responds, "It's
bizarre; it's totally absurd."
Even more telling is
the reaction of Gerald R. Cysewski, president and chief
executive officer of Cyanotech Corporation, a Hawaii company
that grows algae for sale as a food supplement. Cysewski,
who holds a doctorate in chemical engineering from UC Berkeley,
is no stranger to the biofuels concept: For his Ph.D. (which
he earned more than two decades ago), he studied the
enzymatic production of ethanol from cellulose. Yet he has
turned down recent offers to collaborate on projects to use
algae for producing biofuels, preferring to keep his
business focused on products that sell anywhere from $18 to
$380 per kilogram (fuel oil, he points out, goes for
something like 45 cents per kilogram). "In the
laboratory, you can create some very efficient bioreactors, but
it just isn't scalable," he says. Asked whether
biodiesel will ever be made this way, he responds: "Not
from microalgae—I just can't see it."
Even Kent SeaTech's Van Olst has serious reservations.
"I'd put myself in with the skeptics," he says.
"It may work, but it's going to take a while and a lot
of research before we get anywhere."