Cheap Gas From Coal

[LJ-TJ]

JIM DOUGLAS / WFAA-TV

Posted on February 19, 2010 at 4:15 PM

Updated Saturday, Feb 20 at 3:32 AM

******

ARLINGTON - How would you like to buy gasoline made from $30 domestic coal versus $75 imported oil?

Researchers at the Unviersity of Texas at Arlington say they've found a practical way to make synthetic crude from inexpensive coal that's common in Texas.

People have been turning coal into oil for 100 years or more, but researchers at UTA say they've invented a better way to do it.

It is so much better that they expect to sign a deal with an oil company within weeks.

"This is East Texas lignite coal. We go from that to this really nice liquid," said Professor Brian Dennis of a light synthetic crude, easily refined into gasoline.

Professor Dennis and a team of scientists have been working on the process for about a year-and-a-half.

"I had the idea for this while I was walking to my car," he said. "I ran back to the lab and I started drawing it out in my notebook."

They only showed News 8 an early model reactor which doesn't look like much. The current reactor design is secret, extremely efficient, and emits no pollution, the UTA scientists said.

"We're improving the cost every day. We started off sometime ago at an uneconomical $17,000 a barrel. Today, we're at a cost of $28.84 a barrel," said engineering dean Rick Billo.

That's $28 a barrel versus $75 we pay now for imported crude.

Texas lignite coal is dirt cheap - less than $18 a ton. A ton of coal will produce up to 1.5 barrels of oil.

UTA researchers expect micro-refineries to be built within a year, turning coal into cheap oil and producing new jobs.

It's still fossil fuel, but scientists say it could bridge the gap until greener technologies catch up.

[jkilbert]

As you said coal liquification has been done for years. During WWII the Nazi's supplied over 50% of their liquid fuels needs this way. I had looked into this before and found references to U.S. patents dating to 1916. I had a friend who worked at USS Clairton Coke Works,  he told me that at one time they made their own gas and diesel for in-plant equipment. Currently there is a bitumen mine in Canada where it is converted to synthetic crude then processed like other crude oil. the company is Syncrude Canada....   www.syncrude.ca
Anyway we'll probably never see this happen in the US due to the enviro-nazi's out there.  They have little to say about the exploits of other countries drilling and mining, but when it comes to the US, Oh MY God....we'll have an ecological catastrophe. I have have a hard time believing that "big oil" is behind this technology not being advanced. Let's see...Pay some sheik $78 a barrell for your raw material or < $30.  tha math seems easy to me

[ClydesdaleKevin]

It might be promising if sufficient volume can be produced...but I'm sort of on the side of the "environazis" when it comes to coal mining.  As long as the mining is kept underground then the environmental impact is minimal.  But you start getting into strip or sluice mining and its horrible!  You ever see what that kind of mining does to the land?

One of the things I've noticed here in Arizona is that they already have a highly evolved infrastructure for alternative fuels...most gas stations carry E-85, there are enough gas stations carrying automotive propane at a cheap price (1.44 a gallon!) to make it a viable and convenient fuel, and there are charge ports for electric cars at several gas stations and even some of the motorpool parking lots!  I think that is the ticket...get that infrastructure to spread across the country.

Kev

[ibdilbert01]

Sweet, a topic I can relate to!  And a topic of much controversy and yet still semi related to our gas guzzling rigs. 

Germany was the king of alternative energy research at one time.   They used coal gas for lighting and heating, and they even used wood Gasification to run engines.  However the cheap cost of petro was pretty hard to beat and the above was almost but forgotten. 

E85 is becoming common in my neck of the woods.  Currently on the average its about 20 to 25% cheaper per gallon than your standard low octane fuel.   Also your average E85 vehicle yields 20 to 25% less miles per gallon of fuel.    As more and more people start using E85, its sure to go up a bit to accommodate demand.

The average propane vehicle will yield about 50 to 60% less miles per gallon than a standard gallon of gas.   Propane in my neck of the woods is $1.48, a few cents higher than Kev has found it.     Current low grade gas prices in my area as of this morning was $2.39.  Funny, not quite 60% more than a gallon of gas.  BTW, This past winter Propane hit $2.05 in my area and $2.55 the year before.

I personally don't feel at this time that one can save money by using standard petro, propane or E85, they all seem to provide about the same miles per the dollar.

E85 does burn cleaner than standard grade fuel, however it also pollutes about 20 to 25% more CO2.    It also takes a lot of energy to create E85, one study showed for every gallon of E85, half a gallon of fuel was used to create it.

Propane on the other hand burns exceptionally clean, almost as clean as natural gas.   For nothing more than to save wear and tear on the environment, propane seems to be a good choice, however I'd like to see how much energy and pollution is created in the production of propane. 

With a few exceptions, electric cars have not improved and in some cases gotten worse than the electric cars of the early 1900s.   The major difference is they use to use  Edison Batteries in the early vehicles.  The Edison battery would take charge at exceptionally fast rates and if maintenance was done right, the battery would survive decades if not a century.   Jay Leno has an original working set of Edison batteries for his 1913 Baker, imagine that!   Did you know in the early 1900s NY was scattered with public charging systems?  Almost all stores and diners had charging stations in front of their buildings.

Todays batteries are heavy, have a short life, and don't hold up very well to fast charging.   The lack of the ability to charge batteries quickly makes electric vehicles hard to justify and certainly not good for long trips.   BTW, the patent for the batteries used in the EV1 were purchased by Exon, surprised? Don't be, Exon holds more battery storage patents than anybody else, and are still buying.  Though the pollution is almost not measurable for an electric vehicle, you have to remember where the electric came from to charge those batteries, and how much pollution was created at the power plant.

Hybrids are the current fad, actually I think they have been trying to be the fad since 1911 when Westinghouse invented and sold the first Hybrids.  Some feel Toyota has perfected the world of Hybrids.   Current MPG is 29/36.

Want to talk about the "Smart Car"?   

• Sluggish acceleration and shifting
• Small size means extra safety concerns
• Requires premium gasoline
• Has the shortest warranty in the class. 

Remember, the manual says "Premium Gas only!", but you'll get 41mpg on the highway.   

Considering the old Geo Metros were double the size and and got 48mpg, the smart car seems like a "Dumb car".     (And to think we called the Geos "Death Traps").  Speaking of smaller cars,  the 1945 Nash Metropolitan advertised 40mpg, and a Honda CRX of the 80/90s averaged 50+ MPG.

It would tickle me to death too see some locals turning coal into gas at only 30 dollars a barrel, however I'm very skeptical it will happen.   As for mining, let them tear the land up, moving dirt will be easier than coughing pollutions into the air.   May I suggest they run their strip mining equipment on propane?   

[ClydesdaleKevin]

For regular vehicles, I'm all about making them all electric.  Pollution creating the electricity for charging?  Go nuclear!  I was on Nuke submarines for years...properly done, they produce only STEAM and heat as a byproduct.  The primary water gets contaminated with radiation, the coolant water only mildly so, and sea water, because of its mineral content and salinity, almost instantly neutralizes the radiation...That is why they have never EVER had a nuclear accident in the US Navy.  And that's with kids running the power plants!  Primary and coolant water can be safely dumped into the ocean without any ill effects to the environment. A reactor core typically lasts for a hundred years...the rods have at least a hundred year life span.  Old rods can be recycled, reenriched, or sunk into the depths of the ocean.  The very first nuclear submarine, the USS Nautilus, STILL has a live reactor, and is still a commissioned vessel!

3 Mile Island?  Total media hype!  There was no danger of an actual meltdown...There was a malfunction, and if it was a RUSSIAN reactor it might have melted down, but our reactors have so many failsafes that failure is next to impossible...

[ClydesdaleKevin]

AND...all of the nuclear power plants in the US are staffed by former Navy nukes!  Highly trained professionals that have never had a fatal accident, not once!

So...increase the infrastructure!  Build a nuclear power plant in each and every state to power the charging systems, and then bring our boys home to guard them!  Stateside duty!  Just LET the terrorists try to steal nuclear material from our boys!

Then we can use propane or gas or whatever to power our RVs...Demand will then go down far enough that supply will dictate cheaper prices, and the small amount of pollutants that are created by RVs and 18 wheelers will amount to didly squat that our ecosystem can take care of without even breathing hard.

Yep...more nuclear power plants...the absolute best solution bar none.

Kev

[jkilbert]

Id love to see more LNG or propane filling for vehicles, i think it could real be viable as an alternative fuel. At this time E-85 is not viable for a host of reasons. in this country it's corn based not sugar based product. the farmers had large tariffs imposed on imported molasses that's used for alcohol production in order to protect their monoploly. also corn based food prices went up due to farmers selling to the refineries at a higher price. this was really felt in mexico where they rely heavily on corn for food. also other grain producers, such as rice, switched over to corn for the higher price. this led to some stores such as Sam's Club limiting how much rice one could buy in bulk. Once produced there is no infrastructure to transport the E-85, it's sent by truck around the country. other fuels go by pipeline. the big thing in the country that makes it so cheap is the government subsidy that keeps the price below that of regular gas on fuel economy since it produces less energy than straight gasoline, your car is up to 30% less fuel efficient. I would bet that if we had access to the lower priced raw materials like in Brazil, where a large amount of E-85 is used it may turn out to be viable. i just can't see taking food off the table to run a car.