Montana's Coal Cowboy(synfuel ping)

CBS ^ | Feb. 26, 2006 | Miguel Sancho

[isaiah55version11_0]

...While the president spent much of last week promoting energy alternatives of the future, like hybrid cars and fuels made from wood chips, the governor of Montana, Brian Schweitzer, says there's something we can have up and running in the next five years.

What he has in mind is using the coal, billions of tons of it, under the high plains of his home state. The governor tells correspondent Lesley Stahl he wants to use an existing process to turn that coal into a synthetic liquid fuel, or synfuel......

"We can produce this fuel for about $1 a gallon. We have gas taxes, depending on what state you're in, of 60, 70, 80 cents a gallon. So, do the math," he said.

"You know, it sounds almost too good to be true," Stahl said.

"Well, that's what got me excited," Schweitzer replied......

[Southack]

"I think after capitalization for the scale this has to be done at, a dollar a gallon seems too cheap..."

The cost in materials/heat is $192 for every 4 barrels of coal oil...and there are 42 gallons in every barrel.

So that's $192 to get 168 gallons (4 barrels * 42 gallons per barrel).

$1.14 per gallon of "diesel."

[John O]

Thanks... But I don't remember it!

Probably all those blows to the head and shoulders. But apparently you recovered nicely.

[Final Authority]

The cost you cite apparently is materials and the variable costs of energy. Add into that overhead, transportation, capitalization costs of the plant and other variables then I think the costs become quite high. Although crude is selling for between $50 and $60 right now, the cost to get it to the tanker for export I think is less than $10.

Hey, I'd love to buy $1.14 #2 fuel to heat my house.

BTW, way back in 1979 didn't Jimmy Carter get the ball rolling on this? Is it too late to thank him?

[taxcontrol]

Hmmm, interesting analysis.

From that we could reasonably assume that the delta between the coal cost and the oil cost could be returned to the customer. That would be a potential savings of $56 dollars or about $14 per barrel. That would put the break even point at about $48 per barrel.

Not bad considering the current market.

[Southack]

"The cost you cite apparently is materials and the variable costs of energy. Add into that overhead, transportation, capitalization costs of the plant and other variables then I think the costs become quite high. Although crude is selling for between $50 and $60 right now, the cost to get it to the tanker for export I think is less than $10."

Crude oil is unrefined, hence the name: crude.

Crude oil and coal oil refineries have nearly identical overhead, capitalization, and transportation costs.

Coal oil, however, is ready to be burned in diesel vehicles without further refining costs. It hasn't been economically viable in the past because crude oil hasn't been above $50 per barrel for extended periods of time. As recently as 2001 we were seeing $12 per barrel for oil (hard to believe, I realize).

In the past, the low price of crude oil has kept refiners away from coal oil...but we're above the break-even point now, and we appear to be staying above that point for some time to come...so investment money may begin going into coal oil (finally).

China just opened up a major coal oil refinery last year, so the hand writing is on the wall. And the longer that crude stays above $50 per barrel, the more we'll shift toward using our reserve fuel: coal oil.

[Southack]

"Hmmm, interesting analysis. From that we could reasonably assume that the delta between the coal cost and the oil cost could be returned to the customer. That would be a potential savings of $56 dollars or about $14 per barrel. That would put the break even point at about $48 per barrel. Not bad considering the current market."

The rule of thumb back in the 1970's was that oil above today's $50 per barrel was a break-even for coal oil, and that long-term prices (no one invests based upon a mere temporary price spike, of course) above $60 per barrel would start to give refiners the incentive needed to begin making initial coal oil investments.

You can make a case that we are finally there...at that investment point.

[taxcontrol]

It would be nice to see a fast track approval process put in place for companies building such plants. Not looking for a grant or tax relief, just a short cut through the red tape.

[Southack]

http://oilspot2.dtnenergy.com/e_article000393394.cfm?x=b11,0,w


Cutting the refinery red tape is about half-way down in that article.

[Final Authority]

How about the cost of getting the sulphur out of the coal? Does coal now compete with sweet crude?

[Southack]

Coal and crude oil are non-uniform. Some variants have sulfur, some don't; some have a little, some a lot.

[painter]

There was a lignite coal plant in North Dakota in the 1970s. It flopped.

Thats because the price of oil was between $5.00 and $10.00 a barrel at that time!! In the early 1970's I was paying $.25 a gallon for premium.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Yes but this thing hung around through the 1990s, sucking up taxpayer money. In 1976, gas was $.85/gallon. $.85 in 1976 dollars is more expensive than $2.25 today.