Managing director Andrew Lawson says testing at James Cook University in Townsville suggests for every two tonnes of carbon captured, the MBD technology can produce almost 1 tonne of algae, of which one-third can be made into oil products and two-thirds into meal. With meal sales about $400/tonne (rival soymeal product sells at about $780/tonne) and oil selling at $800/tonne, that equates to about $570 of revenue from each tonne of algae, or more than $250 for each tonne of CO2 captured.

The article touches upon the “competition” between geosequestration and algae based carbon capture technologies:

But Lawson is frustrated that the federal government’s carbon pollution reduction scheme only recognises and supports geosequestration. Why seek to bury it at massive cost and with unproven technology, he asks, when it can be recycled and used to generate a new earnings stream?

To illustrate the point, he says a privately funded, $1.2 billion facility could capture half of Loy Yang’s carbon emissions and generate $740m of meal income a year and $660m of oil income, as well as carbon credits of about $225m, while using just 10MW of energy. It also recycles water.

A carbon capture and storage facility is at least a decade away, would require a government investment of more than $5 billion, require 300MW of power a year and only generate income from carbon credits. The difference in value creation over 20 years is $26.8bn for the MBD technology and minus $2.6bn from CCS.

The information provided in the article about MBD Energy makes it quite interesting to follow going forward:

MBD Energy is in the process of raising about $10m from three cornerstone investors, including an international energy company and a local carbon fund.