ScienceDirect - Fuel Processing Technology : Liquefaction of lignocellulosic and plastic wastes with coal using carbon monoxi.

 

 

Liquefaction of lignocellulosic and plastic wastes with coal using carbon monoxide and aqueous alkali

 

Perhaps not a lot of new information herein, just more confirmation, if it was even needed, that coal and plastic wastes and sawdust (and old Intel's)  can be converted together into liquid fuel. 

 

The excerpt (please note the authors' affiliation.):

Abstract

An investigation has been made of the coprocessing of paper and other lignocellulosic wastes, and also of waste plastics, with coal via the COsteam route—treatment with CO, water and alkali at elevated pressures. The liquefaction of lignocellulosic and polymeric wastes was studied separately and then with the addition of coal. High conversion of lignocellulosic wastes could be achieved at 400°C. Polypropylene and polystyrene are completely converted to liquids and gases at 400°C; however, the conversion of high density polyethylene requires a temperature of 445°C. Coprocessing of Wyodak coal and lignocellulosics at 400°C did not change the yields or product quality compared with the liquefaction of Wyodak coal or lignocellulosics alone. However, the coprocessing of Wyodak coal and polypropylene at 400°C resulted in a decrease in coal conversion accompanied by an increase in the asphaltene fraction from coal. It is possible that the combination of free radicals from the polymer with coal fragments is responsible for this result. However, coliquefaction of Wyodak coal with less than 30% high density polyethylene at 445°C resulted in good coal conversion (85–90%) and did not increase the asphaltene yield from coal."

This, from the University of Pittsburgh. Another respected local institution, like WVU, showing us that coal can be converted into liquid fuels; and, renewable biomass (cellulose) and wastes can be combined with the coal to not only provide more raw material for liquid fuels, but to make the conversion process more efficient and profitable; and, through the inclusion of cellulose, to close the Carbon cycle.

Using this scenario, coal can lead us into a liquid fuel future that could ultimately rely in large part on renewable biomass for it's raw material, and clean up all our waste plastics as part of the bargain.

An effective coal liquefaction solvent obtained from the vacuum pyrolysis of waste rubber tires

Some of our previous posts documented how coal and used auto tires can be co-liquefied to produce raw materials that could be converted into liquid fuels. And, we noted there were "synergies" - the researchers' word, not ours - generated in the process by combining those feed stocks.

 

Herein is more documentation attesting to that fact.

 

The excerpt: 

"Titre du document / Document title

An effective coal liquefaction solvent obtained from the vacuum pyrolysis of waste rubber tires

Auteur(s) / Author(s)

ORR E. C. (1) ; SHI Y. (1) ; JI Q. (1) ; SHAO L. (1) ; VILLANUEVA M. (1) ; EYRING E. M. (1) ;

Affiliation(s) du ou des auteurs / Author(s) Affiliation(s)

(1) Department of Chemistry, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah 84112, ETATS-UNIS

Résumé / Abstract

Oil derived from vacuum pyrolysis of waste rubber tires was used as a coal liquefaction solvent with a high-volatile A bituminous coal and a Mo catalyst. The vacuum-pyrolyzed tire oil along with the Mo catalyst was found to convert over 90% (daf) of the coal to gas, oil, and asphaltenes. Reactions were carried out in tubing reactors heated to 430 °C under 1000 psig (cold) of hydrogen gas. The vacuum-pyrolyzed tire oil (PTO) obtained from waste rubber tires contained various polyaromatic molecules which have been shown to be beneficial in coal liquefaction. Coal conversion was found to be hydrogen pressure dependent for reactions where coal and PTO were coprocessed together. Conversion results show that most of the coal reacted within the first 10 min of coprocessing. Electron probe microanalysis (EPMA) detected the presence of Mo inside coal particles after 20 min of coprocessing coal and PTO."

 

As we understand this, old tires will help convert more than 90% of our coal to petroleum products. In other words, for every ton of coal, we would get the equivalent of more than 3 barrels of, essentially, crude petroleum. That, we would suspect, in terms of chemical engineering, is more than "pretty good".

 

We wanted to follow up quickly on our dispatch concerning your Cap & Trade Legislation op-ed piece, and our first response concerning the research at Cornell which illustrates that Ethanol isn't a very attractive option compared to other liquid fuels - especially those made from coal..

 

We will provide documentation of what we herein relate, if needed/requested.

 

But, Cornell's Pimental asserts that ethanol requires about half again as much energy to produce as it actually provides.

 

What isn't clearly stated is that much of that needed extra energy comes from burning coal in the Iowa power plants serving the several ethanol producing facilities there.

 

Iowa has some of it's own coal, but it's mostly lignite that will generate a lot of waste ash, relative to WV-type bituminous, and just as much CO2 when it's combusted to generate electricity.

 

They might import coal for their power plants from southern Illinois, in which case it would be about the same as "Pittsburgh" seam types widely exploited in our area. It wouldn't be any worse than what we have, but no better, either.

 

Point is: They are burning coal to get the power to convert corn into ethanol. The process of making ethanol is just a very indirect and wildly inefficient coal-to-liquid fuel conversion process.

 

We would be far better off converting our coal directly into methanol, an established technology whose end product has more "energy density" than ethanol in the first place, provides a material which can be efficiently converted into gasoline, and is, plainly, a more direct, more efficient and cleaner use of coal.