Technology Review - Published By MIT
Advertisement

Clean Diesel from Coal

A novel catalytic method could let you fill up your tank with coal-derived diesel, cutting U.S. dependence on foreign oil.

By Kevin Bullis

Wednesday, April 19, 2006

smaller text tool iconmedium text tool iconlarger text tool icon

As the cost of oil soars and worries over the U.S. dependence on foreign petroleum escalate, coal is becoming an increasingly attractive alternative as a feedstock to make a range of fuels. Now chemists have invented a new catalytic process that could increase the yield of a clean form of diesel made from coal.

The method, described in the current issue of the journal Science, uses a pair of catalysts to improve the yield of diesel fuel from Fischer-Tropsch (F-T) synthesis, a nearly century-old chemical technique for reacting carbon monoxide and hydrogen to make hydrocarbons. The mixture of gases is produced by heating coal. Although Germany used the process during World War II to convert coal to fuel for its military vehicles, F-T synthesis has generally been too expensive to compete with oil.

Part of the problem with the F-T process is that it produces a mixture of hydrocarbons -- many of which are not useful as fuel. But in the recent research, Alan Goldman, professor of chemistry and chemical biology at Rutgers University, and Maurice Brookhart, professor of chemistry at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, use catalysts to convert these undesirable hydrocarbons into diesel. The catalysts work by rearranging the carbon atoms, transforming six-carbon atom hydrocarbons, for example, into two- and ten-carbon atom hydrocarbons. The ten-carbon version can power diesel engines. The first catalyst removes hydrogen atoms, which allows the second catalyst to rearrange the carbon atoms. Then the first catalyst restores the hydrogen, to form fuel.

Diesel fuel produced in this way has several potential advantages. Ordinary diesel contains molecules, called aromatics, that, when combusted, produce particulates, Goldman says. But the diesel formed by the new catalysts does not include aromatics, so it burns much cleaner, overcoming one of the major objections to diesel fuel. This could lead to more vehicles using diesel engines, which are about 30 percent more efficient than gasoline engines.

But the biggest advantage may be that the United States has huge amounts of coal: "We have as much energy in coal as the rest of the world has in oil. That's enough to last us the next hundred years or so," Goldman says. Thus, a more efficient, and so less expensive method of converting coal to diesel could significantly cut U.S. dependence on foreign oil, and do so for a long time.

Comments

  • Clean Diesel from Coal
    ...because swapping one non-renewable resource for another is a good idea? There are other ways to produce fuel, although they probably can't keep up with our consumption levels. Besides, transport fuel should be the least of our worries. Petroleum is the staple of most man-produced goods. It's in your plastic water bottle, your clothes, your dashboard, your iPod, medicines, foods, solar panels, carpet, rubber, pesticides, asphalt, glues, waxes, inks and dyes, cosmetics, etc. Even if we cut back on transport of products, the act of manufacturing them is at stake. As far as dependancy on foreign oil goes, there's oil in other places besides the middle east, like Canada. Oh, wait - our penchant for cheap (petroleum-based) goods ala dollar stores and Walmart has fueled the growth of a middle class in China, so we're competing against them for that Canadian oil. Oops again.
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (Joy H.)
    04/19/2006
    Posts:1
    • Your going to die Joy!
      Joy, the're coming for you...the mindless hordes of unemployed....they're coming for you! James Kunstler is leading them......you're going to die because we're all out of oil...its the end.....you're going to die.......HA HA HA HA HA HA HA ! Remember Soylent Green is people! Eric Pianka is going to get you! You won't be one of the 10% allowed to survive.......HA HA HA!
      Rate this comment: 12345
      Guest (dave)
      04/19/2006
      Posts:1
    • fuel prices
      I do not think truck drivers should
      pay over $2.00/gal. for fuel. If
      our cost gets worse,how can we get
      products to customers and buyers?
      I would like to help solve this
      problem.
      Rate this comment: 12345
      Guest (ronda allen)
      04/22/2006
      Posts:1
      • Fuel Prices
        If the free market does not set the price of diesel for truckers then the Government must artificially freeze diesel prices, which means either (1) the companies producing the diesel will quit making it when they are losing money by selling their product at a price below their cost to produce it or (2) the Government must subsidize the producers to keep them producing.  Now would you rather have the free market determine the price of any products you purchase or have the government, with its built in inefficiencies, setting prices?  For me it is a no brainer.  The free market reacts to supply/demand imbalances with infinitely greater efficiency than Government ever can.
        Rate this comment: 12345
        Guest (Landon)
        04/24/2006
        Posts:1
      • fuel prices
        We Truck drivers thank you for your concern,my top was 3.32 in Corning Ca. for 185 gallons of diesel
        Rate this comment: 12345
        Guest (Mike H)
        04/26/2006
        Posts:1
  • Clean Diesel from  Coal
    A historical note: I recall reading  somewhere that the  ORIGINAL engine  developed by  Mr  Diesel in Germany ran on powdered  coal -- before we  had  liquid  fuels.
    What happened?
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (S Fred Singer)
    04/19/2006
    Posts:1
    • oil, coal, diesel NOW!
      Professor Diesel experimented with many fuels--as did all other internal combustion pioneers--before settling on liquid fuel. The liquid could be stored and pumped safely, whereas coal dust clogged valves and often ignited. Diesel actually used a bio-fuel, intending his engine to be used on German farms and using locally derived fuel. But, petro-fuels are so much more readily available in bulk, that they took over the market. Until a bio-fuel is available in bulk, petroleum is king.
      Rate this comment: 12345
      Guest (kitk)
      04/19/2006
      Posts:1
  • coal shmoal
    come on kids, if you are going to report new fuels cant you make *some* effort to estimate price/gallon. i dont want to waste my time reading cozy new deals how we are saved from oil crunch and then learn cost of just the energy it takes to manufacture it is 1000$/gallon , if oyu cant work it out just say why not and someone will help you.
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (roy)
    04/20/2006
    Posts:1
  • The Methanol Economy
    Please do read Nobel prizewinner George Olah's new book, Beyond Oil and Gas: The Methanol Economy, for ways to make methanol fuel, from coal, from methane, or from recycled CO2 and H20, with energy possibly provided by nuclear power. Check out pebble bed reactors, too.
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (Bob Hargraves)
    04/20/2006
    Posts:1
  • the future
    The future, at least for power plant electrical generation will be nuclear, wind, biomass, geothermal, hydro, as well as the current use of coal and natural gas.

    As far as ground transportation goes, the best bet is for flex-fuel plug-in hybrids.  This will be the next big thing, since fuel cell technology is way too expensive and years away. 
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (Bill)
    04/20/2006
    Posts:1
  • so many alternatives
    Unfortunately there is not a silver bullet against the oil addiction. But considering the oil is consumed vast majority by transportation, the bio-diesel (especially by recycled cooking oils and animal fats), coal
    derived diesel and even power plant smoke stack diesel should be the ways to go. Indeed celluso based ethanol can be bronze bullet
    Hopefully in 20 years, USA will buy back the Treasury-bonds exported to 'peace-loving' Sheiks
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (ed)
    04/23/2006
    Posts:1
  • science
    yulook graet.......
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (andrea)
    04/24/2006
    Posts:1
  • There's plenty of oil in the US
    we can create high paying jobs,lower the price of gas and keep more money in the US and be less dependent on foreign oil if the dems will stop blocking oil production and refineries in the US.President Bush has been trying to drill for oil in alaska since he's been in office and if he would have gotten his way we wouldn't be in this mess.
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (Eric)
    04/24/2006
    Posts:1
    • Not even close.

      Dept. of Energy's own estimates say Anwar would produce 3% maximum of our daily requirements, and that would be 15 years down the road.

      http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/pdf/trend_4.pdf
      Rate this comment: 12345
      Guest (Tom)
      04/24/2006
      Posts:1
      • we need everything we can get
        Yes, ANWAR may only provide 3%, but it doesn't take much to turn the global shortage into a surplus. 500,000 barrels a day is a huge factor in the world price of crude if it is a surplus. Also, increased domestic production coupled with alternative energy sources such as wind, solar, ethanol and a healthy dose of conservation would easily remove us from being at the mercy of OPEC and the big oil companies.
        Rate this comment: 12345
        Guest (Brian)
        04/25/2006
        Posts:1
      • [no subject]
        Actually, Anwar could provide up to 1,000,000 barrels a day which is far greater than your 3% projections. We should have started years ago in Anwar and more offshore continental shelf exploration.
        Rate this comment: 12345
        Guest (Mason)
        04/25/2006
        Posts:1
        • [no subject]
          Maybe the WMD's are in Anwar too.  My problem is that even if people really know they would still lie about it. When parties run for election by distorting their opponents positions - well who should be surprised that they will lie most anytime.
          Rate this comment: 12345
          Guest (Phil)
          05/23/2006
          Posts:1
  • Which car to buy?
    I'm in the market for a small SUV and I've been toying with the idea if buying the Jeep Liberty with the diesel engine. It's supposed to get 30 MPG.  If the price of diesel remains stable or comes down compared to gas, it may be an attractive option.  Any thoughts?
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (David W.)
    04/24/2006
    Posts:1
    • not an SUV
      Why not buy a wagon? Volkswagen Passat and Jetta are available w/ terrific TDI diesel engines -- 40-45mpg. For Escape hybrid allegedly gets 36mpg, but longer distances (highway driving) w. hybrids can be an issue. Why not get a smaller car with better mpg and skip the diesel altogether? There was a slightly interesting op-ed on this in the NY Times last week; also see http://lime.com/post/article/2000/11/30/The-Greenest-Cleanest-Car-Better-Mileage-or-Different-Fuel-
      Rate this comment: 12345
      Guest (Fil)
      04/25/2006
      Posts:1
  • Producers verses Comsumers
    The dems are comsumers, The repubs are Producers
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (POGO)
    04/25/2006
    Posts:1
    • Producers verses Comsumers
      POGO you're a MORON
      Rate this comment: 12345
      Guest (PAGA)
      04/25/2006
      Posts:1
    • Producers vs Consumers
      Yea, POGO, a unwarranted war in Iraq, a huge deficit, Abu Grev (sp), Lies, law breakers, etc. The most corrupt administration in out lifetime.
      Rate this comment: 12345
      Guest (Karl)
      04/28/2006
      Posts:1
  • clean diesel
    what are the two catalysts used in formation of clean diesel from coal
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (prem shankar)
    07/12/2006
    Posts:1
    • catalysts
      1. Iron
      2. Cobalt
      Rate this comment: 12345
      Guest (Ron Peck)
      08/11/2006
      Posts:1
  • ECONOMIC ALT ENERGY
    ft liquids from coal---expensive to set up------cellulose expensive to operate,bse -laden animal fat kills 2 birds with one stone--------but for the money alberta tarsands beats even new oil---and there is enough that we wouldnt have to be held hostage by bigoil--shieks,or texas republicans
    Rate this comment: 12345

    DRO
    11/23/2006
    Posts:1

Log In

Forgot your password?     Register »
Advertisement
Technology Review July/August 2009

Current Issue

Search Me
Inside the launch of Stephen Wolfram’s new “computational knowledge engine.”
•  Subscribe
Save 41%
•  Table of Contents
•  MIT News
Advertisement

Follow us on Twitter

Twitter

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

Advertisement
Subscribe to Technology Review's daily e-mail update. Enter your e-mail address

Advertisement
TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES

More Technology News from Forbes

Advertisement
MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology © 2009 Technology Review. All Rights Reserved.