Friday, 3 December 2010

Mabfuel

Posted by Stella Kin

Just looking at the website now. They're pretty much doing what we're doing minus the GM. It gives an idea of where our costs should be and our time-scale too.

Firstly, in our objectives, should we include a review of all the research out there? At the moment, what we have is what we managed to find in 4 weeks.

Should we consider a GANTT chart for the presentation based on the one Chris drew up?

It might be handy to have an extra slide on costs and timescales for similar info to below.

Implementation

Funding Scheme – Marie Curie Industry Partnerships and Pathways
Start date – 1st June 2009
Duration – 48 months  Funding - €1,430,841

(with today's exchange rate, about 303,000 pounds a year)

Researchers involved – 18 researchers (174 person months)

GANTT CHART: Tasks, Project Milestone and Timetables

 

 

Minutes for meeting 9

Posted by Stella Kin
Friday 3 December
Present: Stella Kin, Louise Anton, Rachel Nichol, Christopher Sanderson
Apologies: Bryan McCulloch
Next meeting: Friday 3 December, 3pm, Project room
  1. Brief discussion and comparison of scripts
  2. The presentation will be presented by Stella, Rachel and Chris. Should any of the speakers be absent, Louise will take over. All scripts will be emailed to the team so they can be read out if necessary.
  3. Oliver suggested looking at Mabfuel.

Agenda for Meeting 9

Posted by Stella Kin

3 November 2010
  1. Discussion and uun through scripts and slides
  2. Project name
  3. Weekend meeting
  4. Contingency plans

Thursday, 2 December 2010

Minutes for meeting 8

Posted by Stella Kin

Thursday 2 December
Present: Stella Kin, Bryan McCulloch, Rachel Nichol, Christopher Sanderson
Apologies: Louise Anton
Next meeting: Friday 3 December, 12pm, King's College 
 
1. Walk through presentation slides
Rachel's slides added to the presentation. Stella's slides are generally complete, but the script needs to be rearranged to reflect the changes in the slides. It also needs to be cut down severely and find the right balance of brevity and detail. 

Discussion around Chris's slides: 
  • 'Challenges ahead' will be preceded by an 'advantages of algae' slide to hammer home why we have chosen this option, given the limited yield information available. 
  • 'Challenges' should have a positive spin, with solutions if possible. Given that there is no guarantee of success, the venture is one of high risk. However if we are successful, the potential to partner with a private company provides significant rewards. Bryan has a paper on upscaling that quantifies the costs. Chris has done research on the obstacles faced in genetic engineering. Chris will provide a rough script or bullet-points for tomorrow.
  • 'Competitors' will focus on the advantages and disadvantages of 1st, 2nd and 4th gen. We can also make a comparison to open pond 'raceways' which are currently the only efficient source of algal biodiesel (on the small scale). Stella will comb through the weblog to look for other comparisons we can make. 
Bryan highlighted the importance of selecting algae that produced not only high yields of oil, but high quality oil, i.e. consideration needs to be given to the type of polysaturates that are being produced. This may allow us to narrow down the strains that need to be looked at and suggest some examples in the weblog. (At what point should we mention this in the presentation? At the start in Stella's slides?)

Bryan will continue the research into relevant costs for the business plan, with slides and a script for the next meeting. A rough timescale was drafted. The plan is for the GM outsourcing to be an ongoing project which can continuously be improved, while the startup tests each batch of algae for oil yield and quality. 

Rachel will write and present the summary once each section is complete.

Louise will complete the script and slides for the next meeting.

Following meeting will include a rehearsal of the presentation. Possible plans to meet on Saturday and a final rehearsal on Monday mornirng.

A Useful Link

By Bryan McCulloch

I found this website whilst looking for prices for a photobioreactor, may come in handy when comparing our company to others

http://www.algalbiomass.org/

Competitors and Comparisons

Posted by Christopher Sanderson

Quick overview of fuels:
The main fuels worth considering in this context are ethanol, butanol, bio-diesel, which we can consider producing as bio-fuels, and for benchmark reference: petro-diesel and petroleum.

The first consideration to make is the energy density by volume of each fuel:
Ethanol has around 21.2MJ/L found http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol#As_a_fuel and cited http://www.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/pdfs/storage.pdf although the value appears to vary by around 2-3MJ/L depending on source.

Butanol has around 29.2MJ/L found http://petrofed.winwinhosting.net/upload/4_Verma.pdf, note that this source cites ethanol as 19.6MJ/L.

Bio-Diesel has around 37.27MJ/L found http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biodiesel and cited from http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file14925.pdf

When these are considered with respect to the current mineral derived fuels:
Petroleum with 34.8MJ/L found http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoline
Diesel with 38.6MJ/L found at the same. Although it's wiki, the values seem reasonably consistant with the other values I've seen.

From this perspective it would appear that as practical replacements for fossil fuels the best candidates are butanol to replace petroleum and bio-diesel to replace petro-diesel.

Also of interest:
BP's perspective - http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/18443/

Another algae link

Posted by Stella

To some questions we had yesterday...

Link