|
Oil from Coal
On-topic, since the price and availability of fuel affects boating.
I've been reading about alternative energy sources lately, including solar, wind, geothermal, etc. All have levels of promise but none will come close to satisfying energy needs in the short or long term. Meanwhile, the US has the world's largest supply of coal in various forms. Coal can be processed into oil. It's called "synthetic oil" because it's not liquid in it's natural state but when processed, it is virtually indistinguishable from high grade oil. Estimates vary, but it is believed that there is at least an 80 year supply of oil obtainable from coal if it supplied all of our energy needs at current rates. It would last much longer when supplemented by conventional oil reserves, solar and wind energy. The process to convert coal to oil becomes economically justified when regular oil prices exceed $35 per barrel. China is busy building several coal to oil conversion plants. Why isn't this technology and resource being tapped into in the US? Eisboch |
Oil from Coal
On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 05:11:32 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:
On-topic, since the price and availability of fuel affects boating. I've been reading about alternative energy sources lately, including solar, wind, geothermal, etc. All have levels of promise but none will come close to satisfying energy needs in the short or long term. Meanwhile, the US has the world's largest supply of coal in various forms. Coal can be processed into oil. It's called "synthetic oil" because it's not liquid in it's natural state but when processed, it is virtually indistinguishable from high grade oil. Estimates vary, but it is believed that there is at least an 80 year supply of oil obtainable from coal if it supplied all of our energy needs at current rates. It would last much longer when supplemented by conventional oil reserves, solar and wind energy. The process to convert coal to oil becomes economically justified when regular oil prices exceed $35 per barrel. China is busy building several coal to oil conversion plants. Why isn't this technology and resource being tapped into in the US? As I understand it there are two main reasons and two minor ones. 1 - The production plants are as expensive to build as a nuclear reactor. 2 - The production process is not pollution free in terms of greenhouse gases. 3 - NIMBY. 4 - To date, no government subsidies. Gotta have those government subsidies. |
Oil from Coal
"Eisboch" wrote in message ... On-topic, since the price and availability of fuel affects boating. I've been reading about alternative energy sources lately, including solar, wind, geothermal, etc. All have levels of promise but none will come close to satisfying energy needs in the short or long term. Meanwhile, the US has the world's largest supply of coal in various forms. Coal can be processed into oil. It's called "synthetic oil" because it's not liquid in it's natural state but when processed, it is virtually indistinguishable from high grade oil. Estimates vary, but it is believed that there is at least an 80 year supply of oil obtainable from coal if it supplied all of our energy needs at current rates. It would last much longer when supplemented by conventional oil reserves, solar and wind energy. The process to convert coal to oil becomes economically justified when regular oil prices exceed $35 per barrel. China is busy building several coal to oil conversion plants. Why isn't this technology and resource being tapped into in the US? Eisboch 80 year supply? Meaning enough to supply our oil needs for 80 years? Or, just an 80 year supply of oil from that source (coal), meaning that's the life of that particular industry? |
Oil from Coal
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message ... "Eisboch" wrote in message ... Estimates vary, but it is believed that there is at least an 80 year supply of oil obtainable from coal if it supplied all of our energy needs at current rates. It would last much longer when supplemented by conventional oil reserves, solar and wind energy. The process to convert coal to oil becomes economically justified when regular oil prices exceed $35 per barrel. China is busy building several coal to oil conversion plants. Why isn't this technology and resource being tapped into in the US? Eisboch 80 year supply? Meaning enough to supply our oil needs for 80 years? Or, just an 80 year supply of oil from that source (coal), meaning that's the life of that particular industry? According to the articles I read (all of which are in general agreement) there is enough oil from coal available in the US to last approximately 80 years at current levels of usage. This assumes that *all* the oil used for energy is coal derived. When you add the additional, liquid oil reserves and production, plus solar and wind, the energy supply from all sources extends well beyond that. The point of the articles was that we are not likely to slam into an energy shortage in the near future, contrary to many gloom and doom predictions, and oil from coal can provide additional time for the development of new energy sources. But, we need to get serious and busy. Eisboch |
Oil from Coal
"Eisboch" wrote in message
... "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message ... "Eisboch" wrote in message ... Estimates vary, but it is believed that there is at least an 80 year supply of oil obtainable from coal if it supplied all of our energy needs at current rates. It would last much longer when supplemented by conventional oil reserves, solar and wind energy. The process to convert coal to oil becomes economically justified when regular oil prices exceed $35 per barrel. China is busy building several coal to oil conversion plants. Why isn't this technology and resource being tapped into in the US? Eisboch 80 year supply? Meaning enough to supply our oil needs for 80 years? Or, just an 80 year supply of oil from that source (coal), meaning that's the life of that particular industry? According to the articles I read (all of which are in general agreement) there is enough oil from coal available in the US to last approximately 80 years at current levels of usage. This assumes that *all* the oil used for energy is coal derived. When you add the additional, liquid oil reserves and production, plus solar and wind, the energy supply from all sources extends well beyond that. The point of the articles was that we are not likely to slam into an energy shortage in the near future, contrary to many gloom and doom predictions, and oil from coal can provide additional time for the development of new energy sources. But, we need to get serious and busy. Eisboch "Get busy" (or busier) may not happen as quickly as certain individuals might like because obtaining more coal ***sometimes*** involves making a mess like this: http://www.ohvec.org/galleries/mountaintop_removal/007/ (Fishing related, since the process often wrecks water for miles around.) This mysterious web site - www.mountaintopmining.com - (registrant: Mining Internet Services, Inc.) tells a prettier story. Looks like it was designed for 6th grade classrooms. On the other hand, "Get busy" might happen, if stuff like this can be hidden more effectively in the futu http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/15/us...gBWXxbIMTsIaXw |
Oil from Coal
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message ... "Eisboch" wrote in message ... "Get busy" (or busier) may not happen as quickly as certain individuals might like because obtaining more coal ***sometimes*** involves making a mess like this: http://www.ohvec.org/galleries/mountaintop_removal/007/ (Fishing related, since the process often wrecks water for miles around.) This mysterious web site - www.mountaintopmining.com - (registrant: Mining Internet Services, Inc.) tells a prettier story. Looks like it was designed for 6th grade classrooms. That's one of the problems. Whenever anybody thinks of coal, they automatically think strip mining. Strip mining is only one of several ways to recover coal, and there are different types of coal, each with it's own properties that are suitable for different purposes. We have a whole civilization dependent on oil for survival. That won't change overnight and real time political issues may cause severe problems in the short term that unfortunately can only be addressed with military force. It seems to me that a rational, well planned program to reduce dependency on foreign oil by using resources controlled by us as a temporary "fix" while new, high tech energy sources are developed makes sense. Eisboch |
Oil from Coal
On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 09:27:16 -0400, Eisboch wrote:
That's one of the problems. Whenever anybody thinks of coal, they automatically think strip mining. Strip mining is only one of several ways to recover coal, and there are different types of coal, each with it's own properties that are suitable for different purposes. We have a whole civilization dependent on oil for survival. That won't change overnight and real time political issues may cause severe problems in the short term that unfortunately can only be addressed with military force. It seems to me that a rational, well planned program to reduce dependency on foreign oil by using resources controlled by us as a temporary "fix" while new, high tech energy sources are developed makes sense. Eisboch Damn, shades of Jimmy Carter, 30 years later. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/carter/...ps_energy.html |
Oil from Coal
"Eisboch" wrote
Whenever anybody thinks of coal, they automatically think strip mining. And when some people think of surface mines, they see red, and tend to exaggerate. I live in West Virginia, btw. |
Oil from Coal
"Eisboch" wrote in message ... On-topic, since the price and availability of fuel affects boating. I've been reading about alternative energy sources lately, including solar, wind, geothermal, etc. All have levels of promise but none will come close to satisfying energy needs in the short or long term. Meanwhile, the US has the world's largest supply of coal in various forms. Coal can be processed into oil. It's called "synthetic oil" because it's not liquid in it's natural state but when processed, it is virtually indistinguishable from high grade oil. Estimates vary, but it is believed that there is at least an 80 year supply of oil obtainable from coal if it supplied all of our energy needs at current rates. It would last much longer when supplemented by conventional oil reserves, solar and wind energy. The process to convert coal to oil becomes economically justified when regular oil prices exceed $35 per barrel. China is busy building several coal to oil conversion plants. Why isn't this technology and resource being tapped into in the US? Eisboch "Bill Clinton, by executive edict, declared 1.7 million acres of Utah to be a national monument. Under those acres are the largest known deposit-more than 60 billion tons-of low-sulfur, clean-burning coal. The second largest deposit, the value of which rose because of Clinton's action locking up an alternative supply, is in Indonesia and is owned by a member of the Indonesian Riady family, of fragrant memory, which was generous to Clinton's 1992 campaign." -George Will Full article he http://www.newsweek.com/id/107575/page/2 db |
Oil from Coal
On Mar 18, 8:50*am, "Eisboch" wrote:
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message ... "Eisboch" wrote in message m... Estimates vary, but it is believed that there is at least an 80 year supply of oil obtainable from coal if it supplied all of our energy needs at current rates. *It would last much longer when supplemented by conventional oil reserves, solar and wind energy. The process to convert coal to oil becomes economically justified when regular oil prices exceed $35 per barrel. China is busy building several coal to oil conversion plants. Why isn't this technology and resource being tapped into in the US? Eisboch 80 year supply? *Meaning enough to supply our oil needs for 80 years? Or, just an 80 year supply of oil from that source (coal), meaning that's the life of that particular industry? According to the articles I read *(all of which are in general agreement) there is enough oil from coal available in the US to last approximately 80 years at current levels of usage. *This assumes that *all* the oil used for energy is coal derived. *When you add the additional, liquid oil reserves and production, plus solar and wind, the energy supply from all sources extends well beyond that. The point of the articles was that we are not likely to slam into an energy shortage in the near future, contrary to many gloom and doom predictions, and oil from coal can provide additional time for the development of new energy sources. *But, we need to get serious and busy. Eisboch- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I wonder what the impact would be on the generating plants that are using raw coal for their fuel supply as well as the newer clean burning coal plants? |
Oil from Coal
On Mar 18, 5:11*am, "Eisboch" wrote:
On-topic, since the price and availability of fuel affects boating. I've been reading about alternative energy sources lately, including solar, wind, geothermal, etc. *All have levels of promise but none will come close to satisfying energy needs in the short or long term. Meanwhile, the US has the world's largest supply of coal in various forms. Coal can be processed into oil. *It's called "synthetic oil" because it's not liquid in it's natural state but when processed, it is virtually indistinguishable from high grade oil. Estimates vary, but it is believed that there is at least an 80 year supply of oil obtainable from coal if it supplied all of our energy needs at current rates. *It would last much longer when supplemented by conventional oil reserves, solar and wind energy. The process to convert coal to oil becomes economically justified when regular oil prices exceed $35 per barrel. China is busy building several coal to oil conversion plants. Why isn't this technology and resource being tapped into in the US? Eisboch Primary issues as I see them. The plants are expensive to build, might as well build nuke plant and hydrolysis plants to change sea water to hydrogen & oxygen for fuel cell use whose byproduct is fresh water which we are short of. Still hydrocarbon fuel with the standard greenhouse gas as well as other NOx, sufuric acid, nitric acid....products of combustion. The process of converting the coal to oil is also very energy intensive. Hitler ran his war machine one coal derived oil because it was all he had access to, not because it was inexpensive or efficient. The process leaves large quantities of nasty & toxic waste, including radioactive waste (most all coal is low grade radioactive) Coal mining itself is a dirty process with large amounts of environmentally damaging waste and requires large slurry lakes. These require damms which have collapsed in the past causing major tragedies. We barely keep this under control at current levels of production. Now lets say we increase it ten fold.... The best direction we have to go now is hydrogen which can only be efficiently and economically produced using nuclear energy. It will produce the minimum amount of waste which can be reprocessed and disposed of on site by drilling holes to 30,000' (we do this right now for deep oil and gas) stacking 10,000' of waste into it, cap with 1000' of leaded concrete and back fill with dirt. |
Oil from Coal
wrote in message ... On Mar 18, 5:11 am, "Eisboch" wrote: On-topic, since the price and availability of fuel affects boating. I've been reading about alternative energy sources lately, including solar, wind, geothermal, etc. All have levels of promise but none will come close to satisfying energy needs in the short or long term. Meanwhile, the US has the world's largest supply of coal in various forms. Coal can be processed into oil. It's called "synthetic oil" because it's not liquid in it's natural state but when processed, it is virtually indistinguishable from high grade oil. Estimates vary, but it is believed that there is at least an 80 year supply of oil obtainable from coal if it supplied all of our energy needs at current rates. It would last much longer when supplemented by conventional oil reserves, solar and wind energy. The process to convert coal to oil becomes economically justified when regular oil prices exceed $35 per barrel. China is busy building several coal to oil conversion plants. Why isn't this technology and resource being tapped into in the US? Eisboch Primary issues as I see them. The plants are expensive to build, might as well build nuke plant and hydrolysis plants to change sea water to hydrogen & oxygen for fuel cell use whose byproduct is fresh water which we are short of. Still hydrocarbon fuel with the standard greenhouse gas as well as other NOx, sufuric acid, nitric acid....products of combustion. The process of converting the coal to oil is also very energy intensive. Hitler ran his war machine one coal derived oil because it was all he had access to, not because it was inexpensive or efficient. The process leaves large quantities of nasty & toxic waste, including radioactive waste (most all coal is low grade radioactive) Coal mining itself is a dirty process with large amounts of environmentally damaging waste and requires large slurry lakes. These require damms which have collapsed in the past causing major tragedies. We barely keep this under control at current levels of production. Now lets say we increase it ten fold.... The best direction we have to go now is hydrogen which can only be efficiently and economically produced using nuclear energy. It will produce the minimum amount of waste which can be reprocessed and disposed of on site by drilling holes to 30,000' (we do this right now for deep oil and gas) stacking 10,000' of waste into it, cap with 1000' of leaded concrete and back fill with dirt. Henning .... is that you? Eisboch |
Oil from Coal
On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 11:33:39 -0500, D-unit wrote:
"Bill Clinton, by executive edict, declared 1.7 million acres of Utah to be a national monument. Under those acres are the largest known deposit-more than 60 billion tons-of low-sulfur, clean-burning coal. The second largest deposit, the value of which rose because of Clinton's action locking up an alternative supply, is in Indonesia and is owned by a member of the Indonesian Riady family, of fragrant memory, which was generous to Clinton's 1992 campaign." -George Will Full article he http://www.newsweek.com/id/107575/page/2 db You might want to look at what Will thinks should be a coal mine. http://www.utah.com/nationalsites/grand_staircase.htm |
Oil from Coal
wrote in message
... On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 11:33:39 -0500, D-unit wrote: "Bill Clinton, by executive edict, declared 1.7 million acres of Utah to be a national monument. Under those acres are the largest known deposit-more than 60 billion tons-of low-sulfur, clean-burning coal. The second largest deposit, the value of which rose because of Clinton's action locking up an alternative supply, is in Indonesia and is owned by a member of the Indonesian Riady family, of fragrant memory, which was generous to Clinton's 1992 campaign." -George Will Full article he http://www.newsweek.com/id/107575/page/2 db You might want to look at what Will thinks should be a coal mine. http://www.utah.com/nationalsites/grand_staircase.htm Maybe it's good that the guvmint thinks waterboarding is OK. Oh George....come over here for a moment.... |
Oil from Coal
On Mar 18, 5:11*am, "Eisboch" wrote:
On-topic, since the price and availability of fuel affects boating. I've been reading about alternative energy sources lately, including solar, wind, geothermal, etc. *All have levels of promise but none will come close to satisfying energy needs in the short or long term. Meanwhile, the US has the world's largest supply of coal in various forms. Coal can be processed into oil. *It's called "synthetic oil" because it's not liquid in it's natural state but when processed, it is virtually indistinguishable from high grade oil. Estimates vary, but it is believed that there is at least an 80 year supply of oil obtainable from coal if it supplied all of our energy needs at current rates. *It would last much longer when supplemented by conventional oil reserves, solar and wind energy. The process to convert coal to oil becomes economically justified when regular oil prices exceed $35 per barrel. China is busy building several coal to oil conversion plants. Why isn't this technology and resource being tapped into in the US? Eisboch Last time I heard that China has stopped their coal-to-oil projects -- probably has to do with this method is not efficient and has a lot of downsides or something like that. US may try planting sugar canes in wetland in Southern part of US to convert sugar into ethanol. This will generate more energy than using corns, and is supposed to be green-house-gas neutral. Of course, this will have a large environmental impact. Jay Chan |
Oil from Coal
On Mar 19, 12:34*pm, "
wrote: On Mar 18, 5:11*am, "Eisboch" wrote: On-topic, since the price and availability of fuel affects boating. I've been reading about alternative energy sources lately, including solar, wind, geothermal, etc. *All have levels of promise but none will come close to satisfying energy needs in the short or long term. Meanwhile, the US has the world's largest supply of coal in various forms. Coal can be processed into oil. *It's called "synthetic oil" because it's not liquid in it's natural state but when processed, it is virtually indistinguishable from high grade oil. Estimates vary, but it is believed that there is at least an 80 year supply of oil obtainable from coal if it supplied all of our energy needs at current rates. *It would last much longer when supplemented by conventional oil reserves, solar and wind energy. The process to convert coal to oil becomes economically justified when regular oil prices exceed $35 per barrel. China is busy building several coal to oil conversion plants. Why isn't this technology and resource being tapped into in the US? Eisboch Last time I heard that China has stopped their coal-to-oil projects -- probably has to do with this method is not efficient and has a lot of downsides or something like that. US may try planting sugar canes in wetland in Southern part of US to convert sugar into ethanol. *This will generate more energy than using corns, and is supposed to be green-house-gas neutral. *Of course, this will have a large environmental impact. Jay Chan- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - The sugar cane industry in south Florida almost wiped out the Everglades as we know it. If not for a smart few, the farming practices would have completely ruined one of the most diverse and ecologically important areas on earth. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:05 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com