Established Member
Dear all
I have lodged a provisional patent application for an Ocean Based Algae Biofuel Production System. In my opinion this method will prove to be the best and most economical way to scale up algae production and reverse anthropogenic global warming. I would welcome comments and questions. The science of the patent is unproven, but appears feasible. I am presenting it here for peer review.
Patent drawings and explanation are here
Robert Tulip
Last edited by Robert Tulip; 2009-Oct-20 at 07:40 PM. Reason: delete mention of $
Banned
Terrific! If it can be upscaled to an area the size of the US, it should ease our dependance on fossil fuels, and might make you rich in the process.
Don't think it'll have much effect on anthropogenic global warming, though...
Now - if you could invent an algae that prevented deforestation and which gobbled up all the pollutants we keep dumping in the ocean, you'd have something!
Established Member
Thanks Mugs. I've also posted this here resulting in the following Q&AOriginally Posted by mugaliens
Question: Why do you think its less expensive to be out in the middle of the ocean vs middle of a desert or other? My guess is that in the end, this would not be the case because of all the new infrastructure cap costs and op expense.
Answer: The idea behind my proposal is to mimic and control the upwelling of deep ocean water which is the source of much ocean fertility. If you read my proposal in full, you will see I explain that the benefits of ocean location are the access to renewable energy from tide and wave using new large scale inventions based on waterbag technology, and the access to abundant nutrient-rich deep ocean water. The tidal pump is a new invention that will inexpensively move nutrient-rich water from deep waters to the surface, and the new inventions using waterbags for wave energy provide a simple way to power the movement of this rich water through an algae production chamber.
Question: Where is all the fresh water coming from?
Answer: Not much fresh water is required. The production chamber uses deep ocean salt water. Fresh water is only used for the buoyancy bags and if needed to reduce the salinity of the salt water. In my proposal to pilot this on the North West Shelf of Western Australia, any fresh water needed would be brought in waterbags from the Fitzroy River or the Ord River.
Question: Where is the CO2 coming from?
Answer: Again, on the North West Shelf the natural gas industry produces immense quantities of CO2 as a gas byproduct, and plans are now in place to bury this CO2 using carbon capture and storage methods. For example the Gorgon Project on Barrow Island, and others. My suggestion is that some of this CO2 can be a feedstock for ocean based algae production. If you look at my drawings, you will see that I suggest a method to use wave energy to pump air into a lower layer below the algae production layer, from where it will drizzle upwards through the algae production level. Normal air is sufficient for this system to work, but using pure CO2 from the mining industry, or from other sources such as coal fired power stations, would be far more productive.
Question: You have very little in the way of air exchanging. I’m curious about your ideas of doing this efficiently (and cheaply) enough on such a massive scale? This is so very important because you are going to be in a tightly sealed environment with low tolerances of extra 'space'. Have you ever done the actual calculations on the air exchange needs and how they are currently being done on dry land?
Answer: See previous answer. I claim that using wave power to pump air into a lower layer below the algae production level will prove economical and feasible as an air exchange method suitable for operation on large scale. I would like to build a laboratory model to investigate this theory, but do not have resources or contacts to do so. This is why I am presenting these preliminary ideas in public here, to find partners who can test them out.
Question: Are you assuming that platforms such as are used in the petrol industry will be utilized as production hubs? And if so, because the water is so deep, is there such a platform in existence today that just 'floats' as opposed to gulf coast platforms are 'afixed' somehow.
Answer: Polymer bags filled with fresh water will float in the ocean. To my knowledge this fact has not previously been exploited by the petroleum industry. I envisage that this system will be feasible in relatively shallow and sheltered coastal waters such as the North West Shelf, with a floating bag system tethered by anchor to the ocean floor, and not requiring a grounded platform as a production hub. In principle, such a floating fresh water system can be as deep as the ocean. Average ocean depth is several kilometres. A floating bag of size one cubic kilometre would stand 25 metres above the ocean surface, and could be used as a floating island for all sorts of purposes. This is a completely new invention.
Question: Raw algae is very wet and would be costly to ship as it can be more than 99% water. Do you plan on processing out to sea, and if so, how? If not and you plan on shipping algae water to land, have you done a cost analysis on something like that?
Answer: I answer this question in detail in my proposal, with a new invention for de-watering algae at sea by sinking it deep in the ocean. Please have a look at the drawings. I have some ancillary drawings regarding a process for using wave power to drive a motor for this component which I would be happy to also share.
Question: I didn’t see in your calculations how long the 'bags' would last. It seems that a very large linchpin to the idea are these bags. I’m not sure there is an inexpensive technology that can handle the conditions for a length of time needed for commercialization. This seems like the first analysis you should do.
Answer: My assumptions on bag durability derive from the work of Terry Spragg of www.waterbag.com who assumes a waterbag life of ten years at fabric cost between $15 and $40 per square metre. Current polymer fabrics are available which are UV resistant and durable under marine conditions. Even at the upper end of this fabric cost the system I propose will be highly profitable just on the fuel production side, as well as making a major contribution to reducing CO2 levels. It should be investigated and funded for the climate security benefit alone. My system should prove to be self-replicating, able to use the biodiesel produced to manufacture new fabric.
Established Member
Amazing things are possible if you can simultaneously solve several really difficult large-scale engineering problems, leavened by a bit of unproven science.
Established Member
Thank you Ivan. Could you please state what you consider to be the "really difficult large-scale engineering problems" and the "unproven science" in my proposal?
Floating fresh water on the sea in polymer bags has been demonstrated, eg at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TEJp6UZaDI A further demonstration of this essential innovation is the key to the spinoff ideas for algae production that I describe.
You have misunderstood the proposal if you think it calls for simultaneous solutions to large problems. There is a critical path, from getting the idea out there to find partners and scientific review, demonstrating and commercialising the waterbag technology, laboratory tests of the system components, through field testing and scale up.
The biggest so-called "large-scale engineering problem" with this proposal may well be the cynicism of engineers. I would prefer responses that engage with the content of the proposal rather than airily implying it is unfeasible.
A two minute video of NASA's work on growing algae at sea is here.
Established Member
For this system to be upscaled to the size of the US, 9,158,960 square kilometres, is theoretically feasible given ocean deserts are 50 million square kilometres in size, five times bigger than the land area of the USA. The production goal of one ton of oil per acre per day would deliver around 700 billion tons of oil per year scaled up to this size, which is 700 times bigger than the actual oil use in the USA. http://www.eia.doe.gov/basics/quickoil.html states US use of around 7 billion barrels of oil per year, or one billion tons.
On this rough initial production intensity goal, the US oil supply could be delivered with area of about twelve thousand square miles. If the production goal is ten times too high the area needed would be around one hundred thousand square miles, just one 500th of the world's ocean desert surface.
This would have major effect on anthropogenic global warming by fixing CO2 in volumes larger than current total emissions.
Last edited by Robert Tulip; 2009-Oct-19 at 08:43 PM.
Established Member
Perhaps Robert could address these issues by reducing the large scale engineering problem to a small scale one by building a small prototype.
This could then be tested in order to prove the science.
Finding a suitable location for a scaled down version is an interesting problem in itself. The requirements would be a shallow enough location for a small scale system to work as intended, with smaller wave sizes, and a nutrient rich bed at a low temperature.
This would probably have to be at a temperate latitude location with a fairly opaque seawater, perhaps near a river mouth where agricultural runoff supplied nutrient.
Banned
You've obviously given this quite a bit of thought, Robert, and that deserves a time-consuming and well-thought response!
Most of you concepts seem reasonable. Just a couple of flags, questions, and ideas:
To summarize, you're using tidal pumps to power the movements, then discuss below fresh-water bags to move the water... We'll get to that.Question: Why do you think its less expensive to be out in the middle of the ocean vs middle of a desert or other? My guess is that in the end, this would not be the case because of all the new infrastructure cap costs and op expense.
Answer: The idea behind my proposal is to mimic and control the upwelling of deep ocean water which is the source of much ocean fertility. If you read my proposal in full, you will see I explain that the benefits of ocean location are the access to renewable energy from tide and wave using new large scale inventions based on waterbag technology, and the access to abundant nutrient-rich deep ocean water. The tidal pump is a new invention that will inexpensively move nutrient-rich water from deep waters to the surface, and the new inventions using waterbags for wave energy provide a simple way to power the movement of this rich water through an algae production chamber.
First, you discuss a vast open ocean area. Why not use solar power, dropping the electrodes deep, and allowing the current-carrying salt water to convey the current, heating the water, which will cause it to rise? Simple. No moving parts. Proven technology. A few key "green" hurdles, but it sounds more green than burning fossil fuels.
If you need to contain the water, consider using anchored, large mesh (or solid plastic) tubes, made of a material adjusted in density to be slightly less dense than sea water (they're anchored at the bottom, though). Collect the water as it rises to the surface. In fact, your entire floating algae farm could be a 30-foot deep series of mesh/solid boxes in which your algae grows and the oil is harvested (the algae, too - could be useful as a protein supplement).
Instead of using fresh water bags to move larger bags containing nutrient-rich deep water, just mix the fresh water in the with nutrient-rich deepwater. It'll rise!Question: Where is all the fresh water coming from?
Answer: Not much fresh water is required. The production chamber uses deep ocean salt water. Fresh water is only used for the buoyancy bags and if needed to reduce the salinity of the salt water. In my proposal to pilot this on the North West Shelf of Western Australia, any fresh water needed would be brought in waterbags from the Fitzroy River or the Ord River.
Engineering problem: It'll take massive amounts of energy to pump the lighter fresh water two miles deep. Perhaps a better solution would be to make it on site, 12,000 ft deep, using submerged reverse osmosis filters.
Or simply bypass that idea and use solar energy to heat the water at depth, allowing it to rise up vertical tubes, as previously mentioned. Simpler.
CO2 is easily dissolved in water, so this shouldn't be a problem. But it produces some pretty serious acid as a result, depending on the concentration. Regardless, you may have to address increased acidity.Question: Where is the CO2 coming from?
Answer: Again, on the North West Shelf the natural gas industry produces immense quantities of CO2 as a gas byproduct, and plans are now in place to bury this CO2 using carbon capture and storage methods. For example the Gorgon Project on Barrow Island, and others. My suggestion is that some of this CO2 can be a feedstock for ocean based algae production. If you look at my drawings, you will see that I suggest a method to use wave energy to pump air into a lower layer below the algae production layer, from where it will drizzle upwards through the algae production level. Normal air is sufficient for this system to work, but using pure CO2 from the mining industry, or from other sources such as coal fired power stations, would be far more productive.
I think the usual oceaning storms do a fair job to mix air into the ocean. The fish don't seem to mind!Question: You have very little in the way of air exchanging. I’m curious about your ideas of doing this efficiently (and cheaply) enough on such a massive scale? This is so very important because you are going to be in a tightly sealed environment with low tolerances of extra 'space'. Have you ever done the actual calculations on the air exchange needs and how they are currently being done on dry land?
Answer: See previous answer. I claim that using wave power to pump air into a lower layer below the algae production level will prove economical and feasible as an air exchange method suitable for operation on large scale. I would like to build a laboratory model to investigate this theory, but do not have resources or contacts to do so. This is why I am presenting these preliminary ideas in public here, to find partners who can test them out.
You're moving up and down again, a very expensive proposition... Most of the ocean qualifies as "desert," i.e. less than 10" rainfall a year. Since 90% of the algae grows with 30 ft. of the sun, just dry it in the sun when it's done growing!Question: Raw algae is very wet and would be costly to ship as it can be more than 99% water. Do you plan on processing out to sea, and if so, how? If not and you plan on shipping algae water to land, have you done a cost analysis on something like that?
Answer: I answer this question in detail in my proposal, with a new invention for de-watering algae at sea by sinking it deep in the ocean. Please have a look at the drawings. I have some ancillary drawings regarding a process for using wave power to drive a motor for this component which I would be happy to also share.
Last edited by mugaliens; 2009-Oct-20 at 12:08 PM.
Moderator
And for that comment in your OP you were nearly permanently banned and your IP address blocked.
Appeals like that for financial support constitute spam.
Do anything like this again and you will be banned.
As a result, pending moderator discussion thread locked
Moderator & Sausage Gawd
Order of Kilopi
We've unlocked this thread.
I've never submitted a patent application. Didn't they used to have a proof of concept requirement? A model, or something? Has that been done away with?
If you're relying on previous research for proof of concept, doesn't that affect your ability to reserve and protect it?
Administrator
That has been done away with, even for patents for which a working model would be meaningful/practical. At least in the US Patent Office, and I believe in the European Patent Office.
Established Member
I think a laboratory model would be required before field testing, but with my background in philosophy and international development I find that no scientists or engineers will take interest in the concept, as it comes out of a new and eclectic combination of disciplines.
In particular, I have invented new methods regarding the use of fresh water bags as a way to tap wave and tide energy. Prior to lodging the provisional patent I discussed the concepts with Australian National University Professor of Hydrology Dr Barry Croke, and he was able to show me that some of my initial assumptions regarding the physics needed revision - in particular, the wave pumping method using expanding and shrinking sacks under the surface waterbag train would need a rigid base beneath it, otherwise the lower bag would just move up and down with the wave.
As well, on the algae de-watering depth compression component, Dr Croke contributed to the idea of a sack of compressed air within the bag, opened at depth, to force the water content through a membrane leaving the algae behind, while also floating the bag to the surface. This may seem farfetched, but such a system can be driven by wave power with no external energy cost, much more efficiently than spreading 1% algated water on a surface layer to dry. I have several ancillary components including on this component for which I want to lodge provisional patents before sharing publicly.
So, there is a connected series of inventions which to me appear scientifically feasible and with major benefit for fuel and climate security.
I hope it is not all sizzle and no sausage.
Established Member
I'm pleased you find the concepts reasonable. It is a big hurdle to get new ideas into the mix for discussion.Ingenious suggestion! However, I think my proposal will be significantly superior. My tidal pump has an upper and lower bag resting on the ocean floor, preferably tethered at the edge of the continental shelf. Below the thermocline (roughly 500 metres deep) ocean water has much higher NPK, while the upper layer is generally much less nutrient-rich. The pumping method uses a fixed volume upper bag at constant depth above a lower bag with inlet and outlet valves. On a rising tide, the upper bag rises, causing the connected lower bag to expand and water to flow in to it. On a falling tide, the upper bag presses down on the lower bag causing water to flow out. This is a simple controlled method to raise deep water, with no energy cost, and using only anchored plastic.To summarize, you're using tidal pumps to power the movements, then discuss below fresh-water bags to move the water... We'll get to that.
First, you discuss a vast open ocean area. Why not use solar power, dropping the electrodes deep, and allowing the current-carrying salt water to convey the current, heating the water, which will cause it to rise? Simple. No moving parts. Proven technology. A few key "green" hurdles, but it sounds more green than burning fossil fuels.
Now here this illustrates what a rich vein of scientific speculation I have tapped! I'm sorry I'm having trouble envisioning your mesh box concept. Controlling the water in fabric bags seems a much more practical method to me.If you need to contain the water, consider using anchored, large mesh (or solid plastic) tubes, made of a material adjusted in density to be slightly less dense than sea water (they're anchored at the bottom, though). Collect the water as it rises to the surface. In fact, your entire floating algae farm could be a 30-foot deep series of mesh/solid boxes in which your algae grows and the oil is harvested (the algae, too - could be useful as a protein supplement).
Or far simpler still, use the power of the tide for pumping on a large scale as I have proposed.Instead of using fresh water bags to move larger bags containing nutrient-rich deep water, just mix the fresh water in the with nutrient-rich deepwater. It'll rise!
Engineering problem: It'll take massive amounts of energy to pump the lighter fresh water two miles deep. Perhaps a better solution would be to make it on site, 12,000 ft deep, using submerged reverse osmosis filters.
Or simply bypass that idea and use solar energy to heat the water at depth, allowing it to rise up vertical tubes, as previously mentioned. Simpler.
A further elaboration on my hybrid raceway pond/photobioreactor system is that the course around the acre field could be divided into parallel rows (in the old measure, an acre is a chain times a furlong, so if the whole system was two chains wide and half a furrow long, then dividing it into rod width channels would produce four channels along and back. Each rod (perch or pole) could be sampled for adaptivity (oil content, growth rate), with the best genes used to seed the following algae. By gradually increasing the CO2 input, algae will evolve that optimises oil production in a high CO2 environment.
CO2 is easily dissolved in water, so this shouldn't be a problem. But it produces some pretty serious acid as a result, depending on the concentration. Regardless, you may have to address increased acidity.We now have 380ppm CO2 in the air, and need to reduce that for climate stability. The issue here is how to pump air into the system to optimise algae production.I think the usual oceaning storms do a fair job to mix air into the ocean. The fish don't seem to mind!
Moving up and down is not expensive if it is powered from renewable sources such as wave energy. As I mentioned in my last post, drying algae in the sun is likely to be a less efficient de-watering method than depth compression. The 'ocean deserts' are defined as the 50 million square kilometres with low surface chlorophyll. Some areas with low rainfall are highly productive due to natural upwelling of deep cold nutrient rich currents.You're moving up and down again, a very expensive proposition... Most of the ocean qualifies as "desert," i.e. less than 10" rainfall a year. Since 90% of the algae grows with 30 ft. of the sun, just dry it in the sun when it's done growing!
Established Member
Thanks hhEb09'1. Sorry Sticks, I've amended the OP.My patent application is just a provisional patent for Australia, giving twelve months till next June to lodge a full patent. You can lodge anything you like as a provisional patent, just to get date priority recognition of the contained intellectual property. Without a proof of concept, I expect the patent would be harder to defend against legal challenge.I've never submitted a patent application. Didn't they used to have a proof of concept requirement? A model, or something? Has that been done away with?I'm working closely with Terry Spragg of www.waterbag.com who has patented the waterbag zipper connection system which is a key prior innovation. The ideas in my patent are all new, and part of my reason for sharing them, apart from making them happen, is to find out if any may have already been patented by someone else.If you're relying on previous research for proof of concept, doesn't that affect your ability to reserve and protect it?
Established Member
Just to add, my system is not burning fossil fuels but replacing them.
Your proposal reminds me of a story from the war in England. An inventor suggested trailing bombs on strings from planes to attack zeppelins. An Air Marshall responded that the planes already had anti-zeppelin bombs, and long strings would be a danger and a drag. A simpler answer already existed. I think the cost of solar electrodes to raise deep water from the ocean depths would be much more expensive than using tidal pumping, or wave pumping. With wave action, the ocean has converted solar energy into a moving wave with high momentum, which is a much more accessible source of motive power than the sun itself in this context.
Banned
Here you go.
I gathered that - thanks. My point is that in order to move near-0 C water from the depths to the much warmer surface, you're going to have to add tons of energy into it in the form of heat. Otherwise, you can pump all day and it'll just sink right back down.
Since you have to heat it anyway, allow the reduced density of the warmer water to do your lifting (pumping) for you.
Established Member
There is no need to add heat. By pumping deep water to the surface in a pipeline powered by tidal waterbags, this water can then be towed in bags to the algae pond in shallower water, all at low cost with no added energy. The water will warm up in the photobioreactor. (Water from the deep ocean provides much higher nutrient content than surface water.)
Established Member
Suction pumps require rigid pipelines. These aren't cheap or light. You seem to be offering some sort of diaphragm pump operated by the water bags flexing, but it's not clear to me that you've considered the head of pressure involved at the suction end of the pump. Another approach is to pump surface water downwards to displace bottom water upwards. This would have the additional benefit of 'cooling' the sea surface, small though the effect would be.
Established Member
Good points.
A tidal pump sitting on the ocean floor at depth of 200 metres, used to pump water from 500 metres deep to the surface, would require a non-collapsible inlet pipeline over the edge of the continental shelf down to 500m. I'm not sure this pipe would have to be rigid. It could be made of fabric, with framework to hold the cylinder open. Pumping from the 200m deep holding bag to the surface is pressure pumping and could use a fabric fire hose.
The disadvantage of pumping surface water down is that this would only use wave power or something more expensive, and requires more complex systems than the tidal pump, which is very simple in design and has massive economies of scale.
Modelling is needed to optimise the relative sizes of the upper and lower tidal pump bags. As the ratio betwee the upper and lower bag size increases, the pumping power also increases.
I will check out diaphragm pumps. My system does not involve waterbags flexing. The upper bag is at constant depth due to buoyancy of its contents, and is fixed to the lower bag, which in turn is fixed to the ocean floor. On a rising tide the upper bag rises causing the lower bag inlet valve to open, and on a falling tide the weight of the upper bag pressing down causes the lower bag outlet valve to open. This has some similarity to a diaphragm, but I'm not sure flexing is the right word.
Established Member
You really want me to spell it out?
You say "the science is unproven" in your original post. I just quoted it back to you.
Wave energy does not have a proven commercial large-scale application, and you want to use it on a large scale a long way off shore in the deep ocean.... There are prototypes and a few small scale demonstration projects of off-shore wave energy which are not economic. But not large-scale implementations. Why? Because it's difficult and not economic yet. You are proposing that somehow wave energy collection can be built into your flexible platform, which you propose to make of structures entirely different from prototype wave energy structures.
Oil platforms pump up liquid from the relatively shallow areas of sea, but you want to pump huge amounts of seawater up from the deep ocean. Putting oil platforms in deep ocean is seen as challenging. People have considered various kinds of energy projects involving large pipes between the surface waters and deep waters, but there is no prototype. So, a large-scale engineering problem known to be difficult. You assert the wave energy will be enough for this pumping, but give no demonstration. Will your flexible platform have the structural integrity and buoyancy to support this tube, and associated pumping machinery, which will be subject to massive forces from ocean currents.
You want to have some thing floating on the ocean surface made of fabrics with a very large surface area. What kind of forces is that subjected to when it has a large surface area? Again, a large-scale engineering problem, probably in the unknown. Same kind of thing as "here's a bridge over a 10m river, now there's the principle go and build one over a 1000m channel". All sorts of serious structural difficulties occur when you scale up small structures to larger scales.
You want to carry out dewatering of the algae on the surface of this large flexible platform, above the deep ocean many miles from land. The algae has to be transferred there, then collected and taken to land. What kind of machinery and labour will this involve, moving these large quantities of material around? Do you have the buoyancy and energy for it? Will the flexible platform have sufficient integrity to support it without being broken up by the forces of the ocean?
If you can't see that you have several simultaneous large-scale difficult engineering problems....
I haven't seen any kind of energy balance analysis and order of magnitude costing to give even the faintest hint of the kind of economics this might have.
So when you say "it appears feasible", I think that mainly shows that you do not appreciate what would be required to be able to make such a claim with authority.
Established Member
Thanks again Ivan, for these detailed comments, which are precisely what I am seeking. The science is unproven because it is new, not because it is wrong. All the claims I have made are testable. Please see my specific responses below.To clarify, the proposal is initially to use wave energy in the shallow ocean of the continental shelf, whereas pumping of water from the deep ocean proposes to use tidal energy. No one to my knowledge has previously investigated the use of polymer waterbags to tap ocean energy. I am claiming it should be a decisive breakthrough in making algae biofuel and wave and tidal power economic.Wave energy does not have a proven commercial large-scale application, and you want to use it on a large scale a long way off shore in the deep ocean.... There are prototypes and a few small scale demonstration projects of off-shore wave energy which are not economic. But not large-scale implementations. Why? Because it's difficult and not economic yet. You are proposing that somehow wave energy collection can be built into your flexible platform, which you propose to make of structures entirely different from prototype wave energy structures.
Waterbags become part of the ocean wave. A laboratory testing program conducted by Dr Cliff Goudey at MIT found that waterbags will be robust and durable even in high seas. My proposal rests on this scientific finding.
Waterbags will provide structural integrity in calm weather, and enable sinking of the system below the waves in rough weather. The reason wave energy has not yet been commercialised, in my opinion, is that no one has yet come up with suggestions to use fresh water bags to drive turbines and pumps.To my knowledge the oil industry has not investigated the use of waterbags for pumping. This is why I claim my patent is innovative.Oil platforms pump up liquid from the relatively shallow areas of sea, but you want to pump huge amounts of seawater up from the deep ocean. Putting oil platforms in deep ocean is seen as challenging. People have considered various kinds of energy projects involving large pipes between the surface waters and deep waters, but there is no prototype. So, a large-scale engineering problem known to be difficult. You assert the wave energy will be enough for this pumping, but give no demonstration. Will your flexible platform have the structural integrity and buoyancy to support this tube, and associated pumping machinery, which will be subject to massive forces from ocean currents.
My proposal is to use tidal energy for the transfer of deep ocean water to the surface, and wave (or tide) energy to pump this water through the algae production chamber. I do not ‘assert the wave energy will be enough for this pumping’. The algae production chamber does not have to support a suction tube, as that is an entirely separate submarine component powered by tidal energy. I do assert that tidal energy is sufficient for the deep water pumping, and that my ideas on this can be tested at low cost.
Structural integrity and buoyancy of the flexible platform derives from surrounding the salt water algae production chamber with a cylindrical waterbag. With fresh water 2.5% lighter than salt water, and additional buoyancy from air pumped into the system, the entire platform would ride high on the swell in calm weather like a ship at anchor.In calm weather the forces of wave and current are regular and predictable. The water pressure on both sides of the waterbag fabric is equal. The bridge analogy is helpful but misleading, as this waterbag technology has been developed precisely to address the scaling problem, and is entirely supported by the surrounding ocean. Terry Spragg’s zipper patent provides a modular solution which means that damage to one bag will not destabilise the whole system. In rough weather the system can be sunk to calm waters by expulsion of contained air.You want to have something floating on the ocean surface made of fabrics with a very large surface area. What kind of forces is that subjected to when it has a large surface area? Again, a large-scale engineering problem, probably in the unknown. Same kind of thing as "here's a bridge over a 10m river, now there's the principle go and build one over a 1000m channel". All sorts of serious structural difficulties occur when you scale up small structures to larger scales.
The MIT lab tests found that a train of connected waterbags containing up to a billion litres of water (one gigalitre) and eleven kilometres long could be towed by a single tug, with the bag becoming part of the ocean wave.
A repeat demonstration of this key innovation, towing six megalitres of water in two connected bags, is central to the critical path for my proposal. A very good press report on the status of this is here.My proposal to dewater the algae is to transport the algated water from the near-shore production centre in a specialised waterbag train to the deep ocean, to sink these algated waterbags deep in the ocean, and to release compressed air into an inner bag at depth. As the bag returns to the surface, the air bag increases in volume, forcing the contained water through a membrane into the ocean while retaining the algae within. I claim that wave energy tapped by waterbags can provide motor power to sink these bags and pull them to the surface.You want to carry out dewatering of the algae on the surface of this large flexible platform, above the deep ocean many miles from land. The algae has to be transferred there, then collected and taken to land. What kind of machinery and labour will this involve, moving these large quantities of material around? Do you have the buoyancy and energy for it? Will the flexible platform have sufficient integrity to support it without being broken up by the forces of the ocean?
If it proves cheaper to dewater algae by evaporation then that is another alternative, but I have included this dewatering component as part of the objective of delivering concentrated algae for refining to diesel. It may be that a second pass of the depth compression dewatering method could separate the contained oil from the algae, as depicted in my patent drawing and text.There is a critical path to solve these problems. They do not need to be solved simultaneously, but present an orderly scientific and commercial research program. Further field demonstration of the Spragg Waterbag will provide opportunity for technical assessment of the spinoff proposals I have presented.If you can't see that you have several simultaneous large-scale difficult engineering problems....I include my very rough financial estimate in my proposal document. This has not been subject to expert appraisal. I present a production goal of one ton of oil per acre per day, which phycologists say is far above results of current methods. My claim is that waterbag technology is a key to achieving these sorts of production targets and making algae biofuel economic. Of course, I think it will be wildly profitable and will make me the Bill Gates of water.
I haven't seen any kind of energy balance analysis and order of magnitude costing to give even the faintest hint of the kind of economics this might have.
The only authority on which I make this claim is my own assessment of the scientific parameters for the proposal. It is somewhat like the dawn of the aviation industry, when no one knew what was feasible in terms of flight, but the Wright Bros prototypes contained key breakthrough innovations.
So when you say "it appears feasible", I think that mainly shows that you do not appreciate what would be required to be able to make such a claim with authority.
Addressing global warming, peak oil and food security are urgent problems. I can’t imagine how the world will deal with these problems without the technological solution I am presenting.
Established Member
I think the point is the lower bag B changes in volume, 'inhaling' water from the deep on the flow tide and 'exhaling' that nutrient rich water to surface storage on the ebb tide. It is in effect a bellows arrangement. The problem is how to fix it to the retaining wall H so that it isn't deformed by the suction partial vacuum, yet can still move up and down concertina fashion with the ebb and flow. The other major problem is the force put on the joint to the lower bag in a heavy sea as bag A pitches, which will surely rip it.
Banned
You're right - neither cheap nor light, and any pipe, whether copper, steel, aluminum alloy, iron, or pvc (my choice due to it's strength, lack of corrosion, and relatively light weight) would require a 2-mile tall support structure!
So pipe is out.
Robert's idea of using freshwater lifting bags to haul cold, dense, nutrient-rich seawater to the surface is actually quite a good one. One could even anchor a line at the bottom, with a station-keeping ship at the surface to move the bags into place, empty their contents, repeat the process, etc. And that may be one way to do it, Robert, but I think there's a better, cheaper, faster, more practical way, in that it involves less manpower overhead, fewer and smaller parts/pieces, and is technologically less complicated (i.e. it adheres to the KISS priniciple).
The problem is two-fold:
1. Surface operations involving the algae farm.
2. Transport operations involving the nutrient-rich waters of the deep.
Let's take them one at a time:
1. Algae farm: Your polyethylene bag approach may work to keep the waters of the farm separate from the waters of the surface. It need not be perfect, as you're constantly replenishing the water, but it should provide a reasonable above-surface and sub-surface barrier.
An elongated box shape with inflated edge floats and cross floats is more stable than a round or square approach, as the box can bend and twist longitudinally, and be secured to other boxes in a stagerred fashion for greater stability. You will need some force which pulls on the periphery, as ocean storm waves are capable of folding your contraption in on itself like a professionally flip-rolled omellete. You would also need the water supply system and a way to harvest the algae safely, efficiently, and effectively, but I'm sure you're way ahead of me on that one.
2. Deep water transport system: You know what? I had an idea on this and I think I'm just going to take out my own patent on it.
Established Member
We are looking at a tidal powered system to pump 250 KL per day, or 125 KL per tide. At one square metre per kilolitre, a circular lower bag (B) fixed to the ocean floor would require diameter about fourteen metres. The lower surface of this bellows bag does not move as it is fixed to the ocean floor. It could rest on sand, with the two chamber bag affixed to a single mooring point, and so aligned down-current from the anchor. This is at about 200m below the surface.
The upper bag (A) has fixed volume of water of brackicity calculated to rest on the lower bag at constant depth from the surface, with depth tuned by addition of salt or water to bag A. The fabric barrier between bags A and B is a single layer, so the rise of bag A on a rising tide expands the volume of bag B just like a bellows and the fall of bag A produces strong gravitational pressure on bag B, giving strong pumping pressure. If bag A has diameter 14 metres and height say 10 metres, it will produce large suction for an inlet pipe to bag B, and strong pressure for the outlet pipe, which could go to the ocean surface.
The inlet pipe to bag B could be reinforced fabric about one metre in diameter, either resting on the ocean floor or with some fresh water buoyancy sacks to keep it at constant depth, going down to the thermocline at about 500 metres depth to access nutrient-rich water.
This tidal pump arrangement is also suitable to pump fresh water from waterbags into a shore based reticulation system. For example, bags at the bottom of Moreton Bay or Sydney Harbour, if suitable locations exist, could pump imported or recycled fresh water to existing water pumping stations.
Established Member
As I just noted, a reinforced fabric inlet pipe could suffice, going from pump at 200 metres deep to richer water at 500 metres deep. No rigid support structures are needed except a mooring point.The idea within the algae biodiesel proposal is to use freshwater bags to pump ocean water to the surface. Tidal pumping also has other applications for moving fresh water which are likely to be part of the overall system.
Robert's idea of using freshwater lifting bags to haul cold, dense, nutrient-rich seawater to the surface is actually quite a good one.I'm all ears if you have a superior method. However, the overheads of the system I have proposed are extremely low by comparison with the value of oil as a main product.I think there's a better, cheaper, faster, more practical way, in that it involves less manpower overhead, fewer and smaller parts/pieces, and is technologically less complicated.
Yes, these are separate states of production and need to be examined separately. Dewatering the produced algae is a third major stage.The problem is two-fold:
1. Surface operations involving the algae farm.
2. Transport operations involving the nutrient-rich waters of the deep.
Let's take them one at a time:
If you look at the two minute youtube footage of Terry Spragg's demonstration which I linked earlier, you will see the type of fabric proposed for the freshwater bags. Terry estimates that this fabric has durability of ten years maintaining impermeability between contents and the surrounding ocean when used for fresh water haulage. Permanent location in the ocean for algae farming creates additional problems for cleaning and a resulting shorter fabric life. 2.5% of the bag content sits above the surface, so it may be possible to shape these bags to limit spill over the top - depending on whether the contained algae farm is covered or uncovered.1. Algae farm: Your polyethylene bag approach may work to keep the waters of the farm separate from the waters of the surface. It need not be perfect, as you're constantly replenishing the water, but it should provide a reasonable above-surface and sub-surface barrier.
The schematic top view shown in my drawing C uses the shape you suggest. Indicative measurements for an acre field is 44 yards wide (two chains) by 110 yards long (half a furlong).An elongated box shape with inflated edge floats and cross floats is more stable than a round or square approach, as the box can bend and twist longitudinally, and be secured to other boxes in a stagerred fashion for greater stability. You will need some force which pulls on the periphery, as ocean storm waves are capable of folding your contraption in on itself like a professionally flip-rolled omellete. You would also need the water supply system and a way to harvest the algae safely, efficiently, and effectively, but I'm sure you're way ahead of me on that one.
My view is that during stormy weather the whole system should be rapidly sunk to about 50 metres deep, or whatever depth is required to get to calm conditions. This will enable much lighter construction, without need to build to withstand storm.
The patent drawings for the Ocean-based Algae Production System are here.
A: Schematic Front View of photo-bioreactor component
B: Schematic Side View of photo-bioreactor component
C: Schematic Top View of photo-bioreactor component
D: Tidal Water Pump Component
E: Desalting Component
F: Schematic Diagram of Liquid Concentration Apparatus
G: Schematic Diagram of Algae Oil Extraction Apparatus
H: Schematic Diagram of Component for using wave energy for pumping and propulsion
Fantastic. Look forward to hearing about it in due course.2. Deep water transport system: You know what? I had an idea on this and I think I'm just going to take out my own patent on it.
Established Member
Hi Robert, I used to work as a production engineer in the pump industry. I think your ideas are interesting, and we can do some relatively simple calcs involving the bouyancy of the top part of the double bag, the relative densities of the cold bottom water and the density ambient at bag level. These figures would enable us to calculate the stresses which would be exerted on the fabric as the attachment points prevent the collapse of the lower bag section under partial vacuum. I suspect we are going to find they are pretty high in the case of the upper bag rising gently over a six hour period, without going into the more complicated maths involved in working out what sort of strains we'll get when the upper part of the system is being tossed around in a storm.
Another relatively simple calculation will tell us how much energy is required to move that much cold water through 500m taking into account the frictional losses of the fabric covered framework 'pipe' you propose. I suspect that we will be struggling to shift the 125KL per tide you are aiming for.
I recently installed a rainwater recovery system which uses a 1kw centrifugal pump to lift water through 10m over a distance of about 100m through a smooth bore pvc pipe of 40mm diameter. The suction side has positive pressure of around 1m head. It shifts around 30 litres/min. With an idea of the pressure differential over the 500m, you can use this to get a ball park figure.
Perhaps an idea worth considering is to 'multistage' the lift, and allow time for the lifted nutrient rich water to reach thermal equilibrium with the surrounding water. This would substantially reduce the energy requirement. I don't know what effect this would have on the nutrients however.
Established Member
Stroller, thank you very much for these comments. They open the question of how to optimise the physical parameters for the tidal pump component. I have prepared the following drawing which indicates the main variables. I would welcome input from readers with expertise in physics and engineering to answer the questions posed in the model:
1. How to optimise variables X (Height of Bag B), Y (Height of Bag A) and W (Width of AB) to maximise water pumping volume.
2. How does Z (depth below surface) vary from constant? What are the forces that cause this variation?
3: Should this system initially pump deep water to a holding pond where its temperature can be increased? Would a single tidal phase pumping of water from 500m below surface to the surface be less efficient than a two phase system involving a holding pond?
4: What materials are most suitable for each component?
5. Could Bag B use geothermal heat, by sending contained water into pipes drilled into the earth beneath, to increase the water temperature?
Note to Moderators: Please leave image in Post for one week. Then please remove as it is available on attached thumbnail.
Last edited by Robert Tulip; 2009-Oct-23 at 12:17 AM. Reason: Add Geothermal Drawing
Established Member
Hi Robert,
pretty late here, so I'll just chuck in an alternative idea to think about for now.
A decomissioned ship would provide a lot more lifting power as it rose on the tide, and it's deck area might come in handy for other parts of the operation too.
I'm getting Heath Robinson style visions of seabed fixed cables running over pulleys to a flywheel which runs a reciprocating piston pump. Anyhow, just wondering why you prefer a submerged bag with minimal bouyancy to a surface pan of some description which would have far more lifting power.
Established Member
Advantages of the two chamber bag system include that it operates entirely at depth, not disrupting surface ocean traffic, and below the depth at which storm weather presents a risk. The two chambers operate as a simple heart with diastolic and systolic pulse. The tidal buoyancy of the submerged bag is equal to or greater than the buoyancy of a floating ship. By increasing the mass of water in the buoyancy bag its lifting power increases. As well, the lower surface of the submerged buoyancy bag is attached to the entire upper surface of the bellows bag, which would not be possible if the buoyancy bag/ship was at the ocean surface.
I've replaced my diagram above with a second drawing, adding geothermal heat exchange.
The cable flywheel is a key part of my dewatering component F and G. I envisage this driven by a wave powered ratchet axle with peripheral waterbags driving axle rotation from wave energy.
Last edited by Robert Tulip; 2009-Oct-23 at 12:53 AM.
Banned
Surely they'll travel around it, particularly if it's located away from the shipping lanes...
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
