Joule patents fuel made from water, sunlight, CO2

Joule patents fuel made from water, sunlight, CO2

The mystery bug--a type of bacteria--behind intriguing biofuel start-up Joule Unlimited was revealed with the publication of a patent on Tuesday.
The Cambridge, Mass.-based start-up said that it has received Patent No. 7,794,969 for an engineered form of cynobacteria, or blue-green algae, which grows in water and is capable of secreting biodiesel fuel.



The company asserts that it can make diesel fuel directly using only sunlight and waste carbon dioxide in glass bioreactors for as little as $30 a barrel.
http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/i/tim//20...al_610x385.jpg A diagram of how a Joule facility would work with bioreactors growing micro-organisms with sunlight and CO2 in water. A separator removes the end product--liquid fuel or chemicals.



Most biofuels processes take multiple steps to convert plant matter into sugars. Joule claims to be the first company to patent a single-step, continuous process that doesn't require a feedstock for fuel production. "Our vision since inception has been to overcome the limitations of biomass-based technologies, from feedstock costs and logistics to inefficient, energy-intensive processing," Joule CEO Bill Sims said in a statement.



According to its patent, Joule combines two enzymes with cyanobacteria to create an organism that can create hydrocarbons or chemicals. Other companies, such as LS9 and Amyris, also use genetically engineered microbes to make biofuels but they are designed to make sugars that can then be turned into fuels.



The company is now testing its system to make diesel and ethanol in Texas where sunlight and waste CO2 are fed into its bioreactors. The organisms grow, the fuel is harvested, and the organisms are then recirculated back into the growing solution. Its bioreactors control heat and light to optimize growth.



Joule plans to begin pilot production of diesel at the end of 2010 and open a commercial plant in 2012. Its pilot tests for ethanol production show it can be produced at a rate of 10,000 gallons per acre per year.
The patent awarded on Tuesday is the second the company has received, according to a company representative. The first one--No. 7,785,861--covers aspects of an engineered photosynthetic micro-organism for fuel production, the company said. Issued on August 31, the first patent went through the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's fast-track program for green technologies.


Read more: http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-20...#ixzz0zWeSFw1p

Now if this is feasible for large scale production, this is the type of renewable power and green energy we need.

I suspect there are drawbacks that will keep this from being a reality. the $30 per bbl of fuel probably only covers the nutrients and base product costs. It probable doesn't cover maintenance, construction costs over time, etc.

At least the fuel should be very clean burning.

http://www.jouleunlimited.com/

I skimmed the patent. It appears to me that there is a long way to go before this becomes a reality.

http://investing.businessweek.com/re...capId=60528105

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

I skimmed the patent. It appears to me that there is a long way to go before this becomes a reality.

---

why

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Parker2112

http://www.jouleunlimited.com/

---

Yes, but these sales pitches are often not realistic.

Ever work for a company in research and development trying to raise money?

I have...

I'll believe this when it happens.

"$30 per bbl"

When oilmen dubya and dickhead started their Reign of Error, oil was $25. They managed to enrich the oilcos and oil traders by pushing the price up by 300% when the left office.

http://www.oftwominds.com/photos07/oil83-07.png

Let's elect the Repugs back into power. They know how to manage the economy and start and run wars.

One of these pie-in-the-sky research projects will pay off. Actually, a whole bunch of them do, or oil and coal will never be replaced.

I expect the Repugs to unfund or underfund or block any govt money that could lead to replacing oil and coal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

"$30 per bbl"

When oilmen dubya and dickhead started their Reign of Error, oil was $25. They managed to enrich the oilcos and oil traders by pushing the price up by 300% when the left office.

http://www.oftwominds.com/photos07/oil83-07.png

Let's elect the Repugs back into power. They know how to manage the economy and start and run wars.

One of these pie-in-the-sky research projects will pay off. Actually, a whole bunch of them do, or oil and coal will never be replaced.

I expect the Repugs to unfund or underfund or block any govt money that could lead to replacing oil and coal.

---

Bouton's. I would love for this to be real. That $30/bbl is in essence, the refined product. Not light sweet crude oil prices. Now I'll bet this could be refined and broken down to lighter hydrocarbons like gasoline. If so, and if we could develope enough, we could lower gas prices to under $1.00 a gallon and tax then $1.00 a gallon, for $2.00 a gallon + profit at the pump.

This sure would help with revenue problems too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

"$30 per bbl"

When oilmen dubya and dickhead started their Reign of Error, oil was $25. They managed to enrich the oilcos and oil traders by pushing the price up by 300% when the left office.

http://www.oftwominds.com/photos07/oil83-07.png

Let's elect the Repugs back into power. They know how to manage the economy and start and run wars.

One of these pie-in-the-sky research projects will pay off. Actually, a whole bunch of them do, or oil and coal will never be replaced.

I expect the Repugs to unfund or underfund or block any govt money that could lead to replacing oil and coal.

---

So you are saying two men > global supply/demand?

While I'm inclined to agree with WC, even at a higher cost per barrel, say, 75$, you know alot of greenies would still buy in due to the much cleaner aspect. I hope this company can pull it off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Yes, but these sales pitches are often not realistic.

Ever work for a company in research and development trying to raise money?

I have...

I'll believe this when it happens.

---

so you cant point to anything in the patent then?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Parker2112

so you cant point to anything in the patent then?

---

I'm not going to take the time. Besides, how many people here would understand the technical nature?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

I'm not going to take the time. Besides, how many people here would understand the technical nature?

---

You acted like there were some questionable things in the patent. Just though it would be easy to point them out. even if you dont explain them.

This would be an awesome stop gap measure. It would allow other technologies to develop at a slower pace, and best of all, it would be made HERE!

The more I read about this, the more excited I get. Sequester the CO2 from coal plants = eco+ #1, it can use any type of water (yes even brackish) = eco+ #2. Burns cleaner than current incarnations = eco+ #3. There is just a lot right about this. I wonder if it will be a net CO2 producer, or consumer.

Interesting stuff. I hope there's something to this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Parker2112

You acted like there were some questionable things in the patent. Just though it would be easy to point them out. even if you dont explain them.

---

No, not at all. It is very realistic. I question the efficiency, available production scale, and gross cost at the end of process. There is also a rather lengthy genetics listing at the end.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drachen

The more I read about this, the more excited I get. Sequester the CO2 from coal plants = eco+ #1, it can use any type of water (yes even brackish) = eco+ #2. Burns cleaner than current incarnations = eco+ #3. There is just a lot right about this. I wonder if it will be a net CO2 producer, or consumer.

---

I think it would produce more CO2's than fossil fuels because you're not only burning the made fuel, but the process releases CO2. Sequestering would likely be imposed on the process. How much will that add to the cost?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

I think it would produce more CO2's than fossil fuels because you're not only burning the made fuel, but the process releases CO2. Sequestering would likely be imposed on the process. How much will that add to the cost?

---

Why would the process release CO2? The process utilizes CO2 in the metabolizing process, and I would assume releases oxygen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Bouton's. I would love for this to be real. That $30/bbl is in essence, the refined product. Not light sweet crude oil prices. Now I'll bet this could be refined and broken down to lighter hydrocarbons like gasoline. If so, and if we could develope enough, we could lower gas prices to under $1.00 a gallon and tax then $1.00 a gallon, for $2.00 a gallon + profit at the pump.

This sure would help with revenue problems too.

---

Dear Spinmeister,

What's not real? It's the price history of benchmark light crude OIL (Brent?), not refined oil products like gasoline, etc.

If this happens, that random guy is going to be pissed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jack sommerset

If this happens, that random guy is going to be pissed.

---

Why?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drachen

Why would the process release CO2? The process utilizes CO2 in the metabolizing process, and I would assume releases oxygen.

---

I thought I read the process releases CO2. Maybe I'm wrong. I'm not going to look again. Unimportant point for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

Dear Spinmeister,

What's not real? It's the price history of benchmark light crude OIL (Brent?), not refined oil products like gasoline, etc.

---

Lets see...

At $80/bbl, gas is above $3.00 per gallon. What is a bbl? Isn't it 42 gallons? That means that $80 bbl is refined to >$126 of product and other products. $30 per bbl is less than $1.00 per gallon, and they are talking usable product.

I would love for this to be real, and not just hype to get investors to invest.