Future development of coal-to-oil projects

Currently, due to the impact of the international financial crisis, international oil prices have dropped below $40 per barrel. Due to the high costs at present, the cost of oil produced from coal is higher than that of petrochemicals. So, internationally, production has basically been reduced or halted as companies wait for conditions to improve. The domestic project for scaling up direct liquefaction to million-ton levels is also affected by this and is currently shut down for maintenance. The other indirect liquefaction projects are all small-scale operations on the order of 100,000 tons each, and they are all in the pilot stage. I believe there will be a rainbow after the storm. The market will get better.

Coal-to-oil is still considered a strategic technological reserve at present, mainly due to the high costs. Once the price of oil reaches $300 per barrel, coal-to-oil becomes competitive. This post was last edited by shirley63 on 2009-4-9 22:56]

The Shenhua coal-to-oil project is currently shut down, primarily to resolve system issues and address design defects. Some devices cannot meet the requirements of actual operating conditions and need to be replaced. Cost is not the main issue.

Currently, hundreds of millions of yuan are being invested in upgrades, primarily to address issues that arise during driving; no other aspects are given much consideration

Companies that are able to afford to engage in coal-to-oil production cannot consider costs and profits in the short term. Shirley63 mentioned that when oil prices reach $300 per barrel, coal-to-oil production becomes competitive – which is absolutely ridiculous. Every technology follows an objective pattern of emergence, development, maturity, and eventual obsolescence. Coal-to-oil technology is currently in the stage of moving from development toward maturity, much like a person’s adolescence. During this phase, it needs to be provided with sufficient support; we should not expect it to undertake too much work, as this can easily lead to deficiencies. The same principle applies to coal-to-oil technology – at this stage, we shouldn’t focus solely on costs, but rather need to provide it with comprehensive support. This post was last edited by wangmingfei on 2009-4-10 11:55.]

To date, coal-to-oil and direct coal liquefaction projects are still in the research and testing phase. Many of the processes and equipment used are among the best in the world, representing a leading level of technology. As for direct coal liquefaction, Shenhua is the only company currently carrying out industrial demonstration projects on a million-ton scale. Although the first trial runs were successful, whether these systems can operate stably over long periods remains to be tested – we will have to wait and see. As for indirect liquefaction, Lu’an and Yitai have both carried out projects on a scale of 100,000 tons each, and have successfully completed their first trials; however, there is still a long way to go before large-scale and industrial production can be achieved. Coal-to-oil is a method of replacing one scarce resource with another, and it involves high energy consumption and high investment costs. As international oil prices rise, the prospects for coal-to-oil production appear optimistic from an economic perspective, but there are also some concerns regarding whether the environment can withstand the emissions and wastewater generated by this process ； With another crisis approaching and crude oil prices low, what is the future of coal-to-oil production? In a country like China that is \"rich in coal but poor in oil,\" coal-to-oil conversion can currently only be regarded as a strategic reserve. As for whether it can serve as a clean alternative energy source to replace oil, opinions vary and no definitive conclusion has been reached. This post was last edited by redfox1985 on 2009-4-12 18:44]

8th floor, what do you mean by \"no technological breakthroughs\"? In your opinion, what specific areas need to see breakthroughs in order for coal-to-oil technology to make progress? Shenhua’s direct liquefaction process is already at an industrial scale; once this project operates stably over a long period of time, it will be no problem to expand it or launch projects with even greater production capacity. The problems that Shenhua is facing now can be considered to be very valuable ones. It has been over 3 months since I last drove the car and then parked it; it will likely be a while before I drive it again. It seems that many problems arose during my first drive. There are a few people from Shenhua in the forum, and they are in the technical field as well, but they rarely discuss specific details. Because the details of those problems are extremely costly; some details cost millions to obtain. It is truly admirable to go from theoretical discussions to achieving a production scale of millions of tons. The several indirect liquefaction projects currently underway in China still have a long way to go. The mainstream technology is slurry bed; the demonstration project with a capacity of 16 wt% also uses a slurry bed. Therefore, large manufacturers have no choice but to use slurry beds as well. When scaling up from 16 wt% to millions of tons, many problems arise with slurry bed technology. Thus, if Ningmei’s project progresses smoothly, it will be able to operate at a stable pace several years earlier than the other large-scale indirect liquefaction projects (should any such projects be initiated). In other words, if Ningmei’s project achieves commercial production in 2015, then the other projects are likely to be delayed until around 2020. Let’s wait and see. Therefore, from a commercial perspective, Shenhua is by far the best in this field. Let’s give Shenhua’s team a boost – the sooner the problems are resolved, the better. I really want to know what problems they are all working on, because these problems are so valuable, alas! If the previous years were a period of great ambition to convert coal into oil, then these past two years have been a time of hardship. Often, trying hard alone is not enough; due to energy demands, it is necessary to get through this difficult period. Once the existing facilities, especially the large ones, are operating smoothly, the good days for converting coal into oil are likely to arrive soon. We must absolutely not follow the path taken by Japan in the 1930s, when, for various reasons, several coal-to-oil projects were launched there, but almost all of them failed. This post was last edited by Zhenzhen Youci on 2009-4-20 at 16:32.]

The future development of coal-to-oil is uncertain; it is most likely to remain a reserve project. It’s not just a cost issue; there are also defects in the technology itself. The current suspension of operations is aimed, on the one hand, at addressing some problems that arise during the testing phase, including potential hazards associated with the equipment, and on the other hand, it’s because this technology is likely to be kept as a backup option for future use. It is uncertain whether coal-to-oil production can start this year, or for how long it can operate; there are still many obstacles. As a reserve project, it is not sufficient to be only in the testing phase – this project needs to be operational for at least half a year before it can be said to be fully under control. This post was last edited by firefox1981 on 2009-4-16 14:22]

The coal-to-oil project is mainly due to the currently low oil prices; production can begin when the price reaches around $80 per barrel. Some of the units in the coal-to-oil projects need to be improved, and it is believed that they will be put into operation soon

Currently, most of everyone’s focus is on the \"oil\" produced from coal. After reading some information about SASOL, it suddenly occurred to me that we might need to pay more attention to products other than oil as well. How many high-value-added products are there from the indirect liquefaction of coal, and how many high-value-added products are there from the direct liquefaction of coal? What is the process route? Is it possible to change the product structure to maximize efficiency? Before 2000, when oil prices were low, SASOL seemed unable to achieve very large profit margins thanks to its price advantage; instead, during those periods of low oil prices, it relied on its by-products to support its main production processes. During periods of high oil prices, we saw SASOL and the huge profit margins associated with coal-to-oil production, but we failed to pay attention to the by-products of this process – at least some people did not do so; in particular, the marketing efforts focused on the oil itself. I think it’s necessary to calm down and assess the value of the by-products generated in its manufacturing process. I hope an expert can explain it.

Direct liquefaction allows many chemicals to be extracted from the products, such as various aromatic compounds, some of which serve as raw materials for synthetic liquid crystal materials. However, the products of coal liquefaction are quite complex; if there are improvements in the directionality of catalysts or significant advances in separation methods, then there is great potential for development

It seems you’re an expert in this field. I would like to ask you, if it’s not a matter of confidentiality, about the general distribution of the by-products resulting from direct coal liquefaction, as well as their approximate specifications. This information might help us find new approaches for developing coal chemical industries, such as developing new catalysts, implementing new technological upgrades, or adding additional equipment. So, in my opinion, doing this can minimize the impact of oil price shocks to the greatest extent possible. These are just the opinions of laypeople; experts, please share your thoughts on whether they are appropriate. Especially regarding its cost-effectiveness, it would be best to have systematic data available.

I really didn’t expect my question to draw so much attention from so many people, nor did I realize there were so many issues in this area; I had no idea there were so many of them before. Thank you all

Currently, most of everyone’s focus is on the \"oil\" produced from coal. After reading some information about SASOL, it suddenly occurred to me that we might need to pay more attention to products other than oil as well. How many high-value-added products are there from the indirect liquefaction of coal, and how many high-value-added products are there from the direct liquefaction of coal? What is the process route? Is it possible to change the product structure to maximize efficiency? Before 2000, when oil prices were low, SASOL seemed unable to achieve very large profit margins thanks to its price advantage; instead, during those periods of low oil prices, it relied on its by-products to support its main production processes. During periods of high oil prices, we saw SASOL and the huge profit margins associated with coal-to-oil production, but we failed to pay attention to the by-products of this process – at least some people did not do so; in particular, the marketing efforts focused on the oil itself. I think it’s necessary to calm down and assess the value of the by-products generated in its manufacturing process. I hope an expert can explain that SASOL’s indirect coal liquefaction process, CTL, utilizes the Fischer-Tropsch reaction to carry out carbon chain elongation reactions, thereby producing hydrocarbons with molecular weights of C1 and above – including gases, liquids, and solids. Through isomerization and cracking, various alkanes, olefins, and their isomers with high molecular weights can be synthesized. Additionally, reactions such as oxidation to produce aldehydes and acids, as well as cyclization reactions, enable the production of a range of chemical products with very high added value. Oil is not Sasol’s main source of profit; your idea aligns well with the concepts of modern coal chemical industry – instead of burning coal, it should be processed. Chassot’s approach is just one direction; there are many other aspects that deserve consideration and development. The coal industry is not just an industry for producing products such as gasification, methanol, methane, dimethyl ether, and so on. It’s a shame to convert a coal resource with a very high molecular weight into products dominated by C1.

This post was last edited by zhuoyue on 2009-6-9 23:54. Could oil prices reach $300 within 5 years? ? To be practical, he is after all an entrepreneur

This post was last edited by zhuoyue on 2009-6-9 23:56. During operation, problems are identified and solved (learning from China’s nitrogen fertilizer factories*; over 40 years, their ammonia synthesis capacity has increased from 3,000 tons per year to 600,000 tons per year, all through the identification and resolution of problems). Some technologies are much more advanced than those abroad (such as PSA), so there is still a long way to go for coal-to-oil technology. Progress requires experience and technical exchange. 2 Profit must also be taken into consideration, as it is after all a business that aims to make money. (To make good use of taxpayers’ money, relatively mature technologies with lower risks should be employed.) The strategic direction is 3**, and implementation should take place once such technologies are fully developed. Avoid taking detours back then; it’s not the right time to rush in now. 4 I wish Shenhua’s coal-to-oil project a smooth start and success throughout its operation.

It’s hard to back out now – so much money has been invested, so one must persevere. If a tooth falls out, swallow it; if an arm is broken, hide it in the sleeve; if a leg is broken, put it in a shoe. By gritting one’s teeth and getting through this difficult time, there might be a bright future ahead

Parking is mainly done to address the issues identified during driving. There is no technical issue per se, but since it is something new, there are some shortcomings in the design; the parking improvements are aimed at addressing these design flaws. At the same time, address the remaining issues from the construction process.

Our leadership in coal-to-oil conversion lies in the scale of our equipment; it’s difficult to say that we lead in terms of technology and processes, such as catalyst technology and separation techniques – many areas where our colleagues still need to work hard to catch up.

In any case, once a choice has been made, one must have the courage to move forward; this is both a mission and a responsibility, as it involves not only the interests of the company but also **a longer-term energy strategy**. Let’s stop discussing whether it should be included, and focus instead on how to enable it to reach its design capabilities as soon as possible. The technology should mature as soon as possible.