[HN Gopher] Computer powered by colony of blue-green algae has r...
___________________________________________________________________
Computer powered by colony of blue-green algae has run for six
months
Author : aq3cn
Score : 133 points
Date : 2022-05-14 04:42 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.newscientist.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.newscientist.com)
| wwilim wrote:
| Now that's what I call a blue-green deployment
| LoveMortuus wrote:
| > The computer ran in cycles of 45 minutes of calculating sums of
| consecutive integers to simulate a computational workload, which
| required 0.3 microwatts of power, and 15 minutes of standby,
| which required 0.24 microwatts. The computer itself measured the
| current output from the device and this data was stored in the
| cloud for researchers to analyse.
|
| > Christopher Howe at the University of Cambridge and his
| colleagues built a small enclosure about the size of an AA
| battery out of aluminium and clear plastic.
|
| That's REALLY not a lot of power, which of course is reasonable,
| but I do wonder how far can it scale, can it reach any generally
| usable.
|
| Let's take a very conservative estimate of watt-hours of an AA
| battery of 2 Wh. The computer used in the paper could run for
| 2,000,000 uWh / 0.3 uW = ~6,666,666h.
|
| Let's convert to a more human friendly numbers: 6,666,666h / 24h
| = ~277,777 days. 277,777 days / 365 days = ~761 years.
|
| I probably calculated all of this incorrectly, but I still have a
| feeling that blue-green algae might not be very scalable... :/
| aliswe wrote:
| Agreed that it's not a lot, but it was also very small.
| hutzlibu wrote:
| "blue-green algae might not be very scalable..."
|
| Actually, the idea is, that they are very scalable, because to
| make more solar panels you have to manufacture more panels.
|
| To make more algae(and get more power), you just let it grow.
|
| So you still have to build more sun exposed tanks but this is
| very low tech, compared to cleanroom solar panel manufacturing.
| What is missing is probably a breakthrough in genetic modified
| improved efficeny, which is currently indeed very low (way
| lower than solar panels per area)
| ineedasername wrote:
| That's only scalable if the material & labor costs to build
| and maintain the tanks is within a certain margin.
|
| How many m^2 of algae is required to equal a m^2 of solar?
| From there you could calculate relative costs, given
| reasonable assumptions of lowered tank/algae costs as the
| tech matured.
| hutzlibu wrote:
| "How many m^2 of algae is required to equal a m^2 of
| solar?"
|
| Some years ago, the efficency was at around 1 % vs. 20%
| with solar panels, meaning you would need 20x the space,
| meaning only dessert areas and big scale production worth
| it. And since no one did it big scale yet, means it is
| economically not worth it yet.
|
| But the cost of further algae itself are zero, which makes
| the idea attractive in theory. Like I said, there is a
| breakthrough required in efficency, or some cheap big scale
| production/deployment system.
| ineedasername wrote:
| Or it might just need an applications where panels aren't
| viable but algae is. Not sure what that would be, but I
| also don't consider myself a visionary. Maybe a high dust
| area where maintenance isn't practical for panels?
| marcosdumay wrote:
| Hum... A large share of the solar costs are on support
| and installation. Those are proportional to the area, and
| are even higher (by area) for algae, because algae
| requires some water, and water is heavy.
|
| So, if they need 20x the area, just their support and
| installation will already cost some 5x more than a full
| solar plant.
| wedn3sday wrote:
| Seems like floating applications might works as well, a
| large raft of connected plastic bladders on a reservoir
| might work. Reduce water loss due to evaporation by
| decreasing light hitting the reservoir at the same time
| as generating power.
| 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
| I had a dream that some super-algae leaked out of a lab and
| colonized the oceans killing nearly all marine life.
| hutzlibu wrote:
| The super algea we are looking for here, would likely have
| no chance in the wild anymore, because to optimize some
| desired traits (thriving in a protected, stable
| environment) usually means giving up on other traits, which
| will force them down when they have competition. (same
| argument applies to GMO plants)
| etiam wrote:
| Are you sure your memory isn't just a bit hazy from last
| time that happened? I think there are credible reasons to
| believe the lab leak never happened, but anyone could be
| forgiven for losing some details in two and a half billion
| years.
| ars wrote:
| The energy embodied in the metal used to make their housing
| is more than the entire possible energy they could make in
| any reasonable timeframe.
|
| So no, this isn't scalable.
|
| On top of that despite them saying the anode was not
| corrected, it's almost certain the algae aren't making any
| electricity at all, it's all coming from the cathode and
| anode oxidizing.
|
| It's easy enough to tell - just let them die and let's see if
| there is a different in energy output. I can almost guarantee
| there will not be any difference.
| phyalow wrote:
| I remember running a calculator via a potato battery when I was
| much younger.
| withinboredom wrote:
| I find it funny that a mobile was listed as "low power devices."
| Phones these days consume quite a bit of electricity, unless they
| are referring to old-style flip phones, which might use quite a
| bit less power.
| bin_bash wrote:
| What like 10w? That's nothing compared to almost any other
| application of electricity.
| maccard wrote:
| What's your comparison to there? 10w is a reasonable amount
| of power and you can do lots with it - my M1 Mac can browse
| the internet on 10w of power.
| bin_bash wrote:
| It's a reasonable amount for computing but not much else:
| heating, cooling, cooking, refrigeration, washing machine.
| Those all need vastly more electricity.
|
| About the only other household application of electricity I
| can think of that would use around 10w is lighting and even
| with LEDs it isn't much. Probably enough for a single room.
|
| My point is if mobile phones _aren 't_ considered "low
| power", then what would be?
| stkdump wrote:
| A clock maybe
| dahart wrote:
| The context clearly was computing, and not cooking,
| right? It's not surprising that the term "low power" is
| relative and thus overloaded. But if you bring cooking
| ovens into a conversation about computers, then a beefy
| desktop with two GPUs burning hot would be considered low
| power.
|
| I don't know that there's a standard definition, but in
| electronics I think it's most common for "low power
| devices" to be referring to sub-watt power levels.
| There's regular low power like Arduino, or ultra low
| power like in this article that consume at most
| milliwatts or microwatts.
| bin_bash wrote:
| It is about general electricity applications and not
| limited to computing. The article states:
|
| > "It's not entirely straightforward," he says. "So
| putting one on your roof isn't going to provide the power
| supply for your house at this stage. There's quite a bit
| more to do on that front. But [it could work] in rural
| areas of low and middle income countries, for example, in
| applications where a small amount of power might be very
| useful, such as environmental sensors or charging a
| mobile phone."
| nobodyandproud wrote:
| That's a disclaimer, scoping out certain applications per
| the research and qualified by "There's quite a bit more
| to do on that front."
|
| I don't it's wrong to think about the general
| applications but the title and research had a very narrow
| focus.
| bin_bash wrote:
| Agreed, nobody thinks you could run a dishwasher on this
| technology. My point is the only place where the article
| labeled mobile phones as "low power" was in this
| disclaimer to contrast it with other household
| appliances.
| nobodyandproud wrote:
| Fair enough.
|
| It's also easy to miss that this was with a "AA" size
| container, and not the size of a pail or a dot battery.
| kderbyma wrote:
| brilliant. lets use this with skyscraper design to build in
| aquaponics into the sides of the buildings and get food
| production, power generation, and local garden life. and everyone
| can look out into a garden Oasis with algae generating some of
| the power back into the system.
| mirceal wrote:
| Now, that's what I call a blue green deployment... of algae.
| andai wrote:
| Since the algae themselves appear to be producing the
| electricity, does that mean they are electrically charged and
| could be sorted into groups of more/less efficient algae? ie.
| using artificial selection to select for electrical output.
| mbil wrote:
| Riffing on this idea but with no real understanding of the
| mechanism: could crispr be used to extract the "produces
| electricity" gene and then put that into bigger organisms?
| mrcartmeneses wrote:
| Only if by "electricity producing gene" you mean "is a
| photosynthesising algae gene"
| Eric_WVGG wrote:
| my first thought before reading the article was, "are we even
| talking about an electric computer here?"
|
| There are all sorts... some MIT wonks built one that plays tik
| tak toe that's made of tinker-toys and powered by a crank... in
| Neal Stephenson's _Cryptonomicon_ , a computer built from a
| church pipe organ is used to decrypt third reich punch cars...
| all quite feasible.
|
| But yeah, this is algae-for-electricity... pretty cool
| regardless, but it does make me wonder if some sort of bio-
| abacus could be possible
| phtrivier wrote:
| Stupid question : do the bacteria manage the create their organic
| mass entirely from air + sunlight, or does the "container" need a
| special substrate / soil / etc... ? How fast would that "deplete"
| relative to the metals in the anode / cathode ?
|
| Also, how much does it "capture" carbon as part of the
| photosynthesis ?
| elsherbini wrote:
| Here are a bunch of different media people use to grow
| cyanobacteria:
|
| https://www-cyanosite.bio.purdue.edu/media/table/media.html
|
| Mostly they need nitrogen, phosphate, and sulfur to make
| protein and nucleic acids, and trace metals,ions, and some
| vitamins to use as cofactors for enzymes. In the wild, the
| limiting nutrient for cyanobacteria is often iron or nitrogen.
|
| They don't need an added carbon source in their media since
| they get to eat dissolved CO2 from the air. Every carbon atom
| in newly synthesized molecules comes from CO2, and there are
| (very roughly) 10^10 carbon atoms per bacterial cell.
| http://book.bionumbers.org/what-is-the-elemental-composition...
| . So if you know the growth rate you can estimate the carbon
| fixation rate.
| ascar wrote:
| > In the wild, the limiting nutrient for cyanobacteria is
| often iron or nitrogen.
|
| How can nitrogen be a limiting factor if ~78% of air is
| nitrogen? I'm assuming they also take the CO2 out of the air,
| which just makes up 0.04%.
| hn_throwaway_99 wrote:
| Nitrogen is often the limiting factor for ALL plant growth,
| which is why it's the primary component of fertilizer.
|
| Nitrogen in air is not normally available to organisms. The
| triple bond between the 2 nitrogen atoms is very strong and
| takes a good deal of energy to break. Some bacteria can do
| this, and legumes famously have evolved to house bacteria
| capable of fixing nitrogen in their roots.
|
| The main way we get nitrogen to agricultural plants today
| is by the industrial production of ammonia, which takes
| enormous amounts of energy and lots of fossil fuels as
| presently implemented.
| elsherbini wrote:
| Some cyanobacteria can take up nitrogen from the air (well,
| dissolved inorganic nitrogen), but many can only use
| organic nitrogen, like N03 or NH4. Those can be limiting in
| the ocean because lots of life wants to grab it up.
|
| Taking up inorganic nitrogen is called nitrogen fixation
| and takes a bunch of machinery and energy. Also, oxygen
| inhibits the process, so for photosynthetic bacteria a
| bunch of extra steps have to be taken to compartmentalize
| photosynthesis and nitrogen fixation. So not all
| cyanobacteria can do it, and even the ones who are able to
| will prefer to take up organic nitrogen if available, and
| they grow slower when they have to use N2.
| couchand wrote:
| Not the GP and I do not have relevant scientific expertise,
| but my memory from beer is that CO2 stays dissolved longer
| than N2? Are they underwater?
| hbates wrote:
| The liquid in the container would contain medium that contains
| chemicals that the microalgae need. Heres a common medium
| recipe BG-11 https://utex.org/products/bg-11-medium
|
| Carbon is captured through photosynthesis and is stored as
| biomass. But when the microalgae dies the carbon is released
| again. So to truely store carbon the microalgae needs to be
| cultivated and buried / contained.
| sigmar wrote:
| anyone have the pdf? not seeing
| https://doi.org/10.1039/D2EE00233G on scihub and it costs PS42.50
| mleonhard wrote:
| Here is a better and non-paywalled article from the researcher's
| university: https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/scientists-
| create-reliab...
|
| The paper: https://doi.org/10.1039/D2EE00233G
| hamiltonians wrote:
| 3 green, 1 blue
| sandworm101 wrote:
| Cool, but can this tech ever approach the effectiveness of a
| smiliarly-sized solar panel? Sure, a solar panel does not
| directly absorb CO2, but at this point wouldnt a panel generate
| literally a thousand times as much power without all the
| maintenace issues?
| kaichanvong wrote:
| topics could be errr nicer linked perhaps, source being Energy
| & Environmental Science, NS website tagged: BACTERIA, COMPUTER,
| ALGAE ... is this the wrong part of the web for you now?
| sp332 wrote:
| Yeah, but solar panels are expensive and usually require
| international freight shipping. This kind of thing could be
| made locally and you only need to ship a small inoculation of
| the algae.
| thinkyfish wrote:
| While I doubt this will be used for main-line power generation,
| it might be useful for low cost, battery free monitoring for
| algae farms.
| samstave wrote:
| It would be really interesting to see if "light pipes" ('fiber'
| optics that can funnel sunlight to interior spaces.
|
| So stack a bunch of these vertically, but have a light-pipe to
| each little window to the algea to feed them photons.
|
| Trickle charge batteries?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-05-15 23:01 UTC)