Proponents tout benefits of coal-to-liquids facility
Published Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Digg
delicious
Facebook
Mixx
Reddit
Stumble It!FAIRBANKS — The $2 billion to $6 billion price tag on a coal-to-liquids plant might seem “tremendously expensive,” but the potential benefits could outweigh the sticker shock, a project proponent told business people on Tuesday.
“It brings tremendous opportunity to Alaska, not just Interior Alaska, but really, all of Alaska,” said Jim Dodson, executive director of the Fairbanks Economic Development Corporation.
He encouraged business people at the Greater Fairbanks Chamber of Commerce weekly luncheon to consider not only the costs associated with the project, but also the potential returns.
FEDC spent $550,000 in 2008 on a feasibility study developed by Toronto-based consultant Hatch. Released in November, the study indicated that a coal-to-liquids plant using Fischer-Tropsch and gasification technology could be economically feasible in Alaska’s Interior, providing that oil prices remain high and that investors don’t expect a high rate of return.
Dodson and others, including borough Mayor Jim Whitaker, have touted the plant as a solution for Fairbanks’ long-term economic viability. The plant could ease the region’s dependence on oil by processing coal into liquid fuels, reining in energy costs that rose dramatically in mid-2008. At the same time, the plant could offset some air quality concerns as liquid fuels are generated without the emissions released by oil-fired refineries, proponents say.
Most of all, the coal-to-liquids plant could produce synthetic fuels for the U.S. Air Force, which in turn could anchor the military’s future in Interior Alaska, Dodson said.
That’s also where funding for the next study phase might come from.
FEDC has discussed terms with and is waiting to start negotiating with the U.S. Air Force for a contract to study further a coal-to-liquids plant, possibly located near Eielson Air Force Base, Dodson said. The air force has $10 million available to advance those studies, he added.
The next study phase would net more detailed engineering plans as well as an analysis of permitting and carbon sequestration issues, he said.
A coal-to-liquids plant would emit carbon dioxide, which is widely credited with causing global warming. Some early technologies are being evaluated to store, or sequester, carbon beneath the surface of the earth.
Ideally, a coal-to-liquids plant could supply Fairbanks with fuel on par with $2 per gallon — about the same price customers pay when oil is going at $88 per barrel, Dodson said. At that level, investors in such a plant could expect a 5-7 percent rate of return, not likely high enough to attract big money, he acknowledged.
Dodson also updated the chamber members on an in-state natural gas line task force evaluating the regional pros and cons to various proposals to transport natural gas from the North Slope to markets. The group is expected to offer a final analysis to Interior legislators, who resume their work Jan. 20 in Juneau.
He further urged business people to take responsibility for economic development by petitioning Gov. Sarah Palin’s administration to do what it can to help Flint Hills Resources maintain its North Pole refinery. Dodson said the facility is a major economic foundation of the Fairbanks community.
Community Discussion
Newsminer.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full user's agreement.
Brain damage due to CO poisoning from Fairbanks vehicle emissions.
If the help involves financial help, the very last thing the State needs to do is "to do what it can to help Flint Hills Resources maintain its North Pole refinery." Outrageous suggestion.
crosswind: LOL. Good one. No wonder they're blaming wood stoves from outside the city! (Funny, can breath just fine here outside Fairbanks. Gee. I wonder why?)
Although I also see the benefits for the AF, I would want that $10 million go towards a "sure thing" and not just another black hole project. Not the first black hole project funded from complaints around here.
And, such a coal-to-liquid plant could also probably be used as heating oil? What kind of quality of coal is required? <shrugs>
There are many, many problems with this coal to liquids idea.
First, is the price tag. Why would an investor pursue this project on the pure speculation that oil will move above $120 dollars per barrel- a price the proponents of this idea originally cited. It is only with oil at $120 dollars per barrel that the product from this coal to liquids technology would break even with fuel oil made from regular crude.
The other major question is with the environmental issues- why would we want to continue to run our heating systems on dirty, inefficient, and expensive, fuel oil? Wouldn't it make far more sense to invest a comparable amount of funds in the Susitna Hydroelectric project and get a stable, 200+ year supply of cheap electricity? Our homes could be heated with cheap, clean, safe and reliable electric heat. Our air would be sparkling pure. No boilers to clean. No fuel oil to run out of. No boilers that break, and require expensive maintenance. No fuel oil tanks to leak and contaminate our ground water.
But lets also address the concept of carbon sequestration. People burning fuel oil at their homes or businesses are still emitting CO2. So it is a myth that a coal to liquids plant would not contribute to CO2 emissions- even if carbon sequestration was attempted at the plant.
Note that nowhere within the US has that technology been allowed. Why? The pesky little problem that CO2 is a colorless, odorless asphyxiant. If the CO2 being injected into the ground 'burped' into our atmosphere on a calm day- in a significant quantity, most residents of the Tanana Valley might be asphyxiated. Those up in the hills might survive- but the stench of 40,000 to 50,000 rotting corpses would probably drive even the hill dwellers away.
Fairbanks could cease to exist.
Does this sound like science fiction? The fact is that thousands have already been killed by a massive CO2 release. In 1986 in Cameroon (West African nation) a CO2 release from a volcano killed 1,700 people. Most died in their sleep-never knowing what hit them.
While it is wonderful that Fedco has explored the coal to liquid concept, the information garnered has shown rather conclusively that this is not a viable idea.
Most would argue the real benefit from this study is that it has reinforced the urgent need to build the Susitna Hydro project. Fairbanks needs affordable energy and the coal to liquids idea does not deliver on that promise.
(This comment was removed by the Newsminer.com staff. Please see our User Agreement for further information.)
Anybody seriously thinking about this FEDCO promotion should see this web site first.
www.aidea.org/PDF%20files/BelugaCTLoverv......
In a post back in November I concluded that this FEDCO promotion appears to be a boondoggle. That being said, being objective, take another look in a little more depth. The Fischer-Tropsch CTL process is not new or untried. It has been around since 1920 or a little earlier. It does produce diesel fuel that meets or exceeds current low sulfur standards and it is in large scale use at a number of locations around the world, primarily in South Africa. It is economically viable to produce diesel by this method if crude oil is unavailable or excessively expensive. One justification for this method for the United States is that it could significantly reduce our dependence on foreign crude oil as we have vast coal deposits. The process also produces large amounts of excess heat that can be used to power steam turbines to generate electricity.
In 2006 AIDEA put a big chunk of funding into a study of this process for a mine mouth operation near Beluga which would produce diesel and electricity to tie into the rail belt power grid. A report on this project can be viewed at the above web site. I am surprised that no one has referenced the AIDEA project in relation to the FEDC idea. When I compare the two I come to the reasoned conclusion that the FEDC project is in fact a "boondoggle". Economies of scale, proximity to coal deposits, access to tidewater shipping and international markets, and other uncertainties mitigate against the Fairbanks project.
In a December post I suggested that Flint Hills has reached the conclusion that the Beluga Coal-to-Liquids project being planned threatens the future demand for their products even if they were to make the investment in upgrading the FH refinery to produce low sulfur diesel. The Beluga project WILL produce low sulfur diesel by the Fischer-Tropsch process. The most logical developments for Interior energy are those that have been proposed by a number of commentators recently. Propane/ethane stocks are readily available and should become the foundation for Interior industry and energy. ANGDA is already headed in this direction. Distant Thunder has made good suggestions, fairbanksgas has made good points, and so have several others in regard to LPG/ETHANE replacing both diesel and gasoline as the foundation energy sources for Interior, riverine, and coastal Alaska.
Agreed.
The Beluga project study has yet to be addressed by Dodson/FEDCO.
The study FEDCO financed (with 'our' money via the state) appears to have redundancies with the information in the site referenced in "crosswind's" post.
Some investigative reporting by the News Miner on this subject would be a great benefit to the community. What did 500k produce that wasn't already useful knowledge gained via the AIDEA study?
They've certainly nailed it with a 2 billion to 6 billion estimated cost. Wish I could do my budgeting that loosely.
The "JIM and Jim" show goes on. When will we cut off the waste from these two??? Stupid ideas come for stupid people. It is no wonder we are in the money mess we are in, we throw it away like so much trash and worse yet give it to people like Jim Dodson and Jim Whitaker, shame on US....
For a comparison to costs, Flint Hills paid $265 million for the North Pole refinery and a 3% ownership in the pipeline. For $100 million more the refinery could be upgraded to the most current technology and produce all the low-sulfur fuels Fairbanks and the rest of the interior could ever use.
The low ball estimate of $2 BILLION is 8 times the cost of the refinery while the more realistic cost of $6 BILLION could purchase 24 refineries. To even go public with these kind of numbers proves that all FEDCO is good for is comic relief. If we are going to spend $6 billion we should get something better than $3 a gallon diesel. That would make a good down payment on Susitna which would provide us 4 cent a kilowatt electricity for the next 100 years.
Is this going to be Whitaker's plan for the EPA to come into compliance with air standards. Another major waste of tax money. Look out your window Fairbanks, new business saying should I develop my plant in the southern part of the US where it is in the 70 today and I do not have to heat my plant or heck, why not spend my profit on heating a building when it is 42 below zero. I only have to pay $2 a gallon for heating fuel, highest taxes in the State, highest electric cost, highest wages, highest cost to get the product to market and bring material in. But what the heck, if I get into trouble the borough government will bail me out. Time to close FEDCO down, get rid of Dobson and let the businesses in Fairbanks pay for this nonsense not the property taxpayers. Whitaker is nothing but a con man who got in trouble in Seattle and brought his game to Fairbanks and has been playing the public for years.
Dear Mayor,
The "Fischer-Tropsch" process is an endothermic (energy added) reaction that uses the same "fluidized Bed" Gasification technology that has given so many problems with the "clean coal" power plant in Healy.
The Fischer-Tropsch catalysts are notoriously sensitive to the presence of sulfur containing compounds among other poisons. The sensitivity of the catalyst to sulfur is higher for cobalt-based catalysts than for their iron counterparts.
It should be noted that, according to published data on the current commercial implementations of the coal-based Fischer-Tropsch process, these plants can produce as much as 7 tonnes of CO2 per tonne of liquid hydrocarbon products (excluding the reaction water product). This is due in part to the high energy demands required by the gasification process, and in part by the design of the process as implemented.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fischer-Tro...
http://www.slate.com/id/2152036/?nav=ais...
Also please build a "pilot plant" this time before building a "full scale production plant" that may not work any better than that so called "clean coal" power plant in Healy.
I say go for it. I could use another (big job)
Like healy #2
Why is it the comments following this article are far more in depth and scrutinizing of this issue than the article itself? The greatest support for this boondoggle seems to come from Eielson AFB who would supposedly stick around if their fuel source was cheaper. Shouldn't national security be the driving force for an AFB?
I liked the part about $88 per barrel crude prices means gas should be about $2 a gal here in town.
With crude oil at just under $50 per barrel our gas shoild be ???
This idea is just another Healy clean coal plant waiting to happen.
I liked the part about $88 per barrel crude prices means gas should be about $2 a gal here in town.
With crude oil at just under $50 per barrel our gas should be ???
This idea is just another Healy clean coal plant waiting to happen.
If they want to spend this kind of money, build that big dam they were talking a couple of years ago!
For every 400 to 500 ton of coal burned they get 50 to 60 ton of ash >
Clean coal, no way!
http://current.com/items/89648833/flood_...
An energy solution for a 6 Billion $ expenditure:
There are approx. 30,000 households in the FNSB; 6B/30,000 = 200k for every home. That mitigates the cost of energy, in every form, for each individual for a generation. If we're (the borough/state) willing and able to expend billions on a facility that is unlikely to be profitable, why finance another 'study?' Logic dictates: just hand-out money.
The interventionist worldview of Whitaker/Dodson permeates Borough activities.
Today's paper has a story on a proposed tax break for an Outside based non-profit...on the basis of "community need." The idea of bailing out an organization for arbitrary reasons originates from the same mind that decides to throw money at studies that conclude we need to spend more money on studies.
Usibelli must buy the Jims dinner once in a while... and maybe through in some cake at the end, if you can smell what I'm stepping in.
Coalwater can be made from brown wet lignite for mere pennies per gallon...
25cents/gal is a high estimate.
There can be much more BTU's in coalwater than you think.
...yeah, I know it's counter-intuitive to consider a fuel that's got up to 50% water.
Coalwater can be mixed with stinky trash biomass sewage-water too.
CTL+BTLwater is a valuable boilerfuel product..
when pretreated-pastureized with submerged carbon-arc and klystron-RF it becomes an activated high-BTU clean burning boiler fuel.
Coal-paste if mixed too hot can be a dangerous self-igniting fire hazard that burns almost as hot as thermite.
Coal-paste can also be made with stabilizers that reduce hazards greatly too.
Coalwater can be processed using electrowinning-tech found in mining industry. Electrowinning of coalwater will remove nearly all poisonous metals like mercury.
Coalwater technology is being used in China as a CleanCoal substitute for the old stinkpot smokestack industries.
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&...
----
http://wlboiler.en.alibaba.com/product/5...
----
http://wlboiler.en.alibaba.com/product/5...
-------------
I can make the special wet-mill that makes coalwater 5times more efficiently than a ball-mill, sag-mill, or rod-mill.
This special mill design uses our own stainless steel alloy formula that exceeds the performance of 2507-superduplex alloy.
My wet-mill design will also grind limestone into limewater.
..it will grind periodite, granidiorite, schist, and olivine too.
Limewater and Coalwater can be used to develop a big&beneficial AAC-cement industry in Alaska.
Manufacturing Cement is a CleanCoal process that has much more benefit than just making steam.
Healy Cleancoal can be converted into a Portland-Cement Factory with a little creative "metal-art"....(;-P)
Polypipe Limewater and Coalwater pipelines running from Healy to Livengood will make lotsa JOBS and many elegant prizewinning fireproof homes fully 100% approved by CCHRC.
http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&am...
yeah, I know how to make coalwater as a 25cent fuel for Boeing & Airbus jetliners too... but if I catch the AirFarce using it to drop bombs on little kids-----
I'm gonna strangle those braindamaged-evil BigBrassBigwigs with my bare hands.
...whutt to do with extra CO2???
http://www.valcent.net/s/Home.asp
--------
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&...
"...coalwater as a 25cent fuel for Boeing & Airbus jetliners too..."
Yah "RIGHT"
At -40 below in summertime at 35,000 feet?
I don't think so.
I am curious too! Why do a few of the commenters seem to have sufficient theory, yet the DNM can only throw out terms like, 2 billion and 6 billion. Does the University of Alaska still have some educated weanies and the state some Engineers that can ADD to the article?
Where is the brain power here?
... heard of fuzzy math? ..or, better yet,
Everybody wants something for nothing?
At -40 below in summertime at 35,000 feet?
-----
giggle-snicker..
it took me a while to figger out how to make the anti-freeze..
and correct the vapor-point
and control corrosion
and stabilize the emulsion up to 5-G's
...yeah, you gotta design a whole new jetliner around the fuel,
it's too difficult to retrofit existing jetliners.
...have you seen the big thumper engine at UAF that was designed to use LRCWF (coalwater) as fuel?
whuwuzzat,errr, 5megawatts???
DistantThunder: Well cr*p. I should have you tinker with my home's heating system!
I heard our illustrious mayor on the radio the other morning spouting off nonsense about global warming and how it's a proven fact that CO2 is the cause. What liberal administration is he looking for a job with? I say follow the money - if Whittaker and Dodson don't see $$$ in their future (or their cronies future) as a result of this project, a bear doesn't you-know-what in the woods.
Ditto about global warming. Much like the effect of trying to heat a house with a forced air furnace in sub zero temperatures. Although all our energy use may cause some warming. Switch it off and the global earth will return to normal within a day or so. What should be more important, is our breathing of these factory/vehicle exhaust fumes.
Next, they'll be saying all the people on the earth are causing the Earth's orbit to wobble.
Should just paraphrase this whole effect as "Wobal Warming".
Post a comment
Commenting requires registration.