Oil from algae: weird?
posted at 9:00 am on February 25, 2012 by Jazz Shaw
Old and busted: Gravy Train. New hotness: Algae Train.
Quite a few of us have been having some fun with President Obama’s energy speech on Thursday, but perhaps none more so than Newt Gingrich. He’s been out on the trail and getting more than a few laughs with one particular portion of the prepared remarks. Those had to do with government’s interest in bio-fuels derived from algae.
Newt Gingrich has been hitting Obama’s energy speech since the president delivered it Thursday, calling the speech funny enough to be on SNL and “something worthy of Leno or Letterman.”
Gingrich’s biggest talking point about Obama’s speech attacks the president for his embrace of investments in biofuels such as those made from algae.
He is referring to a point in Obama’s speech when the president said, “We’re making new investments in the development of gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel that’s actually made from a plant-like substance known as algae.”
On Thursday night, Gingrich mocked the president’s speech in front of an Idaho crowd, by suggesting that he should take a bottle of algae with him and “go around and we can have the Obama solution.”
“And maybe what we ought to do at Newt.org is we ought to get t-shirts that say ‘You choose.’ Gingrich went on to suggest the slogans, ‘You have Newt: Drill here, Drill Now, Pay Less. You have Obama: Have Algae, Pay More, Be Weird.”
Politics is all too often more about image than substance, as Newt knows well, and on the surface he’s found himself a target. Oil from what most people think of essentially as “pond scum” does indeed sound kind of weird. But is it? (You can find a beginner’s guide to how it’s done here.)
Research into this technology has been gong on for quite a while now, and it’s not science fiction. In fact there are some companies who have already established international partnerships to bring a variety of products to market by processing algae. But how close are we to the point where it becomes a viable source for fuel oil? Even Newt himself said we might get there in the next few decades, but those trying to do it today have run into some problems.
Case in point is Solazyme Inc., a South San-Francisco-based biofuel company that made over its product line and is now selling beauty products and nutritional supplements in addition to fuel that can be used in ground and air transportation. But how quickly the new model pays off is to be determined.
On Tuesday, Solazyme posted a wider-than-expected net loss for Q4 2011 of $15.6 million on a GAAP basis, compared with $2.9 million in the same quarter in 2010.
Revenue dropped to $14.9 million compared with $23.2 million in the fourth quarter of 2010…
Learning from failure is also critical. “We were right that algae was the best platform to make oil but wrong about how to do it,” he said.
“It soon became clear we were making renewable oils,” Wolfson said.
A Solazyme food chemist experimented with microalgae and discovered that it could be used as a cosmetic that protects against sunlight or lack of moisture. Moreover algae could also produce ingredients low in saturated fats that can be used in cookies, snacks and other foods.
I’m sure it’s just a coincidence that Solazyme has a name which sounds so much like Solyndra, so don’t worry. But they might have something more in common than that. Solazyme has already gotten more than $20M in federal grants to develop bio-fuels. I’m glad to see that the company is surviving and employing people, but there may be a lesson to be learned here from the fact that they’ve scaled back their efforts to create fuel and are instead making cosmetics and snack food supplements.
Like so many other such efforts, new technologies take time to develop and this one may still wind up producing something good on a large scale. But we don’t appear to be there yet. When the President says we’re going to “focus” on this more, we need to ask if that means pouring more taxpayer dollars into these companies and if we learned anything from Washington’s dalliance with tinkering in ethanol, wind and solar.
If Solazyme can make a go of it and become profitable on their own, that’s great – even if it’s from making skin care products. (And it’s worth noting that they are still producing fuel. In fact, United Airlines recently made their first flight using a 60/40 mix of standard and bio-fuel, and have contracted with Solazyme to purchase more fuel from them each year.) But if they’re going to produce oil on the scale required to replace a significant amount of the fossil fuels we use, they need to show that they can do so in a competitive marketplace. Algae based production of oil obviously works in the laboratory and has been expanded in volume in a few places. But to scale it up requires a huge amount of space, lots of water and other infrastructure support. Until those challenges can be overcome and allow for mass production, this may not be quite “shovel ready” just yet.
Related Posts:
Breaking on Hot Air


Report: Oversight on IRS targeting came from Washington all along

DOJ seized logs for five Fox News phones, possibly James Rosens’ parents’ house






Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Obama is the biggest azzhole the US ever had as president.
Schadenfreude on April 24, 2013 at 8:42 PM
JugEars: …tough shit!…eat shit!
KOOLAID2 on April 24, 2013 at 8:43 PM
…we have other things to do… like pay for welfare…disabilities…etc. so we can blow ourselfs up!
KOOLAID2 on April 24, 2013 at 8:46 PM
and the downside for Idi Hussein is ?????
burrata on April 24, 2013 at 8:46 PM
Well, my Canadian friends, across the lake…it is your oil…do with it what you will.
Our current government is hell-bent on shutting down oil, coal and any other fossil fuel here in the States.
Can’t upset the Saudis, you know.
But do for Canada what is best for Canada.
Most of us rational Americans will understand.
Besides, there are a few countries who will pay you in cash…not promises.
coldwarrior on April 24, 2013 at 8:48 PM
In the not so distant future..
Ever seen that satellite photo of North/South Korea at night?
Just rotate that photo 180 degrees..
Electrongod on April 24, 2013 at 8:51 PM
Whatever. We will soon have wind-powered
submarinesships that go under water.Bishop on April 24, 2013 at 8:52 PM
Ahuh. Sure. Right. I’m sure you’d be sooo mad at your fellow socialist…
Only if we’re very, very, fortunate.
MelonCollie on April 24, 2013 at 8:56 PM
He’ll do anything to hurt the economy. Obamaphones and food stamps. The new norm…and all to plan.
CW on April 24, 2013 at 8:57 PM
nobar on April 24, 2013 at 9:01 PM
I didn’t mean that.
I was implying a satellite photo of a future North America compared to the photo of the Korea’s today but rotated.
Canada has an abundance of light..
U.S. not so much..
Electrongod on April 24, 2013 at 9:01 PM
Canadians (Canadiens for Quebecers) have gotten more feisty since their NHL teams are playing better.
bw222 on April 24, 2013 at 9:02 PM
Oh. Thank you for clarifying.
MelonCollie on April 24, 2013 at 9:03 PM
Who let Richard Windsor off the hook, huh? You morons hold the purse strings, don’t just do something, stand there. At least the Canucks understand how energy affects the economy.
antipc on April 24, 2013 at 9:04 PM
If it causes embarrassment or detriment to our great nation, Barry definitely will do it. It’s his mission to destroy our economy and turn our allies into foes. What part of this does Canada not understand?
Philly on April 24, 2013 at 9:04 PM
No prob
Electrongod on April 24, 2013 at 9:06 PM
Then it’s a sure thing.
vityas on April 24, 2013 at 9:08 PM
Every ship can go under water. The really cool ones can come back up.
BobMbx on April 24, 2013 at 9:13 PM
Boehner and Cantor…MIA on this?
BobMbx on April 24, 2013 at 9:15 PM
Annoying our allies is Dear Liar’s intent.
rbj on April 24, 2013 at 9:16 PM
Someone needs to tell our Canadian friends in very easy and clear language that Hussein will never ever do anything to financially hurt any of the 57 states of the OIC .
burrata on April 24, 2013 at 9:19 PM
‘
We are still in the various stages of beat-down.
By the end of President Downgrades reign of terror they will be telling us to be cheering for Dear Leader because when we flip the light switch, the one, cold, flickering bulb in the house lights up.
NoKo has got nothing on BO
.
.
cntrlfrk on April 24, 2013 at 9:20 PM
Which is precisely why Teh SCOAMT is going to ultimately reject Keystone XL.
Steve Eggleston on April 24, 2013 at 9:22 PM
Ok, seriously, how do we stop these damn eco-Marxists who have been successfully crippling our energy economy for years and have only accelerated their destruction under Obama?
It would be a start if the GOP would cut the EPA budget in half. I’ve read multiple sources that say that 50% of EPA’s budget goes to environmental groups as grants.
It would also be nice if environmental groups coud be stripped of standing so they’re unable to sue on behalf of the public.
GOP, pease stop complaining about the EPA and do something.
Charlemagne on April 24, 2013 at 9:46 PM
I keep coming back to the same old question (as do others)… Why hasn’t the House cut off funding to the EPA…?
fabrexe on April 24, 2013 at 9:48 PM
When will Congress finally have enough of the EPA and DEFUND them?
Let’s see the eco-freaks work for “free”.
GarandFan on April 24, 2013 at 9:51 PM
just licking my chops waiting for EPA/State to become the domestic Sunni/Shi’a…
affenhauer on April 24, 2013 at 10:00 PM
I see the slob Warren Buffett cackling demonically, flat on his hairy back in a garden of $100 bills.
slickwillie2001 on April 24, 2013 at 10:25 PM
Thread winner!!..:)
Dire Straits on April 24, 2013 at 10:26 PM
I don’t understand why this pipeline is such a big deal, it’s not like we don’t have a ton of them.
Cindy Munford on April 24, 2013 at 10:32 PM
Maybe I’m wrong, but I seem to remember at least one report here some months ago that said the Keystone was a “go”? But it’s not…?
Nineteen Eighty-Four to be sure.
Dr. ZhivBlago on April 25, 2013 at 12:17 AM
It’s designed to pump the oil down to the refineries here in the US which are equipped to handle it.
Right now, that crude is being hauled by train to the refinery. A train owned by Warren Buffet.
Canada intends to sell this crude. It can either come here and create jobs in the USA, or it can be put onto supertankers and taken to China where it will make jobs for them.
The supertanker route is far more apt to cause problems in the long run. The environmentalists have problems with spills in the 50,000 barrel range, but a supertanker hauls 3,000,000 barrels, and those would be sailing off our coast on the way to China.
unclesmrgol on April 25, 2013 at 1:47 AM
If they start digging a pipeline straight to China, straight down…will be a pretty deep hole, of course…but it should pop out in China, if my recollection of those old Saturday morning Looney Tunes cartoons is correct. And oil spills? No problem, they’ll just run down to China, right?
Problem solved.
coldwarrior on April 25, 2013 at 7:29 AM
Reversal? By telling Obama that, it might just make his day. This president is tearing everything else to pieces so why not our long standing relationship with Canada also.
Pardonme on April 25, 2013 at 10:27 AM
Just Canadian PR prepping the way to build a pipeline to BC and sea-ship all that crude to China.
Marcola on April 25, 2013 at 12:21 PM