Research & Development

WVU - Mossgas "Gas-to-Liquid" Diesel


 
 
"Mossgas" has, since this publication, merged with South Africa's petroleum monopoly, PetroSA. But, they are still making liquid fuel from natural gas, using the same sort of Fischer-Tropsch processing technology that Sasol, and others, use to convert syngas, produced from coal, into liquid fuels.
 
Note, especially, the highlight in the excerpt, below.
 
We were informed, by parties we believe to be knowledgeable, that WVU was very active in the coal and gas-to-liquid arena. We earlier reported on their participation in China's mammoth coal-to-liquid undertaking, and their invention of an improved coal-to-liquid technology, called, we believe, the "West Virginia Process".
 
As follows:

"Abstract

This paper presents a brief summary and comparison of heavy vehicle emissions using Mossgas synthetically derived diesel as opposed to a US Regular Federal 49-state number 2 diesel fuel. A series of engine dynamometer and heavy-duty chassis dynamometer tests were performed at West Virginia University early in 1999.

The Mossgas gas-to-liquid (GTL) low sulphur diesel fuel is produced primarily by the conversion of olefins to distillate (COD) process in conjunction with a high temperature Fisher–Tropsch technology process."

Hydrocarbons from CO2

 
 
We submit this, the report of yet another research effort in Japan, which confirms once more that we can utilize the by-products of coal use, including and especially Carbon Dioxide,  to manufacture useful, valuable organic chemicals and hydrocarbons. 
 
Methane, one product of the CO2 conversions described herein, is just a "natural gas", and has some basic uses we're all familiar with. It can also serve as the raw material for synthesis into other products, including, through several competing processes - processes, in truth, of debateable practicality - methanol, which itself can be further converted into gasoline.
 
Notably, in the abstract below, you will see that the Japanese researchers have achieved a 95% yield of methane from CO2, using appropriate catalysts, which is beyond pretty-darned pure. The end product would require much less refining and cleaning than the stuff we would get from nature, and the processing costs would thus be much lower. 
 
The Japanese researchers also demonstrate that, through the use of other catalysts, they can synthesize other gaseous, and liquid, hydrocarbons from Carbon Dioxide.
 
As follows:
 
"Title;Hydrocarbon Synthesis from Carbon dioxide by Catalytic Hydrogenation
Author;SOUMA YOSHIE, FUJIWARA MASAHIRO,  ANDO HISANORI,  XU QIANG - Kansai Center, National Inst. Advanced Industrial Sci. and Technol., JAPAN   
Journal Title;Nippon Kagakkai Koen Yokoshu
Journal Code:S0493A
ISSN:0285-7626
VOL.85th;NO.1;PAGE.509(2005)
 
Pub. Country;Japan
Language;Japanese
Abstract;The synthesis of hydrocarbon was carried out by the catalytic hydrogenation of carbon dioxide. Methane was obtained in 95% yield by LaNi5 catalyst. Gaseous hydrocarbons (C2-C5) were obtained by zeolite/Cu/Zn hybrid catalyst. Liquid hydrocarbons (higher than C5) were obtained by Cu/Fe mixed oxide catalyst."
 
As we've been reporting, Carbon Dioxide could, and  should, be a raw material resource, a valuable by-product of our coal use. 
 
And, a final point: These processes are, generically, the hydrogenation of CO2, the same type of process that is, in some forward-thinking, but out-of-the-way places around the world, being applied to coal to make synthetic liquid fuel.

Conversion of CO2 by Hydrogenation

 

More research from Japan confirming that Carbon Dioxide can be a raw material for the synthesis of valuable organic chemicals and hydrocarbons, which would include, one infers, the precursors, at least, of liquid fuels.
 
Some important points in this study are that the CO2 conversions were evaluated, it seems, with a direct focus on their applicability to flue gasses - as in the stacks of coal-fired power plants and coal-to-liquid conversion facilities, where CO2 could be directly recovered in more concentrated, more valuable forms; with emissions problems thus obviated.
 
The excerpted summary: 

"Titre du document / Document title

Chemical conversion of carbon dioxide by catalytic hydrogenation and room temperature photoelectrocatalysis

Auteur(s) / Author(s)

ICHIKAWA S. ; ICHIKAWA S. ;

Affiliation(s) du ou des auteurs / Author(s) Affiliation(s)

Hitachi Ltd, Hitachi res. lab., Green cent., Ibaraki-ken, JAPON

Résumé / Abstract

Conversion of effluent carbon dioxide to fuels is one of the possible methods to decrease its emission into the atmosphere. The concept of «chemical recycling» is expected to become a universal practice in the long run not only for its relevancy to CO2 but also as a means to solve energy problems by revitalizing flue gases in general through catalytic processes. This report gives new results on the developments of a rhodium-manganese catalyst for high-conversion of CO2 to methane by contact catalytic process and a photoelectrocatalytic process to convert CO2 to useful chemicals..."
 
Note that it is a for-profit company, Hitachi, conducting this research. They see profit potential in it. And, note also the use of the descriptor "photoelectrocatalytic" as applied to the process. Have they developed an artificial photosynthesis, do you suppose? It is, as they say in the title, a "room temperature" process, which would suggest, at least, that some, perhaps significant, energy savings would be realized.

Alternative Liquid Fuel

 
We earlier wrote you about the many merits of Dimethyl Ether as an alternative liquid fuel for America's, the world's, transportation "fleet".
 
Foremost among it's many virtues, from our point of view, is that it can be readily and economically extracted from coal.
 
It also can, with very, very minimal modifications to engines and fuel supply infrastructure, be used as a direct substitute for gasoline.
 
Finally, it is a "cleaner" fuel, and it's widespread use would have environmental benefits.
 
We reproduce the abstract, below, with important highlights: 

"Troy A. Semelsbergera, b, , Rodney L. Borupa and Howard L. Greeneb

aMaterials Science & Technology Division, Los Alamos National Laboratory, P.O. Box 1663, Mail Stop J579, Los Alamos, NM 87545, USA

bDepartment of Chemical Engineering, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH 44106-7217, USA 

Abstract

With ever growing concerns on environmental pollution, energy security, and future oil supplies, the global community is seeking non-petroleum based alternative fuels, along with more advanced energy technologies (e.g., fuel cells) to increase the efficiency of energy use. The most promising alternative fuel will be the fuel that has the greatest impact on society. The major impact areas include well-to-wheel greenhouse gas emissions, non-petroleum feed stocks, well-to-wheel efficiencies, fuel versatility, infrastructure, availability, economics, and safety. Compared to some of the other leading alternative fuel candidates (i.e., methane, methanol, ethanol, and Fischer–Tropsch fuels), dimethyl ether appears to have the largest potential impact on society, and should be considered as the fuel of choice for eliminating the dependency on petroleum.

DME can be used as a clean high-efficiency compression ignition fuel with reduced NOx, SOx, and particulate matter, it can be efficiently reformed to hydrogen at low temperatures, and does not have large issues with toxicity, production, infrastructure, and transportation as do various other fuels. The literature relevant to DME use is reviewed and summarized to demonstrate the viability of DME as an alternative fuel."

You will note, above, that DME is said to be preferable even to Fischer-Tropsch (FT) fuels (derived from coal). Perhaps. As we've documented, FT coal fuels themselves offer many advantages over current petroleum liquids. Either way, though, the clear evidence is that we can make liquid fuels that are beneficial both to our economy and to our environment from our abundant reserves of coal.

Indirect Coal Liquefaction


We submit the attached, very recent, article not only as further evidence that the technology to convert coal into liquid fuel is well-known and established, but that some ignorance concerning the facts, even among those somewhat educated about it, still exists.
 
Specifically, the researchers make the seemingly-required intellectual obeisant gesture to the false demon of Carbon Dioxide by noting, almost as an aside, that the gas should be captured and stored.
 
It should be captured and used.
 
However, they do note, importantly, that coal gasification can lead to multiple income streams.
 
The excerpts. without further comment:
 
""Synthetic Fuel Production By Indirect Coal Liquefaction"  

Eric D. Larson(a) and Ren Tingjin(b)

a Princeton Environmental Institute, Princeton University Guyot Hall, Washington Road, Princeton, NJ 08544-1003, USA.

b Department of Thermal Engineering, Tsinghua University, 100084 Beijing, China



This paper reports detailed process designs and cost assessments for production of clean liquid fuels (methanol and dimethyl ether) by indirect coal liquefaction (ICL). Gasification of coal produces a synthesis gas that can be converted to liquid fuel by synthesis over appropriate catalysts. Recycling of unconverted synthesis gas back to the synthesis reactor enables a larger fraction of the coal energy to be converted to liquid fuel. Passing synthesis gas once over the synthesis catalyst, with unconverted synthesis gas used to generate electricity in a gas turbine combined cycle, leads to less liquid fuel production, but provides for a significant second revenue stream from sale of electricity. Recently-developed liquid-phase synthesis reactors are especially attractive for “once-through” processing. Both “recycle” and “once-through” plant configurations are evaluated in this paper. Because synthesis catalysts are poisoned by sulfur, essentially all sulfur must be removed upstream. Upstream removal of CO2 from the synthesis gas is also desirable to maximize synthesis productivity, and it provides an opportunity for partial decarbonization of the process, whereby the removed CO2 can be captured for underground storage. The analysis here suggests that co-capture and co-storage of CO2 and H2S (if this is proven technically feasible) could have important favorable impacts in some cases on liquid fuel production costs. Furthermore, the life-cycle CO2 emissions from production and use of fuels made by ICL would be lower than with production and use of petroleum-derived transportation fuels. If CO2 is not captured at ICL facilities, lifecycle CO2 emissions to the atmosphere would be considerably higher than lifecycle emissions with petroleum-derived fuels."
  1. Gasification Technology
  2. Coal Liquid - Low CO2
  3. C02 Reduction to Fuel
  4. Cogeneration and Co-Feed

Page 411 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