sparky wrote:.
I was under the impression this thread was about the conversion of methane to gasoline
it is doable , it has been done ,
some serious engineering work has been done about it and there is solid industrial data on it
it's not done because it doesn't make economic sense
unless one is fighting a world war or one is under united nation embargo , then of course economics are moot
of course one could think the whole tar sands endeavor is exactly that ,
they do use a lot of NG to dilute those embarrassingly long hydrocarbon chains
Army Col. John Hope blew the whistle on a task force that spent $43 million to build a useless gas station in Afghanistan. The Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction says the useless gas station should have cost about $500,000. As a result of pointing out the doubly wasteful project, Hope has “been singled out for retaliation and retribution” for “speaking truth,” said Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) in a letter to Defense Secretary Ashton Carter.
The gas station is useless because it supplies natural gas to cars that have been converted to run on natural gas. But there are hardly any cars that run on natural gas in Afghanistan, and the cost to convert a car to run on natural gas is $700. The average annual income in Afghanistan is $690,
ROCKMAN wrote:"...Dineen acknowledged that his company faces a challenge in convincing the world of its results" Utter bullsh*t. It will be very easy to convince the world: just start selling gasoline et al at the then market price (or even less). Once he starts posting those profits the world will beat a path to his door step.
The trick is to figure out how to do it profitably. BTW I live 5 miles from La Port and will try to find the facility and chat them up. My billionaire boss owners a large chunk of land in La Port and was thinking about building an LNG export terminal on it. One does get peoples' attention when you work for a man with the really big bucks. LOL.
What Chevron Is Doing
Chevron operates in some of the world's leading natural gas basins and is using technology, including GTL, to develop the full spectrum of natural gas resources.
Together with the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation, we built a GTL plant designed to convert 325 million cubic feet of natural gas per day into 33,000 barrels of liquids—principally synthetic diesel. The plant supplies clean-burning, low-sulfur diesel fuel for cars and trucks.
Updated: May 2015
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
hvacman wrote:1/29/16 Henry Hub spot NG price = $2.26/1,000 ft3
325,000,000 ft3 @ $2.26/1,000 ft3 = $734,500 for 33,000 bbls. That's $22/bbl or $0.53/gallon for syn diesel, not including CAPEX and OPEX.
Good $ price but from an energy-efficiency standpoint, it's a disaster.
325,000,000 ft3 of NG is 3,250,000 therms of energy.
33,000 barrels of syn diesel is 1,396,000 gallons. Energy content per gallon is 1.4 therms, so the total syn fuel energy is 1,940,000 therms. You lose 40% of the energy just making the conversion. Yeah, liquid HC is way more energy-dense and portable than NG. But we as a world continue to pay a very high long-term price for that versatility. Way better to run the gas through a combined cycle power plant and charge my Volt with the electricity:)
pstarr wrote:The Escravos GTL plant cost US$10 billion. (Its original cost started out at US$1.9 billion in 2005, rising to US$5.9 billion in 2009 but continued to escalate.) Does't feel like a good investment. The income from $40/barrel is $1.3 million per day, < $ .5 billion/year, the initial CAPEX would take 22 years to pay off. Plus OPEX
pstarr wrote:Subjectivist wrote:pstarr wrote:The Escravos GTL plant cost US$10 billion. (Its original cost started out at US$1.9 billion in 2005, rising to US$5.9 billion in 2009 but continued to escalate.) Does't feel like a good investment. The income from $40/barrel is $1.3 million per day, < $ .5 billion/year, the initial CAPEX would take 22 years to pay off. Plus OPEX
That presumes diesel will remain at $40/bbl for the next 22 years, something I find foolishly optimistic.
I thought I was giving the pessimistic scenario? With this oil glut and all that shale out there the price might reasonably stay at $20. The payback would then be 45 years.
So you are saying there is no glut?
Subjectivist wrote:pstarr wrote:Subjectivist wrote:pstarr wrote:The Escravos GTL plant cost US$10 billion. (Its original cost started out at US$1.9 billion in 2005, rising to US$5.9 billion in 2009 but continued to escalate.) Does't feel like a good investment. The income from $40/barrel is $1.3 million per day, < $ .5 billion/year, the initial CAPEX would take 22 years to pay off. Plus OPEX
That presumes diesel will remain at $40/bbl for the next 22 years, something I find foolishly optimistic.
I thought I was giving the pessimistic scenario? With this oil glut and all that shale out there the price might reasonably stay at $20. The payback would then be 45 years.
So you are saying there is no glut?
Peak oil was 2015, it won't be very long before the surplus turns back into a shortage.
Subjectivist wrote:Peak oil was 2015, it won't be very long before the surplus turns back into a shortage.
pstarr wrote:The Escravos GTL plant cost US$10 billion. (Its original cost started out at US$1.9 billion in 2005, rising to US$5.9 billion in 2009 but continued to escalate.) Does't feel like a good investment. The income from $40/barrel is $1.3 million per day, < $ .5 billion/year, the initial CAPEX would take 22 years to pay off. Plus OPEX
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
ennui2 wrote:Subjectivist wrote:Peak oil was 2015, it won't be very long before the surplus turns back into a shortage.
Care to make that into a formal prediction? How long is "won't be long"?
Subjectivist wrote:hvacman wrote:1/29/16 Henry Hub spot NG price = $2.26/1,000 ft3
325,000,000 ft3 @ $2.26/1,000 ft3 = $734,500 for 33,000 bbls. That's $22/bbl or $0.53/gallon for syn diesel, not including CAPEX and OPEX.
Good $ price but from an energy-efficiency standpoint, it's a disaster.
325,000,000 ft3 of NG is 3,250,000 therms of energy.
33,000 barrels of syn diesel is 1,396,000 gallons. Energy content per gallon is 1.4 therms, so the total syn fuel energy is 1,940,000 therms. You lose 40% of the energy just making the conversion. Yeah, liquid HC is way more energy-dense and portable than NG. But we as a world continue to pay a very high long-term price for that versatility. Way better to run the gas through a combined cycle power plant and charge my Volt with the electricity:)
Nice math! So if $2.26 per therm works out to $0.53/gallon syndiesel then in theory natural gas prices could go up to $5.00/therm or maybe a little higher depending on capex and opex for the whole system. Yeah you lose 40 percent of the energy in the conversion process so making syndiesel to run your oil furnace wouldn't make sense unless it is impossible to run a gas line in for your home. On the other hand a 200 gallon tank of syndiesel will fuel a locomotive for eight hours to haul a mile long train of cargo from one city to the next.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests