[A little bit of energy tech for those of you interested in cutting edge 
technology.]

July 5, 2006

Search for New Oil Sources Leads to Processed Coal
By MATTHEW L. WALD
NY Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/05/business/05coalfuel.html?ei=5087%0A&en=ff8df2827fa28efe&ex=1152331200&pagewanted=print


EAST DUBUQUE, Ill. — The coal in the ground in Illinois alone has more 
energy than all the oil in Saudi Arabia. The technology to turn that coal 
into fuel for cars, homes and factories is proven. And at current prices, 
that process could be at the vanguard of a big, new industry.

Such promise has attracted entrepreneurs and government officials, 
including the Secretary of Energy, who want domestic substitutes for 
foreign oil.

But there is a big catch. Producing fuels from coal generates far more 
carbon dioxide, which contributes to global warming, than producing vehicle 
fuel from oil or using ordinary natural gas. And the projects now moving 
forward have no incentive to capture carbon dioxide beyond the limited 
amount that they can sell for industrial use.

Here in East Dubuque, Rentech Inc., a research-and-development company 
based in Denver, recently bought a plant that has been turning natural gas 
into fertilizer for forty years. Rentech sees a clear opportunity to do 
something different because natural gas prices have risen so high. In an 
important test case for those in the industry, it will take a plunge and 
revive a technology that exploits America's cheap, abundant coal and 
converts it to expensive truck fuel.

"Otherwise, I don't see us having a future," John H. Diesch, the manager of 
the plant, said.

With today's worries about the price and long-term availability of oil, 
experts like Bill Reinert, national manager for advanced technologies at 
Toyota, say that turning coal into transportation fuel could offer a bright 
future. "It's a huge deal," he said.

There are drawbacks; the technology requires a large capital investment, 
and a plant could be rendered useless by a collapse in oil prices. But 
interest was high even before the rise in oil prices; three years ago, the 
Energy Department ran a seminar on synthetic hydrocarbon liquids, and 
scores of researchers and oil company executives showed up. The agency that 
runs municipal buses in Washington, D.C., and other consumers expressed 
interest.

But the enthusiasm was not enough to overcome the fear of a drop in oil 
prices. Lately, however, the price of diesel fuel, which determines the 
value of this coal-based fuel, also called synfuel, has soared, as has the 
price of natural gas, which made plants like the one at East Dubuque ripe 
for change.

Most of the interest is in making diesel using a technology known as 
Fischer-Tropsch, for the German chemists who demonstrated it in the 1920's. 
Daily consumption of diesel and heating oil, which is nearly identical, 
runs more than $400 million. The gasoline market is more than twice as 
large, but if companies like Rentech sated the demand for diesel, the 
process could be adapted to make gasoline.

The technology was used during World War II in Germany and then during the 
1980's by South Africa when the world shunned the apartheid regime there. 
Now Rentech is preparing to use an updated version.

Sasol, the company that has used the technology for decades in South 
Africa, is exploring potential uses around the world and is conducting a 
feasibility study with a Chinese partner of two big coal-to-liquids 
projects in western China. Last August, Syntroleum, based in Tulsa, agreed 
with Linc Energy, of Brisbane, Australia, to develop a coal-to-liquids 
plant in Queensland.

Other projects are in various stages of planning in this country, although 
the one here on the Mississippi River just south of the Wisconsin border 
has a head start.

But people who think this technology will find wide use presume some kind 
of environmental controls, which the Rentech plant, thus far, does not 
have. Some environment and energy experts doubt that the method is 
compatible with a world worried about global warming.

Unless the factory captures the carbon dioxide created during the process 
of turning coal into diesel fuel, the global warming impact of driving a 
mile would double.

"It's a potential disaster for the environment if we move in the direction 
of trying to create a big synfuel program based on coal to run our 
transportation fleet," said Daniel A. Lashof, of the Natural Resources 
Defense Council. "There's a brown path and a green path to replacing oil, 
and Fischer-Tropsch fuel is definitely on the brown path."

But the Energy Department sees potential. In March, the Energy Secretary, 
Samuel K. Bodman, said in a speech that making diesel fuel or jet fuel from 
coal was "one of the most exciting areas" of research and could be crucial 
to the President's goal of cutting oil imports. He said that loan 
guarantees enacted in last summer's energy bill might be used for 
Fischer-Tropsch diesel fuel.

In Des Plaines, Ill., near Chicago, a new company called GreatPoint Energy 
has developed, on a laboratory scale, a vastly improved process for turning 
coal into natural gas.

The promise and the pitfalls are similar for both GreatPoint and Rentech. 
Measured in the standard energy unit of a million British thermal units, or 
B.T.U.'s, coal sells for $1 or so, natural gas around $7. Diesel fuel is 
around $23. As with all energy conversions, turning coal into natural gas 
or diesel fuel means losing something in translation — specifically, energy 
— but if the price difference is big enough, the energy loss is not 
something that investors will worry about.

But it also means carbon emissions, which causes concern to 
environmentalists. Carbon is released in converting coal into an 
energy-rich gas made up of carbon monoxide and hydrogen, and then 
converting the gas into something more useful. Rentech wants to turn it 
into liquid fuel. GreatPoint wants to rearrange the molecules into natural gas.

But coal is cheap and the energy possibilities are endless. For example, at 
the Rentech plant, a substation on the east side of the plant that 
currently pulls in electricity will send it out instead. And, uniquely in 
this country, the plant will take coal and produce diesel fuel, which sells 
for more than $100 a barrel.

The cost to convert the coal is $25 a barrel, the company says, a price 
that oil seems unlikely to fall to in the near future. So Rentech is 
discussing a second plant in Natchez, Miss., and participating in a third 
proposed project in Carbon County in Wyoming.

The plant here will "bring back an industry that's shutting down," Hunt 
Ramsbottom, the company chairman, said of the fertilizer business. "The 
goal is fuels, but to get the plant up and running, fertilizer is a good 
backstop."

And it is all local. The coal will come from southern Illinois, by barge or 
rail. The diesel can go straight to terminals or truckstops in the area, 
said Mr. Diesch, the plant manager, and the fertilizer to local farms. An 
odd advantage is that today, most coal-burning power plants in the area use 
coal hauled from Wyoming, because its sulfur content is lower; burning 
high-sulfur coal encourages acid rain. But if the coal is gasified, rather 
than burned, filtering out the sulfur is relatively easy, and the sulfur 
changes from a pollutant to a salable product.

Emissions of traditional pollutants — that is, the ones the government 
regulates, and not carbon dioxide — will be lower with coal than they were 
with natural gas, he said. Outsiders are interested, but skeptical, because 
of the carbon problem. "It might serve our goals in terms of reducing oil 
dependence," said Phil Sharp, a former congressman from Indiana and now 
head of Resources for the Future, a nonprofit research organization in 
Washington. But "they should take into account that we are headed to a 
carbon-constrained economy."

Robert Williams, a senior research scientist at Princeton, said "it's a 
step backward" to operate a plant like Rentech's without capturing the 
carbon. "It almost doubles the emission rate," he said.

Mr. Ramsbottom also sees the carbon dioxide problem. "The worldwide 
production of Fischer-Tropsch fuels is going to ramp up dramatically, and 
carbon sequestration is on everybody's mind," he said. But the geology of 
this part of Illinois is not suitable for sequestering the carbon dioxide 
from these plants. Building a pipeline would be expensive and difficult to 
justify while carbon emissions are not taxed, experts say.

GreatPoint has a different plan: move the plant where it can sell the carbon.

Andrew Perlman, the company's chief executive, thinks it has value. "Not 
only is it capturable, one of biggest advantages of the system is, we can 
locate our plant near a natural gas pipeline, in places where we can sell 
that carbon dioxide for a profit, using existing technology," he said. Oil 
producers inject carbon dioxide into old oil fields, to force oil to the 
surface.

Backers also hope that methanization, the process GreatPoint uses, will 
succeed in part because it fits in with existing energy infrastructures, 
like gas pipelines and coal mines. If it did, it could have a profound 
impact on the balance of natural gas imports, lessening or eliminating the 
need for liquefied natural gas ports. Like Fischer-Tropsch diesel, 
methanization is not a new idea; one plant in North Dakota does it now, 
using a technology paid for under the Carter-era Synthetic Fuels 
Corporation. But GreatPoint is going about it in a new way, in which far 
less energy is lost in the transition. There is a potential to make fuels 
from gasification better than ordinary fuels. Robert Williams, a senior 
research scientist at Princeton University, points out that crop wastes and 
wood chips can also be gasified, producing carbon monoxide and hydrogen.

Normally, biomass is thought of as carbon-neutral, because for each plant 
cut down for gasification, another grows and absorbs carbon from the 
atmosphere. But if biomass is gasified and the carbon dioxide sequestered 
by being pumped into the ground in the expectation that it will stay there, 
then atmospheric carbon actually declines for every gallon produced.

 From a greenhouse perspective, that is more attractive than what Rentech 
does now with the carbon dioxide from its plant here. It is sold to 
soft-drink bottlers. That keeps the gas sequestered until someone burps.


================================
George Antunes, Political Science Dept
University of Houston; Houston, TX 77204
Voice: 713-743-3923  Fax: 713-743-3927
antunes at uh dot edu



Reply with a "Thank you" if you liked this post.
_____________________________

MEDIANEWS mailing list
medianews@twiar.org
To unsubscribe send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to