Is there anything to worry about?

RE: response to post #154.

Some quick thoughts. One, I would like to see a price breakdown of the actual cost per unit of the various energy sources. Included should be subsidies by subsidizing entity. Parse it down from the too nebulous "global" to at least the regional level.

Two, I wonder if comparing of various alt energy to Fossil Fuel (FF) based energy is accurate. The reason is FF industry got it's start in a different time. The perspective is it grew naturally as the need grew. It was plentiful and it was cheap. The opposite could be said of other energy sources. They are called alternate specifically because they are trying to replace the FF model. The alt fuels industries are being forced into being as opposed to a somewhat organic growth which is the FF(pun not intended).

I disagree. Again, economics. Fossil fuels provide the most BTUs for the lowest production cost. If anything, fossil fuel production was even cheaper in the past as the coal seams were closer to the surface, there was less gov't regulation, oil deposits were more plentiful thus easier to pump out (no steam injection required, for example). No, I'd have to say that fossil fuel works 'cause it's cheap and has the energy content.

Now, if you factor in cost of externalities into the equation, then I might agree with you. I think the externalities in, say, coal power, are far greater than, say, hydro power. Even with the Nobel, Coase's work still doesn't get the attention it deserves.
 
Good luck in your search. :D
I know, right?
It's just sorta difficult to get the gist when it's Mandarin Oranges compared to Tangerines compared to Kumquats. I think ratcheting down to the regional level would make the data more presentable, ie, accurate. It's a question of scale. I think the various economies are hidden when all the data is put into one pile.
 
Last edited:
I disagree. Again, economics. Fossil fuels provide the most BTUs for the lowest production cost. If anything, fossil fuel production was even cheaper in the past as the coal seams were closer to the surface, there was less gov't regulation, oil deposits were more plentiful thus easier to pump out (no steam injection required, for example). No, I'd have to say that fossil fuel works 'cause it's cheap and has the energy content.

Now, if you factor in cost of externalities into the equation, then I might agree with you. I think the externalities in, say, coal power, are far greater than, say, hydro power. Even with the Nobel, Coase's work still doesn't get the attention it deserves.
Then we do agree. I specifically mentioned the plentiful and cheap aspects of FF.

You caught a point I did not address...BTUs. So there is the base line. Compare BTUs of alt fuels. And do so at the regional level. The global scale does not offer a very good datum.
 
For what it's worth, algae farming is still pretty new. I'm no expert on much of this, but if it is still being developed, i.e. emerging, there aren't many buisnesses willing to throw money at it without KNOWING the return on their investment, I can see this being part of the major speedbump.
Also FWIW, there's a deal out here that putting solar panels on your home and plugging them into the grid saves so much $$ per year hence paying for itself in X years, and the gov't helps offset the initial cost. "Every little bit helps," so to speak. With that in mind, Tom's proposal would not be all that "crazy" when the kinks are worked out of algae farms. Sprouting up some greenhouses with the appropriate equipment would not be so hard, and would increase the value of the land (tax assessment at least), and the ability to ship product would inherently be there as well since the material and equipment will have arrived on a truck. When there is enough quantity of algae farms in an area, there will be enterprising individuals who will set up trucking/delivery of product...and on and on the ripple goes.
If I knew more about it, I'd either be one of the suckers or one of the pioneers.
 
I think there are quite a few business' willing if not ready to throw their stake in. If a biz is mkt driven, they will be giving this and other similar projects a hard look.

True story: Many bit players and several large corps wanted to get into mariculture. They could cultivate the market but were unsure of the physical logistics of such a plant. Along comes a man like John Alexander who if anyone knows water systems, it's John. He'd been as a Pied Piper for years but no one took him serious. So he invested his own money. The mariculture industry bloomed! Since then the world has beaten a path to his door. His chief obstacle...federal and state govts.

Another story: I knew a guy who wanted to construct the first straw bale home in CA. Local govts all said No way. So he went to NV and became a success. He helped write the new codes for straw bale homes. Now the B&P dudes all act like they been with him all along. Govt turds.

This algae thing will take off but only when govt gets out of the way. The infrastructure is not so massive that a proof of concept is untenable nor is the technology new. It is just a slightly different application of existing technology. When govt gets out of the way you will see invester dollars flow. The govt will have to regulate but after the industry is up.
 
You need to do your home work a little better. Come out into the real world and realize we are in big trouble.

You need to raise your eyes above the Government BS and start thinking for your self. the real world is out there and it's hurting. Yet you think we can give up our expensive toys and every thing will be OK.

I never said the farmers were the ones to give up their toys. The toys are with those who should be investing in their own neighborhoods and businesses. There's piles of people in cities driving unnecessary "luxury" cars. Unfortunately most were paid for with credit. Look for the old guy with a beat up Ford F-150 and calluses on his hands and you might find he has a million bucks to invest. Or not. But my point was that there's plenty of folks who have money. They're not building algae farms because they've done the math. They can't make back their investment before they die.

I also don't believe the government BS which is exactly why I find your cry that "Government should save us" so silly. Government workers outnumber manufacturing workers in the U.S. now, two to one. So, I'm pretty sure "more government" isn't the answer -- judging by where we're at today.

Government was regulating the mortgage loan banks, in fact, guaranteeing their loans through Fannie and Freddie which are still both yet to be "un-wound". Government was "regulating" Goldman Sachs while they sold derivatives. Government convinced a nation that 1/4 million dollar houses or higher, financed over 30 years, was "affordable housing for all". Government was in charge of regulating AIG who was insuring it all.

We've been in big trouble my whole life. The "consumer" nation must consume or die. The "consumer" nation had no idea how to save for a rainy day and spends both nationally and individually on credit, and has no clue the effects of compound interest.

We need to be a "maker" nation again and it won't happen until things get bad enough folks realize government doesn't make anything and politicians living off their dime aren't going to save them.

If you don't believe there are a) folks smart enough to start the algae thing without government assistance, and b) who have the money to do so tomorrow -- if the numbers worked for it -- you're crazy. It could be started up tomorrow, if it made any fiscal sense.

As a nation, our lifestyle is adjusting to match what we produce, which is mostly plastic trash and video games. People are more interested in Farmville than real farming.

The electronics to run the video games are made somewhere else. The plastic trash was manufactured somewhere else. We want our middle class to be able to afford expensive import "luxury" automobiles that are fussy and no better than what Detroit produced as they were dying for customers. Cessna is making their new airplanes in Mexico and China. We still innovate but that was only a portion of our working class even back in the hey-day. We tell kids that learning a trade is "second-best" to getting an education -- where the most they aspire to is being a middle-manager with no real authority and certainly no leadership skills -- for the rest of their lives. Plumbers and electricians who work hard are starting to pull down six figure salaries after paying their dues, time-wise. Landscapers aren't doing too bad either. Trades are bouncing back. Would I support a government that actually budgeted to do proper upkeep on things like roads and bridges with real planning who didn't tell kids they have to have a college degree to make a living, and instead set up trade schools in road and bridge building? You only need so many engineers for those projects. Fire up the government work camps and build some bridges. AFTER you do that, you can then have a government backed student loan or mortgage. Make the government subsidies something you earn. I'm cool with that. I took the hard road and worked as a busboy, waiter, mail sorter, airplane baggage loader, phone operator, and all sorts of menial jobs to avoid school debt. I never finished college either. My chance to go to work as a field tech came up and I didn't ignore it. I put supporting myself and my family over my desires to finish my Aviation degree. I think it came out better for me in the end.

Lamenting that we're going broke buying things we don't need from foreign manufacturers is kinda silly, of course we are! Common sense. How many decades ago was the last time you heard of anyone paying for their first house with cash? How bad does our society treat folks who live in mobile homes (which are quite affordable and a decent roof over your head -- I've had lots of family live in mobile home parks...). We call our hardest workers, "Trailer trash." We have a crisis in this country we haven't recognized yet, it's one of disrespect for anyone who works for an honest wage with their hands. I realize this.

I grew up with a farmer. A Great Depression farmer. He passed away last year. He took vacation once a year, with cash in his pocket, and told my dad and grandma that they could do anything they wanted to do, but when the cash was gone, they were going home. Meals were prepared at home out of mostly staples, and no one went hungry, but eating out was a social/special treat for Sunday nights when it was affordable. Potatoes are filling and pretty good for you. They're a few bucks for ten pounds of 'em. Chicken dinners were followed by making stock/broth out of the carcass and yummy chicken noodle soup was not far behind on the menu in the next week or so. Baseball was imagined and listened to on an AM radio right up until his death, never a 40" flat-screen TV. Things worth doing were things like going flying on the weekend. You worked all week to pay for that privilege. In fact, his very first question any time you said you wanted to do something was, "Okay you can. How are you going to pay for it?" College loans were avoided if at all possible, and payments started with the three jobs you held while you were in school, taking classes. Canning and pickling weren't quaint pastimes, they were a way to preserve and store some of the treats you grew in your backyard garden for winter. And yes, you grew a garden. Cash in your pocket was something that stayed in your pocket to pay for those things you said you wanted to do.

Look I'm not saying these folks aren't hurting. They are. We all need to help when we can.

I'm not heartless. I've taken people into my home. They were required to do the chores our way, share their financial situation with us, and let us at least attempt to show them how to budget. I've directly supported folks for months at a time who were clueless about work ethic and were still in bed at 11 AM when they didn't have a job. No amount of threats or cajoling worked. It was like raising a teenager.

There really are people out there who "don't get it", badly. I had to pay for the moving truck to get one out of my house after eight months when he forgot to figure out how the stuff would magically be whisked to his new apartment. Less than a year later, he was fired for sleeping at his desk. Now he's thinking he'll be evicted and homeless.

Do you go back in after the guy who jumped knowingly into the deep end twice? When and how does he learn that you don't blow a good job by staying up all night on the Internet in a job market this bad? He's older than I am! You have to draw a line somewhere.

I feel for the farmers, I really do. But if there's nothing being grown there that I want, I don't think my money (directly or in the form of government subsidies) should go there. Grow something I want, I'll buy three. Just 'cause I know they're hurting. Or raise the prices so they can fill their gas tanks. I'll have to pay more for whatever it is that they farmed. Fine by me.

I took a job at a company that's trying to compete with call center overseas outsourcing head-on. They're creating jobs. I buy my groceries and somewhere, someone planted and grew the stuff to make those and raised the animals for slaughter. I got a new job 3.8 miles from home to lower my need for fuel to get there. I invest in or purchase from local businesses when I can. I save up and buy a few toys a year. When the cars get really old I buy solid used ones.

At one time I was $30K in credit card debt. I know how this broken "consumer" mindset works. I got off the treadmill. I can't really help it much if the rest of the Country won't follow suit and they've voted in their "saviors" (both Parties play that game, don't worry I'm not playing favorites here) who promise if they keep giving them their money, they'll magically create jobs.

I watch politicians make promises and think, "Yeah, and unicorns will fly out of my butt too." Until the rest of the Country figures that out... We're pretty screwed. I rolled my eyes when that Senator went to Wichita and spoke to the aviation companies and told them he was their savior. He hasn't produced a single aviation job in his life and never will. If we didn't send him and the rest of government 40% of what we make, you think we might buy new Cessnas with that money and voila... Jobs? Duh.

Duh. Duh. Duh. Duh. Duh.

I'm dumping as much money into this economy as a normal middle-class Joe with a normal job should. I'm not buying much on credit, and I'm not putting the farmers out of business up there. Someone else is doing that. Go find 'em. They're probably playing a round of golf with one of their government buddies.

I'm definitely not the guy who's taxes should be raised, to pay for someone else's algae dreams, through that same utterly corrupt government -- I know that! I'll happily invest in it if someone can show ROI numbers that work, though. If you can get your message out to a million of "me" and we're all convinced you could cover costs and produce cheaper fuel that everyone could use, you'd easily have the Capital to start the business. Crunch the numbers, let's see 'em.

Or as the old farmer used to say, whenever I had a new job... "Get out your calculator." That meant figuring out transportation costs to get me to/from the new job, expected wages after taxes, and time spent working and going to and from (overhead). He made us write it down. It didn't have to be fancy, but it had to be written. There had to be a plan. The plan could change, but you had to know up-front if it was a winner or a loser going in. He'd ask pointed questions like, "What happens if your car breaks down?" If the entire plan worked and you truthfully said, "I doubt I could afford a new starter or alternator right now." He'd say he'd back you up but you'd better be finding another job to reach self-sufficiency.

So if you're serious about this algae thing, show us your plan that doesn't include free land. There are sane fiscal responsible people willing to listen but it's not their job to do the legwork. Having the government back up something solid is fine. The government is us. We want to see the business plan. Fair enough?
 
For what it's worth, algae farming is still pretty new. I'm no expert on much of this, but if it is still being developed, i.e. emerging, there aren't many buisnesses willing to throw money at it without KNOWING the return on their investment, I can see this being part of the major speedbump.
But as I posted much earlier in the thread, Exxon/Mobil has already invested money. They must think there are possibilities with algae but they are certainly not a mom and pop operation. That's why I think that if algae is a viable and economic energy source it will not be produced on small family farms in any great quantity but will be overshadowed by "big algae", not that I think this is necessarily bad as I don't have the bias against big business that some do. As other people have pointed out, there are many efficiencies of scale.
 
I never said the farmers were the ones to give up their toys. The toys are with those who should be investing in their own neighborhoods and businesses. There's piles of people in cities driving unnecessary "luxury" cars. Unfortunately most were paid for with credit. Look for the old guy with a beat up Ford F-150 and calluses on his hands and you might find he has a million bucks to invest. Or not. But my point was that there's plenty of folks who have money. They're not building algae farms because they've done the math. They can't make back their investment before they die.

I also don't believe the government BS which is exactly why I find your cry that "Government should save us" so silly. Government workers outnumber manufacturing workers in the U.S. now, two to one. So, I'm pretty sure "more government" isn't the answer -- judging by where we're at today.

Government was regulating the mortgage loan banks, in fact, guaranteeing their loans through Fannie and Freddie which are still both yet to be "un-wound". Government was "regulating" Goldman Sachs while they sold derivatives. Government convinced a nation that 1/4 million dollar houses or higher, financed over 30 years, was "affordable housing for all". Government was in charge of regulating AIG who was insuring it all.

We've been in big trouble my whole life. The "consumer" nation must consume or die. The "consumer" nation had no idea how to save for a rainy day and spends both nationally and individually on credit, and has no clue the effects of compound interest.

We need to be a "maker" nation again and it won't happen until things get bad enough folks realize government doesn't make anything and politicians living off their dime aren't going to save them.

If you don't believe there are a) folks smart enough to start the algae thing without government assistance, and b) who have the money to do so tomorrow -- if the numbers worked for it -- you're crazy. It could be started up tomorrow, if it made any fiscal sense.

As a nation, our lifestyle is adjusting to match what we produce, which is mostly plastic trash and video games. People are more interested in Farmville than real farming.

The electronics to run the video games are made somewhere else. The plastic trash was manufactured somewhere else. We want our middle class to be able to afford expensive import "luxury" automobiles that are fussy and no better than what Detroit produced as they were dying for customers. Cessna is making their new airplanes in Mexico and China. We still innovate but that was only a portion of our working class even back in the hey-day. We tell kids that learning a trade is "second-best" to getting an education -- where the most they aspire to is being a middle-manager with no real authority and certainly no leadership skills -- for the rest of their lives. Plumbers and electricians who work hard are starting to pull down six figure salaries after paying their dues, time-wise. Landscapers aren't doing too bad either. Trades are bouncing back. Would I support a government that actually budgeted to do proper upkeep on things like roads and bridges with real planning who didn't tell kids they have to have a college degree to make a living, and instead set up trade schools in road and bridge building? You only need so many engineers for those projects. Fire up the government work camps and build some bridges. AFTER you do that, you can then have a government backed student loan or mortgage. Make the government subsidies something you earn. I'm cool with that. I took the hard road and worked as a busboy, waiter, mail sorter, airplane baggage loader, phone operator, and all sorts of menial jobs to avoid school debt. I never finished college either. My chance to go to work as a field tech came up and I didn't ignore it. I put supporting myself and my family over my desires to finish my Aviation degree. I think it came out better for me in the end.

Lamenting that we're going broke buying things we don't need from foreign manufacturers is kinda silly, of course we are! Common sense. How many decades ago was the last time you heard of anyone paying for their first house with cash? How bad does our society treat folks who live in mobile homes (which are quite affordable and a decent roof over your head -- I've had lots of family live in mobile home parks...). We call our hardest workers, "Trailer trash." We have a crisis in this country we haven't recognized yet, it's one of disrespect for anyone who works for an honest wage with their hands. I realize this.

I grew up with a farmer. A Great Depression farmer. He passed away last year. He took vacation once a year, with cash in his pocket, and told my dad and grandma that they could do anything they wanted to do, but when the cash was gone, they were going home. Meals were prepared at home out of mostly staples, and no one went hungry, but eating out was a social/special treat for Sunday nights when it was affordable. Potatoes are filling and pretty good for you. They're a few bucks for ten pounds of 'em. Chicken dinners were followed by making stock/broth out of the carcass and yummy chicken noodle soup was not far behind on the menu in the next week or so. Baseball was imagined and listened to on an AM radio right up until his death, never a 40" flat-screen TV. Things worth doing were things like going flying on the weekend. You worked all week to pay for that privilege. In fact, his very first question any time you said you wanted to do something was, "Okay you can. How are you going to pay for it?" College loans were avoided if at all possible, and payments started with the three jobs you held while you were in school, taking classes. Canning and pickling weren't quaint pastimes, they were a way to preserve and store some of the treats you grew in your backyard garden for winter. And yes, you grew a garden. Cash in your pocket was something that stayed in your pocket to pay for those things you said you wanted to do.

Look I'm not saying these folks aren't hurting. They are. We all need to help when we can.

I'm not heartless. I've taken people into my home. They were required to do the chores our way, share their financial situation with us, and let us at least attempt to show them how to budget. I've directly supported folks for months at a time who were clueless about work ethic and were still in bed at 11 AM when they didn't have a job. No amount of threats or cajoling worked. It was like raising a teenager.

There really are people out there who "don't get it", badly. I had to pay for the moving truck to get one out of my house after eight months when he forgot to figure out how the stuff would magically be whisked to his new apartment. Less than a year later, he was fired for sleeping at his desk. Now he's thinking he'll be evicted and homeless.

Do you go back in after the guy who jumped knowingly into the deep end twice? When and how does he learn that you don't blow a good job by staying up all night on the Internet in a job market this bad? He's older than I am! You have to draw a line somewhere.

I feel for the farmers, I really do. But if there's nothing being grown there that I want, I don't think my money (directly or in the form of government subsidies) should go there. Grow something I want, I'll buy three. Just 'cause I know they're hurting. Or raise the prices so they can fill their gas tanks. I'll have to pay more for whatever it is that they farmed. Fine by me.

I took a job at a company that's trying to compete with call center overseas outsourcing head-on. They're creating jobs. I buy my groceries and somewhere, someone planted and grew the stuff to make those and raised the animals for slaughter. I got a new job 3.8 miles from home to lower my need for fuel to get there. I invest in or purchase from local businesses when I can. I save up and buy a few toys a year. When the cars get really old I buy solid used ones.

At one time I was $30K in credit card debt. I know how this broken "consumer" mindset works. I got off the treadmill. I can't really help it much if the rest of the Country won't follow suit and they've voted in their "saviors" (both Parties play that game, don't worry I'm not playing favorites here) who promise if they keep giving them their money, they'll magically create jobs.

I watch politicians make promises and think, "Yeah, and unicorns will fly out of my butt too." Until the rest of the Country figures that out... We're pretty screwed. I rolled my eyes when that Senator went to Wichita and spoke to the aviation companies and told them he was their savior. He hasn't produced a single aviation job in his life and never will. If we didn't send him and the rest of government 40% of what we make, you think we might buy new Cessnas with that money and voila... Jobs? Duh.

Duh. Duh. Duh. Duh. Duh.

I'm dumping as much money into this economy as a normal middle-class Joe with a normal job should. I'm not buying much on credit, and I'm not putting the farmers out of business up there. Someone else is doing that. Go find 'em. They're probably playing a round of golf with one of their government buddies.

I'm definitely not the guy who's taxes should be raised, to pay for someone else's algae dreams, through that same utterly corrupt government -- I know that! I'll happily invest in it if someone can show ROI numbers that work, though. If you can get your message out to a million of "me" and we're all convinced you could cover costs and produce cheaper fuel that everyone could use, you'd easily have the Capital to start the business. Crunch the numbers, let's see 'em.

Or as the old farmer used to say, whenever I had a new job... "Get out your calculator." That meant figuring out transportation costs to get me to/from the new job, expected wages after taxes, and time spent working and going to and from (overhead). He made us write it down. It didn't have to be fancy, but it had to be written. There had to be a plan. The plan could change, but you had to know up-front if it was a winner or a loser going in. He'd ask pointed questions like, "What happens if your car breaks down?" If the entire plan worked and you truthfully said, "I doubt I could afford a new starter or alternator right now." He'd say he'd back you up but you'd better be finding another job to reach self-sufficiency.

So if you're serious about this algae thing, show us your plan that doesn't include free land. There are sane fiscal responsible people willing to listen but it's not their job to do the legwork. Having the government back up something solid is fine. The government is us. We want to see the business plan. Fair enough?

Your ranting and ravings are so far off topic, it's impossible to respond, the simple idea of a new homestead act seems inconceivable to you. But in fact there are enough people in this country that would jump at the opportunity to own land that is now used for nothing.

The US has no more money to throw at the problem, but it does own millions of Ac. of land.

There will always be those of you heavy thinking nay sayers that will object to the simplicity of the solution. But none the less this could end the dependence on foreign oil.

Algae is here and now, the technology to grow it is already here, vertical closed loop systems are already used in other crops. Pipes, hoses, tanks, are nothing new or is sort supply. The only thing in short supply is congress's ability to act and your ability to understand.
 
But as I posted much earlier in the thread, Exxon/Mobil has already invested money. They must think there are possibilities with algae but they are certainly not a mom and pop operation. That's why I think that if algae is a viable and economic energy source it will not be produced on small family farms in any great quantity but will be overshadowed by "big algae", not that I think this is necessarily bad as I don't have the bias against big business that some do. As other people have pointed out, there are many efficiencies of scale.

As long as there is more profit in drilling or importing the big oil companies will not bring this new energy source to market. The reason the fossil fuel became the main energy fuel was because it was cheap, easy to get and there was enough on shore to supply the demand, none of those reasons are true any more.

I would hate to guess how many ac.of land the government is now paying farmers to not grow any thing. If the land bank was desolved and that land alone was placed in production our problem of imported oil would be solved.

We must remember the problem we face today is not one of production, we have plenty of oil, it's the cost of it that is the problem.

Flooding the market would stop the profit taking on the commodities market.
 
Mark me words. If we ever derived a non-fossil energy source, it will be microbes. Algae can efficiently harness sunlight and build complex macromolecules, and there is no lignin barrier to overcome, unlike terrestrial plants.

Oils can be extracted from algae the same as from any vegetable material. And they can be genetically engineered to make hydrocarbons more amenable to our use.


Correct, what does a gallon of vegetable oil sell for?
 
As long as there is more profit in drilling or importing the big oil companies will not bring this new energy source to market. The reason the fossil fuel became the main energy fuel was because it was cheap, easy to get and there was enough on shore to supply the demand, none of those reasons are true any more.

I would hate to guess how many ac.of land the government is now paying farmers to not grow any thing. If the land bank was desolved and that land alone was placed in production our problem of imported oil would be solved.

We must remember the problem we face today is not one of production, we have plenty of oil, it's the cost of it that is the problem.

Flooding the market would stop the profit taking on the commodities market.

You think? The market is already flooded, there is no shortage of crude, and we have refining capacity that is not in use and every quarter new record profits get posted by the oil companies....
 
I know, right?
It's just sorta difficult to get the gist when it's Mandarin Oranges compared to Tangerines compared to Kumquats. I think ratcheting down to the regional level would make the data more presentable, ie, accurate. It's a question of scale. I think the various economies are hidden when all the data is put into one pile.

Go ahead, you'll find that when broken down to the regional level that we are still being bent over and f-ed, same goes for the local level as well.
 
FWIW, I buy feed grade veggie oil(corn and soy) for $0.46/lb in tanker quantities.

Eggman

Ok, so that makes it just over $3.00 a gallon figuring 6.6lbs/gallon, so that's doable depending on your road taxes. Is that more or less than the red diesel you buy?
 
Flooding the market would stop the profit taking on the commodities market.
Companies are smart enough not to flood the market as that drives the unit price down. They need to have the cost of production a certain amount above the price they receive for their product. If thousands of small farmers flood the market with algae fuel what do you think is going to happen to their profits, if they had any to begin with?
 
You think? The market is already flooded, there is no shortage of crude, and we have refining capacity that is not in use and every quarter new record profits get posted by the oil companies....

We certainly have a problem when the speculators can cause the whole economy to falter. The ripple effect of the high price of fuel will effect every one with higher consumer prices.

I flew over to BVS today and that takes me past 3 refineries/tank farms, they have tanks with floating lids which tells you how full the tanks are. and the entire tank farm is full, there is no steam coming out of the cat cracker, which says they have shut down due to lack of storage.

yet we pay 4 bucks per gallon.
 
Companies are smart enough not to flood the market as that drives the unit price down. They need to have the cost of production a certain amount above the price they receive for their product. If thousands of small farmers flood the market with algae fuel what do you think is going to happen to their profits, if they had any to begin with?

The big oil companies make a 3 dollar a barrel profit, they are not the problem, they would be the primary buyer of the farmer produced crude, rather than buying it from the OPEC nations.

but we still have the profiteering speculators to deal with. to fix that problem, simply reduce the margin they can use to buy commodities, require them to use their own money.
 
Your ranting and ravings are so far off topic, it's impossible to respond, the simple idea of a new homestead act seems inconceivable to you. But in fact there are enough people in this country that would jump at the opportunity to own land that is now used for nothing.

The US has no more money to throw at the problem, but it does own millions of Ac. of land.

Incorrect. One thing leads to another. You didn't suggest ONLY a land deal, you suggested the government guarantee equipment and other loans. If you want the government to give away land to homesteaders, I'm fine with that. They come up with their own startup costs or present a real business plan.

I respond in kind to rants. You rant, I rant back. You've given no indication that you're going to provide a viable fiscally-sound plan, thus you're ranting IMHO. Platitudes don't work very often in the business world.

There will always be those of you heavy thinking nay sayers that will object to the simplicity of the solution. But none the less this could end the dependence on foreign oil.

All I'm asking is for a written business plan. That's not exactly "heavy thinking". I expounded on some social/mental/moral ills the Country has, but bottom line was "Show me the plan." Us so-called "heavy thinking naysayers" are allowed to change our minds, you know.

Algae is here and now, the technology to grow it is already here, vertical closed loop systems are already used in other crops. Pipes, hoses, tanks, are nothing new or is sort supply. The only thing in short supply is congress's ability to act and your ability to understand.

So you're a gifted visionary and we're all dolts, I suppose, Tom. Plenty of visionaries in the history books who failed because they couldn't sell their plans. See Nikolai Tesla as perhaps one example. There are probably better ones.

If you can't sell the common man on your plan... Which you haven't published yet or even given any hard dollar estimates on... You won't get Congress. I'm all for your plan to give away land, I guess... How about a free lease instead that will have onerous taxes on it some arbitrary date in the future on the algae multi-billionaires who will be the "evil" ones who got free land from their ancestors? ;)

Seriously. Write a proposal. Put some numbers behind it. It's going to take at least a lifetime's work by an expert "crusader" to pull it off, like all great endeavors. You have the drive, you're presenting to the wrong audience. Talk to my CongressCritter.
 
...simply reduce the margin they can use to buy commodities, require them to use their own money.

And you said my rant about everyone living on leverage beyond their means wasn't relevant. Ha.
 
The big oil companies make a 3 dollar a barrel profit, they are not the problem, they would be the primary buyer of the farmer produced crude, rather than buying it from the OPEC nations.
Those are not their only two choices. Even if algae becomes a viable fuel, commercially, I can't see oil companies buying from a thousand small farmers when they could buy it from a handful of large growers who could produce it cheaper due to the large quantities involved. This is what happened to conventional farming and I can't see that the algae business model is any different. Besides, now you have the oil companies involved. I thought you were trying to shut them out.
 
Those are not their only two choices. Even if algae becomes a viable fuel, commercially, I can't see oil companies buying from a thousand small farmers when they could buy it from a handful of large growers who could produce it cheaper due to the large quantities involved. This is what happened to conventional farming and I can't see that the algae business model is any different. Besides, now you have the oil companies involved. I thought you were trying to shut them out.

They will buy crude where they can get it the cheapest. mom and pop have a lower overhead than the big guys. thus competition reduces the price.
 
They will buy crude where they can get it the cheapest. mom and pop have a lower overhead than the big guys. thus competition reduces the price.
I think this is just wishful thinking. It's also harder to negotiate with 1,000 different suppliers than a handful. Why doesn't Wal-Mart buy toys from mom and pop making them in their living rooms? Surely the overhead must be lower than shipping from China. Making toys sounds easier than growing algae.
 
Only in your mind, because you are so far off topic your rants do not deserve a response.

Or perhaps you just have none. Here's on-topic for ya, 100%.

***Show us the business model.***

Same question over and over until you answer it.

You can't or won't.

Without a business model that might work, it's filed directly in File 13 under "unworkable".
 
Or perhaps you just have none. Here's on-topic for ya, 100%.

***Show us the business model.***

Same question over and over until you answer it.

You can't or won't.

Without a business model that might work, it's filed directly in File 13 under "unworkable".

Use the same model as the farmers of the 20th century used. grow and sell a product. The same method used for many hundreds of years, it works for cattle, crops, of all kinds, only this crop will use land good for nothing else.

Start up costs guaranteed by the government, and land gotten by a homestead act.

This model has been used by every rancher that still owns land gotten by his forefathers during the first, and second home stead act.
 
Or perhaps you just have none. Here's on-topic for ya, 100%.

***Show us the business model.***

Same question over and over until you answer it.

You can't or won't.

Without a business model that might work, it's filed directly in File 13 under "unworkable".

I've explained this several times to you, try opening your mind to a new and simple idea.
 
I've explained this several times to you, try opening your mind to a new and simple idea.

No, you've given a general story. A business plan includes NUMBERS. You haven't explained anything.

For your government-backed loans, please indicate who would be actually backing them...?

- The Fed Directly? (Doubtful about that.)
- Another debacle/fake bank like Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac?
- Goldman Sachs with the government backing them with the "full faith" of the United States of America?
- A hodgepodge of banks bidding to do it at the lowest interest rate and "regulated" by the government?

(In other words, who gets the interest payments on those loans?)

Where's the capital coming from if they fail and have to be bailed out?

(The problem with Fannie and Freddie... 30% failed... and we had to de-value our dollar by printing more of them to pay off the fantastic default rate.)

- The Fed?
- AIG / Lloyds of London / Another large commercial insurer?

Okay now that we have the loan part covered, please describe the terms of the land giveaway. What are the terms?

- Land is given to the new owner immediately and even if they fail or walk away, they keep it?

- Land is given over time to the new owner, per the following stipulations...

Possible examples:
- Land owner must take up permanent residence on the land
- Land owner must not sub-let land to any other entity (Or can land owner sell the land off to a mega-corporation interested in algae farming a month after they move there?)
- Land owner must live on the land at least X years, or they forfeit all rights to the land and improvements thereon if they vacate the property
- Land owner is not exempt from land-use taxes levied by either Federal or State jurisdictions.

Etc etc etc...

You haven't given a plan. You've given a Platitude.
"It'd be nice if... the government did X."

It'd be nice if the government gave me an airplane/pony/unicorn/free healthcare too. It's not a plan. You'll have to work harder than just stating it'd be "nice" to do something.
 
No, you've given a general story. A business plan includes NUMBERS. You haven't explained anything.

For your government-backed loans, please indicate who would be actually backing them...?

- The Fed Directly? (Doubtful about that.)
- Another debacle/fake bank like Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac?
- Goldman Sachs with the government backing them with the "full faith" of the United States of America?
- A hodgepodge of banks bidding to do it at the lowest interest rate and "regulated" by the government?

(In other words, who gets the interest payments on those loans?)

Where's the capital coming from if they fail and have to be bailed out?

(The problem with Fannie and Freddie... 30% failed... and we had to de-value our dollar by printing more of them to pay off the fantastic default rate.)

- The Fed?
- AIG / Lloyds of London / Another large commercial insurer?

Okay now that we have the loan part covered, please describe the terms of the land giveaway. What are the terms?

- Land is given to the new owner immediately and even if they fail or walk away, they keep it?

- Land is given over time to the new owner, per the following stipulations...

Possible examples:
- Land owner must take up permanent residence on the land
- Land owner must not sub-let land to any other entity (Or can land owner sell the land off to a mega-corporation interested in algae farming a month after they move there?)
- Land owner must live on the land at least X years, or they forfeit all rights to the land and improvements thereon if they vacate the property
- Land owner is not exempt from land-use taxes levied by either Federal or State jurisdictions.

Etc etc etc...

You haven't given a plan. You've given a Platitude.
"It'd be nice if... the government did X."

It'd be nice if the government gave me an airplane/pony/unicorn/free healthcare too. It's not a plan. You'll have to work harder than just stating it'd be "nice" to do something.

Are you a member of Congress....
 
Are you a member of Congress....

Nope. I already told you you're talking to the wrong audience.

No one here has the power nor the authority to make happen what you want to happen. This is a discussion list, but if you're serious -- go get that business plan done and go talk to your CongressCritter.

I just know what investors are going to ask, having watched a few small companies grow with other people's money. I've often asked the same questions because I know if they're not spending money on it, whatever it is... "ain't happenin'". Business is business.

Unless, of course, you drop all pretense of actually having a plan and just sell the religion of it all. You can be Reverend Tom of the Church of Algae, and that's fine with me. Without businesspeople on board, you're likely to not have any real results, but you may have some followers and "true believers". They might even "tithe" if you send 'em a monthly newsletter.
 
So if this fuel is so much better economically, it should be able to pay for the distribution system easily, right?

If petroleum is so much better economically, why do we need huge miltary expenditures in the Middle East? Let the oil companies raise their own armies if they need protection. And why did the Senate just now feel compelled to protect the oil industry by protecting its tax breaks?
 
Unless, of course, you drop all pretense of actually having a plan and just sell the religion of it all. You can be Reverend Tom of the Church of Algae, and that's fine with me. .

There ya go again babbling. I gave you an Idea, If you can't get your mind around it, that's to bad.

The dairy industry started this way way back in the late 1600s, it worked then and algae production would too.

The cheap on shore oil is gone, the oil companies moved over seas to get the next cheapest oil, and that trend has continued until we are now trying to extract oil shale.

why? because until lately we had no alternative, but we do now, and it can be done within our own boarders.

but getting every one on board will be the biggest hurdle to cross.

America has used much of its natural resources, what we have left is the land, the people, and a corrupt bunch of politicians who can't think of the obvious.

You give the American people some land and a mission they will always get past the nay sayers and make the mission a reality.
 
We certainly have a problem when the speculators can cause the whole economy to falter. The ripple effect of the high price of fuel will effect every one with higher consumer prices.

I flew over to BVS today and that takes me past 3 refineries/tank farms, they have tanks with floating lids which tells you how full the tanks are. and the entire tank farm is full, there is no steam coming out of the cat cracker, which says they have shut down due to lack of storage.

yet we pay 4 bucks per gallon.

Correct, and those same people will be in charge of Algae produced oil, so tell me where you think the change is going to be? The market will still be funded by commodity speculators as well. A gallon of gas by all rights should still be <$2 gallon, yet it's over twice that. Changing base stocks will not change that fact.
 
Correct, and those same people will be in charge of Algae produced oil, so tell me where you think the change is going to be? The market will still be funded by commodity speculators as well. A gallon of gas by all rights should still be <$2 gallon, yet it's over twice that. Changing base stocks will not change that fact.

If there were a lot more of it, why wouldn't the price drop.?
 
Correct, and those same people will be in charge of Algae produced oil, so tell me where you think the change is going to be? The market will still be funded by commodity speculators as well. A gallon of gas by all rights should still be <$2 gallon, yet it's over twice that. Changing base stocks will not change that fact.

If there were a lot more of it, why wouldn't the price drop.?

Same reason prices don't drop right now, people are willing to pay it and companies are willing to reap the profits.

There is some truth to all these comments. Certainly speculation is a driver on oil prices. That being said, there is another reason for the price being what it is. Go back... say 20-30 years ago, the production side was quite different. At that time, the oil companies (Exxon, Total, Shell, Texaco...etc.) actually owned the oil when it came out of the ground. Now a days, all those oil producing countries have gotten smart and nationalized the oil production, they now hire the big companies to be only operators, not owners. If the profits of an Exxon are startling, the profits of Saudi family are just staggering. The Saudi's (and a few others) have found it is FAR more profitable to pump the oil, refine it within their borders and ship the finished product to the market. They pay an Exxon a fixed $/barrel under a contract. Over time, more and more will do so.

We certainly can whine about the profits of an Exxon, and they are quite impressive, but the real profits are increasingly going to those countries with nationalized oil production - they REALLY make the money.

Gary
 
There ya go again babbling. I gave you an Idea, If you can't get your mind around it, that's to bad.

Too bad, even. I have my head around it. It isn't fiscally going to work until you freak out a lot more people with $7/gallon gas. Then it'll work, and it won't be "the little guy" who starts it. Big oil will buy it up and that'll be the next big boom.

The dairy industry started this way way back in the late 1600s, it worked then and algae production would too.

That was the 1600s when the world was a lot bigger place due to lack of communications technology. If you start an algae plant today, it'd start off huge for economies of scale, and it'd have to pay for itself quickly.

The cheap on shore oil is gone, the oil companies moved over seas to get the next cheapest oil, and that trend has continued until we are now trying to extract oil shale.

We've been attempting that since the 80's. Please go read up on the Bakken and of course ANWR... and even the Canadian Oil Sands are easier to extract from than shale. Frac'ing has changed the game and probably will for a while... but frac'ing is only viable when the Middle East is charging $80/bbl or higher. Got family and friends in the oil biz, they have the numbers.

why? because until lately we had no alternative, but we do now, and it can be done within our own boarders.

but getting every one on board will be the biggest hurdle to cross.

Isn't that exactly what I've been saying? "Everyone" *includes* those of us who want to see a business plan before handing you free money for your scheme with no plan.

America has used much of its natural resources, what we have left is the land, the people, and a corrupt bunch of politicians who can't think of the obvious.

Wait, you're aloud to expound on "off-topic" thoughts, but I'm not? I see how this works. ;) By the way, I obviously agree with you wholeheartedly, although I do disagree that "they can't think of it"... they know exactly what they're doing. Politicians maximize their pay-out and hey... if you're elected to Congress once, you get a very nice health care and retirement plan and money for the rest of your life. Such a deal. They're colder and more calculating than you think. Big money special interests get them hired, and they're set for life.

You give the American people some land and a mission they will always get past the nay sayers and make the mission a reality.

Agreed. 100%. Haven't seen a mission yet. And very little "leadership" worth following. When are you running for office? We could use some "no BS" folks in Washington. Let me know when you get there, since I can't vote for you from here.
 
I love America's new boogeyman: the speculator.

When my FIL was alive, his boogeyman was "the middleman" who apparently was responsible for high gas prices in CT. That boogeyman was, in fact, the state of CT which placed high taxes on gasoline. Regardless, it was still easier to believe that some mysterious boogeyman was reponsible.

Take the dreaded "evil" speculators out of the market mix and just watch what happens to pricing and volatility.

I believe we'll be looking for a new boogeyman at that point.
 
But my point was that there's plenty of folks who have money. They're not building algae farms because they've done the math. They can't make back their investment before they die.

I don't buy that argument. It's just like the LSA thing in the "is GA dying" thread - Just because everybody's not doing it doesn't mean you can't make money at it.

SOMEBODY has to be the pioneer. They'll make money. The next few who come along will make big money. It'll be a while before it's popular, and once it's popular there'll be so much competition that nobody will be making as much money.

But, just because rich folks aren't buying/building algae farms doesn't mean they've done the math. It doesn't mean a damn thing.
 
Back
Top