A Canadian company has used the current presidential race to plug it’s coal-to-liquid process. Citing positive statements by presidential hopefuls, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Mike Huckabee, Silverado Green Fuel has posted a video on it’s front page, explaining the process of turning low-grade coal into a clean-burning, non-polluting product.
The Vancouver, BC firm claims their initial production costs will come in at $15 per barrel, on an oil equivalent energy basis. Not bad, they say, considering oil is hanging in there at $90 plus a barrel.
I have to warn you though, the video is ok, considering it’s a company product, so you can take that grain of salt along as you watch. You’ll hear from kids on how important clean air is, and you’ll see the annoucement of a $26 million Demonstration Plant in a joint venture with the State of Mississippi, and, of course, a demonstration on how it’s done.
Personally, I think the use of kids is a bit tacky, but all’s fair in love and commerce.
Think coal gasification and coal-to-liquid is the same? Not even close.
More coal to liquid fuels research from Penn State.
Coal-to-liquid fuels: Not ‘clean coal’, not economically viable, and just not cool
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
Max Lindberg
My home state is Illinois, and my hometown a little railroad/farming community named Galesburg.We lived on a small farm during my high school years and I became very aware of nature and it's wonders. I loved the out of doors, working with animals, plowing fields and harvesting crops. Those were very good years.After a stint in the Army during the Korean war my broadcasting career took off at the local radio station, a 250 watt "teapot" as it was called in those days. My first job was as an engineer, then the ham came out and I became an announcer/newsman, graduating after several years to a larger market and a stint as a TV journalist/photographer. Cold, wet weather led me to the southwest where I've lived for most of the last 40 years, with a couple of years out to have fun working as a private investigator in San Francisco, and a few years working in Las Vegas hotels and casinos. In all, its been a real ride.After retiring a few years back I became fascinated with the efforts being made to find alternative energy sources. I've watched our environment deteriorate during my lifetime, and now it's my chance to join the chorus of intelligent and caring individuals making a difference one day at a time.
4 Responses to Coal-to-Liquid, A Company’s Pitch
Click on a tab to select how you'd like to leave your comment
Kira’s right. In order to convert coal to liquid it requires energy thus means more greenhouse gases released. Coal to Liquid seems to be much dirtier than traditional oil refineries because of this extra step but this article makes it seem like they might have that covered or at least reduced to some degree. This article i was reading called The Coal to Liquid Debate gave me a great picture of why this is happening and let me better understanding what this means for my wallet as well. I like to know everything about a topic before I make a decision and this has definitely influenced me.
http://www.energyandoil.com/the-coal-to-liquid-debate-part-i
It could be a better solution for keeping the environment clean – only if adopted by the governmental policies.
Thanks, Kira for the comment and the link. CTL proponents are suggesting underground sequestration of greenhouse gasses produced in the CTL process. In all, a very expensive process.
Aack! Coal in any form generally releases more greenhouse gases! I suppose if they’ve found a way to genuinely sequester the carbon it could actually end up clean, but it’s a tall order.
This post by Bill Chameides explains how the particular molecular structure of coal releases more carbon per unit energy than other fossil fuels: http://environmentaldefenseblogs.org/climate411/2007/04/24/should-we-fill-our-gas-tanks-with-coal/