Electricity with CO2 Recycling

 
 
The enclosed report introduces yet more information detailing how technologies for our use of coal can be fully integrated to generate power and synthesize liquid fuels concurrently, and reduce emissions of Carbon Dioxide as a productive function of the overall process.
 
Other references detailing these developments are available, and we will attempt to summarize the import of this technology following the excerpt: 

"Document title

MHD power systems for reduction of CO2 emission

Journal Title

Energy conversion and management; 1998, vol. 39, pp. 529-539

Authors

ISHIKAWA M; STEINBERG M.;

Authors Affiliations

Department of Electrical Engineering, Kyoto University, Yoshida-Honmachi, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, JAPON
Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, Long Island, NY 11973, ETATS-UNIS

Abstract

To reduce the emission of CO2 into the atmosphere, two schemes are proposed. The first one is a coal-fired MHD-steam combined power generation system where coal is burned with oxygen rather than air, the obtained high temperature is utilized for the MHD generator and the CO2 is liquefied and recovered. The cycle efficiency with CO2 recovery is estimated to be 45.3% (HHV). Another scheme is a combination of liquid fuel production and MHD-steam combined system, where the CARNOL processes of methanol production are used to reduce CO2 emission from sectors where collection of COI is otherwise impossible, such as highly dispersed heat engines and small scale fuel users. The carbon produced from the CARNOL processes is used as a fuel for the MHD-steam combined cycle, and CO2 is liquefied and recovered. 56.2 kg/sec of methanol is produced while the net power delivered to the grid is 370.7 MW, 42.2 kg/sec of CH4 is consumed."
 
First of all, "MHD" abbreviates "Magnetohydrodynamic", a mouthful, which denotes the technology of generating electricity by passing a mixture of gases, ionized by high temperature, through a magnetic field.
 
In this concept, that gas arises from coal combustion. And, after MHD power generation, the Carbon Dioxide in the gas used for that electricity generation is collected and converted, via the Carnol technology we've previously documented, into the liquid fuel and gasoline raw material, Methanol.
 
However, the Abstract is so abbreviated that what isn't clearly explained is the associated concept that CO2 can be collected from smaller sources of emission, as well, and also converted into liquid fuel. Unmentioned are the logistics of how the economics of a dispersed collection network would play out, but, certainly, for major CO2 emitters, such as coal-fired power plants, the concept could be feasible and practical, especially if other, mandated, costs, such as Cap & Trade and Sequestration, were thus eliminated.

Coal as Methanol Economy Basis

 
 
We want to continue emphasizing the extraordinary importance that the technology for converting both our abundant coal and coal's misunderstood shadow, Carbon Dioxide, into the versatile liquid fuel and gasoline precursor, Methanol, could have for the economies and the citizens of West Virginia and the United States.
 
The enclosed link leads to the web site of the "Institute For The Analysis Of Global Security".
 
We, honestly, have no idea who they are and cannot, through independent third parties, either elaborate on their identity, or confirm their bona fides.
 
However, the information they present on the industry and technology of Methanol production agrees in general, and in most specifics, with other summaries we've seen, and more information can be accessed via the link to Georgetown University included near the end of the excerpt, below:
 
(All emphases added.)
 
"Sources of Methanol

Today, methanol is produced in the U.S. for mostly nonfuel usage. There are eighteen U.S. methanol production plants, with a total annual capacity of over 2.6 billion gallons. Today most of the methanol in the U.S. is produced from natural gas. Shifting to methanol as our major transportation fuel requires greatly upping production. The biggest potential source of methanol in the U.S. is coal. (Oil can also be used to produce methanol, but this would defeat the purpose!) We've come a long way since the days when coal usage was synonymous with terrible pollution. These days plants using coal are among the cleanest power sources in the U.S. And plants using coal to produce methanol are the cleanest by far. By a simple reaction between coal and steam, a gas mixture called syn-gas (synthesis gas) is formed. The components of this mixture are carbon monoxide and hydrogen, which through an additional chemical reaction are converted to methanol. 

A major powerplant in Tampa, Florida, built under the auspices of the Department of Energy, has proven the feasibility of converting coal to syn-gas on a very large scale. This process does not release carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Although the syn-gas in this plant is utilized as fuel for gas turbine electric generators, the same process can be taken a step further, by reacting the carbon monoxide and hydrogen in the syn-gas over a catalyst, to produce methanol on a large scale. Not only are the emissions of this syn-gas plant well below regulatory limits - it is one of the cleanest coal-based power plants in the world - but the sulfur content of the coal is utilized as raw material for fertilizer production, rather than being emitted to the atmosphere as a pollutant.

In Kingsport, Tennessee, a plant participating in the Department of Energy's Clean Coal Technology Program combines both processes, for clean mass production of methanol from coal at under $0.50 a gallon.
 
Biomass can be converted to syn-gas by a process called partial oxidation, and later converted to methanol. Biomass is organic material, such as urban wood wastes, primary mill residues, forest residues, agricultural residues, and dedicated energy crops (e.g. sugar cane and sugar beets,) that can be made into fuel. The U.S. Department of Energy estimates 2.45 billion metric tons a year of biomass are available for U.S. fuel production. One ton can be converted to 186 gallons (721 liters) of methanol.
 
(Such practice would also, one must presume, offer the additional value of "Carbon Offsets".)

In the United States there are numerous unused nuclear reactors. These reactors could be brought into electricity production within a relatively short timeframe. The electrical energy produced by these reactors could be utilized to convert water into hydrogen by one of several processes. This hydrogen could be further reacted with carbon dioxide to produce methanol. It is time to openly and thoroughly examine the feasibility of using our built and unutilized nuclear infrastructure to produce hydrogen based fuels. While nuclear energy is feared by many, it is a greatly misunderstood resource. Nuclear power is utilized as a prime energy source in countries like France and Sweden. In the United States, where nuclear energy supplies about 20% of our electrical power, not one American has been killed in a nuclear accident involving radiation exposure. On the other hand, thousands of Americans have been killed as a result of our energy dependence, and the funds that our oil dependence funnels to terrorist sponsoring regimes.
 
(Some interesting thoughts, but we're not fans of nuclear energy. The following might be, from our point of view, the better course to intensively develop, especially given West Virginia's wind and hydro power potential.) 

Electricity can also be generated by solar, wind, hydro and geothermal energy sources (while these resources supply a much smaller amount of energy than nuclear power and can't supplant our other energy sources, they are an important supplement we should fully utilize.) As just mentioned, electricity can be used to convert water into hydrogen, which is then reacted with carbon dioxide to form methanol.

More information:
Georgetown University Advanced Vehicle Development Program: An Investigation of the Feasibility of Coal-Based Methanol for Application in Transportation Fuel Cell Systems, April 2004 - Summary, Full report "

Penn State Seeks CoalTL Patent

 
 
We earlier informed you that, inexplicably, West Virginia and WVU were, seemingly, standing idle while the Chinese government and their Japanese corporate partners filed for a US Patent on Coal-to-Liquid conversion technology, a technology which our assessment suggests is directly derived from the "West Virginia Process" for coal liquefaction.
 
Now, a long-time rival of West Virginia University, Penn State, has filed for a similar, international, patent on technology for converting coal into liquid fuel.
 
Excerpt as follows:
 
"Pub. No.:    WO/2008/130746    International Application No.:    PCT/US2008/056575
Publication Date: 30.10.2008 International Filing Date: 12.03.2008
IPC: C10G 1/00 (2006.01)
Applicants: THE PENN STATE RESEARCH FOUNDATION [US/US]; 304 Old Main, University Park, PA 16802 (US) (All Except US).
SCHOBERT, Harold, H. [US/US]; (US) (US Only).
Inventor: SCHOBERT, Harold, H.; (US).
Agent: FISH, Paul, W. et al.; Rader, Fishman & Grauer Pllc, 1233 20th Street, N.w., Suite 501, Washington, DC 20036 (US).
Priority Data:
60/907,882   20.04.2007   US
12/068,937   13.02.2008   US
Title & Abstract:: INTEGRATED PROCESS AND APPARATUS FOR PRODUCING COAL-BASED JET FUEL, DIESEL FUEL, AND DISTELLATE FUELS
 
 Coal-based jet fuel, diesel fuel and/or distillate fuels are produced by selectively introducing a coal-based product directly into the petroleum refinery process flow to thereby create an integrated refinery process for producing the distillate fuels."
 
In case you were wondering, "distillate fuels" would be alcohols and gasoline.
 
So, WVU and WV, and the US, are, as we have thoroughly documented, allowing China and Japan to patent, in the US, the West Virginia Process for converting coal into liquid fuels. And, WVU is sitting on the bench while their long-time rival, Penn State, scores, internationally, with similar technology.

CO2 Provides Pollution Solution

 
We've thoroughly documented that the Carbon Dioxide arising from our employment of coal can be efficiently collected from flue gas and then converted, through various processes, into valuable liquid fuels.
 
In one such process, CO2 can be first converted into methane gas, which itself can then be converted, with the addition of more CO2, into the valuable liquid fuel, Methanol.
 
However, there are other intriguing options for the use of  CO2-derived Methane.
 
A portion of the Methane so produced could be used, as in the enclosed study, to remove another, much-maligned, set of compounds from coal plant emissions, as in the following excerpt from the enclosed link: 

"STUDY: METHANE CLEANS NITRIC OXIDE FROM POWER PLANT EMISSIONS

COLUMBUS, Ohio -- Ohio State University engineers have found a way to use methane to remove toxic nitric oxide emissions from the stack gases of coal-burning power plants.

This new method of catalytically reducing nitric oxide with methane removes up to 100 percent of nitric oxide from stack gases in a safer and less expensive way than any currently available."

In other words, collecting CO2 from flue gas, with the intent of converting it into "natural gas", which can then be used to synthesize liquid fuels, could provide a means to remove almost all of the potentially hazardous nitric oxide from the same flue gas; and, do it more cheaply than we can now.

We've over-used the word "synergy" previously, when documenting efficiencies inherent, and available for us to profit by, in the conversion of our abundant coal into now-scarce liquid fuels and industrial chemicals that have so far been based solely on petroleum. It is difficult to resist the temptation to employ it yet again.

However, we will ask a question, or questions, we've asked, in general terms, before:

How much more complete does our understanding have to be? How much more valuable does the technology of coal-to-liquid conversion, and it's associated technologies of CO2 extraction and conversion, have to be? How technically, economically and environmentally good do they have to be before we drop the pretenses and dismiss the false objections, and begin converting our abundant domestic coal into materials that will replace those derived from increasingly scarce and increasingly, in several insidious ways, expensive foreign petroleum? 

Recycle CO2 - Korea

 

We have documented the practical feasibility of capturing and recycling the CO2 by-product of our coal-use industries, especially by adding it to "syngas" blends, themselves derived from coal, intended for conversion into liquid fuels. But, an article today in the WV Coal News, concerning the costs and difficulties of capturing CO2 generated from coal at the Great Plains Synfuels Plant, and then piping the gas up into Canada to help, to subsidize, Big Oil operations there which are attempting to extort a few last drops of petroleum from an almost-depleted oil field, so that we can be further extorted with their produce, has prompted us to submit more documentation, if more were still needed, that Carbon Dioxide is a valuable by-product of our coal use industries. 
 
Korea, where Imperial Japan established one of their several factories that converted coal into liquid fuels during World War II, has been studying the technology that does exist, on a practical basis, to capture the Carbon Dioxide emitted by coal-use processes and recycle it, convert it, into liquid fuels.
 
Some excerpts:

"Journal Title

Industrial & engineering chemistry research; American Chemical Society, Washington, DC, 1987  

Document title

Optimal Design of Synthesis Gas Production Process with Recycled Carbon Dioxide Utilization

Authors

CHOI Seungjune ; PARK Jehun; HAN Chonghun; SUP YOON En;

Affiliations

Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering, Seoul National University, 151-744, Seoul, COREE, REPUBLIQUE DE

Abstract

Many countries are trying to reduce their primary energy demand and greenhouse gas (such as carbon dioxide (CO2)) emissions. There has been much research on CO2 utilization to reduce CO2 emission and increase economic efficiency in industries. In this paper, an integrated optimization strategy of an industrial synthesis gas production plant with additional CO222 emission decreased by 31% from the base case to the optimal structure. Three other extensions to the optimal design were evaluated for the case studies."   recycling processes using carbon dioxide as a reactant is presented. The CO recycling process allows three different kinds of alternative synthesis gas reaction processes in parallel: steam reforming, dry methane reforming, and reverse water-gas shift reaction. The strategy is based on the integrated superstructure optimization that assists the formulation of the optimal process design problem such that mixed integer programming can be derived. The mathematical programming problem which has flexibility in selecting different synthesis gas reaction processes is used to find the optimal configuration of the process. The industrial synthesis gas plant case studies have been applied to present the optimization strategy. With the optimum configuration, the annualized profit increased by 14% and CO
 
We don't pretend to understand much of the technical language. One clear message, though, about CO2 recycling, besides the fact it can be done, is that the Koreans, as herein, figured it out twenty years ago, about seventy years after Paul Sabatier was lionized by the Nobel Committee for revealing the fact.