Blatant Reality

It looks like there is another world’s first in the realm of algae biofuel. Today, New Zealand’s very own Aquaflow Bionomic Corporation announced that it has successfully created a key jet fuel component from a wild strain of algae. Here is the complete press release:

BLENHEIM, NEW ZEALAND: New Zealand-based Aquaflow Bionomic Corporation says the world’s first test flight using wild-algae based jet fuel may be nearer than many pundits think.

 

The company announced today that its wild algae has been successfully refined to produce the world’s first sample of synthetic paraffinic kerosene (SPK) converted from compounds derived from Aquaflow’s wild algae. SPK, when blended with petroleum-based kerosene, can be used to power commercial and military aircraft.

 

“This is a major breakthrough and confirms that wild and naturally occurring algae and its components can produce quality, sustainable aviation fuel,” says Aquaflow director, Nick Gerritsen.

 

Gerritsen says the sample meets Jet A-1 specifications and, when blended with petroleum-based Jet A-1, could be used by commercial aircraft. The algae was converted using technology from United States-based UOP LLC, a Honeywell company. UOP utilized its proprietary hydroprocessing technology to convert the sample to SPK and confirmed that the sample meets the critical specifications for SPK including density, flash point and freeze point.

 

The wild algae sample also yielded a sample of diesel fuel.

 

“We are a company focused upon developing the sustainable production of green crude, similar to that which could be expected from mineral crude oil, and combining that with waste treatment and clean water production,” comments Gerritsen.

 

Gerritsen says this announcement is a significant milestone for the aviation industry and supports the identification of algae-based fuels solutions by Boeing and leading airlines.

 

Wild algae grows in wastewater and is continuously harvested, one of the great benefits of algae over other land based crops, and it doesn’t compete with food crops or agricultural land.

 

Aquaflow sources its wild algae from the local oxidation ponds in Marlborough on New Zealand’s South Island – essentially recycling a waste product.

Why is this important? Well for one it shows that algae, even in its natural (or wild) state can be processed to produce aviation fuel. That means that years of R&D might not be needed to search for a specific strain of algae to use or years of trying to genetically modify algae to produce the needed chemicals.

With this discovery, algae based biofuels could be a lot closer than many people think.

To see more on algae based biofuels, go here.

Here are some pictures, first is a picture of the sample fuels that they produced and the second is of a pond in Marlborough where the algae is grown.

They have set a date and January 7th will be the day Continental Airlines performs a test flight using a partial blend of algae biofuel. This fuel will be comprised of a 50-50 blend of regular fuel and an algae/jatropha mix. Now, while this isn’t a 100% algae biofuel, it sure is a step in the right direction.
-
More on this test flight here

Today, the Senate’s Environment and Public Works Committee Minority (aka Republicans) posted a full list of 650 International Scientists who have spoken out against the Man-Made Global Warming Theory. I didn’t take the time to go through and read about every single scientist in the 231 page report but I did skim through it and recognized several names.

For those of you who may be wondering why this is such a big deal, proponents of anthropological global warming state that there is a “consensus” of scientists out there. This list seems to shatter the whole “consensus” theory unless by “consensus” they mean that except the many dissenting scientist, all scientists agree that global warming is caused by man. If that is their definition of “consensus” then they are correct. However, whenever I have seen the whole consensus argument used, it seems like they mean that there is no legitimate dissenters among us “deniers.” Obviously, from the extensive list above, they are wrong.

Oh and one other thing, science isn’t ruled by consensus. Remember Copernicus?  Galileo? Yea, they were considered “deniers” in their own time.

Out of all the things that Obama could have gone and done, this is one that I definitely wish he wouldn’t have. If his definition of energy ‘czar’ even remotely resembles the James Hansen’s (the guy whose Institute messed up NASA’s temperature report), we all might be in a load of hurt.  Take a look at how he defines it:

Yep, you heard him right. If the price of oil fell from from a record high of $147/barrel to roughly $50/barrel, this “carbon czar” would be there to make sure you, the consumer, wouldn’t reap the benefits of lower prices. Wouldn’t want those pesky, inexpensive fossil fuels getting in the way of the expensive alternative energy sources, now would we?

At least someone at the Capitol already has an idea of what this will do with energy costs.

“I look forward to learning more about the position of an ‘energy czar’ in the new administration,” Senator Inhofe said. “Certainly Carol Browner’s record as the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency under former President Clinton is well known. She is a proud liberal who has long advocated  an environmentalist agenda that would drive-up energy costs on families and put thousands of Americans out of jobs. At a time when the economy is already suffering, it will be interesting to see how President Obama will reconcile what seems to be conflicting agendas in the White House.”

On a different note, why in the world would they use the word ‘czar‘ to describe this position? You know where that word comes from? It’s roots trace all the way back to the word ‘Caesar’ which basically means emperor, an autocratic ruler. So it appears that Obama has appointed someone to a position whose title precludes them from having to take orders from a lowly president. Doesn’t sound like there will be a lot of oversight or ‘checking and balancing’ going on with this new office.

Oh, but who needs Democracy anyways when our government only has our best intentions in mind.

If you care to see what else James Hansen said in that speech, you can see more video and my take on it here.

Today, Alan Caruba wrote an article for Canada Free Press arguing that Obama’s environmental policies and plans would basically destroy the US economy.

The worst and most dangerous aspect of Obama’s objectives is the imposition of limits on greenhouse gas emissions in the name of ending a “global warming” that is not happening. Cutting 80-90% of U.S. carbon emissions would result in the closing of a comparable amount of U.S. industries. It would so weaken the U.S. economy that it would render it a Third World nation. The European Union nations that agreed to such reductions via the Kyoto Protocol are seeking to alter or end these commitments.

Not only that, but he calls out Obama for making a blatantly false remark. Take a look:

Here are Obama’s words: “Few challenges facing American and the world are more urgent than combating climate change. The science is beyond dispute and the facts are clear. Sea levels are rising. Coastlines are shrinking. We’ve seen record drought, spreading famine, and storms that are growing stronger with each passing hurricane seasons. Climate change and our dependence on foreign oil, if left unaddressed, will continue to weaken our economy and threaten our national security.”

 

Every single word of this statement is false in whole or in part.

 

To begin with, there is no problem with regard to climate change, a term adopted by environmentalists as the public becomes more and more aware that there was and is not dramatic global warming. Indeed, the world is now into a cycle of global cooling that has been in effect since around 1998. A number of solar scientists are predicting we are in for at least fifty years of global cooling and its effects will be far more destructive to modern societies than any fictitious warming.

 

Nothing, absolutely nothing should be done to deal with a non-existent global warming. The Earth is 4.5 billion years old and climate changes have occurred throughout all that time. Humans have been around for about 200,000 years and the Industrial Revolution began just over two hundred years ago. In the process, the ordinary lives of humans have been extended and enhanced in ways that were unimaginable even in my youth.

 

Briefly, the sea levels during the twentieth century rose worldwide by less than eight inches, nor are the coastlines “shrinking.” Obama is engaging in scare mongering by saying that there has been record drought. There were far worse U.S. droughts in the early part of the last century. Even the intentionally flawed UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warns against attributing droughts or floods to “global warming.” The natural cycles of hurricanes are well known and attributing more of them to “global warming” is utterly false.

Pretty good article. You should read the rest of it.

Boeing is looking to algae as a new aviation fuel source and is starting to research its potential. However, they feel that whatever fuel is developed, it will most likely be a mixture of oil and algae fuels even though planes could run strictly on algae based fuels.
-
More on the story here

It looks like climate change realism might be gaining some ground since CNN has dropped Miles O’Brien, a very vocal climate change alarmist.
-
Now, did they drop him and his entire segment because their theory of man made global warming is losing popularity with the public? Could it have been for some other reason, such as economic reason? Maybe CNN needs more money for all those flashy ‘holograms’ they had election night. Whatever the reason may be, it’s a nice move in the right direction.
-
Click here for the whole NewsBusters article