<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_07_16_2027230</id>
	<title>Novel Algae Fuel-Farming Method Gets Big Backing</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1247736600000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.technologyreview.com/" rel="nofollow">Al</a> writes <i>"Dow Chemical has given its backing to a Florida startup called <a href="http://www.algenolbiofuels.com/">Algenol Biofuels</a> that hopes to produce commercial <a href="http://www.technologyreview.com/business/23009/">quantities of ethanol directly from algae</a> without the need for fresh water or agricultural lands. Dozens of companies are trying to produce biofuels from algae, mostly by growing and harvesting the microorganisms to extract their oil. Algenol has chosen instead to genetically enhance certain strains of blue-green algae, also known as cyanobacteria, to convert as much carbon dioxide as possible into ethanol using a process that doesn't require harvesting to collect the fuel. Algenol's bioreactors are troughs covered by a dome of semitransparent film and filled with salt water that has been pumped in straight from the ocean. The photosynthetic algae growing inside are exposed to sunlight and fed a stream of carbon dioxide from Dow's chemical production units. The goal is to produce 100,000 gallons of ethanol annually."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Al writes " Dow Chemical has given its backing to a Florida startup called Algenol Biofuels that hopes to produce commercial quantities of ethanol directly from algae without the need for fresh water or agricultural lands .
Dozens of companies are trying to produce biofuels from algae , mostly by growing and harvesting the microorganisms to extract their oil .
Algenol has chosen instead to genetically enhance certain strains of blue-green algae , also known as cyanobacteria , to convert as much carbon dioxide as possible into ethanol using a process that does n't require harvesting to collect the fuel .
Algenol 's bioreactors are troughs covered by a dome of semitransparent film and filled with salt water that has been pumped in straight from the ocean .
The photosynthetic algae growing inside are exposed to sunlight and fed a stream of carbon dioxide from Dow 's chemical production units .
The goal is to produce 100,000 gallons of ethanol annually .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Al writes "Dow Chemical has given its backing to a Florida startup called Algenol Biofuels that hopes to produce commercial quantities of ethanol directly from algae without the need for fresh water or agricultural lands.
Dozens of companies are trying to produce biofuels from algae, mostly by growing and harvesting the microorganisms to extract their oil.
Algenol has chosen instead to genetically enhance certain strains of blue-green algae, also known as cyanobacteria, to convert as much carbon dioxide as possible into ethanol using a process that doesn't require harvesting to collect the fuel.
Algenol's bioreactors are troughs covered by a dome of semitransparent film and filled with salt water that has been pumped in straight from the ocean.
The photosynthetic algae growing inside are exposed to sunlight and fed a stream of carbon dioxide from Dow's chemical production units.
The goal is to produce 100,000 gallons of ethanol annually.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723157</id>
	<title>Sources of Ethanol</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247740620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Good for Dow. It's probably about time some company jumped on this. I'm just waiting for one of the big oil companies to shut them down so they can go back to using expensive corn crops for ethanol. I mean, corn? Really? Couldn't they have come up with anything more costly that produces less ethanol? Oh! Coming in 2015 from Shell: puppy ethanol!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Good for Dow .
It 's probably about time some company jumped on this .
I 'm just waiting for one of the big oil companies to shut them down so they can go back to using expensive corn crops for ethanol .
I mean , corn ?
Really ? Could n't they have come up with anything more costly that produces less ethanol ?
Oh ! Coming in 2015 from Shell : puppy ethanol !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good for Dow.
It's probably about time some company jumped on this.
I'm just waiting for one of the big oil companies to shut them down so they can go back to using expensive corn crops for ethanol.
I mean, corn?
Really? Couldn't they have come up with anything more costly that produces less ethanol?
Oh! Coming in 2015 from Shell: puppy ethanol!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723515</id>
	<title>Is this based in Alaska?</title>
	<author>InfinityWpi</author>
	<datestamp>1247742300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a theory that if this goes wrong, and some of the stuff gets out into the ocean, you get a blob like the one they're tracking up there...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a theory that if this goes wrong , and some of the stuff gets out into the ocean , you get a blob like the one they 're tracking up there.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a theory that if this goes wrong, and some of the stuff gets out into the ocean, you get a blob like the one they're tracking up there...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28729397</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome to hear!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247843700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>        So far the money doesn't work! Creating 100,000 gallons of alcohol equals about 50,000 gallons of gasoline. The size and complexity of the facility indicates that this will loose money unless it scales up to far greater production.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So far the money does n't work !
Creating 100,000 gallons of alcohol equals about 50,000 gallons of gasoline .
The size and complexity of the facility indicates that this will loose money unless it scales up to far greater production .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>        So far the money doesn't work!
Creating 100,000 gallons of alcohol equals about 50,000 gallons of gasoline.
The size and complexity of the facility indicates that this will loose money unless it scales up to far greater production.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723111</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723237</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome to hear!</title>
	<author>religious freak</author>
	<datestamp>1247740980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>My first question after reading TFS is where these little buggers go after the salt water is pumped in.  Presumably, the salt water is pumped out at some point in time.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...  Oh, don't worry, I'm sure they filter them out after returning them to the ocean - yeah somehow I highly doubt it.  <br> <br>
I agree this type of stuff is the least worst choice, but something about genetically modified bacteria designed to produce fuel, in the ocean gives me the creeps.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My first question after reading TFS is where these little buggers go after the salt water is pumped in .
Presumably , the salt water is pumped out at some point in time .
... Oh , do n't worry , I 'm sure they filter them out after returning them to the ocean - yeah somehow I highly doubt it .
I agree this type of stuff is the least worst choice , but something about genetically modified bacteria designed to produce fuel , in the ocean gives me the creeps .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My first question after reading TFS is where these little buggers go after the salt water is pumped in.
Presumably, the salt water is pumped out at some point in time.
...  Oh, don't worry, I'm sure they filter them out after returning them to the ocean - yeah somehow I highly doubt it.
I agree this type of stuff is the least worst choice, but something about genetically modified bacteria designed to produce fuel, in the ocean gives me the creeps.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723111</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723395</id>
	<title>Where's the downside?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247741760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, we could hook up the CO2 exhaust from a coal-fired plant, use that to grow algae, and then turn algae into fuel? And as a "dreadful" side-effect, we get clean water from sea water?</p><p>Greenhouse gas reduction, renewable fuel, and fresh water...</p><p>Why aren't we focusing everything we have on such a process? It sounds too good to be true.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , we could hook up the CO2 exhaust from a coal-fired plant , use that to grow algae , and then turn algae into fuel ?
And as a " dreadful " side-effect , we get clean water from sea water ? Greenhouse gas reduction , renewable fuel , and fresh water...Why are n't we focusing everything we have on such a process ?
It sounds too good to be true .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, we could hook up the CO2 exhaust from a coal-fired plant, use that to grow algae, and then turn algae into fuel?
And as a "dreadful" side-effect, we get clean water from sea water?Greenhouse gas reduction, renewable fuel, and fresh water...Why aren't we focusing everything we have on such a process?
It sounds too good to be true.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28728129</id>
	<title>Re:Welcome to our next ecological disaster</title>
	<author>dkleinsc</author>
	<datestamp>1247837460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This sounds like a segment from "The Root of All Evil", where a comedian would try and convince Lewis Black that, say, Oprah would destroy the universe.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This sounds like a segment from " The Root of All Evil " , where a comedian would try and convince Lewis Black that , say , Oprah would destroy the universe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This sounds like a segment from "The Root of All Evil", where a comedian would try and convince Lewis Black that, say, Oprah would destroy the universe.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723441</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724267</id>
	<title>Re:100,000 gallons = drop in the bucket (SSIA)</title>
	<author>tsotha</author>
	<datestamp>1247746020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I suspect it's a "plan B" option for DOW if carbon taxes go through.  They can easily ramp up production if it's economically feasible.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I suspect it 's a " plan B " option for DOW if carbon taxes go through .
They can easily ramp up production if it 's economically feasible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I suspect it's a "plan B" option for DOW if carbon taxes go through.
They can easily ramp up production if it's economically feasible.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28725533</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome to hear!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247757000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Like bioengineering lysine dependent reptiles!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Like bioengineering lysine dependent reptiles !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Like bioengineering lysine dependent reptiles!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723453</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28727145</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome to hear!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247825460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Understandably, however, that kind of significant change in the population is likely to be slow. They may have to purge the population periodically, and recreate a population that produces our optimal output of ethanol.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Understandably , however , that kind of significant change in the population is likely to be slow .
They may have to purge the population periodically , and recreate a population that produces our optimal output of ethanol .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Understandably, however, that kind of significant change in the population is likely to be slow.
They may have to purge the population periodically, and recreate a population that produces our optimal output of ethanol.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723453</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723433</id>
	<title>Watch Out!</title>
	<author>crsuperman34</author>
	<datestamp>1247742000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Man oh man, you guys have done it now. Burnin' up the the Rougarou's swamp gas is really going to upset him...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Man oh man , you guys have done it now .
Burnin ' up the the Rougarou 's swamp gas is really going to upset him.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Man oh man, you guys have done it now.
Burnin' up the the Rougarou's swamp gas is really going to upset him...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28725527</id>
	<title>How to increase algae yield for free</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247756880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Simple: You put dead people into the tanks!</p><p>There will be a small additional cost for taking care of the mold-men that rise from the vats.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Simple : You put dead people into the tanks ! There will be a small additional cost for taking care of the mold-men that rise from the vats .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Simple: You put dead people into the tanks!There will be a small additional cost for taking care of the mold-men that rise from the vats.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28729233</id>
	<title>What the HELL. . ?????</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247842980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't believe that I of all people have to be the one to point this out.  (Please bear in mind when I say that, that I am one of those Free Energy dudes who thinks Pons &amp; Fleishmann were on to something and that it was suppressed).</p><p>--I mean, I'd be as happy as anybody for a smart solution to the fuel problem to be embraced by industry.  While wind and solar farming seem to be catching on, hydrogen and electric vehicles seem to be anathema.  But anyway, the point of this post. . .</p><p>Bacteria need more than sunlight and CO2 to produce an energy-rich byproduct like alcohol.</p><p>They need biomass of some sort.  The petri dishes we used in my highschool biology lab didn't come with nutrient agar spread across the bottom for no reason, now did they?</p><p>The last time I read up on one of these fuel-from-algae efforts, they involved feeding a rather large quantity of SUGAR CANE and WOOD CHIPS to the cultures.  Scaled up to industrial quantities, this method of fuel production works out to be about the same as Corn Ethanol.  Growing gasoline.  Anybody who needs to be informed as to why this is an incredibly stupid idea should go and inform themselves at once.</p><p>This story looks like very carefully worded P.R. spin.  "They produce their own sugars"?  Ugh.  Human cells can do that too.  It's called, "Burning Fat".  That energy has to come from somewhere, and it doesn't come from Salt Water and Carbon Dioxide.</p><p>Come on Slashdot.  Wake up.  Conservation of Energy doesn't go away just because it spends a bit of time being green and gooey.</p><p>-FL</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't believe that I of all people have to be the one to point this out .
( Please bear in mind when I say that , that I am one of those Free Energy dudes who thinks Pons &amp; Fleishmann were on to something and that it was suppressed ) .--I mean , I 'd be as happy as anybody for a smart solution to the fuel problem to be embraced by industry .
While wind and solar farming seem to be catching on , hydrogen and electric vehicles seem to be anathema .
But anyway , the point of this post .
. .Bacteria need more than sunlight and CO2 to produce an energy-rich byproduct like alcohol.They need biomass of some sort .
The petri dishes we used in my highschool biology lab did n't come with nutrient agar spread across the bottom for no reason , now did they ? The last time I read up on one of these fuel-from-algae efforts , they involved feeding a rather large quantity of SUGAR CANE and WOOD CHIPS to the cultures .
Scaled up to industrial quantities , this method of fuel production works out to be about the same as Corn Ethanol .
Growing gasoline .
Anybody who needs to be informed as to why this is an incredibly stupid idea should go and inform themselves at once.This story looks like very carefully worded P.R .
spin. " They produce their own sugars " ?
Ugh. Human cells can do that too .
It 's called , " Burning Fat " .
That energy has to come from somewhere , and it does n't come from Salt Water and Carbon Dioxide.Come on Slashdot .
Wake up .
Conservation of Energy does n't go away just because it spends a bit of time being green and gooey.-FL</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't believe that I of all people have to be the one to point this out.
(Please bear in mind when I say that, that I am one of those Free Energy dudes who thinks Pons &amp; Fleishmann were on to something and that it was suppressed).--I mean, I'd be as happy as anybody for a smart solution to the fuel problem to be embraced by industry.
While wind and solar farming seem to be catching on, hydrogen and electric vehicles seem to be anathema.
But anyway, the point of this post.
. .Bacteria need more than sunlight and CO2 to produce an energy-rich byproduct like alcohol.They need biomass of some sort.
The petri dishes we used in my highschool biology lab didn't come with nutrient agar spread across the bottom for no reason, now did they?The last time I read up on one of these fuel-from-algae efforts, they involved feeding a rather large quantity of SUGAR CANE and WOOD CHIPS to the cultures.
Scaled up to industrial quantities, this method of fuel production works out to be about the same as Corn Ethanol.
Growing gasoline.
Anybody who needs to be informed as to why this is an incredibly stupid idea should go and inform themselves at once.This story looks like very carefully worded P.R.
spin.  "They produce their own sugars"?
Ugh.  Human cells can do that too.
It's called, "Burning Fat".
That energy has to come from somewhere, and it doesn't come from Salt Water and Carbon Dioxide.Come on Slashdot.
Wake up.
Conservation of Energy doesn't go away just because it spends a bit of time being green and gooey.-FL</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724247</id>
	<title>Butanol needed, not ethanol</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247745780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They need to make <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butanol\_fuel" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow"> Butanol</a> [wikipedia.org] instead of ethanol. It's a much better motor fuel.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They need to make Butanol [ wikipedia.org ] instead of ethanol .
It 's a much better motor fuel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They need to make  Butanol [wikipedia.org] instead of ethanol.
It's a much better motor fuel.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28734359</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the downside?</title>
	<author>hador\_nyc</author>
	<datestamp>1247822160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><blockquote><div><p>It sounds too good to be true.</p></div></blockquote><p>It is.  The CO2 from the coal-fired plant would not go away.  It would be converted into ethanol and then released back as CO2 when the ethanol was burned.</p><p>The reason some people are so excited about bio-fuels is they are supposedly "carbon neutral."  They take CO2 out of the atmosphere, then release it back when burned.  If one were to use CO2 from coal combustion instead, then the CO2 stored in the alcohol is coming out of the ground.  In other words, inserting algae into the coal -&gt; atmosphere chain does not change the carbon balance, only interrupts it.</p><p>It is possible that adding algae into the chain could make energy production more efficient (more joules of energy per ton of total CO2 emissions) and may still be worth doing.</p><p>My concern is that the coal plant owner would convince the general public (who by and large do not understand such basic scientific laws as conservation of mass) that their CO2 is a "green energy source" and therefore should not be taxed/capped as a greenhouse gas.  In other words, using coal exhaust to feed the algae is basically playing a shell game -- "which one has the CO2 under it now?"</p><p>The point to remember is that bio-fuels do not provide a net benefit to CO2 reduction.  Ever.  They're simply carbon neutral or approximately so.</p></div><p>You're wrong, at least partially.  The ethanol does not displace extra electricity production, but could displace extra oil production.  Think of it this way.  Right now there are A LOT of coal plants.  They aren't going anywhere any time soon.  Hooking them up to this to make lots of ethanol would enable us to displace a lot of oil that is currently being burned in cars.  So, this CO2 does get "burned" twice, but it does save the CO2 from the gallons of gasoline that are not being burned, but would have been if we hadn't done this.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It sounds too good to be true.It is .
The CO2 from the coal-fired plant would not go away .
It would be converted into ethanol and then released back as CO2 when the ethanol was burned.The reason some people are so excited about bio-fuels is they are supposedly " carbon neutral .
" They take CO2 out of the atmosphere , then release it back when burned .
If one were to use CO2 from coal combustion instead , then the CO2 stored in the alcohol is coming out of the ground .
In other words , inserting algae into the coal - &gt; atmosphere chain does not change the carbon balance , only interrupts it.It is possible that adding algae into the chain could make energy production more efficient ( more joules of energy per ton of total CO2 emissions ) and may still be worth doing.My concern is that the coal plant owner would convince the general public ( who by and large do not understand such basic scientific laws as conservation of mass ) that their CO2 is a " green energy source " and therefore should not be taxed/capped as a greenhouse gas .
In other words , using coal exhaust to feed the algae is basically playing a shell game -- " which one has the CO2 under it now ?
" The point to remember is that bio-fuels do not provide a net benefit to CO2 reduction .
Ever. They 're simply carbon neutral or approximately so.You 're wrong , at least partially .
The ethanol does not displace extra electricity production , but could displace extra oil production .
Think of it this way .
Right now there are A LOT of coal plants .
They are n't going anywhere any time soon .
Hooking them up to this to make lots of ethanol would enable us to displace a lot of oil that is currently being burned in cars .
So , this CO2 does get " burned " twice , but it does save the CO2 from the gallons of gasoline that are not being burned , but would have been if we had n't done this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It sounds too good to be true.It is.
The CO2 from the coal-fired plant would not go away.
It would be converted into ethanol and then released back as CO2 when the ethanol was burned.The reason some people are so excited about bio-fuels is they are supposedly "carbon neutral.
"  They take CO2 out of the atmosphere, then release it back when burned.
If one were to use CO2 from coal combustion instead, then the CO2 stored in the alcohol is coming out of the ground.
In other words, inserting algae into the coal -&gt; atmosphere chain does not change the carbon balance, only interrupts it.It is possible that adding algae into the chain could make energy production more efficient (more joules of energy per ton of total CO2 emissions) and may still be worth doing.My concern is that the coal plant owner would convince the general public (who by and large do not understand such basic scientific laws as conservation of mass) that their CO2 is a "green energy source" and therefore should not be taxed/capped as a greenhouse gas.
In other words, using coal exhaust to feed the algae is basically playing a shell game -- "which one has the CO2 under it now?
"The point to remember is that bio-fuels do not provide a net benefit to CO2 reduction.
Ever.  They're simply carbon neutral or approximately so.You're wrong, at least partially.
The ethanol does not displace extra electricity production, but could displace extra oil production.
Think of it this way.
Right now there are A LOT of coal plants.
They aren't going anywhere any time soon.
Hooking them up to this to make lots of ethanol would enable us to displace a lot of oil that is currently being burned in cars.
So, this CO2 does get "burned" twice, but it does save the CO2 from the gallons of gasoline that are not being burned, but would have been if we hadn't done this.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28727791</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723447</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome to hear!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247742060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You'll stop worrying once the sea is 5\% alcohol.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 'll stop worrying once the sea is 5 \ % alcohol .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You'll stop worrying once the sea is 5\% alcohol.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723237</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723291</id>
	<title>Also in the news: Exxon backing Synthetic Genomics</title>
	<author>matrix mechanic</author>
	<datestamp>1247741280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>And here I thought this was going to be about Exxon backing Synthetic Genomics.

<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/14/business/energy-environment/14fuel.html" title="nytimes.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/14/business/energy-environment/14fuel.html</a> [nytimes.com]

Algae fuels are just so hot right now!</htmltext>
<tokenext>And here I thought this was going to be about Exxon backing Synthetic Genomics .
http : //www.nytimes.com/2009/07/14/business/energy-environment/14fuel.html [ nytimes.com ] Algae fuels are just so hot right now !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And here I thought this was going to be about Exxon backing Synthetic Genomics.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/14/business/energy-environment/14fuel.html [nytimes.com]

Algae fuels are just so hot right now!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723581</id>
	<title>Coming To A Theater Near YOU:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247742540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Attack of the Exploding Algae.</p><p>&gt; Hey, Dude, got a cigarette.</p><p>&gt;&gt; No, Asshole, buy your own tobacco</p><p>&gt; I got a cigar, Asswipe. Got a match</p><p>&gt;&gt; Sure, Asshole. Here. Kkaaaabbbbboooooommmmm.</p><p>Yours In Comediy,<br><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHwuL4YwzQo" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow"> Trout Kilgore</a> [youtube.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Attack of the Exploding Algae. &gt; Hey , Dude , got a cigarette. &gt; &gt; No , Asshole , buy your own tobacco &gt; I got a cigar , Asswipe .
Got a match &gt; &gt; Sure , Asshole .
Here. Kkaaaabbbbboooooommmmm.Yours In Comediy , Trout Kilgore [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Attack of the Exploding Algae.&gt; Hey, Dude, got a cigarette.&gt;&gt; No, Asshole, buy your own tobacco&gt; I got a cigar, Asswipe.
Got a match&gt;&gt; Sure, Asshole.
Here. Kkaaaabbbbboooooommmmm.Yours In Comediy, Trout Kilgore [youtube.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723535</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome to hear!</title>
	<author>WindBourne</author>
	<datestamp>1247742420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>ethanol and salt mixes with water. As such, they will likely use a distillation or a chromatograph  to separate ethanol from the water and salt. To do that, means that it will run better if they do not have the algae in there. I think that they will have some sieve filters that will hold back large molecules, which will also hold back the algae.</htmltext>
<tokenext>ethanol and salt mixes with water .
As such , they will likely use a distillation or a chromatograph to separate ethanol from the water and salt .
To do that , means that it will run better if they do not have the algae in there .
I think that they will have some sieve filters that will hold back large molecules , which will also hold back the algae .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ethanol and salt mixes with water.
As such, they will likely use a distillation or a chromatograph  to separate ethanol from the water and salt.
To do that, means that it will run better if they do not have the algae in there.
I think that they will have some sieve filters that will hold back large molecules, which will also hold back the algae.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723237</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28725419</id>
	<title>Re:Ok for a tech demonstration</title>
	<author>thesandtiger</author>
	<datestamp>1247755740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, I could see it becoming interesting if it were made smaller-scale and efficient enough to have individual fuel producing systems for rural and distant suburban dwellers. Enhance public transit in cities (reducing the need for cars) where land is scarce, and it might be very well worth it for places where driving is essential and the grid is less reliable.</p><p>Another (small but important) contribution to the many different ways we can kick fossil fuel dependence and go with renewable sources.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , I could see it becoming interesting if it were made smaller-scale and efficient enough to have individual fuel producing systems for rural and distant suburban dwellers .
Enhance public transit in cities ( reducing the need for cars ) where land is scarce , and it might be very well worth it for places where driving is essential and the grid is less reliable.Another ( small but important ) contribution to the many different ways we can kick fossil fuel dependence and go with renewable sources .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, I could see it becoming interesting if it were made smaller-scale and efficient enough to have individual fuel producing systems for rural and distant suburban dwellers.
Enhance public transit in cities (reducing the need for cars) where land is scarce, and it might be very well worth it for places where driving is essential and the grid is less reliable.Another (small but important) contribution to the many different ways we can kick fossil fuel dependence and go with renewable sources.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724357</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome to hear!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247746620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe nature has never evolved/designed this specific type of bacteria.  Maybe the alcohol will be a serious weapon against other bacteria killing them all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe nature has never evolved/designed this specific type of bacteria .
Maybe the alcohol will be a serious weapon against other bacteria killing them all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe nature has never evolved/designed this specific type of bacteria.
Maybe the alcohol will be a serious weapon against other bacteria killing them all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723453</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723249</id>
	<title>Novell?</title>
	<author>I\_Can't\_Fly</author>
	<datestamp>1247741040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sorry.  Read that as "Novell Algae Fuel Farming Gets Big Backing" and thought it a good question to ask if it ran Linux.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry .
Read that as " Novell Algae Fuel Farming Gets Big Backing " and thought it a good question to ask if it ran Linux .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry.
Read that as "Novell Algae Fuel Farming Gets Big Backing" and thought it a good question to ask if it ran Linux.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723199</id>
	<title>Great</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247740800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If it pans out, this is an obvious win.  Not to stare a gift horse in the mouth or anything, but exactly how are these algae modified, and are we sure they won't be able to survive in the wild?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If it pans out , this is an obvious win .
Not to stare a gift horse in the mouth or anything , but exactly how are these algae modified , and are we sure they wo n't be able to survive in the wild ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If it pans out, this is an obvious win.
Not to stare a gift horse in the mouth or anything, but exactly how are these algae modified, and are we sure they won't be able to survive in the wild?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724333</id>
	<title>Re:Sources of Ethanol</title>
	<author>nevergleam</author>
	<datestamp>1247746440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was listening to NPR's All Things Considered yesterday (7/15/09) and they had a profile on a California start-up developing algae-sourced fuel in partnership with Exxon-Mobil.</p><p>Oil companies aren't stupid.  They invest heavily in all of the R&amp;D for these alternative sources of fuel so they can oligopolize it when any of the research produces something practical.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was listening to NPR 's All Things Considered yesterday ( 7/15/09 ) and they had a profile on a California start-up developing algae-sourced fuel in partnership with Exxon-Mobil.Oil companies are n't stupid .
They invest heavily in all of the R&amp;D for these alternative sources of fuel so they can oligopolize it when any of the research produces something practical .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was listening to NPR's All Things Considered yesterday (7/15/09) and they had a profile on a California start-up developing algae-sourced fuel in partnership with Exxon-Mobil.Oil companies aren't stupid.
They invest heavily in all of the R&amp;D for these alternative sources of fuel so they can oligopolize it when any of the research produces something practical.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723157</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28726355</id>
	<title>Re:Sources of Ethanol</title>
	<author>Bigjeff5</author>
	<datestamp>1247768400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This technology has a LONG way to go, 100,000 gallons per year is quite litterally nothing in the energy business.</p><p>For example, the Alaska oil field, which produces quite a lot of oil but nowhere near what is needed, put out an average of 650,000 <b>barrels</b> per <b>day</b>, or just shy of 30 <b>million</b> gallons per <b>day</b>.  That's ten and a half <b>billion</b> with a "B" gallons per year.  Also bear in mind that Alaska accounts for only 1/3 the total oil production in North America, and also remember that the US must import 80\% of its oil from overseas.</p><p>100,000 gallons per year is nothing more than a "proof of concept".  If they can scale that up to the millions of barrels per year range they'll start making a profit.  If this scales well enough it could eventually be a good replacement for gasoline, which would mean the demand for gasoline could be cut in half.  That would be awesome.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This technology has a LONG way to go , 100,000 gallons per year is quite litterally nothing in the energy business.For example , the Alaska oil field , which produces quite a lot of oil but nowhere near what is needed , put out an average of 650,000 barrels per day , or just shy of 30 million gallons per day .
That 's ten and a half billion with a " B " gallons per year .
Also bear in mind that Alaska accounts for only 1/3 the total oil production in North America , and also remember that the US must import 80 \ % of its oil from overseas.100,000 gallons per year is nothing more than a " proof of concept " .
If they can scale that up to the millions of barrels per year range they 'll start making a profit .
If this scales well enough it could eventually be a good replacement for gasoline , which would mean the demand for gasoline could be cut in half .
That would be awesome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This technology has a LONG way to go, 100,000 gallons per year is quite litterally nothing in the energy business.For example, the Alaska oil field, which produces quite a lot of oil but nowhere near what is needed, put out an average of 650,000 barrels per day, or just shy of 30 million gallons per day.
That's ten and a half billion with a "B" gallons per year.
Also bear in mind that Alaska accounts for only 1/3 the total oil production in North America, and also remember that the US must import 80\% of its oil from overseas.100,000 gallons per year is nothing more than a "proof of concept".
If they can scale that up to the millions of barrels per year range they'll start making a profit.
If this scales well enough it could eventually be a good replacement for gasoline, which would mean the demand for gasoline could be cut in half.
That would be awesome.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723157</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723225</id>
	<title>100,000 gallons annually?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247740920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just a test facility, I suppose.

Does it scale?  'cause we're gonna need these by the 1000s.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just a test facility , I suppose .
Does it scale ?
'cause we 're gon na need these by the 1000s .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just a test facility, I suppose.
Does it scale?
'cause we're gonna need these by the 1000s.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723277</id>
	<title>The 3 Steps</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247741220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1)make a carbon-dioxide sequestering device.<br>2)transfer CO2 to algae ethanol farm<br>3)profit!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) make a carbon-dioxide sequestering device.2 ) transfer CO2 to algae ethanol farm3 ) profit ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1)make a carbon-dioxide sequestering device.2)transfer CO2 to algae ethanol farm3)profit!!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723941</id>
	<title>I feel compelled to point out that it's not algae</title>
	<author>Brian Feldman</author>
	<datestamp>1247744340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cyanobacteria has some similarities with algae, but <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyanobacteria" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">it is not algae</a> [wikipedia.org].</p><p>It actually can be quite toxic, to boot.  This doesn't seem all that ecologically-minded to me....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cyanobacteria has some similarities with algae , but it is not algae [ wikipedia.org ] .It actually can be quite toxic , to boot .
This does n't seem all that ecologically-minded to me... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cyanobacteria has some similarities with algae, but it is not algae [wikipedia.org].It actually can be quite toxic, to boot.
This doesn't seem all that ecologically-minded to me....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724255</id>
	<title>Re:Sources of Ethanol</title>
	<author>tsotha</author>
	<datestamp>1247745840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The use of corn has less to do with oil companies than it has to do with pork barrel politics in farm states.  Biodiesel will probably never be competitive with fossil fuels on a purely economic basis, so it's hard to believe the oil companies care.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The use of corn has less to do with oil companies than it has to do with pork barrel politics in farm states .
Biodiesel will probably never be competitive with fossil fuels on a purely economic basis , so it 's hard to believe the oil companies care .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The use of corn has less to do with oil companies than it has to do with pork barrel politics in farm states.
Biodiesel will probably never be competitive with fossil fuels on a purely economic basis, so it's hard to believe the oil companies care.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723157</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28730453</id>
	<title>Re:Welcome to our next ecological disaster</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247848080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ok, I just laughed up my breakfast. If I had mod points, I'd give them to you.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok , I just laughed up my breakfast .
If I had mod points , I 'd give them to you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok, I just laughed up my breakfast.
If I had mod points, I'd give them to you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723441</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723631</id>
	<title>Re:Water/Coastal towns, sewage, animal feed?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247742780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>So I can poo in it?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So I can poo in it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So I can poo in it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723265</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28728677</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the downside?</title>
	<author>Sandbags</author>
	<datestamp>1247840520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, no.</p><p>As a side effect, through ADDITIONAL processing, we can get water that can be filtered into drinking water, without actually having to run through traditional desalination.</p><p>As a dreadful side effect, we'll have a mass of biowaste, and every last contaiminant in the ocean cleaned from the water becomes a toxic sludge waste, which will include large amounts of murcury, other heavy metals, and some farily dangerous compounds mixed in with some poitentially useful organic materials and other compunds.  All that crtap then itself needs to be processed, sorted, and disposed of in a varying and complicated array of processes.</p><p>Getting ethanol out of algae isn;t so much the issue.  Getting the resulting crap out of the tank and safeley disposed of is, and may actually cost more than getting the fuel...</p><p>Look into a real technology.  dotyenergy.com and see how it compares:</p><p>- 300 times more fuel per site (up to 30M gallons anually, not 100,000).<br>- operational costs of about $90M anually, on $225M anual expected revenue.<br>- Fuel (methanol, propanol, ethanol, and several other blends, including higher alcohols and jet fuels too!) that will compete in price with oil at $70/bbl<br>- NO hazardous byproducts, little to no environmental impact<br>- Energy derived from off-peak wind production<br>- CARBON NUETRAL<br>- We've been using this technology for over 50 years (we made deisel fuels using a very similar process in WWII)!</p><p>very detailed information, including some actual science data can be found <a href="http://dotyenergy.com/PDFs/WindFuels\_Sci\_Engr\_ppt.pdf" title="dotyenergy.com">http://dotyenergy.com/PDFs/WindFuels\_Sci\_Engr\_ppt.pdf</a> [dotyenergy.com].  (FAR more than other companies I've seen provide) and this research has been confirmed by multiple universities and science firms.</p><p>They also have a lot of great data at dotyenergy.com on the undisclosed facts about all of the other alternatives, some real numbers and analysis on feasability and costs, and explanations about a lot of other solutions.  They've been researching this process and patenting improvements for over 20 years, and were recently awarded over 60 world patents for their enhancements to this technology.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , no.As a side effect , through ADDITIONAL processing , we can get water that can be filtered into drinking water , without actually having to run through traditional desalination.As a dreadful side effect , we 'll have a mass of biowaste , and every last contaiminant in the ocean cleaned from the water becomes a toxic sludge waste , which will include large amounts of murcury , other heavy metals , and some farily dangerous compounds mixed in with some poitentially useful organic materials and other compunds .
All that crtap then itself needs to be processed , sorted , and disposed of in a varying and complicated array of processes.Getting ethanol out of algae isn ; t so much the issue .
Getting the resulting crap out of the tank and safeley disposed of is , and may actually cost more than getting the fuel...Look into a real technology .
dotyenergy.com and see how it compares : - 300 times more fuel per site ( up to 30M gallons anually , not 100,000 ) .- operational costs of about $ 90M anually , on $ 225M anual expected revenue.- Fuel ( methanol , propanol , ethanol , and several other blends , including higher alcohols and jet fuels too !
) that will compete in price with oil at $ 70/bbl- NO hazardous byproducts , little to no environmental impact- Energy derived from off-peak wind production- CARBON NUETRAL- We 've been using this technology for over 50 years ( we made deisel fuels using a very similar process in WWII ) ! very detailed information , including some actual science data can be found http : //dotyenergy.com/PDFs/WindFuels \ _Sci \ _Engr \ _ppt.pdf [ dotyenergy.com ] .
( FAR more than other companies I 've seen provide ) and this research has been confirmed by multiple universities and science firms.They also have a lot of great data at dotyenergy.com on the undisclosed facts about all of the other alternatives , some real numbers and analysis on feasability and costs , and explanations about a lot of other solutions .
They 've been researching this process and patenting improvements for over 20 years , and were recently awarded over 60 world patents for their enhancements to this technology .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, no.As a side effect, through ADDITIONAL processing, we can get water that can be filtered into drinking water, without actually having to run through traditional desalination.As a dreadful side effect, we'll have a mass of biowaste, and every last contaiminant in the ocean cleaned from the water becomes a toxic sludge waste, which will include large amounts of murcury, other heavy metals, and some farily dangerous compounds mixed in with some poitentially useful organic materials and other compunds.
All that crtap then itself needs to be processed, sorted, and disposed of in a varying and complicated array of processes.Getting ethanol out of algae isn;t so much the issue.
Getting the resulting crap out of the tank and safeley disposed of is, and may actually cost more than getting the fuel...Look into a real technology.
dotyenergy.com and see how it compares:- 300 times more fuel per site (up to 30M gallons anually, not 100,000).- operational costs of about $90M anually, on $225M anual expected revenue.- Fuel (methanol, propanol, ethanol, and several other blends, including higher alcohols and jet fuels too!
) that will compete in price with oil at $70/bbl- NO hazardous byproducts, little to no environmental impact- Energy derived from off-peak wind production- CARBON NUETRAL- We've been using this technology for over 50 years (we made deisel fuels using a very similar process in WWII)!very detailed information, including some actual science data can be found http://dotyenergy.com/PDFs/WindFuels\_Sci\_Engr\_ppt.pdf [dotyenergy.com].
(FAR more than other companies I've seen provide) and this research has been confirmed by multiple universities and science firms.They also have a lot of great data at dotyenergy.com on the undisclosed facts about all of the other alternatives, some real numbers and analysis on feasability and costs, and explanations about a lot of other solutions.
They've been researching this process and patenting improvements for over 20 years, and were recently awarded over 60 world patents for their enhancements to this technology.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723395</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28731309</id>
	<title>Re:Water/Coastal towns, sewage, animal feed?</title>
	<author>mattwarden</author>
	<datestamp>1247851740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>These are awesome questions. I'm not really on board with this green tech stuff, because I think there is so much bad science out there right now (probably due to the politicization). But your comment almost inspired the geeky excitement I get over other areas of science. Good thoughts...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>These are awesome questions .
I 'm not really on board with this green tech stuff , because I think there is so much bad science out there right now ( probably due to the politicization ) .
But your comment almost inspired the geeky excitement I get over other areas of science .
Good thoughts.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These are awesome questions.
I'm not really on board with this green tech stuff, because I think there is so much bad science out there right now (probably due to the politicization).
But your comment almost inspired the geeky excitement I get over other areas of science.
Good thoughts...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723265</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28730781</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome to hear!</title>
	<author>Sabathius</author>
	<datestamp>1247849520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>something about genetically modified bacteria designed to produce fuel, in the ocean gives me the creeps.</p></div><p>
Perhaps <a href="http://science.slashdot.org/story/09/07/16/1421255/Huge-Unidentified-Organic-Blob-Floating-Around-Alaska?art\_pos=28" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">this</a> [slashdot.org] is the result. (or something like it) *shiver*
</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>something about genetically modified bacteria designed to produce fuel , in the ocean gives me the creeps .
Perhaps this [ slashdot.org ] is the result .
( or something like it ) * shiver *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>something about genetically modified bacteria designed to produce fuel, in the ocean gives me the creeps.
Perhaps this [slashdot.org] is the result.
(or something like it) *shiver*

	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723237</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28725855</id>
	<title>Re:Welcome to our next ecological disaster</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247761980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So... does this mean that environmental groups will get pissed when each new generation of algae is created, tested, recognized as a unique species and wiped out? Do these even qualify to be covered under the Endangered Species Act?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So... does this mean that environmental groups will get pissed when each new generation of algae is created , tested , recognized as a unique species and wiped out ?
Do these even qualify to be covered under the Endangered Species Act ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So... does this mean that environmental groups will get pissed when each new generation of algae is created, tested, recognized as a unique species and wiped out?
Do these even qualify to be covered under the Endangered Species Act?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723441</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28726785</id>
	<title>Surface area</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247862180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The downside is the land area required for the algae ponds, followed by the fact that your output is determined by solar input. They are basically solar panels.</p><p>replacing the troughs with floating platforms on the other hand might remove the need for land and pumping seawater.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The downside is the land area required for the algae ponds , followed by the fact that your output is determined by solar input .
They are basically solar panels.replacing the troughs with floating platforms on the other hand might remove the need for land and pumping seawater .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The downside is the land area required for the algae ponds, followed by the fact that your output is determined by solar input.
They are basically solar panels.replacing the troughs with floating platforms on the other hand might remove the need for land and pumping seawater.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723395</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723897</id>
	<title>Re:Ok for a tech demonstration</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247744100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But less than 2,400 barrels of ethanol (~1,600 barrels of oil) is such a small drop in the bucket as to be laughable (The US consumes ~21M barrels a day!). Of course scale it up and feed it the output of some GW scale coal plants and you are starting to make at least some impact.</p></div><p>Yes but say 10,000 plants did the same. You'd be talking about 24 million barrels a year which may only be one day of oil use but that's still attractive for a wasted source of energy. Want a single solution? We obvious use a lot of sources now. Even "fossil fuels" are made of oil, coal and natural gas. People want one solution because it keeps things simple. The problem is then you depend on one source which is dangerous. I lived through the oil embargo and it wasn't fun. Better to have a 100 sources so loosing a few hardly causes a ripple. More sources also decentralizes things so corporate control is less of an issue. I've been a big proponent of using excess and over ripe fruits and high sugar vegitables for alcohol. Only a few million barrels a year? Yes it won't replace oil but it could be another. I know from experience there are millions of fruit trees on private property that are never harvested a year. If people simply harvest the fruit and turned it over to a recycling center it could mean millions of barrels a year. The whole point is there are vast sources of untapped energy out there. People just need to decide it's worth a little effort to make use of the micro sources.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But less than 2,400 barrels of ethanol ( ~ 1,600 barrels of oil ) is such a small drop in the bucket as to be laughable ( The US consumes ~ 21M barrels a day ! ) .
Of course scale it up and feed it the output of some GW scale coal plants and you are starting to make at least some impact.Yes but say 10,000 plants did the same .
You 'd be talking about 24 million barrels a year which may only be one day of oil use but that 's still attractive for a wasted source of energy .
Want a single solution ?
We obvious use a lot of sources now .
Even " fossil fuels " are made of oil , coal and natural gas .
People want one solution because it keeps things simple .
The problem is then you depend on one source which is dangerous .
I lived through the oil embargo and it was n't fun .
Better to have a 100 sources so loosing a few hardly causes a ripple .
More sources also decentralizes things so corporate control is less of an issue .
I 've been a big proponent of using excess and over ripe fruits and high sugar vegitables for alcohol .
Only a few million barrels a year ?
Yes it wo n't replace oil but it could be another .
I know from experience there are millions of fruit trees on private property that are never harvested a year .
If people simply harvest the fruit and turned it over to a recycling center it could mean millions of barrels a year .
The whole point is there are vast sources of untapped energy out there .
People just need to decide it 's worth a little effort to make use of the micro sources .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But less than 2,400 barrels of ethanol (~1,600 barrels of oil) is such a small drop in the bucket as to be laughable (The US consumes ~21M barrels a day!).
Of course scale it up and feed it the output of some GW scale coal plants and you are starting to make at least some impact.Yes but say 10,000 plants did the same.
You'd be talking about 24 million barrels a year which may only be one day of oil use but that's still attractive for a wasted source of energy.
Want a single solution?
We obvious use a lot of sources now.
Even "fossil fuels" are made of oil, coal and natural gas.
People want one solution because it keeps things simple.
The problem is then you depend on one source which is dangerous.
I lived through the oil embargo and it wasn't fun.
Better to have a 100 sources so loosing a few hardly causes a ripple.
More sources also decentralizes things so corporate control is less of an issue.
I've been a big proponent of using excess and over ripe fruits and high sugar vegitables for alcohol.
Only a few million barrels a year?
Yes it won't replace oil but it could be another.
I know from experience there are millions of fruit trees on private property that are never harvested a year.
If people simply harvest the fruit and turned it over to a recycling center it could mean millions of barrels a year.
The whole point is there are vast sources of untapped energy out there.
People just need to decide it's worth a little effort to make use of the micro sources.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723223</id>
	<title>Ok for a tech demonstration</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247740920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>But less than 2,400 barrels of ethanol (~1,600 barrels of oil) is such a small drop in the bucket as to be laughable (The US consumes ~21M barrels a day!). Of course scale it up and feed it the output of some GW scale coal plants and you are starting to make at least some impact.</htmltext>
<tokenext>But less than 2,400 barrels of ethanol ( ~ 1,600 barrels of oil ) is such a small drop in the bucket as to be laughable ( The US consumes ~ 21M barrels a day ! ) .
Of course scale it up and feed it the output of some GW scale coal plants and you are starting to make at least some impact .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But less than 2,400 barrels of ethanol (~1,600 barrels of oil) is such a small drop in the bucket as to be laughable (The US consumes ~21M barrels a day!).
Of course scale it up and feed it the output of some GW scale coal plants and you are starting to make at least some impact.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28726847</id>
	<title>Re:Ok for a tech demonstration</title>
	<author>mac1235</author>
	<datestamp>1247863020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And the factory is now carbon neutral.  (Minus energy and transport costs etc..)</htmltext>
<tokenext>And the factory is now carbon neutral .
( Minus energy and transport costs etc.. )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And the factory is now carbon neutral.
(Minus energy and transport costs etc..)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723453</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome to hear!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247742060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>I agree this type of stuff is the least worst choice, but something about genetically modified bacteria designed to produce fuel, in the ocean gives me the creeps.</i> <p>

It is producing alcohol. It is spending a part of its energy budget into producing alcohol, which is totally useless for reproduction and survival. Thus out in the wild it will be swamped out by the regular bacteria. Remember the currently bacteria living in the ocean have been fighting it out for some 3 billion years and they are as fine tuned to optimum as they can get. Any deviation from it is likely to fall at a suboptimal point in the fitness landscape. Any large deviation like producing alcohol is really a saltation. It will land it so far off the starting point in the fitness landscape it is likely to be much much lower than optimum.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree this type of stuff is the least worst choice , but something about genetically modified bacteria designed to produce fuel , in the ocean gives me the creeps .
It is producing alcohol .
It is spending a part of its energy budget into producing alcohol , which is totally useless for reproduction and survival .
Thus out in the wild it will be swamped out by the regular bacteria .
Remember the currently bacteria living in the ocean have been fighting it out for some 3 billion years and they are as fine tuned to optimum as they can get .
Any deviation from it is likely to fall at a suboptimal point in the fitness landscape .
Any large deviation like producing alcohol is really a saltation .
It will land it so far off the starting point in the fitness landscape it is likely to be much much lower than optimum .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree this type of stuff is the least worst choice, but something about genetically modified bacteria designed to produce fuel, in the ocean gives me the creeps.
It is producing alcohol.
It is spending a part of its energy budget into producing alcohol, which is totally useless for reproduction and survival.
Thus out in the wild it will be swamped out by the regular bacteria.
Remember the currently bacteria living in the ocean have been fighting it out for some 3 billion years and they are as fine tuned to optimum as they can get.
Any deviation from it is likely to fall at a suboptimal point in the fitness landscape.
Any large deviation like producing alcohol is really a saltation.
It will land it so far off the starting point in the fitness landscape it is likely to be much much lower than optimum.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723237</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723499</id>
	<title>Re:Ok for a tech demonstration</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247742240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>DOOD, it's a TEST plant. If it works and is profitable you'll see these plants (probably bigger ones) pop up all over.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>DOOD , it 's a TEST plant .
If it works and is profitable you 'll see these plants ( probably bigger ones ) pop up all over .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DOOD, it's a TEST plant.
If it works and is profitable you'll see these plants (probably bigger ones) pop up all over.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723817</id>
	<title>Re:Welcome to our next ecological disaster</title>
	<author>TeknoHog</author>
	<datestamp>1247743680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>10.1) So these two baby seals walk into a club...</htmltext>
<tokenext>10.1 ) So these two baby seals walk into a club.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>10.1) So these two baby seals walk into a club...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723441</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723663</id>
	<title>Re:Water/Coastal towns, sewage, animal feed?</title>
	<author>allawalla</author>
	<datestamp>1247742900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Cyanobacteria not algae, in most instances it isn't good for animals to eat...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Cyanobacteria not algae , in most instances it is n't good for animals to eat.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cyanobacteria not algae, in most instances it isn't good for animals to eat...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723265</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723807</id>
	<title>Re:Ok for a tech demonstration</title>
	<author>ArsonSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1247743620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>21M barrels a day?  That's ~14 Barrels for each man/woman/child in the country.  At $33 a barrel that's $168,000 a year per person, or about 4 times the national average household income.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>21M barrels a day ?
That 's ~ 14 Barrels for each man/woman/child in the country .
At $ 33 a barrel that 's $ 168,000 a year per person , or about 4 times the national average household income .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>21M barrels a day?
That's ~14 Barrels for each man/woman/child in the country.
At $33 a barrel that's $168,000 a year per person, or about 4 times the national average household income.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723265</id>
	<title>Water/Coastal towns, sewage, animal feed?</title>
	<author>wonkavader</author>
	<datestamp>1247741100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From TFA: "Every gallon of ethanol made creates one gallon of fresh water out of salt water."</p><p>This sounds interesting.  If this can be cheaply scaled up, it sounds like coastal towns all over the developing world would want to become gas providers for more inland towns -- it solves their water problem at the same time as it solves their cash flow problem.</p><p>I suspect there is a lot of distillation in the process as well, to purify the alcohol.  So this sort of system would couple well with hot equator sun and passive solar systems.</p><p>All this makes me wonder: how much human waste can you pour into the system to fertilize the algae?  Can this system be used to solve that problem, too?</p><p>And what do you do with the algae?  Once you have a full tank, you just want to maintain the status quo, but the algae will continue to reproduce.  Could the excess turn into an animal feed?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From TFA : " Every gallon of ethanol made creates one gallon of fresh water out of salt water .
" This sounds interesting .
If this can be cheaply scaled up , it sounds like coastal towns all over the developing world would want to become gas providers for more inland towns -- it solves their water problem at the same time as it solves their cash flow problem.I suspect there is a lot of distillation in the process as well , to purify the alcohol .
So this sort of system would couple well with hot equator sun and passive solar systems.All this makes me wonder : how much human waste can you pour into the system to fertilize the algae ?
Can this system be used to solve that problem , too ? And what do you do with the algae ?
Once you have a full tank , you just want to maintain the status quo , but the algae will continue to reproduce .
Could the excess turn into an animal feed ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From TFA: "Every gallon of ethanol made creates one gallon of fresh water out of salt water.
"This sounds interesting.
If this can be cheaply scaled up, it sounds like coastal towns all over the developing world would want to become gas providers for more inland towns -- it solves their water problem at the same time as it solves their cash flow problem.I suspect there is a lot of distillation in the process as well, to purify the alcohol.
So this sort of system would couple well with hot equator sun and passive solar systems.All this makes me wonder: how much human waste can you pour into the system to fertilize the algae?
Can this system be used to solve that problem, too?And what do you do with the algae?
Once you have a full tank, you just want to maintain the status quo, but the algae will continue to reproduce.
Could the excess turn into an animal feed?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723541</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome to hear!</title>
	<author>hey!</author>
	<datestamp>1247742420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Especially if it ends up you can eat the organic residue.   The omega 3 fatty acids that  make fish so healthy for you aren't made by the fish; they're made by algae and bioaccumulated up the food chain.</p><p>So have another of those yummy Soylent Green crackers...  They've got everything needed to build strong bodies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Especially if it ends up you can eat the organic residue .
The omega 3 fatty acids that make fish so healthy for you are n't made by the fish ; they 're made by algae and bioaccumulated up the food chain.So have another of those yummy Soylent Green crackers... They 've got everything needed to build strong bodies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Especially if it ends up you can eat the organic residue.
The omega 3 fatty acids that  make fish so healthy for you aren't made by the fish; they're made by algae and bioaccumulated up the food chain.So have another of those yummy Soylent Green crackers...  They've got everything needed to build strong bodies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723111</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724573</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome to hear!</title>
	<author>Michael Woodhams</author>
	<datestamp>1247748120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The algae aren't doing anything new, they are just doing much more of what they can already do. If this made them more able to survive in the wild than current algae, evolution would have produced them already. Instead, we have a bunch of algae which waste most of their energy pointlessly making and leaking ethanol - they won't survive long. Also, ethanol won't cause any harm unless in high concentrations. There are already lots of natural critters who produce ethanol, especially yeasts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The algae are n't doing anything new , they are just doing much more of what they can already do .
If this made them more able to survive in the wild than current algae , evolution would have produced them already .
Instead , we have a bunch of algae which waste most of their energy pointlessly making and leaking ethanol - they wo n't survive long .
Also , ethanol wo n't cause any harm unless in high concentrations .
There are already lots of natural critters who produce ethanol , especially yeasts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The algae aren't doing anything new, they are just doing much more of what they can already do.
If this made them more able to survive in the wild than current algae, evolution would have produced them already.
Instead, we have a bunch of algae which waste most of their energy pointlessly making and leaking ethanol - they won't survive long.
Also, ethanol won't cause any harm unless in high concentrations.
There are already lots of natural critters who produce ethanol, especially yeasts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723237</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723367</id>
	<title>Re:100,000 gallons = drop in the bucket (SSIA)</title>
	<author>Sooner Boomer</author>
	<datestamp>1247741700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>100,000 gallons = drop in the bucket (SSIA)</p></div> </blockquote><p>Yeah, I drink more than that in.....wait, is this my inner voice....</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>100,000 gallons = drop in the bucket ( SSIA ) Yeah , I drink more than that in.....wait , is this my inner voice... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>100,000 gallons = drop in the bucket (SSIA) Yeah, I drink more than that in.....wait, is this my inner voice....
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723245</id>
	<title>Pour me another glass</title>
	<author>idontgno</author>
	<datestamp>1247740980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>of that pondscum whiskey.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>of that pondscum whiskey .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>of that pondscum whiskey.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724447</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome to hear!</title>
	<author>ceoyoyo</author>
	<datestamp>1247747220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You should have read TFA.  Sometimes there are more details in it.</p><p>The salt water isn't pumped out.  The alcohol evaporates into the air at the top of the bioreactor and is skimmed off.  The bioreactor does produce fresh water as a "waste product" but presumably they seem rather optimistic about finding a better use for that than dumping it in the ocean.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You should have read TFA .
Sometimes there are more details in it.The salt water is n't pumped out .
The alcohol evaporates into the air at the top of the bioreactor and is skimmed off .
The bioreactor does produce fresh water as a " waste product " but presumably they seem rather optimistic about finding a better use for that than dumping it in the ocean .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You should have read TFA.
Sometimes there are more details in it.The salt water isn't pumped out.
The alcohol evaporates into the air at the top of the bioreactor and is skimmed off.
The bioreactor does produce fresh water as a "waste product" but presumably they seem rather optimistic about finding a better use for that than dumping it in the ocean.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723237</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28727927</id>
	<title>The numbers don't work</title>
	<author>Baldrson</author>
	<datestamp>1247835600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>TFA says 6000 gallons/acre/year of ethanol which translates to around $6000/acre/year assuming 0 costs.  OK, so how are they going to amortize an acre of photobioreactor on $6000/year?</htmltext>
<tokenext>TFA says 6000 gallons/acre/year of ethanol which translates to around $ 6000/acre/year assuming 0 costs .
OK , so how are they going to amortize an acre of photobioreactor on $ 6000/year ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>TFA says 6000 gallons/acre/year of ethanol which translates to around $6000/acre/year assuming 0 costs.
OK, so how are they going to amortize an acre of photobioreactor on $6000/year?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723147</id>
	<title>Concern.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247740560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is a bad, bad idea.</p><p>How long before it's noticed by the Invid???</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a bad , bad idea.How long before it 's noticed by the Invid ? ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a bad, bad idea.How long before it's noticed by the Invid??
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28727307</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome to hear!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247827560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well I agree with all your reasoning, I wouldn't be so cocky.  I find that people are good at using or finding unintended purposes for things, can we be so sure that mother nature won't be the same?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well I agree with all your reasoning , I would n't be so cocky .
I find that people are good at using or finding unintended purposes for things , can we be so sure that mother nature wo n't be the same ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well I agree with all your reasoning, I wouldn't be so cocky.
I find that people are good at using or finding unintended purposes for things, can we be so sure that mother nature won't be the same?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723453</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28726427</id>
	<title>Re:Proof of concept?</title>
	<author>TubeSteak</author>
	<datestamp>1247769480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The questions are:</p><p>1) Can it be done?</p><p>2) Can it be done cheaply enough?</p><p>After those two questions are answered with "yes", then scale is largely a matter of getting sufficient capital, and working out the mechanics.</p></div><p>Ethanol still has two crushing problems:<br>1. Anything over 10\% ethanol (E10) destroys the fuel systems of old(er) cars. There are <i>a lot</i> of old(er) cars.<br>2. E10 ruins most small motors (tractors, lawnmowers, weedwackers, etc) and is awful for marine applications.</p><p>You can pump out all the cheap ethanol you like, but until all those "legacy" engines are out of service, ethanol cannot reach its full potential.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The questions are : 1 ) Can it be done ? 2 ) Can it be done cheaply enough ? After those two questions are answered with " yes " , then scale is largely a matter of getting sufficient capital , and working out the mechanics.Ethanol still has two crushing problems : 1 .
Anything over 10 \ % ethanol ( E10 ) destroys the fuel systems of old ( er ) cars .
There are a lot of old ( er ) cars.2 .
E10 ruins most small motors ( tractors , lawnmowers , weedwackers , etc ) and is awful for marine applications.You can pump out all the cheap ethanol you like , but until all those " legacy " engines are out of service , ethanol can not reach its full potential .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The questions are:1) Can it be done?2) Can it be done cheaply enough?After those two questions are answered with "yes", then scale is largely a matter of getting sufficient capital, and working out the mechanics.Ethanol still has two crushing problems:1.
Anything over 10\% ethanol (E10) destroys the fuel systems of old(er) cars.
There are a lot of old(er) cars.2.
E10 ruins most small motors (tractors, lawnmowers, weedwackers, etc) and is awful for marine applications.You can pump out all the cheap ethanol you like, but until all those "legacy" engines are out of service, ethanol cannot reach its full potential.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723945</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723519</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome to hear!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247742360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>According to the science section of their website:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>5. Algenol only uses algae strains that do not produce human toxins. In addition, the specific algae cells used cannot live in the environment found outside their Capture TechnologyTM contained sealed bioreactor.</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>According to the science section of their website : 5 .
Algenol only uses algae strains that do not produce human toxins .
In addition , the specific algae cells used can not live in the environment found outside their Capture TechnologyTM contained sealed bioreactor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to the science section of their website:5.
Algenol only uses algae strains that do not produce human toxins.
In addition, the specific algae cells used cannot live in the environment found outside their Capture TechnologyTM contained sealed bioreactor.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723237</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723441</id>
	<title>Welcome to our next ecological disaster</title>
	<author>gestalt\_n\_pepper</author>
	<datestamp>1247742000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1) Dow makes magic algae.<br>2) Economic pressure forces Dow to make algae directly excrete ethanol in high concentrations (about 20\%).<br>3) Algae gets into environment<br>4) Algae kills almost anything near it.<br>5) Algae lives on rotting stuff it killed.<br>6) Water around algae becomes flammable, sparked by lightning. Fires ensue.<br>7) Worldwide, waterways and oceans become alcohol laden.<br>8) Dolphin's social life improves remarkably.<br>9) Whales start singing a *lot* more.<br>10) Seals start coming ashore, seeking bars when their algae supply runs out. Barfights ensue. The ACLU gets involved. Punching seals is declared a hate crime.<br>11) Growing algae becomes illegal. Everyone grows it anyway. California semi-legalizes "medicinal algae."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) Dow makes magic algae.2 ) Economic pressure forces Dow to make algae directly excrete ethanol in high concentrations ( about 20 \ % ) .3 ) Algae gets into environment4 ) Algae kills almost anything near it.5 ) Algae lives on rotting stuff it killed.6 ) Water around algae becomes flammable , sparked by lightning .
Fires ensue.7 ) Worldwide , waterways and oceans become alcohol laden.8 ) Dolphin 's social life improves remarkably.9 ) Whales start singing a * lot * more.10 ) Seals start coming ashore , seeking bars when their algae supply runs out .
Barfights ensue .
The ACLU gets involved .
Punching seals is declared a hate crime.11 ) Growing algae becomes illegal .
Everyone grows it anyway .
California semi-legalizes " medicinal algae .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1) Dow makes magic algae.2) Economic pressure forces Dow to make algae directly excrete ethanol in high concentrations (about 20\%).3) Algae gets into environment4) Algae kills almost anything near it.5) Algae lives on rotting stuff it killed.6) Water around algae becomes flammable, sparked by lightning.
Fires ensue.7) Worldwide, waterways and oceans become alcohol laden.8) Dolphin's social life improves remarkably.9) Whales start singing a *lot* more.10) Seals start coming ashore, seeking bars when their algae supply runs out.
Barfights ensue.
The ACLU gets involved.
Punching seals is declared a hate crime.11) Growing algae becomes illegal.
Everyone grows it anyway.
California semi-legalizes "medicinal algae.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724449</id>
	<title>Cyanobacteria aren't even close to algae.</title>
	<author>Colin Douglas Howell</author>
	<datestamp>1247747220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As a couple of other people have pointed out, these are <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyanobacteria" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">cyanobacteria</a> [wikipedia.org], not "algae".  Except for being microscopic and having photosynthesis, cyanobacteria are a long way from algae, although they used to be called "blue-green algae" before biologists figured out what they really were.  They're actually a type of bacteria and are a very ancient group, possibly as old as 3 billion years or more.  They are single-celled <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prokaryote" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">prokaryotes</a> [wikipedia.org] with a very simple cell structure which has no <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cell\_nucleus" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">nucleus</a> [wikipedia.org] and lacks significant <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organelle" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">organelles</a> [wikipedia.org].  <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algae" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Algae</a> [wikipedia.org], on the other hand, are <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eukaryote" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">eukaryotes</a> [wikipedia.org], which evolved much later; they have a much more complex cell with both a nucleus and organelles.  Among these organelles are <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chloroplast" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">chloroplasts</a> [wikipedia.org], which do the actual photosynthesis in algae cells, and in fact these chloroplasts may be descended from cyanobacteria which became <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endosymbiont" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">internal symbionts</a> [wikipedia.org] within eukaryotic cells.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a couple of other people have pointed out , these are cyanobacteria [ wikipedia.org ] , not " algae " .
Except for being microscopic and having photosynthesis , cyanobacteria are a long way from algae , although they used to be called " blue-green algae " before biologists figured out what they really were .
They 're actually a type of bacteria and are a very ancient group , possibly as old as 3 billion years or more .
They are single-celled prokaryotes [ wikipedia.org ] with a very simple cell structure which has no nucleus [ wikipedia.org ] and lacks significant organelles [ wikipedia.org ] .
Algae [ wikipedia.org ] , on the other hand , are eukaryotes [ wikipedia.org ] , which evolved much later ; they have a much more complex cell with both a nucleus and organelles .
Among these organelles are chloroplasts [ wikipedia.org ] , which do the actual photosynthesis in algae cells , and in fact these chloroplasts may be descended from cyanobacteria which became internal symbionts [ wikipedia.org ] within eukaryotic cells .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a couple of other people have pointed out, these are cyanobacteria [wikipedia.org], not "algae".
Except for being microscopic and having photosynthesis, cyanobacteria are a long way from algae, although they used to be called "blue-green algae" before biologists figured out what they really were.
They're actually a type of bacteria and are a very ancient group, possibly as old as 3 billion years or more.
They are single-celled prokaryotes [wikipedia.org] with a very simple cell structure which has no nucleus [wikipedia.org] and lacks significant organelles [wikipedia.org].
Algae [wikipedia.org], on the other hand, are eukaryotes [wikipedia.org], which evolved much later; they have a much more complex cell with both a nucleus and organelles.
Among these organelles are chloroplasts [wikipedia.org], which do the actual photosynthesis in algae cells, and in fact these chloroplasts may be descended from cyanobacteria which became internal symbionts [wikipedia.org] within eukaryotic cells.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28730975</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the downside?</title>
	<author>MrNiceguy\_KS</author>
	<datestamp>1247850180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't be so dismissive of bio-fuels.  Remember that the purpose of bio-fuel is to replace fossil fuels, and the CO2 that goes with burning them.  That advantage holds true here as well.  Yes, the carbon is released when the bio-fuels are burned.  But (CO2 from industrial process into atmosphere plus CO2 from fossil fuel into atmosphere) &gt; (CO2 from industrial process made into bio-fuel, then burned and released into atmosphere)  You aren't just moving around carbon production, you're also producing a lot less of it.  To take your CO2 shell game analogy, before, the shell game had a ball under 2 shells, now it's just under 1.</p><p>If you read the article, page 2 also mentions using the ethanol to replace fossil fuels in the production of plastics, which would be carbon-negative.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't be so dismissive of bio-fuels .
Remember that the purpose of bio-fuel is to replace fossil fuels , and the CO2 that goes with burning them .
That advantage holds true here as well .
Yes , the carbon is released when the bio-fuels are burned .
But ( CO2 from industrial process into atmosphere plus CO2 from fossil fuel into atmosphere ) &gt; ( CO2 from industrial process made into bio-fuel , then burned and released into atmosphere ) You are n't just moving around carbon production , you 're also producing a lot less of it .
To take your CO2 shell game analogy , before , the shell game had a ball under 2 shells , now it 's just under 1.If you read the article , page 2 also mentions using the ethanol to replace fossil fuels in the production of plastics , which would be carbon-negative .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't be so dismissive of bio-fuels.
Remember that the purpose of bio-fuel is to replace fossil fuels, and the CO2 that goes with burning them.
That advantage holds true here as well.
Yes, the carbon is released when the bio-fuels are burned.
But (CO2 from industrial process into atmosphere plus CO2 from fossil fuel into atmosphere) &gt; (CO2 from industrial process made into bio-fuel, then burned and released into atmosphere)  You aren't just moving around carbon production, you're also producing a lot less of it.
To take your CO2 shell game analogy, before, the shell game had a ball under 2 shells, now it's just under 1.If you read the article, page 2 also mentions using the ethanol to replace fossil fuels in the production of plastics, which would be carbon-negative.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28727791</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723945</id>
	<title>Proof of concept?</title>
	<author>mcrbids</author>
	<datestamp>1247744340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When considering new technology, scale is largely irrelevant. For a proof-of-concept, 2,400 barrels is not much more or less useful than 240 or 2.4 million, since even at the latter level, it's more an indication of how well funded the project is than it is an indication of the usefulness of the technology.</p><p>The questions are:</p><p>1) Can it be done?</p><p>2) Can it be done cheaply enough?</p><p>After those two questions are answered with "yes", then scale is largely a matter of getting sufficient capital, and working out the mechanics.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When considering new technology , scale is largely irrelevant .
For a proof-of-concept , 2,400 barrels is not much more or less useful than 240 or 2.4 million , since even at the latter level , it 's more an indication of how well funded the project is than it is an indication of the usefulness of the technology.The questions are : 1 ) Can it be done ? 2 ) Can it be done cheaply enough ? After those two questions are answered with " yes " , then scale is largely a matter of getting sufficient capital , and working out the mechanics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When considering new technology, scale is largely irrelevant.
For a proof-of-concept, 2,400 barrels is not much more or less useful than 240 or 2.4 million, since even at the latter level, it's more an indication of how well funded the project is than it is an indication of the usefulness of the technology.The questions are:1) Can it be done?2) Can it be done cheaply enough?After those two questions are answered with "yes", then scale is largely a matter of getting sufficient capital, and working out the mechanics.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28726417</id>
	<title>Re:Ok for a tech demonstration</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247769360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>U.S. Motor Gasoline Consumption<br>8,989,000 barrels/day (378 million gallons/day)</p><p><a href="http://www.eia.doe.gov/basics/quickoil.html" title="doe.gov" rel="nofollow">http://www.eia.doe.gov/basics/quickoil.html</a> [doe.gov]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>U.S. Motor Gasoline Consumption8,989,000 barrels/day ( 378 million gallons/day ) http : //www.eia.doe.gov/basics/quickoil.html [ doe.gov ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>U.S. Motor Gasoline Consumption8,989,000 barrels/day (378 million gallons/day)http://www.eia.doe.gov/basics/quickoil.html [doe.gov]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723389</id>
	<title>If this thing is really true ...</title>
	<author>140Mandak262Jamuna</author>
	<datestamp>1247741760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>... this could turn out to be the one that will allow us to tell the OPEC to go drink their own oil.</htmltext>
<tokenext>... this could turn out to be the one that will allow us to tell the OPEC to go drink their own oil .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... this could turn out to be the one that will allow us to tell the OPEC to go drink their own oil.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28729411</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome to hear!</title>
	<author>SQLGuru</author>
	<datestamp>1247843700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It is producing alcohol. It is spending a part of its energy budget into producing alcohol, which is totally useless for reproduction and survival. Thus out in the wild it will be swamped out by the regular bacteria. Remember the currently bacteria living in the ocean have been fighting it out for some 3 billion years and they are as fine tuned to optimum as they can get. Any deviation from it is likely to fall at a suboptimal point in the fitness landscape. Any large deviation like producing alcohol is really a saltation. It will land it so far off the starting point in the fitness landscape it is likely to be much much lower than optimum.</p></div><p>Or the alcohol produced will make the immediate area uninhabitable for the existing buggers.  This genetically modified version will start with a small area but reproduce and wipe out not only the competing bacteria, but all other marine life as they upset the balance that currently exists......these things not only change the scale biologically, but environmentally.  Who will win?  Who knows right now.  But both outcomes are possible.....and it only takes a couple of mutations for it to swing a different way.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is producing alcohol .
It is spending a part of its energy budget into producing alcohol , which is totally useless for reproduction and survival .
Thus out in the wild it will be swamped out by the regular bacteria .
Remember the currently bacteria living in the ocean have been fighting it out for some 3 billion years and they are as fine tuned to optimum as they can get .
Any deviation from it is likely to fall at a suboptimal point in the fitness landscape .
Any large deviation like producing alcohol is really a saltation .
It will land it so far off the starting point in the fitness landscape it is likely to be much much lower than optimum.Or the alcohol produced will make the immediate area uninhabitable for the existing buggers .
This genetically modified version will start with a small area but reproduce and wipe out not only the competing bacteria , but all other marine life as they upset the balance that currently exists......these things not only change the scale biologically , but environmentally .
Who will win ?
Who knows right now .
But both outcomes are possible.....and it only takes a couple of mutations for it to swing a different way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is producing alcohol.
It is spending a part of its energy budget into producing alcohol, which is totally useless for reproduction and survival.
Thus out in the wild it will be swamped out by the regular bacteria.
Remember the currently bacteria living in the ocean have been fighting it out for some 3 billion years and they are as fine tuned to optimum as they can get.
Any deviation from it is likely to fall at a suboptimal point in the fitness landscape.
Any large deviation like producing alcohol is really a saltation.
It will land it so far off the starting point in the fitness landscape it is likely to be much much lower than optimum.Or the alcohol produced will make the immediate area uninhabitable for the existing buggers.
This genetically modified version will start with a small area but reproduce and wipe out not only the competing bacteria, but all other marine life as they upset the balance that currently exists......these things not only change the scale biologically, but environmentally.
Who will win?
Who knows right now.
But both outcomes are possible.....and it only takes a couple of mutations for it to swing a different way.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723453</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724833</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome to hear!</title>
	<author>ground.zero.612</author>
	<datestamp>1247750220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dude, let's just hope that blob floating around Alaska doesn't get pissed and go on the offensive!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dude , let 's just hope that blob floating around Alaska does n't get pissed and go on the offensive !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dude, let's just hope that blob floating around Alaska doesn't get pissed and go on the offensive!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723111</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28727125</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome to hear!</title>
	<author>SharpFang</author>
	<datestamp>1247825340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>so you mean the wine yeast is an extinct species?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>so you mean the wine yeast is an extinct species ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so you mean the wine yeast is an extinct species?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723453</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723893</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the downside?</title>
	<author>ArsonSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1247744100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We have several variations of it.  We normally call it solar power though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We have several variations of it .
We normally call it solar power though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We have several variations of it.
We normally call it solar power though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723395</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723491</id>
	<title>I love how the environmentalist scream here</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247742240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They finally get what they claim they want.<br>Cleaning the environment while producing fuel and fresh water.<br>Yet from the reaction, you'd think someone is trying to destroy the planet.<br>If anyone has any doubt left that radical environmentalists are for crippling the economy rather than saving the planet, read the first post in the article.  The guy laments that this must not impede the phasing out of the Internal Combustion Engine...<br>So sad...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They finally get what they claim they want.Cleaning the environment while producing fuel and fresh water.Yet from the reaction , you 'd think someone is trying to destroy the planet.If anyone has any doubt left that radical environmentalists are for crippling the economy rather than saving the planet , read the first post in the article .
The guy laments that this must not impede the phasing out of the Internal Combustion Engine...So sad.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They finally get what they claim they want.Cleaning the environment while producing fuel and fresh water.Yet from the reaction, you'd think someone is trying to destroy the planet.If anyone has any doubt left that radical environmentalists are for crippling the economy rather than saving the planet, read the first post in the article.
The guy laments that this must not impede the phasing out of the Internal Combustion Engine...So sad...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28726219</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome to hear!</title>
	<author>afidel</author>
	<datestamp>1247766720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What if the alcohol offers a competitive advantage by keeping their colonies from being eaten by other organisms?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What if the alcohol offers a competitive advantage by keeping their colonies from being eaten by other organisms ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What if the alcohol offers a competitive advantage by keeping their colonies from being eaten by other organisms?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723453</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724781</id>
	<title>Re:Welcome to our next ecological disaster</title>
	<author>JackSpratts</author>
	<datestamp>1247749740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>yeh, who needs jesus when we have dow turning the seas into seagrams.</htmltext>
<tokenext>yeh , who needs jesus when we have dow turning the seas into seagrams .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yeh, who needs jesus when we have dow turning the seas into seagrams.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723441</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28729213</id>
	<title>Oooops!</title>
	<author>hesaigo999ca</author>
	<datestamp>1247842920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can just see it now, we create some sort of alge that somehow gets out of its containment unit, and gone unchecked<br>replicates itself until it has no more source of fuel, oxygen that is, to continue reproducing, cutting our own air supply<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....sounds like we might be needing to bottle air up just in case a sort of self inflicted disaster occurs....!  O\_O</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can just see it now , we create some sort of alge that somehow gets out of its containment unit , and gone uncheckedreplicates itself until it has no more source of fuel , oxygen that is , to continue reproducing , cutting our own air supply ....sounds like we might be needing to bottle air up just in case a sort of self inflicted disaster occurs.... !
O \ _O</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can just see it now, we create some sort of alge that somehow gets out of its containment unit, and gone uncheckedreplicates itself until it has no more source of fuel, oxygen that is, to continue reproducing, cutting our own air supply ....sounds like we might be needing to bottle air up just in case a sort of self inflicted disaster occurs....!
O\_O</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724535</id>
	<title>Algae + Trees = Profit</title>
	<author>Thail</author>
	<datestamp>1247747820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Combine this with those artificial trees that pull CO2 from the air.

Use Artificial Trees to gather CO2 from the air,
Use CO2 to feed Algae (along with salt water),
Use algae to create ethanol AND potable water,
use ethanol to create fuel,
burn fuel for transportation,
capture released CO2 using artificial trees

Charge for water and ethanol fuel
add a CO2 collection tax to car and fuel purchases

Profit ???</htmltext>
<tokenext>Combine this with those artificial trees that pull CO2 from the air .
Use Artificial Trees to gather CO2 from the air , Use CO2 to feed Algae ( along with salt water ) , Use algae to create ethanol AND potable water , use ethanol to create fuel , burn fuel for transportation , capture released CO2 using artificial trees Charge for water and ethanol fuel add a CO2 collection tax to car and fuel purchases Profit ? ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Combine this with those artificial trees that pull CO2 from the air.
Use Artificial Trees to gather CO2 from the air,
Use CO2 to feed Algae (along with salt water),
Use algae to create ethanol AND potable water,
use ethanol to create fuel,
burn fuel for transportation,
capture released CO2 using artificial trees

Charge for water and ethanol fuel
add a CO2 collection tax to car and fuel purchases

Profit ??
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28728469</id>
	<title>Re:Sources of Ethanol</title>
	<author>Sandbags</author>
	<datestamp>1247839560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>OK, a massive expensive facility that requires proximity to an ocean, and in one YEAR it can't produce even 20\% of what my town uses for fuel in 1 day.</p><p>Dow, please get your heads out of your asses and look at an actual viable technology:</p><p>dotyenergy.com.</p><p>- Sequestered CO2 + Wind Energy = FUEL  Propanol, methanol, ethanol, whatever hydrocarbon blend you want...</p><p>A 250MW facility running on an annual cost of about $90M will produce nearly 30M gallons of fuels and higher alcohols.  (300 TIMES what the algae farm claims to produce, and using less land to do it!).</p><p>This is NOT vaporware, RFTS processing to make fuels has been in use since WWII.  This is simply an expansion in scientific scope, efficiency, and balanced economics.  They can make fuel to compete with Oil at under $70/bbl.</p><p>VERY detailed data is available here:  <a href="http://dotyenergy.com/PDFs/WindFuels\_Sci\_Engr\_ppt.pdf" title="dotyenergy.com">http://dotyenergy.com/PDFs/WindFuels\_Sci\_Engr\_ppt.pdf</a> [dotyenergy.com]</p><p>If you want MORE details, you can purchase a hardcopy of theiur detailed design document for a whoping $45...</p><p>This is Real stuff folks, which is probably why you have not heard of it...</p><p>(I am not paid or compensated for my comments in any way).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>OK , a massive expensive facility that requires proximity to an ocean , and in one YEAR it ca n't produce even 20 \ % of what my town uses for fuel in 1 day.Dow , please get your heads out of your asses and look at an actual viable technology : dotyenergy.com.- Sequestered CO2 + Wind Energy = FUEL Propanol , methanol , ethanol , whatever hydrocarbon blend you want...A 250MW facility running on an annual cost of about $ 90M will produce nearly 30M gallons of fuels and higher alcohols .
( 300 TIMES what the algae farm claims to produce , and using less land to do it !
) .This is NOT vaporware , RFTS processing to make fuels has been in use since WWII .
This is simply an expansion in scientific scope , efficiency , and balanced economics .
They can make fuel to compete with Oil at under $ 70/bbl.VERY detailed data is available here : http : //dotyenergy.com/PDFs/WindFuels \ _Sci \ _Engr \ _ppt.pdf [ dotyenergy.com ] If you want MORE details , you can purchase a hardcopy of theiur detailed design document for a whoping $ 45...This is Real stuff folks , which is probably why you have not heard of it... ( I am not paid or compensated for my comments in any way ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OK, a massive expensive facility that requires proximity to an ocean, and in one YEAR it can't produce even 20\% of what my town uses for fuel in 1 day.Dow, please get your heads out of your asses and look at an actual viable technology:dotyenergy.com.- Sequestered CO2 + Wind Energy = FUEL  Propanol, methanol, ethanol, whatever hydrocarbon blend you want...A 250MW facility running on an annual cost of about $90M will produce nearly 30M gallons of fuels and higher alcohols.
(300 TIMES what the algae farm claims to produce, and using less land to do it!
).This is NOT vaporware, RFTS processing to make fuels has been in use since WWII.
This is simply an expansion in scientific scope, efficiency, and balanced economics.
They can make fuel to compete with Oil at under $70/bbl.VERY detailed data is available here:  http://dotyenergy.com/PDFs/WindFuels\_Sci\_Engr\_ppt.pdf [dotyenergy.com]If you want MORE details, you can purchase a hardcopy of theiur detailed design document for a whoping $45...This is Real stuff folks, which is probably why you have not heard of it...(I am not paid or compensated for my comments in any way).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723157</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28729385</id>
	<title>Arizona State University is also working on this</title>
	<author>bjdevil66</author>
	<datestamp>1247843640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Polytechnic campus of ASU in Mesa, AZ has <a href="http://www.abc15.com/content/weather/stories/story/Its-true-ASU-scientists-create-jet-fuel-out-of/9ymVVJOWiUq2FK6TjX-NtA.cspx" title="abc15.com">created jet fuel out of algae</a> [abc15.com]. That school has been focusing on many other solar technologies as well, since Arizona annually has an abundance of sunny days.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Polytechnic campus of ASU in Mesa , AZ has created jet fuel out of algae [ abc15.com ] .
That school has been focusing on many other solar technologies as well , since Arizona annually has an abundance of sunny days .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Polytechnic campus of ASU in Mesa, AZ has created jet fuel out of algae [abc15.com].
That school has been focusing on many other solar technologies as well, since Arizona annually has an abundance of sunny days.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724189</id>
	<title>read the article</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247745420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>read more.  talk less.  the article describes a pilot project.  if you read it, the article also mentions another project which aims to produce 1 billion gallons annually.</htmltext>
<tokenext>read more .
talk less .
the article describes a pilot project .
if you read it , the article also mentions another project which aims to produce 1 billion gallons annually .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>read more.
talk less.
the article describes a pilot project.
if you read it, the article also mentions another project which aims to produce 1 billion gallons annually.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724385</id>
	<title>Re:$1.25 a gallon?</title>
	<author>tsotha</author>
	<datestamp>1247746800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>$1.25 a gallon is about twice the spot price for methanol, and $1.25 isn't what they can do, it's what they hope they can do eventually.</p></div></blockquote><p>But remember they're using C02 as an input to the process.  If cap and trade goes through this would allow them to sell or avoid buying carbon credits for other processes.  I think C02 is a relatively common by-product in industrial chemistry.  $1.25 isn't too bad if the cost of one of the inputs is <i>negative</i>.

</p><p>Also, don't underestimate the value of a continuous process.  The big knock on batch processing isn't the cost of the press, but rather the complication (and cost) it adds to scaling the process.  It's the biggest reason we see all those little pilot projects that seem promising but never go anywhere.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>$ 1.25 a gallon is about twice the spot price for methanol , and $ 1.25 is n't what they can do , it 's what they hope they can do eventually.But remember they 're using C02 as an input to the process .
If cap and trade goes through this would allow them to sell or avoid buying carbon credits for other processes .
I think C02 is a relatively common by-product in industrial chemistry .
$ 1.25 is n't too bad if the cost of one of the inputs is negative .
Also , do n't underestimate the value of a continuous process .
The big knock on batch processing is n't the cost of the press , but rather the complication ( and cost ) it adds to scaling the process .
It 's the biggest reason we see all those little pilot projects that seem promising but never go anywhere .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>$1.25 a gallon is about twice the spot price for methanol, and $1.25 isn't what they can do, it's what they hope they can do eventually.But remember they're using C02 as an input to the process.
If cap and trade goes through this would allow them to sell or avoid buying carbon credits for other processes.
I think C02 is a relatively common by-product in industrial chemistry.
$1.25 isn't too bad if the cost of one of the inputs is negative.
Also, don't underestimate the value of a continuous process.
The big knock on batch processing isn't the cost of the press, but rather the complication (and cost) it adds to scaling the process.
It's the biggest reason we see all those little pilot projects that seem promising but never go anywhere.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723561</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome to hear!</title>
	<author>Marxist Hacker 42</author>
	<datestamp>1247742480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No need to pump the salt water out- ethanol has a lower boiling point, so you simply boil it out of the tank- leaving the salt water behind to grow more algae.  The ocean only is the initial input- from there on out, the tank produces ethanol until the algae dies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No need to pump the salt water out- ethanol has a lower boiling point , so you simply boil it out of the tank- leaving the salt water behind to grow more algae .
The ocean only is the initial input- from there on out , the tank produces ethanol until the algae dies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No need to pump the salt water out- ethanol has a lower boiling point, so you simply boil it out of the tank- leaving the salt water behind to grow more algae.
The ocean only is the initial input- from there on out, the tank produces ethanol until the algae dies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723237</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28727791</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the downside?</title>
	<author>SirGarlon</author>
	<datestamp>1247834280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>It sounds too good to be true.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>It is.  The CO2 from the coal-fired plant would not go away.  It would be converted into ethanol and then released back as CO2 when the ethanol was burned.</p><p>The reason some people are so excited about bio-fuels is they are supposedly "carbon neutral."  They take CO2 out of the atmosphere, then release it back when burned.  If one were to use CO2 from coal combustion instead, then the CO2 stored in the alcohol is coming out of the ground.  In other words, inserting algae into the coal -&gt; atmosphere chain does not change the carbon balance, only interrupts it.</p><p>It is possible that adding algae into the chain could make energy production more efficient (more joules of energy per ton of total CO2 emissions) and may still be worth doing.</p><p>My concern is that the coal plant owner would convince the general public (who by and large do not understand such basic scientific laws as conservation of mass) that their CO2 is a "green energy source" and therefore should not be taxed/capped as a greenhouse gas.  In other words, using coal exhaust to feed the algae is basically playing a shell game -- "which one has the CO2 under it now?"</p><p>The point to remember is that bio-fuels do not provide a net benefit to CO2 reduction.  Ever.  They're simply carbon neutral or approximately so.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It sounds too good to be true .
It is .
The CO2 from the coal-fired plant would not go away .
It would be converted into ethanol and then released back as CO2 when the ethanol was burned.The reason some people are so excited about bio-fuels is they are supposedly " carbon neutral .
" They take CO2 out of the atmosphere , then release it back when burned .
If one were to use CO2 from coal combustion instead , then the CO2 stored in the alcohol is coming out of the ground .
In other words , inserting algae into the coal - &gt; atmosphere chain does not change the carbon balance , only interrupts it.It is possible that adding algae into the chain could make energy production more efficient ( more joules of energy per ton of total CO2 emissions ) and may still be worth doing.My concern is that the coal plant owner would convince the general public ( who by and large do not understand such basic scientific laws as conservation of mass ) that their CO2 is a " green energy source " and therefore should not be taxed/capped as a greenhouse gas .
In other words , using coal exhaust to feed the algae is basically playing a shell game -- " which one has the CO2 under it now ?
" The point to remember is that bio-fuels do not provide a net benefit to CO2 reduction .
Ever. They 're simply carbon neutral or approximately so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It sounds too good to be true.
It is.
The CO2 from the coal-fired plant would not go away.
It would be converted into ethanol and then released back as CO2 when the ethanol was burned.The reason some people are so excited about bio-fuels is they are supposedly "carbon neutral.
"  They take CO2 out of the atmosphere, then release it back when burned.
If one were to use CO2 from coal combustion instead, then the CO2 stored in the alcohol is coming out of the ground.
In other words, inserting algae into the coal -&gt; atmosphere chain does not change the carbon balance, only interrupts it.It is possible that adding algae into the chain could make energy production more efficient (more joules of energy per ton of total CO2 emissions) and may still be worth doing.My concern is that the coal plant owner would convince the general public (who by and large do not understand such basic scientific laws as conservation of mass) that their CO2 is a "green energy source" and therefore should not be taxed/capped as a greenhouse gas.
In other words, using coal exhaust to feed the algae is basically playing a shell game -- "which one has the CO2 under it now?
"The point to remember is that bio-fuels do not provide a net benefit to CO2 reduction.
Ever.  They're simply carbon neutral or approximately so.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723395</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28725891</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the downside?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247762460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"Greenhouse gas reduction"
<br> <br>
I doubt it...
<br> <br>
Before: Coal - Power Plant - CO2 in atmosphere.
<br>
After:  Coal - Power Plant - CO2 - Algae - Fuel - Combustion - CO2 in atmosphere.</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Greenhouse gas reduction " I doubt it.. . Before : Coal - Power Plant - CO2 in atmosphere .
After : Coal - Power Plant - CO2 - Algae - Fuel - Combustion - CO2 in atmosphere .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Greenhouse gas reduction"
 
I doubt it...
 
Before: Coal - Power Plant - CO2 in atmosphere.
After:  Coal - Power Plant - CO2 - Algae - Fuel - Combustion - CO2 in atmosphere.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723395</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723219</id>
	<title>100,000 gallons = drop in the bucket (SSIA)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247740860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>100,000 gallons = drop in the bucket (SSIA)
<p>
Note, the only reason I repeat myself is that I get this message when I try to leave out the body:
"Cat got your tongue? (something important seems to be missing from your comment<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... like the body or the subject!)"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>100,000 gallons = drop in the bucket ( SSIA ) Note , the only reason I repeat myself is that I get this message when I try to leave out the body : " Cat got your tongue ?
( something important seems to be missing from your comment ... like the body or the subject !
) "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>100,000 gallons = drop in the bucket (SSIA)

Note, the only reason I repeat myself is that I get this message when I try to leave out the body:
"Cat got your tongue?
(something important seems to be missing from your comment ... like the body or the subject!
)"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724009</id>
	<title>gene swapping</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247744700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Everywhere we look, we see single-celled organisms swapping genes.  I'm just sayin'.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Everywhere we look , we see single-celled organisms swapping genes .
I 'm just sayin' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everywhere we look, we see single-celled organisms swapping genes.
I'm just sayin'.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723519</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723111</id>
	<title>Awesome to hear!</title>
	<author>electrosoccertux</author>
	<datestamp>1247740440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lets just hope the corn lobby doesn't catch wind of this...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Lets just hope the corn lobby does n't catch wind of this.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lets just hope the corn lobby doesn't catch wind of this...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724215</id>
	<title>from a 24 acre demonstration plant</title>
	<author>CanadianRealist</author>
	<datestamp>1247745540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That 100,000 gallons is from a 24 acre demonstration plant.<br>Sounds like a bit more than a drop in the bucket when you consider that fact.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 100,000 gallons is from a 24 acre demonstration plant.Sounds like a bit more than a drop in the bucket when you consider that fact .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That 100,000 gallons is from a 24 acre demonstration plant.Sounds like a bit more than a drop in the bucket when you consider that fact.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723129</id>
	<title>This is Going to be Big</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247740500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is a great example of human ingenuity and self-directed evolution.</p><p>As peak oil approaches and passes us by, these fuel farming methods are going to have to take their place.</p><p>All the people hoping for a car-less future can kiss my ass. We may run out of oil, but we will never run out fuel.</p><p>I'm going to drive my SUV in circles to celebrate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a great example of human ingenuity and self-directed evolution.As peak oil approaches and passes us by , these fuel farming methods are going to have to take their place.All the people hoping for a car-less future can kiss my ass .
We may run out of oil , but we will never run out fuel.I 'm going to drive my SUV in circles to celebrate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a great example of human ingenuity and self-directed evolution.As peak oil approaches and passes us by, these fuel farming methods are going to have to take their place.All the people hoping for a car-less future can kiss my ass.
We may run out of oil, but we will never run out fuel.I'm going to drive my SUV in circles to celebrate.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28732391</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome to hear!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247856300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>My first question after reading TFS is where these little buggers go after the salt water is pumped in. Presumably, the salt water is pumped out at some point in time.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... Oh, don't worry, I'm sure they filter them out after returning them to the ocean - yeah somehow I highly doubt it.</p></div><p>http://www.adn.com/2835/story/864687.html</p><p>I wouldn't be surprized to see it start an arguement with people, and not let them beam back to their spaceship.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>My first question after reading TFS is where these little buggers go after the salt water is pumped in .
Presumably , the salt water is pumped out at some point in time .
... Oh , do n't worry , I 'm sure they filter them out after returning them to the ocean - yeah somehow I highly doubt it.http : //www.adn.com/2835/story/864687.htmlI would n't be surprized to see it start an arguement with people , and not let them beam back to their spaceship .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My first question after reading TFS is where these little buggers go after the salt water is pumped in.
Presumably, the salt water is pumped out at some point in time.
... Oh, don't worry, I'm sure they filter them out after returning them to the ocean - yeah somehow I highly doubt it.http://www.adn.com/2835/story/864687.htmlI wouldn't be surprized to see it start an arguement with people, and not let them beam back to their spaceship.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723237</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28733711</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the downside?</title>
	<author>Sinical</author>
	<datestamp>1247862480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, that's not quite true.  If we could replace overseas oil with this product, then we would reduce carbon emissions by however much foreign oil this new fuel supplants.  It would also render us safer in the sense that we have assloads of coal here in the United States.  It is true that it would not be as nice as using some other source of CO2 and at the same time closing down coal powerplants.  But note that the two are not mutually exclusive: if we have some other source of carbon dioxide (as apparently this pilot project does), then the coal plants could still go.</p><p>I agree that this process could never be a net carbon sink.  Maybe we could convince/engineer the algae to grow little carbon skeletons, and then we could bury them in tiny coffins when they die.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , that 's not quite true .
If we could replace overseas oil with this product , then we would reduce carbon emissions by however much foreign oil this new fuel supplants .
It would also render us safer in the sense that we have assloads of coal here in the United States .
It is true that it would not be as nice as using some other source of CO2 and at the same time closing down coal powerplants .
But note that the two are not mutually exclusive : if we have some other source of carbon dioxide ( as apparently this pilot project does ) , then the coal plants could still go.I agree that this process could never be a net carbon sink .
Maybe we could convince/engineer the algae to grow little carbon skeletons , and then we could bury them in tiny coffins when they die .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, that's not quite true.
If we could replace overseas oil with this product, then we would reduce carbon emissions by however much foreign oil this new fuel supplants.
It would also render us safer in the sense that we have assloads of coal here in the United States.
It is true that it would not be as nice as using some other source of CO2 and at the same time closing down coal powerplants.
But note that the two are not mutually exclusive: if we have some other source of carbon dioxide (as apparently this pilot project does), then the coal plants could still go.I agree that this process could never be a net carbon sink.
Maybe we could convince/engineer the algae to grow little carbon skeletons, and then we could bury them in tiny coffins when they die.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28727791</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723331</id>
	<title>$1.25 a gallon?</title>
	<author>AnotherBlackHat</author>
	<datestamp>1247741520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>... using a process that doesn't require harvesting to collect the fuel.</p> </div><p>Most of the reasonable plans I've read involve growing algae in ponds, sucking it up, and running it through a press (rather like an olive press)<br>The expensive part of the operation isn't the press - it's the pond.<br>As I recall, NREL recommended holes in the ground lined with plastic, and the pond was still the most expensive part.</p><p>$1.25 a gallon is about twice the spot price for methanol, and $1.25 isn't what they can do, it's what they hope they can do eventually.</p><p>Color me unimpressed.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>... using a process that does n't require harvesting to collect the fuel .
Most of the reasonable plans I 've read involve growing algae in ponds , sucking it up , and running it through a press ( rather like an olive press ) The expensive part of the operation is n't the press - it 's the pond.As I recall , NREL recommended holes in the ground lined with plastic , and the pond was still the most expensive part. $ 1.25 a gallon is about twice the spot price for methanol , and $ 1.25 is n't what they can do , it 's what they hope they can do eventually.Color me unimpressed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ... using a process that doesn't require harvesting to collect the fuel.
Most of the reasonable plans I've read involve growing algae in ponds, sucking it up, and running it through a press (rather like an olive press)The expensive part of the operation isn't the press - it's the pond.As I recall, NREL recommended holes in the ground lined with plastic, and the pond was still the most expensive part.$1.25 a gallon is about twice the spot price for methanol, and $1.25 isn't what they can do, it's what they hope they can do eventually.Color me unimpressed.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28732575</id>
	<title>So the stuff is toxic, how dangerous is it?</title>
	<author>proto</author>
	<datestamp>1247857140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>   Suppose there is a spill within the production plant, can it be cleaned up?  Can a spill harm the environment for 100's of years?  No one else is asking the questions, please help me understand with some reasonable answers. Thanks in advance.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Suppose there is a spill within the production plant , can it be cleaned up ?
Can a spill harm the environment for 100 's of years ?
No one else is asking the questions , please help me understand with some reasonable answers .
Thanks in advance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>   Suppose there is a spill within the production plant, can it be cleaned up?
Can a spill harm the environment for 100's of years?
No one else is asking the questions, please help me understand with some reasonable answers.
Thanks in advance.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724449</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28725685</id>
	<title>Re:Ok for a tech demonstration</title>
	<author>Hubbell</author>
	<datestamp>1247760120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Fuck coal plants.  We need to invest heavily in nuclear and educate the public on the fact that they're pretty much the safest form of largescale electricity production we have, and start building shittons of fast breeder reactors as they can consume up to, I believe, 90\% of their waste as fuel and what's eventually left over is only radioactive for like 5-10 years, and even then the level of radiation it emits is laughable.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Fuck coal plants .
We need to invest heavily in nuclear and educate the public on the fact that they 're pretty much the safest form of largescale electricity production we have , and start building shittons of fast breeder reactors as they can consume up to , I believe , 90 \ % of their waste as fuel and what 's eventually left over is only radioactive for like 5-10 years , and even then the level of radiation it emits is laughable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fuck coal plants.
We need to invest heavily in nuclear and educate the public on the fact that they're pretty much the safest form of largescale electricity production we have, and start building shittons of fast breeder reactors as they can consume up to, I believe, 90\% of their waste as fuel and what's eventually left over is only radioactive for like 5-10 years, and even then the level of radiation it emits is laughable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723223</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28725533
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723453
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723237
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723111
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724189
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723219
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28730975
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28727791
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723395
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723631
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723265
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724255
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723157
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28727125
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723453
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723237
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723111
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723561
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723237
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723111
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28732391
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723237
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723111
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724215
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723219
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28725855
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723441
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28729411
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723453
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723237
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723111
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28728129
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723441
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724267
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723219
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28732575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724449
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723817
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723441
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28726847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723223
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28733711
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28727791
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723395
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28729397
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723111
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723535
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723237
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723111
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28725891
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723395
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723893
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723395
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28730781
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723237
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723111
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28726427
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723945
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723223
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723541
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723111
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723111
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28734359
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28727791
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723395
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724333
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723157
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28725419
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723223
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723663
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723265
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28727145
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723453
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723237
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723111
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723447
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723237
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723111
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724009
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723237
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723111
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724573
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723237
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723111
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723367
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723219
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724447
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723237
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723111
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724781
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723441
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28728677
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723395
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28726355
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723157
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724385
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723897
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723223
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28726219
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723453
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723237
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723111
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28726417
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723223
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723223
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28728469
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723157
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724247
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723223
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28726785
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723395
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28725685
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723223
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28727307
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723453
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723237
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723111
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724357
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723453
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723237
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723111
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28730453
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723441
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723807
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723223
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_16_2027230_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28731309
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723265
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_16_2027230.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723441
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28725855
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724781
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28730453
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28728129
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723817
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_16_2027230.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724449
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28732575
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_16_2027230.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723265
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723631
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723663
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28731309
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_16_2027230.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723331
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724385
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_16_2027230.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723389
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_16_2027230.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723111
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723541
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724833
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28729397
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723237
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723535
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723519
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724009
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723561
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723453
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28729411
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724357
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28726219
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28727307
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28727145
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28727125
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28725533
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28732391
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724573
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723447
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724447
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28730781
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_16_2027230.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723223
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723499
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723807
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723897
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28726417
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723945
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28726427
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28726847
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28725419
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724247
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28725685
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_16_2027230.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723515
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_16_2027230.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723277
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_16_2027230.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28729233
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_16_2027230.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723147
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_16_2027230.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723219
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723367
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724267
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724189
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724215
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_16_2027230.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723395
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28725891
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723893
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28726785
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28728677
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28727791
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28733711
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28730975
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28734359
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_16_2027230.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28723157
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28726355
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724333
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28724255
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_16_2027230.28728469
</commentlist>
</conversation>
