Algae a viable biofuel?

Ethanol from corn is nothing but a shakedown, and other biofuels are marginal, but what about algae? --

Yield of vegetable oil in gallons per acre per year:

• Algae: 100,000

• Palm: 700

• Rapeseed: 130

• Sunflower: 110

• Soybeans: 50

• Corn: 29

Source: GlobalGreen Solutions; Valcent Products

Is there anything to this? And why in dry West Texas?

The two companies behind it, El Paso's Valcent Products and Canadian alternative energy firm Global Green Solutions, have developed a system they claim will allow for cheap mass production of algae in just about any corner of the world.

Why not in the wet East?

The Price of Gasoline SHOULD Go Up

Tom Evslin (on the kitchen blogroll) has a must read post on why The Price of Gasoline SHOULD Go Up:

Suppose we were to raise the tax on gasoline and diesel used as motor fuels by $.50/gallon every six months for the next three years. We could immediately end the $.50/gallon subsidy to ethanol producers without discouraging production. We could remove the stupid restrictions on importing ethanol made from sugar since there’s be plenty of demand for both foreign and domestic ethanol. We could stop the tariffs which protect the sugar growers as they find a market – as corn has already done – as a fuel source.

Even more expensive biofuels would become economical without subsidy. The government could stop playing the pork barrel game of trying to decide which alternative fuels to subsidize how much and let the most efficient producers replace gasoline.

Putting aside the politics, there are still two enormous problems with this proposal:

1. The tax is extremely regressive – the working poor pay much more of their income in gas tax than the rich.
2. The government will withdraw huge sums from the economy and legislators’ll invent vote-buying programs to spend it.

Both problems could be solved, however, by reducing or eliminating social security taxes – also regressive – at lower income levels, maybe after keeping a little of the surplus to make sure that social security and Medicare are actually funded for when the baby boomers retire.

Absolutely, though Kitchen Linker will argue that a gas tax is not regressive on a global and long term scale.

Branson's billions putting brains to work for the earth

Richard Branson's investments in biofuels were welcome but not exciting, as biofuels are marginal at best (and environmental suicide via politics at worst).

With the Virgin Earth Challenge (and some instruction from Al Gore?), Branson's money is working smarter. Very very cool.

The Virgin Earth Challenge is a prize of $25m for whoever can demonstrate to the judges' satisfaction a commercially viable design which results in the removal of anthropogenic, atmospheric greenhouse gases so as to contribute materially to the stability of Earth’s climate.

Pigou Club vs. Pig Club

Bryan Caplan:

Given all the pork involved in the biofuels ripoff, I think that those politicians who support it ought to be called the Pig Club.

Indeed. Let Kitchen Linker give Caplan a hint: the Pigou Club is the alternative to the Pig Club.

SugarCorn Mafia

Bring it to justice. James Surowiecki in the New Yorker:

Our current policy is absurd even by Washington standards: Congress is paying billions in subsidies to get us to use more ethanol, while keeping in place tariffs and quotas that guarantee that we’ll use less. And while most of the time tariffs just mean higher prices and reduced competition, in the case of ethanol the negative effects are considerably greater, leaving us saddled with an inferior and less energy-efficient technology and as dependent as ever on oil-producing countries. Because of the ethanol tariffs, we’re imposing taxes on fuel from countries that are friendly to the U.S., but no tax at all on fuel from countries that are among our most vehement opponents. Congressmen justify the barriers to foreign ethanol with talk of “energy security.” But how is the U.S. more secure when it has to import oil from Venezuela rather than ethanol from Brazil? These tariffs are bad economic policy, bad energy policy, and bad foreign policy. Talk about your Domino effect.

Of course ethanol from tropical sugar, not eight times less efficient midwestern corn, could be an important component of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Time to congress with Congress.

Billion Biofuel Branson

Bully for Branson. The article reads like most of the expected $3 billion (highly unknown, based on future Virgin profits) will be spent on developing biofuels. That sounds unexciting, but looks like they're going for big improvements.

The first investment was made in Cilion, a new California company building ethanol refineries that Virgin officials said burn far less fossil fuel than conventional biofuel operations.

However I think people are confusing not using fossil fuels and not producing greenhouse gasses:

“But the only way global warming is going to be beaten is to invest in new fuels that can actually replace fossil fuels.”

Uh, biofuels still produce greenhouse gasses. That's why I'm more excited by solar, windpower and other zero-emission technologies.

But airplanes aren't going to fly on electricity anytime soon, so Branson can be forgiven for being conservative. IATA has some cool figures on airplane fuel efficiency:

• New aircraft are 70% more fuel efficient than 40 years ago and 20% better than 10 years ago.
• The industry is aiming for a further 50% fuel efficiency improvement by 2020.
• Modern aircraft achieve fuel efficiencies of 3.5 litres per 100 passenger km.
• The A380 and B787 are aiming for 3 litres per 100 passenger km – better than a compact car!

I had no idea airplanes had improved so much. Sounds like another good investment would be to retire old planes ASAP. Maybe big airlines will lobby to force retirement, as new airlines using old planes are cutting into big airlines' profits.