But you can't get out more or even equal to what you put in in terms of energy content. There have to be some losses along the way, especially if a steam cycle is involved. I'm wondering what the energy balance looks like for the whole plant. That is, for a BTU out contained in a hydrocarbon product, how much went in to produce it?
I don't mean this to imply its not a good idea, as it makes use of a domestically-available material and perhaps it puts it into a more eco-friendly form. We just need to know how much raw material usage we're talking about if we're thinking of going this way to, say, displace a significant fraction of foreign-sourced petroleum products in the transport fuel sector (which is the number one thing we should do if we want to get off of the foreign oil addiction that people worry about).
Of course not--but by getting the fuel into a source that can be used directly in fuel cells, the MUCH higher conversion efficiency of the fuel cell more than compensates for those losses. It is the efficiency of the TOTAL CYCLE that counts---not just the efficiency of the gasification process vs. combustion.
And in fact, for central power usage, coal gasification/fuel cells is an even BETTER combination, as what is called the "solid oxide fuel cell" can eat BOTH the hydrogen AND the carbon monoxide.
It is the use of the fuel cell in the total conversion process that makes major gains in efficiency possible.