US history of Syn. Gasoline

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - US history of Syn. Gasoline

Posted: 4/3/2006 9:57:11 AM EDT

http://www.fossil.energy.gov/aboutus/history/syntheticfuels_history.html

OK WHY THE FUCK ARE WE NOT MAKING THIS NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Call, write, or email your representives about this now!!!!!!!!!

Posted: 4/3/2006 9:58:38 AM EDT

[#1]

www.fossil.energy.gov/aboutus/history/syntheticfuels_history.html

Posted: 4/3/2006 10:00:11 AM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:
http://www.fossil.energy.gov/aboutus/history/syntheticfuels_history.html

OK WHY THE FUCK ARE WE NOT MAKING THIS NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

<snip>

Because it costs more per gallon then that made from oil.

Posted: 4/3/2006 10:04:42 AM EDT

[#3]

Optimism reigned supreme in the first year of the expanded national synthetic fuels effort. In August 1949, the Bureau's synfuels experts issued a stunning assertion that they could make gasoline from coal for as little as 1.6 cents per gallon before profits and taxes.

Posted: 4/3/2006 10:06:09 AM EDT

[#4]

"Coal is one of the true measures of the energy strength of the United States. One quarter of the world’s coal reserves are found within the United States, and the energy content of the nation’s coal resources exceeds that of all the world’s known recoverable oil. Coal is also the workhorse of the nation’s electric power industry, supplying more than half the electricity consumed by Americans. "

DOE

Posted: 4/3/2006 10:15:22 AM EDT

[#5]

The USofA govt started to fund research for "coal to gasoline" research, but the idea was dropped when the Arabs dropped crude oil prices to something like $20/BBL, of at that price level you would never make your money back.

Posted: 4/3/2006 10:17:39 AM EDT

[#6]

Crude is at $67.30 as of this very moment. It has reached a peak of 70 dollars in 2005. So its very viable now as a option of energy now.

Besides, I am sure the coal industry could create a more efficent process of making this compared to 1920s technology, if we can put a man on the moon, we can make this stuff work again.

Posted: 4/3/2006 10:21:08 AM EDT

[#7]

I remember watching a video in school about our fossil fuels and it was mentioned that there is a process to turn coal into oil. I had completely forgotten about it.

Posted: 4/3/2006 10:22:50 AM EDT

[#8]

IIRC, syn-gas, with current environment regulations, would cost around $100/bbl.

Kharn

Posted: 4/3/2006 10:23:44 AM EDT

[#9]

The Germans did it during WWII IIRC. Surely the technology has improved since then.

Posted: 4/3/2006 10:24:28 AM EDT

[#10]

I say we use the Arab oil first.... The last country with oil wins.

Posted: 4/3/2006 10:26:49 AM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
"Coal is one of the true measures of the energy strength of the United States. One quarter of the world’s coal reserves are found within the United States, and the energy content of the nation’s coal resources exceeds that of all the world’s known recoverable oil. Coal is also the workhorse of the nation’s electric power industry, supplying more than half the electricity consumed by Americans. "

DOE

Yes, which means that we need to build nuke plants now and save that coal for if/when we really do use up the rest of the world's oil (if we don't have any better alternatives by then).

(edit: I guess this is a +1 to Oregon Shooter's post)

Posted: 4/3/2006 10:28:51 AM EDT

[#12]

In March 1953 when the Republican-led House Appropriations Committee opened its budget hearings, its first official act was to kill funds for the Louisiana, MO, synthetic fuel plants. The cost of synthetic fuels was too high for the government to bear, the Committee stated. Estes Kefauver, then out of Congress but later elected to the U.S. Senate, claimed that the nation's oil companies had been behind the Committee's action because they did not want the competition from coal. A short time later, the Committee voted to cease funding for all the programs authorized under the Synthetic Fuels Act.

Within 90 days, the Missouri plants were closed and turned back to the Department of the Army. The coal hydrogenation plant returned to making ammonia.

Jeez the oil companies were in bed with the GOP even then!!! Its very plausable that the actual cost to do this was over estimated at an effort to kill the project because of the will and power of the big oil companies.

Posted: 4/3/2006 2:06:43 PM EDT

[#13]

Energy analysts say coal liquefaction can produce synthetic oil at a cost of $32 a barrel, well below the $50 range where oil has been trading for the past year or so. But before they invest billions of dollars in coal liquefaction, investors want to be sure that oil prices will remain high.

Posted: 4/3/2006 2:08:13 PM EDT

[#14]

Pending final government approvals, Shenhua Group -- China's largest coal producer -- just announced it aims to build a 50,000 barrels/day refinery to make ultra-low sulfur diesel and gasoline from direct coal liquefaction.

The $2 billion plant, to be built adjacent to coal mines at Majata, Inner Mongolia, will use coal liquefaction technology developed by U.S.-based Hydrocarbon Technologies Inc., (HTI) a division of coal-synfuels developer, Headwaters.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0CYH/is_15_6/ai_89924477

Posted: 4/3/2006 2:17:08 PM EDT

[#15]

Sasoldoes it today. They have a process for Coal to Oil and Natural Gas to Oil.

Coal to Oil would work here in the US but the Gas to Oil is for places like Papua New Guinea that have a lot of Natural Gas but no market for it.

Posted: 4/3/2006 2:30:07 PM EDT

[#16]

paging Armed_Scientist.

Posted: 4/3/2006 3:30:27 PM EDT

[#17]

It seems the time has come for this and a combined use of E85, biodiesel, electric hybrid, and hydrogen combustion will really effect the world price of crude oil.

Posted: 4/3/2006 3:59:44 PM EDT

[#18]

Can this Syn Oil be used to make plastics?

Posted: 4/3/2006 4:09:24 PM EDT

[#19]

tag

Posted: 4/3/2006 6:49:22 PM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:
Energy analysts say coal liquefaction can produce synthetic oil at a cost of $32 a barrel, well below the $50 range where oil has been trading for the past year or so. But before they invest billions of dollars in coal liquefaction, investors want to be sure that oil prices will remain high.

The problem here is that the cost of oil is merely the cost of the extraction and transport process -- CHEAP. The rest is markup that we're willing to pay because there is no substitute. Once one comes around, OPEC can just slash it's prices and voila, they've destroyed the substitute, then jack em up again after they've gone bankrupt and have been liquidated.

Posted: 4/4/2006 8:35:46 AM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Energy analysts say coal liquefaction can produce synthetic oil at a cost of $32 a barrel, well below the $50 range where oil has been trading for the past year or so. But before they invest billions of dollars in coal liquefaction, investors want to be sure that oil prices will remain high.

The problem here is that the cost of oil is merely the cost of the extraction and transport process -- CHEAP. The rest is markup that we're willing to pay because there is no substitute. Once one comes around, OPEC can just slash it's prices and voila, they've destroyed the stubstitute, then jack em up again after they've gone bankrupt and have been liquidated.

That report in 02 said as long as oil stays at 35 a barrel, this will be cheaper to do, well OPEC wants to stay at 50 a barrel or plus and right now we are just shy of 70, and with another big storm or revolution its gonna hit 100. Oils days are done, OPEC could never swing the power to elimate this

Posted: 4/4/2006 8:38:20 AM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:
I remember watching a video in school about our fossil fuels and it was mentioned that there is a process to turn coal into oil. I had completely forgotten about it.

Sure. It takes about about a million years to do.

Posted: 4/4/2006 9:04:20 AM EDT

[#23]

Try getting a loan and then try having one built in your back yard. We can't even build a new refinery, let alone the number of these plants needed to make a difference. They are trying to build one in PA that would use waste coal (cheap) to make liquid fuel and heat. It has made little progress in three years.

Waste Management and Processors Inc. (WMPI PTY., LLC) of Gilberton, PA, which will head a team to build and operate a power plant that will produce clean electricity, high-value industrial heat, and nearly 5,000 barrels per day of clean-burning diesel fuel from raw anthracite wastes. At the core of the advanced process will be a coal gasification process that will turn the wastes into a chemically-rich source of gas. A portion of the gas will be converted into diesel while the rest will be combusted to make electricity and steam. Planned for a 75-acre site adjacent to the existing Gilberton Power plant, the $612 million project is the largest of the eight projects selected. The Energy Department's share is proposed at $100 million.

Posted: 4/4/2006 9:15:06 AM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:
Try getting a loan and then try having one built in your back yard. We can't even build a new refinery, let alone the number of these plants needed to make a difference. They are trying to build one in PA that would use waste coal (cheap) to make liquid fuel and heat. It has made little progress in three years.

Waste Management and Processors Inc. (WMPI PTY., LLC) of Gilberton, PA, which will head a team to build and operate a power plant that will produce clean electricity, high-value industrial heat, and nearly 5,000 barrels per day of clean-burning diesel fuel from raw anthracite wastes. At the core of the advanced process will be a coal gasification process that will turn the wastes into a chemically-rich source of gas. A portion of the gas will be converted into diesel while the rest will be combusted to make electricity and steam. Planned for a 75-acre site adjacent to the existing Gilberton Power plant, the $612 million project is the largest of the eight projects selected. The Energy Department's share is proposed at $100 million.

Let me guess: because of the enviro-nazi's?

Posted: 4/4/2006 9:19:23 AM EDT

[#25]

Half of these synfuel company's are ripoffs. They take the coal, spray it with chemicals and diesel and call it synfuel for the huge tax breaks they get. One of these company's can have a net loss of 400 million dollars a year and claim a tax break of over 800 million a year for a profit of 400+ million per year, all at the expense of the tax payers.

All I know is some of the coal at the mine I work at is already oily as hell, and if there's a process that can make it run my car... I'm on board... and there's probably a pay raise in it for me!

Posted: 4/4/2006 9:22:20 AM EDT

[#26]

Coal=Gas
Damn, now I know why the Rockefellers moved to West Virginia.

Posted: 4/4/2006 9:36:40 AM EDT

[#27]

In this case, it is not entirely the fault of environmentalist, but the locals have some issues. They even have a website http://www.ultradirtyfuels.com/ Also, licensing with SASOL and other technology owners has been slow. Not really sure how the money part is going, but the Governor of PA has announced the state's intention to purchase all the liquid fuel output. That should help secure funding.

Posted: 4/4/2006 10:09:21 AM EDT

[#28]

Thermal depolymerization.

Posted: 4/4/2006 10:41:11 AM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:
Quoted:
I remember watching a video in school about our fossil fuels and it was mentioned that there is a process to turn coal into oil. I had completely forgotten about it.

Sure. It takes about about a million years to do.

Now there are processes to accelerate the process. I read about a year ago there was a company in Texas that took turkey guts and was able to convert it to oil in a short time. Of course I'm sure oil companies and environazis want this shut down.

Posted: 4/4/2006 10:48:59 AM EDT

[#30]

if coal takes off as an source of gas, will peak_oil change its userid to peak_coal?

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - US history of Syn. Gasoline

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us