Read the forum code of contact
By: - 21st September 2006 at 11:14 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Um... well an amazing piece of research..... but a total waste to time and money... since coal.... like oil is a finite resource this is fruitless research....
Now if they made a 100% blend of synthetic Jetfuel.......
By: - 21st September 2006 at 11:14 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Germany got the largest part of its avgas and diesel from coal during WW2.
http://www.fe.doe.gov/aboutus/history/syntheticfuels_history.html
And South Africa also produced fuel with an akin process during the apartheid sanctions.
By: - 21st September 2006 at 11:17 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
This method was used back in WW2 by Germany and Japan to produce fuel.That is also one of the reasons for lack of widespread use of diesel engines in german tanks during WW2.
By: - 21st September 2006 at 11:49 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Um... well an amazing piece of research..... but a total waste to time and money... since coal.... like oil is a finite resource this is fruitless research....Now if they made a 100% blend of synthetic Jetfuel.......
The research was done mostly in the 1930s. So no need to be too amazed.
Corresponding to current figures the known reserves of coal hold for anbother 300 years if consumption is constant. Not included are reserves that are either unknwon or deemed unusable with acceptable costs. So no real shortage of coal in the next 100 years to be expected.
Germany got the largest part of its avgas and diesel from coal during WW2.
Depends how you look at it. The largest part was conventional oil coming from Romania and - until the 21st of June 1941 - from the Soviet Union. Later the percentage of "coal fuel" increased while the overally available oil supply dropped drastically.
This method was used back in WW2 by Germany and Japan to produce fuel.That is also one of the reasons for lack of widespread use of diesel engines in german tanks during WW2.
Did anyone use diesel engines in tanks in WW2? Even American tanks delivered to Germany after WW2 (post-war designs) were running on gas, which actually did not fit into the German Army's policy of having only diesel engine vehicles.
By: - 21st September 2006 at 12:27 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Corresponding to current figures the known reserves of coal hold for anbother 300 years if consumption is constant....And US holds the largest reserves in the world; this explains the interest of USAF.
Did anyone use diesel engines in tanks in WW2?The most produced tank in WWII (T34) was diesel powered...
By: - 21st September 2006 at 12:33 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
There has been significant advances in this area in recent years and indeed the whole Gas to liquids and Coal to liquids technology, particularly in simplifying the process and hence reducing the capital cost. The recent high oil prices have helped
Its more economic than it once was and commercial applications are not far away. With 15-25 years great supply of gas and more of coal available than oil it may give us the headroom needed, particularly if combined with the related biomass technologies
By: - 21st September 2006 at 13:04 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The main problem with coal-to-liquids (coal gasification followed by Fischer-Tropsh synthesis) is that the process releases huge amounts of CO2. In fact about half of the carbon in the coal ends as CO2. Thats ~3.5 tons of CO2 for every ton of fuel.
By: - 21st September 2006 at 13:42 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The main problem with coal-to-liquids (coal gasification followed by Fischer-Tropsh synthesis) is that the process releases huge amounts of CO2. In fact about half of the carbon in the coal ends as CO2. Thats ~3.5 tons of CO2 for every ton of fuel.
That's an issue which excludes the general public from usage of this technology. Thinking 30 years ahead we might come to the situation where oil is indeed unaffordable. That would call for all users to switch to other energy sources. Power plants can use coal, nuclear energy or maybe even renewable energy. Cars and trains will be powered by electricity directly or via an energy-carrier like hydrogen. Same applies generally for ships, while it would be more challenging.
Remains the aviation industry: all hydrogen-phantasies are just that, phantasies. It would be more efficient tu use coal-fuel, especially if parts of the carbon dioxide can be catched up before leaving in the atmosphere.
Another possible scenario: 30 years from now nobody matters about CO2 any more and the extra exhaustion is deemed irrelevant. That still doesn't refill the oil supplies.
By: - 21st September 2006 at 13:42 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Double post. See below.
By: - 21st September 2006 at 13:44 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
South Africa has massive coal deposits and during the Apartheid years, generated I think 45% of it's oil using coal to liquid fuels processes. I may be slightly out on the percentage , but it's pretty close. Still , a very impressive amount considering it is in the top 10% largest economies in the world.(based on total GDP and the number of countries there are.) SASOL is probably the world leader in this technology and has recently won a massive order to help China set up a similar system. SASOL has been doing this refinement process for many years now and it makes perfect sense given that oil reseves will not last forever. I'll try find a link.
By: - 21st September 2006 at 14:58 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The technology has been used for many years. I got this advertising blurb from the SASOL website.
"The history of Sasol began in 1927 when a White Paper was tabled in Parliament
to investigate the establishment of a South African oil-from-coal industry.
It was realised then that, because South Africa did not have crude oil reserves, the country's balance of payments had to be protected against increasing crude oil imports. After many years of research and international negotiations, the South African Coal Oil and Gas Corporation was formed in 1950.
From its first eight drums of creosote to the acquisition of the German CONDEA Group in 2001, Sasol is a company whose success has been founded on innovative thinking. Major milestones include our first automotive fuel (1955), the construction of the National Petroleum Refiners of South Africa (1967) and the establishment in 1990 of our first international marketing company, Sasol Chemicals Europe, which paved the way for our globalisation programme.
The company has developed world-leading technology for the conversion of low grade coal into value-added synfuels and chemicals. Today our operational footprint extends to more than 20 countries and we export to over 100. Sasol is one of the top five publicly listed companies in South Africa and is quoted on the JSE and the NYSE."
By: - 21st September 2006 at 15:08 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Between November and December 1955, SASOL delivered their first batch of coal-derived petrol for sale in South Africa. It produces 40% of South Africa's liquid transport fuels as well as most of the countries chemical building blocks.
By: - 21st September 2006 at 20:44 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Yeah, SASOL's the world-leader in this stuff, and it has been involved in past tests of this nature with parts of the US military. It might even be a partner in this set of tests, though I can't confirm that.
The process itself is economical and reliable, and around 40% of South Africa's automobile fuel is still manufactured from coal using the process which SASOL perfected. In addition, every aircraft leaving from Johannesburg International (and other major S.African airports) has a 50/50 blend of synthetic/natural fuel in its wings. Pending certification, this will soon be upped to 100% synthetic, if indeed it hasn't been already. The nice thing about SASOL's synthetic fuel is that it's actually better for jet engines than ordinary fuels, as it results in less wear and tear over time.
Considering the US's coal reserves and the high price of oil, it makes a ton of sense for the USAF to be going this route.
By: - 22nd September 2006 at 07:40 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The main problem with coal-to-liquids (coal gasification followed by Fischer-Tropsh synthesis) is that the process releases huge amounts of CO2. In fact about half of the carbon in the coal ends as CO2. Thats ~3.5 tons of CO2 for every ton of fuel.
Looks like there might be a way to make fuel out of CO2.
http://sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa003&articleID=0000517B-5652-1509-965283414B7F0000
By: - 22nd September 2006 at 19:30 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The main problem with coal-to-liquids (coal gasification followed by Fischer-Tropsh synthesis) is that the process releases huge amounts of CO2. In fact about half of the carbon in the coal ends as CO2.
A rather unsurprising outcome, since coal contains way more carbon than fuel. It's got to go somewhere.
By: - 23rd September 2006 at 00:03 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
There are several large EU funded projects running currently to eliminate CO2 release that should bare fruit in this respect in the next 5 years or so. Most of the main energy players are part of these projects
By: - 23rd September 2006 at 09:17 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Quite right. My prediction is that within 10 years we'll have the technology to counter CO2 release that'll make Kyoto and similar moves obsolete.
By: - 23rd September 2006 at 10:18 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Arent they going back to looking for Ethanol and Hydrogen for Fuel?
By: - 23rd September 2006 at 12:49 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Quite right. My prediction is that within 10 years we'll have the technology to counter CO2 release that'll make Kyoto and similar moves obsolete.
We already do, it's the will, not the technology, that's lacking.
Posts: 75
By: Avid Aviator - 21st September 2006 at 10:41
Tuesday, Sept. 19, 2006. Two of the B-52's eight jet engines were powered by a 50-50 blend of synthetic and oil-based fuel that proponents hope to eventually market commercially. The research is focused on the Fischer-Tropsch process for producing synthetic kerosene from coal. The military wants a fuel that works with engines, fuel systems and supply infrastructure already in the field.