Browse Prior Art Database

COAL GASIFICATION Disclosure Number: IPCOM000221525D
Publication Date: 2012-Sep-07
Document File: 41 page(s) / 2M

Publishing Venue

The Prior Art Database


This text was extracted from a PDF file.
This is the abbreviated version, containing approximately 9% of the total text.

Page 01 of 41



Go T. Skaperdas

Northeast Operations Center

Pullman Kellogg

Division of Pullman Incorporated

Presented to

The Long Island Section

American Institute of Chemical Engineers

~lay 20~ 1976

Page 02 of 41


         The contribution of natural gas to the nation's energy balance will be reviewed and compared with the resource and reserve bases avail- able to support continued use of natural gas. This comparison will demonstrate the need to develop alternate sources of natural gas very preferably using domestic raw materlals such as coal,

         Existing technology for coal gasification will be presented
and .estimated costs of substitute natural gas (SNG) using this technology will be summarized. Some of the basic reasons for the high cost of SNG produced by means of existing technology will be considered and the possibilities of process modifications to reduce costs will be set forth.

         Finally, the Kellogg Coal Gasification process using a molten sodium carbonate reaction system will be reviewed as an example of de- veloping technology that can reduce coal gasification costs significantly. Impediments to co~nerclalizatlon of new technology, including other new processes, will be discussed.

Page 03 of 41

I. Natural Gas in the National Economy
Natural oas has ass mned ~ itl

                              ~~lon ~ong~ources of
energy that fuel the national econom~ ~b~ I~atura~gas

   hal~aS much again. ~a substantial par~ of petrole~ supplies /~/~imp~ted ~d, if the ~ports are subtract~ from the total, domestic

the position of being econd to non ~ong the d~estic sources of ~ergy. As a result the ,a~ion Is ~ heavily ~e~dent on ~tural gas fuel.

        .~e distr~utlon of gas ~ng ~e national ~ets is sh~ In Table Z~. I~ is clear ~at use of 8as is important for
customers ~d s~ll comercial Insta1~atlons, but ~dus~rlaZ and elec- tric u~ility pl~s are, ~oge~er, ~e~]or cons~ers of natural gas. Consequently, the curren~ industrial facilities of the United S~a~es depend on nat~a~ gas to an ~por~t degree and would require si~if- ~cant redesi~ to e1~ate ~is depend~ce. Su~ redesi~ could be very costly on ~e na~io~ scale, p~tlcularly wh~ one considers ~ere were 193~800 indus~rlal cons~ers of gas in 197•.

         It is of interes~ to revi~ ~e EriCh of ~e natural g~ industry as sh~ in Fibre I. ~is ~ow~h in gas cons~ption has been stagy fr~ 6.9 trillion cubic feet (T~) in 1950 to 22.6 T~ in
~ a sli~ decline to 21.3 T~ in 1974.

         Gas discoveries~ in ~e~s o~ ~di~ions to proved resales,
~e also sh~ in Fibre i. Discoveries ~ceed~ cons~p~ion untll 1967 bu~ have not kep~ up w~h production and cons~p~ion s~ce then //0

Page 04 of 41


for 1970 when the Alaskan North Slope find was made. As a result, proved reserves, as shown in Figure 2 have been declining since 1967 and represent about I0 years supply at current rates of consumption.

         ~t should be noted that ~Iproved reserves" do not necessarily indicate the total amount of a mineral that is available for extraction.

To prove a reserve a si~niflcant investment i...