PowerSwitch

Coal Liquefaction (or Fischer-Tropsch plus), could this be the answer to the world?s requirement for transport fuel?

The world has, by some estimates up to 200 years worth of coal (possibly 40 with increased consumption), so following a short period of conservation, as the world oil production peaks, will we increasingly transfer to a coal based transport fuel?

The big transport energy users have lots of coal, especially America, the creation of coal to fuel plants could happen relatively quickly, and because they are likely to be based on or near existing industrial coal mines could get through the planning process without too much bother.

This may mean higher prices for transport fuel, but at $70 a barrel coal to fuel looks increasingly likely. In fact ?coal to oil? projects are already gaining approval.

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/bizchina/2 ... 576103.htm

So as skeptik says

Well that?s that sorted then. Might as well go home now, see you in 30 years

Or does anyone refute this?

When considering R/P ratios for coal, I'd be inclined to watch the Bartlett lecture

watch the Bartlett lecture

Yup, I'm not claiming 1000 years of coal or anything, and I have my doubts about the viability of CO2 sequestration, I do however think that there will be great pressures to continue the BAU approach as long as possible. If liquified coal can offset the loss of oil based fuels for 20 years or so, I would anticipatde the Bush Administration (among others) embracing a new rush to coal.

The first phase of the project in Northwest China's Shaanxi Province is estimated to cost 10 billion yuan (US$1.25 billion). Its capacity will reach 1 million tons of oil products a year, Chief Financial Officer Wu Yuxiang told reporters in Hong Kong yesterday.

So an investment of $1.25bn gets you 7m barrels per year of oil, that means (in round numbers) an investment of $456bn worldwide will provide 7mbd. Looks like a drop in the ocean to me.

Isn't this what Germany did during WWII? And look what happened to them