Experts point out the six weaknesses of coal chemical industry
Thread Content
Li Fenming, deputy chief engineer at the Petroleum and Chemical Industry Planning Institute and a reporter from China Chemical Industry News, pointed out at a seminar organized by the media recently that there are currently six main issues affecting the development of China’s coal chemical industry. Relevant departments and enterprises should take ensuring energy supply security and meeting domestic market demands as their guiding principles, and carry out scientific planning and rational layout. Li Fenming pointed out that there are six major issues in the development of China’s coal chemical industry at present: first, the standards for petroleum substitute products are not standardized, which hinders the promotion and use of such products ； Second, the scale of the facilities is small, resulting in weak competitiveness in the international market ； Third, the lack of domestically developed technologies and equipment results in a low return on investment for the projects ； Fourth, there is a shortage of water resources in the country, which cannot meet the needs of the development of coal chemical industry ； Fifth, the ecological environment is fragile and the environmental capacity is limited, which restricts the development of coal chemical industry ； Sixth, the scale of construction for coal chemical plants is restricted by factors such as bridges and tunnels in inland areas. He analyzed that most of the coal chemical projects currently built in our country rely on foreign technologies; since equipment also has to be imported along with those technologies, the investment costs are relatively high. If localization is achieved, the investment costs are expected to decrease by around 40%. In China, the areas with abundant coal reserves are often those facing water shortages. This contradiction between the distribution of coal resources and water resources limits the scale of coal chemical plants in the country. Furthermore, the ecological environment in regions rich in coal in our country is extremely fragile, with levels of substances such as sulfur dioxide and carbon dioxide generally exceeding acceptable limits; therefore, the construction of large-scale coal chemical projects will inevitably be constrained by environmental capacity. To this end, he proposed that consideration should be given to the economic development of regions where resources are sourced; a strategy that combines rational use of environmental capacity with ecological environment management should be adopted. In areas with the appropriate conditions, the development of coal chemical industries, with an emphasis on oil substitutes, should be accelerated, following a path of integration of coal, electricity, and chemicals in order to reverse the situation of surplus supply of high-energy-consuming products in certain regions.
There is a lack of necessary incentive mechanisms to encourage the use of domestic technologies in state-owned enterprises! Why should everyone adopt imported technology? It’s nothing more than this: 1. Although it costs a lot of money, it’s not my own money anyway! 2. The introduced technology is reliable, with minimal risk for the leadership! 3. There are other benefits as well (I won’t go into detail here).
That makes sense; it’s also the main reason why so many things are introduced into the country. Ah,,,
It now seems that the degree of localization of these devices is already quite high; imports are mainly needed for instruments and valves. It’s probably too optimistic to assume that simply using domestic equipment can save 40% on investment, as the costs of domestic equipment manufacturers are now getting closer and closer to those of foreign manufacturers.
Imported equipment boasts superior performance; using such equipment can improve production efficiency and ensure its long-term stable operation. For example, the high-pressure coal slurry pumps manufactured in Germany, as well as the slag locking valves made in the United States, can operate without failure for up to ten years
Actually, 40% isn’t that much; a large portion of it goes towards costs such as patent licenses and process software packages!
That’s indeed the current situation; it’s a dilemma!
From a market-oriented perspective, it is understandable to introduce technical equipment; however, from the standpoint of national interests, it is appropriate to support domestic equipment. Resource constraints have become an issue that we must address. What lies ahead then is, first, to strengthen macro-level guidance in order to maximize the use of state-owned resources, avoid redundant construction and over-exploitation, and slow down the depletion of natural resources； Second, it is necessary to persist in introducing advanced technologies to improve production efficiency and reduce energy consumption levels ； Third, internal production is carried out as much as possible in conjunction with external authorization to support the advancement of localization. :lol
Although there are significant investments and many difficulties, we cannot give up
There’s no need for words; I hope the original poster will take a look at the ratio of China’s methanol production to the world’s total methanol production – it might be enlightening. It’s also worth studying in detail the main equipment and technical components used in coal chemical industries, both domestically and abroad. In fact, I think the technologies available, whether multi-functional or single-functional, are similar in both cases. Most of the equipment still has to be imported, and although some domestic products have gained recognition, they represent only a small fraction. Abroad, companies make money in China mainly through high-tech solutions such as DCS and various instruments. And high-tech applications account for a significant portion of investments. Personally, I think points 1 and 5 are more appropriate when referring to Texaco’s and Shell’s processes, while the Lurgi process has all of the aforementioned disadvantages