Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Liquid coal: A cheaper, cleaner 21st century fuel?
yahoo.com ^ | 12/17/2006 | Steve James

Posted on 12/18/2006 9:10:18 AM PST by Red Badger

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-48 next last
To: Red Badger

Are their coal deposits left that the greens and Democrats haven't made off limits?


21 posted on 12/18/2006 9:41:27 AM PST by Retired Chemist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Retired Chemist

Yes, there are many. And they want those shut down.....


22 posted on 12/18/2006 9:42:38 AM PST by Red Badger (New! HeadOn Hemorrhoid Medication for Liberals!.........Apply directly to forehead.........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Retired Chemist

Let me direct you to the "Prime Farmlands" provisions of the Federal surface mining law (signed by Jimmah Cahtah.) Also see "Alluvial Valley Floors" provisions. The answer is yes.


23 posted on 12/18/2006 9:57:43 AM PST by Eric in the Ozarks (BTUs are my Beat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
"What the Hell is nuclear power? Chopped liver? I'm sick and tired of these "alternative energy" articles. If they were feasible, they'd be on the market already, without being sustained by taxpayer subsidies."

I'm all in favor a the "full-bore fission economy", but let's be real, here. Nuclear power was MASSIVELY "sustained by taxpayer subsidies" for a LONG time.

I think that doing the equivalent for a cheap, efficient, thin-film solar cell is a "good thing".

24 posted on 12/18/2006 10:01:29 AM PST by Wonder Warthog (The Hog of Steel-NRA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
For transportation, just drill for more oil domestically. How hard is this?

Physically, not too hard. But the government red tape and environmentalist rules make it almost impossible especially in undisturbed areas. They would rather blame the oil companies for high prices than solve the problem (except yelling "conservation").

25 posted on 12/18/2006 10:01:45 AM PST by CedarDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

whew..thanx dor the xplanation...
Now what do I do with these three truck loads of Pabst Blue Ribbon beer ?


26 posted on 12/18/2006 10:06:30 AM PST by stylin19a ("Klaatu Barada Nikto")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger
"I have heard reports that China can produce oil for $25 per barrel from coal. We see it more in the $45 range here."

Everything is cheaper when produced with slave labor, and without environmental regs!

27 posted on 12/18/2006 10:08:36 AM PST by JimRed ("Hey, hey, Teddy K., how many girls did you drown today?" (Hello, I'm a TAGLINE virus. Please help m)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stylin19a

Turn them into diesel fuel...........you wouldn't have much trouble...........


28 posted on 12/18/2006 10:08:44 AM PST by Red Badger (New! HeadOn Hemorrhoid Medication for Liberals!.........Apply directly to forehead.........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger
If we had PBR's in our backyards, we wouldn't be having this conversation.......

I've got a few in my fridge. Think I'll crack one open.

29 posted on 12/18/2006 10:35:43 AM PST by GOP_Party_Animal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: GOP_Party_Animal

Careful you don't spill any of the Polonium 210 on you........


30 posted on 12/18/2006 10:36:28 AM PST by Red Badger (New! HeadOn Hemorrhoid Medication for Liberals!.........Apply directly to forehead.........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger
If we had PBR's in our backyards, we wouldn't be having this conversation.......


31 posted on 12/18/2006 1:15:06 PM PST by BlueMondaySkipper (The quickest way of ending a war is to lose it. - George Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Watch for the envirowhackos to sue, sue, sue, because it uses icky, dirty coal...


32 posted on 12/18/2006 8:20:46 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (“Don’t overestimate the decency of the human race.” —H. L. Mencken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: coloradan

yeah, why did some idiot invent the internal combustion engine when we had steam engines? And don't get me started on those atuomobiles! What was wrong with plain old horse power....! [sarc]


33 posted on 12/20/2006 3:06:27 AM PST by Diggadave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Bloody Sam Roberts

you are definitely too cynical: Shell is one of the largest alternative energy providers and has plenty of proprietory technology in this area.


34 posted on 12/20/2006 3:09:17 AM PST by Diggadave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

With rhat line of thought, we shouldn't use cotten because it was picked by slaves..........

Or, as Eli Whitney said, "Keep your cotton picking hands off my gin!".


35 posted on 12/20/2006 3:10:30 AM PST by tet68 ( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: JimRed

Actually, the labour costs are only really involved in the construction of the plant, which is relatively low in labour costs because most of it is automated, so CTL costs about the same anywhere, unless your coal is particularly high in sulphur content (and therefore more expensive to process).

The other factors that will effect the production cost is having to ship the coal to a plant somewhere else for processing, whereas the Chinese are building their CTL plants virtually on top of the feedstock (ie, the mines), and it is cheaper to ship the liquified fuel than the huge amounts of coal needed for processing.

Since most coal in the US is mined in areas far from existing refining capacity, you will need to persuade any investor in a CTL refinery that you can deliver the fuel products to market without added huge infrastructure costs (line additional rail lines, roads, etc) when the existing pipeline network isn't counted as a cost against mineral oil sources.

The other factor is the price of coal - which is being used more and more for power generation (see ExtremeExtremist's arguement in favour of nuclear technology as a power source), it hikes the price, which impacts the cost of CTL fuels.


36 posted on 12/20/2006 3:22:12 AM PST by Diggadave (You cannot buck the market, but you can make it tilt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

I'm not believing this until Volvo makes a car that runs on this stuff....

/sarc


37 posted on 12/20/2006 3:26:34 AM PST by Loud Mime (Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: coloradan
They're trying to liquefy coal, and turn hydrogen into a solid (sodium borohydride). Carburetors turn gasoline into a vapor. Why can't people just be happy with the way things are?

Damn straight. I'll have my Congresscritter Dan Lungren introduce a bill to outlaw phase conversion and energy conversion and leave things the way they are.

Rubber - ought be liquid like it comes right out of the tree ... hey - no more tires or at least a much smoother ride!

Bourbon - leave it like a gas the way it come (not comes, mind you!!) out of the still ... hey no more Saturday nites!

Let's get a new engine that burns fuel like a man would - liquid! None of them sissy intermediate stages like gasification an' mixing with air an' stuff.

Do it the ol' way so we can say: "that blowed up real good!!"

Sorry coloradan to go on this way but I'm assumin' you're on this parody trail - as we know - a trail with no end ...

38 posted on 12/20/2006 4:01:06 AM PST by SFConservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Diggadave
Shell is one of the largest alternative energy providers and has plenty of proprietory technology in this area.

Mobil Oil is the largest owner of solar panel technologies. If you want to build a solar panel, you will have to buy components from companies owned by Mobil or from companies who pay Mobil licensing fees to sell it...since Mobil bought up all the patents and such many years ago. They now sit on this and other technologies until such time as it economically benefits them to do otherwise.

This is more the type of thing I was alluding to.

The market for oil being what it is, it makes good business sense for companies to do this but given the current state of energy supplies and consuption it still seems a bit crass for them to do so.

39 posted on 12/20/2006 12:09:25 PM PST by Bloody Sam Roberts (This is my tagline. There are many like it but this one is mine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Bloody Sam Roberts

Even if this were true, remember that a patent is valid for only 17 years.


40 posted on 12/20/2006 12:15:56 PM PST by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-48 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson