Research & Development

Actual Costs of Oil

ICTA - 

 
The link will take you to a report detailing the actual "price" we - US citizens - pay for a gallon of gasoline - gasoline derived from petroleum, so much of which we import from overseas.
 
Some excerpts:
 
"Washington D.C. -- A report released today by the International Center for Technology Assessment (CTA) calculates that the actual cost of a gallon of gas to the American consumer could be as high as $15.14. (Whoooeee - ouch!!! - JtM) The report "The Real Price of Gas" identifies and quantifies the many external costs of using gas that consumers pay indirectly by way of taxes, insurance costs and retail prices in other sectors. Established in 1994, the International Center for Technology Assessment (CTA), is a Washington-based research organization that analyzes how technology affects society."

"The CTA study examines more than 40 separate cost factors associated with gasoline production and consumption. These include subsidies for the petroleum industry such as the percentage depletion allowance; tax-funded programs that directly subsidize oil production and consumption, like government-sponsored R&D for the oil industry; the costs of protecting oil supplies, shipments and motor vehicle usage, including military expenditures for protecting the Middle East and other oil rich regions; and environmental, health and social costs including those for global warming. Together these subsidies for gas paid by consumers total up to $1.68 trillion per year."
 
According to CTA Director Andrew Kimbrell, "The real price of gas has been hidden from the consumer for far too long. Some of these costs including those associated with military actions in the Middle East and global warming could skyrocket in the coming years. Once the public understands how much they are really paying for gas we should see a tremendous increase in political pressure for alternatives."
 
Now, we are most interested in the concluding sentence in the excerpt, which bears repeating:
 
"Once the public understands how much they are really paying for gas we should see a tremendous increase in political pressure for alternatives."

Coal TL vs. Hidden Oil Costs

NDCF report: The hidden cost of imported oil 

 
Herein is more documentation attesting to the fact that we don't actually know how much our oil and gasoline really cost us.
 
An excerpt:
 
"NDCF report: the hidden cost of imported oil

The National Defense Council Foundation, an Alexandria, Virginia-based research and educational institution has completed its year-long analysis of the "hidden cost" of imported oil. The NDCF project represents the most comprehensive investigation of the military and economic penalty our undue dependence on imported oil exacts from the U.S. economy. Included in this economic toll are:

Almost $49.1 billion in annual defense outlays to maintain the capability to defend the flow of Persian Gulf Oil - the equivalent of adding $1.17 to the price of a gallon of gasoline;
The loss of 828,400 jobs in the U.S. economy;
The loss of $159.9 billion in GNP annually;
The loss of $13.4 billion in federal and state revenues annually;
Total economic penalties of from $297.2 to $304.9 billion annually.
If reflected at the gasoline pump, these "hidden costs" would raise the price of a gallon of gasoline to over $5.28, a fill-up would be over $105.

One striking figure was the cost of the periodic oil shocks the U.S. has experienced over the past three decades which NDCF estimates at from over $2.2 Trillion to almost $2.5 Trillion."

Fuel + Power; No CO2

 
 
We submit the enclosed article in further support of our contention, that: Combining coal with biomass as feed for a suitably-designed coal-to-liquid conversion facility could result in a calculated total net "zero" carbon emission effect.
 
And, as we've earlier demonstrated, liquid fuels and electricity can be produced from coal, at the same facility, at the same time.
 
The excerpt: 
 
"Co-production of synfuels and electricity from coal + biomass with zero net carbon emissions: An Illinois case study

E.D. Larson(a), G. Fioreseb, G. Liua, R.H. Williamsa, T.G. Kreutza and S. Consonnic

aPrinceton Environmental Institute, Princeton University, Guyot Hall, Washington Road, Princeton, NJ, 08544, USA

bDepartment of Information Technology, Politecnico di Milano, via Ponzio 34/5, 20133 Milano, Italy

cDepartment of Energy, Politecnico di Milano, piazza Leonardo da Vinci 32, 20133 Milano, Italy

Abstract

Energy, carbon, and economic performance are estimated for facilities co-producing Fischer–Tropsch Liquid (FTL) fuels and electricity from a co-feed of biomass and coal in Illinois, with capture and storage of by-product CO2. The estimates include detailed models of supply systems for corn stover or mixed prairie grasses and of feedstock conversion facilities. The Illinois results are extrapolated to estimate the potential FTL production in 23 states."

Note the authors' credentials. We have previously documented Italy's coal-to-liquid conversion efforts and  cited researchers there. We have also noted the work underway at Princeton, and will be citing Dr. Larson, and his research, in additional reports.

Coal and Bio Conversion Cost Advantages

 
Fischer–Tropsch fuels from coal and biomass: Strategic advantages of once-through (“polygeneration”) configurations

Robert H. William, Eric D. Larson, Guangjian Liu and Thomas G. Kreutz


Princeton Environmental Institute, Princeton University, Guyot Hall, Washington Road, Princeton, NJ, 08544, USA


The brief Abstract, as excerpted below, says it all:


"Systems that produce synthetic liquid fuels and electricity from coal and biomass with carbon capture and storage offer an attractive cost-effective approach for decarbonising (sic) liquid fuels and electricity simultaneously."


Our preference is for one of the approaches that actually captures and recycles the carbon, as we've documented to be possible and practical. But, according this report from Princeton, even if we were to waste the money it would take to waste the potentially-valuable CO2 resource - by pumping it underground,  i.e., the "storage" as above -  coal/biomass combined fuel/power production is "an attractive cost-effective approach".

China, CoalTL, Capitalism



We have detailed China's extraordinary plans to develop an extensive coal-to-liquid conversion industry, to produce liquid fuels, chemical manufacturing raw materials and fertilizers from their vast reserves of coal.
 
They have undertaken that monumental task with the help of many foreign corporations expert in coal technology, including some from the US, such as Exxon-Mobil and Peabody.
 
As has been the Chinese practice in other areas of commerce and industry, they have begun to assimilate the technology of coal-to-liquid conversion, perhaps developed it a little further, and are now offering it as a Chinese export to the rest of the world.
 
Following are some excerpts from the enclosed link:
 
"Additron Technologies Inc.
Shen Xiang Road, Zhu Jia Jiao Town
Qing Pu Area, Postalcode: 201714
Shanghai, R.O.C"
 
"Additron Technologies has a developed a proven Coal-to-Liquid (CTL) technology that together with Nano Technology (R), converts low quality lignite coal into ultra clean, environmentally friendly, high-value and low-sulfur synthetic diesel fuel. Our proprietary technology is zero-emission based, wherein all harmful particles and by-products are recycled and rendered harmless."
 
(China is touting the environmental benefits, no doubt, as a sales point to impress the rest of the ecologically-minded world. It is, nonetheless, true, and a valid sales point. - JtM)

"The middle east has about 685 billion barrels of oil compared with 22 billion barrels in the United states. However, there is enough coal in the United states to produce 964 billion barrels of fuel, according to the pentagon (sic.)."

(Sounds as if they are chiding - justifiably - the US somewhat for not climbing onto this CoalTL train. - JtM)

"Synthetic fuels from coal can be used directly in today’s vehicles, with no need for modification."

  1. Inferred Costs: ASTM International - Standards Worldwide
  2. Sasol's Synthetic Jet Fuel to Gain Worldwide Approval by August
  3. WVU & CTL Costs
  4. Co-Liquefaction of Coal & Micro Algae

Page 405 of 449

Image

Join Friends of Coal

Be part of West Virginia's coal industry future. Together, we can continue building a stronger, more prosperous Mountain State by supporting our miners and communities.
Learn More About FOC