Home » Public Forums » GMCnet » SYNTHETIC FUEL
| SYNTHETIC FUEL [message #102330] |
Sat, 09 October 2010 10:20  |
Michael Bozardt
Messages: 367
Registered: January 2007
Location: College Station, Texas
Karma: 1
|
Senior Member |
|
|
The following is quoted from an article by Dr Peter W. Becker. The article was found under Synthetic Fuels on the internet. The USA has a lot of coal, now mainly used to power electric plants I think. Beats the heck out of ethanol(my opinion). Synthetic fuel can be made from coal, natural gas, oil shale and biomass.....Michael at GEMRECS
"The Role of Synthetic Fuel
In World War II Germany
implications for today?
Dr. Peter W. Becker
The United States is faced with an acute energy problem. Our dependence on imported petroleum, which accounts for half of the country’s consumption, has caused rising balance of payments deficits that weaken the dollar and contribute to inflation. More worrisome in the long run for the future of this country is the realization that eventually most oil deposits, both foreign and domestic, will be depleted. This grim specter is accompanied by a lack of control over foreign supplies, leaving us dependent on the goodwill and mercy of the oil-producing states.
A third formula, the Fischer-Tropsch process, was, at that time, still in the research and testing stage. Under this system, coal is compressed into gas which is mixed with hydrogen. By placing this mixture in contact ovens and adding certain catalysts, oil molecules are formed. Further treatment of this primary substance generates fuel, chiefly diesel oil.
Coking and distillation extracted oils and tars from coal, and additional cracking refined them into gasoline. The Fischer-Tropsch process and a fourth method, the hydrogenation process, changed coal directly into gasoline. As coal is a hydrocarbon containing little hydrogen and gasoline is a hydrocarbon with a high hydrogen content, the problem consisted of attaching hydrogen molecules to coal, thereby liquefying it. This was the basis of the hydrogenation process, which required high temperatures and high pressures. By 1933, this method had been thoroughly tested and was ready for large-scale practical application. The advantage of the hydrogenation method was that as primary material it could use the tars from the distillation of both lignite and bituminous coal (although the distillation of the latter was not possible on a large scale until 1943) as well as lignite and bituminous coal directly.11"
[Updated on: Sat, 09 October 2010 10:21] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: SYNTHETIC FUEL [message #102387 is a reply to message #102330] |
Sun, 10 October 2010 08:50  |
 |
Matt Colie
Messages: 8547
Registered: March 2007
Location: S.E. Michigan
Karma: 7
|
Senior Member |
|
|
| Michael Bozardt wrote on Sat, 09 October 2010 11:20 |
The following is quoted from an article by Dr Peter W. Becker. The article was found under Synthetic Fuels on the internet. The USA has a lot of coal, now mainly used to power electric plants I think. Beats the heck out of ethanol(my opinion). Synthetic fuel can be made from coal, natural gas, oil shale and biomass.....Michael at GEMRECS
"The Role of Synthetic Fuel
In World War II Germany
implications for today?
Dr. Peter W. Becker
The United States is faced with an acute energy problem. Our dependence on imported petroleum, which accounts for half of the country’s consumption, has caused rising balance of payments deficits that weaken the dollar and contribute to inflation. More worrisome in the long run for the future of this country is the realization that eventually most oil deposits, both foreign and domestic, will be depleted. This grim specter is accompanied by a lack of control over foreign supplies, leaving us dependent on the goodwill and mercy of the oil-producing states.
A third formula, the Fischer-Tropsch process, was, at that time, still in the research and testing stage. Under this system, coal is compressed into gas which is mixed with hydrogen. By placing this mixture in contact ovens and adding certain catalysts, oil molecules are formed. Further treatment of this primary substance generates fuel, chiefly diesel oil.
Coking and distillation extracted oils and tars from coal, and additional cracking refined them into gasoline. The Fischer-Tropsch process and a fourth method, the hydrogenation process, changed coal directly into gasoline. As coal is a hydrocarbon containing little hydrogen and gasoline is a hydrocarbon with a high hydrogen content, the problem consisted of attaching hydrogen molecules to coal, thereby liquefying it. This was the basis of the hydrogenation process, which required high temperatures and high pressures. By 1933, this method had been thoroughly tested and was ready for large-scale practical application. The advantage of the hydrogenation method was that as primary material it could use the tars from the distillation of both lignite and bituminous coal (although the distillation of the latter was not possible on a large scale until 1943) as well as lignite and bituminous coal directly.11"
|
Mike,
While the article is good and the information is accurate, how will this help when the current administration has set a goal of putting coal mines out of business regardless of demand. (reference SF Chronicle - 08 October 2009)
Other remarks withheld because this might get political.
Matt
Matt & Mary Colie - Chaumière -'73 Glacier 23 - Members GMCMI, GMCGL, GMCES
Electronically Controlled Quiet Engine Cooling Fan with OE Rear Drum Brakes with Applied Control Arms
SE Michigan - Near DTW - Twixt A2 and Detroit
|
|
|
|
| Re: SYNTHETIC FUEL [message #102389 is a reply to message #102330] |
Sun, 10 October 2010 09:21 |
GeorgeRud
Messages: 1380
Registered: February 2007
Location: Chicago, IL
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I imagine a lot (if not all) has to do with the economics of producing the fuel, it's still probably cheaper to import the oil than to convert the coal.
Probably as costs of imported oil rise, these processes will become more feasable. If the EPA's policies (and those of the government as well) don't interfere, I imagine that we'll see some of these alternative energy sources coming into their own in the future.
George Rudawsky
Chicago, IL
75 Palm Beach
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] SYNTHETIC FUEL [message #102399 is a reply to message #102389] |
Sun, 10 October 2010 10:38 |
 |
USAussie
Messages: 15912
Registered: July 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Karma: 6
|
Senior Member |
|
|
G'day,
I humbly suggest that the oil producing countries will NEVER let the price
of oil reach a level that makes converting coal to gasoline becomes cost
effective!
Regards,
Rob M.
USAussie
-----Original Message-----
From: gmclist-bounces@temp.gmcnet.org
[mailto:gmclist-bounces@temp.gmcnet.org] On Behalf Of George Rudawsky
Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2010 9:22 AM
To: gmclist@temp.gmcnet.org
Subject: Re: [GMCnet] SYNTHETIC FUEL
I imagine a lot (if not all) has to do with the economics of producing the
fuel, it's still probably cheaper to import the oil than to convert the
coal.
Probably as costs of imported oil rise, these processes will become more
feasable. If the EPA's policies (and those of the government as well) don't
interfere, I imagine that we'll see some of these alternative energy sources
coming into their own in the future.
--
George Rudawsky
Chicago, IL
75 Palm Beach
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
List Information and Subscription Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
List Information and Subscription Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Regards,
Rob M. (USAussie)
The Pedantic Mechanic
Sydney, Australia
'75 Avion - AUS - The Blue Streak TZE365V100428
'75 Avion - USA - Double Trouble TZE365V100426
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] SYNTHETIC FUEL [message #102403 is a reply to message #102399] |
Sun, 10 October 2010 11:02 |
Craig Lechowicz
Messages: 541
Registered: October 2006
Location: Waterford, MI
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Don't remember the details, but I think they worked on coal to gas a lot in South Africa, back during the apartheid embargo days. I read somewhere where they got it down to about $70 or $80/ barrel, back when OPEC was at $25, so it was considered "too expensive". Doesn't sound like such a bad deal today, especially if you brought some serious scale to it.
Craig Lechowicz
'77 Kingsley, Waterford, MI
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: SYNTHETIC FUEL [message #102437 is a reply to message #102389] |
Sun, 10 October 2010 18:02 |
|
|
This technology that was originally developed by Germany, was later refined by the South Africans, to convert natural gas into a ultra clean fuel oil (Diesel) the company keeps a tight lid on the process, but it needs a lot of electricity to do it, SA and most of the other industrialized world is a firm believer in the fissioning of atoms to produce massive amounts of electricity, while we here in the USA still harbor an unreasonable fear of this process which is one of many reasons we are still stuck in the mid 20th century in terms of infrastructural development. here is an article of a huge plant being built to make natural gas into fuel. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7815172/ the unfortunate thing is this is not being built here in the USA. with highest recorded unemployment in this nation since the great depression, you would think we would be jumping on projects to update this Nations capacity and infrastructure. however that I do not believe is the goal of the leadership of this nation which was selected to preside over the decline of the USA as a global power. The current ruling political class in this nation does not believe in American exceptionalism, and actually would go as far as to erroneously blame it for much of whats wrong in the world today. With this mentality it will be virtually impossible to advance our condition.
While I will try not to get to political, as some of the statements I made in this post have already walked that line, I am not the one who is politicizing ownership of a motor vehicle. The sad fact is, in the modern world, owning a vehicle is a political statement of Independence. Just look at the current issues of car craft, and MM&FF about new legislation designed to limit what we can do to our vehicles, all in the name of pseudo science, bureaucratic control, and good old fashioned fear of the boogie man (I.E. Climate Change). What C.A.R.B. here in California is a fine example of this, with AB32 and AB375 which will kill an estimated 1.5 million jobs in this state and making owning any vehicle prohibitively expensive. Granted you may not live in California, but history has shown us that bad ideas that start here, tend to spread like cancer to uninfected areas of the nation...
| GeorgeRud wrote on Sun, 10 October 2010 09:21 |
I imagine a lot (if not all) has to do with the economics of producing the fuel, it's still probably cheaper to import the oil than to convert the coal.
Probably as costs of imported oil rise, these processes will become more feasable. If the EPA's policies (and those of the government as well) don't interfere, I imagine that we'll see some of these alternative energy sources coming into their own in the future.
|
73 Canyon Lands, (a.k.a. The Yellow Submarine) West Los Angeles CA
|
|
|
|
| Re: SYNTHETIC FUEL [message #102465 is a reply to message #102437] |
Sun, 10 October 2010 21:13 |
Carl S.
Messages: 4186
Registered: January 2009
Location: Tucson, AZ.
Karma: 13
|
Senior Member |
|
|
[quote title=Duce Apocalypse wrote on Sun, 10 October 2010 16:02]This technology that was originally developed by Germany, was later refined by the South Africans, to convert natural gas into a ultra clean fuel oil (Diesel) the company keeps a tight lid on the process, but it needs a lot of electricity to do it, SA and most of the other industrialized world is a firm believer in the fissioning of atoms to produce massive amounts of electricity, while we here in the USA still harbor an unreasonable fear of this process which is one of many reasons we are still stuck in the mid 20th century in terms of infrastructural development. here is an article of a huge plant being built to make natural gas into fuel. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7815172/ the unfortunate thing is this is not being built here in the USA. with highest recorded unemployment in this nation since the great depression, you would think we would be jumping on projects to update this Nations capacity and infrastructure. however that I do not believe is the goal of the leadership of this nation which was selected to preside over the decline of the USA as a global power. The current ruling political class in this nation does not believe in American exceptionalism, and actually would go as far as to erroneously blame it for much of whats wrong in the world today. With this mentality it will be virtually impossible to advance our condition.
While I will try not to get to political, as some of the statements I made in this post have already walked that line, I am not the one who is politicizing ownership of a motor vehicle. The sad fact is, in the modern world, owning a vehicle is a political statement of Independence. Just look at the current issues of car craft, and MM&FF about new legislation designed to limit what we can do to our vehicles, all in the name of pseudo science, bureaucratic control, and good old fashioned fear of the boogie man (I.E. Climate Change). What C.A.R.B. here in California is a fine example of this, with AB32 and AB375 which will kill an estimated 1.5 million jobs in this state and making owning any vehicle prohibitively expensive. Granted you may not live in California, but history has shown us that bad ideas that start here, tend to spread like cancer to uninfected areas of the nation...
AMEN Duce
Carl Stouffer
'75 ex Palm Beach
Tucson, AZ.
Chuck Aulgur Reaction Arm Disc Brakes, Quadrabags, 3.70 LSD final drive, Lenzi knuckles/hubs, Dodge Truck 16" X 8" front wheels, Rear American Eagles, Solar battery charging. GMCSJ and GMCMI member
|
|
|
|
| Re: SYNTHETIC FUEL [message #102682 is a reply to message #102465] |
Tue, 12 October 2010 10:48 |
Mike O'Connell
Messages: 53
Registered: November 2008
Location: Deerfield MA
Karma: 0
|
Member |
|
|
Like the Lorax, I gotta speak for the trees...
Anybody with a vested interest in the future of a habitable planet as well as any forward thinking regulatory body has got to question the additional use of coal and other sequestered carbon sources for future energy development. No matter what the process, carbon in the ground will be deposited into the atmosphere if coal is used.
There are plenty of options that can be explored before we have to resort to pumping even more sequestered carbon into the atmosphere.
I'm particularly interested in seeing butanol used as a fuel. It can be made by fermenting a wide variety of organic waste (corn stalks , etc.) or switchgrass or algae. Unlike ethanol, the energy to create butanol does not exceed the energy derived from butanol. It has many of the same properties as gasoline, is non-polar so it doesn't absorb water, has a RON of 96 to 105, and has 90% of the specific energy of gasoline for good fuel mileage (as opposed to 60% for ethanol). As such it's a direct replacement for gasoline and I think it would be viable for use in older vehicles with only modest modification.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butanol_fuel
Mike O'Connell
Deerfield, MA
'75 Eleganza
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] SYNTHETIC FUEL [message #102684 is a reply to message #102683] |
Tue, 12 October 2010 11:08 |
Mike O'Connell
Messages: 53
Registered: November 2008
Location: Deerfield MA
Karma: 0
|
Member |
|
|
Yeah Nature may survive, but we might not like it much.
Unfortunately we are accustomed to the way things are right now. Our cities are on coastlines that can change radically with minute changes in climactic temperatures, and historically the distribution of food producing land makes kings and paupers of us all.
All I'm sayin' is the last time all that carbon was in the atmosphere was in the per-Cambrian era and that any appreciable fraction of that period's climate occuring today would make vapor lock in a motorhome (and virtually any other human burden) seem somewhat ... trivial.
Mike O'Connell
Deerfield, MA
'75 Eleganza
|
|
|
|
| Re: SYNTHETIC FUEL [message #102687 is a reply to message #102682] |
Tue, 12 October 2010 11:37 |
|
Matt Colie
Messages: 8547
Registered: March 2007
Location: S.E. Michigan
Karma: 7
|
Senior Member |
|
|
| Mike O'Connell wrote on Tue, 12 October 2010 11:48 |
Like the Lorax, I gotta speak for the trees...
Anybody with a vested interest in the future of a habitable planet as well as any forward thinking regulatory body has got to question the additional use of coal and other sequestered carbon sources for future energy development. No matter what the process, carbon in the ground will be deposited into the atmosphere if coal is used.
There are plenty of options that can be explored before we have to resort to pumping even more sequestered carbon into the atmosphere.
I'm particularly interested in seeing butanol used as a fuel. It can be made by fermenting a wide variety of organic waste (corn stalks , etc.) or switchgrass or algae. Unlike ethanol, the energy to create butanol does not exceed the energy derived from butanol. It has many of the same properties as gasoline, is non-polar so it doesn't absorb water, has a RON of 96 to 105, and has 90% of the specific energy of gasoline for good fuel mileage (as opposed to 60% for ethanol). As such it's a direct replacement for gasoline and I think it would be viable for use in older vehicles with only modest modification.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butanol_fuel
|
Mike,
While your state is accurate, I am afraid you are missing the point. Any energy use is too be discouraged. Wind and Solar are excused because they cannot supply continues and reliable energy.
The current plans (as best interpreted from congressional publications) is two fold.
-First is to tax all energy use to the point that it is no longer economically reasonable. (Called Cap and Trade)
-Second is to support several commercial concerns (one often referred to as ADM) until there is no energy based economy still in operation. (Called Renewable Energy Initiative).
Let's try not to get political here. If the it was in the interest of the powers that be to make the country greener (in the environmental sense) and completely energy independent, they would not be going with the actions we are seeing.
Matt
Matt & Mary Colie - Chaumière -'73 Glacier 23 - Members GMCMI, GMCGL, GMCES
Electronically Controlled Quiet Engine Cooling Fan with OE Rear Drum Brakes with Applied Control Arms
SE Michigan - Near DTW - Twixt A2 and Detroit
|
|
|
|
| Re: SYNTHETIC FUEL [message #102693 is a reply to message #102330] |
Tue, 12 October 2010 12:52 |
jknezek
Messages: 1057
Registered: December 2007
Karma: 5
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I won't get too much into this but anyone who has flown over West Virginia can see the effects of coal mining on this country. We have levelled mountain tops in the most brutal and disgusting manner, destroying countless habitats and setting up vicious impoundments full of dangerous sludge water. Coal is an interesting proposition, but not one I will get behind.
The problems with extracting Natural Gas through the process known as CRACKING is also problematic. Carbon based fuel is just going to have to be slowly phased out as other technologies become more competitive. That doesn't mean other technologies will be monetarily cheaper, just that when you include the environmental effects and the monetary together, it becomes more feasible in the long run.
We aren't running out of energy in this world, we are just running out of monetarily cheap carbon based energy. Like all things, we are going to have to pay more to mitigate the effects on our grandchildren and their grandchildren. The fact that we aren't good at that kind of thinking in this country is just going to have to change.
Thanks,
Jeremy Knezek
1976 Glenbrook
Birmingham, AL
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] SYNTHETIC FUEL [message #102695 is a reply to message #102693] |
Tue, 12 October 2010 13:31 |
jw mills
Messages: 199
Registered: September 2006
Karma: -30
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Try flying over Wyoming and looking at the coal operations there.
It might change your views because with out a map you won't be able to
find the areas they have finished mining.
--
Jim Mills
Greeley, CO
1973 CanyonLands 260 TZE-063V100731(under renovation)
1973 Glacier 230 TZE-033V101993
On Tue, 2010-10-12 at 12:52 -0500, Jeremy wrote:
>
> I won't get too much into this but anyone who has flown over West Virginia can see the effects of coal mining on this country. We have levelled mountain tops in the most brutal and disgusting manner, destroying countless habitats and setting up vicious impoundments full of dangerous sludge water. Coal is an interesting proposition, but not one I will get behind.
>
> The problems with extracting Natural Gas through the process known as CRACKING is also problematic. Carbon based fuel is just going to have to be slowly phased out as other technologies become more competitive. That doesn't mean other technologies will be monetarily cheaper, just that when you include the environmental effects and the monetary together, it becomes more feasible in the long run.
>
> We aren't running out of energy in this world, we are just running out of monetarily cheap carbon based energy. Like all things, we are going to have to pay more to mitigate the effects on our grandchildren and their grandchildren. The fact that we aren't good at that kind of thinking in this country is just going to have to change.
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
List Information and Subscription Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] ADMIN: SYNTHETIC FUEL [message #102708 is a reply to message #102707] |
Tue, 12 October 2010 15:23 |
Mike O'Connell
Messages: 53
Registered: November 2008
Location: Deerfield MA
Karma: 0
|
Member |
|
|
I like how when the non-conservative view surfaces the discussion is branded political ...
Anyway, My main point is "Butanol ...It's cool. Look into it."
Mike O'Connell
Deerfield, MA
'75 Eleganza
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] ADMIN: SYNTHETIC FUEL [message #102736 is a reply to message #102708] |
Tue, 12 October 2010 18:43 |
Patrick Flowers
Messages: 195
Registered: February 2004
Karma: -24
|
Senior Member |
|
|
You're welcome Mike. Glad I can be of service.
On 10/12/2010 4:23 PM, Mike O'Connell wrote:
>
>
> I like how when the non-conservative view surfaces the discussion is branded political ...
--
Patrick Flowers
GMCnet Listmaster
'73 CanyonLands
Tyrone, GA
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
List Information and Subscription Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Patrick Flowers
GMCnet Listmaster
'73 CanyonLands
Tyrone, GA
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] SYNTHETIC FUEL [message #102748 is a reply to message #102723] |
Tue, 12 October 2010 20:28 |
shawnee
Messages: 422
Registered: February 2004
Location: NC
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
| comcast wrote on Tue, 12 October 2010 18:31 |
Our recent GMCMI convention was held on top of an old coal mine. I
think anyone there will agree it was a beautiful site. I questions
all the lakes in the area and was told by a local, it was former coal
mines. It can be done responsibly for use in the future.
Roger Black
77 Birchaven
Burns, Tn
|
Roger,
The lake we were next to is used for water ski contests. A Dixielander, Bobby Moore, won the championship there one year. Also the lake was an old coal strip mine. It is a beautiful place.
Gene Dotson
74 Canyonlands
www.bdub.net/Motorhome_Enhancements New Windows and Aluminum Radiators
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Fri Nov 15 02:59:30 CST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01249 seconds
|
GMCforum
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
