Home » 2011 » January (Page 3)

2010 MEP National Conference Keynote

Sec. Gary Locke addresses attendees at 2010 MEP National Conference held in Orlando, FL, on May 3, 2010.
Video Rating: 0 / 5

WV Governor Joe Manchin, III delivers his 2010 State of the State Address January 13, 2010
Video Rating: 0 / 5

Latest Human Ecology News

Genghis Khan the GREEN: Invader killed so many people that carbon levels plummeted
Genghis Khan has been branded the greenest invader in history – after his murderous conquests killed so many people that huge swathes of cultivated land returned to forest.
Read more on Daily Mail

Need A Date? Take A Cue From The Birds [The Thoughtful Animal]
What’s the best way for a lonely guy to get a date? If you’re a Splendid Fairy-Wren ( Malurus splendens , native to Australia), your best bet might be to frighten the object of your affection. You’ve learned all about the birds and the bees; now it’s time to learn from them. Lots of research has shown that animals reduce their sexual behaviors when predators are around. After all, it isn’t just …
Read more on ScienceBlogs

Evolution by mistake: Major driving force comes from how organisms cope with errors at cellular level
A major driving force of evolution comes from mistakes made by cells and how organisms cope with the consequences, biologists have found. Their discoveries offer lessons for creating innovation in economics and society.
Read more on Science Daily

Climate Watch: California at the Tipping Point

The world’s climate is changing and California is now being affected in both dramatic and subtle ways. Get an in-depth look at the science behind climate change as we explore the environmental changes taking place throughout the state.
Video Rating: 0 / 5

Tips to Building an Online Business: Start With the Basics First

Start with the Basic Business Development Activities Initially

Starting your own business can be easy, fulfilling, or a pain in the butt. The easiest way and most cost effective way to go about doing it is via the Internet. This may seem like a no brainer but there are many important thing to consider when starting out. Some of the tips to be considered from the get go are outlined in the following article.

Set up a Website to Front your Off line Business

You can always have a web site that caters to a physical location, but you don’t have to do that if you don’t want to. Instead, you can sell or offer a service right out of your own home without having a lot of the same overhead one would have when renting or buying a building and equipping a new business from the ground up. There are some special considerations when starting an online business, However, most of those are for safety reasons, privacy, and your bottom line reasons.

Take Care of Your Financial Transactions

One thing that can happen when you have a site that handles money transactions is identity theft and the threat of hackers. If someone chooses to target your online business, all of the credit cards that might have gone through your site might be at risk.

When setting up an online business, spend the money to have a secure and encrypted system to taking money. There are some that will not buy online unless they see this, so not only will you have more protection, you won’t be scaring off potential customers who are worried about using credit cards online.

Pick the Products or Services that are In-Demand

They say when you open a business in the physical sense it is all about location. Location makes a huge difference because all eye balls drift your direction. The same mentality applies to picking the right products or services to offer your customers.

You really need to take a look at the current market conditions, what people are looking to buy, and how the buying patterns of online shoppers are trending. What this equates to is having your eye to the ground so that you can be just a head of the heard.

Going Green is Oh So Popular

The current roar in the market place is GREEN. Unless, you have lived under a rock for the past year you most likely have experiences the wave of Green, eco, environmentally, Earth-friendly products flooding our way. This is a great thing for those wanting to start an online business. The global society and all of the millions of shoppers are currently moving to more sustainable or Earth-friendly, green products. This could be residential energy systems, organic bedding products, or variety or everyday household items.

With the competition comes increase work to get your products in front of customers. It’s pretty obvious we are at a cross-roads related to just about everything we consume. We, as a society, are moving to higher energy efficiency, calculation of carbon in everything we do, and how we as individuals, companies, and countries effect the environment. For the online entrepreneur, the emerging trend illustrates a clear path to take when building your online business.

Protect Your Personal Information

You may also have to worry about your personal safety. Some people acquire a secret identity online. They feel protected or have less concerns about how they act. They work to hid their true identity when they are surfing the Internet. They like to find people to harass. If you can run your business without giving away your personal phone number, you should do so. You should find a way to have this available to those who have already placed orders if need be. Try to avoid having it on your main page.

Often, you may wish to create special email addresses. You can have one email address to take care of your online business. Make sure to have ample space so it will not fill up too fast. You can make sure you have your attention on it at all times. You may not be able to avoid having a number online, but if you must, get a new phone line just for your online business customer service.

Running an online business is actually safer in many ways. You don’t have to worry about being held up at gun point or to a specific return in investment for your efforts. You don’t have overhead and you don’t have the potential for those ‘I burnt my mouth on hot coffee’ lawsuits that can put you out of business.

You can get a business built online is easily and fast. You just need to get started on the right foot. As long as you make sure your website is as secure as it can possibly be, and that you have taken precautions against those who might wish to harass you in any way, you can feel reasonably secure with your online business. Keep up to date on the newest online security options you might have and make sure you put them to good use.

At Solargies, our goals are not to just promote the adoption of alternative energy sources and the help change the general mind set towards improved energy conservation but it is also my personal quest is to create a powerful, grassroots movement for social, economic and environmental change. Learn more at http://www.Solargies.com

Article from articlesbase.com

Related Green Business Development Articles

Synthetic Fuel

Classification and principles

The term ‘synthetic fuel’ has several different meanings and it may include different types of fuels. More traditional definitions, e.g. definition given by the International Energy Agency, define ‘synthetic fuel’ as any liquid fuel obtained from coal or natural gas. The Energy Information Administration defines synthetic fuels in its Annual Energy Outlook 2006, as fuels produced from coal, natural gas, or biomass feedstocks through chemical conversion into syncrude and/or synthetic liquid products. A number of synthetic fuel’s definitions include also fuels produced from biomass, and industrial and municipal waste. The definition of synthetic fuel may also consist of oil sands and oil shale as synthetic fuel’s sources and in addition to liquid fuels also gaseous fuels are covered. On his ‘Synthetic fuels handbook’ a petrochemist James G. Speight included liquid and gaseous fuels as well as clean solid fuels produced by conversion of coal, oil shale or tar sands, and various forms of biomass, although he admits that in the context of substitutes for petroleum-based fuels it has even wider meaning. Depending the context, also methanol, ethanol and hydrogen may be included.

Synthetic fuels are produced by the chemical process of conversion. Conversion methods could be direct conversion, that means that the source substance is converted directly into liquid transportation fuels, or indirect conversion, that means that the source substance is converted initially into syngas which then goes through additional conversion process to become liquid fuels. Basic conversion methods are carbonization and pyrolysis, hydrogenation, and thermal dissolution.

History

Ruins of the German synthetic petrol plant (Hydrierwerke Plitz Aktiengesellschaft) in Police, Poland

See also: Oil Campaign of World War II and Synthetic Liquid Fuels Program

Direct conversion of coal to synthetic fuel was originally developed in Germany. The Bergius process was developed by Friedrich Bergius, yielding a patent on the Bergius process in 1913. Karl Goldschmidt invited him to build an industrial plant at his factory the Th. Goldschmidt AG (now known as Evonik Industries) in 1914. The production began only in 1919.[citation needed]

Also indirect coal conversion (where coal is gasified and then converted to synthetic fuels) was developed in Germany by Franz Fischer and Hans Tropsch in 1923. During the World War II, Germany used synthetic oil manufacturing (German: Kohleveredelung) to produce substitute (Ersatz) oil products by using the Bergius process (from coal), the Fischer-Tropsch process (water gas), and other methods (Zeitz used the TTH and MTH processes). The Bergius process plants were the primary source of Nazi Germany’s high-grade aviation gasoline and the source of most of its synthetic oil, 99% of its synthetic rubber and nearly all of its synthetic methanol, synthetic ammonia, and nitric acid. Nearly 1/3 of the Bergius production was produced by plants in Plitz (Polish: Police) and Leuna, with more than 1/3 more in five other plants (Ludwigshafen had a much smaller Bergius plant which improved “gasoline quality by dehydrogenation” using the DHD process).

Synthetic fuel grades included “T.L. [jet] fuel “, “first quality aviation gasoline”, “aviation base gasoline”, and “gasoline – middle oil”; and “producer gas” and diesel were synthesized for fuel as well (e.g., converted armored tanks used producer gas).:4,s2 By early 1944, German synthetic fuel production had reached more than 124,000 barrels per day (19,700 m3/d) from 25 plants,[verification needed] including 10 in the Ruhr Area.:239 In 1937, the four central Germany lignite coal plants at Bhlen, Leuna, Magdeburg/Rothensee, and Zeitz, along with the Ruhr Area bituminous coal plant at Scholven/Buer, had produced 4.8 million barrels (76010^3 m3) of fuel. Four new hydrogenation plants (German: hydrierwerke) were subsequently erected at Bottrop-Welheim (which used “Bituminous coal tar pitch”), Gelsenkirchen (Nordstern), Plitz, and, at 200,000 tons/yr Wesseling. Nordstern and Plitz/Stettin used bituminous coal, as did the new Blechhammer plants. Heydebreck synthesized food oil, which was tested on concentration camp prisoners. the Geilenberg Special Staff was using 350,000 mostly foreign forced laborers to reconstruct the bombed synthetic oil plants,:210,224 and, in an emergency decentralization program, to build 7 underground hydrogenation plants for bombing protection (none were completed). (Planners had rejected an earlier such proposal because the war was to be won before the bunkers would be completed.) In July 1944, the ‘Cuckoo’ project underground synthetic oil plant (800,000 m2) was being “carved out of the Himmelsburg” North of the Mittelwerk, but the plant was unfinished at the end of WWII.

Indirect Fischer-Tropsch (“FT”) technologies were brought to the US after World War 2, and a 7,000 barrels per day (1,100 m3/d) plant was designed by HRI, and built in Brownsville Texas. The plant represented the first commercial use of high-temperature Fischer Tropsch conversion. It operated from 1950 to 1955, when it was shut down when the price of oil dropped due to enhanced production and huge discoveries in the Middle East.

Direct coal conversion plants were also developed in the US after WW2, including a 3 TPD plant in Lawrenceville, NJ, and a 250-600 TPD Plant in Catlettsburg, KY.[citation needed]

South Africa uses the Fischer-Tropsch process to produce most of that country’s diesel. Another form of synthetic oil is produced at Syncrude sands plant in Alberta, Canada. This huge facility removes highly viscous bitumen from oil sands mined nearby, and uses a variety of processes of hydrogenation to turn it into high-quality synthetic crude oil. The Syncrude plant supplies about 14% of Canada’s petroleum output. A similar plant is the smaller nearby facility owned by Suncor.[citation needed]

Processes

There are numerous processes that can be used to produce synthetic fuels.

These broadly fall into three categories: Indirect, Direct, and Biofuel processes.[dubious discuss]

This is a listing of many of the different technologies used for synthetic fuel production. Please note that although this list was compiled for coal to liquids technologies, many of the same processes can also be used with biomass or natural gas feedstocks.

Indirect conversion

Indirect conversion has the widest deployment worldwide, with global production totaling around 260,000 barrels per day (41,000 m3/d), and many additional projects under active development.

Indirect conversion broadly refers to a process in which biomass, coal, or natural gas is converted to a mix of hydrogen and carbon monoxide known as syngas either through gasification or steam methane reforming, and that syngas is processed into a liquid transportation fuel using one of a number of different conversion techniques depending on the desired end product.

The primary technologies that produce synthetic fuel from syngas are Fischer-Tropsch synthesis and the Mobil process (also known as Methanol To Gasoline, or MTG). There are some technologies under development to produce ethanol from syngas, though these have not yet been demonstrated at commercial scale.

The Fischer-Tropsch process reacts syngas with typically a cobalt or iron-based catalyst, and transforms the gas into liquid products (primarily diesel fuel and jet fuel) and potentially waxes (depending on the FT process employed).

The process of producing synfuels through indirect conversion is often referred to as coal-to-liquids (CTL), gas-to-liquids (GTL) or biomass-to-liquids (BTL), depending on the initial feedstock. At least three projects (Ohio River Clean Fuels, Illinois Clean Fuels, and Rentech Natchez) are combining coal and biomass feedstocks, creating hybrid-feedstock synthetic fuels known as Coal and Biomass To Liquids (CBTL).

Indirect conversion process technologies can also be used to produce hydrogen, potentially for use in fuel cell vehicles, either as slipstream co-product, or as a primary output.

Direct conversion

Direct conversion refers to processes in which coal or biomass feedstocks are converted directly into intermediate or final products, without going through the intermediate step of conversion to syngas via gasification.

Direct conversion processes can be broadly broken up into two different methods: Pyrolysis and carbonization, and hydrogenation.[citation needed]

Hydrogenation processes

See also: Bergius process

One of the main methods of direct conversion of coal to liquids by hydrogenation process is the Bergius process. In this process, coal is liquefied by mixing it with hydrogen gas and heating the system (hydrogenation). Dry coal is mixed with heavy oil recycled from the process. Catalyst is typically added to the mixture. The reaction occurs at between 400 C (752 F) to 5,000 C (9,030 F) and 20 to 70 MPa hydrogen pressure. The reaction can be summarized as follows:

After World War I several plants were built in Germany; these plants were extensively used during World War II to supply Germany with fuel and lubricants.

The Kohleoel Process, developed in Germany by Ruhrkohle and VEBA, was used in the demonstration plant with the capacity of 200 ton of lignite per day, built in Bottrop, Germany. This plant operated from 1981 to 1987. In this process, coal is mixed with a recycle solvent and iron catalyst. After preheating and pressurizing, H2 is added. The process takes place in tubular reactor at the pressure of 300 bar and at the temperature of 470 C (880 F). This process was also explored by SASOL in South Africa.

In 1970-1980s, Japanese companies Nippon Kokan, Sumitomo Metal Industries and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries developed the NEDOL process. In this process, coal is mixed with a recycled solvent and a synthetic iron-based catalyst; after preheating H2 is added. The reaction takes place in tubular reactor at temperature between 430 C (810 F) and 465 C (870 F) at the pressure 150-200 bar. The produced oil has low quality and requires intensive upgrading. H-Coal process, developed by Hydrocarbon Research, Inc., in 1963, mixes pulverized coal with recycled liquids, hydrogen and catalyst in the ebullated bed reactor. Advantages of this process are that dissolution and oil upgrading are taking place in the single reactor, products have high H/C ration, and a fast ration time, while the main disadvantages are high gas yield, high hydrogen consumption, and limitation of oil usage only as a boiler oil because of impurities.

The SRC-I and SRC-II (Solvent Refined Coal) processes developed by Gulf Oil and implemented as pilot plants in the United States in the 1960s and 1970s. The Nuclear Utility Services Corporation developed hydrogenation process which was patented by Wilburn C. Schroeder in 1976. The process involved dried, pulverized coal mixed with roughly 1wt% molybdenum catalysts. Hydrogenation occurred by use of high temperature and pressure syngas produced in a separate gasifier. The process ultimately yielded a synthetic crude product, Naphtha, a limited amount of C3/C4 gas, light-medium weight liquids (C5-C10) suitable for use as fuels, small amounts of NH3 and significant amounts of CO2. Other single-stage hydrogenation processes are the Exxon Donor Solvent Process, the Imhausen High-pressure Process, and the Conoco Zinc Chloride Process.

There is also a number of two-stage direct liquefaction processes; however, after 1980s only the Catalytic Two-stage Liquefaction Process, modified from the H-Coal Process; the Liquid Solvent Extraction Process by British Coal; and the Brown Coal Liquefaction Process of Japan have been developed.

Pyrolysis and carbonization processes

See also: Karrick process

There are a number of different carbonization processes. The carbonization conversion occurs through pyrolysis or destructive distillation, and it produces condensable coal tar, oil and water vapor, non-condesable synthetic gas, and a solid residue-char. The condensed coal tar and oil are then further processed by hydrogenation to remove sulfur and nitrogen species, after which they are processed into fuels.

The typical example of carbonization is the Karrick process. The process was invented by Lewis Cass Karrick in the 1920s. The Karrick process is a low-temperature carbonization process, where coal is heated at 680 F (360 C) to 1,380 F (750 C) in the absence of air. These temperatures optimize the production of coal tars richer in lighter hydrocarbons than normal coal tar. However, the produced liquids are mostly a by-product and the main product is semi-coke, a solid and smokeless fuel.

The COED Process, developed by FMC Corporation, uses a fluidized bed for processing, in combination with increasing temperature, through four stages of pyrolysis. Heat is transferred by hot gases produced by combustion of part of the produced char. A modification of this process, the COGAS Process, involves the addition of gasification of char. The TOSCOAL Process, an analogue to the TOSCO II oil shale retorting process and Lurgi-Ruhrgas process, which is also used for the shale oil extraction, uses hot recycled solids for the heat transfer.

Liquid yields of pyrolysis and Karrick processes are generally low for practical use for synthetic liquid fuel production. Furthermore, the resulting liquids are of low quality and require further treatment before they can be used as motor fuels. In summary, there is little possibility that this process will yield economically viable volumes of liquid fuel.

Biofuels processes

One example of a Biofuel based synthetic fuel process is Hydrotreated Renewable Jet (HRJ) fuel. There are a number of variants of these processes under development, and the testing and certification process for HRJ aviation fuels is beginning.

There are two such process under development by UOP. One using solid biomass feedstocks, and one using bio-oil and fats. The process using solid second-generation biomass sources such as switchgrass or woody biomass uses pyrolysis to produce a bio-oil, which is then catalytically stabilized and deoxygenated to produce a jet-range fuel. The process using natural oils and fats goes through a deoxygenation process, followed by hydrocracking and isomerization to produce a renewable Synthetic Paraffinic Kerosene jet fuel.

Oil sand and oil shale processes

See also: Synthetic crude and Shale oil extraction

Synthetic crude may also be created by upgrading bitumen (a tar like substance found in oil sands), or synthesizing liquid hydrocarbons from oil shale. There are number of processes extracting shale oil (synthetic crude oil) from oil shale by pyrolysis, hydrogenation, or thermal dissolution.

Commercialization

This section may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia’s quality standards. Please improve this section if you can. (July 2009)

The leading company in the commercialization of synthetic fuel is Sasol, a company based in South Africa.

Worldwide commercial synthetic fuels plant capacity is over 240,000 barrels per day (38,000 m3/d), including indirect conversion Fischer Tropsch plants in South Africa (Mossgas, Secunda CTL), Qatar {Oryx GTL}, and Malaysia (Shell Bintulu), and a Mobil process (Methanol to Gasoline) plant in New Zealand.

Numerous large projects are under construction in China and Qatar. Some analysts believe that Chinese CTL production will exceed that of South Africa by 2015, and new and existing GTL capacity in Qatar should also exceed the July 2009 South African production level some time in 2011.

Existing producers

The leading company in the commercialization of synthetic fuel is Sasol, a company based in South Africa. Sasol operates the world’s only commercial Fischer Tropsch coal-to-liquids facility at Secunda, with a capacity of 150,000 barrels per day (24,000 m3/d).

Sasol’s Oryx Fischer Tropsch gas-to-liquids plant in Ras Laffan Industrial City, Qatar is running at 29,000 barrels per day (4,600 m3/d) capacity, near its anticipated 34,000 barrels per day (5,400 m3/d) nameplate capacity.

Royal Dutch Shell operates a 14,700 barrels per day (2,340 m3/d) Fischer Tropsch gas-to-liquids plant in Bintulu, Malaysia.

The Mossgas gas to liquids plant in South Africa produces 45,000 barrels per day (7,200 m3/d) of Fischer Tropsch synthetic fuels.

Other companies that have developed coal- or gas-to-liquids processes (at the pilot plant or commercial stage) include ExxonMobil, StatoilHydro, Rentech, and Syntroleum .

Projects under construction

The Pearl GTL project, a joint venture of Shell and Qatar Petroleum, is under construction in Ras Laffan, Qatar, and will produce 140,000 barrels per day (22,000 m3/d) of Fischer Tropsch petroleum liquids starting in 2010 (first train) and 2011 (second train).

The Escravos GTL project in Nigeria is expected to produce 34,000 barrels per day (5,400 m3/d) of Fischer Tropsch synthetic fuel in 2011.

Shenhua completed a trial run in January 2009, and expects to begin operation in July 2009 of their 1.08 million ton per year (roughly 22,200 barrels per day (3,530 m3/d)) direct coal liquefaction plant (Erdos CTL) in Ejin Horo Banner in north China’s Inner Mongolia autonomous region. Shenhua eventually intends to expand the facility to 5 million tons per year (roughly 102,000 barrels per day (16,200 m3/d)).. The Shenhua Group also expects to complete a 6 Million ton per year (3 Million TPY first phase) coal-to-fuel project using its own Fischer Tropsch indirect conversion technology next to the Inner Mongolia plant in the third quarter of 2009.

Yankuang expects to break ground shortly on a 22,000 barrels per day (3,500 m3/d) (1 million ton per year) indirect synthetic fuels project. Final products will include 780,800 tons of diesel, 258,400 of naphtha, 56,480 of LPG.

Proposed projects

United States

In the United States, a number of different synthetic fuels projects are moving forward, with the first expected to enter commercial operation starting in 2013.

American Clean Coal Fuels, in their Illinois Clean Fuels project, is developing a 30,000 barrels per day (4,800 m3/d) Fischer Tropsch biomass and coal to liquids project with carbon capture and sequestration in Oakland Illinois. The project is expected to come online in 2013.

Baard Energy, in their Ohio River Clean Fuels project, are developing a 53,000 barrels per day (8,400 m3/d) Fischer Tropsch coal and biomass to liquids project with the carbon capture and sequestration. Pending close of a financing package, Baard hopes to begin on site preparation work before the end of 2009, with plant construction starting in 2010. Initial project startup is anticipated in 2013, with full production capacity targeted in 2015.

Rentech is developing a 29,600 barrels per day (4,710 m3/d) Fischer Tropsch coal and biomass to liquids plant with carbon capture and sequestration in Natchez Mississippi. The project is in the permitting phase, with receipt of permits anticipated by Rentech in 2010.[unreliable source?]

DKRW is developing a 15,000 to 20,000 barrels per day (2,400 to 3,200 m3/d) Fischer Tropsch coal to liquids plant with carbon capture and sequestration in Medicine Bow Wyoming. The project is expected to begin operation in 2013.[unreliable source?]

Aviation fuel

A significant effort is under way to certify FT synthetic fuels for use in US and international aviation fleets. In this effort is being led by an industry coalition known as the Commercial Aviation Alternative Fuels Initiative(CAAFI), also supported by a parallel initiative under way in the US Air Force , to certify FT fuel for use in all aviation platforms. The US Air Force has a stated goal of certifying its entire fleet for use with FT Synthetic Fuel blends by 2011. The CAAFI initiative aims to certify the civilian aviation fleet for FT synthetic fuels blends by 2010, and has programs under way to certify HRJ hydrogenated biofuels as early as 2013.

Presently, certification efforts appear to be ahead of schedule. On June 24, 2009 the ASTM International Aviation Fuels subcommittee voted to approve the creation of a new fuels specification allowing 50/50 blends of FT jet fuel to be used in commercial aviation. Assuming that this action is approved by the Petroleum Products and Lubricants committee of ASTM International, then CAAFI anticipates that the specification will be issued with its official ASTM designation by the fall. Ongoing research is continuing into HRJ fuels for incorporation in the standard, with HRJ fuels inclusion in the standard anticipated by the end of 2010, pending favorable evaluation of the research report.

Sasol has also announced that they have achieved the first approval for 100% synthetic jet fuel use sanctioned by global aviation fuel specification authorities.

On 12 October 2009, a Qatar Airways Airbus A340-600 conducted a the world’s first commercial passenger flight using a mixture of kerosene and synthetic Gas-to-Liquid fuel in its flight from London’s Gatwick Airport to Doha.

JBUFF (Joint Battlespace Use Fuel of the Future) fuel

Future blends and fuel formulations may result in a JBUFF (Joint Battlespace Use Fuel of the Future) or a single battlespace fuel that can be used in both diesel and jet fuel application. A JBUFF fuel will allow for rapid deployment and logistic enhancement for military and emergency aid environments where various types of equipment can be operated with one fuel in place of several types of fuel.

Initial consumers

In the United States, the aviation community has taken a leadership role in establishing a major US market for synthetic fuel. In addition to their certification efforts, the United States Air Force has publicly stated their intention to fuel half of their domestic US flights with synthetic fuel by 2016. The commercial aviation industry, working with potential suppliers via CAAFI, is also pushing hard to secure sources of fuel.

Substantial interest has also been shown from municipal and commercial vehicle fleet operations, railroads, and even refiners looking to use synthetic fuels as blendstock.[citation needed]

The United States Department of Energy projects that domestic consumption of synthetic fuel made from coal and natural gas will rise to 3.7 million barrels per day (59010^3 m3/d) in 2030 based on a price of per barrel of high sulfur crude.

Non-transportation “synfuel”

Numerous American companies (TECO, Progress Energy, DTE, Marriott) have also taken advantage of coal-based synfuel tax credits established in the 1970s, however many of the products qualifying for the subsidy (for example slurries or briquettes) are not true synthetic fuels since they are not the portable, convenient, end-user liquids that the credit was established for.[neutrality is disputed]

The coal industry uses the credit to increase profits on coal-burning powerplants by introducing a “pre-treatment” process that satisfies the technical requirements, then burns the result the same as it would burn coal. Sometimes the amount gained in the tax credit is a major factor in the economic operation of the plant. The synfuel tax credit has been used primarily in this manner since the cheap gas prices of the 1980s killed any major efforts to create a transportation fuel with the credit, and its continuation is seen as a major “pork project” win for coal industry lobbyists, to the tune of billion per annum.[neutrality is disputed] The total production of such synfuels in the United States was an estimated 73 million tons in 2002.[citation needed]

The synthetic fuel tax credit, Section 45K, under which these activities occurred, expired 31 December 2007.

Economics

The economics of synthetic fuel manufacture vary greatly depending the feedstock used, the precise process employed, site characteristics such as feedstock and transportation costs, and the cost of additional equipment required to control emissions. The examples described below indicate a wide range of production costs between /BBL for large-scale gas-to-liquids, to as much as 0/BBL for small-scale biomass-to-liquids + Carbon Capture and Sequestration.

In order to be economically viable, projects must do much better than just being competitive head-to-head with oil, they must also be profitable, and generate a sufficient return on investment to justify the capital investment in the project. This means the Required Selling Price of the fuel that they produce will have to be above the break even mark by a significant amount before any projects will be built.

GTL economics

A synthetic fuel manufactured from natural gas (GTL), without CCS, in a large scale plant in the middle east (where gas is relatively inexpensive), is expected to be competitive with oil down to approximately per barrel.

Recent advances by the oil company Shell have seen synthetic fuels start to become profitable. The company is building a GTL (gas-to-liquid) plant in Qatar, due to come online in 2011. It will be capable of producing 300,000 barrels per day (48,000 m3/d) of synthetic fuels and other products, using natural gas as a feedstock. Their spokesman claims the process will remain competitive with traditional diesel unless the price of crude falls below per barrel.

CTL/CBTL/BTL economics

According to a December 2007 study, A medium scale (30,000 BPD) coal-to-liquids plant (CTL) sited in the US using bituminous coal, is expected to be competitive with oil down to roughly 56/bbl crude-oil equivalent. Adding carbon capture and sequestration to the project was expected to add an additional /BBL to the required selling price, though this may be offset by revenues from Enhanced Oil Recovery, or by tax credits, or the eventual sale of carbon credits.

A recent NETL study examined the relative economics of a number of different process configurations for the production of indirect FT fuels using biomass, coal, and CCS. This study determined a price at which the plant would not only be profitable, abut also make a sufficient return to yield a 20% return on the equity investment required to build the plant.

This chapter details an analysis which derives the Required Selling Price (RSP) of the FT diesel fuels produced in order to determine the economic feasibility and relative competitiveness of the different plant options. A sensitivity analysis was performed to determine how carbon control regulations such as an emissions trading scheme for transportation fuels would affect the price of both petroleum-derived diesel and FT diesel from the different plants. The key findings of these analyses were: (1) CTL plants equipped with CCS are competitive at crude oil prices as low as per barrel and have less life cycle GHG emissions than petroleum-derived diesel. These plants become more economically competitive as carbon prices increase. (2) The incremental cost of adding simple CCS is very low (7 cents per gallon) because CO2 capture is an inherent part of the FT process. This becomes the economically preferred option at carbon prices above /mtCO2eq.27 (3) BTL systems are hindered by limited biomass availability which affects the maximum plant size, thereby limiting potential economies of scale. This, combined with relatively high biomass costs results in FT diesel prices which are double that of other configurations: .45 to .96/gal compared to .56 to .82/gal for CTL and 15wt% CBTL systems equipped with CCS. The conclusion reached based on these findings was that both the CTL with CCS and the 8wt% to 15wt% CBTL with CCS configurations may offer the most pragmatic solutions to the nation energy strategy dilemma: GHG emission reductions which are significant (5% to 33% below the petroleum baseline) at diesel RSPs that are only half as much as the BTL options (.56 to .82 per gallon compared to .45 to .96 per gallon for BTL). These options are economically feasible when crude oil prices are to per barrel.

These economics can change in the event that plentiful low-cost biomass sources can be found, lowing the cost of biomass inputs, and improving economies of scale.

Economics for solid feedstock indirect FT process plants are further confused by carbon regulation. Generally, since permitting a CTL plant without CCS will likely be impossible, and CTL+CCS plants have a lower carbon footprint than conventional fuels, carbon regulation is expected to be balance-positive for synthetic fuel production. But it impacts the economics of different process configurations in different ways. The NETL study picked a blended CBTL process using 5-15% biomass alongside coal as the most economical in a range of carbon price and probable future regulation scenarios. Unfortunately, because of scale and cost constraints, pure BTL processes did not score well until very high carbon prices were assumed, though again this may improve with better feedstocks and more efficient larger scale projects.

Chinese direct coal liquefaction economics

News reports have indicated an anticipated cost of production of less than per barrel, based on a direct coal liquefaction process, and a coal mining cost of under /ton.

Security considerations

A central consideration for the development of synthetic fuel is the security factor of securing domestic fuel supply from domestic biomass and coal. Nations that are rich in biomass and coal can used synthetic fuel to off-set their use of petroleum derived fuels and foreign oil.

Environmental considerations

One factor that is a central focus of all large-scale synthetic fuels development is the environmental footprint of the various technologies and processes that can be employed. The environmental footprint of a given synthetic fuel varies greatly depending on which process is employed, what feedstock is used, what pollution controls are employed, and what the transportation distance and method are for both feedstock procurement and end-product distribution.

In many locations, project development will not be possible due to permitting restrictions if a process design is chosen that does not meet local requirements for clean air, water, and increasingly, lifecycle carbon emissions.

Lifecycle green house gas emissions

A topic that has been a major focus recently in the discussion of all unconventional fuels technologies is the carbon emissions generated by their production and use.

In order to truly assess these emissions, the full lifecycle from feedstock procurement, through refining, to ultimate tailpipe end-use must be considered. This is known as a life cycle assessment.

Among different indirect FT synthetic fuels production technologies, potential emissions of greenhouse gasses vary greatly. Coal to liquids (“CTL”) without carbon capture and sequestration (“CCS”) is expected to result in a significantly higher carbon footprint than conventional petroleum-derived fuels (+147%). On the other hand, Biomass to liquids with CCS is expected to be able to deliver a 358% reduction in lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions. Both of these plants fundamentally use gasification and FT conversion synthetic fuels technology, but they deliver wildly divergent environmental footprints.[citation needed]

Lifecycle carbon emissions profiles of various fuels, including many synthetic fuels. Coal and biomass co-conversion to transportation fuels, Michael E. Reed, DOE NETL Office of Fossil Energy, Oct 17 2007

Generally, CTL without CCS has a higher greenhouse gas footprint. CTL with CCS has a 9-15% reduction in lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions compared to that of petroleum derived diesel. CBTL+CCS plants that blend biomass alongside coal while sequestering carbon do progressively better the more biomass is added. Depending on the type of biomass, the assumptions about root storage, and the transportation logistics, at conservatively 40% biomass alongside coal, CBTL+CCS plants achieve a neutral lifecycle greenhouse gas footprint. At more than 40% biomass, they begin to go lifecycle negative, and effectively store carbon in the ground for every gallon of fuels that they produce.[citation needed]

Ultimately BTL plants employing CCS could store massive amounts of carbon while producing transportation fuels from sustainably produced biomass feedstocks, although there are a number of significant economic hurdles, and a few technical hurdles that would have to be overcome to enable the development of such facilities.[citation needed]

Serious consideration must also be given to the type and method of feedstock procurement for either the coal or biomass used in such facilities, as reckless development could exacerbate environmental problems caused by mountaintop removal mining, land use change, fertilizer runoff, food vs fuels concerns, or many other potential factors. Or they could not. Depending entirely on project-specific factors on a plant-by-plant basis.[citation needed]

A study from U.S. Department of Energy National Energy Technology Laboratory with much more in-depth information of CBTL life-cycle emissions “Affordable Low Carbon Diesel from Domestic Coal and Biomass”: http://www.netl.doe.gov/energy-analyses/pubs/CBTL Final Report.pdf

Hybrid hydrogen-carbon processes have also been proposed recently as another closed-carbon cycle alternative, combining ‘clean’ electricity, recycled CO, H2 and captured CO2 with biomass as inputs as a way of reducing the biomass needed.[citation needed]

Fuels emissions

The fuels produced by the various synthetic fuels process also have a wide range of potential environmental performance, though they tend to be very uniform based on the type of synthetic fuels process used (i.e. the tailpipe emissions characteristics of Fischer Tropsch diesel tend to be the same, though their lifecycle greenhouse gas footprint can vary substantially based on which plant produced the fuel, depending on feedstock and plant level sequestration considerations.)[citation needed]

In particular, Fischer tropsch diesel and jet fuels deliver dramatic across-the-board reductions in all major criteria pollutants such as SOx, NOx, Particulate Matter, and Hydrocarbon emissions. These fuels, because of their high level of purity and lack of contaminants, further enable the use of advanced emissions control equipment that has been shown to virtually eliminate HC, CO, and PM emissions from diesel vehicles.

In testimony before the Subcommittee on Energy and Environment of the U.S. House of Representatives the following statement was made by a senior scientist from Rentech:

F-T fuels offer numerous benefits to aviation users. The first is an immediate reduction in particulate emissions. F-T jet fuel has been shown in laboratory combusters and engines to reduce PM emissions by 96% at idle and 78% under cruise operation. Validation of the reduction in other turbine engine emissions is still under way. Concurrent to the PM reductions is an immediate reduction in CO2 emissions from F-T fuel. F-T fuels inherently reduce CO2 emissions because they have higher energy content per carbon content of the fuel, and the fuel is less dense than conventional jet fuel allowing aircraft to fly further on the same load of fuel.

The cleanliness of these FT synthetic fuels is further demonstrated by the fact that they are sufficiently non-toxic and environmentally benign as to be considered biodegradable. This owes primarily to the near-absence of sulfur and extremely low level of aromatics present in the fuel.

Using Fischer Tropsch diesel results in dramatic across the board tailpipe emissions reductions relative to conventional fuels

Using Fischer Tropsch jet fuels have been proven to dramatically reduce particulate and other aircraft emissions

Sustainability

One concern commonly raised about the development of synthetic fuels plants is sustainability. Fundamentally, transitioning from oil to coal or natural gas for transportation fuels production is a transition from one inherently depeleteable geologically limited resource to another.[citation needed]

One of the positive defining characteristics of synthetic fuels production is the ability to use multiple feedstocks (coal, gas, or biomass) to produce the same product from the same plant. In the case of hybrid BCTL plants, some facilities are already planning to use a significant biomass component alongside coal. Ultimately, given the right location with good biomass availability, and sufficiently high oil prices, synthetic fuels plants can be transitioned from coal or gas, over to a 100% sustainable biomass feedstock. This provides a path forwards to true sustainable fuel production, even if the plant originally produced fuels solely from coal, making the infrastructure forwards-compatible even if the original fossil feedstock runs out.[citation needed]

Some synthetic fuels processes can be converted to sustainable production practices more easily than others, depending on the process equipment selected. This is an important design consideration as these facilities are planned and implemented, as additional room must be left in the plant layout to accommodate whatever future materials handling and gasification plant change requirements might be necessary to accommodate a future change in production profile.[citation needed]

See also

Energy portal

Coal liquefication

Gasification

Methanol to gasoline

Biofuel

Butanol fuel

Gas to liquids

Synthetic oil

Synthetic Fuels Corporation

Synthetic Liquid Fuels Program

Cracking

Shale oil extraction

Pyrolysis

Methanol economy

References

^ (PDF) Tracking Industrial Energy Efficiency and CO2 Emissions. Paris: OECD/IEA. 2007. p. 289. ISBN 9789264030169. http://www.iea.org/textbase/nppdf/free/2007/tracking_emissions.pdf. Retrieved 2009-07-09. 

^ a b c d (PDF) Annual Energy Outlook 2006 with Projections to 2030. Washington, D.C.: Energy Information Administration. 2006. p. 5254. DOE/EIA-0383(2006). http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/archive/aeo06/pdf/issues.pdf. Retrieved 2009-07-09. 

^ Patel, Prachi (2007-12-21). “A comparison of coal and biomass as feedstocks for synthetic fuel production”. Alternative energy sources: an international compendium. MIT Technology Review. 

^ Antal, M. J. (1978). “Fuel from waste. A portable system converts biowaste into jet fuel and diesel for the military”. Hemisphere. p. 3203. ISBN 9780891160854. 

^ Thipse, S. S.; Sheng, C.; Booty, M. R.; Magee, R. S.; Dreizin, E. L. (2001). “Synthetic fuel for imitation of municipal solid waste in experimental studies of waste incineration”. Chemosphere (Elsevier) 44 (5): 10711077. 

^ Lee, Sunggyu; Speight, James G.; Loyalka, Sudarshan K. (2007). Handbook of Alternative Fuel Technologies. CRC Press. p. 225. ISBN 9780824740696. http://books.google.com/books?lr=&id=hyNbv60Px8oC&dq=subject:”Synthetic+fuels”&q=synthetic+fuel. Retrieved 2009-03-14. 

^ a b c d Speight, James G. (2008). Synthetic Fuels Handbook: Properties, Process, and Performance. McGraw-Hill Professional. pp. 12; 910. ISBN 9780071490238. http://books.google.com/books?id=E3pgqnGgHjIC&pg=PA2. Retrieved 2009-06-03. 

^ Lee, Sunggyu (1990). Methanol Synthesis Technology. CRC Press. p. 1. ISBN 9780849346101. http://books.google.com/books?id=Qdnc7uK-aH8C&pg=PA1. Retrieved 2009-07-09. 

^ Lapedes, Daniel N. (1976). McGraw-Hill encyclopedia of energy. McGraw-Hill. p. 377. ISBN 9780070452619. 

^ a b Luik, Hans (2009-06-08). “Alternative technologies for oil shale liquefaction and upgrading” (PDF). International Oil Shale Symposium. Tallinn, Estonia: Tallinn University of Technology. http://www.oilshalesymposium.com/fileadmin/user_upload/documents/LUIK_2.pdf. Retrieved 2009-06-09. 

^ a b c Cicero, Daniel (2007-06-11). “Coal Gasification & Co-production of Chemicals & Fuels” (PDF). Workshop on Gasification Technologies. Indianapolis. pp. 5. http://www.gasification.org/Docs/Workshops/2007/Indianapolis/06Cicero GTC_June2007.pdf. Retrieved 2009-07-09. 

^ According to the Degussa biography of Hans Goldschmidt at “Degussa Geschichte – Hans Goldschmidt”. http://www.degussa-history.com/geschichte/en/personalities/hans_goldschmidt/. Retrieved 2009-11-10. , Karl Goldschmidt had invited Bergius to become director of research at Chemische Fabrik Th. Goldschmidt.

^ a b c (PDF) Minutes of Meeting No. 45/6. Enemy Oil Intelligence Committee. 1945-02-06. http://www.fischer-tropsch.org/Tom Reels/Linked/B1870/B1870-0073-0208 Item 4.pdf. Retrieved 2009-03-22. 

^ a b c d e f Schroeder, W. C. (August 1946). Holroyd, R.. ed. Report On Investigations by Fuels and Lubricants Teams At The I.G. Farbenindustrie, A. G., Works, Ludwigshafen and Oppau. United States Bureau of Mines, Office of Synthetic Liquid Fuels. http://www.fischer-tropsch.org/Bureau_of_Mines/info_circ/ic_7375/ic_7375.htm. Retrieved 2009-03-21. 

^ a b Miller, Donald L. (2006). Masters of the Air: America’s Bomber Boys Who Fought the Air War Against Nazi Germany. New York: Simon & Schuster. p. 314,461. ISBN 978-0-7432-3544-0. http://books.google.com/books?id=5GMoWyUd41cC&pg=PA314. 

^ “The Early Days of Coal Research”. Fossil Energy. United States Department of Energy. http://www.fe.doe.gov/aboutus/history/syntheticfuels_history.html. Retrieved 2008-11-09. 

^ a b Galland, Adolf (1968 Ninth Printing – paperbound). The First and the Last: The Rise and Fall of the German Fighter Forces, 1938-1945. New York: Ballantine Books. pp. 210,224,239. 

^ Becker, Peter W. (1981). “The Role of Synthetic Fuel In World War II Germany: implications for today?”. Air University Review (Maxwell AFB). http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/aureview/1981/jul-aug/becker.htm. 

^ Speer, Albert (1970) [1969 – German: Erinnerungen (Recollections)]. Inside the Third Reich. Translated by Richard and Clara Winston. New York and Toronto: Macmillan. p. 418. LCCN 70-119132. ISBN 978-0-684-82949-4. http://books.google.com/books?id=XLSa_RIDHMUC&pg=PA348. Retrieved 2009-03-17. 

^ Irving, David (1964) (pdf). The Mare’s Nest. London: William Kimber and Co. p. 300. http://www.fpp.co.uk/books/MaresNest/index.html. Retrieved 2009-01-03. 

^ a b c d e f g h i j Tarka, Thomas J.; Wimer, John G.; Balash, Peter C.; Skone, Timothy J.; Kern, Kenneth C.; Vargas, Maria C.; Morreale, Bryan D.; White III, Charles W.; Gray, David (2009). Affordable Low Carbon Diesel from Domestic Coal and Biomass. United States Department of Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory. pp. 1; 30. 

^ Edward Schmetz & Lowell Miller (2005). “Hydrogen Production from Coal, 2005 Annual DOE Hydrogen Program Review”. U.S. Department of Energy Office of Sequestration, Hydrogen, and Clean Coal Fuels. p. 4. 

^ Robert Haul: Friedrich Bergius (1884-1949), p. 62 in ‘Chemie in unserer Zeit’, VCH-Verlagsgesellschaft mbH, 19. Jahrgang, April 1985, Weinheim Germany

^ Stranges, Anthony N. (1984). “Friedrich Bergius and the Rise of the German Synthetic Fuel Industry”. Isis (University of Chicago Press) 75 (4): 643667. http://www.jstor.org/pss/232411. Retrieved 2009-06-03. 

^ a b c d e Cleaner Coal Technology Programme (October 1999) (PDF). Technology Status Report 010: Coal Liquefaction. Department of Trade and Industry. http://www.dti.gov.uk/files/file18326.pdf. Retrieved 2006-11-23. 

^ a b c d Lee, Sunggyu (1996). Alternative fuels. CRC Press. pp. 166198. ISBN 9781560323617. http://books.google.com/books?id=GBnEDJZase8C&pg=PA166. Retrieved 2009-06-27. 

^ Lowe, Phillip A.; Schroeder, Wilburn C.; Liccardi, Anthony L. (1976). Technical Economies, Synfuels and Coal Energy Symposium, Solid-Phase Catalytic Coal Liquefaction Process. American Society of Mechanical Engineers. p. 35. 

^ a b c Hk, Mikael; Aleklett, Kjell (2009). “A review on coal to liquid fuels and its coal consumption” (PDF). International Journal of Energy Research (Wiley InterScience) 33. http://www.tsl.uu.se/uhdsg/Publications/CTL_Article.pdf. Retrieved 2009-07-04. 

^ “JetBlue readies for alternative fuel trial”. http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2009/02/10/322355/jetblue-readies-for-alternative-fuel-trial.html. Retrieved 2009-06-06. 

^ “USAF launches new biofuel testing programme”. http://www.janes.com/news/defence/air/jdw/jdw090204_1_n.shtml. Retrieved 2009-06-06. 

^ “UOP Receives .5M for Pyrolysis Oil Project from DOE”. Green Car Congress. 2008-10-29. http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/10/uop-receives-15.html. Retrieved 07-09-2009. 

^ Burnham, Alan K.; McConaghy, James R. (2006-10-16). “Comparison of the acceptability of various oil shale processes” (PDF). 26th Oil shale symposium. Golden, Colorado: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. UCRL-CONF-226717. https://e-reports-ext.llnl.gov/pdf/341283.pdf. Retrieved 2007-05-27. 

^ Motor-fuel production at the New Zealand Synfuel site has been shut down since the mid nineties, although production of methanol for export continues. This site ran on the Mobil process converting gas to methanol and methanol to gasoline.http://www.techhistory.co.nz/ThinkBig/Petrochemical Decisions.htm

^ “China CTL to Exceed South Africa by 2015”. http://www.chemweekly.com/ReadNews.asp?NewsID=3374&BigClassName=Business&BigClassID=36&SmallClassID=56&SmallClassName=Business. Retrieved 2009-06-22. 

^ sum of existing production at Oryx and planned production at Pearl “Pearl Gas-to-Liquids Plant, Ras Laffan, Qatar”. http://www.chemicals-technology.com/projects/pearl-gtl/. Retrieved 2009-06-22. 

^

^ http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssIndustryMaterialsUtilitiesNews/idUSWEB365320090309

^ http://www.shell.com/home/content/qatar/bintulu/bintulu_malaysia_08102003_1230.html

^ http://www.gasification.org/Docs/Conferences/2005/33VAND.pdf

^

^ “Pearl Gas-to-Liquids Plant, Ras Laffan, Qatar”. http://www.chemicals-technology.com/projects/pearl-gtl/. Retrieved 2009-06-22. 

^ “Escravos GTL costs surge.(In brief)”. http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-34633583_ITM. Retrieved 2009-06-22. 

^ “Shenhua’s coal-to-oil project to start trial operation in July”. http://www.chinadaily.net/bizchina/2009-06/12/content_8277455.htm. Retrieved 2009-06-22. 

^ “Sasol, Shenhua Group May Complete Coal-to-Fuel Plant by 2013”. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=a.MSdPvb0Ep8. Retrieved 2009-07-21. 

^ “Shenhua Coal Conversion Technology and Industry Development”. http://gcep.stanford.edu/pdfs/wR5MezrJ2SJ6NfFl5sb5Jg/16_china_zhangyuzhuo.pdf. Retrieved 2009-07-23. 

^ “Yankuang to invest 13.5 bln yuan in CTO project”. http://en.sxcoal.com/NewsDetail.aspx?cateID=167&id=20330. Retrieved 2009-06-22. 

^ “Loan will assist Columbiana Co. Port Authority”. http://www.vindy.com/news/2009/may/05/loan-will-assist-columbiana-co-port-authority/?newswatch. Retrieved 2009-07-21. 

^ “American Clean Coal Fuels website, Projects section”. http://www.cleancoalfuels.com/cleancoalfuels_projects.html. Retrieved 2009-06-24. 

^ “Baard Energy website, Ohio River Clean Fuels section”. http://www.baardenergy.com/orcf.htm. Retrieved 2009-06-24. 

^ “Investors move forward with Baard Energy plant”. http://www.reviewonline.com/page/content.detail/id/516873.html?nav=5008. Retrieved 2009-07-23. 

^ [www.ohioforest.org/pdf/stevedopuchpresentation.ppt “Outlook for Clean Fuels from Coal and Biomass, Steve Dopuch, Baard Energy, L.L.C., March 7, 2009”]. www.ohioforest.org/pdf/stevedopuchpresentation.ppt. Retrieved 2009-07-23. 

^ “Rentech website, Natchez Project section”. http://www.rentechinc.com/natchez.php. Retrieved 2009-06-24. 

^ “DKRW website, Medicine Bow Project section”. http://www.dkrwadvancedfuels.com/fw/main/Medicine_Bow-111.html. Retrieved 2009-06-24. 

^ “Significant progress made towards adoption of semi-synthetic aviation fuel”. http://www.caafi.org/information/pdf/CAAFI_factsheet_12dec2008.pdf. Retrieved 2009-06-24. 

^ “Synthetic Future, USAF Pushes Ahead With Fuel Production Despite Price Drop”. http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=3969089&c=FEA&s=TEC. Retrieved 2009-06-24. 

^ “USAF drives biofuel bandwagon”. http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2009/02/09/322208/usaf-drives-biofuel-bandwagon.html. Retrieved 2009-06-24. 

^ “CAAFI pools aviation industry resources to certify synthetic jet fuel”. http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2008/02/25/221767/caafi-pools-aviation-industry-resources-to-certify-synthetic-jet-fuel.html. Retrieved 2009-06-24. 

^ “Landmark synthetic jet fuel specification passes critical hurdle”. http://www.caafi.org/files/altfuelstandard-rls6-09.pdf. Retrieved 2009-06-26. 

^ “Sasol – 100% Synthetic Fuel Wins First-Time Approval for Use Internationally in Commercial Aviation”. http://www.aviationtoday.com/pressreleases/20968.html. Retrieved 2009-06-24. 

^ “Qatar Airways Makes GTL History”. Downstream Today. 2009-10-15. http://www.downstreamtoday.com/news/article.aspx?a_id=18626. Retrieved 2009-10-17. 

^ “DOD & DOE Assured Fuels Initiative Slide 12 & 13”. http://www.trbav030.org/pdf2006/265_Harrison.pdf. 

^ “Integrated Synthetic Fuel Incorporated Developing 100% Joint Synthetic Fuel”. http://isfuel.com/index.html. 

^ “U.S. Air Force Plans Coal-to-Fuel Conversion Plant”. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,340923,00.html. Retrieved 2009-06-24. 

^ “Commercial Alternative Aviation Fuels Initiative, Function and Focus”. http://www.caafi.org/about/functionnfocus.html. Retrieved 2009-06-24. 

^ a b Barlett, Donald; Steele, James (2003-10-04). “The Great Energy Scam”. Time. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,493241,00.html. Retrieved 2009-07-22. 

^ “A Magic Way to Make Billions”. Time. 2006-02-26. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,493241,00.html. Retrieved 2009-07-22. 

^ “Headwaters INC. 10-K SEC filing”. Yahoo! Inc.. 2008-11-21. http://biz.yahoo.com/e/081121/hw10-k.html. Retrieved 2009-07-22. 

^ http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2005/05/67534

^ “Natural-Gas Diesel May Cut Smog”. http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2005/05/67534. 

^ Berg, David R. (2008). The Business Case for Coal Gasification with Co-Production, Business Risks, Financial Prospects, Potential Incentives, Impact of Sequestration. United States Department of Energy, United States Air Force Energy Forum II, March 4, 2008. pp. 12. 

^ “China Shenhua, Yankuang to Boost Coal-to-Fuels Output Six Fold”. Bloomberg.com. 2007-06-22. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=conewsstory&refer=conews&tkr=YZC:US&sid=a6VwxDlvG4nM. Retrieved 2009-07-09. 

^ “CTLC Synthetic Fuel Will Enhance U.S. National Security”. http://www.futurecoalfuels.org/documents/022208_synth_fuels_security.pdf. 

^ examples of such restrictions include the us clean air act http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_Air_Act_(United_States) and clean air mercury rule http://www.epa.gov/mercuryrule/, and the recent limits imposed on new coal-to-liquids projects in china by the National Development and Reform Commission http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/bizchina/2008-10/09/content_7090441.htm

^ An excessive carbon footprint can prevent the United States federal government from being able to purchase fuel. Section 526 of the Energy Independence And Security Act prohibits Federal agencies, including the Department of Defense, from purchasing alternative synfuels unless the alternative fuels have lower GHG emissions than refined petroleum based fuels. Kosich, Dorothy (2008-04-11). “Repeal sought for ban on U.S. Govt. use of CTL, oil shale, tar sands-generated fuel”. Mine Web. http://www.mineweb.com/mineweb/view/mineweb/en/page38?oid=50551&sn=Detail. Retrieved 2008-05-27.  Bloom David I, Waldron Roger, Layton Duane W, Patrick Roger W (2008-03-04). “United States: Energy Independence And Security Act Provision Poses Major Problems For Synthetic And Alternative Fuels”. http://www.mondaq.com/article.asp?articleid=58310. Retrieved 2008-05-27. 

^ http://coalgasificationnews.com/2009/05/28/coal-to-liquid-fuels-have-lower-ghg-than-some-refined-fuels/

^ Agrawal R, Singh NR, Ribeiro FH, Delgass WN (2007). “Sustainable fuel for the transportation sector”. PNAS 104 (12): 48284833. doi:10.1073/pnas.0609921104. 

^ Per the work of NREL http://www.nrel.gov/vehiclesandfuels/npbf/pdfs/36363.pdf, http://www.nrel.gov/vehiclesandfuels/npbf/pdfs/38195.pdf, and various other DOE/DOD studies

^ see Yosemite Waters study http://www.nrel.gov/vehiclesandfuels/npbf/pdfs/38195.pdf

^ (.PDF) Technical Support Document, Coal-to-Liquids Products Industry Overview, Proposed Rule for Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases. Office of Air and Radiation, United States Environmental Protection Agency. January 28, 2009-01-28. http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/downloads/tsd/TSD CTL suppliers_013009.pdf. Retrieved 2009-07-15. 

^ “Biodegradable diesel fuel”. http://www.freshpatents.com/Biodegradable-diesel-fuel-dt20060914ptan20060201850.php. Retrieved 2009-06-24. 

Synfuel Plants Expand In W. Va (Coal Age, Feb 1, 2002)

External links

Alliance for Synthetic Fuels in Europe

Gas to liquids technology worldwide, ACTED Consultants

Synfuel Producers Hit Paydirt! (NCPA Policy Digest) – an analysis of synfuel subsidies in the USA

US DoD launches quest for energy self-sufficiency Jane’s Defence Weekly, 25 September 2006

Alberta Oil Sands Discovery Centre

Bitumen and Synthetic Crude Oil

World CTL 2008 Conference 3 & 4 April, 2008 – Paris

Synthetic Fuel Concept to Steal CO2 From Air

EU project to convert CO2 to liquid fuels

Fourth generation synthetic fuels using synthetic life. Lecture by Craig Venter

Categories: Synthetic fuelsHidden categories: Articles containing German language text | All articles with unsourced statements | Articles with unsourced statements from July 2009 | Articles containing Polish language text | All pages needing factual verification | Wikipedia articles needing factual verification from January 2008 | All accuracy disputes | Articles with disputed statements from July 2009 | Articles needing cleanup from July 2009 | All pages needing cleanup | All articles lacking reliable references | Articles lacking reliable references from July 2009 | All articles with minor POV problems | Articles with minor POV problems from December 2007 | Articles with unsourced statements from December 2008

I am China Crafts Suppliers writer, reports some information about deformed steel bars , 6150 steel.

Article from articlesbase.com

San Diego Limos – Green Travel Options In A Difficult Economy

San Diego limos offer an extremely attractive and cost-effective method to enjoy all the creature comforts of managed entertainment and business travel. What’s not so apparent is that using San Diego limousines more frequently, for larger groups, offers in fact very desirable and real economic and environmental benefits. A Plus San Diego limos offers many examples of this “green travel” concept, which includes reductions in gas usage, emissions and cost savings on the part of both travelers and drivers.

San Diego limos waste much less time traveling congested routes and finding parking than the average car trip for family tourism, entertainment or business purposes. The amount of time and gas you’d normally waste across potentially several cars for a party of 8 or more, hunting for parking, getting stuck in traffic, driving and parking just to reach public transportation, in addition to the low mileage and high emissions of an older, badly-maintained vehicle is very likely reduced when renting San Diego limousine services. A Plus limo drivers are highly competent and efficient in choosing routes and avoiding excessive idling, run very well-maintained limousines (both engines and tire inflation), and can deliver your party to its destination with an overall minimum carbon footprint.

San Diego limos by Aplus Limos are also an extremely cost effective method of transportation among San Diego tourist destinations, city sights and features, major business districts and entertainment venues. Especially at this time, as vacation and business travel budgets are drastically reduced, in-town events and meetings are favored over out-of-town, public transportation prices are rising (due to difficult economic situations of state and local municipalities) – travel by groups of 5 or more using San Diego limo services is an extremely appealing and cost effective mechanism. The price of direct, door-to-door efficient limo transportation services can be very reasonably accommodated in a travel budget, and can be very competitive or even quite cheaper than the overall cost of using individual taxis or public transportation (including the costs to park and get to and from the train or bus stop). Limousine service around San Diego isn’t at all the expensive, exclusive proposition it may have once seemed; it’s in fact an entirely enjoyable, economically reasonable and budget-fitting method of transportation for parties of 5-18 persons.

Green travel, therefore, is an entirely supported outcome of San Diego limo services, or limo services anywhere in the world. While traveling in groups on public transportation, or via entirely “carbon-neutral” means (i.e. bikes or walking) is the ultimate economic-friendly means of transportation – these methods don’t typically make sense for business or entertainment travel for smaller groups of people, especially in suburban areas, at night, or under tight schedules. The next best choice for greener travel outcomes is in fact group limousine services – given the economic and environmental facets described earlier. Leave the driving to professionals, who know the area and the routes, who maintain their vehicles to the highest and most efficient mechanical operating standards, and who can pick up and deliver parties exactly where needed with little diversion or need for time wasted in parking or queuing for gas.

In summary, though it’s not always apparent, limousine service can be a highly effective, efficient and “Green” travel option around San Diego and any other major metropolitan area – check out San Diego limo services such as those from Aplus Limos for for your business, your family and friends.

Virginia Konrad writes and comments about Internet business news and information on a regular basis, publishing material across several news channels and social media outlets, including Northern Virginia and Washington DC Business News. Aplus Limos offers “Green Travel benefits for San Diego limos and limousine services in the greater San Diego metropolitan area, for business travelers, family and friends entertainment or events.

Article from articlesbase.com

Introduction to COA

This is an introduction to College of the Atlantic. A private interdisciplinary college on Mount Desert Island in Maine.

Diversity, Innovation, Business Dev & Emerging Markets

Google Tech Talk September 18, 2009 ABSTRACT Presented by Jorge Zavala. A walk through the life of Jorge Zavala as an engineer, serial entrepreneur and business developer, and the challenges he faced doing business in Latin America to the creation of global companies in Silicon Valley. Jorge will share his experiences opening the first TechBA office: a Mexican program to help startups to jumpstart in a highly innovated and competitive environment. He will also explain about various opportunities to help and advise foreign companies. So far, TechBA has introduced more than 450 companies to new markets in the USA, Canada and Europe. Jorge Zavala is the CEO of TechBA, The Mexico-Silicon Valley Technology Business Accelerator. Jorge has been very active in promoting entrepreneurship, venture capital and business development strategies in Mexico as a tool to position emerging companies in global markets. He is a member of the Mexican Diaspora with an active participation in Brain Circulation forums related to best practices for learning and knowledge sharing. He holds an Engineering degree from La Salle University and a Masters in Mathematics from the University of Waterloo. About Perspectivas Speaker Series: Perspectivas is a speaker series aimed to empower and inspire individuals by providing ‘mentoring at scale’. Latino scientists and professionals share their perspectives on careers, work-life balance, and how they’ve achieved personal success. More videos on this series
Video Rating: 0 / 5

Conversations with Green Gurus features the collected wisdom of some of the world?s most influential environmental movers and shakers. The chosen gurus consists both of thinkers those who have set the agenda, and of doers those business people who made the green cause their mission long before it became so prominent. The gurus explore a broad range of environmental issues as they apply to business, industry and the economy. They share their stories, advice and tips on the ecoissues of today and point the way for corporate sustainability. The cutting edge thinking of the books contributors provides businesses with the information they need when considering how to change in a green direction. The end result is an illuminating insight into both general views on sustainability as well as good and bad business decisions made in the search for sustainability. The full list of green gurus include: Ray Anderson, founder and chairman of Interface Inc, one of TIME Magazines Heroes of the Environment James Cameron, founder of Executive Director and ViceChairman of Climate Change Capital (CCC) Paul Dickinson, CEO of the Carbon Disclosure Project John Elkington, founding partner and director of Volans, cofounder of SustainAbility, world authority of sustainable development, author of The Green Consumer Guide John Grant, author of The Green Marketing Manifesto, frequent conference speaker and prolific blogger Denis Hayes, President and CEO of The Bullitt Foundation, Chair of the

SHARE Makes a Difference!

Half of the people on our planet suffer from chronic food shortages. Over 80% are families of farmers and farm workers in developing countries who make their living off the land. They live in poverty and lack the training and resources to overcome the challenges of marginal land, adverse weather and socio-economic adversity. The SHARE Agriculture Foundation strives to alleviate rural poverty by supporting rural groups in countries and regions with the greatest need, primarily in Central and South America. SHARE works with rural people disadvantaged by civil war, displacement, poverty or extreme social injustice. Drive off the highway onto a rutted dirt path, across miles of droughty terrain or up steep mountain slopes. At the end of the road you may find a SHARE project … a group of proud farmers ready to show you their well cared for herd of goats, sheep or cattle … their bountiful market gardens, a bee keeping or chicken project. They’ll tell you how their incomes have doubled and their families now have a more reliable and diversified diet. SHARE stands for Sending Help And Resources Everywhere and began in 1976. SHARE supports skills and expertise in agriculture and rural development. The non-profit, non-government organization works through volunteers. Small overhead expenses are covered by investment income from a bequest, so all donations go to worthy, sustainable projects. Hundreds of small projects have been completed in Brazil and Bolivia in South America

Motionpoint Ranks No. 148 Fastest-Growing Company In North America On Deloitte’s 2010 Technology Fast 500(TM)

COCONUT CREEK, FL – MotionPoint Corporation, the leader in website translation and localization services, today announced it has ranked number 148 on Technology Fast 500™, Deloitte’s ranking of 500 of the fastest growing technology, media, telecommunications, life sciences, and clean technology companies in North America. Rankings are based on percentage of fiscal year revenue growth from 2005-2009. MotionPoint grew 686% during this period.

MotionPoint’s Chief Executive Officer Will Fleming credits several key factors to the company’s exponential growth. Specifically, he cites a steady increase in the importance of companies’ websites and the continuing trend of companies seeking growth in new markets. For years, leading companies and major brands have relied on MotionPoint as a strategic partner helping manage their localized website presence worldwide and maximize returns from new markets.

“MotionPoint and the other 2010 Technology Fast 500™ winners forged ahead in a challenging economic environment to realize exceptional growth,” said Phil Asmundson, vice chairman and Deloitte’s U.S. technology, media and telecommunications leader. “Deloitte commends MotionPoint for this impressive accomplishment.”

Added Mark Jensen, managing partner, venture capital services, Deloitte & Touche LLP: “MotionPoint has proved itself to be one of the fastest-growing tech companies in North America, and we are proud to honor it as one of the 2010 Technology Fast 500™.”

For additional details about Technology Fast 500™ including selection and qualifying criteria, visit www.fast500.com.

About MotionPoint
MotionPoint Corporation’s patented technologies make it easier for companies to penetrate new markets domestically and internationally. MotionPoint translates and localizes client websites, drives traffic to those sites and optimizes user experiences in every target market. Its solution delivers the business impact, scalability and quality that propel world-class brands. For more information, visit www.motionpoint.com.

As used in this document, “Deloitte” means Deloitte LLP. Please see www.deloitte.com/us/about for a detailed description of the legal structure of Deloitte LLP and its subsidiaries.

MEDIA CONTACTS
For MotionPoint Corporation
Jeannie Salameh, Roar Media
jeannie ( @ ) roarmedia dot com
(727) 644-5010

Source:
http://www.1888pressrelease.com/motionpoint-ranks-no-148-fastest-growing-company-in-north-a-pr-254344.html

http://www.motionpoint.com/

Article from articlesbase.com