Author Topic: CO2 --(bacteria)--> Methane (Read 831 times)

moot · « **on:** February 29, 2008, 07:54:14 PM »

Quote

"We think we will have fourth-generation fuels in about 18 months, with CO2 as the fuel stock."

How about that?

Since I learned about oil reserves' limits, I've always been worried more about not having any gasoline left to run big roadsters later in my life (and all the downstream products like plastics etc) than about global warming by car exhausts, but if this works well enough, neither'll be a problem.
It should make for some change of plans for the global warming chicken-littles and all those that have a stake in alcohol and algae as the next fuel. It doesn't look like those'll be better alternatives.. Not if this solves both the fuel supply problem and the CO2 excess problem at the same time.

Lumpy · « **Reply #1 on:** February 29, 2008, 07:56:19 PM »

Linky no worky.

moot · « **Reply #2 on:** February 29, 2008, 07:58:02 PM »

Should be fixed.

AquaShrimp · « **Reply #3 on:** February 29, 2008, 08:07:30 PM »

Its just another biofuel. That guy seems like an ego-maniac to me. They haven't even done anything and already they are running into problems (extracting enough CO2 from the air).

Lumpy · « **Reply #4 on:** February 29, 2008, 08:19:16 PM »

Oh hello Mr I am Legend.

I've never worried about cloning or growing organs in labs etc. They're big and complex organisms that we can shoot and kill if necessary. However these geneticists that want to create something microscopic and simple to help us frightens me. I don't want my internal organs turned into liquid fuel.

moot · « **Reply #5 on:** March 01, 2008, 01:16:26 AM »

Biofuel yes, but the algae and alcohol and all others I've heard of so far don't seem to have this sort of efficiency. They aren't designed at the genetic level to actualy produce the fuel. And it seems much more efficient to have the bugs excrete the fuel rather than burning the algae.. I'm not sure how algae works but I don't think it would be as efficient a process, from aenergy in/energy out ratio.
The existing biofuel processes don't (as far as I recall) feed on a noxious compound either... This solution is outside the box compared to the classic biofuels. It does seem like it deserver the "4th gen" tag.
It probably does have its problems to be worked out, but so do algae and alcohol, hyrdrogen and all the others. They're on equal footing in that respect.

Ego-maniac or not, Venter's done a crap load of stuff for genomics. We're talking about this being ready in 2 years. At this rate the CO2 extraction problem will be fixed, if it can be, within a decade at most. This sets a precedent for any other bug-based solution for waste management and/or resource production; "anything we can imagine" as he says.
I don't see what being an ego-maniac has to do with any of that.

Re: the grey-goo risk, someone in the spotlight as he is couldn't get away with it. His track record doesn't support it either.. Like you say, you're frightened.. It doesn't sound like you actualy know enough facts to actualy say what the risks are in this specific case.

Lumpy · « **Reply #6 on:** March 01, 2008, 01:23:45 AM »

Nope I don't, but considering humanity's track record for screwing up science projects and killing people my worries are well founded.

moot · « **Reply #7 on:** March 01, 2008, 01:35:51 AM »

Yeah but not specificaly for this case. You're talking about a statistic that includes every other project, and saying this one will be in the smaller portion that does go wrong.. How do you know that for sure?
This isn't like geneticaly altered foods, or cell phone radiation. It's bacteria that will be entirely coded to do specific things, including self-destructing if it steps out of bounds, and most likely made to only interact with very specific compounds in very specific conditions.

I don't think it'll be any riskier than most of the things we live with today. It'll get the same sort of quarantine as sensitive nuclear materials, if it has to. It's not like viruses and other pathogens which are hard to contain and stop from spreading. This thing'll be made to die if it's anywhere it's not supposed to be, right down at the genetic level.
Of course, if you drink a gallon of it, or something like that..

Lumpy · « **Reply #8 on:** March 01, 2008, 01:52:36 AM »

It's a bacteria. Antrax is a bacteria. If this was a nuclear project I wouldn't worry. That could only become a very localized problem (unless it was really really big, like say a Ukrainian nuclear power plant). However when your science project has the potential, no matter how farfetched, to become a pandemic killer bug...

Standard consequence based fear-factor.

moot · « **Reply #9 on:** March 01, 2008, 09:52:10 AM »

Yeah and those are bacteria in your gut and all over your skin, etc. Don't those have potential (even far-fetched) to become pandemic killer bugs? Not by any reasonable stretch, and that's because they aren't programmed for it.
This CO2 bug will be programmed for its job. That means the only way for it to go bad is for the code to have unexpected secondary effects (which I don't think are likely given how small and simple the bugs are) or to change, which in the case of bacteria would mean mutation.. I'm pretty sure they'll have some sort of redundancy check in a few different ways the same way software has checksum etc.

There's a lot of bacteria that's naturaly weak and can't survive out of their petri dish, or even outside of pretty narrow food and environment conditions inside the petri dish. I don't see how this one which is programmed by us should be any more dangerous than that.

lazs2 · « **Reply #10 on:** March 01, 2008, 10:00:06 AM »

It's all interesting. I just don't see the need to run around like chicken little..

No one knows what we will have available to us in 10 years much less 50 or 100..

the scare about running out of buffalo hides by the year 1900 to keep us warm in our horse drawn wagons.. well.. that was a tad overblown. the buggy whip crisis was averted also..

lazs

myelo · « **Reply #11 on:** March 01, 2008, 11:03:18 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Lumpy
Antrax is a bacteria.

No, it's a disease. And a band. The disease is caused by a bacterium but what's that got to do with anything?

We've been using bacteria for thousands of years. Wine, cheese, yogurt, insulin all are made with bacteria. Making champagne didn't lead to a killer pandemic.

Tac · « **Reply #12 on:** March 01, 2008, 01:45:00 PM »

"Making champagne didn't lead to a killer pandemic."

and what do you call the French? C'mon man THINK.

AquaShrimp · « **Reply #13 on:** March 01, 2008, 01:48:19 PM »

Bio-algae has a proposed efficiency of 100,000 gallons of oil per acre. Right now they are getting 5,000 to 15,000 gallons of oil per acre.

bozon · « **Reply #14 on:** March 01, 2008, 01:51:47 PM »

I still do not understand what is the energy source. To turn CO2 into methane you need to invest energy. This is somewhat similar to what plants do and there the enrgy source is solar.