There has been an increase of 2.8% in oil production by Britain during the second quarter of this year in comparison with that same quarter last year. The reason is the start-up of six new fields, which include the massive Buzzard field located in the North Sea. Overall, the UK output of crude oil and "natural gas to liquids", which I take to mean gas-liquefaction, i.e. conversion of methane to syn-gas and Fisher-Tropsch catalytic conversion of this to hydrocarbons, increased to almost 20 million tonnes once six new fields came on-stream at the start of the year.
Consequently, the UK is a net exporter of oil to the excess of 0.8 million tonnes more than it used domestically in terms of imported oil and oil-products. The UK used less energy to the extent of 4% overall, corresponding to a fall in production by 5.4% at an equivalent of 46.5 million tonnes of oil during the second quarter of this year. However, the total production of gas by the UK continues to fall, by almost 10% to an equivalent of 206.6 TWh (terrawatt hours = billion kWh) from the same quarter last year. Simply this is due to the inexorable drop in North Sea gas output, and a matter we should not be mislead into forgetting.
New facilities for importing gas, e.g. from Norway and from Qatar, has made us a net importer of gas, to a net quantity of 25 TWh equivalent, despite the fact that the UK was a net gas-exporter in the second quarter of 2006. These higher net imports permitted a 4.6% rise in total consumption of gas and significantly, UK electricity production used 26.5% more gas in that second quarter than in its equivalent in 2006. Lower gas prices and a shortfall in nuclear power as a result of two reactors being closed won for extended periods.
There was also a decrease in the total amount of electricity by 0.2% (that's 0.2 TWh) in this latter quarter due to a hike in gas prices and that loss of nuclear capacity. Coal production fell by 11% (4.4 million tons), in part from a 20% decline in deep mine output, and a fall by 2.4% in open-cast mining.
Renewable energy production was twice as large in Scotland as England last year but is still small as an overall fraction of the energy we use. I predict that we will see a shift in the use of all kinds of energy, which by 2050 is expected to come from a mix of all, nuclear, coal, gas and renewable sources, although the latter degree of development is a matter of speculation. Despite the recent increase in UK oil production making us a fractional net exporter of oil, our resources in the North Sea certainly, are in a steep decline and I await with interest what might be pumped from undersea fields, for example the stretch from Biscay to Rockall that I wrote about a couple of days ago.
Related reading.
UK Oil Output Up Six Oilfield Start-Ups," By Alex McDonald: http://www.rigzone.com/news/article.asp?a_id=50745
Friday, September 28, 2007
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
Sex , Food and Life.
Sexual reproduction being a physically binary process, it is not surprising that a Malthusian law follows. The demographic philosopher, Thomas Malthus, at the age of 23 (mmm... I had just got my first degree by then; Ph.D at 26! Higher Doctorate, D.Sc, at 43!) predicted that the human numbers would increase geometrically by a series of 2^n, i.e. 1, 2, 4, 8, 16 etc., whereas food supply can increase arithmetically, i.e. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 etc. Put another way, we are more productive in reproducing ourselves than in feeding ourselves. Malthus predicted that crops would fail, that there would be a very poor harvest, the cost of food would soar and some would starve.
Indeed, in 1789, the cost of bread almost doubled as a consequence of the kind of awful British weather we saw in the last summer and nine years later Malthus published his "Essay on the Principle of Population", in which he came to the conclusion that "misery" (famines and epidemics of disease) and "vice" (contraception, abortion and alcohol abuse) would provide a check on the rise in population.
The population of the world is close to 6.5 billion now, or about 6 times what it was when Multhus was writing, and so there was not a huge die-off as he anticipated. Not only that but the number of daily calories we are all getting per capita were 2,700 in the 1990's, up from 1,848 during the French Revolution. The mean income per capita too has risen by a factor of eight, life expectancy has increased on a worldwide basis from 28 to 67, and while in the late 18th Century, the average British man was 5 feet 5 inches tall, now he stands at an average five feet nine inches. So abundant is our food supply now that a fifth of all Americans can be classified as obese, and with the European nations such as the UK following a close suit.
The usual reason given for the failure of Malthus' prediction of a calamitous collapse of food and population is the "Green Revolution" characterised by a succession of agricultural advances which led to greater and more efficient production, and now the current generation of GM crops. Despite the forces of "vice" which have as Malthus predicted kept population growth at a roughly arithmetic rather than a geometric rate, and at a level where food production could keep pace with its increase, the question remains of whether we will be able to feed the world by 2050, when it is thought there may be 9 billion of us on the planet. The term "peak oil" comes to mind, since modern agriculture is underpinned in large measure by resources of oil. As the oil becomes more expensive and there is less of it on the world markets, food production could be hit hard, with according food shortages.
There might be a shortage of grain especially, especially, as more of it is grown for the ethanol industry, and we are approaching a situation where the production of fuel crops is coming into direct competition with growing crops for food, since, certainly in Europe, the amount of arable land is limited. The UK produces only about two thirds of its own food and surely, as transportation is curbed by the lack of oil to run planes and ships, becoming as self-sufficient on food production for each nation within that nation, must be a priority. World food prices have soared of late, and it appears that capital cereal production has passed its peak (in the mid 1980's); it is noteworthy too that the International Monetary Fund has recorded a 23% hike in food prices during the last 18 months. In Britain food inflation now runs at 4.8%, while national inflation is 2.4%. It is worse than this for some kinds of food, and for example, the inflation rate for fish is nearer 11% and for potatoes it is about 10% - good that our national dish is no longer fish and chips but chicken tikka masalla!
We may well struggle to maintain the arithmetic growth in world population to 9 billion by 2050, as a combination of food shortages per se and the competition between food and fuel crops, the lack of oil to run farms and indeed gas from which chemical fertilisers are made to increase agricultural yields per hectare of land. Malthus may have been fundamentally correct in asking 200 years back, the question: "whether man shall henceforth start to shift with an accelerated velocity towards illimitable, and hitherto unconceived improvement, or be condemned to a perpetual oscillation between happiness and misery."
I guess something has to give eventually, since resources of food, fuel and indeed water are not limitless.
Related Reading.
"Worry about bread, not oil," By Niall Ferguson: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/07/29/do2901.xml
Indeed, in 1789, the cost of bread almost doubled as a consequence of the kind of awful British weather we saw in the last summer and nine years later Malthus published his "Essay on the Principle of Population", in which he came to the conclusion that "misery" (famines and epidemics of disease) and "vice" (contraception, abortion and alcohol abuse) would provide a check on the rise in population.
The population of the world is close to 6.5 billion now, or about 6 times what it was when Multhus was writing, and so there was not a huge die-off as he anticipated. Not only that but the number of daily calories we are all getting per capita were 2,700 in the 1990's, up from 1,848 during the French Revolution. The mean income per capita too has risen by a factor of eight, life expectancy has increased on a worldwide basis from 28 to 67, and while in the late 18th Century, the average British man was 5 feet 5 inches tall, now he stands at an average five feet nine inches. So abundant is our food supply now that a fifth of all Americans can be classified as obese, and with the European nations such as the UK following a close suit.
The usual reason given for the failure of Malthus' prediction of a calamitous collapse of food and population is the "Green Revolution" characterised by a succession of agricultural advances which led to greater and more efficient production, and now the current generation of GM crops. Despite the forces of "vice" which have as Malthus predicted kept population growth at a roughly arithmetic rather than a geometric rate, and at a level where food production could keep pace with its increase, the question remains of whether we will be able to feed the world by 2050, when it is thought there may be 9 billion of us on the planet. The term "peak oil" comes to mind, since modern agriculture is underpinned in large measure by resources of oil. As the oil becomes more expensive and there is less of it on the world markets, food production could be hit hard, with according food shortages.
There might be a shortage of grain especially, especially, as more of it is grown for the ethanol industry, and we are approaching a situation where the production of fuel crops is coming into direct competition with growing crops for food, since, certainly in Europe, the amount of arable land is limited. The UK produces only about two thirds of its own food and surely, as transportation is curbed by the lack of oil to run planes and ships, becoming as self-sufficient on food production for each nation within that nation, must be a priority. World food prices have soared of late, and it appears that capital cereal production has passed its peak (in the mid 1980's); it is noteworthy too that the International Monetary Fund has recorded a 23% hike in food prices during the last 18 months. In Britain food inflation now runs at 4.8%, while national inflation is 2.4%. It is worse than this for some kinds of food, and for example, the inflation rate for fish is nearer 11% and for potatoes it is about 10% - good that our national dish is no longer fish and chips but chicken tikka masalla!
We may well struggle to maintain the arithmetic growth in world population to 9 billion by 2050, as a combination of food shortages per se and the competition between food and fuel crops, the lack of oil to run farms and indeed gas from which chemical fertilisers are made to increase agricultural yields per hectare of land. Malthus may have been fundamentally correct in asking 200 years back, the question: "whether man shall henceforth start to shift with an accelerated velocity towards illimitable, and hitherto unconceived improvement, or be condemned to a perpetual oscillation between happiness and misery."
I guess something has to give eventually, since resources of food, fuel and indeed water are not limitless.
Related Reading.
"Worry about bread, not oil," By Niall Ferguson: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/07/29/do2901.xml
Monday, September 24, 2007
Undersea Oil Claims - Rockall!
Several nations, including the UK, are set to expand their domains, in terms of "extended underwater territory", where claims are made under a new UN Law of the Sea Convention. The reason is of course, oil. It is thought that an area of 2.7 million square miles (about the size of Australia) is up for grabs, and includes the Arctic where Russia made a recent claim for land under the North Pole, and new islands off the coast of India which have apparently emerged from the sea. Now that is interesting. Is it due to changes in the sea-levels or to volcanism? Australia is claiming some Pacific islands too.
According to this new law, which is set to come into force within a few years, such tiny pieces of land as Ascension Island and the Falklands have become of great national interest. I recall 25 years ago, when the Falklands War kicked-off between the UK and Argentina, it was mentioned that the real reason we wanted to hold onto those islands was likely "mineral claims" on Antarctica in the future. Significantly, each piece of land carries with it a 350 mile zone in which hydrocarbons and minerals might be exploited by the owner. It is not surprising: we are approaching a period of desperation in terms of oil recovery, to be followed by gas shortages and indeed a scarcity of other minerals to fuel the electronics industry for example. If the world does contract, i.e. transform from the Global Village to a collective of localised economies, we will presumably want to hang into the internet and at least information and knowledge can thus be ferried around the world even if people no longer can be, on the currently accepted scale. Hence we will need as much germanium, gallium, indium, platinum and so on as we can get.
The matter signifies a shift in thinking. It seems odd to dig for diamonds off the South African coast, or for oil some miles off the coast of Australia, and yet, why not. Britain dug for oil off its coast under the North Sea, and indeed much of the deep-drilling technology used around the world for underwater oil exploration was developed by British/Dutch/Norwegian engineers through the North Sea bonanza which is now running dry for us. Hence we are looking pretty assiduously for any new sources of oil and gas, even of Rockall, which is the summit of an extinct volcano, but fortunately a part of British territory.
Rockall is around 25 metres wide at its base, rising to an elevation of around 22 metres at the summit: i.e. it is practically a single shaft of rock projection out of the North Atlantic ocean. Nobody lives there, apart from periwinkles and other molluscs, and it is frequently surged by storm waves. The first recorded landing on Rockall was in 1810 by an officer from the Royal navy called Basil Hall, who led a small landing party from the frigate HMS Endymion (which is also the title of a poem by John Keats).
Geologists are enthusiastic that there is a large area of seabed running from the Bay of Biscay and on past the west of Ireland into the Atlantic which might contain a massive and undiscovered oilfield. Iceland, Norway, Ireland and the UK all have claims to Rockall, which was described in 1957 as the last land-grab of the British Empire, when the Union Jack flag was raised there by British Marines. Now it is described by "greens" as the first stage of British eco-colonialism! In addition to possible oil resources, it is thought that there may be deposits of methane-hydrates which could be mined from the seabed to produced methane gas. That however is speculative. There have been large quantities of this material found at depths under the Gulf of Mexico and under the Caspian Sea. However, environmentalists are scared that digging into methane hydrates might trigger a runaway process, and add to the atmospheric burden of greenhouse gases, among which methane is a strong contender. The rapid release of methane from methane hydrate is also a hazard to undersea drilling, and is thought can trigger tsunamis too in extreme cases, as happened off the coast of Norway and which hit the UK around 8,000 years ago.
Altogether, 45 nations including South Africa, Australia, the UK, Russia, France, Brazil and Ireland are intent on expanding their territories too, in the new oil-rush that beckons.
Related Reading.
"Scramble for the seabed: or how Rockall could be the key to a British oil bonanza", by John Vidal and Owen Bowcott, The Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/sep/22/oilandpetrol/print
According to this new law, which is set to come into force within a few years, such tiny pieces of land as Ascension Island and the Falklands have become of great national interest. I recall 25 years ago, when the Falklands War kicked-off between the UK and Argentina, it was mentioned that the real reason we wanted to hold onto those islands was likely "mineral claims" on Antarctica in the future. Significantly, each piece of land carries with it a 350 mile zone in which hydrocarbons and minerals might be exploited by the owner. It is not surprising: we are approaching a period of desperation in terms of oil recovery, to be followed by gas shortages and indeed a scarcity of other minerals to fuel the electronics industry for example. If the world does contract, i.e. transform from the Global Village to a collective of localised economies, we will presumably want to hang into the internet and at least information and knowledge can thus be ferried around the world even if people no longer can be, on the currently accepted scale. Hence we will need as much germanium, gallium, indium, platinum and so on as we can get.
The matter signifies a shift in thinking. It seems odd to dig for diamonds off the South African coast, or for oil some miles off the coast of Australia, and yet, why not. Britain dug for oil off its coast under the North Sea, and indeed much of the deep-drilling technology used around the world for underwater oil exploration was developed by British/Dutch/Norwegian engineers through the North Sea bonanza which is now running dry for us. Hence we are looking pretty assiduously for any new sources of oil and gas, even of Rockall, which is the summit of an extinct volcano, but fortunately a part of British territory.
Rockall is around 25 metres wide at its base, rising to an elevation of around 22 metres at the summit: i.e. it is practically a single shaft of rock projection out of the North Atlantic ocean. Nobody lives there, apart from periwinkles and other molluscs, and it is frequently surged by storm waves. The first recorded landing on Rockall was in 1810 by an officer from the Royal navy called Basil Hall, who led a small landing party from the frigate HMS Endymion (which is also the title of a poem by John Keats).
Geologists are enthusiastic that there is a large area of seabed running from the Bay of Biscay and on past the west of Ireland into the Atlantic which might contain a massive and undiscovered oilfield. Iceland, Norway, Ireland and the UK all have claims to Rockall, which was described in 1957 as the last land-grab of the British Empire, when the Union Jack flag was raised there by British Marines. Now it is described by "greens" as the first stage of British eco-colonialism! In addition to possible oil resources, it is thought that there may be deposits of methane-hydrates which could be mined from the seabed to produced methane gas. That however is speculative. There have been large quantities of this material found at depths under the Gulf of Mexico and under the Caspian Sea. However, environmentalists are scared that digging into methane hydrates might trigger a runaway process, and add to the atmospheric burden of greenhouse gases, among which methane is a strong contender. The rapid release of methane from methane hydrate is also a hazard to undersea drilling, and is thought can trigger tsunamis too in extreme cases, as happened off the coast of Norway and which hit the UK around 8,000 years ago.
Altogether, 45 nations including South Africa, Australia, the UK, Russia, France, Brazil and Ireland are intent on expanding their territories too, in the new oil-rush that beckons.
Related Reading.
"Scramble for the seabed: or how Rockall could be the key to a British oil bonanza", by John Vidal and Owen Bowcott, The Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/sep/22/oilandpetrol/print
Friday, September 21, 2007
Toxic Waste Injection Risks Earthquakes.
There are plans afoot to inject some nine million cubic metres of toxic chemical waste into the ground near to the Wafra farms area of southern Kuwait. The chairman of Green Line Environmental Group, Khaled Al-Hajri, has accused the Kuwait Gulf Oil Company (KGOC) - which is a subsidiary of Kuwait Petroleum Company (KPC) - and the Saudi SAK Oil Company of "anti-environmental procedures" which have caused the creation of a lake of toxic liquid petroleum wastes with a volume of about 9 million cubic metres, near to crops growing at Al-Wafra. He said that: "The lake is 3 x 2 kilometres long and about 1.5 metres deep, [and is] the largest of its nature in the Arabian Gulf area."
Now Kuwait is an arid country and its groundwater levels have fallen significantly during recent years, hence there is pressure on providing water for farming there. It might appear then that pumping contaminated water into dry ground which will readily absorb it, as will any plants that grow there, is asking for trouble. Al-Hajry is of the opinion that the two companies are intent on this strategy simply to rid themselves of a problem they have created themselves. However, in addition to the toxic risk to vegetation (and to any humans and animals that eat it) there is the further prospect of tremors, since such a practice of suffusing rock-layers with fluid material will disrupt its structure, thus creating new fractures and deepening existing ones. He pointed out that the consequences would be earthquakes in the Al-Wafra region that could strike as far away as the Al-Khafgee area in Saudi Arabia where a significant population lives, and risking many lives.
Al-Hari explained: "I have attempted repeatedly to contact Acting Oil Minister, Mohamed Al-Olaim, who has not replied. I have resorted to foreign individuals to interfere since Kuwaiti nationals who have the power to stop this aren't cooperating. KGOC administrators claim that our information is exaggerated despite their knowledge that it is extracted from their own documents which they are trying to hide from the public.
Stressing the potentially calamitous consequences of the waste-injection procedure, Al-Hajri said it would lead to pollution of the soil with toxic materials and contamination of groundwaters that could extend to the Wafra farmlands poisoning their crops, in addition to the blockage (and contamination?) of water wells, causing "severe uncontrollable geological problems" (e.g. quakes). The technology was apparently used in Purdhoe Bay in Alaska in 1997, and resulted in "natural catastrophes" - which were presumably triggered from their "natural" course.
According to an anonymous source from the Public Authority for Agricultural Affairs and Fish Resources (PAAAFR), there has been no contamination of any kind in Al-Wafra, and the PAAAFR routinely performs analyses of samples from the region which have never provided any indication of pollution by petroleum chemical wastes. He did note, however that, "We have noticed an increase in groundwater levels in that region and will collaborate with the Ministry of Water and Electricity to tackle this issue."
I wonder what that really means?
The whole business seems to me to be another example of the dangers of "Geo-engineering", i.e. tinkering around with natural structures and processes, with unknown consequences, as was demonstrated by the Swiss Geothermal Project, recently, in which the injection of water into hot-rock at depths of 3 miles caused earthquakes as far as 10 miles distant, near the city of Basle.
Related Reading.
"Injection Risks Tremors, Pollution"; "Green" sounds toxic alarm; "Tests negative", By Dahlia Kholaif, Arab Times: http://www.arabtimesonline.com/client/pagesdetails.asp?nid=4210&ccid=9
Now Kuwait is an arid country and its groundwater levels have fallen significantly during recent years, hence there is pressure on providing water for farming there. It might appear then that pumping contaminated water into dry ground which will readily absorb it, as will any plants that grow there, is asking for trouble. Al-Hajry is of the opinion that the two companies are intent on this strategy simply to rid themselves of a problem they have created themselves. However, in addition to the toxic risk to vegetation (and to any humans and animals that eat it) there is the further prospect of tremors, since such a practice of suffusing rock-layers with fluid material will disrupt its structure, thus creating new fractures and deepening existing ones. He pointed out that the consequences would be earthquakes in the Al-Wafra region that could strike as far away as the Al-Khafgee area in Saudi Arabia where a significant population lives, and risking many lives.
Al-Hari explained: "I have attempted repeatedly to contact Acting Oil Minister, Mohamed Al-Olaim, who has not replied. I have resorted to foreign individuals to interfere since Kuwaiti nationals who have the power to stop this aren't cooperating. KGOC administrators claim that our information is exaggerated despite their knowledge that it is extracted from their own documents which they are trying to hide from the public.
Stressing the potentially calamitous consequences of the waste-injection procedure, Al-Hajri said it would lead to pollution of the soil with toxic materials and contamination of groundwaters that could extend to the Wafra farmlands poisoning their crops, in addition to the blockage (and contamination?) of water wells, causing "severe uncontrollable geological problems" (e.g. quakes). The technology was apparently used in Purdhoe Bay in Alaska in 1997, and resulted in "natural catastrophes" - which were presumably triggered from their "natural" course.
According to an anonymous source from the Public Authority for Agricultural Affairs and Fish Resources (PAAAFR), there has been no contamination of any kind in Al-Wafra, and the PAAAFR routinely performs analyses of samples from the region which have never provided any indication of pollution by petroleum chemical wastes. He did note, however that, "We have noticed an increase in groundwater levels in that region and will collaborate with the Ministry of Water and Electricity to tackle this issue."
I wonder what that really means?
The whole business seems to me to be another example of the dangers of "Geo-engineering", i.e. tinkering around with natural structures and processes, with unknown consequences, as was demonstrated by the Swiss Geothermal Project, recently, in which the injection of water into hot-rock at depths of 3 miles caused earthquakes as far as 10 miles distant, near the city of Basle.
Related Reading.
"Injection Risks Tremors, Pollution"; "Green" sounds toxic alarm; "Tests negative", By Dahlia Kholaif, Arab Times: http://www.arabtimesonline.com/client/pagesdetails.asp?nid=4210&ccid=9
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Magnetic Reactor to Improve Ethanol Production.
There have been many interesting propositions regarding the effect of electromagnetic fields on living systems. Most notably, it has been suggested that living near overhead power-lines or communications masts can cause an increased incidence of cancers. The Royal Society carried out an investigation into the matter and concluded there was no firm evidence for a causative link between electromagnetic radiation and cancer, however. There is apocryphal evidence that magnetic fields can assist healing of bones, and that they may encourage growth in a more general sense, and I was alerted to a recent paper (referenced below) which shows that the application of a low-frequency "pulsating" magnetic field supplied by a solenoid can bring the fermentation of sugar cane molasses to a conclusion 17% (two hours) faster than in the control experiment.
The cellular suspension from a batch reactor was recycled externally through a stainless steel pipe inserted through two magnetic field generators, and the optimum conditions were found for a flow rate of 0.9 - 1.2 m/s and 20 mT (200 G, or about 300 times the Earth's magnetic field), plus the solenoid. The overall extent of fermentation was increased marginally to 86.7% from 83.5% in the control, but it is the rate of fermentation that is most markedly enhanced.
Now, the cause of the effect is mysterious. The changes in the initial-to-final pH during the fermentation were broadly similar for all fermented media; however, the difference between the initial and final electrical conductivity was greater in the suspension that had been exposed to magnetic fields, as suggests that the influence of the latter is via induced electric fields in the medium. It is thought that the associated currents can be induced in the culture medium in consequence of the magnetic field because the fermentation medium contains various electrolytes, e.g. Na+, K+, Mg2+, NH4+ and their associated anions, e.g. sulphate, phosphate and chlorate, along with yeast cells that contain various components including ionic solutions, proteins and lipids, which are susceptible to the influence of magnetic or induced electric fields.
Since a cell is essentially non-conducting, at low frequencies, in comparison to the surrounding electrolyte, and electrical interactions among the cells have little influence on the bulk conductivity of the suspension, it is most likely a localised effect on the ions etc. that is responsible, possibly acting on the transport properties of the membrane.
These findings are extremely interesting, but I doubt that it will be practical to modify the entire sugar-cane ethanol industry to forced production conditions employing magnetic field generators, and it would be easier to simply multiply conventional production by 17% to obtain an equivalent enhancement in output, while avoiding the enormous cost and pressure on raw materials such as copper (currently at a world high in price) and the associated engineering on a massive scale that would be incurred in attempting to adopt this technology. The simple approach would also enhance the total quantity of ethanol produced by about 15%.
Related Reading.
Biotechnol. Prog., ASAP Article 10.1021/bp070078k S8756-7938(07)00078-1 Web Release Date: July 31, 2007.
The cellular suspension from a batch reactor was recycled externally through a stainless steel pipe inserted through two magnetic field generators, and the optimum conditions were found for a flow rate of 0.9 - 1.2 m/s and 20 mT (200 G, or about 300 times the Earth's magnetic field), plus the solenoid. The overall extent of fermentation was increased marginally to 86.7% from 83.5% in the control, but it is the rate of fermentation that is most markedly enhanced.
Now, the cause of the effect is mysterious. The changes in the initial-to-final pH during the fermentation were broadly similar for all fermented media; however, the difference between the initial and final electrical conductivity was greater in the suspension that had been exposed to magnetic fields, as suggests that the influence of the latter is via induced electric fields in the medium. It is thought that the associated currents can be induced in the culture medium in consequence of the magnetic field because the fermentation medium contains various electrolytes, e.g. Na+, K+, Mg2+, NH4+ and their associated anions, e.g. sulphate, phosphate and chlorate, along with yeast cells that contain various components including ionic solutions, proteins and lipids, which are susceptible to the influence of magnetic or induced electric fields.
Since a cell is essentially non-conducting, at low frequencies, in comparison to the surrounding electrolyte, and electrical interactions among the cells have little influence on the bulk conductivity of the suspension, it is most likely a localised effect on the ions etc. that is responsible, possibly acting on the transport properties of the membrane.
These findings are extremely interesting, but I doubt that it will be practical to modify the entire sugar-cane ethanol industry to forced production conditions employing magnetic field generators, and it would be easier to simply multiply conventional production by 17% to obtain an equivalent enhancement in output, while avoiding the enormous cost and pressure on raw materials such as copper (currently at a world high in price) and the associated engineering on a massive scale that would be incurred in attempting to adopt this technology. The simple approach would also enhance the total quantity of ethanol produced by about 15%.
Related Reading.
Biotechnol. Prog., ASAP Article 10.1021/bp070078k S8756-7938(07)00078-1 Web Release Date: July 31, 2007.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)