WV Coal Member Meeting 2024 1240x200 1 1

DOE - Fossil Energy: Auto Created


If we've sent this along previously, our apologies.
However, allow us some pertinent excerpts:
"The Bureau (of Mines/Mining - JtM) had been studying the gasification of coal and purification of the coal gas at Morgantown in space made available in West Virginia University buildings. A pilot scale gasifier capable of processing 500 pounds per hour of coal had been constructed in 1948. Now, the Bureau began drawing the blueprints for a new research facility to be designated the Appalachian Experiment Station. The first buildings were erected between 1952 and 1954."
"By the early 1950s, with the benefit of lessons learned in the first experimental units, the Bureau revised its cost projections for coal-based liquid fuels to a more cautious 11 cents a gallon (conventional gasoline cost about 10.6 cents at that time). The National Petroleum Council – an industry advisory committee to the Interior Department – disagreed (of course they did! - JtM), citing 41.4 cents per gallon as the likely cost."
"The same year (1952 - JtM), the nation's first privately built and operated coal hydrogenation plant began operating at Institute, West Virginia. Constructed by the Carbide and Carbon Chemical Company (later to become Union Carbide), the Institute plant could process 300 tons of coal daily. From 1952 to 1956, the plant produced chemicals from coal...".
"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." (Emphasis added, natch. JtM)
And, to salute a home boy:
"The knowledge they gained during this period would prove extremely valuable when West Virginia Senator Robert C. Byrd decided in 1961 to rejuvenate the nation's coal research program by pushing through legislation..."
Check it out, Mike. Tell the story. Mountaineers have a right to know.

Algae: Biofuel of the Future?

From the University of Virginia:
"As part of the photosynthesis process algae produce oil and can generate 15 times more oil per acre than other plants used for biofuels, such as corn and switchgrass. Algae can grow in salt water, freshwater or even contaminated water, at sea or in ponds, and on land not suitable for food production.

On top of those advantages, algae — at least in theory — should grow even better when fed extra carbon dioxide (the main greenhouse gas) and organic material like sewage. If so, algae could produce biofuel while cleaning up other problems."
As we've been saying, couple some bio-reactors to the flues of coal-to-liquid conversion plants where the appropriate coal conversion technologies have been installed and additional raw material for the conversion process can be grown on site - all while protecting the environment.
Joe the Miner

Alternative Energy & Fuel News: ENN - Know Your Environment

Just more, Mike, on UVA's work.
A key excerpt, emphases added:

"Scientific interest in producing fuel from algae has been around since the 1950s, Colosi said. The U.S. Department of Energy did pioneering research on it from 1978 to 1996. Most previous and current research on algae biofuel, she said, has used the algae in a manner similar to its natural state — essentially letting it grow in water with just the naturally occurring inputs of atmospheric carbon dioxide and sunlight. This approach results in a rather low yield of oil — about 1 percent by weight of the algae. 

The U.Va. team hypothesizes that feeding the algae more carbon dioxide and organic material could boost the oil yield to as much as 40 percent by weight, Colosi said.

Proving that the algae can thrive with increased inputs of either carbon dioxide or untreated sewage solids will confirm its industrial ecology possibilities — to help with wastewater treatment, where dealing with solids is one of the most expensive challenges, or to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide, such as coal power-plant flue gas (or the by-products of coal-to-liquid conversion processes - JtM) which contains about 10 to 30 times as much carbon dioxide as normal air."

Grow the bugs with our coal's off-gas, dump 'em in the feed hopper, make more diesel and gasoline. Take a deep breath of fresh, clean air. Breathe. We can do this.

Joe the Miner

Global Warming: A Closer Look at the Numbers

One excerpt:

"...how much of the "Greenhouse Effect" is caused by human activity?

It is about 0.28%, if water vapor is taken into account-- about 5.53%, if not."

Unfortunately, most of the "discussions" we've managed to find so far are more "editorial" than anything else, and, excepting a few, don't include references for rigorous follow-up.


EPA Fascism versus America: There is No Natural Evidence for Man-Made Global Warming (3 of 7) by John Lewis & Paul Saunders

Although published in an obviously "biased" venue, this piece, unlike most others, pro and con, lists it's references.- which are extensive and include some unimpeachably academic and scholastic sources.
It's concluding, well-supported, statement:
"Based on natural history, there is no basis for assuming the truth of an impending climate crisis caused by human action."