Aaron wrote:Oil traditionally comes gushing out of the ground from miles around in liquid form. In fact, we have to cap it off, so it stops flowing.
No matter what we decide to smash into liquid fuel, it won't be in the same ballpark as oil. Or on the same team... Or even the same sport...
"We plan to spend six billion dollars on a major GTL plant in Qatar," Shell CEO Jeroen van der Veer told a Business Week conference in Paris, but gave no timeframe.
Shell signed a $5 billion deal in October last year with Qatar Petroleum to build a 140,000 barrels per day gas-to-liquids (GTL) plant, due to start in two stages with the first onstream in 2008-2009 and the second two years later.
Van der Veer added that by 2015 GTLs could meet three percent of world diesel demand.
GTL plants process natural gas into products such as diesel. Europe is short of diesel as oil refiners lack sufficient production capacity and demand is rising.
Qatar has racked up over $20 billion in GTL deals, as it seeks to cash in on its huge gas reserves.
Source
Under the belief that partially replacing coal with natural gas as the synthetic-fuel feedstock would reduce investment expenditures in coal mining operations, Sasol began importing gas from Mozambique in 2004.
Devil wrote:Long live climate change: this is the way to promote it!
As for Aaron's objection: Natural gas traditionally comes gushing out of the ground from miles around in gaseous form. In fact, we have to cap it off, so it stops flowing.
Of course, Aaron will point out the tremendously complex refinery apparatus which is necessary to turn natural gas into diesel and gasoline. I will rebut by pointing out the tremendously complex refinery apparatus which is necessary to turn crude oil into diesel and gasoline.
Also, it is no more expensive per btu than oil. In fact, in many places it is worth nothing, and is simply flared.
The first 70,000 bbl/d of capacity is expected to commence operation by 2009, with the rest in 2010 or 2011
JohnDenver wrote:Right now, I believe the #1 contender among synthetic oils is gas-to-liquids(GTL).
Right now, I believe the #1 contender among synthetic oils is gas-to-liquids(GTL).
Under the belief that partially replacing coal with natural gas as the synthetic-fuel feedstock would reduce investment expenditures in coal mining operations, Sasol began importing gas from Mozambique in 2004.
MicroHydro wrote:JohnDenver wrote:Right now, I believe the #1 contender among synthetic oils is gas-to-liquids(GTL).
That does it, welcome to my Ignore list.
Aaron wrote:70,000 bbl/d ? lol
More gigawatt solutions in a terawatt world...
GTL has a large potential simply because natural gas has such a potential resource base. While I don't think it'll help much in the long term, it could mitigate some peak oil effects in regional areas.
Ok a couple of things.. First of all isnt natural gas set to reach peak production with in a decade or so after oil peaks? Also why would this be much more favorable to coal conversion into oil ? Coal all though probably a much more difficult medium to start with is much much more abundant than natural gas. We have no shortage of coal or any sort of forseeable shortage anytime soon. I beleive there are the equivelent to 4.6 trillion barrels of oil in the worlds known coal reserves.
JohnDenver wrote:The Shell GTL project will produce 4 times as much diesel per day as Thunderhorse.
JohnDenver wrote:diesel only accounts for about 15% of a barrel of crude oil. Which means the plant will be providing as much diesel as an ordinary crude source producing 930,000bbl/day. That's huge. The Shell GTL project will produce 4 times as much diesel per day as Thunderhorse.
Sparaxis wrote:Using natural gas as a feedstock, particularly if it is diverted from flaring, results in fewer CO2 (and equivalent) emissions than using coal as a feedstock.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests