Liquid coal
Thread Starter
|
Cargo Master
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,899
Likes: 2
From: Lynnwood, WA
Liquid coal
Not really new, but it could be one of the alternatives -- when, and if, oil prices start climbing again.
http://today.reuters.com/news/articl...AL-FUEL-DC.XML
http://today.reuters.com/news/articl...AL-FUEL-DC.XML
Post Fiend
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 20,589
Likes: 2
From: Charlotte, NC
You're absolutely correct. Should it be proven to be cost-efficient AND environmentally friendly (or as environmentally friendly as a fossil fuel could be expected to be), it WOULD solve our energy problem (reliance on foreign sources)....and would make us a net exporter. That would be exciting times.
AND we have the closest thing to an "inexhaustible" supply of coal anywhere in the world.
This has been discussed in other energy threads...and as you can imagine, the discussions were fairly lively.
Steve
AND we have the closest thing to an "inexhaustible" supply of coal anywhere in the world.
This has been discussed in other energy threads...and as you can imagine, the discussions were fairly lively.
Steve
Post Fiend
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 5,228
Likes: 5
From: Running Springs CA
What do you do with all the CO2 that is a byproduct? GTL, which uses the same process, but with natural gas as feedstock is actually "clean". Science be damned, coal states want taxpayer funded projects, just like the midwest farm states want ethanol subsidies, its all the same game.
If it is so cheap to do, why ask for tax credits or other taxpayer assistance?
Since the 1970's, the US government has spent on the order of half a trillion dollars on "alternative energy" projects and research. What has all that money produced, a few windmills?
Jim
If it is so cheap to do, why ask for tax credits or other taxpayer assistance?
Since the 1970's, the US government has spent on the order of half a trillion dollars on "alternative energy" projects and research. What has all that money produced, a few windmills?
Jim
Postmaster
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,043
Likes: 4
Originally Posted by jimandmandy
What has all that money produced, a few windmills?
Jim
Jim
Nope. A lot of rich researchers suckling from the gov't teat.
Meh, whatever. I see more promise in this than I do bottling cow farts.
Post Fiend
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 20,589
Likes: 2
From: Charlotte, NC
Originally Posted by jimandmandy
What do you do with all the CO2 that is a byproduct? GTL, which uses the same process, but with natural gas as feedstock is actually "clean". Science be damned, coal states want taxpayer funded projects, just like the midwest farm states want ethanol subsidies, its all the same game.
If it is so cheap to do, why ask for tax credits or other taxpayer assistance?
Since the 1970's, the US government has spent on the order of half a trillion dollars on "alternative energy" projects and research. What has all that money produced, a few windmills?
Jim
If it is so cheap to do, why ask for tax credits or other taxpayer assistance?
Since the 1970's, the US government has spent on the order of half a trillion dollars on "alternative energy" projects and research. What has all that money produced, a few windmills?
Jim
Post Fiend
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,600
Likes: 4
From: Iowa
Is it just diesel fuel that is able to be produced with this process? Or could they produce any oil derived fuel, such as gasoline? If they could make straight 100 octane gasoline, for $40 a barrel, that would be nice!
Post Fiend
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 20,589
Likes: 2
From: Charlotte, NC
Let's say, Rusty, that the coal-process only produces diesel fuel (and prob. kerosene, etc.)......And let's say that the oil shale reserves do the same thing....but that the sources would supply ALL of our energy needs (not even including nuclear) for 200 years....even while exporting some of the liquid gold.....Would it be so bad....or so difficult, to...over a period of years....make nothing but diesel engines for passenger cars and trucks, etc.?.....particularly with the advances in clean diesel, etc.?......
Is it doable?....Of course, the gas fanatics would probably hate it, but the country would be better off......
Is it doable?....Of course, the gas fanatics would probably hate it, but the country would be better off......
Trending Topics
Post Fiend
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 5,228
Likes: 5
From: Running Springs CA
Distillates (diesel, kerosene, jet) and waxes are the main output of this process. They are hydrocarbon molecules with more carbon atoms than gasoline. Gasoline could still be hydrocracked from this feedstock, just like in a conventional refinery. It just takes more energy in to convert it to gasoline, which raises the cost.
Jim
Jim
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
Top 6 Best Deals Available on New Fords & Lincolns Right Now
Brett Foote
This Hennessey Takes the Expedition Tremor's Off-Roading Capability to the Next Level
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Fords at 2026 Carlisle Ford Nationals
Joe Kucinski
3 Best / 3 Worst Parts of Modern Ford Ownership
Brett Foote
10 Amazing Upgrades That Solve Common Ford Truck Owner Headaches
Pouria Savadkouei
Every 2026 Ford Engine Explained
Brett Foote
10 Ugly Ford Trucks That We Still Kinda Love
Joe Kucinski
10 Things Every Truck Owner NEEDS (2026 Edition)
Michael S. Palmer
Rezvani's Latest Post-Apocalyptic Monster Is a Ford F-150 Raptor Underneath
Verdad Gallardo
Post Fiend
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 20,589
Likes: 2
From: Charlotte, NC
But we're not talking about burning coal (and different grades of coal pollute at different levels).....We're talking about turning coal into something different and burning that.....and is THAT final product (used in diesel cars, etc.) an undue pollutant.........If not, then hey.................
Thread Starter
|
Cargo Master
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,899
Likes: 2
From: Lynnwood, WA
and would make us a net exporter
coal states want taxpayer funded projects, just like the midwest farm states want ethanol subsidies
In any case, if ethanol were to become a major fuel (which is highly unlikely in the US) tax subsidies would go away.
Since the 1970's, the US government has spent on the order of half a trillion dollars on "alternative energy" projects and research. What has all that money produced, a few windmills?
Postmaster
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,043
Likes: 4
Originally Posted by aurgathor
I kinda doubt that -- we'd need much more miners and mines, plus many plants. However, it would definitely lessen dependency on foreign oil (in the foreseeable future) and ensure more predictable pricing on diesel and gasoline.
Thread Starter
|
Cargo Master
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,899
Likes: 2
From: Lynnwood, WA
Originally Posted by 76supercab2
And more miners wouldn't be hired or plants built if there was a profit in it? :shrug:
I think what the feds want is to have several technologies ready when oil prices go up, that's why the tax subsidies on ethanol, for instance.
Thread Starter
|
Cargo Master
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,899
Likes: 2
From: Lynnwood, WA
Originally Posted by jimandmandy
The biggest problem with this particular alternative energy source is that it produces a huge amount of CO2.