Technology Review - Published By MIT
Advertisement

Thursday, January 04, 2007

Part I: China's Coal Future

Continued from page 2

By Peter Fairley

smaller text tool iconmedium text tool iconlarger text tool icon

China's government in Beijing created Shenhua a decade ago to bring economies of scale and modern technology to bear on the Dongsheng coalfields. The company's $1.5 billion coal-to-fuels plant is an expression of that strategy--a facility so technically ambitious that many experts, Chinese and Western alike, doubted it would ever be built.

The production of transportation fuels from coal dates to early-20th-century Germany, where chemists developed two approaches to converting coal's solid long-chain hydrocarbons into the shorter liquid hydrocarbons found in motor fuels. (Nazi Germany, with little access to oil, relied heavily on these processes to fuel its highly mechanized army and air force, producing gasoline, diesel, and aviation fuel from coal.) Franz Fischer and Hans Tropsch invented the better known of the two approaches in the 1920s. Fischer-Tropsch synthesis reduces coal to syngas, a mixture of hydrogen and carbon monoxide. A catalyst, often cobalt, then causes the carbon and hydrogen atoms to reconnect into new compounds, such as alcohols and fuels. Fischer-Tropsch synthesis is conventional chemistry today: in South Africa, for example, Johannesburg-based Sasol built Fischer-Tropsch coal-to-oil plants to ensure the country's fuel supply during the trade boycotts of the apartheid years; and by swapping in different catalysts, China's coal-to-chemicals gasification plants have employed Fischer-Tropsch for decades to yield products such as synthetic fertilizers and methanol.

Shenhua's plant, in contrast, chose Fischer-Tropsch's lesser-known rival, invented by Friedrich Bergius a decade earlier. Though used extensively by the Nazis, Bergius's process was subsequently abandoned. The process has come to be known as direct liquefaction, because it bypasses the syngas step. In direct liquefaction, the bulk of the coal is pulverized and blended with some of the plant's synthetic oil, then treated with hydrogen and heated to 450 °C in the presence of an iron catalyst, which breaks the hydrocarbon chains into the shorter chains suitable for refining into liquid fuels.

Direct liquefaction produces more fuel per ton of coal than Fischer-Tropsch synthesis. Experts at the Chinese Coal Research Institute in Beijing estimate that the process captures 55 to 56 percent of the energy in coal, compared to just 45 percent for Fischer-Tropsch. However, direct lique­faction is also far more complicated, requiring separate power and gasification plants to deliver heat and hydrogen and considerable recycling of oil, hydrogen, and coal sludge between separate sections of the plant. And breaking down hydrocarbons to just the right length requires exquisite control of the operating conditions and a consistent coal supply.

Shenhua redesigned the process over the last five years to boost efficiency and reduce waste but, at the same time, increased its complexity. And the company is taking a huge engineering and economic risk by pursuing so novel a technology on such a vast scale.

By the end of this year, Shenhua hopes to be pumping out 20,000 barrels of synthetic oil per day, nearly 500 times as much as its pilot plant in Shanghai produces. According to Jerald Fletcher, a natural-resource economist at West Virginia University in Morgantown, the Erdos plant constitutes a $1.5 billion experiment that could only take place in China. "It would be hard to get that kind of commitment of funds in the West without a more proven technology," says Fletcher. Eric Larson, an expert in energy technology and modeling at Princeton University, puts it more bluntly: "It doesn't make a lot of sense to build a huge plant like that, because it may not work."

January/February 2007

Would you like to read more articles from the January/February 2007 issue?

This article is from the January/February 2007 Issue of Technology Review. To read other articles from this issue simply register for My.TechnologyReview.com. It's free.

Subscribe today and save up to 41% »

Comments

  • Undermining American foreign policy
    gabrielg01 on 01/04/2007 at 1:48 PM
    Posts:
    317
    Avg Rating:
    3/5
    China's development of coal-based fuels, as an alternative to oil is a clear case of outsmarting American power politics.

    America's increasing presence and domination in the Middle East and Central Asia is driven by the goal to project economic power all over the world. Today we have military bases even in the formerly Soviet states of Central Asia (Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kirgyzstan). Check this link out:
    http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2002/020209-attack01.htm
    The point is that even if the USA is not reliant on this oil, these oil reserves represent such a gigantic value that dominating them gives America the economic power levers to the world economy. Or so the assumption goes.

    This assumption is being challenged, and possibly proven wrong today. Brasil is shifting to ethanol (several South American countries will follow suit), and China is shifting to liquefied coal. Europe will shift to liquefied coal too, when they get fed up with the Russian bullying and blackmailing. Nuclear power will see a new renaissance as well. There will be a convergence of green technologies too: much improved batteries, fuel-cells, photovoltaic and windpower. All this will lead to increased independence from the oil-bullies.

    The oil-bullies of the world, OPEC, America and Russia will be left with much diminished economic domination. As for us Americans, we will never get our money's worth out of these oil-adventures. The oil and military barons will get rich of course, but the rest of us will see no benefit.
    Rate this comment: 12345
    • Re: Undermining American foreign policy
      jpdemers on 01/05/2007 at 2:10 AM
      Posts:
      34
      Avg Rating:
      4/5
      China's gain is not necessarily our loss.

      The US has coal reserves rivaling those of China.  We will no doubt follow China's lead and build our own gasification plants -- I don't see that we even have a choice. 
      Rate this comment: 12345
    • America is an oil bully?
      badspine on 01/19/2007 at 2:59 PM
      Posts:
      1
      America is an oil bully? When did this happen? Apparantly between causing global warming, causing people to starve all over the world, and causing EVERY OTHER SINGLE problem in the world, now we're an oil bully too. Sounds like another cheesy rallying cry for America bashers.

      I did a project on Fischer Trospch (Ft) fuels for my grad school and many aspects of Ft fuels would be great for America. One of the major problems with adopting these fuels is environmental regulations (according to some environmentalists / alarmists, the Ft process for creating fuel causes as much polution as burning natural fossil fuels) and the threat of Saudi Arabia and OPEC crushing the oil market by lowering oil prices dramatically (look up a company called syntek (I think thats the spelling) in the 1980s.

      There are backers that are very interested in pursuing Ft fuels. Recently, the CEO of Jet Blue Airlines contacted General Electric about this idea. GE was too afraid to pursue this technology, due to Saudi Arabia and OPEC's ability to effect oil prices. The only way American companies would build Ft plants is if the United States government promised to buy the fuel if the price / barrel (PPB) dropped below a certain point. However, certain groups would proclaim this as government welfare for oil companies. So, despite being an excellent idea, Ft fuels may not be seen being produced in America anytime soon.

      China is a different story altogether. They really have no social conscious and no special interest groups to deal with. They just do whatever is necessary to move along. For example, they don't respect copyright laws, do business readily with countries that don't respect child labor laws, etc. In many ways adopting a dramatic shift in energy production is much easier in China than the U.S. In particular, the U.S. can't even drill for oil in its own territory, let alone pursue new courses of fuel production because of environmental concerns (but yet, we're oil bullies).
      Rate this comment: 12345
Advertisement

Current Issue

Technology Review January/February 2009
Lifeline for Renewable Power
Without a radically expanded and smarter electrical grid, wind and solar will remain niche power sources.
•  Subscribe
Save 41%
•  Table of Contents
•  MIT News

Magazine Services

Career Resources

MIT Technology Insider

Stories and breaking news from inside MIT about the latest research, innovations, and startups--in a convenient monthly e-newsletter. Subscribe today
Advertisement

Follow us on Twitter

Twitter

Get Technology Review updates via the web, cellphone, or Instant Messager – Follow techreview on Twitter!

Advertisement

More Technology News from Forbes

Advertisement
Advertisement
TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES
Advertisement
MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology