Clean Energy from Coal-Derived DME

 
In the course of our dispatches documenting the truth that coal can be economically converted, via established, even well-known, technologies, into all the liquid fuels and organic chemical manufacturing materials we need, and pave the way to sustainability, through direct and indirect routes of carbon dioxide recycling, we've guided you to some commercially-available research reports on the subject. Herein is another. And, it might be one you should consider acquiring, if you do, as we believe everyone in Coal Country should, want to know the full truth of coal's vast potential to provide us with clean liquid fuels, plastics manufacturing raw materials, and innovative technological bases for recycling Carbon Dioxide that would establish true sustainability in all of those industrial endeavors.
 
The excerpt:
 
"Clean Energy from Dimethyl Ether

SRI Consulting Publishes Techno-Economic DME from Coal Report

MENLO PARK, Calif.---Dimethyl ether (DME) is a clean energy fuel that can be manufactured from various primary energy resources including coal. DME is a colorless, nontoxic and environmentally benign compound used in industry today as a solvent and a propellant in aerosol products. When DME is combusted, it generates absolutely no sulfur oxides and 90% less nitrogen oxide emissions than today’s fossil fuels. Today, SRI Consulting (SRIC) published its techno-economic report DME from Coal providing detailed analysis of two leading DME from coal technologies and their process economics.

Author and SRIC senior consultant Ron Smith commented, “According to the International Energy Agency, long term global energy demand is expected to increase by 60% between 2002 and 2030. In this report, we have calculated that DME as an energy source is economically viable when the crude oil price is at US$55 a barrel. Clearly DME needs to be part of the future energy supply.”

Conventional DME (methanol dehydration) technology lacks the efficiency for large-scale production. By integrating coal gasification and single step DME technology, large-scale production can be achieved from low cost coal. SRIC‘s DME from Coal report provides process economics for integrated production of DME from coal using indirect process technology developed by Haldor-Topsoe, and a direct process technology developed by JFE Holding. The report shows comparative economic summary results for both technologies which are presented at two different capacity levels, 2500 and 5000 metric tons/day.

The DME from Coal report is essential for technical and business managers involved in planning and understanding the market potential of DME as a fuel for power generation, transportation, and domestic use, as well as for the production of industrial chemicals."

Again:

"DME is a clean energy fuel that can be manufactured from ... coal" and "we have calculated that DME as an energy source is economically viable when the crude oil price is at US$55 a barrel."

Oil closed yesterday, November 10, 2009, on the New York Mercantile Exchange, at US$78, and change, per barrel.

Belgium & Coal-Methanol-Plastics

 
Coal is mentioned only peripherally in this report. But, coal is noted as a source of methanol, along with carbon-recycling biomass. And, the utility of methanol, as a route of carbon sequestration, through it's use as a raw material for versatile plastics, is reaffirmed.
 
The excerpt:
 

"Total to make plastics from methanol

The oil company opened a demonstration plant to produce olefins and polyolefins from methanol.

Paris-based  Total (NYSE: TOT) announced today that it inaugurated a demonstration plant in Feluy, Belgium, to make plastics from methanol.

The company said the 45 million Euro integrated unit is the world's first application of the technology, which will produce olefins and polyolefins from methanol, helping to diversify the source of plastic feedstock.

"Given that energy demand will continue to grow, petroleum supply will be tight and the prices should stay at a high level, we firmly believe that the methanol to olefins process will play a vital role in the production of petrochemical products in the future," said François Cornélis, president of chemicals at Total, in a statement.

The process uses technology from UOP, a subsidiary of Morris Township, N.J.-based Honeywell International.

"Integrating the methanol to olefins and olefin cracking processes makes it possible to produce light olefins at a very reasonable cost."

Total said the petrochemicals industry currently relies on oil and natural gas derivatives, naphtha or ethane, to produce olefins, which are subsequently converted into polyolefins, the raw material for plastics.

The company said the pilot plant was designed to assess the technical feasibility and cost effectiveness of two integrated processes that produce olefins and subsequently polyolefins from methanol, which Total said can be obtained from natural gas, coal or biomass."

We've reported previously on the coal conversion expertise of UOP-Honeywell. And, we've no idea why the French company, TOTAL, are approaching this Belgian facility as a yet another "pilot plant", when China is now starting to exploit the vast potential of methanol, derived from coal, in plastics manufacturing in a very serious way.

But, note: In Belgium, this French company are utilizing US technology to process methanol obtained from "coal or" carbon-recycling "biomass" into valuable, very useful, carbon-sequestering products.

Bio Improves CoalTL - SI University

 
We've recently been focusing on the potential of liquefying the "lignin" component of woody biomass, in combination with coal,  to both increase the potential volume of liquid fuel production and to provide an inherent route of Carbon Dioxide recycling.
 
A number of researchers, as we've documented, have clearly demonstrated that cellulose, which comprises, roughly, 50% of the mass of wood, can be converted synergistically with coal into liquid fuel compounds.
 
Confirming a few citations we've already brought to your attention, the enclosed report from Southern Illinois University, who, again as we've reported, have been working to refine some processes of coal liquefaction, shows again that lignin, which can account for up to 30% of woody biomass, can be liquefied along with coal. Like other reports, it demonstrates that, not only can lignin be liquefied with coal, it actually enhances, or improves, the efficiency of the process.
 
Comment follows the excerpt:
 
Title: Lignin-assisted coal depolymerization. Technical report, December 1, 1991--February 29, 1992
 
Author: Lalvani, S.B.
 
Date: August 1, 1992
 
Report Number: DOE/PC/91334--T62; DOE Contract Number: FG22-91PC91334
 
Research Organization: Southern Illinois Univ., Carbondale, IL . Dept. of Mechanical Engineering and Energy Processes
 
Sponsoring Organization: USDOE, Washington, DC;Illinois Dept. of Energy and Natural Resources, Springfield, IL 
 
Abstract:
 
Previous research has shown that addition of lignin and lignin-derived liquids to coal stirred in tetralin under mild reaction conditions (375{degrees}C and 300--500 psig) results in a marked enhancement in the rate of coal depolymerization. In this quarterly report, overall mass balances on experiments conducted with tetralin, coal, lignin and coal-lignin mixture are reported. Overall mass recoveries of 95--99% of the total mass charged to the reactor were obtained. A number of experiments were conducted on coal, lignin and coal-lignin depolymerization. A careful statistical analysis of the data shows that coal depolymerization is enhanced by 10.4%, due to the lignin addition. The liquids obtained are being examined for their elemental composition, and molecular weight determination by size exclusion chromatography. The stability of the liquid products is being examined in various environments. The gaseous product analyses show that the major gases produced during the course of depolymerization are CO, CH{sub 4}, and CO{sub 2}. When coal and lignin are reacted together, the amount of CO and CH{sub 4}produced respectively 12% and 38% greater than the corresponding amount of gases calculated, based on the weighted average of values obtained for coal and lignin alone. The data obtained show that lignin addition to coal is synergistic in that not only is the extent of coal depolymerization increased, but the gas produced contains higher concentrations of more desirable gaseous products."
 
First of all, they were using the hydrogen-donor solvent, tetralin, in this work. That relates it to WVU's "West Virginia Process" for coal liquefaction, which China, as we have earlier and substantively documented, is attempting to hijack via US and International patent filings.
 
Notably, confirming other research we've reported, utilizing the carbon-recycling lignin in a coal liquefaction process "results in a marked enhancement in the rate of coal depolymerization", with "mass recoveries of 95--99% of the total mass charged to the reactor".
 
In other words, combining carbon-recycling lignin with coal can result in a nearly 100% rate of liquefaction.
 
Recycling CO2 by liquefying coal with lignin results in a production of liquid fuel precursors up to "38% greater than the ... average of values obtained for coal and lignin alone. The data obtained show that lignin addition to coal is synergistic ... the extent of coal depolymerization increased ... (and) the gas produced contains higher concentrations of more desirable gaseous products."
 
And, again, we recycle Carbon Dioxide. That makes it all sound even "more desirable", doesn't it?

More Coal + Bio TL at South Illinois

 

Earlier, we sent you a progress report on development work sponsored by our own, US, Department of Energy, and being performed at Southern Illinois University, which demonstrated that a component of woody biomass, lignin, when combined with coal, aside from providing an integral route of carbon recycling, actually enhanced and improved the conversion of coal into liquid fuel raw materials.
 
Herein is the Final Report on that project. Comment follows the excerpt:
 
"Title: Lignin-assisted coal depolymerization. [Final] technical report, September 1, 1991--August 31, 1992
 
Authors: Lalvani, S.B.; Muchmore, C.B.; Koropchak, J.A.; Kim, Jong Won; South. Illinois. Univ.; USA
 
Date: December 31, 1992
 
Report Number: DOE/PC/91334--T117   DOE Contract Number: FG22-91PC91334
 
Abstract:
 
Liquefaction of an Illinois bituminous and a caustic lignin was studied in an initial hydrogen pressure of 140 psig. Experiments were conducted in the temperature range of 325-375{degree}C in tetralin. The addition of lignin to coal was found to be synergistic in that it significantly improves the quality and yield of the liquid products obtained. Kinetic data for coal conversion enhancement due to lignin addition were obtained. A mathematical model describing the reaction chemistry, using lignin, has been proposed and developed. The analysis of the results indicates that the intermediates produced from lignin were responsible for enhancement in coal depolymerization rate, however, the intermediates are short-lived as compared to the time needed for a significant coal conversion yield. Coal depolymerization rate was found to be a function of time; compared to processing coal alone, it doubled upon reacting coal with lignin at 375{degree}C and after 67 minutes from the beginning of the experiment. Overall mass recoveries of 95--98% of the total mass charged to the reactor were obtained. A careful statistical analysis of the data shows that coal depolymerization yield is enhanced by 11.9% due to the lignin addition. The liquids obtained were examined for their elemental composition, and molecular weight determination by size exclusion chromatography. The stability of liquid products was characterized by determining their solubility in pentane and benzene, and by evaluating the molecular weight."
 
As with other research clearly demonstrating that coal can be efficiently converted into the liquid fuel materials we seem, in the US, to rather desperately need, this effort was sponsored and supervised by our own US Government's Department of Energy. This work clearly demonstrates that coal can be converted into liquid fuel raw materials, and done so efficiently when combined with a biological resource that provides an inherent route of Carbon Dioxide recycling.
 
Since this successful work with coal was overseen and supervised by our own, US, government, why have we US citizens, especially those of us in Coal Country, not yet heard of it?
 
Clearly, we have in hand the solutions to two problems, the defenses against two threats:
 
Liquid fuel shortages and the concomitant flow of our US wealth to overseas, unfriendly oil powers can be stopped by converting our domestic coal into liquid fuels.
 
The potential danger of global warming, possibly caused by carbon emissions, can be, at least in part, averted by utilizing botanical resources to supplement, enhance and improve our use of coal.
 
Again, this is US Guv-sponsored research. We paid for it. Why hasn't the product been publicly delivered to us?

Coal vs. Corn Ethanol in CA; Corn Flunks

 
As with many topics we've addressed in our documentation of the very practical reality of coal-to-liquid conversion technologies and potentials, we've flogged the misperception of corn-based ethanol as being some sort of "solution" to our liquid fuel shortages nearly to death.
 
Among the many fallacies about the popular concepts of ethanol derived from agricultural sources is the one that it is somehow "cleaner" than coal or petroleum, or liquid fuels derived from coal.
 
We won't recap our several refutations of that flawed concept, but, as in the enclosed, California recently put the official lie to it.
 
Brief comment follows: 

"Corn-Based Ethanol Flunks Key Test

Dan Charles

Last week, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) adopted a low-carbon fuel standard that requires greater use of fuels that cause lower greenhouse gas emissions, compared with gasoline. Corn-based ethanol doesn't meet that test and won't benefit from the new standard, CARB says, because diverting corn into ethanol production increases deforestation and the clearing of grasslands. The biofuels industry has attacked the board's methodology, as well as similar conclusions in a regulation drafted last year by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency that is under review by the Obama Administration."

Note that President Obama's Administration drew similar "conclusions".  Aside from being a misuse of precious food-growing cropland, the production of liquid fuels from agricultural produce is no "cleaner" than producing all the liquid fuels we need from our abundant coal, and establishing, with our coal-to-liquid conversion industry, a conjoined system of Carbon Dioxide recycling, as we've documented, based on synthetic liquid fuel production via Sabatier or Carnol technologies; or, through purpose-grown botanical resources, such as algae or trees, which can yield large amounts of carbon-recycling, but inedible, cellulose and lignin, that can be combined with coal in a suitably-designed and specified facility to make all the liquid fuels we need, from our own abundant coal, while at the same time recycling carbon dioxide.  

Now, if California and President Obama, who is, as we've thoroughly documented, a supporter of coal-to-liquid conversion technologies, recognize that diverting agricultural resources into the production of liquid fuel is a dreadfully short-sighted concept; a concept that offers no real advantages in terms of "cleanliness", or much of anything else, when will the popular press stop focusing on those spurious proposals? When will they start publicly promoting the very real energy salvation offered to us, by established, patented and Nobel Prize-winning, technologies, that would allow us to convert our abundant coal, and directly recycle carbon dioxide, into, again, the all the domestically-sourced liquid fuels we need?