Snap: Algae Wars Are On!

If in the 50s, plastics were the field to go in to, in the Naughts, it was biofuels.

But then came reports that ethanol and other early biofuels caused more environmental havoc than they resolved.

Our daring industrialists promised a "second wave" of biofuels that would have none of the problems of the early prototypes. Two fuels of the future were touted above all: fuel from biomass, or the waste material left by agriculture, and fuel from algae.

After having read a lot of stories like this one about brilliant human interventions to magically fix natural inconveniences, I tend to be rather skeptical. But I want a magic fix to the climate crisis as much as the next guy, so I was willing to entertain some optimism about these ideas.

Even after I read this fall that the promises of algae are really just that — promises, I continued to hold out hope. But my optimism continued to wane as I watched fossil fuel giants invest heavily in algae biofuels.

And then came a study that found that even corn — you know, your grandfather's biofuel — has a better lifecycle carbon footprint than algae grown for fuel. (Algae fuel can outpace corn ethanol if wastewater is used instead of manufactured fertilizer.)

The industry is not to be deterred, however, and has fired back with a PR blast. Its trade association claims the researchers used outdated data, and failed to factor in improvements in the algae-to-fuel manufacturing process.

The research "is absolutely right if you think of it as last generation algae,” Riggs Eckelberry, chief executive of the New Jersey Los Angeles algae biofuel company Origin Oil, told Green Inc.

The lead researcher on the study, Andres Clarens, acknowledged that his findings were based on 10-year-old data, which was the most recent available. But, he added, "Everybody talks about the next generation — what is the next generation?" he said. "I'd be happy to model it if somebody produces it."

Industry: It's your move.

Photo credit: Jim Conrad via Wikimedia Commons