[ExI] Cheap fuel from coal and solar

[Keith Henson]

On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 11:11 PM Phil Gossett <cphilgossett at gmail.com> wrote:

snip
>
> Coal gas? Really?
>
> This was common in the UK a century ago. And was banned because carbon monoxide killed thousands of people. Because it's f'ing toxic as hell.

This kind of gas was common in the US up to the 1950s.  As far as I
know, it was never banned but displaced by cheaper natural gas.

> And perhaps more to the point, it "burns" into CO2. So what exactly are we gaining here?

Cheaper diesel.  Farming and food transportation are utterly dependent
on diesel.  The process does allow for capturing and sequestering half
the carbon.

Keith

> I'm confused...
>
> - Phil
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023, 10:41 PM 'William Arnett' via Inventor's Lunch <inventors-lunch at googlegroups.com> wrote:
>>
>> Fischer–Tropsch?
>>
>> --
>> Bill Arnett
>> bill at arnett.us.com
>>
>> On Oct 18, 2023, at 10:24 PM, David Gluss <dgluss at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> 
>> C'mon Keith. What's F/T? I want to understand you. Fundamental rule: don't use an acronym until you've defined it, unless you know your audience already knows. I do have a fucking PhD in engineering and I have no fucking clue what you mean by F/T so please enlighten me.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 7:14 PM DV Henkel-Wallace <gumby at henkel-wallace.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Nate Lewis’s group at Caltech was making an artificial “leaf” to produce oil from sunlight and photosynthesis.   Anything ever come of that effort?
>>>
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>
>>> > On Oct 18, 2023, at 10:41, Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > --------- Forwarded message ---------
>>> > From: Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com>
>>> > Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 2:17 PM
>>> > Subject: Cheap fuel from coal and sola
>>> >
>>> > We are going to need fuel for a considerable time.
>>> >
>>> > From the dawn of the industrial revolution,
>>> >
>>> > H2O + C → H2 + CO (ΔH = +131 kJ/mol)
>>> >
>>> > The reaction is endothermic, so the fuel must be continually re-heated
>>> > to maintain the reaction. (Wikipedia)
>>> >
>>> > Carbon is 12 gm/mol. 83 mol/kg and a kg would soak up 10900 kJ. A
>>> > metric ton of carbon evaporated in steam would need 10900000 kJ or
>>> > 3.03 MW hours.
>>> >
>>> > This would produce 1/6th of a ton of hydrogen with a combustion energy
>>> > content of 50 MWh/ton, about 8.3 MWh. CO combustion is 10.1 MJ/kg. We
>>> > have 2800 kg or about 7.85 MWh. So we make about 16 MWh of gas from a
>>> > ton of coal and 3 MWh of renewable electric power. Most of the energy
>>> > in the gas is from the coal.
>>> >
>>> > A few years ago a 900 MW solar PV project in the Mideast signed a
>>> > power purchase for 1.35 cents per kWh so I think $20/MWh works for a
>>> > rough economic analysis.
>>> >
>>> > Following a ton of coal, the syngas from a ton would cost ~$20 for the
>>> > coal (plus shipping) and $60 or less for the intermittent power.  Call
>>> > it ~$80/ton.
>>> >
>>> > Half a ton of carbon would be pulled out in the water gas shift
>>> > reaction to get the hydrogen ratio up to where you need it for F/T
>>> > input.  500 kg of carbon and 1/6 of that in hydrogen should show up in
>>> > the product.  The F/T energy loss is about 25%, not sure about the
>>> > material loss or where it might go.  .583 ton x 7.3 bbl/ton is 4.26
>>> > bbl. or $18.80 /bbl.
>>> >
>>> > That's down near or below the production cost for oil.  Of course, the
>>> > F/T capital cost has to be added to this plus the completely unknown
>>> > cost of the arc gasifiers.  The Orxy plant cost is ~$8/bbl (ten-year
>>> > write-off) but that was in 2007 dollars.  What comes out of an Oryx
>>> > plant is a refined product rather than crude oil making it more
>>> > valuable than crude
>>> >
>>> > Most big energy projects when you analyze them are just silly.  This
>>> > is not something you can reject out of hand.
>>> >
>>> > This does not help with the build-up of carbon in the atmosphere, but
>>> > we will have to do air capture anyway.
>>> >
>>> > Please check the math.  Age is making this harder and harder.
>>> >
>>> > Keith
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Inventor's Lunch" group.
>>> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to inventors-lunch+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
>>> > To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/inventors-lunch/CAPiwVB42xfQDJyPVrDoeJOAvU3Eo9gByEMdbNHbSqKuG%3D2e7Xw%40mail.gmail.com.
>>> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Inventor's Lunch" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to inventors-lunch+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
>>> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/inventors-lunch/8A9432CE-720A-43E8-9D0C-6C98C04764D0%40henkel-wallace.org.
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Inventor's Lunch" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to inventors-lunch+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/inventors-lunch/CAGY9AND%3D6nQb5O5i-89mHE79_odkVi-VNysWYN%3DJ0e1wz2Q-RQ%40mail.gmail.com.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Inventor's Lunch" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to inventors-lunch+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/inventors-lunch/BFF911F3-1E44-4A09-B0B2-0222BB30EA0D%40mac.com.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.