Energy Citations Database (ECD) - Sponsored by OSTI
In a number of our previous reports, we've documented the Carbon Dioxide recycling achievements of several highly-accomplished scientists: Carol Kreutz, Etsuko Fujita and Meyer Steinberg, all of whom worked in our taxes-paid employ at our own United States Department of Energy's Brookhaven, NY, National Laboratory.
In one of those previous reports, in fact, as accessible via:
USDOE 1976 Atmospheric CO2 to Methanol | Research & Development; which concerns: "United States Patent 3,959,094 - Electrolytic Synthesis of Methanol from CO2; 1976; Inventor: Meyer Steinberg, NY; Assignee: The USA as represented by the USDOE; Abstract: A method and system for synthesizing methanol from the CO2 in air using electric power";
we saw that our USDOE, and other branches of our US Government, knew, fully thirty-five years ago, that Carbon Dioxide could be productively reclaimed and recycled into liquid hydrocarbon fuels.
And, so promising was Steinberg's achievement, in US Patent 3,959,094, that he was apparently allowed and assigned to keep working on the development of such technology, with the result that a process was designed wherein a theoretical 100% of the Carbon Dioxide emitted by a Coal-fired power plant could be captured, and then be efficiently converted into Methanol.
Comment and additional information follows, and is inserted within, excerpts from the initial link and another following, included since that initial link might not prove durable, in this dispatch, to:
"Brookhaven National Laboratory Report Number 63316
The Carnol Process System for CO2 Mitigation and Methanol Production
Meyer Steinberg, Department of Advanced Technology, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY
Abstract - The feasibility of an alternative CO2 mitigation system and a methanol production process is investigated. The Carnol system has three components: (i) a coal-fired power plant supplying flue gas CO2, (ii) the Carnol process which converts the CO2 with H2 from natural gas to methanol, (iii) use of methanol as a fuel component in the automotive sector.
For the methanol production process alone, up to 100% CO2 emission reduction can be achieved; for the entire system, up to 65% CO, emission reduction can be obtained.
(The lower emission reduction results from the fact that the power plant CO2, as Steinberg posits, will be recycled into fuel, and, thus, essentially and ultimately, be "re-burned".)
The Carnol system is technically feasible and economically competitive with alternative CO2-disposal
systems for coal-fired power plants.
The Carnol process is estimated to be economically attractive compared to the current market price of methanol, especially if credit can be taken for carbon as a marketable co-product.
(As indicated above, some elemental Carbon is generated as a "co-product"; and, we will have some suggestions as to what can be done with it to make it more "marketable".)
In the US., about one-third of the CO2 comes from the industrial sector (mainly from central power stations which are largely fueled by coal ... .
In this paper, we describe and develop the Carnol system, which converts CO2 from coal-fired power-plant stack gases with natural gas (NG) to produce methanol as a liquid fuel for use in automotive engines.
Carbon is produced as a co-product and is a storable commodity.
The carbon from coal is used twice and, therefore, the CO2 is greatly reduced compared to conventional systems.
The basis for the Carnol system depends on integration of the following four developments:
1. A significant amount of effort and improvement has gone into the removal of CO2 from the stack gas of fossil fuel-burning plants, particularly for recovery and disposal of CO2 ... . In the Carnol configuration, it is proposed to utilize the CO2 rather than dispose and sequester it.
2. To provide H2 to reduce the CO, to methanol, it is proposed to decompose methane (from abundant Natural Gas) thermally to H2 and Carbon. In order to produce H2 without generation of CO2, it is proposed not to bum the Carbon produced but to use it instead as a materials commodity.
(We are absolutely compelled to interrupt here. There are far, far better options for obtaining the needed Hydrogen than by decomposing Natural Gas, the extraction of which, as seen for just a few examples in:
Marcellus Shale Gas and the "Terrible, Horrible...Very Bad" | Research & Development; and,
The Marcellus Shale, and "Gasland" | Research & Development;
can lead to some truly grotesque environmental consequences. There are, as seen in:
NASA Hydrogen from Water and Sunlight | Research & Development; and,
Hydrogen from Wind Power | Research & Development; and,
Germany Makes Economical Hydrogen from H2O | Research & Development;
some far, far more economically- and environmentally-sensible options for obtaining that Hydrogen.)
It is proposed to react the CO2-saturated monoethanolamine (MEA) solvent used in the recovery of CO2 from coal-fired power-plant stack gases to produce methanol.
It is proposed to use the methanol produced in the Carnol system as an alternative fuel in automotive internal combustion engines in the transportation sector. It is recognized that in order to make an impact on CO2 reduction, a large market must be available for the methanol product. The automotive fuel market provides that possibility. It is shown that methanol is 30% more efficient in IC engines than conventional gasoline, thus providing further incentives for reducing CO2 emissions.
(We must note that using Methanol directly as an automotive fuel is certainly feasible, but does have some drawbacks. It is, for instance, not as "energy-dense" as Gasoline, and, it can, in high concentrations, cause some corrosion problems in auto engines not deliberately built with materials intended to accommodate high concentrations of Methanol in the fuel system. The same is true of our current liquid fuel transportation, storage and delivery infrastructure. However, as can be learned, for just one out of now many examples, in:
Mobil Oil Coal to Methanol to Gasoline | Research & Development; wherein is explained: "United States Patent 4,447,310 - Production of Distillates through Methanol to Gasoline; 1984; Mobil Oil Corporation, NY;
Abstract: A process for producing a wide slate of fuel products from coal is provided by integrating a methanol-to-gasoline conversion process with coal liquefaction and coal gasification";
there are technologies that have been developed and which are available to convert Methanol, synthesized from whatever intriguing source, into Gasoline.)
The Synthesis of Methanol With Zero CO2 Emission: The hydrogen ... is used to react with CO2 recovered from (a) coal fired power plant.
If one mole of CO2 is removed from the stack gases to produce 1 mole methanol, then when, the methanol is combusted as fuel, one mole of CO2 is produced. Therefore, the net generation of CO2 for production of methanol is zero.
(Could not, then, the resulting net reduction in CO2 emissions attributable to automobiles, which use Methanol synthesized from "stack gases", be accounted as "credits" to the "coal fired power plant" that, in the first place, generated such a valuable raw material, i.e., Carbon Dioxide?)
Using (monoethanolamine) solvent gases, it is reported that it requires at least 25% of the capacity of the power plant to remove and recover CO2 from the stack gases of the power plant. With improvement in absorber packing, the pressure drop for feeding flue gas through the absorber using a hindered amine solvent the fraction loss of power to recover 90% of the CO2 from a coal burning plant is reduced to 12%.
About 92% of the energy is needed in the stripper portion of the recovery system which is obtained from the low pressure side of the turbine and reduces the net power output of the plant. However, if the CO2 is reacted with hydrogen, methanol is produced in an exothermic reaction and that energy can be used to strip out the CO2 from the MEA and therefore it becomes unnecessary to take steam from the power plant for this purpose.
Furthermore, if a liquid phase slurry catalyst system is used with an MEA solvent, the heat of reaction resulting from the synthesis of methanol is sufficient to distill out the methanol from the MEA solvent. The
synthesis of methanol has an exothermic heat of reaction of 33 Kcal/gm mol CO2 (or MeOH), which is more than enough to provide the heat of vaporization of methanol which is only 9 Kdmol.
(In other words, the overall process of converting Carbon Dioxide into Methanol generates so much extra exothermic heat energy itself that the heat energy can be recovered and is more than sufficient to power the capture and extraction of the Carbon Dioxide from the flue gas. It is better than energy-neutral.)
(Given current conditions) the methanol can be produced for $0.45/gal. However, recently due to the mandated use of methanol for MTBE oxygenation of gasoline, the price of methanol has increased to as high as $1.30/gal and has then dropped back to about $0.70/gal. At these prices, the Carnol process can easily meet these market costs, even when charging for CO2 from the power plant at a rate of as high as $108/ton.
(In other words, a Coal-fired power plant could charge a Carnol-process Methanol manufacturing facility as much as "$108" per ton for the Carbon Dioxide they delivered to the Methanol plant, and, the Methanol made there could then still be price-competitive in the current market.
The general conclusion is that the Carnol process is potentially competitive with conventional methanol prices while significantly reducing CO2 emissions.
The Carnol process system configuration appears to be technically feasible and economically viable both
as a CO2 mitigation method for coal-fired power plants and as a methanol production process compared to the conventional method especially when considering credit for marketing the carbon co-product."
------------------
And, note: That "carbon co-product" is generated only when the needed Hydrogen is obtained by a process that reacts Steam with Natural Gas, as Steinberg specifies as his route of obtaining that Hydrogen.
As we documented in comments inserted above, and as we will document in reports to follow, there are far, far better ways to obtain the needed Hydrogen.
However, should the Natural Gas lobby insist on having a piece of the action, then any residual, elemental Carbon that is co-produced could simply be dumped, with Coal, into a process such as that described in:
Eastman Coal to Methanol and Electric Power | Research & Development; concerning: "US Patent Application 20060096298 - Method for Satisfying Variable Power Demand; 2006; Assignee: Eastman Chemical Company, TN; Abstract: A process for satisfying variable power demand and a method for maximizing the monetary value of a synthesis gas stream are disclosed. One or more synthesis gas streams are produced by gasification of carbonaceous materials and passed to a power producing zone to produce electrical power during a period of peak power demand or to a chemical producing zone to produce chemicals such as, for example, methanol, during a period of off-peak power demand";
and be converted, with Coal, as the situation dictated, into either electricity, or, more Methanol.
And, another thing:
Steinberg performs all of his Carbon Dioxide reduction calculations, which we haven't reproduced in our excerpts, based on the concept of directing all of the Methanol synthesized from power plant CO2 into use as an automotive fuel.
There are additional, productive and profitable, options that would reduce the total CO2 emissions even further.
As seen in:
Coal and CO2 to Gasoline and Plastics via Methanol | Research & Development; which relates, in part, that:
"Using the methanol to olefin (MTO) process, methanol can also be converted to ethylene and propylene, the two largest chemicals produced by the petrochemical industry. These are important building blocks for the production of essential polymers (LDPE, HDPE, PP) and other chemical intermediates (that) are currently produced mainly from petroleum feedstock"; and, in:
Plastics News - China plant to use methanol-to-olefins technology; which relates that:
Wison (Nanjing) Clean Energy Co. Ltd. will use technology from Honeywell International’s UOP LLC unit to convert methanol from ... coal into olefins. Honeywell announced that it will provide technology licenses, basic engineering, catalysts, adsorbents, specialty equipment and technical services for the plant, which is scheduled to start up in 2013. The plant, in Nanjing, China, will be one of the world’s first methanol-to-olefin production facilities. It is projected to produce 295,000 metric tons per year of ethylene and propylene";
we can, in addition to Gasoline, also synthesize a variety of very useful Plastics from Methanol, regardless of it's source.
And, if the source of the Methanol is the USDOE's CO2-recycling Carnol process, as described by Steinberg herein, then, as the USDOE specifies, "CO2 from the stack gases of" a Coal-fired "power plant" would be productively and profitably, and permanently, sequestered in a variety of quite useful plastics that could even supplant the use of wood in some applications, thus helping to keep our forests standing, green, and growing, and, absorbing and sequestering Carbon Dioxide from the atmosphere.
And, the profits from that productive "sequestration" could, and should, flow directly back to the vicinity of the "power plant" where that "CO2 from the stack gases" was collected.
"Profits coming in" sounds a whole lot better than "Cap & Trade taxes going out", don't it?